Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

(I think this goes in here - appologies if I got it wrong)

Right I've just got back into wargaming (see my introdustion page thread) and am needing to create a new army having sold all my old ones off.

Now my favourite force has always been Space Marines and I still had the codex so figured that they were the perfect choice to get back into gaming with - so with that in mind I wrote out a list and it came out perfect, it was (pretty) balanced, non-beardy, fluff accurate and had everything I wanted in it in the quantities I wanted - as I said perfect.

Then speaking to my mate who had continued to game (and had purchased my DA's off me) he told me about the changes they had made to the DA and BA - for the most part I was alright with it and then he came to the tactical squads. The new rule of not allowing heavy weapons in squads of less than 10 men (we all know its coming to the new maines in 5th, it came to the BA and to Chaos) has completely prevented me doing my dream list as it was based around 5 man squads w/ Heavy Bolters & Plasma Guns in Razorbacks (allowing each squad to be able to cope with all situations), which can no longer be done so I am kind of annoyed at this.

I was just wondering therefore what peoples opinions are on the heavy weapon/squad size rule and whether I am just beinga whiny b**** about the whole thing or if other people feel the same way. As I said I haven't played with this rule so I can't truely say if it does have any affect on peoples armies (though it appears that they will make, marines especially due to their lack of unique units, rather bland as if some one wants to take heavy weapons to make it tactically worth while they will also be doing the 5 man 'combat-squad' split with that half inc. special weapon in a transport - the same as every other marine army that wants to take heavy weapons).

Fluff wise it doesn't work for either - yes chapters are comprised of numerous 10 man tactical squads, each with 1 sgt., 1 specialist and 1 heavy but why owuld a general always field an entire tactical squad? And if he chose to only field half a squad why wouldn't he want to optimise their effectiveness by giving them optimum fire power? (It makes even less sense for Chaos who don't have any form of structure to their armies like the marines do with the Index Astartes (that thing the smurf primarch implemented)) Also where do the other 4 men go when they utalise the razorback transport when not in battle?

I can see the the advantages of combat squads and how it stops gamers having an unbalanced force (but surely that is the gamer's/general's choice?) , I just don't like the fact that I'm forced to have a generic army in order to field some of what I want.

(Sorry, this is pretty much just a winge because I can't do my dream force)

Im a litle put off by it aswell, but the way I see it is that it make the squads in transports make more sense, afterall they cant fire the Heavy bolter after disembarking as they count as having moved. Also the fact heavy weapons are mainly the forte of devestators means they should now get the main roles as lots of hurty fire, instead of everyone gets to do it!

I think this is more of a discussion and opinion question, which fits better in Dakka Discussions than in You Make The Call, which is really for rules questions and debates. I'm moving the thread.

As for the actual point of your thread, I can sympathize. I’ve played marines (Dark Angels and chaos) for several years now, and it’s been tough to adapt to the change. I’ve wound up playing more chaos than Dark Angels as it’s been easier to adapt my army to fit the chaos codex’s lesser restrictions. You’re certainly not alone in wishing GW were still allowing greater flexibility in squad sizes.

Blackjack13 wrote:
Then speaking to my mate who had continued to game (and had purchased my DA's off me) he told me about the changes they had made to the DA and BA - for the most part I was alright with it and then he came to the tactical squads. The new rule of not allowing heavy weapons in squads of less than 10 men (we all know its coming to the new maines in 5th, it came to the BA and to Chaos) has completely prevented me doing my dream list as it was based around 5 man squads w/ Heavy Bolters & Plasma Guns in Razorbacks (allowing each squad to be able to cope with all situations), which can no longer be done so I am kind of annoyed at this.

Actually, it can still be done, to an extent. Dark Angels get Combat Squads(split the 10 man squad into 2 5 man squads with equipment split however you choose) and can buy Razorbacks even at full 10 Marines. You'll just have 5 marines hanging out somewhere.

Blackjack13 wrote:my dream list was based around 5 man squads w/ Heavy Bolters & Plasma Guns in Razorbacks

I was just wondering therefore what peoples opinions are on the heavy weapon/squad size rule

Erm, from a min-max standpoint, 6 men is better, as the enemy has to kill a 4th SM before the squad can't contest objectives.

I'm OK with it. In the backs of their minds, GW wanted people to follow the Codex Astartes Fluff and take 10-man squads with 1 Heavy and 1 Special, but they gave the option to field smaller squads. Apparently, it never occurred to them that players would min-max this option and field predominantly. GW has since learned that players cannot be trusted to follow the Fluff, so they took that privilege away.

It's good news for Tau who cannot have any heavy weapons in their infantry squads. The Tau's relative disadvantage over other armies' infantry is reduced by the change.

maybe, but Tau guns are as strong as a Heavy Bolter already, they don't need heavy weapons in a squad, unless you're sugesting giving them the option to take a rail gun?

Kilkrazy wrote:It's good news for Tau who cannot have any heavy weapons in their infantry squads. The Tau's relative disadvantage over other armies' infantry is reduced by the change.

Hopefully the rumored change to jetpacks allowing them to move and still fire heavy weapons is true - marker drones will be the "heavy weapons" for our troop squads.

Lets be Honest here. The ability and usage of the 5 man las/plas squads was completely OP. I myself used 6 man plas/plas and 8 man dev squads and didnt think much of it. With 5th ed right around the corner, and the BA codex coming out in what seems like a more 5th edition fashion, I chose to convert my marines into BA successor. I did it to get used to the newer feel marines, and I will tell you I am thoroughly enjoying 5/10's. Combat squads in 4th need to be brought down to 2 man to no longer be counted, and you can split them into your HW teams (4 marines and HW) and your CC Units (Flamer/Melta/Plas), Sgt and marines and stick them in a BA rhino or Razorback. It also allows you to deploy them in different area, creating more options in terms of your deployment

[quote=Blackjack13
I was just wondering therefore what peoples opinions are on the heavy weapon/squad size rule and whether I am just beinga whiny b**** about the whole thing or if other people feel the same way.

Storm Lord wrote:maybe, but Tau guns are as strong as a Heavy Bolter already, they don't need heavy weapons in a squad, unless you're sugesting giving them the option to take a rail gun?

I'm suggesting that Tau already pay the points for the pulse rifle, it has less range than a heavy bolter, they can't take any heavy weapons such as plasma or lascannon. This is all good for the Tau fluff which is that the support weapons are carried on Crisis Suits. However the new requirement to take lots of troops limits Tau more than other armies who can put heavy weapons in infantry squads. By taking more troops they can't take as many Crisis suits.

OTOH the new rapid fire/models hit rules is more benefit to Tau infantry than most others, and if Crisis can move and fire heavy weapons that makes markerlight drones a useful option.

So it's not all bad.

Thanks for the feedback, it's good to hear others views on the matter.

As I said I can see the purpose of combat squads (this isn't a rant against them by any means) and that they are incredibly good - I recently 5th'ed (combination of educated guessing/predictions) my Marine list to see what it would look like and it is alot better from a gaming point of view to the current 'dream' list, but alot more generic. The list I wrote wasn't designed to be min/max for competitive reasons, thats just how I percieved marine armies that utalised Razorbacks fighting (I always percieved marines being min/max naratively). I just, and still don't, see why it was necissary to implement the rule for heavy weapons/squad size (then again I never really faced 'cheese' lists that exploited it to the extent of those yu guys describe) and even from a fluff approach it doesn't work. I don't know, I'll wait 'till 5th and decide what to do then (as my 5th list is so similar to the 'dream' list marines may be back on the cards for my return army)

I was unhappy about it at the time, but I'm used to them now. It gets better with 5th too, so can't complain there.

I'm a Fluff nut, so it used to bother me to see the min/max thing all over the place. Sure, in mathhammer, it made sense, but I just didn't like it.

If you think about it, Marines are warrior MONKS. Their faith is what makes them strong. Part of that faith is having faith in the Bolter. It is Emperor's Devine Wrath being unleashed upon the enemy. Why would they give that up? It's what makes them the devine warriors that they are. Sure, heavy weapons make sense. But, the basic Bolter is part of their belief system. Just like Power Armor. Just like 10 man squads. It's part of who they are. That means that Fluffwise, even Combat Squads are not all that fluffy.

Just my two cents worth...

The fact is, the marine fluff was always roughly based off of real-world military squads which tend to have a limited number of specialist weapons to provide support to their unit.

In the real-world you have things to consider like specialist weapon and ammo weight not to mention cost and availability of the weapon.

Now, while these factors don't obviously weigh into a game, the idea behind them is still represented in the way the marines are organized.

The unit is made up of primarily of bolters because that is the standard weapon of the marine. Heavy and special weapons are limited in each squad due to the codex limitations written by Guilliman.

Sure it's easy to think that you'd want your forces to be entirely armed with heavy and special weapons but the fluff "reality" of 40k is that special weapons are actually rather rare and even with power-armor marines walking around with heavy weapons have to be slower and more cumbersome than marines with bolters.

Really, whatever the reason the fluff has laid down over the years about how marine squads are organized, and marines tend to be very dogmatic and ritualized and follow this organization as gospel.


It's just that GW has finally started to get around to writing the rules in the codex to somewhat match what they've writen in the fluff, which is fine with me personally.

yakface wrote:
It's just that GW has finally started to get around to writing the rules in the codex to somewhat match what they've writen in the fluff, which is fine with me personally.

yakface wrote:yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.

Janthkin wrote:

yakface wrote:
It's just that GW has finally started to get around to writing the rules in the codex to somewhat match what they've writen in the fluff, which is fine with me personally.

yakface wrote:yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.

WIN!

Also, Space Marines are supposed to be ASSAULT troops. That's why they are so big and tough, in order to get to grips with the enemy. Imagine trying to fight a 7 1/2 foot tall, 400 pound, amazingly armored, gifted close combat monster. Even our best troops would die. Except for Chuck Noris, of course, but that is a different thing altogether...

I wish the rules reflected the fluff. Every Marine would have a CCW, Bolt Pistol, and Bolter (maybe the Chaos Marines have something there...). The Bolter would be and ASSAULT weapon. However, that would make every anti-Marine player quit the game. There's enough flack about MEQ armies out there already.

Besides, if you want a heavy weapon/shooty army, you need to look at the Imperial Guard. That's their bag. Marines are the line breakers/surgical strike experts. Even though 10 Heavy Bolter armed Marines would be murder, that's not their job. If the Emperor wanted mobile gun platforms, He would have used Servitors. They are much easier to produce, much easier to maintain, and who cares if you waste a whole squad of them. There's plenty more of them out there...

However, I see your point as well. It would be nice to arm your troops as you desire. Afterall, YOU are the one that spent $300.00+ on your army. So, until we can all have fun with the fluff AND rules, we just have to go along...

Janthkin wrote:

yakface wrote:
It's just that GW has finally started to get around to writing the rules in the codex to somewhat match what they've writen in the fluff, which is fine with me personally.

yakface wrote:yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.

You do have me there, but they also seem to be applying the same rationale in all the new armies (where appropriate). For example, Orks got saddled with the same type of limitation.

yakface wrote:Sure it's easy to think that you'd want your forces to be entirely armed with heavy and special weapons but the fluff "reality" of 40k is that special weapons are actually rather rare and even with power-armor marines walking around with heavy weapons have to be slower and more cumbersome than marines with bolters.

It's just that GW has finally started to get around to writing the rules in the codex to somewhat match what they've writen in the fluff, which is fine with me personally.

Yak: "rather rare" only means that "uncommon", because in the 40k universe, these weapons are only rare in the sense that not every Marine can be armed with one. I.e. They're not Eldar Aspects.

Actually, it's just that GW has finally gotten back to restoring the rules in the codex to somewhat match what they were back in 2nd Edition. I'm OK with this, too.

I like it, personally. I'd prefer to fight the way the Codex Astartes dictates, but I have a strong competitive streak.

It's realistic and strategically wise. You don't say to a five-man squad "Here, take five lascannons so you've got nothing to fight with at close range." or "Here, have 5 plasma cannons, go melt yourselves."

You do if they're Devestators. Which I guess might be another eason for the 'you need 10 men for a heavy weapon' idea and rule. It makes Devestators a much more appealing choice (Not that they never weren't) so you can take more Heavy weapons-instead of lots of tanks, which does the job as well.

The thing I want to know is why do people arm Tactical squads with both a heavy weapon and a flamer? With combat squads I can see why, but with the current SM codex it make little sense

If Devastators were a troop choice, would people max out on them?

Just asking. It might prove effective, though salty.

Possibly, but they wouldn't be numerous enough, or tactically flexible enough really. If engaged in hth they'd be screwed, and as heavy weapons cost a fair bit, whilst they could put out a fair amount of hard hitting shots, they wouldn't fire enough to do the damage needed. Even heavy bolters would struggle against hordes in the long run

Wehrkind wrote:If Devastators were a troop choice, would people max out on them?

DA/BA style?

Yes, unquestionably.

I'd take 6 Troops, each consisting of 2 Combat Squads armed with 2 Heavy Weapons and an attached Razorback. It would be awesome.

And I were BA, I'd get 6 "FREE" DC models for countercharge... What's not to like?

It's a game, not a simulation. The rules about squad composition should support fun gaming. 40K already suffers from there being too many SM players. The rules should not encourage more.

Again thanks alot for all the feedback on this, the opinions I'm getting are very appreciated and much more thought out than those I've gotten from others.

I agree that marines are based on real world armies and that in both there are only a limited range of specialist available and hence you couldn't have an entire force made up of them but I was looking at it from the perspective that a marine force is going to be made up of troops from 1 battle company plus a couple from the 1st and 10th. Now each battle company consists of 10 squads - 6 Tactical, 2 Assault and 2 Devestators - and each tactical squad has 1 Sgt., 1 Specialist and 1 'heavy'. Now I can't see why a tactical squad would always be fielded in full, especially if they were employing a razorback which would prevent them from doing this as half would be unable to utalise it - which is its purpose as a transport. By looking at it this way it is possible to have 6 tactical squads with the correct number of 'specialist' but in less than 10 men, it would be the battle companies entire tactical squad base being field with some left behind at base etc. which from a fluff tactical view, as in from the leader of the force, would be acceptible as it would mean maxising their effectiveness, if the tactics being employed were based on heavy weapons that is, and therefore increasing the liklihood of victory. And yes heavy weapons are bulky but in the hands of marines they are able to be used in an assualt element - you don't need to be running into close range to be an assault force, the surgical strike element is more than possible with heavy weapons in a deploy-destroy-move tactic.

Also for me marines seem to lack any 'super-ness' (for lack of a better word) - yes they have the 2nd best stat-line and equipment for any basic troop (grey knights being the first) but so do chaos marines and they get viscious units like defilers, obliterators, demons, marked units etc. plus all the other stuff marines have (bar the wirlwind (boo-hoo), landspeeders, scouts & assault cannons which aren't that much of a loss in my eyes, though I do love that latter 3), guard get stupid amounts of guns (both heavy and ordance) for the points, which more than makes up for the fact that they are pants stat wise, 'nids get really powerful big monsters plus hordes of little things which are more than capable due to the numbers w/ stats, haven't seen new orks so can't say on them. so the fact that marines could take considerable fire power atop their stats gave them that little something 'super'.

I appologise if this sounds offence/aggressive towards anyone, it's not meant to, so please don't take it the wrong way, my writing may just make it sound that way but I respect everything that has been saidand those that have said it.

If they went back to the old editions where anti-tank could shoot at tanks while the rest got to shoot other stuff it would make sence. Pretty pointless to either have a lascannon hunt infantry or have bolters hunt landraiders.

Yes, I agree. There should be a target profile rule so that AT weapons find it really hard to shoot at infantry. Except for Tau Crisis suits of course.