why powerfists?

[Grey Mage]

Well I play to win. Such is the judgment of the righteous

well I don't and never will and don't want to.

 

Well thats pretty sad

Gaius the irony of this statement is only further compounded by the probability of your inability to understand the irony.

[greatcrusade08]

Gaius the irony of this statement is only further compounded by the probability of your inability to understand the irony.

 

Too many big words grey mage, give us lowly initiates a chance to understand your cliches

[Grey Mage]

Gaius the irony of this statement is only further compounded by the probability of your inability to understand the irony.

 

Too many big words grey mage, give us lowly initiates a chance to understand your cliches

Translated to low gothic: "LMAO!"

[Brother-Chaplain Gaius]

Well I play to win. Such is the judgment of the righteous

well I don't and never will and don't want to.

 

Well thats pretty sad

Gaius the irony of this statement is only further compounded by the probability of your inability to understand the irony.

I understood what he is saying in relation to his own original argument. And no, nobodys impressed by apparently how smart you think you are.

[Grey Mage]

Well I play to win. Such is the judgment of the righteous

well I don't and never will and don't want to.

 

Well thats pretty sad

Gaius the irony of this statement is only further compounded by the probability of your inability to understand the irony.

I understood what he is saying in relation to his own original argument. And no, nobodys impressed by apparently how smart you think you are.

Im sorry this was meant to be a joke, but on a more serious note:

 

The objective of the game, should be as rule # 1 points us to, having fun. If winning is fun, then yes winning is something to strive for, however if winning is the only thing that is fun then this game is not for you.

[Brother-Chaplain Gaius]

Well I play to win. Such is the judgment of the righteous

well I don't and never will and don't want to.

 

Well thats pretty sad

Gaius the irony of this statement is only further compounded by the probability of your inability to understand the irony.

I understood what he is saying in relation to his own original argument. And no, nobodys impressed by apparently how smart you think you are.

Im sorry this was meant to be a joke, but on a more serious note:

 

The objective of the game, should be as rule # 1 points us to, having fun. If winning is fun, then yes winning is something to strive for, however if winning is the only thing that is fun then this game is not for you.

oh right you were just joking

 

Yeah funs important but I dont find encouraging mediocrity very fun.

[DerekLee688]

I'll say this. I'm not good enough to prevent my tac squads from getting assaulted. Yes, sometimes pride is hard to swallow. That 25pt fist is as terrifying to IC/MC/etc. as MM are to vehicles, and flamers are to hordes. You pay 80pts. to get those free weapons, why not 25 to punch Marbo in the face to death?

 

With the prevelance of mech. armies, bikes (nob/loyalist/nurgle), flying bugs, and the spread of drop pods(Nids/C:SM/SW and probably Blood Angels) who besides angry man can say their lines will not be breached? When they are, they'll no doubt go for my only troop choice I field.

[greatcrusade08]

I'll say this. I'm not good enough to prevent my tac squads from getting assaulted. Yes, sometimes pride is hard to swallow. That 25pt fist is as terrifying to IC/MC/etc. as MM are to vehicles, and flamers are to hordes. You pay 80pts. to get those free weapons, why not 25 to punch Marbo in the face to death?

 

With the prevelance of mech. armies, bikes (nob/loyalist/nurgle), flying bugs, and the spread of drop pods(Nids/C:SM/SW and probably Blood Angels) who besides angry man can say their lines will not be breached? When they are, they'll no doubt go for my only troop choice I field.

 

This man should be heard.. common sense prevails over pride or wishful thinking ever day of the week..

sometimes you just have to bite the bullet and say "what if"

[Brother-Chaplain Gaius]

I can agree with that, theres been games were I didnt use the PFs on my tacs at all but you know those are the games i should've won anyway. When I find myself using the PFs then I know its gonna be a tough one. So always be prepared nothing ever goes as planned.

[rat of vengence]

I am finding it hard to give Angry Man the credibility he possibly deserves. I just read a lot of posts basically saying "If you aren't doing it my way you fail!". As an example, the assumption that he can shred any horde from midfield with his army. Right. Not played well-played nids or Orks much? And then there is his list on page one, including how much scouts suck. Tell me that after my outflanking LSS flames your squad, and then the 5 scouts hit it with combiflamer/pistols followed by CCW and a powerfist. Might not kill it, but it wont be acting alone...

 

I could be wrong though, I don't know the fellow. But there seems to be many other combinations of units and tactics he is unaware of, and perhaps his opponents too if his approach has been successful.

 

Personally, I use fists on Tac squads destined to be within rapidfire range. I never assume that my rhinos won't die at the most inconvenient time either. ;)

 

RoV

[Xeonic]

I like them and take them when points allow. Why?

Because my fistasarge can potentially kill your expensive TDA libby in one hit.

 

I've run a few lists with power weapons, plamsa pistols, fists, no upgrades, combi weapon only... I still go back to powerfists, because it always makes me grin with my tactical sergeant instakills someone's expensive HQ.

My personal enjoyment in this one fact far overrides my dislike of the cost of the upgrade, the other benefits in terms of taking on MCs, armor, walkers in CC are just a bonus.

 

Obviously there are HQs where it won't matter, who are T5+ and/or eternal warrior, but in most of those cases the fist can cause wounds easily where a PW or chainsword couldn't.

 

Simply put, I can't always count on a rhino bunker to protect me for 100% of the game, and I can't always rely on combat tactics either(I occasionally play certain stubborn HQs), so fists it is whenever I can.

 

EDIT: And I think powerfisting assault scouts are awesome. ;)

[Mithril hound]

I use 2 5 man GH squads, and play anihalate, more points = more termis.

[King Tiger]

Well I play to win. Such is the judgment of the righteous

well I don't and never will and don't want to.

 

Well thats pretty sad

I don't see how, I play for the sake of playing and only to enjoy the game, I don't give a damn if I win or lose, its a game of little toy soldiers, why would winning ever be important to anyone when you can just play the game?.

 

its not as if losing a game of toy soldiers is gonna make people think any less of you, only wanting to win and nothing more makes people think less of you.

 

but back to the topic I don't even like the look of most power fists, they just look like toy boxing gloves, if I take any power fist I might only take 1 in an entire army to avoid replicating sgt's and that 1 might be the only power fist sculpted by GW that doesn't look pathetic.

 

I prefer power weapons and combi weapons and plasma pistols, and mixing them up around my squads so the sgts match the unit, so a unit with a meltagun and multi melta might have a sgt with combi melta but not a power fist.

[Brother-Chaplain Gaius]

Well I play to win. Such is the judgment of the righteous

well I don't and never will and don't want to.

 

Well thats pretty sad

I don't see how, I play for the sake of playing and only to enjoy the game, I don't give a damn if I win or lose, its a game of little toy soldiers, why would winning ever be important to anyone when you can just play the game?.

 

its not as if losing a game of toy soldiers is gonna make people think any less of you, only wanting to win and nothing more makes people think less of you.

 

but back to the topic I don't even like the look of most power fists, they just look like toy boxing gloves, if I take any power fist I might only take 1 in an entire army to avoid replicating sgt's and that 1 might be the only power fist sculpted by GW that doesn't look pathetic.

 

I prefer power weapons and combi weapons and plasma pistols, and mixing them up around my squads so the sgts match the unit, so a unit with a meltagun and multi melta might have a sgt with combi melta but not a power fist.

 

look guy, I play "little toy soldiers" as you call it to win. When I goto my job I go there to win as well, I enjoy excelling at everything I do. guess you don't sorry to hear that. Maybe you should try sometime. Playing this game is fun but ya know what winning makes it just that much better.

 

Don't point fingers at me, step your mediocre game up. and dont settle for anything less than the best

[King Tiger]

look guy, I play "little toy soldiers" as you call it to win. When I goto my job I go there to win as well, I enjoy excelling at everything I do. guess you don't sorry to hear that. Maybe you should try sometime. Playing this game is fun but ya know what winning makes it just that much better.

 

Don't point fingers at me, step your mediocre game up. and dont settle for anything less than the best

take a chill pill, I'm just saying I don't understand why you must win when you can just play for the sake of playing, the game is supposed to be enjoyable for both people involved, and I know I wouldn't enjoy playing someone whos only objective was to win and nothing more.

 

its why I stopped playing 40k years ago, too many players only care about winning and not just playing because its fun win or lose, and that still a reason why I don't play 40k, its still the same today, and things like planetstrike and apocalypse has only made it worse.

 

heck some of my most fun games I lost, a really great loss can be a million times more fun than any mediocre win

[angry man]

i think this thread has begun to widely miss the point. after my original post, i was immediately accused of saying/inferring things i didnt. the original post was supposed to take a tactical squad, and discuss the pros/cons of giving the sgt a power fist (maybe this was a bad idea as myself or anybody else failed to give an insight into the rest of the list or the squad's designated job. what it then evolved into was grey mage giving me a list of things that might threaten a tactical squad without a tactical squad without said fist, without caring to consider the comparative points of such units, whether their best/optimal purpose was hunting tactical squads or something else, or even what else might be in the rest of the army. this led to me defending myself in terms of a whole army -- now ew are nowhere near the original topic.

 

now i find myself defending against more assumptions. i never said my tactical squads can shred an entire horde army. of course they cant; at 1500pts i run 410pts worth of the little guys. but what i do think, is that when i wrote my list, i considered how all the aspects work together, and whether the list as a whole could handle horde/mech/elite armies. and, in reference to horde, i think that with the amount of back-of-the-board fire support, 'shred' is an appropriate term.

 

with regards to the storm mounted scout squad (170pts); first of all, if your willing to risk them not turning up when you need them, then power to you i suppose. then theres the board edge lottery (fair enough, minimised by the storm), more power to you. and they wont be acting alone, i would expect no less. however, for 60/70pts, you could buy a land speeder with either 2HF or HF/MM respectively and then a pred for 85pts...

 

as im writing this, im slowly realising that im going further away from the original topic, and that no matter what i or you (everyone else) says, units need to be taken in the context of the rest of an army. (although there are always some units that shouldnt be taken because they just are poo or there is another unit that does its job better). and therefore this post is probably highly irrelelvant

 

i dont make assumptions, but with forward planning i feel i am able to make the best of bad situations. i try to see where my army might fall short during a game and act accordingly. if you can anticipate your opponents next optimal moves, then, by your own actions, you can make them doubt what that move is, or reduce/nulify the damage it could do. personally i find that easier to do with the presence of a higher number of dangerous/valuable units than a fist in each tact sqd

 

AM

[Hfran Morkai]

Dudes...people have different styles and let them get on with it.

 

I like the idea of weapons being able to deal with heavy stuff out there and as such include them in each pack, though I normally take Thunder Hammers as I like the rules and the models better. It enables to to deal with emergent threats (admittedly GH's are better combat machines anyway) In a normal Marine list I would probably mix up what I kit sergeants out with but I cannot deny the powerfist is a tempting option.

 

Another example is me running pure Razorback pack lists, sure I lose out on scoring units and firepower but I enjoy the idea and the models so much better. If I can win, great, if not I'll still enjoy myself.

 

If we all played the same the game would become very boring, very rapidly.

[voi shet magir]

look guy, I play "little toy soldiers" as you call it to win. When I goto my job I go there to win as well, I enjoy excelling at everything I do. guess you don't sorry to hear that. Maybe you should try sometime. Playing this game is fun but ya know what winning makes it just that much better.

 

Don't point fingers at me, step your mediocre game up. and dont settle for anything less than the best

take a chill pill, I'm just saying I don't understand why you must win when you can just play for the sake of playing, the game is supposed to be enjoyable for both people involved, and I know I wouldn't enjoy playing someone whos only objective was to win and nothing more.

:lol:

 

The rules for this game are not a knife-edge contest of wills for proving tactical acuity. It started out as a role playing game and turned into a marketing ploy; at no point on that continuum is "a game of kings since the dawn of civilization." For a test of skill and daring play, like, go. Play poker. actually wait, if you are going to take warhammer seriously there should at least be money involved. If you double down you get bolter drill for one turn.

 

by that I mean you should not bet on warhammer.

 

I think powerfists are pretty comical and put them with combi-bolters for symmetry that also doesn't get you a bonus attack. or didn't, whatever. The main thing is why do you have a giant hand and then a relatively tiny pistol? It is especially hilarious in like rtb01 where he's got his hand on his waist like a stern schoolmarm.

[waaanial00]

I am finding it hard to give Angry Man the credibility he possibly deserves.

 

This is my issue as well. Essentially it is a good idea wrapped in a poor justification. I do understand that Power Fists are not always needed (against T3, WS3 troops a power weapon is probably better for example). In a few games I have run tacticals without Power Fists and if they get to just shoot then they do ok. Sometimes I sit back and reconsider my position on them.

 

Then I have a game like last night. Almost all of my long ranged firepower (2 Typhoons, Rifleman, Lascannon/ML Dread) was countered by one terrain piece for two turns. Thats right out of about 6 pen and 2 glances per turn for two turns, was reduced to 1 pen and 1 glance getting through :lol: .

 

This meant that my Chaos opponent was more than able to get enough of his forces close enough where my Power Fists were required. Oh and combat tactics be damned, I am an avid supporter of them and have used them to great success many times, however last night I just couldnt get out of combat and then I would fail my LD in my turn allowing him to steam roll my position without being able to use my superior firepower.

 

I also couldnt rely on my Rhinos surviving because whichever rhino wasnt killed by Lascannons (even with hulldown) were killed by plasma or melta shots. Its only AV11 after all. Again dont get me wrong, I am not saying that Rhinos get destroyed as soon as you look at them. On the on contrary they are tough little beasts in 5th Ed, however enough dice solves any probability curve and eventually they go the way of the dodo.

 

I do see the reason for not taking them, however experience shows me that at least in my area and with my play style they will always be an asset.

 

Wan

[Hellios]

Before they changed the space Wolf codex I used to always give my Wolfguard powerfists... 8 attacks from a sarg equivalent :lol: or in a Storm claw squad where I could get 16 (well in 4th) fist attacks from 3 guys :D. I realise that isn't a tactical squad but still... my wolfguard took 4 wounds off the Nighbringer in one round of combat by himself...

 

and you thought raider spam was evil...

 

I think the role of a tactical squad is to do anything, obviously you can specialise them in anyway you want but I like my tactical squads to be able to kill anything in any situation (recognising that they may be at a disadvantage). That is why I have power fists in some squads. I also play a number of aggressive lists including those from other dexs (SW, BT) where my whole army goes forward and I expect to get into combat.

 

I can understand saving points :D

[Warprat]

Lively discussion... well done angryman!

ta very much

 

Angryman, what weapons do you give your Tac squads? Do you specialize them, or generalize them?

 

 

Specialize:

 

Plasma Cannon, plasma gun.

Multi-melta, melta gun (or las cannon, melta gun.)

 

 

 

Generalize:

 

Plasma cannon, flamer.

Missile launcher, plasma gun.

10 man, multi-melta, flamer, rhino -- 205pts. 2-3 squads

take up positions in the mid-field. 24" danger zone to AV12 or less. 12" danger zon to any AV. shred any horde that comes near. now by no means are they meant to be indestructible, and of course may have their rhino destroyed or assaulted. their rhino and support from other units should keep them safe or at least allow them do escape from dangers they cant handle.

 

I like your use of combat tactics. Don't see many people actually taking advantage of that. Kudos to you! You say that you use powerfists in other squads. Can you post an army list that shows what choices you make? It would be interesting to see where you put your points saved. Again, the art of the middle...

1500pts would look something like this:

 

libby; TDA, null zone, avenger - 125pts

 

tac sqd; 10marine, MM, fl, rhino - 205

tac sqd; 10marine, MM, fl, rhino - 205

 

dread; 2x twin AC - 125

dread; 2x twin AC - 125

assault termies; 8termies, TH/SS - 320

 

speeder; MM/HF - 70

speeder; MM/HF - 70

 

predator; HB sponsons - 85

predator; HB sponsons - 85

predator; HB sponsons - 85

 

i have psychic defence, plenty of fire support both anti tank AND horde. and then i have a cc punch. i tend not to run assault marines, they pale in comparison to the termies. bikes would make an appearance in a larger game, preferably with th presence of a bike captain, although they still probably wouldnt take a fist.

 

AM

 

 

Thanks for the great reply!

 

 

The list looks to be a good mix of efficient units that can work well together, and cover each others weaknesses. The maximal appoach with as few upgrades as possible. Quantity over quality. But as Joseph Stalin would say "quantity has a quality of its own."

 

So, you are near one side of the extreme in your list building philosophy. Lets say the left, since I quoted Stalin. The far left would be specialized units with little upgrades. You are all the way to the left, except that your Tac squads are generalized, rather than specilaized. The other side (the right,) would be the extreme where every unit is upgraded to be as well rounded as possible, able to take on most enemies and at least hurt them. Most people tend to build thier lists in the middle somewhere. The middle being a broad spectrum.

 

 

I find this all interesting, because like so many others, I have been trying to perfect my Tactical Squads too. To come up with the perfect list. I have been exploring the strategy of Specialized squads vs. Generalized squads. What's interesting to me in your appoach, is that you have managed to make a minimal costing Tac squad fairly well rounded, while at the same time covering a slight overall weakness in melta weaponry.

 

While I love your list, and find your tactics to be excellent. For myself I want more...

 

 

 

I want to make Generalized Tac squads that can combat squad into Specialized squads. I want specialized Combat Squads, because I believe that is one of the better (of the limited) reasons for combat squadding. To make maximum use of specialized weapons, to combat a specific foe. When that foe appears, I consider whether I want to combat squad, (or not,) based on the battlefield and victory conditions.

 

Heavy Infantry Killer- Plasma cannon, plasma gun, + maybe a plasma pistol or combi plasma.

Vehicle Killer- Las cannon (or multimelta,) melta gun + maybe a combi melta.

 

 

As whole squads, the vehicle killer squad is well rounded enough to take on most threats. But the plasma squad lacks a little. Which is where I would consider adding a power fist. As combat squads, the units are specialized enough to take on a specific foe using the special and heavy weapons designed to maximize damage.

 

 

 

I realize that I am asking for the near impossible. A list with varied units that can work together, with as much efficiency as possible. One that can take advantage of all the spiffy new marine capabilities like Combat Tactics and Combat Squads. I realize that is a tall order.... especially with the Combat Squads. I am seeking the middle ground, between left and right.

 

I am thinking that powerfists are a necessity in some squads, and I would like to be talked out of it, so I can be more efficient. Failing that, I would like to be convinced of thier necessity. I find myself on the fence...

 

Warprat ;)

[waaanial00]

Ahhh the beauty of quoting what someone has written.

 

Angry Man says (Bold emphasis is what I believe to be the key point, though I dont agree with the statement)

 

10 man, multi-melta, flamer, rhino -- 205pts. 2-3 squads

take up positions in the mid-field. 24" danger zone to AV12 or less. 12" danger zon to any AV. shred any horde that comes near.

 

ROV says (Emphasising the point made underlined and possibly missing the bold part, though could arguably have calculated it as well and disagreed)

 

As an example, the assumption that he can shred any horde from midfield with his army. Right. Not played well-played nids or Orks much?

 

Angry Man says (Bold part is possibly a mistype or misunderstanding of what ROV says)

 

i never said my tactical squads can shred an entire horde army.

 

How beautiful it is that personal emphasis of statements and possible misunderstanding hardens opinions isnt it?

 

Not actually criticising either of the people I have quoted just pointing out how misunderstandings happen through possible mis quoting.

 

On topic. As I said above, meh its an option and depending on your playing style, tactics, experience and local opponents you will have an opinion about the benefits of Power Fists. Is someone elses opinion better than yours?

 

Oh and people take this stuff far too seriously. Its a game of random chance, if lady luck is not smiling on you no matter what you take you might still lose. It is a game after all.

 

Wan

[Koremu]

On the other hand, I almost always take at least one Power Fist armed 10 man Tactical Squad, because the opportunity to deploy a Power Fist with 9 spare wounds in a Rhino half way up the board is invaluable in Dawn of War.

no no no... intending for your tacticals to make combat is setting up for a fail. thats how you waste them

Roughly 1/3rd of a 1500 point army is Tacticals. If you aren't taking advantage of their combat potential, you are the one who is wasting them.

 

The last time I deployed for a Dawn of War like that, the Tactical Squad ended up being the unit with the second highest kill tally on the table - right after the other Tactical Squad.

 

Tactical Squads are the best all-round Infantry in the game. If you can't find something to do with them, then you're just not trying.

[Giga]

What's all this with "your tacticals should never ever get into close combat"?

 

There are plenty of situations when tacticals are very useful in assault. A 10 men squad with powerfist will do a great job of killing tanks in close combat (9 str6 grenade attacks + 3 PF attacks on charge, against rear armor which is usually 10). They're also good against things without many armor-ignoring attacks, especially if you use them to back up a close combat character or in conjunction with other units (such as depleted th/ss squads). There are things in the game, like nobz, tyranid warriors, immortals, dakkafexes, plague marines, etc. whose innate resilience is completely neutered by powerfists attacks. In fact, a single powerfist hit against a tyranid warrior is almost guaranteed to insta-kill one, which translates into an extra 3 wounds when it comes to winning the combat. Moreover, having a powerfist means you can efficiently threaten independent characters.

 

One needs to keep in mind that, despite their overall shoddiness, tactical marines are still MEQ. They can still survive for a long time in close combat as long as the enemy doesn't have a bunch of power attacks. A powerfist goes a long way towards making them more effective. They aren't and shouldn't be the kings of assault, but if used in conjunction with other units, they win close combats simply by piling in and throwing a bunch of attacks. Having pedro nearby means you're getting 4 attacks on charge from that powerfist sergeant. Not at all shoddy.

The objective of the game, should be as rule # 1 points us to, having fun. If winning is fun, then yes winning is something to strive for, however if winning is the only thing that is fun then this game is not for you.

No.

 

The point of playing the game is to have fun. The objective of the game itself is to win.

 

These two things are inseparable parts of any competitive game (ie. any game that has winners and losers). Trying to say that one is more important then the other is pointless. Fun is the reason behind getting into the game and the reason why you keep playing. Winning is what the game itself is all about, as the entire rulesets is made so that we can have a battle where a winner is eventually determined.

I don't see how, I play for the sake of playing and only to enjoy the game, I don't give a damn if I win or lose, its a game of little toy soldiers, why would winning ever be important to anyone when you can just play the game?.

Because some of us deride entertainment from competitive play. As far as I'm concerned, the real fun only happens when I'm pitting my carefully made all-comers list against another players carefully made all-comers list, and we're both truly fighting to win, and hence using strategy, making meaningful choices, and learning from our experiences so that we would be on a continuous path of self-improvement.

 

That a player's assets within the game happen to be represented by toy soldiers is irrelevant - it's still a great game that offers lots of depth and competitive entertainment. Would the game be more "serious" if instead of GW models we used generic boring pieces like those from chess? Of course not.

 

Again, like someone had asked you already, if you don't care about winning/tactics and only play to move pieces around... Why even post at a tactics forum?

[GreatEscape_13]

Again, like someone had asked you already, if you don't care about winning/tactics and only play to move pieces around... Why even post at a tactics forum?

 

Perhaps someone can do both? Deciding to field a "fluff" or "fun" or "different" or "visually pleasing" or "unusual" list can be an enjoyable experience for many players. And they can care about the tactically efficient ways of still fielding those units. That entire departure from the main topic was sparked by the age-old "I play to win" vs. "I play to have fun" debate. Heard it before. Both sides just need to realize that there is no one "correct" way to enjoy the game, and that people draw their enjoyment from all sorts of aspects that another might think is "mediocre".

 

And back to the powerfists question:

 

I am very convinced by the people who argue that the fist is good because it allows flexibility, particularly when the enemy's movements, list, and lady luck are involved. The fist gives tactical squads yet another option. And 25 points is not a bad price to pay for options.

 

The other thing I like about the power fist is that it makes me more likely to include a combi-weapon, since there is never an issue of getting an extra attack with a pistol. Which is 10 more points for even more options. Solid investments. With two tactical squads as the core of my force, a whopping 70 points gets spent on tactical sergeants. Sure, i could trim it. But I think the investment is worth the flexibility, as many have indicated.

 

Cheers.