how to equip your sergeant?

[mowglie]

I think it looks better. :huh:

 

I accept that, but for the sake of a tactics discussion, let's put it aside (unless having a cooler-looking army intimidates your opponent and causes him to make more mistakes ;))

 

Power fists, lightning claws, and thunder hammers can never claim the additional attack unless you're packing a pair

 

Yes, I'm quite aware of that, my problem is:-

 

you get an additional attack for having two close combat weapons

 

those 3 attacks is 30% as much as the rest of the squad combined in CC.

 

First, let me concede a point. IF you take a power weapon, then you take a bolt pistol for the extra A. Doing otherwise is nonsense.

 

That said, why take the power weapon in the first place? I consider bp+chainsword a waste, and bp+pw an even bigger waste. It's about roles, and what you want to do with your squad. Let me try to explain.

 

A power fist fundamentally changes the tactical squad's function. A tactical squad with a fist can threaten an entirely new class of targets which a naked tactical squad cannot - particularly MCs, ICs.

 

A power weapon or a chainsword makes the tactical squad incrementally better at something it is not particularly good at in the first place, and still isn't good at after the upgrade. It cannot threaten any new targets, and still isn't particularly threatening against the things it is now better against.

 

Let's say you get assaulted by something with WS4, I4, T4 and a 3+ save. This is probably one of the best situations to be using a power sword over a bolter.

 

• Squad + bolter sergeant deals 11A => 11/2H => 11/4W => 11/12 = 0.92 casualties.
  
• Squad + chainsword sergeant deals 12A => 12/2H => 12/4W => 12/12 = 1 casualty.
  
• Squad + powersword sergeant deals 9 + 3A => 9/2 + 3/2H => 9/4 + 3/4W = 9/12 + 3/4 = 1.5 casualties.
  
• Squad + powerfist sergeant deals 9 + 2A => 9/2 + 2/2H => 9/4 + 10/12W = 9/12 + 10/12 = 1.58 casualties (assuming your fist survived until I1, which it probably did. Almost everything that'll wipe out a tacsquad in a single turn is also hitting at higher than I4 e.g. banshees).
  

 

The chainsword in particular makes a pathetic amount of difference, and you're paying for this in bolter shots (something which the squad is good at!). The power fist is only 10pts more than the sword, is almost always better, opens up an entirely new class of targets, doesn't cost you the bolter shot, leaves you the option of using a combi-weapon... For me it's not about the ~50% improvement you get with the power weapon, it's the fact that the squad isn't an effective counter to heavy infantry in assault either with or without the power weapon.

 

I would say:-

 

• Almost any situation where the tactical squad wants to be in assault, it's good enough with a naked sergeant (e.g. Fire Warriors).
  
• Almost any situation where the tactical squad doesn't want to be in assault, the chainsword or power sword don't swing it to the point where it wants to be in assault (e.g. vs Howling Banshees).
  

 

Is there a situation I missed where a Power Weapon or Chainsword makes the tactical squad an effective tool where it wasn't previously?

 

Why pay to make the squad better at something it still sucks at?

[rat of vengence]

A power fist fundamentally changes the tactical squad's function. A tactical squad with a fist can threaten an entirely new class of targets which a naked tactical squad cannot - particularly MCs, ICs.

Actually, I think you have half the point. Yes, the tac squad can threaten a new class of targets, but that doesn't change it's function. It opens up options and stops your tac squad from being a safe place a MC or Walker can hide from shooting in.

 

I put fists on any tac squad I expect to get up close and personal with the enemy. A firepower based unit (eg Plascannon, plasgun) needs it not.

 

RoV

[Giga]

@ mowglie

 

I agree. Having a power weapon on a tac squad is a waste unless you're gearing up to fight craftworld eldar, tau, or veteran heavy guard. I also agree that power fists are the absolute best option.

 

However, the reason I run my defensive tac squad sergeant with chainsword+bp is that this squad rarely if ever sees close combat anyway. They're either reserved, combat squadded, or they're far in the backfield, firing their plasma cannon and maybe adding some single bolter shots. Hence, they rarely if ever get into close combat, and they almost never have to fight against actual assault specialists.

 

When they do have to fight, it's either because I'm losing badly (ie. the rest of my army has already been mauled hard and the enemy is all over my deployment zone), or because some fast-moving unit, such as veterans in a vendetta, or an unit of eldar in a star-engineing transport, etc. has managed to get into my backfield and is trying to contest the objective my objective-camping tac squad is holding. In these situations, having a sergeant with 4 attacks on charge means a lot more then a single bolter shot.

 

Simply put, I found out of my own experience that having a powerfist on my defensive tac squad means this power fist is usually wasted. So I don't take it, and I don't regret it, either.

[mowglie]

Simply put, I found out of my own experience that having a powerfist on my defensive tac squad means this power fist is usually wasted. So I don't take it, and I don't regret it, either.

 

*nods* I'm definitely happy with that. I wouldn't play a fist in a home-objective-camping tacsquad either.

 

In these situations, having a sergeant with 4 attacks on charge means a lot more then a single bolter shot.

 

I'm less happy with this, although I should say that I'm happer with chainsword + bp than with power weapon + bp - partly because you're only paying the bolter shot, not 15pts, and partly because it's "traditional".

 

You say "having a sergeant with 4 attacks", but that's not the whole story.

 

BP+CS vs bolter:-

 

• On the assault: you have 22 attacks, I have 21
  
• Defending against assault: you have 12 attacks, I have 11
  
• At 24" you have, say, 7 bolters, 1PG, 1PC, I have 8 bolters, 1PG, 1PC (or maybe 7 bolters + a combi-weapon, but probably not in this example)
  
• at 12" you have 15 bolters, 2PG, 1PC (or +1 bolter), I have 16 bolters, 2PG, possibly 1PC (or +1 bolter)
  

 

(although, given your previous lists, don't you combat squad your defensive tacsquad and put the sergeant in the razorback?)

 

The difference in CC is minimal. In my opinion (and in my experience, which granted is presumably much less than yours), the bolter has more of an impact over the course of the game. I don't want to sacrifice capability in something I'm good at to bolster my capability in something that I'll still suck at.

 

That said, it's all about roles, and what you want your tacsquad to do. You have a particular purpose on mind for your defensive tacsquad, which arguably supports the selection of BP+CS. I reserve the option of having both my tacsquads pile out the side of a rhino for rapidfire, which is why I play 2 squads, 2x flamer, 2x combi-flamer.

 

To the OP: What you should probably take from this is "Equip your sergeant to support what squad in its designated role." If you want the option of taking on MCs, ICs, etc, take a fist. If it's going to be shooting hordes at close-range, take a combi-flamer. If it's just going to be hiding in a corner squatting on an objective, save the points.

 

Which of those you need will depend at least slightly on the rest of your list.

[Giga]

(although, given your previous lists, don't you combat squad your defensive tacsquad and put the sergeant in the razorback?)

Depends on mission, terrain, and opponent, but oftentimes it's exactly what I do. This way the sergeant goes around accompanied by 3 bolter dudes and a flamer dude. In combat squads, that additional attack is also very practical.

 

The one additional bolter shot at 24" range is again something I rarely get to use, since the enemy either never gets within 24" of my objective-camping squad/combat squad, and/or it simply doesn't make a noticeable difference as far as shooting is concerned.

 

 

However, in battles where I want to get into assault with my entire army as soon as possible (when I fight an IG or tau gunline, or necrons) because that's where I'm going to be most efficient, having that extra attack is a real nice asset.

 

 

 

Either way, it's not like it's a huge deal. Basically, it all comes down to preference.

[Brother-Chaplain Gaius]

My primary sergeants all have powerfists + bolters

 

and my secondary ones I occasionally swap out with are powerweapon + plasma pistol

 

works every time ^_^

 

I run the PF and bolter in a las/plas squad with rhino

 

and PW/PP in my all melta squads with rhino

 

my tac squads are rarely beaten or outperformed by my rivals tacs and thats something I take pride in and focus on

[Fatuous]

(although, given your previous lists, don't you combat squad your defensive tacsquad and put the sergeant in the razorback?)

Depends on mission, terrain, and opponent, but oftentimes it's exactly what I do. This way the sergeant goes around accompanied by 3 bolter dudes and a flamer dude. In combat squads, that additional attack is also very practical.

 

The one additional bolter shot at 24" range is again something I rarely get to use, since the enemy either never gets within 24" of my objective-camping squad/combat squad, and/or it simply doesn't make a noticeable difference as far as shooting is concerned.

 

 

However, in battles where I want to get into assault with my entire army as soon as possible (when I fight an IG or tau gunline, or necrons) because that's where I'm going to be most efficient, having that extra attack is a real nice asset.

 

 

 

Either way, it's not like it's a huge deal. Basically, it all comes down to preference.

 

I can see the arguements on both sides for this. A bolter is going to give you the extra shot to range in every one of your shooting phases, which can add up.

 

But, a chainsword will give you 1 more attack in every assualt phase, yours and your opponents, potentially more extra attacks over the course of the game.

 

Sure the bolter shots have an AP, compared to the assualt which doesn't, but 1 extra wound that does get thru can seriously alter the out come of an assualt in to a route, having a far greater affect on the game as a whole.

 

It all goes back to what you want them to do.

 

For me I like my tactical squads to be as flexible a possible, and would prefer a power weapon/fist, but if you're trying to save points for objective holders, the chainsword option does add a little more flexibility for no cost, especially coupled with a flamer. Where as any squad with a plasma gun should prob have a bolter.