Regular v.s. Assualt Terminators

[Shadowstalker Grim]

When running 10 with 2 CMLs and 2 Chainfists, thats like 470 points. A whopping investment thats going to be trundling accross the board! I would love to run something like this actually, one of my friends is thinking of running tau...would a unit of this size be able to weather the masses of firepower aimed at them?

 

I ask this because it seems one of the weaknesses of the unit, its massive and so naturally attracts fire, but against an army that will be blasting away at it from the other side of the board....can it survive, or is it better against shorter range opponents?

 

EDIT: Points costs, thanks mysticaria :cuss

[Mysticaria]

When running 10 with 2 CMLs and some Chainfists, thats like 480 points. A whopping investment thats going to be trundling accross the board! I would love to run something like this actually, one of my friends is thinking of running tau...would a unit of this size be able to weather the masses of firepower aimed at them?

 

I ask this because it seems one of the weaknesses of the unit, its massive and so naturally attracts fire, but against an army that will be blasting away at it from the other side of the board....can it survive, or is it better against shorter range opponents?

465 actually.... as opposed to 5 T-hammer terminators in a Land Raider which comes in at 450-460.

 

-Myst

[DarkGuard]

@ Mysticaria

 

I'm not dismissing Tactical Termys completely, in fact out of the two they are perhaps my favourite as they are the pinnacle of what a Space Marine should be, excellent strategic ability in movement, shooting and assault, whereas the Assault Termys are a point and click troubleshooter. However, it is a simple fact that compared to one another, a TH/SS Terminator is more resilient than a normal Tactical Terminator, and it's because of the storm shield.

 

True, they tend to have less numbers than a Tactical Terminator squad should have, but I've already covered that earlier in this thread. However, in combat against the biggest, baddest enemies you can find they are unmatched by the Tactical Termys. If people want a counter-assault unit, or an assault unit to lead their army they don't take Tactical Termys, who specialize in a bit of everything, they take Assault Terminators who specialize in assault. Shooting can come from the rest of the army, but this unit is unmatched by anything else in the Marine Codex thanks to their resiliency, which gains a boost while in the Land Raider, and the damage they can put out.

 

Certainly I base resiliency around what's easier to kill, and for my its easier to kill footslogging normal Terminators over Assault Termys in a Land Raider, whether its by Demolisher Cannon or plasma gun Command Squad.

 

I don't like favouring one unit over the other without trying it. I've tried Assault Terminators in a LRR, and they were effective but boring. I've tried a small squad of Tactical Terminators with assault cannon to deep strike in and support my battleline where it was weakest, and this didn't work out too well most times, but it was fun. My brother though runs 10 Terminators with a TDA Libby and assault cannons, and it is a pain in the backside when it hits. He's still learning to use it though, as he's new to the game, and is planning on CMLs when he can add them. However, I've still had little trouble in taking them out with a couple of Demolisher Cannon hits backed up by Sternguard hellfire rounds and Null Zone. The problem I would have is Land Raiders, as meched up troops are easier to kill, and my vehicle damage rolls are appalling, but then this is all contextual now.

 

In any list TH/SS in a LR are effective as they are in the one of the hardest tanks in the game, are resilient, not invulnerable, but resilient in combat, and can smash enemies to a pulp. In lists built around them squads of Tactical Termys are also effective, as they can put out impressive firepower and still pull their weight in assault. In the end it comes down to preference and what works for you. TH/SS Termys worked for me, but I don't want to use them. Tactical Termys didn't work for me, but I may have a look at them some other time, it's just at the moment I'm sticking with my 3rd Company. If Tactical Termys work for you, go ahead and use them. I'm not dismissing their ability, I'm just saying that in terms of survival Assault Termys tend to be better, and as you want to outlast your opponent in assault that makes them more desirable.

 

@Wildfire: no problem there, different locations and different opponents lead to different experiences. Its what makes the game so amazing IMO, nothing is ever the same.

[Mysticaria]

Problem might be how people are trying to use Tactical Terminators. Deepstriking into a tight circle to become vindicator meat is bad news bears. Using your 2" base and 2" unit coherency means that a 5" vindicator template is going to hit 3 guys max if they roll really well. Usually it's 1-2 guys. Also, walking into range of a sternguard/nullzone volley is going to similarily be bad news bears. Ironically... null zone/sternguard hurts T-hammers just as bad as it hurts tactical terminators (arguably worse since there are less of them and since they rely on their 3++ save) ... just had to point that out.

 

Have your brother try out the 10x Termies with 2x CML unit, and have him walk them from his side, paying special attention to their spacing, the support units around them, the threats on the table that can take them out, and what targets they really want to go after... and see what happens. If his long-range or fast anti-tank can stop any vindicators, I imagine it becomes a lot harder to take them out "easily". Also, the CMLs want to be firing from turn 1 and waiting in reserves for deep strike is just not that good. I almost never deepstrike terminators, just because when they are in reserve they aren't contributing (ok, I know they are still influencing the board with their potential, but it feels like they aren't doing all they could when they are in reserve)... not to mention the chance to mishap with such an expensive unit.

 

Again... T-hammers are only more resilient because 3++ versus 5++. If you are facing null zone, or something that goes against 2+ (keep in mind this is MOST units in the game) then they aren't really more resilient. Don't forget that you get to use your entire army to fight the battle, so if the opponent has something that is going to go against that 3++ or 5++ you still get to play the game to try and limit those threats.

 

Finally... Tactical Terminators open up options and make the game more interesting. T-hammers, well, they are going to do one thing and that's it. Of course they are good at it, but if that is your opponent's strength you are forced to go "strength versus strength" where the tacticals always have the option to go "strenth versus weakness" in any matchup.

 

-Myst

[Bartali]

The problem with Tactical Terminators is that they're for the most part anti-infantry, and C:SM isn't exactly short of anti-infantry firepower.

Assault Terminators however are one of only two worthwhile assault units in the codex (the other being bike command squads).

[DarkGuard]

Some fantastic advise and points there about Tactical Terminators Mysticaria. I have been telling him many times to walk them, and when we swapped armies once I was able to walk them on from reserve (was Spearhead) and so they had lots of juicy side armour shots on his vehicles (or mine, this is confusing), and they carved a way through the army. Certainly not as single minded as Assault Terminators, but effective if used right. However, I would imagine that most of the time it is problematic ensuring that every Terminator is exactly 2" apart, I find this very long and arduous with my Marines, and instead most of the time I try and guess and put them about 1.5" apart.

 

I still maintain that Assault Terminators are the best for assault, but by no means the best. It all comes down to personal preference and taste, and what you want in your army.

[Mysticaria]

However, I would imagine that most of the time it is problematic ensuring that every Terminator is exactly 2" apart, I find this very long and arduous with my Marines, and instead most of the time I try and guess and put them about 1.5" apart.

 

I still maintain that Assault Terminators are the best for assault, but by no means the best. It all comes down to personal preference and taste, and what you want in your army.

 

Agreed... and you only have to worry about it if the opponent has large blast AP2 stuf. That doesn't happen too much, so most times you don't need to be more than 1" apart.

 

Agreed... but as always the point of my post was not to say promote Tactical Terminators as the best solution. Just want to get people thinking about them logically and get past that common consensus that T-hammers are awesome and Tactical Terminators are bad. They are both really good. One is purpose driven and the other is flexible. If you desire purpose driven, fine. If you desire flexible, cool. But don't just assume that one is bad because it's been said a million times.

 

-Myst

[Shadowstalker Grim]

Actually what do people think to a 1:1 ratio with Assault Cannons and Cyclone Missile Launchers in a 10 men squad (I ask because terminator packs come with 1 of each i believe and I'm thinking of maxing out the 5 men AOBR squad....)

[Bartali]

No one has really talked about lists, and where Terminators sit in them. I think your troops choice determines what sort to take more than anything.

 

Running five man Tacs in Las/Plas Razorbacks sitting in your deployment zone ? Take Tactical Terminators with CMLs to babysit them, providing some anti-infantry punch.

 

Running ten man tacs in Rhinos occupying the midfield ? You've got enough anti-infantry shooting with all those bolters, but need TH/SS terminators with either GoI TDA Libby or an LRC in case something starts popping those Rhinos and assaulting those ten man squads

[Mysticaria]

The problem with Tactical Terminators is that they're for the most part anti-infantry, and C:SM isn't exactly short of anti-infantry firepower.

Assault Terminators however are one of only two worthwhile assault units in the codex (the other being bike command squads).

 

Anti-infantry? now sure what you mean... what are the other options? Anti-vehicle? Anti-Monster? In this context, what are T-hammers "anti" that Tactical Terminators aren't?

 

Anti-vehicle:

I would argue that Missile Launchers, Assault Canons, Chainfists, and powerfists makes them a little more anti-vehicle than T-hammers.... they can take out vehicles at range, and with a chainfist have a better chance to peg them in close combat. Also, Dark Eldar skimmers, landspeeder storms, and Ork trucks can go down to a volley of bolter fire too, which is something that T-hammers can't do.

 

Anti MC:

I would also argue that missiles which ignore 3+ save on most MCs are not something to discount. Also, Tactical Termies have the exact same damage output in close combat as T-hammers (although T-hammers are twice as resilient). I think missiles and powerfists are more than enough to make sure the combat doesn't go too many rounds, somewhat negating the need for improved resiliency, and of course having more bodies because you saved on the landraider actually increases killiness for the first couple combats.

 

Not sure what you are trying to say with this post. Can you add some more about what makes them anti-infantry?

 

 

@shadowstalker: I suppose that might be ok. It would definately open up the option to combat squad (might be mandatory since it would make shooting at something outside 24" really unappealing). I found the bits for CMLs on a certain internet auction site for relatively cheap. Apparently everyone knows Tactical Terminators suck. ^_^ Seriously though, I've always found the assault canon to be rather underwhelming. It only gets better than the CML when you hit with everything or when you get rendings. Most times I just wish I had another CML. That opens up the option to combat squad and have a Terminator Devastator squad (4x missile shots and 2+ save), although I almost always keep them together nowadays for increased resiliency. Some people like the Assault Canon, so I would recommend playtesting both and see what you like. I just like the fact that CML is S8 AP3 and you don't lose any storm bolter shots, that's really good.

 

-Myst

[Wildfire]

There does seem to be one exception to the general "all hammers all the time" rule; when you LC terminators who have access to furious charge. S5 I5 claws are a lot more tempting, since they hit first against most opponents and have a pretty good chance of completely shredding the enemy before they ever get a chance to hit back.

 

This is true. But aside from Khan joining the squad, I don't know how you'd accomplish that.

 

Anti MC:

I would also argue that missiles which ignore 3+ save on most MCs are not something to discount. Also, Tactical Termies have the exact same damage output in close combat as T-hammers (although T-hammers are twice as resilient).

 

Thammers are better than pfists vs. MC, because after the first round they go at I1.

[LardO'Blood]

Just thought I'd do this for any future people who want to run tactical terminators, these are lists of threads regarding them. They seem to be one of those threads that comes up every few months (I think I have gone back to the start of C:SM5 but I'm not sure):

Lysander with Tactical Terminators Discussions

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...p;hl=terminator

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...p;hl=terminator

Tactical Terminator Weapon Configuration

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...p;hl=terminator

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...p;hl=terminator

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...p;hl=terminator

Army Building and Tactical Terminators

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...p;hl=terminator

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...p;hl=terminator

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...p;hl=terminator

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...p;hl=terminator

Ten Man Terminator Squads

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...p;hl=terminator

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...p;hl=terminator

Tactical (mostly) Terminator Tactics

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...p;hl=terminator

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...p;hl=terminator

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...p;hl=terminator

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...p;hl=terminator

Tactical Terminators vs. Assault Terminators

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...p;hl=terminator

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...p;hl=terminator

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...p;hl=terminator

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...p;hl=terminator

I think all of these links are helpful, if they aren't then tell me and I'll remove the ones that aren't. I hope that somebody will make use of these links I compiled and try tactical terminators out.

I thought I'd re post this. I think it is a decent resource regarding tactical terminators.

[Bartali]

Anti-infantry? now sure what you mean... what are the other options? Anti-vehicle? Anti-Monster? In this context, what are T-hammers "anti" that Tactical Terminators aren't?

 

The Tactical Terminator's gun is a Storm Bolter, which excels at anti-infantry. This is their primary role.

Sure you can fire an Assault Cannon or CML at MCs or tanks, but then you're wasting all the other Terminators. You don't really want to waste them shooting at tanks, when other things in your list should be doing this and do it better.

[DarkGuard]

Anti-infantry? now sure what you mean... what are the other options? Anti-vehicle? Anti-Monster? In this context, what are T-hammers "anti" that Tactical Terminators aren't?

 

The Tactical Terminator's gun is a Storm Bolter, which excels at anti-infantry. This is their primary role.

Sure you can fire an Assault Cannon or CML at MCs or tanks, but then you're wasting all the other Terminators. You don't really want to waste them shooting at tanks, when other things in your list should be doing this and do it better.

 

Using this logic we'd never put combi-meltas on Sternguard to take out tanks, as then you waste their special ammo bolters. Using this logic you'd never fire multi-meltas and meltaguns from Tactical squads at tanks, because then you'd waste their normal bolters.

 

I think what Myst is trying to say here is that Tactical Terminators are not stuck at anti-infantry, otherwise everyone would buy heavy flamers for them, which are better anti-infantry than frag missiles. Or assault cannons, which I firmly believe are better anti-infantry than frag missiles.

 

No, the reason why people take CMLs with Tactical Terminators is so that they can threaten a wide range of targets, much like why people take Typhoons, or why people put combi-meltas on Sternguard squads. If you have a CML, you not only have fantastic anti-infantry with frag missiles for light infantry and krak for heavy, plus your bolt shots, but your krak missiles will knock unsaveable wounds on a 2+ on most MCs, and stand a good chance at most tanks your opponent can put out, especially transports. The prime focus of Tactical Terminators may be anti-infantry, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't take options in other areas. Tactical Terminators are the pinnacle of Tactical Marines, and so therefore they should be flexible in everything they do.

[Captain Juan Juarez]

Basically, to put it succinctly:

 

Assault Terminators are extremely specialised; they will carve through almost anything they can get to grips with.

 

Tactical Terminators are pure versatility; they can cause damage at range and in CC, but they won't always match the damage output of a specialised unit - that said, I believe them to be the better option purely because of the weapon configurations available.

[Bartali]

Using this logic you'd never fire multi-meltas and meltaguns from Tactical squads at tanks, because then you'd waste their normal bolters.

 

Picked this one, as Tactical Marine squads are (suprise ! ^_^) very similar to Tactical Terminators in that their primary use is anti-infantry.

Why do you pay 200+ pts for a tactical squad in a Rhino ? Do you pay it to have one melta shot on a tank ? No, you buy them for rapid firing bolters.

 

CMLs, Chain Fists, Meltaguns, Missile Launchers etc give both something to do should their primary targets (infantry) not be available to shoot at in your turn. There's nothing worse than a specialist that doesn't get out of their tank because they don't have anything to do (cf Eldar).

[DarkGuard]

Using this logic you'd never fire multi-meltas and meltaguns from Tactical squads at tanks, because then you'd waste their normal bolters.

 

Picked this one, as Tactical Marine squads are (suprise ! :)) very similar to Tactical Terminators in that their primary use is anti-infantry.

Why do you pay 200+ pts for a tactical squad in a Rhino ? Do you pay it to have one melta shot on a tank ? No, you buy them for rapid firing bolters.

 

True, although for me I buy them for their scoring status, if I want infantry killing I rely on my Sternguard and Vindicators. However, I understand what you're saying, I agree that Tactical Terminators are primarily anti-infantry, but due to their nature they can pretty much handle anything.

[Mysticaria]

Basically, to put it succinctly:

 

Tactical Terminators are pure versatility; they can cause damage at range and in CC, but they won't always match the damage output of a specialised unit - that said, I believe them to be the better option purely because of the weapon configurations available.

Huh? Tactical Terminators due EXACTLY the same damage output as T-hammer terminators... only difference is that instead of 3++ they get Range Weapons. Coming from a purely "damage output" standpoint, that meanst that Tactical Terminators are clearly superior to T-hammers. The advantage T-hammers have is the 3++, hence they are harder to kill (in some situations). That is the only difference... 3++ save & ability to stun MCs vs. 5++ save and shooting options.

 

Anti-infantry? now sure what you mean... what are the other options? Anti-vehicle? Anti-Monster? In this context, what are T-hammers "anti" that Tactical Terminators aren't?

 

The Tactical Terminator's gun is a Storm Bolter, which excels at anti-infantry. This is their primary role.

Sure you can fire an Assault Cannon or CML at MCs or tanks, but then you're wasting all the other Terminators. You don't really want to waste them shooting at tanks, when other things in your list should be doing this and do it better.

I see what you are saying as far as the stormbolters, and I used to have this mindset. I felt that if I wasn't using the storm bolters I wasn't getting the best use out of the squad. But I urge you to think about it differently. Do you get upset when your T-hammer terminators take 2+ saves? I mean, they aren't using their stormshields that they are paying points for, right? Same goes for the storm bolters... if you can use them great, but don't let that define the unit. Here's how I look at the weapons and try to get the most use out of it:

 

1- Missiles: This is the easiest to use as they are good against many targets and have the longest range. I always want to fire missiles.

2- Powerfists: This is the next best strength of the unit. It comes on a 2+ save body, and this is the second ability I try to maximise

3- Stormbolters: These are included in the unit, but aren't the part that you need to maximise. As you say, lots of bolters in the rest of the army. This is a bonus when it helps.

 

 

Oh yeah, and I forgot to point out that Tactical Termies can very easily get a 4++ cover save in most battles. Combination of terrain, vehicles, and other troops in your armie means that from enemy shooting you really will have 2+/4++ versus 2+/3++... I can't believe I forgot to point that out so long, but it just came to me again when thinking through a recent battle. My Tactical Termies are usually one of the last combat capable units on the table, and the main complaint has been resiliency, so I was trying to figure out why I haven't experienced that as a problem. Anyway, hopefully some of this rambling post is a little help.

 

-Myst

[Captain Juan Juarez]

Basically, to put it succinctly:

 

Tactical Terminators are pure versatility; they can cause damage at range and in CC, but they won't always match the damage output of a specialised unit - that said, I believe them to be the better option purely because of the weapon configurations available.

 

Huh? Tactical Terminators do EXACTLY the same damage output as T-hammer terminators... only difference is that instead of 3++ they get Range Weapons. Coming from a purely "damage output" standpoint, that meanst that Tactical Terminators are clearly superior to T-hammers. The advantage T-hammers have is the 3++, hence they are harder to kill (in some situations). That is the only difference... 3++ save & ability to stun MCs vs. 5++ save and shooting options.

-Myst

 

Really? It's not a comparison I have ever made with an massive depth of scientific evaluation of, but - in my mind - it seems that in CC (which is what i should have more clearly referred to) they shouldn't match a dedicated Assault unit.

[Mysticaria]

Basically, to put it succinctly:

 

Tactical Terminators are pure versatility; they can cause damage at range and in CC, but they won't always match the damage output of a specialised unit - that said, I believe them to be the better option purely because of the weapon configurations available.

 

Huh? Tactical Terminators do EXACTLY the same damage output as T-hammer terminators... only difference is that instead of 3++ they get Range Weapons. Coming from a purely "damage output" standpoint, that meanst that Tactical Terminators are clearly superior to T-hammers. The advantage T-hammers have is the 3++, hence they are harder to kill (in some situations). That is the only difference... 3++ save & ability to stun MCs vs. 5++ save and shooting options.

-Myst

 

Really? It's not a comparison I have ever made with an massive depth of scientific evaluation of, but - in my mind - it seems that in CC (which is what i should have more clearly referred to) they shouldn't match a dedicated Assault unit.

Yep, that's kind of my point. There is a prevaling mindset that Tactical Terminators are bad at close combat and T-hammers are good at close combat. Just wanted to point out that it deserves some consideration because the difference, while there, isn't as one sided as everyone likes to point out. They both have 2x S8 power weapon attacks each. Tac Termies as a unit actually have a few S4 I4 power weapons attacks for the sergeant, and of course assault terminators can mix in lightning claws as needed, but really if you compare 1 tactical terminator with 1 thunder hammer they have the same attacks, WS, S, etc... T-hammers really excel when they get to use their 3++(MCs, honor guard, witches) or their hammers (MCs). Tac Termies are the same in Close Combat against most units and have shooting. Depends what you think you'll be facing in your environment, and what you want your play style to be.

 

** Just want to throw this out there... Black Reach Terminators are cheap, a lot cheaper than T-hammers and a Landraider. I know this is a tactics thread and not a hobby thread, but that could be a concern for some people. **

 

-Myst

[Captain Juan Juarez]

Yep, that's kind of my point. There is a prevaling mindset that Tactical Terminators are bad at close combat and T-hammers are good at close combat. Just wanted to point out that it deserves some consideration because the difference, while there, isn't as one sided as everyone likes to point out. They both have 2x S8 power weapon attacks each. Tac Termies as a unit actually have a few S4 I4 power weapons attacks for the sergeant, and of course assault terminators can mix in lightning claws as needed, but really if you compare 1 tactical terminator with 1 thunder hammer they have the same attacks, WS, S, etc... T-hammers really excel when they get to use their 3++(MCs, honor guard, witches) or their hammers (MCs). Tac Termies are the same in Close Combat against most units and have shooting. Depends what you think you'll be facing in your environment, and what you want your play style to be.

 

** Just want to throw this out there... Black Reach Terminators are cheap, a lot cheaper than T-hammers and a Landraider. I know this is a tactics thread and not a hobby thread, but that could be a concern for some people. **

 

-Myst

 

Actually I don't believe that Tactical Terminators are "bad" at CC, in my view it is just that Assault Terminators are tasked for it and should therefore be better.

 

In my mind that leads me to the argument that the protection offered form the SS, is worth the tradeoff in terms of firepower et al.

[breng77]

Well consider 5 Tactical Termies, VS. 5 TH/SS.

 

Tacticals Charge

Kill about 2 TH/SS after all is said and done.

 

TH/SS kill about 3 Tactical Terminators.

 

TH/SS Charge

Tacticals Kill about 1 TH/SS

 

TH/SS kill all 5 Tactical Terminators.

 

If you assume the Tacticals Charge and Shoot first (assuming Cyclone shooting 2 Krak Missiles)

Shooting Kills 1 TH/SS termi on average.

Then they Kill 2 more

 

TH/SS Kill 3 Tacticals.

 

TH/SS win Combat by 1.

 

The problem with this is that Assault Termies are almost always in a Landraider, and are more likely to get the charge, than tactical termies who are often on foot.

[DarkGuard]

Well consider 5 Tactical Termies, VS. 5 TH/SS.

 

Tacticals Charge

Kill about 2 TH/SS after all is said and done.

 

TH/SS kill about 3 Tactical Terminators.

 

TH/SS Charge

Tacticals Kill about 1 TH/SS

 

TH/SS kill all 5 Tactical Terminators.

 

If you assume the Tacticals Charge and Shoot first (assuming Cyclone shooting 2 Krak Missiles)

Shooting Kills 1 TH/SS termi on average.

Then they Kill 2 more

 

TH/SS Kill 3 Tacticals.

 

TH/SS win Combat by 1.

 

The problem with this is that Assault Termies are almost always in a Landraider, and are more likely to get the charge, than tactical termies who are often on foot.

 

The problem with that example is that it illustrates what we all know is true, that Assault Terminators are better than Tactical Terminators in combat. What I believe that Myst is trying to say is that against squads like Tactical Marines, Devs, Guardians, Dire Avengers, Necron Warriors etc, Tact Termys are no worst than TH/SS Termys as they don't need the SS, they hit the same, and may be superior in this respect due to their shooting. SS only comes in against things which ignore army save, so quite obviously you don't go charging your Tactical Termys againt Howling Banshees and MCs, and I don't think Myst is telling us that Tactical Termys should do that. IMO, and I think everyone agrees, Tact Termys are a bully unit, don't use them to take out the big, power weapon killy things, but use them to support your army and take out the Devs and Guardians.

[breng77]

Sure Tactical Termies are better than TH/SS termies against anything that does not ignore their 2+ save. When you start seeing, marines with PWs or PFs, Orks with Power Claws, etc. Then the difference becomes larger in CC. The difference also exists out of CC as far as Durability, Plasma, and Melta hurt tactical termies twice as badly as they hurt TH/SS termies. Now I love tactical termies. I play Deathwing as one of my armies, and we don't even have TH/SS termies (not good ones anyway).

[Mysticaria]

Well consider 5 Tactical Termies, VS. 5 TH/SS.

 

Tacticals Charge

Kill about 2 TH/SS after all is said and done.

 

TH/SS kill about 3 Tactical Terminators.

 

TH/SS Charge

Tacticals Kill about 1 TH/SS

 

TH/SS kill all 5 Tactical Terminators.

 

If you assume the Tacticals Charge and Shoot first (assuming Cyclone shooting 2 Krak Missiles)

Shooting Kills 1 TH/SS termi on average.

Then they Kill 2 more

 

TH/SS Kill 3 Tacticals.

 

TH/SS win Combat by 1.

 

The problem with this is that Assault Termies are almost always in a Landraider, and are more likely to get the charge, than tactical termies who are often on foot.

 

The problem with that example is that it illustrates what we all know is true, that Assault Terminators are better than Tactical Terminators in combat. What I believe that Myst is trying to say is that against squads like Tactical Marines, Devs, Guardians, Dire Avengers, Necron Warriors etc, Tact Termys are no worst than TH/SS Termys as they don't need the SS, they hit the same, and may be superior in this respect due to their shooting. SS only comes in against things which ignore army save, so quite obviously you don't go charging your Tactical Termys againt Howling Banshees and MCs, and I don't think Myst is telling us that Tactical Termys should do that. IMO, and I think everyone agrees, Tact Termys are a bully unit, don't use them to take out the big, power weapon killy things, but use them to support your army and take out the Devs and Guardians.

Of course...

 

And the above example shows 450 points of T-hammers (including the raider since that's the only way they don't get shot 3-4 turns in a row before combat) going against 230 points of tactical termies... not really fair in my opinion. If you are ever in a situation where your tactical termies are fighting close combat against thunderhammer termies on equal footing then something went wrong, since apparently the tactical terminators were reduced to about half strength without even getting to kill 1 T-hammer. Tactical Termies should get at least 2-3 rounds of shooting against footslogging termies, more if they use movement to keep the range open (which is the only smart play when you have guns and the other guy doesn't) and if the T-hammers are in a ride (which I would think is 95% of the time) please don't forget to factor in the other 5 tactical terminators that will be in the squad. Run the math with 10 tactical terminators versus 5 T-hammers and you might get a different result. And, I want to point out that we're not comparing unit A versus unit B in a head to head situation where we already agread unit A was purpose built for. We're comparing the uses of unit A and unit B when they are in different situations, within the context of a 40k battle, with or without objectives, against many different posssible opponents. Saying "my unit would beat yours in a situation which heavily favors them, with twice as many points of guys, without any other parts of our armies involved, and without considering previous game turns" is really not that helpful here.

 

Let's be fair in the analysis please....... I could come up with every situation where T-hammers aren't that good and point out where Tacticals would be better if I wanted to. That's not the point though. I'm trying to point out that Tacticals aren't as bad as people tend to say they are, and that they especially aren't that bad when compared to T-hammers which everyone says are awesome.

 

Say you traded your unit of Tactical Terminators in the previous example for a unit of T-hammers. Would you be any better off? You are still losing if you don't get the charge, and you have no option other than to try and get the charge. Even if you get the charge you aren't killing any more bad guys than you would with Tactical Terminators. And... you can't switch to a backup plan, you can't sacrifice a small unit to get the other guy in the open and shoot him up, you can't use your mobility to stay away, you are forced to play "strength versus strength". Meanwhile, Tactical Terminators at least give you the option to play "Strength versus Weakness" in that you try and keep the range open, shoot them up, don't get to close combat until you have more guys. Besides leading to a more interesting game, it opens up your tactical options significatly.

 

-Myst