whats a good amount of scoring units to field?

[DarkGuard]

Thank you, DarkGuard. That means a lot from you, especially since I feel like I don't know how to play Space Marines anymore.

 

In general, Razorbacks support Campers, because they have long-range weapons, and benifit from finding a hull-down position. Heavy Bolter Razorbacks are ok in a Claiming roll, simply because they're cheap. Once the squad inside deploys, their main job is to provide mobile cover, and hopefully blast some infantry too. The Assault Cannon Razorback maneuvers the same way as a Claimer, but is much more expensive to use as a throw-away transport.

 

Perhaps the best use for the AssCan Razor is as a seperate Claimer paired with a Camping Tac Squad. Heck, it doesn't even need a squad inside to count as Scoring, right? But if you're doing that, you'll be using it with a Combat-squadded Tac anyway. 10 Marines Camping doesn't make much sense.

 

Remember, the point is to help people select the proper Troop choices for their army. In theory, it should be pretty obvious that if you're taking Pedro and Sternguard, you won't need Objective Claimers, so you should focus on Campers instead for your Troop slots. The trick is figuring out which Campers to use.

 

To make it a bit easier, I put together this list:

 

Campers

Sniper Scouts

5-man Tac Squads (Default upgraded Razorback, Rhino OK with squad Heavy Weapon)

 

Claimers

Assault Scouts (Ideally with a LSS)

5-man Tac with melta or dual-flamer (default Rhino, HB Razor OK)

10-man Tac with Rhino (Heavy Weapon optional)

Bikes as Troops (Attack Bike optional)

 

In general, I find plasmaguns a lackluster option now. It's good for a Camper Tac and Bikes, but that's about it. It's point cost and competition pretty much kill it, 'Get's Hot' is just too much. Maybe if it ignored cover, or invulnerable saves, it would be viable again, but...

 

A good summary, I would agree with that. However, it does appear that you're talking about 5 man Tactical squads with a heavy or special. I'm sure you know, but just to make it clear to those who don't, 5 man Tactical squads cannot take any weapon upgrades except those for a Sergeant. So if you're just taking the 5 man Tactical squad with a Razor the best you can probably do is las plas with a combi-flamer. If, however, you decide to take a 10 man squad with Razorback, you can then take the specials and heavy plus a combi, and split them down to have a 5 man Tactical squad camping and a 5 man Tactical squad claiming.

 

Also, plasma guns can still be good. Personally I agree with the points cost issue, against most targets the flamer does a good enough job, except for Terminators and MCs etc. However, the plasma gun is still good with high strength and a high rate of fire making it flexible, and Gets Hot! isn't a big issue. I have a feeling that plasma will be more popular now, what with all those new Grey Knights about to be unleashed on the tabletop.

[Ryjak]

@ Myst: By my terminology, the squad you described is a Camper: It's a full 10-man squad. Just because they spend the first turn moving forward and deploying doesn't matter. After they deploy, they Camp. Remember, Scoring status doesn't matter; what your Troops do for your army does.

 

Back in 4th Edition, my army was almost nothing but forward-deployed Campers. The dual-plasma/Multimelta in a Rhino is perhaps the best forward-deployed Camper available in the SM Codex, along with 4x Multimelta Devs in a Droppod or Rhino. Heck, any unit in a Drop Pod is a forward-deployed Camper. The fact you can almost guarantee where they'll land and what they can shoot when they arrive simply makes them a lot more viable than if they were just in a Rhino.

 

@ nurglephill: Plague Marines are one of the best Campers in the game, period. They're very hard to kill without assaulting with multiple power weapons. Dual plasmaguns are great for Campers. No surprise you have a lot of success with that unit. My guess is that the rest of your army NEEDS a Camper Troop, which is why it works very well for you, even if 'common wisdom' says they should be Claimers. I'd be interest in seeing your army without your Troop Choices and your point limit.

 

Something I keep forgetting to address is the 1 Troop per 500 points rule I've seen tossed around here. I'm guessing this works for certain people because of how their army functions. In Elemental terms, everyone that advocates this rule is probably using an Earth army, which really needs resiliancy and redundancy, and spamming Tactical Squads is a great way to get that. Three 10-man Campers are going to be hard to kill. They also cost about 700 points, which can also get you a LOT of killy, esp. compared to what those three Tac squads will kill.

 

Basically, this 'rule' works for some people on accident. I feel a better rule is spending a certain percentage on Troops, depending on your army. Earth armies probably need at least 40% on Troops, while Fire armies can easily get by with 20%.

 

I designed an army last night where all I felt I needed were two cheap Campers:

 

HQ - Librarian in Terminator Armor with Storm Shield, Vortex of Doom, Null Zone (Killer)

 

Elite - 5-man TH/SS Terminators (Killer) mounted in a Land Raider with Multi-Melta (Fire Support)

 

Fast Attack - Two pairs of MM/HF Landspeeders (Hunters)

 

Heavy Support - Two Vindicators (limited Killers)

 

The army would probably be better served with Tactical Terminators and a Missile Launcher or Assault Cannon and a pair of Chainfists, since I'm only getting them for access to the Land Raider. The army started with the two-three Vindicators and a Land Raider, after all.

 

Ultimately, this is an aggessive Earth army. By default, I'm the Controller and hanging back in my deployment zone. I'm the Beatdown against armies that can outshoot me, and must charge them with everything. So, for my Troops, I need something that can switch-hit. Something that can Camp when I'm the Controller, and something that can Claim when I'm the Beatdown. This throws out all Scouts (which don't switch-hit well) and Bikes, which don't Camp. So I need two Tac Squads that Camp, but can Claim when necessary. For the points, I feel two 5-man Tactical Squad with a combi-flamer in a Las-plas Razorback fits the bill. This unit is perfectly happy sniping with the Lascannon, or pushing forward aggresively to unleash the flamer and getting the plasmagun in range. For more points, I could get a second 5-man Tactical Squad with a Heavy Weapon as well, but I'm not sure it's worth dropping a Landspeeder to get it.

 

Another option is a 10-man squad with a meltagun, ML/MM, and a Rhino. However, I feel this unit is focused more on Claiming, with the option to Camp, when my army needs a Camper with the option to Claim. A 10-man squad with dual-flamers and a Lascannon in a Rhino or Razorback, however...

[nurglephill]

@ nurglephill: Plague Marines are one of the best Campers in the game, period. They're very hard to kill without assaulting with multiple power weapons. Dual plasmaguns are great for Campers. No surprise you have a lot of success with that unit. My guess is that the rest of your army NEEDS a Camper Troop, which is why it works very well for you, even if 'common wisdom' says they should be Claimers. I'd be interest in seeing your army without your Troop Choices and your point limit.

 

 

 

Ultimately, this is an aggessive Earth army. By default, I'm the Controller and hanging back in my deployment zone. I'm the Beatdown against armies that can outshoot me, and must charge them with everything. So, for my Troops, I need something that can switch-hit. Something that can Camp when I'm the Controller, and something that can Claim when I'm the Beatdown.

 

Interesting as ever Ryjak.

 

My army list would not help you at all because it is made up of units I like and nothing to do with units that work. I have also played 7 games this ed only. But in those 7 when my termies and termie lord have been wiped out to a man by IG in two turns only killing 2 men, or when they are cut to pieces by a C:SM HQ with a higher 'I', power weapons and the invulnerable save of a storm shield to save the two attacks that come back at them the first round....sigh. Of all my Death Guard units the DP is good when used right and the Plague Marines are excellent, especially against bolt weapons. The simple tactic being wipe out the high AP weapons turn one ruthlessly, then any power weapons etc.

 

ANYWAY this is not about Plague Marines XD

 

I do have a question about your last post...what is an 'Earth army', 'controller' and 'beatdown' ?

 

I feel you are using terms very well known, perhaps in a famous tactica or something? I would love to read these if that is true :D

[Grey Mage]

An earth army is one that emphasizes how tough it is, and tends to be good at shooting, and often a bit slow.

 

Beatdown means in this case attacking the enemy aggressively and up close- often in close combat.

 

Controller, in this context, means he seeks to make his opponent do certain things during the battle, limiting their options so he can take the battle where he wants it to go.

[nurglephill]

Ahhh! Many thanks :)

 

I actually just found the tactica astartes project, which seems to have all the stuff I asked about. I DO look...honestly. I admit to sucking however :lol:

 

Many thanks for the explanation Grey Mage :tu:

[Ming]

At 1850 to 2000 points, 30 scoring models. Split anyway you want.

[Deus de Mortalis]

For me, scoring units are bikers and scouts, often two squads of each. I absolutely hate tactical squads though sometimes I will take a 170pt squad of them just to babysit an objective or just sit in the back and I find them to just be a points sink and are utilized not because they actually bring anything on their merits but because people feel forced to by the force organization chart and the need for holding objectives. It seems that people try to force tactical squads into their lists, when if given the option, they probably wouldn't use them. Another thing I dislike is that they usually give up two victory points since 90% of the time they are paired with a rhino. Those are two victory points worth of your army without the ability to really make that back unless it is with the heavy weapon getting lucky against an opponent's rhino or someone being dumb and charging your marines with guard or fire warriors. Also many excuses are made. Like instead of not being good at anything, they are called "flexible," while when creating an army list and on the battlefield, they really aren't any more flexible than many other units. Tactical squads were by far the biggest disappointment to me when I got my 5th edition codex. GW neutered them way too much. Although I will admit that maybe tactical squads were a little too good in 4th edition, GW always seems to go overboard in correcting any sort of imbalance. Today's tactical squads ended up far more inflexible than those of 3rd edition, and taking codex creep into account, actually end up being a ripoff compared to 3rd edition. And for those of you who never played 3rd edition, tacticals were never really considered awesome back then.

[TyrionTheImp]

Why the tactical hate still?!

 

Tacticals are GOOD, people just misuse them and assume they're bad, then complain their codex is gimped. They aren't Grey Hunters, and they aren't BA Assault Squads, but that doesn't make them bad, overcosted, or anything, you just can't use them in the same capacity and expect the same results. It saddens me to see so many people cast aside tacticals as useless. I've actually flip flopped from being a tactical minimalist to taking a lot more, and I've actually started to win more games.

 

*Sigh* :)

[Deus de Mortalis]

Why the tactical hate still?!

 

Tacticals are GOOD, people just misuse them and assume they're bad, then complain their codex is gimped. They aren't Grey Hunters, and they aren't BA Assault Squads, but that doesn't make them bad, overcosted, or anything, you just can't use them in the same capacity and expect the same results. It saddens me to see so many people cast aside tacticals as useless. I've actually flip flopped from being a tactical minimalist to taking a lot more, and I've actually started to win more games.

 

*Sigh* ^_^

 

My hate really just stems from the fact that tacticals were my favorite unit in the game. In fact, my favorite army ever was a 4th edition power armor horde. Tacticals were very flexible and could be tailored to your situation. Now you must have ten men to have a special weapon, and the veteran sergeant is forced upon you. And the "free" flamer and missile launcher are because the marines cost more now. Also two special weapons and/or BP+CCW are out. So now whether you choose to shoot or assault, you lose with tacticals. If you shoot, you have wasted points on the veteran sergeant, and if you assault, you have wasted points on the heavy weapon. Plus you lose previous options that allowed you to be more flexible with their loadout. With the current way tactical marines are set up, you are forced to find a problem for the solution and not the other way around like you do with the rest of your units, and it is more difficult to make effective use of your tacticals since you are wasting some aspect you are forced to pay for. The fact that tacticals have been dumbed down to at the very best only as good as they were in 3rd edition, although still far less flexible, while at the same time the undeniable fact of codex creep has made most other units and abilities cheaper over time has turned tacticals from an asset to a liability for most players who only take them because they need the troop choices. I'm not even comparing tacticals to power armor troop choices in other codices though. Even the old 4th edition Chaos Marine codex we still use has their standard tacticals beating vanilla tacticals by a looong shot in terms of both cost and flexibility. I really hope that the 6th edition Space Marine codex rectifies this somewhat. If it wasn't for the fact that I would have to shelve my large collection of bikes and scouts, I would be using the Chaos codex right now just because I miss having tacticals I can rely on to get the job done instead of having to rely on them to just keep the deployment zone warm or provide backup support to the units that are carrying the game.

[Something Wycked]

Why the tactical hate still?!

 

Tacticals are GOOD, people just misuse them and assume they're bad, then complain their codex is gimped. They aren't Grey Hunters, and they aren't BA Assault Squads, but that doesn't make them bad, overcosted, or anything, you just can't use them in the same capacity and expect the same results. It saddens me to see so many people cast aside tacticals as useless. I've actually flip flopped from being a tactical minimalist to taking a lot more, and I've actually started to win more games.

 

*Sigh* ^_^

Tacticals fail except in very limited circumstances. They get out-assualted by other armies' basic troops (GK, SW, CSM, Orks, Nids, etc etc etc), and they get out-shot by other armies' basic troops (GK, SW, CSM, IG, Tau...) For a unit that's supposed to be able to sit near midfield and do "everything" at least marginally well, it fails miserably.

 

Your own post admits they're bad compared to Grey Hunters and BA Troops, and that they can't be used "in the same capacity", but that's what they should be able to do. Tactical Marines should be able to do what Grey Hunters and BA Assault Squads do, and do it just as well.

 

But they don't. And having to buy a full squad just to get any sort of upgraded weaponry for the squad is NOT free; that Flamer and ML cost you 80 points while at the same time buying you 5 wounds and 3 bolters. Not a bargain in any sense of the word.

 

On topic... I often bring the bare minimum Troops choices composed of Scouts to maximize the Killy part of the army. I clear/contest the enemy objective and ensure mine stays controlled by having enough threats to do both at the same time.

 

However, with the points increase to 1750 and my switch to the BA dex, I imagine the battle plan will change; I may end up rolling Troop-heavy with Assault Squads leading the way, supported by most of the big guns from my old lists.

[TyrionTheImp]

I don't see how shooting wastes points for the sergeant and assaulting wastes points on the heavy weapon.

 

Most heavy weapons are free, specifically the ones I use most (Multi-melta and Missile Launcher), so I'm not "wasting" any points if I choose to move or assault.

 

As for "wasting" your points on sergeant, give him a combi-weapon to shoot. If anything he's there for the Leadership boost as one extra attack in close combat isn't anything special. I don't give him anything else, no reason to.

 

Sure, they aren't as versatile as they used to be, but they don't need to be, they're scoring troops, they're hard to kill, and they can threaten vehicles and infantry quite easily without being terribly costly. You just need them to stick around until the end of the game, anything else they do is just gravy.

 

I've started bringing 4 Squads of tacticals to great effect. 40 Scoring Marine bodies is kinda hard to get rid of, throw them into Rhino's and they're just that much tougher to kill.

 

I find the rest of my list still has enough killy elements to put my enemy down.

[TyrionTheImp]

Tacticals fail except in very limited circumstances. They get out-assualted by other armies' basic troops (GK, SW, CSM, Orks, Nids, etc etc etc), and they get out-shot by other armies' basic troops (GK, SW, CSM, IG, Tau...) For a unit that's supposed to be able to sit near midfield and do "everything" at least marginally well, it fails miserably.

Orks are assaulty, Nids are assaulty, of course Tacticals are out assaulted by them. GK's have Storm Bolters but also cost significantly more, I've already talked about SW, CSM are sort of in-line with SW, but they lack some special rules. IG can't outshoot Marines except in sheer numbers, and Tau net the same amount of wounds as SM do shooting infantry, but are terribly overcosted and can't bring a special weapon.

 

Your own post admits they're bad compared to Grey Hunters and BA Troops, and that they can't be used "in the same capacity", but that's what they should be able to do. Tactical Marines should be able to do what Grey Hunters and BA Assault Squads do, and do it just as well.

Grey Hunters and BA Assault squads can't bring heavy weapons to bear, that is a huge and crucial part of Tacticals, the ability to pack more multi-meltas and more missiles into a list is a huge deal that I think a lot of people just skim over. Not to mention combi-weapons can be brought too, thus mimicking the "double special" that GH's can bring.

 

But they don't. And having to buy a full squad just to get any sort of upgraded weaponry for the squad is NOT free; that Flamer and ML cost you 80 points while at the same time buying you 5 wounds and 3 bolters. Not a bargain in any sense of the word.

5 T4 3+ Save Wounds? Totally worth it. Having more bodies is always a good thing, I don't see how that's remotely bad, especially when I can split my squads of 10 up into 5 each and play MSU games.

 

Assault Squads shine with their MSU Razorspam. Grey Hunters shine because they can MSU spam, or play big squads of 10 and be good at everything. Tacticals shine because you can pack more heavy weapons into your list, and still get your special weapons in.

[Mysticaria]

You don't see me hating on tacticals... heck my theory for scoring units is "two tacticals per army at any point level" ^_^

 

Yeah, they aren't super killer, but they do have strengths. They are very hard to completely kill off. I like to take advantage of their strength (hard to kill) and use the extra points to buy more killy stuff. Here are some things that tacticals have going for them. Scouts share some of these, but the rhino and 3+ save is really the main differences between the two units.

 

1- They have ATSKNF so you have to assault them or shoot every last one to get rid of them.

2- They have combat tactics, so even when you assault them you might not get them all.

3- They have combat squads, so 2 scoring units suddenly becomes 3-4 in a given game.

4- They have rhinos, so at the very least you have to get them out of their shell first to even shoot/assault them

5- Small squads of 1-5 guys are not a big threat, and are really hard to kill if they are hiding (vehicles, buildings, etc...)

6- They are marines. Sometimes they are just better than the other guy and can asault

7- Heavy weapons. hiding in the back with a lascanon or missile is not the worst thing ever.

8- 3+ save.

 

-Myst

[nurglephill]

I have a question about tactical marines and this seems like the perfect thread actually. I am told that a 5 man squad isnt really tough enough to hold your base objective, especially with all the super kill weapons and CC monsters about but a ten man squad is.

 

This has led me to a thought. (a rare event I assure you!)

 

You have 10 tactical marines in cover on your base objective with (for arguments sake) a Missile Launcher and flamer. In front of you is a unit that will be in assault range next turn.

 

Can you split your tactical squad into two 5 man units at this point, and count the Heavy Weapon as NOT moving as his combat squad stayed still? The idea being that they stand there ground and fire at the squad facing them, with the other 5 retreating behind them. They take the charge (having fired obviously, and there brother 5 man squad firing too) and this leave the other 5 free to charge in the next turn thus giving you more attacks.

 

Is this OK rules wise, and is it viable?

 

Thanks :)

[Deus de Mortalis]

I have a question about tactical marines and this seems like the perfect thread actually. I am told that a 5 man squad isnt really tough enough to hold your base objective, especially with all the super kill weapons and CC monsters about but a ten man squad is.

 

This has led me to a thought. (a rare event I assure you!)

 

You have 10 tactical marines in cover on your base objective with (for arguments sake) a Missile Launcher and flamer. In front of you is a unit that will be in assault range next turn.

 

Can you split your tactical squad into two 5 man units at this point, and count the Heavy Weapon as NOT moving as his combat squad stayed still? The idea being that they stand there ground and fire at the squad facing them, with the other 5 retreating behind them. They take the charge (having fired obviously, and there brother 5 man squad firing too) and this leave the other 5 free to charge in the next turn thus giving you more attacks.

 

Is this OK rules wise, and is it viable?

 

Thanks :)

 

No, the rule for combat squads says that they have to be split at deployment if they are to be split at all, and they are treated as completely separate after that. Now if you split your squad in two before hand, but just kept them near each other for this exact purpose, it would work. But make sure your opponent knows they are split and not one squad when you deploy them!

[nurglephill]

Ahh, many thanks! So I could 'technically' have two 5 man squads on my home objective, then just retreat the non heavy weapon squad behind the other to the counter assault the next turn.....I like this idea.

[DarkGuard]

I don't see why there is so much hate for Tactical squads all of a sudden. People forget that they're better at fighting and more durable than Scouts, have a lot of fantastic options to choose from, are mobile when in a transport (which Scouts need to be 5 in number and use a FA slot for), and when used in tandem with your army can be a real difficult unit for your opponent to deal with.

 

Oh, but I forgot, just because they can't stand up to multiple enemy units and smear them all in a short time means they're worthless. Come on guys, 5th Ed is all about synergy, you should never analyse a unit in a vacuum, but rather in a list. Tacticals have their place in any list, and I'd say they are our premier Troops choice, and that's not bad. Set up well they can still kill lots of people, survive and be mobile, while having a degree of flexibility. I'd like to see Fire Warriors or Guardians do that. The trick is to support them well, leave them on they're own and they will die, horribly, and not put a big dent in the opponent. But use them alongside more killy units like Assault Terminators, Sternguard, even an Assault squad, and they start to shine.

 

I'm even going to go as far to say that they're better than bikers. Why? Well bikers seems to necessitate taking a 200 odd point model to even unlock them as troops. And then they're not as durable as Tactical squads, given that they aren't immune to small arms fire which Tactical squads are in Rhinos. I'll give you the twin-linked boltguns and the improved toughness and inherent mobility, but I'd take numbers, better movement through terrain and immunity to damage while in a cheap transport anyday.

 

And they're cheaper in general. Sure, they went up a point from 4th Ed so they're more expensive. That's not true. In 4th Ed you had to pay for your Sergeant and all your specials, and Tactical squads came with a boltgun and power armour as standard. For 1pt extra they now come with a bolt pistol, frag and krak grenades, Combat Tactics and Combat Squads as standard, plus the initial squad has a free Sergeant and 10 man squads get free or cheap wargear. And they're transport is 15pts cheaper. If you wanted frag and krak grenades on old Tactical squads then I believe you're looking at 18pts a model, and that forgoes the bolt pistol and cheap weapons.

 

But then Grey Hunters have all this and more for cheaper. Well, not exactly, they can't take a heavy weapon and so can't camp well. They need an elites choice taken if they want a Sergeant, and that 1 attack power fist won't be too impressive. They aren't as tactically flexible with no Combat Squads or Combat Tactics, and so are therefore very one dimensional. Blood Angel Assault squads? They need a Sang Priest to make them more effective and durable in combat, and again are one dimensional, needing to be on the frontline in combat and not able to engage in ranged warfare.

 

Everything in 40K has its chance to shine an do well. Ask anyone what they think of Vanguard and the same few people will tell you not to bother, but yet we have people like thade making good use them. Tactical Terminators? Most people tell you to go for Assault Terminators but again other people like Mysticaria use them regularly. Just because a unit didn't work out for you, or wasn't what you expected or didn't do what you thought it could do, does not make that unit inherently bad to use and the worst thing ever. Many people on here have had great success with Tactical squads, myself included, and this has come around through trial and error, learning which set ups work and which don't, how to use them and how not to. If you don't like them in your list then that's fine, but don't go dissuading other people from using a perfectly good unit just because you don't like it.

[Deus de Mortalis]

I don't see how shooting wastes points for the sergeant and assaulting wastes points on the heavy weapon.

 

Most heavy weapons are free, specifically the ones I use most (Multi-melta and Missile Launcher), so I'm not "wasting" any points if I choose to move or assault.

 

As for "wasting" your points on sergeant, give him a combi-weapon to shoot. If anything he's there for the Leadership boost as one extra attack in close combat isn't anything special. I don't give him anything else, no reason to.

 

Sure, they aren't as versatile as they used to be, but they don't need to be, they're scoring troops, they're hard to kill, and they can threaten vehicles and infantry quite easily without being terribly costly. You just need them to stick around until the end of the game, anything else they do is just gravy.

 

I've started bringing 4 Squads of tacticals to great effect. 40 Scoring Marine bodies is kinda hard to get rid of, throw them into Rhino's and they're just that much tougher to kill.

 

I find the rest of my list still has enough killy elements to put my enemy down.

 

Just because the squad automatically comes with a veteran sergeant and lists the flamer and missile launcher or whatever as "free" doesn't mean you aren't paying for it. The cost of these is factored into the cost of the squad. For 170 points you get 10 marines, a flamer, a missile launcher, 8 bolters, 11 CC attacks, and leadership 9 with ATSKNF. For example, compared to a tactical squad from the Chaos codex. For the same 170 points you get 10 marines, a flamer, a missile launcher, 8 bolters, 20 CC attacks, a teleport homer, and leadership 9 with re-rolls. So I really wouldn't say anything for the tactical marines in C:SM comes free of charge. The most effective use of veteran sergeants is in CC. Any time where they have been optional in any codex, that is usually the only reason people chose to use them. Whether the squad is intended to assault, counter-assault, or sit back and have a sergeant with a power fist just in case, the sergeant has only been worthwhile as an assaulter. Now though that the sergeant is forced upon you, giving him a combi weapon for ten points isn't so bad, but if you had to pay 20-25 points for that combi weapon, you would think again and probably forget it. But at the same time, if you want to assault, the only big hitters are going to be the special weapon before the charge, and the sergeant. Everyone else is pretty much a meat bag and above a certain amount just dead weight. This doesn't apply against soft targets that don't bite back like tau and guard infantry, who are hurt bad by bolters and basic marine CC attacks, but it does to most everybody else. The sergeant is really the one that is going to account for about half or more of the CC kills your squad inflicts. And not only are you wasting extra marines, but wasting the heavy weapon you paid for too. Back when there was a real choice, 7-8 marines was found to be optimal for mobile support assault-if-necessary tactical squads that pinned everything on the sergeant and special weapon. So yeah, shooting wise on top of either wasting points on a sergeant or paying too much for a combi-weapon, you are paying for a lot of marines whose bolters are rarely going to do much and who are providing just a bit too much extra padding for the special and heavy in the squad. I don't know if you remember the las-plas craze, but it was actually the catalyst for tightening up restrictions on tactical squads. For a shooty squad, the optimal configuration was just 5 men with special and heavy weapons and no veteran sergeant. So our shooty tactical squads are really way too many points for a single special and heavy that can't move and shoot. So that leaves with with a tactical squad that costs a lot of points for its limited assault capability and a lot of points for its limited shooting capability. I think this is where all this talk about it being versatile comes from. It isn't good at any shooting or assaulting, so it really doesn't hurt you in any way to use it as one or the other, although for its points you are getting majorly screwed for the meager capability it offers either way.

 

So what are tactical squads good for? I guess just manning the fort, tying up a dreadnought for the rest of the game, taking potshots at vehicles here and there, throwing more warm bodies into an assault, or hunting other vanilla tactical squads, kroot, or guardsmen. The limited usefulness they provide most people for the points they cost tied with how limited your ability to tailor them to any activity in the army list is makes them loathed by a lot of people. Of course there are those whose tactical squads fit in perfectly with their idea for the army and play style, and aren't shoe-horning them into their army list like most people do and that is great. But vanilla space marines are supposed to be very flexible and tactical squads are supposed to be their bread and butter. Tactical squads just don't play to either of those standards.

[Grey Mage]

Wow.....

 

So what your telling me is, you dont know how to use bolters effectively on the battlefield and/or your dice hate you.

 

Got it.

 

Because thats the main appeal for tactical troops really- large volume of small arms fire for dealing with enemy infantry. The heavy weapon is targets of opportunity, the special to give you options.

 

The sarge? 10pts for +1 LD and +1 A isnt bad. LD 8 isnt as reliable as it aught to be, but ld 9 seems pretty golden. You dont want to 'waste' him? Then give him a bolter and fall in line with the rest of the squad- the leadership boost alone is a bargain.

 

You want a 5 man Las/Plas squad? Cool- buy 10, combat squad them with the las/plas in one squad and use the others in a razorback as mobile harassment units. Or character escorts- tossing in a techmarine even increases their firepower and CC potential nicely.

 

Of course there are those whose tactical squads fit in perfectly with their idea for the army and play style, and aren't shoe-horning them into their army list like most people do and that is great. But vanilla space marines are supposed to be very flexible and tactical squads are supposed to be their bread and butter. Tactical squads just don't play to either of those standards.

.... 'fit perfectly with their idea for the army and playstyle'.

 

So, like Ive been saying all along- if you cant make tacticals work for you, your probly playing the wrong army. Theyre a keystone unit in the list, and if theyre not your style its unlikely that C:SM really is either. Thats not a problem with tactical squads, its a bad matchup between general and forces.

[DarkGuard]

So what are tactical squads good for? I guess just manning the fort, tying up a dreadnought for the rest of the game, taking potshots at vehicles here and there, throwing more warm bodies into an assault, or hunting other vanilla tactical squads, kroot, or guardsmen. The limited usefulness they provide most people for the points they cost tied with how limited your ability to tailor them to any activity in the army list is makes them loathed by a lot of people. Of course there are those whose tactical squads fit in perfectly with their idea for the army and play style, and aren't shoe-horning them into their army list like most people do and that is great. But vanilla space marines are supposed to be very flexible and tactical squads are supposed to be their bread and butter. Tactical squads just don't play to either of those standards.

 

I think you'll find that Tactical squads can be perfectly flexible. My favourite build is combi-flamer, flamer, multi-melta, Rhino. Comes in at 215pts and I run at least two of these. Absolutely fantastic unit. With dual flamer in one turn, plus boltguns they can destroy a lot of units, especially if I decide to take Vulkan to twin-link those flamers. And that multi-melta might just make my Tactical squad flexible. I mean, they have one of the best anti-tank weapons in the game, and they get it for free, and can shoot out the top hatch! Or how about another favourite? Combi-melta, meltagun, plasma cannon, Rhino. Mobile, again, but with two melta shots in a turn they will kill a tank, and continue to threaten others during the game. The boltguns and more specifically the plasma cannon is fantastic for taking out infantry. So here they can take out infantry or tanks.

 

I mean sure, neither of these squads will take out infantry quite like a Sternguard squad with dual heavy flamers, or a tank quite like a squadron of melta attack bikes, but they're not supposed to. They are meant to perform a myriad of roles in your army, the most pivotal of which is providing support to your more killy unit, and providing redundancy across your army. My MM/HF Speeders got killed. No worry, my Tactical squad has a MM. My Vindicator lost it's demo cannon. O well, quite handy my Tactical squad is good at rapid fire range. I think you'll find that if you lower your expectations a bit you'll start to see Tacticals in a new light and come to appreciate them for the job they do. They aren't Chaos Space Marines, they aren't Grey Hunters, they aren't scoring Sternguard etc, so don't compare them with them. They are Tactical squads, and should be held on their own merits and faults, not against the units from other races. And IMO, two full units of Tactical squads is a fantastic way to start an army and give yourself a couple of tough scoring units.

[Luis_CC]

Wow.....

 

So what your telling me is, you dont know how to use bolters effectively on the battlefield and/or your dice hate you.

 

Got it.

 

Because thats the main appeal for tactical troops really- large volume of small arms fire for dealing with enemy infantry. The heavy weapon is targets of opportunity, the special to give you options.

 

...So, like Ive been saying all along- if you cant make tacticals work for you, your probly playing the wrong army. Theyre a keystone unit in the list, and if theyre not your style its unlikely that C:SM really is either. Thats not a problem with tactical squads, its a bad matchup between general and forces.

 

Wow, that´s a good example of "ad hominem" debating ("You don´t like tactical squads, you are a bad general").

 

Tactical squads are the most versatile SM unit, they score and they have the lowest "point cost-power armour wound" ratio and, hence, they offer the power of number to an army that tends to be in numerical inferiority. That is all.

 

They are not good in assaulting, they have no USR (scouts can infiltrate, scout, flank and benefit from stealth), they have no DS (unless you pay for the drop pod), they only can take a heavy weapon if they are ten, they are slow on foot. So, they are in strong inferiority when compared with specialized units, such as sternguard, terminators, vindicator, LSs. On long range, they are even inferior to sniper scouts.

 

You may love tactical squad, as others love scouts, but I would not say that one of these options is clearly superior.

[TyrionTheImp]

I don't think Grey Mage was calling him a bad general, merely that perhaps C:SM isn't the book for him?

 

Scouts certainly have their roles when used in the right army, as do Troop choice bikers, but I feel calling Tacticals inferior is just plain silly, and the fact of the matter is you probably aren't using them right. I know I used to not use them right, but after trial and error, I've started using more of them to greater effect and bringing more into my lists, I have no problems killing things even though I'm spending more points on my tacticals rather than more killy elements. Sure, they might not kill things very well, but I know when I have that one last guy left, and he manages to hold onto an objective at the end of the game, I know my points were well spent.

[Deus de Mortalis]

Ok, sorry, maybe I do just suck at 40k, but I'm not saying tacticals are worthless (I do have two squads of them and often run at least one), just that they have some pretty large flaws. I said I hate them just because they used to be my favorite unit in the game and got kind of neutered from 4th to 5th. You really can't kit them out to suit your needs in the way you used to be able to in 3rd and 4th. They lost a TON of flexibility in the one codex that prides itself on being the most flexible. Roboute Guilliman is rolling in his grave... With my scouts and bikes however, I can do this a lot easier and make these units much more efficient uses of points. I can get them with the gear and unit size that I want to complete the objectives that I want them to. With tacticals, your hand is a lot more forced. The only things tacticals truly excel at is being a troops choice and being able to absorb ranged weapons fire. Your heavy weapon is not going to stop firing until every last marine is dead (or they get assaulted :cuss ) When I play with my army which has bikes, attack bikes, speeders, scouts, assault marines, and tacticals in rhinos, I already have an idea of what I am going to do with each unit except the tacticals. With them it is just like I have to find some way for them to contribute with the least waste, which is difficult since they have no specialty. They are not a jack of all trades. They simply are not particularly good at anything, so whatever you choose to use them for isn't really wasting much potential. I've always been partial to scouts and lots of troops, but the reason I went with bikes is because I didn't see how increased lameness and stiffness of my beloved tacticals was going to do me any good.

[TyrionTheImp]

How are you equipping your Tactical squads? This could be the problem as there are "right" ways to run them and "wrong" ways to run them (in my opinion).

 

For instance, I don't even touch close combat weapons anymore, I always pack a combi-weapon that matches my special weapon on my sarge. Double flaming, or double melta-ing (don't use Plasma, though I've heard good things about it) always either severely harms a infantry squad, or at least disables a tank for a turn. I always bring squads of 10, and I always have a task in mind for them. Flamer squads with multi-meltas clear objectives and hold, Melta combat squads support my other melta elements and blow up transports for the flamer squads, while the missile launcher adds to my firebase and protects a home objective, I bring 2 of each squad, giving me 4 rhinos rolling up to midfield and 40 marines bodies scoring. They're never alone, and I never disembark them unless I'm certain I can eliminate the threat via rapid fire and take minimal casualties, or I can get them to cover easy.

 

Does it always work that easily? No, but each of my squads has a task, and each of my squads is always doing something, whether it's sitting on an objective using the threat of a multi-melta to perhaps make my opponent second guess, or double templating infantry on an objective to get them off. Since they're supporting each other, I know that I'll probably have scoring bodies near where they need to be, whether it's the 5 man combat squad, or the 10 man full squad.

[maturin]

Deus, it sounds like you're lamenting the change from 4th ed. to 5th ed. more than anything else. Yes, I too mourn the loss of the 6-man las/plas squad. And the option to kit out with CCW/BP's. You're right - the change has made the tactical squad less flexible, from an armybuilding point of view. But from an on-the-field point of view, really they're still MORE flexible than previously. What happened when a 6-man las/plas got into CC? It died. No question. Could a tac squad with CCW/BP's shoot at range? No - the old tac squads were actually very role-specific, and not generalist at all.

 

Your comments about the new tac squads all have an element of truth. They are not particularly good at anything. They don't have the killyness of sternguard or vanguard. They can't infiltrate like scouts. They can't zip around like bikes. Yet sometimes that's exactly what you need. Don't look for them to shine - that's other people's job.

 

As an example - I am currently playing a list that sounds very similar to yours. It's got sniper scouts, LSS with melta scouts, scout bikes, DP with MM dread, Sternguard, Vanguard.....all very in-your-face. And I have a single tactical squad, las/flamer, with rhino. They don't kill much, they help out another squad with pre-assault bolter fire to thin enemy ranks and then climb back in their rhino, and they plink away when given the opportunity. The fact that they don't do much places them pretty low on my opponent's threat profile. As a result, they somehow always survive the game and end up sitting on an objective or two, while everyone one else is off contesting. I love that tac squad. You should too. :)