Would you agree with this advice about BA?

[Indefragable]

This is from my club's forum. I copy-pasted from there and am not a HTML guy so I apologize if the formatting is weird. Indy is my name on that site so anything that is in quotations is what I had posted while everything else is this person's, Brian's, advice:

 

 

+++++

 

Indy wrote:

"So this one isn't quite what the OP had in mind as it is more about what I do then what an opponent does...

 

...I tend to have chronic low model count syndrome.

 

Partly this is b/c BA have SO many options in the Elites section. Not only the cool fluffy unique units like Death Company and Sanguinary Guard, but also the shared units like Sternguard and Command Squad as well as all dreadnought options. So if you want to take 1x DC, 1x Dreadnought of any flavor, and say Sternguard, right there you have to start cutting points somewhere."

 

...or play really, really big games? Cutting out some of the toys is a problem for everyone, I think. You gotta choose your favorite child) With the price tag on Marines, low model count is a constant struggle.

 

Indy wrote:

"The next piece is that my Troops seem underwhelming. Sure Heavy Flamer Tacticals who are S5 on the Charge sound cool but it seems like the only times I ever get to use Furious Charge on Tacticals is the situation sort of falls into my lap. And I am almost always outnumbered."

 

Your Troops seem underwhelming for two reasons. One, because they ARE. Tacticals are "generalists." That means that, theoretically, they fill every role fairly well. In reality, it means that they don't do especially well at anything. I wrote a treatise in a much older thread about how Marines always need to choose the mode of battle least advantageous to their opponent, because they will be always be outshot by dedicated shooters and outpunched by dedicated punchers.

 

Two, you're trying to use them in a "fluffy" way, but their stats really don't support that kind of play very well. I said above that Tacticals aren't especially good at anything, but that's not the whole story. They are BS4, carry a decent anti-infantry gun, stand up to returning small-arms fire very well, and have a huge variety of special weapons options. Ergo, Tacticals are better at shooting than punching. This is especially true of Blood Angels, who can get an additional assault weapon. Heavy Flamer + Flamer + Hand Flamers is firepower that vanilla Marines can only dream of.

 

This is compounded by the facts that CC requires much more specialized units than shooting, and it's very difficult to get footsloggers into a charge situation without your opponent allowing it. This is the crux of your problem. BA Tacticals are best at shooting first, shooting last, and shooting some more in between. The only things they should charge are units like Guardsmen and Firewarriors, or some dedicated shooting unit in order to tie it up for a while.

 

Indy wrote:

"I copied Brian for a bit and put PF on my sergeant, but for each PF I bring on a Tactical, that's another DC body I am passing up. PFs also swing last and many BA Formations give +1I on the Charge which seems wasted on a PF. So then I went and made Vet Sgts w/ Power Swords and Melta Bombs to really add some CQC teeth to all my Tacs. But once again that starts eating away at the points."

 

I'm, not surprised that it didn't work out for you. I do it for two specific reasons. First, I have a significant close-combat investment, and my army is designed to irresistably control 1 small area of the board through CC threats. Second, within this small area, Pedro grants a +1 Attack bubble that means my Sergeants can get 3 attacks standing still. That justifies the cost a bit more. A non-Veteran sarge swinging once is not worth 25 points, especially when you also invest heavily in special shooting weapons.

 

 

Indy wrote:

"Part of my struggle with building a good TAC list is that to really get some deadliness I have to spend points on Units. I don't really seem to have any units that are competitive (not in the tournament way, but against similar units from other factions) out of the box and have to dump points into them. So it becomes this vicious cycle of bringing boys over toys only to find the boys are kinda useless w/o their toys only to end up with more toys than boys, etc..."

 

Yes, you've rather hit the nail on the head. Your codex has no obvious, overwhelming winners in it, at least from a standpoint of pure offensive damage potential. There are nuances, of course, but that's beyond the scope of this topic.

 

Anyway, as a rule of thumb, remember this:

--Anti Infantry shooting is cheap.

--Anti-Tank shooting is a small investment.

--Close Combat is very, very expensive.

 

So, the idea is that, for your close combat units, you must be willing to invest heavily. But for your shooting units, boys before toys, and pinch your pennies.

 

Because kitting up for CC is so expensive, what typically needs to happen is you choose one or two dedicated punching units and arm them to the teeth--and then everyone else is a cheap-as-chips shooter. So you run your maxed-out Death Company, maybe a DC Dread or two, and then everyone else focuses on guns. Tacticals shoot. Razorbacks play conservative LOS games, and blaze away. Command Squad? Five Meltaguns, a Drop Pod, and no CC weapons. Sternguard? Run them naked, relying on their special ammo to prove their value."

 

++++++

 

Brian is one of the best players at my local club. He goes to tournaments and I am told does alright there. His main list involves maximizing Imperial Fists Chapter Tactics to get insane numbers of Bolter hits (including from Land Raider Crusader). He runs Pedro Kantor and has every Sgt equipped with a Power Fist so they are a threat to everything. He also has Tigurius around add some serious psychic punch at just the right moment...such as Enfeebling Mephiston (making him T3) so that all those Bolters do even more work.

 

My question to fellow Blood Brothers is do you agree with his advice? I suppose more to the point is where should we focus on shooting and where should we capitalize on Furious Charge?

[Xenith]

Erm. Focus on shooting with the shooting units.

 

Focus on furious charge with combatty units.

 

I dont know what you want us to tell you, really. The advice is so basic about marines., that yes, it is all true. Tacticals are better in combat that things that are bad in combat. Tacticals are better at shooting than things that are bad at shooting. Tacticals are worse in combat than things that are good in combat etc ad nauseum.

 

The point of a space marine profile and a drop pod, is that you can pick your fights. Space marines are OK at everything, and really bad at nothing, compared to say, guardsmen. The idea with a drop pod is to drop in and kill a high priority target that threatens your other units. They will generally do more damage from shooting, and are not great in combat, so an opponent may attempt to charge them. Having a powerfist in the unit that has the potential to instant death a character is a big reason to be wary of that unit.

 

Putting a pf on a 1A sergeant is dumb. Pay the 10pts and get the extra attack. 

 

Your main problem is that you dont have enough points. Yes. Everyone has that problem. Pick your favourite units, move on.

 

Rather than posting a massive discussion here, your best best is to post an army list in the correct section and ask for critique. People will tear it apart.

[Captain Caine 24th]

Everybody has to pay for troops in some fashion, so build the tactical to supplement the vision you have for the army, or mitigate an anticipated weakness. Just because their firepower isn't extraordinary doesn't mean they can't cripple weaker enemies or slow down strong enemy units.  That said, Blood Angels have better rules in close combat, and I'd leverage extra points into what blood angels do best instead of an indirect support role.

 

Experiment, playtest, watch other games. See what you like and what fits your playstyle. Play the game you want, not what your opponent is setting you up to play.  I've lost plenty of games to better generals  with 'substandard' units.  

 

Except for a 1 attack powerfist. Don't do that. 

[GrunTeufel]

I am using FTSF more and more lately so troop tax is a non issue these days. You can always go with a minimal scout squad or go balls to the wall and include cassor in your list.

 

Tacticals I never really liked. Vanilla marines do it much better than us with doctrines and chapter tactics. When the army wide buff is furious charge and rapid fire stops you from charging the enemy afterwards, tacticals may feel a bit underwhelming. To me at least.

 

Thats why most of my latest posts generally have me whining about the new vanilla scouts. Simply the better choice when you can jjust get a squad of them and have more points to spend on more specialist troops.

[Zeller]

I agree with his assessment. We have assault units and tactical squads sure aren't one. Powerfists are better left to tactical terminators. 

 

Use the rhino or drop pod to get tacticals close before engaging in CQC. Charge only if desperate or victory is assured. 

[Indefragable]

Thats why most of my latest posts generally have me whining about the new vanilla scouts. Simply the better choice when you can jjust get a squad of them and have more points to spend on more specialist troops.

That's what I am getting at. Nearly every list I have ever made has like 2x 5 man Tac squads and that's it. The rest go into Dreads or DC or SG or Mephiston and Command Squad. The issue I was pointing out is that it seems like we BA really have to spend points to get out money's worth especially compared to other SM (both before and after this latest codex release for them). Mephiston is the perfect example: heck of a character but to really make him worthwhile and able to go toe-toe with other beat stocks you need to support him, thus reducing your total models even less.

 

I will post some army lists when I get a moment and also a BR that points out what I really mean.

[Fahlnor]

Alternative viewpoint:

Based on a fluff perspective and, by extension (for me), the Rule of Cool, Tactical Squads are vitally important.

I can't bring myself to build an army list with minimal Troops unless I have an exceptionally good fluff reason for it.

Your 1,500 point army which has Death Company and Sanguinary Guard and Furioso Dreadnoughts and Sternguard and meltacide Assault Squads and Stormravens is all well and good, says I, but at what point in any story ever written about any Space Marine Chapter does it make sense?

For me, I need to build my armies to a fluff-acceptable style. If I'm taking Scouts for my Troops, then I'm probably running Scout Bikers, Bike Squads, Land Speeders, Baal Predators and Assault Squads because - to my mind at least - this is a force in training, with a focus on the development on the individual Marines and those are units which represent that style of army. There is a small contingent of maybe five Death Company led by a Chaplain and the Assault Squad is probably led by a Sanguinary Priest, because that's the role I see those characters playing in the fluff.

I guess my feeling is that yes, we can Netlist and min/max to our hearts' content. But if we're doing that to the exclusion of playing armies we enjoy, then we're ultimately losing before the game has begun. I don't buy that any of our units are auto-don't-includes. There's nothing in there that will hamstring you to the extent that you actually cannot win a game.

Take the units you think are cool. Equip them the way you think would be cool for them to be equipped. Play a game. Have fun.

And sure, learn what works and what doesn't - but you kinda need to learn that for yourself. A lot of the answer depends on your own playstyle and the rest of your army list and the interactions of all your units.

Hope that helps.

Edited for spelling.

[GrunTeufel]

Alternative viewpoint:

 

Based on a fluff perspective and, by extension (for me), the Rule of Cool, Tactical Squads are vitally important.

 

I can't bring myself to build an army list with minimal Troops unless I have an exceptionally good fluff reason for it.

 

Your 1,500 point army which has Death Company and Sanguinary Guard and Furioso Dreadnoughts and Sternguard and meltacide Assault Squads and Stormravens is all well and good, says I, but at what point in any story ever written about any Space Marine Chapter does it make sense?

 

 

 

See, thats the thing though. It was actually quite fluffy for Blood Angels to play with all jump lists since we had them as troops. Since third (second does not count since it didn't exactly have an org chart as such) edition It was jump heavy. The fluff changes according to what GW wants to sell at that moment. New BA tactical box and we are tactical heavy all of the sudden.

 

I have plenty tacticals don't get me wrong. I love modeling them and a marine with a bolter is iconic. I still rather have my army flying across the battlefield since it was the fluff presented to me way back when I first started. 

 

Also, you should check out shield of baal campaign. There are plenty of instances where a task force that consisted of only specialist troops was sent to deal with a problem. 

 

But you are right. It is all about fun. Go do whats fun for you.

[Spagunk]

I once took down an Ork flyer with a lone heavy bolter marine from a previously annihilated tactical squad. Just sayin'.

[tjr]

I once took down an Ork flyer with a lone heavy bolter marine from a previously annihilated tactical squad. Just sayin'.

 

I once had a 5 man Devastator squad with 4x Flakk missiles do :cuss all to a Blitza-Bomba

[Spagunk]

I once took down an Ork flyer with a lone heavy bolter marine from a previously annihilated tactical squad. Just sayin'.

I once had a 5 man Devastator squad with 4x Flakk missiles do all to a Blitza-Bomba

Yeah, I never hear good things from flakk missiles. Starting to understand why the Imperium loathes new technology.

[evildrcheese]

I agree with much of what is being said I this thread. Tac Marines for BA feel lack lustre, because, as pointed out, our chapter tac-tic offers no real benefit to what tac marines are meant to be doing, which is essentially shooting their bolt guns and being semi-durable and semi-tough to root off an objective.

 

To make them a good CC threat you need to drop some serious points, upgrades on sgt, force multiply character and/or beatstick character and a delivery system. Which is totally feasible, or you could drop those point on a CC unit that's already good and make the great.

 

In terms of putting tacs to good use there's a couple of builds which work for BA (YMMV dependent on your local meta)

 

1) The Campers: 5 man squads with a heavy weapon for plinking long range shots off, sit them on an objective and leave them be. If anyone gets within 24" the other bolters can fire too. Another option for this one is give them either a flamer or H flamer and use them as a counter charge/charge bait unit.

 

2) ap2 MSU. 5 man again, plas gun, combi plas, in a las/plas razorback. Make the most of the fast rule with 2 weapons to shoot both of which ate ap2, guys inside have more ap2 and all weapons have the same range so synergise quite well. Best taken in multiples.

 

3) 10 man rhino rush. Give them a special and matching combi, I like plasma as all are then rapid fire and same range. T1 you can flat out then jump out in T2 to rapid fire something in the face. Good for establishing board control and you can use the vehicles to screen your jump units.

 

So yeah, Scouts are probably a better choice for getting the most out of our troops choice and whilst tac marines aren't especially bad, they're not especially good either...

 

D