Usage of Power Armor ‘Line’ Troops

[Beta galactosidase]

If they're meant to lend a hand in combat, then their upgrades are wrong - the heavy and special weapon point to them being mid-range combat unit who can peck at things from long range.

 

This is "jack of all trades" at its finest. It sounds good on paper, but two specialists working together will typically do better than two "jack of all" units excelling at nothing.

So there must be a reason why that is.

 

The reason that everyone in a unit isn't armed with a powerful and full auto weapon is that it isn't possible to carry enough ammunition. Fighting in a battle most of the unit has to be able to fire at will at any targets that break cover, and fighting that way with powerful weapons they'd expend all their ammunition too quickly.

 

So there are one or two main weapons that fire deliberately, and they are under control of more than one fighter. There are a gunner and a squad leader, like a tank commander but on foot, who make sure that those resources get used judiciously, that they get put on the right target, that they have a good angle, that they hit, that the weapon is functioning right. Everyone else has a weapon with ammo that weighs less and is easier to snap fire.

 

The game doesn't represent that strongly. There is no difference between a weapon shooting reactively and defensively and one shooting deliberately. There's no difference between a model that's all alone shooting a lascannon 12" from enemies who are presumably shooting at it and a model shooting a lascannon 30" from the nearest enemy and surrounded by squad mates giving covering fire.

 

So the thread is correct, the use of MEq troops is to put them center field and occupy space, to consolidate kills by fire raptors or mass plasma squads.

[Wargamer]

 

If they're meant to lend a hand in combat, then their upgrades are wrong - the heavy and special weapon point to them being mid-range combat unit who can peck at things from long range.

 

This is "jack of all trades" at its finest. It sounds good on paper, but two specialists working together will typically do better than two "jack of all" units excelling at nothing.

So there must be a reason why that is.

 

The reason that everyone in a unit isn't armed with a powerful and full auto weapon is that it isn't possible to carry enough ammunition. Fighting in a battle most of the unit has to be able to fire at will at any targets that break cover, and fighting that way with powerful weapons they'd expend all their ammunition too quickly.

 

So there are one or two main weapons that fire deliberately, and they are under control of more than one fighter. There are a gunner and a squad leader, like a tank commander but on foot, who make sure that those resources get used judiciously, that they get put on the right target, that they have a good angle, that they hit, that the weapon is functioning right. Everyone else has a weapon with ammo that weighs less and is easier to snap fire.

 

The game doesn't represent that strongly. There is no difference between a weapon shooting reactively and defensively and one shooting deliberately. There's no difference between a model that's all alone shooting a lascannon 12" from enemies who are presumably shooting at it and a model shooting a lascannon 30" from the nearest enemy and surrounded by squad mates giving covering fire.

 

So the thread is correct, the use of MEq troops is to put them center field and occupy space, to consolidate kills by fire raptors or mass plasma squads.

 

This has nothing to do with the tabletop. There's no requirement to model ammunition. There's no way a Terminator Assault Cannon is carrying enough rounds for more than a few seconds of fire. There's no suppression mechanics of any kind. Tac Squads can only have one plasmagun, but Tempstus Scions (who are mortal) can have four.

 

In reality, those Tactical squads absolutely have a purpose. A 10-man flamer in a realistic scenario are going to be out of ammo and next to useless very quickly, but as far as the tabletop is concerned they've got enough fuel to burn a city down, so that's not a consideration.

[Beta galactosidase]

... that's what I'm saying. There is no use for the bolters in a mixed bolter and heavy squad, because the game rules don't include their lunches intended function. In absence of this, the purpose of the squad is to take up space.

[Wargamer]

Ah I see. Sorry, misunderstood your other post.

[Schlitzaf]

@Schiltzaf You're correct, his points are wrong. I think he may have been alluding to the need for support HQ's for relevance of tacticals.

 

That said, would you rather 40ish tacticals or 160ish Cultists for the same points? That's a massive difference in wound count, even when taking the save of the PA troops into consideration. Weight of dice comes into play significantly in these circumstances.

 

I just feel like 4/5 point models are far better at the jobs of our 13 point Astartes. Tacticals need a point drop and something special, like what Scouts do...

Depends on the role and battle situation. Cultists are rather bad at holding objective* during an extended battle of attrition. And vaporize under chaff level fire. And why I wouldn’t use them as a center. Further they have too many models to make a functional center. A center is a compact force designed to secure the most critical battlefield position (the center objective often enough).

 

So yes I’d take the 40 Marines, because they take up a smaller board space so once the midfield is joined more will be able to shoot and properly engage the enemy. While I’d use Cultists to anchor my Backfield.

 

*Yes, and this applies to all horde units. Remember the unit with that has the largest amount of models within 3”. Not a unit within 3” that has the most models. So go ahead have 30 Cultists. You’ll properly only have 4-5 on the actual objective and my 3-4 Marines will kill and consolidate with a large base size be better able to cover the objective

[Tyberos the Red Wake]

 

 

Um 40-50 MeQ wounds should run you about 600 points where are you getting 1000? From.

"Before upgrades". Spending so many points on such a mediocre unit and not even taking advantage of the wargear slots they possess is even worse. You're better off spamming Scouts or allies at that point.

Umm....40 Tacticals is 500ish Points, give or take depending on Loadout, you will end up 40-50 Points up grades (40ish is more common/better, Plas/CombiPlas/HvyBolter) brings you to 660. If you instead replace two 10 man Tacticals with Intercessors your in low 50 range and if you include a 3rd Intercessors Squad as I would personally in that setup your only 600.

 

Where in the world are are you getting 1000 Points?

 

 

50 Marines = 650

5 heavy weapons = 125

5 special weapons = 75

 

Already way more than 600.

 

Where in the world are you getting 500 points for 40 Tacticals? It's already 520 just for 40. Drop the  attitude.

[Schlitzaf]

Tyberos I said 500ish, because last we checked we aren’t allowed to say same point value. Also I said 40-50 wounds. And second your giving a Squad you want moving every turn a Lascannons?!

 

If you want to get particular

2 10 Man Tacticals w/HvyBolter, Plasma, Combi Plasma. 168 for each. 336.

 

3 5 Man Intercessors Squads with Power Sword. 94 Each. 282 Total.

 

330+280 = 610 + 2 + 6. 618 Total.

 

Or if you do 4 10 Men Tacticals with above Loadout 672.

 

And for the record my Crusader/Intercessors Center is 580 Points.

[Panzer]

 

@Schiltzaf You're correct, his points are wrong. I think he may have been alluding to the need for support HQ's for relevance of tacticals.

That said, would you rather 40ish tacticals or 160ish Cultists for the same points? That's a massive difference in wound count, even when taking the save of the PA troops into consideration. Weight of dice comes into play significantly in these circumstances.

I just feel like 4/5 point models are far better at the jobs of our 13 point Astartes. Tacticals need a point drop and something special, like what Scouts do...

Depends on the role and battle situation. Cultists are rather bad at holding objective* during an extended battle of attrition. And vaporize under chaff level fire. And why I wouldn’t use them as a center. Further they have too many models to make a functional center. A center is a compact force designed to secure the most critical battlefield position (the center objective often enough).

So yes I’d take the 40 Marines, because they take up a smaller board space so once the midfield is joined more will be able to shoot and properly engage the enemy. While I’d use Cultists to anchor my Backfield.

*Yes, and this applies to all horde units. Remember the unit with that has the largest amount of models within 3”. Not a unit within 3” that has the most models. So go ahead have 30 Cultists. You’ll properly only have 4-5 on the actual objective and my 3-4 Marines will kill and consolidate with a large base size be better able to cover the objective

The problem is that Tacticals are just as bad at holding objectives or even worse unless they're in cover.

They cost 3 times as much but aren't three times as durable. Plus their durability compared with Guardsmen gets worse the higher AP is directed at them while Guardsmen don't care about anything better than AP-2 (aka Plasma and stuff).

Oh and because Tacticals have far fewer models they theoretically have a far harder time to hold any objective against horde type troops in the first place.

 

I use Guardsmen instead of Cultists in my example since they're more durable for the same cost while Cultists have a lot of Stratagem support which would make things just more complicated.