Making Tactical Marines and Assault Marines more viable

[Captain Idaho]

I would say the specific units GW wants to stick around likely doesn't include Tacticals and Assault Marines but that is a good point.

 

A solid Specialist Detachment or two could change them completely and make them very worthwhile.

 

I'd like to see that. There is definitely an appetite for keeping the Classic Marines relevant and it would be an easy fix to add a Detachment that amends the issue.

 

***

 

It's a wider issue but I really like the idea of allowing any of the non-BT Strategums to be used by any Codex Chapter provided they pay an additional CP. It would make sense since the Codex binds them all and they should be able to stretch to do what any of the others can do.

 

It's the Chapter Tactics that provide the unique flavour and character.

I’ll say what I say in all tactical fix threads;

Do all 4 core tactical equivalents get this change?

(Grey Hunters/Crusaders/Chaos Marines/Tacticals)

No.

 

Their individual books can fix things as needed. If the fix in question fits each though, then that's fine by me.

[domsto]

I would disagree. A t4 3+ save no longer is a great defensive statline on elite forces. Now if you give them a 2+ save it really does alter their survivability imo

We must not forget that marines are the only ones with army wide t4 and +3 save. If not better.

What's pretty good.

The fact that they die faster is mostly becauce everything does.

Tanks getting gunned down by lasgun and so on.

So a 3+ is good enought after all i think.

Keep all those 2+ things for the Heros and even more Elite guys (golden boys)

[Schlitzaf]

Idaho, I must protest vehemently then

1) Free Rhinos? That exactly why Crusaders compared to tacticals last edition were rather.....bad. If you are gonna make one change to fix tacticals espacially one involving free Gear/Rhino. Each of the 4 tactical equivalents should get that.

2) Universal Scion access. And free not counting. Once again unless it’s a change for all 4 tacticals and equivalents it’s one that basically renders the other 3 to trash heap.

3) CP is fine to be limited to tacticals

 

Unless all 4 tactical core equivalents get change 1) that is not an option that should be on the table

[Ishagu]

Let's break down the free Rhino idea.

 

Assume Marines stay the same cost. If the Rhino is free it means you just paid 130 points for 20 wounds, 10 of them at t4 and 10 at t7, all with a 3+ save. Doesn't this make them into a mechanised Horde again?

 

Heck, the super efficient Astra Militarum are paying 80 points for 20 t3 wounds with a 5+ save.

 

I can't get behind it...

 

 

Any substantial stat changes would also need to be shared across other Astartes in the same position, and the Chaos counterparts also. I suggested that Assault Marines should have 2 attacks base but that means that Chaos Raptors would need that two as well - They are mirrors of each other after all.

[Kallas]

We must not forget that marines are the only ones with army wide t4 and +3 save. If not better.

What's pretty good.

The fact that they die faster is mostly becauce everything does.

Tanks getting gunned down by lasgun and so on.

So a 3+ is good enought after all i think.

Keep all those 2+ things for the Heros and even more Elite guys (golden boys)

 

You're doing the exact same thing that GW is doing: massively overvaluing T4/3+. It's not pretty good, or at least it's not for the cost.

[Subtleknife]

 

I would disagree. A t4 3+ save no longer is a great defensive statline on elite forces. Now if you give them a 2+ save it really does alter their survivability imo

We must not forget that marines are the only ones with army wide t4 and +3 save. If not better.

What's pretty good.

The fact that they die faster is mostly becauce everything does.

Tanks getting gunned down by lasgun and so on.

So a 3+ is good enought after all i think.

Keep all those 2+ things for the Heros and even more Elite guys (golden boys)

It isnt good though and in the current addition is massively overvalued. The problem is you can make all sorts of changes for tacs and assaults but if you dont address both their offence and defence at the same time you will never make them an accurate abstraction of the fluff.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

Free rhino/upgrades at 10 - I don't think that that free units/upgrades are good for the game. It was the main reason 7th stunk (along with a certain psychic power) and I think using it as a band aid solution just leads to more problems. Rhino's probably do need a point drop though. 

 

Command point for every 10 tacticals - I don't think the current command point system works, and I think this would help but I'd rather they redo the system or give more armies detachments like the one for Imperial knights with special conditions that grant more CP than normal. 

 

I would boost Tactical marines by making it so at five models they could choose between 2 specials or 2 heavies, and at 10 unlock the other two weapons.

 

For Assault marines just use vanguard vets rules or make them troops for chapters like raven guard and blood angels. The units just overlap too much, and we aren't using a single FOC for army construction so the fact that assault marines are fast attack isn't important.   

[Dracos]

I’ll say what I say in all tactical fix threads;

Do all 4 core tactical equivalents get this change?

(Grey Hunters/Crusaders/Chaos Marines/Tacticals)

I sympathize with your point of view but feel the Hereticus SW DA and BA all have dedicated Codexes and any changes made need to be able to be balanced within their own Codex.

 

The one thing that all those armies have in common that needs to be addressed is the sadly lacking performance of Astartes Power Armor. That’s another discussion but hopefully Bolter Discipline is a peek at GW trying to fix the top two Astartes army issues.

 

I like the idea of no movement penalty for Astartes Power armor but that’s more in Schlitzaf ballpark concerns.

 

I love the idea of utilizing other Chapter Tactics as if they were Stratagems for 1CP. It steps into the Deathwatch arena while still being totally reasonable and unique for Loyalist Marines.

 

Sorry Blackstar but Raven Guard can’t take Assault Marines as Troops. But ... ;)

 

Although I’m only using Primaris, I think using a CP to make Assault Marines troops is a winner. I’d even suggest this as a pregame stratagem and include a point reduction for NOT using jump packs.

 

Also ... Yeah. Combat Blades and Chainswords need to be -1 AP ... but I think that’s a more expansive change that should be connected to Astartes (sorry not you Custodes ;)) Power Armor.

[Captain Idaho]

Idaho, I must protest vehemently then

1) Free Rhinos? That exactly why Crusaders compared to tacticals last edition were rather.....bad. If you are gonna make one change to fix tacticals espacially one involving free Gear/Rhino. Each of the 4 tactical equivalents should get that.

2) Universal Scion access. And free not counting. Once again unless it’s a change for all 4 tacticals and equivalents it’s one that basically renders the other 3 to trash heap.

3) CP is fine to be limited to tacticals

Unless all 4 tactical core equivalents get change 1) that is not an option that should be on the table

Templars gonna protest... ;)

 

Seriously, why does everyone take any suggestion made in a thread as a stand alone entity that can't be made because it affects someone else?

 

I actually think Crusader squads should have their own fix. An extra attack standard and if they suffer any losses in the shooting phase they move an additional D6" is a start.

 

If someone made a thread for improving the Crusader squad I wouldn't come into it and say "No none of that as Tacticals are poor".

 

It's off topic for a start.

 

Tacticals can have a change, as I said, without it being done to other units. If they receive similar or the same changes because it's appropriate to them then so be it.

 

I'm not mad, I'm just incredulous!

 

The tone isn't intended as aggressive.

[Schlitzaf]

Draco for clarity sake those four units are the Tacticals or the equivalent thereof

Crusader Squads literally ‘replace’ Tacticals for Templars

Grey Hunters are Wolves Tactical analogue

Chaos Marine Squads are Chaos Tactical equivalent

 

(My different word choice is deliberate to represent the minor flavor/codex differences those squads have in their rules and application).

 

Like some buffs to tacticals I don’t think Hunters or Crusaders should get like 1CP at 10. Because those units are currently strictly better than tacticals in all but most niche circumstances. But for massive point/buffs like free transports not good enough to not get that*.

 

*tbh other major issue tacticals have is most of the proposed fixed are already being used by the other three core variations or Intercessors.

[domsto]

You're doing the exact same thing that GW is doing: massively overvaluing T4/3+. It's not pretty good, or at least it's not for the cost.

Yes Tacicals are overpriced

That's why i said drobing them alongside with Assault Marines and Devastator to 11ppm.

But giving them Custodes stats will make it extremly frutrating to play against them.

[lythari]

There need to be more synergies between tactical, assault and devastator squads. E.g.

 

- if all models in tactical squad shoots at a target, assault squad squad ignores overwatch charging that target

[thewarriorhunter]

There need to be more synergies between tactical, assault and devastator squads. E.g.

 

- if all models in tactical squad shoots at a target, assault squad squad ignores overwatch charging that target

 

That's a really good idea.

 

I could see that being a nice stratagem, but word it in a way that allows for a single tac squad to suppress multiple enemy units since we can split fire.

[Subtleknife]

 

You're doing the exact same thing that GW is doing: massively overvaluing T4/3+. It's not pretty good, or at least it's not for the cost.

Yes Tacicals are overpriced

That's why i said drobing them alongside with Assault Marines and Devastator to 11ppm.

But giving them Custodes stats will make it extremly frutrating to play against them.

But giving them a better amour save does not make them custodes. I want tacs and assaults to stay the same price, I dont want them to feel anything like a horde.

[Kallas]

But giving them a better amour save does not make them custodes. I want tacs and assaults to stay the same price, I dont want them to feel anything like a horde.

 

Yup, totally. Marines in cover are actually pretty resilient vs Lasguns, but in the open or in melee they fold way too easily.

 

To avoid Terminators falling behind, they could easily have either Sv1+, reroll 1s, or a better Invulnerable (because 2+/5++ makes the 5++ functionally worthless).

 

Yes Tacicals are overpriced

That's why i said drobing them alongside with Assault Marines and Devastator to 11ppm.

But giving them Custodes stats will make it extremly frutrating to play against them.

 

You actually didn't say they were overpriced, you only said that they were resilient enough (which they just aren't).

 

Also, making them more resilient, in some way, doesn't default to making them as tough as Custodes. Sv2+ might be the same as Custodes base, but T5 goes a long way to making them much more tanky, and 3W is a big deal particularly when backed up by a 4++ (and possibly a 3++ if they shoehorn in a Sentinel Blade/Storm Shield Custodian).

 

But simply:

• Marines need to hit harder: they don't need to slaughter Bloodthirsters with every Bolter shot, but they do need to be able to actually kill things that aren't Grots
• Marines need to not die so easily: they don't need Knight levels of resilience, but they shouldn't fall over to weight of dice so easily, and even AP-1 is incredibly impactful on them due to their cost.

 

[Edit: Stupid quote issues!]

[Ishagu]

If they had some good strategems and potentially re-worked chapter tactics they might not need any significant changes.

 

Some Xenos units are only good because of strats, relics and their clan/craftworld/Sept rules, and not because of their stats or weapon profiles per se.

[lythari]

How about this for a army wide rule:

 

Codex Compliant

Any battle forged detachment that contains Tactical Squads, Assault Squads and Devastator Squads gains +1CP.

[Ishagu]

The extra CP is good and all but we forget that we're lacking powerful strategems. I don't even run Astartes Battalions anymote because the strats don't offer anything as significant as getting more powerful units into my list.

[lythari]

The extra CP is good and all but we forget that we're lacking powerful strategems. I don't even run Astartes Battalions anymote because the strats don't offer anything as significant as getting more powerful units into my list.

Yeah, definitely need some good strategems.  Hopefully we'll get some interesting formations in the second vigilus book and white dwarf index astartes articles.

[Captain Idaho]

Yup we need more Strategums. Some of the ones we have are useful, particularly in the Victrix Guard, but that could make Tactical and Assault Marines great value.

 

***

 

I noticed the Sanctus Genestealer Cult character is has a special rule that counts a Strategum used on it as 0 CPs. That is precedent Tactical and Assault Marines could benefit from (new Strategums not withstanding)

[FlamingDeth]

There need to be more synergies between tactical, assault and devastator squads. E.g.

 

- if all models in tactical squad shoots at a target, assault squad squad ignores overwatch charging that target

This is fantastic and should be expanded upon. Give tactical marines a bonus when shooting at units that assault marines fell out of combat with as well. Ignore cover? +1 hit? I dunno, I'm terrible at this balance thing.

[Captain Idaho]

Ooo that's interesting. Tactical Marines can give their support by "marking" the target that grants say +1 to wound that turn for the next unit that fires or assaults the unit.

 

+1 to hit is more of a Scout thing, but for Tactical Marines it could represent them hurting the enemy with their Bolters and opening them up for greater damage.

[Tamiel]

Hell yeah! There needs to be special rules (stratagems, maybe?) that reward players who use tactical, assault, and devastator squads in tandem. This is exactly what I want to see. Ever since reading the Black Reach short story, I've always loved the idea of tactical, assault, and devastator squads working together to assist each other. I don't know how often this happens in other books, but I would imagine it is pretty often. This is a golden idea that needs to be implemented. I don't know how GW would do it, but some sort of stratagem that helps these three squads working together (possibly as part of a new formation) would breathe so much life into the oldmarines units that are currently gathering dust for many players.

GW needs to be notified of this idea ASAP

[thewarriorhunter]

After thinking about this thread and different points made I think the biggest issue for marines in general is the lack of good stratagems. I think some stratagems that would promote synergy among units would go a long way. It would help to promote balanced list building as well as give marine players tools to make them a little meaner on the table.

[PeteySödes]

After thinking about this thread and different points made I think the biggest issue for marines in general is the lack of good stratagems. I think some stratagems that would promote synergy among units would go a long way. It would help to promote balanced list building as well as give marine players tools to make them a little meaner on the table.

I don’t disagree but I’d point out that the SW book has many strats that are supposed to promote synergy but are just sort of unusable. The strongest ones IMO are some of the recent gaurd ones that just let you break a core rule or disrupt your opponent.

 

Just something to think about.