PDA

View Full Version : Las/Plas : Cheesy or cool?



ChaosBob
09-01-2007, 03:34
How do you guys feel about mini max squads? You know, 5 man marine squads with a lascannon and a plasma gun. I am on the fence. On one hand I see the reason for them. It gives you more room for more stuff. On the other hand I think it is kind of cheap. How bout it?

Lord Malek The Red Knight
09-01-2007, 03:49
the "Torrent of Fire" (p26, right hand side) and "Torrent of Blows" (p41, Armour Saves) rules have come some way to balance min/max squads.

taking out a Lascannon or Plasma Gun is much easier when they they are hidden in 6 man squads than it is when they are buried in 10 man units. and, the smaller the squad the less likely they will be to cause ToF/ToB themselves than bigger units, too.

so its a rule that encourages bigger units to achieve it against the enemy and protect against it in return.

even wihtout it, though, im not too bothered by min/maxed squads. being smaller, they are easier to cause Morale Checks on, and easier to take below Scoring/get VPs for. and if it means my opponent has more points to spend on more interesting units, leading to a more varied game, them whats wrong with that? :)

~ Tim

Curufew
09-01-2007, 03:50
It's boring.

Gen.Steiner
09-01-2007, 04:04
It's un-Codex.

A five marine Combat Squad should have EITHER one (1) special weapon OR one (1) heavy weapon.

Not both. One or the other.

Mr_Smiley
09-01-2007, 04:09
It is a bit against the Fluff, but I don't really mind, if they give you the option you may as well take it.

Gen.Steiner
09-01-2007, 04:11
It is a bit against the Fluff, but I don't really mind, if they give you the option you may as well take it.

HERESY! HERESY!

Lord Malek The Red Knight
09-01-2007, 04:19
It's un-Codex.
but, for a "non-codex"/"divergent" chapter, isnt that actually quite fluffy?

:p

~ Tim

hiram
09-01-2007, 04:20
I don't care for it much cause it really says to me that the guy does not want to play for fun he just wants another notch on his belt.

Brother_Falco
09-01-2007, 04:53
What hiram said. Aaaand...

+ It's retarded. small squads are less flexible.
+ It's not fluffy, as the good General says.
+ It's bad for other Marine players, as it impacts on peoples' perceptions of all Marine players, and results in crap like C:SM Redux.
+ It's a waste. Lascannon is a vehicle killing weapon, plasma gun is anti-heavy infantry.
+ Small squads also offer less modelling time. Everyone should build their taccies in ten man blocks, even if they only field half of them. Five man only units are the devil's work.

Laughingmonk
09-01-2007, 04:55
How is this against the fluff?

Granted, the Codex Astartes divides Tac squads into 10 man units, with the option of seperating them into 5 man units.

However, war isn't that nice, and I would imagine that Space Marines (since their slow to recover losses) would often find themselves understrength.

I would imagine many chapters would have the common sense (or leniency, depending on your POV) to mix and match squads to achieve maximum efficiency.

Plus, if there's a spare lascannon lying around, in the minds of any but the most adherant followers of the codex it would stand to reason that it would be a crime for an understrength unit NOT to pick it up.

As far as the "boring" arguement, I find tactical squads in generall very boring to use or face against, so this point is moot for me. But, this is where the Space marine Bread and Butter is, so if a player wants to forego one of his biggest strengths to use other more interesting units, then kudos, cause it's his army, and I for one am not going to tell an opponent thiat his army/unit is "Unfluffy."

The Emperor
09-01-2007, 05:04
However, war isn't that nice, and I would imagine that Space Marines (since their slow to recover losses) would often find themselves understrength.

Not really. For one, Space Marines aren't used anywhere near as often as Imperial Guard, and when they are, it isn't for prolonged engagements. So they have time to replace losses inbetween battles. And when it comes to prolonged engagements, well, that's what the Reserve Companies are for, and the Scouts. Not to mention that they can simply combine depleted units into full-strength units. Factor all that in, and it isn't hard for a Space Marine force to maintain 5-man and 10-man units.


Plus, if there's a spare lascannon lying around, in the minds of any but the most adherant followers of the codex it would stand to reason that it would be a crime for an understrength unit NOT to pick it up.

Most Chapters are considered Codex Chapters. And the Codex Astartes is considered by them to be a holy tome. To break faith with it is to break faith with the Emperor, himself. Besides, one can make that same argument to say that Tactical Squads should be allowed to take all Special Weapons. After all, a Chapter won't have 8 or 9 spare Plasma Guns lying around? Why let them go to waste when they can arm an entire 10-man squad with Plasma Guns or Meltaguns? Just because there're spare weapons lying around doesn't mean they must be used.

Light of the Emperor
09-01-2007, 05:38
As much as I hate that combination, the codex allows it as a possibility. If it can be done, then its fine with me. If I face squads like that, I make it my personal mission to wipe them out. Simple as that.

Iracundus
09-01-2007, 05:44
Don't complain when the non-Marine players load up on the AP3 weapons then. Wait they already do due to the prevalence of 3+ armor armies. Nevermind.

Light of the Emperor
09-01-2007, 05:50
Exactly. Point and counterpoint basically.

Irondog
09-01-2007, 06:21
BWAHAHAHAHAHHA!!!!! Bring 'em on! My Boyz all save on a 6+ anyway. Your Las/Plas squads are wasted on me, you beakie scum.

In all seriousness, they can be an easy way to cram as much shooting into your army as possible. But they are BOOOOORING to play against. I feel it doesn't show a lot of creativity in the making of an army list. Wow! You have 4 5-man Las/Plas squads, a Chaplain with a jump pack, and the rest you spent on Land Speeder Tornados? How original.

C'mon guys, lets show some thought in making your lists. Go with what you think might look cool and be fun to play. Not what some monkey on a message board says works the best.

Laughingmonk
09-01-2007, 06:27
----------- "Not really. For one, Space Marines aren't used anywhere near as often as Imperial Guard, and when they are, it isn't for prolonged engagements. So they have time to replace losses inbetween battles. And when it comes to prolonged engagements, well, that's what the Reserve Companies are for, and the Scouts. Not to mention that they can simply combine depleted units into full-strength units. Factor all that in, and it isn't hard for a Space Marine force to maintain 5-man and 10-man units. "-------- The Emperor



You make some good points. However, given that space marines operate at a tempo that greatly exceeds guard, it would stand to reason that combat losses would hit marines especially hard, given their extremely low numbers. As their way of war relies on speed and shock, they would probably not wait around for reserve companies, and even if they did, the reserves might be called out for a different mission when they arrive. War isn't nice, and neither is the enemy, and it's not like the Companies in action can call a "Time Out" to replace/ reorganize their losses. Time is a factor in warfare, and they need to be able to capatilize on the openings that are given to them, so waiting around to replace their losses would be detrimental in many cases.

As far as using Reserve companies solely to replace combat losses, that depends entirely on the theatre itself. They may find themselves with two missions that need to be done right then, and the reserve companies might simply be used to bolster two existing companies to the manpower levels to accomplish them. Or, they just might do as you said, replace combat losses. It just depends on what's going on.




--------- "Most Chapters are considered Codex Chapters. And the Codex Astartes is considered by them to be a holy tome. To break faith with it is to break faith with the Emperor, himself. Besides, one can make that same argument to say that Tactical Squads should be allowed to take all Special Weapons. After all, a Chapter won't have 8 or 9 spare Plasma Guns lying around? Why let them go to waste when they can arm an entire 10-man squad with Plasma Guns or Meltaguns? Just because there're spare weapons lying around doesn't mean they must be used. " --------------------------- The Emperor



The first point is debatable. Not in the fact that most marine chapters are codex, but in the fact that they all follow the Codex to the word. Given the fact that the Space Marine Army book allows Marine chapters to deviate from Codex organisation, it would seem that many chapters use the Codex Astartes as rather a set of guidelines to be respected, rather than obeyed to a T. Just take a look at the Differences between say, White Scars and Ultramarines. As far as "Breaking Faith" with the emperor, I entirely disagree. The book was written by Gulliman, not the Emperor, and there are many, many chapters who have large deviations from the Codex Astartes and still are still very devout to the Big E (Black Templars, as an example). It's on a chapter specific basis. Some consider it a Holy Tome, others (such as the Space Wolves) virtually throw it to the wind.

The second point is is merely a game balance issue. Yes, background wise there is no reason every space marine in an entire army shouldn't be able to carry a lascannon. After all, it is alot easier to build a lascannon than it is to train a new space marine. But it would make for some very boring/one sided games.

Irondog
09-01-2007, 06:41
The book was written by Gulliman. Some consider it a Holy Tome, others (such as the Space Wolves) virtually throw it to the wind.

Actually I tend to think the Space Wolves use it to wipe their arses.

UncleCrazy
09-01-2007, 06:41
Well not all Chapters follow the Codex Astartes such as the Space Wolves. They pretty much gave Gillie Boy the finger when it came to using it. And going in to a fight most armies are going to take what they think need.

I have no problem playing vs min/max-ed armies. Just remember that people can and will fail Ld checks even with Ld 10.

Dark Apostle197
09-01-2007, 06:55
I don't care about 6 man las/plas. I use two in 2000 points and a lot of 6 man squads with twin specials in my word bearers. But I guess that could be considered fluffy because full man Word Bearer squads run in twelves, so they were split in two -.- But either way I do not care. Lord Malek is right, they can be easilly countered. Kill 4 bodies and you drop them below scoring, kill 5 and you definitely got rid of one of the main weapons. I was used my Word bearers quite a few times now, and have not gotten any complaints against them except for one. Ofcourse, this one was from a guy who complains about chease at any Chaos army, then looks at ways to try and cheese his Eldar, and when he finds out they are fairly balanced he complains about his favorite army being nerfed :)

Cypher
09-01-2007, 07:23
I dont like them. Boring, unfluffy and powergamey (is that a word?). Not something I ever give a good comp score to.

[SD] Bob Plisskin
09-01-2007, 07:24
In my list I have 6 men squads with 5 x bolter 1 x heavy bolter mounted in razorbacks with HBs. I have one squad you could say is min maxed with 4 x bolter 1 x plasma gun and 1 x plasma cannon in a lascannon razorback.

My army isn't astartes fluffwise.

is this cheesy?

how do marines normally get around in razorbacks if they are astartes?

will this list be playable after redux comes out?

Maren
09-01-2007, 07:48
Personally I dont go for tactical or flexible I just think the dark future is all about plasma and "lazerz" so I just try to get as much of them in my army as possible. The same with my Imperial Guard army. Sure it gives me less anti horde firpower but if i meat a mech army im rolling baby. Plus the chance to go "pew pew!" every time i roll a dice is just...it's just...pure love!

broxus
09-01-2007, 07:50
I wish that razorbacks could allow you to place 10 man tac squads in it. I just simply hate that it gives you such a small squad option. I say toss the rhino's and get razorbacks if they change that. I would use them over drop pods. Just seems a simple waste to buy a transport for so few men. THe more it can transport the better the value.

AngryAngel
09-01-2007, 08:20
I have no real problem with the min maxed squads. As plenty of others have said, it has its purpose, and has its flaws. A good player will get around it.

golembane
09-01-2007, 10:48
If you want to play with squads of that nature, all good, but can't complain when a full unit of Spiders teleports in behind you and turn that unit to dust, or a unit of banshees run it into the ground, or the shooty DA squad unloads 33 shots into it.

Forbiddenknowledge
09-01-2007, 10:54
Or a starcannon army wastes your men..... oh, wait.... that got nerfed.

If people want to use them, they can. Its in their codex. I find it unfluffy, and it is beardy only when overloaded. If you pack 6 min/max squads, thats powergaming, you can kiss good bye to comp score, and you won't get a very good game. If you have 2, and then some other units, its not beardy at all. All things in moderation.

Scythe
09-01-2007, 11:03
It is pretty boring, especially when an army is loaded with those squads. Anyone with 6 las/plas squads won't be getting any points for orginality from me.

ashc
09-01-2007, 11:04
An absolute pet hate of mine.

Smacks of unimaginative powerplaying to me.

Ash

Angelus Mortis
09-01-2007, 11:07
It's un-Codex.

A five marine Combat Squad should have EITHER one (1) special weapon OR one (1) heavy weapon.

Not both. One or the other.I dunno. If you want to play fulffy, then you could always say they were a 10 man squad before the battle, but lost 5 brothers in the the last one. Still, that being said I dont care for it much myself. It just to me doesnt feel right.

DesolationAngel
09-01-2007, 11:08
If people can do it then why not, most efficient way of getting max firepower out of troops, 2 high ap weapons over one, both can damage vechiles. Nastier with blood angels though as the sergeants normally have termi honours too for extra powerfist death company. Played a list that had four 5 man units like that plus scouts, doesn't bother me, whatever works.

Gen.Steiner
09-01-2007, 11:54
but, for a "non-codex"/"divergent" chapter, isnt that actually quite fluffy?

Yes, but those chapters are heretical anyway. So I stand by my opinion of HERESY! HERESY!

Besides, a heavy bolter and a plasma gun is much better at killing infantry. :)

Kahadras
09-01-2007, 11:55
It's unimaginative IMO. People just use the set up 'because it's the best'. Most follow the 'wisdom' of tactical posts claiming that 6 men laz/plas squads, 9 Land speeder Tornadoes and 3 Predator annihilators with HB sponsons is the best possible set up for SM due to the fact a guy won GT with it.

I also don't like people claiming that it's fluffy. It blatently isn't. It's not that I mind to much them taking the unit/s but I really don't like people trying to justify the fact that they are taking them on any other grounds that they think it's the 'best' combo going.

Kahadras

Mr_Smiley
09-01-2007, 11:59
They put the rule in so people could use it, I find large squads more fun, but I will not complain if people want smaller squads with more heavy/special weapons because its in the codex and I find it balanced, well against me anyway.

Zubb
09-01-2007, 12:30
U can use anything thats in the codex. Small squad have higher firepower per point but are valnurable easily reduced to non-scourings. The good player will get around it.

Nehcrum
09-01-2007, 12:30
What they need to do, is to remove the "discount" tactical squads has on heavy weapons. Make them pay the full price for their heavy weapon. That'll put an end to the min/max squads, when the heavy weapons cost the same as for devastator squads.

Mr_Smiley
09-01-2007, 12:43
What they need to do, is to remove the "discount" tactical squads has on heavy weapons. Make them pay the full price for their heavy weapon. That'll put an end to the min/max squads, when the heavy weapons cost the same as for devastator squads.

Not really, as people still get more bang with the smaller squads, its just they will have a few less of them running around, or will lose point elsewhere.

Takitron
09-01-2007, 12:43
Personally I dont go for tactical or flexible I just think the dark future is all about plasma and "lazerz" so I just try to get as much of them in my army as possible.

at least you are honest? Ive not experienced this particular bit of cheese, but Its really nothing a good general should be afraid of. There are plenty of ways that many armies can deal with this.

IAMNOTHERE
09-01-2007, 12:44
Or reduce the premium devastators pay for heavy weapons instead.

The 6 man squad size is a controversial issue in the codex astartes and dates from the discovery of a vehicle that is some where between the rhino and the predator.

Yes the Razoback, some chapter masters wont use it, others swear by it.

It led to one of the biggest changes in tactical doctrine in the Astartes history, the 6 man squad.

This led some divergent codex chapters to develope new tactics such as 2 special weapons in the squad so it can stay mobile whilst being supported by anti tank from the razorback.

Another tactic is the moving wall of fire where squads advance on foot between the razorbacks putting down a lot of rounds whilst only exposing them minimally.

Different chapters different tactics. ALL sanctioned by the codex astartes to a greater or lesser extent. Most armoured infantry based chapters would use razorbacks for their tactical squads whilst rhinos, lacking any firepower would be kept for reserves.

Gen.Steiner
09-01-2007, 12:57
There are plenty of ways that many armies can deal with this.

Die at it, in an agressive manner?

Rioghan Murchadha
09-01-2007, 13:09
I absolutely love 6 man las/plas.. go ahead.. fire your lascannon at my infantry platoon.. oh darn.. there goes a guardsman.. I dare you to rapid fire your plasma gun... ouch.. that cost me 18 pts..

Gen.Steiner
09-01-2007, 13:27
I dare you to rapid fire your plasma gun... ouch.. that cost me 18 pts..

Mmm, surely it'll cost you either 0 pts (as Guardsmen don't give VP's until half the squad is dead) or 12 points...?

I can't think of anything in the Guard 'dex that's 18pts. :p

Chimera
09-01-2007, 13:31
I play marines, and I've never seen the appeal, really... and I don't stick religeously to fluff. (I'm expecting a visit from the Inquisition, hopefully they'll just content themselves with executing my pet Termagent and not me.)

Anyway, tactically, if someone suggested to me to give my Lascannon-armed 5-man squad a plasma gun... why oh why? The bolters in the squad rarely get to shoot at anything because I'm busy using my anti-tank gun to shoot at tanks, or other tank-like creations.

Lascannons can shoot a LONG way. And kill big things. Plasma guns can't do either, and have a reasonable chance of killing one of my marines. Let the IG take them and die in droves when they overheat. No-one cares about them. Marines are expensive and rare.

I do agree that this situation is not helped by the immense cost of devastator squads. 215 points for five guys? No ta.

That said I do believe in the 'each to their own' philosophy, so I'm not going to complain or whinge about a player that takes six Las/Plas squads in his army. He'll learn the error of his ways eventually.

Kahadras
09-01-2007, 13:48
The 6 man squad size is a controversial issue in the codex astartes and dates from the discovery of a vehicle that is some where between the rhino and the predator.

Yes the Razoback, some chapter masters wont use it, others swear by it.


I always thought Razorbacks were for command squads. The fact that you get five man command box sets has always led me to believe that they were there to transport them and your captain/chapter master. It's clear from the background that most chapters only have a few Razorbacks when compared to the amount of Rhinos they can field.

Kahadras

dean
09-01-2007, 13:48
The 6 man squad size is a controversial issue in the codex astartes and dates from the discovery of a vehicle that is some where between the rhino and the predator.

Yes the Razoback, some chapter masters wont use it, others swear by it.

It led to one of the biggest changes in tactical doctrine in the Astartes history, the 6 man squad.



Some history; The Razorback was changed from capacity 5 to 5+1 (then just to 6) because people complained they couldnt get both their 5 man command squad (with two special weps) and the character into the vehicle. (Rhinos went from 10 to 10+1 for the same reason and then back to 10) :rolleyes:

The 6 man squad came from the "it will fit" and the "he has to kill 4 to get points instead of 3".


Edit: Beat by Karhadras

DAs had a 4-9 man command squad to overcome the 5 man limit on razorbacks. (And to make it seem the master was a member of the squad.)

Pootleflump
09-01-2007, 14:00
Some history; The Razorback was changed from capacity 5 to 5+1 (then just to 6) because people complained they couldnt get both their 5 man command squad (with two special weps) and the character into the vehicle. (Rhinos went from 10 to 10+1 for the same reason and then back to 10) :rolleyes:

The 6 man squad came from the "it will fit" and the "he has to kill 4 to get points instead of 3".


Edit: Beat by Karhadras

DAs had a 4 man command squad to overcome the 5 man limit on razorbacks. (And to make it seem the master was a member of the squad.)

I never knew this until now, And it makes good sense. But why go from 5+1 to a straight 6 man capacity, the original 5+1 seems a much more appropriate soloution?

Wraithbored
09-01-2007, 14:05
It's cheesy, boring, unfluffy and annoying.

And to counter 5 man las/plas squads why shouldn't I stock up on starcannons on everything I can. Any marines crying cheese yet? Thought so...

What IF it's in my codex as an option shouldn't I be able to use it? :rolleyes:

Onisuzume
09-01-2007, 14:27
I think it's an great way to see what kind of player your opponent is.
6-men las/plas with a possible razorback for powergamers.
5/6-men and 1 special/heavy weapon with a possible razorback for those who play by fluff.

Scythe
09-01-2007, 14:39
I never knew this until now, And it makes good sense. But why go from 5+1 to a straight 6 man capacity, the original 5+1 seems a much more appropriate soloution?

Well, it would be purely a game mechanic, which wouldn't make that much sense. After all, if you can fit 5 marines and a chaplain in a razorback, you can also fit an additional marine instead of the chaplain there, can you?

Forbiddenknowledge
09-01-2007, 14:53
You'd have thought.... but take the wave serpent. Carries 12, and wraithguard count as 2. Now, I havn't read this bit for a while in my dex, but its something along the lines of "...5 wraithguard and two characters". So why not 6 guard, and no characters? You can have six man squads after all, so why not?

dean
09-01-2007, 14:58
I never knew this until now, And it makes good sense. But why go from 5+1 to a straight 6 man capacity, the original 5+1 seems a much more appropriate soloution?

Because it wasn't really a 5+1, the rule actually stated that (any one) character can squish in even if the vehicle is full. Razors were then changed to 6 but Rhinos werent changed to 11 (IIRC) and the (global) character squish in rule was dropped.

Scythe
09-01-2007, 15:15
You'd have thought.... but take the wave serpent. Carries 12, and wraithguard count as 2. Now, I havn't read this bit for a while in my dex, but its something along the lines of "...5 wraithguard and two characters". So why not 6 guard, and no characters? You can have six man squads after all, so why not?

Because wraithguard are shaped differently from normal eldar. You could make a (not that strong, I admit) point for wraithguard only fitting in set spaces in a transport.

Marines, on the other hand, are physically exactly the same, so the weak argument wouldn't hold there.

Gen.Steiner
09-01-2007, 15:17
Who would sit in the 'Special Seat' in the Razorback, though? I mean, come on - if the Chaplain/Librarian/Captain always sits in one particular seat... I know I wouldn't sit there.

Sgt Biffo
09-01-2007, 15:31
To min-max or not to min-max.

I can see the attraction in having as much hoopty froop juice in every squad in site.

That said small squads get swapped in close combat and even gretchin can stomp a small squad of terminators (wether they have suffer battle attrition or not).

Close combat has always been the pivotal phase in all editions of 40k in my experience, and weight of numbers is always a telling factor especially in the current edition.

So that said: I don't care if its cheese or not:cheese: . Small squad=easy to route/cut down in CC. Go for it if you want!

JustTony
09-01-2007, 15:31
Yes it's somewhat cheesy, however it does make it easier to get the whole squad under a Battle Cannon pie plate. SPLAT! Go ahead and paint up one marine covered in red splatter to show the survivor, the one "1" rolled on the to wound roll. Everyone else is just the feet left on the base.

On the other hand, keep in mind the difference between the spirit of the rules and the letter of the rule. A local SF/Fantasy convention often has a 500 point mini tourney, using standard Force Org. Here's what one guy showed up with, using the old Eldar list:
HQ:
Avatar
Basic Farseer
Troops:
3 rangers
3 rangers
Heavy Support:
1 Wraithlord w/BL
1 Wraithlord w/SC
He did win a couple of these tourneys and complained when he did not get full points for Comp scores. His stand was that he was within the force org stated by the codex so he should get full points. So I guess he wanted some whine to go with his cheese. Oh well.
Peace; through superior firepower
JustTony

Kriegsherr
09-01-2007, 15:40
It is a bit against the Fluff, but I don't really mind, if they give you the option you may as well take it.

Then they shouldn't give the option. And thats exactly what they do with the DA codex. I really hope this is also enforced on other codex-chapters.

Yes, everyone can call me fluff-nazi. I'll call you powergamer then ;)

John Vaughan
09-01-2007, 15:45
...It's retarded. small squads are less flexible...


On the contrary:

Small squads can be moved to tighter positions, ones less accessible by 10 man squads. You would end up with half as many squads, which means that you cannot place them all as strategically as you may like to. Odd that it's me saying this. I play necrons and tyranids, two armies where small squads is a bad idea...

Quantum Physics??? Interesting...

Carlos
09-01-2007, 15:46
These 5-man units tend to sit back and shoot so a quick starcannon/Ioncannon to the face normally forces them to fall back off the table.

If my opponent is stupid enough to put 5 marines near to my banshees/dragons they aint coming back. Smaller units are easier to eat whilst larger ones take a while.

JustTony
09-01-2007, 16:03
Good point, Carlos. My nids don't care care about the 10 or 12 that get splattered charging across the table. Las/plas is a real waste in this case. I worry more about HBs and Plas Cannons. Out of 30 hormagaunts, the surving twenty or so will certainly see off 5 marines. I consider 5 man squads to simply be a convient way to deliver high quality hormagaunt chow. If they don't shoot at the gaunts to hammer the fexs' and Tyrants, then even more gaunts and stealers get where they're going. And enough stealers will whack anything.

Peace; through superior firepower.

Midknightwraith
09-01-2007, 17:42
Both sides have valid points as far as tactical soundness. TBH, I used to be in the short squad is cheezy crowd. As my understanding of the game has increased over the years, I have changed my view somewhat. One point that I am surprised no one has brought up is that more/smaller squads give a more efficient firing potential, in addition to the position benefits.

It is one of the reasons I think people complain about the cheapness of the Tactical Squad Heavy Weapons, so much. 4 x 5man Tactical squads with a heavy weapons cost 360, while a 10man DevSquad with the same weapons costs 290. For those 70 pts you gain the ability to engage 3 more targets if you need to, plus you have more than 2x as many bullet catchers w/ bolters (16 vs 6). In addition you've given your opponent 3 more targets that he has to deal with. The only percieved drawback is that you use 4 FOC slots instead of 1.

The reason heavies are cheap in Tactical squads is because Tactical Squads are supposed to be flexible and mobile. The theory is the heavy will not be fired every turn, because the squad will be moving, and so is not worth as much in that unit. The problem is, that is not how a tactical squad is used when it has a heavy weapon in it, by the majority of people who take that option.

A Codex Marine force can fill up the org chart with as little as 1500 points. The same exact models can be used to fill out FOC slots and come up with 1/2 to 2/3s the number of units. Against players of equivalent skill the full org chart has a distinct advantage over the force with fewer units. The full FOC force can better split their fire, and thereby avoid over killing their targets, while the reverse is true of the more compact FOC force. More units to kill, with greater potential for overkill. This is a big mechanical problem with 40k game balance due to the no split fire rule.

Midknightwraith
09-01-2007, 17:56
I would like to see a ld test with a cumulative -1 modifier for each time a unit wants to split fire. Fail, and that unit doesn't fire, and can not fire anymore this turn.

Working something like this. Marine Tactical Squad has LasCannon, Meltagun, and 6 Bolters. 1st Target with the Melta-gun is a nearby tank. Shoots, target is destroyed. Marine Player takes a leadership test to use the lasCannon against a more distant target, with a -1Ld. Passes, but misses the target. The rest of the squad decides to fire at a nearby ork squad, takes a Ld test at -2 and fails. The remainder of the squad therefore fires nothing, and no further shooting can be done this turn.

This is of course in lieu of being able to just split fire, which I am in favor of.

Lieutenant Frederic Henry
09-01-2007, 18:56
I don't cry cheese when I see to many min/max tactical squads. The imagination of the other player doesn't impress me, but I tend not to protest. In fact, one or two in support of larger tactical squads isn't even a problem. But when I see 4x 6 marine squads with las/plas deployed on the other side of the table, that is when I would say the opposing player has taken it too far. Someone said it earlier; all things in moderation.
Cheers.

Dark Apostle197
09-01-2007, 22:16
Just out of curiosity. Everyone is using fluff as a reason for marines. Now, what about chaos marines. I can't see a chaos marine going, "but sir, we cannot do a six man squad, it is heresy... oh" I still agree that it should not matter if there are a few, though i do not like seeing six las/plas squads.

jfrazell
09-01-2007, 22:27
Makes me think they are a sit and shoot army.

As an IW/shooty LATD I like sit and shoot opponents focused on other MEQ opponents. Oh yes indeedy play to my strength...:cool:

Rioghan Murchadha
09-01-2007, 23:18
Mmm, surely it'll cost you either 0 pts (as Guardsmen don't give VP's until half the squad is dead) or 12 points...?

I can't think of anything in the Guard 'dex that's 18pts. :p

It was a cumulative tally. 1 guardsman costs I believe something on the order of 6 pts if you extrapolate the cost of a squad. (discounting any extra for the sarge). So if I take a hit from a lascannon, and 2 from a plasma gun, that's 3 dead guardsman, who no, don't cough up points til the end of the game, but I tend to keep a running tally of the efficiency of fire and return fire based on points killed. ;)

Dark Apostle197
09-01-2007, 23:20
The funny thing is, by your tally I would have gained 12 points, and lost 25 :)

Skyth
09-01-2007, 23:42
I find playing against an army that doesn't use 6 man las/plas squads is quite boring typically.

Deafwing
09-01-2007, 23:43
Both sides of this discussion have valid opinions. Myself, I like using both a pair of full tactical squads (usually with plasma cannons, even) and either a full devastator squad or two 6 man squads for fire support as the "core" of my Dark Angels.
Is that cheesy? Debatable.
Does it go against fluff? Um, according to fluff, marines should be able to wade through entire armies alone...fluff says a lot of stuff :p
Is it easy to kill? Sure, of course 6 guys are easier to kill than 10.
Balanced? Well, its not like all my squads are like that...

Deafwing

Kahadras
10-01-2007, 00:07
I find playing against an army that doesn't use 6 man las/plas squads is quite boring typically.

Wow you must be bored in most of your games then. Playing armies like Necron and Eldar must suck! Joking aside. Marines need 6 man laz/plas squads to make them interesting to play??? My God that's a bit sad isn't it?

Kahadras

Gen.Steiner
10-01-2007, 00:08
It was a cumulative tally. 1 guardsman costs I believe something on the order of 6 pts if you extrapolate the cost of a squad. (discounting any extra for the sarge). So if I take a hit from a lascannon, and 2 from a plasma gun, that's 3 dead guardsman, who no, don't cough up points til the end of the game, but I tend to keep a running tally of the efficiency of fire and return fire based on points killed. ;)

D'oh! I really should stop trying to do advanced maths, like adding. :p

HMSNoodles
10-01-2007, 00:25
The problem is the options you actually have. As a shooty marine army, smaller squads are better, its a simple as that. The restriction that means you can only fire all the squad at a single target, regardless of the weapons it carries make putting a lascannon in a 10 man tactical squad retarded as you gotta waste 8 bolters just to fire at something only the the plasma and las can actually hurt. In most armies you'll have a commander on the table, so although you'll have to made an extra test or two for leadership from squad losses, your mostly doing that against LD10 anyway.

I like my squads to be tactical, mobile and effective against most enemy types, thats why I take the clense and purge trait so I can replace my lascannon with a 2nd special weapon.

I think the best solution to this is allow the squad to take one special OR heavy weapon per 5 members, this means you could decide to deploy a squad that presses the advantage with 2 plasma or melta guns, or a shooty squad that sits back with 2 heavy bolters or lascannons.

Not being able to move and fire weapons, and not being able to shoot a different target from the rest of the squad with the heavy stuff makes large squads a waste of points.

Mr_Smiley
10-01-2007, 00:29
Another possible solution would be to allow Devastators to split fire.
But I prefer the only one heavy/special weapon per 5 men idea.

garro
10-01-2007, 00:51
Personally I don't like the 6 man Las/Plas combo in under 1500 point games.
I play Doom Eagles so i like to play a more aggressive Assaulty Army.
In 1500 Points the Only 6 Man Squad is 6 Dev Marines with 3 Missile Launchers with a Twin Las Razorback. To me the Razorback comes into it's own with Dev Squads, able to use it as a force multplier is a Bonus.
In 1850 Pt+ Games I do take 2 6 Man Las Plas Squads but that's only for some back up firepower for the Army. I prefer the 8 Man Dev Squad with 4 Missile Launchers or 8 Man Squads in Rhinos.

I think a couple of 6 Man Las/Plas Squads is ok but the armies that consist of only 2 5/6 man Las/Plas Squads or 5/6 Las/Plas Squads just make me want to cry with frustration at the lack of originality. Marines are supposed to get up close and crack heads. So a few Squads of Fire support makes sense tactically but all 6 man Las/Plas Screams cheese and a lack of originality

cailus
10-01-2007, 02:04
5-6 man las/plas squads are not only unfluffy but boring as well.

Personally I think that the best options for Tactical squads are 10 man fully equipped units.

The new DA codex clearly aims to remove the 5-6 man las/plas as an option with the Combat Squad rules. I assume the SM Codex redux will do the same.

The Dude
10-01-2007, 03:14
I wish that razorbacks could allow you to place 10 man tac squads in it. I just simply hate that it gives you such a small squad option. I say toss the rhino's and get razorbacks if they change that. I would use them over drop pods. Just seems a simple waste to buy a transport for so few men. THe more it can transport the better the value.

Ah ha ha ha ha ha!!! You mean you'd take a 10-man transport with a Twin-Linked Heavy Weapon over a one-shot deep-strike with a Stormbolter? Get outta here! ;)


They put the rule in so people could use it,

well, I'd argue they put the rule in because they didn't foresee the implications of it. They wanted the Marines to have more flexibility than they did in 2nd edition, as so gave them flexible squad numbers. However, this then allowed people to build armies that in no way reflected the background of the Marines and their fighting style.

It seems that this will soon be rectified though.

Yes, the small size of the squad makes them easier to deal with, but I don't think the small size is the point. It's the wepons fit that runs against convention. 5-man squads are fine, and fit the background well enough, but not if they're armed with a heavy and a special.

Griffin
10-01-2007, 06:07
Agreed - I'm of the oppinion that you should use 5/10 man squads as a Standard size. Maby they should add a rule so that You can use "remanent" squads, like 6 strong or so for every 2 full combat squads you have. This would be able to more accurately depict combat losses than the current system.

Dark Apostle197
10-01-2007, 06:29
Again, all of these things are about loyalist marine squads, why no complaints about chaos ones. There full squads are 20... So that doesn't work. And again, I doubt they wouldn't not use full squads just because that is heresy... Cause you know... That boat sailed a looong time ago. You cannot just complain about loyalists and things to stop them from doing it, while ignoring chaos.

Griffin
10-01-2007, 06:37
Chaos doesn't use the codex astartes. They don't get goodies like Psy Hoods, assault cannons, speeders enc. The codex was completed after the heresy - as a result they still fight in many cases according to their structures pre heresy Or in sacred numbers of 6,7,8,9 enc. Generally speaking chaos has no reason to use standard squad sizes, and las plas chaos is the least of your worries since oblits, bezerkers, Daemon Princes enc are much worse. Besides they Don't get ATSKNF meaning the chance of running off of the board is larger. Marines Follow codex astartes, Chaos does whatever the hell it wants. it makes sense. Besides why complain about having to take more basic troops ? I'd say the more the better since grunts win games.

Draco Argentum
10-01-2007, 07:56
I don't see how everyone using 6 man las/plas is more boring that everyone using 10man tac squads.

Scythe
10-01-2007, 10:09
1) There are more 6 man squads, since those are cheaper as 10 man squads

2) Ten man squads aren't the same, 6 man las/plas squads are. People use different configurations and combinations of specials and heavies on 10 man squads, they might get veteran sergeants with different gear, get a rhino transport or a drop pod, and so on. In short: they are diverse.

3) Following point 2, ten man squads can be used in the way they are intended: tactical squads. They can advance, provide fire support, even engage in combat if needed. Las/plas squads only have 1 purpose: stay still and fire away.

4) And you can still split up your ten man squad into two five man combat squads, giving further diversity.

Griffin
10-01-2007, 10:17
1) There are more 6 man squads, since those are cheaper as 10 man squads

2) Ten man squads aren't the same, 6 man las/plas squads are. People use different configurations and combinations of specials and heavies on 10 man squads, they might get veteran sergeants with different gear, get a rhino transport or a drop pod, and so on. In short: they are diverse.

3) Following point 2, ten man squads can be used in the way they are intended: tactical squads. They can advance, provide fire support, even engage in combat if needed. Las/plas squads only have 1 purpose: stay still and fire away.

4) And you can still split up your ten man squad into two five man combat squads, giving further diversity.


AND WE HAVE A WINNER

*gives Scythe a cookie*

Tyron
10-01-2007, 10:33
BWAHAHAHAHAHHA!!!!! Bring 'em on! My Boyz all save on a 6+ anyway. Your Las/Plas squads are wasted on me, you beakie scum.

In all seriousness, they can be an easy way to cram as much shooting into your army as possible. But they are BOOOOORING to play against. I feel it doesn't show a lot of creativity in the making of an army list. Wow! You have 4 5-man Las/Plas squads, a Chaplain with a jump pack, and the rest you spent on Land Speeder Tornados? How original.

C'mon guys, lets show some thought in making your lists. Go with what you think might look cool and be fun to play. Not what some monkey on a message board says works the best.

Best post yet and the first bit made me laugh hard.

Rioghan Murchadha
10-01-2007, 11:53
It is very nearly amusing that people are arguing about the millitary structure of a fake group of GESHKMs, as put forth in a fake book, written by a fake person, the words of which book nobody has ever seen.

Who in this thread has actually read the codex Asstarts.. I mean Astartes? How is a 6 man Tactical squad 'unfluffy', or somehow against Space Marine combat doctrine? The Ultramarines are pretty much the only chapter who are super anal-retentive about codex adherence anyway, and probably only because their primarch wrote the damn thing.

Until someone produces a document written and signed by the Emperor himself stating that marines MUST deploy in 10 man tactical squads, there is no way that anyone will put forth a convincing argument that 6 man las/plas is 'wrong'. Boring maybe, uncreative maybe, easy to beat since EVERY army has stuff that well outranges plasma guns yes.

Tyron
10-01-2007, 13:45
Rioghan Murchadha is right. Marines fight for the Emperor not Gullimen, also they put the mission first, and will do anything no matter what to complete it. Killing innocents, having 6 or 7 man squads you name it.

As a side not I always use 5 man squads as they are more flexible then a big 10 man unit. However I only put a heavy weqapon in them, be it mostly a heavy bolter/missile laurncher with the odd lascannon here and there.

The Emperor
10-01-2007, 14:12
Who in this thread has actually read the codex Asstarts.

Cute.


I mean Astartes? How is a 6 man Tactical squad 'unfluffy', or somehow against Space Marine combat doctrine?

Do you read any of the books? If not, then let me point you to any one of the following books, which says otherwise.

Codex: Angels of Death
Codex: Ultramarines
Codex: Space Marines (4th edition)
Codex: Blood Angels
Codex: Dark Angels
Index Astartes

Each and every single one states that a Codex Chapter is supposed to be made up of 10 Companies of 100 men each, broken down into 10 squads of 10 men. I can give you page references if you'd like, though if you would flip through these books, you'd quickly find the references to the Codex Astartes.


The Ultramarines are pretty much the only chapter who are super anal-retentive about codex adherence anyway, and probably only because their primarch wrote the damn thing.

After the Horus Heresy, when Roboute Guilliman became de facto Warmaster, he forced the Codex Astartes onto most of the other Legions. Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Imperial Fists, and Raven Guard are Codex Chapters, for the most part. Same goes for most of their successors. On top of which, 3/5th of all Space Marine Chapters are from Ultramarines geneseed. So no, it isn't just the Ultramarines who adhere to the Codex Astartes. Most Chapters adhere to one degree or another, and a great deal are 100% faithful to the Codex Astartes. The big things from the Codex, however, the parts that're repeated over and over again in all the various army books, most Codex Chapters adhere to stringently. I.E. Chapters being restricted to 1,000 men, 10-man squads, etc.

Forbiddenknowledge
10-01-2007, 14:23
Even with slight variation, most, hell, nearly all chapters follow the C:A - but vary on certain parts, like it says 2 Comp should be battle, DA says sod that and has Ravenwing. Their others, for the most part, are Codex.


I've read the codex Astartes..... go on, prove me wrong ;)

Kahadras
10-01-2007, 14:32
I agree with The Emperor, although I don't disagree with the 6 man laz/plas squads on the basis of the 'fluff'. Fluff is easily twisted to fit peoples demands. They're based on a Forge World which only produces plasma guns and lazcannon. They have taken lots of casualties recently so are using 6 man squads till they have built their numbers back up etc etc.

I've seen a Warhammer Empire gunline army justified in the most horrible way using fluff. 'An artillery train gets lost in a forest and comes across a wizards tower with four wizards in it. They say "Do you want to come and fight for us?" and the wizards say "OK".' That then totaly justifies, from a fluffy stand point, taking a wizard lord, 3 other wizards, 30 hand gunners, 3 cannon and 2 hellblaster volleyguns.

Kahadras

Captain Micha
10-01-2007, 18:34
I think by squad they meant like 1st squad... does not mean ALL of first squad will be deployed all at once.

Would you use a whole squadron when a flight of three would do the job? no. anything else is a waste of man power. Which while the Imperium is prone to such wastes. Usually the Astartes follow at least a little more intelligent thought process.

IcedCrow
10-01-2007, 18:36
I think we should focus on playing the game and not worrying about anything else.

Midknightwraith
10-01-2007, 19:58
I think the best solution to this is allow the squad to take one special OR heavy weapon per 5 members, this means you could decide to deploy a squad that presses the advantage with 2 plasma or melta guns, or a shooty squad that sits back with 2 heavy bolters or lascannons.

The problem with this solution is that, as has been noted, Tactical squads get a discount on their heavy Weapons because they are not expected to sit back and Fire them every turn. I have no problem with it directly, but the points values for the cost of the heavy weapons in the tactical squad would then need to be increased to take into account that the squad with two heavies in it is basically half of a devestator squad, whose weapons cost half as much, and aren't going to be moving, and thus get full effect from those weapons.

The Dude
11-01-2007, 00:22
Would you use a whole squadron when a flight of three would do the job? no. anything else is a waste of man power. Which while the Imperium is prone to such wastes. Usually the Astartes follow at least a little more intelligent thought process.

I would if the Bible told me to ;)


The problem with this solution is that, as has been noted, Tactical squads get a discount on their heavy Weapons because they are not expected to sit back and Fire them every turn. I have no problem with it directly, but the points values for the cost of the heavy weapons in the tactical squad would then need to be increased to take into account that the squad with two heavies in it is basically half of a devestator squad, whose weapons cost half as much, and aren't going to be moving, and thus get full effect from those weapons.

I think the inequity in heavy weapon prices isn't so much about how often they are expected to fire as it is how many you can take per squad. If a squad has the option to take 4 heavies, it makes sense to charge a premium for the pleasure.

AngryAngel
11-01-2007, 05:21
I honestly don't see why the stringent squad sizes are considerd so needed. I see why the number per chapter is needed. However for a tactical genius, the ultramarines founder really was hitting the wrong target with squads.

No set number would be the best. Each diffrent situation might need more or less people all in one place. It in fact seems kinda counter intuitive how he's got them set up. To keep your opponent guessing would be the best strategy..or use however little or much you might need at the time.

Really if anything, seems like something put into the fluff just for outside control of how big or small a squad can be. Justified by plot line, though without real point. Then again alot is that way I suppose.

I've never had a real issue with these min maxed squads so I say, live and let die people.

Griffin
11-01-2007, 05:30
AngryAngel - That was more akin to Alpharius way of war. That's exactly why he and Robute Gulliman came into conflict. Robute was harsh and Unyielding for the most part, only bending when it was a absolute must, Alpharius advocated your approach.

Draco Argentum
11-01-2007, 08:03
1) There are more 6 man squads, since those are cheaper as 10 man squads

Fair point


2) Ten man squads aren't the same, 6 man las/plas squads are. People use different configurations and combinations of specials and heavies on 10 man squads, they might get veteran sergeants with different gear, get a rhino transport or a drop pod, and so on. In short: they are diverse.

Whilst you may have diverse 10 man squads someone trying to min/max quite likely wouldn't. If you're going to complain about min/maxed 6mans you have to realise that 10mans can also be min/maxed. People trying to powergame will just move from 6man las/plas to whatever the internet tells them is the best 10man config.

Fluffwise, I agree with making the 10man a better choice. The current codex presents options and the fluff one isn't quite as efficient. It is nice to have the non codex sizes though. The last thing we need is a dex for strict codex marines then a second for not so strict codex marines.

Personally I hope the rumored C:SM redux evens out the power differences between the options rather than simply removing some.

rrchristensen
11-01-2007, 08:29
It is very nearly amusing that people are arguing about the millitary structure of a fake group of GESHKMs, as put forth in a fake book, written by a fake person, the words of which book nobody has ever seen.

SNIP! [does anyone actually write that anymore? Ah, good ol' Usenet. - RRChristensen]

Until someone produces a document written and signed by the Emperor himself stating that marines MUST deploy in 10 man tactical squads, there is no way that anyone will put forth a convincing argument that 6 man las/plas is 'wrong'. Boring maybe, uncreative maybe, easy to beat since EVERY army has stuff that well outranges plasma guns yes.

Quoted for truth.


Cute.
Do you read any of the books? If not, then let me point you to any one of the following books, which says otherwise.

Codex: Angels of Death
Codex: Ultramarines
Codex: Space Marines (4th edition)
Codex: Blood Angels
Codex: Dark Angels
Index Astartes

Each and every single one states that a Codex Chapter is supposed to be made up of 10 Companies of 100 men each, broken down into 10 squads of 10 men. I can give you page references if you'd like, though if you would flip through these books, you'd quickly find the references to the Codex Astartes.


Yes yes. There are lots of codices out there to prove your fluff-point. And within the fictional universe which we call W40K your point is valid. If we lived in that world of pretend it would be heresy to field our Brother-Marines in six-man squads. But we don't live in there. The real-world point is that they're all fictional, or fake as Rioghan Murchadha put it. They don't matter in the real world, i.e. the place where we play with our little toy soldiers. The fluff in the codices mentioned above is background material. The fluff is useful for drawing people into the hobby - I wholeheartedly agree that people probably are drawn to the game initially due, at least in part - to the cool fluff and imagery, as well as the minis and the actual game. But to argue that there should be unbending real-world** game implications to background material, however central it may be to the imagery of the game, is untenable. The fluff evolves. It is not set in stone. As long as the games developers stay within broad lines of the fluff - as it stands at that point in time, and only to provide a guideline for people getting into the hobby -, I really don't care about 6-men las/plas squads violating the fictional Codex Astartes.

The fluff, if rigidly adhered to - which Sod knows even GW doesn't - is more of a straightjacket than a help. To hold anyone to essentially minor details randomly thought up by a GW employee at some point over the last 20 years and then largely perpetuated by other random GW employees since, suggests the attitude of an accountant or corporate lawyer rather than that of a person seeking an outlet for his creative energy in his spare time. You see that every time there's a 10+ page thread on why there can't be female Space Marines. Why does anyone care to argue against it, really? Let the guy who wants to do such an extensive modelling project have his fun. (If it even IS a modelling project. Maybe it just gives that person a warm feeling to imagine that there are steroid-enlarged mammaries somewhere under that MK8 breast plate). It's his money, time, and models. Chances are you'll never meet him nor will ever play a game with him. Just shut the concept out of your mind if it annoys you.

[** real-world as in, the world we live in in which we physically play a game of pretend with plastic pieces. Yes I know it's not 'real' in any meaningful sense except for the physical existence of the minis, terrain, and rule books]

Now, from a game-mechanics point of view, I find 6-man las/plas squads exceedingly boring. But that's an entirely different argument.

AngryAngel
11-01-2007, 08:41
@ griffin...alright well at least someone then was arguing for reason over harsh strictness for no real benefit. I can buy then why its in the fluff. However though it also shows why some chapters might deviate from the norm squad size. Afterall if such an issue came up a long time past..why wouldn't it pop up in the future as well ?

Griffin
11-01-2007, 09:13
@ AngryAngel - I concede that yes it is possible in the current WH40K timeline. In my oppinion if you can give a *good* justification for it, or site some kind of reference to it happening before - then feel free.

But if your playing a chapter that is codex, or uses ultra marines, imperial fist, dark angel enc gene seed - then I'd say no, your chapter would revere the teachings of its Primarch to much to go against it.

On the other hand if you are playing a founding that occured after the cursed founding (where in some cases gene seed was mixed and matched to prevent flaws, and another cursed founding) then your chapter *might* have a reason, due to having to adapt to certain condition enc.

But in any other case I would say - No, its just a lame excuse to build lame boring stupid powergaming armies going agianst the fluff about how marines operate as well as squad sizes.

Rioghan Murchadha
11-01-2007, 14:58
Cute.



Do you read any of the books? If not, then let me point you to any one of the following books, which says otherwise.

Codex: Angels of Death
Codex: Ultramarines
Codex: Space Marines (4th edition)
Codex: Blood Angels
Codex: Dark Angels
Index Astartes


Yup, yup, yup, yup, yup, and yup (own all of em, and the white dwarfs the articles originally appeared in). However.. hey.. guess what.. read the crimson fists entry in the index astartes articles.. Now read the current crimson fists fluff where somehow way more of them miraculously came back to life and were off world when their monastary blew up. GW changes the fluff to suit themselves constantly, which is why rules remain independant of fluff.


Each and every single one states that a Codex Chapter is supposed to be made up of 10 Companies of 100 men each, broken down into 10 squads of 10 men. I can give you page references if you'd like, though if you would flip through these books, you'd quickly find the references to the Codex Astartes.

After the Horus Heresy, when Roboute Guilliman became de facto Warmaster, he forced the Codex Astartes onto most of the other Legions. Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Imperial Fists, and Raven Guard are Codex Chapters, for the most part. Same goes for most of their successors. On top of which, 3/5th of all Space Marine Chapters are from Ultramarines geneseed. So no, it isn't just the Ultramarines who adhere to the Codex Astartes. Most Chapters adhere to one degree or another, and a great deal are 100% faithful to the Codex Astartes. The big things from the Codex, however, the parts that're repeated over and over again in all the various army books, most Codex Chapters adhere to stringently. I.E. Chapters being restricted to 1,000 men, 10-man squads, etc.

See.. here's the thing.. as someone else has kindly pointed out.. When we make space marine armies to play 40k with, we are forced to adhere to Codex:Space Marines, which states that "an army may be made up of as many little plastic/metal men will fit into the previously agreed upon points value. It also states that a Space Marine squad can be 6 guys. Tell Roboute Gulliman to take that and lump it. Or, at least if you can find him to tell him.. assuming he's not sitting in a corner on Macragge somewhere crying over all the 6 man las/plas squads out there...

That's another thing.. How do you have a primarch named Gulliman, your base on a world with a scottish name, and your current chapter master and a bunch of other characters with roman names? And isn't it also convenient that there was a system named ultramar just lying around for the Ultramarines to go live in..

Forbiddenknowledge
11-01-2007, 15:07
Well, they most likely named the system after they settled it.....

Kahadras
11-01-2007, 15:14
See.. here's the thing.. as someone else has kindly pointed out.. When we make space marine armies to play 40k with, we are forced to adhere to Codex:Space Marines, which states that "an army may be made up of as many little plastic/metal men will fit into the previously agreed upon points value. It also states that a Space Marine squad can be 6 guys.

I agree but in my experience that's been the rallying cry of WAACers. 'The rulebook, army book, FAQ says I can do it so I'm going to'. If the rumours are true about the SM codex being redone though it should instantly fix the problem IMHO. It'll also be interesting to see what happens to SM armies in tournies. I foresee a downturn in SM armies and an increase in CSM.

Kahadras

Griffin
11-01-2007, 15:31
Sad but true kahadras. Then CSM will be called even more beardy.

Rioghan Murchadha
11-01-2007, 23:41
I agree but in my experience that's been the rallying cry of WAACers. 'The rulebook, army book, FAQ says I can do it so I'm going to'. If the rumours are true about the SM codex being redone though it should instantly fix the problem IMHO. It'll also be interesting to see what happens to SM armies in tournies. I foresee a downturn in SM armies and an increase in CSM.

Kahadras

This is not the rallying cry of a WAACer.. I don't even own a single space marine.. (except the one member of the purple headed warriors chapter I painted when I worked at the local GW...)

GW obviously doesn't agree with your philosophy either, as they are the ones who both write the background, AND wrote the rulebook that states 6 man squads are legal and viable.

Besides.. I don't worry too much since I invariably end up playing omega level missions, since alphas are for rank noobs :p and it's damn easy to cack 3 marines to score half VPs for a typical las/plas squad.

Perhaps las/plas is min/maxing.. but isn't that the whole point of sound force selection? Maximising your strengths, while minimising your weaknesses?

My thousand sons army is my 'fluff' army.. It's supposed to represent Ahriman and his cabal of sorcerors. They have no vehicles as they travel the webways, just him (crappiest special character in the game.. no invuln save at over 200 pts.. :D) a squad of 9 chosen sorcerors, and however many favoured squads of rubric marines as I can fit in. Guess how many games its won... I dare you... The short answer is none. It's not even fun to play as it's totally non-competitive.

Seriously, it sounds like most of you arguing against these squads are trying to play a storybook rather than a game where you face off against another opponent to try to achieve victory. Yes, you're supposed to make it fun, but that can be done even with las/plas squads. Handing your opponent a victory because you're afraid the Inquisition might get you for violating the codex astartes isn't fun for anyone.

The Dude
11-01-2007, 23:45
If we lived in that world of pretend it would be heresy to field our Brother-Marines in six-man squads. But we don't live in there. The real-world point is that they're all fictional, or fake as Rioghan Murchadha put it. They don't matter in the real world, i.e. the place where we play with our little toy soldiers. The fluff in the codices mentioned above is background material.

I would argue that the tabletop is where the background material and the real world meet. It is a representation of the fictional universe, and the rules are there to guiide how that universe is represented

Games Workshop saw that the universe wasn't being represented in the way they felt it should, so they are taking steps to correct it. Simple.


See.. here's the thing.. as someone else has kindly pointed out.. When we make space marine armies to play 40k with, we are forced to adhere to Codex:Space Marines, which states that "an army may be made up of as many little plastic/metal men will fit into the previously agreed upon points value. It also states that a Space Marine squad can be 6 guys. Tell Roboute Gulliman to take that and lump it. Or, at least if you can find him to tell him.. assuming he's not sitting in a corner on Macragge somewhere crying over all the 6 man las/plas squads out there...

So when Games Workshop re-release the rules preventing people from doing it, you won't have a problem with it? I mean Codex: Space Marines will say that's how it has to be done, won't it?


I agree but in my experience that's been the rallying cry of WAACers.

Arrgh!!! More acronyms! Please elaborate. I know what you're saying, but I need to know what it stands for. :(

Edit: It's okay, I've figured it out :)

Laughingmonk
12-01-2007, 00:00
This is not the rallying cry of a WAACer.. I don't even own a single space marine.. (except the one member of the purple headed warriors chapter I painted when I worked at the local GW...)


Hahahaha..... are you serious?!?!?

Dare I ask what the chapter symbol was?

Gen.Steiner
12-01-2007, 00:04
Who in this thread has actually read the codex Asstarts.. I mean Astartes? How is a 6 man Tactical squad 'unfluffy', or somehow against Space Marine combat doctrine? The Ultramarines are pretty much the only chapter who are super anal-retentive about codex adherence anyway, and probably only because their primarch wrote the damn thing.

Codex: Ultramarines 2nd Edition, Insignium Astartes and Codex: Imperialis (2nd Edition) together with various other bits of background all make up the known Codex Astartes.

A six man Tac Squad is not Codex Adherent. End of story.

Almost every chapter is - or should be - a Codex chapter. As far as I can remember, the figure is something silly like 80% of the Chapters around are Codex adherent.

Kahadras
12-01-2007, 00:19
This is not the rallying cry of a WAACer

It might not be but it's starting to sound amusingly close. 'If the rules say so I can do it'. 'The game should be all about maximising your strengths and minimising your weaknesses'. 'People who play using the fluff are blinkered'. 'You want to play a story rather than a game'. 'I'm being forced to play the way fluff Nazis tell me to'.

Kahadras

The Emperor
12-01-2007, 01:16
See.. here's the thing.. as someone else has kindly pointed out.. When we make space marine armies to play 40k with, we are forced to adhere to Codex:Space Marines, which states that "an army may be made up of as many little plastic/metal men will fit into the previously agreed upon points value. It also states that a Space Marine squad can be 6 guys. Tell Roboute Gulliman to take that and lump it. Or, at least if you can find him to tell him.. assuming he's not sitting in a corner on Macragge somewhere crying over all the 6 man las/plas squads out there...

And Codex: Space Marines 4.5 will likely say that Space Marines must come in 5-man or 10-man squads. So it appears that Roboute Guilliman will be having the last laugh. :D


That's another thing.. How do you have a primarch named Gulliman, your base on a world with a scottish name, and your current chapter master and a bunch of other characters with roman names? And isn't it also convenient that there was a system named ultramar just lying around for the Ultramarines to go live in..

Before they found their Primarch, they were simply the 13th Legion. None of the Legions got their names til after their Primarchs were found.


Arrgh!!! More acronyms! Please elaborate. I know what you're saying, but I need to know what it stands for.

Edit: It's okay, I've figured it out

Enlighten me, please, cause I have no clue what it means. :p

The Dude
12-01-2007, 01:33
Enlighten me, please, cause I have no clue what it means. :p

Best I can determine it's Win At All Costs.

I hope that's right ;)

The Emperor
12-01-2007, 01:45
Thanks! Rest assured, I'm slapping myself silly for not figuring that one out. D'OH!

Gen.Steiner
12-01-2007, 01:59
It's also Women's Auxiliary Air Corps. ;)

Laughingmonk
12-01-2007, 03:53
It's also Women's Auxiliary Air Corps. ;)


What's that, a witch hunters variant list? :p
(An entire army of Seraphim! Let the Hit and Run games begin!)

Griffin
12-01-2007, 06:21
It might not be but it's starting to sound amusingly close. 'If the rules say so I can do it'. 'The game should be all about maximising your strengths and minimising your weaknesses'. 'People who play using the fluff are blinkered'. 'You want to play a story rather than a game'. 'I'm being forced to play the way fluff Nazis tell me to'.

Kahadras

SIGGED for SURE !

Rioghan Murchadha
12-01-2007, 06:28
I would argue that the tabletop is where the background material and the real world meet. It is a representation of the fictional universe, and the rules are there to guiide how that universe is represented

Correct.. and as they currently stand, the rules allow 6 man tactical squads.


Games Workshop saw that the universe wasn't being represented in the way they felt it should, so they are taking steps to correct it. Simple.

So when Games Workshop re-release the rules preventing people from doing it, you won't have a problem with it? I mean Codex: Space Marines will say that's how it has to be done, won't it?

Entirely correct. While I may not agree with how GW 'balances' the game, or the business decisions they make, it's their game, and I abide by their rules.


Hahahaha..... are you serious?!?!?

Dare I ask what the chapter symbol was?

It was large erect wang.. some of the best freehand I've ever done.

AngryAngel
12-01-2007, 06:38
If the rules happen, and they tale away any flexability with the squad sizes. Marine players will have to accept it.

All I was saying with it is I could see the variance in size. If it was with a non strictly codex chapter.

I have never had a problem with the las plas squads. Though maybe its because I ended up starting to play with some people who did need to win at all costs.

Armies should be built with either fun, or complete destruction in mind. You have to know the people your playing with. No one forces anyone to play against this min maxed squads except for in a tournament. If ya see um ? You hate um..don't play um..simple. No one twists your arm to play any other person. Ya hate min max, don't play who does it, ya hate marines, don't play um or against um. Ya hate assault cannons, then call um cheese and snub who uses them too.

If you see um at a trounament, then nut the hell up and play on, you did choose to play in that kind of environment. If they take it away, it won't matter they'll just use the next best combo. Or use another army entirely and cheese it out to the extreme.

Some people just don't have any fun unless they are always winning, and yeah I find that sad, but I also know that will never change in games.

Deathraven
12-01-2007, 07:29
I don't mind the odd under strength squad, as long as it's the odd one out. I generally field 3 10 man squads and one 6 man squad and I don't usually get complaints about them. I would only object strongly if they were used to fill the compulsory troop slots. It's people who take 2 five man squads and no other troops so they have more points for assault cannon toting whatevers.

AngryAngel
12-01-2007, 07:52
I usually field 10 man squads myself..the only time I field less is if I need to field less for points. Though even then its like 7 or 8 models. I tend to feel the basic trooper is the backbone of the army. I've also learned being a marine player to give thoughtless trust into the assault cannon, is a fools errand. Though I've never fielded the absolute most I possibly could.

insectum7
12-01-2007, 08:25
Moderation in all things really. The small, crack team of well equipped marines is a cool idea, the abuse of it is not.

I like to fit a five man Heavy Plasma / Plasma Rifle team into my army. Sometimes a Razorback friendly Heavy Bolter / Flamer squad runs around too, but the Bulk of my guys are in 10 man squads.

The exact strictness of the codex astartes and the adherence to it are pretty undefined in the fluff. Certainly, the ideal chapter layout is available for all to see, but I don't see it as being as binding as some posters here seem to suggest. Part of the beauty of the game is the interpretive nature of the background.

Rioghan Murchadha
12-01-2007, 08:39
It might not be but it's starting to sound amusingly close. 'If the rules say so I can do it'. 'The game should be all about maximising your strengths and minimising your weaknesses'. 'People who play using the fluff are blinkered'. 'You want to play a story rather than a game'. 'I'm being forced to play the way fluff Nazis tell me to'.

Kahadras

So, exactly what are you playing? Last I checked, I was playing WH40k, which, believe it or not.. is a game. Games have rules, or they don't generally work. a 6 man marine squad isn't an 'abuse' or stretching/bending of the rules at all. People who play using fluff and lose to people just playing the game shouldn't complain that the other person isn't only playing to fluff standards.

I'm not being forced to play any way other than how I want to. Perhaps if you'd actually read my post you'd note that I don't even OWN marines. It is possible that I could care less if GW tinkered with the min/max squad sizes of marines, but as of this moment, I don't see how.

And actually, I said list building was about min/maxing weakness/strength. Playing the game is about having fun. Sure, I could be a flufftard and say, "Hmm... my guard army is from a poor planet and doesn't have any special equipment looking at this grand 500 page background dossier I wrote for them, but I'm going up against an army with lots of vehicles.. Oh well, better stay true to the fluff and rely on my trusty S3 lasguns..." Or, I could give my opponent some respect, throw in some heavy weapons, and maybe a tank or 2, and try to make it a close fight.

Oh, and seriously.. of all the reasons to consider something cheesy.. "But it doesn't adhere to the Codex Astartes!!! WAAAAAAH!"... It's not overly powerful, it's easy to score points from.. (stop playing alpha mission variants), and it's just not that big a deal.

Unfluffy does not equate to cheesy

Griffin
12-01-2007, 09:26
Of course not, but watered down weak excuses arn't good enough either when trying to explain why all your squads are 6 man strong.

Rioghan Murchadha
12-01-2007, 11:11
Of course not, but watered down weak excuses arn't good enough either when trying to explain why all your squads are 6 man strong.

Well, if the purist gamers would stop harrassing the fluffheads and vice versa, there wouldn't be any explanation required. I know it's heresy, but some people who play the game, haven't read any 40k literature beyond the rulebook, and their army codex (some of them haven't even read that much ;)) So to them, it may make complete sense to have 6 man squads. On the other hand, somebody who owns everything GW has ever put out and has a small private shrine to the emperor in their bedroom closet is going to scream and howl cheese and violation of Astartes combat doctrine... (What the hell is Astartes supposed to mean anyway? It's not proper latin for anything, and it certainly doesn't come close to translating as marine, or space.)

Kahadras
12-01-2007, 12:36
I'm not being forced to play any way other than how I want to. Perhaps if you'd actually read my post you'd note that I don't even OWN marines.

Pershaps if you read my posts closely you'll note I've merely been remarking that your terminology has been along the same lines as a lot of people who WAAC. I've never accused you of owning Marines, or playing to win, or anything yet. I fact if you go back a few posts of mine you'll find that I'm agreeing with the fact that saying it is unfluffy is not really an arguement against not fielding them.


Sure, I could be a flufftard and say, "Hmm... my guard army is from a poor planet and doesn't have any special equipment looking at this grand 500 page background dossier I wrote for them, but I'm going up against an army with lots of vehicles.. Oh well, better stay true to the fluff and rely on my trusty S3 lasguns..." Or, I could give my opponent some respect, throw in some heavy weapons, and maybe a tank or 2, and try to make it a close fight.


No I think your getting mixed up between fluffy and stupidity here.


Unfluffy does not equate to cheesy

Funny though isn't it how rarely we see balanced unfluffy armies. :)

Kahadras

Griffin
12-01-2007, 13:44
Well, if the purist gamers would stop harrassing the fluffheads and vice versa, there wouldn't be any explanation required. I know it's heresy, but some people who play the game, haven't read any 40k literature beyond the rulebook, and their army codex (some of them haven't even read that much ;)) So to them, it may make complete sense to have 6 man squads. On the other hand, somebody who owns everything GW has ever put out and has a small private shrine to the emperor in their bedroom closet is going to scream and howl cheese and violation of Astartes combat doctrine... (What the hell is Astartes supposed to mean anyway? It's not proper latin for anything, and it certainly doesn't come close to translating as marine, or space.)

;) *don't tell the Emperor worshippers*
I read the rulebook and some of the codexes, I'm currently busy with my first BL book (greyknight). From the rulebook and codecii one can gather how they fight, and why. I don't mind if people don't know how astartes fight and then do it. BUT if you know that they use 5/10 man squads and still continue to use 6 man squads purely from a POWER point of view, that pisses me off. The only thing that pisses me off more is people who play marines and don't even know who their legions Primarch is. Using 6 man squads and then trying to justify it afterwards is rediculous. Besides have you ever considered why they have a SPECIAL and HEAVY weapon ?

Squad of 10 with heavy bolter and Flamer.
Split into 2 groups. Group with heavy weapon stays stationary and Suppresses enemy squad with heavy bolter. Squad with flamer flanks them and then proceeds to clear out ruins. Squad links up again. Repeat pattern. Does it make sense only using 3 men in a group then ? They wouldn't be able to put out enough firepower to harm most GEQ (most numerous marine enemies) squads then. With 4 men that rapid fire + flamer you can kill a large amount of lightly armored enemies.

Anyways - I'm really not worried either way, I'm Ork player at heart these days so I lose lots of boys and then I hit you in the head.

Sorry if I come across as aggro, its just that as soon as people use 6 man squads, the tournament mentality kicks in, WAAC sucks badley.:) Forgive my ran't but :cheese: gets to me.

rrchristensen
12-01-2007, 13:49
Funny though isn't it how rarely we see balanced unfluffy armies. :)
Kahadras

I guess I got to be the first to jump and say how fluffy my army is even though I think that arguing army composition from Games Workshop Fluff merely makes one a Games Workshop Fluffer (some may want to look up that term :angel:)

Point is, I don't really think the argument from fluff is valid, but I can play just as fluffy as anyone, if for no other reason than my own enjoyment of my little army men.

My DIY marine force, which will become Dark Angels successors as soon as the DA Codex is out, contains 3-4 10-man squads in Rhinos, no veteran sergeant, no heavy weapon, but 2 special weapons. Add one or two 8-man squads (yes I know, the heresy :p ) of Devastators with missile launchers; maybe an 8 or 10-man assault squad, including one veteran sargeant with a power fist; an 8-10 man sniper scout squad possibly including one heavy bolter; and a small, stationary command squad with an apothecary and two heavy weapons (heavy bolters for crowd suppression, or missile launchers with Tank Hunter skill to replace a Devastator squad). Add one Commander with a bolter, auspex, and Iron Halo to cooly oversee the battle and direct fire from a secure position.

Count the assault cannons! Count the power fists! :D

THIS is what I consider a cool force. It's got mechanized infantry in their mobile walls of wafer-thin steel*, insane crazies with jet engines on their back, stealthy guys with scopes, guys with bazookas, and a commander who knows he's supposed to direct his forces, not run haywire all over the battlefield with an over-large toothpick. Barring a few changes (yes I am familiar with the rumors about the 5/10 rule, the special/heavy weapons rule, the pistols and grenades rule, the one about scouts being Elite choices etc.), the new DA codex seems perfect for my style of play. Can't wait.

(* John Cleese: "and phinally, a hwafer-thin mint!")

rrchristensen
12-01-2007, 13:58
;)
Split into 2 groups. Group with heavy weapon stays stationary and Suppresses enemy squad with heavy bolter. Squad with flamer flanks them and then proceeds to clear out ruins. Squad links up again. Repeat pattern. Does it make sense only using 3 men in a group then ? They wouldn't be able to put out enough firepower to harm most GEQ (most numerous marine enemies) squads then. With 4 men that rapid fire + flamer you can kill a large amount of lightly armored enemies.

Anyways - I'm really not worried either way, I'm Ork player at heart these days so I lose lots of boys and then I hit you in the head.



Sounds like a Dark Angels Battle Company will be getting a new recruit ... y'all green, soil yer robes, and come in large numbers. Wot ya say?

Griffin
12-01-2007, 13:59
Hey - you stole my Black legion configuration ! ;)

I allso like my commander to command, instead of being a one man wrecking crew. I allso think that the basic grunts rule, and that they win wars - not special units.


Sounds like the Dark Angels are getting a new recruit ...

Not for atleast another 2 Years - I need to get my ork forces ready for a proppa 5000Pt WHAAAGH first...:rolleyes:


Actually my Blacklegion fights the way you describe, except I use a squad of deepstriking termies to kill commanders - just like Horus tought us. Cut off the head and the body will fall.

Atog
12-01-2007, 14:23
Cheap talking. Bolter are NOT holy weapon of redemption and SMs are not Angels Of Death. In a beatyful story combat squad with HB and FL are devastating and unstopable power. In a game- say hello to 20+ guardsmens with flashlights, sitting in some kind of cover. Line weapons and troops dont make that game. Special do. So chease and unfluffy lasplaz and ass cannons at masses are rules that stupid game.

Sad but true

Griffin
12-01-2007, 14:43
Welcome to the Warseer forums mister Atog.

Actually if you have that many gaurdsmen clumped in a piece of cover that flamer is REALLY going to hurt. If you don't rapid fire then the follow up charge is going to hurt. If he piles all those 20 something gaurdsmen (providing they survive) into the marines and the other 5 link up again. They would actually have a chance of sending them packing since those flamers would really have done a number on clumped up GEQ's.

20 Gaurdsmen versus 10 marines don't stand that a good chance, but they will bog them down for a while. 20 flashlights arn't that scary, 200 on the other hand...

The Emperor
12-01-2007, 15:19
Yeah, Flamers auto-hit with no cover save, and hit enemy models whose bases are even partially covered by the template (unlike blast weapons, which require a 4+ to hit a model whose base is only partially covered). So those bunched up Guardsmen would get roasted. Add in shots from the Combat Squad's bolt pistols, followed up by a charge (with both sides hitting simultaneously, thanks to the Space Marines frag grenades), and one of those two squads of Guardsmen would be mulch.

buzzin_yoof
12-01-2007, 15:31
How is this against the fluff?

Granted, the Codex Astartes divides Tac squads into 10 man units, with the option of seperating them into 5 man units.


Question and answer in two convenient sentences.

I wish they had kept marines as 5 or 10 man squads.

I play marines and we do have an unbelievably good core troop at 15 pts. I feel like the 5/10 man squads was a good balance to that in the loss of flexibility.

Atog
12-01-2007, 16:40
2Griffin
It was kind of metaphor. Don't get my words literally. The point is that game totally different from background. Replace 20 guardsmens with 1 leman russ anything else you want.

Anyway 10 story-marines will punish 1000 of heretics,but in game 30 may be killed by ~60-70 IG and their tanks, or 6 carnies and 2 tyrants . *

*relative amount of models in 1500 pts game

ps
Thanks for welcome, actually I read this forum since 2000 =)

2The Emperor
I know about flamer rules.

Lt. Mitch
12-01-2007, 17:10
I am a dedicated Fluff player who always enjoys games based on narative and not rules. However, though I like the feel of the 5/10 split rule, I don't think it is all that fluffy.

I spent 6 years serving with the british army in such favoured holiday resorts like Iraq, Kosovo, and Afganistan, and we very rarely had the 'codex' 8 man fire teams when going on operations. There were always injuries, casualties, transfers, ect. that always ment that we had seven, six or sometimes even nine men in a fire team. During one period of time spent as a member of 16 Air Assault brigade the fire teams were reduced to 6 in order to alow the use of Lynx Helicopter Insersion (They seat 6).

What, for example, happens when you wish to deploy using a Razorback? You waist one seat? Hardly efficient. Or what happens if you have just come from a warzone and have not had the opertunity to gather reinforcements? This would be especialy pertinent to Marines due to the difficulty of training them up.

My point is that a truly fluffy list would allow you to replicate these external, narative driven influences and not enforce an unrealistic parade ground force.

AngryAngel
13-01-2007, 09:47
Very good words Mitch. Another reason to why it would be allowable. Seems the issue isn't as much about "It is impossible to believe"..as "I don't want to do it..no one else should either." We all play the game to have fun, there is just as much to hint to why it would be alright. As there is to say it isn't cool. Just try and have fun, thats really all that matters in the end. Seeing a min maxed las plas squad has never ruined a games fun for me. Takes a bit more then that..like really horrible die rolls.

Bloodthirster90
13-01-2007, 10:06
Think about it. An army/weapon combo is only considered 'cheesy' if someone ether overuses it (i.e. has just las/plas 5 man squads) or is beating someone badly with it.

It's like people using the 'rushing' tactic in DoW. The people who use it would think its cool, but the people they are using it against think it's cheesy, nooby and stupid.

I suppose wheather or not las/plas squads are cheesy depends on wheather the player is a sore loser or not. I'm not saying that everyone who shouts "CHEESE!" when they see a las/plas squad is a sore loser, but if you're going up against a marine army, you'd expect to see las/plas squads and you'd prepare for it. When you see these squads, people shouldn't look suprised. They are a good combination; that's why alot of people use them and yet everybody seems so amazed that people are using it.

Rowenstin
13-01-2007, 11:03
Not directly related with laser or plasma, but with fluff in general. Are pictures and art in general part of the fluff? If so, the codex contradicts itself in the right number of marines per chapter (you can see much, much, MUCH more than 1000 marines in them) and their operational procedure (footslogging like an horde army, not a quick, inside-and-out strike force)

Kriegsherr
13-01-2007, 11:08
Cheap talking. Bolter are NOT holy weapon of redemption and SMs are not Angels Of Death. In a beatyful story combat squad with HB and FL are devastating and unstopable power. In a game- say hello to 20+ guardsmens with flashlights, sitting in some kind of cover. Line weapons and troops dont make that game. Special do. So chease and unfluffy lasplaz and ass cannons at masses are rules that stupid game.

Sad but true

Well, Las/Plas won't do anything to the 20+ guardsmen in cover you described.... even asscannons won't do too much here.... the oh so unimpressive flamer is the weapon of choice in this case.

But then again, who has the balls to play with 5+ toy-soldiers nowadays,eh?


Not directly related with laser or plasma, but with fluff in general. Are pictures and art in general part of the fluff? If so, the codex contradicts itself in the right number of marines per chapter (you can see much, much, MUCH more than 1000 marines in them) and their operational procedure (footslogging like an horde army, not a quick, inside-and-out strike force)

IMO, no! Pictures were drawn for the hell of it, not to represent anything accuratly. They should look cool and often overexagurate stuff to make it look bigger and more badass. Just look how tiny the heads of even normal humans are in GW Pictures (in the case of marines it would be maybe understandable because of their height)...

And of course, the "mass-battle" scenes and things like you described are a long-time running gag with GW. Don't take them literally, they should give you an impression of the size of the Imperium and the unimportance of human or marine life in it, but are not meant to represent reality.

Its like on a lot of historical paintings, were symbols are much more important than realistic depiction of past events.

Gaebriel
13-01-2007, 12:31
...
Seriously, it sounds like most of you arguing against these squads are trying to play a storybook rather than a game where you face off against another opponent to try to achieve victory.
...My, and there was me actually trying to play this game with the background in mind, how could I have made such a mistake, when it's only right to exist is to give the players a mind-crunching competitive experience - oh wait, wouldn't they play something else except this poor excuse for a tactically challenging game then?

I play this game for the background, I play this game to accurately prepresent forces I have much fun in researching throughout the different editions, and my most beloved games are those scenarioes that feature unbalanced forces centering on neat objectives giving a cinematic feel (something like 500 vs. 2000 against all odds) - yes right, no chance to win for one side :eek:

People rarely field 5/10 squads for efficiency, they field them for the story factor. Vice versa, I will suggest people rarely field 6-Las-Plas for story factor, but efficiency. I don't mind either as long as both get their arguments right.

Lord Malek The Red Knight
13-01-2007, 19:32
People rarely field 5/10 squads for efficiency, they field them for the story factor. Vice versa, I will suggest people rarely field 6-Las-Plas for story factor, but efficiency. I don't mind either as long as both get their arguments right.
it seems the old dividing line is whats causing the problem here.
those that play by the fluff are (in general) appauled by the (over) use of 6-man Las/Plas squads, where as those that play the game for its own sake (as a game) dont seem to mind them.

its "storytellers" vs "players". and even within the "player" camp there is further devision between those that derive fun simply from having a game and those who get their enjoyment from seeking to win.

i cant imagine a "competitive player" having a problem with 6-man Las/Plas. within the context of a competitive event, i would imagine they are quite acceptable.

on the other hand, in a narrative campaign or "historical" recreation they do seem out of place (unless they come about naturally, due to rules for cumalative casualties during a campign etc).

as long as 2 people that are looking for a different sort of 40K dont play eachother, its not going to be a problem.

how about if we put a different slant on things:
- in the context of a competive event, where the whole point is that you and your opponent enjoy the fact that you both try your hardest to win, within the rules (and bounds of common courtesy), does everyone agree that while taking 6-man Las/Plas squads have their advantages and disadvantages tactically, they are a perfectly valid choice from a moral standpoint, in a C:SM army?

- in the context of a narrative campaign, where the point of playing is to tell an entertainig story, where who wins or loses is of no real consequence, as long as it was exciting and dramatic, does everyone agree that while taking 6-man Las/Plas squads in a "Codex" army could be explained away by arguing that units had taken casualties, it is unlikely that this could happen in a uniform way, so that several of them (if any at all) shouldnt be taken, for background adherance reasons?

~ Tim

Rowenstin
13-01-2007, 19:41
That's a good post from LordMalekTheRedKnight.

Now, fluffwise, would it as appropiate (or even more) to force every tactical, veteran, command and devastator squad to buy rhinos or razorbacks?

Lord Malek The Red Knight
13-01-2007, 20:11
That's a good post from LordMalekTheRedKnight.
cheers :)


Now, fluffwise, would it as appropiate (or even more) to force every tactical, veteran, command and devastator squad to buy rhinos or razorbacks?
well it could be said that even if they dont all have one in the battle, that could still be how they got there in the first place.

although in a narrative campaign, transportation should really be organised.

fluffwise, remember, it wont always been a fair fight, so even forcing marines to pay xx pts for a transport for every squad wont necessarily be a problem (even if they arent being used for the game), as the points values wont really be that important.

~ Tim

lanrak
14-01-2007, 00:25
I have been playing 40k since RT days.
And I have always exepted certain restrictions is force lists were there for game ballance.

C:SM restriction in fixed squad sizes ,10man squad with one heavy weapon and one special weapon,that could be split into 5 man squad with A heavy OR special weapon was one of these game balance issues to my mind.

But as SM are the most popular product for GW thay will continue to make them more apealing ,traits are a free bonus ,and the flexi unit size just add extra nails in the coffin of xenos armies IMO.

What ballance is there in a game where MEQ armies make up the majority of forces actualy played?
This has to have a negative effect on players chioces,most think about MEQ or anti MEQ forces.

When are Orks and DE going to get thier much NEEDED codex,after SMs get more specific Chapter Codexes of course!!!!

The grim future of 40k is ,20+ chapter specific C:SM codexes,ONE imperium codex,and ONE codex xenos.
And that will actualy represent the armies that gamers play, and GW will feel justified!

Why dont GW just call the damn game Space Marine Crusade,to fit thier marketing strategy!

I am just mightily angry the disreguard GW have for one of the games that inspired generations of gamers, and was a cornerstone in the building of GW corperation.

To paraphase the great Jervis Johnson,in a recent interview,'the games are just iceing on the cake..'

To the gamers ,the games ARE the cake!!!!

Iceing is the asthetic covering over the cake,rather like the nice minatures we use to make the game look better.

Perhaps GW have got thier priorities wrong?

Rant over....

Rioghan Murchadha
14-01-2007, 01:06
My, and there was me actually trying to play this game with the background in mind, how could I have made such a mistake, when it's only right to exist is to give the players a mind-crunching competitive experience - oh wait, wouldn't they play something else except this poor excuse for a tactically challenging game then?

I play this game for the background, I play this game to accurately prepresent forces I have much fun in researching throughout the different editions, and my most beloved games are those scenarioes that feature unbalanced forces centering on neat objectives giving a cinematic feel (something like 500 vs. 2000 against all odds) - yes right, no chance to win for one side :eek:

People rarely field 5/10 squads for efficiency, they field them for the story factor. Vice versa, I will suggest people rarely field 6-Las-Plas for story factor, but efficiency. I don't mind either as long as both get their arguments right.

Actually, where you make the mistake is assuming everyone plays for the same reasons/motivations as you. I personally don't enjoy historical style games where you know outright who wins and who loses. I'd rather read a book or watch the history channel.

Personally, I play to have fun, but within the bounds of fun, I try to achieve the objectives of the scenario. (you may have noticed that all of the scenario objectives pretty much boil down to "Win the Game".) I'm not going to play to win to the extent that we're not having fun anymore, but I'm going to play the game.

If you like to write stories about battles and then fight them out to fit the story afterwards, more power to you, but it's quite hard to do that in a pick-up game environment like a GW store.

wingedserpant
14-01-2007, 01:21
I have no problem with it. Its a small unit able to be taken out by one ordanance shell. Plus I'm an iron warriors player so ordanance ain't a problem.

Scythe
15-01-2007, 15:34
Actually, if one deploys the unit in a line at 2" maximum distance, you only hit 3 marines at max. Ordnance is quite often overrated.

Deadnight
15-01-2007, 16:23
i remember the 3rd ed SM codex. Only one company was at full strength with 6 10-man tac squads, 2 10-man assault squads, and 2 10-man devestator squads.

all other companies were between 70odd and 90odd marines in strength, and in all cases (bar the one full strength company) there were 6-man, 7-man, 8-man and 9-man squads in each.

Now, furthermore, there were 3 strike forces from the ultramarines currently en route to combat. in each case, they had odd numbered squads.

its perfectly fine to take 6 or 5 man squads to represent battle damage, depleted numbers and so forth. its perfectly fluffy. trust me, the UMs are not so anally retentive that as soon as a squad takes a casualty, they're pulled out of the action, and a brother from the 6th company is brought uo for that squad to fight again. the reality is that a 10-man squad is an ideal. the codex astartes organisation is an ideal. 10 squads of 10. and 10 companies of these. simple fact is 90% of SM chapters will be between 750-850 battle brothers strong at any one point. or less, even... Furthermore, should a strike force be stuck in the middle of a campaign, reinforcements do not arrive every 2 minutes. this isnt dawn of war where we right click on the reinforce button to bring the squad up to full strength. all squads will be depleted, not at full strength, and the squads will just have to fight on as best as they can. they wont cannibalise one squad to bump up the numbers in the other squads. each squad is a team of members who know how the rest of the team acts, thinks, and how best to play to their strengths. remove that, and stick them with unfamiliar troops with unfamiliar sergeants and the efficiency will drop.

Leo
15-01-2007, 19:44
@lanrak:
well, that´s nice, and I can´t say that I disagree but what does this little whining have to do with the topic of this thread? Maybe you should create a ´we hates Mareen players´ topic. There hasn´t been one for about a week.

@deadnight:
what you say about squad sizes is quite true but the same could be said about working Plasma weapons and Lascannons of which there always seems to be an abundance.
It´s not Dawn of War, where you can reequip squads by hitting a button, after all.
In Powergamer background, battle losses only ever seem to cause a shortage of personell, never equipment.

One thing I´ll grant them though. It seems quite unfair that for an Imperial Marine player 6 man lasplas is considered bad form because of their background while with Chaos marines it´s no problem because they ´don´t follow the Codex´.

Dark Apostle197
15-01-2007, 20:40
One thing I´ll grant them though. It seems quite unfair that for an Imperial Marine player 6 man lasplas is considered bad form because of their background while with Chaos marines it´s no problem because they ´don´t follow the Codex´.


I was saying that earlier... I agree, but us Chaos players are just cool :)

The Emperor
15-01-2007, 22:17
i remember the 3rd ed SM codex. Only one company was at full strength with 6 10-man tac squads, 2 10-man assault squads, and 2 10-man devestator squads.

Yes, and that was a snapshot at a specific point in time. It wouldn't have taken long to shuffle things around to get 5-man and 10-man squads.


all other companies were between 70odd and 90odd marines in strength, and in all cases (bar the one full strength company) there were 6-man, 7-man, 8-man and 9-man squads in each.

Were they all 6-man? Nope. Yet 6-man is the most common configuration. And in each case, both the Special Weapon and the Heavy Weapon just HAPPEN to survive intact. Funny how exactly four men get killed from every squad, yet the weapons which killed them didn't damage or destroy the Special/Heavy Weapons some of them were carrying.


Now, furthermore, there were 3 strike forces from the ultramarines currently en route to combat. in each case, they had odd numbered squads.

Except for one case, no they didn't. In the first they had 10 Terminators, 35 Tactical Marines, 20 Devastators, 8 Assault Marines, and 20 Scouts. In the second they had 10 Veterans, 30 Tactical Marines, 20 Assault Marines, and 5 Scouts. In the third case they had 5 Terminators, 15 Tactical Marines, 10 Assault Marines, 5 Devastators, and 5 Scouts.

And these are Space Marine forces on their way into combat. Notice how they come in numbers divisible by 5?


trust me, the UMs are not so anally retentive that as soon as a squad takes a casualty, they're pulled out of the action, and a brother from the 6th company is brought uo for that squad to fight again.

:rolleyes: Space Marines don't fight trench warfare, so it's not as if they don't have time to replace losses or rearrange units.


they wont cannibalise one squad to bump up the numbers in the other squads. each squad is a team of members who know how the rest of the team acts, thinks, and how best to play to their strengths. remove that, and stick them with unfamiliar troops with unfamiliar sergeants and the efficiency will drop.

This is where you're just plain wrong. Space Marines are SUPPOSED to be mixed and matched at will. Just look at those strike forces.

Two of them feature troops from one Company or another fighting alongside 1st and 10th Company troops. In one of them, you've got troops from the 1st, 6th, 8th, 9th, and 10th Companies. Mixing units from several Companies is common. Likewise, in Crusades, it isn't uncommon for units to be mixed between Chapters! The Ultramarines Honor Company on Cadia is made up of units from different Ultramarines Successor Chapters. That means that they've got a Company made up of squads from different Chapters. If Space Marine units can work fine alongside units from other Companies and even other Chapters, then they can certainly work fine under the command of Brother-Sergeant Gilbert from Tactical Squad Charlie.


Furthermore, should a strike force be stuck in the middle of a campaign, reinforcements do not arrive every 2 minutes.

Space Marines aren't meant to be stuck in. In the vast majority of operations they engage in, they go in, strike at the enemy, and then come back out. That gives them plenty of time to get reinforcements.


One thing I´ll grant them though. It seems quite unfair that for an Imperial Marine player 6 man lasplas is considered bad form because of their background while with Chaos marines it´s no problem because they ´don´t follow the Codex´.

Not unfair at all. It's harder for Chaos Marines to replace battle losses then it is for Space Marines, since they don't have Reserve Companies, Scout Companies, and it's more difficult for them to get new recruits.

Locke
15-01-2007, 22:47
In game sense it's silly to represent space marines as 1000 member strong, they should change the fluff to reflect 10,000 member strong chapters. It would also help to suspend some disbelief betweent he fuff and mechanics.

Leo
16-01-2007, 00:39
Not unfair at all. It's harder for Chaos Marines to replace battle losses then it is for Space Marines, since they don't have Reserve Companies, Scout Companies, and it's more difficult for them to get new recruits.

things get slippy when these limitations of Chaos armies actually make life easier for Chaos players as they promote 6lasplas squads which are considered a power gamers squad of choice.
And as I said before: Shortages in supplies should not only work for personell but equipment, too. So when a Chaos army has limited resources this should not only be shown by 6 guys per squad but also by not having all the plasma weapons they can fit in.
So yes, it´s unfair. Two armies can do something, but only one gets frowned when doing it.

The Dude
16-01-2007, 01:23
I imagine this will be solved by giving Chaos the same limitation on weapons, ie needing 10 men to have 2 weapons, but not having the Combat Squad rules and set squad sizes.

TheSanityAssassin
16-01-2007, 06:56
I do it for a couple of my Alpha Legion squads.....we just wanna win, prove our superiority over the loyalists by not being limited by their silly "codex"

*spits on Guilliman*

Indrid Khold
16-01-2007, 08:52
In game sense it's silly to represent space marines as 1000 member strong, they should change the fluff to reflect 10,000 member strong chapters. It would also help to suspend some disbelief betweent he fuff and mechanics.

Standard Arguments:

1. The usual game of 40K, in which the Space Marines are squaring off against a comparable enemy force, is not how they usually operate. Usually they zoom in, hit the enemy at a weak point, shatter their lines, then mop up. Games of 40K are those rare instances in which there is no choice but to face the enemy on their own terms.

2. Models in the game are "wounded" not "killed." It's likely that many of the Space Marines removed as casualties in any given game are actually not dead and, after a visit to the apothecary, they'll be back terrorizing children (or whatever the hell they do for fun) in no time.


Having said that, I actually rather agree with you.


And on topic: the las/plas squads CAN be justified by the backstory, but I personally wouldn't do it. If you don't care about the backstory, then go ahead and use them. But, as has been pointed out ad infinitum, they're really not all that effective.

Deadnight
16-01-2007, 12:59
Yes, and that was a snapshot at a specific point in time. It wouldn't have taken long to shuffle things around to get 5-man and 10-man squads.
.

it might have. in any case, they could bring the battle companies to full strength, and then the reserve companies are not the 10 10man squads. and there are only some scouts able to be promoted to these companies.... they might just have to do the job with the forces at hand. tough....




Were they all 6-man? Nope. Yet 6-man is the most common configuration. And in each case, both the Special Weapon and the Heavy Weapon just HAPPEN to survive intact. Funny how exactly four men get killed from every squad, yet the weapons which killed them didn't damage or destroy the Special/Heavy Weapons some of them were carrying.


point was, 6-man squads exist. how can the special weapons survive? easily. they're the important guns. they get picked up when thetrooper is medivac-ed out. they get replaced. i doubt the ultramarines have a 10-meltagun and flamer per company policy..... its easier to replace them than a trooper, and its more necessary if that squad has to hold the line and perform their job.




Except for one case, no they didn't. In the first they had 10 Terminators, 35 Tactical Marines, 20 Devastators, 8 Assault Marines, and 20 Scouts. In the second they had 10 Veterans, 30 Tactical Marines, 20 Assault Marines, and 5 Scouts. In the third case they had 5 Terminators, 15 Tactical Marines, 10 Assault Marines, 5 Devastators, and 5 Scouts.

And these are Space Marine forces on their way into combat. Notice how they come in numbers divisible by 5?
.

and they deploy in 7 squads of 5. once squad gets reduced to 3. one squad gets reduced to 4. they split up these squads and you get 7 squads of 6. whats your point? and they have to do this before reinforcements arrive.

in any case, its not just squads of 5 or 10. o remember vaguely the taros book had the aurora marines running aroundin squads of 3 to kill the tau when they made their initial advance on the palace...




:rolleyes: Space Marines don't fight trench warfare, so it's not as if they don't have time to replace losses or rearrange units.
.

you assume i mena trench warfare. not necessarily. how about the first battle of the fang? space wolves on their own for months at a time, with most of the population enslaved. how about the combat during the eye of terror. forces are constantly being thrown into combat that casualties might exceed reinforcements.... how about armageddon? doesnt have to be trench warfare and months and months of combat straight. how about the "last stand against overwhelming odds" that they do so well? the first wave is repulsed, and squads are mangled. ones and twos are missing everywhere....



This is where you're just plain wrong. Space Marines are SUPPOSED to be mixed and matched at will. Just look at those strike forces.

Two of them feature troops from one Company or another fighting alongside 1st and 10th Company troops. In one of them, you've got troops from the 1st, 6th, 8th, 9th, and 10th Companies. Mixing units from several Companies is common. Likewise, in Crusades, it isn't uncommon for units to be mixed between Chapters! The Ultramarines Honor Company on Cadia is made up of units from different Ultramarines Successor Chapters. That means that they've got a Company made up of squads from different Chapters. If Space Marine units can work fine alongside units from other Companies and even other Chapters, then they can certainly work fine under the command of Brother-Sergeant Gilbert from Tactical Squad Charlie.
.

i dont mean having a squad from the 8th fighting alongside a squad from the 4th company. i mean 2 guys from the 5th tac squad being transferred to the 3rd squad. different sergeant. different battle brothers. they wont be as good as with their own guys. look at space wolves. squad casualties are never replaced. what if another chapter has a similar ethos? very plausible.



Space Marines aren't meant to be stuck in. In the vast majority of operations they engage in, they go in, strike at the enemy, and then come back out. That gives them plenty of time to get reinforcements.
.

and what if its the EoT where as soon as they go in, strike, and go out, they're going in again, and striking again, and coming back out again, and all the companies are engaged become the enemy is making a system wide advance and there is no relief whatsoever? what if its a marine company cut off? what if its the company of the scythes of the emperor (or was it the lamenters?) who held the line to allow refugees from the tyranid attacks to escape, and gave their lives to the last man. they're not getting reinforcements, and most fluff puts marines in these situations....

Griffin
16-01-2007, 14:49
I might clarify one of the statements - I don't think that any kind of limitation should be imposed on Chaos - I'm not saying this from a power point of view. I just think it's silly. Some other method should rather be adopted to structure the legions of chaos. Where Marines have a Codex influence chaos has none.

Yes it's unfair that marines have to take 10/5 man squads theoretically, but they do have alot of goodies that make up for it. I personally hate 6 man squads regardless of them being loyalist/traitor - slaaneshi exempt of course. BIG squads rule - 10 Rapid fire shots is piddeling, 20 is something else all together.

Personally there is justification for 6 man squads - but not all of them every game. I mean whats the odds of exactly 4 men dying from EVERY squad. If I have 5x 6 man squads I would rather have formed them into 6x 5 man squads to confirm closer to combat doctrine, and training. Training is done at 5/10 man level usually.

If I had a marine force that had taken very large amounts of casualties like in some of the scenarios suggested then some of my squads would be 9 man, 8 man ,7 man enc not a even 6 across the board. I allso would have had a lascannon, and plasma gun missing from a squad here and there, or even both.

Some Marines might be killed by ordinance, their plasma guns overheating enc. So they would have had less of them. Other might have left behind a lascannons during a emergency evac (unlikely) enc.

All these factors would have made 6 man las/plas squads highly unlikely even with combat losses factored in enc. At the end of the day i suppose its fine, but using lame excuses before a game about why they are all 6 man las/plas is silly. Sure if you have a GOOD reason for it, with a great piece of history, or recent combat engagement to back it - by all means use it. Otherwise lose it.

fhelvie
16-01-2007, 15:53
Well, I won't pretend to be anywhere up to speed on the fluff (aside from reading what I have here). So you'll have to excuse my less-than-creative reasoning behind the way I form up my armylists.

I USED to implement the 10 Man Tac SQD, but came to find after time, I was getting my rear handed to me- almost always fielded with one heavy and one special weapon. I changed tactics, played with smaller sized squads (6 Man), and found that I enjoyed increased maneuverability and additional points to spend on other units. I normally will field a PlasGun and either a Plasma Cannon or heavy bolter w/ a Vet SGT armed with a bolter pistol and power weapon.

I guess you could call me cheesy if you wanted, but I'd rather play a game that will be competitive for my opponent than organize a list that doesn't play to my strengths causing me to apologize for being a pushover.

Rioghan Murchadha
16-01-2007, 23:38
Not unfair at all. It's harder for Chaos Marines to replace battle losses then it is for Space Marines, since they don't have Reserve Companies, Scout Companies, and it's more difficult for them to get new recruits.

Actually, it's easier for Chaos to replenish. For starters, they are still Legions, not 1000 man chapters. There are a great many more members of, say, the World Eaters, than there are Blood Angels.

Likewise, time flows differently in the Warp.. They have all the time they need to corrupt, engineer, and train new followers, or to have their forge worlds crank out new gear.

That aside, limiting Chaos Marines to standard 10/5 man sizes would be stupid. I refuse to field my Thousand Sons in anything but 9 man squads, even if it leaves me out points at the end of list construction. Anything else just ain't right. (I also like the free aspiring champion ;))

ashc
16-01-2007, 23:46
On the subject of Chaos and lasplas, i cannot remember whether it was this thread earlier or another along similar veins (sm redux thread?) where i said that im pretty sure we will see chaos retain their flexible squad sizes but gain limitation on their weapon options, something along the lines of 'for every 5 chaos space marines in the unit you may take one special or heavy weapon........ up to a maximum of one heavy weapon and one special weapon' and then allow for the cult or favoured squad sizes two weapons (it would be a perk making taking cult units worth it).

its just another step for GW to remove minmaxing from the game whether the fluff agrees or not (and hell, its their game, they can write whatever the hell they want if they feel they need to justify it without just saying 'we are removing minmaxing').

Ash

Predator101
17-01-2007, 03:49
I'm a SM player, so my opinion is probably gonna be Biased. But this whole Fluff thing to explain why you can't have 6 man squads seems ridiculous. Sure the codex says that you should have 10 man teams, but would you be as pissed with the combo if it was fielded as 2x5 man squads each with las/plas? After all squads do separate in battle in order to have a better tactical advantage. But then again the rules screw you with the Fluff. You see why is it that 2 space marines don't count for taking an objective when 3 do? If you ask me, if they're alive they should be just as important wether their squad is 3 men short or 3 men short. So beacuse you have to sacrifice a little logic, in order to give rules to a war, (which is generally a more chaotic thing) you have to adapt the way you field your armies in order to maximize your ability to win the battle. It's ridiculous for you to tell me that I should have either 5 or 10 marines, when because of the rules it's more productive for me to have 6. Or perhaps you can give me a reason why in one squad losing 3 members makes me useless, while in another squad losing 3 members means I can still make a difference. Either way, try playing against a SM player that doesn't use a min/maxing config and tell me how challenging it was.

P.S. Pardon the grammar if there's errors, English isn't my native tongue.

Lord Malek The Red Knight
17-01-2007, 04:06
but would you be as pissed with the combo if it was fielded as 2x5 man squads each with las/plas?
if they had both, then that would still break from fluff, AFAIK.
but it sure is possible, and has to be seen as "worse" by those who dislike 6man Las/Plas - so the sort of squads we are discussing could be worse.


You see why is it that 2 space marines don't count for taking an objective when 3 do? If you ask me, if they're alive they should be just as important wether their squad is 3 men short or 3 men short. So beacuse you have to sacrifice a little logic, in order to give rules to a war, (which is generally a more chaotic thing) you have to adapt the way you field your armies in order to maximize your ability to win the battle.
you make a very good point there: "scoring math" is already unrealistic. x number of SMs is x number of SMs, so can capture the same amount of ground etc - so why should it matter how big their starting squad size was? how can 3 marines out of 5 capture more than 4 left out of 10?!


P.S. Pardon the grammar if there's errors, English isn't my native tongue.
LOL dont worry, you did better than me... English is my first language (although i am Welsh...) . ;)

~ Tim

The Dude
17-01-2007, 04:26
you make a very good point there: "scoring math" is already unrealistic. x number of SMs is x number of SMs, so can capture the same amount of ground etc - so why should it matter how big their starting squad size was? how can 3 marines out of 5 capture more than 4 left out of 10?!

To me, this is a completely different issue, and would be easily solved by saying a squad is a scoring unit as long as it is more than 1 model, and unbroken. This would make people focus a bit more on wiping squads out, rather than just getting them below "scoring" level, and Marines would be particularly nasty, as they auto-regroup. It also makes morale a little more important.

Of course, I'm talking out of my **** and there are probably tons of balance issues I'm not thinking of at the moment, but hey, what do I care.

The main issue I have with the Las/plas squad is that no basic troops choice should have the option for that much special firepower from such a small number of models. It was the same with Guardians. The only possible exceptions to this are very special elite armies like Grey Knights, but I'm not familiar with their rules, so couldn't say what their options allow.

AngryAngel
17-01-2007, 07:49
Alright, for the fluff it makes sense with the squads sizes, we all agree on that.

Gameplay wise there are reasons why the variable squad size can be allowed. As well as fluff considerations.

To each their own, if people want to the field the same exact army time and time again, I pity them for being boring. I grow bored doing the exact same army list over and over. Don't know about everyone else. Why not just live and let die with this..and everyone can then be happy. Or does it make everyone just so mad to see min maxed las/plas squads you just can't over look it ?

I don't see the point of getting bent outta shape over it one way or the other. Its just a game, you'll win or you'll lose, and dice have alot to say about that. Good set up and army construction is still just a part. Lets all just enjoy the game.

Griffin
17-01-2007, 09:30
@ Angry Angel - HAH! My worthy foe posts once more !

I agree - lets just let people do as they wish and just all try and have a good time. Its why we play after all, right ?

buzzin_yoof
03-02-2007, 23:25
i remember the 3rd ed SM codex. Only one company was at full strength with 6 10-man tac squads, 2 10-man assault squads, and 2 10-man devestator squads.



Hahahahahahha fool.

You should look further back to the fluff of second edition. Basically it totally refutes your view. If, after a battle a squad has taken damage, then a reserve marine will be posted to that squad.

Bring back 5/10. It is the one good balance for marines.

I say this as a marine player.

Edit: Having re-read some posts -

Deadnight you are totally wrong - especially regarding plasma technology - it is very difficult to replace. Praise be to the emperor - in more ways than one. His posts show that he has read some fluff beyond the fairy stories of 3rd edition.

You cannot hope to justify though fluff the abundance of 6 man laz plaz squads. They are true horse s h i t.

Voodoo Boyz
03-02-2007, 23:40
Oh please.

Do I use 6 Man Las/Plas when I want to have fun? No.

I DO use 6 Man Las/Plas squads when I go to tournaments or for tournament practice games at my GW store.

WHY?

How else am I supposed to counter armies like Mech Tau, Mech Eldar, Godzilla Tyranids, or IW & Demon Bomb Chaos, or whatever the hell else kind of BS crap you pull out from other Dex's.

Every army has got it's power builds (well except Orks and Demon Hunters), I don't know why you people all like to bitch about Marines more than anyone else.

Stella Cadente
04-02-2007, 00:27
The 6 man Las/Plas combo is seriously overrated, in my opinion it is combat ineffective and a waste of points, you loose two men (which is easy to do) and its a moral check, thats not a good thing.

also by adding that lascannon you reduce the maneuverability of the squad, meaning if you want to fire the lascannon you have to stay still and get blown up, if you move you can't fire the lascannon but it means you can't blow anything up yourself, and then next turn you blow you.

nah you can shove you 6 man Las/Plas squads, I'll stick to more effective methods.

Vic
04-02-2007, 02:33
It's un-Codex.

A five marine Combat Squad should have EITHER one (1) special weapon OR one (1) heavy weapon.

Not both. One or the other.

According to who or what?!? I've NEVER seen that listed in a 'dex, and the fluff is so varied, there is no real consensus. This is well after 20 years of fluff.

Besides, a 6 man squad is less combat effective than a 10 man IMHO. Let the rube take a small squad if he wants, it'll break quicker and cant put out enough shots to take out whatever it is up against (and in most probability outnumbered by in the first place).

Sekhmet
04-02-2007, 02:47
6 man squads are easier to torrent of fire, easier to drop below 75% for morale checks, etc.

Voodoo Boyz
04-02-2007, 02:53
OK, if they're so bad then why is everyone in the thread bitching about them?

Oh that's right because even if I have to take a LD test it's either at 8 or LD10 because of a master.

Torrent of fire is all well and good but when they're going to be around 36-48" away (for the lascannon) then you're going to have sort of a hard time torrenting 6 T4 models.

And if you do kill them, well there's 4 other squads and all you've done is kill 115 Points.

Lets not be stupid and try and say that they're not good. Either they're good and you can bitch about them, or they suck and everyone else needs to clam up.

Sakura
04-02-2007, 02:56
This topic is almost pathetic. (Dont go getting all mad at me for saying that :rolleyes:)
10 man, 5 man... codex, fluff, gameplay, cheese. wtf!

If you want to play to win cool. (Bring it! chance to test my tactics and army lists.)
If you want to play for fluff cool. (Nice friendly non competitve gaming with your next door neighbour.)
If you want to play themed cool too. (Wrote a story, have a background, its part of the hobby.)

A lot of people here remind me of grumpy grandparents, you know the type, grumpy about everything that annoyied them even if it was just the way the wind was that day. "Oh I dont want to go outside, its 1 degree colder, the worlds going to hell!"

Making it no longer an option is like forcing people to use wasteful special characters as HQ.

If they did this to Chaos i'd have a fit.

While I fully believe in fluff (and it shows in my lists) it doesnt mean that you cant try to make a really nasty army.
I love playing cheesey players, I hate playing people that use this as an excuse:"Oh, its just because my army is not really set up for this, its a fluffy army".
I roll my eyes really hard when people say stuff like that.
That would mean you dont care if you lose right? So why are they so surprised? Whats with all the backing themselves up?

Something as insignificant as a minmax unit is only cheesey unless its in large quantities, just like lots of anything effective really.

Tell me how fun a unit of 5 marines with bolters is?
Its more boring than 10 Necrons.
Give the marines a plasmagun and suddenly there's colour.
Give them a Plasma cannon and you have theme, give them a Lascannon and you have tank and Meq killers, give them a unit of 5 and then the lascannon can be taken out without too much trouble.

10 men just a little more boring.
and it doesnt really matter.
I'd rather have options just in case I want a 6 man unit.
I seriously would be pissed If my assualt marines come in 5 or 10s.

Sekhmet
04-02-2007, 03:25
OK, if they're so bad then why is everyone in the thread bitching about them?

Because people whine about everything, needing only the slightest reason to get worked up on.



Oh that's right because even if I have to take a LD test it's either at 8 or LD10 because of a master.

Ld8 isn't that great, Ld10 is still breakable. You only need to kill a few models to bring the squad below half.



Torrent of fire is all well and good but when they're going to be around 36-48" away (for the lascannon) then you're going to have sort of a hard time torrenting 6 T4 models.

Oh yeah, I forgot not everyone has 15 S6 shots mounted on jetbikes, per squad. For 250 pts, they're worth it. Sentinels with multilasers could do it, warwalkers with scatter lasers have it nearly guaranteed. Tau using pulse rifles can pull it off as well.



And if you do kill them, well there's 4 other squads and all you've done is kill 115 Points.

It only takes me one round of shooting with one squad to render them fairly ineffective. I can take down ~3 per turn. :D



Lets not be stupid and try and say that they're not good. Either they're good and you can bitch about them, or they suck and everyone else needs to clam up.
They're both good and bad, the world isn't black and white. Against certain enemies, a 6 man las/plas squad is a complete waste of 115 pts (or whatever they cost). Against others they can go as far as winning you the game.

AngryAngel
04-02-2007, 08:02
@ griffin glad to hear i'm a worthy foe.

MampiSwift
04-02-2007, 08:07
Or a starcannon army wastes your men..... oh, wait.... that got nerfed.

If people want to use them, they can. Its in their codex. I find it unfluffy, and it is beardy only when overloaded. If you pack 6 min/max squads, thats powergaming, you can kiss good bye to comp score, and you won't get a very good game. If you have 2, and then some other units, its not beardy at all. All things in moderation.

seconded. I also totally agree with sakura, just dont know how to multi quote

Sakura
04-02-2007, 13:34
Aww, see, I wanted to be quoted.

I multi quote by clicking quote on one person and ctrl c
then press back and pressing quote on someone else and ctrl cv what i copied and then write whatever.

azimaith
04-02-2007, 13:43
OK, if they're so bad then why is everyone in the thread bitching about them?

I could make a thread on practically any topic other than "who hates orks" and get an entire slew of bitching. Bitching is fun, its relaxing, it leads to post action.



Oh that's right because even if I have to take a LD test it's either at 8 or LD10 because of a master.

I think its time for everyone to realize that against many armies psychology is dead and buried and you may as well just use some other tactic against them... like big blasty guns.



Torrent of fire is all well and good but when they're going to be around 36-48" away (for the lascannon) then you're going to have sort of a hard time torrenting 6 T4 models.

Not really, I assume everyones modes are moving, if you've got lines of sight to most of the board for 48" you are playing on planet bowling ball and need to get some terrain. Beyond that, theres alot of ways to give them a torrent of fire, arillerty, deep strike, infiltrators to name a few.



And if you do kill them, well there's 4 other squads and all you've done is kill 115 Points.

And somehow thats bad? You've just taken out a fifth of their tactical squad firepower. I also find 6 man squads are the perfect size to defeat on the second round of close combat for my hormagaunts which means I can go pac man on their ass. Wakka wakka wakka.



Lets not be stupid and try and say that they're not good. Either they're good and you can bitch about them, or they suck and everyone else needs to clam up.
They're good at killing meqs, and they may even be too good considering general meta game, but they aren't the be all end all. Alot of whats problematic in games stems from a lack of terrain, or wisely placed terrain.

I am an advocate of *terrain warfare* where you put down terrain to hurt your opponent, then you have your opponent change terrain to hurt you, till you bring it down to a amiable medium. Third parties can be relatively useless because they don't guarantee a good terrain spread for both sides. Thats only done via competition between two players with opposing goals.

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
04-02-2007, 20:51
The first point is debatable. Not in the fact that most marine chapters are codex, but in the fact that they all follow the Codex to the word. Given the fact that the Space Marine Army book allows Marine chapters to deviate from Codex organisation, it would seem that many chapters use the Codex Astartes as rather a set of guidelines to be respected, rather than obeyed to a T. Just take a look at the Differences between say, White Scars and Ultramarines. As far as "Breaking Faith" with the emperor, I entirely disagree. The book was written by Gulliman, not the Emperor, and there are many, many chapters who have large deviations from the Codex Astartes and still are still very devout to the Big E (Black Templars, as an example). It's on a chapter specific basis. Some consider it a Holy Tome, others (such as the Space Wolves) virtually throw it to the wind.

The second point is is merely a game balance issue. Yes, background wise there is no reason every space marine in an entire army shouldn't be able to carry a lascannon. After all, it is alot easier to build a lascannon than it is to train a new space marine. But it would make for some very boring/one sided games.

codex marines /say 70% or more i'm not sure/ use 5 or 10 man squads and 1 special or heavy weapon - i wonder why in DA codex they cant have 5 man squad with sarge and Lascannon !!!!!! it is unfluffy that they cant do it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

AngryAngel
05-02-2007, 07:57
I just find it...at least a little funny. One of the biggest gripes people say about marines is they are all the same. All set up the same. Yet people condone standardizing marines to set numbers. Perhaps even set options, making sure all you see is the same units fielded the same exact ways.

I think the real problem is peoples lack of imagination in our world in general. We have more choices now with the main codex, it's just most people fail or don't wish to use them. However like any choices not taken, and like any freedom wasted, it will soon be taken away.

So why worry about it now ?..Soon all marines will be 5 or 10 with most likely the same options all the time, the ones that work the most. Then they will be fluffy, and can't we then all be happy ?

Drasriath
05-02-2007, 08:56
the "Torrent of Fire" (p26, right hand side) and "Torrent of Blows" (p41, Armour Saves) rules have come some way to balance min/max squads.

taking out a Lascannon or Plasma Gun is much easier when they they are hidden in 6 man squads than it is when they are buried in 10 man units. and, the smaller the squad the less likely they will be to cause ToF/ToB themselves than bigger units, too.

so its a rule that encourages bigger units to achieve it against the enemy and protect against it in return.

even wihtout it, though, im not too bothered by min/maxed squads. being smaller, they are easier to cause Morale Checks on, and easier to take below Scoring/get VPs for. and if it means my opponent has more points to spend on more interesting units, leading to a more varied game, them whats wrong with that? :)

~ Tim

But against marines they do a very poor job. This means that they'd have to take perhaps one armor save or so, unless they took five wounds from AP 3 weapons. Not likely, unless you have Dark Reapers, and even still, not a for-sure thing. The 3+ save means that there is still a 66% chance you'll fail to kill the heavy weapon gunner.

As I stated in the thread about cheesy armies, I feel a cheesy army is one that you have to build a specific list to beat. Min/max las plas is one of them. When you start talking about 6 tac squads, and two devestators with missile launchers, plus two for shot absorbtion, and a couple assault squads, then you need to build a specific list to beat it. The one time I've seen it done my 9/1 Eldar list got squashed simply because any vehicle or wraithlord was useless, and got fragged in one turn. 10 rocket launchers, 1 plasma cannon, 4 lascannons, a heavy bolter and 6 plasma guns is WAY too much coming from dispersed squads. Even with a list tooled against it, you end up wasting shots, since the squads are so small, you need to always commit more fire than you want to against them to take them off the board. Furthermore, you can't ever have any anti-tank weaponry at all, or you will lose for lack of shots.

I find it strange that guardian defender squads got the min size cap upped for just that reason, but marines stayed the same... ahhhh... GW at it's finest.

Stormsender
05-02-2007, 13:39
I am all for going by the codex when GW changes that I will abide by that change. RAW thats what controls army options and to suggest that it's not fluffy to have 6 man Laz/ Plaz squads I see it in my Codex Space Marines I don't get how anyone can say that it's un-fluffy. Also if everything in the pulp books were in the game that would be great because that would just through everything on it's ear, that is a poor justification for game balance IMHO. So I say if it's in the codex I can use it just like anyone else. 10 man squads are whats boring to me.

bratbag
05-02-2007, 16:09
Meh, doesn't bother me too much. If you abused 6 man las/plas then in a tournament you would get zero comp score from me and in a friendly i wouldn't play you.


RAW thats what controls army options and to suggest that it's not fluffy to have 6 man Laz/ Plaz squads I see it in my Codex Space Marines I don't get how anyone can say that it's un-fluffy.

Fluff does not = Rules
Rules do not = Fluff

Thankfully if the new DA codex is anything to go by then the disassociation between the game and the background that many of us have grown up with is coming to an end.

Steel_Legion
05-02-2007, 16:15
what about melta/las? If I use that on my guardsmen squads will someone destroy me for it? Or is this seen as acceptable, the way I see it, both weapons as mass produced, Meltas and Lascannon, unlike Plasma, so I see no issue, do you all?
On Las/Plas if people use them I dont care, they are actually better off shooting me with a bolter as it kills me just as good but wont kill the user (Ok 3+ to wound compared to 2+ to wound) and as for a Lascannon, thats just funny when it blows the **** out of a guardsmen... however if they target my tanks, then we have a problem

jfrazell
05-02-2007, 16:58
what about melta/las? If I use that on my guardsmen squads will someone destroy me for it? Or is this seen as acceptable, the way I see it, both weapons as mass produced, Meltas and Lascannon, unlike Plasma, so I see no issue, do you all?
On Las/Plas if people use them I dont care, they are actually better off shooting me with a bolter as it kills me just as good but wont kill the user (Ok 3+ to wound compared to 2+ to wound) and as for a Lascannon, thats just funny when it blows the **** out of a guardsmen... however if they target my tanks, then we have a problem

You will find frequently, if it has strong potential to take down a MEQ army, it will be termed "cheese." That’s really the only common theme I’ve found for why a list is “cheesy”

The argument against this variant is that it someone will suggest lascannons are rare weapons, and potentially the same for melta weapons. You may also find that certain players will label your force 'cheesy' if you have too many troops in, on inversely if you have too many vehicles.

Here’s the following guard lists of mine that were labeled cheesy (for the record all of them) by differing players.

*mechanized with las/melta squads. The 6 sentinels, las/melta combo and the fact I had too many vehicles (er, it’s a mechanized list) were viewed as cheesy.

*armored company. I had developed an armored company list which effectively employed 4 ordnance throwers, with the rest troops, hellhounds, sentinels etc. Effectively a mechanized with four heavies instead of three.

*drop troop. It was composed of two demo teams, ST’s, sentinels (can you tell I like sentinels), troops with las/melta (same troops as above) and dedicated antiassault with four flamers, and three air dropped assault tanks (3 basis-the first version had two basis and a griffon but people kept annoying me about the griffon). Accused of being cheesy because: too many troops, too many heavies, too many deepstriking units (interesting only MEQs called it cheesy, a Nid player loved it despite actually tying his monster hoard).

*SAFH. All troops. Lots of heavy weapons, special weapons of all kinds-meltas, plasmas, grenade launchers, flamers, lascannons, autocannons, and three heavy bolters. Played it four times. Two viewed it as cheesy because it had too many troops-they couldn’t kill them all. One (against whom the army was made as a lark to see how many guardsmen could kill in one turn) loved it because he went through a one turn storm and then we had bloodbath by the bayou (I left the minis on the table, just laid them down, it realy did look quite epic). For the record it averaged 40 guardsmen a turn…One other player thought it was difficult but an interesting game (he’s a tournament player and we used the Elysian rules in that game, nothing like dropping something like 160 guys).

Its interesting. Of these lists non-MEQ players typically did not throw around the term cheese, difficult was usually the harshest words used. I can think of two instances where a necron player and a Tau player (who was learning) though the lists were cheesy. Once the Tau player figured it out we evened out on the victories against each other and he later termed my “underpowered.” Marine players on the other hand seemed to gripe about them a lot more. As I have played marines in the past (SW/IW) that always bothered me, especially when it was coming from some las/plas tac squad master..


No insult meant to marine players. Usually when I played non-MEQs its more experienc players who've already won and lost their share of games.

Sekhmet
05-02-2007, 17:47
That's an interesting observation, jfrazell, on marine players.

It's actually another example of meta game. You should have just told them "It's not my fault you loaded up on lascannons."

jfrazell
05-02-2007, 18:25
Well its not meant as a slam against marines. Its just the fact that people go on and on about cheesy lists but you can never get a firm lockdown on whats cheesy and whats not. There's no agreement.

Do I like to play against min/max las/plas lists? Meh, I don't play that much now and don't see them often. I think they're a bit boring. But I don't view them as cheesy.

bratbag
05-02-2007, 19:55
Well its not meant as a slam against marines. Its just the fact that people go on and on about cheesy lists but you can never get a firm lockdown on whats cheesy and whats not. There's no agreement.

Do I like to play against min/max las/plas lists? Meh, I don't play that much now and don't see them often. I think they're a bit boring. But I don't view them as cheesy.

And here is where we differ.

I play an ork army with a strong foot slogging core.My opponent can take all the las/plas squads he likes, they aren't going to affect me that much.

I still consider them to be a boring, cheesy, power gaming tool when used in large amounts.They don't spoil the game for me by kicking my ass, they spoil the game for me by making me feel like I'm not actually fighting loyalist marines.

Ill take bolter rounds in the face all day from a balanced marine opponent and smile about it, but beating a las/plas tool (which is incredibly easy for orks) leaves such a bad taste in my mouth that I will now refuse to play those lists unless forced to in a tourney.

jfrazell
05-02-2007, 21:04
And thats their mistake for taking las/plas against a horde player. Never bring a knife to a gun fight.

bratbag
05-02-2007, 21:13
And thats their mistake for taking las/plas against a horde player. Never bring a knife to a gun fight.

I think we agree but are arguing at cross purposes.

Are las plas universally effective against all armies? No (we agree)

Does the fact they are useless against my army make them fun to play against? No it doesn't.

Onisuzume
05-02-2007, 21:22
I guess it's a bit ironic that the only thing a las/plas army is good for is against MEQ/Vehicles, and can only be done by a MEQ army... (generally speaking)

Ill take bolter rounds in the face all day from a balanced marine opponent and smile about it, but beating a las/plas tool (which is incredibly easy for orks) leaves such a bad taste in my mouth that I will now refuse to play those lists unless forced to in a tourney.
Even though the bolters kill the orks by the dozen...
Ok, so las/plas is good against MEQ, missile launchers are also good against MEQ, has a chance to ruin AV14 tanks, as well as blast the fight out of a horde. They're cheaper as well, so why don't we see lists full of those?

Sekhmet
05-02-2007, 21:51
I guess it's a bit ironic that the only thing a las/plas army is good for is against MEQ/Vehicles, and can only be done by a MEQ army... (generally speaking)

Even though the bolters kill the orks by the dozen...
Ok, so las/plas is good against MEQ, missile launchers are also good against MEQ, has a chance to ruin AV14 tanks, as well as blast the fight out of a horde. They're cheaper as well, so why don't we see lists full of those?

They don't kill terminators.

Slaaneshi Slave
05-02-2007, 21:57
And you're on a 6 to glance most MBTs, which a petty slim chance of taking it out, even for a section with 4 launchers.

Stormsender
06-02-2007, 00:52
Meh, doesn't bother me too much. If you abused 6 man las/plas then in a tournament you would get zero comp score from me and in a friendly i wouldn't play you.



Fluff does not = Rules
Rules do not = Fluff

Thankfully if the new DA codex is anything to go by then the disassociation between the game and the background that many of us have grown up with is coming to an end.

See this is what I don't get:confused: , is the attitude that even though it is an the 5/6 man squad option in every base Marine codex, sheese I hope you mark every single Tau player down in comp too, Oh and Eldar. Here is a player that not only is an example of what I see as poor sportsman, he marks a player down in composition because he loses, instead of proving his abilities on the table he uses Laz/Plaz as an excuse to cry and whine, and berate a winning player.

I welcome a new codex I have no problem if the changes come to the way squads currently run because I play the game to have fun and use tactics to control the flow of battle. People are always going to find something to whine about, it doesn't bother me when I beat some one fare and square and they want to be a poor sport. There are over balancing things in the game I don't think someone running a couple 6 man squads is a big deal "common".

Next they'll be whining about Vet Sgt's w/ PF's or something.

Rioghan Murchadha
06-02-2007, 00:59
Next they'll be whining about Vet Sgt's w/ PF's or something.

Ok.. I'll start. Vet Sergeants with power fists are cheesy!! I play guard and my Vet Sgts don't get the option for power fists... damn cheesy marines! :p

bratbag
06-02-2007, 10:15
See this is what I don't get:confused: , is the attitude that even though it is an the 5/6 man squad option in every base Marine codex, sheese I hope you mark every single Tau player down in comp too, Oh and Eldar. Here is a player that not only is an example of what I see as poor sportsman, he marks a player down in composition because he loses, instead of proving his abilities on the table he uses Laz/Plaz as an excuse to cry and whine, and berate a winning player.

I welcome a new codex I have no problem if the changes come to the way squads currently run because I play the game to have fun and use tactics to control the flow of battle. People are always going to find something to whine about, it doesn't bother me when I beat some one fare and square and they want to be a poor sport. There are over balancing things in the game I don't think someone running a couple 6 man squads is a big deal "common".

Next they'll be whining about Vet Sgt's w/ PF's or something.

Try reading all the posts in a thread. I am an ork player. Las/Plas is suicide against me. A person who uses las/plas against me will be marked down on composition not because they are going to beat me (because they won't) but because their army composition is un-imaginative and poor.

I have trashed las/plas heavy armies each and every time I have played against them.My view on them is not due to anything so childish as 'waa waa waa they keep beating me' because they don't beat me.

Talking about poor sports, in my own experience it was the las/plas humpers that always seemed to throw a hissy fit when my un-optimized ork force trashed their powergaming army.That is another reason why i will now refuse to play friendlies against such a build.

Captain Micha
06-02-2007, 12:32
My problem with las plas.... "Could you not seriously think of any other army" "Well you use vehicle heavy tau so thats why your complaining" "No actually I didn't bring them today" "HUH you have another list for Tau?" "No, I have another army... meet my necrons." "hahaha noob. I'll win"


three turns later.

"OMG WTF YOU @$$, YOU CHEATED." "How because I brought Necrons to the table instead of my Tau?" *guy says nothing and leaves the store, have not seen him since*

I don't think las plas is cheesy or cool. Because its users are usually tardlets.

If you're wondering how I beat him, I warriored him to death. literally.. thats all I took to battle along with 2 lords.

Sakura
06-02-2007, 12:34
So bratbag, you mark people down because theyre cheesey agaisnt marine players.
Arnt you a hero.

Sakura
06-02-2007, 12:39
This thread has gone to the youngsters. Even editing posts after, sheesh.

Captain Micha
06-02-2007, 12:46
its not all bad *L* I love the edit button... saves so much space in a thread

jfrazell
06-02-2007, 13:29
I think we agree but are arguing at cross purposes.

Are las plas universally effective against all armies? No (we agree)

Does the fact they are useless against my army make them fun to play against? No it doesn't.


We are in complete agreement bratbag. They aren't so hot against LATD or drop troop guard either. And they are boring.



Originally Posted by Stormsender
Next they'll be whining about Vet Sgt's w/ PF's or something.
Ok.. I'll start. Vet Sergeants with power fists are cheesy!! I play guard and my Vet Sgts don't get the option for power fists... damn cheesy marines!

Guard players who don't have power fists for their Vet sergeants are cheesy! They don't have to worry about finding the points to equip their vet serg's with powerfists and can opt for cheaper power weapons. Thats cheesy!
:)

Rioghan Murchadha
06-02-2007, 13:57
We are in complete agreement bratbag. They aren't so hot against LATD or drop troop guard either. And they are boring.


Guard players who don't have power fists for their Vet sergeants are cheesy! They don't have to worry about finding the points to equip their vet serg's with powerfists and can opt for cheaper power weapons. Thats cheesy!
:)

Actually Guard Vet Sarges can't have power weapons either.. they're officer only :p Although they're only 5 pts...

and I love Las/Plas.. Oh noes!! you lascannoned one member of my infantry platoon!!! He REALLY doesn't get a save now... As for the plasma gun, it's a 6 pt sacrifice for me, and an off chance that he'll overheat and cook himself. (I play very vehicle light guard).

jfrazell
06-02-2007, 14:01
Actually Guard Vet Sarges can't have power weapons either.. they're officer only :p Although they're only 5 pts...

and I love Las/Plas.. Oh noes!! you lascannoned one member of my infantry platoon!!! He REALLY doesn't get a save now... As for the plasma gun, it's a 6 pt sacrifice for me, and an off chance that he'll overheat and cook himself. (I play very vehicle light guard).

guard vet serg's are cheesy! you don't have to spend money to give them power weapons or power fists. Thats just cheesy. :cool:

dean
06-02-2007, 14:11
guard vet serg's are cheesy! you don't have to spend money to give them power weapons or power fists. Thats just cheesy. :cool:


Dude. I get what you are saying BUT you are implying that Guard sarges can have upgrades. They cant... Lasgun or las pistol and CCW

jfrazell
06-02-2007, 14:34
Dude. I get what you are saying BUT you are implying that Guard sarges can have upgrades. They cant... Lasgun or las pistol and CCW

sarcasm generator on
Exactly. Guard are cheesy because they don't have the options that make us spend points on them. Its cheesy that they don't have any options! %#@% If my (insert codex here) didn't have options for power fists I wouldn't have to spend points on them either! Thats just cheesy and not fluffy at all! Guard should have to pay for powerfists and powerweapons like the rest of us! Steenking cheesers!


sarcasm generator off

dean
06-02-2007, 15:04
sarcasm generator on.....


sarcasm generator off

Better :p