Tactica - Space Marines

[Carnage]

We do? Where are they?

In a nut shell? Garbage

12/12/12 means it's fragile, even with cermite armor. MM/HB/Cyclone + 2 shot whirlwind launcher means it doesn't outgun a normal storm raven with it's better secondary weapon and S8 AP1 missiles. 20 man transport ability is meh, since assault marines don't really need a ride, and who's going to spring for 9-10 terminators for that? Also, cannot carry a dreadnought like the BA one. The TL-lascannon or missile options start pushing the price into the 300 range.

It also start more expensive then a normal storm raven, which itself is 25+ points too expensive.

Overall. It's junk, and 50-60 points away from being correctly priced. 225 wouldn't be bad if it came with the lascannons though.

People bitch and moan about Forgeworld stuff all the time, but I love how they look. That said, I own exactly zero FW models. Not because they are too expensive, or silly looking, or the questionable legality of their rules, but because they are straight up non-competitive options almost right across the board.

[Glenn87]

Your list is what is known as a "single rock" list. The army's counter charge and offensive "take the fight to the enemy" abilities are all tied up in a single expensive, but tough, unit (which I bet is also where your libby goes?). My experience has been that it's melta fodder and focused down to the exclusion of everything else. The problem with dropping the unit in exchange for say, sternguard and more speeders (besides buying the models) is that you basically have zero hth ability left, and are a pure shooting army. This makes it's almost impossible to push enemy units off of objectives.

It's an issue I struggled with for a while before just giving up and playing Blood Angels. You can either go with a pure shooting army, a vulkan melta variant of it, or try a double LR/terminator list. There's not really any other options.

So it might be better dropping them? I don't want to add another unit of LR termies. I think havind 900 points in 2 units is a bit of an overkill.
So what to add then, as I've got 450 points to spend?

Another Tactical (195pts), Riflemen (125pts) and Rhino comes down at 355.
Still have about 100pts then?

[Freman Bloodglaive]

It's difficult once you go over about 1500 points with Space Marines because once you have.

Librarian, nullzone, avenger
5 Sternguard, 4 combi-melta, heavy flamer, Rhino
Rifleman Dread
Rifleman Dread
10 Tactical, multi-melta, melta, combi-melta, Rhino
10 Tactical, multi-melta, melta, combi-melta, Rhino
Land Speeder Typhoon
Land Speeder Typhoon
Land Speeder Typhoon
Predator, heavy bolters
Predator, heavy bolters
Predator, heavy bolters

You've used up all your good slots and are left with either doubling up on Land Speeders, or taking more Tactical squads.

At 2000 I run bikes with a biker Captain.

It is conceivable that you could replace your terminators with a captain and tooled command squad. They wouldn't be as hard as the terminators, but you could put them in a Rhino which fits in with the rest of your army.

[Crimson Templar]

What is really bad about the new SM flyer is the rules actually match the model. I dislike the storm raven and like this even less.

[stereynolds]

I managed to knock up this which I think is a vaible competitive build at 1500pts:

Librarian
5 Sniper Scouts, Camo Cloaks, Missile Launcher
5 Sniper Scouts, Camo Cloaks, Missile Launcher
Dreadnought with 2x Twin Linked Autocannons
Dreadnought with 2x Twin Linked Autocannons
Dreadnought with 2x Twin Linked Autocannons
Predator with Autocannon turret, Lascannon Sponsons
Predator with Autocannon turret, Lascannon Sponsons
Predator with Autocannon turret, Lascannon Sponsons
Landspeeder Typhoon
Landspeeder Typhoon
Landspeeder Typhoon

Leaves about 168pts spare. Figured I could either drop the 2 scout squads and fit in 2 5 man tactical squads in Las/Plas backs or drop one for a 10 man tactical squad with a razorback, plasma gun and combi-plasma.

On the Storm Eagle front its a shame as it looks pretty cool. Here was me expecting a cross between a Storm Raven and a Vendetta. Never mind...FW missed the mark again.

[Carnage]

I managed to knock up this which I think is a vaible competitive build at 1500pts:

Librarian
5 Sniper Scouts, Camo Cloaks, Missile Launcher
5 Sniper Scouts, Camo Cloaks, Missile Launcher
Dreadnought with 2x Twin Linked Autocannons
Dreadnought with 2x Twin Linked Autocannons
Dreadnought with 2x Twin Linked Autocannons
Predator with Autocannon turret, Lascannon Sponsons
Predator with Autocannon turret, Lascannon Sponsons
Predator with Autocannon turret, Lascannon Sponsons
Landspeeder Typhoon
Landspeeder Typhoon
Landspeeder Typhoon

Leaves about 168pts spare. Figured I could either drop the 2 scout squads and fit in 2 5 man tactical squads in Las/Plas backs or drop one for a 10 man tactical squad with a razorback, plasma gun and combi-plasma.

On the Storm Eagle front its a shame as it looks pretty cool. Here was me expecting a cross between a Storm Raven and a Vendetta. Never mind...FW missed the mark again.

Yeah, you need to fix the troops. As much as tactical squads suck, you do need them for objective games. Outside of the speeders the army is really slow as well.

[Kelanen]

Never mind...FW missed the mark again.

In fairness FW are supposed to miss the mark. If you read their editorials, they are supposed to be overcosted/underpowered compared to codex units, so people don't get cheesed by powerful units they don't know about.

There are very few exceptions, and they are mainly where the codex is lousy in that slot (eg: Blight Drones are quite reasonable compared to Vendettas, Baal Predators, they only look good because CSM have such lousy FA choices).

[Kelanen]

I managed to knock up this which I think is a vaible competitive build at 1500pts:

Librarian
5 Sniper Scouts, Camo Cloaks, Missile Launcher
5 Sniper Scouts, Camo Cloaks, Missile Launcher

I ALWAYS advocate sniper scouts as one Troops choice, but you really do want 10 Tacs as they other - that gives you 3 units which is plenty.

[Glenn87]

hmm, would I switch the Terminators for Sternguards??

[Kelanen]

hmm, would I switch the Terminators for Sternguards??

They are not a universal panacea, and all things to all lists, but yes I find them to be effective, and find them useful in many lists. It's the swap out I'd probably make.

[Freman Bloodglaive]

Sternguard offer extremely effective shooting troops, while terminators are compromised because you end up paying for the melee ability you don't use.

[Kelanen]

Sternguard offer extremely effective shooting troops, while terminators are compromised because you end up paying for the melee ability you don't use.

Yes I'd agree with that. Terminators really need a Lash-like Librarian ability, or access to a cheap transport in the current meta. As it stands even Tactical Terminators can best most things in combat, TH/SS being taken for the shield not for any necessity of needing more CC oomph, the problem is that without investing in a Land Raider (probably a pair of units and a pair of Raiders) they never seem to get there against todays highly mobile lists. Certainly none of my armies fear terminators, and they rarely if ever get into combat unless I choose to let them.

As such a list that uses them defensively (ie: Thunderbubble) seems to be the only good usage atm. It's strange TH/SS termies are one of the gold standards, fearsome in mathhammer, but which are so easy to work around on the field.

[CarstairsCowboy]

I find that the best way to use terminators is in a land raider, as well as backing them up with speeders and drop pod dreadnoughts. That way the enemy is either too busy shooting at the stuff that I just put in his deployment zone to shoot my land raider, or they are too busy trying to kill the land raider and terminators, allowing my speeders and dreadnoughts to wreak havoc along their lines. Either way the opponent has to choose between splitting their fire for a diluted result or concentrating on one thing and allowing everything else to remain more or less untouched.

[stereynolds]

I generally don't take terminators. I find the 450pts (once you include their transport) better spent elsewhere.

[Treadhead_1st]

I actually prefer "Tactical" Terminators these days, because of the faster natures of most army lists.

Yes, you are paying for CC potential that you don't use, however they make a nice shooting unit (with any of the Heavy Weapons, though obviously the Heavy Flamers are short-ranged) that, for the most part, breaks the usual mantra of "shoot the choppy and chop the shooty". I've found that they add a very flexible unit that works against most foes (I typically run 5-7 with either a Heavy Flamer or Assault Cannon, and a couple of Chainfists) - it is not amazing firepower for the points, to be sure, but I feel that it is the better way to run Terminators than 5x Thunder Hammers in a Land Raider. If they could only take 2 Heavies at 5 Men, they would be fantastic again (or alternatively some boost to their accuracy/rate-of-fire), rather than out-shined by their Thunder Shield brothers. Thrown down into a good position, they can either inflict great damage on the enemy or force them to avoid an area entirely - which whilst they're not doing much themselves, can greatly influence the battle.

However, though it is not a popular choice, I feel that Assault Terminators can be made to work without a transport. My army has a few Tactical Squads, Dreadnoughts and close-combat elements advancing upon a weak-point in the enemy army (usually by a refused-flank deployment) - dropping 5-10 Assault Terminators behind the enemy as this force closes makes them very difficult to avoid - the opponent can't really run away from them (barring Dark Eldar - though that is what Predators and Devastators are for, catch them as they run!), as they are either running into the teeth of my advancing force or forced to engage them. If they are avoided that's 200-400 points the opponent isn't getting hold of, if they are not then they will get shredded.

[Crimson Templar]

You know how sometimes you read something and think nothing of it, them read it again and find what you read was quite offensive. The previously posted 1500 list is boring and dull, the comment about all your good slots being taken up is the offensive part. So how many people who say run 3x rifleman dreads actually own3xRifleman dreads. Really??? You all actually went out and bought or converted them right?!? I think that at 1500 points I feel limited and at 2000 points I am starting to have fun with list design. What about a venerable dread with Plasma cannon, Assault marines, Bikers, Other tanks besides Dakka or AC/LC preds? Half the challenge of this game and hobby is building a list that is fun and competitive?

Sorry for the rant but I am so tired of seeing people suggest the same old same old. I wish I could run a tournement where points were awarded for the most diverse list. Where a repeat unit would be a negative modifier and where general ship was about making it work, not just throwing A at B and C at D!

[Kelanen]

So how many people who say run 3x rifleman dreads actually own3xRifleman dreads.

Pretty much all of us who play competitively, and most that play casually. Often for several armies.

Really??? You all actually went out and bought or converted them right?!?

Yes. Why so surprised, it's not that big a deal.

I think that at 1500 points I feel limited and at 2000 points I am starting to have fun with list design.

If by have fun you mean put suboptimal units in your list that you can't otherwise fit.

I don't like 1500 at all, and find 1750 then minimum I can tolerate, and prefer much bigger. That said, SM more than most armies are better 1500. At 1500 you can take the optimum list, after that you are just padding out. Most armies can fill 2k with good stuff, and and even 2.5k or 3k without adding bad stuff, but SM have peaked at 1500 and do notably better at that level. Even at 1750/1850 (the value of which most serious tournies are held) SM performance nosedives.

What about a venerable dread with Plasma cannon, Assault marines, Bikers, Other tanks besides Dakka or AC/LC preds?

Crap, Crap, Average, Crap. None have a place in a competitive SM list. You'll see BA improved versions of some of those though.

Half the challenge of this game and hobby is building a list that is fun and competitive?

A competitive list is fun if you are a competitive player. A fun list is not competitive, no matter what sort of player you are.

Competitive is not the only way to play the game, and both are fine as long as you have a pool of the same mentality players to play with. If you want to play 'fun' lists (at least as you're defining them) go for it, but be aware they are no longer competitive - SM are already a Tier 2 codex, small parts 'fun' will likely make you Tier 3, much more will drop you off the chart. You don't have to like it, but it remains the situation anyway.

I wish I could run a tournement where points were awarded for the most diverse list. Where a repeat unit would be a negative modifier and where general ship was about making it work, not just throwing A at B and C at D!

It's been done - heavily. It was called Comp scoring, and actually the US and Australia was where it was biggest, and is still used in some areas. It was an utter abomination (competitive = best, there is no other possibility) and all it does is create a new set of best units that get used by everyone. Thankfully it never took hold over here, and it's died away in most other areas too.

Comp scoring is basically a way of letting casual players take an army they like to a tournament without being flattened by players who take an army that is good. That's no longer competitive, it's just a large scale casual environment. If you want casual play casual, if you want competitive play competitive. The two types of player really don't work well together though - neither enjoys it, nor gains anything from it.

[13th guest]

A competitive list is fun if you are a competitive player. A fun list is not competitive, no matter what sort of player you are.


(competitive = best, there is no other possibility) and all it does is create a new set of best units that get used by everyone. Thankfully it never took hold over here, and it's died away in most other areas too.

Comp scoring is basically a way of letting casual players take an army they like to a tournament without being flattened by players who take an army that is good. That's no longer competitive, it's just a large scale casual environment. If you want casual play casual, if you want competitive play competitive. The two types of player really don't work well together though - neither enjoys it, nor gains anything from it.

First, a fun list can be competitive in the right meta. Too say it is not competitive I assume you mean in WAAC events on a national level (in England and the US). So I guess you could say a fun list is never fun if you are a competitive player? How do you deal with beginning players? Or player who do not have an unlimited budget?
2 things can be competitive against each other even if they are not against the top thing ever. I personally can bring competitive lists that can auto play themselves and win me a tournie in my local meta. I don't because it is not fun (and really not competitive either (as it implies that there is a competition, steam rolling someone is not a competition)).

Comp scores do not just make a new level of best units. What will happen is WAAC players will find the best units they can and only use them, but it does mean other people can use more interesting units too. Would you prefer if they had a tournie where they just banned all WAAC players (I find it strange they don't self ban as it's not really competitive enough) to give other people a chance to enjoy the game.
Hopefully I have misunderstood you but it sounds like you don't want comp scores in any competition because you don't like them. Why not if there are comp scores and you know they are there, don't go. I think there is a need for casual competition as well as WAAC competition and both are good for the game. The big problem isn't casual players going to the big competitons and being out of their depth (They knew what they were getting into when they signed up). But people who play at that highly competitive level and then bring the same lists to the local clubs "competition" to destroy everyone and win all the prizes. I did it once by accident and now unless I know it is a very highly competitive tournie I bring toned down lists. It is very important at a local level to have a different balance to the top level, or we will struggle to keep players in the game (especially with GW doing their best to scare off newbees with prices).

The problem with saying: "If you want casual play casual, if you want competitive play competitive." is that if a casual player goes into a competitive environment they get what they deserve. But how do you stop a super competitive player from curbstomping beginners in the kiddie pool.

[stereynolds]

Pretty much all of us who play competitively, and most that play casually. Often for several armies.



Yes. Why so surprised, it's not that big a deal.

Agreed. I have an entire company plus support which is fun building and painting. If I want to play a game then I want to give my opponent a challenge...hence Predaotr/Rifleman/Landspeeder orgy appears!

[stereynolds]

The problem with saying: "If you want casual play casual, if you want competitive play competitive." is that if a casual player goes into a competitive environment they get what they deserve. But how do you stop a super competitive player from curbstomping beginners in the kiddie pool.

I have a folder full of alt lists. If I'm playing with someone who wnats to play competitively I pull out a list approrpiate if its against either a newbie or a relaxed game the I'll pull out a 'silly list' or an experimental list. Also by silly list I mean a list that is generally full of whats called 'sub optimal' unit choices.