PDA

View Full Version : Tac termies better the Assault termies?



fox-hound
13-03-2010, 15:44
Has anyone tried this before? sticking 5 tac termies in a raider with leader/hero of your choice. Then run the raider up to an enemy unit disimbark shoot at said enemy unit with stormbolters then charge. sure it's not as affective in assault but i still have the shooting and if the raider gets taken out your termies still have a chance. what do you think?

the gribbly
13-03-2010, 16:30
Many have tried it as that is common practice with deathwing to have shooty squads embarked in land raiders for the very reasons you stated and the because of the older SS rules. For C:SM I think you find that while shooty squads are still effective, 200 pt TH/SS termies are plainly a better buy.

Archangel_Ruined
13-03-2010, 16:48
TH/SS termies are just too good to turn down if you're already getting the raider. A 3+ save against every Tom, Dick and Harry with a melta weapon is worth it, and with the machine spirit on the raider you can plough forward whilst still posing a threat.

Tiller5
13-03-2010, 17:05
Also, with Tactical Terminators, you will almost always want a heavy weapon with the squad, thereby making the squad a bit more expensive. If you plan on assaulting with them, the Power Fists will put them at a relative disadvantage, especially if charging anything with power weapons and a decent Weapon Skill (eg. Banshees, Incubi, Chaos Terminators etc.).

On the other hand, Thunder Hammers and Storm Shields work so much better with the Assault Vehicle rule - they have the protection to survive the enemy striking, where they can then unleash the Hammers. Also, they would cost less than the hypothetical Tactical Terminator squad, therefore making them a much better choice.

bigcheese76
13-03-2010, 17:09
I play Chaos so I have a mixture of weapons within the squad but overall, I would say it is worth having some sort of shooting ability as once you have assaulted and wiped out the squad you assaulted then you are unlikely to get back in the land raider, so will continue the rest of the game on foot making use of any shooting attacks you may have.

Archangel_Ruined
13-03-2010, 17:13
Just get out near multiple squads or an objective, no need to go for a jog that way. If you're running a crusader you might want to field a bigger squad, mainly with TH/SS but also with some lightning claws in there for the rare occasions when you need something dead in initiative order or just to up your horde killing skills, you can still take any return hits on your trusty storm shields.

fox-hound
13-03-2010, 17:41
Yeah sure, but what about if you get second turn and get your beloved raider blown up on turn one by DSing meltas etc., or what if your enemy is a shooty IG/Tau/ or anything else with big guns? Yes Im aware that tac dont even compare to assault but 13 (10storm bolters 3raider HB)shots in their face right before 4PF 1PW and an HQ(optional) charge into them is a pretty scarry thought for them. Not to mention I'll have Pedro in with them as I'll be running to van vet squads in this list. So that makes it 10SB 4pedro 3HB(i run godhammer raiders) 5PF 1PW equalling out to be 19attacks in CC and 17 shots equaling 26attacks total and If my raider gets blowd up then i still have a good chance of reaching my main objective or another unit(espically with Pedro's orbital bombardment). The heavy weapon is deffinatly somthing I'm considering, the cyclone missles perhaps?

Archangel_Ruined
13-03-2010, 17:55
It's not an awful choice, by any means, it's just more expensive and not as good as assault terminators when you think about where they excel. If you want to run a shooting squad that isn't that bad in combat then just throw 10 sternguard in the raider and massacre whatever you jump out on. The points for the two are really quite close and if shooting is a worry then the sternguard are better. The truth of the matter is that the most damage you can do in 40k is in assault, and once you've shelled out 35 and ~250pts for a land raider then assault is probably where you're heading. If you go second then only drop pods and daemons can DS on turn one, and Daemons aren't worrying AV14 at range. So, that's only one build that's going to worry your raider, after that you should be popping smoke if that's a risk. If the worst scenario does happen your termies can still run. If you're happy using SC's in your force then consider taking Shrike, then you have fleeting TH/SS terminators. I don't think they really thought that rule through though...

Spoik
13-03-2010, 20:34
I really love using my regular terminators, and when they work, they can be spectacular.

Practically, however, their shooting is often iffy, and they are horribly vulnerable to things like Fire Dragons.

bobafett012
13-03-2010, 20:42
I play shooty DW and thats all i run, total shooty terms and believe me they can lay waste to entire armies with ease. you have ALOT of fire power at your disposal and at a minimum of 24" range you can stay out of rapid fire range which is a terms worst enemy. However i footslog mine with my LR's as fire support and fire magnets drawing alot of heavy fire power away from the terms plus providing a measure of cover as i can screen my terms, and of course IF i have to i can load a few squads into the LR's to get them somewhere.

You have to be careful with your movements and often times i back peddle when incoming CC units or transports are inbound until i can neutralize them and whittle their numbers down at which point charging with a squad full of power fists becomes less dangerous to my terms.

Basically when running shooty terms you just have to make sure to take out the most threatening targets at all costs. Transports full of fire dragons, vindis, demolishers, etc etc and/or anything that can deal mass amount of AP 1/2 fire, the rest you can absorb for the most part with your 2+ armor saves. keeping them in cover or screened by other units can help boost your 5+ invul to a 4+ which is very helpful as well.

Griffindale
13-03-2010, 20:45
Essentially, TH/SS termies are underpriced and possibly overpowered for so they're a real no brainer choice atm.

Its a good time to be an Imperial Fist.

Archangel_Ruined
13-03-2010, 20:50
It's a better time to be a Salamander though...

Mawchild
14-03-2010, 00:38
I like having a squad babysit my backfield. CSM termies with either Tzeentch for the 4++ or undivided for morale plus autocannon give great fire support and if you give them combi plasmas, they can deal with any nasties deepstriking in the rear or act as a great speedbump. yes they are expensive but if used properly they are great at babysitting troops who are holding objectives. A squad of normal SM Termies can do the same thing if given a cyclone missile launcher.
I think that they are worth more in objective based missions where they are able to babysit troops. In kill point missions then assault termies are often far more effective. The trick as always is to be agressive but not reckless and to recognise that even termies have their weaknesses and that an invulnerable save does not confer invincibilty.

Znail
14-03-2010, 00:47
It's a better time to be a Salamander though...

One has to wonder if it was by accident they picked Thunderhammers, Flamer and Melta weapons to give bonus to, or did they realy intentionaly buff the already strongest choises?

Archangel_Ruined
14-03-2010, 00:51
I'm succumbing to the prosecco but I think that it was an unfortunate oversight by the GW staff playtesters. If they'd been powergamer types they'd have realised that DP'd melta squads mixed with Vulkan and TH/SS termies in a raider were improbably buffed. As it stands they missed the possibility of optimising a build so Vulkans buffs become a gamebreaking nastiness.

Epicenter
14-03-2010, 01:04
Tac Terminators still aren't as good as TH/SS, I don't think. For one thing, it's darn hard to take out a Land Raider, but most of all it's just not very efficient.

Tac Terminators aren't very efficient - you're either paying for a stormbolter you don't use much, or you're paying for a powerfist that is late-striking overkill for a lot of stuff. Having a powerfist on every terminator is expensive and you reach (and pass) the point of diminishing returns after about 2-3 PFs as a lot of nastiness that you throw Terminators at can pop multiple 2+/5++ terminators in CC before those expensive PFs hit. TH/SS Terminators would have the same problem, but they have the 3++ save which blunts the force of MCs and power weapons a lot so the THs users can live to strike; PF/SB terminators don't have that cushion. This is the crux of the PF/SB terminator problem.

To put this problem into focus: SW and CSM terminators are a lot better for the kind of tactic you describe because both of them are not required to buy the power fist - guys who are just there for shooting can just carry around combi-bolters, storm/twin-linked bolters, and a power weapon. If something with a power weapon or an MC attacks them, you can remove the "cheap" terminators to keep the PF or TH guys alive to strike, granting them better points efficiency.

Archangel_Ruined
14-03-2010, 01:17
It isn't just that, after a TH hits home (just one, mind) you wont be striking until they've had another go at you. That gives the double lightning claws another rerolled attempt to put you on your **** (if you took them). At the very least it means you will be taking some more wounds from nasty S8 power weapons.

shabbadoo
14-03-2010, 01:22
Keeping Tactical Terminators in a Land Raider is not such a good idea, as it means they are not shooting while embarked. Land Raiders are better suited to Assault Terminators, as Tactical Terminators do not need to get into close combat to be effective, while for Close Combat Terminators it is a necessity.

Archangel_Ruined
14-03-2010, 01:27
Indeed, the lack of fire points in a raider should be noted here. It matters to a unit you've paid +30pts for the cyclone launcher and not a jot to the assault termies.

Lord of Worms
14-03-2010, 03:28
Assault terminators need a LR. That works out to a 500 point or so unit. That can be enough of a disadvantage in many cases. You can deepstrike rifle-termies based on what you need them for, and they aren't such one trick ponies. The thing is, that assault termies are only really good against MEQs, against everybody else they have a hard time earning back the 500 points to justify them.

fox-hound
14-03-2010, 04:43
Assault terminators need a LR. That works out to a 500 point or so unit. That can be enough of a disadvantage in many cases. You can deepstrike rifle-termies based on what you need them for, and they aren't such one trick ponies. The thing is, that assault termies are only really good against MEQs, against everybody else they have a hard time earning back the 500 points to justify them.

EXACTLY my point! I'm using this in my first tourney and i want to be ready to take on anything i meet.

ICEMANQ
14-03-2010, 05:05
EXACTLY my point! I'm using this in my first tourney and i want to be ready to take on anything i meet.

TH/SS termies can stomp just about anything in the game. Ork Warboss with nobs, Trygons, Tyrants, tanks, anything.. It's not just about making points back with every unit. Also if you put them in a Redeemer, they can taxi into combat and then the Redeemer can cruise around flaming everything senseless.

TH/SS termies are one of the most powerful units in the game. Especially if Pedro is riding in their Land Raider..

ehlijen
14-03-2010, 05:38
While TH/SS termies are indeed tough, I find their severe sacrifices in offensive capabilites to be lacking.

First of all, the unit has no ranged attacks at all. The requires you to go where the enemy is, ceding at least a portion of the initiative to them. You can still use them as area denial (and I believe that is their most important function) but otherwise you're pretty much required to go big bad hunting to make use of them.

They just don't cut it against swarming units. A decent size horde of hormagaunts can easily leave a significant dent before the low number of return attacks try to even things out.

LCs are not indespensible for those units, but for the I4 and the extra attack.

Regular termies can affect things up to 24" around them. Sure, they're not as deadly, or as tough, but they can still easily outkill their CC brethren simply through getting more opportunities to do so.

So yes, I consider regular termies to be the slightly better unit overall, but I don't deny the sheer deadlyness of CC termies.

fox-hound
14-03-2010, 17:06
While TH/SS termies are indeed tough, I find their severe sacrifices in offensive capabilites to be lacking.

First of all, the unit has no ranged attacks at all. The requires you to go where the enemy is, ceding at least a portion of the initiative to them. You can still use them as area denial (and I believe that is their most important function) but otherwise you're pretty much required to go big bad hunting to make use of them.

They just don't cut it against swarming units. A decent size horde of hormagaunts can easily leave a significant dent before the low number of return attacks try to even things out.

LCs are not indespensible for those units, but for the I4 and the extra attack.

Regular termies can affect things up to 24" around them. Sure, they're not as deadly, or as tough, but they can still easily outkill their CC brethren simply through getting more opportunities to do so.

So yes, I consider regular termies to be the slightly better unit overall, but I don't deny the sheer deadlyness of CC termies.

Sir you are a master with words!:angel:

marv335
14-03-2010, 17:21
As an Ork player, assault terminators don't scare me in the slightest.
Tactical Terminators do though.
Cyclone missile launchers firing two frags a turn with the accompanying stormbolter shots are nasty.
I can avoid the AT, TT are a bit more difficult.
I've only faced TH/SS TT once, and I carved them up with a unit of Burna Boys without any difficulty. (a warboss did a drive by with a boarding plank of their land raider)

Grand Master Raziel
14-03-2010, 17:36
I make good use out of Tactical Terminators. I find them to be a good big-stick unit. Usually, whatever I send them after will die. Yes, if I send them after a big nasty, I'll usually lose at least one or two before the remainder get to strike, but that's still a beatdown by three or four power fists, which not much is going to walk away from. The only problem I have with the current state of the Tac Terminator squad is that there's very little incentive not to throw the first bad wound on the sergeant, because that power sword is unspectacular, to say the least.

Anyhow, Tac Terminators have a 24" radius of effect with their shooting, which is a not-insignificant advantage. Against hordes, that dakka is going to be more important than the 3++. Also, with a chainfist or two, Tac Termies can be more deadly in assault against vehicles than TH+SS Termies. That's a pretty important consideration, too.

fox-hound
14-03-2010, 18:30
Chain fists are a good idea, thanks!

carl
14-03-2010, 19:03
I'm succumbing to the prosecco but I think that it was an unfortunate oversight by the GW staff playtesters. If they'd been powergamer types they'd have realised that DP'd melta squads mixed with Vulkan and TH/SS termies in a raider were improbably buffed. As it stands they missed the possibility of optimising a build so Vulkans buffs become a gamebreaking nastiness.

I think it's more than that. i think they just didn't expect 5th ed to so heavilly push people into Melta usage, which in turn favours Flamers and CC squads. Vulkan was clearly made with the 3rd ed and to a degree 4th ed mindset in mind. I.e. tottally short range melta and flame based armies would stil be less efficent than more long ranged forces or mixed forces meaning somone wanting to play fluffy Slammanders would need such a buff to e competetive.

Mawchild
15-03-2010, 18:23
[QUOTE= Also, with a chainfist or two, Tac Termies can be more deadly in assault against vehicles than TH+SS Termies. That's a pretty important consideration, too.[/QUOTE]

A couple of chainfists are definately a must.

It all depends like I said earlier on what you want your termies to achieve and how you like to play them. The thing to remember is that termies aren't troops, they don't score. Therefore their jobs is to die in as useful a manner as possible or to contest in an objective based mission. In kp missions their job is to draw fire from flakier units while causing maximum carnage.

Ass termies need a raider to do their job which means you are paying extra points where as a tac squad can fulfill their brief without the need to add a 250 point transport.

Fixer
15-03-2010, 18:41
It used to be a no-brainer to choose Tactical terminators in 4th. Back then a squad of 5 with twin assault cannons and maybe a chainfist were one of the most versatile and powerful units you could field.

The triple nerfing they received and the buff granted to Assault Terminators changed all that. Halving the number of assault cannons you could take on a small unit, the nerf to rending in general and the price increase for a single assault cannon left the unit overpriced and undergunned. In addition the change with the rest of the army list's balance reducing the amount of anti MC firepower meant the newly buffed ATs (whos 3+ invulnerable save was now far more effective compared to the old comparison of the 4+ save and zero ranged firepower next to the old tact termies) now took the spotlight as the best and in some cases, the only unit Space Marines had that were effective at taking down enemy hammer units. If you're facing nob bikers there's frankly nothing else.

My old Tact termies have now been resigned to foam ever since then. The deathknell was my match against Twin lash with oblit spam where they were plasmacannoned or pulled into melee against beserkers despite an attached terminator librarian to try and counter. That was the dawn of my re-mechanisation to defend against zeroskill psychic powers and instakill charges.

GrogDaTyrant
15-03-2010, 18:45
As an Ork player, I second Marv. The only real problem I've had with Assault Terminators, is that they (always) come in a Land Raider. The Land Raider (of any variant) isn't the problem. It's just an overpriced glorified-transport with mediocre to sub-par damage output for it's cost (predators and vindicators do better for their price-tag). But it's the fact that in order to take care of what's inside the LR, you have to deal with it's AV14. Which more often than not means you have to resort to PKs or hope for a ram with a deathrolla.

Assault Terminators themselves aren't really much of a problem. They can be tough for a unit of Nobs or MANz, simply because of the "Combat Resolution" mess. But standard Ork infantry will bury them in saving throws. Burnas are exceptional at wiping out assault terminators, provided they're firing out the back of a transport and covering 3+ models a template (10 to 15 times). And a unit or two of shootas can easily cut down the majority of a unit just by causing enough saving throws (prior to charging).

Honestly, I think TH/SS nurminators are just a pain because they're extremely undercosted for what you get. Especially since they completely mitigate the high AP weaponry that is often employed to deal with TEQ to begin with. But when you stop employing such weapons and instead opt for forcing a bucket of saving throws... they die like any terminators.

Archangel_Ruined
16-03-2010, 01:21
Weight of fire is the death knell for any 3+ save or better unit, that almost goes without saying.