@st what do you mean..?
@rhodri that sounds like a suggestion that would at least be worth trying.
|
|
|
@st what do you mean..?
@rhodri that sounds like a suggestion that would at least be worth trying.
So we throw balance out of the window for a little fluff? Melee units were nerfed because Sm couldn't counter melee without power. Now certain races(orks for instance) can't counter tacs without power. So Tacs should be brought down again(their melee damage/resistance OR their abnormal resistance to ranged fire) so they can be countered again.
melee counters and range counters should not require power. only things that counter stuff that requires power should require power. that would be the logical way of doing it imo.
In fairness, strictly speaking since Tacs are heavy armour their hard counters aren't melée but powerweapon melée and plasma weaponry.
These all require power (banshees excepted) which, yes, strikes me as a little unfair.
Still, if tacs are too good for cost now, I'd rather see Tac squads increased to 600 req with more popcap and keep their proficiencies as they are now. This of course means that they move into 3-figure costs for reinforcements, which is nothing to sneeze at.
I like asymmetrical balance. I like how Tac squads are 8 foot tall tank-men in T1. What they need is price parity.
My thoughts really.
Why is it unfair that the counters to Tacs require power (power and plasma weapons), if the Tacs cost more than a whole power farm?
GFWL gamertag/ LoL name: ReadInPeace
Just call me Readin'
same reason its unfair that the counter to sluggas and shees cost power... its a very screwed up balance the beta has decided to go with.
If you wouldn't need power for counters, wouldn't the game degrade into teching race?
Or the opposite, everybody would spam req-only counters, and the game wouldn't go anywhere.
Tier 1 is longer for a reason. To let you get counters without the danger of being outteched then beat too easily.
Despite some minor issues, I think the current system is okay.
This can't be fixed by changing the cost. It doesn't matter if you make them cost 1000 req - the fact is the bastards won't die. This means any SM who knows where the X button is on the keyboard inevitably gets a pop quota full of tacs (in team games), by which point nothing can stop them.
Is one argument I will agree makes sense. But tacs are available from the get-go and power is not.Why is it unfair that the counters to Tacs require power (power and plasma weapons), if the Tacs cost more than a whole power farm?
not really. set up teams require power which give you an advantage in another dimension, ie suppression, they are countered by jump troops and sniper type units which also require power.
@ elsmore
That's more of a problem with team games than it is with Tacs.
Also, if they retreat squash some of their gens (hard to do in team games, which brings us back to my first point).
@ Mooglepies
The point is that if the SM player builds Tacs from the get go, then the SM player will get power later than you, giving you some teching advantage (if you go for power first).
A further argument would be that Scouts require power to counter melee, and those melee do not require power to field.Why is it unfair that the counters to Tacs require power (power and plasma weapons), if the Tacs cost more than a whole power farm?
"ALIEN BEANS!!!!"
"The point is ours, NONE SHALL TAKE IT!!!"
"You shall not die until I say so, Tyranid."
"My face is my shield, my furry is my sword!" - Force Commander
http://1d4chan.org/images/4/49/Angry_Marine_Desktop.jpg - ANGRY MARINES FTW
@ D-coy
If tacs cost no power (and I'm not saying they should since they are SM's vanilla combat unit), power doesn't seem to be particularly relevant when considering tac blobs. Yeah, I'd say it's more of a problem with tacs IN team games but I know where you're coming from.
#114
It makes you tech. Not a bad thing. It's probably designed to work out as follows:Originally Posted by MasterBlaster
1. Build Shees/Sluggas/whatever at beginning to game. Whoever gets them out first gains the upper hand in map control (and thus the game).
2. The person who came first has to get Power up and running (thus sacrificing map control to defend whatever Nodes he/she has from Node-bashing infantry), to get viable counters to the enemy who has more map control.
3. Person pushes back with Slugga/Shee counters, hopefully out-teching the first player who held the advantage.
4. It descends into all out war/rush to T3/whatever.
I think Relic are aiming for a system where players effectively take turns pushing against the other team/player(s). Whoever gives the most ground when being pushed would then end up in the least advantageous position come late T2/T3 and thus will lose.
Of course, it isn't working exactly like that at the moment because some units are overpowered, some are underpowered and some don't appear to have as much of a definitive role as other units.
I am an Iron Warrior! Iron Within, Iron Without!
@ Gorb
Nice summary, I was thinking something along those lines, too.
@ elsmore
Power is relevant, if Tacs can't get power, they'll be swarmed with melee troops and a walker in Tier 2 will end the deal. Of course in this sense, it's the same with every race, but Tacs are less expendable then the other races' troops. Killing some Tacs can be a great setback for the SM player, killing a whole squad is almost fatal.
I'd like to point out the fact that scouts aren't supposed to be hard counters to melee spam.
That's more of a job for the suppression teams, which admittedly need a reduction in power cost to hit the field timely. Once this is rectified I see no problem with Tacs being more vulnerable to/doing less damage in melee.
As long as they remain the sturdy powerhorses that have no counter that beats them fast and decidedly for cost, Tac spam won't go away.
All right i haven't read 100% of the posts posted since my last reply, to much bickering and too many posts for me to trawl through tem ALL. So i'm soprry if i missed your post and you had somthing important to say.
A few points:
A) This discushion has raised several questions regarding the supposed role of Tacs.
The Devs HAVE in fact stated their suposed role in one of their videos:
SM's Hard counter to ranged untis but are hard countered by melee.
Weather thats true to fluff, TT, how they're set up now, or how they where set up in 1.3.2 is irrelevant, thats how they're supposed to be and i think we have finnially got some agreement that they don't fit that functinallity.
Ultimetly theire is nothing to discuss as to how tacs are supposed to work. We have our anwser. Soke posters just don't want to accept it.
B) there's been a littile discushion about how to fix things but ultimetly i feel the straight melee damage reduction is the simplest anwser. The whole issue with 1.4.1 tac's was that if melee did reach them they had to retreat immidetly. there was no time to apply anti-melee counters to the units attacking the Tac's.
Now with 1.4.2 there's actually time to apply the counters and so Melee decimating tacs for few losses isn't going to be an issue because it will be "eventual" decimation, not "immediate decimation".
Only when the scouts have to worry about the melee charging them is any of that true. In the examples i gave, unless you could force one scout off the feild it was allways going to be the case that it was 2 melee vs. 2 scouts and 2 Tacs. It's a lose-lose situation for the melee units at that stage, all the scouts need is one knockback in reserve and they canm deal with one squad without have to retreat a scout and then it's 1 scout and 2 tac's vs. 1 shee.@Carl
Chances are pretty much even in any of those engagements you outlined after the first that one or all of the scouts you're toting around will either
a) have insufficient energy to use knockback when needed. Especially problematic if you bought stealth for them.
b) still have their knockback in cooldown when needed.
Scouts as they stand are only an effective counter to melee when they outnumber them on a per squad basis.
If that melee happens to be ASM, that goes from 'when they outnumber them' to 'when they significantly outnumber them'. Nothing says pew-pew like 18 (30*0.6, one of the few times that heavy armour really helps) damage a shot point blank against a squad with 1200 hp.
Your also correct about the scout point, but i delibretly ignored those.
Remember the statment about examples not definative balance statments?
The key point about the "perfect" example i gave is that that is how the devs intend for it to ACTUALLY WORK.
We know it dosen't work like that ATM, so we have to work out why that is.
The issue in 1.4.1 was that Tacs died so fast to melee units that they couldn't tie them up for the scouts to blast, (similar deal with ASM).
Now Tacs have the tie up power, but they're actually able to inflict significant losses on melee units as well because they're so much more durable and powerful. That means Melee is no longer a Hard Counter to Tac's and that leaves tacs horrifficlly short of counters, since melee was supposed to be pretty much the only counter besides a stronger ranged unit, (and only Tacs with Plasma really fall into that category).
Thus ultimetly Tacs are spammed because their supposed hard counter isn't hard countering them. Since we don't want a return to 1.4.1. a reduction in damage done to melee units is the simplest balance fix.
AGAIN, according to the devs own statments of intent, they ARE supposed to be a melee hard counter. Suppreshion teams and shotties are just 2 diffrent ways of doing the same job.I'd like to point out the fact that scouts aren't supposed to be hard counters to melee spam.
I don't know what i'm talking about, ignore me.
Thousands of years ago, Egyptians worshipped what would become our ordinary housecat. The cats have never forgotten this.
Tacs are spammed because they're the main damage dealer, anti power, and AV troop from Tier 1 to Tier 2.
About counters not countering them: you don't win a battle by killing every last one of the enemy, you win by foiling their plans. Sorry if this is a little vague, but think about it for a little, and you might draw some conclusions. (Liberally taken from the Art of War
Carl, that statement came for 1.4.1, some of whose concepts have apparently been reversed again?
Be that as it may, i think the devs never intended for SM players to counter Slugga spam with scouts alone. Only the set-up teams came way to late to save Tacs from getting ripped to pieces.
Edit: Also, scouts have other uses than putting Shees on their butts, like infiltrate+disrupt plats asf
The question is though:About counters not countering them: you don't win a battle by killing every last one of the enemy, you win by foiling their plans. Sorry if this is a little vague, but think about it for a little, and you might draw some conclusions. (Liberally taken from the Art of War .)
How valuble is foiling the enemies plans if the cost of doing so is nearly as high to the victor as the vanquished.
It's a bit like Jutland. Yes the germans plans where foiled, and yes the british held the feld of battle at the end of the day. But the battle was far more costly to the british in terms of big ships lost and good crews killed.
Whilst the melee vs. Tac's situation isn't quite as bad, it's sill bad enough that the cost of foiling the Tac';s plans is painfully high, and of course once enough tacs are on the feild you need painfully large amounts of melee units JUST to foil their plans.
There's been no statment that they reversed it, nor any of the massive factinol level design changes that would be needed to support such a change.Carl, that statement came for 1.4.1, some of whose concepts have apparently been reversed again?
Removing scouts as a cost effective anti-melee unit would require MAJOR rebalancing of every fation with pretty sweeping changes, (i',m a modder, trust me on this). We just didn't get that so i don't see how it CAN have changed because the current metagame layout just dosen't support it.
Ultimetly if you wat to mess up plats and the like with scouts your intended to get Snipers, delaing wth those is most defintly NOT supposed to be blowing the crap ou of enemy ranged units as well.
Carl: what the devs intend(ed) is a non-issue. This is a discussion on whether there is an issue with tac marines and how to fix it if there is, not how to fix it within one narrow framework that may have been flawed in the first place.
We tried tacs when they were as intended in 1.4.1 and the consensus from almost everyone was that it did not work.
Where on a BETA.Carl: what the devs intend(ed) is a non-issue.
That means OUR JOB HERE is to look at how the units are SUPPOSED to function.
Work out hiow they ACTUALLY function.
Then tell the devs why they don't work as they're SUPPOSED to.
Our wishes and thoughts about how WE want the metagame to work
DO NOT MATTER AND ARE UNIMPORTANT.
I fact they are strictly speaking
OFF TOPIC.
EDIT: I mean off-topic from the PoV of how i belive, (based on expiriance of Beta's), the Dev's will see it
No we tried tacs as unintended. it didn't work.We tried tacs when they were as intended in 1.4.1 and the consensus from almost everyone was that it did not work.
I don't trust anyone. Especially people saying trust me. lol.
Last edited by Carl; 14th Jul 09 at 9:06 AM.
Ok, sorry for being not clear enough. I never intended to get rid of scouts as an anti-melee unit. They're good to get the occasional Banshee/slugga squad on its back and should be.
However, I was only under the impression that a lot of resistance to lowering the melee capability of Tacs was due to the fact of there is no good way to keep them from getting swarmed by 2++ melee squads, as the scout KD is only so good.
And that's where HBT come in, which in 1.4.1 came in too late (game-wise). Which is one of the reasons why SM players swoon when they are confronted with the possibility of Tacs getting torn apart by melee types (nevermind that heavy_infantry was major fail because of other things).
Bottom line: You shouldn't try to counter 3 sluggas/banshees/gaunts with 3 shotties. You should be able to do with 1 HBT.
Until counters for that arrive.
I get what your kinda sayingOk, sorry for being not clear enough. I never intended to get rid of scouts as an anti-melee unit. They're good to get the occasional Banshee/slugga squad on its back and should be.
However, I was only under the impression that a lot of resistance to lowering the melee capability of Tacs was due to the fact of there is no good way to keep them from getting swarmed by 2++ melee squads, as the scout KD is only so good.
And that's where HBT come in, which in 1.4.1 came in too late (game-wise). Which is one of the reasons why SM players swoon when they are confronted with the possibility of Tacs getting torn apart by melee types (nevermind that heavy_infantry was major fail because of other things).
Bottom line: You shouldn't try to counter 3 sluggas/banshees/gaunts with 3 shotties. You should be able to do with 1 HBT.
Until counters for that arrive.
I agree Scouts aren't going to stop a pure melee spamm alone ATM, but i veiw that as a scout issue, nothing more.
The real point i'm digging at here is that Tacs that can actually last a while in melee just dn't have anything to worry about. Judious use of scout knockback should under a working system ENSURE that the total number of melee squads to resarch your lins is no greater than the number of tac+asm squads in your army. All you have to do then is tie the melee up with your heavy armour units and let the scouts unload, your Tac's at least just don't NEED to do massive damage in melee to justify their cost then, because somthing else is doing vastly more damage to the enemy for them. All they have to do is keep the enemy tied up so that these other units can unload on them.
If anything else fails, would a 2.5%-5% nerf to Tac melee damage be enough to satisfy both parties of the discussion?
One thing that got left out in those examples. If those scouts have shotguns, those banshees are going to have aspect. Warshout. Everybody stops shooting. Banshees chase off or murder the scouts, proceed to walk all over the tacs with minimal losses or force a retreat, which is just fine.Only when the scouts have to worry about the melee charging them is any of that true. In the examples i gave, unless you could force one scout off the feild it was allways going to be the case that it was 2 melee vs. 2 scouts and 2 Tacs. It's a lose-lose situation for the melee units at that stage, all the scouts need is one knockback in reserve and they canm deal with one squad without have to retreat a scout and then it's 1 scout and 2 tac's vs. 1 shee.
Your also correct about the scout point, but i delibretly ignored those.
Remember the statment about examples not definative balance statments?
So while I understand they're not definitive balance statement, if an example fails to hold up to even casual examination it's not much of an example. If it's how it 'should be', it's some pretty serious rebalances away. And changing tacs melee isn't doing much for it, nor is it going to help the blob situation.
@D-coy no I dont think melee nerf is the way to go since the issue is tacs suffer no casualties since their ranged focus fire from two squads decimates Shees and equal req Gus lose and WS blob loses since its Heavy armor.
So I ll say Ranged damage nerf to 1.41 levels or Shee-Slugga buff to 1.41 level with the later as my personal choice
That could work, too. We shall wait till the end of the beta and see.
I just that Tacs don't get too gimped.
Which was specificlly why i said it wasn't a definative balance statment.If it's how it 'should be', it's some pretty serious rebalances away.
Where in a beta.
Our job is to take the devs statments of intent and figure out how to get from where we are to there, and then tell the devs what we think.
Tacs should be vulnerable to melee... period. They're a range unit, and range units should be countered by melee.
For example, ASM should mop the floors with the Tacs, especially after they've been crushed by the jet-pack jump. But they don't... ASM's more often than not (unless supported by Apoth's Purification Vials) have to retreat after jumping on Tacs, because of Tac mass focus fire... and i dunno, that just seems wrong. Speaking as an exclusive SM player, ASM should be the hard counter to Tacs, because it's simply logical.
I think that that's the main issue... that melee counters aren't working against Tacs and it really shows in late game in Tier 3, where nothing can stop a Tac mass now in 1.4.2. Since it's harder to gain Zeal now, hitting a Tac mass with Orbital Bombardment doesn't work anymore either... did i mention that Orbital Bombardment got nerfed back in 1.3.1?? O_o
Arrgh! Relic! What have you done!?
The thing is, Tacs are not a ranged unit. They're a multi-purpose, 'badass' unit.
ASM are a slightly more powerful version of Tacs with jetpacks strapped on their backs... why should they win alone by a large margin? I know they have a steep 50 power cost, but they're meant to complement Tacs, not do the work instead of them.
ASM are the hard counter to HWT's, and soft ranged targets. Tacticals aren't in the same league with guardians, shootaz, scouts, ect. They're a unique unit that aren't easily countered by a specific unit type.ASM should be the hard counter to Tacs, because it's simply logical.
I don't have a problem with that because they're few in number, and more expensive to train and upgrade than most units. They're also harsh on your economy if you loose a squad of tacts. The problem is trying to kill them when fighting the apothecary.
I think stat wise tacts are fine, the main thing that needs to be tweaked is their cost and upkeep. Once you start producing multiple squads of tacts, their upkeep should go up higher than it is now. I'd prefer to see Tacts remain as strong as they are now, but make them harder to get so you can't mass them so easily. That's the main problem with the unit, when you spam them.
Actually Tacts are more powerful versions of ASM in the fluff. Tacts are the more experienced troop, and have a more diverse set of skills. ASM are the shock/disruption troops, Tacticals are the core assault force. Not sure if you were talking about gameplay or the story?ASM are a slightly more powerful version of Tacs with jetpacks strapped on their backs... why should they win alone by a large margin?
In the interest of making the game fun, they should be ranged instead of melee. I don't really care how they're "supposed" to be.
I don't buy this "oh but if you lose them it's such a loss" argument, either, because they're so tough that you'd have to be missing both of your eyes, and blind, to lose a whole squad of Tacs.
Stormboyz have power weapons and ASM dont lolololollllllll
but seriously I d like ASM being a counter to Tacs but hope that doesnt screw Nob vs ASM matchup
Actually melee capabilities of Tacs is one of my favourite novelties of the game and I hated when DoW1 Gus would tie Tacs that was sooo lame
So, question. If "all ranged is countered by melee," and ranged is countered by jump troop, and ranged is countered by suppression...Tacs should be vulnerable to melee... period. They're a range unit, and range units should be countered by melee
WTF is ranged suppose to counter?
Fun to who, you? I'm having plenty of fun fighting SM, for the most part. I think some of you have to get realistic here. SM players represent the largest player-base of DoW II. If you're gonna mess with tacts, like Relic did in 1.4.1 be prepared for a crusade. You're just gonna have to live with Tacticals being a tough unit. I play Orks and Nids and i'm totally fine with that, and I don't have a big problem beating tacticals.In the interest of making the game fun, they should be ranged instead of melee.
If Relic adjusts the price of Tacticals & their upkeep, and balance the apothecary, that would solve the "Tactical spam problem". It's not that complicated as this is turning out to be.
Tacs would counter other ranged units and would cause casualties to melee. If 2 Banshee models die while charging Tacs then the fight would end in SMs favor
@Steel faith
you should be very lucky playing with noobs SM, disrupting a TACs blob its almost imposible.
actually i consider ranged unit as a support unit not a killer, but actually raned units like shootas and guardians have a pretty cool DPS.
but i actually agree with Tiranot, they should be countered by melee, i dont know why SM dosent like to accept they are just to powerful for how versatile they are.
what im trying to say its that "well i will go with my slugga and TAC must die" but they should lose maximun 1 model and the other one really punished! and the slugga with some damage and might be in the HQ ro recover healt and model if they lost.
if you stop and think a bit you could continue blobing, but will be much easier to counter and will push the SM to micro and use other units because from T1 to T3 TAC.
i agree to with suppresion team power cost reduction, (one day i told a friend that form 6-10 power will be cool, because it makes you think if you want to upgrade some of your units, or use your devastator or shuriken team.
Yes, it would be in the SM favor, but not a guaranteed win.
Why are people trying to compare units on a 1v1 basis against SM? SM untis are supposed to be superior 1v1 for the most part. SM are few in number, and are supposed to be able to take on most of the other races units 1v1.
Eldar are about combined arms. Eldar have tons of different ways they can change the the advantage of a battle with their abilities, and they do the most damage out of any of the races.
So I don't see what comments likeare supposed to accomplish here? You're using these unrealistic situations to justify nerfing tacts? Since when are sluggaz, banshees, hormagaunts ect alone? The whole point of melee is to support them with ranged, or abilities."If 2 Banshee models die while charging Tacs then the fight would end in SMs favor"
There's no problem with the fact that Tacts can kill at ranged, and handle themselves in melee. Tacts definitely have their advantages & strengths, but they certainly have weaknesses as well that can be taken advantage of.
@steel faith
im not talking about they in 1v1 ok they are strongh, but in blob they are just inmortal.
because its simple as that for what do you want to compare 2 sluggas agaist 1 tac, i mean tac can win if they micro.
and they dont compare with a whole blob, because one sample of that blob (on tacs squad) show us how powerful they are.
lulz.you should be very lucky playing with noobs SM, disrupting a TACs blob its almost imposible.
Correction, punching through an Apothecary tac blob is almost impossible. Killing a standard Tac blob is an exercise of using almost anything other than attack moving.
If you are discussing team games, well, unfortunately that will never be balanced. Critical mass problems will never go away in that game mode.
Anti-Melee, though Tac's are unigue in being the best Ranged unit and thus being SM's ranged counter, ASM are more a diruption unit for taking out single troublesome targets that tacs just can't reach fast enugh.WTF is ranged suppose to counter?
The problem is SOMTHING has to counter them, and they're decidedly set up as anti-ranged with the option to become an AV hard counter as well.The thing is, Tacs are not a ranged unit. They're a multi-purpose, 'badass' unit.
Melee is the ONLY thing they can have a vulnrability against.
Or do you want to take away their ranged power instead?
You CANNOT have your cake and eat it, as long as tacs can do anti-melee and anti-ranged then people will blob and mass them because there is ABSOLUTLY NO REASON to build ANYTHING ELSE.
Ultimetly the entire andti-SM hard counters system is built around nutrelising the suport units for Tac's so that you can use your counter on the Tac's. Rigth now Tac's need no support to counter EVERYTHING. It's lke critical mass WS, beyond a certian point they can gun any melee mass down before they run out of ports. For SM it's an ability to shoot enough down that they can melee the rest to death.
"Tacticals aren't in the same league with guardians, shootaz, scouts, ect. They're a unique unit that aren't easily countered by a specific unit type."
Such a unit is not needed in the game. Even further, it would hurt the gameplay.
Even though, in fluff, SM are Supermen, butchering the enemies of the Emperor in thousands, they need to be "normal" in a competitive RTS.
If they deal good ranged damage and have no real counter, massing gets good, and if massing is good in a game, the game is dumb.
You might enjoy it now, but you won't if you face nothing else the next 6 month, because it's the best thing to do.
Make TAcs slightly more vulnerable to melee dmg, and reduce their melee dmg significantly, lets say by 40%. So they won't perish the second they are hit, but it won't be a winning option leaving them in melee.
War does not determine who is right,
...only who is left
Not if Relic makes it harder to mass tacts, and adjusts their cost and upkeep (I keep saying this but no one is listening I guess). Yes there are reasons to build other units, except some SM units are not that useful. The answer isn't to nerf tacts stats, and make them fragile in melee.as long as tacs can do anti-melee and anti-ranged then people will blob and mass them because there is ABSOLUTLY NO REASON to build ANYTHING ELSE.
The answer is to make massing tacts difficult, to make using other SM units more economically viable over spamming tacts, to make other SM more useful at their jobs, so tacts aren't better replacements, and to balance the Apothecary's abilities because he's the primary problem with Tact mass.
That's your opinion, and you're entitled to it. So it comes down to one groups opinion, compared to the others opinion. Well what's more like WH40k, your opinion or mine? They don't need to be normal, they need to be Warhammer 40k, because that's what this is a Warhammer 40k game, not Command and Conquer, or Company of Heroes.Such a unit is not needed in the game. Even further, it would hurt the gameplay.
The changes I listed above could balance SM gameplay, not diminish the power of tacts, and encourage the use of more diverse units and stop tact spam. Nering Tacts stats, and making them uncharacteristically weak isn't a good way to balance them, there's others ways to do it effectively (like I mentioned) without degrading them.
Yes, they do need support. A Tac mass is vulnerable to anything that prevents them from firing long enough for melee to walk into them. Again, something like Phase Shift from WPE, followed by Banshee Warshouts to neuter the blob's damage output.Ultimetly the entire andti-SM hard counters system is built around nutrelising the suport units for Tac's so that you can use your counter on the Tac's. Rigth now Tac's need no support to counter EVERYTHING. It's lke critical mass WS, beyond a certian point they can gun any melee mass down before they run out of ports. For SM it's an ability to shoot enough down that they can melee the rest to death.
The only question are, if every race/hero combo have the appropriate abilities to do this (and if their cost is balanced to be available in time to counter the blob), and when is Apothecary getting nerfbatted because he throws a wrench in everything.
1. The problem with nerfing Tacs is SM go back to being chew toys in tier 1.
2. The problem with giving a race enough brute force to smash a Tac mass (a type of force that is inherently very strong in a blob due to durability, ranged damage output, and decent melee) head on is that the particular strategy will overrun everything else, becoming the new Tac blob.
You could make a case for nerfing Tacs and buffing everything else SM have in tier 1. Or you can make a case for ensuring that natural counters to Tac blobs in form of abilities are available to every race, forcing SM players to use mixed forces and spreading them out so their 2k+ req investment doesn't get annihilated in 1 battle action.
@Steel Faith
I agree with you that Tac blobs is the problem and not Tac unit stats per se.
However I do believe that their price is high enough already and that reducing their melee damage wouldnt change much regarding Eldar to say the least ( i dont play other races very well). Eldar only have Shees carryin power weapons and since Spiders do meh in this patch against Tacs there s a balance issue. Maybe change Shee armor to light armor and give them 0.7 modifier vs bolters :P
I agree, I think 500 req is fine for a vanilla tact squad. Although I think some of their upgrades could cost a bit more. I don't think their price needs adjustment so much, but I think their upkeep cost could be raised. That way if you're massing tacts, it's draining your economy more, and it makes it harder to replenish your losses.
Tacs, Scouts, Predators are the only SM units that are reasonably balanced imo. Devastators are under powered (that goes for all HWT's), ASM's are under powered, The Dreadnaught could use some attention (primarily the Assault Cannon), and Terminators are not as effective as they should be. That's why people Tact Spam or Scout spam, and rush to get predators out.
I'd like to hear why Terimanators do not perform as they should be Stell Faith?
Btw I reasonly stepped down from my awesome SM horse which pwns like crazy to have a ride on the Nids train and well Nids are right now the weakest race by far.
I think that the issue of the fluff is a valid one, but i think in terms of game balance, WH40K fluff should and must be sacrificed in order to balance the gameplay.
A balanced game should make you want to use every unit type available and should have a variety of strategies to be at your disposal in order to play to win. With the current Tacs situation, it's almost silly to want to build anything else because Tacs are so superior.
I, for one, don't want to be facing legions of Tacs for the next several months.
I think another drastic measure that could be considered is to have hard caps for Tacs (for example, can only build a max of 3 squads), as it was with the tank hard-caps in DoWI.
But i like my original suggestion, tbh, which is to re-buff the globals, and re-buff the Zeal accumulation rate to a higher rate. Also they should increase the targetting accuracy of globals so that they can be employed to punish those that blob and obliterate them. Seriously, i miss the good 'ol days of laying down an Orbital Bombardment on a Tac spammer and watching the body parts fly.
Uh, hey testthewest? You... you know that the tacs lose in melee, right? Like to any melee unit? They'll inflict casualties, but they're not going to win. Leaving them in melee means losses for both sides, and the tacs are more expensive.
And Carl, I hate that saying. I can in fact have my cake, and eat it. What I can't do is eat my cake and have it.
Well said Konfeta. Axe + armour of purity + purification rites lolololol. I love it, but it makes me feel so dirty.
Tac Blob issues:
1) Suppression teams suck. You know it. I know it. Everybody seems to know it. They fail in just about every way. They're too expensive, too cumbersome, and too vulnerable. SM and orks can garrison their suppression teams in buildings, but that introduces it's own problems (Not that window you moron! The one on the other side!), is highly map dependent and only partially deals with the vulnerability problem. They're no longer susceptible to jump troops, but they only receive light cover bonuses, so can actually be focus fired down easier than if they were standing behind a pile of rubble. Easily flanked, have to be baby sat, and units that are worth blobbing tend to get a tier 2 ability that renders suppression null and void(recklessness for slugga's, ATSKNF for Tacs, etc)
All of this is very sad, because suppression + melee should be a very viable tac blob counter. Melee's do fine against individual tacs for cost, so wouldn't it be better to fix the suppression part of the equation than to cry nerf on tacs, which could easily wind up hamstringing the SM's opening game? Every squad of ASM he has to build to counter your platforms is 1 less squad of tacs on the field.
2) Drop pods. Before 1.4, they actually perpetuated the tac blob, delivering a fresh tac squad to the battlefield and reinforcing any nearby tac squads that happen to have lost a member.
In 1.4.2 they're not as bad, but maybe they should have an upper limit of troops delivered? A ragged 4 squad tac blob where each squad is missing 1 or 2 members (or 3 if some have a sergeant) calls in a drop pod and instantly reinforces an unholy amount of req. The tac blob stays on the field instead of going back to base to reinforce, or needing an increasingly rarely seen razorback (300/60? Die in a fire) to reinforce in the field. Makes the apothecary + tacs significantly more attractive than using a techmarine + relay for forward reinforces and healing too.
Kratos: Their storm bolters damage output is mediocre, as is their assault cannon, and the flamer. The only thing worth getting them for is the cyclone missiles which are pretty fantastic, if somewhat unreliable at times. For their cost, they're just ..really unimpressive. For the sake of comparison, I'd rather have a seer council any day.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
