Problem with TACS and how to fix them

[stranger]

@Kratos
For something costing an arm, two legs and a truckload of dead marines, those things have dps barely above that of a tac squad, are sluggish, easily overrun (the teleport doesn't mean squat with this kind of walk speed), are a huge 'hit me' sign in themselves as well as being classified as large which means effectively being AT weapons magnet, can't retreat and come well after the time when your opponent is fully tooled up with every possible heavy infantry hard counter to hunt tacs. Think he meant that.

[Steel*Faith]

WH40K fluff should and must be sacrificed in order to balance the gameplay.

Not if it doesn't have to be, it should be a last resort. This isn't that kind of situation, there's different ways this problem can be fixed and balanced. Can someone respond back to some of the solutions i've posted so far? Do people agree or disagree with my balance proposals for SM's?

What I meant about Terminators Kratos, was that they're very expensive and difficult to get. Considering the difficulty in getting Terminators on the field, they don't feel all that powerful compared to a Venerable Dreadnought, Avatar, Tanks, or even a Tact Blob. They certainly not weak, but are they really worth their expensive and effort to get, when you could get a pair of predators, or just mass tacts.

Edit: Stranger also summed up my thought pretty well.

[endikux]

Tac's not dying is really the main problem here any way you slice it. It's quite obvious to anyone who plays that marines suffer the fewest losses. A marine can easily have a 1:4 death ratio over any of the other three races. It doesn't matter how expensive their upkeep or replacing their losses is or even buying a new unit, when they simply never die.

I wouldn't mind seeing tacs keeping all their exact same squad stats and having a fourth squad member added. That would result in more marine deaths but not necessarily more squad deaths. Individual tacs dying and needing replacing would do more towards the economy and fragility of the tac squads and therefor blobbing.

Obviously adding a 4th squad member is not a new idea but when you examine all the arguments of nerfs vs costs its the best one. You can retain all the exact same squad stats by weakening the 4 tacs individually to equal that of the 3 tacs so you are still putting out the exact same squad dps and yet now those blobs are not nearly so invulnerable to aoe and return fire or any counter.

The three man squad is the problem here, its staring everyone in the face.

[Carl]

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?

Ultimetly, the Devs.

Which as i've allready stated is that tacs should be LOLWTFPWND by melee.

What you or i or anyone else in this thread actuially wants just DOSEN'T MATTER.

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.

I agree that some units are UP ATM, but this isn't a discushion thread relating to them so they're irrelevent. Ultimetly none of those other units will work right if tacsdon't work right because tac's are the lynchpin on which everything else turns.

I also get where your coming from with the upkeep, a bit like american rifles TBH.

but;

A) it's against how the devs want tacs to function so it has ZERO chance of happening. Concentrate on making Tacs work as the devs intend, (i.e as a unit that gets LOLWTFPWND by melee), because everything else will just be ignored and has roughly 0.001% chance of ever happening IMHO.

B) it will still have the same issues that riflespam had. Once enough rifles hit the feild it becomes unstopable because it kills stuff so quick, (reletive to hiow fast it dies), that you could never inflict enough losses to take advantage of the upkeep. Only the lack of rifle AV made it countarable.

Finnially where did i say make them FRAGILE.

I said they've got to be able to tie up for decent periods of time. They just shouldn't be inflicting noticabkle amounts of damage in melee, (they could littrially have 0DPS in melee and still work).

Honestly a full set of Tac changes for me would consist of cutting their melee 80%, raising their melee resistance from 40% to 60%, and maybe reverting their bolter damage. They'd last a LONG time in melee, they just wouldn't do much damage.

[BudgetMessiah]

A couple of ideas...

Have eldar plasma grenades do a plasma-type of damage (1.5) rather than explosive (1.25). Maybe change some costs or damage around. They could use a little more leverage early on besides banshees. (One thing that should be nerfed, a little, is fire prisms. They murder marines if they engage, and murder them extra if they retreat when engaged. Fire prisms shouldn't knock down retreating guys.)

Orks are probably okay. I think tyranids needs warriors that don't hurt the rest of their army so much, and possibly a switch on the raveners' weapons, or giving them a melee buff with the burrowing upgrade (make it a little more expensive).

I would agree with people that ASMs might be made more attractive as an option, a little less power maybe. A more crazy idea would be to move sargeants earlier (T1) for ASMs to make their survivability and DPS matter earlier on.

No matter what else...please give the ASM sarge a plasma pistol. He's kinda naked without it. And his DPS in SM mirror is really low without it if the enemy kites him at all.

[InteR Mind]

Isn't the purpose of melee units is to counter ranged?

[konfeta]

That's an asinine statement. Melee and Ranged units soft counter each other based on micro and ability usage. Otherwise, it will be ranged hard countering melee or melee hard countering range, relegating one to almost complete uselessness.

People are getting too fixated on the hard counter system.

[Dux]

I really don't like the OP suggestions at all, to be honest. I would be totally against any change that lowers Tac melee; versatility is a core design principle of the unit.

[InteR Mind]

Carl I agree with you completely. Tacs should be WTFPWND by melee counters.

[Garumsh-Zott]

yep leaving the counter system intact for ALL races(so melee counters ranged for cost) is the only viable way to go imo. Make them last a while in CC without any losses but ultimately they should lose. Their CC damage is the main problem.

@Dux What should counter them then? So far the arguments circle like this:

A: Tacs are not properly countered by melee. What should we do?
B: Tacs are jack of all trades(master of ALL). They are expensive. They should be good in CC too!
A: But what is supposed to counter them then? Nothing beats them for cost and spam becomes a problem.
B: Tacs shouldn't be countered. In Fluff they defeat whole armies!!

[nbates66]

them last a while in CC without any losses but ultimately they should lose. Their CC damage is the main problem.

ultimately they DO lose, though... the problems i've seen happen when there are more than two squads of them, or when an apoc is nearby, in which cases they are supposedly unstoppable, i say supposedly because while i cannot stop them, i'm not that good a player and thus what i'm able to do counts as little

[Carl]

That's an asinine statement. Melee and Ranged units soft counter each other based on micro and ability usage. Otherwise, it will be ranged hard countering melee or melee hard countering range, relegating one to almost complete uselessness.

NO

Melee hard counters Ranaged

Anti-Melee hard counters Melee

Ranged hard counter Anti-Melee


See how it works.

Of course there are esceptions and addittions to this.

Set-up teams counter melee but can create issues for ranged units, (AFAIK Suppreshion in DoWII is a speed cut only, though i can't find the file detaling it's effects so i'm not 100% sure on that, it certianlly dosen't have CoH's level of damage reduction however).

Jump Units can counter set up weapons and provide rapid reaction forces in addittion to normale melee damage.

Tac's (and maybe ASM, i'm not sure on dev intent here), are exceptions to the normal rules. SM don't get an early melee unit, only a jump unit, so Tac's are now the SM's Anti-Ranged hard counter as well, (why do you think they cost 500 Req, they hard counter 2 unit types at once). By the same token ASM are more a low damage high durability unit, relegating them more to a jumping tie up unit than a damage dealer.

There are numerous other addittions and exceptions as well, (heros and synapse being two obvious ones).

ultimately they DO lose, though...

Of course, but how many req in reinforcemnts do the SHees/Sluggas need, and how many do the Tacs need. If the costs are similar then ultimetly the melee isn't a COST EFFICENT counter.

[Borrish]

Appart from the balance issues, tac spam just isn't fun to play against. It's a lot more fun to have to balance your army to counter a variety of threats then it is to just face one unit for the entire game. I often play team games and it gets very dull to have to face two tac blobs backed up by two apoths every game, especially when it's almost always a loosing battle. It would be nice to have a bit more variety.

While tacs do lose you're often worse off req wise then the SM player is even if you get him to retreat. I find it common to find tac squads retreating on low hp (below 300) without having lost a single squad member. In contrast it's pretty much impossible to force them to retreat without losing squad members.

[D-coy]

@ Carl

You need to kill 3-4 Sluggas if you've lost a marine to inflict the same damage req-wise as your opponent did. Same with Shees and Gaunts.

The difference is that reinforcing dead Tacs hurts your income better.

About my point of not killing the opponent's troops, but foiling their plans: I meant that with 2 Sluggas, you should win the first skirmish, thus get map control. Talking 1v1 here. Yes, I've never encountered a proper Apoth blobber yet, so I can't comment on how hard it is to counter. Tacs are slower than Ork troops, go for map control. If the SM player does the same, build Shootas, because the only unit that can get good map control using SM is Scouts, and Shootas decimate them even by looking their way. If going for indirect tactics such as this does not work, then yes, Tacs need a looking at. If they do work, you just have to practice more.

[Garumsh-Zott]

C'mon D-Coy that's just 1.3 against SM all over again. Get the map in tier1 and then ninja-cap and avoiding confrontation until you get to T3. It's even worse now because teching is slowed. This is not how 1.4 is supposed to be played anymore

[Borrish]

The problem with having to win in tier 1 is that it gives you no room for any kind of mistake. It means you HAVE to push him off the map early on and then you HAVE to make the most of your power advantage. It means that if you make ANY kind of mistake early on you're doomed to lose.

[Hirmetrium]

I still don't understand how tactical spam is a significant issue. Tac squads take up 15 cap - getting more than one means an investment of at least 1000 req. thats 3 and bit equivilent squads. The most number of tacticals plausable is 5 squads, with no room for scouts, ASM, vehicles or terminators. Its a whole 100 population cap.

Are people seriously telling me they are facing more than 3 squads, and if so how it classifies as "spam" when its going to SERIOUSLY limit their tactical options down to flamer/plasma/rocket launcher?

If there is a problem with tac spam, its a commander issue - I fail to see how you don't have something just as competitive with the tacs. Hell you can get two deff dreads for the price of one tac squad (req wise) and it locks them up in melee so they can't fire their rocket launchers...

[Mooglepies]

Carl: I can agree with the changes you suggest to Tacs in principle (lowering melée damage etc, although 80% is a bit harsh IMO) provided SM have a reasonable, consistent and not hugely expensive answer to melée in the early game themselves; shotgun scouts and HB devvies should be doing this but shotguns often don't do their jobs and dev teams often arrive as their own counters hit the field.

The problem with tacs though is even if you do lower melée damage they will still be blobbed, if only because they're walking tanks that you can use to counter any type of enemy at range, regardless of the decent melée damage they do.

Also Carl: though we clearly have very different ideas on the role of the beta tester that's neither here nor there because it's not relevant to this discussion at all. I just think we should all be keeping an open mind; just because the devs have said something does not mean that it is right or the gospel truth and the sheer amount of people that have taken issue with how tacs are "supposed" to work (on both sides) should indicate that it at least warrants some discussion.

[Ceorl]

Endikux and Borrish have it right here. Not only is Tac spam not fun to play against (especially when an Apoc is the SM hero) but the Tacs will not die. I have no problem with the SM suffering low casulties, fluffy, but it gets to the point in game that Tacs cover every threat.

Are people seriously telling me they are facing more than 3 squads, and if so how it classifies as "spam" when its going to SERIOUSLY limit their tactical options down to flamer/plasma/rocket launcher?

The problem is that three squads with those three tactical options counter every tactic in game. Plasma kills infantry and rockets counter vehs. Apoth heals all damage and the Tac special ability basically makes them invincible. All the SM player has to do is hold out on upgrades to see which emphasis his opponent is taking, which is not difficult to do because killing his Tacs off is so hard.

The two suggestions I've heard that I like the most are either increasing the upkeep cost for Tacs or simply adding a fourth squad member without changing any base stats in order to reduce unit HP.

[Hirmetrium]

The problem is that three squads with those three tactical options counter every tactic in game.

Your kidding me right? Your seriously believe that 3 squads, of which he's likely focused everything into, are beating your entire army?

1500 req + all the upgrades is a LOT of money. Like I said, you can get a walker, such as KK, and still maintain most of your tier 1 squads out.

You mention "the apoth". Theres your problem. Its not that tacticals are imba. Their fine as far as troops go - every other commander will be gimped otherwise. Its the fact that the apoth can power up tacticals better than any other commander can.

Consider that every tactical death costs 83 req. thats about 4 of any regular troop reinforcement, more for nids and a bit less for orks. If your telling me that you can't kill one for every 4 troops of yours, then I think your playing the game wrong.

[stranger]

@Carl
You're missing one teeny little thing. The hard counters to tacs, by design, are plasma weapons and power weapons. Thus, every squad, be it melee or ranged, can be a hard counter to them, provided it has the necessary kit. How does this fall into your little rock-paper-scissors theory?

[D-coy]

People need to learn to use Stormboyz, instead of keep spamming Sluggas.

[Mooglepies]

Stranger: I note, with amusement, that they just nerfed those exact hard counters too. I'll be honest I had no issues with those hard counters at all, only the fact that tacs died in a single hit to any tank.

[Garumsh-Zott]

No stormboyz cost 400 req 40 power and get focus-fired down far too easily to be a cost effective counter to tacs. They also get no upgrades in T1 and are very fragile in T2. For their high cost, having power weapons AND being melee should almost instagib a tac squad but they pretty much fail against tac blobs as it is now. If you have the money(so almost never) they are still a better bet than most things in T1 but in T2 i would rather buy a dread or two and try to lockdown the missile tacs...

[stranger]

I must have missed that then? Mind pointing out the part of the patch notes where they blanket-nerfed plasma_pvp and power_melee_pvp? The only relevant part I can see is a minimal decrease in banshee damage offset by an increase by similar amount added on top of their aoe special...

[Mooglepies]

Didn't they decrease the bonuses for those weapons against heavy armour? Or did I imagine that and have been talking out of my arse again?

[Ceorl]

Your kidding me right? Your seriously believe that 3 squads, of which he's likely focused everything into, are beating your entire army?

Just finished a game against a rank 53 player (don't know his TS) who had 3 Tacs (one flamer two missle) one plasma gun, one scout and (later) two preds. My force of two shootas, one slugga, one Mekboy, one Nob squad, and three (one knocked out) tanks barely, barely beat him because I had to fight like a maniac to damage the tac swarm. Wish I had saved the replay but I didn't. The problem, by far, was the tacs. Even the Nobs had trouble killing them off.

Are they able to take on an entire army by themselves? No. But they form such a powerful core force (as they should in some respects) that it becomes very difficult to defeat them.

You mention "the apoth". Theres your problem. Its not that tacticals are imba. Their fine as far as troops go - every other commander will be gimped otherwise. Its the fact that the apoth can power up tacticals better than any other commander can.

I could agree to that. But how you nerf the Apoc? I'm skeptical reducing his healing ability slightly will help because the Tac squad can take a ton of damage before a model dies. All the Apoc has to do is prolong the Tacs life long enough for the DPS to take hold, which is certainly the case right now.

[D-coy]

@ Ceorl

If you want to save that rep, rename the temp.rec file in your Playback folder, before playing any more games. Then it will appear ingame as a game without a name. Sorry if you already knew that.

[Carl]

@Carl
You're missing one teeny little thing. The hard counters to tacs, by design, are plasma weapons and power weapons. Thus, every squad, be it melee or ranged, can be a hard counter to them, provided it has the necessary kit. How does this fall into your little rock-paper-scissors theory?

Very well, because you forgot two key points. Firstly, basic non-power wepaon melee gets a dmaage bonus against them, (non-melee, non-plasma is a 0.6 damage modifier), power wepaons just get a larger bonus. Secondly. Ultimatly the main sources of ranged Plasma these days are SM ranged weapons, (and guess what, ASM aside, the SM hard counter to ranged is their own ranged unit, tacs), and Power weapons are melee, as is basic melee.

In short the anti-tac counter for every race, EXCEPT SM, ATM is melee. Because melee is the only source of conciostant damage that is cost efficent. Plasma ranged isn't widely avalibile for everyone else. And Ordinary ranged fire isn't effective. The only weapons with a (releatively speaking), high damage modifier vs. Tac armour for most armis is Melee and Power Melee.

I just think we should all be keeping an open mind; just because the devs have said something does not mean that it is right or the gospel truth and the sheer amount of people that have taken issue with how tacs are "supposed" to work (on both sides) should indicate that it at least warrants some discussion.

It's irrelevent if it's gospel truth or not. the Devs, (based on my pst expiriances), aren't going to pay ANY attention to any talk or discushion or suggestion that dosen't involve having Tac's be LOLWTFPWND by melee. SO whats the point of discussing it if it achives, (like chris's goggles), NOTHING?

Your complaint about scouts only highlights the issue with Tac's IMHO.

Scouts do their job largely just fine, (i think they do need a bit of tweaking but not much), it's just that tacs can't pin enemy melee long enough for the scouts to kill them. A Tac squad bogging the enemy down in melee ultimetly means scouts damage need only be adjusted to how long Tacs can last. So that Tac's take a very prescise level of damage from the melee unit before the melee dies to scout shotgun fire.

You need to kill 3-4 Sluggas if you've lost a marine to inflict the same damage req-wise as your opponent did. Same with Shees and Gaunts.

The difference is that reinforcing dead Tacs hurts your income better.

There's no question the tac's suffer more, i didn't say that, the point is that ultimetly the tacs only pay SLIGHTLY more than the slugga's.

Hard counters is about cost efficiancy, not "kill the enemy in 5 seconds". Even if a Tac vs. Melee fight took 30 seconds, (extreme example), So long as the melee paid only a small fraction of the cost the tacs pay they work out as a hard counter. Right now Melee is paying a significant fraction fo the cost the tacs do, and as a result, despite the relativlly quick victory, they're a soft cunter, not a hard one.

@Hirmetrium: The issue is tacs have a 0.6 recived damage modifier from their armour against all basic ranged fire. They're INCREDIBLLY cost efficent vs ranged units, they pretty much are a hard counter to them ATM, (as intended). However they can also gun down a decent amount of a charging melee mass, and then inflict addittinol losses in melee. They may lose, but on cost terms it's a "very barely" situation, a single hero ability or global will pretty much tip the balance, and not al enemy heros/globals have the capability to tip things back the other way.

Ultimetly if the opponnent gets cuaght with the wrong hero, the right hero but wrong wargear, or just being out of ZEQ at the moment of engagment will leave the Tacs te Victors. Drop Pod is especially bad, as is Apoc heals, but they're just the tip of the iceberg as it where, theres a lot more capable of a less dramatic vershion of the same effect.

[D-coy]

@Carl

Wait. You said Tacs should be countered cost efficiently. Fine. We came to the conclusion that 3 or 4 Sluggas worth one Tac. Let's look at some numbers.

1 Slugga squad costs 300 req
1 Tac squad costs 500 req

2 Slugga squads beat 1 Tac squad without question. Even if they lose 5 or 6 members that only costs them 125 or 150 req (25 req reinforce per member). This totals to a full req cost of Sluggas of 2 times 300 plus 125 or 150, which equals to 725 or 750 compared to the req cost of 2 Tac squads which is 1000.

How's that not countering Tacs?

For that price you can almost buy another Shoota squad with which you can counter Shotgun Scouts. And again if they retreat, Tacs are useless. Buy Burnas for one squad for the same price of Shotguns (if I'm right, not going to check now) and it'll be total murder.

[Mooglepies]

Carl: you just contradicted yourself with the damage modifier thing. That normal melée has a 0.6 modifier against heavy armour means it takes less damage and thus it is not a counter to tacs.

Whether or not the Devs want to hear something is irrelevant if what is being said is a workable or desirable situation.

[Carl]

Your math threw me D-Coy there so i'm gonna focus on one thing.

The basic cost of the unit only matter in the intial engagments, (if you wil it's an upfront surcharge to stop rapid massing of the most powerful units). If you don't lose the whole unit quickly, (which you shouldn't generally speaking), then the reinforcment costs are going to add upto far more than the purchase costs.

The ultimate question is.

How many Slugga's die for each Tac member killed assuming at least on member of the squad makes it back to base.

Those kind of numbers tend to favor the tac's a lot more heavily from what i've seen.

Thats what i mean by cost efficiancy.

EDIT: Made sense of your math there. So 2 slugga's counter 2 Tac's for 75% the cost of the Tac's. Thats not a very hard counter, it's better than what i tend to see, (which is more like 2 and a bit slugga's for every tac member killed, (rough guesstimate average)). But it's still a bit low for a HARD counter.

Realisticlly in my book 3 shees or 4 slugga's should counter 5 Tacs with around 40-50% squad losses, assuming tottally tac's with 1 member surving each. Thats a hard counter in my book because you've got smaller numbers of, (overall), weaker squads destroying their anti-unit, (i.e. the unit they hard counter), for around half the cost in reinforcemnts.

In a perfect world however the mere addittion of a pair of shotgun scouts and a pair of GU's would result in the victor being decided by weather or not the GU's could drive off the scouts before the melee hit's melee with the tacs.

I.e. The outcome is suddenlly decided by your ability to apply counters, rather than what actually hard counters what.

Carl: you just contradicted yourself with the damage modifier thing. That normal melée has a 0.6 modifier against heavy armour means it takes less damage and thus it is not a counter to tacs.

Unless they changed it and NO ONE has mentioned it yet, normal melee has a 1.0 modifier. Normal ranged and normal melee are difrent damage types.

Give me a sec to check it.

Whether or not the Devs want to hear something is irrelevant if what is being said is a workable or desirable situation.

Except for the fact that if the devs don't want it it will NEVER happen so it achives NOTHING.

[stranger]

@Carl
You're still missing the point. You're advocating for tacs to be lolwtfpwned by anything holding a pointy stick, while forgetting that the only true melee hard counter to them is and will be power_melee_pvp. So no, a basic slugga squad is not, and never gonna be a hard counter to tacs.

Just because the difference between melee and power melee is significantly smaller than between piercing_pvp and plasma_pvp doesn't mean both melee and power_melee are supposed to be hard counters to heavy inf. I'll let you onto a secret here now. Cover doesn't work in melee. So you don't have to worry about your hard counters getting neutered by clever hedge usage.

[BudgetMessiah]

I think a very big problem is, as has already been mentioned, tacticals are the only unit that really gets a good plasma weapon. So tacticals are a great counter to tacticals (and ASMs for mirror...grrr), and that's about it.

Everything else has to get to within melee range, which by then, is advantage: tacticals.

Unless you also have a disruption unit in there (stikkbommas, rangers), but because of that you have fewer power melee squads to tie up and efficiently damage tacticals with, and that means advantage: tacticals.

Also, I believe power weapons do 1.3 and plasma 1.5 to heavy armor, and we might be seeing the result of that. Even if the power melee closes, after they run through the plasma guns, all other things being equal, it's still advantage:tacticals.

If other races only have reliable power melee counters to heavy armor, then make them a little more effective, and possibly make plasma weapons a bit less. They do sort of dominate the SM mirror.

[D-coy]

Uhm, doesn't normal melee do 100% damage to Heavy Armour? It's normal ranged damage (piercing or bolter or whatever ) which does only 60%.

[Carl]

You're still missing the point. You're advocating for tacs to be lolwtfpwned by anything holding a pointy stick, while forgetting that the only true melee hard counter to them is and will be power_melee_pvp. So no, a basic slugga squad is not, and never gonna be a hard counter to tacs.

Just because the difference between melee and power melee is significantly smaller than between piercing_pvp and plasma_pvp doesn't mean both melee and power_melee are supposed to be hard counters to heavy inf. I'll let you onto a secret here now. Cover doesn't work in melee. So you don't have to worry about your hard counters getting neutered by clever hedge usage.

Except for the fact that neithier Orks nor Nids get a power melee weapon out the box.

OMG IMBA FTL.

THAT is why melee has a 1.0 damage modifier. Because it's supposed to counter ranged like tacs, BUT, it's not supposed to be as strong for some reason, (i think it's so that power melee wll lose to non-power melee, since the non-power melee should have the greater danmage for cost, that way power melee dosen't dominate).

Ultimetly though your missing the biggest point.

WEAPON TYPES are NOT hard counters as such.

Rather Specific weapon types donate what role the unit performs, (melee, ranged, or anti-melee). But it is those unit typs that counter each other within the system i allready outlined.

[Garumsh-Zott]

power melee (with the exception of banshees) costs power, so come far later than the first tac squad. But go ahead and do the math for sluggas with the burna upgrade. This is really an upgrade intended to make them more hard counters to tacs.

edit:
Aaaaw Carl beat me to it

[stranger]

Except for the fact that neithier Orks nor Nids get a power melee weapon

Heh. That's a good one. You mean, except the basic blades on stormboyz, the burnas, the ravener and warrior talons? Yeah, true, no power_melee at all.

out of the box

Well boo the fricking hoo, and marines don't get any melee counters out of the box either, and even the ones they do get are of questionable quality.

[Mooglepies]

Ah fair enough then d-coy. Do tacs get melée resistance?

[BudgetMessiah]

@ Carl

What is "anti-melee" in your system? Specifically?

@Stranger

He said, "out the box". Meaning, the first thing you can make is power melee (like Howling Banshees).


@Moogle

Yes, I am pretty sure they do. I also think raveners retain it when in shooty mode.

[Carl]

think a very big problem is, as has already been mentioned, tacticals are the only unit that really gets a good plasma weapon. So tacticals are a great counter to tacticals (and ASMs for mirror...grrr), and that's about it.

Everything else has to get to within melee range, which by then, is advantage: tacticals.

Unless you also have a disruption unit in there (stikkbommas, rangers), but because of that you have fewer power melee squads to tie up and efficiently damage tacticals with, and that means advantage: tacticals.

Also, I believe power weapons do 1.3 and plasma 1.5 to heavy armor, and we might be seeing the result of that. Even if the power melee closes, after they run through the plasma guns, all other things being equal, it's still advantage:tacticals.

The plasma point just dosen't apply in T1 though, (i agree on plasma guns vs. ASM though). Yet Tacs generally are seen as presenting the same issues there if you get a critical mass.

It's all about the fact that after being hosed down with ranged fire, melee isn't doing doing enough damage (relative to their losses), to really take advantage of the fact that they are now in melee.

Raising melee units melee damage would ultimetly achive very litile other than put us back in 1.4.1.

Lowering Tac melee damage would change the equation so melee still won 1.4.1. style from a cost efficiancy PoV, but that they took so long to win that you could actually counter melee units AFTER they engage your tacs.

Without = or > numbers of Shottie squads you simply cannot counter melee before they reach you.

[Garumsh-Zott]

@ stranger
Quoting out of context much?

edit:
ah ok now I understand...

[stranger]

Not my fault he edited the thing after I quoted his post.

[BudgetMessiah]

Heh, much editorial work here.

Anyway, even without a power melee option at the outset, the other races have good opening melee answers. Tyranids have so many models to swarm those first 2 marine squads with, power weapons aren't really needed, and orks can waaagh and slap marines around with normal melee well enough to not be taking a lot of damage, and win even squad to squad. Plus you can have 1 and 2/3 melee squads for every tac he's got on the field early game, so power weapons are superfluous. You're only going to have 1 banshee against that first tac, first encounter.

I think the big problem is having more efficient answers if and when he has a higher concentration of marines. The early game is pretty ok.

[D-coy]

@ Carl

Let's introduce HARD counters then.

Add Burnas to Sluggas. I won't add the cost of getting power up because every race will get power at some point, probably early, so they don't get gimped in teching.

Tacs cost 500 req
Sluggas with Burnas cost 350 req 15 power and even if you count it so that 1 power equals 3 req (extreme example) it costs 395 req

And Sluggas with Burnas will murder Tacs. Even without using WAAAAGH. How about that? You made a constant threat to Tier 1 Tacs and can afford an extra generator. After all this, I don't see how would you encounter a serious Tac blob in a 1v1. Unless they use the Apoth, but that's a whole different topic altogether.

@ Mooglepies

Oh, melee resistance. I forgot about that.

[Carl]

What is "anti-melee" in your system? Specifically?

Anything thats good at dealing with melee, eithier at doing damage to them after they hit melee or keeps them ut of melee.

ALL Suppreshion weapons

All Abilities avalibile that provide Suppreshion and or Slow and or knockback on a squad wide basis. (Upgraded Guants, scouts, and shoota's, plus some wargear abilities and Rangers)

All Units able to do a great deal of point blank range, (i.e. shoot into an ongoing mlee and butcher the enemy melee). (pretty much only scous).

A quick set of sums should show everyone but orks has 2 T1 Anti-melee units. I'm not sure about Orks TBH. And eldar seemingly have 3 with Shees, (an issue in it's own right).

Anti-Melee is diffrent from ranged only in what it is efective against, and as some examples above show these units can somtimes be effectiove against other typs of unit as well. Shootas and Termagunats with upgrade counter melee and anti- melee in fact. But suffer from jump units, (their abilities need the enemy to be at a range to be effective), and suppreshion temas.

SM work very diffrently though. Their basic Tac squad hard counters enemy anti-melee and enemy ranged out the box because it can outshoot any of them.

SM are the only race to get a no power dual purpose counter unit. In turn they pay for thatvwith the somewha dubious downside of needed power to counter enemy melee. However so long as teir tacs are intact they have the advantage (on paper anyway), of the best anti-melee in the game, since scout shotguns given an ongoing melee to shot into are pure evil. The hard part is getting a melee to last long enough to take advantage of that. (that was the 1.4.1 issue). Scout shotguns with their knockback to use aginst jump troops just don't care if the enemy melee has got close to them, every other melee counter in the game does care about that.

Ultimetly scouts +Tacs can hard counter allmost everything. Only grenades, snipers, and suppreshion weapons give them issues, and thats what your ASM and HBD are their for.

Not my fault he edited the thing after I quoted his post.

Actuially i edited while you where quoting. I realised i'd not put that on and it was bound to cuase a bad response. So i edited, but you beat me to it.

[Mooglepies]

It would strike me as odd if a unit dedigned to be countered by a certain type of unit was in fact resistant to said counter. It's been mooted by others before but perhaps we need a new armour class for power armoured marines.

[Carl]

Ah fair enough then d-coy. Do tacs get melée resistance?

They do, but melee resistance effects power and non-power equally.

EDIT: And shee's and possibbly others, (i'm checking), get the exact same aura, (it's the same littiral ability).

[BudgetMessiah]

It's all about the fact that after being hosed down with ranged fire, melee isn't doing doing enough damage (relative to their losses), to really take advantage of the fact that they are now in melee.

I think the "correct" way to approach a blob of tacticals, other than to somehow shield your troops (infiltration/concelmeant, healing, globals, etc.), is to hit them with aoe or disperse them (stikkbombs, bombardments, kinetic shot, raveners). Problem is, with all of these but raveners, you're buying something that isn't also the power weapon to kill them. You just getting a distraction, and often one that buys you a very narrow margin of error (I'm assuming the bombs and bombardments are dodged...most good players dodge and I can close while they are moving). So, you probably need more distraction, which really cuts into your DPS.

No matter how many distractions you ultimately use to break up a tac blob's firing on your melee's approach, if you mitigate your damage taken in this way, you also are cutting your possible damage dealt. I'm wondering if damage dealt by power weapons were upped just a touch to compensate for this, it wouldn't be the right sort of change.

[Carl]

I think the "correct" way to approach a blob of tacticals, other than to somehow shield your troops (infiltration/concelmeant, healing, globals, etc.), is to hit them with aoe or disperse them (stikkbombs, bombardments, kinetic shot, raveners). Problem is, with all of these but raveners, you're buying something that isn't also the power weapon to kill them. You just getting a distraction, and often one that buys likely buys you a very narrow margin of error (I'm assuming the bombs and bombardments are dodged...most good players dodge and I can close while they are moving). So, you probably need more distraction, which really cuts into your DPS.

Perfectly stated.

EDIT: All basic melee units i've checked so far have the same damage resistance aura as SM.

I'm wondering if damage dealt by power weapons were upped just a touch to compensate for this, it wouldn't be the right sort of change.

we'd be risking a return to 1.4.1. Thats why i feel a melee damage reduction for tacs and increasing the melee damage resistance aura would work better. It keeps tacs durable while raising the effective damage to losses ratio of all melee units once they hit melee.

It's he same effect as raising power wepaon damage in the end.