Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

Can marines be balanced without Warhounds and terminators?
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=73&t=19414		 Page 1 of 3
Author:  The_Real_Chris [ Fri Oct 15, 2010 11:54 am ]
Post subject:  Can marines be balanced without Warhounds and terminators?
Or perhaps be taking a list that only needs one formation?

I ask because they are both currently such mainstays at tourneys. The DA experience shows how hard playing without warhounds and thunderbolts is. But if for a second warhounds were erased and terminators made very expensive/otherwise limited, how would the current list stand?

The arguement about needing them to deal with WE doesn't hold too much with me. I simply typically avoid big WE (with objective placement and mobility) and don't always need them to deal with smaller WE. Instead terminators go after formations which they can deal with wihout getting mauled to increase activation advantage, take objectives and pile on pressure in future turns, or are sacrificed for strategic goals (normally slowing the enemy force). Warhounds hit enemy problems like AA, eliminate smaller formations and attack as harrassers and objective grabbers.
Author:  Athmospheric [ Fri Oct 15, 2010 12:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Can marines be balanced without Warhounds and terminator
Well I've summed up my concerns in the warhound thread. I'm hesitant about double-posting.

On the other hand, it's been a long time since last I played, and it's possible that my meta game is quite outdated by now.
Author:  The_Real_Chris [ Fri Oct 15, 2010 12:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Can marines be balanced without Warhounds and terminator
Warhounds have very little role to play in killing enemy WE. Their main contribution is trying to drawn the WE fire whilst frolicing in cover. 2 MW2+ shots every two turns does not a titan slayer make. A warhound advancing on a baneblade is unlikely to kill it (on average doing just over 1 point of damage only).

Instead they get to get resilant activations, fast units, handy support, good small formation killers (further boasting their activation advantage) and with the MW great at hitting those mdeium targets like marines, non reinforced vehicles and the like. Warhounds can also support a turn 1 drop and while preds are a better choice for AT the warhounds have the excellent AP as well and a good chance of being around turn 2.

And I'll curt and paste the above into the other thread and add...

Terminators are also not the first choice to get WE 'kills'. Certainly with support they can break a big WE, but they lack the firepower to do it completely. Small WE like warhounds, yes they toast them, but so do other marine formations. Amoungst the mediums Eldar titans are best dealt with by crossfires (reducing their saves to 4+ or 4+/6+), at least until the holofields fail. Warlords are very tough and could well beat the terminators (killing on average almost 2 of them in return for losing just over 2 points of damage) but equally its weapons fit is not ideal when fighting marines and most players have the sense to not both to fight them - if it sits on the blitz there are still 3 other victory goals to get and all your army fights 2/3's of his! Great gargants are similar and while the weapons are ideal for fighting marines activating them to fire properly isn't and the marine armies that have beaten my GG orks have done so by not fighting it. Leaving reavers as a good target, but reavers aren't that common losing out to warhounds for the speed and activations.
Author:  Steve54 [ Sun Oct 17, 2010 8:50 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Can marines be balanced without Warhounds and terminator
That is far from standard though - most effective SM lists take 1 terminators, 2 warhounds and tbolts as standard, I don't think a Codex SM list has come in the top half in UK tournaments without at least warhounds.

Terminators - I use them, and generally see them used, far more as TRC has described to kill a small-mid size formation to increase SM activation advantage (often a warhound) and they are then recycled with another thawk. Taking on a Russ Co is just too risky.
Author:  dptdexys [ Sun Oct 17, 2010 11:43 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Can marines be balanced without Warhounds and terminator
Just playing devils advocate here.
If most lists having Warhounds is a problem then we need to look at Eldar with Falcons (almost all have 2 formations) and Orks with Blitz Brigades (almost all have atleast 1 but most have 2 or 3 formations with oddboys) and both appear more frequently than Warhounds do. I'm sure most armies have formations that appear in most lists.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Sun Oct 17, 2010 11:48 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Can marines be balanced without Warhounds and terminator
Playing God's Advocate :)

Quote:
If most lists having Warhounds is a problem then we need to look at Eldar with Falcons (almost all have 2 formations)

Wasn't half the reason for the NetEA's mods to the Fire Prism to make it more appealing as compared to the Falcon?

Quote:
and Orks with Blitz Brigades (almost all have atleast 1 but most have 2 or 3 formations with oddboys)

And whatever happened to making Oddboys 75pts? :-P


In other news, 95% of Steel Legion lists include a Regimental HQ, so they need a total nerfing.
Author:  Spectrar Ghost [ Sun Oct 17, 2010 12:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Can marines be balanced without Warhounds and terminator
Evil and Chaos wrote:
In other news, 95% of Steel Legion lists include a Regimental HQ, so they need a total nerfing.


You think it's that few? Dropping SC and 50pts should make them balanced.

The Warhounds and Terminators happen to be the best/only options in their respective niches, in a similar way to the RHQ.
Author:  Mephiston [ Sun Oct 17, 2010 12:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Can marines be balanced without Warhounds and terminator
I played a game against 5 Termies, 5 Thunderhawks and one of each character (A perfect 3000 points!). I lost the game but at no point did I feel it was overpowering.
Author:  Ginger [ Mon Oct 18, 2010 1:29 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Can marines be balanced without Warhounds and terminator
Well, for what its worth I never take Warhounds for a number of reasons :) - consider my last list at Britcon:-
    Strike Cruiser
    2x Landing Craft
    Thunderhawk
    Terminators + Chaplain + 2 x Dreadnoughts
    Terminators + Chaplain
    Land Raiders
    2x Tacticals
    2x Devastators
    Bikes + Chaplain
    2x Thunderbolts

Ok, so I didn't do that well (put that down to my infamous dice :) ), but I believe the list is reasonably sound. However in this context it does present several features worth discussing.
  • The marines do need some cheap activations. Warhounds do provide this, and so do Thunderbolts, Bikes, Speeders and Scouts.
  • Marines also need deep-strike capabilities and Warhounds also fill that niche (along with Termies, TBolts, THawks and planet-falling). The choices here tend to determine your army strategy. Without Warhounds you are moving towards some form of air-assault or planet-falling list.
  • I always take terminators! Point for point, they are still the most cost effective formation in the army. But they do need support in the form of transport, which adds to their overall cost IMHO (see air-assault debate elsewhere). This means that to be truely effective you usually need one or more THawks to move them where they are needed - or you have to create a strategy around where you drop them. (Ok so I am less good at that). However the presence of THawks also tends towards an air-assault list, at least in part.
    (In this context, I welcome the LR Crusader as a balanced alternative for Terminator transport)

Without either Terminators or Warhounds, the Marines tend to struggle in a number of situations that are reasonably well documented. This in turn imposes strategic constraints on the army plays, and hence on the formations chosen. eg TRC says, he avoids titans, Hena majors on cross-fire etc

I am sure that the Marines can do without Warhounds, but am less sure about increasing the cost of Terminators is necessary and certainly not both. I would suggest that Warhounds are less prevalent in the 'fluff' than in the armies generally used in E:A. Consequently I would be in favour of reducing their availability in the list. However, I agree with Meph that Terminators seem reasonably balanced in the context of their inbuilt weakness of relative imobility. So I would not recommend changing them.
Author:  Simulated Knave [ Mon Oct 18, 2010 2:11 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Can marines be balanced without Warhounds and terminator
There are units which should probably be in every Space Marine army.

However, I think it would be fair to say that units in the allies section should not reasonably be one of them.

Terminators shouldn't entirely be that sort of unit, either, but it's more justifiable than Titans.
Author:  Tim_nz [ Tue Oct 26, 2010 5:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Can marines be balanced without Warhounds and terminator
For what its worth i hardly ever take terminators, i like the assualt marines persoanlly i think they are great value for there points.
and as mentioned above just because something is used often doesnt mean its unbalanced, and in a marine list the real options of mixing things up arent huge anyway in my eyes, they do what they are designed to do, hit hard and fast.
I dont really see a issue with people taking staple units that work within lists, and based on the premiss that if units are always appearing in armies changes are needed then once changed something else will become a main stay then that will need changing and so foth and so forth right ? where do you draw the line ?

Just my 5 cents worth :)


Cheers


Tim NZ
Author:  Simulated Knave [ Tue Oct 26, 2010 5:51 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Can marines be balanced without Warhounds and terminator
I think the issue is at least as much that the staple units appear to be units that should be relatively uncommon in a Space Marine army. If it were Tactical Detachments I don't think anyone would mind nearly as much.
Author:  The_Real_Chris [ Fri Oct 29, 2010 2:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Can marines be balanced without Warhounds and terminator
I echo SK - yes there is no problem per say if they are essential, but it comes down to theme, style and whatnot. Since when were warhounds standard chapter equipment? And aren't terminators 1/10 of the avalible manpower?

But conversly - try taking marines without them, it is extremely hard. Surely that indicates problems elsewhere? Or is a lack of dimensions ok?
Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/