Disagreed; They do pretty much the same thing as Devastators, in that they put out about the same in Firefight hits (In fact, they'll lay slightly more hits in a firefight (3 versus 2.66), and that's disregarding the Rhinos' shots), and trade a bit of ranged firepower for extra survivability and outnumbering resistance in Engagements.

When airborne, Tacticals can take a Dreadnought to fill up a Thunderhawk.

What Tacticals don't do exceptionally well is character upgrades, as they're naturally going to work better with unit types that can roll 3's rather than 4's.

At 250pts, I'd happily take whole armies of Tactical Marine formations.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

In a THawk Devs and Assaults are superior to Tacs.

On the ground Tacs are superior. Especially when fielded with Rhinos, 9 units with ATSKNF is handy.

I think they might carry a bit more of the premium that comes with SR5 and 1+ init.

I have been using speeders as a garrison. Its been working ok for me, what does everyone else think of this tactic?

Perfect.

I love Land Speeders. One of my favourite strategies is to take a formation of 4 Multi-Meltas and 1 Typhoon.

That gives flexibility, the ability to reach out and lay blast markers almost anywhere on the board as preparation for a Thunderhawk attack, and of course they still have great firefight abilities.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Hang on... I thought garrisoning could only be done by units that moved 15cm?

_________________
That's not a moon....it's a space station....

And scouts...

I never have the points left to try the typhoon, is it really worth that 25pts. I personally like the 5+MW shots honestly. But maybe I will try it some time.

That's why Devs/Assaults cost 75 points more than Tacs/Dread.

It absolutely is worth the points. The high to-hit values for the Typhoon's weapons mean that double moving does not hinder their firepower as much as the other weapon loads. A full formation of 5 Typhoons will lay down a lot of fire at good range, nearly anyplace on the board, and can use pop-up to protect themselves from return fire.

Personally, I'm not as keen on E&C's mixed formation but I think that's because it doesn't suit my style as well rather than because it's inherently problematic.

Check the garrisoning rules in the tourney scenario, formations need to meet one of the three criteria in order to garrison.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

Not just on a points per effectiveness rating though.

Why do you think there is effectiveness that is disproportionate to the point difference?

The only time they are clearly better is if you have an air assault target that is vulnerable to a mix of FF and CC. If you want to go pure FF or pure CC, the numbers are only slightly in favor of Devs/Assaults. Most of the time after an air assault you've lost most of the lead formation, so the difference in formation count after landing is nominal. If you want to land/shoot, it's 8 shots either way (assuming the 2-shot Dread).

For the point difference, that seems about right to me.

They also significantly increase the effective range of the formation, they may not kill anything (although their weapon is pretty decent) but a blast marker is a blast marker. I'm not convinced by a full formation (325 points for 5 light vehicles is just asking for trouble IMO) but 1 per 'speeder formation is definitely worth 25 points, even if it doesn't kill anything all game.

That's not quite what I meant Neal. My fault I posted in haste.

Firstly I wasn't exclusively referring to Tacs+Dread vs Devs+Assault as a THawk load. As you have explained that is about right for the cost.

I mean that Devs and/or Assaults are better used in a THawk than on the ground. For a few reasons.
1. The "maximum potential" is higher. If you can get all 8 attacks on 3+ compared to 4+.
2. You have the option of adding 2 characters, increasing the potential further.
3. You have the chance of 2 formations to act in subsequent turns (even if one of them is rather depleted it can still claim objectives and/or require a full enemy activation to remove).
4. Devs and Assaults are "best used" for engagements when intact, when they deploy on the ground the chance of that is less than when using them by THawk.
5. A mono-load Thawk (2x assault or 2x dev) is better suited to pick on the relevent vulnerability of enemy formations.

As Devs and Assaults are more "specialised" than Tacs the ability of the THawk to pick out a suitable target is more valuable to them than for Tacs.

By contrast Tacs, mainly due to their greater numbers (and flexibility), are better as ground units IMO. They gain the largest number of units by doing so (3 rhinos). They are best suited as a place for the SC (you want your SC on the board at all times, and Tacs have the numbers to better protect him). They are also a better place for hunters (again extra ablative units). Also as a ground unit they are more likely to be targeted by enemy units seeking to take advantage of your formations weaknesses, and Tacs don't have a specific CC/FF weakness.