Dawn of War Codex

I've noticed more and more players across the board going hard on basic tier 1 infantry, and with space marine players in particular, more players are forgoing tactical marines in tier 1 over a pair of scout marines, as double scouts give similar damage, but greater map presence and early upgrades for the scout marine can be more powerful against early units.

I feel like the high value of scouts in general has somewhat displaced the unique advantages of the tactical marine squad, and I feel that, by comparison to similar types of units (chaos space marines and GK strike squads) the high cost of the tactical marine dilutes its strengths by comparison.

While I cannot deny that as of right now tactical marines are most likely balanced, I feel that they are none the less underused in favor of the early utility of scouts, or the focused strength of devastators and assault marines. I would like to see tacticals become more affordable, and their ability to weapon swap freely and capture points faster become the "focus" of that unit.

To do this, I would like the cost of Tactical marines be reduced to 400 requisition and their reinforcement cost reduced to 70 (upkeep reduced to 11 and red reduced from 18 to 16). In order to preserve balance, I would suggest reducing tactical marine HP down to retail value of 325, and i'll explain why:

The two unique features of tactical marines are:
A) enhanced capture speed... and
B) versatile weapons and unrestricted weapon swaps

Baring tactical marines being too squishy, health has little to no bearing on capture speed, so a loss of 25 hp for reduced cost and better availability only improves the tactical marines ability to make use of it's enhanced capture speed.

A similar feature arises for the tactical marine's weapons: a tactical marine squad with a flamethrower for gen bashing or breaking cover, while inconvenienced by the reduction in health, will not see a significant reduction in performance of that role. This is the same for a missile AV tactical squad, in that situation as well, the missile launcher is the most important part of the squad, and it is less likely that the tactical squad will be toward the front of any engagement with that weapon.

However, in order to emphasize the focus on the ability to weapon swap and the ability to adapt tacticals to any situation, I would propose lastly a reduction in upgrade time of tactical squad weapons from 15 seconds to 10 seconds. I believe that, combined with being cheaper overall, will help solidify the unique spot in the space marine army for tactical marines and encourage their use without harming general balance in any way.

The point is to emphasis the unique versatility of the tactical marine squad, beyond being a slightly different and more expensive pair of scouts rolled into one squad.

(I am aware that chaos space marines cost 400 req and have 325 hp also thank you, them being too similar isn't really a concern to me)

Tacts are fine, there is nothing to add.

I didnt say tacticals weren't fine, and i'm not adding anything.

It was more of statement that scouts are more cost effective than tacticals, so I feel like unless I absolutely need tacticals as a direct counter to something, It's always better to just get scouts instead.

I would love if someone would dispute that, because then I would feel less guilty when I buy them on a whim.

I dont know who ur playing. But if u skip tacts for scouts in a 1v1 expect to lose.

xerrol nanoha wrote:I didnt say tacticals weren't fine, and i'm not adding anything.

It was more of statement that scouts are more cost effective than tacticals, so I feel like unless I absolutely need tacticals as a direct counter to something, It's always better to just get scouts instead.

I would love if someone would dispute that, because then I would feel less guilty when I buy them on a whim.

They both have their place I don't see where you place scouts on a higher position than tacts, tacts draw fire,do most of the initial dps and support in various ways in the different tiers, scouts are there to annoy the opponent and provide intel + repair/anti melee support.

xerrol nanoha wrote:I've noticed more and more players across the board going hard on basic tier 1 infantry, and with space marine players in particular, more players are forgoing tactical marines in tier 1 over a pair of scout marines, as double scouts give similar damage, but greater map presence and early upgrades for the scout marine can be more powerful against early units.

I feel like the high value of scouts in general has somewhat displaced the unique advantages of the tactical marine squad, and I feel that, by comparison to similar types of units (chaos space marines and GK strike squads) the high cost of the tactical marine dilutes its strengths by comparison.

While I cannot deny that as of right now tactical marines are most likely balanced, I feel that they are none the less underused in favor of the early utility of scouts, or the focused strength of devastators and assault marines. I would like to see tacticals become more affordable, and their ability to weapon swap freely and capture points faster become the "focus" of that unit.

To do this, I would like the cost of Tactical marines be reduced to 400 requisition and their reinforcement cost reduced to 70 (upkeep reduced to 11 and red reduced from 18 to 16). In order to preserve balance, I would suggest reducing tactical marine HP down to retail value of 325, and i'll explain why:

The two unique features of tactical marines are:
A) enhanced capture speed... and
B) versatile weapons and unrestricted weapon swaps

Baring tactical marines being too squishy, health has little to no bearing on capture speed, so a loss of 25 hp for reduced cost and better availability only improves the tactical marines ability to make use of it's enhanced capture speed.

A similar feature arises for the tactical marine's weapons: a tactical marine squad with a flamethrower for gen bashing or breaking cover, while inconvenienced by the reduction in health, will not see a significant reduction in performance of that role. This is the same for a missile AV tactical squad, in that situation as well, the missile launcher is the most important part of the squad, and it is less likely that the tactical squad will be toward the front of any engagement with that weapon.

However, in order to emphasize the focus on the ability to weapon swap and the ability to adapt tacticals to any situation, I would propose lastly a reduction in upgrade time of tactical squad weapons from 15 seconds to 10 seconds. I believe that, combined with being cheaper overall, will help solidify the unique spot in the space marine army for tactical marines and encourage their use without harming general balance in any way.

The point is to emphasis the unique versatility of the tactical marine squad, beyond being a slightly different and more expensive pair of scouts rolled into one squad.

(I am aware that chaos space marines cost 400 req and have 325 hp also thank you, them being too similar isn't really a concern to me)

It seems every few days you post about wanting to change something in the game. Yet I don't see you at the top levels of game play. I am not sure your in a position to be suggesting balance changes. As ace said, Tacs are fine. In fact I think they are one of the few things in the game that are perfect.

Lol, this thread. No, tacs are extremely viable at the moment. I often go 2x tacs, especially vs eldar or other SM, even in 1v1.

The modern 1v1 SM meta pretty much requires 3 scouts or 2 tacs, depending on opponent's race.

0 wrong with tacs.

Gorilla wrote:It seems every few days you post about wanting to change something in the game. Yet I don't see you at the top levels of game play. I am not sure your in a position to be suggesting balance changes.

Why is this or should this even be a criteria?
I find the original post to make a lot of sense.

Tactical Marines are quite an amazing t1 unit and are in no need of any sort of change. Might be because I main FC but I think they are one of the best t1 units.

Since they offer like you said a faster capping rate.

They are also quite tanky.

For how much ranged dps they put out they are also great in melee.

They also have a great ability "Kraken Bolts" which works in melee as well as with any weapon they are equipped with.

One for infantry or blobbing(flamer), one for HI and SHI (plasma gun) and one for vehicles (missle launcher).

And just like you said, they can switch between these.

Then there is their leader. Who does everything a normal tacs does but is more badass and gives tacs They Shall Know No Fear (love that ability).

So honest to god, Tactical Marines are most defiantly tactical enough.

Idk if anybody else would agree but the reason I get scouts is for map control and on demand knock back and suppression.

to me, the problem with the SM roster comes in t2 with the libby and whirlwind, and in t3 with vanguards (they are pretty good, but the transition from ASM to vanguard doesn't make natural sense) plus how easy are termies to counter now.

Tacticals in t1 are pretty good, they don't scale as good as other units tho, tzeentch marines, catachans, GMs, even dire avengers will surpass tacticals later on. It would be awesome if sternguards were moved to t3 but they had some of their ammos buffed and they kept their levels

Bahamut wrote:to me, the problem with the SM roster comes in t2 with the libby and whirlwind, and in t3 with vanguards (they are pretty good, but the transition from ASM to vanguard doesn't make natural sense) plus how easy are termies to counter now.

Tacticals in t1 are pretty good, they don't scale as good as other units tho, tzeentch marines, catachans, GMs, even dire avengers will surpass tacticals later on. It would be awesome if sternguards were moved to t3 but they had some of their ammos buffed and they kept their levels

how tacticals scales bad?DA never surpass tacticals...One of the main strength of tacticals dps is that they dont loose the main weapon dps, when they loose model.
Sternguards cant be in T3, they are needed in T2.

and about the T2 roster, i wont start speaking about that here.

I have to say, I agree with a few of the OP's points.

It would be nice if dynamic tactical marine play was incentivized through special weapon pricing/upgrade time. More so than any other Tac weapon, I have the plasma gun in mind.

I also agree that Tactical Marine scaling into Tier 3 seems problematic. I'll leave it to more experienced SM players to confirm or deny my opinion, but I often feel as if late game Tacs become a missile launcher on legs and little else. Their bolter damage is pretty shoddy, and downright unnoticeable later in the game. Considering their high reinforcement cost and upkeep cost, it would be nice if they had some additional hitting power later in Tier 3.

I actually like the idea of SG serving this purpose. If the SG upgrade were moved to Tier 3, with the idea that it was a way of scaling up one Tac squad into more impactful late tier unit, I think that would make a good deal of sense. It would work in terms of the lore, it would help scale one Tac squad more aggressively, and it wouldn't be spammable because SG are limited to one unit per player. It would also diversify late tier SM play, which I think is pretty terminator focused.

I don't think SG are necessarily needed in Tier 2. In fact, I occasionally notice players on here complaining (usually regarding orcs, elder, nids) that SG hellfire rounds are difficult for certain factions to weather. Moving SG to tier 3, and improving their power, would help the factions that struggle with SG hellfire rounds in Tier 2 and help make SG a more interesting component of SM play. I recognize that the cost of the SG upgrade would need to increase proportionate to the effectiveness of the SG.

As soon as I saw "Tactical Marines..." in the title of this thread...I knew I was doomed to yammer on in here. Apologies.

(Note: I agree with Bahamut that most of the problems with SM play right now center on Tier 2 units like the Librarian and Whirlwind. If both of these were viable, SM Tier 2 would be very diverse (good for dynamic gameplay, player choice) and moving SG to Tier 3 would be an even more viable option for integrating Tacs into a lategame SM army)

They both got significant buffs come beta 9. The libby was already viable and the whirlwind will never be viable in 1v1, it isn't meant to be.

That Torpid Gamer wrote:They both got significant buffs come beta 9. The libby was already viable and the whirlwind will never be viable in 1v1, it isn't meant to be.

i think WW is viable vs eldar and orks
allows you to out range them and kill/harass the low hp vehicles.
ww is actually high threat to fireprism:)

EDIT PS:
WW default launcher should be able to turn around 360 degree and able to shoot, now it is something like 120-180 degree i guess

There was a time when tacs were concidered largely unviable for anyone but apo and 3 scouts bos were common. Not much (if anything apart from the missile launcher build time) has changed with tacs since then.

Guess people were bad at the game back then then?

Faultron wrote:how tacticals scales bad?

Because even when tacticals can be kited out to help in any situation, they don't get any direct upgrades where other squads do. For example, tacs are the tankiest squad in t1 right?, but then catas get more sergeants and they scale up to 2400 hp at lvl 4 where tacticals with sarge get 1850.

Dark Riku wrote:

Gorilla wrote:It seems every few days you post about wanting to change something in the game. Yet I don't see you at the top levels of game play. I am not sure your in a position to be suggesting balance changes.

Why is this or should this even be a criteria?
I find the original post to make a lot of sense.

This adds credibility. If this was a good post, or his one and only post on suggestions. It would carry more weight. For example, would you listen to ME about balancing the game regarding using the APO or you? (if you were an observer)

I think first hand knowledge at the top level gameplay of the game easily lends you credibility. For example, just a few days ago I saw toilalee do a double tac build and it was completely viable.

That Torpid Gamer wrote:The libby was already viable

No SM player ever gets this useless sub-commander. Buying this unit is like shooting yourself in the foot. Something you can't afford doing with the SM economy. There is no 1v1 game out there where a libby is used to good effect in equal level of play.

Gorilla wrote:This adds credibility. If this was a good post, or his one and only post on suggestions. It would carry more weight. For example, would you listen to ME about balancing the game regarding using the APO or you? (if you were an observer)

If it is something sound then yes. Why wouldn't I? ^^

Dark Riku wrote:

That Torpid Gamer wrote:The libby was already viable

No SM player ever gets this useless sub-commander. Buying this unit is like shooting yourself in the foot. Something you can't afford doing with the SM economy. There is no 1v1 game out there where a libby is used to good effect in equal level of play.

You have used libby vs me effectively many times and just cos he doesn't fit your playstyle that well doesn't mean hes bad. In fact aren't you always telling people something like "just cos you can't use it, it sucks XD ?", you should remember your own advice sometimes. :]

Libby is mostly fine, only thing that needs to be changed/fixed is his inability to retreat from force barrier.

And stop using that "shooting yourself in the foot" -thing. It's not that bad, you just get a nice adrenaline high from shooting yourself in the foot, and after that you might be brave enough to actually point the gun to your head instead.

I never meant to say that tactical marines are under or overpowered, or that there was any balance issue at all. I offered a commentary that I don't feel as much incentive to buy tactical marines as I wish I did, or feel that I should; Also that in recent games that I have seen from the ranked thread as well as from Indrid's casts I tend to see games that either delay tacticals in favor of multiple scouts, or just skip tacticals completely to get devastators or a fast tier 2.

Although scouts lack the HP of tactical marines, they do comparable damage for their cost (more than half damage and less than half cost). They also have superior movespeed, and with the ability to afford twice as many they can theoretically capture a pair of points as fast as tacticals can (since tacticals capture twice as fast).

Both shotguns and sniper rifles are very powerful in the early game, and I would say more valuable for combat than tactical flamethrowers (gen bashing aside). I will however give tacticals the benefit of kracken rounds against other heavy infantry, but I would say that following up on scouts with a devastator squad can give equal or better control of engagements with heavy infantry.

I will surrender that I don't have a great deal of personal experience or mechanical mastery, but that doesn't change what I see other players do, or feelings or thoughts I have when I play.

Bahamut wrote:

Faultron wrote:how tacticals scales bad?

Because even when tacticals can be kited out to help in any situation, they don't get any direct upgrades where other squads do. For example, tacs are the tankiest squad in t1 right?, but then catas get more sergeants and they scale up to 2400 hp at lvl 4 where tacticals with sarge get 1850.

I still dont understand, how tacticals scale badly into T2.In my opinion they are the best or one of the best.They get xp easy.
they dont get direct upgrades cos they are able to change weapons.catachans are not the counterpart of tacticals to using dat comparison.Tacticals are T1 standard unit, catachan T1.5 non standard unit+they have less range(+hp justified).Sentinel is more like the counterpart.(i dont play IG maybe i am wrong, but from my view i see like this)

Faultron wrote:

Bahamut wrote:

Faultron wrote:how tacticals scales bad?

Because even when tacticals can be kited out to help in any situation, they don't get any direct upgrades where other squads do. For example, tacs are the tankiest squad in t1 right?, but then catas get more sergeants and they scale up to 2400 hp at lvl 4 where tacticals with sarge get 1850.

I still dont understand, how tacticals scale badly into T2.In my opinion they are the best or one of the best.They get xp easy.
they dont get direct upgrades cos they are able to change weapons.catachans are not the counterpart of tacticals to using dat comparison.Tacticals are T1 standard unit, catachan T1.5 non standard unit+they have less range(+hp justified).Sentinel is more like the counterpart.(i dont play IG maybe i am wrong, but from my view i see like this)

i also think they scale badly. not actually because they were changed but because so many other things around them have changed.

former Times they were the most expensive T1 squad for reason.
at the very beginning they were the only T1 squad which had HI so they were able to easily outshoot everey other squad.
with chaos Rising Chaos came into play and had also HI - so tacs got the Kraken bolts and the ability to switch wheapons. also they had more damage at all than CSM.

nowadays tyranids can also switch wheapons (which is ridicolus), which means this exclusive strength is gone.
overall its much easier to counter HI now due to Reapers, plsama guns at GM, Powerblades at Catas, BL and many other things which just did not exist before ELITE and in some cases even before retribution.

being a HI squad is no more what it was former times... sometimes its even an issue.

well then Sternguard. a quite good upgrade actually, if you are still level 1 with your tacs, but not if you were good at the time when teire strengh is still there (T1)
then Sternguard gives nothing what a even cheaper Upgrade cant give. (e.g. Hellfire < Flamer, Kraken < Plasma)
so sternguard are good as repurchase if you lost your tacs or if they didnt do much in T1 but not if you have a fast vehicle to deal with since the vangence Rounds do have no snare, less dmg and less range than a missile launcher.

in T3 tacs are even worse since they have nothing which is really good vs strong vehicles or SHI.

Tacs nerver have been bad, but they remain the same where many other things became better. or at least more dangerous for tacs. (i dont think that Bloodletters are better, but they are a much bigger thread to tacs now)
there was a time where SM spam (4+ squads was uncounterable)

so but actually i dont think they need to be changed.
i would like to switch wheapons for free (if it was purchased once) thou
they are a very good, very versatile core unit for SM, but SM really lacks things with Impact.
there the libby discussion comes into play. he just is that no more.

And shoota boyz scale fantastically into t3 don't they? Hmm, I wonder why flash gitz and kommandoz even exist when shoota boyz have such good tier scaling.

That Torpid Gamer wrote:And shoota boyz scale fantastically into t3 don't they? Hmm, I wonder why flash gitz and kommandoz even exist when shoota boyz have such good tier scaling.

that's exactly the point torpid

Bahamut wrote:

That Torpid Gamer wrote:And shoota boyz scale fantastically into t3 don't they? Hmm, I wonder why flash gitz and kommandoz even exist when shoota boyz have such good tier scaling.

that's exactly the point torpid

Because Flash Gits don't literally lol at shuris and things like that ?
And kommandos are a fantastic unit, AV, burna bomb is amazing and they counter melee pretty easily..

My point was that in t3 shootas are next to useless, tacs certainly aren't. Shootas aren't phasing vehicles or SHI, tacs can. Most other t1 ranged squads are only useful in t3 for their abilities (crippling poison/awd/repair/worship), except for tacs, they're the only one which scales so well vs both SHI and vehicles and then they have the whole sternguard option on top of that.

Paint me biased, but I dont expect some units to scale better than others, for fluff reasons alone.

I'd hope very much (tactical) Space Marines still be a force even in later stages of the game ( at the same time for example I dont expect lets say Scout to scale at all )

Orkfaeller wrote:Paint me biased, but I dont expect some units to scale better than others, for fluff reasons alone.

I'd hope very much (tactical) Space Marines still be a force even in later stages of the game ( at the same time for example I dont expect lets say Scout to scale at all )

But with immortal srgts scouts scale extremely well all the way into t3.