[Izzleydill]

I think space marine scouts are one of the most underused units in the game. For 100 points I can outflank with a unit with 4/4 S/T and when assualting has a powerfist with 3 attacks, and 12 other attacks. They are also a great stalling unit. If you infiltrate with 4 snipers and 1 ML and camo cloaks, and put it as deep into your enemy's territory as possible, your going to stall a lot of his army for 2+ turns. you can target rear and side armor on vehicles with ML, or go to ground with a 2+ cover save to increase stall time. Or give them a bunch of close combat weapons (except for ML) to starve off the eventual assualt. In objective games you can hassle opponets objectives early, or come in late and steal it from under there noses. I think people are too focused on what they kill, and not how they help. They can make their point costs worth in ways other then killing people by tieing up units and opening up the enemy for the rest of your troops.

Is it just me, or do you rarely see scouts. And if so, is it just the sniper variation with maybe tellion? Am I just plain crazy?

 

[Vaz]

I think you're overestimating their WS and BS3 when they're dealing with dedicated assault units. Shooting is horrendous - 100pts with 5 weapons means 3 shots, and one wound, of which that is likely to be saved on monsters, or of no real issue to Hordes.

There's not much help there when the average marine army consists of around 50-60 models in any case, and you're taking away valuable points on stuff that is both psychologically damaging to your opponent (i.e those 100 pts could go towards a Vindicator or Sternguard Squad, which are infinately more damaging and helpful), and physically more dangerous.

 

[Izzleydill]

that's my entire point. Everyone is so focused on how much can I kill with this specific unit that they don't field scouts, instead of thinking about how much protection they can give other units through distraction or how they can make a vehicle turn around, giving the rest of the army a good shot at its side. And I never said they kill what their points are worth, infact they rarely do. Its all about stalling the enemy, making them concentrate on them. When I make 800 points of the enemy waste 2 full turns shooting at them, while the rest of my army gets in poisition and pours in heavy fire into the enemy, the scouts end up helping way more then the 100 point cost.

 

[Vaz]

They don't stall the enemy though, because they are that useless.

They lose, what? A Gaunt/Ork a turn at best? Stalling the enemy? It's no good tbh, if you can't capitalize on that.

Say if you've got Scouts to hold the enemy up, and the enemy takes the bait - they will be wiped out, easily. That means your marines would have not taken another round of shooting.

But, if you had not taken those Scouts, those Marines/Vindicator you had in the first place would have been able to take out far more, meaning less coming back at you.

For... what, 3pts less than a Bog Standard Marine, if you Infiltrate, you lose a round of shooting, one point of BS, and one point of WS. Infiltrate isn't worth that at all, and in an army as poor in the meta game as the SM's, you're going to need to get the benefit out of everything you can.

And I know it's not exactly encouraging, but pretty much everything has been done and tried before. if it's not commonplace by now (after... a year and a bit?), then it's almost certainly not worth being competitive with, and as many of these lists in this section are built for criticism to get them competitive, it's quite obvious that both SM Scouts and SMs in general aren't going to be 123ing any GT's coming up.

 

[hippypancake]

back in the ol' days when sniper rifles needed 2s to hit and 4s to wound regardless of anything I ran a full army of scouts but alas when you need double 4s to wound a target it becomes to much of a hassle to really kill anything

 

[lsarofeen]

ol days @ 16 years old?! i know the uk has an old culture, but when their youth start using the phrase, 'back in the ol days'.. i just don't know, probably shouldn't have said anything.

 

[Stella Cadente]

Its all this competitive BS thats the problem these days, if your not tailoring your list to be the best of the best (or copy pasting off a forum and pretending your a good player) and table your opponent in 2 or 3 turns your just not playing properly, and people are VERY quick to point this out and be very vocal about it.

if you want to use scouts use them, just be prepared to get the annoying small minded people coming along telling you your army is shit and your shit and nobody loves you and your never gonna win a game ever.

another problem is all this maths and percentages and averages bollocks "ooh your scouts are shit cus you will only EVER kill 1 person", rubbish, people like that need to shut up and pick up some bloody dice and roll them for a change, instead of working out the average of every turn of every game and not even needing to play, heck why buy models in the first place, just get pen and paper and play with maths.

are scouts useful?, bloody right they are, sure there not great alone, but you charge them into a unit already being attacked or add there shooting to another units and there brilliant, there support units, not main core choices like average lovers seem to think, and thats there problem, they sound like experts, but they have no clue what to do with a unit outside there happy dull box of a mind.

I'd take them, and you'll probably find the small minority of people who realise this is a game with toy soldiers and NOT a competition to see who is the biggest asshole would take them also, there very good when used properly, cheaper than your basic marines to help you get numbers up, and very much underestimated choices.

its just those few that do probably use them don't want the hassle of stating they do use them and having to defend there decisions against people who don't like what toys you buy.

 

[gen.ahab]

Ok, I will be the first person to tell you you have a shitty list if you are asking for help building a GOOD list, but I am not going to say it is shit unless you are actually asking for help. There is nothing wrong with helping a new player out with a list if he needs it and there is nothing wrong with asking for help if you need it.

 

[KingOfCheese]

In the competitive scene, scouts are generally a poor choice.
There are much better options for the points.

But in a friendly game, as Stella said, who gives a fuck about competition.
Its a game, and is played for fun, and a majority of the fun comes from running an army how YOU want to run it regardless of how "effective" it is.

 

[Vaz]

Stella get off your fucking high horse. We're in a tactics discussion forum - where to get the best out of units or armies - and hence competitively - you make reasons as to why.

If we had your way, we might as well just get rid of the tactics section and army list section in general.

If the answer is just going to be "ignore these cunts who only talk competitively, play what you want", just put that as the header, and disable all posting. Because, I mean, who cares about tactics, or reasons why units do, or don't work, when all you want to do is play a game fun?

Just because people don't play it YOUR way doesn't mean we can't play it ours. I'll happily play a list using whatever I've got to hand, and whatever my opponent has, and regularly do. However, I don't play a game for my own enjoyment to only get destroyed game after game - so I'll also take myself a competitive army.

Don't come in every single fucking thread about how particular units do and don't work, or competitive tactics, and whine like a 13 year old bitch. It's getting tiresome. We get the picture, you don't like tournaments.

I don't particularly like you - but you don't see me kicking off every time you post.

 

[lsarofeen]

wow. i'd say youre both in the right. stella is saying that they are just toys and every unit is viable because 40k is greater than just tournament play, where vazs' point is that this is a discussion about elite tactics and viability, for scouts. Both very valid.

Yet, both of you are wrong in taking it so very personal.

calm down and back away from your keyboards, find some fresh air and a glass of water. Life is a whole lot bigger than Warhammer 40k... that's what my wife tells me anyway

 

[Capt.Al'rahhem]

We're in a tactics discussion forum - where to get the best out of units or armies - and hence competitively - you make reasons as to why.

If we had your way, we might as well just get rid of the tactics section and army list section in general.

If the answer is just going to be "ignore these cunts who only talk competitively, play what you want", just put that as the header, and disable all posting. Because, I mean, who cares about tactics, or reasons why units do, or don't work, when all you want to do is play a game fun?

I have to agree with Stella, if not his tone and attitude.

What you're say there is exactly what's wrong with the Tactics & Army List Sections and that is that the discussion always has to about what's competitive or not competitive. It doesn't have to be that way.

To say there is no need to discuss tactics for a "fun game" is arrogant and ignorant. Fun games are all about tactics, it's just not about what unit is the "best for it's points" or "works best". Tactics can also involve using not the "best" unit to accomplish something or using what you have at hand to overcome obstacles, like actual military commanders do. Tactics is using everything that's available to you to achieve a goal, just because your playing for fun doesn't mean your not trying to achieve objectives.

Most of the major tactical geniuses, IRL, are thought of as such because the won battles when the didn't have the "best" army or the "best" weapons. For those of us trying to have "fun" while playing this great game, that is what we're trying to emulate. Building an army like we see that army being made up of in the fluff, with things we think are cool and then using it to try and achieve objectives on the field.

I see what Stella is angry about and that is competitive players have for the most part taken over this Forum, and most others I'd imagine, and only want to talk about the way they play. They are also condescending and dismissive of others views and ideas. I think allot of us want to talk about fun and fluff but are shut out by overbearing competitive players.

As I've always said there is no right or wrong way to play the game, it's your game, play it the way you want. I don't dislike competitive players at all, I just wish they'd learn to tone it down a bit and be able to talk about some non-standard tactics & Army list. Without throwing out the "take whatever you want, if you want to lose all the time" card, all the time.

As always these are just my opinions and there is no right or wrong, just different ways of looking at things.

 

[unixknight]

Sadly, as a Black Templars player the idea of Scouts generally amounts to little more than meat shields, since the only common use for scout models in a BT army is Neophytes that are part of a Crusader squad.

(For those unfamiliar with BT organization, our regular space marines come in only one type of unit-Crusader Squads which can be a mix of Initiates and Neophytes.)

If I were playing a regular Space Marine force I'd use scouts to guard flanks and harass my opponent with a unit they might be tempted to ignore.

 

[Stella Cadente]

Stella get off your fucking high horse. We're in a tactics discussion forum - where to get the best out of units or armies - and hence competitively - you make reasons as to why.

then why don't people discuss tactics on getting the best out of there units instead of labeling 90% of every codex as crap, and actually helping people with there army lists instead of just telling them to copy the latest bullshit 2 turn winning list available to them, spouting averages and statistics like its going out of fashion and not actually helping anyone with actual tactics.

maybe there should be a competetive tactics section, so you can all repeat "don't take unit X its shit, spam unit Y and MECH!!!!! to make your list the same as player ABCDEFGHI etc"

thats not a tactics discussion, thats a be a lazy ass and copy this discussion.

 

[Katie Drake]

then why don't people discuss tactics on getting the best out of there units

Because nobody that knows what they're doing wants to waste their time explaining how to make a sub-par unit perform half decently when you can just take a unit that doesn't suck and use intelligent tactics to make it incredibly useful.

 

[Stella Cadente]

Because nobody that knows what they're doing wants to waste their time explaining how to make a sub-par unit perform half decently when you can just take a unit that doesn't suck and use intelligent tactics to make it incredibly useful.

sounds like there just plain lazy then, just as I've said all along, if they don't wanna waste there time helping people use units they think are "sub-par" then maybe they are the ones who shouldn't be wasting everyones time in tactic and list sections.

and how would they know a unit is sub-par without using it?, and maybe its sub-par because these people "who know what there doing" have no idea what there doing at all, and so stick to two dimensional lists that require no brain power to use

its like these people are on some crusade given out by oliver cromwell, to destroy all forms of fun, and turn 40k into a stale boring game where everyone uses the exact same army in the exact same way, no deviation from that path.

 

[gen.ahab]

Ok, we can go into an indepth discussion as to why BC(X) arn't as good as GH(Y), stat line and point cost should make that obvious to most people, but wouldn't you just prefer I tell you unit Y is better than unit X; you should use unit Y more often?

 

[Stella Cadente]

Ok, we can go into an indepth discussion as to why BC(X) arn't as good as GH(Y), stat line and point cost should make that obvious to most people, but wouldn't you just prefer I tell you unit Y is better than unit X; you should use unit Y more often?

no, because if I want to use X I should be told ways on using X effectively, its far more helpful than just saying Y is better, which true or not doesn't help me use X.

thats the problem these days, thats all people will say, they don't say why Y is better (despite how obvious it is to vets new players don't know though do they, but as katie said why should you waste time explaining to them, even though it means your actually better for doing so), they don't say why X is worse, they don't give situations where either is better or worse than the other, nobody just bothers, its just X is shit, Y is good and no helpful advice.

but as said, why should you.

 

[gen.ahab]

In list sections, most people are asking for advice on how to make their list more effective... Wouldn't I be remiss if I did not tell them how to get the most out of the codex?

 

[Stella Cadente]

In list sections, most people are asking for advice on how to make their list more effective... Wouldn't I be remiss if I did not tell them how to get the most out of the codex?

thats the point though, they ask for how to make there list effective, not how to completely change the structure of it, if someone has brought everything in there list your telling them they should buy more toys because its too much of an effort to help them use what they have.

by all means suggest different units to take, but at least have the decency to also suggest how to use what they have, because that option is not always viable.

I would be extremely pissed off if all I got as advice was "X unit sucks, take Y unit instead, and no I shall not waste my time explaining why or how to use X properly", its one reason I stopped posting list