I am curious how the other C:SM players out there have been doing with the codex in 6th Ed. Have you guys been winning your games lately? I do ALRIGHT, but I'd say I am about 50% wins right now (most losses are to new codexes), as opposed to about 90% from last edition. The tanks seem to be near useless in my experience, all transports seem to do for me is give opponents first blood, and the troops in general seem lackluster.
So the question I'm asking is how have other people been doing? Have you been winning against the newer codexes consistently? Are you guys looking forward to the new codex to make marines viable again? Am I just doing everything completely wrong in the new ed?
I wanted to ask this prior to the new release, because i'm curious about how strong the army is and I will be curious to see how it changes.
I clean clocks. I win about 80-90% of my games, and from what I've seen of the new 'dex, it's going to be a case of the rich getting richer. I play a Salamanders Drop Pod army, and this edition has been pretty good to me so far. The grenades rules are pretty awesome, truth be told, and have done a whole lot of good for me.
I definitely see the benefit of multiple drop pods, my sternguard are consistently effective. I only have one though, and would surely benefit from more. I also play with no special characters, maybe that would help.
Guess i'm the only person with this issue? It seems to me that theres not really a stand-out unit for the space marines, and they are all a bit expensive, so I usually cant take a devastator squad, a tactical squad, and an assault squad to meet whatever roles I might need them to fill.
I get outshot by Tau, out melee'd by monstorous creatures and a number of other races, and generally feel second class, but maybe it's my bad rolls as well. I've had a number of situations where things SHOULD have gone my way, and the dice had something else to say....
Oh well, maybe i'll have more luck with the new codex.
If you're wanting units that perform well consistently, then in the previous edition I can say that Sternguard, Tactical Marines, and Assault Terminators with Storm Shields and Thunder Hammers were easily the work horses of my army. (Honestly, once you mix Vulcan and some dedicated transports into the mix, you've got all you need right there.) Don't know how they'll hold up with the new 'dex, though.
AtariAssasin wrote: I am curious how the other C:SM players out there have been doing with the codex in 6th Ed. Have you guys been winning your games lately? I do ALRIGHT, but I'd say I am about 50% wins right now (most losses are to new codexes), as opposed to about 90% from last edition. The tanks seem to be near useless in my experience, all transports seem to do for me is give opponents first blood, and the troops in general seem lackluster.
So the question I'm asking is how have other people been doing? Have you been winning against the newer codexes consistently? Are you guys looking forward to the new codex to make marines viable again? Am I just doing everything completely wrong in the new ed?
I wanted to ask this prior to the new release, because i'm curious about how strong the army is and I will be curious to see how it changes.
The 5th ed Dex was my favourite of that edition for many reasons, but the biggest is the fact that the Marines had an answer for everything.
I've seen some really cheesy 6th ed Tau and Eldar lists fold to the 5th ed book just because Marines had the most balanced book and it rewarded a good player with a great gaming experience.
While this in no means is a frequent occurrence or easy feat, it was possible for the Marine Codex to beat nearly any 6th ed book.
I bought the New Dex today and I like it as much as the last. It had big boots to fill for me and Cruddace has done a great job of keeping the balance while adding in some great new stuff.
Marines still have major weaknesses though... 3+ saves are easy to ignore, Marine armies are also quite small... Etc.
Yes there is some cheese... Devastator Centurions with Grav Cannons, Amps and ML for one, are incredibly OP, but thankfully have a huge price tag.
The old favourites are still in the book, like Bike Armies (which are very very powerful in this book with the White Scars rules) and new ones like Honour Guard armies, which sound good, but I think the jury is still out on.
While I didn't field a vanilla Marine army in 5th (Orks, GK and Deathwing instead), I certainly want to now.
I was very successful with the 5th edition Codex: Space Marines in 6th edition. The 6th edition Codex looks like it will make my armies more or less strictly better. I anticipate great success.
I think the new C:SM codex basically sucks. Tau and Eldar are going to shoot it off table just like what is happening right now. Remember that once you drop in, your marines are then footsloggers, ie dead men.
Martel732 wrote: I think the new C:SM codex basically sucks. Tau and Eldar are going to shoot it off table just like what is happening right now. Remember that once you drop in, your marines are then footsloggers, ie dead men.
While I don't share your opinion on the book, I do agree that Marines are easy to kill.
I think Marines are quite fragile in the meta right now and are going to need a great deal of finesse to play in the top tiers vs the Xenos and Heretic 6th ed books.
Eldar, Tau and some CSM lists have crazy amounts of answers for 3+ saves.
Martel732 wrote: Yes, which means this book sucks, as it does absolutely nothing to change that.
The anti-air tanks needed to be upgrades to the Rhino.
Thats like saying the Tau book sucks because it did nothing to change the fact they are bad at cc.
How do you think they could have changed the Marine army?
Space marines need a better transport option, maybe something fast, or something AV12, or another assault/opentop vehicle. Just anything that can give them both durability & speed & doesn't cost 250 or crumple like a tin can(rhino). Maybe something to help them get into CC. Make the ubiquitous heavy bolter better(why do only scouts get hellfire shells?). Reduce the points cost of the LR, predator & dread to make them worth their points. Open up the weapon options so anyone can get grav-cannons or let assault squads take grav-rifles/melta/plasma guns, reduce the points cost of plasma/grav pistols. Allow mixed units of terminators & make them cheaper. Maybe give us a tank with grav weapons, or landspeeders. I'm sure I can think of more but these are just off the top of my head.
Also giving more models the chance to get locator beacons would be great. O 1 more, make Chaplains elite & make them more useful or reduce their points cost.
Martel732 wrote: Yes, which means this book sucks, as it does absolutely nothing to change that.
The anti-air tanks needed to be upgrades to the Rhino.
Thats like saying the Tau book sucks because it did nothing to change the fact they are bad at cc.
How do you think they could have changed the Marine army?
Space marines need a better transport option, maybe something fast, or something AV12, or another assault/opentop vehicle. Just anything that can give them both durability & speed & doesn't cost 250 or crumple like a tin can(rhino). Maybe something to help them get into CC. Make the ubiquitous heavy bolter better(why do only scouts get hellfire shells?). Reduce the points cost of the LR, predator & dread to make them worth their points. Open up the weapon options so anyone can get grav-cannons or let assault squads take grav-rifles/melta/plasma guns, reduce the points cost of plasma/grav pistols. Allow mixed units of terminators & make them cheaper. Maybe give us a tank with grav weapons, or landspeeders. I'm sure I can think of more but these are just off the top of my head.
Also giving more models the chance to get locator beacons would be great.
I can see some of your points.
Well... Fast rhinos and Razorbacks are sole property of the Blood Angels and no, it doesnt work for them. They still have to get out to do anything good. So that's one turn of death. Marines also do not have open topped transports. It's a complete antithesis to the Marine fluff and flavour in game.
Can agree with the Heavy Bolter opinion.
I don't think the Land Raiders need a reduction in points. I used them in my DW list and found the Crusaders are basically a Tactical Squad that shields and moves my guys to where they need to go.
The regular Predator is a fairly priced tank. The Las variant is not and should come down in price.
I agree with the Dread opinion. I like Dreads a lot, but I never take them cuz they suck in anything bigger than 1000 point games.
As for mixed units of Terminators, only DW and to a point, SW get those. I played DW for two editions so I know it works, but again... Fluff and flavour.
My biggest gripe with the new codex is point costs -- especially with Tac marines.
The costs of bodies went down, but their equipment all went up. Net result: It all costs about the same, and they still suffer from the same fragility as before. It's still 220 points for a Melta, Multi-Melta, Combi-Melta squad in a Drop Pod (I play Salamders) as it was in the previous codex.
We have a lot of powerful tools, but in order to bring them, we have to break the bank -- limiting the rest of our list.
Tac marines became a pretty poor option when the new Tau, Eldar, and CSM books came out and not much changed that in the new codex. They became cheaper at the cost of reduced firepower and still die all the same. Maybe the troop choice will start shifting to Scouts more. They are cheaper, die pretty much the same (3+/4+ are essentially the same against Eldar), end up getting better cover saves through Camo cloaks and got a new dedicated transport.
But now you can toss out 3 5 man tac pods and 3 ten man stern pods and then a master with 9 honor guard in a 7 th pod. That's one heck of and alpha. I can still shoe horn in a talon and a raven too. Not too shabby.
If you think the predator is fairly priced go try & trade it for your buddies WS in a game, or a vendetta, or an ani-barge, etc... The space marine vehicle options are sub par when compared to any other codex. Well maybe not sisters, but they don't really have a codex :(. As for the LR, I'd much rather have an AV 13 or 14 assault vehicle with no weapons whatsoever for the price of a lc pred.
It would be a heck of a lot better if you could actually move & still shoot effectively. It's slow, static, & puts out less effective firepower than any other armies battle tanks. Of course that's just my opinion.
AtariAssasin wrote: I am curious how the other C:SM players out there have been doing with the codex in 6th Ed. Have you guys been winning your games lately? I do ALRIGHT, but I'd say I am about 50% wins right now (most losses are to new codexes), as opposed to about 90% from last edition. The tanks seem to be near useless in my experience, all transports seem to do for me is give opponents first blood, and the troops in general seem lackluster.
So the question I'm asking is how have other people been doing? Have you been winning against the newer codexes consistently? Are you guys looking forward to the new codex to make marines viable again? Am I just doing everything completely wrong in the new ed?
I'm sorry but, what..?
Your win rate is 50% and that means that marines were not viable? The codes is only 'viable' if it has 90% win rate?
50% should be the 'go to' percentage because it means basically that you have even fight. Less is bad, no questions here, but much more means one of two things (or both):
- your codex is better,
- you're way above your opponents in skill
I guess luck could also factor in but let's drop this one. Why would you want to go into the rolfstomp-fest of almost always winning?
If my post sounds too aggressive I'm sorry, it's definitely not meant to. I'm just really surprised.
AtariAssasin wrote: I am curious how the other C:SM players out there have been doing with the codex in 6th Ed. Have you guys been winning your games lately? I do ALRIGHT, but I'd say I am about 50% wins right now (most losses are to new codexes), as opposed to about 90% from last edition. The tanks seem to be near useless in my experience, all transports seem to do for me is give opponents first blood, and the troops in general seem lackluster.
So the question I'm asking is how have other people been doing? Have you been winning against the newer codexes consistently? Are you guys looking forward to the new codex to make marines viable again? Am I just doing everything completely wrong in the new ed?
I'm sorry but, what..?
Your win rate is 50% and that means that marines were not viable? The codes is only 'viable' if it has 90% win rate?
50% should be the 'go to' percentage because it means basically that you have even fight. Less is bad, no questions here, but much more means one of two things (or both):
- your codex is better,
- you're way above your opponents in skill
I guess luck could also factor in but let's drop this one. Why would you want to go into the rolfstomp-fest of almost always winning?
If my post sounds too aggressive I'm sorry, it's definitely not meant to. I'm just really surprised.
Sorry, maybe I wasnt clear. I suppose my question is that if I was at 90% when I was starting out, and presumably I learned something and hopefully my tactics got better, then why would my win ratio sink so much (against the newer codexes). And I think I may have overestimated, i'd say my 50% wins is more like 50% ties. I am also comparing my ratings to the other people who tend to win about 90% of their games (chaos daemons/tau).
But the points that everybody else has made have been my experience as well. All the units are not as effective as other armies versions, and I dont have enough points to bring a dev/assault/tactical squad for the rocks paper scissors.
However, looking at the new codex I did manage to get some more flexibility with the reduced points, but at the cost of less toys. Haven't played the new codex yet so we shall see.
lord_blackfang wrote: Sounds like the sort of thing a bad player would say to explain how someone else could be using the same army successfully...
You would be 100% right, if not for the fact that all major GTs are flooded with Tau, Tau/Eldar, Eldar/Tau, Eldar, and Chaos Daemons in the winners' brackets. There's been a grand total of 3 C:SM finalists spread throughout the greater-than-3 amount of tournaments, and each one has used allies and scouts over tactical marines. It really says a lot.
Plus, let's be honest. Saying you have a 90% win record is like saying "I manage to get 90% of the candy I try and steal from babies. Look, I'm really good at this, look at the success rate!"
I agree that if you're winning a big majority of your games, that means that you're not really competing (because competition means that you have a serious chance of losing), and if you're not really competing, that means the wins you get are rather worthless. Just like the "win" of candy after stealing it from a baby.
And Helldrakes are completely counterable by MEq armies. Bring a few good guns and learn how displacement works, and you shouldn't have overwhelmingly serious problems with them.
... especially now that SM has dedicated anti-air.
That dedicated anti-air is still quite inefficient against triple helldrake. Displacement only gets you so far, and there are still the actual CSM to deal with. Plague marines are still badass in 6th edition.
The marine anti-air tanks needed to be Rhino upgrades, not heavy support slots.
You can't really count on ST 7 AP 4 to ever kill hell drakes. I guess there's the spear thingie, but one shot is hellalame.
As I said, displacement only gets you so far, there's still vector strike + barbeque. The saving grace IS rolling for reserves. But once they show up, you're up against the wall.
I even have this thingie cut out to help place my models at max displacement. Doesn't seem to help that much vs helldrakes. Or more specifically, CSM in general, But maybe BA are just that fething gimp. It's hard to tell.
My gripe about our dedicated AA is that it interferes with the rest of our heavy support options. The HS portion of the dex is so overcrowded with units I need to take over the dedicated AA.
lord_blackfang wrote: Sounds like the sort of thing a bad player would say to explain how someone else could be using the same army successfully...
You would be 100% right, if not for the fact that all major GTs are flooded with Tau, Tau/Eldar, Eldar/Tau, Eldar, and Chaos Daemons in the winners' brackets. There's been a grand total of 3 C:SM finalists spread throughout the greater-than-3 amount of tournaments, and each one has used allies and scouts over tactical marines. It really says a lot.
You mean all these GT that happened before the new C:SM even came out?
And when it came out it didn't take a mere week for people to get the grips of the new codex, build power lists, and master playing them and go for GT wins?
WEll I'll be damned, the new codex must suck.
Also, why marine players keep crying for assault transports?
You are not an assault army, accept it.
C:SM is a hybrid army, assaulting the shooty and shooting the assaults. you can never truly master any one aspect, but you will be decent in both without even trying.
lord_blackfang wrote: Sounds like the sort of thing a bad player would say to explain how someone else could be using the same army successfully...
You would be 100% right, if not for the fact that all major GTs are flooded with Tau, Tau/Eldar, Eldar/Tau, Eldar, and Chaos Daemons in the winners' brackets. There's been a grand total of 3 C:SM finalists spread throughout the greater-than-3 amount of tournaments, and each one has used allies and scouts over tactical marines. It really says a lot.
You mean all these GT that happened before the new C:SM even came out?
And when it came out it didn't take a mere week for people to get the grips of the new codex, build power lists, and master playing them and go for GT wins?
WEll I'll be damned, the new codex must suck.
Also, why marine players keep crying for assault transports?
You are not an assault army, accept it.
C:SM is a hybrid army, assaulting the shooty and shooting the assaults. you can never truly master any one aspect, but you will be decent in both without even trying.
Because non-assault transport blow chunks in 6th, unless you are Eldar or IG. Hell, I'd rather have Ork trukks for my BA than Rhinos. That's why. And the new codex does suck. It won't make a dent in the meta. You wait and see.
As a marine player who suffered through 2nd edition, I don't want to be back in that spot. And given this codex, I think that's where the marines will be after the Orks and Nids drop.
BoomWolf wrote: You are not an assault army, accept it.
C:SM is a hybrid army, assaulting the shooty and shooting the assaults. you can never truly master any one aspect, but you will be decent in both without even trying.
Because being hybrid sucks.
It'd be okay if hybrid means you can make a 'decent' shooting OR a 'decent' close combat list.
Hybrid means that you: a) get shot down before getting into melee or b) don't have the firepower to stop melee armies that will kick your ass in melee.
Non-assault transports only bother you if you even bother to assault out of them. look at sisters, they got no assault transports and they SPAM them, and WORK. (and that "codex" is one of the least flexible, compared to SM who is undoubtfully the most flexible)
Being hybrid is great, you just don't know how to play hybrid. you don't pull a a "decent" list in either one, you pull a decent list in both at once.
You should play the reverse game against non-hybrid codex.
If they are assault oriented like demons-you avoid direct confrontation and shoot them down so by the time they get into the assault game, you already raked such an edge that your "decent" assault stats are enough to handle his weakened assault army.
Get early edge to prevent the endgame fall.
When facing dedicated shooting armies you charge into them, hoping to melee them ASAP (as even your less-then-divine assault is enough to beat them in CC), while using your shooting powers to make sure they don't rank up too much of an edge over you while you do so.
Prevent early edge to secure endgame sweeps.
Now, I wont say its EASY, but its a valid tactic.
And when all else fails, TFC still single-handedly undo tau castle lists, and grav guns pretty much ruin the day for the current MC domination when armor is bad and T doesn't matter. so there is no godamn way the meta wont be effected, even if cheeselists wont come up.
After that we can all see the white scars assault armies coming and the salamander drop pods-both with high potential.
And even then, that's not counting the chapters like ultras or IH who are too hard to decipher their true potential before the real pros start testing them.
Crying right now that they will have zero effect on the meta is seriously deserving a bitchslap.
Chaos players would whore themselves in order to get what SM got. and yet all I hear from SM is whine.
BoomWolf wrote: You are not an assault army, accept it.
C:SM is a hybrid army, assaulting the shooty and shooting the assaults. you can never truly master any one aspect, but you will be decent in both without even trying.
Because being hybrid sucks.
It'd be okay if hybrid means you can make a 'decent' shooting OR a 'decent' close combat list.
Hybrid means that you: a) get shot down before getting into melee or b) don't have the firepower to stop melee armies that will kick your ass in melee.
I agree with this wholeheartedly. My shooting is NOT good enough to kill anything big before it gets into melee, and generally even a small amount of dedicated melee will kill double that amount of marine troops.
We are subpar at both shooting and melee. So if an army is all melee (like most of the armies i play), when even one unit makes it into my lines thats a huge obstacle. It will probably decimate several units if my rolls are not good.
Also, in response to BoomWolf, my comments were specifically set to question the older codex, and obviously I dont know how the new codex will preform. Secondly however, just the other day I was playing Blood Angels, and a group of 10 assault marines with a priest managed to get into my lines and destroy one group of 5 marines, as well as a 10 man assault squad with a captain set up for CC. This is after I had shot him down to 5 marines and a priest.
Maybe it was just bad luck, my poor shooting rolls and his good saves, but it seems to go like this more often than not.
BoomWolf wrote: You are not an assault army, accept it.
C:SM is a hybrid army, assaulting the shooty and shooting the assaults. you can never truly master any one aspect, but you will be decent in both without even trying.
Because being hybrid sucks.
It'd be okay if hybrid means you can make a 'decent' shooting OR a 'decent' close combat list.
Hybrid means that you: a) get shot down before getting into melee or b) don't have the firepower to stop melee armies that will kick your ass in melee.
I agree with this wholeheartedly. My shooting is NOT good enough to kill anything big before it gets into melee, and generally even a small amount of dedicated melee will kill double that amount of marine troops.
We are subpar at both shooting and melee. So if an army is all melee (like most of the armies i play), when even one unit makes it into my lines thats a huge obstacle. It will probably decimate several units if my rolls are not good.
What is it that you are having issues with? I've been able to drop pretty tough units before they were able to get into melee through the use of Sternguard and lascannons. Everything else dies by Thunderfire cannons, flamers and bolters. The only units I really had trouble with were TEQ lists...those were hard to deal with. I never brought enough AP2 or higher to really deal with them, but the new Centurions will hopefully be able to fix that for me.
I agree with this wholeheartedly. My shooting is NOT good enough to kill anything big before it gets into melee, and generally even a small amount of dedicated melee will kill double that amount of marine troops.
Then I think you need to re-examine your play style. Marine shooting is VERY good, and they have bar none the most options for kitting out basic units with special/heavy weapons in the game.
And while I agree, they aren't the best at close combat, a 3up save against punching is nothing to sneeze at when combined with stats of four and immunity to the morale section of the rules. Sure some monster CC unit will sweep the floor with troops, but if you play smart, you're only feeding that unit what you want it to eat. Not to mention we have our own CC monster units too (honour guard, THSS termies, vanguard vets(to a much lesser extent)).
Marines still suck and I"m not sure what dream people are chasing if they think the new book changed that when the net cost of everything stayed the same where it mattered or even went up for no reason. Pick a top army or stick to campaigns or something.
Marine shooting is not very good. It's mediocre to decent, because the ways the marines have to field their heavy weapons are not nearly as good as the Eldar or Tau. Also, marines still have a firepower cap because of model count.
In my melee, i tend to fail a decent amount of 3+, and when an opponent only needs 5 units to do 20 attacks its not hard to fail some. And then when you lose your combat, I also tend to get sweeping advanced. Daemons are just scary, rending/high toughness/flying/lots of wounds.
In my possibly incredibly bad luck, the only unit that is worth its weight in gold is Sternguard. They generally always preform for me. However, my experience with melee is any of my dedicated melee won't hold up against anything specifically melee. And no way i'm making it across the board against tau shooting... they're scary too.
In my melee, i tend to fail a decent amount of 3+, and when an opponent only needs 5 units to do 20 attacks its not hard to fail some. And then when you lose your combat, I also tend to get sweeping advanced. Daemons are just scary, rending/high toughness/flying/lots of wounds.
In my possibly incredibly bad luck, the only unit that is worth its weight in gold is Sternguard. They generally always preform for me. However, my experience with melee is any of my dedicated melee won't hold up against anything specifically melee. And no way i'm making it across the board against tau shooting... they're scary too.
This is why I run siege assault vanguard.
Most armies most certainly do not have the weight of fire to kill marines protected by a Siege Mantlet (50 points flat fee for rerollable armor saves vs shooting) and Apothecaries (for feel no pain) before I'm in rapid fire range.
Or deal with the row after row of tanks I have.
I'm hoping they get updated so I can couple them with Iron Hands rules outside of house ruled games.
In my melee, i tend to fail a decent amount of 3+, and when an opponent only needs 5 units to do 20 attacks its not hard to fail some. And then when you lose your combat, I also tend to get sweeping advanced. Daemons are just scary, rending/high toughness/flying/lots of wounds.
In my possibly incredibly bad luck, the only unit that is worth its weight in gold is Sternguard. They generally always preform for me. However, my experience with melee is any of my dedicated melee won't hold up against anything specifically melee. And no way i'm making it across the board against tau shooting... they're scary too.
When opponents bring Sternguard against me, they perform for a turn, and then I kill them.
The BA have a similar problem. I can't effectively use the DC, because nothing else I field can draw any heat off them. No one cares about assault marines, even BA ones.
Another Martel732 Bitch thread, or at least that is what it has turned into...
Martel plays BA, not generic SM to my knowledge. Most of his hate and rage is for how much of a beating they took with the edition change and some of it is warranted. Happens to a lot of armies at the edition changes.
The meta is constantly changing and will change even without a new codex drop. Tau and and Eldar were a similar and strong drop that has thrown the meta upside down as it has been with the vast majority of new Dex drops. Anyone remember IG in 5th? SW? BA ? GK? Necron? and is just a list of them in order. Almost every new dex is touted as OP and dominates the Tournament scene for a couple of months then interest shifts to the new Dex in Town and the meta and tournament scene changes.
We still have a number of new Codices coming for 6th Edition and I'm betting two of them are likely to hit the current meta like a hammer(most likely in the form of mass bodies aka Tyranids and Orks). We also have two more PA codexes on the Horizons SW and BA, both of those will undoubtedly have a meta impact as well. Not to mention any of the upcoming supplements which may have a couple of gems that unlock previously overlooked competitive builds.
As always the current dominating armies will depreciate in power as the edition moves forward and the meta will change and compensate.
To the OP, its still too early to tell just how well the SM book will do, I'm betting on helping the SM players out as it is basically a strict improvement over the old book. Is it likely to dominate like the Tau and Eldar, probably not, but it will be a good Mid Tier book.
Theduke07 wrote: Marines still suck and I"m not sure what dream people are chasing if they think the new book changed that when the net cost of everything stayed the same where it mattered or even went up for no reason. Pick a top army or stick to campaigns or something.
The problem has never been that marines suck, its that they're expencive. They're good, but you have to pay for that ability. They shoot even better now that you can pull all sorts of rerolling shenanigans with UM, and assault a bit better beause of the Scars and Raven traits.
2 years ago, having durable troops won you the game most of the time a mission was rolled. Today, having many troops wins you the game 5/6th of the time. Marines DON'T suck, they just aren't good at being cheaply spammed; and thats what's winning games now.
You know, for people that can do math and analyze what they are looking at, only the OP codices get touted as OP. I don't seem to recall a "OMG DA are OP!" phase. Even CSM, helldrake not withstanding, really got this moniker I think.
The demons are strong, but at least with them I get the sense my choices might make a difference. I get to shoot some of them. Assault some others. Maybe I can get a break.
The Eldar/Tau phenomenon is point and click army deletion. Unlike the demons (for the most part), the Eldar/Tau choose what dies and what lives. If there is something that the Eldar/Tau feel threatened by, it dies. I have no say in the matter. I just roll saves until I fail enough for the unit to be crippled and then they move onto the next biggest threat.
I really, really don't see anything in the marine codex to change this. I will agree that this is a mid tier codex. For now. After Nids and Orks drop, however, I don't think it's going to age well at all.
Theduke07 wrote: Marines still suck and I"m not sure what dream people are chasing if they think the new book changed that when the net cost of everything stayed the same where it mattered or even went up for no reason. Pick a top army or stick to campaigns or something.
The problem has never been that marines suck, its that they're expencive. They're good, but you have to pay for that ability. They shoot even better now that you can pull all sorts of rerolling shenanigans with UM, and assault a bit better beause of the Scars and Raven traits.
2 years ago, having durable troops won you the game most of the time a mission was rolled. Today, having many troops wins you the game 5/6th of the time. Marines DON'T suck, they just aren't good at being cheaply spammed; and thats what's winning games now.
The tactical marine has never really been up to snuff. Ever. They constantly struggle to beat their point value of practically anything in hand to hand combat, yet they are supposed to be "balanced". The Grey Hunter is what the tactical marine SHOULD be. So, in that way, Astartes marines do suck.
AtariAssasin wrote: And then when you lose your combat, I also tend to get sweeping advanced.
another bit of advice, marines are immune to being swept in an advance.
Which is actually a nerf, if you wanted to shoot the opponent on your turn. I'm not a huge fan of ATSKNF really. It's becoming moot because Tau/Eldar will just kill your marines.
Martel732 wrote: That dedicated anti-air is still quite inefficient against triple helldrake. Displacement only gets you so far, and there are still the actual CSM to deal with. Plague marines are still badass in 6th edition.
The marine anti-air tanks needed to be Rhino upgrades, not heavy support slots.
Dedicated transport anti-air?
You are aware that is every bit as dumb as flying annihilation barges for dedicated transports right?
If you say so. It's not like the weapons they gave the "dedicated anti-air" tanks are taking over the world. They can't be squadroned and take up heavy slots.
It would have given the marines a fighting chance against Wave Serpents. Which they still lack.
Theduke07 wrote: Marines still suck and I"m not sure what dream people are chasing if they think the new book changed that when the net cost of everything stayed the same where it mattered or even went up for no reason. Pick a top army or stick to campaigns or something.
The problem has never been that marines suck, its that they're expencive. They're good, but you have to pay for that ability. They shoot even better now that you can pull all sorts of rerolling shenanigans with UM, and assault a bit better beause of the Scars and Raven traits.
2 years ago, having durable troops won you the game most of the time a mission was rolled. Today, having many troops wins you the game 5/6th of the time. Marines DON'T suck, they just aren't good at being cheaply spammed; and thats what's winning games now.
The tactical marine has never really been up to snuff. Ever. They constantly struggle to beat their point value of practically anything in hand to hand combat, yet they are supposed to be "balanced". The Grey Hunter is what the tactical marine SHOULD be. So, in that way, Astartes marines do suck.
AtariAssasin wrote: And then when you lose your combat, I also tend to get sweeping advanced.
another bit of advice, marines are immune to being swept in an advance.
Which is actually a nerf, if you wanted to shoot the opponent on your turn. I'm not a huge fan of ATSKNF really. It's becoming moot because Tau/Eldar will just kill your marines.
Feels almost as if you want marines to be all around good at everything. They aren't, and its meant to be that way. C:am is about tactics, you don't just throw dice at problems like Orks, you have to make clever use of combat squads to block assaults, heavy weapons to open transports and reserve shenanigans to control the direction of play. Its nowhere near as powerful as eldar or tau, but that's its appeal; You gotta think.
Likewise, grey hunters Don get to do things like put a heavy weapon on the table, split their squad and now twinlink an alpha hit (previously elect to fail)
Atsknf isn't fearless, if you want to leave combat you still can. In fact with I4 its no unreasonable to assume you will either, it just means that your dudes won't die for free when it happens, and that you get a free 3 inch move afterwards. Plenty of times has a single marine running for LOS blocking terrain saved me a kill point or gotten me a table quarter in the past. Atsknf is not a liability in the least
The Grey Hunter really is what a baseline Marine should be. Especially given how much else got nerfbatted with PA armies this edition. At least give the Space Marines a bolter, pistol, and ccw. If the Space Marine is the new standard against how other units are judged, that standard should at least be set fairly high.
The fact that Space Marines just continually get weaker and weaker so you need to buy more of them seems to defeat the idea of them being elite. And if they aren't elite, then the makeup of the army should be adjusted then.
Right now, the fluff and points costs seem to suggest Space Marines are elite, but the rules don't reflect that. And that's why C:SM won't be very competitive without allies.
Martel732 wrote: If you say so. It's not like the weapons they gave the "dedicated anti-air" tanks are taking over the world. They can't be squadroned and take up heavy slots.
It would have given the marines a fighting chance against Wave Serpents. Which they still lack.
I do agree that both the Hydra and Hunter/Stalker needed Interceptor, so the group has decided to house rule them in as having it.
I don't care about interceptor. I just want more dakka for Wave Serpents and Helldrakes. If I could make my Rhinos actually do something to Wave Serpents for a surcharge, I would do it in a heartbeat.
With the absurd amount of dakka a Wave Serpent has, coupled with being immortal, I don't think an AA gun on an AV 11 Rhino is nuts.
Martel732 wrote: I don't care about interceptor. I just want more dakka for Wave Serpents and Helldrakes. If I could make my Rhinos actually do something to Wave Serpents for a surcharge, I would do it in a heartbeat.
With the absurd amount of dakka a Wave Serpent has, coupled with being immortal, I don't think an AA gun on an AV 11 Rhino is nuts.
I'm fairly certain you were one of those complaining when Night Scythes became impossible to hit annihilation barges that could vomit out a brick of Necrons at the end of the game. As for Rhinos, a skyfire upgrade for razorbacks would probably be a bit more fitting.
Yeah, I'd settle for it being a razorback upgrade. Anything but a single tank per heavy slot. I'm not picky here, just desperate
The Night Scythe at first was dismissed as being a meh unit until 6e, where everyone started QQing over it.
As for why a Razorback upgrade would be better...a Transport has to transport stuff, and I don't think there's any room left over to pile in with all the secondary systems needed for those giant guns.
Martel732 wrote: Okay. Good enough for me on the Razorback thing.
Pre-flyer rules, the Night Scythe was meh. As was the Vendetta. And the Stormraven was unusable.
The Vendetta was still seen as undercosted for what it did. It became super ridiculous with the Flier rules.
Anyway I'll try some rules for skyfire/interceptor upgrades on lascannon/assault cannon/autocannon (also a house rule invention) Razorbacks and see how well they work.
Martel732 wrote: Marine shooting is not very good. It's mediocre to decent, because the ways the marines have to field their heavy weapons are not nearly as good as the Eldar or Tau. Also, marines still have a firepower cap because of model count.
I agree... But I think there are ways to mitigate important areas of the shooting phase with rerolls.
Tigurius for UM is a boon to just about every unit and has access to Prescience. This works wonders with that one shot cannon on the AA tank.
As for non UM armies, there are some areas of Twin Linked that are dotted around and the IF CT is also not bad.
It's not a great fix, but it's better than nothing.
Puscifer wrote: This works wonders with that one shot cannon on the AA tank.
Am i miss reading this? i though the hunter was Heavy 1 not a oneshot. aka you can have a bunch of savant locked missiles flying all over the place as the game continues.
Martel732 wrote: Okay. Good enough for me on the Razorback thing.
Pre-flyer rules, the Night Scythe was meh. As was the Vendetta. And the Stormraven was unusable.
The Vendetta was still seen as undercosted for what it did. It became super ridiculous with the Flier rules.
Anyway I'll try some rules for skyfire/interceptor upgrades on lascannon/assault cannon/autocannon (also a house rule invention) Razorbacks and see how well they work.
Really? Yeah three TL lascannons for what the Vendetta charges is a little nuts in even 5th. But at least it could be targeted by other lascannons.
Puscifer wrote: This works wonders with that one shot cannon on the AA tank.
Am i miss reading this? i though the hunter was Heavy 1 not a oneshot. aka you can have a bunch of savant locked missiles flying all over the place as the game continues.
Martel732 wrote: Marine shooting is not very good. It's mediocre to decent, because the ways the marines have to field their heavy weapons are not nearly as good as the Eldar or Tau. Also, marines still have a firepower cap because of model count.
I agree... But I think there are ways to mitigate important areas of the shooting phase with rerolls.
Tigurius for UM is a boon to just about every unit and has access to Prescience. This works wonders with that one shot cannon on the AA tank.
As for non UM armies, there are some areas of Twin Linked that are dotted around and the IF CT is also not bad.
It's not a great fix, but it's better than nothing.
I've been using prescience on BA for months now, and there's nothing potent enough in the marine lists that causes enough damage for prescience to really pay off. Back when warwalkers needed guide, that was a unit that really cashed in on that effect. I find it's actually best to prescience my assault teams so they get rerolls on bolt pistols and all their CC swings. If they live long enough. It works greats against other BA and C:SM and Orks.
Puscifer wrote: This works wonders with that one shot cannon on the AA tank.
Am i miss reading this? i though the hunter was Heavy 1 not a oneshot. aka you can have a bunch of savant locked missiles flying all over the place as the game continues.
I meant one shot per turn. My bad.
Which is effectively .6667 shots per turn against a Helldrake.
No problems mate. I think the hunter should be fine at lower points where they may be only 1 or two flyers floating around.
Iv been debating missile devs with flakk at imperial fist chap tactics for tank hunter. i think it should work generally well per turn and properly placed should be fine against hell turkeys.
Flakk missiles are not particularly effective against Helldrakes. None of the STR 7 AP 4 weapons are. You can't attrition them down nearly as quickly as Stormravens or Vendettas. And you are on the clock, because they are barbequeing your scoring units. Or the devs themselves.
Martel732 wrote: Okay. Good enough for me on the Razorback thing.
Pre-flyer rules, the Night Scythe was meh. As was the Vendetta. And the Stormraven was unusable.
The Vendetta was still seen as undercosted for what it did. It became super ridiculous with the Flier rules.
Anyway I'll try some rules for skyfire/interceptor upgrades on lascannon/assault cannon/autocannon (also a house rule invention) Razorbacks and see how well they work.
Really? Yeah three TL lascannons for what the Vendetta charges is a little nuts in even 5th. But at least it could be targeted by other lascannons.
It is perhaps the greatest twist of irony that the Vendetta got super buffed...
Only for the meta to alter and ironically, take away all the metal bawkses it would have been ideal for preying on.
Of course somehow this flying dumpster of a transport with guns slapped on it routinely defeats dedicated air superiority craft like the Crimson Hunter and Storm Talon.
Yeah, but those lascannons still are good against Wraithknights, Riptides, teqs, centurions, Night Scythes, helldrakes, the list goes on. The Vendetta is still a baller vehicle for sure. It's better than anything in the new space marine codex, lol.
I think there is some merit to them. especially with a ADL quad. having the sarge on it gives you 8 st 7 ap 4 shots. half being interceptor and all having tank hunter.
Its something i will try out as i build more models.
Martel732 wrote: Yeah, but those lascannons still are good against Wraithknights, Riptides, teqs, centurions, Night Scythes, helldrakes, the list goes on. The Vendetta is still a baller vehicle for sure. It's better than anything in the new space marine codex, lol.
As I said, this unaerodynamic dump truck in spehss
Is somehow a better air superiority craft than this.
Piloted by people who focus their entire lives on air superiority.
Martel732 wrote: Marine shooting is not very good. It's mediocre to decent, because the ways the marines have to field their heavy weapons are not nearly as good as the Eldar or Tau. Also, marines still have a firepower cap because of model count.
I agree... But I think there are ways to mitigate important areas of the shooting phase with rerolls.
Tigurius for UM is a boon to just about every unit and has access to Prescience. This works wonders with that one shot cannon on the AA tank.
As for non UM armies, there are some areas of Twin Linked that are dotted around and the IF CT is also not bad.
It's not a great fix, but it's better than nothing.
I've been using prescience on BA for months now, and there's nothing potent enough in the marine lists that causes enough damage for prescience to really pay off. Back when warwalkers needed guide, that was a unit that really cashed in on that effect. I find it's actually best to prescience my assault teams so they get rerolls on bolt pistols and all their CC swings. If they live long enough. It works greats against other BA and C:SM and Orks.
e.
Kain wrote:Of course somehow this flying dumpster of a transport with guns slapped on it routinely defeats dedicated air superiority craft like the Crimson Hunter and Storm Talon.
Obviously they need to stay at altitude where they can superioritize the air, and stay out of 40K where all the aircraft fly around at like 50kph and are easy targets.
Kain wrote:Of course somehow this flying dumpster of a transport with guns slapped on it routinely defeats dedicated air superiority craft like the Crimson Hunter and Storm Talon.
Obviously they need to stay at altitude where they can superioritize the air, and stay out of 40K where all the aircraft fly around at like 50kph and are easy targets.
As someone who's been in the military, if a Blackhawk with rockets on it's sides shot down an F-22, you'd probably be going "What the feth?" right?
Kain wrote:Of course somehow this flying dumpster of a transport with guns slapped on it routinely defeats dedicated air superiority craft like the Crimson Hunter and Storm Talon.
Obviously they need to stay at altitude where they can superioritize the air, and stay out of 40K where all the aircraft fly around at like 50kph and are easy targets.
Puscifer wrote: I'm thinking of taking one Hunter and up to two Stormtalons for Drakespam duty.
It's about as good as you'll get for AA in a SM army.
You can't really take another AA Tank as it'll be a waste of a HS slot, which you may want for TFC and something else.
Also, you'll be screwed in games without flyers by taking more than one AA Tank.
Yeah. I'm looking at running assault marines in my FA slot. Because I have BA models. If I even use this codex. Which I might not. But maybe I will just to get the HTH scouts in storms. Because that's slicker than anything in the BA codex. FML.
Martel732 wrote: Marine shooting is not very good. It's mediocre to decent, because the ways the marines have to field their heavy weapons are not nearly as good as the Eldar or Tau. Also, marines still have a firepower cap because of model count.
I agree... But I think there are ways to mitigate important areas of the shooting phase with rerolls.
Tigurius for UM is a boon to just about every unit and has access to Prescience. This works wonders with that one shot cannon on the AA tank.
As for non UM armies, there are some areas of Twin Linked that are dotted around and the IF CT is also not bad.
It's not a great fix, but it's better than nothing.
I've been using prescience on BA for months now, and there's nothing potent enough in the marine lists that causes enough damage for prescience to really pay off. Back when warwalkers needed guide, that was a unit that really cashed in on that effect. I find it's actually best to prescience my assault teams so they get rerolls on bolt pistols and all their CC swings. If they live long enough. It works greats against other BA and C:SM and Orks.
e.
Sternguard? or are we only talking about BA?
BA have Sternguard. But if you pod them, you can't cast prescience that turn.
Ailaros wrote: Plus, let's be honest. Saying you have a 90% win record is like saying "I manage to get 90% of the candy I try and steal from babies. Look, I'm really good at this, look at the success rate!"
I'd be pretty worried about how OP babies were if they managed to knock out a grown man trying to steal candy from them.
Ailaros wrote: Plus, let's be honest. Saying you have a 90% win record is like saying "I manage to get 90% of the candy I try and steal from babies. Look, I'm really good at this, look at the success rate!"
I'd be pretty worried about how OP babies were if they managed to knock out a grown man trying to steal candy from them.
Cmon man, dont derail things. If you wanna argue that babies need to be nerfed please start a thread.
I apologize if this question is a bit off topic, but I've read that heavy weapon upgrades for tactical terminators (as opposed to regular tactical marines) now cost less. Is that true?
And is that also true that upgraded weapons on the land speeder are cheaper as well?
Also, why marine players keep crying for assault transports?
You are not an assault army, accept it.
C:SM is a hybrid army, assaulting the shooty and shooting the assaults. you can never truly master any one aspect, but you will be decent in both without even trying.
Oh sorry, I was under the impression that my Black Templars were supposed to be about close combat, my bad.
