Would then, they actually be tough enough to brave enemy fire? Obviously they'd need a price hike. Probably about 6 or more points - what do you think?

I think they'd be even more worthless than they are now. At 20 points, losing a marine to every Krak, Rokkit, Lascannon, Powerfist, etc in the game starts to hurt real bad. Instant death is an adepta sororitas.

 docdoom77 wrote:
I think they'd be even more worthless than they are now. At 20 points, losing a marine to every Krak, Rokkit, Lascannon, Powerfist, etc in the game starts to hurt real bad. Instant death is an adepta sororitas.

They would be twice as resilient to plasma and small arms fire though and shouldn't rockets be shooting at tanks?

Not if they'll ID marines. My crisis suits would suddenly have a lot of melta guns instead of plasma

I remember a certain codex writer saying something about an army with 2 wounds having something going for it and us all talking about how Thousand Sons were still gak.

It'd be impossible to keep track of the wounds.

NauticalKendall wrote:
Not if they'll ID marines. My crisis suits would suddenly have a lot of melta guns instead of plasma

Exactly. It would shift the meta for sure, but I'd rather have cheaper 1 wound marines than expensive 2 wound marines. Now, if we were talking 16-17 pt range.... that might be different. But 20 points. No thank you.

 ChazSexington wrote:
It'd be impossible to keep track of the wounds.

Wouldn't they more or less be shoot off 1 at a time with closest first rules?

 Xenomancers wrote:

 ChazSexington wrote:
It'd be impossible to keep track of the wounds.

Wouldn't they more or less be shoot off 1 at a time with closest first rules?

If taking fire from multiple units, or on different turns, it would be an issue.

Closest first is the problem. During the shooting phase, a guy is left with one wound. They get charged in the assault phase. At one initiative step, the guy chooses a full wound marine in base as "the closest." He takes one wound. At another initiative step he chooses a different marine in base as closest, that guy takes a single wound. Next turn, a different guy is in front and becomes the closest. Maybe he takes a single wound. Over time a unit could have many marines with one wound.

It's not likely to get quite that complicated every time, but it sure can.

NauticalKendall wrote:
Not if they'll ID marines. My crisis suits would suddenly have a lot of melta guns instead of plasma

You could tailor lists to bring a lot of str 8 - true - it's not that difficult to do but this in turn would make bike 2 wounds as well. So you couldn't ID them.

Change back to 5th wound allocation rules (and be sure to account for the stupidity of bikenobz etc) and make these Tacticals 16-17ish ppm, and you have something better.

I think grabbing the problem on the other end would be a much better idea: make every special and heavy weapon cost double as now, and every unit that comes with a special or heavy weapon cost +50% of its base cost. You can spare the sub-par weapons (heavy bolter, grenade launcher, etc) though.

This would help assault (as shooting would become quite expensive in comparison), all the neglected character weapons (a 15pts plasma pistol is a deal when your other option is the 30pts plasma gun), and give quite a lot of survivability to everyone through the (roughly halved) firepower people can bring to the board.

Instant death is an adepta sororitas.

HA

I will use that in my sig, thank you very much.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Change back to 5th wound allocation rules (and be sure to account for the stupidity of bikenobz etc) and make these Tacticals 16-17ish ppm, and you have something better.

Now THAT is something I can get behind! I hate 7th wound allocation and crave simpler days.

 AtoMaki wrote:
I think grabbing the problem on the other end would be a much better idea: make every special and heavy weapon cost double as now, and every unit that comes with a special or heavy weapon cost +50% of its base cost. You can spare the sub-par weapons (heavy bolter, grenade launcher, etc) though.

This would help assault (as shooting would become quite expensive in comparison), all the neglected character weapons (a 15pts plasma pistol is a deal when your other option is the 30pts plasma gun), and give quite a lot of survivability to everyone through the (roughly halved) firepower people can bring to the board.

Or you'll see a return to barebones tact squads with tons of everything else. Upping the cost of Plasma Guns and such won't increase a tac marines survivabilty against, say, a Riptide or Exocrine.

 docdoom77 wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Change back to 5th wound allocation rules (and be sure to account for the stupidity of bikenobz etc) and make these Tacticals 16-17ish ppm, and you have something better.

Now THAT is something I can get behind! I hate 7th wound allocation and crave simpler days.

I'm totally behind that one. 7th wound allocation is garbage.

Agreed. I think 2 wounds would be great, but not for the cost of a Melta Bomb. 16-17 would be the right amount, as you have more survivability, but can still be ID by a lot of weapons.

 AtoMaki wrote:
I think grabbing the problem on the other end would be a much better idea: make every special and heavy weapon cost double as now, and every unit that comes with a special or heavy weapon cost +50% of its base cost. You can spare the sub-par weapons (heavy bolter, grenade launcher, etc) though.

This would help assault (as shooting would become quite expensive in comparison), all the neglected character weapons (a 15pts plasma pistol is a deal when your other option is the 30pts plasma gun), and give quite a lot of survivability to everyone through the (roughly halved) firepower people can bring to the board.

I like where you are coming from with this idea but I fear it would just result in vehicle spam.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jreilly89 wrote:
Agreed. I think 2 wounds would be great, but not for the cost of a Melta Bomb. 16-17 would be the right amount, as you have more survivability, but can still be ID by a lot of weapons.

I was figuring a wound should cost at least 5 points. A Gk paladin pays like 16 points for it.

Remember that the Paladin also recieves +1 WS, so it's not quite 16 points.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Remember that the Paladin also recieves +1 WS, so it's not quite 16 points.

right it's probably more like 10 because its on a 2+ save model so i thought 5-6+ for 3+ save modle seemed fair.

 Xenomancers wrote:
I like where you are coming from with this idea but I fear it would just result in vehicle spam.

With every vehicle costing +50% (as they are all weapon platforms), I don't think that anyone would spam them that much. And even if they do, heavy and special weapons would cost double for vehicles too. The same goes for the other heavy-hitters too, like the Riptide and the Exocrine. 270 points per one basic Riptide (probably more because the Riptide is undercosted - 220 without the increment and 330 for this scenario would be more realistic) would dry up the Tau army's points pool pretty quickly.

 Matthew wrote:

Instant death is an adepta sororitas.

HA

I will use that in my sig, thank you very much.

Explain the quote to me, please. Is it about melta spam?

 AtoMaki wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
I like where you are coming from with this idea but I fear it would just result in vehicle spam.

With every vehicle costing +50% (as they are all weapon platforms), I don't think that anyone would spam them that much. And even if they do, heavy and special weapons would cost double for vehicles too. The same goes for the other heavy-hitters too, like the Riptide and the Exocrine. 270 points per one basic Riptide (probably more because the Riptide is undercosted - 220 without the increment and 330 for this scenario would be more realistic) would dry up the Tau army's points pool pretty quickly.

Ahh, well if vehicles went up in price too it would just result in a lot of infantry spam. Now this would be a game marines would excel at. It would be a very different game though. I think it would be an okay house rule but most people have a lot of specialized modles and not too many infantry so this wouldn't gain much support. cept orks would love this lol.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Matthew wrote:

Instant death is an adepta sororitas.

HA

I will use that in my sig, thank you very much.

Explain the quote to me, please. Is it about melta spam?

It is not. They took the common expression 'X is a bitch' and replaced the latter with 'Adepta Sororitas'.

Oh. That is bad. Sororitas are humans, not canine.

It took me a second to get the joke. of course, I dont refer to women using that term as it is degrading to them so it isnt all that funny.

Marines dont need two wounds. They may not be the current top cheese army but they are still more than competitive as they are. The issue is not the number of wounds. I feel that it is the use of the D6 system. It just does not allow for the differences in many of the "soldiers" in the armies of 40k. A D10, i think would be closer to what would be needed. This would allow greater spacing of the stats. While a guard might be toughness 3, a marine could be a toughness 5 and a ogryn toughness 6. As it is using the D6, You cant properly demonstrate the fluff in terms of the differences.
It goes beyond the unneeded extra wounds on a marine, it goes into the basic mechanics.

Besides, as someone else said, it would be a royal pain to keep track of wounds and would only lead to different issues with a different sort of spam.

I have long wished for GW to make all marines have more true to the fluff statlines, but then they wouldn't be able to sell as many models.


My theorized true marine statline would look something like this.

Tactical Marine 20 pts

WS: 4 BS: 4 Str:5 T:4 W:2 I:5 A:2 Ld:8

Special rules(in addition to current rules): FnP(6+), Night Vision

Terminators and Veterans would both gain +1WS, BS, and attack. Terminators would also gain a wound and +1T(and cost 55 pts each minimum)

No character would have fewer than 4 wounds.

Krak missiles would have a use, at least. But I think 2 W is too much.

 Grey Templar wrote:
I have long wished for GW to make all marines have more true to the fluff statlines, but then they wouldn't be able to sell as many models.

If anything, they should hit the fluff with the nerfhammer IMHO. This heroic nonsense the Space Marines have now is not really in-line with the grimdark theme.

A 16-17 point 2W Marine would be absurd...

An Ork Nob with heavy armour, in comparison, sports a much worse statline (with the exception of attacks) for 22 points.

Wait. would this mean attack bikes get 4 wounds?

 Xenomancers wrote:

 ChazSexington wrote:
It'd be impossible to keep track of the wounds.

Wouldn't they more or less be shoot off 1 at a time with closest first rules?

Then the next turn, which marines have 1 wound left etc.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Matthew wrote:

Instant death is an adepta sororitas.

HA

I will use that in my sig, thank you very much.

Explain the quote to me, please. Is it about melta spam?

Ahem, Adepta Sororitas... It's a word that can be used as a substitute for... Female Dog.

 King Pariah wrote:
Wait. would this mean attack bikes get 4 wounds?

This would indeed be absurd. Attack bikes would instantly become the best unit in the game with 4 W relentless multi meltas. Attack bikes used to just be 1w 2+ save. I think 2W 2+ save would be fine if points were adjusted properly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
On a further note I was never suggesting the sisters get 2 wounds. They are not genitically modified and enhanced with machines and such. They should remain what they - special weapons users with 3+ saves for a cheap price.

I would hug my Earthshakers even tighter, probably breaking them.

And anyone with hotshot lasguns would cry.

 Bobthehero wrote:
I would hug my Earthshakers even tighter, probably breaking them.

And anyone with hotshot lasguns would cry.

Basilisks already ruin marines. They don't live long enough to get them out of their transport though.

That's why I said I will hug mine even more, as they'd be even more useful.

As for survivability, Earthshaker Carriages are T7 4W 3+ with 4 crewmen to be used as cannon fodder. They're going to be fine.

Tankbustaz? More like Beakiebustaz!

 Matthew wrote:
Ahem, Adepta Sororitas... It's a word that can be used as a substitute for... Female Dog.

Not it is not.

Marines already have abysmal damage output for their points. With a price hike and 2w they would become the army that everyone loves to beat up on: they don't have the firepower to kill your army, and your army gets to try out all their toys without worrying about dying.

I'd rather see bolter rounds buffed, knives on everybody to give minimum 2 cc attacks if they have a pistol, and rending chainswords.

niv-mizzet wrote:
Marines already have abysmal damage output for their points. With a price hike and 2w they would become the army that everyone loves to beat up on: they don't have the firepower to kill your army, and your army gets to try out all their toys without worrying about dying.

Not true, people will always prefer to watch Tau die.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Matthew wrote:
Ahem, Adepta Sororitas... It's a word that can be used as a substitute for... Female Dog.

Not it is not.

Have you ever hear the saying... Bolter ?

Codex: Space Marines has been renamed 'Codex: Bolter Dicks'.

That would be an interesting move. I am just wondering about Codex: Blood Dicks!

There is no universe in which this would be viewed as a favorable decision.

 docdoom77 wrote:
Instant death is an adepta sororitas.

I see what you did there. And having been ID'd by S6 my Sisters would agree.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Codex: Space Marines has been renamed 'Codex: Bolter Dicks'.

Sold!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SGTPozy wrote:

niv-mizzet wrote:
Marines already have abysmal damage output for their points. With a price hike and 2w they would become the army that everyone loves to beat up on: they don't have the firepower to kill your army, and your army gets to try out all their toys without worrying about dying.

Not true, people will always prefer to watch Tau die.

Pretty much. Of any army, it's a tie between Tau and Eldar on who I like to see die.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

niv-mizzet wrote:
Marines already have abysmal damage output for their points. With a price hike and 2w they would become the army that everyone loves to beat up on: they don't have the firepower to kill your army, and your army gets to try out all their toys without worrying about dying.

I'd rather see bolter rounds buffed, knives on everybody to give minimum 2 cc attacks if they have a pistol, and rending chainswords.

Attack buff would be fine, but the extra wound is not to help them kill. It would be so you can take 2 or 3 tac squads in a Rhino and they'd actually survive long enough to hold an objective without getting shot to

I think feel no pain would have a similar effect to two wounds (being negated by the same thing), would increase overall survivability and would cause far fewer problems.

So, my suggestion for tougher marines is Feel No Pain.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Would then, they actually be tough enough to brave enemy fire? Obviously they'd need a price hike. Probably about 6 or more points - what do you think?

Look how badly Nobz are regarded. Even Mega Nobz. 2 wounds a piece, but they WILL die to a well placed S8 shot, two wounds or no. The issue isn't Marines, or Nobz. It's the easy and abundant access to Tank busting weaponry that armies can load up on with little to no worry.

 docdoom77 wrote:
I think feel no pain would have a similar effect to two wounds (being negated by the same thing), would increase overall survivability and would cause far fewer problems.

So, my suggestion for tougher marines is Feel No Pain.

What about Apothecaries?

 Ashiraya wrote:
Change back to 5th wound allocation rules (and be sure to account for the stupidity of bikenobz etc) and make these Tacticals 16-17ish ppm, and you have something better.

What you of course meant to say was change it back to 4th edition, were you were forced to allocated your wounds on a model who already suffered a wound. I never understood why they changed that in 5th, allowing biker nobz and other stupid things to exist.

As for this topic: what would happen is that bike marines would be even more overused and spammed, since the gap between tactical squads and bikes would be even larger. The marines have issues, but defense isn't one of them. Sure, there is a lot of low AP flying around in these newer editions but it's offensive capabilities normal marines truly lack, not more wounds and certainly not an increase in points.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 docdoom77 wrote:
I think feel no pain would have a similar effect to two wounds (being negated by the same thing), would increase overall survivability and would cause far fewer problems.

So, my suggestion for tougher marines is Feel No Pain.

What about Apothecaries?

Just change it to a +1 to FNP rolls. Done.

 docdoom77 wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 docdoom77 wrote:
I think feel no pain would have a similar effect to two wounds (being negated by the same thing), would increase overall survivability and would cause far fewer problems.

So, my suggestion for tougher marines is Feel No Pain.

What about Apothecaries?

Just change it to a +1 to FNP rolls. Done.

I was would suggest re-roll FNP of 1's, since supplement iron hands smashfucker could get a potential of 2+ FNP; Gorgon chains + apothecary + warlord trait that grants +1 to FNP..

I think 20 points would be too cheap for two wound marines to be honest. A naked Crisis suit is 22 points and has the same T and W and is worse in almost every other stat. It has the whole Jetpack thing sure, but it has no weapons.

Melevolence wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Would then, they actually be tough enough to brave enemy fire? Obviously they'd need a price hike. Probably about 6 or more points - what do you think?

Look how badly Nobz are regarded. Even Mega Nobz. 2 wounds a piece, but they WILL die to a well placed S8 shot, two wounds or no. The issue isn't Marines, or Nobz. It's the easy and abundant access to Tank busting weaponry that armies can load up on with little to no worry.

more to the point the problem with Marines is inheriant in their being Marines.

the fluff for Marines is basicly written for a VERY VERY differnt meta.
Imagine if you would a meta where 75% of players are guard or lost and the damned, whom actually exist as a major and popular army in this fictional meta. , something like 20% are Orks, there are a few guys who play eldar but you don't see them much and most players don't even know what the differance between dark eldar and standard eldar are, Tau is one or two guys who play only at one location in town (you're lucky and your local town has 2 gaming clubs and 3 stores) Necrons you've never even heard of beyond a rumored army that supposedly exists and is proably out there hanging with plastic sisters and plastic thunderhawks, Tyranids are a brand new army, and tend to run 'gaunt heavy but are winning an aweful lot of games.
and out of a 1000 man community, maybe 5 people play space Marines of various types. (you don't even know that grey knights exist!) Imagine what the meta for that would be like.

that is proably what the "in universe" meta is like. most local metas however are based around the assumption of Marines being common. you proably don't see a lot of armies gearing to crack 3+ armor saves in universe. but obviously there's nothing GW's gonna be able to do about the fact that Marines of all stripes make up proably a good 75% of the armies out there

 docdoom77 wrote:
I think they'd be even more worthless than they are now. At 20 points, losing a marine to every Krak, Rokkit, Lascannon, Powerfist, etc in the game starts to hurt real bad. Instant death is an adepta sororitas.

Hahaha FEEL MY PAIN!

I'm kinda struggling to find a reason for W2 marines. W2 would change their dynamic significantly, you'd probably be looking a 9-10ppm increase, not a 6ppm increase.

 Grey Templar wrote:
I have long wished for GW to make all marines have more true to the fluff statlines, but then they wouldn't be able to sell as many models.


My theorized true marine statline would look something like this.

Tactical Marine 20 pts

WS: 4 BS: 4 Str:5 T:4 W:2 I:5 A:2 Ld:8

Special rules(in addition to current rules): FnP(6+), Night Vision

Terminators and Veterans would both gain +1WS, BS, and attack. Terminators would also gain a wound and +1T(and cost 55 pts each minimum)

No character would have fewer than 4 wounds.

Something I have thought about a lot and couldn't agree more. Also along with your stat lines, power armor should be 2+ and terminator 2+ rerollable 4+. Then the game would match the fluff and I for one would happily take a huge point increase. But GW will not do it...

Whoa 2+ power armor? That would be insane, CC would become impossible for any non-marine player.

The problem with MEQ's isn't their wounds, and giving them wounds would probably be a nightmare for large armies.

A better idea would be to just balance the bloody game already, kill the power creep, and stop armies from being able to spam plasma and melta weapons for cheap. Make them expensive and something you need to truly plan around as a more limited resource then current.

 Quickjager wrote:
Whoa 2+ power armor? That would be insane, CC would become impossible for any non-marine player.

of course marines would go up in points dramatically but it would match the fluff. a 3+ armour save means the armour isn't working 33% of the time, think about it like that. I for one think its ridiculous how maybe 6 marines will die from a few volleys from a squad, marines die like guardsman die in the books.

 redrooster148 wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
I have long wished for GW to make all marines have more true to the fluff statlines, but then they wouldn't be able to sell as many models.


My theorized true marine statline would look something like this.

Tactical Marine 20 pts

WS: 4 BS: 4 Str:5 T:4 W:2 I:5 A:2 Ld:8

Special rules(in addition to current rules): FnP(6+), Night Vision

Terminators and Veterans would both gain +1WS, BS, and attack. Terminators would also gain a wound and +1T(and cost 55 pts each minimum)

No character would have fewer than 4 wounds.

Something I have thought about a lot and couldn't agree more. Also along with your stat lines, power armor should be 2+ and terminator 2+ rerollable 4+. Then the game would match the fluff and I for one would happily take a huge point increase. But GW will not do it...

It might match some of the more outlandish and ridiculous fluff, but would make for a very poor reflection of a lot of other fluff, not to mention do nothing positive for the game.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 redrooster148 wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
I have long wished for GW to make all marines have more true to the fluff statlines, but then they wouldn't be able to sell as many models.


My theorized true marine statline would look something like this.

Tactical Marine 20 pts

WS: 4 BS: 4 Str:5 T:4 W:2 I:5 A:2 Ld:8

Special rules(in addition to current rules): FnP(6+), Night Vision

Terminators and Veterans would both gain +1WS, BS, and attack. Terminators would also gain a wound and +1T(and cost 55 pts each minimum)

No character would have fewer than 4 wounds.

Something I have thought about a lot and couldn't agree more. Also along with your stat lines, power armor should be 2+ and terminator 2+ rerollable 4+. Then the game would match the fluff and I for one would happily take a huge point increase. But GW will not do it...

It might match some of the more outlandish and ridiculous fluff, but would make for a very poor reflection of a lot of other
fluff, not to mention do nothing positive for the game.

I must ask you. Do you firmly believe its right that power armour only works 66% of the time?

 redrooster148 wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
Whoa 2+ power armor? That would be insane, CC would become impossible for any non-marine player.

of course marines would go up in points dramatically but it would match the fluff. a 3+ armour save means the armour isn't working 33% of the time, think about it like that. I for one think its ridiculous how maybe 6 marines will die from a few volleys from a squad, marines die like guardsman die in the books.

Why can you see my Striking Scorpions from the other side of the table? Fluffwise you shouldn't be able to see them until it's too late.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 redrooster148 wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
Whoa 2+ power armor? That would be insane, CC would become impossible for any non-marine player.

of course marines would go up in points dramatically but it would match the fluff. a 3+ armour save means the armour isn't working 33% of the time, think about it like that. I for one think its ridiculous how maybe 6 marines will die from a few volleys from a squad, marines die like guardsman die in the books.

Why can you see my Striking Scorpions from the other side of the table? Fluffwise you shouldn't be able to see them until it's too late.

the only reason I shouldn't be able to see them is if they're infiltrating, not walking in plain sight. And if you infiltrate well, I wont see them till its too late, (12 inch infiltrate distance without los)

And IG should probably more artillery than you've got units, and said arty will be a few kilometers and blah blah blah.

I think having more Guardsmen Spotters could replicate that very well. It would be a interesting trade-off, small, possibly mobile, high-value targets and the arty would be untargetable. BUT they would... you know... have the statline of a Guardsmen. If you want to kick the idea around a bit more open something up in Propsed Rules, I'll help kick the concept around abit.

 Bobthehero wrote:
And IG should probably more artillery than you've got units, and said arty will be a few kilometers and blah blah blah.

Well no because then it wouldn't be fair points or a fair game. Buffing marines whilst adding points still makes it fair and fluffy

Meh, 3+ is fluffy enough, shows that PA protects well, but its not perfect, and that there's better protection out there, anything that is 2+.

66% thing is just gamey­.

 Bobthehero wrote:


66% thing is just gamey­.

What do you mean by that?

Its just a game mechanic, not meant to be taken litteraly as far as fluff goes, but its a good way to show that PA isn't perfect.

Also 2+ would make so many weapons that are good at killing SM not good its not even funny.

Oh okay I see what you are trying to say

 redrooster148 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 redrooster148 wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
I have long wished for GW to make all marines have more true to the fluff statlines, but then they wouldn't be able to sell as many models.


My theorized true marine statline would look something like this.

Tactical Marine 20 pts

WS: 4 BS: 4 Str:5 T:4 W:2 I:5 A:2 Ld:8

Special rules(in addition to current rules): FnP(6+), Night Vision

Terminators and Veterans would both gain +1WS, BS, and attack. Terminators would also gain a wound and +1T(and cost 55 pts each minimum)

No character would have fewer than 4 wounds.

Something I have thought about a lot and couldn't agree more. Also along with your stat lines, power armor should be 2+ and terminator 2+ rerollable 4+. Then the game would match the fluff and I for one would happily take a huge point increase. But GW will not do it...

It might match some of the more outlandish and ridiculous fluff, but would make for a very poor reflection of a lot of other
fluff, not to mention do nothing positive for the game.

I must ask you. Do you firmly believe its right that power armour only works 66% of the time?

That 66% of the time isn't a direct correlation to an actual bullet or shot striking the armor and deflecting. Just like an Assault Cannon isn't only firing 4 bullets.

With that abstraction in mind, yes, that 66% success rate given the other realities of this game, sounds right to me. Power armor isn't invulnerable, there are weak spots (elbows, neck, lower abdomen, back of the knee, the huge vulnerable powerpack, etc), repeated hits can defeat it, shots may inflict tissue or bone damage even if they don't penetrate, etc. A 3+ works for me as powerful protective armor. I've never felt my Chaos Space Marines or any other 3+sv unit I own to be under-armored. When a wall of fire (from weapons roughly equivalent to modern day assault rifles) from a full squad of guardsmen may down a single marine on average (20 shots, 10 hits, 3.33 wounds, 1.11 failed saves) at point blank ranges, that's pretty powerful to me.

hmmmm... okay then

Power armor should be 4+ armor on a D10. Then you could have terminators at 2+ on a D10 and something like sanguinary guard and artificer armor at 3+ on a D10. The D6 system has created a situation where the space marines can't be modeled properly in the game. The D6 doesn't have enough dynamic range for the number of models in the game now.

 Wyzilla wrote:
The problem with MEQ's isn't their wounds,.

The problem with them isn't any kind of weakness, what with them being the statistically best army as evidenced by tournaments since their most recent codex was released.

Oooh, Wave Serpents are scary, but the Marines still always win somehow?

Gravstars are good. Not marines.

Take away Grav and marines will die off... seriously that is what 40k is reduced to. I still fething hate grav... entire army gets wounded on 3+ essentially.

 Quickjager wrote:
Take away Grav and marines will die off... seriously that is what 40k is reduced to. I still fething hate grav... entire army gets wounded on 3+ essentially.

It's the hard-counter to the silly 6e-era MCs. Take away grav and Riptides/Dreadknights become a lot more powerful than they were a moment ago.

 ChazSexington wrote:
It'd be impossible to keep track of the wounds.

with the size of the new space marine bases it shouldn't be too hard to mark remaining wounds with a small railway system - two wounds if you can see the train, one wound if not...

SirDonlad wrote:

 ChazSexington wrote:
It'd be impossible to keep track of the wounds.

with the size of the new space marine bases it shouldn't be too hard to mark remaining wounds with a small railway system - two wounds if you can see the train, one wound if not...

Plus new wound allocation.

That said I tried a system for Aegis where most infantry had two wounds and heavier infantry (Marines, for instance) had three, everything became very, very slow. It's getting dropped for the second version.

The counter to grav is orkses and IG schmucks. But everyone wants to use their Riptides and Wraithknights.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
Take away Grav and marines will die off... seriously that is what 40k is reduced to. I still fething hate grav... entire army gets wounded on 3+ essentially.

It's the hard-counter to the silly 6e-era MCs. Take away grav and Riptides/Dreadknights become a lot more powerful than they were a moment ago.

...Did I say anything else differently? Defensive much?

Give Riptides and Dreadknights 3+ armor and we don't need grav. Krak missiles do something again.

Ain't it too fat of you to get a 2-wound marine for 20 pts?

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:
The problem with MEQ's isn't their wounds,.

The problem with them isn't any kind of weakness, what with them being the statistically best army as evidenced by tournaments since their most recent codex was released.

Oooh, Wave Serpents are scary, but the Marines still always win somehow?

I'd imagine that's due to drop pod lists with suicide grav and melta. Otherwise infinite daemons or invisible eldar infantry should take the cake as best army.

 Grey Templar wrote:
I have long wished for GW to make all marines have more true to the fluff statlines, but then they wouldn't be able to sell as many models.


My theorized true marine statline would look something like this.

Tactical Marine 20 pts

WS: 4 BS: 4 Str:5 T:4 W:2 I:5 A:2 Ld:8

Special rules(in addition to current rules): FnP(6+), Night Vision

Terminators and Veterans would both gain +1WS, BS, and attack. Terminators would also gain a wound and +1T(and cost 55 pts each minimum)

No character would have fewer than 4 wounds.

That does not seem far off the mark - although there are other units that need looking at as well....

Dark Eldar Wyches should be more like:

WS: 6 BS: 6 Str: 3 T:3 W:1 I:6 A:2 Ld:8

Special rules(in addition to current rules): FnP(6+), Poison CC Attacks (2+)

Hekatrxices would gain +1WS, BS, and attack.

Martel732 wrote:
Power armor should be 4+ armor on a D10. Then you could have terminators at 2+ on a D10 and something like sanguinary guard and artificer armor at 3+ on a D10. The D6 system has created a situation where the space marines can't be modeled properly in the game. The D6 doesn't have enough dynamic range for the number of models in the game now.

This I really like, this is a good preposition and it now I think about it, a d6 dice really doesn't have a very dynamic range. Think of the possibilities, every unit in the game would be represented so much better

 redrooster148 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Power armor should be 4+ armor on a D10. Then you could have terminators at 2+ on a D10 and something like sanguinary guard and artificer armor at 3+ on a D10. The D6 system has created a situation where the space marines can't be modeled properly in the game. The D6 doesn't have enough dynamic range for the number of models in the game now.

This I really like, this is a good preposition and it now I think about it, a d6 dice really doesn't have a very dynamic range. Think of the possibilities, every unit in the game would be represented so much better

I throw 50-60 dice on charge. On average. Sometimes 20-30, sometimes 100. d10 would be a bit too unwieldy to both store and use. That's one of the reasons GW moved to d6. It's perfectly fine in skirmish and small squads. But when youhave a possibility to have 30+ strong squads, it's becoming a problem.

Moved? Which dice did they use before?

There was a set of different dice for different type of weaponry. D10, D12 iirc.

Want to know something crazy? I just bought a plastic 5 man scout squad for 20 bucks- gonna put them in a storm. With a combi flamer and a melta bomb...this squad is gonna kill more and have more practical and tactical uses than a marine squad ever could. Sure I drop to a 4+ save but it just doesn't matter. The 3+ hardly offers any more protection. Let me tell you something. I loathe scouts. I want to use marines. They are cooler and supposed to be near impossible to kill - otherwise humanity would be fethed when their 1000 man elite armies were destroyed volleys from their enemies front line troops. I think 2 wounds would be a great solution. Chim on more and more about how anti tank weapons would easily kill them so it wouldn't help. You know whats already killing my marines without issue? Shuirkens, plasmas, just about any squad taking 30 shots at them (just about every shooting squad in the game can do this.) 2 wounds would double their effectiveness vs infantry and that's what needs to happen. Right now they are considered a suicide unit cause thats all they are good at. Thats not being generalist...thats being useless and overpriced.

 koooaei wrote:

 redrooster148 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Power armor should be 4+ armor on a D10. Then you could have terminators at 2+ on a D10 and something like sanguinary guard and artificer armor at 3+ on a D10. The D6 system has created a situation where the space marines can't be modeled properly in the game. The D6 doesn't have enough dynamic range for the number of models in the game now.

This I really like, this is a good preposition and it now I think about it, a d6 dice really doesn't have a very dynamic range. Think of the possibilities, every unit in the game would be represented so much better

I throw 50-60 dice on charge. On average. Sometimes 20-30, sometimes 100. d10 would be a bit too unwieldy to both store and use. That's one of the reasons GW moved to d6. It's perfectly fine in skirmish and small squads. But when youhave a possibility to have 30+ strong squads, it's becoming a problem.

My conscripts can relate to this. Also, FRFSRF on blobs..

 Zewrath wrote:

 koooaei wrote:

 redrooster148 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Power armor should be 4+ armor on a D10. Then you could have terminators at 2+ on a D10 and something like sanguinary guard and artificer armor at 3+ on a D10. The D6 system has created a situation where the space marines can't be modeled properly in the game. The D6 doesn't have enough dynamic range for the number of models in the game now.

This I really like, this is a good preposition and it now I think about it, a d6 dice really doesn't have a very dynamic range. Think of the possibilities, every unit in the game would be represented so much better

I throw 50-60 dice on charge. On average. Sometimes 20-30, sometimes 100. d10 would be a bit too unwieldy to both store and use. That's one of the reasons GW moved to d6. It's perfectly fine in skirmish and small squads. But when youhave a possibility to have 30+ strong squads, it's becoming a problem.

My conscripts can relate to this. Also, FRFSRF on blobs..

D6 has no issues that ca't be fixed by changing the existing stats on units...I don't understand why people keep pointing fingers at the dice. we already roll at least 2 series of dice sometimes as many as 5. If you had to go through more series of dice to kill a marine it would increase it's surivability. And no one would have to go buy more dice.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Codex: Space Marines has been renamed 'Codex: Bolter Dicks'.

Powered Codpiece is a new wargear option.
It has armorbane, for extra penetration.

Though dick is not the male version of bitch.
A bitch is not a reproductive organ.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:
The problem with MEQ's isn't their wounds,.

The problem with them isn't any kind of weakness, what with them being the statistically best army as evidenced by tournaments since their most recent codex was released.

Oooh, Wave Serpents are scary, but the Marines still always win somehow?

I'd imagine that's due to drop pod lists with suicide grav and melta. Otherwise infinite daemons or invisible eldar infantry should take the cake as best army.

I doubt it, because suicide pods aren't that hot.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Zewrath wrote:

 koooaei wrote:

 redrooster148 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Power armor should be 4+ armor on a D10. Then you could have terminators at 2+ on a D10 and something like sanguinary guard and artificer armor at 3+ on a D10. The D6 system has created a situation where the space marines can't be modeled properly in the game. The D6 doesn't have enough dynamic range for the number of models in the game now.

This I really like, this is a good preposition and it now I think about it, a d6 dice really doesn't have a very dynamic range. Think of the possibilities, every unit in the game would be represented so much better

I throw 50-60 dice on charge. On average. Sometimes 20-30, sometimes 100. d10 would be a bit too unwieldy to both store and use. That's one of the reasons GW moved to d6. It's perfectly fine in skirmish and small squads. But when youhave a possibility to have 30+ strong squads, it's becoming a problem.

My conscripts can relate to this. Also, FRFSRF on blobs..

D6 has no issues that ca't be fixed by changing the existing stats on units...I don't understand why people keep pointing fingers at the dice. we already roll at least 2 series of dice sometimes as many as 5. If you had to go through more series of dice to kill a marine it would increase it's surivability. And no one would have to go buy more dice.

That's not true. D6 limits the range of playable stats in the game. People want differentiation, not just marines to be tougher. At least I do.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Though dick is not the male version of bitch.
A bitch is not a reproductive organ.

It is almost an equivalent in the sense it is a gendered insult.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Though dick is not the male version of bitch.
A bitch is not a reproductive organ.

Minute of education on Dakka.

Bolter Bastards would be a closer male equivalent to Bolter Bitches.

I wouldn't be for this, myself. It won't solve the marine survivability much and it would make troops choices for other armies to be even more usess. In addition to the increaded amount of book keeping. I think 40k needs an entire rewrite to address it's balance issues including how easily marines die.

Martel732 wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:
The problem with MEQ's isn't their wounds,.

The problem with them isn't any kind of weakness, what with them being the statistically best army as evidenced by tournaments since their most recent codex was released.

Oooh, Wave Serpents are scary, but the Marines still always win somehow?

I'd imagine that's due to drop pod lists with suicide grav and melta. Otherwise infinite daemons or invisible eldar infantry should take the cake as best army.

I doubt it, because suicide pods aren't that hot.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Zewrath wrote:

 koooaei wrote:

 redrooster148 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Power armor should be 4+ armor on a D10. Then you could have terminators at 2+ on a D10 and something like sanguinary guard and artificer armor at 3+ on a D10. The D6 system has created a situation where the space marines can't be modeled properly in the game. The D6 doesn't have enough dynamic range for the number of models in the game now.

This I really like, this is a good preposition and it now I think about it, a d6 dice really doesn't have a very dynamic range. Think of the possibilities, every unit in the game would be represented so much better

I throw 50-60 dice on charge. On average. Sometimes 20-30, sometimes 100. d10 would be a bit too unwieldy to both store and use. That's one of the reasons GW moved to d6. It's perfectly fine in skirmish and small squads. But when youhave a possibility to have 30+ strong squads, it's becoming a problem.

My conscripts can relate to this. Also, FRFSRF on blobs..

D6 has no issues that ca't be fixed by changing the existing stats on units...I don't understand why people keep pointing fingers at the dice. we already roll at least 2 series of dice sometimes as many as 5. If you had to go through more series of dice to kill a marine it would increase it's surivability. And no one would have to go buy more dice.

That's not true. D6 limits the range of playable stats in the game. People want differentiation, not just marines to be tougher. At least I do.

A nearly all drop pod Ultramarine army with lots of grav has a tendency to demolish Tau or Eldar, as it mitigates their range advantage, or removes it completely.

I brought up the D10 system early on in the thread and have been advocating it for years. The only 'unwieldy" aspect would be packaging of the dice. Little cubes are easier to put into bigger cubes and set nicely on a shelf. Once bought and emptied into the dice bag, they would take up no more space and be just as easy to roll (you would actually have LESS problem with cocked dice when rolling).

I meant range of stats, not range of weapons. Drop lists get you close for a single turn.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Bolter Bastards would be a closer male equivalent to Bolter Bitches.

Bastard is not a gendered insult. Both men and women can be born out of wedlock.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Bolter Bastards would be a closer male equivalent to Bolter Bitches.

Bastard is not a gendered insult. Both men and women can be born out of wedlock.

However it's a bigger insult for men though.

Bastard male children aren't heirs after all unless everyone else is dead.

Well, bastard female children are not heirs either!

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Well, bastard female children are not heirs either!

But women traditionally weren't heirs at all. Especially at Europe, excluding some rare exceptions, they're to be used to unite another house so the Franks will think twice before declaring war.

But historically, "bastard" is incredibly damaging to male heirs.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Well, bastard female children are not heirs either!

But women traditionally weren't heirs at all. Especially at Europe, excluding some rare exceptions, they're to be used to unite another house so the Franks will think twice before declaring war.

But historically, "bastard" is incredibly damaging to male heirs.

but not insurmountable. *looks at William the Conquerer*

BrianDavion wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Well, bastard female children are not heirs either!

But women traditionally weren't heirs at all. Especially at Europe, excluding some rare exceptions, they're to be used to unite another house so the Franks will think twice before declaring war.

But historically, "bastard" is incredibly damaging to male heirs.

but not insurmountable. *looks at William the Conquerer*

True, but it helps when you've got a large army. But Count Nobody-Remembers who lacked any political power being officially labeled a bastard is never touching the throne of his respective land.

 redrooster148 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Power armor should be 4+ armor on a D10. Then you could have terminators at 2+ on a D10 and something like sanguinary guard and artificer armor at 3+ on a D10. The D6 system has created a situation where the space marines can't be modeled properly in the game. The D6 doesn't have enough dynamic range for the number of models in the game now.

This I really like, this is a good preposition and it now I think about it, a d6 dice really doesn't have a very dynamic range. Think of the possibilities, every unit in the game would be represented so much better

i wouldn't put it past GW to try to copywrite a D10

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Bolter Bastards would be a closer male equivalent to Bolter Bitches.

Bastard is not a gendered insult. Both men and women can be born out of wedlock.

However it's a bigger insult for men though.

Bastard male children aren't heirs after all unless everyone else is dead.

So why don't we use the equivalent for men then. Bitch is a female dog. A Stud is a male dog. Terms often used when breeding. So, Bolder Studs. Not as humorous but...

It's humorous if you give them bolt-codpieces.

In the Thousand Sons fan codex I've been working on, anything that isn't a vehicle or a psyker has 2 wounds, and I've had mixed results with it.

The under-the-hood cost I've given that extra wound is 10 points, and it comes with a rule similar to servitor lock. Assuming you kit out your Rubricae to be similar to CSM Thousand Sons, you wind up with a very pricey model.

So far, playtesting has shown that the army *is* very limited in what it can do offensively. Your whole army typically gets bogged down dealing with whatever your opponent's main push is while the rest of his army is free to deal with objectives. However, my 2 wound rubricae *are* extremely durable. Part of this is the 4+ save they're packing, but the two wounds work pretty much the way I'd hoped. Keeping track of wounds isn't as difficult as you might think. If a model has a wound token next to it, it has taken one of its two wounds. If there's no token, it's at full health.

So in other words, I think the two wound thing is more feasible and wieldy than some posters have suggested, but the increase in points is definitely felt.

Again, I don't think two wounds will help Marines. Not at 4 toughness with S8 everywhere. I want to run Nobz a lot more than I can because they die far too easily without their second wound even coming into play. 1 wound Marines would be more than fine if the state of the game was a bit less...explodey.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Want to know something crazy? I just bought a plastic 5 man scout squad for 20 bucks- gonna put them in a storm. With a combi flamer and a melta bomb...this squad is gonna kill more and have more practical and tactical uses than a marine squad ever could. Sure I drop to a 4+ save but it just doesn't matter. The 3+ hardly offers any more protection. Let me tell you something. I loathe scouts. I want to use marines. They are cooler and supposed to be near impossible to kill - otherwise humanity would be fethed when their 1000 man elite armies were destroyed volleys from their enemies front line troops. I think 2 wounds would be a great solution. Chim on more and more about how anti tank weapons would easily kill them so it wouldn't help. You know whats already killing my marines without issue? Shuirkens, plasmas, just about any squad taking 30 shots at them (just about every shooting squad in the game can do this.) 2 wounds would double their effectiveness vs infantry and that's what needs to happen. Right now they are considered a suicide unit cause thats all they are good at. Thats not being generalist...thats being useless and overpriced.

I still agree on this. I'm not sure about points wise, but I think 18 ppm would be probably the best suited, because they can still be easily ID'ed by most weapons, so I'd be hesitant to go more then a 4 point upgrade.

18 ppm is still too low. The SM stat line is far superior to that of the standard Crisis battlesuit, and the space marine is already fully equipped. A Crisis battle suit is more or less a two wound space marine with lower combat abilities traded out for a little bit of extra mobility, no grenades, and zero weapons at a cost of 22 ppm. The only difference from there is that a Crisis Suit squad can then equip special weapons on every model, but that then takes their cost to between 35 to 60 ppm. Where a melta toting space marine would be roughly 30 ppm with 2 wounds.

Changing the wounds characteristic on a standard space marine would still require a full rebalance of the game which it needs now. I have to say I've been in the change to d10s boat for a long time myself. While I understand the argument that it would be a little more cumbersome, but after playing 4 or 5 games everyone would be getting use to it and the complaints would begin to fade just like they do with every new edition of the game. Sure you'll have the people who whine about the old days, just like we do now, and you'll have the people who say they are going to quit, just like they do now, but in the end it will all work out and it will IMHO help balance out a system that already uses stats numbered 1-10.

Noc

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Bolter Bastards would be a closer male equivalent to Bolter Bitches.

Bastard is not a gendered insult. Both men and women can be born out of wedlock.

However it's a bigger insult for men though.

Bastard male children aren't heirs after all unless everyone else is dead.

Good lord you two, let it go. This is Page 4.

This argument gets tossed into a nice giant bag of "Nobody fething cares" and you're once again cluttering up this forum with horsegak.



Back on topic, if you wanted to have tougher Space Marines that fit in closer with the fluff, a supplemental Feel No Pain or I'll Be Back-style save (perhaps 5+?) seems more apt to fit that bill than a second wound. Would better reflect their ability to shrug off wounds.

Nocturus wrote:
18 ppm is still too low. The SM stat line is far superior to that of the standard Crisis battlesuit, and the space marine is already fully equipped. A Crisis battle suit is more or less a two wound space marine with lower combat abilities traded out for a little bit of extra mobility, no grenades, and zero weapons at a cost of 22 ppm. The only difference from there is that a Crisis Suit squad can then equip special weapons on every model, but that then takes their cost to between 35 to 60 ppm. Where a melta toting space marine would be roughly 30 ppm with 2 wounds.

Changing the wounds characteristic on a standard space marine would still require a full rebalance of the game which it needs now. I have to say I've been in the change to d10s boat for a long time myself. While I understand the argument that it would be a little more cumbersome, but after playing 4 or 5 games everyone would be getting use to it and the complaints would begin to fade just like they do with every new edition of the game. Sure you'll have the people who whine about the old days, just like we do now, and you'll have the people who say they are going to quit, just like they do now, but in the end it will all work out and it will IMHO help balance out a system that already uses stats numbered 1-10.

Noc

Crisis Suits also have more survivability, deep strike, and jump moves. Crisis Suits are way more deadly than marines and about the same in CC.

 jreilly89 wrote:

Nocturus wrote:
18 ppm is still too low. The SM stat line is far superior to that of the standard Crisis battlesuit, and the space marine is already fully equipped. A Crisis battle suit is more or less a two wound space marine with lower combat abilities traded out for a little bit of extra mobility, no grenades, and zero weapons at a cost of 22 ppm. The only difference from there is that a Crisis Suit squad can then equip special weapons on every model, but that then takes their cost to between 35 to 60 ppm. Where a melta toting space marine would be roughly 30 ppm with 2 wounds.

Changing the wounds characteristic on a standard space marine would still require a full rebalance of the game which it needs now. I have to say I've been in the change to d10s boat for a long time myself. While I understand the argument that it would be a little more cumbersome, but after playing 4 or 5 games everyone would be getting use to it and the complaints would begin to fade just like they do with every new edition of the game. Sure you'll have the people who whine about the old days, just like we do now, and you'll have the people who say they are going to quit, just like they do now, but in the end it will all work out and it will IMHO help balance out a system that already uses stats numbered 1-10.

Noc

Crisis Suits also have more survivability, deep strike, and jump moves. Crisis Suits are way more deadly than marines and about the same in CC.

Jump moves are not reliable, dice determine how much you get, their deep strike is only reliable if you take farsight or luck out and roll the warlord trait that gives you no scatter deep strike, as for survivability they are the same T4 2W model that you yourself said was too easy to ID.

I agree that good rolls on jump moves can make them extremly survivable. However, a bad roll loses a 150 to 200 pt unit.

I agree being able to deep strike them can prove pivital. However, please take into account that for 35 points any tac squad gains the ability to deep strike WITHOUT THE CHANCE OF MISHAP, and it is objective secured so cannot be ignored.

As for being about equal in CC, I fully disagree. Crisis suits have the minor advantage of being S5 and can be a little more effective against vehicles, but from there the advantage goes to the marine. The marine cannot get overrun (CSM not being talked about here), the marine has the ability to be S6 if needed, and the only similarity is both being a 3+ save. The marine squad has the ability to bring dedicated CC weapons if they chose too. Meaning they can bypass the 3+ save of the crisis suit by taking a power weapon of some sort, and even gain the ability to ID Crisis Suits if they take a PF.

With all that being said, 18 ppm 2W marines ARE too cheap, 22ppm bare bones no guns/upgrades Crisis Suits are fairly well priced, but the real problem is the d6 does not allow enough diversity to encompace these two units. If you put a d10 in its place you will find a far more easily balanced game. It WOULD require most units to be restated and the definition of a weak armour save would have to change, but a lot of them could stay the same. Want to make those SM be suriviable with a d10? Let them keep their 3+ armour. However, in that world the crisis suit deserves to be bumped to a 4+. Still greater than a 50% chance to save considering you now a d10 instead of d6, but it makes a distinction between the two of them. Don't change the stats on the guns either doing this. Plasma should still eat power armour for breakfast, melta should still leave smoking holes in terminators, but imagine how much more effective that 5+ invuln save on termies would be if you were rolling a d10? What about that 2+ armour save against massed pulse fire if you only had a 1 in 10 chance of failing vs your current 1 in 6? The problem finding a solution to a lot of 40ks problems is everyone tries to fix it by thinking inside the bounds of the current rules. If you want to fix it take one step outside your comfort zone and think outside the box. Change one major mechanic and fix ALL the problems instead of changing 50 rules to keep one mechanic.

Noc