I've been doing a lot of thinking about Chapter Approved #2 lately or even a Marines Codex 2.0 and I think I think I have come to a few conclusions to help bring the Marines up to snuff with newer books.
1: Chapter Tactics will apply to every unit with the "chapter" keyword.
Every other "Chapter Tactic" equivalent works for every unit in the book why not Space Marines?
2: All "chapter" Infantry, Bikers and Dreadnoughts reduce the AP of incoming attacks by 1. (IE: A Plasma Gun will only be AP -2 instead of AP -3.)
It's too easy to kill a Marine and Knight Armagiers have made Dreadnoughts obsolete. By reducing incoming AP by 1 I feel like this change will be a HUGE boon to the survivability of space marines and its my biggest proposed change.
3: All vehicles with the "chapter" keyword have the "Power of the Machine Spirit" special rule. Ignoring the penalties for moving and shooting heavy weapons.
Space Marine Tanks suck right now. Predators are totally outclassed, I have never seen anyone play a Vindicator and Razorbacks are troop transports not meant to fill up a parking lot. Dreadnoughts being able to move and shoot at Full BS would also give them a much needed boost to be comparable to something like a Knight Armagier.
4: All "chapter" infantry, bikers, and dreadnoughts gain +1 attack.
In 7th Edition at least Marines had their Initiative 4 which meant that they struck first in Close Combat against "most" opponents. Now with the way close combat works, that is not really the case anymore. An additional attack would help to make up for their loss of "first strike" potential.
5: Make Terminators WS/BS 2+ and 3 Wounds.
I dont remember the last time I saw someone taking Terminators in 8th edition. Matter of fact I dont remember seeing anyone take Terminators in 7th edition either... Make them WS/BS 2+ to make up for their loss of relentless and it only makes sense that a veteran in terminator armor specifically designed for close assault operations is going to be a proficient close combat fighter. It suddenly makes both assault or basic terminators significantly scarier in close combat and less dependent on buffing characters. Combine 3 wounds with my proposed AP modifier and all of a sudden you have a unit you can deep strike viably without NEEDING to get a buff character in with them to get something out of them.
6: Increase the range of all character aura effects by 3 Inches.
Guard have their orders, Tau have their markerlights, Eldar has a hellaciously effective psychic phase and Space Marines have their Re-Roll Auras. Make them slightly larger and it will go a long way to help give marines a more flexible and mobile game play instead of the traditional "castle."
7: Exploding 6s. Count each hit roll of a 6 with "Bolt Weapons" as two instead of 1 when determining the number of to wound rolls made on a target.
Its an exponentially better bolter drill stratagem and its universal. Bolters took a hit in the transition from 7th to 8th loosing the ability to pop flack armor and other similar light infantry. At least give us something to make up for it with volume. Chaos Marines get death to the false emperor in combat this could serve as a loyalist equivalent.
I dont feel like any of these proposed options would be too game breaking.
1. Most people agree with this. Some of the Chapter Tactics need to be worked on though. I was personally a fan of how Imperial Guard handled it, but it would be considerably more work.
2. If you wanted a Chapter to function like Lucius for AdMech I'm okay for that. This rule is far too silly though.
3. Nah. This should be for only a select few vehicles.
4. I'm neutral on this one.
5. I'm basically the person shoving the idea of WS/BS2+ Terminators in everyone's face. However I would rather give them an extra attack instead of an extra wound. You're trying to make them as durable as Custodes, which partly steps on their toes.
6. I would rather focus on making Marines more functional without the need for reroll. The standard 6" is fine as is.
7. I proposed the idea of a 6 To Wound forces the model to reroll a successful save as a new mechanic. Someone else proposes the idea that Bolt weapons cause an extra autohit upon an unsuccessful save. I liked that one as it wasn't too over the top.
So full disclosure, my pet preference for marines in general would be to rework them from the groundup and make them significantly beefier and less numerous than they are now. So I have my biases on marine rules suggestions. Trying to put those aside, I can get behind a lot of this. Some thoughts:
1. Sure. No broken combos jump to mind. Giving pseudo-fly to UM vehicles seems annoying, but some people would like to see that become a rule for vehicles/monsters in general, so...
2. Ehhh. I don't hate this. The proliferation of AP -1 or better weapons, despite feeling good against most targets, does sort of hit marines harder than it probably ought to. My main objection here is that it doesn't do anything to help marines against most small arms fire while also basically negating the investment in better AP options. To me, it's lamer when a marine dies to a random lasgun than when he dies to some shiny xenos weapon designed to get through snazzy armor. Plus, it feels bad to have taken, say, inferno weapons because they're good at killing heavy infantry, only to have half their advantage negated by said heavy infantry. That said, I don't really have an alternative marine durability booster in mind that doesn't involve overhauling marines to look like primaris.
3. This feels weird. I get that it's frustrating when you're to-hit roll of 3 misses, but surely things like eldar should be better at shooting on the move than mon-keigh tanks. And if we give this to all the factions where it makes sense to be good at shooting on the move, then you've just created this weird dispairty between the haves and the have-nots that you'd have to address. Basically, why does it make sense for marines to ignore the heavy weapon penalty but not eldar or tau or orks?
4. I'm for this. (Again, preferably as part of a larger rework)
5. Wouldn't be opposed to this. I think that 3 wounds on terminators does good things for them. Having to fail 3 2+ saves against small arms fire makes them feel properly resistant to such attacks. Being able to take multiple 2 damage hits before dropping feels a lot better than dying to each one. Basically, a lot of the issues with overpriced 2+ saves are diminished when you have 3 wounds instead of 2. This plus the #2 suggestion feels like double-dipping though.
6. Kind of meh on this. To me, marines feel like they should be able to function effectively even while dispersed across the battlefield. I'd rather see them swap some of the auras for something akin to orders. Having your captain shout, "Bring down the xenos machine!" at the right moment to maximize the firepower of his forces feels better than everyone shuffling their feet while bunched together. The aura mania feels more like a tyranid thing, and I suspect it's the result of the designers being told auras were a thing while also coming up with new rules for lieutenants and reimagining ICs like chaplains.
7. I"d be okay with this. It's weird that most armies have a gimmick on their basic guns except marines these days. That said, if you were to overhaul marines more thoroughly, I think you could probably up the volume of shots on marines in some fashion and have that work perfectly well. Add 1 to the bolter's shots if the marine didn't move that turn, or something.
"You're trying to make them as durable as Custodes, which partly steps on their toes. "
Anything that wants to live needs 3W, not 2W. Custodes should be T6 W5, so they are actually better than fricking grotesques. Terminators need 3 wounds imo.
"You're trying to make them as durable as Custodes, which partly steps on their toes. "
Anything that wants to live needs 3W, not 2W. Custodes should be T6 W5, so they are actually better than fricking grotesques. Terminators need 3 wounds imo.
That's an issue with certain D2 weapons. I've already explained why 3 wounds or -1 damage scales terribly. Do I need to do it again?
Shootin Putin wrote: I've been doing a lot of thinking about Chapter Approved #2 lately or even a Marines Codex 2.0 and I think I think I have come to a few conclusions to help bring the Marines up to snuff with newer books.
1: Chapter Tactics will apply to every unit with the "chapter" keyword.
Every other "Chapter Tactic" equivalent works for every unit in the book why not Space Marines?
Wont be happening, Ork codex has the same inane restrictions on units and kultures.
2: All "chapter" Infantry, Bikers and Dreadnoughts reduce the AP of incoming attacks by 1. (IE: A Plasma Gun will only be AP -2 instead of AP -3.)
It's too easy to kill a Marine and Knight Armagiers have made Dreadnoughts obsolete. By reducing incoming AP by 1 I feel like this change will be a HUGE boon to the survivability of space marines and its my biggest proposed change.
I agree, but this should only be for units in Tactical / Primaris armor.
3: All vehicles with the "chapter" keyword have the "Power of the Machine Spirit" special rule. Ignoring the penalties for moving and shooting heavy weapons.
The heavy penalty should only be for non-terminator infantry, and this should apply for all armies.
4: All "chapter" infantry, bikers, and dreadnoughts gain +1 attack.
No. I do NOT want to see Spacewolves with an extra attack, always first hit and ignore first AP value.
5: Make Terminators WS/BS 2+ and 3 Wounds.
No. Ignore first AP, +1 attack at WS AND 3 Wounds?
More elegant solution would be to remove all heavy weapon penalties, including Power fists etc from all terminator like units.
Or, perhaps increase the Invulnerable save of Terminators by 1 per damage of the gun, starting at 6++.
6: Increase the range of all character aura effects by 3 Inches.
No. This removes the punishment of "Aura deathball" using the one or two AOE things in the game.
I'd rather see Marines get their own version of the order system.
7: Exploding 6s. Count each hit roll of a 6 with "Bolt Weapons" as two instead of 1 when determining the number of to wound rolls made on a target.
No.
To sum up for the same points you want:
+1 Attack
Ignore first AP Exploding 6's with a constant reroll aura
WS/BS 2+ on certain units.
Sure, wishlist away but these haven't been though through when added together.
The game needs less of:
- Rerolls
- Auto hits (BS 2+ and Rerolls, begone!)
"You're trying to make them as durable as Custodes, which partly steps on their toes. "
Anything that wants to live needs 3W, not 2W. Custodes should be T6 W5, so they are actually better than fricking grotesques. Terminators need 3 wounds imo.
That's an issue with certain D2 weapons. I've already explained why 3 wounds or -1 damage scales terribly. Do I need to do it again?
I think 3 wounds scales great. I don't accept your explanation, so don't bother. They gave custodes too few wounds, and so now there is no design space left. Not my problem. 3W is a very viable fix. Just like gravis armor granting +1 W as well.
One of the things I am surprised every time I see a battle report is so many armys has a invuln save. SM marines should have one. The price we are paying for each unit, we need an ++
High AP is really only effective vs marines and IGatm. Most other armies have too many invulns at their disposal. That's why I don't take many high AP weapons anymore. And I still have no problem with terminators. -1 is sufficient to remove them, particularly if it 2 damage -1 AP. Hence, the call for 3 wounds.
I think that the humble bolter could use a tweak. Either some kind of +1 damage on 6s, or exploding hits effect on 6s to hit would work.
However, in my mind, the Chapter Tactics need a complete overhaul....look at the Ork Kultures...they are basically THREE things rolled into one.
The other thing is strategems. In the current environment, 90% of them are worthless, overpriced, or both. Need to be brought into line with the rest of the meta.
Finally, ignoring the first point of AP on power armor without reducing cost of the model is a decent step towards making marines feel like bloody marines again.
"You're trying to make them as durable as Custodes, which partly steps on their toes. "
Anything that wants to live needs 3W, not 2W. Custodes should be T6 W5, so they are actually better than fricking grotesques. Terminators need 3 wounds imo.
That's an issue with certain D2 weapons. I've already explained why 3 wounds or -1 damage scales terribly. Do I need to do it again?
I think 3 wounds scales great. I don't accept your explanation, so don't bother. They gave custodes too few wounds, and so now there is no design space left. Not my problem. 3W is a very viable fix. Just like gravis armor granting +1 W as well.
Fine. If you won't accept my explanation, explain HOW three wounds scales well.
The whole game needs more differentiation between units. Terminators and gravis at 3W would differentiate them from 2W primaris. Custodes need to be increased to 5W to get them above grotesques and ogryns. To me, it's about differentiation and protection from 2 damage weapons. I'm not as concerned about scaling. I don't really understand the magnitude of your concern with it, honestly.
Here's something I posted about the design space for Marines a while back, you guys gotta try to work within this otherwise you break or invalidate other chapters and factions.
I think 3 Wound Primaris is a bit over the top, as 2 W is *only* bad right now due to the over abundance of 2 Damage weapons.
imo the only solution is a new mechanic, not more stats as everyone and their mother uses marines as the baseline.
Not to mention that the change cannot be blown out of proportion by the other marine factions.
Here's some of the restricted design space:
- Marines cannot have an extra attack - Space Wolves and Blood Angels benefit from it too much
- Marines cannot have BS 2+ / WS 2+ - Space Wolves trait is now useless
- Removes design space for veterans
- Marines cannot have a FNP - Iron Hands trait is now useless
- No extra wound or attack - muh primaris
- No higher armour save - Kills terminator space
- No rerolling armour save - 2+ rerolling in cover is bad design
This basically means marines must be improved sideways, not vertically.
Some examples of sideways upgrades:
- Ignore first AP of all weapons shot at them
- Reduce damage taken by 1, to a minimum of 1 (This may only apply to Primaris and their brethren)
- Special ammunition variations for all bolters, unique to snowflake faction ( Perhaps change for 1 CP at the start of your turn ) ie.
- Exploding Shot: 2 damage against < INFANTRY > targets
- Neurotoxin Shot: Units shot at by this weapon strike as if they did not charge this turn (Including in overwatch)
- Haywire Shot: For everyone 1 damage suffered by weapons with this shot, reduce its M by 1" and its BS by 1 (to a maximum of 6+).
The special ammunition would also make taking 'max marine squads' good again, as it minimises the cost of changing shots.
imo the only solution is a new mechanic, not more stats as everyone and their mother uses marines as the baseline.
Not to mention that the change cannot be blown out of proportion by the other marine factions.
Here's some of the restricted design space:
- Marines cannot have an extra attack - Space Wolves and Blood Angels benefit from it too much
- Marines cannot have BS 2+ / WS 2+ - Space Wolves trait is now useless
- Removes design space for veterans
- Marines cannot have a FNP - Iron Hands trait is now useless
- No extra wound or attack - muh primaris
You talk about a new mechanic, but I expected that to mean something that's interactive and works in a new way, not that just raise the chances of a save and raise the chances of a wound.
I'm not sure I'm worried about infringing on things like the space wolves' trait, which isn't sacred, it's just a rule and they went without it from third to seventh editions. Primaris don't have a solid and exclusive claim on a second wound. They're brand new.
They could just as well have come out last year with one wound and M7" S5, we'd never even have heard of the second wound. Very very few of these things seem like immovable obstacles.
I don't really understand the "design space" confinement you guys are so worried about. I don't see anyone complaining that Bullgryns are stepping on Custodes toes (or vice versa) with their T5, 2+ sv, and 3W. Yet somehow giving a termie 2 of those 3 is too close to Custodes. (funny enough, Custodes and Bullgryns tend to be viewed more favorably than Termies so there's an argument that it would be a positive change)
To add on to that, I firmly believe that Primaris stats should just be the standard marine stats. Primaris are structurally different anyway, so there's no strict need to make them marines +1. (aside from marketing) And I'd give SoB 2W base (though still at T3) to keep things consistent. Orks and Necrons infantry too while were at it since they're supposed to be tough yet an ork boy dies just as fast as a guardsman (also 2W helps ork specialists like lootas since they use the same basic profile and their major problem is survival). It'd help differentiate heavy infantry to light infantry much more easily (T3 to T4 is only a minor boost after all)
Martel732 wrote: It's his rules. Not mine. As I said, Custodes need 5W.
These are the rules the game has to be designed in to prevent unit roles from stepping on toes.
GW would want this because it lets them sell models, and is a [good] design goal.
The oversaturation of statlines and models ARE a problem, especially for imperium players.
imo the only solution is a new mechanic, not more stats as everyone and their mother uses marines as the baseline.
You talk about a new mechanic, but I expected that to mean something that's interactive and works in a new way, not that just raise the chances of a save and raise the chances of a wound.
I'm not sure I'm worried about infringing on things like the space wolves' trait, which isn't sacred, it's just a rule and they went without it from third to seventh editions. Primaris don't have a solid and exclusive claim on a second wound. They're brand new.
They could just as well have come out last year with one wound and M7" S5, we'd never even have heard of the second wound. Very very few of these things seem like immovable obstacles.
Yes, but if you want to talk about realistic changes you must take those into account.
But in order for marines to NOT be overshadowed by their better brethren, the Primaris they must do something they can't.
Perhaps GW's goal here is for them to be overshadowed, in which case all this theorycrafting is pointless
Well, they aren't going to get that if everything has one or two wounds only and it tops out a three for custodes. They done fethed themselves there.
Regular marines are still better than primaris atm, because they give up points slower to multi-wound and get actual guns.
But after playing against Sisters many times, I'm pretty convinced that tac marines are 10 ppm or 11 at the most. The WS and S don't do a thing (only one swing), and the T doesn't help vs the weapons invalidating marines. If sisters get caught in CC, they just tarpit and the other squads just keep shooting. Because 9 ppm.
One of the problems of too much escalation is you will need AT weapons to kill anything. If Custodes went to 5W then a fething lascannon (an Antitank weapon) will have trouble causing enough wounds.
Orks are supposed to be able to soak more damage than a marine out of armour. You blow a guardsmans arm off he's dead; You blow a marines arm off he out of the battle; You blow an orks arm off he kills you with his other won and staples it back on after the battle.
The ripple effect I think. Small changes can have big effects.
The problem is that elite troops IRL are in trouble when heavily outnumbered. Just look at the special forces that were killed in Mogadishu (see the movie Blackhawk Down for the dramatisation of the real event). There is just too much firepower crammed into modern 40k.
+1 Attack all around (Minus Characters), This would bring up units like Tactical Squads in versatility, and give Assault Squads a little extra punch.
+1 AP for bolt guns. Bolt guns suck. There's no way around it. This would help them against all types of infantry, against which they extremely underperform.
Chapter Tactics apply to everything. This should be for every faction. Ideally, each trait would have a section for vehicle's, but I doubt we'll see that.
Give Vets WS/BS 2+. This should go around for all factions. Ideally, I'd also like to see a smaller amount of rerolls with this change.
Obviously, point costs may need to be adjusted for these, but I think it could go a long way in buffing SM. Other factions this effects, others with bolt guns ect., would need to be reviewed and points would need to be adjusted.
I'd also like to see an Iron Father unit for the IH as a generic HQ, along with a generic Tank Commander and Sniper Sergeant. (Really, just give most named characters a generic version, for Your Dudes.)
+1 Attack all around (Minus Characters), This would bring up units like Tactical Squads in versatility, and give Assault Squads a little extra punch.
+1 AP for bolt guns. Bolt guns suck. There's no way around it. This would help them against all types of infantry, against which they extremely underperform.
Chapter Tactics apply to everything. This should be for every faction. Ideally, each trait would have a section for vehicle's, but I doubt we'll see that.
Give Vets WS/BS 2+. This should go around for all factions (Crisis suits, looking at you.) Ideally, I'd also like to see a smaller amount of rerolls with this change.
Obviously, point costs may need to be adjusted for these, but I think it could go along way in buffing SM. Other factions this effects, others with bolt guns ect., would need to be reviewed and points would need to be adjusted.
I'd also like to see an Iron Father unit for the IH as a generic HQ, along with a generic Tank Commander and Sniper Sergeant. (Really, just give most named characters a generic version, for Your Dudes.)
The first two have been addressed they are called primaris marines they just currently still cost about 2-3 points more than they should.
The chapter tactics thing is annoying but not surr even that would sace marines Vehicals their is just way better for less points out there.
Vets having improved WS,BS ok but not sure ecen as a tau player I can get behind WS2+, BS2+ Crisis suits. They would be nice and nasty but thats custodes levels of stats.
+1 Attack all around (Minus Characters), This would bring up units like Tactical Squads in versatility, and give Assault Squads a little extra punch.
+1 AP for bolt guns. Bolt guns suck. There's no way around it. This would help them against all types of infantry, against which they extremely underperform.
Chapter Tactics apply to everything. This should be for every faction. Ideally, each trait would have a section for vehicle's, but I doubt we'll see that.
Give Vets WS/BS 2+. This should go around for all factions (Crisis suits, looking at you.) Ideally, I'd also like to see a smaller amount of rerolls with this change.
Obviously, point costs may need to be adjusted for these, but I think it could go along way in buffing SM. Other factions this effects, others with bolt guns ect., would need to be reviewed and points would need to be adjusted.
I'd also like to see an Iron Father unit for the IH as a generic HQ, along with a generic Tank Commander and Sniper Sergeant. (Really, just give most named characters a generic version, for Your Dudes.)
The first two have been addressed they are called primaris marines they just currently still cost about 2-3 points more than they should.
The chapter tactics thing is annoying but not surr even that would sace marines Vehicals their is just way better for less points out there.
Vets having improved WS,BS ok but not sure ecen as a tau player I can get behind WS2+, BS2+ Crisis suits. They would be nice and nasty but thats custodes levels of stats.
1: Honestly, screw primaris marines. They should just be removed from the game. I know GW won't do this because they want their new special marines, but this is a wishlist.
2: Yes. They are worse than some other vehicles. Remove grinding advance, or add it, and the issue is fixed (mostly).
3: I mean BS3+, WS4+ Crisis suits. Ideally Commanders would be the same. Vets should be on a Character level, and Characters should usually be just a little bit better than their counterparts.
+1A -1AP, actually most of these fixes people have demanded seem so linear, and they were always a huge turnoff for being.
I was actually pretty offended by Primaris because they were a capitulation to that kind of thinking.
Heckington do you mean shas'ui or sha'vre? I think it's pretty important, actually.
see to me, shas'ui and veteran marines have an exceptional amount of gumption, and that's what makes them exceptional compared to regular soldiers. It seems more likely that there'd be a skilled marksman who's content to do his job as a regular soldier, and an average shot who has unusual grit and gets promoted to the elite or sergeant level corps, in marines or tau.
Then out of those units there are some who also have unusual amounts of skill, and they are from where the Shas'vre, the Sanguinary Guard, honor guard, and deathwing knights come.
pelicaniforce wrote: +1A -1AP, actually most of these fixes people have demanded seem so linear, and they were always a huge turnoff for being.
I was actually pretty offended by Primaris because they were a capitulation to that kind of thinking.
Heckington do you mean shas'ui or sha'vre? I think it's pretty important, actually.
see to me, shas'ui and veteran marines have an exceptional amount of gumption, and that's what makes them exceptional compared to regular soldiers. It seems more likely that there'd be a skilled marksman who's content to do his job as a regular soldier, and an average shot who has unusual grit and gets promoted to the elite or sergeant level corps, in marines or tau.
Then out of those units there are some who also have unusual amounts of skill, and they are from where the Shas'vre, the Sanguinary Guard, honor guard, and deathwing knights come.
I'd say sergeants of squads should keep the same stats, with their extra A and LD (Heck, you could remove the A.) The main reason for this is simplicity. Veteran Squads should be better than their counterparts in stats that actually matter, we already see this in play with Guard Vets. Why not other factions?
Yes, the marine fixes are linear. The other solution is to add more special rules. I don't think we need more special rules. I think with the removal of Primaris, it'd slot in a good slot for Marines. Their 3+ SV, and T4 still make them tough, while -1 AP and +1 A make them reasonably decent at offensive power. Heck you could even keep Primaris, they still have 2 wounds, which is a pretty big difference.
Really - these would all be great changes. As a whole this list addresses all the issues I have with the army even going as far as to give some more flexibility to positioning on the battle field.
The only thing that is missing is a rework of a few stratagems and psychic powers but that's not as big as an issue as the issues listed above.
Man...Shootin Puttin's first post is remarkably on point for a newb...I wonder who he really is...
I'd say sergeants of squads should keep the same stats, with their extra A and LD (Heck, you could remove the A.) The main reason for this is simplicity. Veteran Squads should be better than their counterparts in stats that actually matter, we already see this in play with Guard Vets. Why not other factions?
Tau suit pilots and the fire warrior sergeants are the same rank, they are shas'ui and they're interchangeable.
Then there is a better grade of suit pilot, called the shas'vre, and if anyone they should get bs3+ ws4+, just like the marines all have a better grade of elite unit who usually have some 2+ skill. There's a good grade of elite who should get the higher skills they often have, and then there are basic elites who should are definitionally basically qualifying elites.
Statswise it's almost universally that way in fantasy in 40k. A basic unit has a champion, 40k marines and guard call them sergeants, and then an elite unit is a unit of champions.
Veteran Squads should be better than their counterparts in stats that actually matter,
BS is the only skill for shooting, and the elite stats A and Ld are useless in shooting because the whole profile comes straight from warhammer fantasy and warhammer historicals. So the problem is that A, the stat that elite units get, doesn't have a shooting use, as a result of it's origin as Bow Skill.
Obviously, Attacks are a stat that matters way more than WS in close combat, so shooting is the main concern.
Veteran Squads should be better than their counterparts
Fluffwise, I don't think that there's a good argument they should have better skill. Gamewise, they're miles better in assault because they have better attacks and Ld, and so they should just get better shooting from their attacks and Ld stats.
The other solution is to add more special rules.
That's one bad solution. Another solution is since there are lots of guns in the setting, characters should have more than one stat that affects guns. Stats like, for example, Attacks and Leadership. So make attacks and leadership power up your shooting, and then you don't have to worry about maxing out the WS/BS chart for guys who are definitely near the middle of the skill levels compared to elites+, DE succubi, Eversor assassins, greater daemons, etcetera.
Yes, but if you want to talk about realistic changes you must take those into account.
But in order for marines to NOT be overshadowed by their better brethren, the Primaris they must do something they can't.
Perhaps GW's goal here is for them to be overshadowed, in which case all this theorycrafting is pointless
I mean I don't really care about GWs goals and for me realistic changes involve being able to ignore some of GWs stuff because their process is always going to yield things that are less than ideal for gameplay.
I'd say sergeants of squads should keep the same stats, with their extra A and LD (Heck, you could remove the A.) The main reason for this is simplicity. Veteran Squads should be better than their counterparts in stats that actually matter, we already see this in play with Guard Vets. Why not other factions?
Tau suit pilots and the fire warrior sergeants are the same rank, they are shas'ui and they're interchangeable.
Then there is a better grade of suit pilot, called the shas'vre, and if anyone they should get bs3+ ws4+, just like the marines all have a better grade of elite unit who usually have some 2+ skill. There's a good grade of elite who should get the higher skills they often have, and then there are basic elites who should are definitionally basically qualifying elites.
Statswise it's almost universally that way in fantasy in 40k. A basic unit has a champion, 40k marines and guard call them sergeants, and then an elite unit is a unit of champions.
Veteran Squads should be better than their counterparts in stats that actually matter,
BS is the only skill for shooting, and the elite stats A and Ld are useless in shooting because the whole profile comes straight from warhammer fantasy and warhammer historicals. So the problem is that A, the stat that elite units get, doesn't have a shooting use, as a result of it's origin as Bow Skill.
Obviously, Attacks are a stat that matters way more than WS in close combat, so shooting is the main concern.
Veteran Squads should be better than their counterparts
Fluffwise, I don't think that there's a good argument they should have better skill. Gamewise, they're miles better in assault because they have better attacks and Ld, and so they should just get better shooting from their attacks and Ld stats.
The other solution is to add more special rules.
That's one bad solution. Another solution is since there are lots of guns in the setting, characters should have more than one stat that affects guns. Stats like, for example, Attacks and Leadership. So make attacks and leadership power up your shooting, and then you don't have to worry about maxing out the WS/BS chart for guys who are definitely near the middle of the skill levels compared to elites+, DE succubi, Eversor assassins, greater daemons, etcetera.
Yes, but if you want to talk about realistic changes you must take those into account.
But in order for marines to NOT be overshadowed by their better brethren, the Primaris they must do something they can't.
Perhaps GW's goal here is for them to be overshadowed, in which case all this theorycrafting is pointless
I mean I don't really care about GWs goals and for me realistic changes involve being able to ignore some of GWs stuff because their process is always going to yield things that are less than ideal for gameplay.
1: They are the same rank. But this is about gameplay, not fluff. For simplicity, keep all the members in a Fire Warrior squad to be 4+ BS, and all the Crisis suit members will be 3+ BS. Those are the elites. Veteran Space Marines are the elites. They get a better BS. That's how it should work imo.
2: Yes, so bring up their BS, WS, A and LD. Melee is much harder to get into, and their points should be balanced as needed.
3: Well since attacks and LD don't affect shooting, and won't, you buff their shooting. Then, you get the question, why are they better at shooting but not in melee? So WS gets boosted.
4: Agreed. That's why I think the BS/WS system should be overhauled to allow for more granularity. I'd like a chart that compared BS to a stat, and WS to a stat, giving you more options.
5: Yep. I think adding in Primaris was a mistake because it basically kills any room for changing around marines without some stupid special rules.
And yes, GW won't remove Primaris marines. They are here to stay.
GW Also won't fix Marines in a reasonable way. The most they'll actually do is a point decrease for power armour hordes. Does that mean we shouldn't discuss this?
Any buff to a standard tactical marines should also be passed onto primaris marines.
If tacs get +1 wound - so should primaris. If Tacs bet -1 ap on bolters - BR should go to ap-2. If points get dropped to 10 for a tac. A primaris should go down to 15.
Though - ITT - it was just suggested that power armor get a -1 to incoming AP. This would scale well across the codex and buff both tacs and primaris simultaneously.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: I mean I fully support BS3+ Crisis Suits. I don't know how I feel about them getting WS4+, but it isn't like they'll hurt much so I don't care.
Bodyguards used to have WS 3, but got nerfed for some reason. It explains why commanders had WS 4. So while commanders got ported over with WS 3+, bodyguards ended up with WS 5+.
+1 Attack all around (Minus Characters), This would bring up units like Tactical Squads in versatility, and give Assault Squads a little extra punch.
+1 AP for bolt guns. Bolt guns suck. There's no way around it. This would help them against all types of infantry, against which they extremely underperform.
I really really support +1 attack all around, with the proviso that it has to affect shooting too. There is so much wasted opportunity in raising attacks but not adding a shooting effect to having high attacks. +1 attacks on a basic tactical squad just means you have a unit that's nearly mediocre in close combat and even less good at shooting. +1 attack in combat and a shooting boost from attacks makes way more sense.
as for boltguns sucking, that's yet another reason to give marines +1a and a bonus connected to their shooting attacks. What should it be? You've already said you want -1AP. If they're shooting at a unit that has only one attack, give them a -1ap, why not? Even better, veterans who would then have 3 attacks could get -1AP against marines, ork boyz, and tau suits, anything. You don't even have to give up bolters having their own -1ap, they could have -1 ap and stack it with the attacks bonus, and use that to wipe out 5+ saves like they used to.
Veteran Space Marines are the elites.
What about sanguinary guard, ultramarine honor guard, Tau bodyguard teams and Black Legion Bringers of Despair? they are the elitest above those elites, what about their design space? You've talked about intruding on design space, what do they get when the people they are drawn from already have bs/ws2+?
Well since attacks and LD don't affect shooting, and won't
why not? this is proposed rules. Having three stats exclusively for close combat vs one for shooting is silly when everyone has space ships and guns.
4: Agreed. That's why I think the BS/WS system should be overhauled to allow for more granularity.
You can get granularity by pasting shooting effects onto the basically useless +1A +1Ld that veterans and sergeants have. Shooting veterans like sternguard and shooty chosen have two attacks. Shas'ui fire warrior leaders and shas'ui crisis teams have two attacks that are completely useless because they are specifically supposed to be bad at shooting. So we can just give attacks a shooting function, and then you have to have both good bs and good attacks to be truly good at shooting, creating way more granularity and also having a unified "good soldier" stat. If you're a veteran, even if you aren't specialized in either cc or shooting, you should automatically get more wily and better generally at both of them than a regular trooper is.
The existence of Primaris marines means that any buff normal marines to their stats get is stepping on their toes.
More attacks? Primaris. More AP? Primaris. More wounds? Primaris.
No, change what Primaris are - there's no reason they shouldn't have something else instead of bonus wounds. I think Primaris should go down to the same wounds as regular marines and get +1 M, +1 S instead. They are complete monsters, I think like they should act like it and go really fast and punch hard, even though they are supposedly civilized shooting units. That also makes them more interesting and keeps them from being just betterized marines.
GW Also won't fix Marines in a reasonable way. The most they'll actually do is a point decrease for power armour hordes. Does that mean we shouldn't discuss this?
We should discuss it a lot and play with rules that are better than what GW can make, and definitely never even think about whether GW's goal is for them to be overshadowed.
What about sanguinary guard, ultramarine honor guard, Tau bodyguard teams and Black Legion Bringers of Despair? they are the elitest above those elites, what about their design space? You've talked about intruding on design space, what do they get when the people they are drawn from already have bs/ws2+?
Well since attacks and LD don't affect shooting, and won't
why not? this is proposed rules. Having three stats exclusively for close combat vs one for shooting is silly when everyone has space ships and guns.
4: Agreed. That's why I think the BS/WS system should be overhauled to allow for more granularity.
You can get granularity by pasting shooting effects onto the basically useless +1A +1Ld that veterans and sergeants have. Shooting veterans like sternguard and shooty chosen have two attacks. Shas'ui fire warrior leaders and shas'ui crisis teams have two attacks that are completely useless because they are specifically supposed to be bad at shooting. So we can just give attacks a shooting function, and then you have to have both good bs and good attacks to be truly good at shooting, creating way more granularity and also having a unified "good soldier" stat. If you're a veteran, even if you aren't specialized in either cc or shooting, you should automatically get more wily and better generally at both of them than a regular trooper is.
The existence of Primaris marines means that any buff normal marines to their stats get is stepping on their toes.
More attacks? Primaris. More AP? Primaris. More wounds? Primaris.
No, change what Primaris are - there's no reason they shouldn't have something else instead of bonus wounds. I think Primaris should go down to the same wounds as regular marines and get +1 M, +1 S instead. They are complete monsters, I think like they should act like it and go really fast and punch hard, even though they are supposedly civilized shooting units. That also makes them more interesting and keeps them from being just betterized marines.
GW Also won't fix Marines in a reasonable way. The most they'll actually do is a point decrease for power armour hordes. Does that mean we shouldn't discuss this?
We should discuss it a lot and play with rules that are better than what GW can make, and definitely never even think about whether GW's goal is for them to be overshadowed.
1: That's an issue with GW not putting enough room for granularity in the game.
2: Melee is already extremely hard to get into, assault is extremely weak.
Does shooting need more buffs??
3: That is true, but how would you do it? There are a lot of interesting mechanics to be explored with these stats I think.
4: No opinion here.
5: Agreed. It's why were here after all.
I think having attacks effecting shooting could be interesting. How would you balance that though? Obviously melee would need to be changed, more reliable to get into.
endlesswaltz123 wrote: When hit with weapons up to AP 1 (so AP:- and AP:1) they may re-roll unsuccessful saves.
In case of deathguard, yes this would work for them but they'd need a point increase across the board for it.
And that's just far too much work. The issue with Plague Marines is something that plagues (heh) CSM armies as a whole, and has relation to the issues Marines do have. Personally I think fixing Bolt weapons and giving them an extra attack (these guys should be Vets after all) would go a long way to making them more appealing.
What if bolter weapons instead of getting more AP, increased in RoF?
Maybe make them either Rapid Fire 2 or Assault 3?
And 2 damage on 6s to wound.
Thoughts?
Never been a big fan of things on 6s, they aren't that useful. More shots would work, but Rapid Fire 2 might be too much. A single tactical squad putting out 40 shots. Assault 3 could work, maybe just a special rule that lets them fire 1 extra shot.
What if bolter weapons instead of getting more AP, increased in RoF?
Maybe make them either Rapid Fire 2 or Assault 3?
And 2 damage on 6s to wound.
Thoughts?
Some time ago I suggested +1 shot within half range (so 3 shots total) specifically for tactical marines to represent their training with the boltgun, but someone thought it made them too close to FW for some reason.
Anyway, the idea being that Marines should want to get close to use all their cool stats (shooting and melee) and this gives them extra reward for at least being close. I also don't want to encourage sitting still.
The other consideration is the plethora of other units with boltguns: both guard and sisters can use and do use boltguns all the time, so any buffs to the bolter also buffs them. And quite frankly, the boltgun only sucks on marines. A 4 pt guardsmen with a 1 pt boltgun is actually really good. So I'd say give the marines the ability and not the gun.
One more option would be to give marines a unique boltgun that does whatever you think should apply.
Points cost and AP raising would help space marines quite a bit, not shifting their list around to be more confusing. I would remove units that don't serve a purpose in the codex (Centurions & vindicators for example).
But the crux of my argument is the following...
Essentially if space marines received a -1 ap to all BOLT weapons they would be far better and would deal with far more.
while also reducing the cost of melta weapons, grav, and heavy weapons up to a half cost (or 20%).
If a space marine is paying a premium cost of 17 points (almost the entire amount for a new model) then that should be changed... Veteran units should be encouraged to take special weapons and heavy weapons and take a cost reduction on all heavy weaponry.
Reducing terminator costs for equipment by 2/3s would help tremendously (Right now a chainfist is as expensive as a scout, previously a chainfist was only 1 pts more than a regular powerfist)
Allowing for 'legio' esque rules for each chapter to allow for interesting combinations, and giving all 'walker' units or dreadnoughts and vehicles access to special rules. And allowing space marines to have the "We fight alone" special rule that gives them the "bolter drill" Special rule if they are a mono army.
ON the topic of vehicles the entirety of 8th edition is anti-vehicle, there is no reason to take any space marine vehicle due to the sheer cost of having one, in previous editions space marine vehicles (predator and razorback for example) never broke the 130pts mark. Even in 7th and 6th.
Terminators need the following buffs: Ap -1 on their storm bolters / combi-bolters, and 6" movement. (assault cannons REND or gain an extra shot for each six rolled on WOUNDing rolls) and a points cost reduction to equipment (by 20 - 60%, storm bolters are FREE for terminators and Termies to have a special rule "SLOW But Relentless" which prevents them from being advanced upon and can fire heavy weapons at no penalty (Like they used to have)). I also believe that Terminators require some much-needed love in just crunching and/or being able to take more of them instead of being punished for taking them (more of them you take the less expensive they become!).
Space Marine Primaris are already good no changes needed for them. Scouts need to be reduced down from their current bs to BS +4 (as they are neophytes after all). While also reducing their effectiveness over taking a Tactical Squad who are meant to be the main part of a Space Marine Strike Force.
I still think taking space marines all by themselves should confer you a BONUS along with bolt weapons just being better bang for their buck. Or just wounding anything with a 5+ armor save far easier.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also seeing as you said Primaris are good as is you haven't a clue what you're talking about.
Rule #1 please and thank you
They are good. Aggressors are great, Inceptors are wonderful, Hellblasters are the best Heavy Weapons unit for space marines. Intercessors in comparison to most of their other troop choices (other than scouts) are great. There is no reason to take a tactical squad over an intercessor squad or a scout squad. Scout squads trump all other choices though just based on cheapness and access to sniper rifles.
If all bolt weapons get -1 ap then bolt Rifles are ap -2.
All of a sudden that intercessor squad becomes what they should be, an elite unit. If you bump down equipment costs for tactical squads and give them access to better chapter tactics, tactical vs intercessors would be a real consideration.
If you take one point out of my post and that is Primaris are fine its because I already said "GIVE ALL BOLT WEAPONS -1 AP". They not only go from "Eh" To "What the hell." Really quickly.
Points wise space marines are fine, its their equipment that is over costed and medicore rules.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also seeing as you said Primaris are good as is you haven't a clue what you're talking about.
Rule #1 please and thank you
They are good. Aggressors are great, Inceptors are wonderful, Hellblasters are the best Heavy Weapons unit for space marines. Intercessors in comparison to most of their other troop choices (other than scouts) are great. There is no reason to take a tactical squad over an intercessor squad or a scout squad. Scout squads trump all other choices though just based on cheapness and access to sniper rifles.
If all bolt weapons get -1 ap then bolt Rifles are ap -2.
All of a sudden that intercessor squad becomes what they should be, an elite unit. If you bump down equipment costs for tactical squads and give them access to better chapter tactics, tactical vs intercessors would be a real consideration.
If you take one point out of my post and that is Primaris are fine its because I already said "GIVE ALL BOLT WEAPONS -1 AP". They not only go from "Eh" To "What the hell." Really quickly.
Points wise space marines are fine, its their equipment that is over costed and medicore rules.
I never violated Rule 1. Also just based on the fact you said Scouts are great with Sniper Rifles, you really don't know what you're talking about. Even Insectum7 would show more awareness than your post and he is a diehard Marine defender.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also seeing as you said Primaris are good as is you haven't a clue what you're talking about.
Rule #1 please and thank you
They are good. Aggressors are great, Inceptors are wonderful, Hellblasters are the best Heavy Weapons unit for space marines. Intercessors in comparison to most of their other troop choices (other than scouts) are great. There is no reason to take a tactical squad over an intercessor squad or a scout squad. Scout squads trump all other choices though just based on cheapness and access to sniper rifles.
If all bolt weapons get -1 ap then bolt Rifles are ap -2.
All of a sudden that intercessor squad becomes what they should be, an elite unit. If you bump down equipment costs for tactical squads and give them access to better chapter tactics, tactical vs intercessors would be a real consideration.
If you take one point out of my post and that is Primaris are fine its because I already said "GIVE ALL BOLT WEAPONS -1 AP". They not only go from "Eh" To "What the hell." Really quickly.
Points wise space marines are fine, its their equipment that is over costed and medicore rules.
I never violated Rule 1. Also just based on the fact you said Scouts are great with Sniper Rifles, you really don't know what you're talking about. Even Insectum7 would show more awareness than your post and he is a diehard Marine defender.
Have you ever faced a deathguard player using the zombie list? No? Scouts with sniper rifles can shoot that blob.
Now they aren't Eldar Rangers, but overall they are far better than taking a tactical or intercessor squad.
If you take scouts you take them with camo cloaks and raven guard tactics. Which not only make them a beefy target to deal with but are hard as nails to kill. Sniper rifles also have great area denial for 'characters' and break more hero armies. But as they are part of the space marines I would not take them entirely by themselves. The point is, scouts are cheap, really cheap, you don't want a ton of them but they are an excellent smokescreen for your army.
Yeah you can take shotguns with them but they need to be very close, you can also take bolters which is one of the major reasons to take them. But the problem becomes why would you ever take a scout squad out of cover if they have camo cloaks? One of the major reasons to field them?
You either take an entire army built around cheesing your opponent with cheap units, but you would not use space marines to do this if there are better armies to use other than Ultras and Bobby G.
Camo Cloaks are possibly one of the worst upgrades in the game right now. You make them more expensive than a Tactical Marine for only the same durability by individual model in cover!
With Scouts you take Shotguns or the CCW. Sniper Rifles are like 2 points too expensive, and Camo Cloaks are just silly. For the price you have better sources of Bolters. Ya know if you want them for whatever reason.
Also what exactly are the Scouts with Sniper Rifles going to do to a Zombie list? They sure as hell aren't gonna kill a buff character, and 5 shots won't kill a horde.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also seeing as you said Primaris are good as is you haven't a clue what you're talking about.
Rule #1 please and thank you
They are good. Aggressors are great, Inceptors are wonderful, Hellblasters are the best Heavy Weapons unit for space marines. Intercessors in comparison to most of their other troop choices (other than scouts) are great. There is no reason to take a tactical squad over an intercessor squad or a scout squad. Scout squads trump all other choices though just based on cheapness and access to sniper rifles.
If all bolt weapons get -1 ap then bolt Rifles are ap -2.
All of a sudden that intercessor squad becomes what they should be, an elite unit. If you bump down equipment costs for tactical squads and give them access to better chapter tactics, tactical vs intercessors would be a real consideration.
If you take one point out of my post and that is Primaris are fine its because I already said "GIVE ALL BOLT WEAPONS -1 AP". They not only go from "Eh" To "What the hell." Really quickly.
Points wise space marines are fine, its their equipment that is over costed and medicore rules.
I never violated Rule 1. Also just based on the fact you said Scouts are great with Sniper Rifles, you really don't know what you're talking about. Even Insectum7 would show more awareness than your post and he is a diehard Marine defender.
Have you ever faced a deathguard player using the zombie list? No? Scouts with sniper rifles can shoot that blob.
Now they aren't Eldar Rangers, but overall they are far better than taking a tactical or intercessor squad.
If you take scouts you take them with camo cloaks and raven guard tactics. Which not only make them a beefy target to deal with but are hard as nails to kill. Sniper rifles also have great area denial for 'characters' and break more hero armies. But as they are part of the space marines I would not take them entirely by themselves. The point is, scouts are cheap, really cheap, you don't want a ton of them but they are an excellent smokescreen for your army.
Yeah you can take shotguns with them but they need to be very close, you can also take bolters which is one of the major reasons to take them. But the problem becomes why would you ever take a scout squad out of cover if they have camo cloaks? One of the major reasons to field them?
You either take an entire army built around cheesing your opponent with cheap units, but you would not use space marines to do this if there are better armies to use other than Ultras and Bobby G.
Scouts with sniper rifles are cheap?
Have you even looked at Astra Millicheese codex that is cheap units. Nothing about marines is cheap. Heck most of the codex isn't worth it's point's.
Bolt rifles being -2AP is OP for a basic troop weapon. Even Pulserifles IIRC wear AP4 are AP0 now FFS an Autocannon and geavy bolter are AP -1.
I don't see neccesary increasing the AP from the Intercessors rifles. Yes, the "normal" Boltgun should be AP -1, it is a 24" weapon. The Bolt Rifle can stay AP -1 as they are 30".
I see as good idea increasing the AP of the bolters if they are at half range, they are shooting mini grenades.
Have you even looked at Astra Millicheese codex that is cheap units. Nothing about marines is cheap. Heck most of the codex isn't worth it's point's.
What did I say?
You either take an entire army built around cheesing your opponent with cheap units, but you would not use space marines to do this if there are better armies to use other than Ultras and Bobby G.
Your stretching there mate. My point has been : "Scouts are the best options for troop choices, they are incredibly flexible and increase in value depending on what chapter tactics you take." +2 Armor save and -1 to hit for a troop choice is kind of awesome. *only if you take raven guard tactic and camo cloak*
I get reading an entire paragraph is difficult but ignoring points made in a discussion is a bit much.
Deathwatch are looking at AP -2 Bolt Rifles and AP -1 Auto Bolt Rifles and laughing hysterically.
They don't have that? What about equipment decreases?
I don't think Primaris are supposed to stand up by themselves. I don't think they ever have been meant to play entirely solo.
I don't see neccesary increasing the AP from the Intercessors rifles. Yes, the "normal" Boltgun should be AP -1, it is a 24" weapon. The Bolt Rifle can stay AP -1 as they are 30".
I do agree, but then auto bolt rifle profiles would be that much worse in comparision to just taking a bolter, just raising all bolt weapon profiles by ap - 1 would go a long way, or increasing their rate of fire at half distance.
Just make them cheaper. Power armor horde works fine for sisters. Lore doesn't matter on the table tap, only efficacy at this point. BA can do NONE of the things in the fluff on the table top already.
Martel732 wrote: Just make them cheaper. Power armor horde works fine for sisters. Lore doesn't matter on the table tap, only efficacy at this point. BA can do NONE of the things in the fluff on the table top already.
If someone wants power armor horde, they can play Sisters. This is about making Marines worth their cost.
Deathwatch are looking at AP -2 Bolt Rifles and AP -1 Auto Bolt Rifles and laughing hysterically.
They don't have that? What about equipment decreases?
Oh they have that, but they don't get to auto-wound anything that isnt a tank with a roll of a 2 in that profile.
Baseline bullets hitting on 3s (rerolling 1s) wounding on 2s (rerolling 1s) with AP-2? The cheese is strong with this one.
Yet people don't use deathwatch?
Even I don't like using deathwatch as they are too limited in what they are doing. (In terms of chapter tactics, their other abilities are great but i only ever take em as detachment but losing the raven guard or ultramarine special rule on them is not worth the risk in some occassions)
Even I don't like using deathwatch as they are too limited in what they are doing.
*shrug*
I'm having an absolute blast with my Primaris Deathwatch. Some folks can't wrap their head around Imperial aspect warriors I guess. I'm not one of them.
Even I don't like using deathwatch as they are too limited in what they are doing.
*shrug*
I'm having an absolute blast with my Primaris Deathwatch. Some folks can't wrap their head around Imperial aspect warriors I guess. I'm not one of them.
I am fine with that honestly.
I would love to have aspect warriors for 40k marines.
Or honestly anything from the 30k space marine armies. Volkite weaponry or anything that raises the value of having a space marine army. (like legion rules, or chapter specific units)
You already do. They're called Primaris Space Marines.
Eh, I can see that now that you mention it but it means every other squad is now not up to par to space marines.
Deathwatch is far less limited than regular Marines.
Seriously after all these posts in this thread, I'm not convinced you play Marines. At all.
Well so far you have ignored the majority of my points. Or completely glossed over them.
Lets try it similarly : Then you haven't played death watch then have you? They are limited. Chapter tactics, chapter relics etc. But you would never take a single mono army of space marines or deathwatch as that is stupidity incarnate in this current meta and play styles.
Deathwatch fuzzled out, the only reason to take deathwatch would be troop choices (intercessors with auto bolt rifles) and maybe 2 watch captains. Other than that there is nothing in their army to take because they are just space marines with no additional benefits that could initially help them.
Overall no scouts are the best troop choices for space marines (if you go mono) but at that point just get guardsmen for cheap CP and don't even take space marines except for Bobby G.
Having all those Chapter Tactics is a false choice though because literally only one was good, Raven Guard, and they nerfed one of the best parts about them. So your relics are limited too (ooooh +1T for Salamanders! Give me a break).
And yeah they do have a benefit. They get the Lt. benefit baked into their cost for your choice target type. That's REALLY good for the cost. And you can switch that target type for only 2CP.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Seriously. I don't think you looked at any Marines ever. Your posts are super misinformed.
Deathwatch fuzzled out, the only reason to take deathwatch would be troop choices (intercessors with auto bolt rifles) and maybe 2 watch captains. Other than that there is nothing in their army to take because they are just space marines with no additional benefits that could initially help them.
Overall no scouts are the best troop choices for space marines (if you go mono) but at that point just get guardsmen for cheap CP and don't even take space marines except for Bobby G.
Deathwatch have their Chapter Tactics in their Mission and SIA profiles, which they can adjust on the fly against every target. Combine with the mixed unit rules and you can tailor terrifyingly flexible and specific loadouts.
Their only real shortcoming is a lack of AT, which can be easily overcome with FW and allies.
1. Scouts are best troop choice by default because how tacs severely under perform for their cost.
2. Scouts aren't taken for their offensive output, but for their flexible deployment option that provides much needed screening for SM. When taken for their offensive output, shotguns have highest offensive output point-for-point under right circumstances among non-special weapons they can take
3. Sniper rifle looks good on paper, but you're relying on a pot-shot 6's to actually deal damage as they are S4 AP0. Sniper rifles were good when they had S X, when they did +4 to wound against non-vehicle targets. Even against a humble Commissar, you're dealing 1W only 29.62% per shot, with 7.41% chance to deal MW. Even THEN the commissar would still be alive with 1 W.
Paying 11 pts for 4+ armor REALLY sucks, though. At least tacs and intercessors can hold their ground vs bolter bitches. Scouts just melt b/c 3+ is where they top out. It's really a lose lose lose position.
Martel732 wrote: Paying 11 pts for 4+ armor REALLY sucks, though. At least tacs and intercessors can hold their ground vs bolter bitches. Scouts just melt b/c 3+ is where they top out. It's really a lose lose lose position.
Yeah, they're CLEARLY the worst at that. Not like there's a now 7 PPM model that only has a 6+. And has worse shooting.
Martel732 wrote: Paying 11 pts for 4+ armor REALLY sucks, though. At least tacs and intercessors can hold their ground vs bolter bitches. Scouts just melt b/c 3+ is where they top out. It's really a lose lose lose position.
Yeah, they're CLEARLY the worst at that. Not like there's a now 7 PPM model that only has a 6+. And has worse shooting.
It's a model with a much more effective melee output. Of course it has worse shooting. For the cost though, you almost get 2 Shoota Boyz, which I'd say is better.
Scouts really only have the deployment shenanagins. That's it.
Martel732 wrote: Paying 11 pts for 4+ armor REALLY sucks, though. At least tacs and intercessors can hold their ground vs bolter bitches. Scouts just melt b/c 3+ is where they top out. It's really a lose lose lose position.
Yeah, they're CLEARLY the worst at that. Not like there's a now 7 PPM model that only has a 6+. And has worse shooting.
It's a model with a much more effective melee output. Of course it has worse shooting. For the cost though, you almost get 2 Shoota Boyz, which I'd say is better.
Scouts really only have the deployment shenanagins. That's it.
2 Shoota Boyz are 14 points now.
A Scout is 11 points.
The Scout has much better armor, better shooting, better deployment, better movement...
The Boyz have better melee, but with slower movement and worse deployment, are not likely to get there very intact.
Martel732 wrote: Paying 11 pts for 4+ armor REALLY sucks, though. At least tacs and intercessors can hold their ground vs bolter bitches. Scouts just melt b/c 3+ is where they top out. It's really a lose lose lose position.
Yeah, they're CLEARLY the worst at that. Not like there's a now 7 PPM model that only has a 6+. And has worse shooting.
Are you talking about Orks? Those Orks that can be taken in absolutely huge mobs, that have multiple ways to avoid taking horrendous losses in the morale phase,and that are meant to be rubbish at shooting (though in huge mobs with the dakkadakka rule are very effective) because they absolutely munch you in combat, that they will get into because of said morale shenanigans. You really can't compare the two as the individual special rules and mechanics of each army add or take away value, and in the sake of the orks, they add huge value.
Martel732 wrote: Paying 11 pts for 4+ armor REALLY sucks, though. At least tacs and intercessors can hold their ground vs bolter bitches. Scouts just melt b/c 3+ is where they top out. It's really a lose lose lose position.
Yeah, they're CLEARLY the worst at that. Not like there's a now 7 PPM model that only has a 6+. And has worse shooting.
It's a model with a much more effective melee output. Of course it has worse shooting. For the cost though, you almost get 2 Shoota Boyz, which I'd say is better.
Scouts really only have the deployment shenanagins. That's it.
2 Shoota Boyz are 14 points now.
A Scout is 11 points.
The Scout has much better armor, better shooting, better deployment, better movement...
The Boyz have better melee, but with slower movement and worse deployment, are not likely to get there very intact.
It really isn't better shooting for the price, and in fact is more around the same The two Boyz would land 1.3 ordinarily, sure. That's not including the DDD rule though (honestly I didn't want to math that out), and that's actually the same average for a Scout shooting at Rapid Fire range (1.3). So 3 points over but with the DDD rule kinda evens out.
I won't deny durability (though not a lot is there) and deployment, but let's not pretend the Scout really shoots better.
At 18-24", Scout is infinitely better because they have range and Boyz don't.
At 12-18", Scouts get .061 hits per point, whereas Boyz get (WITH Dakka Dakka Dakka) .052 hits per point.
At under 12", Scouts get improved to .121 hits per point, Boyz stay the same.
If the enemy is Ravenguard or, worse, a Stealth Suit (or anything else that ALWAYS imposes a -1 on shooting), Boyz drop to .014 hits per point whenever they're in range.
Scouts, meanwhile, are at .045 at greater than 12" and at .091 at 12" or less.
Their shooting is better by a significant margin.
Edit: Feth, I completely forgot that Shootas are two shots.
Nevermind, Ork Shooting does edge out Scout shooting. (Unless facing a -1 hit penalty.)
Martel732 wrote: Paying 11 pts for 4+ armor REALLY sucks, though. At least tacs and intercessors can hold their ground vs bolter bitches. Scouts just melt b/c 3+ is where they top out. It's really a lose lose lose position.
Yeah, they're CLEARLY the worst at that. Not like there's a now 7 PPM model that only has a 6+. And has worse shooting.
It's a model with a much more effective melee output. Of course it has worse shooting. For the cost though, you almost get 2 Shoota Boyz, which I'd say is better.
Scouts really only have the deployment shenanagins. That's it.
2 Shoota Boyz are 14 points now.
A Scout is 11 points.
The Scout has much better armor, better shooting, better deployment, better movement...
The Boyz have better melee, but with slower movement and worse deployment, are not likely to get there very intact.
boys don't move 6? Plus they have assault weapon - and an army trait which lets them ignore the penalty for advancing and shooting assault weapons + bonus advance dice. WOW.
Fun fact: I can charge a full 20-man Crusader Squad with melee weapons into their equivalent points in Boyz and have the privilege of losing when I swing first. Replace the Crusader Squad with literally any other melee unit in the book and the result is the same. So maybe, just maybe, I have a bit of a tough time feeling sympathy for the poor downtrodden Orks.
Obligatory mention of the fact that you can double the attacks of any melee units in the Marine Codex and still be worse per point than Khorne Berzerkers in offensive output bar some edge cases.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: Fun fact: I can charge a full 20-man Crusader Squad with melee weapons into their equivalent points in Boyz and have the privilege of losing when I swing first. Replace the Crusader Squad with literally any other melee unit in the book and the result is the same. So maybe, just maybe, I have a bit of a tough time feeling sympathy for the poor downtrodden Orks.
Obligatory mention of the fact that you can double the attacks of any melee units in the Marine Codex and still be worse per point than Khorne Berzerkers in offensive output bar some edge cases.
Look out, some more wild hyperbole from people wanting sympathy for their poor downtrodden marines.
Did you forget that your Crusaders have melee weapons? Or forget about their pistols. Oh, I know. They forgot their privilege of donning their armour that battle!
Assuming you get your "20 man charge" against a full healthy squad of "30 orks" this is what happens:
Bolt Pistol Shooting
20 * 4/6 * 3/6 * 5/6 = 5.55 Dead Orks
Overwatch
Choppa Boyz with overwatch:
(26 * 2/6 * 3/6 * 2/6) + (26 * 1/6 * 2/6 * 3/6 * 2/6) = 1.68 dead crusaders, including Dakka Dakka Dakka!
Melee
37 * 4/6 * 3/6 * 5/6 = 10.27 Dead Orks
And now the Orks strike back
44 * 4/6 * 3/6 * 2/6 = 4.88 Dead Crusaders
Nob w/ Power Klaw
3 * 3/6 * 5/6 * 5/6 = 1.041 Dead Crusaders
So thats 110 points worth of dead orks, 87 Points of dead Crusaders
Followed by the Morale phase which will wipe out at least 1d6 additional Orks.
Also note, this isn't including any of your marine rerolls.
Automatically Appended Next Post: You also forgot the new Strength and Damage on the Flash Gitz gun too.
Choppa Boyz with overwatch:
(31 * 2/6 * 3/6 * 2/6) + (31 * 1/6 * 2/6 * 3/6 * 2/6) = 2.009 dead crusaders, including Dakka Dakka Dakka!
Which Klan rules?
Flash Gitz were so stupidly overpriced for a less than 1 shot on average round of firing, so it's not really comparable.
Edit: It also doesn't include lost Orks from shooting
There's several Klan rules that would've had effect: Goffs, Snakebites, Deathskulls, and Bad Moonz (though that would've been minimal effect on the Overwatch). Freebooterz it would have to depend on earlier.
The only thing that Black Templars can do is guarantee a charge.
Automatically Appended Next Post: You also forgot the new Strength and Damage on the Flash Gitz gun too.
Choppa Boyz with overwatch:
(31 * 2/6 * 3/6 * 2/6) + (31 * 1/6 * 2/6 * 3/6 * 2/6) = 2.009 dead crusaders, including Dakka Dakka Dakka!
Which Klan rules?
Flash Gitz were so stupidly overpriced for a less than 1 shot on average round of firing, so it's not really comparable.
Edit: It also doesn't include lost Orks from shooting
There's several Klan rules that would've had effect: Goffs, Snakebites, Deathskulls, and Bad Moonz (though that would've been minimal effect on the Overwatch). Freebooterz it would have to depend on earlier.
The only thing that Black Templars can do is guarantee a charge.
Goffs are about 0.8 extra dead marines
Deathskulls does nothing
Snakebites is about 1.8 less dead Orks
Badmoons is about 2.34413580247 dead orks in overwatch (extra 0.3 more)
I'm not sure what mathhammer for Orks had to do with a wishlist for marines.
I'd be happy with 2 attacks for base marine and a drop to 12 points for now.
I've used primaris and I've used non primaris. The difference in combat output is significant. I feel the 2 attacks idea helps back up the generalist idea of marines.
Zustiur wrote: I'm not sure what mathhammer for Orks had to do with a wishlist for marines.
I'd be happy with 2 attacks for base marine and a drop to 12 points for now.
I've used primaris and I've used non primaris. The difference in combat output is significant. I feel the 2 attacks idea helps back up the generalist idea of marines.
Agree with the points reduction. About the two base attacks I am not sure about it. I prefer they way improving the weapons. Maybe improve the base attacks on the assault marines. I shoot with marines and mostly I don't want to put them into close combat. On the other side maybe you are right. If primaris has two base attacks why not the straight ones.
But I still prefer a point reduction and weapon improve
Zustiur wrote: I'm not sure what mathhammer for Orks had to do with a wishlist for marines.
I'd be happy with 2 attacks for base marine and a drop to 12 points for now.
I've used primaris and I've used non primaris. The difference in combat output is significant. I feel the 2 attacks idea helps back up the generalist idea of marines.
Agree with the points reduction. About the two base attacks, I am not sure about it. I prefer they way improving the weapons. Maybe improve the base attacks on the assault marines. I shoot with marines and mostly I don't want to put them into close combat. On the other side maybe you are right. If primaris has two base attacks why not the straight ones.
But I still prefer a point reduction and weapon improve
A points drop for equipment would be a nice start and lowering the cost of terminators would go a long way in giving space marines their much needed heavy infantry a much-needed buff. (Or giving each option the codex a special rule accessible if you have an Sgt in the squad, (similar to Aspect Warriors of the Eldar)
Space marines are outperformed in almost every regard on paper and in tournaments, much of the great part of space marines was nerfed very hard by this edition and subpar unit entries that suffer entirely because of over adjusting (Grav Weaponry for example). Or some options completely being left out.
With the ready access to Multiple damage weapons currently out there this edition, there is little reason to take multi wounds like primaris as it means very little if they get blasted apart so commonly by even the most basic weapons from less expensive squads or units.
We also have some of the worst vehicles or overcosted vehicles in the game (other than poor necrons). Its why I dub most of the equipment cost on all weapons in the codex the "Space Marine Tax", Heavy Bolter in guardsmen codex 8 points, Space Marine Codex 10 points... Lascannon 25 pts, Guardsmen Codex : 17 pts. Yeah, that's just a massive mark up unnecessarily.
Twinlinked weaponry are also double the cost of everything making them very risky to take as you could get the same firepower for cheaper from other imperial codexes.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: Fun fact: I can charge a full 20-man Crusader Squad with melee weapons into their equivalent points in Boyz and have the privilege of losing when I swing first. Replace the Crusader Squad with literally any other melee unit in the book and the result is the same. So maybe, just maybe, I have a bit of a tough time feeling sympathy for the poor downtrodden Orks.
Obligatory mention of the fact that you can double the attacks of any melee units in the Marine Codex and still be worse per point than Khorne Berzerkers in offensive output bar some edge cases.
Look out, some more wild hyperbole from people wanting sympathy for their poor downtrodden marines.
Did you forget that your Crusaders have melee weapons? Or forget about their pistols. Oh, I know. They forgot their privilege of donning their armour that battle!
Assuming you get your "20 man charge" against a full healthy squad of "30 orks" this is what happens:
Bolt Pistol Shooting
20 * 4/6 * 3/6 * 5/6 = 5.55 Dead Orks
Overwatch
Choppa Boyz with overwatch:
(26 * 2/6 * 3/6 * 2/6) + (26 * 1/6 * 2/6 * 3/6 * 2/6) = 1.68 dead crusaders, including Dakka Dakka Dakka!
Melee
37 * 4/6 * 3/6 * 5/6 = 10.27 Dead Orks
And now the Orks strike back
44 * 4/6 * 3/6 * 2/6 = 4.88 Dead Crusaders
Nob w/ Power Klaw
3 * 3/6 * 5/6 * 5/6 = 1.041 Dead Crusaders
So thats 110 points worth of dead orks, 87 Points of dead Crusaders
Followed by the Morale phase which will wipe out at least 1d6 additional Orks.
Also note, this isn't including any of your marine rerolls.
Sorry, should've specified that I was talking about Index prices for Boyz, not the new 7 PPM Boyz. The 1 PPM difference actually lets me win if I manage to get the charge, hence why I roll my eyes at Ork players who gnash their teef about how their army is ruined now.
EDIT: To be more on topic, I think the two biggest issues with the transition from 7th edition to 8th edition from a Space Marine perspective is the change in the AP system and the change in how pistols and charging work.
Previously, a 3+ save was a 3+ save, even against Autocannons and the like. Despite complaints about how it was "unrealistic" that a more powerful weapon had less chance to penetrate I actually think this made more sense; if I'm shooting at the main belt of a battleship it doesn't matter if I use an AK47 or a 6" destroyer cannon; they're both going to bounce harmlessly off the armour, despite the fact that a 6" shell could gut a building while a bullet from an AK47 most certainly couldn't. With the new armour penetration system, Marines really should've dropped to a 2+ save, potentially even better. Sure, you get a 6+ save against AP-3 weapons now, most of which were at least AP3 in the old system, so that's an improvement, but you've lost in power massively against stuff that's AP-1 and AP-2, the stuff that were mostly AP4 in the old system. Plus, there's something absurd with cover being more effective the better your armour save.
Regarding pistols and the loss of attacks from charging, this impacted Marine units heavily because they have few attacks on their profile. In 7th edition Honour Guard had 4 attacks with their Power Weapons on the charge (5 if you brought a banner which you always did, but that's not part of this discussion); in 8th you get 2 attacks and a bolt pistol shot. Sure, you now hit on 3+ rather than 4+, but that's still one hell of a drop in power. Similarly, Thunder Hammer Terminators and Veterans have lost 33% of their hitting power on the charge, which just isn't compensated by not being I1 any longer. The amount of S4 attacks you get dropped on the charge (2 attacks + pistol with chainsword vs. the old 3 attacks + pistol) but is otherwise slightly improved between the 3+ to hit and being able to shoot your pistol in CC, but here's the catch; S4 AP0 melee attacks are rubbish unless you've got an obscene amount of them, like Orks. The loss of quality attacks really hurt the Marine elite melee units.
There's also an argument to be made that the loss of Initiative 4 also hampered Marines, but that's a story for another time.
Wow guys this was a much more enthusiastic response than I was expecting from my first post. i realize a lot of this may seem wishlisty and can in fact sep on the toes of other factions. In an ideal world both the cost of a marine "body" and war gear require some significant adjustment but seeing as I dont think even GW know how to quantify the value of a "point" when determining a models "value" I dont think I am the right guy to mathhammer out that statistical significance. However, I for one dont see any reason why a meltagun costs more than the Space Marine Shooting it? Thats just bonkers to me.
To the hopeful souls desperate for marines to get a second wound. I understand the reasoning behind it but I dont think it would ever happen. it would do amazing things in terms of durability and help them regain some of the fabeled durability of pervious editions. It would "defeat" the purpose of why GW brought about Primaris Marines. But when I think about it, on the subject of Primaris Marines there is a fairly straightforward way to balance them in relation to your "Normal Space Marine" if Marines were to get two wounds. That solution is to just add a point of toughness. There now they are back to what they were introduced as which were IMO "Marines +1"
After a little bit more reflection and reading some of your responses I have come up with a few changes to my initial proposals.
1: No Changes
2: No Changes
3: Only dreadnoughts should benefit from POTMS along with vehicles that already have it. Quad las predators hiding behind LOS blocking terrain, killshot, no penalty to hit and re rolls would be quite silly.
4: No Changes
5: No Changes
6: We really dont need this... However I would like to see a system in place for a "build a hero" options with additional special rules you could "pay points for" for non named characters. Could be cool for people wanting to build their own chapter.
7: Bolt guns, I often forget that other factions get access to bolters... Sorry Sisters of Battle players (All 8 of you. ) and any changes to them need to scale appropriately. SO my new proposed ruling for bolt guns would simply be a simple Space Marine specific special rule.
"Transhuman Physiology" -(chapter) units may treat (Bolt Guns) as "Assault 2" (Storm Bolters) as "Assault 4" and so on and so on. That funky Primaris bolt gun thats already assault that nobody uses anyways? Give it an extra shot or something, I dont give a damn. On the plus side, this makes Hurricane Bolters Insane. My LRC would actually see a table again.
Marines are S4 they are strong enough to support a full auto bolt gun and still shoot accurately. Poor unagumented guardsmen and sisters are still humbly S3.
Until my Men in Black get some much needed love I guess I will continue to play the game on hard mode. Sigismund would have wanted it that way anyways.
+1 Attack all around (Minus Characters), This would bring up units like Tactical Squads in versatility, and give Assault Squads a little extra punch.
+1 AP for bolt guns. Bolt guns suck. There's no way around it. This would help them against all types of infantry, against which they extremely underperform.
I really really support +1 attack all around, with the proviso that it has to affect shooting too. There is so much wasted opportunity in raising attacks but not adding a shooting effect to having high attacks. +1 attacks on a basic tactical squad just means you have a unit that's nearly mediocre in close combat and even less good at shooting. +1 attack in combat and a shooting boost from attacks makes way more sense.
as for boltguns sucking, that's yet another reason to give marines +1a and a bonus connected to their shooting attacks. What should it be? You've already said you want -1AP. If they're shooting at a unit that has only one attack, give them a -1ap, why not? Even better, veterans who would then have 3 attacks could get -1AP against marines, ork boyz, and tau suits, anything. You don't even have to give up bolters having their own -1ap, they could have -1 ap and stack it with the attacks bonus, and use that to wipe out 5+ saves like they used to.
Veteran Space Marines are the elites.
What about sanguinary guard, ultramarine honor guard, Tau bodyguard teams and Black Legion Bringers of Despair? they are the elitest above those elites, what about their design space? You've talked about intruding on design space, what do they get when the people they are drawn from already have bs/ws2+?
Well since attacks and LD don't affect shooting, and won't
why not? this is proposed rules. Having three stats exclusively for close combat vs one for shooting is silly when everyone has space ships and guns.
4: Agreed. That's why I think the BS/WS system should be overhauled to allow for more granularity.
You can get granularity by pasting shooting effects onto the basically useless +1A +1Ld that veterans and sergeants have. Shooting veterans like sternguard and shooty chosen have two attacks. Shas'ui fire warrior leaders and shas'ui crisis teams have two attacks that are completely useless because they are specifically supposed to be bad at shooting. So we can just give attacks a shooting function, and then you have to have both good bs and good attacks to be truly good at shooting, creating way more granularity and also having a unified "good soldier" stat. If you're a veteran, even if you aren't specialized in either cc or shooting, you should automatically get more wily and better generally at both of them than a regular trooper is.
The existence of Primaris marines means that any buff normal marines to their stats get is stepping on their toes.
More attacks? Primaris. More AP? Primaris. More wounds? Primaris.
No, change what Primaris are - there's no reason they shouldn't have something else instead of bonus wounds. I think Primaris should go down to the same wounds as regular marines and get +1 M, +1 S instead. They are complete monsters, I think like they should act like it and go really fast and punch hard, even though they are supposedly civilized shooting units. That also makes them more interesting and keeps them from being just betterized marines.
GW Also won't fix Marines in a reasonable way. The most they'll actually do is a point decrease for power armour hordes. Does that mean we shouldn't discuss this?
We should discuss it a lot and play with rules that are better than what GW can make, and definitely never even think about whether GW's goal is for them to be overshadowed.
1: That's an issue with GW not putting enough room for granularity in the game.
2: Melee is already extremely hard to get into, assault is extremely weak.
Does shooting need more buffs??
3: That is true, but how would you do it? There are a lot of interesting mechanics to be explored with these stats I think.
For shooting, I'd compare the shooter's attack to the defender's. If one model's is higher, they get a bonus. See this way it kind of moderates the effect, because giving it a defensive shooting bonus means that cc and shooting elites both benefit from the rule and it raises all ships, at least in the balance between cc and shooting. The bonus for the shooter would be -1 ap. If the defender has more attacks, and they're in cover, they get a 5++.
When comparing attacks, you put three different stats into the shooting phase, instead of the current one stat. You get the attacker BS, the attacker A, and the defender A. That's a lot more granularity, so you don't have veteran guardsman with bolter being just the same as marine company company veteran with bolter. I also think this makes it much more reasonable to do +1 A globally on marines like you have said you like. I think it should be the AP value that gets the bonus for a lot of reasons involving all the other options being bad choices.
The thing is that it's already a useful stat in the assault phase, and a useful stat in the attacking shooting phase. I think the way to sort of moderate the effect, so that it doesn't really unbalance shooting vs. assault that much, is to use it in the phase that both kinds of units participate in, and that is their opponent's shooting phase.
4: No opinion here.
5: Agreed. It's why were here after all.
I think having attacks effecting shooting could be interesting. How would you balance that though? Obviously melee would need to be changed, more reliable to get into.
Yeah there are two aspects to balancing this with melee. One is that melee is already weak and hard to get into; that needs to be fixed independently of whether this happens or not. That's kind of a separate issue from elites getting good in all the phases not just cc. I actually don't think that it means changing melee/assaulting rules themselves, I think it that shooting needs to be changed so it's not just having enough guns + range makes cc units die.
The other is that thing where cc units with high attacks get a defensive bonus.
1: I agree here. Astartes shouldn't forget how to fight like their chapter just because they are driving a tank.
2: This could work, though we'd have to see how it interacts with the more durable astartes groups like Death Guard and Thousand Sons. Imagine trying to shift Rubrics or SOT in cover.
3: I'd be fine with this if there were a "if it moves at half speed or stays still" for rhino hulls. Dreads I'm fine with move & shoot no penalty though.
4: As much as I would love by murderblob of skyclaws to be throwing out 92 attacks on the charge, I'm going to have to 'no' this one. There are other ways to make marines better in combat. Because remember, there are CHAOS marines as well. Do you want to fight berserkers with 3 attacks base?
5: Terminators need something. I disagree on this being that something. Perhaps one or two of the following. Give them their old "roll 2d6 save" rule. True grit all the time (can fire rapid fire/assault weapons in CC as if they were pistols). Ignore hit penalties for hammers/fists on the charge.
6: Auras are dumb. If a unit cannot stand on its own without daddy to be around to babysit them, they should go back to the 10th company. Or be sacrificed to the Gods. Maybe if all the auras weren't the same damn thing I'd be more ok with it. A bike captain giving advance+shoot/charge to nearby bikes. Terminator captain FNP or 1/2 damage to minimum of 1 to nearby terminators. Jump captains giving +2" to advance/charge to nearby Jumpy dudes. Make them interesting. 7: Meh. Exploding dice only really work well if you throw buckets of dice. Take it from someone with a pure tempestas force. It rarely comes into play.
My thoughts on where improvement can happen:
I. Chapter tactics all suck. All of them. Even you smurfs and emo marines.
--Ultramarines are supposed to have nearly peerless tactical precision, not being cowards to leg it the moment a couple termigants get in their way. Give them some way to synergize. Shoot with at a thing with a tactical squad, get +1 to hit and/or wound when you fire at them with a devistator squad or assault squad. Replace Tac/Dev/Assault with Intercessor/Hellblaster/Reaver.
--Fists are bolter masters and fortification specialists. Any unit that only fires bolt weapons may fire their bolt weapons a second time at -1 to hit. Can take fortifications as dedicated transports, and the fortification gets BS 3+.
--Raven guard sneaky. Always get benefit of cover, and if they are actually in cover, reduces AP of incoming fire by 1. Nobody likes fighting against negative hit modifier armies.
--Salamanders like fire from what I hear. Any flame weapon rolls two dice and picks highest for # of shots, perhaps increase range of all flame weapons by 50% as well. If they kill a model with a Melta weapon, they may fire again (maybe limit this to only 1 extra shot/kill?).
--Iron Hands are hard to kill and are awesome with tech. All shooting attacks that target IH get -1 strength. Techmarines become elites and you get 1-5 per slot. All non-vehicle characters can repair.
--White Scars like to go fast. They once painted their armor red, but they went so fast it all peeled off. +2 movement to all bikes. Infantry without the Terminator keyword may disembark after a vehicle moves and act normally.
--BT like to sword things out and hate psykers. Re-roll charges and improve ap of Melee weapons by 1 on charge, anything can deny the witch but only rolls 1d6, characters roll 2d6.
--BA Like to fly and stuff. +1 to wound on charge is awesome. Anything with FLY charges an extra d3 inches, and can declare charges against anything in its max charge distance.
--SW actually have a decent CT. That 6" heroic intervention has caught quite a few people with their pants down in my area already.
II. Less awful stratagems. Way too much to list, plus I'm out of creative juice for now.
Xenomancers wrote: Really - these would all be great changes. As a whole this list addresses all the issues I have with the army even going as far as to give some more flexibility to positioning on the battle field.
The only thing that is missing is a rework of a few stratagems and psychic powers but that's not as big as an issue as the issues listed above.
Man...Shootin Puttin's first post is remarkably on point for a newb...I wonder who he really is...
I am just a dude who likes 40k and hates to see my my Black Templars so criminally underpowered. I usually stuck to a more casual local meta and never really thought about taking the plunge into competitive until I was convinced by a friend to give a local tournament a shot... I am by no means a novice gamer (Been around since 6th edition.) but wow can some of those soup lists really bring the pain. "Note to self, if you want to play melee marines your gonna have a bad time."
The Marine Stratagems IMO are "mostly" useless and as a Templar Player I cant rightly speak to the effectiveness of the psychic phase.
In a game the only stratagems I use regularly would be "Honor the Chapter." 3CP IMO is a little steep for what oftentimes can be an underwhelming round of attacks. "Only in death does duty end." 2CP eh I feel like thats actually ok. Sure I would love for my Smash Captain to get another round of combat against the knight that just stomped him to death and "Wisdom of the Ancients." Its pretty handy on a Mortis Dred so I dont need to baby sit a firebase with a captain that I typically want to get stuck into close combat ASAP.
As for any possible points adjustments, I dont even think GW has figured out the actual value of what a "point" is worth? They claim that the game is built using space marines as a base but lets be real here, clearly something is WAY outa wack. IMO the biggest issue is how expensive Marine Wargear is, why the are Melta Guns 4 points more than the genetically modified power armored super soldier wielding it? I "think" if nothing were to change rules wise a points drop across the board would go a long way to helping space marine effectiveness.
Personally, I think a huge bonus for Space Marines would be a change in transports. If the humble rhino and drop pod were to get a points drop AND allow Primaris units to take them it COULD do amazing things for the army. Getting your boys where they can do the maximum amount of damage is a HUGE boon to the effectiveness of a space marine army. My old 7th ed Gladius remembers those days fondly. Plus I may or may not have a dozen rhino chassis sitting around collecting dust.... I would do some questionable things to get a rhino with a transport capacity of 11-12 instead of 10 so you can take a full squad/ pair of combat squads AND their ever so important Captain/Lts.
After reading this entire thread I would have to say I love the idea of cutting the equipment cost. I think that would go a long way towards putting SM where they need to be. Looking at how 8th was setup, I think that this is more of a problem with the fact that the edition is more suited for horde armies and not factions that are geared toward a smaller count with elite units.
Some more BT love wouldn't hurt, but I'm not sure that is entirely on topic.
Xenomancers wrote: Really - these would all be great changes. As a whole this list addresses all the issues I have with the army even going as far as to give some more flexibility to positioning on the battle field.
The only thing that is missing is a rework of a few stratagems and psychic powers but that's not as big as an issue as the issues listed above.
Man...Shootin Puttin's first post is remarkably on point for a newb...I wonder who he really is...
I am just a dude who likes 40k and hates to see my my Black Templars so criminally underpowered. I usually stuck to a more casual local meta and never really thought about taking the plunge into competitive until I was convinced by a friend to give a local tournament a shot... I am by no means a novice gamer (Been around since 6th edition.) but wow can some of those soup lists really bring the pain. "Note to self, if you want to play melee marines your gonna have a bad time."
The Marine Stratagems IMO are "mostly" useless and as a Templar Player I cant rightly speak to the effectiveness of the psychic phase.
In a game the only stratagems I use regularly would be "Honor the Chapter." 3CP IMO is a little steep for what oftentimes can be an underwhelming round of attacks. "Only in death does duty end." 2CP eh I feel like thats actually ok. Sure I would love for my Smash Captain to get another round of combat against the knight that just stomped him to death and "Wisdom of the Ancients." Its pretty handy on a Mortis Dred so I dont need to baby sit a firebase with a captain that I typically want to get stuck into close combat ASAP.
As for any possible points adjustments, I dont even think GW has figured out the actual value of what a "point" is worth? They claim that the game is built using space marines as a base but lets be real here, clearly something is WAY outa wack. IMO the biggest issue is how expensive Marine Wargear is, why the are Melta Guns 4 points more than the genetically modified power armored super soldier wielding it? I "think" if nothing were to change rules wise a points drop across the board would go a long way to helping space marine effectiveness.
Personally, I think a huge bonus for Space Marines would be a change in transports. If the humble rhino and drop pod were to get a points drop AND allow Primaris units to take them it COULD do amazing things for the army. Getting your boys where they can do the maximum amount of damage is a HUGE boon to the effectiveness of a space marine army. My old 7th ed Gladius remembers those days fondly. Plus I may or may not have a dozen rhino chassis sitting around collecting dust.... I would do some questionable things to get a rhino with a transport capacity of 11-12 instead of 10 so you can take a full squad/ pair of combat squads AND their ever so important Captain/Lts.
First - I was calling you a newb to dakka. I saw this was your first overall post. It might be one of the best first posts ever. I like most of your changes.
I agree that wargear costs are a great place to make adjustments to the marine codex. There isn't a single weapon I can equip to a tactical marine that I feel I am paying a fair cost for. There isn't a single infantry model outside of a captain that I feel I am paying a fair cost for. When it comes to tanks - the stalker and the stormhawk are the only reasonably costed vehicals - maybe venerable dreads too but really - these are just "okay" options compared to the rest of the imperium.
Sorry, should've specified that I was talking about Index prices for Boyz, not the new 7 PPM Boyz. The 1 PPM difference actually lets me win if I manage to get the charge, hence why I roll my eyes at Ork players who gnash their teef about how their army is ruined now.
Even then, it shows that Boyz are having their asses canned by an army that people cry "is ruined now". It goes both ways.
That being said, I don't think Ork Boyz are in as bad of a spot (right now) compared to how tactical marines are.
But out of the changes in the OP, only 1 or 2 of them should be implemented.
Sorry, should've specified that I was talking about Index prices for Boyz, not the new 7 PPM Boyz. The 1 PPM difference actually lets me win if I manage to get the charge, hence why I roll my eyes at Ork players who gnash their teef about how their army is ruined now.
Even then, it shows that Boyz are having their asses canned by an army that people cry "is ruined now". It goes both ways.
That being said, I don't think Ork Boyz are in as bad of a spot (right now) compared to how tactical marines are.
But out of the changes in the OP, only 1 or 2 of them should be implemented.
They're not though, they're mutually obliterating a unit they should be weak to (high volume low S attacks) when they get charged.
While we're on the subject of Orks though, can I have my Chapter Tactic refunded? It's kinda getting sad at this point...
Until my Men in Black get some much needed love I guess I will continue to play the game on hard mode. Sigismund would have wanted it that way anyways.
Loyalists pft. (10/10 remark though)
Can you imagine that Marines are actually not the poorest f'thers out there?
I honestly belive that baseline marines should not be the metric unit anymore for pricing. I think the Guardsmen would serve better for it and i suspect that for atleast the following units it was the guardsmen that was taken as a meassurment standart: Kabalists, firewarriors.
I still not quite understand why the price hike for boyz happened, i never really felt they were the problem.
The price hike for Boyz happened because they're really good. They still are. I'm not certain they required a price hike, but with all the added stuff they can do now they're certainly still going to be playable at 7 PPM.
"You're trying to make them as durable as Custodes, which partly steps on their toes. "
Anything that wants to live needs 3W, not 2W. Custodes should be T6 W5, so they are actually better than fricking grotesques. Terminators need 3 wounds imo.
Honestly I feel like the Custodes are what marines should be. Let's be fair, did we really even need a custodes army? Everything they do on the table, is basically the fluff description of what marines do in the 41st millennium.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AlmightyWalrus wrote: The price hike for Boyz happened because they're really good. They still are. I'm not certain they required a price hike, but with all the added stuff they can do now they're certainly still going to be playable at 7 PPM.
So far the price hasn't made me consider not running them. I don't really think it was all that big a deal.
are Melta Guns 4 points more than the genetically modified power armored super soldier wielding it? I "think" if nothing were to change rules wise a points drop across the board would go a long way to helping space marine effectiveness.