Considering the number of rumors and reviews going around, I've decided to put everything in a google doc so the people on the board can have something to reference when discussion on the new codex happens. I will attempt to update it as I'm searching for more information. Most of this is based on what was revealed in the Warhammer Community articles and Winters SEO's review.
Ap-2 bolt rifles are fine I think - 3 would be too much. I wonder how the math works now for Guilliman. Sure we can't reroll all wound but our wounds that succeed have a better chance of going through (barring invulns of course)
Marine on Marine violence is going to be brutal. The AP system change combined with weight of dice have made their ability to stay on the table fleeting.
Now matches against their own will be potent doses of both right from the word go.
What are people's thoughts on Incursors? To me the seem better than Infiltrators. Ignoring cover* and modifiers is a solid ability and the mine is a nasty trick. Their knives also make them a bit better in melee. And the seem to be cheaper. But perhaps I'm undervaluing the anti-DS bubble of the Infiltrators.
* It is a bit annoying though that the share this ability with IF chapter trait.
Relics at 1:03:47-ish. Biggest winners are Burning Blade and Teeth of Terra. Nothing majorly overpowered from what I could tell.
0:39:34 shot of the wargear list reveals:
1. Intercessor sergeants can take thunder hammers (probably going to be on a chapter upgrade sprue)
2. "Bolt Weapons" reveals either relic or special character wargear from upcoming supplements (don't recognise guns named as "blackout" or "gorgons wrath" amongst other familiar items)
3. "Flame Weapons" does the same for "drakkis"
Strats has relics at 1cp with no wording to say can only use the strat once or increased price for 2 (probably a typo)
**Edit
There are numerous sources of unmodified 6's count as two hits and also unmodified 6's autowound for both melee and shooting, no apparent wording to say they don't stack.
Interesting that they took all the Indomitus Crusader veteran strats from Vigilus Defiant, let normal Intercessors use them at double (or triple!) the CP cost. I think people will still use (assuming they can) Indomitus Crusader lists. 3CP to get Stalker Bolt Rifles sniping for one turn, or 2 CP to take Indomitus Crusade and Veteran Intecessor, +1 CP every turn they snipe.
Crimson wrote: What are people's thoughts on Incursors? To me the seem better than Infiltrators. Ignoring cover* and modifiers is a solid ability and the mine is a nasty trick. Their knives also make them a bit better in melee. And the seem to be cheaper. But perhaps I'm undervaluing the anti-DS bubble of the Infiltrators.
* It is a bit annoying though that the share this ability with IF chapter trait.
Incursors do have a very useful place in pulling out entrenched units, but I'm not sure I'd like them "better" than infiltrators, since both have a separate use and since they're both troops they're not exactly fighting over space. It depends on what type of army you want to counter. I certainly care more about the anti-deep strike zone as an ork player than removing cover/BS mods.
That being said, I think there's going to be two places where the Incursors are going to dominate: City of Death, and murdering units that relied on cover and BS mods. I'll be amazed if alaitoc rangers are still viable after the codex drops, considering you pentuple the damage done to them compared to regular bolters.
I definatly agree that incursors and infilstrators will have differant times you wanna use them. Infiltrators will be your preferance if your enemy has a lot of deep striking etc units. meanwhile if neither of these things is uber prevalianet in your meta you'll proably be better off just taking intercessors.
Crimson wrote: What are people's thoughts on Incursors? To me the seem better than Infiltrators. Ignoring cover* and modifiers is a solid ability and the mine is a nasty trick. Their knives also make them a bit better in melee. And the seem to be cheaper. But perhaps I'm undervaluing the anti-DS bubble of the Infiltrators.
* It is a bit annoying though that the share this ability with IF chapter trait.
They will be great for plinking Tau stealth drones, so auto include until my friend stops running 2 ghostkeels
There was a sneaky little change to the Infiltrators. Now they can replace an Infiltrator with the Helix Adept or Comms Array rather than have to include them as a 6th member of the squad. So if you want to run smaller squads (I do), you can.
casvalremdeikun wrote: There was a sneaky little change to the Infiltrators. Now they can replace an Infiltrator with the Helix Adept or Comms Array rather than have to include them as a 6th member of the squad. So if you want to run smaller squads (I do), you can.
Yeah that's an interesting point.
I can't really see it clear enough, but it looks like the comms array is 10 points thus making him the same cost as a Helix Adept.
The document has been updated with Danny and Dave's look through on Mob Rule! I definitely recommend checking that one out. I also added the relics, just for Slayer-fan :V
The GMG guys did a video review and read the <CHAPTER> section. I banged my head on my desk. They updated the previous (Cannot choose DA/BA/DW/ETC) stuff in a book they've said is to be used for all those non-codex chapters. I'd like to assume GW had a blurb before or immediately after this with an exception for the non-codex chapters to use the book and select DA/BA/ETC for their <CHAPTER> but I'm not counting on it.
I haven't seen a review yet that didn't flip through that faster than a parent sick of reading Cat In The Hat to their toddler. You'll have to wait until you get one in your hands to check the fluff. I expect there to be fluff new to Codex SM, but I also wouldn't be surprised if most of the new to Codex fluff was in the Vigilus/Phobos books. I expect the real avalanche of Fluff to come in the Codex Supplements for the non-UM-But-Still-Codex chapters. I expect to see a lot of fluff for Imperial Fists, Salamanders, Iron Hands, and so on now that they get their own book.
looking at the reviews sounds like there is definatly some new fluff, (likely how primaris fit into the orginization will be expanded on) looking forward to that.
Alex_T wrote: Any news on inceptor points are they stayng the same as i found them opvercosted whilst great models?
They got a durability boost from what may have been an across the board - or nearly so I'm wondering if Calgar got it, or if they skipped him accidentally or on purpose - Gravis Armor statline boost. Price wise, the Inceptors probably were pretty close to correct. Squad Size is an issue, it's far too easy to get tempted into suicide squad'ing them as a deep striking throw away.
Alex_T wrote: Any news on inceptor points are they stayng the same as i found them opvercosted whilst great models?
They got a durability boost from what may have been an across the board - or nearly so I'm wondering if Calgar got it, or if they skipped him accidentally or on purpose - Gravis Armor statline boost. Price wise, the Inceptors probably were pretty close to correct. Squad Size is an issue, it's far too easy to get tempted into suicide squad'ing them as a deep striking throw away.
Thik maybe for the bolt options, but the plasma ones were close to 58 points I think and if you overcharge and roll a 1 they die
Somewhere close to 45-50pts id think would be fair
Alex_T wrote: Any news on inceptor points are they stayng the same as i found them opvercosted whilst great models?
They got a durability boost from what may have been an across the board - or nearly so I'm wondering if Calgar got it, or if they skipped him accidentally or on purpose - Gravis Armor statline boost. Price wise, the Inceptors probably were pretty close to correct. Squad Size is an issue, it's far too easy to get tempted into suicide squad'ing them as a deep striking throw away.
Thik maybe for the bolt options, but the plasma ones were close to 58 points I think and if you overcharge and roll a 1 they die
Somewhere close to 45-50pts id think would be fair
So don't overcharge. Or give them support to reroll those 1's. Drop a 1.0 Captain and Lieutenant in 1.0 Jump Packs with them and you've got reroll auras, and a couple smash characters to finish off anything they miss with shooting and impact hits.
Alex_T wrote: Any news on inceptor points are they stayng the same as i found them opvercosted whilst great models?
They got a durability boost from what may have been an across the board - or nearly so I'm wondering if Calgar got it, or if they skipped him accidentally or on purpose - Gravis Armor statline boost. Price wise, the Inceptors probably were pretty close to correct. Squad Size is an issue, it's far too easy to get tempted into suicide squad'ing them as a deep striking throw away.
Thik maybe for the bolt options, but the plasma ones were close to 58 points I think and if you overcharge and roll a 1 they die
Somewhere close to 45-50pts id think would be fair
So don't overcharge. Or give them support to reroll those 1's. Drop a 1.0 Captain and Lieutenant in 1.0 Jump Packs with them and you've got reroll auras, and a couple smash characters to finish off anything they miss with shooting and impact hits.
I have done this, but not overcharging defeats the point and also you can get units such as Ravenwing knights for 20 pts cheaper
Hey guys, wouldn’t happen to know how much the new War Suit is in points with all the gear and either the autocannon or flamer? And if the reiver Lt is more or less points than the current Phobos Lt?
The GMG guys did a video review and read the <CHAPTER> section. I banged my head on my desk. They updated the previous (Cannot choose DA/BA/DW/ETC) stuff in a book they've said is to be used for all those non-codex chapters. I'd like to assume GW had a blurb before or immediately after this with an exception for the non-codex chapters to use the book and select DA/BA/ETC for their <CHAPTER> but I'm not counting on it.
GW has already stated there will be an FAQ at the time of Codex release to allow you to use all those Space Marines goodies and add Shock Assault for the non-Codex Astartes.
I did hear WinterSEO say the Vindicator was d6 shots, but he said it so despairingly I thought the Vindivator was already d6! I will be adding that to the sheet
^Yeah that's really cool. I expect Chaos will get FAQ'd for it day 1 too. It's a great model and it's a shame I haven't seen any on the table in a while.
Luke_Prowler wrote: I did hear WinterSEO say the Vindicator was d6 shots, but he said it so despairingly I thought the Vindivator was already d6! I will be adding that to the sheet
It is, but only against 5 or more models. Now it pumps out 3.5 lascannon+ shots for 125 and T8.
So that begs the question though, is the Vindicator given a new "named" cannon now, or will all Demolishers become that? It would make the Guard one immensely powerful...and thus continue to make the Vindicator look like ass by comparison. Is the Vindicator still 125 points?
Elbows wrote: So that begs the question though, is the Vindicator given a new "named" cannon now, or will all Demolishers become that? It would make the Guard one immensely powerful...and thus continue to make the Vindicator look like ass by comparison. Is the Vindicator still 125 points?
I guess they could just handwave it as "the Astartes ones are better than the mass-produced ones the Guard get" or something.
I'm glad I built Intercessor squads with all three types of bolters now.
Centurions really needed that extra wound, but they really didn't need Dreads getting another points reduction. Hopefully the Devastator version also got a points cut along with the Assault ones. Gravis needed the extra wound too, and they both are happy about getting the extra attacks.
The Vindicator cannon really needed going up to a straight Heavy d6, that's a very good change. That thing having fewer shots against the targets you most wanted to hit with an S10 was always kind of baffling.
Suppressors staying as straight 3-man units is surprising. Kind of expected it on Eliminators though due to Shrouding.
Digging that Infiltrators don't have to go up to six men for the Helix Adept. It's not actually a big deal game-wise but it was messing up my squad numbering scheme. Also digging that the Incursors come in the same box set.
Point reductions for Tacs, Assault Marines, and Sternguard! Huzzah!
Sad that the Phobos warlord traits are now restricted to effecting Phobos units, although I half expected that to turn out to be an oversite. At least we got Recitation of Focus to partially make up for the loss.
Oh, Whirlwinds being able to double-shot but only if they can't see the target is lolzy. "Sir, we can't see the target." "FIRE EVERYTHING!" "Sir, I have visual on the target". "Ok, now take careful aim and don't waste ammunition..."
15 compared to the 12 Tactical I'm still all over Sternguard. Sternguard Lias Bomb still reigns supreme in my book.
I still need confirmation on how named Characters with the successors work though, especially now that we got Gabriel Angelos without the need for Blood Ravens Chapter Tactics existing in the codex.
15 compared to the 12 Tactical I'm still all over Sternguard. Sternguard Lias Bomb still reigns supreme in my book.
I still need confirmation on how named Characters with the successors work though, especially now that we got Gabriel Angelos without the need for Blood Ravens Chapter Tactics existing in the codex.
The writeup seems to indicate a 2 point reduction coming from the SI bolter being free. So 14 points, which is superb value.
15 compared to the 12 Tactical I'm still all over Sternguard. Sternguard Lias Bomb still reigns supreme in my book.
I still need confirmation on how named Characters with the successors work though, especially now that we got Gabriel Angelos without the need for Blood Ravens Chapter Tactics existing in the codex.
well the Blood ravens chapter tactic can be whatever you want it to be, per-index astartes. (they literally say use other tactics if you feel it fits them better) the pistol is now a general relic in the book, so the one thing blood ravens get is the chief librarian strat. So Blood Ravens are the ideal chapter to play if you wanna play a sucessor chapter lead by a Libby
15 compared to the 12 Tactical I'm still all over Sternguard. Sternguard Lias Bomb still reigns supreme in my book.
I still need confirmation on how named Characters with the successors work though, especially now that we got Gabriel Angelos without the need for Blood Ravens Chapter Tactics existing in the codex.
The writeup seems to indicate a 2 point reduction coming from the SI bolter being free. So 14 points, which is superb value.
That's honestly a bit broken to me.
Did I already mention Lias Bomb? Bet I did like 5× already.
15 compared to the 12 Tactical I'm still all over Sternguard. Sternguard Lias Bomb still reigns supreme in my book.
I still need confirmation on how named Characters with the successors work though, especially now that we got Gabriel Angelos without the need for Blood Ravens Chapter Tactics existing in the codex.
well the Blood ravens chapter tactic can be whatever you want it to be, per-index astartes. (they literally say use other tactics if you feel it fits them better) the pistol is now a general relic in the book, so the one thing blood ravens get is the chief librarian strat. So Blood Ravens are the ideal chapter to play if you wanna play a sucessor chapter lead by a Libby
That's not a bad thing. The previous tactic they were given was plain garbage. They'd still keep the latter part for fluff sake but I wonder what to add to it as a compliment?
15 compared to the 12 Tactical I'm still all over Sternguard. Sternguard Lias Bomb still reigns supreme in my book.
The real question on Sternguard was "is a SIB as valuable as a Stormbolter?" Before the Doctrines I'd have probably said close enough, after the doctrines I'd say probably not. After a point AP starts hitting diminishing returns, going from 0 to 1 on an S4 is big, going from 2 to 3 on an S4 isn't so much. And SIBs cost more than just their points because you really want to use the strat on them and the CP pool is limited.
Making SIBs free might have been a step too far, I guess we'll see.
Blood Ravens can be whatever they damn well please. So that is good because the Wound roll Chapter Tactic is way too situational. Knowledge is Power is pretty decent, especially when combined with their Chief Librarian Stratagem. Take a much better tactic to go with it.
I am definitely liking the fact Sternguard went down in price. I probably still won't use them since I have six squads of Intercessors, but I still like them. I might need to combine some Sternguard bits with a squad of Intercessors to make a unit of Veteran Intercessors.
Luke_Prowler wrote: I did hear WinterSEO say the Vindicator was d6 shots, but he said it so despairingly I thought the Vindivator was already d6! I will be adding that to the sheet
It is, but only against 5 or more models. Now it pumps out 3.5 lascannon+ shots for 125 and T8.
If you can get linebreaker off it's a steal.
Lemme tell yeah as an army that has had a 125pt d6 shot T8 tank for a while now, it's not worth the headache or the heartache. Just take something consistent.
15 compared to the 12 Tactical I'm still all over Sternguard. Sternguard Lias Bomb still reigns supreme in my book.
The real question on Sternguard was "is a SIB as valuable as a Stormbolter?" Before the Doctrines I'd have probably said close enough, after the doctrines I'd say probably not. After a point AP starts hitting diminishing returns, going from 0 to 1 on an S4 is big, going from 2 to 3 on an S4 isn't so much. And SIBs cost more than just their points because you really want to use the strat on them and the CP pool is limited.
Making SIBs free might have been a step too far, I guess we'll see.
Sternguard might actually be viable now. Maybe. I'm not 100% sure though because they were pretty crap outside of deathwatch, Lias or otherwise.
casvalremdeikun wrote: Blood Ravens can be whatever they damn well please. So that is good because the Wound roll Chapter Tactic is way too situational. Knowledge is Power is pretty decent, especially when combined with their Chief Librarian Stratagem. Take a much better tactic to go with it.
I am definitely liking the fact Sternguard went down in price. I probably still won't use them since I have six squads of Intercessors, but I still like them. I might need to combine some Sternguard bits with a squad of Intercessors to make a unit of Veteran Intercessors.
I think the best, in terms of fitting the chapter is to run knowledge is power combined with Master artisans (reflecting the ravens tendancy to hoard relics)
bort wrote: What is considered Unaligned to not interfere with the doctrine bonus? Assassins? Anything else?
Not Assassins. Fortifications.
But you can add an Assassin via the strat.
Oh right, fortifications.
So an Execution Force would break doctrines, but using the 2cp strat to take 1 would not?
Correct. There is also some other unaligned BSF models that no one uses.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote: not sure assasins are needed with the new sniper marines.
If you don't take Tigurius then it might benefit to be able to keep a Callidus around.
This is actually not correct. Combat Doctrines state that you can only benefit from combat doctrines if every unit in your ARMY(NOT on your army LIST)except Servitors and things that are unaligned(which Assassins are NOT unaligned) have the combat doctrine rule.
So RAW, you can use the strat to set aside the points for an assassin without breaking doctrines, but the second it hits the table, your doctrines shut off.
ERJAK wrote: This is actually not correct. Combat Doctrines state that you can only benefit from combat doctrines if every unit in your ARMY(NOT on your army LIST)except Servitors and things that are unaligned(which Assassins are NOT unaligned) have the combat doctrine rule.
So RAW, you can use the strat to set aside the points for an assassin without breaking doctrines, but the second it hits the table, your doctrines shut off.
ERJAK wrote: This is actually not correct. Combat Doctrines state that you can only benefit from combat doctrines if every unit in your ARMY(NOT on your army LIST)except Servitors and things that are unaligned(which Assassins are NOT unaligned) have the combat doctrine rule.
So RAW, you can use the strat to set aside the points for an assassin without breaking doctrines, but the second it hits the table, your doctrines shut off.
Really? That stinks. I own all four Assassins.
It could get FAQed either way depending on what GW's intent is for the stratagem, but atmRAW is pretty clear that assassins shut off doctrines.
GW has already stated there will be an FAQ at the time of Codex release to allow you to use all those Space Marines goodies and add Shock Assault for the non-Codex Astartes.
Oh I know. My point is - they then wrote the codex to specifically prohibit what they said you could do, when they could have put those instructions in the codex instead. The instructions for how to use the new Codex SM with the Non-Codex Chapters should have been in the book, not a PDF to be named later.
Sentineil wrote: But then you'd have to buy the SM codex just to get shock assault on your DA?
FAQing the existing codexes makes more sense than publishing it in something you might not intend to buy
Why aren't they intended to buy it again? Are they expected to download a Centurion datasheet with a code from their DA codex? They are intended to buy this codex. Between points changes, and new units this is where they're supposed to get their shared units.
Sentineil wrote: But then you'd have to buy the SM codex just to get shock assault on your DA?
FAQing the existing codexes makes more sense than publishing it in something you might not intend to buy
Why aren't they intended to buy it again? Are they expected to download a Centurion datasheet with a code from their DA codex? They are intended to buy this codex. Between points changes, and new units this is where they're supposed to get their shared units.
except centurions are not a DA/BA/SW unit and are not intended to be. the Primaris stuff on the other hand..
I truly find Sternguard interesting now. I was a Vanguard Veteran guy, but with Sternguard during tactical you need to realize you are firing Power Sword attacks now. S4 AP-3. That's mean
As someone else said, Lias BOMB.
It would be amazing that the two models included in the RG supplement are Shrike and Lias.
Sentineil wrote: But then you'd have to buy the SM codex just to get shock assault on your DA?
FAQing the existing codexes makes more sense than publishing it in something you might not intend to buy
Why aren't they intended to buy it again? Are they expected to download a Centurion datasheet with a code from their DA codex? They are intended to buy this codex. Between points changes, and new units this is where they're supposed to get their shared units.
This is assuming that you want to add new models to your army. If you just want the few updates that carry across all marine chapters you're hardly going to buy a whole new book. The DA/BA/SW aren't a supplement to SM (yet anyway). There's a difference between getting the new SM codex to add optional units to your list and being required to get the SM codex to play your current army.
Sentineil wrote: But then you'd have to buy the SM codex just to get shock assault on your DA?
FAQing the existing codexes makes more sense than publishing it in something you might not intend to buy
Why aren't they intended to buy it again? Are they expected to download a Centurion datasheet with a code from their DA codex? They are intended to buy this codex. Between points changes, and new units this is where they're supposed to get their shared units.
except centurions are not a DA/BA/SW unit and are not intended to be. the Primaris stuff on the other hand..
To be fair the GW previews initially said all chapters got access to the full generic marines book. The even called out Space Wolf Stormravens and Dark Angel Centurions as being an option, it was then redacted off the articles at a later date.
Sentineil wrote: But then you'd have to buy the SM codex just to get shock assault on your DA?
FAQing the existing codexes makes more sense than publishing it in something you might not intend to buy
Why aren't they intended to buy it again? Are they expected to download a Centurion datasheet with a code from their DA codex? They are intended to buy this codex. Between points changes, and new units this is where they're supposed to get their shared units.
except centurions are not a DA/BA/SW unit and are not intended to be. the Primaris stuff on the other hand..
To be fair the GW previews initially said all chapters got access to the full generic marines book. The even called out Space Wolf Stormravens and Dark Angel Centurions as being an option, it was then redacted off the articles at a later date.
yeah, my guess is that was a internal communication issue.
"ohh and tom while writing the article mention that the stuff in this codex can be used by space wolves etc" the person who says that is intending the new stuff but tom interprets it to mean everythin
Sentineil wrote: But then you'd have to buy the SM codex just to get shock assault on your DA?
FAQing the existing codexes makes more sense than publishing it in something you might not intend to buy
Why aren't they intended to buy it again? Are they expected to download a Centurion datasheet with a code from their DA codex? They are intended to buy this codex. Between points changes, and new units this is where they're supposed to get their shared units.
except centurions are not a DA/BA/SW unit and are not intended to be. the Primaris stuff on the other hand..
Did they change their mind? Wasn't that one of the things everyone was talking about, that DA/BA/ETC can now take Cents and what not? If they're not buying the book, why do they need the PDF for how taking things from this book works with their army?
Sentineil wrote: But then you'd have to buy the SM codex just to get shock assault on your DA?
FAQing the existing codexes makes more sense than publishing it in something you might not intend to buy
Why aren't they intended to buy it again? Are they expected to download a Centurion datasheet with a code from their DA codex? They are intended to buy this codex. Between points changes, and new units this is where they're supposed to get their shared units.
except centurions are not a DA/BA/SW unit and are not intended to be. the Primaris stuff on the other hand..
Did they change their mind? Wasn't that one of the things everyone was talking about, that DA/BA/ETC can now take Cents and what not? If they're not buying the book, why do they need the PDF for how taking things from this book works with their army?
I explained it already. the new stuff that BA/SW/DA will be able to take will be the new primaris, infiltrators, incursors, impulsors. eliminators etc.
Daedalus81 wrote: Interesting...no wound marine units on a 1 or 2 as a successor trait.
That seems damn good.
eh.. i mean it only matters for str 8 or above. That is what would be wounding on a 2 anyway, so not sure here how good this is. improved ~16.7% survivability vs str 8 or higher. seems like the iron hands ignore wounds on a 6 is just better for overall survivability.
Daedalus81 wrote: Interesting...no wound marine units on a 1 or 2 as a successor trait.
That seems damn good.
eh.. i mean it only matters for str 8 or above. That is what would be wounding on a 2 anyway, so not sure here how good this is. improved ~16.7% survivability vs str 8 or higher. seems like the iron hands ignore wounds on a 6 is just better for overall survivability.
The side question is if it kills rerolls to wound.
Orodhen wrote: Are Stratagems not found in the new codex still usable? Killshot and Linebreaker don't appear to be in the new book.
No.
What is your thoughts on the vigilous strategums?
It's just an opinion but I do expect an FAQ saying everything strategums wise that came before the new codex is retried from the game, bar possibly the blood ravens strategum and some of the vigilous stuff, I do expect some of the vigilous stuff to be culled as it exists in the main codex now.
GW has been fairly consistent on shutting down loopholes that allow double use of a stratageum. But we'll have to wait for the FAQ's
Daedalus81 wrote: Interesting...no wound marine units on a 1 or 2 as a successor trait.
That seems damn good.
eh.. i mean it only matters for str 8 or above. That is what would be wounding on a 2 anyway, so not sure here how good this is. improved ~16.7% survivability vs str 8 or higher. seems like the iron hands ignore wounds on a 6 is just better for overall survivability.
The side question is if it kills rerolls to wound.
This is what I have been curious about. Why would it mention ones when they are always fails anyway unless it means that ones and twos cannot be re-rolled? I am interested to see if that is what happens.
Can anyone confirm if the stratagem to turn a captain into a Chapter Master has dropped on CP? I think I read somewhere that it did, but I have not been able to confirm it anywhere.
Daedalus81 wrote: Interesting...no wound marine units on a 1 or 2 as a successor trait.
That seems damn good.
eh.. i mean it only matters for str 8 or above. That is what would be wounding on a 2 anyway, so not sure here how good this is. improved ~16.7% survivability vs str 8 or higher. seems like the iron hands ignore wounds on a 6 is just better for overall survivability.
Takes plasma off the table at least. And makes Castellans less foreboding for tanks.
Daedalus81 wrote: Interesting...no wound marine units on a 1 or 2 as a successor trait.
That seems damn good.
eh.. i mean it only matters for str 8 or above. That is what would be wounding on a 2 anyway, so not sure here how good this is. improved ~16.7% survivability vs str 8 or higher. seems like the iron hands ignore wounds on a 6 is just better for overall survivability.
Takes plasma off the table at least. And makes Castellans less foreboding for tanks.
oh for sure. I am not saying it is useless by any means, just comparing it to the iron hands one I think it is inferior.
With the doctrines, does it only apply to weapons that do not have an AP value or it doesn't stack with abilities that give an AP value?
For example, a bolt rifle within range of a captain with storm of fire WT and hats a 6 to wound would get either -1 (normal stat) -2 (either doctrine or WT) and not -3 (doctrine and WT)
Dr. Mills wrote: With the doctrines, does it only apply to weapons that do not have an AP value or it doesn't stack with abilities that give an AP value?
For example, a bolt rifle within range of a captain with storm of fire WT and hats a 6 to wound would get either -1 (normal stat) -2 (either doctrine or WT) and not -3 (doctrine and WT)
Which would be correct?
It stacks with a weapons normal AP, but it doesn't stack with other AP enhancing abilities.
It was originally looking like space marines were going to be be OP but as all the details come out. It's easy to see how this changes nothing.
I'm sorry but ap is one of the weakest abilities in the game and aside from a few OP chapter tactics (Iron hands/imperial fists)these doctrines are not as good as they appear.
With the nerf to Gman and repulsors arguabley the 2 best marine units in the codex. The bar is about as high as it was before. Marines will still suck. They still revolve around plasma in a -1 to hit eddition. They still don't have invun saves (weak transports with low firepower don't really count). Seriously whoever decided the repulsor should go up in points needs to get kicked directly in the balls -DIRECTLY.
Xenomancers wrote: It was originally looking like space marines were going to be be OP but as all the details come out. It's easy to see how this changes nothing.
I'm sorry but ap is one of the weakest abilities in the game and aside from a few OP chapter tactics (Iron hands/imperial fists)these doctrines are not as good as they appear.
With the nerf to Gman and repulsors arguabley the 2 best marine units in the codex. The bar is about as high as it was before. Marines will still suck. They still revolve around plasma in a -1 to hit eddition. They still don't have invun saves (weak transports with low firepower don't really count). Seriously whoever decided the repulsor should go up in points needs to get kicked directly in the balls -DIRECTLY.
AP increases are a great ability once enemy units start jumping into cover. Ever fought againt Custodes in Cityfight? Yuck. And IG tanks dont have invulns. Against stuff with invulns basic bolters will fare better than they have, because rarely does the armor save match the invuln.
Xenomancers wrote: It was originally looking like space marines were going to be be OP but as all the details come out. It's easy to see how this changes nothing.
I'm sorry but ap is one of the weakest abilities in the game and aside from a few OP chapter tactics (Iron hands/imperial fists)these doctrines are not as good as they appear.
With the nerf to Gman and repulsors arguabley the 2 best marine units in the codex. The bar is about as high as it was before. Marines will still suck. They still revolve around plasma in a -1 to hit eddition. They still don't have invun saves (weak transports with low firepower don't really count). Seriously whoever decided the repulsor should go up in points needs to get kicked directly in the balls -DIRECTLY.
Take a lascannon from AP3 to AP4? Take small arms up to AP1/2/3?
Repulsors just got chapter tactics, so it may have been warranted. "Changes nothing" is...an absurd way to characterize the codexes.
Xenomancers wrote: It was originally looking like space marines were going to be be OP but as all the details come out. It's easy to see how this changes nothing.
I'm sorry but ap is one of the weakest abilities in the game and aside from a few OP chapter tactics (Iron hands/imperial fists)these doctrines are not as good as they appear.
With the nerf to Gman and repulsors arguabley the 2 best marine units in the codex. The bar is about as high as it was before. Marines will still suck. They still revolve around plasma in a -1 to hit eddition. They still don't have invun saves (weak transports with low firepower don't really count). Seriously whoever decided the repulsor should go up in points needs to get kicked directly in the balls -DIRECTLY.
I am actually looking forward to playing my space marines again some. I do think overall from what I have seen space marines will be better off. With Iron hands and the land raider points drops I may try a 4 landraider and terminator list with chaplains buffing em.
Xenomancers wrote: It was originally looking like space marines were going to be be OP but as all the details come out. It's easy to see how this changes nothing.
I'm sorry but ap is one of the weakest abilities in the game and aside from a few OP chapter tactics (Iron hands/imperial fists)these doctrines are not as good as they appear.
With the nerf to Gman and repulsors arguabley the 2 best marine units in the codex. The bar is about as high as it was before. Marines will still suck. They still revolve around plasma in a -1 to hit eddition. They still don't have invun saves (weak transports with low firepower don't really count). Seriously whoever decided the repulsor should go up in points needs to get kicked directly in the balls -DIRECTLY.
Take a lascannon from AP3 to AP4? Take small arms up to AP1/2/3?
Repulsors just got chapter tactics, so it may have been warranted. "Changes nothing" is...an absurd way to characterize the codexes.
PFFF - repulsors were the best option in a very overpriced codex with no access to chapter tactics. You give them chapter tactics and raise their points by 10% has an overall net 0 gain effect. Not great units just need buffs - you dont have to nerf them at the same time. This is what dumb people do. Make changes to something bad without actually making something better. Yeah they got some AP - but lost access to reroll all wounds. The unit is not a lot worse as a result. We know what gman and repuslors was doing before. Not winning a lot. How do you think slightly better repulsors that cost 10% more without gman will be doing? It is easy to predict. AP on small arms isn't all that useful. Might kill 5-6 more infantry a turn as a result. Marines are already good at killing infantry but the end result is a nerf because no gman.
Xenomancers wrote: It was originally looking like space marines were going to be be OP but as all the details come out. It's easy to see how this changes nothing.
I'm sorry but ap is one of the weakest abilities in the game and aside from a few OP chapter tactics (Iron hands/imperial fists)these doctrines are not as good as they appear.
With the nerf to Gman and repulsors arguabley the 2 best marine units in the codex. The bar is about as high as it was before. Marines will still suck. They still revolve around plasma in a -1 to hit eddition. They still don't have invun saves (weak transports with low firepower don't really count). Seriously whoever decided the repulsor should go up in points needs to get kicked directly in the balls -DIRECTLY.
I am actually looking forward to playing my space marines again some. I do think overall from what I have seen space marines will be better off. With Iron hands and the land raider points drops I may try a 4 landraider and terminator list with chaplains buffing em.
Iron hands is going to be the only mildly effective way to play marines competitively.
Xenomancers wrote: It was originally looking like space marines were going to be be OP but as all the details come out. It's easy to see how this changes nothing.
I'm sorry but ap is one of the weakest abilities in the game and aside from a few OP chapter tactics (Iron hands/imperial fists)these doctrines are not as good as they appear.
With the nerf to Gman and repulsors arguabley the 2 best marine units in the codex. The bar is about as high as it was before. Marines will still suck. They still revolve around plasma in a -1 to hit eddition. They still don't have invun saves (weak transports with low firepower don't really count). Seriously whoever decided the repulsor should go up in points needs to get kicked directly in the balls -DIRECTLY.
Take a lascannon from AP3 to AP4? Take small arms up to AP1/2/3?
Repulsors just got chapter tactics, so it may have been warranted. "Changes nothing" is...an absurd way to characterize the codexes.
PFFF - repulsors were the best option in a very overpriced codex with no access to chapter tactics. You give them chapter tactics and raise their points by 10% has an overall net 0 gain effect. Not great units just need buffs - you dont have to nerf them at the same time. This is what dumb people do. Make changes to something bad without actually making something better. Yeah they got some AP - but lost access to reroll all wounds. The unit is not a lot worse as a result. We know what gman and repuslors was doing before. Not winning a lot. How do you think slightly better repulsors that cost 10% more without gman will be doing? It is easy to predict. AP on small arms isn't all that useful. Might kill 5-6 more infantry a turn as a result. Marines are already good at killing infantry but the end result is a nerf because no gman.
Xenomancers wrote: It was originally looking like space marines were going to be be OP but as all the details come out. It's easy to see how this changes nothing.
I'm sorry but ap is one of the weakest abilities in the game and aside from a few OP chapter tactics (Iron hands/imperial fists)these doctrines are not as good as they appear.
With the nerf to Gman and repulsors arguabley the 2 best marine units in the codex. The bar is about as high as it was before. Marines will still suck. They still revolve around plasma in a -1 to hit eddition. They still don't have invun saves (weak transports with low firepower don't really count). Seriously whoever decided the repulsor should go up in points needs to get kicked directly in the balls -DIRECTLY.
I am actually looking forward to playing my space marines again some. I do think overall from what I have seen space marines will be better off. With Iron hands and the land raider points drops I may try a 4 landraider and terminator list with chaplains buffing em.
Iron hands is going to be the only mildly effective way to play marines competitively.
Or you could stop acting like a kid and actually read the book and interprate what the point of the changes was.
But I'll give you a hint if you want to play repulsor spam stop playing Ultramarines and embrace ironhands. They are way better than ultramarines repulsors.
Ultramarines actually I would say buffs more of the old marines units that I am actually looking forward to being able to break out.
Aslong as GW don't screw me by not giving FW models angles of death I'm looking forward to try out some quite fun to downright nasty lists as ultramarines.
Without Bobby G ir a repulsive in sight.
Iron hands had a chance to be really good. Unfortunately They nerfed repulsors and executioners in anticipation for it. You really think 330 point tanks without invos can be played in competitive? Get outta here. They can't. Plus they will do close to half the damage gman repsulors did. It just doesn't work. Realsitcally. A repuslor with traits is worth about 260 and anytone with half a brain can figure that out quickly by looking at comparable units. Anything that isn't an iron hands repulsor is just laughable too.
So glad I spent 600 bucks on useless executioners and repulsors just for them to get nerfed when they were already overcosted. LOL.
None of the real issues were fixed and strongest units were nerfed. Not very good stragems ether.
Plasma still slays you on a 2 wound model.
Aggressors got a nice buff but their deliver system nerfed so it's a net loss there.
Drop pods come in turn one but still cost too much
Veteran units now cost 2 cp for 10 man...another nerf.
Cents lost gman and mortal wounds strata too?
Storm raven still overcosted AF Vindi gets a nice buff but loses marines best overall stragem.
There seems to be a consistent theme here - anything that got better got worse in another way. This is essentially a zero sum gain in order to generate sales and confuse people.
I think it is silly hard to judge a book that hasn't been released, let alone going to its a failure.
Facts we know seem to point to good things. Sub 100 point impulsors. Weapon upgrades on Eliminators. Doctrines, Angels of death, Drop Pods, Scions of Gman, and many of the new strats point to SM getting stronger.
The nerf side seems much lighter, and even some of those mitigated some like Gman going down 50 points, But No soup and the Repulsor point bump does hurt.
In all, Its far too premature to get up tight right now.
Xenomancers wrote: PFFF - repulsors were the best option in a very overpriced codex with no access to chapter tactics. You give them chapter tactics and raise their points by 10% has an overall net 0 gain effect. Not great units just need buffs - you dont have to nerf them at the same time. This is what dumb people do. Make changes to something bad without actually making something better. Yeah they got some AP - but lost access to reroll all wounds. The unit is not a lot worse as a result. We know what gman and repuslors was doing before. Not winning a lot. How do you think slightly better repulsors that cost 10% more without gman will be doing? It is easy to predict. AP on small arms isn't all that useful. Might kill 5-6 more infantry a turn as a result. Marines are already good at killing infantry but the end result is a nerf because no gman.
Repulsors and Bobby lists are ham fisted. If your whole strategy rolling dice harder than everyone else you're going to lose games.
You can make an executioner or repulsor auto hit a flyer.
Assuming Vigilus isn’t removed, you could still get 1cp 10 man Vet Intercessors for 1cp if you pay the 1cp formation tax, right? Yeah it’s the same for 1 unit but then you do get the Vigilus options too.
Reemule wrote: I think it is silly hard to judge a book that hasn't been released, let alone going to its a failure.
Facts we know seem to point to good things. Sub 100 point impulsors. Weapon upgrades on Eliminators. Doctrines, Angels of death, Drop Pods, Scions of Gman, and many of the new strats point to SM getting stronger.
The nerf side seems much lighter, and even some of those mitigated some like Gman going down 50 points, But No soup and the Repulsor point bump does hurt.
In all, Its far too premature to get up tight right now.
You take gman for the reroll wounds aura. If I wanted a beast CC unit I'd just take a knight gallant - which hilariously I can't do anymore because marines lose doctrines if they soup...It just keeps getting worse and worse the more I look into it. I called marines being a bottom tier faction about 2 years ago when I saw the codex. It's really not hard to figure out a codex isn't getting much better when you nerf it's best units.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
bort wrote: Assuming Vigilus isn’t removed, you could still get 1cp 10 man Vet Intercessors for 1cp if you pay the 1cp formation tax, right? Yeah it’s the same for 1 unit but then you do get the Vigilus options too.
The appearance of the vilgis stratagems in the codex basically confirms that vigilus is invalidated.
Xenomancers wrote: PFFF - repulsors were the best option in a very overpriced codex with no access to chapter tactics. You give them chapter tactics and raise their points by 10% has an overall net 0 gain effect. Not great units just need buffs - you dont have to nerf them at the same time. This is what dumb people do. Make changes to something bad without actually making something better. Yeah they got some AP - but lost access to reroll all wounds. The unit is not a lot worse as a result. We know what gman and repuslors was doing before. Not winning a lot. How do you think slightly better repulsors that cost 10% more without gman will be doing? It is easy to predict. AP on small arms isn't all that useful. Might kill 5-6 more infantry a turn as a result. Marines are already good at killing infantry but the end result is a nerf because no gman.
Repulsors and Bobby lists are ham fisted. If your whole strategy rolling dice harder than everyone else you're going to lose games.
You can make an executioner or repulsor auto hit a flyer.
Uhhh - for a glass cannon army I'm sorry. Rolling dice harder is your ownly option. Vs a lot of armies you wont even be taking saving throws most the time.
bort wrote: I know they copied some in. But there’s still the grey shield and the relics I don’t recall from the previews.
Not confrimed - I am just assuming. Why would they print the strats in the codex with changes values if you could just run vigilis and get them cheaper? It wouldn't make any sense.
bort wrote: I know they copied some in. But there’s still the grey shield and the relics I don’t recall from the previews.
Not confrimed - I am just assuming. Why would they print the strats in the codex with changes values if you could just run vigilis and get them cheaper? It wouldn't make any sense.
If they are identical, then true. What I thought I heard on the preview was they now cost 2cp, but no longer require a veteran intercessors unit. So Vigilus ones would be cheaper, but more upfront tax and fewer units.
bort wrote: I know they copied some in. But there’s still the grey shield and the relics I don’t recall from the previews.
Not confrimed - I am just assuming. Why would they print the strats in the codex with changes values if you could just run vigilis and get them cheaper? It wouldn't make any sense.
If they are identical, then true. What I thought I heard on the preview was they now cost 2cp, but no longer require a veteran intercessors unit. So Vigilus ones would be cheaper, but more upfront tax and fewer units.
If you wanted a single 5 man intercessor vet unit - that is the only way it would be cheaper. A 10 man and the detachment costs 2 and then you'd get bonus 10 man vets for 1 cp instead of 2. Rapid fire is also in there but I didn't see the others. ANother thing I initially thought would be good was taking the buffed stalker bolter and using the strat on it.
"Standard of the Emperor Ascendant
Only model with Astartes Banner ability/ +3” to the range of banner ability (no longer +1 to test roll). Friendly Chapter units with 9” do not roll for morale, enemies have -1 leadership within 9”
Not happy about this, the 3+ to shoot upon death was really good, now the relic isn't worth anything.
CREEEEEEEEED wrote: "Standard of the Emperor Ascendant
Only model with Astartes Banner ability/ +3” to the range of banner ability (no longer +1 to test roll). Friendly Chapter units with 9” do not roll for morale, enemies have -1 leadership within 9”
Not happy about this, the 3+ to shoot upon death was really good, now the relic isn't worth anything.
The range is good but yet again another example of a nerf and buff at the same time.
Relic Leviathan: Stormcannon x2
Contemptor Mortis: Twin Las x2
Total: 10CP
I still have some points to spend, not sure where to chuck it. Was thinking Hunter Killers since they get another AP on turn 1 for chucking them out.
Was also thinking of spending another CP to give my Captain a Sanctic Halo, just for the 3++ and extra denial chance. Was also thinking of dropping a Rhino, even if I like it for fluff reasons (there being 3 Tac Squads of dudes)
You take gman for the reroll wounds aura. If I wanted a beast CC unit I'd just take a knight gallant - which hilariously I can't do anymore because marines lose doctrines if they soup...It just keeps getting worse and worse the more I look into it. I called marines being a bottom tier faction about 2 years ago when I saw the codex. It's really not hard to figure out a codex isn't getting much better when you nerf it's best units.
Always knights, knights, knights.
Bobby did nothing overwhelming for things wounding on 3s for his cost when put up against a lieutenant. Losing reroll 2s to wound is not considerably consequential in that regard.
Xenomancers wrote: Iron hands had a chance to be really good. Unfortunately They nerfed repulsors and executioners in anticipation for it. You really think 330 point tanks without invos can be played in competitive? Get outta here. They can't. Plus they will do close to half the damage gman repsulors did. It just doesn't work. Realsitcally. A repuslor with traits is worth about 260 and anytone with half a brain can figure that out quickly by looking at comparable units. Anything that isn't an iron hands repulsor is just laughable too.
So glad I spent 600 bucks on useless executioners and repulsors just for them to get nerfed when they were already overcosted. LOL.
None of the real issues were fixed and strongest units were nerfed. Not very good stragems ether.
Plasma still slays you on a 2 wound model.
Aggressors got a nice buff but their deliver system nerfed so it's a net loss there.
Drop pods come in turn one but still cost too much
Veteran units now cost 2 cp for 10 man...another nerf.
Cents lost gman and mortal wounds strata too?
Storm raven still overcosted AF Vindi gets a nice buff but loses marines best overall stragem.
There seems to be a consistent theme here - anything that got better got worse in another way. This is essentially a zero sum gain in order to generate sales and confuse people.
Right mister negativity
Sorry the strategum are way better dreadnaught strategum, grav strategum, physioclogy strategum.
Plasma is plasma at this point your complaining about the base 8th rules
Agressors got buffed and I've no idea what delivery system your talking about as I've only ever seen them walking (nobody ever took a repulsor as anything but a MBT)
Turn 1 deepstrike is still a buff not a nerf.
They already cost 2 CP anyway as you needed the detachment for 1 and then the unit for 1Cp dont BS that anyone was running multiple 10 man squads.
Cents lost Gman Gman was broken as feth fishing for MW on reroll your rerolls was toxic play style. They gained 1w and a number of strategums are viable for them.
Vindicator as a top unit your definataly high (it got bar gaining CT and some move and shoot ability as ultramarines and whatever may come form the remaining supplements)
All dreadnaughts gained a strategums and +1A and (movement buffs or what may come)
predators etc all gained Chapter tactics Buff
Calgar +1W and benifits for the shock assualt
Smash captains took a hit but a cheaper more versatile Burning blade option exsists.
Chaplin massive buff for a gutter unit to playable
Tacs -1 point
You take gman for the reroll wounds aura. If I wanted a beast CC unit I'd just take a knight gallant - which hilariously I can't do anymore because marines lose doctrines if they soup...It just keeps getting worse and worse the more I look into it. I called marines being a bottom tier faction about 2 years ago when I saw the codex. It's really not hard to figure out a codex isn't getting much better when you nerf it's best units.
Always knights, knights, knights.
Bobby did nothing overwhelming for things wounding on 3s for his cost when put up against a lieutenant. Losing reroll 2s to wound is not considerably consequential in that regard.
You aren't wrong. Space marines best weapons are str 4-7 though. Rockets and las are pretty terrible. Plasma is basically unfieldable at this point with it's interactions with -1 to hit (and people still want it nerfed). The new lasfusils seem nice though - can those be taken in 6 man squads now?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Who walks aggressors? LOL no one.
Automatically Appended Next Post: You still can't deny I am right. The space marine codex looks initially really good but then you look closer and it's really not that good.
You have to approach it like this. Did the army get better than gman reroll all wounds? No it didn't. The codex is a failure at making marines a better army.
I kind of have to take exception to the idea that the Vindicator strat was the best one in the book. It depended on 1) your opponent bunching up a lot of units and 2) taking three Vindicators in the first place and still having all three in the list when you wanted to use it. Against anyone who knew what it did you'd get at most one chance to use it, unless their dice were really cold.
I'd trade a straight d6 shots for that strat any day of the week.
Reemule wrote: I think it is silly hard to judge a book that hasn't been released, let alone going to its a failure.
Facts we know seem to point to good things. Sub 100 point impulsors. Weapon upgrades on Eliminators. Doctrines, Angels of death, Drop Pods, Scions of Gman, and many of the new strats point to SM getting stronger.
The nerf side seems much lighter, and even some of those mitigated some like Gman going down 50 points, But No soup and the Repulsor point bump does hurt.
In all, Its far too premature to get up tight right now.
You take gman for the reroll wounds aura. If I wanted a beast CC unit I'd just take a knight gallant - which hilariously I can't do anymore because marines lose doctrines if they soup...It just keeps getting worse and worse the more I look into it. I called marines being a bottom tier faction about 2 years ago when I saw the codex.
Seeing as they were top tier when their codex came out, up until CA - I wouldn't be too proud of making *that* particular call.
It's really not hard to figure out a codex isn't getting much better when you nerf it's best units.
Is that why the 7E CWE book was so trash? Because of the nerf to Serpents? Nerfing the best units doesn't, historically, map all that closely to being a bad book.
Ideally, the best stuff gets nerfed, and everything else gets buffed. As Gman was still ocassionally a contender, any half-decent buff to anything else in the book would be OP if they didn't also nerf him.
Also, how do you call a 10% price increase on a vehicle that can now get a 16% durability increase, situationally a 20%-100% firepower increase, and a host of other buffs a net negative - before even seeing all the buffs or any of it in action?
bort wrote: Assuming Vigilus isn’t removed, you could still get 1cp 10 man Vet Intercessors for 1cp if you pay the 1cp formation tax, right? Yeah it’s the same for 1 unit but then you do get the Vigilus options too.
The appearance of the vilgis stratagems in the codex basically confirms that vigilus is invalidated.
Xenomancers wrote: PFFF - repulsors were the best option in a very overpriced codex with no access to chapter tactics. You give them chapter tactics and raise their points by 10% has an overall net 0 gain effect. Not great units just need buffs - you dont have to nerf them at the same time. This is what dumb people do. Make changes to something bad without actually making something better. Yeah they got some AP - but lost access to reroll all wounds. The unit is not a lot worse as a result. We know what gman and repuslors was doing before. Not winning a lot. How do you think slightly better repulsors that cost 10% more without gman will be doing? It is easy to predict. AP on small arms isn't all that useful. Might kill 5-6 more infantry a turn as a result. Marines are already good at killing infantry but the end result is a nerf because no gman.
Repulsors and Bobby lists are ham fisted. If your whole strategy rolling dice harder than everyone else you're going to lose games.
You can make an executioner or repulsor auto hit a flyer.
Uhhh - for a glass cannon army I'm sorry. Rolling dice harder is your ownly option. Vs a lot of armies you wont even be taking saving throws most the time.
I'm sorry, but which armies have AP-4 or better on *most* of their weapons?
You're usually getting an armor save against IG, Knights, CWE, DE, T'au, Marines, Necrons, Nids, .... basically everyone.
The Newman wrote: I kind of have to take exception to the idea that the Vindicator strat was the best one in the book. It depended on 1) your opponent bunching up a lot of units and 2) taking three Vindicators in the first place and still having all three in the list when you wanted to use it. Against anyone who knew what it did you'd get at most one chance to use it, unless their dice were really cold.
I'd trade a straight d6 shots for that strat any day of the week.
LOL. The strata is very powerful if you go first. Lots of armies have to start bunched up. Plus it was awesome for shooting over walls.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Eldar...DE...Orks...Necrons...Knights...Space marines...harliquens...Like...basically every army brings tons of it. Or at least tons of AP -3. Plus mortal wounds...
You have to approach it like this. Did the army get better than gman reroll all wounds? No it didn't. The codex is a failure at making marines a better army.
Gmans rerolls were so OP he had to be nerfed into the 400pt range to be "fair" - even when taking otherwise-halfdecent options.
If you need "reroll all wounds" auras to be considered a non-failure, your idea of balance is out of whack.
CWE is known as the "buffing" faction. They have nothing close to a "reroll all wounds" aura.
You take gman for the reroll wounds aura. If I wanted a beast CC unit I'd just take a knight gallant - which hilariously I can't do anymore because marines lose doctrines if they soup...It just keeps getting worse and worse the more I look into it. I called marines being a bottom tier faction about 2 years ago when I saw the codex. It's really not hard to figure out a codex isn't getting much better when you nerf it's best units.
Always knights, knights, knights.
Bobby did nothing overwhelming for things wounding on 3s for his cost when put up against a lieutenant. Losing reroll 2s to wound is not considerably consequential in that regard.
You aren't wrong. Space marines best weapons are str 4-7 though. Rockets and las are pretty terrible. Plasma is basically unfieldable at this point with it's interactions with -1 to hit (and people still want it nerfed). The new lasfusils seem nice though - can those be taken in 6 man squads now?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Who walks aggressors? LOL no one.
Automatically Appended Next Post: You still can't deny I am right. The space marine codex looks initially really good but then you look closer and it's really not that good.
You have to approach it like this. Did the army get better than gman reroll all wounds? No it didn't. The codex is a failure at making marines a better army.
I can deny your right because you are WRONG.
Your particular playstyle got nerfed yes, but the codex is better for it. GMAN plus High RoF medium Strength weapon spam is dead thank you GW.
I have only seen 1 dude with agressors lately and he did a good job of having his hold an objective by standing in cover or out of LOS and just blasting anyone who stood on it. Not a repulsor near them.
Move and shoot without penalty dreadnaughts feels like quite a nice buff to me, but you stick to your Gman plus 32 plus knight's "Pure Knights" list of your so unhappy with the codex.
LOL if space marines were top teir when the eddition came out and I called them falling to the bottom. I am very proud of having that amount of foresight.
You have to approach it like this. Did the army get better than gman reroll all wounds? No it didn't. The codex is a failure at making marines a better army.
Gmans rerolls were so OP he had to be nerfed into the 400pt range to be "fair" - even when taking otherwise-halfdecent options.
If you need "reroll all wounds" auras to be considered a non-failure, your idea of balance is out of whack.
CWE is known as the "buffing" faction. They have nothing close to a "reroll all wounds" aura.
What you fail to understand. Is he was overpointed at 400.
I put this in the news thread, but according to GW Facebook, Special Characters that are not currently covered in their own supplements (Pedro Kantor, Shrike, etc) will be getting their stats in a PDF when the codex is released.
That makes me think that some of those characters will be getting new models so they can still get some money out of us. I am fine with that. I want to be able to use Pedro Kantor, but don't want to wait for the supplement. Hooray.
The Newman wrote: I kind of have to take exception to the idea that the Vindicator strat was the best one in the book. It depended on 1) your opponent bunching up a lot of units and 2) taking three Vindicators in the first place and still having all three in the list when you wanted to use it. Against anyone who knew what it did you'd get at most one chance to use it, unless their dice were really cold.
I'd trade a straight d6 shots for that strat any day of the week.
LOL. The strata is very powerful if you go first. Lots of armies have to start bunched up. Plus it was awesome for shooting over walls.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Eldar...DE...Orks...Necrons...Knights...Space marines...harliquens...Like...basically every army brings tons of it. Or at least tons of AP -3. Plus mortal wounds...
Eldar? Mind posting these lists that run nothing but CHs/BL Falcons/Reapers? Because most lists use a lot more Shuriken than anything else. And you get your armor save against most Shuriken hits (unless you're T8, which is rare).
DE? Since when does Splinter have an AP-3? Or do you just mean the handful of Disintegrator shots? Those are awfully outnumbered by Splinter/etc weapons.
Orkz? Do Boyz have AP-3 now? How did I miss that?
Necrons? Well, you're getting closer, as their basic troops do take you down to a 4+ in the open. But there's a huge difference between taking a 4+ and not being allowed to take a saving throw...
Knights? Might have a point with that faction, depending on build.
Space Marines? If the new book really did give them AP-3 across-the-board, at 14ppm for basic Marines, they really would be OP...
Harlies? The Fusion build, outside CC, sure. Because they're buying Fusion Guns for every dood. So shoot them... with boltguns? You still get your save in CC. And their doods are costing twice what your doods are.
So maybe 2 of those factions, with very specific builds, that I don't recall featuring promenently recently. Sounds like you're fabricating a meta in your own head again.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Xenomancers wrote: LOL if space marines were top teir when the eddition came out and I called them falling to the bottom. I am very proud of having that amount of foresight.
Sure, if your argument at the time was "They're fine now, they'll be trash later". Your argument was "They are trash, and always will be". Quite a difference.
You have to approach it like this. Did the army get better than gman reroll all wounds? No it didn't. The codex is a failure at making marines a better army.
Gmans rerolls were so OP he had to be nerfed into the 400pt range to be "fair" - even when taking otherwise-halfdecent options.
If you need "reroll all wounds" auras to be considered a non-failure, your idea of balance is out of whack.
CWE is known as the "buffing" faction. They have nothing close to a "reroll all wounds" aura.
What you fail to understand. Is he was overpointed at 400.
I'm not sure how thinking they had to "fix" him by overpointing him somehow means I fail to understand he's overpointed.
His aura is really hard to balance. Especially if you want to make the book work for subfactions that can't/won't take him. Their solution was to drive his points so far up that he's not all that important anymore. That part seemed to work; the problem is they failed to follow up with making the rest of the faction competent.
The Newman wrote: I kind of have to take exception to the idea that the Vindicator strat was the best one in the book. It depended on 1) your opponent bunching up a lot of units and 2) taking three Vindicators in the first place and still having all three in the list when you wanted to use it. Against anyone who knew what it did you'd get at most one chance to use it, unless their dice were really cold.
I'd trade a straight d6 shots for that strat any day of the week.
LOL. The strata is very powerful if you go first. Lots of armies have to start bunched up. Plus it was awesome for shooting over walls.
That's kind of making my point for me. It's good. Once. If you take three of a tank with a slightly iffy gun and if you get to go first and if your opponent doesn't know what it does to realize they might need to mitigate it. It can't be the best strat in the book with that many caveats.
The Newman wrote: I kind of have to take exception to the idea that the Vindicator strat was the best one in the book. It depended on 1) your opponent bunching up a lot of units and 2) taking three Vindicators in the first place and still having all three in the list when you wanted to use it. Against anyone who knew what it did you'd get at most one chance to use it, unless their dice were really cold.
I'd trade a straight d6 shots for that strat any day of the week.
LOL. The strata is very powerful if you go first. Lots of armies have to start bunched up. Plus it was awesome for shooting over walls.
That's kind of making my point for me. It's good. Once. If you get to go first and your opponent doesn't know what it does to realize they might need to mitigate it. It can't be the best strat in the book with that many caveats.
Marines are a go first or lose army because it has no defense. It fits in just perfectly with their playstyle.
Daedalus81 wrote: There are gobs of possibilities for this codex, but I'm not putting anything real on paper until I can read it.
Expecting the book to hinge on whether or not Bobby rerolls all wounds seems really short sighted.
It hinges on things like Repulsors and storm ravens not being overcosted. They still are and repulsors went up in price. Old Gman with these changes could probably have won some events. Overall I think the army went down it's ability to place high at tournaments. That is a bad thing.
Daedalus81 wrote: There are gobs of possibilities for this codex, but I'm not putting anything real on paper until I can read it.
Expecting the book to hinge on whether or not Bobby rerolls all wounds seems really short sighted.
It hinges on things like Repulsors and storm ravens not being overcosted. They still are and repulsors went up in price. Old Gman with these changes could probably have won some events. Overall I think the army went down it's ability to place high at tournaments. That is a bad thing.
There are more units in the army than Repuslors, Guilliman, Stormravens. Maybe try something new?
That the idiotic G-man monobuild is dead is an amazing thing. Now there actually will be several viable ways to play. And if you can't compete after all these amazing buffs, then the problem probably isn't the codex.
Insularum wrote: So good news for CF/IF aggressors i guess... unmodified 6's cause 2 hits with "bolt weapons", their melee profile meets that criteria.
Looks like im slightly wrong here - IF tactics specifically call out ranged attacks so only CF gets double melee hits with boltstorm/auto-boltstorm gauntlets
The Newman wrote: I kind of have to take exception to the idea that the Vindicator strat was the best one in the book. It depended on 1) your opponent bunching up a lot of units and 2) taking three Vindicators in the first place and still having all three in the list when you wanted to use it. Against anyone who knew what it did you'd get at most one chance to use it, unless their dice were really cold.
I'd trade a straight d6 shots for that strat any day of the week.
LOL. The strata is very powerful if you go first. Lots of armies have to start bunched up. Plus it was awesome for shooting over walls.
That's kind of making my point for me. It's good. Once. If you get to go first and your opponent doesn't know what it does to realize they might need to mitigate it. It can't be the best strat in the book with that many caveats.
Marines are a go first or lose army because it has no defense. It fits in just perfectly with their playstyle.
That's stupid and fits under the logic that Killshot was fine.
In reality these Stratagems don't get used and the fact you tried to defend the Vindicator Stratagem as any good is pretty fething laughable to be honest and just makes you look bad.
The Newman wrote: I kind of have to take exception to the idea that the Vindicator strat was the best one in the book. It depended on 1) your opponent bunching up a lot of units and 2) taking three Vindicators in the first place and still having all three in the list when you wanted to use it. Against anyone who knew what it did you'd get at most one chance to use it, unless their dice were really cold.
I'd trade a straight d6 shots for that strat any day of the week.
LOL. The strata is very powerful if you go first. Lots of armies have to start bunched up. Plus it was awesome for shooting over walls.
That's kind of making my point for me. It's good. Once. If you get to go first and your opponent doesn't know what it does to realize they might need to mitigate it. It can't be the best strat in the book with that many caveats.
Marines are a go first or lose army because it has no defense. It fits in just perfectly with their playstyle.
That's stupid and fits under the logic that Killshot was fine.
In reality these Stratagems don't get used and the fact you tried to defend the Vindicator Stratagem as any good is pretty fething laughable to be honest and just makes you look bad.
Whatever dude. It's won me so many games. You obivously are wrong. 3d3 mortals per unit in range of your target for 1 cp? It is hands down amazing. Just for the fact it forces your opponent to deploy differently.
The Newman wrote: I kind of have to take exception to the idea that the Vindicator strat was the best one in the book. It depended on 1) your opponent bunching up a lot of units and 2) taking three Vindicators in the first place and still having all three in the list when you wanted to use it. Against anyone who knew what it did you'd get at most one chance to use it, unless their dice were really cold.
I'd trade a straight d6 shots for that strat any day of the week.
LOL. The strata is very powerful if you go first. Lots of armies have to start bunched up. Plus it was awesome for shooting over walls.
That's kind of making my point for me. It's good. Once. If you get to go first and your opponent doesn't know what it does to realize they might need to mitigate it. It can't be the best strat in the book with that many caveats.
Marines are a go first or lose army because it has no defense. It fits in just perfectly with their playstyle.
That's stupid and fits under the logic that Killshot was fine.
In reality these Stratagems don't get used and the fact you tried to defend the Vindicator Stratagem as any good is pretty fething laughable to be honest and just makes you look bad.
Whatever dude. It's won me so many games. You obivously are wrong. 3d3 mortals per unit in range of your target for 1 cp? It is hands down amazing. Just for the fact it forces your opponent to deploy differently.
Yeah and then your opponent has something with forward deployment so you can't get a good shot in and then they just plink one Vindicator to death.
The stratagem was garbage and anyone defending has a garbage opinion.
The Newman wrote: I kind of have to take exception to the idea that the Vindicator strat was the best one in the book. It depended on 1) your opponent bunching up a lot of units and 2) taking three Vindicators in the first place and still having all three in the list when you wanted to use it. Against anyone who knew what it did you'd get at most one chance to use it, unless their dice were really cold.
I'd trade a straight d6 shots for that strat any day of the week.
LOL. The strata is very powerful if you go first. Lots of armies have to start bunched up. Plus it was awesome for shooting over walls.
That's kind of making my point for me. It's good. Once. If you get to go first and your opponent doesn't know what it does to realize they might need to mitigate it. It can't be the best strat in the book with that many caveats.
Marines are a go first or lose army because it has no defense. It fits in just perfectly with their playstyle.
That's stupid and fits under the logic that Killshot was fine.
In reality these Stratagems don't get used and the fact you tried to defend the Vindicator Stratagem as any good is pretty fething laughable to be honest and just makes you look bad.
Preds are more expensive and less durable then vindis. Plus they also average 2 str 10 d6 damage shots per turn after that and tend to get ignored. It's probably going to be a game changer with d6 shots now. Not sure why you would take any other tank than a vindi now with d6 shots automatic. It would be great if we still had the stragem though.
The Newman wrote: I kind of have to take exception to the idea that the Vindicator strat was the best one in the book. It depended on 1) your opponent bunching up a lot of units and 2) taking three Vindicators in the first place and still having all three in the list when you wanted to use it. Against anyone who knew what it did you'd get at most one chance to use it, unless their dice were really cold.
I'd trade a straight d6 shots for that strat any day of the week.
LOL. The strata is very powerful if you go first. Lots of armies have to start bunched up. Plus it was awesome for shooting over walls.
That's kind of making my point for me. It's good. Once. If you get to go first and your opponent doesn't know what it does to realize they might need to mitigate it. It can't be the best strat in the book with that many caveats.
Marines are a go first or lose army because it has no defense. It fits in just perfectly with their playstyle.
That's stupid and fits under the logic that Killshot was fine.
In reality these Stratagems don't get used and the fact you tried to defend the Vindicator Stratagem as any good is pretty fething laughable to be honest and just makes you look bad.
Whatever dude. It's won me so many games. You obivously are wrong. 3d3 mortals per unit in range of your target for 1 cp? It is hands down amazing. Just for the fact it forces your opponent to deploy differently.
Yeah and then your opponent has something with forward deployment so you can't get a good shot in and then they just plink one Vindicator to death.
The stratagem was garbage and anyone defending has a garbage opinion.
It had unreasonable requirements but it was an amazing stratagem. A game winner actually.
Game winner is the key. It has amazing damage potential but it's difficult to pull off unless you go first. This is also true of killshot but killshot is a lot easier to shut down. Heck you just need to touch one of the preds in cc and youll never use the strat. Vindis can use their ability even after being charged. So you have to kill it and they are harder to kill too.
That's stupid and fits under the logic that Killshot was fine.
In reality these Stratagems don't get used and the fact you tried to defend the Vindicator Stratagem as any good is pretty fething laughable to be honest and just makes you look bad.
Preds are more expensive and less durable then vindis. Plus they also average 2 str 10 d6 damage shots per turn after that and tend to get ignored. It's probably going to be a game changer with d6 shots now. Not sure why you would take any other tank than a vindi now with d6 shots automatic. It would be great if we still had the stragem though.
Found an image they are Heavy D6 but they no londer scale in any way.
If the requirements are too unreasonable, even if it's a game-winner, it's not worth it. If the requirements aren't too unreasonable, if it's a game-winner, it's OP.
Relying on a too-unreasonable game-winner is basically accepting that you can't actually win half of your games, so you'll go for a gimmick win when you can. Basically, a defeated player before they show up.
You're basically saying that your ability to win games should hinge on this "one little trick" actually working. If we want Marines to be capable of wining without relying on such a game-winner, the game-winner needs to be toned down while the rest of the army gets toned up.
Which seems to be what they're trying to do.
To make matters worse, your chosen hero game-winner has nothing to do, thematically, with the army. You're playing Marines so you can have an armored spearhead obliterate the enemy without any Marines involved?
The swing of "Marines are going to be so OP with all the new rules" to "Marines have gotten worse/still terrible and the codex is crap" is both amusing and worrying.
Worrying in the sense that the certainty which this is all said without playing a single game or the codex even being out is stunning.
Drop pods, grav devs, doctrines, massive boosts to chapter tactics, points drops for tacs and ASM... the list goes on.
Marines might have lost the Gman crutch, but they've gained fantastic versatility from what I can see, and going by Lawrence's first game on Tabletop Tactics he seems incredibly impressed with them.
I'm excited for the changes. But I guess the usual doomsayers will still claim the sky is falling.
Xenomancers wrote: LOL if space marines were top teir when the eddition came out and I called them falling to the bottom. I am very proud of having that amount of foresight.
Gmans rerolls were so OP he had to be nerfed into the 400pt range to be "fair" - even when taking otherwise-halfdecent options.
If you need "reroll all wounds" auras to be considered a non-failure, your idea of balance is out of whack.
What you fail to understand. Is he was overpointed at 400.
Dude, you read like trumps twitter account when you're talking about your own army; Could you please talk about how you'd buff guilliman and make CWE pay for it?
Xenomancers wrote: LOL if space marines were top teir when the eddition came out and I called them falling to the bottom. I am very proud of having that amount of foresight.
Gmans rerolls were so OP he had to be nerfed into the 400pt range to be "fair" - even when taking otherwise-halfdecent options.
If you need "reroll all wounds" auras to be considered a non-failure, your idea of balance is out of whack.
What you fail to understand. Is he was overpointed at 400.
Dude, you read like trumps twitter account when you're talking about your own army; Could you please talk about how you'd buff guilliman and make CWE pay for it?
Not to get political. If someone is right about something. They are right whether you like them or not. Space marines have been a bottom tier army for a long time. Nerfing their best units in an attempt to fix the codex is a pretty idiotic way of doing that. I am also right. Gman and repuslors were our best units and they have both been heavily nerfed. GW seems to have the opposite Idea of how to fix things. For example - not nerfing infantry and buffing LR commanders does nothing to fix guard being OP. Agressors are a pretty okay unit and they buffed them to be a good unit. Then made a new transport that would make them fantastic but aggressors cant ride in them and they nerfed respulsors and executioners who can carry them....GREAT. They buff stalker bolt rifles (good) then they take away their best stratagem. The don't fix hellbalsters (plasma slays you when you roll a 1 - when lots of other armies plasma does 1 mortal wound only) so they are still unplayable because of -1 to hits. The make drop pods deep strike turn 1 but don't fix their real problem - they aren't worth points - deep striking in other armies cost command points (which aren't equal to points). Tactical go down 1 point and get access to these new abilities as well - great - now they are a relatively average unit.
Point remains that while a lot of space marine units have improved - they havn't improved to the point where they have surpassed gman ultras earlier in the edition - which is a basic fact of 40k - was not a very good army. Might they shake up the meta a bit - sure. If there is a lot of MEQ out there - everyone is just going to spam AP-3/4 weapons because they get amazing return on it. For this? Space marines have almost no defense. This has basically always been the problem - not fixed. These are casual type fixes that don't help the army competitively for the most part. Which is all I care about. Marines could already do pretty okay in a casual setting because -1 to hits and t8 spam aren't really a thing in casual games.
BrianDavion wrote: you know Xenomancers, you don't HAVE to over charge your plasma.
Not overcharged a plasma is a very subpar weapon. It is what you have to end up doing - but doing 50% less damage so you don't slay yourself is actually pretty absurd in a game of 17% dice pips. Typically moving a pip is a pretty big deal. Not overcharging your plasma is like a 2 or 3 dice pip negative on you. Vs t8 mutli wound. Or if it means you wound on 3's instead of 2's - it is also a big deal. It is absurd that plasma is still doing a complete slaying of 2 wound models. It is actually absurd that plasma overheat isn't just on an unmodified 1 to hit at this point. Those are the kinds of changes marines need. Not bonus AP on their bolt guns (while I'll take it) plasma really needs fixing for marines to be competitive.
Xenomancers wrote: LOL if space marines were top teir when the eddition came out and I called them falling to the bottom. I am very proud of having that amount of foresight.
Gmans rerolls were so OP he had to be nerfed into the 400pt range to be "fair" - even when taking otherwise-halfdecent options.
If you need "reroll all wounds" auras to be considered a non-failure, your idea of balance is out of whack.
What you fail to understand. Is he was overpointed at 400.
Dude, you read like trumps twitter account when you're talking about your own army; Could you please talk about how you'd buff guilliman and make CWE pay for it?
Bharring wrote: If the requirements are too unreasonable, even if it's a game-winner, it's not worth it. If the requirements aren't too unreasonable, if it's a game-winner, it's OP.
Relying on a too-unreasonable game-winner is basically accepting that you can't actually win half of your games, so you'll go for a gimmick win when you can. Basically, a defeated player before they show up.
You're basically saying that your ability to win games should hinge on this "one little trick" actually working. If we want Marines to be capable of wining without relying on such a game-winner, the game-winner needs to be toned down while the rest of the army gets toned up.
Which seems to be what they're trying to do.
To make matters worse, your chosen hero game-winner has nothing to do, thematically, with the army. You're playing Marines so you can have an armored spearhead obliterate the enemy without any Marines involved?
Don't get me wrong - the buff to the vindi is pretty nice. I will be using them. As you can see from slayers reaction to my comment about the stratagem being good - it's really only because vindis were "that bad" to even consider taking them. Id say now they are a toppish teir unit. d6d6 damage shots is swingy - but powerful for a unit that cheap. I'll be taking 3 every game.
Xenomancers wrote: LOL if space marines were top teir when the eddition came out and I called them falling to the bottom. I am very proud of having that amount of foresight.
Gmans rerolls were so OP he had to be nerfed into the 400pt range to be "fair" - even when taking otherwise-halfdecent options.
If you need "reroll all wounds" auras to be considered a non-failure, your idea of balance is out of whack.
What you fail to understand. Is he was overpointed at 400.
Dude, you read like trumps twitter account when you're talking about your own army; Could you please talk about how you'd buff guilliman and make CWE pay for it?
Not to get political. If someone is right about something. They are right whether you like them or not.
Conversely, when they are wrong about something, claiming to be right doesnt make it so.
Back into his metaphore, trump absolutely waa right that he'd build a "wall". He was wrong about it being more than piles of barbed wire, or that Mexico, and not extralegoslatively repurposed military funds. How right or wrong he is on specific points is aatter of fact, but how "right" he was overall is a judgement call (and heavily political).
Likewise, when you claimed Marines were trash tier, like they were for all of bith previous editions, and always woild be this edition, you were clearly right in one respect (Marines became trash tier soon after). But you were wrong that Marines at the time were trash tier - they held their own well until the following CA came out, even against the OPCWE book that followed. And that they were trash throughout all of 6th and 7th, but we dont need to waste pages rehashing your denials again. The always will br claim is what youre asking us to trust your judgement on.
So of 4 claims (are trash, will be trash, were always trash previously, and never in 8th wont be trash), two are flat out wrong, one is true, and one we cant know yet.
And so you carry on banding about how "right" you were.
I'd put that accuracy in "broken clock" territory. Your theories and predictions are clearly rooted in assuming Marines are always bad. So your claims anx predictions are independant of reality - they are an extension of "assuming marines are bad". Which makes it entirely worthless when looking at if Marines are bad.
And the rest of your rant shows it. You balance things by needing the best and buffing the worst. Simply buffing the best is literally (actual, non-figurative meaning) asking for terrible internal balance.
For a less bleak discussion, here's a picture of the unit points cost I found in the rumor thread and have added to the sheet. It's a french, but the names are in proper nouns so its still useful
I own about 10 armies. The respulsor nerf is laughable. It was already overpriced by about 40-50 points. I MEAN LAUGHABLE. You have to be senile to agree with it.
I own about 10 armies. The respulsor nerf is laughable. It was already overpriced by about 40-50 points. I MEAN LAUGHABLE. You have to be senile to agree with it.
See, it's thing like that that make your case weaker.
There's no need to insult anyone who disagrees with you.
This week.. " Marines are awful trash, they'll never get any better !! "
No one likes nerfs but I still say wait to actually use the rules first then see what they look like.
I'll say I don't like hearing the repulsors went up in cost. I get they did some price wiggling because of access to CT but what about armies where you don't have CT ? Like Deathwatch, or have old chapter tactics that didn't effect vehicles like SW, DA, BA ? Are they going to have their units jacked up for CTs we don't get access to ? That wouldn't make me very happy at all unless we're getting more of a rework with this new FaQ release than I was expecting.
I feel like this kind of leads to a messy set up given the other marine books and this one. Vehicles shouldn't be going up that don't have access to the CTs, will our old marines go down a point ? Chaplains gain abilities ?
I'm really hoping GW do this right and don't end up borking the non codex chapters to try and make one size fits all when it makes no sense unless they are re working things with some thought placed into them that doesn't just translate to copy paste.
Luke_Prowler wrote: For a less bleak discussion, here's a picture of the unit points cost I found in the rumor thread and have added to the sheet. It's a french, but the names are in proper nouns so its still useful
Spoiler:
Huh, looks like the rumored drop in Dreadnaught points didn't happen after all.
So, rather than talk about what is OP and what is trash. Should we talk about potential builds? I had an idea for an army that would be something like this:
Troops:
Scouts (engineers)
Intercessor squad (no upgrades) (engineers)
Intercessor squad x 2 with thunderhammers (vets) with transports
Intercessor squad with power sword with transport
10 man Intercessor squad with power sword
Elites
3xreivers with grav shoots
Fast attack
3xinceptors with heavy bolters
or
2xinceptors 1xsuppressor
Heavy Supp
3xElims
or
2x Elims 1xHellblasters
This is around 2k pointsish (I haven't worked out the exact details).
This army isn't really meant to outshoot a gunline, but sit on objectives in cover and weather the storm while getting rid of the harshest targets. That is quite a lot of 2+ wounds to get through. It's something like 140 wounds with a 2+ save in cover or better with strong counter-melee bully in the form of hard hitting characters with multiple swing/swing when killed strats/sergeants with thunderhammers, tons of attacks, and fairly reliable charges. Also, it will have a 5+ mortal wound protection army-wide which will give it death guard level durability against psy-heavy armies (with twice as many wounds).
And that's without any additional supplements. (which should be out pretty soon given that there are no chapter specific strats in the main book)
Orodhen wrote: Are Stratagems not found in the new codex still usable? Killshot and Linebreaker don't appear to be in the new book.
That depends, did you make your army out of the new book, or the old book? As long as everything comes out of the same book... Meh. Go to town. To answer the question I suspect you were asking without actually asking it - No, you're not using the old Linebreaker Stratagem with the New Vindicator datasheet.
Daedalus81 wrote: Interesting...no wound marine units on a 1 or 2 as a successor trait.
That seems damn good.
eh.. i mean it only matters for str 8 or above. That is what would be wounding on a 2 anyway, so not sure here how good this is. improved ~16.7% survivability vs str 8 or higher. seems like the iron hands ignore wounds on a 6 is just better for overall survivability.
You mean like Overcharged Plasma? That's what that one was aimed at.
Orodhen wrote: Are Stratagems not found in the new codex still usable? Killshot and Linebreaker don't appear to be in the new book.
No.
What is your thoughts on the vigilous strategums?
It's just an opinion but I do expect an FAQ saying everything strategums wise that came before the new codex is retried from the game, bar possibly the blood ravens strategum and some of the vigilous stuff, I do expect some of the vigilous stuff to be culled as it exists in the main codex now.
GW has been fairly consistent on shutting down loopholes that allow double use of a stratageum. But we'll have to wait for the FAQ's
I wouldn't be surprised to see them to the Rule of Three on it. You can use the stratagem(s) from either, but the one is the same as the other so you can't use it twice.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sterling191 wrote: Theyre explicitly classified as failed rolls, therefore an ability that allows you to reroll failed wounds would still function.
And hit rolls of a 3+ for BS 3+ are explicitly classified as a successful hit. Then mods come in and make it not a hit, and no-rerolls. Even tho the rules explicitly called it successful. Until we figure out that breaks just about every reroll mechanic we made, so we have to modify our modification. Wait for the codex, read the wording. Stick your head in the sand, and wait for GW to fix the screw up to the fix of the original screw up.
Daedalus81 wrote: Interesting...no wound marine units on a 1 or 2 as a successor trait.
That seems damn good.
eh.. i mean it only matters for str 8 or above. That is what would be wounding on a 2 anyway, so not sure here how good this is. improved ~16.7% survivability vs str 8 or higher. seems like the iron hands ignore wounds on a 6 is just better for overall survivability.
Takes plasma off the table at least. And makes Castellans less foreboding for tanks.
oh for sure. I am not saying it is useless by any means, just comparing it to the iron hands one I think it is inferior.
A weapon that wounds on a 2 after hitting on a 3 will roll a 2 - hypothetically - more often than a weapon that hits on a 3, wounds on a 4, and is saved on a 3+, 4+, 5+ or 6+ will then roll a 6. Not wounding on a 2 is well ahead of FNP because of all the filters in front of it further chipping away at it's frequency.
I may be being naive here, but if Xenomancers likes the last book and hates the new book, can't he just continue to use the old one? I mean, I know it's presumed the old book is no longer valid, but is that actually stated anywhere? Surely, so long as you don't try to mix and match things from both books, you can choose to use either-or as you please, no?
Ginjitzu wrote: I may be being naive here, but if Xenomancers likes the last book and hates the new book, can't he just continue to use the old one? I mean, I know it's presumed the old book is no longer valid, but is that actually stated anywhere? Surely, so long as you don't try to mix and match things from both books, you can choose to use either-or as you please, no?
Not really, genereally GW states that the new iteration takes precedence.
However in the case of CSM they stated explicitly that you would not need dex 2.0
And we have no counter statement to their general rule in this case.
Automatically Appended Next Post: A chaplain is 72 pts?
WTF?
Ginjitzu wrote: I may be being naive here, but if Xenomancers likes the last book and hates the new book, can't he just continue to use the old one? I mean, I know it's presumed the old book is no longer valid, but is that actually stated anywhere? Surely, so long as you don't try to mix and match things from both books, you can choose to use either-or as you please, no?
It depends on who he's playing against. They're both 8E codex. Who's REALLY going to say "Nah, I'll pass on having a game because you haven't bought the new better codex you think is junk yet.". Heck, he could just play using the Index if he really wanted to.
Bear in mind, I doubt we're going to see anyone thrown out of a GW store for playing 5E (or whatever edition I'm thinking of when you could run Belial and Sammael together and make all Ravenwing and Deathwing Obj Secured troops) because that was when Dark Angels were cool.
I kind of have to agree with Xenos, the repulsor is/was overpriced by a bit maybe not 30-40 but 2 of them take up a quarter of your army which makes the rest of your list a little awkward to manage since it really is one of those units you have to take 2 of.
Granted you can do pretty well with them if you're targeting things T5 or less. I think the biggest thing to complain about is that UM don't have an excuse. There no CT benefits for it, sure you could say there's a dev doctrine but we know you're gonna wanna lock in the tactical one asap for them
My concern is that whilst Marines are indeed more effective at dealing damage, they are now worse at dealing with Knights and from what we currently have, are no more survivable.
Yes, Intercessors are awesome. Great troops. Yes, the strats are much better and the chapter specific powers are so far pretty nice.
Ultras in specific are worse at clearing out the meta's favourite tap dancing Robots, but that's fine - I understand why RG was changed.
The cost increases are really painful, however. There was no need whatsoever to nerf the Repulsors. If you focus on Primaris, as I now do because the army looks so much better on the table, you're left with a real lack of options for high impact, high durability units.
The army is still very small, and very elite. I think they can do some quality damage to an opponent but would suffer just as much in return, likely more.
The better rules were a system shock precisely because they were so rubbish in the past books. Once the smoke clears it will become apparent that the army isn't going to be a meta buster.
The other supplaments could change that, of course, but Ultras are certainly not going to be a hyper dominant force. I actually see better combos in the White Scars books.
fraser1191 wrote: I kind of have to agree with Xenos, the repulsor is/was overpriced by a bit maybe not 30-40 but 2 of them take up a quarter of your army which makes the rest of your list a little awkward to manage since it really is one of those units you have to take 2 of.
Granted you can do pretty well with them if you're targeting things T5 or less. I think the biggest thing to complain about is that UM don't have an excuse. There no CT benefits for it, sure you could say there's a dev doctrine but we know you're gonna wanna lock in the tactical one asap for them
I was actually thinking about Tactical Doctrine and Scions for them, but that got me thinking about LRC's... which also have POTMS but that isn't much of a buff for them, unless they screw up Bolter discipline and they ended up getting Beta Bolter with the way Scions would work... So I'm looking forward to my codex. That then got me thinking about Predators. Who now basically have POTMS. Heck every UM vehicle will now basically have POTMS.
And no you don't have to take two Repulsors. You can take one, and two Redemptors for example, your opponent may be more inclined to shoot two Redemptors than one Repulsor Two Redemptors are going to have about the same firepower, plus be walking up to maul his stuff. He's theoretically on a shorter timer with those.
fraser1191 wrote: I kind of have to agree with Xenos, the repulsor is/was overpriced by a bit maybe not 30-40 but 2 of them take up a quarter of your army which makes the rest of your list a little awkward to manage since it really is one of those units you have to take 2 of.
Granted you can do pretty well with them if you're targeting things T5 or less. I think the biggest thing to complain about is that UM don't have an excuse. There no CT benefits for it, sure you could say there's a dev doctrine but we know you're gonna wanna lock in the tactical one asap for them
I was actually thinking about Tactical Doctrine and Scions for them, but that got me thinking about LRC's... which also have POTMS but that isn't much of a buff for them, unless they screw up Bolter discipline and they ended up getting Beta Bolter with the way Scions would work... So I'm looking forward to my codex. That then got me thinking about Predators. Who now basically have POTMS. Heck every UM vehicle will now basically have POTMS.
And no you don't have to take two Repulsors. You can take one, and two Redemptors for example, your opponent may be more inclined to shoot two Redemptors than one Repulsor Two Redemptors are going to have about the same firepower, plus be walking up to maul his stuff. He's theoretically on a shorter timer with those.
This is why I'm excited for this release. New dread infiltrates so it's already up there, I can have that one up field with my redemptor coming along too. I shouldn't need 2 repulsors now with the impulsor to deliver my hellblasters but I still need a repulsor for aggressors.
Another thing is that the invictor has auto cannons and I'm so glad because most of the 1st wave was S4-5 and then 8 with no middle ground
Also I've noticed no one is talking about UM suppressors, they can freely deepstrike and maintain their 3+ BS
fraser1191 wrote: I kind of have to agree with Xenos, the repulsor is/was overpriced by a bit maybe not 30-40 but 2 of them take up a quarter of your army which makes the rest of your list a little awkward to manage since it really is one of those units you have to take 2 of.
Granted you can do pretty well with them if you're targeting things T5 or less. I think the biggest thing to complain about is that UM don't have an excuse. There no CT benefits for it, sure you could say there's a dev doctrine but we know you're gonna wanna lock in the tactical one asap for them
I was actually thinking about Tactical Doctrine and Scions for them, but that got me thinking about LRC's... which also have POTMS but that isn't much of a buff for them, unless they screw up Bolter discipline and they ended up getting Beta Bolter with the way Scions would work... So I'm looking forward to my codex. That then got me thinking about Predators. Who now basically have POTMS. Heck every UM vehicle will now basically have POTMS.
And no you don't have to take two Repulsors. You can take one, and two Redemptors for example, your opponent may be more inclined to shoot two Redemptors than one Repulsor Two Redemptors are going to have about the same firepower, plus be walking up to maul his stuff. He's theoretically on a shorter timer with those.
This is why I'm excited for this release. New dread infiltrates so it's already up there, I can have that one up field with my redemptor coming along too. I shouldn't need 2 repulsors now with the impulsor to deliver my hellblasters but I still need a repulsor for aggressors.
Another thing is that the invictor has auto cannons and I'm so glad because most of the 1st wave was S4-5 and then 8 with no middle ground
Also I've noticed no one is talking about UM suppressors, they can freely deepstrike and maintain their 3+ BS
Hadn't thought about the hosepipe guys tbh but that's a very valid point, it gets rid of the worst of their issues which was wtf would you move them. Makes more sense to keep then on the board turn 1 for the AP-2 though, then ignore the penalty and move after
fraser1191 wrote: I kind of have to agree with Xenos, the repulsor is/was overpriced by a bit maybe not 30-40 but 2 of them take up a quarter of your army which makes the rest of your list a little awkward to manage since it really is one of those units you have to take 2 of.
Granted you can do pretty well with them if you're targeting things T5 or less. I think the biggest thing to complain about is that UM don't have an excuse. There no CT benefits for it, sure you could say there's a dev doctrine but we know you're gonna wanna lock in the tactical one asap for them
I was actually thinking about Tactical Doctrine and Scions for them, but that got me thinking about LRC's... which also have POTMS but that isn't much of a buff for them, unless they screw up Bolter discipline and they ended up getting Beta Bolter with the way Scions would work... So I'm looking forward to my codex. That then got me thinking about Predators. Who now basically have POTMS. Heck every UM vehicle will now basically have POTMS.
And no you don't have to take two Repulsors. You can take one, and two Redemptors for example, your opponent may be more inclined to shoot two Redemptors than one Repulsor Two Redemptors are going to have about the same firepower, plus be walking up to maul his stuff. He's theoretically on a shorter timer with those.
This is why I'm excited for this release. New dread infiltrates so it's already up there, I can have that one up field with my redemptor coming along too. I shouldn't need 2 repulsors now with the impulsor to deliver my hellblasters but I still need a repulsor for aggressors.
Another thing is that the invictor has auto cannons and I'm so glad because most of the 1st wave was S4-5 and then 8 with no middle ground
Also I've noticed no one is talking about UM suppressors, they can freely deepstrike and maintain their 3+ BS
Hadn't thought about the hosepipe guys tbh but that's a very valid point, it gets rid of the worst of their issues which was wtf would you move them. Makes more sense to keep then on the board turn 1 for the AP-2 though, then ignore the penalty and move after
Even better point!
But this kinda highlights how everyone is focusing on a couple units when the guys you weren't paying attention to are getting better. Except reivers
Also I've noticed no one is talking about UM suppressors, they can freely deepstrike and maintain their 3+ BS
Because Moving and Firing was only one of the reasons nobody liked...
Oh that's funny.
With Tactical Doctrine and Scions you can fire as if you hadn't moved. If you fall back and shoot as UM, you get a -1. But Scions says you can shoot as if you hadn't moved. Those YMDC fireworks are going to be fun to watch.
Also I've noticed no one is talking about UM suppressors, they can freely deepstrike and maintain their 3+ BS
Because Moving and Firing was only one of the reasons nobody liked...
Oh that's funny.
With Tactical Doctrine and Scions you can fire as if you hadn't moved. If you fall back and shoot as UM, you get a -1. But Scions says you can shoot as if you hadn't moved. Those YMDC fireworks are going to be fun to watch.
That's interesting. I mean if you did not move you did not fall back. Does this mean they fire as if they still are in combat? (meaning only pistols)
Also I've noticed no one is talking about UM suppressors, they can freely deepstrike and maintain their 3+ BS
Because Moving and Firing was only one of the reasons nobody liked...
Oh that's funny.
With Tactical Doctrine and Scions you can fire as if you hadn't moved. If you fall back and shoot as UM, you get a -1. But Scions says you can shoot as if you hadn't moved. Those YMDC fireworks are going to be fun to watch.
That's interesting. I mean if you did not move you did not fall back. Does this mean they fire as if they still are in combat? (meaning only pistols)
Depends on how far they fell back. If they're still within 1" they're stuck with pistols. That's the test for shooting... range not close combat.
And yes, there’s still a loophole where people will try to force UM flyers to take a -2 penalty for heavy and falling back tactic.
Thats a fundamentally different discussion than "hey guyz I'm falling back but not falling back so now I can shoot you in the face with all my guns even though I'm still within an inch cause I got super-smurf doctrine powers".
Ishagu wrote: My concern is that whilst Marines are indeed more effective at dealing damage, they are now worse at dealing with Knights and from what we currently have, are no more survivable.
Yes, Intercessors are awesome. Great troops. Yes, the strats are much better and the chapter specific powers are so far pretty nice.
Ultras in specific are worse at clearing out the meta's favourite tap dancing Robots, but that's fine - I understand why RG was changed.
The cost increases are really painful, however. There was no need whatsoever to nerf the Repulsors. If you focus on Primaris, as I now do because the army looks so much better on the table, you're left with a real lack of options for high impact, high durability units.
The army is still very small, and very elite. I think they can do some quality damage to an opponent but would suffer just as much in return, likely more.
The better rules were a system shock precisely because they were so rubbish in the past books. Once the smoke clears it will become apparent that the army isn't going to be a meta buster.
The other supplaments could change that, of course, but Ultras are certainly not going to be a hyper dominant force. I actually see better combos in the White Scars books.
A couple um grav devs in a pod will put a big hurt on a knight. Smash captains are widely available now. An executioner can auto hit with all of its weapons. Vindicators bring D6 shots.
And yes, there’s still a loophole where people will try to force UM flyers to take a -2 penalty for heavy and falling back tactic.
Thats a fundamentally different discussion than "hey guyz I'm falling back but not falling back so now I can shoot you in the face with all my guns even though I'm still within an inch cause I got super-smurf doctrine powers".
you wouldn’t have been able to do it within an inch. That was the whole determined by range thing. Within 1 you can only shoot pistols. I never said they could shoot the big guns within 1” and having fallen back I think they have to fall back outside the 1” to boot.
And no, it’s not a fundamentally different discussion, it’s the karmic justice side of the same discussion coin. A UM flyer isn’t worse than any other flyer and should only get the one -1. Getting a 0 vs the people who make them take a -2 would have been a little delicious.
And yes, there’s still a loophole where people will try to force UM flyers to take a -2 penalty for heavy and falling back tactic.
Thats a fundamentally different discussion than "hey guyz I'm falling back but not falling back so now I can shoot you in the face with all my guns even though I'm still within an inch cause I got super-smurf doctrine powers".
you wouldn’t have been able to do it within an inch. That was the whole determined by range thing. Within 1 you can only shoot pistols. I never said they could shoot the big guns within 1” and having fallen back I think they have to fall back outside the 1” to boot.
And no, it’s not a fundamentally different discussion, it’s the karmic justice side of the same discussion coin. A UM flyer isn’t worse than any other flyer and should only get the one -1. Getting a 0 vs the people who make them take a -2 would have been a little delicious.
I was quite surprised GW didn't fix that with the new book.
BrianDavion wrote: regarding the repulsor, I'm withholding judgement, and hope that if we do decide it's something we dislike we can get it changed with CA 2019.
What is to hold judgement on? Overcosted model gets raised in price by 15% with it's best combo nerfed to oblivion and only receives light bonuses to AP sometimes as a result and chapter tactics which should have already applied anyways. It is unplayable as ultramarines and at best a medium/low tier option for ironhands at that price now. Just to put in a little perspective The Castelan knight which dominated competitive play for a long time got a 15% point increase to 700 ish from 600 and now nobody plays it. A Repulsor is no where near the Castellan was and got the same level nerf based on percentage. It is sheer incompetence to make that Nerf. It hurts the army more than you know too. Repuslors are essential to competitive marine game play because they are fly and ignore move penalties - the rest of the army basically cant move. Sure the new ultras tactical doct allows you to but not if you get touched in CC (that is a big drawback). Compared to the harlequins general ability to fallback and act as normal it quite a joke. The ability to move and shoot heavies is a good one no doubt but seriously...I just lots reroll wounds on my whole army and I have a really crappy chapter tactic. Ultramarines are now worse than they were before. Literally...nerfing an army with a 40% competitive win rate. Incompetence at it's finest.
BrianDavion wrote: regarding the repulsor, I'm withholding judgement, and hope that if we do decide it's something we dislike we can get it changed with CA 2019.
What is to hold judgement on? Overcosted model gets raised in price by 15% with it's best combo nerfed to oblivion and only receives light bonuses to AP sometimes as a result and chapter tactics which should have already applied anyways. It is unplayable as ultramarines and at best a medium/low tier option for ironhands at that price now. Just to put in a little perspective The Castelan knight which dominated competitive play for a long time got a 15% point increase to 700 ish from 600 and now nobody plays it. A Repulsor is no where near the Castellan was and got the same level nerf based on percentage. It is sheer incompetence to make that Nerf. It hurts the army more than you know too. Repuslors are essential to competitive marine game play because they are fly and ignore move penalties - the rest of the army basically cant move. Sure the new ultras tactical doct allows you to but not if you get touched in CC (that is a big drawback). Compared to the harlequins general ability to fallback and act as normal it quite a joke. The ability to move and shoot heavies is a good one no doubt but seriously...I just lots reroll wounds on my whole army and I have a really crappy chapter tactic. Ultramarines are now worse than they were before. Literally...nerfing an army with a 40% competitive win rate. Incompetence at it's finest.
Gman and 2 repulsors using anti infantry weapons against Knights wasn't an army it was bad rules being abused.
The fact that you think overwatch on 5+, 6+FNP and counting as double wounds for iron hands is barely viable rules shows just how biased your being.
Thats 3 solid buffs along with additional AP along with whatever bonus it is Iron hands have that we haven't seen yet. That you think a repulsor needed all of that and a points drop, is crazy.
BrianDavion wrote: regarding the repulsor, I'm withholding judgement, and hope that if we do decide it's something we dislike we can get it changed with CA 2019.
What is to hold judgement on? Overcosted model gets raised in price by 15% with it's best combo nerfed to oblivion and only receives light bonuses to AP sometimes as a result and chapter tactics which should have already applied anyways. It is unplayable as ultramarines and at best a medium/low tier option for ironhands at that price now. Just to put in a little perspective The Castelan knight which dominated competitive play for a long time got a 15% point increase to 700 ish from 600 and now nobody plays it. A Repulsor is no where near the Castellan was and got the same level nerf based on percentage. It is sheer incompetence to make that Nerf. It hurts the army more than you know too. Repuslors are essential to competitive marine game play because they are fly and ignore move penalties - the rest of the army basically cant move. Sure the new ultras tactical doct allows you to but not if you get touched in CC (that is a big drawback). Compared to the harlequins general ability to fallback and act as normal it quite a joke. The ability to move and shoot heavies is a good one no doubt but seriously...I just lots reroll wounds on my whole army and I have a really crappy chapter tactic. Ultramarines are now worse than they were before. Literally...nerfing an army with a 40% competitive win rate. Incompetence at it's finest.
Gman and 2 repulsors using anti infantry weapons against Knights wasn't an army it was bad rules being abused.
The fact that you think overwatch on 5+, 6+FNP and counting as double wounds for iron hands is barely viable rules shows just how biased your being.
Thats 3 solid buffs along with additional AP along with whatever bonus it is Iron hands have that we haven't seen yet. That you think a repulsor needed all of that and a points drop, is crazy.
This is a really bad argument. Essentially every army in the game is utilizing volume over quality. As a knight player I can tell you (yeah I play knights too) Nothing is more scary than getting charges by a unit of korne bezerkers or Tzangors with veterans of the long war...Is that? Rules abuse? Piss ant attacks killing knights is rules abuse? LOL. Come on man. You are just an ultramarines hater and you know it. Stop pretending to be objective. We are objectively talking about a bottom tier army strategy for space marines. SM with GMan averages an insanely low WR to the field over 2 years. So much all that "rules abuse" got them. It didn't need to get "fixed" it needed to actually get better to get to 50% WR at least. IF you can't agree with that are essentially admitting you don't care about balance.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote: 215 might be fine for ih, but its insane for sw, ba, or even ws.
My thoughts exactly. It's not great at that price but it's basically where it was before as the insane 3 CT traits you get are probably worth about the 30 point increase. It's still not a great unit though even as iron hands with these nerf.
Ironhands are gonna be running tripple vindi tripple redemptor and a levi with a ton of intercessors. They aren't gonna touch repulsors. Maybe a single executioner for long range antitank.
BrianDavion wrote: regarding the repulsor, I'm withholding judgement, and hope that if we do decide it's something we dislike we can get it changed with CA 2019.
What is to hold judgement on? Overcosted model gets raised in price by 15% with it's best combo nerfed to oblivion and only receives light bonuses to AP sometimes as a result and chapter tactics which should have already applied anyways. It is unplayable as ultramarines and at best a medium/low tier option for ironhands at that price now. Just to put in a little perspective The Castelan knight which dominated competitive play for a long time got a 15% point increase to 700 ish from 600 and now nobody plays it. A Repulsor is no where near the Castellan was and got the same level nerf based on percentage. It is sheer incompetence to make that Nerf. It hurts the army more than you know too. Repuslors are essential to competitive marine game play because they are fly and ignore move penalties - the rest of the army basically cant move. Sure the new ultras tactical doct allows you to but not if you get touched in CC (that is a big drawback). Compared to the harlequins general ability to fallback and act as normal it quite a joke. The ability to move and shoot heavies is a good one no doubt but seriously...I just lots reroll wounds on my whole army and I have a really crappy chapter tactic. Ultramarines are now worse than they were before. Literally...nerfing an army with a 40% competitive win rate. Incompetence at it's finest.
Gman and 2 repulsors using anti infantry weapons against Knights wasn't an army it was bad rules being abused.
The fact that you think overwatch on 5+, 6+FNP and counting as double wounds for iron hands is barely viable rules shows just how biased your being.
Thats 3 solid buffs along with additional AP along with whatever bonus it is Iron hands have that we haven't seen yet. That you think a repulsor needed all of that and a points drop, is crazy.
This is a really bad argument. Essentially every army in the game is utilizing volume over quality. As a knight player I can tell you (yeah I play knights too) Nothing is more scary than getting charges by a unit of korne bezerkers or Tzangors with veterans of the long war...Is that? Rules abuse? Piss ant attacks killing knights is rules abuse? LOL. Come on man. You are just an ultramarines hater and you know it. Stop pretending to be objective. We are objectively talking about a bottom tier army strategy for space marines. SM with GMan averages an insanely low WR to the field over 2 years. So much all that "rules abuse" got them. It didn't need to get "fixed" it needed to actually get better to get to 50% WR at least. IF you can't agree with that are essentially admitting you don't care about balance.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote: 215 might be fine for ih, but its insane for sw, ba, or even ws.
My thoughts exactly. It's not great at that price but it's basically where it was before as the insane 3 CT traits you get are probably worth about the 30 point increase. It's still not a great unit though even as iron hands with these nerf.
Ironhands are gonna be running tripple vindi tripple redemptor and a levi with a ton of intercessors. They aren't gonna touch repulsors. Maybe a single executioner for long range antitank.
You seem more bitter about the repulsors than anything. Did you perhaps make a whoopsie and buy some expecting a massive points break or to push a meta list?
If something is where it was before a points hike because it got 3 decent new rules, then that's not a nerf, it's just a change.
Ultimately a lot of people will branch out and try different stuff, they will use alternative lists because they'll enjoy playing that way and experimenting. When you rule something out as useless, you actually mean they're useless to you, when plenty of none die hard meta players will no doubt have fun with their new ultramarine repulsors following this book.
BrianDavion wrote: regarding the repulsor, I'm withholding judgement, and hope that if we do decide it's something we dislike we can get it changed with CA 2019.
What is to hold judgement on? Overcosted model gets raised in price by 15% with it's best combo nerfed to oblivion and only receives light bonuses to AP sometimes as a result and chapter tactics which should have already applied anyways. It is unplayable as ultramarines and at best a medium/low tier option for ironhands at that price now. Just to put in a little perspective The Castelan knight which dominated competitive play for a long time got a 15% point increase to 700 ish from 600 and now nobody plays it. A Repulsor is no where near the Castellan was and got the same level nerf based on percentage. It is sheer incompetence to make that Nerf. It hurts the army more than you know too. Repuslors are essential to competitive marine game play because they are fly and ignore move penalties - the rest of the army basically cant move. Sure the new ultras tactical doct allows you to but not if you get touched in CC (that is a big drawback). Compared to the harlequins general ability to fallback and act as normal it quite a joke. The ability to move and shoot heavies is a good one no doubt but seriously...I just lots reroll wounds on my whole army and I have a really crappy chapter tactic. Ultramarines are now worse than they were before. Literally...nerfing an army with a 40% competitive win rate. Incompetence at it's finest.
Gman and 2 repulsors using anti infantry weapons against Knights wasn't an army it was bad rules being abused.
The fact that you think overwatch on 5+, 6+FNP and counting as double wounds for iron hands is barely viable rules shows just how biased your being.
Thats 3 solid buffs along with additional AP along with whatever bonus it is Iron hands have that we haven't seen yet. That you think a repulsor needed all of that and a points drop, is crazy.
This is a really bad argument. Essentially every army in the game is utilizing volume over quality. As a knight player I can tell you (yeah I play knights too) Nothing is more scary than getting charges by a unit of korne bezerkers or Tzangors with veterans of the long war...Is that? Rules abuse? Piss ant attacks killing knights is rules abuse? LOL. Come on man. You are just an ultramarines hater and you know it. Stop pretending to be objective. We are objectively talking about a bottom tier army strategy for space marines. SM with GMan averages an insanely low WR to the field over 2 years. So much all that "rules abuse" got them. It didn't need to get "fixed" it needed to actually get better to get to 50% WR at least. IF you can't agree with that are essentially admitting you don't care about balance.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote: 215 might be fine for ih, but its insane for sw, ba, or even ws.
My thoughts exactly. It's not great at that price but it's basically where it was before as the insane 3 CT traits you get are probably worth about the 30 point increase. It's still not a great unit though even as iron hands with these nerf.
Ironhands are gonna be running tripple vindi tripple redemptor and a levi with a ton of intercessors. They aren't gonna touch repulsors. Maybe a single executioner for long range antitank.
You seem more bitter about the repulsors than anything. Did you perhaps make a whoopsie and buy some expecting a massive points break or to push a meta list?
If something is where it was before a points hike because it got 3 decent new rules, then that's not a nerf, it's just a change.
Ultimately a lot of people will branch out and try different stuff, they will use alternative lists because they'll enjoy playing that way and experimenting. When you rule something out as useless, you actually mean they're useless to you, when plenty of none die hard meta players will no doubt have fun with their new ultramarine repulsors following this book.
First of all I had no idea the space marine codex was coming this soon. It was just a rumor it was coming at all. I did figure that the repulsor types could only get better though and I like their models and play style (I like big tanks) but nerfed? Heck no. That is asinine. Overall the unit got worse - it a nerf. Army rules are difficult to determine value anyways - this is why point reductions is what space marines needed. Chapter tactics are supposed to be free though.
Want a list of everything I am disappointed about?
Gman nerf
repulsor/exectuoner nerf
Eliminators not being able to be taken in 6 man units.
Suppressors not being able to be taken in 6 man units.
Loss of vigilis stratagems (nerfed in the codex- some are just missing)
Chaplain disciplines are much weaker than CSM counterparts.
Ultramarine tactic not getting changed (even despite gman being ultra nerfed)
New transport can't carry aggressors.
Most primaris HQ have no options.
There is plenty to be happy about but also a lot of missed opportunities and mistakes. Not sure why so miffed. This is GW - I should know at this point not to get excited about marines finally not sucking. They must always suck.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote: Repulsors do fit under a Deredeo shield. That's something.
If it wasn't the most idiotic looking model that would be a lot more interesting.
Ironically I actually play ultramarines got probably 4k points of them.
I also have about 3-4k of knights.
Funny thing is pre GW nerfing FW to heck I was actually having some sucess with actual mono knights as using unusual units that dont fall prey to peoples go to answer for knights was surprisingly effective.
I'm looking forward to playing my ultramarines because I wasn't playing the Gman dubble repulsor, cheeser list, I was actually using appropriate weapons for appropriate targets. My lists just got way better and even gained from the Gman rewrite.
They look like the should finally actually be able to go round for round with my tau instead of being tabled turn 3.
BrianDavion wrote: regarding the repulsor, I'm withholding judgement, and hope that if we do decide it's something we dislike we can get it changed with CA 2019.
What is to hold judgement on? Overcosted model gets raised in price by 15% with it's best combo nerfed to oblivion and only receives light bonuses to AP sometimes as a result and chapter tactics which should have already applied anyways. It is unplayable as ultramarines and at best a medium/low tier option for ironhands at that price now. Just to put in a little perspective The Castelan knight which dominated competitive play for a long time got a 15% point increase to 700 ish from 600 and now nobody plays it. A Repulsor is no where near the Castellan was and got the same level nerf based on percentage. It is sheer incompetence to make that Nerf. It hurts the army more than you know too. Repuslors are essential to competitive marine game play because they are fly and ignore move penalties - the rest of the army basically cant move. Sure the new ultras tactical doct allows you to but not if you get touched in CC (that is a big drawback). Compared to the harlequins general ability to fallback and act as normal it quite a joke. The ability to move and shoot heavies is a good one no doubt but seriously...I just lots reroll wounds on my whole army and I have a really crappy chapter tactic. Ultramarines are now worse than they were before. Literally...nerfing an army with a 40% competitive win rate. Incompetence at it's finest.
Gman and 2 repulsors using anti infantry weapons against Knights wasn't an army it was bad rules being abused.
The fact that you think overwatch on 5+, 6+FNP and counting as double wounds for iron hands is barely viable rules shows just how biased your being.
Thats 3 solid buffs along with additional AP along with whatever bonus it is Iron hands have that we haven't seen yet. That you think a repulsor needed all of that and a points drop, is crazy.
This is a really bad argument. Essentially every army in the game is utilizing volume over quality. As a knight player I can tell you (yeah I play knights too) Nothing is more scary than getting charges by a unit of korne bezerkers or Tzangors with veterans of the long war...Is that? Rules abuse? Piss ant attacks killing knights is rules abuse? LOL. Come on man. You are just an ultramarines hater and you know it. Stop pretending to be objective. We are objectively talking about a bottom tier army strategy for space marines. SM with GMan averages an insanely low WR to the field over 2 years. So much all that "rules abuse" got them.
I'm not a UM hater - my Marines are UM-descendants, even. They're my favorite chapter.
However, my love for Ultramarines makes me hate "Gman + Tanks" even more. Sure, it was the most effective build of their list. That didn't make it "Ultramarines" in anything but name.
What screems UltraMarines? A variety of Marine times, preferably at least Tacs, Devs, and ASMs. PA Marines being the bulk of the force. Using the right tool for the job - so Lascannons vs vehicles, Flamers/Boltguns/fists vs hordes, Plasma vs elite infantry, and so forth.
What doesn't scream UltraMarines? Single huge beatstick character and 5 tanks. With just a couple doods - often some BT mixed in for the strat - for CP/slots.
Hating the "UltraMarines are really just tank drivers" mentality is in no way hating UltraMarines.
Sure, Gman gave armies that used the 'UltraMarine' name a win. But those armies weren't UltraMarines.
It didn't need to get "fixed" it needed to actually get better to get to 50% WR at least. IF you can't agree with that are essentially admitting you don't care about balance.
Then play FlipACoin. You can get a 50% WR with Gman any day with that game. Or paint your Knights blue and pretend they're Primaris Centurion Primes or something. But please let GW make UltraMarines an army again.
I do care about balance. But if they buffed Gman back to what he was, then either they make Marines with him balanced and thus make all other Marines trash, or they make Marines without him balanced, and Marines with him OP. Either is bad.
If you have terrible internal balance in a book, and that book isn't top-tier anymore, it's quite common for the right step to be a nerf to the best thing and buff to lots of other things. It's called internal balance. Most of us like it. And it's a lot easier to do external balance when you don't have such a lopsided single-subfaction distorting the internal balance so bad.
So, obviously, not agreeing with such a silly theory is nothing at all like not caring about balance.
The list I was typically running was actually 40 intercessors a levi dread and gman tiggy phobos libi and primaris ancient and some extra points that I dabbled with. I had the most success with that list. That was a supper fluffy lists. 40 marines and a dread fighting in ranks? I guess I can do it now and still move while I do it...I'll autolose to MEQ armies though. Oh well. Can't have a chance to win them all apparently.
I'd hasten to add that Guilliman is almost impossible to point accurately. So much of his worth is tied into his aura buffs, but the value of those is dependent on what is in the aura. Because that's so variable and the impact it has on a lit is so drastic, how do you price it?
Case in hand if he has a pair of repulsors next to him and ups their damage output by a further 60-70% (arbitrary made up numbers) you added 300 or so points of value to the army. Sticking 30 tac marines around him will net you a couple of hundred worth of value tops. Obviously these are generalist statements and don't take survivability into account, but hopefully give an idea of why he's so hard for them to balance correctly. It would be easier if he had a mediocre buff aura and baked more power into him personally somehow.
It looks like someone cutt a boat in half and smashed it over a contemptor dreads head...contemptors are also pretty ugly. They look like some crap I was making with legos when I was 6 years old.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote: I'd hasten to add that Guilliman is almost impossible to point accurately. So much of his worth is tied into his aura buffs, but the value of those is dependent on what is in the aura. Because that's so variable and the impact it has on a lit is so drastic, how do you price it?
Case in hand if he has a pair of repulsors next to him and ups their damage output by a further 60-70% (arbitrary made up numbers) you added 300 or so points of value to the army. Sticking 30 tac marines around him will net you a couple of hundred worth of value tops. Obviously these are generalist statements and don't take survivability into account, but hopefully give an idea of why he's so hard for them to balance correctly. It would be easier if he had a mediocre buff aura and baked more power into him personally somehow.
You balance him by looking at competitive WR. If the WR was to high you raise his points - if the WR was too low you don't touch his points and buff other marine units.
Xenomancers wrote: The list I was typically running was actually 40 intercessors a levi dread and gman tiggy phobos libi and primaris ancient and some extra points that I dabbled with. I had the most success with that list. That was a supper fluffy lists. 40 marines and a dread fighting in ranks? I guess I can do it now and still move while I do it...I'll autolose to MEQ armies though. Oh well. Can't have a chance to win them all apparently.
So Bobby G spearheading the force of nearly half the Company, all kitted identically? With Tiggy + Libby + another solo?
It sounds to me like you're playing Necron Warrior spam with better rules.
Where's the combined arms aspect? Where's the specialists in each squad? Where's the heavy support? FA skirmishers?
It's a spam list. UM spam PA, but PA of multiple varieties.
Xenomancers wrote: The list I was typically running was actually 40 intercessors a levi dread and gman tiggy phobos libi and primaris ancient and some extra points that I dabbled with. I had the most success with that list. That was a supper fluffy lists. 40 marines and a dread fighting in ranks? I guess I can do it now and still move while I do it...I'll autolose to MEQ armies though. Oh well. Can't have a chance to win them all apparently.
So Bobby G spearheading the force of nearly half the Company, all kitted identically? With Tiggy + Libby + another solo?
It sounds to me like you're playing Necron Warrior spam with better rules.
Where's the combined arms aspect? Where's the specialists in each squad? Where's the heavy support? FA skirmishers?
It's a spam list. UM spam PA, but PA of multiple varieties.
(Edit: Oops, thanks CrazyTerran.)
Seeing as specialists in each squad hasn't been good ever and Primaris bringing that specialization in the entire squad, what's the problem?
Xenomancers wrote: The list I was typically running was actually 40 intercessors a levi dread and gman tiggy phobos libi and primaris ancient and some extra points that I dabbled with. I had the most success with that list. That was a supper fluffy lists. 40 marines and a dread fighting in ranks? I guess I can do it now and still move while I do it...I'll autolose to MEQ armies though. Oh well. Can't have a chance to win them all apparently.
So Bobby G spearheading the force of nearly half the Company, all kitted identically? With Tiggy + Libby + another solo?
It sounds to me like you're playing Necron Warrior spam with better rules.
Where's the combined arms aspect? Where's the specialists in each squad? Where's the heavy support? FA skirmishers?
It's a spam list. UM spam PA, but PA of multiple varieties.
(Edit: Oops, thanks CrazyTerran.)
Seeing as specialists in each squad hasn't been good ever and Primaris bringing that specialization in the entire squad, what's the problem?
I mean, that's the greatest thing ever, for all the players that loved having specialists in their squads!
Now, instead of specialists in our squads, we can trade all that sctick in for "Necron Warriors, but better" intercessor spam! Or "Aspect Warriors but better" Hellblasters/eliminators/etc. Or "Falcon/Hammerhead, but better" Repulsors/Executioners!
Sorry, but these things aren't what I'm looking to get from my UltraMarines.
Sorry, but these things aren't what I'm looking to get from my UltraMarines.
Then play with old marines and problem solved?
How does playing with OldMarines without Bobby G in a book balanced around taking Bobby G solve the problem? The point is, Bobby G shouldn't make "Armored Column" or "Intercessor Spam" the only way to play the book.
Sorry, but these things aren't what I'm looking to get from my UltraMarines.
So glad we have you here to tell us the permitted ways to play particular factions.
Quite the opposite. I'm aggrevated by the idea that I "obviously" hate UltraMarines just because I want to be able to field them without Bobby G or 40 Intercessors.
I'm not saying those lists should be bad. I was just saying there's nothing "super fluffy" about UltraMarines using no Devs (or Primaris equivelants) or Tacs (or Primaris equivelents), or really anything else but characters. Any combined arms at all. So dismissing me (and others like me) that want UltraMarines as playable without Bobby G or spam as "hating UltraMarines" is bad.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Addendum:
When I wrote "what I'm looking to get from my UltraMarines", I'm not sure how everyone is reading that as "What I'm demanding you be limited to with your Marines".
It looks like someone cutt a boat in half and smashed it over a contemptor dreads head...contemptors are also pretty ugly. They look like some crap I was making with legos when I was 6 years old.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote: I'd hasten to add that Guilliman is almost impossible to point accurately. So much of his worth is tied into his aura buffs, but the value of those is dependent on what is in the aura. Because that's so variable and the impact it has on a lit is so drastic, how do you price it?
Case in hand if he has a pair of repulsors next to him and ups their damage output by a further 60-70% (arbitrary made up numbers) you added 300 or so points of value to the army. Sticking 30 tac marines around him will net you a couple of hundred worth of value tops. Obviously these are generalist statements and don't take survivability into account, but hopefully give an idea of why he's so hard for them to balance correctly. It would be easier if he had a mediocre buff aura and baked more power into him personally somehow.
You balance him by looking at competitive WR. If the WR was to high you raise his points - if the WR was too low you don't touch his points and buff other marine units.
You do that and you end up with a situation where he's so expensive he only ever gets fielded with 1-2 units that are the perfect fit. Which is the exact opposite of what balance is about, it should be about making hard decisions and opportunity cost, not take these 3 models this exact way or don't bother.
Xenomancers wrote: The list I was typically running was actually 40 intercessors a levi dread and gman tiggy phobos libi and primaris ancient and some extra points that I dabbled with. I had the most success with that list. That was a supper fluffy lists. 40 marines and a dread fighting in ranks? I guess I can do it now and still move while I do it...I'll autolose to MEQ armies though. Oh well. Can't have a chance to win them all apparently.
So Bobby G spearheading the force of nearly half the Company, all kitted identically? With Tiggy + Libby + another solo?
It sounds to me like you're playing Necron Warrior spam with better rules.
Where's the combined arms aspect? Where's the specialists in each squad? Where's the heavy support? FA skirmishers?
It's a spam list. UM spam PA, but PA of multiple varieties.
(Edit: Oops, thanks CrazyTerran.)
Seeing as specialists in each squad hasn't been good ever and Primaris bringing that specialization in the entire squad, what's the problem?
I mean, that's the greatest thing ever, for all the players that loved having specialists in their squads!
Now, instead of specialists in our squads, we can trade all that sctick in for "Necron Warriors, but better" intercessor spam! Or "Aspect Warriors but better" Hellblasters/eliminators/etc. Or "Falcon/Hammerhead, but better" Repulsors/Executioners!
Sorry, but these things aren't what I'm looking to get from my UltraMarines.
You can deny it all you want, but Tactical Marines have always had a terrible setup, even now when they get Relentless Lite.
Not everyone plays the game in the same way, if you think a certain setup is bad from a competitive/math-hammer point then that doesn't mean someone that plays more narratively can't enjoy them for what they are.
So, has everyone seen the new strategems? Autohitting Assault bolters? Rapidfire 2 bolt rifles? Stalker Bolters can now target characters and do mortal wounds?
This is getting friggin ridiculous. We haven't even seen the other sub codex's and this is way out of hand.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: So, has everyone seen the new strategems? Autohitting Assault bolters? Rapidfire 2 bolt rifles? Stalker Bolters can now target characters and do mortal wounds?
This is getting friggin ridiculous. We haven't even seen the other sub codex's and this is way out of hand.
Wait till you realize that the Hunterslayer also ignores LOS and Targeting restrictions. Gman over there? Take D3 mortals. Demon prince is monsterous? Take D3 mortals...
Don't forget that each intercessor can take a Stalker bolt rifle! That's a potential for 30 mortal wounds! Guess what guys? Intercessors can 1 shot A KNIGHT.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: So, has everyone seen the new strategems? Autohitting Assault bolters? Rapidfire 2 bolt rifles? Stalker Bolters can now target characters and do mortal wounds?
This is getting friggin ridiculous. We haven't even seen the other sub codex's and this is way out of hand.
Where are you seeing that? I've watched several codex review and haven't seen anything but the rapid fire stratagem. Which isn't actually new. All of those were stratagems from vigilis.
I think you can relax. A single fire prism can 1 shot a Knight too, but that doesn't mean it's likely to at all. In order to drop a Knight reliably, you need 3 Prisms and 1CP to Link Fire (and even then I've seen Knight survive a volley). That costs a bit more than a Knight. Same goes for the Intercessors. You'd need well more points-worth of them to drop a Knight.
30 mortal wounds? Wut?
1. The strat only works on 1 unit, so 10 mortals with a perfect roll of all 6s, statistically more like 1.5.
2. The strat existed before in Vigilus and no one cared.
3. If you had enough Intercessors to do 30 wounds in 1 turn to a Knight you’ve paid more than the Knight cost so its all balanced anyways.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Don't forget that each intercessor can take a Stalker bolt rifle! That's a potential for 30 mortal wounds! Guess what guys? Intercessors can 1 shot A KNIGHT.
But, I thought new marines still sucked ? Now they are back to being OP ? I can't handle all the back and forth, I need to know are they OP or Poop ? I'm so confused.
AngryAngel80 wrote: But, I thought new marines still sucked ? Now they are back to being OP ? I can't handle all the back and forth, I need to know are they OP or Poop ? I'm so confused.
Xeno your entire codex got bonus AP across the whole army…. wounds, attacks and multiple point drops plus all sorts of strats. Do you even have the book yet?
How you can complain is beyond me.. You codex has a bad unit in it? Woopse friggin doodle. welcome to 40k where most codex have 60% of their entries dog gak.
Heaven forbid you have to think and use right weapons for right targets rather than spam 40 intercessors with g man and expect to win purely through ROF re-roll everything... Most of us having to choose bwteen fine cast or gtfo units would kill their first borns for a kick ass codex and constant stream of new releases...
Argive wrote: Xeno your entire codex got bonus AP across the whole army…. wounds, attacks and multiple point drops plus all sorts of strats. Do you even have the book yet?
How you can complain is beyond me.. You codex has a bad unit in it? Woopse friggin doodle. welcome to 40k where most codex have 60% of their entries dog gak.
Heaven forbid you have to think and use right weapons for right targets rather than spam 40 intercessors with g man and expect to win purely through ROF re-roll everything... You are giving marine players a bad rep as most of us would kill their first borns for a kick ass codex and constand stream of new releases...
AngryAngel80 wrote: But, I thought new marines still sucked ? Now they are back to being OP ? I can't handle all the back and forth, I need to know are they OP or Poop ? I'm so confused.
To answer seriously to you probably not so serious question, I think they're mostly fine. Of course some units are still overcosted or just bad. I however fear that with the plethora of new special rules there will be some (probably unforeseen) combinations that will prove to be a bit too much. One obvious thing that comes to mind is the Ultra super doctrine with Aggressors and Repulsor Executioners. Being able to always double shoot with them is pretty damn insane, especially as the Aggressors were buffed already.
How to get the Aggressors up the table is the sticking point. Unless you want to put them in a Repulsor and paint an even larger ‘shoot me’ sign on a unit with no invuln.
bort wrote: How to get the Aggressors up the table is the sticking point. Unless you want to put them in a Repulsor and paint an even larger ‘shoot me’ sign on a unit with no invuln.
Argive wrote: Xeno your entire codex got bonus AP across the whole army…. wounds, attacks and multiple point drops plus all sorts of strats. Do you even have the book yet?
How you can complain is beyond me.. You codex has a bad unit in it? Woopse friggin doodle. welcome to 40k where most codex have 60% of their entries dog gak.
Heaven forbid you have to think and use right weapons for right targets rather than spam 40 intercessors with g man and expect to win purely through ROF re-roll everything... Most of us having to choose bwteen fine cast or gtfo units would kill their first borns for a kick ass codex and constant stream of new releases...
True - I am getting a healthy dose of plastic crack compared to eldar for marines but I play all the armies. you have my sympathy if all you want is new eldar minis to build and paint. Have you considered quins? I have a fair sized eldar force too. All ulthwe. Realistically I use the same strategy with eldar as well - except I don't have to rally around a 6" bubble buff. I deep strike 20-40 gaurdians and shoot the doomed target + I take starcannon warwalkers because I plan to shoot them at doomed target. I take 2-3 fireprisims and use linked fire. Reliability is the name of the game.
Imagine you spent like 500 quid on 3 repuslors and 2 executioners. Got them all painted and then suddenly they both get nerfed by about 15% point cost - when they already werent that great flying around with 3+ saves and no invunes. I think you'd be equally bitter as me. Your favroite and best painted model by far gets nerfed into oblivion (Guilliman). Your chapter tactic (which might as well not even exist in most games) is ignored while every other chapter tactic gets buffed (when they were already better). It is a pretty depressing day to play Ultramarines. They did get some neat new rules but it isn't nearly cosolidation for the losses. The army got weaker and it was already pretty freaking weak. A not ass chapter tactic really should have come with the nerf to gman.
I literally could not beat tau or admech or eldar with space marines. Granted all I face is really well built armies. It seems to me there is a giant disconnect between the rules makers and people who actually understand how the game is played.
JNAProductions wrote: You keep saying the UM tactic sucks. And yet models with FLY are considered pretty damn good, if they're shooty.
If it functioned as actual fly keyword (this would actually be silly because they aren't harlequins) I wouldn't complain. Typically when you lose combat you are gonna get wrapped. Not because they don't want you to be able to shoot - but they don't want to get shot by the rest of your army. It really isn't hard to wrap units ether. You can't really wrap a fly unit. Also the minus -1 penalty is another silly weakness. For such a conditional trait it should really be removed. I don't know how you can argue otherwise. Fly keyword is handed out like candy in other armies and they sure aren't paying much for it ether. +1 LD? I can honestly say the leadership is almost entirely worthless. 1 out of 20 games it will matter. Where as every other trait will matter in pretty much every game. I always considered it being a balancing factor for Gman and I just kinda accepted it. With gman being nerfed to doing nothing any other chapter can do. There is absolutely no reason for such a weak trait. They even made a stratagem for you to ignore the -1 to hit from your trait when you fall back. Insult to injury - that is acknowledging the fact they know the trait is garbage but think you should have to spend CP to make your trait not garbage.
Argive wrote: Xeno your entire codex got bonus AP across the whole army…. wounds, attacks and multiple point drops plus all sorts of strats. Do you even have the book yet?
How you can complain is beyond me.. You codex has a bad unit in it? Woopse friggin doodle. welcome to 40k where most codex have 60% of their entries dog gak.
Heaven forbid you have to think and use right weapons for right targets rather than spam 40 intercessors with g man and expect to win purely through ROF re-roll everything... Most of us having to choose bwteen fine cast or gtfo units would kill their first borns for a kick ass codex and constant stream of new releases...
True - I am getting a healthy dose of plastic crack compared to eldar for marines but I play all the armies. you have my sympathy if all you want is new eldar minis to build and paint. Have you considered quins? I have a fair sized eldar force too. All ulthwe. Realistically I use the same strategy with eldar as well - except I don't have to rally around a 6" bubble buff. I deep strike 20-40 gaurdians and shoot the doomed target + I take starcannon warwalkers because I plan to shoot them at doomed target. I take 2-3 fireprisims and use linked fire. Reliability is the name of the game.
Imagine you spent like 500 quid on 3 repuslors and 2 executioners. Got them all painted and then suddenly they both get nerfed by about 15% point cost - when they already werent that great flying around with 3+ saves and no invunes. I think you'd be equally bitter as me. Your favroite and best painted model by far gets nerfed into oblivion (Guilliman). Your chapter tactic (which might as well not even exist in most games) is ignored while every other chapter tactic gets buffed (when they were already better). It is a pretty depressing day to play Ultramarines. They did get some neat new rules but it isn't nearly cosolidation for the losses. The army got weaker and it was already pretty freaking weak. A not ass chapter tactic really should have come with the nerf to gman.
I literally could not beat tau or admech or eldar with space marines. Granted all I face is really well built armies. It seems to me there is a giant disconnect between the rules makers and people who actually understand how the game is played.
It seems you like a hard stomping tabling style of play..
I'm a purist so only CWE units for CWE army(quins should be part of our book but hey ho...). I tend to make lists out of units I like which normally people say they suck and try to make them work for me. It's usualy a 50/50 toss up and people often just don't expect to be dealing with the mobility of warp spiders for example. My next crazy idea is for a warlock conclave on foot and some other wriath shenanighans. My rangers don't even have an infiltrate style deployment so that sucks..
It sucks for you, I get it. But nobody put a gun to your head and told you to Spend £500 on 5 models. You made the choice and banked on the new hotness winning you games and it is not delivering...
When ynnari got nerfed, people dumped their whole armies on ebay so you can cheer yourself up with that.
My goal in every game I play is to table my opponent. Much like in chess or starcraft or any other type of strategy game I enjoy. I have a lot more fun destroying the other guys toys than standing on a poker chip that I got to first. But hey - everyone enjoys the game differently I don't have any problem with that. My repuslors still look friggen sweet so it's not like I wasted the money. The point is everyone has more fun when everyone has an equal chance to win. In this new codex it seems like there is less emphasis on making what was good - no longer good.
Xenomancers wrote: My goal in every game I play is to table my opponent. Much like in chess or starcraft or any other type of strategy game I enjoy. I have a lot more fun destroying the other guys toys than standing on a poker chip that I got to first. But hey - everyone enjoys the game differently I don't have any problem with that. My repuslors still look friggen sweet so it's not like I wasted the money. The point is everyone has more fun when everyone has an equal chance to win. In this new codex it seems like there is less emphasis on making what was good - no longer good.
So you outright admit you don't actually play to the mission, you just look to table?
Xenomancers wrote: My goal in every game I play is to table my opponent. Much like in chess or starcraft or any other type of strategy game I enjoy. I have a lot more fun destroying the other guys toys than standing on a poker chip that I got to first. But hey - everyone enjoys the game differently I don't have any problem with that. My repuslors still look friggen sweet so it's not like I wasted the money. The point is everyone has more fun when everyone has an equal chance to win. In this new codex it seems like there is less emphasis on making what was good - no longer good.
So you outright admit you don't actually play to the mission, you just look to table?
I don't ignore it. I want to win ofc. However early in the game if I have a choice to go for kills or points. I'm going to go for kills. If I can do both at the same time all the better. Also taking points away from opponents is a net positive. As Ultramarines though in the past - I pretty much had to table to win.
Xenomancers wrote: My goal in every game I play is to table my opponent. Much like in chess or starcraft or any other type of strategy game I enjoy. I have a lot more fun destroying the other guys toys than standing on a poker chip that I got to first. But hey - everyone enjoys the game differently I don't have any problem with that. My repuslors still look friggen sweet so it's not like I wasted the money. The point is everyone has more fun when everyone has an equal chance to win. In this new codex it seems like there is less emphasis on making what was good - no longer good.
I'm sorry ma dude but what you say I do not get.. You either play to win or you don't. If you do, then getting flustered because your way of playing doesn't win seems odd, because you can change the way you aim to play, and play the mission rather than table... And if you don't, then why does it even matter? You cant have your cake and eat it too.
Xenomancers wrote: My goal in every game I play is to table my opponent. Much like in chess or starcraft or any other type of strategy game I enjoy. I have a lot more fun destroying the other guys toys than standing on a poker chip that I got to first. But hey - everyone enjoys the game differently I don't have any problem with that. My repuslors still look friggen sweet so it's not like I wasted the money. The point is everyone has more fun when everyone has an equal chance to win. In this new codex it seems like there is less emphasis on making what was good - no longer good.
you realize repulsors now have a tactic that allows them to deal 1d3 mortal wounds right? that might be why they raised the cost BTW, specificly to dischourage repulsor spam.
Xenomancers wrote: My goal in every game I play is to table my opponent. Much like in chess or starcraft or any other type of strategy game I enjoy. I have a lot more fun destroying the other guys toys than standing on a poker chip that I got to first. But hey - everyone enjoys the game differently I don't have any problem with that. My repuslors still look friggen sweet so it's not like I wasted the money. The point is everyone has more fun when everyone has an equal chance to win. In this new codex it seems like there is less emphasis on making what was good - no longer good.
you realize repulsors now have a tactic that allows them to deal 1d3 mortal wounds right? that might be why they raised the cost BTW, specificly to dischourage repulsor spam.
They can take the orbital relay?
Also - repuslors spam bad but command tank spam okay?
Xenomancers wrote: My goal in every game I play is to table my opponent. Much like in chess or starcraft or any other type of strategy game I enjoy. I have a lot more fun destroying the other guys toys than standing on a poker chip that I got to first. But hey - everyone enjoys the game differently I don't have any problem with that. My repuslors still look friggen sweet so it's not like I wasted the money. The point is everyone has more fun when everyone has an equal chance to win. In this new codex it seems like there is less emphasis on making what was good - no longer good.
you realize repulsors now have a tactic that allows them to deal 1d3 mortal wounds right? that might be why they raised the cost BTW, specificly to dischourage repulsor spam.
They can take the orbital relay?
no it's a stratigium. hunter-slayer missile Hunter Slayer Missile: Repulsor, target vehicle /monstrous creature potentially takes d3 mortal wounds, once per repulsor
Xenomancers wrote: My goal in every game I play is to table my opponent. Much like in chess or starcraft or any other type of strategy game I enjoy. I have a lot more fun destroying the other guys toys than standing on a poker chip that I got to first. But hey - everyone enjoys the game differently I don't have any problem with that. My repuslors still look friggen sweet so it's not like I wasted the money. The point is everyone has more fun when everyone has an equal chance to win. In this new codex it seems like there is less emphasis on making what was good - no longer good.
you realize repulsors now have a tactic that allows them to deal 1d3 mortal wounds right? that might be why they raised the cost BTW, specificly to dischourage repulsor spam.
They can take the orbital relay?
no it's a stratigium. hunter-slayer missile Hunter Slayer Missile: Repulsor, target vehicle /monstrous creature potentially takes d3 mortal wounds, once per repulsor
If it was a 1 time use ability that didn't cost CP yeah...that might be worth 10-15 points but it cost CP. So should not affect point cost.
Xenomancers wrote: My goal in every game I play is to table my opponent. Much like in chess or starcraft or any other type of strategy game I enjoy. I have a lot more fun destroying the other guys toys than standing on a poker chip that I got to first. But hey - everyone enjoys the game differently I don't have any problem with that. My repuslors still look friggen sweet so it's not like I wasted the money. The point is everyone has more fun when everyone has an equal chance to win. In this new codex it seems like there is less emphasis on making what was good - no longer good.
I'm sorry ma dude but what you say I do not get.. You either play to win or you don't. If you do, then getting flustered because your way of playing doesn't win seems odd, because you can change the way you aim to play, and play the mission rather than table... And if you don't, then why does it even matter? You cant have your cake and eat it too.
Nah man I lose to eldar and tau because they are better armies than marines buffed by gman. I can't cap objectives when my army is gone.
Justyn wrote: So anyone have the scoop on the new Thunderhammer point costs? I saw someone said 40pts, but they seemed to be questioning it not stating it.
Thanks much.
16 pts on non-characters. 40 pts on Characters. These are 100% verified from images of the codex points pages.
16 points for a thunderhammer on a sergent's not abd when you consider that a sergent can get a good 4 attacks on a charge. that'll be eneugh to put the hurt on something. with the ability to make sergent weapons masterwork in the codex supplements (it's costly guys don't freak out) that's something worth considering.
So, me and my friend decided to do a 2000pts game last Friday after all of the "official" GW previews had come out. Marine on marine. At this point none of the codex leaks/stratagems/wargear etc. Had been leaked, so it was simply the doctrines and angels of death rules with the enhanced chapter tactics.
My friend played Ultramarines and myself Minotaurs masquerading as Crimson Fists. He had a battalion with a repulsor, executioner, Gman, librarian, vindicare assassinand 3 ten man squads of bolt intercessors. I ran a Brigade with 6 5 man intercessor squads, 3 5 man hellblaster squads, 3 3 man inceptors squads, redemptor dread with gatling/flame, Apothacary, ancient, captain in gravis, lieutenant and Chaplin. All primaris.
I absolutely rekt him. By the end of the third turn, he decided to concede, as we were doing a custom ITC mission with primary/secondry/tertiary objectives, and he was at 1 primary point by that time with me outscoring him badly. He was relying on Gman for full rerolls and the repulsor/executioner to do the heavy lifting, but it didn't palm out. My inceptors deepstriking with -2AP was incredibly bpowerful at deleting his intercessors and vindicare. His unwanting to change from devastator to tactical was baffling as it only buffed his executioners main gun.
While this is a completely abstract and one game example, it shows just how much of a crutch the full reroll Guilliman build was. It's tactically inflexible and armies can and will run rings/out distance you. The codex has really changed the way marines play and I'm positive it's for the good. Because people using guilliman to make anti infantry anti tank was obnoxious as anything and tactically very lazy IMHO.
I've got a tournament coming up in September, and I'm gonna take pictures and write a full report for DakkaDakka. Hopefully the new Codex will help marines be better...
16 pts on non-characters. 40 pts on Characters. These are 100% verified from images of the codex points pages.
Thanks much!
I saw one review that showed the points page, but couldn't make out the Thunderhammer numbers. One character with a Thunderhammer is not so big a deal. But that might make two or three start to seem expensive.
Dr. Mills wrote: So, me and my friend decided to do a 2000pts game last Friday after all of the "official" GW previews had come out. Marine on marine. At this point none of the codex leaks/stratagems/wargear etc. Had been leaked, so it was simply the doctrines and angels of death rules with the enhanced chapter tactics.
My friend played Ultramarines and myself Minotaurs masquerading as Crimson Fists. He had a battalion with a repulsor, executioner, Gman, librarian, vindicare assassinand 3 ten man squads of bolt intercessors. I ran a Brigade with 6 5 man intercessor squads, 3 5 man hellblaster squads, 3 3 man inceptors squads, redemptor dread with gatling/flame, Apothacary, ancient, captain in gravis, lieutenant and Chaplin. All primaris.
I absolutely rekt him. By the end of the third turn, he decided to concede, as we were doing a custom ITC mission with primary/secondry/tertiary objectives, and he was at 1 primary point by that time with me outscoring him badly. He was relying on Gman for full rerolls and the repulsor/executioner to do the heavy lifting, but it didn't palm out. My inceptors deepstriking with -2AP was incredibly bpowerful at deleting his intercessors and vindicare. His unwanting to change from devastator to tactical was baffling as it only buffed his executioners main gun.
While this is a completely abstract and one game example, it shows just how much of a crutch the full reroll Guilliman build was. It's tactically inflexible and armies can and will run rings/out distance you. The codex has really changed the way marines play and I'm positive it's for the good. Because people using guilliman to make anti infantry anti tank was obnoxious as anything and tactically very lazy IMHO.
I've got a tournament coming up in September, and I'm gonna take pictures and write a full report for DakkaDakka. Hopefully the new Codex will help marines be better...
To be entirely fair it sounds like your opponent did make some questionable choices for no real reason and in hindsight invalidated his doctrines with the assassin. There may some legs in the tanks and gman yet, but not as a 1 trick pony, people will spend time trying out combos and lists and in a few months when the dust settles we'll have a bigger picture.
Dr. Mills wrote: So, me and my friend decided to do a 2000pts game last Friday after all of the "official" GW previews had come out. Marine on marine. At this point none of the codex leaks/stratagems/wargear etc. Had been leaked, so it was simply the doctrines and angels of death rules with the enhanced chapter tactics.
My friend played Ultramarines and myself Minotaurs masquerading as Crimson Fists. He had a battalion with a repulsor, executioner, Gman, librarian, vindicare assassinand 3 ten man squads of bolt intercessors. I ran a Brigade with 6 5 man intercessor squads, 3 5 man hellblaster squads, 3 3 man inceptors squads, redemptor dread with gatling/flame, Apothacary, ancient, captain in gravis, lieutenant and Chaplin. All primaris.
I absolutely rekt him. By the end of the third turn, he decided to concede, as we were doing a custom ITC mission with primary/secondry/tertiary objectives, and he was at 1 primary point by that time with me outscoring him badly. He was relying on Gman for full rerolls and the repulsor/executioner to do the heavy lifting, but it didn't palm out. My inceptors deepstriking with -2AP was incredibly bpowerful at deleting his intercessors and vindicare. His unwanting to change from devastator to tactical was baffling as it only buffed his executioners main gun.
While this is a completely abstract and one game example, it shows just how much of a crutch the full reroll Guilliman build was. It's tactically inflexible and armies can and will run rings/out distance you. The codex has really changed the way marines play and I'm positive it's for the good. Because people using guilliman to make anti infantry anti tank was obnoxious as anything and tactically very lazy IMHO.
I've got a tournament coming up in September, and I'm gonna take pictures and write a full report for DakkaDakka. Hopefully the new Codex will help marines be better...
Do you think the lists or the CT / doctrines were the most important part of your victory ?
Justyn wrote: So anyone have the scoop on the new Thunderhammer point costs? I saw someone said 40pts, but they seemed to be questioning it not stating it.
Thanks much.
16 pts on non-characters. 40 pts on Characters. These are 100% verified from images of the codex points pages.
Justyn wrote: So anyone have the scoop on the new Thunderhammer point costs? I saw someone said 40pts, but they seemed to be questioning it not stating it.
Thanks much.
16 pts on non-characters. 40 pts on Characters. These are 100% verified from images of the codex points pages.
LOL 40 point thunderhammers. GW is bonkers.
It's an appropriate price for a model with WS2 and more attacks (plus another attack now). Smash captains have been overtly strong for a while now. Taxing them another 19 points isn't going to break the bank.
Justyn wrote: So anyone have the scoop on the new Thunderhammer point costs? I saw someone said 40pts, but they seemed to be questioning it not stating it.
Thanks much.
16 pts on non-characters. 40 pts on Characters. These are 100% verified from images of the codex points pages.
LOL 40 point thunderhammers. GW is bonkers.
basically a GW equivalent to slapping a child about the head and saying "stop that nonsense" to the whole concept of SmashCaptains. Maybe they're just pissed because they didn't get to copyright that name.
Justyn wrote: So anyone have the scoop on the new Thunderhammer point costs? I saw someone said 40pts, but they seemed to be questioning it not stating it.
Thanks much.
16 pts on non-characters. 40 pts on Characters. These are 100% verified from images of the codex points pages.
LOL 40 point thunderhammers. GW is bonkers.
It's an appropriate price for a model with WS2 and more attacks (plus another attack now). Smash captains have been overtly strong for a while now. Taxing them another 19 points isn't going to break the bank.
It was already quite expensive though. I really don't think the thunderhammer was the problem. Stratagems enhancing their power 4 fold is the problem. I totally agree - smash captain are too strong with all the combinations.
It was already quite expensive though. I really don't think the thunderhammer was the problem. Stratagems enhancing their power 4 fold is the problem. I totally agree - smash captain are too strong.
Put it this way - those stratagems wouldn't be worth using if there wasn't a thunderhammer there.
It was already quite expensive though. I really don't think the thunderhammer was the problem. Stratagems enhancing their power 4 fold is the problem. I totally agree - smash captain are too strong.
Put it this way - those stratagems wouldn't be worth using if there wasn't a thunderhammer there.
Or if the thunder hammer costs a arm, leg and liver.
It was already quite expensive though. I really don't think the thunderhammer was the problem. Stratagems enhancing their power 4 fold is the problem. I totally agree - smash captain are too strong.
Put it this way - those stratagems wouldn't be worth using if there wasn't a thunderhammer there.
Why not just increase the cost of the stratagem that gives bonus attacks? Or fix the busted CP system. It seems like they are trying to do that as in this codex space marines basically lost the ability to bring allies because it takes away doctrines. At the same time they make a thunder hammer 40 points. Basically you can't take it at that price. If a power fist is 9 points.
Justyn wrote: So anyone have the scoop on the new Thunderhammer point costs? I saw someone said 40pts, but they seemed to be questioning it not stating it.
Thanks much.
16 pts on non-characters. 40 pts on Characters. These are 100% verified from images of the codex points pages.
LOL 40 point thunderhammers. GW is bonkers.
basically a GW equivalent to slapping a child about the head and saying "stop that nonsense" to the whole concept of SmashCaptains. Maybe they're just pissed because they didn't get to copyright that name.
Kinda like they doubled the cost of most titans. It's a statement "don't use this".
I'll admit, 40ppm Hammers for characters is a bit much, but 30ppm would have hit the right tone. Characters always get more out of melee weapons because of their better WS, Atx and inherent rerolls (most of the time) and the Hammer having reliable D3 is huge.
21ppm was an auto-take option, so bumping up to 30ppm would have left room for other options like Fists or Relic blades.
I suspect CA2019 will tone down the TH price for Characters, but likewise bump the cost on units to 20ppm (since you are now getting Sgts with the same number of attacks as some Characters)
It was already quite expensive though. I really don't think the thunderhammer was the problem. Stratagems enhancing their power 4 fold is the problem. I totally agree - smash captain are too strong.
Put it this way - those stratagems wouldn't be worth using if there wasn't a thunderhammer there.
Or if the thunder hammer costs a arm, leg and liver.
If the smash captain is able to make it to combat unmolested, which is expected for him to work, then he's hitting like a truck. That you have to pay 21 more points doesn't change that he;ll still hit above his weight.
Why not just increase the cost of the stratagem that gives bonus attacks? Or fix the busted CP system. It seems like they are trying to do that as in this codex space marines basically lost the ability to bring allies because it takes away doctrines. At the same time they make a thunder hammer 40 points. Basically you can't take it at that price. If a power fist is 9 points.
Then take a power fist if you think the cost is too high. When a fist was less than half a TH people STILL didn't take it, because they're going to make sure they maximize damage.
It was already quite expensive though. I really don't think the thunderhammer was the problem. Stratagems enhancing their power 4 fold is the problem. I totally agree - smash captain are too strong.
Put it this way - those stratagems wouldn't be worth using if there wasn't a thunderhammer there.
Or if the thunder hammer costs a arm, leg and liver.
If the smash captain is able to make it to combat unmolested, which is expected for him to work, then he's hitting like a truck. That you have to pay 21 more points doesn't change that he;ll still hit above his weight.
Why not just increase the cost of the stratagem that gives bonus attacks? Or fix the busted CP system. It seems like they are trying to do that as in this codex space marines basically lost the ability to bring allies because it takes away doctrines. At the same time they make a thunder hammer 40 points. Basically you can't take it at that price. If a power fist is 9 points.
Then take a power fist if you think the cost is too high. When a fist was less than half a TH people STILL didn't take it, because they're going to make sure they maximize damage.
I take powerfist all the time on intercessor sargents. Probably still will. I would sometimes take a TH on a bike captain but now it kinda like...not even an an option. BA can still use it I suppose but a 20 point increase is nothing to 1 shot knights. Other marines can't do that though so it is a bad change. Yet another bad change in this codex. Seems like they are just nerfing everything that has been good for marines when they have in fact been one of the worst armies in the game. It's pretty absurd. This isn't how you make an army better.
Argive wrote: Xeno your entire codex got bonus AP across the whole army…. wounds, attacks and multiple point drops plus all sorts of strats. Do you even have the book yet?
How you can complain is beyond me.. You codex has a bad unit in it? Woopse friggin doodle. welcome to 40k where most codex have 60% of their entries dog gak.
Heaven forbid you have to think and use right weapons for right targets rather than spam 40 intercessors with g man and expect to win purely through ROF re-roll everything... Most of us having to choose bwteen fine cast or gtfo units would kill their first borns for a kick ass codex and constant stream of new releases...
True - I am getting a healthy dose of plastic crack compared to eldar for marines but I play all the armies. you have my sympathy if all you want is new eldar minis to build and paint. Have you considered quins? I have a fair sized eldar force too. All ulthwe. Realistically I use the same strategy with eldar as well - except I don't have to rally around a 6" bubble buff. I deep strike 20-40 gaurdians and shoot the doomed target + I take starcannon warwalkers because I plan to shoot them at doomed target. I take 2-3 fireprisims and use linked fire. Reliability is the name of the game.
Imagine you spent like 500 quid on 3 repuslors and 2 executioners. Got them all painted and then suddenly they both get nerfed by about 15% point cost - when they already werent that great flying around with 3+ saves and no invunes. I think you'd be equally bitter as me. Your favroite and best painted model by far gets nerfed into oblivion (Guilliman). Your chapter tactic (which might as well not even exist in most games) is ignored while every other chapter tactic gets buffed (when they were already better). It is a pretty depressing day to play Ultramarines. They did get some neat new rules but it isn't nearly cosolidation for the losses. The army got weaker and it was already pretty freaking weak. A not ass chapter tactic really should have come with the nerf to gman.
I literally could not beat tau or admech or eldar with space marines. Granted all I face is really well built armies. It seems to me there is a giant disconnect between the rules makers and people who actually understand how the game is played.
It seems you like a hard stomping tabling style of play..
I'm a purist so only CWE units for CWE army(quins should be part of our book but hey ho...). I tend to make lists out of units I like which normally people say they suck and try to make them work for me. It's usualy a 50/50 toss up and people often just don't expect to be dealing with the mobility of warp spiders for example. My next crazy idea is for a warlock conclave on foot and some other wriath shenanighans. My rangers don't even have an infiltrate style deployment so that sucks..
It sucks for you, I get it. But nobody put a gun to your head and told you to Spend £500 on 5 models. You made the choice and banked on the new hotness winning you games and it is not delivering...
When ynnari got nerfed, people dumped their whole armies on ebay so you can cheer yourself up with that.
Eh, it's not so much that as it is he needs a reason for why he loses that isn't his fault. If his army is bad or if his army can't 'table his opponent every game (LOL what a joke of an excuse that is) then he can play the victim and never examine whether or not he's actually just really not very good at the game.
Just stop with that - I win far more than I lose. Marines are a bad army full stop. They always have been. I play in most the local tournaments around here and do really well. Top table is pretty much expect for me - not that I am bragging - it's actually you that is bragging by telling me to learn to play. You are saying you are better at playing the game than I am. I didn't bring up skill once. I'd also never bring marines to a tournament ether. The people that do have something other than winning on their mind. Never understood the aversion to tabling - you know you are playing a wargame right?
Our tournments are ITC around here. a few weeks before a tournamnet we play ITC - the rest of the time it's like semi competitive rulebook missions. So 50/50.
I'm actually gonna be doing a lot better in tournaments because my Gman and knights build just got a whole lot better.
Yeah ITC drives people into certain lists because of the way scoring is done.
The game is by far the best with the missions in the 2018 Chapter Approved. They are so much better than people realise, I'm hoping you've given them a fair shot. They prevent lists that are too focused on one thing from succeeding over the whole range of missions which is an incredible balancing factor:
EG: No invuls near the central objectives, or only troops can score, or characters get bonus points on objectives, etc etc drives armies to build well rounded lists.
It means that meta busters like the all flyer Eldar list or some static gunline list can't win the missions.
The ITC has become a giant so shifts will be hard, and it has the downside of limiting the experience of players. There are entire communities that have not experienced the missions from the recent Chapter Approved.
Also, whilst the secondary ITC objectives are pretty damn good, the main missions are pretty dull! But hey, that's just my opinion. I'm sure I'll be playing at an ITC event again soon lol
I prefer ITC, as it gives actual penalties to horde armies. Mass body count obj sec is a real headache in CA 2018. However CA 2018 is better than all previous GW offerings. So they are learning. Also, gangbusters is very welcome!
Ishagu wrote: Yeah ITC drives people into certain lists because of the way scoring is done.
The game is by far the best with the missions in the 2018 Chapter Approved. They are so much better than people realise, I'm hoping you've given them a fair shot. They prevent lists that are too focused on one thing from succeeding over the whole range of missions which is an incredible balancing factor:
EG: No invuls near the central objectives, or only troops can score, or characters get bonus points on objectives, etc etc drives armies to build well rounded lists.
It means that meta busters like the all flyer Eldar list or some static gunline list can't win the missions.
The ITC has become a giant so shifts will be hard, and it has the downside of limiting the experience of players. There are entire communities that have not experienced the missions from the recent Chapter Approved.
Also, whilst the secondary ITC objectives are pretty damn good, the main missions are pretty dull! But hey, that's just my opinion. I'm sure I'll be playing at an ITC event again soon lol
Yes by rulebook mission i mean chapter approved. That is the majority of what we play except for tournament prep. I like them - most of those missions tabling doesn't even mean you auto win. It helps though.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote: I prefer ITC, as it gives actual penalties to horde armies. Mass body count obj sec is a real headache in CA 2018. However CA 2018 is better than all previous GW offerings. So they are learning. Also, gangbusters is very welcome!
ITC is not perfect. Secondaires too strong IMO. Objectives dont actually matter enough IMO. This coming from a guy that doesn't even care for objectives all that much. Anyways. ITC is still fun because at least people understand that it is a competitive game mode and don't bitch about army comp.
Martel732 wrote: Of course its not perfect. I just said it has some downsides for hordes, since gw made them all immune to morale.
Id prefer secondaries be even stronger, but i like player agency.
Daemons aren't.
Whose most commony used troop is very very very difficult to damage.
They're less durable than a Tactical Marine to small arms fire.
5++/5+++ gives you a 56% chance of saving against a D1 weapon, as compared to a Tac Marines 67% chance. Tac Marine does suffer from AP, true, but they can also go in cover to halve damage taken from AP0-Daemons can't do that.
Martel732 wrote: Of course its not perfect. I just said it has some downsides for hordes, since gw made them all immune to morale.
Id prefer secondaries be even stronger, but i like player agency.
Daemons aren't.
Whose most commony used troop is very very very difficult to damage.
They're less durable than a Tactical Marine to small arms fire.
5++/5+++ gives you a 56% chance of saving against a D1 weapon, as compared to a Tac Marines 67% chance. Tac Marine does suffer from AP, true, but they can also go in cover to halve damage taken from AP0-Daemons can't do that.
They always have neg to hit as well but i get your point. Demons have a fantastic record atm, so they have their advantages.
Xenomancers wrote: +1 to wound isn't that great. Because it has to be at the closest enemy and it activates at the start of the turn. +1 to hit is the best option IMO.
Given the timing, I agree, still not crappy, there will be situations where it's very useful. That being said, if it works like Dark Apostles, you'll have to pick and choose, at which point the +1 to hit is going to be the go to. Of course, I have some lists where I run multiple Dark Apostles, I suspect multiple Chaplains won't be that unusual.
The +1 to hit is very good, especially with abilities that trigger on a 6 to hit. This is going to be auto-include for most Marine lists I suspect and mandatory for IF lists.
The +2 to charge is interesting. Seems like it could have some potential with White Scars and Assault Doctrine, but the timing looks a bit funky currently.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ishagu wrote: Does the +1 to hit impact all units within 6 or just one?
Xenomancers wrote: I take powerfist all the time on intercessor sargents. Probably still will. I would sometimes take a TH on a bike captain but now it kinda like...not even an an option. BA can still use it I suppose but a 20 point increase is nothing to 1 shot knights. Other marines can't do that though so it is a bad change. Yet another bad change in this codex. Seems like they are just nerfing everything that has been good for marines when they have in fact been one of the worst armies in the game. It's pretty absurd. This isn't how you make an army better.
Wait a tick. Other marines weren't doing it before. That's why BA were the only Smashcaps. So them not doing it still isn't some great loss. Nevertheless --
2 CP - unwoundable on 1,2, or 3
Generic WL Trait - Reroll any dice on charging, +1S +1A
Mastercrafted Weapon - +1D
RG Trait - no overwatch
WS trait - +D3 attacks on charge
WS doctrine - +1D on the charge
So, WS Smash Captain can:
- Run and charge
- +1A from AoD
- +1S & +1A OR +D3A
- +1D for relic
- +1D for charging on turn 3
He can be on a bike and be given jink for a 3++. He can tank a knight with Transhuman.
This makes a potential AP4 5 damage thunderhammer at S10 with 6 attacks.
Xenomancers wrote: +1 to wound isn't that great. Because it has to be at the closest enemy and it activates at the start of the turn. +1 to hit is the best option IMO.
Given the timing, I agree, still not crappy, there will be situations where it's very useful. That being said, if it works like Dark Apostles, you'll have to pick and choose, at which point the +1 to hit is going to be the go to. Of course, I have some lists where I run multiple Dark Apostles, I suspect multiple Chaplains won't be that unusual.
The +1 to hit is very good, especially with abilities that trigger on a 6 to hit. This is going to be auto-include for most Marine lists I suspect and mandatory for IF lists.
The +2 to charge is interesting. Seems like it could have some potential with White Scars and Assault Doctrine, but the timing looks a bit funky currently.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ishagu wrote: Does the +1 to hit impact all units within 6 or just one?
Just one, selected within 6".
For the most part the on 6 procs in this codex are on unmodified rolls. It's still great for not killing yourself with plasma though and shooting flyers. +2 to charge isn't bad but the same issue is timing. +1 to hit just seems the best overall buff and it is the easiest to utilize.
Xenomancers wrote: For the most part the on 6 procs in this codex are on unmodified rolls. It's still great for not killing yourself with plasma though and shooting flyers.
Missed the unmodified part, that sucks. It's still going to be auto-include I suspect, Flawless Host sends their condolences regardless.
