Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 12:08:50


Post by: Salt donkey


To clarify this threads title IMO marines are no longer the tier 0 menace this forum and many others have complained about for months (years?) Their decline has been slow due to how many options of units and supplements this army has access to, but with the release of the new DE book I think we’ve finally reached the point where the army as a whole isn’t on a tier of it’s own.

Now to be clear, certain builds like ravenwing heavy DA armies and white scars are still competitive options, but as more and more rules for other armies get released, it’s becoming clear that the base marine dex isn’t that strong. Marines are back to having the same problem they have had most editions. They are good at everything, but not masters of anything. Want a tanky melee unit? Sure bladeguard and DW terminators are good, but DG deathshroud are better. Want efficient shooting? Eradicators have been complained about a ton, but they don’t hold a candle against retributors. Fast melee units? Bikers, vanguard vets, and sang guard are nice, but many Drukhari units have those beat. This issue is compounded by the fact that everything in a marine army is expensive, so marine players are forced to pick and choose what kind of units they want to play. Also many of these units lack good inv saves, so marines die a lot faster than some armies.

Some here won’t notice the armies apparent weakening as marines are still good in certain matchups and in more casual games, but i can bet many DG and sisters players have already starting feeling better playing against them.

Frankly I am relieved the marine era is finally over, as the army was too strong for too long .That said I think many will be surprised by how quickly we see the return of “how do we fix marines/Why are marines so bad? ”threads.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 12:26:27


Post by: the_scotsman


Yep. In the competitive setting, we have entered into something of a 'predatory meta' where a faction or playstyle has been a fixture of the meta for so long that the place of top dog is now a fight between the things that counter the common thing.

In reality, what faction a person is playing is generally secondary to what playstyle they're bringing to the table. A Custodes list, a Necron list, a space marine list and some Death Guard lists all work off of a similar playstyle of mid-toughness infantry with good save values and low points cost per wound locking down and holding objectives while putting out enough offense to disrupt an opponent's scoring.

That playstyle at the peak of marine dominance was 70-75% of the meta, and now sits closer around 40-50% based on fairly recent numbers (lists heavily revolving around Magnus and Mortarion are more superheavy oriented death star setups than true heavy infantry lists, so it's not possible to really say that Death Guard numbers contribute to the numbers of the MEQ oriented playstyle)

The most similar period of time I was involved in the competitive 40k scene was late in 7th edition, when "The Eldar List" had been such a fixture for such a long time that the lists actually winning events were fairly rarely scatterbikes+wraithknights, but Eldar still represented a gigantic chunk of the play base.Instead the top tables were generally a fight between a list that could best prey on Eldar but could also beat the other eldar-killers.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 12:38:57


Post by: wuestenfux


Well, I wouldn't be too enthusiastic that the Marine era is over.
Codex creep during an edition is a fact.
However, Marines are so good and versatile in many ways that their competitiveness will not suffer (much).


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 12:51:21


Post by: the_scotsman


 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, I wouldn't be too enthusiastic that the Marine era is over.
Codex creep during an edition is a fact.
However, Marines are so good and versatile in many ways that their competitiveness will not suffer (much).


Marine overall winrate has been sitting at or around 50% for a while now. They are factually balanced against other competitively viable factions currently. How much of that is due to external balancing from GW or internal balancing from people stacking their lists with marines in mind is not knowable.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 13:19:18


Post by: The_Real_Chris


Unless you are a deathwatch marine, in which case your era never started :( (oh woe is my loss of special ammo on my terminators...)


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 13:19:37


Post by: PenitentJake


I think you may misunderstand the issues people have with space marines.

It doesn't matter if you're not dominating the game; if you have 3-4 x as many models and options than the rest of us and you're still getting new kits, we're still gonna rip on the faction. If I had 100 + Drukhari kits all in plastic to choose from, or 100 + Sisters kits, I think I'd be more likely to be receptive to Space Marine player's complaints about anything.

And yeah, there have been threads complaining about power- mostly Eradicators, but I think there have been far more about the disproportionate amount of model support marines receive. Problem A is getting to be less problematic. Problem B probably isn't going anywhere.

And I'm writing this at a time when we're in a bit of a marine lull; it's been a month or so since the last Marine release, and they've been previewing non-marine models. Sisters are getting four kits including a tank and a walker; it looks like it will be a fair number of kits for Orks too. But not a lot for Death Guard, Drukhari or Admech.

Drukhari's my second army; I'm happy with their dex, I'm happy that our combat patrol box is the best one they've released so far- heck I even like Lelith and I'm grateful for a box set. Not enough to make me forget that Mandrakes, Beasts and the Court of the Archon are still finecast, or that every Space Marine Lieutenant after the fist could have been a plastic Slyth or Lhamaean.

It's fun to search GW's store by unit type and see that sisters don't have an Aircraft, but marines have two dual build kits, a single, and two faction specific flyers. I guess what I mean is it's fun if you're a marine player.

Anyway, it is objectively better that the power gap is closing. But I'd also warn you about picking the best unit in every army and comparing it to a marine unit without looking at the rest of the army. I'm also not sure I buy your comparison between Eradicators and Retributors; when either unit is shooting, they're close; when they are getting shot at, there is 0 comparison.

Still, Marines aren't killing the tournament circuit right now, so Erad vs Ret aside, your point stands; the power gap is not what we once perceived it to be.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 13:25:31


Post by: BlackoCatto


Things that still suck still suck however.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 13:29:20


Post by: the_scotsman


I also think that, speaking personally, there's a large shift in how to approach space marines that needed to happen post-2.0dex. The additional offensive and defensive tools available to space marines (and other post-2.0 MEQ armies) necessitates treating basic marine infantry units very differently than you did before.

where before, I would think nothing of charging a MEQ unit with a cheap chaff squad to tie them up and prevent them shooting, now I consider it a much better use of that chaff squad to break LOS with the marine squad, hunker down and begin performing an action or stand on an objective. Most marine units will simply be able to punch their way out of any attempt to cause them harm by light infantry, and it's actually now easier for light infantry to meaningfully interact with superheavy vehicles than it is to interact with MEQ elite infantry, because superheavies rarely have the means to wipe them out completely for free outside of their normal activation order, wheras if you charge a 5-man squad of primaris marines, those 16 attacks have a fairly good chance of simply carving up all or most of your light infantry squad.

You can still use light infantry for what their primary purpose in 40k is against MEQs - forcing an opponent to target a cheap, suboptimal target unit instead of the thing in your army that is an actual threat - you just have to take a completely different approach to it now. Flinging a min squad of ork boyz or Kommandos into a squad of primaris marines is not a smart move, even though your unit is a dedicated melee combatant and theirs is essentially a stationary gun turret with a range nearly equal to the board width.

This is very counterintuitive and a lot of people still struggle with it. 2.0dex made the marine army a puzzle for the other player to solve - ideal for an army intended for beginners.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 13:58:10


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


No that you mentioned they haven't received any new models, they will be receiving a full re-vamp of the Reivers next week.....Thanks!

Not going to lie, I think this is pretty simple. GW is going to flood the market with the faction that people buy and play. The data shows the clear majority of players play some form of Astartes force, either due to product upselling or forcing gak onto customers, doesn't matter. The vast majority of players both common and elite, play power armor. I would honestly love to know where the paints rank in purchases? Obviously Nuln oil and the metal paints would be near the top?


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 14:38:11


Post by: wuestenfux


the_scotsman wrote:
 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, I wouldn't be too enthusiastic that the Marine era is over.
Codex creep during an edition is a fact.
However, Marines are so good and versatile in many ways that their competitiveness will not suffer (much).


Marine overall winrate has been sitting at or around 50% for a while now. They are factually balanced against other competitively viable factions currently. How much of that is due to external balancing from GW or internal balancing from people stacking their lists with marines in mind is not knowable.

Overall winning rate is not decisive.
GW has little support for tourneys.
Sales (pound signs in the eyes) count and nothing else.
If you look as GW's sale figures, they do everything right atm.
And a big proportion of GW's success comes from the faction of Marines - more than 100 data sheets and still growing (and more than 30 variations of bolters of course).


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 14:39:44


Post by: Kanluwen


Your post was about competitiveness and then you claim that "winning rate is not decisive"?

I don't understand. What is decisive with regards to competitiveness?


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 14:54:59


Post by: Daedalus81


 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, I wouldn't be too enthusiastic that the Marine era is over.
Codex creep during an edition is a fact.
However, Marines are so good and versatile in many ways that their competitiveness will not suffer (much).


I'm curious to see how marine players react to oncoming changes.

D3+3 is getting quite common. That means a whole attack bike gone shifting people back to Eradicators ( also vulnerable ) or something else. Add on that D2 is getting pushed into lots of places too, it becomes pretty dangerous to be a marine.

Since marines don't have W1 they are going to need to layer W2 / W3. Heavy Intercessors are probably going to be necessary to get there without overspending on specialists.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 15:14:15


Post by: Xenomancers


Title is inaccurate - marines have not been the boogeyman in 9th except in your own imaginations. The whole time it's just been ... sisters/custodes/daemons/quinn.

Marines just get played a lot. If you compare the play rate with expected win rate (top finish) at tournaments - it is fairly average.

8.5 was really problematic but the majority of the 8.5 rules are busted for all armies. Yall just don't know that cause nearly no one played during that period. (see pandemic)

9.0 marines is a little different. Everything costs more points but a few new units and a few got better. A few strats got better. Errads/Attack bikes are quite good but compared to a unit of quinn troopers -1 to hit and wound transport from a free auto include 9" aura....give me a GD break! It is not even in the same ballpark.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 16:17:47


Post by: the_scotsman


 Xenomancers wrote:
Title is inaccurate - marines have not been the boogeyman in 9th except in your own imaginations. The whole time it's just been ... sisters/custodes/daemons/quinn.

Marines just get played a lot. If you compare the play rate with expected win rate (top finish) at tournaments - it is fairly average.

8.5 was really problematic but the majority of the 8.5 rules are busted for all armies. Yall just don't know that cause nearly no one played during that period. (see pandemic)

9.0 marines is a little different. Everything costs more points but a few new units and a few got better. A few strats got better. Errads/Attack bikes are quite good but compared to a unit of quinn troopers -1 to hit and wound transport from a free auto include 9" aura....give me a GD break! It is not even in the same ballpark.


If they're not in the same ballpark, how do we see lists featuring eradicators and attack bikes regularly topping tournaments?

Harlequins as of march 2021 are sitting at a 55% wr, 2% higher than the top performing space marine chapter, 1% higher than Custodes, and 2% lower than Death Guard. Chaos Daemons are sitting at a perfect 50%. It would appear to me that elite infantry armies have found some ways of dealing with the initial wave of MEQ-eaters.

Barring the obvious underperforming factions in desperate need of updates - GSC, Tau, Guard, Eldar, CSM, and the factions hard-screwed by the new secondary mission structure - knights, chaos knights, tsons, GK - the meta is appearing extremely healthy right now. 15 factions have winrates within 5% of 50%, less of a variance than which player goes first/second. One single faction is hitting 60%. Comparing to the wacko world of 65%+ winrate iron hands post 8.5 and harlequins super early in 9th, things are looking extremely good and the only real flop 'dex of the edition so far is deathwatch.

death Guard are hitting a little harder than expected - pulling 57%, but we are still only a month out from their codex and the meta hasn't adapted to them yet, but look at these numbers:

-Space Wolves 52%
-Blood Angels 50%
-Dark Angels 49%
-Necrons 50%
-Space Marines 47%

^THAT's 9th edition encroaching codex creep? That looks to me like an EXTREMELY well balanced release so far.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 16:51:22


Post by: endlesswaltz123


I suppose the one advantage of the marine codex if it does in fact suffer from codex creep in the end is that bar one or two units, in theory all are playable with the right price point, their rules aren't being necessarily outclassed (other than the lascannon equivalent change that has come long).

So no big FAQ is needed to amend them at some point (or a new codex), just point cost tweaking which we may see happen more often in 9th and it be more effective also.

I'd also like to caution against the idea of going off of tournaments and win rates at the moment. A hell of a lot of 40k players globally are still not playing at the moment, so the data is likely to be skewed in some respect.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 16:51:53


Post by: Daedalus81


the_scotsman wrote:
^THAT's 9th edition encroaching codex creep? That looks to me like an EXTREMELY well balanced release so far.


I don't know how things might shape up as we go forward ( and more people can play ), but I really like seeing the variety of armies reaching top tables. Just about every army has had representation in the top 3 ( no GSC or T'au ). Some aren't as frequent, but other than that it really looks like an environment I'd like to play in.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 16:54:23


Post by: Xenomancers


"marines just get played a lot" I explained why.

We really need a real stat accumulation center. looking at all of 40k stats data...its saying there are only 8 iron hands list since the start of 9th...that is obviously not true. Where are you getting these stats?



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 17:02:50


Post by: yukishiro1


It's just the effect of codex creep. Necrons went from top-tier to mid-tier as well. GW seems to be doubling down on codex creep in 9th edition, and if you listen to people who playtest, they're subtly telling you it's going to continue (i.e. Brian from TT a few weeks ago was asked whether he thinks codex creep will continue and said yes, it will because for a lot of reasons it suits GW's model).

Space Marines will get a 9th edition Codex 2.0 in a year (probably before some other factions even get a first codex) that will once again put them top of the heap.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 17:05:21


Post by: ccs


Supreme tourney menace atm or not, ill still see plenty of SMs in my circles & local shops.

And if the Eldar were to get a 100% awesome revamp, with the most beautiful plastics seen to date, tomorrow?
That still wouldn't shut people up from complaining about Marines.
"They've got too much, they're too good, they're too bad, they recieved too much stuff in the past....", etc.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 17:06:00


Post by: Daedalus81


 Xenomancers wrote:
"marines just get played a lot" I explained why.

We really need a real stat accumulation center. looking at all of 40k stats data...its saying there are only 8 iron hands list since the start of 9th...that is obviously not true. Where are you getting these stats?



Stats pulled are typically not for small tournaments. Usually on the 28/30 man make the cut for analysis.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 17:12:21


Post by: Xenomancers


 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
"marines just get played a lot" I explained why.

We really need a real stat accumulation center. looking at all of 40k stats data...its saying there are only 8 iron hands list since the start of 9th...that is obviously not true. Where are you getting these stats?



Stats pulled are typically not for small tournaments. Usually on the 28/30 man make the cut for analysis.

That is an okay metric I guess if that is what they are doing. I still find it hard to believe only 8 iron hands lists have been played since the start of 9th edition. I wouldn't be surprised if a single 50ish man tournament had 8 iron hands list in it overall. Something is not right with the calculations on their right now. which makes me very skeptical. There has gotta be something better than this site anyways. Why don't the ITC AP collect this data and make it easily accessible and organized.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 17:13:43


Post by: ccs


yukishiro1 wrote:
It's just the effect of codex creep. Necrons went from top-tier to mid-tier as well. GW seems to be doubling down on codex creep in 9th edition, and if you listen to people who playtest, they're subtly telling you it's going to continue (i.e. Brian from TT a few weeks ago was asked whether he thinks codex creep will continue and said yes, it will because for a lot of reasons it suits GW's model).


A truly shocking revelation.
Predicting the continuation of Codex Creep is about as hard as figuring out that the sun will rise in the East tomorrow.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 17:19:54


Post by: Daedalus81


yukishiro1 wrote:
It's just the effect of codex creep. Necrons went from top-tier to mid-tier as well. GW seems to be doubling down on codex creep in 9th edition, and if you listen to people who playtest, they're subtly telling you it's going to continue (i.e. Brian from TT a few weeks ago was asked whether he thinks codex creep will continue and said yes, it will because for a lot of reasons it suits GW's model).

Space Marines will get a 9th edition Codex 2.0 in a year (probably before some other factions even get a first codex) that will once again put them top of the heap.



I've said it before and I'll say it again - perception is everything.

Necrons falling down to mid-tier isn't a bad thing at all - at least as long as they maintain that level.

DG & DA are armies that if you are unfamiliar with can really take you for a ride. This can result is those armies taking WWWLL or WWWWL more often, because they abuse the more casual players early in a tournament. That doesn't mean they're superior and that the "Tier 2" armies can't beat them. This gives them a good WR, but not necessarily a lot of tournament wins. In fact most Tier 1 armies aren't 9th edition books...


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 17:24:25


Post by: PenitentJake


ccs wrote:
Supreme tourney menace atm or not, ill still see plenty of SMs in my circles & local shops.

And if the Eldar were to get a 100% awesome revamp, with the most beautiful plastics seen to date, tomorrow?
That still wouldn't shut people up from complaining about Marines.
"They've got too much, they're too good, they're too bad, they recieved too much stuff in the past....", etc.


A good Eldar revamp would shut me up for a while at least. Heck, if they had given DE just one of plastic Mandrakes, Court of the Archon or Beasts, I'd have been less likely to make the post I made earlier today. But they didn't.

Like I said, glad Sisters are getting 4 units- I'm one of the few who actually likes all four models previewed thus far; glad orks are getting some new models too. By December I think we'll be at a better playing field; by then all the Ork and Sister models should be out, plus a lot of models for other factions- maybe even another big range refresh, like CWE or Guard. Time will tell.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 18:40:35


Post by: Cornishman


Whilst global pandemic probably has influenced tournament results, I would say that the results of those tournaments that have been run are probably reasonably representative (so long as they used the GT Mission pack).

On this basis I would be confident that these limited results are way way more representative than most of the information available for 8E given that such data no longer has to transcend the notable differences between vanilla (e.g Eternal War/ Maelstrom of War) Missions and ITC Missions and some of the marked differences in performance observed between these two environments.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 18:53:56


Post by: yukishiro1


ccs wrote:
yukishiro1 wrote:
It's just the effect of codex creep. Necrons went from top-tier to mid-tier as well. GW seems to be doubling down on codex creep in 9th edition, and if you listen to people who playtest, they're subtly telling you it's going to continue (i.e. Brian from TT a few weeks ago was asked whether he thinks codex creep will continue and said yes, it will because for a lot of reasons it suits GW's model).


A truly shocking revelation.
Predicting the continuation of Codex Creep is about as hard as figuring out that the sun will rise in the East tomorrow.


The point is that he in fact knows it will continue, because he's playtesting those books. When he says he thinks it'll continue, he's not predicting, he's telling you what's going to happen with a nudge and a wink.

Space Marines were top dog at the end of 8th and the beginning of 9th because in both cases they had a new book that out codex-creeped the competition. They're falling back to "only good" now because of other, newer books that out-codex-creep them. They'll be back on top when the 9th edition SM 2.0 book comes out (and we all know it will happen, don't kid yourself that they'll actually let SM go a full edition with only one codex).


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 19:25:40


Post by: blaktoof


The drukhari codex is fresh and has imagined possibilities.

It will be interesting to see how that plays out over time and hundreds of competitive games. My opinion- Drukhari will be competitive, but it won't unseat Marines as being tier 0 boogeymen. It will be less of a power gap between the marines and other factions.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 19:29:37


Post by: Audustum


blaktoof wrote:
The drukhari codex is fresh and has imagined possibilities.

It will be interesting to see how that plays out over time and hundreds of competitive games. My opinion- Drukhari will be competitive, but it won't unseat Marines as being tier 0 boogeymen. It will be less of a power gap between the marines and other factions.


Marines are basically already unseated. Harlies, Chaos Soup (MW spamming monster mash), Sisters of Battle and Dark Angels are the generally agreed upon best. Death Guard and AdMech are 'maybes' in the S-class.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 19:35:23


Post by: yukishiro1


DA are marines. That, incidentally, is part of why Marines are the target of so much ire. Because they're all interchangeable, and because they get more frequent codex releases than anybody else, the chance of any one of them being top dog at a given time is extremely high.

There are a ton of Blue Angels going around right now, for example - the chaosy kind, not the vampiric kind.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 19:50:57


Post by: dogboy311


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
No that you mentioned they haven't received any new models, they will be receiving a full re-vamp of the Reivers next week.....Thanks!

Not going to lie, I think this is pretty simple. GW is going to flood the market with the faction that people buy and play. The data shows the clear majority of players play some form of Astartes force, either due to product upselling or forcing gak onto customers, doesn't matter. The vast majority of players both common and elite, play power armor. I would honestly love to know where the paints rank in purchases? Obviously Nuln oil and the metal paints would be near the top?




So what, what’s wrong with that? Like are trying too make a dig at marine players, or just a dig at people who don’t paint at apparently your master level.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 19:52:51


Post by: xerxeskingofking


yukishiro1 wrote:
DA are marines. That, incidentally, is part of why Marines are the target of so much ire. Because they're all interchangeable, and because they get more frequent codex releases than anybody else, the chance of any one of them being top dog at a given time is extremely high.

There are a ton of Blue Angels going around right now, for example - the chaosy kind, not the vampiric kind.


i think you might have hit the nail on the head, or at least thats part of the problem. the various SM sub-factions are heavily interposed in terms of playstyle and model range, at least form a non SM point of view. a IG or Nid player doesn't really care which colour the intercessor squad that just shot his infantry off the board are, even if the marine player makes that distinction. and often the difference in counter-play between blue, green, yellow, grey, or red marines is also relatively minor (compared to, say, the approach taken agianst a Nid horde army, or a chaos deamons list).

a marine player might go to a tourney and face Ultras, Iorn fists, salamanders, then Dark Angels, but a SOB player might go to that same set of match ups and say "i faced 4 marine armies", and both are correct, form their own point of view.

thats part of the whining with marines. for non marines, they are everywhere.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 19:53:58


Post by: Audustum


yukishiro1 wrote:
DA are marines. That, incidentally, is part of why Marines are the target of so much ire. Because they're all interchangeable, and because they get more frequent codex releases than anybody else, the chance of any one of them being top dog at a given time is extremely high.

There are a ton of Blue Angels going around right now, for example - the chaosy kind, not the vampiric kind.


My point was they're almost extinct in the top slot and just kinda holding on. Harlies have been the biggest, longest boogieman of competitive 40k in 9th.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 19:56:54


Post by: yukishiro1


DA are probably the top faction in the game, they're not remotely extinct.

"Space marines - well, except for these space marines that are the best faction in the game right now - aren't at the very top of the meta. The rest are only very good." sorta says it all.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 20:03:41


Post by: dogboy311


 Xenomancers wrote:
"marines just get played a lot" I explained why.

We really need a real stat accumulation center. looking at all of 40k stats data...its saying there are only 8 iron hands list since the start of 9th...that is obviously not true. Where are you getting these stats?




You’re right people play space marines more then any other faction. So what’s wrong with that? I’m not trying to argue and hope you are just speaking the truth. But marines have not always been top tier, and have always been a the biggest seller. In my local game shop, and at the large events that have been held locally they tend to outnumber everything else. Why is this, maybe because people actually like them, they have great backgrounds and the books about them have been for the most part really good. I do stress most have been. They have great characters with Herculean stories, so yeah people enjoy that. Again who cares what plastic Bonnehommes people prefer.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 20:21:44


Post by: Audustum


yukishiro1 wrote:
DA are probably the top faction in the game, they're not remotely extinct.

"Space marines - well, except for these space marines that are the best faction in the game right now - aren't at the very top of the meta. The rest are only very good." sorta says it all.


What? No. Sisters of Battle are actually regarded as the best faction in the game right now, followed very closely by Harlies.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 20:33:13


Post by: yukishiro1


SoB, DA, DG, Harlies and Chaos Soup are all top-tier. Harlies are no longer number two, that's out of date at this point; if anything they are slipping out of the top tier because they have trouble against DG and DA. You could definitely argue SoB are the top faction, but DA are very much up there too, and it's a much more recent release, that continues to do better and better as people realize that the RW part of the army is at least as good, probably better than the DW part.

I'm not saying DA conclusively are the best faction, but they're firmly in the range where you can make an argument for them.

"Space marines aren't top tier except for the kind that are absolutely top tier and doing better and better since their recent release." Well...yeah?


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 20:36:08


Post by: Tyel


In the last few weeks I think I've read that the best faction is Marines, Sisters, Harlequins, Deathguard, Ad Mech and even some still holding out on Necrons (I think we can probably discount them). DE can probably now join them.

Realistically, the game is comparatively well balanced at a faction to faction level although going first still has a huge impact. Worryingly if they resolve that, the internet will have to start accepting that the better player wins the game, or they are just consistently lucky.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 20:54:04


Post by: endlesswaltz123


RW will not hold on to the torch as the best within DA for very long, RW alone are going to be the reason attack bikes will get nerfed (points increase) at which point, a huge source of their current potency will disappear. Why would GW want people using a model that there are loads of in circulation in the second hand market, let alone outside of RW armies, they want you buying and using ATV's. This isn't me bashing GW btw, but it's what will happen.

Also, RW require a lot of skill and finesse to use, many players may go out there and buy 'the list' but not many will be successful with it, bring the DA win rate down. There are also some fairly hard counters out there to RW lists also, namely long range heavy armour with plenty of multi-shot, multi-wound damage output (or the same for psychic MW spam). Too many people are too gung ho with RW and lose too many valuable units in the first turn.

Now, sort of on topic. Would marines be OP again if the old doctrines Mechanic was brought back in (move doctrine when you want too, this is almost a given that it would be OP), or if it was tweaked again. Due to the nature of 9th reliance on mobility, and tables having better LOS blocking terrain, the devastator doctrine is fairly underpowered, to the point it is not worth having in the first turn. What if you could delay the doctrine process, meaning you can start the game in no doctrine, and choose when to start the doctrine countdown (dev on turn 2, then tac turn 3 etc etc).


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 22:39:03


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, I wouldn't be too enthusiastic that the Marine era is over.
Codex creep during an edition is a fact.
However, Marines are so good and versatile in many ways that their competitiveness will not suffer (much).

We're what, four codices in, and the win rate has been going down. It's just like 8th hahaha


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 22:43:39


Post by: Voss


 Daedalus81 wrote:
yukishiro1 wrote:
It's just the effect of codex creep. Necrons went from top-tier to mid-tier as well. GW seems to be doubling down on codex creep in 9th edition, and if you listen to people who playtest, they're subtly telling you it's going to continue (i.e. Brian from TT a few weeks ago was asked whether he thinks codex creep will continue and said yes, it will because for a lot of reasons it suits GW's model).

Space Marines will get a 9th edition Codex 2.0 in a year (probably before some other factions even get a first codex) that will once again put them top of the heap.



I've said it before and I'll say it again - perception is everything.

Necrons falling down to mid-tier isn't a bad thing at all - at least as long as they maintain that level.


I honestly don't think they will. As welcome as a big update was for necrons, a lot of it was oddly redundant and didn't solve their problems (or provide tools to solve 9th edition problems)
I mean, sure its great that you don't have to take a Doomsday ark to get high strength AT guns, but your other options for the role are in the same slot in the same kind of numbers.
The new CC units that aren't wraiths are the same price and aren't as fast or durable.
The relative lack of D2 weapons in the army puts them on the back foot against the most common opponents (regardless of their 'power level'), while other armies can full on spam heavy bolters and/or plasma or whatever their signature equivalents are.

There aren't a lot of options for actions or holding objectives that weren't present before. The new version of RP helps some, but getting there relies on the same old shenanigans.

It was a great model update, but its very much an archetypical 'start of the edition' codex, and long run its going to be fairly mediocre (or worse).


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 22:55:21


Post by: Daedalus81


yukishiro1 wrote:


The point is that he in fact knows it will continue, because he's playtesting those books. When he says he thinks it'll continue, he's not predicting, he's telling you what's going to happen with a nudge and a wink.

Space Marines were top dog at the end of 8th and the beginning of 9th because in both cases they had a new book that out codex-creeped the competition. They're falling back to "only good" now because of other, newer books that out-codex-creep them. They'll be back on top when the 9th edition SM 2.0 book comes out (and we all know it will happen, don't kid yourself that they'll actually let SM go a full edition with only one codex).


There's a difference between power creep or the sake of creep that sets an army well above others and power creep that sets an army within the scope of the edition design.

When a new book does significantly better than other books ( after people have been allowed to adapt ) like old Ynnari or Castellans then I'll concede the former is true for that instance.







An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 23:19:09


Post by: Void__Dragon


yukishiro1 wrote:
DA are probably the top faction in the game, they're not remotely extinct.

"Space marines - well, except for these space marines that are the best faction in the game right now - aren't at the very top of the meta. The rest are only very good." sorta says it all.


It's more like you're saying,"Space Marines are the best faction in the game right now and are overpowered - well, as long as you play this one specific chapter in one or two specific ways (either leaning fully on Ravenwing or at least halfway on Ravenwing), and every other variation of loyalist Marine is very solid (White Scars, Black Templars) to dog gak (Imperial Fists, Deathwatch).

Dark Angels being top tier means absolutely nothing to an Imperial Fists player who only barely has a chapter tactic.

And no, comparing the various chapters of Marines to subfactions of Eldar or Necrons or whoever is a false equivalency and you know it friendo. There's more variance in how one can play a single chapter of Marine than there is in some entire non-Marine armies. Hate that all you wish, it's still true and as such lumping all Marines together when they are much more different from each other than any other army's subfactions is being intellectually dishonest.

You don't have to try to internally justify your bias against Marines my dude.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 23:31:59


Post by: drbored


I feel like the OP of this post didn't just experience all of 8th edition where whenever the Space Marines dipped below a certain meta point, they got FAQ'd or got a whole slew of new releases to bring them back up to the top.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 23:49:47


Post by: Daedalus81


drbored wrote:
I feel like the OP of this post didn't just experience all of 8th edition where whenever the Space Marines dipped below a certain meta point, they got FAQ'd or got a whole slew of new releases to bring them back up to the top.



....Marines weren't good from 2017 all the way to Oct 2019.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/07 23:56:51


Post by: Salt donkey


Interesting that a lot of people disagree with me for different reasons. I’m going to tackle each point.

-“Marines as a whole are much stronger than you are saying”

chalking this up to the casual vs competitive divide. Winrates at tournaments and tourney victories do a much better job showing the reality of a situation than the internet telling you eradicators are OP or you being crushed by them at your LGS. Having faced both eradicators and Retributers many times I can tell you one scares me a lot more than the other to face.

-“People don’t mind the power level of marines, they mind the disproportionate amount of releases and amount games they have /show up in.”

While I don’t exactly disagree with this, I have to say what did you expect when started this hobby. Marines being the golden child of 40k has at least been the case since I started playing 14 years ago, and I can’t remember a time where things haven’t been this way. It’s annoying for us non-marine players, but GW liking $$$ isn’t going to change soon(ever). Also it’s likely that once the perception that marines are weaker becomes more mainstream, you’ll see less of them played at your LGS. There will always be some marine players, but we are seeing a lot more than usual since 2.0 due to how strong the army was.


-“DA are strong therefore marines are strong”

Poster above me addresses this point well. More marine players are not playing ravenwing than the ones who are. 1 or 2 very competitive options does not mean an army is OP. Also I’d also point out that people where not complaining much about ravenwing before the codex came out, That only happened once it became clear that RW is better than DW.




An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 00:09:38


Post by: Voss


Salt donkey wrote:

While I don’t exactly disagree with this, I have to say what did you expect when started this hobby.

I expected all the factions in the Rogue Trader book were viable. It was particularly notable that an entire marine squad (Toughness 3, 4+ armor saving throw) could theoretically be wiped out with the Following Fire rule of a single eldar with a shuriken catapult.
They didn't particularly stand out or seem like they were going to get an order of magnitude more model support (especially when craftworlds and aspect warriors came out, vs the three types of marines tac/dev/assault)


but GW liking $$$ isn’t going to change soon(ever)

Not sure how this is supposed to be relevant. They get the money they like from sales of other factions as well.


I'm just going to snip the rest, as it doesn't seem relevant. Arguments about 'perception' and the 'casual/competitive divide' just get an eyeroll.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 00:16:29


Post by: Luke_Prowler


 Void__Dragon wrote:
yukishiro1 wrote:
DA are probably the top faction in the game, they're not remotely extinct.

"Space marines - well, except for these space marines that are the best faction in the game right now - aren't at the very top of the meta. The rest are only very good." sorta says it all.


It's more like you're saying,"Space Marines are the best faction in the game right now and are overpowered - well, as long as you play this one specific chapter in one or two specific ways (either leaning fully on Ravenwing or at least halfway on Ravenwing), and every other variation of loyalist Marine is very solid (White Scars, Black Templars) to dog gak (Imperial Fists, Deathwatch).

Dark Angels being top tier means absolutely nothing to an Imperial Fists player who only barely has a chapter tactic.

And no, comparing the various chapters of Marines to subfactions of Eldar or Necrons or whoever is a false equivalency and you know it friendo. There's more variance in how one can play a single chapter of Marine than there is in some entire non-Marine armies. Hate that all you wish, it's still true and as such lumping all Marines together when they are much more different from each other than any other army's subfactions is being intellectually dishonest.

You don't have to try to internally justify your bias against Marines my dude.

*Poe's Law intensifies*


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 01:08:15


Post by: yukishiro1


 Luke_Prowler wrote:
 Void__Dragon wrote:
yukishiro1 wrote:
DA are probably the top faction in the game, they're not remotely extinct.

"Space marines - well, except for these space marines that are the best faction in the game right now - aren't at the very top of the meta. The rest are only very good." sorta says it all.


It's more like you're saying,"Space Marines are the best faction in the game right now and are overpowered - well, as long as you play this one specific chapter in one or two specific ways (either leaning fully on Ravenwing or at least halfway on Ravenwing), and every other variation of loyalist Marine is very solid (White Scars, Black Templars) to dog gak (Imperial Fists, Deathwatch).

Dark Angels being top tier means absolutely nothing to an Imperial Fists player who only barely has a chapter tactic.

And no, comparing the various chapters of Marines to subfactions of Eldar or Necrons or whoever is a false equivalency and you know it friendo. There's more variance in how one can play a single chapter of Marine than there is in some entire non-Marine armies. Hate that all you wish, it's still true and as such lumping all Marines together when they are much more different from each other than any other army's subfactions is being intellectually dishonest.

You don't have to try to internally justify your bias against Marines my dude.

*Poe's Law intensifies*


Haha, I was thinking the same thing.

The fact is that space marine chapters are interchangeable, and as long as that's true, there's almost always going to be at least one type people can migrate to and still be at a minimum top tier. All the Blue Guard armies that became Blue Hands or even Blue Fists, then Blue Scars, then Blue Angels, and now the other type of Blue Angels attests to this. Sure, you need to get different models, but 90% of the them can still be used as some other kind of Blue Something down the line when that's the best thing, so it's not like being stuck playing any of the other factions in the game.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 01:14:38


Post by: Daedalus81


Voss wrote:
Arguments about 'perception' ... just get an eyeroll.


Eradicators and Outriders were perceived as hugely problematic units. Where are they?
People thought that DA terminator spam would be the winning play. When will that materialize?

Every "imbalance" by GW is whatever the community deems to be too strong. Is it not possible for the community to be wrong?

Do we really need to revive the old Outrider threads?



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 01:35:59


Post by: PenitentJake


Salt donkey wrote:

Having faced both eradicators and Retributers many times I can tell you one scares me a lot more than the other to face.


Guarantee the Retributor strat gets nerfed hard. It's the only thing that makes Rets scarier than Eradicators. Without it, we get the same number of identically statted shots point for point when focus firing, but Erads do it with 9 T5 wounds, while sisters do it with 5 T3 wounds. We're going to enjoy that stat for the next 30-60 days, but that's about it.

Yes, we get a 6++, and yeah, once per turn we can sub in a miracle die if the rest of the army doesn't need it more. But without that strat, you're golden, and that's exactly why its days are numbered.

Salt donkey wrote:


-“People don’t mind the power level of marines, they mind the disproportionate amount of releases and amount games they have /show up in.”

While I don’t exactly disagree with this, I have to say what did you expect when started this hobby. Marines being the golden child of 40k has at least been the case since I started playing 14 years ago, and I can’t remember a time where things haven’t been this way.


Second ed was the last edition before Marines really ran away with it. Rogue Trader was warband style gaming to low skirmish level and all model ranges were sparse. It was in second when Marines got Angels books, and one faction became 4. But they still had to grow ranges for other factions so it did feel much more balanced. It's just that once all the armies achieved a reasonable range, everyone except Marines stopped growing. It went on for a while like that, then other ranges actually started shrinking while marines continued to grow.

Marines releases have peaked for a while; Heavy Intercessors are coming as separates in May, but now is the time for GW to step up and show us what they're going to do other than marines. We've seen Sisters and Orks on the way- a single Admech kit, and we know Be'Lakor is getting 40k rules. That's a start. By the end of this year, GW could really turn things around on Marine skew, and I'm cautiously optimistic.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 02:42:00


Post by: CEO Kasen


 Daedalus81 wrote:
Voss wrote:
Arguments about 'perception' ... just get an eyeroll.


Eradicators and Outriders were perceived as hugely problematic units. Where are they?
People thought that DA terminator spam would be the winning play. When will that materialize?

Every "imbalance" by GW is whatever the community deems to be too strong. Is it not possible for the community to be wrong?

Do we really need to revive the old Outrider threads?


So when the community does get things wrong, it is important to ask why, or how wrong they really were, or comparing what opinion was held to when that opinion was held given what information was available. Sometimes initial community instincts and evaluations are correct at the time, but can be slow to change when rules and units do, especially if the cause of that change isn't a direct nerf.

Eradicators got a 5-point hike, but perhaps more importantly were suddenly being heavily rivalled if not outshined by - of all things - Melta Attack Bikes when GW decided that all the Multi-Meltas should shoot twice and have the +2 damage while in your face, a thing that came with Marines 9th and wasn't true at the launch of Indomitus.

At launch, the community was absolutely right: Eradicators were (and depending on your codex, still are) almost a direct insult to other anti-tank units (particularly Fire Dragons) at their price point. The largely unnecessary "Melta Rifle" in an army that's having enough weapon name problems compounded with a special rule that seemed a flimsy downside to a powerful - and initially unmatched - form of antitank firepower. Generalizing their firepower by making multi-meltas suddenly really good in multiple armies softened this somewhat, so Eradicators no longer completely outstripped all other antitank options in it or other (Imperium-weapon-based, at least) Codexes. Even afterwards, though, Eradicators have not disappeared from competitive lists.

It wasn't totally clear even at the time of Marines 9th that GW fully intended to place all of 9th edition on this tier of power, and some of this stuff was - much like Marines 8th-2.0 itself - disgusting in the then-context of 8th edition.

Outriders also got a 5 point hike IIRC, but I didn't see the Outrider threads, so I'm not clear on what the initial complaints were. If I were to purely speculate as to why they aren't everywhere, I would guess it turned out to be the fate of so many Marine units - They actually are in the "Not bad" to "Quite strong" band, but there's some other option in the book that does the job better, possibly Vanguard Vets. Hell, I half expect that they were blasted off the table by new Melta rules... Except Outriders are seeing a revival with Ravenwing, aren't they?

Which nicely segues: Deathwing Terminators are extremely strong and competitively used, and Dark Angels are by all accounts a top tier army - they just apparently don't work great if trying to use nothing but Deathwing.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 05:22:40


Post by: yukishiro1


The miracle dice make retributors super strong too, it's not just the strat. The big weakness of low volume, high quality shots is that the end output is very RNGy, and Sisters have a way to get rid of the RNG when they need to do so most. That's worth a ton on something like a melta shot.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 05:37:32


Post by: AngryAngel80


Heres the thing, people have complained about space marines as long as I played the game. For decades now, for seemingly no reason years back. They had some time at the top but now are around middle which is fine.

The part people find that haunts them is the constant flow of new marine stuff for years. Which at the moment we are almost done with, maybe. If it all starts up again peoples rage will continue because they'd like new or updated stuff sometime soon as well. That complaint won't be about how broke they are but I fear marines will be the boogeymen for quite some time to come yet for others reasons.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 06:10:08


Post by: yukishiro1


As long as half the players in the game and half the factions in the game and half of the releases for the game are all space marine of some variety or another, you're not going to get away from the fact that, well, people are going to get sick of them.

40k's big weakness has always been the unbalanced way that one faction archetype dominates the game - not always in terms of competitiveness, but certainly in terms of lore, background, the limelight, the lion's share of the releases, etc. The fact that it's arguably only gotten worse over the four decades of the game's history, not better, suggests it is a permanent feature of the setting, so griping about it will be a permanent feature as well.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 06:13:28


Post by: CEO Kasen


yukishiro1 wrote:
As long as half the players in the game and half the factions in the game and half of the releases for the game are all space marine of some variety or another, you're not going to get away from the fact that, well, people are going to get sick of them.

40k's big weakness has always been the unbalanced way that one faction archetype dominates the game - not always in terms of competitiveness, but certainly in terms of lore, background, the limelight, the lion's share of the releases, etc. The fact that it's arguably only gotten worse over the four decades of the game's history, not better, suggests it is a permanent feature of the setting, so griping about it will be a permanent feature as well.


As I say to people complaining about the griping: "If you're still showing symptoms, then keep taking your medicine, motherfether."


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 06:24:52


Post by: Bosskelot


 Void__Dragon wrote:
yukishiro1 wrote:
DA are probably the top faction in the game, they're not remotely extinct.

"Space marines - well, except for these space marines that are the best faction in the game right now - aren't at the very top of the meta. The rest are only very good." sorta says it all.


And no, comparing the various chapters of Marines to subfactions of Eldar or Necrons or whoever is a false equivalency and you know it friendo. There's more variance in how one can play a single chapter of Marine than there is in some entire non-Marine armies. Hate that all you wish, it's still true and as such lumping all Marines together when they are much more different from each other than any other army's subfactions is being intellectually dishonest.

You don't have to try to internally justify your bias against Marines my dude.


There really isn't though, which is kind of an indicator on how the supplement system has failed from a design perspective for the Marine Codex.

You'll see greater variances in unit choices and army builds in Necron and Ork armies depending on subfaction than you will for like most Marine armies outside of the ones that have significant numbers of unique units. (So BA, DA, SW and arguably DW)

A big reason for this is poor internal balance and design of the core codex which gives a handful of very excellent units that are universally good no matter what subfaction you're running them as. I've even seen plenty of BA lists that load up on Plasma Inceptors despite their chapter tactics providing no real bonuses, just because Plasceptors are so inherently good. Another aspect of this is the drowning of Core availability and bonuses that benefit Core units that exacerbate the issue even more and further pigeonhole different Marine chapters into basically taking the same list archetype despite having 108 datasheets to choose from and an entire extra book of stuff that tries to make them unique.

Juxtaposed on this you have Necrons, where a Novokh list is going to look majorly different to an Obsekh list, to the point where the only shared units will be Scarabs and a Chronomancer. Or just look at Goff or Deathskullz lists for Orks. Completely different structure, units and stratagems being used.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 06:52:21


Post by: Voss


 Daedalus81 wrote:
Voss wrote:
Arguments about 'perception' ... just get an eyeroll.


Eradicators and Outriders were perceived as hugely problematic units. Where are they?
People thought that DA terminator spam would be the winning play. When will that materialize?

Every "imbalance" by GW is whatever the community deems to be too strong. Is it not possible for the community to be wrong?

Do we really need to revive the old Outrider threads?


I think you need a broader focus, beyond the limited problems brought by two specific units, and rejoin the general conversation about the strength and ease of the codex as a whole (with answers to everything) and roughly four codexes worth of army selections in terms of models and roughly ten in rules. Having more design space is simply more problematic to balance, grants more options to the marine player, and weirdly even the basic secondary objectives for the edition shy away from rewarding opponents for playing against marines.

Your hyper focus on eradicates and outriders as the only problems you're aware of is exactly why I dismissed 'perception.' And no, imbalance is not just 'this is too strong.' It's also very much that other <factions> lack tools and survivability for the new environment.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 07:41:08


Post by: wuestenfux


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, I wouldn't be too enthusiastic that the Marine era is over.
Codex creep during an edition is a fact.
However, Marines are so good and versatile in many ways that their competitiveness will not suffer (much).

We're what, four codices in, and the win rate has been going down. It's just like 8th hahaha

I'm sure they'll get another codex halfway (to the next ed.).


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 07:58:59


Post by: Pyroalchi


First of my usual disclaimer in these kind of topics: I so far only collect and have not yet played a game. Therefore all my opinions are based on theoryhammer and what I read in Forums like this. Therefore feel free to take it with as many grains of salt as you want.


I think another angle that often leads to frustration with marines (besides release schedule, lore focus and the other things mentioned) is the feeling (however warranted it is), that over time they tend to get tools that were taken away from other factions. Like copying or taking away what was meant or advertised as other factions speciality.

The example I read about most often was the frustration of GSC as advertised "Deep strike faction" loosing the ability for a first turn deepstrike (as did all factions except...) just to see SM getting an exemption of the general rule and being able to do this. One can argue about if Drop Pods are really worth it (and I lack experience to have a well founded opinion on that) but I fully sympathize with the feeling.
Similarily I can imagine (DG Players correct me if I'm wrong) that before DG got their codex it felt... weird being advertised as the super durable faction and then see SM getting a second wound and lots of Gravis dudes with T5 W3. I'm fully aware that DG are much more durable now, but I think you get the concept.
From what I read in various threads I got the impression that there are barely any tactics/playstyles left for non-SM armies that can not be done equally good if not better by SM (we had a thread a while back and I remember the only thing really agreed upon was "cheap hordes" )
Another thing leading to feelbad moments is having a unit in ones own army that is considered really good (in its context) and then seeing marines getting basically that unit +1. And that frustration is then only increased when reading that the consensus amongst SM players is that this unit is bad because they have better stuff available.
Example: The advent of Gravis armor is (for me, and again on a theoretical level). As an IG Player I look at Agressors and see a unit that costs almost the same as my Bullgryns (that are considered pretty solid), has almost the same defensive profile (3+ instead of 2+), hits more or less the same if not better (worse WS, but better S and AP and get their bonus attack also when they were charged) but on top of that can still shoot pretty good (not overwhelmingly good any more, but much better than a Bullgryn who can't shoot at all) and profit from its chapter etc. while my Bullgryns have barely any synergy with my army. Still after loosing double shoot they seem to be considered a weak choice for SMs.
=> again: I know codizes are different and it is often unfair to compair units out of context. But it is something that comes up quite often. So even givven that Melta rets are better than Eradicators (I just don't know), the latter still seem EDIT: ON PAPER to be more or less any other factions Melta-unit +1.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 08:04:41


Post by: Eldarsif


I feel the argument from perception is relevant as the frequent and large releases has created a surge in Space Marine players. You can't go to a tournament or friendly shindig without a significant majority of the players being Space Marines. Nobody cares if there are chapter differences when a majority of the units behave similarly. Space Marines, for all intents and purposes, have become the faceless NPC that one must grind through for the boss battles, those being non-Marine armies.

Ultimately this is a hole that GW has dug themselves into. They've been giving Space Marines a lot of attention in the past few years and the harvest has been good with the faction numbers swelling up with new and old players. The question remains whether GW will be able to dig themselves out of this particular hole and if not I can imagine players, who have no desire to play Space Marines, will eventually move onto other games. That is not necessarily a bad thing for the industry.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 08:13:21


Post by: tneva82


 Eldarsif wrote:
I feel the argument from perception is relevant as the frequent and large releases has created a surge in Space Marine players. You can't go to a tournament or friendly shindig without a significant majority of the players being Space Marines. Nobody cares if there are chapter differences when a majority of the units behave similarly. Space Marines, for all intents and purposes, have become the faceless NPC that one must grind through for the boss battles, those being non-Marine armies.


Yeh. I barely have interest going to play at FLGS these days unless I can pre-arrange game against something OTHER than marines.

Marines every game gets old. One can predict how game goes pretty easily and it's rather repetive.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 08:24:50


Post by: AngryAngel80


tneva82 wrote:
 Eldarsif wrote:
I feel the argument from perception is relevant as the frequent and large releases has created a surge in Space Marine players. You can't go to a tournament or friendly shindig without a significant majority of the players being Space Marines. Nobody cares if there are chapter differences when a majority of the units behave similarly. Space Marines, for all intents and purposes, have become the faceless NPC that one must grind through for the boss battles, those being non-Marine armies.


Yeh. I barely have interest going to play at FLGS these days unless I can pre-arrange game against something OTHER than marines.

Marines every game gets old. One can predict how game goes pretty easily and it's rather repetive.


Which is sad that isn't gotten to that point. No one should feel like their faction is just boring to play against. However this isn't a problem that will correct itself until it gets a sales impact so GW decide to diversify out the offerings more than they do currently. Which I'm sure someone will come by and say " It isn't that bad " but really it is. I mean I love marines and honestly I feel bad even trying to get in games with them as I don't want to bore people with yet another marine list, even if I run mine different than others.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 08:50:40


Post by: Snake Tortoise


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
No that you mentioned they haven't received any new models, they will be receiving a full re-vamp of the Reivers next week.....Thanks!

Not going to lie, I think this is pretty simple. GW is going to flood the market with the faction that people buy and play. The data shows the clear majority of players play some form of Astartes force, either due to product upselling or forcing gak onto customers, doesn't matter. The vast majority of players both common and elite, play power armor. I would honestly love to know where the paints rank in purchases? Obviously Nuln oil and the metal paints would be near the top?


The common rebuttal: What if one of the other factions received the model and lore support SM get? Imagine orks but with the same support. Boyz getting a new kit every two editions. Plastic HQ models coming out every two months. Individual codexes for Goffs, Snakebites, Bad Moons etc. complete with their own set of named characters, unique units (with kits of course) and plenty of strats and distinct rules. A new codex coming out first or second every edition, and sometimes two codexes in one edition. The starter set always containing orks, and orks featured in most Black Library books.

Admittedly marines are a cool concept that would likely always be popular even if they were a niche faction in the game, but some of their success is probably because they're pushed so much.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 10:41:46


Post by: Tyel


Models and lore help - but really its about power.

The woes of 2018's creep on Marines can be overblown (last 8 LVO says hi) - but they did grow weaker, perhaps especially in more casual player's hands. Very unscientific, but I'd say they probably reached a low of around 10-15% of armies played.

Then Marines 2.0 came out, and suddenly its back to 30-50% of the playerbase. Because they are the best faction by a distance and you can easily crush your friends.

The real double standard is that GW seemingly always get twitchy if Marines are seen as "bad". Insert "but I didn't like spamming free razorbacks" - but you could. And people did. Whereas historically other factions have been abandoned for years.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 12:22:18


Post by: PenitentJake


yukishiro1 wrote:
The miracle dice make retributors super strong too, it's not just the strat. The big weakness of low volume, high quality shots is that the end output is very RNGy, and Sisters have a way to get rid of the RNG when they need to do so most. That's worth a ton on something like a melta shot.


It's true, and I love my Miracle dice. Yes, I can make ONE of my shots an auto 6 on damage, but if I'm going point for point with Erads, I can't afford a Simulacrum, so I can only do it once per shooting phase and if I do, the only other units that can do AoF that phase are the units who do have simulacra. That's not as much of an advantage as toughness +2 and wounds +4 which is what you get for Erads. The retributor potential to split fire and not lose shots goes some small distance toward closing the gap, and the fact that I can afford one armorium cherub helps too.

They're close, but erads are still better without the strat. Not so much better that I think rets are terrible- obviously they aren't- especially since I pay the extra points to get the 4rth MM and the second Cherub and the simulacrum. If I do that, I get two extra shots (all the time) with an additional once per game shot and I can do 2 AoF for damage, plus I pick up one extra T3 wound. For the price, a Marine would get an extra shot, 2 on focus fire, so that's a wash; they get no extra one use goodies, but they get 3 more T5 wounds.

The other thing to consider is that the rets get weaker every wound; Marines only get weaker every 3.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 13:02:23


Post by: Audustum


yukishiro1 wrote:
SoB, DA, DG, Harlies and Chaos Soup are all top-tier. Harlies are no longer number two, that's out of date at this point; if anything they are slipping out of the top tier because they have trouble against DG and DA. You could definitely argue SoB are the top faction, but DA are very much up there too, and it's a much more recent release, that continues to do better and better as people realize that the RW part of the army is at least as good, probably better than the DW part.

I'm not saying DA conclusively are the best faction, but they're firmly in the range where you can make an argument for them.

"Space marines aren't top tier except for the kind that are absolutely top tier and doing better and better since their recent release." Well...yeah?


Harlies are absolutely number 2. Some still say number 1. Where did you hear this?

DA are arguably doing well because the meta hasn't 'solved' them and hasn't had time too. We need a bit more time to figure it out. Hence why their position is tenuous.

'Space marines aren't top tier* (there is a chance DA can hang with the big boys but we're still collecting data).


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 13:46:09


Post by: Daedalus81


Voss wrote:

I think you need a broader focus, beyond the limited problems brought by two specific units, and rejoin the general conversation about the strength and ease of the codex as a whole (with answers to everything) and roughly four codexes worth of army selections in terms of models and roughly ten in rules. Having more design space is simply more problematic to balance, grants more options to the marine player, and weirdly even the basic secondary objectives for the edition shy away from rewarding opponents for playing against marines.

Your hyper focus on eradicates and outriders as the only problems you're aware of is exactly why I dismissed 'perception.' And no, imbalance is not just 'this is too strong.' It's also very much that other <factions> lack tools and survivability for the new environment.


It goes well beyond that - I'm just too lazy to enumerate all of it. "Hordes are dead". Some also thought melee wouldn't be good, because of the fallback rules, but experience in the missions and table size changed that.

People put up meltas as their own boogeyman, but DG, Daemons, Harlies, Orks, Custodes still win and don't bring that weapon to the table. Does MM make it easier to solve some problems? Sure, but it isn't singlehandedly winning them games - especially not in the limited numbers they come in.

Marines certainly are an easier book to play and they'll stay that way, because they will be the banner faction forever, but at higher levels of play that simplicity can falter.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 15:11:40


Post by: the_scotsman


 Daedalus81 wrote:
Voss wrote:

I think you need a broader focus, beyond the limited problems brought by two specific units, and rejoin the general conversation about the strength and ease of the codex as a whole (with answers to everything) and roughly four codexes worth of army selections in terms of models and roughly ten in rules. Having more design space is simply more problematic to balance, grants more options to the marine player, and weirdly even the basic secondary objectives for the edition shy away from rewarding opponents for playing against marines.

Your hyper focus on eradicates and outriders as the only problems you're aware of is exactly why I dismissed 'perception.' And no, imbalance is not just 'this is too strong.' It's also very much that other <factions> lack tools and survivability for the new environment.


It goes well beyond that - I'm just too lazy to enumerate all of it. "Hordes are dead". Some also thought melee wouldn't be good, because of the fallback rules, but experience in the missions and table size changed that.

People put up meltas as their own boogeyman, but DG, .....Harlies.......


Hordes make up an absolutely tiny portion of what gets played currently. You've got some ork lists (ork lists are split between ghazzy+tide and buggies mostly), some slaanesh daemon lists, some sisters lists arguably and some necron lists arguably, but in general, any truly light infantry unit (and no, I'm not counting T4 4+ RP 10pt necron warriors or T3 3+ ignore AP-1 and -2 SoBs as "Light Infantry" really) is pretty terribad.

The worst armies in 9th ed include GSC, Guard, Tau, Nids, and CWE, and before their codex Drukhari.

"Hordes" - as in, taking your whole army as spammed light infantry with a ton of protections and defensive special rules, might be OK, but if you're just thinking "What is the absolute worst type of unit to slot into any given list" a cheap light infantry unit in 9th is effectively in the same tier as, say, a deep striking melee unit in 5th edition. There were a couple specific builds and combos that made use of them....but in general, pick one out at random, it was probably one of the worst units in the codex it was in.

And uhhhhhhhhhhhh competitive DG lists do seem to have a lot of those blighthaulers....and I seem to recall a looooot of fusion pistols in those competitive harlequin lists...



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 15:55:04


Post by: yukishiro1


Yeah, ironically if hordes actually were good, not just a novelty, a lot of the problems with MM spam would go away.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 17:10:44


Post by: Insectum7


PenitentJake wrote:
Salt donkey wrote:

-“People don’t mind the power level of marines, they mind the disproportionate amount of releases and amount games they have /show up in.”

While I don’t exactly disagree with this, I have to say what did you expect when started this hobby. Marines being the golden child of 40k has at least been the case since I started playing 14 years ago, and I can’t remember a time where things haven’t been this way.


Second ed was the last edition before Marines really ran away with it. Rogue Trader was warband style gaming to low skirmish level and all model ranges were sparse. It was in second when Marines got Angels books, and one faction became 4. But they still had to grow ranges for other factions so it did feel much more balanced. It's just that once all the armies achieved a reasonable range, everyone except Marines stopped growing. It went on for a while like that, then other ranges actually started shrinking while marines continued to grow.
I think I disagree with that bit. While 2nd Ed did see codex support (well, half codex support for DA and BA), I wouldn't have said that Marines were running away with it. Care was being taken for every codex released, and they all had nice flavor and lots of new models for each faction were released during that edition. Then 3rd was released and introduced Dark Eldar, Tau and Necrons (into a full faction), while Marines got very little (and also lost options). SW, BA and DA were small supplements at the time. 4th ed is, imo when the seeds were planted for what we have now when they released the Adeptus Astartes (is that what they were called?) expansions with extra background and rules for the founding chapters, and Black Library and the Horus Heresy novels were beginning to take hold. Then 5th rolled around and things really started to steamroll with BA, DA, SW and GK all being released as stand alone codexes again, with a bunch of new units getting crammed into them. Imo 5th ed was the official "Marine Bloat" edition in my eyes. They just started exploding.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 17:10:47


Post by: Daedalus81


the_scotsman wrote:


Hordes make up an absolutely tiny portion of what gets played currently. You've got some ork lists (ork lists are split between ghazzy+tide and buggies mostly), some slaanesh daemon lists, some sisters lists arguably and some necron lists arguably, but in general, any truly light infantry unit (and no, I'm not counting T4 4+ RP 10pt necron warriors or T3 3+ ignore AP-1 and -2 SoBs as "Light Infantry" really) is pretty terribad.

The worst armies in 9th ed include GSC, Guard, Tau, Nids, and CWE, and before their codex Drukhari.

"Hordes" - as in, taking your whole army as spammed light infantry with a ton of protections and defensive special rules, might be OK, but if you're just thinking "What is the absolute worst type of unit to slot into any given list" a cheap light infantry unit in 9th is effectively in the same tier as, say, a deep striking melee unit in 5th edition. There were a couple specific builds and combos that made use of them....but in general, pick one out at random, it was probably one of the worst units in the codex it was in.

And uhhhhhhhhhhhh competitive DG lists do seem to have a lot of those blighthaulers....and I seem to recall a looooot of fusion pistols in those competitive harlequin lists...



I don't think I've seen a single Blighthauler. Fusion is not "multi-melta", but do Harlies work, because of fusion pistols or is it more complicated than that?

To me hordes is not "the entire army is hordes", but "I can safely take a unit(s) of 11+ models and can be effective".

In two recent tournaments ( non-Aussie ) Ork players took 120ish boyz in one list and 50 grots in another. A Nids player had 60 gaunts/gants. You're likely to see fewer horde style lists right now, because the armies that can really lean on them are in need of a redo and not as popular, because of the way people talk about hordes.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 17:12:50


Post by: Insectum7


 Daedalus81 wrote:

People put up meltas as their own boogeyman, but DG, Daemons, Harlies, Orks, Custodes still win and don't bring that weapon to the table. Does MM make it easier to solve some problems? Sure, but it isn't singlehandedly winning them games - especially not in the limited numbers they come in.
Didn't we just see a list with like . . . 8-9 attack bikes with MMs in it?


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 17:13:02


Post by: Daedalus81


yukishiro1 wrote:
Yeah, ironically if hordes actually were good, not just a novelty, a lot of the problems with MM spam would go away.


1) MM is not spammed. 18 Smasha Guns is spam. 3 MM attack bikes is not.
2) MM would not go away, because there will always be people not taking hordes as is expected in a system where multiple kinds of lists are viable.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 17:21:32


Post by: yukishiro1


Uh I think you need to look at the typical attack bike build again; it's 3x attack bike squads, not 3x attack bikes - usually 7-9 MM bikes total. Most lists that can take melta spam 3x of whatever their best melta squad is.

And I didn't say MM would "go away," I said "a lot of the problems with MM spam would go away." Please read what's being written. If hordes were a big deal, spamming MM would have a natural counter that would limit people's tendency to do it. People would still take a squad, but taking 3x your best MM unit wouldn't be an obvious choice, and the game might not be so dominated by how you trade your melta squads with your opponent's.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 17:40:50


Post by: the_scotsman


 Daedalus81 wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:


Hordes make up an absolutely tiny portion of what gets played currently. You've got some ork lists (ork lists are split between ghazzy+tide and buggies mostly), some slaanesh daemon lists, some sisters lists arguably and some necron lists arguably, but in general, any truly light infantry unit (and no, I'm not counting T4 4+ RP 10pt necron warriors or T3 3+ ignore AP-1 and -2 SoBs as "Light Infantry" really) is pretty terribad.

The worst armies in 9th ed include GSC, Guard, Tau, Nids, and CWE, and before their codex Drukhari.

"Hordes" - as in, taking your whole army as spammed light infantry with a ton of protections and defensive special rules, might be OK, but if you're just thinking "What is the absolute worst type of unit to slot into any given list" a cheap light infantry unit in 9th is effectively in the same tier as, say, a deep striking melee unit in 5th edition. There were a couple specific builds and combos that made use of them....but in general, pick one out at random, it was probably one of the worst units in the codex it was in.

And uhhhhhhhhhhhh competitive DG lists do seem to have a lot of those blighthaulers....and I seem to recall a looooot of fusion pistols in those competitive harlequin lists...



I don't think I've seen a single Blighthauler. Fusion is not "multi-melta", but do Harlies work, because of fusion pistols or is it more complicated than that?

To me hordes is not "the entire army is hordes", but "I can safely take a unit(s) of 11+ models and can be effective".

In two recent tournaments ( non-Aussie ) Ork players took 120ish boyz in one list and 50 grots in another. A Nids player had 60 gaunts/gants. You're likely to see fewer horde style lists right now, because the armies that can really lean on them are in need of a redo and not as popular, because of the way people talk about hordes.


You said "melta" not "Multi-melta". Harlequins ABSOLUTELY are as competitive as they are riht now because of how their melta pistols combine with the soaring spite subfaction and their newfound defensive abilities from PA.

30" threatrange 19pt melta pistol wielders are absolutely what the meta harlequin setup is relying on right now.

I understand that some lists - notably ork lists and slaanesh daemons - are able to make a skew anti-meta horde setup work right now. Maybe you can do something with Gaunts as well as an antimeta setup. but the play numbers of them being as low as they are proves that the only reason they're finding any success is because of the fact that they're anti-meta. People are spamming MMs and guns to kill MEQs, taking the few efficient light infantry choices left in the game is going to be fairly successful, yes.

The existence of orks and daemonettes does not disprove the fact that, on the whole, 9th edition is supremely punishing to two main types of units:

1) light infantry, due to the insane efficiency of specialised horde clearing elite infantry.
2) mid-cost vehicles, due to the ridiculous amount of extremely effective anti-tank weaponry

Youve got units that are supremely common in the meta that can get an over 100% points return shooting at stuff like guardians, guardsmen, grots, etc and others that can get over 100% points return firing at T7 3+ vehicles, even vehicles like rhinos that are essentially rolling boxes with nothing else.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 17:52:02


Post by: Daedalus81


yukishiro1 wrote:
Uh I think you need to look at the typical attack bike build again; it's 3x attack bike squads, not 3x attack bikes - usually 7-9 MM bikes total. Most lists that can take melta spam 3x of whatever their best melta squad is.

And I didn't say MM would "go away," I said "a lot of the problems with MM spam would go away." Please read what's being written. If hordes were a big deal, spamming MM would have a natural counter that would limit people's tendency to do it. People would still take a squad, but taking 3x your best MM unit wouldn't be an obvious choice, and the game might not be so dominated by how you trade your melta squads with your opponent's.




I did read what you wrote and it isn't based in the reality of lists out there. No one is taking 9ABs, except perhaps Salamanders, and even then I would bet maxing out is quite rare.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
the_scotsman wrote:
You said "melta" not "Multi-melta". Harlequins ABSOLUTELY are as competitive as they are riht now because of how their melta pistols combine with the soaring spite subfaction and their newfound defensive abilities from PA.


Apologies - I use the term interchangeably, because MM is all we talk about. Harlies have to be able to kill things, but that doesn't make fusion the problem in being able to fight them. Just like people seem to prefer AB over Eradicators - the speed/manouverability is key.

This Halie/CWE list took first on 3/27 and didn't use Soaring Spite:

Spoiler:
++ Spearhead Detachment -3CP (Aeldari - Craftworlds) [45 PL, 915pts, -3CP] ++

​Craftworld Attribute
. Custom Craftworld: Expert Crafters, Hunters of Ancient Relics


+ HQ +

Farseer Skyrunner [7 PL, 135pts]: 0. Smite, 3. Fortune, 4. Executioner, Shuriken Pistol, Witchblade


+ Heavy Support +

Wraithlord [7 PL, 135pts]: Flamer, Flamer, 2x Starcannon
Wraithlord [7 PL, 135pts]: Flamer, Flamer, 2x Starcannon
Wraithseer [8 PL, 170pts]: 0. Smite, 4. Protect/Jinx, D-cannon
Wraithseer [8 PL, 170pts]: 0. Smite, 5. Quicken/Restrain, D-cannon
Wraithseer [8 PL, 170pts]: 0. Smite, 4. Protect/Jinx, D-cannon


++ Battalion Detachment 0CP (Aeldari - Harlequins) [54 PL, 1,073pts, 9CP] ++


Masque Form: The Midnight Sorrow: The Art of Death

+ Stratagems +

Enigmas of the Black Library (1 Relic) [-1CP]

+ HQ +

Shadowseer [6 PL, 115pts, -1CP]: Shield From Harm, Shuriken Pistol, Stratagem: Pivotal Role, Twilight Pathways, Veil of Illusion, Webway Dance

Troupe Master [4 PL, 65pts, -1CP]: Choreographer of War, Darkness' Bite, Harlequin's Blade, Shuriken Pistol, Stratagem: Pivotal Role, The Twilight Fang


+ Troops +

Troupe [5 PL, 109pts]
. Player: Fusion Pistol, Harlequin's Caress
. Player: Fusion Pistol, Harlequin's Caress
. Player: Fusion Pistol, Harlequin's Caress
. Player: Harlequin's Caress, Shuriken Pistol
. Player: Harlequin's Blade, Shuriken Pistol

Troupe [5 PL, 109pts]
. Player: Fusion Pistol, Harlequin's Caress
. Player: Fusion Pistol, Harlequin's Caress
. Player: Fusion Pistol, Harlequin's Caress
. Player: Harlequin's Caress, Shuriken Pistol
. Player: Harlequin's Blade, Shuriken Pistol

Troupe [5 PL, 109pts]
. Player: Fusion Pistol, Harlequin's Caress
. Player: Fusion Pistol, Harlequin's Caress
. Player: Fusion Pistol, Harlequin's Caress
. Player: Harlequin's Caress, Shuriken Pistol
. Player: Harlequin's Blade, Shuriken Pistol

Troupe [5 PL, 94pts]
. Player: Harlequin's Caress, Shuriken Pistol
. Player: Harlequin's Caress, Shuriken Pistol
. Player: Harlequin's Caress, Shuriken Pistol
. Player: Harlequin's Caress, Shuriken Pistol
. Player: Harlequin's Blade, Shuriken Pistol



+ Elites +

Death Jester [3 PL, 50pts]: 6: Player of the Twilight, Death is not Enough, Warlord

Solitaire [5 PL, 102pts]: Blitz, Cegorach's Rose



+ Dedicated Transport +

Starweaver [4 PL, 80pts]

Starweaver [4 PL, 80pts]

Starweaver [4 PL, 80pts]

Starweaver [4 PL, 80pts]



I understand that some lists - notably ork lists and slaanesh daemons - are able to make a skew anti-meta horde setup work right now. Maybe you can do something with Gaunts as well as an antimeta setup. but the play numbers of them being as low as they are proves that the only reason they're finding any success is because of the fact that they're anti-meta. People are spamming MMs and guns to kill MEQs, taking the few efficient light infantry choices left in the game is going to be fairly successful, yes.


When the core of the book can support hordes you will see them more. That Boyz list beat DA with 5 MM ABs, a terminator block, BKs, bikes, and the other usual DA assortment. He also soundly beat 4th round DG with two PBCs , Pox, Termies, 2 Fleshmower Drones, Shrouds - how is he anti-meta to this? His one loss was to Tesseract, SK, Warriors, Spyders and Scarabs 48 to 47 - how is he anti-meta here?

1) light infantry, due to the insane efficiency of specialised horde clearing elite infantry.
2) mid-cost vehicles, due to the ridiculous amount of extremely effective anti-tank weaponry


I'll give you that people are scared to use higher cost vehicles, but CK soup is making inroads now, too so you're stuck between enough MM for those or Morty and enough anti-horde for Necrons/Orks/Daemons. Once the knight books release this whole thing could go on its head with people stressing about those and open the door for even more hordes. It's all quite messy, I think.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 18:34:24


Post by: Insectum7


Daedalus81:
 Daedalus81 wrote:

1) MM is not spammed.


Also Daedalus81:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
Ezekiel

Bladeguard Ancient, Remembrance ( -1D to one unit )
2x DW Command, 2xLC & TH/SS
2x DW Command, 2xLC & TH/SS
10x Assault Terminators, 6 dual LC, 4 TH/SS, Homer

Talonmaster, Obsec bubble trait
Talonmaster
Chap on Bike

Chief Apothecary

3x MM Attack Bikes <<=====
2x MM Attack Bikes <<=====
2x MM Attack Bikes <<=====

3x3 Bikes, LC Sarge, Dual CS

Fin.

Looks to be less about Inner Circle spam and more about adding obsec and turning off obsec at the right places.

Given few the low amount of psykers in the game at the moment I wonder how it would fair if it can't turn off obsec.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 18:38:36


Post by: yukishiro1


 Daedalus81 wrote:
yukishiro1 wrote:
Uh I think you need to look at the typical attack bike build again; it's 3x attack bike squads, not 3x attack bikes - usually 7-9 MM bikes total. Most lists that can take melta spam 3x of whatever their best melta squad is.

And I didn't say MM would "go away," I said "a lot of the problems with MM spam would go away." Please read what's being written. If hordes were a big deal, spamming MM would have a natural counter that would limit people's tendency to do it. People would still take a squad, but taking 3x your best MM unit wouldn't be an obvious choice, and the game might not be so dominated by how you trade your melta squads with your opponent's.




I did read what you wrote and it isn't based in the reality of lists out there. No one is taking 9ABs, except perhaps Salamanders, and even then I would bet maxing out is quite rare.



...it doesn't look like you did. You read "7-9 MM bikes" as "9 MM bikes," you read "make the problems with melta spam go away" as "make melta go away."

I won't belabor the point further, it's not really important, it's just frustrating when people don't read.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 18:45:27


Post by: Daedalus81


Spoiler:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Daedalus81:
 Daedalus81 wrote:

1) MM is not spammed.


Also Daedalus81:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
Ezekiel

Bladeguard Ancient, Remembrance ( -1D to one unit )
2x DW Command, 2xLC & TH/SS
2x DW Command, 2xLC & TH/SS
10x Assault Terminators, 6 dual LC, 4 TH/SS, Homer

Talonmaster, Obsec bubble trait
Talonmaster
Chap on Bike

Chief Apothecary

3x MM Attack Bikes <<=====
2x MM Attack Bikes <<=====
2x MM Attack Bikes <<=====

3x3 Bikes, LC Sarge, Dual CS

Fin.

Looks to be less about Inner Circle spam and more about adding obsec and turning off obsec at the right places.

Given few the low amount of psykers in the game at the moment I wonder how it would fair if it can't turn off obsec.



Hey - you got me. That was an introspective at one winning DA list. So let me walk back - Salamanders, Sisters and DA, because RW has a lot to offer bikes. Where is the rest of the spam?




Automatically Appended Next Post:
yukishiro1 wrote:


...it doesn't look like you did. You read "7-9 MM bikes" as "9 MM bikes," you read "make the problems with melta spam go away" as "make melta go away."

I won't belabor the point further, it's not really important, it's just frustrating when people don't read.


That's kind of splitting hairs. In the T'au Tipping tournament of the lists in the top 10 one DA list has 9 AB. A sisters list has zero ( opting for Exorcists ).

If MM is oppressive / prevalent why is it only in one list of a top 10?


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 18:56:43


Post by: endlesswaltz123


Honestly, it's probably not worth continuing this argument about melta being spammed or not and whether it is the sole reason some lists are winning, as D3+3 dark lance spam, D3+3 special lascannons and who else knows what is on it's way. Dark Eldar can produce a SCARY amount of dark lances if they want, the same will be for Admech with their special lascannons, all on super mobile platforms.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 19:09:20


Post by: yukishiro1


Definitely, it's not only going to be melta any more. All anti-tank weapons (except normal lascannons apparently, because lol <reasons> ) seem scheduled for big stat inflation in 9th, to match defensive stat inflation for heavy infantry, though not, again because lol <reasons>, for vehicles.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 19:09:47


Post by: Insectum7


 Daedalus81 wrote:
Spoiler:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Daedalus81:
 Daedalus81 wrote:

1) MM is not spammed.


Also Daedalus81:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
Ezekiel

Bladeguard Ancient, Remembrance ( -1D to one unit )
2x DW Command, 2xLC & TH/SS
2x DW Command, 2xLC & TH/SS
10x Assault Terminators, 6 dual LC, 4 TH/SS, Homer

Talonmaster, Obsec bubble trait
Talonmaster
Chap on Bike

Chief Apothecary

3x MM Attack Bikes <<=====
2x MM Attack Bikes <<=====
2x MM Attack Bikes <<=====

3x3 Bikes, LC Sarge, Dual CS

Fin.

Looks to be less about Inner Circle spam and more about adding obsec and turning off obsec at the right places.

Given few the low amount of psykers in the game at the moment I wonder how it would fair if it can't turn off obsec.



Hey - you got me. That was an introspective at one winning DA list. So let me walk back - Salamanders, Sisters and DA, because RW has a lot to offer bikes. Where is the rest of the spam?

Automatically Appended Next Post:
yukishiro1 wrote:


...it doesn't look like you did. You read "7-9 MM bikes" as "9 MM bikes," you read "make the problems with melta spam go away" as "make melta go away."

I won't belabor the point further, it's not really important, it's just frustrating when people don't read.


That's kind of splitting hairs. In the T'au Tipping tournament of the lists in the top 10 one DA list has 9 AB. A sisters list has zero ( opting for Exorcists ).

1+1=2 . .. which is more than one.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
If MM is oppressive / prevalent why is it only in one list of a top 10?
Multimeltas, meltas etc. could still be oppressive/prevalent while not making tourney top lists, functioning as a "gatekeeper" capability that precludes other lists from feeling viable because there's a reasonable possibility that massed melta will be part of any tourney or meta.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 19:20:00


Post by: Daedalus81


Damn you, Insectum.

MM is a part of what you can face, but is no more a gatekeeper than anything else can be in the game when your list leans too much.

I'm sure we'll see small point bumps in the future, but nothing that is going to take them out of the equation.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 19:25:14


Post by: Gadzilla666


yukishiro1 wrote:
Definitely, it's not only going to be melta any more. All anti-tank weapons (except normal lascannons apparently, because lol <reasons> ) seem scheduled for big stat inflation in 9th, to match defensive stat inflation for heavy infantry, though not, again because lol <reasons>, for vehicles.

Some vehicles have gotten a durability boost in the new codexes. Necrons got Quantum Shielding, dreadnoughts got Relentless Hatred, and Death Guard daemon engines are still pretty tough, just not as tough as before against AT. Other stuff has been left in the dust though. It's the mid-priced stuff that's hurting. You either need lots of cheap stuff like Ork buggies or something big that can take a hit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
Damn you, Insectum.

MM is a part of what you can face, but is no more a gatekeeper than anything else can be in the game when your list leans too much.

I'm sure we'll see small point bumps in the future, but nothing that is going to take them out of the equation.

I don't think anyone wants melta out of the equation, just less spammable, especially on fast units that can get into melta range easily.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 19:31:20


Post by: Insectum7


 Daedalus81 wrote:
Damn you, Insectum.

MM is a part of what you can face, but is no more a gatekeeper than anything else can be in the game when your list leans too much.

I'm sure we'll see small point bumps in the future, but nothing that is going to take them out of the equation.
Right, it's a skew to be sure. But it's a NEW skew and happens to be a skew that Marines are good at . . . In addition to all the other things Marines are good at doing these days. So it's pretty understandable why some folks can feel sour about it.

And from the marine perspective it's just another stir of the churning "new hotness" pot that many are getting tired of.

At least the predictable thing is that the churn will continue and Eradicators will get nerfed like Aggressors did and MMs will go up in price or whatever. Such is the 40k way.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 19:31:56


Post by: warmaster21


 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Honestly, it's probably not worth continuing this argument about melta being spammed or not and whether it is the sole reason some lists are winning, as D3+3 dark lance spam, D3+3 special lascannons and who else knows what is on it's way. Dark Eldar can produce a SCARY amount of dark lances if they want, the same will be for Admech with their special lascannons, all on super mobile platforms.


though with DE lances (and other heavy weapons) no longer becoming assault on vehicles their mobility is slightly restricted without being able to advance and fire them now


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 19:47:11


Post by: Quasistellar


 warmaster21 wrote:
 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Honestly, it's probably not worth continuing this argument about melta being spammed or not and whether it is the sole reason some lists are winning, as D3+3 dark lance spam, D3+3 special lascannons and who else knows what is on it's way. Dark Eldar can produce a SCARY amount of dark lances if they want, the same will be for Admech with their special lascannons, all on super mobile platforms.


though with DE lances (and other heavy weapons) no longer becoming assault on vehicles their mobility is slightly restricted without being able to advance and fire them now


Regardless, ravagers have fly and high base move and dark lances have good range and amazing damage. I think net gain there.

Think about this (slightly off topic) and laugh: a Myphitic Blight-hauler and a dark lance Ravager are the same points. Lol.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 19:53:12


Post by: Daedalus81


Quasistellar wrote:
Think about this (slightly off topic) and laugh: a Myphitic Blight-hauler and a dark lance Ravager are the same points. Lol.


That seems pretty reasonable to me or at least not wildly off base.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 20:14:21


Post by: Xenomancers


Quasistellar wrote:
 warmaster21 wrote:
 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Honestly, it's probably not worth continuing this argument about melta being spammed or not and whether it is the sole reason some lists are winning, as D3+3 dark lance spam, D3+3 special lascannons and who else knows what is on it's way. Dark Eldar can produce a SCARY amount of dark lances if they want, the same will be for Admech with their special lascannons, all on super mobile platforms.


though with DE lances (and other heavy weapons) no longer becoming assault on vehicles their mobility is slightly restricted without being able to advance and fire them now


Regardless, ravagers have fly and high base move and dark lances have good range and amazing damage. I think net gain there.

Think about this (slightly off topic) and laugh: a Myphitic Blight-hauler and a dark lance Ravager are the same points. Lol.
This is why no one is taking a bloody ravager ever.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 20:21:13


Post by: ccs


 Daedalus81 wrote:
Spoiler:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Daedalus81:
 Daedalus81 wrote:

1) MM is not spammed.


Also Daedalus81:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
Ezekiel

Bladeguard Ancient, Remembrance ( -1D to one unit )
2x DW Command, 2xLC & TH/SS
2x DW Command, 2xLC & TH/SS
10x Assault Terminators, 6 dual LC, 4 TH/SS, Homer

Talonmaster, Obsec bubble trait
Talonmaster
Chap on Bike

Chief Apothecary

3x MM Attack Bikes <<=====
2x MM Attack Bikes <<=====
2x MM Attack Bikes <<=====

3x3 Bikes, LC Sarge, Dual CS

Fin.

Looks to be less about Inner Circle spam and more about adding obsec and turning off obsec at the right places.

Given few the low amount of psykers in the game at the moment I wonder how it would fair if it can't turn off obsec.



Hey - you got me. That was an introspective at one winning DA list. So let me walk back - Salamanders, Sisters and DA, because RW has a lot to offer bikes. Where is the rest of the spam?




Automatically Appended Next Post:
yukishiro1 wrote:


...it doesn't look like you did. You read "7-9 MM bikes" as "9 MM bikes," you read "make the problems with melta spam go away" as "make melta go away."

I won't belabor the point further, it's not really important, it's just frustrating when people don't read.


That's kind of splitting hairs. In the T'au Tipping tournament of the lists in the top 10 one DA list has 9 AB. A sisters list has zero ( opting for Exorcists ).

If MM is oppressive / prevalent why is it only in one list of a top 10?


Maybe they're encountering it where it matters, I.E. where they actually play?


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 20:28:52


Post by: Tyel


 Daedalus81 wrote:
Quasistellar wrote:
Think about this (slightly off topic) and laugh: a Myphitic Blight-hauler and a dark lance Ravager are the same points. Lol.


That seems pretty reasonable to me or at least not wildly off base.


I don't think its wildly off - but the difference is that the Ravager (probably Black Heart of Obsidian Rose) is very good for its 140 points - while the MBH feels a bit lacking, and probably should be 130. (This treads into Hellbrute territory and they don't have the 5++ - but I don't think anyone thinks they are priced especially competitively.)
Not that DG need help but still.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/08 22:20:03


Post by: Catulle


 Xenomancers wrote:
This is why no one is taking a bloody ravager ever.


Uh huh. Sure.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 00:57:02


Post by: Daedalus81


ccs wrote:


Maybe they're encountering it where it matters, I.E. where they actually play?


At some point you can't fall back on whatever meta you isolate to, because then no discussion is ever valid. If we want to discuss the direction the game is going in then it should be on the broadest terms possible.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 01:31:33


Post by: Voss


 Daedalus81 wrote:
ccs wrote:


Maybe they're encountering it where it matters, I.E. where they actually play?


At some point you can't fall back on whatever meta you isolate to, because then no discussion is ever valid. If we want to discuss the direction the game is going in then it should be on the broadest terms possible.


That's really reductionist, and it seems moderately offensive to tell people how the game plays where they play doesn't matter. People can still talk about the armies the field and face locally. Its not like its on some other planet where no one has anything in common. There will still be the same army books, weapons, and tactics, and what works against a space marine army in Finland will work against a Space Marine army in Seattle.

Chasing the theoretical tournament meta this week is an exercise in mild curiosity for most people, at best. What people actually turn up with at the local shop or club (when that happens) actually matters week-to-week. That doesn't mean there's nothing to discuss- its actually a lot more, because then it isn't solely around the Bestest Cookie Cutter list (or meta skew to counter said net lists), but a variety of units that people buy and put on the table.

Otherwise you get people yammering nonsense about how no one ever fields ravagers, and how to painstakingly calculate the number of melta weapons that sufficiently count as spam.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 02:09:08


Post by: Salt donkey


Voss wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
ccs wrote:


Maybe they're encountering it where it matters, I.E. where they actually play?


At some point you can't fall back on whatever meta you isolate to, because then no discussion is ever valid. If we want to discuss the direction the game is going in then it should be on the broadest terms possible.


That's really reductionist, and it seems moderately offensive to tell people how the game plays where they play doesn't matter. People can still talk about the armies the field and face locally. Its not like its on some other planet where no one has anything in common. There will still be the same army books, weapons, and tactics, and what works against a space marine army in Finland will work against a Space Marine army in Seattle.

Chasing the theoretical tournament meta this week is an exercise in mild curiosity for most people, at best. What people actually turn up with at the local shop or club (when that happens) actually matters week-to-week. That doesn't mean there's nothing to discuss- its actually a lot more, because then it isn't solely around the Bestest Cookie Cutter list (or meta skew to counter said net lists), but a variety of units that people buy and put on the table.

Otherwise you get people yammering nonsense about how no one ever fields ravagers, and how to painstakingly calculate the number of melta weapons that sufficiently count as spam.


What me ask you. Who’s opinion on game balance would you trust more? Causal Cory, who plays 4 games a year in his garage, or spike Steve who travels for tournaments and gets 100+ games a year?

The fact is trusting either has problems, but we have to weigh Steve’s ideas more due to statistically principles. Cory and could have been crushed once by a particular nasty Tyranid list using FW big stuff and therefore think the army is the most OP thing ever. More likely he played a netlist marine build and therefore thinks that army is OP, but is that any different than the Tyranid example? Steve/ competitive stats might look at the game in skewed light, but at least he has a large understanding of the game as whole, while Corey might only know his army/ whatever he plays again + what the internet tells him,

To me the whole “We shouldn’t listen to competitive players” mindset comes from people who don’t play the game much trying to justify their creditability. They take the reasonable point that some things are bad simply from a basic play level (that competitive players have a harder time understanding) and extend it as the only thing that matters. But at the end of the day if you play the game enough then it’s competitive concerns that matter to you.

So TLDR Listening to casual community some when it comes to game balance is fine. But, weighing their opinion as just as/more important than competitive statistics makes no sense.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 02:24:47


Post by: Insectum7


The local meta is more important, it's just harder to get data for.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 02:28:30


Post by: Daedalus81


Voss wrote:


That's really reductionist, and it seems moderately offensive to tell people how the game plays where they play doesn't matter. People can still talk about the armies the field and face locally. Its not like its on some other planet where no one has anything in common. There will still be the same army books, weapons, and tactics, and what works against a space marine army in Finland will work against a Space Marine army in Seattle.

Chasing the theoretical tournament meta this week is an exercise in mild curiosity for most people, at best. What people actually turn up with at the local shop or club (when that happens) actually matters week-to-week. That doesn't mean there's nothing to discuss- its actually a lot more, because then it isn't solely around the Bestest Cookie Cutter list (or meta skew to counter said net lists), but a variety of units that people buy and put on the table.

Otherwise you get people yammering nonsense about how no one ever fields ravagers, and how to painstakingly calculate the number of melta weapons that sufficiently count as spam.


I'm not intending to dismiss the experiences of other so I apologize if I came across that way.

Don't take Xeno too seriously on ravagers though.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 02:34:19


Post by: the_scotsman


Tyel wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
Quasistellar wrote:
Think about this (slightly off topic) and laugh: a Myphitic Blight-hauler and a dark lance Ravager are the same points. Lol.


That seems pretty reasonable to me or at least not wildly off base.


I don't think its wildly off - but the difference is that the Ravager (probably Black Heart of Obsidian Rose) is very good for its 140 points - while the MBH feels a bit lacking, and probably should be 130. (This treads into Hellbrute territory and they don't have the 5++ - but I don't think anyone thinks they are priced especially competitively.)
Not that DG need help but still.


I don't get it, it's a completely apples to oranges comparison.

One is T6, degrades, has a 4+ base save, but is more mobile and has safer range on its three anti-tank weapon shots. The other is slower, but MUCH more durable - no degradation, -1 damage, 3+ base save and T7, has an extra short ranged weapon, and has 4 S6 Ap-2 D1 melee attacks.

Other than the fact that they're both vehicles and both feature 3 S8 Anti-tank oriented shots, the comparison is essentially meaningless, but I would argue both bring some value to the table though I'd rather have the blighthauler as it will actually participate in the winning the game portion of the game, as opposed to the just killing stuff portion.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 02:41:50


Post by: Salt donkey


 Insectum7 wrote:
The local meta is more important, it's just harder to get data for.


Maybe to the person who’s in it, but it doesn’t mean jack to everyone else who isn’t. So how is it generally more important than the larger competitive meta? as there are a lot more people not in local scene then are.

Right now people are being told all over the place that marines are OP. Will local metas change due to them not being at all OP in the competitive scene? Yeah, it’s just takes longer for them to adjust. We already seeing a lot more “how do I counter DG” type topics popping up all over the internet, and it’s likely we’ll see the same for drukhari. Unlike in real economics, the trickle down economy is very much a thing In 40k.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 03:02:30


Post by: Gadzilla666


Salt donkey wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
The local meta is more important, it's just harder to get data for.


Maybe to the person who’s in it, but it doesn’t mean jack to everyone else who isn’t. So how is it generally more important than the larger competitive meta? as there are a lot more people not in local scene then are.

Right now people are being told all over the place that marines are OP. Will local metas change due to them not being at all OP in the competitive scene? Yeah, it’s just takes longer for them to adjust. We already seeing a lot more “how do I counter DG” type topics popping up all over the internet, and it’s likely we’ll see the same for drukhari. Unlike in real economics, the trickle down economy is very much a thing In 40k.

Which is just as true for tournament play. Not everyone enjoys the spam (and seven of the exact same unit is spam) and meta chasing of tournament play. You shouldn't have to build a cutthroat tournament list to have a chance of winning against a casual loyalist list, but right now that's where a lot of factions are. I don't care if heavy melta rifle Eradicators aren't "meta" in the tournament scene right now. They exist, and can evaporate any but the toughest vehicles from full range. That forces people to leave models they want to play at home because no one wants to pick that favorite model up before it's had a chance to do anything. Having your army choices dictated by the existence of a single unit isn't fun. If you enjoy tournament games that's fine, but it isn't what everyone wants to play.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 03:19:07


Post by: the_scotsman


 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Salt donkey wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
The local meta is more important, it's just harder to get data for.


Maybe to the person who’s in it, but it doesn’t mean jack to everyone else who isn’t. So how is it generally more important than the larger competitive meta? as there are a lot more people not in local scene then are.

Right now people are being told all over the place that marines are OP. Will local metas change due to them not being at all OP in the competitive scene? Yeah, it’s just takes longer for them to adjust. We already seeing a lot more “how do I counter DG” type topics popping up all over the internet, and it’s likely we’ll see the same for drukhari. Unlike in real economics, the trickle down economy is very much a thing In 40k.

Which is just as true for tournament play. Not everyone enjoys the spam (and seven of the exact same unit is spam) and meta chasing of tournament play. You shouldn't have to build a cutthroat tournament list to have a chance of winning against a casual loyalist list, but right now that's where a lot of factions are. I don't care if heavy melta rifle Eradicators aren't "meta" in the tournament scene right now. They exist, and can evaporate any but the toughest vehicles from full range. That forces people to leave models they want to play at home because no one wants to pick that favorite model up before it's had a chance to do anything. Having your army choices dictated by the existence of a single unit isn't fun. If you enjoy tournament games that's fine, but it isn't what everyone wants to play.


...except that there are tons of units that can do that out there. I can make a unit of aberrants or acolytes out of the single worst codex (by competitive wr anyway) that can supremely reliably delete any vehicle you've got on the table, just as easily as heavy melta rifle erads.

You don't need a hyper-competitive list to take on an actually casual space marine list. You need a competitive list to take on a competitive marine list. The reason it seems like you do is, surprise surprise, the units that everyone owns from all the starter boxes of primaris marines are basically the competitive marine choices right now. If you actually go up against someone taking a wider slice of the many many many many options in the marine codex, they're perfectly easy to deal with with the fluff-bunniest of lists. i've beaten marines with my "take 1 of each aspect warrior squad, 3 storm guardian squads and an avatar of khaine and go from there" Eldar list, and that's...never not been a joke.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 03:35:58


Post by: AngryAngel80


 Daedalus81 wrote:
Damn you, Insectum.

MM is a part of what you can face, but is no more a gatekeeper than anything else can be in the game when your list leans too much.

I'm sure we'll see small point bumps in the future, but nothing that is going to take them out of the equation.


GW isn't exactly known for moderated changes all the time. I wonder what will be said if they sledge hammer meltas down. As is they are too cheap and useful, while some AT options like Missile launcher and Lascannon are too swingy and end up being too expensive so don't get a nod unless you have no other choice, like say Guard.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Salt donkey wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
The local meta is more important, it's just harder to get data for.


Maybe to the person who’s in it, but it doesn’t mean jack to everyone else who isn’t. So how is it generally more important than the larger competitive meta? as there are a lot more people not in local scene then are.

Right now people are being told all over the place that marines are OP. Will local metas change due to them not being at all OP in the competitive scene? Yeah, it’s just takes longer for them to adjust. We already seeing a lot more “how do I counter DG” type topics popping up all over the internet, and it’s likely we’ll see the same for drukhari. Unlike in real economics, the trickle down economy is very much a thing In 40k.


For an overall discussion yes the larger community is more important but to the person who is playing in their local area, the world around doesn't mean as much. What he's saying is accurate as is what you are but to the individual what you will see will always be more important than a faceless boogeyman of what someone across the globe is dealing with in their games for instance. Where the truth is in what is broken clearly will usually eventually end up in your area, even if its not there already unless a community actively keeps it out.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 03:58:19


Post by: Racerguy180


The thing is the "competitive" meta matters absolutely zero to GW. they want you to buy something, you only buy it for rules, you morons buy it...lather, rinse repeat. Ergo, pendulums gotta swing. Cuz what was once OP yesterday will be "trash" tomorrow and vice-versa.

Not an attack on anyone, but if you think GW cares what you think(comp, garage, whatever)....you're wrong. As long as you keep gobbling up every.single.release, they have absolutely no incentive to make it better for that style of play. Cuz it behooves them not to.

I will never purchase a model for the rules, irrespective of how OP it may be.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 04:02:25


Post by: Gadzilla666


the_scotsman wrote:
Spoiler:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Salt donkey wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
The local meta is more important, it's just harder to get data for.


Maybe to the person who’s in it, but it doesn’t mean jack to everyone else who isn’t. So how is it generally more important than the larger competitive meta? as there are a lot more people not in local scene then are.

Right now people are being told all over the place that marines are OP. Will local metas change due to them not being at all OP in the competitive scene? Yeah, it’s just takes longer for them to adjust. We already seeing a lot more “how do I counter DG” type topics popping up all over the internet, and it’s likely we’ll see the same for drukhari. Unlike in real economics, the trickle down economy is very much a thing In 40k.

Which is just as true for tournament play. Not everyone enjoys the spam (and seven of the exact same unit is spam) and meta chasing of tournament play. You shouldn't have to build a cutthroat tournament list to have a chance of winning against a casual loyalist list, but right now that's where a lot of factions are. I don't care if heavy melta rifle Eradicators aren't "meta" in the tournament scene right now. They exist, and can evaporate any but the toughest vehicles from full range. That forces people to leave models they want to play at home because no one wants to pick that favorite model up before it's had a chance to do anything. Having your army choices dictated by the existence of a single unit isn't fun. If you enjoy tournament games that's fine, but it isn't what everyone wants to play.


...except that there are tons of units that can do that out there. I can make a unit of aberrants or acolytes out of the single worst codex (by competitive wr anyway) that can supremely reliably delete any vehicle you've got on the table, just as easily as heavy melta rifle erads.

You don't need a hyper-competitive list to take on an actually casual space marine list. You need a competitive list to take on a competitive marine list. The reason it seems like you do is, surprise surprise, the units that everyone owns from all the starter boxes of primaris marines are basically the competitive marine choices right now. If you actually go up against someone taking a wider slice of the many many many many options in the marine codex, they're perfectly easy to deal with with the fluff-bunniest of lists. i've beaten marines with my "take 1 of each aspect warrior squad, 3 storm guardian squads and an avatar of khaine and go from there" Eldar list, and that's...never not been a joke.

......except you just compared two units that have to get into melee to do the job with one that does it from 24 away. It's a lot easier to screen out melee units than 24 inch range guns. It's not the existence of units that can reliably delete vehicles that's a problem, it's the ones that can do it with little counterplay. I have no problem with normal MMs or Eradicators, as they need to get close to do the job, it's the melta weapons that essentially get around the rules for melta that are an issue.

Agreed on your second point. The issue is that the best loyalists units are widespread and easily available, and therefore seen everywhere. Doesn't change the fact that they're everywhere.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 04:17:26


Post by: Insectum7


Salt donkey wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
The local meta is more important, it's just harder to get data for.


Maybe to the person who’s in it, but it doesn’t mean jack to everyone else who isn’t. So how is it generally more important than the larger competitive meta? as there are a lot more people not in local scene then are.
I speak not of a single local meta, but the aggregation of local metas among all players.. There are a lot more people in various local metas than there are in the high end tournament scene, and as such, they are the larger customer base and represent the vast majority of how people experience the game. GW should be aiming to provide the best experience for the various local metas 'in the wild', and the tournament data, while useful, is not going to represent those communities very well.

And this is maybe where a lot of disconnect comes from. If Marines aren't doing well in tournies against hyper optimized lists that's one thing. But if relatively casual, popular and common models in the most common faction are curbstomping the relatively casual common and popular models and builds of other factions, that's a big problem even if it's not manifesting at the tournament level, because that's how the game may be manifesting to the vast majority of players.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 04:53:13


Post by: Racerguy180


Word!

Perspective is everything!



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 06:17:11


Post by: Sunny Side Up


Either way.

Marines are still strong and nowhere near the Ynnari/GSC-naughty corner, despite their sins being far greater in late 8th


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 07:17:49


Post by: Blackie


SM were, are and always will be boogieman in some form. At the moment that form is Dark Angels.

In casual games anything SM related that is at least barely optimized is still very powerful. Which isn't true for many of the other top factions: their effectiveness drops dramatically outside the lists that heavily rely on their cheesiest combos.

The era has not ended at all.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 07:48:25


Post by: Umbros


Racerguy180 wrote:
The thing is the "competitive" meta matters absolutely zero to GW. they want you to buy something, you only buy it for rules, you morons buy it...lather, rinse repeat. Ergo, pendulums gotta swing. Cuz what was once OP yesterday will be "trash" tomorrow and vice-versa.

Not an attack on anyone, but if you think GW cares what you think(comp, garage, whatever)....you're wrong. As long as you keep gobbling up every.single.release, they have absolutely no incentive to make it better for that style of play. Cuz it behooves them not to.

I will never purchase a model for the rules, irrespective of how OP it may be.


This is factually not true - they have made a very clear effort to engage more with the competitive communities during 8th and especially in 9th.

It clearly isn't all they care about; nor should it be.

Not buying models for rules is the right idea though.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 08:14:27


Post by: Cornishman


I’d argue that whilst Competitive and Local-metas are both useful measurements of a codex’s/list’s/unit’s performance neither offer a complete view point.

By the nature of competitive play, I would expect those lists that do well in this environment to be optimised to perform as well as possible. I’d assume the selection of a faction(s) and the composition of the armies in this environment would tend towards the attaining the best possible performance dependent on what miniatures a player has access to (whether owning or borrowing). Like many optimisation problems whilst there doesn’t seem to be definitively a single best list consistently a small number of builds from limited range of factions often seem to be on top.

Depending on how competitive/ casual the local meta is we could (I’d say should) start to see different properties emerge. The more casual the environment the greater variety of factions and list I would expect to see. As the casualness of meta increases I would expect the performance measure being sort in any given army moves away from ‘absolute best possible of all factions available to the player’ to ‘solid enough to have a fun game’ through to ‘I just like the model/ these are the models I have/when I put the list together performance wasn’t an important factor’.

With performance no longer being the only criteria/lower performance being sort it/acceptable seems natural that a greater range of possible solutions should be able to provide it.

As others have brought an issue with Space Marines of late has been that this increase in breadth possible solutions hasn’t come that far down a power curve.

So to be a healthy game do you optimise it so that the maximum possible performance of each faction is equal accepting that this may come at the cost of variety contained with those solutions (i.e. optimise based on/for competitive play) or optimise it such that each army has a broad and varied selection of options that can offer a ‘good’ level of performance and accept that the absolute peak performance may differ (e.g. optimise on/for casual/ local meta). Yes, ideally you would do both, but given the complexity of the system in practical terms I don’t think that achieving a perfect solution to both is attainable.

I think the answer to this will vary from player to player depending on how important they think these two are.

Having played since the days rogue trader GW seem to err towards the latter category.
This isn’t to say that they there isn’t room for improving the balance (whether the absolute peak performance of a codex or the power/ variety curve of a codex) or that they shouldn’t pay attention improving the balance.
Compared to previous editions the annual points updates, and twice-yearly FAQ updates are a revolution and clearly demonstrate that they are listening and are doing.

In a way, yes the era is ended, but in others it hasn’t. Whilst in a competitive setting space marines of a variety of chapters are no longer topping the tables (as much), DA look to be in a good place and critically are still marines. Thus, Space Marines still have a subfaction which is likely to be table topping. In casual play marines are still very ‘solid’.

Then there is the entire preferential treatment with respect to models they are getting. Yes I play marines, but boy am I bored of the new models. There are so many armies who I feel are more deserving or in need of new/ refreshed models. Hopefully the introduction of the plastic SoB will have demonstrated to the bean counters at GW that giving a non-marine army a large refresh/ update is profitable. With Beast Snaggas on the horizon there may be hope yet.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 12:51:38


Post by: Daedalus81


Racerguy180 wrote:
The thing is the "competitive" meta matters absolutely zero to GW. they want you to buy something, you only buy it for rules, you morons buy it...lather, rinse repeat. Ergo, pendulums gotta swing. Cuz what was once OP yesterday will be "trash" tomorrow and vice-versa.

Not an attack on anyone, but if you think GW cares what you think(comp, garage, whatever)....you're wrong. As long as you keep gobbling up every.single.release, they have absolutely no incentive to make it better for that style of play. Cuz it behooves them not to.

I will never purchase a model for the rules, irrespective of how OP it may be.


I bought a ton of the new CSM, because I adore the models and I've been looking to replace them for a long time. I didn't buy them for competitive reasons or rules ( lol, dem traits ). Where does that place me?

People constantly meme about having boxes on miniatures unassembled. People just like buying cool gak.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 13:18:53


Post by: the_scotsman


 Gadzilla666 wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
Spoiler:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Salt donkey wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
The local meta is more important, it's just harder to get data for.


Maybe to the person who’s in it, but it doesn’t mean jack to everyone else who isn’t. So how is it generally more important than the larger competitive meta? as there are a lot more people not in local scene then are.

Right now people are being told all over the place that marines are OP. Will local metas change due to them not being at all OP in the competitive scene? Yeah, it’s just takes longer for them to adjust. We already seeing a lot more “how do I counter DG” type topics popping up all over the internet, and it’s likely we’ll see the same for drukhari. Unlike in real economics, the trickle down economy is very much a thing In 40k.

Which is just as true for tournament play. Not everyone enjoys the spam (and seven of the exact same unit is spam) and meta chasing of tournament play. You shouldn't have to build a cutthroat tournament list to have a chance of winning against a casual loyalist list, but right now that's where a lot of factions are. I don't care if heavy melta rifle Eradicators aren't "meta" in the tournament scene right now. They exist, and can evaporate any but the toughest vehicles from full range. That forces people to leave models they want to play at home because no one wants to pick that favorite model up before it's had a chance to do anything. Having your army choices dictated by the existence of a single unit isn't fun. If you enjoy tournament games that's fine, but it isn't what everyone wants to play.


...except that there are tons of units that can do that out there. I can make a unit of aberrants or acolytes out of the single worst codex (by competitive wr anyway) that can supremely reliably delete any vehicle you've got on the table, just as easily as heavy melta rifle erads.

You don't need a hyper-competitive list to take on an actually casual space marine list. You need a competitive list to take on a competitive marine list. The reason it seems like you do is, surprise surprise, the units that everyone owns from all the starter boxes of primaris marines are basically the competitive marine choices right now. If you actually go up against someone taking a wider slice of the many many many many options in the marine codex, they're perfectly easy to deal with with the fluff-bunniest of lists. i've beaten marines with my "take 1 of each aspect warrior squad, 3 storm guardian squads and an avatar of khaine and go from there" Eldar list, and that's...never not been a joke.

......except you just compared two units that have to get into melee to do the job with one that does it from 24 away. It's a lot easier to screen out melee units than 24 inch range guns. It's not the existence of units that can reliably delete vehicles that's a problem, it's the ones that can do it with little counterplay. I have no problem with normal MMs or Eradicators, as they need to get close to do the job, it's the melta weapons that essentially get around the rules for melta that are an issue.

Agreed on your second point. The issue is that the best loyalists units are widespread and easily available, and therefore seen everywhere. Doesn't change the fact that they're everywhere.


I dunno, I guess I've just played against eradicators enough at this point that I'm so used to dealing with them and it doesn't bother me that much. I play tanks against them, and I've played against the heavy rifle version as well as the normal version.

They show up, turn 2, and generally if you've got a vehicle that doesn't have any kind of additional defenses just straight T7 3+ they kill it, then you kill them. If you do, they don't. The last time I played against them, I had a grot megatank loaded up with rokkits, so like 160 points, big expensive target. Turn 1 it rolled up and killed 3 aggressors, turn 2 eradicators showed up and shot at it, missed twice, failed to wound once, one shot got saved by the invuln, and one shot did 1 damage because of ramshackle, they took 6 out of 9 wounds off and then he had to direct a whole bunch of his longrange firepower into the GMT to finally take it out.

You're gonna lose models in warhammer 40k, and there's gonna be units with antitank weaponry that shoot your stuff. I'd actually rather the units that come down to destroy my vehicles:

-cost a cp to use properly
-don't show up until turn 2 so I get a chance to make some points back with my vehicle
-have T5 3+ instead of a vehicle statline
-lose 1/3 of their firepower every 3 wounds
-have 24" range instead of like 48" range
-have to turn up 9" from a board edge so I can protect really vital assets by placing them in the center and screening for them

Melta doesn't work on suicide units in the 8th+ framework because GW hasn't been able to jam the idea that transports should make units move faster into their brains since 7th. It has never been a thing that worked in 8th in basically any faction, and it was due to get a buff comparative to much longer range, safer weaponry. They overshot by like 5 points with base eradicators, and when analyzing heavy erads initially people didnt realize they were another 5pts, and they bumped their cost up pretty quick. The vehicles that you can actually make the argument eradicators make unusable...were already bad before. High cost low durability mediocre damage vehicles like the quad-las predator, land raider, and big nid monsters.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Blackie wrote:
SM were, are and always will be boogieman in some form. At the moment that form is Dark Angels.

In casual games anything SM related that is at least barely optimized is still very powerful. Which isn't true for many of the other top factions: their effectiveness drops dramatically outside the lists that heavily rely on their cheesiest combos.


1) I can take my pile of rogue trader pewter harlequins with completely random wargear and make a list with almost no effort at all that will style all over 90% of armies that exist in the game. Most of the top factions right now don't actually have that many choices to choose from. I guess I could be like...spamming Voidweavers on purpose to try and make my list shittier?

2) Dark angels are currently sitting at a 49% wr post-codex. Just, so we are clear on the numbers that are being shown right now. just under 50%. something like the twelfth or fourteenth most competitive faction.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 13:49:47


Post by: Daedalus81


the_scotsman wrote:
2) Dark angels are currently sitting at a 49% wr post-codex. Just, so we are clear on the numbers that are being shown right now. just under 50%. something like the twelfth or fourteenth most competitive faction.


They're just a bit under 53% for March, but then CK are 66%. People finally realized that there isn't a lot of anti-tank out there. And by virtue of their success Thousand Sons are being dragged up unwillingly since they're caster whipping boys in CK soup. Asuryani sit high, because of Wraithseers in soup. Deathwatch is all but abandoned.

Of course this is all just a small snapshot in time and we're bound to see things fluctuate as more people start to play and learn the ropes.




An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 14:08:44


Post by: Blackie


Harlequins are overrated IMHO. They're perfect marines killers, so perfect anti tournament meta. In single random games they're not that powerful. They're not even particularly common and so not many players tailor their lists to counter them. Tailor your list against Harlies instead of SM and you will likely beat them with not much effort.

Looking at the ratings orks are very high, but they're in fact a mid tier army with a single build that is excellent in tournaments. Tailor against the greentide and the same competitive list becomes pretty mediocre because it's not powerful at all, it just benefits from the fact that people tailor against opponents that spam completely different profiles.

But I aknowledge Harlequins have an advantage over the majority of other factions: they just have 8 datasheets, which means any random collection would be reasonably close to their top builds anyway.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 14:22:41


Post by: Daedalus81


 Blackie wrote:
Harlequins are overrated IMHO. They're perfect marines killers, so perfect anti tournament meta. In single random games they're not that powerful. They're not even particularly common and so not many players tailor their lists to counter them. Tailor your list against Harlies instead of SM and you will likely beat them with not much effort.

Looking at the ratings orks are very high, but they're in fact a mid tier army with a single build that is excellent in tournaments. Tailor against the greentide and the same competitive list becomes pretty mediocre because it's not powerful at all, it just benefits from the fact that people tailor against opponents that spam completely different profiles.


There isn't any real tailoring against Harlies.

Orks have more than one list.

Boyz & Smashas

Spoiler:
Lukas Troller - T'au Tipping

++ Battalion Detachment 0CP (Orks) [73 PL, 12CP, 1,380pts] ++

+ Configuration [12CP] +

Battle Size [12CP]: 3. Strike Force (101-200 Total PL / 1001-2000 Points) [12CP]

Clan Kultur / Specialist Mobs: Evil Sunz

Detachment Command Cost

+ HQ [8 PL, , 135pts] +

Big Mek W/ Kustom Force Field [4 PL, 1CP, 60pts]: Choppa, Follow Me, Ladz! [1CP], Kustom Force Field (PA), Slugga, Stikkbombs, Warlord

Weirdboy [4 PL, -1CP, 75pts]: 2. Warpath, 3. Da Jump, Warphead [-1CP], Weirdboy Staff

+ Troops [48 PL, 957pts] +

Boyz [12 PL, 255pts]: 3x Tankbusta Bombs
. Boss Nob [23pts]: Killsaw [5pts], Killsaw [10pts], Stikkbombs
. 29x Ork Boy W/ Slugga & Choppa [232pts]: 29x Choppa, 29x Slugga, 29x Stikkbombs

Boyz [12 PL, 234pts]: 2x Tankbusta Bombs
. Boss Nob [18pts]: Choppa, Killsaw [10pts], Stikkbombs
. 27x Ork Boy W/ Slugga & Choppa [216pts]: 27x Choppa, 27x Slugga, 27x Stikkbombs

Boyz [12 PL, 234pts]: 2x Tankbusta Bombs
. Boss Nob [18pts]: Choppa, Killsaw [10pts], Stikkbombs
. 27x Ork Boy W/ Slugga & Choppa [216pts]: 27x Choppa, 27x Slugga, 27x Stikkbombs

Boyz [12 PL, 234pts]: 2x Tankbusta Bombs
. Boss Nob [18pts]: Choppa, Killsaw [10pts], Stikkbombs
. 27x Ork Boy W/ Slugga & Choppa [216pts]: 27x Choppa, 27x Slugga, 27x Stikkbombs

+ Elites [17 PL, 288pts] +

Kommandos [3 PL, 45pts]: Tankbusta Bombs
. 5x Kommando [45pts]: 5x Choppa, 5x Slugga, 5x Stikkbombs

Kommandos [3 PL, 45pts]: Tankbusta Bombs
. 5x Kommando [45pts]: 5x Choppa, 5x Slugga, 5x Stikkbombs

Kommandos [3 PL, 45pts]: Tankbusta Bombs
. 5x Kommando [45pts]: 5x Choppa, 5x Slugga, 5x Stikkbombs

Nob with Waaagh! Banner [5 PL, 88pts]: Choppa, Kustom Shoota [3pts], Stikkbombs, Waaagh! Banner

Painboy [3 PL, 65pts]: 'Urty Syringe, Da Killa Klaw, Power Klaw

++ Spearhead Detachment -3CP (Orks) [46 PL, -3CP, 620pts] ++

+ Configuration [-3CP] +

Clan Kultur / Specialist Mobs
. Grot Mobs: Specialist Mob

Detachment Command Cost [-3CP]

+ HQ [4 PL, 60pts] +

Big Mek W/ Kustom Force Field [4 PL, 60pts]: Choppa, Kustom Force Field (PA), Slugga, Stikkbombs

+ Heavy Support [42 PL, 560pts] +

Mek Gunz [18 PL, 240pts]
. Gun [3 PL, 40pts]: Smasha Gun
. Gun [3 PL, 40pts]: Smasha Gun
. Gun [3 PL, 40pts]: Smasha Gun
. Gun [3 PL, 40pts]: Smasha Gun
. Gun [3 PL, 40pts]: Smasha Gun
. Gun [3 PL, 40pts]: Smasha Gun

Mek Gunz [18 PL, 240pts]
. Gun [3 PL, 40pts]: Smasha Gun
. Gun [3 PL, 40pts]: Smasha Gun
. Gun [3 PL, 40pts]: Smasha Gun
. Gun [3 PL, 40pts]: Smasha Gun
. Gun [3 PL, 40pts]: Smasha Gun
. Gun [3 PL, 40pts]: Smasha Gun

Mek Gunz [6 PL, 80pts]
. Gun [3 PL, 40pts]: Smasha Gun
. Gun [3 PL, 40pts]: Smasha Gun


Scraps, Dreads, Bombers, and Ghaz

Spoiler:
Dan Sammons - Free City GT



++ Patrol Detachment 0CP (Orks) [70 PL, 10CP, 1,320pts] ++

Clan Kultur / Specialist Mobs: Deathskulls

+ HQ [6 PL, 115pts] +

Warboss on Warbike [6 PL, 115pts]: Brutal but Kunnin, Da Killa Klaw, 2x Dakkagun, Power Klaw, Warlord

+ Troops [2 PL, 50pts] +

Gretchin [2 PL, 50pts]
. 10x Gretchin [50pts]: 10x Grot Blaster

+ Elites [6 PL, 90pts] +

Kommandos [3 PL, 45pts]
. 5x Kommando [45pts]: 5x Choppa, 5x Slugga, 5x Stikkbombs

Kommandos [3 PL, 45pts]
. 5x Kommando [45pts]: 5x Choppa, 5x Slugga, 5x Stikkbombs

+ Fast Attack [15 PL, -1CP, 330pts] +

Megatrakk Scrapjets [15 PL, -1CP, 330pts]
. Kustom Job [-1CP]: Korkscrew
. Megatrakk Scrapjet [5 PL, 110pts]: Nose Drill, Rokkit Cannon, 2x Twin Big Shoota, Wing Missiles
. Megatrakk Scrapjet [5 PL, 110pts]: Nose Drill, Rokkit Cannon, 2x Twin Big Shoota, Wing Missiles
. Megatrakk Scrapjet [5 PL, 110pts]: Nose Drill, Rokkit Cannon, 2x Twin Big Shoota, Wing Missiles

+ Heavy Support [21 PL, -1CP, 360pts] +

Deff Dreads [12 PL, -1CP, 190pts]
. Deff Dread [6 PL, 95pts]: Kustom Mega-blasta [5pts], Kustom Mega-blasta [5pts], Kustom Mega-blasta [5pts], Kustom Mega-blasta [5pts]
. Deff Dread [6 PL, 95pts]: Kustom Mega-blasta [5pts], Kustom Mega-blasta [5pts], Kustom Mega-blasta [5pts], Kustom Mega-blasta [5pts]
. Kustom Job [-1CP]: Sparkly Bitz

Kannonwagon [9 PL, 170pts]: 3x Big Shoota, Supa-Kannon

+ Flyer [16 PL, 310pts] +

Burna-bommer [8 PL, 155pts]: 2x Burna Bomb, 2x Supa Shoota, Twin Big Shoota

Burna-bommer [8 PL, 155pts]: 2x Burna Bomb, 2x Supa Shoota, Twin Big Shoota

+ Dedicated Transport [4 PL, 65pts] +

Trukk [4 PL, 65pts]: Big Shoota

++ Patrol Detachment -2CP (Orks) [39 PL, -2CP, 680pts] ++

Clan Kultur / Specialist Mobs: Goffs

+ HQ [15 PL, 300pts] +

Ghazghkull Thraka [15 PL, 300pts]: Gork's Klaw, Mork's Roar, Stikkbombs

+ Troops [2 PL, 50pts] +

Gretchin [2 PL, 50pts]
. 10x Gretchin [50pts]: 10x Grot Blaster

+ Elites [3 PL, 65pts] +

Painboy [3 PL, 65pts]: 'Urty Syringe, Power Klaw

+ Heavy Support [15 PL, 200pts] +

Mek Gunz [15 PL, 200pts]
. Gun [3 PL, 40pts]: Smasha Gun
. Gun [3 PL, 40pts]: Smasha Gun
. Gun [3 PL, 40pts]: Smasha Gun
. Gun [3 PL, 40pts]: Smasha Gun
. Gun [3 PL, 40pts]: Smasha Gun

+ Dedicated Transport [4 PL, 65pts] +

Trukk [4 PL, 65pts]: Big Shoota



Grots, Grot tanks, and MORE smashas

Spoiler:
Clifton Russell - Clutch City GT



++ Battalion Detachment 0CP (Orks) [107 PL, 1,580pts, 11CP] ++

Clan Kultur / Specialist Mobs
. Grot Mobs

+ HQ +

Big Mek W/ Kustom Force Field [4 PL, 60pts]

Warboss on Warbike [6 PL, 115pts, -1CP]: Brutal but Kunnin, Da Biggest Boss, Da Killa Klaw, Power Klaw, Warlord

+ Troops +

Gretchin [4 PL, 100pts]
. 20x Gretchin: 20x Grot Blaster

Gretchin [4 PL, 100pts]
. 20x Gretchin: 20x Grot Blaster

Gretchin [2 PL, 50pts]
. 10x Gretchin: 10x Grot Blaster

+ Elites +

Kommandos [3 PL, 45pts]: Tankbusta Bombs
. 5x Kommando: 5x Choppa, 5x Slugga, 5x Stikkbombs

+ Fast Attack +

Grot Mega-tank [10 PL, 130pts]: 3x Big Shoota, 2x Two Kustom Mega-blastas

Grot Mega-tank [10 PL, 130pts]: 3x Big Shoota, 2x Two Kustom Mega-blastas

Grot Mega-tank [10 PL, 130pts]: 3x Big Shoota, 2x Two Kustom Mega-blastas

+ Heavy Support +

Mek Gunz [18 PL, 240pts]
. Gun: Smasha Gun
. Gun: Smasha Gun
. Gun: Smasha Gun
. Gun: Smasha Gun
. Gun: Smasha Gun
. Gun: Smasha Gun

Mek Gunz [18 PL, 240pts]
. Gun: Smasha Gun
. Gun: Smasha Gun
. Gun: Smasha Gun
. Gun: Smasha Gun
. Gun: Smasha Gun
. Gun: Smasha Gun

Mek Gunz [18 PL, 240pts]
. Gun: Smasha Gun
. Gun: Smasha Gun
. Gun: Smasha Gun
. Gun: Smasha Gun
. Gun: Smasha Gun
. Gun: Smasha Gun


Another at Clutch was 2 Wartrikes and literally all buggies and went 4-2 (WWLLWW)






An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 15:07:35


Post by: Blackie


No, the grot list is garbage. Just because it had a result at a tournament it doesn't mean it's good. Massed smashas are amazing on planet bowling ball tables, otherwise they're a liability. So those lists must be put into context. Orks have basically two builds: green tide and light/medium vehicles spam. Both are extremely skew and the average player won't likely play something like that. More likely a mix between both, which is the opposite of a competitive list.

And all those lists that placed in tournaments aren't really that powerful in a single random game, they all rely on the fact that meltas and other super powerful tools are largely wasted. Try to assault 12-18 smashas with 3x5 deathguard termies, you won't tag more than a single one per charge, maybe two as their footprint is massive.

Harlequins can be tailored. Bring lots and lots of mid strenght weapons and you'll melt them. Aggressors or even bolter firstborn guys can easily do the job. Of course if you spam anti elite and anti tank you're gonna struggle, as you're not tailoring harlies, you're tailoring other SM or custodes. Which makes sense as they're the most common faction to face in a random game. But then if harlies are the real bullies of your meta just tailor against them. Tailoring against orks is even easier, and I mean with both greentides and light/medium vehicles spam in mind, not just a single archetype.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 15:21:13


Post by: PenitentJake


Racerguy180 wrote:
The thing is the "competitive" meta matters absolutely zero to GW. they want you to buy something, you only buy it for rules, you morons buy it...lather, rinse repeat. Ergo, pendulums gotta swing. Cuz what was once OP yesterday will be "trash" tomorrow and vice-versa.

Not an attack on anyone, but if you think GW cares what you think(comp, garage, whatever)....you're wrong. As long as you keep gobbling up every.single.release, they have absolutely no incentive to make it better for that style of play. Cuz it behooves them not to.

I will never purchase a model for the rules, irrespective of how OP it may be.


True to an extent of course, in that all for-profit enterprise is ultimately at the mercy of its bottom line.

But grossly over simplified.

If they don't care about the competitive meta, why did they incorporate ITC style missions into the core game and higher TO's to be a part of their design team? You think they didn't track the hit count on the Warcom Metawatch articles? Think that tracking has anything to do with why we've seen four so far?

GW care about their bottom line- this is your argument.

They can't maximize their profits without catering to the competitive scene, the narrative scene, the store circuit, the garage hammer, and the new players all at the same time. Therefore they care about all of these things.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 15:38:57


Post by: TangoTwoBravo


 Blackie wrote:
No, the grot list is garbage. Just because it had a result at a tournament it doesn't mean it's good. Massed smashas are amazing on planet bowling ball tables, otherwise they're a liability. So those lists must be put into context. Orks have basically two builds: green tide and light/medium vehicles spam. Both are extremely skew and the average player won't likely play something like that. More likely a mix between both, which is the opposite of a competitive list.

And all those lists that placed in tournaments aren't really that powerful in a single random game, they all rely on the fact that meltas and other super powerful tools are largely wasted. Try to assault 12-18 smashas with 3x5 deathguard termies, you won't tag more than a single one per charge, maybe two as their footprint is massive.

Harlequins can be tailored. Bring lots and lots of mid strenght weapons and you'll melt them. Aggressors or even bolter firstborn guys can easily do the job. Of course if you spam anti elite and anti tank you're gonna struggle, as you're not tailoring harlies, you're tailoring other SM or custodes. Which makes sense as they're the most common faction to face in a random game. But then if harlies are the real bullies of your meta just tailor against them. Tailoring against orks is even easier, and I mean with both greentides and light/medium vehicles spam in mind, not just a single archetype.


I get the impression you are discarding data that does not fit with your argument. Are you saying that competitive lists will not be successful in random games? There are bad match-ups out there, but that is also true at a tourney. Plus list-tailoring when you don't know exactly what you are facing can be a blind alley of list design. Part of the whole challenge of list design for a tourney is not knowing/controlling what you will face. You can guess and plan for "gate keeper" archetypes, but over-tailor for one and you get punished by another. That is why I do believe that tournament data is important. It needs to be analyzed to become information, but its what we have to work with.

In my little meta (before this latest lockdown) I certainly see Orks with Green Tide, others with lots of buggies and still others with lots of (counts-as) artillery. Indeed, the same guy can and does run all three. Harlies are powerful and draw from a limited model pool, so I am not convinced that there is a massive difference between a "competitive" and "casual" Harelquin list.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 15:45:52


Post by: Bosskelot


There is going to be little difference between a competitive and casual Harlie list, but the army is so finesse focused and punishing of mistakes that unless someone is ultra familiar with the army and very skilled in using it, they could easily crumble in a lower skill/casual environment.

As has already been stated, the army is very good at killing power armour but it folds vs other armies. It has a miserable time into Daemons, Orks and Admech and plenty of Necron builds give it a tough game too. And despite being power armour it tends to bounce off DG pretty hard as well.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 16:04:32


Post by: Daedalus81


 Blackie wrote:
No, the grot list is garbage. Just because it had a result at a tournament it doesn't mean it's good. Massed smashas are amazing on planet bowling ball tables, otherwise they're a liability. So those lists must be put into context. Orks have basically two builds: green tide and light/medium vehicles spam. Both are extremely skew and the average player won't likely play something like that. More likely a mix between both, which is the opposite of a competitive list.

And all those lists that placed in tournaments aren't really that powerful in a single random game, they all rely on the fact that meltas and other super powerful tools are largely wasted. Try to assault 12-18 smashas with 3x5 deathguard termies, you won't tag more than a single one per charge, maybe two as their footprint is massive.


I definitely don't know the life of these lists. I have no idea what terrain was like, but I imagine the quantity of smashas outweighs the potentially limited firing lanes. All he really needs is sight to the objectives.

The grot list beat a crummy Necron list, UM with 30 heavy intercessors / 9 Erads / Bobby, SW with MM LFs / 3 Erads / TWC / BGV / WG, DG with 3 rhinos / shrouds / 3 PBCs / a bunch of PMs, Black Templars with 15 Crusaders / 16 BGV / 6 Erads.

He only lost to Custodes dread spam & scions.

Despite feelings about the list it appears he was able to beat some pretty serious lists and opponents.

Also people should take note of the variety of lists in the field. It's been quite something.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 16:55:26


Post by: Racerguy180


Umbros wrote:
Racerguy180 wrote:
The thing is the "competitive" meta matters absolutely zero to GW. they want you to buy something, you only buy it for rules, you morons buy it...lather, rinse repeat. Ergo, pendulums gotta swing. Cuz what was once OP yesterday will be "trash" tomorrow and vice-versa.

Not an attack on anyone, but if you think GW cares what you think(comp, garage, whatever)....you're wrong. As long as you keep gobbling up every.single.release, they have absolutely no incentive to make it better for that style of play. Cuz it behooves them not to.

I will never purchase a model for the rules, irrespective of how OP it may be.


This is factually not true - they have made a very clear effort to engage more with the competitive communities during 8th and especially in 9th.

It clearly isn't all they care about; nor should it be.

Not buying models for rules is the right idea though.

Engagement = caring???
They only care that the competitive types buy the OP stuff and sell it as soon as it's no longer so.
They engage and are you feel like they really care about what GT(insert city name)results are, but only such as to inform the next round of changes to get more people(whom are inclined by rules) to buy more models.

The only way to get me to buy more models is to make new units, new factions or refreshing old range designs. When CW get refreshed I'm on board & God help my wallet if Squats come back


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 17:02:04


Post by: Gadzilla666


the_scotsman wrote:
Spoiler:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Salt donkey wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
The local meta is more important, it's just harder to get data for.


Maybe to the person who’s in it, but it doesn’t mean jack to everyone else who isn’t. So how is it generally more important than the larger competitive meta? as there are a lot more people not in local scene then are.

Right now people are being told all over the place that marines are OP. Will local metas change due to them not being at all OP in the competitive scene? Yeah, it’s just takes longer for them to adjust. We already seeing a lot more “how do I counter DG” type topics popping up all over the internet, and it’s likely we’ll see the same for drukhari. Unlike in real economics, the trickle down economy is very much a thing In 40k.

Which is just as true for tournament play. Not everyone enjoys the spam (and seven of the exact same unit is spam) and meta chasing of tournament play. You shouldn't have to build a cutthroat tournament list to have a chance of winning against a casual loyalist list, but right now that's where a lot of factions are. I don't care if heavy melta rifle Eradicators aren't "meta" in the tournament scene right now. They exist, and can evaporate any but the toughest vehicles from full range. That forces people to leave models they want to play at home because no one wants to pick that favorite model up before it's had a chance to do anything. Having your army choices dictated by the existence of a single unit isn't fun. If you enjoy tournament games that's fine, but it isn't what everyone wants to play.


...except that there are tons of units that can do that out there. I can make a unit of aberrants or acolytes out of the single worst codex (by competitive wr anyway) that can supremely reliably delete any vehicle you've got on the table, just as easily as heavy melta rifle erads.

You don't need a hyper-competitive list to take on an actually casual space marine list. You need a competitive list to take on a competitive marine list. The reason it seems like you do is, surprise surprise, the units that everyone owns from all the starter boxes of primaris marines are basically the competitive marine choices right now. If you actually go up against someone taking a wider slice of the many many many many options in the marine codex, they're perfectly easy to deal with with the fluff-bunniest of lists. i've beaten marines with my "take 1 of each aspect warrior squad, 3 storm guardian squads and an avatar of khaine and go from there" Eldar list, and that's...never not been a joke.

......except you just compared two units that have to get into melee to do the job with one that does it from 24 away. It's a lot easier to screen out melee units than 24 inch range guns. It's not the existence of units that can reliably delete vehicles that's a problem, it's the ones that can do it with little counterplay. I have no problem with normal MMs or Eradicators, as they need to get close to do the job, it's the melta weapons that essentially get around the rules for melta that are an issue.

Agreed on your second point. The issue is that the best loyalists units are widespread and easily available, and therefore seen everywhere. Doesn't change the fact that they're everywhere.


I dunno, I guess I've just played against eradicators enough at this point that I'm so used to dealing with them and it doesn't bother me that much. I play tanks against them, and I've played against the heavy rifle version as well as the normal version.

They show up, turn 2, and generally if you've got a vehicle that doesn't have any kind of additional defenses just straight T7 3+ they kill it, then you kill them. If you do, they don't. The last time I played against them, I had a grot megatank loaded up with rokkits, so like 160 points, big expensive target. Turn 1 it rolled up and killed 3 aggressors, turn 2 eradicators showed up and shot at it, missed twice, failed to wound once, one shot got saved by the invuln, and one shot did 1 damage because of ramshackle, they took 6 out of 9 wounds off and then he had to direct a whole bunch of his longrange firepower into the GMT to finally take it out.

You're gonna lose models in warhammer 40k, and there's gonna be units with antitank weaponry that shoot your stuff. I'd actually rather the units that come down to destroy my vehicles:

-cost a cp to use properly
-don't show up until turn 2 so I get a chance to make some points back with my vehicle
-have T5 3+ instead of a vehicle statline
-lose 1/3 of their firepower every 3 wounds
-have 24" range instead of like 48" range
-have to turn up 9" from a board edge so I can protect really vital assets by placing them in the center and screening for them

Melta doesn't work on suicide units in the 8th+ framework because GW hasn't been able to jam the idea that transports should make units move faster into their brains since 7th. It has never been a thing that worked in 8th in basically any faction, and it was due to get a buff comparative to much longer range, safer weaponry. They overshot by like 5 points with base eradicators, and when analyzing heavy erads initially people didnt realize they were another 5pts, and they bumped their cost up pretty quick. The vehicles that you can actually make the argument eradicators make unusable...were already bad before. High cost low durability mediocre damage vehicles like the quad-las predator, land raider, and big nid monsters.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. To me melta has always equaled: Good at a distance, devastating up close. And those Heavy Melta-Rifles just seem to get around that. But I guess we can't be expecting loyalists to be moving around that much, can we? Maybe gw should just consider some points drops for vehicles without durability buffs and invuls like the ones you mentioned.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 17:02:15


Post by: SemperMortis


 Xenomancers wrote:
Title is inaccurate - marines have not been the boogeyman in 9th except in your own imaginations. The whole time it's just been ... sisters/custodes/daemons/quinn.

Marines just get played a lot. If you compare the play rate with expected win rate (top finish) at tournaments - it is fairly average.

8.5 was really problematic but the majority of the 8.5 rules are busted for all armies. Yall just don't know that cause nearly no one played during that period. (see pandemic)

9.0 marines is a little different. Everything costs more points but a few new units and a few got better. A few strats got better. Errads/Attack bikes are quite good but compared to a unit of quinn troopers -1 to hit and wound transport from a free auto include 9" aura....give me a GD break! It is not even in the same ballpark.


Ah, good ol Xenomancer, never misses the chance to shine. Marines have 50 Tournament Placements out of 161 on 40kstats. And that is without including grey knights or Custards as Space Marines because in my opinion those technically "aren't" space Marines. I would say almost 1/3rd of tournament placements going to Space Marines of one color or another is fairly significant. Some would even go as far as to put them in the same Category as Sisters with their 10 placements, Custards with their 14 placements, Daemons with their 13 placements and Harlies with their 12. In fact, i'll go as far as to agree with Goonhammer which lists Sisters of Battle,Death Guard, Harlequins,Dark Angels and Chaos Soup as the "Top tier" You will notice that Dark Angels are a Space Marine faction Don't worry though, Tier 2 contains 13 other factions, 6 of which are Space Marines of different colors (not including Custards)

 Daedalus81 wrote:

....Marines weren't good from 2017 all the way to Oct 2019.


Correct, just ignore the actual statistics and numbers and that would be a correct statement. But if you do look at the numbers and data in general, Marines in the 2017 LVO (LVO is held in January) Finished 2nd at one of the absolute largest tournaments of the year...if not the largest. In 2018 they finished with 4 top 10 placings. Now, I won't split hairs with you here, but I would argue that 40% of the top 10 belonging to Space Marines means they were somewhat good...dare I say...great? In 2019, the height of the Imperial Knight shenanigans the Marines still managed a top 8 placing. So when you say "Marines weren't good from 2017 all the way to Oct 2019" you mean they weren't the end all be all, best army in the game, because by tournament standards they were doing very well.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

It's more like you're saying,"Space Marines are the best faction in the game right now and are overpowered - well, as long as you play this one specific chapter in one or two specific ways (either leaning fully on Ravenwing or at least halfway on Ravenwing), and every other variation of loyalist Marine is very solid (White Scars, Black Templars) to dog gak (Imperial Fists, Deathwatch).

Dark Angels being top tier means absolutely nothing to an Imperial Fists player who only barely has a chapter tactic.

And no, comparing the various chapters of Marines to subfactions of Eldar or Necrons or whoever is a false equivalency and you know it friendo. There's more variance in how one can play a single chapter of Marine than there is in some entire non-Marine armies. Hate that all you wish, it's still true and as such lumping all Marines together when they are much more different from each other than any other army's subfactions is being intellectually dishonest.

You don't have to try to internally justify your bias against Marines my dude.
Yes...Goffs play much closer to Freebootas than say Ultramarines to Iron hands.... sure...

Also, Dark Angels being good is VERY important to all other Marine factions as well. Why? Because I just played against a beautifully painted army of Blue Dark Angels. A week or so ago I played against a similarly beautiful Green White Scars army that had some very interesting cloaks on instead of the traditional white scars attire....its almost like...Marine players will pick and choose which "faction" they are based on what is good. Weird right? How many units (outside of named characters) do White scars have that Smurfs don't? How many Units do Ironhands have that White Scars dont? there are some for sure, but not many and not noticeable enough to deter anyone from doing exactly what I have seen happen countless times at FLG and at tournaments.

 Xenomancers wrote:
"marines just get played a lot" I explained why.
We really need a real stat accumulation center. looking at all of 40k stats data...its saying there are only 8 iron hands list since the start of 9th...that is obviously not true. Where are you getting these stats?

Yeah, when 8.5 ended a lot of those "Iron Hands" players went on to play whatever the next best Space Marine chapter became.

How many Iron hands did you play against in 8.5 time frame? How many BEFORE 8.5? From the start of 9th edition in 2020 to the end of the year (5ish months) Dark Angels had 34 TOTAL primary lists in tournaments. From January 1st 2021 to the end of March(3 months) Dark Angels had 47. Its almost like Marine players will just randomly choose whatever is the best sub faction of Marines to play. Just to prove the point though, In those same time frames, Salamanders had 51 lists in 2020 9th and have 15 in 2021 so far.

 Blackie wrote:
SM were, are and always will be boogieman in some form. At the moment that form is Dark Angels.
In casual games anything SM related that is at least barely optimized is still very powerful. Which isn't true for many of the other top factions: their effectiveness drops dramatically outside the lists that heavily rely on their cheesiest combos.
The era has not ended at all.


Very true Blackie. How many posters here have called bolt gauntlet aggressors garbage since they were "nerfed"? The damn thing will still earn back its points against Ork boys in less than 3 turns without any buffs, stratagems, auras and without chapter tactics/Doctrines. So those un-optimized aggressors will be damn powerful still.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
yukishiro1 wrote:
Yeah, ironically if hordes actually were good, not just a novelty, a lot of the problems with MM spam would go away.

1) MM is not spammed. 18 Smasha Guns is spam. 3 MM attack bikes is not.
2) MM would not go away, because there will always be people not taking hordes as is expected in a system where multiple kinds of lists are viable.


I mean....its already been covered somewhat heavily but Marines aren't taking 3 MM attack bikes. The last 2 Space Marine lists to place on 40k stats had 6 MM attack bikes and 3 Eradicators and the other list was 3 MM Attack Bikes and 4 MM Devestators.

I don't think there is any real argument from players that Melta weapons in general are under priced right now. A decent comparison would be the fact that a Multi-melta is a 10pt upgrade and gives the Marine 2 S8 -4 D6 dmg shots at BS3. And if the weapon is in half range its D6+2. An ork unit that upgrades a weapon to a Rokkit likewise costs 10pts. A rokkit is 1 shot S8 -2 and 3Dmg hitting on BS5. You could argue that MM's being Heavy vs Rokkitz being assault is at least somewhat part of the disparity but the fact is that Attack bikes aren't impacted by heavy weapon restrictions and Eradicators just use the stratagem to count as not moving if its that important.

Also, I do agree with you that 18 Smasha Guns is Spam. I do want to make a quick point though. 1 Smasha gun on GW's website is $50, so 18 costs you $900 On the flipside of this, 1 attack bike is $34 and you can only have 9 I believe, so to max out those bikes would cost you $306. And 9 Attack bikes (which in my opinion are under priced by 5-10pts) is equivalent to about 12 Smasha Guns.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 17:05:54


Post by: wuestenfux


The question remains whether GW will be able to dig themselves out of this particular hole and if not I can imagine players, who have no desire to play Space Marines, will eventually move onto other games. That is not necessarily a bad thing for the industry.

My thesis is that GW has great competence about Marines (rules, gaming).
However, the competence about Xenos has diminished over the last few years.
You can see this e.g. from the Ynnari rules.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 17:27:17


Post by: yukishiro1


It's not a coincidence that the elf standard bearer at GW moved from 40k to AOS at about the same time that space elves became boring cheap bargain basement trash spammers and space marines started getting all the kinds of tricky stuff that space elves used to specialize in.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 17:28:26


Post by: Insectum7


 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Spoiler:
the_scotsman wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Salt donkey wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
The local meta is more important, it's just harder to get data for.


Maybe to the person who’s in it, but it doesn’t mean jack to everyone else who isn’t. So how is it generally more important than the larger competitive meta? as there are a lot more people not in local scene then are.

Right now people are being told all over the place that marines are OP. Will local metas change due to them not being at all OP in the competitive scene? Yeah, it’s just takes longer for them to adjust. We already seeing a lot more “how do I counter DG” type topics popping up all over the internet, and it’s likely we’ll see the same for drukhari. Unlike in real economics, the trickle down economy is very much a thing In 40k.

Which is just as true for tournament play. Not everyone enjoys the spam (and seven of the exact same unit is spam) and meta chasing of tournament play. You shouldn't have to build a cutthroat tournament list to have a chance of winning against a casual loyalist list, but right now that's where a lot of factions are. I don't care if heavy melta rifle Eradicators aren't "meta" in the tournament scene right now. They exist, and can evaporate any but the toughest vehicles from full range. That forces people to leave models they want to play at home because no one wants to pick that favorite model up before it's had a chance to do anything. Having your army choices dictated by the existence of a single unit isn't fun. If you enjoy tournament games that's fine, but it isn't what everyone wants to play.


...except that there are tons of units that can do that out there. I can make a unit of aberrants or acolytes out of the single worst codex (by competitive wr anyway) that can supremely reliably delete any vehicle you've got on the table, just as easily as heavy melta rifle erads.

You don't need a hyper-competitive list to take on an actually casual space marine list. You need a competitive list to take on a competitive marine list. The reason it seems like you do is, surprise surprise, the units that everyone owns from all the starter boxes of primaris marines are basically the competitive marine choices right now. If you actually go up against someone taking a wider slice of the many many many many options in the marine codex, they're perfectly easy to deal with with the fluff-bunniest of lists. i've beaten marines with my "take 1 of each aspect warrior squad, 3 storm guardian squads and an avatar of khaine and go from there" Eldar list, and that's...never not been a joke.

......except you just compared two units that have to get into melee to do the job with one that does it from 24 away. It's a lot easier to screen out melee units than 24 inch range guns. It's not the existence of units that can reliably delete vehicles that's a problem, it's the ones that can do it with little counterplay. I have no problem with normal MMs or Eradicators, as they need to get close to do the job, it's the melta weapons that essentially get around the rules for melta that are an issue.

Agreed on your second point. The issue is that the best loyalists units are widespread and easily available, and therefore seen everywhere. Doesn't change the fact that they're everywhere.


I dunno, I guess I've just played against eradicators enough at this point that I'm so used to dealing with them and it doesn't bother me that much. I play tanks against them, and I've played against the heavy rifle version as well as the normal version.

They show up, turn 2, and generally if you've got a vehicle that doesn't have any kind of additional defenses just straight T7 3+ they kill it, then you kill them. If you do, they don't. The last time I played against them, I had a grot megatank loaded up with rokkits, so like 160 points, big expensive target. Turn 1 it rolled up and killed 3 aggressors, turn 2 eradicators showed up and shot at it, missed twice, failed to wound once, one shot got saved by the invuln, and one shot did 1 damage because of ramshackle, they took 6 out of 9 wounds off and then he had to direct a whole bunch of his longrange firepower into the GMT to finally take it out.

You're gonna lose models in warhammer 40k, and there's gonna be units with antitank weaponry that shoot your stuff. I'd actually rather the units that come down to destroy my vehicles:

-cost a cp to use properly
-don't show up until turn 2 so I get a chance to make some points back with my vehicle
-have T5 3+ instead of a vehicle statline
-lose 1/3 of their firepower every 3 wounds
-have 24" range instead of like 48" range
-have to turn up 9" from a board edge so I can protect really vital assets by placing them in the center and screening for them

Melta doesn't work on suicide units in the 8th+ framework because GW hasn't been able to jam the idea that transports should make units move faster into their brains since 7th. It has never been a thing that worked in 8th in basically any faction, and it was due to get a buff comparative to much longer range, safer weaponry. They overshot by like 5 points with base eradicators, and when analyzing heavy erads initially people didnt realize they were another 5pts, and they bumped their cost up pretty quick. The vehicles that you can actually make the argument eradicators make unusable...were already bad before. High cost low durability mediocre damage vehicles like the quad-las predator, land raider, and big nid monsters.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. To me melta has always equaled: Good at a distance, devastating up close. And those Heavy Melta-Rifles just seem to get around that. But I guess we can't be expecting loyalists to be moving around that much, can we? Maybe gw should just consider some points drops for vehicles without durability buffs and invuls like the ones you mentioned.
I'll take that a step further and point out the night inevitable "Marines stepping on other factions" thing again, and compare the Eradicators to Wraithguard. Back in the day Wraithguard had D weapons or rough equivalents, functioning as slower, tougher, super-Fire Dragons. The Eradicator's firepower blows them out of the water completely, with double the range, double the shots and wicked damage bonuses especially on the Heavy Melta Rifle.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 17:33:53


Post by: Racerguy180


yukishiro1 wrote:
It's not a coincidence that the elf standard bearer at GW moved from 40k to AOS at about the same time that space elves became boring cheap bargain basement trash spammers and space marines started getting all the kinds of tricky stuff that space elves used to specialize in.


At least they didn't get Squatted.....


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 17:34:40


Post by: the_scotsman


Spoiler:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
[spoiler]
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Salt donkey wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
The local meta is more important, it's just harder to get data for.


Maybe to the person who’s in it, but it doesn’t mean jack to everyone else who isn’t. So how is it generally more important than the larger competitive meta? as there are a lot more people not in local scene then are.

Right now people are being told all over the place that marines are OP. Will local metas change due to them not being at all OP in the competitive scene? Yeah, it’s just takes longer for them to adjust. We already seeing a lot more “how do I counter DG” type topics popping up all over the internet, and it’s likely we’ll see the same for drukhari. Unlike in real economics, the trickle down economy is very much a thing In 40k.

Which is just as true for tournament play. Not everyone enjoys the spam (and seven of the exact same unit is spam) and meta chasing of tournament play. You shouldn't have to build a cutthroat tournament list to have a chance of winning against a casual loyalist list, but right now that's where a lot of factions are. I don't care if heavy melta rifle Eradicators aren't "meta" in the tournament scene right now. They exist, and can evaporate any but the toughest vehicles from full range. That forces people to leave models they want to play at home because no one wants to pick that favorite model up before it's had a chance to do anything. Having your army choices dictated by the existence of a single unit isn't fun. If you enjoy tournament games that's fine, but it isn't what everyone wants to play.


...except that there are tons of units that can do that out there. I can make a unit of aberrants or acolytes out of the single worst codex (by competitive wr anyway) that can supremely reliably delete any vehicle you've got on the table, just as easily as heavy melta rifle erads.

You don't need a hyper-competitive list to take on an actually casual space marine list. You need a competitive list to take on a competitive marine list. The reason it seems like you do is, surprise surprise, the units that everyone owns from all the starter boxes of primaris marines are basically the competitive marine choices right now. If you actually go up against someone taking a wider slice of the many many many many options in the marine codex, they're perfectly easy to deal with with the fluff-bunniest of lists. i've beaten marines with my "take 1 of each aspect warrior squad, 3 storm guardian squads and an avatar of khaine and go from there" Eldar list, and that's...never not been a joke.

......except you just compared two units that have to get into melee to do the job with one that does it from 24 away. It's a lot easier to screen out melee units than 24 inch range guns. It's not the existence of units that can reliably delete vehicles that's a problem, it's the ones that can do it with little counterplay. I have no problem with normal MMs or Eradicators, as they need to get close to do the job, it's the melta weapons that essentially get around the rules for melta that are an issue.

Agreed on your second point. The issue is that the best loyalists units are widespread and easily available, and therefore seen everywhere. Doesn't change the fact that they're everywhere.


I dunno, I guess I've just played against eradicators enough at this point that I'm so used to dealing with them and it doesn't bother me that much. I play tanks against them, and I've played against the heavy rifle version as well as the normal version.

They show up, turn 2, and generally if you've got a vehicle that doesn't have any kind of additional defenses just straight T7 3+ they kill it, then you kill them. If you do, they don't. The last time I played against them, I had a grot megatank loaded up with rokkits, so like 160 points, big expensive target. Turn 1 it rolled up and killed 3 aggressors, turn 2 eradicators showed up and shot at it, missed twice, failed to wound once, one shot got saved by the invuln, and one shot did 1 damage because of ramshackle, they took 6 out of 9 wounds off and then he had to direct a whole bunch of his longrange firepower into the GMT to finally take it out.

You're gonna lose models in warhammer 40k, and there's gonna be units with antitank weaponry that shoot your stuff. I'd actually rather the units that come down to destroy my vehicles:

-cost a cp to use properly
-don't show up until turn 2 so I get a chance to make some points back with my vehicle
-have T5 3+ instead of a vehicle statline
-lose 1/3 of their firepower every 3 wounds
-have 24" range instead of like 48" range
-have to turn up 9" from a board edge so I can protect really vital assets by placing them in the center and screening for them

Melta doesn't work on suicide units in the 8th+ framework because GW hasn't been able to jam the idea that transports should make units move faster into their brains since 7th. It has never been a thing that worked in 8th in basically any faction, and it was due to get a buff comparative to much longer range, safer weaponry. They overshot by like 5 points with base eradicators, and when analyzing heavy erads initially people didnt realize they were another 5pts, and they bumped their cost up pretty quick. The vehicles that you can actually make the argument eradicators make unusable...were already bad before. High cost low durability mediocre damage vehicles like the quad-las predator, land raider, and big nid monsters.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. To me melta has always equaled: Good at a distance, devastating up close. And those Heavy Melta-Rifles just seem to get around that. But I guess we can't be expecting loyalists to be moving around that much, can we? Maybe gw should just consider some points drops for vehicles without durability buffs and invuls like the ones you mentioned.


[/spoiler]

Primaris stuff trending towards having either extreme range or the ability to just turn up in your deployment zone does 100% make them one of the most boring opposing forces to face, I'm absolutely with you there. but I don't think a 55pt (i think) infantry model having a Heavy 2 S8 Ap-4 D6+2 24" range gun is the end of medium vehicles. Vehicles with points costs over 150, basic statline with no T8, no invuln, no other abilities definitely suffer against them...but they already suffered against everything else. Point drops would probably be helpful, but I think ultimately the thing that'll help them the most is the trend GW seems to be taking towards diversifying the kinds of defensive statlines you're seeing represented in the game, and pushing away from T7 3+ being basically every big thing and T4/T3 W1 being basically every small thing.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 17:34:41


Post by: Tyel


Roll on the Ork Codex and Rokkits will probably be 2 shots for reasons. Or damage 6.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 17:44:52


Post by: NinthMusketeer


Afaik the last time the marine boogeyman was dead it came back in an Iron Hands dreadnought...


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 18:28:52


Post by: SemperMortis


Tyel wrote:
Roll on the Ork Codex and Rokkits will probably be 2 shots for reasons. Or damage 6.


4th edition Bolters vs Shootas:

Bolters: 1 shot at 24, 2 shots at 12 but only if they didn't move. If you did move you got 1 shot at 12.
Shootas: 2 shots at 18

9th edition Bolters vs Shootas:

Bolters: 2 shots at 24 or 1 shot at 24 if you move, 2 shots at 12 no matter what. Also 1/3rd of the game you get -1AP on your bolter.
Shootas: 2 shots at 18.

While I sincerely hope Ork ranged weapons get a buff of some kind, I am highly skeptical it will be as significant as DOUBLING the fire power of Space Marine Meltas while simultaneously buffing its dmg output as well. Especially when you factor in the above stats.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 18:31:26


Post by: the_scotsman


my bet would be:

-shoota the same
-big shoota now D2
-rokkit now AP-3

A man can dream about D3 power klaws but I doubt we'll ever see a return to the days when they were actually threatening. THeyll likely just be identical to power/chainfists.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 18:37:35


Post by: SemperMortis


the_scotsman wrote:
my bet would be:

-shoota the same
-big shoota now D2
-rokkit now AP-3

A man can dream about D3 power klaws but I doubt we'll ever see a return to the days when they were actually threatening. THeyll likely just be identical to power/chainfists.



For you non-ork players this translates to

-Shoota still being useless
-Big shoota remaining useless, but on units/vehicles we are required to take them on, they might actually accomplish something for a change
-Rokkit being a significantly worse version of the multi-melta for the same price.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 18:54:23


Post by: the_scotsman


SemperMortis wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
my bet would be:

-shoota the same
-big shoota now D2
-rokkit now AP-3

A man can dream about D3 power klaws but I doubt we'll ever see a return to the days when they were actually threatening. THeyll likely just be identical to power/chainfists.



For you non-ork players this translates to

-Shoota still being useless
-Big shoota remaining useless, but on units/vehicles we are required to take them on, they might actually accomplish something for a change
-Rokkit being a significantly worse version of the multi-melta for the same price.


TIL a rokkit is a 20 point weapon.

MMs are only 10pts when they're replacing a weapon like a heavy bolter, which is 10pts. That's how GW does weapon options now as opposed to in 8th.

Assuming big shootas remain a 5pt weapon, having them be a slightly nerfed version of a heavy bolter would seem to make sense to me. Comparing to a marine heavy bolter, the BS of the model is worse, and the AP is worse, and comparing to a guard heavy bolter, the AP is worse but it's an assault weapon.

I dunno on a shoota. I guess you could make it 3 shots or strength 5 or something.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 19:27:05


Post by: Daedalus81


SemperMortis wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

....Marines weren't good from 2017 all the way to Oct 2019.


Correct, just ignore the actual statistics and numbers and that would be a correct statement. But if you do look at the numbers and data in general, Marines in the 2017 LVO (LVO is held in January) Finished 2nd at one of the absolute largest tournaments of the year...if not the largest. In 2018 they finished with 4 top 10 placings. Now, I won't split hairs with you here, but I would argue that 40% of the top 10 belonging to Space Marines means they were somewhat good...dare I say...great? In 2019, the height of the Imperial Knight shenanigans the Marines still managed a top 8 placing. So when you say "Marines weren't good from 2017 all the way to Oct 2019" you mean they weren't the end all be all, best army in the game, because by tournament standards they were doing very well.


*sigh* You're really reaching here.

Did you forget what those lists were and how soup works? A handful of models cherry picked from marine books backed up by the loyal 32 and/or knights or that revolve around tanks and Bobby does make marines great.

Let's look at 2019 LVO -

Castellan
Ynnari
Castellan
Castellan
Ynnai
T'au
Chaos
Eldar

Better yet here's the whole 2018 season:

Spoiler:


And here's 2019 through September:

Spoiler:


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 19:38:21


Post by: Xenomancers


 Insectum7 wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Spoiler:
the_scotsman wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Salt donkey wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
The local meta is more important, it's just harder to get data for.


Maybe to the person who’s in it, but it doesn’t mean jack to everyone else who isn’t. So how is it generally more important than the larger competitive meta? as there are a lot more people not in local scene then are.

Right now people are being told all over the place that marines are OP. Will local metas change due to them not being at all OP in the competitive scene? Yeah, it’s just takes longer for them to adjust. We already seeing a lot more “how do I counter DG” type topics popping up all over the internet, and it’s likely we’ll see the same for drukhari. Unlike in real economics, the trickle down economy is very much a thing In 40k.

Which is just as true for tournament play. Not everyone enjoys the spam (and seven of the exact same unit is spam) and meta chasing of tournament play. You shouldn't have to build a cutthroat tournament list to have a chance of winning against a casual loyalist list, but right now that's where a lot of factions are. I don't care if heavy melta rifle Eradicators aren't "meta" in the tournament scene right now. They exist, and can evaporate any but the toughest vehicles from full range. That forces people to leave models they want to play at home because no one wants to pick that favorite model up before it's had a chance to do anything. Having your army choices dictated by the existence of a single unit isn't fun. If you enjoy tournament games that's fine, but it isn't what everyone wants to play.

If you go back literally 1 eddition WG had literally had the best weapon in the game...D weapons...It is not fair to compare 9th edd changes to anything 8th eddition right now.

...except that there are tons of units that can do that out there. I can make a unit of aberrants or acolytes out of the single worst codex (by competitive wr anyway) that can supremely reliably delete any vehicle you've got on the table, just as easily as heavy melta rifle erads.

You don't need a hyper-competitive list to take on an actually casual space marine list. You need a competitive list to take on a competitive marine list. The reason it seems like you do is, surprise surprise, the units that everyone owns from all the starter boxes of primaris marines are basically the competitive marine choices right now. If you actually go up against someone taking a wider slice of the many many many many options in the marine codex, they're perfectly easy to deal with with the fluff-bunniest of lists. i've beaten marines with my "take 1 of each aspect warrior squad, 3 storm guardian squads and an avatar of khaine and go from there" Eldar list, and that's...never not been a joke.

......except you just compared two units that have to get into melee to do the job with one that does it from 24 away. It's a lot easier to screen out melee units than 24 inch range guns. It's not the existence of units that can reliably delete vehicles that's a problem, it's the ones that can do it with little counterplay. I have no problem with normal MMs or Eradicators, as they need to get close to do the job, it's the melta weapons that essentially get around the rules for melta that are an issue.

Agreed on your second point. The issue is that the best loyalists units are widespread and easily available, and therefore seen everywhere. Doesn't change the fact that they're everywhere.


I dunno, I guess I've just played against eradicators enough at this point that I'm so used to dealing with them and it doesn't bother me that much. I play tanks against them, and I've played against the heavy rifle version as well as the normal version.

They show up, turn 2, and generally if you've got a vehicle that doesn't have any kind of additional defenses just straight T7 3+ they kill it, then you kill them. If you do, they don't. The last time I played against them, I had a grot megatank loaded up with rokkits, so like 160 points, big expensive target. Turn 1 it rolled up and killed 3 aggressors, turn 2 eradicators showed up and shot at it, missed twice, failed to wound once, one shot got saved by the invuln, and one shot did 1 damage because of ramshackle, they took 6 out of 9 wounds off and then he had to direct a whole bunch of his longrange firepower into the GMT to finally take it out.

You're gonna lose models in warhammer 40k, and there's gonna be units with antitank weaponry that shoot your stuff. I'd actually rather the units that come down to destroy my vehicles:

-cost a cp to use properly
-don't show up until turn 2 so I get a chance to make some points back with my vehicle
-have T5 3+ instead of a vehicle statline
-lose 1/3 of their firepower every 3 wounds
-have 24" range instead of like 48" range
-have to turn up 9" from a board edge so I can protect really vital assets by placing them in the center and screening for them

Melta doesn't work on suicide units in the 8th+ framework because GW hasn't been able to jam the idea that transports should make units move faster into their brains since 7th. It has never been a thing that worked in 8th in basically any faction, and it was due to get a buff comparative to much longer range, safer weaponry. They overshot by like 5 points with base eradicators, and when analyzing heavy erads initially people didnt realize they were another 5pts, and they bumped their cost up pretty quick. The vehicles that you can actually make the argument eradicators make unusable...were already bad before. High cost low durability mediocre damage vehicles like the quad-las predator, land raider, and big nid monsters.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. To me melta has always equaled: Good at a distance, devastating up close. And those Heavy Melta-Rifles just seem to get around that. But I guess we can't be expecting loyalists to be moving around that much, can we? Maybe gw should just consider some points drops for vehicles without durability buffs and invuls like the ones you mentioned.
I'll take that a step further and point out the night inevitable "Marines stepping on other factions" thing again, and compare the Eradicators to Wraithguard. Back in the day Wraithguard had D weapons or rough equivalents, functioning as slower, tougher, super-Fire Dragons. The Eradicator's firepower blows them out of the water completely, with double the range, double the shots and wicked damage bonuses especially on the Heavy Melta Rifle.

WG had D weapons in 7th eddition. Much better than a MM at that time. In fact MM has been utterly useless since 5th edition salamanders.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

....Marines weren't good from 2017 all the way to Oct 2019.


Correct, just ignore the actual statistics and numbers and that would be a correct statement. But if you do look at the numbers and data in general, Marines in the 2017 LVO (LVO is held in January) Finished 2nd at one of the absolute largest tournaments of the year...if not the largest. In 2018 they finished with 4 top 10 placings. Now, I won't split hairs with you here, but I would argue that 40% of the top 10 belonging to Space Marines means they were somewhat good...dare I say...great? In 2019, the height of the Imperial Knight shenanigans the Marines still managed a top 8 placing. So when you say "Marines weren't good from 2017 all the way to Oct 2019" you mean they weren't the end all be all, best army in the game, because by tournament standards they were doing very well.


*sigh* You're really reaching here.

Did you forget what those lists were and how soup works? A handful of models cherry picked from marine books backed up by the loyal 32 and/or knights or that revolve around tanks and Bobby does make marines great.

Let's look at 2019 LVO -

Castellan
Ynnari
Castellan
Castellan
Ynnai
T'au
Chaos
Eldar

Better yet here's the whole 2018 season:

Spoiler:


And here's 2019 through September:

Spoiler:

Nothing I haven't pointed out 1000 times. Why even humor them?


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 19:52:15


Post by: Purifying Tempest


Spoiler:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

....Marines weren't good from 2017 all the way to Oct 2019.


Correct, just ignore the actual statistics and numbers and that would be a correct statement. But if you do look at the numbers and data in general, Marines in the 2017 LVO (LVO is held in January) Finished 2nd at one of the absolute largest tournaments of the year...if not the largest. In 2018 they finished with 4 top 10 placings. Now, I won't split hairs with you here, but I would argue that 40% of the top 10 belonging to Space Marines means they were somewhat good...dare I say...great? In 2019, the height of the Imperial Knight shenanigans the Marines still managed a top 8 placing. So when you say "Marines weren't good from 2017 all the way to Oct 2019" you mean they weren't the end all be all, best army in the game, because by tournament standards they were doing very well.


*sigh* You're really reaching here.

Did you forget what those lists were and how soup works? A handful of models cherry picked from marine books backed up by the loyal 32 and/or knights or that revolve around tanks and Bobby does make marines great.

Let's look at 2019 LVO -

Castellan
Ynnari
Castellan
Castellan
Ynnai
T'au
Chaos
Eldar

Better yet here's the whole 2018 season:

[spoiler]


And here's 2019 through September:

Spoiler:
[/spoiler]

All I learned from this was that the Dark Mechanicus had a codex in 2019, and had a 50% win rate... and none of the props they deserved for being a 50/50 army in the age of the Castellan and Loyal 32.

Going to look at Amazon now and see if I can find this unicorn of a Codex for my friend who has been wanting to do Dark Mechanicus for awhile

Edit: and broken Ynnari... geez, DM was rocking out hard!


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 19:55:33


Post by: Insectum7


 Xenomancers wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Spoiler:
the_scotsman wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Salt donkey wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
The local meta is more important, it's just harder to get data for.


Maybe to the person who’s in it, but it doesn’t mean jack to everyone else who isn’t. So how is it generally more important than the larger competitive meta? as there are a lot more people not in local scene then are.

Right now people are being told all over the place that marines are OP. Will local metas change due to them not being at all OP in the competitive scene? Yeah, it’s just takes longer for them to adjust. We already seeing a lot more “how do I counter DG” type topics popping up all over the internet, and it’s likely we’ll see the same for drukhari. Unlike in real economics, the trickle down economy is very much a thing In 40k.

Which is just as true for tournament play. Not everyone enjoys the spam (and seven of the exact same unit is spam) and meta chasing of tournament play. You shouldn't have to build a cutthroat tournament list to have a chance of winning against a casual loyalist list, but right now that's where a lot of factions are. I don't care if heavy melta rifle Eradicators aren't "meta" in the tournament scene right now. They exist, and can evaporate any but the toughest vehicles from full range. That forces people to leave models they want to play at home because no one wants to pick that favorite model up before it's had a chance to do anything. Having your army choices dictated by the existence of a single unit isn't fun. If you enjoy tournament games that's fine, but it isn't what everyone wants to play.

If you go back literally 1 eddition WG had literally had the best weapon in the game...D weapons...It is not fair to compare 9th edd changes to anything 8th eddition right now.

...except that there are tons of units that can do that out there. I can make a unit of aberrants or acolytes out of the single worst codex (by competitive wr anyway) that can supremely reliably delete any vehicle you've got on the table, just as easily as heavy melta rifle erads.

You don't need a hyper-competitive list to take on an actually casual space marine list. You need a competitive list to take on a competitive marine list. The reason it seems like you do is, surprise surprise, the units that everyone owns from all the starter boxes of primaris marines are basically the competitive marine choices right now. If you actually go up against someone taking a wider slice of the many many many many options in the marine codex, they're perfectly easy to deal with with the fluff-bunniest of lists. i've beaten marines with my "take 1 of each aspect warrior squad, 3 storm guardian squads and an avatar of khaine and go from there" Eldar list, and that's...never not been a joke.

......except you just compared two units that have to get into melee to do the job with one that does it from 24 away. It's a lot easier to screen out melee units than 24 inch range guns. It's not the existence of units that can reliably delete vehicles that's a problem, it's the ones that can do it with little counterplay. I have no problem with normal MMs or Eradicators, as they need to get close to do the job, it's the melta weapons that essentially get around the rules for melta that are an issue.

Agreed on your second point. The issue is that the best loyalists units are widespread and easily available, and therefore seen everywhere. Doesn't change the fact that they're everywhere.


I dunno, I guess I've just played against eradicators enough at this point that I'm so used to dealing with them and it doesn't bother me that much. I play tanks against them, and I've played against the heavy rifle version as well as the normal version.

They show up, turn 2, and generally if you've got a vehicle that doesn't have any kind of additional defenses just straight T7 3+ they kill it, then you kill them. If you do, they don't. The last time I played against them, I had a grot megatank loaded up with rokkits, so like 160 points, big expensive target. Turn 1 it rolled up and killed 3 aggressors, turn 2 eradicators showed up and shot at it, missed twice, failed to wound once, one shot got saved by the invuln, and one shot did 1 damage because of ramshackle, they took 6 out of 9 wounds off and then he had to direct a whole bunch of his longrange firepower into the GMT to finally take it out.

You're gonna lose models in warhammer 40k, and there's gonna be units with antitank weaponry that shoot your stuff. I'd actually rather the units that come down to destroy my vehicles:

-cost a cp to use properly
-don't show up until turn 2 so I get a chance to make some points back with my vehicle
-have T5 3+ instead of a vehicle statline
-lose 1/3 of their firepower every 3 wounds
-have 24" range instead of like 48" range
-have to turn up 9" from a board edge so I can protect really vital assets by placing them in the center and screening for them

Melta doesn't work on suicide units in the 8th+ framework because GW hasn't been able to jam the idea that transports should make units move faster into their brains since 7th. It has never been a thing that worked in 8th in basically any faction, and it was due to get a buff comparative to much longer range, safer weaponry. They overshot by like 5 points with base eradicators, and when analyzing heavy erads initially people didnt realize they were another 5pts, and they bumped their cost up pretty quick. The vehicles that you can actually make the argument eradicators make unusable...were already bad before. High cost low durability mediocre damage vehicles like the quad-las predator, land raider, and big nid monsters.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. To me melta has always equaled: Good at a distance, devastating up close. And those Heavy Melta-Rifles just seem to get around that. But I guess we can't be expecting loyalists to be moving around that much, can we? Maybe gw should just consider some points drops for vehicles without durability buffs and invuls like the ones you mentioned.
I'll take that a step further and point out the night inevitable "Marines stepping on other factions" thing again, and compare the Eradicators to Wraithguard. Back in the day Wraithguard had D weapons or rough equivalents, functioning as slower, tougher, super-Fire Dragons. The Eradicator's firepower blows them out of the water completely, with double the range, double the shots and wicked damage bonuses especially on the Heavy Melta Rifle.

WG had D weapons in 7th eddition. Much better than a MM at that time. In fact MM has been utterly useless since 5th edition salamanders.
Yes Wraithcannons were D weapons, and before D weapons they had some special rules that were similar to D weapons. Not sure where you're going with that.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 20:34:29


Post by: Xenomancers


 Insectum7 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Spoiler:
the_scotsman wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Salt donkey wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
The local meta is more important, it's just harder to get data for.


Maybe to the person who’s in it, but it doesn’t mean jack to everyone else who isn’t. So how is it generally more important than the larger competitive meta? as there are a lot more people not in local scene then are.

Right now people are being told all over the place that marines are OP. Will local metas change due to them not being at all OP in the competitive scene? Yeah, it’s just takes longer for them to adjust. We already seeing a lot more “how do I counter DG” type topics popping up all over the internet, and it’s likely we’ll see the same for drukhari. Unlike in real economics, the trickle down economy is very much a thing In 40k.

Which is just as true for tournament play. Not everyone enjoys the spam (and seven of the exact same unit is spam) and meta chasing of tournament play. You shouldn't have to build a cutthroat tournament list to have a chance of winning against a casual loyalist list, but right now that's where a lot of factions are. I don't care if heavy melta rifle Eradicators aren't "meta" in the tournament scene right now. They exist, and can evaporate any but the toughest vehicles from full range. That forces people to leave models they want to play at home because no one wants to pick that favorite model up before it's had a chance to do anything. Having your army choices dictated by the existence of a single unit isn't fun. If you enjoy tournament games that's fine, but it isn't what everyone wants to play.

If you go back literally 1 eddition WG had literally had the best weapon in the game...D weapons...It is not fair to compare 9th edd changes to anything 8th eddition right now.

...except that there are tons of units that can do that out there. I can make a unit of aberrants or acolytes out of the single worst codex (by competitive wr anyway) that can supremely reliably delete any vehicle you've got on the table, just as easily as heavy melta rifle erads.

You don't need a hyper-competitive list to take on an actually casual space marine list. You need a competitive list to take on a competitive marine list. The reason it seems like you do is, surprise surprise, the units that everyone owns from all the starter boxes of primaris marines are basically the competitive marine choices right now. If you actually go up against someone taking a wider slice of the many many many many options in the marine codex, they're perfectly easy to deal with with the fluff-bunniest of lists. i've beaten marines with my "take 1 of each aspect warrior squad, 3 storm guardian squads and an avatar of khaine and go from there" Eldar list, and that's...never not been a joke.

......except you just compared two units that have to get into melee to do the job with one that does it from 24 away. It's a lot easier to screen out melee units than 24 inch range guns. It's not the existence of units that can reliably delete vehicles that's a problem, it's the ones that can do it with little counterplay. I have no problem with normal MMs or Eradicators, as they need to get close to do the job, it's the melta weapons that essentially get around the rules for melta that are an issue.

Agreed on your second point. The issue is that the best loyalists units are widespread and easily available, and therefore seen everywhere. Doesn't change the fact that they're everywhere.


I dunno, I guess I've just played against eradicators enough at this point that I'm so used to dealing with them and it doesn't bother me that much. I play tanks against them, and I've played against the heavy rifle version as well as the normal version.

They show up, turn 2, and generally if you've got a vehicle that doesn't have any kind of additional defenses just straight T7 3+ they kill it, then you kill them. If you do, they don't. The last time I played against them, I had a grot megatank loaded up with rokkits, so like 160 points, big expensive target. Turn 1 it rolled up and killed 3 aggressors, turn 2 eradicators showed up and shot at it, missed twice, failed to wound once, one shot got saved by the invuln, and one shot did 1 damage because of ramshackle, they took 6 out of 9 wounds off and then he had to direct a whole bunch of his longrange firepower into the GMT to finally take it out.

You're gonna lose models in warhammer 40k, and there's gonna be units with antitank weaponry that shoot your stuff. I'd actually rather the units that come down to destroy my vehicles:

-cost a cp to use properly
-don't show up until turn 2 so I get a chance to make some points back with my vehicle
-have T5 3+ instead of a vehicle statline
-lose 1/3 of their firepower every 3 wounds
-have 24" range instead of like 48" range
-have to turn up 9" from a board edge so I can protect really vital assets by placing them in the center and screening for them

Melta doesn't work on suicide units in the 8th+ framework because GW hasn't been able to jam the idea that transports should make units move faster into their brains since 7th. It has never been a thing that worked in 8th in basically any faction, and it was due to get a buff comparative to much longer range, safer weaponry. They overshot by like 5 points with base eradicators, and when analyzing heavy erads initially people didnt realize they were another 5pts, and they bumped their cost up pretty quick. The vehicles that you can actually make the argument eradicators make unusable...were already bad before. High cost low durability mediocre damage vehicles like the quad-las predator, land raider, and big nid monsters.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. To me melta has always equaled: Good at a distance, devastating up close. And those Heavy Melta-Rifles just seem to get around that. But I guess we can't be expecting loyalists to be moving around that much, can we? Maybe gw should just consider some points drops for vehicles without durability buffs and invuls like the ones you mentioned.
I'll take that a step further and point out the night inevitable "Marines stepping on other factions" thing again, and compare the Eradicators to Wraithguard. Back in the day Wraithguard had D weapons or rough equivalents, functioning as slower, tougher, super-Fire Dragons. The Eradicator's firepower blows them out of the water completely, with double the range, double the shots and wicked damage bonuses especially on the Heavy Melta Rifle.

WG had D weapons in 7th eddition. Much better than a MM at that time. In fact MM has been utterly useless since 5th edition salamanders.
Yes Wraithcannons were D weapons, and before D weapons they had some special rules that were similar to D weapons. Not sure where you're going with that.

Going at it's probably the first time in the history of the MM it was prefered over a wraith cannon and that might change when...Eldar get their 9th edition codex.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 20:51:25


Post by: SemperMortis


 Daedalus81 wrote:

*sigh* You're really reaching here.

Did you forget what those lists were and how soup works? A handful of models cherry picked from marine books backed up by the loyal 32 and/or knights or that revolve around tanks and Bobby does make marines great.


2018: 2nd place LVO list contained 1085pts of Blood Angels. So I guess over 50% of a list is now "A handful of models" . The irony being that even assuming your premise was correct (it wasn't) you still miss the point that in SOUP you take THE BEST you can take that is legal, and Space Marines fit that bill in sufficient force to be considered the "Primary" force in all those Soup lists. So yes, Space Marines did wonderful, they, like every other army in the fething game wasn't as strong as a standalone force as they were a SOUP but that was Gdubz terrible design mechanism that let 70%ish of the game take allies to grab the best from while ignoring the worst. But on top of all of that, you had a PURE Blood angels army in the top 8,

2019: Again height of the Imperial Knights and soup land and yet Space Marines finished in 8th place with a list containing a triple detachment featuring "Space Marines", Blood angels and Papa smurf.

So your original premise which was
....Marines weren't good from 2017 all the way to Oct 2019.
isn't correct. In smaller tournaments there are always outliers and the random list that just completely confounds the other players (i've done this with my old Kommando Horde in 8th). But at major events where the attendees are measured in their hundreds rather than their dozens, its extremely unlikely you bluff your way onto the top tables. And in my opinion, if your army can get to the top 8...hell the top 12 or even 15 at LVO, your army has to be doing ok. It might only have one or two builds but it at least can compete.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 21:47:08


Post by: Insectum7


 Xenomancers wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Spoiler:
the_scotsman wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Salt donkey wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
The local meta is more important, it's just harder to get data for.


Maybe to the person who’s in it, but it doesn’t mean jack to everyone else who isn’t. So how is it generally more important than the larger competitive meta? as there are a lot more people not in local scene then are.

Right now people are being told all over the place that marines are OP. Will local metas change due to them not being at all OP in the competitive scene? Yeah, it’s just takes longer for them to adjust. We already seeing a lot more “how do I counter DG” type topics popping up all over the internet, and it’s likely we’ll see the same for drukhari. Unlike in real economics, the trickle down economy is very much a thing In 40k.

Which is just as true for tournament play. Not everyone enjoys the spam (and seven of the exact same unit is spam) and meta chasing of tournament play. You shouldn't have to build a cutthroat tournament list to have a chance of winning against a casual loyalist list, but right now that's where a lot of factions are. I don't care if heavy melta rifle Eradicators aren't "meta" in the tournament scene right now. They exist, and can evaporate any but the toughest vehicles from full range. That forces people to leave models they want to play at home because no one wants to pick that favorite model up before it's had a chance to do anything. Having your army choices dictated by the existence of a single unit isn't fun. If you enjoy tournament games that's fine, but it isn't what everyone wants to play.

If you go back literally 1 eddition WG had literally had the best weapon in the game...D weapons...It is not fair to compare 9th edd changes to anything 8th eddition right now.

...except that there are tons of units that can do that out there. I can make a unit of aberrants or acolytes out of the single worst codex (by competitive wr anyway) that can supremely reliably delete any vehicle you've got on the table, just as easily as heavy melta rifle erads.

You don't need a hyper-competitive list to take on an actually casual space marine list. You need a competitive list to take on a competitive marine list. The reason it seems like you do is, surprise surprise, the units that everyone owns from all the starter boxes of primaris marines are basically the competitive marine choices right now. If you actually go up against someone taking a wider slice of the many many many many options in the marine codex, they're perfectly easy to deal with with the fluff-bunniest of lists. i've beaten marines with my "take 1 of each aspect warrior squad, 3 storm guardian squads and an avatar of khaine and go from there" Eldar list, and that's...never not been a joke.

......except you just compared two units that have to get into melee to do the job with one that does it from 24 away. It's a lot easier to screen out melee units than 24 inch range guns. It's not the existence of units that can reliably delete vehicles that's a problem, it's the ones that can do it with little counterplay. I have no problem with normal MMs or Eradicators, as they need to get close to do the job, it's the melta weapons that essentially get around the rules for melta that are an issue.

Agreed on your second point. The issue is that the best loyalists units are widespread and easily available, and therefore seen everywhere. Doesn't change the fact that they're everywhere.


I dunno, I guess I've just played against eradicators enough at this point that I'm so used to dealing with them and it doesn't bother me that much. I play tanks against them, and I've played against the heavy rifle version as well as the normal version.

They show up, turn 2, and generally if you've got a vehicle that doesn't have any kind of additional defenses just straight T7 3+ they kill it, then you kill them. If you do, they don't. The last time I played against them, I had a grot megatank loaded up with rokkits, so like 160 points, big expensive target. Turn 1 it rolled up and killed 3 aggressors, turn 2 eradicators showed up and shot at it, missed twice, failed to wound once, one shot got saved by the invuln, and one shot did 1 damage because of ramshackle, they took 6 out of 9 wounds off and then he had to direct a whole bunch of his longrange firepower into the GMT to finally take it out.

You're gonna lose models in warhammer 40k, and there's gonna be units with antitank weaponry that shoot your stuff. I'd actually rather the units that come down to destroy my vehicles:

-cost a cp to use properly
-don't show up until turn 2 so I get a chance to make some points back with my vehicle
-have T5 3+ instead of a vehicle statline
-lose 1/3 of their firepower every 3 wounds
-have 24" range instead of like 48" range
-have to turn up 9" from a board edge so I can protect really vital assets by placing them in the center and screening for them

Melta doesn't work on suicide units in the 8th+ framework because GW hasn't been able to jam the idea that transports should make units move faster into their brains since 7th. It has never been a thing that worked in 8th in basically any faction, and it was due to get a buff comparative to much longer range, safer weaponry. They overshot by like 5 points with base eradicators, and when analyzing heavy erads initially people didnt realize they were another 5pts, and they bumped their cost up pretty quick. The vehicles that you can actually make the argument eradicators make unusable...were already bad before. High cost low durability mediocre damage vehicles like the quad-las predator, land raider, and big nid monsters.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. To me melta has always equaled: Good at a distance, devastating up close. And those Heavy Melta-Rifles just seem to get around that. But I guess we can't be expecting loyalists to be moving around that much, can we? Maybe gw should just consider some points drops for vehicles without durability buffs and invuls like the ones you mentioned.
I'll take that a step further and point out the night inevitable "Marines stepping on other factions" thing again, and compare the Eradicators to Wraithguard. Back in the day Wraithguard had D weapons or rough equivalents, functioning as slower, tougher, super-Fire Dragons. The Eradicator's firepower blows them out of the water completely, with double the range, double the shots and wicked damage bonuses especially on the Heavy Melta Rifle.

WG had D weapons in 7th eddition. Much better than a MM at that time. In fact MM has been utterly useless since 5th edition salamanders.
Yes Wraithcannons were D weapons, and before D weapons they had some special rules that were similar to D weapons. Not sure where you're going with that.

Going at it's probably the first time in the history of the MM it was prefered over a wraith cannon and that might change when...Eldar get their 9th edition codex.
You think Wraithcannons will double their range and get two shots? I won't hold my breath.

But we weren't talking about the Multimelta, and instead the Heavy Melta Rifle, which in the hands of Eradicators is actually even better than a (non-eradicator) Multimelta. It exists for 'reasons'. ($$) Point remains though. Yet again we have a Marine unit that mirrors a Xenos unit in function except is just plain better.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 22:23:47


Post by: Salt donkey


Got to love dakka, where people who barely play the game complain about it non-stop. The fact that somehow people are complaining that marines pre 2.0 were powerful is absolutely insane. Scouts, Bobby G, smash captains. Those where the competitive units marines brought to the table with their 1.0. Dex. There where a few rogue builds that popped up from time to time (usually abusing the above units) and marines had good soup lists during the Wild West index era (again by abusing Bobby G and how broke the game was at that time.)

Anyone who argues otherwise is making logical fallacies to prove a bad point. We can all agree that 2.0 was too powerful, there’s no need to go further than that. If you want to argue something contentious, go join the “are eradicators OP” discussion.

Edit: well looking at this more it appears people are arguing that marines where competitive in 8th before 2.0. That’s true but again they where mainly carried by the above 3 units. My bad for strawmanning that argument though,


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 22:25:13


Post by: JNAProductions


Salt donkey wrote:
Got to love dakka, where people who barely play the game complain about it non-stop. The fact that somehow people are complaining that marines pre 2.0 were powerful is absolutely insane. Scouts, Bobby G, smash captains. Those where the competitive units marines brought to the table with their 1.0. Dex. There where a few rogue builds that popped up from time to time (usually abusing the above units) and marines had good soup lists during the Wild West index era (again by abusing Bobby G and how broke the game was at that time.)

Anyone who argues otherwise is making logically fallacy to prove a bad point. We can all agree that 2.0 was too powerful, there’s no need to go further than that. If you want to argue something contentious, go join the “are eradicators OP” discussion.
So why is "Marines only had one or two good builds, propped up by a couple of units!" the argument, but when other factions have only one or two good builds, propped up by a couple of units, that faction is considered to be doing fine?


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 22:27:16


Post by: Voss


I mean, you started a thread about how space marines aren't a problem any more. Did you actually expect people not to argue about it?


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 22:34:07


Post by: Daedalus81


SemperMortis wrote:
isn't correct. In smaller tournaments there are always outliers and the random list that just completely confounds the other players (i've done this with my old Kommando Horde in 8th). But at major events where the attendees are measured in their hundreds rather than their dozens, its extremely unlikely you bluff your way onto the top tables. And in my opinion, if your army can get to the top 8...hell the top 12 or even 15 at LVO, your army has to be doing ok. It might only have one or two builds but it at least can compete.


You're killing me.

So out of one thousand two hundred and ninety seven games in 30 man ( or more ) tournaments that Blood Angels could not break a 39% WR because there wasn't enough super major tournaments to bring it back up?

I will agree they could be competitive in a very narrow setup. That doesn't make them "good" in the same sense that they are now.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 23:20:18


Post by: Tyel


I think its a whinge in a whinge.

I think you'd be a brave man to suggest Marines were top tier in late 2018->2019. It was fairly clear whole swathes of the codex were terrible.

But we constantly hear how it was woe upon woe. While GK and Necrons (and possibly other factions tbh - Orks for example were massively hyped up for the LVO and well...) were standing right there.

I mean it feels like this thread title. Marines - no longer a bogeyman. Sure - but probably still winning a third or something of tournaments (not checked, don't @ me). Its not as if they've become GSC overnight.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/09 23:25:04


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


A lot has to go wrong before you're as bad as GSC. For what it's worth I think they're paying for the sins of the 7th Edition codex. I'm still calling that one of the most broken codices to have been created.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/10 02:49:05


Post by: the_scotsman


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
A lot has to go wrong before you're as bad as GSC. For what it's worth I think they're paying for the sins of the 7th Edition codex. I'm still calling that one of the most broken codices to have been created.


No GSC player ever asked to be shackled to a mechanic that basically is like "all your gak shows up anywhere you want, and then there's a 33% chance your opponent gets absolutely hosed with zero counterplay and a 66% chance they stand around doing fething nothing!"

Redesign Cult Ambush to be something with actual counterplay and interactivity - I've proposed before a system with the blips similar to Space Hulk, where you get to place blips down on your turn to signal to your opponent that *something* is there and if they get within a certain range you either have to remove the blip or put a unit down that they can target, but if they dont you get to deploy a unit there in your next command phase - and just please for the love of god give GSC decent statlines for their points already.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/10 08:58:43


Post by: Blackie


TangoTwoBravo wrote:


I get the impression you are discarding data that does not fit with your argument. Are you saying that competitive lists will not be successful in random games? There are bad match-ups out there, but that is also true at a tourney. Plus list-tailoring when you don't know exactly what you are facing can be a blind alley of list design. Part of the whole challenge of list design for a tourney is not knowing/controlling what you will face. You can guess and plan for "gate keeper" archetypes, but over-tailor for one and you get punished by another. That is why I do believe that tournament data is important. It needs to be analyzed to become information, but its what we have to work with.

In my little meta (before this latest lockdown) I certainly see Orks with Green Tide, others with lots of buggies and still others with lots of (counts-as) artillery. Indeed, the same guy can and does run all three. Harlies are powerful and draw from a limited model pool, so I am not convinced that there is a massive difference between a "competitive" and "casual" Harelquin list.


I discard data from lists that aren't real. 18 mek gunz aren't real, especially where "count as" are banned or avoided. Even 10-12 are extremely uncommon. Data must be put into context as numbers aren't info: when the numbers are elaborated you get the info. And harlequins are very good in tournaments because not only they have a solid codex but mostly because they're not extremely common, so if among 30 players one or two are harlequins or orks and 15 are SM on any flavour people will still tailor against SM, not the clowns or the greenskins. Which is part of the reason why some lists do very well in competitive metas.

So the grot list can be very well against lots of opponent but if in real life there's basically no chance to play against it, of course I discard those data. 18 mek gunz are just 720 points, but also 18 kits that costs 50$ each and also 18 light vehicles + 90 infantry models to assemble and paint. It's not the same of things like 3x5 termies which are just 3-5 kits to buy and 15 infantry models to assemble and paint. Smasha Gunz have been extremely good since 3 years now, and yet they're still uncommon in large numbers.

And I'm also not sure about the real potential of that list as many players still use 8th edition oriented tables, and it's very counter meta oriented. It may beat some top SM, necrons, etc... lists but all those armies can easily adapt and counter it if they need to. Just stop tailoring against marines. Bring more aggressors instead of eradicators and other melta platforms for starters.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Daedalus81 wrote:


So out of one thousand two hundred and ninety seven games in 30 man ( or more ) tournaments that Blood Angels could not break a 39% WR because there wasn't enough super major tournaments to bring it back up?

I will agree they could be competitive in a very narrow setup. That doesn't make them "good" in the same sense that they are now.


BA couldn't break a 39% WR because half the lists they went against were mirror matches against chapters that had better rules/combos. How many Boomboyz, Snakebites or Blood Axes lists will defeat top Deathskulls, Evil Sunz or Goffs lists? What WR would they have in the competitive scene? Definitely not something as high as 39%.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
the_scotsman wrote:


Assuming big shootas remain a 5pt weapon, having them be a slightly nerfed version of a heavy bolter would seem to make sense to me. Comparing to a marine heavy bolter, the BS of the model is worse, and the AP is worse, and comparing to a guard heavy bolter, the AP is worse but it's an assault weapon.



Which is almost irrelevant since vehicles don't suffer penalties from firing heavy weapons and HB have a 36'' range anyway. A footslogger with HB will likely be fine without moving the entire game, a vehicle with HB will fire like it was an assault weapon, and Big shootas on infantries is something we don't see since 3rd edition, the fact that they're assault weapons really means nothing.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/10 20:35:00


Post by: alextroy


Tyel wrote:
I think its a whinge in a whinge.

I think you'd be a brave man to suggest Marines were top tier in late 2018->2019. It was fairly clear whole swathes of the codex were terrible.

But we constantly hear how it was woe upon woe. While GK and Necrons (and possibly other factions tbh - Orks for example were massively hyped up for the LVO and well...) were standing right there.

I mean it feels like this thread title. Marines - no longer a bogeyman. Sure - but probably still winning a third or something of tournaments (not checked, don't @ me). Its not as if they've become GSC overnight.
Amazingly, marines are actually doing worst than their representation. Over the last 5 weeks, they've been nearly a third of the list but only a quarter of the list manage to go 4-0 in tournaments. They were also only 2 of 11 undefeated list over that period. Collective win rate for the Codex: Space Marines factions was 47.93%.

Space Marines have definitely been dethroned as the kings of Warhammer 40K. Even their best performing supplements (Black Templars and Iron Hands) are low representation factions and getting only 56% win rates.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/10 23:48:02


Post by: Daedalus81


 Blackie wrote:


BA couldn't break a 39% WR because half the lists they went against were mirror matches against chapters that had better rules/combos. How many Boomboyz, Snakebites or Blood Axes lists will defeat top Deathskulls, Evil Sunz or Goffs lists? What WR would they have in the competitive scene? Definitely not something as high as 39%.


Er mah gerd.

First, no. Marines were not the same percent of the meta back then as they are now. According to BCP stats circuit they were 10% of the meta in 2019. They were 22% in 2020. This would greatly reduce the chance to face other marines.

Second, the concept of a mirror match isn't "if I play this army with the same general faction keyword it's a mirror". That isn't how it works. It's in the name - mirror. A sanguinary guard list facing UM dreadnought list is not a mirror match just as them facing DG dreadnoughts is not a mirror match. BA plays differently from mainline astartes who plays differently from SW who plays differently from DA. And even RG plays differently from WS and UM and so on.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/11 00:07:17


Post by: the_scotsman


 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Blackie wrote:


BA couldn't break a 39% WR because half the lists they went against were mirror matches against chapters that had better rules/combos. How many Boomboyz, Snakebites or Blood Axes lists will defeat top Deathskulls, Evil Sunz or Goffs lists? What WR would they have in the competitive scene? Definitely not something as high as 39%.


Er mah gerd.

First, no. Marines were not the same percent of the meta back then as they are now. According to BCP stats circuit they were 10% of the meta in 2019. They were 22% in 2020. This would greatly reduce the chance to face other marines.

Second, the concept of a mirror match isn't "if I play this army with the same general faction keyword it's a mirror". That isn't how it works. It's in the name - mirror. A sanguinary guard list facing UM dreadnought list is not a mirror match just as them facing DG dreadnoughts is not a mirror match. BA plays differently from mainline astartes who plays differently from SW who plays differently from DA. And even RG plays differently from WS and UM and so on.



Purely from the perspective of a statistical average, however, each mirror match between the same faction does inevitably push the winrate towards 50%.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/11 00:12:50


Post by: Daedalus81


the_scotsman wrote:
Purely from the perspective of a statistical average, however, each mirror match between the same faction does inevitably push the winrate towards 50%.


Yes, true. In this case though BA represents an even smaller cross section of that pie ( about 6% ).


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/11 00:31:13


Post by: the_scotsman


 Daedalus81 wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
Purely from the perspective of a statistical average, however, each mirror match between the same faction does inevitably push the winrate towards 50%.


Yes, true. In this case though BA represents an even smaller cross section of that pie ( about 6% ).


if we're still considering BA as its own faction, rather than as Space marines as a whole, then it's not a mirror match anyway.

If we're considering Space Marines as a whole, as in all combined, then I HOPE they're not drastically higher than 50% winrate with that kind of play percentage. That would be an indicator of a real problem.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/11 05:13:44


Post by: SemperMortis


 Daedalus81 wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
isn't correct. In smaller tournaments there are always outliers and the random list that just completely confounds the other players (i've done this with my old Kommando Horde in 8th). But at major events where the attendees are measured in their hundreds rather than their dozens, its extremely unlikely you bluff your way onto the top tables. And in my opinion, if your army can get to the top 8...hell the top 12 or even 15 at LVO, your army has to be doing ok. It might only have one or two builds but it at least can compete.


You're killing me.

So out of one thousand two hundred and ninety seven games in 30 man ( or more ) tournaments that Blood Angels could not break a 39% WR because there wasn't enough super major tournaments to bring it back up?

I will agree they could be competitive in a very narrow setup. That doesn't make them "good" in the same sense that they are now.


I have yet to argue that Marines were OP in 8th or even "top tier". My only argument thus far is that the naysayers like xeno who constantly screamed that the world was ending for Marines pre-2.0 were wrong. Marines were able to field a couple of competitive lists that literally made it into the top 8 at LVO, and if you counted the SOUP lists that were dominating the meta, they were present in a fairly large amount of those. Conversely, I think Orkz were probably at their strongest in 8th edition but even then we weren't able to breach the top 8 even with previous LVO winners running Ork lists at LVO.

Basically, you have people like Xeno who were saying Marines were bottom tier in 8th until 2.0 and anytime I show them they are wrong via Tournament top placements a host of people than falsely assume that my argument is that they are/were top tier in 8th. On the contrary I have stated a number of times that in my opinion, based on their ability to place in Tournaments, Space Marines were mid tier competitively.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/11 06:27:55


Post by: Bosskelot


Yeah, Marines were never really bottom tier in 8th and still managed to post some strong results at the height of Castellan and Aeldari soup tyranny. By comparison you had Necrons and GK who were truly godawful and never really posted strong results at all throughout the edition until 2019 where points drops and PA (for GK) made some impact (along with the Necron builds naturally having some good counterplay to Marines)

Of course this is where I expect some ACKSHULLY person to come in and try to argue that since it was only Guilliman gunlines or RG lists it doesn't count somehow.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/11 11:20:27


Post by: Daedalus81


 Bosskelot wrote:
Yeah, Marines were never really bottom tier in 8th and still managed to post some strong results at the height of Castellan and Aeldari soup tyranny. By comparison you had Necrons and GK who were truly godawful and never really posted strong results at all throughout the edition until 2019 where points drops and PA (for GK) made some impact (along with the Necron builds naturally having some good counterplay to Marines)

Of course this is where I expect some ACKSHULLY person to come in and try to argue that since it was only Guilliman gunlines or RG lists it doesn't count somehow.


I will concede this point to you guys. This is clear and concise.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/11 11:20:58


Post by: Wayniac


Problem with using the larger meta for any kind of discussion is that it's completely degenerate and is nothing but skew lists, so it warps the perception. A faction might do well but if it only does well with one single build that ignores 75% of the codex is that faction really doing well or is it just the outlier that's propping it up? I would argue that while in the context of an international discussion you can't rely on "well at my local store..." but you also can't use tournament data, which is always skewed by very specific types of armies, as an indicator either.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/11 11:23:55


Post by: Daedalus81


Wayniac wrote:
Problem with using the larger meta for any kind of discussion is that it's completely degenerate and is nothing but skew lists, so it warps the perception. A faction might do well but if it only does well with one single build that ignores 75% of the codex is that faction really doing well or is it just the outlier that's propping it up? I would argue that while in the context of an international discussion you can't rely on "well at my local store..." but you also can't use tournament data, which is always skewed by very specific types of armies, as an indicator either.


The lists recently contain much less skew and much more variety.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/11 11:35:24


Post by: endlesswaltz123


You think that DA RW AB spam isn't skew because they throw in a few other units?

Tournament lists generally are always skewed, even if they aren't repeats of exactly the same unit, the units do a similar function. A BA list that contained 90% jump pack units in some variety I would argue is skew, not on the extreme end but they are only using a tiny amount of the codex still.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/11 11:47:40


Post by: Wayniac


 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
You think that DA RW AB spam isn't skew because they throw in a few other units?

Tournament lists generally are always skewed, even if they aren't repeats of exactly the same unit, the units do a similar function. A BA list that contained 90% jump pack units in some variety I would argue is skew, not on the extreme end but they are only using a tiny amount of the codex still.
Exactly. Tournaments by their nature reward you for ignoring most of a book to focus on the "OP" parts. That alone ruins the perception because it's focusing on such a tiny portion of the entire game that, while a minority, is the loudest and most in-your-face aspect. So I'd argue it's not a good representation of anything, let alone a healthy game, if X faction is doing well at tournaments with some netlist since that means those units might be doing well, but the army as a whole might be garbage tier without them. Does that mean the faction is good? I don't think so.

There seems to be a fallacy I've seen both in 40k and AOS that people will say the game and meta are "healthy" if there's a faction variety, while ignoring that those factions ignore a vast majority of the options available to them. That, to me, says that neither the game nor the meta are healthy if armies have only one build that's any good and the rest is trash.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/11 11:52:29


Post by: Tyel


To my mind a skew is when you show only one form of defensive profile to the enemy - such that all the weapons not designed to deal with it are very bad. So if you bring say a mech wall you are making your opponent's small arms irrelevant. If you bring 200+ bodies, you are making their melta, lascannons etc irrelevant. You are asking your opponent "can you deal with this?" and if the answer is "no" you should have a relatively easy game.

Some sneak through occasionally - but I don't think you'd say this is the norm of placing lists in 40k today.

Spending 400 points on attack bikes isn't really any more of a skew than spending 400-600 on a brick+friends of Terminators. Its just a very efficient unit for the points - possibly too efficient.

Ultimately its bad when a book has only one "competitive list" but its much preferable to having none.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/11 12:04:12


Post by: Wayniac


Tyel wrote:
To my mind a skew is when you show only one form of defensive profile to the enemy - such that all the weapons not designed to deal with it are very bad. So if you bring say a mech wall you are making your opponent's small arms irrelevant. If you bring 200+ bodies, you are making their melta, lascannons etc irrelevant. You are asking your opponent "can you deal with this?" and if the answer is "no" you should have a relatively easy game.

Some sneak through occasionally - but I don't think you'd say this is the norm of placing lists in 40k today.

Spending 400 points on attack bikes isn't really any more of a skew than spending 400-600 on a brick+friends of Terminators. Its just a very efficient unit for the points - possibly too efficient.

Ultimately its bad when a book has only one "competitive list" but its much preferable to having none.
not by a lot though both show a distinct problem with the game's design


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/11 13:58:31


Post by: Daedalus81


 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
You think that DA RW AB spam isn't skew because they throw in a few other units?

Tournament lists generally are always skewed, even if they aren't repeats of exactly the same unit, the units do a similar function. A BA list that contained 90% jump pack units in some variety I would argue is skew, not on the extreme end but they are only using a tiny amount of the codex still.


Let's look at some lists for a tournament happening right now with some big names. These are 3-0 going into day 2.

DE
Spoiler:
Drazhar
3x5Wracks
Venom

Archon
10 Trueborns
2x5 Kabs
5 Incubi
5 Mandrakes
6 Raiders

Succubus
Succubus
10 Brides
2x10 Wyches
5 Hellions

BT

Spoiler:
Bike Cap
Grimaldus
Bike Chap
3x5 Crusaders
Apoth
2x Redemptor
10 Assault Termies
5 VV
3 Erads

Orks

Spoiler:
KFF Mek
Bike Boss
12 Boyz
2x10 Boyz
3 KBBs
3 Scrapjets
3 Dragstas
Bonebreaka
2x Traktor Kannons
2x Burnabommers


Chaos (Lannigan)
Spoiler:
Bile
Word Bearers Sorc
10 Cultists

Typhus
2x20 Pox
10 Pox
Putrifier
2x5 BL
5 Shrouds
Blightspawn
Surgeon
Tallyman
2 PBCs

And for good measure two more that are WWL

DE
Spoiler:
Archon
Drazhar
10 Truborn
9 Incubi
5 Scourges
Ravager
3x Raider

Succubus
10 Brides
10 Hellions
9 Reavers

Haemonculus
10 Xtyes
5 Grots

Necrons
Spoiler:
CCB
Chrono
Skorpekh Lord
2x5 Immortals
20 Warriors
3 S.Destroyers
2x T.Stalkers
3 Wraiths
2x Doomstalker
5 Destroyers

Convergence


These lists are :

1) full of variety
2) not lists "seen" before
3) not spam
4) not skew
5) not dominated by a single faction



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/11 14:48:39


Post by: the_scotsman


Those all look like normal, reasonable lists youd see at a flgs and not bat an eye. Some of them are what youd probably see as "themed" like the ork one with tons of buggies, but condemning it as "degenerate" seems ridiculous.

Also, in terms of only taking the best 25% of a dex....theres only so much you can put in a 2k list.

When I look at the worst units in my codex - drukhari beasts for example - I go "welp, these fulfil the exact same role as the mandatory troops I have to take, but do the job worse, and take up space that could go to other fast attack choices that make my list less skewed and better at taking all comers." Is it "degenerate" to not give them a participation trophy for being a thing I can take in the codex?


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/11 16:01:47


Post by: Gadzilla666


This really seems like a "my faction still has an 8th edition codex" problem. Just look at the lists Daedelus posted: all of them, bar the Orks list and a tiny WB patrol component in the Chaos list, are from factions with 9th edition codexes. All of the 9th edition codexes have gone a long way towards good internal balance and allowing for varying play styles. I just hope they can keep doing that.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/11 17:14:39


Post by: Racerguy180


Wayniac wrote:
 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Spoiler:
You think that DA RW AB spam isn't skew because they throw in a few other units?

Tournament lists generally are always skewed, even if they aren't repeats of exactly the same unit, the units do a similar function. A BA list that contained 90% jump pack units in some variety I would argue is skew, not on the extreme end but they are only using a tiny amount of the codex still.
Exactly. Tournaments by their nature reward you for ignoring most of a book to focus on the "OP" parts. That alone ruins the perception because it's focusing on such a tiny portion of the entire game that, while a minority, is the loudest and most in-your-face aspect. So I'd argue it's not a good representation of anything, let alone a healthy game, if X faction is doing well at tournaments with some netlist since that means those units might be doing well, but the army as a whole might be garbage tier without them. Does that mean the faction is good? I don't think so.


There seems to be a fallacy I've seen both in 40k and AOS that people will say the game and meta are "healthy" if there's a faction variety, while ignoring that those factions ignore a vast majority of the options available to them. That, to me, says that neither the game nor the meta are healthy if armies have only one build that's any good and the rest is trash.

For me this shows just how bad of an influence focusing on "Meta" is to the game.

If someone says "damn Harlis are OP" and everything that they can take in any slot is better than anyone else's(point-for-point), yes the faction is OP as feth.
But if in reality it is 1 or 2 units that are better and the list includes only those(+ tax) is that same faction OP?
For those without the "OP" units the faction is far from OP.

Before the words "this unit's OP" leave your mouth, the nerf gun can get whipped out or it become invalidated by the next "OP" codex

Insert any OP faction into the above question and see what it sounds like.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/11 17:41:27


Post by: Wayniac


Racerguy180 wrote:
For me this shows just how bad of an influence focusing on "Meta" is to the game.

If someone says "damn Harlis are OP" and everything that they can take in any slot is better than anyone else's(point-for-point), yes the faction is OP as feth.
But if in reality it is 1 or 2 units that are better and the list includes only those(+ tax) is that same faction OP?
For those without the "OP" units the faction is far from OP.

Before the words "this unit's OP" leave your mouth, the nerf gun can get whipped out or it become invalidated by the next "OP" codex

Insert any OP faction into the above question and see what it sounds like.


Yeah, that's pretty much my point. Meta is bad to focus on because it's the wrong thing. It's a very narrow part of the game, yet has an abnormally large ripple effect because it's also the most visible. How many armies have gotten nerfed to hell because a handful of units were "meta" and OP? How many units that were abused with specific combos by the tournament crowd suffered nerfs and changes that made them worse for everything else? And so on. A faction is not OP if a handful of units are good in very specific (i.e. meta/comp) situations, and the rest of the faction is garbage.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/11 19:03:40


Post by: TangoTwoBravo


Gamers are free to game outside of the Meta. Put the force on the table that speaks to your heart regardless of effectiveness. You totally can.

But if we are going to talk about the Meta then we pretty much only have tourney results to go on. The available data from 9th Edition tourneys indicates that there is plenty of variety at the top tables. The trend of 9th Ed Codexes also seems to show a little more thought to balance than some of the 8th Edition ones.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/11 22:29:37


Post by: Tyel


Its very difficult to discuss balance between someone running say 30 Imperial Fist Assault Marines and idk, 30 Iyanden Rangers and Striking Scorpions. Both armies would seem bad - the reasons for taking them are unclear, their usage therefore likely less than optimal. The result therefore is hard to comprehend. You had a game, stuff happened.

I actually think GW is very slow to nerf armies for "tournament success" - see Knights/Eldar and then Marines 2.0. Its when they see something they deem toxic that they are suddenly off their chair to ban ban exterminate. The two most recent casualties were probably GSC (clearly... abberants were unfair - as would later handflamer spam) and Nurgle Daemons+Thousand Sons. I have to believe someone whinged to GW, they determined a "normal" list couldn't cope, so there might some sad faces in FLGS across the world. The fact they'd made Marines into a complete monster and then let them loose for 9 months or so (interrupted by Covid rather than than anything they did) was neither here nor there.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/11 23:12:42


Post by: the_scotsman


Wayniac wrote:
Racerguy180 wrote:
For me this shows just how bad of an influence focusing on "Meta" is to the game.

If someone says "damn Harlis are OP" and everything that they can take in any slot is better than anyone else's(point-for-point), yes the faction is OP as feth.
But if in reality it is 1 or 2 units that are better and the list includes only those(+ tax) is that same faction OP?
For those without the "OP" units the faction is far from OP.

Before the words "this unit's OP" leave your mouth, the nerf gun can get whipped out or it become invalidated by the next "OP" codex

Insert any OP faction into the above question and see what it sounds like.


Yeah, that's pretty much my point. Meta is bad to focus on because it's the wrong thing. It's a very narrow part of the game, yet has an abnormally large ripple effect because it's also the most visible. How many armies have gotten nerfed to hell because a handful of units were "meta" and OP? How many units that were abused with specific combos by the tournament crowd suffered nerfs and changes that made them worse for everything else? And so on. A faction is not OP if a handful of units are good in very specific (i.e. meta/comp) situations, and the rest of the faction is garbage.


-I'd say probably less than there used to be. GW has been fairly good in recent years about nerfing the elements of an army that actually are overpowered and leaving the rest alone. The only time a whole army truly suffers is when they make a blanket army-wide rule overpowered, which is why I particularly hated the execution of the Marine 2.0dex. It wasn't particular units within the army that were crazy, it was the fact that they dropped new redesigned chapter traits, AND +1 attack on the charge/when charged, AND doctrines, AND superdoctrines, AND 42 new psychic powers, AND 80something new stratagems, which could all. be used. by every. unit. in the whole army.

And they did it all at once, with zero recompense for any other army in the game at the time. There was absolutely 100% no way that was not going to cause massive balance problems, and also no way to walk any of it back without overly punishing the casual space marine players who finally for the first time in ages had a decently competitive army, because it wasn't a handful of broken units that they could bump the point costs of.

The 9th ed method of bumping the stats and abilities of individual units is way, way better. I just wish we didnt have the stupid albatross of needing to add yet another layer of army-wide rules on top, because we couldn't just have deleted doctrines and admitted 'whoops, we dun fethed up' - nope, now we need "necron imperatives" so every necron player can track 12 micro-buffs each turn of the game, and "drukhari blade artisans" so every drukhari player has to separate his wound rolls of 6 out and make their opponent make 2 different save rolls just to slow down the game a bit.

I'm sure we'll all love "ork waagh energies" where the player can get +1 strength on any melee attack roll if the player spins around waving his arms and saying "ooga-booga" and Tyranid 'microbe assault' where enemy units have a debuff dependent on the relative position of the sun as determined by a handy sextant GW will ship out with the codex.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 00:25:02


Post by: BlackoCatto


To me if they can fix the constant feeling that my best isn't as good as their weakest I think it would be better.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 03:07:32


Post by: Eldenfirefly


I feel that Space Marines are still great in that they have an answer to everything. Show me any army, and Marines have the the toolbox and unit variety to build a "counter" list. And in that same vein, you can never be 100% good against marines, because they have such a huge variety that the armies they can build can have very different playstyles and focus.

Take Dark Angels. Green wing, raven wing and deathwing are like 3 different army styles already. And thats just one faction of space marines. Then you have the melee specialists blood angels and space wolves. And the vehicle or dreadnaught specialists Iron hands. And the melta flamer specialists salamanders. There is just such a huge variety out that you can never counter them all.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 16:04:23


Post by: SemperMortis


 BlackoCatto wrote:
To me if they can fix the constant feeling that my best isn't as good as their weakest I think it would be better.


I mean....that sounds like an extreme exaggeration/example but yet again I want to point out that point for point a Space Marine intercessor will beat ork boyz in close combat if they get to swing first.

10 intercessors = 200pts, 25 boyz = 200pts

10 intercessors get 31 attacks for 20.66 hits, 10.33 wounds and against orkz that is 8.66 dead orkz, or likely 9.

The remaining 15 boyz get 45 attacks, 30 hits, 15 wounds and 5 dmg for 2 dead Primaris Marines and 1 wounded Marine, the Nob swings with 4 attacks, 2.66 hits 1.33 wounds and a .44 chance to wound 1 Marine, so likely he is fine.

orkz lose 72pts of boyz, Primaris lose 40pts, 50 if you count the half wound and 60pts if you are really unlucky and the Nob inflicts 1 dmg.

Keep in mind, that is assuming the intercessors didn't blast the orkz with their rifles before charging in. Assuming they did that, you can scratch 6-7 more boys off the list before they even get into CC.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 16:18:26


Post by: the_scotsman


Honestly even that doesn't bug me. Marines are meant to be shock troops, and for the longest thing the whole 'good in combat and good in shooting' thing was just a bad joke. Both a marine and an ork are anti-light infantry (S4 Ap- on both of their weaponry) and the ork is a light infantry unit, while the marine is not.

I'm only annoyed when you look at the comparison between, for example, the comparison between the prime example of "supposed to be really good at long range shooting/bad at melee" unit (Fire Warriors) or when you look at something like Genestealers/Howling Banshees which are supposed to be anti-elite troops that supposedly put none of their points into shooting, but somehow lose in melee to intercessors.

the orks also have an obvious way to win the exchange - get the charge. Or, use one of their units that's intended to be good at fighting marines, like Nobz/MANZ/Gitz etc. Boyz have always been kind of a blunt instrument, and the best counter to them has always been 'have good armor' - which obviously marines have.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 16:29:19


Post by: Xenomancers


 Bosskelot wrote:
Yeah, Marines were never really bottom tier in 8th and still managed to post some strong results at the height of Castellan and Aeldari soup tyranny. By comparison you had Necrons and GK who were truly godawful and never really posted strong results at all throughout the edition until 2019 where points drops and PA (for GK) made some impact (along with the Necron builds naturally having some good counterplay to Marines)

Of course this is where I expect some ACKSHULLY person to come in and try to argue that since it was only Guilliman gunlines or RG lists it doesn't count somehow.

This is what the data shows. You are just willfully ignorant about it. In fact. Even Gman themed armies were still quite low on the totem poll once armies you know...stopped playing out of the index. By comparison...the armies you list that were "truly bad" were incredibly low play rate to the point there is no reason to even mention it. UM will always have a high play rate because they are the poster army for the game. You are spewing a false narrative which Deadalus disproved with hard data. You have no interest in the data ofc - only your false narrative.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 16:33:46


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I'm confused? SM were never top 8 in the meta? What was that whole couple of months when Iron Hands vehicle lists were topping everything? Or when the triple BA Slam Captain with loyal 32 lists were everywhere. Did I just suddenly learn that I experienced a very different 8th than everyone else?


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 16:34:17


Post by: the_scotsman


 Xenomancers wrote:
 Bosskelot wrote:
Yeah, Marines were never really bottom tier in 8th and still managed to post some strong results at the height of Castellan and Aeldari soup tyranny. By comparison you had Necrons and GK who were truly godawful and never really posted strong results at all throughout the edition until 2019 where points drops and PA (for GK) made some impact (along with the Necron builds naturally having some good counterplay to Marines)

By comparison...the armies you list that were "truly bad" were incredibly low play rate to the point there is no reason to even mention it.


So when you have an army with, ohhhh say a 3% playrate but with a high winrate we should just ignore that as an outlier as well, right?


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 17:16:48


Post by: Xenomancers


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'm confused? SM were never top 8 in the meta? What was that whole couple of months when Iron Hands vehicle lists were topping everything? Or when the triple BA Slam Captain with loyal 32 lists were everywhere. Did I just suddenly learn that I experienced a very different 8th than everyone else?

No doubt that for about a 6 month period marines were the top faction in 8th - we refer to this period as 8.5. What is interesting is this period as coincides with covid and those releases that came out after 8.5 marines are equally if not more broken than 8.5 marine armies and these rules are currently legal in 9th edition where space marines 8.5 was nerfed. They are also posting similar win rates...and have been since the data has been collected but...You don't really see a lot of ...."is this the end of the harlequin boogie man" posts here on dakka do you? Nor should you expect it. Most on Dakka hate marines.

pre 8.5 marines of every type were pretty much the worst armies or among the worst in the game. Sub 40% WR. It is an undeniable fact. To dispute this is to dispute statistical data.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 the_scotsman wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 Bosskelot wrote:
Yeah, Marines were never really bottom tier in 8th and still managed to post some strong results at the height of Castellan and Aeldari soup tyranny. By comparison you had Necrons and GK who were truly godawful and never really posted strong results at all throughout the edition until 2019 where points drops and PA (for GK) made some impact (along with the Necron builds naturally having some good counterplay to Marines)

By comparison...the armies you list that were "truly bad" were incredibly low play rate to the point there is no reason to even mention it.


So when you have an army with, ohhhh say a 3% playrate but with a high winrate we should just ignore that as an outlier as well, right?

Low play rate and is losing...compared to low play rate and is winning major tournaments on the regular...There is a minor difference here right?

There is also a difference between low play rate - low win rate - never wins events.

and low win rate - high play rate - rarely wins events.

Not sure why this has to be explained so much...but here - I'll explain it to those that just don't seems to understand this fact. 40k is a game with a random outcome - determined by dice. You roll enough dice you will roll a really unlikely outcome every once in a while. It doesn't mean that outcome is to be expected normally. Meanwhile a bad army like 8.0 crons had so few entries and such low chance they literally never win events.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 17:33:53


Post by: SemperMortis


 the_scotsman wrote:
Honestly even that doesn't bug me. Marines are meant to be shock troops, and for the longest thing the whole 'good in combat and good in shooting' thing was just a bad joke. Both a marine and an ork are anti-light infantry (S4 Ap- on both of their weaponry) and the ork is a light infantry unit, while the marine is not.

I'm only annoyed when you look at the comparison between, for example, the comparison between the prime example of "supposed to be really good at long range shooting/bad at melee" unit (Fire Warriors) or when you look at something like Genestealers/Howling Banshees which are supposed to be anti-elite troops that supposedly put none of their points into shooting, but somehow lose in melee to intercessors.

the orks also have an obvious way to win the exchange - get the charge. Or, use one of their units that's intended to be good at fighting marines, like Nobz/MANZ/Gitz etc. Boyz have always been kind of a blunt instrument, and the best counter to them has always been 'have good armor' - which obviously marines have.


Except Ork boyz are not anti-light, they are the de-facto anti-everything due to the Ork codex having a bit of a MASSIVE internal balance issue. Nobz are just not playable in a competitive environment. 17pts for what amounts to a Tactical Space marine with S5 and 1 extra attack but with none of the ridiculous rules or shooting ability and a 4+ save. The S5 doesn't make them any better vs Marines because for that price point you could take more than 2 boyz. So 4 attacks at S5 Vs 6 attacks at S4 = 0.59 wounds for the Nob and 0.66 wounds for the boyz. The biggest difference is the relative durability between the two units (boyz/nobz) with nobz having that 4+ save they are significantly more durable vs no AP 1dmg attacks, but at the moment the game is riddled with -AP weapons that do 2+dmg on average, which means that 4+ is borderline useless. Meganobz are better but still in my opinion not that great, and realistically, you don't want a unit of meganobz getting into CC with basic space marine troops, you want them going after vehicles and expensive shooting units, because a meganob is almost exactly as durable as a Gravis armored Space Marine.

 Xenomancers wrote:

This is what the data shows. You are just willfully ignorant about it. In fact. Even Gman themed armies were still quite low on the totem poll once armies you know...stopped playing out of the index. By comparison...the armies you list that were "truly bad" were incredibly low play rate to the point there is no reason to even mention it. UM will always have a high play rate because they are the poster army for the game. You are spewing a false narrative which Deadalus disproved with hard data. You have no interest in the data ofc - only your false narrative.


yes, GMAN armies were very low on the totem poll...unless you looked at Top 4 placement. Its important to note here Xeno, when we are talking about "Power level" and tiers, we are talking strictly on the competitive scene, IE power lists. Space Marines did really well in 8th until the knights became broken good, and then they were still good, but only in a support role, usually the loyal 32 and a knight backed up by some smash captains, but again, you still had pure SM lists finishing in the top 8 at Major events with 100+ players in attendance. So yet again, the SM codex was still able to produce tournament winning lists, the difference was the casual gamer could no longer rely on broken units to make his gaming experience easy mode. And yes, SM had easy mode units for most of 8th. Aggressors who could shoot twice is a wonderful example


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 17:34:27


Post by: ccs


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'm confused? SM were never top 8 in the meta? What was that whole couple of months when Iron Hands vehicle lists were topping everything?


That only counts when it supports ones particular narrative.




An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 17:44:56


Post by: Xenomancers


ccs wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'm confused? SM were never top 8 in the meta? What was that whole couple of months when Iron Hands vehicle lists were topping everything?


That only counts when it supports ones particular narrative.



No one says that period doesn't count. It is just a different period. Us experienced players have seen it before from GW. 7.5 was just about as silly. Free transports...entire armies shooting twice...daemons essentially picking their warpstorm table per turn...extremely busted stuff. some of that marine stuff from 8.5 is exceptionally busted but so were the quinns/tau/custodians/daemons from that period too. It is irritating that dakka doesn't acknowledge this because those are the armies currently winning events with said busted rules. Yet here we are talking about the space marine boogieman. Snap back to reality! Space marines were never the boogieman of 9th edition.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 17:51:44


Post by: Argive


 Xenomancers wrote:
ccs wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'm confused? SM were never top 8 in the meta? What was that whole couple of months when Iron Hands vehicle lists were topping everything?


That only counts when it supports ones particular narrative.



No one says that period doesn't count. It is just a different period. Us experienced players have seen it before from GW. 7.5 was just about as silly. Free transports...entire armies shooting twice...daemons essentially picking their warpstorm table per turn...extremely busted stuff. some of that marine stuff from 8.5 is exceptionally busted but so were the quinns/tau/custodians/daemons from that period too. It is irritating that dakka doesn't acknowledge this because those are the armies currently winning events with said busted rules. Yet here we are talking about the space marine boogieman. Snap back to reality! Space marines were never the boogieman of 9th edition.


Wow... the memory people have is so short.. beofore 2.0 dex there was various G man parking lot bs.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 18:01:18


Post by: the_scotsman


Spoiler:
SemperMortis wrote:
 the_scotsman wrote:
Honestly even that doesn't bug me. Marines are meant to be shock troops, and for the longest thing the whole 'good in combat and good in shooting' thing was just a bad joke. Both a marine and an ork are anti-light infantry (S4 Ap- on both of their weaponry) and the ork is a light infantry unit, while the marine is not.

I'm only annoyed when you look at the comparison between, for example, the comparison between the prime example of "supposed to be really good at long range shooting/bad at melee" unit (Fire Warriors) or when you look at something like Genestealers/Howling Banshees which are supposed to be anti-elite troops that supposedly put none of their points into shooting, but somehow lose in melee to intercessors.

the orks also have an obvious way to win the exchange - get the charge. Or, use one of their units that's intended to be good at fighting marines, like Nobz/MANZ/Gitz etc. Boyz have always been kind of a blunt instrument, and the best counter to them has always been 'have good armor' - which obviously marines have.


Except Ork boyz are not anti-light, they are the de-facto anti-everything due to the Ork codex having a bit of a MASSIVE internal balance issue. Nobz are just not playable in a competitive environment. 17pts for what amounts to a Tactical Space marine with S5 and 1 extra attack but with none of the ridiculous rules or shooting ability and a 4+ save. The S5 doesn't make them any better vs Marines because for that price point you could take more than 2 boyz. So 4 attacks at S5 Vs 6 attacks at S4 = 0.59 wounds for the Nob and 0.66 wounds for the boyz. The biggest difference is the relative durability between the two units (boyz/nobz) with nobz having that 4+ save they are significantly more durable vs no AP 1dmg attacks, but at the moment the game is riddled with -AP weapons that do 2+dmg on average, which means that 4+ is borderline useless. Meganobz are better but still in my opinion not that great, and realistically, you don't want a unit of meganobz getting into CC with basic space marine troops, you want them going after vehicles and expensive shooting units, because a meganob is almost exactly as durable as a Gravis armored Space Marine.

 Xenomancers wrote:

This is what the data shows. You are just willfully ignorant about it. In fact. Even Gman themed armies were still quite low on the totem poll once armies you know...stopped playing out of the index. By comparison...the armies you list that were "truly bad" were incredibly low play rate to the point there is no reason to even mention it. UM will always have a high play rate because they are the poster army for the game. You are spewing a false narrative which Deadalus disproved with hard data. You have no interest in the data ofc - only your false narrative.


yes, GMAN armies were very low on the totem poll...unless you looked at Top 4 placement. Its important to note here Xeno, when we are talking about "Power level" and tiers, we are talking strictly on the competitive scene, IE power lists. Space Marines did really well in 8th until the knights became broken good, and then they were still good, but only in a support role, usually the loyal 32 and a knight backed up by some smash captains, but again, you still had pure SM lists finishing in the top 8 at Major events with 100+ players in attendance. So yet again, the SM codex was still able to produce tournament winning lists, the difference was the casual gamer could no longer rely on broken units to make his gaming experience easy mode. And yes, SM had easy mode units for most of 8th. Aggressors who could shoot twice is a wonderful example


The claims made about me in my sig get sillier and sillier every time I talk to you huh.

My point here is not that everything in the ork dex is fine and dandy and units like Nobz do not need buffs. My point is that the fact that intercessors (a unit that can only be armed with anti-light infantry weapons and S4 AP- D1 fists) can beat ork boyz (a light infantry unit) in melee if they get the charge off, doesn't bug me, because I can beat them either by getting the charge off on them myself, or by using some anti-elite unit in my army.

If I play my GSC, all my ostensibly mid-strength good AP "anti elite" melee units get splattered by Intercessors. At least with Orks, if I take my unit of Nobz with big choppas+choppas WHICH I UNDERSTAND IS AN OVERCOSTED UNIT FFS but if I take them and charge them into some intercessors, my 5-man squad takes 4 intercessors down, and the sergeant who survives returns 1 wound.

Meanwhile if I charge a unit of howling banshees, or melee-equipped harlequins, or genestealers into those same intercessors, they kill like 2, then the remaining 3 intercessors turn around and fething obliterate the whole unit in one swing.

It's still not quite balanced, and when your opponent's turn rolls around, yeah, nobz stop feeling like a 22 point unit really freaking quick when they evaporate to a stiff breeze, but at least if you get the tools in the ork army that are supposed to take down marines, and you point them at marines, they take them down reasonably well, generally thanks to the fact that we got a good deal of flat 2 and flat 3 damage weaponry "before it was cool." I am completely 10 billion percent in agreement with you that orks are in need of buffs on basically everything that's not a buggy, ghaz, boyz and mek gunz. Can we finally just nerf mek gunz and buff up everything else, what ork player actually like mek gunz, I own a 2000+ point all grots all the time army and I hate these stupid things, they're just not orky and they cost an arm and a leg.

Heck, intercessors can kill Incubi just great if they get the charge off - doesn't make Incubi not absolutely butcher intercessors for Eradicators-shooting-a-tank levels of points return percentage when they get the charge on them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Argive wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
ccs wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'm confused? SM were never top 8 in the meta? What was that whole couple of months when Iron Hands vehicle lists were topping everything?


That only counts when it supports ones particular narrative.



No one says that period doesn't count. It is just a different period. Us experienced players have seen it before from GW. 7.5 was just about as silly. Free transports...entire armies shooting twice...daemons essentially picking their warpstorm table per turn...extremely busted stuff. some of that marine stuff from 8.5 is exceptionally busted but so were the quinns/tau/custodians/daemons from that period too. It is irritating that dakka doesn't acknowledge this because those are the armies currently winning events with said busted rules. Yet here we are talking about the space marine boogieman. Snap back to reality! Space marines were never the boogieman of 9th edition.


Wow... the memory people have is so short.. beofore 2.0 dex there was various G man parking lot bs.


Please don't compare people being repeatedly and demonstrably dishonest over a period of several years to people with bad memories, it's offensive to the proud traditions of my people, which I would write down if I could just find the dang pen I had a few seconds ago.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 18:07:18


Post by: Daedalus81


SemperMortis wrote:
 BlackoCatto wrote:
To me if they can fix the constant feeling that my best isn't as good as their weakest I think it would be better.


I mean....that sounds like an extreme exaggeration/example but yet again I want to point out that point for point a Space Marine intercessor will beat ork boyz in close combat if they get to swing first.

10 intercessors = 200pts, 25 boyz = 200pts

10 intercessors get 31 attacks for 20.66 hits, 10.33 wounds and against orkz that is 8.66 dead orkz, or likely 9.

The remaining 15 boyz get 45 attacks, 30 hits, 15 wounds and 5 dmg for 2 dead Primaris Marines and 1 wounded Marine, the Nob swings with 4 attacks, 2.66 hits 1.33 wounds and a .44 chance to wound 1 Marine, so likely he is fine.

orkz lose 72pts of boyz, Primaris lose 40pts, 50 if you count the half wound and 60pts if you are really unlucky and the Nob inflicts 1 dmg.

Keep in mind, that is assuming the intercessors didn't blast the orkz with their rifles before charging in. Assuming they did that, you can scratch 6-7 more boys off the list before they even get into CC.


You shorted the boyz a model, but let's drop him anyway and give the Nob a PK, because that's propa.

3 * .5* .833 * .833 * 2 = 2.1

And add the sluggas

25 * 1.167 * .167 * .5 * .333 = 0.8

And since the opponent is unlikely to burn the CP for O/W add on the original 5 wounds. That gives a total of 4 marines dead for 80 points compared to 9 Boyz for 72 points.

If Boyz swung first -- 96 * .666 * .5 * .333 = 10.6 + 2.8 (PK) + 0.8 (Sluggas) = 7 marines who would just almost auto fail morale leaving two or fewer.

Either marines advance on Boyz and shoot and charge and pummel them or Boyz advance and charge on marines and pummel them.

So it becomes a problem of delivery, support assets, terrain, and other factors to see who actually comes out on top. However one wants to view it Boyz are not really in bad shape. The big shootas could use some love though.






An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 18:22:51


Post by: SemperMortis


 Xenomancers wrote:

No one says that period doesn't count. It is just a different period. Us experienced players have seen it before from GW. 7.5 was just about as silly. Free transports...entire armies shooting twice...daemons essentially picking their warpstorm table per turn...extremely busted stuff. some of that marine stuff from 8.5 is exceptionally busted but so were the quinns/tau/custodians/daemons from that period too. It is irritating that dakka doesn't acknowledge this because those are the armies currently winning events with said busted rules. Yet here we are talking about the space marine boogieman. Snap back to reality! Space marines were never the boogieman of 9th edition.

Xenos I love you man, sometimes you are just having a bad day and need something completely ridiculous to make you smile and here you are day after day

Can you name me another faction which has swept all top 4 placings in a GT or Major? How about any faction that has taken 3 out of 4?



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 18:24:00


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Daedalus81 wrote:
[7 marines who would just almost auto fail morale leaving two or fewer.


To be fair, those two marines have more attacks than Jain Zar (way more if they're charged or charge), as many bullets and better saves than a Dire Avengers squad (if they're armed with auto-bolt rifles), and as many wounds as most default HQ models.

It's not like 2 intercessors is ignorable, unlike 2 guardsmen or 2 boys.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 18:26:18


Post by: Daedalus81


SemperMortis wrote:
Xenos I love you man, sometimes you are just having a bad day and need something completely ridiculous to make you smile and here you are day after day

Can you name me another faction which has swept all top 4 placings in a GT or Major? How about any faction that has taken 3 out of 4?



https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2019/02/10/introducing-your-2019-las-vegas-open-top-8-players/


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 18:32:11


Post by: Xenomancers


 Argive wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
ccs wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'm confused? SM were never top 8 in the meta? What was that whole couple of months when Iron Hands vehicle lists were topping everything?


That only counts when it supports ones particular narrative.



No one says that period doesn't count. It is just a different period. Us experienced players have seen it before from GW. 7.5 was just about as silly. Free transports...entire armies shooting twice...daemons essentially picking their warpstorm table per turn...extremely busted stuff. some of that marine stuff from 8.5 is exceptionally busted but so were the quinns/tau/custodians/daemons from that period too. It is irritating that dakka doesn't acknowledge this because those are the armies currently winning events with said busted rules. Yet here we are talking about the space marine boogieman. Snap back to reality! Space marines were never the boogieman of 9th edition.


Wow... the memory people have is so short.. beofore 2.0 dex there was various G man parking lot bs.
If that list was actually good... why would it struggle a castellan knight? Reroll all wounds is literally the hardest counter to knights you can have. Yet...it stood no chance against knights because that list has 0 durability. As in it is not durable at all. Like...do you get that marine units did not even get army traits on anything but infantry until 8.5? So you are running a parking lot without army traits. You get that - that is...not good right?




Automatically Appended Next Post:
SemperMortis wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:

No one says that period doesn't count. It is just a different period. Us experienced players have seen it before from GW. 7.5 was just about as silly. Free transports...entire armies shooting twice...daemons essentially picking their warpstorm table per turn...extremely busted stuff. some of that marine stuff from 8.5 is exceptionally busted but so were the quinns/tau/custodians/daemons from that period too. It is irritating that dakka doesn't acknowledge this because those are the armies currently winning events with said busted rules. Yet here we are talking about the space marine boogieman. Snap back to reality! Space marines were never the boogieman of 9th edition.

Xenos I love you man, sometimes you are just having a bad day and need something completely ridiculous to make you smile and here you are day after day

Can you name me another faction which has swept all top 4 placings in a GT or Major? How about any faction that has taken 3 out of 4?


What are you refereeing to? 8.5 iron hands did that...do you see me denying that? More than anything marines suffer from getting their rules first typically. Which both makes them the best and worst in literally every edition due to power creep. At least since the 7th edition blueprint came out.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 18:41:13


Post by: SemperMortis


 Daedalus81 wrote:

You shorted the boyz a model, but let's drop him anyway and give the Nob a PK, because that's propa.

3 * .5* .833 * .833 * 2 = 2.1

And add the sluggas

25 * 1.167 * .167 * .5 * .333 = 0.8

And since the opponent is unlikely to burn the CP for O/W add on the original 5 wounds. That gives a total of 4 marines dead for 80 points compared to 9 Boyz for 72 points.

If Boyz swung first -- 96 * .666 * .5 * .333 = 10.6 + 2.8 (PK) + 0.8 (Sluggas) = 7 marines who would just almost auto fail morale leaving two or fewer.

Either marines advance on Boyz and shoot and charge and pummel them or Boyz advance and charge on marines and pummel them.

So it becomes a problem of delivery, support assets, terrain, and other factors to see who actually comes out on top. However one wants to view it Boyz are not really in bad shape. The big shootas could use some love though.


Nope, I added the extra boy in as a nob and calculated his dmg potential as well because im amazing 15 boyz + 1 nob = 16 + 9 dead boyz = 25 = 200pts I didn't give the Nob any weapon upgrades because i was trying to keep the math exactly even at 200 vs 200pts. If you add in a PK you give the Orkz a 5% advantage in points over the Marines and there isn't a comparable upgrade to give the Intercessors to even it out.

The one mistake I did make was I forgot to factor in the Sgt's Free SM Chainsword which ups his attacks by 1 and gives his attacks -1AP so no saves allowed. So it would be 27 normal attacks, 18 hits, 9 wounds and 7.5 dead boyz from the Intercessors and the Sgt would get 4 attacks, 2.66 hits, 1.33 wounds for 1.33 dead Orkz, so it would be about 8.83 dead orkz, or still, basically 9.

I do want to point out though that I didn't allow the Marines to shoot even once at the Orkz, even though with a 30' range its basically impossible barring "Da Jump" or Tellyporta strike for the Intercessors to not at least get 1 shooting phase in against the boyz. And 10 Intercessors plinking away at boyz = 6-7 dead orkz in 1 turn.

Also, the premise was that Intercessors can beat ork boyz in CC if they get the charge off. I'm well aware that if boyz get the charge off they come out on top usually, especially if they can keep their numbers over 20 (dumbest buff in the game).





Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
Xenos I love you man, sometimes you are just having a bad day and need something completely ridiculous to make you smile and here you are day after day

Can you name me another faction which has swept all top 4 placings in a GT or Major? How about any faction that has taken 3 out of 4?



https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2019/02/10/introducing-your-2019-las-vegas-open-top-8-players/


That was 8th we were talking 9th.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Xenomancers wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:

Space marines were never the boogieman of 9th edition.

Xenos I love you man, sometimes you are just having a bad day and need something completely ridiculous to make you smile and here you are day after day

Can you name me another faction which has swept all top 4 placings in a GT or Major? How about any faction that has taken 3 out of 4?


What are you refereeing to? 8.5 iron hands did that...do you see me denying that? More than anything marines suffer from getting their rules first typically. Which both makes them the best and worst in literally every edition due to power creep. At least since the 7th edition blueprint came out.


I highlighted what I was referring to since you and daed seemed confused.

And I just want to reiterate this. At no point, literally NO POINT were Space Marines ever "worst" in ...god I can't even remember when. Definitely since 4th edition. You can sit here and go "but meh win/loss ratio!" until you are blue in the face. The WORST faction CAN NOT PLACE at majors and GTs on a regular basis and be considered the WORST faction in the game.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 18:56:01


Post by: Xenomancers


You are in fact wrong. The worst army can win events if you just keep trying. Any army wins if it rolls hot or its opponents roll like dog. When it happens it is a huge outlier and it is clear from that data that it shouldn't happen often and it doesn't. Being as marines are the most played faction (by a long shot) they are going to have the most outliers as well. Cause in the end - we are only looking at the end result with tournament results.

This is also. Undisputable. Would you seriously argue that an army with a 40% WR is good? LOL? Come on I wanna see you say it.

BTW...We were talking 8th - 8.5 - and 9th. All at once. You have to read the context of all the discussion.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 19:04:12


Post by: ccs


 Xenomancers wrote:
ccs wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'm confused? SM were never top 8 in the meta? What was that whole couple of months when Iron Hands vehicle lists were topping everything?


That only counts when it supports ones particular narrative.



No one says that period doesn't count. It is just a different period. Us experienced players have seen it before from GW. 7.5 was just about as silly. Free transports...entire armies shooting twice...daemons essentially picking their warpstorm table per turn...extremely busted stuff. some of that marine stuff from 8.5 is exceptionally busted but so were the quinns/tau/custodians/daemons from that period too. It is irritating that dakka doesn't acknowledge this because those are the armies currently winning events with said busted rules. Yet here we are talking about the space marine boogieman. Snap back to reality! Space marines were never the boogieman of 9th edition.


Ooh, struck a nerve, did I? That was mostly a joke. but....

As to your claim? bs.
I've read plenty of threads on this very site where people have claimed everything/anything, picked & chose their stats/examples, conveniently ignored things to make their point, demonstrated astoundingly bad math skills, and said contradictory things in different threads.
And then there's the gibberish I hear at the local shops.
Someone will make the claim.

"Us experienced players"~~~ Yup, been doing this awhile. I've seen decades worth of GW rules wonkiness myself. More than some of you "experienced players" I bet.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 19:10:22


Post by: Xenomancers


ccs wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
ccs wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'm confused? SM were never top 8 in the meta? What was that whole couple of months when Iron Hands vehicle lists were topping everything?


That only counts when it supports ones particular narrative.



No one says that period doesn't count. It is just a different period. Us experienced players have seen it before from GW. 7.5 was just about as silly. Free transports...entire armies shooting twice...daemons essentially picking their warpstorm table per turn...extremely busted stuff. some of that marine stuff from 8.5 is exceptionally busted but so were the quinns/tau/custodians/daemons from that period too. It is irritating that dakka doesn't acknowledge this because those are the armies currently winning events with said busted rules. Yet here we are talking about the space marine boogieman. Snap back to reality! Space marines were never the boogieman of 9th edition.


Ooh, struck a nerve, did I? That was mostly a joke. but....

As to your claim? bs.
I've read plenty of threads on this very site where people have claimed everything/anything, picked & chose their stats/examples, conveniently ignored things to make their point, demonstrated astoundingly bad math skills, and said contradictory things in different threads.
And then there's the gibberish I hear at the local shops.
Someone will make the claim.

"Us experienced players"~~~ Yup, been doing this awhile. I've seen decades worth of GW rules wonkiness myself. More than some of you "experienced players" I bet.

What nerve did you strike? Maybe you imagine I am fuming or something but I am actually elated.

What am I ignoring to make my point? Bad math skills? Explain pls.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 19:17:43


Post by: Daedalus81


SemperMortis wrote:
That was 8th we were talking 9th.


Ok fair, but that's a pretty limited window during a pandemic for those results.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 19:23:38


Post by: Cornishman


SemperMortis wrote:
I didn't give the Nob any weapon upgrades because i was trying to keep the math exactly even at 200 vs 200pts. If you add in a PK you give the Orkz a 5% advantage in points over the Marines and there isn't a comparable upgrade to give the Intercessors to even it out.


Now if only an intercessor sergeant had a 10 pt weapon option between a powersword and thunder hammer... something less like a claw and more like a 'hand'...

A big 'if' in the analysis is assuming that you can get 30 odd orks close enough to the unit so that all of them can attack


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 19:25:35


Post by: Daedalus81


Cornishman wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
I didn't give the Nob any weapon upgrades because i was trying to keep the math exactly even at 200 vs 200pts. If you add in a PK you give the Orkz a 5% advantage in points over the Marines and there isn't a comparable upgrade to give the Intercessors to even it out.


Now if only an intercessor sergeant had a 10 pt weapon option between a powersword and thunder hammer... something less like a claw and more like a 'hand'...

A big 'if' in the analysis is assuming that you can get 30 odd orks close enough to the unit so that all of them can attack


Against 10 marines? Not terribly hard. 5 is a different story.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 20:08:42


Post by: Cornishman


 Daedalus81 wrote:
Cornishman wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
I didn't give the Nob any weapon upgrades because i was trying to keep the math exactly even at 200 vs 200pts. If you add in a PK you give the Orkz a 5% advantage in points over the Marines and there isn't a comparable upgrade to give the Intercessors to even it out.


Now if only an intercessor sergeant had a 10 pt weapon option between a powersword and thunder hammer... something less like a claw and more like a 'hand'...

A big 'if' in the analysis is assuming that you can get 30 odd orks close enough to the unit so that all of them can attack


Against 10 marines? Not terribly hard. 5 is a different story.


How so?

The changes for the fight phase mean it's fighting 2 tightly packed rows. 30 orks = 15 orks front row, 15 second.

With the 9E unit coherency rules (as the squad in>5 each model has to be within 2" of at least 2 other models from the unit) those 10 intercessors could easily be in 2 rows of 5 in quite tightly packed group as opposed to a single row of 10 that just meets the coherency requirements.

I don't see how 10 intercessors automatically presents a much different layout of models for the orks to engage with than that a squad of 5.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 20:17:37


Post by: Xenomancers


Cornishman wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
Cornishman wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
I didn't give the Nob any weapon upgrades because i was trying to keep the math exactly even at 200 vs 200pts. If you add in a PK you give the Orkz a 5% advantage in points over the Marines and there isn't a comparable upgrade to give the Intercessors to even it out.


Now if only an intercessor sergeant had a 10 pt weapon option between a powersword and thunder hammer... something less like a claw and more like a 'hand'...

A big 'if' in the analysis is assuming that you can get 30 odd orks close enough to the unit so that all of them can attack


Against 10 marines? Not terribly hard. 5 is a different story.


How so?

The changes for the fight phase mean it's fighting 2 tightly packed rows. 30 orks = 15 orks front row, 15 second.

With the 9E unit coherency rules (as the squad in>5 each model has to be within 2" of at least 2 other models from the unit) those 10 intercessors could easily be in 2 rows of 5 in quite tightly packed group as opposed to a single row of 10 that just meets the coherency requirements.

I don't see how 10 intercessors automatically presents a much different layout of models for the orks to engage with than that a squad of 5.

Marines vs ork boys might be kind of a draw but how do ork boys do when engaging other hordes in melee? I feel like their 4 attacks each for 8 points probably goes father than the marines 3 str 4 attacks for 20 points. Oh yeah...because it does. Seems very much to be working as intended when the 200 point elite infantry squad meets a unit they are literally designed to kill and sustain.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 20:41:41


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


Personally I just Boyz to have W2 so they feel tougher. They'd not need a giant point increase either!


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 20:45:05


Post by: Xenomancers


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Personally I just Boyz to have W2 so they feel tougher. They'd not need a giant point increase either!

They'd need to go to about 12ish points for 2 wounds.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 21:03:41


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Xenomancers wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Personally I just Boyz to have W2 so they feel tougher. They'd not need a giant point increase either!

They'd need to go to about 12ish points for 2 wounds.

Not with the non-armor save they got. 10 points is reasonable for a singular T4 6+ W2 model. That's 5 points per wound.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 21:06:53


Post by: JNAProductions


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Personally I just Boyz to have W2 so they feel tougher. They'd not need a giant point increase either!

They'd need to go to about 12ish points for 2 wounds.

Not with the non-armor save they got. 10 points is reasonable for a singular T4 6+ W2 model. That's 5 points per wound.
And is still a 25% increase-more than Marines had for their second wound.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 21:26:02


Post by: Bosskelot


 Xenomancers wrote:
 Bosskelot wrote:
Yeah, Marines were never really bottom tier in 8th and still managed to post some strong results at the height of Castellan and Aeldari soup tyranny. By comparison you had Necrons and GK who were truly godawful and never really posted strong results at all throughout the edition until 2019 where points drops and PA (for GK) made some impact (along with the Necron builds naturally having some good counterplay to Marines)

Of course this is where I expect some ACKSHULLY person to come in and try to argue that since it was only Guilliman gunlines or RG lists it doesn't count somehow.

This is what the data shows. You are just willfully ignorant about it. In fact. Even Gman themed armies were still quite low on the totem poll once armies you know...stopped playing out of the index. By comparison...the armies you list that were "truly bad" were incredibly low play rate to the point there is no reason to even mention it. UM will always have a high play rate because they are the poster army for the game. You are spewing a false narrative which Deadalus disproved with hard data. You have no interest in the data ofc - only your false narrative.


They won tournaments and placed highly even deep into 2018.

I've made endless posts about how winrate alone is misleading and one of the reasons for that is prevalence. More players = more mirror matchups, more players also = a higher percentage of bad players piloting the faction. All of these serve to drag an absolute winrate down. On the flipside we have Necrons after their 9th codex drop where for a while they were sitting at a 65% winrate.... and yet were winning 0 events and even failing to dominate top 4's or top 10's. They were considered "high" tier but nowhere near top despite having at one point a higher winrate than any army in the game because at the end of the day it doesn't matter what your winrate is if you fail to actually win events or place highly.

The fact is, during 8th and long after many codexes were out, plenty of good players were taking Marine armies to events and going 5-0 or 4-1 or 4-2. You wanna know why those other armies had a low play rate? Because they weren't any fething good. Lawrence Baker was the only committed GK player and he only ever managed to win a heavily narrative-focused tournament with them (or it may have been someone else, regardless some GK list won No Retreat 2018). For actual GT's and majors he was playing Drukhari and left the GK on the shelf until their PA release.

Granted this does not mean that Marines were a tip top tier army during 2018 and the first half of 2019, but they certainly were not the worst.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 22:06:34


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 JNAProductions wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Personally I just Boyz to have W2 so they feel tougher. They'd not need a giant point increase either!

They'd need to go to about 12ish points for 2 wounds.

Not with the non-armor save they got. 10 points is reasonable for a singular T4 6+ W2 model. That's 5 points per wound.
And is still a 25% increase-more than Marines had for their second wound.

Yeah and if a model that was 2 points was given a second wound and raised to 4 points that's a 100% point increase. Your point is what?


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 22:10:32


Post by: JNAProductions


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Personally I just Boyz to have W2 so they feel tougher. They'd not need a giant point increase either!

They'd need to go to about 12ish points for 2 wounds.

Not with the non-armor save they got. 10 points is reasonable for a singular T4 6+ W2 model. That's 5 points per wound.
And is still a 25% increase-more than Marines had for their second wound.

Yeah and if a model that was 2 points was given a second wound and raised to 4 points that's a 100% point increase. Your point is what?
That Marines underpayed for their second wound.

I don't think bumping an Ork by 25% or even possibly more for a second wound would be unwarranted-I do think that Marines payed too little for their second wound, since while it's not a straight 100% durability buff, it's still a VERY significant increase.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 22:58:02


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 JNAProductions wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Personally I just Boyz to have W2 so they feel tougher. They'd not need a giant point increase either!

They'd need to go to about 12ish points for 2 wounds.

Not with the non-armor save they got. 10 points is reasonable for a singular T4 6+ W2 model. That's 5 points per wound.
And is still a 25% increase-more than Marines had for their second wound.

Yeah and if a model that was 2 points was given a second wound and raised to 4 points that's a 100% point increase. Your point is what?
That Marines underpayed for their second wound.

I don't think bumping an Ork by 25% or even possibly more for a second wound would be unwarranted-I do think that Marines payed too little for their second wound, since while it's not a straight 100% durability buff, it's still a VERY significant increase.

You're going under the assumption that Intercessors are some magically durable unit at their current price point. Manlet Marines getting the W2 for the small increase was fine simply because they were already so close in price to begin with. If Intercessors aren't super magical (and they aren't), the Tactical Marine being only a couple points cheaper is fine.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 23:08:22


Post by: Argive


 Bosskelot wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 Bosskelot wrote:
Yeah, Marines were never really bottom tier in 8th and still managed to post some strong results at the height of Castellan and Aeldari soup tyranny. By comparison you had Necrons and GK who were truly godawful and never really posted strong results at all throughout the edition until 2019 where points drops and PA (for GK) made some impact (along with the Necron builds naturally having some good counterplay to Marines)

Of course this is where I expect some ACKSHULLY person to come in and try to argue that since it was only Guilliman gunlines or RG lists it doesn't count somehow.

This is what the data shows. You are just willfully ignorant about it. In fact. Even Gman themed armies were still quite low on the totem poll once armies you know...stopped playing out of the index. By comparison...the armies you list that were "truly bad" were incredibly low play rate to the point there is no reason to even mention it. UM will always have a high play rate because they are the poster army for the game. You are spewing a false narrative which Deadalus disproved with hard data. You have no interest in the data ofc - only your false narrative.


They won tournaments and placed highly even deep into 2018.

I've made endless posts about how winrate alone is misleading and one of the reasons for that is prevalence. More players = more mirror matchups, more players also = a higher percentage of bad players piloting the faction. All of these serve to drag an absolute winrate down. On the flipside we have Necrons after their 9th codex drop where for a while they were sitting at a 65% winrate.... and yet were winning 0 events and even failing to dominate top 4's or top 10's. They were considered "high" tier but nowhere near top despite having at one point a higher winrate than any army in the game because at the end of the day it doesn't matter what your winrate is if you fail to actually win events or place highly.

The fact is, during 8th and long after many codexes were out, plenty of good players were taking Marine armies to events and going 5-0 or 4-1 or 4-2. You wanna know why those other armies had a low play rate? Because they weren't any fething good. Lawrence Baker was the only committed GK player and he only ever managed to win a heavily narrative-focused tournament with them (or it may have been someone else, regardless some GK list won No Retreat 2018). For actual GT's and majors he was playing Drukhari and left the GK on the shelf until their PA release.

Granted this does not mean that Marines were a tip top tier army during 2018 and the first half of 2019, but they certainly were not the worst.


You cant reason with these people. To them Marines were/are trash tier no matter what. Unless.. The only thing that would count as OP/strong is if the game ends as soon as the minatures are put on the table and you say "haha! My marines are more powerful than anything ever anywhere haha! I win! haha" and the other person agrees and auto concedes because that's a rule.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 23:12:35


Post by: Galas


9 point ork boyz with 2 wounds feel fine. The 6+ save is like not having a save. The problem would be with the 5++ mek shields you could give them, of course.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 23:29:52


Post by: Charistoph


I can make Space Marines trash tier in one move: start investing in them. It seems to work everywhere else.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/12 23:39:42


Post by: Daedalus81


I'm pretty sure that giving a 30 man horde W2 would be one of the more short-sighted blunders you could make...

D2 guns don't have that many shots.

660 points ( 600 as per Galas ) will get you 120 5++/6+++ wounds ( 1 mek per 2 hordes & snakebites ).

10 marines would kill less than 2 boyz per round of shooting. 6 flamer aggs with max shots would kill... 10.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 00:49:46


Post by: Galas


Yeah. As I said, 9 point 2 wound models with a 5 invul and a 6 FNP would be a problem. But a 2w T4 6+sv model would not.

At that tougthness and save level, even with 1 damage weapons you can reliably kill them. You don't need two damage weapons.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 04:47:10


Post by: SemperMortis


Cornishman wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
I didn't give the Nob any weapon upgrades because i was trying to keep the math exactly even at 200 vs 200pts. If you add in a PK you give the Orkz a 5% advantage in points over the Marines and there isn't a comparable upgrade to give the Intercessors to even it out.


Now if only an intercessor sergeant had a 10 pt weapon option between a powersword and thunder hammer... something less like a claw and more like a 'hand'...

A big 'if' in the analysis is assuming that you can get 30 odd orks close enough to the unit so that all of them can attack


10pt Powerfist is actually a downgrade for those Marines when fighting Orkz. So why would I skew the numbers by buffing the orkz with a powerklaw and gimp the marines with a Powerfist? Sgt with PF gets 3 attacks instead of 4 and hits on 4s instead of 3s. The benefit to strength doesn't even out the results and the extra AP does nothing against a 6+ save.

And you are correct, getting 20 boyz into CC is hard enough as is, 30 is basically impossible under the new rules.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Personally I just Boyz to have W2 so they feel tougher. They'd not need a giant point increase either!

They'd need to go to about 12ish points for 2 wounds.

Not with the non-armor save they got. 10 points is reasonable for a singular T4 6+ W2 model. That's 5 points per wound.
And is still a 25% increase-more than Marines had for their second wound.

Yeah and if a model that was 2 points was given a second wound and raised to 4 points that's a 100% point increase. Your point is what?


Ork boyz definitely need a buff of some kind to increase their durability, I think T5 would be better than a 2nd wound but I won't hold my breath. The problem is at the moment with ork boyz is that they are over priced at 8ppm.

Boyz in 4th all the way to 7th were 6ppm. Space Marines in 4th were 15ppm. So 1 space marine = 2.5 boyz. Since than Orkz went up to 8ppm and got buffed to have S4 instead of Furious Charge and S3, they gained DDD and Ere we go. Ere we go is good, DDD is.....mostly useless. Space Marines on the flipside have gone up 3pts to 18ppm and gained a 2nd wound, twice as many shots, twice as many attacks on the first round, doctrines, super doctrines, etc etc. So when you say Ork boyz at 10ppm with 2 wounds is OP...that is a 60% increase since 7th edition, Marines on the flipside got all those benefits and went up 20%. Boyz would literally go up 4pts per model and gain less than Space Marines who went up 3pts per model

 Xenomancers wrote:
You are in fact wrong. The worst army can win events if you just keep trying. Any army wins if it rolls hot or its opponents roll like dog. When it happens it is a huge outlier and it is clear from that data that it shouldn't happen often and it doesn't. Being as marines are the most played faction (by a long shot) they are going to have the most outliers as well. Cause in the end - we are only looking at the end result with tournament results.

This is also. Undisputable. Would you seriously argue that an army with a 40% WR is good? LOL? Come on I wanna see you say it.

BTW...We were talking 8th - 8.5 - and 9th. All at once. You have to read the context of all the discussion.


Xeno, I want you to focus and actually read as opposed to jumping to conclusions and running around making strawmen arguments. Nowhere did I say the worst army can't win events at all, I said they can't win REGULARLY. In fact, here is the direct quote
The WORST faction CAN NOT PLACE at majors and GTs on a regular basis and be considered the WORST faction in the game.


So again, Space Marines, even before 8.5 were placing regularly in tournaments which meant the faction was doing fine. To put it bluntly yet again, At no point in time since 4th edition (basically since I remember) were Space Marines the WORST faction in the game.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 06:09:22


Post by: Insectum7


^Hah! How were they possibly bad in 4th?!


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 06:35:12


Post by: AngryAngel80


I didn't play super hard in 4th but I didn't feel marines were the worst, I recall them being sort of middle of the road. Though I do remember how much I disliked transports in 4th it felt more like move up, disembark and use transports for mobile walls as opposed to riding in an actual transport.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 07:07:33


Post by: Blackie


I'd call the end of an era when I see tournament lists tailoring against Slaanesh, Orks, Aeldari, Sisters, etc... As long as competitive builds are tailored against marines, either in offensive potential or staying power or even both, SM will still be the boogieman of the edition.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 07:08:22


Post by: Cornishman


SemperMortis wrote:


10pt Powerfist is actually a downgrade for those Marines when fighting Orkz. So why would I skew the numbers by buffing the orkz with a powerklaw and gimp the marines with a Powerfist? Sgt with PF gets 3 attacks instead of 4 and hits on 4s instead of 3s. The benefit to strength doesn't even out the results and the extra AP does nothing against a 6+ save.

And you are correct, getting 20 boyz into CC is hard enough as is, 30 is basically impossible under the new rules.



I'd have put the fist/klaw on both the Nob and Intercessor Serg, because (to me) a fist/klaw on the serg/nob is a fairly typical to run either unit.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 08:32:48


Post by: ccs


 Xenomancers wrote:

What nerve did you strike? Maybe you imagine I am fuming or something but I am actually elated.


(shrugs) Much like you couldn't read the humor, I'm not seeing your elation. You just seemed a bit angry to me.

 Xenomancers wrote:
What am I ignoring to make my point?


You specifically? Right now, here? None. But don't play stupid. I know you've read many of the same threads I have in the past 2.5 years.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Bad math skills? Explain pls.


Once again, we've read the same threads....


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 14:54:46


Post by: Daedalus81


 Galas wrote:
Yeah. As I said, 9 point 2 wound models with a 5 invul and a 6 FNP would be a problem. But a 2w T4 6+sv model would not.

At that tougthness and save level, even with 1 damage weapons you can reliably kill them. You don't need two damage weapons.


But that's a crucial consideration to make. A unit is not itself a monolith. It exists within a system that bears other synergies that can't always be ignored. Even with D1 weapons I can see people flooding the table with 160 to 180 boyz.

320 wounds means 640 wounding hits and 960 shots. 960 shots is 9,600 points of double tapping bolt rifle Primaris or basically 1,920 points of Primaris shooting every round. And with the way morale works for Orks they'll be essentially fearless.

With 5++/6++ it becomes 384 before FNP, 576 before invuln, 1,152 wounding hits, and 1,728 shots - un-killable by almost any measure if you can shield them.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 15:20:03


Post by: SemperMortis


Cornishman wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:


10pt Powerfist is actually a downgrade for those Marines when fighting Orkz. So why would I skew the numbers by buffing the orkz with a powerklaw and gimp the marines with a Powerfist? Sgt with PF gets 3 attacks instead of 4 and hits on 4s instead of 3s. The benefit to strength doesn't even out the results and the extra AP does nothing against a 6+ save.

And you are correct, getting 20 boyz into CC is hard enough as is, 30 is basically impossible under the new rules.



I'd have put the fist/klaw on both the Nob and Intercessor Serg, because (to me) a fist/klaw on the serg/nob is a fairly typical to run either unit.


Ironically, I don't regularly put Powerklaws on my boyz nobz atm, in fact, i don't believe I have all edition The nob in a boyz mob is free, id rather take 4 free S5 attacks rather than pay for the privilege of losing 1 attack and hitting on 4s instead of 3s. Against most targets I want the boyz running into its a minimal upgrade at best, just happens to be pretty good against marines atm. 4 attacks hitting on 3s = 2.66 hits, wounding on 3s = 1.777, against 3+ = 0.59 3 PK attacks hitting on 4s = 1.5 hits, wounding on 2s = 1.25, against a 3+ = 0.83 wounds going through for 1.66 dmg, in other words, against single wound models its almost exactly the same as the choppa. In an edition where orkz haven't gotten their codex yet, and ork hitting power is...weak to say the least, id rather take those 8pts and buy more models to hold objectives, or use those points to help pay for a KFF.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 15:43:55


Post by: Canadian 5th


 Blackie wrote:
I'd call the end of an era when I see tournament lists tailoring against Slaanesh, Orks, Aeldari, Sisters, etc... As long as competitive builds are tailored against marines, either in offensive potential or staying power or even both, SM will still be the boogieman of the edition.

This doesn't make them a boogieman it just makes them a widely played gatekeeper that most lists need to go through to get to the top tables. The lists that can do that and still have enough tools left to deal with the other lists that hit top tables will always be the top lists in the tournament meta.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 15:45:41


Post by: Galas


 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Galas wrote:
Yeah. As I said, 9 point 2 wound models with a 5 invul and a 6 FNP would be a problem. But a 2w T4 6+sv model would not.

At that tougthness and save level, even with 1 damage weapons you can reliably kill them. You don't need two damage weapons.


But that's a crucial consideration to make. A unit is not itself a monolith. It exists within a system that bears other synergies that can't always be ignored. Even with D1 weapons I can see people flooding the table with 160 to 180 boyz.

320 wounds means 640 wounding hits and 960 shots. 960 shots is 9,600 points of double tapping bolt rifle Primaris or basically 1,920 points of Primaris shooting every round. And with the way morale works for Orks they'll be essentially fearless.

With 5++/6++ it becomes 384 before FNP, 576 before invuln, 1,152 wounding hits, and 1,728 shots - un-killable by almost any measure if you can shield them.


But how is a 9 point 2wound 4T 6+ save ork boy different from 2 4.5ppm 1wound 3T 5+save infantry guard?

Of course I'm saying this change should come with the new ork codex to avoid those extremes.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 16:15:39


Post by: the_scotsman


 Canadian 5th wrote:
 Blackie wrote:
I'd call the end of an era when I see tournament lists tailoring against Slaanesh, Orks, Aeldari, Sisters, etc... As long as competitive builds are tailored against marines, either in offensive potential or staying power or even both, SM will still be the boogieman of the edition.

This doesn't make them a boogieman it just makes them a widely played gatekeeper that most lists need to go through to get to the top tables. The lists that can do that and still have enough tools left to deal with the other lists that hit top tables will always be the top lists in the tournament meta.


right, like how eldar in 7th were considered just a gatekeeper and not the top - no, wait.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm going to throw out there that I think orks should stay with the current wound paradigm and move to T5.

Not only because introducing a 'tough but bad saves' faction is excellent for 9th eds continuing durability diversification, but also because I think it'd be hilarious if the lighter ork vehicles literally add almost nothing to the toughness of the boyz riding around in them, and the question of 'why cant i just shoot the boyz off the buggy' is answered with 'you are, they're just as tough as the vehicle itself because its a gakky vehicle and they have good strong skin'


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 16:29:49


Post by: Daedalus81


 Galas wrote:
But how is a 9 point 2wound 4T 6+ save ork boy different from 2 4.5ppm 1wound 3T 5+save infantry guar


Morale, unit size, force multipliers, and detachment slots.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 16:29:58


Post by: Xenomancers


I think this thread reach its natural death when people started suggesting ork boys get 2 wounds for 9 points. LOL. No.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 17:16:24


Post by: SemperMortis


 Xenomancers wrote:
I think this thread reach its natural death when people started suggesting ork boys get 2 wounds for 9 points. LOL. No.



As opposed to scotsman and myself saying go to T5 instead? And Just as a reminder again. In 4th edition, orkz had 2.5x more wounds per point as Space Marines. 1 Tactical Marine was 15pts, an Ork was 6pts. As it currently stands right now Orkz have 0.25x more wounds per point than a Tactical Marine. Bumping them to 2 Wounds at 9pts would actually be LESS than they used to have in 4th, but significantly more than they currently do. Of course, Orkz also got buffed in dmg potential as well between 4th and 9th. I mean...we went from S4 on the charge to S4 all the time. We also gained Ere we go which helps with charges and DDD which...is mostly useless. On the flipside, GW decided that Orkz needed to be slower and made us M5 so now even guardsmen are faster than Orkz. So we definitely gained more than Space Marines did between 4th and 9th. I mean...they only gained, 2x as many shots, 2x as many attacks on the charge, 2x as many wounds, doctrines, super doctrines, etc etc

Keep in mind, I am against going to 2 wounds because as it currently stands, Ork boyz don't do enough dmg in any phase as their current price point which means they would need an upgrade in dmg potential as well and based on GDubz history of being unable to correctly buff Orkz I think we would end up with an over priced upgrade that doesnt work well. I'll point to the Stompa being functionally useless for a decade or more as proof that GW can't price orkz correctly.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 17:47:05


Post by: Xenomancers


SemperMortis wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
I think this thread reach its natural death when people started suggesting ork boys get 2 wounds for 9 points. LOL. No.



As opposed to scotsman and myself saying go to T5 instead? And Just as a reminder again. In 4th edition, orkz had 2.5x more wounds per point as Space Marines. 1 Tactical Marine was 15pts, an Ork was 6pts. As it currently stands right now Orkz have 0.25x more wounds per point than a Tactical Marine. Bumping them to 2 Wounds at 9pts would actually be LESS than they used to have in 4th, but significantly more than they currently do. Of course, Orkz also got buffed in dmg potential as well between 4th and 9th. I mean...we went from S4 on the charge to S4 all the time. We also gained Ere we go which helps with charges and DDD which...is mostly useless. On the flipside, GW decided that Orkz needed to be slower and made us M5 so now even guardsmen are faster than Orkz. So we definitely gained more than Space Marines did between 4th and 9th. I mean...they only gained, 2x as many shots, 2x as many attacks on the charge, 2x as many wounds, doctrines, super doctrines, etc etc

Keep in mind, I am against going to 2 wounds because as it currently stands, Ork boyz don't do enough dmg in any phase as their current price point which means they would need an upgrade in dmg potential as well and based on GDubz history of being unable to correctly buff Orkz I think we would end up with an over priced upgrade that doesnt work well. I'll point to the Stompa being functionally useless for a decade or more as proof that GW can't price orkz correctly.

A tactical marine has been a notoriously bad value in literally every edition I have played except for 8th/9th. Like legit dogshit bad - space marine lists usually had 0 space marines in it. Sad level pathetic stats to compare to there. Where as ork boys have pretty much always been good. For exactly the reason you are mentioning here. Most of orks points ar in their raw potential damage - which is about twice that of a marine for the points.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 18:19:45


Post by: Insectum7


 Xenomancers wrote:
Spoiler:
SemperMortis wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
I think this thread reach its natural death when people started suggesting ork boys get 2 wounds for 9 points. LOL. No.



As opposed to scotsman and myself saying go to T5 instead? And Just as a reminder again. In 4th edition, orkz had 2.5x more wounds per point as Space Marines. 1 Tactical Marine was 15pts, an Ork was 6pts. As it currently stands right now Orkz have 0.25x more wounds per point than a Tactical Marine. Bumping them to 2 Wounds at 9pts would actually be LESS than they used to have in 4th, but significantly more than they currently do. Of course, Orkz also got buffed in dmg potential as well between 4th and 9th. I mean...we went from S4 on the charge to S4 all the time. We also gained Ere we go which helps with charges and DDD which...is mostly useless. On the flipside, GW decided that Orkz needed to be slower and made us M5 so now even guardsmen are faster than Orkz. So we definitely gained more than Space Marines did between 4th and 9th. I mean...they only gained, 2x as many shots, 2x as many attacks on the charge, 2x as many wounds, doctrines, super doctrines, etc etc

Keep in mind, I am against going to 2 wounds because as it currently stands, Ork boyz don't do enough dmg in any phase as their current price point which means they would need an upgrade in dmg potential as well and based on GDubz history of being unable to correctly buff Orkz I think we would end up with an over priced upgrade that doesnt work well. I'll point to the Stompa being functionally useless for a decade or more as proof that GW can't price orkz correctly.

A tactical marine has been a notoriously bad value in literally every edition I have played except for 8th/9th. Like legit dogshit bad - space marine lists usually had 0 space marines in it. Sad level pathetic stats to compare to there. Where as ork boys have pretty much always been good. For exactly the reason you are mentioning here. Most of orks points ar in their raw potential damage - which is about twice that of a marine for the points.
Played in 4th ed. Used Tacs against Orks. Tacs were fine. In 3rd ed I used like 60 of them in many games, they were great. Tactical marines aren't sexy, but they've always had a place. People that think they're bad just didn't know how to use them.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 18:30:50


Post by: Galas


 Insectum7 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
Spoiler:
SemperMortis wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
I think this thread reach its natural death when people started suggesting ork boys get 2 wounds for 9 points. LOL. No.



As opposed to scotsman and myself saying go to T5 instead? And Just as a reminder again. In 4th edition, orkz had 2.5x more wounds per point as Space Marines. 1 Tactical Marine was 15pts, an Ork was 6pts. As it currently stands right now Orkz have 0.25x more wounds per point than a Tactical Marine. Bumping them to 2 Wounds at 9pts would actually be LESS than they used to have in 4th, but significantly more than they currently do. Of course, Orkz also got buffed in dmg potential as well between 4th and 9th. I mean...we went from S4 on the charge to S4 all the time. We also gained Ere we go which helps with charges and DDD which...is mostly useless. On the flipside, GW decided that Orkz needed to be slower and made us M5 so now even guardsmen are faster than Orkz. So we definitely gained more than Space Marines did between 4th and 9th. I mean...they only gained, 2x as many shots, 2x as many attacks on the charge, 2x as many wounds, doctrines, super doctrines, etc etc

Keep in mind, I am against going to 2 wounds because as it currently stands, Ork boyz don't do enough dmg in any phase as their current price point which means they would need an upgrade in dmg potential as well and based on GDubz history of being unable to correctly buff Orkz I think we would end up with an over priced upgrade that doesnt work well. I'll point to the Stompa being functionally useless for a decade or more as proof that GW can't price orkz correctly.

A tactical marine has been a notoriously bad value in literally every edition I have played except for 8th/9th. Like legit dogshit bad - space marine lists usually had 0 space marines in it. Sad level pathetic stats to compare to there. Where as ork boys have pretty much always been good. For exactly the reason you are mentioning here. Most of orks points ar in their raw potential damage - which is about twice that of a marine for the points.
Played in 4th ed. Used Tacs against Orks. Tacs were fine. In 3rd ed I used like 60 of them in many games, they were great. Tactical marines aren't sexy, but they've always had a place. People that think they're bad just didn't know how to use them.


So most of 40k players for most of the time warhammer 40k has existed as a wargame?

I mean, I also use a ton of tacs but in years of playing there never was a time where I tought "Man, I'm so glad to be fielding Tactical Marines right now!"

I had many more "feel good" moments with Kroot Carnivores than with my tactical squads.

For Ork Boyz I believe at 9-10ppm with -1Ap on their choppas (like witches) and a second wound or T5 (But TBH I feel T5 is just too much for a normal boy, but is not like toughtness or wounds represent different stuff, just being harder to kill) they could work.

Now, I also believe they should lose their +1 attack for horde bonus and have it on their profile. And probably have "Shoota boyz" as a separate datasheet to make them viable in some way.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 18:33:04


Post by: SemperMortis


 Xenomancers wrote:

A tactical marine has been a notoriously bad value in literally every edition I have played except for 8th/9th. Like legit dogshit bad - space marine lists usually had 0 space marines in it. Sad level pathetic stats to compare to there. Where as ork boys have pretty much always been good. For exactly the reason you are mentioning here. Most of orks points ar in their raw potential damage - which is about twice that of a marine for the points.


Space Marines out perform orkz at 19-24' range just because Orkz don't have 24' guns. So right off the bat, a Space Marine out performs the ork by 100% at 19-24' range.
From 0-18 range
Ork Boy: 2 shots, .77 hits and 0.38 wounds against T4 0.04dmg per point
Space Marine: 2 shots, 1.33 hits, 0.66 wounds against T4 and 0.037dmg per point.

So wow you are right, Orkz have 0.003 more dmg per point than Space Marines at range. Jesus that is incredible dmg potential. Totally worth having a 6+ save compared to a 3+ save Oh wait, I also forgot to mention that depending on what turn it is, those Marines also get -1AP which will actually increase their dmg potential vs Orkz (Against 3+ save the ork boy is 0.015 the Space Marine is 0.018...or higher than orkz per point)

How about in CC.
Choppa boy is 3 attacks 2 hits 1 wound vs T4 for 0.125 dmg per point
Space Marine is 2 attacks, 1.33 hits, 0.66 wounds against T4 for 0.037 dmg per point.

So there it is, Orkz dmg potential per point is 3.3x that of Space Marines in CC.

Of course that is based on a tactical Marine without changing his weapons loadout while changing out the weapons loadout of the ork to best benefit the scenario. If I put in Assault intercessors (Also troops choice) which are 1pt more against Ork choppa boyz....the math is a bit different.

Choppa Boy is 3 attacks 2 hits 1 wound vs T4 and 0.33 dmg vs a 3+ save for potential of 0.04 dmg per point
Assault intercessor is 4 attacks, 2.66 hits, 1.33 wounds and against 3+ that is 0.66dmg...unless its the assault doctrine turn in which case its 0.886 for potential of 0.03 dmg per point OR 0.46 in the assault doctrine turn. Or again...HIGHER than ork boyz.

So if you compare like with like the Space marine is slightly weaker point for point in pure dmg potential while also being drastically more durable vs most anti-infantry weapons. And during the correct doctrine turn the Space marine is actually BETTER in dmg potential than the ork boy.

Want to compare durability into that?

Vs a S4 shot an Ork takes 2.33 Hits to kill (2.33 = 1.166 wounds vs 6+ save = 1 dead ork) The Marine takes 12 Hits to kill (12 hits = 6 wounds vs 3+ save = 1 dead Marine). So a bit more than 5x more durable vs small arms fire. Against -1 AP weapons its 2 to 8 or 4x more, against -2 AP weapons its 2 to 6 or 3x more durable and against -3AP its 2 to 4 or twice as durable. Multi-dmg weapons obviously favor the ork because 1 wound models don't care if they are hit with 1 dmg weapons or 10 dmg weapons


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 19:57:17


Post by: Insectum7


 Galas wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
Spoiler:
SemperMortis wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
I think this thread reach its natural death when people started suggesting ork boys get 2 wounds for 9 points. LOL. No.



As opposed to scotsman and myself saying go to T5 instead? And Just as a reminder again. In 4th edition, orkz had 2.5x more wounds per point as Space Marines. 1 Tactical Marine was 15pts, an Ork was 6pts. As it currently stands right now Orkz have 0.25x more wounds per point than a Tactical Marine. Bumping them to 2 Wounds at 9pts would actually be LESS than they used to have in 4th, but significantly more than they currently do. Of course, Orkz also got buffed in dmg potential as well between 4th and 9th. I mean...we went from S4 on the charge to S4 all the time. We also gained Ere we go which helps with charges and DDD which...is mostly useless. On the flipside, GW decided that Orkz needed to be slower and made us M5 so now even guardsmen are faster than Orkz. So we definitely gained more than Space Marines did between 4th and 9th. I mean...they only gained, 2x as many shots, 2x as many attacks on the charge, 2x as many wounds, doctrines, super doctrines, etc etc

Keep in mind, I am against going to 2 wounds because as it currently stands, Ork boyz don't do enough dmg in any phase as their current price point which means they would need an upgrade in dmg potential as well and based on GDubz history of being unable to correctly buff Orkz I think we would end up with an over priced upgrade that doesnt work well. I'll point to the Stompa being functionally useless for a decade or more as proof that GW can't price orkz correctly.

A tactical marine has been a notoriously bad value in literally every edition I have played except for 8th/9th. Like legit dogshit bad - space marine lists usually had 0 space marines in it. Sad level pathetic stats to compare to there. Where as ork boys have pretty much always been good. For exactly the reason you are mentioning here. Most of orks points ar in their raw potential damage - which is about twice that of a marine for the points.
Played in 4th ed. Used Tacs against Orks. Tacs were fine. In 3rd ed I used like 60 of them in many games, they were great. Tactical marines aren't sexy, but they've always had a place. People that think they're bad just didn't know how to use them.

So most of 40k players for most of the time warhammer 40k has existed as a wargame?

I mean, I also use a ton of tacs but in years of playing there never was a time where I tought "Man, I'm so glad to be fielding Tactical Marines right now!"
Yeah totally. For a lot of that time Tacs were a fundamentally tricky squad to use. That makes it not a "good" unit for people who couldn't leverage their worth. But being harder to use doesn't make a unit bad.

Personally I found Tacs to be very rewarding to use. One of my favorite units.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 20:56:26


Post by: Ordana


Tyel wrote:
In the last few weeks I think I've read that the best faction is Marines, Sisters, Harlequins, Deathguard, Ad Mech and even some still holding out on Necrons (I think we can probably discount them). DE can probably now join them.

Realistically, the game is comparatively well balanced at a faction to faction level although going first still has a huge impact. Worryingly if they resolve that, the internet will have to start accepting that the better player wins the game, or they are just consistently lucky.
I would say a few factions at the top are comparatively well balanced. But there is a deep gully below them where everyone else is hoping to get a good codex.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/13 22:17:37


Post by: Charistoph


I've never used Tactical Squads. I've found Crusader Squads to be far more flexible and practical.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 07:18:48


Post by: Blackie


 Xenomancers wrote:

A tactical marine has been a notoriously bad value in literally every edition I have played except for 8th/9th. Like legit dogshit bad - space marine lists usually had 0 space marines in it. Sad level pathetic stats to compare to there. Where as ork boys have pretty much always been good. For exactly the reason you are mentioning here. Most of orks points ar in their raw potential damage - which is about twice that of a marine for the points.


I think you're completely wrong on that. Tac weren't present in those lists because SM had tons of overpowered stuff to choose. Boyz were present because most of the ork toys was garbage or overpriced. That's it. It doesn't mean that Tacs were bad and boyz were good. Scouts for example should have been elites since the beginning, and alliances banned: everyone would have played tacs then. Orks couldn't play cheap squads of kommandos as troops to generate CPs, let alone allies.

I've always used and still use a lot of firstborn models and I found them great!


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 13:27:16


Post by: ZebioLizard2


 Blackie wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:

A tactical marine has been a notoriously bad value in literally every edition I have played except for 8th/9th. Like legit dogshit bad - space marine lists usually had 0 space marines in it. Sad level pathetic stats to compare to there. Where as ork boys have pretty much always been good. For exactly the reason you are mentioning here. Most of orks points ar in their raw potential damage - which is about twice that of a marine for the points.


I think you're completely wrong on that. Tac weren't present in those lists because SM had tons of overpowered stuff to choose. Boyz were present because most of the ork toys was garbage or overpriced. That's it. It doesn't mean that Tacs were bad and boyz were good. Scouts for example should have been elites since the beginning, and alliances banned: everyone would have played tacs then. Orks couldn't play cheap squads of kommandos as troops to generate CPs, let alone allies.

I've always used and still use a lot of firstborn models and I found them great!
No even then Tacticals weren't good. There's a reason why they lamented the fact that Grey Hunters were overall better because they got to specialize in their role and were cheaper since 5th edition. Tacticals have always been in this spot of "We're a generalist jack of all trades, that doesn't really work at being a jack of all trades. We don't outshoot the unshooty, we don't outfight the unfighty" and have always been a tax on the army in general when people took them.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 14:01:45


Post by: Voss


SemperMortis wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
I think this thread reach its natural death when people started suggesting ork boys get 2 wounds for 9 points. LOL. No.



As opposed to scotsman and myself saying go to T5 instead? And Just as a reminder again. In 4th edition, orkz had 2.5x more wounds per point as Space Marines. 1 Tactical Marine was 15pts, an Ork was 6pts. As it currently stands right now Orkz have 0.25x more wounds per point than a Tactical Marine. Bumping them to 2 Wounds at 9pts would actually be LESS than they used to have in 4th, but significantly more than they currently do. Of course, Orkz also got buffed in dmg potential as well between 4th and 9th. I mean...we went from S4 on the charge to S4 all the time. We also gained Ere we go which helps with charges and DDD which...is mostly useless. On the flipside, GW decided that Orkz needed to be slower and made us M5 so now even guardsmen are faster than Orkz. So we definitely gained more than Space Marines did between 4th and 9th. I mean...they only gained, 2x as many shots, 2x as many attacks on the charge, 2x as many wounds, doctrines, super doctrines, etc etc

Keep in mind, I am against going to 2 wounds because as it currently stands, Ork boyz don't do enough dmg in any phase as their current price point which means they would need an upgrade in dmg potential as well and based on GDubz history of being unable to correctly buff Orkz I think we would end up with an over priced upgrade that doesnt work well. I'll point to the Stompa being functionally useless for a decade or more as proof that GW can't price orkz correctly.



Two wound orks would be terrible. Weapon damage upgrades (either in shots or just the base damage, see the lastest on Ad Mech weapons) means that orks would take it in the teeth. Its already the go-to ideal for dealing with marines, and it would gut two wound orks even faster, with no armor or widespread invulnerables.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 16:22:04


Post by: SemperMortis


 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
No even then Tacticals weren't good. There's a reason why they lamented the fact that Grey Hunters were overall better because they got to specialize in their role and were cheaper since 5th edition. Tacticals have always been in this spot of "We're a generalist jack of all trades, that doesn't really work at being a jack of all trades. We don't outshoot the unshooty, we don't outfight the unfighty" and have always been a tax on the army in general when people took them.



Tacticals absolutely outshot the non-shooty units, Ork slugga boyz are "unshooty" and Tacticals absolutely out shoot them. Tactical Marines again absolutely outfight the "unfighty" Ever seen tacticals let loose in a Tau Fire warrior squad?

Blackie hit the nail on the head, the real reason why Tactical Marines were considered "Bad' was because Marines have always had better units to take. Hell, you are seeing it right now with the current Marine codex, any unit that isn't the "BEST" inside the Marine codex is called weak or unplayable. When Aggressors got nerfed you had several people who are posting in this very thread saying that they were now unplayable and bad, even after I and several others pointed out that "nerfed" Aggressors made back their points value in basically 2 shooting phases against Ork boyz and other horde units (AKA their target of choice). Why take 15-30 Tactical Marines when instead you can take 15 scouts for a fraction of the price and then dump the points saved into Centurions (7th edition) or Girlyman and MOAR gunships (8th) or Bladeguard and eradicators/Attack bikes with MM (9th)

I've already pointed this out before, but Intercessors out shoot Tau firewarriors. 10 Firewarriors get 10 shots at 30' range, 5 intercessors get 10 shots at 30' range. 10 firewarriors get 5 hits, 10 intercessors get 6.66 hits Against T4 those firewarriors get 3.33 wounds, the intercessors get 3.33 wounds, against a 3+ save those Firewarriors inflict 1.11 dmg, the Intercessors inflict 1.66dmg.
Those same intercessors also beat Genestealers in CC 5 Genestealers (85pts) get 15 attacks, 10 hits, 5 wounds at -1 AP with the possibility of 1 being at AP-4. resulting in 2.5-3 dmg on average.
4 intercessors (80pts) get 14 attacks for 9.33 hits, 4.66 wounds and 3.11 dmg on average.
Intercessors kill 51pts of genestealers, Genestealers kill 20pts of intercessors.

So keep that in mind, intercessors out shoot Fire warriors (shooty unit) and out fight Genestealers (Choppy Unit). How often are you seeing lists spamming intercessors? Why is that? Why are people still taking the bare minimum for troops choices? Because Marines yet again have significantly better units that accomplish those same tasks even better than their troops choices do.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:02:27


Post by: Xenomancers


I hate to break it to you. But the marine HAS been bad in every eddition until 8.5. If you don't understand that there is no point in discussing further honestly. Other units have been bad in the history of the game ofc - but the marine is almost every choice in the marine arsenals. It is a much bigger problem when a marine is bad - than a gradian being bad. It had to be fixed.

They are pretty good now with 2 wounds - but if you want to give everything else 2 wounds they will be bad again. It is that simple.

My personal opinion is the +1 attack in the first round of combat is unnecessary for the "angels of death" rule. However for ork boys the +1 attacks for 20 man units is also unnecessary so there is tones of rules bloat all over the place.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:05:47


Post by: JNAProductions


 Xenomancers wrote:
I hate to break it to you. But the marine HAS been bad in every eddition until 8.5. If you don't understand that there is no point in discussing further honestly. Other units have been bad in the history of the game ofc - but the marine is literally EVERY SINGLE CHOICE in the marine arsenals. It is a much bigger problem when a marine is bad - than a gradian being bad.

They are pretty good now with 2 wounds - but if you want to give everything else 2 wounds they will be bad again. It is that simple.

My personal opinion is the +1 attack in the first round of combat is unnecessary for the "angels of death" rule. However for ork boys the +1 attacks for 20 man units is also unnecessary so there is tones of rules bloat all over the place.

Then how come Marines consistently topped tournaments, going at least two editions back? Possibly more-I just started in 7th, so I don't have experience in 6th and earlier.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:09:10


Post by: Xenomancers


 JNAProductions wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
I hate to break it to you. But the marine HAS been bad in every eddition until 8.5. If you don't understand that there is no point in discussing further honestly. Other units have been bad in the history of the game ofc - but the marine is literally EVERY SINGLE CHOICE in the marine arsenals. It is a much bigger problem when a marine is bad - than a gradian being bad.

They are pretty good now with 2 wounds - but if you want to give everything else 2 wounds they will be bad again. It is that simple.

My personal opinion is the +1 attack in the first round of combat is unnecessary for the "angels of death" rule. However for ork boys the +1 attacks for 20 man units is also unnecessary so there is tones of rules bloat all over the place.

Then how come Marines consistently topped tournaments, going at least two editions back? Possibly more-I just started in 7th, so I don't have experience in 6th and earlier.

Cause they didn't? Soup gimicks did. Bark star and superfriends are not marine lists. They also typically get their rules first so they get an inflated amount of tournament placings for how strong their books are.

If we ever got an edition that played with every army at full strength for the edition. Marines would be near the bottom at literally ever step of the way. Except maybe in 8.5 eddition.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:10:35


Post by: Darsath


 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
I hate to break it to you. But the marine HAS been bad in every eddition until 8.5. If you don't understand that there is no point in discussing further honestly. Other units have been bad in the history of the game ofc - but the marine is literally EVERY SINGLE CHOICE in the marine arsenals. It is a much bigger problem when a marine is bad - than a gradian being bad.

They are pretty good now with 2 wounds - but if you want to give everything else 2 wounds they will be bad again. It is that simple.

My personal opinion is the +1 attack in the first round of combat is unnecessary for the "angels of death" rule. However for ork boys the +1 attacks for 20 man units is also unnecessary so there is tones of rules bloat all over the place.

Then how come Marines consistently topped tournaments, going at least two editions back? Possibly more-I just started in 7th, so I don't have experience in 6th and earlier.

Cause they didn't? Soup gimicks did. Bark star and superfriends are not marine lists.

Marines with the 700 points of free transports did, in fact, top tournaments with Double Demicompany my man.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:10:39


Post by: JNAProductions


 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
I hate to break it to you. But the marine HAS been bad in every eddition until 8.5. If you don't understand that there is no point in discussing further honestly. Other units have been bad in the history of the game ofc - but the marine is literally EVERY SINGLE CHOICE in the marine arsenals. It is a much bigger problem when a marine is bad - than a gradian being bad.

They are pretty good now with 2 wounds - but if you want to give everything else 2 wounds they will be bad again. It is that simple.

My personal opinion is the +1 attack in the first round of combat is unnecessary for the "angels of death" rule. However for ork boys the +1 attacks for 20 man units is also unnecessary so there is tones of rules bloat all over the place.

Then how come Marines consistently topped tournaments, going at least two editions back? Possibly more-I just started in 7th, so I don't have experience in 6th and earlier.

Cause they didn't? Soup gimicks did. Bark star and superfriends are not marine lists.
They're made from Marine Codecs. Are you saying that Eldar lists don't count because they took Windriders and Wraithknights instead of Guardians and Dire Avengers?


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:10:44


Post by: catbarf


 Xenomancers wrote:
I hate to break it to you. But the marine HAS been bad in every eddition until 8.5. If you don't understand that there is no point in discussing further honestly. Other units have been bad in the history of the game ofc - but the marine is literally EVERY SINGLE CHOICE in the marine arsenals. It is a much bigger problem when a marine is bad - than a gradian being bad.

They are pretty good now with 2 wounds - but if you want to give everything else 2 wounds they will be bad again. It is that simple.


SemperMortis gave a well-reasoned statistical breakdown of why your drive-by claim about Orks having much better offensive output is wrong, and you didn't address it at all. Several people in this thread- including other Marine players- have made arguments for why Marines haven't historically been terrible, and you're ignoring them now.

If you don't want to participate in the thread, could you start your own to whine about how your army has always been terrible, everyone who disagrees doesn't know the army, and if you're not kept super-special then your army will be terrible again?


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:13:16


Post by: Xenomancers


Darsath wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
I hate to break it to you. But the marine HAS been bad in every eddition until 8.5. If you don't understand that there is no point in discussing further honestly. Other units have been bad in the history of the game ofc - but the marine is literally EVERY SINGLE CHOICE in the marine arsenals. It is a much bigger problem when a marine is bad - than a gradian being bad.

They are pretty good now with 2 wounds - but if you want to give everything else 2 wounds they will be bad again. It is that simple.

My personal opinion is the +1 attack in the first round of combat is unnecessary for the "angels of death" rule. However for ork boys the +1 attacks for 20 man units is also unnecessary so there is tones of rules bloat all over the place.

Then how come Marines consistently topped tournaments, going at least two editions back? Possibly more-I just started in 7th, so I don't have experience in 6th and earlier.

Cause they didn't? Soup gimicks did. Bark star and superfriends are not marine lists.

Marines with the 700 points of free transports did, in fact, top tournaments with Double Demicompany my man.

A brief period where they get new rules before other armies did. You do realize 7.5 ynnari would literally never lose a game with those busted rules - if the edition did not die right after that - it would have been top 10 ynnari every time in 7.5. It was a joke. Also - gladius did not win by destroying its opponent. It was a horde list that could only win on objectives. Playing with it I was tabled multiple times by deathstars I could not possibly destroy.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:16:07


Post by: JNAProductions


 Xenomancers wrote:
A brief period where they get new rules before other armies did. You do realize 7.5 ynnari would literally never lose a game with those busted rules - if the edition did not die right after that - it would have been top 10 ynnari every time in 7.5. It was a joke. Also - gladius did not win by destroying its opponent. It was a horde list that could only win on objectives. Playing with it I was tabled multiple times by deathstars I could not possibly destroy.
So, what you're saying is that while other players were winning tournaments with that type of list, you were getting crushed?

Xeno, have you tried being introspective?

And, can someone who's more up-to-date on older tournament scenes let me know, how did Marines do in top placing for 6th? 5th? Earlier?


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:16:59


Post by: Darsath


 Xenomancers wrote:
Darsath wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
I hate to break it to you. But the marine HAS been bad in every eddition until 8.5. If you don't understand that there is no point in discussing further honestly. Other units have been bad in the history of the game ofc - but the marine is literally EVERY SINGLE CHOICE in the marine arsenals. It is a much bigger problem when a marine is bad - than a gradian being bad.

They are pretty good now with 2 wounds - but if you want to give everything else 2 wounds they will be bad again. It is that simple.

My personal opinion is the +1 attack in the first round of combat is unnecessary for the "angels of death" rule. However for ork boys the +1 attacks for 20 man units is also unnecessary so there is tones of rules bloat all over the place.

Then how come Marines consistently topped tournaments, going at least two editions back? Possibly more-I just started in 7th, so I don't have experience in 6th and earlier.

Cause they didn't? Soup gimicks did. Bark star and superfriends are not marine lists.

Marines with the 700 points of free transports did, in fact, top tournaments with Double Demicompany my man.

A brief period where they get new rules before other armies did. You do realize 7.5 ynnari would literally never lose a game with those busted rules - if the edition did not die right after that - it would have been top 10 ynnari every time in 7.5. It was a joke. Also - gladius did not win by destroying its opponent. It was a horde list that could only win on objectives. Playing with it I was tabled multiple times by deathstars I could not possibly destroy.

This was the same for Necrons, and I'd consider them to be a strong 7th edition army for sure. Space Marines were similar, they were busted when they first came out, then the next power-crept release came out and outshone them. They never truly went away, but were never top tier after that either.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:18:34


Post by: Xenomancers


 catbarf wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
I hate to break it to you. But the marine HAS been bad in every eddition until 8.5. If you don't understand that there is no point in discussing further honestly. Other units have been bad in the history of the game ofc - but the marine is literally EVERY SINGLE CHOICE in the marine arsenals. It is a much bigger problem when a marine is bad - than a gradian being bad.

They are pretty good now with 2 wounds - but if you want to give everything else 2 wounds they will be bad again. It is that simple.


SemperMortis gave a well-reasoned statistical breakdown of why your drive-by claim about Orks having much better offensive output is wrong, and you didn't address it at all. Several people in this thread- including other Marine players- have made arguments for why Marines haven't historically been terrible, and you're ignoring them now.

If you don't want to participate in the thread, could you start your own to whine about how your army has always been terrible, everyone who disagrees doesn't know the army, and if you're not kept super-special then your army will be terrible again?

Saying words that sound good together does not make a well reasoned response. Tactical marine has always been bad. It has always been avoided and similarly there has always been a huge amount of people saying they aren't bad ether...It is always the same people too.

Currently - 30 orks has 120 str 4 attacks that hit on 3's and 30 str 4 attacks that hit on 5's - 10 intercessors has 61 str 4 attacks that hit on 3's if they have autobolters(the best choice).

Do we really need to go further into which unit does more damage?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Darsath wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
Darsath wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
I hate to break it to you. But the marine HAS been bad in every eddition until 8.5. If you don't understand that there is no point in discussing further honestly. Other units have been bad in the history of the game ofc - but the marine is literally EVERY SINGLE CHOICE in the marine arsenals. It is a much bigger problem when a marine is bad - than a gradian being bad.

They are pretty good now with 2 wounds - but if you want to give everything else 2 wounds they will be bad again. It is that simple.

My personal opinion is the +1 attack in the first round of combat is unnecessary for the "angels of death" rule. However for ork boys the +1 attacks for 20 man units is also unnecessary so there is tones of rules bloat all over the place.

Then how come Marines consistently topped tournaments, going at least two editions back? Possibly more-I just started in 7th, so I don't have experience in 6th and earlier.

Cause they didn't? Soup gimicks did. Bark star and superfriends are not marine lists.

Marines with the 700 points of free transports did, in fact, top tournaments with Double Demicompany my man.

A brief period where they get new rules before other armies did. You do realize 7.5 ynnari would literally never lose a game with those busted rules - if the edition did not die right after that - it would have been top 10 ynnari every time in 7.5. It was a joke. Also - gladius did not win by destroying its opponent. It was a horde list that could only win on objectives. Playing with it I was tabled multiple times by deathstars I could not possibly destroy.

This was the same for Necrons, and I'd consider them to be a strong 7th edition army for sure. Space Marines were similar, they were busted when they first came out, then the next power-crept release came out and outshone them. They never truly went away, but were never top tier after that either.
Because only a few armies got updated.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:20:14


Post by: JNAProductions


 Xenomancers wrote:
 catbarf wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
I hate to break it to you. But the marine HAS been bad in every eddition until 8.5. If you don't understand that there is no point in discussing further honestly. Other units have been bad in the history of the game ofc - but the marine is literally EVERY SINGLE CHOICE in the marine arsenals. It is a much bigger problem when a marine is bad - than a gradian being bad.

They are pretty good now with 2 wounds - but if you want to give everything else 2 wounds they will be bad again. It is that simple.


SemperMortis gave a well-reasoned statistical breakdown of why your drive-by claim about Orks having much better offensive output is wrong, and you didn't address it at all. Several people in this thread- including other Marine players- have made arguments for why Marines haven't historically been terrible, and you're ignoring them now.

If you don't want to participate in the thread, could you start your own to whine about how your army has always been terrible, everyone who disagrees doesn't know the army, and if you're not kept super-special then your army will be terrible again?

Saying words that sound good together does not make a well reasoned response. Tactical marine has always been bad. It has always been avoided and similarly there has always been a huge amount of people saying they aren't bad ether...It is always the same people too.

Currently - 30 orks has 120 str 4 attacks that hit on 3's and 30 str 4 attacks that hit on 5's - 10 intercessors has 61 str 4 attacks that hit on 3's.

Do we really need to go further into which unit does more damage?
Yes. Because 30 Orks will almost never reach combat as a squad of 30, and if they do, they're unlikely to get all 30 attacking. They also need to get melee to use their 120 attacks, whereas Intercessors can do it from 24" away at minimum. The Intercessors are also cheaper, and gain AP on their weapons as turns go on.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:23:47


Post by: catbarf


 Xenomancers wrote:

Saying words that sound good together does not make a well reasoned response. Tactical marine has always been bad. It has always been avoided and similarly there has always been a huge amount of people saying they aren't bad ether...It is always the same people too.

Currently - 30 orks has 120 str 4 attacks that hit on 3's and 30 str 4 attacks that hit on 5's - 10 intercessors has 61 str 4 attacks that hit on 3's if they have autobolters(the best choice).

Do we really need to go further into which unit does more damage?


Ah, so it's not that you're ignoring SemperMortis's reply, it's that you didn't actually read it.

Because he makes a pretty salient point about comparing Choppa Boyz to Intercessors being an apples-to-oranges comparison, whereas Intercessors out-shoot Shoota Boyz and Assault Intercessors out-fight Slugga Boyz. Comparing melee damage output to 24" shooting output is weird to start with.

I guess if your entire game experience is getting destroyed in casual play and setting up unfair comparisons to paint your own units in the worst possible light, I can understand why you might reach this sort of conclusion. But Marines were absolutely not as awful as you seem to think in 4th-5th, and I see plenty of support for them achieving good tournament results in 7th.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:30:19


Post by: Xenomancers


 catbarf wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:

Saying words that sound good together does not make a well reasoned response. Tactical marine has always been bad. It has always been avoided and similarly there has always been a huge amount of people saying they aren't bad ether...It is always the same people too.

Currently - 30 orks has 120 str 4 attacks that hit on 3's and 30 str 4 attacks that hit on 5's - 10 intercessors has 61 str 4 attacks that hit on 3's if they have autobolters(the best choice).

Do we really need to go further into which unit does more damage?


Ah, so it's not that you're ignoring SemperMortis's reply, it's that you didn't actually read it.

Because he makes a pretty salient point about comparing Choppa Boyz to Intercessors being an apples-to-oranges comparison, whereas Intercessors out-shoot Shoota Boyz and Assault Intercessors out-fight Slugga Boyz. Comparing melee damage output to 24" shooting output is weird to start with.

I guess if your entire game experience is getting destroyed in casual play and setting up unfair comparisons to paint your own units in the worst possible light, I can understand why you might reach this sort of conclusion. But Marines were absolutely not as awful as you seem to think in 4th-5th, and I see plenty of support for them achieving good tournament results in 7th.

It is a bad point.

Orks boys don't match up well against intercessors because they have ap-0 attacks vs 3+ saves. 10 Intercessors only kills 1 Primaris marine but kills 8 ork boys in melee...They actually have the same quality attack and orks per point put out about 4x the melee damage.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:31:52


Post by: JNAProductions


 Xenomancers wrote:
 catbarf wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:

Saying words that sound good together does not make a well reasoned response. Tactical marine has always been bad. It has always been avoided and similarly there has always been a huge amount of people saying they aren't bad ether...It is always the same people too.

Currently - 30 orks has 120 str 4 attacks that hit on 3's and 30 str 4 attacks that hit on 5's - 10 intercessors has 61 str 4 attacks that hit on 3's if they have autobolters(the best choice).

Do we really need to go further into which unit does more damage?


Ah, so it's not that you're ignoring SemperMortis's reply, it's that you didn't actually read it.

Because he makes a pretty salient point about comparing Choppa Boyz to Intercessors being an apples-to-oranges comparison, whereas Intercessors out-shoot Shoota Boyz and Assault Intercessors out-fight Slugga Boyz. Comparing melee damage output to 24" shooting output is weird to start with.

I guess if your entire game experience is getting destroyed in casual play and setting up unfair comparisons to paint your own units in the worst possible light, I can understand why you might reach this sort of conclusion. But Marines were absolutely not as awful as you seem to think in 4th-5th, and I see plenty of support for them achieving good tournament results in 7th.

It is a bad point.

Orks boys don't match up well against intercessors because they have ap-0 attacks vs 3+ saves. 10 Intercessors only kills 1 Primaris marine but kills 8 ork boys...They actually have the same quality attack though.
Unless it's T4+, or T3 in an Assault Doctrine army.
Or if they're Assault Intercessors, with an extra attack and everything at at least AP-1.
Or if they're getting buffed by a Captain and Lieutenant.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:34:04


Post by: Xenomancers


 JNAProductions wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 catbarf wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:

Saying words that sound good together does not make a well reasoned response. Tactical marine has always been bad. It has always been avoided and similarly there has always been a huge amount of people saying they aren't bad ether...It is always the same people too.

Currently - 30 orks has 120 str 4 attacks that hit on 3's and 30 str 4 attacks that hit on 5's - 10 intercessors has 61 str 4 attacks that hit on 3's if they have autobolters(the best choice).

Do we really need to go further into which unit does more damage?


Ah, so it's not that you're ignoring SemperMortis's reply, it's that you didn't actually read it.

Because he makes a pretty salient point about comparing Choppa Boyz to Intercessors being an apples-to-oranges comparison, whereas Intercessors out-shoot Shoota Boyz and Assault Intercessors out-fight Slugga Boyz. Comparing melee damage output to 24" shooting output is weird to start with.

I guess if your entire game experience is getting destroyed in casual play and setting up unfair comparisons to paint your own units in the worst possible light, I can understand why you might reach this sort of conclusion. But Marines were absolutely not as awful as you seem to think in 4th-5th, and I see plenty of support for them achieving good tournament results in 7th.

It is a bad point.

Orks boys don't match up well against intercessors because they have ap-0 attacks vs 3+ saves. 10 Intercessors only kills 1 Primaris marine but kills 8 ork boys...They actually have the same quality attack though.
Unless it's T4+, or T3 in an Assault Doctrine army.
Or if they're Assault Intercessors, with an extra attack and everything at at least AP-1.
Or if they're getting buffed by a Captain and Lieutenant.

Or unless the orks are in a 5++ bubble and have +1 str stratagem - or da jumped into combat turn 1 before they got to shoot. The game has aspects that you can't analyze in a discussion. Things like raw damage we can discuss though. Orks boys do a lot more damage than intercessors - not even disputable.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:34:52


Post by: SemperMortis


 Xenomancers wrote:
I hate to break it to you. But the marine HAS been bad in every eddition until 8.5. If you don't understand that there is no point in discussing further honestly. Other units have been bad in the history of the game ofc - but the marine is almost every choice in the marine arsenals. It is a much bigger problem when a marine is bad - than a gradian being bad. It had to be fixed.

They are pretty good now with 2 wounds - but if you want to give everything else 2 wounds they will be bad again. It is that simple.

My personal opinion is the +1 attack in the first round of combat is unnecessary for the "angels of death" rule. However for ork boys the +1 attacks for 20 man units is also unnecessary so there is tones of rules bloat all over the place.



7th edition, 14pts for a Space Marine tactical. Capable of going toe to toe with Ork boyz that you claimed were great, absolutely out shooting them and almost being able to beat orkz in CC if they got the charge off. You know, the phase in which orkz are supposed to be amazing?

You complain all the time that SMs are pathetic and weak, you claim they are literally bottom tier at the same time as they are winning or placing highly in massive GTs and majors. You move the goal posts and shift arguments when you are proven wrong. SM tacticals weren't AMAZING but they weren't garbage, they competed basically on the same footing as other factions troops choices. I think that is the problem though, in your head you think Marines are the best at everything so therefore they shouldn't "Compete" with other factions troops, they should always be better.

Again, Intercessors out shoot Tau Firewarriors and out fight Genestealers, why aren't you guys spamming the hell out of them? Because yet again, the SM Codex is filled with even more broken units and combinations that make a troop choice beating a dedicated shooting unit AND a dedicated CC unit at the same time look bad.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:37:45


Post by: JNAProductions


Spoiler:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 catbarf wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:

Saying words that sound good together does not make a well reasoned response. Tactical marine has always been bad. It has always been avoided and similarly there has always been a huge amount of people saying they aren't bad ether...It is always the same people too.

Currently - 30 orks has 120 str 4 attacks that hit on 3's and 30 str 4 attacks that hit on 5's - 10 intercessors has 61 str 4 attacks that hit on 3's if they have autobolters(the best choice).

Do we really need to go further into which unit does more damage?


Ah, so it's not that you're ignoring SemperMortis's reply, it's that you didn't actually read it.

Because he makes a pretty salient point about comparing Choppa Boyz to Intercessors being an apples-to-oranges comparison, whereas Intercessors out-shoot Shoota Boyz and Assault Intercessors out-fight Slugga Boyz. Comparing melee damage output to 24" shooting output is weird to start with.

I guess if your entire game experience is getting destroyed in casual play and setting up unfair comparisons to paint your own units in the worst possible light, I can understand why you might reach this sort of conclusion. But Marines were absolutely not as awful as you seem to think in 4th-5th, and I see plenty of support for them achieving good tournament results in 7th.

It is a bad point.

Orks boys don't match up well against intercessors because they have ap-0 attacks vs 3+ saves. 10 Intercessors only kills 1 Primaris marine but kills 8 ork boys...They actually have the same quality attack though.
Unless it's T4+, or T3 in an Assault Doctrine army.
Or if they're Assault Intercessors, with an extra attack and everything at at least AP-1.
Or if they're getting buffed by a Captain and Lieutenant.

Or unless the orks are in a 5++ bubble and have +1 str stratagem - or da jumped into combat turn 1 before they got to shoot. The game has aspects that you can't analyze in a discussion. Things like raw damage we can discuss though. Orks boys do a lot more damage than intercessors - not even disputable.
They won't be in a 5++ if they charge T1. Overwatch can still hurt them. Screening hurts them-hell, Marines have Omniscramblers, which makes their charge literally impossible. The S5 Strat is Goff-Locked. And Multicharging has been nerfed.

Edit: Also, I'd still like to point out that you've said you were getting smashed while playing with the lists that won tournaments. I'll be blunt-it sounds like you've got a lot of room to grow as a player, or at least did back in 7th. There's no shame in that-hell, I can think of a very clear instance in 7th where I royally screwed up, and lost the game awfully because of it.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:48:07


Post by: Xenomancers


SemperMortis wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
I hate to break it to you. But the marine HAS been bad in every eddition until 8.5. If you don't understand that there is no point in discussing further honestly. Other units have been bad in the history of the game ofc - but the marine is almost every choice in the marine arsenals. It is a much bigger problem when a marine is bad - than a gradian being bad. It had to be fixed.

They are pretty good now with 2 wounds - but if you want to give everything else 2 wounds they will be bad again. It is that simple.

My personal opinion is the +1 attack in the first round of combat is unnecessary for the "angels of death" rule. However for ork boys the +1 attacks for 20 man units is also unnecessary so there is tones of rules bloat all over the place.



7th edition, 14pts for a Space Marine tactical. Capable of going toe to toe with Ork boyz that you claimed were great, absolutely out shooting them and almost being able to beat orkz in CC if they got the charge off. You know, the phase in which orkz are supposed to be amazing?

You complain all the time that SMs are pathetic and weak, you claim they are literally bottom tier at the same time as they are winning or placing highly in massive GTs and majors. You move the goal posts and shift arguments when you are proven wrong. SM tacticals weren't AMAZING but they weren't garbage, they competed basically on the same footing as other factions troops choices. I think that is the problem though, in your head you think Marines are the best at everything so therefore they shouldn't "Compete" with other factions troops, they should always be better.

Again, Intercessors out shoot Tau Firewarriors and out fight Genestealers, why aren't you guys spamming the hell out of them? Because yet again, the SM Codex is filled with even more broken units and combinations that make a troop choice beating a dedicated shooting unit AND a dedicated CC unit at the same time look bad.
You are missing the point. Their strength is their 3+ save. If you weapon is designed to kill things without armor - your weapon will underperform.

Intercessors don't outshoot IG vets with plasmaguns. Or necron warriors with gauss reapers/ or flayers.

Certain weapons excel in certain sitations. Firewarriors do more damage to imperial knights than marines do. Khabalites do more damage to high T monsters.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Spoiler:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 catbarf wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:

Saying words that sound good together does not make a well reasoned response. Tactical marine has always been bad. It has always been avoided and similarly there has always been a huge amount of people saying they aren't bad ether...It is always the same people too.

Currently - 30 orks has 120 str 4 attacks that hit on 3's and 30 str 4 attacks that hit on 5's - 10 intercessors has 61 str 4 attacks that hit on 3's if they have autobolters(the best choice).

Do we really need to go further into which unit does more damage?


Ah, so it's not that you're ignoring SemperMortis's reply, it's that you didn't actually read it.

Because he makes a pretty salient point about comparing Choppa Boyz to Intercessors being an apples-to-oranges comparison, whereas Intercessors out-shoot Shoota Boyz and Assault Intercessors out-fight Slugga Boyz. Comparing melee damage output to 24" shooting output is weird to start with.

I guess if your entire game experience is getting destroyed in casual play and setting up unfair comparisons to paint your own units in the worst possible light, I can understand why you might reach this sort of conclusion. But Marines were absolutely not as awful as you seem to think in 4th-5th, and I see plenty of support for them achieving good tournament results in 7th.

It is a bad point.

Orks boys don't match up well against intercessors because they have ap-0 attacks vs 3+ saves. 10 Intercessors only kills 1 Primaris marine but kills 8 ork boys...They actually have the same quality attack though.
Unless it's T4+, or T3 in an Assault Doctrine army.
Or if they're Assault Intercessors, with an extra attack and everything at at least AP-1.
Or if they're getting buffed by a Captain and Lieutenant.

Or unless the orks are in a 5++ bubble and have +1 str stratagem - or da jumped into combat turn 1 before they got to shoot. The game has aspects that you can't analyze in a discussion. Things like raw damage we can discuss though. Orks boys do a lot more damage than intercessors - not even disputable.
They won't be in a 5++ if they charge T1. Overwatch can still hurt them. Screening hurts them-hell, Marines have Omniscramblers, which makes their charge literally impossible. The S5 Strat is Goff-Locked. And Multicharging has been nerfed.

Edit: Also, I'd still like to point out that you've said you were getting smashed while playing with the lists that won tournaments. I'll be blunt-it sounds like you've got a lot of room to grow as a player, or at least did back in 7th. There's no shame in that-hell, I can think of a very clear instance in 7th where I royally screwed up, and lost the game awfully because of it.

First of all I will just point out. I play Ultramarines no matter what. I'm not gonna play white scars cause they have been rules. Because I have honor. But it literally doesn't matter. What can razor spam do against - fateweaver? Or a unit with 2++ reroll saves? You just lose man.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:52:36


Post by: JNAProductions


A 20 point Intercessor does .11 damage per turn to an IK.
A pair of 9 point Fire Warriors does the same.

90% of the cost for the same damage isn't shabby... But they're also a lot less durable.

Edit: As for what to do... What did the tournament winners do?


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:55:22


Post by: Xenomancers


 JNAProductions wrote:
A 20 point Intercessor does .11 damage per turn to an IK.
A pair of 9 point Fire Warriors does the same.

90% of the cost for the same damage isn't shabby... But they're also a lot less durable.

4 shots str 5 hitting on 4's is somehow doing worse than 3 str 4 shots hitting on 3's?



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:56:32


Post by: JNAProductions


 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
A 20 point Intercessor does .11 damage per turn to an IK.
A pair of 9 point Fire Warriors does the same.

90% of the cost for the same damage isn't shabby... But they're also a lot less durable.

4 shots str 5 hitting on 4's is somehow doing worse than 3 str 4 shots hitting on 3's?

2 shots. Unless you're putting your Fire Warriors in easy charge range of the Imperial Knight, which results in some VERY DEAD Fire Warriors.

And, of course, if you have the AutoBoltRifles, you can increase that damage by 50% Turns 2 and 3, without even reducing damage T1 and T4-5. Shorter ranged, but 24" isn't bad.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 18:59:45


Post by: Daedalus81


 JNAProductions wrote:
2 shots. Unless you're putting your Fire Warriors in easy charge range of the Imperial Knight, which results in some VERY DEAD Fire Warriors.

And, of course, if you have the AutoBoltRifles, you can increase that damage by 50% Turns 2 and 3, without even reducing damage T1 and T4-5. Shorter ranged, but 24" isn't bad.


Should the marine be half the FW?

1 * .666 * .167 * .5 = 0.055
2 * .5 * .333 * .333 = 0.11

EDIT: Oh, I see - presuming standing still. Derp.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 19:00:18


Post by: JNAProductions


Edit: Ignore this, you Daedalus realized his mistake, so this post is irrelevant.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 19:00:23


Post by: Xenomancers


 JNAProductions wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
A 20 point Intercessor does .11 damage per turn to an IK.
A pair of 9 point Fire Warriors does the same.

90% of the cost for the same damage isn't shabby... But they're also a lot less durable.

4 shots str 5 hitting on 4's is somehow doing worse than 3 str 4 shots hitting on 3's?

2 shots. Unless you're putting your Fire Warriors in easy charge range of the Imperial Knight, which results in some VERY DEAD Fire Warriors.

And, of course, if you have the AutoBoltRifles, you can increase that damage by 50% Turns 2 and 3, without even reducing damage T1 and T4-5. Shorter ranged, but 24" isn't bad.
You compare weapons under ideal conditions to get potential damage.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 19:04:58


Post by: JNAProductions


 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
A 20 point Intercessor does .11 damage per turn to an IK.
A pair of 9 point Fire Warriors does the same.

90% of the cost for the same damage isn't shabby... But they're also a lot less durable.

4 shots str 5 hitting on 4's is somehow doing worse than 3 str 4 shots hitting on 3's?

2 shots. Unless you're putting your Fire Warriors in easy charge range of the Imperial Knight, which results in some VERY DEAD Fire Warriors.

And, of course, if you have the AutoBoltRifles, you can increase that damage by 50% Turns 2 and 3, without even reducing damage T1 and T4-5. Shorter ranged, but 24" isn't bad.
You compare weapons under ideal conditions to get potential damage.
Okay.

5-man Intercessor Squad does, for 105 points...

30 Shots at S4 AP-1 D1
2 Shots at S6 AP-2 Dd3
All at +1 to-hit, +1 to-wound, RR1s to-hit and to-wound.
Total of 5.67 damage from the Rifles and 1.51 from the Grenades, for 7.18 damage.

12-man Fire Warrior Squad does, for 108 points...

36 shots at S5 AP0 D1
All at +1 to-wound and RR1s to-hit
Total of 3.5 damage.

Edit: Completely butchered the math, since I used a 10-man Intercessor squad. My bad! Is better now.

Intercessors, under optimal circumstances, do twice as good as Firewarriors for slightly cheaper.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 19:16:05


Post by: Xenomancers


 JNAProductions wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
A 20 point Intercessor does .11 damage per turn to an IK.
A pair of 9 point Fire Warriors does the same.

90% of the cost for the same damage isn't shabby... But they're also a lot less durable.

4 shots str 5 hitting on 4's is somehow doing worse than 3 str 4 shots hitting on 3's?

2 shots. Unless you're putting your Fire Warriors in easy charge range of the Imperial Knight, which results in some VERY DEAD Fire Warriors.

And, of course, if you have the AutoBoltRifles, you can increase that damage by 50% Turns 2 and 3, without even reducing damage T1 and T4-5. Shorter ranged, but 24" isn't bad.
You compare weapons under ideal conditions to get potential damage.
Okay.

5-man Intercessor Squad does, for 105 points...

30 Shots at S4 AP-1 D1
2 Shots at S6 AP-2 Dd3
All at +1 to-hit, +1 to-wound, RR1s to-hit and to-wound.
Total of 5.17 damage from the Rifles and 1.51 from the Grenades, for 6.68 damage.

12-man Fire Warrior Squad does, for 108 points...

36 shots at S5 AP0 D1
All at +1 to-wound and RR1s to-hit
Total of 3.5 damage.

Edit: Completely butchered the math, since I used a 10-man Intercessor squad. My bad! Is better now.
I didn't say buff them up with command points. Just assume the unit is using it's to damage profile when it is shooting - otherwise you are doing an unfair comaprsion for an assault weapon over rapid fire weapon.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 19:18:00


Post by: JNAProductions


Moving the goal posts much?

Fire Warriors like to sit back at 30" and plink shots forward. They're a fragile and crappy at melee unit-they don't WANT to move forward. Why should I compare that at 15" when the Intercessors do the same damage at 24" (AutoBolt) or at 30" (Bolt)?

Not to mention, Marines have much easier access to buffs-a Captain and Lieutenant increase their damage by more than a third.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 19:21:43


Post by: Bosskelot


At two recent GT's, Marines placed 3rd and 4th in one and then came 1st, 2nd and 4th at the other.

But I'm sure we'll have some more posts about how Marines are terrible.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 19:53:35


Post by: Daedalus81


 Bosskelot wrote:
At two recent GT's, Marines placed 3rd and 4th in one and then came 1st, 2nd and 4th at the other.

But I'm sure we'll have some more posts about how Marines are terrible.


Posting good results some of the time is fine. It certainly isn't the same domination of 8.5, but they definitely aren't bad either. The point of the thread, I think, is that they're not the 8.5 boogeyman any longer. The model situation notwithstanding.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 20:13:24


Post by: Pyroalchi


Quote from Xenomancer:
Intercessors don't outshoot IG vets with plasmaguns

That's kind of a really weird comparison... Intercessors are a troop choice able to do melee and with rifles geared against (light to medium) infantry (I don't play marines, but from the datasheet I only see S4 weapons options) Vets are elite, squishy and can't really melee and the plasmagun is geared towards heavy infantry/vehicles.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 20:14:20


Post by: Xenomancers


 JNAProductions wrote:
Moving the goal posts much?

Fire Warriors like to sit back at 30" and plink shots forward. They're a fragile and crappy at melee unit-they don't WANT to move forward. Why should I compare that at 15" when the Intercessors do the same damage at 24" (AutoBolt) or at 30" (Bolt)?

Not to mention, Marines have much easier access to buffs-a Captain and Lieutenant increase their damage by more than a third.

Im pretty sure a knight is moving towards the tau.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Pyroalchi wrote:
Quote from Xenomancer:
Intercessors don't outshoot IG vets with plasmaguns

That's kind of a really weird comparison... Intercessors are a troop choice able to do melee and with rifles geared against (light to medium) infantry (I don't play marines, but from the datasheet I only see S4 weapons options) Vets are elite, squishy and can't really melee and the plasmagun is geared towards heavy infantry/vehicles.


Aren't vets troops? They used to be anyways. They don't outshoot tau breachers...just pick a troop that costs less with a better gun. The marines don't "outshoot" them.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 20:15:08


Post by: JNAProductions


 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Moving the goal posts much?

Fire Warriors like to sit back at 30" and plink shots forward. They're a fragile and crappy at melee unit-they don't WANT to move forward. Why should I compare that at 15" when the Intercessors do the same damage at 24" (AutoBolt) or at 30" (Bolt)?

Not to mention, Marines have much easier access to buffs-a Captain and Lieutenant increase their damage by more than a third.

Im pretty sure a knight is moving towards the tau.
Castellan. Crusader. Helverin.

And excellent point, Pryo! Something that Xeno himself brought up earlier, then forgot about, apparently.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 20:18:07


Post by: CommanderWalrus


Talking about Spacw Marines? Oh no, I hope everyone is being nice...something about that faction seems to provoke people to extreme anger arguing for and against them.
This thread is an interesting read though.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 20:19:29


Post by: Xenomancers


 CommanderWalrus wrote:
Talking about Spacw Marines? Oh no, I hope everyone is being nice...something about that faction seems to provoke people to extreme anger arguing for and against them.
This thread is an interesting read though.

It's cause dakka.
The land where tactical marines havn't been terrible for all existence. Only here too.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 20:25:42


Post by: CommanderWalrus


 Xenomancers wrote:
 CommanderWalrus wrote:
Talking about Spacw Marines? Oh no, I hope everyone is being nice...something about that faction seems to provoke people to extreme anger arguing for and against them.
This thread is an interesting read though.

It's cause dakka.
The land where tactical marines havn't been terrible for all existence. Only here too.

I'm fresh and green so I can't speak to how good or bad tactical marines have or haven't been, but I will say that in general, in other games highly generalized units like that tend to be a bit hard to gauge. Good and bad gets muddled when a unit is advertised for it's simplicity.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 20:47:41


Post by: Insectum7


 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
No even then Tacticals weren't good. There's a reason why they lamented the fact that Grey Hunters were overall better because they got to specialize in their role and were cheaper since 5th edition. Tacticals have always been in this spot of "We're a generalist jack of all trades, that doesn't really work at being a jack of all trades. We don't outshoot the unshooty, we don't outfight the unfighty" and have always been a tax on the army in general when people took them.

A: Grey Hunters weren't in my codex.
B: Grey Hunters couldn't take the heavy that Tacs could. The Heavy is really useful, allowing them to act as fire support when they need to. Tacs also got it at a discount for many editions. Paying 15 points for a Lascannon while Devastators paid 35, for example. The Las-Plas Tacs weren't common in 3rd and 4th because they sucked.

 Xenomancers wrote:

It's cause dakka.
The land where tactical marines havn't been terrible for all existence. Only here too.
Elite veteran units require elite veteran commanders to use well, my man.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 20:52:44


Post by: catbarf


 Xenomancers wrote:
It is a bad point.

Orks boys don't match up well against intercessors because they have ap-0 attacks vs 3+ saves. 10 Intercessors only kills 1 Primaris marine but kills 8 ork boys in melee...They actually have the same quality attack and orks per point put out about 4x the melee damage.


Nah.

SemperMortis already demonstrated that the Marines have better damage output, point-for-point, even without considering durability two pages ago.

Go actually read his post, then you can explain why it's wrong.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 21:10:09


Post by: the_scotsman


No, it's time to try and out-meme himself by claiming that a unit with THREE INCH engagement range can outshoot a unit with THIRTY INCH engagement range therefore marines are weak and underpowered XD


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 21:50:16


Post by: Argive


Ahhh yes xeno doing xeno things.



An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 21:53:21


Post by: CEO Kasen


 Argive wrote:
Ahhh yes xeno doing xeno things.


I disagree with some people here, and sometimes the way some of them behave, and sometimes with a bit of vehemence - but the very, very few people I actually ignore are those who have thought processes or environments so utterly divorced from conventional sapience and understood fact that it's just not worth trying to work through the diplomatic equivalent of a tense alien first-contact scenario to explain basic math on every single thread when they aren't going to take anything away from it anyway.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 21:57:10


Post by: ZebioLizard2


Tacticals absolutely outshot the non-shooty units, Ork slugga boyz are "unshooty" and Tacticals absolutely out shoot them. Tactical Marines again absolutely outfight the "unfighty" Ever seen tacticals let loose in a Tau Fire warrior squad?

I mean this is true. They did outshoot slugga boys pistols.. And then just fell to pieces when their 24" 1 shot (or 2 within 12 if they haven't moved) and the much cheaper boyz came in and ran them over. Since the boyz even with special weapons in the Tactical squad couldn't kill enough of them to really do much to really do a dint.

As for the Tau Warriors.. Yeah they certainly feared S4 A1 attack per round. Yeah they were outfought with their much lower WS skill, but they're also cheaper then your tactical marine, and now your special weapons and bolters are tied up plinking away with combat knives. This is certainly not the thing they want to be doing at all in past editions, and short of desperately tying something dangerous up they were generally bad at melee. Not to mention there was no real way to get them into melee range with Tau warriors shooting them beforehand since the only option would be the Rhino with the lack of assault charge unless you were trying something odd from the land raider.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 22:26:27


Post by: Insectum7


 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Tacticals absolutely outshot the non-shooty units, Ork slugga boyz are "unshooty" and Tacticals absolutely out shoot them. Tactical Marines again absolutely outfight the "unfighty" Ever seen tacticals let loose in a Tau Fire warrior squad?

I mean this is true. They did outshoot slugga boys pistols.. And then just fell to pieces when their 24" 1 shot (or 2 within 12 if they haven't moved) and the much cheaper boyz came in and ran them over. Since the boyz even with special weapons in the Tactical squad couldn't kill enough of them to really do much to really do a dint.
Flamers were my go-to Special in 3rd ed. They did good work.

Lascannons to blow up the Trukks/Wagons, Bolters to thin the ranks, Flamers to finish them off. If that wasn't enough rely on ATSKNF to get you not-wiped out in combat, then fall back (using Purity Seals to get an ideal roll) and put the Bolters and Flamers to work again. Rinse and repeat until there are no more Orks.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 22:38:08


Post by: SemperMortis


 Insectum7 wrote:
 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Tacticals absolutely outshot the non-shooty units, Ork slugga boyz are "unshooty" and Tacticals absolutely out shoot them. Tactical Marines again absolutely outfight the "unfighty" Ever seen tacticals let loose in a Tau Fire warrior squad?

I mean this is true. They did outshoot slugga boys pistols.. And then just fell to pieces when their 24" 1 shot (or 2 within 12 if they haven't moved) and the much cheaper boyz came in and ran them over. Since the boyz even with special weapons in the Tactical squad couldn't kill enough of them to really do much to really do a dint.
Flamers were my go-to Special in 3rd ed. They did good work.

Lascannons to blow up the Trukks/Wagons, Bolters to thin the ranks, Flamers to finish them off. If that wasn't enough rely on ATSKNF to get you not-wiped out in combat, then fall back (using Purity Seals to get an ideal roll) and put the Bolters and Flamers to work again. Rinse and repeat until there are no more Orks.


Insectum, you don't understand, SM players shouldn't have to use tactics or skill. They should just have better rules/models so that you can just meet at the game store, say "I win" shake hands and go home.

And lets not bring pesky things like Flamers into this discussion, where a single flamer could, and did, wipe out anywhere from 3-8 boyz in a single turn. Because remember, Most flamers were AP5 back then which meant orkz didn't even get a save vs their autohits.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 22:40:54


Post by: Canadian 5th


 Insectum7 wrote:
Flamers were my go-to Special in 3rd ed. They did good work.

Lascannons to blow up the Trukks/Wagons, Bolters to thin the ranks, Flamers to finish them off. If that wasn't enough rely on ATSKNF to get you not-wiped out in combat, then fall back (using Purity Seals to get an ideal roll) and put the Bolters and Flamers to work again. Rinse and repeat until there are no more Orks.

Except you couldn't fire the lascannon if you moved, so you'd have a number of turns where you paid for a weapon that was doing jack squat for you. The same goes for the flamer, if you used the lascannon then you were 100% wasting your flamer and bolter shots. If you included a fist or a power sword you had even more points sitting around useless each turn.

This is why mixed heavy/special tac squads have always been pretty bad except for rare cases when las/plas/combi-plas was a reasonable threat to a vehicle or heavy infantry unit.

SemperMortis wrote:
And lets not bring pesky things like Flamers into this discussion, where a single flamer could, and did, wipe out anywhere from 3-8 boyz in a single turn. Because remember, Most flamers were AP5 back then which meant orkz didn't even get a save vs their autohits.

Did you tank shock them into a clump or did you only ever face trukk boyz who tend to bunch up after their ride explodes?


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 22:51:22


Post by: Charistoph


 Insectum7 wrote:
Lascannons to blow up the Trukks/Wagons, Bolters to thin the ranks, Flamers to finish them off. If that wasn't enough rely on ATSKNF to get you not-wiped out in combat, then fall back (using Purity Seals to get an ideal roll) and put the Bolters and Flamers to work again. Rinse and repeat until there are no more Orks.

Not every edition allowed a unit to change targets to the transported if they blew up a transport for one reason or another. I'm glad that foolishness is over.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 22:53:22


Post by: SemperMortis


 Canadian 5th wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Flamers were my go-to Special in 3rd ed. They did good work.

Lascannons to blow up the Trukks/Wagons, Bolters to thin the ranks, Flamers to finish them off. If that wasn't enough rely on ATSKNF to get you not-wiped out in combat, then fall back (using Purity Seals to get an ideal roll) and put the Bolters and Flamers to work again. Rinse and repeat until there are no more Orks.

Except you couldn't fire the lascannon if you moved, so you'd have a number of turns where you paid for a weapon that was doing jack squat for you. The same goes for the flamer, if you used the lascannon then you were 100% wasting your flamer and bolter shots. If you included a fist or a power sword you had even more points sitting around useless each turn.

This is why mixed heavy/special tac squads have always been pretty bad except for rare cases when las/plas/combi-plas was a reasonable threat to a vehicle or heavy infantry unit.


2 words: Combat Squad

Suddenly that lascannon is sitting in the backfield with 4 bolters as ablative wounds while the Sgt and Flamer run forward to flame targets and duel the ork character for easy points

 Canadian 5th wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
And lets not bring pesky things like Flamers into this discussion, where a single flamer could, and did, wipe out anywhere from 3-8 boyz in a single turn. Because remember, Most flamers were AP5 back then which meant orkz didn't even get a save vs their autohits.

Did you tank shock them into a clump or did you only ever face trukk boyz who tend to bunch up after their ride explodes?
I play orkz and guess what happens when you try to get into CC with enough boyz to have an impact with your 3 S4 attacks on the charge and S3 every turn thereafter? You group up and suddenly you are an easy target for template weapons.

On the topic of Trukk Boyz though, if a Trukk exploded, it killed 1/6th of the passengers, this meant you had to roll a 2-3 to pass your morale check, meaning you likely failed and ran away while also losing D6 more boyz, and after that you had to check for morale from losing boys which meant you likely lost another D6 (D6 were auto-hits so you still had to roll to wound on a 4+).


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 22:59:44


Post by: catbarf


 Canadian 5th wrote:

Did you tank shock them into a clump or did you only ever face trukk boyz who tend to bunch up after their ride explodes?


6" move and no pile-in meant a mob of 30 Boyz maximally spread out to avoid flamers and templates wasn't much of a melee threat, so if the Ork player was hamstringing themselves just because you brought a flamer, mission accomplished.

Keeping horde infantry strung out 100% of the time was never, ever practical. It's one of those nonsense theorycrafting arguments that only exists when there's no table to cram that green tide into, no objectives to hold, and no enemies that require you to bring an entire unit within Shoota or melee range.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 23:02:05


Post by: Insectum7


 Canadian 5th wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Flamers were my go-to Special in 3rd ed. They did good work.

Lascannons to blow up the Trukks/Wagons, Bolters to thin the ranks, Flamers to finish them off. If that wasn't enough rely on ATSKNF to get you not-wiped out in combat, then fall back (using Purity Seals to get an ideal roll) and put the Bolters and Flamers to work again. Rinse and repeat until there are no more Orks.

Except you couldn't fire the lascannon if you moved, so you'd have a number of turns where you paid for a weapon that was doing jack squat for you. The same goes for the flamer, if you used the lascannon then you were 100% wasting your flamer and bolter shots. If you included a fist or a power sword you had even more points sitting around useless each turn.

This is why mixed heavy/special tac squads have always been pretty bad except for rare cases when las/plas/combi-plas was a reasonable threat to a vehicle or heavy infantry unit.
At 15 points the Las was hardly a waste of points even if you only used it once or twice in a game. Plus Bolters could glance Trukks so could still support the Las.

I could spend 170 points on a Predator with four Lascannons, or I could spend a fraction of the points and put Lascannons on squads I already have to buy (troops) and I'll get value out of them doing other things as well. Plus, Lascannons distributed among a bunch of marines didn't die nearly as fast as a Predator. Using Tacticals was all about choosing the right target priority and firing order. Sometimes you don't use the Lascannon, and that's fine.
. . .
The Orks are usually all grouped up after they've closed in for CC. Flamer target paradise.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
SemperMortis wrote:

2 words: Combat Squad
Well Combat Squadding wasn't a thing again until 5th edition. During 3rd and 4th we did without. 5th Ed changed Tacticals pretty dramatically by giving them Bolt Pistols, Frag and Krak by default, making them more capable in CC against Vehicles in particular.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 23:08:16


Post by: Charistoph


 Insectum7 wrote:
Well Combat Squadding wasn't a thing again until 5th edition. During 3rd and 4th we did without. 5th Ed changed Tacticals pretty dramatically by giving them Bolt Pistols, Frag and Krak by default, making them more capable in CC against Vehicles in particular.

Till Krak Grenades went from being placed in Melee to being Thrown in Melee so only one guy could use one.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 23:09:33


Post by: Insectum7


 Charistoph wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Well Combat Squadding wasn't a thing again until 5th edition. During 3rd and 4th we did without. 5th Ed changed Tacticals pretty dramatically by giving them Bolt Pistols, Frag and Krak by default, making them more capable in CC against Vehicles in particular.

Till Krak Grenades went from being placed in Melee to being Thrown in Melee so only one guy could use one.
In all of 7th edition that was the actual worst rule change they made.

Edit: ESPECIALLY since Knights and WraithKnights were running around by then and Ork Tankbustas, (traditionally armed with Meltabombs or some equivalent) were one of the best options in that army to deal with superheavies. But no, a mob of 20 Tankbustas, instead of being able to all plant AT charges on a Knight, only one could. How $#&^ing stupid of GW.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 23:31:58


Post by: ZebioLizard2


SemperMortis wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Tacticals absolutely outshot the non-shooty units, Ork slugga boyz are "unshooty" and Tacticals absolutely out shoot them. Tactical Marines again absolutely outfight the "unfighty" Ever seen tacticals let loose in a Tau Fire warrior squad?

I mean this is true. They did outshoot slugga boys pistols.. And then just fell to pieces when their 24" 1 shot (or 2 within 12 if they haven't moved) and the much cheaper boyz came in and ran them over. Since the boyz even with special weapons in the Tactical squad couldn't kill enough of them to really do much to really do a dint.
Flamers were my go-to Special in 3rd ed. They did good work.

Lascannons to blow up the Trukks/Wagons, Bolters to thin the ranks, Flamers to finish them off. If that wasn't enough rely on ATSKNF to get you not-wiped out in combat, then fall back (using Purity Seals to get an ideal roll) and put the Bolters and Flamers to work again. Rinse and repeat until there are no more Orks.


Insectum, you don't understand, SM players shouldn't have to use tactics or skill. They should just have better rules/models so that you can just meet at the game store, say "I win" shake hands and go home.

And lets not bring pesky things like Flamers into this discussion, where a single flamer could, and did, wipe out anywhere from 3-8 boyz in a single turn. Because remember, Most flamers were AP5 back then which meant orkz didn't even get a save vs their autohits.
I play CSM. I had the at the time surprisingly better CSM which could double up on special weapons or melee to actually specialize for a role that actually works for winning the game, but at the time most slugga boyz were riding in vehicles anyways for all your snark comes into play since they could charge out of the open topped vehicle with assault vehicle rules. Not to mention flamers range tends to mean that you'll get to fire it once before being swarmed by boyz, though you are right in that some will die due to it being effectively the counter to boyz.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 23:41:35


Post by: Insectum7


^CSM whom Orks could run down and wipe out in CC. Which they could not do to Tacticals and other loyalists. Tacs carried the Lascanons for the Trukks, as I mentioned.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 23:50:56


Post by: ZebioLizard2


 Insectum7 wrote:
^CSM whom Orks could run down and wipe out in CC. Which they could not do to Tacticals and other loyalists. Tacs carried the Lascanons for the Trukks, as I mentioned.
They couldn't take down tacticals.. Why exactly? CSM could take double flamers, or double plasma for generalist dealings for shooting light vehicles and heavily armored units. If Orks got into melee with Tacticals they fell apart just like the rest. CSM could even do proper counter charges if they took melee weapons (which they were still less expensive then tacticals for at the time).


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 23:52:01


Post by: SemperMortis


 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
I play CSM. I had the at the time surprisingly better CSM which could double up on special weapons or melee to actually specialize for a role that actually works for winning the game, but at the time most slugga boyz were riding in vehicles anyways for all your snark comes into play since they could charge out of the open topped vehicle with assault vehicle rules. Not to mention flamers range tends to mean that you'll get to fire it once before being swarmed by boyz, though you are right in that some will die due to it being effectively the counter to boyz.


Slugga boyz were not riding in vehicles for the most part in 7th. In fact, the most competitive build for Orkz in 7th was "Green Tide" Which was 10 Mobz of Boyz who weren't allowed to take vehicles. And it was only competitive because of the 5+ FNP they all got and the 5++ invuln save they all got for the KFF.

Trukk rush was a thing for a bit but thanks to AV10, +1 for being open topped and the god awful morale rules we had in 7th, Trukk boyz weren't as good as the Green Tide.

As far as flamers, you are forgetting their most useful role though. If you got to use them 1 time you killed 3-8 ork boyz, if you got charged you did D6 auto-hits which again, went through ork armor so you were basically autokilling anyone wounded in overwatch by a flamer. Also, the rule was if a flamer hit a vehicle with occupants....all the occupants were hit I had that particular trick used on me once or twice


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/14 23:54:01


Post by: ZebioLizard2


SemperMortis wrote:
 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
I play CSM. I had the at the time surprisingly better CSM which could double up on special weapons or melee to actually specialize for a role that actually works for winning the game, but at the time most slugga boyz were riding in vehicles anyways for all your snark comes into play since they could charge out of the open topped vehicle with assault vehicle rules. Not to mention flamers range tends to mean that you'll get to fire it once before being swarmed by boyz, though you are right in that some will die due to it being effectively the counter to boyz.


Slugga boyz were not riding in vehicles for the most part in 7th. In fact, the most competitive build for Orkz in 7th was "Green Tide" Which was 10 Mobz of Boyz who weren't allowed to take vehicles. And it was only competitive because of the 5+ FNP they all got and the 5++ invuln save they all got for the KFF.

Trukk rush was a thing for a bit but thanks to AV10, +1 for being open topped and the god awful morale rules we had in 7th, Trukk boyz weren't as good as the Green Tide.

As far as flamers, you are forgetting their most useful role though. If you got to use them 1 time you killed 3-8 ork boyz, if you got charged you did D6 auto-hits which again, went through ork armor so you were basically autokilling anyone wounded in overwatch by a flamer. Also, the rule was if a flamer hit a vehicle with occupants....all the occupants were hit I had that particular trick used on me once or twice
Oh if we were discussing 7th that's an entirely different game... My brain was stuck in 5th for this discussion


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/15 00:14:56


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^CSM whom Orks could run down and wipe out in CC. Which they could not do to Tacticals and other loyalists. Tacs carried the Lascanons for the Trukks, as I mentioned.
They couldn't take down tacticals.. Why exactly? CSM could take double flamers, or double plasma for generalist dealings for shooting light vehicles and heavily armored units. If Orks got into melee with Tacticals they fell apart just like the rest. CSM could even do proper counter charges if they took melee weapons (which they were still less expensive then tacticals for at the time).

He greatly overvalues ATSKNF


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 Charistoph wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Well Combat Squadding wasn't a thing again until 5th edition. During 3rd and 4th we did without. 5th Ed changed Tacticals pretty dramatically by giving them Bolt Pistols, Frag and Krak by default, making them more capable in CC against Vehicles in particular.

Till Krak Grenades went from being placed in Melee to being Thrown in Melee so only one guy could use one.
In all of 7th edition that was the actual worst rule change they made.

Edit: ESPECIALLY since Knights and WraithKnights were running around by then and Ork Tankbustas, (traditionally armed with Meltabombs or some equivalent) were one of the best options in that army to deal with superheavies. But no, a mob of 20 Tankbustas, instead of being able to all plant AT charges on a Knight, only one could. How $#&^ing stupid of GW.

What's funny is most people I know didn't even catch that change and about halfway through 7th were still playing it the other way.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/15 00:39:37


Post by: Insectum7


 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^CSM whom Orks could run down and wipe out in CC. Which they could not do to Tacticals and other loyalists. Tacs carried the Lascanons for the Trukks, as I mentioned.
They couldn't take down tacticals.. Why exactly?
CSM could be Sweeping Advanced and wiped out through morale, loyalists could not.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/15 01:00:14


Post by: ZebioLizard2


 Insectum7 wrote:
 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^CSM whom Orks could run down and wipe out in CC. Which they could not do to Tacticals and other loyalists. Tacs carried the Lascanons for the Trukks, as I mentioned.
They couldn't take down tacticals.. Why exactly?
CSM could be Sweeping Advanced and wiped out through morale, loyalists could not.
Ah ATSKNF. I was more thinking that Tacs were going to be obliterated through sheer numbers of attacks rather then morale typically.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/15 01:06:21


Post by: Canadian 5th


SemperMortis wrote:
2 words: Combat Squad

Not in 3rd and 4th edition they couldn't. Even in 5th where you could squad, most people still preferred to run a minimum-sized unit and a Razorback for the better points efficiency.

I play orkz and guess what happens when you try to get into CC with enough boyz to have an impact with your 3 S4 attacks on the charge and S3 every turn thereafter? You group up and suddenly you are an easy target for template weapons.

Sure, but before 5th they could also just consolidate back into melee and be safe.

On the topic of Trukk Boyz though, if a Trukk exploded, it killed 1/6th of the passengers, this meant you had to roll a 2-3 to pass your morale check, meaning you likely failed and ran away while also losing D6 more boyz, and after that you had to check for morale from losing boys which meant you likely lost another D6 (D6 were auto-hits so you still had to roll to wound on a 4+).

This also varies from edition to edition.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/15 01:09:22


Post by: Charistoph


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:What's funny is most people I know didn't even catch that change and about halfway through 7th were still playing it the other way.

That ruling wasn't made till halfway through 7th, though. While there were discussions a few here, it wasn't until the Grand FAQ that GW specifically stated that only one Grenade-style weapon could be used in Melee.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/15 01:21:45


Post by: Insectum7


 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^CSM whom Orks could run down and wipe out in CC. Which they could not do to Tacticals and other loyalists. Tacs carried the Lascanons for the Trukks, as I mentioned.
They couldn't take down tacticals.. Why exactly?
CSM could be Sweeping Advanced and wiped out through morale, loyalists could not.
Ah ATSKNF. I was more thinking that Tacs were going to be obliterated through sheer numbers of attacks rather then morale typically.
If you run the numbers it still takes a lot of Boyz to wipe out a squad, and as a defender you shouldn't be letting full 30-man squads hitting you in the first place. It's much more likely that you lose part of the squad, in which case you're probably facing some morale issues.

(30×4×.5x.333x.5=9.99)? 10 wounds if you get all 30 into combat, which was pretty unlikely. Nob give you some more, but lost casualties on the way in and incomplete contact swings it down again.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/15 02:07:45


Post by: Canadian 5th


 Insectum7 wrote:
If you run the numbers it still takes a lot of Boyz to wipe out a squad, and as a defender you shouldn't be letting full 30-man squads hitting you in the first place. It's much more likely that you lose part of the squad, in which case you're probably facing some morale issues.

(30×4×.5x.333x.5=9.99)? 10 wounds if you get all 30 into combat, which was pretty unlikely. Nob give you some more, but lost casualties on the way in and incomplete contact swings it down again.

As the defender, you'd still want to position to actually shoot stuff with more than just your tac's single heavy weapon. If your board also had some LoS blocking terrain on it, those boyz were far more likely to get there even if they were worse off against blast weapons. Even then, how many blasts would you have unless you list tailored against orks? Most blasts were bad against the Marine v Marine mirror and didn't get any better against CSM, Necrons, Tau, heck even some guard lists could ignore them and turn those flamers into wasted points.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/15 02:35:26


Post by: Insectum7


 Canadian 5th wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
If you run the numbers it still takes a lot of Boyz to wipe out a squad, and as a defender you shouldn't be letting full 30-man squads hitting you in the first place. It's much more likely that you lose part of the squad, in which case you're probably facing some morale issues.

(30×4×.5x.333x.5=9.99)? 10 wounds if you get all 30 into combat, which was pretty unlikely. Nob give you some more, but lost casualties on the way in and incomplete contact swings it down again.

As the defender, you'd still want to position to actually shoot stuff with more than just your tac's single heavy weapon.
Duh?
If your board also had some LoS blocking terrain on it, those boyz were far more likely to get there even if they were worse off against blast weapons. Even then, how many blasts would you have unless you list tailored against orks? Most blasts were bad against the Marine v Marine mirror and didn't get any better against CSM, Necrons, Tau, heck even some guard lists could ignore them and turn those flamers into wasted points.
Whirlwinds and Vindicators were pretty great for either spooking people from clumping up or dissuaded from advancing down corridors. Plasma Cannons too, once they were available again in 4th.


An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman. @ 2021/04/15 02:43:36


Post by: Canadian 5th



You were making it sound like 20+ man boyz squads never got to touch your tactical squads. It's not as cut and dry as just saying that they shouldn't ever hit you with a full-strength unit while you're defending.

Whirlwinds and Vindicators were pretty great for either spooking people from clumping up or dissuaded from advancing down corridors. Plasma Cannons too, once they were available again in 4th.

Vindicators are stuck with 24" range single-shot weapons and only effective if you go first. If you go second and aren't able to hide them, they're like as not to be stunned and then they don't threaten anything.

Plus, anybody running transports just wouldn't care about a Whirlwind and even if a Vindicator did take out a Rhino or Razorback that was a better outcome than it hitting anything that actually matters. You'd have scared me far more if you invested in assault canons and dreadnoughts because those could have an impact on more aspects of my army.