Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

More man-lovin' please...

indeed

cromwest wrote:

starsdawn wrote:
In short: I choose them knowing full well that they're underpowered than BA or SW. At least not by a lot, so you can still pull some wins. Count on the Alapin move.

Pull some wins!?! Underpowered!?! Speak for your self buddy because no one who plays me thinks codex marines are underpowered. At best BA and SW took the solid SM core and built on it and in some cases tweaked the points values of certain units while adding/subtracting abilities. When you strip all that extra stuff away your still left with a really solid core ready to lay some smack down.

Wrong. SW and BA plays extremely differently. Codex are underpowered compared to SW and BA. Not the entire game.

Then again, I dont expect you to know since you probably didnt play SW or BA. So speak for YOURSELF.

Chongara wrote:Well, I'm sure you've seriously read twilight with a critical eye and thus have a legitimate reason to think so little of it. Well, that or at least have taken in some if the serious literally criticisms on the issues the stories have, after all time is precious and you don't always have time to do it yourself. I'm also positive you have perfectly reasonable and rational reasons why physical affection between men is something of little enough value, that it is amusing to mock through lazily modified images. I'm also sure you've got a very convincing line of reasoning on how both those things not only draw relevant parallels to two factions in a miniatures, but how those parallels form a legitimate criticism of said factions.

I'm sure of all that because otherwise trying to make those comparison in that fashion would be very immature and more then a little bit crude, and I'm positive nobody would around here would do that. Certainly, nobody around here would be silly enough to be crude and immature just to jump on an internet bandwagon on an issue they've never actually considered. We're better than that around here!

Surely.

OMG WE SHOULD TAKE THESE THINGS REALLY SERIOUSLY WE CAN'T JOKE ABOUT THEM.

Because we can't joke about stuff because you know, it's funny. Surely. Because making jokes are immature at best, right? That's why my grandpa always makes them, to feel his youth coming back to him!

Look at what I've said after the joke (hint: it's at the bottom of the message). I mainly stay away from BA and SW because I want to make my own chapter and I don't like it written out for me. I like to use my own colors and I don't want stupid people to say "BUT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE RED/BLUE". Also, hint: jokes are not to be taken seriously. Also, hint: you just ruined the joke by taking it seriously, therefore.... well, I was going to make a joke out of it but since I fear you would take it seriously again and leave you offended and broken-hearted, I think not.

And yes, I've read the first book (not seriously, because who can take a sparkling vampire seriously?). It's guilty pleasure at best, and overglorified fanfic-level writing at worst. As a matter of fact, I've read better written fanfics. I also approve of gay marriage, and joking about something =/= thinking little of it. I don't know where you live, but where I live we can joke about anything. And as far as I know the rest of the world treats it all the same. Where do you live? Mars?

C'mon, we are grown adults playing with toys. That's a whole lot of room for joking. Can't we joke about things we love? Can't we joke about things we don't love? Are Nazis only allowed to make Jew jokes? Is the sky purple? Is Napoleon still alive? Whatever happened to Amelia Earhart? Who holds the stars up in the sky? Is true love just once in a lifetime? Did the captain of Titanic cryyyyyyy~

I think it's more immature that you can't take a joke that's in context with what we're discussing. You know, a joke that's not supposed to be taken seriously, right? Do I need to insert an icon for the canned applause?

You need this:


PS:I've marked the jokes in red, just in case you missed them.

PPS: The Care Bear should be Red too.

cromwest wrote:Pull some wins!?! Underpowered!?! Speak for your self buddy because no one who plays me thinks codex marines are underpowered. At best BA and SW took the solid SM core and built on it and in some cases tweaked the points values of certain units while adding/subtracting abilities. When you strip all that extra stuff away your still left with a really solid core ready to lay some smack down.

Hey, it's a bit harder to pull off a win in chess when you're black, since white has the first turn advantage, thus it dictates the game. Does that mean you can't win when you're on the black side? No. Does that mean black is stronger than white? No.

Winning with something doesn't mean it's the best there is. Maybe you're just good, or maybe everyone you played with sucks. Lot of things that affect a win, not just your list.

Actually, while White can attack better, Black has the advantage of seeing the first move, and so has an advantage defending.

i voted space wolves, but then I play space wolves so would have to.

some reasons i like space wolves:

I love the models, they are great fun to paint.

iin game they are great. as well as being able to hold there own in close combat and on the offenisve they are also great defenders. Its very seldom they loose I nearly awlays get at least a draw.

The grey hunters (there standard troops) are great. They take some some beating when holding an objective. last game i played i drop a squad of ten of them into the middile of a 4000 point tau and chaos marine army and they serviced a hole round of being shot at them with no casualties. The game before that i made some bad moves and lost my whole army except for two grey hunters and yet that was enough to keep the game a draw. so yeah love them.

its a very versatile army, you can make loads of different stlyes. for example an all terminator army no other marine force can do one of those.

Wait, surely the Edward to the SW's Jacob is the Dark Angels here? I mean, that's a legitimate rivalry/love affair.

Amount of bulls*it in this thread offends the Emperor! How dare you to speak against any of the astartes? I wonder how deep have you stumbled upon road to damnation you BLASPHEMOUS HERETICS! Chapters are waging wars, wars in the Emperors name! That some of them are curently undermanned does not give you right to dishonour them! Chapters are like the trees, trees which gives fruit to those who serve the Emperor. When branches are taken in their service and their fruit is used, tree needs time to revitalize. When next edition come...I mean when next year comes and the tree was given enough love, next gathering can come as well! Rejoicer those who stand loyal to the Emperor, for your unyielding service shall be rewarded in the end and those who jump from tree to tree like parasits, HERETICAL parasits, will be cleansed by puryfing fire and turned to ash and cinders, ASH and CINDERS!!!

Time for your medication, methinks.

Destrado wrote:Actually, while White can attack better, Black has the advantage of seeing the first move, and so has an advantage defending.

I thought it was black attack/white flight. I've either missed a major shift in socio-economic trends, or your point. one or the other. j/k

Destrado wrote:Time for your medication, methinks.

I dont associate with sheeps. Carry on with your forgiving live.

Jolrael wrote:I dont associate with sheeps. Carry on with your forgiving live.

Sorry, I try not to discriminate based on colour.

If you want to go for a scoring bike army, then SMurfs are the only way to go.

Go for Vanilla, it's better than labelling yourself an Edward Marine or Jacob Marine.

I voted space wolves.
I have all 3 armies painted, Space Wolves, Blood Angels and Crimson Fists.

There are things to like in all 3, but the space wolves probably offer the best base combination of army style lists, and all of them are effective.

Thunderwolf Cavalry
Transport Spam
Drop Pod Style
All Wolf Guard
Terminator Army

Plus IMO their extra custom bits are the best (though I liked the winged Blood Angels packs and melta pistols so much I built that army as well!)

Best of luck whatever you choose all 3 are great!

Space Wolves will probably give you the most options. You can play an assault army, a gunline army, a pod army, a fast cav army, or an elite herohammer army. No matter which one you pick you'll be good in H2H so you can afford to make a few mistakes and the list will forgive you.

And seriously, the shooting can be BRUTAL. In 2000+ games SW players can field more than 30 missile launchers.


If you want to do pure mech, especially if you want Predators or Vindicators, BA will give you the best bang with fast vehicles and more FA options for those vehicles. I played 3 Baal Preds/3 Vindicators and razorback troops and it was awesome the amount of firepower I could throw down range while shrugging basically anything below S8.

Codex Marines are bland, but they do have their strengths; Vulkan is still good with cheap terminators and rhino melta bunkers. Shrike can pull off some shenanigans.

Codex: Space Marines have more subtle application than Blood Angels or Space Wolves, particularly if you don't get caught up in variant Chapter Tactics and stick to Combat Tactics.

Codex: Space Marines lets you field:

A Forge Army (Master of the Forge, Independent Character Techmarines, Thunderfire Cannons)

A Bike Army

A Sternguard Army (either Gate of Infinity in combination with Locator Beacons or Crimson Fists)

A Scout Army

Personally I find that the Blood Angels and Space Wolves epitomise the epiphet that Space Marines are a beginner's army: they're easier to learn, but ultimately have a relatively low ceiling, whereas Space Marines have more options that reward more nuanced play.

Take Space Wolf firepower, for example. Vanguard Veterans, Zagstruck, Barrage shooting, Mawlocs, and so on will shut Long Fangs down. Or just shoot them. Each wound loses either a Heavy Weapon or Fire Control.

Or take Blood Angel assault power, for another example, just charge them first and hit the Sanguinary Priest with a Power Weapon, then they'll be bog standard Assault Marines caught on a back foot. Or just bubble-wrap some Plasma and mow them down.

Personally I blame the community for promoting a resource-based view of 40,000, and ignoring game-play or tactical solutions...

I absolutely love seeing "solutions" like "Just charge them first."

Tactical genius, that.

sourclams wrote:I absolutely love seeing "solutions" like "Just charge them first."

Tactical genius, that.

Why would you need something more complicated? Charging a BA assault army before it can charge you will shut it down. No need to reinvent the wheel.

sourclams has a point, "Just charge them first" is incredibly vacant. The thing is, however, that there are strategies available to people that are facing certain Blood Angel armies that wouldn't be available facing Blood Angels list that didn't emphasize anti-mech.

Take the tactic of 'bubble-wrap' whereby an expandable infantry unit surrounds another unit, for example. I recently surrounded two Devastator Combat Squads and a Command Squad with two full Tactical Squads. The Devastators had two Plasma Cannons in one Combat Squad, and two Missile Launchers in the second Combat Squad. The Command Squad was three Plasma Gunners with an Apothecary and a Standard Bearer. It was a classic castle, as there was no space for the Blood Angels to assault inside of the formation, and if they assaulted the outer Tactical Squads then they would get Rapid Fired by the Command Squad, and point blanked sans cover by the Devastator Squads.

The configuration worked well for shooting, but it would have worked equally well for a counter-assault by stuff like Assault Terminators. Maybe you could take Vanguard Assault Squads, but the same problem would have occurred with Shooting, and perhaps even in Assault.

So yeah, "charge them first" is vacant like any variable that isn't paid out, but the problem facing a player is on any particular board is how to be able to charge them first. If you're going with the mechanized strategy then you're frankly boned because the Blood Angel shuck your Rhinos-Land Raiders and then charge the remains with Vanguard.

An Infantry-based strategy, on the other hand...

There is an element of rock paper scissors to any good strategy game, and that's true of 40k as well - any list you can make will have strengths and weaknesses. Serlin has a great article about RPS in game design here -

http://www.sirlin.net/articles/rock-paper-scissors-in-strategy-games.html

The tl;dr version of the article is that uneven weighting (winning with rock pays $10, while winning with paper pays $1) and unpredictable counters make for a much more nuanced and interesting game than boring, repetitive RPS.

Balance at a macro level is important, so that competitive tournaments aren't filled with a single army or list, but at a micro level IMbalance is what makes a game challenging and interesting. SC2 does this really well, giving almost every unit in the game situations in which they shine and others in which they get creamed. The armies are distinct I'm both play style and cost, as well. 40k does it pretty well, too, but there are tons more units, making the balance much more complicated and therefore less precisely tuned. Some units (DA assault marines for example) just aren't worth their points.

Clearly math can (and at a competitive level, must) be used to analyze the cost vs benefit of units in your army. Calculating kills per turn per point is useful for determining the efficiency of similar units; the less efficient unit is worse. If the game consisted of just CC, with no deployment, movement, objectives, etc. then you could create a list based solely on [(k/t)/pt] - and we'd be back to the single competitive list situation.

Because of the above, I think saying "this is a game of math, there is one right answer" ignores all of the RPS baked right into the rules of the game. The designers want you to make choices about composition and tactics, and they want the evaluation of units to be complex enough that a single metric doesn't work. So yes, math is a useful tool for evaluating army strengths, but no, there isn't one right answer, because the game is intentionally designed to make that kind of right answer impossible to calculate.

If you're looking to maximize your win ratio above all other concerns, you can take a look around at which lists are winning tournaments and choose an army that way (SW aren't a bad choice based on this method). Personally, I've played with lists that smashed the gak out of my opponents and been bored to tears (4th Ed. Korne army, zerkers on bikes), so I choose armies that are fun, look cool, and have fluff that I find appealing. I still play to win, but I do it within the context of an army that appeals to me.

The people who are saying take what appeals to you and play what you enjoy have a point, as do those that say some books are less competitive than others; it's up to you to decide what motivates you to spend piles of money and time on this game, and get the most out of that investment.

Tl;dr: I voted for the wolves. Vikings in space kick ass, and win tournaments, too.