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.

 SHUPPET wrote:

remember that you're the ones who quoted me to argue that MY opinion was invalid

Ehhh I don’t believe I did. I didn’t dispute your opinion beyond expressing an observation of what I feel is more common and obnoxious.

I don’t have a horse in this race. After reading two pages or so of this back and forth the combination of your generalisations of a group of people along with the what seemed to me an implication that your opinion was in any way more informed than the others’ irked me just enough to call you on it.

Ultimately, as the teenagers might say, ‘whatever, man.’



Closer to on-topic, what I hope the status of regular Space Marines is is ‘temporary’. Long-term I hope they phase out the Primaris/non-Primaris dichotomy entirely and just give every Space Marine the Primaris upgrade.. I think that would be healthiest for the faction as a whole.

kombatwombat wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:

remember that you're the ones who quoted me to argue that MY opinion was invalid

Ehhh I don’t believe I did. I didn’t dispute your opinion beyond expressing an observation of what I feel is more common and obnoxious.

I made a post. You responded to it. Not the other way around.

I respect your opinion on what you feel is more or uncommon. That's totally up to you to say, and while my experience is vastly dissimilar, the most ridiculous response I could possibly conjure up would be to ask you to take a mandatory census of everyone, or your opinion is invalid.

kombatwombat wrote:
I don’t have a horse in this race. After reading two pages or so of this back and forth the combination of your generalisations of a group of people along with the what seemed to me an implication that your opinion was in any way more informed than the others’ irked me just enough to call you on it.

As I said earlier - an emotional response, based on the fact that you saw something you chose to take as attack on every SM player yourself include. You didn't need to do that, as you knew it wasn't. A generalization is just that - the a rough summary of the general state of the subject. Plenty of exceptions to every generalization, thats what the word means. The only person who took it to an individual level and brought it all the way down to a personal attack on yourself - was you.

kombatwombat wrote:
Ultimately, as the teenagers might say, ‘whatever, man.’

Cool, thoroughly agree. I wouldn't quote me again to start arguing with me about something that you weren't involved in, if you don't want a response to that post. Feel free to do it anytime if you do want one. Two-way street. Ciao.

 Primark G wrote:
Pointless arguments.

Indeed any further posts on this diversion will be treated as spam.

back to the topic.

I remain disappointed that the Deathwatch codex is Primarus focused it seems. And of course while I can mix bikes, terminators and marines in a squad I can't put in Primaris it seems? Will they be able to fit in the flyer? Dissapointed because the deathwatch were the best marine plastics to come out pre 8th and they had a great special forces vibe, something Primaris painted black don't have.

fraser1191 wrote:

Annirak wrote:
* There's no fast-delivery close combat troop--an assault squad equivalent
* There's no infantry heavy support unless you count hellblasters
* The transport options are far too limited and too expensive: the Repulsor is a Primaris Land Raider, but the Primaris marines need a Rhino and a Razorback.
* The Primaris options are all so monochromatic: they're like aspect warriors, with no basic troops.

As has been mentioned before, there's nothing akin to a modern fire-team, where there are at least 4 different weapons for different scenarios. The old tac-squads had that with 1 special, 1 combi/CCW, 1 heavy, 7 bolters. I dare say that they were modelled on modern fire teams.

I think that Primaris could be good, but that there are a few troop types missing.

I'm planning to pick up some aggressors and some intercessors to augment my Salamanders at some point. The thing that bothers me is that I can't work out which bolt rifles to equip them with, and they're not particularly switchable. I worry that I'll need 2 boxes of intercessors to field 2 MSU squads, but still have options: 2 bolt rifle, 1 stalker, 1 auto, choose 2.

I think that was their plan all along.

Take a look at the Repulsors squres again, the chassis is on 2 and the turret is on its own so there's either going to be a less equipped version or one with bigger guns

GW didn't finish releasing primaris Marines by a longshot.

As for what to give your Intercessors, Bolt rifles are always the safe bet. Auto Bolt rifles really only perform better between 16"-24"

I'm sure you're right. There have got to be more kits coming. The observation about the Repulsor is interesting. I wonder how they'd release rules for that with the codex already out? I guess for back-field objective campers, I should look at Stalkers, but regular bolt rifles elsewhere.

novembermike wrote:

Annirak wrote:

* There's no fast-delivery close combat troop--an assault squad equivalent
* There's no infantry heavy support unless you count hellblasters
* The transport options are far too limited and too expensive: the Repulsor is a Primaris Land Raider, but the Primaris marines need a Rhino and a Razorback.
* The Primaris options are all so monochromatic: they're like aspect warriors, with no basic troops.

I'm pretty sure the line just isn't done yet. I'd expect to see at least some close combat options, more characters and options, more heavy support (at least an anti-tank variant), a cheaper transport and bikers (jet or normal).

I also don't see them like aspect warriors. Primaris so far have been specialized, but in a generalist sort of way. Aggressors mix ranged anti-infantry with anti-tank melee, Inceptors are shooty but have special rules on the charge, Hellblasters are relatively efficient shooting at anything, etc. Primaris squads feel very different from aspect warriors in practice to me.

As has been mentioned before, there's nothing akin to a modern fire-team, where there are at least 4 different weapons for different scenarios. The old tac-squads had that with 1 special, 1 combi/CCW, 1 heavy, 7 bolters. I dare say that they were modelled on modern fire teams.

The problem is that in game terms multiple weapons tends to mean that you've got a bunch of ablative wounds and the guys that really matter. That doesn't necessarily feel appropriate for marines to me.

That's an interesting observation. I'm not sure what to do with it. Like one of the other posters in the thread, I guess I'd say "if you're marines aren't shooting anything, you're not playing them efficiently." At the same time, there's the other question: how does a real fire team work when one of the weapons is far more effective than the basic for the given situation?

Alternatively, don't think of the others as ablative wounds; think of it this way: any time a marine is knocked out of combat, another marine will pick up his kit if it's more effective than his own in the situation.

Annirak wrote:
At the same time, there's the other question: how does a real fire team work when one of the weapons is far more effective than the basic for the given situation?

Well, they employ the weapon and the others in theory hold fire... But that is tricky to do in many situations. A good example is footage of troops in Afghanistan all blazing away while only their squad support weapons are realistically going to be having any effect (those M4's needing a 8 to hit and 6 to wound ). But they are being attacked and want to respond. Conversely you can see engagements where the support weapon is doing the heavy lifting the the rest of the squad are providing support to its operate and overwatch to the core gunner team. In this way whilst their bullets fired is way down to the all blazing away situation, their effective fire down range is increased.

Well in todays world with Nato 5.56 being the standard ammo for most UN forces. Their weapons are effectively useless outside of 250 yards and most engagements occur at about 300 yards.

The only effective weapon in an infantry squad at that range is going to be their 7.62 machine gun (they probably only have 1 or 2 of these).

The issue is - in real life - fighting at 300 yards - there is 0 risk that the unit they are fighting against can close the ground in about 10 seconds and prevent you from firing and start stabing you with knives. You realistically can not advance over open ground against machine gun fire...or really even against rifle fire.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Well in todays world with Nato 5.56 being the standard ammo for most UN forces. Their weapons are effectively useless outside of 250 yards and most engagements occur at about 300 yards.

The only effective weapon in an infantry squad at that range is going to be their 7.62 machine gun (they probably only have 1 or 2 of these).

The issue is - in real life - fighting at 300 yards - there is 0 risk that the unit they are fighting against can close the ground in about 10 seconds and prevent you from firing and start stabing you with knives. You realistically can not advance over open ground against machine gun fire...or really even against rifle fire.

So the closest analog is presumably the marine combat squad with Heavy Bolter. And... that sounds roughly as described: with split fire, the non-bolter marines provide overwatch & ablative wounds for the HB marine.


Also, from what you're saying, modern militaries sound a lot like Tau

From what others have said, and my own personal thoughts/observations, I'm thinking that the regular Marine is going nowhere. While the Primaris may be the new hotness on the block, mono-Primaris armies are too.... limited in many respects. They lack answers to combat everything, which is where the "normal" marine steps in, they have a myriad of units and weapons that can (supposedly at least) take on a wide range of targets, while the Primaris arsenal is a tad more limited.

So basically I think the normal Marines aren't going anywhere, but I don't think we'll get a lot more kits for them, but more Primaris may be in our future. Primaris Techmarine anyone?

 War Kitten wrote:
From what others have said, and my own personal thoughts/observations, I'm thinking that the regular Marine is going nowhere. While the Primaris may be the new hotness on the block, mono-Primaris armies are too.... limited in many respects. They lack answers to combat everything, which is where the "normal" marine steps in, they have a myriad of units and weapons that can (supposedly at least) take on a wide range of targets, while the Primaris arsenal is a tad more limited.

So basically I think the normal Marines aren't going anywhere, but I don't think we'll get a lot more kits for them, but more Primaris may be in our future. Primaris Techmarine anyone?

WELL, they get special ammo in the new Deathwatch codex, so they kinda have all the tools they need anymore. All you need is AT, and honestly you got Predators for that.

Annirak wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Well in todays world with Nato 5.56 being the standard ammo for most UN forces. Their weapons are effectively useless outside of 250 yards and most engagements occur at about 300 yards.

The only effective weapon in an infantry squad at that range is going to be their 7.62 machine gun (they probably only have 1 or 2 of these).

The issue is - in real life - fighting at 300 yards - there is 0 risk that the unit they are fighting against can close the ground in about 10 seconds and prevent you from firing and start stabing you with knives. You realistically can not advance over open ground against machine gun fire...or really even against rifle fire.

So the closest analog is presumably the marine combat squad with Heavy Bolter. And... that sounds roughly as described: with split fire, the non-bolter marines provide overwatch & ablative wounds for the HB marine.


Also, from what you're saying, modern militaries sound a lot like Tau

Well - probably more like imperial guard. Modern militarizes are definitely gun-lines though. LOL


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 War Kitten wrote:
From what others have said, and my own personal thoughts/observations, I'm thinking that the regular Marine is going nowhere. While the Primaris may be the new hotness on the block, mono-Primaris armies are too.... limited in many respects. They lack answers to combat everything, which is where the "normal" marine steps in, they have a myriad of units and weapons that can (supposedly at least) take on a wide range of targets, while the Primaris arsenal is a tad more limited.

So basically I think the normal Marines aren't going anywhere, but I don't think we'll get a lot more kits for them, but more Primaris may be in our future. Primaris Techmarine anyone?

All we really need is primaris lascannons.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Well in todays world with Nato 5.56 being the standard ammo for most UN forces. Their weapons are effectively useless outside of 250 yards and most engagements occur at about 300 yards.

The only effective weapon in an infantry squad at that range is going to be their 7.62 machine gun (they probably only have 1 or 2 of these).

The issue is - in real life - fighting at 300 yards - there is 0 risk that the unit they are fighting against can close the ground in about 10 seconds and prevent you from firing and start stabing you with knives. You realistically can not advance over open ground against machine gun fire...or really even against rifle fire.

In 40k a squad of Chaos Cultists with a Heavy Stubber are going to murder any equivalent trying to advance on them across open ground from 24" away.

 Nurglitch wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Well in todays world with Nato 5.56 being the standard ammo for most UN forces. Their weapons are effectively useless outside of 250 yards and most engagements occur at about 300 yards.

The only effective weapon in an infantry squad at that range is going to be their 7.62 machine gun (they probably only have 1 or 2 of these).

The issue is - in real life - fighting at 300 yards - there is 0 risk that the unit they are fighting against can close the ground in about 10 seconds and prevent you from firing and start stabing you with knives. You realistically can not advance over open ground against machine gun fire...or really even against rifle fire.

In 40k a squad of Chaos Cultists with a Heavy Stubber are going to murder any equivalent trying to advance on them across open ground from 24" away.

This is how real warfare works. Infantry can not advance on infantry in equal force. 1 heavy weapon can hold back a whole platoon if it is in a good position.

Also its important to note that in "real life" having more machine guns doesn't really make you more deadly. In the early days of World War 2, armies were mounting lots of Machine Guns on Tanks, see the T-28 or some Stuart variants. But the various nations all quickly realized that they weren't getting much if any additional performance out of 3-4 machine guns than they were out of a single machine gun. Since the main use of them was suppression anyway, and one machine gun had plenty of fire power to mow down infantry in the open. By the end of the war, pretty much all of the tanks had one or two Machine Guns tops typically a front hull mount, and a coaxial on the turret.

Compared to war gaming where more guns = more dice we have the very impractical situation where we strap as many guns as possible on our units because each extra gun is more dice and more shots- like a Leman Russ with 3 Heavy Bolters or a Wave Serpent with 3 Shuriken Cannons. This problem persists in WW2 mini gaming as well, as in most game systems the MMG boat style early war tanks are much more effective on the tabletop then they were in real life.

Back on topic.

The real problem with regular marines is that currently GW has been overpricing their defensive abilities.

In theory, if we were playing a game primarily focusing on engagements involving small arms fire, where the most common shot fired was from a Bolter or Las equivalent, Space Marines would be very strong.

In order for Marines to actually be good... basically Plasma of all kind needs to be removed. Anything with high rate of fire (including rapid fire) and good armor penetration is an anathema to Marines- and there is A LOT of that stuff out there. If the game shifted over to small arms with bad AP vs infantry (read flamers, bolters / lasguns, heavy bolters) and single shot Missile / Las Cannons vs vehicles and monsters the game balance would be able to shift back to Marines as anti vehicle weapons would inefficiently over kill them, and their toughness 4 and good armor save would help vs small arms and anti personnel special and heavy weapons.

Basically, Marines pay too many points for armor that is too easily invalidated by the special weapons- especially plasma and its equivalents, tend to spam.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Nurglitch wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Well in todays world with Nato 5.56 being the standard ammo for most UN forces. Their weapons are effectively useless outside of 250 yards and most engagements occur at about 300 yards.

The only effective weapon in an infantry squad at that range is going to be their 7.62 machine gun (they probably only have 1 or 2 of these).

The issue is - in real life - fighting at 300 yards - there is 0 risk that the unit they are fighting against can close the ground in about 10 seconds and prevent you from firing and start stabing you with knives. You realistically can not advance over open ground against machine gun fire...or really even against rifle fire.

In 40k a squad of Chaos Cultists with a Heavy Stubber are going to murder any equivalent trying to advance on them across open ground from 24" away.

This is how real warfare works. Infantry can not advance on infantry in equal force. 1 heavy weapon can hold back a whole platoon if it is in a good position.

I think you can have some pretty good games of just AM Infantry squad, Chaos Cultists, and so on. It really gives you some perspective on some of the more fantastic elements of the game.

 Nurglitch wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Nurglitch wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Well in todays world with Nato 5.56 being the standard ammo for most UN forces. Their weapons are effectively useless outside of 250 yards and most engagements occur at about 300 yards.

The only effective weapon in an infantry squad at that range is going to be their 7.62 machine gun (they probably only have 1 or 2 of these).

The issue is - in real life - fighting at 300 yards - there is 0 risk that the unit they are fighting against can close the ground in about 10 seconds and prevent you from firing and start stabing you with knives. You realistically can not advance over open ground against machine gun fire...or really even against rifle fire.

In 40k a squad of Chaos Cultists with a Heavy Stubber are going to murder any equivalent trying to advance on them across open ground from 24" away.

This is how real warfare works. Infantry can not advance on infantry in equal force. 1 heavy weapon can hold back a whole platoon if it is in a good position.

I think you can have some pretty good games of just AM Infantry squad, Chaos Cultists, and so on. It really gives you some perspective on some of the more fantastic elements of the game.

Infantry only games can be a lot of fun I agree. It's great to know that you won't be removed from the table in 1 turn and possitioning and stuff actaully start to matter when you removed 60 inch range guns capable of removing 6 marines a turn.

Ruleswise there is 0% chance that the iconic most popular unit in 40k, the vanilla marine, is going anywhere at all. That's just not going to happen. Whether a Primaris style model becomes the standard for that is another question.

"Basically, Marines pay too many points for armor that is too easily invalidated by the special weapons- especially plasma and its equivalents, tend to spam."

After being away from the game and playing admittedly only a few games under the new rules with a pure Ultramarine force and facing things like what the new Necron codex throws at you, this feels about right. I play a balanced force, not a Guilliman gunline, which I think has its own inherent weaknesses, so take this with a grain of salt, but it seems like their are only a few pure Marine factions that can now stay on the table with OP Xenos.

"Ruleswise there is 0% chance that the iconic most popular unit in 40k, the vanilla marine, is going anywhere at all. That's just not going to happen. Whether a Primaris style model becomes the standard for that is another question."

Perhaps, but the first part seems a little off to me when many of the tourney lists use scouts instead of tacticals and you have Guilliman chasing hordes of flyers or razorbacks across the table. It seems like the tactical squat could just wither from lack of use.

The second part seems more likely as the iconic tactical marine is so pervasive in the game that a pure profit motive on the part of the evil geniuses at GW could eventually see Primaris ascendant and squat marines retired. Devilishly clever those Lords of Chaos running GW.

Fool that I am, I have already added 2k of Primaris to my 6k of Ultramarines, so their fiendish plan seems to be working on the weak-willed customers...

As to the topic, look at sites on the web that track tournaments over the last year and try to find pure marine lists of any faction. Should be an interesting exercise. Once you find them, see where they finished. GW, thy name is Profit.

Dragonbreath wrote:
"Basically, Marines pay too many points for armor that is too easily invalidated by the special weapons- especially plasma and its equivalents, tend to spam."

After being away from the game and playing admittedly only a few games under the new rules with a pure Ultramarine force and facing things like what the new Necron codex throws at you, this feels about right. I play a balanced force, not a Guilliman gunline, which I think has its own inherent weaknesses, so take this with a grain of salt, but it seems like their are only a few pure Marine factions that can now stay on the table with OP Xenos.

"Ruleswise there is 0% chance that the iconic most popular unit in 40k, the vanilla marine, is going anywhere at all. That's just not going to happen. Whether a Primaris style model becomes the standard for that is another question."

Perhaps, but the first part seems a little off to me when many of the tourney lists use scouts instead of tacticals and you have Guilliman chasing hordes of flyers or razorbacks across the table. It seems like the tactical squat could just wither from lack of use.

The second part seems more likely as the iconic tactical marine is so pervasive in the game that a pure profit motive on the part of the evil geniuses at GW could eventually see Primaris ascendant and squat marines retired. Devilishly clever those Lords of Chaos running GW.

Fool that I am, I have already added 2k of Primaris to my 6k of Ultramarines, so their fiendish plan seems to be working on the weak-willed customers...

As to the topic, look at sites on the web that track tournaments over the last year and try to find pure marine lists of any faction. Should be an interesting exercise. Once you find them, see where they finished. GW, thy name is Profit.

Thinking that tournament lists are representative of the overall playerbase is a mistake. Most players are a lot more casual than Dakka.

The other thing is, unpopular at tournament level or not, if that was a problem to GW (unlikely) the answer is not in a million years going to be cutting them from the game, they would just make them more useful. They don't even need to release a dex to do it anymore.

Also, how popular are Primaris marines at a tournament level? Theres no reason at all to think they will replace the vanilla marines rules as a dex entry imo.

A five man Crusader squad with two plasma and a lascannon is an awesome troop no matter how you slice it. Saying Marines are bad here is just preaching to the choir.

 Primark G wrote:
A five man Crusader squad with two plasma and a lascannon is an awesome troop no matter how you slice it. Saying Marines are bad here is just preaching to the choir.

Not exactly. They give up points very quickly. They are destructive until they get zorfed, and then you just lost three expensive pieces of gear quickly.

The unit is less than 120 points and much better than an IG troop.

120 pts for 5 power armor bodies is ~24 pts /W. With no FNP, no invuln. That's getting into repulsor territory of bad.

I said less than 120 points. Come on now.

How much less? 110?

Martel732 wrote:
How much less? 110?

65+25+13=103 points

So yeah, two Infantry squads would be a lot better.

They have two plasma guns somehow. Wait, isn't that illegal?

Not really they do two very different things. The Crusader squad is not for board control (strong hint).

So they've got one lascannon and one plasma gun. Tactical squads used to be able to do that a long time ago. That's pretty good, but it completely wastes their chapter tactics, and most BT players I know refuses to build their lists like this.

I think ten kabalites with 2X special and one heavy is cheaper and better.

Martel732 wrote:
They have two plasma guns somehow. Wait, isn't that illegal?

Ah it's the Combi-Plasma. So that's 118 points.

It's less than 120 technically. Not the absurd amount hinted by Primark though.