Switch Theme:

An end to Era, the death of the space marine boogieman.  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in es
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain




Vigo. Spain.

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.

 Crimson Devil wrote:

Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.

ERJAK wrote:
Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




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.

 Tomsug wrote:
Semper krumps under the radar

 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






^Hah! How were they possibly bad in 4th?!

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





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.
   
Made in it
Gargantuan Gargant




Italy

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.


 
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




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.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




NE Ohio, USA

 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....

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/13 08:33:16


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 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.

   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




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.

 Tomsug wrote:
Semper krumps under the radar

 
   
Made in ca
Secretive Dark Angels Veteran




Vancouver, BC

 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.
   
Made in es
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain




Vigo. Spain.

 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.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/13 15:46:42


 Crimson Devil wrote:

Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.

ERJAK wrote:
Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.

 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






 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'

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/13 16:17:32


"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"

"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"

"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"

"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"  
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 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.

   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






I think this thread reach its natural death when people started suggesting ork boys get 2 wounds for 9 points. LOL. No.


If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 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.


 Tomsug wrote:
Semper krumps under the radar

 
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






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.

If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






 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.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/13 18:20:13


And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in es
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain




Vigo. Spain.

 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.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/04/13 18:33:03


 Crimson Devil wrote:

Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.

ERJAK wrote:
Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 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

 Tomsug wrote:
Semper krumps under the radar

 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






 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.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in nl
Longtime Dakkanaut





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.
   
Made in us
Second Story Man





Astonished of Heck

I've never used Tactical Squads. I've found Crusader Squads to be far more flexible and practical.

Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
 
   
Made in it
Gargantuan Gargant




Italy

 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!

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/14 07:20:58



 
   
Made in us
Beautiful and Deadly Keeper of Secrets





 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.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/14 13:28:07


 
   
Made in us
Exalted Beastlord




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.

Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 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.

 Tomsug wrote:
Semper krumps under the radar

 
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






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.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/04/14 18:05:55


If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in us
Insect-Infested Nurgle Chaos Lord





In My Lab

 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.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






 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.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/14 18:10:46


If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran




 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.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: