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.

Bharring wrote:
Umm, my back/midfielders can put out decent anti-infantry fire at 24"? Not great, but much better than currently. So they do the job they have now, but instead of having that bite against MCs that wander too close, they do most of that damage, but now do decent damage at longer range than most of my Eldar infantry.

I like how they are now more, but boltguns instead of shurikats would make them absurd at mid range. A huge buff.

1 shot at 24 is decent?...wow. Let me tell you something about 1 str 4 shot at range 24...it's so worthless - most the time you wont even remember to shoot it.

Arnais wrote:
I'm sure a lot of eldar players, myself included, would be happy if the Offensive capabilities of the WS shield were dropped for something like if you desactivate the shield the WS becomes assault vehicle and enemy units in the front arc at 6' from the WS have to take a pinning check.

It is unfair to judge guardians and avengers by their transports,

By the same standards tactical SM are all overpowered because for 35 points they can objective secure with a drop pod, deploy safely wherever they want and get an almost assured alpha strike to deal with the most dangerous units/vehicles by flooding them in plasma and melta.

Drop pods are in no way nearly as good as WS. A tactical marine alpha strike is a joke and opponents and set up in ways to minimize drop pod alpha strikes in general. Drop pods aren't as good as Xeno generals claim, because I OWN drop lists consistently, but have beaten Eldar once since their 6th ed codex dropped. That's not even remotely comparable. Players have been dealing with drop pods since 5th ed and they aren't any scarier now than they were then.

For 9 ppm? As a *tertiary* responsibility?

(This post refers to swapping ShuriCats for Boltguns on Guardians)

9ppm would be a little high if that were their only responsibility. But holding a position comes first. Then, potshots with a heavy weapon. And then they'd still get 2xS4 within 12". Finally, if the opponent avoids all that, they still would shoot like Marines.

So 13-14 Guardians would kill 1 Tac Termie that waltzed up in front of them without the Guardians being shot. Not as good as 3, but who lets Guardians get away with that anyways?

Ask Ork or Nid players what they think of that!

But who really cares about a boltgun shot?
Marines? It only has a 1/9 chance of killing a Marine, right? So 13/9 ppm/shot killed. Not terrible.
DAs? 2/9 chance, or 26/9 ppm/shot. Nice.
Orkz? 1/3 chance, only 18/9 ppm/shot. Adds up.
Termies? 1/18 chance. So expensive, though, so 20/9 ppm/shot. Does some damage.
Guardians? 4/9 chance. *36*/9 ppm! Thats who really cares!

Boltguns aren't the trash you seem to think they are.

But the price paid to get those shots is high. Boltguns are indeed awful. They've been awful since 5th and were super awful in 2nd. Marines in general have poor firepower across the board for their price. The exceptions are what you see spammed over and over.

I don't like blade storm from a "fun" perspective because it doesn't let me roll dice. I just see my opponent's dice and pick up models that normally would get a save. While that's fine for more powerful stuff, I don't think that ability should ever be on a basic troop gun.

I think the most fun part of the game is when you have two squads shooting or fighting that can both hit each other, both wound each other, and both take saves.

I play marines because I like being able to roll saves against junk instead of just watching my opponent's dice on his turn. It keeps me more involved in the game. But the sheer amount of stuff in the game now that tells me I don't get to roll crap is getting ridiculous.

#shouldhavepickednecrons

But doesn't a PG/combiPG squad do the same? Or Grav bikers?

Granted, its 5 in that squad compared to 7 DAs, for the points. But it does about the same to armor saves, and a lot more to AVs.

And Guardians *are* APed by Boltguns...

(
I picked Marines because I wanted reasonably survivable basic troops that were generalists. And could kit them out for specific roles. More choppy than the shooty, more shooty than the choppy.

I picked Eldar because I wanted short-range infantry, each really good at what they did, but fell apart if not kept safe. With ways to keep them safe, but unable to do much until they engage.

I picked Tau, because I wanted to do Xenos mech, and Serpents OP. And I like their look.
)

I think it's an even worse feeling that SS/SL give marines a save, but it just doesn't matter because wound spam.

I think I said this several pages ago, but bladestorm is just one more unfun rule to deal with in a book filled with unfun units to go up against. Units that literally make other lists' units die in place after having accomplished nothing.

Why are people comparing a one use weapon, the combi-plasma, that also has the Gets Hot special rule to a weapon that has no similar downside? Why is that not apart of this conversation that you are trying to control? I don't think that Bladestorm is OP, I do think that it is an unnecessary additional buff on top of everything else. DA's are more resilient to small arms fire because they have more wounds to go through than that five man CSM squad that also has a chance of killing itself with Gets Hot. In the current meta more wounds is more important that armor saves because of things like Bladestorm and all of the high AP weapons that have become more and more prevalent as each new codex gets released.

I understand that people want to paint this conversation in a way that we talk about DA vs Terminators with both sides walking across the board at each other with no cover between them, but that is ludicrous. If all Eldar had was Bladestorm then it would probably be okay, but they have Battle Focus, the WS, and plenty of other little toys to play with. Bladestorm is basically a multiplier that just adds on to an already unbalanced equation, that is all anyone is saying. If they changed Bladestorm and nothing else, nothing would change. If they changed everything else and left Bladestorm alone, I don't know. It still might be rather annoying but it is something that is hard to judge based on all the other crap you can get.

I will tell you that when I was playing my Eldar army I never used the Serpent Shield as a weapon and only played two of them with 9 man DA squads with Warlocks attached. Bladestorm made them dangerous enough that I could move my WS's into position and unload them at any target I wanted and take them off the table regularly. So yeah, from my perspective Bladestorm alone is a little silly, I may have had to point a larger amount of points than the target sometimes but I could do it in a way that allowed little retaliation.

"Why are people comparing a one use weapon, the combi-plasma, that also has the Gets Hot special rule to a weapon that has no similar downside?"

Because proponents of marine efficacy want to act like access to gear is the same as having the gear for free and ignore the 14 pt dead weight model that is carrying it as well as the cost of the plasma gun/combi-gun. The IG does it so much better than marines. Cheap guy, potent gun, done.

Marines have efficacious units. Tac squads, regardless of gear, are not one of them.

In terms of marine durability, they are taking it from both ends from the proliferation of AP 2 as well as high ROF S6+ attacks. Both of these mechanics just wreck marines by invalidating their save, their T, or sometimes both. But maybe even worse than this is the marine's inability to remove the sources of AP2/ROF S6+ from the table. Poor firepower is now an unforgivable sin in 40K.

DAs would need 2x the number to be as resilient as Marines to small arms (boltguns).

Guardians would need 4x.

(Also, Warlocks can't currently join DAs, and haven't since the current codex released)

What role do you see DAs and Guardians playing? Should they really do less/the same damage in shooting than Marines, in all circumstances?

Its not like Marines never remove other units from the table that way. I see it happen/do it all the time.

(CombiPlas is 1-shot, but if Termies or equivalents are a threat, they are charging next round anyways)

"Its not like Marines never remove other units from the table that way. I see it happen/do it all the time. "

We have very different experiences. I struggle to remove anything from good lists with tac squads. In a wall of WS/WK, for example, they have no targets at all.

"What role do you see DAs and Guardians playing?"

Right now they are life support systems for WS. If that weren't true, the situation becomes more complex.

Martel - PG and Combi - and the guys carrying them *were* factored in. In fact, DAs payed 1 more point in that analysis. Saying otherwise is just spouting FUD.

The point of comparing them to Tacs is (1), people keep bringing them up, and (2), if DAs compare reasonably to a unit most consider garbage, then they should be reasonable. If they compare reasonably to something broken, they're probably broken.

As for S6 spam or AP3 killing Marines almost as well as DAs (not true anyways - DAs die faster by 50% more to s6 that doesn't AP), DAs die even easier to S5 or AP4.

And Marines sure don't lack the ability to remove high-volume Bladestorm from the table.

The easiest way to take down Eldar is to be 'more Eldar' than them.
Get in behind a Wave Serpent, and the AV10 with no shield is now just the back-end of a Rhino.
Dark Reapers ignore Jink, so send your bikes the other way around.
Fighting Guardians with Marines? Get your Bolters to 23" range and they'll have trouble getting into 12", where you get to assault them. 3s to hit, 3s to wound and only cover saves can protect them.

As for Bladestorm, it is a bit too ubiquitous. I try to keep it out of my lists, but Windrider Jetbikes get it. 60-ish points for a 3-wound ShuriCannon is too good to pass up.

How do you get get 50% more to a scattler laser? The math is almost the same except the save rate is 50% instead of 66%.

I wasn't specifically referring to your analysis, but I could see how you would take it that way. It also didn't help the CSM that they had to be within 12" to do that, and the DA could do it safely from 18".

Fail on a 1,2
Vs
Fail on a 1,2,3

66% -> 50% is actually a 50% increase in vulnerability. Its one of those odd-sounding ways numbers work.

Bharring wrote:
Fail on a 1,2
Vs
Fail on a 1,2,3

66% -> 50% is actually a 50% increase in vulnerability. Its one of those odd-sounding ways numbers work.

Okay, fair enough.

Against Davu + WK, this whole debate is marginal, certainly.

My interest - and I think the OPs - is more about other Eldar lists. More casual environments.

The hate for Bladestorm is strong. Not sure what to do about it in my lists.

Bharring wrote:
Against Davu + WK, this whole debate is marginal, certainly.

My interest - and I think the OPs - is more about other Eldar lists. More casual environments.

The hate for Bladestorm is strong. Not sure what to do about it in my lists.

I hate WS a lot more. And scatter walkers or scatter/SC walkers. I've seen those walkers fortuned in ruins way too many times.

Bharring wrote:
DAs would need 2x the number to be as resilient as Marines to small arms (boltguns).

Guardians would need 4x.

(Also, Warlocks can't currently join DAs, and haven't since the current codex released)

What role do you see DAs and Guardians playing? Should they really do less/the same damage in shooting than Marines, in all circumstances?

Its not like Marines never remove other units from the table that way. I see it happen/do it all the time.

(CombiPlas is 1-shot, but if Termies or equivalents are a threat, they are charging next round anyways)

To the Warlock point, I did not know that. In my defense Eldar have never really been an army I cared to play. I only played them a couple of times when the 6th codex came out because I was given a free army by a friend who was getting out of the game. After playing a couple of games with them I sold the army.


Yes, DA take more wounds than Marines to bolters...great, what is the point in saying that? Are bolters currently the top tier of the meta? Are they something that we build armies around in order to deal with? The most common place weapons will wound Marines and DA's on 2+ some of them ignore army and some of them do not. DA save 16% less times than Marines. There are very few AP4 high strength weapons that are going to be fired with any regularity at DAs.

In a Marine vs DA fight, the Marines will probably win out. But really this game is not won and loss on your troops, so many list take minimum troop choices that we affectionately call them a tax. It is only in maelstrom missions that you start to see more than minimum troops and people are certainly NOT using them for their offensive capabilities.

So you are right, in a straight up fight DA are not to bad compared to some other troop choices, Bladestrom puts them towards the higher end of the pack when it comes to potential. But as I said in my previous point, as much as you want to frame this conversation in that way, that isn't how this game is played. I wish this game played in such a way where troops had a larger impact on the game rather than just being their to capture objectives. I wish we played a game with more restrictions on how many non-troop choices you could take. Infact, my ideal would be to do something similar to Deadzone, which is basically saying only one non-troop for every troop choices or something similar.

With the way this game is set up and the way the current meta is, troops are a tax that don't generally apply to the games outcome except for surviving long enough to hold objectives. Because of that what is more valuable than an elite generalist is a cheap and efficient fodder. Guardians are cheap and efficient fodder. DA allow access to the most powerful dedicated transport out there. The fact that both Guardians and DA can put the hurt on any non AV unit in the game because of their psuedo rending that doesn't require additional points is what takes them from being a tax to being a tax that might actually accomplish something. SM can take a plasma/combiplasma, but why would I waste the points on my troop tax when I could just take some Sternguard and do the same thing? We are forced to take troops, most times we want to minimize how many points they are going to cost us. Eldar troops just come out as more appealing when you look at it from the cost perspective.

Martel732 wrote:
Marines have efficacious units. Tac squads, regardless of gear, are not one of them.

Maybe when you play, but in my experience that is simply not true.

@Arbiter_Shade:

You point out two things I'd like to address. First, that avengers allow cheap access to the serpent. As previously mentioned, the serpent is broken. We all know this. The question is whether or not bladestorm itself is also broken. Avengers can cheaply unlock another serpent. Okay. That doesn't really have much direct bearing on bladestorm. I don't say this to be rude but to try and keep this conversation from devolving into yet another "wave serpents OP," thread.


Second, you mention that avengers can harm any non AV unit in the game. This is certainly nice for the avengers, but marines aren't exactly incapable of hurting targets themselves. Plasma and melta both ignore armor. They also threaten armor. I'm not going to say that krak grenades are a cure-all, but you *do* have the option to lob a strength 6 attack in shooting or to have nothing but strength 6 attacks in melee against especially hardy targets.

Bladestorm *does* let avengers hurt any non-av target in the game, but they're certainly not alone in that.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Marines have efficacious units. Tac squads, regardless of gear, are not one of them.

Maybe when you play, but in my experience that is simply not true.

What exactly do they do for you? And furthermore, how many of those things were preventable by your opponent?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Wyldhunt wrote:
@Arbiter_Shade:

You point out two things I'd like to address. First, that avengers allow cheap access to the serpent. As previously mentioned, the serpent is broken. We all know this. The question is whether or not bladestorm itself is also broken. Avengers can cheaply unlock another serpent. Okay. That doesn't really have much direct bearing on bladestorm. I don't say this to be rude but to try and keep this conversation from devolving into yet another "wave serpents OP," thread.


Second, you mention that avengers can harm any non AV unit in the game. This is certainly nice for the avengers, but marines aren't exactly incapable of hurting targets themselves. Plasma and melta both ignore armor. They also threaten armor. I'm not going to say that krak grenades are a cure-all, but you *do* have the option to lob a strength 6 attack in shooting or to have nothing but strength 6 attacks in melee against especially hardy targets.

Bladestorm *does* let avengers hurt any non-av target in the game, but they're certainly not alone in that.

18" range is infinitely better than krak grenades.

Martel732 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Marines have efficacious units. Tac squads, regardless of gear, are not one of them.

Maybe when you play, but in my experience that is simply not true.

What exactly do they do for you? And furthermore, how many of those things were preventable by your opponent?

I play Sisters, aka the extra squishy Tactical Marines and do fine with them. Adding in options like Chapter Tactics (replacing AoF & Shield of Faith), the statline bonus (+1WS/S/T/I for 1pt), Combat Squads (basically 1pt), and ATSKNF (free) and I can't see HOW they are so bad.

Also you keep comparing the strengths of specialists to Tact Marines but ignore all penalties they have. .

Tact Marines have no real weaknesses, they're just not god-tier in every single thing they can do. That doesn't make them bad. Playing them poorly makes them bad.

There is no way to play a unit poorly that has no real capability/pt to begin with. Their primary strength is bullet catcher in a game about devastating offense. They are in the wrong game; they are an artifact from 3rd. They are bad because their offense, in practice, is terrible. They are so generalized that they can't do anything cost effectively. Add this up over several squads, and you have a dumpster fire.

Again, what exactly are people doing with tac squads to make them so great? Tac marines alleged lack of weakness is completely overshadowed by their lack of strengths in the current meta in my view.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Marines have efficacious units. Tac squads, regardless of gear, are not one of them.

Maybe when you play, but in my experience that is simply not true.

What exactly do they do for you? And furthermore, how many of those things were preventable by your opponent?

I play Sisters, aka the extra squishy Tactical Marines and do fine with them. Adding in options like Chapter Tactics (replacing AoF & Shield of Faith), the statline bonus (+1WS/S/T/I for 1pt), Combat Squads (basically 1pt), and ATSKNF (free) and I can't see HOW they are so bad.

Also you keep comparing the strengths of specialists to Tact Marines but ignore all penalties they have. .

Tact Marines have no real weaknesses, they're just not god-tier in every single thing they can do. That doesn't make them bad.

That pretty well sums up my thoughts on tac marines. When people talk about marines, they often say something to the effect of, "Marines are a forgiving army to play." I think that's pretty accurate. They don't excel at anything, but they're not bad at most things either. Plus, they're durable enough that they'll usually have a few bodies left over to keep fighting with even if they fail to kill something on the first try. I know plenty of things out there can deal handily with marines, but it's generally something very powerful/expensive that you want to be using on something more important than a tac squad or else it's an option made specifically to deal cost-effectively with marines. Or they just pile on the shots which means they aren't shooting at other things in your army.

Actually, I find marines extremely UNforgiving. Mainly because your return fire is usually weak compared to incoming fire. You only have a few units that are actually fearsome, and if those get focused down, your list is basically helpless.

This is why you see so many biker/cent lists that involve invisibility.

Martel732 wrote:
There is no way to play a unit poorly that has no real capability/pt to begin with. Their primary strength is bullet catcher in a game about devastating offense. They are in the wrong game; they are an artifact from 3rd. They are bad because their offense, in practice, is terrible. They are so generalized that they can't do anything cost effectively. Add this up over several squads, and you have a dumpster fire.

Again, what exactly are people doing with tac squads to make them so great?

You answer comes from the question: What are Tact Marines real weaknesses? The list is REALLY short compared to most units.

And if you're losing your Tact Marines all the time you're doing something very wrong. Like standing out in the middle of the table, without cover and not trying to protect your models. Your Rhinos can turbo boost for example. USE IT. Shoot your Tacts, then turbo-boost the Rhino between the biggest threat and the Marines.

Or you can ram Rhinos up in your opponent's face turn 1 (12" move + 6" flat out to go 18" a turn, meaning you can cross the No Man's Land on most deployments in one turn, doing this with enough targets can prevent your opponent from effectively being able to respond to every threat, especially when paired with other high priority threats like your HS slots).

The few things that are actual weaknesses for Marines (AP3, AP2) can be countered with cover, creating LoS blocking through screening and playing smart. Just running your stuff up the board like you're playing the Green Tide is just asking for trouble.

Seriously, all I ever hear you do is bitch about how bad Marines are, and how you can't compete with any other army because of it. If you hate your Marines so much wtf are you playing them?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Actually, I find marines extremely UNforgiving. Mainly because your return fire is usually weak compared to incoming fire. You only have a few units that are actually fearsome, and if those get focused down, your list is basically helpless.

This is why you see so many biker/cent lists that involve invisibility.

Funny, because I never see that list. That list didn't even do well at LVO. Sure it looks good on paper, but when against people who know how to pick it apart it isn't that good.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
There is no way to play a unit poorly that has no real capability/pt to begin with. Their primary strength is bullet catcher in a game about devastating offense. They are in the wrong game; they are an artifact from 3rd. They are bad because their offense, in practice, is terrible. They are so generalized that they can't do anything cost effectively. Add this up over several squads, and you have a dumpster fire.

Again, what exactly are people doing with tac squads to make them so great?

You answer comes from the question: What are Tact Marines real weaknesses? The list is REALLY short compared to most units.

And if you're losing your Tact Marines all the time you're doing something very wrong. Like standing out in the middle of the table, without cover and not trying to protect your models. Your Rhinos can turbo boost for example. USE IT. Shoot your Tacts, then turbo-boost the Rhino between the biggest threat and the Marines.

Or you can ram Rhinos up in your opponent's face turn 1 (12" move + 6" flat out to go 18" a turn, meaning you can cross the No Man's Land on most deployments in one turn, doing this with enough targets can prevent your opponent from effectively being able to respond to every threat, especially when paired with other high priority threats like your HS slots).

The few things that are actual weaknesses for Marines (AP3, AP2) can be countered with cover, creating LoS blocking through screening and playing smart. Just running your stuff up the board like you're playing the Green Tide is just asking for trouble.

Seriously, all I ever hear you do is bitch about how bad Marines are, and how you can't compete with any other army because of it. If you hate your Marines so much wtf are you playing them?

They're what I have. And I'm not giving GW the kind of jack it would take to change. That said, I really bought in in 3rd edition, where marines were very, very good. I expected them to be toned down over time, but it's gotten a bit silly I think.

No one is running marines up the center of the board and hoping for the best. It's about the crippling firepower of Xeno lists vs the mediocre return fire of marines.

"can prevent your opponent from effectively being able to respond to every threat"

Well built Xeno lists can respond to most marine threats.

"how bad Marines are"

Tac marines. C:SM is full of nasty stuff. Just none of it is in the troop section. And I hate how the term "generalist" is used as an excuse to have crap capabilities. Doing nothing well is not useful in this kind of game.

Martel732 wrote:
They're what I have. And I'm not giving GW the kind of jack it would take to change. That said, I really bought in in 3rd edition, where marines were very, very good. I expected them to be toned down over time, but it's gotten a bit silly I think.

Seeing as Marines have gotten a lot cheaper since 3rd and gained options they used to pay for (grenades) for free as well as gained free USRs I have to heavily disagree with your assessment that they got "worse".

Martel732 wrote:
No one is running marines up the center of the board and hoping for the best. It's about the crippling firepower of Xeno lists vs the mediocre return fire of marines.

It's not using screening, cover, and learning how to properly wield a Marine army to counter that "crippling firepower" (that's mounted on more fragile everything). Inversely the most durable Xenos (Necrons) has the least crippling firepower.

Seriously, if you can't win with Marines the problem isn't that your army is "underpowered", it's you at this point. There are a LOT of ways to mitigate the things you complain about (not to mention most Marine weapons AP a majority of Xenos options out there) but you just keep bitching about the 1-2 things they specialize in while ignoring the things that make them easier to take down. It's like complaining that Fire Dragons are good at killing tanks while ignoring that they don't do well against hordes or close-combat units.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Arbiter_Shade wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
Do any non-SM armies hate bladestorm? The only real arguments are that they kill marines too easily but marines are only half off the armies; so do the other half hate the rule?

Personally I think that it's fine due to their short ranged guns.

I hate them with my Tyranids...nothing like making TMCs even more squishy.

I hate them as Necrons, though now I still get a decent save against it, so I have little right to complain. And I also hate it as Tyranids. And everyone says it balances well with their short ranged guns, but I'd kill for 2 shots at 18" instead of 12, and be able to run before or after. THAT is what makes up for their range. So, essentially, they have a 24" threat range in the shooting phase.

Aren't Fleshborers the only 12" gun in the Nids army?

Umm, I believe Spinefists are as well, but yes. I was simply referring to rapid firing Gauss rifles. I only get 2 shots at 12", not 18.