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.

 G00fySmiley wrote:

 Jaxler wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Sisters of battle are undercosted though.

Marines have defense. They don't have offense. Staying power is also a function of how hard you hit. The more you kill, the longer you live.

Marines are actually one of the squishiest armies in the game.

they are no longer the toughest army in the game with custodes, deathguard and knights in the mix... but they are still among the toughest armies in the game, t4 and 3+ or 2+ is not squishy and thier tanks/vehiclesa are plenty durable. they just pay to much for it. I do thin space marines need some points adjustments but that does not mean they are easy to kill, it just means they do not have enough models on the field. its liek playing 1200 points of custodes vs 1750 of imprerial guard.. custodes are still tough , they just don't have enough bodies or offense to compete. .

They become squishy after you equip them. On a per point basis, which is what matters.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:
Yes, Multi-Melta, and Melta, are way overpriced for what they do.

Now, if the multi-melta had a rule that if a 6 is rolled for damage against a <VEHICLE>, then that vehicle is instantly slain, that would make melta worthwhile. And, getting into melta range.

But that's not generally a function of TAC marines.

In truth if you:

(a) change ATSKNF so that instead of rerolling dice for morale checks, marines auto-pass
and
(b) adjusted the cost of some wargear - for instance, grav, melta, etc.
(c) allowed marines to take 2 special and 2 heavy if it's a 10-man squad

You'd find yourself with reasonably potent squads. You'd have 5 ablative wounds before you're pulling a special/heavy/sarge, and you've got a bit of specialization/flexibility.

It's really all the equipment, though. When you start at 13 ppm, and none of the equipment is helping your survival, any kind of equipment is a liability on your opponent's turn. Plasma gets a pass, but it still increases the cost of a squad significantly.

You guys are off the rails. A 4 point price cut is huge. This game isn't played troops vs troops. If you subtract Grey Knights and Space Wolves marines are mid-tier.

 Marmatag wrote:
You guys are off the rails. A 4 point price cut is huge. This game isn't played troops vs troops. If you subtract Grey Knights and Space Wolves marines are mid-tier.

I keep hearing that, but for marines to be mid-tier, there would have be approximately half of the non-marine codices considered inferior. Do you really think that's true?

"This game isn't played troops vs troops."

And that's exactly why marines are so poor. Their troops are also their elites, fast attack, etc.

I mean this gets back to the soup or no soup in regards to balance.

When you factor in soup, marines do well enough. Yes, there are a lot of "never bring this" units in the codex, but that's true of every army.

Trygon, Tyrannofex, Exocrine, Pryovores, Broodlords, Tyranid Warriors, Tyranid Prime, Old One Eye, Hive Tyrant without Wings, Tyrant Guard, Tervigon, Gargoyles, Malceptor, Melee Carnifex... Not even really playable. And there's more in the codex that's just "blah" like Mawlocs and Swarmlord.

There is not a single BA kit playable in the meta. The only troop "allowed" is from the 90s, and the other is a kitbash job. GW goes to the trouble to make a bunch of BA-specific kits, but then puts out codex: scout and smash captain.

To be clear, that's like 50 entries that are all useless; many because of the failings of T4 3+.

Martel732 wrote:
There is not a single BA kit playable in the meta. The only troop "allowed" is from the 90s, and the other is a kitbash job. GW goes to the trouble to make a bunch of BA-specific kits, but then puts out codex: scout and smash captain.

To be clear, that's like 50 entries that are all useless; many because of the failings of T4 3+.

BA are essentially red marines, you have the entire marine line to draw on. That said, Death Company need fixes, and many go beyond points. For instance, their leadership is disgustingly low.

ATSKNF is an absolute joke.

 Marmatag wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
There is not a single BA kit playable in the meta. The only troop "allowed" is from the 90s, and the other is a kitbash job. GW goes to the trouble to make a bunch of BA-specific kits, but then puts out codex: scout and smash captain.

To be clear, that's like 50 entries that are all useless; many because of the failings of T4 3+.

BA are essentially red marines, you have the entire marine line to draw on. That said, Death Company need fixes, and many go beyond points. For instance, their leadership of is disgustingly low.

You could make them fearless, and they'd still suck, because they are too easy to remove in 8th ed. The FAQ killed their only meaningful job, and they were overcosted then, too. I simply cannot surrender 20+ pts every time I roll 1 or 2. And that's against weapons marines are supposed to be good against.

Most of the marine line is useless, too. In fact, most of the BA codex IS the marine line. 50+ useless entries, just as I said. Because they get gunned down so easily in 8th.

We all get gunned down easy in 8th.

I'd rather lose 4 pts at a time than 13 pts. That's why souping in IG is a revelation. My last list had exactly 5 power armor guys. They were vets with stormbolters in a rhino. And even they are really overcosted.

 Marmatag wrote:
You guys are off the rails. A 4 point price cut is huge. This game isn't played troops vs troops. If you subtract Grey Knights and Space Wolves marines are mid-tier.

I can agree with a lot of what you say - but your opinions on tyranids and marines seem a little off to me. Tyranids are strong - a lot stronger than marines.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:
We all get gunned down easy in 8th.

Well at least a a tyranid (i also play tyranids) you have that 4++ invo save to rely on for your hive tyrant (we know what they are shooting first). For a marine they are shooting at your hell blaster squad or agressors. The same guns almost automatically wipe out agressors or hell blasters - probably no save. FHT gets a 4++ save with a reroll for the fail lascannon save. He is a lot harder to bring down.

I'm happy with my Tyranids right now, but that's also because this is the best they've ever been in my time playing 40k. They were a dumpster fire in 7th and 8th up until the codex. To not be an auto-lose faction is a major step up.

But let's not pretend that marines aren't consistently out-performing Tyranids in major events post Big-FAQ & Tyrant Nerf... because they are. Yeah, they're using vehicles and soup to do it, but those options still exist. Tyranids might be doing better if they didn't have hard-counters, like Imperial Guard, and Imperial Knights. Custodes Soup is also very strong against Tyranids.

Tyrants /w wings are the single best unit in the codex. We're not discussing a best-versus-best comparison here... we're talking troops.

 Marmatag wrote:
I'm happy with my Tyranids right now, but that's also because this is the best they've ever been in my time playing 40k. They were a dumpster fire in 7th and 8th up until the codex. To not be an auto-lose faction is a major step up.

But let's not pretend that marines aren't consistently out-performing Tyranids in major events post Big-FAQ & Tyrant Nerf... because they are. Yeah, they're using vehicles and soup to do it, but those options still exist. Tyranids might be doing better if they didn't have hard-counters, like Imperial Guard, and Imperial Knights. Custodes Soup is also very strong against Tyranids.

Tyrants /w wings are the single best unit in the codex. We're not discussing a best-versus-best comparison here... we're talking troops.

Are you really gonna bring up allies in this discussion? Either the army is good enough to perform on its own or it needs a redesign.

 fraser1191 wrote:
Does anyone think Kill team is going to have any bearing on the core game?
They dropped intercessors to 15, reivers to 16(I think the chute was still 2 points) , and classic marines to 12.

Intercessors seem like a steal now that they cost the same as the gun that kills them the best.

I think some of the mechanics might port over into 9th edition if they are successful in Kill Team. I'm less certain about the point values. Lots of things have point adjustments not because they are miscosted in 40k, but because they are more/less effective in Kill Team.

Tyel wrote:

meleti wrote:
Morale is hugely important for anyone not playing an army with high leadership and re-rolling morale tests.

And who would that be?

Many armies. Are you thinking that no one's ever lost a Cultist to morale, for instance?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
I'm happy with my Tyranids right now, but that's also because this is the best they've ever been in my time playing 40k. They were a dumpster fire in 7th and 8th up until the codex. To not be an auto-lose faction is a major step up.

But let's not pretend that marines aren't consistently out-performing Tyranids in major events post Big-FAQ & Tyrant Nerf... because they are. Yeah, they're using vehicles and soup to do it, but those options still exist. Tyranids might be doing better if they didn't have hard-counters, like Imperial Guard, and Imperial Knights. Custodes Soup is also very strong against Tyranids.

Tyrants /w wings are the single best unit in the codex. We're not discussing a best-versus-best comparison here... we're talking troops.

Are you really gonna bring up allies in this discussion? Either the army is good enough to perform on its own or it needs a redesign.

Unfortunately, this is not how GW sees it.

Power armor is pretty bad this edition for the cost marines are paying for it. It got alot softer and the T4 dose not matter as much as it used to. Also losing the attack on the charge hurt marines in general alot since that was always where alot of their CC damage came from. The core rules changes in general hurt marines alot and comparatively they did not really get any cheaper. It is not like last edition power armor was that good either it was just 500 points of free razorbacks and grav was busted. With most the crutches off it is starting to show a bit how bad the marine stat line is. You pay to much for so many useless stats.

I think if you made the current assault marines to 10 or 11 points with jumpacks they still would not get run much. Their durable at that point but still their damage is terrible 2S4 attacks in CC is not scaring anything that's the same thing as getting shot by a bolter but you had to get into CC to do it.

I keep seeing this "T4 is not good" mantra thrown around. How is it any worse than it once was?

 Eonfuzz wrote:
I keep seeing this "T4 is not good" mantra thrown around. How is it any worse than it once was?

Getting hit by S5 is the same for T3 as it is T4 now. Well and with the overkill mechanic removed it is no longer needed to not get 1 shot by stuff like assault cannons.

 mew28 wrote:
I think if you made the current assault marines to 10 or 11 points with jumpacks they still would not get run much. Their durable at that point but still their damage is terrible 2S4 attacks in CC is not scaring anything that's the same thing as getting shot by a bolter but you had to get into CC to do it.

This is the problem. There's no incentive to take ass marines. They'll always have inferior damage output to a tac with a bolter.

For me they need +1 attack as a minimum and perhaps AP-1 on their chainswords (as well as the extra attack it grants).

This should roll out to all melee marines. They're never going to be the same (or lower) points cost than an Ork Boy and its unlikely their points decrease massively because GW seems to like the ratio of marines you can put in a 2k list at present. So they need an increase in either damage, utility or durability. Their durability and utility is already OK, it is their damage that's lacking.

 mew28 wrote:

 Eonfuzz wrote:
I keep seeing this "T4 is not good" mantra thrown around. How is it any worse than it once was?

Getting hit by S5 is the same for T3 as it is T4 now.

And getting hit by S6 is the same for T4 as it is for T5 now, so it does depend on what you face.
IMO it's not toughness 4 that has particularly changed. But T3 has gotten tougher and 6-7 in particular notably weaker.

IMO the big change has been in armour. 3+ doesn't give the protection it used to while 5+ gives far more - doubled down on by the weapons that used to be effective against the T3/5+ hordes now being far less so, for instance a flamer fired into a huddled band of guardsmen in cover used to be good for half a squad or more while now it's barely a single wound.

My 2c on the topic though, no assault marines should not be 5pts. There is simply no room in the points range for all the sub 5pt models and you'd have to re-point practically everything else in the game too.

Martel732 wrote:
They become squishy after you equip them. On a per point basis, which is what matters.

Sisters are way squisher on a per-point basis after you equip them, if you put 2 melta 1 combi-melta in a 5 sisters squad!
So 3 points Sisters is about right, to compensate.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
They become squishy after you equip them. On a per point basis, which is what matters.

Sisters are way squisher on a per-point basis after you equip them, if you put 2 melta 1 combi-melta in a 5 sisters squad!
So 3 points Sisters is about right, to compensate.

You dont take meltas on sisters lol you take HB's and SB's, Melta Guns are not good at all this edition.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
You dont take meltas on sisters lol you take HB's and SB's, Melta Guns are not good at all this edition.

You don't take meltas on sisters because you put them on the dominions and seraphim. Or you take allies. Or you don't take sisters.

Will be interesting to see where chapter approved goes with them. A +1 to wound vehicles would help but the spread of invulnerable saves vs ranged attacks has really wasted the -4 AP GW used to replace old armourbane/lance/etc properties.

 Jaxler wrote:
My arguemebt is that at 8-9 points with the jump pack they’d be comparable in cost to scions, which they are worse than in every way. Their ability to tie down things in CC is rather pointless when scions will delete a unit instead of making a charge 50~% of the time with a reroll. Also, without their jump packs they literally cannot do anything useful. A guardsmen has better killing power when buffed with orders, and a better gun. Compare an assault marine to a fire warrior. A fire warrior has a vastly better gun and more synergy, and honestly is comparable in CC because they’re both useless in CC.

Convince me that they’re not a 5-6 point model that’s just overpriced.

Why not just fix the base models role?

Give them lots of CC attacks, 3 Minimum per model.
When equipped with a jumpack, a successful charge should inflict an automatic mortal wound.
Allow them to carry power weapons.
Give them a 6++ in CC after charging to illustrate the tactics of jumping around, dodging and parrying.

3 attacks per model is rather high.

Genestealers have 3 attacks per model and are T4 with a slower move speed - even with advance - can't deep strike - and have a 5++ instead of a 3+ - for 12ppm.

2 attacks per model seems more fair.

 Marmatag wrote:
3 attacks per model is rather high.

Genestealers have 3 attacks per model and are T4 with a slower move speed - even with advance - can't deep strike - and have a 5++ instead of a 3+ - for 12ppm.

2 attacks per model seems more fair.

They can also advance and charge, have better melee weapons, can easily go up to 4 attacks, and easy access to +1 to-hit.

Don't undersell Genestealers.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
3 attacks per model is rather high.

Genestealers have 3 attacks per model and are T4 with a slower move speed - even with advance - can't deep strike - and have a 5++ instead of a 3+ - for 12ppm.

2 attacks per model seems more fair.

They can also advance and charge, have better melee weapons, can easily go up to 4 attacks, and easy access to +1 to-hit.

Don't undersell Genestealers.

Advancing and charging on an 8" move, compared to a base 12" move with <Fly>?

4 attacks require they be at 10+ capacity, and not guaranteed.

Access to +1 to hit is in the form of a Broodlord, which (a) isn't easy because the broodlord sucks and (b) also isn't easy because the broodlord costs 165 points.

Genestealers are solid. Don't oversell them.

I actually agree, generally, with Marmatag. <Fly> is pretty hella useful (to the point where I'd consider 10 Seraphim to be better at assault than 10 Daemonettes, having experienced both units, because the Seraphim aren't under my opponent's control as much when using them). That by itself is a pretty kickass ability.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
...to the point where I'd consider 10 Seraphim to be better at assault than 10 Daemonettes...

It takes what, two, three daemonettes to out-assault a full 10 seraphim against a MEQ statline?

<FLY> is excellent though.

A.T. wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
...to the point where I'd consider 10 Seraphim to be better at assault than 10 Daemonettes...

It takes what, two, three daemonettes to out-assault a full 10 seraphim against a MEQ statline?

<FLY> is excellent though.

The real way Assault does damage in 8th edition (at least for small, fairly low-damage squads like 10-girl daemonettes) isn't by actually doing raw damage, but by shutting down large swaths of the opponent's shooting so that the big, actually strong, attackers can do the real work. The sooner a minor assault unit can shut down the enemy's shooting, the longer the major assault units survive to wreck face. Being able to shut down shooting, for a unit like Daemonettes and Seraphim, is of much greater value than the sum of the "points per swing" killed or whatever.