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.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Space Marines are not top tier, but they can still give a good fight in capable hands. I do pretty well with mono-UM power armor swarm type lists, (No Guilliman) and don't feel too far behind super-soup style lists. Like a Ynnari soup is scary, but I still feel my odds are 40/60ish.

You realize that 40/60 odds means your opponent's list is 50% more powerful than yours, right? "Not too far behind"?

Guilliman is a massive force multiplier and the only reason he isn't dominating every tournament is that base marines are so bad. If you want a laugh roll some dice to see what a guard/DE/Eldar army would do with full rerolls.

As said - the core problem with marines is that they are overpriced, at just about every level. Again, the basic tactical marine starts badly because he shoots like a 6-7 point unit but costs twice that. At the same time he isn't tough. His base defensive stats are worth about 12 points. He has the one upside of getting a 2+ save in cover. That aside however its all downside. Any AP disproportionately boosts your effectiveness versus 3+ armour more than say 5+ armour. There are plenty of guns with Plasma style stats (good strength, good AP) that give horrendously good returns for their points versus Marines. You also have mortal wounds that ignore that overrated 3+ armour save entirely. By contrast there are no weapons that give close to this return versus basic infantry of other factions.

This is just the basic Marine - before you bling him up. Lets say you want devastators, or assault units with thunderhammers etc etc? Suddenly you have a model which is 30-40 points per wound. In a meta where you can get 40% return against basic tactical marines at 13 points a model you can now get 100% returns.

This leads to the much maligned Grey Knight problem. I think a Strike Marine has a reasonable offensive power for his points (baby smite, stormbolter, 2 attacks at -2 AP D3 damage in assault) but 21 points for a 3+ save is far too fragile. This applies through most of their roster.

Primaris just take this to extremes. The intercessor has even worse shooting for his points than the tactical marine except in certain niche situations. (They win out in a straight duel between vs tactical marines because of that -1 AP, but that's about it, and as said tactical marines are about half as effective as they should be). At the same time there are seemingly an ever expanding list of reasonable AP Damage 2 weapons who can drop a Primaris stone dead - and generate an incredible return on their points for the trouble.

So in conclusion you have a faction which is expensive so you don't get much stuff, which undermines board control and claiming objectives. Its fragile, so stuff dies relatively easily and gives up a lot of points when doing so. Finally, by and large it doesn't have good offensive output, so your opponent can weather your attacks.

With that said 40k is a game of skill and luck. Within reason any army can win against any other army. Dakka and other forums tends to assume that if unit X is "better" than unit Y, it always wins every game. This is not the case. People run hot and cold on dice. Some people don't know/forget what they are doing and completely ignore the objectives. Maelstrom can render games into a farce (which is why I don't think its popular and tends to be quietly purged from tournaments). This isn't to say list building doesn't stack the odds in one or the other player's favour but it isn't true to say any faction automatically loses all its games.

Karol wrote:
Probablly a matter of perspective and how a given marine codex is writen. For example the SW codex is not a good codex in terms of tournament winning, but it seems to give SW player the option to play an army that feels and plays like a SW army should to a degree they find ok.

I will agree that the SW codex "feels" like what I think the army should be like. And I'm capable of fielding my old 2e force with minimum changes (had to swap a few weapons about & add another 5 Grey Hunters to qualify as a battalion).

Karol wrote:
On the other part of the marine spectrum we have something like deathwing, which fans and player think who the hell knows what about their army, because it is neither good, nor fun to play, nor does it feel like a termintor army should.

(shrugs) Aside from the continuous nerfing of the deep strike rules, DW look to play just about how they've always played. Limited # of high pt models divided between assorted terminators, dreadnoughts, land raiders, a few characters & mediocre special rules.
Now days though there's a few more weapon options....

Karol wrote:
Also marines have one of the few books where there are just no good or fun builds in the entire codex. Which does give then a +1 in the who ever is the worse race.

I'll disagree with you on this one. I'm sure I can build several effective (& fun) lists.

I like the fact that they are supposed to be an elite army. I'd hate to see points reductions that turn them into a horde. My issue is they don't actually kill things. They're shock troops with pillow fists. Their offensive capabilities, whether through improving ballistic skill or changing weapon profiles or using buff characters to improve AP etc need sorting out. A full tactical squad should be able to delete a squad of 10 guard mooks. If this means increasing their points then so be it.

The more you look at tge marine codex the more issues you find
A heavy bolter is 10 pts
A twin heavy bolter is 17 pts
An assualt cannon is 22pts
Twin assualt cannons are 44pts

The problem is GW can't balance stuff without Guilliman's aura or its super OP around him or they balance it for his aura and it sucks if its not parked next to him.

But they refuse to admit that they made a mistake with his aura.

 Arachnofiend wrote:
No army in 8th stands on its own, soup is just too damn powerful. Guard and Drukhari get fairly close but that's about it.

Even by your metric Space Marines are fairly mid tier. They're sure as hell not Necron level.

My mono 1ksons do damn well.


Edit : when im not running any rubrics or SoTS that is.

Ice_can wrote:
The more you look at tge marine codex the more issues you find
A heavy bolter is 10 pts
A twin heavy bolter is 17 pts
An assualt cannon is 22pts
Twin assualt cannons are 44pts

The problem is GW can't balance stuff without Guilliman's aura or its super OP around him or they balance it for his aura and it sucks if its not parked next to him.

But they refuse to admit that they made a mistake with his aura.

the primarchs are a mistake in 40k, they should really be like the land raider terminus or whatever it is called. narrative only and not for matched play. in an 1850 list guilliman should cost 500 points, but in a 1000 point list he is not worth that. the issue specifically isn't what guilliman does himself but that aura.

on the topic of vanilla marines though they are lower mid tier. not garbage specifically, but defiantly behind the median by a noticeable amount and not in the same league as the top tier armies. That is as a mono dex vs mono dex. now add soup into the mix and given all the options that imperium have there is rarely any reason to add in a vanilla ingredient because they do not do anything specifically well. They are the swiss army knife of codexes, they have middling toughness, good armor, middling firepower, middling close combat, middling movement and pay for all of it on units that don't need it all. to compare a 5 man group of devistators with 4 heavy bolters is 105 points,, 3 heavy mortar teams is 33 points... why would naybody ever take the devistators? sure they have a better toughness, armor, movement, S,T, WS, BS, and L ... but they pay ~3x as much for stats they don't use or could compromise on to be better use of points. so when t picking soup ask me what is bette at their jobr... 5 devs, 4 with heavy bolters, or 9 HW mortars for 6 less points.

I read many saying they are Elite. But they are overpriced for this edition.

No ++ Saves.
No tactics for the entire army.
Agressors, Terminators, Assault units ( what I understand for Elite in an army) are a insane amount of points wasted)

Marines pay a lot to do almost nothing.

Ice_can wrote:
The more you look at tge marine codex the more issues you find
A heavy bolter is 10 pts
A twin heavy bolter is 17 pts
The problem is GW can't balance stuff without Guilliman's aura or its super OP around him or they balance it for his aura and it sucks if its not parked next to him.

I'm not sure of the connection between the heavy bolter cost and Guilliman. All the other BS 3+ factions pay the same, or are you just pointing out that it's not doubled?

FWIW this is not the place to push forward your hot takes on the merits of various human racial types.

Space marines are meh duh to a few core changes in 8th that make power armor meh, reward numbers over quality unless it's super elite and fast and GW pricing them as if rerolls are always on. 8th edition is so lethal that T4 3+ doesn't mean much when I can just bring more bodies. A few builds work ok but we have a multi edition issue that the marine stat line has not been good in a long time.

HoundsofDemos wrote:
Space marines are meh duh to a few core changes in 8th that make power armor meh, reward numbers over quality unless it's super elite and fast and GW pricing them as if rerolls are always on. 8th edition is so lethal that T4 3+ doesn't mean much when I can just bring more bodies. A few builds work ok but we have a multi edition issue that the marine stat line has not been good in a long time.

Slightly op in 3rd, adequate in 4th, bad since 5th.

Martel732 wrote:

HoundsofDemos wrote:
Space marines are meh duh to a few core changes in 8th that make power armor meh, reward numbers over quality unless it's super elite and fast and GW pricing them as if rerolls are always on. 8th edition is so lethal that T4 3+ doesn't mean much when I can just bring more bodies. A few builds work ok but we have a multi edition issue that the marine stat line has not been good in a long time.

Slightly op in 3rd, adequate in 4th, bad since 5th.

Tippety top tier in 7th. Initially okay in 8th until they got codex creeped out.

I meant the stat line. Base marines were trash in 7th. They needed 400 free points to gave a chance.

ccs wrote:
In addition apparently you should never buy anything/start a new army because either CA or the next FAQ is just around the corner & MIGHT change something.

I never understood this mindset. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate that people want to warn others that there may be some large changes coming in the next couple of months or so (or however long it will be). But, what if it's for an escalation league starting in the next week or two at my FLGS or GW? What if I want to start a new army now because I have time to start one now but won't have the time to start one once Chapter Approved is released. Let's say I have a week off for Thanksgiving and a week off for Christmas. Yes, Chapter Approved will be be out in December sometime, but will I have the money to invest in a new army after buying Christmas gifts? Maybe... maybe not. Will I have enough time to put all of these new models for this army on my Christmas list after Chapter Approved is released but before people have finished their Christmas shopping? Again, maybe... maybe not. It really depends on when people do their Christmas shopping.

People honestly just need to help someone who wants to start a new army by walking them through the decision then. I agree that it's definitely a great idea to warn someone that rules may be drastically changing in the next six weeks or so, but don't just leave it there. Warn them, but then continue to help them as if the current rule set isn't changing anytime in the near future.

SG

Marines absolutely have the right points costs, in that they are slightly more expensive than other armies. The problem is that they aren't worth that cost.
The Primaris line was a mistake. Marines should have just been updated to 8E with 2Ws standard and "Primaris" could have just been an updated Armour variant, maybe giving T5 of something along with the unique wargear.
But the basic Bolter Marine should have started 8E with 2W at about 15-16ppm. And Termies get 3W. Bikes might be fine with 2W, but T5 as now, but cheaper.

With this durability, Marines wouldn't "die in droves" to massed standard weaponry. You would need bigger guns to reliably take them out. Sure there are lots of "bigger guns" out there, but at least Marines would feel more durable in some situations.

But that didn't happen and Primaris Marines are a different thing, leaving regular Marines without the design space to "properly" fix.
The only realistic solution now is to dramatically drop their posts, but unfortunately that will make them feel cheap, which Marines should not feel expendable.

-

 Galef wrote:
Marines absolutely have the right points costs, in that they are slightly more expensive than other armies. The problem is that they aren't worth that cost.
The Primaris line was a mistake. Marines should have just been updated to 8E with 2Ws standard and "Primaris" could have just been an updated Armour variant, maybe giving T5 of something along with the unique wargear.
But the basic Bolter Marine should have started 8E with 2W at about 15-16ppm. And Termies get 3W. Bikes might be fine with 2W, but T5 as now, but cheaper.

With this durability, Marines wouldn't "die in droves" to massed standard weaponry. You would need bigger guns to reliably take them out. Sure there are lots of "bigger guns" out there, but at least Marines would feel more durable in some situations.

But that didn't happen and Primaris Marines are a different thing, leaving regular Marines without the design space to "properly" fix.
The only realistic solution now is to dramatically drop their posts, but unfortunately that will make them feel cheap, which Marines should not feel expendable.

-

You are right, without changing their Codex, points reduction is the only solution.

 reds8n wrote:
FWIW this is not the place to push forward your hot takes on the merits of various human racial types.

really ? that was an example of how a small deviation from the mean generates huge differences at both ends of statistic spread. What is wrong with that, plus it had nothing to do with merits, only with what the other anon showed that a 40\60 split means the 60 army is at a huge adventage. You could use anything in that example female to male income, size of trees in a forest, wealth redistribution etc The example I used is just the best known and one people understand the best. Because the ratio is huge.

People honestly just need to help someone who wants to start a new army by walking them through the decision then. I agree that it's definitely a great idea to warn someone that rules may be drastically changing in the next six weeks or so, but don't just leave it there. Warn them, but then continue to help them as if the current rule set isn't changing anytime in the near future.

See because of people like you, telling me that everything is more or less fine, and it only depends on the "right meta" to play, I invested in to Grey Knights. Also some people, and I belong to this group, do not have the option to buy a bad army, find out that it is bad and then buy in to another . So yeah maybe for someone like you buying any army on a whim, is ok. If it is unfun, you just buy another one. Some people on the other hand get stuck with their armies, can't even resell them to get their money back. And trust me there is few things worse then starting an army, people around you having fun with theirs and you not having no with yours, and worse you not knowing if GW will ever fix your army, because they may as well phase it out as they did it to some armies.

Or to not use me as an example. Imagine someone wanted a nice BA army, bought the cpts with scouts, the IG and the castellan, because mono BA doesn't work. And the nerf happened. And he maybe even did get the option to play with the army. They must feel great right now. Back to the even worse BA now, or should they switch to playing IG/knights, when all they wanted to play is some BA space marines ? Wonderful prospect for the future.

 Asherian Command wrote:
I have lost every game with space marines at my store. Its not because of luck, its just that everything out paces space marines.

Guardsmen can kill space marines in droves. In Droves.

They need help in all regards to their weaponry.

It's more that Guardsmen need to be nerfed in their ridiculous cost-effectiveness. 4 points is ridiculous for a T3 5+ wound that can poop out 4 BS4+ shots in rapid-fire range with orders. Every marine would practically need to come with a free Heavy Bolter to compare at their cost.

Karol wrote:

Or to not use me as an example. Imagine someone wanted a nice BA army, bought the cpts with scouts, the IG and the castellan, because mono BA doesn't work. And the nerf happened. And he maybe even did get the option to play with the army. They must feel great right now. Back to the even worse BA now, or should they switch to playing IG/knights, when all they wanted to play is some BA space marines ? Wonderful prospect for the future.

If you're explicitly chasing the meta, with the sole objective of "I must be the bleeding edge of efficacy" you're going to be 100% disappointed.

Sterling191 wrote:
If you're explicitly chasing the meta, with the sole objective of "I must be the bleeding edge of efficacy" you're going to be 100% disappointed.

Its not as if the Guard/Castellan/BA army is suddenly terrible now.

Tyel wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

HoundsofDemos wrote:
Space marines are meh duh to a few core changes in 8th that make power armor meh, reward numbers over quality unless it's super elite and fast and GW pricing them as if rerolls are always on. 8th edition is so lethal that T4 3+ doesn't mean much when I can just bring more bodies. A few builds work ok but we have a multi edition issue that the marine stat line has not been good in a long time.

Slightly op in 3rd, adequate in 4th, bad since 5th.

Tippety top tier in 7th. Initially okay in 8th until they got codex creeped out.

The army as whole maybe but the game has had the same basic problem for a long while now and that is the MEQ and terminator infantry are not good choices. Most space marine lists are either helped along by the crutch that is Bobby G or are soup. Pure marines, especially playing anything resembling how a company would be built is bad.

Tyel wrote:

Its not as if the Guard/Castellan/BA army is suddenly terrible now.

Agreed. I was commenting more on the "I wasted my money on an army that isn't the top cookie cutter meta" complaint.

Guilliman is a pox on marines. His re-roll all wound bubble was a huge mistake and marines cannot be fixed as long as he is out there.

In a competitive setting you are at a disadvantage for playing them (outside of the psychic brothers supreme command detachment and maybe some scouts). You can win if you outplay/roll your opponent but pretty much everything in their army has been outclassed by imperium units in subsequent codexes (armigers to predators, guardsmen to tacs, knights to everything...).

It gets worse when the meta has evolved to exploit the biggest weaknesses of the army. Reapers at the beginning, dark eldar disi cannons, knights...

Lack of mobility, most weapons struggle against invluns or hordes, lack of melee options outside of smash captains, bad vehicles, bad points per wound and really bad strats.

You can get creative and do the weird MW spam (supported by banners, apothecaries) but even then you better be one of the best players in the world and even then you are playing at a disadvantage (other armies do MW spam better).

Most of the models you own are bad (tacs, termies, razors, dreads, land raiders, cents, assaults, non-scout bikes) which contributes to the perception of them being trash tier.

They are bottom tier just above grey knights. Necrons, marines, blood angels, Ad Mech. DA, SW and DW are a tier above and playable but DW pretty much auto lose to DE dissie spam and struggle mightily against knights which is pretty much the meta. DA get by on the back of good characters, dark shroud and dark talons. SW I don't see much but they have good strats, psychic powers, a couple good units and their flyer isn't trash.

 reds8n wrote:
FWIW this is not the place to push forward your hot takes on the merits of various human racial types.

But I prefer Eldar Wymen

bananathug wrote:
Guilliman is a pox on marines. His re-roll all wound bubble was a huge mistake and marines cannot be fixed as long as he is out there.

Every time a Primarch is out, people buy it in droves.
If the model is a primarch, it will be appropriately statted.
There is no solution to this. Marine players (and chaos) made their bed.

Same things with big models. More knights.
Want tau auxiliaries? Forget them. Enjoy more big robots.

Pandabeer wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:
I have lost every game with space marines at my store. Its not because of luck, its just that everything out paces space marines.

Guardsmen can kill space marines in droves. In Droves.

They need help in all regards to their weaponry.

It's more that Guardsmen need to be nerfed in their ridiculous cost-effectiveness. 4 points is ridiculous for a T3 5+ wound that can poop out 4 BS4+ shots in rapid-fire range with orders. Every marine would practically need to come with a free Heavy Bolter to compare at their cost.

If you're factoring Orders into that equation, we are no longer talking about 4ppm models, as those Orders have to come from Officers who also have a cost.

 Vaktathi wrote:
.If you're factoring Orders into that equation, we are no longer talking about 4ppm models, as those Orders have to come from Officers who also have a cost.

And are not exactly invulnerable (yeah I know about positioning).

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Space Marines are not top tier, but they can still give a good fight in capable hands. I do pretty well with mono-UM power armor swarm type lists, (No Guilliman) and don't feel too far behind super-soup style lists. Like a Ynnari soup is scary, but I still feel my odds are 40/60ish.

You realize that 40/60 odds means your opponent's list is 50% more powerful than yours, right? "Not too far behind"?

The equation you're using to translate between chance of winning and percentage of power is wrong. Especially because any power discrepancy happens over multiple turns of the game. Plus, you'd have to define "power". If an army had 50% more points than mine (and was well constructed/played) I'd expect to have basically zero chance of winning.

But playing against some more super-soup type armies recently hasn't convinced me that I haven't any chance against them with vanilla marines (as some posters here would suggest), it's just an uphill battle. But the fact that I still have a 40%ish chance of winning tells me that they're closer than many would give credit for.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sterling191 wrote:

Karol wrote:

Or to not use me as an example. Imagine someone wanted a nice BA army, bought the cpts with scouts, the IG and the castellan, because mono BA doesn't work. And the nerf happened. And he maybe even did get the option to play with the army. They must feel great right now. Back to the even worse BA now, or should they switch to playing IG/knights, when all they wanted to play is some BA space marines ? Wonderful prospect for the future.

If you're explicitly chasing the meta, with the sole objective of "I must be the bleeding edge of efficacy" you're going to be 100% disappointed.

Words of truth.