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.

The morale rules in Epic Armageddon are vastly superior to those in 40k, and they'd probably be easy enough to use in the context of 40k.

Pretty much everyone's Ld went down a point during the edition change. (Characters are usually the exception)

I was losing Khorne Berserkers to morale last game. Find that a little questionable, lore-wise...

Morale is kinda weird in 40k because it's a setting where everything other than a guardsman or a termagaunt is puffed up as this fearless badass who will stand up against impossible odds with unshakable resolve. And sometimes the guardsmen get in on that too.

Like, it should be impossible for a Necron Warrior to fail a morale save because Warriors are functionally mindless. They don't have enough emotions to be scared. And sure, that's kinda represented with Ld 10, but due to the mechanics of the phase Warriors are actually one of the most vulnerable to running away since they must be used in max squads.

I dunno if this disconnect is enough to scrap the mechanic entirely for something that performs a similar function without the fluff weirdness, but it is annoying.

Yeah not all decisions are logic fluff-wise but the game was never the same as the fluff anyway. My Kataphrons Servitors should be unbreakable (they're brainwashed mono-task soldiers), my Skitarii could benefit from a +1 to their current Ld and yes, ATSKNF is not perfect, having a reroll shouldn't be a russian roulette thing where you can lose more than before the reroll, that's terrible design.

Morale probably is there to represent more than just running away. It could be that the model is shell shocked or confused by the volume of fire power focussed on the unit. Otherwise Tau drones would be immune.

Morale also represents squadmates caring for the wounded and taking them from the battlefield.

First game I had in 8th after my long hiatus I used 10 man squads. The last time. When I realized about morale for SM next game y used 6 man squads.

Some units should be inmune to morale, but GW wanted that no army is inmune to test.

Having units that are immune to morale breaks the game when some factions depend on morale <removed> to get through the game

Message edited for language - BrookM

And remember, losing models to Morale does not mean they "ran away like a coward" lore-wise. They could be carrying a wounded comrade off the battlefield at the order of their commander or something like that

And if you are losing Marines to Morale, several things HAVE to be in play. Either:
A) Your squad was bigger than 5 models. Don't do that, or at least be prepare to spend some CPs to ignore Morale

B) You're playing against Dark Eldar with -LD shenanigans. Just like A, don't do that either. DE seem tailor-made to wipe Marines quickly, so if you do play against them, know what you are in for, which brings me to:

C) If you are losing enough Marines to be taking risky Morale checks, it isn't the Morale that is killing those last few Marines, it was the lack of Marine's durability in the first place, followed by your bad luck at roll 5 or higher twice in a row.

In any case, LD8 is more than good for Marines, especially considering all the ways you can possible mitigate it (ATSKNF, the ignore Morale strat, UM tactic, etc)

-

My main problem with the morale in this edition is that it is boring. You kill some guys and then as a result of that you kill some more guys in the morale phase. I preferred how in the earlier editions morale might cause status effects or force an unit to fall back from the objective.

Morale, like the Psychic phase, needs a complete overhaul IMO. It's pretty much non-functional as is, with it very rarely mattering in a lot of cases. In particular, the system penalises you for taking larger units, and also becomes less impactful the longer the game goes on, which seems backwards to me. In essence you can have your squad massacred around you, roll well on the Morale roll and then be fine for the rest of the game as if nothing happened. I'd like to see Ld lowered across the board, with the current values only applied to squads taken above a certain size.

There are also far too many things in the game immune to Morale. Morale was supposed to be the anti-horde mechanic but when things like Poxwalkers, Gaunts and Orks are either completely immune or often functionally immune it makes a mockery of the system.

I assure you that orks are not immune to morale.

Where did you get that idea from? Have you actually ever played against orks?

Morale is also a far better mechanic in 8E than in prior ones. It actually does something from time-to-time, vs everything being Fearless, and what it does is clear and simple, vs falling back and having to rally and overall being a waste of time.

I can't remember what edition it was, but I remember a time when you could make a unit fall back and by keeping one of your units near it, you could force them to continue to fall back until they "killed themselves" by running off the table. It was dumb and I'm glad that's gone
In prior editions, Morale was either ignored altogether, or was far too harsh. 8E is my favor mechanic so far

And GW was smart to make Marines LD7, 8 with a Sgt, as it leaves room for Morale to actually matter some times for them. If they were LD9-10, ATSKNF would be pointless (which it arguable is in many cases anyway)

-

 Jidmah wrote:
I assure you that orks are not immune to morale.

Where did you get that idea from? Have you actually ever played against orks?

Yeah, its actually really easy to force a morale test. If you spread damage around you can negate the bonus morale from Mob Rule.
Its like the opposite of necrons.

 Marmatag wrote:

Sir Heckington wrote:
Basically LD8. The sergeant in the squad will always be one of the last, and LD7(Usually 8) + rerolls + MSU, means you'll probably almost never take morale causalities. I can't remember the last time I saw a marine die to morale.

I can. Marines lose guys to morale to me all the time. I can safely rely on them losing guys to morale.

The best part is when they reroll that "4" into a "6", and it wipes the squad. ATSKNF is probably the biggest insult to marines in 8th edition. If we're being honest.

It's not the game's fault some ...body is out there running more than 5 space marines in a squad when there's only one decent unit in the book that benefits from it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:
My main problem with the morale in this edition is that it is boring. You kill some guys and then as a result of that you kill some more guys in the morale phase. I preferred how in the earlier editions morale might cause status effects or force an unit to fall back from the objective.

I prefer boring to frustrating. If you were one of the 3 units in 7th that didn't have ATSKNF or fearless, randomly losing a squad of 9 people because you went 0-1 in a troop slap fight, or having units be totally useless for a turn because your opponent remembered a pinning rule he never got to use before was annoying.

Most of the units I played had neither Fearless nor ATSKNF in 6e/7e.

Actually I think that Leadership is too high across the board and contribute to the horde durability issue.

I think the game would be more interesting if Guard was LD 4, Marines LD 5.

People shouldn't run 10 man marine squads because marines morale is crap. Not because there is any other real downside. Most stratagems scale better when you're dealing with 10 man squads.

For instance, if you were Blood Angels & wanted to drop 10 death company in and 3d6 charge, you'll get more bang for your buck with 10 dudes. Or, if you're Space Wolves & outflanking something, you'd want to get as much dakka/melee in there as possible.

Acting like marines don't *want* to have bigger squads for any reason OTHER than morale isn't really fair. This specific mechanic makes it generally unwise, and not really anything else.

And Orks aren't CP hungry unless you're playing Orks wrong. See how easy that is?

And seriously, nothing here changes that an Infantry Squad is functionally leadership 7, and Death Company are also leadership 7. ATSKNF is not adequate protection.

Bharring wrote:
Most of the units I played had neither Fearless nor ATSKNF in 6e/7e.

As an Eldar player, neither did I. However it was easy enough to take units in small enough sizes, or big enough one, that the opponent would end up having to complete wipe the unit before Morale mattered
-

There are reasons besides LD to run 5-man Marines over 10mans:
1) Free Sarge - +1A, can take a Combi, can take a CC weapon
2) Can take 2xPG or 2xLC instead of having to mix & match
3) Tying up a 5-man leaves the other 5-man not-tied-up
4) More likely to squander enemy firepower on overkill
5) Easier to get cover or LOS
6) Can tie something up with only half the bodies, if needed

Now, buffs tend to prefer larger units. Targetted (stratagems and powers) buffs prefer 10mans quite a bit, but SM doesn't have a lot of those. Auras also prefer 10mans (only one has to be in the aura), but not by as much.

It's a tradeoff, but Marines prefer MSU almost always. A deathstar of DC or SG or something might not, but there are other factors at play there (if your Deathstar took so many casualties that Ld is crippling, you're already losing).

Bharring wrote:
There are reasons besides LD to run 5-man Marines over 10mans:
1) Free Sarge - +1A, can take a Combi, can take a CC weapon
2) Can take 2xPG or 2xLC instead of having to mix & match
3) Tying up a 5-man leaves the other 5-man not-tied-up
4) More likely to squander enemy firepower on overkill
5) Easier to get cover or LOS
6) Can tie something up with only half the bodies, if needed

Now, buffs tend to prefer larger units. Targetted (stratagems and powers) buffs prefer 10mans quite a bit, but SM doesn't have a lot of those. Auras also prefer 10mans (only one has to be in the aura), but not by as much.

It's a tradeoff, but Marines prefer MSU almost always. A deathstar of DC or SG or something might not, but there are other factors at play there (if your Deathstar took so many casualties that Ld is crippling, you're already losing).

100% agree.
Even with the very, very few units you'd want to be larger than 5, you would basically build your army around that unit anyway, so Morale would not be an issue.
You'd basically expect to be using the Ignore Morale strat on that unit

 Insectum7 wrote:
If you're having issues, UM gives them Ld 9 for normal squads. Nearby Chaplain will give them 10. Most effective is to take the Relic Banner for auto-pass, or Combat Squad/take min sized squads and it won't be an issue either.

Yep - and every marine should have relic banner anyways.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
There are reasons besides LD to run 5-man Marines over 10mans:
1) Free Sarge - +1A, can take a Combi, can take a CC weapon
2) Can take 2xPG or 2xLC instead of having to mix & match
3) Tying up a 5-man leaves the other 5-man not-tied-up
4) More likely to squander enemy firepower on overkill
5) Easier to get cover or LOS
6) Can tie something up with only half the bodies, if needed

Now, buffs tend to prefer larger units. Targetted (stratagems and powers) buffs prefer 10mans quite a bit, but SM doesn't have a lot of those. Auras also prefer 10mans (only one has to be in the aura), but not by as much.

It's a tradeoff, but Marines prefer MSU almost always. A deathstar of DC or SG or something might not, but there are other factors at play there (if your Deathstar took so many casualties that Ld is crippling, you're already losing).

What is this MSU nonsense? 10 man for auras is essential in a real marine force - it will double your overwatch effectiveness too. Plus the banner makes you ignore leadership checks all together.

You can literally tell how good a codex is by the combination two things:

1. Army Bonus. Chapter tactics, relics, etc.
2. Stratagems.

Stratagems scale best with larger units. It is an absolute no brainer that bigger squads, to take advantage of stratagems, is ideal.

Blood Angels:
Death Company, Sanguinary Guard, get the most out of the BA deep strike + assault combo stratagems. You can't field DC in squads of 10 because leadership 7. BA have bonkers good stratagems despite anything Martel says, they just can't make full use of them because of how overpowered Chaos, Imperial Guard, and Eldar are.

Space Wolves:
Anything Outflanking, the cost of this for MSU is rather large. 4 squads of 5 is twice as expensive as 2 squads of 10. Consider stratagems such as Chooser of the Slain, Keen Senses, True Grit. These work best with bigger squads. Also, Wolf Guards in the squads take the size up, and is well worth it.

Dark Angels:
Increase plasma damage on bigger squads with Weapons of the Dark Age. Don't forget others like Deathwing Assault - being able to drop 40 shots into chaff and then deep strike another squad in the void is pretty damn useful.

Deathwatch:
These guys benefit from being in bigger squads because you can bring a lot of different models and get all kinds of special rules in a kill team. Put the inceptor in there and they can fall back and shoot, put in an aggressor, put in hellblasters, fill with intercessors. Super flexible squads that can pump out dakka and are generally well protected with combined rules.

In an overall general sense, you want to fight twice with a big squad.

Codex Marines don't really have much reason for bigger squads, but they have garbage, flavorless stratagems. All is made well with Guilliman, though. In a general sense, a devastator squad is better with more bodies (without factoring in morale) because that is additional ablative wounds for the lascannons you just purchased. Also, in scenarios where you can mix-n-match wargear, bigger squads allows for some creative defensive options. Like, 1 Stormshield in a unit of 10. You may not want to pay that defensive tax for every 5 man squad.

If ATSKNF allowed you to choose to auto-pass morale tests, you would instantly see 10 man squads, or squads with more than 5 dudes.

Karol wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Because Morale is fundamentally different. If you're losing enough Marines in a single turn to force a Morale test you've done something wrong. I just had a game against Marines not two hours ago and the entire game I forced two Morale tests, one passed and one re-rolled into a pass.

I have often lost 4-5 dudes to shoting and then failed a morale test only to see my last termintor or justicar go puff from failing Ld. Ld7 is ok for armies with 60-80 models on the table, or those that have 20-40man sized squads. when an army is full of high cost elite dudes, that are supposed to kill demons nude as part of their aspirant training, it is stupid to lose them to a Ld roll.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:
If you're having issues, UM gives them Ld 9 for normal squads. Nearby Chaplain will give them 10. Most effective is to take the Relic Banner for auto-pass, or Combat Squad/take min sized squads and it won't be an issue either.

How do you find the points to run chaplains, ancients etc ?

7 editions of "my doods are too cool/crazy/fanatical/mindless to be having any kind of problem with morale!!!" is how we got to where we were in 7th ed where 90% of armies were just effectively fearless.

Morale as a small but buffable and measurable part of the game is much, much better than just "everything is fearless, it's 40k, everyones a super duper dupersoldier."


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:
You can literally tell how good a codex is by the combination two things:

1. Army Bonus. Chapter tactics, relics, etc.
2. Stratagems.

Yeah, like Guard, which are really amazing because their stratagems...are....really...good?

Or Eldar, who have super...broken...army bonuses?

You can literally tell how good a codex is by a combination of unit profiles, army bonuses, point costs, stratagems, warlord traits, relics, allies, psychic powers, and the current meta.

You're probably the only person in the universe that thinks Alaitoc passive -1 to hit isn't super good, and that Soulburst as a mechanic isn't broken. I guess access to Agents of Vect is kind of pointless in an Eldar army?

And imperial guard get everything. They're the faction with everything, it's been that way from the jump. They are wall to wall broken. Catachan tactics are bonkers, Cadian is great, Tallarn is great. They have very good stratagems, it's not my fault if you don't see it. I wonder if you'll ever find yourself fighting against 4 point Guardsmen with 3x Strength 4 melee attacks.

 jobalisk wrote:
So judt picked up a copy of eighth ed rules and saw this, why!?

I agree, it's too much: even Sisters have Ld7, so marines should be Ld6 since they have ATSKNF on top of it .

-1 to hit on overcosted units would not a good codex make. It's the combination of many factors that make an army good.

"What is this MSU nonsense? 10 man for auras is essential in a real marine force - it will double your overwatch effectiveness too. Plus the banner makes you ignore leadership checks all together."
Then why did we see Tacs as 5-mans when they actually were in lists?

Looking at the 6 Vanilla Marine lists BoK lists:
-4 MSU builds
-2 no-multimodel-units builds
-0 non-MSU builds

 Arachnofiend wrote:
Morale is kinda weird in 40k because it's a setting where everything other than a guardsman or a termagaunt is puffed up as this fearless badass who will stand up against impossible odds with unshakable resolve. And sometimes the guardsmen get in on that too.

Like, it should be impossible for a Necron Warrior to fail a morale save because Warriors are functionally mindless. They don't have enough emotions to be scared. And sure, that's kinda represented with Ld 10, but due to the mechanics of the phase Warriors are actually one of the most vulnerable to running away since they must be used in max squads.

I dunno if this disconnect is enough to scrap the mechanic entirely for something that performs a similar function without the fluff weirdness, but it is annoying.

With respect to viewing the Background aspect, Ld is a weird stat where we call it one thing, but it's really a combination of several things. Originally in RT there was Intelligence (for how smart things were), Cool (for courage under fire), and Ld (ability to lead). This all got rolled into one stat used for everything.

Basically Morale and Ld covers a lot of stuff that happens on a battlefield and rolling it into one mechanic. Failing a morale test isn't just dudes panicking and running off in terror. It's troops leaving the line and hauling wounded comrades away, losing communication and contact with command, fighting among each other, forgetting orders or procedures, deciding to go looting instead of fighting, phasing out or teleporting away, getting lost, running out of ammunition, playing dead, running to send a message, the burning roof finally collapsing above them, having mental/programming breakdowns or being temporarily dazed, encountering equipment problems, and anything else that takes a combatant out of a fight that is not directly attributable to enemy fire finding its mark.


With Necrons, I've usually viewed this as phase out protocols kicking in. A unit that just lost eight of ten dudes is obviously not doing well, and get phased out so they can be repaired and reused. Their disappearance may endanger a critical battlefield location, but such are the risks of automated processes.