Switch Theme:

The Power Armor Problem  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in fi
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 Blackie wrote:
And also cost 12 points instead of 5 though.

I wasn't referring to 1-shot a superhero, I was talking to kill regular power armor dudes. The thread is about power armors being terrible, in fact they're more effective than previous editions unless targeted by the former AP4 weapons like heavy bolters or big choppas.

Not even power klaws or lascannons can bypass their save now.


And if something can kill Magnus in one go how many power armour marines that kills? 18 whether that's 1-2 wound models. Like how last time I played vs space marines one shotted death company and sanquinary guard(minus 1 of them as he got the 1 he needed with 1d6 with reroll).

Hint: If something can kill Magnus it usually kills crapload of infantry as well ;-)

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/12/12 08:27:07


https://middleagedstrategybattlegamers.home.blog/2019/09/12/tneva82-minas-tirith-vs-isengard/ <- lotr painting blog

12 factions for Lord of The Rings
11772 pts(along with lots of unpainted unsorted stuff)
5265 pts
5150 pts
~3200 pts Knights

 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran



NE Ohio, USA

 Asherian Command wrote:
ccs wrote:
 Brutus_Apex wrote:

Fluff wise, they are a blitzkreig type shock and awe force that strikes the enemy at its weakest point and breaks it with overwhelming force.


Well if they'd stop nerfing deep strike I'd be able to properly get on with that....


Yeah, deep strike is not really that viable with marines if it means them immediately dying upon arrival.


They don't die immediately upon arrival, I mean , I DO get a shooting phase (+ an assault phase if I roll well - wich is up from what I got in previous editions). But getting killed isn't really the problem. I expect that to happen in fairly short order. It's been happening for decades. If I wasn't OK with that I wouldn't be DSing.
No, it's the not being allowed to land within 9" of an enemy. That creates giant swathes of empty table where I simply can't land - for reasons. Like an enemies rear area in order to hunt down objective holders, indirect fire units, etc.
But oh, hey, that's not enough. Now I can't land in turn 1. Or turn 4+ (here in the real world games DO go beyond turn 3)
   
Made in hk
Steadfast Ultramarine Sergeant




 Blackie wrote:
 Drudge Dreadnought wrote:
ABSOLUTELY ZERO OF THOSE THINGS.


Most of the things you listed affect all the units in 40k, not only power armor dudes. My orks used to wreck faces with their pks, now they're almost dead weight. Oh, and they cost more than the SM equivalent.


That sounds like you are saying "marine players have edition lag". But have to say what he said is true and actually for the cost over durability or cost over "killability", the removal of those gaming mechanics do hurt marines much harder than any other armies.
   
Made in it
Ichor-Dripping Talos Monstrosity




Italy

tneva82 wrote:
 Blackie wrote:
And also cost 12 points instead of 5 though.

I wasn't referring to 1-shot a superhero, I was talking to kill regular power armor dudes. The thread is about power armors being terrible, in fact they're more effective than previous editions unless targeted by the former AP4 weapons like heavy bolters or big choppas.

Not even power klaws or lascannons can bypass their save now.


And if something can kill Magnus in one go how many power armour marines that kills? 18 whether that's 1-2 wound models. Like how last time I played vs space marines one shotted death company and sanquinary guard(minus 1 of them as he got the 1 he needed with 1d6 with reroll).

Hint: If something can kill Magnus it usually kills crapload of infantry as well ;-)


Maybe, but that's not the point. Rokkits are less efficient vs SM than they used to be, that's a fact. Another fact is that power armor dudes are now more resilient against anything but the former AP4 weapons, which aren't even common. Hence the assumption of power armors that were able to soak a lot of shots in previous edition and now are melted by anything or too easily is completely false.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Neophyte2012 wrote:
 Blackie wrote:
 Drudge Dreadnought wrote:
ABSOLUTELY ZERO OF THOSE THINGS.


Most of the things you listed affect all the units in 40k, not only power armor dudes. My orks used to wreck faces with their pks, now they're almost dead weight. Oh, and they cost more than the SM equivalent.


That sounds like you are saying "marine players have edition lag". But have to say what he said is true and actually for the cost over durability or cost over "killability", the removal of those gaming mechanics do hurt marines much harder than any other armies.


I don't think so. Tac dudes were competitive only because they were part of a formation that granted 300+ points of free stuff. They weren't particularly amazing once. The only things I can admit they have become really worse are flamers and melta guns that were pretty effective options for power armor dudes. Also grav but grav spam was something insane and I'm glad that GW has nerfed it into the ground. Plasma guns are now way better than before though. Not to mention ass cannons, storm bolters and heavy bolters, all better now.

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2018/12/12 14:04:59


Orks 9000
Space Wolves 6500
Drukhari 4500 
   
Made in us
Ancient Venerable Dark Angels Dreadnought





The issue is just that at its core the 40k game is completely and utterly fethed. The balance between infantry/vehicles is basically nonexistent, there's a ton of mechanics that just don't make a lick of sense, and a lot of the new rules neither reduce the playtime or make the game simpler as was advertised. Blast templates were easy, and all they needed to fix them was to simply reduce or remove scattering altogether- instead we now have d6 hit mechanics that take even more time. Marine infantry wasn't stupendous in prior editions as mentioned, but at least there was transport and sweeping advance rules to give them an edge over your basic guardsmen squad. That's all gone now, and instead we have a terrible edition of poorly implemented mechanics that weren't thought out well - coupled with bizarre religious adherence to statlines even though the limits to strength and toughness have been removed. And keeping the asinine turn system that encourages "shot off the board syndrome", where you either have enough cover to protect your army or expect to lose a significant chunk on the first shooting phase.

If you want to improve marines, you need to improve 40k so there's actual tactics for heavy and elite infantry compared to the standard gameplay of just pushing up the table with blobs of units trying to screen as much fire as possible for your deathstar(s), a concept that also needs to be taken outside and shot once and for all. I wouldn't opt for just stat increases, but completely and utterly changing the wargame to add deep mechanics for both infantry and vehicles while also speeding things up for gameplay's sake (such as minimal/no scatter templates). Add suppression mechanics to infantry, make dedicated AT weapons suffer minuses to hit against infantry targets, bring back things like sweeping advances to quickly resolve melee combat, mandate heavy use of terrain in the rules themselves, and use alternating unit turns to prevent one person just activating all of their units and blowing units clean off the table. All elite infantry such as Space Marines, Custodes, and Aspect squads should be a pain in the ass to kill without using the proper tools for the job, and inferior infantry units such as guardsmen shouldn't be able to outshoot them on a per-points basis.

Cause it's not just Marines. Aspect Warriors, Custodes, warriors, etc are all gak units with no place on the table in a game that caters mostly to superheavies and blobs of infantry where "tactics" consist of merely spamming shots and managing auras. GW keeps creeping the scale forward and shoving more Epic units in without giving a single damn as to how it'll effect the meta, and doesn't seem to care about game design either really. It's just about getting people to field expensive blobs of infantry and superheavies now to be pushed on and off the table with a broom as people dump bucketloads of dice that take forever to count hits. At this point the community either needs to make its own rules or just switch to kill team, because there's probably no improving 40k for there to even be a place for elite armies at this point.

“There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance.”
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






Easy to fix, -2pts +1 attack, -1ap to bolters if they all target the same unit

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/12/12 23:20:06


15k+ :Harlequin: 4k
12k+ SOLD (to many armies)
5k
Beastmen 6500

Reading/Writing LD, be kind!

https://maddpaint.blogspot.com 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






SoCal, USA!

 Asherian Command wrote:
 JohnHwangDD wrote:
 Asherian Command wrote:
Dakknauts, what do you think is wrong with Space Marines?


Nothing.

SM's are completely fine relative to other infantry in the game.


Sooo 5ppm Guardsmen and 360-400 pt knight titans are acceptable? When if a space marine unit equal in cost 2 predators could both be popped on the same turn by a single Knight Titan?

Space marines pay quite a bit for ineffective vehicles and infantry that does not put out as much damage output as other races.

A striking scorpion is a 11ppm and has an exarch that gives them an ability cause mortal wounds upon touch effectively giving the squad at 55 points +5 attacks on immediate base contact when charging.... an assault squad costs 13ppms and are 65 points in total. You have maybe 11 attacks on base at t4 S4 WS3. Striking scorpions get 17 attacks, 5 which cause mortal wounds. They also gain +1 to their rolls if they are fighting in cover. And every single time the unit makes a hit roll of 6+ they gain another attack... So effectively has 21 attacks.... at WS 3 S4 with a 2W sarge.... so 6 wounds in total for the striking scorpion squad. Compared to the marines 5 wounds. So yeah Totally fine! Space marines not only have no benefits in close combat (I gave the assault squad an additional attack from their chainsword ability). But they have no way to counter this even with their elite option is more expensive and you can take far more scorpions and upgrades, and they have a better option for shooting.

So not only am I paying effectively 2 points per a model extra for 1 toughness but I am also dying far more often with ineffective weapons that don't do nearly as much damage. Tell me how is that fair? (we are comparing an elite unit to a fast attack option though, but the point still stands the elite choice is better in every respect to the assault squad which costs more even without jumppacks!)


The way you're whining, guardsmen should be 2 pts, and conscripts 1 pt.

No problem with Knights... If you are consistently losing multiple expensive units of SMs each turn to single Knights, the problem is not SM. The problem is that you are a bad player. L2P

Scorpions, Harlies, and Genestealers should all always auto-win any flavor of basic SM in Assault. It's stupid of you to argue otherwise. L2P

The issue you have is that you want SM to be a no-skill unkillable army that matches semi-elite Assault Marines equal to hyper-elite assault, when that hss never been what they were or should be. AMs are only supposed to be faster SMs, not Uber killer



Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Wyzilla wrote:
8nferior infantry units such as guardsmen shouldn't be able to outshoot them on a per-points basis.


WTF? If guard can't outshoot SM, and they certainly should not out-fight them, what's the point of even having them. Of course Guard should always out-shoot SM! That's what they do!

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/12 10:10:43


   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




In general play there is nothing really that wrong with Space Marines. Tactical marines are a bit bleh as they have always been; they suffer from the problem that generalist units just have efficiency problems in competitive play in the hands of good players. A specialist unit in the hands of a good player will be performing its specialist role nearly every turn and will be inherently more efficient than a generalist unit in that role which *could* have been doing something else that turn but is not. The other marine units are a mix of good and bad just like in every other faction.

So what is wrong with Space Marines: slightly overcosted for what they do. If we look at the running totals on the 40K stats page (https://www.40kstats.com/faction-breakdown-report) they are running at 39% win rate. Ideally we would want every major faction to be in that average 2-3 wins out of a 5 game tournament which would be the 40-60% win rate range, having the single biggest faction drop below that is not what we would want. On the other hand we are not exactly far from that range so clearly some points adjustments should be able to do the job.

My experience from tournaments (typically 2-3 per year, I am definitely not a hardcore tournament player) is that you see a lot of really bad marine armies from inexperienced players. It is like having all those choices confuse players and they put out an army that is less than the sum of its parts - i.e. there are some good things in there but it just does not function as a whole. I think this factor will hold marines back from a 50% win rate unless they are actually undercosted or suddenly have enough auto-take obviously good options that it cuts through any amount of inexperience or confusion and just shouts "take ME!" in the same way that whatever is stupid good in any given Eldar codex usually does. However this last "fix" is basically just a call for terrible internal balance in the codex and I would not want to see it happen.

So despite the amount of dakka hate this might draw my way - I think the answer is "not that much". They are slightly below par but not by enough that really needs more than a slight points tweak and maybe a few more options in the form of specialist detachments to supplement their rather meh range of stratagems.

Of course if you believe marine armies should by right dominate the top tables and only measure an army but how many enormous tournaments they are winning - then I just disagree with you on a far more fundamental level
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






 JohnHwangDD wrote:
WTF? If guard can't outshoot SM, and they certainly should not out-fight them, what's the point of even having them. Of course Guard should always out-shoot SM! That's what they do!


Guard =/= basic infantry squad. Basic infantry should be cannon fodder whose primary role is to set up camp somewhere (preferably on an objective) and die so that something more important doesn't. The IG units that should be out-shooting marines are the veterans, tanks, etc.

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut




I don't know what is precisely with marines and how to fix them. All I know is that a 20+pts meq stats model with no resilient would have to have a god like fire power and alfa strike possibility build in, to be considered ok. If it does not have that, then it just doesn't make sense as far the game mechanics in 8th ed go.
Same points put in to IG are more resilient and more shoty, and that is not counting any support options. From what I understand other marines live on their support options and auras etc. GK don't have working versions of those, which makes them quad or quint punished in the game.

I can't think of a single aspect of the game, be it speed, buffs, synergy etc that does not work as far as GK goes. Add being high cost to that and the army will never work, save for something crazy like a flat 75% drop of unit cost. But something like that could fix, almost anything in w40k.

To a degree I have a feeling that GK have rules ment either for next edition or one of the editions prior to this one, and because their rules end up being copy pasted instead of actually designed from ground up, the state of the faction is the way it is now.
   
Made in us
Ancient Venerable Dark Angels Dreadnought





 JohnHwangDD wrote:
 Asherian Command wrote:
 JohnHwangDD wrote:
 Asherian Command wrote:
Dakknauts, what do you think is wrong with Space Marines?


Nothing.

SM's are completely fine relative to other infantry in the game.


Sooo 5ppm Guardsmen and 360-400 pt knight titans are acceptable? When if a space marine unit equal in cost 2 predators could both be popped on the same turn by a single Knight Titan?

Space marines pay quite a bit for ineffective vehicles and infantry that does not put out as much damage output as other races.

A striking scorpion is a 11ppm and has an exarch that gives them an ability cause mortal wounds upon touch effectively giving the squad at 55 points +5 attacks on immediate base contact when charging.... an assault squad costs 13ppms and are 65 points in total. You have maybe 11 attacks on base at t4 S4 WS3. Striking scorpions get 17 attacks, 5 which cause mortal wounds. They also gain +1 to their rolls if they are fighting in cover. And every single time the unit makes a hit roll of 6+ they gain another attack... So effectively has 21 attacks.... at WS 3 S4 with a 2W sarge.... so 6 wounds in total for the striking scorpion squad. Compared to the marines 5 wounds. So yeah Totally fine! Space marines not only have no benefits in close combat (I gave the assault squad an additional attack from their chainsword ability). But they have no way to counter this even with their elite option is more expensive and you can take far more scorpions and upgrades, and they have a better option for shooting.

So not only am I paying effectively 2 points per a model extra for 1 toughness but I am also dying far more often with ineffective weapons that don't do nearly as much damage. Tell me how is that fair? (we are comparing an elite unit to a fast attack option though, but the point still stands the elite choice is better in every respect to the assault squad which costs more even without jumppacks!)


The way you're whining, guardsmen should be 2 pts, and conscripts 1 pt.

No problem with Knights... If you are consistently losing multiple expensive units of SMs each turn to single Knights, the problem is not SM. The problem is that you are a bad player. L2P

Scorpions, Harlies, and Genestealers should all always auto-win any flavor of basic SM in Assault. It's stupid of you to argue otherwise. L2P

The issue you have is that you want SM to be a no-skill unkillable army that matches semi-elite Assault Marines equal to hyper-elite assault, when that hss never been what they were or should be. AMs are only supposed to be faster SMs, not Uber killer



Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Wyzilla wrote:
8nferior infantry units such as guardsmen shouldn't be able to outshoot them on a per-points basis.


WTF? If guard can't outshoot SM, and they certainly should not out-fight them, what's the point of even having them. Of course Guard should always out-shoot SM! That's what they do!


Light infantry isn't for out shooting something, it's for occupying the line. You don't bring guard to out-shoot elite infantry but to engage in attrition warfare. Dig in and force the enemy to evict your infantry in order to take the objective or push the line of board control. In turn while the heavy/elite infantry is busy mopping up cheap and worthless light infantry, they aren't dealing with your tanks, artillery, or air support. Which is also part of the critique regarding 40k lacking actual strategy, you shouldn't just be spamming shots at something to resolve the issue. Trying to engage in a shooting match with a unit catered to annihilate you in a shooting match should only result in you getting wiped out, no different from trying to attack an AT emplacement head-on as a tank. You resolve your issues with combined arms, looking for artillery or armor support to deal with the heavy infantry.

 Peregrine wrote:
 JohnHwangDD wrote:
WTF? If guard can't outshoot SM, and they certainly should not out-fight them, what's the point of even having them. Of course Guard should always out-shoot SM! That's what they do!


Guard =/= basic infantry squad. Basic infantry should be cannon fodder whose primary role is to set up camp somewhere (preferably on an objective) and die so that something more important doesn't. The IG units that should be out-shooting marines are the veterans, tanks, etc.

IMO the things countering a basic tactical marine squad should be Scions, not Veterans. Mechanically what Veterans should do is being harder to wipe out in sweeps in charges or just being highly resistant to routing - ultimately they're still equipped with the same gakky weapons as the rest of the Guard. It's the Scions who bring the heavy firepower to the field, especially modern Scions and their LMG-analogous volley gun.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/12/12 11:25:40


“There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance.”
 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Peregrine wrote:
 JohnHwangDD wrote:
WTF? If guard can't outshoot SM, and they certainly should not out-fight them, what's the point of even having them. Of course Guard should always out-shoot SM! That's what they do!


Guard =/= basic infantry squad. Basic infantry should be cannon fodder whose primary role is to set up camp somewhere (preferably on an objective) and die so that something more important doesn't. The IG units that should be out-shooting marines are the veterans, tanks, etc.
That's ignoring the fact that 4ppm Catachan's whoop them in CC Point for point.
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






Ice_can wrote:
That's ignoring the fact that 4ppm Catachan's whoop them in CC Point for point.


Err, what? How is it ignoring that when I'm talking about hypothetical alternative rules, not the current (broken) state of the game?

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in gb
Princeps of the Emperor's Titan!






Power Armour isn't the problem.

Rogue Trader, 2nd Ed, 8th Ed. It's been modifiable.

For those (who no fault of their own I might add) new to armour modifiers, they need to adapt their playstyle.

Cover now boosts your standard Marines, but Heavy Weapons pose more of a threat. So gone are the days of just treating a massed barrage of Heavy Bolters as a shower.

But Marines do need AP-1 on their Bolters. It just seems wrong for them to not have that!

Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives?Why not join us?

 
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






 Wyzilla wrote:
IMO the things countering a basic tactical marine squad should be Scions, not Veterans. Mechanically what Veterans should do is being harder to wipe out in sweeps in charges or just being highly resistant to routing - ultimately they're still equipped with the same gakky weapons as the rest of the Guard. It's the Scions who bring the heavy firepower to the field, especially modern Scions and their LMG-analogous volley gun.


The original idea of veterans was that they weren't armed with the same weapons, they scrounged up better gear than a normal squad. That's why they got three special weapons and the option to buy camo cloaks or carapace armor or a whole pile of melta bombs. Storm troopers have better generic guns, but their emphasis was (and should be) the alternate deployment options that make them pinpoint assassins vs. the veterans that bring better firepower but with only the conventional Chimeras or Valkyries to deploy it. In strategic terms storm troopers wipe out key targets anywhere on the table, veterans provide force concentration alongside the rest of the main line. It's just unfortunate that GW, in their desperate attempt to sell the new faction (because the awful fluff sure wasn't doing it), stripped veterans of all of their toys and put them in a useless slot.

The solution IMO is to give veterans back their camo/carapace/demolitions options, put them back in the troops slot, throw the Taurox in the garbage where it belongs, and stop trying to treat storm troopers as a separate sub-faction.

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Peregrine wrote:
Ice_can wrote:
That's ignoring the fact that 4ppm Catachan's whoop them in CC Point for point.


Err, what? How is it ignoring that when I'm talking about hypothetical alternative rules, not the current (broken) state of the game?
Sorry i didn't communicate what I ment.
The current rules allow Guard to actually out fight marines in CC let alone outshoot them.
Infantry should loose both of those fights, that they don't shows one of the main issue with marine's can't out shoot or out fight models at 1/3 of their cost. Partly because those models are ao cheap but marine's don't have quantity or quality of damage in any phase.
   
Made in us
Ancient Venerable Dark Angels Dreadnought





 Peregrine wrote:
 Wyzilla wrote:
IMO the things countering a basic tactical marine squad should be Scions, not Veterans. Mechanically what Veterans should do is being harder to wipe out in sweeps in charges or just being highly resistant to routing - ultimately they're still equipped with the same gakky weapons as the rest of the Guard. It's the Scions who bring the heavy firepower to the field, especially modern Scions and their LMG-analogous volley gun.


The original idea of veterans was that they weren't armed with the same weapons, they scrounged up better gear than a normal squad. That's why they got three special weapons and the option to buy camo cloaks or carapace armor or a whole pile of melta bombs. Storm troopers have better generic guns, but their emphasis was (and should be) the alternate deployment options that make them pinpoint assassins vs. the veterans that bring better firepower but with only the conventional Chimeras or Valkyries to deploy it. In strategic terms storm troopers wipe out key targets anywhere on the table, veterans provide force concentration alongside the rest of the main line. It's just unfortunate that GW, in their desperate attempt to sell the new faction (because the awful fluff sure wasn't doing it), stripped veterans of all of their toys and put them in a useless slot.

The solution IMO is to give veterans back their camo/carapace/demolitions options, put them back in the troops slot, throw the Taurox in the garbage where it belongs, and stop trying to treat storm troopers as a separate sub-faction.


Huh, I always forgot that Veterans didn't use to just be Guardsmen +1. Although that's just compounded by the lack of model options, I'm just used to "Veterans" being a guardsmen squad with some fancy hats to signify their Veterancy instead of being decked out in carapace like the old Storm Trooper models that GW squatted.

And I agree the Taurox belongs in the trash. Both for mechanical redundancy and being a crime against aesthetics.

“There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance.”
 
   
Made in nz
Angry Blood Angel Assault marine



New Zealand

My 2 cents: There is too much firepower and too many models on the table.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Stormonu wrote:What is wrong with Space Marines is that 40K has turned into Epic, where you have a proliferation of tanks, vehicles and knights that make common infantry redundant, and the heavy armor of marines worthless.

Short of going back to an infantry-only game with 0-1 vehicle-sized support units, you can't do anything to make marines worth taking.


Pretty much this. The scale of the game and the escalation/abundance of extremely powerful weapons has made mere boots on the ground with more sidearms and longarms essentially pointless.

Look to this first.

epronovost wrote:A WWI French general once said (and I'm roughly transating here), war is making 90 kilos men wrestle against 90 kilos bombs. That's Space Marine (and by extention 40K) "problem" in a nutshell.

Space Marines are 500 kilos supermen who are sent to wrestle with 1 000 000 degree plasma beam, 500 kilos cannon shells, etc. They get slaughter like simple guardsmen because they are forced to face off against armies filled with weapons design to kill them or even tougher things.

What 40K needs is a redesign of its infantry vs vehicle/monstruous creature point value as well as a redesign of its special/heavy weapons vs normal weapons. As of now, Tactical Space Marines are rather well priced when compared with other basic infantry before any upgrades are taken.


Hmm, rather than points values, I'd look to caps on vehicles and heavy/special weapons first . Look at how Infinity has an SWC limit for its 'big' guns.

greatest band in the universe: machine supremacy

"Punch your fist in the air and hold your Gameboy aloft like the warrior you are" 
   
Made in us
Fresh-Faced New User




If you look at a game system like Horus Heresy, the tactical marine is very important and not so bad. But why is that?

Simple, they are ~11ppm, they have fury of the legion (fire twice now but can't fire next round), and only troops can capture objectives. I personally think that making it so that anything can score in 8th edition was a mistake, but making bolter space marines cheaper is a start.
   
Made in it
Ichor-Dripping Talos Monstrosity




Italy

RedGriefer wrote:
If you look at a game system like Horus Heresy, the tactical marine is very important and not so bad. But why is that?



Maybe because all factions are marines?

Allowing only troops to score would make cheap troops like guardsmen even more effective and required at competitive games.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/12 13:37:13


Orks 9000
Space Wolves 6500
Drukhari 4500 
   
Made in us
Legendary Master of the Chapter





Chicago, Illinois

 Blackie wrote:
RedGriefer wrote:
If you look at a game system like Horus Heresy, the tactical marine is very important and not so bad. But why is that?



Maybe because all factions are marines?

Allowing only troops to score would make cheap troops like guardsmen even more effective and required at competitive games.


There is also Ad Mech, Solar, Custodes, Titans, Demons.... They have fewer factions. Not because all of them are space marines. The fewer the factions the easier to balance.

Guardsmen are already required for all imperial soup lists so that wouldn't change anything.

Heres a fun article on ppm and effectiveness :
www.3plusplus.net/2017/12/mathammer-why-tactical-squads-and-a-lot-of-elite-infantry-generally-suck/

The way you're whining, guardsmen should be 2 pts, and conscripts 1 pt.


Ignoring your insult. I am arguing "This doesn't feel right from a gameplay prespective." Telling someone they are whining is not very constructive to a conversation is it not? It is very dismissive.

No, Per a Point Effectively guardsmen are fine and they are by which all imperial faction troops are tested. And guardsmen beat space marines overall in shooting, durability, and resistance. You can get a full squad of 10 for half the cost of a space marine squad. This makes them far more durable. It also doesn't help space marine tacticals have no ap whatsoever or additional firepower for cheap. Elite infantry do not perform well, and that is what space marines are as a whole, they pay more because they are elite infantry, in lore and on the tabletop.

The problem is that you are a bad player. L2P


Or Knights area very powerful unit that Space marines currently have an issue in handling cause most of their anti tank is very expensive. And is the most expensive it has ever been.

Of course if you believe marine armies should by right dominate the top tables and only measure an army but how many enormous tournaments they are winning - then I just disagree with you on a far more fundamental level!


No, Marines shouldn't be the 'best' army in the game, but they should at least be competitive from a Mono army standpoint. if their basic infantry cannot stand up to the basic infantry of other factions then something needs to be looked at fundamentally. Space Marines are supposed to be the 'beginner race' the faction that takes the least amount of skill to perfect but does not have a high skill curve. Most 'competitive' marine lists are the same, scouts, gulliman, scout bikers, and a bunch of Devastators. Nothing else in their codex is viable for Vanilla. Then you take imperial soup to increase its effectiveness artificially inflating how 'good' the army actually is.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/12/12 13:51:40


 
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Power Armour isn't the problem.

Rogue Trader, 2nd Ed, 8th Ed. It's been modifiable.

For those (who no fault of their own I might add) new to armour modifiers, they need to adapt their playstyle.

Cover now boosts your standard Marines, but Heavy Weapons pose more of a threat. So gone are the days of just treating a massed barrage of Heavy Bolters as a shower.

But Marines do need AP-1 on their Bolters. It just seems wrong for them to not have that!


but everyone knows that. The question is about how to adapt to this when your basic cheapest dude is 20pts or more. In case of GK it aint speed, because they don't have it, you cant stack up on the supper killer stuff and just use throw away troops, because there are no throw away troops in the codex the way it is costed and the super killy stuff isn't that super killy comparing to other factions. You can't just do it DG way and tank the shots, because again no cultists, no cheap chaff and the 20+pts dudes aren't as resilient as DG. the best thing people came up on this forum is take as few GK as possible and load up on IG, and hope that the IG part will not be burdened too much by the GK part, and will carry the list.


Allowing only troops to score would make cheap troops like guardsmen even more effective and required at competitive games.

It would do the same to casual games too. 10-15 GK strikes just don't surive till end game. So if everything else is not scoring, all opponents have to do is kill or keep away from objectives 15 power armored models in 1-2 turns.

   
Made in fi
Furious Raptor



Finland

Banville wrote:
One hundred per cent this. Marines die. Less easily than Guard, but they die. The issue is that a Tactical Marine does no damage. FAQ their guns into ASTARTES Bolters and do the same for Chaos Marines. Like they do for Astartes shotguns. Give them a higher rate of fire or plus 1 strength at half range. Anything.
It's a damage thing, but also a durability thing. Consider this example:

Heavy Bolter, 3 hits (consider both SM and Guardsman equally easy to hit), firing at:

1. Guardsman (4 points)
3 shots, 3 x 2/3 hits, 3 x 2/3 x 2/3 wounds, 3 x 2/3 x 2/3 x 5/6 unsaved wounds = 1.11 damage; 1.11 x 4 = 4.44 points destroyed on average.

2. MEQ (13 points)
3 hits, 3 x 2/3 hits, 3 x 2/3 x 2/3 wounds, 3 x 2/3 x 2/3 x 1/2 unsaved wounds = 0.66 damage, 0.66 x 13 = 8.58 points destroyed on average.

Same trend goes on, flamer is point-by-point more efficient against MEQ than Guardsmen, almost anything is more efficient against MEQs. Even Guardsmen shooting autoguns at MEQs is more efficient than at shooting other Guardsmen or equivalent. Note MEQs are point by point more durable now than Cultists against Autogun fire. But this difference goes away with weapons that have strength 4 or higher.

Also let's consider 10 Space Marines (130 pts) firing at 32 Guardsmen (128 pts) within 12" distance.

Space Marines do 23.7 points worth of damage (5.92 damage).
Guardsmen do 46.2 points worth of damage (3.55 damage).
Space marines lose these 'stand off' even if they fire first volley. Space Marines only win if they get 2 free volleys. Close Combat won't change this. I disregarded Morale Phase effect.

So in short, MEQs don't have damage output and they can't take the fire either.
   
Made in us
Pyro Pilot of a Triach Stalker





Somewhere over the rainbow, way up high

Its less marine survivability, and more marine firepower.

For 1 Tac Marine with a Bolter, you can get 3 guardsmen at equal distance, with orders for 2 or 3 shots each, giving you 9 shots to 2.

The math is apparent that the weight of dice make the guard more dangerous.

The issue is the humble bolter needs an RoF increase, or Marines need a rule improving their armor save by 1 against weapons with no AP, or otherwise ignore the first point of AP.

I get it, marines die, but when you're playing a marine army, and the consensus is that taking marine bodies is actually a tax/inefficient, you have a serious problem.

Bedouin Dynasty: 9000 pts
The Silver Lances: 4k pts
The Emperor's Finest 3k pts

MajorStoffer wrote:
...
Sternguard though, those guys are all about kicking ass. They'd chew bubble gum as well, but bubble gum is heretical. Only tau chew gum. 
   
Made in us
Horrific Hive Tyrant




Tampa, FL

In general, the issue is armor save modifiers returning. The last time there was armor save mods, it was 2nd edition. The game was very, very different back then. The Marine statline, while virtually identical (your heroes had S5/T5 though IIRC) meant a lot more back then.

Part of it is that they die easily, but are priced as though they are resilient. Before when you had the old AP system, it was all or nothing so most non-special/heavy weapons didn't affect your save. When most weapons now do affect your save, your survivability takes a hit but they haven't gotten anything to really compensate for the game-changing around them. They are priced/positioned the same way as they were in 3rd through 7th edition, but without the survivability since their armor is more easily reduced.

- Wayne
Formerly WayneTheGame 
   
Made in it
Ichor-Dripping Talos Monstrosity




Italy

Wayniac wrote:
In general, the issue is armor save modifiers returning. The last time there was armor save mods, it was 2nd edition. The game was very, very different back then. The Marine statline, while virtually identical (your heroes had S5/T5 though IIRC) meant a lot more back then.

Part of it is that they die easily, but are priced as though they are resilient. Before when you had the old AP system, it was all or nothing so most non-special/heavy weapons didn't affect your save. When most weapons now do affect your save, your survivability takes a hit but they haven't gotten anything to really compensate for the game-changing around them. They are priced/positioned the same way as they were in 3rd through 7th edition, but without the survivability since their armor is more easily reduced.


Why you all keep saying that when it's actually the opposite? Modifiers made power armor stronger.

In previous editions all AP2 and AP3 completely bypassed SM save, now they get a 6+ and 5+ against the same weapons. The former AP5 and AP6 are now AP- so they don't affect marine save at all. Only the former AP4 is now more dangerous against marines, but those kind of weapons are not extremely common. And they still save the wound at 4+ against those weapons.

The only thing about the returning of armor save modifiers that made marines worse is that enemy dudes with 5+ and 6+ save now actually roll a save against the former imperium AP5 or AP6 weapons. But marines durability is now superior, let's be honest about that.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/12 14:58:36


Orks 9000
Space Wolves 6500
Drukhari 4500 
   
Made in us
Locked in the Tower of Amareo




In actually started in 2nd and it has all the problems of 8th in spades. Multiple games where I didn't even get a turn.
   
Made in us
Krazed Killa Kan






A lot of the value of marines in 6th/7th was their ATSKNF which made them basically stay in the fight until every one of them died unlike guardsmen who where quite susceptible to getting swept, falling back which made them combat ineffective for at least 1 turn, and when below 25% total models if they where running away they basically never returned to the fight. The new morale system and the very weak new form of ATSKNF makes guardsmen a far less liability while making Marines way closer in function to other infantry units.

All that being said Marines in 6th and 7th where still considered somewhat over costed given their still lackluster damage output and dubious melee capability.

"Hold my shoota, I'm goin in"
Armies (7th edition points)
7000+ Points Death Skullz
4000 Points
+ + 3000 Points "The Fiery Heart of the Emperor"
3500 Points "Void Kraken" Space Marines
3000 Points "Bard's Booze Cruise" 
   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran



London

I don't think they should get cheaper, they should be elite which implies not that numerous, but they should get better. If I could go the whole hog…

Armour
Astartes Power Armour (not sisters of battle etc)
Larger, heavier and better integrated with the users nervous system, Astartes power armour provides incredible protection.
Save 2+
Terminator armour
Save 1+/5++
Special rule – Tactical Dreadnaught Armour
Designed for the harshest environments Terminator armour reduces all damage suffered from any source by 1 to a minimum of 1. For example an autocannon would do 1 damage to an Astartes wearing Terminator armour.

Bolters
Astartes have access to larger calibres and the assistance of autosenses and extensive training to make best use of the armour penetrating mass reactive ammunition they fire. In particular the ability to use mass reactive explosions amongst tightly packed hordes of enemies while rapidly advancing into close range.
Bolter
range 24/Rapid Fire 1/Str 4/Dmg 1/Sv -1
OR
range 24/Assault 2/Str 3/Dmg 1/Sv 0
Bolt Pistol
Gets the -1 (as should a chainsword to be honest…)
Storm Bolter is double a bolter with both fire modes.
Etc.
Heavy bolter stats not affected.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: