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.

I have only played against them as I am a chaos player, but from the receiving end, they are much better. And while the UM trait of fall back and shoot is average, their supplement rule for not counting as moving is really good if you build for it. If you play objective games it gives the UM a whole range of utility for moving to capture objectives, but yet still fire their weapons at full capacity. It mattered a lot in the last game I played as my opponents stern guard (who are ap-3 with Tac Doc) fire full shots while moving to an objective killing my squad (he needed all the shots) but also getting within 3".

The thing I have noticed is that the SM codex is no longer build a list and pick the best Chapter Tactic. You really have to build to take advantage of the synergy with the chapter tactics, doctrines, and strats. If you go vehicle heavy IH are what you want. But if you use lots of infantry, UM are better. Lots of bikes? White scars. I think if you build your list to and take units to maximize the doctrines and traits the SM codex and supplements are really good.

Also if you don't like a particular chapter tactics, like UM fall back, you can always make a custom chapter, pick two of the successor traits that fit your play style, then use the founding chapters special doctrines.

I would kill for this level of customization for my chaos armies. Knights will probably still be tough for marines, as knights are really efficient at killing them, but that is more of a problem with knights being a thing, rather than a problem with the new codex. Just my thoughts.

Ironhands are awesome. I don't know how I'm gonna hold all these dreadnoughts.

Also I suspect the backbone of a LOT of marine infantry forces these days are intercessors not tacticals.

Overall, I like it.

The career of Gaius Pollandus was a nice bit giving the reader a good idea of what space marine does over their lifetime.

It is nice to have all the datasheets for army in one place (for now) and many of the rule changes have allowed me to better field what I was going to field good or bad. The biggest nitpick was the Phobos Lieutenant literally being swapped with deployment options from the squad they most closely resemble. Which is fine, it saved me $35 US.

I don't plan on picking up any of the supplements. The Raven Guard one didn't seem to have anything on their Successors, and ultimately; I don't really want to run my army as Raptors anyways. As for successor chapter tactics, I think it is a mixed bag of good and bad ones in terms of power. I suspect successors will always be noticeably less powerful than supplement possessing chapters. Which I think is fine with flexibility comes less power, but I think the gap might be a little too much. I think my chapter is going to have Bolter Fusillades and Rapid Assault (Indicating my marines carry more ammo than typical), but I don't think those are going make up for the additional stuff any of the 1st founding chapters (and some of the Fist successors) will have. Which I am okay with, but like I said; I think the differences in power will be noticeable even in a casual setting.

BrianDavion wrote:
Also I suspect the backbone of a LOT of marine infantry forces these days are intercessors not tacticals.

I think that can depend on your chapter. Tacticals for Salamanders is obvious, and for UM they can move and shoot Heavies without penalty.

 Insectum7 wrote:


The bolters are wounding the lighter models more often though. Also the percentage shifts for AP move around depending on cover.

It doesn't matter that you're wounding them more, the increase in lethality from AP is a percentage, and it's greater against elite units. If you're killing X marines and Y guardsmen before Tactical Doctrine, you're now killing 1.5X marines and 1.25Y guard after.
And if you're considering cover, then the AP bonus impacts elite models even more. AP -1 kills twice as many marines in cover than AP0, while AP -1 kills 33% more guardsmen in cover than AP 0.

So I think Chaos Marines are likely to feel these changes more than other factions, even though everyone will be hurting more.

^I guess I just don't see why it's an issue, other than the fact that Chaos Marines don't get the same/similar AP bonus. Otherwise it doesn't bother me in the least that Bolters are suddenly better against Custodes.

I'm going to lose it if Las Fusils cost less than a lascannon.

 skchsan wrote:
I'm going to lose it if Las Fusils cost less than a lascannon.

Why? And it does. A lot less.

 Insectum7 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
Also I suspect the backbone of a LOT of marine infantry forces these days are intercessors not tacticals.

I think that can depend on your chapter. Tacticals for Salamanders is obvious, and for UM they can move and shoot Heavies without penalty.

the UM doctrine abilty is insanely good, it benifits tacticals and bolt rifle intercessors both. it's really an incrediable ability

BrianDavion wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
Also I suspect the backbone of a LOT of marine infantry forces these days are intercessors not tacticals.

I think that can depend on your chapter. Tacticals for Salamanders is obvious, and for UM they can move and shoot Heavies without penalty.

the UM doctrine abilty is insanely good, it benifits tacticals and bolt rifle intercessors both. it's really an incrediable ability

Agreed. Killer on vehicles, too. And finally Terminators aren't penalized for moving with heavy weapon. . . In a sorta roundabout way.

BrianDavion wrote:
Also I suspect the backbone of a LOT of marine infantry forces these days are intercessors not tacticals.

Oh yeah, definitely. And bolterdrill isn't nearly as good on tacs as it is on intercessors.

I'm going all in on Ravenguard, they just play differently enough to be both challenging and fun. I don't need or want anymore marine vehicles (outside of Invictor suits), so it suits me fine.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
Also I suspect the backbone of a LOT of marine infantry forces these days are intercessors not tacticals.

Oh yeah, definitely. And bolterdrill isn't nearly as good on tacs as it is on intercessors.

It turns Intercessors into Sternguard. Of course then Sternguard go to AP-3.

Or then Sternguard can use Storm Bolters for double the shots back at AP -1 again, which is even better, imo. Although +20 points.

Honestly the marine codex has too many Bolters in general. It covers basically any combination of S4 AP0-3 D1-2, in various range bands.

 Insectum7 wrote:
^I guess I just don't see why it's an issue, other than the fact that Chaos Marines don't get the same/similar AP bonus. Otherwise it doesn't bother me in the least that Bolters are suddenly better against Custodes.

I was just showing that it doubles down on killing elites when that was really needed. RIP Chaos Termies, who weren't even good to begin with, meanwhile cultists are barely affected.

The stalker boltrifle is basically a knock-off plasma gun now, so...

Dandelion wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
^I guess I just don't see why it's an issue, other than the fact that Chaos Marines don't get the same/similar AP bonus. Otherwise it doesn't bother me in the least that Bolters are suddenly better against Custodes.

I was just showing that it doubles down on killing elites when that was really needed. RIP Chaos Termies, who weren't even good to begin with, meanwhile cultists are barely affected.

The stalker boltrifle is basically a knock-off plasma gun now, so...

Well there's a couple of things that happened at the same time. Marines got more shots with their bolters at range, more attacks in the first round of CC, and an additional AP when the appropriate doctrine is active. The extra shot and extra attack sure go a long way to dealing with those pesky cultists. Imo the AP just means that in built up areas, Marines slaughter GEQ, which seemed to be what everybody was crying for. The Marines get to "ignore" the cover bonus with their AP, while being able to get a 2+ vs Lasfire.

As for Chaos Terminators, they get combi-weapons and access to Fire-twice. Both of which are great abilities.

I hate it but I really want to use it. All the options of different combinations of successors are super interesting to consider if they might be worth it compared to the first founding chapter. Thinking about doing a Libators first company (SM w. bolter drills and master artisans) with a bunch of Company Veterans with storm bolter and storm shields and 30 Veteran Intercessors gets me excited. My two favourite SM factions are BA first and IH second, I might play IH a bit to understand how good they truly are but truly switching over would feel too cowardly to me. I love the fact that Raven Guard are good at assasinating Knights, it's hilarious to me.

If SM are really strong I might switch from Necrons to Craftworlds because it will not be a cowardly move as it previously would have been. I'm already playing very rarely ATM because of headaches so I might just hibernate in terms of 40k play until GW fixes things. Depending on the FAQ that should be coming out in the next couple of weeks things could change, hopefully Alaitoc gets nerfed, but I'm pretty sure Craftworld players would have a flip if they got nerfed after this SM release. Nerfing IH just a touch is something I'm hoping for, just 10 pts for the Iron Father and nerf the -1 damage aura Relic in some way, just to show that GW cares because it's hard to believe GW cares about anything but monies with this release.

1. The Doctrines are stupid because you can't start in the one you want, ergo favoring shooting once again.
2. The codex forgets some units are still bad.
3. BLOAT FOR THE BLOAT GOD! RULES FOR THE RULE THRONE! It's more bloat when we could've easily fixed this all into one stupid codex which I already proved possible in another thread.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Well there's a couple of things that happened at the same time. Marines got more shots with their bolters at range, more attacks in the first round of CC, and an additional AP when the appropriate doctrine is active. The extra shot and extra attack sure go a long way to dealing with those pesky cultists. Imo the AP just means that in built up areas, Marines slaughter GEQ, which seemed to be what everybody was crying for. The Marines get to "ignore" the cover bonus with their AP, while being able to get a 2+ vs Lasfire.

As for Chaos Terminators, they get combi-weapons and access to Fire-twice. Both of which are great abilities.

Extra attacks are just as good against elites as they are against cheap infantry. (an across the board buff)
The extra AP affects elites more than cheap infantry. (a skewed buff)
I'm not saying marines are bad at killing cheap infantry, I'm saying they're more skewed towards killing armor now. That's it.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

nekooni wrote:


We have bolters. And those get to be AP-1 in the tactical doctrine, how is that not helping vs light infantry? how is bolter drill not helping with that, either? How are extra attacks on the charge for all our units not helping?

Going from AP-1 to AP-2 against Guardsmen, Cultists, Boyz, Gretchin, etc is basically worthless. Even against T3 4+ models it's not a big deal.

But going for AP-1 to AP-2 against a Predator, or worse, the Stalker guns which are going to be AP-3 D2, is pretty bad news for a Predator when they formerly would have been at least mostly unconcerned.


The fundamental gist of it is that each point of AP is worth more against a better armor save unit than a high armor save unit. A predator [or other 3+ unit] takes 33% more wounds, but a guardsman takes only 16% more wounds from the extra point of AP; and the guardsmen were probably going to be tabled off anyway before the AP buff while the predator would have been marginally inconvenienced.


I already think the fact that tanks are T7 and T8 wasn't the ideal course. I think the default state of infantry weapons should have been wounding tanks on a 6+ with only exceptionally light vehicles being T7 and most standard tanks being T8 or T9. This would have had the added bonus of giving greater differentiation in AT systems, since with mostly T7 and some special T8 almost all the AT systems are effectively identical and S10 AT weapons like Railcannons and Demolishers are basically useless. Being mostly proof against assault rifle fire should not have been the standard that differentiates heavy from regular tanks.

Bolters aren't going to AP-2. You're talking bolt rifles which is a different weapon. All the standard S4Ap0 Bolter type weapons are benefitting from this VS light infantry.

And the statement I questioned wasn't about predators, it was about how allegedly we didn't receive anything to deal with light infantry.

I like the premise of the revamp but good god GW handled this poorly.

Makes my CSM v2 codex + Vigilus seem... awful. Like, embarrassingly awful in comparison.

also the new marine buffs just kind of seal the lid on my Tyranid monster mash coffin. In even causal games my monsterous creatures cannot get close to ironhands or even damage them for long anyway and their chaff clearing ability it just crazy strong. I look at primaris with their buffs and then at my Tyranid Warriors and Im just... :(

Dandelion wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Well there's a couple of things that happened at the same time. Marines got more shots with their bolters at range, more attacks in the first round of CC, and an additional AP when the appropriate doctrine is active. The extra shot and extra attack sure go a long way to dealing with those pesky cultists. Imo the AP just means that in built up areas, Marines slaughter GEQ, which seemed to be what everybody was crying for. The Marines get to "ignore" the cover bonus with their AP, while being able to get a 2+ vs Lasfire.

As for Chaos Terminators, they get combi-weapons and access to Fire-twice. Both of which are great abilities.

Extra attacks are just as good against elites as they are against cheap infantry. (an across the board buff)
The extra AP affects elites more than cheap infantry. (a skewed buff)
I'm not saying marines are bad at killing cheap infantry, I'm saying they're more skewed towards killing armor now. That's it.

Ehhh, that S4 1D is still a tough hill to climb when shooting at elites or tanks. 20 AP -1 Bolters still only do a wound and a half to a Custodes after hitting and wounding. 2.2 Wounds vs. Terminators. Both those units can be in cover and just negate it. Bolters remain a not-good solution against actually tough models. Concentrating fire you can squeeze a couple wounds out of them, but they're no substitute for the application of high-powered equipment. Because of these shortcomings I say they "work better" against lighter units because you can actually meaningfully damage or cripple units with them. The same 20 Bolters gets you 7.3 GEQ kills, which averages a killed Infantry Squad after the morale test.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Well there's a couple of things that happened at the same time. Marines got more shots with their bolters at range, more attacks in the first round of CC, and an additional AP when the appropriate doctrine is active. The extra shot and extra attack sure go a long way to dealing with those pesky cultists. Imo the AP just means that in built up areas, Marines slaughter GEQ, which seemed to be what everybody was crying for. The Marines get to "ignore" the cover bonus with their AP, while being able to get a 2+ vs Lasfire.

As for Chaos Terminators, they get combi-weapons and access to Fire-twice. Both of which are great abilities.

There are termis thought that do no have fire twice or combi weapons, and -1AP and more attacks on something as popular as regular marines is big hit. The way GW designs stuff, everything they make kind of a good vs horde units, are super efficient vs elite units, specially with all the +1D, extra AP etc.

Karol wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Well there's a couple of things that happened at the same time. Marines got more shots with their bolters at range, more attacks in the first round of CC, and an additional AP when the appropriate doctrine is active. The extra shot and extra attack sure go a long way to dealing with those pesky cultists. Imo the AP just means that in built up areas, Marines slaughter GEQ, which seemed to be what everybody was crying for. The Marines get to "ignore" the cover bonus with their AP, while being able to get a 2+ vs Lasfire.

As for Chaos Terminators, they get combi-weapons and access to Fire-twice. Both of which are great abilities.

There are termis thought that do no have fire twice or combi weapons, and -1AP and more attacks on something as popular as regular marines is big hit. The way GW designs stuff, everything they make kind of a good vs horde units, are super efficient vs elite units, specially with all the +1D, extra AP etc.

Try a game where you attempt to grind it out with bolters. You're gonna feel the lack of better guns when it takes all your units to kill a Leman Russ or a single Custodes squad, for example. Against tough units, bolters really only work well in support to plink off an extra wound or two. They're only really a solution against light and medium infantry, which seems about right.

 Insectum7 wrote:



Try a game where you attempt to grind it out with bolters. You're gonna feel the lack of better guns when it takes all your units to kill a Leman Russ or a single Custodes squad, for example. Against tough units, bolters really only work well in support to plink off an extra wound or two. They're only really a solution against light and medium infantry, which seems about right.

My army only has stormbolters as weapons. I have 4 weapons that are ranger that are not stormbolters. 2 psycannons and 2 incinertors. So I know how hard it is to kill tank with them. What I am saying is that -1AP and 2D on a unit of bolters means 46pts termintors die real fast. And you can have almost 3 intercessors for 1 termintor, and the intercessors will have a triple the termintors wounds.

I get it that bolters aren't the weapon of doom, since DW lost their ammo+bolter drill combo, but it doesn't change the fact that the changes make them really point efficient at killing elite stuff. And am assuming this is not intentional, and that GW did try to make them more anti horde. Which again boils down to the fact that anything anti horde is just as efficient vs elite units nowadays, because most elite units have a horrible points to efficiency ratio.

Marines damage output went up, but their ability to take a hit didn’t adjust as well. I would have preferred it the other way.

Played a game vs. my sons’s Salamanders. Non optimized lists. The interaction between his chapter tactics and the doctrines was odd. He either got his full save, or a -2, and vs. what depended on the turn. Didn’t mater for normal bolters, but vs. bolt rifles there wasa significant difference between turn 1 and 2. Also for the TFC the first turn was key, but once I switched to Tac, it was a lot less impressive.

Game felt a lot like rocket tag. Which is a wider 40k problem, but marines with more damage output makes who gets the first punch more relevant.

The extra attack made CC feel more then just a slap fest.

Overall I like the new book. I like that they’ve gone back to supplements. In one sense it is more rules bloat and another book I have to flip through. On the other, I don’t need to look at other chapters named characters and stratagems while trying to find my stuff. Everything in the core book is relevant to me. Not a fan of the extra cost, but that’s not shock. While I like that they have a few UM units, denying other chapters those guys feels wrong. Obviously the other 999 chapters never fly their chapter banners in combat, or have guys to protect their chapter master. You can just use the company level stuff rules-wise, but I’d always like more options spread out, not less. Also, lost opportunity to fix TWV, who remain useless.

I was not maximally utilizing my supplement options, as I had my book while my son did not, and it was our first game with the new book. It looks like there will be a lot of fun, fluffy tricks in store in future games.

Sterling191 wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Where is that. 83 coming from insectum? Would it not be. 333?

3+ Save goes to 6+ Save, stopping 17% of wounds.

But doesn't every single knight have a 5++?

 fraser1191 wrote:

Sterling191 wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Where is that. 83 coming from insectum? Would it not be. 333?

3+ Save goes to 6+ Save, stopping 17% of wounds.

But doesn't every single knight have a 5++?

Not in melee.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
3. BLOAT FOR THE BLOAT GOD! RULES FOR THE RULE THRONE! It's more bloat when we could've easily fixed this all into one stupid codex which I already proved possible in another thread.

Soon, we're going to end up with a 2 page datasheet.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Ehhh, that S4 1D is still a tough hill to climb when shooting at elites or tanks.

Was that seriously your take away? If so, I must be terrible at getting my point across. The doctrines can apply an AP bonus to any weapon, and many of those weapons are anti-tank (missile launcher, autocannons, even plasma). I was just using boltguns to prove the point. So again, marine capability against armor went up a lot, but their capability against light infantry went up a little. (also, they get no bonus vs invulns like Knights, which also doesn't help)

Anyway, I'm tired of discussing this point. It doesn't really matter enough to me to bother.