Banner Abuse

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 Newman**

the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, the whole party line of "ultras/Sallies/WS/whoever are reasonable and fine and good, everyone ELSE is the problem!" is utter horsecrap.

Any space marine chapter that has a less than stellar chapter tactic can keep all their bonuses, relics, and assorted free gak and swap that tactic out for "Reroll 1 hit and 1 wound, you are in cover over 12" away."

All of them get at least four army-wide abilities that are on par with other armies' chapter tactics.

All of them have ridiculously easy access to crazy cheap full hit rerolls that are now uniquely resistant to negative to-hit modifiers (well, unique unless you're Bellisarius Cawl).

Every marine subfaction has access to a whole suite of rules that no other faction gets, and even when other factions get stuff that resembles numarine stuff, they have to make actual trade-offs and sacrifices to get it - see Tyranid/Eldar/Drukhari pick-your-own chapter tactics. Do you get to pick your own chapter tactic for those factions and get the relic/stratagem/warlord trait of a subfaction of your choice? feth no, that'd be stupid, obviously you will be able to powergame those and find a combo that's probably better than most chapter tactics.

But marines get to. And marines get 6x the warlord traits, 6x the relics, a whole psychic discipline, and 10x the stratagems than anyone else gets for their subfactions.

Imagine the level of rage coming from the marine fanbase if a xenos faction had been released with an army wide chapter tactic of:

-Reroll failed morale tests
-Reroll 1 hit and wound roll per unit
-All units are in cover if the firer is over 12" away
-Additional -1AP on all heavy weapons turn 1, then on all basic infantry weapons turn 2+
-Rapid Fire weapons fire two shots at full range if the unit was stationary
-+1 attack per model if any unit charged, was charged, or performed a heroic intervention
-All units count as stationary unless they advance turn 2+

That is what people are touting as perfectly reasonable and only IH/IF are over the line. Turn 2+ Aggressors with a bonus AP on all their guns getting double shots all the time, and BTW they've also got a 2cp stratagem to fall back and count as stationary even if you didn't take the Ultras chapter tactic lololololol.

These supplements make Decurions and scatterbikes look like a joke. I'd take any chapter against Necrons with full 7th ed decurion bonuses paying 8th ed point costs any day.

And then you remember that all those special rules are layered on top of a faction hamstrung with hideously overpriced units from top to bottom. GW over-corrected by a lot with the codex suppliments, but the baseline problems that GW was trying to fix are still there.

Aggressors are a good unit with the UM or Sally special rules, they're trash without them. IF, IH, and UM abilities help their tanks a lot, only three or four of those tanks are even remotely worth taking without them. +1 AP on a Boltgun with all the rerolls is good, lose either buff they get out-shot by practically everyone.

(Aggressors do not get to fire as though they were stationary if they left combat with the strat. The UM super-doctrine bonus doesn't kick in if the unit advanced or fell back.)

Marines got a big boost in Codex 2.0, but they needed a big boost. They were in a terrible place before. If the Codex Supplements had been in the vicinity of the boosts the Chaos Legions got in PA things would probably be fine. If the Codex Suppliments replaced the warlord traits, strats, relics, and pyschic disciplines out of the main book instead of adding to them it would probably be fine. As stands they need a correction to bring them back into line, but don't try to pretend that handing the current stack of UM buffs to anyone else besides Necrons or GK wouldn't be three times worse.

**the_scotsman**

The Newman wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, the whole party line of "ultras/Sallies/WS/whoever are reasonable and fine and good, everyone ELSE is the problem!" is utter horsecrap.

Any space marine chapter that has a less than stellar chapter tactic can keep all their bonuses, relics, and assorted free gak and swap that tactic out for "Reroll 1 hit and 1 wound, you are in cover over 12" away."

All of them get at least four army-wide abilities that are on par with other armies' chapter tactics.

All of them have ridiculously easy access to crazy cheap full hit rerolls that are now uniquely resistant to negative to-hit modifiers (well, unique unless you're Bellisarius Cawl).

Every marine subfaction has access to a whole suite of rules that no other faction gets, and even when other factions get stuff that resembles numarine stuff, they have to make actual trade-offs and sacrifices to get it - see Tyranid/Eldar/Drukhari pick-your-own chapter tactics. Do you get to pick your own chapter tactic for those factions and get the relic/stratagem/warlord trait of a subfaction of your choice? feth no, that'd be stupid, obviously you will be able to powergame those and find a combo that's probably better than most chapter tactics.

But marines get to. And marines get 6x the warlord traits, 6x the relics, a whole psychic discipline, and 10x the stratagems than anyone else gets for their subfactions.

Imagine the level of rage coming from the marine fanbase if a xenos faction had been released with an army wide chapter tactic of:

-Reroll failed morale tests
-Reroll 1 hit and wound roll per unit
-All units are in cover if the firer is over 12" away
-Additional -1AP on all heavy weapons turn 1, then on all basic infantry weapons turn 2+
-Rapid Fire weapons fire two shots at full range if the unit was stationary
-+1 attack per model if any unit charged, was charged, or performed a heroic intervention
-All units count as stationary unless they advance turn 2+

That is what people are touting as perfectly reasonable and only IH/IF are over the line. Turn 2+ Aggressors with a bonus AP on all their guns getting double shots all the time, and BTW they've also got a 2cp stratagem to fall back and count as stationary even if you didn't take the Ultras chapter tactic lololololol.

These supplements make Decurions and scatterbikes look like a joke. I'd take any chapter against Necrons with full 7th ed decurion bonuses paying 8th ed point costs any day.

And then you remember that all those special rules are layered on top of a faction hamstrung with hideously overpriced units from top to bottom. GW over-corrected by a lot with the codex suppliments, but the baseline problems that GW was trying to fix are still there.

Aggressors are a good unit with the UM or Sally special rules, they're trash without them. IF, IH, and UM abilities help their tanks a lot, only three or four of them are even remotely worth taking without them. +1 AP on a Boltgun with all the rerolls is good, lose either buff they get out-shot by practically everyone.

(Aggressors do not get to fire as though they were stationary if they left combat with the strat. The UM super-doctrine bonus doesn't kick in if the unit advanced or fell back.)

Marines got a big boost in Codex 2.0, but they needed a big boost. They were in a terrible place before. If the Codex Supplements had been in the vicinity of the boosts the Chaos Legions got in PA things would probably be fine. If the Codex Suppliments replaced the warlord traits, strats, relics, and pyschic disciplines out of the main book instead of adding to them it would probably be fine. As stands they need a correction to bring them back into line, but don't try to pretend that handing the current stack of UM buffs to anyone else besides Necrons or GK wouldn't be three times worse.

Yeah, obviously, if Drukhari got six chapter tactics they'd be ridiculous. If Eldar got six chapter tactics they'd be ridiculous. This gak would be stupid if any army got it, and the current crop of marine apologists would be losing their goddamn minds instead of pretending that the subfactions with 57% winrates are fine, only the factions with 70% winrates need any adjustment. I agree with you that swapping the codex relics, powers, strats and doctrines out for the supplement ones would probably approach reasonable, if you also removed the "have your trait and eat it too" of the successor chapter traits. 2CP to fall back and do everything is semi-reasonable if your whole chapter tactic is fall back and shoot with -1, it becomes stupid if you have that AND a crazy powerful custom trait combo.

Aggressors are a T5 W3 3+ unit that fires 6+D6 bolt shots and 12+2d6 bolt shots if you ignore them. Oh, and they also get 4 powerfist attacks each in melee, just in case you want to tie them up with something, they can easily mulch a transport or something in a turn with decent rolls. for 37ppm. If that's your standard of a "trash" unit, I can see why even the most casual games of 8th are ending in tablings turn 3.

Grotesques, a unit considered so good they were spammed in tournaments, are T5 W4 with a 5++ save, get zero shooting, and get 1 more attack with S5 Ap-2 D1 instead of S8 Ap-3 Dd3. For 35ppm.

Tell me again how Aggressors are "trash" unless they get 12+2D6 shots and Ap-1 all the time.

**AlmightyWalrus**

They're M5 with an 18" range and desperately want to stand still. Their only transport option is a 300+ point tank.

**the_scotsman**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
They're M5 with an 18" range and desperately want to stand still. Their only transport option is a 300+ point tank.

Great, explain why Grotesques are a competitive choice for Drukhari and have been since the codex release when they have no guns at all, comparable melee, worse defenses and cost 2pts less. Even moving, Aggressors put out the firepower of an equivalent number of tactical marines in RF range+1D6 bonus shots. Here's a non-exhaustive list of ways I can come up with to make Aggressors easy to get into range with, just by scrolling thru 1d4chan a bit.

1) put them in a repulsor or repulsor executioner, a competitive piece in its own right in a number of tournament lists I've seen.

2) give them a custom trait that includes Rapid Assault, Long Range Marksmen, or Hungry for Battle

3) Put them in Ultramarines, where they can move and fire in tactical doctrine.

4) Put them in Raven Guard, where they can deploy 9" away from enemy models and not move turn 1

5) put them in Salamanders, and use Relentless Determination (bonus points if you want to make them worth buying a Repulsor for, give them Flamestorm Gauntlets and use Flamecraft as well for a fun 120 S4 shots with +1 to wound. Just make your opponent pick up 67 ork boyz! Fun for everyone!)

6) Put them in White Scars, plop them out of their transport after it moves for 1CP.

Aggressors are now a unit with a "weakness" that has so many solutions with so much flexibility it's laughably easy to make them broken as gak. With 2W, when they were more expensive, they were gak. Funny how increasing their survivability by a huge amount and giving them 1 billion ways to get around their little handicap changes the ball game!

**The Newman**

Aggressors are stupidly easy to shoot off the table before they get to do anything if they have to work from their base 18" gun + M5 stats, provided that you recognize them as a threat and didn't bring an army with no shooting whatsoever, and quite frankly any melee unit worth the name has a way to shut off overwatch and should wipe even a full squad of Aggressors without breaking a sweat.

Full disclosure; I don't actually think Aggressors are a trash unit, but every time I try to say their a good unit I get several pages of argument from people who do think they're garbage. My experience has been that they're a unit you have to fully commit to because they have significant flaws. I have to build my whole list around making them work. Even then I consider eight of them to be the cut-off line at 1000 points, anything less than that and they'll all be dead before my turn if I go second. If I'm taking that many Aggressors it's hard to bring enough bubble-wrap and still bring some AT as well.

**Stormonu**

Granted, my rules knowledge is feeble, but how I’d the Lord get Lassed? Isn’t he a character - were there no closer units to protect him from being shot?

**AlmightyWalrus**

the_scotsman wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
They're M5 with an 18" range and desperately want to stand still. Their only transport option is a 300+ point tank.

Great, explain why Grotesques are a competitive choice for Drukhari and have been since the codex release when they have no guns at all, comparable melee, worse defenses and cost 2pts less. Even moving, Aggressors put out the firepower of an equivalent number of tactical marines in RF range+1D6 bonus shots. Here's a non-exhaustive list of ways I can come up with to make Aggressors easy to get into range with, just by scrolling thru 1d4chan a bit.

1) put them in a repulsor or repulsor executioner, a competitive piece in its own right in a number of tournament lists I've seen.

2) give them a custom trait that includes Rapid Assault, Long Range Marksmen, or Hungry for Battle

3) Put them in Ultramarines, where they can move and fire in tactical doctrine.

4) Put them in Raven Guard, where they can deploy 9" away from enemy models and not move turn 1

5) put them in Salamanders, and use Relentless Determination (bonus points if you want to make them worth buying a Repulsor for, give them Flamestorm Gauntlets and use Flamecraft as well for a fun 120 S4 shots with +1 to wound. Just make your opponent pick up 67 ork boyz! Fun for everyone!)

6) Put them in White Scars, plop them out of their transport after it moves for 1CP.

Aggressors are now a unit with a "weakness" that has so many solutions with so much flexibility it's laughably easy to make them broken as gak. With 2W, when they were more expensive, they were gak. Funny how increasing their survivability by a huge amount and giving them 1 billion ways to get around their little handicap changes the ball game!

The argument was that every Chapter is too good because Aggressors are OP. If you have to take a specific Chapter to make them work, then by definition the Chapters with which they do not work does not support this argument.

You also can't put Aggressors in Repulsors, and if you're spending 300+ points on a transport for them (which you're then wasting the potential of to move the Aggressors up) they'd better do damage.

I haven't played enough against Drukhari to know how they work on anything more than a shallow level, so I'll guess that you're glossing over a bunch of other special rules the same way you're confusing a bunch of rules together for the Aggressors?

**the_scotsman**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
They're M5 with an 18" range and desperately want to stand still. Their only transport option is a 300+ point tank.

Great, explain why Grotesques are a competitive choice for Drukhari and have been since the codex release when they have no guns at all, comparable melee, worse defenses and cost 2pts less. Even moving, Aggressors put out the firepower of an equivalent number of tactical marines in RF range+1D6 bonus shots. Here's a non-exhaustive list of ways I can come up with to make Aggressors easy to get into range with, just by scrolling thru 1d4chan a bit.

1) put them in a repulsor or repulsor executioner, a competitive piece in its own right in a number of tournament lists I've seen.

2) give them a custom trait that includes Rapid Assault, Long Range Marksmen, or Hungry for Battle

3) Put them in Ultramarines, where they can move and fire in tactical doctrine.

4) Put them in Raven Guard, where they can deploy 9" away from enemy models and not move turn 1

5) put them in Salamanders, and use Relentless Determination (bonus points if you want to make them worth buying a Repulsor for, give them Flamestorm Gauntlets and use Flamecraft as well for a fun 120 S4 shots with +1 to wound. Just make your opponent pick up 67 ork boyz! Fun for everyone!)

6) Put them in White Scars, plop them out of their transport after it moves for 1CP.

Aggressors are now a unit with a "weakness" that has so many solutions with so much flexibility it's laughably easy to make them broken as gak. With 2W, when they were more expensive, they were gak. Funny how increasing their survivability by a huge amount and giving them 1 billion ways to get around their little handicap changes the ball game!

The argument was that every Chapter is too good because Aggressors are OP. If you have to take a specific Chapter to make them work, then by definition the Chapters with which they do not work does not support this argument.

You also can't put Aggressors in Repulsors, and if you're spending 300+ points on a transport for them (which you're then wasting the potential of to move the Aggressors up) they'd better do damage.

1) Uh...yes you can? You can put 3 aggressors in an executioner and 5 in a regular repulsor.

2) using a transport to transport models that want to be transported is...wasting its potential? What?

Unless a unit gets no chapter tactics, it doesn't make sense to completely ignore the potential rules it has access to through chapter tactics. I would agree with you if the only way you could reliably get Aggressors into range was by taking them in one specific chapter, ala Assault Centurions in Raven Guard, but there are 3-4 supplement books and a bunch of different chapters and successor traits that provide them with benefits that more than make up for their drawback.

Also, the "Just focus them down" argument is how you USED to be able to deal with aggressors. They're W3 now. They have identical points/wound as regular tactical marines, and they've lost the weakness to W2 weaponry. They're not unstoppable bricks, but if T5 W3 3+ for 37pts looks like a glass cannon to you....I dunno, I invite you to play any other faction in the game and see how their stuff feels? Bring some orks, nids or GSC into a marine army with Doctrines and see how many hours worth of painting you have to scoop up every time your opponent declares a shooting attack.

Also also, you have massively mischaracterized what the argument was. The argument ACTUALLY was that everything Marines is overcosted trash and that the supplements were just a "slight overcorrection."

**catbarf**

The Newman wrote:
Aggressors are a good unit with the UM or Sally special rules, they're trash without them.

I wonder how many Guard players would pass up the opportunity to have their Bullgryns become better in melee, get a whole crapton of bolter shots (at full effectiveness while Advancing, for a 26.5" threat range), and a points reduction, all at the cost of just 1" of movement and going from a 2+ to a 3+ save.

A SM unit being 'trash' while comparing favorably to one of the Guard's best units really says it all.

**Daedalus81**

the_scotsman wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
They're M5 with an 18" range and desperately want to stand still. Their only transport option is a 300+ point tank.

Great, explain why Grotesques are a competitive choice for Drukhari and have been since the codex release when they have no guns at all, comparable melee, worse defenses and cost 2pts less. Even moving, Aggressors put out the firepower of an equivalent number of tactical marines in RF range+1D6 bonus shots.

I take issue with worse defense. Grotesques are W4 4++/6+++ vs Aggressors W3 3+. They're also pretty easily amped up to T6 (and often S6).

The other huge factor is being able to take 10 Grotesques (40 friggin' wounds) in a single selection as opposed to 6 Aggressors.

That said Aggressors and Grotesques are roughly on par now with the edge to Aggressors just from the sheer variety of choice.

**AlmightyWalrus**

the_scotsman wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:
They're M5 with an 18" range and desperately want to stand still. Their only transport option is a 300+ point tank.

Great, explain why Grotesques are a competitive choice for Drukhari and have been since the codex release when they have no guns at all, comparable melee, worse defenses and cost 2pts less. Even moving, Aggressors put out the firepower of an equivalent number of tactical marines in RF range+1D6 bonus shots. Here's a non-exhaustive list of ways I can come up with to make Aggressors easy to get into range with, just by scrolling thru 1d4chan a bit.

1) put them in a repulsor or repulsor executioner, a competitive piece in its own right in a number of tournament lists I've seen.

2) give them a custom trait that includes Rapid Assault, Long Range Marksmen, or Hungry for Battle

3) Put them in Ultramarines, where they can move and fire in tactical doctrine.

4) Put them in Raven Guard, where they can deploy 9" away from enemy models and not move turn 1

5) put them in Salamanders, and use Relentless Determination (bonus points if you want to make them worth buying a Repulsor for, give them Flamestorm Gauntlets and use Flamecraft as well for a fun 120 S4 shots with +1 to wound. Just make your opponent pick up 67 ork boyz! Fun for everyone!)

6) Put them in White Scars, plop them out of their transport after it moves for 1CP.

Aggressors are now a unit with a "weakness" that has so many solutions with so much flexibility it's laughably easy to make them broken as gak. With 2W, when they were more expensive, they were gak. Funny how increasing their survivability by a huge amount and giving them 1 billion ways to get around their little handicap changes the ball game!

The argument was that every Chapter is too good because Aggressors are OP. If you have to take a specific Chapter to make them work, then by definition the Chapters with which they do not work does not support this argument.

You also can't put Aggressors in Repulsors, and if you're spending 300+ points on a transport for them (which you're then wasting the potential of to move the Aggressors up) they'd better do damage.

1) Uh...yes you can? You can put 3 aggressors in an executioner and 5 in a regular repulsor.

Sorry, I keep getting the Impulsor and the Repulsor mixed up. My bad.

the_scotsman wrote:

2) using a transport to transport models that want to be transported is...wasting its potential? What?

Yes. It's the same problem Land Raiders have; you're paying 300+ points for the firepower, not for the incidental transport capacity. Having to drive your expensive but good shooting tank closer to the enemy where it is at greater risk is not getting the full potential out of it.

the_scotsman wrote:

Unless a unit gets no chapter tactics, it doesn't make sense to completely ignore the potential rules it has access to through chapter tactics. I would agree with you if the only way you could reliably get Aggressors into range was by taking them in one specific chapter, ala Assault Centurions in Raven Guard, but there are 3-4 supplement books and a bunch of different chapters and successor traits that provide them with benefits that more than make up for their drawback.

Absolutely. Taken as one of those Chapters they're really good. The thing is though, you said:

the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, the whole party line of "ultras/Sallies/WS/whoever are reasonable and fine and good, everyone ELSE is the problem!" is utter horsecrap.

Any space marine chapter that has a less than stellar chapter tactic can keep all their bonuses, relics, and assorted free gak and swap that tactic out for "Reroll 1 hit and 1 wound, you are in cover over 12" away."

**catbarf**

Daedalus81 wrote:
I take issue with worse defense. Grotesques are W4 4++/6+++ vs Aggressors W3 3+. They're also pretty easily amped up to T6 (and often S6).

IIRC, Grotesques only get a 4++ if they're taken as Prophets of Flesh. I thought we weren't taking subfactions into consideration. The Haemonculus buff to their durability also would broadly compare to the various re-rolls available from SM characters, which if we take into consideration turn Aggressors into some ridiculous shooting units, especially in conjunction with Tactical doctrine.

Also, I don't understand why people are talking about their low movement and range as a crippling weakness. They can Advance without penalty to project a threat radius of, on average, 26.5", and can very easily be shooting turn 1. Against any army reliant on melee or short-ranged shooting, the rest of the SM list can castle up and fire with full effectiveness out to 30" while the Aggressors provide a huge deterrent to getting in close enough to charge or Rapid Fire back. And if you want to take a more aggressive posture, you have transports and a host of subfaction abilities to mitigate their slow speed entirely.

**AlmightyWalrus**

People are balking at their slow speed because the best ways of mitigating them is, as you said, through subfaction abilities. This serves as an example of why claiming that the entire book is broken regardless of Chapter Tactics is wrong.

It's not like anyone is claiming that Armageddon Steel Legion Tank Commanders are really strong just because Catachan ones are.

**the_scotsman**

Oop, no no no no, daed, grotesques aren't 4++, they're 5++. We're indulging a universe where we ignore chapter rules and traits.

Aggressors compare perfectly fine to comparable competitive heavy infantry units that you can take in tournament lists. They are a unit with a built in weakness and they make up for it by having a massive reward. They do not need their double shooting all the time to be worth it - that makes them way over the top, which should be immediately obvious to anyone who plays with or against them in ultra doctrines.

They were trash on release. Since then they've gotten shock assault, +1W, and a solid 30% points reduction.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
People are balking at their slow speed because the best ways of mitigating them is, as you said, through subfaction abilities. This serves as an example of why claiming that the entire book is broken regardless of Chapter Tactics is wrong.

It's not like anyone is claiming that Armageddon Steel Legion Tank Commanders are really strong just because Catachan ones are.

You are once again assuming I'm claiming that space marine units are inherently op. I'm really not. I'm claiming they're average and that most compare favorably with comparable units in other armies, and that the supplements make them hideously over the top.

Maybe, maybe if you swapped out access to the librarius discipline, the base relic list, the normal stratagems, and the standard -1AP from whatever doctrine swaps to the unique one, and you played by the same rules everyone else does with the pock your own chapter traits, marines would be OK.

Until then though, they're going to continue to dominate the meta harder than Eldar in 7th.

**Klickor**

On a model with higher toughness and lots of wounds a 5++ is probably equal or better than a 3+ against almost anything worth targeting them with. Since most weapons with lots of damage usually also have the AP to match. You dont really kill those kind of units with mass ap 0 weapons anyway. Sure you might kill one or remove the last wound with lasguns but not whole units. Ap 3-4+ damage d6 weapons are like half as good against one of the 2 units compared to the other.

**catbarf**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:People are balking at their slow speed because the best ways of mitigating them is, as you said, through subfaction abilities. This serves as an example of why claiming that the entire book is broken regardless of Chapter Tactics is wrong.

It's not like anyone is claiming that Armageddon Steel Legion Tank Commanders are really strong just because Catachan ones are.

If a unit is incredibly powerful in one way (shooting) but is balanced out by being critically weak in another area (mobility), but a subfaction ability lets you completely circumvent that weakness- then it's the subfaction ability that makes them OP; I don't see how you could construe it any other way. Even without subfaction abilities it's a mitigable weakness since they can be transported, and their lack of mobility isn't a problem for a static gunline anyways.

Klickor wrote:On a model with higher toughness and lots of wounds a 5++ is probably equal or better than a 3+ against almost anything worth targeting them with. Since most weapons with lots of damage usually also have the AP to match. You dont really kill those kind of units with mass ap 0 weapons anyway. Sure you might kill one or remove the last wound with lasguns but not whole units. Ap 3-4+ damage d6 weapons are like half as good against one of the 2 units compared to the other.

A 5++ takes 80% the damage of a 3+ against AP3 weapons, and 67% damage against AP4. Meanwhile a 3+ takes 75% damage of a 5++ against AP1, and 50% damage against AP0.

Given the common distribution of weapon profiles in the game, and the fact that shooting Aggressors with lascannons is a waste of anti-tank, the 3+ is virtually always better.

**the_scotsman**

Ahhhh, I remember back in 7th edition, having the discussions we're having right now with the exact same folks.

*wobblyscreen flashback*

*People arguing in favor of marines now* "Every unit in the Eldar codex is horribly undercosted! All of it needs a hefty points nerf or else the game will continue to be imbalanced!!!"

"What? There are clearly units like Vypers, Falcons, Dire Avengers, and Storm Guardians that just aren't very good"

I get it. There are units that as a baseline actually aren't great in the current marine codex that does get improved by doctrines - stuff like Tactical Marines, predator tanks, land speeders, whirlwinds, scouts with shotguns or sniper rifles or whatever, etc. But marines have gotten rules changes that other factions haven't over the course of the edition to improve many of their stinker units.

With units like Aggressors, Intercessors, Vindicators, etc, we just aren't where we started the edition with them. Making people choose between base codex stuff and fancy supplement stuff would not bring all those units back to index levels.

**Imateria**

I think what really hammers home this comparison between Agressors and Grotesques is that Grotesques really only ever work as Prophets of Flesh, take away the 4++, Vexators Mask relic and even Urien (who's +1S aura is overrated IMO) and they suddenly loose all that resiliance that is needed to get them into combat (where your choices are walk them up the board or deep strike for a 9" charge, you cna put them in Raiders but you limit the squad to 5 and are going to leave the characters and their buffs behind).

Agrressors on the other hand have access to an extremely wide variety of buffs that can make them work really well and mitigates their downsides effectively. You can also just use them as a distraction carnifex, a friend of mine uses a squad of 6 with Flamestorm Gauntlets as Salamanders, I've lost an entire squad of Talos to a single round of shooting from just 4 of them thanks to double shooting and getting max shots through strats. It was horrific and they can't be ignored, but at only 230pts or so my opponent can afford to have me focus down on them rather than something else. Can't say the same about Grotesques, they need to survive.

**Imateria**

Klickor wrote:
On a model with higher toughness and lots of wounds a 5++ is probably equal or better than a 3+ against almost anything worth targeting them with. Since most weapons with lots of damage usually also have the AP to match. You dont really kill those kind of units with mass ap 0 weapons anyway. Sure you might kill one or remove the last wound with lasguns but not whole units. Ap 3-4+ damage d6 weapons are like half as good against one of the 2 units compared to the other.

If you're using lascannon equivelants against these types of units then you either have no tanks/monsters to shoot at or are just plane doing it wrong. Autocannon type weapons, with massed mid strength shooting that's typically about AP-1 and D1-3 is the type of weapon you should be using, and the Aggressor comes off much better than the Grotesque does in this case thanks to the 3+ armour.

**Daedalus81**

Imateria wrote:
Klickor wrote:
On a model with higher toughness and lots of wounds a 5++ is probably equal or better than a 3+ against almost anything worth targeting them with. Since most weapons with lots of damage usually also have the AP to match. You dont really kill those kind of units with mass ap 0 weapons anyway. Sure you might kill one or remove the last wound with lasguns but not whole units. Ap 3-4+ damage d6 weapons are like half as good against one of the 2 units compared to the other.

If you're using lascannon equivelants against these types of units then you either have no tanks/monsters to shoot at or are just plane doing it wrong. Autocannon type weapons, with massed mid strength shooting that's typically about AP-1 and D1-3 is the type of weapon you should be using, and the Aggressor comes off much better than the Grotesque does in this case thanks to the 3+ armour.

Disintegrators? Plasma? Stalker Bolt Rifles? Armiger AC? Those far far better against Aggressors than Grotesques. All are fairly common.

**the_scotsman**

Daedalus81 wrote:
Imateria wrote:
Klickor wrote:
On a model with higher toughness and lots of wounds a 5++ is probably equal or better than a 3+ against almost anything worth targeting them with. Since most weapons with lots of damage usually also have the AP to match. You dont really kill those kind of units with mass ap 0 weapons anyway. Sure you might kill one or remove the last wound with lasguns but not whole units. Ap 3-4+ damage d6 weapons are like half as good against one of the 2 units compared to the other.

If you're using lascannon equivelants against these types of units then you either have no tanks/monsters to shoot at or are just plane doing it wrong. Autocannon type weapons, with massed mid strength shooting that's typically about AP-1 and D1-3 is the type of weapon you should be using, and the Aggressor comes off much better than the Grotesque does in this case thanks to the 3+ armour.

Disintegrators? Plasma? Stalker Bolt Rifles? Armiger AC? Those far far better against Aggressors than Grotesques. All are fairly common.

Again, if you are volunteering to give up all the shooting, all of it, for that slightly better defense, be my guest.

**The Newman**

I do get a chuckle because I said explicitly in a follow up that I think Aggressors are an 'ok' a unit with flaws that you need to work around to make them good, and my whole original point was "Marines have poor baseline units, it's two layers of buffs making them brokenly good" and everyone's responses have been "you can't say that unit is bad if it has a lot of buffs available to mitigate it's weaknesses."

And I really wish I could find the thread from a week or two back when I said I thought Aggressors are very strong with the right buffs and had two pages of responses that all read basically "Aggressors are garbage, you're stupid and your regular opponents are all scrubs if you think otherwise."

**AlmightyWalrus**

catbarf wrote:
AlmightyWalrus wrote:People are balking at their slow speed because the best ways of mitigating them is, as you said, through subfaction abilities. This serves as an example of why claiming that the entire book is broken regardless of Chapter Tactics is wrong.

It's not like anyone is claiming that Armageddon Steel Legion Tank Commanders are really strong just because Catachan ones are.

If a unit is incredibly powerful in one way (shooting) but is balanced out by being critically weak in another area (mobility), but a subfaction ability lets you completely circumvent that weakness- then it's the subfaction ability that makes them OP; I don't see how you could construe it any other way. Even without subfaction abilities it's a mitigable weakness since they can be transported, and their lack of mobility isn't a problem for a static gunline anyways.

I'm not saying otherwise? I agree completely. But that makes the problem the unit's interaction with that subfaction's rule, not the book as a whole, and it certainly doesn't make other subfactions in the same book broken.

the_scotsman wrote:
Ahhhh, I remember back in 7th edition, having the discussions we're having right now with the exact same folks.

*wobblyscreen flashback*

*People arguing in favor of marines now* "Every unit in the Eldar codex is horribly undercosted! All of it needs a hefty points nerf or else the game will continue to be imbalanced!!!"

"What? There are clearly units like Vypers, Falcons, Dire Avengers, and Storm Guardians that just aren't very good"

That's funny, I distinctly remember that one time that you admitted to stealing candy from an orphanage, dousing the place with gasoline and setting it on fire while cackling with evil glee.

**the_scotsman**

The Newman wrote:
I do get a chuckle because I said explicitly in a follow up that I think Aggressors are an 'ok' a unit with flaws that you need to work around to make them good, and my whole original point was "Marines have poor baseline units, it's two layers of buffs making them brokenly good" and everyone's responses have been "you can't say that unit is bad if it has a lot of buffs available to mitigate it's weaknesses."

And I really wish I could find the thread from a week or two back when I said I thought Aggressors are very strong with the right buffs and had two pages of responses that all read basically "Aggressors are garbage, you're stupid and your regular opponents are all scrubs if you think otherwise."

And I guess that's where I disagree with you. I don't think marine units are bad as a baseline anymore. I really don't. Taken with Shock Assault, beta bolters and their various points and rules buffs throughout the edition, I really can't see the marine codex as a whole as anything but a thoroughly average book.

When I play my Deathwatch they feel utterly bonkers compared to all my other armies. And I run literally nothing but Veterans, Terminators, and Vanvets with buff characters. Every other army I have is built with at least some degree of competitive, coherent squad construction, while I threw my DW together from a Kill Team collection, Deathwatch Overkill, and a box of Space Hulk terminators.

**BrianDavion**

ohh look this thread has developed into another "space marine doctrines complaint" thread.

*takes a shot*

**fraser1191**

BrianDavion wrote:
ohh look this thread has developed into another "space marine doctrines complaint" thread.

*takes a shot*

Don't worry in a years time marines will be back to what less than 40% win rate?