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.

Isn't the biggest shift going to be that we are going to see 2W models in a Rhino now? Going to be a lot harder to drop SM off of objectives now that they have a faster means of entrenching on them early game...

 Vaktathi wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Nazrak wrote:
I'm still slightly taken aback by people freaking out about Multi Meltas being changed just so they aren't complete dogshit any more.

I think there's a case to be made that they went overboard. MM's needed help, absolutely. Tripling the average damage output however may have been...a wee bit much. Two BS3+ MM's now in optimal range will kill almost any T7 3+ vehicle in one round of shooting, delivering 12 wounds with average rolls with the new Heavy 2 "2d6-pick-highest+2" Damage profile.

Where are you getting "2d6-pick-highest+2"? Last I checked the leaked statline had a damage of 1d6 and the half-range bonus was +2 instead of roll twice and pick highest, your average per multi-melta at optimal range without rerolls is about 4 wounds to T7/3+ (2/3*2/3*5/6*5.5*2 = 220/54). (5.5 with Captain/Lieutenant, in case anyone's curious)

Ah ok, seems I missed that they dropped the "pick highest". Still works out to a 2.5x damage bonus and an average of 10 wounds inflicted in my previous example case. A bit better, but still probably overboard.

Which is fine for a 24" weapon that will most likely also get a price increase to 35 or 40 points, which puts it at the level of a twin lascan.

 Vaktathi wrote:
...Ah ok, seems I missed that they dropped the "pick highest". Still works out to a 2.5x damage bonus and an average of 10 wounds inflicted in my previous example case. A bit better, but still probably overboard.

Dramatically worse against the most commonly-seen Xenos vehicles (Venoms, Wave Serpents, Quantum Shielded Necrons), mind. The multi-melta's stats seem like more of an argument that older Imperial vehicles (Rhinos and Chimeras) need help.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SaganGree wrote:
Isn't the biggest shift going to be that we are going to see 2W models in a Rhino now? Going to be a lot harder to drop SM off of objectives now that they have a faster means of entrenching on them early game...

They already had 2W Primaris Vanguard deploying on objectives, mind.

More fundamentally the issue is somewhere along this Primaris selfloveathon that GW has been having they have taken almost every factions defining thing they do better than everyone else and just made marines do it better or mucked up the balance so hard the army now doesn't work right.
Take the data from 8th

Drukari the fast glass needle army, meta build Transport spam with deapstriking heavy support that played the mobile firepower style?

ELDAR the specialists to beat all when used well, meta list un hitable snipers and more aeroplanes than the US military

Tau the mobile gunline army, meta list Who needs an army when you have drone warfare that can outlast everyone while doing minimal actual damage output.

Knights Noble households going into battle as one, meta build 1Castellen 3 smashcaptains each with their own scout squad and Guard for days.

Choas supposed to be mainly 1 warband or god specific army for the most part, meta list how many wombo combos can we stack from 18 books to make a viable army.

Necrons the hard to get rid of army that doesn't die easy, meta list 3 LoW like WTF?

I swear dakka used to ban people for a lot less than this bs.

Non stop panic posts based on assumptions and no evidence.
We know marines are getting 2 wounds.
What we don’t know is what else is changing for them and by how much.
Until we get specific, it’s just pointless panic posts.


The fact that these are endless now and most end with a lock is just a joke.

 Irkjoe wrote:


And being a better player means what? What impactful decisions are made on the table besides target priority? Not positioning when everything can threaten most of the table. I said that outplaying was the ideal, but 40k isn't about that. The point was that if you prioritize winning then you'll have to play what wins, if gw decides that isn't xenos then too bad.

There's this new thing this edition. Terr...terren?...terrain! Basically they have these rules that make it harder to see everything all the time. And then they made it so winning revolves around holding objectives instead of shooting stuff.

Some decisions in my last game:

- Committing a DP to Assassinate their while risking While We Stand
- Making a movement and advance to make sure the unit is wholly within for Engage
- Picking target priority between preventing Engage or holding an Objective
- Deepstriking Tzaangors into a no-win position in the hopes that a charge will out ObSec the enemy
- Holding back Gaze of Fate reroll on a failed psychic test to use in the even deepstriking Tzaangors rolled something like 6:1 on the charge
- Abandoning the right flank to oncoming Aggressors & Judiciar and pushing towards left flank deployment, but stringing out speed bumps to keep them from catching up
- Pulling back a Vindicator on 2 wounds and then using Warp Time to get it fully behind obscuring to get it heals as well as to block Bring It Down
- Deploying my bigger targets to one side of the board, which forces reserved Eradicators to deploy to that side and subsequently forcing them into their own deployment

I'm a CSM player and survived 6th and 7th Edition. Xenos players just have to survive until the next FAQ. And since we have no actual Info and this is another idiotic nonsense thread from icegoat it's even possible the new SM Codex might be weaker than the current one because GW saw the outrage about their Iron Hands.

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
I'm a CSM player and survived 6th and 7th Edition. Xenos players just have to survive until the next FAQ. And since we have no actual Info and this is another idiotic nonsense thread from icegoat it's even possible the new SM Codex might be weaker than the current one because GW saw the outrage about their Iron Hands.

Your common sense has little place here mate, we are in a minority on this forum.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SemperMortis wrote:

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Bloody hell, it's a game designed predominantly for adults with toy soldiers.....

Get a grip. Get some new hobbies, the curve will swing back around at some point and marines will be trash. Eldar were OP for the best part of a decade at some point.

Your livelihood is not on the line, this is just a game....

I have played since 3rd...I can not remember a single edition where space marines were "trash" tier.

As far as this game and calming down..im not freaking out, i just would like a bit more balance in a game ive spent a lot of time and money on. But if GW wants me to wait until my codex to have a chance at playing a fair game, so be it, thats why I have fishing and shooting as a fall back

Before the 2nd codex of 8th edition, they were pretty poor, with some chapters having different mileage. I also seem to remember them being quite poor in 3rd edition, they were far too squishy and instant death absolutely gibbed characters, and well, vehicles were poor in 3rd, this was before hull points remember.

Maybe certain marine builds did okay in third, but marines were not good. It was the first edition terminators were awful.

Icegoat wrote:
Thousands of people own thousands of points worth of old marines who just became the most overpowered horde army in warhammer history. Entire armies are going to be obliterated in one turn. This paradigm shift is going to create a black hole of despair come October to every non marine player in 40k.

Dude, seriously, just stop. Horde armies are not made of 18 point models that cost even more to get those fancy "overpowered" toys on them. Terrain rules and Strategic Reserves will prevent entire armies from dying to a single well-placed alpha strike. To me, it sounds like the only black hole of despair around here is you. Get over yourself, and wait for the codex to drop at least before you post a billion complaint threads.

Me, I'm just glad my mini-Marines are actually going to be viable. I bought a whole bunch of them to run the Lion's Blade Strike Force back in 7th edition, and I never even actually got to play that because circumstances beyond my control kept me from playing in a tournament and then the edition changed, making all that stuff just a very expensive shelf filler. Now I have a good reason to go back and actually paint those Marines and their vehicles beyond just for funsies.

Ice_can wrote:
More fundamentally the issue is somewhere along this Primaris selfloveathon that GW has been having they have taken almost every factions defining thing they do better than everyone else and just made marines do it better or mucked up the balance so hard the army now doesn't work right.
Take the data from 8th

Drukari the fast glass needle army, meta build Transport spam with deapstriking heavy support that played the mobile firepower style?

ELDAR the specialists to beat all when used well, meta list un hitable snipers and more aeroplanes than the US military

Tau the mobile gunline army, meta list Who needs an army when you have drone warfare that can outlast everyone while doing minimal actual damage output.

Knights Noble households going into battle as one, meta build 1Castellen 3 smashcaptains each with their own scout squad and Guard for days.

Choas supposed to be mainly 1 warband or god specific army for the most part, meta list how many wombo combos can we stack from 18 books to make a viable army.

Necrons the hard to get rid of army that doesn't die easy, meta list 3 LoW like WTF?

the fact that the most powerful list for each of those fsctoons is nothing like their fluff just speaks to GW's inability to write good rules. If an army is supposed to be good at X, then X should be their strongest and most efficient choices, with other options in the book as just that, options so that there is still variety and choice enough to keep customers interested in the product.

Jackal90 wrote:
I swear dakka used to ban people for a lot less than this bs.

Non stop panic posts based on assumptions and no evidence.
We know marines are getting 2 wounds.
What we don’t know is what else is changing for them and by how much.
Until we get specific, it’s just pointless panic posts.


The fact that these are endless now and most end with a lock is just a joke.

I agree, the Mods need to step in and tell people ENEUGH. theyre too slow for that and the result is DakkDakka has gotten a well deserved reputation as a absolute pit of negativity. I mean the last person to get banned (or I assume banned since he dissappered) only got banned after COUNTLESS warnings, and hijacking literally EVERY thread to complain about the same thing.

to the Mods: for feth's sake start coming down on people who post thread after thread complaining about the same fething thing!

BrianDavion wrote:

Jackal90 wrote:
I swear dakka used to ban people for a lot less than this bs.

Non stop panic posts based on assumptions and no evidence.
We know marines are getting 2 wounds.
What we don’t know is what else is changing for them and by how much.
Until we get specific, it’s just pointless panic posts.


The fact that these are endless now and most end with a lock is just a joke.

I agree, the Mods need to step in and tell people ENEUGH. theyre too slow for that and the result is DakkDakka has gotten a well deserved reputation as a absolute pit of negativity. I mean the last person to get banned (or I assume banned since he dissappered) only got banned after COUNTLESS warnings, and hijacking literally EVERY thread to complain about the same thing.

to the Mods: for feth's sake start coming down on people who post thread after thread complaining about the same fething thing!

Ah, the ork fan.

However, you are correct and these are complaints I have been making for a while now.

My experience in 40k has never seen any army made intentionally overpowered, rather a byproduct of circumstance. Eldar for example dominated the meta for a long time not because they were buffed, but because the game at the time lent itself to their ability to move fast in maelstrom missions.

As such, the question to ask yourself is not how they are supposed to complete, it’s how should they compete and do they have the ability to do so? Stat changes aside, to me the game looks like one where grabbing and holding objectives for a long time is what will win the game, as such I feel that armies which can field durable, ObSec units will be the real winners of this edition. That said, stat changes could see said units nullified by high damage weapons, lending the game instead to horde armies in the future. All very much in the air but one thing I am sure of - it’s all going to be about objectives.

endlesswaltz123 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Jackal90 wrote:
I swear dakka used to ban people for a lot less than this bs.

Non stop panic posts based on assumptions and no evidence.
We know marines are getting 2 wounds.
What we don’t know is what else is changing for them and by how much.
Until we get specific, it’s just pointless panic posts.


The fact that these are endless now and most end with a lock is just a joke.

I agree, the Mods need to step in and tell people ENEUGH. theyre too slow for that and the result is DakkDakka has gotten a well deserved reputation as a absolute pit of negativity. I mean the last person to get banned (or I assume banned since he dissappered) only got banned after COUNTLESS warnings, and hijacking literally EVERY thread to complain about the same thing.

to the Mods: for feth's sake start coming down on people who post thread after thread complaining about the same fething thing!

Ah, the ork fan.

However, you are correct and these are complaints I have been making for a while now.

Indeed, it's pretty much gotten to this way after a while.

nekooni wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Nazrak wrote:
I'm still slightly taken aback by people freaking out about Multi Meltas being changed just so they aren't complete dogshit any more.

I think there's a case to be made that they went overboard. MM's needed help, absolutely. Tripling the average damage output however may have been...a wee bit much. Two BS3+ MM's now in optimal range will kill almost any T7 3+ vehicle in one round of shooting, delivering 12 wounds with average rolls with the new Heavy 2 "2d6-pick-highest+2" Damage profile.

Where are you getting "2d6-pick-highest+2"? Last I checked the leaked statline had a damage of 1d6 and the half-range bonus was +2 instead of roll twice and pick highest, your average per multi-melta at optimal range without rerolls is about 4 wounds to T7/3+ (2/3*2/3*5/6*5.5*2 = 220/54). (5.5 with Captain/Lieutenant, in case anyone's curious)

Ah ok, seems I missed that they dropped the "pick highest". Still works out to a 2.5x damage bonus and an average of 10 wounds inflicted in my previous example case. A bit better, but still probably overboard.

Which is fine for a 24" weapon that will most likely also get a price increase to 35 or 40 points, which puts it at the level of a twin lascan.

Lol, it's not gonna go up to 35 or 40pts. Multimeltas were unusable garbage before at 25 for vehicles and 20 for infantry. Them going up to be the same price as a twin lascannon just makes them unusable garbage again.

The changes to the MM prices in CA are almost certainly intended for the new statline(because it made NO sense for the old one) they might need to nerf it down at some point in the future, but honestly, with how terrible multimeltas were before, I wouldn't be surprised if 25pts ends up being fair for their current output.

I been playing (theoretically) One of the biggest winners of the change in editions in custodes and I am going. "How the heck am I gonna compare to all these stat bumps?"

The way Xenos compete is to wait for their codex and see what has changed. We have been told endlessly that play-testers were involved in this part of the development.

It sucks right now, but no need to panic if the 9th ed codexes hit in a timely matter.

 Rinkydink wrote:
The way Xenos compete is to wait for their codex and see what has changed. We have been told endlessly that play-testers were involved in this part of the development.

It sucks right now, but no need to panic if the 9th ed codexes hit in a timely matter.

sounds good right no need to panic if your faction is unplayable bad by comparison for months on end.

The game needed a rebaseline for a while. This is the absolute worst way to do it. Updates should have been all at once. People will still buy the codexes when they come out if the crusade stuff is really all that like they say. Plus, new models? Gw says they're a model company, so make some new kits for someone other than space marines and put the rules in their new books when they're released.

The main problem is that the superDoctrine codex 2.0 is very fresh. Marines just got an overhaul for a massive boost. Now they're getting another overhaul and it also looks like a big boost. So while a bunch of xenos aren't getting much at all, marines get these two huge inflations.

Phenatix wrote:

 Rinkydink wrote:
The way Xenos compete is to wait for their codex and see what has changed. We have been told endlessly that play-testers were involved in this part of the development.

It sucks right now, but no need to panic if the 9th ed codexes hit in a timely matter.

sounds good right no need to panic if your faction is unplayable bad by comparison for months on end.

While I would normally agree with this, and it's a fair complaint, given the current state of world affairs, how relevant is it when many if not most gaming venues are closed and events are practically nonexistent? Most of us aren't getting any games in right now, or for the foreseeable future, either way. None of the clubs or stores within about an hour's drive of me are open for gaming, only limited occupancy shopping or curbside service, and that doesn't look to be changing any time soon, though I'll grant other areas of the world may be different.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Phenatix wrote:

 Rinkydink wrote:
The way Xenos compete is to wait for their codex and see what has changed. We have been told endlessly that play-testers were involved in this part of the development.

It sucks right now, but no need to panic if the 9th ed codexes hit in a timely matter.

sounds good right no need to panic if your faction is unplayable bad by comparison for months on end.

While I would normally agree with this, and it's a fair complaint, given the current state of world affairs, how relevant is it when many if not most gaming venues are closed and events are practically nonexistent? Most of us aren't getting any games in right now, or for the foreseeable future, either way. None of the clubs or stores within about an hour's drive of me are open for gaming, only limited occupancy shopping or curbside service, and that doesn't look to be changing any time soon, though I'll grant other areas of the world may be different.

Honestly that is a problem for the future health of the game. A long period of stagnation with no games, events, releases, etc is really deadly to a hobby type community that could easily move on to the next thing. Now is not the time for GW to make unforced errors that will only serve to further drive players away from their game during this downtime.

What if instead they had said “hey guys, we wanted to release 9th edition this summer, and that’s what we’re going to do... however, with the current state of the world due to covid, we're seeing production and shipping delays on our end. But don’t worry! We are taking this time to finish up (and this is the part where GW adapts) a complete rework of the game, so that you’ll be able to enjoy 9th edition as the best edition of 40k yet!” They take the 2-4 month delay we are seeing to package up new indices covering all factions basic stat lines and weapons, then sell these as digital editions $10 each for imperium, chaos, xenos, however they want to break them up.

This would accomplish several things simultaneously:
1) Nobody is left behind waiting months and months for new stats. When the new space marine and neuron codexes drop in October, everybody else is served by a stop gap $10 index to bring their state and weapons in line so everyone can be playing the same game.
2) This gives customers something to buy, which keeps higher ups happy because money is flowing in.
3) Digital index releases would cost almost nothing to produce, because this is the same work GW is already doing, but now they get to sell it to everybody twice - once as a barebones index with just stays, and again later when the codex is fully released with updated points, crusade gak, new special rules, kits, whatever else they’re adding.
4) They could even make these digital editions app only, which would essentially force people to use the app. If it’s too gak to handle that at the moment... well honestly the app is just another unforced error by GW that should never have been released in the state it was.

That’s what I would have done.

 Vaktathi wrote:
While I would normally agree with this, and it's a fair complaint, given the current state of world affairs, how relevant is it when many if not most gaming venues are closed and events are practically nonexistent? Most of us aren't getting any games in right now, or for the foreseeable future, either way. None of the clubs or stores within about an hour's drive of me are open for gaming, only limited occupancy shopping or curbside service, and that doesn't look to be changing any time soon, though I'll grant other areas of the world may be different.

I think your post was intended to be kind, and to redirect the anger and frustration of not just OP, but all of those who feel betrayed. I appreciate the comment on that level. But this is the second time I've seen this argument, and I'd like to point out that tournaments and public play spaces are not necessary to play 40k. In fact, the changes to board size in this edition, which cynics attributed entirely to corporate greed, were probably based on solid market research that indicated there were more play at home customers than there are tournament/ public play space people. Could be wrong, and certainly not saying corporate greed didn't play a part. But dude, I can play combat patrol games on my coffee table. Seriously- not even a kitchen table. It's awesome. It's nice and low so we feel like we have a bird's eye view when we're sitting in our computer chairs.

As for OP, and to continue the small game, small table theme, I recommend crusade.

Your army will grow and improve, win or lose, so it will always be fun.

Better armies will grow and improve slightly faster, but if they get too far ahead, you start getting giant killer bonuses, which levels things out.

Best part? Crusade is actually best with friends and family instead of strangers, because the story of your crusade links with the story of your opponents crusades. Playing random pickup games in stores is nowhere as rich, because you might never get enough battles against one enemy crusade to build a real impact on the growth of their army, or for them to impact the growth yours. Crusade rivalries are fun- just ask Yarrick and Ghaz.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Phenatix wrote:

 Rinkydink wrote:
The way Xenos compete is to wait for their codex and see what has changed. We have been told endlessly that play-testers were involved in this part of the development.

It sucks right now, but no need to panic if the 9th ed codexes hit in a timely matter.

sounds good right no need to panic if your faction is unplayable bad by comparison for months on end.

While I would normally agree with this, and it's a fair complaint, given the current state of world affairs, how relevant is it when many if not most gaming venues are closed and events are practically nonexistent? Most of us aren't getting any games in right now, or for the foreseeable future, either way. None of the clubs or stores within about an hour's drive of me are open for gaming, only limited occupancy shopping or curbside service, and that doesn't look to be changing any time soon, though I'll grant other areas of the world may be different.

That's the key thing other areas of the world are different their might not be any 100 to 200 people events but smaller events are coming back and the ability to play is increasing as lockdowns are lifted/easing. This isn't some theoretical exercise this is the current game state for people, not to mention all the TTS games etc peoole are playing.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

Eldar: starcannons, falcons, hornets and wraithblades with axes can all deal with primaris.

Harlequins : Kisses kill marines on every failed saves.

1. It is fairly difficult to build a balanced / interesting list, and still cram in enough starcannons to get through even one unit of 2W marines in a turn. It takes 7 starcannons to kill an MSU unit, and that is assuming you always roll 2s for damage. For every 1 you roll on that D3, you have to fire at least 1 or 2 more starcannons. That's, at minimum, using the cheapest option I can think of, ... 600 points of specialised units, to kill a single MSU troops choice.

Hornets are more expensive again. Wraithblades are never going to get into combat with marines offensively, unless the marines come to them.


2. Kisses are the same. Every failed save does not make a kill. You still need to roll that D3. It takes 30 kiss attacks to kill an MSU squad (double what it used to take), which is 120 points of harlequins (assuming they get into melee without any losses, and are frozen stars). This is significantly better, but again relies on those damage rolls being 2's, otherwise lacking wound rollover means you wasted that attack. So realistically it'll take more like 7 or maybe 8 players (so call it 160pts), depending on when you get 1's in the wound allocation. Taking that into account, the caresses still probably work out as the more reliable killer (as wounds are never wasted), and still requires 7 players on average.



So you're mostly right on harlequins, except they rely on getting into melee to do anything. And marines can kill whole units of harlequins really very easily.

Edit:
Just to add, I agree the bigger problem (though the wounds is also a big problem) is that marine weapons in many cases are increasing in power significantly. The new multi melta alone is capable of destroying most eldar vehicles in a single volley, now that it has both doubled it's number of shots AND increased its reliable AND maximum damage output.

Was it a bad gun before? Maybe. It was basically equivalent to the best anti-tank options that Eldar have available, so if it was bad then it was equally as bad as everyone elses. Now it's more than twice as good as the xeno equivalent. Will it also double in price? Probably not. But even if it does, the fact that you can take double the firepower per vehicle platform means your vehicles costs suddenly become HUGELY more efficient.

Do marines need this boost right now? Not even slightly. If every other army got these buffs first, they'd probably just end up on the same level marines are already at now. Buffing the current best army in the game even more, with years of a delay before you update the armies that actually already needed buffs, is just an insane tactic. But it will probably sell a lot of marines, I guess.

Why is it that the loudest voices about Marines are almost universally Eldar?

And definitely way off on Eldar Wraithblades. There are these things called objectives near the middle of the board...my axe blades will meet you there.

ERJAK wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Nazrak wrote:
I'm still slightly taken aback by people freaking out about Multi Meltas being changed just so they aren't complete dogshit any more.

I think there's a case to be made that they went overboard. MM's needed help, absolutely. Tripling the average damage output however may have been...a wee bit much. Two BS3+ MM's now in optimal range will kill almost any T7 3+ vehicle in one round of shooting, delivering 12 wounds with average rolls with the new Heavy 2 "2d6-pick-highest+2" Damage profile.

Where are you getting "2d6-pick-highest+2"? Last I checked the leaked statline had a damage of 1d6 and the half-range bonus was +2 instead of roll twice and pick highest, your average per multi-melta at optimal range without rerolls is about 4 wounds to T7/3+ (2/3*2/3*5/6*5.5*2 = 220/54). (5.5 with Captain/Lieutenant, in case anyone's curious)

Ah ok, seems I missed that they dropped the "pick highest". Still works out to a 2.5x damage bonus and an average of 10 wounds inflicted in my previous example case. A bit better, but still probably overboard.

Which is fine for a 24" weapon that will most likely also get a price increase to 35 or 40 points, which puts it at the level of a twin lascan.

Lol, it's not gonna go up to 35 or 40pts. Multimeltas were unusable garbage before at 25 for vehicles and 20 for infantry. Them going up to be the same price as a twin lascannon just makes them unusable garbage again.

The changes to the MM prices in CA are almost certainly intended for the new statline(because it made NO sense for the old one) they might need to nerf it down at some point in the future, but honestly, with how terrible multimeltas were before, I wouldn't be surprised if 25pts ends up being fair for their current output.

Minor nitpick: the average damage output is actually 4.93 for an unbuffed bs3+ multimelta shooting a t7 3+ target in optimal range. AnomanderRake added a 1/6 armor save in there which shouldn't be there. Instead it should be 2 * 4/6 * 4/6 * 5.5 = 4.89.

BrianDavion wrote:Why is it that the loudest voices about Marines are almost universally Eldar?

kinda like sour grapes

BrianDavion wrote:
Why is it that the loudest voices about Marines are almost universally Eldar?

They're not, these posters are just discussing the problems the current eldar codices have targetting multiwound infantry. Nice try though, maybe next time try actually adressing what's being discussed instead of hopping threads attempting to discredit anyone that dares to be critical of your beloved marines? I mean, just a few posts earlier you were actually calling for banning posters for being too negative (read: about space marines). Where would your own behavior fall on your bannable offense scale?

Well, an even stronger move to loyal Marines could kill the game.
Imagine you go to a tourney with your Marine army and face 5 Marine armies over the weekend, two or three of which from the same chapter.
I guess the tourney scene could loose grip and extinct.

However, GW announced (with the announcement of 2W Tacticals) that they would do something to Xenos as well.
Not sure how this would look like.
Two wound Aspect warriors, say?