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.
And those scions are only T3 with a 4+, and unless you're buying them a chimera, you can either make them walk and shoot them at long range, or control where they drop.
Hot-shpot las guns make marines turn into gibblets Ap -2 effectively removes their save and have better deployment options and hit at the same BS as a marine. I can t ake a squad of 10 for 100pts or 5 power. For a squad of 10 marines for a tactical squad its 165pts with maybe two special weapons / and a heavy weapon. or 9 power. so in total tempestus's have 1 less strength, 1 less toughness, but deal 80% more damage per a model.
If they manage to wound.
They still only wound on 5's, and marines still get a save. Actually, they get the very same save you've been claiming is too strong for IG to get. Hmmm
As for that 80% more damage? Nope. Three dead marines. Marines shooting back? Three dead scions. That's the same number in models, and 12 less in points for the marines. Of course this all assumes naked for both squads. Adding in special weapons changes things a bit. Particularly as both are lobbing 4 special weapons at each other.
Finally, You can take APC's and Drop pods for marines.
It's not, if you're using it right. And there are definitely factors that don't get crunched well in a calculator. Such as line of sight, deployment, actual tactics, ect.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/14 18:08:35
Crimson wrote: These Dakka 'How to Fix Marines' threads are always so fething pointless.
Poster 1: "How to fix problem X, Y and Z on marines'
Poster2: "Primaris have fixed the problems X, Y and Z."
Poster1: "Noo, Primaris bad! No Primaris!"
Have you read what I've said? I haven't said 'they are bad'. Just that it would make them too powerful. Primaris are good but not that good. (Hence why no one runs them in tournaments).
So Primaris stats would make the marines too powerful but at the same time the Primaris are not powerful enough?
What is this I don't even...
It comes down to rules and effectiveness per a model. Primaris don't really have anything to make them entirely good as they are too specialized they don't have much tank hunting equipment and are a bit too expensive for their special units (hellblasters, aggressors, reivers, inceptors). Because of this they aren't used due to cost-effectiveness of Guardsmen for CP generation. Until marines are good for mono army settings they will never be good in a tournament scene. (So maybe a mono-army only ability then?)
There are many ways to mitigate morale. The problem for you here is that the basic Marine has his morale-mitigation built in. They can be in units of 5, and have ATSKNF. It's intrinsically part of the valuation of the unit. Guardsmen don't have mitigation built in, and come in squads of ten. They are intrinsically more suspect to morale than marines, and that's a part of their points value. Therefore, if you want to have a discussion about efficiency/durability per point, morale can't be ignored.
ATSKNF is a great rule... if it was used more often. But its not. If marines could use it to determine if they can retreat in combat sure it would be great. but you can just retreat from combat without a dice roll. Which is stupid but thats another topic. Morale is only used to calculate casualities and thats it.
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
We just showed that 20 bolter shots will cause a morale check, and marines can get far more effective weapons than bolters.
If 1 marine dies that's 3 guardsmen dead in comparison. Thus a more substantial decrease in the effectiveness of the squad and the army. For every 13pts dead that is nearly a 1/10 of the squad removed entirely. Guardsmen have the abilities and special rules to back it up and can effectively eliminate morale checks. I play guard in my imperial soup lists their leadership checks rarely happen if done well. Morale is not used often this is unchanged.
The exact same thing can be said in reverse, in fact, even more so. I will rewrite your statement:
If 3 Guardsmen die that's 1 marine dead in comparison. Thus a more substantial decrease in the effectiveness of the squad and the army. For every 12pts dead that is nearly a 1/3 of the squad removed entirely. Marines have the abilities and special rules to back it up and can effectively eliminate morale checks. I play Marines in my imperial soup lists their leadership checks rarely happen if done well. Morale is not used often this is unchanged.
So I'm not clear anything you said actually has any weight.
We just showed that 20 bolter shots will cause a morale check, and marines can get far more effective weapons than bolters.
If 1 marine dies that's 3 guardsmen dead in comparison. Thus a more substantial decrease in the effectiveness of the squad and the army. For every 13pts dead that is nearly a 1/10 of the squad removed entirely. Guardsmen have the abilities and special rules to back it up and can effectively eliminate morale checks. I play guard in my imperial soup lists their leadership checks rarely happen if done well. Morale is not used often this is unchanged.
The exact same thing can be said in reverse, in fact, even more so. I will rewrite your statement:
If 3 Guardsmen die that's 1 marine dead in comparison. Thus a more substantial decrease in the effectiveness of the squad and the army. For every 12pts dead that is nearly a 1/3 of the squad removed entirely. Marines have the abilities and special rules to back it up and can effectively eliminate morale checks. I play Marines in my imperial soup lists their leadership checks rarely happen if done well. Morale is not used often this is unchanged.
So I'm not clear anything you said actually has any weight.
At 24 inches, a Guardsman firing at a Predator (T7, 3+ AS) causes 0.0069 Wounds per Point (hereafter referred to as WPP for brevity’s sake): 1 shot, hitting 50% of the time, wounding 16% of the time and going through the tank’s armour 33% of the time will do 0.027 wounds, which is then divided by the model’s cost (4 points), giving us 0.0069 WPP. At the same range, a Tactical Marine will cause 0.0056 WPP to the vehicle: 1 shot hitting 66% of the time, wounding 33% of the time and defeating the tank’s armour 33% of the time causes 074 wounds, which is then divided by the model’s cost (13 points), giving us 0.0056 WPP. If you’re even the least bit good at math, you will have already calculated that the Guardsman does over 20% more Wounds per Point that a Tactical Marine against the Predator.
“Well, so what? It’s not like shooting at tanks is what Bolters are supposed to be good at, anyways!”
True, but the bad news is that it only goes downhill from here:
At 24 inches, a Guardsman firing at a Chaos Marine (T4, 3+ AS) will cause 0.0138 WPP: 1 shot hitting 50% of the time, wounding 33% of the time and going through the armour 33% of the time will cause 0.055 wounds. Divided by model cost of 4 points leaves us with 0.0138 WWP. At the same range, a Tactical Marine will cause 0.0085 WPP to his heretical counterpart: 1 shot hitting 66% of the time, wounding 50% of the time and going through the filthy corrupted armour 33% of time will cause 0.111 wounds; divided by 13 points, we get 0.0085 WPP. So, that’s over 60% more WPP against the Chaos Marine for the Imperial Guardsman. Ouch.
“Hmm… well ok, that’s bad, but bolters have always been best at shredding light infantry anyways!”
Hang on to your hat, my friend!
At 24 inches, a Guardsman firing at another Guardsman will cause 0.0416 WPP: 1 shot hitting 50% of the time, wounding 50% of the time and going through the armour 66% of the time will cause 0.166 wound, which is then divided by the model’s cost of 4 points = 0.0416 WPP. At the same range, a Tactical Marine will cause 0.0227 WPP: 1 shot hitting 66% of the time, wounding 66% of the time and going through the armour 66% of the time, divided by a model cost of 13 pts = 0.0227 WWP. That is over 80% more WPP in favour of the Guardsman! Holy smokes!
“Well, ok, Tacticals don’t do a lot of damage, but at least they are durable, right?”
Are they really, though? Let’s take a look:
A 4-points Guardsman will suffer 0.66 WPP from a Chaos Cultist (BS 4+) firing an autogun (S3 Ap0) at him from 24 inches away: 1 shot hitting 50% of the time, wounding 50% of the time and bypassing the flak armour 66% of time will cause 0.16 wounds, which is then multiplied by the model’s cost (4 points), giving us 0.66 WPP suffered. A 13-points Tactical Marine will suffer 0.72 WPP from the same Chaos Cultist: 1 shot hitting 50% of the time, wounding 33% of the time, bypassing the Marine’s armour 33% will cause 0.05 wounds, which multiplied by 13 (points), gives us 0.72 WPP. So the Tactical Marine will suffer about 8% more WPP than the Guardsman will in this instance. That’s unbalanced but within the realm of the tolerable. The thing is that once again, that’s just the tip of the iceberg…
When shot at by a Chaos Marine (BS 3+) wielding a Boltgun (S4 Ap 0), our Guardsman loses 1.18 WPP: 1 shot hitting 66% of the time, wounding 66% of the time and bypassing the Guardsman’s armour 66% of the time causes 0.29 wounds, which multiplied by 4 points gives us 1.18 WPP. In the same situation, our Tactical Marine will suffer 1.44 WPP: 1 shot hitting 66% of the time, wounding 50% of the time and bypassing power armour 33% of the time will cause 0.11 wounds, which multiplied by 13 points gives 1.44 WPP. In this scenario, our Tactical Marines suffers over 20% more WPP than the Guardsman! And if you think that’s bad, just wait when we introduce a weapon with a good AP into the mix!
When shot by a Tempestus Scion Stormtrooper (BS 3+) with a Plasmagun (S7 Ap -3), a Guardsman will suffer 2.22 WPP: 1 shot hitting 66% of the time, wounding 83% of the time and completing negating his armour will cause 0.55 wounds. Multiplied by 4 points gives us 2.22 WPP. In the same situation, our Tactical Marine will lose 4.81 WPP: 1 shot hitting 66% of the time, wounding 66% of the time and bypassing the armour 83% of the time will cause 0.37 wounds. Multiplied by 13 gives us 4.81 WPP.
Please read.
Mmmpi if continue to ignore points sure 1/3 of a marine squad? You must only count the one squad then, as you can fire multiple units for the cost of 1 tactical squad. As all of them have the same AP values as bolters.
In previous editions marines would just ignore it entirely from a hotshot lasgun and would still have their +3 save. While also having their +1 attack on charge. Marines are less effective this edition and you keep comparing 1 unit that costs less to one that costs more.
The problem here is that you continue to do it in a vacuum, guardsmen units continously have more units and thus sheer weight of fire and access to map wide abilities.... Marines have... erm that 6" ability that gives rerolls on hits. Wow amazing. best ability 10/10. Except I would need that unit to not only cost 225 pts but it would mean babysitting that entire unit for the rest of the game. Now tell me is that effective compared to.... 4 squads of infantry with 4 mortars or 4 heavy bolters (For 8pts derp), and 4 grenade launchers for less than 225. So yeah sure we can say "Oh marines are still effective model to model"
But thats not what is here. It is still an ineffective unit due to sheer weight of fire. For every tactical squad you bring, I can bring 3 squads of guardsmen with 1 special weapon and heavy weapon each. And we'd still have more room for more CP and better units. Guardsmen are cheap and effective. Actually too effective.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/14 18:20:25
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
There are many ways to mitigate morale. The problem for you here is that the basic Marine has his morale-mitigation built in. They can be in units of 5, and have ATSKNF. It's intrinsically part of the valuation of the unit. Guardsmen don't have mitigation built in, and come in squads of ten. They are intrinsically more suspect to morale than marines, and that's a part of their points value. Therefore, if you want to have a discussion about efficiency/durability per point, morale can't be ignored.
ATSKNF is a great rule... if it was used more often. But its not. If marines could use it to determine if they can retreat in combat sure it would be great. but you can just retreat from combat without a dice roll. Which is stupid but thats another topic. Morale is only used to calculate casualities and thats it.
Your personal feelings about ATSKNF aren't relevant to the discussion about durability per point, which is the context here. Marines pay for ATSKNF, and Guard don't. When comparing the two units, you use morale because A:it's a core mechanic, and B: It's relevant to the cost of the units in question.
How do you calculate the effect of minimizing line of sight?
Of making your opponent second guess?
Of good target priority?
How about the effect that list building has on a list's performance?
How about the effective use of transports?
Or using AM's to tie up shooting squads?
The problem with that block of math is that it loses the forest for the trees. In addition you're also falling into issues with the standard deviation.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/14 18:17:27
Bharring wrote: I'm not saying DE and CWE need buffs. I'm just pointing out that Marines didn't "lose" AP-1 any more than most of the other factions did. AP5 became AP0. AP4 became AP-1. There were changes atop that as well, but Marines didn't lose AP-1.
Okay so how would you go about changing bolters to be viable?
How you change And they Shall know no fear to be viable as an ability again?
How would you make morale more of a constant?
How would you give space marines more power in close combat?
How would you give space marines their fire power back?
Cause right now what I see is that marines are underpowered in the shooting of all their primary weaponry. We can't just give marines more specialists cause that just racks up the costs again.
Marines lost out on having powerful equipment everyone else was given special rules or additional power to their weaponry while space marines stayed in the back with a terrible weapon. AP-1 would not harm everyone as marines already have an ap-1 bolter but only for primaris.
I wouldn't change And They Shall Know no Fear. Marines take so few casulties that cause battle shock that a re-roll pretty much fixes any losses they would have.
I personally preferred the old Moral system.
Remind marine players that unless they're fighting marines, they typically are stronger, tougher, and more durable then anything they're fighting against, outside of specialist melee units like ork boyz and guants.
Remind them that they can take more special/heavy weapons in a squad then other armies can for the same squad size. You get two plasma guns (one is a combi) for guard's one, and your better shots, and more durable.
Special weapons can only be taken if a squad is 10. So you can take one per a squad as cp generation is again everything emphasizing smaller squads. Marines being cheaper helps but i think making the tactical squads have half costed heavy weaponry and special weapons (like in 5th and 4th) would be helpful in bringing down the costs of space marines.
WE don't get two plasma guns for the 'guards one' you need a full squad of ten to do that which is around 190 pts. So no thank you. I'll take my 7 squads of guardsmen veterans for cheaper cp generation.
When you're fighting Guard, it's a mechanic at your disposal that you should use.
Oh I bet but its only relevant once. which is my point its only used when calculating casualities (sometimes psychic phase). But otherwise its so rare that it doesn't come into account in most games. Which if you've been reading the other thread on close combat changes would fix that issue i have.
You do get two special weapons, if you count the combi-weapon on your Sargent. You get one heavy or one special at 5, one of each at 10, and in both cases the sargent gets a combi. Why should marines get weapons cheaper, despite being better at using them (BS:3+)
You get two plasma guns for roughly 80 points (including the five marines). It costs the IG player close to 100 points for the same number, and they're worse shots. And good luck fielding 7 units of vets with the rule of three.
You also get 20 bodies vs 5 so...
Also there's no reason Guard should pay cheaper for weapons. Every other army pays for their BS to use their range weapons better, and THEN they have to pay higher for the weapon too? That's already in their base cost.
I never said they should pay less than marines, I said marines shouldn't pay less than guard.
Yup, 20 guard bodies. Again, why are you running five marines straight at 20 guardsmen?
10 Infantry with both a special and heavy weapon cost less than a base Marine squad.
Maybe that's why.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Asherian Command wrote: It comes down to rules and effectiveness per a model. Primaris don't really have anything to make them entirely good as they are too specialized they don't have much tank hunting equipment and are a bit too expensive for their special units (hellblasters, aggressors, reivers, inceptors). Because of this they aren't used due to cost-effectiveness of Guardsmen for CP generation. Until marines are good for mono army settings they will never be good in a tournament scene. (So maybe a mono-army only ability then?)
But nothing about that has to do with the basic statline. Sure, the lack options, everyone knows this. Give them more options and units and marines are basically fixed.
Bharring wrote: I'm not saying DE and CWE need buffs. I'm just pointing out that Marines didn't "lose" AP-1 any more than most of the other factions did. AP5 became AP0. AP4 became AP-1. There were changes atop that as well, but Marines didn't lose AP-1.
Okay so how would you go about changing bolters to be viable?
How you change And they Shall know no fear to be viable as an ability again?
How would you make morale more of a constant?
How would you give space marines more power in close combat?
How would you give space marines their fire power back?
Cause right now what I see is that marines are underpowered in the shooting of all their primary weaponry. We can't just give marines more specialists cause that just racks up the costs again.
Marines lost out on having powerful equipment everyone else was given special rules or additional power to their weaponry while space marines stayed in the back with a terrible weapon. AP-1 would not harm everyone as marines already have an ap-1 bolter but only for primaris.
I wouldn't change And They Shall Know no Fear. Marines take so few casulties that cause battle shock that a re-roll pretty much fixes any losses they would have.
I personally preferred the old Moral system.
Remind marine players that unless they're fighting marines, they typically are stronger, tougher, and more durable then anything they're fighting against, outside of specialist melee units like ork boyz and guants.
Remind them that they can take more special/heavy weapons in a squad then other armies can for the same squad size. You get two plasma guns (one is a combi) for guard's one, and your better shots, and more durable.
Special weapons can only be taken if a squad is 10. So you can take one per a squad as cp generation is again everything emphasizing smaller squads. Marines being cheaper helps but i think making the tactical squads have half costed heavy weaponry and special weapons (like in 5th and 4th) would be helpful in bringing down the costs of space marines.
WE don't get two plasma guns for the 'guards one' you need a full squad of ten to do that which is around 190 pts. So no thank you. I'll take my 7 squads of guardsmen veterans for cheaper cp generation.
When you're fighting Guard, it's a mechanic at your disposal that you should use.
Oh I bet but its only relevant once. which is my point its only used when calculating casualities (sometimes psychic phase). But otherwise its so rare that it doesn't come into account in most games. Which if you've been reading the other thread on close combat changes would fix that issue i have.
You do get two special weapons, if you count the combi-weapon on your Sargent. You get one heavy or one special at 5, one of each at 10, and in both cases the sargent gets a combi. Why should marines get weapons cheaper, despite being better at using them (BS:3+)
You get two plasma guns for roughly 80 points (including the five marines). It costs the IG player close to 100 points for the same number, and they're worse shots. And good luck fielding 7 units of vets with the rule of three.
You also get 20 bodies vs 5 so...
Also there's no reason Guard should pay cheaper for weapons. Every other army pays for their BS to use their range weapons better, and THEN they have to pay higher for the weapon too? That's already in their base cost.
I never said they should pay less than marines, I said marines shouldn't pay less than guard.
Yup, 20 guard bodies. Again, why are you running five marines straight at 20 guardsmen?
10 Infantry with both a special and heavy weapon cost less than a base Marine squad.
Bharring wrote: I'm not saying DE and CWE need buffs. I'm just pointing out that Marines didn't "lose" AP-1 any more than most of the other factions did. AP5 became AP0. AP4 became AP-1. There were changes atop that as well, but Marines didn't lose AP-1.
Okay so how would you go about changing bolters to be viable?
How you change And they Shall know no fear to be viable as an ability again?
How would you make morale more of a constant?
How would you give space marines more power in close combat?
How would you give space marines their fire power back?
Cause right now what I see is that marines are underpowered in the shooting of all their primary weaponry. We can't just give marines more specialists cause that just racks up the costs again.
Marines lost out on having powerful equipment everyone else was given special rules or additional power to their weaponry while space marines stayed in the back with a terrible weapon. AP-1 would not harm everyone as marines already have an ap-1 bolter but only for primaris.
I wouldn't change And They Shall Know no Fear. Marines take so few casulties that cause battle shock that a re-roll pretty much fixes any losses they would have. I personally preferred the old Moral system. Remind marine players that unless they're fighting marines, they typically are stronger, tougher, and more durable then anything they're fighting against, outside of specialist melee units like ork boyz and guants. Remind them that they can take more special/heavy weapons in a squad then other armies can for the same squad size. You get two plasma guns (one is a combi) for guard's one, and your better shots, and more durable.
Special weapons can only be taken if a squad is 10. So you can take one per a squad as cp generation is again everything emphasizing smaller squads. Marines being cheaper helps but i think making the tactical squads have half costed heavy weaponry and special weapons (like in 5th and 4th) would be helpful in bringing down the costs of space marines.
WE don't get two plasma guns for the 'guards one' you need a full squad of ten to do that which is around 190 pts. So no thank you. I'll take my 7 squads of guardsmen veterans for cheaper cp generation.
When you're fighting Guard, it's a mechanic at your disposal that you should use.
Oh I bet but its only relevant once. which is my point its only used when calculating casualities (sometimes psychic phase). But otherwise its so rare that it doesn't come into account in most games. Which if you've been reading the other thread on close combat changes would fix that issue i have.
You do get two special weapons, if you count the combi-weapon on your Sargent. You get one heavy or one special at 5, one of each at 10, and in both cases the sargent gets a combi. Why should marines get weapons cheaper, despite being better at using them (BS:3+)
You get two plasma guns for roughly 80 points (including the five marines). It costs the IG player close to 100 points for the same number, and they're worse shots. And good luck fielding 7 units of vets with the rule of three.
You also get 20 bodies vs 5 so...
Also there's no reason Guard should pay cheaper for weapons. Every other army pays for their BS to use their range weapons better, and THEN they have to pay higher for the weapon too? That's already in their base cost.
I never said they should pay less than marines, I said marines shouldn't pay less than guard.
Yup, 20 guard bodies. Again, why are you running five marines straight at 20 guardsmen?
10 Infantry with both a special and heavy weapon cost less than a base Marine squad.
Maybe that's why.
And they're less effective with them.
Are they though? If you take the cadian special rule they reroll all ones if they didn't move. If they have an order they reroll everything until the end of that phase. That means that +1 difference is completely nullified by basic math of increase of probabilities
Read it yesterday. Summarize for me why it's important here.
Marines cause less WPM than a guardsmen squad, take more damage from guardsmen squads PPM and have more damage to their leadership per a model per a point. They also have Less effective damage against the same units due to cost efficiencies.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/12/14 18:35:48
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
Bharring wrote: I'm not saying DE and CWE need buffs. I'm just pointing out that Marines didn't "lose" AP-1 any more than most of the other factions did. AP5 became AP0. AP4 became AP-1. There were changes atop that as well, but Marines didn't lose AP-1.
Okay so how would you go about changing bolters to be viable?
How you change And they Shall know no fear to be viable as an ability again?
How would you make morale more of a constant?
How would you give space marines more power in close combat?
How would you give space marines their fire power back?
Cause right now what I see is that marines are underpowered in the shooting of all their primary weaponry. We can't just give marines more specialists cause that just racks up the costs again.
Marines lost out on having powerful equipment everyone else was given special rules or additional power to their weaponry while space marines stayed in the back with a terrible weapon. AP-1 would not harm everyone as marines already have an ap-1 bolter but only for primaris.
I wouldn't change And They Shall Know no Fear. Marines take so few casulties that cause battle shock that a re-roll pretty much fixes any losses they would have.
I personally preferred the old Moral system.
Remind marine players that unless they're fighting marines, they typically are stronger, tougher, and more durable then anything they're fighting against, outside of specialist melee units like ork boyz and guants.
Remind them that they can take more special/heavy weapons in a squad then other armies can for the same squad size. You get two plasma guns (one is a combi) for guard's one, and your better shots, and more durable.
Special weapons can only be taken if a squad is 10. So you can take one per a squad as cp generation is again everything emphasizing smaller squads. Marines being cheaper helps but i think making the tactical squads have half costed heavy weaponry and special weapons (like in 5th and 4th) would be helpful in bringing down the costs of space marines.
WE don't get two plasma guns for the 'guards one' you need a full squad of ten to do that which is around 190 pts. So no thank you. I'll take my 7 squads of guardsmen veterans for cheaper cp generation.
When you're fighting Guard, it's a mechanic at your disposal that you should use.
Oh I bet but its only relevant once. which is my point its only used when calculating casualities (sometimes psychic phase). But otherwise its so rare that it doesn't come into account in most games. Which if you've been reading the other thread on close combat changes would fix that issue i have.
You do get two special weapons, if you count the combi-weapon on your Sargent. You get one heavy or one special at 5, one of each at 10, and in both cases the sargent gets a combi. Why should marines get weapons cheaper, despite being better at using them (BS:3+)
You get two plasma guns for roughly 80 points (including the five marines). It costs the IG player close to 100 points for the same number, and they're worse shots. And good luck fielding 7 units of vets with the rule of three.
You also get 20 bodies vs 5 so...
Also there's no reason Guard should pay cheaper for weapons. Every other army pays for their BS to use their range weapons better, and THEN they have to pay higher for the weapon too? That's already in their base cost.
I never said they should pay less than marines, I said marines shouldn't pay less than guard.
Yup, 20 guard bodies. Again, why are you running five marines straight at 20 guardsmen?
10 Infantry with both a special and heavy weapon cost less than a base Marine squad.
Maybe that's why.
And they're less effective with them.
It doesn't matter if the individual model is less effective with them if the pricing is too low.
10 Infantry with a Plasma Gun and Autocannon are far more effective than 5 Marines with a Plasma Gun, even if they got that Plasma Gun for free.
Math is all that matters there.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Bharring wrote: I'm not saying DE and CWE need buffs. I'm just pointing out that Marines didn't "lose" AP-1 any more than most of the other factions did. AP5 became AP0. AP4 became AP-1. There were changes atop that as well, but Marines didn't lose AP-1.
Okay so how would you go about changing bolters to be viable?
How you change And they Shall know no fear to be viable as an ability again?
How would you make morale more of a constant?
How would you give space marines more power in close combat?
How would you give space marines their fire power back?
Cause right now what I see is that marines are underpowered in the shooting of all their primary weaponry. We can't just give marines more specialists cause that just racks up the costs again.
Marines lost out on having powerful equipment everyone else was given special rules or additional power to their weaponry while space marines stayed in the back with a terrible weapon. AP-1 would not harm everyone as marines already have an ap-1 bolter but only for primaris.
I wouldn't change And They Shall Know no Fear. Marines take so few casulties that cause battle shock that a re-roll pretty much fixes any losses they would have.
I personally preferred the old Moral system.
Remind marine players that unless they're fighting marines, they typically are stronger, tougher, and more durable then anything they're fighting against, outside of specialist melee units like ork boyz and guants.
Remind them that they can take more special/heavy weapons in a squad then other armies can for the same squad size. You get two plasma guns (one is a combi) for guard's one, and your better shots, and more durable.
Special weapons can only be taken if a squad is 10. So you can take one per a squad as cp generation is again everything emphasizing smaller squads. Marines being cheaper helps but i think making the tactical squads have half costed heavy weaponry and special weapons (like in 5th and 4th) would be helpful in bringing down the costs of space marines.
WE don't get two plasma guns for the 'guards one' you need a full squad of ten to do that which is around 190 pts. So no thank you. I'll take my 7 squads of guardsmen veterans for cheaper cp generation.
When you're fighting Guard, it's a mechanic at your disposal that you should use.
Oh I bet but its only relevant once. which is my point its only used when calculating casualities (sometimes psychic phase). But otherwise its so rare that it doesn't come into account in most games. Which if you've been reading the other thread on close combat changes would fix that issue i have.
You do get two special weapons, if you count the combi-weapon on your Sargent. You get one heavy or one special at 5, one of each at 10, and in both cases the sargent gets a combi. Why should marines get weapons cheaper, despite being better at using them (BS:3+)
You get two plasma guns for roughly 80 points (including the five marines). It costs the IG player close to 100 points for the same number, and they're worse shots. And good luck fielding 7 units of vets with the rule of three.
You also get 20 bodies vs 5 so...
Also there's no reason Guard should pay cheaper for weapons. Every other army pays for their BS to use their range weapons better, and THEN they have to pay higher for the weapon too? That's already in their base cost.
I never said they should pay less than marines, I said marines shouldn't pay less than guard.
Yup, 20 guard bodies. Again, why are you running five marines straight at 20 guardsmen?
10 Infantry with both a special and heavy weapon cost less than a base Marine squad.
Maybe that's why.
And they're less effective with them.
Are they though? If you take the cadian special rule they reroll all ones if they didn't move. If they have an order they reroll everything until the end of that phase. That means that +1 difference is completely nullified by basic math of increase of probabilities
Read it yesterday. Summarize for me why it's important here.
Marines cause less WPM than a guardsmen squad, take more damage from guardsmen squads PPM and have more damage to their leadership per a model per a point. They also have Less effective damage against the same units due to cost efficiencies.
But morale! You forget morale! Totally got you!
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Read it yesterday. Summarize for me why it's important here.
Marines cause less WPM than a guardsmen squad, take more damage from guardsmen squads PPM and have more damage to their leadership per a model per a point. They also have Less effective damage against the same units due to cost efficiencies.
I don't deny any of that, and my proposed direction of fixes is to increase offensive output for Marines.
But the bit about morale is specifically in regards to the claim of Guardsmen durability. Guard are intrinsically more vulnerable to morale and that is part of their point valuation. Do you deny this?
Are they though? If you take the cadian special rule they reroll all ones if they didn't move. If they have an order they reroll everything until the end of that phase. That means that +1 difference is completely nullified by basic math of increase of probabilities
And marines can take a captain to reroll 1's for multiple squads, and lieutenants to reroll 1's for wounds.
Seems like both have force multipliers.
Marines cause less WPM than a guardsmen squad, take more damage from guardsmen squads PPM and have more damage to their leadership per a model per a point. They also have Less effective damage against the same units due to cost efficiencies.
...by such a small margin that standard deviation in dice rolls is enough to throw that off.
It doesn't matter if the individual model is less effective with them if the pricing is too low.
10 Infantry with a Plasma Gun and Autocannon are far more effective than 5 Marines with a Plasma Gun, even if they got that Plasma Gun for free.
Math is all that matters there.
So 65 points of guard (roughly) as opposed to 80 points of marines (again, roughly). One has 9 guys with an auto cannon and a PG. The other has 5 guys with two plasma guns (sarge's combi is the 2nd). That's not that far off in fire power from each other, or in cost once you factor in the difference between BS 3 and 4. Or that if everything is rapid firing, a PG is better than an Autocannon.
Read it yesterday. Summarize for me why it's important here.
Marines cause less WPM than a guardsmen squad, take more damage from guardsmen squads PPM and have more damage to their leadership per a model per a point. They also have Less effective damage against the same units due to cost efficiencies.
I don't deny any of that, and my proposed direction of fixes is to increase offensive output for Marines.
But the bit about morale is specifically in regards to the claim of Guardsmen durability. Guard are intrinsically more vulnerable to morale and that is part of their point valuation. Do you deny this?
And marines can take a captain to reroll 1's for multiple squads, and lieutenants to reroll 1's for wounds.
Seems like both have force multipliers.
Marines don't have that on base though... Guardsmen do. Space marines pay a premium of 65 PTS extra to have that within... 6" which again means you have to have babysit the unit. So this 65 pt unit with an additional 87 pts.... means that my unit of space marines together costs me 152pts! for 6 models! While the guard get an additional 10.... oh and an infantry commander!... so thats 24 wounds compared to my 9 wounds? Oh yeah I have a better save but they have four times the damage.... while I have 1 plasma gun and 4 bolters. Oh man at this rate I can kill 2 models a turn!
.by such a small margin that standard deviation in dice rolls is enough to throw that off.
Precentages and WPPM are dramatically higher than you read and again you ignored it!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/14 18:45:32
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
Are they though? If you take the cadian special rule they reroll all ones if they didn't move. If they have an order they reroll everything until the end of that phase. That means that +1 difference is completely nullified by basic math of increase of probabilities
And marines can take a captain to reroll 1's for multiple squads, and lieutenants to reroll 1's for wounds.
Seems like both have force multipliers.
Marines cause less WPM than a guardsmen squad, take more damage from guardsmen squads PPM and have more damage to their leadership per a model per a point. They also have Less effective damage against the same units due to cost efficiencies.
...by such a small margin that standard deviation in dice rolls is enough to throw that off.
It doesn't matter if the individual model is less effective with them if the pricing is too low.
10 Infantry with a Plasma Gun and Autocannon are far more effective than 5 Marines with a Plasma Gun, even if they got that Plasma Gun for free.
Math is all that matters there.
So 65 points of guard (roughly) as opposed to 80 points of marines (again, roughly). One has 9 guys with an auto cannon and a PG. The other has 5 guys with two plasma guns (sarge's combi is the 2nd). That's not that far off in fire power from each other, or in cost once you factor in the difference between BS 3 and 4. Or that if everything is rapid firing, a PG is better than an Autocannon.
TIL: base army trait is equal to a 70+ point HQ. Lol k
Also that infantry squad with an Autocannon, Plasma Gun, and a Bolter on the Sergeant is 60 points.
That's actually 5 points less.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
So 65 points of guard (roughly) as opposed to 80 points of marines (again, roughly). One has 9 guys with an auto cannon and a PG. The other has 5 guys with two plasma guns (sarge's combi is the 2nd). That's not that far off in fire power from each other, or in cost once you factor in the difference between BS 3 and 4. Or that if everything is rapid firing, a PG is better than an Autocannon.
Well, I gotta correct the Marine squad to 87(now) as a nitpick. But otherwise it's a good comparison. Don't forget Krak Grenades, which I wind up using all the time as it's a much better option against Custodes than firing a Bolter.
Its not, its 2x wounds and twice as much firepower as the marine squad has with reroll on 1s for all of the models in the imperial guard squad.
Again, counter base-trait is -1 to hit, which hurts guard more than reroll 1s help them. Design claim was originally made with no traits, so stick to it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/14 18:49:30
Its not, its 2x wounds and twice as much firepower as the marine squad has with reroll on 1s for all of the models in the imperial guard squad.
Again, counter base-trait is -1 to hit, which hurts guard more than reroll 1s help them. Design claim was originally made with no traits, so stick to it.
I already did ignore army traits. They're the ones that brought it up.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
TIL: base army trait is equal to a 70+ point HQ. Lol k
Counter base-trait is -1 to hit, which will hurt guard more than reroll 1s will help.
Original and relevant claims for design change were based of single unit vs. single unit, ppm. Stick to it.
So this raven guard unit has a 157pts vs 30 guardsmen with 3 special weapons, 3 heavy weapons... rerolls all to hit on 1s.... and 21 lasgun shots, 3d6 grenade launchers, and s4 3D6 mortars.
sooooo.... 1.3 dead guardsmen per a turn from the space marine unit compared to 2.7 dead marines per a turn... IE 50% of the whole squad dead from 3 squads of shooting compared to one squad shooting into 1 platoon.
Got it.
lets do it without it and just do 1 platoon
3/6 of a chance to hit 4+
6 lasguns
3.2?
1.16 to wound
.77 to lose a marine
1d6 4+ Average of 3
3
1.5 to hit
.75 to wound
.5 To lose a marine
mortar average 3
3 1.5 1 to wound
.66 chance to wound!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/14 19:09:14
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
10 guardsmen with 6 lasguns, 1 laspistol, an AC and PG do 1.611 wounds to a squad of marines in rapid fire range (no overcharge). They do 3.694 wounds to Guardsmen. In close combat they do 0.611 wounds to Space Marines and 1.83 wounds to Guardsmen.
5 marines with 4 bolters and 1 PG do 1.63 wounds to a squad of marines in rapid fire range (no overcharge). They do 3.48 wounds to Guardsmen. In close combat they do 0.66 wounds to Marines and 1.77 wounds to Guardsmen.
Within the current 8E paradigm, the IG unit costs 57pts, the SM unit costs 76pts. The Marines have a couple extra bits over the guard (ATSKNF, Krak grenades, etc) . I think a simple 2/3ppm cost reduction on the Tac squad puts them where they need to be in relation to the guardsmen, and probably makes them among some of the most cost effective troops in the ame at that point.
The bigger issue either way is that heavy weapons and Knights and Primarchs and the like dont really care either way.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/14 19:07:22
Ok, so here's my basic claim regarding morale, so we can get back to it.
Any unit to unit comparison has to take Morale into account. This is especially relevant between the ever popular Guard vs. Marine points-per-model comparison, since the intrinsic morale capabilities between to two are so different. Marines can, without additional cost, effectively ignore morale by having higher Leadership, taking minimum sized squads, and ATSKNF.
Any mitigation of morale by an Infantry squad is either at an additional cost beyond their 4 ppm, or by escalation into army traits. "At additional cost" should need no explanation. "Escalation into army traits" has the cost of the opposing side escalating into army traits. (and any obvious resulting complication for comparisons)
TIL: base army trait is equal to a 70+ point HQ. Lol k
Counter base-trait is -1 to hit, which will hurt guard more than reroll 1s will help.
Original and relevant claims for design change were based of single unit vs. single unit, ppm. Stick to it.
So this raven guard unit has a 157pts vs 30 guardsmen with 3 special weapons, 3 heavy weapons... rerolls all to hit on 1s.... and 21 lasgun shots, 3d6 grenade launchers, and s4 3D6 mortars.
sooooo.... 1.3 dead guardsmen per a turn from the space marine unit compared to 2.7 dead marines per a turn... IE 50% of the whole squad dead from 3 squads of shooting compared to one squad shooting into 1 platoon.
Got it.
Ok. So this is an admission that your whole careful post with all the number calculations you did is totally irrelevant, because there are other units and equipment in the game. If you can't stick to your own premises, we're done.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/12/14 19:10:32
Vaktathi wrote: I think a simple 2/3ppm cost reduction on the Tac squad puts them where they need to be in relation to the guardsmen.
Is this assuming that guardsmen are ok at the current price? Because they should be more expensive, regardless of any comparison with SM.
5ppm would be fine!
The bigger issue either way is that heavy weapons and Knights and Primarchs and the like dont really care either way.
Honestly those units shouldn't even be playable in Match Play.
If you can't stick to your own premises, we're done.
The premise that guardsmen enmasse are more effective than marines? If you say "well use this then!" I am going to use it in calculations. If marines want to have that -1 to hit, and 1 to rerolls then i factored that in. Don't get angry if the math proves your point wrong.
Any unit to unit comparison has to take Morale into account. This is especially relevant between the ever popular Guard vs. Marine points-per-model comparison, since the intrinsic morale capabilities between to two are so different. Marines can, without additional cost, effectively ignore morale by having higher Leadership, taking minimum sized squads, and ATSKNF.
Morale means nothing if it is rarely used. morale does not happen as much as you think it does. Most times people just wipe out the whole squad. Yeah marines have a higher chance to not worry about it... but that doesn't really effect people's list building well does it?
Also for fun : Now lets add the ap -1 value With Bolters 1.6 to wound 1.3 dead guardsmen
so from that 87 pt unit they kill 2 kills?
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2018/12/14 19:28:37
If you can't stick to your own premises, we're done.
The premise that guardsmen enmasse are more effective than marines?
If the original point is about un-reinforced marines vs. Guard, that's one way of doing it, and it's nice and concise. The moment you escalate beyond that is the moment the Marines bring Storm Ravens and strafe them all to death, or whatever. You've sabotoged your basic premise for your argument.
Morale means nothing if it is rarely used. morale does not happen as much as you think it does. Most times people just wipe out the whole squad. Yeah marines have a higher chance to not worry about it... but that doesn't really effect people's list building well does it?
Aboslutely people build to avoid morale issues. I'm shocked you would claim otherwise. (though not really, at this point.)
. . .
On the one hand you've made the claim "marines don't do enough damage to force morale", on the other hand you're saying "most people just wipe the whole squad". It sure seems like you're avoiding something.
