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.

 Galef wrote:
If Dark Lances are 20ppm, Dissies should be 25. Fixed.
I'm fine with Dissies having the profile they have (maybe should only be damage 1 though).
I'm not fine with them costing less than DLs, which are an inferior (but appropriately costed) weapon.

-

25 is still too cheap. It's better than every imperial heavy.

Martel732 wrote:
.... It's better than every imperial heavy.

Which we have already established are too expensive and need to be improved and/or lowered in cost.

Curiosity questions for you:
A) Do you think Star Cannons are also OP? They have better strength and do d3 damage. Being Heavy 2 is really the only downside compared to Dissies
B) What specifically do you not like about Dissies? Being Assault 3? Flat D2?
C) If you were able bump Dissies up to 25ppm, what single other change would you make to the profile to make it "fair"?

My answer to C would be to make them D1. It makes their role fit anti-infantry better and as a result, makes it a harder choice between the Dark lance. You have to decide what role the vehicle will fill, rather than just taking Dissies because they are both cheaper AND multipurpose.

-

Because 36" S6 AP-2 D2 or Dd3 with 2 or 3 shots is OP, but 36" S8 AP-2 D2 with d3 shots is trash?

Dissies aren't that much better than Plasma Cannons. They're just too cheap.

Like OC Plas and it's other siblings, I'd certainly love to see Dissies go down to D1, though.

Yeah, either D1 or be 25ppm would be just fine.

Speaking of weapon changes, and this being a thread for Marines, I think now is a decent time to post my thoughts on Marine weapon options:

As I've started before:
HBs should be RF2...for Marines. Other factions can still be Heavy, but Marines should have a better capacity for using what is essentially a bigger version of their standard weapon
RF2 makes the HB a more mobile weapon and rewards getting closer, which Marines should be doing. Still 10ppm

MM - Heavy 2, easy fix there. Maybe go to 25ppm
Lascannons - As-is. Maybe go down to 20ppm
Missile Launcher - Also should be 20ppm and the Str 4 mode should be either strait Heavy 6, or AP-1. It needs to be better than just D6 Bolter shots.

-

I figured I would try and tackle Chapter Tactics now. The main question is if we hand Vehicles the same Tactics or make different traits for the vehicles, and if Dreads get a combination of both of so. I will say that is the best thing that the Imperial Guard codex got right: infantry and tanks fight differently.

1. Iron Hands need love. The 6+++ not stacking anymore is probably the dumbest thing GW has done in 8th. Remove that restriction, and give Iron Hands infantry and Dreads Relentless lite. They ignore the -1 penalty for moving and firing with Heavy Weapons. Do Vehicles get the same stuff or something different?
2. Imperial Fists having Ignores Cover is fine, but their specific Warlord trait is something they should have standard. Infantry and Dreads in cover gain +2 to their save instead of just +1. All of them are cover camping cowards, not just the ones near their Warlord! Same question about other vehicles applies here too.
3. Black Templars have a solid first part for their Chapter Tactics as long as the melee units don't suck. Only other addition I would add was something I was a fan of that someone else suggested: you ignore Mortal Wounds caused by Psykers on a 4+, OR maybe for all mortal wounds in general. What would you do for the vehicles?
4. Ultramarines are sorta fine as is I think. I'm open to suggestions though. One idea I had for core rules was that units with Fly fleeing and all that junk get a -1 penalty on their BS. Then Ultramarines stay the same and their Flying infantry don't suffer a BS penalty for fleeing. Just something I had in mind.
5. Raven Guard already have a solid Chapter Tactic as is. Do they get a second part or nah? OR do we change how it is entirely?
6. Honestly I don't know what to do about White Scars.
7. Salamanders is too redundant. I'd suggest a copycat of the AdMech Lucius trait you guys want to incorporate in Marines, and they reroll damage on weapons with a random roll.
8. Blood Angels have a good trait. Maybe add +1" to charge rolls?
9. I like the morale part of Grim Resolve, but the rest of the trait is very redundant. What would you add instead?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

7. Salamanders is too redundant. I'd suggest a copycat of the AdMech Lucius trait you guys want to incorporate in Marines, and they reroll damage on weapons with a random roll.

Don't you touch my Salamander Re-rolls.

Seriously, it's the only CT that allows me to consistently avoid blobhammer by reducing the reliance on reroll characters. I've been winning all of my games recently by combining 3 things that most people here think are pretty underwhelming (melta guns, rhinos, and tac squads) with Salamander CTs.

I prefer it more than RG, but I have a definite bias in that respect as I've always been a Salamander Player.

Vilehydra wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

7. Salamanders is too redundant. I'd suggest a copycat of the AdMech Lucius trait you guys want to incorporate in Marines, and they reroll damage on weapons with a random roll.

Don't you touch my Salamander Re-rolls.

Seriously, it's the only CT that allows me to consistently avoid blobhammer by reducing the reliance on reroll characters. I've been winning all of my games recently by combining 3 things that most people here think are pretty underwhelming (melta guns, rhinos, and tac squads) with Salamander CTs.

I prefer it more than RG, but I have a definite bias in that respect as I've always been a Salamander Player.

There's too much redundancy the moment you have a Chapter Master and to a lesser extent a Captain. Marines are basically priced as though they're getting those aura buffs, so you gotta be sure they're in the auras.

I'd rather they have slightly better armor and more damaging weapons.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Vilehydra wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

7. Salamanders is too redundant. I'd suggest a copycat of the AdMech Lucius trait you guys want to incorporate in Marines, and they reroll damage on weapons with a random roll.

Don't you touch my Salamander Re-rolls.

Seriously, it's the only CT that allows me to consistently avoid blobhammer by reducing the reliance on reroll characters. I've been winning all of my games recently by combining 3 things that most people here think are pretty underwhelming (melta guns, rhinos, and tac squads) with Salamander CTs.

I prefer it more than RG, but I have a definite bias in that respect as I've always been a Salamander Player.

There's too much redundancy the moment you have a Chapter Master and to a lesser extent a Captain. Marines are basically priced as though they're getting those aura buffs, so you gotta be sure they're in the auras.

I'd rather they have slightly better armor and more damaging weapons.

First, redundancy is not a bad thing

Second, a chapter master has an aura of 6" that can be used to stretch up to a foot using MSU (if your not MSUing why even bother with Salamander CT). That's not enough board control. This edition is all about board control. Being able to screen deepstrikers, slow assaulter, protect characters, engage firebases, and hold objectives. Tying yourself down to a captain/LT can limit your ability to control the board.

In my current list I have a Termi Captain (because I don't have the model for a jump captain) that is generally supposed to deepstrike with a wall of bodies piling out of rhinos and provide rerolling 1s. That almost never happens because the termi captain is better used elsewhere. The entire army is independent which allows me to be flexible (asides from non dread vehicles, because please give our vehicles CT like almost everyone else)

Also, don't forget that the Salamander CT gives a Re-roll for both hitting AND wounding which is really useful to ensure damage happens. Think of how many times you may have used the Re-roll CP to get an extra hit or wound in. Now spend that CP on a poor damage roll if needed.

Salamanders CT encourage an entirely different style of play from the reroll castle, which is what CT's should do.

2 fixes for chaos space marines and space marines, and more specifically powered armour

- Lethality
- Resilience

That is the 2 things that lacks marines and are not well represented on the tabletop if you compare to the fluff.
Marines lost the ''ignore armour of save 5+'' with the V8 on their bolters.

2 rules to add to space marines:

- Explosive Shells : Each 5+ to wound cause a mortal wound.
Bolters are like mini grenade launcher, a concentred volley of fire will do a better damage. 10 csm with voltw can also hurt a lot, or aggressors.

Superhuman Physiology: +1 wound to all marines. Primaris 3 wound, Plague marine 2 and terminators 3hp.

I am convinced that buffing marines is the way to do, and gw need to stop reduce their points. the more your reduce their points the more their feels elite.
Of course if they buff them like that they will go up in points.

That Explosive Shells rule is simply ridiculous.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
That Explosive Shells rule is simply ridiculous.

Agreed 100%. Why do Bolters have a 1/3 chance of completely and utterly ignoring saves? Which, by the way, means they always wound on a 5+ and never worse.

Sarevokk wrote:
2 fixes for chaos space marines and space marines, and more specifically powered armour

- Lethality
- Resilience

That is the 2 things that lacks marines and are not well represented on the tabletop if you compare to the fluff.
Marines lost the ''ignore armour of save 5+'' with the V8 on their bolters.

2 rules to add to space marines:

- Explosive Shells : Each 5+ to wound cause a mortal wound.
Bolters are like mini grenade launcher, a concentred volley of fire will do a better damage. 10 csm with voltw can also hurt a lot, or aggressors.

Superhuman Physiology: +1 wound to all marines. Primaris 3 wound, Plague marine 2 and terminators 3hp.

I am convinced that buffing marines is the way to do, and gw need to stop reduce their points. the more your reduce their points the more their feels elite.
Of course if they buff them like that they will go up in points.

Lets see if we can fix this mess with some common sense

Boltguns, Bolt rifles, storm bolters, heavy bolters and bolt pistols(bolt storm guantlet agressors would probably be OP with this) have the Mass Reactive Rule (Can not be used by Deathwatch)
Mass Reactive all wound rules of 5+ generate an additional hit against the target unit. Roll to wound normally, these additional rolls can not generate additional hits.
If the target toughness is double the strength of the weapon this rule produces no additional hits.

Your really advocating 3wound 2+4++5+++ terminators for deathguard. That would need to be insane levels of points.

The idea is balanced not Aeldari levels of cheese topped with cheese with a side of dipping cheese. With a Cheese shake.

Ice_can wrote:

Sarevokk wrote:
2 fixes for chaos space marines and space marines, and more specifically powered armour

- Lethality
- Resilience

That is the 2 things that lacks marines and are not well represented on the tabletop if you compare to the fluff.
Marines lost the ''ignore armour of save 5+'' with the V8 on their bolters.

2 rules to add to space marines:

- Explosive Shells : Each 5+ to wound cause a mortal wound.
Bolters are like mini grenade launcher, a concentred volley of fire will do a better damage. 10 csm with voltw can also hurt a lot, or aggressors.

Superhuman Physiology: +1 wound to all marines. Primaris 3 wound, Plague marine 2 and terminators 3hp.

I am convinced that buffing marines is the way to do, and gw need to stop reduce their points. the more your reduce their points the more their feels elite.
Of course if they buff them like that they will go up in points.

Lets see if we can fix this mess with some common sense

Boltguns, Bolt rifles, storm bolters, heavy bolters and bolt pistols(bolt storm guantlet agressors would probably be OP with this) have the Mass Reactive Rule (Can not be used by Deathwatch)
Mass Reactive all wound rules of 5+ generate an additional hit against the target unit. Roll to wound normally, these additional rolls can not generate additional hits.
If the target toughness is double the strength of the weapon this rule produces no additional hits.

Your really advocating 3wound 2+4++5+++ terminators for deathguard. That would need to be insane levels of points.

The idea is balanced not Aeldari levels of cheese topped with cheese with a side of dipping cheese. With a Cheese shake.

Considering 2 Terminators cost more then a Sentinel, 3 can get you a fully kitted Chimera or other various goodies, i belive we could deal with 3w DG Terminators.
Frankly it would be annoying to play against, (albeit matches against DG can also turn into boring slugfests anyways) but considering that they are even more expensive than their CSM /Sm counterpart i belive they would not really break the balance, not aslong as the -1 to hits literally are flat out better then additional W's.

I personally still think that the problem lies within the fact that the "good" (e.g. BA smashcaptain broken) stuff of marines requires mass CP and that regular SM only achieve this via soup. Most elite Armies could do with more CP, especially necrons and marines of any flavour and with or without edgy spikes. That beeing said the regular Tac marines/CSM/Plague Marine/Raptor/Assult Marine don't have a place since they can't generate enough CP for their price tag to make the units that are good and can take advantage of stratagems actually viable.
This again boils down to my comparison sometimes back:
Why Pick a regular CSM squad for a min troop tax in a elite army that will allways suffer from to few pts, when you can get the min troop tax filled way cheaper (and get access to potentially 160pts recycling from any side of the table via tide of traitors).
Basically if i want to fill a regular 5 cp formation, with 3 troop squads, even if i take 3x5 CSM that are still 210 pts. For that i can get 2x10 cultists and a 30 cultists blob for tide of traitors. I even could split them up and go full brigade if i wanted to for 210 pts and nearly would get my min troop tax. Additionally if i just want to fill min taxes i just pay 120 pts with cultists saving me additional 90 pts on taxes for units that profit more from Stratagems, basically the good units, you know those slaaneshi doublshooting obliterators.
The same goes for SM. Why take a pure SM list without soup, if you overpay for CP massively and can just abuse AM for a CP farm.

Basically we face the Problem that CSM/SM regulares are obsolete, either they lack DMG and durability to be cost effective or can not generate enough CP compared to other options, massively thanks to the gold CP standard dominated via Cultists and CP farms. So long CP is needed to activate abilities and so long min-troop-taxes detachments get the most CP, so long no CSM/ SM player will field CSM/ SM regulars on a semi- competitive level or higher, when he has access to cannonfodder/ cultists.

Now we could go two ways about this:

A) Either Buff specific Elite factions (read models with a price tag higher then 10 on standard infantery) via allowing them to baseline generate more CP with smaller detachments. (Especially Necrons do need something like this, additionally pure CSM / SM armies that don't field cultists/souped allies or scouts could get a rule for their detachment). Basically making them CP effecive.

Or, Buff those elite factions standard infantery, then we just run into the problem that the design space really is extremely marginal what with Primaris marines and custodes blocking buffs to stats. Additionally we still have the CP inefectivness to deal with and that would be needed to counterbalance, leading inevitably to huge buffs for regular marines of any spike and edgyness.

Space marines need to be 2hp, DG marines and other will be increased in points that sure, but thats not shocking because we play an elite army.

- Transhuman Physiology : When inflicting damage up an "Insert Intercessor, etc...", reduce the damage of the attack by 1 to a minimum of 1.

This solves vulnerability of MEQ to plasmas, that will twice the shot to kill them, and D3 damage will not be certain death.

Explosives Shells or another fancy names for bolter : Count this weapons as Ap-2 against armor save up to 5+. This is maybe not elegant, but this idea is give the bolter the AP 5 thats they always had in previous editions, and focus them on what they are supposed to do : Kill infantry units.

I dont think its op because each model will be expensive

I don't want anything close to the old AP system. All-or-nothing is a stupid mechanic and modifiers make more sense.

I don't like the idea that Boltguns would be 50% less effective vs Dire Avengers or Fire Warriors than Guardsmen.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I don't want anything close to the old AP system. All-or-nothing is a stupid mechanic and modifiers make more sense.

Completely agree. the AP system is probably one of the best things about 8E. It would be a shame to start adding rules to modify it.
A better option would be to USE the AP system as it is. Termies with 1+ armour is a good example of this. No special rule/ability needed since 1s already fail

The other option is to make it matter more. By making AP-1 and AP-2 less common. And even downgrade some of the AP-3 or better.

Take this as a grain of salt, but apparently Grey hunters are going to 13ppm. They were 14 before since they could take a chain sword for free at no loss.

If GW wants to maintain the price difference between Tacticals and hunters then Tacticals will have to drop to 12. Which is in line with the new kill team points.

Well now I'm curious if them bumping rad rifles to do 3 damage on 6s to wound instead of 2 will make it to the core game. Seemed like a needless buff in KT to be honest

 fraser1191 wrote:
Take this as a grain of salt, but apparently Grey hunters are going to 13ppm.

I can't say I'm shocked. Like, at all.

I would like to see two changes in the interim FAQ - for terminator armour whenever the model takes a wounding hit, reduce the wounds taken by 1 to a minimum of 1.

2 wound and to a lesser extent D3 wound weapons would be far less of a problem.

The second would be a universal marine boost. Any Astarte's bolter has an additional -1 to account for the larger calibers used. Bolt pistols, Bolters and Storm Bolters to -1, Bolt Rifles to -2. Chaos and Imperial.

Don't you think the basic weapon for a 1000 man elite force should be A LOT better than the standard weapon of armies of countless billions?

Adding Ap won't help marines the only way to make them semi competative is I hate to say it points cost drops.

Ice_can wrote:
Adding Ap won't help marines the only way to make them semi competative is I hate to say it points cost drops.

Or durability increase

Ice_can wrote:
Adding Ap won't help marines the only way to make them semi competative is I hate to say it points cost drops.

How does fixing the main problem for the basic Marine NOT help make them better?

 Xenomancers wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
Adding Ap won't help marines the only way to make them semi competative is I hate to say it points cost drops.

Or durability increase

Or both?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
Adding Ap won't help marines the only way to make them semi competative is I hate to say it points cost drops.

How does fixing the main problem for the basic Marine NOT help make them better?

Because marines still die like flies to dark eldar, guardsmen etc they will now also die like flies to other marines and primaris are now rocking -2AP bolters and Deathwatch -what AP they'll ve better anti tank than a heavy bolter for crying out loud.

It also doesn't fix their huge weakness in CC or fix assualt marines, makes bike armies the best way to play marines again hello 7th edition. Marines need better stats or less AP in the game to be worth thier points. If they arn't worth their point make them cheaper it's all thats left. Also cheaper marines might actually give them some CP to play with and some board presence.

Also more dudes with guns = more shooting which is a lot more effective against all the - to hit shenanigans than an additional Ap

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
Adding Ap won't help marines the only way to make them semi competative is I hate to say it points cost drops.

How does fixing the main problem for the basic Marine NOT help make them better?

The main problem for marines is not damage. It is durability. We can load all kinds of units with specials on every model. Rerolling all hits and 1's to wound. True bolters are trash and probably should be a little better but durability is the main issue.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
Adding Ap won't help marines the only way to make them semi competative is I hate to say it points cost drops.

How does fixing the main problem for the basic Marine NOT help make them better?

The main problem for marines is not damage. It is durability. We can load all kinds of units with specials on every model. Rerolling all hits and 1's to wound. True bolters are trash and probably should be a little better but durability is the main issue.

Except we really can't just load up on Special Weapons.

I'm not saying Marines are exactly durable, but Deathwatch proved that they CAN be offensively capable even with a basic Bolter when these base problems are fixed.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
Adding Ap won't help marines the only way to make them semi competative is I hate to say it points cost drops.

How does fixing the main problem for the basic Marine NOT help make them better?

The main problem for marines is not damage. It is durability. We can load all kinds of units with specials on every model. Rerolling all hits and 1's to wound. True bolters are trash and probably should be a little better but durability is the main issue.

Except we really can't just load up on Special Weapons.

I'm not saying Marines are exactly durable, but Deathwatch proved that they CAN be offensively capable even with a basic Bolter when these base problems are fixed.

Yeah deathwatch gets some stuff that is unreasonably good compared to trash space marine stuff. Pretty funny...because they are just space marines. Yet - they are still trash! LOL. All deatch-watch do is prove how trash space marines are. You give them all kinds of special rules for the cost of 1 ppm and they still can't compete.

And we can. Hellblasters / inceptors / sterngaurd / vangaurd / Centurians. Every single model has 1 or multiple specials.They do a lot of damage. The problem is - they die to whatever shoots at them.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galef wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
Adding Ap won't help marines the only way to make them semi competative is I hate to say it points cost drops.

Or durability increase

Or both?

Have you tested any of these proposed fixes Galef?