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.

Not Online!!! wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Because 200pt vehicles should be wounded on 5+s by heavy, expensive, anti-tank weapons?

Those vehicles are expensive in the first place and never reach something like T8 overall. It encourages thingies like Lances and Lascannons though. Which isn't bad.

It is, i should not need a lascannon to destroy any overgrown dreadnaught. Additionally those dreads allready have an invulnerability save, which makes them vastly superior to regular dreads.
The problem here is called scalling and mind you leviathans are allready playable.

You shouldn't need a Lascannon to kill a super Dread? You really said those words. Amazing.

Leviathans are already plenty killable for the price tag. What's your point?

My point is that a allready strong unit (double butchercannon f.e.) with an invulnerability is allready good enough.
I also question the whole idea since wounding on -1 is a pretty big deal, compared to the normal wounding. Additionally don't forget that you gain a bigger imunity range since the 6+ result is not a possible option anymore.

Not Online!!! wrote:
My point is that a allready strong unit (double butchercannon f.e.) with an invulnerability is allready good enough.
I also question the whole idea since wounding on -1 is a pretty big deal, compared to the normal wounding. Additionally don't forget that you gain a bigger imunity range since the 6+ result is not a possible option anymore.

It's also a 350 point model that folds to a breeze for the price. Also Iron Hands don't get Butcher Cannons so...

It still is a terrible fix, and consecutivly would also be applied to csm which get double butchercannon loadouts.
Mind you i agree that marines need a fix but this one seems terribly thought out.

Not Online!!! wrote:
It still is a terrible fix, and consecutivly would also be applied to csm which get double butchercannon loadouts.
Mind you i agree that marines need a fix but this one seems terribly thought out.

I'm pretty sure the suggestion was for Iron Hands. Helbrutes not getting a way to heal themselves is a crime though, even if they're likely going to die in a round of shooting.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
It still is a terrible fix, and consecutivly would also be applied to csm which get double butchercannon loadouts.
Mind you i agree that marines need a fix but this one seems terribly thought out.

I'm pretty sure the suggestion was for Iron Hands. Helbrutes not getting a way to heal themselves is a crime though, even if they're likely going to die in a round of shooting.

Then we have just another trait like ravenguard and alpha legion which is terrible internal balance.

In which case we buff the other Chapter Tactics as well. Otherwise you'll never get anywhere.

There never be balance amongst Chapter Tactics and other such army traits in the manner in which it wouldn't matter which one you take. There will ALWAYS be a "clear winner" as that is the nature of competitive choice.

We can be fairly close, to the point that at first players won't immediately recognize the "best" trait, but eventually combos will emerge that make it obvious to all.
I feel like this was (almost) the case with Craftworld Eldar when it first came out. They all looked good, if a bit weird for our previous ideas of fluff. Alaitoc was obviously good, but the other seemed to have their merit, so it appeared more or less balanced at first.
But as we now know, Eldar only have 1 trait because -1 to hit modifiers combo too well with other rules.

Chapter Tactics are the same. If we tweak them, there will only be 2 outcomes:
1) The tweak to one tactic won't be enough to make it better than the current "best" tactic, therefore nothing changes in the overall meta or
2) The tweak makes a particular tactic better then the current "best" and thus replaces it in the meta. But then we still only see the same tactic over and over

GW includes these tactic for fluff, not competitive play, but as they clearly affect competitive play, we are stuck with it as-is.
The only change I would be for is to make all the -1 to be hit traits be the following instead:
"Units with this trait receive +1 to armour save rolls in the same manner as being in cover if the firing enemy unit is outside 12". If the unit is already in cover, the total bonus for this trait and cover are +2."
Then update Marine and CSM trait to apply to all units.

-

The -1 to hit is fine though and helps counter total gunline armies. That's where the complaints come from after all. Now, is stacking beyond -2 silly? Sure I'll agree with that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
It still is a terrible fix, and consecutivly would also be applied to csm which get double butchercannon loadouts.
Mind you i agree that marines need a fix but this one seems terribly thought out.

I'm pretty sure the suggestion was for Iron Hands. Helbrutes not getting a way to heal themselves is a crime though, even if they're likely going to die in a round of shooting.

Then we have just another trait like ravenguard and alpha legion which is terrible internal balance.

Is it that those Traits are broken, or that the rest of the traits are bad?

If it was just -1 to hit.

And not (before modifiers)
So -1 to hit cancels procs on 6's
Makes overheats go off on 2's

It would still be a really strong trait but not the OP mess we have now. It is just too powerful.

Because of this before modifiers nonnsense. If you are 3+ reroll all hits. You are statistically down to 3+ to hit. Imagine you has an army trait a strong as reroll all hits in shooting!

"I feel like this was (almost) the case with Craftworld Eldar when it first came out. They all looked good, if a bit weird for our previous ideas of fluff."

Initial reaction that most people had to Craftworld Attributes:
-Alaitoc: OP
-Uthwe: Better IH (somewhat trash)
-Iyanden: Inferior to Uthwe (trash)
-Sam-Hann: Reroll charges on everyone? Only a couple units will charge, and they'll be safe charges - CP reroll does this better. Oh, and Vypers and Scatter Bikes are slightly less bad. (trash)
-Biel-Tan: Small arms always pretend there's an Autarch nearby? In an army heavily dependent on it's non-small-arms? In the one CW that is most likely to have an Autarch nearby? (trash)

It was immediately obvious that one CT was clearly the best, by a lot. A few corner cases were seen for some of the others, but most were downright bad.

Lets not rewrite history.

As for IH getting the ShadowSeer effect army-wide: this just makes IH the best trait. Now, if they ever did try to balance Marines, Ultra Marines and White Scars tacs are paying points for IH's "Can't touch this" CT, and not benefiting from it.

 Xenomancers wrote:
If it was just -1 to hit.

And not (before modifiers)
So -1 to hit cancels procs on 6's
Makes overheats go off on 2's

It would still be a really strong trait but not the OP mess we have now. It is just too powerful.

Because of this before modifiers nonnsense. If you are 3+ reroll all hits. You are statistically down to 3+ to hit. Imagine you has an army trait a strong as reroll all hits in shooting!

So it's overpowered because it's a way to punish people bringing too many Plasma and Disintegrators?

Sorry but cry me a river with that complaint.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
"I feel like this was (almost) the case with Craftworld Eldar when it first came out. They all looked good, if a bit weird for our previous ideas of fluff."

Initial reaction that most people had to Craftworld Attributes:
-Alaitoc: OP
-Uthwe: Better IH (somewhat trash)
-Iyanden: Inferior to Uthwe (trash)
-Sam-Hann: Reroll charges on everyone? Only a couple units will charge, and they'll be safe charges - CP reroll does this better. Oh, and Vypers and Scatter Bikes are slightly less bad. (trash)
-Biel-Tan: Small arms always pretend there's an Autarch nearby? In an army heavily dependent on it's non-small-arms? In the one CW that is most likely to have an Autarch nearby? (trash)

It was immediately obvious that one CT was clearly the best, by a lot. A few corner cases were seen for some of the others, but most were downright bad.

Lets not rewrite history.

As for IH getting the ShadowSeer effect army-wide: this just makes IH the best trait. Now, if they ever did try to balance Marines, Ultra Marines and White Scars tacs are paying points for IH's "Can't touch this" CT, and not benefiting from it.

I would actually argue Iyanden is a LOT better than Ulthwe and has several better applications. Then Sam Hainn is...blech. The other two Craftworlds were entirely screwed over though for sure.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
If it was just -1 to hit.

And not (before modifiers)
So -1 to hit cancels procs on 6's
Makes overheats go off on 2's

It would still be a really strong trait but not the OP mess we have now. It is just too powerful.

Because of this before modifiers nonnsense. If you are 3+ reroll all hits. You are statistically down to 3+ to hit. Imagine you has an army trait a strong as reroll all hits in shooting!

So it's overpowered because it's a way to punish people bringing too many Plasma and Disintegrators?

Sorry but cry me a river with that complaint.

Well it doesn't punish disintegrators specifically. Plus a ravager/night fighter can probably just fly up within 12 of you and ignore your trait completely. It punishes every ability that needs a 6 to proc a special too...Like Tesla and splinter racks...

Overall - it's more than the -1 is what I am saying. Also - why is it that when you bring a lot of plasma it's like a sin against humanity compared to spamming any other weapon...probably weapons that don't kill their own users?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ignoring 18% of wounds including mortal is better than leadership immunity (which is pretty much useless always)

"I would actually argue Iyanden is a LOT better than Ulthwe and has several better applications."
At first glance, it's not apparent how much better the Uthwe trait is, I'll give you that. But:
-Using the better statline is great, until you realize Uthwe will also be using the better statline in almost all cases - because they haven't lost the wound. And it's better to not lose the wound than to pretend you haven't for one purpose. Yes, Uthwe is the much better choice for Spirit Hosts.

-Old Commisar rule looks great, until you realize that most of your squads can lose at most one model from Morale anyways - because they're MSU with high LD. Guardians can use it, but a 6+++ is a lot more useful. Ironically, it does mean Black Guardian Warhosts are the only army that might possibly want to be Iyanden over Uthwe, but even that is debateable.

And it's no end of amusement that Black Guardians align better with Iyanden and Biel Tan traits, Spirit Hosts align better with Uthwe, and Aspect Warriors want anyone but Biel Tan.

Back on topic: why would Iron Hands be more durable vs Lasguns than Nurgle-marked Marines? Or non-IH Bikers? -1-to-be-wounded is far better than +1T, and +1T is far better than almost all CTs.

Bharring wrote:
"I would actually argue Iyanden is a LOT better than Ulthwe and has several better applications."
At first glance, it's not apparent how much better the Uthwe trait is, I'll give you that. But:
-Using the better statline is great, until you realize Uthwe will also be using the better statline in almost all cases - because they haven't lost the wound. And it's better to not lose the wound than to pretend you haven't for one purpose. Yes, Uthwe is the much better choice for Spirit Hosts.

-Old Commisar rule looks great, until you realize that most of your squads can lose at most one model from Morale anyways - because they're MSU with high LD. Guardians can use it, but a 6+++ is a lot more useful. Ironically, it does mean Black Guardian Warhosts are the only army that might possibly want to be Iyanden over Uthwe, but even that is debateable.

And it's no end of amusement that Black Guardians align better with Iyanden and Biel Tan traits, Spirit Hosts align better with Uthwe, and Aspect Warriors want anyone but Biel Tan.

Back on topic: why would Iron Hands be more durable vs Lasguns than Nurgle-marked Marines? Or non-IH Bikers? -1-to-be-wounded is far better than +1T, and +1T is far better than almost all CTs.

Bharring you've got good eldar knowledge. Don't sell black guardians short though +1 to hit stratagem +1 autarch (ofc I bring an Ulthwe autharch!) and you are 2+ reroll 1's....+ Doom. GG whatever you shoot.

But only one such unit. A true Black Guardian warhost will have several!

A Guardian bomb in a non-Guardian warhost (meaning, it's only one of your threats) isn't worth taking Iyanden over Uthwe for the trait - when you have only one Guardian unit to use it.

And you can only use stratagems and buffing powers on 1 unit. So a Guardian Bomb is a lot more common than a Guardian warhost (as in several).

So, no, Iyanden is not typically a non-trash choice.

Bharring wrote:
"I would actually argue Iyanden is a LOT better than Ulthwe and has several better applications."
At first glance, it's not apparent how much better the Uthwe trait is, I'll give you that. But:
-Using the better statline is great, until you realize Uthwe will also be using the better statline in almost all cases - because they haven't lost the wound. And it's better to not lose the wound than to pretend you haven't for one purpose. Yes, Uthwe is the much better choice for Spirit Hosts.

-Old Commisar rule looks great, until you realize that most of your squads can lose at most one model from Morale anyways - because they're MSU with high LD. Guardians can use it, but a 6+++ is a lot more useful. Ironically, it does mean Black Guardian Warhosts are the only army that might possibly want to be Iyanden over Uthwe, but even that is debateable.

And it's no end of amusement that Black Guardians align better with Iyanden and Biel Tan traits, Spirit Hosts align better with Uthwe, and Aspect Warriors want anyone but Biel Tan.

Back on topic: why would Iron Hands be more durable vs Lasguns than Nurgle-marked Marines? Or non-IH Bikers? -1-to-be-wounded is far better than +1T, and +1T is far better than almost all CTs.

1. What's the wound count for the Serpent? Wraithlord? Wraithknight?
You're only getting 1 wound per 6 remember? So let's assume the Serpent has 12 wounds, which means it had a degrading status. By the time you reached 4, it'll be 6 on the one with FNP, except one is still firing better.
2. Actually the reason is precisely Guardians as to why Iyaden works better. As long as you can Deep Strike 20 dudes, you don't have to worry about 15 of them dying. Only one runs away, and the 2 or 3 you tried to save with Ulthwe will run away with the others unless you're gonna burn those CP.

Lets do Wraithlord.

5 or less unsaved wounds: neither bracketed
6 unsaved wounds. Iyanden is now at 4 wounds, but counts as unbracketed. Uthwe is at 5 wounds but counts as unbracketed (because it isn't).
7 unsaved: Iyanden is slightly better at this time, because Uthwe is more likely than not bracketed.
8 wounds: Both are bracketed once
9 wounds: Both are bracketed twice
10 wounds: Uthwe is still alive
11 wounds: Uthwe is still alive
12 wounds: They should both be dead

So they have the same killiness from 0-6 unsaved wounds. Iyanden pulls ahead at 7 unsaved wounds. Uthwe ties it up at 8. Uthwe pulls (way) ahead at 10. And that's just killiness.

Iyanden has a minor advantage when they've taken 7 unsaved wounds, and Uthwe has a major advantage at 10/11 unsaved wounds Otherwise, they're both just as deadly. So Uthwe is more deadly in more situations. And that's on top of *living longer*.

Iyanden is worse than Uthwe for performing at higher brackets. They're just that unbalanced.

But, of course if you take Alaitoc, all your units are less squishy in general and you have access to a WL trait to make Morale irrelevant for all your 20 Guardian blobs.
Arguing whether Ulthwe or Iyanden is a better choice is pointless when Alaitoc exists. It's the clear winner.

Even if GW mercifully added a basic rule that 6s to hit always succeed for all factions, or capped to hit mods at -2, Aliatoc would still be the best Eldar trait.

-

"As long as you can Deep Strike 20 dudes, you don't have to worry about 15 of them dying. Only one runs away, and the 2 or 3 you tried to save with Ulthwe will run away with the others unless you're gonna burn those CP."
So you're taking a Trait to only impact one or two units? Really?

Also, how much of a difference is it? If you've lost 15 Iyanden, you've lost 12.5 Uthwe. So you're probably going to have 4 remaining Iyanden versus 0 remaining Uthwe, that's true. So you saved 4 GEQs with bolgun-equivelents in the middle of the field. What are you going to do with 4 guardians? Sure, it's useful. But much less useful than a 6+++ on *everything in your army*. So if your entire army is mostly 20-man guardian squads? Yeah, sure, it could be useful. But for a single bomb, or even 2, not so much. Besides, it's not like killing 4 more Guardsmen within 12" of the entire enemy army is that big a feat for just about any army. I'd rather a 16% beefer *everything* than a small chance to save a half dozen Guardsmen if the enemy is dumb.

 Galef wrote:
But, of course if you take Alaitoc, all your units are less squishy in general and you have access to a WL trait to make Morale irrelevant for all your 20 Guardian blobs.
Arguing whether Ulthwe or Iyanden is a better choice is pointless when Alaitoc exists. It's the clear winner.

Even if GW mercifully added a basic rule that 6s to hit always succeed for all factions, or capped to hit mods at -2, Aliatoc would still be the best Eldar trait.

-

For me Ulthwe gardians are best because they will never be outside of 12" of anything. I only ever deep strike them or put them in a wave serpent. Alaitoc is great for that serpant - only turn 1 though - after turn 1 my serpants are in CC and the essentially "free spirit stones" is very much appreciate there.

Then again - I play Ulthwe because that is what I have painted. I just wouldn't call it trash. If it was trash - my eldar would be on the shelf.

Marine traits isn't the problem is what I am saying. Apart from the fact that the traits don't apply to vehicals (they should) they have good traits. Some of the best ones. I think -1 to hit 6+ FNP and ignore cover are some of the best traits out there. It really is just the units suck. My nids use 6+++ and it works great for them.

Put Ulthwe eldar up against Iron hands if you don't believe me. The results are pretty predictable.

Uthwe, I think - and appeared to be consensus as soon as the traits were revealed - is the 2nd best of the traits. But way behind Alaitoc.

More on-topic, the proposed trait is clearly a massive upgrade over the Uthwe/IH trait, and is stronger than the clearly-OP Alaitoc trait. So how can it be fair?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(I, too, play Uthwe - because that's what my army is. I think you're underselling what you get from Alaitoc, though - it pushes the opponent to close in, and you need the opponent close to do anything.)

Anyway to get this back on track, would changing the Ultramarines chapter tactic to being able to ignore models within 1 inch for the purposes of shooting or overwatch, actually be a worth while chapter tactic that doesn't work against taking vehicals or fly units in ultramarine lists.

(Yes Bobby G needs reworked but thats GW's screw up.)

Additionally what do people feel should be the Ultramarines warlord trait seing as their mandatory one got the grand strategist nuclear nerf.

Ice_can wrote:
Anyway to get this back on track, would changing the Ultramarines chapter tactic to being able to ignore models within 1 inch for the purposes of shooting or overwatch, actually be a worth while chapter tactic that doesn't work against taking vehicals or fly units in ultramarine lists.

(Yes Bobby G needs reworked but thats GW's screw up.)

Additionally what do people feel should be the Ultramarines warlord trait seing as their mandatory one got the grand strategist nuclear nerf.

Make the roll an easier one to achieve or they can make one Stratagem cost 1 less CP a turn. Not too sure to be honest.

Had a random thought:

What if they made it so combat squads would allow you to either combine two squads (so long as the total # of models aren't greater than 10) or split them in half at the beginning of the movement phase.

Splitting (and not requiring a 10-man squad to do so) would give some great board control flexibility for objectives and such.

Combining would be a good way to use mandatory unit slots to buff up certain units (like a tac squad being used to provide wounds for devastators or sternguard instead of spending points on additional ablative wounds)

Primaris could only CS with other primaris, standard PA marines with standard PA, etc.,

Still might never be used, but just an idea.

Vilehydra wrote:
Had a random thought:

What if they made it so combat squads would allow you to either combine two squads (so long as the total # of models aren't greater than 10) or split them in half at the beginning of the movement phase.

Splitting (and not requiring a 10-man squad to do so) would give some great board control flexibility for objectives and such.

Combining would be a good way to use mandatory unit slots to buff up certain units (like a tac squad being used to provide wounds for devastators or sternguard instead of spending points on additional ablative wounds)

Primaris could only CS with other primaris, standard PA marines with standard PA, etc.,

Still might never be used, but just an idea.

How would objective securedwork with that?

I haven't read the whole thread so apologies if this has already come up.

Regarding the balancing of chapter traits, whilst it is very hard to balance different traits with each other there are other thing that can be used other than just the basic trait it self. Chapter specific warlord traits, special characters, strats and relics should be used to fine tune each sub faction with each other. I think the Knight codex does a really good job of this with various houses being used in top tourney lists and most of the being at least useful and offering something unique.


Onto the topic of space marines and how to make them more competitive. Firstly I don't think it is realistic to think gw will alter the stat block for all marine units so best not to consider that. Fixing vehicles is just a case of giving them chapter tactics. My main issue with marines is their survivability, they become more dangerous if they live longer and they are super humans in super armour they should be hard to put down!
Upping wounds won't happen and upping saves doesn't work all round, I don't like a reroll mechanic as the game needs less rolls so how about this.

Transhuman physiology: all wound rolls made against models with this ability suffer minus 1 (a 6 always succeeds).
Add this to all actual marines (not cultists, dreads, vehicles, spawn, etc...) simple for gw to put in an faq an gives an instant simpl3 survivability boost to all marines making them twice as survivable against Lasguns, but having a much smaller but still useful effect against heavier weapons. It also has the added effect of making marines feel a little more special, my super soldiers shouldnt be the flat baseline of the game.

 WisdomLS wrote:
I haven't read the whole thread so apologies if this has already come up.

Regarding the balancing of chapter traits, whilst it is very hard to balance different traits with each other there are other thing that can be used other than just the basic trait it self. Chapter specific warlord traits, special characters, strats and relics should be used to fine tune each sub faction with each other. I think the Knight codex does a really good job of this with various houses being used in top tourney lists and most of the being at least useful and offering something unique.


Onto the topic of space marines and how to make them more competitive. Firstly I don't think it is realistic to think gw will alter the stat block for all marine units so best not to consider that. Fixing vehicles is just a case of giving them chapter tactics. My main issue with marines is their survivability, they become more dangerous if they live longer and they are super humans in super armour they should be hard to put down!
Upping wounds won't happen and upping saves doesn't work all round, I don't like a reroll mechanic as the game needs less rolls so how about this.

Transhuman physiology: all wound rolls made against models with this ability suffer minus 1 (a 6 always succeeds).
Add this to all actual marines (not cultists, dreads, vehicles, spawn, etc...) simple for gw to put in an faq an gives an instant simpl3 survivability boost to all marines making them twice as survivable against Lasguns, but having a much smaller but still useful effect against heavier weapons. It also has the added effect of making marines feel a little more special, my super soldiers shouldnt be the flat baseline of the game.

While it would help somewhat it doesn't address the issue that their vehicals are also far to easy to kill for what they cost.
The entire codex just feels way to armoured with paper for the points cost.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The -1 to hit is fine though and helps counter total gunline armies. That's where the complaints come from after all. Now, is stacking beyond -2 silly? Sure I'll agree with that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
It still is a terrible fix, and consecutivly would also be applied to csm which get double butchercannon loadouts.
Mind you i agree that marines need a fix but this one seems terribly thought out.

I'm pretty sure the suggestion was for Iron Hands. Helbrutes not getting a way to heal themselves is a crime though, even if they're likely going to die in a round of shooting.

Then we have just another trait like ravenguard and alpha legion which is terrible internal balance.

Is it that those Traits are broken, or that the rest of the traits are bad?

-1 Traits, especially the "to hit's", are broken.
Not only do they just add 1/6th more durability but make whole armies ineffective in what is probably the most important battlephase.
Now you can argue that it is good against gunline armies, but consider this an Ork mekwarband loses HALF it's efficency against that trait, atleast half and up to their codex they can lose all efficency, but then you say " Why would you play a Mek warband, orks are not suposed to be able to shoot anything". Fine i say, but what about R&H? A army which has primary troops made for shooting but have bs 5+ also on average? Even armies like Tau or Guard or Tyranids suffer from a loss of 1/3rd in efficency because of this trait alone. Even "Elite" armies like other marines lose a 1/4th of efficency in what is probably our most important damage pahse. We haven't even talked about stacking of those yet.

Now you proposed a -1 to wound. Superficially it might looks better then the" -1 to hit" bs that we have to deal now with. Still though it adds again 1/6th in pure durability against all weaponry at ALL ranges.
Weapons like Battlecannons which normaly would and should wipe a t4 model now suddendly wounds only 2/3rds of the time? Heavy Bolter is wounding on 4+? Basically instead of the to hit change you now go into the problem that alot of guns suddendly lose their purpose or are not as effective against their intended targets as they should be for their pricetag. Is it equally as bad as the whole -1 bs fiasco? No. Is it still a terrible band aid solution and a future autopick? yes. I do think however that Terminator armor could give this, that atleast would solve their durability issue, now we just have to deal with the PF not doing stuff and the bolters beeing terrible at output.

Marines and also CSM however have another problem and that is to answer your last question: TIT or Terrible Internal Traitbalance.
Let's take a look shall we, in the CSM Codex: Traits range from WB trait, which is basically just ATSKNF, which is terrible as a trait btw, to WE which gain an additional attack if you successfully charge and is a melee trait, which surprise runs into the problem that the Melee units on the basis of a Marine profile will not get into, except if you devote ALOT of points for transports which CSM have the worse bin to chose from (no razorbacks). To EC, which is nice as a side buff but still not particulary relevant since their main reason to field are noise marines which don't want to get into melee anyways as of yet. Night lords is Morale shenanigans and requires a specific build to be played to it's strength but decentish, but Raptors and warptalons aren't that good atm and that makes their Morale shenanigans a bit too useless.
Black Legion is kinda like Renegades trait but instead of haveing a potential 1 turn charge you now have a mobile wall of fire, which loses -1 for using assult guns, hurray for requireing even more HQ's then we do now as a CSM warband in order to maintain accuracy. IW are great for a gunline duel and against buildings, probably a trait that will pay off in a match the easiest, especially in matches on good tables.
But all of these basically pale in comparison to the -1 to hit shenanigans that alpha legion can pull. IW havocs are decent, but you can give them alpha legion and they survive waaay longer. IW dakka hellbrutes are good but you can give the AL for waaaayyy better survivability and also to let plasma users detonate more frequently. etc.

Marines look much the same: basically 2 passable traits 1 really good one and the rest is either terribly situational or just plain bad.

Compare that now to guard:
IG Has 2 outliers really, Cadia a "free" reroll aura IF they stood still, so they atleast have a condition to their trait that in theory requires brain, in practice though just leads to mortars and stting somewhere and Catachan, which basically is just plain stupid buff to their Melee performance and a massive boost to the rate of fire for D3/6 weaponry. The rest of the traits are good but either require some conditions or are a bit weaker, still a better trait balance internally achieved then any marine /csm book offer.

Here's idea I was toying with:
- Oldmarines get +1 attack to bring them inline with Primaris (who would still be tougher with +1W)
- Bolters become assault 2 to give tac marines more firepower at long range
- Fix mis-pointed wargear (i.e assault marine jumppacks should cost the same as vanguard jumppacks, grav guns should drop in points)
- Maybe there should be an across the board reduction in points for marine wargear (at least for non-characters) to compensate for the expensive 'chasis'
- No change in cost for oldmarines (scout 11pts - 2pts deploy + 2pts save + 2points attack = 13pts)


This would mean
- Devastators the same (except maybe for points changes on weapons)
- Assault marines become much better
- Tac marines are better in melee, have more firepower at range, can advance and shoot
- Smash captain too good? Maybe can be compensated for with increased cost of thunderhammer for characters
- Blood angels and space wolves become too good? :(