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.

I am still waiting for someone to say lasguns are way better than bolters.

The new Tau hotness is 3 rptides with 30-40 shieldrones.
I have seen a good bunch of those lists used with great results in a recent team GT.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:
S4 WS3+ is only half the CC equation. They're also T4 Sv3+.

That might not seem as big a deal, but CC between non-CC units is about attrition, not just damage. So, sure, you only kill about twice as many GEQ as a Fire Warrior (2/3*2/3*2/3 vs 1/2*1/2*2/3: works out to be nearly twice as much, and for nearly twice the points). But you also take about half as much in return (1/2*1/3*1/3 vs 1/2*1/2*1/2 - same ratio). So you kill twice as fast for twice the points, yet also survive twice as long. Now you're fighting twice per game round (both players' turns), and they're likely to start losing some bodies to Morale, while your Marines aren't going to.

Never seen this play out really.

Typically a 5 man in CC is lucky to get a single kill. Where I feel I can get real mileage out of primaris if I can utilize both their profiles - sadly - at 18 points and most every unit in the game has a gun that does flat 2 damage or d3 damage. These guys don't live very long.

That's part of the issue being so expensive its 5 marines vrs 10 guardsmen or cultist, so survive overwatch throw 5 attacks and hope the returning 7/8 doesn't kill a dude. Then watch them fall back and your marines get shot of the board by the next squad.
People don't stay in CC unless they have no choice

 Galas wrote:
The new Tau hotness is 3 rptides with 30-40 shieldrones.
I have seen a good bunch of those lists used with great results in a recent team GT.

Yeah I can buy that, the Drones are incredibly annoying.

Ice_can wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
I think its kind of cool that Marines are supposed to shoot and charge in and finish things off in melee. It's unfortunate that this really doesn't in any way translate into a viable playstyle.

Indeed:

Rather than 2W - Would it make a difference with 2A base?

The change I'd like to see.
Secondis marines 14 points - 2W 2A
Primaris marines 20 points - 3W 3A (terminators and gravis armor would also get this profile with perhaps a 3-5 point increase)

the issue with 3W 3A is thats basically the custodes profile.
It degrades the separation.

3W 3A is also "basically" the crisis bodyguard profile. There's more to a unit than those two stats. A terminator might be similar to a custode (which is fine IMO) but a primaris marine would still play very differently.

But considering how divisive this topic is, the best short term solution would just be to cost marines according to how good they are, not by pretending they are super elite. 11 pt marines would probably be a good start. That and reduced weapon prices, especially melee weapons.

Thats kinda the problem:

You have Marines
You have Marines + - the Snowflake Chapters
You have Marines ++ Grey Knights and Deathwatch
You Have Marines +++ The Primaris
Marines ++++ - The Snowflake Chapter Primaris versions
Marines +++++ Custodes

All trying to be the same super elite units.

Give all Marines Primaris stats and all Snowflake Chapter options that they keep wasting time on and which mnay Chapters would have access to anyway.

Dandelion wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
I think its kind of cool that Marines are supposed to shoot and charge in and finish things off in melee. It's unfortunate that this really doesn't in any way translate into a viable playstyle.

Indeed:

Rather than 2W - Would it make a difference with 2A base?

The change I'd like to see.
Secondis marines 14 points - 2W 2A
Primaris marines 20 points - 3W 3A (terminators and gravis armor would also get this profile with perhaps a 3-5 point increase)

the issue with 3W 3A is thats basically the custodes profile.
It degrades the separation.

3W 3A is also "basically" the crisis bodyguard profile. There's more to a unit than those two stats. A terminator might be similar to a custode (which is fine IMO) but a primaris marine would still play very differently.

But considering how divisive this topic is, the best short term solution would just be to cost marines according to how good they are, not by pretending they are super elite. 11 pt marines would probably be a good start. That and reduced weapon prices, especially melee weapons.

This is all I've been trying to say.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
S4 WS3+ is only half the CC equation. They're also T4 Sv3+.

That might not seem as big a deal, but CC between non-CC units is about attrition, not just damage. So, sure, you only kill about twice as many GEQ as a Fire Warrior (2/3*2/3*2/3 vs 1/2*1/2*2/3: works out to be nearly twice as much, and for nearly twice the points). But you also take about half as much in return (1/2*1/3*1/3 vs 1/2*1/2*1/2 - same ratio). So you kill twice as fast for twice the points, yet also survive twice as long. Now you're fighting twice per game round (both players' turns), and they're likely to start losing some bodies to Morale, while your Marines aren't going to.

That seems reasonable on paper, but never comes to fruition in the game because of the shooting phase.

Ice_can wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:
S4 WS3+ is only half the CC equation. They're also T4 Sv3+.

That might not seem as big a deal, but CC between non-CC units is about attrition, not just damage. So, sure, you only kill about twice as many GEQ as a Fire Warrior (2/3*2/3*2/3 vs 1/2*1/2*2/3: works out to be nearly twice as much, and for nearly twice the points). But you also take about half as much in return (1/2*1/3*1/3 vs 1/2*1/2*1/2 - same ratio). So you kill twice as fast for twice the points, yet also survive twice as long. Now you're fighting twice per game round (both players' turns), and they're likely to start losing some bodies to Morale, while your Marines aren't going to.

Never seen this play out really.

Typically a 5 man in CC is lucky to get a single kill. Where I feel I can get real mileage out of primaris if I can utilize both their profiles - sadly - at 18 points and most every unit in the game has a gun that does flat 2 damage or d3 damage. These guys don't live very long.

That's part of the issue being so expensive its 5 marines vrs 10 guardsmen or cultist, so survive overwatch throw 5 attacks and hope the returning 7/8 doesn't kill a dude. Then watch them fall back and your marines get shot of the board by the next squad.
People don't stay in CC unless they have no choice

Charge multiple squaaaaads.

Imo this just translates to supporting your assault appropriately. Tyranids know all about this because they have to follow the "multiple threats" mantra. Charge multiple squads, throw some other dangerous looking things up there, whatever.

"That's part of the issue being so expensive its 5 marines vrs 10 guardsmen or cultist, so survive overwatch throw 5 attacks and hope the returning 7/8 doesn't kill a dude. [...]"

So your 5 Marines shoot Guardsmen:
5x2x(2/3)(2/3)(2/3) = 80/27 or roughly 3 dead Guardsmen.

Charge in, eating overwatch:
7x2x(1/6)(1/3)(1/3) = 14/54 Marines (so unlikely to kill even one)

Then swing:
5x1x(2/3)(2/3)(2/3) = 40/27 or roughly 1.5 more dead Guardsmen

Take the rebuttle:
6x1x(1/2)(1/3)(1/3) = 1/3 of a Marine Marine

Guardsmen take morale on ~-4.5. Then the remaining (probably 2-4 guys) fall back, so can't shoot.

So over half the Guardmen are dead and half a Marine is dead. That doesn't sond so bad, even for the points.

"[...]Then watch them fall back and your marines get shot of the board by the next squad. "

You have about 4.5 Marines left. Guard shooting:
2x(1/2)(1/3)(1/3) or 1/9 Marine kills per Guardsman. So you need 40 *more* guardsmen to actually pull that off.

Congratulations, your 50 Guardsmen, at 200pts, managed to kill 5 Marines at 65 points. And you only lost 6-8 Guardsmen to do it!

Dandelion wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
I think its kind of cool that Marines are supposed to shoot and charge in and finish things off in melee. It's unfortunate that this really doesn't in any way translate into a viable playstyle.

Indeed:

Rather than 2W - Would it make a difference with 2A base?

The change I'd like to see.
Secondis marines 14 points - 2W 2A
Primaris marines 20 points - 3W 3A (terminators and gravis armor would also get this profile with perhaps a 3-5 point increase)

the issue with 3W 3A is thats basically the custodes profile.
It degrades the separation.

3W 3A is also "basically" the crisis bodyguard profile. There's more to a unit than those two stats. A terminator might be similar to a custode (which is fine IMO) but a primaris marine would still play very differently.

But considering how divisive this topic is, the best short term solution would just be to cost marines according to how good they are, not by pretending they are super elite. 11 pt marines would probably be a good start. That and reduced weapon prices, especially melee weapons.

Well in that case - a tactical marine is worth between 10-11 and a primaris is worth 14-15. Also why are we pretending they are super elite - marines are super elite? Crisis suits are clearly overcosted too - horrible comparison - their base cost should be closer to 20.

Custodes and terms should be similar. They are both genetically modified by the emperors geens or the decedents of the emperor (his children) and are wearing ancient and powerful armor. Also - this really isn't about fluff for me. It's about what these units need to be viable.

Bharring wrote:
(As for the Titans made of Adamantium, how does that cover the squared/cubed problem? Unless I'm missing a gakton of lift on every Titan, they'd only be functional when walking on surfaces made of Adamantium.)

Adamantium is supposed to have multiple times the durability of hardened steel while being as light, or lighter than titanium. Such a material allows for architecture that just wouldn't work with conventional materials, including titan chassis. The square cubed law still applies to titans but adamantium raises the ceiling of what is possible. It also solves the titan's "weight" problem by being so light.

The square/cubed law applies to what you're standing upon, too. Sure, Adamantium may be lighter than any known material per volume, but you're still running at cubed volume standing on squared surface area.

Assuming Adamantium is heavier than air, something the size of a Titan would not be supported by a surface made by any known material, just standing.

If Adamantium were as heavy as air, the Titan could stand still. But any attempt to move would require enough force applied to where it's standing to displace it's volume (cubed side of the equation) of air. Which would be to much force for any known material to support on the relative size of a Titan's footprint.

If Adamantium were lighter than air, it would float up. Further, it would not be able to move by "walking" in the traditional sense. And still, you're displacing your volume during movement. But now you're doing it entirely by thrusters/etc, not by "walking".

The feth, stop with the physics discussion!

Bharring wrote:
"That's part of the issue being so expensive its 5 marines vrs 10 guardsmen or cultist, so survive overwatch throw 5 attacks and hope the returning 7/8 doesn't kill a dude. [...]"

So your 5 Marines shoot Guardsmen:
5x2x(2/3)(2/3)(2/3) = 80/27 or roughly 3 dead Guardsmen.

Charge in, eating overwatch:
7x2x(1/6)(1/3)(1/3) = 14/54 Marines (so unlikely to kill even one)

Then swing:
5x1x(2/3)(2/3)(2/3) = 40/27 or roughly 1.5 more dead Guardsmen

Take the rebuttle:
6x1x(1/2)(1/3)(1/3) = 1/3 of a Marine Marine

Guardsmen take morale on ~-4.5. Then the remaining (probably 2-4 guys) fall back, so can't shoot.

So over half the Guardmen are dead and half a Marine is dead. That doesn't sond so bad, even for the points.

"[...]Then watch them fall back and your marines get shot of the board by the next squad. "

You have about 4.5 Marines left. Guard shooting:
2x(1/2)(1/3)(1/3) or 1/9 Marine kills per Guardsman. So you need 40 *more* guardsmen to actually pull that off.

Congratulations, your 50 Guardsmen, at 200pts, managed to kill 5 Marines at 65 points. And you only lost 6-8 Guardsmen to do it!

Sure except it's unlikely that the Marines die to 50 guardsmen vs something else that is better at killing them. Plus you have to get the Marines into combat in the first place, which doesn't seem like something you can automatically assume will be possible / the best thing to do.

When fighting guardsmen getting into combat is a pretty good move, imo, esp if you're ultramarines. Extra casualties to force morale, gain ground (sometimes into cover.)

Getting into CC is certainly not automatic. My point was to refute a specific claim about how it's worthless because:

"That's part of the issue being so expensive its 5 marines vrs 10 guardsmen or cultist, so survive overwatch throw 5 attacks and hope the returning 7/8 doesn't kill a dude. Then watch them fall back and your marines get shot of the board by the next squad."

My point isn't that Marines are fine. My point is that the above claim does not show that Marine CC stats are worthless.

Bharring wrote:
Getting into CC is certainly not automatic. My point was to refute a specific claim about how it's worthless because:

"That's part of the issue being so expensive its 5 marines vrs 10 guardsmen or cultist, so survive overwatch throw 5 attacks and hope the returning 7/8 doesn't kill a dude. Then watch them fall back and your marines get shot of the board by the next squad."

My point isn't that Marines are fine. My point is that the above claim does not show that Marine CC stats are worthless.

Totally missed the point but whatever.
I wasn't saying guardsmen kill you in CC Catachans though do some nasty work.
The issue is you need to move forward so your either bringing a rhino at Y plus the squad inside at X points of your x points of marines are running across the board. If your cover hopping you'll be lucky to make CC turn 2 unless your opponent want you in CC so your onto turn 3 before those CC stats matter on foot.

So your trading fire turn 1 and turn 2 against a gunline so they have 2 turns to mutilate whatever they think is most scary.
You then have to take overwatch, make the charge fight CC.
Their turn they probably fall back and shoot at you and potentially countercharge with something with CC ability and your 65 pts marines have achived what in 3/4 turns probably killing 20 points of guardsmen. Thats not doing enough damage output to be viable.
And I've lost plenty of tac marines to know that while lasguns might not be scary add in the always taken HW usually mortors and the guard damage improves.
At their current cost marines can't afford to me running across the table to beat on some guardsmen in the hope of some additional damage.

w1zard wrote:

The Newman wrote:

Right, because cheetas totally rip themselves apart trying to turn when a gazelle spots them and takes off at any sort of angle. At twice what we've established is the required minimum speed.

You can be as dismissive as you like, but basic math and some common real-world examples say you're wrong. It's still a ridiculous scenario overall, but trying to claim it's physically impossible in the face of that is sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "na na na I can't hear you".

I'd like to see a cheetah catch 10 gazelle all standing 5-6+ feet apart in under a single second. You are being absolutely stupid or willfully ignorant.

Nobody said anything like that. Cheetas absolutely do make turns while chasing down prey, even if they slow down to half speed to do it they're still going well over 35 mph and they don't rip themselves apart doing it. And catching a gazelle is not remotely the same proposition as getting close enough to one for a light-saber swipe, which is how power swords act in the fluff. One of us is being willfully ignorant and it isn't me.

w1zard wrote:

If you want math, here we go...

I do, because math is fun.

w1zard wrote:

Assuming the howling banshee starts at a standstill 10 meters away from a group of 10 tactical marines spread 3 meters from their nearest comrade. Also assuming the banshee must be within arms reach of her target to kill (sword), and that the banshee has a mass of 90 kilos decked out in all of her gear.

Nope, sorry. 6 feet is only 2 meters.

w1zard wrote:

The banshee must cover a total of 40 meters in a single second, meaning that she must be moving at roughly 144 kph, which is already stretching it but ok let's assume she can do it and continue...

Nope, gotta stop you again there. You only count the separation distance 9 times, not 10, and even assuming Marines are a full 3 feet wide (not ureasonable with those ridiculous shoulder pads) that's still only 27 mps if they were in the straight line you keep harping about.

** I have to take an aside here and concede the overall point since 27 mps is 60 mph, which means I obviously did a converion wrong on the back of the envelope yesterday. Mr. Bolt set the human speed record at 27.8 mph back in 09, but physics are still physics and traction is a thing that exists. **

w1zard wrote:

She has to accelerate to this speed in about .1 second from a dead stop, which would impart roughly 36,000 newtons on her body. This is roughly equivalent to a 3,700 kg object being dropped on top of her head in earth's gravity. The forces would literally rip her apart.

Ok, but lets just say she slowly built up to speed and was already moving at 144 kph fine. Say she wanted to change direction going this speed to kill all of the space marines... she would need to change directions (say 30 degrees?) 9 times in under a second, so each directional change would have to take max around .075 seconds. This means that each directional change would be a delta-v of 40*sin(30)=20 m/s. This delta-v must be reached in 0.075 seconds so that is 24,000 newtons per direction change. This would be equivalent of getting 9 pickup trucks, one after another dropped on top of your head within the span of a single second.

That's not how you calculate force on a curved path, that calculation is (kg * mps^2)/radius of the curve in meters. Which admittedly gives a similar answer if the banshe has to make turns with a radius less than 3m or so, but that's also ignoring that a power sword has a danger zone roughly a meter. She wouldn't need turns that sharp for a vaguely straight picket line.

w1zard wrote:

There is no way it is physically possible unless these marines are all lined up in a straight line hugging each other.

You are wrong. Now sit down.

Nah, all we've really established is that the Marines have to be in closer order (say, 3 feet apart instead of 6) and in a not terribly wavy line so the Banshee can take more gradual arcs to keep within the 3 foot danger zone of a light saber to pull off the ridiculous feat in question.

Bharring wrote:
Getting into CC is certainly not automatic. My point was to refute a specific claim about how it's worthless because:

"That's part of the issue being so expensive its 5 marines vrs 10 guardsmen or cultist, so survive overwatch throw 5 attacks and hope the returning 7/8 doesn't kill a dude. Then watch them fall back and your marines get shot of the board by the next squad."

My point isn't that Marines are fine. My point is that the above claim does not show that Marine CC stats are worthless.

Technically, i suppose i agree. But i think the practical value of the cc stats is so low that it rounds to zero averaged across many games.

Bharring wrote:
Congratulations, your 50 Guardsmen, at 200pts, managed to kill 5 Marines at 65 points. And you only lost 6-8 Guardsmen to do it!

Well.. yeah? You killed 65 points and lost 32-40. This is advantage Guardsmen.

"Well.. yeah? You killed 65 points and lost 32-40. This is advantage Guardsmen."

.... By leveraging 200 points of Guardsmen.

ON the other hand:
65 points is roughly 16 Guardsmen.

200 points of Marines is roughly 15 Marines.

First they shoot:
15x2x(2/3)(2/3)(2/3) = 8 dead Guardsmen.

Then eat Overwatch:
8x2x(1/6)(1/3)(1/3) = 16/54, so a third of a dead marine.

Then they bash skulls:
15x(2/3)(2/3)(2/3) = another 4 dead guardsmen

The remaining 4-5 guardsmen swing back:
5x(1/2)(1/3)(1/3) kiling 5/12, or half a Marine.

4-5 Guardsmen now take Morale at a distributed *-12*. Remaining guardsmen are almost certainly going splat. One squad certainly is, and if you distributed your attacks evenly both are.

Marines killed 65 points of guardsmen and lost less than 13 points.

Of course 200 points of whatever is going to win the tradeoff vs 65 points in most cases.

I love how when somebody sais "this unit is worse/better than this other unit" then people goes, does the math of one unit shooting at the other, and then sais "No, it is not, look!" Like, WTF, Tau Firewarriors are much better than tacticals marines and not because if one shoots at the other it will return more points, but because it does his job much better.

Ice_can,
I'm not proposing using Marines as a specifically CC unit, even against Guard. I'm arguing that their CC can at times have use.

The point isn't just run them up the field and get stuck. That's what Orkz do. Even CSM do it slightly better than SM. It's that you can leverage their stats in ways that units without it can't.

Maybe I've fielded a few too many Dire Avengers or Fire Warriors in addition to my Marines. When I field DAs/FWs/etc, there are a number of units that are much scarier, and the idea of holding a position even in cover is much less tennable. DAs might hold their own per model in CC vs GEQ, but they cost 3 times as much for only being marginally better. 5 Marines in cover does take quite a bit more to dislodge than 5 DAs/Guardians/etc. And so, when I see small skirmishy squads, my Marines don't need to worry about being assaulted by them the same way other troops do.

 Galas wrote:
I love how when somebody sais "this unit is worse/better than this other unit" then people goes, does the math of one unit shooting at the other, and then sais "No, it is not, look!" Like, WTF, Tau Firewarriors are much better than tacticals marines and not because if one shoots at the other it will return more points, but because it does his job much better.

Dont forget when they start doing physics and trying to apply current real world principles and materials to a sci fi game set 40,000 years into the future in order to justify why a unit should be different

Bharring wrote:
"Well.. yeah? You killed 65 points and lost 32-40. This is advantage Guardsmen."

.... By leveraging 200 points of Guardsmen.

ON the other hand:
65 points is roughly 16 Guardsmen.

200 points of Marines is roughly 15 Marines.

First they shoot:
15x2x(2/3)(2/3)(2/3) = 8 dead Guardsmen.

Then eat Overwatch:
8x2x(1/6)(1/3)(1/3) = 16/54, so a third of a dead marine.

Then they bash skulls:
15x(2/3)(2/3)(2/3) = another 4 dead guardsmen

The remaining 4-5 guardsmen swing back:
5x(1/2)(1/3)(1/3) kiling 5/12, or half a Marine.

4-5 Guardsmen now take Morale at a distributed *-12*. Remaining guardsmen are almost certainly going splat. One squad certainly is, and if you distributed your attacks evenly both are.

Marines killed 65 points of guardsmen and lost less than 13 points.

Of course 200 points of whatever is going to win the tradeoff vs 65 points in most cases.

You're all making this more complicated than it has to be.

In terms of points, 4 Marines = 13 Guardsmen.
4 Marines will kill 13 Guardsmen in about 10 turns.
13 Guardsmen will kill 4 marines in about 6 turns.

Bam, done.

In a pitched battle, outside cover, Marines never advance, and with no force concentration.

In cover:
4 Marines kill 13 Guardsmen in about 8 turns
13 Guardsmen kill 4 Marines in about 12 turns
Marines win.

Advancing and force concentration both get very complicated.

It's not as simple as just mathing it out in the open assuming the Marines player is dumb.

That's not to say Marines stand up to Guardsmen overall. It's just to say that the numbers you provide basically best-case for Guardsmen, and so aren't as accurate a reflection as implied.

Also, remember that my post is in response about a very specific claim about why Marine CC is worthless. It was not a response about why Marines are fine. The exact post you quote is actually saying 200pts of just about anything will stomp 65pts of just about anything else, while taking minimum casualties. That claim I didn't think would see this much debate.

One thing to understand is a good guard player can burn 2 cp every turn to keep a squad from breaking so you have to hammer at least two separate units.

 Galas wrote:
I love how when somebody sais "this unit is worse/better than this other unit" then people goes, does the math of one unit shooting at the other, and then sais "No, it is not, look!" Like, WTF, Tau Firewarriors are much better than tacticals marines and not because if one shoots at the other it will return more points, but because it does his job much better.

Ooh, very different units. Tac marines have access to much more dangerous gear.

 Galas wrote:
I love how when somebody sais "this unit is worse/better than this other unit" then people goes, does the math of one unit shooting at the other, and then sais "No, it is not, look!" Like, WTF, Tau Firewarriors are much better than tacticals marines and not because if one shoots at the other it will return more points, but because it does his job much better.

Well said. Part of the genesis of the problems with marines is they don't really have a job to do. They aren't resilient (nurgle) they aren't CC (berserkers) they aren't shooty (tau) they don't take up space (guard). They are pointed like they can do 2-3 jobs per turn where they really are just failing to do 1. It seems to be a fundamental design flaw which is hard to work around and I think it is just something marines are stuck with.

Even marine specialized troops aren't nearly specialized enough (assault marines? cent devs? termies? hell blasters? aggressors?) as they are all paying for some part of their stat-line they'd really rather not be using or can't use simultaneously (I'd trade the second attack and the 3+WS on my hell blasters for a point reduction without a second though, the mortal wounds for charging something with plasma inceptors because exactly what I want to do with a unit that pays half+ its cost for ranged weapons is charge...).

I think this is both why marines need a codex redesign but also why we won't get one. It is why charge the shootie ones and shoot the choppy ones doesn't work for marines because specialist of other armies do it so much better and in the name of balance marines have to be worse at both but yet not good enough at either...

bananathug wrote:

Well said. Part of the genesis of the problems with marines is they don't really have a job to do.

It's pretty much the only problem. What unit in the game are they good targets for them? Unless they're just raw unkillable rocks for scenario purposes (which doesn't work as long as objectives are won on figure count anyway) then they need to be slightly efficient at killing... something and they're just not.