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.

sourclams wrote:I've seen Fire Warriors beat off Raveners. Are you going to field an assault Fire Warrior army versus Nidzilla any time soon?

Marines do not easily outfight most assault units. Genestealers will kill Marines. Khorne Berzerkers will easily kill Marines. Rough Riders will double-plus-easily kill Marines, and the fact that you somehow had "a single guy and a ret2" devastate 20 rough riders just emphasizes my point that you're arguing the exceptions, and not the rule.

I play almost exclusively against Marines, Necrons, Tau, and Eldar with my Imperial Guard. There is no basic Marine-heavy list that I'm afraid of. Imperial Guard vaporize basic Marines in vast swathes. With 4th ed rules, the basic marine sucked.

The thing is sourclams you are argueing "outshot by shooty guys, outmeleed by choppy guys" well yeah, that's kinda how a jack of all trades works, but go ahead and get your marines stuck in a melee with firewarriors, and shoot those approaching gene stealers to hell. That's what you are meant to do, why you would expect anything different.

You seem to want "jack of all trades" to mean "god incarnate" which isn't really a very good thing to do for gameplay balance. I'm not saying they are too much, nor would I bank a marine army on them exclusively, but I don't think your assessment of them is exactly fair.

No actually I'm just generally opposed to the idea of a "jack of all trades" unit with such a high point cost. It's a self-defeating liability. You have a small, elite army made up of units not particularly good at anything. That's why the new codex is actually *good*. You can field specialised units designed for rocking out their niche. Sternguard, Vanguard (to an extent), Thunderfire cannon. When they rock out, they rock out *hard*.

I'm with the spleen on this one. Marines don't suck, they just need to engage what they can kill. This is the basis for all units. Though some units are CC specialists, or shooting specialists, they engage targets that play to their advantages.

While Jack of all trade units aren't usually worth the high cost of marines, their durability makes up for their relative "master of none" abilities.

sourclams wrote:No actually I'm just generally opposed to the idea of a "jack of all trades" unit with such a high point cost. It's a self-defeating liability. You have a small, elite army made up of units not particularly good at anything. That's why the new codex is actually *good*. You can field specialised units designed for rocking out their niche. Sternguard, Vanguard (to an extent), Thunderfire cannon. When they rock out, they rock out *hard*.

Well that's fair enough, because I would consider the tac troops support for those specialised units too. Just seemed awfully harsh because I would hardly consider them useless.

Funnily enough GW seem to have made thier best role still getting a lascannon on the board because you pay so much to get one anywhere else in the list.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

sourclams wrote:I've seen Fire Warriors beat off Raveners.

This is almost sig-worthy...

LOL

Little know fact: Tyranids are hexapods.

/what, you thought those were back legs?

FWIW, if Kor'sarro Khan rides his bike, he makes any bike squad of 5 or more models a Troop choice. So there's another way to get scoring units as well as the Pedro-Sternguard combo.

Nope not at all. Easy to beat and easy to lose to. Just depends on the other person. It does give you alot of great choices though.

Thunder fire isnt that good IMO

I think it has some distinct advantages right now over other codices because it was the first truly released under 5th edition, and other armies haven't gotten a new codex in a long time.

If all the other armies get nifty things like they do it will be fine (like all the fun ammo types Sternguard get) and a decent smattering of new units it will turn out okay.

For now, it is pretty difficult for my Tyranids to beat even an average Marine force.

Lictors can deep strike/assault.

Crazy_Carnifex wrote:Lictors can deep strike/assault.

Yeah, so? They still have to get lucky to overcome a Marine Armor save with Rending, and can't take the hits back from a squad. Add in Fearless casualties and I have yet to see a Lictor survive past it's first turn of Assault combat.

Hell, at this point my Lictors are only there for the reserves re-roll. I'd rather take a couple less gaunts to get another biovore.

Yes and alot of people in conjunction with 5th ed have quit. Ebay and craigslist are flooded with stuff lately. And yes I know some fo the 12 yr olds will go "QQ More" but with no one else playing and not buying entire SM ( economy) armies. Its just not good for the hobby.

my only beef w/ 5ed are the mission rules. A bit more diversity & 3+ player support would be nice.

Tyranids get beat by marines? 14ppm hormagaunts will shred marine tac squads. MC's just dont die unless you really pump shots into them. Which will you shoot at?

Tyrannids do fiiine. I want more new codexes for, at the very least, more & new fluff.

Razerous wrote:my only beef w/ 5ed are the mission rules.

A bit more diversity & 3+ player support would be nice.

I thought GW recently confirmed they were working on something here. No details or timeframe, of course, so we might see something in the next couple years.

Isn't that what Apoc does?

I wouldn't complain about vanguards. minimum 275 points for 5 men with jump packs, add 150 more for the full squad and you've still only got 1 power weapon, and they die as easily as regular marines.

Heck without jump packs, a vanguard with a power weapon is 40 points. I can think of something else that's 40 points, has a better gun, a better weapon, an invulnerable save, and better armour off the top of my head.

I call bs. I watch ebay fairly closely, and have not seen this 'flood' of people quiting and selling.

Most folks I know think 5E is a vast improvement over 4E.

coredump wrote:I call bs. I watch ebay fairly closely, and have not seen this 'flood' of people quiting and selling.

Most folks I know think 5E is a vast improvement over 4E.

My observations match yours--if anything I've seen less stuff to pick and choose from lately. The obvious exceptions to this are models from the Black Reach set which people are splitting and selling like there's no tomorrow.

And I also like 5th edition more than 4th with the notable exception of KPs vs VPs. I haven't heard many others complain about 5th edition in general, aside from the guys who complain about everything and just hate change as a rule.

they have some cool options, but to look at how overpowered something is, you have to look at the cost, you get cool stuff, but you pay for it, you have to balance out your list to be effective, oherrwise you have nothing to hold objectives with because you made your bike captai too shiny

Also the fact that they haven't yet placed well in any tournament I have ever heard of.

Augustus wrote:
The codex is overpowered because it breaks the core mission equation with things no other dex can do.

Im talking about troop choices splitting into 2 squads and about non scoring units becoming scoring. With the missions about KP 1/3rd of the time and OBJs 2/3rds of the time creating an army that can dynamically morph its KP and potentially double its scoring unit count is unfair. No one else can do that, and suposedly the new missions were for balance of army (emphasis on troops) but the new marine dex has already broken the equation.

QFT.

Most of the marine stuff is crap. But, the options that they have that are not crap are priced cost-effectively. With a direct comparison to identical units in the Dark Angel, Blood Angel, or Chaos Marine books, marines get a 5-10 point discount per unit, sometimes more (like bikes). Predators are cheaper, Land Raiders are better, Tac Squads, while required to be 10 men, are cheaper after factoring the cost of the weapons in, assault marines are considerably cheaper.

Assault marines - 10 men, PF sarge, 2 flamers - 235 points. Ld 9 + ATSKNF + Combat Tactics
Raptors: 10 men, PF champion, 2 flamers - 250 points, Lost hit&run from last edition, Ld 10, no ATSKNF, no Combat Tactics

When you get essentially the same unit for 15 points cheaper, with better intangibles (anyone who would take Ld10 over Ld9, ATSKNF and Combat Tactics is an idiot), there's a sign that you've got an overpowered codex.

Now, they're still marines, and they're still going to lose the way that marines always lose - people know that they'll face more MEQs than anything else, so armies will be largely designed to beat them. As a jack-of-all-trades army, they'll be out-assaulted by real assault armies, and out-shot by real shooty armies, so they'll need to find a way to utilize their flexibility and bring their strengths to bear as needed. And, in a tournament environment, that means marines will suffer because it is hard to design an army that can both handle 200 orks and also handle 4 land raiders - (although, sternguard in drop pods appear to have the best shot at this).

In an environment where the marine player makes his list knowing what his opponent is playing (the 'friendly' environment), I cannot see a competent marine player losing often. There are too many options that allow them to bring whatever they need against a known target.

Raptors also have the option of taking an Icon to bring in Terminators, Obliterators, and Lesser Daemons; their Champion can become a Greater Daemon, they have the options of taking Melta and Plasma Guns, they can be 20 goons-strong, and they don't have the option of a transport.

Leadership 10 can make the difference between being Pinned and being Useful, particularly if that Ld10 is re-rollable via an Icon of Chaos Glory.

Remember, Combat Tactics is useless if you're planning on winning a combat. Ditto for And They Shall Know No Fear. Combat Squads is nice, but it seems to suit the Space Marine "divide and conquer" strategy better than the Chaos Space Marine "crushing blow" strategy. Space Marines are more reliable, but they don't hit as hard as Chaos Marines, which hit harder but are less reliable.

I'd definitely prefer the Assault Marines in a Space Marine army, but I think I prefer having the option of Raptor in a Chaos Marine army.

Different costs for different armies.

Redbeard wrote:In an environment where the marine player makes his list knowing what his opponent is playing (the 'friendly' environment), I cannot see a competent marine player losing often. There are too many options that allow them to bring whatever they need against a known target.

Although I agree 100%, isn't this true for just about any army? If you posted a set list and called it the Unbeatable Power List, the first thing that a dozen people will do is post a dozen different lists that would beat it into the ground based on its hard counters.

Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tyranids, even Tau and Witch Hunters, have varied codexes with a lot of different options for creating counter lists, and I'd say every codex could create some sort of better-than-viable opposition save maybe Orks versus Land Raider spam.

Marines have lots of options, which is why I picked them up in 5th ed, but I haven't seen a universal list effective against all the power lists at once.

Nurglitch wrote:
Raptors also have the option of taking an Icon to bring in Terminators, Obliterators, and Lesser Daemons; their Champion can become a Greater Daemon, they have the options of taking Melta and Plasma Guns, they can be 20 goons-strong, and they don't have the option of a transport.

Taking said icon costs points. Without the icon, they're no different. Are you trying to tell me that I should pay a fifteen point premium for having the option to take something I'm not taking? Yes, there are some minor cosmetic differences between what raptors may take and what assault marines may take - and these differences have, hopefully appropriate, point costs associated with them.

So, when you take the two squads and configure them as closely as possible, it's pretty clear to me that assault marines are the better bargain. Their base cost, for what the provide, is 15 points cheaper across the squad.

Leadership 10 can make the difference between being Pinned and being Useful, particularly if that Ld10 is re-rollable via an Icon of Chaos Glory.

Again, we don't have an Icon of Chaos Glory, that's an option that you really can't equate with the Space Marines, and one which, again, costs more points, making the raptors even more expensive. Furthermore, while you are correct, the difference in Ld can make the difference in being pinned, having no fear means you cannot be sweeping advanced off the table. Now, you might think that it's more valuable to have an 8% better chance at passing a pinning test than being immune to sweeping advances, being able to rally below 50%, and all the other knowing-no-fear powers, but I certainly don't.

Remember, Combat Tactics is useless if you're planning on winning a combat. Ditto for And They Shall Know No Fear.

Of course, things always go according to plan I never lose a round of combat that I planned to win.

Space Marines are more reliable, but they don't hit as hard as Chaos Marines, which hit harder but are less reliable.

And, yet, raptors don't hit harder, unless you pay more points for additional upgrades. Which is generally the concept of balance. If I have two of the same thing, they should cost the same amount, and perform comparably. The more similar the things, the more similarly they should perform.

There's a reason that I don't think I've ever seen anyone use raptors since the new codex came out. Assault marines get a lot of play.

Different costs for different armies.

This is obviously GW's thinking too - it's why we keep seeing crappy unbalanced codexes.

What rationalization can you come up with for the 10 point difference between identical autocannon predators, the 15 point difference between then when they've got HB sponsons. The 10 point difference between identical Vindicators? There's no icons or extra Ld to blame this on, just crappy game balance.

Marines have lots of options, which is why I picked them up in 5th ed, but I haven't seen a universal list effective against all the power lists at once.

My guess is that drop-podding kantor sternguard lists will fill this out. Roughly:
Kantor
Master of Forge
Sternguard in pods w/ combimeltas
Iconclad dreads in pods as Heavies
Something for troops.

They get in close, the meltas take out hard targets first, the sternguard magic ammo can take care of just about anything. Ironclads are good against anything and hard to kill. Kantor means that they're all decent in assault as well, and combat tactics means you're never locked in a combat, unable to shoot stuff. They can field more scoring units than any other army, barring guard, when objectives matter, but give up considerably fewer kill points in return.

There haven't been any big tournaments that have had enough time for the marine strengths to show up yet, but they will. Baltimore allowed them, but it didn't really give people enough time to change the armies around as needed prior to the event.

Redbeard:

Like I said, different armies mean different points values. GW Design Studio members have pointed this out in various interviews. It's not some "rationalization", it's their stated reasons for doing this. Different units have different values in different armies.

What I find strange is that, given the emphasis so many people give to combinations of troops, you would expect similar troops in different combinations to be the same value.

Maybe it's just my approach to the game, but when I see a unit like Raptors and compare them to Assault Marines, I don't think "Aw, they're not as good as Assault Marines", I think: "Huh, they're not the same as Assault Marines, I wonder how I should use them differently".

Also, I think you're over-stating the case for that "power-gamer" army you've presented. Sternguard special ammunition won't do them any good when they get assaulted. An extra attack does make them decent in combat, but if they win combats with a thin margin they won't survive a battle of attrition and they won't be able to use Combat Tactics to pull them out of the situation, particularly against high Initiative enemies.

Don't get me wrong, Combat Squads and Combat Tactics are handy, particularly since I've been pointing out the efficacy of Combat Squads since I got back into the game in 4th edition (Go Blood Angels!). But Combat Tactics is basically just a way to mitigate casualties against a slower and more powerful foe. The Sternguard will have to lose the combat to use it, and they'll have to escape to avoid No Retreat! wounds, which they don't have the numbers to sustain.

They're characterful rules, and really fun to use, just not over-whelmingly powerful.

Redbeard wrote:

My guess is that drop-podding kantor sternguard lists will fill this out. Roughly:
Kantor
Master of Forge
Sternguard in pods w/ combimeltas
Iconclad dreads in pods as Heavies
Something for troops.

They get in close, the meltas take out hard targets first, the sternguard magic ammo can take care of just about anything. Ironclads are good against anything and hard to kill. Kantor means that they're all decent in assault as well, and combat tactics means you're never locked in a combat, unable to shoot stuff. They can field more scoring units than any other army, barring guard, when objectives matter, but give up considerably fewer kill points in return.

There haven't been any big tournaments that have had enough time for the marine strengths to show up yet, but they will. Baltimore allowed them, but it didn't really give people enough time to change the armies around as needed prior to the event.

Redbeard, you creepy creepy dude, you've just posted almost verbatim the list that I run.

It's a very good list, it's a very fun list, and I've had great success with it brutalizing the friendly scene at my store but I think "outside the box" people are more than capable of beating it.

Nurglitch wrote:
Like I said, different armies mean different points values. GW Design Studio members have pointed this out in various interviews. It's not some "rationalization", it's their stated reasons for doing this. Different units have different values in different armies.

It is their stated excuse after they realize what they did. I still think it's shoddy design and balance. You can't honestly expect me to believe that a Dark Angel Predator is used in so significantly a way in a Dark Angel Army as to warrant an increased cost over the exact same model used in a Space Marine army. Does the predator really have different value to a Dark Angel or a Marine?

Maybe it's just my approach to the game, but when I see a unit like Raptors and compare them to Assault Marines, I don't think "Aw, they're not as good as Assault Marines", I think: "Huh, they're not the same as Assault Marines, I wonder how I should use them differently".

Indeed - and the answer, in the specific case of raptors, is to use god-specific icons to make them hit harder, faster, or add to their resilience. If you're not doing that, you're spending more on inferior troops than your opponent is. It's ok to spend more for superior troops, it is not ok to spend more for inferior troops. But, in several of the cases I've mentioned - predators, vindicators, etc - there is no viable way to use them differently. In these cases, the logic above doesn't work. You just have to pay more for them.

And, to top it off, you'll note that I didn't mention the difference between Dark Angels and Space Marine assault squads. How do you use these differently? How do they differ at all? Well, Space Marines get Combat Tactics, and cost 25 points less for the base 5-man squad, and 45 points less for the full squad. The Space Marine Sgt pays less for his combat shield, and has about 5 more equipment options than the Dark Angel. The Space Marines can run anywhere from a 5 to a 10 man squad, while the Dark Angels are limited to 5 men OR 10 men. 45 points - that's a landspeeder, or a razorback. Are Dark Angels that different than Space Marines?

Redbeard:

A Space Marine Predator, no options, is 10 points cheaper than a Dark Angels Predator. I put this down to nobody actually taking Dark Angel or Blood Angel Predators.

However, if you replace the Autocannon with Twin-Linked Lascannons, the Space Marine Predator is exactly the same points as a Dark Angels Predator.

The Space Marine Predator pays twice as much for the Storm Bolter option, the Dark Angels Predator pays 1/3 more for the Hunter-Killer Missile option.

The Dark Angel Combat Shield is twice as effective as a Space Marine Combat Shield, and the Dark Angel Assault Squad does not get the option of taking Flamethrowers.

The Space Marine Assault Squad competes with the Vanguard Veteran Squad, Landspeeder Squadron, Bike Squad, Attack Bike Squad, Land Speeder Storm, and Scout Bike Squad for Fast Attack slots.

The Dark Angels Assault Squad competes with the Ravenwing Attack Squadron and the Ravenwing Support Squadron for Fast Attack slots.

They sure look different to me.

sourclams wrote:

Redbeard wrote:

My guess is that drop-podding kantor sternguard lists will fill this out. Roughly:
Kantor
Master of Forge
Sternguard in pods w/ combimeltas
Iconclad dreads in pods as Heavies
Something for troops.

They get in close, the meltas take out hard targets first, the sternguard magic ammo can take care of just about anything. Ironclads are good against anything and hard to kill. Kantor means that they're all decent in assault as well, and combat tactics means you're never locked in a combat, unable to shoot stuff. They can field more scoring units than any other army, barring guard, when objectives matter, but give up considerably fewer kill points in return.

There haven't been any big tournaments that have had enough time for the marine strengths to show up yet, but they will. Baltimore allowed them, but it didn't really give people enough time to change the armies around as needed prior to the event.

Redbeard, you creepy creepy dude, you've just posted almost verbatim the list that I run.

It's a very good list, it's a very fun list, and I've had great success with it brutalizing the friendly scene at my store but I think "outside the box" people are more than capable of beating it.

I'll second the creepy thing.

2 Sternguard units in Pods.
2 Ironclads in Pods.
3 Tactical Squads in Pods.
Kantor
MotF with Fancy-gun tm

Right on the nose.

Redbeard wrote:Most of the marine stuff is crap. But, the options that they have that are not crap are priced cost-effectively. With a direct comparison to identical units in the Dark Angel, Blood Angel, or Chaos Marine books, marines get a 5-10 point discount per unit, sometimes more (like bikes).

OTOH, when you do this, you also have to compare overpriced and useless SM VG against efficient BA VAS, or SM Tacs against CSM PM, and SM Assault Scouts aganst CSM LDs.

Redbeard wrote:Assault marines - 10 men, PF sarge, 2 flamers - 235 points. Ld 9 + ATSKNF + Combat Tactics
Raptors: 10 men, PF champion, 2 flamers - 250 points, Lost hit&run from last edition, Ld 10, no ATSKNF, no Combat Tactics

When you get essentially the same unit for 15 points cheaper, with better intangibles (anyone who would take Ld10 over Ld9, ATSKNF and Combat Tactics is an idiot), there's a sign that you've got an overpowered codex.

Actually, it's a sign that you shouldn't field CSM Raptors like SM AM. Raptors should be smaller squads, with tLC AC and Meltas, rather than 10-man AS. Or Rapters should be huge with MoN.

The fact is, if you want CSM, BA, DA, or BT to play as SM, it's better to use SM. So don't do it. OTOH, if you want to use SM as CSM, BA, DA, or BT, then SM will generally do a bad job of it. SM don't have Icons or Cult Marines; SM don't have AS as Troops or VAS Elites; SM don't have RW&DW; SM don't have Vows. Play each army the way it's intended to play, not as something it isn't.