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.

Tbh I agree that SM are becoming obsolete, if only because people are no longer shocked by all their new shiny things, and have worked out ways to beat them. Every army has a weakness . . . except fantasy deamons . . . But yeah, BA will hopefully be partially nerfed due to higher points values than vanilla SM, such as with the elites in SW compared to vanilla. TH/SS termies costing over 100 points more for example.

Just wait and see how the army plans out after a few months of the codex coming out. Right now we're already beginning to see how Nids can be defeated, even the Doom isn't that scary any more. It's all about learning how the armies work, so that you don;t get nasty surprises when playing against the 'scary' things.

Oshova

CrazyThang wrote:I personally don't think any unit should be banned. They put it in the game so it's legal right? No? You mean I can't use this unit here in my book? Oh... I wonder why they made it then? (Btw, this isn't intended as an attack on you, just sayin')

There are two common ways to look at this. One view is that since it's put in the game it's legal. All sorts of dirty tricks and maneouvres and loop holes in the rules are there to be abused and rules-lawyering is a necessary skill for a succesful tournament player just like finding the broken army lists and combos to field. The other view is that GW designers aren't infallible and expecting them to design a balanced game after two decades of failures is futile. These people think that the smartest, most active, most succesful, whatever, players can and should make changes to the tournament game. Changes that people can vote for or against by either participating or not.

In addition to what I said above there are countless shades of grey and other variables. Needless to say I have nothing against sensible people trying to make our game better and in fact more competitive.

As for costs.. BA tactical squads are same cost and assault squads are same cost which means they get descent of angels for free and are troop choices

DC are 20 pts each which makes them better than khorne berserkers (Long as theyre in a transport.. and berserkers are always in one too)

Furiosos are insane with blood talons and AV13, best dredanought by far

Vanguard are cheaper, sternguard are same
vehicles are more expensive but are FAST which is huge when you consider that extra 6" move on turn on means you should be in charge range turn 2 with a foot slogging unit

All in all, I have seen the codex and the points and its pretty clear that my beloved BA dont pay many extra points over normal SM.. Most units are just named differently (sanguinary guard = honor guard.. honor guard = command squad but better!)

Tbh I think that tournaments that throw away some standard things are better. They make you think differently about the game. And as such better test your adaptability, and how good you are at facing new challenges.

For example playing a tournament with a different FOC, banning SCs, they just make you think differently about how you play.

Oshova

I understand what your saying but if I'm using... well any special character I don't feel like I'm trying to break the game or rules lawyer my way into win.

I may be wrong but I've always thought this game was skill > army composition.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Oshova wrote:Tbh I think that tournaments that throw away some standard things are better. They make you think differently about the game. And as such better test your adaptability, and how good you are at facing new challenges.

For example playing a tournament with a different FOC, banning SCs, they just make you think differently about how you play.

Oshova

I agree that it can be a new challenge or something though.

Therion wrote:Easily the most competitive tournament in the world for both Warhammer and Warhammer 40K, the ETC, isn't allowing any named characters this year. If you're curious, WH and DH allies are banned too.

Sorry, but that's not a competitive Warhammer 40k tournament. It may be a competitive ETChammer 40k tournament, but that's something quite different.

Kirasu wrote:As for costs.. BA tactical squads are same cost and assault squads are same cost which means they get descent of angels for free and are troop choices

DC are 20 pts each which makes them better than khorne berserkers (Long as theyre in a transport.. and berserkers are always in one too)

Furiosos are insane with blood talons and AV13, best dredanought by far

Vanguard are cheaper, sternguard are same
vehicles are more expensive but are FAST which is huge when you consider that extra 6" move on turn on means you should be in charge range turn 2 with a foot slogging unit

All in all, I have seen the codex and the points and its pretty clear that my beloved BA dont pay many extra points over normal SM.. Most units are just named differently (sanguinary guard = honor guard.. honor guard = command squad but better!)

How expensive are their TH/SS terms?

AgeOfEgos wrote:How expensive are their TH/SS terms?

5 pts more than regular from what I've heard.

CrazyThang wrote:

AgeOfEgos wrote:How expensive are their TH/SS terms?

5 pts more than regular from what I've heard.

Doh, that's not enough of a draw to keep loyalists from the BA dex. Vulkans load is getting heavy.

Now that I think about it it may have been "a few" more points... check the 50s around this thread http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/275431.page along with a comprehensive summary in the OP.

Oshova wrote:Tbh I agree that SM are becoming obsolete,

For what it's worth, that's another one of those comments that's been made every time a variant Marine codex has been released since 2nd edition. And yet people continue to play Ultramarines.

Good info here, thanks and I'm looking into starting Flesh Tearers again. My 6 Dread army of 3rd edition may just get a re-vamp. No pun intended.

insaniak wrote:

Oshova wrote:Tbh I agree that SM are becoming obsolete,

For what it's worth, that's another one of those comments that's been made every time a variant Marine codex has been released since 2nd edition. And yet people continue to play Ultramarines.

Because Ultramarines die for da Emphra!

WAAAGH!!!BLITZROG wrote:

insaniak wrote:

Oshova wrote:Tbh I agree that SM are becoming obsolete,

For what it's worth, that's another one of those comments that's been made every time a variant Marine codex has been released since 2nd edition. And yet people continue to play Ultramarines.

Because Ultramarines die for da Emphra!

And I admit I have played Vanilla marines . . . The new codex came out after finishing my 3000pt Dark Angels (after their codex). So yeah, I wanted to try out another type of marine . . . After a while I decided that I preffered DA. Mainly due to the Deathwing. Then Space Wolves came out and I liked them for their psykers. Now Blood Angels MAY trump SW with their psykers, so they might become my 2nd marine army. But getting back to my point, for my play SM are obselete, as I don't particularly like the style of play you need to win with them. As generally you need to use chapter tactics to fit your army into a niche that you can exploit. This makes a fun, fluffy army, that actually stands a chance of winning. I like nichey armies, and vanilla niches don't really do it for me . . . excepy maybe White Scars, but that is VERY hard to win with.

But I also realise that other people have other views . . . but in the majority of cases I find that most people are beginning to see that unless you like the niches provided in the vanilla codex, you need to look elsewhere. =D

Oshova

insaniak wrote:

Oshova wrote:Tbh I agree that SM are becoming obsolete,

For what it's worth, that's another one of those comments that's been made every time a variant Marine codex has been released since 2nd edition. And yet people continue to play Ultramarines.

oh shush! a dose of reality is the last thing the chicken littles here need! obviously the game world is ending just like it did when the space wolves came out, the IG codex was published, the 5th edition vanilla marine dex hit the shelves... oh wait... it didn't back then either.

Sorry did you call me Chicken Little? =P

And it's not as if I made a baseless argument with nothing to back it up. I well and truly described why they are becoming obsolete for me. They may not be for you. Also the fact remains that I have no problem with SW, IG, BA, or any new codices. It's just that FOR ME the vanilla SM codex is obsolete. And correct me if I'm wrong, but generally forums are for telling people your opinions, and discussing topics to do with them . . .

Oshova

Oshova wrote:Sorry did you call me Chicken Little? =P

And it's not as if I made a baseless argument with nothing to back it up. I well and truly described why they are becoming obsolete for me. They may not be for you. Also the fact remains that I have no problem with SW, IG, BA, or any new codices. It's just that FOR ME the vanilla SM codex is obsolete. And correct me if I'm wrong, but generally forums are for telling people your opinions, and discussing topics to do with them . . .

Oshova

Well, maybe you need to define what "obsolete" is to you then.

Is it because that after hearing about the new shiny toys of the BA codex that you think the vanilla marines don't match up.....or is it something else?

To me, the C:SM is just fine as it is and there are some things that are in there that the BA cannot run or have access to; additionally, there are many builds you can run as well.

So, while you say that you're just voicing your opinion, please remember that stating that something is "obsolete" without defining why or how, somehow really doesn't get your point across....

And let us remember that, like the SW and others, points will be a major factor here, so yes, the cool abilities and elite units are nice, it will still boil down to what is point-efficient for your buck here. I'm pretty sure that they'll be expensive if you load up on all the "bling", so players are going to have to make hard choices, which actually is a good thing. I personally believe that loads of options is way better than lack of the same.....so, let's see what everything costs first before we start throwing out knee-jerk statements like other posters have stated......

Cheers!

So, that Librarian dreadnought has a 12inch move and 6 inch charge - I know it is going to be the biggest fire magnet around, but that is going to be nasty for things like tau and orks to deal with. Two of them are going to have a nasty multiplier effect. Furioso dreadnoughts were a fire magnet in 3ed, though I never understood why. 95 points only but they sure as heck attracted a lot of more points in fire power.

Lots of peaple overlook FEAR Factor. You up out a Land Raider with 5 TH/SS WOlf Guard and look at the fire it will and they will ignore the Blood Claw with a Rune Priest.

Anpu42 wrote:Lots of peaple overlook FEAR Factor. You up out a Land Raider with 5 TH/SS WOlf Guard and look at the fire it will and they will ignore the Blood Claw with a Rune Priest.

Very true. If memories serves correctly you could upgrade it with a heavy flamer for 10pts. 105pts guarenteed to make any DE player make sure it was the first thing that was targeted - I used to have to try and stick it behind the biggest cover possible and try and hold it in reserve ready to counter attack. Dark Lance magnet!!

fullheadofhair wrote:So, that Librarian dreadnought has a 12inch move and 6 inch charge - I know it is going to be the biggest fire magnet around, but that is going to be nasty for things like tau and orks to deal with. Two of them are going to have a nasty multiplier effect. Furioso dreadnoughts were a fire magnet in 3ed, though I never understood why. 95 points only but they sure as heck attracted a lot of more points in fire power.

Don't forget the 12" magna grapple.

Dreadnaught army, FTW

Anpu42 wrote:Lots of peaple overlook FEAR Factor. You up out a Land Raider with 5 TH/SS WOlf Guard and look at the fire it will and they will ignore the Blood Claw with a Rune Priest.

But due the 40k becoming more and more marinehammer....

People get used to seeing Space marine squads crumple under adequate amount of fire, which is very often so much less than expected due to the fluff. Fear is lost around these parts.

Unless i get one of my high roller days, and lose like 5 marines out of 60 in the whole 5-7 turns played. But then i know that i didnt win because i can play, but because i can roll ^^.

By obsolete I mean that I can't really see me playing that army over another that is quite comparable to it. So in this case I prefer DA, SW, and (depending on how the codex turns out) quite possibly BA. I'm pretty sure the definition of obsolete is pretty universal. That it has become useless in a situation, and something else has taken it's place of use. =D

Oshova

Deadshane1 wrote:

Lorek wrote:At 50+ pages, the other thread is pretty intimidating.

If some kind soul would like to get all the most recent pertinent information and post it here, that'd be terrific.

or you can simply hit the old post and go back as many pages as you care to read.

Being too lazy to look/search for a question thats been asked/answered 20+ times is no reason to spam new threads on the same subject.

Sure it is. 50+ pages is just venting.

Oshova wrote:By obsolete I mean that I can't really see me playing that army over another that is quite comparable to it. So in this case I prefer DA, SW, and (depending on how the codex turns out) quite possibly BA. I'm pretty sure the definition of obsolete is pretty universal. That it has become useless in a situation, and something else has taken it's place of use. =D

Oshova

That might be but at first you were talking in obsolutes in regards to C:SM being an obsolete army. You were impling that it was not just your opinion in regards to your choices, but no one would play them again.

Well I didn't mention C:SM, who I actually like . . . I was saying VANILLA marines were obsolete to me. And sorry if it seemed that I was saying everyone thought the same as me, it wasn't my intention. Because obviously people will play them, as they are the standard all round marine army . . . But that really isn't for me. I prefer the more focused army, which I found too hard to do with Vanilla SM. =]

Oshova

C:SM is Codex: Space Marines, not Chaos Space Marines. Look for the colon.

Oh ok =D my mistake . . . in that case yes I did say they were becoming obsolete. =] Sorry for missing that.

Oshova

A marine update that doesn't tickle my fancy. Business as usual then? Carry on gents.