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.

Xarian wrote:The best fix for DA (and BA, SW, and every other individual chapter) would be to move to a small PDF-based codex.

You mean like the old BA codex? I'm sure that will go over great with the players!

Gavo wrote:

Xarian wrote:The best fix for DA (and BA, SW, and every other individual chapter) would be to move to a small PDF-based codex.

You mean like the old BA codex? I'm sure that will go over great with the players!

You mean not having to pay $35, that you can access from any wireless device, and is easily updateable?

Most peoples problems with the BA PDF were not the fact that it was a PDF, though many people stupidly attributed it to that.

One will notice which two Space Marine books players are unhappy with the most, Dark Angels and Chaos Space Marines. Guess what came out between those two books on 2007 with the exact same army design mentality that was quickly reversed the next year?

The BA WD lists perceived problems were not a result of it not being a full print codex.

You haven't played many SW armies lately have you? Between krak missiles and Lascannons, the last one I played had 26 long range AT guns, plus another 23 meltaguns, combi-meltas and TL'd plasma guns, with a rune priest toting Living Lightning and JotWW as well. Currently, oddly enough, SW's are probably the shootiest SM's in the game (Hooray for balance!). Make an SM army shootier than that and I don't know why someone would play IG, and I'd dread what Tau would look like to be able to claim "shootiest army" title when they get redone

Most of that firepower comes from tanks or Longfangs with a smattering of wolfguard. The majority of that firepower is heavy or specialist weaponry. What I would like to see would be an army that is feasible based around a core of Bolters, not missile or special weapon spam.

A question I'd like to ask is what's wrong with Dark Angels having archaeotech? The main problems with it I'm reading seem to be:

a) It's not canon. But why not? The Dark Angels are the oldest of the Space Marine chapters, they have been in existance since the start of the Astartes. Even if there were no fluff written so far, would it really be such a divergence from existing canon? No, it would not.

b) It would make them overpowered. This would only be the case if you gave them improved equipment at the same points cost of a Vanilla Marine. So they've got better weapons? Make them cost more.

There's nothing wrong with them being done that way. My only hesitation with the theme is you'd think a lot of the ancient tech type stuff would be only found on vehicles or the odd piece of wargear simply because most other stuff would be used too often and break down just because of that.

The ideas of giving them a lot of plasma (especially since no marines really use plasma these days), and fleshing out the terminator and bike entries more would make them stand out a little better plus it would tie in with what the army currently plays like so existing players may not be so pissed.

How about if it were limited to a one per squad selection? Maybe just sergeant upgrades? Giving every tac marine a stalker would be going too far, in my opinion, but having more access to 'unique' wargear seems like a good way to further differentiate from the norm. Fleshing out Terminators and bikes is a must, I think.

Who said anything about giving every Tactical Marine a Stalker? Why would you be giving a marksman's tool that is commonly used by the Deathwatch and Scout teams to the jack of all trade Marine squads?

Well, no-one. I just wanted to make sure no-one was thinking it.

Basically, here's my thinking:

If we're stuck with Scouts in the Elite slot--they damned well better be Elite. None of this standard loadout crap that the other SM books have.

I want Scouts that are worth their points and worth not taking a Dreadnought for.

For that matter, I do think there should be a bit more restrictiveness in how the Deathwing/Ravenwing interactions go.

Something like:
If the Master of the Deathwing is taken as your 'primary' HQ, then Ravenwing Bike Squads retain their spot as Fast Attack and the Master of the Ravenwing can only be taken as an upgrade to a Bike or Land Speeder squad.
Scout Squads retain their Elite spot and any Dreadnoughts or Tactical/Devastator Squads have to be in a Drop Pod(to represent that it's going to be a 'strike' rather than a simple knockdown slugfest).

The reverse also happens if the Master of the Ravenwing is taken as the 'primary' where Deathwing Terminators retain their Elite spot, Scout Squads become Troops(but must be mounted in Land Speeder Storms) and Dreadnoughts must be mounted in Drop Pods, Tactical/Devastator Squads must be mounted in Rhinos or Razorbacks.

If Azrael is taken as your 'primary' HQ then Deathwing and Ravenwing can be taken as Troops, as can Scouts(to represent the fact that it's the overall Master of the Unforgiven in command of the force, not one of the specialist formations). In addition, he allows for some 'unique' rules to be put army wide. Like Inner Circle upgrades for the squads, a kind of 'Hunt the Fallen' special rule, etc.

This is all off the top of my head mind. I could probably finesse something better if I wasn't still waking up.

Would that be in addition to Bikes/Terminators becoming troops under Raven/Deathwing command?

Of course.

The difference is that if Azrael's effectively your 'Leader', then both can be troops at the same time.

The thing is I think that with Dark Angels, some kind of very specific 'Order' of HQ choices needs to be done. So, say you have the Masters of both Raven and Deathwing in the force.

You have to pick one to be in overall command. That individual is whose special rules are in effect.
Think of it like 'Chapter Tactics'. Only one can be in effect at a time.

Azrael essentially nullifies that and allows for a huge mishmash of them.

Sounds good to me. It'd make for, effectively, four very different army types in the same codex. I'm very in favour of that.

So what do the elite scouts get? Personally, I'd like to see them WS4 BS4, and wouldn't be adverse to giving them all Stalkers. How about:

Squad size 3-10
WS4 BS4 S3 T3 W1 I4 A1 Ld8 4+
Stalker Pattern Boltgun

With options for ML, sniper, HB, etc.

I'd avoid ML, sniper, and heavy bolters.
They're the 'standard' stuff after all--and frankly, the Stalker boltguns are sniper rifles by another name.

I'd go for maybe giving them Sternguard styled ammunition loadouts though.

Ah, good call. Say, pinning rounds, AP rounds and... AT rounds? Too much?

I'd say: 'Stalker' rounds(longer ranged, better against single high armor targets like Marines in PA), 'Hellfire' rounds (shorter ranged, AP rounds that have the 'Toxic' quality) and 'Vengeance' rounds which could be nasty against armored vehicles.

I think one of the prime faults of the codex is the hamstringing of the Deathwing. 5 man squads? No transports? Sure they're fearless and can deep strike on turn 1, is that worth the handicap that 5 lascannon-esque shots later they are more than likely gone? If I could, I'd play a Land Raider Rush-style with them, but I can only get three Land Raiders into my army, leaving me a little lean on the anti-tank my self.

I would like to see more incentive for the plasma heavy Dark Angels to field more plasma. Maybe make it a little cheaper, or a re-roll on the Gets Hot! fail, showing that they are trained in avoiding accidents.

I am, however, opposed to the concept that all Marines need one codex with a bunch of special defining rules for each chapter. For one, GW wouldn't make as much money selling individual codexes. Also, it would just make the Flavor-of-the-month players even happier, probably end up with dozens of rainbow colored marines to fit all paint schemes...

I like where this is going, but I'm needed elsewhere. Hopefully we can continue this massively time-lagged conversation later.

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:I think one of the prime faults of the codex is the hamstringing of the Deathwing. 5 man squads? No transports? Sure they're fearless and can deep strike on turn 1, is that worth the handicap that 5 lascannon-esque shots later they are more than likely gone? If I could, I'd play a Land Raider Rush-style with them, but I can only get three Land Raiders into my army, leaving me a little lean on the anti-tank my self.

Even if you could take them as dedicated transports, you arent' really going to be getting more than 3 squads with 3 land raiders in any non-apoc game. The bigger issue is that to take the LR's you have to give up your other HS options.

Also, it would just make the Flavor-of-the-month players even happier, probably end up with dozens of rainbow colored marines to fit all paint schemes...

They do that already, for many players all marines are already one book. if anything, it would reduce FOTM as there wouldn't be a new fotm every few months and the endless cycle of marine books one-upping each other.

Vaktathi wrote:

Also, it would just make the Flavor-of-the-month players even happier, probably end up with dozens of rainbow colored marines to fit all paint schemes...

They do that already, for many players all marines are already one book. if anything, it would reduce FOTM as there wouldn't be a new fotm every few months and the endless cycle of marine books one-upping each other.

The marine books aren't actually one-upping each other. They're good at different stuff, even if razorspam seems to be a (very) common theme.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:The marine books aren't actually one-upping each other. They're good at different stuff, even if razorspam seems to be a (very) common theme.

If you look at the marine books out now, especially sans Update FAQ's, they very much do tend to one-up each other. Not always in the same ways or preditably every time, but it's consistent and clear enough. There's a reason there's so many more SW and BA "players" swarming out of the woodwork when before a couple years ago they had been relatively fringe armies for nearly a decade. Going from Dark Angels to C:SM many things got cheaper and/or more capable (tac squads, predators, Stormshields, land speeders, vindicators, etc). Then with SW's they have tons of units that do the same job as many C:SM units, but also even cheaper and significantly better (grey hunters, long fangs, runepriests, etc). BA's come out and now offer an unprecedented ability to field huge quantities of heavy armor and generally more effective mechanized troops than C:SM in addition to the best jump troops in the game. Aside from possible social ostracization, if I'm playing an undivided CSM army, why on earth would I not use Space Wolves instead of C:CSM?

Lets not forget when we had three or four different iterations of stormshields, multiple PotMS/Assault Cannon rules, etc.

Vaktathi wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:The marine books aren't actually one-upping each other. They're good at different stuff, even if razorspam seems to be a (very) common theme.

If you look at the marine books out now, especially sans Update FAQ's, they very much do tend to one-up each other. Not always in the same ways or preditably every time, but it's consistent and clear enough. There's a reason there's so many more SW and BA "players" swarming out of the woodwork when before a couple years ago they had been relatively fringe armies for nearly a decade. Going from Dark Angels to C:SM many things got cheaper and/or more capable (tac squads, predators, Stormshields, land speeders, vindicators, etc). Then with SW's they have tons of units that do the same job as many C:SM units, but also even cheaper and significantly better (grey hunters, long fangs, runepriests, etc). BA's come out and now offer an unprecedented ability to field huge quantities of heavy armor and generally more effective mechanized troops than C:SM in addition to the best jump troops in the game. Aside from possible social ostracization, if I'm playing an undivided CSM army, why on earth would I not use Space Wolves instead of C:CSM?

Lets not forget when we had three or four different iterations of stormshields, multiple PotMS/Assault Cannon rules, etc.

Since when is differences between 2 editions evidence of "one-upping"? While I can agree that BA and SW do certain things better than C:SM the smurfs still does the best bikelists. Furthermore, and this is what I really meant when I said that there's not too much "one-upping", the BA, SW and (obviously) GK books aren't one-upping each other at all, they're good in different ways.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Since when is differences between 2 editions evidence of "one-upping"?

Differences caused by changes in editions are usually covered by changes in mechanics, not wholesale points cuts and expanded abilities and unit selection 16months later.

Furthermore, and this is what I really meant when I said that there's not too much "one-upping", the BA, SW and (obviously) GK books aren't one-upping each other at all, they're good in different ways.

they do however make playing any of the other 4 marine armies 2nd fiddle, which is generally a cycle repeated year after year. Instead of having the cycle of "marine book comes out...then marines+X comes out followed by Marines +Y and then Marines +Z". We'd have everything in one book, that could be balanced against itself all at once instead of through multiple books over the course of years with each one having to provide new reason to play it instead of sticking to the whatever marines you're already playing.

While it'd make it a little easier for players to switch between SM armies, a big enough chunk of the playerbase switches on a whim already (unless you've painted your army specifically in Ultramarines or Black Templars colors or whatever, there's really not much to stop you, even then I've seen Ultramarine SW's more than once...and often there's little required purchasing of new models), enough so that it's increasingly hard to justify many of these books (SW's had a negligible turnout in most tournaments before 2009, suddenly at the last Adepticon they're not only the most popular but literally 90% of them filed to play as "counts as" SW's) since it's already so easy to flip between them, and it'd remove the problems of some marine books being left behind for multiple editions and others getting updated every edition, and the ensuing mess with multiple rules for the same piece of wargear and vastly different costs for identical units, and the ensuing sillyness with FAQ's and Errata that may or may not come for years.