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.

Poly Ranger wrote:
So you agree that +1pt for a ccw option would be ok? Two specs at 10men ok too?

Well, it's worth pointing out that SW Grey Hunters can take two specs per 10 man squad, and itbdefinitely doesn't break the game. And in the last codex, Grey Hunters cose 15ppm and came with a CCW, in the new dex, they're 14ppm, and you can take a CCW for another 2ppm. So, in essence +1ppm for a CCW and two specs per squad have been play tested, and as far as I know, nobody had a problem with old GH being OP.

I will say, though, that I personally think GH should get +1ppm CCWs like they used to, but other marine armies should get +2ppm CCWs. Not to OP Wolves, but just to maintain distinction between armies (e.g., Wolves get cheaper CCWs because they are a CC centric army, whereas other armies would get their own special upgrades that reflect their personal strengths). But that's just my opinion, and it would't bother me if every marine army got +1ppm CCWs for their tacs.

Lots of people complained about the old GH actually. :p

That was mainly due to counter attack though right? (They did have counter attack didn't they? I forget)

Yay, another Hate Poll! 3 pages in less than 1 day, nice!

I marked "Other", because the armies are being rebalanced, and Imperial armies have been getting nerfed this edition. So have some non-Imperials. We shall see how it works out.

SJ

Poly Ranger wrote:
That was mainly due to counter attack though right? (They did have counter attack didn't they? I forget)

Yeah, they had and still have counter attack (all non-vehicle SW units do). I really don't get all the hate on Wolves for having CA and Acute Senses, though. In essence, they take the place of the Chapter tactics that C: SM chapters have. It's what makes them Wolves. And considering SW are consistently among the lowest if not the lowest overall tiered of all SM armies, I'd say CA isn't exactly giving them a huge advantage.

AnFéasógMór wrote:

Poly Ranger wrote:
That was mainly due to counter attack though right? (They did have counter attack didn't they? I forget)

Yeah, they had and still have counter attack (all non-vehicle SW units do). I really don't get all the hate on Wolves for having CA and Acute Senses, though. In essence, they take the place of the Chapter tactics that C: SM chapters have. It's what makes them Wolves. And considering SW are consistently among the lowest if not the lowest overall tiered of all SM armies, I'd say CA isn't exactly giving them a huge advantage.

Grey Hunters were one of the best troops in the game in 5th edition iirc though.

I agree. Counter attack isn't that broken. Counter attack isn't as good as fnp (6+) on all infantry and IWND on all vehicles. Neither is it as good as Hit and Run, Scout (from Khan) and skilled rider. Or scout on all infantry (and DTs) and rending bolters if going FW.
Plus CSM can get CA and bp&ccw (and rage and FC) but aren't considered OP (quite the opposite).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
P.s. I love how this thread has evolved into a serious discussion rather than what it set out to be ;-).

AnFéasógMór wrote:
. And considering SW are consistently among the lowest if not the lowest overall tiered of all SM armies, I'd say CA isn't exactly giving them a huge advantage.

Lies! SW have TWC, what do DA have?

True, TWC does indeed put SW in a good position.

Poly Ranger wrote:
I agree. Counter attack isn't that broken. Counter attack isn't as good as fnp (6+) on all infantry and IWND on all vehicles. Neither is it as good as Hit and Run, Scout (from Khan) and skilled rider. Or scout on all infantry (and DTs) and rending bolters if going FW.
Plus CSM can get CA and bp&ccw (and rage and FC) but aren't considered OP (quite the opposite).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
P.s. I love how this thread has evolved into a serious discussion rather than what it set out to be ;-).

What was it that made Grey Hunters so good back in 5th then? Because I remember them being one of the better troops in the game, but CA isn't that great...

It was the double special weapons + the ability to give a random mook a plasma pistol, effectively making them the most plaspammy army in the game.

SGTPozy wrote:

AnFéasógMór wrote:
. And considering SW are consistently among the lowest if not the lowest overall tiered of all SM armies, I'd say CA isn't exactly giving them a huge advantage.

Lies! SW have TWC, what do DA have?

An assload of bikes that move fast enough to stay away from my TWC! Damn DA. I just want to be your friend and make you drown in your own blood. Why do you run from me??!

But seriously, yeah, TWC are nasty. But frankly, they're balanced nasty. They're expensive, both pointswise and moneywise, and they don't rely on cheap tricks, they fight a fair fight. They're just good at that fair fight. I think it's fair for every squad to have a big, nasty unit or two. It's the power combo, gravstar, I-don't-even-have-to-get-stuck-in-to-win stuff that drives me mad.

SGTPozy wrote:

AnFéasógMór wrote:
. And considering SW are consistently among the lowest if not the lowest overall tiered of all SM armies, I'd say CA isn't exactly giving them a huge advantage.

Lies! SW have TWC, what do DA have?

Black Knights.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
It was the double special weapons + the ability to give a random mook a plasma pistol, effectively making them the most plaspammy army in the game.

Yeah, you can still do that, too.

IoM have some very legitimate complaints, and I don't even like using my IoM armies nowadays.

Consider dreadnauts- when was the last time you saw someone seriously take an assault cannon? Right, because it's almost exactly twice as good as a TL autocannon, but costs 6 times more - that's even accepting that they aren't overcosted as base. Compare them to the new, nerfed Annihilation barges which have an extra gun, generate more hits due to tesla and have 1 higher AV on every side plus they get junk as skimmers. What do they pay for this? 5 points less than a 2 autocannon dread. They really should be getting an invulnerable save if they're ever going to be taken again.

Consider terminators. For 40 points, you get 2 S8 AP2 attacks, a 2+/5++ and 2 S4 AP5 shots, plus deep striking and no ability to sweeping advance. Now look at Necron Praetorians. They have a 3+ followed by a 5+, though in a Decurian that's a 4+. A 3+ then 4+ is mathematically equivalent to a 2+/4++ in terms of protection. Then, they get a 12" S5 AP2 shot rather than 2 S4 AP5 (better vs everything with a 4+ save or better), are T5, jump infantry, S5 AP2 but at I2 rather than I1, and no restriction on sweeping advance. In a fight between the two, Praetorians win, will usually get the charge, require no help getting to combat and are significantly more dangerous outside of combat too. Sure, terminators can buy assault cannons, but these are 30 points - way overcosted, and doesn't make up for anything anyway, as Praetorians still outshoot and out assault you. They need help to be taken again, which needs to either be a hefty points drop or 2 wounds, maybe even a little of both.

Consider Marines. For 14 points, you get a solid stat lines. Compare them to Necron Warriors. Warriors are as durable against everything which isn't exactly AP4, even outside of a Decurian. Against AP3, they're more durable. Now, you trade ATSKNF for LD10 which is a big deal, but you also get the following:
-1 point cheaper
-Guns can glance any tank (roughly as effective as a 10 man squad with a free meltagun)
-Access to a vehicle which repairs models to the unit
Is combat squads or special weapon access enough to make up the difference? You're outgunned, out survived and, barring your 1 special weapon and 1 heavy weapon, have no advantage at shooting. Solution? Let tactical marines have 2 special weapons and maybe even cost 1 point less per squad. I feel terrible for CSM who can't even begin to compare to Warriors for the same points. Now consider in a Decurian where warriors are always more survivable, get move through cover, relentless and usually reroll 1s to reanimate. I think tacticals are a bit undersold by people, but that's just how 7e is with the silly detachment rules - there's no reason to buy troops any more, just fill those slots with crud and take good stuff in other slots.

Marines suffer from legacy - their points don't shift much and they're very much stuck with their stats, having had them for 5 editions now. Whereas with xenos, it doesn't matter as much if the basic guns change, marines are pretty much stuck with S7 AP2 gets hot plasma or S4 AP5 bolters forever. People dislike that because, hey, marines barely use marines any more. Adding what is effectively rending to all basic bloody Eldar guns didn't help either. All tournament lists are taking scouts or bikes, because why wouldn't you? They're much better. All tacticals really have over them is drop pods. Marines are in a sad position where basically every other army's troops outshoot them for the points. In a game where assault is not close to good enough, does that seem good? For a game where in the background tacticals can beat stuff in combat out of choice, they're actually better standing 1 inch away and shooting instead.

Basically, marines are in a situation where they're carried by scouts and bikes, plus exceptional heavy support+storm talons. They're less "jack of all trades, master of none" and more "jack of just bikes, master of centurions". Terminators are effectively unuseable. Assault marines are not good at all. Vanguard veterans are a farce. Razorbacks are overcosted (should cost 40 points max, the trade of transport space is more than balanced vs the rhino), the weapon upgrades worse still. Assault cannons and lascannons are universally overcosted. Dreadnauts are too easy to kill and don't shoot well enough. The special characters are hugely overcosted. Tacticals are weaker than most troops in the game. Centurion assault squads are a total joke unit. Hunters can't even do the one job they're designed to do. Land Raiders are awful, and would be bad at 150 points too which is almost half what they currently are. LRCs are overcosted. LRRs are overcosted. The entire book is like the old Necron codex - mediocre, most units worse than other comparable units from other armies, but the whole book sees play because 2 builds are worth using in it.

So yeah, I really dislike marine armies, but let's not pretend they're in a spot where they don't need help.

BrianDavion wrote:
it's worth noting BTW that when discussing why Terminators could use some improvements, CSM players are proably involved in that discussion.

as someone noted, a lot of the core units for space marines are core units across something like half the armies in the game.

start thread titled "gee I think Ork Boyz could use a buff" and you're just gonna get less reponses.

Oh yeah, when you improve CSM Terminators, all they need is just a couple points shaved off. In general, the conclusion is that Terminators with a Power Weapon and Storm Bolter is worth 30 points, and then the Power Fist might be worth 5. That's what my locals came to the conclusion to, anyway...

 ImAGeek wrote:

Poly Ranger wrote:
I agree. Counter attack isn't that broken. Counter attack isn't as good as fnp (6+) on all infantry and IWND on all vehicles. Neither is it as good as Hit and Run, Scout (from Khan) and skilled rider. Or scout on all infantry (and DTs) and rending bolters if going FW.
Plus CSM can get CA and bp&ccw (and rage and FC) but aren't considered OP (quite the opposite).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
P.s. I love how this thread has evolved into a serious discussion rather than what it set out to be ;-).

What was it that made Grey Hunters so good back in 5th then? Because I remember them being one of the better troops in the game, but CA isn't that great...

Free special weapon, second (same as first) special 5 points cheaper than any other army (5 point meltaguns, 10 point plasma guns), well priced lasplas Razorbacks, cheaper than other armies. They also had counterattack+FC which used to stack in 5th, plus pistol+cc weapon, so 3 attacks when charged at S5, S4 in 6th. Their rune priests were exceptional too. Basically, they were true all rounders - extremely capable in assault (they actually beat wraiths on average, so probably too good), they got 2 plasma guns for 10 points effectively (160 for a squad of marines with 2 plasma guns is sweet, as is 155 for 2 meltaguns) and their Razorbacks were solid support. To be honest, I miss that codex. I wish all marines got 2 special weapons, the first free. You might actually see marines on tables outside of friendly games again.

EDIT: also, long fangs had 10 point missile launchers, so a unit of 5 MLs was 140 points (yes, 5).

Plus flyers kinda cooked the space wolf goose, they have little to deal with them and, let's face it, flak should be free.

I feel like 90% of this applies only to SM players. We humble IG players just wish that we had a bit of reason to dig the ogryns and rough riders out from the bottom of the drawer.

 TheSilo wrote:
I feel like 90% of this applies only to SM players. We humble IG players just wish that we had a bit of reason to dig the ogryns and rough riders out from the bottom of the drawer.

Meh, I want my alternative firing mode Vanquisher cannons with coaxial weapons back.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
it's worth noting BTW that when discussing why Terminators could use some improvements, CSM players are proably involved in that discussion.

as someone noted, a lot of the core units for space marines are core units across something like half the armies in the game.

start thread titled "gee I think Ork Boyz could use a buff" and you're just gonna get less reponses.

Oh yeah, when you improve CSM Terminators, all they need is just a couple points shaved off. In general, the conclusion is that Terminators with a Power Weapon and Storm Bolter is worth 30 points, and then the Power Fist might be worth 5. That's what my locals came to the conclusion to, anyway...

That would make them 35 points, so only 5 points less. That's still bad. Compare them to TWC or Wraiths or Lychguard - they die too easily, can't get into assault to use their biggest asset in the first place and still pay through the nose for upgrades. Compare them to 2 tacticals - you lose the power weapon and one attack, but 2 marines of stats is effectively 2+/4++, fires the same shots at range, fires 2 more at 12", gets grenades, can sweep, has more options and costs 28 points. Suppose a power fist is worth 5 points (it's not, maybe 2 points on a single wound model) - even at 33 points you would be worse than 2 tacticals. I personally don't think they should be even 25 points with their current stats, especially not if they're paying for special guns. My preferred fix would be 2 wounds for all terminators, with heavy flamers costing 5, assault cannons costing 10, missile launcher 10. Then, armies are incentivised to take them. In my experience, these are the costs to make them viable. Assault terminators should be 35 base with 2 wounds, otherwise unchanged. Let's face it, they should be able to beat flayed ones, or at least give them a fight - they currently can't.

I'll say it:
Imperium and Imperium centric armies (Marines of all kinds, Daemons, Guard, SoB, Chaos Marines) tend to have way less cheese.
-Eldar now have 3+ armor (da fuq? Our 7ft 600lb gorillas only have that), the MC with the most ridiculous stat block outside of Apoc (Really Wraithknight? 6 wounds and T:8?), and simply mindless levels of dakka (AP:2 and Twin linked are like dirt)
-Necrons have the most powerful MCs with the Shards, Ridiculously good troops with the 4+ FNP warriors, even more dakka than the Eldar, the best shock assault troops in the game with Wraiths, and can excel in anything even World Eaters style Charge Everything! tactics.
-Tau have the most dakka of any army, are the easiest and most boring to play, have a better MC than any Imperium army with the Riptide, great elite troops with the Suits, and the best vehicles.

 Sigvatr wrote:
...because they always get them. Marine favorism has always been a thing.

Blatantly not true. In fact, marines have steadily gotten worse since 3rd ed.

 ThePrimordial wrote:
I'll say it:
Imperium and Imperium centric armies (Marines of all kinds, Daemons, Guard, SoB, Chaos Marines) tend to have way less cheese.
-Eldar now have 3+ armor (da fuq? Our 7ft 600lb gorillas only have that), the MC with the most ridiculous stat block outside of Apoc (Really Wraithknight? 6 wounds and T:8?), and simply mindless levels of dakka (AP:2 and Twin linked are like dirt)
-Necrons have the most powerful MCs with the Shards, Ridiculously good troops with the 4+ FNP warriors, even more dakka than the Eldar, the best shock assault troops in the game with Wraiths, and can excel in anything even World Eaters style Charge Everything! tactics.
-Tau have the most dakka of any army, are the easiest and most boring to play, have a better MC than any Imperium army with the Riptide, great elite troops with the Suits, and the best vehicles.

Eldar I can agree with, though I'd rather they changed the Wave Serpent and Wraithknight over the troops - Eldar infantry are pretty fair.
Necron shards? Is that a joke? Have you seen Dreadknights, or really any other MC in the game? Shards are one of the worst units in 40k at the moment, because you pay 240 points for something with a 4++ and 4 wounds - necrodermis is apparently made of paper mâché and hope. They have nowhere near the firepower of Eldar - what they do have is the most durable everything, whilst being on par with/better than marines otherwise.
Tau don't have the best vehicles either, that honour goes to either Eldar, just for the incredibly broken Serpent, or Imperial Knights. I think they outshoot everyone but Eldar though (notice the pattern of Eldar being better at everything than everybody - I expect them to be swatted with the nerf bat like Grey Knights because of it).

AnFéasógMór wrote:

Poly Ranger wrote:
That was mainly due to counter attack though right? (They did have counter attack didn't they? I forget)

Yeah, they had and still have counter attack (all non-vehicle SW units do). I really don't get all the hate on Wolves for having CA and Acute Senses, though. In essence, they take the place of the Chapter tactics that C: SM chapters have. It's what makes them Wolves. And considering SW are consistently among the lowest if not the lowest overall tiered of all SM armies, I'd say CA isn't exactly giving them a huge advantage.

z

It's because it makes them immune to many assault schemes. Or at least it did. I don't know if it means anything against Wraiths now.

Martel732 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
...because they always get them. Marine favorism has always been a thing.

Blatantly not true. In fact, marines have steadily gotten worse since 3rd ed.

Not entirely true, 5e was also the hay day of marines, especially space wolves who would probably stand up well today given their old codex back+the new units. Rhino rush really was something though.

SGTPozy wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Because there's more people that play them. Cmon man...

Just because more people play them it doesn't mean that theybhave to have the most 'fixing' threads that end up being ridiculous buffing threads.

Terminators are good. Storm bolter ones not so much but that's only because of the power that THSS ones bring.

Tacticals are all-rounders like they are supposed to be, therefore they are fine.

They do not need to be cheaper nor better.

The fact that you typed the words "terminators are good" makes everything else you say completely suspect. Just sayin'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Eyjio wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
...because they always get them. Marine favorism has always been a thing.

Blatantly not true. In fact, marines have steadily gotten worse since 3rd ed.

Not entirely true, 5e was also the hay day of marines, especially space wolves who would probably stand up well today given their old codex back+the new units. Rhino rush really was something though.

5e was the heyday of vehicles, not marines. SW were special because they were insane if deployment via drop pod. The rest of the marines were basically garbage in 5th. Also, did no one here play 2nd? The marines were the low of the low in that edition, and so they've had their time on the bottom of the heap. BA arguably STILL are on the bottom of the heap with DA. Both codices are super weak.

SGTPozy wrote:

AnFéasógMór wrote:
. And considering SW are consistently among the lowest if not the lowest overall tiered of all SM armies, I'd say CA isn't exactly giving them a huge advantage.

Lies! SW have TWC, what do DA have?

Yeah, well he clearly hasn't been keeping track of the general meta for very long, he also thinks that GH are considered weak by and large. From my understanding, Marines go: C:SM>SW>BA>DA

 Talys wrote:
1. Everyone "wants" buffs for their faction

2. There are a lot of IoM players, and therefore, you should see more IoM... complaining... if you want to call it that.

3.Terminators really do suck.

4. Tactical marines are not really that great.

5. I'm not sure if I've seen anyone *seriously* asking for a point reduction on DP. If they do, well, they're just strange

Seriously. Troll post. But OT, go on any part of Dakka and you'll see people clamoring for buffs to DE/CSM/Tau/Nidz/Orkz. About the only people who don't clamor for buffs are Eldar lol


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:

AnFéasógMór wrote:
. And considering SW are consistently among the lowest if not the lowest overall tiered of all SM armies, I'd say CA isn't exactly giving them a huge advantage.

Lies! SW have TWC, what do DA have?

Yeah, well he clearly hasn't been keeping track of the general meta for very long, he also thinks that GH are considered weak by and large. From my understanding, Marines go: C:SM>SW>BA>DA

Given some of the new formations, I think SW and BA are close to being on par, with SW edging them out a little. DA are still underpowered, even with the dataslates.

Martel732 wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Because there's more people that play them. Cmon man...

Just because more people play them it doesn't mean that theybhave to have the most 'fixing' threads that end up being ridiculous buffing threads.

Terminators are good. Storm bolter ones not so much but that's only because of the power that THSS ones bring.

Tacticals are all-rounders like they are supposed to be, therefore they are fine.

They do not need to be cheaper nor better.

The fact that you typed the words "terminators are good" makes everything else you say completely suspect. Just sayin'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Eyjio wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
...because they always get them. Marine favorism has always been a thing.

Blatantly not true. In fact, marines have steadily gotten worse since 3rd ed.

Not entirely true, 5e was also the hay day of marines, especially space wolves who would probably stand up well today given their old codex back+the new units. Rhino rush really was something though.

5e was the heyday of vehicles, not marines. SW were special because they were insane if deployment via drop pod. The rest of the marines were basically garbage in 5th. Also, did no one here play 2nd? The marines were the low of the low in that edition, and so they've had their time on the bottom of the heap. BA arguably STILL are on the bottom of the heap with DA. Both codices are super weak.

Marines had the cheapest vehicles and most widely available methods for dealing with them, so were the best. Not entirely sure how that's contradicting them being the best in 5th. SW lived off lasplas Razorbacks too, not just pods - they were the shootiest army when they wanted to be. I'm not sure you played the same 5e as the rest of us if you think that one of the armies consistently doing well was "garbage" - especially not Blood Angels who were wrecking face for months until they were figured out. The top 6 armies in order in 5e were Space Wolves, then Grey Knights (or, realistically, Coteaz+henchmen in psybacks+psyrifledreads+Dreadknights), then Imperial Guard (aka vets in chimeras with meltas+vendettas: the codex: the movie:the game), then Necrons (aka wraiths and annihilation barges with bargelords), then BA, then SM. If you don't believe me, just look up tournament results and see which armies were consistently top of the pile. SM were in no way bad, and if you think they were you clearly didn't try to play with orks, Eldar, SoB, tau, da, bt, nids, etc.

Generic marines were garbage compared to the power builds. That was my point that you made for me. SM could have just as easily been put in the list with the Orks, Eldar, SoB, Tau, etc. I personally had a lot more problems with Eldar and Orks than vanilla marines in 5th.

The BA marines themselves weren't good. It was all the crazy Wardism in the codex. And even those were just mere gimmicks that could be easily trumped with experience by SW, Eldar, GK, Necrons.