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.

 NorseSig wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

They actually don't die as easily most of the time, but their lack of offense makes this a pointless feature.

It has been my experience that they do. On a side note I freaking HATE necrons.

Thats the thing about dice games. gak all happens with random number generators.

Iv had games where an entire unit rolled under 3 and other games where iv tanked at least 4 full turns of rapid fire bolt shots.

Iv also had games where i drop podded a full stern guard unit with combi meltas and wiff ALL 5 shots. while the same turn a 5 man tactical with a combi + normal melta get the job done

The real question is What % of effectiveness and survivability do you realistically want?

Thats the thing about dice games. gak all happens with random number generators.

Iv had games where an entire unit rolled under 3 and other games where iv tanked at least 4 full turns of rapid fire bolt shots.

Iv also had games where i drop podded a full stern guard unit with combi meltas and wiff ALL 5 shots. while the same turn a 5 man tactical with a combi + normal melta get the job done

The real question is What % of effectiveness and survivability do you realistically want?

You make it sound like an extra special on tacticals or having up to two specials or heavies (or a mix) is somehow overpowered. Especially when you still HAVE TO PAY FOR THE UPGRADE. Any changes to bolters like assault 2 or changing things so space marines can make a disorganized charge (maybe with a successful leadership check) after shooting two shots is hardly game breaking or a huge boost either. Even when combined with the extra upgrade. Likewise removing the squad size requirement doesn't add any power to tacticals, it just makes them more versatile (and helps in lower point games where space marines suffer a great deal). The points drops are because those particular items are overpriced to begin with, and I don't see a good reason why space marines should be penalized more with overly expensive upgrades. Even the chainswords upgrade is reasonable and available to certain chapters already at the same price point (and makes sense for those chapters that are more assault orientated)

All of these changes give a slight increase in damage potential (at an increased price) but doesn't make them OMG strong. They certainly aren't necron warriors who can wreck vehicles fairly easily and can eat several vindicator pie plates and only lose 4 models. WWhich is something I have seen quite consistently. I am not saying space marines should be this durable or destructive, but they do need a slight boost to their damage output.

Like I said before you shouldn't feel like you are being taxed to take troops or an HQ. Should they neccassarily be the best option? No. But you shouldn't feel like you are being punished by taking them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

3 attack bikes have better range and more wounds than 5 bikers with 3 X melta shots.

You are correct. However if you can't get 3 attack bikes into range it doesn't matter. This is where the extra bodies come in handy. You are less likely to lose your melta weapons before they do their jobs. Which has been my experience. Losing even one attack bike before it gets in range can be pretty devastating. Plus attack bike squads do not have objective secured for those times when you need to contest an objective rather than destroy a vehicle. Which has happened to me too. Not often but often enough for me to prefer the bike squads.

Bike squads don't have it either for me: I'm BA. I have trouble physically getting the bikes to melta range before they get assaulted or double tapped out.

So what exactly are you trying to compare tactical too. I would be fine with 1 special or heavy per 5 and with changes to some of the heavy weapons to something more mobile like Salvo. Would make Em a little more interesting without making them full special snowflaky

 Desubot wrote:
So what exactly are you trying to compare tactical too. I would be fine with 1 special or heavy per 5 and with changes to some of the heavy weapons to something more mobile like Salvo. Would make Em a little more interesting without making them full special snowflaky

Personally I compare tacticals to other troop choices that fill a similar role as tacticals when possible. I absolutely loathe the 1 per 5 model. I think it should be done away with. It works fine with other armies with much cheaper units, but it really hurts space marines especially at lower points levels. What exactly would you call special snowflakey? What falls into that category?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Bike squads don't have it either for me: I'm BA. I have trouble physically getting the bikes to melta range before they get assaulted or double tapped out.

The tactic I have had the most success with is to try and make all my other stuff so threatening that my "just a bike squad that isn't even grav" gets a lesser target priority than the other stuff long enough to do it's job. I find in my local meta attack bike squads draw entirely too much hate in comparison. Not a great tactic but certainly better than losing the unit before it gets to do anything.

 NorseSig wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
So what exactly are you trying to compare tactical too. I would be fine with 1 special or heavy per 5 and with changes to some of the heavy weapons to something more mobile like Salvo. Would make Em a little more interesting without making them full special snowflaky

Personally I compare tacticals to other troop choices that fill a similar role as tacticals when possible. I absolutely loathe the 1 per 5 model. I think it should be done away with. It works fine with other armies with much cheaper units, but it really hurts space marines especially at lower points levels. What exactly would you call special snowflakey? What falls into that category?

Persudo relentless, presudo overwatch bonuses and actually basically everything listed in the op that wasn't a simple stat or points change.

DO they really need 5-6 special rules that fundamentally change what they do?

When troops start getting more than 1 per 5 special/heavy they start hitting dev and sternguard levels. 2 is already half way to dev's and a 2/3rd to a stern. and they ALL have to pay for weapon. what would happen to those kinds of units then when the basic tactical already do the same thing and obj sec.

 NorseSig wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
So what exactly are you trying to compare tactical too. I would be fine with 1 special or heavy per 5 and with changes to some of the heavy weapons to something more mobile like Salvo. Would make Em a little more interesting without making them full special snowflaky

Personally I compare tacticals to other troop choices that fill a similar role as tacticals when possible. I absolutely loathe the 1 per 5 model. I think it should be done away with. It works fine with other armies with much cheaper units, but it really hurts space marines especially at lower points levels. What exactly would you call special snowflakey? What falls into that category?

1 per 5 is standard across most armies for units which come in 10's, with 1 per 10 being common for most units which go up to 20+.

Wanting 2 specials and/or 3-4 weapon upgrades across 10 men is a complete feth-you to CSM's as well.

1 per 5 is standard across most armies for units which come in 10's, with 1 per 10 being common for most units which go up to 20+.

Wanting 2 specials and/or 3-4 weapon upgrades across 10 men is a complete feth-you to CSM's as well.

And it is something I personally would do away with for all armies. Which obviously means the change would apply to CSM as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Persudo relentless, presudo overwatch bonuses and actually basically everything listed in the op that wasn't a simple stat or points change.

DO they really need 5-6 special rules that fundamentally change what they do?

When troops start getting more than 1 per 5 special/heavy they start hitting dev and sternguard levels. 2 is already half way to dev's and a 2/3rd to a stern. and they ALL have to pay for weapon. what would happen to those kinds of units then when the basic tactical already do the same thing and obj sec.

So what changes would you make?

Initially I had given dev squads an extra heavy as well. The sternguard get special issue ammo for their bolters and far more upgrade options than tacticals even with the proposed changes. More chainswords seems fitting for space marines since they are often depicted with them. Initially assault 2 within 12 in is what I changed the bolter to. The change to pistols was to preserve them having a role. Tactical marines and marines in general (imo) should still be able to assault even if they fire 2 shots with their bolter. Space marines are given stats that in part lend themselves to assault why the heck wouldn't they use it. How the heck would firing an extra shot with a bolter (semi auto weapon) preclude someone from assaulting. I often wonder why space marines with bolters even have pistols since a rifle makes a much better melee weapon than a pistol. Heck armies used to (and some still do) affix bayonets to rifles.

And how is the "pseudo" abilities any different than any other army that each has its unique things. And fyi the changes to bolters is meant to be applied to EVERY army that uses them. At least that was my intention At a shorter range semi auto weapons and auto weapons should be more dangerous.

 NorseSig wrote:


So what changes would you make?

Sledge hammer to the entire rule book and start from the ashes
You are trying to fix a game that is fundamentally feth.


But if i had to make changes to balance the "game" not the "fluff". it should start with fixing any rules that have gak interactions.
Next go through all the various high % win net lists see what is being mass spammed and winning to much and nerf the feth out of it. such as changing the wave serpent shield into a invul and shortening its ignore cover shooting by a lot. OH and nuke the gak out of invisibility.

Then after like a month of play testing check it out again and make fixes again.

Thats play testing and it helps balance things without adding to the power creep.

Edit: but to keep in touch with this thread.

BRB change: You can make a disordered charge out of a stationary vehicle without ramps
universal heavy weapons: Heavy bolter change to salvo 2/3 (allows for slightly mobile tac squads and other things) ML comes stock with flakk because the cost is dumb as feth, Heavy flamer access all around.

Grav weapons: change to Glance vehicles + immobilize on 6, Infantry on a 5+, Bulky on 4+, Very bulky on 3+ extremely bulky and MC on 2+

Personal wish list: Allow access to auspex sergeants.

Edit: in this way tactical squads can be built in a way to still support a bit better while holding onto the objective like good little troops. and the changes to grav makes them far less a kill everything important and more a focus your face on MC and other bikes.

Edit: and with the exception of the Grav weapon (since its a pretty fetting slowed add on to this game) not much was special ruled that isnt already in the BRB.

 NorseSig wrote:
So what changes would you make?

Initially I had given dev squads an extra heavy as well. The sternguard get special issue ammo for their bolters and far more upgrade options than tacticals even with the proposed changes. More chainswords seems fitting for space marines since they are often depicted with them. Initially assault 2 within 12 in is what I changed the bolter to. The change to pistols was to preserve them having a role. Tactical marines and marines in general (imo) should still be able to assault even if they fire 2 shots with their bolter. Space marines are given stats that in part lend themselves to assault why the heck wouldn't they use it. How the heck would firing an extra shot with a bolter (semi auto weapon) preclude someone from assaulting. I often wonder why space marines with bolters even have pistols since a rifle makes a much better melee weapon than a pistol. Heck armies used to (and some still do) affix bayonets to rifles.

And how is the "pseudo" abilities any different than any other army that each has its unique things. And fyi the changes to bolters is meant to be applied to EVERY army that uses them. At least that was my intention At a shorter range semi auto weapons and auto weapons should be more dangerous.

For the record, most modern military forces still issue bayonets because it is a knife, and knives are excellent utility tools. One of these utility functions is to be put on the end of a longarm and turn it into a modern day spear that also shoots bullets (which makes me think that a spear that shot more spears would be awesome).

It's not because a rifle is a "better" melee weapon, it's more to do with the fact that it's easy to issue a bunch of knives out because knives are handy tools to have on hand.

 Desubot wrote:

 NorseSig wrote:


So what changes would you make?

Sledge hammer to the entire rule book and start from the ashes
You are trying to fix a game that is fundamentally feth.


But if i had to make changes to balance the "game" not the "fluff". it should start with fixing any rules that have gak interactions.
Next go through all the various high % win net lists see what is being mass spammed and winning to much and nerf the feth out of it. such as changing the wave serpent shield into a invul and shortening its ignore cover shooting by a lot. OH and nuke the gak out of invisibility.

Then after like a month of play testing check it out again and make fixes again.

Thats play testing and it helps balance things without adding to the power creep.

Edit: but to keep in touch with this thread.

BRB change: You can make a disordered charge out of a stationary vehicle without ramps
universal heavy weapons: Heavy bolter change to salvo 2/3 (allows for slightly mobile tac squads and other things) ML comes stock with flakk because the cost is dumb as feth, Heavy flamer access all around.

Grav weapons: change to Glance vehicles + immobilize on 6, Infantry on a 5+, Bulky on 4+, Very bulky on 3+ extremely bulky and MC on 2+

Personal wish list: Allow access to auspex sergeants.

Edit: in this way tactical squads can be built in a way to still support a bit better while holding onto the objective like good little troops. and the changes to grav makes them far less a kill everything important and more a focus your face on MC and other bikes.

Edit: and with the exception of the Grav weapon (since its a pretty fetting slowed add on to this game) not much was special ruled that isnt already in the BRB.

Well, what about this radical idea for Grav:

Make Grav weapons work like their Heresy-era counterparts; IE, a blast template that imposes a Strength test, has the Haywire trait, and creates dangerous/difficult terrain wherever the blast template lands (the terrain effect is only for that game turn).

Whiskey144 wrote:


Well, what about this radical idea for Grav:

Make Grav weapons work like their Heresy-era counterparts; IE, a blast template that imposes a Strength test, has the Haywire trait, and creates dangerous/difficult terrain wherever the blast template lands (the terrain effect is only for that game turn).

Oh right forgot it was heresy style too

But haywire would make these guys WAY too good against vehicles.

we already never use landraiders anymore and now no one will. probably see a whole lot of drop pod command squads with 4-5 grav guns to punk vehicles left and right.

Sledge hammer to the entire rule book and start from the ashes
You are trying to fix a game that is fundamentally feth.

You are right that this is probably the best solution, but it is MUCH harder to get people to agree to try that approach from my experience. I wouldn't say preserve the fluff as much as the spirit of it. You need to keep armies unique in something other than looks otherwise what is the point. And I would say take some of the literature on various armies with a grain of salt. The stories are often greatly over exagerated in their achievements or one of those rare cases where someone or a group manages something phenominal and not at all standard.

BTW I LOVE the idea of flakk being stock. I like the flamer idea as well. I am still inclined to think heavy bolters should be salvo 3/4 but 2/3 isn't as bad as heavy 3. The issue with this change and no option for an extra special is it kind of limits their ability to be customized against targets other than hordes and still remain mobile.

I agree with changing gakk interactions. I don't know if nerfing all the high % win stuff is the best way to go about this. A lot of the problem is the gakk interactions. I think removing that junk first might be better. If there is still a problem after then proceed with nerfs or points increases.

The wave serpent or at least its upgrades need a points bump.

I like your disordered charge idea. I will have to test your grav idea. I don't know if it would make things more or less complicated with saves and such but it is worth a try.

I would be fine with auspex sergeants.

It's not because a rifle is a "better" melee weapon, it's more to do with the fact that it's easy to issue a bunch of knives out because knives are handy tools to have on hand.

I don't know i would think using a rifle/bolter as a club or using the butt as a club would be far more effective than the tactic of pistol whipping someone which is kind of implied what you are doing. The rifle butt has more mass, longer reach, and can be used in two hands. Even if you are using the rifle in more of a downward jabbing motion (striking with the butt) you are going to inflict more damage than a pistol.

I kind of figured most armies still gave out bayonets I KNEW they gave knives (damn useful tool the knife is) but I didn't want to fall into the category of assuming since I am not familiar with all modern armies and what they are issued for gear.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I think if you started from scratch with this game you might as well go to a d10 system. It would suck having to buy new dice but then again I used to play Werewolf the Apocalypse and other world of darkness games so I have over 300 of the effers. Or maybe even d12 to just be different.