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.

They're not that cheap. Drukhari are not an horde army.

The "insane" shooting is lackluster against hordes though, and they have no psykers. They're not even that tough, coven stuff can have a 4+ and 6+ FNP but they're not killing machines.

In a real 40k game, that lasts 5-7 turns, things are very different than tournaments, where even orks (which are way worse than SM) manage to compete.

For what they do, Drukhari are pretty damn cheap.

Martel732 wrote:
For what they do, Drukhari are pretty damn cheap.

Anti horde is very much a problem for this army and we hate kill point missions.

At the end... SM are the problem. Last weeks in order to learn about 8 edition I saw a lot of Batle Report ( Winters Seo and Tabletop Tactics). I think from Winters I only saw one victory of SM. I was watching and thinking.... dam... SM loses and loses no mather. About Tabletop Tactics, I only saw a couple reports, and the only with SM ( Dark Angels) they lost against Necron.

I know that Battle Reports are not the best way to say what works, but statistically...men, at least a 20% of Wins, but one from 15+ is trash.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Maybe I have special skills of prediction but I can pretty much tell you how strong an army will be just by looking at their units/ weapons/ and how much they cost.

Maybe because these are the only things that matter when determining if an army is strong on not.

The thing is tho, DE has some clear weakness, if tournaments dont play with those that doesnt mean DE is insanely strong, it means they are Scissor in a Paper's world.

I still stand by my 1st post, DE isnt the problem, honestly SM are just weak atm, over costed due to a couple things in the codex that dont scale well with each other and are hard to balance.

I totally agree with you - they aren't over the top compared to craftworlds/nids/AM+soup. Space marines are just trash - it's time people just admit it. Getting tired of repeating myself. Give people like the OP an honest assessment - stop expecting to beat nuclear subs with diesels. You will fail every-time.

Also - it really doesn't have a weakness ether. They can be tough with covens/ have insane shooting and mobility with kabals / cults can tie up expensive units for pennies.

An honest assessment is also realizing that "army tiers" matter far, far, far FAR less when you stop looking at things from a competitive/tournament standpoint.

Look at the matchup OP is facing here. Notice that it's a single mixed drukhari battalion, with no ravagers, and no grotesques, and a unit of incubi. Either that or it's two patrols and his opponent is playing with 3CP.

That's not a list that's going to categorically invalidate a marine list. Asserting that that is so is being categorically dishonest. OPs list/lists is definitely more casual, but the fact that he's got expensive heavy weapons in tactical squads, random sgt chronus in a Razorback, double captains and no lieutenant, mixed weapons in squads etc is much more of a major factor than the fact that he's playing a low-tier army.

When people don't separate the level of importance army tiers play in competitive tournament metas and the level of importance they place in casual club metas, they start blaming army tier for losses that are caused by suboptimal list and game decisions, and those list and game decisions are never improved. As a consequence, they're just going to keep losing until they get frustrated and quit.

it is equally fantasy to pretend that army tiers don't matter or make a difference at all, but generally when giving tactical advice or receiving it, it's a helpful fantasy, because it keeps your brain from diverting to the easy, emotionally pleasing "I lost because of circumstances that were outside my control and for no other reason! Damn you GW!!!!!!!"

 Imateria wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
For what they do, Drukhari are pretty damn cheap.

Anti horde is very much a problem for this army and we hate kill point missions.

The shredder begs to differ - IMO most DE are taking way too many blaster and not enough shredder. Not being able to kill tanks later in the game might be a concern but when your whole armies is fast and flies you don't really need to worry about armor anymore at that point in the game - you can just keep them from shooting.

My DE list has 10 shredders and only 2 blasters on it's warriors for example. OFC all 3 archons have blasters and all my raiders have dark lances. I've found this to work best for the high hordes I expect to encounter. The ignore cover I get from flayed skull more than makes up for wounding on 4's instead of 3's. Infantry is no problem my friend.

The last time someone linked 3 tourny standings in one of these discussions, Marines were in the top 10 in all 3.

The last time Marines were at the top of the heap was only a few months ago.

In the last year, AM, Marines, CSM, Death Guard, Eldar, and Dark Eldar have all been the top army in the game. Sisters, Demons, Thousand Sons, Custodes, and more have all been powerful.

The meta shifts all the time in 40k. Some armies are typically near the top (CWE and SM), some are typically near the bottom (GK and DE). But it changes all the time.

One problem with the forums for Marines is that people always complain about Marines. Even when SM is the top book, there are just as many "SM are trash" threads on dakka dakka. SM is second to CWE only in "Who's been top dog the most" over the past several years. But you'll still see 10 pages of rebuttal and denial.

If you're getting into the hobby, don't pay so much attention to what people are saying about standings. First, because what you hear is going to be bogus. Second, what's top dog when you start building an army and what's top dog when you finish are not likely to be the same thing. Third, finally, and most importantly, your army should be what you enjoy most - if all you care about is the crunch and the competition, computers do that better.

So this is a great place to ask questions about tactics or discuss the hobby, but a terrible place to inform what you should and shouldn't be collecting/building/painting. You spend far too much time on any given model taking it from grey sprues to table-ready warriors to field someone else's idea of what an army should be.

 Imateria wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
For what they do, Drukhari are pretty damn cheap.

Anti horde is very much a problem for this army and we hate kill point missions.

Unless it's ITC kill points, where the "kill points" are power level.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Maybe I have special skills of prediction but I can pretty much tell you how strong an army will be just by looking at their units/ weapons/ and how much they cost.

Maybe because these are the only things that matter when determining if an army is strong on not.

The thing is tho, DE has some clear weakness, if tournaments dont play with those that doesnt mean DE is insanely strong, it means they are Scissor in a Paper's world.

I still stand by my 1st post, DE isnt the problem, honestly SM are just weak atm, over costed due to a couple things in the codex that dont scale well with each other and are hard to balance.

I totally agree with you - they aren't over the top compared to craftworlds/nids/AM+soup. Space marines are just trash - it's time people just admit it. Getting tired of repeating myself. Give people like the OP an honest assessment - stop expecting to beat nuclear subs with diesels. You will fail every-time.

Also - it really doesn't have a weakness ether. They can be tough with covens/ have insane shooting and mobility with kabals / cults can tie up expensive units for pennies.

An honest assessment is also realizing that "army tiers" matter far, far, far FAR less when you stop looking at things from a competitive/tournament standpoint.

Look at the matchup OP is facing here. Notice that it's a single mixed drukhari battalion, with no ravagers, and no grotesques, and a unit of incubi. Either that or it's two patrols and his opponent is playing with 3CP.

That's not a list that's going to categorically invalidate a marine list. Asserting that that is so is being categorically dishonest. OPs list/lists is definitely more casual, but the fact that he's got expensive heavy weapons in tactical squads, random sgt chronus in a Razorback, double captains and no lieutenant, mixed weapons in squads etc is much more of a major factor than the fact that he's playing a low-tier army.

When people don't separate the level of importance army tiers play in competitive tournament metas and the level of importance they place in casual club metas, they start blaming army tier for losses that are caused by suboptimal list and game decisions, and those list and game decisions are never improved. As a consequence, they're just going to keep losing until they get frustrated and quit.

it is equally fantasy to pretend that army tiers don't matter or make a difference at all, but generally when giving tactical advice or receiving it, it's a helpful fantasy, because it keeps your brain from diverting to the easy, emotionally pleasing "I lost because of circumstances that were outside my control and for no other reason! Damn you GW!!!!!!!"

All you are gonna do is start an arms race that he will eventually lose because his arms dealer sucks compared to the other guy. Best to let him know the truth.

Assuming the meta remains the same over the next six months. Which seems far from certain.

So, improving your play and list building decisions is just starting an "arms race" and the correct answer is to sit around and refuse to play (presumably while complaining online and telling others to give up) until such time as GW makes your army so top-tier that you can take your non synergistic poorly played army and steamroll?

I guess I can't say it doesn't seem like a popular strategy.

Bharring wrote:
Assuming the meta remains the same over the next six months. Which seems far from certain.

What is certain is that every comparable top teir choice in space marines is worse than the DE equivalent by more than a small margin. I'd like to think that marines will get a much needed buff but I really doubt it's going to happen. Marines are one of the most nerfed armies in this edition. Guilliman has been increased in price twice. The points drops on the units they buffed were so tiny - they didn't even make up for the nerfs on their actual good units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:
So, improving your play and list building decisions is just starting an "arms race" and the correct answer is to sit around and refuse to play (presumably while complaining online and telling others to give up) until such time as GW makes your army so top-tier that you can take your non synergistic poorly played army and steamroll?

I guess I can't say it doesn't seem like a popular strategy.

I put my marines on the shelf a long time ago. I only play them in fun games or as punching bags. If I want to play a competitive game I play tau/DE/craftworld/nids.

Yes I asume I played bad.From the beginning. Not having heavy weapons was a BIG mistake. I know. And I know next match will be better for me.

But, still have this feeling that Drukhari are much more better balanced in points and rules and that SM seems to be a little nerfed. But, I asume also that a nerfed faction well played can do it very well if you don´t do mistakes and choosing well.

I learned a lot allong this thread. He has much more experience tan me playing, and has his self SM ( knows SM weakness). Have to surprise him.

I will let you know next match. Now he has got new vehicles and also troops. Will be interesting.

regards

An additional piece of advice, an addendum to the keep them at arms length suggestion:

Do keep them at an arms length. But if their Kabs or Raiders get too close, don't be afraid to give them a nice big hug. With your fists.

Your Tacs are bad in CC compared to Incubi or Wyches, but against same-points Kabs or Raiders, if they were foolish enough to get too close, a surprise charge can do mean things.

Also note that transports/tanks charging will also throw people off. Your Razorback can actually charge things! Not the incubi, unless you really need to. But Kabs or Wyches. Conversely, their Raiders can charge you. Also, be prepared for this nasty surprise: their raiders can fall back *then shoot* because Fly.

To be a CC unit, you don't need to have a super awesome weapon or lots of attacks. It just needs to be better at CC than the poor sod opposite it. In small or casual games, that is often Tac Marines. Don't expect to see that sort of thing at top tables in tournies, but at your level, it can be a fun little surprise.

Don't expect your Tacs to kill things in CC, but they'll outfight things. And, typically, my Tacs do best in CC in taking the heat off my HQs - who do the real damage.

As others have said, in most circumstances, cleaning up your list and figuring out how your units play will go a long way towards evening the gap. Unless you are prepping for a major tournament, even against other good players army tier as a whole will seldom matter.

Of course if your pond is big enough, there may very well be some hyper competitive players looking to test out their latest tournament list. Just go into those games with a heads up and be ready to fast the worst of a hyper competitive soup list.

As far as fighting Elves. the best thing you can do is keep your forces together and push aggressively on the elves. The absolute worst thing you can do against Elves is play passively and spread out. Letting Eldar of any kind maneuver around terrain to isolate and destroy your army piece by piece is a recipe for disaster. Play aggressively and get in their face so that their superior mobility matters less. Its also important to not lose your composure after taking a big hit. Remember that Elves tend to have a very glass jaw, and even a weakened counter punch can often break their back, I know when I play my Eldar I'm often hopping for shock and awe to get into my opponents head and cause them to play more defensively instead of counter punching.

Actually, elves do NOT have a glass jaw to shooting. Don't fool yourself into thinking they do. To take away most of their special gimmicks, you need to be in melee.

Raiders are tougher than Rhinos against most AT guns.

Serpents are tougher than almost anything in the game vs D2 guns.

Venoms get a built-in -1 to hit, taking plasma off the table.

But the rest of the advice is great. But realize that you are going to have to focus a LOT of fire at their units.

"Raiders are tougher than RHinos against most AT guns" As long as AT is just Lascannons and better, not AutoCannons or such. And then, not by much.

"Serpents are tougher than almost anything in the game vs D2 guns" then don't use D2 guns. Against D6 or D1 guns, Rhinos are a lot tougher per point. D2 guns are perfectly optimised for not killing Serpents. Also, he's fasing DE not CWE.

"Venoms get a built-in -1 to hit, taking plasma off the table." Or don't overcharge the guns. You do half the damage, but you don't blow up. Sure, it makes spamming Plas as your AT weapon of choice suboptimal vs DE. I wish more things did that.

Anti-elite weapons (Plasma guns) and weapons desgned to pop super tough targets (Lascannons) are not ideal when aiming at either non-elites (Kabs) or light vehicles (Raiders). Anti-GEQ and anti-light armor weapons (Heavy bolters, ACs, etc) are a much better option. If you spec your army for killing Termies and Land Raiders, you're not going to kill DE efficiently.

Marines can't afford to bring a wide spectrum of weapons usually. I've punted all the lascannons out of my lists because of Xenos for these reasons.

I personally find plasma to be flashy, but ultimately not that useful for marines, because they can't afford the blow ups and -1 to hit trait cripples them.

Marines actually don't have that many good ways to bring autocannons or heavy bolters. I said GOOD ways. Not total ways.

Bharring wrote:
"Raiders are tougher than RHinos against most AT guns" As long as AT is just Lascannons and better, not AutoCannons or such. And then, not by much.

"Serpents are tougher than almost anything in the game vs D2 guns" then don't use D2 guns. Against D6 or D1 guns, Rhinos are a lot tougher per point. D2 guns are perfectly optimised for not killing Serpents. Also, he's fasing DE not CWE.

"Venoms get a built-in -1 to hit, taking plasma off the table." Or don't overcharge the guns. You do half the damage, but you don't blow up. Sure, it makes spamming Plas as your AT weapon of choice suboptimal vs DE. I wish more things did that.

Anti-elite weapons (Plasma guns) and weapons desgned to pop super tough targets (Lascannons) are not ideal when aiming at either non-elites (Kabs) or light vehicles (Raiders). Anti-GEQ and anti-light armor weapons (Heavy bolters, ACs, etc) are a much better option. If you spec your army for killing Termies and Land Raiders, you're not going to kill DE efficiently.

As math has shown already in this post, a HB is 2x stronger against a Raider than a Rhino, you need the right weapons for the right Job, there are NO SUCH THING AS AT GUNS ANYMORE, players need to learn this, Tanks are just MC now, you need weapons to handle each unit, some Tanks are better vs Lascannons, some are better vs HB's, and some you just need Bolters.

8th isnt like other editions, we need to stop talking about AT as High S high D weapons.

Yeah, that's what I was trying to say, too. You still need dozens and dozens of heavy bolter shots against a raider. So where is my statement about needing to focus them down being invalidated?

Martel732 wrote:
Yeah, that's what I was trying to say, too. You still need dozens and dozens of heavy bolter shots against a raider. So where is my statement about needing to focus them down being invalidated?

You can shoot Bolters, Bolt Rifles, HB's, Plasma, Tank guns (Stalkers etc..) Autocannons, etc..

In my experience, marines can't really afford to wound on 5's. Bolters are not much more effective vs raiders than any old T7 transport. Wjhen you get to Stalkers, now we are talking. But you still need mutiple 100+ point tanks to reliably down a sub 100 pt transport that the boards are calling "glass". Doesn't sound like glass.

I think that whatever marginal effectiveness gain some weaponry gains vs raiders is more than balanced out by 5++ and open topped.

Martel732 wrote:
Marines can't afford to bring a wide spectrum of weapons usually. I've punted all the lascannons out of my lists because of Xenos for these reasons.

I personally find plasma to be flashy, but ultimately not that useful for marines, because they can't afford the blow ups and -1 to hit trait cripples them.

Marines actually don't have that many good ways to bring autocannons or heavy bolters. I said GOOD ways. Not total ways.

As compared to who? Guard?

A Hydra costs pretty much exactly the same as a Stalker, and it gets .3 extra autocannon hits on the same target, but it gives up 2 points of toughness and access to marines' aura buffs.

You're not thinking about Leman Russ Exterminators I hope, 155 points for 4 shots, BS4+, same statline as a Stalker plus one wound?

HWTs are double the shots for the same points, but shoot at BS4+ and are T3 5+ and for every 2 damage you lose an autocannon.

Havocs? Sentinels?

If you only need 1-2 more wounds to get it to 1-2 wound profile, it'll be worth shooting 10-20 bolters/bolt rifles/SB's at it to see if you cant get that 1 more wound off, being 5+ BS is better than 4+ and shooting at and maybe wounding something else.

I've had games where i lost 3 in 1 turn, 5++ isnt that great outside of a block against D6 weapons. If i'm wounded with 4 Plasma and block 1, thats still 6 wounds through.

Stalkers are a very nice tank, as it shares many properties of IG tanks.

I don't suppose I see that many IG autocannons, because the ignore LoS artillery is so much better.

I think a Russ punisher is probably the best heavy bolter platform I can think of. Well, baneblades get 10 of them too.

HWT are good vs scrubs like BA, but definitely don't stand up to good lists.

This actually makes the autocannon/heavy bolter paradigm harder to execuse than I thought even in a soup list.

Marine platforms for these weapons are typically straight garbage, like predators.

Realistically venoms should be t4. That would probably fix them.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
If you only need 1-2 more wounds to get it to 1-2 wound profile, it'll be worth shooting 10-20 bolters/bolt rifles/SB's at it to see if you cant get that 1 more wound off, being 5+ BS is better than 4+ and shooting at and maybe wounding something else.

I've had games where i lost 3 in 1 turn, 5++ isnt that great outside of a block against D6 weapons. If i'm wounded with 4 Plasma and block 1, thats still 6 wounds through.

Agreed, but you need to get it that close to degradation to being with. Not easy with marines.

the_scotsman wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Marines can't afford to bring a wide spectrum of weapons usually. I've punted all the lascannons out of my lists because of Xenos for these reasons.

I personally find plasma to be flashy, but ultimately not that useful for marines, because they can't afford the blow ups and -1 to hit trait cripples them.

Marines actually don't have that many good ways to bring autocannons or heavy bolters. I said GOOD ways. Not total ways.

As compared to who? Guard?

A Hydra costs pretty much exactly the same as a Stalker, and it gets .3 extra autocannon hits on the same target, but it gives up 2 points of toughness and access to marines' aura buffs.

You're not thinking about Leman Russ Exterminators I hope, 155 points for 4 shots, BS4+, same statline as a Stalker plus one wound?

HWTs are double the shots for the same points, but shoot at BS4+ and are T3 5+ and for every 2 damage you lose an autocannon.

Havocs? Sentinels?

But if as you say S4 is enough why isn't a punisher with its 40 shots plus hull and sponsons in your list?

Martel732 wrote:
Stalkers are a very nice tank, as it shares many properties of IG tanks.

I don't suppose I see that many IG autocannons, because the ignore LoS artillery is so much better.

I think a Russ punisher is probably the best heavy bolter platform I can think of. Well, baneblades get 10 of them too.

HWT are good vs scrubs like BA, but definitely don't stand up to good lists.

This actually makes the autocannon/heavy bolter paradigm harder to execuse than I thought even in a soup list.

Marine platforms for these weapons are typically straight garbage, like predators.

Just play forge world. Lots of FW stuff obliterates venoms. Sicarians/Leviathans/deredos

It's on my list.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Stalkers are a very nice tank, as it shares many properties of IG tanks.

I don't suppose I see that many IG autocannons, because the ignore LoS artillery is so much better.

I think a Russ punisher is probably the best heavy bolter platform I can think of. Well, baneblades get 10 of them too.

HWT are good vs scrubs like BA, but definitely don't stand up to good lists.

This actually makes the autocannon/heavy bolter paradigm harder to execuse than I thought even in a soup list.

Marine platforms for these weapons are typically straight garbage, like predators.

Just play forge world. Lots of FW stuff obliterates venoms. Sicarians/Leviathans/deredos

I fething hate resin. And their prices. And for the last 10 months, I was in a league that disallowed FW.