Effect of 2+ power armour?

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.

**Sir Heckington**

Martel732 wrote:
Sir Heckington wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
SM durability is absolutely an issue.

Which isn't fixed by marines. A marine is just as durable against a lasgun as he should be, and just as durable against a lascannon as he should be. The prevalence of AP should be lessened, marine's don't need the boost.

Marine's output is the issue that needs to be fixed by marines.

Not compared to 4 pt lasguns doubled by 30 pt dum dums.

Maybed those 4 point lasguns need nerfed then huh?

**Mr Morden**

epronovost wrote:
The_Real_Chris wrote:

Nope, just astartes with all their bio engineering and special armour and armour interfaces.

I would consider this a mistake. The fluff explicitly stated in previous SoB codexes that Sisters armors were offering equal protection to that of Space Marines, but failed to provide them the same level of strength enhancement. Technically, the bio engineering of Space Marines is represented by their Strength and Toughness of 4 (formerly Initiative of 4 or 5 for more heroic Space Marines). A better autosense or magboots can ill explain a higher resistence to heavy fire. In the smae fashion, the Black Carapace is nothing more than a cluster of nerves implanted bellow the skin, it provides no protection, it's just a neural interface for the armor that allows it to be grafted so to speak on their skin. At best, it could explain Marines having a slightly higher movement speed compared to Sisters and explains their higher toughness. Considering that Space Marines aren't much tougher than Orks, it's unlikely that they should gain a toughness of 5. The problem of Space Marines isn't with Space Marines themselves all that much it's with the fact that a weapon out of 5 (or even 3) out there can be an anti-tank weapon or at least something that can destroy light vehicles. Of course, these will slaugther Space Marines these weapons are made to kill things way tougher than Marines in droves. What Space Marines truly need to receive a defense boost is a reduction in cost or of the global firepower available on the board at any given time (usually by making heavy restriction on none troop units). I would prefer option two, but many people love the min-max system. Failling the small boost in offense I proposed earlier seem to be the most reasonnable way to go.

Agreed - you simply can't match fluff Marines AND still field them in large numbers. Especially when the fluff argument is not even correct......

Space Marines should move quickly - that would be quite interesting actually.

**epronovost**

Mr Morden wrote:
Agreed - you simply can't match fluff Marines AND still field them in large numbers. Especially when the fluff argument is not even correct......

Space Marines should move quickly - that would be quite interesting actually.

They are supposed to be shock troopers so yes, they should move around a bit more quickly then they currently do. As of now, their mobility isn't that much greater than that of Guards who are supposed to be slow and ponderous. Space Marines aren't supposed to be a gunline army. I don't think we should strive to make them into one.

**Sir Heckington**

Space Marines aren't supposed to be a gunline army.

I'd like to note that one of Space marines main appeal (to me at the very least) is versatility. I can build a gunline Iron Hands army, or a melee Black Templar army. Or mix them! They should be able to play both as a gunline army and as a melee army. They should excel in both roles imo, but I do agree some extra mobility would be nice.

**Bharring**

Marines should be shooting the choppy, and chopping the shooty. That's hard to pull off with the current rulesset.

**epronovost**

Bharring wrote:
Marines should be shooting the choppy, and chopping the shooty. That's hard to pull off with the current rulesset.

The fact close combat is so much more difficult to use effectively than shooting is indeed a big problem that's why I think giving them a bit more mobility by making their tanks and infantry slightly faster would allow them to be more versatile.

**Mr Morden**

Sir Heckington wrote:

Space Marines aren't supposed to be a gunline army.

I'd like to note that one of Space marines main appeal (to me at the very least) is versatility. I can build a gunline Iron Hands army, or a melee Black Templar army. Or mix them! They should be able to play both as a gunline army and as a melee army. They should excel in both roles imo, but I do agree some extra mobility would be nice.

They "Should " be great at most things - but then they have to be you know much more expensive which causes other issues.

**Sir Heckington**

Mr Morden wrote:
Sir Heckington wrote:
Space Marines aren't supposed to be a gunline army.

I'd like to note that one of Space marines main appeal (to me at the very least) is versatility. I can build a gunline Iron Hands army, or a melee Black Templar army. Or mix them! They should be able to play both as a gunline army and as a melee army. They should excel in both roles imo, but I do agree some extra mobility would be nice.

They "Should " be great at most things - but then they have to be you know much more expensive which causes other issues.

I do agree there. Also with the current rules melee is gak outside of a few cases.

**fraser1191**

Properly pointed marines and God forbid giving assault marines power weapons would go a long way to giving marines solid melee.

I think giving JP reroll charges would be nice too(I know BT trait is that but they need a better one anyway)

**Luke_Prowler**

The problem with giving space marines a +1 to their armor (or even just an AP reduction) is that when combined with other positive defensive modifiers. weapons that were meant to deal with power armor specificly, like hellguns and inferno pistols, would basicly be a joke

**BaconCatBug**

So give to them only against small arms. Give them the same rule that Steel Legion have, or give them +1 vs AP0 and AP-1.

**Grey Templar**

Honestly, short of a new edition sized overhaul, Space Marines can't really be fixed. And the fix that would be necessary is one GW will not do because they want you to buy lots of models.

Space Marines should really have gotten Primaris Marine-ish stats, and Primaris should have never happened(but thats neither here nor there).

If I were to stat a tactical marine appropriately, I would go for something like

WS3+, BS3+, Str5, T5, W2, A2, Save 2+(sergeants, vets, terminators, etc... would gain +1 in WS/BS/attacks)

2 new Special Rules:

Ossmodula: When suffering wounds, attacks which cause multiple wounds reduce the number of wounds caused by 1 to a minimum of 1. Attacks with a strength of 3 or less must reroll successful to wound rolls.

Larraman's Organ: After suffering wounds, but before removing casualties, you may roll a D6 for each non-Mortal Wound that was suffered. For each roll of 6 or higher, you may ignore 1 wound.

Astartes Power Armor now gives a 2+ armor save. TDA gives a 1+ save.

**Slayer-Fan123**

Sounds like you just want Custodes. Go play Custodes.

**Dandelion**

Grey Templar wrote:
Honestly, short of a new edition sized overhaul, Space Marines can't really be fixed. And the fix that would be necessary is one GW will not do because they want you to buy lots of models.

What do you mean by "fixed"? I'm sure if GW dropped them to 10 pts apiece and cheaper guns then Marines players would be all over them, while also forcing the players to buy more marines.
Granted, that's a boring fix and I, too, would prefer a primarisation of their stats just for the sake of in game presence, but it would "work" in game terms.

Though tbh I suspect a special weapons upgrade sprue might be coming along for primaris. Currently, the primaris upgrade sprues have weapons that you don't get in the core boxes, so GW is likely to rectify that with a generic one with at least melee weapons but probably also grav, flamers, heavy bolters etc... Then boom, all old marines get upgraded to primaris and everything's hunky dory. Unless you're Chaos and you don't get primaris and are stuck with slightly shorter marines that only have 1W and 1A.

**some bloke**

Regarding an improvement to their resilience against small arms fire but without limiting powerful weapons, what about a flat +1 to save if targeted by anything which has a damage statistic of 1?

This way anything built for taking out tanks will still hurt them, but basic weapons will be much less effective.

(I thought about having -1 to wound if damage 1, but that's something that's easy to miss and involves stopping the opponent halfway through their attack to explain, which is bad.)

**Galef**

some bloke wrote:
Regarding an improvement to their resilience against small arms fire but without limiting powerful weapons, what about a flat +1 to save if targeted by anything which has a damage statistic of 1?

This is what Thousand Sons already have, so you'd need to give them something different.

-

**Kitane**

some bloke wrote:

...

(I thought about having -1 to wound if damage 1, but that's something that's easy to miss and involves stopping the opponent halfway through their attack to explain, which is bad.)

I was going to bring this up while reading through his topic and there was your post right at the end. It's not more complicated than the negative modifier to hit.

We have both rerolls and positive/negative modifiers for rolls to hit
We have rerolls and positive modifiers for rolls to wound
We have a weird sort of a rerolls for damage in form of melta, and also extra/reduced damage.

A negative modifier to wound isn't used anywhere, and it could.

It would be a third way to make a unit feel durable:
1) FnP - effective against everything, extra effective when the incoming damage characteristic equals wounds on multi-wound models.
2) Reduction of damage - effective against heavy weapons, but no effect against light weapons
3) -1 to wound (6+ still wounds) - highly effective against low strength weapons, less effective against high strength weapons, but still useful.

MEQ and TEQ would go from 100% extra durability against S3 to 25% extra durability against S8+

**JNAProductions**

Actually, Shadowseers give a -1 To wound aura.

**some bloke**

I just thought that a -1 to wound is a lot easier to miss, it's better if your rules affect your rolls, that way it's your responsibility to remember them.

**BaconCatBug**

-1 to wound is a simpler and more elegant solution that things like "re-roll successful wounds against weapons with strength less than toughness".