Switch Theme:

Just how "Elite" are marines supposed to feel?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Dakka Veteran




Annandale, VA

 Xenomancers wrote:
They aren't really glass they are t4 with a 5++ and hit them with catalyst. They are ignoring about half of all incoming wounds and they best part about it is it is guaranteed durability. I stopped taking the steelers though in favor of warriors.


So they have a quarter of the durability of Primaris despite being 70% the cost, until you layer on a psychic power- which we aren't, because this comparison is based on the units themselves and not all the other buffs that armies can stack on.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Blood Hawk wrote:
Marines have stalkers that d2. It's not hard to build lists with most factions that have lots of multiple damage weapons. Primaris Marines are easy to plan for with most armies.


Leaving aside that your example of a unit capable of countering Primaris Marines is a Primaris Marine, there is a massive difference between 'you can plan for it and take units that are a good counter' versus 'lots of armies basically every weapon they shoot at you does 2 flat or d3 damage', which is what Xeno said and is nonsense.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/02/24 21:49:30


 
   
Made in us
Morphing Obliterator



The dark hollows of Kentucky

 Xenomancers wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
So you're just gonna ignore the two differenr ways I just proved you wrong? Harlequins do not win in melee vs primaris wirh any weapon, and csm pay exactly the same prices loyalists do for all their shared stuff except for 1ppm for marines.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
What army has every weapon damage 2 or D3? Knights? Im coming up with one troop unit with only d3d guns, battle servitors.

Yeah knights is possible. DE and eldar too.
The tau missle spam that is coming (oh they get free AP too) - happy me (I have 15 tau suits with rocket pods).

I'm not sure you are correct here. If the quins (frozen stars) attack. They kill 7 primaris marines with caress (without reroll wounds which they gonna have). They completely make up their points in 1 turn if they have a troop master nearby.

So you're comparing sm troops against other factions' elites, heavy support, and fething super heavys?
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




Illinois

 catbarf wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Blood Hawk wrote:
Marines have stalkers that d2. It's not hard to build lists with most factions that have lots of multiple damage weapons. Primaris Marines are easy to plan for with most armies.


Leaving aside that your example of a unit capable of countering Primaris Marines is a Primaris Marine, there is a massive difference between 'you can plan for it and take units that are a good counter' versus 'lots of armies basically every weapon they shoot at you does 2 flat or d3 damage', which is what Xeno said and is nonsense.

It's Xeno, his posts are almost always hyperbolic. I have played with primaris Marines all edition, trust me they die fast when people plan for them. So the smart version of his point is armies can bring a good amount of multiple damage weapons if they want. Those weapons shred primaris.

Also I just mentioned stalkers because that is what came to mind (probably because I primary play Marines). Plenty of other troops can take at least some multiple damage weapons, for instance lots of troops can take plasma weapons. My Tau generally can't outside of missile pods on the turret drone, however my suits kill primaris just fine.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/02/24 22:05:27


 
   
Made in us
Ancient Ultramarine Venerable Dreadnought






 Blood Hawk wrote:
 catbarf wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Blood Hawk wrote:
Marines have stalkers that d2. It's not hard to build lists with most factions that have lots of multiple damage weapons. Primaris Marines are easy to plan for with most armies.


Leaving aside that your example of a unit capable of countering Primaris Marines is a Primaris Marine, there is a massive difference between 'you can plan for it and take units that are a good counter' versus 'lots of armies basically every weapon they shoot at you does 2 flat or d3 damage', which is what Xeno said and is nonsense.

It's Xeno, his posts are almost always hyperbolic. I have played with primaris Marines all edition, trust me they die fast when people plan for them. So the smart version of his point is armies can bring a good amount of multiple damage weapons if they want. Those weapons shred primaris.

Also I just mentioned stalkers because that is what came to mind (probably because I primary play Marines). Plenty of other troops can take at least some multiple damage weapons, for instance lots of troops can take plasma weapons.


I think that's a bit beside the point though. If I understand the OP correctly, the question should be about how elite marines should feel when compared to other "common" opposing units. How strong should marines feel against typical 40K enemies.

Like, they should beat up on GEQ. They should beat up on Orks, sorta. Should they be handily pummeling Striking Scorpions though? And my point, should they be pummeling Chaos Marines, because that's what Intercessors do. Half of the comparison is points to points, but also what are we after in terms of imagery? Loyalist Marines (Intercessors) just standing there and mowing down waves of the best troops the opponent can toss at them?

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot





I mean, he also claimed that csm got huge points drops in CA... Do we get to call that a lie or is it also "hyperbole" because of the 1ppm discount on csm vs Tacs?
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





the_scotsman wrote:
I mean, he also claimed that csm got huge points drops in CA... Do we get to call that a lie or is it also "hyperbole" because of the 1ppm discount on csm vs Tacs?


Well, they did. They just didn't get huge drops on analogues.

   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot





 Insectum7 wrote:
 Blood Hawk wrote:
 catbarf wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Blood Hawk wrote:
Marines have stalkers that d2. It's not hard to build lists with most factions that have lots of multiple damage weapons. Primaris Marines are easy to plan for with most armies.


Leaving aside that your example of a unit capable of countering Primaris Marines is a Primaris Marine, there is a massive difference between 'you can plan for it and take units that are a good counter' versus 'lots of armies basically every weapon they shoot at you does 2 flat or d3 damage', which is what Xeno said and is nonsense.

It's Xeno, his posts are almost always hyperbolic. I have played with primaris Marines all edition, trust me they die fast when people plan for them. So the smart version of his point is armies can bring a good amount of multiple damage weapons if they want. Those weapons shred primaris.

Also I just mentioned stalkers because that is what came to mind (probably because I primary play Marines). Plenty of other troops can take at least some multiple damage weapons, for instance lots of troops can take plasma weapons.


I think that's a bit beside the point though. If I understand the OP correctly, the question should be about how elite marines should feel when compared to other "common" opposing units. How strong should marines feel against typical 40K enemies.

Like, they should beat up on GEQ. They should beat up on Orks, sorta. Should they be handily pummeling Striking Scorpions though? And my point, should they be pummeling Chaos Marines, because that's what Intercessors do. Half of the comparison is points to points, but also what are we after in terms of imagery? Loyalist Marines (Intercessors) just standing there and mowing down waves of the best troops the opponent can toss at them?


I mean, this is the company that made the Ultramarines movie, lol. You can see how much they value narrative tension and faction parity in that one




Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
I mean, he also claimed that csm got huge points drops in CA... Do we get to call that a lie or is it also "hyperbole" because of the 1ppm discount on csm vs Tacs?


Well, they did. They just didn't get huge drops on analogues.


Mmmmm. Got it. So conveniently all the units they share are the same, but we can say they got a drop on something marines dont have so its fair.

A claim that cannot be falsified: it's PERFECT!

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/02/24 22:17:44


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




It's almost as though GW just writing CSM as mostly stragglers with less equipment doesn't actually work and we need a total rewrite to properly represent the Legions.

What do I know though? The happiest CSM players were in years was the Legion supplement in 7th, despite obvious balance flaws (anyone remember how absurd Death Guard were?), and that wasn't a brilliant piece of writing either.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Morphing Obliterator



The dark hollows of Kentucky

 Daedalus81 wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:
I mean, he also claimed that csm got huge points drops in CA... Do we get to call that a lie or is it also "hyperbole" because of the 1ppm discount on csm vs Tacs?


Well, they did. They just didn't get huge drops on analogues.

And loyalists didn't get any drops in ca because they had already gotten theirs in c:sm.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 Insectum7 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Spoiler:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Stormonu wrote:Marines are supposed to be the epitome - if not superhuman model of humanity.

But the thing is, even marines are generally inferior to many of the Xenos they face - not as swift or elegant in warfare as the Eldar, not as indestructible as the Necrons, not the unstoppable flood of biomass of the Tyranids or as technologically adaptive as the Tau. Nor are they as brutally cunning as the orcs and their endless destructive waves of hate.

Marines should be outgunned, outmanned and outclassed. But they hold the line because they must and win where they can through sheer tenacity of the human spirit. Not because they are 2W and have better faction doctrines.
Eh, can't say I agree. You're welcome to your interpretation, but I've never seen it that way.

A Space Marine should be feared by all who face them. It's GUARDSMEN who are inferior in every way to xenos races, but not the Astartes. The Astartes are as strong as an Ork Nob, as fast as an Eldar, as resilient as a Necron, as relentless as a Tyranid, and on a similar technological parity with Tau (Marines have power through brute force, Tau have power through perfect science and engineering).

Where a Space Marine fails is that there are so few of them. Each one is a squad, a small army unto itself, but the enemy is so much more numerous that even the apex of humanity (barring the Custodes, who are pretty much just the same thing to Marines as Marines are to everything else) must rely on their fearlessness and wits to triumph.

So no, I can agree that they should be outmanned, and as a result, outgunned (by volume, not quality), but outclassed? Hell no. If an Eldar is faced with a Space Marine, they should be scared. An Ork fighting a Space Marine will see it as a great challenge, or flee, if sufficiently prompted. A Tyranid synapse creature will see a Space Marine as a high priority target and allocate far more resources than necessary to take one out, as a grave threat to the Hive. Tau will look on in awe and terror as great brutish battlesuits shrugging off their fire rip and tear through their lines. Space Marines are, and should be, terrifyingly powerful. The catch is that they're mortal, and there's never enough of them.

It's guardmen who are the embodiment of human spirit, not the Space Marines. Astartes are the embodiment of humanity's brutality in war, and their answer to the horrors of the void.

And what about a Chaos Space Marine? Should Marines have more wounds and attacks and a better gun than CSM?
It doesn't tact marines and csm have the exact same base stats.

Intercessors, my friend, is what we're talking about. The new "marine baseline". AKA, the subject in the OP.

Which begs the question: how would people feel on merging of statlines?

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot





Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Spoiler:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Stormonu wrote:Marines are supposed to be the epitome - if not superhuman model of humanity.

But the thing is, even marines are generally inferior to many of the Xenos they face - not as swift or elegant in warfare as the Eldar, not as indestructible as the Necrons, not the unstoppable flood of biomass of the Tyranids or as technologically adaptive as the Tau. Nor are they as brutally cunning as the orcs and their endless destructive waves of hate.

Marines should be outgunned, outmanned and outclassed. But they hold the line because they must and win where they can through sheer tenacity of the human spirit. Not because they are 2W and have better faction doctrines.
Eh, can't say I agree. You're welcome to your interpretation, but I've never seen it that way.

A Space Marine should be feared by all who face them. It's GUARDSMEN who are inferior in every way to xenos races, but not the Astartes. The Astartes are as strong as an Ork Nob, as fast as an Eldar, as resilient as a Necron, as relentless as a Tyranid, and on a similar technological parity with Tau (Marines have power through brute force, Tau have power through perfect science and engineering).

Where a Space Marine fails is that there are so few of them. Each one is a squad, a small army unto itself, but the enemy is so much more numerous that even the apex of humanity (barring the Custodes, who are pretty much just the same thing to Marines as Marines are to everything else) must rely on their fearlessness and wits to triumph.

So no, I can agree that they should be outmanned, and as a result, outgunned (by volume, not quality), but outclassed? Hell no. If an Eldar is faced with a Space Marine, they should be scared. An Ork fighting a Space Marine will see it as a great challenge, or flee, if sufficiently prompted. A Tyranid synapse creature will see a Space Marine as a high priority target and allocate far more resources than necessary to take one out, as a grave threat to the Hive. Tau will look on in awe and terror as great brutish battlesuits shrugging off their fire rip and tear through their lines. Space Marines are, and should be, terrifyingly powerful. The catch is that they're mortal, and there's never enough of them.

It's guardmen who are the embodiment of human spirit, not the Space Marines. Astartes are the embodiment of humanity's brutality in war, and their answer to the horrors of the void.

And what about a Chaos Space Marine? Should Marines have more wounds and attacks and a better gun than CSM?
It doesn't tact marines and csm have the exact same base stats.

Intercessors, my friend, is what we're talking about. The new "marine baseline". AKA, the subject in the OP.

Which begs the question: how would people feel on merging of statlines?


Sounds great. But how about we price them in a way that every other faction in the game doesnt feel like vastly weaker second fiddles.

"Necrons are the highly durable faction. Theyre nearly HALF as tough as a space marine!!"
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




the_scotsman wrote:
I mean, he also claimed that csm got huge points drops in CA... Do we get to call that a lie or is it also "hyperbole" because of the 1ppm discount on csm vs Tacs?

Hey now, the CSM army gets exploding hits on a 6 vs Imperium units! That's pretty fething hardcore of a rule! Sure it doesn't work against half the armies you'll face but GW was totally writing with fluff in mind which is what the people want! Generic exploding 6s would just be broken!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
the_scotsman wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Spoiler:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Stormonu wrote:Marines are supposed to be the epitome - if not superhuman model of humanity.

But the thing is, even marines are generally inferior to many of the Xenos they face - not as swift or elegant in warfare as the Eldar, not as indestructible as the Necrons, not the unstoppable flood of biomass of the Tyranids or as technologically adaptive as the Tau. Nor are they as brutally cunning as the orcs and their endless destructive waves of hate.

Marines should be outgunned, outmanned and outclassed. But they hold the line because they must and win where they can through sheer tenacity of the human spirit. Not because they are 2W and have better faction doctrines.
Eh, can't say I agree. You're welcome to your interpretation, but I've never seen it that way.

A Space Marine should be feared by all who face them. It's GUARDSMEN who are inferior in every way to xenos races, but not the Astartes. The Astartes are as strong as an Ork Nob, as fast as an Eldar, as resilient as a Necron, as relentless as a Tyranid, and on a similar technological parity with Tau (Marines have power through brute force, Tau have power through perfect science and engineering).

Where a Space Marine fails is that there are so few of them. Each one is a squad, a small army unto itself, but the enemy is so much more numerous that even the apex of humanity (barring the Custodes, who are pretty much just the same thing to Marines as Marines are to everything else) must rely on their fearlessness and wits to triumph.

So no, I can agree that they should be outmanned, and as a result, outgunned (by volume, not quality), but outclassed? Hell no. If an Eldar is faced with a Space Marine, they should be scared. An Ork fighting a Space Marine will see it as a great challenge, or flee, if sufficiently prompted. A Tyranid synapse creature will see a Space Marine as a high priority target and allocate far more resources than necessary to take one out, as a grave threat to the Hive. Tau will look on in awe and terror as great brutish battlesuits shrugging off their fire rip and tear through their lines. Space Marines are, and should be, terrifyingly powerful. The catch is that they're mortal, and there's never enough of them.

It's guardmen who are the embodiment of human spirit, not the Space Marines. Astartes are the embodiment of humanity's brutality in war, and their answer to the horrors of the void.

And what about a Chaos Space Marine? Should Marines have more wounds and attacks and a better gun than CSM?
It doesn't tact marines and csm have the exact same base stats.

Intercessors, my friend, is what we're talking about. The new "marine baseline". AKA, the subject in the OP.

Which begs the question: how would people feel on merging of statlines?


Sounds great. But how about we price them in a way that every other faction in the game doesnt feel like vastly weaker second fiddles.

"Necrons are the highly durable faction. Theyre nearly HALF as tough as a space marine!!"

Necrons haven't been the tough faction since 7.5th edition. RP has always basically been a rule that's really easily denied and overall useless. As someone that started in 4th with Necrons as their first army, I can easily say this. What they were though is very middling toughness but some decent mobility with an overall lack of killing tools.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/02/24 22:29:02


CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Battlefortress Driver with Krusha Wheel




Douglasville, GA

I gotta say that Marines DO feel like a Faction that does everything. And, generally, can do something better than Factions that are supposed to be specialized in it. Will this always be the case? I don't know. 40k favors "going all in" on a gimmick, so it might be that, in the near future, the specialized Factions will get Buffs which drop Marines to the bottom of the meta (as they're more generalists). Eldar are still at the "top" because they have that skew mechanic.

But, in regards to "take options to deal with Primaris", I find that doing so tends to leave you vulnerable to other builds. For example, taking weaponry to deal with Marines can leave you lacking in options to take out Aeldari Flyers. Which kinda just goes back to the whole "skew is King" thing I alluded to.

I feel like I might be going on a bit of a tangent here, so I'll just stop here. The tldr; is that Marines DO feel like an elite army right now, but that may change quickly as the rest of the game "catches up" to the Codex 2.0 format.
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




Illinois

 Insectum7 wrote:
 Blood Hawk wrote:
 catbarf wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Blood Hawk wrote:
Marines have stalkers that d2. It's not hard to build lists with most factions that have lots of multiple damage weapons. Primaris Marines are easy to plan for with most armies.


Leaving aside that your example of a unit capable of countering Primaris Marines is a Primaris Marine, there is a massive difference between 'you can plan for it and take units that are a good counter' versus 'lots of armies basically every weapon they shoot at you does 2 flat or d3 damage', which is what Xeno said and is nonsense.

It's Xeno, his posts are almost always hyperbolic. I have played with primaris Marines all edition, trust me they die fast when people plan for them. So the smart version of his point is armies can bring a good amount of multiple damage weapons if they want. Those weapons shred primaris.

Also I just mentioned stalkers because that is what came to mind (probably because I primary play Marines). Plenty of other troops can take at least some multiple damage weapons, for instance lots of troops can take plasma weapons.


I think that's a bit beside the point though. If I understand the OP correctly, the question should be about how elite marines should feel when compared to other "common" opposing units. How strong should marines feel against typical 40K enemies.

Like, they should beat up on GEQ. They should beat up on Orks, sorta. Should they be handily pummeling Striking Scorpions though? And my point, should they be pummeling Chaos Marines, because that's what Intercessors do. Half of the comparison is points to points, but also what are we after in terms of imagery? Loyalist Marines (Intercessors) just standing there and mowing down waves of the best troops the opponent can toss at them?

Intercessors are infantry killing specialists. Complaining about them killing your T3 infantry is odd to me no offense. It would be like complaining that my cold star Tau commander with quad fusion is killing your T7 vehicle without an inv. That is kinda his whole job. If he doesn't do that well then I won't take him.

So yes I do think slow heavy infantry infantry with S4 guns should be good at fighting infantry. Because if they weren't I won't take them.

Also I do rather like the new Marines. They actually feel like Marines should feel on the table. You are free to disagree.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




the_scotsman wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Spoiler:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Stormonu wrote:Marines are supposed to be the epitome - if not superhuman model of humanity.

But the thing is, even marines are generally inferior to many of the Xenos they face - not as swift or elegant in warfare as the Eldar, not as indestructible as the Necrons, not the unstoppable flood of biomass of the Tyranids or as technologically adaptive as the Tau. Nor are they as brutally cunning as the orcs and their endless destructive waves of hate.

Marines should be outgunned, outmanned and outclassed. But they hold the line because they must and win where they can through sheer tenacity of the human spirit. Not because they are 2W and have better faction doctrines.
Eh, can't say I agree. You're welcome to your interpretation, but I've never seen it that way.

A Space Marine should be feared by all who face them. It's GUARDSMEN who are inferior in every way to xenos races, but not the Astartes. The Astartes are as strong as an Ork Nob, as fast as an Eldar, as resilient as a Necron, as relentless as a Tyranid, and on a similar technological parity with Tau (Marines have power through brute force, Tau have power through perfect science and engineering).

Where a Space Marine fails is that there are so few of them. Each one is a squad, a small army unto itself, but the enemy is so much more numerous that even the apex of humanity (barring the Custodes, who are pretty much just the same thing to Marines as Marines are to everything else) must rely on their fearlessness and wits to triumph.

So no, I can agree that they should be outmanned, and as a result, outgunned (by volume, not quality), but outclassed? Hell no. If an Eldar is faced with a Space Marine, they should be scared. An Ork fighting a Space Marine will see it as a great challenge, or flee, if sufficiently prompted. A Tyranid synapse creature will see a Space Marine as a high priority target and allocate far more resources than necessary to take one out, as a grave threat to the Hive. Tau will look on in awe and terror as great brutish battlesuits shrugging off their fire rip and tear through their lines. Space Marines are, and should be, terrifyingly powerful. The catch is that they're mortal, and there's never enough of them.

It's guardmen who are the embodiment of human spirit, not the Space Marines. Astartes are the embodiment of humanity's brutality in war, and their answer to the horrors of the void.

And what about a Chaos Space Marine? Should Marines have more wounds and attacks and a better gun than CSM?
It doesn't tact marines and csm have the exact same base stats.

Intercessors, my friend, is what we're talking about. The new "marine baseline". AKA, the subject in the OP.

Which begs the question: how would people feel on merging of statlines?


Sounds great. But how about we price them in a way that every other faction in the game doesnt feel like vastly weaker second fiddles.

"Necrons are the highly durable faction. Theyre nearly HALF as tough as a space marine!!"

I mean I'm all for lots of revisiting of points AND stats. Because of how weapons work now, I'm all for Exarchs getting the WS/BS2+ and W2 they had last edition for example, and actually making sure the Aspects accomplish what they're supposed to do in fluff.
Keep in mind, as you already know, I'm for a total revision of core rules as well, and believe some of these problems are greatly exacerbated because of poor terrain rules, IGOUGO, and the God awful Fall Back rules.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot





If you said "we want to make nearly every elite unit in 40k more expensive and more durable" I would probably say that sounds like exactly what 40k needs right now.

It also has a 0% chance of happening. Units like kabalites, guardians and genestealers being horde units that you shovel off the table a bucket at a time is exactly what makes gw the most money.
   
Made in us
Morphing Obliterator



The dark hollows of Kentucky

 Blood Hawk wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 Blood Hawk wrote:
 catbarf wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Blood Hawk wrote:
Marines have stalkers that d2. It's not hard to build lists with most factions that have lots of multiple damage weapons. Primaris Marines are easy to plan for with most armies.


Leaving aside that your example of a unit capable of countering Primaris Marines is a Primaris Marine, there is a massive difference between 'you can plan for it and take units that are a good counter' versus 'lots of armies basically every weapon they shoot at you does 2 flat or d3 damage', which is what Xeno said and is nonsense.

It's Xeno, his posts are almost always hyperbolic. I have played with primaris Marines all edition, trust me they die fast when people plan for them. So the smart version of his point is armies can bring a good amount of multiple damage weapons if they want. Those weapons shred primaris.

Also I just mentioned stalkers because that is what came to mind (probably because I primary play Marines). Plenty of other troops can take at least some multiple damage weapons, for instance lots of troops can take plasma weapons.


I think that's a bit beside the point though. If I understand the OP correctly, the question should be about how elite marines should feel when compared to other "common" opposing units. How strong should marines feel against typical 40K enemies.

Like, they should beat up on GEQ. They should beat up on Orks, sorta. Should they be handily pummeling Striking Scorpions though? And my point, should they be pummeling Chaos Marines, because that's what Intercessors do. Half of the comparison is points to points, but also what are we after in terms of imagery? Loyalist Marines (Intercessors) just standing there and mowing down waves of the best troops the opponent can toss at them?

Intercessors are infantry killing specialists. Complaining about them killing your T3 infantry is odd to me no offense. It would be like complaining that my cold star Tau commander with quad fusion is killing your T7 vehicle without an inv. That is kinda his whole job. If he doesn't do that well then I won't take him.

So yes I do think slow heavy infantry infantry with S4 guns should be good at fighting infantry. Because if they weren't I won't take them.

Also I do rather like the new Marines. They actually feel like Marines should feel on the table. You are free to disagree.

What about other "slow heavy infantry" with t4 and s4 guns? Should they be complete pushovers for them? Point for point?

The problem is that troops are a "tax" unit and intercessors are good enough that they don't feel like a tax whereas other armies troops feel exactly like a tax. In fact intercessors can often go toe to toe with elite options for other armies in their specialized roles.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/02/24 23:03:47


 
   
Made in gb
Mekboy on Kustom Deth Kopta






"They feel like Marines should feel" is one of the most subjective and poorly defined phrases I repeatedly hear on this forum.

If a unit "feels like Marines should feel", they're probably broken, because Marines are ridiculously OP in almost every piece of lore they feature in and this is synonymous with our thinking of what a marine is.

Unfortunately this does not make for a fun or balanced game, as we are now realising.

I've read Scotsman's maths on the first page and I'm not surprised. We have these units that are better at everything than the specialists. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that this is probably not a good game state to exist in.
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




Annandale, VA

 Blood Hawk wrote:
Intercessors are infantry killing specialists.


So are Striking Scorpions. But Intercessors are primarily a ranged unit, while Scorpions are primarily a melee unit, and yet the Intercessors are better in melee. Why's that?

I think there's a problem when a generic, basic, jack-of-all-trades infantry choice can reliably beat most specialist infantry while requiring very specific weapons to counter. There is very little risk in taking Primaris infantry because they serve as counters to a huge chunk of the game's units, while it requires a high investment in very specific units and weapons to effectively counter Primaris.

I've stopped playing my Guard because the only way to fight against 2.0 Marines is to take a skew list of all tanks, and even then it's an uphill battle. Infantry- even the 4pt Guardsmen that used to be the poster child for game imbalance- just aren't worth fielding.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




Striking Scorpions weren't that good to begin with though, and pay for that Deep Strike that should've been an Infiltrate. Their problems aren't related to whether or not Intercessors are too good. If a unit wasn't worth taking, a supposed broken unit being released never changed that, it merely exaggerated the issue.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




Illinois

 catbarf wrote:
 Blood Hawk wrote:
Intercessors are infantry killing specialists.


So are Striking Scorpions. But Intercessors are primarily a ranged unit, while Scorpions are primarily a melee unit, and yet the Intercessors are better in melee. Why's that?

I think there's a problem when a generic, basic, jack-of-all-trades infantry choice can reliably beat most specialist infantry while requiring very specific weapons to counter. There is very little risk in taking Primaris infantry because they serve as counters to a huge chunk of the game's units, while it requires a high investment in very specific units and weapons to effectively counter Primaris.

I've stopped playing my Guard because the only way to fight against 2.0 Marines is to take a skew list of all tanks, and even then it's an uphill battle. Infantry- even the 4pt Guardsmen that used to be the poster child for game imbalance- just aren't worth fielding.

Sword and pistol infantry have pretty much sucked all edition. The second marine codex didn't change that.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




Which is part of the Pistol rules, on top of falling back being absurdly easy, having issues to begin with.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot





Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Striking Scorpions weren't that good to begin with though, and pay for that Deep Strike that should've been an Infiltrate. Their problems aren't related to whether or not Intercessors are too good. If a unit wasn't worth taking, a supposed broken unit being released never changed that, it merely exaggerated the issue.


Thats why I used Banshees - theyre the anti marine killing aspect and GW just released new models for them, which is supposedly when they release the "broke rules to drive sales."

Believe me, there are plenty of pound for pound comparisons of supposed melee units that intercessors shellack pound for pound even worse. My premise was an intentional steelman situation where melee specialists magically teleport into combat ignoring oberwatch and the marines opt not to fall back.
   
Made in us
Ancient Ultramarine Venerable Dreadnought






 Blood Hawk wrote:
Spoiler:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 Blood Hawk wrote:
 catbarf wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Blood Hawk wrote:
Marines have stalkers that d2. It's not hard to build lists with most factions that have lots of multiple damage weapons. Primaris Marines are easy to plan for with most armies.


Leaving aside that your example of a unit capable of countering Primaris Marines is a Primaris Marine, there is a massive difference between 'you can plan for it and take units that are a good counter' versus 'lots of armies basically every weapon they shoot at you does 2 flat or d3 damage', which is what Xeno said and is nonsense.

It's Xeno, his posts are almost always hyperbolic. I have played with primaris Marines all edition, trust me they die fast when people plan for them. So the smart version of his point is armies can bring a good amount of multiple damage weapons if they want. Those weapons shred primaris.

Also I just mentioned stalkers because that is what came to mind (probably because I primary play Marines). Plenty of other troops can take at least some multiple damage weapons, for instance lots of troops can take plasma weapons.


I think that's a bit beside the point though. If I understand the OP correctly, the question should be about how elite marines should feel when compared to other "common" opposing units. How strong should marines feel against typical 40K enemies.

Like, they should beat up on GEQ. They should beat up on Orks, sorta. Should they be handily pummeling Striking Scorpions though? And my point, should they be pummeling Chaos Marines, because that's what Intercessors do. Half of the comparison is points to points, but also what are we after in terms of imagery? Loyalist Marines (Intercessors) just standing there and mowing down waves of the best troops the opponent can toss at them?

Intercessors are infantry killing specialists. Complaining about them killing your T3 infantry is odd to me no offense. It would be like complaining that my cold star Tau commander with quad fusion is killing your T7 vehicle without an inv. That is kinda his whole job. If he doesn't do that well then I won't take him.

So yes I do think slow heavy infantry infantry with S4 guns should be good at fighting infantry. Because if they weren't I won't take them.

Also I do rather like the new Marines. They actually feel like Marines should feel on the table. You are free to disagree.

Ahh, but you see, Striking Scorpions are also infantry killing specialists, and they've held rough parity with Marines troops with an emphasis and advantage in CC for 20+ years. And at the same time, Dire Avengers have been roughly equivalent to Tac Marines at shooting, and are also anti infantry specialists. Both units are now totally outclassed in each of their specialties by Intercessors. Likewise Necrons, who are billed as very tough troops, are now totally outclassed by the 2W Intercessors. Do you see the trend here?
   
Made in gb
Executing Exarch






Im surpised ishagu hasn't yet logged on to tell us how were all wrong and marines are weak in actuality(especialy UM) and IH are the only "strong" marines. (strong but not OP) But I guess it mus be early in the day.

Its been a good read, made me chuckle how its like talking to a wall lol.
It seems no matter what, some people just flat out refuse to accept endless stacking rules, superior number of options, and strategems and re-rolls maybe just maaaaybe gives some statistical advantages. radical I know...

Having one faction that is just plan good at everything and better than everyone makes for terrible game. If you cant see that I don't know what to tell you lol.
Its funny that competitive marine players in my local area are asking for games saying that they would like to play game against "different armies" by which they mean they don't want to play other marines lol.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 Blood Hawk wrote:
Spoiler:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 Blood Hawk wrote:
 catbarf wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Blood Hawk wrote:
Marines have stalkers that d2. It's not hard to build lists with most factions that have lots of multiple damage weapons. Primaris Marines are easy to plan for with most armies.


Leaving aside that your example of a unit capable of countering Primaris Marines is a Primaris Marine, there is a massive difference between 'you can plan for it and take units that are a good counter' versus 'lots of armies basically every weapon they shoot at you does 2 flat or d3 damage', which is what Xeno said and is nonsense.

It's Xeno, his posts are almost always hyperbolic. I have played with primaris Marines all edition, trust me they die fast when people plan for them. So the smart version of his point is armies can bring a good amount of multiple damage weapons if they want. Those weapons shred primaris.

Also I just mentioned stalkers because that is what came to mind (probably because I primary play Marines). Plenty of other troops can take at least some multiple damage weapons, for instance lots of troops can take plasma weapons.


I think that's a bit beside the point though. If I understand the OP correctly, the question should be about how elite marines should feel when compared to other "common" opposing units. How strong should marines feel against typical 40K enemies.

Like, they should beat up on GEQ. They should beat up on Orks, sorta. Should they be handily pummeling Striking Scorpions though? And my point, should they be pummeling Chaos Marines, because that's what Intercessors do. Half of the comparison is points to points, but also what are we after in terms of imagery? Loyalist Marines (Intercessors) just standing there and mowing down waves of the best troops the opponent can toss at them?

Intercessors are infantry killing specialists. Complaining about them killing your T3 infantry is odd to me no offense. It would be like complaining that my cold star Tau commander with quad fusion is killing your T7 vehicle without an inv. That is kinda his whole job. If he doesn't do that well then I won't take him.

So yes I do think slow heavy infantry infantry with S4 guns should be good at fighting infantry. Because if they weren't I won't take them.

Also I do rather like the new Marines. They actually feel like Marines should feel on the table. You are free to disagree.

Ahh, but you see, Striking Scorpions are also infantry killing specialists, and they've held rough parity with Marines troops with an emphasis and advantage in CC for 20+ years. And at the same time, Dire Avengers have been roughly equivalent to Tac Marines at shooting, and are also anti infantry specialists. Both units are now totally outclassed in each of their specialties by Intercessors. Likewise Necrons, who are billed as very tough troops, are now totally outclassed by the 2W Intercessors. Do you see the trend here?


DA are 11pts btw.. just saying.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/02/24 23:21:31


https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/772746.page#10378083 - My progress/failblog painting blog thingy

Eldar- 4436 pts


AngryAngel80 wrote:
I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
 
   
Made in us
Locked in the Tower of Amareo




GW lost their damn mind with the marines. Instead of making reasonable changes, they layered on rules on top of new rules. Marines just needed to be cheaper.
   
Made in ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





 Argive wrote:
Im surpised ishagu hasn't yet logged on to tell us how were all wrong and marines are weak in actuality(especialy UM) and IH are the only "strong" marines.

Its been a good read, made me chuckle how its like talking to a wall lol.

It seems no matter what, some people just flat out refuse to accept endless stacking rules, optons, and strategems and re-rolls maybe just maaaaybe gives some statistical advantages. radical I know...

Having one faction that is just plan good at everything and better than everyone makes for terrible game.

Its funny that competitive marine players in my local area are asking for games saying that they would like to play game against "different armies" by which they mean they don't want to play other marines lol.


not a tourny player but even if they weren't OP I know I'd get bored playing the same Iron Hands netlist every game

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in us
Steadfast Ultramarine Sergeant






I would say as marines are now, namely Ultramarines, feel elite compared to my Admech for instance and generally can do more than another armies infantryman. Small model count roughly 30 including vehicles. Admech I average on 70 models.

Being out numbered 2:1 I'd expect marines/custodes/etc to have more rules, or better stats, etc than a Ranger

That being said with the lethality of the game "elite" armies or status is more of a hindrance. I've yet to play a game past turn 2 since I got the codex with a win ratio of like 33%, near perfect win ratio with Admech (Mars) but I struggle with marines
   
Made in us
Ancient Ultramarine Venerable Dreadnought






 Argive wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
 Blood Hawk wrote:
Spoiler:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 Blood Hawk wrote:
 catbarf wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Blood Hawk wrote:
Marines have stalkers that d2. It's not hard to build lists with most factions that have lots of multiple damage weapons. Primaris Marines are easy to plan for with most armies.


Leaving aside that your example of a unit capable of countering Primaris Marines is a Primaris Marine, there is a massive difference between 'you can plan for it and take units that are a good counter' versus 'lots of armies basically every weapon they shoot at you does 2 flat or d3 damage', which is what Xeno said and is nonsense.

It's Xeno, his posts are almost always hyperbolic. I have played with primaris Marines all edition, trust me they die fast when people plan for them. So the smart version of his point is armies can bring a good amount of multiple damage weapons if they want. Those weapons shred primaris.

Also I just mentioned stalkers because that is what came to mind (probably because I primary play Marines). Plenty of other troops can take at least some multiple damage weapons, for instance lots of troops can take plasma weapons.


I think that's a bit beside the point though. If I understand the OP correctly, the question should be about how elite marines should feel when compared to other "common" opposing units. How strong should marines feel against typical 40K enemies.

Like, they should beat up on GEQ. They should beat up on Orks, sorta. Should they be handily pummeling Striking Scorpions though? And my point, should they be pummeling Chaos Marines, because that's what Intercessors do. Half of the comparison is points to points, but also what are we after in terms of imagery? Loyalist Marines (Intercessors) just standing there and mowing down waves of the best troops the opponent can toss at them?

Intercessors are infantry killing specialists. Complaining about them killing your T3 infantry is odd to me no offense. It would be like complaining that my cold star Tau commander with quad fusion is killing your T7 vehicle without an inv. That is kinda his whole job. If he doesn't do that well then I won't take him.

So yes I do think slow heavy infantry infantry with S4 guns should be good at fighting infantry. Because if they weren't I won't take them.

Also I do rather like the new Marines. They actually feel like Marines should feel on the table. You are free to disagree.

Ahh, but you see, Striking Scorpions are also infantry killing specialists, and they've held rough parity with Marines troops with an emphasis and advantage in CC for 20+ years. And at the same time, Dire Avengers have been roughly equivalent to Tac Marines at shooting, and are also anti infantry specialists. Both units are now totally outclassed in each of their specialties by Intercessors. Likewise Necrons, who are billed as very tough troops, are now totally outclassed by the 2W Intercessors. Do you see the trend here?


DA are 11pts btw.. just saying.

I don't follow?

My point is that DA are also anti infantry specialists, whose firepower in the past has roughly equaled tac marine bolter output or better. And now Intercessors shooting output is far superior.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in gb
Executing Exarch






Ohh I was just trying to highlight they now cost the same as tacs which is... well.. crazy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote:
 Argive wrote:
Im surpised ishagu hasn't yet logged on to tell us how were all wrong and marines are weak in actuality(especialy UM) and IH are the only "strong" marines.

Its been a good read, made me chuckle how its like talking to a wall lol.

It seems no matter what, some people just flat out refuse to accept endless stacking rules, optons, and strategems and re-rolls maybe just maaaaybe gives some statistical advantages. radical I know...

Having one faction that is just plan good at everything and better than everyone makes for terrible game.

Its funny that competitive marine players in my local area are asking for games saying that they would like to play game against "different armies" by which they mean they don't want to play other marines lol.


not a tourny player but even if they weren't OP I know I'd get bored playing the same Iron Hands netlist every game


Its virtually every colour of marines under the sun with people trying to come up with new "COCOCOCOOOOMBO!!!!"
Obviously IF/IH/RG being the most prevailent no doubt.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/02/24 23:39:34


https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/772746.page#10378083 - My progress/failblog painting blog thingy

Eldar- 4436 pts


AngryAngel80 wrote:
I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: