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.

Back when I started playing 40k (*shakes cane), Astartes/Space Marines were head and shoulders better than most factions' other troops, but things like Bloodletters actually posed a challenge for them 1 on 1, and when Necrons were introduced they were actually tough for Astartes to take on. Thematically, this made the Astartes good antiheroes - sure, they were fascists, but the things they were up against were actually terrifying. Now that they've been power creeped to the moon, it's hard to take them as seriously - they're just this legion of super-powered fascists that are running around beating the crap out of everyone, they're not even sympathetic since they win all the time.

Your thoughts on this? If you were in charge of things, where would you put the Astartes profile with respect to things like demons and Necrons, which in other editions have either been their match or slightly their better?

IMO, if the stat line for a normal human became S2 T2 a lot of relative unit strengths would make sense. There are a lot of thematic misalignments that happen but that is one of the more prevalent.

To bring this around to the topic at hand, if a regular human was S2 T2 then things like Necron Warriors, Bloodletters, and Ork Boyz get to be way stronger than a human but still weaker than an astartes. And astartes get to be crazy potent compared to a human, which in the fluff they are.

I kind of like the fact, that humans are the meanest aliens in the galaxy.
I also like that they used the profile to differentiate more between the models. If you only use T3 or T4, Sv3+ or Sv4+ and W1 as all allowable profiles for infantry, then it is really hard to convey the impression of a space marine (or any other elite) being leagues better than a simply guardsman or gaunt. That in turn allows for necron warriors to be better than those two, but less strong than a space marine. Overall, it was a good change and I don´t mind it.
Now they just have to cost them appropriately.....

I very much dislike the continued boosting of Marines in relation to the other "troops" out there. The 2W thing in particular took it way too far.

From a thematic standpoint, I think the current marine profiles are actually about right. Lore-wise, a certain amount of plot armor is kind of marines' "thing." You want orks to feel numerous, eldar to feel fast, necrons to feel durable, and you want marines hit hard and last longer than a "realistic" reading of their fluff probably calls for.

So comparing a marine to a necron warrior, I like that the marine has an extra wound. I want the marine to feel like he can take a hit and keep going, and I want the warriors to be fielded in large groups and go down easily so that they can show off their spooky reanimation mechanics.

For multiple editions, marines really felt like they were basically just guard veterans with slightly better armor. They hit on a 3+. They could die to a single lucky lasgun shot. The marines just didn't feel quite right. 2 wound marines (especially 2 Attack marines like intercessors) basically have the statline I wanted firstborn to have for years. As savemelmac says, now they just have to balance them for their cost.

That said, inflating marine statlines has left a few units feeling a bit awkward. Eldar and dark eldar having an inch or two of extra movement really doesn't make up for all the speed-related rules they've lost over the years. Comparing the number of Attacks a striking scorpion has to an assault marine or a banshee to a vanguard vet is kind of disheartening. Tyranid warriors used to feel properly beefy when they had thrice the wounds of a marine, but now a heavy intercessor has the same number of wounds along with a much crunchier shell. Drukhari splinter weapons used to be a bit worse versus guardsmen than their bolter equivalents but better versus monsters and bikes and such. Now, the increased number of wounds on bikers and MCs combined with the various boosts to bolter AP (doctrines, primaris guns, etc.) has caused splinters to go from comparable/specialized to simply worse.

tldr; I like where marines are at because it fits their fluff/playstyle/"feel". However, the fluff/feel of many other units have kind of withered in comparison.

One of the cool things when Necrons were first introduced was how terrifying they were because they were better than SM - better armour, Tougher, better gun and with better special rules too. That really made them feel like an ancient, highly advanced threat (with a points cost to match, of course). I think with SM now pushing the basic statline to breaking point and piling loads of special rules on top we've lost that possibility, IMO. It'll be interesting to see what GW does with Aspect Warriors because they've usually been portrayed as being the equal of, or superior to, a SM in their area of specialisation. With the stat inflation of a SM I'm not sure how easy that will be to achieve with an Aspect Warrior.

Lesser daemons are probably fine being worse than a SM as that's usually been the case in the past. Some of them are a bit tougher, or slightly better in close combat, but overall daemons were usually outclassed by SM.

The big problem with pushing the stats and special rules as far as they have is with how the spread of stats now works. In order for units like Custodes to work, or just any slightly more elite unit than SM, we need to go to S/T5 and 2+ saves and loads of Attacks and Wounds and even better equipment etc. I'd have probably removed the Shock Assault bonus from SM at the very minimum when designing them for 9th. It would have been interesting to see a complete reworking of stats to put humans at S/T2 as another poster mentioned. That might have allowed the necessary room to represent the various unit types across all the races.

I think they pretty much nailed Necron design in this regard. Relentless. Tough. Knock it down and it will keep coming.

Daemons have never quite felt right. I can't put my finger on it. It isn't about the statistical values alone but the invulnerable save just never felt... enough.

Umbros wrote:
I think they pretty much nailed Necron design in this regard. Relentless. Tough. Knock it down and it will keep coming.

They felt that way when they were individually tougher than Marines, too.

Khorne daemons once were able to get SV 3+

Further i feel like daemons in general shouldn't have less than a 4++ (also not more but yeah), they are otherwordly horrors, just as likely to shrugg off massive damage as they are to be felled.

Another factor is that their corrupting lore never really has been represented well enough.
DG are a step in the right direction, except, dg well, aren't daemons...




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Umbros wrote:
I think they pretty much nailed Necron design in this regard. Relentless. Tough. Knock it down and it will keep coming.

They felt that way when they were individually tougher than Marines, too.

A marine shouldn't have more or equal W to a nob and better SV then the ancient horror skelleton metal thingy that is constructed out of living metal...
Yet here we are, marines have nobs level W, better SV and on top of it better weapons and a whole boatload of paragrpahs of free rules.

To really bring everything back into line there would need to be a complete overhaul, and that would mean raising the stats of all units across the board.
For example currently everything is kept down to a range between 2-5 for strength and toughness for troops which is just too restrictive. Why not go as high as 7 or 8 for strength and toughness of marines, then use this as a yardstick for restatting everything else. Would it hurt the game if we started using bigger numbers?

I'm of the opinion that any troop out there should only have a higher stat than a Marine to show off that they're exceptional in that area, and should only have a lower stat than a Guardsmen to show off that they're unusually poor in that area.

I can't say I'm a fan of Marines getting power-boost after power-boost, so that even the elite units of other armies have been left in the dirt.

I also think it undermines many of the themes in 40k. Why does the Imperium need to fear anything when its soldiers can mow down enemy ranged units from afar, and club elite, alien-warriors to death in melee?

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
IMO, if the stat line for a normal human became S2 T2 a lot of relative unit strengths would make sense. There are a lot of thematic misalignments that happen but that is one of the more prevalent.

To bring this around to the topic at hand, if a regular human was S2 T2 then things like Necron Warriors, Bloodletters, and Ork Boyz get to be way stronger than a human but still weaker than an astartes. And astartes get to be crazy potent compared to a human, which in the fluff they are.

Honestly, I don't think this would have the desired effect. Because of the way the factions have been designed, Marines are the default comparison - not guard (i.e. 'regular' humans). Hell, the ubiquity of Marines already gives the impression that the Imperium consists of about 90% super-soldiers.

Hecaton 795854 11045604 wrote:Your thoughts on this? If you were in charge of things, where would you put the Astartes profile with respect to things like demons and Necrons, which in other editions have either been their match or slightly their better?

Yes. Demons melt from even looking or being around my dudes. They should die in droves again a Grey Knight army.

Hecaton wrote:
Back when I started playing 40k (*shakes cane), Astartes/Space Marines were head and shoulders better than most factions' other troops, but things like Bloodletters actually posed a challenge for them 1 on 1, and when Necrons were introduced they were actually tough for Astartes to take on. Thematically, this made the Astartes good antiheroes - sure, they were fascists, but the things they were up against were actually terrifying. Now that they've been power creeped to the moon, it's hard to take them as seriously - they're just this legion of super-powered fascists that are running around beating the crap out of everyone, they're not even sympathetic since they win all the time.

Your thoughts on this? If you were in charge of things, where would you put the Astartes profile with respect to things like demons and Necrons, which in other editions have either been their match or slightly their better?

Thematically, lesser daemons and Necron warriors are still terrifying. Remember that according to the fluff there are about 1 million Space Marines in the galaxy. The amount of Necron warriors in the galaxy is... billions? trillions? Maybe even more. And that's not even starting to talk about how many daemons might exist within the Warp (maybe even an infinite amount given that the Warp is so different from realspace). So the fact that 1 Marine might maybe be able to take on 10 Necron warriors or 10 Bloodletters at the same time and win fluffwise doesn't mean much. Those billions of Necrons or infinite amount of Bloodletters WILL overrun a chapter planet if enough resources are allocated to the assault.

It hardly matters since it's never really depicted in stories and most certainly not on tabletop. As it stands, if you take BL stories and tabletop experience, it's a miracle any xenos are left in the galaxy at all.

My Tyranid warriors make me sad now days, comparing them to new heavy intercessors is sad indeed

 vipoid wrote:


I also think it undermines many of the themes in 40k. Why does the Imperium need to fear anything when its soldiers can mow down enemy ranged units from afar, and club elite, alien-warriors to death in melee?
...
Honestly, I don't think this would have the desired effect. Because of the way the factions have been designed, Marines are the default comparison - not guard (i.e. 'regular' humans). Hell, the ubiquity of Marines already gives the impression that the Imperium consists of about 90% super-soldiers.

The only thing I can say to this, while Marines are over-represented on the table top [as you mention 90% super soldiers lol], in the fluff there is only about 1 million space marines in the entire galaxy. Some Imperial Guard 'Regiments' contain more troops than this.

Hecaton wrote:
Back when I started playing 40k (*shakes cane), Astartes/Space Marines were head and shoulders better than most factions' other troops, but things like Bloodletters actually posed a challenge for them 1 on 1, and when Necrons were introduced they were actually tough for Astartes to take on. Thematically, this made the Astartes good antiheroes - sure, they were fascists, but the things they were up against were actually terrifying. Now that they've been power creeped to the moon, it's hard to take them as seriously - they're just this legion of super-powered fascists that are running around beating the crap out of everyone, they're not even sympathetic since they win all the time.

Your thoughts on this? If you were in charge of things, where would you put the Astartes profile with respect to things like demons and Necrons, which in other editions have either been their match or slightly their better?

SM are not fascists. They are warrior monks bordering on becoming religious nuts which the Black Templars already accomplished.
Thus they have more in common with the Spanish inquisition hunting down perceived threats. Targets would be the xenos, the traitor and the witch.

The Imperium would need a dictator in order to be recognized as a fascist state. Such a figure was in the past the Emperor but he obviously doesn't rule the IoM anymore. The true rulers are the High Lords of Terra and so the Imperium has become after the Horus Heresy an oligarchy.

Marines are right at the moment, good stats, weaponry etc. T4 1W, 1A was a terrible statline for them.
Guardsmen are right in comparison.
Now we work on what's left.

Necrons should be tough but I like the mechanic of them just repairing and getting back up. It feels right, rather than just being harder to put down (would make them more expensive).

Eldar are in a weird place.

IMHO, I always liked that the old marine stat line wasn't "that" much better than a regular human. It was all a bit tongue in cheek that marines were "so amazingly more powerful" and yet on the battlefield, they really weren't - it was all internal-game lore propaganda and part of what supported broader ironies of the entire universe. The imperium wasn't really as great as it claimed to be. And it reinforced humanity really being on the brink of collapse. Now that they literally are super-powered by relative comparison it's done a disservice to the game's setting, IMHO.

Most of the game's basic units are in a pretty sad state atm. A space marine in relation to a guardsman, cultist, GSC neophyte, whatever is fairly OK.

But the classic comparison of:

Ork: As good at punching as a space marine, as tough as a space marine, but cannot aim and doesn't wear any armor at all.

^nope, now 1/2 as tough as a space marine

Necron: As tough as a space marine and as good at shooting, but slower and worse at melee

^Nope, now easier to kill than marines.

Tau: Better than a marine at shooting, but way worse at melee and just a guardsman wearing fancy armor on defense.

^nope, now worse than marines shooting pound-for-pound

Eldar: Equally skilled as marines and equipped with better technological weaponry, physically weaker but faster allowing them to win with lightning strikes but lose longer sustained melee fights, good armor but less tough

^nope, now just straight-up lose in melee basically no matter what, crappier weaponry comparative to marine equipment, and their "faster speed' amounts to literally +1" of movement most of the time.

Tyranids: Genestealers would get totally carved up by shooting but the second they got to grips with even terminator-armored marines in Space Hulk you were praying as the marine player.

^now just lose in melee pound-for-pound vs basic marine troops, even if they get the charge.

A Harlequin currently feels about like what an eldar elite specialist vs a space marine should feel like. A Banshee, Scorpion, Wych, Dire Avenger, whatever...all a bad joke.

Luckily, if the new statline for Incubi is anything to go off of, the drukhari book and hopefully the craftworld book will bring back that parity through increased offense. A3 S5 Ap-2 D2 for a marine-killing melee-only specialist is about where you should be.

the_scotsman wrote:
Luckily, if the new statline for Incubi is anything to go off of, the drukhari book and hopefully the craftworld book will bring back that parity through increased offense. A3 S5 Ap-2 D2 for a marine-killing melee-only specialist is about where you should be.

You say that but I'm not sure it will actually work out that way, at least as far as Incubi are concerned.

Incubi's damage has kept up with Marines getting 2 wounds. Okay.

However, there has been no corresponding increase for Incubi letting them keep up with the ever-increasing firepower of Marines.

In other words, Marines have stepped forward 2 paces, Incubi have stepped forward just 1. And they weren't exactly an outstanding unit to begin with.


Also, to be clear, I get that Incubi are a glass cannon and so shouldn't necessarily be getting massive improvements to their toughness/save. The problem is that haven't gained any improvement to their killing power (or even their speed) instead. All they've done is achieve parity with Marines in one aspect, whilst falling behind them in all others.

To me it seems like a worrying trend for non-Marine elites.

 vipoid wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
Luckily, if the new statline for Incubi is anything to go off of, the drukhari book and hopefully the craftworld book will bring back that parity through increased offense. A3 S5 Ap-2 D2 for a marine-killing melee-only specialist is about where you should be.

You say that but I'm not sure it will actually work out that way, at least as far as Incubi are concerned.

Incubi's damage has kept up with Marines getting 2 wounds. Okay.

However, there has been no corresponding increase for Incubi letting them keep up with the ever-increasing firepower of Marines.

In other words, Marines have stepped forward 2 paces, Incubi have stepped forward just 1. And they weren't exactly an outstanding unit to begin with.


Also, to be clear, I get that Incubi are a glass cannon and so shouldn't necessarily be getting massive improvements to their toughness/save. The problem is that haven't gained any improvement to their killing power (or even their speed) instead. All they've done is achieve parity with Marines in one aspect, whilst falling behind them in all others.

To me it seems like a worrying trend for non-Marine elites.

Assuming that the points costs from the recent MFM are the final points costs for the new Incubi statline I'm in no way concerned. Incubi are 16ppm for A3 WS2+ S5 AP-3 D2. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe they also got +1W on the Klaivex, +1S on all klaive weapons, and Ws2+ always as opposed to Ws2+ turn 3+.

We don't know how SFD is going to be shaking out but, for 16pts per model Incubi get a 138% points return rolling into even basic tactical marines even totally ignoring SFD.

I like that statline at that point cost. To me, it bodes well. Just my opinion, obviously the whole rest of the book could be a clusterfeth.

 Strg Alt wrote:

SM are not fascists. They are warrior monks bordering on becoming religious nuts which the Black Templars already accomplished.

T-thank you for coming to the defense of fascist space marines, but they remain fascist scum upholding the worst, least effective regime humanity has ever seen.

Anyway, let's talk about why GW thinks shuriken catapults, actual railguns, would have short range

Hecaton wrote:
Back when I started playing 40k (*shakes cane), Astartes/Space Marines were head and shoulders better than most factions' other troops, but things like Bloodletters actually posed a challenge for them 1 on 1, and when Necrons were introduced they were actually tough for Astartes to take on. Thematically, this made the Astartes good antiheroes - sure, they were fascists, but the things they were up against were actually terrifying. Now that they've been power creeped to the moon, it's hard to take them as seriously - they're just this legion of super-powered fascists that are running around beating the crap out of everyone, they're not even sympathetic since they win all the time.

Your thoughts on this? If you were in charge of things, where would you put the Astartes profile with respect to things like demons and Necrons, which in other editions have either been their match or slightly their better?

Necron warriors should be close (durability), but not on par or flexible. Their condition makes them limited.

Daemons should be nowhere as feeble as they are. They're supposed to be creatures of other world horror, not bad jokes.
Orks should be closer than they currently are.

Eldar Guardians and tau are about right. (Points not withstanding). Aspect warriors are definitely not right, including Incubi. And wyches are just sad.

Immortals are pretty equivalent now, to be honest. W2 isn't always the best way to represent being tougher.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
IMO, if the stat line for a normal human became S2 T2 a lot of relative unit strengths would make sense. There are a lot of thematic misalignments that happen but that is one of the more prevalent.

To bring this around to the topic at hand, if a regular human was S2 T2 then things like Necron Warriors, Bloodletters, and Ork Boyz get to be way stronger than a human but still weaker than an astartes. And astartes get to be crazy potent compared to a human, which in the fluff they are.

I'd rather bump Humans to S4/T4, and Marines to S6/T6. Adjust everything else as needed-GW opened up the statlines, but then didn't use them at all.

To the OP, though, it depends.

An ordinary Eldar Guardian? Joe-Schmoe militia of an ancient race? Weaker than a Marine.
An Aspect Warrior, though, should be a match for a Marine. Maybe less durable, but vastly better in their specialty.

Which relates to...

the_scotsman wrote:
Assuming that the points costs from the recent MFM are the final points costs for the new Incubi statline I'm in no way concerned. Incubi are 16ppm for A3 WS2+ S5 AP-3 D2. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe they also got +1W on the Klaivex, +1S on all klaive weapons, and Ws2+ always as opposed to Ws2+ turn 3+.

We don't know how SFD is going to be shaking out but, for 16pts per model Incubi get a 138% points return rolling into even basic tactical marines even totally ignoring SFD.

I like that statline at that point cost. To me, it bodes well. Just my opinion, obviously the whole rest of the book could be a clusterfeth.

16 PPM for an Incubi might be a relatively balanced price point for their abilities and stats.

But when a Marine costs 18+ points, it's not THEMATICALLY appropriate. Incubi should be a similar cost and similar power to Marines.

Eldar Infantry are sorely in need of a buff

They shouldn't be particularly numerous, but they should shred things on contact. Perhaps returning to one of their sources of inspiration, Tolkien's Noldor for inspiration. Eldar should be an army which is almost frustrating to fight. I say this as a primarily Tyranid and Ork player btw.

But Eldar infantry seriously need a buff, for a start increasing the range on their basic weaponry to match that of everyone else. 12 inch weapons on a fragile unit that can't be taken in the disposable masses my Termagants can be taken is is ridiculous.

But either Astartes need to be toned down or everyone else brought to a comparable level. Honestly outside of tyranids I don't know of any army which has the sheer variety of troops choices that Space Marines get. Giving the Xenos faction some of that customization tools would help roll some of this back. Such as rolling back Ork Ardboyz being turned into an awful stratagem into a proper unit for one. Say make a dual kit for Skarboyz and Ard boyz, both more elite than ork boyz, but with smaller unit sizes, have Ard Boyz just be boyz with 4+ saves and Skarboyz having 5+ saves but more melee punch than ork boyz, say something like having their attacks either be higher in strength or some AP boost to make them better against space marines.

But given my experiences with Necron Warriors in 9th, they feel durable, I've had times when I've dumped loads of shooting into a squad only for many of them to get right back up, and a Ghost Ark to help the remainder do so next turn. They feel like a horde that without massive force being applied will not die. I personally think that reanimation should be tweaked so that it also works on the bigger guys, for instance instead of not working unless you get the full wound count, allowing partial reanimations, for instance allowing a Skorpekh destroyer to return with a single wound remaining. Further reanimation applying those successes to models until all models are at max wound count then the remainder reanimate the fallen.

In terms of Imperial guard, well to be honest, the individual Guardsman shouldn't be murdering Astartes unless he has a melta gun or some heavy weapon. But Guard tanks should massacre Astartes in the open. Heavy infantry should get ripped apart by walkers in melee (if equipped for melee) or tanks in shooting. GW also needs to be less afraid of expanding the toughness of models and modifying the wound table so that I am not cutting his tanks apart with ork choppas.

Dark Eldar need some more work because yes they're a small faction compared to others but even base kabalite warriors should be decent infantry, not just guardsmen with poison weaponry. Enhancing their splinter weapons, or giving them rules to represent their ability to use these very effectively is where I personally think the direction should be. Giving them something that lets them tailor their poisons to their expected foe. Almost akin to the Deathwatches special ammo but chosen prebattle like the Necron's protocols. Give them like 6 choices that they can pay to upgrade those weapons with various exotic poisons or alchemical weapons. Paralyzers to slow the enemy down, fear toxins that reduce the effectiveness of enemy troops. That sort of deal. Plus give them a Trueborn kit for Kabalite elite infantry. Eldar as a whole should be amazing on a 1 on 1 basis, and they should be based around buffing or debuffing the enemy to make the little engagements very one sided and have things set to a careful plan. Give it room for the other player to put kinks that plan and I believe this would some depth to the plan.

Marines (Not Primaris) were balanced about right just before the 8.5 book, iirc. Tough as an Ork with the armor of an Eldar, with a Strength and Ld./discipline better than both.

savemelmac wrote:
I kind of like the fact, that humans are the meanest aliens in the galaxy.
I also like that they used the profile to differentiate more between the models. If you only use T3 or T4, Sv3+ or Sv4+ and W1 as all allowable profiles for infantry, then it is really hard to convey the impression of a space marine (or any other elite) being leagues better than a simply guardsman or gaunt. That in turn allows for necron warriors to be better than those two, but less strong than a space marine. Overall, it was a good change and I don´t mind it.
Now they just have to cost them appropriately.....

Marines aren't humans. Marines are Chimera.

But yes. I agree with this point. The issue is humans are too strong.