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.

I just wandered over to the 40k Tactics section and noticed something a bit astounding. We can all agree that SM's are the most popular faction in the game bar none. Yes there are different flavors but even the different chapters base most of their codex off the SM codex. So what did I notice? The SM tactics thread was started on July 28th of 2020, it has a grand total of 692 posts and just under 98,000 views. Thats a lot right? Well...no. The Ork Tactics thread which was Started in August of 2021 when Orkz got their codex has 5,027 posts and 340,000 views and they aren't even the top dog, Ad Mech, omnissiah bless their little clockwork hearts, was started in 2019 and has 5,174 posts and over half a Million views.

So why is this? I know from my own personal orky experiences that we are always in those threads talking tactics, debating what would work against new developments in the game etc etc etc. Why is it that after 2 1/2 years the SM Tactics thread has 7x fewer posts than the year younger Ork Thread? Why is it that they have 5x fewer views than the Ad Mech thread? Both those factions have smaller fan bases and definitely aren't represented in tournaments like Space Marines, so whats the deal?

It might be that Marines, instead of sticking to 1 thread, are instead generating more individual threads and thus the "mega" thread sees less attention because its all spread out.

Meanwhile other factions might simply be relying on one mega thread far more often and thus they appear to get greater interest, but might have way fewer separate threads outside.




Another element might be that marines, by general design, are "easy" to build forces for as a concept. Because they've a lot of generally fairly sturdy and versatile options. So it could be that there's less tactical chat because the army works much more easily than some other forces.

Correlation does not imply causation.

Many SM-players are active over at Bolter&Chainsword instead of Dakka.

Edit: And for what it's worth, no I don't consider my Salamanders boring, especially now post AoO.

Xenos I find the most boring. The players are always crying yet their codices are always the most OP

I cba checking the numbers but there's a 10 page DA and a 50 page SW thread literally within eye sight of the base marine one, alongside 2 newish marine threads. They clearly just don't group in the main space marine thread.

There's also more SM info out there in the wild, of better quality, which is easier to find.

Maybe it's a quality over quantity thing?
I mean, take the ork thread for example. If you cut out all the pages of wishlisting & rehashing how things used to work rt - 7th ed you'd shrink it'd post count dramatically.

ccs wrote:
Maybe it's a quality over quantity thing?
I mean, take the ork thread for example. If you cut out all the pages of wishlisting & rehashing how things used to work rt - 7th ed you'd shrink it'd post count dramatically.

Such is the ork way I suppose? Quantity is viewed as quality.

Are we talking about the fluff or about how they play on the table?

To be fair some of the writers of Space Marines are boring. I mean. Oh No. Marneus Calgar was stabbed in the heart. Again. And saved by having two hearts. Again.

 vipoid wrote:
Are we talking about the fluff or about how they play on the table?

The point of this thread is "look, people talk more about orks in the orks tactics thread thanmarines do in the generic marines thread." so it should be about tabletop but the ork tactics thread does have a lot of guff in as well.

From a narrative point I think marines can be very compelling, but GW wastes so much potential.

On the table, it’s tougher to make them interesting I feel in current 40k a lot of the bloat pushes around a lot of interesting forces as they will fall flat on the table top if you don’t go all in. But, I do enjoy my little marine force for other games now.

Moorecox wrote:
Xenos I find the most boring. The players are always crying yet their codices are always the most OP

Genestealer Cults are OP? News to me.

To clarify, are Marines boring from a tactics perspective

Primaris are boring.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Primaris are boring.

Hard to argue that things like an actual Assault troop and Aggressors are boring because you're perpetually stuck with the mindset of Manlet Marines for the sake of hating change.

SemperMortis wrote:
To clarify, are Marines boring from a tactics perspective

id aruge they are more of a "solved puzzle" than boring. The basic marine playbook hasnt changed in over 2 years. The points changes have fiddled with the relative efficiency of its elements, but they haven't (for example) made Assault Squads better than Vanguard Veterans. Both units fulfil very similar roles, but given the choice, people will nearly always pick Van Vets.

Its roughly the same across the board. I don't pay close attention to tourney list composition, but i wouldn't be surprised if the current best preforming lists for marines have not changed significantly in 18 months. If the "Ideal" list is basically circling around the same ground with minor changes to react to points adjustments, is thier really much to talk about in the abstract?

One thing to consider is that online discussion of Warhammer has one big void - tactics.


Tactically speaking we have very few actual discussions on the subject and often as not those few that do happen are very light on actual details. "Screen with chaff; play to the objectives" type comments.


Basically a lot of the "tactical" chatter is more army building chatter. What combos, what equipment sets, what models, what leaders etc... You can get a LOT of chat about that. However when an army is broadly well performing across the board and has a fairly easy division of units and unit roles; there's far less to chat about on the building side.



So perhaps whilst Marines are simple to build a list that works; the lack of general chatter of actual tactics online, stifles the conversation in general when there's armies that don't need much to ask or talk about when it comes to composing a list.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Primaris are boring.

Hard to argue that things like an actual Assault troop and Aggressors are boring because you're perpetually stuck with the mindset of Manlet Marines for the sake of hating change.

It's true, Aggressors aren't boring. They're some of the ugliest "marines" GWs ever put out :p

Marine players are too busy going on hot dates with celebrities and running fortune 500 businesses to post about "tactics" on 40k forums.

SemperMortis wrote:
I just wandered over to the 40k Tactics section and noticed something a bit astounding. We can all agree that SM's are the most popular faction in the game bar none. Yes there are different flavors but even the different chapters base most of their codex off the SM codex. So what did I notice? The SM tactics thread was started on July 28th of 2020, it has a grand total of 692 posts and just under 98,000 views. Thats a lot right? Well...no. The Ork Tactics thread which was Started in August of 2021 when Orkz got their codex has 5,027 posts and 340,000 views and they aren't even the top dog, Ad Mech, omnissiah bless their little clockwork hearts, was started in 2019 and has 5,174 posts and over half a Million views.

So why is this? I know from my own personal orky experiences that we are always in those threads talking tactics, debating what would work against new developments in the game etc etc etc. Why is it that after 2 1/2 years the SM Tactics thread has 7x fewer posts than the year younger Ork Thread? Why is it that they have 5x fewer views than the Ad Mech thread? Both those factions have smaller fan bases and definitely aren't represented in tournaments like Space Marines, so whats the deal?

in your example while orks have different subfactions, as far as i am aware they all use the same exact units and models for all klan kultures.
where as there are several unique units in the blood angels, space wolves, dark angels, and black templars alone. this means that people may choose to start chapter specific threads as a space wolf or imperial fist player wouldn't likely have much input about how best to utilize sanguinary guard and librarian dreads. this would thus detract a lot of attention away from the general space marine thread, and spread posts up between 5 or more threads if you consider that even the ultramarines now have enough unique units that make enough of a difference on the table that general marine players likely wouldn't be familiar with them.

Yes marines are boring. Not sure I can put my finger on exactly why anymore.. take your pick. Hype, bazillion entries but nuthin does what you want. OP looking units but the factions still lose so fething always. But it's true and why I moved on years ago to the better neglected legions. Now I can bitch about gw in style.

Only boring if you've played them before. I'm trying to help out young one with Blood Angels, having been mostly Necrons or Kroot for 20yrs, I'm constantly blown away by the amount of options, for freaking everything!

I'd argue they are boring if you HAVE played them before. I've played them all and a few twice. That said BA is its own animal I always thought they pulled them off pretty well. At least through 6th iirc I lost track after that.

 Overread wrote:
One thing to consider is that online discussion of Warhammer has one big void - tactics.


Tactically speaking we have very few actual discussions on the subject and often as not those few that do happen are very light on actual details. "Screen with chaff; play to the objectives" type comments.


Basically a lot of the "tactical" chatter is more army building chatter. What combos, what equipment sets, what models, what leaders etc... You can get a LOT of chat about that. However when an army is broadly well performing across the board and has a fairly easy division of units and unit roles; there's far less to chat about on the building side.



So perhaps whilst Marines are simple to build a list that works; the lack of general chatter of actual tactics online, stifles the conversation in general when there's armies that don't need much to ask or talk about when it comes to composing a list.

well, actual tactical discussion is dominated by the terrian layout, enemy composition, the relative positioning of various supporting units, and a whole host of other variables that make it basically impossible to talk tactics in the abstract becuase the answers to those inputs will radically change the "correct" answer. Also, given the slow response time for a question on this forum, you can't ask for real time help, only post battle analysis.

so, yhea, tactics threads tend to be about listbuilding and general overarching plans, becuase in game, its impossible to advise.

Astartes, friends, are boring. We must not say so.
After all the players purchase, the Primarchs return,
We ourselves purchase and return,
And moreover my mother told me as a child
(repeatedly) "Ever to confess you're bored
Means you have no

Strategic Reserves." I conclude now I have no
Strategic Reserves, for I am heavy bored.
Primaris armor bores me,
Primarchs bore me, especially playable Primarchs,
Guilliman bores me, with his hugeness and his strategies
As unending as the Heresy,

Who loves detachments and Eldar bitches, who bore me.
And the printed battlemat and the ruins, look ever smaller,
And somehow my Kill Tank
Has sat on the shelf gathering dust
Next to old codices and battlemechs, leaving behind
Me, groaner.

Yeah, they're boring, but they should have a place in the setting. I'd love to see them take a step back for a bit.

It'd be audacious, but imagine a new edition launch without a space marines vs. x starter.

Or even two boxes - one is Space Marines vs. Orks or Nids, the other is CSM vs. Guard

They are indeed boring and should be banned immediately at all venues and events, with the offending player escorted off the premises by a police officer.

The sale of Space Marine products should also be reported to trading standards.

SemperMortis wrote:
To clarify, are Marines boring from a tactics perspective

Loyalist Scum? In 9th edition 40k? Of course they are. Everything in 9th edition 40k is boring from a "tactics perspective".

Wait. Did you mean: "Are they especially boring for 9th edition 40k from a tactics perspective"?

Moorecox wrote:
Xenos I find the most boring. The players are always crying yet their codices are always the most OP

Yeah! Blasted Ork players and their OP tournament-dominating Codex!!! *shakes fist at sky*

Breton wrote:
To be fair some of the writers of Space Marines are boring. I mean. Oh No. Marneus Calgar was stabbed in the heart. Again. And saved by having two hearts. Again.

This, I find space marine stories boring. I have no issues with how marines play in-game, though I do have issues with how much attention they get.