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.

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:
While a cool idea wouldn't it just be easier to make the bolter have the assault special rule then give ALL Marines relentless? That would be op in my opinion.

This is something of an aside, but I've been wondering whether it would make more sense to ditch the Assault, Rapid Fire, heavy and Salvo rules and just give weapons a separate profile for when the firer moved. Keep 'Assault' as a special rule (which allows the firer to still charge in the assault phase).

Seems like it would be simpler than messing around with weapon types that have lost a lot of meaning anyway, and would also allow more flexibility in weapons.

Right... because Space Marines already ignore moral... they should also ignore the weapon-type restrictions that go with their relatively cheap melta, plasma, flamer, and grav weapons.

Remember, movement prior to the shooting phase is on a per model basis already. You can have your plasma gunner stay still and fire at full BS even though the entire unit has moved around him.

Long and short, Space Marines don't need any help. They are, and will always be one of the strongest armies of any edition. Just because rumors of Necron detachment giving all troops relentless shouldn't make any space marine jealous.

 Anpu-adom wrote:
Right... because Space Marines already ignore moral... they should also ignore the weapon-type restrictions that go with their relatively cheap melta, plasma, flamer, and grav weapons.

Remember, movement prior to the shooting phase is on a per model basis already. You can have your plasma gunner stay still and fire at full BS even though the entire unit has moved around him.

Long and short, Space Marines don't need any help. They are, and will always be one of the strongest armies of any edition.

Don't ignore moral. Don't ignore pinning. In game terms the only real benifit of TSKNF is not being swept to death - more often than not this hurts you more than it helps you - unless you have calgar as a warlord - then it can be a little more helpful. Marines are an aggressive unit, they don't hide on the board edge so immunity to falling off the board is basically an afterthought. Gardians get relentless platforms at bs 4...it's really not breaking the game as they aren't even used. Also it's undeniable that looking at a marine statline that we pay a premium for they are intended to be used in assault with WS4 and STR4. Then you give them a rapid fire weapon? Just doesn't make sense and it doesn't work. Lots of ideas are suggested all the time to fix PA marines. So much hostility about these units actually being viable. It disgusts me.

 Anpu-adom wrote:
Right... because Space Marines already ignore moral... they should also ignore the weapon-type restrictions that go with their relatively cheap melta, plasma, flamer, and grav weapons.

Remember, movement prior to the shooting phase is on a per model basis already. You can have your plasma gunner stay still and fire at full BS even though the entire unit has moved around him.

Long and short, Space Marines don't need any help. They are, and will always be one of the strongest armies of any edition.

If you're referring to my post, that wasn't the suggestion I was making.

Right... now you are complaining that being immune to 'fear' isn't good enough because it used to be better when you could choose to fail, regroup, shoot, and then charge in again all on the next turn.
Get this... most Xenos codecs have Fear as one of their Warlord traits... and you are immune. All deamons have fear as one of their special rules... a rule that the units pay for as part of their cost... and you are immune. As already pointed out, Dark Eldar also have fear as part of their army rules... and you are immune.

Chaos Space Marines, who live in what amounts to hell aren't immune from fear. If you want to argue from fluff, they are the ones who should have ATSKNF.

Between ATSKNF, Chapter Tactics, cheap heavy and special weapons, easy to get 2+ and good invuln saves... Marines don't need any help to be good and easy to play. So what if your troops aren't as awesome as the fluff... they are still way better than most of the troop choices in the game.

 Anpu-adom wrote:
Right... now you are complaining that being immune to 'fear' isn't good enough because it used to be better when you could choose to fail, regroup, shoot, and then charge in again all on the next turn.
Get this... most Xenos codecs have Fear as one of their Warlord traits... and you are immune. All deamons have fear as one of their special rules... a rule that the units pay for as part of their cost... and you are immune. As already pointed out, Dark Eldar also have fear as part of their army rules... and you are immune.

Chaos Space Marines, who live in what amounts to hell aren't immune from fear. If you want to argue from fluff, they are the ones who should have ATSKNF.

Between ATSKNF, Chapter Tactics, cheap heavy and special weapons, easy to get 2+ and good invuln saves... Marines don't need any help to be good and easy to play. So what if your troops aren't as awesome as the fluff... they are still way better than most of the troop choices in the game.

You are correct - CSM should have TSKNF - can't imagine a marine player would ever disagree with this. Be warned though - paying an extra point for a mostly worthless ability wont end well. I agree with you 100% though. A chaos marine should probably be fearless. I think the reasoning behind the ruling was to suggest that chaos marines are broken men. A broken mans will is weaker than a a loyalist who is willing and determined to die for his cause if the need arise. Perhaps a chaos marine who has chosen and lusts for personal gain might know true fear whilst being torn apart by an all powerful force when a loyalist embraces the fear an prepares for a glorious death.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Anpu-adom wrote:
Right... because Space Marines already ignore moral... they should also ignore the weapon-type restrictions that go with their relatively cheap melta, plasma, flamer, and grav weapons.

Remember, movement prior to the shooting phase is on a per model basis already. You can have your plasma gunner stay still and fire at full BS even though the entire unit has moved around him.

Long and short, Space Marines don't need any help. They are, and will always be one of the strongest armies of any edition.

Don't ignore moral. Don't ignore pinning. In game terms the only real benifit of TSKNF is not being swept to death - more often than not this hurts you more than it helps you - unless you have calgar as a warlord - then it can be a little more helpful. Marines are an aggressive unit, they don't hide on the board edge so immunity to falling off the board is basically an afterthought. Gardians get relentless platforms at bs 4...it's really not breaking the game as they aren't even used. Also it's undeniable that looking at a marine statline that we pay a premium for they are intended to be used in assault with WS4 and STR4. Then you give them a rapid fire weapon? Just doesn't make sense and it doesn't work. Lots of ideas are suggested all the time to fix PA marines. So much hostility about these units actually being viable. It disgusts me.

You know that all marines have bolt pistols right?

Yay. I gave my tac squad a plasma gun, I can't use it if I need to charge. Worth

 raiden wrote:
Yay. I gave my tac squad a plasma gun, I can't use it if I need to charge. Worth

Just don't shoot and charge - what's the big deal? You want all the benefits and no drawbacks. Man, it's not codex: Eldar.

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:
While a cool idea wouldn't it just be easier to make the bolter have the assault special rule then give ALL Marines relentless? That would be op in my opinion.

I think you might have the perfect solution there.

AnFéasógMór wrote:
That would be crazy overpowered, IMO, especially for only 1-2 points. For one thing it would all but double the number of shot's you're firing, for all of 25-50 points difference across your whole army, since it would mean everybody is going to rapid fire at least one additional time, before charging. It would also remove all impetus to strategically place heavy weapons units. I'm just sitting here imagining the amount of devastation my Long Fangs could do if they were able to just chase vehicle around the field to keep them in range, shooting lascannons at full BS. I wouldn't object to the idea of being able to somehow purchase relentless for models, but it should be something like 10 points per model, and certainly not available for things like most chapters' neophyte scouts.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Why is it that whenever we get "X doesn't reflect the fluff, we should buff it!" it's always a Marine player?

I don't know. I see lot's of Sisters players constantly pointing out that in the fluff they don't suck donkey hole, and the rules should reflect that.

Wow, you are really on fire against marine players wanting a buff (remembering from other threads). I know you have a crusade against them, but to be honest, I get the sense you have an ulterior motive? Like you secretly hate the bell bottoms SM's have....

You do realize that space marines play a bigger part in the universe than aspect warriors, and going from lore, are probably 'better' than most xenos elite units. Heck, even countering with 'well these other dudes should have a buff too, because they once dude this in lore...' well, most likely you are referring to an exception, not a generality - like with SM's.

Lore wise, look at it from a numbers point of view.......

You have a branch of the Imperium (Adeptus Astartes) that requires a lot of resources, affects theatres where billions of combatants may be involved, and the replenshiment rate ratio is probably in the realm of 1000000:1 (compared to the militarum). Think about it, in table top perspective, how do the rules even come close to lore?
Im not insinuating that 1 marine should be able to take on 1000000 or something daft like that, but rather, they should be able to hold their own very well against one or two squads easily.

Marine armies should be 3-12 man armies in a 500 - 2000 pt game. The problem with this is that GW would lose in sales, hence is why more consistent SM rules will never happen.

 TheSilo wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Anpu-adom wrote:
Right... because Space Marines already ignore moral... they should also ignore the weapon-type restrictions that go with their relatively cheap melta, plasma, flamer, and grav weapons.

Remember, movement prior to the shooting phase is on a per model basis already. You can have your plasma gunner stay still and fire at full BS even though the entire unit has moved around him.

Long and short, Space Marines don't need any help. They are, and will always be one of the strongest armies of any edition.

Don't ignore moral. Don't ignore pinning. In game terms the only real benifit of TSKNF is not being swept to death - more often than not this hurts you more than it helps you - unless you have calgar as a warlord - then it can be a little more helpful. Marines are an aggressive unit, they don't hide on the board edge so immunity to falling off the board is basically an afterthought. Gardians get relentless platforms at bs 4...it's really not breaking the game as they aren't even used. Also it's undeniable that looking at a marine statline that we pay a premium for they are intended to be used in assault with WS4 and STR4. Then you give them a rapid fire weapon? Just doesn't make sense and it doesn't work. Lots of ideas are suggested all the time to fix PA marines. So much hostility about these units actually being viable. It disgusts me.

You know that all marines have bolt pistols right?

I guess this makes marines multirole right? because they can gimp their firepower to charge an enemy? ofc I know they have bolt pistols.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

kveldulf wrote:

AnFéasógMór wrote:
That would be crazy overpowered, IMO, especially for only 1-2 points. For one thing it would all but double the number of shot's you're firing, for all of 25-50 points difference across your whole army, since it would mean everybody is going to rapid fire at least one additional time, before charging. It would also remove all impetus to strategically place heavy weapons units. I'm just sitting here imagining the amount of devastation my Long Fangs could do if they were able to just chase vehicle around the field to keep them in range, shooting lascannons at full BS. I wouldn't object to the idea of being able to somehow purchase relentless for models, but it should be something like 10 points per model, and certainly not available for things like most chapters' neophyte scouts.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Why is it that whenever we get "X doesn't reflect the fluff, we should buff it!" it's always a Marine player?

I don't know. I see lot's of Sisters players constantly pointing out that in the fluff they don't suck donkey hole, and the rules should reflect that.

Wow, you are really on fire against marine players wanting a buff (remembering from other threads). I know you have a crusade against them, but to be honest, I get the sense you have an ulterior motive? Like you secretly hate the bell bottoms SM's have....

You do realize that space marines play a bigger part in the universe than aspect warriors, and going from lore, are probably 'better' than most xenos elite units. Heck, even countering with 'well these other dudes should have a buff too, because they once dude this in lore...' well, most likely you are referring to an exception, not a generality - like with SM's.

Lore wise, look at it from a numbers point of view.......

You have a branch of the Imperium (Adeptus Astartes) that requires a lot of resources, affects theatres where billions of combatants may be involved, and the replenshiment rate ratio is probably in the realm of 1000000:1 (compared to the militarum). Think about it, in table top perspective, how do the rules even come close to lore?
Im not insinuating that 1 marine should be able to take on 1000000 or something daft like that, but rather, they should be able to hold their own very well against one or two squads easily.

Marine armies should be 3-12 man armies in a 500 - 2000 pt game. The problem with this is that GW would lose in sales, hence is why more consistent SM rules will never happen.

Ehh...not sure they would lose money. All they would have to do is release an 80 dollar box set with new and better looking marines in them - (currently no one buys tacticals execpt the bare minimum required.) People would buy that. Then make marines cost 30-35 points but actually be bad asses. 2 base attacks, 5++ saves, and rending chainswords - with special ammo on all their bolters and relentless. Sterngards and vets would just become more BA. 3 base attacks WS 5 BS 5 and have some other special rules but cost like 40-50 poitns. Terms should cost what a centurian costs but be as effective in a multi purpose roll as opposed to just being shooters. It would require so much escalation of all their units that it could never happen. It's fun for house rules though.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 TheSilo wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Anpu-adom wrote:
Right... because Space Marines already ignore moral... they should also ignore the weapon-type restrictions that go with their relatively cheap melta, plasma, flamer, and grav weapons.

Remember, movement prior to the shooting phase is on a per model basis already. You can have your plasma gunner stay still and fire at full BS even though the entire unit has moved around him.

Long and short, Space Marines don't need any help. They are, and will always be one of the strongest armies of any edition.

Don't ignore moral. Don't ignore pinning. In game terms the only real benifit of TSKNF is not being swept to death - more often than not this hurts you more than it helps you - unless you have calgar as a warlord - then it can be a little more helpful. Marines are an aggressive unit, they don't hide on the board edge so immunity to falling off the board is basically an afterthought. Gardians get relentless platforms at bs 4...it's really not breaking the game as they aren't even used. Also it's undeniable that looking at a marine statline that we pay a premium for they are intended to be used in assault with WS4 and STR4. Then you give them a rapid fire weapon? Just doesn't make sense and it doesn't work. Lots of ideas are suggested all the time to fix PA marines. So much hostility about these units actually being viable. It disgusts me.

You know that all marines have bolt pistols right?

I guess this makes marines multirole right? because they can gimp their firepower to charge an enemy? ofc I know they have bolt pistols.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

kveldulf wrote:

AnFéasógMór wrote:
That would be crazy overpowered, IMO, especially for only 1-2 points. For one thing it would all but double the number of shot's you're firing, for all of 25-50 points difference across your whole army, since it would mean everybody is going to rapid fire at least one additional time, before charging. It would also remove all impetus to strategically place heavy weapons units. I'm just sitting here imagining the amount of devastation my Long Fangs could do if they were able to just chase vehicle around the field to keep them in range, shooting lascannons at full BS. I wouldn't object to the idea of being able to somehow purchase relentless for models, but it should be something like 10 points per model, and certainly not available for things like most chapters' neophyte scouts.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Why is it that whenever we get "X doesn't reflect the fluff, we should buff it!" it's always a Marine player?

I don't know. I see lot's of Sisters players constantly pointing out that in the fluff they don't suck donkey hole, and the rules should reflect that.

Wow, you are really on fire against marine players wanting a buff (remembering from other threads). I know you have a crusade against them, but to be honest, I get the sense you have an ulterior motive? Like you secretly hate the bell bottoms SM's have....

You do realize that space marines play a bigger part in the universe than aspect warriors, and going from lore, are probably 'better' than most xenos elite units. Heck, even countering with 'well these other dudes should have a buff too, because they once dude this in lore...' well, most likely you are referring to an exception, not a generality - like with SM's.

Lore wise, look at it from a numbers point of view.......

You have a branch of the Imperium (Adeptus Astartes) that requires a lot of resources, affects theatres where billions of combatants may be involved, and the replenshiment rate ratio is probably in the realm of 1000000:1 (compared to the militarum). Think about it, in table top perspective, how do the rules even come close to lore?
Im not insinuating that 1 marine should be able to take on 1000000 or something daft like that, but rather, they should be able to hold their own very well against one or two squads easily.

Marine armies should be 3-12 man armies in a 500 - 2000 pt game. The problem with this is that GW would lose in sales, hence is why more consistent SM rules will never happen.

Ehh...not sure they would lose money. All they would have to do is release an 80 dollar box set with new and better looking marines in them - (currently no one buys tacticals execpt the bare minimum required.) People would buy that. Then make marines cost 30-35 points but actually be bad asses. 2 base attacks, 5++ saves, and rending chainswords - with special ammo on all their bolters and relentless. Sterngards and vets would just become more BA. 3 base attacks WS 5 BS 5 and have some other special rules but cost like 40-50 poitns. Terms should cost what a centurian costs but be as effective in a multi purpose roll as opposed to just being shooters. It would require so much escalation of all their units that it could never happen. It's fun for house rules though.

While this isn't particularly relevant to the discussion, quite a few of us buy more tacticals than the minimum. They might not finish as tacticals, but for the $, the box gives you a good number of bodies and options which can be kitbashed into just about any other unit in the codex with leftover parts. I've almost tripled my Sternguard vets with a tactical squad box and some easy greenstuffing.

kveldulf wrote:

AnFéasógMór wrote:
That would be crazy overpowered, IMO, especially for only 1-2 points. For one thing it would all but double the number of shot's you're firing, for all of 25-50 points difference across your whole army, since it would mean everybody is going to rapid fire at least one additional time, before charging. It would also remove all impetus to strategically place heavy weapons units. I'm just sitting here imagining the amount of devastation my Long Fangs could do if they were able to just chase vehicle around the field to keep them in range, shooting lascannons at full BS. I wouldn't object to the idea of being able to somehow purchase relentless for models, but it should be something like 10 points per model, and certainly not available for things like most chapters' neophyte scouts.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Why is it that whenever we get "X doesn't reflect the fluff, we should buff it!" it's always a Marine player?

I don't know. I see lot's of Sisters players constantly pointing out that in the fluff they don't suck donkey hole, and the rules should reflect that.

Wow, you are really on fire against marine players wanting a buff (remembering from other threads). I know you have a crusade against them, but to be honest, I get the sense you have an ulterior motive? Like you secretly hate the bell bottoms SM's have....

You do realize that space marines play a bigger part in the universe than aspect warriors, and going from lore, are probably 'better' than most xenos elite units. Heck, even countering with 'well these other dudes should have a buff too, because they once dude this in lore...' well, most likely you are referring to an exception, not a generality - like with SM's.

Lore wise, look at it from a numbers point of view.......

You have a branch of the Imperium (Adeptus Astartes) that requires a lot of resources, affects theatres where billions of combatants may be involved, and the replenshiment rate ratio is probably in the realm of 1000000:1 (compared to the militarum). Think about it, in table top perspective, how do the rules even come close to lore?
Im not insinuating that 1 marine should be able to take on 1000000 or something daft like that, but rather, they should be able to hold their own very well against one or two squads easily.

Marine armies should be 3-12 man armies in a 500 - 2000 pt game. The problem with this is that GW would lose in sales, hence is why more consistent SM rules will never happen.

Not just that, but it would hurt the variety of the game. If it only cost about $80 to put together a space marine army, who's ever gonna play Orks or Nids, at $600-$800 for a 2500 point army? (Obviously this is overly-simplistic, but it would have some impact)

^ This is the very reason marines are 14 ppm instead of 140 ppm.

kveldulf wrote:

AnFéasógMór wrote:
That would be crazy overpowered, IMO, especially for only 1-2 points. For one thing it would all but double the number of shot's you're firing, for all of 25-50 points difference across your whole army, since it would mean everybody is going to rapid fire at least one additional time, before charging. It would also remove all impetus to strategically place heavy weapons units. I'm just sitting here imagining the amount of devastation my Long Fangs could do if they were able to just chase vehicle around the field to keep them in range, shooting lascannons at full BS. I wouldn't object to the idea of being able to somehow purchase relentless for models, but it should be something like 10 points per model, and certainly not available for things like most chapters' neophyte scouts.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Why is it that whenever we get "X doesn't reflect the fluff, we should buff it!" it's always a Marine player?

I don't know. I see lot's of Sisters players constantly pointing out that in the fluff they don't suck donkey hole, and the rules should reflect that.

Wow, you are really on fire against marine players wanting a buff (remembering from other threads). I know you have a crusade against them, but to be honest, I get the sense you have an ulterior motive? Like you secretly hate the bell bottoms SM's have....

You do realize that space marines play a bigger part in the universe than aspect warriors, and going from lore, are probably 'better' than most xenos elite units. Heck, even countering with 'well these other dudes should have a buff too, because they once dude this in lore...' well, most likely you are referring to an exception, not a generality - like with SM's.

Lore wise, look at it from a numbers point of view.......

You have a branch of the Imperium (Adeptus Astartes) that requires a lot of resources, affects theatres where billions of combatants may be involved, and the replenshiment rate ratio is probably in the realm of 1000000:1 (compared to the militarum). Think about it, in table top perspective, how do the rules even come close to lore?
Im not insinuating that 1 marine should be able to take on 1000000 or something daft like that, but rather, they should be able to hold their own very well against one or two squads easily.

Marine armies should be 3-12 man armies in a 500 - 2000 pt game. The problem with this is that GW would lose in sales, hence is why more consistent SM rules will never happen.

Interests of full disclosure: One of my largest armies is Dark Angels, I am a Marine player. I don't have an ulterior anti-Marine crusade going on. The issue I have is Marine players deciding that their exaggerated lore is obviously the most accurate exaggeration and Space Marines are so much better than everyone else that five guys should be able to fight an army. 'Small, elite army' does not, cannot, and should not mean 'I get to buy one box and play the game while everyone else has to spend hundreds of dollars on cannon fodder that exists only for my special, special dudes to remove it from play'. This is a two-player game at the end of the day. If it was a single-player video game or a movie you might see a dozen Space Marines fighting thousands of enemies and winning (hey, you could go watch Ultramarines or play DoW2 if you want that experience!), but there's a real, live person on the other side of the table who's just as emotionally invested in his army as you are in yours and didn't come to be massacred to make you feel better about yourself.

I don't even care about the lore when it comes to this issue; it's the callous disregard for the limitations of the format and for non-Marine players that gets me grumpy about this problem.

As to your more specific lorewise points I suggest you pick up a Xeno Codex sometime and tell me how many Incubi or Crisis suits it ought to take to fight an army. As to the numerical argument the primary advantage of Space Marines is force concentration, they don't exist to pit a thousand Marines against hundreds of thousands of traitors in open field battles, they exist to pick a precise target and kill it very, very dead. Consider the difference between five Drop Pods full of Space Marines and five Drop Pods full of Guardsmen on the tabletop.

I do not think lore-accurate Marines are viable for tabletop play for the reasons you mention.

However, they are still lore-accurate.

 Ashiraya wrote:
I do not think lore-accurate Marines are viable for tabletop play for the reasons you mention.

However, they are still lore-accurate.

Can you point me at an example where Space Marines are not the protagonists and yet are still fighting hundreds of guys alone and winning?

Then the space marines win! six devs with lascannons they move and shoot on full BS and its "ok"

I think they should have assault weapons. Like the bolter should be assault 2.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
I do not think lore-accurate Marines are viable for tabletop play for the reasons you mention.

However, they are still lore-accurate.

Can you point me at an example where Space Marines are not the protagonists and yet are still fighting hundreds of guys alone and winning?

Death of Antagonis. The Chaos Space Marines are antagonists but still wipe out a Guard company + armoured support with only 6 guys, and they don't really do their worst either (doing things like whipping the IG to pieces with treads ripped from their tanks).

Done.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
I do not think lore-accurate Marines are viable for tabletop play for the reasons you mention.

However, they are still lore-accurate.

Can you point me at an example where Space Marines are not the protagonists and yet are still fighting hundreds of guys alone and winning?

Death of Antagonis. The Chaos Space Marines are antagonists but still wipe out a Guard company + armoured support with only 6 guys, and they don't really do their worst either (doing things like whipping the IG to pieces with treads ripped from their tanks).

Done.

The Space Marines aren't the protagonists of a "Space Marine Battles" novel?

Note how I said Chaos Space Marines.

The Chaos Space Marines in that novel are not protagonists, but they are fighting hundreds and winning easily.

Indeed, they directly oppose the protagonists and still pull off just as sick gak.

Seems like a safe sign that no worfing is present.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Note how I said Chaos Space Marines.

The Chaos Space Marines in that novel are not protagonists, but they are fighting hundreds and winning easily.

Indeed, they directly oppose the protagonists and still pull off just as sick gak.

Seems like a safe sign that no worfing is present.

You're telling me a "Space Marine Battles" novel isn't exaggerating how awesome the Space Marines are?

I damn right am.

People usually complain on how worfed their opponents are, yes?

Well, have CSM fight SM and both pull of impressive feats.

Would you expect CSM to fight SM in a Tau novel? The only way you could possibly get more objective, but it's never going to happen.

 Ashiraya wrote:
I damn right am.

People usually complain on how worfed their opponents are, yes?

Well, have CSM fight SM and both pull of impressive feats.

Would you expect CSM to fight SM in a Tau novel? The only way you could possibly get more objective, but it's never going to happen.

I'm expecting you to show me an individual Space Marine slaughtering hundreds of enemies in a source that's not set up to exaggerate their prowess if you're planning on justifying Movie Marines as the true lore representation of the faction...

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
I damn right am.

People usually complain on how worfed their opponents are, yes?

Well, have CSM fight SM and both pull of impressive feats.

Would you expect CSM to fight SM in a Tau novel? The only way you could possibly get more objective, but it's never going to happen.

I'm expecting you to show me an individual Space Marine slaughtering hundreds of enemies in a source that's not set up to exaggerate their prowess if you're planning on justifying Movie Marines as the true lore representation of the faction...

Guess we can go back to having legions then because marines aren't actually that bad ass according to you.

Have you ever seen Terminator 2? When arnold walks out of cyberdyne systems building and easily waxes 10-15 dudes because they are shooting 9mm rounds into his full metal skeleton? This is how space marines work. They walk right into the enemy and shoot them ignoring small arms fire like it doesn't even exist. Now imagine arnold is 9 feet tall in full power armor with a .75 mm gernade launcher as his primary weapon...how easy do you think he would have wrecked 15 humans with small arms considering he did is pretty easy without armor and using a 1911 pistol?

Except marine armor fails utterly 33% of the time. The T-800 is much better

Martel732 wrote:
Except marine armor fails utterly 33% of the time. The T-800 is much better

We're talking lore now, Martel.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
I damn right am.

People usually complain on how worfed their opponents are, yes?

Well, have CSM fight SM and both pull of impressive feats.

Would you expect CSM to fight SM in a Tau novel? The only way you could possibly get more objective, but it's never going to happen.

I'm expecting you to show me an individual Space Marine slaughtering hundreds of enemies in a source that's not set up to exaggerate their prowess if you're planning on justifying Movie Marines as the true lore representation of the faction...

Even with the commonly used movie marine stats (S6 T6 W2, S6 bolters) they're still going to struggle killing hundreds of enemies of pretty much all troops units in the game.

The problem with lore is that each race's lore makes them out to be the badass. As it turns out, 16% of shots from some guardian chumpo kills your mythical supermen dead as a doornail.

Martel732 wrote:
The problem with lore is that each race's lore makes them out to be the badass. As it turns out, 16% of shots from some guardian chumpo kills your mythical supermen dead as a doornail.

Do we really have to do this dance again?

Go back to your naked IG majors who reliably eat 3 times as many Warboss punches to the face as a naked regular Guardsman would.