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.

 lolman1c wrote:
Terminator should be S5 T5... I mean... come on! Since when did rowboatface have the ability to mass produce big marines who are basically just as durable as an invulnerable walking tank that are extremely rare because they're so good? To the point that entire wars will be fought to obtain a single suit....

If Terminators had T5 S and T they would damage most vechiles on a 3 and be pretty tough against all none elite weapons while staying the same vs S3 weapons.

If I had my way they would be a 3+ save but you roll 2 dice and pick the highest.

A lot of people want Termis to be 3+ on 2d6, but that'd be a MASSIVE hassle to roll out.

Against AP0 it's the same as a 2+ rerollable, but what about against AP-1? Let's say a Helverin or two shoot at your Termis. We'll say 16 shots, 10-11 hit, 7-8 wound, and you now need to roll 2d6 7 or 8 times. Annoying as hell.

I make no claims as to whether it'd be balanced or not, just that it'd be time-consuming.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 lolman1c wrote:
Terminator should be S5 T5... I mean... come on! Since when did rowboatface have the ability to mass produce big marines who are basically just as durable as an invulnerable walking tank that are extremely rare because they're so good? To the point that entire wars will be fought to obtain a single suit....

If Terminators had T5 S and T they would damage most vechiles on a 3 and be pretty tough against all none elite weapons while staying the same vs S3 weapons.

If I had my way they would be a 3+ save but you roll 2 dice and pick the highest.

A lot of people want Termis to be 3+ on 2d6, but that'd be a MASSIVE hassle to roll out.

Against AP0 it's the same as a 2+ rerollable, but what about against AP-1? Let's say a Helverin or two shoot at your Termis. We'll say 16 shots, 10-11 hit, 7-8 wound, and you now need to roll 2d6 7 or 8 times. Annoying as hell.

I make no claims as to whether it'd be balanced or not, just that it'd be time-consuming.

Agreed. Imagine throwing termies into CC and having to roll in...di...vi...du...al saves for every single wound when fighting orks or something with high attack/wounds. This will never happen buuuuut D10 ? it would solve more than just marine woes.

Karol wrote:
there is some big problems with tank resiliance in melee. A tank in melee should be a dead tank. I get that lasguns shouldn't be blowing up land raiders, without some god tier level of rolls. But 5 termintors being stuck on a rhino for 3 turns, should really not happen.

There are some easy solutions to this: Bring back multi-bombing and allow it to be used as single melee attack to replace all other attacks the model has: -3 to hit general; -2 to hit against vehicles; -1 to hit against Titanic units. These limitations would hinder Marine HQs from Instagibbing other characters with single Meltabomb attack. And for Damage melee meltabomb should have: '3D6 (or even 4D6?) discard the lowest' and single use per game, obviously. Those are heavy modifiers and damages, but this would make Marine Assault Squads actually scary against Knights and Vehicles, and of course the meltabombs can still be point costed to oblivion. With GW's general hate towards Melta and Love of Knights I could foresee GW slapping Meltabombs hefty 20 points per grenade price.

I don't understand why they did away with Meltabombs anyway, and other grenades have really really artificial limitation of 1 attack per unit. Even basic marines could be far more scary if they could multibomb with frag and krak grenades. For example multi-bombing marines gain +20% firepower against GEQs if they all could throw frag grenades at the guardsmen. Very easy buff to marines would be to allow multi-bombing only for them, and then bring back the meltabombs. If cheese like krak grenade cultists become problem one could just restrict cultists not getting frag or krak grenades.

But cold hard reality is starting to look like that normal marines are being phased out in favour of primaris, and this is happening very aggressively on rule writing level.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 lolman1c wrote:
Terminator should be S5 T5... I mean... come on! Since when did rowboatface have the ability to mass produce big marines who are basically just as durable as an invulnerable walking tank that are extremely rare because they're so good? To the point that entire wars will be fought to obtain a single suit....

If Terminators had T5 S and T they would damage most vechiles on a 3 and be pretty tough against all none elite weapons while staying the same vs S3 weapons.

If I had my way they would be a 3+ save but you roll 2 dice and pick the highest.

A lot of people want Termis to be 3+ on 2d6, but that'd be a MASSIVE hassle to roll out.

Against AP0 it's the same as a 2+ rerollable, but what about against AP-1? Let's say a Helverin or two shoot at your Termis. We'll say 16 shots, 10-11 hit, 7-8 wound, and you now need to roll 2d6 7 or 8 times. Annoying as hell.

I make no claims as to whether it'd be balanced or not, just that it'd be time-consuming.

Go the battletech rout and buy different colored dice and roll them in pairs all at once.

 lolman1c wrote:
Terminator should be S5 T5... I mean... come on! Since when did rowboatface have the ability to mass produce big marines who are basically just as durable as an invulnerable walking tank that are extremely rare because they're so good? To the point that entire wars will be fought to obtain a single suit....

If Terminators had T5 S and T they would damage most vechiles on a 3 and be pretty tough against all none elite weapons while staying the same vs S3 weapons.

If I had my way they would be a 3+ save but you roll 2 dice and pick the highest.

Agree about the S5 but if they are T5 also other armored elites need to gain that buff. Meganobz are the first example, they should definitely have the same T of terminators.

I would play Kill Team where Marines are Marines.

 Blackie wrote:

 lolman1c wrote:
Terminator should be S5 T5... I mean... come on! Since when did rowboatface have the ability to mass produce big marines who are basically just as durable as an invulnerable walking tank that are extremely rare because they're so good? To the point that entire wars will be fought to obtain a single suit....

If Terminators had T5 S and T they would damage most vechiles on a 3 and be pretty tough against all none elite weapons while staying the same vs S3 weapons.

If I had my way they would be a 3+ save but you roll 2 dice and pick the highest.

Agree about the S5 but if they are T5 also other armored elites need to gain that buff. Meganobz are the first example, they should definitely have the same T of terminators.

Meganobz are proof Terminators can work. Simply decrease their points to usable and make them S5 with good weapon choice and good shooting. Hell, meganobz arn't even OP but they're not something to scoff at... imagine a Meganobz if it also had a auto 5+ invulnerable, better movement and a free DS ability. That's what terminators should be. They're price right now would be about right if they had S5.

I’d go with +1 wound across the board including vehicles and an additional -1 ap on all standard Bolt weapons and justify it by calling them Astartes bolters.

Then for Terminators including the above I’d allow mixing of the units, so assault and tactical combined, and -1 damage to a minimum of one on all weapons firing at them.

No point changes. This may be over the top for some, but I think they need it all to bring them up to standard.

 lolman1c wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

 lolman1c wrote:
Terminator should be S5 T5... I mean... come on! Since when did rowboatface have the ability to mass produce big marines who are basically just as durable as an invulnerable walking tank that are extremely rare because they're so good? To the point that entire wars will be fought to obtain a single suit....

If Terminators had T5 S and T they would damage most vechiles on a 3 and be pretty tough against all none elite weapons while staying the same vs S3 weapons.

If I had my way they would be a 3+ save but you roll 2 dice and pick the highest.

Agree about the S5 but if they are T5 also other armored elites need to gain that buff. Meganobz are the first example, they should definitely have the same T of terminators.

Meganobz are proof Terminators can work. Simply decrease their points to usable and make them S5 with good weapon choice and good shooting. Hell, meganobz arn't even OP but they're not something to scoff at... imagine a Meganobz if it also had a auto 5+ invulnerable, better movement and a free DS ability. That's what terminators should be. They're price right now would be about right if they had S5.

Imagine meganobz with 3++ with no additional points costs, they'd just need to switch their kustom shoota (-2pts +2pts) with a shield

 Blackie wrote:

 lolman1c wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

 lolman1c wrote:
Terminator should be S5 T5... I mean... come on! Since when did rowboatface have the ability to mass produce big marines who are basically just as durable as an invulnerable walking tank that are extremely rare because they're so good? To the point that entire wars will be fought to obtain a single suit....

If Terminators had T5 S and T they would damage most vechiles on a 3 and be pretty tough against all none elite weapons while staying the same vs S3 weapons.

If I had my way they would be a 3+ save but you roll 2 dice and pick the highest.

Agree about the S5 but if they are T5 also other armored elites need to gain that buff. Meganobz are the first example, they should definitely have the same T of terminators.

Meganobz are proof Terminators can work. Simply decrease their points to usable and make them S5 with good weapon choice and good shooting. Hell, meganobz arn't even OP but they're not something to scoff at... imagine a Meganobz if it also had a auto 5+ invulnerable, better movement and a free DS ability. That's what terminators should be. They're price right now would be about right if they had S5.

Imagine meganobz with 3++ with no additional points costs, they'd just need to switch their kustom shoota (-2pts +2pts) with a shield

They'd hit hard and survive most assualts. 3 wounds really helps vs plasma attacks and 3++ would also deal a lot with that. Meganobz and terminators should be on par with each other with terminators costing more for a bit of survival and ds.

3++ is not something that should be available unit wide.

I'm not convinced it's something that should ever be available to be honest, but that ship has sailed!

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
I’d go with +1 wound across the board including vehicles and an additional -1 ap on all standard Bolt weapons and justify it by calling them Astartes bolters.

Then for Terminators including the above I’d allow mixing of the units, so assault and tactical combined, and -1 damage to a minimum of one on all weapons firing at them.

No point changes. This may be over the top for some, but I think they need it all to bring them up to standard.

So any change in points for inquisitors and sisters with the new bolter rules than?

 Mmmpi wrote:
So any change in points for inquisitors and sisters with the new bolter rules than?

The sisters benefit most from retaining the old guns and their low price point. They are just bodies to protect the special weapons anyway and would benefit far more from melta and flamer weapons not being so underwhelming.
Inquisitors have bigger problems.

As for marines, all the suggestions seem to just loop back around to 'make them primaris' in all but name. Though I suspect if GW did it would just spawn a dozen more threads about why the extra cost that comes with it have made marines terrible.

A.T. wrote:

As for marines, all the suggestions seem to just loop back around to 'make them primaris' in all but name. Though I suspect if GW did it would just spawn a dozen more threads about why the extra cost that comes with it have made marines terrible.

Indeed which is why these 'Improve marines' threads are so fething pointless. Most of the posters are in denial about the Primaris and try their utmost to pretend they do not exist and then go on reinventing them. "Guys, I have an novel idea how to fix marines, what if they had two attacks and two wounds and AP on their bolters!" It is utterly comical. GW is improving marines, these improvements are called Primaris. Like it or not, that's how it is and wishing for any other path is utterly unrealistic.

A.T. wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
So any change in points for inquisitors and sisters with the new bolter rules than?

The sisters benefit most from retaining the old guns and their low price point. They are just bodies to protect the special weapons anyway and would benefit far more from melta and flamer weapons not being so underwhelming.
Inquisitors have bigger problems.
.

If you're going to use fluff to justify a decision, then the fluff needs to be applied all around.

My suggestions above would apply to primaris also, so most wold be 3W. They would also then apply to grey knights, chaos etc also (deathguard must become more expensive though).

I'd then be inclined to increase custodes by at least the wound and ap on the bolt weapons as well, however points would adjust and they would be more expensive, which in turn would make them even more elite and in smaller numbers which they should be.

I did forget one thing, I'd allow terminators to deep strike closer than any other unit in the game, up to 6" away but they'd have to roll a danger close roll. I see this as working by roll a dice for each terminator in the unit, on a roll of one they would then have to roll a D3 for mortal wounds with no way a FNP roll could work to save them, so you could potnetially lose models, or even the whole squad if you are super unlucky.

At that point, you re-balance the rest of the armies by way of point changes. No sisters would not get the better bolter as they are not astartes, however they could potentially become cheaper (if they need to become cheaper).

Whilst the above may seem super overboard, it is with the intention for marines to live up to their fluff justification more. A rebalance of the game point wise for all other armies would then be absolutely fine. I personally want to have a game where a squad of 10 tactical marines (or intercessors) can potentially go toe to toe with a whole guard platoon for example across a game and if that's the case, they should be around the same points.

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
My suggestions above would apply to primaris also, so most wold be 3W.

Thing is, soon enough the Primaris will just be the standard baseline for marines, so you cannot make them too tough. Sure, you could nerf them later, but that would annoy people a lot.

 Mmmpi wrote:
If you're going to use fluff to justify a decision, then the fluff needs to be applied all around.

Human/astartes scale weapons.

Anyway - proposed 'new' marines :
6" move, WS/BS 3+, S4, T4, W2, A2, Ld7, Sv 3+ (sergeant has Ld8)
Each model carries an astartes scale boltgun - let's call it a 'bolt rifle' - 30" range, Rapid fire 1, S4, AP -1, Damage 1
Troops choice, squad of 5-10 models, 17pts per model.

Seems to tick all the boxes?

 Crimson wrote:

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
My suggestions above would apply to primaris also, so most wold be 3W.

Thing is, soon enough the Primaris will just be the standard baseline for marines, so you cannot make them too tough. Sure, you could nerf them later, but that would annoy people a lot.

They wouldn't be too tough though, yeah a 5 man squad would be hard work for 10 guardsmen but they bloody should be, you just get cheaper guardsmen and throw the hordes at them.

A.T. wrote:

Anyway - proposed 'new' marines :
6" move, WS/BS 3+, S4, T4, W2, A2, Ld7, Sv 3+ (sergeant has Ld8)
Each model carries an astartes scale boltgun - let's call it a 'bolt rifle' - 30" range, Rapid fire 1, S4, AP -1, Damage 1
Troops choice, squad of 5-10 models, 17pts per model.

Seems to tick all the boxes?

A.T. wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
If you're going to use fluff to justify a decision, then the fluff needs to be applied all around.

Human/astartes scale weapons.

Anyway - proposed 'new Intercessor' marines :
6" move, WS/BS 3+, S4, T4, W3, A2, Ld7, Sv 3+ (sergeant has Ld8)
Each model carries an astartes scale boltgun - let's call it a 'bolt rifle' - 30" range, Rapid fire 1, S4, AP -2, Damage 1
Troops choice, squad of 5-10 models, 17pts per model.

Seems to tick all the boxes?

Fixed that

What about intercessors at 15ppm and tacs/devs at 9 ppm but BS4+ and 4+ save?

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Fixed that

Seems like you've just made them arbitrarily tougher and shootier for no points change.
Lets call that the 6e eldar 'fix'

A.T. wrote:

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Fixed that

Seems like you've just made them arbitrarily tougher and shootier for no points change.
Lets call that the 6e eldar 'fix'

We call that a "buff". It's what you do when something is underperforming.

A.T. wrote:

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Fixed that

Seems like you've just made them arbitrarily tougher and shootier for no points change.
Lets call that the 6e eldar 'fix'

At which point, all other units across all other armies can be adjusted in point cost to balance, as I explained above.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
We call that a "buff". It's what you do when something is underperforming.

At this point the 'buffed' unit has twice the firepower, twice the close combat ability, and three times the toughness of a vanilla marine for a 30% points increase (when the two units are compared directly to one another), and will win by some margin a head on firefight with units such as the undercosted 4pt guardsmen even without having to use their superior range or assault capabilities.

Yeah, I think people often completely lose the plot with their buffs. I think Intercessors as they currently are are pretty close at being OK. If they were 16 points and guardsmen were the five points (like they by all reason should!) then it would be fine. And of course no extensive rewriting of marine statlines is going to happen, so suggesting such is pointless anyway. Small point tweaks however happen annually.

 Crimson wrote:
Yeah, I think people often completely lose the plot with their buffs. I think Intercessors as they currently are are pretty close at being OK. If they were 16 points and guardsmen were the five points (like they by all reason should!) then it would be fine. And of course no extensive rewriting of marine statlines is going to happen, so suggesting such is pointless anyway. Small point tweaks however happen annually.

Agreed. Intercessors ARE the Marine fix. They aren't quite there, but it's pretty close.

Terminators are crap still though, that's where some attention is needed. Points are fine, they're supposed to be super elite, they need more durability to mid tier weapons (plasma etc).

 Stux wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Yeah, I think people often completely lose the plot with their buffs. I think Intercessors as they currently are are pretty close at being OK. If they were 16 points and guardsmen were the five points (like they by all reason should!) then it would be fine. And of course no extensive rewriting of marine statlines is going to happen, so suggesting such is pointless anyway. Small point tweaks however happen annually.

Agreed. Intercessors ARE the Marine fix. They aren't quite there, but it's pretty close.

Terminators are crap still though, that's where some attention is needed. Points are fine, they're supposed to be super elite, they need more durability to mid tier weapons (plasma etc).

The problem with fiddling around with Terminators is when you start to step on the toes of things that are supposed to be slightly bigger than Terminators; bump them to S/T 5 with 3W and a 4++ and you've made them underarmed Custodes.

 Crimson wrote:

A.T. wrote:

As for marines, all the suggestions seem to just loop back around to 'make them primaris' in all but name. Though I suspect if GW did it would just spawn a dozen more threads about why the extra cost that comes with it have made marines terrible.

Indeed which is why these 'Improve marines' threads are so fething pointless. Most of the posters are in denial about the Primaris and try their utmost to pretend they do not exist and then go on reinventing them. "Guys, I have an novel idea how to fix marines, what if they had two attacks and two wounds and AP on their bolters!" It is utterly comical. GW is improving marines, these improvements are called Primaris. Like it or not, that's how it is and wishing for any other path is utterly unrealistic.

Overpriced thought. Intercessors would have to drop to 15ppm before I'd be willing to seriously consider using them.