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.

Again, bolters don't suck, they're just distinctly average.

There being better basic weapons doesn't mean bolters are awful. There's still worse out there.

Traditio wrote:
If the 5 man squad takes a rhino or a drop pod, the point cost per model for a marine jumps to 7 points per model.

Sure With +1S, +1T, +1I, ATSKNF, Chapter Tactics, … over Sisters, Marines definitely need to be 5 points less than a Sister for it to be fair!

Experiment 626 wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Scions and CSM?

Khorne Berserkers are even worse...

I believe the challenge was to name a troops that was worse for a comparable price, not worse for considerably more points

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Traditio wrote:
If the 5 man squad takes a rhino or a drop pod, the point cost per model for a marine jumps to 7 points per model.

Sure With +1S, +1T, +1I, ATSKNF, Chapter Tactics, … over Sisters, Marines definitely need to be 5 points less than a Sister for it to be fair!

Maybe instead of SM needing a nerf, maybe sisters just need a buff/a reworking of their codex.

Traditio wrote:
Maybe instead of SM needing a nerf, maybe sisters just need a buff/a reworking of their codex.

Yeah, but they are hardly the only one. That's why people call the GSF is considered unfair. It's part of powerful half of 40k, so it is unfair to the other half of 40k, just like the rest of the powerful half.

Genestealers are also 14 ppm.
No shooting attack. 5+ armour (so they die in droves to bolters). 2 attacks each. Rending. High initiative, but no frag grenades so they never get to use it. No transport options short of a bio-titan.

That's all you get. No equivalent to chapter tactics or anything like that. The best you can do is babysit them with a synapse creature to make them fearless, or pile on expensive/mostly useless close combat upgrades and watch the points cost skyrocket.
Tacticals are amazing in comparison.

Oh, and their big deal is that they DON'T have the special rule that makes them kill half of their own unit or run off the table if you don't have a bigger creature babysitting them.
The other tyranid troops choices aren't so lucky.

Traditio I just wanted to point out a few things.

1. Your opening post was made with a goal in mind, to defend the case for why the GSF is balanced. A fine cause if that is what you believe, you're entitled to your opinion and even have the right to share it. However the way in which you wrote it came off as abrasive and condescending to the reader. Reading your post I felt that you were more interested in making a personal attack against anyone who felt GSF was OP than you were in defending the merits of the formation. Having such an aggressive opening post really doesn't help your cause as people will then stop looking at the points you present in a logical manner and will instead perceive it as another whining player who just wants to rant. I don't mean this in any hurtful way, I simply wish to give you my feedback on the tone of your initial post so that in the future you may be cognitive that you'll generate better discussion with a less abrasive post.

2. A common mistake many people make in discussing power levels of units is to always compare them to the best or the broken. You used the example of scatbikes and WK. To always compare units to the best units is how we end up with these nuke wars where everything has to be better than everything else, this is not good for the game. It is generally accepted that the WK is undercosted and that scatbike spam should never have been a thing. Instead of comparing GSF to two known OP units you should be trying to compare it as best as possible to the game as a whole. Some units need nerfs, we can all agree, some units need buffs, we can also agree on that. The path to balance lies not in making everything as good as the best but instead in having everything meet in the middle.

3. Some of your defence for the GSF came from being angry at the Eldar power-units. There is well over a dozen armies in this game and many units for each one. The GSF needs to be balanced against ALL of them, not just two units from one codex. This is a problem that doesn't just lie in the GSF but in the game as a whole. What about fighting DE? Orks? Even one of your brother chapters, the Blood Angels, languish in a pre-necron codex where the power levels were significantly less and they were given less options in how to field and play their army. Even look at a simple CAD Eldar force with no spam units and just a good balance of what the codex has to offer, would the GSF not give this force a good fight?

4. You mention about tabling a lot in many of your later posts. I'd like to point out that short of one eternal war mission, this game has objectives beyond simply tabling your opponent. There are other ways to win and certain armies have an easier time of winning in different methods. Tau and Eldar are very offensive armies. They make up for lack of defense with higher than average firepower. Other armies rely on numbers instead of defense while yet others have great defenses but lack strong firepower in any great numbers. This is the variety of the game and helps to distinguish one force from another. Space Marines, in my opinion of their design, are meant to be the ultimate generalists of the game. They shoot better than some but not as good as others, they have adequate melee that is better than some but not others. They have adequate defenses but not the best in the game. Whatever SM do they do it adequately but not as good as the best but certainly never the worst. Tabling an opponent in matches requires overwhelming firepower that SM were simply not built for, in fact many armies aren't built for that. Surviving this firepower is something some armies excel at, SM can do alright in this regard but again, not the best. To put out the challenge for GSF players to table opponents to show that they are OP isn't fair. The GSF isn't built to table your opponent, it's built to have more units protected by transports than your opponents could eliminate in a game. It's designed to play the objective game and outlast your opponent while using those free points you have to equip special weapons on your marines so they can return some firepower with effect. Instead of looking at how many opponents a GSF can table you should be looking at how many games do they win over their losses.

5. Many players have pointed it out: Tournaments. A place where the top players almost invariably use the most broken/Op/undercosted units available. Compare tournament results and see where SM sit. They seem to be holding their own up there with the other 7.5 dexes. Look at their liss now and see how many top placing SM players are using the GSF, that should give you an idea of it's value compared to the strongest this game has to offer.

6. This is a personal one for me. You said you have no sympathy for CSM. I'm actually pretty hurt by this as CSM are one of the worst codexes in existence right now and are in a terrible place. Not only is their power level way below the curve but their ability to play in fun and fluffy ways is completely neutered as well. They simply aren't fun by a competitive or a fluff standpoint. You said they can spam High S low Ap templates. Well I'm not sure where you got that idea and I'm doubly not sure how you think this makes them good. My precious CSM army is on the shelf now and have been for quite a while.

Full disclosure, I have never fought a GSF so I have no firsthand experience to make an opinion as to if they are OP/broken. I won't post my opinion about them for that reason, however the above points are meant to address very specific points that I do have experience in. Also this post is not meant to cut you down at all Traditio, I type this post with nothing but constructive criticism in mind.

Maybe Traditio is just a poster child fan boy who is defending his army? Of course the players of an army can occasionally be blind to the power in which they possess.

I would just disregard this thread. It really serves no purpose, and he's probably trolling us.

Arson Fire wrote:
Genestealers are also 14 ppm.
No shooting attack. 5+ armour (so they die in droves to bolters). 2 attacks each. Rending. High initiative, but no frag grenades so they never get to use it. No transport options short of a bio-titan.

That's all you get. No equivalent to chapter tactics or anything like that. The best you can do is babysit them with a synapse creature to make them fearless, or pile on expensive/mostly useless close combat upgrades and watch the points cost skyrocket.
Tacticals are amazing in comparison.

Oh, and their big deal is that they DON'T have the special rule that makes them kill half of their own unit or run off the table if you don't have a bigger creature babysitting them.
The other tyranid troops choices aren't so lucky.

That's not entirely fair. You neglected to mention that they have infiltrate, move through cover and fleet, as well as an AP 5 melee weapon, and are both WS and I 6. You further neglected to mention that they have the option to bring a pysker along. You also neglect to mention that they have LD 10.

Furthermore, do their claws count as 1 or 2 weapons for the purposes of close combat? How many attacks do they actually get?

14 ppm still is probably overcosted, though. I'll grant you that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Inevitable_Faith wrote:
6. This is a personal one for me. You said you have no sympathy for CSM. I'm actually pretty hurt by this as CSM are one of the worst codexes in existence right now and are in a terrible place. Not only is their power level way below the curve but their ability to play in fun and fluffy ways is completely neutered as well. They simply aren't fun by a competitive or a fluff standpoint. You said they can spam High S low Ap templates. Well I'm not sure where you got that idea and I'm doubly not sure how you think this makes them good. My precious CSM army is on the shelf now and have been for quite a while.

Generally fair comments all around; thus the reason I only quoted the above.

I wish to retract my comment about CSM. I had the defiler in mind, but apparently, they count as a heavy support and you can only take 3 of them.

All that stuff you said about genesteelers is functionally moot due to overwatch. If they use infiltrate they need to stand around a turn doing nothing and likely getting shot. If you don't you need to walk slowly towards them enemy and get shot. Then you hopefully get a charge off and get shot again, with even bolters deny you a save. There bad for some of the same reasons Tac Marines are bad, they are charge points for things that don't really add much value this edition. Not having grenades in particular kills them since they drop to I1 if you have you toe in cover. Ap5 melee doesn't matter much when the most common army has 3 up. Not having a gun in an edition where shooting is king all hurt.

I'm a fellow Marine player and I'm glad I have a strong book that has lots of viable builds and options but I don't pretend that doesn't come at the expense of other armies. Half the armies in this game pretty much have one build if they want anything resembling a competitive game or are so reliant on allies you get to the point that you might as well just play another army. If I want to give people a good game especially in a non tournament setting I pretty much have to tone it down or else it's one sided.

Genestealers are the mirror image of tac marines. Both from Rogue trader, both "old school". The tac marines are somewhat survivable, but have no offense to speak of. The genestealers have dangerous offense in melee, but this is 7th ed, and they have 5+ armor. Both are bad unit for different reasons.

 Blacksails wrote:
Again, bolters don't suck, they're just distinctly average.

There being better basic weapons doesn't mean bolters are awful. There's still worse out there.

The only basic weapon that worse Is a Las gun and most of the tyranid weapons.

Other basic troop weapons

Gaus flayer- Bolter that on a six can hurt anything in the game
Shuriken weapons- assault weapons that can hurt anyone in the game on a six
Pulse weapon- Longer ranged, stronger strength.
Storm bolter- Bolter but better
Galvanic Rifle- Longer range, better AP, Precision shots
Rad Carbine- More shots, even more wounds on a 6
Splinter Rifle- Bolter that hurts every thing on a 4+

Bolters are not average

HoundsofDemos wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:
Again, bolters don't suck, they're just distinctly average.

There being better basic weapons doesn't mean bolters are awful. There's still worse out there.

The only basic weapon that worse Is a Las gun and most of the tyranid weapons.

Other basic troop weapons

Gaus flayer- Bolter that on a six can hurt anything in the game
Shuriken weapons- assault weapons that can hurt anyone in the game on a six
Pulse weapon- Longer ranged, stronger strength.
Storm bolter- Bolter but better
Galvanic Rifle- Longer range, better AP, Precision shots
Rad Carbine- More shots, even more wounds on a 6
Splinter Rifle- Bolter that hurts every thing on a 4+

Bolters are not average

I find it amusing that the same people who have a problem with the idea of boltguns taking down a Titan have no problem with Necron immortals doing the exact same thing.

Bolters didn't suck in 3rd, but now they certainly suck. This game has IKs and GMCs in it. People don't need troops at all to score, and there are obj sec troops with scatterlasers in the game. S4 with no special rules is a dumpster fire in 7th.

HoundsofDemos wrote:
The only basic weapon that worse Is a Las gun and most of the tyranid weapons.

Other basic troop weapons

Gaus flayer- Bolter that on a six can hurt anything in the game
Shuriken weapons- assault weapons that can hurt anyone in the game on a six
Pulse weapon- Longer ranged, stronger strength.
Storm bolter- Bolter but better
Galvanic Rifle- Longer range, better AP, Precision shots
Rad Carbine- More shots, even more wounds on a 6
Splinter Rifle- Bolter that hurts every thing on a 4+

Bolters are not average

Ye forgot the Ork stuff.

I would note that bolters do have advantagrs over some of the weapons listed. Splinter rifles wound everything on 4's...which is great until you're fighting Guardsmen, Tau (barring MC suits), Eldar or another DE army. Basic Shuriken Catapulta only have a 12" range, giving the bolter a substantial range boost over Guardians, its only the Dire Avenger catapult that has an 18" range.

That said, in straight up infantry firefights, SM's arent at any meaningful disadvantage because of the Bolter not having extra special rules, its usually because theyre fighting stuff that small arms can hurt anyway, or theyre fighting something they can dramatically crush in CC. The problem is that *getting* into CC is unreasonably tough, they should be able to assault out of stationary transports as in 5th, and that would solve a tremendous number of problems.

Traditio wrote:

HoundsofDemos wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:
Again, bolters don't suck, they're just distinctly average.

There being better basic weapons doesn't mean bolters are awful. There's still worse out there.

The only basic weapon that worse Is a Las gun and most of the tyranid weapons.

Other basic troop weapons

Gaus flayer- Bolter that on a six can hurt anything in the game
Shuriken weapons- assault weapons that can hurt anyone in the game on a six
Pulse weapon- Longer ranged, stronger strength.
Storm bolter- Bolter but better
Galvanic Rifle- Longer range, better AP, Precision shots
Rad Carbine- More shots, even more wounds on a 6
Splinter Rifle- Bolter that hurts every thing on a 4+

Bolters are not average

I find it amusing that the same people who have a problem with the idea of boltguns taking down a Titan have no problem with Necron immortals doing the exact same thing.

It doesn't help your argument. Gauss is a stupid rule to begin with

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

HoundsofDemos wrote:
The only basic weapon that worse Is a Las gun and most of the tyranid weapons.

Other basic troop weapons

Gaus flayer- Bolter that on a six can hurt anything in the game
Shuriken weapons- assault weapons that can hurt anyone in the game on a six
Pulse weapon- Longer ranged, stronger strength.
Storm bolter- Bolter but better
Galvanic Rifle- Longer range, better AP, Precision shots
Rad Carbine- More shots, even more wounds on a 6
Splinter Rifle- Bolter that hurts every thing on a 4+

Bolters are not average

Ye forgot the Ork stuff.

I'd also put the Splinter Rifle into the pool of purely 'average' weapons. Yes, it has an advantage vs. T5+, however, it is 100% useless against anything with an AV value, whereas Bolters can HP most vehicles on their rear, and sometimes even side (or front!) armour facings.

 Tactical_Spam wrote:

Traditio wrote:

HoundsofDemos wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:
Again, bolters don't suck, they're just distinctly average.

There being better basic weapons doesn't mean bolters are awful. There's still worse out there.

The only basic weapon that worse Is a Las gun and most of the tyranid weapons.

Other basic troop weapons

Gaus flayer- Bolter that on a six can hurt anything in the game
Shuriken weapons- assault weapons that can hurt anyone in the game on a six
Pulse weapon- Longer ranged, stronger strength.
Storm bolter- Bolter but better
Galvanic Rifle- Longer range, better AP, Precision shots
Rad Carbine- More shots, even more wounds on a 6
Splinter Rifle- Bolter that hurts every thing on a 4+

Bolters are not average

I find it amusing that the same people who have a problem with the idea of boltguns taking down a Titan have no problem with Necron immortals doing the exact same thing.

It doesn't help your argument. Gauss is a stupid rule to begin with

Yet it exists.

Martel732 wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
I read the OP's post and laughed.
Then I read the rest of the thread and realised that he is deadly serious.

OP: Please put down your SM codex and open up the Imperial Guard one. Or the Tyranid one. Or the CSM one. Or the Ork one. Try and play these codex's, try and play the weaker ones without the fancy formations.
the SM Gladius takes some of the better troops choices in the game and gives them massive buffs in the form of free obsec transports. Sure, these units are some of the less useful ones within the codex but they are still far superior to most of the other codex's troops choices.

They are not far superior. They are only good because of gladius.

No Martel, that is just you being you again.

The average SM comes in at 14 points. He has above average WS, BS, S, T, I and LD, a 3+ save, ATSKNF, a Bolter, Frag and Krak grenades, a Bolt Pistol and a CCW.
The average Guardsman comes in at 5 points. He has average stats, a 5+ save (Which he will almost never get), a glorified flashlight (the worst basic weapon in the game), Frag Grenades and a CCW.

The Guardsman also pays the same amount for his upgrades as the Marine.

The only way to make the Guardsman good is to pay yet more points to make him a veteran and then pay even more to give him either Carapace and/or Forward Sentries and then pay even more to give him Krak grenades (so he is not totally useless against a walker.
And then SM players complain about getting free transports?

 Vaktathi wrote:
I would note that bolters do have advantagrs over some of the weapons listed. Splinter rifles wound everything on 4's...which is great until you're fighting Guardsmen, Tau (barring MC suits), Eldar or another DE army. Basic Shuriken Catapulta only have a 12" range, giving the bolter a substantial range boost over Guardians, its only the Dire Avenger catapult that has an 18" range.

That said, in straight up infantry firefights, SM's arent at any meaningful disadvantage because of the Bolter not having extra special rules, its usually because theyre fighting stuff that small arms can hurt anyway, or theyre fighting something they can dramatically crush in CC. The problem is that *getting* into CC is unreasonably tough, they should be able to assault out of stationary transports as in 5th, and that would solve a tremendous number of problems.

If this was fifth I would agree with you but these days depending on the meta I'm not worried about light to medium infantry. I would much rather take a weapon that's worse at hitting guardsman but has a real shot at hurting MC/GMC. If bolters had shred, I'd be a bit happier.

Shred on something like a bolter (a relatively static fixture of the game for decades) would be more than a wee bit much, especially with all the rerolls they already get through chapter tactics and whatnot (really dont need tac marines rynning around rerolling both to hit and to wound rolls for what likely will be every shot they take, at that point might as well just make them auto-hit/auto wound against most infantry). At this point, the game really needs a reboot and a refocus on what scale it really wants to play at or a split rules system for different scales, rather than continuously pouring on more and more special rules in a never ending arms race that just further devalues individual infantry models.

 master of ordinance wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
I read the OP's post and laughed.
Then I read the rest of the thread and realised that he is deadly serious.

OP: Please put down your SM codex and open up the Imperial Guard one. Or the Tyranid one. Or the CSM one. Or the Ork one. Try and play these codex's, try and play the weaker ones without the fancy formations.
the SM Gladius takes some of the better troops choices in the game and gives them massive buffs in the form of free obsec transports. Sure, these units are some of the less useful ones within the codex but they are still far superior to most of the other codex's troops choices.

They are not far superior. They are only good because of gladius.

No Martel, that is just you being you again.

The average SM comes in at 14 points. He has above average WS, BS, S, T, I and LD, a 3+ save, ATSKNF, a Bolter, Frag and Krak grenades, a Bolt Pistol and a CCW.
The average Guardsman comes in at 5 points. He has average stats, a 5+ save (Which he will almost never get), a glorified flashlight (the worst basic weapon in the game), Frag Grenades and a CCW.

The Guardsman also pays the same amount for his upgrades as the Marine.

The only way to make the Guardsman good is to pay yet more points to make him a veteran and then pay even more to give him either Carapace and/or Forward Sentries and then pay even more to give him Krak grenades (so he is not totally useless against a walker.
And then SM players complain about getting free transports?

Most of those things you listed are irrelevant in Eldar/Tau 40K. There are lots of weapons in the game now that scoop space marines just as fast as guardsmen. These weapons make guardsmen actually very desirable, as they are paying points for substandard outcomes. And these weapons are adept at dealing with marine-sized squads, not huge squads.

I hate L2P arguments, but I have seen some IG lists that bite the bullet and give up on Russes do some nasty stuff. Your expensive tanks are the liability in 7th, not the guardsmen themselves. Get rid of the useless tanks and get some psykers to make your infantry dangerous.

Again, Gladius makes tac marines good, because otherwise you have BA tacticals, which are simply horrendous on the 7th ed table top. If space marines didn't have the gladius, I bet you'd see a ton more scouts.

Those 'nasty guardsmen'? They die to anything and everything, especially the Vindicator Linebreaker which just loves to scoop vast blobs of infantry from the board.

Ive never seen an infantry heavy IG army do better than a mechanized force (at least, post 4E aside from some artillery park shennanigans in 6E). Even with psyker support, theres too many hardcounters and too many things that just will not care about Flashlights no matter how many there are and a handful of BS3 heavy weapons just wont cut it, especially when theres fewer heavy weapons than in the mech lists typically, and what there are are typically less effective and even less mobile.



Its just insanely easy to clear out IG infantry, theyre the worst part of the book.

It also doesnt helo that moving from a mech/tank IG army to an infantry IG army is basically buying a whole new army.

 master of ordinance wrote:
Those 'nasty guardsmen'? They die to anything and everything, especially the Vindicator Linebreaker which just loves to scoop vast blobs of infantry from the board.

Vindicator linebreakers only get one shot. Even vs BA. Try again. If that, actually because the last time someone trotted that out, one of them ate some drop meltas to the face. Drop meltas aren't even that good. But against that, they're good. But three AV 11 vehicles are not good at that price point.

Infantry heavy is counter meta. People are bringing weapons to kill titans and crap. Give them a 4++ and they're golden.

.

stopcallingmechief wrote:

Traditio wrote:
Furthermore, I wish to ask this question to all of the people who are complaining about it:

When is the last time you got tabled by a battle company?

I got tabled saturday vs my buddies battle company in an ETC tourney practise game. Had 4 warpspiders and one swooping hawk exarch on the table after five turns when i called it.

But i prolly dont count since im not a "name" player.

That is a very unlikely outcome with Eldar. You should be doing the tabling with that codex. AV 11 doesn't last long vs Eldar weaponry, even when it's free. Then, the infantry are disembarked and the same weapons that killed the tanks kill the infantry very easily.

Would Rending on bolters be fair? or too much? As is, I'm pretty jealous of Eldar with all their psuedo-AP 2 weapons

Way too much. Currently, there is no real niche for the bolter in the 40k system. There never has been, really.