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 think its going to be a fairly niche ability.

It makes "soft" melee units that don't really kill the enemy but just tie them up worse. That's unfortunate but such melee has never been much good in game given all the problems of assault. If you make contact you need it to count.

Marines tend to have small squad sizes and sufficient leadership that +1 leadership won't be a massive change either.

That dreadnought being 10 power upsets me, because Furioso dreads are 10 power and DC dreads are 11. Same movement, more wounds, likely better weapon options. I really hope they fix dreads in the codices. =\

 Crimson wrote:

 Arandmoor wrote:

This x1000. It's the exact same problem I brought up in the chapter tactics thread from a few weeks ago.

If you're going to make a chapter codex that isn't just "vanilla space marines, BUT BETTER!" like the Blood Angels and Dark Angels, any disadvantages you put in to offset the chapter advantages you give them need to be disadvantages that you will feel in game. Your advantage needs to make you feel like you chose this army for a reason and, similarly, any disadvantage needs to almost make you regret your decision. This preview "chapter tactic" is BS. It costs them nothing, and gives them a serious advantage. With this, Ultramarines will now be "vanilla marines", and actual vanilla marines will be something you take when you don't know any better.

If they balance this properly (they probably won't but in theory), no one is 'vanilla but better', they're just different. Every chapter gets something, their 'disadvantage' is that they don't get the stuff other chapters get. Then the point cost takes that capability in account.

If every chapter gets assigned, or gets to pick, a small advantage like this it will be fine. My problem isn't with vanilla marines, or near-vanilla marines.

My problem is going to be with Blood Angels and Dark Angels, and any other chapter that get their own physical book "juse 'cause", that get everything normal marines get, plus a bunch of special units that only they can take, plus a chapter-wide advantage like +1 S on the charge or something pants-on-head retardedly strong, AND don't actually pay for any of it except by maybe losing access to a unit or two that they can either easily cover the loss of by taking something else or by it being a unit they probably wouldn't normally take (*cough*spacewolves*cough*).

Basically, I am fully of the opinion that simply removing a chapter's access to certain units isn't actually a disadvantage in most cases, and that anything a chapter uses to "pay" for an above-and-beyond advantage needs to come in the form of a rule that will impact them in play. This is because of the transient and quantum nature of army lists from game to game. Losses do not carry over from one game to the next, and there is nothing stopping you from simply altering your list when you go from one game to the next based on your expectations of your opponent.

Lets take Blood Angels for example. How do you remove access to something that will penalize them, without gimping them? No tac squads, but assault squads are troops as long as they don't take jump packs? Is that actually a disadvantage when they get +1S in the turn they charge and can still take predators, and whirlwinds, and landspeeders? Do we keep going and remove their access to devastators? Vindicators? Centurion Devastators?

If they need to shoot, they'll just spam the one unit you leave them that can shoot unless you remove that capacity from their army list completely. Their disadvantage won't actually be a disadvantage. It will simply dictate their army structure.

How about we completely remove their access to anti-air guns. No icarus autocannons. No skyhammer missile launchers. No flack missiles in their Tac squads. No. Blood Angels are so bat-s**t crazy, they perform anti-air maneuvers against supersonic targets with jump-pack equipped assault marine squads, krak grenades, and melta bombs (you know...like real men). That and good ol' mass bolter fire is the only anti-air the chapter has got. Problem here is that if their opponent doesn't field flyers, the BA player, again, won't notice his disadvantage.

Removing access to units doesn't disadvantage an army. It just helps shape their list.

Now, what would I do to balance something like this?

For an advantage as stupidly OP as +1S on the charge, I'd penalize the shooting with any heavy-type weapon by 1. Baal laspred? -1 to everything. Vindicator? -1 to the cannon. Stormraven gunship? -1 on top of the movement penalties, and on top of that I'd probably remove the stormtalon and stormhawk from their list entirely just because they'd be, effectively, at BS 5+ with them in most cases.

Besides, in the case of the stormhawk, they have assault marines with jump packs...

How about this ultramarine "everyone has fly, but worse" rule?

If every marine army gets something like this, then we can just count it as part of the baseline. I'm not worried about the baseline. It's the outlier codicies that tend to get out of control a bit.

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
With flamers you get D6 autohits, resolved at the same strength as a SB.

For the price of a nine point flamer, you could equip a battle sister squad with three storm bolters (two special weapons sisters, and the sister superior) and be one point shy of a power sword/power maul. These three storm bolters are able to fire multiple times a game, where a flamer you'd only ever get to fire once before your squad got assaulted.

So there's your choice, what would you pick; three storm bolters and three spare points for something else, or a single flamer?

Yeah, you have a point there. Sounds like flamers are overpriced

In this army, yes. For anything that can soak a charge, they're not. Flamers are a very good example of something that has a wildly different value on different units. In a vacuum they're amazing stats, but on the wrong model they're still pants. Now on a Penitent Engine, however...

This seems like a pretty nonsensical argument. They're firing overwatch before they take the loses in combat. The flamer exists at the time of being charged.

The *reason* a flamer is good is because it won't roll to hit on overwatch. This doesn't make it any different if it's on a gaunt, sister, ork, or marine. It still kills the same exact way.

If you wanted to walk up to a unit, and light them up with 5D6 S4 hits and then let them charge and take 5D6 S4 hits - that's what flamers are for. If you want to shoot something sooner and get some extra shots in up close and have a crummier overwatch - that's what storm bolters are for. It is no burden to add a flamer or two to make charging hurt.

And an autohit is worth 1.5 bolter shots making D6 worth 5.3 bolter shots - as an average.

The fact that you fail to understand it doesn't make it nonsensical. You don't want to be within 8 inches with a Sisters unit, so you're actively trying to stay out of range of the flamer. On top of that, if you ignore the flamer, you can take two bolters instead of 1 flamer (an extra sister is another bolter) so the point comparison at 8 inches is 2 bolters at rapid fire instead of 1 flamer. Now it's not a huge difference, and add to that the fact that the bolters have been shooting while the flamer was out of range before they got into this precarious situation. If you start waddling a unit up the field full of flamers, it should really be taken down in short order by any enemy with half a brain, as the battlesisters aren't really optimal at getting into 8" range, and have nothing better than a rhino to get them there. No one would charge that unit either. If they've managed to get into range to shoot at a unit, then they are gonna get shot down 9 times out of 10. Or charged by a rhino and followed by a real unit after.

If Retributor's get a rule back that allows them to manouver, then yes, that would work, but then we're back to how the weapons work better on some units than others.

Tyel wrote:
I think its going to be a fairly niche ability.

It makes "soft" melee units that don't really kill the enemy but just tie them up worse. That's unfortunate but such melee has never been much good in game given all the problems of assault. If you make contact you need it to count.

Marines tend to have small squad sizes and sufficient leadership that +1 leadership won't be a massive change either.

The leadership is pretty useless - except for weapons and spells that target you by your leadership - that is fairly niche. However - the way I play Ultra marines is with guilliman surrounded by a lot of guys with lots of guns and an ancient. One of the more frustrating things is that sometimes a dedicated assault unit will break through 5 intercessors like they aren't even there - and because I am deliberately stacking as many units as I can in guillimans 6 inch bubble - consolidation into another unit is a big problem. Not anymore and In fact - a lot of time players might not even consolidate into my next line because I will be rerolling the hits anyways - so giving me some extra close combat attacks doesn't seem so appealing when I am still shooting them next turn.

Honestly - this is massive - just because with gulliman the -1 to hit isn't going to be felt nearly as much as it would be otherwise. I don't think the -1 was necessary - I guess they figure with gulliman and possible another chapter master rerolling hits - the sustained fire a marine list can put on mille attacks would be too much without the -1.

 Purifier wrote:


The fact that you fail to understand it doesn't make it nonsensical. You don't want to be within 8 inches with a Sisters unit, so you're actively trying to stay out of range of the flamer. On top of that, if you ignore the flamer, you can take two bolters instead of 1 flamer (an extra sister is another bolter) so the point comparison at 8 inches is 2 bolters at rapid fire instead of 1 flamer. Now it's not a huge difference, and add to that the fact that the bolters have been shooting while the flamer was out of range before they got into this precarious situation. If you start waddling a unit up the field full of flamers, it should really be taken down in short order by any enemy with half a brain, as the battlesisters aren't really optimal at getting into 8" range, and have nothing better than a rhino to get them there. No one would charge that unit either. If they've managed to get into range to shoot at a unit, then they are gonna get shot down 9 times out of 10. Or charged by a rhino and followed by a real unit after.

If Retributor's get a rule back that allows them to manouver, then yes, that would work, but then we're back to how the weapons work better on some units than others.

It doesn't make sense, because you're arguing that a flamer is not useful, because it's on a weaker model. Where do you draw that line? Does everything need to be T4 3+ to be worth taking?

Sisters aren't going to run around a unit full of flamers. No one should, really unless they enjoy the risk or are in a transport. That said a full unit of flamers is 180 and does the same damage as a unit of marines loaded the same way, but for 40 points less. Yes - you're a softer target, but you paid 40 less. Not to mention guide and hand being an option for sisters.

If you can never get charged, sure, storm bolters are perfect. But something that does want to charge won't usually be walking it in. For those you'll get one - maybe two rounds of shooting.

Which is okay logic and all, but you can still give a battle sister squad three storm bolters plus points to spare for the cost of a single flamer. Even if all you get is a single round of shooting, plus overwatch, that's more firepower point per point than a single flamer (6 shots hitting at 3+ meaning an average of 4 hits, 6 more shots hitting at overwatch meaning one more hit, vs d6 hits). Five hits average, vs 3.5 hits.

 Melissia wrote:
Which is okay logic and all, but you can still give a battle sister squad three storm bolters plus points to spare for the cost of a single flamer. Even if all you get is a single round of shooting, plus overwatch, that's more firepower point per point than a single flamer (6 shots hitting at 3+ meaning an average of 4 hits, 6 more shots hitting at overwatch meaning one more hit, vs d6 hits). Five hits average, vs 3.5 hits.

You need a body to hold the weapon.

And there's an upper limit on the bodies. 2 flamers in a squad is an extra 10 points from a regular squad. If you don't think flamers are good enough for what you want to do - that's fine. They play a specific role and what carries them doesn't change that.

@ Melissa: Right, but then your squad, while less expensive (by 18 points?), is also less frightening.

I mean, its your army, do what you will. I think I'd rather have the flamers though.

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Which is okay logic and all, but you can still give a battle sister squad three storm bolters plus points to spare for the cost of a single flamer. Even if all you get is a single round of shooting, plus overwatch, that's more firepower point per point than a single flamer (6 shots hitting at 3+ meaning an average of 4 hits, 6 more shots hitting at overwatch meaning one more hit, vs d6 hits). Five hits average, vs 3.5 hits.

You need a body to hold the weapon.

And there's an upper limit on the bodies. 2 flamers in a squad is an extra 10 points from a regular squad. If you don't think flamers are good enough for what you want to do - that's fine. They play a specific role and what carries them doesn't change that.

Yes it does. If the people that carry them are specifically terrible at that role, the flamers aren't worth their points on that unit. If the people carrying them are awesome at being exactly 8 inches away from the enemy, then the cost of the flamers is absolutely worth it on that body. This isn't a hard concept. The abilities and limitations of the body can very much make the flamer worth the cost or not. And I never once mentioned statlines, so I don't know where you got that from.

Daedalus81 wrote:
2 flamers in a squad is an extra 10 points from a regular squad..

2 flamers = 18 points, not 10.

We're really getting off topic. If you want to go and argue Sisters should be spamming flamers, you should probably go to the sisters tactics thread.

 Melissia wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:
2 flamers in a squad is an extra 10 points from a regular squad..

2 flamers = 18 points, not 10.

We're really getting off topic. If you want to go and argue Sisters should be spamming flamers, you should probably go to the sisters tactics thread.

Yes, but it's 10 points more for the squad since SBs are 4 each.

 Purifier wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Which is okay logic and all, but you can still give a battle sister squad three storm bolters plus points to spare for the cost of a single flamer. Even if all you get is a single round of shooting, plus overwatch, that's more firepower point per point than a single flamer (6 shots hitting at 3+ meaning an average of 4 hits, 6 more shots hitting at overwatch meaning one more hit, vs d6 hits). Five hits average, vs 3.5 hits.

You need a body to hold the weapon.

And there's an upper limit on the bodies. 2 flamers in a squad is an extra 10 points from a regular squad. If you don't think flamers are good enough for what you want to do - that's fine. They play a specific role and what carries them doesn't change that.

Yes it does. If the people that carry them are specifically terrible at that role, the flamers aren't worth their points on that unit. If the people carrying them are awesome at being exactly 8 inches away from the enemy, then the cost of the flamers is absolutely worth it on that body. This isn't a hard concept. The abilities and limitations of the body can very much make the flamer worth the cost or not. And I never once mentioned statlines, so I don't know where you got that from.

Sisters are good at what range though? They always seemed like short range firefighters to me.

 Purifier wrote:

Yes it does. If the people that carry them are specifically terrible at that role, the flamers aren't worth their points on that unit. If the people carrying them are awesome at being exactly 8 inches away from the enemy, then the cost of the flamers is absolutely worth it on that body. This isn't a hard concept. The abilities and limitations of the body can very much make the flamer worth the cost or not. And I never once mentioned statlines, so I don't know where you got that from.

Aside from tanks...they're all pretty vulnerable. T3 3+ is better than T4 5+ though. Especially considering S5 doesn't wound on 2s anymore.

If a group of SM carried flamers i'm going to shoot more guns at them, because they're worth even more points. So the durability is a little moot. In any case...moving on...

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Yes it does. If the people that carry them are specifically terrible at that role, the flamers aren't worth their points on that unit. If the people carrying them are awesome at being exactly 8 inches away from the enemy, then the cost of the flamers is absolutely worth it on that body. This isn't a hard concept. The abilities and limitations of the body can very much make the flamer worth the cost or not. And I never once mentioned statlines, so I don't know where you got that from.

Aside from tanks...they're all pretty vulnerable. T3 3+ is better than T4 5+ though. Especially considering S5 doesn't wound on 2s anymore.

If a group of SM carried flamers i'm going to shoot more guns at them, because they're worth even more points. So the durability is a little moot. In any case...moving on...

Yeah, the durability is a little moot since it can actually be a benefit for cheapå sacrificial troops, so I never mentioned that. What the hell... are you making up your own things to argue against?

 Purifier wrote:


Yeah, the durability is a little moot since it can actually be a benefit for cheapå sacrificial troops, so I never mentioned that. What the hell... are you making up your own things to argue against?

Err, no, maybe I quoted the wrong person. *shrug*

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:


Yeah, the durability is a little moot since it can actually be a benefit for cheapå sacrificial troops, so I never mentioned that. What the hell... are you making up your own things to argue against?

Err, no, maybe I quoted the wrong person. *shrug*

... did you mean to quote yourself? Because you're the only one I can see that brought it up.

reading this thread is bizarre, it's like people are spazzing about UM chapter tactics pretending that like, only the UM are getting chapter tactics. It's fugging wierd. Every big name chapter is getting tactics savvy?

maybe we should try not to derail a space marines thread with Sisters tactica? (not for the least of reasons, someone looking for info on that specificly wou;dn't think to look in this thread

In my defense, I did try to point them at a more appropriate thread.

 Melissia wrote:
In my defense, I did try to point them at a more appropriate thread.

eh conversations get side tracked, it happens. the value of flamers or not is definatly worth talking about, I know if I started a SOB army my first instinct would be "ALL THE FLAMERS"

I think that a lot of the hate for this also comes from the fact that UM keep getting stuff when they already have the most stuff. If I was starting a space marine army, why wouldn't I pick Ultramarines? You get access to a ton of stuff and a chapter tactic that will always be useful. Hopefully the codex stops that and starts to give more to the other chapters, but I doubt it.

As far as the rule goes, i'm a bit torn about it. It's nice to make chapter tactics meaningful but it will be hard to keep all the army and faction special rules equal in the future if they do so much. This is really what caused a lot of the problems in 7th. I think going with weaker chapter tactics across all factions would have been smarter for balance, even if it makes for less diversity.

It is obviously a fairly powerful ability. My concern is the way it reduces overall tactical depth, kind of a dumbing down.

I actually like the appearance of the new dread. I thought it was supposed to be a Primaris dread though. Or did I get it confused with another future model? Weapons, points, and options will tell if it is good or not. That Ultra Marines ability seems really strong, kinda muddies the water clean rules wise with the pseudo fly, and to top it off feels more like a white scars ability. Makes me a bit apprehensive as to what other space marine chapters will have.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Egyptian Space Zombie wrote:
I think that a lot of the hate for this also comes from the fact that UM keep getting stuff when they already have the most stuff. If I was starting a space marine army, why wouldn't I pick Ultramarines? You get access to a ton of stuff and a chapter tactic that will always be useful. Hopefully the codex stops that and starts to give more to the other chapters, but I doubt it.

As far as the rule goes, i'm a bit torn about it. It's nice to make chapter tactics meaningful but it will be hard to keep all the army and faction special rules equal in the future if they do so much. This is really what caused a lot of the problems in 7th. I think going with weaker chapter tactics across all factions would have been smarter for balance, even if it makes for less diversity.

I kinda feel the tactics should have been a bit more on the fluffy side. Still useful, but fluffy. Either that or very narrow and powerful. The Ultramarine ability feels really powerful and army wide.

Ix_Tab wrote:
It is obviously a fairly powerful ability. My concern is the way it reduces overall tactical depth, kind of a dumbing down.

Could you explain that more?

If anything, 20 different chapter tactics / faction abilities add more options/possibilities to the game, which would increase the depth and tactical complexity.

How is adding complexity dumbing something down?

I have to agree with verticalgain here. This may need to be rebalanced later, but as long as GW keeps giving stuff like this to ALL factions and subfactions, it's perfectly fine and makes the currently fairly identical marine-flavors more unique.

If you had to pay points for this chapter tactic then it wouldn't even be worth taking. A tactical marine with ld8 and the ability to fall back and shoot at BS4+ is perfectly balanced at 13 ppm.

Frankly it's still not enough to make them comparable to real troops choice like horrors and conscripts.

It makes falling back the obvious choice when you get into combat. It's no longer a hard decision. Also having different tactics only gives possibilities if they are balanced. If there is a best choice, most people will pick that and then it's back to the mono build armies of 7th.

As opposed to every chapter being the exact same, which is basically monobuilds of a different variety?

I mean FFS I'll complain all day about the fact taht GW is likely to release 10 space marine codices this year before they ever get to anything else. But it's not because I think space marines don't deserve the variety. I just think others need to get in on the action too.

That's true as well. It's a tough balance. Hopefully they can find that middle ground.