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.

 master of ordinance wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
I thinnk (based upon what I have read and the summary I recieved) that the main 'problem' with the Marine codex is that it is no longer glaringly overpowered and capable of roflstomping all the other factions into the ground, but is instead now balanced, or at least more in line with the other, once weaker, codexes.
The pervieved weakness comes from Marine armies no longer being able to trample all over equally costed armies of other factions and win without any use of tactics as they could in the past few editions, causing a radical need for a shift in tactics that few Marine players have recognised.

And my codex?

GK? I cant speak too much for them at the moment as I have not seen them in 8th. However my 6h/7th memories of them involve being tabled on turn 2, so.....

Honestly if 6th edition GK tabled you by T2 you've got more issues than you'd think. They were easily one of the biggest losers in 6th/7th, managing to be almost as bad as Blood Angels.

It might have been T3 now that I think about it, it was a few years back now. All I remember is that he had that deepstriking formation and that he dropped onto my side, negated my range advantage and destroyed my right flank. Guard being what it was I didnt have the mobility to redeploy and bring my guns to bare and he just rolled me up.

Xenomancers wrote:
We are talking about chapter tactics on space marine tanks and how they don't have them...but imperial guard tanks do as well as every other armies traits applying to their vehicals. Even your bane blade super-heavies...it would be OP if LR had chapter tactics though...reason being - they are marines.

Perhaps this is because Tanks in the Guard are an integral part of the army whereas Tanks in the Marine's are a small part of the force that is delegated to the support roll in what is a highly elite mainly infantry army of special forces.

1. By Turn 3 you're still a bad player. Sorry. It's Grey Knights. You have NO excuses.
2. And the Daemon engines that CSM use aren't an integral part of their army?

T3 tabling is possible... I think. I never had a game that didn't end till turn 5 though, outside conceding which is different than a tabling.

Just really unlikely because how a GK army likely still didn't have their entire army on the board.

Spoletta wrote:
Didn't anyone suppose that right now the SM vehicles could be costed with no CTs in mind?
If things are not as good as other factions (and i wouldn't be so sure) then chapter approved will fix that by switching some points around, but i don't think that you can honestly say that things don't work because you have a restriction that SOME other factions don't get. That's in the design of the faction, if not i want my reroll auras on the 'nids!

From what I've seen the tanks are costed fairly decently for their lack of CT, given most marine armies still use tanks/flyers over the other options when possible. The fact the best options in the codex don't benefit from CT does lead to the current situation, where CT are basically irrelevant to the overall army which kinda kills the point of them. It's also why every uses Robby G and ultramarines, the bonus he gives actually matters unlike the majority of CT benefits. If the goal of CT on only infantry+bikes+dreads was to encourage their usage, it failed because those units aren't very good by comparison to other options even with CT. Because marine infantry are fairly awful.

Personally, I think it's a weird distinction to make fluff wise. White scars don't modify their tanks to go fast? Iron hands don't have exceptionally sturdy tanks? Salamander crewmen don't spend the same amount of effort on the weapons mounted on their vehicles? Seems a little arbitrary tbh.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
1. By Turn 3 you're still a bad player. Sorry. It's Grey Knights. You have NO excuses.
2. And the Daemon engines that CSM use aren't an integral part of their army?

1: Guard are a low mobility long range army. If you negate the range and deploy well when you ds in you stand a pretty good chance of winning with your melee specialists and their flying brick of doom.
2: Demon engines are not integral to Chaos Marines as tanks are to the Guard. Guard armies are like the old Panzergrenadier regiments - an integral mix of infantry, armour and artillery fighting as one unit, Chaos Marine units, as with regular Marines, treat their armour as a seperate, supporting factor rather than a core part of the force.

Quickjager wrote:T3 tabling is possible... I think. I never had a game that didn't end till turn 5 though, outside conceding which is different than a tabling.

Just really unlikely because how a GK army likely still didn't have their entire army on the board.

It was some formation or other that let his army ds in on the first turn as I said, I think it was one he had to roll for though, I cant remember, but I do remember he had his entire army on the board and in my deployment zone by turn 2 - his rolls where good.

To be clear:

I think SM should have chapter tactics on their tanks.

But, I can see why they don't: GW doesn't want to push them as "the tank army."

That said, as for what Eldar get them... *shrug cluelessly*

Aren't actually Imperial Guard armies divided in regiments that can't mix Infantry, Tanks and Artillery?

A force of Space Marines Scouts, Bikers and Land Speeders work as a much cohesive force than Imperial Guard.

You are trying to justify by fluff something that doesn't makes any sense. Why Space Marines not, but Eldar yes? Is obviously a change in design phylosophy that screw Space Marines over.
And I'll say that it even screwed IG because they did received double regiments so their tanks weren't as OP with infantry tactics and their Flyers and other units don't have the "regiment" keyword.

The worst offenders of this are Eldar, where they have the <craftworld> keyword everywhere.

 master of ordinance wrote:

Xenomancers wrote:
We are talking about chapter tactics on space marine tanks and how they don't have them...but imperial guard tanks do as well as every other armies traits applying to their vehicals. Even your bane blade super-heavies...it would be OP if LR had chapter tactics though...reason being - they are marines.

Perhaps this is because Tanks in the Guard are an integral part of the army whereas Tanks in the Marine's are a small part of the force that is delegated to the support roll in what is a highly elite mainly infantry army of special forces.

That was my thought as well. Guard have always had tanks be a big part of the army, and had armored company lists going back through almost every edition, Space Marines have always been about the super-soldier infantry while the tanks were relatively minor support elements. Particularly as Space Marines would make awful tank crews and be really wasted there, party because of their physical size (in real life, tankers need to be short, in the Soviet army you couldn't be taller than 5'6" and be a tanker), and partly because the benefits of being a genetically engineered super soldier are greatly mitigated in vehicle combat. That extra strength, speedy reflexes, the power armor, enhanced senses, etc doesn't mean much when it's the tank that's doing the fighting and the crew is basically just acting as a brain.

 Galas wrote:
Aren't actually Imperial Guard armies divided in regiments that can't mix Infantry, Tanks and Artillery?

A force of Space Marines Scouts, Bikers and Land Speeders work as a much cohesive force than Imperial Guard.

You are trying to justify by fluff something that doesn't makes any sense. Why Space Marines not, but Eldar yes? Is obviously a change in design phylosophy that screw Space Marines over.
And I'll say that it even screwed IG because they did received double regiments so their tanks weren't as OP with infantry tactics and their Flyers and other units don't have the "regiment" keyword.

With regards to the flyers, fluffwise the aircraft belong to the Imperial Navy, not the Imperial Guard, hence no regimental bonuses.

The worst offenders of this are Eldar, where they have the <craftworld> keyword everywhere.

Aye, Eldar are always treated really well with regards to such things.

Yeah, but at the same time having Regimental Auxilia, Imperial Navy, Astra Telephatica, etc... allowed with IG to select what do you want to receive bonuses and what not.

At first with Adeptus Mechanicus there was no problem with everything receiving ForgeWorld Dogmas because they didn't had any vehicle, and the Imperial Knighst didn't had the forgeworld keyword.

But then with IG tanks and Superheavies received the Regimental Bonuses, that I believe shouldn't had happened, and Tyranid and Eldars receive those in all of their stuff.

I believe the first restrictions where good: Give those bonuses to Infantry, Bikers/Equivalents and Dreadnought/SmallWalkers equivalents (Wraithlords, Deff Dreads and Killa Kans, in IG Sentinels, etc...)

If GW wants Space Marine tanks to be bad they should probably just give them Tactics and make them more expensive rather than making it so that all Chapters' tanks work the same, since that's a lot more fun for the people who actually want to use the tanks.

I think there's a pretty compelling game design argument for giving Eldar traits on their vehicles (though perhaps not the flyers): You're supposed to put everything in transports. There's really not a single non-character infantry unit in the whole codex that you're generally going to want to deploy normally. Maybe Dark Reapers. Maybe. And the transports are expensive. Most of the price of Guardians/Avengers/Banshees in a Serpent is due to the Serpent. Lots of Eldar lists would be spending most of their points on stuff that doesn't get traits, if they used the same rules as Marines.

I can't believe this is still going on. As a chaos player, hearing marine players complain is pretty rich. We got our codex in 6th and within a month our codex was immediately outdated and revealed to be codex heldrake cultist. We suffered with it through 7th ed. No codex till 8th. There was a lot of complain ing. But I still played and did the best I could.

Facing armies with ATSKNF was tough. Seeing that they had 3 times as many characters, options and special rules was annoying. Imperial still have the most options. Nothing has changed.

Multiple fliers including multiple flying g translorts and gunboats. Check. Snipers check. Infiltrate check. 3++ available. Check. Assassins and ways to shut down psychers. Check. Anit air units. Check. Assault cannons, razorbacks, check check check.

So you lost your auto win button. You don't get every thing free anymore. You can still combine space marines, inquisition custodian s, guard. .the fact.that.marine players are.whining despite years of beong tbe poster boys of.GW because you have to work a bit harder to try to win. Please.... Having faced all bike armies.covered with grav, getting destroyed for years by drop pod heavy lists. I have very little.sympathy.... Here is the advice I used to recieve from marine players.

Try harder.
Practice more...
If you dont like it you should sell your army.
Its ok. Your new. Codex will come out soon. Etc.

 Galas wrote:

I believe the first restrictions where good: Give those bonuses to Infantry, Bikers/Equivalents and Dreadnought/SmallWalkers equivalents (Wraithlords, Deff Dreads and Killa Kans, in IG Sentinels, etc...)

This seems to have the opposite problem where everyone except Space Marines can reasonably complain that Marines get traits on all kinds of vehicles whereas they only get traits on a small number. There are a ton of Dreadnoughts that fill a bunch of different roles. It'd feel pretty unfair if IG only got traits on Sentinels and no other vehicle.

If you were getting destroyed by drop pods, you have no room to talk. Most good players solved pods in 5th
Grav bikers were only scary when invisible.

Chaos had better deep strike and assault units than ba. The crazy gravy they you guys at the end of 7th was really good, and now you have viable screens while loyalist marines don't.

Marines were far from the most abusive list in 6/7th.

Ally in some conscripts and suck it up.

Doesn't change the fact that your post was a bunch of erroneous crap. All the chaos whining since 3.5 dex amuses me. Because dual lash princes wasn't a thing in 5th.

Your whining amuses me. Cheers.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 Galas wrote:

I believe the first restrictions where good: Give those bonuses to Infantry, Bikers/Equivalents and Dreadnought/SmallWalkers equivalents (Wraithlords, Deff Dreads and Killa Kans, in IG Sentinels, etc...)

This seems to have the opposite problem where everyone except Space Marines can reasonably complain that Marines get traits on all kinds of vehicles whereas they only get traits on a small number. There are a ton of Dreadnoughts that fill a bunch of different roles. It'd feel pretty unfair if IG only got traits on Sentinels and no other vehicle.

At the time of typing that I was actually thinking about allowing both Sentinels and Leman Russes for IG to receive those bonuses. You know. The phylosophy behind is: Infantry, Fast Units (Bikers, Cavalry, Chariots, Jetbikes, Hellions, etc...), Some kind of Iconic Walker/Smallish vehicle type. For every faction.

So Marines will have Dreadnought: Normals, Ironclads, Venerables, Contemptors, Redemptors with Tactics, and IG will have: Scout Sentinels, Armour Sentinels, and the ... 8 types of leman russes? I know the different Leman Russes are just basically the same tank with a different turrent weapon, so marines still have more Dreadnoughts to choose and benefit for the tactics. But I believe is an acceptable compromise. The ones screwed would be Eldar, because besides Wraithlord... and... War-Walkers? They don't have as much variety.

 master of ordinance wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
1. By Turn 3 you're still a bad player. Sorry. It's Grey Knights. You have NO excuses.
2. And the Daemon engines that CSM use aren't an integral part of their army?

1: Guard are a low mobility long range army. If you negate the range and deploy well when you ds in you stand a pretty good chance of winning with your melee specialists and their flying brick of doom.
2: Demon engines are not integral to Chaos Marines as tanks are to the Guard. Guard armies are like the old Panzergrenadier regiments - an integral mix of infantry, armour and artillery fighting as one unit, Chaos Marine units, as with regular Marines, treat their armour as a seperate, supporting factor rather than a core part of the force.

Quickjager wrote:T3 tabling is possible... I think. I never had a game that didn't end till turn 5 though, outside conceding which is different than a tabling.

Just really unlikely because how a GK army likely still didn't have their entire army on the board.

It was some formation or other that let his army ds in on the first turn as I said, I think it was one he had to roll for though, I cant remember, but I do remember he had his entire army on the board and in my deployment zone by turn 2 - his rolls where good.

1. Yeah and even with that formation literally nobody cared about Grey Knights. Just admit you lost to a bad army and that skews your perception a bit.
It doesn't matter if you're melee specialists if you're deep striking and can't charge. The bonus from the formation was, on top of being able to Deep Strike T1, the Marines can run and shoot. There's nothing the army is running that would kill that many Infantry units. Not even if there was like 10+ Incinerators.
2. Yes they ARE integral. It doesn't matter if YOU think they're just support. It's all part of the army. Under that logic, if the Guard are about tanks and then Infantry second, the Infantry shouldn't get Regiment bonuses.

CT should definitely apply to their tanks hopefully the new chapter approved will adress this oversight.

sennacherib wrote:Ally in some conscripts and suck it up.

Exalted Honestly, your posts have been some of the best in this thread for amusing me, especially this one

sennacherib wrote:Here is the advice I used to recieve from marine players.

Try harder.
Practice more...
If you dont like it you should sell your army.
Its ok. Your new. Codex will come out soon. Etc.

Using their old offhands against them - excellent!

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
1. Yeah and even with that formation literally nobody cared about Grey Knights. Just admit you lost to a bad army and that skews your perception a bit.
It doesn't matter if you're melee specialists if you're deep striking and can't charge. The bonus from the formation was, on top of being able to Deep Strike T1, the Marines can run and shoot. There's nothing the army is running that would kill that many Infantry units. Not even if there was like 10+ Incinerators.
2. Yes they ARE integral. It doesn't matter if YOU think they're just support. It's all part of the army. Under that logic, if the Guard are about tanks and then Infantry second, the Infantry shouldn't get Regiment bonuses.

1: Someone clearly never saw 6th/7th Guard played. Anyway, please tell me how my Veterans + Russ army was supposed to magically redeploy to bring a narrow 4' gunline to focus on a roughly 1' stretch of table at 90 degrees to the line? Not everyone got free transports you know, and ds units do not have to assault on that turn, they have anti armour weapons. and psygatling thingies. Dont make me spell it out for you....
What the hell, why am I defending myself against a Marine player, one of the most overpriviledged factions in the entire game?
2: Name me a single Chaos armoured division

Anyway, back on topic:
I have to agree that Eldar getting to use their tactics on their vehicles is wrong, but sadly thats the way it has always been: Eldar are space elves so automatically get to be +1 to everything else. Thats the way it has always been.
Anyway, I still do not really see a major problem with the Marine codex, despite what some people have said. There are no real issues, it can hold its own, it has access to Rawbutt and if you really need to then you can ally in units from other Imperial armies anyway, I mean, after all, wasnt "just ally in x, y and z" a popular Marine player comment to Imperial Guard, Sisters and Chaos players back in 6th and 7th, when we used to complain about the stupidly massive disparity in power levels? So go on, do it. Just ally in some Guard units if you want fancy tanks, or bring some Custodians.... Its all the same, right?



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Primark G wrote:
CT should definitely apply to their tanks hopefully the new chapter approved will adress this oversight.

I dont think its an oversight, I think it is actually a fluff thing. Marines are not very tankish, they are more about the infantry and support walkers (dreadnoughts) - units that can be rapidly deployed to a target area for a surgical strike and then airlifted out again. Tanks are far harder to transport by air, and less well suited to specialist operations.

1. Psy Gatling Guns? You mean the Heavy 6 weapon that costed 10 points that never took? Or do you mean the Salvo 2/4 weapon that was 20 points at S7 Rending for "Anti-Tank"?
You've got to literally be making this up. ANY army tabled by Turn 3 by a Grey Knights army was either the most poorly composed list ever or being played by the worst player ever.

But it could also be both. I'd be more leaning towards that at this point.

2. There aren't because they fight as a more cohesive force. However there are plenty of examples of Chapters that like tanks more than anything, like the freaking Iron Hands or Aurora Chapter, and obviously had ways of representing this last edition.
Having just an all tank regiment means literally nothing. If anything, that would more support that only one or the other should get access to Regiment bonuses if they're both in the same army. Or you can accept everyone fights together all the time, and that an Imperial Fist or Iron Warrior in a Predator suddenly forgot how to ignore cover.

 master of ordinance wrote:

1: Someone clearly never saw 6th/7th Guard played. Anyway, please tell me how my Veterans + Russ army was supposed to magically redeploy to bring a narrow 4' gunline to focus on a roughly 1' stretch of table at 90 degrees to the line? Not everyone got free transports you know, and ds units do not have to assault on that turn, they have anti armour weapons. and psygatling thingies. Dont make me spell it out for you....
What the hell, why am I defending myself against a Marine player, one of the most overpriviledged factions in the entire game?

My guard army was pretty decent in 6th, but I didn't do the chimera/vet thing everyone else did.

Grey knights have genuinely been an uphill battle every edition that wasn't the tail end of 5th. Early 6th they were probably middle of the power curve. This edition has left them in a state probably worse relative to other armies than they were in 5th pre-codex.

Honestly, in 7th, you could take 9 Earthshakers for fairly cheap and annihilate most of a GK player's army in a single round of shooting. Renegades and Heretics did it to great effect using zombies as meat walls.

GK has been a struggling faction starting in 6th. I know not how long we must pay for the sins of 5th.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

2. There aren't because they fight as a more cohesive force.

Daemon engines going to battle with a chaos warband 'cohesive'? Nooo... Chaos warbands are not known for being stable institutions.

Psilencers were, and continue to be trash. If you are going to claim that GK shooting was threatening in 7th or 6th I know you haven't played them ever. A Psilencer would be SNAPSHOTTING on deepstrike so ONE shot would hit, wound 2/3 of the time AND THEN have to get through an armor save because it had AP-. If it was on Terminators... which they shouldn't have been, then 4 hit. It wasn't a good weapon. Stormbolter was better, it ignored 5+ armor at least.

So yea, you don't know what you're talking about man. The formation was nice, but it didn't fix GK. It just made it harder for non-interceptor pie plates to kill us for 1 turn. I mention interceptor because R.I.P.tide.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
However there are plenty of examples of Chapters that like tanks more than anything, like the freaking Iron Hands or Aurora Chapter, and obviously had ways of representing this last edition.
Having just an all tank regiment means literally nothing. If anything, that would more support that only one or the other should get access to Regiment bonuses if they're both in the same army. Or you can accept everyone fights together all the time, and that an Imperial Fist or Iron Warrior in a Predator suddenly forgot how to ignore cover.

Marines are marines first. Marine tanks are crewed by troops of the line, and acting as a crewman is secondary to their role as infantryman. IG tanks are crewed by dedicated crewmen, Eldar vehicles are piloted by dedicated crewmen. Its not ridiculous that vehicles wouldn't benefit from CTs, as its not their pilots primary role.

Iron hand bonuses could be an exception, as they were last edition, Salamanders potentially too, but those are more technological bonusses rather than infantry training/disposition.

Oh my god the amount of people doing mental blackflips to arguee that marine vehicles shouldn't have Tactics where everyone else does is baffling. Learn the lore before saying all this BS.

Space Marine Tanks, that are driven by TECHMARINES, you know, those marines that are specially trained in MARS to know about that kind of stuff. Space Marines, that have characters like CHRONUS that are literally Tank-Aces. Space Marines that have dedicated marines that just pilot their tanks and airship, that have tank commanders and aces. Those Space Marines shouldn't have Chapter (Or Legion) Tactics in their tanks because ... because Imperial Guard has dedicated crewmen and Eldars are Eldars.

Chaos and Loyal Marines not having Chapter Tactics in their vehicles was a good thing. The problem is the rest have them. So GW can do two things:
-Remove the bonuses from the rest (I doubt that)
-Give the bonuses to Marines. (More probably)

GW Page wrote:Antaro Chronus is the most gifted of all the Ultramarines tank commanders. While most such warriors dedicate themselves to mastery of a particular vehicle, Chronus' abilities extend to almost any tank in the armoury of the Adeptus Astartes. Few other commanders can match the precision of his bombardments when at the helm of a Whirlwind or Vindicator. No living man can hope to be as coldly precise when unleashing the baleful weaponry of a mighty Predator.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

2. There aren't because they fight as a more cohesive force.

Daemon engines going to battle with a chaos warband 'cohesive'? Nooo... Chaos warbands are not known for being stable institutions.

However they fight against the Imperium in an organized fashion and therefore it seems mildly off that a Maulerfiend in a World Eaters force isn't getting an extra attack on the charge and that Iron Warriors Vindicator gets no damage bonus towards buildings. Your excuse is bad and you should feel bad.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
However there are plenty of examples of Chapters that like tanks more than anything, like the freaking Iron Hands or Aurora Chapter, and obviously had ways of representing this last edition.
Having just an all tank regiment means literally nothing. If anything, that would more support that only one or the other should get access to Regiment bonuses if they're both in the same army. Or you can accept everyone fights together all the time, and that an Imperial Fist or Iron Warrior in a Predator suddenly forgot how to ignore cover.

Marines are marines first. Marine tanks are crewed by troops of the line, and acting as a crewman is secondary to their role as infantryman. IG tanks are crewed by dedicated crewmen, Eldar vehicles are piloted by dedicated crewmen. Its not ridiculous that vehicles wouldn't benefit from CTs, as its not their pilots primary role.

Iron hand bonuses could be an exception, as they were last edition, Salamanders potentially too, but those are more technological bonusses rather than infantry training/disposition.

So under that logic a REALLY new Marine like a Scout who hasn't really received any training shouldn't have Chapter Tactics, correct?

 Galas wrote:

Space Marine Tanks, that are driven by TECHMARINES

Source, because I have sources that say otherwise. Edit: apparently thats true now, and explicitly stated in the 8e book. Prior versions have stated that vehicles are driven by members of the reserve companies, and the new codex aknowledges this history by saying that they still crew vehicles as well. Interesting. Note that not all vehicles are necessarily piloted by Techmarines, although there is now a pool of Techmarine pilots to draw from.

Not convinced that should mean they should get chapter tactics though.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

2. There aren't because they fight as a more cohesive force.

Daemon engines going to battle with a chaos warband 'cohesive'? Nooo... Chaos warbands are not known for being stable institutions.

However they fight against the Imperium in an organized fashion and therefore it seems mildly off that a Maulerfiend in a World Eaters force isn't getting an extra attack on the charge and that Iron Warriors Vindicator gets no damage bonus towards buildings. Your excuse is bad and you should feel bad.

So Iron Hands marines should get Ultramarines tactics when theyre fighting together? Is that your reasoning? "Fighting together"?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
However there are plenty of examples of Chapters that like tanks more than anything, like the freaking Iron Hands or Aurora Chapter, and obviously had ways of representing this last edition.
Having just an all tank regiment means literally nothing. If anything, that would more support that only one or the other should get access to Regiment bonuses if they're both in the same army. Or you can accept everyone fights together all the time, and that an Imperial Fist or Iron Warrior in a Predator suddenly forgot how to ignore cover.

Marines are marines first. Marine tanks are crewed by troops of the line, and acting as a crewman is secondary to their role as infantryman. IG tanks are crewed by dedicated crewmen, Eldar vehicles are piloted by dedicated crewmen. Its not ridiculous that vehicles wouldn't benefit from CTs, as its not their pilots primary role.

Iron hand bonuses could be an exception, as they were last edition, Salamanders potentially too, but those are more technological bonusses rather than infantry training/disposition.

So under that logic a REALLY new Marine like a Scout who hasn't really received any training shouldn't have Chapter Tactics, correct?

So this seems to be the prevailing argument here.
1. Some faction got a bonus so space marines players are entitled to that same bonus because space marines are best. Chaos of course dosnt because Chaos.

I guess I should feel bad for you...

Here you are.at the top of the heap. You have the largest model range and despite being the poster boys you don't win every game. Other armies get their own cool rulze. ImAgine how you would feel if your identicle land raider only had room inside for ten marines instead of twelve. Oh the nashing of teeth and ringing of hands. Or god forbid your entire codex just vanished the way the daemonkin did. Whoa. Light up your tiki torches and march on GW.

Consider this.
When your army gets its buffs back and its it point cost reductions I want you to remember two things. Remember all this whinning. Then, when you play in games with your new bestest army, I want you to nerf your lists so you only win half the time or less. Put yourself in the shoes of your foe and remeber this is a game. Every other army doubt have access to hundreds of dataslates and a book that gets updated EVERY time a.new.edition comez out. This is a.great time to actually embody the space marine trait of humility, perseverance and stoicism.

As a chaos player I feel your argument that chaos shouldnt get the same bonuses to be limp. Flacid. Chaos levionairz are ancient warriors of the original crusade. They often have grown into their vehicles making them one with their tanks. The daemons that are bound to them are more powerful than any machine spirit. Chaos possesses ancient relics throughout their legion, not cheap soulless crap stamped.out in the forces of mars. Whatever we don't possess we loot it from the spineless lapdogs of the corpse god. If anything chaos deserves all the same equipment options that loyalists get instead of codex full of so many terribad units that when they hit the table top, people have to ask what they are. Ever seen someone playing mutilators.

With all this whining you sir will be the first to fall to chaos. Buck up.

They have been utter trash for year's with the exception of oblits. Chaos can finally field an aarmy that isn't just cultists and heldrake or double lash prince. I'm happy that our codex isn't firmly at the bottom tier where its been for 5 years. I'm not the one who's complaining.

Making traits benefit vehicles just screws other factions since lots of legion traits do nothing for vehicles. If you want every thing to be fair and equal you have to rewrite every thing so everyone gets a benefit not just the emperors lapdog s. But I guess if every thing got rewritten just to benefit marines and screw everyone else that would just be a return to what has been the norm for years.