Proof that space marine codex is the worst.

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.

**Blacksails**

Unit1126PLL wrote:

But my point is that army choice IS the player's choice. If you take my logic to the extreme, then even settling down to play the game with miniatures is merely a formality, in a world with 0% balance - the real game is picking what to play.

Nope. One simple argument is that new players would be punished entering a game if they picked an army they liked the look of, but was terrible. That's just gak game design no matter how you cut it.

Factions exist for aesthetics differences and for unique gameplay focuses. It should never be to make one better than another overall.

That's not player choice or skill, that's just fething stupid.

**Bharring**

(Also, this thread has shown that I undervalued Fly. That's why I take part in these threads. I'm not sure it significantly changes the calculus, though.)

**Xenomancers**

Blacksails wrote:
Unit1126PLL wrote:

But my point is that army choice IS the player's choice. If you take my logic to the extreme, then even settling down to play the game with miniatures is merely a formality, in a world with 0% balance - the real game is picking what to play.

Nope. One simple argument is that new players would be punished entering a game if they picked an army they liked the look of, but was terrible. That's just gak game design no matter how you cut it.

Factions exist for aesthetics differences and for unique gameplay focuses. It should never be to make one better than another overall.

That's not player choice or skill, that's just fething stupid.

Exactly.

**Slayer-Fan123**

YOU said, and I quote, "But, much like the Big G is one guy, the Serpent is one CWE vehicle", forgetting that Rowboat is available to ONE Marine army if you wants buffs like we are talking about for him.

Also Tactical Marines are not paying for decent CC ability, and Serpents don't pay for any because they have Fly. I'm also not sure if you know what the Ultramarines ability is if you think it's better than Fly.

**Unit1126PLL**

Blacksails wrote:
Unit1126PLL wrote:

But my point is that army choice IS the player's choice. If you take my logic to the extreme, then even settling down to play the game with miniatures is merely a formality, in a world with 0% balance - the real game is picking what to play.

Nope. One simple argument is that new players would be punished entering a game if they picked an army they liked the look of, but was terrible. That's just gak game design no matter how you cut it.

Factions exist for aesthetics differences and for unique gameplay focuses. It should never be to make one better than another overall.

That's not player choice or skill, that's just fething stupid.

I agree that it's bad game design! I'm definitely not advocating for it to be the case. I'm just trying to understand why people who aren't new to the game are upset they lose with a subpar faction over and over again. You chose a subpar faction, and realized it's subpar, and won't leave said shoddily designed game or play a better faction - so surely it's best just to cool your heels and be comfortable where you are?

I played Armoured Company in 5e and lost every game that had objectives in it, because only troops can score. That's what I mean: I picked a faction where the troops choices were only Leman Russ tanks, and the HQs and Elites were only Leman Russ Tanks, and the fast attack choices were Hellhounds or Chimeras, and the heavy support choices were Basilisks or Leman Russ Demolishers.

And I was okay with losing every game because I enjoyed the faction for other reasons. I somehow had fun.

**Bharring**

Big-G is one guy also means he only has 1 codex entry. I appologise in that I wasn't clear in what I said. It's rather obvious the Serpent is spammable. I complained quite a bit about DAVU spam in 6th.

Yes, UM CT is worse than Fly in regards to falling back (the context here). I mistook something about it. Neither can charge - so the Serpent that charges after falling back every turn is still cheating.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, 7E SM didn't need to wait for free Razorbacks to start winning tournies. They were doing so with several builds even before they got all those free toys. Many of those wins spammed Tacs or Scouts, too.

**Breng77**

Bharring wrote:
Serpents don't pay for decent CC, and Tacs don't pay for decent Transport Capacity. Sure, it's not a generalist in the sense that it can't do everything any model type can. It's a generalist in that it can do a bit of anything things in it's class can. Even in CC, it pays for Fly, so yes, it is better than the average Tank in CC.

Against overcharged plasma, yes, the Serpent is more durable. Against non-overcharged, it's much less durable. Against D3, it's an EV of 5/3rds vs an EV of 6/3rds of HP lost per failed save - making Rhinos still take less.

Xeno,
If you're using Fly units - like the StormRaven - to fall back then charge, you're cheating. So that Serpent that keeps locking that Razorback in CC is cheating. Meanwhile, the non-cheating Serpent is losing out on shootout.

Fly units can shoot if they fall back. They cannot charge. When it comes to falling back, UM is better than Fly, not worse.

You don't take an AssaultCannon Razorback for fighting a Serpent, and you don't take a BL Serpent for fighting a Razorback. You take TLLC and TLBL. and the TLLC is strictly superior to the TLBL now.

And before you say "in a vacuum", of course, that's the point of this part of the discussion.

Also, it's not *twice* as durable as *TWO* razorbacks, even in it's absolute best matchup - the Overcharged plasma. It's a little more durable than 2, or a little more than twice as durable as 1 Rhino/Razorback. But then, against their ideal target (T8 at >36" away), the Razorback is at least twice as good (hitting on 3s wounding on 3s vs hiitting on 4s wounding on 4s). The numbers in both durability and dakka are closer on other targets.

Bottom line, in durability per point, the kitted Serpent is less durable than 2 Rhinos to everything *except* 2W weapons. It's 30% more durable to those specific 2W weapons.

@breng,
I think we're on the same page that the Serpent is a little better than it should be. But the point wasn't that the Serpent was too good. The point was to expose the fallacies in several of the arguments here - like the Serpent locking down a Razorback by charging every round after falling back.

On the RowBoat vs Serpent comparison wasn't that you can have only one of them. It was that it's one entry in the Dex, and discounting that one entry, and the one Razorback entry, and the one StormRaven entry, it seems to be uncharitable to not discount the one CWE vehicle that does so well. So if you want to talk about Preds and Tacs and Rhinos, then you shouldn't be ignoring Falcons and DAs and such. Pretending I'm claiming that the Serpent has all the limitations of RowBoat is silly.

Also, what's with all the people complaining that we should look at non-UM SM, but not non-Alaitoc CWE? Isn't that disengenous?

Mostly on the same page, I don't think Eldar suddenly became OP with their new dex, I think all factions need (and hopefully will continue to receive) some tweaking. Personally I see some upside in Marines, and some decent non-UM builds. I might be wrong, but I'm also not trying to go win a GT either, just to have fun close games in my local meta, and when I go to tournaments which happens less today than it used to.

**Xenomancers**

Bharring wrote:
Serpents don't pay for decent CC, and Tacs don't pay for decent Transport Capacity. Sure, it's not a generalist in the sense that it can't do everything any model type can. It's a generalist in that it can do a bit of anything things in it's class can. Even in CC, it pays for Fly, so yes, it is better than the average Tank in CC.

Against overcharged plasma, yes, the Serpent is more durable. Against non-overcharged, it's much less durable. Against D3, it's an EV of 5/3rds vs an EV of 6/3rds of HP lost per failed save - making Rhinos still take less.

Xeno,
If you're using Fly units - like the StormRaven - to fall back then charge, you're cheating. So that Serpent that keeps locking that Razorback in CC is cheating. Meanwhile, the non-cheating Serpent is losing out on shootout.

Fly units can shoot if they fall back. They cannot charge. When it comes to falling back, UM is better than Fly, not worse.

You don't take an AssaultCannon Razorback for fighting a Serpent, and you don't take a BL Serpent for fighting a Razorback. You take TLLC and TLBL. and the TLLC is strictly superior to the TLBL now.

And before you say "in a vacuum", of course, that's the point of this part of the discussion.

Also, it's not *twice* as durable as *TWO* razorbacks, even in it's absolute best matchup - the Overcharged plasma. It's a little more durable than 2, or a little more than twice as durable as 1 Rhino/Razorback. But then, against their ideal target (T8 at >36" away), the Razorback is at least twice as good (hitting on 3s wounding on 3s vs hiitting on 4s wounding on 4s). The numbers in both durability and dakka are closer on other targets.

Bottom line, in durability per point, the kitted Serpent is less durable than 2 Rhinos to everything *except* 2W weapons. It's 30% more durable to those specific 2W weapons.

@breng,
I think we're on the same page that the Serpent is a little better than it should be. But the point wasn't that the Serpent was too good. The point was to expose the fallacies in several of the arguments here - like the Serpent locking down a Razorback by charging every round after falling back.

On the RowBoat vs Serpent comparison wasn't that you can have only one of them. It was that it's one entry in the Dex, and discounting that one entry, and the one Razorback entry, and the one StormRaven entry, it seems to be uncharitable to not discount the one CWE vehicle that does so well. So if you want to talk about Preds and Tacs and Rhinos, then you shouldn't be ignoring Falcons and DAs and such. Pretending I'm claiming that the Serpent has all the limitations of RowBoat is silly.

Also, what's with all the people complaining that we should look at non-UM SM, but not non-Alaitoc CWE? Isn't that disengenous?

Humm - yeah I know a storm raven can't charge things...unless it hovers in which case it can (I think it can still hover - the storm talon can I know that).

The Ultra marines tactic is strictly worse than fly key word. It's the exact same thing except it's -1 to hit.

The Bright lance is not inferior to the las cannon - Bl has AP-4. Which means 3+ save is compeltely ignored where a las cannon would give you a 6+ save. It's made worse if your target is is cover with a lascannon and they get a 5+ save. The BL also cost 5 points less to make up for the range discrepancy.

Serpant is also more durable vs d3 weapons than 2 rhinos (even without army traits) it's also faster - has assault weapon loadout - and basically a smite that goes off on a 2+. Just stop defending the space marine tanks...they don't deserve your effort - they are bad. yeah sorry if I miss spoke. I ment to say they are twice as durable as a razorback vs overcharged plasma and D3 weapons.

Feel free to compare space marine tanks against ulthwe eldar also or even iayden. The wave serpant should cost more than the falcon - it is strictly better than the falcon - that is pretty clear.

**Bharring**

Xeno,
You missed what I was saying. It can hover then charge. however, if it falls back, it then cannot charge. Because Fly only allows it to shoot. Not ignore that it fell back.

Fly is even better than that, outside CC - it's a very nice rule. UM get the +1 LD, but I think we can agree it's not a big deal. Doesn't do much to mitigate that -1 to hit.

The Serpent more durable than 2 Rhinos vs 2W weapons without traits?
EV vs Serpent is 5/3rds EV vs Rhino is 6/3rds. So 7.8 hits, average, to kill a Serpent. 10 hit, average, to kill 2 Rhinos. Your math is very, very wrong.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Range *and* strength. S9 matters when shooting S8+. Most things are T7 or less, but the things you most need BL or LC for are T8+.

**Xenomancers**

Bharring wrote:
Xeno,
You missed what I was saying. It can hover then charge. however, if it falls back, it then cannot charge. Because Fly only allows it to shoot. Not ignore that it fell back.

Fly is even better than that, outside CC - it's a very nice rule. UM get the +1 LD, but I think we can agree it's not a big deal. Doesn't do much to mitigate that -1 to hit.

The Serpent more durable than 2 Rhinos vs 2W weapons without traits?
EV vs Serpent is 5/3rds EV vs Rhino is 6/3rds. So 7.8 hits, average, to kill a Serpent. 10 hit, average, to kill 2 Rhinos. Your math is very, very wrong.

Yeah - I wasn't claiming it could. I was talking about a hypothetical 1v1 matchup that could go on forever.
I wasn't saying it could literally do it the entire game. It can only charge on a turn that it didn't fall back.

What is EV?

My math is right - serpants reduce all damage by 1 so overcharged plasma does 1 damage to a serpant. 13 wounds required to kill a serp with plasma where 5 is required to kill a razor.

T8 is pretty rare - only some armies have it. The Str9 vs Str8 is basically covered by the ap-3 or ap-4 - To say a BL is inferior is incorrect. They are both suited to different targets. I'd even go as far as to say a BL is the better weapon vs a lot more targets.

**Breng77**

Xenomancers wrote:
Bharring wrote:
Xeno,
You missed what I was saying. It can hover then charge. however, if it falls back, it then cannot charge. Because Fly only allows it to shoot. Not ignore that it fell back.

Fly is even better than that, outside CC - it's a very nice rule. UM get the +1 LD, but I think we can agree it's not a big deal. Doesn't do much to mitigate that -1 to hit.

The Serpent more durable than 2 Rhinos vs 2W weapons without traits?
EV vs Serpent is 5/3rds EV vs Rhino is 6/3rds. So 7.8 hits, average, to kill a Serpent. 10 hit, average, to kill 2 Rhinos. Your math is very, very wrong.

Yeah - I wasn't claiming it could. I was talking about a hypothetical 1v1 matchup that could go on forever.
I wasn't saying it could literally do it the entire game. It can only charge on a turn that it didn't fall back.

What is EV?

My math is right - serpants reduce all damage by 1 so overcharged plasma does 1 damage to a serpant. 13 wounds required to kill a serp with plasma where 5 is required to kill a razor.

T8 is pretty rare - only some armies have it. The Str9 vs Str8 is basically covered by the ap-3 or ap-4 - To say a BL is inferior is incorrect. They are both suited to different targets. I'd even go as far as to say a BL is the better weapon vs a lot more targets.

He is talking about D3 weapons, 2 damage weapons are better against the rhinos, D3 weapons are better against the Serpent 33% of the time. So if you look at shooting them at each

ever 3 wounds does 4 damage to the serpent, and does 6 to the rhinos. So 10 wounds almost always kills the Serpent, and the same to the Rhinos, so they are about the same, however, 2 targets will be more durable due to spill over damage. That said once you include traits it swings in favor of the serpent due to damage.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
Xeno,
You missed what I was saying. It can hover then charge. however, if it falls back, it then cannot charge. Because Fly only allows it to shoot. Not ignore that it fell back.

Fly is even better than that, outside CC - it's a very nice rule. UM get the +1 LD, but I think we can agree it's not a big deal. Doesn't do much to mitigate that -1 to hit.

The Serpent more durable than 2 Rhinos vs 2W weapons without traits?
EV vs Serpent is 5/3rds EV vs Rhino is 6/3rds. So 7.8 hits, average, to kill a Serpent. 10 hit, average, to kill 2 Rhinos. Your math is very, very wrong.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Range *and* strength. S9 matters when shooting S8+. Most things are T7 or less, but the things you most need BL or LC for are T8+.

The charge thing can be a serpent advantage though. Given its better mobility it is likely to get the first shots, if it then charges the Razorback it takes overwatch (so highly reduced shooting), then leaves the razor forced to give up a round of shooting and stick in combat allowing the serpent to fall back and get another round of shooting, or the razor can fall back, and hope other things kill the serpent.

1 on 1 the serprent almost always comes out on top in a fight because at some point it will get more rounds of shooting. The only time this isn't the case is maybe the lascannon - bright lance match-up.

**sennacherib**

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Then there's almost no hope for you.

Armies NEED to be equal, and internal balance shouldn't be garbage.

I agree with this statement.
If internal balance was perfect then wins on the table would come down solely to generalship and the impact of luck on the game. Part of the problem here though is that list building when your codex alone has 130 entries gives SM players a significant advantage simply because they have access to the aforementioned Razorback. CSM would love a Razorback as they would also love landspeeder storms loaded with scouts, storm raven gunships etc. we simply do not have the same flexibility that SM codex armies do when it comes to list creation. Sure we have Units that SM do not have but there is a vast gulf in terms of the flexibility of choice that SM players have when they are list building compared to every other faction of the game. Since list bulidling is a crucial element in attaining a win, this alone gives SM players a huge advantage. I’m not sure how you balance this in other codex short of making SM entries slightly less competitive than their opposing counterparts.

I would say this tactical advantage SM have in list building would also extend to any non SM codex. Very hard to consider calls for balance and arguments over slight advantages that eldar or some other codex have when imbalances such as these exist in the game.

**Breng77**

sennacherib wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Then there's almost no hope for you.

Armies NEED to be equal, and internal balance shouldn't be garbage.

I agree with this statement.
If internal balance was perfect then wins on the table would come down solely to generalship and the impact of luck on the game. Part of the problem here though is that list building when your codex alone has 130 entries gives SM players a significant advantage simply because they have access to the aforementioned Razorback. CSM would love a Razorback as they would also love landspeeder storms loaded with scouts, storm raven gunships etc. we simply do not have the same flexibility that SM codex armies do when it comes to list creation. Sure we have Units that SM do not have but there is a vast gulf in terms of the flexibility of choice that SM players have when they are list building compared to every other faction of the game. Since list bulidling is a crucial element in attaining a win, this alone gives SM players a huge advantage. I’m not sure how you balance this in other codex short of making SM entries slightly less competitive than their opposing counterparts.

I would say this tactical advantage SM have in list building would also extend to any non SM codex. Very hard to consider calls for balance and arguments over slight advantages that eldar or some other codex have when imbalances such as these exist in the game.

ummm...I'll trade you access the landspeeder storms and scouts for Noise Marines, and Berserkers. Lets not pretend CSM are hurting for options. In fact I would argue CSM have better flexibility because they have more viable choices for a variety of roles. Want to play beat face, you can, want to shoot stuff, you can, want to be mobile, you can, want chaff, it's in there. Long range fire, yup.

**Insectum7**

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Insectum7 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
But that's not the same as tac marines having it, now is it?

And then with Ultramarines you've got Rowboat, which is all that matters.

Never used him and probably never will.

Well aren't you special. Let us know how well that works while topping Marine lists steadily decline.

It will work great, thank you. I care little about tournaments.

Xenomancers wrote:
Insectum7 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
But that's not the same as tac marines having it, now is it?

And then with Ultramarines you've got Rowboat, which is all that matters.

Never used him and probably never will.

I respect the way you play. It's totally fine to not play with just the cheesiest units but that's how it is in tournaments and that's how it is in the entire area I play. Why do you have such strong opinions about competitive play when you aren't playing competitively?

I could ask the same of you. There are many who would say that a 50 Primaris with Guilliman army isn't competetive. Yet it works well for you, in a local meta you think of as competitive.

Local metas tend to be small and varied, my own included. I do well with non-Guilliman just as you do well (presumably) with Primaris. I don't care that much about tourrnaments honestly, I care about how games manifest at local levels more, because thats what most people actually play. Local is the 90% use case.

As for tournaments themselves, its only natural that Guilliman gets countered after being so popular. I expect lists still relying on him aren't doing as well. I wouldn't take that as evidence that the book is bad, just that theres a new hotness and a good counter strategy with marines hasn't been capitalized on yet.

But its got a ton of options, making it a flexible book.

**sennacherib**

Breng77 wrote:
sennacherib wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Then there's almost no hope for you.

Armies NEED to be equal, and internal balance shouldn't be garbage.

I agree with this statement.
If internal balance was perfect then wins on the table would come down solely to generalship and the impact of luck on the game. Part of the problem here though is that list building when your codex alone has 130 entries gives SM players a significant advantage simply because they have access to the aforementioned Razorback. CSM would love a Razorback as they would also love landspeeder storms loaded with scouts, storm raven gunships etc. we simply do not have the same flexibility that SM codex armies do when it comes to list creation. Sure we have Units that SM do not have but there is a vast gulf in terms of the flexibility of choice that SM players have when they are list building compared to every other faction of the game. Since list bulidling is a crucial element in attaining a win, this alone gives SM players a huge advantage. I’m not sure how you balance this in other codex short of making SM entries slightly less competitive than their opposing counterparts.

I would say this tactical advantage SM have in list building would also extend to any non SM codex. Very hard to consider calls for balance and arguments over slight advantages that eldar or some other codex have when imbalances such as these exist in the game.

ummm...I'll trade you access the landspeeder storms and scouts for Noise Marines, and Berserkers. Lets not pretend CSM are hurting for options. In fact I would argue CSM have better flexibility because they have more viable choices for a variety of roles. Want to play beat face, you can, want to shoot stuff, you can, want to be mobile, you can, want chaff, it's in there. Long range fire, yup.

So what your saying is that you feel like even more options are required by SM because other armies have those options? And you are patently wrong that CSM have the most varied options for a variety of roles.
Flyers- stormraven, storm hawk interceptor, storm talon. VS heldrake
Transports - rhino, Razorback, land speeder storm, drop pod, 3 types of landraider, repulsion VS rhino and godhammer
Artillery - Thunderfire Cannon, whirlwind VS - nothing
Anti air - stalker, hunter vs nothing
Shall I go on....

I think you ignored the point I was making entirely. SM have the most options. That alone enhances their flexibility when list building, which we can likely agree is the most important factor in game play, arguably more so that’s generalship.

**Bharring**

If the SC Serpent and the Assault Cannon Razorback go head to head, yeah, the Serpent eventaully wins. Takes a long time, but does happen.

The TLLC and TLBL variants it depends. Razorback should get first shot, and never have to move while firing. Serpent should have to move one round, unless it wants to use the charge gimmick. I'd still take the Serpent, though.

I don't deny that the serpent is *better*, all things considered. I'm saying that if you're just looking at firepower, or just looking at Durability, or just looking at transport, then either the Razorback or Rhino does it better per point. But the Serpent can does everything reasonably well, so comes out ahead.

**Breng77**

sennacherib wrote:
Breng77 wrote:
sennacherib wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Then there's almost no hope for you.

Armies NEED to be equal, and internal balance shouldn't be garbage.

I agree with this statement.
If internal balance was perfect then wins on the table would come down solely to generalship and the impact of luck on the game. Part of the problem here though is that list building when your codex alone has 130 entries gives SM players a significant advantage simply because they have access to the aforementioned Razorback. CSM would love a Razorback as they would also love landspeeder storms loaded with scouts, storm raven gunships etc. we simply do not have the same flexibility that SM codex armies do when it comes to list creation. Sure we have Units that SM do not have but there is a vast gulf in terms of the flexibility of choice that SM players have when they are list building compared to every other faction of the game. Since list bulidling is a crucial element in attaining a win, this alone gives SM players a huge advantage. I’m not sure how you balance this in other codex short of making SM entries slightly less competitive than their opposing counterparts.

I would say this tactical advantage SM have in list building would also extend to any non SM codex. Very hard to consider calls for balance and arguments over slight advantages that eldar or some other codex have when imbalances such as these exist in the game.

ummm...I'll trade you access the landspeeder storms and scouts for Noise Marines, and Berserkers. Lets not pretend CSM are hurting for options. In fact I would argue CSM have better flexibility because they have more viable choices for a variety of roles. Want to play beat face, you can, want to shoot stuff, you can, want to be mobile, you can, want chaff, it's in there. Long range fire, yup.

So what your saying is that you feel like even more options are required by SM because other armies have those options? And you are patently wrong that CSM have the most varied options for a variety of roles.
Flyers- stormraven, storm hawk interceptor, storm talon. VS heldrake
Transports - rhino, Razorback, land speeder storm, drop pod, 3 types of landraider, repulsion VS rhino and godhammer
Artillery - Thunderfire Cannon, whirlwind VS - nothing
Anti air - stalker, hunter vs nothing
Shall I go on....

I think you ignored the point I was making entirely. SM have the most options. That alone enhances their flexibility when list building, which we can likely agree is the most important factor in game play, arguably more so that’s generalship.

No they don't, you are talking about battlefield role, not in game role. Sure space marines have more flyers than CSM, all SM flyers serve the same purpose, they are gun boats.

Simply put look at all the "options" you just gave, other than transports, what do all of those things do? Answer, shoot stuff, most don't even do that well. I'm not arguing that CSM has a larger model line, or array of available units, I'm arguing that they have more options for making viable lists that have a variety of playstyles.

You need to look at what they units actually do and are they actually good at it. CSM have better close combat options, better chaff options, the same or better shooting options, better psykers. Lets not even get in to things like: Better strategems and better psychic powers.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
In the end my response was to the notion that somehow having a lot of units gives SM an advantage. This is a laughable notion, it makes the assumption that all those options are actually good. I mean you mention Land Speeder Storms as something CSM would love to have, well sure they wouldn't hurt, but you aren't going to give up your Berzerkers in favor of having that option. If all options were equally viable, you would be right but they aren't, and if you look at actual good units I think you'll find your argument turned on its head.

**Xenomancers**

Land speeder storms are a huge diapointment. I have 6 of them so needless to say I was basically always bringing at least 3 every game as marines in 7th. They used to be 40 points - could jink - had a large blast weapon that blinded - it was a super efficient little beast. Now it's one of the worst units in the codex.

**sennacherib**

I just want to point something out

Storm ravens are gunboats that are transports last I checked. Something about 10 marines and a dread.

We lack some of these same or better options you keep talking about. Like grav, assault cannons, storm shields etc. the sit goes on and on. Agreed we have berserkers, arguably the best single infantry unit in the codex, maybe the game. It is an elite however. Our troop choices consist of cultists and CSM power armor. Yours, scouts with the sniper option a weapon choice CSM do not have access to, primaries intercessors and primaries marines. Cultists are cheap chaff. They vanish at the first sign of trouble. I think you need to carefully examine the benefits that having more than twice as many options gives you.

I also think you fail to recognize that armies are fundamentally different. If you want everything to be as good as everyone else’s then you also have to accept that you deserve the handicaps that other armies have to play with. One of these being the lack of unit choices. Also, some armies have great rules like tau for supporting fire in overwatch situations. That’s cause they suck in melee. Your codex fills all the gaps except chaff units like cultists though scouts are what, more than twice the price and you can infiltrate them give them unique weapon options etc.

**Breng77**

sennacherib wrote:
I just want to point something out

Storm ravens are gunboats that are transports last I checked. Something about 10 marines and a dread.

We lack some of these same or better options you keep talking about. Like grav, assault cannons, storm shields etc. the sit goes on and on. Agreed we have berserkers, arguably the best single infantry unit in the codex. It is an elite however. Our troop choices consist of cultists and CSM power armor. Yours, scouts with the sniper option a weapon choice CSM do not have access to, primaries intercessors and primaries marines. Cultists are cheap chaff. They vanish at the first sign of trouble. I think you need to carefully examine the benefits that having more than twice as many options gives you.

I think you fail to recognize that armies are fundamentally different. If you want everything to be as good as everyone else’s then you also have to accept that you deserve the handicaps that other armies have to play with. One of these being the lack of unit choices. Also, some armies have great rules like tau for supporting fire in overwatch situations. That’s cause they suck in melee. Your codex fills all the gaps except chaff units like cultists though scouts are what, only twice the price and you can infiltrate them p, give them great weapon options etc.

No one takes Storm Ravens because they are transports, they take them because they are gun boats. They may use the transport capacity, but that is not the reason they are in the list, they are there to shoot stuff period. So again missing the point of, everything you listed exists for the purpose of shooting stuff.

You mean we have more troops assuming you don't elect to play certain factions right, because berserkers can be troops, as can Noise Marines. Or you can cheaply fill your troop slots with cultists. Chaff is great this edition.

You are the one that started by saying CSM would love to have Razorbacks, Storm Ravens, so how is it wrong for me to say "Sure, so long as I can have the units from your dex that I don't get." Cultists are 1/3rd the price of scouts, less if you want to use any of the weapon options (1/4th if you want snipers, less if you want cloaks, or a heavy weapon).

I'm simply pointing out that in reality your perceived lack of flexibility of CSM, vs SM is not true, if anything CSM have more viable options for good builds, because they have good units for any purpose. Lets put it this way, if we go Slot by Slot, I think CSM match or exceed Marines with at least 1 unit in every slot outside of Flyers and Dedicated transports.

HQs- DPs are better than any Marine option, Chaos lords = captian, Sorcerers >= Libby
Elites - Berserkers and Noise marines > any marine option
Troops - Pretty close, Tacticals = CSM, Scouts vs Cultists wash, Intercessors remain to be seen, might be better but pricey, that said CSM can take Berserkers and Noise Marines in this slot in some factions which would be better.
Heavy - Predators are equal, Devs are slightly better than Havocs, Oblits are better than any other Marine choice
Fast - Warp Talons are good, not sure about marines in this slot right now raptors >= assault marines, bikes=bikes

I don't think marines need a huge buff just some points adjustments, I just think there is a myth that marines have a ton of options, and that is a big advantage in list building. I'm pretty happy with my current marine list, I think it is decent, making it however basically involved throwing most of what you call flexibility right out the window.

**Scott-S6**

Blacksails wrote:
Even if army balance will never be a perfect 50/50 win rate (assuming a robot played both 1000 times), the idea is to get them close enough that the primary factor in deciding who wins rests in player decision making. Secondary should be in pre-game decisions (list, deployment, choice of booze, comfy shoes), and tertiary should be the ever present factor of luck. The strength of the faction will inevitably skew the results, but it should never be the dominant factor in determining a winner in a properly designed game.

Deployment absolutely should be a primary factor - that's player decision making. Likewise, list-building is player decision making.

**Xenomancers**

Breng77 wrote:
sennacherib wrote:
I just want to point something out

Storm ravens are gunboats that are transports last I checked. Something about 10 marines and a dread.

We lack some of these same or better options you keep talking about. Like grav, assault cannons, storm shields etc. the sit goes on and on. Agreed we have berserkers, arguably the best single infantry unit in the codex. It is an elite however. Our troop choices consist of cultists and CSM power armor. Yours, scouts with the sniper option a weapon choice CSM do not have access to, primaries intercessors and primaries marines. Cultists are cheap chaff. They vanish at the first sign of trouble. I think you need to carefully examine the benefits that having more than twice as many options gives you.

I think you fail to recognize that armies are fundamentally different. If you want everything to be as good as everyone else’s then you also have to accept that you deserve the handicaps that other armies have to play with. One of these being the lack of unit choices. Also, some armies have great rules like tau for supporting fire in overwatch situations. That’s cause they suck in melee. Your codex fills all the gaps except chaff units like cultists though scouts are what, only twice the price and you can infiltrate them p, give them great weapon options etc.

No one takes Storm Ravens because they are transports, they take them because they are gun boats. They may use the transport capacity, but that is not the reason they are in the list, they are there to shoot stuff period. So again missing the point of, everything you listed exists for the purpose of shooting stuff.

You mean we have more troops assuming you don't elect to play certain factions right, because berserkers can be troops, as can Noise Marines. Or you can cheaply fill your troop slots with cultists. Chaff is great this edition.

You are the one that started by saying CSM would love to have Razorbacks, Storm Ravens, so how is it wrong for me to say "Sure, so long as I can have the units from your dex that I don't get." Cultists are 1/3rd the price of scouts, less if you want to use any of the weapon options (1/4th if you want snipers, less if you want cloaks, or a heavy weapon).

I'm simply pointing out that in reality your perceived lack of flexibility of CSM, vs SM is not true, if anything CSM have more viable options for good builds, because they have good units for any purpose. Lets put it this way, if we go Slot by Slot, I think CSM match or exceed Marines with at least 1 unit in every slot outside of Flyers and Dedicated transports.

HQs- DPs are better than any Marine option, Chaos lords = captian, Sorcerers >= Libby
Elites - Berserkers and Noise marines > any marine option
Troops - Pretty close, Tacticals = CSM, Scouts vs Cultists wash, Intercessors remain to be seen, might be better but pricey, that said CSM can take Berserkers and Noise Marines in this slot in some factions which would be better.
Heavy - Predators are equal, Devs are slightly better than Havocs, Oblits are better than any other Marine choice
Fast - Warp Talons are good, not sure about marines in this slot right now raptors >= assault marines, bikes=bikes

I don't think marines need a huge buff just some points adjustments, I just think there is a myth that marines have a ton of options, and that is a big advantage in list building. I'm pretty happy with my current marine list, I think it is decent, making it however basically involved throwing most of what you call flexibility right out the window.

What is your current marine list?

**Primark G**

Xenomancers wrote:
Land speeder storms are a huge diapointment. I have 6 of them so needless to say I was basically always bringing at least 3 every game as marines in 7th. They used to be 40 points - could jink - had a large blast weapon that blinded - it was a super efficient little beast. Now it's one of the worst units in the codex.

This is your problem - you can only see the bad for your codex and what is good in others.

**sennacherib**

To address your points.

A storm raven remains a transport and a gunboat. One does not mutually exclude the other, and having the ability to do both is incredible. My original statement stands. Breng77 was just selectively ignoring that fact.

Berserkers can be troops in attachments without any psykers. Noise marines can be troops in any detatchment without berserkers. They are both good but they also retain limitations.

You can get a lord with a power sword and a sorcerer for the price of a daemonprince. You also will get an addition psychic ability each turn. I’m not saying Daemon princes are not good, however, it’s like trying to compare a Razorback and a landraider. There is a huge points difference between them.

With respect to wargear, space marines can kit their army out in all manner of ways enabling them far greater versatility than CSM. If I could only have..... it would make my army so much better. Pretty much every codex has standouts but to deny that having multiple options and a wider variety of wargear dosnt give you an advantage? I’m pretty certain that almost everyone would recognize that to be false.

I’m also glad your happy with your marine list. I’m happy to finally have a codex (DG) and that the CSM codex dosnt suck royally any more.

**Xenomancers**

Primark G wrote:
Xenomancers wrote:
Land speeder storms are a huge diapointment. I have 6 of them so needless to say I was basically always bringing at least 3 every game as marines in 7th. They used to be 40 points - could jink - had a large blast weapon that blinded - it was a super efficient little beast. Now it's one of the worst units in the codex.

This is your problem - you can only see the bad for your codex and what is good in others.

Enlighten me.

**Breng77**

Xenomancers wrote:
Breng77 wrote:
sennacherib wrote:
I just want to point something out

Storm ravens are gunboats that are transports last I checked. Something about 10 marines and a dread.

We lack some of these same or better options you keep talking about. Like grav, assault cannons, storm shields etc. the sit goes on and on. Agreed we have berserkers, arguably the best single infantry unit in the codex. It is an elite however. Our troop choices consist of cultists and CSM power armor. Yours, scouts with the sniper option a weapon choice CSM do not have access to, primaries intercessors and primaries marines. Cultists are cheap chaff. They vanish at the first sign of trouble. I think you need to carefully examine the benefits that having more than twice as many options gives you.

I think you fail to recognize that armies are fundamentally different. If you want everything to be as good as everyone else’s then you also have to accept that you deserve the handicaps that other armies have to play with. One of these being the lack of unit choices. Also, some armies have great rules like tau for supporting fire in overwatch situations. That’s cause they suck in melee. Your codex fills all the gaps except chaff units like cultists though scouts are what, only twice the price and you can infiltrate them p, give them great weapon options etc.

No one takes Storm Ravens because they are transports, they take them because they are gun boats. They may use the transport capacity, but that is not the reason they are in the list, they are there to shoot stuff period. So again missing the point of, everything you listed exists for the purpose of shooting stuff.

You mean we have more troops assuming you don't elect to play certain factions right, because berserkers can be troops, as can Noise Marines. Or you can cheaply fill your troop slots with cultists. Chaff is great this edition.

You are the one that started by saying CSM would love to have Razorbacks, Storm Ravens, so how is it wrong for me to say "Sure, so long as I can have the units from your dex that I don't get." Cultists are 1/3rd the price of scouts, less if you want to use any of the weapon options (1/4th if you want snipers, less if you want cloaks, or a heavy weapon).

I'm simply pointing out that in reality your perceived lack of flexibility of CSM, vs SM is not true, if anything CSM have more viable options for good builds, because they have good units for any purpose. Lets put it this way, if we go Slot by Slot, I think CSM match or exceed Marines with at least 1 unit in every slot outside of Flyers and Dedicated transports.

HQs- DPs are better than any Marine option, Chaos lords = captian, Sorcerers >= Libby
Elites - Berserkers and Noise marines > any marine option
Troops - Pretty close, Tacticals = CSM, Scouts vs Cultists wash, Intercessors remain to be seen, might be better but pricey, that said CSM can take Berserkers and Noise Marines in this slot in some factions which would be better.
Heavy - Predators are equal, Devs are slightly better than Havocs, Oblits are better than any other Marine choice
Fast - Warp Talons are good, not sure about marines in this slot right now raptors >= assault marines, bikes=bikes

I don't think marines need a huge buff just some points adjustments, I just think there is a myth that marines have a ton of options, and that is a big advantage in list building. I'm pretty happy with my current marine list, I think it is decent, making it however basically involved throwing most of what you call flexibility right out the window.

What is your current marine list?

Right now I'm using

Battalion - Raven Guard
Captain - Jump Pack, Storm Bolter, Power Sword
Lieutenant - Jump Pack, Storm Bolter, Chain Sword
Primaris Ancient
2x 10 Helblasters w/ Assault Plasma
3 x 5 Intercessors

Battlation - Imperial Fists
Captain - Jump Pack, Storm Bolter, Chain Sword - warlord - storm of fire
Lieutenant - Jump Pack, Storm Bolter, Chain Sword
1 x 6 Inceptors - Assault Bolters
5 Intercessors
2 x 5 scouts

It does ok, it is not a world beating list, it won't top the GT winning lists, but I can win more than I lose against tournament players at events. So not a lot of variety of units, the only other units I even considered were things like, Devs, Preds, Ravens but did not really want to go that route as I have a Dark Angel Gunline using those types of units already.

**sennacherib**

That looks like a fun list. One without the use of a crutch.
Jobs a good un.

Btw. He’ll blasters are a nice option unavailable to CSM. As is pretty much everything in your army baring the commanders.

**Insectum7**

Xenomancers wrote:
Primark G wrote:
Xenomancers wrote:
Land speeder storms are a huge diapointment. I have 6 of them so needless to say I was basically always bringing at least 3 every game as marines in 7th. They used to be 40 points - could jink - had a large blast weapon that blinded - it was a super efficient little beast. Now it's one of the worst units in the codex.

This is your problem - you can only see the bad for your codex and what is good in others.

Enlighten me.

Easy, go back and review the thread. It's mostly one big case of "The grass is always greener on the other side."

**Gene St. Ealer**

sennacherib wrote:
To address your points.

A storm raven remains a transport and a gunboat. One does not mutually exclude the other, and having the ability to do both is incredible. My original statement stands. Breng77 was just selectively ignoring that fact.

Berserkers can be troops in attachments without any psykers. Noise marines can be troops in any detatchment without berserkers. They are both good but they also retain limitations.

You can get a lord with a power sword and a sorcerer for the price of a daemonprince. You also will get an addition psychic ability each turn. I’m not saying Daemon princes are not good, however, it’s like trying to compare a Razorback and a landraider. There is a huge points difference between them.

With respect to wargear, space marines can kit their army out in all manner of ways enabling them far greater versatility than CSM. If I could only have..... it would make my army so much better. Pretty much every codex has standouts but to deny that having multiple options and a wider variety of wargear dosnt give you an advantage? I’m pretty certain that almost everyone would recognize that to be false.

I’m also glad your happy with your marine list. I’m happy to finally have a codex (DG) and that the CSM codex dosnt suck royally any more.

Right, and let's translate the berserkers/noise marine thing. That's basically telling Chaos players "you have to play World Eaters or you have to play Emperor's Children". So let's employ that against SM -- alright, you have to play Ultramarines! So many double standards in this thread.

**sennacherib**

@Gene - I couldn’t agree more.

@ Brenn77. Your list looks pretty nasty. Baring games where you faced Maelific lord spam, or twin primarch spam, how many games have you lost to Chaos players.