Hysterial rant of a Space Marine player who just bought the Eldar Codex

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.

**HuskyWarhammer**

Gwarok wrote:
HuskyWarhammer wrote:
Gwarok wrote:
Bharring wrote:
1)
Brightlance is the LasCannon equivelent, not the MultiMelta equivelent. It doesn't have the Melta quasi-rule (Melta weapons can roll 2 dice and take the higher on the damage roll in half range).

Compared to the LC, it's -1 S -12" range, +1 AP, and a little cheaper. It's hard to call the Brightlance a win over the Lascannon.

2)
Yeah, it's unbalanced. But Alaitoc didn't get Raven Guard's Infiltrate, so there's that. That would have been truly broken.

3)
Dreads have better ranged weapons, and don't degrade. A kitted Dread and an kitted Wraithlord cost about the same, and can perform at about the same. Give the Dread a CCW and TLLC, and give the Wraithlord a sword and 2xBL and they cost the same.

4) Eldar Exarchs are *not* sarges. First, they are exemplars of the shrine, not squad leaders. They do not give +1 LD. They are not just more-experienced Eldar. Aspect Warriors are Eldar wearing armor. Exarchs are armor wearing a now-joined Eldar. They are not physically the same in the way that a SM Sarge is the same as a SM Battle Brother. They should have to pay for their Exarchs, but don't confuse them for Sarges.

5) Rangers only get those for free if you don't count the 4 points they pay over Guardians to get them. They're S/T 3 5+ base. Scouts are S/T 4 4+ base. Of course the Scouts should pay more.

6) Reapers are OP. No argument there. The "guarentee" powers do have some downsides, and the character-buffs SMs have have some upsides. Not enough to make Reapers balanced, but they exist.

7) Even firing twice, the Fire Prism does much less to damage to a heavy target than a LasPred. It has three modes, but any one of them is inferior to the equivelent with one fire mode.

CWE is OP, but some of these points are offbase.

I do think CWE are going to run tournies. Although not with Eldrad.

1) No its not the LC equivalent, it is the Multimelta equivalent. The melta quasi rule comes in exactly once per melta per fight. It is irrelevant. If the SM Hvy Weapon list included a BL for 20 points over a MM at 27, you'd never see any, ANY, marine army take a MM. Hell you barely see them now. And yea, the LC has 12" more range, but I think we can all agree the 12" between 12-24 is a lot more important than 24-36, and 36-48 is even less critical. I never called a BL over a LC, I called it a win over the MM. Which it is, hands down.

3) Yes, that is my point. You kit both the Wraithlord and Dread to roughly equal firepower, they cost almost the same, yet the wraithlord will be cheaper. ALSO, the Wraith is 2" faster, has +1T, and +2W over the Dread. That is my issue.

4) Yes, they are "Sarges". You have an infantry unit, their leader is a bit tougher for the same points. That little bit tougher they are is more for Eldar. They get more. If I waved a magic wand and said all Marine Sgt also get +1W you'd agree that was worth something? Would change their value on the board? Of course it would, because it's more.

5) Are you seriously using another Eldar unit to justify how much more Rangers pay? As to the importance of the extra S/T and armor do you really think that is the primary factor in picking a stealthed long range sniper unit? And even if it was, we are talking 50% more. You tell me you would stack 30 Rangers vs. 20 Scouts?

6) A Las Pred doesn't have the option to pop a tank on round 1, then fire 2D6 S6 AP -3 D1 shots against a mob unit the next. You know what fires 2D6 S6 shots at AP -3 in the Marine arsenal? Nothing, nothing at all does that. A marine army would pay 155pts just for that, let alone the ability to rip into tanks.

It seems like you're trying to pick hairs and exaggerate to make your point, but it's simply not accurate. For example:

6 - You are *vastly* overstating the firepower if you think a fire prism is going to frequently "pop a tank on round 1." Even with both shots, it's only going to pump out an average of something like 3-4 wounds against the average tank. A las pred is going to do about double that.

Perhaps your "hysterical" rant would do with a dose of calm reality. I mean, you're here trying to argue that bright lances aren't lascannon analogues, but of melta...? Dafuq...?

Edit: as an aside, I think this is why so many people dislike SM players. Despite their special snowflake treatment and blatantly OP models, a loud few never stop complaining while the rest of us just want to have a fun game.

Well I don't expect a Prism to destroy a tank in one round, very few units can destroy another 13W unit in one round, but it is to be considered a legit threat as opposed to be ignored like say, a bunch of cultists. And in addition to threatening tank units, it has a lot of long range shots to pour down on tough infantry. Its flexible. And a LOT cheaper than a Las Pred, which is my central point here. Marines have units to match Eldar, they just have to spend significantly more points to keep up. And why do you folks confuse the BL with a LC? If I pick an LC it's because I want 48" range and wound on a 3+ against even T8, which the LC does. I wouldn't trade an LC for a BL. I would however trade a Multi Melta in a heartbeat for a Bright Lance. If you went to any SM player and said "hey, would you trade the reroll on damage at half range for another 12" on the Multi Melta, would you take it?" The answer would be every time, HELL YEA. And if I then said ok, you got it pal, also, I'm refunding you 7pts on the weapon, you'd be like, no way man, that's too generous. Multi Meltas should be cheaper is my point, that is why you hardly ever see them. For Eldar, they are cheaper. Like most of their stuff that works more efficenently.

So...now you're complaining that a Laspred has to pay more to do a better job at taking out tank units...and barely even more. A laspred runs 190 while a fire prism is 180 with moderate equipment (targeting matrix and stones or engines). You're upset that a tank that costs about the same trades high wound-killing specialty for target versatility against hordes. It's ridiculous.

And your argument about BL/melta is a farce on its face, seriously.

I think you're throwing a mountainous fit about an ant hill. Maybe it'd be good to take some time reading through lists and forums, considering you're just now relearning things? Better to take a measured approach than fly off the handle.

**KingCorpus**

I read this whole thread and it gave me a huge headache from the amount of bellyaching.

There's a reason why every codex has different point values, and stats. An army may seem strong in one way but won't be in another.

If you are amazed with how good Eldar are, maybe space marines aren't the army for you. Heretic.

**the_scotsman**

No way the Eldar missile launcher is the same as the imperial missile launcher, it's the equivalent of a multi melta EXCEPT MORE BETTER. If I told you you could have a multi melta, except double the range, less AP, but with an optional anti infantry attack youd be like, "bro" and I'd be like "bro" and then you'd take it on completely different platforms from multi meltas and you'd use it as a backfield gunline weapon and not a close range anti tank weapon like a multi melta because it would have a totally different role, not at all related to other weapons that I don't want to compare to because I'm engaged in willful ignorance of data that backs up my presupposed conclusion.

**Slayer-Fan123**

HuskyWarhammer wrote:
I love how the OP conveniently forgot to mention things like assault cannon Razorbacks, Guileman, being able to ally with Imperium, and Stormravens.

I could make any codex sound better than another if I cherry-picked my facts, too. I mean, Grey Knight units are *all psykers*! How is that balanced?! (/s)

So basically you're saying the units that are getting price increases and will continue to receive them are your argument for it being a good codex.

Under your logic, the 6th edition Tyranid codex was fantastic.

Also allies should be compliments, not crutches.

**the_scotsman**

I hope this thread goes on for fifty pages, just so I can link to it every time someone goes "nuh uh!" to a claim that space Marine players are entitled.

**fraser1191**

the_scotsman wrote:
I hope this thread goes on for fifty pages, just so I can link to it every time someone goes "nuh uh!" to a claim that space Marine players are entitled.

mmmm people get passionate about the game, the grass is greener on the other side etc...

Frankly i find the proposed rules section more for entertainment than actually to achieve anything seeing as how GW doesn't really pop in to see what we're saying

**Kaiyanwang**

shortymcnostrill wrote:
the nasty ones currently shining spears

What a time to be alive

**Bharring**

Op
I overreacted. I've been seeing a lot of 'Boltguns should be just as strong as Avenger SC' and such lately.

There isn't much disagreement with CWE being OP. But there has been so much FUD about it here lately that it gets people up in arms.

Back to the specific points:
1. When my CWE want to take a Lascannon, they sigh and take a Brightlance. If they want to take a multimeta, they are SOL. Marines usually take a Lascannon over a MultiMelta. When they do take the MM, it's because 2d6 take the highest is impactful, if you're going to be close anyways. MM is a close range weapon. The long-range one shot AT gun for Eldar is the Brightlance.

3) The Wraithlord is marginally cheaper in some configurations. But the Dread typically has better shooting. So, after 5 wounds, the Wraithlord gets much worse. The Dread gets no worse until completely killed.

4) I agree we should have to pay for Exarchs. That was a huge disappointment. But what I'm saying is they are *not* squad leaders. They aren't Eldar anymore. Their +1W is fluffy. A Sarge getting +1W would not be. But the Exarchs *should* pay for it.

5) My point was Rangers should pay less than Sniper Scouts. Not that they should pay that much more.

6) Marines CAN pay less for that firepower. 4 Plas Cannons in a Dev squad. 4d3 S7 AP-3 shots for fewer points. Not as substantially better as the LasPred vs the anti-tank beam, but still better per point. As for the third profile, it's weaker than the better anti-tank profile. So Marines can get more efficiency for either type of dakka, but can t swap mid game.

CWE are OP. But some of this stuff deserves a second look.

**xeen**

Despite all the arguing on this thread it seems that everyone is on the same page that the “craft world” tactics applying to all units not just infantry bikes or some walkers is pretty broken and should not be the rule. And if you can get agreement on Dakka on an issue that the issue is bad then there is pretty great evidence that a mistake was made. Clearly of all issues GW should address this issue as it is one of the clearest to fix if they are serious about balance.

**ERJAK**

What's the onomonopiea for the noises adults make in Charlie Brown? Is it 'whomf'?

Because OP could have wrote that for 4 pages and had the same number of valid points and demonstrated the exact same level of game knowledge.

**Blackie**

Marines without Guilliman are inferior only to Eldar, AM and Tyranids. Against index armies they'll always have balanced matches, and in many cases they will be superior.

Against semi-competitive (if we cut Guilliman why should other factions bring their best combos?) tyranids and eldar lists they have concrete possibilities of winning the game, even if those xenos have the edge. AM is the most effective army in the game, everyone will struggle against guardsmen.

Eldar are very strong, but not even remotely as OP as they were in 7th edition.

**Fafnir**

Eldar are strong, definitely in the top half of the codecies. I'd definitely rank IG and Tyranids as being more powerful. Not sure about where it stands in relation to CSM.
however, unlike IG and Tyranids, Eldar don't have near as much viability spread within the faction. On a competitive level, the codex basically gets shrunken down to Reapers, Spears, Hemlocks and Rangers. Other units can find niche roles, but the power gaps are clear.

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

Spoiler:

Gwarok wrote:
I imagine anyone who visits this place regularly has probably heard this schpeel or one just like it a billion times already, so feel free to ignore me. I'm under no illusions that I'm trodding unexplored territory here. I stopped playing 40K about 8 years ago as I was just tired of my friend's Eldar running circles around my marines like they were nothing. Marines frankly just couldn't move and shoot, I tried Terminators simply for the reason they were one of the few units that could equip assault weapons so they could move and shoot farther than 12". We played about 10 matches, one draw, the rest were just embarrassing slaughters. I'm willing to admit that he's a better player than me but whatever combo I tried just failed miserably.

I think 8th Ed is a good one, I'm very happy Marine infantry has the ability to move around a bit and shoot, both in the same round now. I like how they've made vehicles into units with the same stat blocks instead of a whole separate mini system to fight with. But I've been reading the boards about Eldar and I just couldn't see how they can field so many awesome units, so today I bought the codex and I am shocked at all the built in advantages. To name a few:

1) Eldar Fusion Gun is the same stats as the Marine Melta Gun, and they cost the same. That is balance. However, the Bright Lance which is basically the same as the Multi Melta, is 7 pts cheaper and has 50% more range. That is not balanced. For the record, the Marines need to spend 13pts for the Tac Marine or 16pts for the Sternguard to gear a melta, while the Eldar Fire Dragon costs 5pts, and also doesn't eat the -1 penalty to hit for firing assault after advancing, so this seeming parity in cost/ability is actually quite heavily skewed towards Eldar, resulting in it not being balanced.

2) Space Marine Chapter Tactics apply to only infantry, bikers, Dreadnoughts, while Eldar Craftworld traits apply to their entire Detachment. That is not balanced. Honestly, of all the "balance" issues, you'd think this one would be a no brainer, but still they tilt it heavily towards Eldar. I'd like my speeders, tanks, transports, fliers to get to get that bonus too, but apparently the folks at GW think just Eldar should have that.

3) Eldar Wraithlords have higher T, more wounds, more speed, and a free but functional CCW with strong AP and wound values, while the Marine Dreadnought is slower, softer, and has to buy a very expensive CCW or simply go without and hope they don't get tied up for the remainder of the fight with any 5 man squad with a 4+ or better save.

4) Eldar squad leaders have +1A like most squad leaders, but also +1W, along a random additional useful ability based on what type of Exarch it is, which others don't get. Not balanced.

5) Space Marine scouts have to pay thru the nose to include "scout" gear. Putting them at 50% more expense than Eldar Rangers who get their sniper rifles for free and their cloaks included, who's cloaks not only add to cover save but come with an awesome -1 to Hit as well. Lovely. Also, not balanced.

6) For 2 more points than a Marine pays for a just a Missile Launcher, Dark Reapers get a better weapon AND the awesome unit that fires it, hitting on 3+ no matter what, with a solid 3+ armor save to boot. And all the units in the squad can take it. Want that 10 man squad to get the most from whatever guarantee-to-hit/wound buff your dirt cheap psykers are going to slap on it? No wasted space there.

7) Prism Tank have 3 useful firing profiles and shoot twice while still moving half their 16" speed? Gimme a break.

Some of this stuff is pretty subjective, and I get that they need to differentiate the races, but some of it isn't. When you give one group like the Eldar the clear superiority in both numbers AND quality on gear and units that have direct analogues in other armies, you've messed something up. I really don't know why Eldar don't run the tables at tournaments. I can think of 3 or 4 combinations of Eldar units, fluffy ones even, that would be all but unstoppable by anything other than a purpose built army. I can think of several more that are just absurd yet legal(1500pts, 50x Dark Reapers + Eldrad) that I honestly don't even know what anyone would bring up to stop.

Crybaby rant over, GO MARINES!

Marines have +1S, +1T compared to Eldars. NOT BALANCED! Checkmate, marine players.

**Crazyterran**

I think the Marines, GK, Chaos Marines (the book proper) suffer from being the first three out, and likely finished before 8th dropped.

**fraser1191**

Crazyterran wrote:
I think the Marines, GK, Chaos Marines (the book proper) suffer from being the first three out, and likely finished before 8th dropped.

I'd say it's just like Ad-mech, almost directly translated from 7th and not really thought through

**Martel732**

The have-not codices will get rebalanced in March, I'd wager. The BA codex seems like it has a lot of special stuff in it. Maybe not Eldar good, but god help the weabo Eldar if the BA reach them.

**Spetulhu**

shortymcnostrill wrote:
My point: Eldar rules and buffs can seem powerful, I get that, but keep in mind that the units receiving these effects are generally not that powerful/tough (the nasty ones currently are reapers, shining spears and the flyers afaik). If it seems powerful, try mathing it out. This usually gives me some perspective (or sometimes confirms something as being very powerful, but then at least my cries of "omg so op nerf now plix" are less subjective).

And ofc, one thing marine players (and many others) conveniently forget about Eldar units like Dark Reapers is that they are specialized to the point they have no meat shields for the special/heavy weapons. Every guy lost is a big gun lost and it's been like that ever since Aspect Warriors were introduced. Losing one to protect the more valuable Exarch is worth it, but it's still a bigger loss than losing a bullet stopper marine or IG trooper to save a squad Lascannon.

**Slayer-Fan123**

Spetulhu wrote:
shortymcnostrill wrote:
My point: Eldar rules and buffs can seem powerful, I get that, but keep in mind that the units receiving these effects are generally not that powerful/tough (the nasty ones currently are reapers, shining spears and the flyers afaik). If it seems powerful, try mathing it out. This usually gives me some perspective (or sometimes confirms something as being very powerful, but then at least my cries of "omg so op nerf now plix" are less subjective).

And ofc, one thing marine players (and many others) conveniently forget about Eldar units like Dark Reapers is that they are specialized to the point they have no meat shields for the special/heavy weapons. Every guy lost is a big gun lost and it's been like that ever since Aspect Warriors were introduced. Losing one to protect the more valuable Exarch is worth it, but it's still a bigger loss than losing a bullet stopper marine or IG trooper to save a squad Lascannon.

The meat shields for Guard are 4 points so they don't care. The supposed meat shields for Marine weapons are 13 points minimum.

The meat shield concept doesn't work with models that cost that much.

**Dionysodorus**

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Spetulhu wrote:
shortymcnostrill wrote:
My point: Eldar rules and buffs can seem powerful, I get that, but keep in mind that the units receiving these effects are generally not that powerful/tough (the nasty ones currently are reapers, shining spears and the flyers afaik). If it seems powerful, try mathing it out. This usually gives me some perspective (or sometimes confirms something as being very powerful, but then at least my cries of "omg so op nerf now plix" are less subjective).

And ofc, one thing marine players (and many others) conveniently forget about Eldar units like Dark Reapers is that they are specialized to the point they have no meat shields for the special/heavy weapons. Every guy lost is a big gun lost and it's been like that ever since Aspect Warriors were introduced. Losing one to protect the more valuable Exarch is worth it, but it's still a bigger loss than losing a bullet stopper marine or IG trooper to save a squad Lascannon.

The meat shields for Guard are 4 points so they don't care. The supposed meat shields for Marine weapons are 13 points minimum.

The meat shield concept doesn't work with models that cost that much.

It works great for Devastators and it's basically the only reason anyone actually uses tactical squads. Devastators pay 5 points for a cherub which can absorb a lascannon wound. Regular 13 point Marines in cover are quite durable and it can make sense to have a couple in your Dev squad. Ultramarines (with Guilliman) or Salamanders tac squads do fine just camping in cover with a lascannon, because they have respectable firepower and are hard to kill efficiently -- the unit absorbs small arms fire better than naked Guardsmen and anti-tank fire better than even the cheapest vehicles.

Dark Reapers are great, sure, and because they can hide in cover at 36-48" they're reasonably durable, but this really is a big disadvantage for most Aspect Warriors. It's why Fire Dragons are a suicide unit. Even Guardian units are extremely fragile for their cost.

**fraser1191**

Do people just not put things in vehicles?
I stuff my valuable things in rhinos which "aren't cost effective" but the fact that people don't ever bother to shoot at a rhino for the most part makes them worth it. Then with guys in deep strike they can't be shot there either sooooopo
Use rhinos dammit!
Yes a rhino costs the same as a tac squad but it fits 2 and shrugs off mall arms fire

**Insectum7**

As a marine player these threads are just embarassing.

**Infantryman**

Galas wrote:
1) No, having guns in different codex costing the same is not balance. Having guns costing the same for different units in the same codex isn't even balanced. The cost of weapons and units should be based in the coherence of the force. I'm not gonna expect Tau meele units to be as point efficient as Genestealer or Khorne Berzerkers.

Coherence of the force and utility of the model in question.

I.E. a <weapon> in the hands of a AM Sergeant should cost less than the same <weapon> in the hands of a Scion Tempestor. This is because the Tempestor has BS3+ WS3+ and other stats that are better than the Sergeant, so that weapon is worth more on the field.

M.

**Gwarok**

KingCorpus wrote:
I read this whole thread and it gave me a huge headache from the amount of bellyaching.

There's a reason why every codex has different point values, and stats. An army may seem strong in one way but won't be in another.

If you are amazed with how good Eldar are, maybe space marines aren't the army for you. Heretic.

I couldn't agree more that there is a reason for different point values, and that they need to differentiate the codexes. But it is a trade off of quality vs. quantity, and as far as I can tell Eldar get both. Yes, armies should be strong one way and not another, but where is the weakness for Eldar? They have very versatile, fast, strong and CHEAP units in all categories. A Vyper is the same thing as a Marine land speeder, base unit. Same stats exactly, they are just a platform to put weapons on at that point. Except it's 20pts cheaper. I could see that if the Vyper had a really poor selection of weapons to put on there, but they don't, their options for weapons are just as good if not better than the Land Speeder. For the same price as a base land speeder with just a Hvy Bolter, a Vyper can get a Shuriken Cannon and a Bright Lance. A marine speeder would have to swap out it's Hvy Bolter to get a Multi Melta, which is basically a 24" Bright lance, and still pay 17pts more, for less. These numbers are pretty straightforward. Also, whatever Craftworld benefit the Eldar is using will benefit the Vyper, whereas a Marine Chatper Tactic does not affect Land Speeders. This is also huge.

Another thing that was bugging me is that as I was trying to make a list that included vehicles, there isn't much you can do to customize them past weapons. Often tanks or whatever will move, and they will take a -1 hit when they do with most of their weapons. So I kept coming back to Land Raiders and Storm Ravens just for Power of the Machine Spirit, which mitigates that move and shoot penalty. Something so important they felt only 300pt+ vehicles get it. I found myself wishing it was an option you could buy for Predators or any vehicle really, and thinking I'd pay 10, 15, 20pts even for that. Hitting with your heavy weapons for marines is pretty critical as you won't have that many. But not an option. Unless you are Eldar, in case not only is it an option on almost any vehicle, it's only 5pts. Does anyone ever not take the Targeting Matrix for so cheap? You'd be crazy not to.

Even transportation is messed up with Marines. Centurion Assault Squads, and Flamer Aggressors, pretty sweet units if you can get them to the party. Sort of like Wraithguards/blades. So put them in a vehicle and get them to the party! Except while the standard Eldar transport can transport any standard non-Jump Eldar infantry, Marines seem to have oddly forbidden a lot of their own units to get on their own transports, even the "Dedicated" ones. Sure, I'd like to stick 5 Hellblasters and a Character of some stripe into a Razorback and shoot them up the field, but I can't, because dumbass Archmagos Cawl somehow made Primaris armor incompatible with everything not made by him. Presumably its a trademark issue he's still working out with the High Lords of Terra or something. So now I have to drop 300+pts on a Repulsor if my Primaris guys ever need a lift. Don't get me wrong, a Repulsor is a mean beast all on its own, but a little much just to get my boys in the game. Not to mention, between Centurions, Aggressors, Wraithguard, the Wraithguard once again have better base unit stats, for the lowest cost. The Centurion Devastators are 80pts alone to the Wraithguard 23? What frigging metric are they using over there to make a Centurion base model 3 times the price, the Assault ones are just over twice. And again don't get me wrong, a Cent Dev with Launchers and Twin LC is mean, but at 155pts we've moved out of close combat infantry comparisons and moved on to a WraithLord with 2 BL's and a Ghostglaive, for all in intents and purposes far better AND cheaper than the most lavishly geared Centurion.

So I agree, there should be trade offs. My point is with the Eldar you don't need to make any.

**HuskyWarhammer**

I love how the OP, when confronted with data that disproves his point, just changes the topic. He/she also just ignores context that takes away from his point (e.g., that CTM only works against the closest target - a huge drawback).

Or complains that he can't customize vehicles as much as he wants, yet has access to the most customization options for infantry by far - and then says Eldar have no trade-offs. Eldar. Whose infantry are among the *least* customizable in the game and are T3.

**Scott-S6**

fraser1191 wrote:
Do people just not put things in vehicles?
I stuff my valuable things in rhinos which "aren't cost effective" but the fact that people don't ever bother to shoot at a rhino for the most part makes them worth it. Then with guys in deep strike they can't be shot there either sooooopo
Use rhinos dammit!
Yes a rhino costs the same as a tac squad but it fits 2 and shrugs off mall arms fire

That made sense when you could shoot out of them. Now while it does protect the passengers it also means they aren't contributing anything. Couple that with disembark only at start of move and it doesn't really help close range shooty squad or melee squads.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

HuskyWarhammer wrote:
I love how the OP, when confronted with data that disproves his point, just changes the topic. He/she also just ignores context that takes away from his point (e.g., that CTM only works against the closest target - a huge drawback).

Or complains that he can't customize vehicles as much as he wants, yet has access to the most customization options for infantry by far - and then says Eldar have no trade-offs. Eldar. Whose infantry are among the *least* customizable in the game and are T3.

He did say that he was hysterical. (at least I assume that's what he meant)

**bananathug**

The marine haters are out in force again.

Fact: Based on recent tournament results codex Eldar, IG and CSM are demonstrably in a better position than SM (it gets worse if you play any other faction than Ultras)

This is not whining nor up for debate. Check October results from BoK or any other amalgamation of larger tournament results. The results I can find for November are even worse.

Fact: SM just had their most competitive codex options increased in point values.

Opinion: Relatively little was done to codexes which are performing better than SM aside from the uber-nerf to Mal-lords and we'll see how that effects Chaos.

This imbalance will get worse as time goes on because the eldar and Nids codexes just came out and once they have been digested will continue to push SM to the bottom. The changes to the SM codex will push it ever further out of the competitive tier relegating it to a fulffy/casual army. If codexes keep coming out in balance with the most recent ones SM will be the outlier with Ad Mech and GK as significantly under powered/overcosted.

Fact: having a wider model range or being good in previous editions has no bearing on the competitive strength of SM.

Opinion: The choice between a $^it sandwich and a douche bag is not really a strength. Competitive strength is not the only metric by which an army can be judged and it is unfair that some of you guys are stuck with sculpts from the 90s but I want to be able to play my army that I have collected and painted over the last 10-20 years in my local meta. At this point I get leaf-blowered off the table by eldar dark reaper spam, morty+magnus, genestealers and dakka flexes and IG tanks+artillery+scions. This is even with playing them as black ultramarines because eff templars am I right?

We can talk about why this is the current state of the meta or we can insult marine players about wanting an army that can compete with the other armies with codexes without replacing 90% of their army with IG.

**HuskyWarhammer**

bananathug wrote:
.Opinion: Relatively little was done to codexes which are performing better than SM aside from the uber-nerf to Mal-lords and we'll see how that effects Chaos.

Without addressing if they are performing better worse...

...Have we already forgotten about the commisar nerf?

...How about the more recent conscript nerf?

...Or the gutting of soulburst?

..The scion nerf?

Again, someone complains about "SM haters" and hangs themselves on the cross while demonstrating how blatantly, factually wrong their "opinion" is.

**Gitdakka**

Marmatag wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
The Cawlbot gunline isn't winning anything though. It's not even placing. Whether or not a build is "cool" has nothing to do with its placement on a tier list, the Morty/Magnus power couple is dumb as gak and its still a top tier build.

Look i'm not here to defend the current state of the game.

It's patently absurd that chaos has multiple top-tier lists and the natural counter army only shows up when it's soup'd into IG.

Insert BERT DER FLERFF argument here:

Dunno why i cant stop giggling from the BERT DER FRERFF! Honestly though this forum should have a generic rant thread

**Slayer-Fan123**

That said, I still love the argument that Assault Cannon Razorbacks and Rowboat make it a good codex.

Tyranid players would rightfully throw a fit if you told them the 6th edition codex was good because Flyrants and Mawlocs.

**pm713**

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
That said, I still love the argument that Assault Cannon Razorbacks and Rowboat make it a good codex.

Tyranid players would rightfully throw a fit if you told them the 6th edition codex was good because Flyrants and Mawlocs.

I played 6th Tyranids once. I killed 2 units with my entire army. Everything seems better after that....