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.

Sample size here is too small for me to say for sure. There are certainly a lot of detractors.

"Easy to learn but difficult to master" is an option. It makes sense that an army built on generalists would fit that description. It's easy to "get by" casually with marines, but because they're jacks-of-all-trades it could be harder to squeeze the efficiency out of them at top levels. That's a perfectly viable design space.

You could spend time whining about it.

Or you
Could
Git
Gud.

Like you? Okay.... None of your list suggestions are exactly awe-inspiring.

 Insectum7 wrote:
"Easy to learn but difficult to master" is an option. It makes sense that an army built on generalists would fit that description. It's easy to "get by" casually with marines, but because they're jacks-of-all-trades it could be harder to squeeze the efficiency out of them at top levels. That's a perfectly viable design space.

You could spend time whining about it.

Or you
Could
Git
Gud.

So now you're using the "Get good" argument.

If ANYONE had told Guard players that last two editions, that person would've been crucified.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Like you? Okay.... None of your list suggestions are exactly awe-inspiring.

That's because his area is casual. The lists don't work in an actual competitive setting and he doesn't understand that.

Martel732 wrote:
Like you? Okay.... None of your list suggestions are exactly awe-inspiring.

Martel, who looks at the cliff wall and says "impossible", while the climber just climbs it.

Slayer, who sees a tourney result he doesn't understand, and says "lucky".

Disparaging me doesn't improve your claims.

Feel free to drop into the ba thread with your meta-breaking ba builds. I forward to them.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Like you? Okay.... None of your list suggestions are exactly awe-inspiring.

Martel, who looks at the cliff wall and says "impossible", while the climber just climbs it.

Slayer, who sees a tourney result he doesn't understand, and says "lucky".

It would be lucky as it wasn't on a consistent basis. Pretty sure that fits under that definition of lucky.

Or are you gonna defend 6th Edition Rubric Marines because they topped once in a list with Ahriman?

You’re obviously having problems and I think you imagine everyone else must be in the same boat to feel better about yourself.

No, I want their solutions so I can replicate them. So far, this thread has been really short on specifics; especially complete lists.

It’s a waste of time trying to suggest any thing useful here since people like you are so quick to shoot it down with your anecdotal evidence. You can’t even see the value in Hellblasters.

I do. I just think that the 30" range is a big gamble. I have a list that uses 8 of them. I fielded it once, and it won, but I don't think it would win vs Chaos soup or IG, so I moved on.

Thanks for proving my point.

How does that prove your point? I don't like the way they play on a real table in a real game. I also don't like the severely reduced utility vs altioc, carnifexes, and raven guard. Some games, they will rock the house. Some games is not enough in my mind to do well consistently. I see the value, I just think its lower than you do. That doesn't make me some unreasonable crazy person.

 Primark G wrote:
It’s a waste of time trying to suggest any thing useful here since people like you are so quick to shoot it down with your anecdotal evidence. You can’t even see the value in Hellblasters.

I don't really see how providing compiled evidence from tournaments is anecdotal while "I use them and they're fine, git gud" isn't.

Hellblasters are properly costed, which means they are "fine", i just don't care for their scheme.

Better units than hellblasters exist and are wholly less expensive. Consider obliterators. Strength 7-9 shooting, ap1-3, damage1-3. No overcharging required. Can deep strike. 4x shots, 24" range, no rapid fire requirement.

Suggesting hellblasters is so comical to me. They're not a good unit. If they could deep strike, they would still be inferior to Plasma Scions which any Imperium list already has access to.

Can you please explain how hellblasters are better than lascannon devastator squads, or heavy plasma devastator squads?

Where is their value??

I'm willing to go with "okay" on hellblasters.

Martel732 wrote:
Disparaging me doesn't improve your claims.

Feel free to drop into the ba thread with your meta-breaking ba builds. I forward to them.

Consistently whining about percieved (or actual) unfairness isn't going to improve your play.

A list doesn't have to be "meta breaking" to win. Arguably it shouldn't be. It should be a solid list with some smart play behind it. I don't know BA, but lets post some recent tournament winning lists and see what we can build to counter them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Porphyrius wrote:

 Primark G wrote:
It’s a waste of time trying to suggest any thing useful here since people like you are so quick to shoot it down with your anecdotal evidence. You can’t even see the value in Hellblasters.

I don't really see how providing compiled evidence from tournaments is anecdotal while "I use them and they're fine, git gud" isn't.

I'm not even sure there's an agreed upon batch of tournament statistics.

Can you provide any tournament stats that show Marines doing well with consistency--from tournaments that have occurred since other armies received their codexes? Because I've seen several users provide tournament results that suggest that Marines aren't exactly setting the world on fire.

I suppose I don't really have a dog in this race--I don't play competitively, and I don't have any plans to start doing so in the future--but it seems to me that the "Marines aren't very good" side has done a lot more to prove their case than the "Marines are great" side.

I'll dig up a winning AM list later and we can look at it.

Once again apparently all Marine players just need to L2P.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
I'll dig up a winning AM list later and we can look at it.

Please don't humor him.

I want to see the solutions.

Martel732 wrote:
I want to see the solutions.

This is the guy working on a Marine list with 70+ Tactical Marines. If you wanna listen to advice from him, that's on you.

I didn't say I was going to copy his list. I wanted to see his solutions.

Martel732 wrote:
I want to see the solutions.

Battalion
Primaris Captain w/ power fist and plasma pistol
Primaris Lieutenant w/ power sword

5 Intercessors w/ grenade launcher
5 Intercessors w/ grenade launcher
5 Intercessors w/ grenade launcher

Primaris Ancient
10 Reivers w/ bolt carbines, grav chutes

5 Hellblasters
5 Hellblasters

Battalion
Captain in terminator armour w/ storm shield (shield eternal) and thunder hammer
Lieutenant w/ combimelta, chainsword

5 Tactical Marines w/ plasma gun, sgt w/ combiplasma, chainsword
5 Tactical Marines w/ plasma gun, sgt w/ combiplasma, chainsword
5 Scouts w/ bolters

Apothecary

Drop Pod

Vanguard Detachment
Greyfax

Callidus
Culexus
Eversor



Ultramarines. Won Oz Masters in December, just before CA point changes, so you have 30 extra points to play with.

How does the character change affect that list? Or does it?

I can field this list minus the assassins and Greyfax.

 Marmatag wrote:

Better units than hellblasters exist and are wholly less expensive. Consider obliterators. Strength 7-9 shooting, ap1-3, damage1-3. No overcharging required. Can deep strike. 4x shots, 24" range, no rapid fire requirement.

Are you suggesting running a CSM detachment to supplement SM?!?!

There are plasma Inceptors but I am sure you don't like them either for whatever reason, right??

I prefer the bolter ones. By a lot. Bolter inceptors are fantastic for ba.

He's pointing out how suboptimal marine choices are by comparing to other armies.

Also, i gave you reasons why i don't care for hellblasters. You ignored them.

 Primark G wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

Better units than hellblasters exist and are wholly less expensive. Consider obliterators. Strength 7-9 shooting, ap1-3, damage1-3. No overcharging required. Can deep strike. 4x shots, 24" range, no rapid fire requirement.

Are you suggesting running a CSM detachment to supplement SM?!?!

There are plasma Inceptors but I am sure you don't like them either for whatever reason, right??

Interceptors have random shots. At worse with an Obliterator squad I get 12 Autocannon shots. On average you only get 12 Plasma Gun shots from Interceptors and for increased cost! People are sticking with the Assault Bolters for a reason.

Also, i want to have my inceptors function with no babysitter.