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.

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Actually Chaos Marines are said to be more powerful, which is why I think the Chosen should be the basic troop rather than the Chaos Marine profile. These are all supposed to be Vets of the long war after all...why aren't they Vet stats?

Yeah, I like Chosen. I'm glad they got their bonus chainsword option back, too. I'm not sure every model is supposed to be a vet. But maybe because of the tyrannical nature of the chaos legions, or just lack of discipline, many marines don't progress as far/fast.

Or if every model had access to the bonus chainsword like they used to.

I would also say it's because not every chaos space marine is a veteran. Some may be fresh chaos space marines made by the legions or recently turned traitor marines from the chapters.

Then those can and should be represented via Vanilla Marines but with different keywords.

Your argument doesn't make sense when the supposed renegades are using heresy equipment they shouldn't have or lets use of tons of Daemon engines they just happened to get access to.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Actually Chaos Marines are said to be more powerful, which is why I think the Chosen should be the basic troop rather than the Chaos Marine profile. These are all supposed to be Vets of the long war after all...why aren't they Vet stats?

Yeah, I like Chosen. I'm glad they got their bonus chainsword option back, too. I'm not sure every model is supposed to be a vet. But maybe because of the tyrannical nature of the chaos legions, or just lack of discipline, many marines don't progress as far/fast.

Or if every model had access to the bonus chainsword like they used to.

The lack of discipline is the higher LD but not being totally indoctrinated (ATSKNF)

 Xenomancers wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:
Only SM players can see an army with 20+ unviable units and literally argue "well it's not as bad as ours so it should NEVER GET FIXED". Forgot how irrational this army makes certain players. Stick to the fluff Xenomancers, that power fantasy you're looking for doesn't belong in a balanced multi-player game, something you've never understood.

I play both armies my friend. Nids is probably my most played army in 8th. My opinion is that it is a very good codex with lots of viable units and combos. I play toned down nids armies ALL THE TIME against armies like pure costodes - TS - admech - tau - harliquens. I still usually win. Space marines are the only army I play that I feel like it's over before it starts. Since eldar got a codex I havn't been able to beat them with marines. They even struggle against weak armies like admech and TS.

I regularly play with 9 man units of warriors with prime support / haruspex / toxicrines (both of which have flat 3 damage explosions that just murder elite units) / swarmlord with tyrant guard / tyranofex. Admittedly I am carried usually by carnifex which is usually include a few of. I even started removing geenstealers and replacing with trash units like hormagants (actually not such a bad unit with 1 cost stratagems giving out huge amounts of mortals). Again I am not disagreeing with you that internal balance is an issue for lots of armies including Nids - for me it's more of an issues that middle tier nids units still cream marines. External balance is a much more important factor though. I really can't sympathize for an army that can field multiple viable army compositions when the most viable marines armies have been constantly nerfed. FFS - the codex for marines was almost a nerf.

That's great - not everyone wants to play like you, and the ones who do still can. As it stands every CC unit in the book not named Genestealer may as well not exist. Even if the answer is nerfing Stealers, this needs to be fixed. SM are getting results too, there isn't a whole lot of variety in what Nid builds do well either. Above all, I can't for the life of me understand the logic that AFTER sm gets their fix and after the dex has all the things you want, why the hell nobody else can get fixed either. Until you drop this only-child attitude then I have zero sympathy for what GW decides to do to your army.

 Insectum7 wrote:
[That's why I don't read much black library. Pulling a turret off a tank now? Are you sure that's not "pulling a pintle mounted heavy bolter off its mount"?

No, as in actually ripping a turret straight off a tank. Space marines can move faster than a human eye can see, their reflexes are about 10x faster than a normal human, and with their power armor on are incredibly strong. If a space marine gets on top of a tank and gets his fingers under the turret and simultaneously uses his legs to push and arms to lift, I can easily see him ripping open a light tank like a tin can.

 Insectum7 wrote:
"Worth an entire platoon of Guardsmen" are we going with a stand up fight in an open field? Or are we going with a marine can kill 30 guardmen if they're only getting to him piecemeal? Or maybe we should go with the fact that they can deploy incredibly fast, making short work of a task that a slower force would have to spend more time and more bodies to do? How do you quantify the "worth"?

In a straight up open field fight. 30-50 guardsmen firing lasguns at 100m with no cover on either side vs a single marine with a bolter. The marine will take a lot of hits and possibly be wounded but all of the guardsmen will be dead by the end of it. Space marines are like aimbots with how accurate and how quickly they shoot.

 Insectum7 wrote:
And how do marines stack up to Aspect Warriors in the fluff? Is it consistent? Or is it all over the place, especially when taking into the account the stories told ftom an Eldar point of view? How does fluff talk about Chaos Marines, are they treated the same? Or does the fluff tell us that loyalists should have 2 wounds, while Chaos marines should only have 1.

A space marine should be roughly equivalent to an aspect warrior. An average chaos marine should actually be even tougher then an average space marine considering they are veterans of the long war and have a TON of combat experience due to a life of constant fighting.

I think CSM should have two wounds and two attacks as well for what it is worth, and be costed appropriately.

What's funny is that I'm actually an Imperial Guard fanboy and think space marines are overrated. But one thing space marines do well is local force superiority.

Local force superiority doesn't mean much if the enemy has dozens of mortars and half a dozen ignore LoS tanks.

Martel732 wrote:
Local force superiority doesn't mean much if the enemy has dozens of mortars and half a dozen ignore LoS tanks.

I meant local force superiority from a lore standpoint.

I agree with you that all flavors of marine are underpowered this edition. It's because the tac marine statline with 1W and 1A doesn't get you much this edition. Instead of making tac marines 11 points and making marines comparable to sisters, why don't we buff them to primaris levels and make them say... 18 points per? I'm not a marine player so it's kinda hard to gauge.

BTW this would include the bolt rifles and the -1 AP they confer.

w1zard wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
"Worth an entire platoon of Guardsmen" are we going with a stand up fight in an open field? Or are we going with a marine can kill 30 guardmen if they're only getting to him piecemeal? Or maybe we should go with the fact that they can deploy incredibly fast, making short work of a task that a slower force would have to spend more time and more bodies to do? How do you quantify the "worth"?

In a straight up open field fight. 30-50 guardsmen firing lasguns at 100m with no cover on either side vs a single marine with a bolter. The marine will take a lot of hits and possibly be wounded but all of the guardsmen will be dead by the end of it. Space marines are like aimbots with how accurate and how quickly they shoot.

Let's give the Tac Marine 50 wounds and BS2+ then to reflect this

 SHUPPET wrote:

Let's give the Tac Marine 50 wounds and BS2+ then to reflect this

That is not what I'm suggesting. All I'm saying is that there is lore justification for giving marines more then 1W and 1A.

EDIT: BTW, if this guy had power armor and a bolter, this is pretty much what I see Space Marines being like on the battlefield. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYGlWjIKoY4

w1zard wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Local force superiority doesn't mean much if the enemy has dozens of mortars and half a dozen ignore LoS tanks.

I meant local force superiority from a lore standpoint.

I agree with you that all flavors of marine are underpowered this edition. It's because the tac marine statline with 1W and 1A doesn't get you much this edition. Instead of making tac marines 11 points and making marines comparable to sisters, why don't we buff them to primaris levels and make them say... 18 points per? I'm not a marine player so it's kinda hard to gauge.

BTW this would include the bolt rifles and the -1 AP they confer.

It's really hard to price point elite infantry with so many weapons that remove them VERY efficiently. Currently, intercessors are not a terrible approximation of what marines might be, but there are way too many weapons that remove them like grots. Therefore, it's a race to the bottom to reduce the efficacy of these weapons.

Martel732 wrote:

w1zard wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Local force superiority doesn't mean much if the enemy has dozens of mortars and half a dozen ignore LoS tanks.

I meant local force superiority from a lore standpoint.

I agree with you that all flavors of marine are underpowered this edition. It's because the tac marine statline with 1W and 1A doesn't get you much this edition. Instead of making tac marines 11 points and making marines comparable to sisters, why don't we buff them to primaris levels and make them say... 18 points per? I'm not a marine player so it's kinda hard to gauge.

BTW this would include the bolt rifles and the -1 AP they confer.

It's really hard to price point elite infantry with so many weapons that remove them VERY efficiently. Currently, intercessors are not a terrible approximation of what marines might be, but there are way too many weapons that remove them like grots. Therefore, it's a race to the bottom to reduce the efficacy of these weapons.

I'd say that Intercessors would be right at 17 points and Deathwatch Intercessors at 19. Make Bolt weapons have their own little gimmick rule for lucky rolls and you would be slightly solid-ish.

Martel732 wrote:

w1zard wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Local force superiority doesn't mean much if the enemy has dozens of mortars and half a dozen ignore LoS tanks.

I meant local force superiority from a lore standpoint.

I agree with you that all flavors of marine are underpowered this edition. It's because the tac marine statline with 1W and 1A doesn't get you much this edition. Instead of making tac marines 11 points and making marines comparable to sisters, why don't we buff them to primaris levels and make them say... 18 points per? I'm not a marine player so it's kinda hard to gauge.

BTW this would include the bolt rifles and the -1 AP they confer.

It's really hard to price point elite infantry with so many weapons that remove them VERY efficiently. Currently, intercessors are not a terrible approximation of what marines might be, but there are way too many weapons that remove them like grots. Therefore, it's a race to the bottom to reduce the efficacy of these weapons.

Sure, plasma rifles eat even two wound marines like candy, but I also think the entire marine lineup needs to be redone along the same lines. I think terminators need to be 3W or possibly even 4W along with commensurate increases in firepower. All appropriately pointed of course.

w1zard wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

w1zard wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Local force superiority doesn't mean much if the enemy has dozens of mortars and half a dozen ignore LoS tanks.

I meant local force superiority from a lore standpoint.

I agree with you that all flavors of marine are underpowered this edition. It's because the tac marine statline with 1W and 1A doesn't get you much this edition. Instead of making tac marines 11 points and making marines comparable to sisters, why don't we buff them to primaris levels and make them say... 18 points per? I'm not a marine player so it's kinda hard to gauge.

BTW this would include the bolt rifles and the -1 AP they confer.

It's really hard to price point elite infantry with so many weapons that remove them VERY efficiently. Currently, intercessors are not a terrible approximation of what marines might be, but there are way too many weapons that remove them like grots. Therefore, it's a race to the bottom to reduce the efficacy of these weapons.

Sure, plasma rifles eat even two wound marines like candy, but I also think the entire marine lineup needs to be redone along the same lines. I think terminators need to be 3W or possibly even 4W along with commensurate increases in firepower. All appropriately pointed of course.

This is the most durable Terminators have been in years. They dont need an extra wound and honestly there are very few weapons they're less durable against. What they need is a boost to offense which is why I literally always plug my idea of WS/BS2+ for all Terminator variants bar the GK troops.

Not just plasma. At least plasma has to get within 12" to really devastate. Dissy cannons and autocannons park at long range and just murder primaris. There's no point in using them. EVer.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

w1zard wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

w1zard wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Local force superiority doesn't mean much if the enemy has dozens of mortars and half a dozen ignore LoS tanks.

I meant local force superiority from a lore standpoint.

I agree with you that all flavors of marine are underpowered this edition. It's because the tac marine statline with 1W and 1A doesn't get you much this edition. Instead of making tac marines 11 points and making marines comparable to sisters, why don't we buff them to primaris levels and make them say... 18 points per? I'm not a marine player so it's kinda hard to gauge.

BTW this would include the bolt rifles and the -1 AP they confer.

It's really hard to price point elite infantry with so many weapons that remove them VERY efficiently. Currently, intercessors are not a terrible approximation of what marines might be, but there are way too many weapons that remove them like grots. Therefore, it's a race to the bottom to reduce the efficacy of these weapons.

Sure, plasma rifles eat even two wound marines like candy, but I also think the entire marine lineup needs to be redone along the same lines. I think terminators need to be 3W or possibly even 4W along with commensurate increases in firepower. All appropriately pointed of course.

This is the most durable Terminators have been in years. They dont need an extra wound and honestly there are very few weapons they're less durable against. What they need is a boost to offense which is why I literally always plug my idea of WS/BS2+ for all Terminator variants bar the GK troops.

Again, the prevalence of 2 damage stuff ruins their resurgence.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

w1zard wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

w1zard wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Local force superiority doesn't mean much if the enemy has dozens of mortars and half a dozen ignore LoS tanks.

I meant local force superiority from a lore standpoint.

I agree with you that all flavors of marine are underpowered this edition. It's because the tac marine statline with 1W and 1A doesn't get you much this edition. Instead of making tac marines 11 points and making marines comparable to sisters, why don't we buff them to primaris levels and make them say... 18 points per? I'm not a marine player so it's kinda hard to gauge.

BTW this would include the bolt rifles and the -1 AP they confer.

It's really hard to price point elite infantry with so many weapons that remove them VERY efficiently. Currently, intercessors are not a terrible approximation of what marines might be, but there are way too many weapons that remove them like grots. Therefore, it's a race to the bottom to reduce the efficacy of these weapons.

Sure, plasma rifles eat even two wound marines like candy, but I also think the entire marine lineup needs to be redone along the same lines. I think terminators need to be 3W or possibly even 4W along with commensurate increases in firepower. All appropriately pointed of course.

This is the most durable Terminators have been in years. They dont need an extra wound and honestly there are very few weapons they're less durable against. What they need is a boost to offense which is why I literally always plug my idea of WS/BS2+ for all Terminator variants bar the GK troops.

Space marines do need damage output increases, but they also need durability increases as well. With how the new AP system works, a +2 save and 2W is only marginally more durable than a tac marine. Plasma rifles still kill them in one shot. Terminators need to be at least 3W.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Edit: Also, there is a lore justification - cutting a Marine in half won’t stop him attacking you. Cut off his arm an he keeps hitting you with the other one without missing a beat. Shoot him in the heart or lungs and his backup ones take over. Give him a wound that would make him bleed out, he clots and forms scar tissue instantly. Of all basic-troop-shaped things in the game, they are kind of the leading contender for having two wounds.

Marines are not still attacking you after being cut in half.

Fallen Angels, p325-326 wrote:
“The Librarian hurled himself to the side just as the creature lunged into the squad’s midst with the force of a runaway train.
With a shout, Zahariel spun to face the beast as the queen gathered herself together like a coiling spring and lashed out again, this time catching Gideon and two of the corpses in its wide mandibles. The curved pincers snapped shut like a giant scissors. The two corpses were bisected at once; Gideon’s armour resisted a half-second longer before giving way as well.

A bolt pistol barked; Gideon, lying in a pool of his own blood, had reloaded his weapon and was snapping careful shots at the worm’s eyes.

*shrug*

 Insectum7 wrote:

w1zard wrote:
I actually think all marines should have the primaris statline. It makes sense from a fluff side where a single marine is easily worth an entire platoon of guardsmen, and is strong enough to rip a turret off a tank with his bare power armored hands, even without a power fist.

That's why I don't read much black library. Pulling a turret off a tank now? Are you sure that's not "pulling a pintle mounted heavy bolter off its mount"?

"Worth an entire platoon of Guardsmen" are we going with a stand up fight in an open field? Or are we going with a marine can kill 30 guardmen if they're only getting to him piecemeal? Or maybe we should go with the fact that they can deploy incredibly fast, making short work of a task that a slower force would have to spend more time and more bodies to do? How do you quantify the "worth"?

And how do marines stack up to Aspect Warriors in the fluff? Is it consistent? Or is it all over the place, especially when taking into the account the stories told ftom an Eldar point of view? How does fluff talk about Chaos Marines, are they treated the same? Or does the fluff tell us that loyalists should have 2 wounds, while Chaos marines should only have 1.

Fluff =/= Crunch

This gets thrown around a lot. So this means basically a commissar gets more than one wound or better yet Calgar can stand beside the second Ultramarines chapter master. But then you have instances of fluff being crunch such as Eldar exarchs. Why do they have 2 wounds? For the most part it improves the game. While the idea that a single marine can take on a single guard unit is amusing, for the health of the GAME, they can't.

Crunch has been provided basically every other day for almost a year that marines can't compete. But here we are doing the same dance over and over and over...

Marines having 2 wounds may be too much, how should I know I never got to play a game with them having 2 wounds, have you?

There's enough Grey area in the fluff for them to have a second wound, or do you need 20+ implants for that extra wound? Must be it, rust stalkers have 2 wounds...

w1zard wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:

Let's give the Tac Marine 50 wounds and BS2+ then to reflect this

That is not what I'm suggesting. All I'm saying is that there is lore justification for giving marines more then 1W and 1A.

EDIT: BTW, if this guy had power armor and a bolter, this is pretty much what I see Space Marines being like on the battlefield. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYGlWjIKoY4

Cool video. It's disappointing not a single comment picked up on the Chrono Trigger joke. But I guess that was the joke.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I literally always plug my idea of WS/BS2+ for all Terminator variants bar the GK troops.

...and I have always disagreed with you whenever you’ve brought it up.

That being said, why not both? A 3W/3A BS/WS2+ Terminator is something I could get behind. Hell, if you did that, you might actually get competitive Terminators. Which might break the internet, or at least the 40k part of it. When was the last time Terminators were competitive? When they had their 3+ on 2D6 save what, a quarter of a century ago?

 Drudge Dreadnought wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Garbage.

Tell us more about your SM list that uses proper tactical squads and wins.

Quantity has a quality all its own, is the basic theory. Lots of power armor, esp in cover, still takes a lot of effort to shift.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

kombatwombat wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Edit: Also, there is a lore justification - cutting a Marine in half won’t stop him attacking you. Cut off his arm an he keeps hitting you with the other one without missing a beat. Shoot him in the heart or lungs and his backup ones take over. Give him a wound that would make him bleed out, he clots and forms scar tissue instantly. Of all basic-troop-shaped things in the game, they are kind of the leading contender for having two wounds.

Marines are not still attacking you after being cut in half.

Fallen Angels, p325-326 wrote:
“The Librarian hurled himself to the side just as the creature lunged into the squad’s midst with the force of a runaway train.
With a shout, Zahariel spun to face the beast as the queen gathered herself together like a coiling spring and lashed out again, this time catching Gideon and two of the corpses in its wide mandibles. The curved pincers snapped shut like a giant scissors. The two corpses were bisected at once; Gideon’s armour resisted a half-second longer before giving way as well.

A bolt pistol barked; Gideon, lying in a pool of his own blood, had reloaded his weapon and was snapping careful shots at the worm’s eyes.

*shrug*

Yeahhh... how common is that? And can an Ork do the same? Because if an ork can do the same rare occurence as a space marine, you're just a heroic T4. (And within range if a banner, so they got you covered from a gameplay perspective).

kombatwombat wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I literally always plug my idea of WS/BS2+ for all Terminator variants bar the GK troops.

...and I have always disagreed with you whenever you’ve brought it up.

That being said, why not both? A 3W/3A BS/WS2+ Terminator is something I could get behind. Hell, if you did that, you might actually get competitive Terminators. Which might break the internet, or at least the 40k part of it. When was the last time Terminators were competitive? When they had their 3+ on 2D6 save what, a quarter of a century ago?

Last time they were not garbage was 4th when you could take 2 Assault Cannons in a 5 man squad. Even that was mediocre.

Also I'm not for over the top escalation like other people are. I prefer being conservative when it comes to making changes. Vanguard get WS2+, Sternguard get BS2+, Terminators get both. Then adjust prices as necessary. Simple and excellent.

w1zard wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
[That's why I don't read much black library. Pulling a turret off a tank now? Are you sure that's not "pulling a pintle mounted heavy bolter off its mount"?

No, as in actually ripping a turret straight off a tank. Space marines can move faster than a human eye can see, their reflexes are about 10x faster than a normal human, and with their power armor on are incredibly strong. If a space marine gets on top of a tank and gets his fingers under the turret and simultaneously uses his legs to push and arms to lift, I can easily see him ripping open a light tank like a tin can.

 Insectum7 wrote:
"Worth an entire platoon of Guardsmen" are we going with a stand up fight in an open field? Or are we going with a marine can kill 30 guardmen if they're only getting to him piecemeal? Or maybe we should go with the fact that they can deploy incredibly fast, making short work of a task that a slower force would have to spend more time and more bodies to do? How do you quantify the "worth"?

In a straight up open field fight. 30-50 guardsmen firing lasguns at 100m with no cover on either side vs a single marine with a bolter. The marine will take a lot of hits and possibly be wounded but all of the guardsmen will be dead by the end of it. Space marines are like aimbots with how accurate and how quickly they shoot.

 Insectum7 wrote:
And how do marines stack up to Aspect Warriors in the fluff? Is it consistent? Or is it all over the place, especially when taking into the account the stories told ftom an Eldar point of view? How does fluff talk about Chaos Marines, are they treated the same? Or does the fluff tell us that loyalists should have 2 wounds, while Chaos marines should only have 1.

A space marine should be roughly equivalent to an aspect warrior. An average chaos marine should actually be even tougher then an average space marine considering they are veterans of the long war and have a TON of combat experience due to a life of constant fighting.

I think CSM should have two wounds and two attacks as well for what it is worth, and be costed appropriately.

What's funny is that I'm actually an Imperial Guard fanboy and think space marines are overrated. But one thing space marines do well is local force superiority.

Okay, so from what I'm reading then, we have a basic Space marine has a strength of 8 doing 2D6 damage. I mean they're ripping turrets off tanks, right?

And T6 5 wounds. With a bolter thats rapid fire 12. Because he's killing 30 guardsmen and only slightly wounded, just standing there in the open.

And at the same time, an Aspect Warrior is roughly equivalent. So let's just jack their stats way up, too. Am I reading this logic right?

 Insectum7 wrote:

w1zard wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
[That's why I don't read much black library. Pulling a turret off a tank now? Are you sure that's not "pulling a pintle mounted heavy bolter off its mount"?

No, as in actually ripping a turret straight off a tank. Space marines can move faster than a human eye can see, their reflexes are about 10x faster than a normal human, and with their power armor on are incredibly strong. If a space marine gets on top of a tank and gets his fingers under the turret and simultaneously uses his legs to push and arms to lift, I can easily see him ripping open a light tank like a tin can.

 Insectum7 wrote:
"Worth an entire platoon of Guardsmen" are we going with a stand up fight in an open field? Or are we going with a marine can kill 30 guardmen if they're only getting to him piecemeal? Or maybe we should go with the fact that they can deploy incredibly fast, making short work of a task that a slower force would have to spend more time and more bodies to do? How do you quantify the "worth"?

In a straight up open field fight. 30-50 guardsmen firing lasguns at 100m with no cover on either side vs a single marine with a bolter. The marine will take a lot of hits and possibly be wounded but all of the guardsmen will be dead by the end of it. Space marines are like aimbots with how accurate and how quickly they shoot.

 Insectum7 wrote:
And how do marines stack up to Aspect Warriors in the fluff? Is it consistent? Or is it all over the place, especially when taking into the account the stories told ftom an Eldar point of view? How does fluff talk about Chaos Marines, are they treated the same? Or does the fluff tell us that loyalists should have 2 wounds, while Chaos marines should only have 1.

A space marine should be roughly equivalent to an aspect warrior. An average chaos marine should actually be even tougher then an average space marine considering they are veterans of the long war and have a TON of combat experience due to a life of constant fighting.

I think CSM should have two wounds and two attacks as well for what it is worth, and be costed appropriately.

What's funny is that I'm actually an Imperial Guard fanboy and think space marines are overrated. But one thing space marines do well is local force superiority.

Okay, so from what I'm reading then, we have a basic Space marine has a strength of 8 doing 2D6 damage. I mean they're ripping turrets off tanks, right?

And T6 5 wounds. With a bolter thats rapid fire 12. Because he's killing 30 guardsmen and only slightly wounded, just standing there in the open.

And at the same time, an Aspect Warrior is roughly equivalent. So let's just jack their stats way up, too. Am I reading this logic right?

Yeah let's stop talking about it and just do it already!

Haha


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Yeah, I like Chosen. I'm glad they got their bonus chainsword option back, too. I'm not sure every model is supposed to be a vet. But maybe because of the tyrannical nature of the chaos legions, or just lack of discipline, many marines don't progress as far/fast.

Or if every model had access to the bonus chainsword like they used to.

The lack of discipline is the higher LD but not being totally indoctrinated (ATSKNF)

Oh I meant lack of discipline as in they're not training as often, doing instead. . . Whatever chaos does. Drinking, playing videogames, swimming lessons, I dunno.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Haha


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Yeah, I like Chosen. I'm glad they got their bonus chainsword option back, too. I'm not sure every model is supposed to be a vet. But maybe because of the tyrannical nature of the chaos legions, or just lack of discipline, many marines don't progress as far/fast.

Or if every model had access to the bonus chainsword like they used to.

The lack of discipline is the higher LD but not being totally indoctrinated (ATSKNF)

Oh I meant lack of discipline as in they're not training as often, doing instead. . . Whatever chaos does. Drinking, playing videogames, swimming lessons, I dunno.

So, let's look at this from the view of other codexii.

Eldar. A howling banshee can run so fast, her footsteps sound like rain. She can kill a full tactical squad of marines between heartbeats. Wraithlords can throw chimeras hard enough to cave in the hulls of land raiders. Not wraith knights, wraith lords. A striking scorpion can step out of the back of a speeding wave serpent, decapitate two marines with a chainsword, and step back in before it move away. Keep in mind the WS didn't slow down, or stop. So, if we're going to go off of fluff for eldar, that means if I take a *squad* of banshees, you should just auto-lose.

Tau. Fire warriors get headshots for days. Dead marines everywhere, Tau reload. Kroot are just as strong, and even more agile. Battlesuits can over power marines in HtH combat, on sheer strength.

Necrons are just functionally immune to weapons. If you do manage to hit something that would be a wound, well, it just self repairs and stands up again. So, no shooting Necrons with your marines.

So, three examples of how xenos kick the feces out of marines like playing kickball on the playground.
Marines have never equaled their fluff on the table top.

So, let's get back to talking about balanced rules, not a fetish.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

I'm not really sure what you think CSM's are doing all day. If they're not fighting the enemy they're fighting each other basically.

They're not some traveling mosh pit. Feth, the Orks aren't even that, despite what some unkulture'd gits'll tell you.

 Larks wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

I'm not really sure what you think CSM's are doing all day. If they're not fighting the enemy they're fighting each other basically.

They're not some traveling mosh pit. Feth, the Orks aren't even that, despite what some unkulture'd gits'll tell you.

Well that's because Orks are actually civilized.

Interestingly enough, in the latest battle report by tabletop tactics- Lawrence basically repeats my opening post, which considering he's a pretty well respected tournament player, with his fingers in just about every codex is a pretty good indication of the state of things.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Larks wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

I'm not really sure what you think CSM's are doing all day. If they're not fighting the enemy they're fighting each other basically.

They're not some traveling mosh pit. Feth, the Orks aren't even that, despite what some unkulture'd gits'll tell you.

Well that's because Orks are actually civilized.

No argument there.

My personal expiriance with the game is rather limited, but I would like to drop in my 2 euros. First of all I think people over focus on singular units. If just one unit or even two get buffed, and the rest stays bad, then the army at best will spam 3 of the good options and pray it is close enough to 2000pts to have a working army.

Second thing people want more damge from marines. Now I do not know how good or bad marines are, as dpt goes, but dpt is the most important factor in two situations.

A when the army has the ability to cripple the opposing army in 1-2 turns. The resilience matters litle as the main goal is to get turn one drop as many of opponents army as possible, and the game is mock up session and going for secondaries after that.

B when the game is based around the destruction of a specific targets like an HQ or a bunker etc. Then it doesn't matter what happens to the list, as long as turn 1-2 it gets the win, but probably loses on secondary objectives.

SM, although I could be wrong here, do not seem to be an army that focuses or can focus on fast destruction of enemy. It is a classic survival army, it is just that the stats are too low to actually survive stuff in 8th ed. So either GW nerfs armies that are build around killing, and imo that would be stupid as it is those armies theme, or GW should buff the resiliance of marines. Now I am not saying that a marine army should be unable to do any damage to the opposing army or have a few specilist units that can be very deadly vs specific targets, but I don't think that giving something like rapid fire 2 str5 ap-1 bolters to all marines and 3 plasma per squad would be good for the game.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Drudge Dreadnought wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Garbage.

Tell us more about your SM list that uses proper tactical squads and wins.

Quantity has a quality all its own, is the basic theory. Lots of power armor, esp in cover, still takes a lot of effort to shift.

That's a cool theory. I'd love to run a marine heavy list that's tough to move (like I used to in previous editions.) But the theory doesn't hold up in practice. Because they still aren't THAT hard to shift. And they don't have enough firepower for it to matter either. And you won't always have the right amount or placement of cover to make this work. At the end of the day, marines in cover are still point for point less durable than lighter, cheaper infantry. And have WAY less firepower. And your opponent can use cover too.

For this to work, marines would have to have more firepower and durability. Which is why I'm advocating for them to have that.