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.

I think that you give marines the ability to shrug off small arms fire better similar to 'all is dust' for 1k sons, and make basic marines, with basic bolters able to proc AP bonuses on 6s.

Keep them at the same price point, i'd rather have buffs than cheaper marines. They need it.

 iGuy91 wrote:
I think that you give marines the ability to shrug off small arms fire better similar to 'all is dust' for 1k sons, and make basic marines, with basic bolters able to proc AP bonuses on 6s.

Keep them at the same price point, i'd rather have buffs than cheaper marines. They need it.

Okay...so why not +1 wound like most people are saying? A conditional rule compared to one that always works is preferable why?

 Xenomancers wrote:

 iGuy91 wrote:
I think that you give marines the ability to shrug off small arms fire better similar to 'all is dust' for 1k sons, and make basic marines, with basic bolters able to proc AP bonuses on 6s.

Keep them at the same price point, i'd rather have buffs than cheaper marines. They need it.

Okay...so why not +1 wound like most people are saying? A conditional rule compared to one that always works is preferable why?

That actually makes more sense if we wanted to go the durability route.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 iGuy91 wrote:
I think that you give marines the ability to shrug off small arms fire better similar to 'all is dust' for 1k sons, and make basic marines, with basic bolters able to proc AP bonuses on 6s.

Keep them at the same price point, i'd rather have buffs than cheaper marines. They need it.

Okay...so why not +1 wound like most people are saying? A conditional rule compared to one that always works is preferable why?

Is the wound worth it?
I question that since d3 dmg weaponry and plasma, autocannons and everything along that line still ruin your day and are still cheaper then the marine they just shot. (except plasma in many cases.)
On the plus side, Lasguns, autoguns, Bolters, etc would now require double the ammount of bullets to wipe out a squad.

It's really a tossup, and durability is only half their problem, since they still are just bolter carriers paying for melee stats they can't use since they have no proper equipment for melee.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
I also have a thought experiment for you, mainly for csm players but also applicable for sm players:
Would you consider tac marines or csm in the following scenario?
-12ppm
- Min squad size 3
- At size 3 they gain the same options as csm/ tac marines have now at 5 models per squad.

I personally could see them then beeing used over cultists for troop min tax. But that is my Personal opinion.

I'd like to see bolters get AP -1 on a 5+ to wound (HBs and Bolter Rifles therefore being AP -2 on a 5+ to wound)
It would vastly improve Marines damage output without being too much of a copy-cat of Eldar Shuriken weapons and Necron Guass.
It's be more of an in-between. Not as good as a flat additional AP like Guass, not as good of AP as Shuriken 6s, but gaining an AP bonus on 5s.

That single change might put Marines at being worth their ppm cost and improves literally any unit with bolt weapons

-

Marines both lack offense and defense. That's why the simplest fix is to make them cheaper, as it fixes both at the same time.

 Galef wrote:
I'd like to see bolters get AP -1 on a 5+ to wound (HBs and Bolter Rifles therefore being AP -2 on a 5+ to wound)
It would vastly improve Marines damage output without being too much of a copy-cat of Eldar Shuriken weapons and Necron Guass.
It's be more of an in-between. Not as good as a flat additional AP like Guass, not as good of AP as Shuriken 6s, but gaining an AP bonus on 5s.

That single change might put Marines at being worth their ppm cost and improves literally any unit with bolt weapons

-

I've before suggested to give Bolt weapons a unique mechanic where a 6+ to wound forces rerolls of successful saves. It's less samey which is why I suggest it all the time.

I feel that that would do jack gak vs Drukhari or IG.

Martel732 wrote:
Marines both lack offense and defense. That's why the simplest fix is to make them cheaper, as it fixes both at the same time.

No doubt the simplest fix is a points drop. It's also the most likely with Chapter Approved
I just think it is the most boring fix.
Marines should feel heroic, not expendable. +1W and decent Bolt weapons would do this.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Galef wrote:
I'd like to see bolters get AP -1 on a 5+ to wound (HBs and Bolter Rifles therefore being AP -2 on a 5+ to wound)
It would vastly improve Marines damage output without being too much of a copy-cat of Eldar Shuriken weapons and Necron Guass.
It's be more of an in-between. Not as good as a flat additional AP like Guass, not as good of AP as Shuriken 6s, but gaining an AP bonus on 5s.

That single change might put Marines at being worth their ppm cost and improves literally any unit with bolt weapons

-

I've before suggested to give Bolt weapons a unique mechanic where a 6+ to wound forces rerolls of successful saves. It's less samey which is why I suggest it all the time.

What would give them a very unique mechanic would be each failed save generates an additional hit, as it's very fluffy a bolt round turning a poorly armoured opponent into additional shrapnel when it detonates.
The issue is it slows the game down a lot.

Also the other thing to consider is an changes made to the bolter will carry across to Sisiters of battle, one of if not the best index power armour faction.
Power armour appears to work at that points cost just not at marine points.

Maybe they could give boltguns the rule for every point of strength above the enemy models toughness increase the ap of the gun by 1, so against t3 you would have an ap of -1, and intercessors would have -2

masterhobo wrote:
Maybe they could give boltguns the rule for every point of strength above the enemy models toughness increase the ap of the gun by 1, so against t3 you would have an ap of -1, and intercessors would have -2

I like the idea but it seems slow and makes bookkeeping for Deathwatch more painful.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ice_can wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Galef wrote:
I'd like to see bolters get AP -1 on a 5+ to wound (HBs and Bolter Rifles therefore being AP -2 on a 5+ to wound)
It would vastly improve Marines damage output without being too much of a copy-cat of Eldar Shuriken weapons and Necron Guass.
It's be more of an in-between. Not as good as a flat additional AP like Guass, not as good of AP as Shuriken 6s, but gaining an AP bonus on 5s.

That single change might put Marines at being worth their ppm cost and improves literally any unit with bolt weapons

-

I've before suggested to give Bolt weapons a unique mechanic where a 6+ to wound forces rerolls of successful saves. It's less samey which is why I suggest it all the time.

What would give them a very unique mechanic would be each failed save generates an additional hit, as it's very fluffy a bolt round turning a poorly armoured opponent into additional shrapnel when it detonates.
The issue is it slows the game down a lot.

Also the other thing to consider is an changes made to the bolter will carry across to Sisiters of battle, one of if not the best index power armour faction.
Power armour appears to work at that points cost just not at marine points.

So either only Astartes Bolters get the bonus rule, or it's decidedly not broken so who cares if Sisters get it. I'm fine with either.

I was thinking on this the other day.

The only way to *not* coincidentally buff the better marine like factions into omnipotence while also fixing marine issues it to just improve the chapter tactics for vanilla marines massively.

And I think this is the pathway Games Workshop has taken. The SW trait ability is that much better than everything else (Other than the -1 to hit).

Some examples:
Imperial Fists
Siege Masters - May also activate Bolter Drill for no cost if shooting at a unit in cover.
Bolster Fortifications - All units have a 4++ save while in cover

Iron Hands
Flesh is Weak - Gives a 6+ FNP to all < Infantry >. If a unit already benefits from a similar rule it instead reduces all damage taken by 1 (to a minimum of 1).
Digital Mnemonics - If an attack would miss because of a 'to hit modifier', you may instead re-roll that attack.

Nah I don't really agree with those two. Imperial Fists should really be gaining +2 to cover saves instead of +1, and then you add their Ignore Cover mechanic for a pretty good camping army.

Iron Hands getting 6+++ (and allowing stacking) on everything is expected, but I think they should get a Relentless of sorts. They ignore the penalty for moving and firing with Heavy Weapons. This makes their infantry AND vehicles better on the move.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Nah I don't really agree with those two. Imperial Fists should really be gaining +2 to cover saves instead of +1, and then you add their Ignore Cover mechanic for a pretty good camping army.

Iron Hands getting 6+++ (and allowing stacking) on everything is expected, but I think they should get a Relentless of sorts. They ignore the penalty for moving and firing with Heavy Weapons. This makes their infantry AND vehicles better on the move.

I see what you're going for, but that would see Scouts with a 2+ save. Perhaps something like 'Ignore the first point of AP while in cover'. The Iron hands one looks good.

 Eonfuzz wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Nah I don't really agree with those two. Imperial Fists should really be gaining +2 to cover saves instead of +1, and then you add their Ignore Cover mechanic for a pretty good camping army.

Iron Hands getting 6+++ (and allowing stacking) on everything is expected, but I think they should get a Relentless of sorts. They ignore the penalty for moving and firing with Heavy Weapons. This makes their infantry AND vehicles better on the move.

I see what you're going for, but that would see Scouts with a 2+ save. Perhaps something like 'Ignore the first point of AP while in cover'. The Iron hands one looks good.

What's the issue with Scouts with a 2+ in cover?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Eonfuzz wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Nah I don't really agree with those two. Imperial Fists should really be gaining +2 to cover saves instead of +1, and then you add their Ignore Cover mechanic for a pretty good camping army.

Iron Hands getting 6+++ (and allowing stacking) on everything is expected, but I think they should get a Relentless of sorts. They ignore the penalty for moving and firing with Heavy Weapons. This makes their infantry AND vehicles better on the move.

I see what you're going for, but that would see Scouts with a 2+ save. Perhaps something like 'Ignore the first point of AP while in cover'. The Iron hands one looks good.

What's the issue with Scouts with a 2+ in cover?

It'd basically mean no Imperial Fist player would ever run Tactical Marines, which iirc was the point of this thread

 Eonfuzz wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Eonfuzz wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Nah I don't really agree with those two. Imperial Fists should really be gaining +2 to cover saves instead of +1, and then you add their Ignore Cover mechanic for a pretty good camping army.

Iron Hands getting 6+++ (and allowing stacking) on everything is expected, but I think they should get a Relentless of sorts. They ignore the penalty for moving and firing with Heavy Weapons. This makes their infantry AND vehicles better on the move.

I see what you're going for, but that would see Scouts with a 2+ save. Perhaps something like 'Ignore the first point of AP while in cover'. The Iron hands one looks good.

What's the issue with Scouts with a 2+ in cover?

It'd basically mean no Imperial Fist player would ever run Tactical Marines, which iirc was the point of this thread

I have 10 tactical squads.... I use two of them and split them into combat squads for cheap CP generation (but scouts are better at doing this)

So, if there were to be changes made to either SM/CSM to boost their durability, how should it be worded, to avoid making already troublesome units even more so?
Personally, I'd write it as such,

Black Carapace
INFANTRY, BIKER, DREADNOUGHT, CAVALRY and HELLBRUTE units (other than than SCOUT, SERVITOR, CHAOS CULTISTS and DAEMON PRINCE units) in ADEPTUS ASTARTES or HERETIC ASTARTES Detachments may add 1 to Save (Sv) rolls for models in that unit.

 Eonfuzz wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Eonfuzz wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Nah I don't really agree with those two. Imperial Fists should really be gaining +2 to cover saves instead of +1, and then you add their Ignore Cover mechanic for a pretty good camping army.

Iron Hands getting 6+++ (and allowing stacking) on everything is expected, but I think they should get a Relentless of sorts. They ignore the penalty for moving and firing with Heavy Weapons. This makes their infantry AND vehicles better on the move.

I see what you're going for, but that would see Scouts with a 2+ save. Perhaps something like 'Ignore the first point of AP while in cover'. The Iron hands one looks good.

What's the issue with Scouts with a 2+ in cover?

It'd basically mean no Imperial Fist player would ever run Tactical Marines, which iirc was the point of this thread

The problem with the Tactical Marine stems from the Bolter and the severely outdated 1 Special 1 Heavy at 10 man setup. I proposed fixes to those issues earlier in the thread, but if you don't want to dig to find them I'll gladly just say it again.

Ice_can wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Galef wrote:
I'd like to see bolters get AP -1 on a 5+ to wound (HBs and Bolter Rifles therefore being AP -2 on a 5+ to wound)
It would vastly improve Marines damage output without being too much of a copy-cat of Eldar Shuriken weapons and Necron Guass.
It's be more of an in-between. Not as good as a flat additional AP like Guass, not as good of AP as Shuriken 6s, but gaining an AP bonus on 5s.

That single change might put Marines at being worth their ppm cost and improves literally any unit with bolt weapons

-

I've before suggested to give Bolt weapons a unique mechanic where a 6+ to wound forces rerolls of successful saves. It's less samey which is why I suggest it all the time.

What would give them a very unique mechanic would be each failed save generates an additional hit, as it's very fluffy a bolt round turning a poorly armoured opponent into additional shrapnel when it detonates.
The issue is it slows the game down a lot.

Also the other thing to consider is an changes made to the bolter will carry across to Sisiters of battle, one of if not the best index power armour faction.
Power armour appears to work at that points cost just not at marine points.

That is a very interesting mechanic! I don't think it'd work for bolters, but I can totally see it being a heavy weapon of sorts.
Your second point is why I think the power needs to be baked into the vanilla Chapter Tactics, so as to not upset the plethora of snowflake chapters.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

The problem with the Tactical Marine stems from the Bolter and the severely outdated 1 Special 1 Heavy at 10 man setup. I proposed fixes to those issues earlier in the thread, but if you don't want to dig to find them I'll gladly just say it again.

Sorry, I've gone back 10 pages of your history Ctrl+f'ing 'Special' and haven't found it.

That's fair. My proposed fixes would basically be around the following:
1. Marines revolve around the Bolter, but the Bolter sucks and Tactical Marines are expensive per model no matter how much better the Bolter becomes
2. Their weapon saturation is pretty garbage. Oh who am I kidding: it's super garbage.
3. Then with everyone being based around the basic Marine and not getting special rules, they end up suffering.

So while I already made mention of how to fix other units, my Tactical Marine fixes are as such, and bear in mind consider that weapon prices would obviously change:
1. Tactical Marines go down a point. This in turn means other units are deserving to go down a point as well, and doesn't lead into Marines being a horde army like some want.
2. Bolt weapons then gain their special rule. What that special rule is, of course, is up for debate. We can just assume my fix of Bolt Weapons forcing successful saves on a wound roll of 6+ is implemented.
3. Tactical Marines gain a point of LD. Tactical Marines are supposed to have a slight amount more grit as they're more experienced than Scouts, Assault and Biker Marines, and Devastator Marines. This then helps with wanting to max squads, which then leads to the following:
4. The squad does the usual either Special or Heavy at 5 man, but then becomes where you buy the opposite at 7 man and then you gain the choice of either one at the 10 man point. This enables the squad to actually specialize, rather than failing at each task you originally built them for in their current incarnation.

My other fixes are in another post in this thread of course.

I always enjoy these threads but feel a lot of suggestions would require pretty much an entire rewrite of the core rules and codices.

my suggestion would be the following- A simple set of rules that could be applied cumulatively depending on keyword, neither of which requires a change to the marine statline;

Astartes- "-1 to all wound roles" - this doesn't break the game, but gives all marines a survivability buff that fits with the fluff.

Terminator- "all AP is reduced by 1" - pair this with the above and terminators survive like terminators- lascannons are no longer wounding on 2's and you still have a 4+ save against it.

If you apply these rules to every model with astartes keyword you suddenly have models worth taking that arent custodes level cheese. I dont think these require points changes.

The other suggestion may need refinement-

All standard bolt weapons get -1 ap with -4 on a 6 to wound (360 no scope headshot rule). Primaris Bolt rifle variants turn to strength 5 remain the same AP as stated but gain the exploding AP rule.

This one MIGHT need a points adjustment, especially for storm/hurricane bolters- but as with above- marines are currently over pointed and pretty much unusable competitively, this brings them to a pretty good level, but not OP.

Ice_can wrote:
Adding Ap won't help marines the only way to make them semi competative is I hate to say it points cost drops.

Well it would up their kills by 25% verses guard. E.g. 6 wounding hits would kill 5 not 4 guardsmen and it makes it more or an AP weapon it is in the fluff.

 Galef wrote:
I'd like to see bolters get AP -1 on a 5+ to wound (HBs and Bolter Rifles therefore being AP -2 on a 5+ to wound)

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I've before suggested to give Bolt weapons a unique mechanic where a 6+ to wound forces rerolls of successful saves. It's less samey which is why I suggest it all the time.

Honestly just keep it simple - if it is needed make it all the time...

Ice_can wrote:
]What would give them a very unique mechanic would be each failed save generates an additional hit, as it's very fluffy a bolt round turning a poorly armoured opponent into additional shrapnel when it detonates.
The issue is it slows the game down a lot.

Is this not just making it a 2 wound weapon? Or you mean roll for wound and armour again? I suppose another hit ont he unit would be interesting as the shrapnel travels. Still a bit of a dice fest.

Also the other thing to consider is an changes made to the bolter will carry across to Sisiters of battle, one of if not the best index power armour faction.
Power armour appears to work at that points cost just not at marine points.

Change should be the larger astartes bolters only.

Process wrote:
Astartes- "-1 to all wound roles" - this doesn't break the game, but gives all marines a survivability buff that fits with the fluff.

It is quite a big jump. Strength 1 and 2 weapons can no longer wound you, str 3 is on a 6, str 4 on a 5+, str 7 on a 4+ and above that always 3+. Why would they be tough verses hell-hammer or volcano cannons?

Terminator- "all AP is reduced by 1" - pair this with the above and terminators survive like terminators- lascannons are no longer wounding on 2's and you still have a 4+ save against it.

Just make the armour save 1+? I still prefer the -1 damage to a minimum of 1 though as their bane is 2 wound weapons.

The_Real_Chris wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
Adding Ap won't help marines the only way to make them semi competative is I hate to say it points cost drops.

Well it would up their kills by 25% verses guard. E.g. 6 wounding hits would kill 5 not 4 guardsmen and it makes it more or an AP weapon it is in the fluff.

 Galef wrote:
I'd like to see bolters get AP -1 on a 5+ to wound (HBs and Bolter Rifles therefore being AP -2 on a 5+ to wound)

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I've before suggested to give Bolt weapons a unique mechanic where a 6+ to wound forces rerolls of successful saves. It's less samey which is why I suggest it all the time.

Honestly just keep it simple - if it is needed make it all the time...

Ice_can wrote:
]What would give them a very unique mechanic would be each failed save generates an additional hit, as it's very fluffy a bolt round turning a poorly armoured opponent into additional shrapnel when it detonates.
The issue is it slows the game down a lot.

Is this not just making it a 2 wound weapon? Or you mean roll for wound and armour again? I suppose another hit ont he unit would be interesting as the shrapnel travels. Still a bit of a dice fest.

Also the other thing to consider is an changes made to the bolter will carry across to Sisiters of battle, one of if not the best index power armour faction.
Power armour appears to work at that points cost just not at marine points.

Change should be the larger astartes bolters only.

Process wrote:
Astartes- "-1 to all wound roles" - this doesn't break the game, but gives all marines a survivability buff that fits with the fluff.

It is quite a big jump. Strength 1 and 2 weapons can no longer wound you, str 3 is on a 6, str 4 on a 5+, str 7 on a 4+ and above that always 3+. Why would they be tough verses hell-hammer or volcano cannons?

Terminator- "all AP is reduced by 1" - pair this with the above and terminators survive like terminators- lascannons are no longer wounding on 2's and you still have a 4+ save against it.

Just make the armour save 1+? I still prefer the -1 damage to a minimum of 1 though as their bane is 2 wound weapons.

A 6 is always a hit, a 1 is always a fail, that has literally always been the case, i dont know why people struggle to grasp that one.

And how is a hellhammer wounding a marine on a 3 any more of a jump than a las pistol being able to wound a hellhammer AT ALL?

The thing is, the -1 to ap value works against a whole host of other weaponry, whereas tailoring a rule to save against 2 damage weapons only works against 2 damage weapons

Reposting from a less-relevant thread to here:

As for what I'm currently thinking for balancing Marines:
-Battle Brothers get +1A base
-Battle Brothers go down to 10ppm, but the Boltgun now costs 1ppm (note - this actually makes specials/heavies 1ppm cheaper, and also makes Chainsword/pistol 1ppm cheaper as well).
-General durability changes I suggested here:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/761963.page#10118792
(cliffnotes - nerf most AP in the game, and nerf Plas back to 7th ed stats, basically)
-CTs affect Vehicles (note - I'd rather rework the CTs, but this is more in line with lightest-touch).

Avoiding giving more AP to Marines, because the super prevelance of AP is part of what's killing them.

Process wrote:
The thing is, the -1 to ap value works against a whole host of other weaponry, whereas tailoring a rule to save against 2 damage weapons only works against 2 damage weapons

Which unless I have missed something are the biggest problem? As instead of needing two shots to kill plasma knocks them down in 1? It is aimed at 2 damage weapons (I would still just change the save to 1+ - it is the same as reducing the ap by one but is written a lot neater and as 1's always fail doesn't change their save vs bolters and co.) and to a lesser extent D3 damage, but honestly against lascannons and the like they should just be relying on the invulnerable save.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
Avoiding giving more AP to Marines, because the super prevelance of AP is part of what's killing them.

Unless you are playing a heresy lite game of marines vs marines in which case bolters aren't doing much..

Unless you are playing a heresy lite game of marines vs marines in which case bolters aren't doing much..

Shouldnt that be the case?

Are we talking only Marine Power Armour getting all the bonuses?

Most marine equipment is also overcosted. Giving tac marines more stuff just makes them give up points faster.

A marine with a plasma gun is 26 pts. What's a dark reaper go for these days? Yeah...

Bharring wrote:
Reposting from a less-relevant thread to here:

As for what I'm currently thinking for balancing Marines:
-Battle Brothers get +1A base
-Battle Brothers go down to 10ppm, but the Boltgun now costs 1ppm (note - this actually makes specials/heavies 1ppm cheaper, and also makes Chainsword/pistol 1ppm cheaper as well).
-General durability changes I suggested here:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/761963.page#10118792
(cliffnotes - nerf most AP in the game, and nerf Plas back to 7th ed stats, basically)
-CTs affect Vehicles (note - I'd rather rework the CTs, but this is more in line with lightest-touch).

Avoiding giving more AP to Marines, because the super prevelance of AP is part of what's killing them.

Nerfing weapons doesn't work. You would have to nerf every weapon in the game. Plus it goes against the concept of the eddition. Faster games is what they are going for. Problem is marines are dying too fast - it really is a unique problem with power armor.