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.

 NurglesR0T wrote:

RogueApiary wrote:


Looks like you're right. The BFS site must have cut the last detachment but since the first two detachments are identical he has to be there. Bummer. Still a competitive marine soup list making it into top 4 at a major.

Fixed that for you.

So, adding even 255 points of not Marines makes it Soup?

Got it.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 NurglesR0T wrote:

RogueApiary wrote:


Looks like you're right. The BFS site must have cut the last detachment but since the first two detachments are identical he has to be there. Bummer. Still a competitive marine soup list making it into top 4 at a major.

Fixed that for you.

So, adding even 255 points of not Marines makes it Soup?

Got it.

A list that contains 4 codexes, with all the cross Stratagems and powers it entails, damn straight it's soup

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I honestly can't see it doing well. It ain't going to get first turn and you can easily take out a lot in that list.

Also no clue how it kills even a single Knight.

Guess you missed the part where it apparently took 4th at a GT. Does that count as doing well in your book? Reece also hit top 16 at Nova with a very similar list.

It's still using Guilliman as a crutch, and like all previous viable marine lists, it is entirely dependent on spamming the most effective units.

 NurglesR0T wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 NurglesR0T wrote:

RogueApiary wrote:


Looks like you're right. The BFS site must have cut the last detachment but since the first two detachments are identical he has to be there. Bummer. Still a competitive marine soup list making it into top 4 at a major.

Fixed that for you.

So, adding even 255 points of not Marines makes it Soup?

Got it.

A list that contains 4 codexes, with all the cross Stratagems and powers it entails, damn straight it's soup

You're bloody hopeless. If that's soup, then long live soup. I hope it never disappears.

 NurglesR0T wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 NurglesR0T wrote:

RogueApiary wrote:


Looks like you're right. The BFS site must have cut the last detachment but since the first two detachments are identical he has to be there. Bummer. Still a competitive marine soup list making it into top 4 at a major.

Fixed that for you.

So, adding even 255 points of not Marines makes it Soup?

Got it.

A list that contains 4 codexes, with all the cross Stratagems and powers it entails, damn straight it's soup

I mean, realistically the list has the power of one codex. Literally the only thing he's taking from the snowflake marine books is 2 psychic powers each.

 Arachnofiend wrote:

Ultrmarine Battalion
Librarian- force sword 98
Telion 75
5 Scouts- snipers 75
5 Scouts- snipers 75
5 Scouts 55
Primaris Ancient 69
5 Vets- 5 storm bolters, 4 storm shields, 1 chain sword 110
5 Vets- 4 storm bolters, 4 storm shields, 1 chain sword, 1 bolter 108
3 Scout Bikes- Storm Bolter on serg 77
3 Scout Bikes- Storm Bolter on serg 77
3 Scout Bikes- Storm Bolter on serg 77
5 Devestaters- 2 heavy bolters, 1 missile, cherub 115

Assassin Vanguard
Cullexus 85
Cullexus 85
Cullexus 85

Supreme Command
Gulliman 400
Captain- Jump Pack, Thunder Hammer, Storm Shield (UM) 129
Primaris Rune Priest- runic sword 103
Dark Angel Primaris Libby- Force Sword 101

Obviously he could have changed the list. Assuming this is the list he ended up taking what's interesting to me is how many psykers he has - three Librarians from three different disciplines. It's almost like a Chaos list.

This is a soup list that uses Guilliman and Telion as crutches. That is not a good example of a "competitive vanilla marine list", especially when I have already talked about the "gimmicky special character" marine lists that do end up doing somewhat well in tournaments.

Really, trying to argue that vanilla marines are even remotely competitive at this point is just pathetic and delusional. I still don't think that guard needs to be nerfed down to vanilla marine level to be "fair".

 Vaktathi wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Notice he didn't say a typical army, he said a horde skew list.

You can field around 400 bodies, easy, in a skew list, if you have the models.

We're not really seeing armies like that though. Even the hordiest Guard or Ork lists will generally run under 200 models, and those already have major trouble fitting in deployment zones and generally aren't winning tournaments. To fit 400 bodies in an IG list, at bare minimum, you'd need to be playing a game larger than 2K (because even the cheapest HQ choices are 7.5x what a 4pt Guardsmen runs).

WTF? Under 200 models for orks? That's 3 turns and you are wiped out in these days. And less than 1500 pts...And no trouble fitting. I have deployed over 320 models and that's with movement trays that eat space.

Sub-200 ork army is super soft army for casual games among casual games. Any decent gunline in tournament will easily kill 50-60 models a turn so unless you deliberately slowplay like hell(320 models, 3h games, quite doable so sub-200 3h games you need to slowplay like hell to not get to the end) to ensure game continues max 2 turns.

tneva82 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Notice he didn't say a typical army, he said a horde skew list.

You can field around 400 bodies, easy, in a skew list, if you have the models.

We're not really seeing armies like that though. Even the hordiest Guard or Ork lists will generally run under 200 models, and those already have major trouble fitting in deployment zones and generally aren't winning tournaments. To fit 400 bodies in an IG list, at bare minimum, you'd need to be playing a game larger than 2K (because even the cheapest HQ choices are 7.5x what a 4pt Guardsmen runs).

WTF? Under 200 models for orks? That's 3 turns and you are wiped out in these days. And less than 1500 pts...And no trouble fitting. I have deployed over 320 models and that's with movement trays that eat space.

Sub-200 ork army is super soft army for casual games among casual games. Any decent gunline in tournament will easily kill 50-60 models a turn so unless you deliberately slowplay like hell(320 models, 3h games, quite doable so sub-200 3h games you need to slowplay like hell to not get to the end) to ensure game continues max 2 turns.

I gotta love the strange world we live in where 60 odd guardsmen can't be killed fast enough, yet 200 Orks is wiped out in 3 turns.

Lemondish wrote:
It's still using Guilliman as a crutch, and like all previous viable marine lists, it is entirely dependent on spamming the most effective units.

What kind of lame complaint is that? Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't all successful tournament lists, whatever the faction, use nothing but the most effective units?

Newsflash: Competitive list spams most cost effective units. More at 11

RogueApiary wrote:

Tyel wrote:
I don't know what people mean by viable.

Obviously a Castellan which can be 3++ and reroll all 1s for 3 turns is better than one which can do it for one turn. It isn't however immediately obvious that its awful without these abilities. If we go "a Castellan is always going to have an IG brigade to feed it CP" then it should probably be 750~ points. at the same time however this is going to make it even worse in a mono knight build.

Right now its hard to talk about mono armies because the meta is dominated by soup. If they would eliminate soup from space (i.e. rules such that make it obviously sub-optimal in competitive play) then we could look at the meta then. We could then have a serious discussion about what is viable and what is not.

It might still be "mono space marines (any flavour) are still not great" - but they would be bumped up, because the gap between them and the top wouldn't be so extreme.

I've said it once, and I'll say it again. Mono Knights players can go pound sand, nobody likes playing against that gak and I struggle to believe anyone enjoys actually playing it outside of the satisfaction they get from curb stomping any list that isn't tailor made to kill Knights and only Knights.

So people shouldn't play mono-knights and instead play even more powerfull list...Ummm...right. You want to play the more broken version?



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Notice he didn't say a typical army, he said a horde skew list.

You can field around 400 bodies, easy, in a skew list, if you have the models.

We're not really seeing armies like that though. Even the hordiest Guard or Ork lists will generally run under 200 models, and those already have major trouble fitting in deployment zones and generally aren't winning tournaments. To fit 400 bodies in an IG list, at bare minimum, you'd need to be playing a game larger than 2K (because even the cheapest HQ choices are 7.5x what a 4pt Guardsmen runs).

WTF? Under 200 models for orks? That's 3 turns and you are wiped out in these days. And less than 1500 pts...And no trouble fitting. I have deployed over 320 models and that's with movement trays that eat space.

Sub-200 ork army is super soft army for casual games among casual games. Any decent gunline in tournament will easily kill 50-60 models a turn so unless you deliberately slowplay like hell(320 models, 3h games, quite doable so sub-200 3h games you need to slowplay like hell to not get to the end) to ensure game continues max 2 turns.

I gotta love the strange world we live in where 60 odd guardsmen can't be killed fast enough, yet 200 Orks is wiped out in 3 turns.

Well I don't think 60 guardsmen is particularly tough to kill either. The point of those guardsmen isn't to be super tough uber soldiers. 60 guardsmen are there to give you 12 CP to fuel up the main killers. And of course the fact those guardsmen have real killers along helps as nobody bothers to shoot at some chaff when there's actual killers around.

 Insectum7 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Notice he didn't say a typical army, he said a horde skew list.

You can field around 400 bodies, easy, in a skew list, if you have the models.

We're not really seeing armies like that though. Even the hordiest Guard or Ork lists will generally run under 200 models, and those already have major trouble fitting in deployment zones and generally aren't winning tournaments. To fit 400 bodies in an IG list, at bare minimum, you'd need to be playing a game larger than 2K (because even the cheapest HQ choices are 7.5x what a 4pt Guardsmen runs).

WTF? Under 200 models for orks? That's 3 turns and you are wiped out in these days. And less than 1500 pts...And no trouble fitting. I have deployed over 320 models and that's with movement trays that eat space.

Sub-200 ork army is super soft army for casual games among casual games. Any decent gunline in tournament will easily kill 50-60 models a turn so unless you deliberately slowplay like hell(320 models, 3h games, quite doable so sub-200 3h games you need to slowplay like hell to not get to the end) to ensure game continues max 2 turns.

I gotta love the strange world we live in where 60 odd guardsmen can't be killed fast enough, yet 200 Orks is wiped out in 3 turns.

Not really considering orks need to make it across the board into melee to do the most damage and don't tend to get the benifit of cover 95% of the time. So a 6+ or a 5++ at best. Also quite hard to overkill a 30 model unit

Guard do shoot well for their points and can stay in cover to rock a 4+ and at 10 model units either don't get wiped or are overkilled wasting firepower.

Also while I get it's interesting to see people doing well with "spacemarine" lists that list has 15 marines in it and the minute GW address the reroll to wound rolls for Guilliman it's dead.
You can win with scouts, it's just not what most people think of when they think spacemarine lists.

tneva82 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Notice he didn't say a typical army, he said a horde skew list.

You can field around 400 bodies, easy, in a skew list, if you have the models.

We're not really seeing armies like that though. Even the hordiest Guard or Ork lists will generally run under 200 models, and those already have major trouble fitting in deployment zones and generally aren't winning tournaments. To fit 400 bodies in an IG list, at bare minimum, you'd need to be playing a game larger than 2K (because even the cheapest HQ choices are 7.5x what a 4pt Guardsmen runs).

WTF? Under 200 models for orks? That's 3 turns and you are wiped out in these days. And less than 1500 pts...And no trouble fitting. I have deployed over 320 models and that's with movement trays that eat space.

In 1500pts? Maybe if you're running buttloads of Grots, but you're going to have trouble killing much of anything. What does your list look like just out of curiosity? I think the largest 2k Ork list I've come across was 250 models, though admittedly I don't see many of them these days and haven't played mine since selling them off in 7E.

Ice_can wrote:

Not really considering orks need to make it across the board into melee to do the most damage and don't tend to get the benifit of cover 95% of the time. So a 6+ or a 5++ at best. Also quite hard to overkill a 30 model unit

Guard do shoot well for their points and can stay in cover to rock a 4+

To be fair, cover exists outside of deployment zones, and there's usually nowhere near enough to ensure all, or even most, guardsmen are getting the benefit just sitting in their deployment zone, especially if they're having to be used as bubble-wrap or are running a giant horde list.

and at 10 model units either don't get wiped or are overkilled wasting firepower.

While true, it also makes such units really vulnerable to fire that other units would consider trivial (things like Rhino Storm bolters), and not all Guardsmen units are 10 strong (e.g. heavy weapons squads)

 Vaktathi wrote:
In 1500pts? Maybe if you're running buttloads of Grots, but you're going to have trouble killing much of anything. What does your list look like just out of curiosity? I think the largest 2k Ork list I've come across was 250 models, though admittedly I don't see many of them these days and haven't played mine since selling them off in 7E.

I thought we were talking tournaments where standards are either 1750 or even more 2000. For 1500 I got somewhere around 215-220 plus KMK grot grews.

And orks DON'T kill much. That's the life of orks. They have worthwhile units: boyz&stormboyz(both exists to create THREAT of h2h so enemy doesn't dare to come forward more than actually killing anything), KMK, grots and characters. Their whole strategy lies upon holding objectives.

Only thing that can actually kill anything without being overpriced junk are boyz&stormboyz(which struggle getting to combat alive) and KMK.

While true, it also makes such units really vulnerable to fire that other units would consider trivial (things like Rhino Storm bolters), and not all Guardsmen units are 10 strong (e.g. heavy weapons squads)

Those storm bolters aren't all that much scarier because squad is 10 strong. And only HWS that are worth taking are mortar ones as they can be put out of LOS.

BFS saw some pretty weird results imo.

The winning list especially is Eldar soup but not as we know it - and I don't really see how it avoids being shot off the table. (Yes, 500 points of skyweavers - but 28 wyches, the Avatar of Khaine, 40 foot guardians?). I often argue people (especially on forums) under-estimate troop blobs with ob-sec at tournaments, but I wonder if he just ran into lists which were all geared up for anti-knight work (Knights seem to have been a big thing at the tournament looking at pictures) and found themselves with nothing worth shooting (just as was described on the last page).

This might also explain the success of Nanavati's list too (although really RG is good and we know it.)

Other than that though you have imperial soups, eldar soups, chaos soups although you do have one mono Eldar, one triple vault list, a tyranid and an Ork army in the top 16.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I honestly can't see it doing well. It ain't going to get first turn and you can easily take out a lot in that list.

Also no clue how it kills even a single Knight.

It played on stream so check the Battleforsalvation switch channel and find out.

turns out daddy's sword is pretty good at cleaving Gallents in 2.

 Crimson wrote:
I think a lot of people would like to see the crazy discrepancies in different armies ability to generate CP to be addressed.

I'm sure many would. In my experience, the difficult part is getting any kind of consensus on how that might be achieved.

ccs wrote:

Lemondish wrote:
It's still using Guilliman as a crutch, and like all previous viable marine lists, it is entirely dependent on spamming the most effective units.

What kind of lame complaint is that? Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't all successful tournament lists, whatever the faction, use nothing but the most effective units?

It's more a comment that marines have rely heavily on this one dimensional gimmick spam. Eldar have really strong options everywhere, and if you look at the lists that hit the top 16 at BFS, they were fairly different than what we've seen in the past.

This is just a one dimensional MW fishing brigade that runs with Guilliman as its core still. It's the same formula over and over again for marines. There's simply so many sub par units in codex marines that without selecting the clear best and leveraging a gimmick by spamming them alongside Guilliman, you can't compete.

Nothing wrong with selecting the best units to do the job. What's wrong is that there are so few good units for codex marines that you end up ignoring so much of the book in favour of gimmicks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
I think a lot of people would like to see the crazy discrepancies in different armies ability to generate CP to be addressed.

I'm sure many would. In my experience, the difficult part is getting any kind of consensus on how that might be achieved.

I think the intent was to have elite armies with strong, reliable stratagems but fewer CP to activate them juxtaposed against armies with a high pool of CP and a boatload of low impact strats you use more often. The problem came when you could fuel the expensive elite stuff with cheap CP generated by the factions that can get high pools.

Best suggestion I've heard is to limit CP generated by a faction in a detachment to that faction. To avoid harming detachments of the same faction, they might need to use the battle brothers wording. Then perhaps to avoid the potential of tracking 4 pools, just give the BF CP to the Warlord's faction?

Lemondish wrote:

Best suggestion I've heard is to limit CP generated by a faction in a detachment to that faction. To avoid harming detachments of the same faction, they might need to use the battle brothers wording. Then perhaps to avoid the potential of tracking 4 pools, just give the BF CP to the Warlord's faction?

That was what I initially suggested, but was immediately met with cries of 'No! We need IG to fuel our elite factions! Removing that will kill them entirely!'

 JNAProductions wrote:

So, adding even 255 points of not Marines makes it Soup?

Got it.

Well, that's the logic IG apologists have been using for months...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lemondish wrote:
I think the intent was to have elite armies with strong, reliable stratagems but fewer CP to activate them juxtaposed against armies with a high pool of CP and a boatload of low impact strats you use more often.

I don't believe that was ever the intent, it is just how some people on Dakka would want it to work. GW fully expected people to use allies. The most elite of these elite armies, the Custodes, even have built in rules to support allies.

RogueApiary wrote:
Hey, here's another 'fluke' for all you marine players. Nick Nanavati took 4th at BFS using UM (a whopping 3 assassin's allied in so I know you haters will complain it's not 'pure' enough). But please, keep saying blaming all your woes on the big guard bogeyman rather than looking inward for the source of your failures.

Edit: BFS results site didn't have all three detachments listed and it turns out he did bring Gman. Ovrrall point stands, Marines have competitive legs, even if Gman is a bit of a crutch.

Clearly not a realistical tournament - people also winning with avatars and guardian spam.

Ultramarines can win easily if they build around Guilliman and go first against the tougher lists. This isn't a secret.

Dakka isn't a tournament crowd, but i'll just throw this out there:

Matchups heavily influence who wins an event, and how the top 5-20 fall out. There is always a luck component when winning an event.

I also think a lot of people are underestimating people like Nicks and Reece's ability to play the missions.

Those culexes were probably getting points, capping objectives and being general impossible to remove nuisances.

Getting into position go get that -2 on an enemies biggest threat or spread it out to -1 on two threats without being in range of enemy denies is hard to do.

I have no idea how that list doesn't get tabled but it's obviously doing something right. I was thinking of running something similar in a local RTT this weekend but I don't have scout snipers and I think they are kind of important to make this thing work.

The meat of the list is Guilliman, culexus assassins, wolf + DA librarians and scout bikers? Turn 1 scout bikers die, turn 2 scouts die but by then guilliman is in your face smashing things? The shield eternal smash captain is very resilient and the emperors champion is no joke. I don't get the storm shields on the company vets but I have issues making 3+ saves and it's only 50ish points to get them protected.

I feel like this list is the equivalent of the necron triple vault list. Relies on a gimmick and good player skill but will still loose to better lists if player skill can be controlled for.

I think people shouting that this "proves that space marines are viable" have a strange idea of what viable is.

bananathug wrote:
I also think a lot of people are underestimating people like Nicks and Reece's ability to play the missions.

Those culexes were probably getting points, capping objectives and being general impossible to remove nuisances.

Getting into position go get that -2 on an enemies biggest threat or spread it out to -1 on two threats without being in range of enemy denies is hard to do.

I have no idea how that list doesn't get tabled but it's obviously doing something right. I was thinking of running something similar in a local RTT this weekend but I don't have scout snipers and I think they are kind of important to make this thing work.

The meat of the list is Guilliman, culexus assassins, wolf + DA librarians and scout bikers? Turn 1 scout bikers die, turn 2 scouts die but by then guilliman is in your face smashing things? The shield eternal smash captain is very resilient and the emperors champion is no joke. I don't get the storm shields on the company vets but I have issues making 3+ saves and it's only 50ish points to get them protected.

I feel like this list is the equivalent of the necron triple vault list. Relies on a gimmick and good player skill but will still loose to better lists if player skill can be controlled for.

I think people shouting that this "proves that space marines are viable" have a strange idea of what viable is.

There is only 1 way that list doesn't just get tabled in 3 turns. Way to friggen much LOS blocking terrain.

I'm also watching the stream now and he should have lost guilliman turn 1 to Jared Parker (they misplayed the knight gauntlet strat). Near the 30 minute mark. Guilliman wouldn't have been able to deal 18 wounds to the knight and the whole game would have been different.

It's a shame that people don't know the rules to their own army (not Nicks fault)...

bananathug wrote:
I'm also watching the stream now and he should have lost guilliman turn 1 to Jared Parker (they misplayed the knight gauntlet strat). Near the 30 minute mark. Guilliman wouldn't have been able to deal 18 wounds to the knight and the whole game would have been different.

It's a shame that people don't know the rules to their own army (not Nicks fault)...

How did they misplay it? Did they forget the d3 automatic mortals you get when you hit the first time? Did they not keep going when Gman loses stregnth tests?

Also - I find it odd that "the best palyer in 40k" doesn't know how deathgrip works. Playing dumb for advantage much more likely.

I think that if the same things keep happening - trash units win, terrible list builders win with their terrible lists, etc - perhaps conceptual models that suggest these things can't happen/should rarely ever happen might not be solid?

 vipoid wrote:

Lemondish wrote:

Best suggestion I've heard is to limit CP generated by a faction in a detachment to that faction. To avoid harming detachments of the same faction, they might need to use the battle brothers wording. Then perhaps to avoid the potential of tracking 4 pools, just give the BF CP to the Warlord's faction?

That was what I initially suggested, but was immediately met with cries of 'No! We need IG to fuel our elite factions! Removing that will kill them entirely!'

Said before, saying again:

The people crying the most about Guard CP generation also will cry the most when the Guard CP isn't available to them. They don't want the soup issue fixed, they want Guard nerfed.

Bharring wrote:
I think that if the same things keep happening - trash units win, terrible list builders win with their terrible lists, etc - perhaps conceptual models that suggest these things can't happen/should rarely ever happen might not be solid?

It's almost like there is some luck involved in 40k and we only see these lists when they do well. We don't see them when they loose 4/5 games.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

Lemondish wrote:

Best suggestion I've heard is to limit CP generated by a faction in a detachment to that faction. To avoid harming detachments of the same faction, they might need to use the battle brothers wording. Then perhaps to avoid the potential of tracking 4 pools, just give the BF CP to the Warlord's faction?

That was what I initially suggested, but was immediately met with cries of 'No! We need IG to fuel our elite factions! Removing that will kill them entirely!'

Said before, saying again:

The people crying the most about Guard CP generation also will cry the most when the Guard CP isn't available to them. They don't want the soup issue fixed, they want Guard nerfed.

They are just realists. the chance of GW fixing they own faction to have good CP generation is much smaller, then GW keeping IG out performing other factions.
Plus people bought models and do not want to see them nerfed. Because that is what GW does, either their fix is not really a fix and the unit or faction still does great and keeps getting used, or they kill a combo or faction. No one wants to spend 100-200$ only to have it changed in to a paper weight a few months later.

It's not really a paper-weight, it's just not as likely to win. The trick to avoiding this issue, I've found, is just to collect what you like and let the meta shift around you.