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.

Yea, people should really stop using GK as an example of anything.
They are a faulty codex. they do not function on ANY level.

 Blackie wrote:

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
The reason basic marines don't get bolt rifles is that GW still thinks marines are the most popular army, and having the most popular army shaving AP off itself during Marine vs Marine battles would make the Power Armor save pointless.

Plus look at what it would do to Chaos Marines.all it would do is make Invuls even more powerful. Nope. Sorry.

I think SM popularity is the reason why GW doesn't want them (and they shouldn't) to be particularly competitive. Because otherwise we'll have even more marine armies at the tables and 40k becomes basically 30k. Now, I'd love more competitive SM but unfortunately this is an edition in which players, especially imperium ones but also chaos, are highly encouraged to soup. With a soup SM are already upper mid tiers, if not top tiers. If soups were illegal in matched games I'd really like buffed and improved SM, but at the moment I think imperium soups are already too powerful and I don't want them to have even more competitive options. Unless tons of AM stuff, knights and the immortal custodes HQ get a significant nerf of course, in that case buffed SM could be acceptable. But I'm sure it won't happen.

So you're actually admitting the codex isn't fine? Isn't that something?

 Blackie wrote:

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
The reason basic marines don't get bolt rifles is that GW still thinks marines are the most popular army, and having the most popular army shaving AP off itself during Marine vs Marine battles would make the Power Armor save pointless.

Plus look at what it would do to Chaos Marines.all it would do is make Invuls even more powerful. Nope. Sorry.

I think SM popularity is the reason why GW doesn't want them (and they shouldn't) to be particularly competitive. Because otherwise we'll have even more marine armies at the tables and 40k becomes basically 30k. Now, I'd love more competitive SM but unfortunately this is an edition in which players, especially imperium ones but also chaos, are highly encouraged to soup. With a soup SM are already upper mid tiers, if not top tiers. If soups were illegal in matched games I'd really like buffed and improved SM, but at the moment I think imperium soups are already too powerful and I don't want them to have even more competitive options. Unless tons of AM stuff, knights and the immortal custodes HQ get a significant nerf of course, in that case buffed SM could be acceptable. But I'm sure it won't happen.

This is straight nonsense.
Because AM and knights are strong - you are opposed to a SM buff? This is straight hater stuff man. Do you even realize you are being a hater?

I like it how someone said that they have been playing for decades, then said 40 years.... especially as not even GW have been around for 40 years. Would like to know how 40k has been around for longer than the company that invented it, because that is a great little trick.

40k was a skirmish game that was geared towards close combat, as the editions have come and gone, the game has become more about shooting (case in point rapid fire weapons being able to move and not have their range reduced, while units in close combat can easily fall back). However some of the forces in the game are still based upon close combat, as such they will always struggle.

 stonehorse wrote:
I like it how someone said that they have been playing for decades, then said 40 years.... especially as not even GW have been around for 40 years. Would like to know how 40k has been around for longer than the company that invented it, because that is a great little trick.

40k was a skirmish game that was geared towards close combat, as the editions have come and gone, the game has become more about shooting (case in point rapid fire weapons being able to move and not have their range reduced, while units in close combat can easily fall back). However some of the forces in the game are still based upon close combat, as such they will always struggle.

GW has been around for 43 years, since 1975. 40k has been around for 31 years but began development in 1983, 35 years ago.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Yea, people should really stop using GK as an example of anything.
They are a faulty codex. they do not function on ANY level.

Don't be silly the GK codex is perfectly useful

- as a small shelf
- putting under a laptop on your knee
- putting plain paper on to write a list from an actual codex
- scaring children away from the fireplace
- gathering sympathy from friends

etc

 stonehorse wrote:
40k was a skirmish game that was geared towards close combat, as the editions have come and gone, the game has become more about shooting (case in point rapid fire weapons being able to move and not have their range reduced, while units in close combat can easily fall back). However some of the forces in the game are still based upon close combat, as such they will always struggle.

I don't agree at all that 40K was originally melee-focused; by 2nd Ed at the very latest the game had become primarily shooting-oriented and it took 3rd to swing the pendulum back a little. RT and 2nd Ed were chock-full of powerful shooting abilities, and a plethora of ways to delete units from the board altogether ('that's a nice unit of Terminators, it'd be a real shame if someone threw a vortex grenade at it'). 2nd Ed Space Wolves were widely considered overpowered, not because they would destroy you in melee, but because they could field enormous numbers of assault cannons and out-shoot pretty much anyone else. One of the design decisions of the 3rd Ed Orks, as the writer recently stated in an interview, was to get away from the 2nd Ed status quo of a bunch of Gretchin serving as meatshields for shooty Orks.

I think the changes you highlight demonstrate that it's mobility that's made the difference. Back in 3rd, being able to move or charge 12" while everyone else could only move and charge 6" was a big deal, and coupled with how Rapid Fire used to work made it a lot harder for ranged units to stop melee units before they charged. Gunlines were powerful, but being static made them tactically inflexible and bad at seizing objectives.

Now anyone can advance, anyone with an assault weapon can advance and still fire, and lots of armies and units have abilities that mitigate the movement penalties to shooting. It's easier for shooting armies to control the board, and with alpha strike being more prevalent than ever, it's easier for shooting armies to take out melee threats before they can get into combat.

My wishlist is very short: Port the range penalty and cover rules from Kill Team over to 40K. -1 to hit at over half range, and cover giving a to-hit penalty, should make it a little easier for melee units to survive turn 1 alpha strikes and make it into combat, without needing to go and individually rebalance every melee unit in the game.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
The reason basic marines don't get bolt rifles is that GW still thinks marines are the most popular army, and having the most popular army shaving AP off itself during Marine vs Marine battles would make the Power Armor save pointless.

Plus look at what it would do to Chaos Marines.all it would do is make Invuls even more powerful. Nope. Sorry.

I think SM popularity is the reason why GW doesn't want them (and they shouldn't) to be particularly competitive. Because otherwise we'll have even more marine armies at the tables and 40k becomes basically 30k. Now, I'd love more competitive SM but unfortunately this is an edition in which players, especially imperium ones but also chaos, are highly encouraged to soup. With a soup SM are already upper mid tiers, if not top tiers. If soups were illegal in matched games I'd really like buffed and improved SM, but at the moment I think imperium soups are already too powerful and I don't want them to have even more competitive options. Unless tons of AM stuff, knights and the immortal custodes HQ get a significant nerf of course, in that case buffed SM could be acceptable. But I'm sure it won't happen.

This is straight nonsense.
Because AM and knights are strong - you are opposed to a SM buff? This is straight hater stuff man. Do you even realize you are being a hater?

This was the guy preaching the codex was fine too. Now we know their actual feelings.

Straight_Memer wrote:

 niv-mizzet wrote:

ccs wrote:

 niv-mizzet wrote:

ccs wrote:

Slipspace wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:
Yaknow, every time someone suggest melee is useless I just laugh considering I find uses for melee with my Tau.
Heck, I initiate charges nearly every other match.

If freaking TAU can find uses for opportunity assault with units who are laughable at it, a "generalist" unit sure can find, and a melee oriented unit sure has uses.

The problem is the melee dudes who wants "ALL MELEE ALL THE TIME!" like they are a khorne army. and that's just dumb, even khone has guns.

Like others have said, there's a difference between charging someone to stop them doing anything next turn and charging someone in order to actually kill them. I suspect as a Tau player you're doing the former, whereas the latter is what most people are referring to when they talk about melee being useless. See, when you have specialist units that are costed based on their melee abilities and those melee abilities don't ever get to be used effectively because of how the game is designed, that can cause some saltiness.

Maybe the flaw doesn't rest with the melee units, but with the people playing them. Perhaps people aiming to kill units need to adjust their plan of attack. Recognize that this is a game dedicated to shooting each other with sci-fi guns. So instead of slamming into full strength units & expecting to kill them all with swords/claws/teeth? Try shooting the piss out of them 1st/as the CC unit closes. And then charge into melee to mop them up.
I know, not the most original tactic. But it's been working for me in 40k, & a lot of other minis games, for decades.

“Dedicated to shooting...” citiation needed. Melee is not only an iconic part of the game and setting, but more unit stats are for melee than shooting, and more of the basic game rules deal with melee instead of shooting. There are also armies whose army bonuses and in some cases near entire roster are only relevant for close combat, so your stance is that the people that play those armies can go sit and spin?

Citation: 40 years of this game & its ever increasing #s & types of crazy shooting weapons.

No. My stance is not that people who play CC oriented/melee heavy armies can go sit & spin. It's that many of them should bitch less & learn to play better.
And for those who play Demons (and this includes myself as I own a Khorne demon army)? They need to accept that they've chosen to play this game with a distinct handicap & that's going to lower their win ratio.

Yes clearly the issue is melee players, just like the issue in 3rd was shooting players, and the issue in 7th was non-deathstar players. Maybe instead of having armies that give a distinct handicap we could maybe I dunno improve that part of the game?

Actually melee is really really powerful if you, like he said, learn to play well and realize that the charge/fight phases are effectvively second movement phases in the hand of a compentant player. Melee is only view as bad becuase people of all the people reeeeeing about not being about to run assault marines straight up the table, lol git gud.

Or maybe the shooty players around your area are just really bad.

Well it does depend on the list. Lets say you play an Inari soup or some castelan+IG wombo combo list. Those few melee units those armies use, are really great, specially when they are backed up by 1600 points of above avarge shoting. Or the melee units are shoting at the same time. So it is not like he is not right, or anything.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

catbarf wrote:


My wishlist is very short: Port the range penalty and cover rules from Kill Team over to 40K. -1 to hit at over half range, and cover giving a to-hit penalty, should make it a little easier for melee units to survive turn 1 alpha strikes and make it into combat, without needing to go and individually rebalance every melee unit in the game.

Werent all editions prior this one dominted by some sort of either shoty as hell eldar army, which may have also been able to do melee on the side, or some other above avarge shoting army ?

 niv-mizzet wrote:
Or maybe the shooty players around your area are just really bad.

Unlikely. He's basically speaking word for word what top tournament players have been saying about 8th for a long time - the melee phases are powerful for reasons entirely unrelated to whether or not you kill a ton of things.

Folks tend to try and diminish this value because they don't understand it, or can't fathom why it's important. They try to compare everything, including melee to shooting, by how many models it removes. That's such a flawed way to look at it.

Lemondish wrote:

 niv-mizzet wrote:
Or maybe the shooty players around your area are just really bad.

Unlikely. He's basically speaking word for word what top tournament players have been saying about 8th for a long time - the melee phases are powerful for reasons entirely unrelated to whether or not you kill a ton of things.

Folks tend to try and diminish this value because they don't understand it, or can't fathom why it's important. They try to compare everything, including melee to shooting, by how many models it removes. That's such a flawed way to look at it.

This guy gets it!

Yes, but melee isn't good in the way it should be good. And because of that, dedicated CC armies fall flat 9 times out of 10, which in a setting where Melee is probably the most iconic thing behind fething space marines, doesn't make any damn sense.

Sir Heckington wrote:
Yes, but melee isn't good in the way it should be good. And because of that, dedicated CC armies fall flat 9 times out of 10, which in a setting where Melee is probably the most iconic thing behind fething space marines, doesn't make any damn sense.

Good point, while melee is good its almost never for the reasons it should be, and on the surface that can make it appear bad

Yeah. The fact that my charges as Tau are often more effective than melee dedicated charges is the main issue.

Of course, I'm not sure how much I trust anyone who talks about melee being bad after 7th. People whined for that entire edition that melee armies were worthless while unkillable totally melee deathstars were clearing thousands of points of shooting units without losing a single model. Bring that up though and you just got 'nuh uh, deathstars don't count'.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
The reason basic marines don't get bolt rifles is that GW still thinks marines are the most popular army, and having the most popular army shaving AP off itself during Marine vs Marine battles would make the Power Armor save pointless.

Plus look at what it would do to Chaos Marines.all it would do is make Invuls even more powerful. Nope. Sorry.

I think SM popularity is the reason why GW doesn't want them (and they shouldn't) to be particularly competitive. Because otherwise we'll have even more marine armies at the tables and 40k becomes basically 30k. Now, I'd love more competitive SM but unfortunately this is an edition in which players, especially imperium ones but also chaos, are highly encouraged to soup. With a soup SM are already upper mid tiers, if not top tiers. If soups were illegal in matched games I'd really like buffed and improved SM, but at the moment I think imperium soups are already too powerful and I don't want them to have even more competitive options. Unless tons of AM stuff, knights and the immortal custodes HQ get a significant nerf of course, in that case buffed SM could be acceptable. But I'm sure it won't happen.

This is straight nonsense.
Because AM and knights are strong - you are opposed to a SM buff? This is straight hater stuff man. Do you even realize you are being a hater?

This was the guy preaching the codex was fine too. Now we know their actual feelings.

The misrepresentation of what Blackie said here is downright pathological.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
The reason basic marines don't get bolt rifles is that GW still thinks marines are the most popular army, and having the most popular army shaving AP off itself during Marine vs Marine battles would make the Power Armor save pointless.

Plus look at what it would do to Chaos Marines.all it would do is make Invuls even more powerful. Nope. Sorry.

I think SM popularity is the reason why GW doesn't want them (and they shouldn't) to be particularly competitive. Because otherwise we'll have even more marine armies at the tables and 40k becomes basically 30k. Now, I'd love more competitive SM but unfortunately this is an edition in which players, especially imperium ones but also chaos, are highly encouraged to soup. With a soup SM are already upper mid tiers, if not top tiers. If soups were illegal in matched games I'd really like buffed and improved SM, but at the moment I think imperium soups are already too powerful and I don't want them to have even more competitive options. Unless tons of AM stuff, knights and the immortal custodes HQ get a significant nerf of course, in that case buffed SM could be acceptable. But I'm sure it won't happen.

This is straight nonsense.
Because AM and knights are strong - you are opposed to a SM buff? This is straight hater stuff man. Do you even realize you are being a hater?

This was the guy preaching the codex was fine too. Now we know their actual feelings.

The misrepresentation of what Blackie said here is downright pathological.

He literally said the army shouldn't be competitive. Name the part where anyone misinterpreted what he said.

Nah, Blackie's right. GW has decided your army is not Space Marines, it is Imperium, and Imperium is already at a point where it's probably too strong and needs no further buffs.

ERJAK wrote:
Of course, I'm not sure how much I trust anyone who talks about melee being bad after 7th. People whined for that entire edition that melee armies were worthless while unkillable totally melee deathstars were clearing thousands of points of shooting units without losing a single model. Bring that up though and you just got 'nuh uh, deathstars don't count'.

The problem wasn't melee, it was psykic powers. Screamer star was due to a combo of psykic powers, book of true names, fate weaver, and tzeench's rerolling 1s to saves. everything else was do to how broken invisibility was. Buff stackability is what 7th edition the way it is, and death stars were the best medium for them. With those kinds of buffs a platoon of 50 guardsmen would have been just as good if there was a way to get to 12" movement.

Thunderwolves/wolfen might have been criminally underpriced, but outside of Superfriends and screamerstar you had gav centurions, windriders with max heavy weapons, wraith knights, tyrants with wings and twin devouers, ion riptides, Gladius razorback parking lots. none of these exactly scream "melee" and if death stars were really that good then meganobz would have been a terror but instead they lagged behind despite being the best the ork codex could offer.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
The reason basic marines don't get bolt rifles is that GW still thinks marines are the most popular army, and having the most popular army shaving AP off itself during Marine vs Marine battles would make the Power Armor save pointless.

Plus look at what it would do to Chaos Marines.all it would do is make Invuls even more powerful. Nope. Sorry.

I think SM popularity is the reason why GW doesn't want them (and they shouldn't) to be particularly competitive. Because otherwise we'll have even more marine armies at the tables and 40k becomes basically 30k. Now, I'd love more competitive SM but unfortunately this is an edition in which players, especially imperium ones but also chaos, are highly encouraged to soup. With a soup SM are already upper mid tiers, if not top tiers. If soups were illegal in matched games I'd really like buffed and improved SM, but at the moment I think imperium soups are already too powerful and I don't want them to have even more competitive options. Unless tons of AM stuff, knights and the immortal custodes HQ get a significant nerf of course, in that case buffed SM could be acceptable. But I'm sure it won't happen.

This is straight nonsense.
Because AM and knights are strong - you are opposed to a SM buff? This is straight hater stuff man. Do you even realize you are being a hater?

This was the guy preaching the codex was fine too. Now we know their actual feelings.

The misrepresentation of what Blackie said here is downright pathological.

He literally said the army shouldn't be competitive. Name the part where anyone misinterpreted what he said.

Past his first sentence. The part that he says they're already upper mid to top tier. The part he says they should be buffed if there was no soup in matched play. Or the part where he says they can be buffed if the other imperial factions get nerfed.

I mean I don't agree with what he's saying necessarily. But: "Wah, you're a hater."

Hey guys. We are expecting good points drops in Grey Knights now.
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/11/24/breaking-news-from-the-vigilus-open-daygw-homepage-post-1fw-homepage-post-1/

Good news for GK players.

"Marneus Calgar gets reborn as a Primaris": cue another 30 page discussion over whether old marines are getting squatted.

Point drops would be nice. The question is, if other armies will also get them. If they do, then GK will require some rule changes too, to keep up.

 Arachnofiend wrote:
Nah, Blackie's right. GW has decided your army is not Space Marines, it is Imperium, and Imperium is already at a point where it's probably too strong and needs no further buffs.

That's right. As long as GW pushes to soups that's the sad reality. In fact imperium soups should be toned down badly, more than aeldari ones.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
The reason basic marines don't get bolt rifles is that GW still thinks marines are the most popular army, and having the most popular army shaving AP off itself during Marine vs Marine battles would make the Power Armor save pointless.

Plus look at what it would do to Chaos Marines.all it would do is make Invuls even more powerful. Nope. Sorry.

I think SM popularity is the reason why GW doesn't want them (and they shouldn't) to be particularly competitive. Because otherwise we'll have even more marine armies at the tables and 40k becomes basically 30k. Now, I'd love more competitive SM but unfortunately this is an edition in which players, especially imperium ones but also chaos, are highly encouraged to soup. With a soup SM are already upper mid tiers, if not top tiers. If soups were illegal in matched games I'd really like buffed and improved SM, but at the moment I think imperium soups are already too powerful and I don't want them to have even more competitive options. Unless tons of AM stuff, knights and the immortal custodes HQ get a significant nerf of course, in that case buffed SM could be acceptable. But I'm sure it won't happen.

So you're actually admitting the codex isn't fine? Isn't that something?

I admit that the codex is bland. Not a mess, but SM aren't top tiers, period. And honestly I don't see the problem at all, in 7th edition I regularly played with three medium-bottom tier armies, I'm still doing that with at least one in this edition. In any real meta optimized SM lists do well. Now I'm all in favor of some minor buffs, but honestly I don't think it would be fair and healthy for the game if they were buffed to top levels as long as AM and knights remain so powerful.

The Newman wrote:
Good news for GK players.

"Marneus Calgar gets reborn as a Primaris": cue another 30 page discussion over whether old marines are getting squatted.

Squated squated probably not.
But its a clear hint that on the Imperium Side anyway its probably going to be all Primaris all the time Primaris.
I can see Primaris Wave 2 for SM coming out in 2019 - then at some point roll outs of Primaris incarnations to the iconic marine factions - so Primaris Death Company, Primaris Deathwing/Raven Guard, Primaris on Wolves etc etc. More special characters will be upgraded.

Tyel wrote:

The Newman wrote:
Good news for GK players.

"Marneus Calgar gets reborn as a Primaris": cue another 30 page discussion over whether old marines are getting squatted.

Squated squated probably not.
But its a clear hint that on the Imperium Side anyway its probably going to be all Primaris all the time Primaris.
I can see Primaris Wave 2 for SM coming out in 2019 - then at some point roll outs of Primaris incarnations to the iconic marine factions - so Primaris Death Company, Primaris Deathwing/Raven Guard, Primaris on Wolves etc etc. More special characters will be upgraded.

In my mind this definitely answers the question of 'are all space Marines going to be replaced by Primaris?' Yes, the answer is yes. GW just weren't able to replace all the codex options with Primaris all at once, so we have to get through this weird transition period for the next few years as everything slowly gets replaced.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
The reason basic marines don't get bolt rifles is that GW still thinks marines are the most popular army, and having the most popular army shaving AP off itself during Marine vs Marine battles would make the Power Armor save pointless.

Plus look at what it would do to Chaos Marines.all it would do is make Invuls even more powerful. Nope. Sorry.

I think SM popularity is the reason why GW doesn't want them (and they shouldn't) to be particularly competitive. Because otherwise we'll have even more marine armies at the tables and 40k becomes basically 30k. Now, I'd love more competitive SM but unfortunately this is an edition in which players, especially imperium ones but also chaos, are highly encouraged to soup. With a soup SM are already upper mid tiers, if not top tiers. If soups were illegal in matched games I'd really like buffed and improved SM, but at the moment I think imperium soups are already too powerful and I don't want them to have even more competitive options. Unless tons of AM stuff, knights and the immortal custodes HQ get a significant nerf of course, in that case buffed SM could be acceptable. But I'm sure it won't happen.

This is straight nonsense.
Because AM and knights are strong - you are opposed to a SM buff? This is straight hater stuff man. Do you even realize you are being a hater?

This was the guy preaching the codex was fine too. Now we know their actual feelings.

The misrepresentation of what Blackie said here is downright pathological.

He literally said the army shouldn't be competitive. Name the part where anyone misinterpreted what he said.

Past his first sentence. The part that he says they're already upper mid to top tier. The part he says they should be buffed if there was no soup in matched play. Or the part where he says they can be buffed if the other imperial factions get nerfed.

I mean I don't agree with what he's saying necessarily. But: "Wah, you're a hater."

Except he didn't say they were top tier. Look at his next reply and he says the codex is bad and bland and not top tier. And that's supposed to be how it should be to him.

Caught up? Good.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Except he didn't say they were top tier. Look at his next reply and he says the codex is bad and bland and not top tier. And that's supposed to be how it should be to him.

Caught up? Good.

He didnt say they were bad. You're doing it again.

They'll never make Draigo a Primaris right? When the feth would he get the operation.