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.

Give all marines +1 wound, so marines go to 2W, terminators go to 3W, Primaris gain +1 toughness instead of +1 wound.

Give marines "Astartes Bolters", which have +1 strength -1AP from regular bolters, so they're basically firing heavy bolter shots, but keep them at Rapid Fire 1.

Then I think marines would be fine.

 Blackie wrote:

RedGriefer wrote:
If you look at a game system like Horus Heresy, the tactical marine is very important and not so bad. But why is that?

Maybe because all factions are marines?

WE HAVE A WINNER!!!

Of course, the problem with HH is that it lacks Eldars and Orks and Guard and Nids and the rest of the 2E stuff...

The_Real_Chris wrote:
I don't think they should get cheaper, they should be elite which implies not that numerous, but they should get better. If I could go the whole hog…

Armour
Astartes Power Armour (not sisters of battle etc)
Larger, heavier and better integrated with the users nervous system, Astartes power armour provides incredible protection.
Save 2+
Terminator armour
Save 1+/5++
Special rule – Tactical Dreadnaught Armour
Designed for the harshest environments Terminator armour reduces all damage suffered from any source by 1 to a minimum of 1. For example an autocannon would do 1 damage to an Astartes wearing Terminator armour.

Bolters
Astartes have access to larger calibres and the assistance of autosenses and extensive training to make best use of the armour penetrating mass reactive ammunition they fire. In particular the ability to use mass reactive explosions amongst tightly packed hordes of enemies while rapidly advancing into close range.
Bolter
range 24/Rapid Fire 1/Str 4/Dmg 1/Sv -1
OR
range 24/Assault 2/Str 3/Dmg 1/Sv 0
Bolt Pistol
Gets the -1 (as should a chainsword to be honest…)
Storm Bolter is double a bolter with both fire modes.
Etc.
Heavy bolter stats not affected.

I can accept the bolter changes but in no way are those armour changes justified. Your going from too weak to greating 2+,3++ stormbolter vets that would be in better armour than custodes and primarchs etc.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

RedGriefer wrote:
If you look at a game system like Horus Heresy, the tactical marine is very important and not so bad. But why is that?

Maybe because all factions are marines?

WE HAVE A WINNER!!!

Of course, the problem with HH is that it lacks Eldars and Orks and Guard and Nids and the rest of the 2E stuff...

Funnily enough even the baseline MEQ tends not to be taken in HH. When you've got Phosper Mortars not much really lives.

I still find it hillarious that 3+ is *obviously* the problem, especially at such a high PPM, after a year of people complaining about *Dark Reapers* and *Shining Spears*.

The problem isn't the Power Armor. It's that everyone and their dog has AP modifiers. If Ap-1/AP-2 were much rarer, Marines would do a lot better.

I disagree. Reapers and Spears have tremendous offense for their cost. Marines have pop guns AND the high AP problem. If you just make AP rarer, marines would not be much better off at all I think. The game you want existed for the first half of 3rd and maybe part of 4th. Maybe. The rest of the game is base marines doing nothing and dying like bitches.

I still think it’s more that your basic or garden variety Astartes has no AP.

From 3rd-7th Ed, the humble Bolter was pretty good in the hands of a Marine. Barring cover, every wounding hit squished a lot of infantry. Now, 1/3rd of those previous casualties survive. And half if they’re in cover. Whereas whilst Marines now benefit from Cover (about time too), they ultimately struggle in attrition, because they just can’t summon the killing power they once did.

It also means the opponent has more time, and less risk, in seizing objectives.

Give Bolters -1 AP, and you start to shift that balance back a bit.

Heck, even take a page out of the Heresy and allow Bolter armed Tacticals to double tap with something akin to Fury of the Legion. Let them punch their weight.

Bolter gets ap - 1 marines ignore a point of Ap

I don't see many faults in this but I won't say I have it's perfect just seems like a decent band aid

Bolters don't need AP-1. If you want that so desperately, Intercessors are only 17 points now. 4 points for a wound, attack, and better base weapon? Yes please.

The issue extends to all Marine Bolt weapons, on top of units having such outdated weapon loadouts. Know why Scions work? They get two special weapons at base and can get two more after being maxed out.

No I agree the point difference between intercessors and tacticals is shrinking to the point where it's becoming an auto take over the other.

But people want a fix and I'd say that'd go over well barring a total remake

Space Marine gets 1 extra shot, per "number of shots stat" for bolters and storm bolters. Bolter shoots 3 times in rapid-fire range, twice at long range. Storm bolter shoots 6 times at short range, 4 times at long range.

The problem with space marines has always been that they are over costed. Previously the problem was that MEQ's paid for a 3+ armour save that they rarely got because everyone took weapons that were AP3 or better - and GW needed to realize that lower their points. Sadly they didn't. Under 8th it isn't as easy as that anymore because most weapons modify armour saves now but marines remain expensive points wise.

 fraser1191 wrote:
Bolter gets ap - 1 marines ignore a point of Ap

I don't see many faults in this but I won't say I have it's perfect just seems like a decent band aid

Given the prevalence of marines your not really changing anything as it's a net zero, it also screws armies that don't have mass high AP or AP- fire.
It also gets increasingly difficult to justify why sisters with bolters and power armour etc shouldn't get the same rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Space Marine gets 1 extra shot, per "number of shots stat" for bolters and storm bolters. Bolter shoots 3 times in rapid-fire range, twice at long range. Storm bolter shoots 6 times at short range, 4 times at long range.

still doesn't make a bolter a better weapon, really the bolter even for SoS, SoB, GK sucks it only actually works fir Deathwatch, Fixing the bolter is better solution than just giving marines a get you by special rule.

kombatwombat wrote:
The forced distinction between Primaris and OldMarines is hurting both. It’s not hard to make Marines in general reasonably strong and fitting to theme, but unfortunately GW won’t do it for marketing and sales reasons.

Marines would work fine if every non-Primaris model got the +1W/+1A and 1 better AP on Bolters/Storm Bolters/Combi-Bolters/Hurricane Bolters//Heavy Bolters/combat knife/chainsword, and the Primaris distinction was removed to let Hellblasters et al use transp....

This. Plus too much trademark gimmickiness. Rather than open to 2d6 armor on some heavy units like old skool termies and to level ranged weapons down by increasing the role of cover on to hit and terrain on movement including charge and making overwatch more tactical a la old skool overwatch, GW has decided to dumb everything down then bloat the new more absract system with all sorts of card games taking place avove the level of the battlefield.

 Blackie wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
In general, the issue is armor save modifiers returning. The last time there was armor save mods, it was 2nd edition. The game was very, very different back then. The Marine statline, while virtually identical (your heroes had S5/T5 though IIRC) meant a lot more back then.

Part of it is that they die easily, but are priced as though they are resilient. Before when you had the old AP system, it was all or nothing so most non-special/heavy weapons didn't affect your save. When most weapons now do affect your save, your survivability takes a hit but they haven't gotten anything to really compensate for the game-changing around them. They are priced/positioned the same way as they were in 3rd through 7th edition, but without the survivability since their armor is more easily reduced.

Why you all keep saying that when it's actually the opposite? Modifiers made power armor stronger.

In previous editions all AP2 and AP3 completely bypassed SM save, now they get a 6+ and 5+ against the same weapons. The former AP5 and AP6 are now AP- so they don't affect marine save at all. Only the former AP4 is now more dangerous against marines, but those kind of weapons are not extremely common. And they still save the wound at 4+ against those weapons.

The only thing about the returning of armor save modifiers that made marines worse is that enemy dudes with 5+ and 6+ save now actually roll a save against the former imperium AP5 or AP6 weapons. But marines durability is now superior, let's be honest about that.

Perhaps you need to make a chart for these people.

 Horst wrote:
Give all marines +1 wound, so marines go to 2W, terminators go to 3W, Primaris gain +1 toughness instead of +1 wound.

Give marines "Astartes Bolters", which have +1 strength -1AP from regular bolters, so they're basically firing heavy bolter shots, but keep them at Rapid Fire 1.

Then I think marines would be fine.

Not sure of the bolters but your first part I think is great and would love to see it implemented.

ccs wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
In general, the issue is armor save modifiers returning. The last time there was armor save mods, it was 2nd edition. The game was very, very different back then. The Marine statline, while virtually identical (your heroes had S5/T5 though IIRC) meant a lot more back then.

Part of it is that they die easily, but are priced as though they are resilient. Before when you had the old AP system, it was all or nothing so most non-special/heavy weapons didn't affect your save. When most weapons now do affect your save, your survivability takes a hit but they haven't gotten anything to really compensate for the game-changing around them. They are priced/positioned the same way as they were in 3rd through 7th edition, but without the survivability since their armor is more easily reduced.

Why you all keep saying that when it's actually the opposite? Modifiers made power armor stronger.

In previous editions all AP2 and AP3 completely bypassed SM save, now they get a 6+ and 5+ against the same weapons. The former AP5 and AP6 are now AP- so they don't affect marine save at all. Only the former AP4 is now more dangerous against marines, but those kind of weapons are not extremely common. And they still save the wound at 4+ against those weapons.

The only thing about the returning of armor save modifiers that made marines worse is that enemy dudes with 5+ and 6+ save now actually roll a save against the former imperium AP5 or AP6 weapons. But marines durability is now superior, let's be honest about that.

Perhaps you need to make a chart for these people.

While he's at it, he can make a chart to prove what I've been saying about Terminators being the most durable they've been in several years.

It is clear that marines need some sort of defensive special rule to bring them back to the sort of durability that they had in the past. They got one in killteam, so we know that GW knows this. The issue is making one that doesn't require too much extra dice rolling or math. It could be a 2+ instead of 3+, or a FNP, or something like All is Dust does. But I think the easiest is just to go back to power armor working like the old AP system did, because it worked under that system:

Astartes Power Armor: Treat ap -1 and -2 weapons as ap0.

That's not gonna fix everything, but at least it restores their toughness to something more like previous editions.

 Drudge Dreadnought wrote:
It is clear that marines need some sort of defensive special rule to bring them back to the sort of durability that they had in the past. They got one in killteam, so we know that GW knows this. The issue is making one that doesn't require too much extra dice rolling or math. It could be a 2+ instead of 3+, or a FNP, or something like All is Dust does. But I think the easiest is just to go back to power armor working like the old AP system did, because it worked under that system:

Astartes Power Armor: Treat ap -1 and -2 weapons as ap0.

That's not gonna fix everything, but at least it restores their toughness to something more like previous editions.

So a marine should fear a lasgun as much as a battlecannon? That's mad, Also if Ppwer Armous is a 2+Sv you'll be ok with 2+ sisters etc?

Ice_can wrote:

 Drudge Dreadnought wrote:
It is clear that marines need some sort of defensive special rule to bring them back to the sort of durability that they had in the past. They got one in killteam, so we know that GW knows this. The issue is making one that doesn't require too much extra dice rolling or math. It could be a 2+ instead of 3+, or a FNP, or something like All is Dust does. But I think the easiest is just to go back to power armor working like the old AP system did, because it worked under that system:

Astartes Power Armor: Treat ap -1 and -2 weapons as ap0.

That's not gonna fix everything, but at least it restores their toughness to something more like previous editions.

So a marine should fear a lasgun as much as a battlecannon? That's mad, Also if Ppwer Armous is a 2+Sv you'll be ok with 2+ sisters etc?

That's why I'm glad they got rid of the old AP system. It scaled REALLY terribly.

Something like this?

Stratagem: The Emperor Protects! (1/2 CP)
Use at the beginning of the phase (or when targeted by an attack) on an Adeptus Astartes Infantry unit (excluding scouts perhaps, up for debate). Until the end of the phase, the unit treats all wounds taken and AP0. 1 CP if used on a troop-choice unit. 2 CP if used on a non-troop choice unit.

Ice_can wrote:

 Drudge Dreadnought wrote:
It is clear that marines need some sort of defensive special rule to bring them back to the sort of durability that they had in the past. They got one in killteam, so we know that GW knows this. The issue is making one that doesn't require too much extra dice rolling or math. It could be a 2+ instead of 3+, or a FNP, or something like All is Dust does. But I think the easiest is just to go back to power armor working like the old AP system did, because it worked under that system:

Astartes Power Armor: Treat ap -1 and -2 weapons as ap0.

That's not gonna fix everything, but at least it restores their toughness to something more like previous editions.

So a marine should fear a lasgun as much as a battlecannon? That's mad, Also if Ppwer Armous is a 2+Sv you'll be ok with 2+ sisters etc?

One of those wounds on 2's, and the other on 5's, so that's hardly the same thing. Of course, battle cannons used to be AP3 and ignore marine armor. But we also used to have 4+ cover saves that were much easier to get. It'll work out better than the current situation.

Sisters could have 2+ as well if they went that route, but they don't necessarily need it since they are much cheaper. I wouldn't see anything wrong with Astartes Power armor being 2+ and human power armor being 3+.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Something like this?

Stratagem: The Emperor Protects! (1/2 CP)
Use at the beginning of the phase (or when targeted by an attack) on an Adeptus Astartes Infantry unit (excluding scouts perhaps, up for debate). Until the end of the phase, the unit treats all wounds taken and AP0. 1 CP if used on a troop-choice unit. 2 CP if used on a non-troop choice unit.

We shouldn't have to burn through CP to have durability. Marines should just have that, as they did in every previous edition.

I guess if you buffed the armour they might eventually be worth it - but that's really not the issue.

The problem is the boltgun sucks for 13 points.
A single S4 punch to the face sucks for 13 points.

This is about half as effective as almost every other troop type in the game.

Net result tacticals suck. Assault marines suck. They are not "generalists". They are just bad.

Net result you have a unit which can't shoot, can't assault, has an okay armour save vs S3/4 AP- weapons but is disproportionately hurt by anything stronger in either category.

-1 AP might help - but really I think they just need a points reduction or more shots/attacks.

I don't buy the claim of "Oh I don't want cheaper Marines because that makes them less special" because right now you see zero on the table because they are so awful. Ditto for basic CSM. (And I don't care if someone shows up saying they currently run 50 tactical marines in their exciting games of garage hammer.)

Primaris are moving in the right direction with every patch - but they still suck for a similar reason. 2 S4/AP-1 shots for 17 points is not good, nor is 2 punches to the face. Not when the same could have bought you over 4 guardsmen or 3 kabalites.

Ice_can wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Space Marine gets 1 extra shot, per "number of shots stat" for bolters and storm bolters. Bolter shoots 3 times in rapid-fire range, twice at long range. Storm bolter shoots 6 times at short range, 4 times at long range.

still doesn't make a bolter a better weapon, really the bolter even for SoS, SoB, GK sucks it only actually works fir Deathwatch, Fixing the bolter is better solution than just giving marines a get you by special rule.

Honestly, that's the first time I've heard anyone complain about bolters for Sisters.

Tyel wrote:
I guess if you buffed the armour they might eventually be worth it - but that's really not the issue.

The problem is the boltgun sucks for 13 points.
A single S4 punch to the face sucks for 13 points.

This is about half as effective as almost every other troop type in the game.

Net result tacticals suck. Assault marines suck. They are not "generalists". They are just bad.

Net result you have a unit which can't shoot, can't assault, has an okay armour save vs S3/4 AP- weapons but is disproportionately hurt by anything stronger in either category.

-1 AP might help - but really I think they just need a points reduction or more shots/attacks.

I don't buy the claim of "Oh I don't want cheaper Marines because that makes them less special" because right now you see zero on the table because they are so awful. Ditto for basic CSM. (And I don't care if someone shows up saying they currently run 50 tactical marines in their exciting games of garage hammer.)

Primaris are moving in the right direction with every patch - but they still suck for a similar reason. 2 S4/AP-1 shots for 17 points is not good, nor is 2 punches to the face. Not when the same could have bought you over 4 guardsmen or 3 kabalites.

Exactly primaris at 17 are a touch too expensive at 16ppm they work against 5ppm Guardsmen
I can maybe see why some wany15 ppm, though I think 15 with cultists having been raised to 5ppm would be too far for interfaction balance. GW just need to fix codex 2 copies for 1.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Space Marine gets 1 extra shot, per "number of shots stat" for bolters and storm bolters. Bolter shoots 3 times in rapid-fire range, twice at long range. Storm bolter shoots 6 times at short range, 4 times at long range.

still doesn't make a bolter a better weapon, really the bolter even for SoS, SoB, GK sucks it only actually works fir Deathwatch, Fixing the bolter is better solution than just giving marines a get you by special rule.

Honestly, that's the first time I've heard anyone complain about bolters for Sisters.

Few people probably still trying to make SoS work, thank you CA.
SoB get by with acts of faith to prop them up, just look at how the beta codex has been received.

 Smirrors wrote:
Had a look at your inputs. While I agree that 3+ armor isnt everything, its also an issue because people dont take enough of it so the few squads that do get taken get removed pretty quickly.

I haven't finished reading the thread, but I had to respond to this because it isn't true.

For quite a while my basic 1000 point list was 42 Marines (Captain and Lieutenant with minimal gear, five 5-man tac squads with a spread of heavies, and three 5-man dev squads with only two heavies each), and I can tell you that a big pile of power armor doesn't hold up any better than a small pile of power armor supporting vehicles. It was not uncommon to lose more than half those Marines before turn 2.

Tyel wrote:
I guess if you buffed the armour they might eventually be worth it - but that's really not the issue.

The problem is the boltgun sucks for 13 points.
A single S4 punch to the face sucks for 13 points.

This is about half as effective as almost every other troop type in the game.

Net result tacticals suck. Assault marines suck. They are not "generalists". They are just bad.

Net result you have a unit which can't shoot, can't assault, has an okay armour save vs S3/4 AP- weapons but is disproportionately hurt by anything stronger in either category.

-1 AP might help - but really I think they just need a points reduction or more shots/attacks.

I don't buy the claim of "Oh I don't want cheaper Marines because that makes them less special" because right now you see zero on the table because they are so awful. Ditto for basic CSM. (And I don't care if someone shows up saying they currently run 50 tactical marines in their exciting games of garage hammer.)

Primaris are moving in the right direction with every patch - but they still suck for a similar reason. 2 S4/AP-1 shots for 17 points is not good, nor is 2 punches to the face. Not when the same could have bought you over 4 guardsmen or 3 kabalites.

This we can all hopefully agree on. Assault marines don't do their job, with the striking scorpion vs assault marine example was : A) showcasing their output compared to other similarly priced units. B) showcasing issues with space marines dealing damage with close combat units. C) their weapons in general not being up to par to other races.

For 'basic' infantry space marines lack staying power and firepower. They are expensive but you aren't really paying for anything special with marines other than your basic save is a +3 armor save.

As I've said I've been playing Eldar for a while now, I remember well having to avoid assault squads with my striking scorpions cause they would tie me up in close combat for eons. Now My scorpions get into base combat and the assault marines are dead by the end of the fight phase. Every single time. To make matters even worse my scorpions are cheaper and far more effective than the assault squad is.

Most marine units are balanced around the old AP rules as I have stated previously because of this they are subpar. I am not advocating redoing the new AP system but how Marines handle AP. AP -3 is very common, every eldar has a 1/6 chance of having an ap-3 and its a lot more common if your shooting 40 shots from one squad into a tactical squad! I've wiped out entire squads of space marines in a single shooting face with my guardians. Guardians! Not only are my guardian squads more effective than a baseline marine, but they don't suffer penalties as marines do, yeah they have a worse armor save, but they have a higher possibility of getting invulnerable saves across the entire unit rather easily. Space Marines have no effective way to get a bubble shield other than running Azrael. But again what if your not running a super tournament list with Bobby G And the Ice Cream Parade? There is no reason why that should be acceptable for a marine army to be viable is to play all flavors of space marines.

The icing on the cake is that guardians have specific strategems and abilities that just flat out make them a fantastic troop choice. In eldar armies you need your troop choices, in space marines you don't want your troop choices as they are always subpar compared to just other choices.

Its horribly balanced not well thought out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Something like this?

Stratagem: The Emperor Protects! (1/2 CP)
Use at the beginning of the phase (or when targeted by an attack) on an Adeptus Astartes Infantry unit (excluding scouts perhaps, up for debate). Until the end of the phase, the unit treats all wounds taken and AP0. 1 CP if used on a troop-choice unit. 2 CP if used on a non-troop choice unit.

No just make it a basic special rule get rid of combat squads just keep this as a universal special rule for space marines.

The solution is to let all marines take 2 point storm sheilds.

 Xenomancers wrote:
The solution is to let all marines take 2 point storm sheilds.

Combat shields a fundamentally worse equipment is now more expensive than a +3 invulnerable save.

Whoever balanced CA needs to get their bolts straightened. Cause honestly at this point a combat shield should just be free.

A stormshield should be 5pts, and/or a combat shield is 2pts. now 2pts. For petes sake.

I think we just need less invulnerable saves. Not more. More invulnerable saves just create blatant power creep. Every squad getting invulnerable saves is just annoying to everyone involved.

Odd, my Striking Scorpions still need to avoid equal numbers of ASM or they get bogged down. You get MWs on 6s, sure, but you wound on 4s and they wound on 3s. Same attacks. Scorpions have a minor edge thanks to the MW, but ASM have either more manueverability (jetpacks) or are cheaper (no jetpacks).

I don't see Scorpions doing anything ASM don't do.