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.
Tygre wrote: Isn't the problem the over abundance of high powered weaponry? Why not increase the price of all weapons. Perhaps start with doubling the cost of all weapons and modify from there.
It is part of the problem but not the biggest problem. Even if you toned down all the shooting, all weapons would still kill more points of marines than of guard.
A: That's not auto-bad.
B: Are you taking morale into account?
Morale is that thing you either never roll or just use 2 cp on, right?
I pretty much laugh at anyone that thinks Morale is a serious argument. Morale hasn't mattered since even 4th edition (it was nice when you made your opponent flee but it was unlikely).
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Tygre wrote: Isn't the problem the over abundance of high powered weaponry? Why not increase the price of all weapons. Perhaps start with doubling the cost of all weapons and modify from there.
It is part of the problem but not the biggest problem. Even if you toned down all the shooting, all weapons would still kill more points of marines than of guard.
A: That's not auto-bad.
B: Are you taking morale into account?
Morale is that thing you either never roll or just use 2 cp on, right?
I pretty much laugh at anyone that thinks Morale is a serious argument. Morale hasn't mattered since even 4th edition (it was nice when you made your opponent flee but it was unlikely).
And you'll lose more games for not taking advantage of it.
Bharring wrote: I'm not saying DE and CWE need buffs. I'm just pointing out that Marines didn't "lose" AP-1 any more than most of the other factions did. AP5 became AP0. AP4 became AP-1. There were changes atop that as well, but Marines didn't lose AP-1.
Okay so how would you go about changing bolters to be viable?
How you change And they Shall know no fear to be viable as an ability again?
How would you make morale more of a constant?
How would you give space marines more power in close combat?
How would you give space marines their fire power back?
Cause right now what I see is that marines are underpowered in the shooting of all their primary weaponry. We can't just give marines more specialists cause that just racks up the costs again.
Marines lost out on having powerful equipment everyone else was given special rules or additional power to their weaponry while space marines stayed in the back with a terrible weapon. AP-1 would not harm everyone as marines already have an ap-1 bolter but only for primaris.
I wouldn't change And They Shall Know no Fear. Marines take so few casulties that cause battle shock that a re-roll pretty much fixes any losses they would have.
I personally preferred the old Moral system.
Remind marine players that unless they're fighting marines, they typically are stronger, tougher, and more durable then anything they're fighting against, outside of specialist melee units like ork boyz and guants.
Remind them that they can take more special/heavy weapons in a squad then other armies can for the same squad size. You get two plasma guns (one is a combi) for guard's one, and your better shots, and more durable.
Crimson wrote: These Dakka 'How to Fix Marines' threads are always so fething pointless.
Poster 1: "How to fix problem X, Y and Z on marines'
Poster2: "Primaris have fixed the problems X, Y and Z."
Poster1: "Noo, Primaris bad! No Primaris!"
Have you read what I've said? I haven't said 'they are bad'. Just that it would make them too powerful. Primaris are good but not that good. (Hence why no one runs them in tournaments).
Shurikens used to be AP:5 and had rending. If we're going to make bolters AP: -1 then no reason not to do the same with shurikens.
Pulse weapons were AP: 5. If we're going to make bolters AP: -1 then no reason not to do the same with pulse weapons.
Shootas were AP: 6. I wouldn't really change them either.
Spinter used to be AP: 5. If we're going to make bolters AP: -1 then no reason not to do the same with splinters.
Okay.
Not taking morale into account is disingenuous, as it is part of unit durability.
20 Bolter shots kills about 6 Guardsmen. At which point they have a 50% chance (4+) of losing 3 more. For a total loss of (9x4) 36 points. (average roll would be 3.5, so 34 points if you want to count it that way)
20 Bolter shots kills 2.2 Marines. No losses to morale. For a total loss of 28ish points.
So when you're dealing with small amounts of small arms, Guard are more durable pp, but when dealing with larger amounts of small arms, Space Marines are more durable.
Not to mention the effect of cover, in which Space Marines halve the damage dealt to them by small arms.
I disagree morale is only used very rarely. Even if that. Morale should be taken into account far more often in games or be apart of close combat etc. The fact its only in when a unit suffers damage is a waste of an entire mechanic.
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
I disagree morale is only used very rarely. Even if that. Morale should be taken into account far more often in games or be apart of close combat etc. The fact its only in when a unit suffers damage is a waste of an entire mechanic.
When you're fighting Guard, it's a mechanic at your disposal that you should use.
Bharring wrote: I'm not saying DE and CWE need buffs. I'm just pointing out that Marines didn't "lose" AP-1 any more than most of the other factions did. AP5 became AP0. AP4 became AP-1. There were changes atop that as well, but Marines didn't lose AP-1.
Okay so how would you go about changing bolters to be viable?
How you change And they Shall know no fear to be viable as an ability again?
How would you make morale more of a constant?
How would you give space marines more power in close combat?
How would you give space marines their fire power back?
Cause right now what I see is that marines are underpowered in the shooting of all their primary weaponry. We can't just give marines more specialists cause that just racks up the costs again.
Marines lost out on having powerful equipment everyone else was given special rules or additional power to their weaponry while space marines stayed in the back with a terrible weapon. AP-1 would not harm everyone as marines already have an ap-1 bolter but only for primaris.
I wouldn't change And They Shall Know no Fear. Marines take so few casulties that cause battle shock that a re-roll pretty much fixes any losses they would have. I personally preferred the old Moral system. Remind marine players that unless they're fighting marines, they typically are stronger, tougher, and more durable then anything they're fighting against, outside of specialist melee units like ork boyz and guants. Remind them that they can take more special/heavy weapons in a squad then other armies can for the same squad size. You get two plasma guns (one is a combi) for guard's one, and your better shots, and more durable.
Special weapons can only be taken if a squad is 10. So you can take one per a squad as cp generation is again everything emphasizing smaller squads. Marines being cheaper helps but i think making the tactical squads have half costed heavy weaponry and special weapons (like in 5th and 4th) would be helpful in bringing down the costs of space marines.
WE don't get two plasma guns for the 'guards one' you need a full squad of ten to do that which is around 190 pts. So no thank you. I'll take my 7 squads of guardsmen veterans for cheaper cp generation.
When you're fighting Guard, it's a mechanic at your disposal that you should use.
Oh I bet but its only relevant once. which is my point its only used when calculating casualities (sometimes psychic phase). But otherwise its so rare that it doesn't come into account in most games. Which if you've been reading the other thread on close combat changes would fix that issue i have.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/14 17:37:54
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
As long as you change everyone's bolters, sure. Go for it.
Thats fine with me honestly.
Bolters are supposed to be terrifying on the field, and it would boost the power of grey knights to ludiciorus degree which I am a fan of. It will help every single faction that uses bolter weapons and that is completely fine. It also punishes eldar, orks, and tau considerably. And makes a Chaos Space Marine squads, Paladins, Deathwing, Sisters of Battle, very good and I am all for making all those races super viable like they are supposed to be.
The problem with that though is that the armies you want to punish already get shellacked by bolter fire. Sure they're more resilient than in 7th, but massed S4 hurts them.
Not in terms of saves. S4 only helps a small bit. not completely as ap is generally how 'killy' a weapon can be against infantry. Strength helps with wound rolls but if it is a s10 ap0 its not going to do as much damage as a s10 ap-1. that changes the die by 1/6.
Bolters should be more powerful and would make some lacking armies much more powerful and have actual killing potential cause currently bolters are overpriced and not worthwhile compared to guardsmen with lasguns.
They are more powerful. They wound guard on a 3+ and marines on a 4+. They're currently -0- points. Sorry but you're not going to convince me that bolters are weak if you're comparing them to lasguns.
The models that require bolters are expensive mate. Stormbolters gaining an AP-1 would be very helpful and would justify the cost it takes to for the unit that can take them.
I am comparing bolters to lasguns because a lasgun is only 1 strength less than a bolter? So that justifies them being almost as powerful as a bolter? In a previous addition a bolter was AP5. So a -1 ap to 6+ saves. Now they are so close in profile its laughable.
They're not just as powerful as a bolter. They're only half as effective, and that's not including a marines's better BS. Even with AP: 0 they still kill guard at a higher rate then guard kill marines with las guns. Maybe don't run your 5 man tactical squads right at 50+ guardsmen in the open.
They're not just as powerful as a bolter. They're only half as effective, and that's not including a marines's better BS. Even with AP: 0 they still kill guard at a higher rate then guard kill marines with las guns. Maybe don't run your 5 man tactical squads right at 50+ guardsmen in the open.
I'll run my marines when they become useful, otherwise I'll take my 50 guardsmen and my knights over any space marine army. And all my generated CP that i can use for my custodes on jetbikes. Again this isn't just for marines but for everyone that uses bolters. Including regular guard units with heavy bolters.
If they did this it would increase the effectiveness of most imperial armies.
So maybe you read my other suggestions as well?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/12/14 17:41:56
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
Bharring wrote: I'm not saying DE and CWE need buffs. I'm just pointing out that Marines didn't "lose" AP-1 any more than most of the other factions did. AP5 became AP0. AP4 became AP-1. There were changes atop that as well, but Marines didn't lose AP-1.
Okay so how would you go about changing bolters to be viable?
How you change And they Shall know no fear to be viable as an ability again?
How would you make morale more of a constant?
How would you give space marines more power in close combat?
How would you give space marines their fire power back?
Cause right now what I see is that marines are underpowered in the shooting of all their primary weaponry. We can't just give marines more specialists cause that just racks up the costs again.
Marines lost out on having powerful equipment everyone else was given special rules or additional power to their weaponry while space marines stayed in the back with a terrible weapon. AP-1 would not harm everyone as marines already have an ap-1 bolter but only for primaris.
I wouldn't change And They Shall Know no Fear. Marines take so few casulties that cause battle shock that a re-roll pretty much fixes any losses they would have.
I personally preferred the old Moral system.
Remind marine players that unless they're fighting marines, they typically are stronger, tougher, and more durable then anything they're fighting against, outside of specialist melee units like ork boyz and guants.
Remind them that they can take more special/heavy weapons in a squad then other armies can for the same squad size. You get two plasma guns (one is a combi) for guard's one, and your better shots, and more durable.
Special weapons can only be taken if a squad is 10. So you can take one per a squad as cp generation is again everything emphasizing smaller squads. Marines being cheaper helps but i think making the tactical squads have half costed heavy weaponry and special weapons (like in 5th and 4th) would be helpful in bringing down the costs of space marines.
WE don't get two plasma guns for the 'guards one' you need a full squad of ten to do that which is around 190 pts. So no thank you. I'll take my 7 squads of guardsmen veterans for cheaper cp generation.
When you're fighting Guard, it's a mechanic at your disposal that you should use.
Oh I bet but its only relevant once. which is my point its only used when calculating casualities (sometimes psychic phase). But otherwise its so rare that it doesn't come into account in most games. Which if you've been reading the other thread on close combat changes would fix that issue i have.
You do get two special weapons, if you count the combi-weapon on your Sargent. You get one heavy or one special at 5, one of each at 10, and in both cases the sargent gets a combi. Why should marines get weapons cheaper, despite being better at using them (BS:3+)
You get two plasma guns for roughly 80 points (including the five marines). It costs the IG player close to 100 points for the same number, and they're worse shots. And good luck fielding 7 units of vets with the rule of three.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/14 17:42:59
And good luck fielding 7 units of vets with the rule of three.
Vets don't count towards the rule of three. They are a troop choice.
You get two plasma guns for roughly 80 points (including the five marines).
You are way off its 87pts. (plasma guns are 11pts each, marines are 13pts each) for a full squad of marines would be around 152pts or 169 (for a heavy bolter).... Which no one will do because bolter marines suck Tactical squads are useless because their firepower does not match any of the other units. Bolters also suffer the problem of needing to be rapid fired. for that 152pts I can get several squads of veterans and guardsmen with heavy emplacements or a voxcaster and a commissar. So no guardsmen still win in terms of sheer weight of fire especially once orders are contributing to them.... or the cadian special rule again Tact marines have nothing on guardsmen. if we were comparing one unit vs one unit sure. but we aren't we are comparing the sheer weight of fire and cost-effectiveness which you have repeatedly ignored.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/12/14 17:49:54
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
Tygre wrote: Isn't the problem the over abundance of high powered weaponry? Why not increase the price of all weapons. Perhaps start with doubling the cost of all weapons and modify from there.
It is part of the problem but not the biggest problem. Even if you toned down all the shooting, all weapons would still kill more points of marines than of guard.
A: That's not auto-bad.
B: Are you taking morale into account?
Morale is that thing you either never roll or just use 2 cp on, right?
I pretty much laugh at anyone that thinks Morale is a serious argument. Morale hasn't mattered since even 4th edition (it was nice when you made your opponent flee but it was unlikely).
And you'll lose more games for not taking advantage of it.
If that were true, the LD shenanigans army traits would actually be popular.
They're not because relying on beating the opponent via morale is literally stupid to do.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
They're not just as powerful as a bolter. They're only half as effective, and that's not including a marines's better BS. Even with AP: 0 they still kill guard at a higher rate then guard kill marines with las guns. Maybe don't run your 5 man tactical squads right at 50+ guardsmen in the open.
I'll run my marines when they become useful, otherwise I'll take my 50 guardsmen and my knights over any space marine army. And all my generated CP that i can use for my custodes on jetbikes. Again this isn't just for marines but for everyone that uses bolters. Including regular guard units with heavy bolters.
If they did this it would increase the effectiveness of most imperial armies.
So maybe you read my other suggestions as well?
My regular space marine opponent has no issues killing guard equivalents with bolters.
My sisters with bolters have no issues killing things like cultists.
I've found marines very useful if you use cover, mass fire where needed, and take advantage of moral.
Bharring wrote: I'm not saying DE and CWE need buffs. I'm just pointing out that Marines didn't "lose" AP-1 any more than most of the other factions did. AP5 became AP0. AP4 became AP-1. There were changes atop that as well, but Marines didn't lose AP-1.
Okay so how would you go about changing bolters to be viable?
How you change And they Shall know no fear to be viable as an ability again?
How would you make morale more of a constant?
How would you give space marines more power in close combat?
How would you give space marines their fire power back?
Cause right now what I see is that marines are underpowered in the shooting of all their primary weaponry. We can't just give marines more specialists cause that just racks up the costs again.
Marines lost out on having powerful equipment everyone else was given special rules or additional power to their weaponry while space marines stayed in the back with a terrible weapon. AP-1 would not harm everyone as marines already have an ap-1 bolter but only for primaris.
I wouldn't change And They Shall Know no Fear. Marines take so few casulties that cause battle shock that a re-roll pretty much fixes any losses they would have.
I personally preferred the old Moral system.
Remind marine players that unless they're fighting marines, they typically are stronger, tougher, and more durable then anything they're fighting against, outside of specialist melee units like ork boyz and guants.
Remind them that they can take more special/heavy weapons in a squad then other armies can for the same squad size. You get two plasma guns (one is a combi) for guard's one, and your better shots, and more durable.
Special weapons can only be taken if a squad is 10. So you can take one per a squad as cp generation is again everything emphasizing smaller squads. Marines being cheaper helps but i think making the tactical squads have half costed heavy weaponry and special weapons (like in 5th and 4th) would be helpful in bringing down the costs of space marines.
WE don't get two plasma guns for the 'guards one' you need a full squad of ten to do that which is around 190 pts. So no thank you. I'll take my 7 squads of guardsmen veterans for cheaper cp generation.
When you're fighting Guard, it's a mechanic at your disposal that you should use.
Oh I bet but its only relevant once. which is my point its only used when calculating casualities (sometimes psychic phase). But otherwise its so rare that it doesn't come into account in most games. Which if you've been reading the other thread on close combat changes would fix that issue i have.
You do get two special weapons, if you count the combi-weapon on your Sargent. You get one heavy or one special at 5, one of each at 10, and in both cases the sargent gets a combi. Why should marines get weapons cheaper, despite being better at using them (BS:3+)
You get two plasma guns for roughly 80 points (including the five marines). It costs the IG player close to 100 points for the same number, and they're worse shots. And good luck fielding 7 units of vets with the rule of three.
You also get 20 bodies vs 5 so...
Also there's no reason Guard should pay cheaper for weapons. Every other army pays for their BS to use their range weapons better, and THEN they have to pay higher for the weapon too? That's already in their base cost.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/14 17:47:12
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
40k is a game that encourages you to play with things like Imperial Knights. No amount of power armor matters at that scale.
If you want tough marines, play Kill Team.
"'players must agree how they are going to select their armies, and if any restrictions apply to the number and type of models they can use."
This is an actual rule in the actual rulebook. Quit whining about how you can imagine someone's army touching you in a bad place and play by the actual rules.
Freelance Ontologist
When people ask, "What's the point in understanding everything?" they've just disqualified themselves from using questions and should disappear in a puff of paradox. But they don't understand and just continue existing, which are also their only two strategies for life.
When you're fighting Guard, it's a mechanic at your disposal that you should use.
Oh I bet but its only relevant once. which is my point its only used when calculating casualities (sometimes psychic phase). But otherwise its so rare that it doesn't come into account in most games. Which if you've been reading the other thread on close combat changes would fix that issue i have.
Being relevant only once, doesn't make it not relevant, however. If it's a viable option to use to kill more models, and is a core mechanic in the game, and we're talking about balancing units based around core mechanics, we gotta acknowledge its potential effects.
When I fight Guard, I gun for dealing about 7 casualties to each squad in order to maximize the potential efficiency for guardsmen running away. While it's true that I have to coordinate a little bit more in order to maximize the effects of morale, the effect is certainly measurable and relevant.
Bharring wrote: I'm not saying DE and CWE need buffs. I'm just pointing out that Marines didn't "lose" AP-1 any more than most of the other factions did. AP5 became AP0. AP4 became AP-1. There were changes atop that as well, but Marines didn't lose AP-1.
Okay so how would you go about changing bolters to be viable?
How you change And they Shall know no fear to be viable as an ability again?
How would you make morale more of a constant?
How would you give space marines more power in close combat?
How would you give space marines their fire power back?
Cause right now what I see is that marines are underpowered in the shooting of all their primary weaponry. We can't just give marines more specialists cause that just racks up the costs again.
Marines lost out on having powerful equipment everyone else was given special rules or additional power to their weaponry while space marines stayed in the back with a terrible weapon. AP-1 would not harm everyone as marines already have an ap-1 bolter but only for primaris.
I wouldn't change And They Shall Know no Fear. Marines take so few casulties that cause battle shock that a re-roll pretty much fixes any losses they would have.
I personally preferred the old Moral system.
Remind marine players that unless they're fighting marines, they typically are stronger, tougher, and more durable then anything they're fighting against, outside of specialist melee units like ork boyz and guants.
Remind them that they can take more special/heavy weapons in a squad then other armies can for the same squad size. You get two plasma guns (one is a combi) for guard's one, and your better shots, and more durable.
Special weapons can only be taken if a squad is 10. So you can take one per a squad as cp generation is again everything emphasizing smaller squads. Marines being cheaper helps but i think making the tactical squads have half costed heavy weaponry and special weapons (like in 5th and 4th) would be helpful in bringing down the costs of space marines.
WE don't get two plasma guns for the 'guards one' you need a full squad of ten to do that which is around 190 pts. So no thank you. I'll take my 7 squads of guardsmen veterans for cheaper cp generation.
When you're fighting Guard, it's a mechanic at your disposal that you should use.
Oh I bet but its only relevant once. which is my point its only used when calculating casualities (sometimes psychic phase). But otherwise its so rare that it doesn't come into account in most games. Which if you've been reading the other thread on close combat changes would fix that issue i have.
You do get two special weapons, if you count the combi-weapon on your Sargent. You get one heavy or one special at 5, one of each at 10, and in both cases the sargent gets a combi. Why should marines get weapons cheaper, despite being better at using them (BS:3+)
You get two plasma guns for roughly 80 points (including the five marines). It costs the IG player close to 100 points for the same number, and they're worse shots. And good luck fielding 7 units of vets with the rule of three.
You also get 20 bodies vs 5 so...
Also there's no reason Guard should pay cheaper for weapons. Every other army pays for their BS to use their range weapons better, and THEN they have to pay higher for the weapon too? That's already in their base cost.
I never said they should pay less than marines, I said marines shouldn't pay less than guard.
Yup, 20 guard bodies. Again, why are you running five marines straight at 20 guardsmen?
Bharring wrote: I'm not saying DE and CWE need buffs. I'm just pointing out that Marines didn't "lose" AP-1 any more than most of the other factions did. AP5 became AP0. AP4 became AP-1. There were changes atop that as well, but Marines didn't lose AP-1.
Okay so how would you go about changing bolters to be viable?
How you change And they Shall know no fear to be viable as an ability again?
How would you make morale more of a constant?
How would you give space marines more power in close combat?
How would you give space marines their fire power back?
Cause right now what I see is that marines are underpowered in the shooting of all their primary weaponry. We can't just give marines more specialists cause that just racks up the costs again.
Marines lost out on having powerful equipment everyone else was given special rules or additional power to their weaponry while space marines stayed in the back with a terrible weapon. AP-1 would not harm everyone as marines already have an ap-1 bolter but only for primaris.
I wouldn't change And They Shall Know no Fear. Marines take so few casulties that cause battle shock that a re-roll pretty much fixes any losses they would have. I personally preferred the old Moral system. Remind marine players that unless they're fighting marines, they typically are stronger, tougher, and more durable then anything they're fighting against, outside of specialist melee units like ork boyz and guants. Remind them that they can take more special/heavy weapons in a squad then other armies can for the same squad size. You get two plasma guns (one is a combi) for guard's one, and your better shots, and more durable.
Special weapons can only be taken if a squad is 10. So you can take one per a squad as cp generation is again everything emphasizing smaller squads. Marines being cheaper helps but i think making the tactical squads have half costed heavy weaponry and special weapons (like in 5th and 4th) would be helpful in bringing down the costs of space marines.
WE don't get two plasma guns for the 'guards one' you need a full squad of ten to do that which is around 190 pts. So no thank you. I'll take my 7 squads of guardsmen veterans for cheaper cp generation.
When you're fighting Guard, it's a mechanic at your disposal that you should use.
Oh I bet but its only relevant once. which is my point its only used when calculating casualities (sometimes psychic phase). But otherwise its so rare that it doesn't come into account in most games. Which if you've been reading the other thread on close combat changes would fix that issue i have.
You do get two special weapons, if you count the combi-weapon on your Sargent. You get one heavy or one special at 5, one of each at 10, and in both cases the sargent gets a combi. Why should marines get weapons cheaper, despite being better at using them (BS:3+)
You get two plasma guns for roughly 80 points (including the five marines). It costs the IG player close to 100 points for the same number, and they're worse shots. And good luck fielding 7 units of vets with the rule of three.
You also get 20 bodies vs 5 so...
Also there's no reason Guard should pay cheaper for weapons. Every other army pays for their BS to use their range weapons better, and THEN they have to pay higher for the weapon too? That's already in their base cost.
I never said they should pay less than marines, I said marines shouldn't pay less than guard.
Yup, 20 guard bodies. Again, why are you running five marines straight at 20 guardsmen?
Why would you run marines? IF you could run guard for more CP and more sheer weight of fire?
20 guards = same cost as a 5 man squad of space marines.
My (standard) IG codex for 8th ed says that they're an elite choice.
Confused Conscripts and Guardsmen for vets. but I also have Tempestus Scions for 50pts as a troop choice.... so already better than marines.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/12/14 17:52:29
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
Bharring wrote: I'm not saying DE and CWE need buffs. I'm just pointing out that Marines didn't "lose" AP-1 any more than most of the other factions did. AP5 became AP0. AP4 became AP-1. There were changes atop that as well, but Marines didn't lose AP-1.
Okay so how would you go about changing bolters to be viable?
How you change And they Shall know no fear to be viable as an ability again?
How would you make morale more of a constant?
How would you give space marines more power in close combat?
How would you give space marines their fire power back?
Cause right now what I see is that marines are underpowered in the shooting of all their primary weaponry. We can't just give marines more specialists cause that just racks up the costs again.
Marines lost out on having powerful equipment everyone else was given special rules or additional power to their weaponry while space marines stayed in the back with a terrible weapon. AP-1 would not harm everyone as marines already have an ap-1 bolter but only for primaris.
I wouldn't change And They Shall Know no Fear. Marines take so few casulties that cause battle shock that a re-roll pretty much fixes any losses they would have.
I personally preferred the old Moral system.
Remind marine players that unless they're fighting marines, they typically are stronger, tougher, and more durable then anything they're fighting against, outside of specialist melee units like ork boyz and guants.
Remind them that they can take more special/heavy weapons in a squad then other armies can for the same squad size. You get two plasma guns (one is a combi) for guard's one, and your better shots, and more durable.
Special weapons can only be taken if a squad is 10. So you can take one per a squad as cp generation is again everything emphasizing smaller squads. Marines being cheaper helps but i think making the tactical squads have half costed heavy weaponry and special weapons (like in 5th and 4th) would be helpful in bringing down the costs of space marines.
WE don't get two plasma guns for the 'guards one' you need a full squad of ten to do that which is around 190 pts. So no thank you. I'll take my 7 squads of guardsmen veterans for cheaper cp generation.
When you're fighting Guard, it's a mechanic at your disposal that you should use.
Oh I bet but its only relevant once. which is my point its only used when calculating casualities (sometimes psychic phase). But otherwise its so rare that it doesn't come into account in most games. Which if you've been reading the other thread on close combat changes would fix that issue i have.
You do get two special weapons, if you count the combi-weapon on your Sargent. You get one heavy or one special at 5, one of each at 10, and in both cases the sargent gets a combi. Why should marines get weapons cheaper, despite being better at using them (BS:3+)
You get two plasma guns for roughly 80 points (including the five marines). It costs the IG player close to 100 points for the same number, and they're worse shots. And good luck fielding 7 units of vets with the rule of three.
You also get 20 bodies vs 5 so...
Also there's no reason Guard should pay cheaper for weapons. Every other army pays for their BS to use their range weapons better, and THEN they have to pay higher for the weapon too? That's already in their base cost.
I never said they should pay less than marines, I said marines shouldn't pay less than guard.
Yup, 20 guard bodies. Again, why are you running five marines straight at 20 guardsmen?
Why would you run marines?
If you don't like them don't.
And those scions are only T3 with a 4+, and unless you're buying them a chimera, you can either make them walk and shoot them at long range, or control where they drop.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/14 17:54:08
Tygre wrote: Isn't the problem the over abundance of high powered weaponry? Why not increase the price of all weapons. Perhaps start with doubling the cost of all weapons and modify from there.
It is part of the problem but not the biggest problem. Even if you toned down all the shooting, all weapons would still kill more points of marines than of guard.
A: That's not auto-bad.
B: Are you taking morale into account?
Morale is that thing you either never roll or just use 2 cp on, right?
I pretty much laugh at anyone that thinks Morale is a serious argument. Morale hasn't mattered since even 4th edition (it was nice when you made your opponent flee but it was unlikely).
And you'll lose more games for not taking advantage of it.
If that were true, the LD shenanigans army traits would actually be popular.
They're not because relying on beating the opponent via morale is literally stupid to do.
Morale traits aren't taken because lots of factions can shrug it off.
It just so happens that Guard aren't usually one of them, and we're talking explicitly about the relationship between Marines and Guard. Therefore, it matters to the discussion.
Tygre wrote: Isn't the problem the over abundance of high powered weaponry? Why not increase the price of all weapons. Perhaps start with doubling the cost of all weapons and modify from there.
It is part of the problem but not the biggest problem. Even if you toned down all the shooting, all weapons would still kill more points of marines than of guard.
A: That's not auto-bad.
B: Are you taking morale into account?
Morale is that thing you either never roll or just use 2 cp on, right?
I pretty much laugh at anyone that thinks Morale is a serious argument. Morale hasn't mattered since even 4th edition (it was nice when you made your opponent flee but it was unlikely).
And you'll lose more games for not taking advantage of it.
If that were true, the LD shenanigans army traits would actually be popular.
They're not because relying on beating the opponent via morale is literally stupid to do.
Morale traits aren't taken because lots of factions can shrug it off.
It just so happens that Guard aren't usually one of them, and we're talking explicitly about the relationship between Marines and Guard. Therefore, it matters to the discussion.
Guard also have the benefit of having orders. Morale doesn't really come in cause marines don't cause enough damage for it to matter. Once guardsmen get leman russes on the field the guard will automatically do better in terms of sheer weight of fire and effectiveness.
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
Tygre wrote: Isn't the problem the over abundance of high powered weaponry? Why not increase the price of all weapons. Perhaps start with doubling the cost of all weapons and modify from there.
It is part of the problem but not the biggest problem. Even if you toned down all the shooting, all weapons would still kill more points of marines than of guard.
A: That's not auto-bad.
B: Are you taking morale into account?
Morale is that thing you either never roll or just use 2 cp on, right?
I pretty much laugh at anyone that thinks Morale is a serious argument. Morale hasn't mattered since even 4th edition (it was nice when you made your opponent flee but it was unlikely).
And you'll lose more games for not taking advantage of it.
If that were true, the LD shenanigans army traits would actually be popular.
They're not because relying on beating the opponent via morale is literally stupid to do.
Morale traits aren't taken because lots of factions can shrug it off.
It just so happens that Guard aren't usually one of them, and we're talking explicitly about the relationship between Marines and Guard. Therefore, it matters to the discussion.
Guard also have the benefit of having orders. Morale doesn't really come in cause marines don't cause enough damage for it to matter. Once guardsmen get leman russes on the field the guard will automatically do better in terms of sheer weight of fire and effectiveness.
And marines have three non-special characters that give re-rolls to various attacks and damages. You also apparently don't talk to many guard players, because they mostly say LR's suck.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/14 17:57:32
Well, why? If Guard are intended to be a tough unit, and they function as a tough unit, what's wrong with that? There's not really a strong reason to make Marines tougher per-point than Guard.
I find it rather surreal that we're arguing whether or not guardsmen should be more durable against every weapon in the game than the marines.
Not taking morale into account is disingenuous, as it is part of unit durability.
Omitting that there are several easy ways to mitigate morale is disingenuous. The guard player can pretty much dictate when and if their models are affected by the morale. Furthermore, citing averages on this example is misleading. Marines lose models to the morale rarely, but when they do, it means a loss of a lot of points. They also have less CP to use for anti-morale stratagems.
Tygre wrote: Isn't the problem the over abundance of high powered weaponry? Why not increase the price of all weapons. Perhaps start with doubling the cost of all weapons and modify from there.
It is part of the problem but not the biggest problem. Even if you toned down all the shooting, all weapons would still kill more points of marines than of guard.
A: That's not auto-bad.
B: Are you taking morale into account?
Morale is that thing you either never roll or just use 2 cp on, right?
I pretty much laugh at anyone that thinks Morale is a serious argument. Morale hasn't mattered since even 4th edition (it was nice when you made your opponent flee but it was unlikely).
And you'll lose more games for not taking advantage of it.
If that were true, the LD shenanigans army traits would actually be popular.
They're not because relying on beating the opponent via morale is literally stupid to do.
Morale traits aren't taken because lots of factions can shrug it off.
It just so happens that Guard aren't usually one of them, and we're talking explicitly about the relationship between Marines and Guard. Therefore, it matters to the discussion.
Guard also have the benefit of having orders. Morale doesn't really come in cause marines don't cause enough damage for it to matter. Once guardsmen get leman russes on the field the guard will automatically do better in terms of sheer weight of fire and effectiveness.
Non substantive irrelevant claim, there. We just showed that 20 bolter shots will cause a morale check, and marines can get far more effective weapons than bolters.
And those scions are only T3 with a 4+, and unless you're buying them a chimera, you can either make them walk and shoot them at long range, or control where they drop.
Hot-shot las guns make marines turn into giblets with an Ap -2 effectively removes their save and have better deployment options and hit at the same BS as a marine. I can take a squad of 10 for 100pts or 5 power. For a squad of 10 marines for a tactical squad its 165pts with maybe two special weapons / and a heavy weapon. or 9 power. so in total tempestus's have 1 less strength, 1 less toughness, but deal 80% more damage per a model due to their ap-. Again tell me how the 'elite space marines' can deal with that? Guardsmen also have orders.
Rerolls matter little if you need to make a 165pt unit more effective thus increasing cost of the entire unit to be useful. Cadians already have that on base and can take things at cheaper.
If you want to continue to say "Why play marines thats your fault." Then that proves my point marines aren't effective. Case and point you've only pointed as to why they are sorely in need buffs.
We just showed that 20 bolter shots will cause a morale check, and marines can get far more effective weapons than bolters.
If 1 marine dies that's 3 guardsmen dead in comparison. Thus a more substantial decrease in the effectiveness of the squad and the army. For every 13pts dead that is nearly a 1/10 of the squad removed entirely. Guardsmen have the abilities and special rules to back it up and can effectively eliminate morale checks. I play guard in my imperial soup lists their leadership checks rarely happen if done well. Morale is not used often this is unchanged.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/12/14 18:04:24
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
Crimson wrote: These Dakka 'How to Fix Marines' threads are always so fething pointless.
Poster 1: "How to fix problem X, Y and Z on marines'
Poster2: "Primaris have fixed the problems X, Y and Z."
Poster1: "Noo, Primaris bad! No Primaris!"
Have you read what I've said? I haven't said 'they are bad'. Just that it would make them too powerful. Primaris are good but not that good. (Hence why no one runs them in tournaments).
So Primaris stats would make the marines too powerful but at the same time the Primaris are not powerful enough?
Well, why? If Guard are intended to be a tough unit, and they function as a tough unit, what's wrong with that? There's not really a strong reason to make Marines tougher per-point than Guard.
I find it rather surreal that we're arguing whether or not guardsmen should be more durable against every weapon in the game than the marines.
That's not a counter argument. Give me some core design principle that's broken by Guard being a simply "tough" unit.
Not taking morale into account is disingenuous, as it is part of unit durability.
Omitting that there are several easy ways to mitigate morale is disingenuous. The guard player can pretty much dictate when and if their models are affected by the morale. Furthermore, citing averages on this example is misleading. Marines lose models to the morale rarely, but when they do, it means a loss of a lot of points. They also have less CP to use for anti-morale stratagems.
There are many ways to mitigate morale. The problem for you here is that the basic Marine has his morale-mitigation built in. They can be in units of 5, and have ATSKNF. It's intrinsically part of the valuation of the unit. Guardsmen don't have mitigation built in, and come in squads of ten. They are intrinsically more suspect to morale than marines, and that's a part of their points value. Therefore, if you want to have a discussion about efficiency/durability per point, morale can't be ignored.
