The Power Armor Problem

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.

**Marmatag**

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Of course, IG (and Orks) are better than Eldar, but fortunately, tournament constraints on time and board space make both of those unplayable competitively. SM have no right to complain when Eldar push their gak in when there's no IG or Orks around.

Probably the funniest post in here. Orks and IG are amazing in ITC tournaments. But this guy is essentially trollposting and gakposting so who really cares what he says.

**JohnHwangDD**

Marmatag wrote:
JohnHwangDD wrote:

Of course, IG (and Orks) are better than Eldar, but fortunately, tournament constraints on time and board space make both of those unplayable competitively. SM have no right to complain when Eldar push their gak in when there's no IG or Orks around.

Probably the funniest post in here. Orks and IG are amazing in ITC tournaments. But this guy is essentially trollposting and gakposting so who really cares what he says.

I only speak to when I played competitively, which predates "ITC" by quite some time. When I played, Orks and IG were consistently low tier because ### SM > IG/Orks. But when I played, I had my gak together. You can check my gallery for "proof".

As for trolling and sh!tposting, that's what this entire post is, right? The SM players are doing nothing but trolling and sh!tposting the entire thread. And don't act like your post was content-free.

**Bharring**

This is what I find hilarious:
-IG were bad for several editions. 8E hit, now they're top tier. GG OP IG GAME IS BAD.
-DE were bad for several editions. 8E hit, they're still terrible. 8E codex hits, now they're OP. GG OP ELDAR GAME IS BAD.
-Marines were top tier at several points in 7E, and for a brief period of time in 8E. Now they're bad. GG OP ELDAR GAME IS BAD MARINES ALWAYS SUCK.

**Insectum7**

^Marine players have complained about marine casualties since time immemorial.

**Slayer-Fan123**

Bharring wrote:
This is what I find hilarious:
-IG were bad for several editions. 8E hit, now they're top tier. GG OP IG GAME IS BAD.
-DE were bad for several editions. 8E hit, they're still terrible. 8E codex hits, now they're OP. GG OP ELDAR GAME IS BAD.
-Marines were top tier at several points in 7E, and for a brief period of time in 8E. Now they're bad. GG OP ELDAR GAME IS BAD MARINES ALWAYS SUCK.

That's literally not what's going on. At all

**Bharring**

"^Marine players have complained about marine casualties since time immemorial."
We even had these threads when Marines *were* on top.

Granted, they're right, right now. Marines are in a bad place. But you wouldn't be able to tell just by reading DakkaDakka.

**Asherian Command**

Bharring wrote:
"^Marine players have complained about marine casualties since time immemorial."
We even had these threads when Marines *were* on top.

Granted, they're right, right now. Marines are in a bad place. But you wouldn't be able to tell just by reading DakkaDakka.

Kind of hard, marines are such in a poor spot. Anyone who vehemently defends and says its acceptable has not faced marine opponents and just how fast they can get slaughtered.

If we removed super heavies it wouldn't be enough to bring marines back to being good. Their units are too expensive and or do not do enough to rationalize their WPP or PPW.

I think it would go a long way to give all vet sarges +1 wound. And all close combat units in the marine codex +1 attack.

**Bharring**

I'd rather give *all* Marines +1A than just the CC units. In theory, a Tac squad should be more of a threat to non-CC units than it is right now. Without being super scary. 2A really helps it there.

**Crimson**

Bharring wrote:
I'd rather give *all* Marines +1A than just the CC units. In theory, a Tac squad should be more of a threat to non-CC units than it is right now. Without being super scary. 2A really helps it there.

And as always, I answer: already happened. Just forget the minimarines exist, the Intercessors are the new tactical marines.

**Asherian Command**

Bharring wrote:
I'd rather give *all* Marines +1A than just the CC units. In theory, a Tac squad should be more of a threat to non-CC units than it is right now. Without being super scary. 2A really helps it there.

I can agree with that. +1 attack would fill the biggest problem marines are finding in not doing enough damage in combat.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Crimson wrote:
Bharring wrote:
I'd rather give *all* Marines +1A than just the CC units. In theory, a Tac squad should be more of a threat to non-CC units than it is right now. Without being super scary. 2A really helps it there.

And as always, I answer: already happened. Just forget the minimarines exist, the Intercessors are the new tactical marines.

Well no he is saying "All Marines get +1 attack."

Intercessors have a nasty habit of being stuck in tarpits.

**Bharring**

I want Tac Marines, not Intercessors. I want an elite unit that brings a specialist weapon, a heavy weapon, and a more custom Sarge.

Same with ASM and Devs.

To that end, if Real Marines are going away, I hope they merge them with Intercessors + company instead of just drop the options. Not that I expect them to.

But, if we were trying to fix Real Marines, in addition to some other changes, +1A for Tacs/Devs/Asm would help. NOt enough alone to fix them, but probably part of a wider change.

**Asherian Command**

Bharring wrote:
I want Tac Marines, not Intercessors. I want an elite unit that brings a specialist weapon, a heavy weapon, and a more custom Sarge.

Same with ASM and Devs.

To that end, if Real Marines are going away, I hope they merge them with Intercessors + company instead of just drop the options. Not that I expect them to.

But, if we were trying to fix Real Marines, in addition to some other changes, +1A for Tacs/Devs/Asm would help. NOt enough alone to fix them, but probably part of a wider change.

Veterans might also need +1 wound honestly, regular marines should stay and scouts should fly out the door. As they are such simple models. Replacing the scout position with a tactical squads. And instead the old marines being a stepping stone towards becoming a primaris. (especially with the release of the rubicon process, turning regular marines into primaris.)

**AlmightyWalrus**

I'm pretty sure a majority of Space Marine players would be perfectly fine with Primaris Marines replacing normal Marines rules-wise, the current problem is that the old models are left in a gakky rules-situation and Intercessors not having the options of normal Marines. Drop "normal" Marines, give Primaris comparable loadouts so people don't have to can their entire armies and call it a day.

**Asherian Command**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
I'm pretty sure a majority of Space Marine players would be perfectly fine with Primaris Marines replacing normal Marines rules-wise, the current problem is that the old models are left in a gakky rules-situation and Intercessors not having the options of normal Marines. Drop "normal" Marines, give Primaris comparable loadouts so people don't have to can their entire armies and call it a day.

Or old marines become scouts.

Sorta like Neophytes.

They skip the prepower armored and just them into power armor.

Then allowing tac marines to be a bit more of a scouting unit. (but means redoing their rules entirely)

**Bharring**

Or Old Marines are rolled into Intercessor rules.

**Asherian Command**

Bharring wrote:
Or Old Marines are rolled into Intercessor rules.

I disagree. Old marines should still be separate and them becoming what the old legions where would be a nice callback and would be a great integration with 30k players.

**Daedalus81**

Ghorgul wrote:
Unit1126PLL wrote:
Asherian Command wrote:
Yes I would. Rhinos are oddly positioned at 72 points. But why would I take grey knights in rhinos that can be exploded by anything? It is a vehicle that has protection against high-end weaponry. If a land raider or a predator tank had access to an invulnerable save they would be a bit more valuable.

If you think your Rhinos are more valuable against my Baneblade company with a 6++ than they otherwise wood be, then let me blow your mind:
What if I told you that my Baneblades let you have a 6+ anyways while they completely annihilated 3-4 Rhinos a turn?
Your Baneblades are silly, cheesy undercosted units compared to Rhinos so your comment is not really fair. Or alternatively Baneblade is correctly priced and Rhinos are overcosted.

Rhinos pay 72 points for 10 T7 3+ Wounds with little firepower. That's 7 points per wound.
Baneblade pays 390 points for 26 T8 3+ Wounds with Baneblade Battle Cannon.
Baneblade cannon being Heavy3D6 S9 AP -3 Dmg. 3 is roughly Lascannon equivalent (S9 AP -3 Dmg. 1D6), so it should cost roughly 3x3.5x25 ~ 262 points, but I'm going to be generous and give it 50 point discount because you can target only one unit so we arrive at 212 point cost for Baneblade Battle Cannon when scaled with Lascannons.
This way we end up Baneblade costing 178 points for 26 T8 3+ Wounds, so Baneblade ends up costing about 7 points per wound, which can't be locked in melee and is actually quite a beast also in melee, unlike the rhino. Also the T7-T8 breakpoint is important and increases durability significantly.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

JohnHwangDD wrote:
OMG. Just recost SMs at 15 pts per model as in 3E, and be done.
Might as well just remove them completely if this is your solution.

You used the price of BS3 lascannons. In either case it's a post hoc justification to fit a narrative.

Rhinos are just fine - shaving a few points off isn't going to magically make them better. With a Trukk at 59 you can't expect lower than 65 to 68 anyway.

**Martel732**

Bharring wrote:
This is what I find hilarious:
-IG were bad for several editions. 8E hit, now they're top tier. GG OP IG GAME IS BAD.
-DE were bad for several editions. 8E hit, they're still terrible. 8E codex hits, now they're OP. GG OP ELDAR GAME IS BAD.
-Marines were top tier at several points in 7E, and for a brief period of time in 8E. Now they're bad. GG OP ELDAR GAME IS BAD MARINES ALWAYS SUCK.

You left out some editions there. Marines usually do suck.

**Crimson**

Bharring wrote:

But, if we were trying to fix Real Marines, in addition to some other changes, +1A for Tacs/Devs/Asm would help. NOt enough alone to fix them, but probably part of a wider change.

People keep suggesting giving marines extra attack, wounds or AP. This is not going to happen. These are Primaris things, GW is not going to give them to old marines. If you want such rules, you can play primaris (or use your old marines as counts as primaris.) Trying to improve old marines at this point is about as relevant as trying to improve Bretonnians during the End Times.

**Bharring**

How many editions did I leave out between 6E, 7E, and 8E?

Sure, there were editions before that. And in 5E, IG wasn't garbage. DE also wasn't always garbage (although didn't they go a *decade* without an update?). But for the past couple of editions, both were garbage.

**Martel732**

Yeah? So were blood Angel's. I dont see them getting any real love in 8th, only nerfs.

**Asherian Command**

Crimson wrote:
Bharring wrote:

But, if we were trying to fix Real Marines, in addition to some other changes, +1A for Tacs/Devs/Asm would help. NOt enough alone to fix them, but probably part of a wider change.

People keep suggesting giving marines extra attack, wounds or AP. This is not going to happen. These are Primaris things, GW is not going to give them to old marines. If you want such rules, you can play primaris (or use your old marines as counts as primaris.) Trying to improve old marines at this point is about as relevant as trying to improve Bretonnians during the End Times.

I disagree i am going to change my tune.

old Marines will become the scouts of the space marines, to harkon back to 30k

**Techpriestsupport**

What if we let marine armor ignore 1 level of save mod? So a -3 mods becomes a -2 for example.

**Crimson**

Techpriestsupport wrote:
What if we just limited marine power armor reduction to -2? Make it so marine armor could be reduced to save mods but not o less than 5+?

That was quite a weird way to say 'give them 5+ invulnerable save.'

**Techpriestsupport**

Crimson wrote:
Techpriestsupport wrote:
What if we just limited marine power armor reduction to -2? Make it so marine armor could be reduced to save mods but not o less than 5+?

That was quite a weird way to say 'give them 5+ invulnerable save.'

I changed that when I realized it would go like that. Now I think marine armor should just ignore 1 level of AP.

**Bharring**

It's been suggested a number of times in Proposed Rules.

Personally, I'd rather drop the AP of most -1 and -2 weapons instead - a little more upfront work for a lot less complexity on the tabletop.

**Karol**

Crimson wrote:
Bharring wrote:

But, if we were trying to fix Real Marines, in addition to some other changes, +1A for Tacs/Devs/Asm would help. NOt enough alone to fix them, but probably part of a wider change.

People keep suggesting giving marines extra attack, wounds or AP. This is not going to happen. These are Primaris things, GW is not going to give them to old marines. If you want such rules, you can play primaris (or use your old marines as counts as primaris.) Trying to improve old marines at this point is about as relevant as trying to improve Bretonnians during the End Times.

Ok great for all the normal marines. But if in case of GK, they said they won't get primaris and the stats of GK unit wont get change, it just means they will end up bad for ever.

**Vaktathi**

Oh man, 3E/4E Eldar skimmmer tanks...

"Oh I wanna hit your Falcon with my S8 powerfist! Oh wait...I only hit you on 6's. And I hit whatever armor facing I actually am in base contact with so its always AV12. And I can only ever glance. Oh, then you roll 2d6 and take the lowest for results. Oh, and you have wargear to ignore the downside of being a skimmer and arent destroyed on an immobilized result. So, I'm gonna need almost 450 powerfist attacks here..."

Eldar have been a top tier army in every edition they have received a codex for. They've never been a bad army, the only time they ever drifted into even "mediocre" was 5E (where they had no 5E specific codex) and the first part of 6E. They have had some crap internal balance (Banshees...for basically ever), but so have most armies.

**Karol**

Bharring wrote:
How many editions did I leave out between 6E, 7E, and 8E?

Sure, there were editions before that. And in 5E, IG wasn't garbage. DE also wasn't always garbage (although didn't they go a *decade* without an update?). But for the past couple of editions, both were garbage.

Weren't DE OP because of ++2 invisible beaststars? It is at least something people claim where I play.

**Crimson**

Karol wrote:

Ok great for all the normal marines. But if in case of GK, they said they won't get primaris and the stats of GK unit wont get change, it just means they will end up bad for ever.

They will probably get Primaris models eventually, but that requires redoing almost the whole line just for them, as they're too distinct to share most models with other chapters. As this will be not happening any time soon, GW said it is not happening lest people stop buying current GK models (in case the there were some people who were not deterred by the quality of their rules.)