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.

 grouchoben wrote:
What's this all about then eh? Genetically modified massive superhumans who have their guns neurologically wired into their nervous system and spend more hours in a day training with them than everything else in their day combined, vs a militant religious order of humans who like their guns a lot and are pretty good with them?

There's no fluff argument for giving SoB the same rule that I can see...

Except for all the reasons given in the last 18 pages...

PiñaColada wrote:
I think he means that since they teleport within 12" they were already in RF range and as such don't really benefit from this new rule. It does give them better flexibility for later turns though.

bingo. The best use case for this for Deathwatch is the turn after they deep strike, if they survive, the models that are left could possibly use it.

That's far less likely in my eyes to the use case for, for example, a competitively-built ultramarine list, where turn 1 I will PROBABLY benefit with a bunch of scout bikers being able to shoot their full amount while remaining in range of a guilliman aura, or a unit of Sternguard with a couple lascannons or Intercessors that can now act like Deathwatch with Stalker Boltguns.

My point is I don't understand the "Deathwatch benefit the MOST from this change" that's being thrown around. Non-DW marines have:

-Biker units that can have storm bolters on every member
-Scouts who alternate-deploy and will probably be able to shoot rapid fire at some chaff turn 1 if they stay still
-playstyles that revolve much more heavily around being in auras tied to slow moving footsloggers like Guilliman/Azrael
-Sternguard whose 30" guns are Rapid Fire 1 instead of Stalker Boltguns which are Heavy 2.

 Apple Peel wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
So, at least three pages were added since I last posted.

Several other people added the source request, and made many of the same fluff arguments as to why Space Marines wouldn't be the only ones to qualify for this, or a similar rule.

If we're going to keep talking about this though, could the people/person pushing the casual sexism please stop? I like this thread so far and don't want to see it ended prematurely.

I haven’t seen any casual sexism here. The worst I’ve noticed is people trying to apply biological differences between men and women to this argument, and that isn’t sexist. It is just useless as we don’t have a game system built for that kind of granularity.
I think the whole Black Carapace argument is much more viable in this scenario. Feeling you weapon in your mind sounds better than someone that just uses a weapon.

A biological difference that had no reason to be brought up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:

If you go into a setting that is designed to be fantastical wish-fulfillment, full of things that are completely beyond the pale of reality, and you use some minute biological distinction between males and females to justify the need to limit women in the setting despite ignoring the numerous other hilariously glaring instances of non-realism as features of the narrative setting (such as, why are 95% of the humans depicted in the setting european?) that is a great example of casual sexism.

This is a setting where your regular humans not wearing face masks are allowed to fight the super duper plague faction and all your soldiers don't keel over and vomit their guts out on turn 2 causing you to auto-lose. Because if that realism was applied, it wouldn't work as a game. Your super-soldiers are allowed to drop onto the battlefield at terminal velocity and not get turned to mush in their armor because that's AWESOME, who the feth cares?

Women are allowed to be elite soldiers with higher ballistic skill without someone going "but muh testosterone!"

It's a fantasy setting. Get over it.

Also this.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Diminishing returns or not, someone who practices 13 hours a day and only needs to sleep 4 hours every day is going to get so much more training in than someone who's only human. Plus, you're still assuming that the training is the same kind of training. Why would a transhuman monster who's faster, stronger, and able to process information much faster than a human be training in the same manner as someone who's human?

Sure, Scouts may not be part of every engagement their Chapter faces, but fighting or going to places where there is fighting is all Space Marines do. Marines usually don't do garrison duty except as part of garrisons they know are going to come under attack. Plus, I'm pretty sure they're Scouts for longer than 10 years.

Why wouldn't they be training the same? Because ballistics don't change just because the wielder does.

The way i see this rule and the I think the cause for I’ll feeling from sisters players etc is that it is been discussed as a buff to bolters, or he bolter bets rule. It isn’t. It’s a buff to marines. It’s a marine beta rule that involves bolters but doesn’t change the gun but the person wielding it. I like it. I liked when marines first got rapid fire and was disappointed when it went mainstream.

 Mmmpi wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Diminishing returns or not, someone who practices 13 hours a day and only needs to sleep 4 hours every day is going to get so much more training in than someone who's only human. Plus, you're still assuming that the training is the same kind of training. Why would a transhuman monster who's faster, stronger, and able to process information much faster than a human be training in the same manner as someone who's human?

Sure, Scouts may not be part of every engagement their Chapter faces, but fighting or going to places where there is fighting is all Space Marines do. Marines usually don't do garrison duty except as part of garrisons they know are going to come under attack. Plus, I'm pretty sure they're Scouts for longer than 10 years.

Why wouldn't they be training the same? Because ballistics don't change just because the wielder does.

Because Marines can go through training that would kill an unaugmented human. Space Marines could train under conditions that wouldn't be conductive to Sisters of Battle surviving.

We're making a whole lot of assumptions about training when we have wildly varying details of what those things are, few specifics to compare, and similar backgrounds of extreme hardships with spartan living and mind boggling levels of mental conditioning/indoctrination/etc, in our background universe of wildly dysfunctional dystopia. Either way we're talking about elite troops in power armor with built in targeting equipment wielding bolters after having been trained in unimaginably brutal regimes.

What training may kill a Sister but not a Space Marine is not likely to be terribly relevant to bolter shooting (much like most gene-seed stuff isn't relevant to shooting). In modern shooting, lots of civilians can match or exceed a match score of an active duty veteran soldier with multiple combat tours under their belt. I've seen people beat special forces members in 3 gun competitions handily. The issue is that that a few seconds of time spread on a course of fire is ultimately a secondary concern for the soldier in the grand scheme of things because pulling that trigger is 1/10,000th of their actual job.

In the end, GW wanted a Marine "rule of cool" thing. I think trying to dig in and justify it beyond that is difficult (same way asking why Marines can't FRFSRF), particularly when instead of Sisters we can also turn to Custodes and ask the same fluff questions.

 Nevelon wrote:
It doesn’t increase the max firepower, but lets you apply it further away. A boon to camping squads.

Bikes will get to project fire on the move, without having to get into rapid fire range. Special weapons will still want to be close, but between their movement and range, they will be able to project fire over a huge amount of the table while staying away from threats. Fits their role as skirmishers.

Terminators will be able to shoot effectively at range, so if they find themselves outside of power-fist charge range, they can still threaten things. The ability to move and project fire was the niche role of the stormbolter in previous editions, for TDA, it is once again.

I think the hurricane bolter arm on my ironclad might get some more use. LRCs and SRs also get a nice boost. Where else can we get them? Centurians, who also get a call out for always on. Will help their tubby slow selves actually be able to shoot stuff.

Camping sternguard with their special issue bolters will enjoy this. Stick them in cover and threaten a 30” radius on the table. Point drop in CA18 with this makes for some nice full gunlines.
--

This is a pretty big slap in the face to all non-rapid fire bolter variants. The heavy bolt rife in particular just had its usefulness cut dramatically. Hopefully they can get adjusted later.

I don’t think this is going to be game breakingly powerful. I normally endeavor to be in rapid fire range anyway for my bolter troops. This just lets us project fire better in the right circumstance.

This nails all the points on the head.

My question is this ... is it worth even giving TDA assault cannons any more? Is the 6 STR 6 shots worth the 22 pts?
Is it better to bring CMLs or just other heavy weapons platforms and have your termies be anti-infantry death machines?
A bare bones PF termie is running 32 points. For something with a 2+/5++, 2W, 4 STR 4, BS3+ shots, it's not so bad for anti-infantry.

Custodes would actually be an easy fix. Make their Axe/Spear Assault 2 and give the Sword gun rerolling to wound.

I mean, with respect to the heavy bolt rifle and the heavy plasma fandangler that the hellblasters get...was anyone taking those anyway?

To me, losing half your shots was a dealbreaker, full stop. And then to have that AND be Heavy? Screw that, those are never-take weapons.

It's always the same. As soon as you get something cool, you're expected to share with your little sisters. lol

the_scotsman wrote:
I mean, with respect to the heavy bolt rifle and the heavy plasma fandangler that the hellblasters get...was anyone taking those anyway?

To me, losing half your shots was a dealbreaker, full stop. And then to have that AND be Heavy? Screw that, those are never-take weapons.

The Stalker would at least be forgivable if it had Sniper rules in place. It doesn't though.

I can't think of a way that's meaningful for the Heavy Plasma option without making it that much better than the other options though.

The heavy plasma should be
48" Heavy 1 S8 AP-4 D2 in normal mode &
48" Heavy 1 S9 AP-4 D3 in overcharged mode

Even then, that might not really be enough but then you could at least place them in ruins on the other side of the board.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
It is certainly a marine buff but it's the worst kind of buff. It just make the strongest marines stronger (DW) and doesn't help the bad units like tactical marines.

There is still no reason not to to take DW everything.

The possitive is -
HB cents are now considerable.
Rhinos with 2 SB now put out reasonable firepower
Redemptors got beter
Repuslors got better
Crusders got better
Even sterngaurd got better
Intercessors got better
Bikes got a lot better
Terminators got better
Stormraven can now stay outside of charge range and still rain death.

Is this going to make a meaningful difference? NO. The real issue with marines is point cost and weak defensive stats and trash stratagems and traits not confering to vehicals.

I still have not gotten a straight answer on how this somehow makes deathwatch better, because as far as I can tell it does absolutely nothing for the units people actually take from DW.

You've got:

SB/SS vet squad with terminator buddies and vanvet buddies: Absolutely nothing. These guys deep strike into rapid fire range, they would only claim any benefit from the rule if they A, survived the turn, then B, managed to be outside of 12" from any available target the following turn.

Mixed squad that combat squads into 2 SS vanvets and 3 DW bikes: Do not have the bike keyword, so therefore gain no benefit from the rule.

Terminators joined to vet squads: Do not have the terminator keyword, therefore gain no benefit.

Mixed Fortis teams with Intercessors bodyblocking for Hellblasters: Might benefit, BUT the hellblasters' guns do not, meaning if you ever make use of the rule you're dividing your plasma fire (the reason for the squad's existence) in half. This squad still needs to be moving up to 15" range to rapid fire.

Are people going to suddenly start taking deathwatch terminator and bike squads to use this rule? Or are they going to decide the drawbacks of those squads over the alternatives (not having 3++ saves) is not worth it?

Humm - maybe you are thinking about the intercessors all wrong. If they don't move they can shoot 36" twice at AP -2. That is a pretty nice buff to a unit that doesn't really like leaving cover - . Or they can just shot twice at 30" with 2+ to wound and ap-1. It's a big deal. For vets - they deep strike in an probably never have to move again to get rapid fire. Plus DW bikes probably just became one of the best units in the entire game. Sure none of these units can kill vehicals but that isn't what DW is for. That is what Castellans are for.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:
I mean, with respect to the heavy bolt rifle and the heavy plasma fandangler that the hellblasters get...was anyone taking those anyway?

To me, losing half your shots was a dealbreaker, full stop. And then to have that AND be Heavy? Screw that, those are never-take weapons.

Agreed - there is little reason to ever take it. Personally I think it should be D2 standard and D3 overcharged. That would make it an actual choice. More damage turn 1? or more damage turn 2? One benefit is it is not heavy in a DW kill team.

Mentioned this in some of the other threads, but figured I would add it here as well. Perhaps it would be better if the rule just added 1 to the number of shots of bolt weapon profiles if one of the three conditions are met. That would allow it to buff the non Rapid Fire bolt weapons as well while also still encouraging forward movement over camping.

 Xenomancers wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
It is certainly a marine buff but it's the worst kind of buff. It just make the strongest marines stronger (DW) and doesn't help the bad units like tactical marines.

There is still no reason not to to take DW everything.

The possitive is -
HB cents are now considerable.
Rhinos with 2 SB now put out reasonable firepower
Redemptors got beter
Repuslors got better
Crusders got better
Even sterngaurd got better
Intercessors got better
Bikes got a lot better
Terminators got better
Stormraven can now stay outside of charge range and still rain death.

Is this going to make a meaningful difference? NO. The real issue with marines is point cost and weak defensive stats and trash stratagems and traits not confering to vehicals.

I still have not gotten a straight answer on how this somehow makes deathwatch better, because as far as I can tell it does absolutely nothing for the units people actually take from DW.

You've got:

SB/SS vet squad with terminator buddies and vanvet buddies: Absolutely nothing. These guys deep strike into rapid fire range, they would only claim any benefit from the rule if they A, survived the turn, then B, managed to be outside of 12" from any available target the following turn.

Mixed squad that combat squads into 2 SS vanvets and 3 DW bikes: Do not have the bike keyword, so therefore gain no benefit from the rule.

Terminators joined to vet squads: Do not have the terminator keyword, therefore gain no benefit.

Mixed Fortis teams with Intercessors bodyblocking for Hellblasters: Might benefit, BUT the hellblasters' guns do not, meaning if you ever make use of the rule you're dividing your plasma fire (the reason for the squad's existence) in half. This squad still needs to be moving up to 15" range to rapid fire.

Are people going to suddenly start taking deathwatch terminator and bike squads to use this rule? Or are they going to decide the drawbacks of those squads over the alternatives (not having 3++ saves) is not worth it?

Humm - maybe you are thinking about the intercessors all wrong. If they don't move they can shoot 36" twice at AP -2. That is a pretty nice buff to a unit that doesn't really like leaving cover - . Or they can just shot twice at 30" with 2+ to wound and ap-1. It's a big deal. For vets - they deep strike in an probably never have to move again to get rapid fire. Plus DW bikes probably just became one of the best units in the entire game. Sure none of these units can kill vehicals but that isn't what DW is for. That is what Castellans are for.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:
I mean, with respect to the heavy bolt rifle and the heavy plasma fandangler that the hellblasters get...was anyone taking those anyway?

To me, losing half your shots was a dealbreaker, full stop. And then to have that AND be Heavy? Screw that, those are never-take weapons.

Agreed - there is little reason to ever take it. Personally I think it should be D2 standard and D3 overcharged. That would make it an actual choice. More damage turn 1? or more damage turn 2? One benefit is it is not heavy in a DW kill team.

A DW biker with his 2+ ammo kills .008 more guardsmen for the points than a company vet biker with SS/SB. The company vet biker has 3++, and his choice of many much better chapter tactics than mission tactics.

I'll definitely grant you that Deathwatch intercessors on their own benefit from the rule. But I'm not convinced they're actually good, compared to the alternative, which is Stalker Bolt Rifle/Storm Shield vets. I can stick terminator tankers in that squad, I can hide missile launchers, I get 3++, and they cost less than intercessors.

Sure, the vets do not HAVE to move again after they drop in the first turn. But what does that...actually get you? If I drop in with my vets and survive, it means my alpha strike probably did really well. Why would I not want to move them forward to continue to mop up?

Like I said: I see some marginal benefits to this rule if you're looking at the deathwatch units that actually see play. The deathwatch units that aren't seeing play (and I am guessing won't suddenly start seeing play, because there are still MAJOR benefits to running them in other configurations) see the biggest buffs here. Terminators. Intercessors not being used to tank for hellblasters. Land Raider Crusaders. Bikers in dedicated bike squads and not obsec combat squads with vanvets.

but it doesn't seem to "make the rich richer" very much. Your actual competitive deathwatch units only occasionally will be using this rule, and usually it'll either be marginal (like if I lost most of my vets in my opponents turn and I get to rapid fire with 2-3 that remain) or it'll be a thing that makes me win more in a situation I'd already be winning (all my vets survive).

Did anyone think about DA? I see them as big winners with this change. They have a trait which already made them standing still, now they are better at what they already did well.
DA intercessors can MSU quite well and place on objectives. They are durable in cover, shoot at full range and reroll 1's. They are a good troop choice.

 Mmmpi wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

kurhanik wrote:

novembermike wrote:
I'm not sure that the rule would make sense for Sisters thematically. Marines are the all range, all strategies, tactically flexible force. Sisters are the melta, flamer and bolter zealots that run at you and knock your teeth in. Giving them rules that promote sitting at 24" doesn't really seem consistent with what the army pushes.

Yeah, I'm fine with them not getting it, but considering Sisters don't have bikers, terminator armor, etc, they wouldn't be receiving one of the big draws of the rule.

I don't think it makes sense for Sisters to get Bolter Discipline for the following reasons:

1) Fluff - Sisters are normal humans with power armor. Space Marines are genetically augmented super soldiers with biomechanical enhancements tailored to improve their tactical efficiency. It makes sense all that engineering would result in a soldier who's handier with their basic armament.

2) Rules - Sisters have their own special mechanics, like Acts of Faith. It makes sense to differentiate between the armies to give each a unique flavor.

3) Points - Sisters are 9 points, Tacticals are 13 points. You can field a lot more Sisters than you can Space Marines. Giving Sisters Bolter Discipline technically nerfs Tacticals, while this rule seems to be aimed at improving the situation for Tacticals (and terminators, and bikes, etc.) It makes sense to focus on Space Marines given their current challenges on the tabletop.

4) It's Not About the Gun - The rule's name is Bolter Discipline, not Better Bolters. The fact the rule applies to bolters is not the point, it suggests a mastery of the weapon in combat. It's not supposed to apply to every single case of someone wielding a bolter, it's supposed to apply to those who have elevated the use over and above the weapon's ordinary use. It makes sense this discipline would be specific to certain forces.

Finally, while it's great that some people have a lot of enthusiasm for Sisters, the last thing anyone needs is another army that throws off game balance. Sisters are pretty tough as-is and I'm not sure I see the deficiency that makes it necessary to tinker with their rules too much.

I think it makes sence for sisters to get bolter discipline for the following reasons:
1) Fluff- Sisters train hours a day using the weapon, which can be used by unaugmented humans with no issues. Sisters infact specialize in it's use.

2) Rules- Space Marines already have better stats, it makes sense that units with similar weapons training would have similar rules.

3) Points- Sisters are 9 points, for that they have a lower leadership, lower strength, lower toughness, and lower WS. The difference in points isn't enough to offset that difference in durability from T4 alone in the use of small arms. Giving sisters bolter disicpline technically buffs sisters to tac marine levels with small arms fire, and vehicles.

4)It's not about the gun - The rule's name is Bolter Discipline, not better bolters. The fact the rule applies to bolters shooting is not the point, it suggests a mastery of the weapon in combat. It's not supposed to apply to every single case of someone wielding a bolter, it's supposed to apply to those who have elevated the use over and above the weapon's ordianary use. It makes sense this discipline would be specific to certain forces, like the ones that consider it's use a literal sacred task.

Finally, while it's great that some people have a lack of understanding of sisters, the last thing anyone needs is another army that throws off game balance. Sister's recent beta heavily nerfed the army, and this rule makes their long range objective holding and vehicles more on par with the rest of the game, particularly imperial units.

While I matched your format, and much of your writing style, all of my points are legitimate reasons why this could be applied to sisters, sisters (silence) and custodies. Granted #3 is a bit of a stretch.

What a clever retort. Thank you for pointing out how you matched my format and writing style, I knew something awesome was happening on but couldn't put my finger on it. Your ability to repeat what others say - but with a twist! - is just incredible.

But I disagree with the idea there are legitimate reasons for applying Bolter Discipline to Sisters. You have presented no arguments to that effect and the responses I've seen from you in this thread are a mix of inaccuracies and talking over other people. Rearranging some words and inserting some pith doesn't say anything unless you also have an intelligent point to make.

Your arguments in all these incredibly clever posts seems to be founded on the idea that spending a lot of time training is somehow on par with genetic engineering, cybernetic augmentation, internal targeting systems, psycho-indoctrination, and all the other stuff that goes into making a Marine.

In response:

1) You have a very unrealistic view of the role of training. Train all they want, a Sister is never going to be at the level of a standard Marine. Training allows one to achieve their physical / mental peak, not to go beyond. In fact, there's plenty of research to show that constant training in any discipline is counterproductive, to sustain any level of tactical effectiveness Sisters would need to engage in a other activities. For example, when you look at elite forces of any Military, the majority of their training routines are focused on goals that don't involve guns and emphasize problem solving / critical thinking skills. So your claim that Sisters spend an exceptional amount of time training on this specific weapon probably means something other than what you think it means, it certainly does not imply they should possess a mastery at the level of someone who was engineered and enhanced to fire it, who is also at his peak.

2) The rules for Sisters are fine as-is, Marines have very serious problems. Pretending that's not the case is purposeful stupidity or willful ignorance. I'm personally in the camp of nerfing Sisters proactively to prevent the game from having another OP Codex.

3) The statline differences mean very little when you are talking about a rule that makes a free weapon more effective. Trying to buff Sisters to Tactical Marine levels is stupid, they are supposed to be different. Are you actually being serious when you say that?

4) I'm not sure what this 'sacred' gibberish has to do with improved mastery of a weapon. What is that proof of, besides the fact you want other people to accept your point uncritically? Is it supposed to be the Emperor squeezing off an extra round for all his wives every time he sends them into battle? If so, why would he favor them over his other subjects, like Guard, who can also have Bolters and whom he certainly loves just as much? Explain your point, don't just use magic space God words and expect everyone to just say OK.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
It is certainly a marine buff but it's the worst kind of buff. It just make the strongest marines stronger (DW) and doesn't help the bad units like tactical marines.

There is still no reason not to to take DW everything.

The possitive is -
HB cents are now considerable.
Rhinos with 2 SB now put out reasonable firepower
Redemptors got beter
Repuslors got better
Crusders got better
Even sterngaurd got better
Intercessors got better
Bikes got a lot better
Terminators got better
Stormraven can now stay outside of charge range and still rain death.

Is this going to make a meaningful difference? NO. The real issue with marines is point cost and weak defensive stats and trash stratagems and traits not confering to vehicals.

I still have not gotten a straight answer on how this somehow makes deathwatch better, because as far as I can tell it does absolutely nothing for the units people actually take from DW.

You've got:

SB/SS vet squad with terminator buddies and vanvet buddies: Absolutely nothing. These guys deep strike into rapid fire range, they would only claim any benefit from the rule if they A, survived the turn, then B, managed to be outside of 12" from any available target the following turn.

Mixed squad that combat squads into 2 SS vanvets and 3 DW bikes: Do not have the bike keyword, so therefore gain no benefit from the rule.

Terminators joined to vet squads: Do not have the terminator keyword, therefore gain no benefit.

Mixed Fortis teams with Intercessors bodyblocking for Hellblasters: Might benefit, BUT the hellblasters' guns do not, meaning if you ever make use of the rule you're dividing your plasma fire (the reason for the squad's existence) in half. This squad still needs to be moving up to 15" range to rapid fire.

Are people going to suddenly start taking deathwatch terminator and bike squads to use this rule? Or are they going to decide the drawbacks of those squads over the alternatives (not having 3++ saves) is not worth it?

Humm - maybe you are thinking about the intercessors all wrong. If they don't move they can shoot 36" twice at AP -2. That is a pretty nice buff to a unit that doesn't really like leaving cover - . Or they can just shot twice at 30" with 2+ to wound and ap-1. It's a big deal. For vets - they deep strike in an probably never have to move again to get rapid fire. Plus DW bikes probably just became one of the best units in the entire game. Sure none of these units can kill vehicals but that isn't what DW is for. That is what Castellans are for.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:
I mean, with respect to the heavy bolt rifle and the heavy plasma fandangler that the hellblasters get...was anyone taking those anyway?

To me, losing half your shots was a dealbreaker, full stop. And then to have that AND be Heavy? Screw that, those are never-take weapons.

Agreed - there is little reason to ever take it. Personally I think it should be D2 standard and D3 overcharged. That would make it an actual choice. More damage turn 1? or more damage turn 2? One benefit is it is not heavy in a DW kill team.

A DW biker with his 2+ ammo kills .008 more guardsmen for the points than a company vet biker with SS/SB. The company vet biker has 3++, and his choice of many much better chapter tactics than mission tactics.

I'll definitely grant you that Deathwatch intercessors on their own benefit from the rule. But I'm not convinced they're actually good, compared to the alternative, which is Stalker Bolt Rifle/Storm Shield vets. I can stick terminator tankers in that squad, I can hide missile launchers, I get 3++, and they cost less than intercessors.

Sure, the vets do not HAVE to move again after they drop in the first turn. But what does that...actually get you? If I drop in with my vets and survive, it means my alpha strike probably did really well. Why would I not want to move them forward to continue to mop up?

Like I said: I see some marginal benefits to this rule if you're looking at the deathwatch units that actually see play. The deathwatch units that aren't seeing play (and I am guessing won't suddenly start seeing play, because there are still MAJOR benefits to running them in other configurations) see the biggest buffs here. Terminators. Intercessors not being used to tank for hellblasters. Land Raider Crusaders. Bikers in dedicated bike squads and not obsec combat squads with vanvets.

but it doesn't seem to "make the rich richer" very much. Your actual competitive deathwatch units only occasionally will be using this rule, and usually it'll either be marginal (like if I lost most of my vets in my opponents turn and I get to rapid fire with 2-3 that remain) or it'll be a thing that makes me win more in a situation I'd already be winning (all my vets survive).

It's not just that they only kill .08 Infantry more. Did you look at other targets?
They also have a Chainsword for 3 total attacks for what it's worth. Not a lot, but still. They can also fall back and charge again. Once again that's niche though.

To give historical context: Main Rulebook, 40K 2nd Edition. 1993.


As for the Marines vs. Sisters debate, Marine Rhinos with Storm Bolters shoot better than Sisters Rhinos with Storm Bolters now. That probably has nothing to do with training. I'd argue that Marines have better equipment than Sisters though, and a piece of game relevant data to back up that claim is the fact that in 2nd edition, all Marine Heavy Weapons came with a targeter for +1 to hit. Sisters Heavy Weapons did not. So, imo, there's ample room to just wave it away. It is what it is.

Sisters Rhinos would need a slight price cut of course. The 6++ they have is almost worthless anyway so...

 Mmmpi wrote:


Why wouldn't they be training the same? Because ballistics don't change just because the wielder does.

But it does. Marines are able to use their bolters one handed or shot as good from the hip as any other position. Only thing better is super rare assasin gear that gives some of them both a 360 field of vision, and the change to brain chemistry that they do not get overhelmed by the shoting. And this is just one thing. A marine can shot while being under fire, and they survive incoming fire better then any human male or not in power armor. If there were man in power armor, then SM would be shoting better then them too. A human in power armor just can't do some stuff marines can, and this is before we get in to different version of power armors and bolters.

For example, when you look at elite forces of any Military, the majority of their training routines are focused on goals that don't involve guns and emphasize problem solving / critical thinking skills

you mixing up veterans with spec ops. Veterans are veterans, because they trained and because they were in combat. They act like machines and don't get shell shocked as easier. They react to danger faster, because they expiriance stuff etc.

A biological difference that had no reason to be brought up.

Why? Just check modern military studies on units with mixed squads and companies, their loses and efficiency at completing assigned tasks. In case of marines and SoB the differences would be even bigger, because we aren't comparing human to human. But a human to super human. If you take a normal human male or female in power armor, and he gets hit by the same type of projectile they may still suffer internal injuries or at least shock, at the same time marines, and even more in the case of primaris would not be effected as much or even at all. This means they can utilise tactics unmodifed troops can not use. Plus non marine power armor, which may have the same save in game, does not have systems in the w40k world. The marine armor is just superior, specially the primaris armor.

That probably has nothing to do with trainin

It is less training, but more the fact that a marine driver is jacked in to the systems of his vehicle. That is a bit like someone having a WWII tank fighting someone a tank from the 70s. Am not saying that driving and shoting for 100-200years doesn't have influence on a drivers ability use the vehicles arment though.

Karol wrote:

Spoiler:

 Mmmpi wrote:


Why wouldn't they be training the same? Because ballistics don't change just because the wielder does.

But it does. Marines are able to use their bolters one handed or shot as good from the hip as any other position. Only thing better is super rare assasin gear that gives some of them both a 360 field of vision, and the change to brain chemistry that they do not get overhelmed by the shoting. And this is just one thing. A marine can shot while being under fire, and they survive incoming fire better then any human male or not in power armor. If there were man in power armor, then SM would be shoting better then them too. A human in power armor just can't do some stuff marines can, and this is before we get in to different version of power armors and bolters.

For example, when you look at elite forces of any Military, the majority of their training routines are focused on goals that don't involve guns and emphasize problem solving / critical thinking skills

you mixing up veterans with spec ops. Veterans are veterans, because they trained and because they were in combat. They act like machines and don't get shell shocked as easier. They react to danger faster, because they expiriance stuff etc.

A biological difference that had no reason to be brought up.

Why? Just check modern military studies on units with mixed squads and companies, their loses and efficiency at completing assigned tasks. In case of marines and SoB the differences would be even bigger, because we aren't comparing human to human. But a human to super human. If you take a normal human male or female in power armor, and he gets hit by the same type of projectile they may still suffer internal injuries or at least shock, at the same time marines, and even more in the case of primaris would not be effected as much or even at all. This means they can utilise tactics unmodifed troops can not use. Plus non marine power armor, which may have the same save in game, does not have systems in the w40k world. The marine armor is just superior, specially the primaris armor.

Just don't. As you say, we're comparing humans to super humans, so gender shouldn't even be a factor. Best to leave it alone.

Until we get female space marines, and who knows maybe we will, It will be a factor. Now an interesting thing to compare would be something like cardinal guard or inquisitorial acylotes vs SoB. But I doubt there is much data on the augmentation levels of the later. It is known that SoB are on the same level of marksman ship as cadian veterans, but it was pre cadia fluff, so who knows maybe it got retconed.

Karol wrote:

It is less training, but more the fact that a marine driver is jacked in to the systems of his vehicle. That is a bit like someone having a WWII tank fighting someone a tank from the 70s. Am not saying that driving and shoting for 100-200years doesn't have influence on a drivers ability use the vehicles arment though.

If you REALLY want to nerd about it, I'll tell you that both factions have auto-senses, and auto-senses bypass the eye and optical nerve and go straight to the brain. And vehicles of both factions have auto-senses.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

It's not just that they only kill .08 Infantry more. Did you look at other targets?
They also have a Chainsword for 3 total attacks for what it's worth. Not a lot, but still. They can also fall back and charge again. Once again that's niche though.

They maintain the same ratio against any target where the deathwatch biker's damage is only better by 1 shift, and the deathwatch biker does 1.18x the damage against any target his weapons get 2 shifts against (say, wounding on a 2 where the regular bolter would wound on a 5, or gaining benefit from both points of AP on the AP-2 ammo).

They also have chainswords, and can fall back and charge. Interesting that you'd want to willingly give up shooting on a unit that puts out that much dakka though.

I think you'll find the increase in offense is marginal when compared to the fact that other space marine chapter options have access to:

-Reroll to hit bubbles that move faster than 6"
-Reroll to wound bubbles
-Chapter tactics that enable them to fall back and shoot
-Guilliman

Also, pretty much all those benefits evaporate when you're looking at W2 UNIT WITH STORM SHIELD vs W2 UNIT WITH NO STORM SHIELD.

I'm not buying Deathwatch bikers in dedicated units being all that when any other thread where any time Terminators Intercessors Bikers Scout Bikers Hellblasters Aggressors Centurions.....you know the drill, gets brought up, you turn up in five seconds flat with "but all those units are trash because muh disintegrators". A disintegrator kills 22 points of deathwatch bikers, and 10 points of company vet bikers.

Karol wrote:
Until we get female space marines, and who knows maybe we will, It will be a factor.

That doesn't make sense. The point is, the difference between any space marine and any human is suitably large that any differences in gender pale in comparison to the difference between a human and post-human.

Not to mention the game itself doesn't have the granularity of detail to care. A weedy 5'4" cadian male has strength 3, a 6'6" roided cadian male has strength 3. We're painting in real broad strokes here.

Now I know one should never trust a wiki, but this is what it says about power armor used by SoB :

However, the Sisters of Battle and Inquisitors who use Power Armour do not possess the Black Carapace gene-seed organ implant, and so cannot be directly linked to the suit's advanced movement enhancement and fire control systems in the way Space Marines are, which decreases the armour's effectiveness.

And this is just the armor. A SoB hit by a bolter or hvy bolter round is not going to stand unmoving and shot, a marine will. Am talking here about field use of people here, not how good or bad someone can shot at the firing range. Am also going through an avarge. But I bet that if you compared the best shot marine ever had to the best shot non marine humans ever had you would end up with an assasin or someone gene breed to do it and not an unaugmented human as his counter part.

Not to mention the game itself doesn't have the granularity of detail to care. A weedy 5'4" cadian male has strength 3, a 6'6" roided cadian male has strength 3. We're painting in real broad strokes here.

yes I do know that a catachan can move faster then a jet plain and fight harder then a space marine, making Rambo seem plausible and realistic. But from what I understand the thread exists, because people want the bolter drill rule for bolter armed units that are not marines. From the rule description I draw the argument that marines have enough traits specific to them, that such a rule being marine exclusive makes sense. I used the male vs female example in the real world only to enhance the gap between marines and SoB, not to make it smaller. yet somehow this is viewed as a non valid argument, because of this being a non realistic setting.

Was gonna comment on the original topic of the thread, but then I saw how the thread devolved. Jesus Christ on the Pogo Stick, this is why I rarely post on dakka any more.


Anyway. Glad my tactical termies are gonna be better. They should apply the rule to sisters and guard, too.

Karol wrote:
Now I know one should never trust a wiki, but this is what it says about power armor used by SoB :

However, the Sisters of Battle and Inquisitors who use Power Armour do not possess the Black Carapace gene-seed organ implant, and so cannot be directly linked to the suit's advanced movement enhancement and fire control systems in the way Space Marines are, which decreases the armour's effectiveness.

And this is just the armor. A SoB hit by a bolter or hvy bolter round is not going to stand unmoving and shot, a marine will. Am talking here about field use of people here, not how good or bad someone can shot at the firing range. Am also going through an avarge. But I bet that if you compared the best shot marine ever had to the best shot non marine humans ever had you would end up with an assasin or someone gene breed to do it and not an unaugmented human as his counter part.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

That an avarge marine can have more possible traits, and has better weapons and armor then SoB, which makes them better shots, bar the "magic" counter argument. The only thing that can be comperable to a space marine as far as shoting goes, is an assasin or some gene breed sniper, and sob are neither of those. There for SoB being excludes from having the drill rule has valid arguments in its favour.