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.

I hope they use the new space marine dex to address some pet peeves.

1. Character customization. Want a gravis armored Libriarian? Go make one.

2. Fix some weapons that just don't work. Looking at Stalker class bolter rifles.

3. Semi squat Classic marines for some chapters, and outline the chapters that are going to keep them, and how they are going to be supported going forward.

Or even build something into the lore to make it work. something like:

After Calgar gets Primarisized a bunch of marines are primarisized, and it is quickly found that primarizing classic marines before age 100 doesn't work and they get dead.

Also it is found that Primarizing a marine to a Primaris Marine works better than making someone from a human to a marine, so nearly all chapters now recruit scouts, Make them into marines, then primarize them at around 100.

Something like that would help with the Classic marine conundrum.

Sure, a few very specific cases. Fire raptor was overpowered, as were flyers like the Stormraven at the start of 8th.

The assault cannon got a price hike, other weapons werent changed.

Nothing else has been changed.

 Crimson wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Lol the hate for Guilliman is strong.

He's not to blame for the poor codex guys, seriously. It's nothing more than first codex syndrome.

He is a reason for price increase for several marine units and probably a reason why GW is cautious to give marines really strong units. His buff is simply too potent for it to be possible to balance. Its effectiveness varies by insane amount depending on what else you're bringing, and thus it is not possible to price it fairly. In theory this is an issue with any aura ability, but more powerful the aura is more prevalent the problem becomes, and if the aura is something only one subfaction in the codex has, then it becomes an even worse balancing nightmare. If the wound portion was removed, or made to be just re-roll of ones, then it would be easier, as that's the same buffs all marines can have. Then every time GW makes rules for a marine unit they don't need to think whether the thing becomes too powerful with Guilliman or alternatively too weak without him.

Now I wonder if Marines would feel less imbalanced (both internally and externally) if the standard Captain & Lieutenant auras were "reroll failed to-hit" and "reroll failed to-wound" instead of rerolling 1s.

The Newman wrote:

Now I wonder if Marines would feel less imbalanced (both internally and externally) if the standard Captain & Lieutenant auras were "reroll failed to-hit" and "reroll failed to-wound" instead of rerolling 1s.

It would obviously make them better, but I wouldn't like that change. It would make standing in the aura bubble even more mandatory than it already is. That is the exact opposite of the direction I want.

 Crimson wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Lol the hate for Guilliman is strong.

He's not to blame for the poor codex guys, seriously. It's nothing more than first codex syndrome.

He is a reason for price increase for several marine units and probably a reason why GW is cautious to give marines really strong units. His buff is simply too potent for it to be possible to balance. Its effectiveness varies by insane amount depending on what else you're bringing, and thus it is not possible to price it fairly. In theory this is an issue with any aura ability, but more powerful the aura is more prevalent the problem becomes, and if the aura is something only one subfaction in the codex has, then it becomes an even worse balancing nightmare. If the wound portion was removed, or made to be just re-roll of ones, then it would be easier, as that's the same buffs all marines can have. Then every time GW makes rules for a marine unit they don't need to think whether the thing becomes too powerful with Guilliman or alternatively too weak without him.

This sounds like speculation.

There is an upper limit to Bobby as mentioned in this thread.

If I have 3 Quad LC Preds and Bobby or the same with a Captain and LT, which is better?

Bobby
12 * .888 * 888 * .5 * 3.5 = 16.6 vs RIS Castellan

CPT & LT
12 * .777 * .777 * .5 * 3.5 = 12.7

Calgar & LT
12 * .888 * .777 * .5 * 3.5 = 14.5


940 for Bobby. 674 for the CPT & LT. 800 for Calgar.

CPT & LT - for 72% of Bobby's formation they did 76% of the damage.
Calrgar - for 85% of Bobby's formation they did 87% of the damage.

3 CP can also get you full rerolls to hit making a CPT & LT way more efficient.

Bobby is a red herring of efficiency. You might get CP and fighting prowess, but he also takes a LoW slot.

There are scenarios when full rerolls to wound work better under bobby when using non-optimal weapons, but that is not a requirement of list building. For example - shooting other marines with S4 means 75% success with RG over 58% with a LT, but the freed up points gives you room to take more prime weapons.

NOTE: for demonstration purposes and not a real world scenario
30 marines with bolters & Bobby - 790 points
40 marines, 8 plasma with CPT & LT - 742 points

Bobby's marines
30 * .888 * .75 * .333 = 6.7 MEQ

CPT & LT marines
32 * .777 * .583 * .333 = 4.8
8 * .777 * .998 * .833 = 5.2

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Lol the hate for Guilliman is strong.

He's not to blame for the poor codex guys, seriously. It's nothing more than first codex syndrome.

He is a reason for price increase for several marine units and probably a reason why GW is cautious to give marines really strong units. His buff is simply too potent for it to be possible to balance. Its effectiveness varies by insane amount depending on what else you're bringing, and thus it is not possible to price it fairly. In theory this is an issue with any aura ability, but more powerful the aura is more prevalent the problem becomes, and if the aura is something only one subfaction in the codex has, then it becomes an even worse balancing nightmare. If the wound portion was removed, or made to be just re-roll of ones, then it would be easier, as that's the same buffs all marines can have. Then every time GW makes rules for a marine unit they don't need to think whether the thing becomes too powerful with Guilliman or alternatively too weak without him.

This sounds like speculation.

There is an upper limit to Bobby as mentioned in this thread.

If I have 3 Quad LC Preds and Bobby or the same with a Captain and LT, which is better?

Bobby
12 * .888 * 888 * .5 * 3.5 = 16.6 vs RIS Castellan

CPT & LT
12 * .777 * .777 * .5 * 3.5 = 12.7

Calgar & LT
12 * .888 * .777 * .5 * 3.5 = 14.5


940 for Bobby. 674 for the CPT & LT. 800 for Calgar.

CPT & LT - for 72% of Bobby's formation they did 76% of the damage.
Calrgar - for 85% of Bobby's formation they did 87% of the damage.

3 CP can also get you full rerolls to hit making a CPT & LT way more efficient.

Bobby is a red herring of efficiency. You might get CP and fighting prowess, but he also takes a LoW slot.

There are scenarios when full rerolls to wound work better under bobby when using non-optimal weapons, but that is not a requirement of list building. For example - shooting other marines with S4 means 75% success with RG over 58% with a LT, but the freed up points gives you room to take more prime weapons.

NOTE: for demonstration purposes and not a real world scenario
30 marines with bolters & Bobby - 790 points
40 marines, 8 plasma with CPT & LT - 742 points

Bobby's marines
30 * .888 * .75 * .333 = 6.7 MEQ

CPT & LT marines
32 * .777 * .583 * .333 = 4.8
8 * .777 * .998 * .833 = 5.2

This man gets it. When you break things down, his cost, slot and play style have a lot of drawbacks.

Guilliman needs a point drop like everything else in the book.

The true power of Gman is not shooting efficiency - he will be remotely more efficiently than just reroll 1's (with 400 points more of shooting in the LT and CM aura). However you do lose a lot more shooting power when you take hits with Gmans army.

The true power is not crumbling in assault when a knight or super CC unit comes along. Because Gman will crush most anything in CC.

Marines that don't fold in assault? Please nerf!

the_scotsman wrote:
I mean, there is another easy way to fix Guilliman Syndrome for marines and it is...price Guilliman around the unique ability to triple the firepower of anything he's shaking his shiny metal ass for.

If they really REALLY want to give Guililman the ability to twerk in the middle of a space marine army and grant them ALL Guide+Doom with no cast roll against every target in the enemy army, just cost the fething dude like 700 points and fix the rest of the damn marine roster.

Don't price everything in the marine codex and every other unit shared by every other marine codex as if they might be in range to watch guilliman drop it down and make it clap.

Ok I lol’d

Of course it has drawbacks, the point is that the efficiency is too variable. Doing one isolated comparison is pointless. Guilliman obviously gets better more things you shove in his aura. Should Guilliman be priced like he is buffing 500 points of stuff, 1000 points of stuff or 2000 points of stuff? Should a potential new Primaris super heavy vehicle be priced like it is sitting on Guilliman's aura, or not?

If you're taking Guilliman AND another super heavy at 2k points you will lose the game.

You know what Guilliman doesn't do? He doesn't make any unit more durable. When the stuff around him dies (and it does) you quickly remember that you have less units to saturate.

He needs a point drop like everything else in the book.

 Crimson wrote:

The Newman wrote:

Now I wonder if Marines would feel less imbalanced (both internally and externally) if the standard Captain & Lieutenant auras were "reroll failed to-hit" and "reroll failed to-wound" instead of rerolling 1s.

It would obviously make them better, but I wouldn't like that change. It would make standing in the aura bubble even more mandatory than it already is. That is the exact opposite of the direction I want.

It can't be more mandatory than it already is. You don't do any damage outside of your auras. It's how the army is played and even when you do this. The army still sucks. Bolters wound most good units on 5's just like lasguns. All the heavy weapons are overcosted. Practically nothing is survivable. People call for plasma nerfs when marines with plasma is less efficient than actual powerful armies and plasma kills your own units to boot.

Anyone calling for nerfs is a casual with nothing but anecdotal evidence and should be ignored anyways.

 Ishagu wrote:
Anyone calling for nerfs is a casual with nothing but anecdotal evidence and should be ignored anyways.

You just don't get it. Some people don't like the bubble hammer. Nerfs to auras should be accompanied to buffs to the units themselves (be this a cost decrease or an actual rule change.)

 Crimson wrote:
Of course it has drawbacks, the point is that the efficiency is too variable. Doing one isolated comparison is pointless. Guilliman obviously gets better more things you shove in his aura. Should Guilliman be priced like he is buffing 500 points of stuff, 1000 points of stuff or 2000 points of stuff? Should a potential new Primaris super heavy vehicle be priced like it is sitting on Guilliman's aura, or not?

The more you stuff in his aura the less flexible you become with objectives. There's an upper limit as well and I'm not sure that a 266 point deficit can succinctly be overcome.

 Crimson wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Anyone calling for nerfs is a casual with nothing but anecdotal evidence and should be ignored anyways.

You just don't get it. Some people don't like the bubble hammer. Nerfs to auras should be accompanied to buffs to the units themselves (be this a cost decrease or an actual rule change.)

I get it! But this is how Marines are.

This is how they've always been. Whether it's bubbles now or multi character units in the past. This is nothing new.

There are different armies for people who don't like this. They should stop making demands on how armies should be.

 Ishagu wrote:
I get it! But this is how Marines are.

This is how they've always been. Whether it's bubbles or multi character units.

There are different armies for people who don't like this. They should stop making demands on how armies should be!

I have played marines since the second edition, it is not how 'marines have always been.' And rules should reflect the fluff. Current rules encourage unfluffy playstyle, thus the rules need to be changed.

Sure, in 2nd edition things were different.

They've been like this for 10+ years in one variation or another.
Sounds like you need a new army to play? There's nothing wrong with that.

"Sounds like you need a new army to play?"

The most GW answer ever.

Things don't satisfy you forever. Sometimes a change is needed.

Hobby projects are no different.

 Ishagu wrote:
Sure, in 2nd edition things were different.

They've been like this for 10+ years in one variation or another.
Sounds like you need a new army to play? There's nothing wrong with that.

My marine army is new, this is my third! And this sort of reliance to auras is new, especially compared to other factions. Deathstar units were a thing in past editions, but that's a different thing. Static, castling gunline was more traditionally a Guard thing. Counterintuitively they're now pretty damn mobile, while marines are static and rely on castling. This is just bad rules writing from army identity perspective.

Auras are new. Characters buffind units is not.

Today it's auras. Yesterday it was all about multiple character units sharing their ability.
It's the same thing. Grouped as one unit or grouped around one character.

Why aren't you playing Blood Angels? All about fast movement and assault with individual units or characters.

 Crimson wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Anyone calling for nerfs is a casual with nothing but anecdotal evidence and should be ignored anyways.

You just don't get it. Some people don't like the bubble hammer. Nerfs to auras should be accompanied to buffs to the units themselves (be this a cost decrease or an actual rule change.)

Ehh - bubble hammer is only problematic play wise because the bubble is only 6 inch. If marines are going to have to be in auras to do decent damage then the auras range should be extended. Or they should get much improved efficiency on their own. Those are the 2 options. None other exist.

The aura is for a unit or two. The rest of the army must spread out or you lose the game.

 Ishagu wrote:
Auras are new. Characters buffind units is not.

Today it's auras. Yesterday it was all about multiple character units sharing their ability.
It's the same thing. Grouped as one unit or grouped around one character.

Why aren't you playing Blood Angels? All about fast movement and assault with individual units or characters.

BA are slaves to babysitters, too. Even worse in some ways, even.

 Ishagu wrote:
The aura is for a unit or two. The rest of the army must spread out or you lose the game.

Not really. Typically a game has 4 objectives. 1 is in your deployment and you just try to control the next closest objective as well. You lose when you don't play to your armies strength. Spreading out is not for marines. Putting your whole army in cover with gman buff is just about the only thing that works.

 Ishagu wrote:
Auras are new. Characters buffind units is not.

Today it's auras. Yesterday it was all about multiple character units sharing their ability.
It's the same thing. Grouped as one unit or grouped around one character.

It absolutely is not the same thing. Deathstars didn't encourage castling and lumping every unit together. It encouraged putting many characters in one unit, which was kinda weird, but a different issue. A character being able to buff one unit (or even limited number of units) incentivises completely different sort of gameplay than auras. If you don't see this you'd make a terrible game designer.

Why aren't you playing Blood Angels? All about fast movement and assault with individual units or characters.

I have considered it, but they're kinda awkward as Primaris only, which is how my new chapter rolls.

Why not wait for the next dex? Primaris are still in very, very early stages.
I wouldn't judge or be upset about things now. They'll change and evolve greatly in the future.

 Ishagu wrote:
Why not wait for the next dex? Primaris are still in very, very early stages.
I wouldn't judge or be upset about things now. They'll change and evolve greatly in the future.

Some of us have been waiting since the beginning of 6th to not a have dog gak army.

 Ishagu wrote:
Why not wait for the next dex? Primaris are still in very, very early stages.
I wouldn't judge or be upset about things now. They'll change and evolve greatly in the future.

IDK about that. This edition is almost 2 years old. I wouldn't be surprised if 9th eddition came out before a new primaris codex.

 Ishagu wrote:
Why not wait for the next dex?

I am waiting for it.

Primaris are still in very, very early stages.
I wouldn't judge or be upset about things now. They'll change and evolve greatly in the future.

I am not upset, and I was speculating about what sort of changes I'd like to see in the future. Then you told me that I shouldn't want marines to be changed and should get a different army instead...