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.

They are the ones who want 100 USD for this thing. Pressure is on them. I guess they've got enough brainwashed fanbois that they don't have to care, though.

Reemule wrote:

Being right makes him look smart enough.

It would. I'm waiting for that to happen.

(And if the new marine codex truly fixes theses issues, I am more than happy to concede he was right. The recent reveals have not exactly filled me with confidence though.)

 Crimson wrote:

Reemule wrote:

Being right makes him look smart enough.

It would. I'm waiting for that to happen.

(And if the new marine codex truly fixes theses issues, I am more than happy to concede he was right. The recent reveals have not exactly filled me with confidence though.)

Define Fix.

Astartes as a mono faction have a 43% win rate, 44% as a Primary. If the win rate after the next book is 50% do you consider them fixed?

I currently have a win rate above 60% with my Astartes based on the last 5 GTs and Majors I attended and ran them. Do you think that being a faction many beginners use might have an impact on the figures?

I personally think the fix would be in having more dynamic ways to play, better chapter tactics, strats and psychic powers.

So that means there are demon players with 75%+ . Aggregate data is aggregate. You dont get to point to yourself as a white knight.

 Ishagu wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

Reemule wrote:

Being right makes him look smart enough.

It would. I'm waiting for that to happen.

(And if the new marine codex truly fixes theses issues, I am more than happy to concede he was right. The recent reveals have not exactly filled me with confidence though.)

Define Fix.

Astartes as a mono faction have a 43% win rate, 44% as a Primary. If the win rate after the next book is 50% do you consider them fixed?

I currently have a win rate above 60% with my Astartes based on the last 5 GTs and Majors I attended and ran them. Do you think that being a faction many beginners use might have an impact on the figures?

I personally think the fix would be in having more dynamic ways to play, better chapter tactics, strats and psychic powers.

No I don't think that beginners are going to GT's. Space marines are just bad. The game literally revolves around invul saves / stratagem combos / spaming undercosted units. Space marines are bottom teir in all of these categories except for a relic levithan.

 Ishagu wrote:
Because the Marine books, all of them, were the first books written for 8th edition. The release schedule does not always reflect the completion schedule of the books. This was confirmed by the FLG guys directly. Sometimes there is over a year between a unit being tested and it's release. The same applies to a codex.

It's a case of 1st codex syndrome. Let's just wait for the next book and see what changes it brings. It's literally around the corner.

Last time I checked, DA were one of the last books released in 8th edition. Do they also caught this '1st codex syndrome'?

But ok, never mind the DA. What about Vanguard codex from this year and hilariously awful both rules and point costs it had? Lt who forgot his combat knife in chapter monastery? Literally the only SM captain in the game's entire existence who had his melee weapon privileges revoked? Badly overpriced troops with access to glorified bolters only, not even bolt rifles/carbines of other primaris, who would be mediocre even without considering the massive, nonsense D2 weapon proliferation making primaris pay premium in points over squatmarines for basically nothing in a lot of cases? Is this the '1st codex syndrome' too?

I don't know, I am not saying GW is stupid, but treatment of primaris (and kinda other SM, too) over last 2 years was so inept I frankly wouldn't be surprised if someone told me a GW writer hates the range and wants to sabotage them, from overpriced points and no options from one end, to making sure every other book in the game has cheap anti-primaris guns everywhere, even where it pees all over fluff and common sense (cough Kelly Sue of GSC banging together dark age of technology grade pistols out of scrap, in a cave cough)

In response to Xenomancer:

I have literally played against people who were playing their first ever game at a 100+ player event. This was at the Last Chance Open.

Many players at the LVO, largest of all events, are there just to roll dice and have fun.

For many people these tournaments are the only time they get to play. The demographic is varied.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Irbis wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Because the Marine books, all of them, were the first books written for 8th edition. The release schedule does not always reflect the completion schedule of the books. This was confirmed by the FLG guys directly. Sometimes there is over a year between a unit being tested and it's release. The same applies to a codex.

It's a case of 1st codex syndrome. Let's just wait for the next book and see what changes it brings. It's literally around the corner.

Last time I checked, DA were one of the last books released in 8th edition. Do they also caught this '1st codex syndrome'?

But ok, never mind the DA. What about Vanguard codex from this year and hilariously awful both rules and point costs it had? Lt who forgot his combat knife in chapter monastery? Literally the only SM captain in the game's entire existence who had his melee weapon privileges revoked? Badly overpriced troops with access to glorified bolters only, not even bolt rifles/carbines of other primaris, who would be mediocre even without considering the massive, nonsense D2 weapon proliferation making primaris pay premium in points over squatmarines for basically nothing in a lot of cases? Is this the '1st codex syndrome' too?

I don't know, I am not saying GW is stupid, but treatment of primaris (and kinda other SM, too) over last 2 years was so inept I frankly wouldn't be surprised if someone told me a GW writer hates the range and wants to sabotage them, from overpriced points and no options from one end, to making sure every other book in the game has cheap anti-primaris guns everywhere, even where it pees all over fluff and common sense (cough Kelly Sue of GSC banging together dark age of technology grade pistols out of scrap, in a cave cough)

Yes, the DA codex was probably from roughly the same design time as the others. GW stagger the Astartes books because they can't just have a full year of Marine releases.

Let's wait to see how the new Astartes measure up.

 Irbis wrote:

But ok, never mind the DA. What about Vanguard codex from this year and hilariously awful both rules and point costs it had? Lt who forgot his combat knife in chapter monastery? Literally the only SM captain in the game's entire existence who had his melee weapon privileges revoked? Badly overpriced troops with access to glorified bolters only, not even bolt rifles/carbines of other primaris, who would be mediocre even without considering the massive, nonsense D2 weapon proliferation making primaris pay premium in points over squatmarines for basically nothing in a lot of cases? Is this the '1st codex syndrome' too?

Yep. This is the stuff that worries me. Sure, I get some old units in the first codex being bad. But new stuff made specifically for this edition being useless is just disheartening. I mean I have whined about the new Reiver Lt. a lot, but to me it really was the thing that made me pretty much lose the faith in them. Like who in their right mind thinks that a melee focused character without a melee weapon is acceptable? Utterly mind-boggling. I really like the Primaris look, and I want to be exited about the new models, but them being often so terrible in game is starting to suck the fun out of it. I mean I'm not a power gamer, I don't need them to be meta-shatteringly amazing, I'd settle for 'adequate.' But apparently having a simple power sword on a melee character is too much to ask for.

Martel732 wrote:
But why don't they just fix their cut and paste error?

I just think that is unlikely at this point. We're 7 months removed from chapter approved and even longer from when the documents for it were created.

Talking about the executioner pdf.

 Irbis wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Because the Marine books, all of them, were the first books written for 8th edition. The release schedule does not always reflect the completion schedule of the books. This was confirmed by the FLG guys directly. Sometimes there is over a year between a unit being tested and it's release. The same applies to a codex.

It's a case of 1st codex syndrome. Let's just wait for the next book and see what changes it brings. It's literally around the corner.

Last time I checked, DA were one of the last books released in 8th edition. Do they also caught this '1st codex syndrome'?

But ok, never mind the DA. What about Vanguard codex from this year and hilariously awful both rules and point costs it had? Lt who forgot his combat knife in chapter monastery? Literally the only SM captain in the game's entire existence who had his melee weapon privileges revoked? Badly overpriced troops with access to glorified bolters only, not even bolt rifles/carbines of other primaris, who would be mediocre even without considering the massive, nonsense D2 weapon proliferation making primaris pay premium in points over squatmarines for basically nothing in a lot of cases? Is this the '1st codex syndrome' too?

I don't know, I am not saying GW is stupid, but treatment of primaris (and kinda other SM, too) over last 2 years was so inept I frankly wouldn't be surprised if someone told me a GW writer hates the range and wants to sabotage them, from overpriced points and no options from one end, to making sure every other book in the game has cheap anti-primaris guns everywhere, even where it pees all over fluff and common sense (cough Kelly Sue of GSC banging together dark age of technology grade pistols out of scrap, in a cave cough)

There are two phases to GW units. The "early release that is not tied to a codex phase" and the "codex phase". It's pretty clear that people shat all over the chaos side of Shadowspear - and then the codex came out. Obliterators remain a hot button issue depending on how you view their use in games, but despite that CSM got some really, really great tools.

Add in to this the kits we get are often not equipped with all the weapons the full kit may grant (releases like the Executioner aside in that regard).

 Ishagu wrote:
In response to Xenomancer:

I have literally played against people who were playing their first ever game at a 100+ player event. This was at the Last Chance Open.

Many players at the LVO, largest of all events, are there just to roll dice and have fun.

For many people these tournaments are the only time they get to play. The demographic is varied.

There are some new players at events but they aren't overwhelmingly space marines. The majority of tournament players are competitive net listers.

 Irbis wrote:
Last time I checked, DA were one of the last books released in 8th edition. Do they also caught this '1st codex syndrome'?

Point of order - assuming you're using DA to refer to Dark Angels, and that Wikipedia is accurate, you're way off the mark with DA being "one of the last books released".

Dark Angels is listed as a December 2017 release, alongside Blood Angels, with the two books being the 8th and 9th released for 8th edition - ahead of the likes of necrons, Dark Eldar and Orks.

 Xenomancers wrote:

The Newman wrote:

Reemule wrote:
The Newman, he is speaking on a point per point basis. A Cap and LT provide roughly 1/2 as much use, but cost far less than 1/2 of Gman's points.

That might have been what he meant, but it's definitely not what he said. He said they were just as good and left more points for other stuff, not that they're as good for the points and 200 points of other stuff balances it out overall.

And to be fair I didn't even disagree about whether g-man was worth the points over the Cap'n / Leiutenant combo.

You still have to get 2 HQs with Gman if you want a batallion and the hq's really suck. It is more tax.

I would point out that GMan brings three CPs just standing there and most of the other formations will give you at least one CP to cover the cost of the Auxillary Superheavy detachment so you don't need to worry as much about taking a Battalion. Techmarines are ... not exactly dirt cheap, but still pretty cheap and they do something GMan doesn't do so you're not wasting points on something redundant and taking a Spearhead, Vanguard, or Outrider means not paying the troop tax either.

I'd actually come out ahead taking Gman and a spearhead/vanguard/outrider since I almost always pay the 3 CP for Master of the Chapter because we always use the CoD rules and I'm usually looking at a -2 to-hit.

The Newman wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

The Newman wrote:

Reemule wrote:
The Newman, he is speaking on a point per point basis. A Cap and LT provide roughly 1/2 as much use, but cost far less than 1/2 of Gman's points.

That might have been what he meant, but it's definitely not what he said. He said they were just as good and left more points for other stuff, not that they're as good for the points and 200 points of other stuff balances it out overall.

And to be fair I didn't even disagree about whether g-man was worth the points over the Cap'n / Leiutenant combo.

You still have to get 2 HQs with Gman if you want a batallion and the hq's really suck. It is more tax.

I would point out that GMan brings three CPs just standing there and most of the other formations will give you at least one CP to cover the cost of the Auxillary Superheavy detachment so you don't need to worry as much about taking a Battalion. Techmarines are ... not exactly dirt cheap, but still pretty cheap and they do something GMan doesn't do so you're not wasting points on something redundant and taking a Spearhead, Vanguard, or Outrider means not paying the troop tax either.

I'd actually come out ahead taking Gman and a spearhead/vanguard/outrider since I almost always pay the 3 CP for Master of the Chapter because we always use the CoD rules and I'm usually looking at a -2 to-hit.

I always take Tiggy and Telion Cause I need the CP to spam intercessor vetreens. It is true a full mech army doesn't even need CP Thats is the build that does best competitively.

“Last time I checked, DA were one of the last books released in 8th edition. Do they also caught this '1st codex syndrome'?"

Lol this just made my day!

 Sir Fred wrote:
“Last time I checked, DA were one of the last books released in 8th edition. Do they also caught this '1st codex syndrome'?"

Lol this just made my day!

To be fair - it's more of a later middle codex. It is not 1st codex syndrome. While Da might have the lowest winrate (they are all pretty low for SM chapters) IMO they have the best marine codex. They have good psychic powers / some actually usable stratagems / and azreal buff is even better than Gman buff. a 4++ bubble is really good.

Dark Angels are Space Marines so despite not being first codex suffer from it anyway

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Sir Fred wrote:
“Last time I checked, DA were one of the last books released in 8th edition. Do they also caught this '1st codex syndrome'?"

Lol this just made my day!

To be fair - it's more of a later middle codex. It is not 1st codex syndrome. While Da might have the lowest winrate (they are all pretty low for SM chapters) IMO they have the best marine codex. They have good psychic powers / some actually usable stratagems / and azreal buff is even better than Gman buff. a 4++ bubble is really good.

I certainly don't enjoy dumping good-AP weapons into an Azrael bubble gunline surrounded by allied GEQ. But Gman's aura is usually well above double firepower, and a 4++ is at best a 50% durability increase (usually much less, especially in Marine dexes). I'm not saying DA are necessarily worse (in this context) - but I'm having a hard time believing Azrael's aura (while excellent) gets anywhere close to Gman's in value.

Bharring wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Sir Fred wrote:
“Last time I checked, DA were one of the last books released in 8th edition. Do they also caught this '1st codex syndrome'?"

Lol this just made my day!

To be fair - it's more of a later middle codex. It is not 1st codex syndrome. While Da might have the lowest winrate (they are all pretty low for SM chapters) IMO they have the best marine codex. They have good psychic powers / some actually usable stratagems / and azreal buff is even better than Gman buff. a 4++ bubble is really good.

I certainly don't enjoy dumping good-AP weapons into an Azrael bubble gunline surrounded by allied GEQ. But Gman's aura is usually well above double firepower, and a 4++ is at best a 50% durability increase (usually much less, especially in Marine dexes). I'm not saying DA are necessarily worse (in this context) - but I'm having a hard time believing Azrael's aura (while excellent) gets anywhere close to Gman's in value.

But doesn't he also have the reroll all hits as a chapter master anyway, si it's really a trade off between 4++ in a book that heavily rewards plasma, vrs a reroll wounds bubble?
Not to mention the additional benifit of not being a LoW.

Azrael also gives a free CP and has a Warlord that's strictly better than the Ultramarines one. He's actually got quite a bit going for him and is only held back by Marine style writing in the rest of the army.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Sir Fred wrote:
“Last time I checked, DA were one of the last books released in 8th edition. Do they also caught this '1st codex syndrome'?"

Lol this just made my day!

To be fair - it's more of a later middle codex. It is not 1st codex syndrome. While Da might have the lowest winrate (they are all pretty low for SM chapters) IMO they have the best marine codex. They have good psychic powers / some actually usable stratagems / and azreal buff is even better than Gman buff. a 4++ bubble is really good.

The DA codex might look good on paper but it is the worst-performing codex in the game in ITC rulesets, which is the only place we have any actual statistics from. If there is some way to actually use DA efficiently, I would love if someone can show me a list.

I've tried running Azrael Hellblaster castles, Ravenwing heavy fast lists, and Deathwing/Ravenwing/Greenwing balanced lists. Every time I've found the DA lack survivability and killing power. Even when I win It feels like I'm playing with a points handicap.

Which is why I'm frustrated the Executioner got a points increase at the same time it became possible to add it to a DA list.


Edit: If DA had access to centurion devastators I would rate Azreal much higher... right now he just does not have good targets for his 4++ and reroll hits bubble.

Dark Angels are lacking because of being written like Marines and pretending they have units that need to be balanced differently when in fact they don't.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Dark Angels are lacking because of being written like Marines and pretending they have units that need to be balanced differently when in fact they don't.

Can you elaborate? What units are being balanced differently? I feel like you have a point but I'm not quite grasping it.

abyrn wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Sir Fred wrote:
“Last time I checked, DA were one of the last books released in 8th edition. Do they also caught this '1st codex syndrome'?"

Lol this just made my day!

To be fair - it's more of a later middle codex. It is not 1st codex syndrome. While Da might have the lowest winrate (they are all pretty low for SM chapters) IMO they have the best marine codex. They have good psychic powers / some actually usable stratagems / and azreal buff is even better than Gman buff. a 4++ bubble is really good.

The DA codex might look good on paper but it is the worst-performing codex in the game in ITC rulesets, which is the only place we have any actual statistics from. If there is some way to actually use DA efficiently, I would love if someone can show me a list.

I've tried running Azrael Hellblaster castles, Ravenwing heavy fast lists, and Deathwing/Ravenwing/Greenwing balanced lists. Every time I've found the DA lack survivability and killing power. Even when I win It feels like I'm playing with a points handicap.

Which is why I'm frustrated the Executioner got a points increase at the same time it became possible to add it to a DA list.


Edit: If DA had access to centurion devastators I would rate Azreal much higher... right now he just does not have good targets for his 4++ and reroll hits bubble.

Find it hard to believe hell blasters doesn't work. They are one of the highest damage output units in the game with their weakness being defense. A 4++ save is an amazing defensive stat. You have to go all in on infantry which isn't much fun but it is IMO the best you can do with marines. Gman is 400 points and the things hes buffing are made of glass. If you build your army right with just high str weapons being your damage dealers. The only advnatage gman gives over azreal is reroll 2's to wound. You really think that is worth 400 points?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

abyrn wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Dark Angels are lacking because of being written like Marines and pretending they have units that need to be balanced differently when in fact they don't.

Can you elaborate? What units are being balanced differently? I feel like you have a point but I'm not quite grasping it.

Hes just responding to an earlier claim that the executioner was nerfed because of DA. It wasn't but that is what he is responding to.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Find it hard to believe hell blasters doesn't work. They are one of the highest damage output units in the game with their weakness being defense.

In a meta of rampant invulns and multiple to hit debuffs, utilizing plasma as your primary armament is a death sentence.

abyrn wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Dark Angels are lacking because of being written like Marines and pretending they have units that need to be balanced differently when in fact they don't.

Can you elaborate? What units are being balanced differently? I feel like you have a point but I'm not quite grasping it.

Basically the codex already shares a bunch of units with the main Marine codex in all but name. They end up being priced differently because of this (Deathwing being the worst example), and therefore the more "Dark Angels" units don't perform up to par. Meanwhile, Greenwing is written like the main Marine codex, where all the units suffer not being under Roboute's aura.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sterling191 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Find it hard to believe hell blasters doesn't work. They are one of the highest damage output units in the game with their weakness being defense.

In a meta of rampant invulns and multiple to hit debuffs, utilizing plasma as your primary armament is a death sentence.

The D3 you can get with that many shots can still be tasty even with the AP-4 being wasted. Overall I agree though.

Sterling191 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Find it hard to believe hell blasters doesn't work. They are one of the highest damage output units in the game with their weakness being defense.

In a meta of rampant invulns and multiple to hit debuffs, utilizing plasma as your primary armament is a death sentence.

This is absolutely my experience. I think hellblasters are one of the worst marine units actually.

Sterling191 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Find it hard to believe hell blasters doesn't work. They are one of the highest damage output units in the game with their weakness being defense.

In a meta of rampant invulns and multiple to hit debuffs, utilizing plasma as your primary armament is a death sentence.

I don't disagree that -1 to hits are really aggravating with plasma. It should really only cause 1 mortal wound on an unmodified roll of a 1. I betcha if they made that rule marines in general would be doing a lot better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:

Sterling191 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Find it hard to believe hell blasters doesn't work. They are one of the highest damage output units in the game with their weakness being defense.

In a meta of rampant invulns and multiple to hit debuffs, utilizing plasma as your primary armament is a death sentence.

This is absolutely my experience. I think hellblasters are one of the worst marine units actually.

It's true. I don't use them. It's mostly because they die easy in my opponents shooting phase though. At least DA can mitigate that with a 4++ save.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Sterling191 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Find it hard to believe hell blasters doesn't work. They are one of the highest damage output units in the game with their weakness being defense.

In a meta of rampant invulns and multiple to hit debuffs, utilizing plasma as your primary armament is a death sentence.

I don't disagree that -1 to hits are really aggravating with plasma. It should really only cause 1 mortal wound on an unmodified roll of a 1. I betcha if they made that rule marines in general would be doing a lot better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:

Sterling191 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Find it hard to believe hell blasters doesn't work. They are one of the highest damage output units in the game with their weakness being defense.

In a meta of rampant invulns and multiple to hit debuffs, utilizing plasma as your primary armament is a death sentence.

This is absolutely my experience. I think hellblasters are one of the worst marine units actually.

It's true. I don't use them. It's mostly because they die easy in my opponents shooting phase though. At least DA can mitigate that with a 4++ save.

They don't die any easier than the rest of the Primaris line outside of Aggressors and Inceptors, why would them being fragile be a consideration?

I don't use them because a -1 to hit would be a nice chance of pace, I'm usually looking at -2 or -3.