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.

Ice_can wrote:
I just hope GW actually realise that it's the traits not the units that are meta breaking before they nerf all my dreadnaughts into unplayable overcosted trash as I don't play Iron hands.
Like they did with codex 1.0

You know that this is exactly what's going to happen.

Whilst it is nice that marines get new rules, I really dislike the trend of the subfaction choices becoming even more important. I already thought that they had too much impact before, and now they have doubled down on it. It literally makes balancing the units properly impossible. If an unit gets massive buffs in one subfaction but negligible buffs in another, while reverse is true for some other unit, assigning proper point costs for those units simply isn't possible.

 Continuity wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Don't worry. I like this crazy train. By the time they get around to GK it will be something truly jaw dropping like:

All Psykic tests succeed on a 1 if there is a Palladin withing 6". All Strike squads now get an extra 12 attacks with their thunder hammers if the models are painted. When your warlord is Kaldor Draigo, all GK within 72" become GMDKs.

Seriously. This is getting silly. The first things were kinda wow, then they released stuff that was borderline meta breaking, now we have this. And still a couple more codexes after this!

Yea, baby! Rock the hyperbole! Ain't nothing stopping you now!

Yeah, nothing in these rules has really screamed 'op' just 'really good' better pricing, better design, hoops to jump through if you want specific bonuses.

It's not at all meta breaking, it's just gonna shift things around a bit.

I don't consider surrounding an Iron Stone chapter master with dreads and repulsors to collect serpent shields to be "jumping through hoops"

The potential to break the meta is absolutely there, the new book buffed marine damage output across the board to an absurd degree, leaving their durability their only weakness, which the iron hands solved. With the new chapter master granting full rerolls, not even stacking -1 to hit will do much against them.

The hoops are 'no allies no other CTs/characters.

And oooh you can waste 2CP on the useless CM strat (the good dreads hit on 2s) and 70+ points on a captain you don't need for the ability to put half to 3/4ths of your army in a 3" bubble. Even in a KP game, that's not ideal. Also, heavy weapons tend to be bouncing off of invuls already, adding -1AP isn't honestly as strong as people think it is.

Stacking -1 to hit NEVER did anything to space marines, they've ALWAYS been able to bring full rerolls. The damage output only increased by the extra AP unless their units MOVE. And if they're MOVING they likely don't get the ironstone damage mitigation.

They traded slightly better durability for a massively reduced mobility.

ERJAK wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Honestly i think that ultramarines are stronger than IH, at least until now.

The devastator doctrine is nice, but the strongest doctrine for marines is the tactical one. Who cares if a lascannon gets an extra -1 AP, it's the additional -1 on bolter weapons which is truly scary.

Really
I'll take a dakka redemptor as ultramarines it's throwing 18 S5 Ap-2 1d shots hitting on 4's or 18 S5 Ap-1 Hitting on 3's

Iron Hands 18 S5 Ap-2 1d shots hitting on 3's rerolling 1's

Repulsor
Ultramarines at best gains the Ap-1 of devistator doctrine for turn 1 but turn 2 onwards gains 0
Iron hands Ap-1 Re-roll 1's

That's qithout taking into account the 6+++ FNP or the double wounds for damage table abilities.

Not even in the same ballpark dude. Even If chapters could start in their desired doctrine Iron Hands would still be preferable. It's an absolute joke of balance. The internal balance with the codex with gman in it before was probably better. Fantastic work GW. FANTASTIC. Real great rules writing. Lets take the ultras special trait they have to wait to turn 2 to get and give it to Ironhands on turn 1 buffing weapons that are buffed on turn 1 and not 2. To the army with the best army trait in the entirety of the game. Lets also give them additional defensive buffs that ALL marines have been crying for since forever. Blue Ironhands...here I come.

Ironhands get literally no benefit from bringing any rapid fire or assault weapons and (without stratagem help) will never have even the option to use the assault doctrine.

They also don't get the ridiculous bevy of powerful named characters ultras do.

Ironhands are great and I would agree that as of now they're the best Chapter overall, but it's not a huge margin and your histrionics are frankly embarrassing.

PFFF - my initial reaction to the codex was being naive to how effective the doctrines were actually going to be and the overall increase in effectiveness of all marine units due to a bevy of free rules being given to them. Much more effective than I thought they would be. It's not hard however to apply my experience to this situation. All the improvements marines unit got as ultra marines are going to be MUCH better as Ironhands.
As they take effect IMMEDIATELY in the dev doctrine. The benefits are quite literally the same but better (free reroll 1's) and the special rule takes away the penalties for moving and shooting heavies while buffing them. Also with knowledge of all the units profiles - I can assure you - heavy weapons are the predominant source of damage on most units. Including the best options - Like Ven dreads/Contemptor dreads/Levithan dreads/Redemptor dreads/executioners/eliminators/suppressors/vindicators/Invictor dreads/ Plus now even stalker bolt rifles are great. You can easily build an entire army with nothing but heavy weapons except for some storm bolters and fraglaunchers which account for basically no points expenditure. All to go along with having a chapter tactic which is literally 3 separate armies individual trait. I'd gladly trade in calgar to have a 5++ bubble to. I'd do it instantly. In fact I am going to do it.

ERJAK wrote:

 Continuity wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Don't worry. I like this crazy train. By the time they get around to GK it will be something truly jaw dropping like:

All Psykic tests succeed on a 1 if there is a Palladin withing 6". All Strike squads now get an extra 12 attacks with their thunder hammers if the models are painted. When your warlord is Kaldor Draigo, all GK within 72" become GMDKs.

Seriously. This is getting silly. The first things were kinda wow, then they released stuff that was borderline meta breaking, now we have this. And still a couple more codexes after this!

Yea, baby! Rock the hyperbole! Ain't nothing stopping you now!

Yeah, nothing in these rules has really screamed 'op' just 'really good' better pricing, better design, hoops to jump through if you want specific bonuses.

It's not at all meta breaking, it's just gonna shift things around a bit.

I don't consider surrounding an Iron Stone chapter master with dreads and repulsors to collect serpent shields to be "jumping through hoops"

The potential to break the meta is absolutely there, the new book buffed marine damage output across the board to an absurd degree, leaving their durability their only weakness, which the iron hands solved. With the new chapter master granting full rerolls, not even stacking -1 to hit will do much against them.

The hoops are 'no allies no other CTs/characters.

And oooh you can waste 2CP on the useless CM strat (the good dreads hit on 2s) and 70+ points on a captain you don't need for the ability to put half to 3/4ths of your army in a 3" bubble. Even in a KP game, that's not ideal. Also, heavy weapons tend to be bouncing off of invuls already, adding -1AP isn't honestly as strong as people think it is.

Stacking -1 to hit NEVER did anything to space marines, they've ALWAYS been able to bring full rerolls.

- The preferred weapons of most dreads are high volume low AP heavy weapons, having the additional AP is helpful
- Yes needing to squeeze a bunch of vehicles around a character (with a larger than 32mm base mind you) sucks, good thing you can move and fire heavy weapons with no penalties right? And if you don't need the full reroll, just don't spend the CP to get it.
- It was rerolling failed hit before instead of all hits, massive difference against -2 to hit units like plaguebearers and eldar flyers

 buddha wrote:

 buddha wrote:
Sounds awesome if true. I'm mostly curious what their doctrine will be. My bet is move and shoot heavy without penalty you n devastator.

Whelp, do I get a prize for guessing right on the doctrine?

No you do not get a prize for guessing that the logical, gun-obsessed machineheads get a bonus to Devastator mode.

regarding whats better this or Scions I think it'll depend how you want to play. Iron Hands is an extremely good choice if you want to play a "less the mobile gunline" but Ultramarines are MUCH MUCH more mobile and synergizes better across the army. the ultramarines "counts as stationary" applies to all unit and weapon types and can have some powerful results, exterminators able to move. agressors being suddenly much better. etc. In my opinion what army is better is going to depend on how your army is built.

BrianDavion wrote:
regarding whats better this or Scions I think it'll depend how you want to play. Iron Hands is an extremely good choice if you want to play a "less the mobile gunline" but Ultramarines are MUCH MUCH more mobile and synergizes better across the army. the ultramarines "counts as stationary" applies to all unit and weapon types and can have some powerful results, exterminators able to move. agressors being suddenly much better. etc. In my opinion what army is better is going to depend on how your army is built.

Fail to see how the army that gets to move with no penalty turn 1 is less mobile than the army that gets it turn 2? Heck - even Ironhands landspeeders are better because of this (In fact they seem quite nice) Plus actually get something out of their chapter tactic rather than ABSOLUTELY NOTHING - suppressors Infinitely better as iron hands. There is a trend...actual mobile units are better as Iron Hands and particularly worse as Ultramarines...why? Because fly keyword gives you the full version of the crap Ultras tactic. Plus they get all their bonus turn 1 and they apply to the weapons you want them to.

 Xenomancers wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
regarding whats better this or Scions I think it'll depend how you want to play. Iron Hands is an extremely good choice if you want to play a "less the mobile gunline" but Ultramarines are MUCH MUCH more mobile and synergizes better across the army. the ultramarines "counts as stationary" applies to all unit and weapon types and can have some powerful results, exterminators able to move. agressors being suddenly much better. etc. In my opinion what army is better is going to depend on how your army is built.

Fail to see how the army that gets to move with no penalty turn 1 is less mobile than the army that gets it turn 2? Heck - even Ironhands landspeeders are better because of this (In fact they seem quite nice) Plus actually get something out of their chapter tactic rather than ABSOLUTELY NOTHING - suppressors Infinitely better as iron hands. There is a trend...actual mobile units are better as Iron Hands and particularly worse as Ultramarines...why? Because fly keyword gives you the full version of the crap Ultras tactic. Plus they get all their bonus turn 1 and they apply to the weapons you want them to.

While I hate to interrupt the histrionics, didn't the combination of units with FLY and the Ultramarines CT get addressed in the Codex: Space Marines errata the other week?

 Dysartes wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
regarding whats better this or Scions I think it'll depend how you want to play. Iron Hands is an extremely good choice if you want to play a "less the mobile gunline" but Ultramarines are MUCH MUCH more mobile and synergizes better across the army. the ultramarines "counts as stationary" applies to all unit and weapon types and can have some powerful results, exterminators able to move. agressors being suddenly much better. etc. In my opinion what army is better is going to depend on how your army is built.

Fail to see how the army that gets to move with no penalty turn 1 is less mobile than the army that gets it turn 2? Heck - even Ironhands landspeeders are better because of this (In fact they seem quite nice) Plus actually get something out of their chapter tactic rather than ABSOLUTELY NOTHING - suppressors Infinitely better as iron hands. There is a trend...actual mobile units are better as Iron Hands and particularly worse as Ultramarines...why? Because fly keyword gives you the full version of the crap Ultras tactic. Plus they get all their bonus turn 1 and they apply to the weapons you want them to.

While I hate to interrupt the histrionics, didn't the combination of units with FLY and the Ultramarines CT get addressed in the Codex: Space Marines errata the other week?

Yes. So the Ultramarines fly unit isn't actively nerfed by it's own chapter tactic. Trust me - I would have mentioned that little giblet there in my tirade. Still It receives NOTHING but +1 LD which if you can even consider that a bonus in a unit that maxes at 1-3. Essentially it is nothing.

The Ironhand Landspeeder can take 2 missiles and a HB/AC move and shoot them at -1 AP all game with not pentalty. It gets a 6+ FNP overwatches on 5+. Fly keyword is even better than Ultramarines tactic to fall back and shoot anways.
The ultramarines landspeeder can switch to tactical doctrine to ignore to hit penalties but loses the AP bonus to do so - it doesn't get a 6+ FNP it doesn't overwatch on 5's.

I wonder which is better. I do hope Ultras get an actual chapter tactic once they realize how weak Ultras are compared to other marine forces. I guess white scars are pretty weak in comparison too they also will need help. It's pretty damn sad that White scars speeders are infinitely worse than Iron Hands ones...

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Man they're really going all in on the bloat now.

Queue the "It'S nOt BlOaT iT's FlAvOr" crowd defending the Angels having different codices.

I'm not a fan of the new Space Marine special rules enhancements [and not just because my marines doesn't get them.]

When it comes to infantry, I would much rather have kept the regular statline without bolterdrill or shock assault or doctrines or whatever and just taken a points cost reduction on the infantry.

First off, I don't like the addition of AP. AP on troop-level weapons just really makes them more effective against other 3+ targets and vehicle targets but doesn't really offer a proportional benefit against light infantry units, which is where I think the problem actually lies; and MEQ units didn't need a greater proliferation of AP on the field [and widespread AP-2 is probably the last thing MEQ wants to find on the field].

Second, and more significantly: I don't really care about Grey Hunters or Intercessors with bolters,they really just exist to eat bullets and take objectives. A points savings on the units would go towards bringing more upgrades, more answers, and more units to have a more comprehensive force than a super troops squad that can heavily damage tanks with their assault rifles.

Do we really care about Marines being more effective against other Marines? Mirror matches don't count much for balance (outside of discussing vs CSM, which as you all know I have a whole host of complaints on how they're handled). Otherwise the extra AP is welcome to fight against cheaper hordes.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Man they're really going all in on the bloat now.

Queue the "It'S nOt BlOaT iT's FlAvOr" crowd defending the Angels having different codices.

Well, it is flavor. Which I'm all for, Iron Hands are supposed to fight very differently than, say, the Blood Angels. For as far as I'm concerned GW should do this to every subfaction in every codex to make them feel unique. Problem is that it's extremely powerful flavor. I think I'd personally have cut some power from the IH special doctrine by writing it as "Heavy weapons do not suffer the penalty for moving and shooting while in the Devastator doctrine. If all models in a unit have the Power of the Machine Spirit rule then those models will reroll hit rolls of 1 instead while in the Devastator doctrine."

But let's not forget that the complete inability to soup is a rather big counterweight to all the power that SM have gotten, so let's not cry havoc before we actually get some results in.

Well it's just a casual kick in the shins of non baseline marine players that now can wait longer for updates to their rules.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
regarding whats better this or Scions I think it'll depend how you want to play. Iron Hands is an extremely good choice if you want to play a "less the mobile gunline" but Ultramarines are MUCH MUCH more mobile and synergizes better across the army. the ultramarines "counts as stationary" applies to all unit and weapon types and can have some powerful results, exterminators able to move. agressors being suddenly much better. etc. In my opinion what army is better is going to depend on how your army is built.

Fail to see how the army that gets to move with no penalty turn 1 is less mobile than the army that gets it turn 2? Heck - even Ironhands landspeeders are better because of this (In fact they seem quite nice) Plus actually get something out of their chapter tactic rather than ABSOLUTELY NOTHING - suppressors Infinitely better as iron hands. There is a trend...actual mobile units are better as Iron Hands and particularly worse as Ultramarines...why? Because fly keyword gives you the full version of the crap Ultras tactic. Plus they get all their bonus turn 1 and they apply to the weapons you want them to.

While I hate to interrupt the histrionics, didn't the combination of units with FLY and the Ultramarines CT get addressed in the Codex: Space Marines errata the other week?

Yes. So the Ultramarines fly unit isn't actively nerfed by it's own chapter tactic. Trust me - I would have mentioned that little giblet there in my tirade. Still It receives NOTHING but +1 LD which if you can even consider that a bonus in a unit that maxes at 1-3. Essentially it is nothing.

The Ironhand Landspeeder can take 2 missiles and a HB/AC move and shoot them at -1 AP all game with not pentalty. It gets a 6+ FNP overwatches on 5+. Fly keyword is even better than Ultramarines tactic to fall back and shoot anways.
The ultramarines landspeeder can switch to tactical doctrine to ignore to hit penalties but loses the AP bonus to do so - it doesn't get a 6+ FNP it doesn't overwatch on 5's.

I wonder which is better. I do hope Ultras get an actual chapter tactic once they realize how weak Ultras are compared to other marine forces. I guess white scars are pretty weak in comparison too they also will need help. It's pretty damn sad that White scars speeders are infinitely worse than Iron Hands ones...

meanwhile a repulsor executioner can move it's full speed and fire twice if it's an ultramarines or sucessor chapter. thats pretty juicy. And the UM ability works for EVERY unit with every type of gun while in the doctrine that your average marine unit will live in. Iron Hands do one thing (tanks) very very well. Ultramarines meanwhile have an immensly flexable toolkit allowing them to perform well in a wide array of situations.
Which is exactly what the lore says should be the case. If you want to play an army that consists of 3 bare bones tactical squads and nothing but vehicles otheriwse, then for god's sake iron hands are GREAT. but if you wanted to run a infantry heavy list advancing quickly and seizing objects etc? Ultramarines is better.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
regarding whats better this or Scions I think it'll depend how you want to play. Iron Hands is an extremely good choice if you want to play a "less the mobile gunline" but Ultramarines are MUCH MUCH more mobile and synergizes better across the army. the ultramarines "counts as stationary" applies to all unit and weapon types and can have some powerful results, exterminators able to move. agressors being suddenly much better. etc. In my opinion what army is better is going to depend on how your army is built.

Fail to see how the army that gets to move with no penalty turn 1 is less mobile than the army that gets it turn 2? Heck - even Ironhands landspeeders are better because of this (In fact they seem quite nice) Plus actually get something out of their chapter tactic rather than ABSOLUTELY NOTHING - suppressors Infinitely better as iron hands. There is a trend...actual mobile units are better as Iron Hands and particularly worse as Ultramarines...why? Because fly keyword gives you the full version of the crap Ultras tactic. Plus they get all their bonus turn 1 and they apply to the weapons you want them to.

While I hate to interrupt the histrionics, didn't the combination of units with FLY and the Ultramarines CT get addressed in the Codex: Space Marines errata the other week?

Yes. So the Ultramarines fly unit isn't actively nerfed by it's own chapter tactic. Trust me - I would have mentioned that little giblet there in my tirade. Still It receives NOTHING but +1 LD which if you can even consider that a bonus in a unit that maxes at 1-3. Essentially it is nothing.

The Ironhand Landspeeder can take 2 missiles and a HB/AC move and shoot them at -1 AP all game with not pentalty. It gets a 6+ FNP overwatches on 5+. Fly keyword is even better than Ultramarines tactic to fall back and shoot anways.
The ultramarines landspeeder can switch to tactical doctrine to ignore to hit penalties but loses the AP bonus to do so - it doesn't get a 6+ FNP it doesn't overwatch on 5's.

I wonder which is better. I do hope Ultras get an actual chapter tactic once they realize how weak Ultras are compared to other marine forces. I guess white scars are pretty weak in comparison too they also will need help. It's pretty damn sad that White scars speeders are infinitely worse than Iron Hands ones...

meanwhile a repulsor executioner can move it's full speed and fire twice if it's an ultramarines or sucessor chapter. thats pretty juicy. And the UM ability works for EVERY unit with every type of gun while in the doctrine that your average marine unit will live in. Iron Hands do one thing (tanks) very very well. Ultramarines meanwhile have an immensly flexable toolkit allowing them to perform well in a wide array of situations.
Which is exactly what the lore says should be the case. If you want to play an army that consists of 3 bare bones tactical squads and nothing but vehicles otheriwse, then for god's sake iron hands are GREAT. but if you wanted to run a infantry heavy list advancing quickly and seizing objects etc? Ultramarines is better.

You can do that turn 3+ as iron hands after you've effectively tabled your opponent in thanks to having bordeline unkillable vehicals half damage strat, -1 damage, counts as double wounds and the ability to double repair and even psychic powers to add wounds to your vehicals, which are primarily armed with heavy weapons.
3 5 man intercessors squads will be more than enough obsec on an empty table.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Man they're really going all in on the bloat now.

Queue the "It'S nOt BlOaT iT's FlAvOr" crowd defending the Angels having different codices.

I'm not a fan of the new Space Marine special rules enhancements [and not just because my marines doesn't get them.]

When it comes to infantry, I would much rather have kept the regular statline without bolterdrill or shock assault or doctrines or whatever and just taken a points cost reduction on the infantry.

First off, I don't like the addition of AP. AP on troop-level weapons just really makes them more effective against other 3+ targets and vehicle targets but doesn't really offer a proportional benefit against light infantry units, which is where I think the problem actually lies; and MEQ units didn't need a greater proliferation of AP on the field [and widespread AP-2 is probably the last thing MEQ wants to find on the field].

Second, and more significantly: I don't really care about Grey Hunters or Intercessors with bolters,they really just exist to eat bullets and take objectives. A points savings on the units would go towards bringing more upgrades, more answers, and more units to have a more comprehensive force than a super troops squad that can heavily damage tanks with their assault rifles.

Do we really care about Marines being more effective against other Marines? Mirror matches don't count much for balance (outside of discussing vs CSM, which as you all know I have a whole host of complaints on how they're handled). Otherwise the extra AP is welcome to fight against cheaper hordes.

Yes?

There's CSM, Space Wolves, Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Grey Knights, Deathwatch, Sisters of Battle, vehicle units as a broad category, some Eldar units, etc. And even then, the mirror match matters a lot.

The proliferation of AP2 is, in my opinion, terrible for the balance of toughness, armor, and wounds as metrics of resilience. A fundamental principle of AP is that the more armor you have, the more you're affected by a point of AP. Guardsmen or Orks have paper for armor, and their resilience comes from wound count in the unit, they don't really feel the additional AP. Marine units, however, feel the AP a lot more. Armor is already the weakest defense mode, and wounds is already the strongest; proliferating AP, especially AP2, further encourages massed light infantry and units that have a high wound density over units with armor.

The relative difference between the way a Space Marine and a Guardsmen felt against a Boltgun wound between this edition and last edition was a matter of a Guardsman taking 200% more wounds. Now, Guardsmen take only 100% more wounds by default, and when you start introducing AP it drop to 66% more and then 50% more.

This is also further affecting vehicle unit's relative immunity to light arms. Vehicle's armor saves are already a formality against AT systems and only really existed to neutralize the effect of infantry against them; and AP-2 infantry is also dismantling that.

I think the solution should have been a measure that improve Marine's troops' offensive and defensive capabilities against light troops without seriously affecting heavy infantry units. This is hard to actually find a special-rules based solution, because wounds and shots are the "base value" and effectively the most important factors and will almost always be less affected than systems relying on quality. Quality effects improve the value of each shot or wound, but they don't substitute for more wounds or shots.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:


I think the solution should have been a measure that improve Marine's troops' offensive and defensive capabilities against light troops without seriously affecting heavy infantry units. This is hard to actually find a special-rules based solution, because wounds and shots are the "base value" and effectively the most important factors and will almost always be less affected than systems relying on quality. Quality effects improve the value of each shot or wound, but they don't substitute for more wounds or shots.

They went for big units and repeated kits for the same unit because you gotta sell hose kits. You Da Jump the boyz, you don't run them in trukks.
The genie is out of the bottle.

 Xenomancers wrote:

The Newman wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

The Newman wrote:
The fact that it's a special character and not a "Khan on a Bike" generic is very much a disappointment, but that has everything to do with local meta for me. We pretty much all agree to not play the special characters since so many of them break game balance over their knee like so much Batman.

No special characters is a really bad rule to adopt. Many armies require special characters to function.

Name three.

(That's a legitimate question, nobody around here seems to care.)

Well for example you literally can't play Ynnari without a special character.

Armies like Ultramarines are particularly bad options without their special characters. (you basically play without a chapter tactic for the ability to use good special characters).

Mono Custodes - no Trajen? Why?

Do you allow units like the Solitaire?

Heck in many cases special characters are a lot worse than the generic HQ's like with Orks and dark eldar.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Ynari
Ultramarines
Sisters

ERJAK wrote:
Saint Celestine, Guillaman pre-codex, Shrike precodex, Cawl

So I'm going to indulge in a little nit-picking here:

Solitaire: Harlequins are a special case since they're so weird.

Cawl: Cawl is not a faction. If you mean AdMech, I play against them regularly and they function perfectly well without him. They're giving mono-guard a run for their money locally and if AdMech is substantially better with him then that's proving my point.

Shrike: Also not a faction, and he didn't bring anything to the table that I'm aware of that a generic Ravenguard Captain didn't do almost as well for cheaper.

Celestine: Seriously, not a faction. Although see Sisters below.

Custodes: Trajen is pretty good, but he's also almost as expensive as a Shield Captain and a Vexilla Magnifica put together. 1/3 more attacks is more valuable than rerolling to wound 1/6 of the time when you're hiting 35/36 attacks, and you could obviously take both but now you're talking 500+ points in an army that's already going to have a very low model count. At the very least I'd call that one debatable.

Ultramarines: I could call bs because they're one sub-faction out of nine in that book, but at least on the tournament scene Gulliman appeared to be pretty much single-handedly carrying Marines, so you have me there I suppose.

Sisters: Can't speak for them, nobody locally is playing them. That's not because of the local special character hate though, the two people who are interested are waiting for the codex to officially drop before they spend any money.

Ynari: Ok, that's a faction that doesn't function at all without special characters.

And nobody mentioned GK, either because nobody wants to think about them anymore or because even with the special characters that GK players were complaining the army was dependent on whenever this came up they're still F-ranked.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Man they're really going all in on the bloat now.

Queue the "It'S nOt BlOaT iT's FlAvOr" crowd defending the Angels having different codices.

I'm not a fan of the new Space Marine special rules enhancements [and not just because my marines doesn't get them.]

When it comes to infantry, I would much rather have kept the regular statline without bolterdrill or shock assault or doctrines or whatever and just taken a points cost reduction on the infantry.

First off, I don't like the addition of AP. AP on troop-level weapons just really makes them more effective against other 3+ targets and vehicle targets but doesn't really offer a proportional benefit against light infantry units, which is where I think the problem actually lies; and MEQ units didn't need a greater proliferation of AP on the field [and widespread AP-2 is probably the last thing MEQ wants to find on the field].

Second, and more significantly: I don't really care about Grey Hunters or Intercessors with bolters,they really just exist to eat bullets and take objectives. A points savings on the units would go towards bringing more upgrades, more answers, and more units to have a more comprehensive force than a super troops squad that can heavily damage tanks with their assault rifles.

Do we really care about Marines being more effective against other Marines? Mirror matches don't count much for balance (outside of discussing vs CSM, which as you all know I have a whole host of complaints on how they're handled). Otherwise the extra AP is welcome to fight against cheaper hordes.

Yes?

There's CSM, Space Wolves, Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Grey Knights, Deathwatch, Sisters of Battle, vehicle units as a broad category, some Eldar units, etc. And even then, the mirror match matters a lot.

The proliferation of AP2 is, in my opinion, terrible for the balance of toughness, armor, and wounds as metrics of resilience. A fundamental principle of AP is that the more armor you have, the more you're affected by a point of AP. Guardsmen or Orks have paper for armor, and their resilience comes from wound count in the unit, they don't really feel the additional AP. Marine units, however, feel the AP a lot more. Armor is already the weakest defense mode, and wounds is already the strongest; proliferating AP, especially AP2, further encourages massed light infantry and units that have a high wound density over units with armor.

The relative difference between the way a Space Marine and a Guardsmen felt against a Boltgun wound between this edition and last edition was a matter of a Guardsman taking 200% more wounds. Now, Guardsmen take only 100% more wounds by default, and when you start introducing AP it drop to 66% more and then 50% more.

This is also further affecting vehicle unit's relative immunity to light arms. Vehicle's armor saves are already a formality against AT systems and only really existed to neutralize the effect of infantry against them; and AP-2 infantry is also dismantling that.

I think the solution should have been a measure that improve Marine's troops' offensive and defensive capabilities against light troops without seriously affecting heavy infantry units. This is hard to actually find a special-rules based solution, because wounds and shots are the "base value" and effectively the most important factors and will almost always be less affected than systems relying on quality. Quality effects improve the value of each shot or wound, but they don't substitute for more wounds or shots.

You bring up the Angels and Wolves like they shouldn't be consolidated because they're really just Marines and you should get over the fear of consolidation.

Grey Knights and Deathwatch and CSM already need a massive rework anyway.

And then you listed no other MEQ armies. So your point remains pointless.

Oh man, my dreadnought hoard will be able to move and shoot at full ballistic skill again.

I wounder if the Gorgon's chain will come back, you know everyone's favorite smash captain.

Also I know there wasn't anything in the preview, but I'm still holding out hope that the rumor about making a dreadnought a character is still true. If I had to guess it would most likely be a stratagem that could turn a venerable dreadnought into a captain in much the same way that you would turn a captain into a chaptermaster.

I have no problem with GW rewarding armies for forgoing soup. It's a bit like when they introduced basic faction abilities that wouldn't work if you had mixed detachments, (back before mixed detachments were banned altogether,) except that it's genuinely effective at punishing soup - You can get your Loyal 64 and then run your main army to get extra flexibility and Command Points, *or* you can run a pure army and get significant buffs for it.

My semi-optimistic but measured expectation is that we'll see some imbalance in the short term, but eventually it will get balanced out as every army gets similar expansions. Goodness knows GW will love an excuse to sell a half dozen expansion books per faction, so it's not like they don't have a monetary reason to do so. There will definitely be growing pains as we get to that point, (Just like the start of 8th when Space Marines were briefly dominating the meta by having the advantage of being the only army with a codex,) but with luck it will even out in the next six to twelve months.

My more pessimistic assumption is that Space Marines will dominate the competition for a few months, get nerfed into the ground because GW doesn't know how to use restraint when eliminating problems, and then Sisters of Battle will turn out to be an april fool's joke that got out of hand.

(Edit: I do agree with above points that AP is maybe not the best way to buff Marines since it throws balance of vehicles and heavy infantry out of whack.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Venerable Ironclad wrote:
Oh man, my dreadnought hoard will be able to move and shoot at full ballistic skill again.

I wounder if the Gorgon's chain will come back, you know everyone's favorite smash captain.

Also I know there wasn't anything in the preview, but I'm still holding out hope that the rumor about making a dreadnought a character is still true. If I had to guess it would most likely be a stratagem that could turn a venerable dreadnought into a captain in much the same way that you would turn a captain into a chaptermaster.

That upgrade would be a bit sad since Iron Hands don't really need captains anymore...

Waaaghpower wrote:

That upgrade would be a bit sad since Iron Hands don't really need captains anymore...

They don't need captains for their heavy weapons any more. I'd bet FF will have no rerolls to offer, either. Their armies will likely be wholly centered around heavy weapons to be functional.

They'll need infiltrators to spread, because once a smash captain gets into that bubble you're at a huge risk of losing control Model counts will likely also be abysmally low as people max out on eliminators, suppressors, and redemptors. They'll also be low on CP unless they also want to drop points on more troops and HQs - and they'll spring for lower shot count heavy weapons meaning the redemptors have to do all the lifting against hordes. The psykers won't be power houses for casting and can be shut down by others fairly well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hell...it's probably going to be assbacks and scouts all the way down until they get rule of 3'd somehow.

I wonder if the optimal Intercessor Build for Iron Hands is going to be Stalker Bolt Rifles now. Spamming Heavy weapons (most vehicle weapons are Heavy) could lead to a very strong Turn 1 alpha strike.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I wonder if the optimal Intercessor Build for Iron Hands is going to be Stalker Bolt Rifles now. Spamming Heavy weapons (most vehicle weapons are Heavy) could lead to a very strong Turn 1 alpha strike.

That's what I'm wondering as well. Really interested in what people think is the way to play IH Intercessors now.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Grey Knights and Deathwatch and CSM already need a massive rework anyway.

Already? CSM got new books only a few months ago.

Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Man they're really going all in on the bloat now.

Queue the "It'S nOt BlOaT iT's FlAvOr" crowd defending the Angels having different codices.

I'm not a fan of the new Space Marine special rules enhancements [and not just because my marines doesn't get them.]

When it comes to infantry, I would much rather have kept the regular statline without bolterdrill or shock assault or doctrines or whatever and just taken a points cost reduction on the infantry.

First off, I don't like the addition of AP. AP on troop-level weapons just really makes them more effective against other 3+ targets and vehicle targets but doesn't really offer a proportional benefit against light infantry units, which is where I think the problem actually lies; and MEQ units didn't need a greater proliferation of AP on the field [and widespread AP-2 is probably the last thing MEQ wants to find on the field].

Second, and more significantly: I don't really care about Grey Hunters or Intercessors with bolters,they really just exist to eat bullets and take objectives. A points savings on the units would go towards bringing more upgrades, more answers, and more units to have a more comprehensive force than a super troops squad that can heavily damage tanks with their assault rifles.

Do we really care about Marines being more effective against other Marines? Mirror matches don't count much for balance (outside of discussing vs CSM, which as you all know I have a whole host of complaints on how they're handled). Otherwise the extra AP is welcome to fight against cheaper hordes.

Yes?

There's CSM, Space Wolves, Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Grey Knights, Deathwatch, Sisters of Battle, vehicle units as a broad category, some Eldar units, etc. And even then, the mirror match matters a lot.

The proliferation of AP2 is, in my opinion, terrible for the balance of toughness, armor, and wounds as metrics of resilience. A fundamental principle of AP is that the more armor you have, the more you're affected by a point of AP. Guardsmen or Orks have paper for armor, and their resilience comes from wound count in the unit, they don't really feel the additional AP. Marine units, however, feel the AP a lot more. Armor is already the weakest defense mode, and wounds is already the strongest; proliferating AP, especially AP2, further encourages massed light infantry and units that have a high wound density over units with armor.

The relative difference between the way a Space Marine and a Guardsmen felt against a Boltgun wound between this edition and last edition was a matter of a Guardsman taking 200% more wounds. Now, Guardsmen take only 100% more wounds by default, and when you start introducing AP it drop to 66% more and then 50% more.

This is also further affecting vehicle unit's relative immunity to light arms. Vehicle's armor saves are already a formality against AT systems and only really existed to neutralize the effect of infantry against them; and AP-2 infantry is also dismantling that.

I think the solution should have been a measure that improve Marine's troops' offensive and defensive capabilities against light troops without seriously affecting heavy infantry units. This is hard to actually find a special-rules based solution, because wounds and shots are the "base value" and effectively the most important factors and will almost always be less affected than systems relying on quality. Quality effects improve the value of each shot or wound, but they don't substitute for more wounds or shots.

So really all these new AP rules will only make marine armies even more fragile against each other, rip GK DA BA SW CSM. I have SS as a DW player, but they can only do so much. I can't think of a good rule to fix durability either. A FNP for marines is the best solution I can come up with, and that's a pretty bad solution. It only increases the quantity of wounds in a statistical manner, and that doesn't address the real problem. Unless the real problem is that marines have too few wounds to manage given the current game rules. Custodes have a baseline of 3 wounds, and that is before a good invuln and a FNP during the psychic phase.

Points cuts for marines is probably the worst solution, marines at an all-time low price (tacs used to be 15 points each) and it turns them into guardsmen who've eaten an extra protein bar. If you don't want angles of death style rules, then marines need basic statline changes.

The Newman wrote:

 Eipi10 wrote:

The Newman wrote:

 Aaranis wrote:
I'm glad to see that after the Repulsor Executioner being better than a Neutron Onager, it's their Techmarines being better at repairing than actual Techpriests.

What's the point in playing anything other than Marines now? They have all codices combined at this point.

Price per model. The new rules are really good, but Marines still wind up outnumbered by a lot against the average army and they're still really fragile per point. They feel like they have the 'hammer' part of 'glass hammer' now, but the 'glass' part is still there too.

Marines are meant to be outnumbered, there are only 1 million across the galaxy. I would be weird if they played like guardsmen with an extra protein bar, and they seemed pretty close to reaching that point at times (12 point marines, scouts replacing tacticals). That being said, I do agree that marines have more than enough killing power while they lack durability and movement.
I wonder if a 7" movement stat, a minimum advance of 2-3", or even new transports would help their movement in a balanced way (but I haven't played with implusors or the new drop pod rule). And I'm not sure what can be done for their durability. +1 wounds would be excessive even with the appropriate points hike. Other statline modifications wouldn't work and rerolling armor saves or adding a FNP would require too much die rolling.
But I play DW, so my marines are meant to be glass cannons and maybe that disqualifies my thoughts.

"Marines are meant to be outnumbered." - True. That's part of why they have such powerful leaf-blower units (and saying that feels weird). Mini-marines struggle there but the Primaris stuff does a lot to pick up the slack.

"Marines lack movement and durability." - Durability yes, movement not so much. I've got turn-one drop-pods, a ton of Advanced Deploy options in Phobos, Phobos can redeploy once they know what the enemy deployment looks like, Ultramarines can do that with normal units, UMs can move anything and fire without penalties, White Scars can do the Assault Vehicle thing out of anything besides a Stormraven, there's good troop options with Assault X weapons and WS can charge after advancing so they're a lot faster than you might be expecting them to be, it doesn't feel like Marines are suffering as much as they used to be there.

I guess I haven't played enough games with the new SM codex to understand their new movement options. But still, what is a possible solution to marine durability problems? Would +1 wound across the board help (for non-characters and vehicles)? I thought of giving marines +1S and + 1T a while back, but that would mean Custodes would need to be a S6 T6 and then Gman would need to be at S7 T7, might as well make him an imperial knight at that point. Obiously these changes would require a big shift in points values, and that has a different set of problems attached to it.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

That upgrade would be a bit sad since Iron Hands don't really need captains anymore...

They don't need captains for their heavy weapons any more. I'd bet FF will have no rerolls to offer, either. Their armies will likely be wholly centered around heavy weapons to be functional.

They'll need infiltrators to spread, because once a smash captain gets into that bubble you're at a huge risk of losing control Model counts will likely also be abysmally low as people max out on eliminators, suppressors, and redemptors. They'll also be low on CP unless they also want to drop points on more troops and HQs - and they'll spring for lower shot count heavy weapons meaning the redemptors have to do all the lifting against hordes. The psykers won't be power houses for casting and can be shut down by others fairly well.

I agree with you, but it's kind of aside the point. A dreadnought who just gives the Captain buff reroll isn't going to be all that useful.

 Eipi10 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Grey Knights and Deathwatch and CSM already need a massive rework anyway.

Already? CSM got new books only a few months ago.

CSM didn't get nearly as many yummy treats as codex marines did so some think CSMs need revamps to get everything codex marines do.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Eipi10 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Grey Knights and Deathwatch and CSM already need a massive rework anyway.

Already? CSM got new books only a few months ago.

CSM didn't get nearly as many yummy treats as codex marines did so some think CSMs need revamps to get everything codex marines do.

Well technically you can state that csm is on an allready " updated " read mostly tacked on meh units, basis.

However as said above the update wasn't really an update that solved the issues.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Eipi10 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Grey Knights and Deathwatch and CSM already need a massive rework anyway.

Already? CSM got new books only a few months ago.

CSM didn't get nearly as many yummy treats as codex marines did so some think CSMs need revamps to get everything codex marines do.

CSM, as well as all other marines, need to be brought up to the same standard for regular marine units as the new Codex Marines. But CSM ought to be the highest priority for it because they are bigger, have more players, and just got a bunch of new kits for units that are now very weak compared to their loyalist counterparts. They don't need a new book, but they do need new Legion traits and something like doctrines.

 Drudge Dreadnought wrote:


CSM, as well as all other marines, need to be brought up to the same standard for regular marine units as the new Codex Marines.

Disagree. CSM are heretics. They don't do doctrines.

But CSM ought to be the highest priority for it because they are bigger, have more players

Citation needed.

units that are now very weak compared to their loyalist counterparts

Citation needed.

- Centurions just got the same number of wounds as obliterators. They pay 70 to the oblit's 115, have worse guns (for that loadout), no invulnerable, no melee weapon, and no deepstrike. Alternatively they pay 110 for grav & 2 lc, which is certainly still not as solid as assault 6 battle cannon shots.
- There is no equivalent to the disco lord.
- Apostles are way more reliable.
- CSM still have largely better spells available though White Scars challenges that a bit so far.
- MoE is a dirt cheap beatstick with no minus to hit.
- Havocs got T5. IH stole their move and shoot, but I don't really care that much as they also need to be monodex.

They don't need a new book, but they do need new Legion traits and something like doctrines.

Traits, sure, but really just some bits that can also apply to vehicles and mono-dex bonuses and we're good.

 Eipi10 wrote:

The Newman wrote:

 Aaranis wrote:
I'm glad to see that after the Repulsor Executioner being better than a Neutron Onager, it's their Techmarines being better at repairing than actual Techpriests.

What's the point in playing anything other than Marines now? They have all codices combined at this point.

Price per model. The new rules are really good, but Marines still wind up outnumbered by a lot against the average army and they're still really fragile per point. They feel like they have the 'hammer' part of 'glass hammer' now, but the 'glass' part is still there too.

Marines are meant to be outnumbered, there are only 1 million across the galaxy. I would be weird if they played like guardsmen with an extra protein bar, and they seemed pretty close to reaching that point at times (12 point marines, scouts replacing tacticals). That being said, I do agree that marines have more than enough killing power while they lack durability and movement.
I wonder if a 7" movement stat, a minimum advance of 2-3", or even new transports would help their movement in a balanced way (but I haven't played with implusors or the new drop pod rule). And I'm not sure what can be done for their durability. +1 wounds would be excessive even with the appropriate points hike. Other statline modifications wouldn't work and rerolling armor saves or adding a FNP would require too much die rolling.
But I play DW, so my marines are meant to be glass cannons and maybe that disqualifies my thoughts.

Guard get 10 T3 wounds, and 20 shots for 10 hits, and ~5/3 wounding hits (vs T3/T4) for 40 points of troop infantry. They also get (some) ObSec Tanks.

For 40 points, Marines get... 3 T4 wounds, and 6 shots, 3 hits, 2/1.5 wounding hits or 4 wounds, 4 shots, 2.5 hits, a little less than 2/1.5 wounding troop models. Start making the Tactical Maine a 2-3 wound model, a Primaris a 3-4 wound model, and Bolters Rapid Fire 2, Storm Bolters Rapid Fire 4 and then it starts getting into an interesting model count vs potency per model trade-off. The same weapons that are useful vs a horde should be as useful vs an elite troop squad. You take a Tactical Marine squad, and stick them up against an equivalent points Guard squadS, and the tactical squad loses long before you start hiding ablative-wound-protected plasma guns. Point for point Marines are both less cannon and less durable than guardsmen. Vs 0 AP, 40 points, 10 guard wounds is 13.333 wounds with saving a third i.e. 3.333 will have to be wounded twice.. plus 10, 13.3333. 3/4 3+ save wounds are 5/6 and some change. the difference between T3 vs T4 in a world of bolters, shootas, pulse, Gauss/Tesla, and their equivalents is pretty meaningless.