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.

Hellebore wrote:


I'm waiting for the day GW releases a horde marine army to out horde Orks...

Arent Tac marines 11points now ?

 Argive wrote:

Hellebore wrote:

I'm waiting for the day GW releases a horde marine army to out horde Orks...

Arent Tac marines 11points now ?

12.

 Argive wrote:

Hellebore wrote:


I'm waiting for the day GW releases a horde marine army to out horde Orks...

Arent Tac marines 11points now ?

I dunno, but I definitely think black templars are going to be able to, with lots of neophytes

As someone that religiously paints everything and never puts an unpainted model on the table, I'm amazed how many people are sore over this

I'm even more amazed that the only possible reason anyone can think of for why you would want to play a Chapter Tactic is to win harder. Even then, as some people have said, if its the only way to have a decent chance at having a fighting chance to begin with a tournament or even just in pick-up games, I can totally understand it.

Especially in an army like Marines, where even with the new Codex update, a lot of hobbitmarine units are absolutely awful, and there's no worse case of this than with Tactical Marines, where GW was so lost for how to fix them that they gave them an extra attack and reduced them to their lowest ever cost at 12ppm and they're still terrible. GW shot them in the kneecaps already by doubling the mandatory transport tax by increasing the cost of Rhinos and Drop Pods to 70~ pts and making the Storm Raven dropship cost more than getting two more full Tactical Squads at minimum. Seriously, 3 editions ago a full squad of 10 with no upgrades costed 170 pts, the same squad now costs 120 pts, has double the firepower, (effective) attacks and can get extra AP by USR, and they're still objectively far worse relatively than they were in 5th at that former cost.

I took a look at the new Codex after all the hype, briefly had a few ideas to bring my homebrew hobbitmarines out, and then in my first game I realized that the new Litanies of Battle and the old re-roll to hit bubble for Chaplains can't be used in a turn where you disembark from a transport or deepstrike. In an army where the whole theme is mobility, lightning assaults and flexibility, you have to eat a whole shooting phase before you can say some prayers and make your dudes hit as hard as they used to last edition, when they were mediocre at best.

I could go on all day about the pains of trying to make mechanised Marines work in the last 3 editions, but I'll be brief. At various times I played my homebrew with the 4th ed Black Templar codex, the 6th ed Dark Angels Codex, and the 5th ed Space Wolves Codex. This was partly to still have an enjoyable experience when you have a meta where few people hold back from making competitive lists and older rules force you into a very narrow field of viable lists which are usually unfluffy and boring as hell anyways. This was partly because for some reason I liked the idea of my supposedly superhuman regular Marines I had spent so much effort painting being actually respectable in melee (5th Edition Grey Hunters) or actually able to hold down a position against oncoming hordes with bolter fire (Standard of Devastation in DA 6thE) when otherwise lumped with rules which have always been bone-achingly boring compared to every other army.

Remember combat tactics? You got to automatically fail morale and retreat the 1-2 dudes that didn't get minced after getting charged by a melee unit. Yeah, that was real compelling stuff, wasn't it? Yawn.

It was also partly because half the fun of the game is experimenting and toying with new ideas on the gaming side of things and trying bizarre and impractical lists with interesting gimmicks. Yeah, you bet I've played my Cadians as all-infantry Tallarn to have the thrill of running an army that can infiltrate 40+ infantry across the board on turn 2. Just as I've run BT Marine hordes, tried out mechanised for all those codexes I mentioned, and tested their special characters just to see how they feel to play amongst many other things. And not once have I ever felt guilty or bad about it.

So tl;dr, if you're truly a purist that feels entitled to sneer at other people for what they do with their property and art, you're not only being just a tad silly, you'd be shooting yourself in the foot if everyone had to be chapter-accurate. Those players then may have to take boring Primaris-Hobbitmarine soup, aggressor spam, minimal/basic troops, cliché and mandatory rambo/smash characters, rule-salad deathstars, etc just to compete against stuff like triple Jetbike Shieldcaptains, Triptide castles, Custodes grav-tank/dreadnought abuse, one-trick-pony IG gunlines, etc. Does that sound lore friendly, immersive and fun to you? Or would you rather play against someone that has taken a different chapter tactic because it may make those fluffy and less gimmicky lists with more Tactical Marines, Intercessors and a balance of interesting units actually viable. And yes, everything I just mentioned in this paragraph I saw at a one-day tournament this weekend just gone. I should know, I was the guy flaunting the one-trick IG gunline having failed to come up with a viable 8.5 hobbitmarine Mech list to bring.

Thanks Mr.Omega. Very well put.

I want to say it matters. But at the same time, it really sucks that my Deathwatch Primaris have gotten nothing but the executioner at this point. I'm sure that we'll eventually get the Vanguard/Phobos stuff, but I'm not going to paint up an entire second Space Marines army just to play them. At this point I'd guess it'll be late 2020 at best before Deathwatch is updated.

I'd just rather paint up a new, non-SM army in general (which is what I'm doing).

If someone is just running it as a one-off for variety, or to test before sinking funds into the new army, I'm cool with it.

If they're playing Ultramarines as one of the others because they think they got a better supplement, I'm going to sprain my eyes rolling them so hard.

I played Ultras when they were fourth out of four for Marine armies. I still play Ultras while they're an unknown standing in the supplement rankings.


Basically if they're play testing, I'm fine with it. Some people can visualize, some people can't. There are times I can, there are times I can't. My spatial imagination for things like furniture in a room sucks. I can get it when someone can't visualize how an army will play enough before they buy.

People who play blue Iron Hands to chase the Flavor Of The Month are far too likely to have other play issues to make me look forward to that kind of game.

This just makes me think of the casual players that Where nasty when they find out you play elder when they where the top stuff.
Ohh your army that you play for 10 years, your a meta chaser.

Was funny, so often space marine players. Oh you got screwed by rules, we don’t care, don’t bring it up in our no negativity meta :p
If people painting there models can screw them on rules, expect them to put less care into the story and the fluff you care about.

As a general rule of thumb, when a person says to me they are playing as Ultramarines, I don't need their entire army painted in those chapter colours to remind me of this.

One of the best thing with Marines is the ability to make your own colour scheme and put your own stamp of individuality on it. Remember this hobby isn't just the game, it's the collecting, assembling and painting of models as well.

SPE825 wrote:
I want to say it matters. But at the same time, it really sucks that my Deathwatch Primaris have gotten nothing but the executioner at this point. I'm sure that we'll eventually get the Vanguard/Phobos stuff, but I'm not going to paint up an entire second Space Marines army just to play them. At this point I'd guess it'll be late 2020 at best before Deathwatch is updated.

I'd just rather paint up a new, non-SM army in general (which is what I'm doing).

Basically this.

I like the new primaris stuff but I cant really play it because my main army right now is Deathwatch.
Now therefore Im building up sort of a „training chapter“ for PRIMARIS that want to join the Deathwatch. Usually Im using 3 chapter tactics depending on the list but mainly its the Imperial Fist one. According to some elitists here I would t be allowed to play them painted as deathwatch because they dont have the new Primaris stuff...

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Your poll SUCKS, where is the hard NO!

Playing and Painting are 2 different hobbies and painting takes an immense amount of time. Rules change all the time, playing is meant to be fun, if you are not having fun with Blue boys and what White, or Red boys, why do i care if your Red boys are painted blue?

No one questions Necrons, Tau, DE colors, they only question SM b.c its "easy to know the colors".

Hrm, it goes beyond just colors. SM's get a lot of product and rules support, particularly for tiny niche subfactions, often that some demand are totally necessary, for factions that often have orders of magnitude less distinction than other forces that share a codex.

Being highly visually distinct does factor into that, but does so on both ends, when people see Red marines they expect Red marine rules, not Blue or Grey marine rules, and if they're that easy to switch around then it causes people to question why we have so many distinct rule sets for them in the first place (particularly with the associated issues of power bloat and rules confusion), and does undercut the immersion factor.

Other factions also have a lot fewer subfaction specific stuff, there's no unique Vior'la suit variant or Iyanden wraithtype or unique Catachan tank model to proxy, no universally recognized distinct Cadian uniform color pallette or Genestealer Cult faction colors to rigidly identify units, no Sa'Cea unique shoulderpads, Kabal-specific troop variant kits, or Biel'tan molded heraldry. Space Marine subfactions have all that stuff, where most other factions don't (or have very little).

It shouldn't be much wonder that such mix and matching causes more consternation in that light.

If you see blue you should ask what they are playing and not assume what they are playing, maybe they are red colorblind and want blue blood angels (i literally know someone that did this for this reason). Who are you to say why they have to play with red guys?

And other some other armies does have more traits, its called successor chapters for a reason, all factions has them, are we supposed to remember 400 subfaction color schemes?

Poll is rather lackluster in options, so not voting.


Homebrew chapters have been a thing since Rogue Trader, so no issue there. Switching out what chapter it's based off of to find the best fit is normal as well, just as much as the powergamers chasing the meta and looking for easiest EASY button.

All perfectly acceptable.


It's when they try to do soup with no way to discern the multiple chapters presented and those designated units seem to be exactly where they need to be for what abilities they have that I have an issue. It's no different than the people who don't lable or differentiate which Rhino has what unit in them.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:I dunno, the Red Talons might have colors that might confuse you with Blood Angels or Ravens so who knows?

In case I didn't make it clear enough (or you're just blatantly misrepresenting my argument), there's more than just colours that make up what a Space Marine Chapter looks like.
The colour is one thing, but alone, means nothing. The Chapter badge, likewise, is another, but the Ultramarine sigil over a red surface? They could be the Imperius Reavers Chapter, a canon Ultramarine succcessor, but still a Chapter that could be used for anything. It's when you have the colour, the sigil, AND things like "Macragge" or "Ultramarines" across your army (say, a banner bearer, or on shoulder pads) that you really lose any doubt that these are supposed to look like Ultramarines first and foremost.

In the Red Talons case, while they have red armour (but not like the Blood Ravens, who have bone coloured pauldrons, and slightly dissimilar to the Blood Angels, who commonly have a black chest aquila instead of silver), it's their chapter badge that would set them apart from the aforementioned, and practically every other red coloured Chapter out there. Not to mention if they had the words "Talons" or "Ferrus" written everywhere. If they were genuinely just "red marines" that's cool IMO, because they're not identifiable as another Chapter immediately.

Crimson wrote:They're the Ultramarine Armoury Guard. They're led by the Ultramarine Master of the Forge (counts as Feirros) and composed mostly of vehicles from the Armour and those marines who aspire to be Techmarines or otherwise show special affinity to the machines. Their fighting style differs from typical Ultramarine forces and resemble more of that of the Iron Hands.

Okay, that's cool. And these models armed with what look like meltaguns are actually carrying Mediant-Pattern Plasma Guns, because my Chapter is supplied by the Forge World Mediant. They have an extended barrel with horizontal heat dispersion slits to additionally cool the weapon, because the plasma coils aren't exposed on this variant.

So - paint and modelling can both be fluffed away, yes?

Anyway, I know that you will never budge from your position, nor will you ever accept that people disagreeing with you could have a valid point. I am not particularly interested in engaging with your false equivalencies.

Why are they false equivalences? I fail to see how playing count-as with one aspect of how the model looks is any different from doing it with another! It would be like saying "oh, yeah, I'm cool with you having regular Space Marines pretending to be CSM, but you can't pretend those meltas are actually plasma guns".

It's about consistency. If paint scheme should be allowed to be ignored to allow someone to try out something else (which I'm not saying is *wrong*), then how something is modelled should also be allowed to be given the same freedom.

I want to encourage an environment where people paint their models however they like, were it an official scheme or custom, and use whatever rules they personally feel most suitable.

And in their same vein, I would like people to be able to model their guys however they like, using the official weapons or custom, and use whatever rules they personally feel most suitable.

Of course, if they were doing that purely to gain more power, then I'm probably not going to play them because I don't really gel with that attitude. But if it's for a genuine fluff reason and I'm sure they're not doing it so they can chase the meta (like in your Master of the Forge example): yeah, I can let that slide - and I'd do the same for their modelled choice of weapons.

Because as much as your concerns are for the person who paints their army without knowing what the rules will be for them, why not show the same concern for the person who builds their model with a weapon that might not be suitable?

Now, people chasing the most powerful rules possible certainly can be annoying, but I really don't think that getting repeatedly tabled by Iron Hands would feel any less frustrating if they were painted black instead of blue. Hell, perhaps some players with armies painted as IH will get tired of having no challenge at some point and might want to use their army with a weaker set of rules. (Personally I have intentionally chosen suboptimal traits against less experienced people even with the old codex.)

Oh, the paint scheme alone wouldn't make the game any more or less frustrating - but I can at least sort out a bunch of players who I wouldn't want to play before I even play them based on it. Of course, there's exceptions (like your example above), but just the initial response to "hey, your guys are painted as Ultramarines, but being used as Iron Hands - is there a narrative reason for that? I'd be interested in playing a narrative game with you" should be able to give me an idea if I actually want to play them.

I'd have no problem with it, so long as they don't have a problem with me bringing the hardest list I can because they are obviously just chasing the fotm.

ImPhaeronWeasel wrote:

SPE825 wrote:
I want to say it matters. But at the same time, it really sucks that my Deathwatch Primaris have gotten nothing but the executioner at this point. I'm sure that we'll eventually get the Vanguard/Phobos stuff, but I'm not going to paint up an entire second Space Marines army just to play them. At this point I'd guess it'll be late 2020 at best before Deathwatch is updated.

I'd just rather paint up a new, non-SM army in general (which is what I'm doing).

Basically this.

I like the new primaris stuff but I cant really play it because my main army right now is Deathwatch.
Now therefore Im building up sort of a „training chapter“ for PRIMARIS that want to join the Deathwatch. Usually Im using 3 chapter tactics depending on the list but mainly its the Imperial Fist one. According to some elitists here I would t be allowed to play them painted as deathwatch because they dont have the new Primaris stuff...

Not a SINGLE person said that.

There is a world apart between "these deathwatch guys are temporary using IF rules as deathwatch didn't get updated with these models yet" and "these 15 years old ultra marines are actually iron hands in disguise"

One is obviously making ends means, the other is obvious power grabbing.

Anyone pretending not to see the difference is either trolling, or just dense.

Everyone's all up in arms about Iron hands they refuse to even consider that people just want to play other tactics for reasons beyond being a waac player. Just because you have your own biases doesn't make it true.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Continuity wrote:

 Galas wrote:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

 Galas wrote:
I'm sorry but as a neutral wistander without a horse in this race, the "Paint matters" don't do any favours to their cause when to demostrate how paint matters they use the argument that models matter.

Yeah we all know models matter. Demonstrate that paint really matters, not go the lazy way, and try to make the two things be the same when they aren't.

Because it is not the same to play with an army of bases than with an army of built and unpainted models. It has never been in 40 years of hobby.

Legally the paint doesn't matter. But the question is does it bother you, not should it be allowed. And yeah it bothers me, it's just shameless meta chasing, and that's not what I engage with 40k for. The IH players who first heard about them last month but have been playing for 5 years can duke it out between each other all they like, but if I can avoid playing them I will.

TBH whats the problem with meta chasing for those that do it? I mean... I have knew a couple of dicks that tell others to "git gud" but in most cases what I have seen are ... "I'm totally casual guys trust me" guys giving gak to pleople that play competitively.

If is not a play style you like, why do you have to add a moral and subjetive value to their actions? Lets not kid ourselves. All this "If you play blue IH , do it, but be honest and say you are doing it to win!" are just passive aggresive ways of taking the high ground. Is a very, very toxic attitude.

And I say this being a giant casual gamer. I mean... I'm one of those that regularly plays with 3-4 giants in his fantasy armies... that should tell you everything.

Personally I've seen more casual players complaining about competitive players than vice versa that's for sure

See, they only want to win on their own terms. So when you decide to create a better army list, they get mad.

Oh the irony. "Of course casual players complain more; they only care about winning, so get angry when they don't win"?

Perhaps we are complaining more than competitive players in this thread. But that's because we're saying "Competitive players aren't necessarily who I want to play against", and competitive players are saying "Casual players are just bad competitive players".

Do you really expect people not to complain when you keep saying "You're actually just like us, but are trying to hide the fact that you're not as good as us"?

 fraser1191 wrote:
Everyone's all up in arms about Iron hands they refuse to even consider that people just want to play other tactics for reasons beyond being a waac player. Just because you have your own biases doesn't make it true.

You don't need to switch Chapters to switch tactics.

 Ordana wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Everyone's all up in arms about Iron hands they refuse to even consider that people just want to play other tactics for reasons beyond being a waac player. Just because you have your own biases doesn't make it true.

You don't need to switch Chapters to switch tactics.

I'd rather play blue UltraMarines that represent their Armory (aspiring tech marines and all) over blue Iron Hands that look like they're wearing toilet seats.

Those are two very different things. But use the same exact rules.

 BoomWolf wrote:

Not a SINGLE person said that.

There is a world apart between "these deathwatch guys are temporary using IF rules as deathwatch didn't get updated with these models yet" and "these 15 years old ultra marines are actually iron hands in disguise"

One is obviously making ends means, the other is obvious power grabbing.

Anyone pretending not to see the difference is either trolling, or just dense.

It isn't always so black or white. And in any case, it seems that you really have no problem with marines being played with rules not corresponding to their paint, you have problem with meta-chasing power gamers.

 Crimson wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:

Not a SINGLE person said that.

There is a world apart between "these deathwatch guys are temporary using IF rules as deathwatch didn't get updated with these models yet" and "these 15 years old ultra marines are actually iron hands in disguise"

One is obviously making ends means, the other is obvious power grabbing.

Anyone pretending not to see the difference is either trolling, or just dense.

It isn't always so black or white. [...]

Of course not. "Ultra Hands" are black and *blue*. Black and white are former "White Scars".

 puma713 wrote:
I'm curious what people out there think, especially with all of the new Chapter hotness coming out. How do you feel about someone who shows up with a bright green army and says they're Iron Hands, but then turns up the next weekend with the same army and says they're Raven Guard? Does it bother you?

It would not bother me at all.

Here are two other examples of things I would not be bothered by, if the size of the proxies matches the original one:
- Someone using his ork minis to play them as Iron Hands.
- Someone using differently colored wooden playing bricks to play them as Iron Hands.

If there is an overpowered meta to hunt, that's something which would bother me and I would be annoyed again by the delivered product.

 BoomWolf wrote:

ImPhaeronWeasel wrote:

SPE825 wrote:
I want to say it matters. But at the same time, it really sucks that my Deathwatch Primaris have gotten nothing but the executioner at this point. I'm sure that we'll eventually get the Vanguard/Phobos stuff, but I'm not going to paint up an entire second Space Marines army just to play them. At this point I'd guess it'll be late 2020 at best before Deathwatch is updated.

I'd just rather paint up a new, non-SM army in general (which is what I'm doing).

Basically this.

I like the new primaris stuff but I cant really play it because my main army right now is Deathwatch.
Now therefore Im building up sort of a „training chapter“ for PRIMARIS that want to join the Deathwatch. Usually Im using 3 chapter tactics depending on the list but mainly its the Imperial Fist one. According to some elitists here I would t be allowed to play them painted as deathwatch because they dont have the new Primaris stuff...

Not a SINGLE person said that.

There is a world apart between "these deathwatch guys are temporary using IF rules as deathwatch didn't get updated with these models yet" and "these 15 years old ultra marines are actually iron hands in disguise"

One is obviously making ends means, the other is obvious power grabbing.

Anyone pretending not to see the difference is either trolling, or just dense.

There IS no difference. Imperial Fists got an update that gives them a lot more goodies than Deathwatch.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Your poll SUCKS, where is the hard NO!

Playing and Painting are 2 different hobbies and painting takes an immense amount of time. Rules change all the time, playing is meant to be fun, if you are not having fun with Blue boys and what White, or Red boys, why do i care if your Red boys are painted blue?

No one questions Necrons, Tau, DE colors, they only question SM b.c its "easy to know the colors".

Hrm, it goes beyond just colors. SM's get a lot of product and rules support, particularly for tiny niche subfactions, often that some demand are totally necessary, for factions that often have orders of magnitude less distinction than other forces that share a codex.

Being highly visually distinct does factor into that, but does so on both ends, when people see Red marines they expect Red marine rules, not Blue or Grey marine rules, and if they're that easy to switch around then it causes people to question why we have so many distinct rule sets for them in the first place (particularly with the associated issues of power bloat and rules confusion), and does undercut the immersion factor.

Other factions also have a lot fewer subfaction specific stuff, there's no unique Vior'la suit variant or Iyanden wraithtype or unique Catachan tank model to proxy, no universally recognized distinct Cadian uniform color pallette or Genestealer Cult faction colors to rigidly identify units, no Sa'Cea unique shoulderpads, Kabal-specific troop variant kits, or Biel'tan molded heraldry. Space Marine subfactions have all that stuff, where most other factions don't (or have very little).

It shouldn't be much wonder that such mix and matching causes more consternation in that light.

If you see blue you should ask what they are playing and not assume what they are playing, maybe they are red colorblind and want blue blood angels (i literally know someone that did this for this reason). Who are you to say why they have to play with red guys?

And other some other armies does have more traits, its called successor chapters for a reason, all factions has them, are we supposed to remember 400 subfaction color schemes?

you're being a wee bit obtuse here, when I'm referring to colors here I'm using shorthand to refer to specific subfactions (Blood Angels, Ultramarines, Space Wolves, etc), hence my talk about faction specific subunits and iconography and identifiable color schemes. These things are much more distinctive with marines than most other armies, hence why it causes a level of consternation.

If someone wants to play a successor chapter, fine. If someone hops codexes every week or every new release though, or is playing with an army with Blood Angels iconography and paintjobs all over everything and using rules from another codex, it's understandable that it causes irritation.

And ultimately, I'm not saying they can't play whatever they want, I'm certainly not the plastic army man police or berate anyone over it. But it's not unwarranted for others to be bothered by that either, or to question why they have or need so many different subfaction rulesets as a result if it's so easy to switch.

So, question for some of the people who say "If you're painted Ultras, you play Ultras."

What's your policy on unpainted minis?

 JNAProductions wrote:
So, question for some of the people who say "If you're painted Ultras, you play Ultras."

What's your policy on unpainted minis?

Clearly they say they MUST be painted. Screw new players trying to learn how to paint!

SPE825 wrote:
I want to say it matters. But at the same time, it really sucks that my Deathwatch Primaris have gotten nothing but the executioner at this point. I'm sure that we'll eventually get the Vanguard/Phobos stuff, but I'm not going to paint up an entire second Space Marines army just to play them. At this point I'd guess it'll be late 2020 at best before Deathwatch is updated.

I'd just rather paint up a new, non-SM army in general (which is what I'm doing).

DW is unlikely to be updated for a long time.

 Ordana wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Everyone's all up in arms about Iron hands they refuse to even consider that people just want to play other tactics for reasons beyond being a waac player. Just because you have your own biases doesn't make it true.

You don't need to switch Chapters to switch tactics.

My Ultramarines are tactical geniuses so they'll use whatever tactics that they deem necessary for their upcoming battle

No. When I play the game, what I want to know is what the dudes do. You can bring your IH tactics tanks against me even if they are painted red with blood symbols as long as you just tell me what the rules are. What saves does that unit have etc. I would like to know is if we should go with tournament level list building or not, so we could have reasonably balanced game. And I don't mean whether you are bringing IH or BA army, but rather are you bringing 100 guardsmen + Knights or something else.

I don't usually care even if the you have multiple chapter tactics (or your faction equivalent) in the army, again as long as I know what that specific unit does. If need be, I will ask does that specific ork boyz unit have a +1 to charge or not, and all I expect is for you to keep to it (not change it during the match).

I don't even require the minis to be painted (I prefer painted and do paint mine before playing), but that will not affect my feelings about playing the game.

The most I comment on someones paint job is admire if something is really nicely done or some kind of technique has been used (example: that wet blending or light sources).

 fraser1191 wrote:

 Ordana wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Everyone's all up in arms about Iron hands they refuse to even consider that people just want to play other tactics for reasons beyond being a waac player. Just because you have your own biases doesn't make it true.

You don't need to switch Chapters to switch tactics.

My Ultramarines are tactical geniuses so they'll use whatever tactics that they deem necessary for their upcoming battle

I honestly was hoping Ultras would get a new tactic that worked kind of like this. LIke they could use a new space marine CT every turn but they would have to change them every turn. That would have been really cool and require a lot of strategy. Nope - all other chapters which already had superior CT got better CT and Ultras terrible tactic remained unchanged.