Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I know it wasn't much of a prediction, but I did call this. It has begun !!! Seeing the future, it is a burden and a curse.

AngryAngel80 wrote:
I know it wasn't much of a prediction, but I did call this. It has begun !!! Seeing the future, it is a burden and a curse.

Man, just imagine the panic over whatever we see for Black Templars or Blood Angels in psychic awakening.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Continuity wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Sterling191 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:


Knights are vehicles. LOL. Imperial fist army is just going to be full of HB and AC and they will obliterate both vehicals and infantry with ease. Much like an army buffed by gman without spending 400 points on a buff champion.

A fully boosted BS2+ quad HB CMortis does a whopping...5 wounds to a knight. A stationary (because I'm feeling generous) Asscannon razorback does a staggering...4.

Yup, them vees are just melting away.

So it does about the same as 4 lascannons? You seem to be missing the point. You also aren't giving rerolls...because why would a marine player put their entire army in a reroll hits aura...

You can't make an assertion that an IF army that spams HB and AC will "obliterate both vehicals and infantry with ease" and then suddenly whip out 4 lascannon when the numbers prove you wrong

Sounds like some playground pretend-fight to me.

If you are going to be snide at least be right. Lascannons average about 1 damage to a vehicle with bs 3+.
Twin las 2x(2/3)(2/3)(2/3)x3.5 = 2.06
a Twin heavy bolter that does 2 damage to a vehicle does
6x(2/3)(1/3)(2/3)x2 = 1.78 (this doesn't even factor in 6's generating 2 hits which actually puts it a little over a LC) that turns it to 2.22 average damage.

Twin HB is 17 and a twin LC is 40....which is the more effective anti tank weapon? You don't have to answer - it's a rhetorical question.

Basically I am right and you are wrong. Imperial fists HB is more effective against tanks than a lascannon...So they don't even have to take lascannons - all they have to do is take anti infantry and they have a TAC list. It's just how I ran Ultramarines before they nerfed Gman...everyone said it was OP then. Now it's knee jerking though. Even though Imperial fists get this for free. FREE.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SeanDrake wrote:
Hahahaha I called it in the last Xeno thread his um would be blue fist before they ever got to be blue IH.

With all the knee jerking going on recently there must be a lot of people walking around like John Cleese

While we have not seen all there stuff yet fists don’t seem more than high mid tier just among the marines.

They aren't as good as Ironhands cause defense wins in the end almost always and ironhands have a lot of goof offensive buffs too. Imperial fists auto win vs any opponent with lots of armor though so...there is a real issue with that to if you are like...using vehicles. Unless your ironhands...

Xeno, I'm running YOUR MATH, and getting different answers.

2*(2/3)*(2/3)*(2/3)*3.5=2.07, not 2.06.

Your Heavy Bolter math seems right, though how are you getting the same save from AP-2 and AP-4? What target are you shooting? And 6s generating an extra hit is, statistically, the same as hitting one point better. so that math at least seems accurate too.

But, even without the Ironstone, shooting at a Redemptor, Rhino, or Repulsor, you get...

2 Lascannon shots
4/3 hits
8/9 wounds
8/9 failed saves
28/9 damage, or just over 3.

6 HBolter shots
5 hits
5/3 wounds
10/9 failed saves
20/9 damage, or almost 2 and a quarter.

If you're up against something with Invulns, like, say, an Iron Hands parking lot with the Iron Father... Well, then they probably have the Ironstone too, meaning the Lascannon damage drops by about a quarter off the Ironstone and not quite half in total (from the 5++ and the Ironstone), but the HBolter drops completely in half.

And if we add in Prepared Positions, the HBolter drops from saving on 5s to on 4s, for another reduction of 25%, while the Lascannon still forces invulns, or 6+s if they don't have one.

Wouldn't the lascannon be doing 4.5 damage in this comparison also?

 ClockworkZion wrote:

AngryAngel80 wrote:
I know it wasn't much of a prediction, but I did call this. It has begun !!! Seeing the future, it is a burden and a curse.

Man, just imagine the panic over whatever we see for Black Templars or Blood Angels in psychic awakening.

You know, we don't always agree but I think we can agree on this. If the marine factions get upgraded like this in the PA books, the threads they spawn will be comical if nothing else.

Derp! Xeno made that mistake and I carried it over.

So that's actually exactly 4 damage for a Twin Lascannon against a T5-8, 3+ or worse target.

This has no real impact on me, but I do like when something this....odd comes up. While I don't do tournaments or even play much if any 40K I do enjoy battle reports when I'm bored, and thus I even tire of "the meta" when the games are so samey.

My first thought was...devastator doctrine Predator autocannon becoming: Strength 7, -2 AP, 4 damage....sweet pickles. I'd love to see how this shakes up the meta if it does at all.

Invictor Warsuits feel like they have a real home in a Primaris IF army between the buffed autocannons and heavy bolter.

Isnt prepared position just cover and IF ignores it anyway? In some scenarios the Heavy Bolter will beat a lascannon and others lose. I would take the option that costs less than half as much and fire 3x the shots though since its good against way more targets. Also much better against a 4++ save vehicle like a knight since its damage is spread out more and not worth it for the knight player to use a cp to reroll a failed save and you dont waste that extra ap on an invul.

You could take 3 eliminator squad for sniping characters and 3 TFC for artillery and still have good chance of killing a Tank Commander/armiger/non IH dread. Add some Invictors who will wipe screens with 2d6 ap2 ignores cover flamer hits and that flamer is even better than a lascannon against tanks when the screens are gone. That flamer is also a serious threat to flyers unlike a lascannon.

Not to mention 30 intercessors with 36" str 4 ap3 D2 guns that ignores cover and have exploding 6s. They will shred anything below t8 and even t8 have to be careful since each 6 to wound is an ap3 flat D3 that needs to be saved.

IH vehicles can survive that fire power but other tanks will just melt.

The amount of weapons marines have that are heavy and usable against infantry and characters shouldnt be underestimated and now all of them also works against tanks due to devastator doctrine more than doubling their damage against tanks.

Hmm.

I'm looking forward to the IF supplement. Mostly I've always enjoyed the IF but the super doctrine will be amazing against some units that you don't want to waste anti tank on but are dangerous enough that you have to.

Examples are land speeders - fast and can carry lots of guns and an ultramarine one with typhoons and bolters is deadly. Add in a 2CP 4++ if moved and it can be dangerous. Two autocannon IF shots and (if he fails the saves) gone.
Various admech units are troublesome, and I can see this as a good counter to them.

Obviously different metas will have different milage, but s a primarily infantry based primaris force, I've struggled to deal with vehicles - hopefully this will help top it in my favour!

I think the reactions are way over the top, and am struggling to see how this is going to be remotely the same tier as IHs super-stacking.

Okay, Imperial Fist Assault Cannons and Heavy Bolters are going to be better than lascannons versus targets with reasonable invuls. Is that... a problem? They are not massively better. I guess you can say "aha! HB spam will crush infantry lists!" creating the super all-comers list, but I'm not entirely convinced.

There is however an issue in the quantum of power. I don't think you should be able to make something 100% better - because that's a huge buff. If it was +1 damage on 6s, that would be fine. +1 damage on D6 weapons would be reasonable too.

But then this is clearly version 8.5, so its just roll on everyone else.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

AngryAngel80 wrote:
I know it wasn't much of a prediction, but I did call this. It has begun !!! Seeing the future, it is a burden and a curse.

Man, just imagine the panic over whatever we see for Black Templars or Blood Angels in psychic awakening.

Who knows melee is lacklustre at the minute to say the least, I suppose they could buff crusader squads to make horde space marines viable but who knows.
I think salamanders still might be the dark horse given there’s so little info at the moment.

Tyel wrote:
I think the reactions are way over the top, and am struggling to see how this is going to be remotely the same tier as IHs super-stacking.

Okay, Imperial Fist Assault Cannons and Heavy Bolters are going to be better than lascannons versus targets with reasonable invuls. Is that... a problem? They are not massively better. I guess you can say "aha! HB spam will crush infantry lists!" creating the super all-comers list, but I'm not entirely convinced.

There is however an issue in the quantum of power. I don't think you should be able to make something 100% better - because that's a huge buff. If it was +1 damage on 6s, that would be fine. +1 damage on D6 weapons would be reasonable too.

But then this is clearly version 8.5, so its just roll on everyone else.

It might not be as obscene as the IH, but it is still pretty crazy and as you note, scales really weirdly. It just feels really wrong that this encourages the IF to abandon heavy, hard hitting big guns and exclusively favour dakka. If I had been designing these rules I would have done something completely opposite and given bonus for hard hitting guns with singe or few shots. This would seem to fit the IF better.

 Crimson wrote:

It might not be as obscene as the IH, but it is still pretty crazy and as you note, scales really weirdly. It just feels really wrong that this encourages the IF to abandon heavy, hard hitting big guns and exclusively favour dakka. If I had been designing these rules I would have done something completely opposite and given bonus for hard hitting guns with singe or few shots. This would seem to fit the IF better.

Single or few shots for the guys who have for years been branded as siege masters and having a culture of all the dakka with bolt weaponry? Just curious, how do you see that fitting them better?

 Sherrypie wrote:

Single or few shots for the guys who have for years been branded as siege masters and having a culture of all the dakka with bolt weaponry? Just curious, how do you see that fitting them better?

Lascannons, missile launchers etc are bunker busting weapons used in sieges. Trying to bring down a fortress with a heavy bolter is just stupid. The Bolter Drill was originally just Lysander's trait, it has now been applied to whole chapter and it has been flanderised to such a degree that now they apparently just use bolters for everything.

 Crimson wrote:

Tyel wrote:
I think the reactions are way over the top, and am struggling to see how this is going to be remotely the same tier as IHs super-stacking.

Okay, Imperial Fist Assault Cannons and Heavy Bolters are going to be better than lascannons versus targets with reasonable invuls. Is that... a problem? They are not massively better. I guess you can say "aha! HB spam will crush infantry lists!" creating the super all-comers list, but I'm not entirely convinced.

There is however an issue in the quantum of power. I don't think you should be able to make something 100% better - because that's a huge buff. If it was +1 damage on 6s, that would be fine. +1 damage on D6 weapons would be reasonable too.

But then this is clearly version 8.5, so its just roll on everyone else.

It might not be as obscene as the IH, but it is still pretty crazy and as you note, scales really weirdly. It just feels really wrong that this encourages the IF to abandon heavy, hard hitting big guns and exclusively favour dakka. If I had been designing these rules I would have done something completely opposite and given bonus for hard hitting guns with singe or few shots. This would seem to fit the IF better.

Your average tank is toughness around T8 IIRC, which means that relying on heavy bolters, or even autocannons to punch holes in things is a bit suspect of a plan. Sure those will work on T6 vehicles, but fishing.for 5s and 6s isn't a good plan.

More realistically I feel the compromise will lead us to heavy plasma weapons. Multiple shots, good strength, decent damage. It doesn't stack with bolter drill, but it has a wider range of targets than lascannons do later in the game.

 Crimson wrote:

 Sherrypie wrote:

Single or few shots for the guys who have for years been branded as siege masters and having a culture of all the dakka with bolt weaponry? Just curious, how do you see that fitting them better?

Lascannons, missile launchers etc are bunker busting weapons used in sieges. Trying to bring down a fortress with a heavy bolter is just stupid. The Bolter Drill was originally just Lysander's trait, it has now been applied to whole chapter and it has been flanderised to such a degree that now they apparently just use bolters for everything.

Fair. In that sense it might have been more thematic to, say, give them the ability to reroll Damage rolls, thus encouraging use of proper heavy weapons like lascannons or missiles while doing nothing for plasma variants while their "ignore cover" trait deals with entrenched infantry.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

Tyel wrote:
I think the reactions are way over the top, and am struggling to see how this is going to be remotely the same tier as IHs super-stacking.

Okay, Imperial Fist Assault Cannons and Heavy Bolters are going to be better than lascannons versus targets with reasonable invuls. Is that... a problem? They are not massively better. I guess you can say "aha! HB spam will crush infantry lists!" creating the super all-comers list, but I'm not entirely convinced.

There is however an issue in the quantum of power. I don't think you should be able to make something 100% better - because that's a huge buff. If it was +1 damage on 6s, that would be fine. +1 damage on D6 weapons would be reasonable too.

But then this is clearly version 8.5, so its just roll on everyone else.

It might not be as obscene as the IH, but it is still pretty crazy and as you note, scales really weirdly. It just feels really wrong that this encourages the IF to abandon heavy, hard hitting big guns and exclusively favour dakka. If I had been designing these rules I would have done something completely opposite and given bonus for hard hitting guns with singe or few shots. This would seem to fit the IF better.

Your average tank is toughness around T8 IIRC, which means that relying on heavy bolters, or even autocannons to punch holes in things is a bit suspect of a plan. Sure those will work on T6 vehicles, but fishing.for 5s and 6s isn't a good plan.

More realistically I feel the compromise will lead us to heavy plasma weapons. Multiple shots, good strength, decent damage. It doesn't stack with bolter drill, but it has a wider range of targets than lascannons do later in the game.

A heavy bolter have a better chance in wounding T8 than a lascannon due to having 3 shots(more like 3,5 due to exploding 6s). In devastator profile ap 2 is usually enough since more usually hits the invul on most targets. Sure its only D2 damage instead of d6 but you are only paying 10 instead of 25pts for the weapon and it is less swingy.

If buying anti tank guns you get more damage/point from heavy bolters than lascannons on T8 targets. Much more.

A IF heavy bolter against a T8 target with a 4++ does the same average damage as a non IF lascannon for 40% of the price and is much better against infantry targets. Against a t8 2+ save without invul the heavy bolter still does more dmg/point than a normal lascannon even if they are closer in effectiveness.

I didn't say lascannons were the better choice, and pointed towards heavy plasma weapos like the plasma cannon instead.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I didn't say lascannons were the better choice, and pointed towards heavy plasma weapos like the plasma cannon instead.

And the heavy plasma incinerator being S8 2D -5AP a shot makes it an excellent weapon against vehicles now, especially overcharged at S9 with 3D...

 Dr. Mills wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I didn't say lascannons were the better choice, and pointed towards heavy plasma weapos like the plasma cannon instead.

And the heavy plasma incinerator being S8 2D -5AP a shot makes it an excellent weapon against vehicles now, especially overcharged at S9 with 3D...

Exactly my thoughts too. The vehicle mounted plasma is D3 shots as well (average 2) which puts it at a good place for the army as well.

Primaris IF may like plasma even more than the DA do.

 Drudge Dreadnought wrote:
Everything was fine when the meta was all about Guilliman, and when it was all about Shadowswords, and when it was all about Pox walkers, and when it was all about Ynnari, and when it was all about tzaangor bombs, and both times it was all about eldar fliers, and when it was all about castellans...but now that it might be all about multiple different space marines chapters, everyone loses their minds.

Having space marines in general become useful is worth having the top meta spot switch to Iron Hands (and maybe Imperial fists) for a bit. I doubt it'll stay there long. Is the meta even worth discussing much until Psychic Awakening is all out? We're in the middle of basically a new edition of army rules. That armies who have gotten updated are more powerful than those who haven't isn't worth all this fuss.

This might be the most level-headed thing anyone has had to say about anything in the Marine 2.0 codex and expansions. Being in any way surprised that the latest codex is also the strongest * is like being surprised that water is wet. GW has always had issues with that, it's why 40k has a lethality issue in general.

Honestly while I do feel like Marines have gotten stronger, I also think they have pretty much the same weaknesses they had to begin with. All those new rules and buffs are being layered on top of what was and still is the weakest profile in the game for the points.

* - I'm not saying that I think Codex 2.0 Marines are the top of the heap now. IG still curb-stomps them, but I've come around to the belief that has more to do with the rock-paper-scissors nature of the 40k rules than it does with their relative power levels.

The Newman wrote:

 Drudge Dreadnought wrote:
Everything was fine when the meta was all about Guilliman, and when it was all about Shadowswords, and when it was all about Pox walkers, and when it was all about Ynnari, and when it was all about tzaangor bombs, and both times it was all about eldar fliers, and when it was all about castellans...but now that it might be all about multiple different space marines chapters, everyone loses their minds.

Having space marines in general become useful is worth having the top meta spot switch to Iron Hands (and maybe Imperial fists) for a bit. I doubt it'll stay there long. Is the meta even worth discussing much until Psychic Awakening is all out? We're in the middle of basically a new edition of army rules. That armies who have gotten updated are more powerful than those who haven't isn't worth all this fuss.

This might be the most level-headed thing anyone has had to say about anything in the Marine 2.0 codex and expansions. Being in any way surprised that the latest codex is also the strongest * is like being surprised that water is wet. GW has always had issues with that, it's why 40k has a lethality issue in general.

* - I'm not saying that I think Codex 2.0 Marines are the top of the heap now. IG still curb-stomps them, but I've come around to the belief that has more to do with the rock-paper-scissors nature of the 40k rules than it does with their relative power levels.

Eh... GW doesn't do Power Creep, they just kinda randomly do Power Levels.

Sometimes, the new stuff is the bomb dot com. Sometimes, it's pretty meh.

SeanDrake wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

AngryAngel80 wrote:
I know it wasn't much of a prediction, but I did call this. It has begun !!! Seeing the future, it is a burden and a curse.

Man, just imagine the panic over whatever we see for Black Templars or Blood Angels in psychic awakening.

Who knows melee is lacklustre at the minute to say the least, I suppose they could buff crusader squads to make horde space marines viable but who knows.
I think salamanders still might be the dark horse given there’s so little info at the moment.

The pessimist in me says that it's gonna be the worst of the lot and people are going to tell us to suck it up because Iron Hands are strong. It's what's happened the last two editions, and hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
. It's what's happened the last two editions, and hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.

We're not powerless. GW wont be idle. Communicate with them in a clear manner and we will see change.

We are in a far different dynamic than any edition prior and the abject pessimism from posters is profound.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
. It's what's happened the last two editions, and hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.

We're not powerless. GW wont be idle. Communicate with them in a clear manner and we will see change.

We are in a far different dynamic than any edition prior and the abject pessimism from posters is profound.

I agree but we're going to be looking at 6 months of this because I doubt there will be changes before the Spring Faq. And even then GW doesn't have a good history in changing rules to be less oppressive instead of just changing points which screws up other less OP space marine chapters.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
. It's what's happened the last two editions, and hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.

We're not powerless. GW wont be idle. Communicate with them in a clear manner and we will see change.

We are in a far different dynamic than any edition prior and the abject pessimism from posters is profound.

I don't know about the communication thing. But maybe what is left of Grey Knight players, just can't write properly to explain GW why they aren't happy with the army. It seems like GW just changes stuff they want to change, and people think that the changes happen, because of stuff they have been saying for decades.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
. It's what's happened the last two editions, and hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.

We're not powerless. GW wont be idle. Communicate with them in a clear manner and we will see change.

We are in a far different dynamic than any edition prior and the abject pessimism from posters is profound.

Yeah, sure. You all complained about ______, and maybe it got toned down. But then you got _______. And complained. And received _________ instead. And now you've got this "Marine problem" (don't worry, it'll go away when the SoB arrive)

I see a pattern here, and you're voices aren't a factor.
GWs continuing to do GWs standard thing and your complaints are just background noise.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Eh... GW doesn't do Power Creep, they just kinda randomly do Power Levels.

Sometimes, the new stuff is the bomb dot com. Sometimes, it's pretty meh.

You're talking about poor intra-faction balance and that's also always been true even for brand-new codexes. The point was that overall GW has always had a problem with the best combos in the most recent codex being a little better than anything in the game prior to that codex. Not always, but consistently enough that the pattern can't be ignored.

ccs wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
. It's what's happened the last two editions, and hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.

We're not powerless. GW wont be idle. Communicate with them in a clear manner and we will see change.

We are in a far different dynamic than any edition prior and the abject pessimism from posters is profound.

Yeah, sure. You all complained about ______, and maybe it got toned down. But then you got _______. And complained. And received _________ instead. And now you've got this "Marine problem" (don't worry, it'll go away when the SoB arrive)

I see a pattern here, and you're voices aren't a factor.
GWs continuing to do GWs standard thing and your complaints are just background noise.

I think our voices are a factor. The problem of 8th from the start has been a proper balancing of firepower vs defense. Marines were low on both. The new books give big buffs to both in a variety of different ways, and it looks like others are getting similar stuff too now, what with the Eldar trait overhaul coming in Phoenix Rising. GW is trying to tackle some of the biggest problems of 8th. The thing is that there's a big time lag. These new sorts of books are addressing problems that became apparent about halfway through the 8th edition codex release cycle (and some that were there from the start of course.) But due to GWs nature as a company and how releases work, they couldn't be fully addressed because stuff like full trait overhauls of a faction are beyond the scope of chapter approved or FAQs. We saw them begin to work on solving the marine problem with Bolter Discipline and internal marine balance changes that brought them more in line with themselves, and it slowly worked up to them realizing they needed to do what they did with the new codex, and now appear to be doing for everyone else with Psychic Awakening.

The direction they're going in seems to be about right, and they seem to be trying to solve a fair amount of the top issues. Its just slow, and they don't necessarily get the new rules/stats exactly right. But those sorts of things can be fixed in FAQs and CA.

To put it simply, we've gone from a rules space where marines could not be properly represented and/or balanced to one where they can, but it'll take some time to iron out (and will never be perfect.) But this is a big improvement.

But it is a big improvement only for factions they got right at the start of 8th ed, or marines who get updated often. An orc or necron play may be forced to play in 8.5 with an unupdated codex for anywhere between 6 to more months. And while we can of course hope that the CA and the spring FAQ will tone stuff down, but it always comes with the fear that some codex may come out in Feb, end up being OP, and not get fixed till CA 2020.