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.

 lonewolf81 wrote:
Lets agree to disagree...

First of all if you are referring to guilliman castle as marines doing well the previous years and everything else being garbage ...dude please...

Tournaments will always spam the flavor of the month .... how many lists where doing well using IG 32 and imperial knight detachments, alatoic flyer spam, dark eldar ravager spam when they were the top dogs... 98% of the tourney lists?

It is the marines time to be the flavor of the month that's all

Outside of the tournament lists (which i personally hate because they are WAAC and they are expected to be when prizes are involved) marines got a much needed boost with some of them (iron hands) being over the top like black heart /prophets of flesh dark eldar, alatoic eldar,IG, castellans etc when they first came out. This always happened and always will happen... you have to be the lucky faction to get the flavor of the month until it gets nerfed...
the bottom line is marines needed the boost.. some of them got more than they deserve but you cant put every marine chapter in the same basket (like GW did with the nerfs cause of guilliman)

Same thing goes for the other armies you cited in your previous post. Eldar, Orks, Tau, Guard, GSC and other well-performing armies over the last year did so by using one particular build and ignoring 80-85% of the available units in their codex.

SM are completely out of balance right now and they'll get nerfed, sooner or later. It's simply the way GW balancing works.
Chapter Approved may not be the place for it, as the Codex and the Supplements are very recent, but in the Spring FAQ they'll get the Castellan treatment.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Marines are absolutely fethed and they are literally breaking the competitive scene.

And before people chime in with the "well then don't play competitive" lines, this kind of imbalance between armies is terrible for all types of play as it makes balancing out narrative scenarios, casual and campaign play much more difficult.

Its also a really, really stupid argument. I only play competitively ruled games with my group and I only play Orks. Am I supposed to just stop playing? Great suggestion lol. You're absolutely right in that it hurts all game types too.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Marines are absolutely fethed and they are literally breaking the competitive scene.

And before people chime in with the "well then don't play competitive" lines, this kind of imbalance between armies is terrible for all types of play as it makes balancing out narrative scenarios, casual and campaign play much more difficult.

Its also a really, really stupid argument. I only play competitively ruled games with my group and I only play Orks. Am I supposed to just stop playing? Great suggestion lol. You're absolutely right in that it hurts all game types too.

Yeah but the current “ competitive” scene don’t actual play 40k they play ITC which due to it’s slant towards just wiping the opponent off the board has balance issues separate to actual 40k. I personally think that under no circumstances should GW be balancing there game to favour a 3rd parties house rules rather than you know the actual rules. Sadly the ITC guys have there feet well under the table as play testers, to’s, retailers and in some cases players not that there’s a number of conflicts of interest there but I mean personally I would not pay to take part in a tournament where a number of players have had months of play testing rules that in some cases everyone else’s has had a couple of weeks to test.

Anyway if you go watch some battle reports involving marines even the dreaded pre nerf IH you will see that they when playing the actual game they lost about as often as they won only in ITC style games did the skew more towards winning. But hey the game should definitely only balanced around house rules and not the objective based game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Marines are absolutely fethed and they are literally breaking the competitive scene.

And before people chime in with the "well then don't play competitive" lines, this kind of imbalance between armies is terrible for all types of play as it makes balancing out narrative scenarios, casual and campaign play much more difficult.

Its also a really, really stupid argument. I only play competitively ruled games with my group and I only play Orks. Am I supposed to just stop playing? Great suggestion lol. You're absolutely right in that it hurts all game types too.

If you also stop posting the yes pleases stop playing

 lonewolf81 wrote:
Lets agree to disagree...

First of all if you are referring to guilliman castle as marines doing well the previous years and everything else being garbage ...dude please...

Everything else wasn't garbage, Guilliman parking lot was simply the strongest average codex marine list.

Tournaments will always spam the flavor of the month .... how many lists where doing well using IG 32 and imperial knight detachments, alatoic flyer spam, dark eldar ravager spam when they were the top dogs... 98% of the tourney lists?

No mate, this is wrong. Ynnari are the closest comparable army in terms of their performance to Marines. They MAXED OUT at 7% of the meta. At their peak. Their average was 5%. No faction has had the representation and the strength of marines. That is part of the problem. Even Ynnari haven't seen the same level of success as marines.

the bottom line is marines needed the boost.. some of them got more than they deserve but you cant put every marine chapter in the same basket (like GW did with the nerfs cause of guilliman)

Again, this is where you are wrong. Every single codex marine subfaction is over performing bar none. All of them. Some, like Iron Hands, Raven Guard and Imperial Fists are better than others, but they are all broken. Let that sink in man - each and every supplement book is over performing.

Is this a surprise, really? They've given one faction triple the stratagems, double or triple the relics, they can take multiple warlord traits in the same army and all of these things are better than other factions' equivalents anyway. This was obvious.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 lonewolf81 wrote:
Lets agree to disagree...

First of all if you are referring to guilliman castle as marines doing well the previous years and everything else being garbage ...dude please...

Everything else wasn't garbage, Guilliman parking lot was simply the strongest average codex marine list.

Tournaments will always spam the flavor of the month .... how many lists where doing well using IG 32 and imperial knight detachments, alatoic flyer spam, dark eldar ravager spam when they were the top dogs... 98% of the tourney lists?

No mate, this is wrong. Ynnari are the closest comparable army in terms of their performance to Marines. They MAXED OUT at 7% of the meta. At their peak. Their average was 5%. No faction has had the representation and the strength of marines. That is part of the problem. Even Ynnari haven't seen the same level of success as marines.

the bottom line is marines needed the boost.. some of them got more than they deserve but you cant put every marine chapter in the same basket (like GW did with the nerfs cause of guilliman)

Again, this is where you are wrong. Every single codex marine subfaction is over performing bar none. All of them. Some, like Iron Hands, Raven Guard and Imperial Fists are better than others, but they are all broken. Let that sink in man - each and every supplement book is over performing.

Is this a surprise, really? They've given one faction triple the stratagems, double or triple the relics, they can take multiple warlord traits in the same army and all of these things are better than other factions' equivalents anyway. This was obvious.

Ya know, on the warlord trait front, the New CSM warlordtraits and all, that should put up/ prop up what is there to compete again, are limited by 1 if you don't play AL.
But sure these warlordtraits make everything allright again and fixing the borked traits is not necessary after that....

SeanDrake wrote:
Yeah but the current “ competitive” scene don’t actual play 40k they play ITC which due to it’s slant towards just wiping the opponent off the board has balance issues separate to actual 40k. I personally think that under no circumstances should GW be balancing there game to favour a 3rd parties house rules rather than you know the actual rules. Sadly the ITC guys have there feet well under the table as play testers, to’s, retailers and in some cases players not that there’s a number of conflicts of interest there but I mean personally I would not pay to take part in a tournament where a number of players have had months of play testing rules that in some cases everyone else’s has had a couple of weeks to test.

Anyway if you go watch some battle reports involving marines even the dreaded pre nerf IH you will see that they when playing the actual game they lost about as often as they won only in ITC style games did the skew more towards winning. But hey the game should definitely only balanced around house rules and not the objective based game.

If only there were tournaments that didn't use ITC rules so we could see if Marines are also broken using 'traditional' 40k rules. If only this data was recorded and shared with people. Wait. It is?! And all that data points towards marines also over performing in those competitive circles?! Well I never.

In some way I can agree that ITC is a format that rewards too much the killing power of an army. Killing the enemy its is own reward. You are destroying the capacity of your opponent to play the game and attack you. But if at the same time I destroy the imperial knight of my opponent that is 1/4 of is army I'am rewarded 4 victory points then the hill becomes even harder to climb back for a balanced game.

I'll always say that the ETC way is the best way (Eternal War Mission + Maelstrom of War mission + Discard the cards you can't accomplish because is impossible + All d3 victory points are 2) or just CA 2018 missions.

Grots and Chaos Cultists will both now be 4 points each?

Totally balanced.

Totally.

 lonewolf81 wrote:

the bottom line is marines needed the boost..

No. They did not need this big. What's wrong in boosting them to EQUAL level? Why marines suddenly NEEDED to be brokenly good?

Why on earth you WANT any army to be brokenly good? What's your take on it? GW giving you share of profit if you help them on the process?

ITC based competitive players being part of the play test has me more or less expecting no real resolution to balance in 40k.

A lot of the answers can be found in re-pricing things people love to be far more expensive, but it's not going to happen because people are stuck at the idea of running 2k points and don't see the need for meaningful opportunity cost to special weapons or units.

Or we could take the axe to bloated unit line ups and thin out the design space a bit.

None of which I see coming from the ITC community or competitive players in general.

tneva82 wrote:

 lonewolf81 wrote:

the bottom line is marines needed the boost..

No. They did not need this big. What's wrong in boosting them to EQUAL level? Why marines suddenly NEEDED to be brokenly good?

Why on earth you WANT any army to be brokenly good? What's your take on it? GW giving you share of profit if you help them on the process?

As i said in a previous post.. iron hands are brokenly good all the others are eldar/dark eldar level good...
Also i dont care about ITC and other house rule stuff.. i play regular 40k and a dark eldar army for example can still erase a SM army (other than IH) in one turn of shooting and they are more resilient with all the invu saves and the FNP across the board, plus they are super cheap for what they do... why dont you cry about eldar or dark eldar .... why didnt you cry when they "auto won" marines the moment they deployed their army on the board...did you share any profit back then?

I play wolves not vanilla (i hope we get a similar treatment and all other armies that need it) but i was tired of marines in general being at the bottom for so long even though they had new units released... anyone who denies it wasnt playing 40k

Space Marines have already been meta in 8th edition before their new Codex and supplement. That's more than some factions have gotten, and they don't get as much as a sniff of a change to come.

 lonewolf81 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 lonewolf81 wrote:

the bottom line is marines needed the boost..

No. They did not need this big. What's wrong in boosting them to EQUAL level? Why marines suddenly NEEDED to be brokenly good?

Why on earth you WANT any army to be brokenly good? What's your take on it? GW giving you share of profit if you help them on the process?

As i said in a previous post.. iron hands are brokenly good all the others are eldar/dark eldar level good...
Also i dont care about ITC and other house rule stuff.. i play regular 40k and a dark eldar army for example can still erase a SM army (other than IH) in one turn of shooting and they are more resilient with all the invu saves and the FNP across the board, plus they are super cheap for what they do... why dont you cry about eldar or dark eldar .... why didnt you cry when they "auto won" marines the moment they deployed their army on the board...did you share any profit back then?

I play wolves not vanilla (i hope we get a similar treatment and all other armies that need it) but i was tired of marines in general being at the bottom for so long even though they had new units released... anyone who denies it wasnt playing 40k

SM (vanilla) have been ultra competitive for years. In 7th they were the most broken faction along with eldar, way more annoying even than tau since they had tons of overpowered combos to choose from. In this edition they have been competitive for a significant period since many armies got their codex only after some time. For example I got my first and my main codexes (drukhari and orks) 10 months and a year and a half after the SM one. SM have been good even before the supplement, at least soups with 60-70% stuff of SM (lists with just a small detachment of SM aren't SM armies), but also some pure builds. I've always had the impression that many SM players need to try the game using real average armies, they'll learn a lot.

In my opinion SM should have stayed with their first 2017 codex till the new edition, with CA and FAQs to adjust stuff that needed corrections.

Take the SW codex, many players consider it garbage but it just needs a few points adjustments, that's all. Of course in an era of broken stuff they look terrbile and ultra competitive players don't pick them up simply because SW are not a faction anymore, just a part of a huge one. In this conditions it's hard to justify a mono subfaction at ultra competitive levels unless that faction is utterly broken. But as a SW player I think our codex is exactly how other SM codexes should be in terms of competitiveness, just with a few small buffs and corrections eventually.

"Space Marines were at the bottom for so long", and other jokes you can tell yourself
Have I been the only one to see invisible deathstars and free (FREE!) transports, or was it all a dream?

 Aenar wrote:
"Space Marines were at the bottom for so long", and other jokes you can tell yourself
Have I been the only one to see invisible deathstars and free (FREE!) transports, or was it all a dream?

TBH, 7th was a nightmare.
One bad cookie in a group bringing some of the issue things or formations could mean that fun fast left.

 Aenar wrote:
"Space Marines were at the bottom for so long", and other jokes you can tell yourself
Have I been the only one to see invisible deathstars and free (FREE!) transports, or was it all a dream?

Never let the truth get in the way of a good story.

I see we're on to the part in the narrative where the fact that Space Marines of all types that weren't Deathwatch had sub-40% winrates for months is swept under the rug.

YeOldSaltPotato wrote:
ITC based competitive players being part of the play test has me more or less expecting no real resolution to balance in 40k.

Exactly this.

ITC is a set of cherished house rules that should not be part of this game any longer.

 Aenar wrote:
"Space Marines were at the bottom for so long", and other jokes you can tell yourself
Have I been the only one to see invisible deathstars and free (FREE!) transports, or was it all a dream?

Marines sucked through the whole 8th edition and now that they boosted them you bring up the 7th edition hahaha... Gw shouldn't boost grey knights then cause they were broken during 5th edition... I rest my case

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
I see we're on to the part in the narrative where the fact that Space Marines of all types that weren't Deathwatch had sub-40% winrates for months is swept under the rug.

Indeed. People like to gloss over that fact.

The fact that marines came back so strong really rustled some people's jimmies to an extent its all they ever talk about. Marines had no viable builds as a vanilla force unless it included Guilliman - as it was painfully obvious marines were balanced around him.
Now that the supplaments and Codex v2 are here, I'm hoping every army gets a similar boost (because by golly some desperately need it!) but the constant diriding of marines, Marine players and the rules is beginning to be an all consuming force on DakkaDakka, and just makes for boring discussion.

Can y'all please stop bumping the thread to discuss the history of space marine rules. I'm sure many other people are waiting for CA 2019 leaks, not 7E rules.


And before any smart-ass comes along, the thread is still top when I'm posting this so I'm not bumping it

 Dr. Mills wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
I see we're on to the part in the narrative where the fact that Space Marines of all types that weren't Deathwatch had sub-40% winrates for months is swept under the rug.

Indeed. People like to gloss over that fact.

The fact that marines came back so strong really rustled some people's jimmies to an extent its all they ever talk about. Marines had no viable builds as a vanilla force unless it included Guilliman - as it was painfully obvious marines were balanced around him.
Now that the supplaments and Codex v2 are here, I'm hoping every army gets a similar boost (because by golly some desperately need it!) but the constant diriding of marines, Marine players and the rules is beginning to be an all consuming force on DakkaDakka, and just makes for boring discussion.

Bit of an oversimplification there isn't it? It isn't that they are mad marines are suddenly super viable, instead they are mad that marines HAD a viable build even if it was only G-Man. They absolutely did need a buff, but vanilla marines had a viable build and the non-vanilla ones who actually do have the worst winrates didn't get anything. Marines can't be shoehorned into a single competitive build, but other armies have been repeatedly nerfed out of the competitive scene even if that's their only viable build. Combine this with the fact that we had 3 straight months of marinesturbation and yeah people are going to resent marine players who think they are the only ones who had to go months without a strong competitive list. Especially when GW has a terrible track record for balancing/releasing anything that isn't Imperial this edition.

From a more positive perspective, I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of people on dakka are much more positive in person and dakka provides a nice place to scream into the void. Just like how marine players spammed dakka for months on how weak marines were, people are going to spam dakka as marines are buffed for months on end. Of course people are going to complain if the once a year point adjustments dictate that months of marine dominance will turn into a year of dominance with no end in sight. This is no different from "lol Castellans are don't need point adjustments" that happened last year.

 DominayTrix wrote:

Bit of an oversimplification there isn't it? It isn't that they are mad marines are suddenly super viable, instead they are mad that marines HAD a viable build even if it was only G-Man. They absolutely did need a buff, but vanilla marines had a viable build and the non-vanilla ones who actually do have the worst winrates didn't get anything. Marines can't be shoehorned into a single competitive build, but other armies have been repeatedly nerfed out of the competitive scene even if that's their only viable build. Combine this with the fact that we had 3 straight months of marinesturbation and yeah people are going to resent marine players who think they are the only ones who had to go months without a strong competitive list. Especially when GW has a terrible track record for balancing/releasing anything that isn't Imperial this edition.

From a more positive perspective, I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of people on dakka are much more positive in person and dakka provides a nice place to scream into the void. Just like how marine players spammed dakka for months on how weak marines were, people are going to spam dakka as marines are buffed for months on end. Of course people are going to complain if the once a year point adjustments dictate that months of marine dominance will turn into a year of dominance with no end in sight. This is no different from "lol Castellans are don't need point adjustments" that happened last year.

I personally dont mind the vanilla marine codex, its the supplements that really took it over the top. And them getting even more good rules in faith and fury really was too much. The main reason that i personally am pissed off at marines is that most releases this year have either been marines or overshadowes by marines.

Look at blood pf the phoenix, yeah its a cool box with new plastic sculpts for long-demanded models. Oh wait, lets make a gakky boxset out of it and overprice it. While were at it, we should also release the IF and Sally supplements at the same time. Lets not forget about the impulsor while were at it. Thats how this year has felt for me as a non-marine player. We get crumbs while marines get a full bread factory. The fact that marines have also started doing things that are "the thing" other armies do better than these armies really pisses me off. How is a 47pts techmarine healing stuff better than belisarius cawl himself? Why do marines get For the greater good? Why do marines get a cloud of flies-ish ability? Why do marines get assault vehicles while admech's higgins boat neither flies not has the assault rule (It was fething marketed as a hovering open-topped transport yet we got neither of these rules...)?

And now stupid abilities that got dumped on marines : WHy do they get ignore LOS snipers? (yea yea, their ammo is gak, thats not the point) Why do they get an infiltrating dreadnought?

its tiring, and its not just on dakka that people complain, at my LGS, everyone is very vocal as to how stupid marines are right now and how unfun they are to play against.

I don't even know why this is a debate lol..

The SM Vanila book alone was really strong. Ya all got the free buffs and even points drops ya wanted for marines and yet people were still saying marines were trash...(remember xenomancers goin on about how because repulsor went up 20 pts it made marines trash?) Because layering free rules with no downsides on wholesale, is just not enough apparently..

The supplements were just totally unnecessary and have swung the ball out the park. And yes its OP broken gak..wholesale.. The other armies mentioned that enjoyed the "well this is op" spot were tied to 1-2 units and specific builds and combos and relied largely on soup. And the players playing those factions dont enjoy having one unit being head over heels better than anything else. This is different..

The sentiment isint so much "bohoo my army should be better than your army" its I want everyone to have a fair fight without having to use the same units every effin game and get nice kits.. Then we all prosper and all have better games and our communities grow thanks to variety. Isint it obvious?


Back on topic of CA2019, is there a date confirmed for this floating around ? Must be getting on soon.

 Argive wrote:

Back on topic of CA2019, is there a date confirmed for this floating around ? Must be getting on soon.

December 7th according to the leaked release schedule (that got Sisters, the PA books and Mephiston correct).

 Argive wrote:
I don't even know why this is a debate lol..

The SM Vanila book alone was really strong. Ya all got the free buffs and even points drops ya wanted for marines and yet people were still saying marines were trash...(remember xenomancers goin on about how because repulsor went up 20 pts it made marines trash?) Because layering free rules with no downsides on wholesale, is just not enough apparently..

The supplements were just totally unnecessary and have swung the ball out the park. And yes its OP broken gak..wholesale.. The other armies mentioned that enjoyed the "well this is op" spot were tied to 1-2 units and specific builds and combos and relied largely on soup. And the players playing those factions dont enjoy having one unit being head over heels better than anything else. This is different..

Back on topic of CA2019, is there a date confirmed for this floating around ? Must be getting on soon.

Ive heard the release was around december 7th, no idea if its official or not.

 Blackie wrote:
In 7th they were the most broken faction along with eldar, way more annoying even than tau since they had tons of overpowered combos to choose from.

In what reality??

Because you know, in this one, it was '500 points of free transports, place all units inside, then pray to Emperor the Eldar/Tau/Mechanicus conclave won't manage to blast you off the board in 6 turns (even thought it often happened) and you somehow manage to squeak a win by camping objectives'. And please, anyone who thinks Riptidewing (something so broken even Eldar allied it in) or infinite drone recycling that hid off the board in opponents turn was in any way OK (instead of being one of the worst, most broken, garbage trash mechanics in the entire 30 year history of the game) is so far divorced from any semblance of balance the opinion is not only instantly discardeable, but also very strong indicator that something completely opposite to it was the truth instead. And these two were far from the only broken stuff Tau could do, to the point that even if you deleted that gak Tau would be still stronger than everyone but Eldar...

 Aenar wrote:
"Space Marines were at the bottom for so long", and other jokes you can tell yourself
Have I been the only one to see invisible deathstars and free (FREE!) transports, or was it all a dream?

The only joke here is the entitlement of xeno players who think being broken junk twice as strong as everyone else is natural, balanced state of things

The invisible death star that could never catch most eldar/tau units, relied on single gimmick Eldar could dispel/Tau could shot off the board instantly despite invisibility - that one? Death star that was way weaker than seerstar or Tau off-table drones? Never mind LOW of both factions? The free transports that bought SM half a turn before either faction could table them with laughable ease?

I have no idea how weak or biased memory you need of something that happened just 3 years ago, but please, nothing in SM book came in any way near eldar jetbikes/aspects or broken Tau suits, and that's before considering ""balanced"" riptidewing with allied eldar knights/psykers to boost them to autowin levels, no matter what opponent did...

Ahh thanks. Will put some pennies aside for pre-order

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
I see we're on to the part in the narrative where the fact that Space Marines of all types that weren't Deathwatch had sub-40% winrates for months is swept under the rug.

This is simply a lie. Ultras had above 50%, for example and just off the top of my head.

For the love of god, stahp. The constant derailing of threads into whinging about marines getting more than the other factions is getting so old. We know. Let’s move on, please. This has been going on for like 5 pages now.