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.

Space Marines also have a problem with being boring.

Chaos in PA has so much flavor and identity. Space Marines have... rerolls and bonus AP?

Yoyoyo wrote:
Space Marines also have a problem with being boring.

Chaos in PA has so much flavor and identity. Space Marines have... rerolls and bonus AP?

Wait, what? Current codex marines have the most interesting and varied rules by far. If you think them boring, you should try a faction like necrons or nids.

Necrons do fun things like resurrecting, Nids go crazy when they're out of synapse. It's more interesting than a bunch of rerolls, AP buffs, and ignoring negative modifiers that other armies suffer IMO

Yoyoyo wrote:
Necrons do fun things like resurrecting, Nids go crazy when they're out of synapse. It's more interesting than a bunch of rerolls, AP buffs, and ignoring negative modifiers that other armies suffer IMO

LOL go into the Necron Tactica thread and tell them how great RP is and how often you get to use it.

Please, it is such a non-rule you'll even forget to use it.

Yoyoyo wrote:
Necrons do fun things like resurrecting, Nids go crazy when they're out of synapse. It's more interesting than a bunch of rerolls, AP buffs, and ignoring negative modifiers that other armies suffer IMO

I think you have different ideas on fun things than others on here. Necrons are about the most boring army I can imagine. Nids might be less so but I'm not sure if being outside synapse counts as " fun ".

As well if that was fun, you should have played old WHFB, if you played Orcs and goblins all your units could just randomly decide to stop doing things and fight with each other mid battle, that was pretty fun, at least thats what the O and G players told me.

AngryAngel80 wrote:
As well if that was fun, you should have played old WHFB, if you played Orcs and goblins all your units could just randomly decide to stop doing things and fight with each other mid battle, that was pretty fun, at least thats what the O and G players told me.

I really have to check that out. Sounds cool.

Yoyoyo wrote:
Necrons do fun things like resurrecting, Nids go crazy when they're out of synapse. It's more interesting than a bunch of rerolls, AP buffs, and ignoring negative modifiers that other armies suffer IMO

Can’t marines reanimate things with their Apothecaries? Nids act worse when out of synapse - you lose control of your own force.

I think we have very different ideas of what fun is. I think most people would not consider the things you’ve mentioned as fun.

Stratagems are fun. Tactical decisions are fun. Making a character an Uber character is fun. Having a variety of play styles true to your sub faction is fun.

And yet everybody seems to be complaining about Marines, right?

Yoyoyo wrote:
And yet everybody seems to be complaining about Marines, right?

Yea because it’s not fun when only one faction in the game has access to these things and therefore blows other factions off the table. Surely you’ve read the rest of the thread? I’ve never enjoyed my poor boys getting wiped to an Ork in previous editions where they did next to nothing to the opponent. In fact, I found it so unenjoyable I stopped playing and hobbying.

Yoyoyo wrote:
Necrons do fun things like resurrecting, Nids go crazy when they're out of synapse. It's more interesting than a bunch of rerolls, AP buffs, and ignoring negative modifiers that other armies suffer IMO

Marines (Chaos and Imperium) are the reason that Nids are just not worth playing. Hateful Assault and Bolter Discipline is what put the final nail in the coffin.

As for Necrons - Necrons have a small handful of interesting things which are now so far behind everyone else's interesting things - the only reason to play them is that you don't like painting.

Sumilidon wrote:

Yoyoyo wrote:
Necrons do fun things like resurrecting, Nids go crazy when they're out of synapse. It's more interesting than a bunch of rerolls, AP buffs, and ignoring negative modifiers that other armies suffer IMO

Marines (Chaos and Imperium) are the reason that Nids are just not worth playing. Hateful Assault and Bolter Discipline is what put the final nail in the coffin.

As for Necrons - Necrons have a small handful of interesting things which are now so far behind everyone else's interesting things - the only reason to play them is that you don't like painting.

Yeah, those 2 rules did really bring the hurt for our poor bugs.

While i do appreciate on one hand that they are the fearsome enemies that they should have always been, both in shooting and in punching, on the other hand i'm finding myself quite out of options now when facing them.

I'm not that worried for nids though. The codex is well designed and offers huge ranges of playstyles, there is nothing lacking in our toolbox. We have only a point cost problem at the moment, and that is a nice problem to have with bugs, since you can decrease the point cost on them without going against the fluff or the "feel" of the army. They are supposed to outnumber you, so even if a termagant costed 1 point, it wouldn't feel narratively strange (no, i'm not suggesting to bring them to 1 point .

I think you would run out of space in your deployment zone

Sumilidon wrote:

Yoyoyo wrote:
Necrons do fun things like resurrecting, Nids go crazy when they're out of synapse. It's more interesting than a bunch of rerolls, AP buffs, and ignoring negative modifiers that other armies suffer IMO

Marines (Chaos and Imperium) are the reason that Nids are just not worth playing. Hateful Assault and Bolter Discipline is what put the final nail in the coffin.

As for Necrons - Necrons have a small handful of interesting things which are now so far behind everyone else's interesting things - the only reason to play them is that you don't like painting.

Nids got issues, but the argument that chaos now suddendly became problematic because they Gained hatetull assault (even though for the majority of the dexes CSM had allways 2 attacks due to getting a free melee weapon, pistol and boltgun for the lack of ATSKNF) i find that a bit lopsided argument.

Otoh, the standard marine profile needed a boost, but considering that GW once again showed that they lack the understanding to achieve "somewhat equal long pikes for everyone" and also the fact that their release pattern is just plain, stupid, these days atleast.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Yoyoyo wrote:
I think you would run out of space in your deployment zone

deployment zones are the bane of my R&H.
SO manny models nowadays needed against nu marines it isn't even funny. OTOH the matches are pure epic when it finaly works.

 Burnage wrote:
https://www.40kstats.com/subfaction-results

For October and November so far;

Imperial Fists - 59.35% win rate
Iron Hands - 68.14% win rate
Raven Guard - 55.65% win rate
Salamanders - 49.02% win rate
Ultramarines - 50.78% win rate
White Scars - 57.45% win rate

All of those are pretty damn high, bar Ultramarines and Salamanders (which didn't have their supplement for most of the data set).

Ynnari were at 58% win rate at their peak, IIRC.
We basically have three Chapters (and relative Successors) on broken-Ynnari level (IF, WS, RG), two chapters well balanced (a 50% win rate is what every army in a balanced game should be at) and then we have Iron Hands.

Yoyoyo wrote:
Space Marines also have a problem with being boring.

Chaos in PA has so much flavor and identity. Space Marines have... rerolls and bonus AP?

I'd say that was true about a year ago when you looked at Marines and thought, well, it's a nice statline, but everyone else also has something special, some trick that makes their weaker statlines more interesting, SM have nothing like that. In earlier editions ATSKNF made them special as it made them ignore the morale phase and the most important part of the assault phase (terrible rule). DTTFE from CSM is nice against Imperium, but only that.

Now that SM and CSM gained Bolter Discipline and shock/hateful assault they became already as interesting as Xenos. Loyalists getting their additional doctrines was probably too much, or let's just say now Xenos/ Chaos have to step up again.

Chaos didn't really step up with Hatefull assault though.
they regained parts of what they had as a consolation for not having ATSKNF

I don't mind those SM/CSM rules too much, they seem thematic and appropriate.

But for a gunline army? Even Tau has something like Markerlights. Guard have Orders. With Marines, everything is so passive. Officer rerolls. Combat Doctrines. Super Doctrines.

It's a bit of a dull mechanic IMO.

Yoyoyo wrote:
I don't mind those SM/CSM rules too much, they seem thematic and appropriate.

But for a gunline army? Even Tau has something like Markerlights. Guard have Orders. With Marines, everything is so passive. Officer rerolls. Combat Doctrines. Super Doctrines.

It's a bit of a dull mechanic IMO.

it reminds me of 18th century musket warfare.In a way.
Not really what Shocktroops should feel like.

I'm interested to know how the new Marine codex and supplements have affected you personally / your local scene.

- Do your Marine players have trouble finding games?
- How do you personally fare against Marines with your army?
- Bonus question: Is your local scene competitive or casual?

a_typical_hero wrote:
I'm interested to know how the new Marine codex and supplements have affected you personally / your local scene.

- Do your Marine players have trouble finding games?
- How do you personally fare against Marines with your army?
- Bonus question: Is your local scene competitive or casual?

1. Nope but they use the supplements only ever in tournament prep phase.

2. One of my csm armies,built around attrition and recycling does't work anymore against marines,the other one centered arround daemonengines and other such entities can pull decently thanks to a discolord pack.
My main r&h army turns into the omaha beach scene. On average against nu marines i lose about 40-50 fodder models and need to field about 250 models to have a figthing chance

3. Both, really but not split,you are just as likely to get a campaign in as you are a tournament match and everything in between .

It's really difficult for me to comment on how strong Primaris are. Because of scheduling and school I've only got in a single game! Which really sucks. Anyway the one game I played I tabled my friend, but it's worth noting that I can table him with GK so I'd call it a moot point.

So, I haven't had much of an opportunity here to tinker with the rules, so correct me if I'm wrong on any of the following points:

Vanilla marines sucked for a long while. Rarely ever in tournaments, even more rare that they won.

Biggest complaint for several years was "Soup".

New Marine rules make it so Doctrines are good, but your entire army has to be Marines of the same Chapter- incentivizing NOT using soup.

One subset of Vanilla Marines with a fairly new batch of rules doe really well in a few tournaments right after its release.

This is a game-wrecking crisis and there's no way to counter these doctrines.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

a_typical_hero wrote:
I'm interested to know how the new Marine codex and supplements have affected you personally / your local scene.

- Do your Marine players have trouble finding games? Nah, generally speaking most people at least wanna see what they can do now- with or against them.


- How do you personally fare against Marines with your army? I can still wreck them pretty easily with Alpha Legion. Deathwatch can be a bit of a challenge if I don't plop in an assassin.

- Bonus question: Is your local scene competitive or casual? Solid mix of both, most competitive play a lot with casuals to help them and most competitive players are willing to play narrative or goof-off games.

For now, I just want to see CSM snipers and Hellblasters, and not just for regular CSM, but DG and TS as well.

 ArcaneHorror wrote:
For now, I just want to see CSM snipers and Hellblasters, and not just for regular CSM, but DG and TS as well.

I've had quite a bit of luck with Slaanesh-Marked Havocs. With Missile Launchers, this can get outright disgusting.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 ArcaneHorror wrote:
For now, I just want to see CSM snipers and Hellblasters, and not just for regular CSM, but DG and TS as well.

I've had quite a bit of luck with Slaanesh-Marked Havocs. With Missile Launchers, this can get outright disgusting.

I might try that in my Red Corsairs battalion that I'm building.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
One subset of Vanilla Marines with a fairly new batch of rules doe really well in a few tournaments right after its release.

This is a game-wrecking crisis and there's no way to counter these doctrines.

This is seriously underselling the issue. Most subsets of Marines have been doing exceptionally well in most tournaments. A couple of the supplements have already necessitated emergency balance fixes from GW, which have helped matters but don't seem to have brought Iron Hands into line (jury still out on Salamanders).

It's not just the case that one faction did kind of well for a bit because people hadn't figured out how to play against them yet.

 Burnage wrote:
This is seriously underselling the issue. Most subsets of Marines have been doing exceptionally well in most tournaments. A couple of the supplements have already necessitated emergency balance fixes from GW, which have helped matters but don't seem to have brought Iron Hands into line (jury still out on Salamanders).

It's not just the case that one faction did kind of well for a bit because people hadn't figured out how to play against them yet.

Right, but that has to be the ONLY faction you take in your army, right?

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Burnage wrote:
This is seriously underselling the issue. Most subsets of Marines have been doing exceptionally well in most tournaments. A couple of the supplements have already necessitated emergency balance fixes from GW, which have helped matters but don't seem to have brought Iron Hands into line (jury still out on Salamanders).

It's not just the case that one faction did kind of well for a bit because people hadn't figured out how to play against them yet.

Right, but that has to be the ONLY faction you take in your army, right?

If you want super doctrines, you need to run one specific chapter. You still get access to doctrines if you're running just Marines overall.

Some tournament winners have been running a mix of various chapters so it's not just super doctrines that are the issue.

I won't say that marines are balanced. As others have pointed out in multiple threads, they are just too much.

Even outside power combos, lists, etc... is insane how good the basic intercessor has become.
I mean, I love intercessors, they have great models, they feel rather powerfull on the table, etc...

But I play Dark Angels. I don't have doctrines or super doctrines, and intercessors with bolter Discipline and Shock Assault allready fell like the best troop of the game. They are a danger at 30", they are a danger in meele, they are extremely durable specially in cover, and they are cheap as chips.
I don't really feel like I need even more AP and then extra rules on top of them.

I can understand the idea of "mono-army" rules. They are very good! But compare the Sororitas one, they are varied, they allow you to addapt to your opponent, but aren't buffs as wide as "+1 ap to nearly all your army... and on top, even more buffs".

Doctrines should be something like
Heavy doctrine: Ignore the penalties of moving with heavy weapons
Tactical doctrine: Ignore the penalties for advancing and shooting with assault weapons
Assault Doctrine: This can remain the same because -1AP in meele and in turn 3 isn't that big of a deal. Or maybe make it +1" to run and charge rolls.

a_typical_hero wrote:
I'm interested to know how the new Marine codex and supplements have affected you personally / your local scene.

- Do your Marine players have trouble finding games?
- How do you personally fare against Marines with your army?
- Bonus question: Is your local scene competitive or casual?

1) I haven't had a problem yet, although I'm probably going to start if I don't tone things down a bit for some of the newer players.

2) Considering that I'm playing marines... I have had some notable losses and close games even post-codex update. A DE have tended to be close games and at least one list that spammed Talos routed my IF pretty convincingly. Deathwatch continues to be a rough match if I don't have the right tools. I had one AdMech vs Ultramarines game that I probably would have lost if the other guy hadn't conceded due to fatigue. And as always the local IG player has a couple of lists that I still don't see any way to counter. Five Leman Russ Demolishers at 1000 points is just gross.

3) It's kind of hard to say since we have a number of people that haven't really got their head around the game yet. Those of us who know what they're doing are tending to build lists to explore the design space (for fun and so the newbs get to actuallly play the game) rather than just murder everything, but there also tends to be some overlap there.