Is not taking allies a drawback for loyalist marines?

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.

**kingheff**

Tank commanders are good for sure but they die a lot easier than a knight and can get shut down pretty easily by quick units charging into them and those lists don't have big screens to help in that regard.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Insectum7 wrote:
kingheff wrote:
I'd still pick las cannons because you won't face an 4++ knight that often for starters and they will serve you better in most games.
In a match specifically against knight heavy plasma cannons are probably the best bet due to not needing to get within 12" to get two shots per gun and having decent range.
But to keep it relatively simple we'll pretend all our guns are on devastators in squads however big they need to be. They have a chapter master and lieutenant besides them somehow because aura's are infinitely sized in this kind of mathhammer calculation.
So you need 20 las cannon devs to take down the knight so 760 points.
We need 24 plasma cannon devs to take down the knight so 696 points.
We need 53 auto cannon devs (I guess they are havocs in disguise) to take down the knight for a whopping 1242 points.
So the plasma guys are the clear winner! Unless the knight is more than 36.1 inches away meaning you have to move to get in range so you die on a roll of a one or a two if you want to overcharge. Or you want to shoot a flyer, or anything else that might happen to have a minus to hit.

I don't know about the other chapters but UM get a Relic aura that allows full hit and wound rerolls against a single target, which moves the equation further in favor of Plasma, plus ignoring movement penalties in Tactical Doctrine to help mitigate overcharge damage.

I like Lascannons too. The triumvirate of heavy weapons is definitely Las, Plas, Grav for my armies. The thing is though, Plasma and Grav is also fantastic for killing marine infantry, too. And there's a lot of players using marines at the moment.

Agreed on all points, master artisans does wonders for las cannons, wave serpents make plasma users cry, there are so many variables in the game that you can pick out numerous examples that skew results in one way or another. I would have put Grav in my comparison but the strat makes it awkward maths wise and I was too lazy!

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ice_can wrote:
kingheff wrote:
So according to the four top four placings in February and March the lists were three knights plus...the rusty 17 plus a couple of dunecrawlers; 15 scions and three tank commanders; rusty seventeen, thirty guardsmen and two tank commanders and finally rusty seventeen plus three skorpius disintigrators.
So not really, the allies were giving the knights cp in traditional fashion whilst the knights do the vast majority of the work.

Martel hit the nail on the head in that it's the allies bringing a lot of work to those lists, screens are game breaking against certain lists.
A Tank commander outshoots even a crusader due to their inherent buffs.

Additionally
Imperial soup isnt a Knights list[u] it's Imperial Faction Imperium not Knights not guard not Admech.
It's not representative of the power of Imperial Knights as a codex, It's let me cherry pick from multiple codex's then use that to claim that 1 out of the 3 codex's involved is a problem while actually pure armies still struggle to break into the 40% or better win ratio.

I thought we were discussing the value of allies in this thread?

**Ice_can**

No The value of Allies for Marines vrs Doctorines and Super dotorines.

For some reason as usual someone tried to imply marines are too weak to kill of a knight easily without trying, which has been demonstrated to be false.

I pointed out killing a knight really shouldn't be the yard stick as they really aren't that hard to kill.
(Iron hands intercessors spam and Charictor dreadnaughts are way harder to kill.)

You randomly started something about this imperial soup list and this imperial soup list didn't do to bad at some events.

**kingheff**

I bought up the knights lists to show that knights are still doing pretty well because it was insinuated that knights are basically useless.
The fact they scored as many top fours in March as Iron hands and Imperial fists combined, two for knights, two for Iron hands and zero for Imperial fists suggests knights still have value and certainly are better than the marine super heavies last time I checked.
With the nerf to their doctrines I actually wouldn't be suprised to see things like Iron hands intercessors with their buddies becoming stirred into imperium soup in the future.
Edit: Just looking again, Iron hands had four placings, three of them were at the same event so I only counted them as one before.

**Ice_can**

kingheff wrote:
I bought up the knights lists to show that knights are still doing pretty well because it was insinuated that knights are basically useless.
The fact they scored as many top fours in March as Iron hands and Imperial fists combined, two for knights, two for Iron hands and zero for Imperial fists suggests knights still have value and certainly are better than the marine super heavies last time I checked.
With the nerf to their doctrines I actually wouldn't be suprised to see things like Iron hands intercessors with their buddies becoming stirred into imperium soup in the future.
Edit: Just looking again, Iron hands had four placings, three of them were at the same event so I only counted them as one before.

Are those Knights lists mono codex lists?
As I doubt that and frankly being out placed by Iron hands mon subfaction vrs Imperial souping of Knights says enough about the power creep that has taken place.

**Martel732**

Ice_can wrote:
No The value of Allies for Marines vrs Doctorines and Super dotorines.

For some reason as usual someone tried to imply marines are too weak to kill of a knight easily without trying, which has been demonstrated to be false.

I pointed out killing a knight really shouldn't be the yard stick as they really aren't that hard to kill.
(Iron hands intercessors spam and Charictor dreadnaughts are way harder to kill.)

You randomly started something about this imperial soup list and this imperial soup list didn't do to bad at some events.

They actually are pretty hard to kill, they just aren't worth the effort much of the time.

**kingheff**

Ice_can wrote:
kingheff wrote:
I bought up the knights lists to show that knights are still doing pretty well because it was insinuated that knights are basically useless.
The fact they scored as many top fours in March as Iron hands and Imperial fists combined, two for knights, two for Iron hands and zero for Imperial fists suggests knights still have value and certainly are better than the marine super heavies last time I checked.
With the nerf to their doctrines I actually wouldn't be suprised to see things like Iron hands intercessors with their buddies becoming stirred into imperium soup in the future.
Edit: Just looking again, Iron hands had four placings, three of them were at the same event so I only counted them as one before.

Are those Knights lists mono codex lists?
As I doubt that and frankly being out placed by Iron hands mon subfaction vrs Imperial souping of Knights says enough about the power creep that has taken place.

We already discussed the composition of the lists so...no, they're not mono faction. But they are all around 1400+ points of knights so definitely knight lists. I suspect the dominance of marines has actually helped knights out, armies gearing up to kill MEQ has probably given them a decent survivability buff and they almost become a counter meta pick. This is all just my speculation of course.
But to get back to the original point, I suspect the answer depends on the subfaction of marines. I can definitely see value in souping in a Salamander vanguard detachment to include a relic scorpius whirlwind, just to give it +1 to wound via the strat, into a guard list for example. Or to soup in knights on top of an Ironhand infantry castle. I only play Salamanders occasionally so I haven't thought too deeply about it but I suspect that there are unit/strat combo's that don't need doctrines to be effective so may see play in the future.

**Gadzilla666**

Ok, so apparently 9th edition is going to give more cp for playing mono faction. So considering that loyalist marines are already very good as a stand alone army, how much better is this going to make them? Especially compared to factions that are currently most competitive as soup?

**Aash**

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Ok, so apparently 9th edition is going to give more cp for playing mono faction. So considering that loyalist marines are already very good as a stand alone army, how much better is this going to make them? Especially compared to factions that are currently most competitive as soup?

Until the new rules drop its too hard to say. Changes to melee (at least for vehicles), “blast weapons” and who knows what else might have more impact than changes to how CP are generated.

**Ice_can**

They have also implied they are going to be changing points aswell so I think it's probably going to be a few months of random swings as different pieces fall into place, as the base rule changes might help and hinder in ways not expected.

**Eldarain**

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Ok, so apparently 9th edition is going to give more cp for playing mono faction. So considering that loyalist marines are already very good as a stand alone army, how much better is this going to make them? Especially compared to factions that are currently most competitive as soup?

As everything for me is through the Word Bearers/Broken Marines prism, this is what I'm most interested in initially.

This whole Chaos didn't get Doctrines because they're designed to soup thing is going to be extra irritating if Marines get maxed out CP and Doctrines as a "Drawback" while what little identity and functionality I'm given dries up with my depleted soup CP pool

**BrianDavion**

Eldarain wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Ok, so apparently 9th edition is going to give more cp for playing mono faction. So considering that loyalist marines are already very good as a stand alone army, how much better is this going to make them? Especially compared to factions that are currently most competitive as soup?

As everything for me is through the Word Bearers/Broken Marines prism, this is what I'm most interested in initially.

This whole Chaos didn't get Doctrines because they're designed to soup thing is going to be extra irritating if Marines get maxed out CP and Doctrines as a "Drawback" while what little identity and functionality I'm given dries up with my depleted soup CP pool

CSMs really need a codex redesign.

**Gadzilla666**

BrianDavion wrote:
Eldarain wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Ok, so apparently 9th edition is going to give more cp for playing mono faction. So considering that loyalist marines are already very good as a stand alone army, how much better is this going to make them? Especially compared to factions that are currently most competitive as soup?

As everything for me is through the Word Bearers/Broken Marines prism, this is what I'm most interested in initially.

This whole Chaos didn't get Doctrines because they're designed to soup thing is going to be extra irritating if Marines get maxed out CP and Doctrines as a "Drawback" while what little identity and functionality I'm given dries up with my depleted soup CP pool

CSMs really need a codex redesign.

Agreed, most factions probably will under the new rules, but csm especially rely on soup and cp.

**Canadian 5th**

kingheff wrote:
Dark angels plasma is very nice, that is true. But how long do your black knights tend to survive once they've parked 18" away from a knight?

That can depend heavily on what's left and how well-positioned the rest of my opponent's force is. It also depends on how well Transhuman Physiology does for me; the terrain; if I've called down the Deathwing Knights yet and the mission itself. It can be anything from wiped out to the man to one squad hanging on by a model, to both squads only losing a couple of bikes.

There are games where it's going to be a winning trade and games where it won't be and that's what keeps my list from being a top table threat.

**BrianDavion**

Gadzilla666 wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
Eldarain wrote:
Gadzilla666 wrote:
Ok, so apparently 9th edition is going to give more cp for playing mono faction. So considering that loyalist marines are already very good as a stand alone army, how much better is this going to make them? Especially compared to factions that are currently most competitive as soup?

As everything for me is through the Word Bearers/Broken Marines prism, this is what I'm most interested in initially.

This whole Chaos didn't get Doctrines because they're designed to soup thing is going to be extra irritating if Marines get maxed out CP and Doctrines as a "Drawback" while what little identity and functionality I'm given dries up with my depleted soup CP pool

CSMs really need a codex redesign.

Agreed, most factions probably will under the new rules, but csm especially rely on soup and cp.

I think some armies could soldier on through the new edition without a new codex, Space Marines, and their loyalist cousins for example work well as stand alone armies right now.

granted chaos might be able to work as a soup irregardless depending on how bad the penalties for taking additional detachments are. There is also, IMHO room to give some HQs an ability to reduce or ignore the penalties for souping. such as giving Abaddon, whose noted for his ability to unite chaos a special rule via FAQ that notes "if Abaddon is your warlord, you may ignore the CP cost of one additional detachment" for example.