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.

Not as commonplace as heavy bolters, autocannons, missile launchers and lascannons.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Give me a break. Multi-Meltas are NOT rare equipment.

So rare that every Imperial Guard tank can only have two of them.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Give me a break. Multi-Meltas are NOT rare equipment.

So rare that every Imperial Guard tank can only have two of them.

Just because it's a viable option doesn't mean it's commonplace. Iirc, traditionally the Plasma Cannon and Multimeltas were reserved for Demolisher variants. They might also be harder to maintain, for whatever reason, or difficult to make man-portable. Compare that to the fact that every infantry squad in a Guard regiment or PDF can be equipped with portable HBs, ACs, MLs and LCs, and supplied ammunition for it. That's going to make for popular choices for a force that has a logistical chain based on raiding.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Give me a break. Multi-Meltas are NOT rare equipment.

So rare that every Imperial Guard tank can only have two of them.

Just because it's a viable option doesn't mean it's commonplace. Iirc, traditionally the Plasma Cannon and Multimeltas were reserved for Demolisher variants. They might also be harder to maintain, for whatever reason, or difficult to make man-portable. Compare that to the fact that every infantry squad in a Guard regiment or PDF can be equipped with portable HBs, ACs, MLs and LCs, and supplied ammunition for it. That's going to make for popular choices for a force that has a logistical chain based on raiding.

So Multi-Meltas are difficult to make portable but Reaper Autocannons are just a quickly modified Autocannon ready to to rock, along with losing those Cyclone Missile Launchers that fire the same rounds as Missile Launchers anyway, with THOSE being apparently impossible to maintain.

Yeah no.

wasn't the reason for the stormcannon beeing introduced that the reaper was expensive to manufacture?

Not Online!!! wrote:
wasn't the reason for the stormcannon beeing introduced that the reaper was expensive to manufacture?

2nd edition chaos codex says the reaper was the first to be developed, later to be improved into the assault cannon. The legions kept it because it was more reliable and easier to maintain. Don't know if that was changed in later editions.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Give me a break. Multi-Meltas are NOT rare equipment.

So rare that every Imperial Guard tank can only have two of them.

Just because it's a viable option doesn't mean it's commonplace. Iirc, traditionally the Plasma Cannon and Multimeltas were reserved for Demolisher variants. They might also be harder to maintain, for whatever reason, or difficult to make man-portable. Compare that to the fact that every infantry squad in a Guard regiment or PDF can be equipped with portable HBs, ACs, MLs and LCs, and supplied ammunition for it. That's going to make for popular choices for a force that has a logistical chain based on raiding.

So Multi-Meltas are difficult to make portable but Reaper Autocannons are just a quickly modified Autocannon ready to to rock, along with losing those Cyclone Missile Launchers that fire the same rounds as Missile Launchers anyway, with THOSE being apparently impossible to maintain.

Yeah no.

Yeah, yes. Cyclones use sophisticated targeting gear that hasn't lasted for CSM, in the same way that in 2nd, CSM Terminators didn't have the targeters that loyalist Terminators did. Also, Cyclones may use different ammunition than MLs even though the common name is the samr. The Frag missile actually has different stats.

And yet, reaper AC were way better in the game too.

Martel732 wrote:
And yet, reaper AC were way better in the game too.

No they weren't. Reapers did D6 damage vs. Assault Cannon D10, making the loyalist weapon much, much better against heavy targets like monsters and tanks. I'd take the Assault Cannon over the Reaper all day.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
And yet, reaper AC were way better in the game too.

No they weren't. Reapers did D6 damage vs. Assault Cannon D10, making the loyalist weapon much, much better against heavy targets like monsters and tanks. I'd take the Assault Cannon over the Reaper all day.

You are free to be wrong about that.

Martel732 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
And yet, reaper AC were way better in the game too.

No they weren't. Reapers did D6 damage vs. Assault Cannon D10, making the loyalist weapon much, much better against heavy targets like monsters and tanks. I'd take the Assault Cannon over the Reaper all day.

You are free to be wrong about that.

Just as you're free to be constantly negative about the armies you play/ed

The Heavy Bolter adequately covered the ground that the Reaper did against infantry. The Reaper wasn't nearly as good against vehicles that the Assault Cannon was. The difference between an average pen roll of 15 vs, 17 was huge, the extra 2 points meant a lot since many common armor values ranged from 17 to 21ish. Likewise wounds dealt to Carnifexes and Bloodthirsters.

So any truth to first born getting additional wounds? Given that an intercessor is (a rather excessive) 5 points more than a tactical, I'm guessing not?

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Give me a break. Multi-Meltas are NOT rare equipment.

So rare that every Imperial Guard tank can only have two of them.

Just because it's a viable option doesn't mean it's commonplace. Iirc, traditionally the Plasma Cannon and Multimeltas were reserved for Demolisher variants. They might also be harder to maintain, for whatever reason, or difficult to make man-portable. Compare that to the fact that every infantry squad in a Guard regiment or PDF can be equipped with portable HBs, ACs, MLs and LCs, and supplied ammunition for it. That's going to make for popular choices for a force that has a logistical chain based on raiding.

So Multi-Meltas are difficult to make portable but Reaper Autocannons are just a quickly modified Autocannon ready to to rock, along with losing those Cyclone Missile Launchers that fire the same rounds as Missile Launchers anyway, with THOSE being apparently impossible to maintain.

Yeah no.

Yeah, yes. Cyclones use sophisticated targeting gear that hasn't lasted for CSM, in the same way that in 2nd, CSM Terminators didn't have the targeters that loyalist Terminators did. Also, Cyclones may use different ammunition than MLs even though the common name is the samr. The Frag missile actually has different stats.

Yeah it just hasn't lasted because. Also the stats aren't different outside the number of shots (with the number of shots being equal in 7th and earlier). They initially priced it in 8th as two MLs for a reason ya know. You also haven't explained how any of the handheld stuff isn't working and they can't get it from vehicles outside "it just doesn't". It's an artificial difference for Renegades that shouldn't exist.

^Though the normal Frag Missile is D6 shots, the Cyclone Frag mode is 2D3, so although Krak mode has the same stats as two Krak missiles, the Frag does not, otherwise it would be 2D6. Even if the stats were the same, that still doesn't mean the ammunition is interchangeable, for whatever reason.

"It just doesn't" is a valid reason if maintenance is poor for lacking the former locgistical advantages a chapter had when it was part of the Imperium. They're on the run, no fortress monasteries, no ties to any Forge Worlds or manufacturing bases. How long do you think fancy equipment works when you can't maintain it?

@ OP:

Highly unlikely. Tacs would then outshine Restartes. Can't have that happening.

 Insectum7 wrote:
^Though the normal Frag Missile is D6 shots, the Cyclone Frag mode is 2D3, so although Krak mode has the same stats as two Krak missiles, the Frag does not, otherwise it would be 2D6. Even if the stats were the same, that still doesn't mean the ammunition is interchangeable, for whatever reason.

"It just doesn't" is a valid reason if maintenance is poor for lacking the former locgistical advantages a chapter had when it was part of the Imperium. They're on the run, no fortress monasteries, no ties to any Forge Worlds or manufacturing bases. How long do you think fancy equipment works when you can't maintain it?

It's been 2 blasts until 8th so clearly they've been the same. Also you'd have a point if killing other Marines for their equipment didn't exist. However it does, so you're totally incorrect.

So basically, you have to go on the belief that Techmarines are incompetent once they turn to Chaos, without being as tied to rules they can't maintain their equipment let alone fix it, the equipment that they use is wildly different from what they're looting from Imperial Guard and they absolutely cannot modify it outside JUST Autocannons, and of course they absolutely no extra equipment or anything they looted from Loyalists. OH and Marines suck at battle plans and therefore lose equipment and Soldiers all the time.

Even in a fictional setting that's just unbelievable.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
^Though the normal Frag Missile is D6 shots, the Cyclone Frag mode is 2D3, so although Krak mode has the same stats as two Krak missiles, the Frag does not, otherwise it would be 2D6. Even if the stats were the same, that still doesn't mean the ammunition is interchangeable, for whatever reason.

"It just doesn't" is a valid reason if maintenance is poor for lacking the former locgistical advantages a chapter had when it was part of the Imperium. They're on the run, no fortress monasteries, no ties to any Forge Worlds or manufacturing bases. How long do you think fancy equipment works when you can't maintain it?

It's been 2 blasts until 8th so clearly they've been the same. Also you'd have a point if killing other Marines for their equipment didn't exist. However it does, so you're totally incorrect.

So basically, you have to go on the belief that Techmarines are incompetent once they turn to Chaos, without being as tied to rules they can't maintain their equipment let alone fix it, the equipment that they use is wildly different from what they're looting from Imperial Guard and they absolutely cannot modify it outside JUST Autocannons, and of course they absolutely no extra equipment or anything they looted from Loyalists. OH and Marines suck at battle plans and therefore lose equipment and Soldiers all the time.

Even in a fictional setting that's just unbelievable.

There's nothing unbelievable about not using guns that you can't get bullets for.

Marines do lose equipment and soldiers all the time, and at the very least, they expend their ammunition and have to replace it. It's far easier to raid PDFs and IG supply ships for Autocannon ammo than it is to raid other Space Marines hoping to hit a jackpot supply of Cyclone ammunition.

What are the Techmarines doing? Probably spending their time repairing as much equipment as they can. Fixing armor, fixing vehicles, etc. Fixing spaceships even, since there's no Imperial dock that's going to repair and refit their ships, and if they try to go for a Chaos one, there's a half decent chance that some other Chaos warband is going to take their ship or scrap it for parts. Techmarines will know their supply chain is busted, so anything that becomes too complicated to maintain get's dropped in favor of equipment with easier logistics.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
^Though the normal Frag Missile is D6 shots, the Cyclone Frag mode is 2D3, so although Krak mode has the same stats as two Krak missiles, the Frag does not, otherwise it would be 2D6. Even if the stats were the same, that still doesn't mean the ammunition is interchangeable, for whatever reason.

"It just doesn't" is a valid reason if maintenance is poor for lacking the former locgistical advantages a chapter had when it was part of the Imperium. They're on the run, no fortress monasteries, no ties to any Forge Worlds or manufacturing bases. How long do you think fancy equipment works when you can't maintain it?

It's been 2 blasts until 8th so clearly they've been the same. Also you'd have a point if killing other Marines for their equipment didn't exist. However it does, so you're totally incorrect.

So basically, you have to go on the belief that Techmarines are incompetent once they turn to Chaos, without being as tied to rules they can't maintain their equipment let alone fix it, the equipment that they use is wildly different from what they're looting from Imperial Guard and they absolutely cannot modify it outside JUST Autocannons, and of course they absolutely no extra equipment or anything they looted from Loyalists. OH and Marines suck at battle plans and therefore lose equipment and Soldiers all the time.

Even in a fictional setting that's just unbelievable.

There's nothing unbelievable about not using guns that you can't get bullets for.

Marines do lose equipment and soldiers all the time, and at the very least, they expend their ammunition and have to replace it. It's far easier to raid PDFs and IG supply ships for Autocannon ammo than it is to raid other Space Marines, hoping to hit a jackpot supply of Cyclone ammunition.

What are the Techmarines doing? Probably spending their time repairing as much equipment as they can. Fixing armor, fixing vehicles, etc. Fixing spaceships even, since there's no Imperial dock that's going to repair and refit their ships, and if they try to go for a Chaos one, there's a half decent chance that some other Chaos warband is going to take their ship or scrap it for parts. Techmarines will know their supply chain is busted, so anything that becomes too complicated to maintain get's dropped in favor of equipment with easier logistics.

So why do they have Reaper Autocannons instead of regular ones?

Why don't they have Multimeltas, which IG has in spades?

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Spoiler:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
^Though the normal Frag Missile is D6 shots, the Cyclone Frag mode is 2D3, so although Krak mode has the same stats as two Krak missiles, the Frag does not, otherwise it would be 2D6. Even if the stats were the same, that still doesn't mean the ammunition is interchangeable, for whatever reason.

"It just doesn't" is a valid reason if maintenance is poor for lacking the former locgistical advantages a chapter had when it was part of the Imperium. They're on the run, no fortress monasteries, no ties to any Forge Worlds or manufacturing bases. How long do you think fancy equipment works when you can't maintain it?

It's been 2 blasts until 8th so clearly they've been the same. Also you'd have a point if killing other Marines for their equipment didn't exist. However it does, so you're totally incorrect.

So basically, you have to go on the belief that Techmarines are incompetent once they turn to Chaos, without being as tied to rules they can't maintain their equipment let alone fix it, the equipment that they use is wildly different from what they're looting from Imperial Guard and they absolutely cannot modify it outside JUST Autocannons, and of course they absolutely no extra equipment or anything they looted from Loyalists. OH and Marines suck at battle plans and therefore lose equipment and Soldiers all the time.

Even in a fictional setting that's just unbelievable.

There's nothing unbelievable about not using guns that you can't get bullets for.

Marines do lose equipment and soldiers all the time, and at the very least, they expend their ammunition and have to replace it. It's far easier to raid PDFs and IG supply ships for Autocannon ammo than it is to raid other Space Marines, hoping to hit a jackpot supply of Cyclone ammunition.

What are the Techmarines doing? Probably spending their time repairing as much equipment as they can. Fixing armor, fixing vehicles, etc. Fixing spaceships even, since there's no Imperial dock that's going to repair and refit their ships, and if they try to go for a Chaos one, there's a half decent chance that some other Chaos warband is going to take their ship or scrap it for parts. Techmarines will know their supply chain is busted, so anything that becomes too complicated to maintain get's dropped in favor of equipment with easier logistics.

So why do they have Reaper Autocannons instead of regular ones?

Why don't they have Multimeltas, which IG has in spades?

Reaper Autocannons might use ammunition that's easy to manufacture, for whatever reason. Low tech ammo for a low tech gun. Multimeltas might not be as common for IG as you think, and iirc they're not available in non-vehicle mounted variants. It's possible that the difficult part about the Multimelta is feeding it power, and the backpack allowing it to be man-portable is the tricky part. I don't think it's a coincidence that the standard CSM Heavy Weapons (up until the Rotor Cannon) were the same weapons that IG squads carried (minus the mortar, because no CSM wants to be part of a mortar team).

So how has this thread gone from : Tacticals might (should) have two wounds to : CSM have a hard time replenishing their resources so they stop using weapons/units even though the fluff says they still use them?

Personally i think normal marines (and csm) should stay at 1wounds and keep their flexibility vs the primaris (gear options).

If anything deserves 2w its cult marines and chosen to mirror the primaris.

How about this: CSM and Loyalists have different weapon options because the designers wanted the factions to play differently, and to reduce the spiky marines effect. Loyalists have more tech, chaos has warp stuff.

There. Done. Now let's not rehash this fluff argument for the thousandth time.

You can argue for any position on chaos marines and they can all sound feasible. Should the game cater to literally every conceivable option, or provide a good range and leave it at that? I would argue the former in which case they should stop creating every conceivable marine chapter, but that's just me....


Back to the original point.

I would actually really like them to mea culpa and align the old marines with the new, making their stats more similar, even if not identical.

They shouldn't be SOOOO much better, but iteratively. This means when they update tac squads etc, they can align them in size without people feeling they HAVE to be primaris to be any good.

The primaris profile is the profile that many (including myself) have argued marines should have for 20 years. It's not a better marine profile, it's what I would consider a 'normal' marine profile.


I expect that GW will eventually redo all the normal marine units as primaris until tac squads and dev squads are primaris and you wouldn't need non primaris versions of those units.

Let's be honest: fluff supports CSM having a lot more than they do. The reason CSM don't have those lore options and only have negatives is that GW hates the faction and shows blatant favoritism towards the pet LSM faction.

Balancing for CSM is built around the philosophy that any of the pros of the faction don't exist outside of fluff while anything that can remotely be considered a drawback has to be represented in mechanics.

hungryugolino wrote:
Let's be honest: fluff supports CSM having a lot more than they do. The reason CSM don't have those lore options and only have negatives is that GW hates the faction and shows blatant favoritism towards the pet LSM faction.

Balancing for CSM is built around the philosophy that any of the pros of the faction don't exist outside of fluff while anything that can remotely be considered a drawback has to be represented in mechanics.

you're not going to get much sympathy - at least CSM get mini options through kitbash with whatever loyal stuff is released.

The xenos armies can't even do that, so they're stuck with nothing at all until GW deigns to release something.

 Hellebore wrote:

hungryugolino wrote:
Let's be honest: fluff supports CSM having a lot more than they do. The reason CSM don't have those lore options and only have negatives is that GW hates the faction and shows blatant favoritism towards the pet LSM faction.

Balancing for CSM is built around the philosophy that any of the pros of the faction don't exist outside of fluff while anything that can remotely be considered a drawback has to be represented in mechanics.

you're not going to get much sympathy - at least CSM get mini options through kitbash with whatever loyal stuff is released.

The xenos armies can't even do that, so they're stuck with nothing at all until GW deigns to release something.

Xenos get shafted too. It's unfortunate for pretty much everyone-Loyalists included, since I'd hazard to think that most people don't actually want to curbstomp foes effortlessly, and would enjoy seeing more variety in their opponents.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Hellebore wrote:

hungryugolino wrote:
Let's be honest: fluff supports CSM having a lot more than they do. The reason CSM don't have those lore options and only have negatives is that GW hates the faction and shows blatant favoritism towards the pet LSM faction.

Balancing for CSM is built around the philosophy that any of the pros of the faction don't exist outside of fluff while anything that can remotely be considered a drawback has to be represented in mechanics.

you're not going to get much sympathy - at least CSM get mini options through kitbash with whatever loyal stuff is released.

The xenos armies can't even do that, so they're stuck with nothing at all until GW deigns to release something.

Xenos get shafted too. It's unfortunate for pretty much everyone-Loyalists included, since I'd hazard to think that most people don't actually want to curbstomp foes effortlessly, and would enjoy seeing more variety in their opponents.

Absolutely. The game requires community and diversity, but if you created tiers of favourtism then people will gravitate towards those fun things that are less work to be fun. Given this is a hobby and fun is the main currency. GW are literally making it harder for non marine players to enjoy the game.

It's an interesting thing as it mirrors structurally (but obviously not ACTUALLY and I'm not claiming any actual victimisation here) racial inequality. You have clear advantages if you are a marine player in terms of support and you are working within an evironment with entrenched favoritism from the authorities that normalise making fun of Xenos, and bigging up marines. You've got a hobby culture of the imperium at the top and everyone else under them. So it's really hard for people to get their voices heard because there's an expectation that they don't matter, that of COURSE marines are the most important and of COURSE the imperium is the focus.

I saw this in a FB post on the GW 40k page, when someone commented on a release that it would be nice to see non marine stuff - the staff actually made fun of that request, like it was fine to tease your customers because if they aren't marines they don't matter.

GW really needs to decide what its product is doing - are they making the imperium the protagonist and everyone else mooks to kill? In which case they need to shift their marketing to a more Space hulk style, where you and your friends take turns playing your chosen marines against the mook aliens. Where everyone starts with their favourite imperial army and that's THEM and anything else is a mook force you pick up cheap to slaughter gloriously in the name of the imperium.

If, however, they are selling a wargame with equally meaningful factions where you the player choose your faction and they are YOU, then GW needs to COMMIT to that by actually treating all their factions equally so players actually feel they've got real choice, rather than 'you can pick a colour of marine that does anything, or make life hard and choose a xenos army that does the same thing worse, with no support and older models'.

GW are currently treating their product like space hulk, but marketing it like its a wargame with real faction choice. It's dishonest and perpetuates a continual cycle of non marine players getting tired of being taken for granted and ignored and either stop playing or switch to marines.

Very few people are masochist enough to stick with an army that is treated like crap and literally made fun of by GW staff...

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
So how has this thread gone from : Tacticals might (should) have two wounds to : CSM have a hard time replenishing their resources so they stop using weapons/units even though the fluff says they still use them?

Personally i think normal marines (and csm) should stay at 1wounds and keep their flexibility vs the primaris (gear options).

If anything deserves 2w its cult marines and chosen to mirror the primaris.

I disagree. I think basic marines should have an extra wound. Infantry have a single wound. Isn't the whole point of the organ implants to make them super-human? Sure, that is partly reflected in the higher toughness of the classic marine vs imperial guardsman, but is that the whole story? the saving throw reflects the armour they wear. I still think a good case could be made for classic marines to have 2 wounds (other than scouts). I'd be happy with Primaris either having an extra pip of toughness compared to classic marines, or maybe even an extra wound (i.e. 3), but if that were to happen then INMHO GW should embark of a massive re-balancing exercise.

I just think classic marines having the same wounds are normal humans, eldar etc. is bonkers. Gronker bonkers even. But hey, won't stop me playing the game and having fun anyways!

 Hellebore wrote:

hungryugolino wrote:
Let's be honest: fluff supports CSM having a lot more than they do. The reason CSM don't have those lore options and only have negatives is that GW hates the faction and shows blatant favoritism towards the pet LSM faction.

Balancing for CSM is built around the philosophy that any of the pros of the faction don't exist outside of fluff while anything that can remotely be considered a drawback has to be represented in mechanics.

you're not going to get much sympathy - at least CSM get mini options through kitbash with whatever loyal stuff is released.

The xenos armies can't even do that, so they're stuck with nothing at all until GW deigns to release something.

Xenos can at least hope for being viable at some point- just look at Necrons. Also, Primaris kits are completely incompatible design-wise with a proper chaos aesthetic.

Keep marines at 1w. They're already resilient against small arms and anti infantry fire. Consider how many marines it takes to drop another marine with their bolters. Right now it takes 5 marines rapid firing to drop a marine on average using boltguns..666×.5×.333×10=1.1 It takes 3 marines if they're in Doctrine and benefitting with a -1 AP. It takes just over 18 Lasgun shots, using an entire Guard Infantry squad to take down a single marine. This is fine.

Instead, give Primaris 1W and toughness 5. Then change the wound chart back to what it was before 8th. Lasguns would be just as effective against Intercessors as they are now, but S4 weapons would get a boost against them. That would put most core infantry back in a better alignment with each other.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Keep marines at 1w. They're already resilient against small arms and anti infantry fire. Consider how many marines it takes to drop another marine with their bolters. Right now it takes 5 marines rapid firing to drop a marine on average using boltguns..666×.5×.333×10=1.1 It takes 3 marines if they're in Doctrine and benefitting with a -1 AP. It takes just over 18 Lasgun shots, using an entire Guard Infantry squad to take down a single marine. This is fine.

Instead, give Primaris 1W and toughness 5. Then change the wound chart back to what it was before 8th. Lasguns would be just as effective against Intercessors as they are now, but S4 weapons would get a boost against them. That would put most core infantry back in a better alignment with each other.

Now that is a really interesting idea. I could live with that!