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'm not sure I've ever played my marines to their fullest potential. Just realized that on top of all the strats I despise, marines also have Combat Doctrines, which give -4AP to every plasma weapon on specific turns? And bolter discipline gives full range rapid fire weapons?

IMO marines didn't need these buffs on top of already having such a decent points/performance ratio. So how can I make sure I cannot take advantage of the stuff I consider OP?

Do you have to use combat doctrines? Or must I always field a soup list in order to eliminate combat doctrines? Haven't thought about using soup before but I could add some Inquisition or Admech to my army I suppose, just to get rid of those doctrines.. Dont mind losing CP either, strats are way OP

On another note - Do you ever nerf your army on purpose? I usually strive to making my lists as "fluffy" as possible, and this often results in unit choices that aren't anywhere near top-tier competitive. I'm guessing I'm not the only one...?

Inquisition doesn't remove doctrines anymore so that doesn't work.

You could simply dictate you don't use them. Technically illegal but as it's only gain without drawback I doubt opponents complain if you don't use them. Except biggest try hard tournament players to whom if game isn't tournament game or practice for one it's worthless game.

Admech it is then, thanks. I admit I've been intrigued by some of those AM units that are from the Rogue Trader rulebook illustrations, so this will give me an excuse to get some.

tauist wrote:


On another note - Do you ever nerf your army on purpose? I usually strive to making my lists as "fluffy" as possible, and this often results in unit choices that aren't anywhere near top-tier competitive. I'm guessing I'm not the only one...?

Not one purpose but I have often forgotten to play a stratagem, or a unique rule or something along those lines. In a friendly if the opponent knows his stuff they may remind you. I'm often willing to let it slide. If I forget to apply my Invul saves or something it's like I moved a tank into the open and you can hit him with half a dozen HW's. My mistake is my mistake.

Ever since the new SM-codex launched last summer I've "forgot" to use my Doctrines with my Salamanders (with the exception of their chapter-specific one, which is still quite limited to say the least.)

Initially I did actually forget them, but then I realized that I don't need them on top of all the other army-wide rules I have..

With that said, it looks like Salamanders CT will take the biggest hit of all chapters in our next codex (for some reason), so I might "start to remember" using Doctrines soon. We'll see.

regarding strats. if you feel a partiuclar strat is cheesy and unsporting, don't use it.

tauist wrote:
I'm not sure I've ever played my marines to their fullest potential. Just realized that on top of all the strats I despise, marines also have Combat Doctrines, which give -4AP to every plasma weapon on specific turns? And bolter discipline gives full range rapid fire weapons?

IMO marines didn't need these buffs on top of already having such a decent points/performance ratio. So how can I make sure I cannot take advantage of the stuff I consider OP?

Do you have to use combat doctrines? Or must I always field a soup list in order to eliminate combat doctrines? Haven't thought about using soup before but I could add some Inquisition or Admech to my army I suppose, just to get rid of those doctrines.. Dont mind losing CP either, strats are way OP

On another note - Do you ever nerf your army on purpose? I usually strive to making my lists as "fluffy" as possible, and this often results in unit choices that aren't anywhere near top-tier competitive. I'm guessing I'm not the only one...?

Play by the rules, but avoid fielding the cheesiest combos. Any classic marine army for example can still be pretty solid but not OP at all. Go souping if you like that second faction, not because you feel you're forced to. SM have plenty of units that never see the table anyway.

I've done it a lot through several editions against opponents that couldn't really field a competitive army. It's amazing as you get to play with the full codex, not just the most 10-15 most popular units.

The last game of 8th I played was with my DA.
1) Strats - other than a basic re-roll I didn't spend a single CP.
2) PA - This book had been out about 2 weeks. I didn't own it yet (and still don't & won't). Whatever's in there? I don't use it. Knowing 9th was imminent I saw no reason to waste the $. whatever's in there will either be rolled into the new codex/supplement or it'll be dropped. Either way, no reason to own a lame duck book.
3) Doctines. I forgot about them. All I had on me was the DA Codex & they aren't in there.... My opponent didn't even realize it. I didn't need them.

(other than ignoring/forgetting special rules) Do I nerf my own forces? Maybe....? Depends upon your PoV I guess.
See, as long as it's a legal option, I build my armies as pleases me. The general hive mind gestalts opinion of what's optimal/how it "should" be built, how the tourney crowd does it, is not my concern. MY enjoyment of it it is. I built it like this for a reason, I'll worry about how to win with it. And I'll be fine. And so sometimes you'll see a tac squad sporting both a Lascannon & a flamer..... Or a character that's surely appears equipped sub-optimally... Or forces that include things like drop pods - for everyone! Or forces that don't include ________ , no matter how awesome _______ is. Sometimes you'll see something/some combo & the reason for it's inclusion is......I simply liked how it looked.
So you might look at one of my forces & think "OMG, this guys an idiot." But on my end? My force is working as intended. Like I said, depends on your PoV.

This approach is hardly necessary if you use Tactical marines and non-optimal units. With all the buffs to Space Marines you can play a thematically appropriate group of models in your army and still do pretty okay if you're a decent player. I would go with that approach.

I just did a game of epic using 8th ed rules (halved ranges) and i was fighting tau, to make the game more fun for my friend i didn't use

.doctrines (heavy/rapid fire/assault)
.salamanders master crafted re-rolls
CP/.stratagems other than build buffs (making a chapter master out of a captain) and the occasional re-roll for saves or charges etc..

He basically did the same. and we had a fun game. (well except when i shot down one of his tiger sharks, there was some salt there)

Among friends you can do whatever you like so long as you both agree. there isn't a secret GW rules enforcer lurking around the corner ready to punish you like a commissar.

I mean, yeah. Part of the unspoken skill of 40k is crafting your list and what rules you should and shouldn't use for the game around the balance between what you know your opponent is bringing and what you are bringing. Don't think a rule is fair? Don't use it. Don't think the points are fair? Give someone extra points.

tauist wrote:I'm not sure I've ever played my marines to their fullest potential. Just realized that on top of all the strats I despise, marines also have Combat Doctrines, which give -4AP to every plasma weapon on specific turns? And bolter discipline gives full range rapid fire weapons?

IMO marines didn't need these buffs on top of already having such a decent points/performance ratio. So how can I make sure I cannot take advantage of the stuff I consider OP?

Do you have to use combat doctrines? Or must I always field a soup list in order to eliminate combat doctrines? Haven't thought about using soup before but I could add some Inquisition or Admech to my army I suppose, just to get rid of those doctrines.. Dont mind losing CP either, strats are way OP

On another note - Do you ever nerf your army on purpose? I usually strive to making my lists as "fluffy" as possible, and this often results in unit choices that aren't anywhere near top-tier competitive. I'm guessing I'm not the only one...?

Largely the same here.

I'm more than happy just not using doctrines or abilities on abilities on abilities. Aura effects? In-datasheet rules? Yeah, sure thing, but I'm not leafing through my book to see if I get an extra reroll or point of AP. So, against players who aren't as familiar with the codex, I just don't mention it, and against people who are, unless they specifically call out "hey, you actually get +1AP here!", I also won't do anything about it.

I've played games against essentially mirror match SM lists, and had the other player say "shouldn't you be getting XYZ buff right now?" and I usually just reply "I mean, I'm happy ignoring that if you are".


My golden rule for being worried about being OP is take the units you want. Don't take units you don't like in order to "nerf" your list. Either take a smaller army, or don't use certain rules or abilities - keep to the basics, if you must. For me, the units I want are usually pretty fluffy - but in the case of Primaris, are also pretty damn powerful in places (my Primaris Ninth Company, for example, will have a fair few Aggressors, Eradicators, Hellblasters, and Eliminators in it - all very capable units, but also a fluffy formation). In cases where I think it might be a bit too skewed, I either make my list smaller, give my enemy more CP, play a bit more lazily, or something else like that.

People need to get over Doctrines. They aren't a problem, especially since you can't stick to the same one for a whole game and are forced to move. Now, the Super Doctrines are a whole other story.

Just have me make your lists for you!

My marine lists all end up terrible!

Honestly though, what I've seen other players do if they wanted to tone things down a bit, is that they only used the three (3 in 8th ed) core strats and ignored the others. That really seemed to balance them back out a bit more.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
People need to get over Doctrines. They aren't a problem, especially since you can't stick to the same one for a whole game and are forced to move. Now, the Super Doctrines are a whole other story.

And it’s really only some of the super doctrines that are way to good.

The BA one gives +1 attack on the first round of combat, which is nice but not really broken, you also have to wait for the 3rd battle round to use it.

The IH super doctrine isn’t nearly as strong now in 9th Ed because you can’t stay in it and everything besides infantry gets to move and fire heavy with no penalty, so really all it is is reroll 1s the first battle round With heavy weapons, good but not hideously OP like before.

IF is pretty good, +1 damage vs vehicles and buildings the first round with heavy weapons.

SW 1 extra hit on natural 6s in melee is pretty nice but not game breaking, thankfully they thought ahead so it does not stack with the +1 to hit from their chapter tactic.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
People need to get over Doctrines. They aren't a problem, especially since you can't stick to the same one for a whole game and are forced to move. Now, the Super Doctrines are a whole other story.

It's funny because I've been on this forum for a while and I remember how long it took you to get over scatterbikes.

And it was the end of 7th edition.

Thanks for your thoughts! Good insight and lots for me to think about.

Still think I'm going to add a small allied force to my army in the future, thinking about it gave me plenty of good ideas why they might be tagging along in terms of fluff. I'll collect a few units all from different factions so I can change the ally unit for a given game (just one or two units max) to spice things up. Its all good.

Cheers

the_scotsman wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
People need to get over Doctrines. They aren't a problem, especially since you can't stick to the same one for a whole game and are forced to move. Now, the Super Doctrines are a whole other story.

It's funny because I've been on this forum for a while and I remember how long it took you to get over scatterbikes.

And it was the end of 7th edition.

What's the point you're trying to make?

tauist wrote:
Thanks for your thoughts! Good insight and lots for me to think about.

Still think I'm going to add a small allied force to my army in the future, thinking about it gave me plenty of good ideas why they might be tagging along in terms of fluff. I'll collect a few units all from different factions so I can change the ally unit for a given game (just one or two units max) to spice things up. Its all good.

Cheers

And this weeks guest stars are _______.

Isn't taking a marine from another chapter breaking the battle forge? So maybe just take one character and a unit from your normal army, as a succesor chapter.