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.

psipso wrote:
At the beginning of 8th edition the factions that first received the update where the garbage one down to the middle-end of 8th edition. In fact space marines they were bottom tier, and consistently amongst the worst army in the tournament for almost all the 8th edition till the close to the last year of 8th edition when they received the new codexes.

He who laughs last laughs best they said. So it seems that in 9th edition xenos will laugh the best. Join this with the fact that due to covid the beginning of 9th edition warhammer activity is reduced down to the minimum, many tournaments are been delayed, local groups are in stand by, etc... and the result is that look like 9th edition won't be friendly for the space marines.

This is one way viewing it.
SM will get a new codex implementing a unifying approach for several Marine chapters.
This will boost SM to a certain degree.
After this, when some Xenos codices will arrive, the task of GW will be to bring Xenos to a level similar to SM and this will be hard enough.

The difference is, this time around GW have a very clear idea of what they want 9th to be. The first Marine codex obviously suffered a lot from not really knowing what they wanted to be doing or even what was really "good" in the new game system.

It has also been stated numerous times that all of the new codexes were playtested at the same time as each other and many are already finished and ready to go.

psipso wrote:
At the beginning of 8th edition the factions that first received the update where the garbage one down to the middle-end of 8th edition. In fact space marines they were bottom tier, and consistently amongst the worst army in the tournament for almost all the 8th edition till the close to the last year of 8th edition when they received the new codexes.

This is completely false. SM have never been bottom tier or amongst the worst armies.

During index times they were average like most of the factions and their index actually last a couple of months. I had to play 18 months with the ork index.

Even using their index SM weren't that bad comparing to other armies, and even when all the armies got their codex SM weren't that bad before their codex 2.0. But I accept that a large portion of SM players isn't very good at playing the game. It happens when their army is overpowered most of the times, then when it suddenly becomes on par with other factions they have the misconception of being garbage tier. Playing with not too competitive SM lists helps a lot, it's something I suggest to all SM players, especially those ones who started when their army was already broken.

Playing with not too competitive SM lists helps a lot, it's something I suggest to all SM players, especially those ones who started when their army was already broken.

Right.
What I recognized over the years is that Marine players have no deeper understanding of tactics (such as refused flank or symetrie de position).
They just rely on the staying power of Marines and whatnot.

On Marine history -
They were fine in the index, and top tier when they got their codex, and as said it was only a progressive slew of nerfs that seriously changed this. The first 6 months of 8th was defined by Guilliman and the gimmicks.

CA17 brought them down to earth, and the power of Marines steadily declined all through 2018 as newer codexes appeared and we entered the seemingly interminable, but actually not that long, Ynnari+Knight soup meta.

Marines would then get significant points reductions in CA2018 and gain bolter discipline in Jan 2019, which hardly made them top tier but pushed them back up. Ynnari and Knights would get brutally stabbed to death with the big FAQ in late April, and Marines would get their new codex in August, with Iron Hands and Ravenguard arriving in September.

So basically they sucked in the second half of 2018, but this idea they were rubbish all through the edition is difficult to credit.

Yea sorry Marines weren't good in the index, Guilliman was. There were 10 types of loyalist marines and only one was was competitive early on (Ultramarines), one was mid tier (RG) and the rest were either in contention for the worst army in the game (GK) or just bad (IH, IF, etc.).

The only reason those Guilliman builds worked is because of all the rerolls. It allowed them to power through armies. Without Guilliman Ultramarines were not competitive.

Marines at index were basically in the same spot that codex space marines were in 5th. They weren't a great army but could take a special character with one chapter that gave the army a bunch of rerolls to increase their offensive output enough to make them competitive.

Ah, yes, right, it wasn't marines who were good, it was Guilliman.

just like how it wasn't Guard who were good, it was Conscripts.

Tyranids weren't good, it was Hive Tyrants (9 in this case XD)...

And eldar were terrible in 7th if it weren't for Scatbikes....

 Blood Hawk wrote:
Yea sorry Marines weren't good in the index, Guilliman was. There were 10 types of loyalist marines and only one was was competitive early on (Ultramarines), one was mid tier (RG) and the rest were either in contention for the worst army in the game (GK) or just bad (IH, IF, etc.).

The only reason those Guilliman builds worked is because of all the rerolls. It allowed them to power through armies. Without Guilliman Ultramarines were not competitive.

Marines at index were basically in the same spot that codex space marines were in 5th. They weren't a great army but could take a special character with one chapter that gave the army a bunch of rerolls to increase their offensive output enough to make them competitive.

Yeah, not like a bunch of other codexes have only 1 viable tournament build, how I weep for early 8th edition space marines

 Ordana wrote:

 Blood Hawk wrote:
Yea sorry Marines weren't good in the index, Guilliman was. There were 10 types of loyalist marines and only one was was competitive early on (Ultramarines), one was mid tier (RG) and the rest were either in contention for the worst army in the game (GK) or just bad (IH, IF, etc.).

The only reason those Guilliman builds worked is because of all the rerolls. It allowed them to power through armies. Without Guilliman Ultramarines were not competitive.

Marines at index were basically in the same spot that codex space marines were in 5th. They weren't a great army but could take a special character with one chapter that gave the army a bunch of rerolls to increase their offensive output enough to make them competitive.

Yeah, not like a bunch of other codexes have only 1 viable tournament build, how I weep for early 8th edition space marines

Unless you were IF and then you had no competitive builds. I understand you guys are still butt hurt by the new codex but it is getting really old.

 Blood Hawk wrote:

 Ordana wrote:

 Blood Hawk wrote:
Yea sorry Marines weren't good in the index, Guilliman was. There were 10 types of loyalist marines and only one was was competitive early on (Ultramarines), one was mid tier (RG) and the rest were either in contention for the worst army in the game (GK) or just bad (IH, IF, etc.).

The only reason those Guilliman builds worked is because of all the rerolls. It allowed them to power through armies. Without Guilliman Ultramarines were not competitive.

Marines at index were basically in the same spot that codex space marines were in 5th. They weren't a great army but could take a special character with one chapter that gave the army a bunch of rerolls to increase their offensive output enough to make them competitive.

Yeah, not like a bunch of other codexes have only 1 viable tournament build, how I weep for early 8th edition space marines

Unless you were IF and then you had no competitive builds. I understand you guys are still butt hurt by the new codex but it is getting really old.

Also, for the record, they weren't 'competitive' with girlyman in the index. They were god-tier mega destructo death. Probably the most broken army relative to the rest of the field until IH post supplement.

ERJAK wrote:

 Blood Hawk wrote:

 Ordana wrote:

 Blood Hawk wrote:
Yea sorry Marines weren't good in the index, Guilliman was. There were 10 types of loyalist marines and only one was was competitive early on (Ultramarines), one was mid tier (RG) and the rest were either in contention for the worst army in the game (GK) or just bad (IH, IF, etc.).

The only reason those Guilliman builds worked is because of all the rerolls. It allowed them to power through armies. Without Guilliman Ultramarines were not competitive.

Marines at index were basically in the same spot that codex space marines were in 5th. They weren't a great army but could take a special character with one chapter that gave the army a bunch of rerolls to increase their offensive output enough to make them competitive.

Yeah, not like a bunch of other codexes have only 1 viable tournament build, how I weep for early 8th edition space marines

Unless you were IF and then you had no competitive builds. I understand you guys are still butt hurt by the new codex but it is getting really old.

Also, for the record, they weren't 'competitive' with girlyman in the index. They were god-tier mega destructo death. Probably the most broken army relative to the rest of the field until IH post supplement.

Yea G Man was very OP at the index.

 Blackie wrote:

psipso wrote:
At the beginning of 8th edition the factions that first received the update where the garbage one down to the middle-end of 8th edition. In fact space marines they were bottom tier, and consistently amongst the worst army in the tournament for almost all the 8th edition till the close to the last year of 8th edition when they received the new codexes.

This is completely false. SM have never been bottom tier or amongst the worst armies.

During index times they were average like most of the factions and their index actually last a couple of months. I had to play 18 months with the ork index.

Even using their index SM weren't that bad comparing to other armies, and even when all the armies got their codex SM weren't that bad before their codex 2.0. But I accept that a large portion of SM players isn't very good at playing the game. It happens when their army is overpowered most of the times, then when it suddenly becomes on par with other factions they have the misconception of being garbage tier. Playing with not too competitive SM lists helps a lot, it's something I suggest to all SM players, especially those ones who started when their army was already broken.

Errr...

 Blackie wrote:
This is completely false. SM have never been bottom tier or amongst the worst armies.

You talking C:SM or all non-Deathwatch/ Grey Knights loyalist marines? Because I certainly remember a time with Codex: Dark Angels was the bottom of the barrel. The list below might refresh some people's minds. To be certain, a number of the are allied armies which muddy the water, but to claim space marines were never at the bottom is not quite right.

2017 ITC Data for Armies taking top 3 spots in GT or Major

69 Astra Militarum
59 Ynnari
39 Dark Eldar
39 Daemons
34 Chaos Space Marines
29 Tyranids
31 Imperial Knights
25 Eldar
23 Ultramarines
21 T’au Empire
22 Orks
17 Thousand Sons
14 Death Guard
12 Genestealer Cults
11 Adeptus Custodes
8 Sisters of Battle
8 Harlequins
8 Blood Angels
8 Grey Knights
8 Adeptus Mechanicus
6 Space Marines
5 Necrons
4 Deathwatch
3 Officio Assassinorum
2 Renegade Knights
2 Space Wolves
2 Dark Angels

^Sure, but UM are sitting right there with 23 wins, too. They are the army on the cover of the SM book.

Where would Eldar sit if they split out Alaitoc? Or Tyranids if you split out Kraken?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

psipso wrote:
At the beginning of 8th edition the factions that first received the update where the garbage one down to the middle-end of 8th edition. In fact space marines they were bottom tier, and consistently amongst the worst army in the tournament for almost all the 8th edition till the close to the last year of 8th edition when they received the new codexes.

This is completely false. SM have never been bottom tier or amongst the worst armies.

During index times they were average like most of the factions and their index actually last a couple of months. I had to play 18 months with the ork index.

Even using their index SM weren't that bad comparing to other armies, and even when all the armies got their codex SM weren't that bad before their codex 2.0. But I accept that a large portion of SM players isn't very good at playing the game. It happens when their army is overpowered most of the times, then when it suddenly becomes on par with other factions they have the misconception of being garbage tier. Playing with not too competitive SM lists helps a lot, it's something I suggest to all SM players, especially those ones who started when their army was already broken.

Errr...

Shhh stop ruining peoples narrative about how every marine release of anything is automatically a chad thunderwang and makes their army obsolete.

 Insectum7 wrote:
^Sure, but UM are sitting right there with 23 wins, too. They are the army on the cover of the SM book.

Where would Eldar sit if they split out Alaitoc? Or Tyranids if you split out Kraken?

A fair portion of those Ultramarine wins likely came in dev doctrine all game marine timeline and the beginning of the edition when people were using gman and storm ravens (index - no rule of 3).

Full RR Gman ultras lists were actually not "competitive" the armies win rate as a whole was below 50%. It was literally just the best the army could do at the time. Space marine codex is was in a dead heat for worst codex in the game along with greyknights. It's not debatable as in - if you debate it you are just lying to yourself. Yet...at the time there was still a fair amount of hatred for marines. Because there is always hatred of marines lol. Also there is always excessive hate of Ultramarines on top of it...because of other jealous snowflake marines combined with typical marine haters who get made every-time Ultras get a model release. Like...Did you not know Ultras get the best model support? You could have picked them - you chose to be a snowflake - that is on you.

Alaitoc (was never pure alitoc anyways - you are literally just talking about the fly wing with eldar soup) - sub ulthwe or siamhan....you would not see a large shift in win rate. Ulthwe primary had a 55%+ win rate in the middle of Ynnari dominance if I remember correctly. Honestly there is no objective way to look at it. Every army build is slightly different for aldari. Aliatoc fly wing was game breaking and allowed to exist along with Ynnari for over a year. Just take it all with a grain of salt.

The data here shows xenos were in fact competitive in 8th.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
^Sure, but UM are sitting right there with 23 wins, too. They are the army on the cover of the SM book.

Where would Eldar sit if they split out Alaitoc? Or Tyranids if you split out Kraken?

A fair portion of those Ultramarine wins came in dev doctrine all game marine timeline and the beginning of the edition when people were using gman and storm ravens (index - no rule of 3).

Gman ultras lists were actually not "competitive" the armies win rate as a whole was below 50%.

Alaitoc (was never pure alitoc anyways - you are literally just talking about the fly wing) - sub ulthwe or siamhan....you would not see a large shift in win rate. Honestly there is no objective way to look at it. Every army build is slightly different. Aliatoc fly wing was game breaking and allowed to exist along with Ynnari for over a year. Just take it all with a grain of salt.

The data here shows xenos were in fact competitive in 8th.

Yes, Xenos were competitive. As-in, some specific builds of Xenos were competitve, if you had the right Dex or mix of Dexes.

The same could be said of Space Marines-only Space Marines are a single Codex, whereas Xenos is an entire (and highly unrelated) superfaction.

There was no Dev Doctrine in 2017. The information I responded to was all 2017.

 Insectum7 wrote:
There was no Dev Doctrine in 2017. The information I responded to was all 2017.

2017 - got it... 5 storm ravens or gman Ultras with razors....middle of the pack...SO OP.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
There was no Dev Doctrine in 2017. The information I responded to was all 2017.

2017 - got it... 5 storm ravens or gman Ultras with razors....middle of the pack...SO OP.

SM combined is above Eldar, and before the Eldar and Nid books came out it was dominating. So sure, for a short while it was OP.

 wuestenfux wrote:

I'm really just waiting to see how the Marine/Necron codexes turn out.

In our gaming group, they have played three times Marines vs. Necrons from the new Indomitus box.
And Necrons were without chance.
I wouldn't be too enthusiastic about the Necron codex.

The Indomnitus box is a joke in terms of competitiveness. It's like GW saw the "NPC faction" meme and said: "hold our beer..."

I don't see what that has to do with the Necron codex, though. It could (it probably won't, but it could) fix all the problems and actually make Necrons competitive with Marines. Anything is possible...

 Blood Hawk wrote:

 Ordana wrote:

 Blood Hawk wrote:
Yea sorry Marines weren't good in the index, Guilliman was. There were 10 types of loyalist marines and only one was was competitive early on (Ultramarines), one was mid tier (RG) and the rest were either in contention for the worst army in the game (GK) or just bad (IH, IF, etc.).

The only reason those Guilliman builds worked is because of all the rerolls. It allowed them to power through armies. Without Guilliman Ultramarines were not competitive.

Marines at index were basically in the same spot that codex space marines were in 5th. They weren't a great army but could take a special character with one chapter that gave the army a bunch of rerolls to increase their offensive output enough to make them competitive.

Yeah, not like a bunch of other codexes have only 1 viable tournament build, how I weep for early 8th edition space marines

Unless you were IF and then you had no competitive builds. I understand you guys are still butt hurt by the new codex but it is getting really old.

Or you did what 90% of matine players actually did and paint the appropriate special charictor or whatever's required in their colour scheme and presto chango Ultramarines and Gman comes in yellow, Red, Gold, White, purple.
So yeah this my power armour is painted a different colour so ymthat sub faction being OP doesn't mean the codex was OP got old along time ago. Especially when choas/Knights, Tau, Drukari, Eldar, Tyranids etc all get zero sympathy when they complain about units being over costed or sub faction locked, or that they got 1 functional subfaction trait which is OP then a mass of trash in their Codex.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
There was no Dev Doctrine in 2017. The information I responded to was all 2017.

2017 - got it... 5 storm ravens or gman Ultras with razors....middle of the pack...SO OP.

SM combined is above Eldar, and before the Eldar and Nid books came out it was dominating. So sure, for a short while it was OP.

1 team has way more tickets to the lotto. Win Rate is what matters in this discussion.

Yeah, those GK players totaly were painting their stuff as something else. Good thing there were no other units with same arment in the game, so you could never get a legal WYSIWYG army.

Ice_can wrote:

 Blood Hawk wrote:

 Ordana wrote:

 Blood Hawk wrote:
Yea sorry Marines weren't good in the index, Guilliman was. There were 10 types of loyalist marines and only one was was competitive early on (Ultramarines), one was mid tier (RG) and the rest were either in contention for the worst army in the game (GK) or just bad (IH, IF, etc.).

The only reason those Guilliman builds worked is because of all the rerolls. It allowed them to power through armies. Without Guilliman Ultramarines were not competitive.

Marines at index were basically in the same spot that codex space marines were in 5th. They weren't a great army but could take a special character with one chapter that gave the army a bunch of rerolls to increase their offensive output enough to make them competitive.

Yeah, not like a bunch of other codexes have only 1 viable tournament build, how I weep for early 8th edition space marines

Unless you were IF and then you had no competitive builds. I understand you guys are still butt hurt by the new codex but it is getting really old.

Or you did what 90% of matine players actually did and paint the appropriate special charictor or whatever's required in their colour scheme and presto chango Ultramarines and Gman comes in yellow, Red, Gold, White, purple.
So yeah this my power armour is painted a different colour so ymthat sub faction being OP doesn't mean the codex was OP got old along time ago. Especially when choas/Knights, Tau, Drukari, Eldar, Tyranids etc all get zero sympathy when they complain about units being over costed or sub faction locked, or that they got 1 functional subfaction trait which is OP then a mass of trash in their Codex.

People meta chase in 40k. That is been a thing since what 2nd ed? The fact that it is easier to do with marines doesn't change what it is.

Ice_can wrote:

 Blood Hawk wrote:

 Ordana wrote:

 Blood Hawk wrote:
Yea sorry Marines weren't good in the index, Guilliman was. There were 10 types of loyalist marines and only one was was competitive early on (Ultramarines), one was mid tier (RG) and the rest were either in contention for the worst army in the game (GK) or just bad (IH, IF, etc.).

The only reason those Guilliman builds worked is because of all the rerolls. It allowed them to power through armies. Without Guilliman Ultramarines were not competitive.

Marines at index were basically in the same spot that codex space marines were in 5th. They weren't a great army but could take a special character with one chapter that gave the army a bunch of rerolls to increase their offensive output enough to make them competitive.

Yeah, not like a bunch of other codexes have only 1 viable tournament build, how I weep for early 8th edition space marines

Unless you were IF and then you had no competitive builds. I understand you guys are still butt hurt by the new codex but it is getting really old.

Or you did what 90% of matine players actually did and paint the appropriate special charictor or whatever's required in their colour scheme and presto chango Ultramarines and Gman comes in yellow, Red, Gold, White, purple.
So yeah this my power armour is painted a different colour so ymthat sub faction being OP doesn't mean the codex was OP got old along time ago. Especially when choas/Knights, Tau, Drukari, Eldar, Tyranids etc all get zero sympathy when they complain about units being over costed or sub faction locked, or that they got 1 functional subfaction trait which is OP then a mass of trash in their Codex.

LOL. The best of the options does not mean OP. It means the best of the options.
DE had Flayed skull and poison tounge. Both very good. IMO better overall but no vect...It is not the situation you are describing where one is good and the others are trash.
Tau sept is auto include...sure. Best stratagems/ Best characters/ best trait overall (in a book with pretty bad traits honestly). No matter though...the trait you are using likely doesn't even get used in a game...The choice literally boils down to - what stratagems do I want access to - or do I want long strike in this army...You could change the sept of tau forces and it would make very little difference in their winrate.
Choas? Oh all your best stratagems are playable in any CSM army because strats are mostly bound to god type? Next...
Eldar...Ynnari????? literally pick your units Craft world based on what strats/relics you want - while mixing detachments...and including allies who benifit from your OP spells which are cast outside of deny range. LOLOLOLOL
Tyranid new supplement is literally the only army that fits your narrative - that supplement actually could have been okay if not for all the rules being hive fleet locked.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blood Hawk wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Blood Hawk wrote:

 Ordana wrote:

 Blood Hawk wrote:
Yea sorry Marines weren't good in the index, Guilliman was. There were 10 types of loyalist marines and only one was was competitive early on (Ultramarines), one was mid tier (RG) and the rest were either in contention for the worst army in the game (GK) or just bad (IH, IF, etc.).

The only reason those Guilliman builds worked is because of all the rerolls. It allowed them to power through armies. Without Guilliman Ultramarines were not competitive.

Marines at index were basically in the same spot that codex space marines were in 5th. They weren't a great army but could take a special character with one chapter that gave the army a bunch of rerolls to increase their offensive output enough to make them competitive.

Yeah, not like a bunch of other codexes have only 1 viable tournament build, how I weep for early 8th edition space marines

Unless you were IF and then you had no competitive builds. I understand you guys are still butt hurt by the new codex but it is getting really old.

Or you did what 90% of matine players actually did and paint the appropriate special charictor or whatever's required in their colour scheme and presto chango Ultramarines and Gman comes in yellow, Red, Gold, White, purple.
So yeah this my power armour is painted a different colour so ymthat sub faction being OP doesn't mean the codex was OP got old along time ago. Especially when choas/Knights, Tau, Drukari, Eldar, Tyranids etc all get zero sympathy when they complain about units being over costed or sub faction locked, or that they got 1 functional subfaction trait which is OP then a mass of trash in their Codex.

People meta chase in 40k. That is been a thing since what 2nd ed? The fact that it is easier to do with marines doesn't change what it is.

You are correct but it's also not the best annalogy because gman and ultras weren't actually ever doing well. Unless you are counting index.

Xeno, Marines are good. Really good. It's more of a problem casually (since everything is just good on its own, it's hard to tone down a list if you're facing a new player or someone who's playing a bad faction) than it is competitively, but Marines are good.

There are many issues here:

People automatically want to start with a human faction - that's just human nature. Imperial Guard and Space Marines are extremely cool in their own way. Who wouldn't want to see a WW2 army with laser guns, up to its neck in evil alien invaders? Who would turn down super-strength and the ability to laugh in the face of death?

The humans are painted in a very heroic light which contradicts the fluff that the Imperium is a nightmare which refused to die. Therefore, anyone who wants to be the "good guy" plays Imperium.

Most of the human factions are allies, and poor Codices meant they were required to be taken together for best advantage - but what an advantage, to have Guard, Marines and Knights in one army!

This ended up creating a massive over-representation of Space Marine armies in particular, which in turn leads GW to focus only on this product line at the expense of almost everything else.

The GW has long had a rule about aliens being entirely alien and impossible for humans to understand. This is why the BL doesn't accept fiction written from an alien POV (that and they were fed up of comedy Cockney orks). It's also why all the older codices were written from the Imperial POV, which led to each xenos codex being full of mystery when it should have given players extensive knowledge about that race. What, someone out there thought keeping secrets from the faction's own players was a good idea?

Compared to the time and attention lavished on Space Marines in particular, almost every xenos army has been left behind. The Eldar are the same now as in 1998. When was the last time the Tyranids, Tau or Eldar got a massive refresh, or perhaps new units that were actually viable, new weapons, new rules for existing weapons, etc? Multiple Eldar factions must ally because only one has a specific transport, for example.

Xenos armies, unlike Imperium and Chaos, are extremely one-dimensional. Tau shoot. Tyranids melee. Eldar move really fast. Wow, such development, such variety.

The xenos factions need a massive refresh, perhaps a total reboot in fact.

EDIT: For the people saying the Indomnitus box is a massacre, my FLGS once had a 40K demo game with ten slugga and choppa Orks and a trukk versus five Space Marines with a flamer and missile launcher. Even though the GW employee let me have 6+ invulnerable saving throws for all models - and I made nearly half a dozen consecutively - I couldn't get halfway across the table. When I suggested we double the number of Orks, he looked at me like I was some kind of supernormal genius.

 Insectum7 wrote:
^Sure, but UM are sitting right there with 23 wins, too. They are the army on the cover of the SM book.

Where would Eldar sit if they split out Alaitoc? Or Tyranids if you split out Kraken?

I don't know. I am not even sure why Ultramarines were separated out beyond Guilliman being that present as to form sub-faction branch. At the same time, I consider Blood Angels, Dark Angels and Space Wolves their own faction as they have their own codex. At least for now. None of them were doing that great. I remember back around that time I didn't have that much difficulty beating Blood Angels and Dark Angels with my Abbadon-less, few Cultists Black Legion army at a casual level. The only thing that really changed was Warp Time was eventually nerfed after most of those games. I kinda felt bad for the Blood Angels player as even his smash captain wasn't that good since I always took the Murder Sword and could MW him away.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
There was no Dev Doctrine in 2017. The information I responded to was all 2017.

2017 - got it... 5 storm ravens or gman Ultras with razors....middle of the pack...SO OP.

SM combined is above Eldar, and before the Eldar and Nid books came out it was dominating. So sure, for a short while it was OP.

1 team has way more tickets to the lotto. Win Rate is what matters in this discussion.

29 SM codex combined wins puts it equal to Nids. Win rate can easily be not usedul as a lot of nubs play marines, too.