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.

people realize BTW that the heavy bolter on heavy intercessors is a "one per squad" weapon right? (honest question as I didn't notice that immediatly, I'm too used to primaris not having that option)

 Alwrath wrote:
So instead of creating new units and innovating with new units and rules you want GW to just throw in the towel? Also what is " gameplay health " ? Gameplay is setting up your models on the table, rolling the dice, and following the rules. Please tell us about this new definition you have created called " gameplay health " and what does it entail? Health is a term used for living breathing people/animals that are actually alive, not plastic models...

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nalim wrote:
They aren't good for gameplay health.

Think of 40K design space as an ecosystem. Marines are taking more than their fair share of the resources/design space of the ecosystem, gobbling up army traits that used to be the defining traits of other factions, as well as increasing in stats in a way that puts them well above previous level of inter-factional model-to-model balance.

"How do Space Marine players feel about the Meta", you ask?

I've not really noticed much of a difference at all. I'm not seeing anyone rush out to buy a Space Marine army and jump on this Space Marine bandwagon.

Are some people griping about Space Marine rules? Yeah, it's the guy that "quit playing after 3rd" but follows every single thing that GW releases religiously and won't go away, he just hangs around to whine.

Most people are still playing their armies, learning what makes them effective with the new rules, and having a pretty good time when they can get games in.

All this 'meta' talk sounds kinda silly, considering most of the globe has COVID-19 restrictions. I've always had a theory about the hardest complainers about a game being people who don't frequently play, and this isn't helping my opinion.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

Are some people griping about Space Marine rules? Yeah, it's the guy that "quit playing after 3rd" but follows every single thing that GW releases religiously and won't go away, he just hangs around to whine.
. . .I've always had a theory about the hardest complainers about a game being people who don't frequently play, and this isn't helping my opinion.

There might be a couple, but a lot of the complaints are coming from people who've played pretty recently.

 charz wrote:
Now that Space Marine 40,000 is set in stone for the forseeable future, how do you Marine players feel? I ask because my local meta has become mirror matches of marines, or non marine players playing each other.

I’ve played way too long to believe anything in 40K is set in stone for long.

Now that smol marines are here to stay and further

Yeah I don’t buy that either.

models and buffs are coming out, do you all have problems finding games?

Yeah but it’s the same COViD meta, not the 40K meta.

Again to touch on the "nobody plays against Marines except Marines" comment, this is across the board, except the highschool kid we have. This is before your smol marines where known not to be legened bound.

I see this becoming worse as time goes on, I know marines are not winning every tournament, but after looking at the obviously weaker Necron codex coming, are any of you experiencing the double edged sword of being the most powerful and common faction?

The interesting thing about the current marine dominance is that it's more at the casual level than the competitive level. I mean don't get me wrong, Salamanders are probably the strongest faction right now. But it's not nearly as bad as, say, Iron Hands were. There are multiple competitive non-space-marine lists that can challenge marines.

But that's the issue: there are multiple lists, not multiple armies. You can engineer a super competitive list that can challenge marines. But what you can't really do is just take a bunch of random models of another faction and go up against a bunch of random space marine models.

Essentially, the issue is that most of space marines' power comes not from particular units but just from the overall army rules. For example, why do space marines not only get their faction rules on their entire army, but also doctrines and super doctrines, whereas the chaos space marine variants get inferior faction rules that only apply to certain units, with no doctrines or super doctrines? There is no good balance reason for things to be set up this way, and it makes even not particularly powerful space marine units competitive compared to the less powerful choices in other armies.

This means that almost any collection of junk you can throw together is going to end up being pretty good, and much better than a random collection of junk thrown together from pretty much any other faction.

Ironically, ideally it'd be great if every faction was like space marines and could take random junk and be good. But that's not how the game is right now. Which means you have one faction that roflstomps in less competitive play. And that's a big problem for a game where the vast majority of players are not particularly competitive, but who still want a game without a predetermined outcome.

IMO the biggest concern is that GW has been unwilling to put out any sort of statement acknowledging the frustrations people are feeling. Because if GW doesn't think there's an issue, there's unlikely to be anything done to fix it.

We have to hope that GW is unwilling to say anything because it doesn't want to suppress sales, but that the new codex is actually going to nerf the generically powerful parts of marines. But that's putting a lot of faith in a company that hasn't generally repaid that faith in the past.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
Are some people griping about Space Marine rules? Yeah, it's the guy that "quit playing after 3rd" but follows every single thing that GW releases religiously and won't go away, he just hangs around to whine.

I know one guy like that. Ironically, he's not someone sick of the Marines; he's our Salamanders Hipster who hasn't played between 3rd and 9th but was, I guess, writing fluff for them or something since well before they became the most broken thing since Humpty Dumpty smashed a mirror with a Thunder Hammer. He tried to convince us that they weren't broken until he actually played a game.

All this 'meta' talk sounds kinda silly, considering most of the globe has COVID-19 restrictions. I've always had a theory about the hardest complainers about a game being people who don't frequently play, and this isn't helping my opinion.

A lot of gaming happens over Tabletop Simulator, which is a functional way to play, if harder to paint models with. It's great for getting to try a variety of forces without getting the plague, though! You learn things.

-Sometimes these are rudimentary, like precisely why matched play doesn't allow your Endless Cacophanying Prescienced Plasma Terminators to deep strike on Turn 1
-Rough Riders are hilarious with their pony gas masks, but last about as long as you'd expect actual ponies to last on a 42nd millenium battlefield
-Holy Balls, Keepers of Secrets are nuts, and a single Fiend of Slaanesh on one wound humping a Rhino that apparently finds it smells too alluring to drive away from, that can win you the game
-JESUS WHY ARE SALAMANDERS FLAMESTORM AGGRESSORS WITH LONG RANGE MARKSMEN, WHO LET THAT THROUGH QA

yukishiro1 wrote:
Essentially, the issue is that most of space marines' power comes not from particular units but just from the overall army rules. This means that almost any collection of junk you can throw together is going to end up being pretty good, and much better than a random collection of junk thrown together from pretty much any other faction.

We recently ran a series of 'test' games with Chaos Marines sporting 2x wounds base. There was obviously a point disparity, though I'm not sure how it was calculated or what the calculations were based on- we just rolled with it. The other factions we were playing did quite well, but there was a notable improvement with Chaos Marines.

However, one of the most competitive players we know runs Admech and Guard, and he's still entirely capable of crushing everything.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

Are some people griping about Space Marine rules? Yeah, it's the guy that "quit playing after 3rd" but follows every single thing that GW releases religiously and won't go away, he just hangs around to whine.
. . .I've always had a theory about the hardest complainers about a game being people who don't frequently play, and this isn't helping my opinion.

There might be a couple, but a lot of the complaints are coming from people who've played pretty recently.

You say that, but put about 8 or so people on ignore, and all these threads go effectively silent.
Its pretty remarkable.

Voss wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

Are some people griping about Space Marine rules? Yeah, it's the guy that "quit playing after 3rd" but follows every single thing that GW releases religiously and won't go away, he just hangs around to whine.
. . .I've always had a theory about the hardest complainers about a game being people who don't frequently play, and this isn't helping my opinion.

There might be a couple, but a lot of the complaints are coming from people who've played pretty recently.

You say that, but put about 8 or so people on ignore, and all these threads go effectively silent.
Its pretty remarkable.

28 unique posters in this thread and it has not even filled two pages yet.

 Insectum7 wrote:
There might be a couple, but a lot of the complaints are coming from people who've played pretty recently.

You say that, but let me put it to you this way:

I'm not a 40k expert, I never will be. But I've got a pretty solid understanding of Necromunda, because I've gone through a lot of campaigns. I can sit and read when people on the internet are passionately complaining about certain things- well, they're usually lying when they say that they've played it out, it's very likely they're just playing one-off skirmish games, they don't know how to put down terrain, they're not using tactics cards at all, or they've taken some dude's house rules as 'official rules gospel', etc. Whatever the case is- they're not playing campaigns, or they're not doing something right.

And you know what? Here's the harsh part:

A lot of times these people are lying. Yeah, people will do that. I'm not saying that out of disgust, disdain, or mockery. If anything- I feel a great deal of sympathy, because I think they may be a lot like I was at a certain point- living somewhere with no one that plays these games, flipping through a book and painting models that will stay on a shelf and collect dust until I can talk some disinterested person into 'trying' the game.

They're not playing the game at all, they're just looking at the rules and 'brainhammering' it out in their mind, without factoring in the myriad of potential problems. It's really, REALLY easy to see something as 'broken' or 'weak' or anything in between when you see it in a bubble by itself. There are very, very few people who can analyze rules in 40k and factor in all the variables and comparisons to other armies. I know they exist, and I know that there's a few people that claim to be able to do this- and maybe one of them is telling the truth... I'm pretty sure this forum might have two? Three? At best.

But yeah, call me what you like- "Meta" doesn't mean anything. For nearly 99% of all of us, "Meta" is just whatever handful of locals we can play with down at the local FLGS or the buddies that we meet to play garagehammer with. And if you have more than one of those little groups, you'll know that the "meta" in each one is different. Now, relocate to another city entirely- completely different kind of "meta".

And quite honestly, considering that every story I've read about the major tournaments in the last few years involves some degree of scumbaggery and cheating? That "meta" to me is about as trustworthy and reliable as a Bill Cosby cocktail.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:


And quite honestly, considering that every story I've read about the major tournaments in the last few years involves some degree of scumbaggery and cheating? That "meta" to me is about as trustworthy and reliable as a Bill Cosby cocktail.

That's been a consistent problem with GW for decades. Since their rules are so bad and so much of the game is decided at the listbuilding stage, themain way to have control over your army's performance on the table is to cheat.

Dakka posters upset with balance, Army A and Army B are OP and just stupid, examples of no one playing anymore...............hmmm, it must be Tuesday.......well the same Tuesday as 20 years ago when everyone was doing the same thing.

Every year, every addition, every faction.

Hard to judge my local meta since every store is closed due to COVID, but my group of friends (2 of whom have marine armies) and I have found ways to get a few games in since 9th launched.

We've been playing AoS instead.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
There might be a couple, but a lot of the complaints are coming from people who've played pretty recently.

You say that, but let me put it to you this way:

I'm not a 40k expert, I never will be. But I've got a pretty solid understanding of Necromunda, because I've gone through a lot of campaigns. I can sit and read when people on the internet are passionately complaining about certain things- well, they're usually lying when they say that they've played it out, it's very likely they're just playing one-off skirmish games, they don't know how to put down terrain, they're not using tactics cards at all, or they've taken some dude's house rules as 'official rules gospel', etc. Whatever the case is- they're not playing campaigns, or they're not doing something right.

And you know what? Here's the harsh part:

A lot of times these people are lying. Yeah, people will do that. I'm not saying that out of disgust, disdain, or mockery. If anything- I feel a great deal of sympathy, because I think they may be a lot like I was at a certain point- living somewhere with no one that plays these games, flipping through a book and painting models that will stay on a shelf and collect dust until I can talk some disinterested person into 'trying' the game.

They're not playing the game at all, they're just looking at the rules and 'brainhammering' it out in their mind, without factoring in the myriad of potential problems. It's really, REALLY easy to see something as 'broken' or 'weak' or anything in between when you see it in a bubble by itself. There are very, very few people who can analyze rules in 40k and factor in all the variables and comparisons to other armies. I know they exist, and I know that there's a few people that claim to be able to do this- and maybe one of them is telling the truth... I'm pretty sure this forum might have two? Three? At best.

But yeah, call me what you like- "Meta" doesn't mean anything. For nearly 99% of all of us, "Meta" is just whatever handful of locals we can play with down at the local FLGS or the buddies that we meet to play garagehammer with. And if you have more than one of those little groups, you'll know that the "meta" in each one is different. Now, relocate to another city entirely- completely different kind of "meta".

And quite honestly, considering that every story I've read about the major tournaments in the last few years involves some degree of scumbaggery and cheating? That "meta" to me is about as trustworthy and reliable as a Bill Cosby cocktail.

I dunno about lying, but I see a LOOOOT of mathhammer and not a lot of discussions on actual experiance. Mathhammer tends to be a bit odd because it misses certain things. like the battle reps with the Orks earlier, most mathhammer people ignore the fact that access to large amounts of cheap bodies gives a an advantage on objectives

Hecaton wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:


And quite honestly, considering that every story I've read about the major tournaments in the last few years involves some degree of scumbaggery and cheating? That "meta" to me is about as trustworthy and reliable as a Bill Cosby cocktail.

That's been a consistent problem with GW for decades. Since their rules are so bad and so much of the game is decided at the listbuilding stage, themain way to have control over your army's performance on the table is to cheat.

That is a good point. The degree of tolerance and apathy for cheating at tournaments is truly shocking.

 Nalim wrote:

Yeah, yeah, Eradicators are OP, bla-bla, I get it. But they (and other SM units) can't be made untargettable and they can't shoot twice with a plethora of buffs. It's not like I'm frustrated about that, I like hard games. What I'm frustrated about is that lots of people seem to have missed what some (non SM-) factions can do nowadays and just go on whining and calling for nerfs.

Eradicators have a specific rule to shoot twice on their datasheet - so yeah.....

 Mr Morden wrote:
Eradicators have a specific rule to shoot twice on their datasheet - so yeah.....

At the same target.
That means that's scary to one model or unit on the table, usually a single vehicle or a knight or something.
If that's the basket you stuffed all your eggs into? Well, what did you learn today?

Well for one, I don't trust meta narratives, not anymore, especially with how editions go. Things can change easily on the dime.

 Asherian Command wrote:
Well for one, I don't trust meta narratives, not anymore, especially with how editions go. Things can change easily on the dime.

You changed it, you editing Scoundrel! Ah, well. Point below still stands.

GW is gonna do what GW does. And Space Marines are their #1 seller, because if they weren't? They wouldn't have had more success in the last few years than they've ever had before.

Your wallet has a louder voice than your mouth, or anything you can type on the internet. Don't want to see as many Marine releases? Do your part and generate interest in something else. Whatever your faction is, show it off. Show someone how it works. Play your army with someone, not against them.

I always thought Necrons were 'cool', but never really played them. I was about to sell off my Necrons from my boxed set for next to nothing, because there weren't enough people that wanted them. However, someone came along and showed me how to use them and helped me build them, and I'm attached... and I've spent a good chunk of change building them up.

You know, I got people to take an interest in Chaos Marines/Daemons in my local area. Wanna know how? I kitbashed 12 unique Marines out of the Chaos Kits and a few other things (9 traitor legions, Fallen, Warp Ghosts, Red Corsairs) and put them up in the FLGS. I started running a narrative "Blackstone Fortress, Kinda" game with Chaos Marine 'heroes'. We couldn't keep Chaos Marines in stock.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:
Well for one, I don't trust meta narratives, not anymore, especially with how editions go. Things can change easily on the dime.

You changed it, you editing Scoundrel! Ah, well. Point below still stands.

GW is gonna do what GW does. And Space Marines are their #1 seller, because if they weren't? They wouldn't have had more success in the last few years than they've ever had before.

Your wallet has a louder voice than your mouth, or anything you can type on the internet. Don't want to see as many Marine releases? Do your part and generate interest in something else. Whatever your faction is, show it off. Show someone how it works. Play your army with someone, not against them.

I always thought Necrons were 'cool', but never really played them. I was about to sell off my Necrons from my boxed set for next to nothing, because there weren't enough people that wanted them. However, someone came along and showed me how to use them and helped me build them, and I'm attached... and I've spent a good chunk of change building them up.

You know, I got people to take an interest in Chaos Marines/Daemons in my local area. Wanna know how? I kitbashed 12 unique Marines out of the Chaos Kits and a few other things (9 traitor legions, Fallen, Warp Ghosts, Red Corsairs) and put them up in the FLGS. I started running a narrative "Blackstone Fortress, Kinda" game with Chaos Marine 'heroes'. We couldn't keep Chaos Marines in stock.

man I kinda wish I was in your area now!

BrianDavion wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
There might be a couple, but a lot of the complaints are coming from people who've played pretty recently.

You say that, but let me put it to you this way:

I'm not a 40k expert, I never will be. But I've got a pretty solid understanding of Necromunda, because I've gone through a lot of campaigns. I can sit and read when people on the internet are passionately complaining about certain things- well, they're usually lying when they say that they've played it out, it's very likely they're just playing one-off skirmish games, they don't know how to put down terrain, they're not using tactics cards at all, or they've taken some dude's house rules as 'official rules gospel', etc. Whatever the case is- they're not playing campaigns, or they're not doing something right.

And you know what? Here's the harsh part:

A lot of times these people are lying. Yeah, people will do that. I'm not saying that out of disgust, disdain, or mockery. If anything- I feel a great deal of sympathy, because I think they may be a lot like I was at a certain point- living somewhere with no one that plays these games, flipping through a book and painting models that will stay on a shelf and collect dust until I can talk some disinterested person into 'trying' the game.

They're not playing the game at all, they're just looking at the rules and 'brainhammering' it out in their mind, without factoring in the myriad of potential problems. It's really, REALLY easy to see something as 'broken' or 'weak' or anything in between when you see it in a bubble by itself. There are very, very few people who can analyze rules in 40k and factor in all the variables and comparisons to other armies. I know they exist, and I know that there's a few people that claim to be able to do this- and maybe one of them is telling the truth... I'm pretty sure this forum might have two? Three? At best.

But yeah, call me what you like- "Meta" doesn't mean anything. For nearly 99% of all of us, "Meta" is just whatever handful of locals we can play with down at the local FLGS or the buddies that we meet to play garagehammer with. And if you have more than one of those little groups, you'll know that the "meta" in each one is different. Now, relocate to another city entirely- completely different kind of "meta".

And quite honestly, considering that every story I've read about the major tournaments in the last few years involves some degree of scumbaggery and cheating? That "meta" to me is about as trustworthy and reliable as a Bill Cosby cocktail.

I dunno about lying, but I see a LOOOOT of mathhammer and not a lot of discussions on actual experiance. Mathhammer tends to be a bit odd because it misses certain things. like the battle reps with the Orks earlier, most mathhammer people ignore the fact that access to large amounts of cheap bodies gives a an advantage on objectives

Except flukes happen. Every other big tournament has the odd list that stands out and people flock to it and say "pLaYeR sKiLl". However, those results aren't replicated with high success. It's a one and done situation that's cute and all but it doesn't help the case you make.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Remember: one Ork player won a tournament via making a timer run out. Was that from the army being good?

BrianDavion wrote:


man I kinda wish I was in your area now!

Sorry, we rake leaves around here. Go suck maple syrup out of a tree, Canuck

Dude- the best advice I can give to you is this: Don't wish for the community you want, make it. You can get things off the ground with two friends backing you up. Do your thing, let people watch, tell 'em about it.

Yeah- one thing I did? I spent a good chunk of change getting a bunch of CSM kits (Marines, Havocs, etc.) and various things from Forge World like helmets, shoulderpads, weapons, etc. I built up the torsos, threw a lot of the bits in a box, added in some various pouches, holsters, knives, grenades, skulls, whatever little bits I could find from everything... and when someone wanted to play? I said, "Hey, sit down and build you a dude, then. You can keep him, if you want- he's your dude."

People start looking into warbands, paint schemes, backgrounds. It creates buzz. People get excited. Pretty soon the guy that once thought of Chaos Marines as generic spiky villains? Well, now he's coming in with an army he's stoked for. Now he's going bananas with insane kitbashes and making stuff you'd never think possible.

So far, my favorite has been the Defiler with the turret from the Repulsor Executioner.

ohh my community's perfectly good just what you're doing sounds so much fun.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
There might be a couple, but a lot of the complaints are coming from people who've played pretty recently.

You say that, but let me put it to you this way:

I'm not a 40k expert, I never will be. But I've got a pretty solid understanding of Necromunda, because I've gone through a lot of campaigns. I can sit and read when people on the internet are passionately complaining about certain things- well, they're usually lying when they say that they've played it out, it's very likely they're just playing one-off skirmish games, they don't know how to put down terrain, they're not using tactics cards at all, or they've taken some dude's house rules as 'official rules gospel', etc. Whatever the case is- they're not playing campaigns, or they're not doing something right.

And you know what? Here's the harsh part:

A lot of times these people are lying. Yeah, people will do that. I'm not saying that out of disgust, disdain, or mockery. If anything- I feel a great deal of sympathy, because I think they may be a lot like I was at a certain point- living somewhere with no one that plays these games, flipping through a book and painting models that will stay on a shelf and collect dust until I can talk some disinterested person into 'trying' the game.

They're not playing the game at all, they're just looking at the rules and 'brainhammering' it out in their mind, without factoring in the myriad of potential problems. It's really, REALLY easy to see something as 'broken' or 'weak' or anything in between when you see it in a bubble by itself. There are very, very few people who can analyze rules in 40k and factor in all the variables and comparisons to other armies. I know they exist, and I know that there's a few people that claim to be able to do this- and maybe one of them is telling the truth... I'm pretty sure this forum might have two? Three? At best.

But yeah, call me what you like- "Meta" doesn't mean anything. For nearly 99% of all of us, "Meta" is just whatever handful of locals we can play with down at the local FLGS or the buddies that we meet to play garagehammer with. And if you have more than one of those little groups, you'll know that the "meta" in each one is different. Now, relocate to another city entirely- completely different kind of "meta".

And quite honestly, considering that every story I've read about the major tournaments in the last few years involves some degree of scumbaggery and cheating? That "meta" to me is about as trustworthy and reliable as a Bill Cosby cocktail.

I dunno about lying, but I see a LOOOOT of mathhammer and not a lot of discussions on actual experiance. Mathhammer tends to be a bit odd because it misses certain things. like the battle reps with the Orks earlier, most mathhammer people ignore the fact that access to large amounts of cheap bodies gives a an advantage on objectives

True. Mathhammer is a useful tool but it isn't a substitute for playing.

Mathammer is also just way, way easier to convey a "fact", than going on about an experience you had on the table. Math is nice and concrete, and more importantly on a forum, for better or for worse, you can't argue against the math itself unless the actual calculations are wrong. The debate becomes more about the meaning of the numbers within the context of a game, and the context is nebulous because there's way more variables in the context of games.

Actual "tactics" discussions tend to be harder because it's a conversation with a higher requirement for two people to actually work together to reach an understanding.

But @AD
Just because people are bad at analyzing 40K (or come to different conclusions than you) doesn't automatically mean they're lying. Since you acknowledge that different "metas" is a thing, that means people can have drastically experiences with the game. Assuming that a story that doesn't line up with your experience is automatically coming from a lie is. . . I'd say that says more about you than it does about them.

Also, some people just genuinely suck at 40K. I've seen people who really don't get it, and probably never will. Their experience of "balance" is going to be veeeery different.

A bunch of recent complaints are not actually about army balance (which is about winning games) but about model balance (which isn't about overall victory, but about how individual models compare to one another).

I'm not saying all complaints are legitimate, but lumping space marine gripers into liars and non-players? Yeah. . . right.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Eradicators have a specific rule to shoot twice on their datasheet - so yeah.....

At the same target.
That means that's scary to one model or unit on the table, usually a single vehicle or a knight or something.
If that's the basket you stuffed all your eggs into? Well, what did you learn today?

It's 120pts for a squad. It's really easy to bring three squads. are you going to claim that putting your eggs in three baskets that just got eradicated is your own fault, too?

On topic: the current balance is gak. I hate that it's gak, because playing marines is only fun if the marine player actively avoids the good stuff available to them,and in the case of Salamanders even "anything that's working well with your chapter tactic" has to be avoided, basically.
My main army is Salamanders, by the way.

nekooni wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Eradicators have a specific rule to shoot twice on their datasheet - so yeah.....

At the same target.
That means that's scary to one model or unit on the table, usually a single vehicle or a knight or something.
If that's the basket you stuffed all your eggs into? Well, what did you learn today?

It's 120pts for a squad. It's really easy to bring three squads. are you going to claim that putting your eggs in three baskets that just got eradicated is your own fault, too?

On topic: the current balance is gak. I hate that it's gak, because playing marines is only fun if the marine player actively avoids the good stuff available to them,and in the case of Salamanders even "anything that's working well with your chapter tactic" has to be avoided, basically.
My main army is Salamanders, by the way.

those 3 squads is ALL your gonna be able to take in your heavy support slot. which means you sacrifice the ability to kill enemy HQs with eliminators, l;ay down heavy fire at range with devestators etc.
And you're going to feel reaaaaaaaaaallly stupid if you run into ohhh... a list that consists of mostly Ork Boyz led by Ghaz.

nekooni wrote:
On topic: the current balance is gak. I hate that it's gak, because playing marines is only fun if the marine player actively avoids the good stuff available to them,and in the case of Salamanders even "anything that's working well with your chapter tactic" has to be avoided, basically.
My main army is Salamanders, by the way.

I have to say this does not match my personal experience.

I use Intercessors, Slam Captains, Relic Condemptor, Aggressors, Outriders and Eradicators and my games feel balanced enough if my opponent isn't completly new to their army or the game.
How many checkboxes did I tick with my unit selection?

Am I the worst Marine player maybe because I can't kick all the NPCs off the board by 2nd turn max? Or *gasp* my opponents have fun as well and ask me for more games afterwards?

BrianDavion wrote:
those 3 squads is ALL your gonna be able to take in your heavy support slot. which means you sacrifice the ability to kill enemy HQs with eliminators, l;ay down heavy fire at range with devestators etc.
And you're going to feel reaaaaaaaaaallly stupid if you run into ohhh... a list that consists of mostly Ork Boyz led by Ghaz.

What's really awkward is that if you fire Eradicators at Ork Boys, you're getting a pretty similar point-efficiency as Intercessors firing Bolt Rifles at them. So bringing Eradicators isn't really a loss against Boyz from a shooting standpoint.

12 bolt rifle shots is 3.99 dead Orks. 6 Melta Rifle shots is 3.3. (no Rerolls, no Doctrines). You're only giving up a small amount of anti-Boyz firepower for an insane amount of AT firepower.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Eradicators have a specific rule to shoot twice on their datasheet - so yeah.....

At the same target.
That means that's scary to one model or unit on the table, usually a single vehicle or a knight or something.
If that's the basket you stuffed all your eggs into? Well, what did you learn today?

Yeah at the same target. But we're talking about a cheap 3 man squad with 3 melta shots that typically aren't enough to kill a tank. They may not even even kill an ork buggy or dread with a single volley: two hits, wounding on 3s and maybe just one shot goes through saves. With double tap they'll pretty much guarantee a kill.

It's not like they'll overkill stuff, their firing twice ability is a huge buff for a unit with their stats.