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.

Any marines. It seems really unbalanced and I am a marine player. Intercessors should be one wound and they’re still under costed for what they do.

Ork boys don’t get two wounds for being superhuman brutes and Sisters of Battle don’t get an extra wound for wearing power armour. So I don’t really get the reasoning. An extra foot shouldn’t double your wounds and they aren’t even using Primaris as an excuse anymore. They got toughness 4 for the superhuman physiology and a 3 up save for the armour. That was in line with every other faction and perfectly reasonable.

Doubling the survivability of your unit should cost more than one or two points. That means marines are even more undercosted.

It will render a lot of one damage weapons like massed bolters or shooters worthless against marines. You’re only going to kill half as many marines as you were before.

It puts “elite” armies like Eldar or Sisters of Battle in a weird place with the chafe wound profile. Making 2 wound a standard across most armies will hurt the game. Any boost to weapon profiles to kill marines means you’ll just mow down these lesser factions.

Damage 2 weapons aren't actually good for killing massed Marines right now. If you've played against Iron Hands, or the new Apothecary combo build doing the rounds you'll know how Feel No Pain is fantastic for dulling 2 Damage weapons on 2 wound models.

Darsath wrote:
Damage 2 weapons aren't actually good for killing massed Marines right now. If you've played against Iron Hands, or the new Apothecary combo build doing the rounds you'll know how Feel No Pain is fantastic for dulling 2 Damage weapons on 2 wound models.

Well. I usually only play friendlies with my mate against his Chaos. So we house rule it that he can summon as much extra stuff as he has. Yet I still win with marines. So I am guessing there’s some imbalance here.

I agree it puts factions like eldar in a weird spot. They are supposed to be expert warriors on a roughly equal footing with marines but I honestly see no way to do that now with their T3 W1 profile without just buffing their offensive output to ridiculous levels. Same with a plethora of D1 weapons which always used to be kinda mediocre but when massed enough could take out a marine or 2 per squad a turn now they just don´t do anything. When there is only one super elite army like custodes, fine. But with SM being over represented, CSM of different flavours also being widely played suddenly, say half the armies in the game are suddenly next to invulnerable to bolters, lasguns, whatever the xenos versions are called. Bad design indeed.
Edit: Although I should add, since the ship has sailed already with Primaris it only feels fair my Plague Marines get it too, as well as the other cult troops and chosen. Unfortunately this hoses a bunch of other factions, but we will have to wait and see how GW aims to rectify this imbalance in basic statlines.

 Totalwar1402 wrote:

Darsath wrote:
Damage 2 weapons aren't actually good for killing massed Marines right now. If you've played against Iron Hands, or the new Apothecary combo build doing the rounds you'll know how Feel No Pain is fantastic for dulling 2 Damage weapons on 2 wound models.

Well. I usually only play friendlies with my mate against his Chaos. So we house rule it that he can summon as much extra stuff as he has. Yet I still win with marines. So I am guessing there’s some imbalance here.

The Space Marine book is by far the strongest book in the game. The new codex hasn't had an opportunity to be tested yet, so the extent of how powerful it is has yet to be proven. But, from what we were seeing before, and some of the buffs in the new codex, it's safe to call them overpowered at the moment.

Stick to previous editions then, I guess? In ninth most Marine models have 2+W. It is what it is.

Well, many people think guardsmen should be minimum 6ppm but that's not happening apparently.

As long as hordes can outnumber marines by factor greater than 3 points-wise, marines need the 2nd wound. The net wound disparity between horde lists and 'elite' list is simply staggering.

 skchsan wrote:
Well, many people think guardsmen should be minimum 6ppm but that's not happening apparently.

As long as hordes can outnumber marines by factor greater than 3 points-wise, marines need the 2nd wound. The net wound disparity between horde lists and 'elite' list is simply staggering.

I’ve heard that said but Iam not sure how tbh. You’ve got lower BS, worse weapons and the casualties you take should mean losing troops to battleshock. Plus, it’s harder to bring your 100 lasguns to bear if you have LOS blocking terrain and such. So a lot of your excess troops are just going to clog the back line or end up stacking out of combat. So your paper damage output won’t be the same as a smaller armies. Who can throw an ungodly number of bolter shots back at you.

 Totalwar1402 wrote:
Any marines. It seems really unbalanced and I am a marine player. Intercessors should be one wound and they’re still under costed for what they do.
.

People have wanted marines to 'take a hit' since before I started in third ed. They're constantly shown in the lore tanking hits that would kill most other things and just shrugging it off and getting back up. Two wounds was something they should arguably have always had.

 Totalwar1402 wrote:

Ork boys don’t get two wounds for being superhuman brutes and Sisters of Battle don’t get an extra wound for wearing power armour. So I don’t really get the reasoning. An extra foot shouldn’t double your wounds and they aren’t even using Primaris as an excuse anymore. They got toughness 4 for the superhuman physiology and a 3 up save for the armour. That was in line with every other faction and perfectly reasonable.

Reasoning: regular Ork Boyz are not as resilirnt as space marines. Likewise, sisters are not as resilient as space marines.

It's not about the extra foot. It's all the other stuff in the geneseed along with the emperor's own space magic that makes marines as hard as anything.

They're now toughness 4 and two wounds for physiology because toughness four and one would didn't reflect correctly on their lore.

 Totalwar1402 wrote:


Doubling the survivability of your unit should cost more than one or two points. That means marines are even more undercosted.

Survivability isn't the only factor that is factored into its points costs. There are many, many ways of taking out marines.

 Totalwar1402 wrote:

It will render a lot of one damage weapons like massed bolters or shooters worthless against marines. You’re only going to kill half as many marines as you were before.

Bolters were never the things that killed lots of stuff - they were always kind of worthless. 40k is a game where historically power weapons power fists and special/heavy weapons did the heavy lifting and everything else carrying a bolter was a wound counter.

And let's be fair. I'll turn d2+ weapons on marines now.

 Totalwar1402 wrote:

It puts “elite” armies like Eldar or Sisters of Battle in a weird place with the chafe wound profile. Making 2 wound a standard across most armies will hurt the game. Any boost to weapon profiles to kill marines means you’ll just mow down these lesser factions.

The game will evolve and settle into a new meta. As it has always done before. Armies will.adapt, mark my words.

I have no issues with 2 wound Marines.

Such large scale changes to the game, units, weapons, etc should have meant a general update to ALL factions.

It does seem perverse to spend the most time and effort on Supplement Marines - which were just updated "to 9th standard" - a lie and are going to be updated again in a month or so.

The races that will have to wait the longest should have had the big faq updates.

Deadnight wrote:

 Totalwar1402 wrote:
Any marines. It seems really unbalanced and I am a marine player. Intercessors should be one wound and they’re still under costed for what they do.
.

People have wanted marines to 'take a hit' since before I started in third ed. They're constantly shown in the lore tanking hits that would kill most other things and just shrugging it off and getting back up. Two wounds was something they should arguably have always had.

 Totalwar1402 wrote:

Ork boys don’t get two wounds for being superhuman brutes and Sisters of Battle don’t get an extra wound for wearing power armour. So I don’t really get the reasoning. An extra foot shouldn’t double your wounds and they aren’t even using Primaris as an excuse anymore. They got toughness 4 for the superhuman physiology and a 3 up save for the armour. That was in line with every other faction and perfectly reasonable.

Reasoning: regular Ork Boyz are not as resilirnt as space marines. Likewise, sisters are not as resilient as space marines.

It's not about the extra foot. It's all the other stuff in the geneseed along with the emperor's own space magic that makes marines as hard as anything.

They're now toughness 4 and two wounds for physiology because toughness four and one would didn't reflect correctly on their lore.

 Totalwar1402 wrote:


Doubling the survivability of your unit should cost more than one or two points. That means marines are even more undercosted.

Survivability isn't the only factor that is factored into its points costs. There are many, many ways of taking out marines.

 Totalwar1402 wrote:

It will render a lot of one damage weapons like massed bolters or shooters worthless against marines. You’re only going to kill half as many marines as you were before.

Bolters were never the things that killed lots of stuff - they were always kind of worthless. 40k is a game where historically power weapons power fists and special/heavy weapons did the heavy lifting and everything else carrying a bolter was a wound counter.

And let's be fair. I'll turn d2+ weapons on marines now.

 Totalwar1402 wrote:

It puts “elite” armies like Eldar or Sisters of Battle in a weird place with the chafe wound profile. Making 2 wound a standard across most armies will hurt the game. Any boost to weapon profiles to kill marines means you’ll just mow down these lesser factions.

The game will evolve and settle into a new meta. As it has always done before. Armies will.adapt, mark my words.

Actually most marines in the lore that get shot by a bolt gun tend to explode. They’re actually tougher in game.

Orks can survive being decapitated. The sort of upgrades marines get from the various organs isn’t about raw toughness (which is already reflected in T4) but more specialist functions that aren’t nearly replicated in game. Also, making them twice as tough as an Ork makes no sense. If you shot an unarmoured marine in the head, he ain’t getting back up. An Ork would keep fighting. In terms of raw toughness Orks actually should win out over space marines.

Well Scouts randomly have one wound despite the genetic engineering reasoning. So, if the reasoning for the extra wound is the power armour then wouldn’t every 3 plus save have 2 wounds? Given that Gravis and Terminator has additional wounds marines are the only faction to get extra wounds for their armour like this. So it’s not just the superhuman aspect. Again, why shouldn’t Sisters of Battle have two wounds if they’re wearing power armour?

It’s a huge factor. A squad is twice as difficult to shift and every weapon in the game is half as effective to kill what is functionally still the same points of marines. That means less losses and more time shooting; which increases the armies long term damage output.

So we make them even less effective by doubling wounds? Also, double wounds doesn’t just reduce bolters effectiveness. If effects all flamers, blast weapons, any variable damage weapon like power fists and mortal wounds. All instantly halved in effectiveness.

The marine statline was terrible for a whole edition. Marines are supposed to be durable. This made them more durable. They didn't get a 2nd wound for just a few points. They were overpriced for their durability before (but couldn't be made any cheaper without causing other problems.)

If you want marines to stay at 1W, then we need to get rid of 8th edition's AP changes. If we keep the new system, Marines need to be 2W.

Comparing to stuff like Boyz isn't valid because you aren't comparing cost per wound. Boyz are still cheaper per wound than marines.

 Mr Morden wrote:
I have no issues with 2 wound Marines.

Such large scale changes to the game, units, weapons, etc should have meant a general update to ALL factions.

It does seem perverse to spend the most time and effort on Supplement Marines - which were just updated "to 9th standard" - a lie and are going to be updated again in a month or so.

The races that will have to wait the longest should have had the big faq updates.

This right here.

By itself, I have no issue with Marines being two wounds now, because it is okay to change what a wound means and what the value of a wound is. Marines should not have had two wounds in 3rd, but a wound is a much different thing now, and this is an adaptation to it. What the value of a wound should be is a debate for another thread.

But if the game is going to change the value of a wound, it should be done to everyone all at once rather than this, because by applying this to Marines only for the time benig, the game as it stands can be best described as a Marine helmet covered in afterbirth half-extruded into the hands of a horrified obstetrician.

I agree marines should never have gone up to 2 wounds. At best, they should have received a toughness bonus, but "one wound = one kill" should have remained the standard for all troops. D2+ weapons should have also been limited to those that are truly anti-tank/anti-vehicle.

I think over the next few years, we're going to see more and more troops moving to becoming base 2 W. Then someone's troops will go to to 3, etc.

Yeah, it should only be Mark of Khorne Marines.

For me it has nothing to do with fluff and everything to do with creating space for weapons and units.

A W1 model is tackled differently then W2 and W2 is tackled differently than W3. I think there is some sour grapes, because marines get more of that puzzle than others right now.

Case in point - before the changes -

If I could take heavy bolters and assault cannons in equal measure why would I ever take a heavy bolter? The assault cannon does better vs GEQ, MEQ, and some vehicles. The HB only exists, because that's the only option for the platform.

NOW I take a HB for W2 and I take an assault cannon for hordes. I have a decision to make.

If T4 wasn't enough to represent the toughness of marines then that can be adjusted in the core rules and faction design.

A universe where a marine is more deadly than an eldar warrior and more durable than an ork is not a grimdark universe.

I think it's an okay move, but should have happened at the beginning of 8th when those indexes came out (though of course they were pushing Primaris difference then). Since it's happened, the only thing I can hope for is that across more factions we see a new category of multiwound infantry emerge. There's nothing inherently wrong with it, but it should be a broader category now that these faction changes are going to hit the meta.

The question of points balance is another issue, but that's a different category of change IMHO.

pothocboots wrote:
If T4 wasn't enough to represent the toughness of marines then that can be adjusted in the core rules and faction design.

A universe where a marine is more deadly than an eldar warrior and more durable than an ork is not a grimdark universe.

I mean, they are both in lore, sooooo...

Marines are more durable than Orks.

Orks are chaff units that waste hundreds if not thousands of lives in every conflict.

My issue with Marines is they have been made very good offensively and very good defensively. Pick one, GW

Cynista wrote:
My issue with Marines is they have been made very good offensively and very good defensively. Pick one, GW

I fail to see a reason why everything must be black or white in that regard.

Cynista wrote:
My issue with Marines is they have been made very good offensively and very good defensively. Pick one, GW

Why? Something can be dangerous and tough at the same time. Why would you only get to pick one?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Cynista wrote:
My issue with Marines is they have been made very good offensively and very good defensively. Pick one, GW

Why? Something can be dangerous and tough at the same time. Why would you only get to pick one?

Because every other faction in the game has to? Because your standard Marines list is not the jack of all trades like they should be, but the master of all trades?

Cynista wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Cynista wrote:
My issue with Marines is they have been made very good offensively and very good defensively. Pick one, GW

Why? Something can be dangerous and tough at the same time. Why would you only get to pick one?

Because every other faction in the game has to? Because your standard Marines list is not the jack of all trades like they should be, but the master of all trades?

Yeah, Jack of all trades was how I like them and one of the reasons I've been iffy on Primaris. In 3rd/4th ed, Marines used to derive power from just having a good statline and very few special rules, as opposed to now, where they have a ton of both. On that principle, though, I like the 2w change, because it's a simple powerup without a torrent of bizarre junk.

How much that statline should cost and whether theirs costs too little given the underbaked state of the game... Thaaaat's a different matter.

 Totalwar1402 wrote:

Darsath wrote:
Damage 2 weapons aren't actually good for killing massed Marines right now. If you've played against Iron Hands, or the new Apothecary combo build doing the rounds you'll know how Feel No Pain is fantastic for dulling 2 Damage weapons on 2 wound models.

Well. I usually only play friendlies with my mate against his Chaos. So we house rule it that he can summon as much extra stuff as he has. Yet I still win with marines. So I am guessing there’s some imbalance here.

Why don't you just house rule his CSM to two wounds?

 CEO Kasen wrote:

Cynista wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Cynista wrote:
My issue with Marines is they have been made very good offensively and very good defensively. Pick one, GW

Why? Something can be dangerous and tough at the same time. Why would you only get to pick one?

Because every other faction in the game has to? Because your standard Marines list is not the jack of all trades like they should be, but the master of all trades?

Yeah, Jack of all trades was how I like them and one of the reasons I've been iffy on Primaris. In 3rd/4th ed, Marines used to derive power from just having a good statline and very few special rules, as opposed to now, where they have a ton of both. On that principle, though, I like the 2w change, because it's a simple powerup without a torrent of bizarre junk.

How much that statline should cost and whether theirs costs too little given the underbaked state of the game... Thaaaat's a different matter.

Generally agree, I don't really have a problem with Marines being 2 wounds in isolation, it's fine. But they don't appear to pay the premium for that, which they should do. And they are too good offensively to have such a good crutch to fall back on.

Any Marine player who doesn't like that truth should read the other codex that came out at exactly the same time. The difference in power between the books is enormous

ccs wrote:

 Totalwar1402 wrote:

Darsath wrote:
Damage 2 weapons aren't actually good for killing massed Marines right now. If you've played against Iron Hands, or the new Apothecary combo build doing the rounds you'll know how Feel No Pain is fantastic for dulling 2 Damage weapons on 2 wound models.

Well. I usually only play friendlies with my mate against his Chaos. So we house rule it that he can summon as much extra stuff as he has. Yet I still win with marines. So I am guessing there’s some imbalance here.

Why don't you just house rule his CSM to two wounds?

The houserule stopgaps while people wait for codexes has been on my mind for a while. I might just create a Rules Proposal thread over this.

When a basic Intercessor costs 1 point less than a Scion packing a Plasmagun, that can oneshot two of them on the drop very reliably... You know they aren't doing so well... I would have given Marines 1W and a built-in base 6++ that could be enhanced by other additions - such as Terminator Armor, or Storm Shields. Hell, change the rules around to:

The Black Carapace:
Models with this rule have a 6++. This can be modified.

Terminator Armor:
2+ save and also improves Invulnerable Saves by 1.

Combat Shield:
Improves Invulnerable Saves by 1.

Storm Shield:
Improves both Armor and Invulnerable saves by 1.

Combine them all, and your current Storm Shield Terminators come into play. 2+/4++

Combat Shield on a model results in a 5++

Basic Space Marine units have a 6++.

Hell, if needed add a clause where Invulnerable saves cannot be improved past a 3++.

Now. I'm going to go back to trying to envisage just how an Imperial Guard Shotgun can kill a Warlord Titan... I haven't had much luck so far...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Marines are more durable than Orks.

Orks are chaff units that waste hundreds if not thousands of lives in every conflict.

Which is why they were T4 3+ to the orks T4 6+ T-shirt save. Giving them double the wounds too makes no sense fluffwise. The real problem is GW made the game way to deadly and started to hand out AP like candy so saves are near useless. They should have addressed the lethality in this game before fiddling with wound profiles. How for example would you make Eldar live up to their fluff now? 2W makes no sense yet they should be on roughly equal footing with marines. Shall we just boost their offence to obscene levels then? I don't think anyone wants to see that.