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.

 Lance845 wrote:
But, in order to tune the game back down, they need to loose those changes. If the lethality of the game goes down those extra wounds are insanity (it's insanity now but whatever). And as shown through examples here often units are not lethal enough despite throwing WAY too many dice.

The game is balanced around points, not what some players feel are too many dice.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
But, in order to tune the game back down, they need to loose those changes. If the lethality of the game goes down those extra wounds are insanity (it's insanity now but whatever). And as shown through examples here often units are not lethal enough despite throwing WAY too many dice.

The game is balanced around points, not what some players feel are too many dice.

As we are seeing with the new dexes, even points can´t help GW balance this game properly. Lance is completely right, the game is an absolute slog to play when you are rolling 100+ dice for several units to kill, wait for it, less than 10 marines. It's not just about balance, the game should be smooth to play too.

 Castozor wrote:
As we are seeing with the new dexes, even points can´t help GW balance this game properly. Lance is completely right, the game is an absolute slog to play when you are rolling 100+ dice for several units to kill, wait for it, less than 10 marines. It's not just about balance, the game should be smooth to play too.

Are you saying that Necrons aren't balanced against Marines? Have you played that match-up yet or...

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
As we are seeing with the new dexes, even points can´t help GW balance this game properly. Lance is completely right, the game is an absolute slog to play when you are rolling 100+ dice for several units to kill, wait for it, less than 10 marines. It's not just about balance, the game should be smooth to play too.

Are you saying that Necrons aren't balanced against Marines? Have you played that match-up yet or...

We are saying that none of this is balanced against anything and the current marine set up just exacerbates the situation.

 Lance845 wrote:
We are saying that none of this is balanced against anything and the current marine set up just exacerbates the situation.

Have you played either side of Marines versus Necrons or are you upset because you codex hasn't had its update yet?

EDIT: My math was off for Warriors versus Terminators. They kill 152 points worth not 136, I was using old points for terminators.

A single glance to eradicators tells me all I need to know, no need to wait for my own codex. But since you seem to be dodging it: do you actually enjoy the game or do you think it is nice to play by rolling boatloads of dice each turn for little to no return?

The question was not directed at me, but I want to answer anyway:

My group and I do enjoy the game and we are constantly getting new members and/or start new armies.

We have distributed among all (13) players:
- 5x Marines
- 3x Tyranids
- 2x Sisters
- 2x Necrons
- 2x Death Guard
- 1x Tau
- 1x Thousand Sons
- 1x Orks
- 1x Chaos Marines
- 2x Chaos Demons
- 1x Craftworlds

Most fun we had since 5th edition.

 Castozor wrote:
A single glance to eradicators tells me all I need to know, no need to wait for my own codex. But since you seem to be dodging it: do you actually enjoy the game or do you think it is nice to play by rolling boatloads of dice each turn for little to no return?

So one bad unit is all it takes to ruin the game for you... If that's the case, why are you still here?

As for me, I have fun with the game and this forum. I can enjoy a flawed product.

 Castozor wrote:
A single glance to eradicators tells me all I need to know, no need to wait for my own codex. But since you seem to be dodging it: do you actually enjoy the game or do you think it is nice to play by rolling boatloads of dice each turn for little to no return?

I think we. As a community need to make rules at the competitive level. Plus at the local level that deal with units like eradicators.

Like maybe. Ban them? That is what they do in other games when something is as insane as eradicators.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
A single glance to eradicators tells me all I need to know, no need to wait for my own codex. But since you seem to be dodging it: do you actually enjoy the game or do you think it is nice to play by rolling boatloads of dice each turn for little to no return?

So one bad unit is all it takes to ruin the game for you... If that's the case, why are you still here?

As for me, I have fun with the game and this forum. I can enjoy a flawed product.

More dodging from you it seems as expected. Eradicators are the most glaring flaw, but not the only one in the marine dex.

 Castozor wrote:
More dodging from you it seems as expected. Eradicators are the most glaring flaw, but not the only one in the marine dex.

I just said I have fun with the game even with its flaws and that was literally answering the question you put forth, but seeing as that wasn't good enough let us do this:

Yes, I enjoy 40k even with the flaws. I don't see rolling a bucket of dice as an issue because you can use an app for that in friendly games and, as much as I enjoy reading about them, I don't play in tournaments. Yes, Marines are over-tuned at the moment but I think it's due to units like Exterminators and Aggressors being too good and not due to the extra durability some units that were rarely used competitively were given in the new codex.

 Castozor wrote:
A single glance to eradicators tells me all I need to know, no need to wait for my own codex. But since you seem to be dodging it: do you actually enjoy the game or do you think it is nice to play by rolling boatloads of dice each turn for little to no return?

What if the answer is both or neither? That's a very polarised opinion to uphold.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
More dodging from you it seems as expected. Eradicators are the most glaring flaw, but not the only one in the marine dex.

I just said I have fun with the game even with its flaws and that was literally answering the question you put forth, but seeing as that wasn't good enough let us do this:

Yes, I enjoy 40k even with the flaws. I don't see rolling a bucket of dice as an issue because you can use an app for that in friendly games and, as much as I enjoy reading about them, I don't play in tournaments. Yes, Marines are over-tuned at the moment but I think it's due to units like Exterminators and Aggressors being too good and not due to the extra durability some units that were rarely used competitively were given in the new codex.

You also said in this thread that you don't look ahead to what impact these changes have on the broader game and other armies. So your opinion from your limited scope is only capable of counting for so much if you cant be bothered to try and measure the impact outside of your codex.

 Castozor wrote:

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
A single glance to eradicators tells me all I need to know, no need to wait for my own codex. But since you seem to be dodging it: do you actually enjoy the game or do you think it is nice to play by rolling boatloads of dice each turn for little to no return?

So one bad unit is all it takes to ruin the game for you... If that's the case, why are you still here?

As for me, I have fun with the game and this forum. I can enjoy a flawed product.

More dodging from you it seems as expected. Eradicators are the most glaring flaw, but not the only one in the marine dex.

then name the other "glaring issues" I think the eradicators horse has been well and truely beaten to death. it's ground meat at this point.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
As we are seeing with the new dexes, even points can´t help GW balance this game properly. Lance is completely right, the game is an absolute slog to play when you are rolling 100+ dice for several units to kill, wait for it, less than 10 marines. It's not just about balance, the game should be smooth to play too.

Are you saying that Necrons aren't balanced against Marines? Have you played that match-up yet or...

Just thought I would put this quote here from another thread since it's relevant.

EightFoldPath wrote:
A Sautekh 9th edition army gets:
51 data sheets (best of any dynasty by a good few)
35 strategems
7 warlord traits
9 relics
21 extras (12 arkana + 9 c'tan powers)

An Ultramarines 9th edition army gets (I ran out of fingers and toes several times so may have miscounted):
110 data sheets (116% more)
50 strategems (42% more)
18 warlord traits (157% more)
30 relics (233% more)
45 extras (7 chapter command upgrades with 7 more warlord traits and 7 more relics, 18 psychic powers, 6 litanies) (114% more)

The supplements are the mistake that keeps on giving.

Also, don't worry forgeworld will be coming soon to give Space Marines a much needed helping hand.

For Necrons in general:

Only 5 out of 51 data sheets are Core. Then they have Capotek and Destroyer Cult as alternatives. This is bad, as it splits the book into three groups that don't work with each other.

The command protocols are also really hard to use effectively, you are constantly thinking "wish I had this one last turn/ext turn". Then when you do get the right protocol, your unit isn't in range of any characters... Can't I just I have an extra AP on all my rapid fire and assault guns turn 2 and 3 no matter where I am standing?

 Lance845 wrote:
You also said in this thread that you don't look ahead to what impact these changes have on the broader game and other armies. So your opinion from your limited scope is only capable of counting for so much if you cant be bothered to try and measure the impact outside of your codex.

I'm going to make you quote me on that one.

The one thing I said is that we can't look at the Necron and Marine rules and compare them backwards to un-updated books. You cannot advance a game by looking backwards.

 Lance845 wrote:
Just thought I would put this quote here from another thread since it's relevant.

EightFoldPath wrote:
A Sautekh 9th edition army gets:
51 data sheets (best of any dynasty by a good few)
35 strategems
7 warlord traits
9 relics
21 extras (12 arkana + 9 c'tan powers)

An Ultramarines 9th edition army gets (I ran out of fingers and toes several times so may have miscounted):
110 data sheets (116% more)
50 strategems (42% more)
18 warlord traits (157% more)
30 relics (233% more)
45 extras (7 chapter command upgrades with 7 more warlord traits and 7 more relics, 18 psychic powers, 6 litanies) (114% more)

The supplements are the mistake that keeps on giving.

Also, don't worry forgeworld will be coming soon to give Space Marines a much needed helping hand.

For Necrons in general:

Only 5 out of 51 data sheets are Core. Then they have Capotek and Destroyer Cult as alternatives. This is bad, as it splits the book into three groups that don't work with each other.

The command protocols are also really hard to use effectively, you are constantly thinking "wish I had this one last turn/ext turn". Then when you do get the right protocol, your unit isn't in range of any characters... Can't I just I have an extra AP on all my rapid fire and assault guns turn 2 and 3 no matter where I am standing?

What do fewer data sheets have to do with balance? You can't just quote numbers and claim imbalance just because Marines have more stuff than Necrons.

For one, no Marine list can take every data sheet in a single battle. Second lists are often locked in for the day when playing at a shop because you can only carry so much. In tournaments, your list is locked for the entire event. So unless every one of those extra sheets options is pure cheese you gain little competitive advantage by having them.

You also can't say that Core versus not core is broken as we have only two examples to go by and nobody has put in the actual games to do more than armchair theory-crafting thus far. It could be that an all Destroyer Cult list emerges as pure game destroying cheese even if that's rather unlikely.

But none of this matters because I've already said that Marines are too strong. I just disagree that the extra wounds for Old Marines is what breaks them. That horse had bolted with Primaris.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
More dodging from you it seems as expected. Eradicators are the most glaring flaw, but not the only one in the marine dex.

I just said I have fun with the game even with its flaws and that was literally answering the question you put forth, but seeing as that wasn't good enough let us do this:

Yes, I enjoy 40k even with the flaws. I don't see rolling a bucket of dice as an issue because you can use an app for that in friendly games and, as much as I enjoy reading about them, I don't play in tournaments. Yes, Marines are over-tuned at the moment but I think it's due to units like Exterminators and Aggressors being too good and not due to the extra durability some units that were rarely used competitively were given in the new codex.

Ah you use an app, fair enough. I don't like using them, so I find rolling loads of dice annoying especially when the pay off is so low. Also it seems perhaps I phrased my question wrong if more than one person interprets it differently from what I meant. I was specifically referring to that dice rolling as being fun/good inclusion to the game. I agree the overall game is very fun despite the issues.

 Lance845 wrote:

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Oh, well I assumed that if synapse toughness is representing how the hive mind drives tyranid organisms to ignore paint hen the whole faction should be getting it shouldn't they? It's not like a warrior or a ravener would be driven differently then a gant.

Since we are using fluff to justify how rules should be written and what "feels right".

While I agree that a faction wide FnP would make sense for Tyranids, that would require a lot of reworking versus giving a bump to a horde unit that isn't seeing a lot of play. That also explains why I didn't go into every ramification that such a change would cause.

I am in this thread debating these things specifically because I think about ramifications. All marines having 2 wounds has ramifications. Bringing other units in line with the new normal based on fluff or balance has ramifications. It not only doesn't make sense fluff wise (unless you start moving everyone else up also) it also doesn't help the game mechanically. It was a bad choice for the game. And I suspect down the line it's going to get worse. Worse for everyone who doesn't get moved up or worse for everyone when we all start throwing tons of dice to no effect. Unless they also make all weapons more lethal too. Then even though the numbers are bigger it won't actually have changed anything.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also nobody has said that old marines getting 2w is THE thing breaking marines. Its been argued that it is A thing that is breaking marines and that the ramifications of such a change are bad for the game.

 Lance845 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Oh, well I assumed that if synapse toughness is representing how the hive mind drives tyranid organisms to ignore paint hen the whole faction should be getting it shouldn't they? It's not like a warrior or a ravener would be driven differently then a gant.

Since we are using fluff to justify how rules should be written and what "feels right".

While I agree that a faction wide FnP would make sense for Tyranids, that would require a lot of reworking versus giving a bump to a horde unit that isn't seeing a lot of play. That also explains why I didn't go into every ramification that such a change would cause.

I am in this thread debating these things specifically because I think about ramifications. All marines having 2 wounds has ramifications. Bringing other units in line with the new normal based on fluff or balance has ramifications. It not only doesn't make sense fluff wise (unless you start moving everyone else up also) it also doesn't help the game mechanically. It was a bad choice for the game. And I suspect down the line it's going to get worse. Worse for everyone who doesn't get moved up or worse for everyone when we all start throwing tons of dice to no effect. Unless they also make all weapons more lethal too. Then even though the numbers are bigger it won't actually have changed anything.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also nobody has said that old marines getting 2w is THE thing breaking marines. Its been argued that it is A thing that is breaking marines and that the ramifications of such a change are bad for the game.

really? funny because we have an entire thread devoted to complaining about it titled "I don't think Marines should have two wounds"

Yes really. Amazingly this entire thread can be about the one issue. There are multiple threads about eradicators. Not because eradicators are the only problem, but because they are A problem.

I don't see an issue so far beyond Xenos factions not getting their new codexes yet, there might be plenty of D2 weapons and horde buff just waiting to roll out. But I am biased as a SW player... don't look at my sig.

 Castozor wrote:
Ah you use an app, fair enough. I don't like using them, so I find rolling loads of dice annoying especially when the pay off is so low. Also it seems perhaps I phrased my question wrong if more than one person interprets it differently from what I meant. I was specifically referring to that dice rolling as being fun/good inclusion to the game. I agree the overall game is very fun despite the issues.

I can see both liking and not liking a ton of die rolling. Some people love that chance to spike a roll and other people dislike all that rolling for little effect. Whatever we think, GW thinks rolling dice is the height of fun so I doubt that changes.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
Ah you use an app, fair enough. I don't like using them, so I find rolling loads of dice annoying especially when the pay off is so low. Also it seems perhaps I phrased my question wrong if more than one person interprets it differently from what I meant. I was specifically referring to that dice rolling as being fun/good inclusion to the game. I agree the overall game is very fun despite the issues.

I can see both liking and not liking a ton of die rolling. Some people love that chance to spike a roll and other people dislike all that rolling for little effect. Whatever we think, GW thinks rolling dice is the height of fun so I doubt that changes.

rolling dice and beating the odds typically gives a brief feeling of adrenaline and excitement. so from that POV, strictly speaking, dice rolling can indeed be pleasurable but for that to be fun it needs to have an effect that is reasonable, shaving one wound off a warlord titan after rolling 600 dice...... yeah that's not gonna do it

Or killing 5 terminators after rolling 300 dice instead of the statistical average 450.

 Lance845 wrote:
Or killing 5 terminators after rolling 300 dice instead of the statistical average 450.

you shouldn't be shooting terminators with lasguns anyway mind you

BrianDavion wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Or killing 5 terminators after rolling 300 dice instead of the statistical average 450.

you shouldn't be shooting terminators with lasguns anyway mind you

Even if thats all you are in range of/w ill be in range of before your lasguns get removed from the game ?

 Argive wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Or killing 5 terminators after rolling 300 dice instead of the statistical average 450.

you shouldn't be shooting terminators with lasguns anyway mind you

Even if thats all you are in range of/w ill be in range of before your lasguns get removed from the game ?

Right. Lasguns are str 3 and single shot. The gun I was referencing was str 4 and tripple shot. Those numbers are far worse with lasguns. And they don't get much better when it's a tac marine.

 Lance845 wrote:

 Argive wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Or killing 5 terminators after rolling 300 dice instead of the statistical average 450.

you shouldn't be shooting terminators with lasguns anyway mind you

Even if thats all you are in range of/w ill be in range of before your lasguns get removed from the game ?

Right. Lasguns are str 3 and single shot. The gun I was referencing was str 4 and tripple shot. Those numbers are far worse with lasguns. And they don't get much better when it's a tac marine.

terminators are intended to require anti-tank weapons to crack. one of the dumbest things about termies before 8th edition was how the most effective way to deal with them was just hose them with small arms fire. Marine players HATED it.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 Argive wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Or killing 5 terminators after rolling 300 dice instead of the statistical average 450.

you shouldn't be shooting terminators with lasguns anyway mind you

Even if thats all you are in range of/w ill be in range of before your lasguns get removed from the game ?

Right. Lasguns are str 3 and single shot. The gun I was referencing was str 4 and tripple shot. Those numbers are far worse with lasguns. And they don't get much better when it's a tac marine.

terminators are intended to require anti-tank weapons to crack. one of the dumbest things about termies before 8th edition was how the most effective way to deal with them was just hose them with small arms fire. Marine players HATED it.

Hosing them with small arms fire was rarely the most effective way to deal with them unless they were sporting 3++ stormshields that made weapons intended to destroy them largely ineffective. Taking 36 lasgun shots to average a single dead terminator wasn't a terribly effective return on effectively two full squads of rapid-firing guardsmen. What was effective was spamming multi-shot S6+ weapons that wounded on 2's and could hit from halfway across the board

 Vaktathi wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 Argive wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Or killing 5 terminators after rolling 300 dice instead of the statistical average 450.

you shouldn't be shooting terminators with lasguns anyway mind you

Even if thats all you are in range of/w ill be in range of before your lasguns get removed from the game ?

Right. Lasguns are str 3 and single shot. The gun I was referencing was str 4 and tripple shot. Those numbers are far worse with lasguns. And they don't get much better when it's a tac marine.

terminators are intended to require anti-tank weapons to crack. one of the dumbest things about termies before 8th edition was how the most effective way to deal with them was just hose them with small arms fire. Marine players HATED it.

Hosing them with small arms fire was rarely the most effective way to deal with them unless they were sporting 3++ stormshields that made weapons intended to destroy them largely ineffective. Taking 36 lasgun shots to average a single dead terminator wasn't a terribly effective return on effectively two full squads of rapid-firing guardsmen. What was effective was spamming multi-shot S6+ weapons that wounded on 2's and could hit from halfway across the board

This. Anti tank weapons in the past were all single shot weapons. When the terminators invul save made that single shot a crap shoot spamming cheaper many shots was more effective. This is an issue unrelated to the number of wounds they have. Its related to the way the weapons work with stat lines and mechanics that are 40 years old.