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 compare units attacking each other a bit too much in here. It is fine that marines beat equal points or more of lesser troops because as soon as someone points plasma guns or equivalent at them they melt 2-4x as fast point for point. If armies were 100% basic troops with only their basic weapons fighting against each other such comparison would be fine. But armies arent like that. Marine troops can crush many times their amount of point in guardsmen bodies but if plasma tank commanders get to shoot at them then they pay 15pts extra a model for a 6+ compared to a guardsman.

Marines with 2 wounds and an increase in price isnt really more Durable than a few weeks ago. Marines will have less models on the table and their opponents will have more damage 2 and above weapons in their lists as well.

As playing one of the marine chapters that arent the strongest I have really felt this. As there are more marines in the meta it gets harder for my guys to survive since everyone will have weapons that are good at marines. Perhaps the ork boys dont kill many of my guys but they are in the way of those mek gunz in the back that just melts my poor and very expensive Blood Angels.

Marine troops are the best at killing others troops but also the best targets for the specialized units in other armies to get easy points back.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:


This most accurately reflects the Marines from the fluff on the tabletop, where they use their strategic and tactical flexibility to force the engagement to happen on their terms. Marines should be a mobile (every squad in a Rhino) force whose primary strength on the tabletop isn't raw statlines (though they should still be above average) but rather is threefold: firstly force concentration, i.e. the ability to put huge amounts of force into small spaces. This is achieved through having slightly more powerful models that are fewer in number, so more combat power (ideally represented by "points" but not in reality currently) can be concentrated into a single area of the board at the player's discretion. Secondly, mobility, to quickly shift that localized, temporary combat power superiority to meet emergent battlefield conditions, and shock - both in terms of inflicting targeted damage to important enemy assets which will shock and unbalance the opposing player, but also the ability to quickly take and secure board space before relocating to the next objective area.


Of course, GW's game doesn't get at these aspects very well currently because the game design is so shallow, meaning that marine players will either have to be very skilled (since achieving those three strengths mentioned above will be more difficult than piloting other armies, which is the situation that CWE are in now I believe) or the codex and units will simply have to be SUPER GREAT (like they are now).

The current state of marines, I would argue, is a direct consequence of the game being far too shallowly designed to permit the "fluff" strengths of Marines to shine.

This.

It's a systemic problem where the fluff that properly separates factions is about their strategic capabilities but the game as it stands is more of a pub brawl simulator. If all we have to work with is a small town square where everyone gets to hit everyone all the time, you can go only so far before degenerating into an inane competition about who is stronger in weightlifting or faster in running to the scrum we all end up at anyway. Things that separate proper elites like marines or aspect warriors from more rigid waves of imperial guard or easily provoked ork hordes are related to command and control, ability to keep going after taking losses and reliability that they won't simply bugger off or sit there twiddling their thumbs when ordered. None of that is present in 40k, unlike say, Epic Armageddon, where you really get to feel the distinction between reliable elites with mobility for days securing your victory while the masses slowly grind each other down in the trenches as they get obliterated under artillery fire.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Denegaar wrote:
Not sure about Orks, but I'm pretty sure you need 10 Wyches to kill a Primaris Intercessor. Maybe 8 of them if they are high.

That's roughly 90-110 pts of melee based models to kill a 20 pts dude.

A 20% return isn't terrible

For a melee unit which still needs to reach the marine and in essence has no armor? only to get beaten up by the inevitable other 4 intercissors`?

I don't think so.

Not even a single week has passed, and we have TWO Codex drops.
I play Deathwatch, and I'm pretty sure what I saw was a solid nerf. Though, I am doing travel so I can't particularly say I've tested it.

Then again, let's be very honest- it's not like most people here are testing it, either. Between the Beer Bug and the fact that it's not been out that long- I doubt there's been extensive looks into the weaknesses and strengths of Space Marines.

And I'm not sure why people consider Space Marines are 'mid tier'. Sisters of Battle, Scions- those struck me as the 'mid-tier' troops. I mean, there's ONE army that pushes out infantry troops scarier than Space Marines and that's Custodes- so now the game fits with the lore. Prior to this, the running joke was that the newb goes out, reads a bunch of stuff about Space Marines, and finds out that they really aren't that great on the tabletop. That was probably the big punch in the gut for a lot of people.

We haven't seen where the other Armies are at, except Necrons- and let me tell you, Necrons were scary enough that I certainly kept my half of the Indomitus boxed set.

I know it sounds cliche', but "Be patient, let's wait and see". Anyone who expected Space Marines to see a MASSIVE nerf when their book dropped was deluding themselves.

Other armies will get their books, and I'm fairly certain- Space Marines are the stick that all other armies will be measured against, the baseline metric.

And honestly, for what it's worth- if I ever find you out there in the wild, and you STILL think Space Marines are OP compared to your army? I'll let you fudge in a few hundred points and balance it out, I'm not worried about losing. I genuinely want everyone to get a good Codex, new models, and a massive keg of pineapple soda for free just because.*

*Except for Tau players.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
A lot of people missed my point it seemed. To wit:

- The Marine army should not be able to out-CC [Melee Force] (I'm talking generically here because people don't like the ork example, but we can put Slaanesh Daemons or World Eaters in here; the specific army is irrelevant).
-- Getting into melee and board control should be a win condition for these fighty armies against a Marine army.
-- The Marine army's win condition is to attrit the enemy sufficiently through a combination of ranged attacks and striking first in melee where possible that the melee army cannot succeed.

- The Marine army should not be able to out-Shoot [Shooting Force] (I'm talking generically here again, but we can put Tau or Imperial Guard in here; the specific army is irrelevant).
-- Attriting the Marine army sufficiently through ranged attacks and using board control should be a win condition for a shooty army.
-- The Marine army's win condition is to close into melee with the shooting force to degrade its capabilities, destroy its assets, and wrest board control from it.

This most accurately reflects the Marines from the fluff on the tabletop, where they use their strategic and tactical flexibility to force the engagement to happen on their terms. Marines should be a mobile (every squad in a Rhino) force whose primary strength on the tabletop isn't raw statlines (though they should still be above average) but rather is threefold: firstly force concentration, i.e. the ability to put huge amounts of force into small spaces. This is achieved through having slightly more powerful models that are fewer in number, so more combat power (ideally represented by "points" but not in reality currently) can be concentrated into a single area of the board at the player's discretion. Secondly, mobility, to quickly shift that localized, temporary combat power superiority to meet emergent battlefield conditions, and shock - both in terms of inflicting targeted damage to important enemy assets which will shock and unbalance the opposing player, but also the ability to quickly take and secure board space before relocating to the next objective area.


Of course, GW's game doesn't get at these aspects very well currently because the game design is so shallow, meaning that marine players will either have to be very skilled (since achieving those three strengths mentioned above will be more difficult than piloting other armies, which is the situation that CWE are in now I believe) or the codex and units will simply have to be SUPER GREAT (like they are now).

The current state of marines, I would argue, is a direct consequence of the game being far too shallowly designed to permit the "fluff" strengths of Marines to shine.
- Concentrating combat power is trivial on such a tiny board - without any space to spread out, every army's combat power is by default concentrated. It takes a VERY skilled player to use the terrain to spot potential fissures where an army can be engaged piecemeal.
- Mobility matters little, again on such a small board but also due to oversimplified deep-strike rules (always 9" whether you're a Marine or a Daemon; the old system of risk-reward and then allowing marines to mitigate risk with a drop pod was much better), oversimplified combat mechanics in which there is no ability to maneuver in response to e.g. enemy charges, shots, or other actions (due to the IGOUGO system), meaning that marines are quite easy to pin down unless, again, piloted by a very skilled player.
- Shock against a skilled opponent is very difficult to achieve, and the incredibly high lethality of all of 40k in general means that few armies have "critical assets" that can be struck; such a unit would just be a weakness, unless it has a special rule ensuring its survivability (which in turn makes it difficult for the marines to take out as well). Furthermore, board space is so small that it is almost impossible to secure ground and move on; Marine units become tethered to objectives which robs the force of its ability to concentrate.

Anyways, some thoughts.

I think this is a good point, and echos something I've been saying since early 8th. Namely, that the major problem with these editions is that the core rules have no depth whatsoever. They still read like introductory rules for new players, introducing them to the basic game while leaving out all the complex mechanics and interactions.

Except that there are no complex mechanics or interactions. So all the game can offer is ten millions ways to reroll 1s, and a card game mechanic which is so disconnected from everything else that you might as well be resolving the outcome of games by playing Yugioh.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
It's telling that the Eldar get new Howling Banshee sculpts that replace the old models but preserve the old rules, but Space Marines get Eliminators to replace scout snipers (but they don't replace scout snipers).

Its telling about the long term future of Scouts and Old Marines maybe.

I believe the game would be better with intercessors at something like 30-35 points. And make other stuff a little expensive with a couple of buffs to balance it. (And we also reduce the amount of models with proper cost increases instead of this travesti of cost increase GW say it did for 9th)

The problem with marines as Lance said is that in general, Primaris are much more limited than non-primaris marines, but now non primaris have the deffensive statlines of primaris with all of the offensive power of non primaris marines, theres a reason why most competitive lists always spam non-primaris units with the exception of buffed intercessors that have been an OP unit since before codex 2.0 with bolter discipline and shock assault. But now I'll say that Intercessors are a troop option that excells at killing chaff. I believe some people has had a negative reaction agaisnt that statement from Xeno but is the reality right now. We can discuss if that should be how they play. The reality is right now they are too good and even kill more specialized and elite troops, and they shouldnt.

I would arguee Tacticals right now are much better than Intercessors. They are weaker at CC ok but they are much better at shooting.


Now, about the "outfight by orks and outshoot by Tau", theres a flaw in that reasoning. The first one is that orks aren't a CC army, they are a mixed army just like marines, they can be CC, Shooting or a mix of both, so in that I believe they should be actually the middle of the road xeno army, just like marines. They are able of making everything. Of course, in an army you can have specialized troops, elite CC troops and elite Shooting troops that should be good at what they do, but in general as an army, Orks aren't a CC army.

Now about Tau. The problem with an army as Tau agaisnt a "balanced jack of all trades marine" army is that Tau as a pure shooting army are designed to compete agaisnt a pure meele army to not get wrecked. Thats when old rules like JSJ , skimmers, fly, etc... enter in play. That makes them be able to fight agaisnt meele armies. The problem with that is when a shooting army fights agaisnt Tau (Like for example Imperial Guard), with mediocre meele, they lose in the shooting fight and then also on the meele fight because they aren't as specialized and dont have the tools to actually kill Taus in meele. And I'm a Tau player, but thats the bigger flaw I see in that kind of reasoning.

In general, I agree that armies should have playstiles, but I don't think an army should be balanced around how they lose or win agaisnt an opponent (They should win agaisnt X by shooting, agaisnt Y by meele), and just make sure they have a viable playstile that feels nice to play and to win the missions.


But I agree with Unit1126PLL. The game can't represent how marines are supposed to play so the only thing they have going for them is stat bloat because they are super-soldiers and pure dice flexing agaisnt enemies. Thats also a problem for Eldar but at least they have psychic going for them.

 Galas wrote:
I believe the game would be better with intercessors at something like 30-35 points. And make other stuff a little expensive with a couple of buffs to balance it. (And we also reduce the amount of models with proper cost increases instead of this travesti of cost increase GW say it did for 9th)

they are NOT worth 30-35 points.

Right now, no they aren't. I wasn't proposing just making Intercessors 35 points and keeping everything the same.

Maybe they are worth 20 when 9th is finished, in 2 years.

Right now, if you compare with the rest of the factions Troops (barring Necrons, maybe), they are undercosted.

The problem is that the only people that knows that are playtesters and GW themselves. We the plebs have no information and we are here to whine about unfairness.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
Not even a single week has passed, and we have TWO Codex drops.
I play Deathwatch, and I'm pretty sure what I saw was a solid nerf. Though, I am doing travel so I can't particularly say I've tested it.

Then again, let's be very honest- it's not like most people here are testing it, either. Between the Beer Bug and the fact that it's not been out that long- I doubt there's been extensive looks into the weaknesses and strengths of Space Marines.

And I'm not sure why people consider Space Marines are 'mid tier'. Sisters of Battle, Scions- those struck me as the 'mid-tier' troops. I mean, there's ONE army that pushes out infantry troops scarier than Space Marines and that's Custodes- so now the game fits with the lore. Prior to this, the running joke was that the newb goes out, reads a bunch of stuff about Space Marines, and finds out that they really aren't that great on the tabletop. That was probably the big punch in the gut for a lot of people.

We haven't seen where the other Armies are at, except Necrons- and let me tell you, Necrons were scary enough that I certainly kept my half of the Indomitus boxed set.

I know it sounds cliche', but "Be patient, let's wait and see". Anyone who expected Space Marines to see a MASSIVE nerf when their book dropped was deluding themselves.

Other armies will get their books, and I'm fairly certain- Space Marines are the stick that all other armies will be measured against, the baseline metric.

And honestly, for what it's worth- if I ever find you out there in the wild, and you STILL think Space Marines are OP compared to your army? I'll let you fudge in a few hundred points and balance it out, I'm not worried about losing. I genuinely want everyone to get a good Codex, new models, and a massive keg of pineapple soda for free just because.*

*Except for Tau players.

I added up the points for my deathwatch army where every single model gained +1W, and it wasn't free, let me tell you.

It was 75 points less XD. I threw in a second imperial assassin and a supporting unit for my allied inquisitorial forces.

And yeah, playing it against some Blood Angels definitely felt like a crazy godzilla fight where if either of us had had any other army it would have been hilariously one-sided. In the end, the battle was basically won by hidden storm shield dudes and hidden terminators in my KT's so blood angel units would meatslap into my dudes, deal like 12 AP-1 wounds, and I'd lose like 1.5 guys and just swing back and slaughter them with my free chainswords that dish out 4 AP-1 attacks when someone charges me.

It's a bad fething joke, my dude, I played through the silliest eras of 7th edition and this is stupider than when the decurion first dropped, or the first time I played against an all-summoning 7th ed chaos army, or the first time I played against necron flyerspam in 6th.

the_scotsman wrote:
I added up the points for my deathwatch army where every single model gained +1W, and it wasn't free, let me tell you.

It was 75 points less XD. I threw in a second imperial assassin and a supporting unit for my allied inquisitorial forces.

And yeah, playing it against some Blood Angels definitely felt like a crazy godzilla fight where if either of us had had any other army it would have been hilariously one-sided. In the end, the battle was basically won by hidden storm shield dudes and hidden terminators in my KT's so blood angel units would meatslap into my dudes, deal like 12 AP-1 wounds, and I'd lose like 1.5 guys and just swing back and slaughter them with my free chainswords that dish out 4 AP-1 attacks when someone charges me.

It's a bad fething joke, my dude, I played through the silliest eras of 7th edition and this is stupider than when the decurion first dropped, or the first time I played against an all-summoning 7th ed chaos army, or the first time I played against necron flyerspam in 6th.

I'm not seeing it. In fact, up against my usual adversaries- which is a pretty fair mix?
I'm coming out about the same. Now, this is only like 3 games, rather rushed- so there's margin for error.
But it's still... about like it was before.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
I added up the points for my deathwatch army where every single model gained +1W, and it wasn't free, let me tell you.

It was 75 points less XD. I threw in a second imperial assassin and a supporting unit for my allied inquisitorial forces.

And yeah, playing it against some Blood Angels definitely felt like a crazy godzilla fight where if either of us had had any other army it would have been hilariously one-sided. In the end, the battle was basically won by hidden storm shield dudes and hidden terminators in my KT's so blood angel units would meatslap into my dudes, deal like 12 AP-1 wounds, and I'd lose like 1.5 guys and just swing back and slaughter them with my free chainswords that dish out 4 AP-1 attacks when someone charges me.

It's a bad fething joke, my dude, I played through the silliest eras of 7th edition and this is stupider than when the decurion first dropped, or the first time I played against an all-summoning 7th ed chaos army, or the first time I played against necron flyerspam in 6th.

I'm not seeing it. In fact, up against my usual adversaries- which is a pretty fair mix?
I'm coming out about the same. Now, this is only like 3 games, rather rushed- so there's margin for error.
But it's still... about like it was before.

How much do you generally use Vets/firstborns vs Primaris?

the_scotsman wrote:
How much do you generally use Vets/firstborns vs Primaris?

Off the top of my head- I generally try to have a good split, usually max 2-3 squads of Primaris to hold objectives and lay down gunfire.
Mostly with regular vets, I run either straight-up 'beat squads' or just straightforward gun-monkeys to clear guys off (crutching heavy on Storm Bolters and Shields as you do, used to rely more heavily on Frag Cannons).

Eradicators and Eliminators seemed to work well for me last time- though the best I've done, I pulled it off with 2 Spectrus kill teams rather than Intercessors.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
And I'm not sure why people consider Space Marines are 'mid tier'. Sisters of Battle, Scions- those struck me as the 'mid-tier' troops.

Just to address this point, if you look back to 3rd-5th Ed the infantry hierarchy was something like this:

Better than Marines- Necron Immortals, Ork Nobz, Cult CSM, Chosen, Tyranid Warriors, Tau battlesuits, Ogryns, Wraithguard, Incubi
Comparable to Marines- Necron Warriors, Aspect Warriors, Battle Sisters (yes, a little worse, but same offensive firepower), 'flashier' Orks (Lootas, Flash Gitz, etc), CSM, Genestealers, Wyches
Worse than Marines- Guardsmen, Storm Troopers, Guardians, Orks, Fire Warriors, Termagants/Hormagaunts, Kabalites, etc

Basically most armies had three tiers of troops- your common chaff, your above-average elites, and then your experts. Marines were on par with the elites; still outclassed by the best experts available to other factions, and tended to lose to more specialized elites of comparable cost, but could bully the chaff and be surprisingly tenacious against elites and experts. Playing against them, they certainly felt like an elite army when units like Aspect Warriors that could butcher their way through the chaff units were seriously challenged by even basic Tacticals. Plus Marines then had their own experts in addition to the elites, so most armies had some nice interplay between different power levels, with Marines being generally more powerful but not universally so.

In the current game, it's something more like this:

Better than Marines- Custodes, Grotesques, bigger Tau battlesuits, Ogryns, Wraithguard (latter three by a smaller margin than before)
Comparable to Marines- Necron Immortals, Ork Nobz, Cult CSM, Chosen, Tyranid Warriors, Incubi
Worse than Marines- Battle Sisters, Guardsmen, Scions, Guardians, Aspect Warriors, Orks, Fire Warriors, Necron Warriors, Termagants/Hormagaunts, CSM, Genestealers, Wyches/Kabalites/Wracks

You see the difference? Now Marines are on par with the experts, and bully both the chaff and the ostensible elites. The units that outclass Marines are exclusively non-humanoid things on 40+mm bases with lots of wounds and attacks, and then even those have trouble against the Marine elites (eg Bladeguard). If you're on a 25mm or 32mm base, you're now chaff, even if your fluff portrays you as an elite badass and even if you used to eat Marines for breakfast. The interplay of different power levels is largely gone; most infantry are now just different flavors of inferior horde units relative to Marines.

Sadly primaris are here to stay. Normal marines becoming two wounds may or may not point to a future demise where only primaris remain, but is not like GW is gonna make primaris 1 wound in the foresable future. Is not like GW is not open to nerfing or removing stuff from marines, look at the primaris tanks all losing FLY or something like that. But making primaris 1 wound, when they were especifically made to have 2 wounds and "Thats how proper marines should be!" seems very much unlikely. And, I mean, Intercessors had been crap since the beginning of 8th edition until the 2.0 Codex, so is not like intercessors are unbalanced just because they have 2 wounds, 2 attacks and -1 ap on their bolters.

 Galas wrote:
Sadly primaris are here to stay. Normal marines becoming two wounds may or may not point to a future demise where only primaris remain, but is not like GW is gonna make primaris 1 wound in the foresable future. Is not like GW is not open to nerfing or removing stuff from marines, look at the primaris tanks all losing FLY or something like that. But making primaris 1 wound, when they were especifically made to have 2 wounds and "Thats how proper marines should be!" seems very much unlikely. And, I mean, Intercessors had been crap since the beginning of 8th edition until the 2.0 Codex, so is not like intercessors are unbalanced just because they have 2 wounds, 2 attacks and -1 ap on their bolters.

So, when should we expect the update to the lore of the eldar that makes it clear that while they have superhuman speed and reflexes, it's nothing compared to the lightning-fast tae bo kicking style of space marine Hellblasters fighting in melee while they hold plasma cannons?

I just can't wait for their fix to the eldar to be "they're always -1 to hit" and then everyone is constantly Advancing, moving and firing heavy weapons, and shooting combiweapons at eldar units because of the modifier cap

Why are you asking me that? I don't work for GW

But I'm sure just like with Necrons, all codex are gonna receive some form of stat upgrades or rebalances and changes, for both weapons and units.

 catbarf wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
And I'm not sure why people consider Space Marines are 'mid tier'. Sisters of Battle, Scions- those struck me as the 'mid-tier' troops.

Just to address this point, if you look back to 3rd-5th Ed the infantry hierarchy was something like this:

Better than Marines- Necron Immortals, Ork Nobz, Cult CSM, Chosen, Tyranid Warriors, Tau battlesuits, Ogryns, Wraithguard, Incubi
Comparable to Marines- Necron Warriors, Aspect Warriors, Battle Sisters (yes, a little worse, but same offensive firepower), 'flashier' Orks (Lootas, Flash Gitz, etc), CSM, Genestealers, Wyches
Worse than Marines- Guardsmen, Storm Troopers, Guardians, Orks, Fire Warriors, Termagants/Hormagaunts, Kabalites, etc

Basically most armies had three tiers of troops- your common chaff, your above-average elites, and then your experts. Marines were on par with the elites; still outclassed by the best experts available to other factions, and tended to lose to more specialized elites of comparable cost, but could bully the chaff and be surprisingly tenacious against elites and experts. Playing against them, they certainly felt like an elite army when units like Aspect Warriors that could butcher their way through the chaff units were seriously challenged by even basic Tacticals. Plus Marines then had their own experts in addition to the elites, so most armies had some nice interplay between different power levels, with Marines being generally more powerful but not universally so.

In the current game, it's something more like this:

Better than Marines- Custodes, Grotesques, bigger Tau battlesuits, Ogryns, Wraithguard (latter three by a smaller margin than before)
Comparable to Marines- Necron Immortals, Ork Nobz, Cult CSM, Chosen, Tyranid Warriors, Incubi
Worse than Marines- Battle Sisters, Guardsmen, Scions, Guardians, Aspect Warriors, Orks, Fire Warriors, Necron Warriors, Termagants/Hormagaunts, CSM, Genestealers, Wyches/Kabalites/Wracks

You see the difference? Now Marines are on par with the experts, and bully both the chaff and the ostensible elites. The units that outclass Marines are exclusively non-humanoid things on 40+mm bases with lots of wounds and attacks, and then even those have trouble against the Marine elites (eg Bladeguard). If you're on a 25mm or 32mm base, you're now chaff, even if your fluff portrays you as an elite badass and even if you used to eat Marines for breakfast. The interplay of different power levels is largely gone; most infantry are now just different flavors of inferior horde units relative to Marines.

+1 to post

Expanding on the highlighted bit: Tenacity was their major advantage, and boy did it make them fight differently. ATSKNF was an amazing rule, because it largely meant that Marines just never, ever, stopped fighting. It was brilliant. Being able to pin units in place and deny the opponent a squad-turn while maneuvering reinforcements in to place was a phenomenal ability, and it had so much more character than "bigger-armor-dude-with-bigger-gun-shoots-and-punches-more,-hur."

With 8th Edition and Primaris GW has seemed to just toss that legacy out the window and favored superhero stats for basic troops instead. It's so sad.

Klickor wrote:
People compare units attacking each other a bit too much in here. It is fine that marines beat equal points or more of lesser troops because as soon as someone points plasma guns or equivalent at them they melt 2-4x as fast point for point. If armies were 100% basic troops with only their basic weapons fighting against each other such comparison would be fine. But armies arent like that. Marine troops can crush many times their amount of point in guardsmen bodies but if plasma tank commanders get to shoot at them then they pay 15pts extra a model for a 6+ compared to a guardsman.

Except plasma guns are 1dmg, so now that Marines are 2 wounds each, your opponent either has to risk losing his model/weapon 1/6th of the time, or shoot twice as often to kill that same Tactical Marine....and of course that completely ignores the fact that your basic marine still gets a 1/6th chance to save against that Plasma gun. Compare that to my ork boyz. 6 plasma hits = 4W against both. Against Marines its 3.333 dmg, for 1 dead marine and 1 wounded Marine. Against my ork boyz thats 4 dead boyz. So you lost 18pts in tacs and I lost 32 in Boyz.

Klickor wrote:
Marines with 2 wounds and an increase in price isnt really more Durable than a few weeks ago. Marines will have less models on the table and their opponents will have more damage 2 and above weapons in their lists as well.

Except it 100% is. the price did not go up enough to justify the increase in durability. Against basic S4 fire your Marines just became twice as durable, against Plasma you are now twice as durable, the benefit of having an apothecary just went up 2 fold. So you are now significantly more durable and your price only went up a few points comparatively. How much were Tactical marines before they got 2 wounds? 15pts? and what are they now? 18? So they went up in price 20% So how would you feel if my Orkz went to 2 wounds each for 1-2pts each. so 9ppm Ork boyz with 2 wounds. Not a big deal right? I mean, they paid about the same amount as Tactical Marines did.

Klickor wrote:
As playing one of the marine chapters that arent the strongest I have really felt this. As there are more marines in the meta it gets harder for my guys to survive since everyone will have weapons that are good at marines. Perhaps the ork boys dont kill many of my guys but they are in the way of those mek gunz in the back that just melts my poor and very expensive Blood Angels.

Ahh yes, the ubiquitous $50 mek gun. Of which, every ork army has 18. Disregarding the fact that to field a max size count of them costs roughly $1,000 (not exaggerating). Those mek gunz are 40ppm with the best setup and get 2 shots a turn each at 48' range and hit on 4s, wound on greater than or equal to T on 2D6. They are basically stationary (3' movement) and while cheap, T5, 6 wounds with a 5+ save is AS durable as Gravis models. On average they kill 1 infantry model a turn. On top of everything else...they are considered by most ork players to be one of, if not THE best unit in our entire codex. They don't benefit from kulture, they don't benefit from stratagems and are prohibitively expensive in regards to $$$. Also, as soon as you touch them in melee they cease to function.

Klickor wrote:
Marine troops are the best at killing others troops but also the best targets for the specialized units in other armies to get easy points back.

yep, I prefer shooting my anti-vehicle weapons at infantry instead of...vehicles. *Obvious sarcasm* They are not the best target for specialized units in my army. 100pts of lootas can barely kill 1 on average, less so if they are in cover. Most of my buggies can kill 1 or so a turn etc.

 Galas wrote:

I would arguee Tacticals right now are much better than Intercessors. They are weaker at CC ok but they are much better at shooting.

How are they "Much better" at shooting? Your standard Tac is 18 compared to an intercessor at 20. They have basically the same gun except the intercessor gets -1 AP. The only thing better is that the tacs can take a special and heavy weapon.

 Galas wrote:
Now, about the "outfight by orks and outshoot by Tau", theres a flaw in that reasoning. The first one is that orks aren't a CC army, they are a mixed army just like marines, they can be CC, Shooting or a mix of both, so in that I believe they should be actually the middle of the road xeno army, just like marines. They are able of making everything. Of course, in an army you can have specialized troops, elite CC troops and elite Shooting troops that should be good at what they do, but in general as an army, Orks aren't a CC army.

You are correct, Orkz are NOT a CC army, they are a CC army with what used to be considered a ridiculous # of ranged attacks that usually missed (BS5+) However, Ork boyz equipped for CC are a CC unit. IE they get +1 attack and gain another attack if they are 20+ models. Most of the auras and buffs they get are geared towards CC. Hell, our biggest character gives +1 attack on the charge. So when I equip ork boyz for CC as opposed to shooting I am running around with 8ppm troops with 3, possibly 4 attacks in CC each. Between 7th and now my troops have gone up 33% in price and gained...basically nothing except standard S4 as opposed to S4 on the charge. Those Tactical Marines on the flipside have gone up 22% i believe (14pts to 18pts) and gained more shots from bolter drill, a 2nd wound, +1 attack on the charge, doctrines and a few other things I am probably forgetting.

So yeah, Ork boyz used to mulch Tacticals in CC, they would die to long ranged fire but when they finally got into CC they would earn their points back. now? not so much. But even if you disregard this because intercessors aren't tacticals and whatever other arguments you have, the fact remains that intercessors are Point for point better at shooting than ork boyz geared towards shooting and point for point better at CC than ork boyz geared towards CC. So no matter how I equip my troops, they lose. Xeno tried to make a BS argument that this was OK because Ork boyz killed genestealers but genestealers beat intercessors....which turned out to be false. Intercessors are better in CC than fething genestealers. We have a problem here.

 Galas wrote:
Now about Tau. The problem with an army as Tau agaisnt a "balanced jack of all trades marine" army is that Tau as a pure shooting army are designed to compete agaisnt a pure meele army to not get wrecked. Thats when old rules like JSJ , skimmers, fly, etc... enter in play. That makes them be able to fight agaisnt meele armies. The problem with that is when a shooting army fights agaisnt Tau (Like for example Imperial Guard), with mediocre meele, they lose in the shooting fight and then also on the meele fight because they aren't as specialized and dont have the tools to actually kill Taus in meele. And I'm a Tau player, but thats the bigger flaw I see in that kind of reasoning.

That doesn't explain why intercessors as a basic troops choice are better than firewarriors at RANGED COMBAT! lol

This is the problem, SM players are currently running around with a basic troops choice that out performs specialist armies troops choices IN THEIR SPECIALTY!

 Lance845 wrote:
But step 1 of getting there is to shed all the extra baggage.

Well, you're right about this part...

 Lance845 wrote:
Old marines need to get squatted asap.

...but wrong about this bit.

The "extra baggage" we need to get rid of are the players and armchair designers who think that they can dictate when someone else's models are no longer usable within the game. Those people can get in the bin.

SemperMortis wrote:

 Galas wrote:

I would arguee Tacticals right now are much better than Intercessors. They are weaker at CC ok but they are much better at shooting.

How are they "Much better" at shooting? Your standard Tac is 18 compared to an intercessor at 20. They have basically the same gun except the intercessor gets -1 AP. The only thing better is that the tacs can take a special and heavy weapon.

The Special/Heavy/Combi is a huuuge difference in damage output.

Grav Cannon vs. Marines .666 x .666 x .83 x 2 x 4 = 2.9
Five RFing Bolt Rifles vs. Marines .666 x .5 x .5 x 10 = 1.66

The single heavy weapon does nearly twice the work of an entire five man squad. On top of the Grav Cannon, you get three bolt guns and a Combi-Plasma. Four boltguns if you decide to fire the combi-bolter as well, and since to-hit mods cap out at -1, there might be no detriment to firing it.

SemperMortis wrote:

 Galas wrote:

I would arguee Tacticals right now are much better than Intercessors. They are weaker at CC ok but they are much better at shooting.

How are they "Much better" at shooting? Your standard Tac is 18 compared to an intercessor at 20. They have basically the same gun except the intercessor gets -1 AP. The only thing better is that the tacs can take a special and heavy weapon.

You answered yourself A single 10 point heavy weapon in a 5 man squad (that makes them both 5 man cost the same) puts tacticals very much ahead in shooting vs intercessors.

SemperMortis wrote:
That doesn't explain why intercessors as a basic troops choice are better than firewarriors at RANGED COMBAT! lol

This is the problem, SM players are currently running around with a basic troops choice that out performs specialist armies troops choices IN THEIR SPECIALTY!

Wait, when did firewarriors become 'specialists?' They're guardsmen with better guns.
Marines have always (since tau were introduced) been better ranged combatants than firewarriors, tau just had a higher strength, longer range gun.

Now, if you want to complain about the sudden advance of Imperium rifle technology, carry on.
But don't pretend firewarriors are or have ever been high tier experts.

Voss wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
That doesn't explain why intercessors as a basic troops choice are better than firewarriors at RANGED COMBAT! lol

This is the problem, SM players are currently running around with a basic troops choice that out performs specialist armies troops choices IN THEIR SPECIALTY!

Wait, when did firewarriors become 'specialists?' They're guardsmen with better guns.
Marines have always (since tau were introduced) been better ranged combatants than firewarriors, tau just had a higher strength, longer range gun.

Now, if you want to complain about the sudden advance of Imperium rifle technology, carry on.
But don't pretend firewarriors are or have ever been high tier experts.

What do you call a unit with crap CC abilities, but a gun that's better than a basic Marine weapon?

Voss wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
That doesn't explain why intercessors as a basic troops choice are better than firewarriors at RANGED COMBAT! lol

This is the problem, SM players are currently running around with a basic troops choice that out performs specialist armies troops choices IN THEIR SPECIALTY!

Wait, when did firewarriors become 'specialists?' They're guardsmen with better guns.
Marines have always (since tau were introduced) been better ranged combatants than firewarriors, tau just had a higher strength, longer range gun.

Now, if you want to complain about the sudden advance of Imperium rifle technology, carry on.
But don't pretend firewarriors are or have ever been high tier experts.

As infantry, Fire Warriors specialize in shooting. They certainly don't have any skill in CC or are particularly durable. They came to the table as a faction whose basic weapon had a range and strength greater than the basic weapon of any other army, at the time making them superior to Space Marines in terms of basic weapon threat.

TBH even playing Tau it always felt a little cheap that Firewarrior pulse rifle was better than space marines bolter.

And playing agaisnt my friend Imperial Guard it always feelt too... cheap, firing my firewarriors agaisnt imperial guardsmen. Poor guys, they had no chance. Now I'm not happy that intercessors eat for breakfast my firewarriors with their bolter discipline but...

 Galas wrote:
TBH even playing Tau it always felt a little cheap that Firewarrior pulse rifle was better than space marines bolter.

Gods. . . Why?

 JNAProductions wrote:

Voss wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
That doesn't explain why intercessors as a basic troops choice are better than firewarriors at RANGED COMBAT! lol

This is the problem, SM players are currently running around with a basic troops choice that out performs specialist armies troops choices IN THEIR SPECIALTY!

Wait, when did firewarriors become 'specialists?' They're guardsmen with better guns.
Marines have always (since tau were introduced) been better ranged combatants than firewarriors, tau just had a higher strength, longer range gun.

Now, if you want to complain about the sudden advance of Imperium rifle technology, carry on.
But don't pretend firewarriors are or have ever been high tier experts.

What do you call a unit with crap CC abilities, but a gun that's better than a basic Marine weapon?

Nothing in particular. Its a good gun, but they lose to hit and gain to wound. Their real value has always been that you can have more firewarriors than marines. That doesn't scream 'specialist' to me. It doesn't even hint at it.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Galas wrote:
TBH even playing Tau it always felt a little cheap that Firewarrior pulse rifle was better than space marines bolter.

Gods. . . Why?

I started playing warhammer 40k as a Tau and they are my biggest army, they are my second favourite because I fell in love with Custodes (So even having Dark Angels as a third army you can understand how I feel about 3 wound T5 marines that cost 2/3 what a basic custodian does and do double the damage at both meele and range), but lets say that theres one thing I agree with Irbis, and its that in most of their history, Tau fluff and rules writter make the most bolterporn-lovers marine writters look like noobs by comparison.

Tau are supposed to be this new race that has no fear to try and developt new technology, and for example they made it great with the Tau Plasma vs Imperial Plasma pre 8th, Tau was weaker but safer and Imperial more powerfull but risky. But theres just no reason why a pulse rifle, a weapon made by a 6000 year old race, the weapon they arm their basic troop with (And even gift to humans and kroot), that has literally no drawback, is extensely availible, is better than the bolter, the sacred weapon designed in the age of the Emperor, to arm his super-soldier legions. I could have accepted the extra range because, like, the weapon is quite a bit longer and all of that, but the extra strenght compared with a bolter? Why?

And then you have a ton of Tau weaponry thats much more powerfull than literally the best imperial weaponry and is, again, like... why? Are humans so useless that they weren't capable of doing relic weapons in the Dark Age of Technology that can compete with Tau weapons? The Admech spends all their budget on titans? Lets say I'm one of those "I prefer my Tau tanks than my Tau mechas" Tau players.

Voss wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

Voss wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
That doesn't explain why intercessors as a basic troops choice are better than firewarriors at RANGED COMBAT! lol

This is the problem, SM players are currently running around with a basic troops choice that out performs specialist armies troops choices IN THEIR SPECIALTY!

Wait, when did firewarriors become 'specialists?' They're guardsmen with better guns.
Marines have always (since tau were introduced) been better ranged combatants than firewarriors, tau just had a higher strength, longer range gun.

Now, if you want to complain about the sudden advance of Imperium rifle technology, carry on.
But don't pretend firewarriors are or have ever been high tier experts.

What do you call a unit with crap CC abilities, but a gun that's better than a basic Marine weapon?

Nothing in particular. Its a good gun, but they lose to hit and gain to wound. Their real value has always been that you can have more firewarriors than marines. That doesn't scream 'specialist' to me. It doesn't even hint at it.

I feel people is overusing the term specialist a little bit. I mean, not in any way this is anything to justify Intercessor or Marine superiority, but theres a difference between "Being mediocre at just one thing" and "Being an specialist in one thing". Tau Firewarriors, Ork choppa boyz unsupported, Cultists, Imperial Guard Infantry, are basic troopers, that can normally only do one thing (Fight or shoot), but they are normally pretty mediocre at it, they are in no way specialists. And they should not be, they are troops. The problem is the power upgrade of marine troops that have become much better than many specialists and by that metric just mulch mediocre troops. And that would be fine, as I said many times, in Fantasy Chaos Warriors destroyed nearly all troops in the game with the exception of Ogres, but they were "never" OP because of that. The problem always comes with point costs, and extra crap and rules that you put on top ,as shown by Intercessors going from crap to OP without a single change to their statline in a single edition.