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.

OK so you just reject the premise of factions being OP.

Tycho wrote:
The issue though, is that it's super easy to say "One or two things may have been OP but not EVERYTHING", and then forget how good a lot of our base stuff actually is. Marines 2.0 was op at every level. It was like bringing an NBA team in to beat up on the local highschool team. I shelved my marines because of this. EVen the weak stuff was just so much better than what almost everyone else had.

I think it's fair to say people are probably over-reacting to the new book and that it is still carrying a bit of left over hate from the Iron Hands debacle of yesteryear, but yeah, 2.0 was insane as a book, and even in the new codex, we still got a lot of things no one else will get.From how CORE works for us (because let's face it, they didn't apply the "fluff" approach in the marines book that they apparently took for crons) to the fact that we still get to ignore an awful lot of the game. Again, think about it from someone else's pov - CSM Player; "Nice! My CSM will get 2 wounds!", Marine Player; "Nice! I'm getting a 3w TROOP unit with a D2 weapon!". It doesn't stack up well does it? There are a ton of examples of this too ...

Marines are just a bit much right now, and have been for a REALLY long time.

If anything, I think SM suffers from the "favored child" syndrome because its new rules always gets released at the beginning of each edition, and all other armies suffer from edition lag and not because the faction itself is actually OP.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Da Boss wrote:
OK so you just reject the premise of factions being OP.

Yes. Boogeyman is a single individual entity. There is no boogeymEn.

If anything, I think SM suffers from the "favored child" syndrome because its new rules always gets released at the beginning of each edition, and all other armies suffer from edition lag and not because the faction itself is actually OP.

I mean, in the past it's rarely been an issue. In fact, there was typically less marine hate because it was a universal truth for a long time that the books released first in the schedule would end up being pretty bad in the long run. You actually wanted your book to come a little later, so I don't know if I agree on that. The main reason for the current amount of hate, as I mentioned, is that their release cycle has simply lasted forever.

As far as factions not being able to be OP? I mean fair enough if that's your viewpoint, but I'm not sure I can really go there. You pointed out a few specific units, but it was way more than a few specific units, and in a lot of the "problem" builds, even the basic troops were an issue. I think if you honestly sat down with the marine dex, and compared it to what everyone else has, you'd be very much surprised by how significantly better it is in almost every way.

I still agree that the 9th ed book gets more hate than it deserves because people can't let things go, and in the case of the 9th ed book you might turn out to be right that it really is only a few OP units, but even without those, it is just WAY better at every level than most other books.

Factions can be OP and UP, because people tend to evolve to the more powerful things over time.
I.E. no one had a Castellan before it was released. Within 3 months it became a terror of tables everywhere, because... you could just go buy one.

But FWIW people have not always hated Marines. Dakka used to sing with 30 page long threads of people explaining in microscopic level how Tactical Marines were awful (usually compared to 4 point guard, who were not), and so Marines were a mediocre faction that basically depended on Guilliman. There was initially general positivity at things like Bolter Discipline. Its just that GW then went on a 2 year tear, which will hopefully conclude with the Dark Angels Codex. (Bolter Discipline, Shock Assault, New Codex buffing chapter tactics, points and profiles. Supplements with super doctrines and even more comical buffs. Faith and Fury because we forgot about moar buffs and then Marines 2.0 because we needed to add more and buff the stuff we missed out last time...)

But even at their supposed nadir of their power, a Marine list got to the last 8 of the 2019 LVO. Armies like Grey Knights and Necrons - and the incredibly overpromoted, supposedly meta changing Orks - did not.

Factions absolute can be OP, the 8.5 had exactly this problem. That's why it wasn't just Iron Hands crushing tournaments with impunity (although they were the worst offenders) and it's not like the IH lists were "just" because of a FW unit. Or are we going to ignore triple RepEx lists or 30 unkillable Intercessors? 18 RG Centurions hello? Aggressors in any chapter hello? Imperial Fists Whirlwinds and TFC's hello? 3 Invictors hello? I could keep listing stuff here btw, but you only needed to compare a standard Intercessor to any other factions basic troops unit to see the discrepancy in statlines, rules and the associated points costs derived from those. And a lot of those issues still exist, especially when it comes to subfactions because Marine subfactions get so much more extra things than any other in the game that it inherently causes wider issues for games at all skill levels. The Marine and Necron codexes could be overall fairly balanced against one another, but you've now added a supplement to the Marines giving them 50% more stuff for no extra points costs so of course it's going to be somewhat of an issue in your average game. Not just from a purely rules perspective either; but the experience will not feel "balanced" and there will be an element of the other, non-marine side, playing at a disadvantage or not being given access to the same amount of tools.

That's why even if points costs put Marines into the dirt competitively, a lot of people will still dislike them, because the rules distribution is still not equitable and there's a sense that flavourful and interesting stuff for other armies, that reflects their lore on the tabletop, is not a priority or even necessary.

Okey, but those are multiple different armies.

So would it have been okey for marines players to say that 8th ed war broken, because castellans, lists, inaris and tau suits were running them over till the 2.0 books?

there is also the problem of always being first. Even if it ain't true for all books, and I can tell things about that, are hiked up in power, the power level of books in general does go up durning an edition. If marines, being the most played army, are suppose to keep up with an army that comes out 2 years later, they have to be better then the number 2 codex in an edition. I mean just look at the DG book, no one is going to say that DG are not very powerful and not stacked with multiple rules and powerful combos. They are litteraly designed with the idea to both kill marines, be resilient, even to powerfists and thunder hammers and melta/plasma weapons.

Couldn't have said it better myself OP. Ofc you are correct.

Space marines literally get accused of being OP when they are statistically at the bottom of competitive play. That is all the evidence you need. Gladius still gets toted as evidence of marines once being strong...which basically proves marines were super weak...they needed formations that gave you 400 free points of units in order to compete - and even that was short lived...like a 6 month period and then we got 8th eddition. Plus Ynnari/Daemons got WAY better rules at the end there...like...7.5 was just stupid.

Just going to point out to you. This is not the place to have this discussion lol. Dakka really don't like marines. There are just a few of us here who are fair to the marines - I think most have been driven away at this point because it really does get old. I enjoy it here though.

Being 'fair' to marines doesn't involve misrepresenting stats.
SM aren't 'statistically at the bottom' of anything.

They get a lot of releases and currently they're doing very well indeed, with some standout problematic balance issues.
_That_ is a fair picture of marines.

Voss wrote:
Being 'fair' to marines doesn't involve misrepresenting stats.
SM aren't 'statistically at the bottom' of anything.

They get a lot of releases and currently they're doing very well indeed, with some standout problematic balance issues.
_That_ is a fair picture of marines.

They aren't now. But have been historically bad in many editions. Which I think it was pretty clear that was the point I was making.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Voss wrote:
Being 'fair' to marines doesn't involve misrepresenting stats.
SM aren't 'statistically at the bottom' of anything.

They get a lot of releases and currently they're doing very well indeed, with some standout problematic balance issues.
_That_ is a fair picture of marines.

They aren't now. But have been historically bad in many editions. Which I think it was pretty clear that was the point I was making.

you have to keep in mind that 8th edition is the edition that saw the most influx of new players too, and marines were never bottom of the barrel in 8th (no matter how much you try and claim they were). Fixating on how they were in pre-8th is irrelevant since for a ton of new people, pre-8th 40k didn't exist

Marines have always suffered a bit because if you are going to build a "take all comers" list you really meant taking an anti-marine list with some general anti-tank or whatever. So the meta is often skewed against marines.

But that is down to what, half the factions in the game at different times being 3+ save dudes or ladies in power armour, and the most popular army in the game being Marines. I often used to fight nothing but marines all the way through tournaments, and indeed, my Ork list was designed to take advantage of the prevalence of anti-MEQ and anti-tank in the game by just having like 180+ infantry models swarming across the table and burying you in bodies.

But Marines have always been updated promptly, had all their kits updated promptly, and had a multitude of subfactions to choose from in every edition of the game, as well as having cheap options through starter sets and so on. And that does grate on people who might be waiting years for any updates or using models that are more than 20 years old.

So the poor me routine with space marine players is never going to get much of a hearing, sorry.

But FWIW people have not always hated Marines. Dakka used to sing with 30 page long threads of people explaining in microscopic level how Tactical Marines were awful (usually compared to 4 point guard, who were not), and so Marines were a mediocre faction that basically depended on Guilliman. There was initially general positivity at things like Bolter Discipline. Its just that GW then went on a 2 year tear, which will hopefully conclude with the Dark Angels Codex. (Bolter Discipline, Shock Assault, New Codex buffing chapter tactics, points and profiles. Supplements with super doctrines and even more comical buffs. Faith and Fury because we forgot about moar buffs and then Marines 2.0 because we needed to add more and buff the stuff we missed out last time...)

Yeah - I really don't get the "It's always been this way" posts. It's only "always been this way" since 8th. Prior to that you had isolated events where they were periodically problematic (just as you would have with any faction over the years), but for the majority of the time I can remember, the biggest "issue" with marines was that we all complained that the marines on the table were nowhere near close enough to the marines in the fluff. There were several editions where people felt straight up sorry for marines! lol

They aren't now. But have been historically bad in many editions. Which I think it was pretty clear that was the point I was making.

It definitely seemed like you were making a different point with that ...

Voss wrote:
Being 'fair' to marines doesn't involve misrepresenting stats.
SM aren't 'statistically at the bottom' of anything.

They get a lot of releases and currently they're doing very well indeed, with some standout problematic balance issues.
_That_ is a fair picture of marines.

If 50% of player base who attends major tournaments, locale whose data we like use to base our discussion on, are marines, and SM are OP as a faction, then statistically speaking, more than 5 out of 10 top 10 slots should be reserved for SM army (as it represents 50% of the attendees and each SM army has significantly greater chance at winning because its OP). That isn't the case. Only 2~4 lists make it to top, and they are usually hard skew lists.

I don't believe a faction's capacity to produce a skew list necessarily translates to the faction being OP.

As far as hard skew goes, most other factions can bring even harder skew list than SM can.

Salt donkey wrote:

To put it bluntly this codex is insanely OP, yet next to no one is talking about this fact.

I've said it multiple times. I'm well aware that tons of the stuff included in that codex is utterly OP, a marine list can be pure cheese without a single Eradicator.

Salt donkey wrote:

A- Salty veterans who are tired of seeing marines get updated instead of their own army.

B) People who are forced to play marines in most of their games.

C) Casuals/new players who naturally get beaten by their friends marines because marines are a noob crusher army.

Point A is actually the only reason why I like SM: new updates for my main army (orks) means more invalidated models that I own, which is something I hate. In an ideal world new releases would be extremely limited, like 1-2 boxes per faction every 10 years.

Point B and C are an issue because they make people quit the hobby or saturate the casual metas.

I don't hate SM, in fact I even have a SM army. I hate the fact that despite they're the most popular faction, which means they're extremely likely to show up on the tables no matter what, GW keeps pushing them over the top. Apparently a SM player can't cope with his army being the 5th or 6th considering winning rates at the highest competitive levels, according to GW at least. They basically consider SM players either as little Timmies or people who need to learn how to play but are not able to do it.

 Blackie wrote:
I don't hate SM, in fact I even have a SM army. I hate the fact that despite they're the most popular faction, which means they're extremely likely to show up on the tables no matter what, GW keeps pushing them over the top. Apparently a SM player can't cope with his army being the 5th or 6th considering winning rates at the highest competitive levels, according to GW at least. They basically consider SM players either as little Timmies or people who need to learn how to play but are not able to do it.

Judging from OP, they're right.

There is also an alot of hate for types of players even though many people here will play many armies.

Old guys like me often have thousands of points of various armies and so saying we are a X or Y player is pretty meaningless.

When stuff is obviously broken - for example Eradicators or Wave Serpents in previous editions it needs to be called out - full stop.

(*) yes I know I say I am a Marine Player but thats because if not I am automatically a filthy Xenos marine hater

I d

on't hate SM, in fact I even have a SM army. I hate the fact that despite they're the most popular faction, which means they're extremely likely to show up on the tables no matter what, GW keeps pushing them over the top. Apparently a SM player can't cope with his army being the 5th or 6th considering winning rates at the highest competitive levels, according to GW at least. They basically consider SM players either as little Timmies or people who need to learn how to play but are not able to do it.

Personally, I don't even hate the fact that they're the most popular. They've been my "main" since the very beginning (I stood with Kantor at the farm ). I just don't like that they seem to be focused on to the apparent exclusion of everything else atm. Do we really need this many -slightly different- captains, this many -slightly different- LTs, this many -slightly different- terminators, etc etc, when Craftworld Eldar are still running 20+ year old sculpts of their main units? No. No we did not.

(*) yes I know I say I am a Marine Player but thats because if not I am automatically a filthy Xenos marine hater

Oh I see - someone wants to have their cake and eat it too! lol/jk

Back in 7th everyone hated Craftworld Eldar. You don't see anything other than lingering remnants of that, because CWE are terrible now and nobody plays them.

SM get lots of hate because they are the perfect storm of super popular and currently overpowered in the casual game. The fact that they are less overpowered at the top of competitive play is irrelevant for 95% of the player base. Playing space marines every other game and having to play a competitive list in your own faction not to get roflstomped, while the SM player can bring anything and do reasonably well because the base power level of their units are simply higher, breeds resentment.

If SM go back to being terrible AND become less popular (lol, lol, I know) you would see the hate for them drop off just like it has for CWE. But because SM are the poster boys of the setting and get hugely disproportionate amounts of the releases, it's pretty rare that they are ever going to be in that position. It's also doubly rare because any SM army can easy sub themselves out for another SM army, so it'd have to be the entire faction that's bad or people just adapt by running Blue Hands or Blue Scars or Blueguard or whatever the most powerful faction is when it's painted blue.

So yes, in a roundabout way, the fact that they are popular creates more resentment. But that's perfectly rational; there's nothing weird about more exposure to a problem generating more resentment than less exposure to a problem.

If everyone and their cousin starts playing DG something similar will probably happen to them.

For a lot of people Marines just happen to be the local boogeyman because of their popularity. They're definitely not top dog at the moment, but there's a number of metas that haven't even seen a Harlequinn army on the table let alone have to deal with one regularly.

 LunarSol wrote:
For a lot of people Marines just happen to be the local boogeyman because of their popularity. They're definitely not top dog at the moment, but there's a number of metas that haven't even seen a Harlequinn army on the table let alone have to deal with one regularly.

To follow up on that who else has a local meta that doesn't have that 1 dude that always play's their faction be it good or bad.

I can say for certain Harlequines especially meta build lists do not like some factions going by just turnament data Drukari and Admech screw with their game plans badly.

I'm sure in a more casual environment with more oddball lists a few other factions would cause them issues too.

yukishiro1 wrote:
Back in 7th everyone hated Craftworld Eldar. You don't see anything other than lingering remnants of that, because CWE are terrible now and nobody plays them.

SM get lots of hate because they are the perfect storm of super popular and currently overpowered in the casual game. The fact that they are less overpowered at the top of competitive play is irrelevant for 95% of the player base. Playing space marines every other game and having to play a competitive list in your own faction not to get roflstomped, while the SM player can bring anything and do reasonably well because the base power level of their units are simply higher, breeds resentment.

If SM go back to being terrible AND become less popular (lol, lol, I know) you would see the hate for them drop off just like it has for CWE. But because SM are the poster boys of the setting and get hugely disproportionate amounts of the releases, it's pretty rare that they are ever going to be in that position. It's also doubly rare because any SM army can easy sub themselves out for another SM army, so it'd have to be the entire faction that's bad or people just adapt by running Blue Hands or Blue Scars or Blueguard or whatever the most powerful faction is when it's painted blue.

So yes, in a roundabout way, the fact that they are popular creates more resentment. But that's perfectly rational; there's nothing weird about more exposure to a problem generating more resentment than less exposure to a problem.

If everyone and their cousin starts playing DG something similar will probably happen to them.

Acting out against a faction because people like them is way more rationale than having power level agreements in casual games... Also eldar even when they are OP - not a lot of people play them. Their models are old and they are a hard army to paint too. They were OP for most of6/7th/ 8th edition and it wasn't just Ynnari ether. Escaped nerf bat CA after CA...Very little complaining.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ice_can wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
For a lot of people Marines just happen to be the local boogeyman because of their popularity. They're definitely not top dog at the moment, but there's a number of metas that haven't even seen a Harlequinn army on the table let alone have to deal with one regularly.

To follow up on that who else has a local meta that doesn't have that 1 dude that always play's their faction be it good or bad.

I can say for certain Harlequines especially meta build lists do not like some factions going by just turnament data Drukari and Admech screw with their game plans badly.

I'm sure in a more casual environment with more oddball lists a few other factions would cause them issues too.

Its cute how you defend the most OP army in the game right now by significant margins. Marines though...they just crush casual games. Harlequins cant crush casuals...

 Xenomancers wrote:
Its cute how you defend the most OP army in the game right now by significant margins. Marines though...they just crush casual games. Harlequins cant crush casuals...

He didn't defend them. Are you paying attention?

Hecaton wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Its cute how you defend the most OP army in the game right now by significant margins. Marines though...they just crush casual games. Harlequins cant crush casuals...

He didn't defend them. Are you paying attention?

"I can say for certain Harlequines especially meta build lists do not like some factions going by just turnament data Drukari and Admech screw with their game plans badly."
Seems like defending to me.
Quins aren't really that good - they are just good at killing marines but suck vs admech and drukari...Which is also BS. Drukari are irrelevant in comparision to harlequins.

 Xenomancers wrote:
They were OP for most of6/7th/ 8th edition and it wasn't just Ynnari ether. Escaped nerf bat CA after CA...Very little complaining.

Lol, it's like we're living in different realities.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Acting out against a faction because people like them is way more rationale than having power level agreements in casual games... Also eldar even when they are OP - not a lot of people play them. Their models are old and they are a hard army to paint too. They were OP for most of6/7th/ 8th edition and it wasn't just Ynnari ether. Escaped nerf bat CA after CA...Very little complaining.

were we on the same dakkadakka? Ynnari and eldar flyers were often the source of complaint on here... Heck, people still complain about eldars as if they were still in the scatterbike era.

were we on the same dakkadakka? Ynnari and eldar flyers were often the source of complaint on here... Heck, people still complain about eldars as if they were still in the scatterbike era.

Scatbike, Seercouncil, Wraithknights ... The wailing and anguish was very loud and very real on here ...

I don't hate marines.

I would like 100 + Sisters kits
(especially a LoW and a flyer for crying out loud)

100 + Dark Eldar kits
(especially the HQ's they took from us)

100 + Craftworld kits

100 + Genstealer Cult kits

I mean, I could go on. But I think you get the picture. Don't care that they are the cash cow; don't care about whether or not they are overpowered. Don't care that they're in almost every boxed set or in every video game or that they are the heroes of novels that aren't even about them.

Just want Kit parity. And yeah, if my non marine armies did have 100+ kits, obviously I wouldn't be able to afford them all, but man I'd have some options, wouldn't I?

Tycho wrote:
It was like bringing an NBA team in to beat up on the local highschool team. I shelved my marines because of this.

I don't know what it was like in your neck of the woods, but my local high-school team absolutely deserved to get beaten up by an NBA team. They probably deserved to get beaten up by actual Marines.

Wait, what were we talking about again?

The Newman wrote:

Tycho wrote:
It was like bringing an NBA team in to beat up on the local highschool team. I shelved my marines because of this.

I don't know what it was like in your neck of the woods, but my local high-school team absolutely deserved to get beaten up by an NBA team. They probably deserved to get beaten up by actual Marines.

Wait, what were we talking about again?

In the real world NBA teams and high-school basketball teams aren't playing against each other, and the quality of a high-school team is judged based on their ability to beat other high-school teams, not on their inability to beat an NBA team.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

The Newman wrote:

Tycho wrote:
It was like bringing an NBA team in to beat up on the local highschool team. I shelved my marines because of this.

I don't know what it was like in your neck of the woods, but my local high-school team absolutely deserved to get beaten up by an NBA team. They probably deserved to get beaten up by actual Marines.

Wait, what were we talking about again?

In the real world NBA teams and high-school basketball teams aren't playing against each other, and the quality of a high-school team is judged based on their ability to beat other high-school teams, not on their inability to beat an NBA team.

That sound you just heard was the joke going over your head.