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.
2021/02/24 02:12:45
Subject: Space marines are supposed to represent 1/4 of the game.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Ok, how many of those are actually "bad" instead of just "bad for loyalists"?
Most of them.
but Vanguard Veterans? Those show up in top placing tournament lists.
In specific subfactions they're excellent, in others they're dead weight that just doesn't synergize with any of your special rules.
And normal dreadnoughts "when compared to specialist dreadnoughts" just sounds like specialist dreads are better, not that normal dreads are bad.
That's like saying Teddy Bridgewater is a good QB. Sure, compared to a college QB or even most CFL QBs he is, but by NFL standards he's below average, and if you had the choice between him and any of the 21 better-rated QBs in the league you'd almost certainly want to take one of them (not accounting for systems fits of course, but you get the idea).
Remember, we're talking casual, not hard-core tournament lists here. "Merely inefficient" isn't the same as "bad" in a casual game.
It's not the end of the world in a casual list but most of the units I listed are objectively worse than other options in any list to the point where taking them should only happen if your collection is limited, you need a handicap versus a bad army/unskilled opponent, or you really like the model. Taking them for any other reason is almost certain to be objectively wrong and that makes the units I listed bad.
Ok, always thinking competitvely I see. That's fine if that's what you enjoy. Keep watching those battle reports and min-maxing your heart out.
2021/02/24 02:17:47
Subject: Space marines are supposed to represent 1/4 of the game.
The whole imperium, chaos, xenos division is entirely artificial and feeds into the worst 'imperial perspective is true perspective' propaganda.
To no one but the imperium are nids, tau and necrons the same thing.
They even had to admit this in their new crusade rules, where they actually split the game into Imperial, Chaos, Eldar, Tau, Tyranids, Orks and Necrons, ie along actual lines as opposed to artificial ones.
What's hilarious is that the 'Xenos' catchall contains, per capita, more individuals than the other two combined.
As in, if you added all the eldar, tau, ork, necron and tyranid numbers together, they would far exceed all the imperial and chaos forces - although there is no clarity on how many daemons there are so you might shore it up there....
From a marketing and business perspective, marines are their own faction. From an IN universe perspective they are a speck of dust drowned in all the other imperial forces.
There are more Warlord titans than there are Thunderwolf Cavalry.
There are more warlord titans than there are deathwing.
There are very likely more ork warbosses than there are space marines in total (a million warbosses isn't much).
The argument here is basically that marines are positioned and marketed completely at odds to their presence in the game, making them take up far more narrative space then they have any right to.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Ok, always thinking competitvely I see. That's fine if that's what you enjoy. Keep watching those battle reports and min-maxing your heart out.
I love sports and I see 40k and most other games as an extension of that mindset. The joy is in analyzing the game, watching high-level play, tinkering with a list and seeing if the theory matches reality and none of that stops me from also enjoying the fluff and forging the narrative of each game.
JNAProductions wrote: How do those units compare to similar units (or units that fill Similar roles) in IG, for instance?
How about we compare them to Harlequins, Custodes, Daemons, and Death Guard instead?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/02/24 02:30:23
2021/02/24 02:50:26
Subject: Space marines are supposed to represent 1/4 of the game.
Spoletta wrote: Ok wait, I was with you until the second part of the post.
I agree with the 8.5 SM dex being all kind of OP, but the 9th one is generally regarded as a mild nerf over their previous incarnation.
Also, they are in no way dominating the game competitvely, and have so many trap options that a casual marine list isn't exactly that scary for another casual list. They may have 100+ datasheets but only a really small part of them gets used.
Ok, I'll bite. What loyalist units do you consider to be "trap options"?
This will vary by subfaction but, off the top of my head,
-Tactical Marines
-Assault Marines
-Scouts
-Repulsors
-Tech Marines
-Half the Named Characters
-Land Speeder Storms
-Reivers
-Vanguard Veterans
-Normal Dreads when Compared to Specialist Dreads
-Land Speeders in General
-Storm Speeders
-Land Raiders of all kinds
-Thunderhawks
-Every LoW Aside from Gulliman
-Every Fortification
-Impulsors
-Predators
-Any Dedicated AA Vehicle
-Every Flyer except the Dark Talon
Yeah, there are a lot of units that range from bad to merely inefficient and I didn't even start on the chapter-specific units that can be duds.
Ok, how many of those are actually "bad" instead of just "bad for loyalists"? Yeah, Thunderhawks and the like, but Vanguard Veterans? Those show up in top placing tournament lists. And normal dreadnoughts "when compared to specialist dreadnoughts" just sounds like specialist dreads are better, not that normal dreads are bad. Remember, we're talking casual, not hard-core tournament lists here. "Merely inefficient" isn't the same as "bad" in a casual game.
For a fun laugh compare loyalist dreadnoughts to any of the various xenos 'similar to dreads' units.
The basic MM+CCW dreadnought fething wipes the floor with any of them effortlessly for a suspiciously similar (sometimes less lol Wraithlords...) point cost. But it's a 'trap option' lol...
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2021/02/24 02:58:04
Subject: Space marines are supposed to represent 1/4 of the game.
Lol I didn't read the thread, but the original post should be taught in logic class as a perfect example of circular reasoning.
"Space Marines get the right amount of attention because they are such an outsized part of the game that they actually belong in their own super category, completely separate from the super category they actually belong to in terms of lore!"
Um....yeah, I guess? Way to define your way out of the issue, Chief.
2021/02/24 03:16:46
Subject: Space marines are supposed to represent 1/4 of the game.
The basic MM+CCW dreadnought fething wipes the floor with any of them effortlessly for a suspiciously similar (sometimes less lol Wraithlords...) point cost. But it's a 'trap option' lol...
I notice that you're mostly focusing on armies that have yet to be updated this edition.
You're also doing that thing you like to do in comparing units in a vacuum and ignoring the fact that, for example, Tyranids should be fielding hierodules instead of Fexes right now. Or that a C'Tan or Ghazkul will mince a Dread and ask for seconds.
2021/02/24 03:24:06
Subject: Space marines are supposed to represent 1/4 of the game.
ccs wrote: No they don't. At best what they really want is stuff for "their" faction released.
Nah. SoB are my least favorite faction in the setting but I'll take the time to say good things about them when their stuff gets released, because at least they aren't more Astartes stuff.
I notice that you're mostly focusing on armies that have yet to be updated this edition.
You're also doing that thing you like to do in comparing units in a vacuum and ignoring the fact that, for example, Tyranids should be fielding hierodules instead of Fexes right now. Or that a C'Tan or Ghazkul will mince a Dread and ask for seconds.
Sure, and Astartes got special carebear handholding with the edition change that no other faction got. More unfairness.
Hecaton wrote: Sure, and Astartes got special carebear handholding with the edition change that no other faction got. More unfairness.
How is the game's single most popular faction getting their rules first and thus maximizing the number of players with a new codex special treatment? It seems like logic to me.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/24 03:35:12
2021/02/24 03:44:36
Subject: Space marines are supposed to represent 1/4 of the game.
Hecaton wrote: Sure, and Astartes got special carebear handholding with the edition change that no other faction got. More unfairness.
How is the game's single most popular faction getting their rules first and thus maximizing the number of players with a new codex special treatment? It seems like logic to me.
It's special treatment by definition. It's not like GW rushed to produce a whole shitton of SoB releases after their redo sold out. They're hellbent on making money with Astartes, to the exclusion of almost all else.
2021/02/24 03:47:03
Subject: Space marines are supposed to represent 1/4 of the game.
Hecaton wrote: It's special treatment by definition. It's not like GW rushed to produce a whole shitton of SoB releases after their redo sold out. They're hellbent on making money with Astartes, to the exclusion of almost all else.
So who should have gotten the first codex, some Xeno faction played by <5% of the player base?
2021/02/24 04:02:13
Subject: Space marines are supposed to represent 1/4 of the game.
Personally, I'm okay with Marines getting some more support, like, the first codex in an edition. That's fine. It's that they got like, what... DA, DW, SW, BA... so 5 out of the first 7?
And indexes to tide them over for those few short months, of course, which no one else gets, and who may be waiting years.
And still have subfaction supplements, which no one else gets.
And got an obscene number of model releases since July, releases which are still ongoing. I'm not sure if they have all the multipose kits out for the Indomitus monopose models, but if they haven't, then the Marine parade hasn't ended yet.
It's honestly a bit soul-crushing if you had, as I had at one point, been emotionally invested in the game.
"All you 40k people out there have managed to more or less do something that I did some time ago, and some of my friends did before me, and some of their friends did before them: When you saw the water getting gakky, you decided to, well, get out of the pool, rather than say 'I guess this is water now.'"
-Tex Talks Battletech on GW
2021/02/24 04:05:03
Subject: Space marines are supposed to represent 1/4 of the game.
So who should have gotten the first codex, some Xeno faction played by <5% of the player base?
I'm not talking about the first codex, I'm talking about the index situation.
Do you mean the two wounds for MEQs and weapons changes preceding their soon-to-release codex? I suspect that only happened due to COVID delays and couldn't have happened for other factions because their rules weren't far enough along to roll anything else out.
CEO Kasen wrote: Personally, I'm okay with Marines getting some more support, like, the first codex in an edition. That's fine. It's that they got like, what... DA, DW, SW, BA... so 5 out of the first 7?
You mean one Codex and some supplements.
And still have subfaction supplements, which no one else gets.
Those used to be full codices, would you have enjoyed that more?
And got an obscene number of model releases since July, releases which are still ongoing. I'm not sure if they have all the multipose kits out for the Indomitus monopose models, but if they haven't, then the Marine parade hasn't ended yet.
Yet they're averaging exactly the same model release percentage that they've always had.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/02/24 04:07:25
2021/02/24 04:20:44
Subject: Space marines are supposed to represent 1/4 of the game.
Do you mean the two wounds for MEQs and weapons changes preceding their soon-to-release codex? I suspect that only happened due to COVID delays and couldn't have happened for other factions because their rules weren't far enough along to roll anything else out.
I still haven't seen a good argument for why they couldn't do it for CSM.
Canadian 5th wrote: Yet they're averaging exactly the same model release percentage that they've always had.
Compared to what time period?
2021/02/24 04:26:47
Subject: Space marines are supposed to represent 1/4 of the game.
So what exactly is your point, Canadian? That actually, we're in a great spot, with most armies being neglected, and Space Marines dominating in terms of rules, fluff and model release is a healthy state for the hobby to be in, doesn't need any changing, and all the fans who are sick and tired of YET ANOTHER year of the Marine are wrong for wanting the 40k universe to be better?
2021/02/24 04:31:15
Subject: Space marines are supposed to represent 1/4 of the game.
Hecaton wrote: I still haven't seen a good argument for why they couldn't do it for CSM.
I have no idea, I'd be fine with them and GK getting the bump but perhaps GW has reason to think that would break something. Neither of us knows why they didn't do it and speculating is pointless.
Compared to what time period?
Basically all of them, except for a couple of periods when they added entire new armies.
posermcbogus wrote: So what exactly is your point, Canadian? That actually, we're in a great spot, with most armies being neglected, and Space Marines dominating in terms of rules, fluff and model release is a healthy state for the hobby to be in, doesn't need any changing, and all the fans who are sick and tired of YET ANOTHER year of the Marine are wrong for wanting the 40k universe to be better?
Between Marines, Necrons, and DG who all got updates and Daemons, Harlequins, Custodes, Orks, and Sisters who don't need an update nearly half the armies in the game already have good rules and that half probably represents an even larger percentage of the player base, so yeah the game is fine as is. We know GW wants to release new rules more quickly than they have been but can't due to COVID so it's entirely possible we were supposed to have every army updated this year.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/02/24 04:34:53
2021/02/24 04:39:11
Subject: Space marines are supposed to represent 1/4 of the game.
I have no idea, I'd be fine with them and GK getting the bump but perhaps GW has reason to think that would break something. Neither of us knows why they didn't do it and speculating is pointless.
No, speculating about it tells us, as customers, whether or not to keep engaging with the product. What makes you think that GW's behavior in this matter has anything to do with balance?
Hecaton wrote: No, speculating about it tells us, as customers, whether or not to keep engaging with the product. What makes you think that GW's behavior in this matter has anything to do with balance?
Yes, making up random junk is how I make every choice about the products I engage with... WHAT?!
2021/02/24 04:45:08
Subject: Space marines are supposed to represent 1/4 of the game.
Hecaton wrote: No, speculating about it tells us, as customers, whether or not to keep engaging with the product. What makes you think that GW's behavior in this matter has anything to do with balance?
Yes, making up random junk is how I make every choice about the products I engage with... WHAT?!
Speculating doesn't baselessly speculating. You've already engaged in speculation by saying it was a balance issue, so clearly you're a hypocrite on this topic.
2021/02/24 04:47:36
Subject: Space marines are supposed to represent 1/4 of the game.
Hecaton wrote: Speculating doesn't baselessly speculating. You've already engaged in speculation by saying it was a balance issue, so clearly you're a hypocrite on this topic.
I prefaced that speculation with the fact that I have no idea why it's being done and that I would agree with the change, but given the lack of facts about my statement carries exactly zero weight and should have no influence on if or how anybody engages with the game.
2021/02/24 04:47:47
Subject: Space marines are supposed to represent 1/4 of the game.
That those books were supplements doesn't make it feel any better. Honestly? I was kind of cooler with it when those "Snowflake Chapters" were their own books, back in the Times Before, when I actually played Vanilla Marines. Maybe it's because that means there'd only be 6 Marine books (Just counting this out so I'm sure I have it right: Vanilla, SW, BA, DA, DW, may or may not be able to count GK) instead of 13; (RG, UM, WS, Sallys, IF, BT, IH; Codex 9.0 replaces the "Vanilla" moniker) maybe it's because their rules could be compartmentalized. At least SW/BA/Etc could reasonably be said to have, within an order of magnitude, the number of rules as most other factions. And hell, if you did play SW/BA/DA/Whatever, at least you'd only have to buy one book!
The very existence of Supplements at all is problematic, because for that particular wound to be completely addressed to the point that things feel fair, every subfaction would have to get their own supplements, and A) I strongly doubt that's happening, B) nor am I particularly sure I want it to, because I'm not anywhere near a good enough game designer to even begin to imagine what a spaghettified mess the game would look like if I'm wrong about A), especially since they ditched USR.
It's a pickle they put themselves into. I honestly don't see a way for GW to back out of that problem until they inevitably scrap everything and run to 10th edition.
As for number of Marine model releases: I could reasonably argue that the historical number is still too many, but you're right in that if that number has not changed, it still feels worse than before, and the reason for that deserves analysis.
Here I'm genuinely speculating, without sarcasm: Were the numerous Marine releases before 8th just little niche characters so no one cared? Has it gotten to a more critical point because that historically is too many Marine releases, it's just now finally become too much, and Indomitus was the tipping point? Is it Primaris-related - the rather scammy feeling that they're trying to sell Marine players more Marine armies, the power fantasy way they've been presented, or the Bigger Batman problem? How nonstop the releases have been in the second half of 2020? The way it's marketed, with constant 'leaks' making the Marine parade feel spirit-grindingly endless?
Probably several if not all of the above, and maybe more, because something like this never has just one cause.
"All you 40k people out there have managed to more or less do something that I did some time ago, and some of my friends did before me, and some of their friends did before them: When you saw the water getting gakky, you decided to, well, get out of the pool, rather than say 'I guess this is water now.'"
-Tex Talks Battletech on GW
2021/02/24 04:54:34
Subject: Space marines are supposed to represent 1/4 of the game.
CEO Kasen wrote: That those books were supplements doesn't make it feel any better. Honestly? I was kind of cooler with it when those "Snowflake Chapters" were their own books, back in the Times Before, when I actually played Vanilla Marines. Maybe it's because that means there'd only be 6 Marine books (Just counting this out so I'm sure I have it right: Vanilla, SW, BA, DA, DW, may or may not be able to count GK) instead of 13; (RG, UM, WS, Sallys, IF, BT, IH; Codex 9.0 replaces the "Vanilla" moniker) maybe it's because their rules could be compartmentalized. At least SW/BA/Etc could reasonably be said to have, within an order of magnitude, the number of rules as most other factions. And hell, if you did play SW/BA/DA/Whatever, at least you'd only have to buy one book!
The very existence of Supplements at all is problematic, because for that particular wound to be completely addressed to the point that things feel fair, every subfaction would have to get their own supplements, and A) I strongly doubt that's happening, B) nor am I particularly sure I want it to, because I'm not anywhere near a good enough game designer to even begin to imagine what a spaghettified mess the game would look like if I'm wrong about A), especially since they ditched USR.
It's a pickle they put themselves into. I honestly don't see a way for GW to back out of that problem until they inevitably scrap everything and run to 10th edition.
Yes, and? GW will always have a strong incentive to reset the game every 3 - 5 years because that generates sales. Stop thinking of 40k as a game seeking perfection and start thinking of it as a game seeking bursts of excitement and GWs strategy makes more sense.
As for number of Marine model releases: I could reasonably argue that the historical number is still too many, but you're right in that if that number has not changed, it still feels worse than before, and the reason for that deserves analysis.
It feels worse because there are more factions so every non-SM faction gets comparatively fewer releases and because GW isn't trickling out releases these days preferring to drop wholesale army changes all at once. So when you're not getting anything you're really not getting anything and when you are getting something it happens so quickly some players can't enjoy it fully. This doesn't affect everybody equally which is why many of us are fine with the situation and others feel like it's ruining the game.
2021/02/24 05:00:53
Subject: Space marines are supposed to represent 1/4 of the game.
... Daemons, Harlequins, Custodes, Orks, and Sisters who don't need an update
Perhaps we don't need one to be competitive... But as a Crusade player, who values Crusade content more than anything else in the new dexes, we ALL need dexes. And we'd all love to have a few new models too.
Canadian 5th wrote: We know GW wants to release new rules more quickly than they have been but can't due to COVID so it's entirely possible we were supposed to have every army updated this year.
This is very fair, and I actually suspect GW would have had them all out by the end of the year if not for the Covid/ Brexit double whammy. They had planned to go two/ month in most months- probably only doing one in months with particularly large releases.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/24 05:06:47
2021/02/24 05:04:21
Subject: Space marines are supposed to represent 1/4 of the game.
PenitentJake wrote: Perhaps we don't need one to be competitive... But as a Crusade player, who values Crusade content more than anything else in the new dexes, we ALL need dexes. And we'd all love to have a few new models too.
That's fair, but you could literally make up your own using the examples from the content that already exists. Narrative game modes are nice like that. You can't house rule your army into being good in a tournament or PUG setting where you may not be playing with a set group so I place greater value on that.
