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.

Spoletta wrote:

Nah, just making the scytal +1S -1AP will bring that number to 8, which is reasonable.

It doesn't look unreasonable until looking back at editions when it took 3-6. They've still slid quite a ways.

And Termagants without Talons? 40 to take down a Marine in cc? Still pretty silly imo.

 Insectum7 wrote:

And Termagants without Talons? 40 to take down a Marine in cc? Still pretty silly imo.

And they also take down 5 marines in shooting with Devourers, while 280 points of marines, while in rapid fire range kill 12 termagants. That's 100 points of dead marines, and only 87 points of dead termagants. Sounds like marines need a buff.

brainpsyk wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

And Termagants without Talons? 40 to take down a Marine in cc? Still pretty silly imo.

And they also take down 5 marines in shooting with Devourers, while 280 points of marines, while in rapid fire range kill 12 termagants. That's 100 points of dead marines, and only 87 points of dead termagants. Sounds like marines need a buff.

When you don't cherry-pick the one Termagant weapon option that was recently and inexplicably reduced in cost, the advantage is back with the Marines. 40 Termagants with Fleshborers kill 3.89 Intercessors for 38.9 points. 10 Intercessors (same cost) in Rapid Fire range kill 8.89 Termagants for 44.5 points. If it's Tacticals, the Termagants kill 35pts and the Tacticals kill 41.1pts without Doctrines, 49.4pts in Tactical Doctrine.

So shooting capability at close range is about a wash, depending on how much you take advantage of weird points changes or not (looking forward to all those Devilgants on eBay), but Termagants get absolutely stomped in melee, and also need Synapse to avoid morale casualties. But most importantly, Marines have a 6"-18" range advantage plus Bolter Discipline, and become twice as hard to kill in cover, so even all-Devourers 'gants get significantly out-shot by Marines. If you do play Guard, you already know how irrelevant a comparison in the open and within Rapid Fire range is.

I mean, this is all kind of a dumb comparison because the purpose of Termagants, unlike Hormagaunts, is not to act as direct combatants, but needing 40 basic troops models to inflict a single casualty is outright ridiculous. That's an average of just under 70 dice rolled to remove a single model from the tabletop.

brainpsyk wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
For what it's worth when I dabbled with a guard infantry heavy list it never went through my head that I can defeat my opponents with lasguns.

I had squads with heavy weapons, special weapons, all with the idea that these weapons had more viable targets than a lasgun and added versatility to the unit.

I also obviously had tanks, transports, sentinels all to support the infantry. The infantry are the focus, but they're not gonna win on their own. I say the same thing about my marines too. I don't plan on my intercessors tabling anyone with bolt rifles.

I think this lasgun argument is a weak. That being said I do expect hot shot lasguns to do something. Elite weapons on an elite unit killing other elite units. (even still I'd take the volley gun)

Exchange Lasguns for Hormagaunts. Hormagaunts cannot give their Sergeant a Powerfist, or purchase a Plasms gun. How many Hormagaunts should it take to down a Marine? How many Shuriken Catapult shots?

How many should it take? Then balance the points by the extra movement of Hormagaunts, the cheapness for screening, the ignoring morale when in synapse range, and effectiveness against non-MEQ... And, if it's a lot of attacks, balance the points against it's effectiveness against tanks & monstrous creatures. Not so simple anymore, is it!

He's right, it's not easy there's a lot of variables.

I don't think the game can be truly balanced under the current system but I do think it can be closer.

I don't think a hormagaunt should 1v1 a marine (I do think it should probably be S4 at least on the charge). But I do think that they should swarm one and take it out, how many is up for debate.

Shuriken catapult or the avenger? The avenger should be better hands down and I think people just want DAs to be better too and I don't blame them for it

brainpsyk wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

And Termagants without Talons? 40 to take down a Marine in cc? Still pretty silly imo.

And they also take down 5 marines in shooting with Devourers, while 280 points of marines, while in rapid fire range kill 12 termagants. That's 100 points of dead marines, and only 87 points of dead termagants. Sounds like marines need a buff.

Points have nothing to do with my perspective here. My question is, regardless of points, does it feel right to require 40 S3 attacks from a variety of sources? Guardsman, Termagants, whatever. It feels crazy to me, especially considering the balance between the same units in earlier editions.

If a player maneuvers a particular unit to attack Marines in the most favorable way, are they rewarded with some kills or just a big FU?

 Insectum7 wrote:

 the_scotsman wrote:
W1 marines obviously feel like crap. Ask any CSM player. Any of them.

There are larger issues at play. I know you know this because you're also one of the voices on the "game is too lethal" subject. 1w Marines worked a lot better when the game was less lethal. More lethality comes from all sorts of places, like weapon proliferation, LOS and cover rules, etc. 1w Marines "feeling like crap" is a symptom of other issues, and just moving Marines to 2w is I nice way to provide excuses for increasing lethality in other areas even more.

Also I played 1W Marines all through 8th and rather enjoyed it.

Chaos has been doing everything it can to avoid using Marines to the point where GW had to keep nerfing cultists. You can say all you like about enjoying it, but it's obvious how things work.

Even before 8th edition CSM has been trying to use anything but CSM with cult troops or otherwise.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 the_scotsman wrote:
W1 marines obviously feel like crap. Ask any CSM player. Any of them.

There are larger issues at play. I know you know this because you're also one of the voices on the "game is too lethal" subject. 1w Marines worked a lot better when the game was less lethal. More lethality comes from all sorts of places, like weapon proliferation, LOS and cover rules, etc. 1w Marines "feeling like crap" is a symptom of other issues, and just moving Marines to 2w is I nice way to provide excuses for increasing lethality in other areas even more.

Also I played 1W Marines all through 8th and rather enjoyed it.

Chaos has been doing everything it can to avoid using Marines to the point where GW had to keep nerfing cultists. You can say all you like about enjoying it, but it's obvious how things work.

Even before 8th edition CSM has been trying to use anything but CSM with cult troops or otherwise.

Yeah yeah, and in many editions people have avoided using Tacticals, I get that too. But I dont fault 1W Marines. Imo the blame lies elsewhere (such as the ballooning of lethality, particularly ranged lethality). But moving Marines to 2W A: doesn't solve the other problems, and B: causes some new ones.

 catbarf wrote:

When you don't cherry-pick the one Termagant weapon option that was recently and inexplicably reduced in cost, the advantage is back with the Marines. 40 Termagants with Fleshborers kill 3.89 Intercessors for 38.9 points. 10 Intercessors (same cost) in Rapid Fire range kill 8.89 Termagants for 44.5 points. If it's Tacticals, the Termagants kill 35pts and the Tacticals kill 41.1pts without Doctrines, 49.4pts in Tactical Doctrine.

Funny thing is that's exactly what you're argument is. You're taking a shooting unit (termagants), and complaining that their melee isn't up to par.

For example, 40 Termagants with Fleshborers kill 3.89 Assault Intercessors for 38.9 points. 10 Assault Intercessors with a PF (same cost) in shooting kill ~4.5 Termagants for ~22.5 points. That would lead to the conclusion that marines need a serious buff.

But the reality is doing what a unit is not designed to do makes it highly inefficient, and thus an invalid comparison. So I'd argue that we'd have to ignore Guard, termagants, hormugants, guardians, etc. in the comparison unless they are armed for their particular targets.

So, using shooting termagants with devourers against shooting intercessors, that's a valid comparision, and turns out to be quite balanced. But even using hormugants against assault intercessors isn't really a valid comparision, because we'd have to factor in the utility and speed of hormugants.

brainpsyk wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

When you don't cherry-pick the one Termagant weapon option that was recently and inexplicably reduced in cost, the advantage is back with the Marines. 40 Termagants with Fleshborers kill 3.89 Intercessors for 38.9 points. 10 Intercessors (same cost) in Rapid Fire range kill 8.89 Termagants for 44.5 points. If it's Tacticals, the Termagants kill 35pts and the Tacticals kill 41.1pts without Doctrines, 49.4pts in Tactical Doctrine.

Funny thing is that's exactly what you're argument is. You're taking a shooting unit (termagants), and complaining that their melee isn't up to par.

For example, 40 Termagants with Fleshborers kill 3.89 Assault Intercessors for 38.9 points. 10 Assault Intercessors with a PF (same cost) in shooting kill ~4.5 Termagants for ~22.5 points. That would lead to the conclusion that marines need a serious buff.

But the reality is doing what a unit is not designed to do makes it highly inefficient, and thus an invalid comparison. So I'd argue that we'd have to ignore Guard, termagants, hormugants, guardians, etc. in the comparison unless they are armed for their particular targets.

That's the wrong tack to take.

Assault is a critical part of the game. It's one of the basic actions that all units are able to take. It's also something that we can understand from an emotional perspective. The heroic Guardsmen fixing bayonets to assault a couple Marines in a key position, who are taking cover out of line of sight to avoid the heavy weapons aimed at their position. The Guardsmen know it's going to be grim, they're facing Marines after all, but they've got to drive them out of that building and they have no other choice. . .

But if it takes 40 friggin Guardsmen to kill a Marine in CC, you've just taken the option of Assault right off the table for that unit, really. You're just removing tactical choices for the player at that point. In the past, because Guardsmen (and everybody) gained an extra attack on the charge, Guardsmen had 4X the killing power on the charge against Marines, making Assault at least an option in some circumstances. In 8th that dropped to 2X, since there's no longer a bonus attack for charging. With 2W Marines, this Guardsmen assault against a fortified position just doesn't even look like a valuable or play-rewarding option anymore, only useful for aggressively blobbing Objectives, and possibly just having those Marines slowly kill you.

Heck Marines assaulting Marines starts to look like an extended slap-fest. 10 Marines charging only kills a single Marine.

Edit: Not to mention the former editions including more tension around who charges first. If the Marines are the ones who initiated Assault in pre-8th, the Guardsmen could have a really bad day.

brainpsyk wrote:
So, using shooting termagants with devourers against shooting intercessors, that's a valid comparision, and turns out to be quite balanced. But even using hormugants against assault intercessors isn't really a valid comparision, because we'd have to factor in the utility and speed of hormugants.

You might want to factor in the utility of. . . oh you know, the Intercessors guns and grenades too?

brainpsyk wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

When you don't cherry-pick the one Termagant weapon option that was recently and inexplicably reduced in cost, the advantage is back with the Marines. 40 Termagants with Fleshborers kill 3.89 Intercessors for 38.9 points. 10 Intercessors (same cost) in Rapid Fire range kill 8.89 Termagants for 44.5 points. If it's Tacticals, the Termagants kill 35pts and the Tacticals kill 41.1pts without Doctrines, 49.4pts in Tactical Doctrine.

Funny thing is that's exactly what you're argument is. You're taking a shooting unit (termagants), and complaining that their melee isn't up to par.

Except that the Marines also outshoot the termagants (especially when you factor in that they'll get at least one full round of shooting before the gaunts are even within range).

The termagants seem to be running out of options.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 the_scotsman wrote:
W1 marines obviously feel like crap. Ask any CSM player. Any of them.

There are larger issues at play. I know you know this because you're also one of the voices on the "game is too lethal" subject. 1w Marines worked a lot better when the game was less lethal. More lethality comes from all sorts of places, like weapon proliferation, LOS and cover rules, etc. 1w Marines "feeling like crap" is a symptom of other issues, and just moving Marines to 2w is I nice way to provide excuses for increasing lethality in other areas even more.

Also I played 1W Marines all through 8th and rather enjoyed it.

Chaos has been doing everything it can to avoid using Marines to the point where GW had to keep nerfing cultists. You can say all you like about enjoying it, but it's obvious how things work.

Even before 8th edition CSM has been trying to use anything but CSM with cult troops or otherwise.

Yeah yeah, and in many editions people have avoided using Tacticals, I get that too. But I dont fault 1W Marines. Imo the blame lies elsewhere (such as the ballooning of lethality, particularly ranged lethality). But moving Marines to 2W A: doesn't solve the other problems, and B: causes some new ones.

I mentioned before 8th as well. In 4th and 5th they took Plague Marines instead. In 3.5 they had a different kettle of fish due to how CSM worked at the time with marking. You can deny all you want but it's something to note.

Erm, at this point, the ship has sailed. Two very practical reasons this won't happen.

1) They will need to reprint tons of marine supplements and stuff to reflect the 1W change. They are not going to do that short of a new edition.

2) Players always hate nerfs and love buffs. Space marines are the most common played faction. They do Not want to piss off such a big percentage of their player base by doing this.

Eldenfirefly wrote:
Erm, at this point, the ship has sailed. Two very practical reasons this won't happen.

1) They will need to reprint tons of marine supplements and stuff to reflect the 1W change. They are not going to do that short of a new edition.

2) Players always hate nerfs and love buffs. Space marines are the most common played faction. They do Not want to piss off such a big percentage of their player base by doing this.

I feel like most people wouldn't be mad if it was done right.....


It wouldn't be done right.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 the_scotsman wrote:
W1 marines obviously feel like crap. Ask any CSM player. Any of them.

There are larger issues at play. I know you know this because you're also one of the voices on the "game is too lethal" subject. 1w Marines worked a lot better when the game was less lethal. More lethality comes from all sorts of places, like weapon proliferation, LOS and cover rules, etc. 1w Marines "feeling like crap" is a symptom of other issues, and just moving Marines to 2w is I nice way to provide excuses for increasing lethality in other areas even more.

Also I played 1W Marines all through 8th and rather enjoyed it.

I did as well and I hated it.

My friend played DE and made questionable list building choices such as blast pistols on all his sybarites including the one in the 15 man blob he kept at the back field doing nothing the entire match plus a splinter cannon also doing nothing.

He could table me without even trying. He could just bring a random Mish mash of units and gear and generally trounce me.

This made me rely on Primaris for marine games but even that wasn't that good either. Admech has been a good shoulder to cry on though.

 fraser1191 wrote:

I did as well and I hated it.

My friend played DE and made questionable list building choices such as blast pistols on all his sybarites including the one in the 15 man blob he kept at the back field doing nothing the entire match plus a splinter cannon also doing nothing.

He could table me without even trying. He could just bring a random Mish mash of units and gear and generally trounce me.

This made me rely on Primaris for marine games but even that wasn't that good either. Admech has been a good shoulder to cry on though.

If 2W Primaris wasn't fixing the issues you were having, maybe the problems lay somewhere else? That's part of my overall push. There are greater issues at play and 2W SM isn't going to solve them. It may in fact just make it worse as units compensate for it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
I mentioned before 8th as well. In 4th and 5th they took Plague Marines instead. In 3.5 they had a different kettle of fish due to how CSM worked at the time with marking. You can deny all you want but it's something to note.

I'm pretty sure most chaos players haven't liked any codex since 3.5, lol.

For editions 5-8 I blame crappy LOS rules and high-AP weapon proliferation for 1w marine problems.

In addition, for editions 5-7 I blame the increased uselesness of weapons like Lascannons. For chaos in particular, since loyalists got Grav Cannons which helped prop them up.

As a chaos player I sort of liked the legions supplement that came at the end of 7th edition... does that count as a codex? I feel like it’s a rough equivalent of the latest loyalist update. It didn’t have grav or anything but... free marks of chaos and interesting formations! Including decurions that made larger scale games more even.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh yeah Khorne daemonkin looked pretty fun actually.

macluvin wrote:
As a chaos player I sort of liked the legions supplement that came at the end of 7th edition... does that count as a codex? I feel like it’s a rough equivalent of the latest loyalist update. It didn’t have grav or anything but... free marks of chaos and interesting formations! Including decurions that made larger scale games more even.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh yeah Khorne daemonkin looked pretty fun actually.

Yeah I played Black Legion out of that one I think. It's a bit of a blur as to what formations I used though.

I think a lot of the Formations across 7th were really neat at least in theory. Just occasionally horrid execution, and combined with 7ths other offences I've sorta culled much of it from memory.

 vipoid wrote:

brainpsyk wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

When you don't cherry-pick the one Termagant weapon option that was recently and inexplicably reduced in cost, the advantage is back with the Marines. 40 Termagants with Fleshborers kill 3.89 Intercessors for 38.9 points. 10 Intercessors (same cost) in Rapid Fire range kill 8.89 Termagants for 44.5 points. If it's Tacticals, the Termagants kill 35pts and the Tacticals kill 41.1pts without Doctrines, 49.4pts in Tactical Doctrine.

Funny thing is that's exactly what you're argument is. You're taking a shooting unit (termagants), and complaining that their melee isn't up to par.

Except that the Marines also outshoot the termagants (especially when you factor in that they'll get at least one full round of shooting before the gaunts are even within range).

The termagants seem to be running out of options.

uhhh.... what? Do you even play bugs? I'm going to take back what I said about not including termagants, as I forgot to include their recent buffs in Warzone Octarius to an S-Tier army (or at least A+)

30 termagaunts with Fleshborers is 150 points. For 1 CP you can do Bio-adapted borer grubs which is MWs on 6s, then for 2CP do "Single minded Annihilation" (shoot twice), that's 60 shots, 6 MWs (because of the cap), then they do 5 normal wounds from shooting. That's 11 wounds and 5.5 (110 points) of dead marines. 150 points of Intercessors only kills 37.5 points of termagants, with 2CP they can shoot twice for that's 75 points, so basic Intercessor shooting needs a SERIOUS buff, or a buff to durability

And I can discount melee for a shooting unit, just like I can discount psychic and shooting for a melee unit, and shooting for a melee unit as that's not the phase the unit is designed to be effective in. Not everything is going to be as effective as everything else in every phase of the game. Otherwise my LRBTs are gonna need some psychic powers, and some swords for all the incubi, bladeguard & genestealers they're going to be dueling with in HtH!

^Intercessors also have access to Strats. But Strats aren't native abilities to a unit, require additional resources, and can only affect one unit at a tim. They're really best left out of the discussion, imo.

brainpsyk wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

brainpsyk wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

When you don't cherry-pick the one Termagant weapon option that was recently and inexplicably reduced in cost, the advantage is back with the Marines. 40 Termagants with Fleshborers kill 3.89 Intercessors for 38.9 points. 10 Intercessors (same cost) in Rapid Fire range kill 8.89 Termagants for 44.5 points. If it's Tacticals, the Termagants kill 35pts and the Tacticals kill 41.1pts without Doctrines, 49.4pts in Tactical Doctrine.

Funny thing is that's exactly what you're argument is. You're taking a shooting unit (termagants), and complaining that their melee isn't up to par.

Except that the Marines also outshoot the termagants (especially when you factor in that they'll get at least one full round of shooting before the gaunts are even within range).

The termagants seem to be running out of options.

uhhh.... what? Do you even play bugs? I'm going to take back what I said about not including termagants, as I forgot to include their recent buffs in Warzone Octarius to an S-Tier army (or at least A+)

30 termagaunts with Fleshborers is 150 points. For 1 CP you can do Bio-adapted borer grubs which is MWs on 6s, then for 2CP do "Single minded Annihilation" (shoot twice), that's 60 shots, 6 MWs (because of the cap), then they do 5 normal wounds from shooting. That's 11 wounds and 5.5 (110 points) of dead marines. 150 points of Intercessors only kills 37.5 points of termagants, with 2CP they can shoot twice for that's 75 points, so basic Intercessor shooting needs a SERIOUS buff, or a buff to durability

And I can discount melee for a shooting unit, just like I can discount psychic and shooting for a melee unit, and shooting for a melee unit as that's not the phase the unit is designed to be effective in. Not everything is going to be as effective as everything else in every phase of the game. Otherwise my LRBTs are gonna need some psychic powers, and some swords for all the incubi, bladeguard & genestealers they're going to be dueling with in HtH!

Lol, do you play Nids? Look at this joker, burning SMA on Fleshborer Termagants. And guess what, Intercessors can shoot twice too!

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

Lol, do you play Nids? Look at this joker, burning SMA on Fleshborer Termagants. And guess what, Intercessors can shoot twice too!

If you'll notice, I included the strat on the intercessors...

Furthermore, the players who aren't burning strats when it's tactically advantageous shouldn't be crying about needing to nerf a C-Tier army (marines) with an S-tier army (Nids). There's an entire skill factor that needs to be addressed by those not-using-strats-in-a-S-tier-faction players first.

But let me upskill those players for a sec. They spend the 3 CP to wipe the MSU unit of marines that is the backup to the unit sitting on the objective. Then you charge the 5 marines on the objective, wrap them so they can't go anywhere with those 30 gaunts so the marines can't escape, now the bugs just camp the objective, pretty much immune to return fire (due to being in melee) & morale (synapse) since the marines can't kill them off fast enough, or have to commit serious units to clearing the objective, leaving the marines with a lot exposed to Hive Guard and other bug shooting. That 30-gaunt squad just punched waaaayyyyyy above it's weight class with shooting, screening, camping and morale.

That's not even an optimal scenario, that's just mid-board control. Those 30 gaunts can also move block the opponent (not just marines) in their backfield with advance & shoot, and bubble wrap an objective with a TON of ObSec bodies that's really hard to shift. That's a LOT for 150 points.

brainpsyk wrote:
. . . a TON of ObSec bodies that's really hard to shift. That's a LOT for 150 points.

10 Intercessors with Assault Bolters then charging averages 22 Gant kills without any buffs. 10 Assault Intercessors does the same. A Chapter master buff requiring no CP brings it to 30.

Im not even calculating for any Doctrines, btw.

Sternguard with Storm Bolters kill 30 just using the passive Captain buff.

 Insectum7 wrote:

brainpsyk wrote:
. . . a TON of ObSec bodies that's really hard to shift. That's a LOT for 150 points.

10 Intercessors with Assault Bolters then charging averages 22 Gant kills without any buffs. 10 Assault Intercessors does the same. A Chapter master buff requiring no CP brings it to 30.

Im not even calculating for any Doctrines, btw.

Sternguard with Storm Bolters kill 30 just using the passive Captain buff.

Yep, and those 10 intercessors are 200 points, plus another ~100 for the Captain you're including, while the gaunts are still 150, and there is still 8 ObSec bodies on the point after the Intercessors are done. So it's 300+ points of marines to kill 150 points of gaunts, while its 150 points of gaunts to kill 110 points of marines. The gaunts are getting 67% efficiency, while the marines are only getting 50%.

Assault Bolters we can exclude becuase A-some have argued to exclude Devourers, and B-Bolt Rifles are better with the -1 AP, so doctrines against Gaunts doesn't even matter.

Also sternguard comparatively suck, and the termagants will wipe that 115 point unit off the board as fast as they will wipe out the intercessors, so that's an even more expensive unit the gaunts just killed, not to mention the cost of the captain, and the gaunt's greater mobility, move blocking and ObSec. But if you want to include Sternguard, let's include Hive Guard (one of the best units in the game) to compare Elites to Elites.

Yep, Marines need a buff, and your data even backs that up.

brainpsyk wrote:

Spoiler:

 Insectum7 wrote:

brainpsyk wrote:
. . . a TON of ObSec bodies that's really hard to shift. That's a LOT for 150 points.

10 Intercessors with Assault Bolters then charging averages 22 Gant kills without any buffs. 10 Assault Intercessors does the same. A Chapter master buff requiring no CP brings it to 30.

Im not even calculating for any Doctrines, btw.

Sternguard with Storm Bolters kill 30 just using the passive Captain buff.

Yep, and those 10 intercessors are 200 points, plus another ~100 for the Captain you're including, while the gaunts are still 150, and there is still 8 ObSec bodies on the point after the Intercessors are done. So it's 300+ points of marines to kill 150 points of gaunts, while its 150 points of gaunts to kill 110 points of marines. The gaunts are getting 67% efficiency, while the marines are only getting 50%.

Assault Bolters we can exclude becuase A-some have argued to exclude Devourers, and B-Bolt Rifles are better with the -1 AP, so doctrines against Gaunts doesn't even matter.

Also sternguard comparatively suck, and the termagants will wipe that 115 point unit off the board as fast as they will wipe out the intercessors, so that's an even more expensive unit the gaunts just killed, not to mention the cost of the captain, and the gaunt's greater mobility, move blocking and ObSec. But if you want to include Sternguard, let's include Hive Guard (one of the best units in the game) to compare Elites to Elites.

Yep, Marines need a buff, and your data even backs that up.

So your argument is unit A is more point efficient than unit B when you spend a bunch of CP on unit A. Okaaay. . .

After assaulting, the Intercessors (without Captain bonus) now outnumber the Termagants, so objective goes to Marines.

Unbuffed, Fleshborer gants kill a whopping 2 Marines if they both fire and charge, for 40 points if we're talking Intercessors.

Unbuffed, Intercessors (Assault or with Assault Bolter) kill 22 Gants for 110 points doing the same.

Sternguard are bad how? They're basically Intercessors with an even better gun that can ride in cheaper transports.

Your post makes no sense.

Edit-Bonus: The same Assault Intercessor Squad does 10.7 wounds to another Intercessor squad on the charge, unbuffed, pre-doctrines. More than twice what the Termagants muster.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
I mentioned before 8th as well. In 4th and 5th they took Plague Marines instead. In 3.5 they had a different kettle of fish due to how CSM worked at the time with marking. You can deny all you want but it's something to note.

I'm pretty sure most chaos players haven't liked any codex since 3.5, lol.

Nope. At least those of us that played with 3.5. Everything afterwards has been a pale reflection.

Starting with the 4th edition CSM codex CSM went from an army that could be, if you spent the points, made up of nothing but veteran marines, basically "Marines +1", to "Marines -1" in the 4th edition CSM codex and every other codex afterwards. You want to talk about units that have been devalued compared to their loyalist counterparts? In 3.5, Raptors were 29 PPM bare (with Veteran Skills mine were typically 34 PPM), Assault Marines were 22 PPM in the loyalist 4th edition codex. Now? Assault Marines: 20 PPM, Raptors: 15 PPM.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
I mentioned before 8th as well. In 4th and 5th they took Plague Marines instead. In 3.5 they had a different kettle of fish due to how CSM worked at the time with marking. You can deny all you want but it's something to note.

I'm pretty sure most chaos players haven't liked any codex since 3.5, lol.

Nope. At least those of us that played with 3.5. Everything afterwards has been a pale reflection.

Starting with the 4th edition CSM codex CSM went from an army that could be, if you spent the points, made up of nothing but veteran marines, basically "Marines +1", to "Marines -1" in the 4th edition CSM codex and every other codex afterwards. You want to talk about units that have been devalued compared to their loyalist counterparts? In 3.5, Raptors were 29 PPM bare (with Veteran Skills mine were typically 34 PPM), Assault Marines were 22 PPM in the loyalist 4th edition codex. Now? Assault Marines: 20 PPM, Raptors: 15 PPM.

Was that late 4th codex also the point when the daemons were stripped out into their own book?

I think the only good thing about that era of codex was the re-giving all Marines (CSM and Loyalists) Bolt Pistols, Frag and Krak as standard equipment. Loyalists regained Combat Squads, which was great, but not Chaos obviously.

Otherwise, big steps down.

^^^^Yup. Also no more Veteran Skills, Daemonic Gifts, Raptors lost Hit and Run, etc, etc. And CSM haven't gotten any of that back. We don't even get +1 Ld compared to loyalists anymore.

brainpsyk wrote:
Funny thing is that's exactly what you're argument is. You're taking a shooting unit (termagants), and complaining that their melee isn't up to par.

No, I'm not. They're not a shooting unit. They're a utility unit that is supposed to be slightly more weighted towards shooting than melee.

brainpsyk wrote:
So, using shooting termagants with devourers against shooting intercessors, that's a valid comparision, and turns out to be quite balanced.

Did you completely miss where they're at rough parity in ranged raw damage against Intercessors, but have a 12" range deficit, get stomped in melee, and lose at shooting when cover is involved?

You don't play 'Nids so maybe you don't know, but even Devilgants lose outright in any realistic scenario against Marines. They get out-ranged to start with, Bolter Discipline takes a toll, and if any cover is involved it's a totally one-sided fight. You take Devilgants en masse to abuse stratagems and deep strike, and you otherwise take Termagants solely to hold objectives and screen out deep strike. As combatants, they're not great.

brainpsyk wrote:
But even using hormugants against assault intercessors isn't really a valid comparision, because we'd have to factor in the utility and speed of hormugants.

You know Hormagaunts only get an 8" move, right? That 'utility and speed' largely boils down to their 6" pile-in and consolidate, which isn't useful if that just makes you lose the ensuing melee faster. Don't take my word for it; look at how many Tyranid lists actually take Hormagaunts in any number.

There was a time when Hormagaunts were a credible melee threat, but in a reality where most lists you face will lose only a model or two to a full-size squad of Hormagaunts, it just doesn't pan out. Their lethality hasn't kept up with Marine resilience and their 'utility and speed' plus a dollar will buy you a cup of coffee.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
^^^^Yup. Also no more Veteran Skills, Daemonic Gifts, Raptors lost Hit and Run, etc, etc. And CSM haven't gotten any of that back. We don't even get +1 Ld compared to loyalists anymore.

Not even the Ld buff anymore?

Goddamn.

Goddamn goddamn. Shameful.

My question is, could GW learn anything about making marines unique and scale back their encroachment upon other faction design space, from the Horus heresy? Could we use Horus heresy units like special weapons squads and highly customizeable veteran squads as inspiration for 40k
loyalist and traitor units? Clearly, we’ve crossed the point of no return there, but would being able to take dirt cheap bolter boys or paying a premium for the privilege of loading the whole squad with plasma or flamers be beneficial?

 catbarf wrote:

No, I'm not. They're not a shooting unit. They're a utility unit that is supposed to be slightly more weighted towards shooting than melee.

Did you completely miss where they're at rough parity in ranged raw damage against Intercessors, but have a 12" range deficit, get stomped in melee, and lose at shooting when cover is involved?

You don't play 'Nids so maybe you don't know, but even Devilgants lose outright in any realistic scenario against Marines. They get out-ranged to start with, Bolter Discipline takes a toll, and if any cover is involved it's a totally one-sided fight. You take Devilgants en masse to abuse stratagems and deep strike, and you otherwise take Termagants solely to hold objectives and screen out deep strike. As combatants, they're not great.

You know Hormagaunts only get an 8" move, right? That 'utility and speed' largely boils down to their 6" pile-in and consolidate, which isn't useful if that just makes you lose the ensuing melee faster. Don't take my word for it; look at how many Tyranid lists actually take Hormagaunts in any number.

1 - If termagants are purely a utility unit, then the comparison of Termagants to Intercessors is a mute point, as they serve different purposes
2 - However, A unit with an Assault 3 weapon isn't a shooting unit? In that case, what are intercessors? They only have a rapid fire 1 weapon... And Termagants can advance and shoot, marines can't. So a non-shooting unit is out-shooting a shooting unit? Marines need a buff.

"As combatants, they're not great." Ding! Ding! Yep, they're a shooting & screening unit & utility & deep striking unit. So let's drop the whole argument that termagants suck because they don't melee.

You do know that marines only have a 6" move, right? 8" is 33% faster...

 Insectum7 wrote:
So your argument is unit A is more point efficient than unit B when you spend a bunch of CP on unit A. Okaaay. . .

After assaulting, the Intercessors (without Captain bonus) now outnumber the Termagants, so objective goes to Marines.

Unbuffed, Fleshborer gants kill a whopping 2 Marines if they both fire and charge, for 40 points if we're talking Intercessors.

Unbuffed, Intercessors (Assault or with Assault Bolter) kill 22 Gants for 110 points doing the same.

Sternguard are bad how? They're basically Intercessors with an even better gun that can ride in cheaper transports.

Your post makes no sense.

Edit-Bonus: The same Assault Intercessor Squad does 10.7 wounds to another Intercessor squad on the charge, unbuffed, pre-doctrines. More than twice what the Termagants muster.

Uhhh... you're going off 10 intercessors, which is 33% more points than the Termagants,
Yes I include strats, because they are a core mechanic of the game (your words!) After spending 3 CP on the termagants you think there are 5 intercessors left? 150 points is 30 termagants or 7 Intercessors. After shooting and the charge, there is ONE intercessor left, 30 > 1. Now 7 intercessors using assault bolters shooting twice kills 18.5 termagants. 11.5 termagants > 7 intercessors, termangants hold the objective marker in both cases

And I said Sternguard COMPARATIVELY suck (do you even read bro?) Sternguard take an elite slot, which is better served with Aggressors, Bladeguard, a Judiciar, Dreadnoughts and Vanguard Vets.

So let's start over @140 points - that's 20 gaunts with Devourers & 7 Intercessors. 20 gaunts kill 3 marines in shooting and hth, for about 50 points of damage. The intercessors do 10.7 wounds to the gaunts, for about 75 points, so the marines have the advantage in kills, but in both cases the gaunts still hold the point, the gaunts have better movement with their assault weapons, the gaunts can still screen, and are a better utility pick. So in raw killing power, Intercessors have the advantage, but as catbarf says about termagants:

 catbarf wrote:
They're not a shooting unit.

So the worst case scenario for termangants is they out-perform marines in utility (since termagants aren't a shooting unit, but will still hold the objective over the marines), but in the best-case scenario termagants, who aren't a shooting unit, out-shoot marines!

Implication, Marines need a buff.