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.

 Dysartes wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Hence why we need consolidation of Marine profiles.

The first thing we need to do is consolidate all the Dakka accounts of those who push for consolidation of profiles into one single account, as a test case...

Our name is Legion for we are many.

Again, people not understanding that consolidation would make the game less overwhelmingly big.

Make ONE captain datasheet, with ALL weapons/armor options

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
Again, people not understanding that consolidation would make the game less overwhelmingly big.

Make ONE captain datasheet, with ALL weapons/armor options

But that means options, and that could confuse new players!!!!!

Not Online!!! wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
Again, people not understanding that consolidation would make the game less overwhelmingly big.

Make ONE captain datasheet, with ALL weapons/armor options

But that means options, and that could confuse new players!!!!!

Spoiler:

oh and actually go back to the strength of 40k of your dudes being your dudes, but what do i know.

Yeah lol, because ask a new player to build a legal squad of plague marines/blightlords and its soooo easy now.
Heck, ask a veteran to build these squads and its still a pain in the ass.

IMO datasheets should have : options for the squad leader, options for the other members.

So you could make a tactical/devastator/assault/veteran squad from the same datasheet

Jarms48 wrote:

Honestly. I'd rather see a Shooter Boy go down to 7 points per model, and a Choppa Boy go down to 8 points per model.

They would still be trash. Nobody takes them at 9ppm right now, dropping them a point won't change that, it just makes the troop tax 10pts cheaper, 20 if you take useless shoota boyz. (10 shoota boyz get 20 shots, 6.6 hits, 3.3 wounds and 1.1dmg vs Marines, at 7ppm thats 70pts inflicting about 11pts of dmg to a Marine)

Dudeface wrote:

Bolters do not innately fire twice at 24", they do not innately have tactical doctrine. Would you swap the shoota for a rapid fire1 24" s4 ap- d1 gun on shoota boys? If you did, would you use them?

Which is why I gave the caveat of standing still, you are attempting to build a strawman. Same for the comment about tac doctrine. The point I was making was, the bolter got better across those editions i mentioned, the shoota somehow got worse.

As far as Rapid fire 1 (2 shots if I stand still) S4 no AP on shoota boyz? If I also got BS3+ absolutely! That would be head and shoulders better than what I currently have.

SemperMortis wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Bolters do not innately fire twice at 24", they do not innately have tactical doctrine. Would you swap the shoota for a rapid fire1 24" s4 ap- d1 gun on shoota boys? If you did, would you use them?

Which is why I gave the caveat of standing still, you are attempting to build a strawman. Same for the comment about tac doctrine. The point I was making was, the bolter got better across those editions i mentioned, the shoota somehow got worse.

As far as Rapid fire 1 (2 shots if I stand still) S4 no AP on shoota boyz? If I also got BS3+ absolutely! That would be head and shoulders better than what I currently have.

I'm not the one strawmanning, the bolter did not get better. Marines got better at firing them. A sister fires 1 shot at 24" even if stationary, they do not get tactical doctrines. Chaos Marines do not get tactical doctrines.

A bolter in 3rd was rapid fire s4 ap5, in 7th it was rapid fire s4 ap5, in 8th it was rapid fire 1 s4 ap- in 9th it is rapid fire 1 s4 ap-. It hasn't changed overall, it just got mildly worse from 7th > 8th.

Dudeface wrote:

I'm not the one strawmanning, the bolter did not get better. Marines got better at firing them. A sister fires 1 shot at 24" even if stationary, they do not get tactical doctrines. Chaos Marines do not get tactical doctrines.

A bolter in 3rd was rapid fire s4 ap5, in 7th it was rapid fire s4 ap5, in 8th it was rapid fire 1 s4 ap- in 9th it is rapid fire 1 s4 ap-. It hasn't changed overall, it just got mildly worse from 7th > 8th.

You sir are arguing semantics. "The gun didn't get better, its just the guy firing who got significantly better at firing it!" I know what you are saying, the point though is that the Marine basic bolter does MORE dmg now than in previous editions.

As far as other factions using them, yeah no real improvement, except for the ones that did like the special ammo, special rules etc. If the bolter gets better than honestly its just going to get insane with how many scream that Marines aren't durable enough and need to be buffed with T5 or 3 wounds or 3+ armor that ignores modifiers etc.

I dont think the bolter is more dangerous than it has ever been, when before ap5 actually wasnt so bad

This would amazing for my Grey Knights. Storm bolters would be way more expensive but I like it.

This edition is too killy as is, way too much stuff needs to be pulled back rather than buffing even more stuff...

 cole1114 wrote:
This edition is too killy as is, way too much stuff needs to be pulled back rather than buffing even more stuff...

This is commonly agreed but that's a long term solution, buffing the bolter is a short term patch job. At the very least it might allow the layering of marine rules to be pulled back.

 cole1114 wrote:
This edition is too killy as is, way too much stuff needs to be pulled back rather than buffing even more stuff...

All the new armies won't be getting substential or core rule changes till they get a 10th ed codex. In the mean time armies that have old books, like necron or marines, are much weaker then what is considered the norm for 9th. Making marines less killy with their 2.0 book, assuming they do get one, would be an odd move. Because then they would be starting 10th with a weaker codex then other faction, so at best a 10th ed book would bring them to the level of 9th ed books of other factions, and then those other factions would get their books, and marines would be weaker again.

Karol wrote:

 cole1114 wrote:
This edition is too killy as is, way too much stuff needs to be pulled back rather than buffing even more stuff...

All the new armies won't be getting substential or core rule changes till they get a 10th ed codex. In the mean time armies that have old books, like necron or marines, are much weaker then what is considered the norm for 9th. Making marines less killy with their 2.0 book, assuming they do get one, would be an odd move. Because then they would be starting 10th with a weaker codex then other faction, so at best a 10th ed book would bring them to the level of 9th ed books of other factions, and then those other factions would get their books, and marines would be weaker again.

I would rather they move on to 10th than actually start putting out 2.0 books.

I think marine players would rather have 6 to 8 months of 2.0 rules, then jumping straight to 10th and then becoming irrelevant 4 to 6 months later. Everyone wants to have their for some time, even just to be able to sell an army before they quit.

Haven't Bolters already been upgraded, complete with buffs that synergize with them?
Also, don't marines have easy access to a bunch of special and heavy weapons?

Imperial Fists have their core army rules based around making bolters even better then those of other marines. IF are one of the worse marine armies right now. And they will definitly go down the rankings, once csm get their extra wound.

Primaris have no special or heavy weapons on their infantry, and those that have heavy weapons are too slow and not resilient enough comparing to how much they cost. For some marines, the heavy/special weapons are so bad that they aren't even running them at all.

And marine bolter buffs, work turn 1 and still make bolters less powerful then other armies basic weapon stats, pre any special army rules they have, and that is on cheaper platforms, meaning that other armies not only have better guns, but they also have more of them. This focuses marines in to melee centric builds, with less shoting. Which does show in armies like WS or BT being the best marine armies. Nothing bad per se, unless you play a marine army which core rules are linked to shoting. You also have to be very good at it and very fast, for such an army to work. And have enough resiliance to bring enough of those melee focused units in to hand to hand combat range. Problem with this, is that the non marines are so fast, so shoty and have ways to avoid melee, that marines can't counter play it or they run in to the problem of having to melee something like a crushar stamped.

The best marine armies are super resilient, be it because extra rules. DA DW rules, invs on a large chunk of army for BT, large part of the army being not marines but vehicles with invs for GK etc An marine army that would try to play the game, the marine way would fail miserably.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Haven't Bolters already been upgraded, complete with buffs that synergize with them?
Also, don't marines have easy access to a bunch of special and heavy weapons?

As far as I can see, the basic bolter/boltgun has the same statline now as it did at the start of 8th.

 Dysartes wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Haven't Bolters already been upgraded, complete with buffs that synergize with them?
Also, don't marines have easy access to a bunch of special and heavy weapons?

As far as I can see, the basic bolter/boltgun has the same statline now as it did at the start of 8th.

I think it's a little awkward because, while the weapon still has the same profile in and of itself, Marines have also been given stuff like Bolter Discipline and Doctrines. These make the Bolter stronger than its statline taken in isolation, might indicate.

 Dysartes wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Haven't Bolters already been upgraded, complete with buffs that synergize with them?
Also, don't marines have easy access to a bunch of special and heavy weapons?

As far as I can see, the basic bolter/boltgun has the same statline now as it did at the start of 8th.

yeah but it gets Bolter discipline and doctrines (for Marines, the most common user)

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Haven't Bolters already been upgraded, complete with buffs that synergize with them?
Also, don't marines have easy access to a bunch of special and heavy weapons?

As far as I can see, the basic bolter/boltgun has the same statline now as it did at the start of 8th.

yeah but it gets Bolter discipline and doctrines (for Marines, the most common user)

I'm sure gaurd/sisters/chaos marines are all jumping in joy at having at best one of those.

Added bonus, imagine a world where those 2 rules aren't needed because the bolter is good enough without them.

 cole1114 wrote:

Karol wrote:

 cole1114 wrote:
This edition is too killy as is, way too much stuff needs to be pulled back rather than buffing even more stuff...

All the new armies won't be getting substential or core rule changes till they get a 10th ed codex. In the mean time armies that have old books, like necron or marines, are much weaker then what is considered the norm for 9th. Making marines less killy with their 2.0 book, assuming they do get one, would be an odd move. Because then they would be starting 10th with a weaker codex then other faction, so at best a 10th ed book would bring them to the level of 9th ed books of other factions, and then those other factions would get their books, and marines would be weaker again.

I would rather they move on to 10th than actually start putting out 2.0 books.

I'd rather they fix the rules without us paying for a new edition.

Karol wrote:
I think marine players would rather have 6 to 8 months of 2.0 rules, then jumping straight to 10th and then becoming irrelevant 4 to 6 months later. Everyone wants to have their for some time, even just to be able to sell an army before they quit.

I agree Karol, most Marine players would love to have the most broken OP army again for 4-6 months before rolling into the next edition where they will likely be again one of the first codex's and still be one of the strongest armies until everyone else catches up at which time they will begin to suffer from not simply being better than everyone else and we will be right back here talking about how the bolter needs to be S6 AP-3 now and have 4 shots instead of 3.

Dudeface wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Haven't Bolters already been upgraded, complete with buffs that synergize with them?
Also, don't marines have easy access to a bunch of special and heavy weapons?

As far as I can see, the basic bolter/boltgun has the same statline now as it did at the start of 8th.

yeah but it gets Bolter discipline and doctrines (for Marines, the most common user)

I'm sure gaurd/sisters/chaos marines are all jumping in joy at having at best one of those.

Added bonus, imagine a world where those 2 rules aren't needed because the bolter is good enough without them.

Guards basic gun is the lasgun, not the bolter
Sisters have other ways to buff their bolters
CSM have "bad" bolters yeah

But i think bolters are fine, the problem is all the extra ap/damage the other weapons have. If everything was at the same powerlevel as bolters, the game would be much more enjoyable because you wouldnt just have units evaporating left and right

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

Yeah lol, because ask a new player to build a legal squad of plague marines/blightlords and its soooo easy now.
Heck, ask a veteran to build these squads and its still a pain in the ass.

IMO datasheets should have : options for the squad leader, options for the other members.

So you could make a tactical/devastator/assault/veteran squad from the same datasheet

I can atest to that. We had a new DG player who went out crazy as far as customisation goes. The store owner had left over nurgle DG stuff in a big bin and no one wanted it. So he gave like 3000pts of PM, pox walker, etb termis etc. This was the DG dudes first w40k army, he only played AoS before that. He took parts from the AoS nurgle models, sculpted stuff himself. Then when to a local tournament, just after the DG codex got updated, and got informed that his army is confusing, that he can of course play, but he will be scored at 0VP and will not be counted for the top and bottom of the faction rewards.

Karol wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

Yeah lol, because ask a new player to build a legal squad of plague marines/blightlords and its soooo easy now.
Heck, ask a veteran to build these squads and its still a pain in the ass.

IMO datasheets should have : options for the squad leader, options for the other members.

So you could make a tactical/devastator/assault/veteran squad from the same datasheet

I can atest to that. We had a new DG player who went out crazy as far as customisation goes. The store owner had left over nurgle DG stuff in a big bin and no one wanted it. So he gave like 3000pts of PM, pox walker, etb termis etc. This was the DG dudes first w40k army, he only played AoS before that. He took parts from the AoS nurgle models, sculpted stuff himself. Then when to a local tournament, just after the DG codex got updated, and got informed that his army is confusing, that he can of course play, but he will be scored at 0VP and will not be counted for the top and bottom of the faction rewards.

Super anti-player of a decision, that would never pass over here. cool conversions are encouraged

Oh his army was very cool. Ton of work done, he even had self made pox walkers, that fit the theme of his army, which was XVIIth century 30 years war time. But because his DG had illegal weapon load outs, it ended like it ended. Dude doesn't play anymore, but he does paint stuff. I know he made the DG tanks look like Hussite/Kossack war wagons with pox walker crews and all.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Haven't Bolters already been upgraded, complete with buffs that synergize with them?
Also, don't marines have easy access to a bunch of special and heavy weapons?

As far as I can see, the basic bolter/boltgun has the same statline now as it did at the start of 8th.

yeah but it gets Bolter discipline and doctrines (for Marines, the most common user)

I'm sure gaurd/sisters/chaos marines are all jumping in joy at having at best one of those.

Added bonus, imagine a world where those 2 rules aren't needed because the bolter is good enough without them.

Guards basic gun is the lasgun, not the bolter
Sisters have other ways to buff their bolters
CSM have "bad" bolters yeah

But i think bolters are fine, the problem is all the extra ap/damage the other weapons have. If everything was at the same powerlevel as bolters, the game would be much more enjoyable because you wouldnt just have units evaporating left and right

Agreed the game is out of whack and that bolters in isolation match the idea of where lethality should be.

AP-1 bolters would buff many factions, not just marines.

EG:
- Would make Bolt Pistol and Boltgun Character upgrades, and Stormbolter vehicle upgrades for Guard more viable.
- Would make keeping the Hurricane Bolters on Vertus Praetors a more viable option, instead of instantly switching to Salvo Launchers without thought.
- Would make Adepta Sororitas Battle Sister, Celestian, etc squads more viable.
- Would make Chaos Space Marines, Plague Marines, etc more viable.

So it’s not just a marine buff, it helps other lessor performing factions as well. The only faction that might become too good is Grey Knights. Strikes and Inceptors could probably go up another 2 points. Purifiers could probably go up 1 point.

 carldooley wrote:
THEIR BEST ARMOR IS CONTEMPT

I really hope that I don't need to say it, but here goes.
I am not an employee of GW, and I had no idea that they would actually use that as the name of a special rule.

With that said...

How do folks in this thread think of the solid defensive buff in lieu of the offensive one that people kept harping for?

 carldooley wrote:

 carldooley wrote:
THEIR BEST ARMOR IS CONTEMPT

I really hope that I don't need to say it, but here goes.
I am not an employee of GW, and I had no idea that they would actually use that as the name of a special rule.

With that said...

How do folks in this thread think of the solid defensive buff in lieu of the offensive one that people kept harping for?

point changes? just saying lore wise the bolter just doesnt match up anymore