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.

After a couple of days chewing it over, I think I've worked out what it is that bugs me about the Guard changes: it's that the rules don't exist in the interests of representing anything and are purely there to paper over the fact that Guard are in a bad way as a faction – it's basically a big flashing light attracting attention to 9th being a half-finished game (see also: c. two years of Chaos Marines only having 1 wound when supposedly-equivalent loyalists have 2, not for any in-universe representational reason, but purely because the book's not ready yet).

 Souleater wrote:
Am I misinterpreting things or does it really come down to 'Xenos shouldn't be killing Marines'?

No, you're correct.

 vipoid wrote:

 Souleater wrote:
Am I misinterpreting things or does it really come down to 'Xenos shouldn't be killing Marines'?

No, you're correct.

"And They Shall Know No Unfavourable Rules Changes". Amirite?

 Souleater wrote:
I think it's difficult to make MEQ players happy to be honest.

In previous editions I had Marine players bemoan the 3+ saves of both my Necron Warriors and Sisters of Battle; who were shooting back at them with effectively identical weapons.

I also used to get complaints about the two Blasters in my eighteen model Dark Eldar Warrior squads. Those blasters were there because the other sixteen folks rapid-firing squad would be high-fiving each other if they lucked out and killed a single Marine.

Today, in my current group, the Marine and Sisters players complain about the standard Bolt Gun's lack of punch; but then want Powered Armour to be better.

Am I misinterpreting things or does it really come down to 'Xenos shouldn't be killing Marines'?

I understand MEQ armies carrying weapons that can punch through powered armour if that's the thing that gives them the most issue.

Eh, if people were complaining about Warriors and SoB getting 3+ saves and Blasters killing their Marines, I'd say it "really comes down to" them just being Big Whiners. SoB are in power armour, same as Marines, and Necron Warriors are solid metal, they should have good saves, same as Marines. And Blasters should be good at killing Marines. If people can't handle that, then they need to reassess their expectations. Most Marine players get those things.

JakeSiren wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:
Why would the Nid's Army of Renown be considered valid? It's for a book that has been superseded. GW would have to FAQ it otherwise for it to be valid again (such as the 8th Ed SM Supplements)

Crusher stamped is valid, it was released just 5 months ago.

And? Just look at Saga of the Beast. That was valid for 7 months until the SM codex dropped and invalidated the Space Wolf half of it. What do you think makes Crusher the exception?

Was saga of wolf specifically said to be overwritten? Is crusher specifically said?

Gw has history of not invalidating by default rules from supplement when rdentical named supplement comes.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Yonow, it was unfluffy and immersion breaking.

But 6's to hit auto-wounding Titans is a-ok?

Twas sarcasm.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Souleater wrote:
I think it's difficult to make MEQ players happy to be honest.

In previous editions I had Marine players bemoan the 3+ saves of both my Necron Warriors and Sisters of Battle; who were shooting back at them with effectively identical weapons.

I also used to get complaints about the two Blasters in my eighteen model Dark Eldar Warrior squads. Those blasters were there because the other sixteen folks rapid-firing squad would be high-fiving each other if they lucked out and killed a single Marine.

Today, in my current group, the Marine and Sisters players complain about the standard Bolt Gun's lack of punch; but then want Powered Armour to be better.

Am I misinterpreting things or does it really come down to 'Xenos shouldn't be killing Marines'?

I understand MEQ armies carrying weapons that can punch through powered armour if that's the thing that gives them the most issue.

Eh, if people were complaining about Warriors and SoB getting 3+ saves and Blasters killing their Marines, I'd say it "really comes down to" them just being Big Whiners. SoB are in power armour, same as Marines, and Necron Warriors are solid metal, they should have good saves, same as Marines. And Blasters should be good at killing Marines. If people can't handle that, then they need to reassess their expectations. Most Marine players get those things.

Plus part of the reason Sisters are cheaper is that most of their stats are worse meaning they're easier to wound and grind down in assualt.

 Souleater wrote:
Am I misinterpreting things or does it really come down to 'Xenos shouldn't be killing Marines'?

You're not. That's the subtext here. A lot of Astartes players are very invested in the power fantasy.

What is that, because the stuff I found after googling definitly is not ment to be used with table top gaming.

I mean people think that marines should be the army to be farmed by other? I mean in game they are most of the time, specially if someone does play specific builds and factions. But to expect that marines player would think it is a good state to be in, seems kind of a odd.

How do people think this should work, most armies and most players are marines. How often should they be good? In way the dediction that marine players have for their armies is rather stuning as most of the time they are not the army to play, if you win and have the biggest turn over of units between editions and codex.

The idea is that nobody should be the army "farmed by others". Space Marines should be good as often as other armies are good, and I'd say the reliability with which GW releases new toys/rules for Space Marines means that the dedication of their fans is...overall less meaningful, I guess? SM rarely go a full year (much less a full edition) without something nice, whereas many other codices have to wait as long or longer to get something.

tneva82 wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:
Why would the Nid's Army of Renown be considered valid? It's for a book that has been superseded. GW would have to FAQ it otherwise for it to be valid again (such as the 8th Ed SM Supplements)

Crusher stamped is valid, it was released just 5 months ago.

And? Just look at Saga of the Beast. That was valid for 7 months until the SM codex dropped and invalidated the Space Wolf half of it. What do you think makes Crusher the exception?

Was saga of wolf specifically said to be overwritten? Is crusher specifically said?

Gw has history of not invalidating by default rules from supplement when rdentical named supplement comes.

I don't believe it was explicitly said, but my experience has been that GW doesn't announce or publish when a specific book or publication is no longer valid.

If you don't consider a supplement invalid when the codex it's referencing is updated, what has to occur for you to consider it invalid?

This just in: the Eye of Terror supplement from 3.5 is legal!

I finally can field Lost and the Damned again.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
This just in: the Eye of Terror supplement from 3.5 is legal!

I finally can field Lost and the Damned again.

Hell yeah, I'ma go run my Cadian Shock Troops!

 waefre_1 wrote:
The idea is that nobody should be the army "farmed by others". Space Marines should be good as often as other armies are good, and I'd say the reliability with which GW releases new toys/rules for Space Marines means that the dedication of their fans is...overall less meaningful, I guess? SM rarely go a full year (much less a full edition) without something nice, whereas many other codices have to wait as long or longer to get something.

I don't get what nice means. Marines get model updates, but unles the nice is related to painting, I do not know what you mean. Heavy intercessors were pushed back so far in their release, that by the time they did arrive at the stores there was no place for them in the lists. Marines characters, with sole exeption of the chaplain, are all not worth taking when regular marine versions with bikes and jet packs exist. In 8th, when the primaris line was given to marine players, it was not worth to take any of those units up until 2.0 books came in. Dead or trap options are not good, and having more of them given, even if the models look nice doesn't help a player much.

JakeSiren wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:
Why would the Nid's Army of Renown be considered valid? It's for a book that has been superseded. GW would have to FAQ it otherwise for it to be valid again (such as the 8th Ed SM Supplements)

Crusher stamped is valid, it was released just 5 months ago.

And? Just look at Saga of the Beast. That was valid for 7 months until the SM codex dropped and invalidated the Space Wolf half of it. What do you think makes Crusher the exception?

Was saga of wolf specifically said to be overwritten? Is crusher specifically said?

Gw has history of not invalidating by default rules from supplement when rdentical named supplement comes.

I don't believe it was explicitly said, but my experience has been that GW doesn't announce or publish when a specific book or publication is no longer valid.

If you don't consider a supplement invalid when the codex it's referencing is updated, what has to occur for you to consider it invalid?

Aren't most Space Marines Chapters still running around with 8th edition supplements?

 Tyran wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:
Why would the Nid's Army of Renown be considered valid? It's for a book that has been superseded. GW would have to FAQ it otherwise for it to be valid again (such as the 8th Ed SM Supplements)

Crusher stamped is valid, it was released just 5 months ago.

And? Just look at Saga of the Beast. That was valid for 7 months until the SM codex dropped and invalidated the Space Wolf half of it. What do you think makes Crusher the exception?

Was saga of wolf specifically said to be overwritten? Is crusher specifically said?

Gw has history of not invalidating by default rules from supplement when rdentical named supplement comes.

I don't believe it was explicitly said, but my experience has been that GW doesn't announce or publish when a specific book or publication is no longer valid.

If you don't consider a supplement invalid when the codex it's referencing is updated, what has to occur for you to consider it invalid?

Aren't most Space Marines Chapters still running around with 8th edition supplements?

GW has active FAQs saying that those supplements are considered legal. Which makes them the exception rather than the rule.

Karol wrote:

I don't get what nice means. Marines get model updates, but unles the nice is related to painting, I do not know what you mean. Heavy intercessors were pushed back so far in their release, that by the time they did arrive at the stores there was no place for them in the lists. Marines characters, with sole exeption of the chaplain, are all not worth taking when regular marine versions with bikes and jet packs exist. In 8th, when the primaris line was given to marine players, it was not worth to take any of those units up until 2.0 books came in. Dead or trap options are not good, and having more of them given, even if the models look nice doesn't help a player much.

"Nice" doesn't mean OP stuff, it means cool new units. Heavy intercessors might not be OP but theyre really cool and lets you bring a whole army of heavy marines. Lots of players locally focused on them.

And even if the models are trash, getting a new model every 6 months is a good way to keep interest in your army.

People gak on the Heavy intercessors/gladiators and stuff but at least theyre new models.
My factions get one new model per codex if any.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

Karol wrote:

I don't get what nice means. Marines get model updates, but unles the nice is related to painting, I do not know what you mean. Heavy intercessors were pushed back so far in their release, that by the time they did arrive at the stores there was no place for them in the lists. Marines characters, with sole exeption of the chaplain, are all not worth taking when regular marine versions with bikes and jet packs exist. In 8th, when the primaris line was given to marine players, it was not worth to take any of those units up until 2.0 books came in. Dead or trap options are not good, and having more of them given, even if the models look nice doesn't help a player much.

"Nice" doesn't mean OP stuff, it means cool new units. Heavy intercessors might not be OP but theyre really cool and lets you bring a whole army of heavy marines. Lots of players locally focused on them.

And even if the models are trash, getting a new model every 6 months is a good way to keep interest in your army.

People gak on the Heavy intercessors/gladiators and stuff but at least theyre new models.
My factions get one new model per codex if any.

Also of note on heavy intercessors, they are not the most powerful unit but they have a place in some lists. heavier backfield troops +1 toughness, +1 W, better rifle, and can take a heavy bolter. with the new AoC they sit back on objectives with effectively a 1+ save in cover shooting at anything in 36 inches while not being a zero threat in melee. I think post aoc you will see 1-2 squads of heavy intercessors in some chapters competitive lists locking down the back field and working secondaries whiel not being completely uselss to the overall game

 G00fySmiley wrote:

Also of note on heavy intercessors, they are not the most powerful unit but they have a place in some lists. heavier backfield troops +1 toughness, +1 W, better rifle, and can take a heavy bolter. with the new AoC they sit back on objectives with effectively a 1+ save in cover shooting at anything in 36 inches while not being a zero threat in melee. I think post aoc you will see 1-2 squads of heavy intercessors in some chapters competitive lists locking down the back field and working secondaries whiel not being completely uselss to the overall game

Exactly, even if they were totally bad, they brought a new option for space marines (resilient backfield holders with obsec)

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:

Also of note on heavy intercessors, they are not the most powerful unit but they have a place in some lists. heavier backfield troops +1 toughness, +1 W, better rifle, and can take a heavy bolter. with the new AoC they sit back on objectives with effectively a 1+ save in cover shooting at anything in 36 inches while not being a zero threat in melee. I think post aoc you will see 1-2 squads of heavy intercessors in some chapters competitive lists locking down the back field and working secondaries whiel not being completely uselss to the overall game

Exactly, even if they were totally bad, they brought a new option for space marines (resilient backfield holders with obsec)

I am glad they are finally useful, I liked the model enough that i got 60 of them, painted up 20 so far and others in various steps of sub assembly for painting. I need an excuse for a narrative event to run the whole group of them, i just thought an all gravis marine army would look cool on the field.

I think a pure gravis army would be really impressive to see on the table, for sure!

Hecaton wrote:

Tyel wrote:

I feel its a cycle:
Power Armour Player: "I'm bringing a lot of 2+ save stuff"
Opponents: "Okay I'm bringing a lot of AP-2, -3, -4 stuff because my AP- does nothing, and since GW know that they give it to me in my codex"
Power Armour Player: "Noooo... all my stuff dies fast now."
GW: "Okay ignore a point of AP on everything."
Power Armour Player: "haha, I love playing best looked after faction"
Opponents: "Okay... but now I'm *really* having to double down on bringing AP-2, -3, -4 etc, because AP- and AP-1 does nothing*
Power Armour Player: "wait a second..."

Yeah this is it. People bring weapons for the target they're most likely to see, and those players complain that it's unfair that when people build against them their armies fold.

I feel like a broken record at this point, but I stand by the assertion that in a game with rock-paper-scissors weapon/armor balance, Marines will never, ever feel durable so long as they are the most likely defensive profile to encounter on the tabletop. A 'take-all-comers' list is an anti-MEQ list. In a lot of ways this was made worse when they got their second wound, as while it made small arms even more useless at anti-Marine duty, it made D2 weapons much more useful. So of course everyone spams D2 weapons, and GW gave more factions D2 weapons so they have options.

The tougher Marines are made, and the more buffs they get, the more they're represented in the general meta, and the more TAC lists double down on anti-MEQ wargear. If you want Marines to feel tough, their defensive profile needs to either be an actual outlier (making them skew), not the default against which everything else is judged, or deliberately engineered such that everything is more or less equally efficient against them so there is no leaning into anti-MEQ.

Even then, there has to be an acceptance that this is a wargame, not a power fantasy, so everything has to average out at the end. If you want your army as a whole to feel tough, they have to pay for it elsewhere.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
The question isn't "why might Guard ignore this penalty" because we can sit here all day coming up with reasons.

The question is "why might Guard alone ignore this penalty".
When, tbh, after Orks; Guard are the last faction that should be ignoring this penalty from a lore point of view.

I know exactly why they did it, it's because of balance. Guard aren't very good and rely a lot on indirect fire to compete. But we're not debating the balance PoV here so it's redundant.

Lore, sure it might not work. Ruleswise, negatives to hit are worse the lower your ballistic skill. Ork lobbas hit on 6’s now and give +1 to save. So many weapons in guard are non los and non offenders in the meta that nerfing them would just be terrible.

Karol wrote:

I mean people think that marines should be the army to be farmed by other?

Not at all! Nobody should be thinking that of other folks armies.

The problem I was trying to describe is difference between me being a gamesmaster running a game of D&D and me as a player in 40K

If I am the GM my goal is to create and run an interesting, challenging encounter for my players. I'm neutral towards the monsters. The monsters are there to be defeated by the heroes of the story i.e. the players.

However, in a game of 40k we are both the heroes of our story. I want both folks to have fun, but I'm not just there to run the non-player character monsters for other people's entertainment.

Unfortunately, I tend to run into players (it's almost invariably Imperial Marines) who think that because I play Xenos armies I'm just there to be a GM while they play out their favourite Black Library novel.

JakeSiren wrote:

I don't believe it was explicitly said, but my experience has been that GW doesn't announce or publish when a specific book or publication is no longer valid.

Interestingly enough that's what they kind of did in the last General's Handbook for AoS. There they listed all existing publications that would remain legal throughout the next season and said that any books coming after this publication would be legal unless otherwise stated. I am actually looking forward to the next GHB to see if they continue with that small article in the book.

Flat out buff to power armor seem to yolo, that is not calculated move, it`s more like led`s do it and see what is going to happen. There are to many power armor units and i`m 100% sure GW did not check all of them to see what is fine with that rule. Also they flat out ignored all other armies units with the some characteristic, it`s again imperial melta is the best melta or the imperial marines have 1 more wound problem. It does not fix anything, it just create other problem. Giving it in melee seems even more cringe.

Marin wrote:
Flat out buff to power armor seem to yolo, that is not calculated move, it`s more like led`s do it and see what is going to happen. There are to many power armor units and i`m 100% sure GW did not check all of them to see what is fine with that rule. Also they flat out ignored all other armies units with the some characteristic, it`s again imperial melta is the best melta or the imperial marines have 1 more wound problem. It does not fix anything, it just create other problem. Giving it in melee seems even more cringe.

I really don't think the -1 ap rule will prove to throw the bathwater out with the baby, it'll maybe shift some list drafting, but that's it. DG are looking good but more due to obsec termites in conjunction with this.

 Souleater wrote:


Unfortunately, I tend to run into players (it's almost invariably Imperial Marines) who think that because I play Xenos armies I'm just there to be a GM while they play out their favourite Black Library novel.

Well w40k is a zero sum game. Either you win or you lose. In general I find the point view an odd one, as most marines armies are weaker then non marine armies through spans of an edition. I can imaigne that at a specific time, a non marine player may think that playing vs marines is not fun. But at the same time I have no idea what they would think, if they were to play vs top tau, tyranids or what ever is the good armies at given moments. Marines are lucky if they are mid tier on avarge. Over the years I did learn a few things about w40k and its community. people claim to not care about winning or power, and then we get 60+pages threats about powerful armies. Everyone claims to care about balance, up until their army gets the power bust, and then it turns in to wait and see, adjust to the meta, it ain't that bad and I don't play the OP stuff etc talk. In the end when someone plays w40k, they should be happy if they get a few months of fun playing every few years. I think only eldar are the faction that always gets to meta shift and stay relevant for longer time. Some armies , like GSC for example or 1ksons, don't even make a splash as far as the meta goes.

Karol wrote:

Well w40k is a zero sum game.

lol, no it isn't.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Karol wrote:

. Everyone claims to care about balance, up until their army gets the power bust, and then it turns in to wait and see, adjust to the meta, it ain't that bad and I don't play the OP stuff etc talk.

Not everyone, most people at my LGS that had armies that became OP in 9th stopped playing them because clubbing people isnt fun for them. i know of two Drukhari players that stopped playing them and a few (myself included) stopped playing Admech completely because they were too good.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Karol wrote:

Some armies , like GSC for example or 1ksons, don't even make a splash as far as the meta goes.

the competitive meta doesnt matter when you're playing at your LGS. Most players arent pro-level so even playing an OP army doesnt net them the crazy winrates you seem to think they would get.

Same with armies that underperform competitively. Thousand Sons has a great winrate at my LGS (its actually the top faction). Can't comment on GSC since no one seems to play them because theyre so strange

Marin wrote:
Flat out buff to power armor seem to yolo, that is not calculated move, it`s more like led`s do it and see what is going to happen. There are to many power armor units and i`m 100% sure GW did not check all of them to see what is fine with that rule. Also they flat out ignored all other armies units with the some characteristic, it`s again imperial melta is the best melta or the imperial marines have 1 more wound problem. It does not fix anything, it just create other problem. Giving it in melee seems even more cringe.

Umm, which armies have units with the same "characteristic"? And what is that "characteristic"? From what I can tell, it's "anything that's an Astartes or Sororitas", so, stuff armored with Ceramite?