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.

So I think most people can agree that the space marine chassis is over priced. Mostly curious on what people think a tac should cost in order for it to be a playable unit,

Wouldn't want them at any less than 11, and even that's cutting it. The point deflation is for real.

11 might be okay, but any cheaper would be unfair. Sisters cost 9, with their only downside over a Marine being Strength and Toughness 3, and lack of rerolls for morale (And They Shall Know No Fear). Marines shouldn't cost that much more.

Really it's Assault Marines that need a boost, though, as they just don't do anything well at all. Tacticals at least can hold objectives (even if Intercessors do it better).

13 ppm is too much to hold objectives poorly.

Wew, the big problem with these questions is: "Does it apply to ALL space marines?".So, Blood lovers, Wolfbois, Codex Nerds and even the Edgy Betrayer marines?

That's why I believe there's no "Easy" fix for marine points. I'd rather see Tac and Assault squads (That use the base codex) get some specific stratagems a la the necron treatment.

Honestly, I don't think the problem is with Space Marines. I think the problem is with rules of AP and cover.

3+ saves used to be much more resilient than they are now. That's the big problem. You can make Space Marines cheap, but that just turns what should be an elite army into a horde one, and then suddenly people are taking a hundred tacs in an army to bolter-spam against the enemy.

Give the standard Space Marine something else to write home about. Give them an extra attack in close combat, or give the standard Bolter the same -1 ap that the Bolt Rifle has. Anything to make them more useful on the table and not the awkward 1 wound nephews of the Primaris.

drbored wrote:

Give the standard Space Marine something else to write home about. Give them an extra attack in close combat, or give the standard Bolter the same -1 ap that the Bolt Rifle has. Anything to make them more useful on the table and not the awkward 1 wound nephews of the Primaris.

Better yet, just get rid of the Primaris/non-Primaris distinction entirely and give the Primaris rules to everything. The disconnect does nothing but hurt both sides by locking Primaris out of Transports and shackling non-Primaris with bad rules.

I would think Astartes of all stripes should have a rule giving -1AP to their bolt weapons to account for training, heavier caliber, etc.

Bolters used to be AP5 in the previous edition, no AP is a big part of the problem.

A Necron warrior is 12 points for worse armour, better morale, better weapon and reanimation protocols. So I'd say 11 would be okay.

I think their armor is fine, it was okay during last editions and it's still good due to cover in this edition.
The bolter never was a strong weapon, AP5 never came into play and when it did models with 5+ save died either way against everything.
People want movie marines, but the usual tactical marine isn't like that. And if we look at what people say about primaris that's good for them.

13ppm is fine, maybe 12ppm could be ok as well but we're talking about saving 30 or less points in a 2000 points list.

Blood claws with BS4+ and a just pistol should be 10ppm.

Instead of just tweaking points I would've liked if they made Space Marines feel like Space Marines and not just fodder. I mean Primaris stats should be the baseline for normal marines. Primaris should be 3W and Terminators 4W (like Custodes). And yeah boltguns -1ap, maybe even rapid fire 2 to boot. Tweak the points accordingly.

It's sad that a mighty space marine cannot weather a stiff breeze.

Crunch > fluff. Space marines are victims, not mighty.

This forum can't agree on a single marine buff. The best choice is points cost to reflect efficacy. As always.

That isn’t the best choice though as it inflated the number of models on the table. 11 points is probably fair based on a comparison to scouts but I’d rather see them at 14-15 points with the primaris stat line.

On the sisters comparison sisters are -1 WS,S, and T at 9 points. Cannot re-roll morale, but get a 6++ save and useless deny the witch.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As for bolters make them assault 3.

 ZergSmasher wrote:
11 might be okay, but any cheaper would be unfair. Sisters cost 9, with their only downside over a Marine being Strength and Toughness 3, and lack of rerolls for morale (And They Shall Know No Fear). Marines shouldn't cost that much more.

(edited) You notice it in the assault phase most of all where a sister is worth half a marine, if that (hence them all being small suicide squads and/or hidden in vehicles).

Sisters have access to more effective weapons that are cheap AND they get extra turns. On top of being cheaper. It's nuts.

S6-S7 doesn NOT inflict twice as many casualties. And S4 does not cause 50% more casualties. Try that again.

Space marines cost 15 points in 3rd ed, before grenades. Back then they fired once up to 12 inches after moving.

15 is a good price point because your basic tac squad becomes 150, which is a nice block for an army. Re-cost Space marines to 15 and then you can recost every other model in the game around this principle.

 =Angel= wrote:
Space marines cost 15 points in 3rd ed, before grenades. Back then they fired once up to 12 inches after moving.

15 is a good price point because your basic tac squad becomes 150, which is a nice block for an army. Re-cost Space marines to 15 and then you can recost every other model in the game around this principle.

That's not going to happen.

Martel732 wrote:
Sisters have access to more effective weapons that are cheap AND they get extra turns. On top of being cheaper. It's nuts.

S6-S7 doesn NOT inflict twice as many casualties. And S4 does not cause 50% more casualties. Try that again.

Sisters have access to more effective weapons that are cheap?

Are you referring to the exactly one weapon on the sisters' special weapon list that isn't on the marines' special weapon list, the storm bolter? That appears to be the only option along with the "mighty" condemnor boltgun that sisters have on any of their weapon lists that marines don't get. Man, those sisters, getting so many options while the poor marine victims are deprived of choice with their extremely limited model range.

Yeah, 1 less point of toughness does not equal twice as many casualties. It equals 1/6 more casualties, as you'd kind of expect from something that causes a one die shift change in wounding.

I think around 12pts would be okay, though I think it would be more useful if all points were at least doubled, so that they could be more easily adjusted.

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
A Necron warrior is 12 points for worse armour, better morale, better weapon and reanimation protocols. So I'd say 11 would be okay.

Except that Necron Warriors really aren't good. AP-1 looks nice . . . but it's all they have. No Special weapons. No Heavy weapons. No melee weapons. Nothing. All they can bring is more AP-1 bolters, which really aren't all that useful.

Better morale is disingenuous. They have a higher Ld, sure, but they also lack ATSKNF. Moreover, whilst marines can do fine in minimum squads (basically making morale a non-issue), Necrons are encouraged to take maximum squads so that RPs aren't completely worthless, meaning morale is a big issue - especially since any morale losses can't be revived with RPs.

It's actually less that, I think.

A single S4 AP 0 hit kills 0.22 sisters, or 1.98 points.

A single S4 AP hit kills 0.17 marines, or 2.21 points.

So sisters are actually MORE durable vs S4 AP0 than marines.

Autocannon hits:

A single S7 AP -1 hit kills 0.42 sisters, or 3.75 points.

A single S7 AP -1 hit kills 0.33 marines, or 4.33 points.

So sisters are more durable against autocannons as well.

11 or 12.

I'd rather the upthread suggestion of 15, then rebalance the game. That's been a dream of mine. It's too bad that won't happen.

If they took ASM/Devs/Tacs, base 15 pts, then balanced everything in regards to those, using more Index than Codex style rules and points, it'd be a very different game. And a much better game.

Marines, to "do it right", need to make use of their specials/heavies. But they've added so many "LC squad +1" and "Flamer squad +1" and "CC squad +1" type units to the game, and escalated from there, that they just aren't as impactful as they should be.

That said, Tacs have been a big part of top lists at several points over the past few years. Sisters, not so much.

That's funny, because I've beaten a lot of lists with tac marines, but I have not a single victory vs Sisters yet. They just don't care about anything I do. They are basically power armor guardsmen.

My personal opinion is that Plasma Guns should be nerfed across the board for all armies that have access to them or their equivalents.

Basically reduce plasma to s5, and s6 on overcharge. Now Plasma Guns do not outshine Melta guns at 12 inches (4 v 3.5), and people can't use Plasma Guns for both anti-marine and anti-vehicle filling the same role in their list.

This would simultaneously create a niche for melta guns vs medium to heavy tanks, plasma guns for elite infantry and light tanks. Now that armies aren't able to spam Plasma equivalents and be secure for both Anti-Tank and Anti-Infantry there is no longer a huge incentive to take this marine busting weapon. With less Plasma everywhere Marines can leverage their ability to withstand small arms, especially in cover, far better.

The best way to make Marines more viable is to reduce the amount of high armor penetration weapons the various factions are able to field. Plasma Guns should never have been viable against both elite infantry and all tanks. Of course this means looking at other codex's like Tau and Eldar as well, and reducing some of their high Ap shenanigans as well. High rate of fire weapons should universally have poor penetration.

Look at my above post. Plasma is only the tip of the iceberg. At 13 ppm, AP 0 is too effective.

Also, plasma guns are tame compared to disintegrators at this point. So what's the point of nerfing plasma?

Martel732 wrote:
Sisters have access to more effective weapons that are cheap AND they get extra turns. On top of being cheaper. It's nuts.

Yes, I wrote that on the way out the door without thinking it through.

Which weapons though?

Stormbolters. They get 3 per 5 chicks. That's amazingly efficient.

Martel732 wrote:
It's actually less that, I think.

A single S4 AP 0 hit kills 0.22 sisters, or 1.98 points.

A single S4 AP hit kills 0.17 marines, or 2.21 points.

So sisters are actually MORE durable vs S4 AP0 than marines.

Autocannon hits:

A single S7 AP -1 hit kills 0.42 sisters, or 3.75 points.

A single S7 AP -1 hit kills 0.33 marines, or 4.33 points.

So sisters are more durable against autocannons as well.

I notice that now in a speculative thread where we're trying to determine what marines should cost, your apologetics have sneakily substituted the metric of comparison - "Casualties" - to one that just confirms the subject of the current discussion - "points of damage".

In a thread about how many points marines *should* cost, current point costs are irrelevant. When you look at casualties

.17 to .22 - 29% increase in casualties.

.33 to .42 - 27% increase in casualties.

add in S3 here because that's the other value where T3-4 gives a shift,

single S3 hit kills .11 marines, .17 sisters - 55% increase in casualties.

If we consider sisters' pre-codex performance as either lower mid-tier or upper low-tier (which is usually about where they sit) to be a pretty good benchmark at 9 ppm, how many points should a marine pay for roughly 30% durability increase vs 4 strength values, 2 being arguably the most common in the game?

ATSKNF vs AOF, a couple points of melee stats that aren't worth much, choice between special and heavy on the sisters vs just heavy on the marines, I think overall sisters gain a couple of extra advantages, so only a 22% increase in cost (11 points) seems like about the right value for the major advantage, being the toughness gain.

The percentage increase in casualties means nothing without point values, since I have to pay for those marines.

You have to get down to S3 weapons until marines have a small advantage, 1.43 vs 1.53. Unit costs dominate every other consideration in the game.

Points of damage is the only real damage metric that matters in overall efficacy assessment.

It's not a 30% durability increase once you take costs into account. Which you have to. Unless you are giving me free models. Stop it.

Martel732 wrote:
Stormbolters. They get 3 per 5 chicks. That's amazingly efficient.

It is efficient.

But it's also a squad with 8 boltguns - aka "I need something to fill out my troop slots, oh look a 2 point special weapon"