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.

The "Terminator" thread seems to have become "how to make Marines better". So to put all that into its own thread, these are some changes I propose:

1) +1W to all MEQs and TEQs.
In an edition in which weapons can cause multiple damage per a single failed save, there really is no reason that a standard Marine should only have 1W
Tactical Marines, Assault marines, Devs, etc as well as all the Chaos equivalents should be 2W standard. This MIGHT come with a 1-2ppm increase, but really no more than that
Scouts can stay at 1W.
TEQs and Bike, therefore, should come standard with 3W.
Primaris Marines can stay as is, because they will have 2 attacks (I'd keep regular Marines at 1atk) and would have Bolt Rifles (which are also improved below). Maybe give them a slight points drop.


2) I like this idea too:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
BS2+ Sternguard, WS2+ Vanguard, and WS/BS2+ Terminators.

I would also apply this to Chaos TEQs and Chosen getting WS/BS2+
Oblits gain BS2+, Mutilators get WS2+, but both would stay at 3W (i.e. not gain +1W as above)


3) Bolters. *sigh*
I personally would have liked Bolt weapons to get something like what Eldar Shuriken weapons have now: AP-3 on a to-wound roll of 6 to represent the additional damage the exploding round would do. We could make it so that it is AP-2 on a 6 to wound for regular Bolters and pistols, but AP-3 on a 6 for HBs and Bolt rifles. The round is bigger, so it should cause more damage

If this change is made, Shuriken weapons for Eldar should be adjusted too, to keep "uniqueness" between the factions. I would make them AP-1 standard, with +1 shot and -1Str. So a Catapult would be Assault 3, S3 Ap-1, a Cannon would be Assault 4, S5, AP-1. No special ability needed. This, I feel, better represents the sheer hail of "ninja stars" the weapons spit out in each volley. They shouldn't be strong (hence S3) but should have lots of shots at AP-1

Heavy Bolter also needs a slight tweak. I would make them Rapidfire 2. Mechanically they work the same as a regular bolter, just bigger, so why be Heavy?
RF2 makes them much more appealing as you wound not suffer -1 for moving (thus evening out the -1 shot outside 18" range) and give a benefit for getting within 18" by gaining 4 total shots. This can provide MUCH needed anti-Horde options for Marines in general, especially combined with being AP-3 on a 6 to wound. The HB becomes the all-rounder weapons it SHOULD be.

---------------
Those 3 changes should make Marines and CSM "feel" more like they should in the fluff as well as balance specific inadequacies that currently exist. I truly do not feel these changes would make Marines OP considering this editions meta still favors Hordes.

-

I think making any basic troops 2W is a bad, slippery slope. Many xeno armies could argue their basic troops should be 2W too (Necrons surely, for 1).

There is a lot to unpack and there will be pushback from many directions.

GW itself can't decide what marines are to be.

I maintain marines need to have dominant troops, since their other slots are so dependent and consequently super inferior to the competition.

As it stands now, marines have no choice but to go power armor horde.

I still think bs 2+ is too much, more shots or a real chance to get into cc would be my preference. The wound I have warmed up to after doing some best case scenarios with dice. Bolters bug me being RF since it keeps mobility and options down, reducing chance to eventually get into melee or be useful getting to a point.

As for terminators, the wounds help and more important than having perfect aim is using the cc weapons they pay for. Now that T1 deepstriking is gone I would consider reducing the 9" distance. If teleport strike were 6" it would still have some risk of failure and be out of melta range but terminators could do precision strikes like they were made for. Obviously it would have been OP before the T1 nerf, but now...

I like bikes, the trade off of cover and climbing for speed is ok. The weapon are very nice (for csm at least) survivability will be good for the cost at 3w, maybe a 2pt increase like the rest of it. Again bolters being rf limits what they do unless using chapter tactics, voice is good but why have options that don't quite work?

 Stormonu wrote:
I think making any basic troops 2W is a bad, slippery slope. Many xeno armies could argue their basic troops should be 2W too (Necrons surely, for 1).

In prior editions, in which 1 failed save only did 1 wound, unless it was Instant Death. I'd agree with you.
But in 8E, more than half the weapons do multiple wounds. Having a higher T and better armour save is no longer an adequate representation of a Marine's durability.

Please keep in mind that my proposed changes are not only for balance, but to better represent how the units SHOULD perform in the fluff compared to others.
A super human walking tank should not die as easily to small arms fire as a regular, barely armoured human.
A Marine dying to a single lasgun wound just doesn't make any sense, no matter how hard it was to get that wound through the T and armour.

Necrons already have RPs, so they have already have the chance to get extra wounds. They also have better LD and better stock weapons.
Other Xenos Troops also have things that make them better than the current 1W Marines. Marines as Troops need a "niche" and I think it should be durability

-

 Galef wrote:

Please keep in mind that my proposed changes are not only for balance, but to better represent how the units SHOULD perform in the fluff compared to others.
A super human walking tank should not die as easily to small arms fire as a regular, barely armoured human.
A Marine dying to a single lasgun wound just doesn't make any sense, no matter how hard it was to get that wound through the T and armour.

Does that mean my Rocket Launchers should instantly kill your Marines as they're using anti-tank warheads, instead of making your save 5+? Should Chainfists automatically wound vehicles as in the fluff they're used to cut open starship bulkheads?

Saying "well they do it in the fluff" isn't really an excuse, Marines should stay 1 wound.

As covered in other threads, the wound change alone puts the Tac on an even playing field with Fire Warriors in a gunline shootout.

It puts them scads ahead of Necron Warriors, Dire Avengers, Guardians, Rangers, and more.

As for the weapons, you're turning CWE weapons into "Necrons, but weaker, with more shots". I'd personally like that change, but that's not really the subject here.

For the weapon change, consider that Guardians pay 8ppm for a 4ppm model (Guardsman) plus a weapon directly inferior to the Boltgun you're implementing.

Heavy Bolters, if they don't get Bladestorm, would be a great candidate for RF3. But with Bladestorm, RF2 36" makes them better than what Shuriken Cannons are currently (A3 24"). Current SCs have S6, but the native AP-1 on the HB is better than the +1S.

Necron RP would have to go to a 4+, maybe even a 3+ to compensate.

If Termies go to WS/BS2+, I'd rather Stern and Van also got WS/BS2+ instead of one or the other. The in-game impact is marginal (Van don't shoot much, Stern don't do much in CC). But it's added crunch (which vets are WS2+? Which are BS2+?), and less fluffy (often, the difference between a Sternie and a Termie is what shirt they put on this morning). But then, as long as Crisis are BS4+ and Exarchs are WS/BS3+, SM Vets beign WS/BS2+ isn't fluffy (yes, they have hundreds of years of experience, but Exarchs have thousands). Wouldn't oppose it myself, though.

"But in 8E, more than half the weapons do multiple wounds."
Simply not true. More weapons do multiple wounds than ever before, and more than should, but nowhere near half.

"Having a higher T and better armour save is no longer an adequate representation of a Marine's durability."
Somewhat agree. But it looks like that primarily because you're mostly only seeing the multiple-wound weapons. Which is mostly because, unlike many other armies, you're actually relatively durable to a lot of 1W weapons. 2W Marines takes you from twice as durable vs small arms to *four times* as durable. All while being maybe twice as expensive in points per model compared to most (read: not all, certainly not hordes like Guardsmen or Gaunts) infantry.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
As for "Marines shouldn't die to lasguns".
When they roll a 5 or 6 and you roll a 1 or 2. One out of every 9 hits.

A Space Elf ninja samurai shouldn't be hit by Lasguns.
It happens when they roll a 4, 5, or 6. Roughly one out of every 2 shots.

Bharring wrote:
As covered in other threads, the wound change alone puts the Tac on an even playing field with Fire Warriors in a gunline shootout.

It puts them scads ahead of Necron Warriors, Dire Avengers, Guardians, Rangers, and more.

But those have better weapons and/or other special rules that make them on par.
I do think 2W Marines should be 14-15ppm.
Ignore my Bolter/Shuriken change (which I agree is the weakest of my 3 proposals), 15ppm 2W Marines would absolutely be on par with those other choices.

At minimum, I would like change #1 & 2 along with Heavy Bolters being RF2 or even 3.
Added durability can push Marines into a "niche" that compensates for there lack of offense (therefore winning games by attrition rather than outright force).
Having decent HBs as a cheap all purpose weapon would also help
It reinforces a factional identity for them (instead of just being a generic standard) and quite frankly should create situations that are more similar to the fluff (which should be a consideration, no matter how much someone disagrees)

If you think fluff should be ignored for rules, then please remove RP from Necrons, ATSNKF for Marines, Invul saves from Daemons and pretty much every other rule.
GW comes up with a concept in the fluff and try to implement a rule to reflect it. Just because they aren't the best at it, doesn't mean fluff wasn't the driving force behind the rule
If you think fluff doesn't drive what rules do in the game, maybe take up chess instead?

-

Well, sure, they have better weapons. Without their better weapon, each one of those would be worse than Marines as-is. With those better weapons, they're worse than Marines with just the +1W Marines, even at 15ppm.

It might seem like it'd make Marines fit their fluff better.

In practice, Marines become those darned robot aliens who you just can't kill with conventional weapons. So they'd behave like Necrons in the fluff, not like Marines.

In practice, Aspect Warriors go from elite models to trash, now that half the troops you see can laugh off most of them. Aspect Warriors are supposed to be as elite as Marines, and now they're half as elite.

Fire Warriors go from "the gunline troop" as a horde, to a niche that can barely hold their own in a firefight against the most common troops in the game. So Tau goes from British Redcoats to Afghan Cave-dwellers in tabletop representation.

Guardsmen do somewhat get put in their place vs Marines, but no other factions are helped.

I don't see how this change will make games feel more fluffy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
On HB specifically:
I could see RF2 and/or a drop to 5 pts. If you've got a special/heavy slot that you didn't fill out, 5pts to replace a boltgun with a Heavy Bolter would certainly give it a place.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also - I'm not arguing the rules shouldn't fit the fluff. I'm arguing that the proposed rules is less representative of the fluff.

It just seems dumb to me that Marines are designed to be withstand damage that would kill a normal human (even without the armour), but on the table-top, 5 Marines (with the armour) die faster than 10 GEQs in just about every situation.

With so many multi-damage weapons around and even armour modifications, giving Marines 2W and a slight points bump would make them perform in 8E about the same as they did in prior editions with only 1W and AP4, 5 or 6 meant nothing to them.

It also better represents the "gap" between a Marine and regular human/Eldar/T'au/Ork.
Necron Immortals, Lychgaurd, Pretorians, etc might also get the 2W treatment, but for those units it should come with a higher pts bump as successfully rolling RP would give them back the entire 2Ws rather than only the current 1W.
Warriors, I think are ok at 1W because they do not have nearly the bulk of the others.

-

Give termies the ability to define their roll. Anti-infantry with storm bolters and a cheap +1 attack CC weapon, Anti elite/vehicle with full squad of special weapons and power fists. Similar to the assault termies with TH+ss or lightning claws (which need another 2 point price reduction)

Termies 1+ save, teleport after deployed strat, +1 attack, +1 wound, re-roll failed saves strat, +1 wound.

Not sure about the +1 wound for tacs. Maybe just bump power armor up to a 2+ save and increase offense.

PoTMS on dreads + preds

Grav cannons down to 20 points, assault cannons + 'cane bolters back to pre-nerf value

Flamers d3 hits per 5 models in unit, st 4 +1 ap

melta double str w/in half range

New BT/white scar tactics

+1 shots for marine bolters (sisters are too cheap to get rf 2 boltguns, rf 3 storm bolters, heavy 4 heavy bolters)

Chapter tactics for vehicles (not just a port of the existing tactic but a special rule the chapters apply to their vehicles)

New strats (-1 to hit, +1 to save, deepstrike, +1 to hit, shoot again, steal cps, anything any good)

chainswords -1 ap

Centurians re-write (like 50% reduction for the dev versions) Native deepstrike. If you guys think termies are bad...

Guilliman re-write (re-roll wounds/hits of 1 for all codex compliant chapters w/in 12", use all chapter tactics in mixed detachments, reduce points back to 350)

Re-work all charges to be movement + d6"

Assault marines +1 attack on charge

Reivers auto apply concision grenades on charge

Disembark after moving for rhinos and land raiders (or just land raiders but rhinos get 2 firing ports) Counts as moved after disembarking.

Repulsor and land raider price reductions

Chaplins can deny the witch, re-roll 1s to hit and wound in fight phase

All that would be a good start...

My idea for marines starts with Tacs with other units being built of of them:

-2W
-2A
"Rapid Fire Drill": Add 1 to the number of attacks made by boltguns while within half range.
-15-16pts

So we get an increase in durability and offense that encourages close encounters (such as out of say... a Drop Pod). The boltgun itself becomes the best anti-infantry gun marines have. i.e. it's better against guardsmen than it is against other marines. (no AP high number of shots)
Against anti-infantry guns, marines are very durable, but against plasma and autocannons they start dropping fast.

And while we're at it, I would be totally cool with 2W necrons and orks. More 2W basic infantry would be cool.
----------
As for the heavy bolter idea I don't agree. Guard heavy weapon teams use heavy bolters too so RF doesn't make much sense there. At most I would give them Heavy 4.

Bharring wrote:
Well, sure, they have better weapons. Without their better weapon, each one of those would be worse than Marines as-is. With those better weapons, they're worse than Marines with just the +1W Marines, even at 15ppm.

It might seem like it'd make Marines fit their fluff better.

In practice, Marines become those darned robot aliens who you just can't kill with conventional weapons. So they'd behave like Necrons in the fluff, not like Marines.

In practice, Aspect Warriors go from elite models to trash, now that half the troops you see can laugh off most of them. Aspect Warriors are supposed to be as elite as Marines, and now they're half as elite.

Fire Warriors go from "the gunline troop" as a horde, to a niche that can barely hold their own in a firefight against the most common troops in the game. So Tau goes from British Redcoats to Afghan Cave-dwellers in tabletop representation.

Guardsmen do somewhat get put in their place vs Marines, but no other factions are helped.

I don't see how this change will make games feel more fluffy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
On HB specifically:
I could see RF2 and/or a drop to 5 pts. If you've got a special/heavy slot that you didn't fill out, 5pts to replace a boltgun with a Heavy Bolter would certainly give it a place.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also - I'm not arguing the rules shouldn't fit the fluff. I'm arguing that the proposed rules is less representative of the fluff.

The thing that really is at the crux of the matter is cheap hoards have no real counters currently as traditional anti horde shooting/templates don't scale they deal d6 shots to 20-40 model units so they don't hit them as hard as 5 model msu's who take the same d6 shots.

Basically post the IG codex every troop is compaired to IS and comes out looking bad, if they balance against each other but not IG the issue is IG codex, not everyone else.

"It also better represents the "gap" between a Marine and regular human/Eldar/T'au/Ork."
The durability gap? Maybe. Debatable about where exactly it should be. Certainly no worse off than they are now (twice as durable), but not necessarily 4x as durable.

Or are you talking about the elitism gap? You do realize that there are other things in the 40k universe that are, by fluff, as elite as Marines, right?

I just played out a scenario of 488pts of csm terminators (10 bodies of 3W, combi-bolter, power mace and termie lord of the same loadout) against 488pts of T'au Sept battalion (30FW strike, 7 pathfinder +3 ion rifle, cadre fire blade, quad cib crisis commander). Keeping costs and skills as is.

The lessons learned was that the 3rd wound helped, but didn't make them op as they got tabled T2 (largely from overwatch after two charges) and reducing deepstrike range to 6" would have helped against anything other than tau sept fire warriors (oh, i forgot to use TUD, that would have hurt).

I was reluctant to give a 3rd wound since Terminators are quite durable against small arms fire, Except that the units that have small arms are so incredibly low cost and buffable that even 2+save gets whittled away pretty readily. That is except marines, who get fewer shots or str or ap generally.

Offensively the terminators did ok. Not incredible in part from dice favoring tau, but still they did some damage each turn and made an impact. Melee also made an impact, forcing morale rolls (one of which got bonding knifed). If I bothered with endless cacophony or armor rerolls it might have gone better.

Overall the change seems like the right direction. I would think that a real game looks different since a battalion shouldn't be unscathed T2 and assaulted by the precision strike team. But hey massed fire still counters them, Dd3 dmg and even D2 counters them alright (especially with fnps)

I'll try against hammerheads using power fits and melta to check viability there.

"You do realize that there are other things in the 40k universe that are, by fluff, as elite as Marines, right? " - Bharring. That should not be forgotten.

Ice_can,
Yes, I think there are things that are in more need of balance than Marines. Such as:
-IG troopers too good for their points
-Plas got too good
-Flamers & related not good enough
-Dissie/Reaper/Spears too good

"Oddly", when you look at most of the things people have been complaining about this edition, many of them are D:2 weapons:
-Plas
-Reapers
-Spears
-Dissies

Bharring wrote:
"It also better represents the "gap" between a Marine and regular human/Eldar/T'au/Ork."
The durability gap? Maybe. Debatable about where exactly it should be. Certainly no worse off than they are now (twice as durable), but not necessarily 4x as durable.

Or are you talking about the elitism gap? You do realize that there are other things in the 40k universe that are, by fluff, as elite as Marines, right?

Kind of, but what I am trying to point out is that 'A' Marine isn't actual twice as durable as "A" Guardsman when you factor in AP modifiers and the 8E to Wound charge.
Take the current HB, for example. Wound both on 3+. Reduces dice roll by -1 on both. If failed, both models die.
While it is true that the Marine would get a 4+ to ignore, while the Guardsman only a 6+, than is NOT twice as durable. The Marine is also over 3x as expensive, so has more to lose.

Having 2W isn't even enough to double a Marine's durability due to so many weapons killing them anyway. The extra wound does almost nothing against Lascannons, Autocannon, Overcharging Plasma, Meltas, Missiles, Starcannons, and a myriad of other weapons that are ALREADY go-to choices to kill Marines.
The extra wound only helps against other Troop's basic weapons and the very few weapons that only do D1. Considering other Troops weapons are often tailor made to benefit most against MEQs, I think it's more than fair.

Bharring wrote:
"Oddly", when you look at most of the things people have been complaining about this edition, many of them are D:2 weapons:
-Plas
-Reapers
-Spears
-Dissies

Exactly my point above. The weapons that are currently the "best" don't even care about Marines being 2W. Except maybe Plasma which would want to Overcharge against them more than currently.
2W Marines are to make them less vulnerable to small arms fire.

EDIT:
An alternative idea (that I'm not a huge fan of, but it might work) is to give all MEQs (and bikes) 2+ armour and TEQs 1+. With armour save modification, this change is more plausible in 8E than in prior editions. It would make Marines tougher to all weapons without needing +1W.
You would also have to address TEQs now redundant invul save. Terminator armour, with this change, should either reduce damage by 1 to a minimum of 1. **OR** have a rule like Venerable Dreads instead of the invul.

-

You brought up Chaos Terminators and Chosen getting the WS/BS2+ here and I'm glad you kinda did.

My issue with Chaos Marines is that these are supposed to be Vets Of The Long War...but they don't have Vet stats.

So while the wrong thread, I would actually get rid of the Chaos Marine entry entirely. Chosen are now the basic Troop choice and are base 15 points like most Marine Vets need to be. Then Havocs gain Vet stats as well.
I also have an idea that Cultists would act as blockers for any unit that's not a vehicle in a similar manner as Characters. Wrong thread though.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You brought up Chaos Terminators and Chosen getting the WS/BS2+ here and I'm glad you kinda did.

My issue with Chaos Marines is that these are supposed to be Vets Of The Long War...but they don't have Vet stats.

So while the wrong thread, I would actually get rid of the Chaos Marine entry entirely. Chosen are now the basic Troop choice and are base 15 points like most Marine Vets need to be. Then Havocs gain Vet stats as well.
I also have an idea that Cultists would act as blockers for any unit that's not a vehicle in a similar manner as Characters. Wrong thread though.

Keep in mind that not all CSM have 10,000 years experience. Some are recently turned Renegades, others think the Heresy just happened yesterday due to the time affects of the Eye of Terror.
So while some CSM should have boosted stats like Chosen and Termies, having Tac Marine equivalents as Troops is not far fetched.

-

Yeah, 2w marines is no big deal, but would conflicts with the primaris (but primaris shouldn't exist so ...).
What do you think about the 3k rule of "if a Tac squad didn't move, it can shoot twice" ? I have never seen anyone complaining about it .

 godardc wrote:
Yeah, 2w marines is no big deal, but would conflicts with the primaris (but primaris shouldn't exist so ...).

Agreed, but they do exist now. If we add +1W to the Marine line, I might keep Primaris at 2W/2A, but to make them different, I'd give them a rule that ignores damage on 6+ like a Venerable, or even 5+. Primaris would still have 2A (b/c I'd keep Tacs at 1A) and have a Bolt rifle. That should make them stand out enough

 godardc wrote:

What do you think about the 3k rule of "if a Tac squad didn't move, it can shoot twice" ? I have never seen anyone complaining about it .

It's fine, but doesn't scream "Shock Troop" to me, which is what Marines should be.

-

It could help against hordes though

True, and for "Tactical" squads that have spent time training as Devs or Assault Marines, it certainly fits what they could potential do.
It would also help against any target given that they could fire twice with their special/heavy weapon.

I might amend it to allow them to shoot twice regardless of moving, but if they chose to do so, they suffer -1 to hit if they moved.
So you either:
-Stay still and shoot twice,
-Move and shoot once,
-or move and shoot twice at -1 to hit

-

 Galef wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You brought up Chaos Terminators and Chosen getting the WS/BS2+ here and I'm glad you kinda did.

My issue with Chaos Marines is that these are supposed to be Vets Of The Long War...but they don't have Vet stats.

So while the wrong thread, I would actually get rid of the Chaos Marine entry entirely. Chosen are now the basic Troop choice and are base 15 points like most Marine Vets need to be. Then Havocs gain Vet stats as well.
I also have an idea that Cultists would act as blockers for any unit that's not a vehicle in a similar manner as Characters. Wrong thread though.

Keep in mind that not all CSM have 10,000 years experience. Some are recently turned Renegades, others think the Heresy just happened yesterday due to the time affects of the Eye of Terror.
So while some CSM should have boosted stats like Chosen and Termies, having Tac Marine equivalents as Troops is not far fetched.

-

The Renegades argument doesn't work because any Renegades aren't going to have things like Reaper Autocannons or suddenly lose their Grav Guns.

Renegades need to be done in a Vanilla Codex setting because of this. You would choose your Chapter Tactic, but basically no access to those main Characters (Calgar ain't a Chaos Marine, duh), change around the keywords, and BAM done.

Also, many Chaos Marines that existed 10k years ago aren't 10k years old. Time works differently in the Warp.

I think this is the best solution.

WS / BS: 2+
S / T: 8
A: 6
W: 12
Sv: 2+, ignores the first -2 points of AP
Ld: 12

When an Astartes model is involved in a die roll, the opponent subtracts 1 from all die rolls. This penalty is increased to -2 in situations that the owner of the Astartes model feels is appropriate in their concept of the fluff.

The Boltgun profile is replaced with 30" range, S8, -3 AP, D3, Assault 8. This is to represent the Boltgun being superior to all weapons, even orbital bombardment.

Chainswords now Exile targeted creatures. If you pay 1 cp, and tap the top of the model, you may instead Exile target Vehicle. No Roll to hit is necessary. This ability can be used to target creatures and vehicles that would otherwise be untargetable, such as creatures with Shroud.

Transports now cost no points, and include a 5 man tactical squad for free. No more than 10 such units may be included in a battleforged army.

Marines are now 40 points base, to balance these upgrades (excluding free Tacticals included with free transports).

Bharring wrote:
Also, many Chaos Marines that existed 10k years ago aren't 10k years old. Time works differently in the Warp.

They're not going to be 10k years old obviously, but they're going to have more of that grit is the point.

We should remember that 8th is has very little wiggle room to define attributes. 4+ws means well trained, well supported, lifelong soldiers. 3+ws means many lifespans of preparation and likely past experience. 2+ws means not just a seasoned warrior or even veteran but tech'd out leader with plot armor. GW wants every lieutenant to have a name and backstory (hence warlord traits and relics), not just the standard named characters of their printed stories.

So we can't go assigning +1ws to marines on their 400th birthday just like how crisis suits aren't between FW and marine WS because there is no room between 3+ and 4+. There is the fairly consistent convention of +1A +1Ld to account for experience. All marines get higher Ld than standard infantry and some people like myself would prefer their "jack of all trades" stats to include the extra attack to balance out (or allow bolter and chainsword intead of those pistols, some exclusions apply).

We should also limit the exaggeration of what's bad. This is more challenging when Aeldari forces are so min/maxed while things like csm traits tend to provide options that aren't particularly better than each other. (black legion bikers vs renegade, vs night lord bikers for example. i still can't decide). We shouldn't look to make everything the best, but bring it all to a fun medium. I'd rather see killiness toned down in general than have everything dakka like oblits in january.

+1A on Marines sounds like a good change. Not a major change, and wouldn't be anywhere close to enough to make them balanced. +1A 11ppm might be enough for Tacs themselves.

Bharring wrote:
+1A on Marines sounds like a good change. Not a major change, and wouldn't be anywhere close to enough to make them balanced. +1A 11ppm might be enough for Tacs themselves.

Yeah, I prefer +1A in all situations instead of WS/BS2+, but it means "veterans" end up with like 4attacks each.

-