Changes we want in Chapter Approved

[Captain Idaho]

What the title says...

 

...Changes for Chapter Approved for us Ultramarines.

 

Let's discuss.

 

I'm thinking (in no particular order):

 

1) Thunderfire Cannon. Make it cheaper or a flat 9 or 10 shots or something.

 

2) While we're at it, I'd like Servo arms to be worthwhile. A simple "make in addition to your attacks" would suffice.

 

3) Hunters could do with a boost. Damage either 2D6 pick the highest or minimum of 3 damage like Neutron lasers would help.

 

4) Some changes to Stratagems please:

 

- Tactical Flexibility... just drop the thing. Worst Stratagem in the game bar nothing. We already can do this so what the hell?

 

- Orbital Bombardment. A great potential to stop clumping and hero hammer but unfortunately just not worth the CPs right now. Either make it more than just D3, or more accurate. Or both for 3 CPs. For 2 CPs I'd try it if it was 3+ to hit and a flat 6 range, which is what it should be changed to for just D3 mortal wounds.

 

- Chapter Master. 2 CPs. We are an expensive elite army where getting more than 7 CPs is a challenge.

 

5) Vindicators... 2D3 shots or sonething. Jeez it's another one outshone by other choices. Actually what I'd like it to be 2D3 or D6 shots AND causes Mortal Wounds on a wound of a 6. Enemy units within 3" of target unit should suffer D3 Mortal Wounds on a 5+ too.

 

That's it for now. Any thoughts?

[Tamiel]

To be fair, tactical flexibility allows you to put 10 marines as one unit, so they count as one drop in the deployment phase. For one CP you get to decrease your drop count by 1, which is situational (like most stratagems) but can mean a big deal when it actually has to be used. It's still a worthless stratagem in most cases, but I wouldn't want to get rid of it unless we get something that is guaranteed to be better.

That aside, I really want there to be some sort of benefit to playing "Full Space Marines" or "Full Chapter X" where your force consists entirely of Space Marines from the same chapter. A lot of tournament SM players do the Imperial Soup tactic where they ally in a bunch of stuff from IG and Grey Knights ect, and most of the time it doesn't look as cool as you'd expect. I don't want Imperial Soup armies to be gone, but I want more incentive for people to play with the chapter as a whole. I remember seeing a recent batrep on frontlilne gaming where one guy was playing as "Ultramarines" but all he did was bring Guilliman + whirlwinds and thunderfire cannons, and Grey Knights were his main troop force with a bunch of conscripts. This is actually a competitive list, but it just doesn't fit 40k that much. Why would Guilliman be hanging out with a bunch of thunderfire and whirlwinds while Grey Knights are his main force (against tyranids)? Why does every Space Marine detachment bring conscripts to deny deep strikes? Weren't Space Marines supposed to be a self-containing force?

Long story short: There should be some sort of bonus to bringing pure Ultramarines, or pure Imperial Guard, or pure Ulthwé, ect. This doesn't mean "Penalize mixed armies". But give something to pure armies to bring them up to speed since a lot of players aren't doing that anymore. Especially Imperial players.

Edited November 2, 2017 by Tamiel

[Tamiel]

And while Detachments are gone, I would like some sort of incentive to run a "Company" structured list again. Bringing lots of tactical squads with some assault marines and some devastators is a very cool and thematic army that fits the Space Marine lore well, but unfortunately some alternatives do much better on the tabletop. Whether detachments come back or not isn't the issue for me, but it'd be cool to see more company structured Space Marine armies (and even other armies have similar structures of their own).

Edited November 2, 2017 by Tamiel

[Brother Captain Ed]

I said it at the time and I will say it again: Getting rid of Detachments was a bad idea. I know why they were hated. But the problem with them was that they were put together without any thought to given to actual gameplay. Now the system is so loose that you can reasonably field whatever you want. Giving up so much control of the list design space was not a good move.

[Tamiel]

I think the reason they got rid of formations was to get rid of additional burden of knowledge from new players. While I liked formations, having to sit through your opponent explaining all the special things his formation gives him was annoying. It felt like I had to keep track of a lot of info which was just dumped at me at the beginning of a match. Some formations had rules that went on and on. Imagine how harmful this is to the flow of new players who might be interested in 40k or trying to learn it for the first time.

And of course there were really overpowered formations, like that one Riptide wing that lets you shoot your weapons twice (or up to four times if you combo it with another rule) in one shooting phase. Formations that gave free stuff were also unbalanced. As much as I liked the thematic element of the Gladius formation, it was too powerful so I often had to not use it.

It would be cool to get formations that just give more CP, for example. That way they would reward players who play thematic armies without giving them overpowered abilities or long rules.

Edited November 3, 2017 by Tamiel

[Lemondish]

It isn't Ultra specific, but I'd like to see Gravis get much more durable. I'd also like to see some minor adjustments to units that have really weird weapon combos, like the fist and sword on the Gravis captain.

 

And with those weapon changes, I'd love to see Reivers become a real decent threat in melee.

[Cpt_Reaper]

Oops. Didn't notice this was a Ultramarines thread. My bad.

Edited November 3, 2017 by Cpt_Reaper

[crazyterran]

What we want and what we get are two separate things. I'm sure we'll get a Roboute price cost increase. We probably won't get any interesting stratagems (something we lack right now, unless you build an army around it). They need to figure out a way to fix the Horde, but they probably won't. 

 

I'm expecting Chapter Approved will be the Errata gathered and another pass over, plus adjusted point costs and updated missions, with maybe a few Chapter Tactic style things thrown in for things they don't plan on doing in the next year, like GHB2017 was. 

[Prot]

I like your list Idaho. I’d like to add the Stormhawk. Some of the armament is brutal and expensive for ground targets.

 

The whole Primaris line minus Helblasters.

 

Pods are too expensive.

[Kinstryfe]

One thing they haven't done to my knowledge is play with codex-specific detachments. Something like a detachment of 6 Tactical Squads, 2 Assault Squads, 2 Devastator Squads, and a Captain give you +9cp. A Lieutenant, 3 Tactical Squads, 1 Assault Squad, and 1 Devastator Squad gives you +4cp. Require the detachment to be entirely from Codex: Space Marines. Make 5-10 of these special detachments, ranging from (Demi) Companies, reserve company (some # of tac squads), assault company (all assault squads/bikes/speeders), devastator company, etc. Maybe give a bonus to CPs or some other effect if all detachments in the army are from these choices.

 

Example, Chapter Command +2cp

1 Commander or Terminator Commander

0-1 HQ (other)

0-1 Honour Guard

3-6 Terminator, Vanguard, or Sternguard Squads

0-1 Company or Chapter Ancient

0-1 Apothecary

0-1 Company or Chapter Champion

If both a Chapter Ancient and Chapter Champion are chosen, may upgrade the Commander to a Chapter Master at no cost.

 

Stuff like that. It could be thematically done for all armies, would be in addition to the normal detachment lists, and give some additional flexibility.

[crazyterran]

I hope they dont do Codex specific detachments again. It was a slippery slope from the GK nemesis strike force to Decurion to Gladius, after all.

[Captain Idaho]

A note on Tactical Flexibility: It can only help you with a single drop, unless you use it multiple turns. Which is almost impossible since as soon a model dies from a unit it is ineligible. 1 drop is meaningless. And if you used it 3 turns in a row, I'd argue you'd get more from the rerolls or other Stratagems. I've literally never seen anyone use it.

 

And no opponent in all the world went "Oh no, Tactical Flexibility!"

 

I say that with a little tongue in cheek but the points stand ;)

 

Anyhow...

 

No one wants to see Formations return in the wider community. It forces players to take stuff that the design team wants rather than my own force. Bad ju ju. I can't add it to the list as GW wouldn't contemplate it.

 

Seriously, does no one remember just how much 7th sucked?

 

I do agree I'd like to see me troops in games but I'd do that by giving an additional CP for Battalions and making sure Stratagems were worthwhile. Which is true of the latest Codex books. Many of the Marines ones suck or are niche. More so than many Stratagems in other Codex books.

 

Prot: I'll add the Storm Hawk to the list. To clarify, you feel the base cost is too high?

 

Drop Pods; yes of course! I forgot!

 

***

 

Here's one - Redemptor Dreadnought Macro plasma should be standard damage 2, damage 3/4 when overcharged.

[Grim Dog Studios]

One thing I would like to return but doubt it will happen is the original honour guard setup as it was in 7th. Up to 10 honour guard in one squad, with all power weapon and relic blade options back. I feel like as regular codex marines, we lack a killy-close combat unit. Sure there are terminators and vanguard veterans, but terminators have to deep strike or ride a LR and I find vanguard just aren't that great the couple times I've proxied them.

 

Also, drop pod price decreases which I assume everyone wants. They are too steep of a price for something that lands once and then pops off a few shots each turn. Or if a price decrease isn't available there should be an additional bonus for running a drop pod based army.

[Tamiel]

A note on Tactical Flexibility: It can only help you with a single drop, unless you use it multiple turns. Which is almost impossible since as soon a model dies from a unit it is ineligible. 1 drop is meaningless. 

Suppose I have 8 drops in my army, and you also have 8 drops (because you are using two 5man squads).

 

Now, suppose you took out those two 5 man squads and replaced them with one 10 man squad.

 

I still have 8 drops. You now have 7. You can still combat squad them into two 5man teams.

 

This is basically the whole point of combat squads. One less drop is meaningless?

 

What if I have X drops and you have X drops? Now One drop is pretty huge.

What if I have X drops and you have X+1 drops? Again, one drop is pretty huge.

 

I will concede that these scenarios aren't exactly common, but you get the idea. Furthermore, if you have two more drops than your opponent, you can cut down on the number of drops by having two 10 man tactical squads (instead of four 5man tactical squads).

 

It's not your run of the mill "shoot at things better" or "do mortal damage" stratagem, and it definitely is situational, but I would hardly call it worthless.

[Captain Idaho]

Agreed on both points. I miss my Honour Guard!

 

I believe the reason we've lost many options for units like Honour Guard and even the Chapter Champion is purely because GW doesn't make a suitable model.

 

I'd like GW to bring back kitbashing. They should produce sprues so we can customise our armies easily.

 

More options please.

[Captain Idaho]

 

A note on Tactical Flexibility: It can only help you with a single drop, unless you use it multiple turns. Which is almost impossible since as soon a model dies from a unit it is ineligible. 1 drop is meaningless.

 

Suppose I have 8 drops in my army, and you also have 8 drops (because you are using two 5man squads).

Now, suppose you took out those two 5 man squads and replaced them with one 10 man squad.

I still have 8 drops. You now have 7. You can still combat squad them into two 5man teams.

This is basically the whole point of combat squads. One less drop is meaningless?

What if I have X drops and you have X drops? Now One drop is pretty huge.

What if I have X drops and you have X+1 drops? Again, one drop is pretty huge.

I will concede that these scenarios aren't exactly common, but you get the idea. Furthermore, if you have two more drops than your opponent, you can cut down on the number of drops by having two 10 man tactical squads (instead of four 5man tactical squads).

It's not your run of the mill "shoot at things better" or "do mortal damage" stratagem, and it definitely is situational, but I would hardly call it worthless.

But in what situation would you really use it to split up a squad? They can split fire and you'll almost never be able to take 2 separate objectives with them. And that's being generous. Just 1 dead Marine and you can't even use it.

 

Objectives have to be spread out anyway so the squad just can't split up and move quickly enough to take objectives and why haven't you got another force going for the other objective?

[Grim Dog Studios]

 

 

A note on Tactical Flexibility: It can only help you with a single drop, unless you use it multiple turns. Which is almost impossible since as soon a model dies from a unit it is ineligible. 1 drop is meaningless.

Suppose I have 8 drops in my army, and you also have 8 drops (because you are using two 5man squads).

Now, suppose you took out those two 5 man squads and replaced them with one 10 man squad.

I still have 8 drops. You now have 7. You can still combat squad them into two 5man teams.

This is basically the whole point of combat squads. One less drop is meaningless?

What if I have X drops and you have X drops? Now One drop is pretty huge.

What if I have X drops and you have X+1 drops? Again, one drop is pretty huge.

I will concede that these scenarios aren't exactly common, but you get the idea. Furthermore, if you have two more drops than your opponent, you can cut down on the number of drops by having two 10 man tactical squads (instead of four 5man tactical squads).

It's not your run of the mill "shoot at things better" or "do mortal damage" stratagem, and it definitely is situational, but I would hardly call it worthless.

But in what situation would you really use it to split up a squad? They can split fire and you'll almost never be able to take 2 separate objectives with them. And that's being generous. Just 1 dead Marine and you can't even use it.

 

Objectives have to be spread out anyway so the squad just can't split up and move quickly enough to take objectives and why haven't you got another force going for the other objective?

 

 

I have to agree, whenever I have used 5-man squads to take objectives they just do not have the longevity of a 10 man squad. They are easily swarmed and just losing one marine pretty much means you have lost. 

Granted, my main opponents are an ork list that has a lot of infantry and a DKoK list which too has a fair few infantry. I need the 10 man squads to hold their ground when they take objectives whilst they get supported by other elements of my army.

 

 

Agreed on both points. I miss my Honour Guard!

 

I believe the reason we've lost many options for units like Honour Guard and even the Chapter Champion is purely because GW doesn't make a suitable model.

 

I'd like GW to bring back kitbashing. They should produce sprues so we can customise our armies easily.

 

More options please.

 

One can hope they release a Victrix Guard chapter approved/data sheet with a conversion sprue similar to the UM/BA/DA/SW ones, just with fancy shoulder pads, power weapons and plastic honour guard eagle helmets. 

[Stoic Raptor]

Not UM specific but I agree that Gravis should be more durable.  T5 alone doesn't cut it - any more than it ever did with a bike.  Give it a better save and people might use it.

And Predators need to start behaving like tanks - give them a T8 or a 2+ save.  Why mobile artillery is tougher, makes no sense to me.

[justicarius6]

#1 Some change to Drop Pods to make them at least viable, don't really care how it's done I just want to be able to use them again as they were hands down my favourite vehicle beforehand even with the advent of free Razorbacks in Gladius'.

 

#2 Tightening up of wording in regards to some rules. I've seen people online and in games stores cherry picking sentences from rules sections and using them to justify their interpretation of the rules rather than reading them in context to the section. Units with <Fly> having infinite vertical distance is one example.

 

#3 Honour guard with options. At the moment they're just a restricted version of company veterans with an extra wound, leadership and save. So much for fighting with the "relics of the chapter".

 

#4 Either a use for servitors or their removal. A boost to techmarines repairs as before would be good.

 

#5 A bonus for single chapter/regiment/craftworld etc. armies, +1 CP would be enough for me.

 

#6 Reduction in points costs for Dev. Centurions. When a dreadnought with the same armament is cheaper than a Centurion, something's wrong....

[Kinstryfe]

"No one wants to see Formations return in the wider community. It forces players to take stuff that the design team wants rather than my own force. Bad ju ju. I can't add it to the list as GW wouldn't contemplate it."

 

While I don't inherently disagree, if you're playing super competitively, my understanding is the design team has already forced you to run an army of assassins, Guilliman, primaris psykers, Nemesis dreadknights, and Conscripts. If that's not what they intended, and they want people to run full Ultramarines armies (or any chapter, really), they need to give people a reason to do so (excepting maybe limited assassins and Inquisitors as fluff friendly add-ons to an extent). Right now, it's not really that the Ultras list can't be powerful, but that soup armies can be so much more powerful. The only ways to do that are to get more restrictive to force people to play mono forces, which I imagine people would hate, (i.e. All units in the ARMY, not detachment, must be Ultramarines to get their chapter tactics), or to add on some benefit to doing it. As much as some people may hate the idea, it would build on the current detachment system and provide one option to players to get some benefit from playing certain fluffy combinations while leaving the current army construction options entirely intact. It could also help fix part of the inequity in CP counts between elite armies and horde armies, and I can only imagine that that would be a good thing.

 

That subject aside, what I would love most is for GW to go back to supporting models that are completely buildable fully in plastic by kitbashing, as Captain Idaho said. Not even stuff needing new sprues. The Marine range can produce an Apothecary or Ancient in Terminator armour, so allow it. You can kitbash a Librarian in Tartaros armour, so allow it. It's literally just making a new datasheet with a few tweaks.

 

Up some unit sizes in two ways. One, stuff like honor guard, up to 10, and give standard options. There's no discernable difference between "honor guard" and fancy vanguard, really. Again, if you can kitbash it, allow it. Two, as primaris are the kings of msu, I'd like them to consider allowing some Marine units up to 20 models. Let Marines get in on the pseudo-horde action, even if the precident post-heresy is that they stick to ten man squads.

 

Drop Pods, give them a reason to exist. Lower the cost significantly and/or improve how they work, let them deploy closer to the enemy, or at the least don't count the pods themselves toward units placed in reserve.

 

Strategems, I can't complain about too much for Ultras specifically. I would like to see like a dozen more universal strategems though. More usable options is imho always better than more restrictions.

 

Some sort of benefit for playing a mono force, however they do it. Guest stars should be like exotic spices; they add a lot of flavor, but you don't want more than a pinch or they overpower everything else. Don't know what would be enough to balance Marines with soup armies without being nuts. Just random ideas, all infantry become objective secured to befit their elite status? Reroll objectives due to superior intelligence? Free orbital strike from chapter ships before the game starts? I dunno what they'd come up with, but I feel they need to do something to stem the trends. There's a fine line between having lots of options and having too many, and I think the designers have swung too far into too many options for allies. Heck, even something like "Codex Astartes: The Codex Astartes is a monolithic collection of the best strategies and tactics the Space Marines have at their disposal. An army drawn entirely from a single <chapter> from Codex: Space Marines always gets X# starting CP instead of the usual 3 to represent their exceptional training."

[Captain Idaho]

1st amendment in Chapter Approved would be to redefine Battle Forged to include all a single Codex (with the exception the Auxiliary Detachment as it's already -1 per choice). That would instantly punish those who take multiple Codex Armies for cheese as they'd lose 3 CPs.

 

Space Marines actually have very few usable Stratagems unless you play huge points or specific choice armies. I don't take 3 Vindicators as I don't have the points or theme (I like OTHER stuff) so I instantly lose out on a single Stratagem.

 

Likewise, I don't take Land Speeders therefore I instantly lose out on another Stratagem.

 

It's impossible to specialise to such an extent whilst maintaining a competitive list with troops numbers so we lose out on a lot of Stratagems.

 

Remember that 7 other Stratagems are not for Ultramarines anyway.

 

Some colourful Stratagems would be nice. Like Teleportation which allows a Terminator squad to redeploy as per teleport rules. Or Offensive Assault where a unit with jump packs can assault after advancing.

 

Lots of things to do.

[Daigo Cannon]

I would like chapter tactics to be revamp to apply to vehicles, we have seen all other codex having and option for infantry and another for vehicles, while marines' tactis only apply to infantry and dread.

 

Pods needs to reduce the cost and ignore the 9'' deployment rule.

 

I'm on board on the stratagems, we loose so many that are unit specific, that we end with 6 usable stratagems.

 

Combat squatting should not count as drops on the deployment, using a 10 man squad vs 2 5 man is already at the cost of a sergeant and his special options, why it needs to count as 2 drops, other units like Lieutenants count as a unit when deploying and don't need to deploy in unit coherence.

 

This is on the wish list but tactical flexibility could be fixed the next, remove the 10 man into 2 5/5, a squad of X into 5/x-5 at any moment, it could be used when the unit is targeted or charged to enable special weapons to survive.

[Stoic Raptor]

I'm not sure how someone can cherry-pick the rules to imply that units with Fly can move an infinite vertical distance.  The rules for movement clearly state that vertical distance is counted as inches of movement.  The only Marine unit I know of that ignores this, would be Rievers with grapnels.

 

If I had an opponent do that to me, I'd pick up my stuff and go elsewhere - I don't tolerate rules lawyers.  If I'm not having fun, let' see how much fun they have twisting the rules when there's no one there. :D

[Ishagu]

Centurions 40 points per model cheaper.

 

Termies 15 point per model cheaper.

 

Drop Pod 30 points cheaper and arrives 6" from units.

 

Predators cheaper.

 

Vindicators 2D3 shots, no movement penalty to BS. Extra D3 for units over 10.

 

All FW models cheaper lol

[Frater Cornelius]

Make bubbles more interesting and buff the Gravis models Oo

 

Edit: Buff Drop Pods.

 

Make tanks cheaper or buff their survivability. In both basis, make them shoot twice at half movement or below like all the other factions.

 

Chapter Tactics for Vehicles.

 

Allow Primaris enter old transports and give them the bulky rule for those. Or just release a small Primaris transport already...

Edited November 3, 2017 by Frater Cornelius