"Fixing" the Space Marine Codex

[Dracos]

Tweak ATSKNF to something mechanically meaningful.

 

3+ is living on past glories 6 editions ago. The new AP rules make 3+ a joke and Custodes (May they burn in the Warp) sets a ceiling for Marines of any ilk.

 

I'm less interested in point drops than I am Space Marines being the mythologically powerful super soldiers they're suppose to be. Point drops? If I wanted to play hordes I'd play Guard. 

[Ratherdashing]

1+ save on Terminators and 2+ on regular Marines (and probably Primaris) is a fair and easy fix (just as easy as reduced points since it's just changing a number) that promotes Marines as elites instead of just making them a horde. It also gives Termies a different identity and role than Primaris. I think it would need to accompany a points drop, but I still say it's a realistic expectation since it can be done in a single line of text (and you can update your codex with a centimeter of Wite Out).

[9x19 Parabellum]

I just don't understand what's so bad about dropping points. You guys understand that all fluff describes their respective armies as the most badass warfighters in the galaxy, right?  All fluff needs to be taken with a grain of salt as whether or not its the codex or a novel it's all intentionally written with quite a bit of hyperbole.

Why would having 15-20% more Astartes on the table be such a horrible thing? Why would having an additional vehicle on the table be so bad?

 

As far as boring, I also don't understand this, and I don't think people are properly thinking through the way the dynamics could/would change if you were able to field more stuff. Imagine being able to use Killshot reliably because you had enough points to field 4 Predators? Or the psychic one because you got 3 librarians out. Or enough CP to use your stratagems because you could fit 2 battalions (or an entire brigade, gasp!) in a list.

[UnkyHamHam]

I'm less interested in point drops than I am Space Marines being the mythologically powerful super soldiers they're suppose to be. Point drops? If I wanted to play hordes I'd play Guard.

Amen, Brother.

 

Marines need to be given tools (or cost value the tools they have appropriately) that allow them to build an identity in the game. Their old identity has been eroded out of the game by lackluster rules, and skyrocketing point costs, and aggressive business practices.

 

Deep strike and drop pods have been reigned in heavily and extremely over costed. Flexibility and wargear options have been squeezed out of codexes due to lack of options in kits in order to fight bitz outlets.

 

Their durability is been laid to waste several times over by the 8th's wounding and AP mechanics, overcosting their actual durability, and escalation of marine+1 codexes like DG, 1kS, and Custodes.

 

They, along with traitor brethren, are the only factions whose vehicles lack sub-faction traits. Making building an Armored or Mech force an uphill battle and sterilizing experience.

 

Their legendary resilience to morale is laughable this edition since everyone one and their brood mother has a way of skirting morale.

 

And in general bolters, chainswords, and Power Armor are just watered down to near uselessness, with mathematical efficiency that is joke.

 

They honestly need to be able to break some rules. Every faction's gameplay identity is usually defined by where they are exceptions to the rules. And it seems every faction but marines gets to be exceptional somewhere in the game. Marines alone tend to abide by every rule. Let them break a few. Strats can do this.

 

Anyways, I'm ranting now. Sorry I got carried away. I know I'm preaching to the choir in these halls. Just want you guys to know that my hearts are in the right place.

[UnkyHamHam]

I just don't understand what's so bad about dropping points. You guys understand that all fluff describes their respective armies as the most badass warfighters in the galaxy, right? All fluff needs to be taken with a grain of salt as whether or not its the codex or a novel it's all intentionally written with quite a bit of hyperbole.

Why would having 15-20% more Astartes on the table be such a horrible thing? Why would having an additional vehicle on the table be so bad?

 

As far as boring, I also don't understand this, and I don't think people are properly thinking through the way the dynamics could/would change if you were able to field more stuff. Imagine being able to use Killshot reliably because you had enough points to field 4 Predators? Or the psychic one because you got 3 librarians out. Or enough CP to use your stratagems because you could fit 2 battalions (or an entire brigade, gasp!) in a list.

I don't wholly disagree with your points here, but I find your examples rather amusing.

 

Can't have 4 predators no matter what they cost. Codex psychic powers are underwhelming and each power can be used once no matter how many Librarians you need. And CPs are not worth a whole lot more than rerolls to a codex marine army. The strats are niche and not useful 90% of the time. And even command rerolls are the least valued to us with Captains, Lts, and Guilliman...

 

I get it, you just chose some rather poor examples to further your point.

 

CA point cost reductions will help. But ultimately remains a bandaid.

[spessmarine]

SM were hot out the gate. CSM are actually in a similar place now as well. I will gladly take some serious points reduction with CA right around the corner. If you truly desire a new codex you might me in for a long wait or major disappointment. At least the wishlisting is not as rampant here now.

I'd rather a supplement anyways.

Some points drops here and there. RG relics+strats (plus sort out the vehicle business) to play up their themes better and I'm fine

[Kallas]

Well, if we take the Daemon Prince datasheet ruling as precedent, then Land Raiders would still be reined in by the Rule of Three: Land Raiders use the same datasheet, without the Daemon Prince which circumvents it by having different datasheet 'titles' (Daemon Prince, DP of Nurgle, DP of Tzeentch). Simply, Land Raiders don't have the same loophole.

 

You'd potentially be able to take more than three once you bring in the variants (so 3 Phobos and 3 Crusaders, for example) but they'd still be fairly expensive and not exactly more resilient than a Knight anyway (which people are building against, as much as possible, already).

 

I disagree, slightly, with the idea that the Land Raider needs to switch PotMS for Steel Behemoth: it should keep PotMS (and I honestly feel like all Marine vehicles should have PotMS: Predators are more lightly armed than similarly priced vehicles, but they're supposed to be roving hunters that operate at higher speeds with similar/better effectiveness due to being Astartes/Astartes equipment) and gain Steel Behemoth. If they had PotMS and SB, then I think they'd be fine (except for the Redeemer, which is a crap deal vs Hellhounds: it needs to have at least Range 10" on its Flamestorm Cannons, if not 12-16", if it remains a measly d6 shots) even at their current cost (but would still absolutely take a small price reduction on top!)

[Kallas]

I just don't understand what's so bad about dropping points. You guys understand that all fluff describes their respective armies as the most badass warfighters in the galaxy, right?  All fluff needs to be taken with a grain of salt as whether or not its the codex or a novel it's all intentionally written with quite a bit of hyperbole.

Why would having 15-20% more Astartes on the table be such a horrible thing? Why would having an additional vehicle on the table be so bad?

 

As far as boring, I also don't understand this, and I don't think people are properly thinking through the way the dynamics could/would change if you were able to field more stuff. Imagine being able to use Killshot reliably because you had enough points to field 4 Predators? Or the psychic one because you got 3 librarians out. Or enough CP to use your stratagems because you could fit 2 battalions (or an entire brigade, gasp!) in a list.

Well, for one thing: Space Marine Chapters are 1,000 (approximately) strong so as to rein in any one individual's ability to command such a strong force. The background of Space Marines has them routinely being deployed in small numbers and having massive influences on the conflicts in which they intervene. In part this is because they perform rapid, surgical strikes (which are incredibly hard to portray on the tabletop) but also because Space Marines are incredibly capable individuals.

 

Neither their statline nor their weapons really represent anything close to their actual capabilities. A Space Marine is shown to be massively stronger than an unimproved human (and even Catachans!  ) yet they have only +1S? Their background is sometimes (well, often) warped to suit various authors' needs, but the overall image of Space Marines as depicted by GW is that they are a force to be reckoned with, even with their incredibly small numbers: this does not translate to the tabletop.

 

---

 

For boring: a lot of the Space Marine stratagems are straight up uninspired and don't do much beyond rerolls or causing a couple of Mortal Wounds.

 

Killshot is a good example, actually: it's a decent effect, but due to the requirements it stifles list building a fair amount (often it's best to either take the full three Predators or none at all) and while a reasonably potent effect (+1 to wound/damage is good) it has many limitations to its actual use (requires three to be deployed and all close together), and the base Predator is only barely passable as a battle tank.

 

For the Librarian example: hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Vanilla Space Marine Librarians are crap. Their personal combat capabilities are pretty pants and the Librarius Discipline is laughable; the Empyric Channelling Stratagem is even more of a joke: you need three, close together (one of three Stratagems that have that stipulation!) and you get a bonus for one Psychic Power (and you also get to cast Smite with that one, since they can already cast both of their Librarius Powers if they wanted to, anyway). And yeah, the Librarius Discipline has some useful effects (specifically Null Zone and Might of Heroes) but the application of them (and the Discipline as a whole) is woeful; Might of Heroes is the best Librarius Power, because it has the least limitations on its use and the most applicable effects.

 

Being able to fit in more units to fill out more Detachments would certainly be welcome, but for Marines, and Vanilla especially, the increase in CP isn't all that worthwhile - a lot of Marine units are pathetic in both offence and defence, and their available, useful Stratagem outlets are few and far between.

[TempestBlade]

I always felt that land raiders should have a rule that lets them move and then disembark the guys inside. Almost like it’s an ASSAULT VEHICLE. It would let it be a big upside to taking it too.

[Ishagu]

Let's be realistic, as we've said before. Chapter Approved will NOT re-write datasheet for an entire codex, and certainly not for units that are the template for multiple datasheets across 8+ books.

 

Point adjustments are on the table and I'm hoping that GW will price units aggressively. We're not looking for minor adjustments but for substantial alterations. To see Landraiders on the table for example, they'd need a point drop in excess of 100.

 

Let's see if GW deliver.

[Tamiel]

If marines became a horde army thanks to point reductions, that could mean seeing more people buy marine models. So based on that, I can definitely see GW just reducing the point costs of marines and calling it a day.

[UnkyHamHam]

Let's be realistic, as we've said before. Chapter Approved will NOT re-write datasheet for an entire codex, and certainly not for units that are the template for multiple datasheets across 8+ books.

 

Point adjustments are on the table and I'm hoping that GW will price units aggressively. We're not looking for minor adjustments but for substantial alterations. To see Landraiders on the table for example, they'd need a point drop in excess of 100.

 

Let's see if GW deliver.

I agree with you here. But with the two caveats. First, that they don't point marines into a hoard. There is such a thing as overdoing it. And second, that they just address the actual issue sooner than later.

 

I don't think anyone thinks CA will be anything other than point changes. But obviously that's not enough. But it will be a nice bandaid for a few more months of uphill struggling. If only to at least further data on why its not the best option.

[Dont-Be-Haten]

Been lurking for a couple weeks following this. In hindsight, many of the codices have talked about marines swelling in numbers. BA have almost as many scouts as an entire chapter at the end of DoB. Ultramarines have the 11 co. Now as well. It is not a stretch to have more Marines on the board thanks to cost reductions of 2-3 ppm.

 

With regards to other things I do think there is a general consensus that legacy marines should be +1 wound/attack and primaris should be +1wound.

 

I do like those few changes. I think parabellum has it in the right direction, as do several of you other gents. BA are only slightly better in only a couple areas, but are in just a tough of a spot.

[Ratherdashing]

Out of curiosity, do Predators, etc, have Machine Spirits in the lore?

[redmapa]

Out of curiosity, do Predators, etc, have Machine Spirits in the lore?

Yes and they used to be a wargear option for SM vehicles.

[ShibeKing]

Out of curiosity, do Predators, etc, have Machine Spirits in the lore?

 

I believe they do, but they're not as advanced as the Machine Spirit you would find in Land Raiders.

[Panzer]

I don't think anybody is disagreeing that a buff to Marines would be more desireable than a points drop. It's just that most of us work&post under the assumption that we won't be seeing such a buff in the CA and I agree with that assumption so the only thing we have left are points adjustments.

 

 

 

I just don't understand what's so bad about dropping points. You guys understand that all fluff describes their respective armies as the most badass warfighters in the galaxy, right?  All fluff needs to be taken with a grain of salt as whether or not its the codex or a novel it's all intentionally written with quite a bit of hyperbole.

Why would having 15-20% more Astartes on the table be such a horrible thing? Why would having an additional vehicle on the table be so bad?

 

As far as boring, I also don't understand this, and I don't think people are properly thinking through the way the dynamics could/would change if you were able to field more stuff. Imagine being able to use Killshot reliably because you had enough points to field 4 Predators? Or the psychic one because you got 3 librarians out. Or enough CP to use your stratagems because you could fit 2 battalions (or an entire brigade, gasp!) in a list.

 

The thing is that even in other armys fluff the Marines get described as elite and near unkillable monsters. It's not a case of "my fluff says my army is the bestest there is". Of course there is also fluff where Marines die in droves, however those depictions are more on the rare side and often citicised as being badly written by basically anyone who isn't biased against that particular subfaction.

[Lemondish]

Well, if we take the Daemon Prince datasheet ruling as precedent, then Land Raiders would still be reined in by the Rule of Three: Land Raiders use the same datasheet, without the Daemon Prince which circumvents it by having different datasheet 'titles' (Daemon Prince, DP of Nurgle, DP of Tzeentch). Simply, Land Raiders don't have the same loophole.

 

You'd potentially be able to take more than three once you bring in the variants (so 3 Phobos and 3 Crusaders, for example) but they'd still be fairly expensive and not exactly more resilient than a Knight anyway (which people are building against, as much as possible, already).

 

I disagree, slightly, with the idea that the Land Raider needs to switch PotMS for Steel Behemoth: it should keep PotMS (and I honestly feel like all Marine vehicles should have PotMS: Predators are more lightly armed than similarly priced vehicles, but they're supposed to be roving hunters that operate at higher speeds with similar/better effectiveness due to being Astartes/Astartes equipment) and gain Steel Behemoth. If they had PotMS and SB, then I think they'd be fine (except for the Redeemer, which is a crap deal vs Hellhounds: it needs to have at least Range 10" on its Flamestorm Cannons, if not 12-16", if it remains a measly d6 shots) even at their current cost (but would still absolutely take a small price reduction on top!)

Gaining both is redundant, though. The idea was to ADD the additional parts of Steel Behemoth because it already does the same thing as PotMS in the first part of the rule.

 

And while everybody already builds to kill Knights, it hasn't stopped people from bringing Knights, which suggests that there is a balanced price for heavy, elite, tough single units like this when they provide sufficient offensive capability with enough durability for their cost.

 

Regarding Terminators - there has to be a cleaner way to increase their durability than this +1 save nonsense.

[Captain Idaho]

Sure. 3 wounds would spectacularly change them.

 

Oooo had a thought - Astartes class weapons. Astartes Chainsword - same but also -1ap. Astartes Boltguns and pistols - same but also -1 ap/S5 (associated bonus to Bolt Rifle).

 

Etc

 

This fix has precedent in the Astartes Shotgun and boosts up the infantry to be more powerful.

[UnkyHamHam]

Sure. 3 wounds would spectacularly change them.

 

Oooo had a thought - Astartes class weapons. Astartes Chainsword - same but also -1ap. Astartes Boltguns and pistols - same but also -1 ap/S5 (associated bonus to Bolt Rifle).

 

Etc

 

This fix has precedent in the Astartes Shotgun and boosts up the infantry to be more powerful.

You, myself, and many others have proposed this. Ultimately I think it should be the right direction. To distinguish Astartes from their human inferiors.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

Has fluff basis too. It's always been said that the Sister's boltgun patterns are smaller than the astartes patterns, because only a transhuman can actually lift, let alone fire one!

I was also thinking, that if you want to justify a change that only affects Adeptus Astartes, without boosting Heretic Astartes, (A problem Ishagu mentions often) the answer must be similar. For instance, we could fluff that the Mechanicum issued the space marines new ammunition, (a la Deathwatch) and then you could justify an AP change or similar which heretics wouldn't have access to.

[Captain Idaho]

I don't even think Heretics and the like SHOULD miss out on these bonuses. Their Codex books need work and wouldn't it be nice if a Chaos player could field a Chaos Marine squad instead of cultists or Death Guard actually took plague Marines!

 

 

Sure. 3 wounds would spectacularly change them.

Oooo had a thought - Astartes class weapons. Astartes Chainsword - same but also -1ap. Astartes Boltguns and pistols - same but also -1 ap/S5 (associated bonus to Bolt Rifle).

Etc

This fix has precedent in the Astartes Shotgun and boosts up the infantry to be more powerful.

You, myself, and many others have proposed this. Ultimately I think it should be the right direction. To distinguish Astartes from their human inferiors.

I have a memory of a sieve so I forget when and who suggested it. Even if it was me!

[Panzer]

I don't even think Heretics and the like SHOULD miss out on these bonuses. Their Codex books need work and wouldn't it be nice if a Chaos player could field a Chaos Marine squad instead of cultists or Death Guard actually took plague Marines!

 

 

 

Agreed. If I recall correctly the argument was always about increasing Marines defenses and that it would affect DG and TSons even more due how durable they already are and the general "problem" of  GW having to touch a lot of books if they roll out those changes to heretic Astartes as well.

Both things I don't particularly mind. If they become too strong GW can always adjust their points upwards and the fact they have to touch so many books is unfortunate but necessary imo.

[CCE1981]

I don't even think Heretics and the like SHOULD miss out on these bonuses. Their Codex books need work and wouldn't it be nice if a Chaos player could field a Chaos Marine squad instead of cultists or Death Guard actually took plague Marines!

 

 

 

Sure. 3 wounds would spectacularly change them.

Oooo had a thought - Astartes class weapons. Astartes Chainsword - same but also -1ap. Astartes Boltguns and pistols - same but also -1 ap/S5 (associated bonus to Bolt Rifle).

Etc

This fix has precedent in the Astartes Shotgun and boosts up the infantry to be more powerful.

You, myself, and many others have proposed this. Ultimately I think it should be the right direction. To distinguish Astartes from their human inferiors.

I have a memory of a sieve so I forget when and who suggested it. Even if it was me!

*Raise my hand*

 

I might not have been the only one but I certainly have been advocating for it.

 

Well at least the wounds.

 

Having Astartes versions of weapons would help a lot. I knew it was one of the nerfs to Marines this edition, I just hadn’t sat down to think of the solution yet.

[Ratherdashing]

Regarding Terminators - there has to be a cleaner way to increase their durability than this +1 save nonsense.

Why is it nonsense? 1+ save seems pretty clean to me. The precedent for the mechanic is set by 7+ saves anyway.