On Primaris and the future of 40k

[Vermintide]

Options of wargear? That matters very little I find for unit effectiveness.

 

To what units are you referring that you think are lacking?

 

Eh? So you reckon a Smash Captain's wargear is of little importance to his effectiveness? Secondly, all of them. Every Primaris unit.

 

I really don't see why you are so dead set on disagreeing with this concept. There are two things Primaris currently lack, compared to their firstborn brethren- Jet packs and close combat weapons.

 

Over time, Primaris will evolve to attain a similar level of flexibility as old Marines did.

[Ishagu]

The smash captain might be a good argument for limiting free choice on units. It creates a grossly overpowered combo compared to other upgrades. It's the same in every edition depending on the greater rules - in 7th it was all about bikes, now it's jump packs.

 

I was referring to stuff like upgrades on Tac Squads, an extra Assault Cannon in a Termie squad, a flamer on an Assault Marine. None of these have a great impact. The focused Primaris units are better in this regard.

 

HQ customisation is different, however. As above it can have a big impact that is difficult to balance.

 

I would be perfectly happy with a jump pack HQ, but probably more happy if his wargear is pre-determined. Heck, only have one for certain chapters to make it more special.

Edited August 28, 2019 by Ishagu

[Vermintide]

Yeah, I think the change in focus to specialised squads has more to do with how antiquated Old Marines rules were, rather than anything radical about Primaris. Old Marines rules stretch back twenty-odd years and have to account for the weird way things worked in those old editions.

 

Take a Devastator Squad for instance. If you were a rookie at the game you could make a 5 man Dev Squad with bolters, and pay way more for them, even though they are functionally the same thing as a Tac squad if you don't give them any heavy weapons. I think the simplification of a 5 man plasma death squad always being a plasma death squad, but with different types of plasma death available, is a good thing.

For the HQs/characters, I'd definitely like more customisation, not less. I miss when you could take anything in the armoury and really customise your army's characters.

[Triszin]

The smash captain might be a good argument for limiting free choice on units. It creates a grossly overpowered combo compared to other upgrades. It's the same in every edition depending on the greater rules - in 7th it was all about bikes, now it's jump packs.

 

I was referring to stuff like upgrades on Tac Squads, an extra Assault Cannon in a Termie squad, a flamer on an Assault Marine. None of these have a great impact. The focused Primaris units are better in this regard.

 

HQ customisation is different, however. As above it can have a big impact that is difficult to balance.

 

I would be perfectly happy with a jump pack HQ, but probably more happy if his wargear is pre-determined. Heck, only have one for certain chapters to make it more special.

I mean, one simple way is to have certain HQ choices locked to mono armies.

[Bryan Blaire]

Maybe it is unclear, math can be hard, but the math behind options (also known as variables) doesn't have to have a "big impact" on a per squad basis to make a balance issue for an army. Synergy, or the lack thereof, across multiple variables in multiple Squads in multiple Detachments in a war game can be difficult to balance, and removing squad variables or limiting them definitely brings the math down.

 

There can also be multiple factors in the reason to do something in game design - you can impact multiple things (such as IP protection) by changing things in just one way.

 

Primaris Squads being more limited in options on everything but the squad leader very likely has to do with multiple factors. It's unwise to assume that we can discount any of them because anecdotally it doesn't fit our preconceived notions.

 

The number of variables in any unit inherently increases the difficulty in a balancing situation where the results of variables across a multitude of factors in and outside the army list can positively or negatively affect said balance equations. Variables present don't have to always be positive to affect said balance equations.

[MegaVolt87]

Even though Inceptors lack dedicated melee weapons, their profile + rules is a good indication of the direction of a melee focused variant of a primaris jump unit. 

[Triszin]

Even though Inceptors lack dedicated melee weapons, their profile + rules is a good indication of the direction of a melee focused variant of a primaris jump unit. 

I love the idea.

 

Inceptor, Meteoric Decent, the turn they arrive, (they have the supersonic keyword), then they get grounded and lose the fly keyword.

[Ciler]

I never said Primaris are lacking in melee ability. They can and do punch pretty hard- If they have to.

 

I said they are lacking in options, which is objectively true. I don't think anyone is specifically taking Intercessor squads with a TH sarge as hard hitting melee troops. Nobody is building their list around how good Aggressors are on the charge. Nobody is thinking "Ahh, I'll leave the Death Company at home, I have Reivers!"

 

Primaris might be legitimately good in melee since the new rules came out, but that's only because of a rules change buff, the design philosophy remains the same. What happens if the new round of codex gives most every other army +1A on their charges too? Suddenly they suck again.

 

And again, I like the change- It's very fluffy for Marines to play that way, well balanced in CC and range. But I'm a Blood Angel, I want to something more up close and personal too

Agreed 110%, very good summary.

[TorvaldTheMild]

Tau have a lack of options? The basic infantry, maybe, but their Battlesuits have an amazing number of options, possibly one of the most versatile units in the game.

 

 

To play devil's advocate, the current range of units certainly focuses on shooting. It has melee capabilities, but that's more of a "they can hold their own if they have to" kind of deal. There are no real options beyond a power sword here and there- You just happen to get a bunch of S4 attacks.

 

But then that's how vanilla marines have always played. You want to shoot things, and aside from certain powerful characters, you only really charge to finish the job your bolters didn't.

 

And let's say nothing about certain other imperial factions who share actual similarities with Tau- Weak, cheap infantry, sub par ballistic skill, but lots of shooting to make up for it...

 

And to play Devils Advocate to your devilry advocation, if the Primaris don't have melee capabilities, then neither do the Orks. After all, they just get a bunch of S4 attacks, with a power klaw here and there, no real options beyond that. 

I'm talking about basic infantry that don't have options.

[TorvaldTheMild]

 

In round 3, 10 Veteran Intercessor can have 41 Attacks at ap-1 with no weapon upgrades on them...

 

You can use a Strat to put them in the assault doctrine at any time too.

And on ROUND 1 a squad of 10 Berzerkers is packing, on their first fight (because they fight twice if you don't remember), 5 S10 AP-3 Dd3, 36 S6 AP-1 D1, and 10 S5 AP0 D1 attacks. And then they fight again for 4 5 S10 AP-3 Dd3, 27 S6 AP-1 D1, and 10 S5 AP0 D1 attacks.

 

For a grand total of 9 S10 AP-3 Dd3, 63 S6 AP-1 D1 and 20 S5 AP0 D1 attacks for their whole fight phase. Which is before the Veteran Intercessors fight if the Berzerkers charge first.

 

I'll give you the point regarding the doctrine giving them an AP of -1, but.... It's almost like those 10 Veteran Intercessors are still FAR WORSE than the Berzerkers in melee.

 

And yes, I'm using Berzerkers because they're honestly the perfect example of what a dedicated assault squad SHOULD BE. Which is to combine quantity and quality of attacks. As of right now, even with that doctrine, Veteran Intercessors are running off of the "if you throw enough at the wall, something will stick" strategy. Which, while okay, isn't really a good way to run at things.

 

And here's the other thing:

 

How many command points does it take to make them that good in melee? Because Berzerkers take a grand total of 0

 

Exactly, CC units have it the worst in every way.  They need to withstand dakka to get into combat, they get blasted with overwatch, if you want them to survive you have to buy a transport etc.  When they get into CC they should hit like a tonne of bricks.  Though it should be balanced, if you are an all rounder army, you should pay more I think for CC units or find some sort of way of balancing because if you have a dakka army you get too much of an edge.  I even think that CSM's should pay a tax for berzerkers because berzerkers in a WE codex will need to be punishing as they won't have a lot of dakka.  I don't know how is the best way to balance it out though whether its to the degree at which they hit or a points tax.  But if you had Berzerker type units in a Primaris army that would be pretty OP, a bit like SW's used to be with their TWC.  Though Orimaris CC units should hit hard, much more than reviers as they are a ridiculous unit.   I mean GW have tried their best to make Primaris competitive, so what did they do... They made them a dakka army.

Edited August 29, 2019 by TorvaldTheMild

[BitsHammer]

Speaking of the flaws of CC troops, I feel like Intercessors walk the line between shooty and melee and hit the feeling of being generalists much better than Tac marines do.

[Schlitzaf]

For the Zerker comparison that not exactly fair. All Zerkers do is punch things good. Intercessors are a definition of a unit jack of all trades master of none...but better than the master of one. The Intercessor Squad epitomizes what a Loyalist Marine squad should be. Tactically flexible on the tabletop to respond a large variety of threats and situations. They lack the specialization of true specialized but can do anything you need.

 

For being stunning at melee? The only loyalist Marine Options (Blood Claws applicable here too), are Hunters and Crusader Squads. Both those squads have an element to give than extra nudge in melee, in case of Hunters they have 4 (6) Power Weapon Level Attacks + Plasma Pistol. Crusader Squads have 3 (5) Power Weapon Attacks and secondly, can take a large enough squad to survive the table. And cheap enough (Espacially Once Crusaders get the tactical reduction) they are affordable to take in mass.

 

But the future? Who can say. The main question is the culling will begin before or after the release of chapter equivalent unique units that firstborn.

[Ciler]

For the Zerker comparison that not exactly fair.

That's the point though. To highlight what a true CC unit is, and why vet intercessors are therefore... not. Doesn't mean they are bad, doesn't mean they don't fulfil their role well, but they are simply not a good CC unit.

[Marshal Rohr]

Vet Intercessors fulfill the role of veterans well. Just not a CC unit like a crusader squad or true Sword Brethren.

[Gederas]

For the Zerker comparison that not exactly fair.

That's the point though. To highlight what a true CC unit is, and why vet intercessors are therefore... not. Doesn't mean they are bad, doesn't mean they don't fulfil their role well, but they are simply not a good CC unit.

This. That's what I was going for. To highlight what a CC unit SHOULD be, and how Veteran Intercessors fall flat against that. Khorne Berzerkers hit every single aspect of what a true CC unit should be.

[Haywire]

A lot of things would definitely be solved on that front for me if GW were to bring out a fresh melee unit for the Primaris in Tacticus armour. A unit that is basically a classic Assault Squad, just Primarised with jump packs and power swords/spears/maces/axes as the players please. Can even give them a veteran version as well that gets extra options like 'heavier' weapons (Power fists/Thunder Hammers/Relic Blades) and storm shields.

 

Such a unit will, naturally, have to be called the Intercedors.

 

They can then help form that traditional power armour trinity of Tactical, Devastator, and Assault with Intercessors, Hellblasters, and Intercedors respectively.

 

Wishlisting, I know, but there's not much more to say at this stage.

[Leif Bearclaw]

A lot of things would definitely be solved on that front for me if GW were to bring out a fresh melee unit for the Primaris in Tacticus armour. A unit that is basically a classic Assault Squad, just Primarised with jump packs and power swords/spears/maces/axes as the players please. Can even give them a veteran version as well that gets extra options like 'heavier' weapons (Power fists/Thunder Hammers/Relic Blades) and storm shields.

 

Such a unit will, naturally, have to be called the Intercedors.

 

They can then help form that traditional power armour trinity of Tactical, Devastator, and Assault with Intercessors, Hellblasters, and Intercedors respectively.

 

Wishlisting, I know, but there's not much more to say at this stage.

You call it wishlisting, but I'm enduringly baffled they didn't do something like this from the get go. Would have made far more sense to do this instead of rolling out the Reivers before the rest of the Phobos armoured stuff.

[Ciler]

You call it wishlisting, but I'm enduringly baffled they didn't do something like this from the get go. Would have made far more sense to do this instead of rolling out the Reivers before the rest of the Phobos armoured stuff.

The thing, what makes sense to you as an individual consumer may not make sense for one of the world's most profitable companies. Here's one possible explanation (mind that I'm not saying it's the actual reason, it's just one thing that strikes me as likely) : any given marines player doesn't have an infinite disposable income, so if you release a whole slew of primaris, they won't be able to buy everything immediately and you only capitalise on the novelty hype on a fraction of the range. By staggering releases over a period of years, you allow your marine players to replenish their savings that they can burn again, and again...

[Bryan Blaire]

In addition to Ciler's comment, I thought I remembered the VoxCast discussion with Jes Goodwin (the first one) saying that the Dark Imperium release and immediate Primaris releases behind it were intended purposefully to introduce players to all the Primaris armor varieties, not release a full line of any of the armors, that those will be coming along more like the Phobos release has done.

 

Now I need to go hunt that VoxCast interview down again.

 

You may not agree with the method, but if I recall that correctly, GW did put some thought into how the releases would occur - they aren't just doing them to spite players or setting things up randomly.

[Leif Bearclaw]

 

You call it wishlisting, but I'm enduringly baffled they didn't do something like this from the get go. Would have made far more sense to do this instead of rolling out the Reivers before the rest of the Phobos armoured stuff.

The thing, what makes sense to you as an individual consumer may not make sense for one of the world's most profitable companies. Here's one possible explanation (mind that I'm not saying it's the actual reason, it's just one thing that strikes me as likely) : any given marines player doesn't have an infinite disposable income, so if you release a whole slew of primaris, they won't be able to buy everything immediately and you only capitalise on the novelty hype on a fraction of the range. By staggering releases over a period of years, you allow your marine players to replenish their savings that they can burn again, and again...

 

But that isn't what I was saying (also, they are far from one of the world's most profitable companies, they're far from doing badly, but they deal in millions, not billions of pounds/dollars). I wasn't saying they should have released xyz etc. all at once. But rather replacing Reivers in wave 1 with a proper assault marine analogue in regular Mk10 armour. Would have rounded out a proper 'trinity' of basic troops types (line, shooty and choppy), plus it would have somewhat filled one of the most glaring weaknesses in the Primaris range. As it was Reivers were easily the red headed step child of Primaris wave 1. They weren't particularly popular then, and seem to have been pretty well overshadowed by Infiltrators and Incursors once we got to the proper 'Phobos Wave'.

[Ciler]

But again, if you round up the trinity from the get go, there is literally no incentive for later purchases, since you already have all that you need. Plus Reavers got a new lease of life with the new codex, White Scar ones anyway.

 

And yes, GW is one of the most profitable companies in the world. Not in net amount, sure, but how many businesses do you know that report over 70% profit margin ? For reference, the tobacco industry is around 40%, the worldwide average is below 10% and retailers like Walmart are below 2%.

[Triszin]

I keep thinking back in this.

 

I think I'm fine with primaris, even though we are likely 1.5-2 years out from chapter specific units.

 

 

And the designs are growing on me, although the slots for some have me scratching my head.

 

I.e. reivers being elite instead of troop, and incursors/infils being troop instead of Elite. .

 

 

Gravis is slowly evolving into something palatable. And I can't wait to see primaris Terminator armor, as I think that needs to hit all the check boxes on launch.

[Bryan Blaire]

So on the fallacy of Reivers aren't an "Assault Marine" equivalent or didn't fill that role for the initial roll-out: if you do a basic squad comparison, that's exactly what they do, and have some trade offs between benefits from the two squads.

 

The basic Reiver squad has the exact same stat line as an Assault Squad in most respects: same Move value, same WS/BS, same Strength and Toughness, same Leadership, and the same Armor Save. However, the Reiver squad automatically has a leg up in that they have two Wounds and two Attacks each (three on the Sergeant). In contrast, the Assault Squad only has one Wound each, and one less attack per member.

 

For basic weaponry (i.e. no upgrade point costs), both squads have a bolt pistol version and a weapon that gives them the +1 attack when used. The Reiver squad has a pistol with better armor penetration in its basic form though. So again, without looking at upgrades, the Reiver squad does the exact same thing as an Assault squad without upgrades regarding CC.

 

Both squads also fill a single slot that is not a Battleline slot.

 

So for squad basics, yes, the Reivers and Assault Marines do, in fact, fulfill the same close combat roll.

 

Now, trade offs:

Assault Marines are more mobile for their 12 points with their Jump Packs, while Reivers have to go from 4 points to member to 8 points per member to get somewhat similar movement benefits - deploy anywhere on the battle field 9" out from the enemy with Grav Chutes, and ignore terrain height when moving with Grapnel Launchers. They still don't get to ignore other models and can't Fall Back and still shoot like Assault Marines can. While ignoring enemy models can allow you to charge over squads (I believe), the Fall Back and shoot isn't actually a benefit for close combat.

 

Reivers get a hand up in getting into CC with their Shock grenades, which can provide Overwatch protection, and don't pay any points for it.

 

Assault Marines can get more effective CC weapons and pistols, but they are all upgrades to the squad, and start to put the Assault Marine more in line (on a single member basis) with the Reiver cost with Grav Chute + Grapnel Launcher equipped. The Melta Bombs do make Assault Marines more potent against vehicles, but are again an upgrade.

 

Outside CC, the Reivers can be a more mobile shooting squad if you want, filling a role that folks often asked why Assault Marines can't in days passed. And they get a leg up in Morale, dropping an enemy squad's check value with the Terror Troops rule (whether it's a huge benefit or not, it's still something Assault Marines can't do.

 

So all in all, Reivers do have to be slightly upgraded to get a similar mobility as Assault Marines, but in basic purpose, they fulfill the exact same role upon release for Primaris that Assault Marines fill for classic Marines.

 

If you want to get into an argument about whether they are in the right slot, that's a completely different discussion, but for close combat role, both squads fill it in the same way. Yes, Assault Marines can get some better CC weapons, but again, those are upgrades that put their costs closer to or over the Reivers' cost with the mobility upgrades.

 

So out of the box on introduction, the Primaris units filled the Tactical, Devastator, and Assault trinity with their basic rules.

 

Yes, you can argue that there are other things in their slot that do the close combat role better, but that's not "Reivers don't fill the same role Assault Marines do." You can argue that Reivers aren't as good an assault unit as other things in the Codex - but most people also say the same things about Assault Marines.

 

Regarding the idea that there should have been a Tacticus armor version of the of a close combat styled unit instead - mechanically it makes absolutely no difference whether the Reivers are in Phobos or Tacticus (also, Tacticus isn't "basic" MkX armor in the lore, it's just a different MkX configuration, there's apparently a basic underlay to all MkX versions, but each type is a different armor plate set) armor - both armor types have the exact same rules, just different lore and appearance. Reivers don't even gain any special benefits from being in Phobos other than the rules from other units that affect things in Phobos.

 

If you mean "basic" MkX in that there isn't any special lore or special rules for Tacticus (at least at this time, they aren't precluded from adding them if they wanted), then basic Marine armor is Mk7 also by those same elements (which I would disagree with also).

 

-------------------

 

TL/DR: Reivers fulfill the exact same battlefield role as Assault Marines and it doesn't matter if they were released in Phobos or Tacticus armor, it's only a visual, not rule, difference.

[Red_Shift]

Reivers don't have chainswords. So meh.

 

Sorry to say it because yours is a well thought out post but reivers fail at a basic level. What's weird is that when you build them with carbines they look very similar to all the new phobos armour variants which make me wonder why they bothered rather than fleshed out tacticus and gravis.

 

I think gravis was an attempt to re imagine terminator armour but it didn't really work out. I hope they do make primaris terminators as they move them forward because it allows those of us who see primaris as true scale to get new opportunities.

[Bryan Blaire]

Reivers don't have chainswords. So meh.

You can replace the Combat Knife appearance with a Chainsword appearance. There is absolutely no mechanical difference at all. If the visual is all that's needed, I'd do it.

 

Sorry to say it because yours is a well thought out post but reivers fail at a basic level.

At a basic level? What basic level is that?

 

Where they fail, IMO, is that they take up an Elite slot without having the capability to actually upgrade them to an "elite" load out (presumably due to not having any of the upgrades available on sprue), and the Terror Troops rule isn't equivalent to having an inherent Infiltrate rule at some potency level, which they should have had (even if it was smaller than 9"). I'm not sure the Shock Grenades really make up for it, since it still requires a successful attack roll for.

 

But that's hardly "basic."