Have they "jumped the shark" with the Marine Dex(s) power?

[BitsHammer]

Yeah, I still remember Jervis proudly boasting in White Dwarf of "yeah, we removed all special stuff from character options, so that way Special Characters can really be special! After all, artificer armor etc should be reserved only for the big heroes", and just thinking to myself "ok, and so what about everyone who doesn't want to just use the existing Special Characters, but want to do our own thing?"

The fact they did that makes.me laugh a bit since 3rd had a meta that largely looked down on the use of special characters.

[Lord_Caerolion]

Well, that was when they also tried to push it so that your Raven Guard didn't get the Chapter Tactic unless you took Shrike, etc. Jervis seemed determined to change the nature of the game from your own armies battling to "hey, aren't these special characters awesome!" 

[jaxom]

I feel like that's still the case for some factions when it comes to competitive list building.

[Lord_Caerolion]

Things being efficient is one thing, but you aren't basically penalized for not taking Vulkan He'Stan if you play Salamanders now, you still get your Chapter Tactics. Back then it was an intentional design element of the codex, "Raven Guard players must take Shrike", now it's just a result of GW rules being as balanced as they usually are.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I listened to a podcast from FLG this morning. It came across as very anti Marine in general. FLG seems like so much poison to the game and hobby now... GW is a cash cow for them and they want to openly actively nerf specific factions... professionally speaking they should keep such opinions to themselves rather than resorting to public diatribes. That and ITC has helped make competitive gaming appear as the pinnacle of the game but in truth have created a toxic environment that gives birth to abominations classed as armies. It’s too early to hit Marines with the proverbial nerf bat. Altioc is still very much a thing and it took over nine months for GW to finally address the much hated Castellan. Give it some time... there’s lots of new stuff in the pipeline.

[mughi3]

I listened to a podcast from FLG this morning. It came across as very anti Marine in general. FLG seems like so much poison to the game and hobby now... GW is a cash cow for them and they want to openly actively nerf specific factions... professionally speaking they should keep such opinions to themselves rather than resorting to public diatribes. That and ITC has helped make competitive gaming appear as the pinnacle of the game but in truth have created a toxic environment that gives birth to abominations classed as armies. It’s too early to hit Marines with the proverbial nerf bat. Altioc is still very much a thing and it took over nine months for GW to finally address the much hated Castellan. Give it some time... there’s lots of new stuff in the pipeline.

It's a fact that every player gets their own enjoyment out of the game in a variety of different aspects. the builders, the model modifiers, the painters, the players and yes even the ITC super competitive WAAC players. sometimes there is crossover between them as well.

 

For somebody like me that has played the game for nearly 20 years, I still prefer the original idea from the beginning-a competitive game yes, as all games are, but one that is a "good time with your friends" drinks and snacks type game. mabey because I have experience with so many different miniature game systems, or I lived through 6 editions with the good and bad that came with them, or the fact we like to do silly things like break out the emperor or other units no longer in the game like the doom of malan'tai. It has led me to dislike the toxic environment GW created when they went the route of GTs and rougue trader sanctioned tournaments back in 3rd ed. I have not set foot in a GT since 2011 (until they ended them anyway) and I have not been in a local tournament since 6th edition dropped.

[toaae]

I listened to a podcast from FLG this morning. It came across as very anti Marine in general. FLG seems like so much poison to the game and hobby now... GW is a cash cow for them and they want to openly actively nerf specific factions... professionally speaking they should keep such opinions to themselves rather than resorting to public diatribes. That and ITC has helped make competitive gaming appear as the pinnacle of the game but in truth have created a toxic environment that gives birth to abominations classed as armies. It’s too early to hit Marines with the proverbial nerf bat. Altioc is still very much a thing and it took over nine months for GW to finally address the much hated Castellan. Give it some time... there’s lots of new stuff in the pipeline.

The guys at Frontline Gaming have done more for this hobby and community than any other independent entity. When GW ignored us, they made an FAQ that made the game playable. They have worked hard to provide a mission format that many players love, and have built a circuit with the expressed goal of driving more participants to events all over, not just their own. They are active playtesters, and their inclusion in the playtest group is a big reason why 8th has been as good as its been.

 

They are saints of this community, and if you find them toxic, it's probably because you're the toxic one. Of course they are talking about Space Marine nerfs. They were subtly warning us leading up to these releases that they thought Space Marines were going to be very strong. They know more than you can even grasp, being a cog on the inside. Future releases? Yeah, they probably provided feedback on it.

 

If you haven't got a clue, you probably shouldn't pass judgement.

[Panzer]

 

I listened to a podcast from FLG this morning. It came across as very anti Marine in general. FLG seems like so much poison to the game and hobby now... GW is a cash cow for them and they want to openly actively nerf specific factions... professionally speaking they should keep such opinions to themselves rather than resorting to public diatribes. That and ITC has helped make competitive gaming appear as the pinnacle of the game but in truth have created a toxic environment that gives birth to abominations classed as armies. It’s too early to hit Marines with the proverbial nerf bat. Altioc is still very much a thing and it took over nine months for GW to finally address the much hated Castellan. Give it some time... there’s lots of new stuff in the pipeline.

The guys at Frontline Gaming have done more for this hobby and community than any other independent entity. When GW ignored us, they made an FAQ that made the game playable. They have worked hard to provide a mission format that many players love, and have built a circuit with the expressed goal of driving more participants to events all over, not just their own. They are active playtesters, and their inclusion in the playtest group is a big reason why 8th has been as good as its been.

 

They are saints of this community, and if you find them toxic, it's probably because you're the toxic one. Of course they are talking about Space Marine nerfs. They were subtly warning us leading up to these releases that they thought Space Marines were going to be very strong. They know more than you can even grasp, being a cog on the inside. Future releases? Yeah, they probably provided feedback on it.

 

If you haven't got a clue, you probably shouldn't pass judgement.

 

 

I personally don't enjoy their videos or their format a lot, however this is true nontheless.

 

Edit: maybe just a bit harsh on the opinion

Edited October 16, 2019 by sfPanzer

[MARK0SIAN]

 

I listened to a podcast from FLG this morning. It came across as very anti Marine in general. FLG seems like so much poison to the game and hobby now... GW is a cash cow for them and they want to openly actively nerf specific factions... professionally speaking they should keep such opinions to themselves rather than resorting to public diatribes. That and ITC has helped make competitive gaming appear as the pinnacle of the game but in truth have created a toxic environment that gives birth to abominations classed as armies. It’s too early to hit Marines with the proverbial nerf bat. Altioc is still very much a thing and it took over nine months for GW to finally address the much hated Castellan. Give it some time... there’s lots of new stuff in the pipeline.

The guys at Frontline Gaming have done more for this hobby and community than any other independent entity. When GW ignored us, they made an FAQ that made the game playable. They have worked hard to provide a mission format that many players love, and have built a circuit with the expressed goal of driving more participants to events all over, not just their own. They are active playtesters, and their inclusion in the playtest group is a big reason why 8th has been as good as its been.

 

They are saints of this community, and if you find them toxic, it's probably because you're the toxic one. Of course they are talking about Space Marine nerfs. They were subtly warning us leading up to these releases that they thought Space Marines were going to be very strong. They know more than you can even grasp, being a cog on the inside. Future releases? Yeah, they probably provided feedback on it.

 

If you haven't got a clue, you probably shouldn't pass judgement.

Doing a lot for the community neither makes them immune from criticism nor guarantees their impartiality on anything.

 

Telling people they can only offer an opinion if they’re in the know is absurd and kind of makes 99% of this site redundant as none of us are in the know.

[kombatwombat]

I also have some issues with FLG. Outside of GW themselves FLG is the body with the single greatest influence over the game and rules, and it’s exclusively comprised of competitive players. The community’s only voice is focused on one element. Imagine having a government where every member of parliament was a metropolitan dentist. People’s teeth would be outstanding and the cities would be well run, but the poor farmers who’d like public transport to service country towns would be up the proverbial creek short of a paddle. Or for our yank fraters, imagine taxation without representation - your response to the last time that happened was breathtaking. For a body to have that much power, they need to have a more diverse makeup of members.

 

Also, the ITC format was extremely helpful from a competitive standpoint in 7th Ed. With the move to 8th that largely became unnecessary, so it feels to me that they made the current ITC format just to have something to do rather than out of any real need. Personally, I hate the current ITC format and am glad it doesn’t have a huge foothold down under. The ‘select your objectives’ mechanic makes it feel like you write a list and battle plan before the game, and then play at your opponent rather than with them. The skill in the game should be adapting to overcome, not who can execute their predetermined Just As Planned most effectively.

[BitsHammer]

Arguably the ITC format is breakibg the game by making it harder to effectively engage Iron Hands armies due to magic box rules and a change to flyers that makes it harder to get LOS on those models you need to remove to engage key elements in the IH army.

 

They have done a lot of good and have done a lot to make the game better, but they are not infallible and may have unintentionally made the game worse for competetive play.

[Morticon]

Lets steer this away from the chatter about the respective gaming bodies thanks, guys. Keep it on track. 

[toaae]

Lets steer this away from the chatter about the respective gaming bodies thanks, guys. Keep it on track. 

 

You couldn't wait for me to finish my long, thought-out response? Oh well.

 

The early numbers don't look healthy for the competitive balance of the game. Regardless of format, Space Marines have the offensive tools to overwhelm many opponents, which will almost always lead to victory. IHs in particular have enough defensive tools to take that overboard, as they don't have to sacrifice anything. And the longer your stuff lives, the more damage it can do over the course of a game.

 

I am one for letting a meta shake out, but if I was a betting man (and I most certainly am), I'd put my money on Space Marines over-representing at the top tables of events. Regardless of format.

[BitsHammer]

Pheonix Rising seems to show a fair shake being given to balance the books a bit with stuff like expanded Exarch powers and build-your-own Craftworld rules. It's no Doctrines, but considering how low tier Elite armies tend to sit they should have some extra tools on top of everything else to balance the books more.

 

And over representation is only really a problem when the percentage of armies in the top tables from a given faction is not proportional to the percentage of total players of said army at the event.

Edited October 16, 2019 by Fulkes

[toaae]

And over representation is only really a problem when the percentage of armies in the top tables from a given faction is not proportional to the percentage of total players of said army at the event.

 

That is what over-representation would mean, yes. If SM are 20% of the field and make up 20% of the top lists, that's probably not a balance concern. But if they make up 15% of the field and 30% of the top lists, then we may have issues.

[GrinNfool]

I listened to a podcast from FLG this morning. It came across as very anti Marine in general. FLG seems like so much poison to the game and hobby now... GW is a cash cow for them and they want to openly actively nerf specific factions... professionally speaking they should keep such opinions to themselves rather than resorting to public diatribes. That and ITC has helped make competitive gaming appear as the pinnacle of the game but in truth have created a toxic environment that gives birth to abominations classed as armies. It’s too early to hit Marines with the proverbial nerf bat. Altioc is still very much a thing and it took over nine months for GW to finally address the much hated Castellan. Give it some time... there’s lots of new stuff in the pipeline.

So I've seen your posts before and generally think along the same lines as you, though not sure I agree with you here.  I think the backlash you are getting from some is a bit harsh though, no one is right by virtue of who they are, GW or FLG.  Whether or not you support competitive gaming marines are causing a stir at most levels, specifically the supplements.  I know in my small group I run I have people who request specifically not to fight new marines if possible, and these are people who have never balked at fighting Alaitoc opponents, or any one else.  To me at least that speaks volumes on how people feel fighting them.  My group generally plays somewhere between comp and casual, where people are trying to win, but no 1 is trying to break the game to do it (no WAAC or net lists basically)

 

Given the generally slow turn around time for GW to fix things (as you pointed out the castellan), I don't think its to early to start the conversation, though I do think some of the things they said (the pod cast) and solutions to them were a bit heavy handed.  As for marines themselves, they are manageable, depending on your army, but some of the stuff in IH is just impossible to deal with depending on your army, and as they correctly pointed out on the podcast, this is just the tip of the iceberg these lists aren't even refined and pulling ~ 70% win rate.  This means (and I have seen in games) that even casual level IH lists are extremely strong, standing up against/winning against very well constructed lists from many other factions.  In a non tournament environment its not a good thing when you almost have to build a tournament list just to beat a near casual level list.  The fact other supplements are only a little behind IH does point to a potential issue with marines as a whole, though I am certainly not ready to say that quite yet.  All of this points, at least to me, that GW has indeed jumped the shark on marines, at the least with IH and I would have a hard time arguing against that.  The rest of marines remains to be seen.

Edited October 16, 2019 by GrinNfool

[Ishagu]

I don't think the Marines need much alteration. There is nothing wrong with them being a strong army - just a few changes are needed to the IH to remove the various toxic combinations of rules, but they should be carefully altered so they remain powerful.

 

I do agree that a few of the podcasts have been overly negative, calling for a faction wide sanction on supplements and what not. That is insanity and frankly offensive to hobbyists and fans of the various sub factions.

[Slasher956]

Hmm... think offensive is a bit OTT....

 

However I do agree that calling for a ban (or sanction as Ishagu puts it) is also a bit much.  The issue here is, as said, the difference between tournament players,competitive gamers, pickup gamers & scenario /open play gamers.  Where one set of rules fits some gamers it doesnt always fit all because some go out of their way to exploit fluff to a level of competitiveness than can be classed as broken in normal pick up /relaxed tournament play.

[Ishagu]

It's a bigger problem than that. You should watch the new episode of stat centre:

 

 

Basically, there are factions that in the right hands can perform very well. Ynnari were one such army, and they had a very high win % when they were used by a few capable players. Their win % actually fell as more people started to use them (typically happens as more people = more players of low skill start using the faction). They hit a win success of about 65% at their peak before they grew in popularity.

 

Iron Hands make up 10% of all tournament armies over the past 2 weeks, meaning players of all skill levels are using them. Despite this they have a win rate of 78% and more worryingly, achieve this with multiple different list templates indicating that the core rules, as well as various unit combinations are too powerful. This means that all sorts of Iron Hands lists will crush opponents in competitive and casual play alike, it's not just a problem in tournaments and it's not just one list you can avoid.

 

White Scars are the 2nd top performers, with a win rate of 66% but are used by a much lower number of players - they are a faction that can perform in the hands of a skilled general, and Ultras are far behind with a win rate of 52% which is actually not much better than what they used to have with the old codex. They are the 2nd most popular after Iron Hands.

 

The issue is not with the codex, and it's important to recognise that all factions are not equal culprits. This is also easily fixed as the rules causing this aren't shared across all the chapters, and can be modified individually.

 

 

Edit: Fixed typos

Edited October 16, 2019 by Ishagu

[Slasher956]

So basically your saying its an issue because more than 3 quarters of players can pick up the IHs supplement and win irrespective of their skill, the opponents skill, terrrain, mission and general all round levels of luck?

 

If so I agree... armies should have a win ratio of about 40 - 60% for a balanced 'dex /supplement (the range being accounted for by players skill level, missions etc etc)

[Ishagu]

Basically if you take Iron Hands you'll win 4/5 games at an tournament irrespective of skill. You'll crush opponents at a casual setting.

 

When the disparity is so high it pushes people away. In that episode they mention the argument of "The meta will adjust" to which they say: It already has - Most the top players immediately jumped to Iron Hands.

[Dark Shepherd]

A friend from another group says Salamanders are the most powerful of the supplements, which will be funny if IH suddenly become yesterdays news

 

In general it feels like with back to the start of 8th with updated codex v codex replacing codex v index for powerfullness

[Ishagu]

That may well be true, in which case GW has multiple books to tone down!

[Panzer]

That may well be true, in which case GW has multiple books to tone down!

 

Or multiple books to catch up with. ;)

[Slasher956]

nah... just more cans of spray paint to sell :p