Astartes Doctrinal Rule Changes

[Tyberos the Red Wake]

Isn’t it ironic how ultramarines are the only ones who can break the rigidness of the docterines.

 

Everyone else:

 

Ultramarine players: Your days as a novice are behind you. Why do you still interpret the codex so narrowly?

Edited February 28, 2020 by Tyberos the Red Wake

[War Angel]

 

Isn’t it ironic how ultramarines are the only ones who can break the rigidness of the docterines.

 

 

Everyone else:

 

Ultramarine players: Your days as a novice are behind you. Why do you still interpret the codex so narrowly?

I mean, I know that tactical flexibility would mean not being rigid, and I don’t think GW ever intended that the codex was supposed to mean “only ever do exactly as I say”. And I know that these changes are a balance thing. but the joke remains valid.

[War Angel]

Iron Hands are still number one in my book.

I like it! So much sense! I really like the fluff of rigid astartes way of war as religion and these rules effortlessly support that idea while also leveling the marine meta a bit and expanding quality choice pool for most lists. Elegant is a word I have NEVER associated with GW rules but this update comes close. Great job.

You always crack me up... do you even SPACE MARINE Bro ??!

Is that because they are your chapter and you support them first, or do you think they are still the best?

[tychobi]

Iron Hands are still number one in my book.

 

I like it! So much sense! I really like the fluff of rigid astartes way of war as religion and these rules effortlessly support that idea while also leveling the marine meta a bit and expanding quality choice pool for most lists. Elegant is a word I have NEVER associated with GW rules but this update comes close. Great job.

You always crack me up... do you even SPACE MARINE Bro ??!

I do! Came 3rd in sportsmanship at Foodhammer with half painted Iron Hands flyer list not too long ago. ( had to throw a game but still). I have dabbled in space marines of various stripes since 1994 and continue to do so today. Power armor does not make the marine and I know my enemy better than myself. (The curse and boon of chaos

[Dracos]

I was just reviewing the Raven Guard Strats and WT the other day to see what we might need to adjust given the changes to pre-game/deployment and secondaries. 

 

This though? This is going to take a much deeper look. Raven Guard super-doctrine was pretty limited (to characters) in the first place. Now that they have that limitation with only have two turns of use the RG list have taken a deeper hit than it appears on the surface.

 

I'm not arguing about the change in Combat Doctrines, just that the fallout is going to have a multitude of effects we haven't begun to imagine yet. 

 

If I were to complain, it would be about Adaptive Strat getting deleted instead of turned into a Once per Battle strat.

[Tyberos the Red Wake]

I was just reviewing the Raven Guard Strats and WT the other day to see what we might need to adjust given the changes to pre-game/deployment and secondaries. 

 

This though? This is going to take a much deeper look. Raven Guard super-doctrine was pretty limited (to characters) in the first place. Now that they have that limitation with only have two turns of use the RG list have taken a deeper hit than it appears on the surface.

 

I'm not arguing about the change in Combat Doctrines, just that the fallout is going to have a multitude of effects we haven't begun to imagine yet. 

 

If I were to complain, it would be about Adaptive Strat getting deleted instead of turned into a Once per Battle strat.

 

I agree, losing anti-character from turns 4 onwards is pretty tough, even moreso if you weren't one of the players running 9 Eliminators. Same with losing the option to rewind back to Tactical Doctrine to get it back. But I can't be too upset, the most important characters will likely be dead by then, and forcing players to progress the doctrines makes sense. It's just another case of certain builds and specific doctrines (Imperial Fists Devastator Doctrine, for example) negatively affecting everyone else once it gets nerfed. Ideally all three doctrines would be more balanced and less overpowered, but also with some good options to more easily rewind for when you really needed that previous doctrine.

[Hellebras]

It doesn't bother me; I already ran dedicated anti-tank guns and built lists that benefit from cycling doctrines, so at worst I won't be able to stay in Devastator doctrine for another turn if I want to.

[jaxom]

 

Also, Ultramarine Doctrine manipulation looks a lot more useful now, which is a cool unique thing for the "exemplars of the Codex" chapter to have.

 

 

Isn’t it ironic how ultramarines are the only ones who can break the rigidness of the docterines.

Iron Hands can give any unit the Dev Doctrine at any time.

 

 

I love how it's all downside except for an "oh Iron Hands have this thing to help them". But of course they do!

 

I went through and looked for all the things I could find relating to manipulating interaction with Combat Doctrines. There are two types: changing weapons so the benefit and putting a unit into a specific Doctrine. The only chapter to not have at least one (from either type) is Raven Guard (and maybe I missed it - I was speed reading).

 

Iron Hands

Methodical Fire Power (1 CP strat) Start of movement phase, one unit goes Devastator Doctrine until next movement phase.

 

Salamanders

Immolation Protocols (1 CP strat) Shooting phase, one unit's flame weapons become Pistol until the end of that phase.

 

Imperial Fists

Close-Range Bolter Fire (2 CP strat) Shooting phase, one unit's bolt weapons become Pistol until the end of that phase.

 

Ultramarines

Master of Strategy (WLT) Once per battle round choose a unit within 6", it goes Tactical Doctrine until the end of the battle round.

Cycle of War (1 CP strat) Ultramarines warlord can transition from Assault Doctrine to Devastator Doctrine (I imagine this will get an FAQ/errata soon to explain that it also restarts the cycle so the turn after going to Devastator you have to go into Tactical Doctrine, then either one more turn of Tactical or go to Assault, and then have to go to Assault).

Squad Doctrines (1 CP strat) Start of movement phase, one infantry or biker unit can go any doctrine until start of next movement phase.

 

White Scars

Hunter's Fusillade (1 CP strat) Use when a unit Advances, until the end of the turn its Heavy and Rapid Fire weapons become Assault until the end of that turn.

 

Black Templars

Crusader's Helm (Relic) Start of movement phase, pick a unit within 6" and it goes Assault Doctrine until your next movement phase.

 

Each has it's own utility and cannot be looked at in a vacuum. The Salamanders and Imperial Fists have a number of synergies which make their weapon type swaps much more than they seem. The reliability of Master of Strategy is nice and it may actually be a decision between it and Adept of the Codex (the CP refund trait). 

 

 

Yeah, this is what annoyed me about the changes (well, that and forcing the Doctrines to change: the problem wasn't necessarily about the Doctrines themselves, 

 

The Design Commentary was rather interesting in this regard. The intent from the get-go was for players to move through a specific progression. They've removed the ability for players to mess with that progression, i.e., the rules now force the intent to be followed with no exceptions. Even Cycle of War does not allow the progression to be ignored. Combat Doctrines, as any army-wide rule, was meant to define the Space Marine codex's play style. The initial preview's of the codex seemed to stress it - to the point where I wrote this back in August:

 

It reminds me of the Idonath Deepkin from AoS; it's all about pacing and planning a turn ahead (with the obvious caveat that no plan survives contact, etc, this is for a "perfect world"). Turn 1: Devastators, Eliminators, sniper Scouts, heavy plasma Helblasters and vehicles open up while footsloggers Advance into position from cover to cover and units in transports move up to block LoS as needed. Turn 2: units disembark, all the rapid fire and assault weapons open up, deep strike in terminators for shooting with storm bolters, deep strike in assault squads or vanguard to set up charges or counter-charges for next turn. Turn 3: Charge all the things or continue to kite around with rapid fire and assault weapons (hello, Inceptors and Aggressors!).

 

 

Similarly, from when IF came out:

 

It reads like the IF were designed around the concept of repelling an assaulting force.

 

Long Range Stage 1: Heavy guns firing at transports and other tanks

Long Range Stage 2: Targeting infantry, probably still in Devastator Doctrine for autocannons, heavy bolters, etc.

Medium Range Stage: Targeting infantry, probably switching to Tactical Doctrine, especially in preparation for...

Short Range Stage 1: Hold the line receiving an assault, Shock Assault and Banner seeing use here. Follow it with...

Short Range Stage 2: Swap to Assault Doctrine. Use Close-Range Bolter Drill so you get some more shooting if they tagged a unit that is happy shooting and staying in melee (I couldn't tell from the write up if it is army-wide. If so, character relic bolters could see some use, but I think the real users are going to be centurions and aggressors).

Short Range Stage 3: Counter-assault, get more out of the Banner and bring in your one or two dedicated close combat units.

Short Range Stage 4: Count survivors, either the enemy is on the back footing or you are, and all that's left is to either get ground down or to grind down.

 

The IF have the individual tools to be good at each discrete portion of the battle, but not a single overarching rule/tool which blends one portion into another (like UM or IH).

 

EDIT: Seriously heavy bolter centurions with close-range bolter drill in Assault Doctrine. Six heavy bolter shots and 6 hurricane bolter shots at AP-2 and AP-1, respectively, followed by 3 Strength 5 AP-1 attacks in the Fight Phase. I could see using a squad of six as bait for a horde, losing 2-3, and then hitting back with a total of 45-60 anti-infantry attacks between shooting and close combat.

 

 

The codex itself matches what has been a design point of Space Marines for at least twenty years; one must engage in all the phases to get the most out of the army (except maybe psychic). If one is paying for Str 4 then it's a waste not to use it when facing chaff. The Bolter Discipline rules and Shock Assault help with this, autobolt rifles help with this, Assault Doctrine helps with this. A generic C:SMarine army cannot afford to ever be just a gun line.[/quote]

 

I think the forces progression is going to make us have to re-examine  playstyles, units, and strats in a way which more closely matches what the Designers had in mind when thinking of their function and cost/benefits.

[justicarius6]

Space Marine forces should never be built around tanks, air force or dreadnoughts apart from in serious narrative games. Hopefully this change will emphasize that a bit more.

[Galron]

Im cool with it. My IH successors usually switched to tactical anyway since I only used it for the 5++ and 5+ in overwatch. My Sallies and Carcharodons(WS)(especially) think its great although I will have to move to get the Sallies in closer range faster, we still have enough buffs through characters and strats that being forced through tactical is a minor annoyance. I still wish there was a way to get to the assault doctrine faster so I actually have turns 1 and 2 consisting of something more than my support characters hiding out of LOS.

[Schlitzaf]

Everyone does realize adaptive strategy already was once per a game right?

[Dark Shepherd]

Am just glad they didnt hit flyers to tackle the IH airwings

[Dracos]

Everyone does realize adaptive strategy already was once per a game right?

Lol well I do now. Thanks. I’ve been posting from my phone at work and never even thought about using the strat until now.

[Kallas]

Lol well I do now. Thanks. I’ve been posting from my phone at work and never even thought about using the strat until now.

 

No-one did, because no-one shifted Doctrines past their preferred one, because why would they (or any army that had a particularly strong focus)?

 

It's why I really dislike the forced shifting:

"Chapter Master, our armoured spearhead of Predators, Repulsors and assorted vehicles are pushing well."

"Excellent. Send the word for the vehicles to charge!"

"...What..?"

[Gree]

I'm getting the impression that the intent of the Errata was to nerf the Iron Hands and some of the other chapters got caught in the crossfire. Imperial Fists and Dark Angels for example.

 

That being said, this was probably for the best. There were times that I thought the NuMarines might be a bit too powerful.

[Snazzy]

The problem was the double dipping.  I'd prefer it if the super doctrine applied when not in Devastator Doctrine.

[War Angel]

I'm getting the impression that the intent of the Errata was to nerf the Iron Hands and some of the other chapters got caught in the crossfire. Imperial Fists and Dark Angels for example.

 

That being said, this was probably for the best. There were times that I thought the NuMarines might be a bit too powerful.

We all have the same limits now. White scars can’t be in assault all game, and we can’t be in devistator.

[jaxom]

I'm getting the impression that the intent of the Errata was to nerf the Iron Hands and some of the other chapters got caught in the crossfire. Imperial Fists and Dark Angels for example.

 

That being said, this was probably for the best. There were times that I thought the NuMarines might be a bit too powerful.

*Puts on Dark Angel robes* My opinion is that it won't make a huge difference for casual play. More of the strength the Dark Angels received from the RotD update was all the ways to count as not-moving so we can benefit from Grim Resolve more often. The loss of 15"-18" Rapid Fire range isn't too bad and the extra 6" otherwise didn't help (me) much past turn 1. I think tournament lists are going to be hit hard because all the current conversation is about Ravenwing and assault cannons/heavy bolters.

[Acebaur]

I'm getting the impression that the intent of the Errata was to nerf the Iron Hands and some of the other chapters got caught in the crossfire. Imperial Fists and Dark Angels for example.

 

That being said, this was probably for the best. There were times that I thought the NuMarines might be a bit too powerful.

IF needed to be toned down too. They were nearly as powerful as IH on the power scale

[Hymnblade]

I don't know if IF were OP per se, but they had an outsized impact on the meta by making everyone unwilling to rely on vehicles because that would make IF a bad matchup. So gutting their chapter doctrine may not be just an accidental side effect. Edited February 29, 2020 by Hymnblade

[War Angel]

I can’t agree with the statements that IF needed to be gutted and toned down and nerfed; because I don’t believe we have been. I believe these changes allow us to function as we should, and will remove WAAC players from infiltrating our ranks. I know some players out there are upset that they’ve made purchases they now believe to be poor, but I would still use them, just not all at once.

[Lemondish]

 

I was just reviewing the Raven Guard Strats and WT the other day to see what we might need to adjust given the changes to pre-game/deployment and secondaries. 

 

This though? This is going to take a much deeper look. Raven Guard super-doctrine was pretty limited (to characters) in the first place. Now that they have that limitation with only have two turns of use the RG list have taken a deeper hit than it appears on the surface.

 

I'm not arguing about the change in Combat Doctrines, just that the fallout is going to have a multitude of effects we haven't begun to imagine yet. 

 

If I were to complain, it would be about Adaptive Strat getting deleted instead of turned into a Once per Battle strat.

 

I agree, losing anti-character from turns 4 onwards is pretty tough, even moreso if you weren't one of the players running 9 Eliminators. Same with losing the option to rewind back to Tactical Doctrine to get it back. But I can't be too upset, the most important characters will likely be dead by then, and forcing players to progress the doctrines makes sense. It's just another case of certain builds and specific doctrines (Imperial Fists Devastator Doctrine, for example) negatively affecting everyone else once it gets nerfed. Ideally all three doctrines would be more balanced and less overpowered, but also with some good options to more easily rewind for when you really needed that previous doctrine.

 

 

The funny part about that IF one being highlighted as the problem child forcing a nerf is that it was terrible then and is terrible now. 

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Reecius said they are the best.

[Chaplain Augustus]

My feeling is that IH were definitely o.p. in a competitive environment but the new doctrine rules just push the big dakka lists with leviathans into ultramaines. Sure the levi won't be impossible to kill (due to the strat nerf) and it will only be ap-2 but in turn 2 and 3 (when it actually gets in range) it will still pretend to stand still and with HQ support be just as accurate. You won't be as resilient, sure, but that sucker is tough and if you get charged you can fall back and shoot.

I guess I'm bummed that my casual fluffy (and at least mostly fun) lists have been shut down a bit because the competitive scene is being dominated by the army I've been playing for ages. I would have been happier with devistator doc. and tactical doc. being set at 2 turns maximum or having the flexibility strat still available (possibly at increased cost).

Edited March 1, 2020 by Chaplain Augustus

[Ishagu]

Ultramarines weren't dominating any environment before, and although they are comparatively better against chapters like Iron Hands now, they are still ultimately worse than they were prior to the patch.