2 wound marines: musings on reasoning

[Mandragola]

 

So they tricked us into buying models that have worse rules by waiting to make them all the same for three years?

 

I got said models for their appearance and not the efficacy of their rules as I've stated elsewhere. If GW wants me to reinvest in old marines, they need to upgrade those with the same aesthetic upgrade and better proportions as Primaris. 

 

Primaris aren't worse than oldmarines with 2 wounds - or at least there's no reason for them to be. Some individual units look questionable right now, often because their Sergeants can't be upgraded with proper weapons. Assault intercessors are way less dangerous than vanguard vets, so long as they can only use chainswords in cc.

 

This, and many other things, could all change with the new codex. Until we see that we won't know which units are actually best. Personally I think we'll see some units doing better with oldmarines, like salamander tactical squads with a heavy weapon. Other chapters will prefer to use intercessors, like white scars with auto bolt rifles or assault intercessors. 

 

Fundamentally, marine players now have even more great units to choose from. That's a good thing for us, not something to complain about.

 

I'll be converting any oldmarine units from Primaris models. I can't stand the idea of an army in which a couple of units are shorter than everyone else.

[Doghouse]

It's a bit of an odd situation to be honest. For the last few years it's been Primaris, Primaris, Primaris and I will happily admit I wasn't on board with the change at first because although I understood the logic behind the change I felt that it was hamfisted the way they did it.

 

Now that time and lore development has passed I am onboard with Primaris and adjusted to the logic and reasoning this changes things a lot. Much like the Primaris themselves I have adjusted my view point and adapted. For me personally from a lore perspective I had accepted both types of marines being the same faction. But from a tabletop perspective the older guys now have more weapon options in my opinion and to me currently better transport capabilities. A good example here being Death Watch, even though a new codex is coming and rules will change, I can't see any reason why I'd take Primaris over Veterans now. They'd need some amazing new options for them for me to do so.

 

I'm not sure I see the point of why we went through the Primaris thing at this time other than for copyright and scale reasons. While I am happy for fans of the older models and of course Chaos Marines it feels like they set things in motion, got a lot of people on board then changed their minds swinging back the other way.

 

I feel a bit confused at the moment and despite grudgling investing heavily in Primaris to be honest I'll probably dust off my landraiders and rhinos and shift back to Firstborn.

[N1SB]

How does it not come off as a bait and switch? They feed you this line about Primaris are tougher (+1A) and faster (+1A) and stronger than the original Marines, and your like cool. Finally, I have to buy a new set of Marines but these guys play how I felt my Marines should through since 2nd edition. 

 

Then oh hey what the heck jsut trow all those rules back on the original Marines. Forget all that lore about bigger stronger faster ... but keep them behind a pay wall of more expensive tanks, dreadnoughts and transports. I'm not against Firstborn getting a 2W but I am against the fact that the whiners who were to cheap (they'll say invested) to start a new army saying they were ugly - dumbest subjective comment ever - or didn't feel like real Marines because they were too powerful are nor - hurrah - this is what my guys should have been to begin with . . . and suddenly bolters are magically 30" also. 

 

Have all the good Primaris stuff and the good cheap support units (2W Devestators for instance are uber good) to boot. Primaris are a better melee option maybe but melees not exactly most Marines strongest phase to do damage in

 

Yeah bait and switch

 

I just wanted to say thank you for sharing your views.  I'm actually gathering opinions just in my local meta, just to understand more from different perspectives, and I was curious of course of everyone here on B&C, you guys are the Marine enthusiasts and experts.

 

As far as I can tell right now, it's kinda like this among just my local meta, but I do want to delve deeper:

• People who were on the fence about starting new Firstborn projects (because they're worried they'll be obsolete) just got the nudge to commit to them.
• But no one here who got Primaris regrets having gotten them here in my local meta (edited, sorry, was unclear), so far.  Not sure if they're just keeping quiet, I really want to hear their honest views.

On this very thread's main topic, musing on the reasoning behind this move, please be reminded GW must have anticipated there would definitely be players who feel this way...and went ahead with it anyway.  Depending on your stance, that may be a good thing or a bad thing, but that's why I think it's very interesting.

Edited August 16, 2020 by N1SB

[Doghouse]

I'm having Primaris regrets.

[Brother Tyler]

...What do you perceive as being the reasons for this change...

I think that @N1SB and @apologist have generally covered the basic reasons (i.e., it's a somewhat complex issue with multiple factors).

 

Like many, I saw the Primaris line as a redux of, and eventual replacement for, the legacy Adeptus Astartes miniatures. Despite the increase in Wounds, I still think that the legacy range will eventually be retired. This change merely makes the legacy range much more attractive and, as has been pointed out, brings the two Astartes sub-factions that don't have Primaris (Grey Knights and Heretic Astartes) up to a basic level of parity with the other sub-factions.

 

From a business standpoint, the moulds for plastic models are expensive. Many of the legacy kits are relatively recent and those moulds will last a long time. In addition, there are many players who, for one reason or another, want to continue collecting the legacy Adeptus Astartes. For some, especially those who are setting their armies in the present of the WH40K timeline, there might be a decision factor between legacy and Primaris. For these, making the legacy models more potent rules-wise might help GW to continue to make the return on investment for the legacy moulds. For those of us who have lore reasons for continuing to collect legacy Adeptus Astartes (i.e., setting a force prior to the introduction of the Primaris, such as collecting a Badab War army), this is a marginal issue, but the change does help us feel better about the decision and the force.

 

The only hobbyists this change might "hurt" would be those who committed to the Primaris range out of some conviction that the new Adeptus Astartes were necessary for competitiveness. It's difficult to say that anyone is actually "hurt" in this, however. We'll continue to see the Primaris range expanded as GW fills all of the niches. We will hopefully see the Primaris units adjusted with more options as GW overcomes the practicality of balancing their resources. We've seen the focus on Primaris kits as GW aligned its resources towards this redux of its flagship line, resulting in additions for other (sub-)factions slowing to a trickle. This has been compounded by the other adjustments in GW's business model and its support for a variety of other lines (i.e., getting enough stuff for other games like Adeptus Titanicus, Aeronautica Imperialis, Blackstone Fortress, Warcry, etc.). As GW nears the completion of the Primaris line (not the end, mind you, but the completion of the basic range), we'll see them align their resources towards giving other (sub-)factions more support. A strong argument could be made for GW eventually shifting the legacy Adeptus Astartes over to Legends, and while I personally don't want that to ever happen, I could see it happening when the Primaris range is completed to the point where it becomes viable to retire the old range (i.e., all of the capabilities of the legacy Adeptus Astartes can be duplicated by their Primaris counterparts).

 

An interesting design space opened up with this change is that it's now much more palatable for some models in other ranges to also have 2 Wounds, and to do so without the inconsistency of having more wounds than the notoriously resilient Adeptus Astartes. Since the rank and file Adeptus Astartes will have 2 Wounds, I doubt that the vast majority of other ranges will see an increase, but I could see some definitely getting a similar increase. Two ranges that stand out to me are the Orks and the Adeptus Mechanicus - not all units in those ranges, but a few here and there. This change also raises the question of how other (sub-)factions might be adjusted to better reflect their lore. That's speculation for another discussion, but it is made viable by considering the potential implications of this change.

 

The interesting questions that this Wounds increase brings up are whether or not we'll see them cascade into other game lines, specifically Kill Team and the Horus Heresy setting. Both are separate games with their own rules, so an argument might be made that a change in WH40K doesn't have to result in a similar change in other games. Many have argued that this Wounds increase is something that should have happened long ago, however, so it opens up some interesting design space. In this, I think that Kill Team is intended to be much closer to WH40K, so I wouldn't be surprised if we see a revision to Kill Team incorporating this adjustment (that's something already being discussed in the Kill Team forum, however). The Horus Heresy is trickier, especially since it maintains the 7th edition rules.

 

Another interesting question is how this change will be reflected in the points - will we see the cost of the affected models increased? And will we see (some) Adeptus Astartes units that already have multiple Wounds (e.g., some named characters) have their Wounds (and potentially points) similarly adjusted?

 

What I don't understand is the emotional baggage that many of us appear to bring to these discussions. Some of us like Primaris while some of us dislike them. Some of us like legacy Adeptus Astartes and want them to stick around while others don't. I've been collecting Adeptus Astartes since the '80s and I'll be sad to see them go. I also come from a background of historical wargaming and would like to see GW explore the thousands of years of history between the time of the Horus Heresy and the Era Indomitus, which would necessitate continued support for the legacy Adeptus Astartes. GW doesn't have to do that, though; or it could relegate that kind of thing to Forge World. Truth be told, the legacy line has its problems; and GW needs to continue to evolve the game if it is to continue to exist (and it needs to make money in order for that to happen). While I dislike the lore behind the Primaris line, I like the models (except for the kneepads) - I just wish that GW had preserved some of the legacy concepts in the Primaris line. Ultimately, I can understand why the Primaris, or something like the Primaris, was necessary. If GW ever retires the legacy Adeptus Astartes in favor of their Primaris brothers, I'll move on. I definitely don't see any point in attacking either GW or my fellow hobbyists over differences of opinion.

 

I, for one, am thankful for the increase to 2 Wounds for the legacy Adeptus Astartes. My grey pile (mountain range) of shame is mostly legacy Adeptus Astartes and I was considering selling/giving most away since it seemed that they were outclassed by their Primaris brothers. Even if the legacy Adeptus Astartes eventually find themselves consigned to the dustbin of Legends classification, they'll be there in a much more competitive position than if they were kept at 1 Wound. I think that my situation isn't exceptional and this change helps a lot of my fellow hobbyists out.

[Blindhamster]

I'm having Primaris regrets.

I switched to primaris for the models, not the rules. I did pure primaris more or less from the moment 8th launched, when they didnt have many options and weren't all that great. They're still great now, classic marines just got a boost too which is nice for people that like those models

[WrathOfTheLion]

There are still subfactions of Space Marines with no Primaris equivalents for how they wage war, and many characters remaining.

 

DA for instance did not even have a major character upgraded in 8E, remaining at ground zero there.

 

Many parts of the range are less than 10 years old. The SW even got a major update in 7E.

 

I do think it seems likely that they will do something with them though. Much of the HH uses upgrade kits on these classic models, so they can't just up and end production.

 

Furthermore, it is difficult to keep doing campaigns in essentially 50 years time, hence they moved forward. However, this can be further accomplished by going back, just as the HH managed to have much more open ground.

[Marshal Reinhard]

I think people, from all sides, might be reading into things a lttile too much. What exactly has happened here? Classic marines got an upgrade. No more and no less. What does this change?

 

I suppose that depends a lot (like a whole lot) on what each and everyone here thinks GW's future plans are. Did you think that classic marines were already "shadow-legended" and doomed to be canned before the end of 9th edition, then this rules update just changed everything. If you thought classics were gonna stay around for several more editions (or even indefinately) before being legended, then very little has changed.

 

I tend towards the latter grouping, rules upgrade were never off the table to begin with, were they? But neither does this undo the Primaris project in any way. Did people forget just how many Primaris kits have been pushed since the introduction of 9th? With more on the way? 

 

I dunno, feels like people are whipping themselves up into a frenzy, regardless of the camp they're in.

[Doghouse]

 

I'm having Primaris regrets.

I switched to primaris for the models, not the rules. I did pure primaris more or less from the moment 8th launched, when they didnt have many options and weren't all that great. They're still great now, classic marines just got a boost too which is nice for people that like those models

 

I think for me it's all three factors of how the model looks, what the rules are and how the lore represents them. I am personally all in favour of the original marines but I would have prefered maybe both got two wounds from day one with Primaris getting +1 Toughness and maybe give the originals a CSM style scale update.

 

My personal sense of regret comes out of the confusion of I bought into Primaris being the future of Astartes then this move makes me think well actually how much better off am I using these guys over the originals? For me personally it's muddied the waters.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

I switched to primaris solely because of their scale. Their power level has been kinda weird because they've been a high floor low ceiling army up until the updates (I mainly play wolves so my release was delayed). So I'm pretty happy with them, and honestly I expect GW to keep them relevant.

[Mandragola]

There's a suggestion above that this change might hurt competitive players who bought into Primaris. It won't do that at all. Competitive players will generally change our armies quite a lot anyway so we're used to having models cycle in, out, and sometimes back into our armies. Something always wins and something else always loses when we get new editions, codexes - and even FAQs and chapter approved.

 

As a competitive player my first thought was that it was great to have all these new options for my marines. Maybe now I'll take rhinos or land raiders full of vanguard veterans to accompany Pedro Kantor, who's been the only lonely non-Primaris guy in my army for most of 8th. It looks like the Prometheus could be a very nice option for my Crimson Fists, now all those cover-ignoring heavy bolters do 2 damage each. An Achilles with four multimeltas could also do work, I imagine, and a drop pod full of Sternguard veterans looks like it could be great too.

[Minsc]

Guys, Firstborn getting a buff doesn't result in Primaris getting worse - it just means that Firstborn is getting a buff.
If you have one bar at 2 meters, and one at 1,5 meters, and you then raise the second bar to 1,9 or even 2 meters, the first bar is still at 2 meters.

For me who has a large collection of both Firstborn and Primaris (with the exception of Primaris-tanks), Firstborn getting an additional wound is probably the best thing that could've happened to my army; The external balance remains largely the same (tbh I kinda hope it gets slightly lower with the new codex) but the internal balance becomes much better because suddenly a large chunk of units get much more viable all of a sudden, and most people would agree that "more options" = "good". 

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

Personally I hope that the other codex are raised up to level marines are at. Right now marines and sisters are the only armies with doctrine style buffs and I really think every army should have them.

[Blindhamster]

Personally I hope that the other codex are raised up to level marines are at. Right now marines and sisters are the only armies with doctrine style buffs and I really think every army should have them.

not necessarily, different armies should have different army rules to appropriately represent how they work on the battlefield (like guard having orders or dark eldar having power through pain or ynnari having stuff to do with death)

[Marshal Valkenhayn]

Blood, Tithe.

[BrainFireBob]

How many are actually angry because they offloaded their Firstborn and feel cheated into rebuying?

 

And how much is humble pie- sorry, but this will be true in some cases- over feeling clever or more insightful for switching early, only to feel being sold a lie?

Edited August 16, 2020 by BrainFireBob

[Blindhamster]

nah im glad i sold my firstborn, i had too many and was never going to paint them, plus the models were just massively inferior (to me).
But again, i didn't move to primaris due to rules, so the change to firstborn rules is pretty unimportant

Edited August 16, 2020 by Blindhamster

[Mandragola]

My firstborn are still in boxes, and likely to stay there. I don't think they look at all good next to Primaris.

 

If I end up making any Firstborn units, they'll be based on the far superior Primaris bodies. I might get a Sternguard and/or Vanguard box for bits or maybe I'll use MkIII shoulder pads to show that they're veterans.

 

I'll obviously have to make sure it's clear which unit is which, but I don't see that as a huge problem. We have to do that already. If I give CCWs to a bunch of Suppressors or asault intercessors, nobody is going to be too confused.

[Robbienw]

This is probably more reflective of the fluff difference in physical capability between marines and primaris marines. They are more durable, but not so much as the previous wounds difference with standard marines would suggest. In nuanced BL fluff where we see lots of detail on marine capabilities, they are more of an incremental improvement on marine physicality, rather than massively better in the way a custodian is physically superior to a marine.

[Blindhamster]

the thing about primaris is their real difference is the furnace which is designed to kick in when they should die and keep them fighting. Would be nice to see that represented somehow (not an extra wound).

[WrathOfTheLion]

A standard Astartes would be much closer to a Primaris than to a guardsman.

 

When that's the granularity we're at, then it makes sense in lore for 2W firstborn.

Edited August 16, 2020 by WrathOfTheLion

[Dracos]

 

I switched to primaris for the models, not the rules. I did pure primaris more or less from the moment 8th launched, when they didnt have many options and weren't all that great. They're still great now, classic marines just got a boost too which is nice for people that like those models

 

Exactly ^this^ for others who only seem to read half of a post when it turns a direction they don't agree with. I bought into GW saying these were to distinct kinds of Space Marines. You can be petty and say it's my fault for drinking the Kool-aid now but I'm going to share it with everyone who cried gloom and doom for the Firstborn, while I spent two years taking a mediocre set of models and made them as competitive as I could. GW promoted in story all-Primaris armies. That there were differences (reflected in the rules) in individual and equipment. I liked there being a measurable difference. Measurable but not drastic. If I wanted to play OP movie Marines I'd have converted a Custodes army. I worked hard learning the rules and coming up with a army of models I personally painted and played differently than Firstborn. I didn't mind the handicap - I happen to be a good enough player I enjoy that kind of thing. What was cool was they played different but were still Space Marines. Ride or Die since 2nd edition I am a Marine.

 

 

For anyone not paying attention I am happy for Firstborn including Chaos, Grey Knights and Deathwatch.

 

I just would like to see some indication that Primaris are going to remain a measurably distinct line of Marines. +1A is situational and I strongly believe 30" boltgun will be a thing. Hardly worth measuring in the end.

 

 

I do not believe they are going to Legends Firstborn anytime in the near future. Certainly not in 10th, 11th and highly doubt 12th edition will see the demise of the model line if the durability of the Necrons and Eldar are anything to go by. The doomsayers have cried for three years and the shift to Astartes into Legends has been miniscule. 

 

 

I'm a competitive person, but I stay true to my lore and theme. I don't chase the meta. 

Edited August 16, 2020 by Dracos

[Lucerne]

Why should Primaris be coddled? They're Aspect Marines. They can be different in fluff all you like. If you like Aspect Marines enough that you can't bring yourself to use a good chunk of the Astartes codex, continue to ignore Firstborn and play what appeals to you the most. It certainly doesn't hamper you in any realistic way that won't be fixed when GW actually finishes with their releases- and they certainly aren't done pampering Primaris with what we know are upcoming releases for that part of the fanbase. You'll get more and unique toys to appease you soon enough, you just won't have an insurmountable advantage over the Firstborn players at every possible opportunity.

 

If you really want to be completely off the wall and distinct, run an all-gravis army or something when heavy intercessors come out. Grab Inceptors for unique flavor jump troops that Firstborn don't have. Take suppressors for those wacky flying autocannons. Hell, run phobos for unique flavor and options- it's obviously distinct from a scout force.

 

But you have nothing to actually complain about. This balance patch isn't and shouldn't be about you and has been GW's best rules decision in years. You don't need to keep Firstborn in the dirt to play your preferred take on Marines.

Edited August 16, 2020 by Lucerne

[Blindhamster]

Why should Primaris be coddled? They're Aspect Marines. They can be different in fluff all you like. If you like Aspect Marines enough that you can't bring yourself to use a good chunk of the Astartes codex, continue to ignore Firstborn and play what appeals to you the most. It certainly doesn't hamper you in any realistic way that won't be fixed when GW actually finishes with their releases- and they certainly aren't done pampering Primaris with what we know are upcoming releases for that part of the fanbase. You'll get more and unique toys to appease you soon enough, you just won't have an insurmountable advantage over the Firstborn players at every possible opportunity.

 

If you really want to be completely off the wall and distinct, run an all-gravis army or something when heavy intercessors come out. Grab Inceptors for unique flavor jump troops that Firstborn don't have. Take suppressors for those wacky flying autocannons. Hell, run phobos for unique flavor and options- it's obviously distinct from a scout force.

 

But you have nothing to actually complain about. This balance patch isn't and shouldn't be about you and has been GW's best rules decision in years. You don't need to keep Firstborn in the dirt to play your preferred take on Marines.

not sure you read what they said? they didn't say they wanted their primaris to be better, they said they wanted them to be different (which IMO, they are even if both types have 2 wounds - so all good!)

 

They were also pretty polite and made it clear they were happy for everyone that benefitted from the change. I know tone is hard to really get over the internet, but yours does come across as a bit on the rude side (just letting you know incase you didn't realise it!)

 

anyways, yeah primaris will remain distinct on the tabletop due to the kind of units they have and the fact they do have rules differences still even in the baseline stats. I am interested to see if the primaris characters will have their wounds reduced to match firstborn characters? if they don't, it's kind of weird but i guess it could be explained away somehow. I'm looking forward to see what other changes there are for marines of all stripes over the course of 9th!

[Captain Idaho]

I've had some time to mull over this subject and I do have some thoughts on the matter.

 

My first reaction is enthusiasm for my own collection. If it's my last hurrah, at least it'll be a good one. 9th is very much going to be great fun for me. 2 wound First Born (to use the vernacular of GW themselves in the article they informed us of the changes) will make a lot of units fun to use again and I think many people are very happy with what this means for Terminators.

 

I completely understand those who bought into Primaris and are worried. They invested into the hobby and now feel like their army is no longer going to be viable to play and that is an awful thing.

 

However, I do believe the worry for Primaris is going to ultimately be unfounded in the sense they are completely supported model wise and will continue to be in that situation. So this should definitely be borne in mind when we start to panic. Now that First Born have 2 wounds and are being supported by the rules, when I start to panic there hasn't been any models etc, it's what I do now.

 

The reasons for First Born might also include a simple financial sales experiment for future investment. Will we see a wave of purchases following the rise in competitive use of First Born, or following a feeling of support? It certainly could show the higher ups there is money yet to be had in releasing Death Watch style new Marines for the First Born range.

 

I'm not really confident this will be the case but it is certainly possible.

 

What I really believe is the reason, however, is simply a move to look after the fan base who are otherwise disappointed to greater or lesser degrees. How many of those fans might feel so satisfied with GW "listening" to them that they back the company again?

 

Looking at the amount of enthusiasm on this very forum tells me the number of fans of First Born is not unsubstantial and we could be forgiven for believing those who felt upset their collections appeared to be marginalised were limited to the smaller numbers who complained such vocally.