If I wrote the next Space Marine FAQ for a day...

[L30n1d4s]

First off, the new Space Marine Codex is excellent. Despite much of the concern and outcry, I think it is one of the best books I have seen (I have been playing since 4th edition) at reigning in over-powered units, making under-powered units more useful/playable, and all the while moving Space Marines to play on the tabletop more like they are in the fluff.

 

 

Of course, making a perfectly balanced codex, where every unit is equally viable and point-costed just right and everything plays in the game in a way that you would imagine it would be used based on the fluff, is almost an impossible task, especially when working with a faction that has so much lore and such a great variety of units.

 

 

With all that said, I do think there are a few units/items within the new codex that could use some "tweaks" to bring the entire faction even closer to this goal of making every unit viable/useable, but not over-powered, and also have all the units play similar to their fluff.

 

 

If I were King for a day and GW let me propose refinements to the book, here are a few units that I would tweak --

 

---

1 - Heavy Intercessors -- Reduce Squad size to 3-6 (can take one Heavy Bolter variant for every 3 models)

 

**Rationale -- Like almost all of the other Gravis options, these guys are quite tough (and even have a new stratagem that allows them go up to a 2+ save against Dmg1 weapons). Combined with the ability to be Objective Secured as a Troops choice, this caps the squad at 18 wounds, which I think it pretty reasonable and keeps them in-line with Aggressors, Inceptors, etc.

 

 

2 - Scouts/Scout Bikes -- Grant them a special rule called "Target Spotted," which enables them, in the Command Phase, to select a single enemy unit in LOS and within 18" and then grant a single <Chapter> Core unit within 18" of them the ability to re-roll 1s to Hit against that unit until the start of the next friendly Command Phase. Additionally, move Scouts from an Elites choice to a Fast Attack choice.

 

**Rationale -- While many don't like it, I totally agree with the premise of keeping Scouts at 1W and moving them out of the Troops slots. Too many people (myself included) have defaulted to them as the cheap, detachment-filling Troop choice, which is neither fluffy or a good way to balance the all-ready crowded SM Troops slots. However, I don't think they should be Elites (both fluff-wise and because there are so many other SM elites to choose from already) so, since mobility seems to be there thing, Fast Attack makes a decent alternative option. Also, beyond just being cheap, 1W (or 2W, for Scout Bikes) objective holders, they need some kind of role that makes them actually useful... hence, the "Target Spotted" rule, which enables them to force-multiply a single Core unit with re-rolls of 1s to Hit, something that is a bit more valuable now that Captains are limited to one per detachment. This  would give them a niche, but not make them auto-take either, I think.

 

 

3 - Primaris Apothecary/Apothecary -- Change their Stratagem for reviving a dead Infantry/Biker model to only work on models with 4W or less. 

 

**Rationale -- This is the obvious one, but it prevents them from resurrecting 8W Invader ATVs

 

 

4 - Sternguard -- Improve their BS up to 2+ if they fire all their weapons at the same unit.

 

**Rationale -- With the loss of their unique Stratagem, plus the fact that basic Intercessors do almost everything they do (except Intercessors have AP-1 instead of AP-2 on their bolters) while filling a Troops slot, I think Sternguard need something to give them a little "oomph" besides just being Veterans who can take a lot of Combo-Weapons. Giving them conditional BS2+ fits their fluff (they are chosen for their marksmanship/have the best ranged weapons in the chapter), lines up with how Eliminators got BS2+, and gives them just enough of a boost to their damage out-put to make them worth considering compared to an Intercessor (or even Veteran Intercessor, if you want more close combat potential).

 

 

5 - Servitors -- Give them a special rule that prohibits them from holding Objectives/doing Actions unless a friendly Techmarine is within 6" of them, but also allows has them make nearby Techmarines able to heal vehicles within a 6" aura, instead of just a 3" aura.

 

**Rationale -- Space Marines are an elite force, and so should not have access to cheap "Action monkeys" just by taking Servitors with no Techmarine to direct them, hence the requirement for a nearby Techmarine supervisor. On the other hand, it has always bothered me that they do not provide any boost to a Techmarine's repair abilities, so allowing a Techmarine to have greater "reach" with his repairs seems a reasonable way to represent this and give you a reason to actually buy them for your army (i.e. a Techmarine with Servitors could help maintain a whole line of vehicles, instead of just one he is right next to)

 

 

6 - Bladeguard Veterans -- Increase their points cost by +10 points/model

 

**Rationale -- I love BG Vets, both how they look and how they function on the table-top (i.e. durable, dangerous close combat elites for the Primaris line). That said, I think they are just too points-efficient right now, especially with their base 2+/4++ and 3W. Making them +10 points a model feels about right to not over-price them, but still make it an actual decision if you include them or not, as right now they feel like an auto-include.

 

 

7 - Relic Terminators -- Drop them to Legends (or just use their models to represent "normal" Terminators)

 

**Rationale -- With their stats being "normalized" and the only thing distinguishing them from Tactical Terminators is a few niche weapons options, I don't see any reason to keep them as a separate unit entry. Just like GW did with the Captain in Cataphractii Armor, just drop them as an option in the codex.

 

 

8 - Reivers/Reiver Lieutenant -- Give them a special rule that grants them +1 to Wound for all their attacks (shooting and close combat) against Infantry Models within 12" of them. Additionally, add to their "Terror Troops" rule the ability to cause enemy units to lose models during Attrition Tests on a 1-2, instead of just a 1. Finally, give Reivers and the Reiver Lieutenant Deep Strike for free (i.e. Grav-chutes as part of their built-in War gear)

 

**Rationale -- Despite their useful new Strat allowing them to turn off enemy ObSec and disrupt enemy Actions, they are still so anemic in their combat potential that it is hard to justify taking them in a list. The +1 to Wound against Infantry would make them much more effective as "deployment zone disruptors/bullies" (i.e. matching their fluff) and help them take out light infantry squads much more effectively. As for the aura for more damaging Attrition Tests on nearby enemies this, along with the -2Ld the give to enemy units, would start to make them a real threat against larger units with low morale, like guardsman and Tai Fire Warriors, again matching their fluff.

 

 

9 - Eradicators -- Add restrictions to their special rule enabling them to shoot twice so that it only works if the did not Advance, arrive from Reserves, or disembark from a Transport that turn. 

 

**Rationale -- Eradicators are the "boogeymen" of so many armies right now, especially with the potential to drop up to 14 Melta Shots at 24" either arriving from Strategic Reserves or even jumping out of a Repulsor. By limiting their "shoot twice" rule in this way, this at least gives other armies a turn to try and deal with them after they appear on the board, or stay outside their range rings, without being subject to double-meta shooting right out the gate. This tweak to their rules would hopefully tone them down so they are not over-powered, but also not completely nerf them to the point that no one takes them anymore either (something I fear might happen in the near future, given how GW tends to react to overly powerful units).

 

 

10 - Inceptors -- Decrease the range of their Plasma Exterminators to 15", increase the range of Assault Bolters to 21"

 

**Rationale -- I see a rising trend right now where Plasma Inceptors (and only Plasma Inceptors; the Assault Bolter variants are too weak in comparison) are being taken VERY frequently in competitive lists. The combination of high mobility, access to buffs through being a "Core" unit, and massive potential Damage output (6 Inceptors could potentially inflict up to 72 Damage!!!) makes them on the edge of auto-include, as well as making the option for Assault Bolters almost obsolete. Reducing the range of Plasma Exterminators to 15" (they are basically pistol sized Plasma Cannons, after all) while increasing Assault Bolters to 21" range balances out the "risk to reward" ratio a bit with these guys, since you can still inflict tons of damage if you go the Plasma route, but you also are within 15" now and risk being charged and losing your expensive unit. This also makes the choice between the two weapon options for Inceptors more balanced, with reasons to take both instead of just auto-defaulting to Plasma Exterminators.

 

 

11 - Eliminators -- Change the Executioner Round to S5 AP-1 Dmg 1, Ignore Cover (both Light and Dense), and re-roll 1s to Hit and to Wound

 

**Rationale - While Mortis Rounds and Hyperfrag Rounds are fine, the nerf to Executioner Rounds (i.e. it used to be able to ignore LOS) was very significant and, along with Eliminators being BS2+ natively now, gives players almost no reason to every use it vis-a-vis the other options. I am glad GW took away the Ignore LOS, which was a bit too powerful and also a bit unrealistic as well, but I think Executioner Rounds now need something to make them a viable option to use... hence, allowing them to re-roll 1s to Hit and to Wound. This gives them the "niche" of being hyper accurate and generally reliable, while not having the raw power/damage potential of Mortis rounds or the anti-horde ability of Hyper-frag rounds.

 

 

12 - Land Raiders (All Types) -- Give them a rule called "Nigh Indestructible" which causes all attacks (shooting and melee) agains them to suffer -1 to their To Wound rolls

 

**Rationale -- Land Raiders still struggle to have role, especially since there is so much potent firepower in the game right now that they can easily be killed on Turn 1. In their lore they truly are nearly indestructible and they fit their role of basically unstoppable transports that can safely ferry Astartes into the heart of even the most deadly battles. Adding this rule improves their survivability significantly, gives you are a reason to consider taking them in competitive lists, and matches their fluff quite accurately, I think.

 

 

13 - Gladiator Lancer and Repulsor Executioner -- Add a special rule to their Heavy Laser Destroyers that reduces the Invul save taken by any target wounded by them by -1 (this only applies to Wounds inflicted by the Heavy Laser Destroyer weapon, not any other weapons)

 

**Rationale -- While I agree with GW in taking away the shoot twice ability and replacing it with +1 to Hit (a significant down-grade overall), both of these vehicles are built around their main gun and that main gun, when only shooting twice at BS2+, does not currently do enough to justify the overall points cost and/or role of the vehicle in the army. By giving them the ability to reduce a target's Invul save by -1 against their shooting, this gives both the Gladiator Lancer and the Repulsor Executioner a distinct and viable role (i.e. countering the enemy hyper-elite units, which often depend on their solid Invul saves).

 

 

14 - Hammerfall Bunker -- Give it the "Drop Pod Assault" rule (i.e. identical to Drop Pods)

 

**Rationale -- Its fluff says it does this and, currently, it costs way to much to just be a long-range, immobile shooting platform that fires at BS4+. Allowing it to be "deployed" in starting Turn 1 of the game gives you flexibility in how to place it and also how to support your army with it, making it a much more viable choice in an Astartes army.

 

 

15 - Invader ATV -- Decrease it to 6W per model

 

**Rationale -- Right now it is just to efficient for its points cost, so reducing its wounds by 25% seems like a decent to balance this a bit, as well as bringing it more in line with the SM Bike/Attack Bike ratio (i.e. SM Bikes now have 3W, Attack Bikes have 4W; Outriders have 4W, so it kind of makes sense to have Invaders be at somewhere between 5-6 wounds).

Edited October 17, 2020 by L30n1d4s

[Marshal Valkenhayn]

Of note, Relic Terminators do have 6" movement rather than 5", so they do have one tiny smidge of a difference other than weapons. But other than that I mostly agree. However, the changes I'd add are:

 

Eradicators should lose the double shoot rule in its entirety. Give Gravis troupes of all varieties the ability to move and shoot heavy weapons and advance and shoot assault weapons with no penalty.

 

Change honor the chapter to work on veteran units rather than assault intercessors.

 

Change transports to be universal across all marines, with Gravis treated like Terminators and the reverse.

 

Bring back the strats that got lost in the new codex, like auto explode for vehicles with POTMS.

[Dracos]

I think we need to take a deep breath and see what the non-marine codexes bring before we start looking at ways to nerf this one so quickly. Marine Burn Out is imo leading many to automatically jump to an omg this it too good needs nerfed position rather than looking for ways to handle said unit. 

[Gryphonne]

I’m glad you didn’t write the FAQ. Maybe let’s wait until the other codices start showing up eh?

[Ishagu]

Any nerfs to the book are premature and unnecessary.

 

6 months from now there might be multiple superior codex books for various factions.

 

Stay calm, wait to see how things pan out.

Edited October 17, 2020 by Ishagu

[Kallas]

I’m glad you didn’t write the FAQ. Maybe let’s wait until the other codices start showing up eh?

 

Right? 

 

@OP: While I can understand the drive behind a lot of these 'suggestions', the majority of them are extremely half-cooked.

Some I can get behind (like #3, #9, #14 and #16) but the majority of them are only half thought out, or just flat out not what goes into FAQs.

 

Adding rules is not what an FAQ is for; sometimes it is done for an egregious mistake, but it's almost never done for balancing purposes.

[L30n1d4s]

Interesting points all around and, of course, it probably is a good thing I don't write the FAQ ... this is just a theoretical experiment in ideas, at the end of the day.

 

 

Also, you all are correct, a FAQ is not really the appropriate name for this, since it involves whole new rules and GW rarely does that in FAQs... perhaps I might have just titled this "Ideas to refine a few units in the Space Marine Codex" instead.

 

 

One thing that does puzzle me a bit is how several people are reacting to these ideas as if my main premise was just "nerf the Space Marines because they are too strong"... if you pay attention to what I said, over half of the ideas are actually BUFFS to units that I thought are underpowered/don't have a really distinct and useful role in the SM army right now (i.e. buffs to Scouts, Sternguard, Reivers, Land Raiders, Gladiator Lancers, Repulsor Executioners, Hammerfall Bunkers, Executioner rounds for Eliminators, etc.)... in some cases, pretty substantial buffs, like with Land Raiders getting -1 to wound them and Sternguard getting BS2+ if they shoot all their weapons at a single target.

 

 

We can all have different opinions of course (Cheers, Kallas and Gryphonne), but even with the units I did propose nerfing a bit (i.e. Eradicators, Bladeguard, Heavy Intercessors, etc.), or in some cases, "side-grading" (i.e. Servitors, Inceptors), the goal was not to punish them into unplayability, but rather just bring them to a place so that they are good and useable, vice "ridiculously good" and "must take," options. An example of this is the idea for the Eradicators... rather than just "knee-jerk" remove their double shoot all together (like happened to Aggressors) or make them cost +15 points each or some extreme change like that, I think making it so they can't double shoot after disembarking or coming in from Reserves  is a more subtle and nuanced way to make them reasonable, but still competitive and useful.

Edited October 17, 2020 by L30n1d4s

[Ishagu]

Why would you want a Bladeguard vet to cost more than a SS/TH Terminator?

 

Anyways I don't see any value in those particular suggestions. There's no reference point in regards to 9th edition because we only have two faction books thus far.

 

Absolutely nothing should be nerfed until the 9th edition has had some time to simmer with multiple updated factions. Also the competitive scene is currently quiet and restrictions continue to limit it.

Edited October 17, 2020 by Ishagu

[L30n1d4s]

Good question Ishagu.

 

 

So, comparing them they both are 3W, T4 and have a 4++ Invul.

 

 

1) TH/SS Termies have the advantage of a 1+ save, built-in deep strike, the Teleporter Homer rule, the Strat "Fury of the First," and 3 Dmg on their Thunder Hammers

2) Bladeguard, on the other hand, have the advantages of striking in combat with no -1 to Hit, AP-3 on their MCed Swords, 3A base, and the ability to get up to WS2+ with a Bladeguard Ancient nearby.

 

 

So far, that makes them pretty even, right? Well, the two factors that push BG Veterans over the top for me, and why I would propose that they be pointed higher than TH/SS Terminators, are:

 

1) Cheaper Transports

2) Access to Transhuman Physiology

 

While Impulsors definitely took a hit in the new codex, they are still highly mobile (14" move) and WAY cheaper than Land Raiders, thus giving the Bladeguard a very viable and affordable transport compared to Assault Terminators.

 

Secondly, Transhuman Physiology makes Bladeguard Veterans potentially significantly tougher than Terminators, even when you account for the 1+ Armor Save. Against anything S5 or above (which is the vast majority of the weapons that you would use to kill either of these units), Transhuman makes Bladeguard 16-33% more survivable than Terminators, which is a MASSIVE advantage to them IMHO.

Edited October 17, 2020 by L30n1d4s

[Jings]

Ironically, despite defending the rule as not game breaking, I'd like to see the new Inner Circle rule changes to a flat -1 to Wound. Not because I think always on TransPhys is overly broken (tho powerful). Small arms will now wound on 6s respectively (with the other changes to all Terminators that I'll mention later) which tracks. Terminators are meant to be particularly resilient to small arms fire and that would do the trick while still protecting them from heavier weapons.

 

Bump Gravis (and other 3-6 Primaris units) to 5-10 man squads. Would make them more expensive to spam and bring them in line with other Marine units. Additionally, allow Primaris units the option to add their Troop equivalents to their squads - for example, Hellblasters can add Intercessors, Aggressors Heavy Intercessors etc. With models with options, they have to match the primary weapon type (Assault Incinerators have to run Assault Bolter intercessors). Intercessors can take 1 Hellblaster per 5 men, ditto Heavies with Aggressors/Eradicators and Infiltrators with Eliminators. Bladeguard lose a wound but are otherwise unchanged. Bring everything more in line with standard Codex squad builds and allow for ablative wounds and more tactical flexibility to undo the Primaris eldarification.

 

Maxed put squads count as 2 of their respective FOC choice but only for fulfilling requirements (i.e. A ten man Tactical squad will count as 2od the 3 Troops choices required for a Batallion, while taking only one Troops FOC slot). Marines in power armour nullify the Blast minimum shots.

 

Terminator armour grants T5 and S5. Firstborn of all stripes gain an extra Attack, Primaris become S5 to compensate. Scouts gain an extra Wound too and return to Troops, at a cost similar to Tacs to avoid the scout spam issue.

 

Twin Lightning Claws lose their new extra attack but gain D2 and damage overspill ala Flails. Flamestorm Gauntlets become S5 AP-1 if they don't advance.

 

Eradicators lose double shoot, which instead becomes a 2CP stratagem for all <Gravis> units allowing them to fire a second time if they did not move in the movement phase.

 

All tanks with primary turrets gain the Guard turret rule giving them shoot twice if they moved less than half speed. Increase the movement of all Rhino chassis by 2" for all profiles. Demolisher Cannons auto hit buildings (always) and units within half range. Rhinos (not Razorbacks) become 45 points base, but gain a rule that prevents them from being able to hold objectives (they can however still contest). Stalkers regain their -1 to hit targets without Fly. Non-Gravis Primaris can take Drop Pods.

 

Land Raiders get a flat double shots on their sponson weapons. They also gain the -1 to wound OP suggested. They can also carry Primaris marines, with Gravis counting as 2 ala Terminators. Heavy Bolter/Assault Cannons in the front become options rather than set load outs - may also be swapped for twin Lascannons. Finally, they gain Assault Transport, allowing units to disembark (but not move) and assault after movement, with a -2 mallus to charge range which can be mitigated by purchasing Assault Launchers. Repulsors get this rule too.

 

 

ALL Firstborn units can take two items from the Sergeant Wargear list, which includes all pistols, Combis and Melee weapons. Sort out the silliness of Bikers being able to rock a special weapon and chainsword but their Sergeants can't. Storm Bolters are added to the Special Weapon list (Sergeants can still take them). All Primaris Sergeants can take a Melee weapon.

 

 

I think that'd do it for me like. Undo the damage (I feel) Primaris has done and just make them a slightly less versatile but slightly stronger version of standard Marines, tanks are useful again and much needed customization is brought back for all infantry.

 

I'd call the Dex perfect at that point tbh.

[Captain Idaho]

I'd have liked my Cataphractii to still be Cataphractii so I'm fairly disappointed with the Relic Terminators entry. Lost a lot of flavour. Just customisable weapons for ordinary Terminators really.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

Any nerfs to the book are premature and unnecessary.

 

6 months from now there might be multiple superior codex books for various factions.

 

Stay calm, wait to see how things pan out.

I agree for the most part, but the ATV Apothecary loophole doesn't seem intentional. They didn't give it the core keyword and it has 8 wounds so I suspect it was meant to be a vehicle not a biker (which is a simple fix of trading the keywords).

 

I also think eradicators will be nerfed at some point, it just won't happen till they have a better feel of how good the new multi-melta rules are. Played against sisters with 5 Immolators and they put out a ton of firepower now.

 

Edit:spelling plus ATV can explode so the apothecary is also a techmarine lol.

Edited October 17, 2020 by Jorin Helm-splitter

[Ishagu]

I agree on the apothecary and ATVs, yes. That just seems a bit silly and weird.

 

Obviously it's very powerful as a single resurrected model could cost more than the Apothecary himself lol

 

There's also that error with the Chapter Command upgrade costs, so some clarifications are needed.

[Lord Raven 19]

I would give eliminators and supressors squad sizes of 3-6 too.

 

I would also give shrike the +2 attacks for having 2 lighting claws that he's been missing since he became a chapter master.

 

I'd also remove eliminator double shoot (or make only if they stand still) and give aggressors advance and shoot with no penalty and possibly advance and charge.

[Ishagu]

Only issue with Eliminators is that if you nerf them they end up being worse than every other infantry unit armed with Multi Meltas. The balance is really tight.

[Minsc]

Good question Ishagu.

 

 

So, comparing them they both are 3W, T4 and have a 4++ Invul.

 

 

1) TH/SS Termies have the advantage of a 1+ save, built-in deep strike, the Teleporter Homer rule, the Strat "Fury of the First," and 3 Dmg on their Thunder Hammers

2) Bladeguard, on the other hand, have the advantages of striking in combat with no -1 to Hit, AP-3 on their MCed Swords, 3A base, and the ability to get up to WS2+ with a Bladeguard Ancient nearby.

 

 

So far, that makes them pretty even, right? Well, the two factors that push BG Veterans over the top for me, and why I would propose that they be pointed higher than TH/SS Terminators, are:

 

1) Cheaper Transports

2) Access to Transhuman Physiology

 

While Impulsors definitely took a hit in the new codex, they are still highly mobile (14" move) and WAY cheaper than Land Raiders, thus giving the Bladeguard a very viable and affordable transport compared to Assault Terminators.

 

Secondly, Transhuman Physiology makes Bladeguard Veterans potentially significantly tougher than Terminators, even when you account for the 1+ Armor Save. Against anything S5 or above (which is the vast majority of the weapons that you would use to kill either of these units), Transhuman makes Bladeguard 16-33% more survivable than Terminators, which is a MASSIVE advantage to them IMHO.

A few things I want to note here;

 

1) SS/TH terminators also strike at S8, causing them to be a real threat to vehicles and monsters. Might be worth adding in your comparison. 

 

2) If you're gonna compare units, then compare units. Claiming "unit X can get benefit Y if you add component Z" (that costs additional points and slots) is disingenuous. At best you can add stratagems that are specific to said unit in the comparison (like "Fury of the Firstborn"), but when you're starting to add characters that cost a noticeable amount by themselves but to nothing else than buff one of the units you're comparing (Bladeguard Ancient) the comparison is starting to lose weight. 

 

3) Bladeguard might have cheaper transports, but at the same time they need transports unless they want to footslog across the table. Terminators essentially have no need for transports due to their inherent deepstrike. 

 

4) A unit should be priced based upon what it can do by default, not based upon what it can do if you throw a bunch of buffs and components onto said unit in order to boost its efficiency; the cost for this increased efficiency should be placed on the very things that causes the efficiency to go up in the first place, be it buffs from characters (where the pricetag is on the character itself, measured in points) or stratagems (where the pricetag is on the stratagem, measured in CP.)

 

Point and case here is the argument that "Bladeguard should cost more because they can utilize Transhuman Physiology". It's a great stratagem, no doubt, but it can only affect one unit (and you usually have more than 1 Primaris-unit in your list) and you pay CP for it if you actually use it.

 

Going down the "price units according to their potential maximum combo efficiency" is the wrong way to go about it because then you penalize everyone else everytime they use said unit without utilizing it to the max, min-max style. The 9th Age Fantasy-team tried to balance their game around the notion of "price everything according to the cheesiest possible combo" and needless to say, it was a horrible decision that lead to a lot of players leaving the game. 

 

 

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I love the relic terminators. It’s what a lot of people here were asking for too. I’d prefer Cataprachtii armor to still be a thing but I not salty about it either. With a heavy weapon, grenade harness and plasma blaster this squad can kick out some serious damage. Really there’s absolutely no reason for them to go Legends.

[WrathOfTheLion]

No drop relic terminators. Need all the options to be able to run a full Deathwing force. We need all the terminator datasheets we can get.

[bigtrouble]

Just fix the ridiculous Combat Revival bringing back an ATV for 1 CP, please. At the very least, the Apothecary should not be able to move or shoot to use that ability.

[Lucerne]

Interesting points all around and, of course, it probably is a good thing I don't write the FAQ ... this is just a theoretical experiment in ideas, at the end of the day.

 

 

Also, you all are correct, a FAQ is not really the appropriate name for this, since it involves whole new rules and GW rarely does that in FAQs... perhaps I might have just titled this "Ideas to refine a few units in the Space Marine Codex" instead.

 

 

One thing that does puzzle me a bit is how several people are reacting to these ideas as if my main premise was just "nerf the Space Marines because they are too strong"... if you pay attention to what I said, over half of the ideas are actually BUFFS to units that I thought are underpowered/don't have a really distinct and useful role in the SM army right now (i.e. buffs to Scouts, Sternguard, Reivers, Land Raiders, Gladiator Lancers, Repulsor Executioners, Hammerfall Bunkers, Executioner rounds for Eliminators, etc.)... in some cases, pretty substantial buffs, like with Land Raiders getting -1 to wound them and Sternguard getting BS2+ if they shoot all their weapons at a single target.

 

 

We can all have different opinions of course (Cheers, Kallas and Gryphonne), but even with the units I did propose nerfing a bit (i.e. Eradicators, Bladeguard, Heavy Intercessors, etc.), or in some cases, "side-grading" (i.e. Servitors, Inceptors), the goal was not to punish them into unplayability, but rather just bring them to a place so that they are good and useable, vice "ridiculously good" and "must take," options. An example of this is the idea for the Eradicators... rather than just "knee-jerk" remove their double shoot all together (like happened to Aggressors) or make them cost +15 points each or some extreme change like that, I think making it so they can't double shoot after disembarking or coming in from Reserves  is a more subtle and nuanced way to make them reasonable, but still competitive and useful.

Your suggestions are interesting, and honestly the kneejerk reactions against it reek of people who like their current flavor of cheese and don't have any interest in seeing any other units taken in the codex.

 

That said, I'd only really dispute the relic terminators being dropped- if anything those need to be mirrored for CSM.

Edited October 18, 2020 by Lucerne

[Ishagu]

Wanting a book to be nerfed across the board before giving the 9th edition meta a chance to develop with factions getting their own updates is a knee jerk reaction in itself.

 

I don't like some things either, and I don't feel that transhuman should be granted for free to multiple units in the DA army, when we know from experience across multiple editions that it's one of the most powerful strats when used on a single unit, never mind multiple. I think damage mitigation like this is too powerful, but maybe I'm wrong. Let's wait and see.

Edited October 18, 2020 by Ishagu

[SkimaskMohawk]

"Know from experience across multiple editions" .

 

You know about a year is a lot more honest that saying "multiple editions" . 11 months of 8th and 3 months of 9 is far from multiple editions, it doesn't even add up to the life span of the shortest (6th).

 

Really gotta get your hyperbole under control.

[Ishagu]

8th edition, and 9th edition. That's more than one.

 

My statement was factually correct lol

[SkimaskMohawk]

No it's not. It's like saying you've played warhammer for multiple years if you started December 31st and it's now January 2nd. It's what's called "misrepresentation" and is deliberately inaccurate. So going back to being honest; you're not.

[Ishagu]

Over a year across two editions.

 

Two is multiple, it's not a sigular. You're really trying to pick a hole in this.

 

I'm just saying that it's a very strong Strat, and I personally don't think multiple units in an army should get it for free all the time.