Returning to the hobby: Primaris vs Firstborn

[Keifer0999]

Title says it all....been on a break of several years, have not played 9th, and I may skip it since it seems one huge mess.

Going forward, What are the thoughts on going with firstborn Marines vs Primaris? I have a ton of both, much of which is unbuilt. Will it be worth the time and effort to finish my firstborn stuff? I was thinking of just assembling it all and then selling it off....

Just not sure where I want to go with this hobby.....

 

[firestorm40k]

Hello, it does seem that going forward GW are moving away from Firstborn in the 40k setting, and focusing on Primaris; Heresy looks to becoming the home of Firstborn. 

Having said that, the majority of Firstborn units are still in the Marine Codex and Supplements, so from a gaming perspective, still 'legal'. 

It depends how you feel about Firstborn and Primaris being in an army together? Rules wise there's (currently) nothing to stop you doing that. But you might not want to do so, due to the difference in scale between the two ranges. 

Personally, I've kept my Firstborn stuff separate from the Primaris stuff when it comes to my armies - i justify this, fluff/narrative wise, that the Firstborn armies are fighting just prior to the Cicatrox Maledictum, whereas my Primaris will be Ultima founding.  But then, I paint far more than I do play the game. 

So, either carry on using both, do separate armies, or just stick to Primaris - it's up to you! 

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

What’s the last firstborn kit that geedub released? I honestly can’t remember.

[TrawlingCleaner]

=][= I've moved this over to the Space Marine Forum as it's better served here  =][=

[Majkhel]

Adding to what firestorm said, it also depends on how competitive you would like to play.

GW is tinkering with rules and points all the time so it happens that some firstborn units become quite attractive. Like for example Assault Squad just became interesting after their points dropped and Armour of Contempt rule adding some  much needed resilience across whole Astartes range. Attack Bikes or Land Speeders are also appearing in the lists. Their output also varies from Chapter to Chapter (Like Blood Angels and their successors are relying heavily on firstborn units) so another question would be what flavor of marines you like to play.

[Karhedron]

Agreed. There are certain units that Primaris don't do very well (or at all) such as jump melee troops. Assault Squads recently got a points drop and are quite good at scoring Objectives. Vanguard Veterans can take the combo of Storm Shields and Lightning Claws making them quite an attractive blender unit for some Chapters. Blood Angels get both Death Company and Sanguinary Guard, the latter of which are quite a competitive choice.

Primaris also don't do long ranged fire support very well. A unit of Devastators with Multimeltas in a drop pod is quite a threat, as are MM attack bikes.

Even the humble Tactical squad is not totally obsolete. If you are looking for something to camp on a backfield Objective they are cheaper than Intercessors and can take a heavy weapon to squeeze off potshots at long range.

I would say, run what you like. So far GW has shown no sign of obsoleting Firstborn Marines and some units still fulfil a valuable role in a Marine army. Of course 10th edition is less than a year away and things may change with a new codex. But as it stands there is no reason to ditch your Firstborn unless you prefer the Primaris minis.

[Orange Knight]

Focus on Primaris. They are the face of the 40k Astartes range, and are regularly being updated with new kits.

The two ranges don't look quite right alongside each other due to the size difference, and there are even restrictions placed upon their interactions within the rules - the old Marines can't use Primaris transports and visa versa.

Keep in mind that Primaris do lack capabilities in a few departments, namely melee units with jump packs and long range heavy weapons infantry, but according to rumors these gaps will be addressed in the next release wave.

[Blindhamster]

Use whichever models you like, mix the two types if you like (in fact, I recommend it if you’re aiming for competitive play). But don’t feel bad if you just want to use firstborn or primaris, that’s fine too

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Many, myself included believe firstborn are going away at some point.

My army up to this point has been mixed, largely because chapter specific units are still FB, but I still use a tactical squad because a unit with 7 bolters and 3 plasma weapons and a power sword is nice to have.

[phandaal]

31 minutes ago, Blindhamster said:

Use whichever models you like, mix the two types if you like (in fact, I recommend it if you’re aiming for competitive play). But don’t feel bad if you just want to use firstborn or primaris, that’s fine too

This.

Would also point out that if you want scaled-up non-Primaris units it is as simple as sticking a Mk 7 helmet on a Primaris body. The scaling works just fine.

A lot of people do this for Vanguard Veterans, for example.

[DesuVult]

I find the difference in scale tends to be exaggerated by some people when looking at the models at tabletop height.  I am a strong proponent of use what you like the look of or feel you need in your list.  To me it is rather doubtful firstborn will go away.

In rules design primaris tend to have the space marine problems exacerbated, units paying for stats they cannot make use of and ending up noticeably less efficient than firstborn staples but primaris are also getting more new kits and get the new hotness rules.  Most armies I see are a mix of both.  Old standbys like terminators and/or vanguard veterans as a solid base with a unit or two of new hotness primaris like when eradiators were dominant, currently I mostly see redemptors and BGV out of primaris, and the choice of tactical or intercessor coming down to if you think transhuman or an extra attack might come in clutch for a couple more points.

[Karhedron]

Assault Intercessors are quite popular with melee-centric armies, particularly Blood Angels and Space Wolves. They are the cheapest Primaris Troop choice and get a built-in chainsword. Cheap melee with ObjSec is a good combo in a lot of cases.

[jimbo1701]

On 8/16/2022 at 10:19 AM, Black Blow Fly said:

What’s the last firstborn kit that geedub released? I honestly can’t remember.

Do the mkVI count? If not then it will probably be one of the limited release models such as the terminator characters / space marine heroes. Real shame as most of those models were absolutely spot on firstborn representations. More of a swan song than a revamp sadly.  
 

edit: Crowe if he counts as grey knights are an entity unto themselves thesedays being the only loyalist marine book with no core common codex. 

Edited August 23, 2022 by jimbo1701

[TheNewman]

"Even Tactical squads are not totally obsolete"

Lol wut?

An Intercessor squad with Assault Bolters is better against light infantry, a Tactical Squad with a Grav Cannon is better than any Intercessor loadout against literally everything else.

Frankly point for point the FB units are currently better than the Primaris equivalent pretty much across the board.

Having offered up that particular hot-take, I'd suggest that if you have a bunch of unassembled units and you're not sure that you even want to pick the game back up, you're probably better off selling them still on the sprue than bothering to assemble them.

[Orange Knight]

There is no situation in which a Tactical squad is better.

Due to the stratagem support and additional attacks, the Intercessors are better at holding objectives and dealing with infantry.

A few diluted special weapons don't tilt the scales. In fact, units that divide their function actually suffer because they sacrifice optimisation. 

Marine units are never too far from each other, so support from heavier weapons can be provided in a more optimised fashion from a unit that dedicates itself to them.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

1 hour ago, Orange Knight said:

There is no situation in which a Tactical squad is better.

Due to the stratagem support and additional attacks, the Intercessors are better at holding objectives and dealing with infantry.

A few diluted special weapons don't tilt the scales. In fact, units that divide their function actually suffer because they sacrifice optimisation. 

Marine units are never too far from each other, so support from heavier weapons can be provided in a more optimised fashion from a unit that dedicates itself to them.

i mean the same can be said for FB marines. devastators can support tacticals, but if some bad rolls leave the tank in front of you with 3-4 wounds, that sgt's plasma pistol, and a plasma or meltagun could clean that right up, much better than any intercessor bolters or the AGL could.

[Orange Knight]

That is more useful in theory than in practice.

What happens in practice is that an opponent will deploy select units to certain spots on the table whilst moving scoring units to secure objectives. The game is actually predictable in terms of placements because of the way the missions work.

You want to have dedicated and predictable units for a specific job, and deploy them appropriately. So for example you have Intercessors holding an objective, shooting at other troops, and you have Eradicators to blow up that tank the opponent deployed. 

The tank might not be close to the troops, in which case that Tactical squad with the melta gun will either have to leave the objective to get a shot at the tank, or simply waste that melta gun on a sub optimal target.

In the meantime with the use of a few strats, the Intercessor squad has fired it's guns twice at a longer range than what Tactical Marines can do, and has whitstood more firepower in return thanks to Transhuman, so has kept the objective better.

Intercessors are simply a better option.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

29 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

That is more useful in theory than in practice.

What happens in practice is that an opponent will deploy select units to certain spots on the table whilst moving scoring units to secure objectives. The game is actually predictable in terms of placements because of the way the missions work.

You want to have dedicated and predictable units for a specific job, and deploy them appropriately. So for example you have Intercessors holding an objective, shooting at other troops, and you have Eradicators to blow up that tank the opponent deployed. 

The tank might not be close to the troops, in which case that Tactical squad with the melta gun will either have to leave the objective to get a shot at the tank, or simply waste that melta gun on a sub optimal target.

In the meantime with the use of a few strats, the Intercessor squad has fired it's guns twice at a longer range than what Tactical Marines can do, and has whitstood more firepower in return thanks to Transhuman, so has kept the objective better.

Intercessors are simply a better option.

So first it’s all about mutual support for units, but now it’s about shooting specific targets halfway across the table?

seems kinda like the goalposts are shifting there.

a devastator squad is just as effective at anti-tank as any primaris infantry unit.

a tactical squad with AP special/heavy weapons is roughly as good at anti infantry as any primaris infantry unit.

 

sure strats allow primaris to perform better, but strats aren’t part of a unit’s datasheet 

[TheNewman]

1 hour ago, Orange Knight said:

That is more useful in theory than in practice.

What happens in practice is that an opponent will deploy select units to certain spots on the table whilst moving scoring units to secure objectives. The game is actually predictable in terms of placements because of the way the missions work.

You want to have dedicated and predictable units for a specific job, and deploy them appropriately. So for example you have Intercessors holding an objective, shooting at other troops, and you have Eradicators to blow up that tank the opponent deployed. 

The tank might not be close to the troops, in which case that Tactical squad with the melta gun will either have to leave the objective to get a shot at the tank, or simply waste that melta gun on a sub optimal target.

In the meantime with the use of a few strats, the Intercessor squad has fired it's guns twice at a longer range than what Tactical Marines can do, and has whitstood more firepower in return thanks to Transhuman, so has kept the objective better.

Intercessors are simply a better option.

In theory yeah, assuming you have nothing better to spend those command points on.  In practice Transhuman almost always has more valuable targets and double-tapping with Intercessors is frequently not the best use of those CP.

Having dedicated units for specific jobs has a significant down-side that you're ignoring.  Suppose you're up against four Tac squads with a Multimelta each vs three Intercessor squads and Eradicators.  If your army is full of vehicles then in the second case you focus down the Eradicators and your vehicles can run the board with impunity, while in the first case you have to wipe all 20 Tac marines to eliminate the threat.  

That's true across the board.  I fear an all FB army a whole lot more than an all Primaris one.

Edited August 25, 2022 by TheNewman

[TheNewman]

2 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

There is no situation in which a Tactical squad is better.

(1) Due to the stratagem support and additional attacks, the Intercessors are better at holding objectives and dealing with infantry.

(2) A few diluted special weapons don't tilt the scales. In fact, units that divide their function actually suffer because they sacrifice optimisation. 

(3) Marine units are never too far from each other, so support from heavier weapons can be provided in a more optimised fashion from a unit that dedicates itself to them.

Nah.

2 and 3, see post above.

1) True Intercessors are better at dealing with other infantry in melee.  They're still terrible compared to any specialist squad on anything heavier than a guardsman though, anything that fights worth a darn is going to demolish either squad too quickly for the difference to be relevant.  There's not a whole lot that Intercessors win and Tacs lose against.  And (again) do the math.  A single Grav Cannon outdamages five Bolt Rifles or Stalkers on every target outside of the ones where the Autobolter is the better than all three.

[Orange Knight]

Dedicated combat units will, yes.

That's why you have your own for that purpose.

 

[TheNewman]

47 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

Dedicated combat units will, yes.

That's why you have your own for that purpose.

 

Which is irrelevant to whether Intercessors bullying light infantry better than Tac marines matters very much.

I did think of a scenario though; T3, T6, or T7, with a 4+/6++ and an even number of wounds, in Assault or Devastator Doctrine.  Stalkers beat Autobolters under those specific conditions.

[Orange Knight]

What do you mean it's irrelevant?

You only want the Intercessors to outlast or bully other troop options as they compete for objectives.

And they can definitely do that against Guard, Orks, Guardians, etc. You can then support the squads with other units that focus on offense or mobility.

 

Now, they aren't as great as they used to be, no doubt, but the whole Astares book is currently in need of an update as it's the oldest codex in the edition.

Going back to the topic.

TC: Yes, you can buy whatever you want, but only the Primaris range in 40k will continue to grow and be expanded. My advice is to focus on that as it future-proofs your force, and will keep the army looking more cohesive and scale accurate. Some of the Firstborn kits look like they belong in the Squat range instead of the Adeptus Astartes.

[SickSix]

Firstborn are deadmen walking. The model line is not going to see any updates (cries for Terminators) and will soon* be wholly relegated to Legends rules. 

[Blindhamster]

Firstborn are functionally generally better on the table, it used to be that primaris had more wounds, which meant they had durability over other marines, even if other marines out damaged them, but since all marines got a bonus wound, primaris have struggled to be relevant outside of a few specific specialist units (bladeguard and eradicators mostly).

and the above comes from someone that doesn’t use firstborn because I don’t like the models, doesn’t mean I can’t acknowledge they’re actually better on tables atm

Edited August 25, 2022 by Blindhamster