Returning to the hobby: Primaris vs Firstborn

[Orange Knight]

Some units are, sure.

Vanguard Veterans are some of the most competitive, and some chapter specific options are very good also.

As for the generic stuff? Infiltrators are better than Scouts. Intercessors are better than Tactical Marines. Eradicators are better than Devastators. The Redemptor is the best Dreadnought, the Primaris Chaplain on Bike is the best Chaplain, etc.

But we shouldn't get hung up on what is and isn't competitive too much just now as the codex is months away from an update. Most likely that by the time TC is done putting together an army the next book will be out or close to release.

[Blindhamster]

Intercessors are maybe equal to tacticals, I’d generally agree with the comments above about them. I already said eradicators were top tier. I wouldn’t say infiltrators and scouts are even intended for the same thing tbh. But yes, they do have an excellent rule.

and yeah I already said people should use whatever they like earlier in this thread, and freely acknowledge that I only use primaris because I like them more. I also don’t play competitively these days (and honestly haven’t for a couple of editions now, I’m more into friendly games with mates now)

[jimbo1701]

One thing I noticed recently is that when chaos marines dropped they were put on par with primaris stats (in terms of wounds / attacks) more than firstborn, even further suggesting firstborn are on the way out. 

[Orange Knight]

They might take Primaris up even higher than that. We really don't know what GW will do, but the next codex could be pretty crazy as it will probably be the last of the edition.

The recent books have been so wild that it to me it indicates 9th is winding down.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Primaris vs FB is purely academic - the best SM armies include both.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

3 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

Some units are, sure.

Vanguard Veterans are some of the most competitive, and some chapter specific options are very good also.

As for the generic stuff? Infiltrators are better than Scouts. Intercessors are better than Tactical Marines. Eradicators are better than Devastators. The Redemptor is the best Dreadnought, the Primaris Chaplain on Bike is the best Chaplain, etc.

But we shouldn't get hung up on what is and isn't competitive too much just now as the codex is months away from an update. Most likely that by the time TC is done putting together an army the next book will be out or close to release.

Lol, infiltrators are better than scouts? Considering scouts are the worst unit in the codex that’s not saying much.

even if Phobos primaris didn’t exist, scouts still wouldn’t make it into a list.

overall, if you don’t want to be struggling, and you want to be just competitive enough, and want to stick to one or the other, your probably best suit sticking to FB.

let’s face it, the HQs are generally better, smash captains can smash any primaris captain, anything in terminator armor is likely better than any primaris counterpart that isn’t.

as noted by yourself VGV are top tier. Rhino transports more, razorback has more dakka than an impulsor.

stormravens can swing a dread into the middle of a battlefield.

 

primaris sculpts are hands down the best space marine sculpts around, but I think that FB marines are generally better, and I’m sure the math hammer would back that up, though since there are so few 1:1 comparisons it’s hard to say one way or the other without leaving room for arguments.

[Orange Knight]

1 hour ago, Black Blow Fly said:

Primaris vs FB is purely academic - the best SM armies include both.

That's not true.

Your interest might be on theme and appearance and not competitive play.

[Blindhamster]

42 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

let’s face it, the HQs are generally better, smash captains can smash any primaris captain, anything in terminator armor is likely better than any primaris counterpart that isn’t.

Id say a gravis captain gives terminator ones a run for their money tbh. You can still master craft the power sword, or master graft the boltstorm gauntlet. He's pretty good

[Orange Knight]

I think characters with a jump pack are good, hence my comment a few pages ago about gaps in capability.

The moment a Primaris Captain with jump pack appears, he will be the better option.

[DesuVult]

27 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

That's not true.

Your interest might be on theme and appearance and not competitive play.

Edit: I believe I misread the statement.

Edited August 25, 2022 by DesuVult

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

1 hour ago, Blindhamster said:

Id say a gravis captain gives terminator ones a run for their money tbh. You can still master craft the power sword, or master graft the boltstorm gauntlet. He's pretty good

Since they both get an invuln sure, but the 2+ save makes a pretty big difference.

if I were going for purely competitive at an event, I’d take the termy captain over the gravis captain.

[Orange Knight]

You can give a Gravis Captain a 2+ save, so in effect you gain more wounds and attacks, and the same durability.

The difference isn't particularly significant however, nothing to really focus on - Just depends on the model and the interactions it has. The Gravis Captain is fully integrated with other Primaris units and strats, however.

Again, this focus on what is perceived as strong is only one aspect of the discussion. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

3 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

That's not true.

Your interest might be on theme and appearance and not competitive play.

No one makes a post like this about theming without making it very clear that’s what it’s about

1 hour ago, Orange Knight said:

You can give a Gravis Captain a 2+ save, so in effect you gain more wounds and attacks, and the same durability.

The difference isn't particularly significant however, nothing to really focus on - Just depends on the model and the interactions it has. The Gravis Captain is fully integrated with other Primaris units and strats, however.

Again, this focus on what is perceived as strong is only one aspect of the discussion. 

I’m comparing datasheet to datasheet, not whatever relics or WLTs, or strats.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Ignoring WLTs and relics is not what you see on the table.

[Malakithe]

For me its a matter of future proofing. Firstborn are going to Legends eventually. Its going to happen once the Primaris range is 'completed'. Will it take another 5-10 years? Yes, but it will happen. If your casual gaming group allows Legends then your good no matter what. But if your like most modern groups that want to stay up to date rules wise then sometime down the long road your going to have a lot of useless plastic taking up space.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

For me the sooner the better, that’s how I really feel about it.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

3 hours ago, Black Blow Fly said:

Ignoring WLTs and relics is not what you see on the table.

Well any WL can get any WLT, so it kinda evens out.

most strats can be used by both, and without a hard reset most stats in datasheets aren’t likely to have major changes, meanwhile strats may come and go or have major changes to their wording.

[phandaal]

53 minutes ago, Malakithe said:

For me its a matter of future proofing. Firstborn are going to Legends eventually. Its going to happen once the Primaris range is 'completed'. Will it take another 5-10 years? Yes, but it will happen. If your casual gaming group allows Legends then your good no matter what. But if your like most modern groups that want to stay up to date rules wise then sometime down the long road your going to have a lot of useless plastic taking up space.

Ten years from now, we will get Ultraprimaris that will totally outclass stupid lame old Primaris on the tabletop. Also their models will be slightly larger, making them superior in every way to Geezer Marines.

There is no such thing as future-proofing your army. Not from a rules standpoint anyway, and certainly not for Space Marines.

If you play one of those factions that only gets an update once every 20 years, maybe you can think about whether you can still use the same models in GT Warzone Nachville, coming 2032.

Otherwise just get what you think will be fun to use for the next few years and leave it at that.

[Blindhamster]

3 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

Well any WL can get any WLT, so it kinda evens out.

most strats can be used by both, and without a hard reset most stats in datasheets aren’t likely to have major changes, meanwhile strats may come and go or have major changes to their wording.

From a pure datasheet perspective, most meaningful attacks will force an invuln. 
the gravis captain has higher toughness and more wounds.

the gravis captain also has more attacks with more versatility in their base weapons. 
 

but I won’t argue the point, you’re welcome to the opinion.

 

I do agree that jump pack captains (with relic armour) are probably the best choice though 

[Kallas]

4 hours ago, phandaal said:

Ten years from now, we will get Ultraprimaris that will totally outclass stupid lame old Primaris on the tabletop. Also their models will be slightly larger, making them superior in every way to Geezer Marines.

There is no such thing as future-proofing your army. Not from a rules standpoint anyway, and certainly not for Space Marines

I think maybe the better term, rather than "future proofing" would be to be "getting ahead of the curve." Those investing in Primaris right now are going to be ahead of the curve on the full range compared to those of us who are not investing as heavily. I, for instance, have no bought any Eradicators, or Outriders, or Invaders; they're all good/decent units, but my current Firstborn fill those roles so I haven't spent excess money on 'updating' - but that means I will most likely be 'behind the curve' once Primaris take an even bigger role in the Astartes line, which they undoubtedly will (regardless of peoples' opinions on whether Firstborn will go away or not, Primaris are 100% the face of Marines now).

[phandaal]

2 hours ago, Kallas said:

Those investing in Primaris right now are going to be ahead of the curve on the full range compared to those of us who are not investing as heavily.

OP says he has a ton of Primaris already, unless I totally misread the first post. Just wants to know if it is worth his time to assemble the non-Primaris stuff.

Really that is going to come down to whether he wants to use the models in the next few years, or if he wants to keep them just for himself even beyond that.

Looking at it from the perspective of future-proofing is the wrong way to do it. We do not even know what else is coming for Primaris models beyond rumors for the immediate future.

For example - Outriders are the new Biker models. Will they be worth using five years from now when GW maybe finally gives them a kit and phases out existing Bikers? Maybe, maybe not. Will OP even want to use them in five years? Who knows. Things change!

[Blindhamster]

and outriders are an excellent example of firstborn being better. The options and squad size for the firstborn bikers is currently just a lot more useful. Outriders do look nice though.

[phandaal]

16 minutes ago, Blindhamster said:

and outriders are an excellent example of firstborn being better. The options and squad size for the firstborn bikers is currently just a lot more useful. Outriders do look nice though.

Nice looking models for sure. I actually used them for conversion fodder to make upscaled Ravenwing HQs and Black Knights.

If we go by units likely to be the core of an army, it will probably be Intercessors. I could see Tactical Marines getting phased out once Intercessors have all the same unit options. At that point the Tacticals may become tournament-legal "counts as" just like the old Calgar model.

With GW it is just too hard to predict.

[Kallas]

28 minutes ago, Blindhamster said:

and outriders are an excellent example of firstborn being better. The options and squad size for the firstborn bikers is currently just a lot more useful. Outriders do look nice though.

Except for use as melee troops. Outriders are far better, bar Sergeant options, than Firstborn Bikers since they have many more attacks on the change, and a few more subsequently. Also, Outriders have better baseline shooting (AP-1 at 30" vs AP0 at 24") though the difference is small overall.

For a small unit for a specific purpose that is not melee, Firstborn are better, yes, as they have many more options.

34 minutes ago, phandaal said:

Looking at it from the perspective of future-proofing is the wrong way to do it. We do not even know what else is coming for Primaris models beyond rumors for the immediate future.

For example - Outriders are the new Biker models. Will they be worth using five years from now when GW maybe finally gives them a kit and phases out existing Bikers? Maybe, maybe not. Will OP even want to use them in five years? Who knows. Things change!

My comment was more to try and clarify a more reasonable statement to attach, since future-proofing is, like you said, not really a good term as things can shift. But in regards to Primaris unit introductions, I suspect it is unlikely that GW will introduced an Outrider+ style unit that is not just a multi-part Outrider boxset that accompanies an updated Datasheet. Could be wrong on that, but I would expect GW to make new units with a different focus (ie, maybe they make a less melee focused Fast Attack/Biker-style unit, rather than make a second melee-focused unit to directly compete with Outriders).

 

[Marshal Reinhard]

18 hours ago, Black Blow Fly said:

Primaris vs FB is purely academic - the best SM armies include both.

Pseudo-true. The best list will include freely as much or as little from either line as it needs to be optimal.  Ie, you will get the best results when there's no restrictions at all on what you pick, and the best  end result may very well be a combination of both, heck this is probably more likely than it being the end point extremes of having only either type and nothing of the other.