do the rules fit the lore?

[jaxom]

5 hours ago, Xenith said:

And they break those enemy strongpoints, first with targeted salvoes from heavy weapons, then accurate deadly bolter fire as they close, then by ripping apart the occupants of those strongpoints in close combat. 

5 hours ago, Ayatollah_of_Rock_n_Rolla said:

There is no reason, why performance of long-range weapons (and grenades, lol) or any other weapons should be dependent on a rigid time schedule

 

I think you're both correct. The Codex Astartes prescribes the right tool for the right job at the right time, but in 'reality' that timing shouldn't really impact how good the weapon/aim/usage ends up being. I'd have to think more about translating it to the table top.

 

One thing I'd want more representation of is Transhuman Dread, the oversized nature of Astartes weapons, and zealotry. I think Marines should alway count as dealing one extra casualty for the purposes of Morale checks.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Chapters that can manipulate doctrines:

 

BA

BT

DA

IH

UM

 

Probably more as well.

[Medjugorje]

1 minute ago, jaxom said:

 

I think you're both correct. The Codex Astartes prescribes the right tool for the right job at the right time, but in 'reality' that timing shouldn't really impact how good the weapon/aim/usage ends up being. I'd have to think more about translating it to the table top.

 

One thing I'd want more representation of is Transhuman Dread, the oversized nature of Astartes weapons, and zealotry. I think Marines should alway count as dealing one extra casualty for the purposes of Morale checks.

why? If you prepare for battle ( when it begins) then you can deal the most important damage. 

 

On the secound point this would always count if you play against drukhari, against each other marine faction.

[jaxom]

54 minutes ago, Medjugorje said:

why? If you prepare for battle ( when it begins) then you can deal the most important damage. 

I'm not sure what you mean.

[Medjugorje]

17 hours ago, jaxom said:

I'm not sure what you mean.

think about an attack or a defense... the heavy weapons are most effective in the first part of that attack and at the end the close combat weapons are more effective...

Thats my opinion on the critiq to doctrine mechanics.

[jaxom]

Tactically, I agree. The question is if that's best represented by -1 AP or something else.

[Medjugorje]

how?

 

Of coure there could be a better way but honestly its simple and its strong imo.

[DesuVult]

I don't feel the rules fit the lore at all currently.

[Medjugorje]

8 hours ago, DesuVult said:

I don't feel the rules fit the lore at all currently.

the whole codex or the supplements? 

 

Imo - the codex is not strong but is not that bad from design although i think even when it was released- characters should be stronger and the whole codex lack of mobility. 

 

What I think dont fit are the supplements on a bigger scale.

[DesuVult]

2 hours ago, Medjugorje said:

the whole codex or the supplements? 

 

Imo - the codex is not strong but is not that bad from design although i think even when it was released- characters should be stronger and the whole codex lack of mobility. 

 

What I think dont fit are the supplements on a bigger scale.

The codex is pretty badly designed to me and is quite bland.  Many units have nothing special about them at all, the stratagems suffer among the worst feeling like powers drawn from a deck, and even though crusade should have strong narrative rules there isn't much going on even.

 

Doctrines are a garbage mechanic.

[Medjugorje]

I like the doctrines mechanic although I think you are correct about the codex. The codex makes it hard to hit the supplements.

 

There are a few units which are good, a few they would be okay or even good but are way to overcosted and then there are too many units which doesnt fit in any list without having better choices.

 

best examples: Sternguard Veterans, Veteran Intercessors, all characters which have at least 5 other datasheets which compete about same battlerole without having significant differences. And of course --> all of our characters are way to overcosted and all the units are bad if not buffed.

THIS last point is what I hate about this codex - REALLY. 

[jaxom]

43 minutes ago, Medjugorje said:

all of our characters are way to overcosted and all the units are bad if not buffed.

I blame auras and not learning the lessons of AoS for this one.

 

A captain or lieutenant buff most units by about 14% increase in wounds done, or about 26% if they're both effecting the same unit. It's really easy to get a lot of units "within" 6 inches of a hero. So, who's paying for the increased efficiency? How many units should one assume will be buffed when determining points? What about when those units are buffing or being buffed? It's really easy to over cost units because of all this.

 

AoS changed most "within" auras to "wholly within" and that would do wonders for Space Marines. One buffed unit (or two smaller units) are a lot easier to account for in points cost of a character, and then the individual units wouldn't need an artificial point boost.

[DesuVult]

I am not even looking at it from how strong or competitive the book is.  The difference between an intercessor and a veteran intercessor is +1A and +1ld for veteran intercessors and intercessors have Objective Secured. 

 

I prefer the 30k style where tacticals have Fury of The Legion and Heart of The Legion special rules and the Line subtype.  Veterans have Relentless and Chosen Warriors special rules.  Regular veterans have the ld of a sergeant, +1 WS, +1 W, and +1 A.  The wargear options for veterans take up the entire next page after their datasheet.  Veterans pay for all this in a hefty point cost, almost double a tactical.  Veterans should be distinct and noteworthy, veterans within a chapter or legion are supposed to be a big deal.

 

It is a similar case for a lot of the units in the codex, so much do so little with nothing noteworthy about them. 

 

I also play AoS, for my Daughters of Khaine every single unit has some rules attached tied to their lore allowing you separate them.  This is an army where your 4 main units come from 2 dual kits and your main 2 infantry share a statline but still are further apart than marines from their veterans or the various marine troops from each other.  Leaders can also interact with different units differently, Witch Aelves need to stay near totems, medusae leader can hand out medusae only buffs.  Someone might complain this sounds more complicated but I find AoS and 30k easier to follow than trying to remember my 50 stratagems and if the niche use stratagem I recall reading previously is from this codex, the last one, the compendium, a campaign book, or was FAQed into new wording.

 

Marines could be criminally undercosted and I would still say this is a bad codex because it is just so bland.  Imperial Fists are a menace in 30k able to push up blocks of difficult to shift infantry, terminators loaded with unique wargear, and a solid base of firepower to fall back on.  Imperial Fists in 40k can make the redemptor's plasma cannon slightly better on the first turn and on subsequent turns their best source of firepower is spending all their CP in 1 turn on a unit of 10 intercessors and 2 characters so the unit shoots 60 shots hitting on 2+, rerolling all hits, 6s are 3 hits, +1 to wound, rerolling 1s to wound, AP -1, D1.  You then die the next turn.  30k IF feels like a legion with some flavor to it, an armored thrust of sicarans speeding into the enemy's backline to secure a landing zone for a deep strike of terminators who have forgone any ranged firepower for their unique shields and unique fists.  Even should they fail their charge in trying to decapitate the Sons of Horus force they have a chance to weather the oncoming storm and retaliate in melee, their leader accepting the challenge of a duel by the enemy warlord taking the blows of the traitor upon his shield and waiting for an opening, only needing to land a single strike from his solarite gauntlet to end this fight.  You or your opponent set the tempo of the battle, not a ticking turn counter rule like doctrines.  If you could control your doctrines armywide completely I could see it, in the command phase you choose which doctrine you are in this turn showing a shift in tactical deployment as the marines adapt to the situation.  Maybe give veteran units the option to be in 2 doctrines at once or gain some secondary effect from each doctrine stage.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

30k is a different animal -> it’s SM 24-7.

[DesuVult]

13 minutes ago, BLACK BLΠFLY said:

30k is a different animal -> it’s SM 24-7.

The problems with the current codex aren't because 40k doesn't focus on marines enough.

[Medjugorje]

4 hours ago, jaxom said:

I blame auras and not learning the lessons of AoS for this one.

 

A captain or lieutenant buff most units by about 14% increase in wounds done, or about 26% if they're both effecting the same unit. It's really easy to get a lot of units "within" 6 inches of a hero. So, who's paying for the increased efficiency? How many units should one assume will be buffed when determining points? What about when those units are buffing or being buffed? It's really easy to over cost units because of all this.

 

AoS changed most "within" auras to "wholly within" and that would do wonders for Space Marines. One buffed unit (or two smaller units) are a lot easier to account for in points cost of a character, and then the individual units wouldn't need an artificial point boost.

I would prefer more "chapter master" like buffs. More like "I (Chapter master XYZ) give you (one single unit) the order rerolls to hitrolls of 1  instead of an aura. Auras are good when it comes to morale, FnP etc...

[Medjugorje]

the main problem is that this buffincrease force you to play bubbles and rely too much on your characters which are too often just 6" footsloggers which are too easy for your opponent to deal with. There is no marine unit which can is good without buffs because GW have to balance with this state of their design. 

 

I would prefer space marines being good without any buffs and HQs are a unit for its own. I maen even Helbrecht with 8W and 2+4++ is dead when my opponent can target him. So I have to screen him and all the close combat power potential is wasted when you know you can use it one single time. Its okay for a buff character but I want to play Captains and eqivalents as "frontline commanders" and not as cowards.

 

I dont see that changing when looking to C:CSM. 

[tychobi]

Well this has descended into a Space Marine whine and cheese party!  How do folks feel about lore and rules matching for other factions?  

[DesuVult]

53 minutes ago, tychobi said:

Well this has descended into a Space Marine whine and cheese party!  How do folks feel about lore and rules matching for other factions?  

Necron rules are a hot mess.  In order to buff them they cut out some restrictions that they appear to have included for lore reasons.  Then left some exclusions to those restrictions being removed for balance reasons but caught a lot of dumb cases.  A necron overlord can give MWBD to a rare seraptek construct, the flayed ones it despises, canoptek wraiths of the crypteks, but not a canoptek doomstalker.

[Lord_Ikka]

1 hour ago, tychobi said:

Well this has descended into a Space Marine whine and cheese party!  How do folks feel about lore and rules matching for other factions?  

Well, it is a topic in the SM forum...

 

7 minutes ago, DesuVult said:

Necron rules are a hot mess.  In order to buff them they cut out some restrictions that they appear to have included for lore reasons.  Then left some exclusions to those restrictions being removed for balance reasons but caught a lot of dumb cases.  A necron overlord can give MWBD to a rare seraptek construct, the flayed ones it despises, canoptek wraiths of the crypteks, but not a canoptek doomstalker.

A lot of the issue is that the Necron codex was really written as an 8.5 codex and not a 9th edition codex. You can see the difference between it and the SM codex (where they were starting to figure out how they wanted 9th to play) in the more expansive CORE selections SM had compared to Necrons and in the less restrictive way SM doctrines work compared to initial Necron command protocols. It took a long time for Necrons to get good competitively (and a lot of CORE issuing/points deductions), and they still aren't really good if you take away their really easy completed secondaries. You're right in that from a fluff perspective, especially with the new fluff in the latest Necron novels, having Overlords interacting with Destroyers/Constructs doesn't really make sense- those should be for their own commanders like Destroyer Lords and Technomancers. 

[Medjugorje]

49 minutes ago, DesuVult said:

Necron rules are a hot mess.  In order to buff them they cut out some restrictions that they appear to have included for lore reasons.  Then left some exclusions to those restrictions being removed for balance reasons but caught a lot of dumb cases.  A necron overlord can give MWBD to a rare seraptek construct, the flayed ones it despises, canoptek wraiths of the crypteks, but not a canoptek doomstalker.

fully agree

 

its imo the worst codex in current state. Core to everything was a poor change and I thought it was good before (from lore perspective).  I think that codex is the only one which has way more problems then Marines.

Edited November 10, 2022 by Medjugorje

[jaxom]

34 minutes ago, Lord_Ikka said:

more expansive CORE selections SM had compared to Necrons and in the less restrictive way SM doctrines work compared to initial Necron command protocols. It took a long time for Necrons to get good competitively (and a lot of CORE issuing/points deductions), and they still aren't really good if you take away their really easy completed secondaries. You're right in that from a fluff perspective, especially with the new fluff in the latest Necron novels, having Overlords interacting with Destroyers/Constructs doesn't really make sense- those should be for their own commanders like Destroyer Lords and Technomancers. 

Because CORE was originally handed out based on who the design team wanted characters to hang out with and then they started handing it out as a way to boost flagging codexes.

[Lord_Ikka]

21 minutes ago, jaxom said:

Because CORE was originally handed out based on who the design team wanted characters to hang out with and then they started handing it out as a way to boost flagging codexes.

To be honest, giving CORE to almost everything in the Necron codex wasn't really something that made the faction decent (it does help, but aside from Overlord/SK buff there isn't a lot of CORE help for Necrons), the main help was the change to combat protocols and points reductions that got them above low-tier. To boost them to where they are now, that is due to their one really good sub-faction (Eternal Expansionists, with the pre-game move and everything is ObSec) and the very easy Necron secondaries in Nephilim. Without those secondaries (which are both easy to score and really boring to play/play against), Necrons are ok, but not one of the top four armies like they are now. And, as a Necron player, I really hope that the next GT pack changes our secondaries to something more interactive.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Personally the rule I dislike the most is how they treat artillery, or really any explosive type of weapon.

 

i don’t like the earthshaker being multiple shots.

 

one shot to represent the one round. I would then treat the explosive part as a sort of set number of additional hits at half strength. 
 

but generally I think rules do a poor job of representing lore.

Edited November 16, 2022 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Medjugorje]

11 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

Personally the rule I dislike the most is how they treat artillery, or really any explosive type of weapon.

 

i don’t like the earthshaker being multiple shots.

 

one shot to represent the one round. I would then treat the explosive part as a sort of set number of additional hits at half strength. 
 

but generally I think rules do a poor job of representing lore.

or maybe max one hit to each oppononet model in the targeted unit.