OPINION: chapter traits should still be a thing

[jaxom]

Meh, it's a very different conversation if we're going to talk about how to get GW to do anything. At the end of the day, if there's a passion for lore or narrative within a community, the old 'zine model is probably still the best model.

 

If we're still talking about "tournament acceptable" then I'd be a-okay with a special unit or two for each gene-line if they aren't or weren't a current unit+1 (or we end up with the problem many have already described) and that's hard to do when the Marine range already covers so many roles.

[SkimaskMohawk]

Guys, objectively the special chapters provide more options than just sticking with the vanilla options. You get an extra detachment and the enhancements and strats to go with, as well as extra units and characters to add to "conventional" builds. 

 

Will the extra detachments always be better? No. Will all the special units always be viable? Also no. But will you always have a better toolkit and list of options? Yes (with the outlier of running ultramarines, as their character support puts them in an in between state). 

 

It will always be better to take the space wolves, dark angels, templars, or blood angels if you want to do the scars detachment over pure vanilla. It will always be better to take black templars or blood angels for the salamander detachment over pure vanilla. It will always be better to go blood angels, dark angels, or templars for the iron hands detachment.

 

It's like in 5th when taking a special character could really force multiply your army; why not take "sicarius" for army wide ld10 and a buffed tactical squad with literally no trade offs? Or "Calgar" to unlock the full synergy of combat tactics and know no fear, again with literally no trade off?

 

All this is a very different topic to current winrates; space wolf players probably aren't interested in just running 85% vanilla stuff in gladius and teching in the most optimal space wolf stuff for the last 15% of the list. They want to use their special units in a way that makes them feel different still.

Edited October 3, 2023 by SkimaskMohawk

[Orange Knight]

Well, in the pure context of the chapters within the codex, the Ultramarines already have an advantage. The more divergent chapters with more unique units will have a grater advantage still.

 

Look at the White Scar inspired detachment, as an example. Is it better played with the White Scars keyword, or the Ultramarines keyword? 

 

100% Ultramarines because you get the White Scar rules, but you also get additional characters that provide utility and combat power that is ahead of what the Khan offers.

 

I am not going to claim that every unit that belongs to a divergent chapter is going to be better than a generic equivalent. They will, however, offer additional niches and options. If you play Dark Angels or Blood Angels or Space Wolves or Black Templars you aren't being asked to give anything up in order to unlock these additional niches and options. Having a bigger toolkit IS an advantage. 

 

Again, let's look at the White Scar style detachment. Now let's imagine that in the near future the Dark Angels get a new kit - Primaris Black Knights on Outrider bikes. Plasmas and Power weapons.

The Dark Angels will automatically be able to leverage this unit to make better use of the White Scar inspired rules than the White Scars themselves.

 

I suppose it's possible that all divergent units will be inferior to the vanilla options, but I doubt that will be the case. Even if they are perfectly balanced in terms of power when compared to the closest vanilla equivalent, simply having the additional option is an advantage as it unlocks additional methods to build lists and potentially subvert the meta.

[Dracos]

@Inquisitor_Lensoven You’re a rude individual aren’t you. Here’s a suggestion. Block me and my post won’t trigger you so much. 

Edited October 3, 2023 by Dracos

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

2 hours ago, SkimaskMohawk said:

Guys, objectively the special chapters provide more options than just sticking with the vanilla options. You get an extra detachment and the enhancements and strats to go with, as well as extra units and characters to add to "conventional" builds. 

 

Will the extra detachments always be better? No. Will all the special units always be viable? Also no. But will you always have a better toolkit and list of options? Yes (with the outlier of running ultramarines, as their character support puts them in an in between state). 

 

It will always be better to take the space wolves, dark angels, templars, or blood angels if you want to do the scars detachment over pure vanilla. It will always be better to take black templars or blood angels for the salamander detachment over pure vanilla. It will always be better to go blood angels, dark angels, or templars for the iron hands detachment.

 

It's like in 5th when taking a special character could really force multiply your army; why not take "sicarius" for army wide ld10 and a buffed tactical squad with literally no trade offs? Or "Calgar" to unlock the full synergy of combat tactics and know no fear, again with literally no trade off?

 

All this is a very different topic to current winrates; space wolf players probably aren't interested in just running 85% vanilla stuff in gladius and teching in the most optimal space wolf stuff for the last 15% of the list. They want to use their special units in a way that makes them feel different still.

No one is arguing the big 5 get extra options.

the question at hand do those extra options make them more competitive?

 

the answer is on average no. 

1 hour ago, Dracos said:

@Inquisitor_Lensoven You’re a rude individual aren’t you. Here’s a suggestion. Block me and my post won’t trigger you so much. 

Just tired of seeing you whine like a child 

“I want cool toys like them! Take theirs away since I don’t have any!”

[TheNicronomicon]

1 hour ago, Orange Knight said:

Again, let's look at the White Scar style detachment. Now let's imagine that in the near future the Dark Angels get a new kit

Lemme stop you right there—couldn’t we just as well imagine that in the near future the White Scars get a new kit? A bike unit that synergizes perfectly with their detachment rules for example. How is this taking away from any other chapter? Why would this be a terrible idea?

[Orange Knight]

4 hours ago, TheNicronomicon said:

Lemme stop you right there—couldn’t we just as well imagine that in the near future the White Scars get a new kit? A bike unit that synergizes perfectly with their detachment rules for example. How is this taking away from any other chapter? Why would this be a terrible idea?

 

I will post a video of me eating my hat if the White Scars receive more model support than the Dark Angels over the next 5 years.

[SkimaskMohawk]

7 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

No one is arguing the big 5 get extra options.

the question at hand do those extra options make them more competitive?

 

the answer is on average no. 

 

The answer is yes. 

 

For it to be no, the extra options need to all be worse than the basic vanilla options. It can't even be "just the same", because then it opens the door to getting around the limits of 3 (like how templars can get 6 lancers in a list). 

 

For as much as blood angel players here have complained about sanguinary guard sucking, and as many downvotes as blindhamster has spammed, nothing is changing the fact that death company with packs, lemartes, the death company dread, and the librarian dreadnought are all very unique units that are either better than their equivalents or have none.

 

I could go and list a single unit from each index that's better or allows for janky spam, but I really shouldn't have to spell it out to such an extent.

[Blindhamster]

I didn’t spam anything, I could if you want, I simply disagreed with some posts even slaps saying why I disagreed, is that not what it’s for?
 

How many of those options do you think will remain post update? I’ll be shocked if we keep death company as they are, I’d bet on them going to the same format as jump intercessors for pack versions. Similarly doubt we keep the dread types. It’s totally true they exist now though.

 

I do disagree that they need to be worse to not be better, because by definition, if they’re equivalent, they aren’t better.

 

but, you do make a really good and valid point on the rule of three, as a blood angel I could in theory run 3 vanguard veteran squads and 3 death company with jump pack units.

 

I personally never would, but it’s very true that it’s possible and possibly is a benefit if that rule of three you’re getting around is actually worth getting around (I used vanvet+deathcompany for the example because it’s the only obvious one I can see people doing with blood angels).

 

librarian dreadnought is an interesting one, the current version really isn’t all that, is it better than other dreadnought options? Not sure honestly, I’d rather use other ones myself, it has been in the past though, but again I’m fully expecting the kit to go when the blood angels get their update at some point this edition.

Edited October 3, 2023 by Blindhamster

[SkimaskMohawk]

34 minutes ago, Blindhamster said:

How many of those options do you think will remain post update? I’ll be shocked if we keep death company as they are, I’d bet on them going to the same format as jump intercessors for pack versions. Similarly doubt we keep the dread types. It’s totally true they exist now though.

 

I'm not speculating on potential changes. There's literally no way to have a good faith discussion about the state of vanilla and divergent marines if we're mixing in guesses about unknown updates at unknown times.

 

51 minutes ago, Blindhamster said:

I do disagree that they need to be worse to not be better, because by definition, if they’re equivalent, they aren’t better.

 

but, you do make a really good and valid point on the rule of three, as a blood angel I could in theory run 3 vanguard veteran squads and 3 death company with jump pack units.

 

I personally never would, but it’s very true that it’s possible and possibly is a benefit if that rule of three you’re getting around is actually worth getting around (I used vanvet+deathcompany for the example because it’s the only obvious one I can see people doing with blood angels).

 

Ya the entirety of my point is that you can break the rule of three/six if the special unit is equally as good as the default.

 

1 hour ago, Blindhamster said:

librarian dreadnought is an interesting one, the current version really isn’t all that, is it better than other dreadnought options? Not sure honestly, I’d rather use other ones myself, it has been in the past though, but again I’m fully expecting the kit to go when the blood angels get their update at some point this edition.

 

Teleporting something up the board always seems good, whether it's to get secondaries, secure primaries, or set up a charge with a unit that can get a bonus/reroll. 

[Karhedron]

2 hours ago, SkimaskMohawk said:

For as much as blood angel players here have complained about sanguinary guard sucking, and as many downvotes as blindhamster has spammed, nothing is changing the fact that death company with packs, lemartes, the death company dread, and the librarian dreadnought are all very unique units that are either better than their equivalents or have none.

 

But are they better in one of the Codex Detachments than a Sons of Sanguinius Detachment? The DC units mostly want to be hitting stuff in melee where the SoS +1S on the charge is a nice bonus to have. Stormlance might get them into combat faster but at the loss of that extra pip of strength. Firestorm may let them pull off neat tricks with massed hand flamers but it costs 2CPs to pop and again they lose out on the +1S. At best the extra Detachments seem like side-grades for BAs. Yes it gives them more options but I don't see it increasing their win-rate.

 

Libby Dread is an interesting one. The ability to yeet infantry squads across the board can be fun, especially on the first turn or two but by Turn 3, most squads could get where they wanted to be anyway.

[SkimaskMohawk]

3 minutes ago, Karhedron said:

 

But are they better in one of the Codex Detachments than a Sons of Sanguinius Detachment? The DC units mostly want to be hitting stuff in melee where the SoS +1S on the charge is a nice bonus to have. Stormlance might get them into combat faster but at the loss of that extra pip of strength. Firestorm may let them pull off neat tricks with massed hand flamers but it costs 2CPs to pop and again they lose out on the +1S. At best the extra Detachments seem like side-grades for BAs. Yes it gives them more options but I don't see it increasing their win-rate.

 

Libby Dread is an interesting one. The ability to yeet infantry squads across the board can be fun, especially on the first turn or two but by Turn 3, most squads could get where they wanted to be anyway.

 

Thats not really relevant to the point though? The whole discussion revolves around the question of whether having more units and options available gives you an advantage over the baseline, and are those special units better than what's commonly available.

 

It really doesn't matter if death company are better in Sons of Sanguinis compared to Gladius or stormlance. What matters is whether they're better than vanguard vets, the vanilla equivalent option. And broadly speaking, they are; they're more reliable at charging, they have way more ranged and melee output, and their durability is better or almost as good up until ap3. 

 

The Libby dread is useful because you don't need to wait until turn 3 to get places. You can score secondaries and control primaries way faster, on top of slingshotting units into melee way faster.

[Brother Tyler]

First, an official note:

 

=][=

 

I've just issued an official warning to one participant in this discussion for their abusive treatment of others. This is not that member's first warning for that type of behavior, so it came with consequences (7-day ban, loss of achievement points to reduce their rank).

 

It is okay to disagree with other members of the community. It is also okay to dispute facts/opinions. What's not okay is treating others disrespectfully when you disagree with them or are disputing their facts/opinions. If you can't phrase your disagreement/disputation respectfully in a post, either don't submit the post or wait until you can phrase it respectfully.

 

Note that the posts of the member that received the warning have not been edited or hidden. They have been dealt with, however, and it is expected that everyone else will rise above the disrespect in those posts.

 

=][=

 

And now with our regularly scheduled programming...

 

Personally, I'm not a fan of Chapter flavor being depicted via the detachment. It seems far too limiting and grossly inconsistent with the well-established lore (even when that lore can be somewhat malleable). In my opinion, Chapter flavor should be applicable regardless of the detachment.

 

I think that Games Workshop has failed to manage expectations, making the sub-factions far too distinctive and unnecessarily overcomplicating the game. This started in 3rd edition when the Index Astartes articles often provided rules for Chapters simply for the sake of making them different. Games Workshop dialed things back a bit in 4th edition, but things have varied from edition to edition. The 4th edition Chapter Traits included drawbacks, but those were such that they rarely offered any real disadvantage to players - players simply chose the drawback(s) that had the least (usually no) effect on them based on their army composition. In subsequent editions, sub-faction rules have usually focused on deriving a result that was better than the baseline without any serious drawbacks. Overall, I think that the baseline Space Marine codex, with the Ultramarines serving as the exemplars, should be sufficient to represent the majority of Chapters (with some level of distinctiveness allowed via a few special characters and units). Where there are differences, those differences should be distinctive, but small. Those differences might give Chapters small advantages here and there, but the aggregate of those differences should be both advantages and disadvantages that largely even out. So while a Chapter's advantages might make them better in certain circumstances, the attendant disadvantages should make them worse in others, with the overall result being that they are largely comparable to the baseline. Advantages/disadvantages conferred via detachments fail to allow for those differences, instead shoehorning all Chapters into certain outcomes based on their force composition.

 

The converse of all of this, of course, is marketing. Games Workshop has conferred advantages on certain Chapters because those advantages promote sales. While the business advantages of this are obvious, that doesn't change the fact that this goes against one of the attractions of the game - that of allowing players to make it their own and to utilize their own bespoke forces on the tabletop. It's fine for those players that really want to use one of the major Chapters, but puts players that want to use other Chapters at a disadvantage.

 

Personally, I'm not sure what the future holds for the Space Marines in 10th edition. The current detachment rules mechanism may or may not be changed later (or we may have to wait for a later edition). Regardless, I'll make the best I can with whatever Games Workshop provides, using the rules to best represent whatever Chapter I'm collecting (and that will likely remain the Imperial Fists, Black Templars, Grey Knights, Exorcists, Fire Claws, Nova Hawks, and Legio). And if I decide that the rules don't work for what I want to do and I'm in an environment where I can tweak things, I'll work on homegrown rules as a solution. And there are always other factions (the Aeldari, especially the Corsairs, being my absolute favorite) to choose from if I hanker for some other style of play.

 

Ultimately, it's just a game so I'm not going to let my disagreement with the rules get in the way of having a good time.

[WrathOfTheLion]

I tend to agree that Chapter traits should be available regardless of detachment, but I see where GW is coming at it as well. From simple (I say simple, but it's combinatorics :/) math, if they have (x) traits and (y) detachments, then each trait can be in each detachment giving (x * y) options. Add further the unit rosters, and make those (z), you get (x * y * z) possibilities you have to balance.

 

Adding a variable in there very quickly compounds into large possibilities, but also very large room for unexpected behavior in game.

 

Not saying necessarily that I agree with it, but that's almost certainly the line of thought they're giving this and where they're coming from.

[Dracos]

15 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

No one is arguing the big 5 get extra options.

the question at hand do those extra options make them more competitive?

 

the answer is on average no. 

Just tired of seeing you whine like a child 

“I want cool toys like them! Take theirs away since I don’t have any!”

Never once have I ever suggested to take anything away from anyone  … please point out where I explicitly said such a thing. I’ve only said it gives them advantages and needs to be balanced.

 

That could be by taking units away that don’t suit that play style … which is not the same thing as taking away their cool toys … or some other mechanism. Get your facts straight. 

Edited October 3, 2023 by Dracos

[Blindhamster]

41 minutes ago, Dracos said:

That could be by taking units away that don’t suit that play style … which is not the same thing as taking away their cool toys … or some other mechanism. Get your facts straight. 

Thing is, this isn’t balance or anything at that point, as you’re taking away the options that probably don’t really get used anyway.

 

which is kind of the point. If you take away the units blood angels (for example) didn’t have before it would be:

- ironclad (gone now anyway)

- thunderfire cannon (gone now anyway)

- centurions (disliked by most anyway, I’ve almost never seen blood angel ones even since they got access)

- venerable dread (gone now anyway)

- storm talon/hawk (kind of a shame but rarely seen anyway)

- hunter (gone now anyway)

- stalker (gone now anyway)

 

so… no real impact at all, and they aren’t likely to drop any of the primaris units. 
 

removing units that don’t really get used is  a placebo thing at most… it would probably have to be one in-one out from some other angle. But that gets awkward because (for example) blood angels had veteran assault marines before anyone else did, and that’s the closest comparison to death company these days.

 

I know skrimshaw doesn’t want to talk about what the future will hold, but frankly the status quo for now is a temporary thing and I’m more interested in the future when we start to see divergent chapters codexes. I’m fairly confident blood angels will eventually lose:

- death company (replaced with jump death company intercessors)

- death company dread (maybe replaced with a variant brutalis if blood angels are lucky, but I suspect not)

- librarian dread (no replacement)

- furioso (there’s the brutalis now)

- I think tycho will officially be dropped

I imagine the baal is safe because the other predators were, but could be wrong. Similarly I imagine sanguinary priest is okay too.

 

I’m still interested to see if we end up seeing a return to totally separate codexes personally (which would facilitate the ability for them to cut some units from the chapters if they want I guess)

[DemonGSides]

Plus it ignores that both BT and SW have lost access to units in the CURRENT edition.

 

Just cuz BA, who are mostly codex compliant, don't lose half a roster doesn't mean they're suddenly better. Gotta actually have good rules. Plus if they're that much better... just run your salamanders as Blood Angels and call sanguinary guard "Dragon Guard" or something and call your mephiston "Vel'Cona" or whatever. Literally no one will care, and you'll get to feel special too!

[Dracos]

42 minutes ago, Blindhamster said:

Thing is, this isn’t balance or anything at that point, as you’re taking away the options that probably don’t really get used anyway.

 

which is kind of the point. If you take away the units blood angels (for example) didn’t have before it would be:

- ironclad (gone now anyway)

- thunderfire cannon (gone now anyway)

- centurions (disliked by most anyway, I’ve almost never seen blood angel ones even since they got access)

- venerable dread (gone now anyway)

- storm talon/hawk (kind of a shame but rarely seen anyway)

- hunter (gone now anyway)

- stalker (gone now anyway)

 

so… no real impact at all, and they aren’t likely to drop any of the primaris units. 
 

removing units that don’t really get used is  a placebo thing at most… it would probably have to be one in-one out from some other angle. But that gets awkward because (for example) blood angels had veteran assault marines before anyone else did, and that’s the closest comparison to death company these days.

 

I know skrimshaw doesn’t want to talk about what the future will hold, but frankly the status quo for now is a temporary thing and I’m more interested in the future when we start to see divergent chapters codexes. I’m fairly confident blood angels will eventually lose:

- death company (replaced with jump death company intercessors)

- death company dread (maybe replaced with a variant brutalis if blood angels are lucky, but I suspect not)

- librarian dread (no replacement)

- furioso (there’s the brutalis now)

- I think tycho will officially be dropped

I imagine the baal is safe because the other predators were, but could be wrong. Similarly I imagine sanguinary priest is okay too.

 

I’m still interested to see if we end up seeing a return to totally separate codexes personally (which would facilitate the ability for them to cut some units from the chapters if they want I guess)

 To be fair … I did say “or some other mechanic” also. 

So for arguments sake let’s say Death Company and or Sanguinary Guard are “merely” as good as good as the Vanilla counterparts this breaking the Rule of 3.

 

What would you consider an appropriate counterbalance? Same could be asked of Deathwing?

 

An obvious balance would be to eliminate the Vanilla counterpart. I personally don’t like that answer. I like seeing armies that lean into one aspect.

 

I don’t mind if something is taken away that that army likely wasn’t going to use anyway for the same reason and when metas shift one trick ponies often go from dude to stud and back again. 
 

I don’t pretend to have the answers of how to balance and again I don’t expect perfect reciprocation, just at the least a token effort. 
 

[Dracos]

51 minutes ago, DemonGSides said:

... just run your salamanders as Blood Angels and call sanguinary guard "Dragon Guard" or something and call your mephiston "Vel'Cona" or whatever. Literally no one will care, and you'll get to feel special too!

^This^ is the thinking that makes me cring. Not because I think it’s a bad idea, but because of the decades of listening to those in the community whine and complain about “meta” players who original color scheme is only an excuse to shift with the meta. Early in the aughts and tens I heard that more than a couple times around here and other websites. 
 

Sorry man triggered old memories there. Personally I think pink Deathwing or lime Sanguinius are just fine. It’s your models do what you like.

[Blindhamster]

21 minutes ago, Dracos said:

 To be fair … I did say “or some other mechanic” also. 

So for arguments sake let’s say Death Company and or Sanguinary Guard are “merely” as good as good as the Vanilla counterparts this breaking the Rule of 3.

 

What would you consider an appropriate counterbalance? Same could be asked of Deathwing?

 

An obvious balance would be to eliminate the Vanilla counterpart. I personally don’t like that answer. I like seeing armies that lean into one aspect.

 

I don’t mind if something is taken away that that army likely wasn’t going to use anyway for the same reason and when metas shift one trick ponies often go from dude to stud and back again. 
 

I don’t pretend to have the answers of how to balance and again I don’t expect perfect reciprocation, just at the least a token effort. 
 

that’s the issue, the only way you could really “balance” it would be to take away the equivalent. But that makes no sense in some cases (as mentioned, if blood angels lost access to vanguard vets it would be all kinds of weird seeing as they are literally where the unit originated)

 

but again, I don’t necessarily think there’s an issue in the first place (this edition) personally.

 

the rule of three thing is a reasonable point, but I also can’t say I’ve noticed armies running 3 units of death company and 3 units of vanguard (though I’m sure some have ran 2 of each).

 

but it’s not like running the above 4 units is more powerful than running other codex combinations necessarily 

 

 

[DemonGSides]

34 minutes ago, Dracos said:

^This^ is the thinking that makes me cring. Not because I think it’s a bad idea, but because of the decades of listening to those in the community whine and complain about “meta” players who original color scheme is only an excuse to shift with the meta. Early in the aughts and tens I heard that more than a couple times around here and other websites. 
 

Sorry man triggered old memories there. Personally I think pink Deathwing or lime Sanguinius are just fine. It’s your models do what you like.

 

I mean this with all the niceness possible, but I don't care at all about what you've heard historically.  You're searching for a problem, I found a solution for a completely made up problem (Because I'm not telling you to shift metas, I'm telling you to just pick the rules you like, paint your dudes your way and use the rules that make most sense), and now you're telling me you've got PTSD because of a suggestion?

C'mon man.

[jaxom]

The upside of getting around the rule of three is that it side-steps the  "X should be battleline in Y detachment" issue. Blood Angels can field more jump pack troops because their special units are primarily jump pack troops. Dark Angels can field more Terminator equipped and bike equipped units. There's an opportunity cost to doing so, because one doesn't have an infinite number of points to spend.

 

Assume every unit has perfect balance and points cost, and there's still a problem. As exemplified by the current Aeldari, the game rewards specific playstyles through the core rules and mission designs. This edition rewards mobile shooting. There's been an ebb and flow to this over years and editions; it's a moving target. In that regard, there will always be haves and haves-nots.

 

[Dracos]

3 hours ago, DemonGSides said:

 

I mean this with all the niceness possible, but I don't care at all about what you've heard historically.  You're searching for a problem, I found a solution for a completely made up problem (Because I'm not telling you to shift metas, I'm telling you to just pick the rules you like, paint your dudes your way and use the rules that make most sense), and now you're telling me you've got PTSD because of a suggestion?

C'mon man.

 

You saw the part where I said it wasn't a bad idea right? 

 

I don't know how old you are but for 30+ years that's been pretty much the only answer. It's a long time to basically be accused of being a scummy win at all cost player by our "friends" here and elsewhere for having an original color scheme. Luckily the environment here and at flgs has gotten (mostly) better. Mostly

[DemonGSides]

23 minutes ago, Dracos said:

 

You saw the part where I said it wasn't a bad idea right? 

 

I don't know how old you are but for 30+ years that's been pretty much the only answer. It's a long time to basically be accused of being a scummy win at all cost player by our "friends" here and elsewhere for having an original color scheme. Luckily the environment here and at flgs has gotten (mostly) better. Mostly

Nevermind, it's not worth it.

I suggest moving past the past.  Just gonna keep ya miserable if you keep reliving it.

Edited October 4, 2023 by DemonGSides

[SkimaskMohawk]

6 hours ago, DemonGSides said:

Plus it ignores that both BT and SW have lost access to units in the CURRENT edition.

 

Just cuz BA, who are mostly codex compliant, don't lose half a roster doesn't mean they're suddenly better. Gotta actually have good rules. Plus if they're that much better... just run your salamanders as Blood Angels and call sanguinary guard "Dragon Guard" or something and call your mephiston "Vel'Cona" or whatever. Literally no one will care, and you'll get to feel special too!

 

They lose access to units if you take their detachments. 

 

But, if you take any of the 6 detachments that are available to the vanilla marines, you don't. Not much else to say about that; you can really handicap yourself with space wolves or you can play the white scar detachment, losing no units, and getting way more benefit from it than vanilla marines. 

 

And ya, the solution to marines+1 has always been counts as the chapter that has the better rules (when allowed, pretty sure gw tournament circuits ban that particular move). It's also always been maligned at worse and generated grumbling at best, and is a sad commentary when the best solution to rules creating marines+1 is "just pretend to be them too, idk".