Should points increase across the board in 11th?

[kabaakaba]

Use lictors reveners hive guards. If you just add 1 unit of half a range  you already get 3000++ army.

I don't agreed for example for 65 point a for cadians squad. Termagaunts overshoot and outmaneuver them easely. Hormagaunts just rip them apart. Cadians should be 45-50 as the best. 

I'm agreed intercessors should be at least 100 for 5. But entire sm army should be re-priced

Edited February 6 by kabaakaba

[Karhedron]

Space Wolves can do horde Marines surprisingly well. 1560 points will get you 120 Blood Claws. That is 240 T4 3+ wounds to chew through! You can just drown most enemies in bodies and you still have over 400 points for a couple of characters to lead them and some anti-tank. 

[kabaakaba]

9 minutes ago, Karhedron said:

Space Wolves can do horde Marines surprisingly well. 1560 points will get you 120 Blood Claws. That is 240 T4 3+ wounds to chew through! You can just drown most enemies in bodies and you still have over 400 points for a couple of characters to lead them and some anti-tank. 

That's terrible to be honest. I prefer some balance with battleline/elite/vehicle. 

And yeah, this is point of this topic. Marine battleline are too cheap. For same price I can bring 250 t3 5+ wounds + some plasma and meltas and that's ain't right. Cause my IG flood have no chance against sm flood. Technically I can overscore them since while they chew first 150 bodies I can score with 100 more. But it's dond change fact that sm battleline should cost more

Edited February 6 by kabaakaba

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

9 hours ago, kabaakaba said:

Tbh I like the fact armies grew larger. It's at least stoped to look like it's a skirmish. We don't need bigger points we need larger tables. 

Yeah it’s a skirmish game makes sense for it to look like a skirmish.

[Karhedron]

11 hours ago, kabaakaba said:

Marine battleline are too cheap. For same price I can bring 250 t3 5+ wounds + some plasma and meltas and that's ain't right. Cause my IG flood have no chance against sm flood. Technically I can overscore them since while they chew first 150 bodies I can score with 100 more. But it's dond change fact that sm battleline should cost more

 

It is not just raw stats though. Blood Claw horde has not made a dent on the tournament scene and competitive lists rarely take more than 1 or 2 battleline squads. If they were really too cheap, you would expect to see people taking them far more than they do. In fact, GW had to release the Battleline-centric Bastion Detachment before Christmas to try and make these units more appealing. 

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

On 2/6/2026 at 11:42 AM, gaurdian31 said:

To me horde is different then infantry heavy. I mean I don't want 100 marines on the field if I decide I don't want to take 15 tanks. If I am playing Tyranids having 100 infantry models makes sense. 5 squads of 5 man intercessors squads feel like they should be more than 400 points. I know that a base intercessor is 16 as a 5 man is 80 points, but I think that 16 is where they should start without equipment and they should be more like 18 to 20 points per model. They don't really feel like the Imperium's elite. A 5 squads of 10 termagaunts is 300 points and honestly that feels like they should be more too. Again I know they are roughly 6 points per model as 10 man squad is 60 but they should be more like 8 to 10 with weapons. They do feel appropriately like cannon fodder as I can have more for the horde. Hopefully that makes things a little clearer.

 

I think you would have to boost gaunts to have the same proportional increase make sense, and if the ratio doesn't change then why not just play smaller games? I will admit that I like marines being more than twice as expensive as a fodder, so I'm hesitant to want the game to move in that direction. I tend to want a bunch of formats to feel supported like how if you play the magic the gathering. They have constructed (standard, modern, legacy, Commander, brawl, pauper, etc) and limited (sealed, draft, two headed giant), and with how expensive 40k is I want that level of choice.

 

11 hours ago, Karhedron said:

 

It is not just raw stats though. Blood Claw horde has not made a dent on the tournament scene and competitive lists rarely take more than 1 or 2 battleline squads. If they were really too cheap, you would expect to see people taking them far more than they do. In fact, GW had to release the Battleline-centric Bastion Detachment before Christmas to try and make these units more appealing. 

 

Yeah, battleline isn't very popular in competitive lists, and Bastion really hasn't accomplished much but that was what it was attempting to do. I tried it a couple of times with my wolves, and while I liked it, I wouldn't run blood claws or grey hunters in it if I decided it was the best fit for me. In a weird way it's part of why the old FOC is appealing to me, they don't seem willing to make troops relevant, and I want to see them again even if its just cause of the old troop tax.

[Karhedron]

8 hours ago, Jorin Helm-splitter said:

In a weird way it's part of why the old FOC is appealing to me, they don't seem willing to make troops relevant, and I want to see them again even if its just cause of the old troop tax.

 

I would like to see Battleline become more relevant again but I just feel mandatory units are the worst way to do it. Firstly it is unfair to armies that have poor Battleline units and secondly because it then provides no incentive for GW to improve Battleline. I would like to see Battleline fixed by making them worth taking.

 

Part of the problem with 40k is that GW tend to overprice generalists and undercost specialists. One solution might be to make most non-Battline units OC0. They would still be good at killing the enemy but rubbish at holding Objectives or completing mission actions because that is not their role. You could then boost some underperforming elites like Terminators and Dire Avengers by giving them OC1 as they are generalists and would give them something to do.

[DemonGSides]

7 hours ago, Karhedron said:

 

I would like to see Battleline become more relevant again but I just feel mandatory units are the worst way to do it. Firstly it is unfair to armies that have poor Battleline units and secondly because it then provides no incentive for GW to improve Battleline. I would like to see Battleline fixed by making them worth taking.

 

Part of the problem with 40k is that GW tend to overprice generalists and undercost specialists. One solution might be to make most non-Battline units OC0. They would still be good at killing the enemy but rubbish at holding Objectives or completing mission actions because that is not their role. You could then boost some underperforming elites like Terminators and Dire Avengers by giving them OC1 as they are generalists and would give them something to do.

 

I like the OC idea.  Something like Bladeguard could get OC1, but something like Assault Terminators would have 0; they're there to clear the point, someone else's job is to hold it; maybe they'd even have a rule where they get OC only for the follow-up scoring phase from when they charged, so you can charge, clear, and take a point, but they're disincentivzed to just stand there and hold it.  That type of theming around the OC stat would be cool, but is probably messy on the larger scale.

Edited February 8 by DemonGSides

[Dr. Clock]

9 hours ago, Karhedron said:

Battleline fixed by making them worth taking.

I still take Battleline. Not as many as back in the days when they were the only proper scoring units, but I still definitely take at least 2 in most lists. 

 

10 hours ago, Karhedron said:

One solution might be to make most non-Battline units OC0. They would still be good at killing the enemy but rubbish at holding Objectives or completing mission actions because that is not their role. You could then boost some underperforming elites like Terminators and Dire Avengers by giving them OC1 as they are generalists and would give them something to do.

I think definitely putting an OC0 on some stuff, but I'd also be wary of taking most OC out of the non-Battleline units... Maybe more like half of units non-Battleline should be OC0, and like a line vehicle should be 1 and a heavy vehicle 2. That'll put Battleline at 2 OC per guy in a decent spot, and then I'd also suggest letting them perform Actions without any of the restrictions on shooting or movement or even falling back. They are meant to be utility and I'd be alot more likely to try and spread marine combat squads around if they could do the button pushing while still taking part in the battle... 

 

Cheers,

 

The Good Doctor.

[kabaakaba]

18 hours ago, Dr. Clock said:

I still take Battleline. Not as many as back in the days when they were the only proper scoring units, but I still definitely take at least 2 in most lists. 

 

I think definitely putting an OC0 on some stuff, but I'd also be wary of taking most OC out of the non-Battleline units... Maybe more like half of units non-Battleline should be OC0, and like a line vehicle should be 1 and a heavy vehicle 2. That'll put Battleline at 2 OC per guy in a decent spot, and then I'd also suggest letting them perform Actions without any of the restrictions on shooting or movement or even falling back. They are meant to be utility and I'd be alot more likely to try and spread marine combat squads around if they could do the button pushing while still taking part in the battle... 

 

Cheers,

 

The Good Doctor.

Making them main action units is a great idea. Cause it's really make them important to have.

[gaurdian31]

On 2/6/2026 at 5:23 PM, kabaakaba said:

Use lictors reveners hive guards. If you just add 1 unit of half a range  you already get 3000++ army.

I don't agreed for example for 65 point a for cadians squad. Termagaunts overshoot and outmaneuver them easely. Hormagaunts just rip them apart. Cadians should be 45-50 as the best. 

I'm agreed intercessors should be at least 100 for 5. But entire sm army should be re-priced

Apologies, I guess I am bad at making my point. Basically I want elite armies to feel elite and horde armies to be hordes. Right now it feels like all armies are hordes with how low the points are. If the points are raised on the elite armies they will need rules to reflect that too. 

[kabaakaba]

I'm trying to build two armies to play my silly solohammer. One ig horde infantry regiment with minimum vehicles(except sentinels) and second elite/monster Tyranids vanguard invaders themed army.  And I'm agrees that points for many units feels a bit too low. But in same time points too high for cadians for example. Yeah, they have sticky and some special weapons. But the  moment the reveners brood reach them there's nothing cadians can do. And their shooting don't do enough damage to remove threat. 

[jaxom]

On 2/7/2026 at 6:32 PM, Jorin Helm-splitter said:

Yeah, battleline isn't very popular in competitive lists, and Bastion really hasn't accomplished much but that was what it was attempting to do. I tried it a couple of times with my wolves, and while I liked it, I wouldn't run blood claws or grey hunters in it if I decided it was the best fit for me.

I've run Bastion using a mix of Intercessors, Heavy Intercessors and Assault Intercessors, primarily at 1000 points. The +1 to Wound from Codex Oath of Moment made for some silliness against a lot of target types. The hardest thing I've had to deal with is Custodes because of high volume of D2 weapon profiles that are efficient into both Tacticus and Gravis.

 

I think gauging appropriate points cost is quite difficult at the moment. Detachment rule, optimising combinations between units, correct application of stratagems can drastically change how offensive/defensive a unit can be.

 

Though I do think it is silly a Company of Space Marines is between 2300 and 2800 points depending on unit composition (e.g. Hellblaster Squad vs Desolator Squad for a Fire Support slot.

 

 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

The problem with with ‘improving’ battleline units is that puts everything else in a weird place. They’re supposed to be the most basic troops, so if they’re too good it just doesn’t feel right to me.

[Karhedron]

4 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

The problem with with ‘improving’ battleline units is that puts everything else in a weird place. They’re supposed to be the most basic troops, so if they’re too good it just doesn’t feel right to me.

 

I think this is where GW goes wrong in that they make Battleline the least powerful units. Battleline should not be chaff or paperweights (at least not in MEQ armies). They are meant to be flexible all-rounders capable of doing any job. Specialists may be able to do their 1 job better but should be worse in all other areas. But elite units are never worse than Battleline at anything (except perhaps shooting for melee units) so we are in a weird situation where GW's heroic design paradigm renders standard infantry undesirable.

 

It should be the case that the default solution for any Battlefield task should come from Battleline units. Only when you have a special problem to crack should you be calling in Elite/Heavy/Fast units. But it is not in GW's interest to do that because selling a wide variety of specialist units is better for business so they need ways to make those cool units exciting and desirable.