Further to a similar discussion occurring in another thread, I would like to float a possible solution that should:

keep the cost of an air-assault-oriented force roughly the same (could end up slightly more expensive for those who make heavy use of air transports), and
make "mud marine" lists more effective, and thereby feasible as a competitive force

I am floating the following changes to the Codex Marines army list:

-25pts per Marines infantry detachment (to make Marine infantry in Rhinos more appealing)

+25pts for a detachment to take Drop Pods (to bring infantry detachments in drop pods back up to the current cost)

+50pts per Thunderhawk (to bring the cost of the standard two-detachments-in-a-Thunderhawk taskforce back up to the current cost)

+100pts per Landing Craft (to bring the three-infantry-detachments-in-a-Landing-Craft taskforce back up to the current cost--will be slightly out, depending on what the player chooses to take)

-25pts per Predator Annihilator detachment (to make Marine armour more appealing)

-50pts per Predator Destructor detachment (to make Predator Destructors worth considering)

-25pts per Land Raider detachment (to make Land Raiders more appealing)

-25pts per Dreadnaught upgrade (to make Dreadnaughts appealing--at all, let alone "more")

-25pts per Vindicator detachment, and increase their speed to be consistent with other Rhino chassis-based units (to make Marine armour more appealing)

Note that I do not advocate reducing the cost of a Vindicator upgrade.

Let me know your thoughts on the list above. Do you agree that these changes would enable Marine players to field their current air-assault lists at roughly the same points cost? Do you agree that a "ground pounder" Marine list is more appealing with these changes? Looking forward to reading your comments.

I will play-test these changes with my local group (testing infantry- and armour-based forces, as well as air-assault and mixed forces) as soon as I can to see how it plays; but, I would, of course, be grateful to any other players who might test these changes to let me know if I've achieved by stated goals.  

Hi, mate. Thanks for the feedback.



True. Also more expensive if used without any Tacs, Devs or Assault troops. When used with dual formations or Tacs with a Dread, the cost should be comparable with now (unless my math is wildly off--definitely possible; I became a writer for a reason).  

Your thoughts?



Agreed. My thinking is that, because that "couple of ways" you mentioned are Drop Pods or air transport, increasing the cost of the Drop Pods and air transport options countered the reduction in the Dreads, thereby making an air-assault force roughly equal in cost under either system. Your thoughts?



I'll disagree with you there. To my mind, what makes Orks and Nids a "horde army" is the size of their formations. In terms of the blast marker mechanics, Marine formations are kept small to avoid them being overly solid. They're already quite solid at 6-9 units in a Tac formation--if that was expanded to 12-18 units, then I would agree they were becoming horde-like. What do you think?



Apologies, but it's not clear to me what you mean by that--I didn't adjust the Terminator cost, so that formation's pros and cons should be pretty much the same for an air-assault list. Can you clarify?



I agree that these changes have little impact on firepower, except of course that if the points reductions generally provide for fielding a greater number of upgrades (if not entire detachments--only likely in larger games). My intention was not to modify the Marines battlefield impact, but rather simply to make fielding a non-air-assault-oriented force a competitive option.  



True. And, indeed, this is something I had hoped to achieve--I in no way want to stop Marines players from taking an air-assault-oriented force, just to provide a competitive alternative (currently, it seems there isn't one; it's Death From Above or bust).  



Like the other Marine armour formations, Vindicator detachments are, to my mind, too expensive. Making the detachment that little bit cheaper increases their appeal for a armour-oriented force. With regard to Vindicator upgrades, by the way, I think they are already useful enough (bolstering armour formations, making them less fragile) at their current cost.

Comments?

Thanks again for your help.  

I'm a little bemused by some of the comments decrying Marine cost and list one-sidedness. I'm no EpicA expert by a long stretch, but one thing I have learned from Epic and other wargames (and war history for that matter) is that you play to your army's strength(s) and your opponent's weaknesses.

In the case of marines, that means hard hitting pinpoint assaults of your choosing with seriously durable units, followed up by some ground forces to hold ground. Trying to play them as a shooty IG-like army against a horde is simply negating all those advantages and handing them to your opponent. I wouldn't play a non-air assault marine army any more than I would an assault only IG or guardian + Banshee only footslogging Eldar

I also think the Marine list is reasonably flexible in terms of unit composition - not as much as IG obviously (with all its many bells and whistles) but more so than Eldar for example (I mean, the only way I can take a SC with Ulthwe is as a 300pt guardian formation!). Besides, it's supposed to be relatively rigid, it's the Marines remember (ultra conservative superhumans and all that)    

_________________
numquam culum es

Lists that are overly air assault don't work. The best option seems generally to be 2 thunderhawks loaded for air assaults - with possibly a third to try and recycle the assault.
Any more than that and the army loses effectiveness - it becomes difficult to suppress flak pre-assault, you and up having to bring the air assult on too early - when your opponent still has activations left to hit the landed troops afterwards and the army becomes a sitting duck after turn 1 as the assaults have come in and now have minimal movement.

Lists that have featured more than 2 air assaults (maybe a 3rd small one or a recycling thawk) or have combined air assaults with drop pods for all out assault have tended to be even less effective than ground based marines. Any experienced opponent will just dig in turn 1 and once that is survived then the marines have lost.

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

This argument fascinates me. Where do you draw the line of 'Death From Above'? One Thunderhawk, two or more? Since the list isn't meant to remove the T'hawks completely how does it actually remove it? I see plenty of lists with one or two T'hawks currently. They give that one alpha strike ability that Marines lack otherwise.

But why would you want people to do that? - that is how SM fight.

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

Lists that are overly air assault don't work.

What points was that at with 2 reavers? I would add that air assaulting has also become less effective now for a few reasons
- CAP is now more effective with the new air rules
- the ability to garrison on overwatch
- practice - players are now useing scout screens to disrupt where the assaults can take place  - this affects air assaults but majorly disrupts droppod armies

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

I disagree.

A Space Marines chapter is a standing army, and supposedly self-sufficient. This would require a Chapter to be capable of fielding a balanced combined arms force.

I would argue that the way Marines fight, their combat doctrine, is that of a modern army. They aim to keep the enemy off-balance by maintaining the initiative and pressuring the enemy.

The reason GW made the Marines play the way they do is for game mechanics reasons only.

What points was that at with 2 reavers?

But all those factors do limit the effectiveness of the air assault and if the Marines do not land a hammer blow with their air assaults in turn 1 then they will have great difficulty in winning
Air assaults are, without doubt, the most effective way of playing marines but , like most over armies+unit choices in epic, maxing out on them is not as effective as a balanced force of thunderhawk assaults, ground holding formations, scouts and variety in a list

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion