Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 5 of 5
  [ 74 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Where do marines stand?
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Where do marines stand?
PostPosted: Sat Oct 14, 2006 3:45 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire

(BlackLegion @ Oct. 14 2006,15:41)
QUOTE
If the SpaceMarines Armylist in the rulebook is an air-assault force list...then why don't you invent an armylist for ground operations?

Well because by all appearances the Marine list in the book is supposed to be a general operations list... it's just that whoever balanced the points costs / stats made a third of the units not worth taking, and another third only worth it if you take an air assault list.

It's not an air assault list, it's just that air assault is the only build that actually works. :)

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
BlackLegion
 Post subject: Where do marines stand?
PostPosted: Sat Oct 14, 2006 3:59 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:13 am
Posts: 8711
Location: Leipzig, Germany, Europe, Sol III, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, Universe
Then the SM list ist initially flawed.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Where do marines stand?
PostPosted: Sat Oct 14, 2006 4:21 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire

(BlackLegion @ Oct. 14 2006,15:59)
QUOTE
Then the SM list ist initially flawed.

Yep, that'd be my conclusion.

Price nudges here and there won't cut it, because they fail to address the air-assault inclined nature of the list. Sure you can make the list balanced for tournament play with the current bias, but there will still only be one valid build; the air assault.

If all aspects of the list are to be of use, it needs a moderate rebalancing right across the list.


Which'd need an army Champion. :)




_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
nealhunt
 Post subject: Where do marines stand?
PostPosted: Sat Oct 14, 2006 5:13 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Transport cost:  You can't just adjust via the transport because the "force multiplier" effect is different for different formations.  The advantage for air assaults is based on movement.  That means it's best for CC troops, less effective for FF and of even less value for shooting troops.  There is necessarily going to be a discrepancy for one option or another.

To use the Thawk/Assault Marine example, if you make Assault Marines cheaper and Thawks more expensive, you just end up with the reverse of the current issue - the only valid use for Thawks is for Assault Marines because they are too expensive/not effective enough to transport anything else.


LC/Armor assaults:  An activation disadvantage is not a problem.  Even if you take a point-heavy loadout for the LC, you can fit 6-7 activations in at 2700-3000 points.  You will crush an enemy formation of your choosing (probably their toughest one) before it activates, so that's effectively the same as an extra formation, taking you to 7-8 "effective" formations.

_________________
Neal
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Where do marines stand?
PostPosted: Sat Oct 14, 2006 5:19 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire

(nealhunt @ Oct. 14 2006,17:13)
QUOTE
Transport cost:  You can't just adjust via the transport because the "force multiplier" effect can be radically for different formations.

No you cannot, every formation (And permutation of those formations) that can be transported by the re-costed Transport must be looked at and possibly re-costed in turn in order to ensure balance.


This ain't a minor thought and certainly would require a Champion, but it would end with a Marine list which could be used in manners other than air-assault. :)




_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
nealhunt
 Post subject: Where do marines stand?
PostPosted: Sat Oct 14, 2006 5:47 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Sorry about that last post.  I had some 2 year old help on it.   :D  I went back to edit.

_________________
Neal
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Where do marines stand?
PostPosted: Sat Oct 14, 2006 5:58 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire

(nealhunt @ Oct. 14 2006,17:47)
QUOTE
Sorry about that last post.  I had some 2 year old help on it.   :D  I went back to edit.

Aye I got the point of your post, even if it was a little curtailed. :)

My initial reply stands though; The entire list needs a rebalance if other builds are to be made viable.


The proposed changes will moderate the worst of the list's faults, but Armoured formations (That's a large proportion of the list!) will still be next to useless, Assault marines will still be largely not worth the use unless placed in Thunderhawks, etc.

To achieve the original aim of the Codex list (A 'general purpose' Marine list), a full rebalance is required.




_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
consectari
 Post subject: Where do marines stand?
PostPosted: Sat Oct 14, 2006 10:36 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 7:36 pm
Posts: 946
Location: On the Ohio river, USA
Does the proposed reduction in the cost of Vindicator formations affect the cost of the Vindicator upgrade? ?

Now that they are running w/ speed 25, ?they are almost a respectable choice to beef up armour formations.


Edit: ?Also will the changes to the LR formation affect the cost to upgrade to LRs in a Terminator formation?




_________________
Understand this: that skag and his floozy...they're gonna die
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Where do marines stand?
PostPosted: Sat Oct 14, 2006 10:39 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
AFAIK noone has yet proposed cost mods to Armour upgrades beyond the Hunter (And that's a whole different kettle of fish anyway...)

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
dptdexys
 Post subject: Where do marines stand?
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:22 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 11:39 pm
Posts: 1974
Location: South Yorkshire

(nealhunt @ Oct. 13 2006,23:01)
QUOTE
At open War it was commented upon that several players there were dropping out of contributing to the rules review as they were fed up to the back teeth with
'I don't see all the stuff you claim happening' ?replies to arguments - we are seeing it happening but apparently that doesn't matter and nobody on the UK tournament scene has the position to influence decisions


Well, I hope that's not true. ?As noted, no one is asking for extensive details, just general descriptions of games. ?We indulge in lots of "theoryhammer" around here to be sure, but in the face of actual game results to the contrary theory has little standing.


When it comes down to it and there is Group A saying "We never use that unit, it's terrible" and Group B saying "It works okay" and both sides have concrete, in-game examples, then I think you have to go with the group that thinks it is okay for reasons of play balance. ?If the "it's fine" group gets a boost, then the unit becomes overpowered.

For example, many, many people don't field Librarians but a different group of people use them a lot. ?It's a style-specific unit, so if you improve it for more general use in a wide range of play styles, those that are already using it well suddenly have an advantage. ?Another example of that balancing process is Assault Marines - fielded on the ground they aren't worth it but fielded in a Thawk they work fine. ?If you listen to the "mud marine" players and adjust them then the Thawk use becomes overpowered.

I'm one of the players steve54 mentioned ,I usually come on the site most nights but rarely post mainly due to seing other posts were if your not a regular contributer and you put your point of view across about a rule or any gaming situation you usually get the "I/we don't see/get that in our games" and this comes across maybe unintentionally as your findings/views are not as important as "Mr megaposter".


Steve54s views are not "theoryhammer" they are through actual gaming experience.He joined our gaming group nearly 2 years ago and has improved his gaming style tremendously.His views on the proposed SM changes are through trail of the list and I share his views.Though we find the proposed changes do improve the armour choices they are still not being included in armylists when we play competative games as they are still not worthy choices to make a competative list,tacticals would be included in this.I've also noticed that even in the battle reports posted on the site that the armour choices are still rarely being used (if ever)even though they are supposed to be being tested .

The problem I see with SM Armour is it's weapon ranges,you have to get within most opponents assault range to use your weapons (45cm mainly) This is what our group calls one-shot formations (preds,land speeders etc.)they move forwards and are then taken out by what i'd like to call a Tiny Tim Special .One formation moves to FF range and places BMs and then another assaults and usually wipes out the target formation, Tim always seems to execute this perfectly in his tournament games.This is I believe why so many Warhounds are used in Marine armies they have a better chance of survivng the assault (being fearless) or the sustained fire that comes at them after they move into range.

Tacticals are usually not worth their points mainly due to the SM army being reliant on Air assaults to be effective and again SMs are usually out ranged weapon wise .They usually have to double to get in range and then get 6 ?shots needing 7+.As with the armoured formations they are then easy targets to get rid of.I've seen posts about tacticals being hard to shift from cover,I'm afraid I've never had a problem getting rid of them as they get no armour bonus.Only the -1 comes in handy from the cover and ?thats if you shoot at them but in our games they are only shot at to put BMs on them before an assault goes in.

As for Librarians over the last 4 years or so while I've been gaming regularly (we usually play 6000point games on a monday 2 x 3000 point tourney games on a thursday 12000 point games on Bank holidays an 6-8 weekends of tournaments a year) they are usally taken out very easily once they come within 15 cm of the enemy,crossfire and clipping assaults come to mind here so if the gamers who claim to get good use out of them could explain how they stop their opponent from ?slaughtering them (my money's on Jedi mind tricks "you don't see those librarians there").

Some of the Tactical advice given on these forums make me wonder of the quality of opponents faced or if some of it is just so called "theoryhammer".
I hope no one takes offence at any of this post as it is not meant to offend or target anyone in any way,shape or form it is just obseravations from a fanatical gamer who doesn't get enough time to enjoy his hobby.

note to Tiny Tim ,hurry up and win the lottery so you can host an International tourney at Warhammer World.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Where do marines stand?
PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 12:42 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
I use Librarians in Devestator formations, usually supporting an Engagement or Engaging on their own behalf, against poor FF / good CC enemies where Assault Marines would only be chopped into little bits. Undoubtedly I'd do better with Chaplains however, I take them more for 'fluff' purposes than any grand faith in their abilities.

Marines rely so heavily on Engagements, and aren't all that amazing at actually killing things, that Inspiring is of more use to the list than Smite. Maybe granting Librarians an attack outside of Engagements might give them an ability to compete with Inspiring.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
ragnarok
 Post subject: Where do marines stand?
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 9:16 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 2:43 pm
Posts: 2084
Location: Reading, England
After seeing marines in action for the first time, and trying to figure out how to make them better I came to realise that ther armour is too inflexible.  Stuck in its own formations (witht eh exception of the vindicator).

So I cam up with an idea.  Remove the vindicator upgrade and replace it with organic armour (or whatever the term is).  This would be available to tactical, devastator and predator formations (and possible assault)

It will allow the formation to add 1 or 2 vindicators or preds (either type) to the formation for 75pts each.  This could add a bit of specialised mid ranged firepower to the unit.

For example a tactical formation with a pred destructor

(or combined with other upgrades)
a devastator formation with 4 razorbacks, 2 preds and a hunter.

_________________
Tyranid air marshal
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Morg
 Post subject: Where do marines stand?
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 9:46 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 4:33 pm
Posts: 193
Location: Ireland
Ragnarok, your idea might be worth a try but I would tend to allow more tanks in the squad, maybe as a limited support option to Tacticals (one per 1500 points). Only one or two is not enough punch.

But there is one important thing dptdexys mentioned which always bugs me when talking about Space Marines. Tactical formations are near useless in this game from a fighting perspective - their only role seems to be sitting around the objective. There is almost no incentive to use them although they are supposed to be the core part of the army.

I can't really say anything on characters, I rarely use 'em apart from the odd chaplain in assault.

_________________
Generosity rules where 6mm soldiers are concerned.
--
Looking for players near Dublin - get in touch with me!
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Darkling
 Post subject: Where do marines stand?
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 2:15 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 3:35 pm
Posts: 4
My feeling is that ATSKNF has been the biggest handicap in balancing the Marine list.  

Marines had to be limited to such small formations because of the advantage they get from ATSKNF in dealing w/ blast markers.  

The problem is those small formations then don't pack the punch that marines should have.

The LR is supposed to be the most feared tank in the Imperial arsenal, but I don't thank anyone would agree that's going to be the case w/ a formation size of 4.

I know this probably won't go anywhere, but I'm throwing it out anyway.

What if some or all core marine formations (Inf. or AV) were allowed to upgrade with 0-1 or 0-2 additional units?  The upgrade, however, costs more than the unit cost from the base formation (ie under the original costing 4 preds for 300 points, upgrades cost an additional 100 points each instead of 75).

You're getting a little more punch, a good beef up in resistance to blast markers, but you're paying a premium for it.

What I'd really like to see is any AV formation be able to take an upgrade of 0-2 of any type of AV, not just Vindis.  Preds could upgrade w/ 2 LRs , or LRs could take 2 WW, etc, all at the new Premium price.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 5 of 5
  [ 74 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net