Kyuss, could an abstract "combined" version of Centurions be designed instead? Say, a mix of the key weapon types and averaged-out CC/FF stats. It simplifies the issue of which is better/more likely to be taken etc. and saves on list space This was how Terminators arrived at what they currently have so I would imagine Centurions could easily go this way too.

Yeah I think that may be their future.....

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

I'd suggest something like

Centurion
Speed Armour CC FF
15cm 4+ RA 4+ 4+

weapons
1x Twin linked heavy flamer 15cm AP4+ IC, small arms IC
1x twin lascannon 45cm AT4+
Siege Drills CCW MW EA+1
Hurricane Bolters, small arms EA+1

could abstract the HB quite easily I suppose... or could just drop one variant altogether and have them as assault OR dev but only one type in the list

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

Which version would get the most use do you think? Given the static nature of the list would the stand and shoot/defensive version be more apt?

I'd recommend sticking with distinct variants, even if you only allow one sort. Rolling them in together well create a jack of all trades, master of none unit which marines already have plenty of and we'll end up with a weapon load it that doesn't synergise well.

If you had to pick one I'd go the assault version as it adds more to the list IMHO. As I understand it this is supposed to be both an offensive and defensive seize list? If it's focus is defensive though, then I'll switch preference to the development variant.

I think it is completely wrong and against all the fluff in a marine force to create a better infantry type than a terminator. Literally decades saying they are the toughest thing in the imperium. Oh apart from sticking a marine in armour an exo suit. We aren't sure why we have terminators and dreadnaughts, but hey.

Really, give them a 3+ save or something. Make them LV's like broadsides (who are also more than one to a base). Just seems very wrong to have a better than terminator infantry stand. Doesn't matter if it is balanced or not.

Indeed if it was balanced, that would be even worse, as you would have more reason to field them. As I understood it in 40k terminators get a 2+ save and then a 3+ save from stormshields? I know everyone is upset with MW killing marines and everyone getting MW, but you have got terminators and RA fortifications, you don't need another RA infantry unit.

I would be in favour of them being a combined unit, in the same way Terminators are (which I believe is why their armour save is so high as it assumes stormshields and the like).

If you are going to include them, make them distinct with a clear role. Really 2 routes to go down are the infantry version of Dreadnaughts with a 3+ save (so tougher marines which would go with a marine in power armour wearing more armour), with either a combined version or two types like dreds, or make them something akin to a broadside. 15cm LV, walker, 4+RA, transport as terminators (for getting in bunkers etc). With a mixed weapon load. Keeping the points down maybe something like CC4+ +1MW, FF2+ (similar firepower to obliterators I believe?), whatever weapons to balance at a 50 point price point.

With those two options you could make them an upgrade for normal marine formations which would help hold ground as an alternative or in addition to (with the LV version) dreadnaughts.

Actually broadsides are typically based singly…. At least in my experience

Before further discussion, I’d like the centurions tested as they are currently, so far we have a single playtest game using them, and one data point does not a graph make, regardless of the fluff or personal opinion, the centurions should be balanced in game terms

if this means stretching the fluff, then so be it

Terminators have several advantages over the centurions, they have teleport, meaning they can hit anywhere on the board, nowhere is safe from them, they have better CC stats with cc3+ and MW EA+1 meaning they’re going to be scoring more kills in CC, they also have TRA so can weather shooting when behind enemy lines, and the ability to bring a character along for an inv save, leader, extra MW attack and inspiring/MW FF/Commander

I’d be willing to drop the centurion CC to 5+ to represent their ponderous nature and further differentiate them from terminators

The problem with merging them into one type of generic ‘centurion’ is that the two variants are really quite different, normal terminators are pretty handy in CC and assault terminators are even better, but they still fulfil the same role of up-close assault specialists, the centurions are pretty distinct, one is the flame-spewing bunker busting trench clearer, the other is the ponderous weapons platform bristling with tank-busting guns and anti-infantry firepower

I think as they have hurricane bolters, FF4+ is fine as two FF4+ shots are better than a single FF2+ one, meaning we’re already at obliterator level

If (and it’s a big if) we go down the LV route, then 4+ RA is still reasonable if the Tau broadsides get it, especially as they’ll be much more vulnerable to AT firepower, from what I’ve read, Broadside armour is roughly comparable to Terminator armour in resilience, and terminator armour is in the same realm as centurion armour too, so they’re pretty comparable

As I said, nothing is happening until we have some real world data, so please playtest them as they are currently and share your thoughts

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

My point is not that it isn't balanced. It might be, it might not be. But I would say the same thing if it was perfectly balanced. Or given a 2+ RA save and an invulnerable save and TRA and was balanced perfectly. My understanding is that Terminators are the toughest thing in a marine list, yes I know they can teleport, and get a chaplain and all that. Vindicators get walker but both they and preds have the same armour save so I would say they had comparable armour?

If you are saying that terminators are no longer the toughest infantry type in the marine chapters, that a centurion has as great a chanch of surviving a multimelta as a terminator, fair enough. Then procede to balance them. Perhaps in that process you would think they add little as an independant formation and try them as an upgrade to replace dreadnaughts, etc etc.

But if they are not meant to be as survivable as tactical dreadnaught armour, no amount of balancing will help. So I am quite prepared to beleive GW has reversed all its fluff to date about terminators being the toughest marines, I just don't know that because I don't follow all the new crap GW puts out in its codex. So I assume they are as tough as terminators (assuming a mix of normal and storm shield guys)? Same chance of surviving multimelta, lascannon, or plasma hit?

Seperately you also have the question of what do they bring to the list, something balance doesn't help with either. I am not sure what role they are meant to fill (terminators are heavy armour assualt infantry, assault are naff assault infantry, bikes are better than ass marines assault infantry, then you have devs, preds and raiders as firepower), currently they don't measure up to terminators at a similar price point but look they replace devestators. Both have 4+RA from the fortifications, but they have a better (first strike) FF and twice the firepower for 50 more points and are far better if you have to advance out of the fortifications. Again they could be well balanced, but if they don't have a clear role, why take them? Unless the planned role is to replace Devs?

To be honest other than a broadside equivalent which would step on dev toes less, or a tough upgrade to a infantry formation to replce dreds, I am hard pressed to think what role they could usefully fill and would have thought the garrissoned firepower could be better done for the list with a formation of 4 hellfire dreds for 200 points (which would also be better for model collections).

So basically just looking for you to say, yes they have been installed by GW as equal to terminators in survivablility and here I intend them to fill the following function (replace garissoned devs, be a formation to take back fortifications, etc, etc). Test them for their ability to fill x role.



(On Tau Broadsides I beleive they even used to have a note on them as FW sold them modelled 2 to a base - only the general shortage and expense led to people doing them 1 to a base - saying yes they can be mounted more than one to a base, but are still light vehicles.)

yes they have been installed by GW as equal to terminators in terms of survivability and here I intend them to fulfil the breaching role in a counterattack, their brutal FF ability is perfect to lead and support massed engagements while the terminators go off on solo missions to take out dangerous targets

from GW fluff they're pretty much as resilient as terminators with increased firepower and lesser CC ability

They also are part of the list because I have chosen to follow the latest fluff for marine chapters (hence why I've also included LR crusaders, thunderfire cannons and storm talons), the IF being the siege specialists tend to make heavy use of siege equipment, I'm fairly sure in the background that centurions are used for breaching bunkers and fortifications, hence the siege drills and heavy flamers, or they are used to establish a firebase with heavy weapons that can be deployed with relative ease

I'm happy to restrict the type to one in future, I'd also consider making them LV as that is a serious dent in their reslience, but right now nobody is using them, and nothing is happening until that changes

finally, not every unit in a list has to fill a distinct role, for example there is plenty of overlap between marine bikers and assault marines or scouts and land speeders...... and don't get me started on the 8 different flavours of aspect warriors....

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

Fairy snuff. I think it is an awful decision by GW and a unit I would drop in a second on that basis, but I shall test them, I suspect as dev replacements in trenches.

Looking at posisble lists I can't justify the assault ones over terminators as termies have teleport and therefore deepstrike, bikes are faster, scouts are cheaper and the 300 point niche is filled by the two tac formations I need to get...

Hard to think of a list where they would be useful as they would need mobility and without 2 crusaders and a vindi for ablative armour can't go anywhere, but then they cost 500 points and don't have a leader.

(What is the reasoning for no chaplain incidentally? Pretty crippling for a marine assault unit.)



Overlap yes - but they all have a distinct role Scouts are the cheap activation booster, land speeders are a more expensive scout that supports assaults, bikes are the better version of assault marines and assault marines are a cunning trap laid for anyone picking an army (yes you can use them with 2 chaplains in a thunderhawk, but really, get some terminators instead!)!

I will be starting to playtest this list soon instead of just playing the codex list the idea of a Marine siege defense list is something that doesnt sit quite right with so I wont be using some units BUT I understand the community voted on it AND I can get behind the list that you have already been working hard on (it just means I cant bring myself to playtest bastions or the razor wire etc but stil will look at static defenses)

I am happy that I can run the list as a siege assault type list as well where conventional blitz tatics would be ineffective (ie using the codex list)

The unit that I have most issue with is the centurions and I think that comes down to the design space they are limited to because Terminators exist and are a unit who also need to be included in this list. I think I have a relatively elegant solution to the problem (that will obviously have to be tweaked but its a start point)

1. Combine the assault cents and dev cents into one unit entry, so taking a unit of them is represenative of a mix of them.
2. looking at them as a combined unit then we look at a new set of stats that make them different to Termies

Unit cost 300pts for 4 stands
INF
15cm Move
Arm 4+
CC 5+
FF 3+
Siege Drills (base contact), assault weapons, EA +1, MW
Hurricane Bolters (small arms), EA +1
Short barreled Lascannon 30cm AT 4+
Reinf Armour

Upgrades allowed are Landraiders (of any type), Vindicators

What I feel this gives the unit is something that is quite different from Terminators and fills a specific role

1. They are still almost as tanky as terminators but vulnerable to crossfire
2. They hit with MW but less hits in CC and less accurate
3. Give some AT support but they cant sit back at range with it (a weakness)
4. They are a fantastic breaching FF unit with each stand getting 2 3+ FF attacks but in order to get in assault they need to take the transport or they are quite reactive.
5. Can add in Heavy Flamers as well maybe?

Obviously some of the numbers might need working around a little but it has a stronger design concept overall for the unit and gives them their own space in the list.

FF stat wise are they really more effective in a firefight than any other marine unit? Otherwise what do you think about no commander allowed? For me a marine assault unit without a chapalin is always at a dissadvantage and is basically looking at being a supporting formation - which for these guys means a 600 point formation as they have to be mixed with land raiders to get mobility.

I would say in a FF that Centurions would be better than Tatcials and would be better than Terminators and Devastators so looking at FF 3+ with EA +1 would be a good place to start working with them.

To be mobile the formation only needs to be 450pts So you take 2 Crusaders and you have a pretty impressive counter strike dedicated FF formation that only costs 50pts more than Termintors with a character but has more durability and arguably more ongoing mobility in the list.

Out of curiousity has anyone modelled centurions up? I'm looking at building a formation or two and am drawing some blanks at the moment

I think an EA+1FF infantry unit is generally unique to a Marine list as far as I remember. Coupled with Crusaders you get a lot of EA FF dice.

For a model, I've wondered about using the Techmarine miniature for conversions myself.

currently the centurions are not permitted a character upgrade (or at least that is the intent)

having discussed with osoi via PM, I am coming round to a single 'centurion' statline and agree with his proposed stats (which I may have had something to do with )

re: FF level, the stock armament for a centurion is two heavy bolters, with three on a stand I think FF3+ is definitely justified in this case, they should be on a par with, or slightly better than obliterators

CC5+ represents their ponderous nature and the fact that they’re more suited to drilling through bunkers than enemy troops, but MW on the extra attacks means if they do catch you, you’re a goner, it also means that they’re not going to be competing with terminators as CC assault specialists, and further differentiates them

The only thing I’m unsure about is giving them a heavy flamer too…. What are people’s thoughts?

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator