"Elite"

[EmperorEternalXIX]

So...I play as the Space Marines. Only the Space Marines. Always the Space Marines. Fanatical devotion to the preservation of mankind is my thing, and I really love the heroic Spartan-like warriors of the Imperium of Man.

Bottom line. The elite armies, ones like the Space Marines, are suffering in the current GW climate. Why? Because of the newfound joys of horde armies.

In the newest Tyranid rumours, they are saying that gaunts are going to be 3 points each and come stock Without Number. In the new Guard codex, guardsmen are dirt cheap and can field high-damage output weaponry on their transports en masse -- I have a friend whose HALF of a tournament list has more tanks on it than me and my partner's entire 2500 points does. The ork codex is another offender, with very cheap toughness 4 bodies that put out a horrendous amount of attacks on the charge.

GW seems to have picked up on the idea that horde armies are money in the bank as people go out and triple their basic model counts at stores in order to max out their three or four troop choices to the 100 models their updates are granting instead of the 40 they had before.

On the other side of the fence, the elite low model count armies are getting more expensive and are being granted outrageous abilities to compensate (things like Sternguard ammo, THSS Termies, and the whole Space Wolf codex). The thing is, it really isn't working, and the scale is very off.

Personally I am a bit upset. Surely GW realizes there is money to be made if, say, the cost of a basic marine was lowered. Then I too would be going out to buffer my force with new models. I would still be an elite minimal force, but my model count would be scaling up slightly, versus these massive horde armies. Instead they are trying to balance it by giving us things like the Jaws of the World Wolf power. I know it might seem like senseless pissing and crying but I am just upset that we are not seeing the same sort of balancing trends the horde guys are. I would rather have 65 marines on the table instead of 50, than something stupidly powerful on a one-trick pony 300-point super model.

The Wolves will at least feel correct, in that they will be total badasses. Other elite armies do not feel right, however; Chaos, other SMs, Necrons...none of them feel like their lore conveys they should. The new game paradigm bodes well for later updates -- the idea of T6 Slow and Purposeful Necron Troops does not seem so unlikely anymore, for example. This would be much better and more realistic to the fluff then, say, giving them an HQ that twin-links their gauss weapons. Unfortunately the latter is more likely; GW seems to think having us spend 20 dollars on a new HQ model with an uber-move is the only way to make money off of elite armies.

When the new Tyranids land, they will be able to field some terrifying numbers. For the cost of one naked tactical squad in the current Space Marine codex, you will be able to field 60 Without Number Gaunts. Now of course we don't know how the rumours will play out fully, but ultimately...this is madness. In Warhammer 40k, you can only use a single squad to perform a singular action (attacking another unit, for example). How on earth is an Elite army supposed to stop a list that can take this many models, even at Toughness 2?

What are the answers? What can be done to bring Elite armies in line with the newfound superhordes that seem to be mounting in force on all sides?

[Disclaimer: This was more of an editorial than a post, I just felt like sharing my opinions on the current meta game.]

[Skragger]

I feel its more fluffy this way..

Example: The imperial guard does not rely on hulking armoured warriors to win its fights like the space marines do, it relies on its tanks, and more importantly, the infantry. Can you imagine how much suckidge a game would be for guard if they DIDN'T have cheap models?

Guard survive because they can field so much infantry, its what lets them stand up to the hulking behemoths in 3+ armour save armour. They are only weak humans afterall

Really thats what it boils down to, S4, T4, 3+ save. Marines are expensive for just that reason. Lets look at a standard ork boy

WS4, BS2, S3, T4, A2, I2, 6+ armour. How balls is that? They're suprisingly easy to kill, the only thing that gives them their armour save is lasguns, and they cant shoot worth a poopoo. With squads of 30 one will routinely have them cut down to about a third by the time they've crossed the table, so you need SOMETHING to keep them worthwhile, thats where the number of attacks and bulk of numbers come into play. As for your concerns with assault, they DO have Initiative 2 you know, so unless you're necrons or a squad entirely armed with powerfists you DO strike first..

Orks and Guard (and soon Nids) simply dont have the survivability or the stats of Marines, so they need to make up for it with numbers. Its the most logical answer.

Plus is makes for more variety of playing: two space marine armies going at it is the dullest thing around, 3+ saves galore. I love watching horde armies go at it because each army gets a good amount of shooty in then there's always some tastey assault.

You should try getting out of your 3+ save world, and run a small xeno army (or guard) for a while, then everything will become clear. Horde armies can be beaten down fairly easily.. you just need to know how to do it (bloody hellhounds..)

[Xas]

just to correct something: if a gaunt costs 3 points standard this means your normal termagaunt will still cost 5 points which is only 1 point cheaper than normal. tyranids have to buy their weapon ontop of the torso.


on the issue itself all I can say is: tactics.
in fluff the eltie armies use superiour tactic and local strenght maximisation to win conflcits. you have to do the same on the tabletop.

your forces are dense and their armor allows them to deploy even more dense (because 3+ save prevents 66% of damage agaisnt most templates they can field) while they naturally take more space and ahve to spread around to not get punished by templates.


against orks one of my favourite units is a 20 man squad of chaos marines with 2 flamers, a fist and an icon of nurlge (t5). this squad regularly takes on 3-4 ork mobs on itself during one game earning its points back twice.

they key really is maneuvring. they only ahve to fight one squad of orks a time because the orks are too pressed by my havoc launcher rhinos, vindicators and flamer templates to deploy too dense. because orks usually are outgunned they are pressed to move forward asap. this means you allmost allways have the choice to either fire a full salvo of rapid fire bolters into them or fire pistols, flamers and charge. I usually go for the 2nd option unless there is another full strenght squad which could easily charge me after I whipped the orks out.

say I fire assoult and charge I'm looking at around 8 hits from the two flamers (whide spread out orks and unfavourably palced flamers usually end that way :) ) and another 7 hits from pistols resulting in an overall ~6-8 dead orks depending on luck and if they get cover against pistols or not. then I charge in with around 48A hitting 24, wounding 12, killing 10. so 12-14 orks remain and score 36A, 18hits, 3 wounds (s3 vs t5) and 1 kill, nob kills another 1-3, my fist kills ~1 so he looses another ~9 orks to no retreat wounds and I'm left to butcher the remaining few orks in his phase to regroup and then fully operate in my turn. after this I had a tradeoff of ~3 marines for a full 30 man squad of orks :)

say I rapid fire and let them charge me. this nets around 37shots, 24hits, 12wounds. as this is only suitable if the orks sit in the open this is 12 dead. then 18 orks assoult. get 38 attacks to the face, 19hits, 10wounds another 8 dead. so 9 orks strike with 36A, 18hits and 6wounds, 2kills. nob another 2-3, my fist kills 1 ork. results in 9 vs 4-5. with a bit of luck (or a kill or two in the shooting from another squad/vehicle) the orks are no longer fearless due to beeing under 10 and get run down.


rinse and repeat 4 times and you end up with prolly 5-10 marines left (enough to conveniently hold one objective) and 120 orks killed. there is basically no chance for the orks unless the manage to get more squads in at once. space marines can prolly do similars with sternguard (more killy in shooting thanks to special ammonitions but not as resilent as t5). additionally rhinos are great as mobile terrain, blocking assoult lines. if your 10 marines fight against only 9 orks worth of attacks thanks to two rhinos only letting a few trough you allmost have a chance even with tacticals.

[EmperorEternalXIX]

I believe the S4 T4 3+ Save is an overrated statline. When you only have 50 models in your army, you are simply 50 rolls of 1-2 away from being tabled.

Warhammer is all about actions. If you only have 6 squads, and the enemy has 18, then he has many more opportunities to harm your units then you do. People often say stuff to me like "use two tactical squads to double up on that Ork squad" ... you know that is 25% of the entire Space Marine army to defeat one squad (that usually costs less than the two units I've committed to the fight, and usually won't be completely killed).

What do you think happens if the elite army has to double or triple team a single targeted horde unit to defeat or counter it effectively? The average SM army would only be able to effectively engage a relative handful of targets -- maybe 4 or 5 at most. Compared to say, an IG army, which can pour fire on an often 3::1 ratio across the entire opposing elite army very easily, and usually with stronger fire. Just because it hits less often doesn't make it less potent...in favorable dice situations the damage potential is much higher for horde armies.

It's not all about defeat, either. Most marine units can be neutralized by other things; being locked in assault, forcing heavy weapons bearer to move, a lack of viable targets, etc. This happens much less often to the horde armies, as they have more armies covering more ground with more weaponry.

BS3 and T3 doesn't even remotely make up for these facts, and are not nearly the handicaps players claim them to be.

In the above example using orks, it describes using a masterful manipulation of the game situation and includes assumptions about perfect mathhammer averages and still requires multiple points of investment just to neutralize one squad, and leaves the marine squad decimated to nearly worthlessness afterward. It also doesn't even take into account the other 10+ units of the Ork army, all of which are significantly more dangerous than a barely-upgraded squad of boyz that are all alone on the field somewhere.


You should try getting out of your 3+ save world, and run a small xeno army (or guard) for a while, then everything will become clear. Horde armies can be beaten down fairly easily.. you just need to know how to do it (bloody hellhounds..) The idea that the 3+ save is some insulated bubble really means nothing to me. Every model lost hurts bad to a Space Marine, and almost every upgraded weapon option in the game affects them heavily (flamers multiply hits severely for wound spam and anything else is easier to wound and may even ignore armor).

The concept that the 3+ save is somehow insulating is foolish, to me. I lose models every time I get shot at or assaulted, even if it is only 1 or 2; but I am getting shot at or assaulted MUCH more often and by many more potential hits then people are accounting for. The 3+ save is not as useful as people think, and every squad is still 10 rolls of 1-2 away from being gone. When you consider there will only be a handful of these aforementioned squads, they actually play pretty...fragile, for lack of a better term. I have earned many victories by cowering or hiding or trying desperately to minimize my casualties, while these horde heroes triumphantly charge screaming into my lines with reckless abandon. 2 crappy units at half the cost will ALWAYS be potentially more effective than 1 decent unit at twice the cost.

It might sound arrogrant, but I find horde armies to be very noobish and fail-proof. I don't like to win, I like to play and really live the fluff on the tabletop. I can't imagine how I would lose at all often with, say, an Imperial Guard army, other than complete and utter carelessness.

[Drunkencorgimaster]

I don't know EE19... I find your writing style a bit opaque at times, but on the other hand you do have a much deeper level of insight into this game then me and you understand the rules far better than myself. If I have read your post correctly, I think I follow your concerns here -especially in the case of the Orks. I do not see how a biker-marine army like the White Scars can stand a chance against those endless waves of green.

Maybe elite armes should be allowed to split-fire, like the Longfangs do? The difference being that all units in an elite army would have this option. Perhaps reducing horde armies' morale-abilities might help. It would be more realistic (and fun) to have a realistic chance that chain-reaction morale failures could sweep entire Ork, Nid, or Guard armies from the field on occassion. On the other hand, one downside to Guard-horde armies my son stumbled across a couple weekends ago is that in an "annihilate" scenario it is much easier to eliminate more 10-man units of guards than it is to eliminate an equal or greater number of Space Marine units.

I do not see these levels of unbalance in other gaming systems. On the other hand, I also do not see as much fun!

Am I correct in thinking that you have moved around to my position on the lack of balance in the game in the few months or so? Or am I about to get one of your famous mega-lectures?:eek:

[Aldramelech]

I do not see these levels of unbalance in other gaming systems.

Play WW2 1943 onwards as the Germans, you'll feel just like a Space Marine.

[EmperorEternalXIX]

Am I correct in thinking that you have moved around to my position on the lack of balance in the game in the few months or so? Or am I about to get one of your famous mega-lectures? I don't consider the game unbalanced, just...illogical. My space marines always feel like they are hitting the board with a phantom squad or two in reserve that will never arrive. It is strange to feel like you are losing a fight before you hit the board. Ultimately the casualties I take are vastly too costly compared to a horde army.

[Drunkencorgimaster]

I do not see these levels of unbalance in other gaming systems.

Play WW2 1943 onwards as the Germans, you'll feel just like a Space Marine.

I'd love to feel like a Space Marine! Energy, stamina, buff-build. I could probably play for the NFL, or be on an Australian rugby team, or even compete in the Hill-Billy Hick rodeos they hold around here.

[Lerra]

Try playing Deathwing!

There is nothing more satisfying that taking your 15 terminators versus a sea of orks or tyranids and wiping them to a man, though.

[Aldramelech]

I'd love to feel like a Space Marine! Energy, stamina, buff-build. I could probably play for the NFL, or be on an Australian rugby team, or even compete in the Hill-Billy Hick rodeos they hold around here.

You have Rodeos? Cool! lol

I don't want to feel like a Space Marine, I couldn't take all that homo-erotic tension! ;)

[sketchesofpayne]

Actually, I used to outnumber my Ork, Guard, and Tyranid buddies with my Space Marine infantry. Now they outnumber me like it should be.

[Melissia]

The Imperial Guard is the primary and most important fighting force of the Imperium, of course they should be able to dish out the damage. I don't see why you're complaining about this.

Orks are a brutal barbaric horde of powerful, deadly monsters whom do not fear death. They SHOULD outnumber the Marines-- they outnumber all races in the galaxy combined in the fluff.

Tyranids generally rely primarily on overwhelming their opponents with cheap, expendable troops, then bringing in the big hitters while the cheaper troops have the enemy bogged down. They nearly destroyed the Ultramarines. A pity they didn't.



There are around a million loyalist Marines in the galaxy at any given time. There are many times more planets in the Imperium than there are individual Marines. The Marines, technically speaking, are not present in the vast majority of battles fought whether on Imperial soil or not. Don't let how common they are in the tabletop cloud your memory of how common they actually are in the fluff.

[Katie Drake]

The biggest failing of 5th edition in my mind is that cover saves are so abundant and effective. This makes the armies like Orks, Tyranids and Guard far more survivable than their points cost reflects. An Ork Boy might appear easy to kill when you take a look at his statline, but try tacking on a 4+ save against most of the weapons in the game and all of the sudden he becomes too much for his low points cost. The more elite armies like the Space Marines don't benefit from cover as much as horde armies do, so they become more vulnerable to weapons that pour out lots of shots than their cost would suggest.

[Exitus Acta Probat]

There are around a million loyalist Marines in the galaxy at any given time. There are many times more planets in the Imperium than there are individual Marines. The Marines, technically speaking, are not present in the vast majority of battles fought whether on Imperial soil or not. Don't let how common they are in the tabletop cloud your memory of how common they actually are in the fluff.

QFT
It is as it should be.

Emp:
Simple fact of the matter, SM armies are one of the most prevalent on the field.
Why?
Because they are one of the most forgiving, rewarding and potentially powerful.

Marines, and to a lesser degree (depending on your viewpoint) CSMs, are the most ubiquitous 'take all comers' armies out there. ALL FLAVORS of marines.

[Katie Drake]

Because they are one of the most forgiving, rewarding and potentially powerful.

That's not true. Marines aren't one of the most powerful armies in the game - at least not since their new Codex arrived. They've done rather poorly in all the most competitive events save 'Ard Boyz, where a few ran Vulkan and Friends, but even still Guard and Eldar came out on top.

[Exitus Acta Probat]

K:
I am going to respectfully disagree with you on that one.

Space Marines have some of the most solid unit/character combos currently available,
have the largest potential spread of 'competitive' builds,
and have arguably the most flexible/forgiving set of rules available.

Right now, Space Marines are suffering from 'IG-itis'.
They look weak, compared to the current Meta top dawg...just like they looked quite weak against 'Fatecrusher' lists until it was unlocked, Nob Bikers until they were unlocked and will against 'Nids (not mentioning SW as they are a marine army) until they are figured out.
They are also, normally, the yardstick the rest of the 40k universe is measured against.

Finally, MEQ armies themselves spawn more conditional 'no more ***' complaints than anything else (which I will freely admit has something to do with GW marketing as well, understood...but not entirely).

Cannot be measured by local RTT's, as this is more affected by localized meta-game than anything else.

I also did not say they were THE most powerful army out there...I said they were ONE OF the most...forgiving, flexible and potentially powerful.
I will take my marines to any RTT, and be sure to place in the top 8(assume 30-ish) barring very-bad RPS matchups Everything else relates to rolls for 1st/2nd, dep zones or seizing.

And though I said finally;
TRULY finally, the measure of an armies appeal/strength should not be it's overall performance in tourney, but how well it plays on the field and rewards it's general.
I find marines/Imp MEQ to be the most flexible build/play/reward army out there.
(And yes, they can place consistently high in tourney as well....)

[mountaincycle661]

I can agree with you, Eternal. Marines nowadays just seem to be a little bit of a...well...soft target. They really do have a low model count. But it might also be the lists thats causing the problem.

For example, my buddy up in Boston (woot boston!) runs a very successful tyranid army. He told the budding space marine players "the only way to win with marines is to take a crap ton of marines. HE WHO ROLLS THE MOST DICE, WINS".

They scoffed and shot down the idea. "No way, man! You need to take this character, and that uber-expensive upgrade, and like...5 dreadnaughts man!". *sigh...*. So my friend sat down, cranked out a well rounded list, and in 1850 had something like 50-60 models. Only ONE of the space marine kids up there gave it a chance and tried the list out.

He won three games in a row, and hasnt looked back.

I think marine players get too side tracked by all the "shiny bits" and expensive wargear or characters. I honestly love playing against marines because they're so damn easy to win against. I play chaos marines. Therefore, i beat you in assault (way more attacks), im on par with you for shooting (same weapons), my characters are mean as HELL (warptime, wind of chaos sorceror anyone?). Marines just...suck? This is how the conversation of a pick up game goes for me:

"hey, wanna get a game in?"
"sure! i play marines!"
"Great! what faction? Salamanders or white scars?"
"Oh i play my own chapter! I call them the *blah blah blah*"
"(thinking quietly to myself) Excellent. This will be easy"

Unless you're playing Vulkan, or Khan, you just dont really have a chance. The marines have some neat toys, but honestly im just not afraid of them anymore. Emperor Eternal said it best: just shoot at them with some spare heavy bolters or something. That +3 save isnt really all that great. It only takes one salvo of bad armor save-rolling and that tac-squad is useless.

I feel that the marines can be a fun army. But in terms of just outright dangerous, i think they pale in comparison to hordes. The +4 cover everywhere makes a huge difference for hordes, but doesnt mean jack $hit for marines (my marines, included!). However, if GW were to change the standard and drop the points on marines or make them "more powerful", even if they had the best intentions of keeping them competitive, everyone in the world would cry out:

"******* GW PUMPING UP THEIR POSTER CHILD ARMY! SO GAY! MARINES ARE SO OVERPOWERED AND OVER THE TOP! SO LAME! DUMB! BLLLAAAAHHHH"

[Katie Drake]

If they'd just lower the omnipresent cover save to 5+ there'd be far less problems. It's irritating that one half of the Imperial Guardsmen that get hit by a bright lance or something survive.

"Thank the Emperor!"

[Exitus Acta Probat]

if they'd just lower the omnipresent cover save to 5+ there'd be far less problems. It's irritating that one half of the imperial guardsmen that get hit by a bright lance or something survive.

"thank the emperor!"

quoted for mo########ing truth.....
(just because I don't think marines aren't completely trashed, doesn't mean I am not sick of 'Cover'-hammer!!!) :))

[DarkLink]

And to think that back in 4th ed I'd think "it'd be really nice if cover saves were 4+".

Really the problem is that GW boosted cover saves to a 4+, and made them way to easy to get at the same time. One or the other isn't bad, but both at the same time... not so much. It's one of the few rules that I wouldn't mind if they revised (I'd like to see ramming be a little more powerful. Tankshocking too. If every model that had to move due to a tank shock had to pass an initiative test or take a high strenght wound, tank shocking would be awesome. Balance it by letting all those infantry Death or Glory if they can, but let tanks actually run over stuff. I want my land raider's prow covered in green ork fungus after a tank shock, not to have all the orks jump out of the way harmlessly).

[Lerra]

The biggest problem with elite armies - and I'm not sure if there is a way to fix this - is reliance on the Dice Gods. A few unlucky rolls can lose you the game, where a horde army is more forgiving in some ways, and each loss is a lot smaller.

Today I sent Logan Grimnar in a drop pod against guardsmen with an inquisitor and 2 mystics. Logan took three 2+ armor saves, I rolled three 1's, and I had one dead HQ before he even hits the table.

I suppose one "fix" would be to add additional wounds in exchange for a lesser armor save. Of course it would be a massive pain in the rear to keep track of squads full of multi-wound models.

[Crae]

I can agree with you, Eternal. Marines nowadays just seem to be a little bit of a...well...soft target. They really do have a low model count. But it might also be the lists thats causing the problem.

For example, my buddy up in Boston (woot boston!) runs a very successful tyranid army. He told the budding space marine players "the only way to win with marines is to take a crap ton of marines. HE WHO ROLLS THE MOST DICE, WINS".

They scoffed and shot down the idea. "No way, man! You need to take this character, and that uber-expensive upgrade, and like...5 dreadnaughts man!". *sigh...*. So my friend sat down, cranked out a well rounded list, and in 1850 had something like 50-60 models. Only ONE of the space marine kids up there gave it a chance and tried the list out.

He won three games in a row, and hasnt looked back.

I think marine players get too side tracked by all the "shiny bits" and expensive wargear or characters. I honestly love playing against marines because they're so damn easy to win against. I play chaos marines. Therefore, i beat you in assault (way more attacks), im on par with you for shooting (same weapons), my characters are mean as HELL (warptime, wind of chaos sorceror anyone?). Marines just...suck? This is how the conversation of a pick up game goes for me:

"hey, wanna get a game in?"
"sure! i play marines!"
"Great! what faction? Salamanders or white scars?"
"Oh i play my own chapter! I call them the *blah blah blah*"
"(thinking quietly to myself) Excellent. This will be easy"

Unless you're playing Vulkan, or Khan, you just dont really have a chance. The marines have some neat toys, but honestly im just not afraid of them anymore. Emperor Eternal said it best: just shoot at them with some spare heavy bolters or something. That +3 save isnt really all that great. It only takes one salvo of bad armor save-rolling and that tac-squad is useless.

I feel that the marines can be a fun army. But in terms of just outright dangerous, i think they pale in comparison to hordes. The +4 cover everywhere makes a huge difference for hordes, but doesnt mean jack $hit for marines (my marines, included!). However, if GW were to change the standard and drop the points on marines or make them "more powerful", even if they had the best intentions of keeping them competitive, everyone in the world would cry out:

"******* GW PUMPING UP THEIR POSTER CHILD ARMY! SO GAY! MARINES ARE SO OVERPOWERED AND OVER THE TOP! SO LAME! DUMB! BLLLAAAAHHHH"

- SIGNED!!!!!

I actually dropped my space marine army after the 5ed codex came out and I can only agree with "normal" space marines being crap. I play Orks as my main army and I am sure to win every time against space marines. It 50/50 against most other armies that are fairly well played (even Well played DE and Tau fair better then space marines). Space marines are blahhh especially against armies that have pie plate attacks with ap3 (loads have those currently), that can take out whole squads in one shoot.

The current edition is favouring number armies. In my opinion the biggest single mistake they made with the new codex is not giving tactical marines a second CC weapon. They where supposed to be "Flexible" but currently they are just to expensive compared to every single troop choice out there. I play against two chaos armies and they out number the space marine army, out equip them, out shoot and assault them. The only time I have ever been able to give them a run for their money was taking Vulkan and **** loads of fire, melta and thunder hammer goodies, but I don't like to depend on special characters to be able to play an army.

The second biggest mistake was moving away from the trait system. It was a really great idea, they just needed to improve on the idea. Special characters to flavour your army is the single stupidest idea they ever had.
Sternguards and vanguards are overpriced toys, that do to little for the price. Combat squading was a great idea and it upped the 10 man squads which is great. The only other problem being that the 10 man squads are just not a very good option currently. I would like to see the tactical marines to be the main stay of the army and a extra CC weapon would solve that perfectly.

I still have a dream about a space marine "Book hero" army list that make them out to be what they are in the books. It is total hero marines that are out numbered 10 to 1 against every thing els :) more suited to RPG probly, but still ;)

Spacemarine - 32 pts
Ws 4 Bs 4 S 4 T 4 W 2 I 4 A2 LD 8 Bolter, frag/krak, boltpistol and Cc weapons.
Special rules
And they shall know no fear
Combat squads
Combat Tactics
Bolter drill:
The spacemarines are so well trained in using the holy boltgun, that they count as being relentless when using a bolter. (no special ammo, does not work on any weapons mounted on a bolter, like combi weapons, but still for the bolter it self)

(hmm....maybe slow and purposeful when firing bolter as relentless....). As I said...a dream...but not sure they would work in game :), maybe to few in the end. But on the other hand I find it strange that Guards don't have multilasers instead of Heavy bolters.

[Crae]

The biggest problem with elite armies - and I'm not sure if there is a way to fix this - is reliance on the Dice Gods. A few unlucky rolls can lose you the game, where a horde army is more forgiving in some ways, and each loss is a lot smaller.

Today I sent Logan Grimnar in a drop pod against guardsmen with an inquisitor and 2 mystics. Logan took three 2+ armor saves, I rolled three 1's, and I had one dead HQ before he even hits the table.

I suppose one "fix" would be to add additional wounds in exchange for a lesser armor save. Of course it would be a massive pain in the rear to keep track of squads full of multi-wound models.

Feel no pain instead of two wounds...would represent the heightened clocking of the blood and secondary heart, power armour stims and drugs kicking in to make the body work through the damage and pain and what ever els they have that counters physical damage.

Would distingshe them from other "power armour" using armies too :)

[Katie Drake]

I think that if Marines hadn't become one point more expensive and were able to take a second special weapon in place of a heavy weapon they'd be in much better shape. Sure, Vulkan and Friends lists would be even more devastating than they are now, but at least Tactical Squads, the most common Space Marine unit and arguably the one with the most problems would be worth their points. As it stands Tactical Squads rarely feel worth their point cost. They just don't stand up to other units of equal or sometimes even less points in far too many cases.

[Drunkencorgimaster]

You have Rodeos? Cool! lol

I don't want to feel like a Space Marine, I couldn't take all that homo-erotic tension! ;)

Yeah, but nothing says homo-erotic like an Australian rugby team or a hick rodeo.

[emperorsaxe]

All I can post is this. This is an interesting thread, alot of food for thought on this subject.
Respects, Emperorsaxe

[Aenir]

I play dark angels, and the only time i have outnumbered an opponent is when im facing Grey Knights.

I agree, with the OP in that, these are supposed to be the best of the best, yet they feel run of the mill, especially as s4 t4 seems to be the new baseline for many armies, then to top it off, many AP3 things hurt marines.

As far as cover saves, I just attempt to run battles with as little cover as possible :)

[Melissia]

However, if GW were to change the standard and drop the points on marines or make them "more powerful", even if they had the best intentions of keeping them competitive, everyone in the world would cry out:

"******* GW PUMPING UP THEIR POSTER CHILD ARMY! SO GAY! MARINES ARE SO OVERPOWERED AND OVER THE TOP! SO LAME! DUMB! BLLLAAAAHHHH"

And can you blame them? GW has a deep and undeniable man-crush on sweaty, hot, muscular super-human freaks in skin-tight metallic armor.

[Cryl]

I think that if Marines hadn't become one point more expensive and were able to take a second special weapon in place of a heavy weapon they'd be in much better shape. *SNIP* As it stands Tactical Squads rarely feel worth their point cost. They just don't stand up to other units of equal or sometimes even less points in far too many cases.

The option to take a second special in place of a heavy would have been nice. IMO the quickest fix that could be applied to the vanilla marines codex is to give them a knife as well as a bolt pistol... the way it currently stands a charging guardsman has more attacks than a space marine which isn't right. Yes I know there's lots of other stuff marines get like ATSKNF and chapter tactics, combat squads etc but base attacks of 1 just isn't right.

[Xas]

ya know what the marines lack, which every other "Elite" force has? flexibility.


what I'd love to see (but never will happen because all the half brainded kiddies wouldnt be able to unterstand the rules OR they would be so simple that everyone wuld exploit the gazillion loopholes) is a marine army where you can freely assign modells to squads. space wolves are a good start with their veterans!


an example armylist would look the following:

HQ1: Brother Captain with Command squad (two apothecary, one standard bearer and one lascannon)
HQ2: Chaplain with Jump Pack

Elite1: 6 Veterans with boltgun and Powerfist
Elite2: 4 veterans with jumppacks (two with powerfist, two with meltagun)

Troop1: 10 Marines
Troop2: 10 Marines
Troop3: 10 Marines
Troop4: 10 Marines
Troop5: 10 Marines
Troop6: 10 Marines

Dedicated Transports: 3 Rhinos, 2 Razorbacks

FA: 10 Marines with jumppacks

HS1: 6 Devastators with 6 meltaguns
HS2: 5 Devastators with 5 Flamers
HS3: 8 Devastators with 4 lascannons and 4 heavy bolters.


and before deployment you could organize them as you want:

15 Marines with jumppack (1 chaplain, 2 fists, 2 meltaguns, 10 plain)

6 marine in razorback (1captain, 1 power fists, 4 plain)
6 marines in razorback (2 power fists, 4 plain)

12 marines in rhino (1 powerfist, 2 meltaguns, apothecary, 8plain)
12 marines in rhino (1 powerfist, 2 meltaguns, apothecary, 8plain)
5 marines in rhino (5 flamers)
16 marines on foot (1 standard, 5 lascanons, 10 plain)
10 marines on foot (2 heavy bolters, 8 plain)
10 marines on foot (2 heavy bolters, 8 plain)

[Marshal2Crusaders]

And can you blame them? GW has a deep and undeniable man-crush on sweaty, hot, muscular super-human freaks in skin-tight metallic armor.

Power Armor is hardly skin tight. MJOLNIR Mk.VI Armor is form fitting and even it is massive. Power armor is even larger/thicker.

[Aldramelech]

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear! Here we go! lol

[EmperorEternalXIX]

I am glad to see people putting serious thought into the subject; it's good to know I'm not alone.

All of the suggestions in this thread from serious posters really show some great thought. Much better than my paradigm-shifting "let us have more of these crappy guys" ideas. Really good stuff, especially about the bolter: I really like the idea of a squad being full of bolters getting some special benefits.

I don't really agree that they should be on par with Chaos; I'm of the mind that Chaos should be the most powerful army in the game, period. But ultimately, the marines do not feel right at all. Many of their options and special rules are completely counter-intuitive. Two of the most useful rules in the book (Combat Tactics and ATSKNF) are negated by the benefits most special characters have (Sicarius Ld thing, Chapter Tactics, etc). Characters often have completely odd powers that don't compliment each other (orbital bombardment on assault-oriented chapter masters, Lysander's bolter drill [yes even though it's there as a throwback], etc). Many units are overcosted or have meta game implementations that make them completely non-viable (The Vindicator is a joke compared to the utility and cost of the ACHB Predator, for example, or the range of the Whirlwind).

My marines are seen as an easy target by everyone in my club. I was really shocked to see people still touting that utility line in this thread, the bit about how they are one of the most forgiving armies, etc. How is an army of 50 dudes with a pathetically small amount of high-end offensive punch more "forgiving" than an army of 150 T4 models with a ubiquitous almost non-negatable 4+ save?

I'm partnering with a Tau player for a local doubles tournament, and we have just been amazed at how sadly my 1250 points of the list is shaping up relative to his. He is running a list with with something like 66 models and has managed to fit in 8 battlesuits with gun drones and 4 broadsides in the list as well as three bigger troops units. This isn't even a 5th edition codex.

The current space marine codex is a real failure when it comes to synergy. And by synergy I don't mean "Unit A gives a Good Rule to Unit B, so Spam Unit B FTW" -- which might as well have been printed on the title of this codex.

I feel like with the current desperate situations outlined in the rulebook, there should be a lot of desperation to the marines' "feel." The bolter thing I mentioned earlier would make more sense; I'd love to not feel like the bolter is a "wasted" model in a squad. I'd also like to see other "Desperate" stuff...like when a dreadnought gets its first immobilized result it can only move D6" and can no longer pivot in the shooting phase, for example. That would make the thing "feel" tougher. Vehicles like the Vindicator need some kind of rules help to prevent their totally easy neutralization (any roll above a 2 on the damage chart eliminates this tank from being useful). I'd up it to 120 points and make it so the cannon can never get a weapon destroyed result -- then people would be pretty terrified of it, eh?

I wish the transports had more utility as offense. Currently a razorback is a stupidly worthless buy for its points and everything else is retarded as far as offense goes. I have to buy roughly 3 transports a game minimum if I want to be competitive; more if I'm podding (which is always suicide but that's another thread entirely).

This is all just hyperbole, of course. GW's current strategy of keeping the model count super low but giving some kind of awesome powers to the leaders isn't going to help. I'd rather have an army that can be competitive with a basic HQ; I don't want to be any of the Ultramarines and I don't want to be any of the other guys in the book either. I want to just be the Space Marines, not the Space Marines +1.

The loss of the trait system was a huge hit to us. With some tweaking it could have been great. Now...well...they might as well call the !@#$ing thing "Codex: Vulkan Spam."

[Melissia]

the way it currently stands a charging guardsman has more attacks than a space marine which isn't right.No, they don't. That CCW the Guardsmen have does not grant an extra attack in any situation. I don't even know why they bothered to list it at all. (Tactical) Marines and Guardsmen have the same number of attacks on the charge-- 2. One base attack, one attack from charging. Unlike Marines, however, the Guardsmen cannot fire their weapons before charging.

Power Armor is hardly skin tight. MJOLNIR Mk.VI Armor is form fitting and even it is massive. Power armor is even larger/thicker.It was a joke dude.

[DarkLink]

I've never been very impressed with basic tactical marines. Basic vanilla Chaos Marines, and now Grey Hunters, are in my opinion quite a bit better. Sure, combat tactics is nice, and all SM's have frag and krak grenades, but a bunch of T4, 3+ save models with bolters and a single close combat attack aren't that intimidating. Buying a heavy weapon for the squad isn't that great of an option, as you're spending nearly 200pts to get that weapon and a bunch of bolters, turning the tactical squad into an overpriced, underpowered Dev squad. Yet dropping the heavy weapon means dropping the main source of killing power in the unit aside from the special weapon (which, typically being short ranged, also conflicts with the use of the heavy weapon on its own).

If I want flexible units that are good at everything, I look at CSM's. They have a bunch of attacks in close combat, bolters and up to two special weapons, plus all the sargent stuff and god powers. Grey Hunters are even better, having counter charge and Wolf Guard sargents (though they then don't get a second special weapon, balancing it out).

I once tried out a space marine army, when the new codex came out. But after playing my Grey Knights (which are far better at being jacks of all trades, despite how overpriced they are, particularly compared to CSM cult troops), I just couldn't play tactical marines. Even with combat tactics and ATSKNF and combat squads, they just didn't have the same flexibilty and damage output my Grey Knights did. Grey Knights can move and shoot everything. Tacticals suck at moving and shooting. Grey Knights can get double heavy flamers (devestating after a tank shock), Tacticals can't. Sure, the basic Grey Knight is overpriced (because half of those special rules they pay so much for either don't do anything anymore, or aren't nearly as good as they should be), but the only thing Tactical Marines have on them is the ability to take cheap transports. If I could take rhino's and razorbacks with my Grey knights, I would, as the Grey Knight's greatest weakness in 5th is the inability to go mech with anything other than Land Raiders, giving the army a ridiculously low model count that falls over to a stiff breeze if you manage to blow up the Land raiders.

As for chaos being the most powerful army, I can't say I entirely agree. Only a very small portion of the Chaos Space Marines are made up of the 10000 year old traitors. The vast majority of Chaos are renegade marines or new(ish) chaos recruits which are more or less on par with Loyalist Marines. And even then, they aren't the biggest, baddest things out there. Chaos Daemons in terms of raw power are much stronger, and Grey Knights are to normal Space Marines what Space Marines are to Guardsmen (in the fluff anyways) and do nothing but fight said Daemons. Tyranids and Orks have overwhelming hordes capable of destroying massive swaths of the most heavily defended space in the galaxy on sheer momentum alone. All the while, Chaos Marines can't fight their way out of the Cadian Gate.

Eldar are just trying to survive, and frankly, Tau are only still alive because no one's bothered to wipe them out yet. A hive fleet or large enough Waaahg and they're gone.

[Marshal2Crusaders]

It was a joke dude.


I know :cool:

[Melissia]

Yes, CSMs are underpriced for what they do. We all know that already :P

[Katie Drake]

No no, it's not Codex: Vulkan Spam. It's Codex: Vulkan and Friends because inevitably the core of the army revolves around Vulkan and a bunch of other units that most benefit from his buffs - so in other words Tactical Squads with flamers or meltas, Sternguard with combi-weapons, Assault Terminators with thunder hammers, Land Speeders and Attack Bikes with heavy flamers and multi-meltas respectively and so on.

The biggest mistake that GW made with Vulkan was making his ability so easy to exploit - basically every decent unit in the Space Marine army can get at least one of the weapons that Vulkan improves.

[Crae]

No no, it's not Codex: Vulkan Spam. It's Codex: Vulkan and Friends.......
The biggest mistake that GW made with Vulkan was making his ability so easy to exploit - basically every decent unit in the Space Marine army can get at least one of the weapons that Vulkan improves.

-Signed-


About the Imp. guards, your correct, they only get one attack so are def. weaker. That said, I still think a basic marine that is supposed to be top of the line and not guards in power armour. Guards have other units to bolster their lack of cc abilities (pie plate throwers of doooooooommmmm!!!!).

Fluff wise the Tactical marine has gone through basic scout training, did a tour with a devastator squad, a tour with a Assault squad and if he survives all that, he ends up as a tactical marine. Tactical marines are those that have been tried, tested and survived. They are the ones you entrust most missions to and the back bone of the army. I personally would prefer if I could have most of my points invested in a solid core of flexible Tac marines that are ready for most situations. A flexible squad that is equipped allround with both good cc weapons/bolter and a special/heavy weapon is how a flexible unit should work. Wouldn't you rather want to play with or against a marine army that feels and looks like how they are described in the codex and books. I understand the need for balance, but I am pretty sure that most will agree that currently no one is realy impressed with the codex as is. I don't need flexible numbers or special rules. All I want is for Tac marines to be what they are supposed to be. I think sticking to the 10 marines for full equipment rule is fair, fits with the fluff (filling squads with reserve marines so they are at optimum str. all the time) and the combat squad rule make more then up for it.

The Chaos boys and wolves can keep their counter attack and marks and what not elite Troops they can get. I just want basic non/vanilla marines to feel right. I hate to have to play with special chars, unfluffy weird combinations ( 3vindicator/ rhino run, sternguards/vanguards and Terms with T-Hammers/S-shields, vulkan-melting pot) to be able to compete with other armies. I don't even want SM to win....I just want them to at least be able to get a draw, maybe even a single win from time to time. Right now its doesn't feel like codex spacemarines, it feels more like a big blunder of "on the paper good" options that forces us to run with stuff, that doesn't feel like something Robout Guillman ever wanted the spacemarines to be.

If I am honest, I can't even remember seeing any spacemarines (off ubber chessyness and doooooommmm) win any tournaments, since the new dex came out. In reality I can't even remember when I last saw a non vulkan-meltingpot army even win a game.

I know people still say its the most forgving army to play, but realy...its not. I play orks mostly atm (one of the top 3 armies with chaos and Imp guard. at tournaments) and they are definitely more forgiving then spacemarines are. I can lose tons and tons of vehicles and troops and still be able to draw home a win, almost no matter the odds. My good friend, that plays Chaos feels the same about his army and frankly he laughed at the new SM dex when it came out. We both feel that it is the saddest codex of them all. He actually said that he would rather play his Dark Eldar then that crap dex. (I am not entirely sure he was serious on that point, but close ;) )

In the end that extra cc weapon would make them more on par, with other core troop choices and it would make the two troop choices that spacemarines get, a real option and not just two over priced fog chart fillers.

As is, I would invite any SM player in my area to come play, and you can have that extra CC weapon when you play me or my friends, just so we can feel right, when we smash your little heads in ;)

Last but not least, I would love to hear how many of you would trade out 10 basic spacemarines, as is, for 200 pts. with a power fist, meltagun and M-launcher (no transport), with 200 points of your basic troops?.

I personally prefer my 205 points - 25 ork boys mob, that include a nob with p-claw, 'eavy armor, bosspole and two big shootas.

My mate gets 10 chaos marines with two meltaguns, champion with power fist and full load of cc weapons for 210 pts (btw don't think they are underpriced) or a 6 plaugemarines (FNP, T5, fearless, lose your +1 attack when you charge them, SOB's) including champion, powerfist and two meltaguns and cc weapons for 198 pts.

and so on and so forth.

[Aldramelech]

I have to admit to being surprised when I picked up Codex Space Marines. What was the point of giving them a bolt pistol as standard? The only point is to have an additional CC weapon, which they don't have! When would you use a pistol when you've got the main gun, unless you had another weapon to go with it?

But then again this is from the people who brought you a shotgun with two different strengths :rolleyes:

[RealGenius]

I play dark angels, and the only time i have outnumbered an opponent is when im facing Grey Knights.

I have a Black Templars army and I outnumber my opponents all the time. Once I think I even outnumbered (or was almost the same) as a Nid army. It was bizarre.

I also have a big Ork army and I was surprised to read that someone said Marine transports aren't offensive. If there is one thing that I don't want to see on the table when I'm playing my Orks, it is an LRC. I can't kill it with Lootas, I can't assault it effectively and it is going to chew through almost any squad I throw in front of it.

The demise of Orks in my area (Austin) started with the birth of the new Marine Codex. And since IG came out they haven't been seen at a tournament since.

We are in the midst of the Badab campaign here and there are a ton of powerful Vanilla Marine builds that are crossing over from the campaign into tournaments and being really effective, even against Nids which are having a rebirth of sorts.

I think you guys might need to start reinventing some of your Marine builds to tackle Hordes. What about the dirt cheap Thunderfire cannon? Free flamer in Tac squads of 10? It seems like Marines are ripe for killing hordes.

[Katie Drake]

I have to admit to being surprised when I picked up Codex Space Marines. What was the point of giving them a bolt pistol as standard? The only point is to have an additional CC weapon, which they don't have! When would you use a pistol when you've got the main gun, unless you had another weapon to go with it?

But then again this is from the people who brought you a shotgun with two different strengths :rolleyes:

So the Marines can fire a shot before charging into combat. It's actually a lot more useful than it sounds. :)

[Aldramelech]

So your going to put your Bolter down, draw your pistol, run towards the enemy (Shouting Agggggggh! one would assume) firing as you go and then what? Well I would grab something long and sharp at this point, but it would seem this is beneath our genetically enhanced Mensa candidates.

[Nabterayl]

I know people still say its the most forgving army to play, but realy...its not.
This, at least, I am glad about. Elite armies should not be easy or forgiving to play. The more elite the force, the more cunning the required tactics and the less available margin of error. Space marines are supposed to be the Imperium's ultimate special forces. All the fancy kit, logistical support, and superhuman physiology is just there to support that basic doctrine.

I hear people's complaints about the codex, but to me it feels like GW tried to make this codex one that emphasized precision and coordination. They may have failed, but I appreciate the effort to treat marines like an elite force that fights like an elite force, and not a forgiving, "average" army. After all, ten marines in the fluff could probably stop 400 orks, but their plan would not be to stand in front of the charging horde and gun them all down.

[Duke]

So your going to put your Bolter down, draw your pistol, run towards the enemy (Shouting Agggggggh! one would assume) firing as you go and then what? Well I would grab something long and sharp at this point, but it would seem this is beneath our genetically enhanced Mensa candidates.

LOL, too true... Apparently we all have group amnesia. "Did anyone bring their hand weapons?" ... "Anyone... Anyone?" .... "Bueller?"

Duke

[Cthulhu]

I am glad to see that GW at least fixed the CCW problem in the SW codex and gave Grey Hunters the additional CCW in addition to the bolt pistol.

I usually play CSM and always make the joke to my friend who plays Marines that after 10k years in the Eye of Terror CSM squads bring everything to the battle.

"Do you think we'll need krak grenades?"
"I dunno, just bring it."
"What about this axe? I have a bolter and a bolt pistol, should cover it right?"
"JUST BRING IT!"

[Nabterayl]

That's what happens when you don't have to get the blessings of the techmarines to bring every darn weapon ;)

"Lo, Brother, before you awake the gun spirit of your bolter, you must repeat three hundred times the Supplication of Loading."

"I have done so, Brother Techmarine. It took me two days."

"And before you draw your pistol from its holster, four hundred times must you repeat the Litany of the Sidearm."

"So I have done, Brother. It took me three days."

"And before you can activate your chainsword, Brother, you must perform five hundred times the Ritual of -"

"Oh, never mind!"

[DarkLink]

Heh, wrist mounted Storm Bolters, Nemesis Force Weapons and True Grit FTW! :p

Now we Grey Knights need special rules that actually do something (and don't try and give them rules that only effect Daemons, I like to play other people, too)

[Melissia]

Honestly sometimes, what's with people? Saying Marines are Guardsmen in Power Armor? Are you smokin' something Crae?

Just because other armies have troops which are better than Tacticals in an assault does not mean that Tactical Marines are by any means bad. Tacticals are excellent choices and good all-around, and can effectively support any specialists within the Marine army. And now that they have a bolt pistol they are actually tactical, as they can choose to rapid fire or to assault when they get close enough.

May surprise you, but many armies can't do that, they must forego shooting anything but special weapons in order to assault. And yet Marines also have deadly shooting with bolter shock. Never underestimate the power of bolters in large numbers.

[Crae]

Honestly sometimes, what's with people? Saying Marines are Guardsmen in Power Armor? Are you smokin' something Crae?

No, I am not smoking anything. Thou sometimes I wish I where..... The comment was sarcastic. I Realy don't think they are Imp. guards in power armour. But you still don't get a lot of bang for your buck.


Just because other armies have troops which are better than Tacticals in an assault does not mean that Tactical Marines are by any means bad. Tacticals are excellent choices and good all-around, and can effectively support any specialists within the Marine army. And now that they have a bolt pistol they are actually tactical, as they can choose to rapid fire or to assault when they get close enough.

May surprise you, but many armies can't do that, they must forego shooting anything but special weapons in order to assault. And yet Marines also have deadly shooting with bolter shock. Never underestimate the power of bolters in large numbers.

It doesn't surprise me me at all, but on the other hand these troops don't depend on a single unit to do every thing. Orks boyz are dirt cheap, so they can be supported by loads of shooty stuff from the backline. Guards have a hard core back bone and should not depend on assaulting units. Tau totally avoid it, except to stall enemies. Marines have always counted on them having a robust baseline. That was the core idea of the marines. Bolt pistols are great, but they just lack the power to get stuck in afterwards. A lot of SM players end up depending on the expensive stuff to carry a punch. In my experience, that just means less models to kill and in effect it cripples them even more to have a lower body count. The enormous amount of 3ap weapons that have come out really hurts that type of army even more, since a few pie templates realy reduces the amount of effective power that the marines have.


I also have a big Ork army and I was surprised to read that someone said Marine transports aren't offensive. If there is one thing that I don't want to see on the table when I'm playing my Orks, it is an LRC. I can't kill it with Lootas, I can't assault it effectively and it is going to chew through almost any squad I throw in front of it.

The demise of Orks in my area (Austin) started with the birth of the new Marine Codex. And since IG came out they haven't been seen at a tournament since.

I think you guys might need to start reinventing some of your Marine builds to tackle Hordes. What about the dirt cheap Thunderfire cannon? Free flamer in Tac squads of 10? It seems like Marines are ripe for killing hordes.

I agree, the landraiders, and especially the crusader, is a pain in the behind if you play orks. Orks lack any real power to punch through their armour at range. On the other hand the way I play my orks, usually means it gets hung on a hook by my dread or kans. I do think he meant razorbacks thou and I can see a point when you compare it to chaos rhinos with their havoc launcher upgrade (str 5, blast-twinlinked), that doesn't lose them any transport ability and puts them a bit more then a basic razorback, but with 10 man transport instead of 6.

As to reinventing builds. Build usually mean you are forced to chose something you don't really want. Special characters, bunch of TH/SH termies, sternguard and so on are not very "fluffy" and might be fine in a tournament, but personally I would get a bad taste if I would have to depend on stuff like that to even have a chance at winning. If you specialise on killing hordes and your opponent turns up with something different?. Most of the time you don't even know what you are fighting beforehand and that calls for broad builds that can take on both chaos and ork or what ever else. There isn't a lot of pony tricks to rely on, as a marine. That is why having a broad "elite" troop choice is the least they should have.


This, at least, I am glad about. Elite armies should not be easy or forgiving to play. The more elite the force, the more cunning the required tactics and the less available margin of error. Space marines are supposed to be the Imperium's ultimate special forces. All the fancy kit, logistical support, and superhuman physiology is just there to support that basic doctrine.

I hear people's complaints about the codex, but to me it feels like GW tried to make this codex one that emphasized precision and coordination. They may have failed, but I appreciate the effort to treat marines like an elite force that fights like an elite force, and not a forgiving, "average" army. After all, ten marines in the fluff could probably stop 400 orks, but their plan would not be to stand in front of the charging horde and gun them all down.

I agree, they should not be forgiving. But on the other hand they centralised to much of the power on small very expensive options. If they get taken out, they are pretty much a mess. The new codex has a lot of nice stuff in it, but it is sadly, as a lot of previous posters said, a problem that they give more "power stuff" instead of relying on tactics and a good baseline to out manoeuvre you enemy or put pressure on your enemy. The game needs to be balanced and as is atm, why should you want to play marines if you can play wolves or chaos, that both get better basic troops and can do the same....just better?

[EmperorEternalXIX]

Even the Blood Angels PDF has better synergy than the Space Marines. Though they are gimpy, the Dark Angels doublewing list still has a lot of damage output potential as well.

The other thing about the SM codex is there are a lot of things in it we totally didn't ask for. Sternguard? Special bullets? WTF. Thunderfire Cannon? WTF. I'm glad we got it, of course, but I don't understand where or how in the fluff they came up with these things.

[Melissia]

A lot of SM players end up depending on the expensive stuff to carry a punch. In my experience, that just means less models to kill and in effect it cripples them even more to have a lower body count.
Which is a problem with the players more than the army itself, building bad army lists and etc.

[EmperorEternalXIX]

That's a pretty foolish idea. I think all the Nob bikers, Seer Councils, Plague Marines, and Leman Russes of the world pretty directly contradict the idea that taking better offensive units to perform offensive duties is a "problem." Either way it is a bit asinine; you are basically agreeing with my synopsis by saying that we should be trying to make the SM lists horde-like and spamming our crappest guys. But our crappest guys are 16 points apiece and have 1 attack and only 10 models to a squad. You may think this "only" in the sense of it just being whiny, and that lots of other armies endure these same limitations. But really, they don't.

With every other army in the game, virtually, it is perfectly viable to use troops to get these jobs done. The Space Marines do not have this option. If I plonked down 6 troop choices full of Tactical Marines with rhinos, it would yield me 66 models, costing somewhere in the neighborhood of 1200 points (sans most weapons). What other army has a squad whose weapon options are limited to NOTHING unless the fullest, most expensive iteration of that squad is taken to start with? What other army could spend 1200 points on troops and get 6 flamers and 6 heavy bolters for weapons, and that's it? The synergy is awful.

I don't think tacs are overpriced, really, but it's these arbitrary and strange limitations placed on most of them that really do this. Take combat squads for example. Does GW really think that I am going to turn the tide of a game by not utilizing 4 bolter marines per every 10 marines I bought, just so I can fire a lascannon or a heavy bolter?At best that is, as I already mentioned, 1200 points for 6 troop squads, yielding a total of...6 heavy weapons, and 24 models that will not even move or fire for most of the game. Who on earth thought this would be a useful way of using the rule? And yet, it seems the rules for the tac squad were written with this exact idea in mind. And yes, there are better ways of using combat squads of course, but all of them are equally stupid. "Screen your special weapons and sergeants with bolter scrubs! Use them as a speedbump!" Yeah, good plan -- cause a powerfist with 3 attacks and a flamer is going to definitely destroy an entire unit of enemies after I feed them half my men, right?

The army's problem is synergy and "action" count. Less models is one thing, but less UNITS means only one potential offensive or defensive action per unit, and currently this is where horde armies excel. It isn't just that they have a million more "Wounds to Zero" (aka number of wounds to take before they are destroyed), it's that you can have so many more units capable of mounting a decent or strong offense.

To give you an idea, I have an outflanking unit of Scouts. Only 5 of them, carrying a power fist. This unit has done perhaps a thousand times more damage to enemy armies than my three tactical squads have. This unit is cheap, and thus, if it manages to kill an enemy unit of any kind, it usually makes its points back. It's also scoring and outflanking, and if I include the scout speeder it can cover a very large area of ground. This unit has often won me games. And that is just ONE of it. Why not make an entire army of these guys? On paper this is a great idea; 3 full scout squads outflanking, and 3 5-man setups with Speeders. This clocks in at just under a thousand points, includes gear unlike my earlier figures, and yields 6-9 scoring units that outflank. So why don't I do it?

BECAUSE HAVING TO USE ALL SCOUTS TO MOUNT AN OFFENSE IN A SPACE MARINE FORCE IS STUPID, THAT'S WHY. It's just as stupid as needing 10 terminators, 30 sternguard, 6 drop podding dreadnoughts, or any of the other lame builds out there (including the Big Green Twin-Linked Bull**** Machine).

There is a big difference between the Space Marine codex, and Chaos players who take 3 squads of 6 plague marines as their core instead of 5 squads of 10 CSM with T5 icon, and wonder why they are losing.

[Aldramelech]

I have to agree. Scouts being better then Marines? It makes no sense.....

[Katie Drake]

Just because other armies have troops which are better than Tacticals in an assault does not mean that Tactical Marines are by any means bad.

I dunno, how else does one judge that a unit is effective or not? Isn't that kinda like saying that Windows Vista isn't crap despite the fact that Windows 7 is so much better?

And it's not just in assault that Tactical Marines suck. See the OP's post above for a list of reasons that Tacticals are bad.

[Melissia]

And yet, despite all the theorycrafting claiming otherwise, well put together armies of lots and lots of tacticals work, and work consistently.

[Drunkencorgimaster]

That's a pretty foolish idea. I think all the Nob bikers, Seer Councils, Plague Marines, and Leman Russes of the world pretty directly contradict the idea that taking better offensive units to perform offensive duties is a "problem." Either way it is a bit asinine;

BECAUSE HAVING TO USE ALL SCOUTS TO MOUNT AN OFFENSE IN A SPACE MARINE FORCE IS STUPID, THAT'S WHY.

When in doubt...just flame 'em.

[EmperorEternalXIX]

1.) It's not a flame to say that an idea has no basis in reality.
2.) Those selectively chosen sentences are attached to a massive exposition that has to do with the conversation, and explains the relevance of the comments in great detail. What does the above post contribute?
3.) Using all scouts in a Space Marine army is rather against the point of the army being "The Space Marines" don't you think? Why not just make tacticals a 0-1 elites choice while we're at it? I'm sure some people want to run mostly scout armies; it should not be more viable than a tactical marine themed army. And it is. Hence my point: It makes no fluff or game sense for me to be relying on a scout squad to bail out an entire army of tactical marines.
4.) I don't know what planet do you play on where all of these armies of tac squad spam are doing so well. Against what, exactly, are they working so well against? Assault Tau or footslogging Guard? Maybe one of those aforementioned Nurgle armies where they are surprised to lose when they only put down 12 models on the table? And what exactly is "lots and lots of tacticals" anyway?

Where I play the competitive factor is pretty high even in friendly games, and the kinds of lists you see and players you face do not make massive mistakes or take units that are ineffective because they are partial to them. My friends find my army laughable, right now; it is by far the least intimidating force on the table at my local club. It's not just me, either; we have other loyalist marine players who have resorted to counts-as chaos to try and dance around the tactical squad viability issue, and otherwise we are all very guilty of shuffling through the special characters week to week, trying to find some answer to make the army "feel" right. We have all failed. Perhaps you would like to explain to them that the issue is that we are silly and aren't taking enough tactical squads (you must be talking about using more than 4, because we have all used as many as 4 and had little to no difference in the results).

Ultimately it is a question of feel, and if it feels wrong, it is something only those of us devoted to it can understand.

With respect to other posters, you can believe what you like to believe. The fact that I can write a dissertation on the faults of this army supported by detail and fact ought to illustrate there is some reality to the situation. Particularly while replies are consisting of single-line remarks with complete disregard for the obvious facts garnered by experiences shown by other users on the forum.

I think that I am not the one in doubt here. My viewpoint on elite armies, the space marines in particular, are all but cemented in logic and factual experiences. A blind one-line post that says "Yeah, but no" hardly disputes any of what the thread has discussed. My points are not theoretical; I am looking for the reason behind what I have seen on the tabletop week after week, not simply just postulating about gameplay scenarios..

[Katie Drake]

And yet, despite all the theorycrafting claiming otherwise, well put together armies of lots and lots of tacticals work, and work consistently.

If that's the case, please provide at least one example to back up this claim. Additionally, please answer these:

In what sort of environment are these armies "working" in? Friendly/casual? Competitive?

How many is "lots and lots"?

What does this supposed "well put together" army of Tactical Marines look like? I don't mean colour schemes, I mean army list.

If someone, anyone can answer these questions and back up their claims with some sort of tangible proof (like a link to a site that shows a Tactical Marine heavy Space Marine army list placing well in a reputable tourney) then we have a conversation. Otherwise we're stuck with EmperorEternal writing excellent posts only to be 'sniped at' with one or two sentence responses with no substance or any real meaning to them.

[Lerra]

The most recent local tournament winner had a list something like this (2k):

Vulcan He'stan, a captain, and squad of 10 sternguard with 10 combi-meltas in a drop pod
Dakka predator
Whirlwind
2 Dreadnoughts with MM
2 Land Speeders with MM
Lots and Lots of tactical marines (5 10-man squads, each with powerfist, meltagun, and a heavy weapon)

His list is a major pain in the rear with that drop pod o' doom and a horde of tactical marines hiding behind the rest of the army. Local meta-game is no fully-mech lists, but lots of lists with some mech or 2-3 Land Raiders. About 50% of armies are some flavor of Space Marine, with Tyranids as the #2 army. Lots of Elite armies - even Tyranids tend to run heavy on the big guns (we've got about 4 guys who run nearly the same tyranid list >_< a dakka flyrant, a tyrant, lots of genestealers, 2-3 zoanthropes, 2-3 carnifexes).

I really dislike tactical squads and completely agree with the reasoning above. They just feel kind of impotent - it's not that they are underpowered, just that they don't feel like Space Marines. It often feels like they don't do much except survive or die. Even in the tournament-winning list, the space marines tend to just sit there and soften stuff up while everything else in the list does the "real" fighting.

I play a tac-marine-free Deathwing list, which is less competitive but feels a lot better. Terminators play like regular space marines ought to, according to the fluff, and being able to move and shoot with >12" range is great.

[Melissia]

If that's the case, please provide at least one example to back up this claim.

It's already been provided in this thread. I'm not a Marine player, don't expect me to come up with lists and playstyles for that boring old army.

But say... a 1750-2000 list with four to six mechanized marine squads w/meltaguns, 1-2 chaplains with assault squads, and some predator destructors or some other heavy support choice is usually much more effective than many of the armies that rely too heavily on overly expensive hq choices and elites...

[Katie Drake]

It's already been provided in this thread. I'm not a Marine player, don't expect me to come up with lists and playstyles for that boring old army.

Well this just goes toward proving my point. Nobody can find what I asked for, because it probably doesn't exist. :P


For those on the fence about the whole issue, take this into account. Nobody at the BOLS Lounge (and I imagine anywhere else) can find anything substantial showing the Marines in action and doing well with a Tactical heavy army. Why? 'Cause it doesn't work.

[Duke]

@ Katie: First off, let me say that I agree with the original theory that Tac Squads are underpowered.
- Bolters should be assault 2
- Tactical Marines should come stock with B.P. & CCW

I do have one question: What counts as "Tactical heavy?" 5 tac Squads?... Put simply it is hard to field an effective tac heavy list becasue of the expense. A fully effective tac squad (Razorback, Heavy Weapon, Assault weapon, power fist, combat squaded) runs in over 250 points. If being tactical heavy means having 4 or more squads then we have run out of points as four squads is 1250+ points. Throw in a decent HQ and we are already at 1500+. This leaves 500 points for Heavy Support/ fast Attack/ Elites... Not much (but you could do something like TH/SS Termies in a LRC...

Anyhow, I think that marines aren't the 'crap,' I keep hearing. From a fluff perspective they are, but if you want 'fluffy,' tactical squads then play movie marines (One squad = 2000 points.)

Yes, we don't see a lot of marines winning the tournaments... But aren't we analyzing this imporperly? To truly get an honest statistical representation we must first determine the percentage of entrants that are playing Marines vs. The number of ofther armies. Then we can statisically compare apples to apples. It could be argued that Marines aren't winning because there are less overall entrants who are playing marines. (Just playing devils advocate here).

Cheers!

Duke

[Aldramelech]

@ Katie: First off, let me say that I agree with the original theory that Tac Squads are underpowered.
- Bolters should be assault 2
- Tactical Marines should come stock with B.P. & CCW

I do have one question: What counts as "Tactical heavy?" 5 tac Squads?... Put simply it is hard to field an effective tac heavy list becasue of the expense. A fully effective tac squad (Razorback, Heavy Weapon, Assault weapon, power fist, combat squaded) runs in over 250 points. If being tactical heavy means having 4 or more squads then we have run out of points as four squads is 1250+ points. Throw in a decent HQ and we are already at 1500+. This leaves 500 points for Heavy Support/ fast Attack/ Elites... Not much (but you could do something like TH/SS Termies in a LRC...

Anyhow, I think that marines aren't the 'crap,' I keep hearing. From a fluff perspective they are, but if you want 'fluffy,' tactical squads then play movie marines (One squad = 2000 points.)

Yes, we don't see a lot of marines winning the tournaments... But aren't we analyzing this imporperly? To truly get an honest statistical representation we must first determine the percentage of entrants that are playing Marines vs. The number of ofther armies. Then we can statisically compare apples to apples. It could be argued that Marines aren't winning because there are less overall entrants who are playing marines. (Just playing devils advocate here).

Cheers!

Duke

Interesting. It would be nice to hear the GW policy on this. Is the Space Marine Codex regarded as an entry level codex aimed at the younger player? What percentage of SM players are under 18? etc. etc.

It does seem to be the kids Codex of choice, is this why it never performs? or is it that the designers were worried about being SM biased they deliberately broke them?

[Katie Drake]

The Space Marines have always been the 'entry level' army of choice. In earlier editions, Space Marines were a forgiving army to play because their units were so rock hard in every arena. Unfortunately, the newest books released since the advent of 5th edition (as well as some of 5th edition's rules itself) have changed things up so that armies full of cheap, expendable troops are generally the way to go.

I think the reason that Space Marines aren't performing is because the game designers aren't realizing what a horde friendly environment the game has become.

[Lanparth]

Horde friendly is awesome. I love fighting the near impossible battle to win against the endless hordes! Its great fun :D

[Nabterayl]

Interesting. It would be nice to hear the GW policy on this. Is the Space Marine Codex regarded as an entry level codex aimed at the younger player? What percentage of SM players are under 18? etc. etc.

It does seem to be the kids Codex of choice, is this why it never performs? or is it that the designers were worried about being SM biased they deliberately broke them?
I'm sure it's regarded as an entry-level codex, but it isn't written as an entry-level codex any more. It's not just the change in editions; I think the book screams "local superiority army" on its own merits. The design philosophy has more in common with the eldar codices than it does with any other codices I can think of.

[Duke]

Interesting. It would be nice to hear the GW policy on this. Is the Space Marine Codex regarded as an entry level codex aimed at the younger player? What percentage of SM players are under 18? etc. etc.

It does seem to be the kids Codex of choice, is this why it never performs? or is it that the designers were worried about being SM biased they deliberately broke them?

Im going to have to say that it is designed as an entry- level codex. My reason is simple: When can you remember a time where the "starter pack," does not include Space marines? My memory could be slipping, but I think every single starter box has inlcuded marines... It doesn't get more 'entry-level,' than that.

Also, everytime I would go into a GW store I would always see the Shirts pitching Marines as the best starter army because their statline is simple, the wepons are forgiving and it is often cheaper to build a 'semi-competitive,' army.

Duke

[Drunkencorgimaster]

Where I play the competitive factor is pretty high

I never would have guessed.

[mountaincycle661]

I never would have guessed.

Dude, I'm sorry...but you're just being a jerk at this point. Ive read this whole post and you've contributed nothing useful or constructive. One-line sarcastic replies arent helping anyone. If you'd like to maturely discuss the issue at hand, leave your attitude at the door.

That said, I again agree with EmperorEternal. The example of 6 tactical squads putting out a max of 6 heavy weapons and 6 assault weapons really put it into perspective for me. Thats a lot of points going into just 12 weapons (besides bolters, which at this point are really just run-of-the-mill. They wont do anything against hordes either due to the ridiculous amounts of cover in 5th ed).

However, a friend of mine uses a list somewhere along these lines. And i know, it uses a special character...but hes cheap and his buffs are well worth it.

Approx. 2000pts of "GET FISTED!"

Pedro Kantor

Termi Chaplain with SS/TH termies in Land Raider Redeemer

Sternguard - heavy flamer, couple of combi meltas, powerfist (expensive, i know. But they are scoring know with pedro...sooo...)

3-4 Tac squads - And it gets interesting here. He takes razor backs for these guys. Then, he combat squads all three tacs. The 5 man units with the heavy weapons (usually plasma cannons) set up on the home objective and blast away at the enemy from afar. meanwhile, the melta/flamer units ride in the razor backs, which also have lascannons on top. This way, he has mobile scoring units that fight up close with assault weapons, backed up by support fire and razor backs. Pedro is always where the fighting is thickest in order to provide that precious +1 attack.

The rest is experimental. He uses bikes, land speeders, dreads occasionally. Whatever, really.

I know it may not be the most hardcore list, but its beautifully painted (hes a golden demon winner) and we have a blast playing. Also, he doesnt mind being outnumbered and losing, so it works out for both of us....because i always hand him his own A$$ by turn 6 hahaha! With respect, of course...;)

[Duke]

@ Mountain Cycle: I think that your friend is right on (Review my earlier post). The only real way to make tactical squads viable is to do an assault weapon, heavy weapon, power weapon/ fist and a razorback. I usually put it like this

Tac Squad: (blood Angels)
Las cannon- This gives me "reach out and touch you," power for light Mech/ dreads.
Melta gun- Obivously this gives me the short range "sure thing,"
Razorback w/ Hvy Bolters- gives me mid range damage at 36" (also with 4-5 of these it adds up)
Power weapon- With only 5 guys the Power fist is too slow, I want to get some killy in before they strike (Also has to do with the fact that I play BA and he Dante/ Corbulo bomb)

So in short I have damage capacity at
Long range, Mid range and short range, not to mention a semi-effective assault capability which is compounded by my HQ selection.

This selection has yet to really let me down, against horde/ elite or whatever, but feel free to comment.

Duke

[Melissia]

*shrug*

I use Sisters lists. Pure Sisters to be exact. Tactical Marines are more efficient per points than Sisters are, and in fact without Acts of Faith Sisters would simply be left on the wayside and be completely unable to compete at all. They'd be classified as middle- to lower-tier in a fighting game, in part because they're rarely used, and in part because it takes a lot of skill and finesse to make them really successful against an upper-tier army in comparison to what it takes for other armies.

The way I see it, Marines are much easier to use. Better statline, better equipment, good rules (ATSKNF, Combat Squadding, Tactics, etc), free veteran, etc... all adds up. I pay 200+ points for a basic mechanized Battle Sisters squad, which is roughly the same as what you're going to pay for a similarly equipped Marine squad.

The difference? Sisters are slightly better in shooting due to Divine Guidance and two special weapons, while Tactical Marines are better in every other circumstance. They are better in an assault (MEQ is a huge improvement in assaults over the human statline), they can take more damage due to increased toughness, they can shoot and then assault, they have free frag and krak nades making them able to assault most vehicles effectively, and so on and so forth. Tacticals have a very undeserved reputation for being bad.

I admit, when I design Marine lists (and I rarely do, but I have in the past), it's based off of my experience in playing Sisters. And these are almost always rather unorthodox lists because most people who play Marines operate on an entirely different mindset. Probably something to do with "oh that's cool, how can I incorporate that into my army?".

[EmperorEternalXIX]

You're very correct, Melissia. That is part of my complaint -- we all approach our lists with that mindset, most likely (the SM playerbase, I mean). This is a failing point of us as players, but also of the codex. When a codex is full of roughly 70% stuff which you'd be better off ignoring in a competitive environment, then I consider it a fault of the army itself, not necessarily the players.

I agree MEQ is a huge improvement over the sister statline, but ultimately, acts of faith and other unique facets of the Sisters army make it dangerous to engage in close quarters. The marines pose no such threat; if you are will to eat one flamer's worth of wounds, or take 2 swings of a power fist, then even a single power weapon wielding model can cripple 1/4 of smaller armies by decimating that one squad.

I recently took your advice and went tactical-heavy for an upcoming tournament, we will see how it works out.

[jeffersonian000]

I've put off reading this thread for a while now, and just decided today to jump in. I use to play Guard in 1st edition and Marines in 2nd edition before moving on to Sisters when they first came out at the end of 2nd (because Sister had a better feel for me as they combined some of the best aspects of Guard and Marines into a single army list). These days I mostly play pure Grey Knights.

From an elite army stand point, the Knights are a much better example of what being "elite" means. They have no low-end units: no scouts, no dedicated transports, no cheap special weapons. They have the most expensive Marines in the game (baring special characters that allow non-troops to be troops), can take either Dreadnoughts or Transport as heavy choices which limits them to no more three total, and are under-stat'd for their cost despite tons of special rules that are of very limited effect in an average game. Yet, they are elite. I will routinely run only half my army for the bulk of a game and only add in other units as needed to secure a win. Every other army out there out numbers my guys, out shoots my guys, and out fights my guys on a point by point basis. I win by staying flexible, using what I can take to the best advantage I can, and by not relying on any one unit to cary the battle.

Guess what? When I break out my Marines or Sisters and run them the same way, I win just as many games. Elite armies require a specific mind set rather than specific rules; if you plan out your army and play it well, you are a better General for the effort win or lose. Marines in the current edition are a great army with, frankly, too many options for an average or new player to be able to grasp and wield as an effective force. Melissia is correct in that the Marine basis units are golden and should be taken advantage of be a savvy General. All those bells and whistles can distract a good player from being a great player. If you can't win with Marines, you should try running an actual elite army for a while and see what an up hill fight really is.

SJ

[Bigred]

Excellent thread, so lets keep the conversation going. Please try to chill out a little on any personal sniping.

[Melissia]

I agree MEQ is a huge improvement over the sister statline, but ultimately, acts of faith and other unique facets of the Sisters army make it dangerous to engage in close quarters.

Which is as it should be, because they have nothing else but short ranged firepower to begin with. Their only infantry based special/heavy weapon with a range longer than 24" is the heavy bolter.

And their standard troop choices can't equip it.

[Duke]

Which is as it should be, because they have nothing else but short ranged firepower to begin with. Their only infantry based special/heavy weapon with a range longer than 24" is the heavy bolter.

And their standard troop choices can't equip it.

Well, there are a few more, but I get what you are saying.

Duke

[Melissia]

Well, there are a few more, but I get what you are saying.

Duke

Not on infantry. The other one is the Exorcist Missile Launcher, which is a tank-based weapon.

[Duke]

Not on infantry. The other one is the Exorcist Missile Launcher, which is a tank-based weapon.

Ah, I read over this so fast I didn't see "infantry," I only saw "over 24 inches" in this light your right (assuming no allies and such, Obviously)

Duke

[Melissia]

Allies is another story entirelly. I actually like to use a cheap Canoness with BoSL and Storm Bolter in order to provide a bubble of uber-stubborn (uber- in that it also effects pinning) of LD10 to my Guardsmen. Quite useful for the price, which is something like 55 points.

[Aldramelech]

OK, This is what Ive bought, all off Ebay and all very cheap. Should weigh in at 1500pts

1 Captain
1 Chaplin (Terminator) or 1 Librarian
1 HQ squad set
3 Tactical Squads
1 Assault Squad
1 Scout Squad
10 Terminators (Incl. 2 Assault Cannons)
2 Dreadnaughts (various weapons to be pinned and therefore interchangeable, 1 to be converted to an Ironclad)

So, I take it I am now the proud owner of a useless army?

[Melissia]

Except for the terminators, I'd say that is potentially a very potent list.

But then I can't say I've ever really been afraid of termies... stuff enough bolter rounds into them and they'll go down like anything else...

[Aldramelech]

If the Tacticals had the CCW I wouldn't have bothered with the Terminators, but as it is I thought I needed to beef it up a bit (+ Their Black Reach and therefore cheap). Maybe a 2nd Assault Squad? Switch them in and out with the Terminators depending on opponent. Devastators didn't appeal at all, they seem like putting alot of eggs in one basket.

[jeffersonian000]

OK, This is what Ive bought, all off Ebay and all very cheap. Should weigh in at 1500pts

1 Captain
1 Chaplin (Terminator) or 1 Librarian
1 HQ squad set
3 Tactical Squads
1 Assault Squad
1 Scout Squad
10 Terminators (Incl. 2 Assault Cannons)
2 Dreadnaughts (various weapons to be pinned and therefore interchangeable, 1 to be converted to an Ironclad)

So, I take it I am now the proud owner of a useless army?

That collection has the makings of a good list. All you need to do to make it a great list is figure out what you want to do with each unit and focus. You will need as much anti-tank as you can fit in (meltas are the meta-game choice, power fists/thunder hammers are good back-up/second choice). Marines do anti-horde fairly well, so you just want to retain your killing power (plasma/assault cannons are a better choice than lascannon for light vehicles and heavy infantry, and assault cannons can take out a Land Raider while also being a good anti-infantry weapon). After that, think about how you will deploy these units to make best use of their assets, think about how you will handle objectives, think about what you would do versus a specific or general army build, etc.

SJ