Here it is, the bonus podcast we here at rites have promised to make up for our long absence. Join Godfrey and I as we chat about our favorite topic, Space Marines! We've both written articles detailing the plight of the space marine, but now we have the ability to post an in depth discussion between the two of us about it. If there's any rules or taking points we missed, make sure to hit us up in the comments!
lol, mawlocs.
ReplyDeleteI want to play my blood angels again.
Godfrey, maybe we can get a good fun game in against my non optimized blood angels hmm?
Also the space wolf players jumped to GK, who jumped to Necrons. just to generalize.
That's an important note that obviously skipped out minds. Thanks for catching it!
DeleteYou guys touched on what I think is the biggest issue with 40k; that is, how armor works, how it is perceived, and the mindset that a weapon is trash unless it can shoot a magic bullet that punches a hole in whatever armor you are shooting at. I think the player base has gotten too tied up with the notion that a good list should be almost untouchable by average / casual lists. This is an assumption that is being taken for granted as a good idea. 40k would benefit greatly from a reimagining of armor and what it means for units. Typically we see armies with either 3+ or 4+ armor, 5+ if you are talking about eldar. It really boils down to one question. Does your weapon punch through armor, yes or no? AP4+ = no, AP3- = yes. Should terminator armor really deflect a plasma gun shot just as effectively as it does a heavy bolter or gauss cannon shot? Is it more fun to shoot volleys back and forth, only removing a few models, or removing a squad that has been mowed down by tactically aggressive placement? As long as the interpretation of the stat line remains the same you will continue to see the issues with misbalanced armies and weapons and models that are outclassed by cheaper options.
ReplyDeleteI still think that thematically and when observing raw numbers, the way saves are organized is important. With the exception of chaos, who in my opinion should have a fair amount of AP 3 weapons (though maybe not so much torrent template), most armies have to level their anti tank weaponry at a marine to outright deny his armor save. That certainly speaks to the fluff that these guys are wearing tanks.
DeleteThe point where this falls apart is that by having a toughness value, you're vulnerable to mass small and midrange arms fire, and it's this volume that is drowning out power armor. You don't always have to deny me my armor save to just murder me because you brought a ton of budget guns.
This in turn touches on a point that I'm not sure we hit in the podcast and comes only further to light with the new codex rumors. The tactical squad is rumored to be staying at $40 for 10 dudes. That's amazing in price for plastic. What isn't amazing is that those dudes won't do you quite so much worth writing home about without the addition of a $40+ transport, in either a rhino chassis vehicle, or a drop pod. While many xenos feel pressure to pay for these as well, they gain significantly more from the transport than the marines do, making the gap appear more than a little disparaging.
Touching on your point about toughness and armor values. The way I'd like to see armor work is as a supplement to toughness. For example, a space marine with a 3+ armor save would be treated as T 8. When shot by a S4 AP5, two points of armor would be ignored, making them T 6, wounding on 6s. This would make AP of any value useful. Also, your monstrous creatures could be based on their toughness alone rather than needing armor.
DeleteAlso, I'd like to see cover saves affect rolls to hit rather than function as a backup save. So a 6+ cover save would require hits on 4s rather than 3s.
Godfrey and I had the quasi-elaborate solution of offering marines FnP against shots which do not ignore their armor save. Blood Angels and other squads tended to by an apothecary would receive +1 to this roll, helping unify marines in their capabilities. This however would lead to a more expensive marine, which GW doesn't seem to display any significant interest in.
Delete