Hi all. Here’s my view for the immediate future....

CODEX LIST
To get a better idea of where people feel the Codex list sits I would like to ask everyone to post their own personal view on anything they feel needs a change and/or they would like to see, and your reasons. To keep it nice and concise, just list the unit etc. and give the reasoning behind it. I have a few ideas I’d like to float myself but, that said, I’m not unhappy with the Codex list and don’t feel as if they need to be absolutely included - more that they might make nice additions, if you like.

To keep the thread as clear as possible for me to track, I would ask that you please don’t reply to other people’s views (for the moment). Specific threads will be opened once I see what needs to be discussed.
This may have been done in the past but I would like to make sure I’m on the same page as everyone and up to date with current views as some may have changed and/or not been voiced etc. Also, so everyone else knows where others stand.

Once I have a better picture of what items people would like I can start looking at adjusting if necessary. I’m not categorically saying much will change and, in fact, very little may change – I won’t be able to make that decision until everyone’s given me their views and it’s discussed a bit further . I do want to say however, that I’m open to change. I’d also like to state that I’m not here to plug every single 40K advance into the Codex list. Epic doesn’t need it and can easily be an amalgam of new and old.

CHAPTER LISTS
With regards to the Chapter specific lists I don’t see why these can’t be sorted simultaneously (to a degree). Some things that might change in the Codex list could possibly map straight over into the Chapter lists; others won’t and these can be hammered out.

What I would like to hear is where the individual Sub Champs think their lists are at and what contentious points there may be from others (or even themselves to a lesser degree).

I would like to start a thread regarding the specific Chapters and see what others think about a given list. I realise not everyone will have played against a specific list but those who have will be able to give reasonable/good feedback and those who haven’t will at least be able to take that information away and digest it and maybe even want to test it themselves.

Lastly, I would like to say that while we may not always agree on things, I will do my best to listen to your reasoning and try for the best outcome for everyone. If you feel something I put forward annoys you or makes you chafe, it’s not done intentionally. I’m not here to make you angry or pissed off; I’m here to see things sorted out fairly as best I can.

Thanks all.

Ok, here's my list, taking the Epic UK Marine list as a baseline (Since it has a lot of good ideas, mostly inline with what the NetEA has done in the past), and proposing changes from there:


FORMATIONS
Vindicator Formation - 200pts
Predator Destructor Formation - 200pts
Tactical Formation - 275pts
Land Raider Formation - 325pts


UPGRADES
Dreadnoughts - 25pts each
Vindicators - 25pts each
Space Marine Captain - 25pts (Librarian & Chaplain to remain at 50pts)


=============================

Rationales:


Vindicator Formation - 200pts
===================
4 Vindicators are not attractive at 250 points.
If you have that many points spare, you find 25pts more and spend it on a Warhound Titan.


Predator Destructor Formation - 200pts
=========================
EUK have this formation priced at 225pts, which thereby also prices the Annihilator formation at 275pts.
FF4+ Pred D's are not worth 225pts, and if you have 275pts available, you take a Warhound Titan, not a Predator Annihilator formation.
A 25pt drop for both formation types is very reasonable.


Tactical Formation - 275pts
=================
This has already been approved for the NetEA list and I think it should remain.


Land Raider Formation - 325pts
====================
350pt Land Raider Formations still aren't worth taking.
I actually think 300pts is probably where this formation should really be priced, but 325pts is a good first step.



Dreadnoughts - 25pts each
=================
Returning to their original 4+ armour save and just costing them at 25pts each is a simple fix for this still rarely-seen unit.


Vindicators - 25pts each
===============
50pt Vindicators are unattractive.
If you have 50pts to spare currently you take 2x Razorbacks, which have more firepower plus two transport slots.
At 25pts they might be attractive.


Space Marine Captain - 25pts (Librarian & Chaplain to remain at 50pts)
=============================================
Captains have always been a poor choice for Marines compared to the other 3 character choices, perhaps a points break would fix that.



POSSIBLE EXTRA CHANGES:
===================
Land Raider Upgrade becomes 50pts.
Land Raider Upgrade becomes available to Tactical formations.
Warlord Titans to 800pts.

Think about it for a while, you know it makes sense. :-)

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

my one overwhelming problem with the core list is still this:

Aircraft should not be available outside the 33% restricted portion of the list

every other army has had its aircraft restricted in such a way, and it is currently possible (if not particularly interesting) to virtually assure a minor win by building an (almost) pure aircraft list with space marines.
the fact that noone has done this yet does not mean they wont, or that they should be able to. orks have had their aircraft restricted back into the 33% and they cant land to contest objectives.

in addition to the balance problems (which are admittedly minor in most situations) putting thunderhawks and landers back into the 33% segment of the list will not impact on the air assault capabilities of most designs (the entirely valid "5 thunderhawks and terminators" choice is still allowed, for instance) but it does stop the trend to load up on both thunderhawks and warhounds. Warhounds are a great choice, and are usually present in numbers within marine lists (too much so, as is often lamented) but forcing the marine player to choose between warhounds, thunderhawks, and thunderbolts, is a good thing, and will hopefully increase list diversity (or at the very least, swing the standard template a bit away from "Titans-And-Aircraft-A-Go-Go")

i'd also like to see predator and raider formations become more viable (perhaps raiders can have a rule that lets them pick up other formations, as though they where a warengine, they are, after all, supposed to be a transport vehicle)

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

My problem with the marine list(s) is ranging deeper than that : it is too specific (Air marines). I long for a list which would work for different styles of armies. More options. It's a bit sad that you have to use different lists to have some different flavour of marines (foot-slogging, air assault, tanks, etc); it means the army list is forcing the composition to stay into very narrow limits to work.

Possible steps to alleviate that :
- price the effectiveness of air assault on Thunderhawks, not infantry detachments
- remove the transport rules and make marines pay for transports.

E&C: So a load of boosts and no downgrades, to one of the most successful tournament lists? We're in danger of serious codex creep here.

How about this: +25 points on a thunderhawk.

+1 to zombo's comment. All improvements and no downgrades?

_________________

In general, a price decrease or a performance increase of uncommon formations and units, and possibly making marine formations like Predators a viable alternative to Warhounds. Most of the below is shamelessly cribbed from the Epic UK recent change.

Things that could do with a look at include:

Predators, probably splitting the cost of the two versions as well as a general price decrease of performance increase.

land raiders: Firefight increase (has this already happened?) and formation price decrease. Maybe add them in as transport options to more formations?

decrease in cost for the land speeder upgrades.

Vindicator formation price decrease. Hopefully if predators, vindicators and land raiders are made more palatable, they'll be taken in place of warhounds more often.

Scout formation price increase: These seem overly useful and powerful for their points.

Dreadnought change: I'd really like to take these more, but they're just not worth it at the moment, let alone their habit of slowing down the formation they're attached too. maybe making stormravens with their dreadnought transport capability available in the list would alleviate this somewhat.

Regarding the Captain change, I'd prefer to keep the three characters costing the same and make the captain more desirable in stead, but that would probably involve changing the commander rule instead, which isn't really in this scope. How about adding something like +1 extra attack firefight, or another shooting attack to make him more palatable?

the real problem is with the commander rule, so it should be adresssed at that level.

If Commander had a 15cm range it'd be worthwhile.

There's no danger of "codex creep", because everything I suggested modding *never gets taken* because it's a terrible, terrible choice.

Note that the EUK Marine list I suggest working off of also includes the downgrade to the Marine "Half BM's in engagements" to a minimum of 1 instead of zero, and includes the dual downgrades to Warhounds of 275pts and the new more damaging critical hit. In other words, not just upgrades.

My suggestions are more about fixing internal balance (Making taking tank formations not completely stupid) than doing anything with the external balance of the Marine list. If you want to do that, sure, mod more core formations like Assault Marines, Thunderhawks, and Devestators.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

If you make previously unfavourable choices into favourable ones, the average list gets better, hence codex creep.

You can't fix things just by making crap stuff cheaper, you have to make good stuff more expensive too.



All of which are readily accepted anyway, so no new downgrades.

Well, I've nothing intrinsically against 225pt Thunderhawks TBH.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Lets all add our suggestions but leave discussion and comments on others’ suggestions till later, as requested by Dobbs in his first post:

I'm writing up some suggestions, which I'll post later.

Dobbsy should be made moderator of this forum section rather than Hena (who I just noticed still is currently).

I'm sure CS will soon elevate Dobby's to full AC status.

I have to agree with most of E&C's recommendations, as they mostly address units that never seem to appear

For the Predators, were you proposing the Annihilator formation takes a 25 point drop as well, to 250?
Tac formations do show up as BTS/SupCom formations, but that's about it.

Dreadnoughts: Would it be better to make them 4+ and drop the points to 25, or keep it at 50 and give them 4+ Reinforced? While I know this isn't really in keeping with their 40k stats, it would give them a significant durability increase. That would help compensate for the vulnerability to AT, inability to be transported, and 15cm speed. Mostly my concern stems from the fact that regardless of their points value, adding a Dread gives you several drawbacks and (disregarding another Missile Launcher), only two real benefits: Heavy Armor, and a TL Lascannon shot. Looking at the 40k codex for inspiration, what about swapping out the Hellfire variant's Missile Launcher for a Twin-linked Autocannon? an AP4+/AT5+ shot in addition to the TL Lascannon would definitely make the chassis more desirable. The Tactical Dreadnought is pretty decent already if you can get its Power Fist into play, but it's not worth 50 points at anytime after an air assault or drop, when it's more likely to make it. Maybe giving it Ignore Cover on the Firefight, to represent its Heavy Flamer? This would prevent it from being totally sidelined.

Space Marine Captain probably should remain at the same points value as the others, but he's going to require some sort of advantage over the others. My first thought is swap his power weapon for either an EA+2 MW (Lightning Claws?) or EA+1 TK(1) (Thunderhammer?) Although the latter might be too strong. The reasoning behind a strengthened Assault weapon is that currently the go-to Space Marine Character is the Chaplain, for the Inspiring special rule. Possible competition needs to be able to provide an equally good benefit, and a likely extra kill in an engagement should frequently equal out to the +1 for Inspiring.

Agree with Jaggedtoothgrin about the Aircraft being restricted to 1/3rd. This would provide a limitation on Titan/Air Assault armies, and hopefully bring more variety. An Increase of 25-50 points to the Thunderhawk as well might go a long way towards balancing them out. I'm definitely in favor of shifting the "air assault fee" to the Thunderhawks, instead of the infantry. Athmospheric's suggestion to make Marines pay for transports is also an interesting option, as it might make Drop/Foot armies more likely. (Although 15cm Infantry don't do well at capturing objectives, it would provide a justification to not have all-mechanized formations)

Disagree with Jaggedtoothgrin about the Land Raiders being able to transport other formations. I can't think of any way that won't get confusing or exploitable. On the other hand, making them cheaper as a formation would address the lost value of their transport capacity.

MikeT's proposed increase to Scouts might be a good thing to consider. Adding 25 points might help balance out their current extreme utility (Scouts, Garrisonable transports, cheap activation)