PDA

View Full Version : Would you like Marines to be more elite?



Murphey
16-01-2010, 04:22
I've always been a little irked by several things with the way Space Marines are represented in game.

Their models are too small. Proportionately, they should be considerably taller than an imperial guard.

There's too many of them. In battles as small in scale as a 1500 pt game, you should not have as many marines running around as you do. (fluff wise, at least)

They are too weak/easily killed. Based on the fluff, I think marines are far too weak, and not anywhere near elite enough.

So, would you all prefer marines to be more elite, mechanically speaking?

~Murphey

starlight
16-01-2010, 04:28
Search *Movie Marines*. :)


It's recognised that if Marines on the tabletop were as hard as in the (admittedly unrealistic) background, there would about half of what we see, and you'd only face Marines about once a year, assuming you gamed at least once a week. :)

Koryphaus
16-01-2010, 04:47
And you would lose. Horribly.

Mecha King Ghidorah
16-01-2010, 04:52
Nah I think the current set up is fine if you were going to do marines more like fluff then you would have to do every race which would lead to some serious imba lol.

mightymconeshot
16-01-2010, 05:03
it should be more fluffy but if you did that other races would also have to be done that way.

Ivellis
16-01-2010, 06:00
Yes, in the scale of the current game marines are fine, otherwise CSM, Eldar, Daemons, Tyranids, etc. Would have to be better too, which makes no sense. (The whole game would need to be overhauled.)

Grimbad
16-01-2010, 07:36
I've always been a little irked by several things with the way Space Marines are represented in game.

Their models are too small. Proportionately, they should be considerably taller than an imperial guard.

Cadians and Vostroyans are gigantic. Get some proper human figures- the old metal guard or the steel legion, and you start to notice how massive the Marines are. I just checked with the guys currently in my painting area- Next to the Mordian doing a hand signal - bottom middle in GW shop's picture of the mordian squad - a tactical marine's neck is about as high as where the guardsman's forehead meets his hat. Considering the stance of the Marine's legs, that marine would be towering above the guardsman if standing up straight. Not to mention that size is not height, and the marine's shoulders are ridiculously far apart. It's my understanding that Steel Legion figures are the smallest and best-proportioned regiment GW sells, and I think they'd be a good marker for 'correct' guardsman scale. If all humans were scaled like them, the marines would look the part.

Rules-wise, I agree. They could be more elite, not through stat bonuses (4s represent superhuman and that's where it should stay) but through additional abilities. Almost all the USRs could be applied to Marines, by the fluff.

Vaktathi
16-01-2010, 08:29
Personally I think the problem is the fluff rather than the rules. If GW would stop putting out pulp drivel where ridiculously tiny numbers of space marines conquer entire enemy armies that they really shouldn't, and stops portraying them as divine angels of destruction and goes back to their imperial super soldier monk thing, we'd be ok. The current fluff, quite frankly looks ridiculous after playing a 40k game. Even if I lose to SM's, but take out a termi squad, a librarian, and two tac squad along with a predator, fluffwise the half company of IG I lost to do it is a stellar, galaxy changing epic victory for the Imperial Guard, yet its commonplace on the table. A company of troops (~100) no matter how powerful, is not powerful enough to conquer a world, unless they are going to destroy it, there just aren't enough to ensure compliance and victory, yet its commonplace in SM fluff. Likewise, half the SM fluff is stuff that the IG really are more suited for, yet SM's get thrown in just to look super badass taking brutal frontal assaults and winning primarily for e-cool points, even if in any realistic, or tabletop scenario, they'd all be dead in minutes, or by turn 2.

An individual space marine now is more powerful and capable than at any point in the history of 40k, and SW's are approaching a level on par with that of Khornate troops. more abilities, more gear, more special rules, etc.

The fluff needs to be toned down, less Brothers of the Snake and junk like the SM/SW codex fluff, and we'd be ok.

azimaith
16-01-2010, 08:31
Yes the only problem with marines are the model sizes of regular humans with their giant pumpkin like heads. When you put a marine next to say, a FW elysian model the effect is much different.

I would like to see more elite chaos marines especially. Make veteran squads full of guys who have been kicking around for the last 10 thousand years. Would love to be able to field a unit of Horusian Veterans.

Badger[Fr]
16-01-2010, 08:48
They are too weak/easily killed. Based on the fluff, I think marines are far too weak, and not anywhere near elite enough.

Hardly. At the moment, Space Marines lack offensive abilities, but they're just as tough as they're supposed to be. Hell, it takes a whole squad of well trained Guardsmen firing at point-blank range to kill a single Space Marine. Though, it is perfectly logical that a single Plasma or Melta shot could kill a Marine outright.



The fluff needs to be toned down, less Brothers of the Snake and junk like the SM/SW codex fluff, and we'd be ok.
Indeed. Guardsmen shouldn't be on par with the ridiculous junk Abnett pulled in the latest GG books, but neither should the Marines.


I would like to see more elite chaos marines especially. Make veteran squads full of guys who have been kicking around for the last 10 thousand years. Would love to be able to field a unit of Horusian Veterans.
To be fair, most CSM aren't Horusian Veterans. After no less than ten thousand years, you'd expect most of them to be either dead, turned into a spawn, promoted to Daemonhood, or leading a Chaos Warband.

azimaith
16-01-2010, 08:59
Well basically what I'm asking for is better/more customizable chosen.

I like the narrative effect of it.

IJW
16-01-2010, 09:01
Their models are too small. Proportionately, they should be considerably taller than an imperial guard.
Like others have said, it's not that the Marine models are too small it's that some of the Guard ranges are too big, notably the plastic Catachans.

P.S. Deathwing/Loganwing rules do a pretty good job of representing a more elite Marine force, to my mind.

Occulto
16-01-2010, 09:32
Nope.

Because if SM are buffed, then Chaos should too.

Let's say they just flat out double the points, so instead of having 50 models in 1500, you now have 25. Net result - even more people playing SM/Chaos because they become even cheaper to collect than they already are.

People could probably pick up a 1500 point army for less than a battleforce. :p

If we're talking pure model size, then that's a lot of obsolete models out there which are the wrong scale.

Mr Zoat
16-01-2010, 09:46
Catachan are supposed to be much bigger than normal humans.

I don't like the novels where marines are invulnerable. Brothers of the Snake was the first where I actually felt that the ridiculousness of the SM plot armour noticeably reduced my enjoyment of the book. Across the board 4s for your statistics means that you are very hard indeed in 40K and is perfectly sufficient to represent marines.

the1stpip
16-01-2010, 09:54
I agree, kepp the current set. Re-scaling the models, would mean the entire range re-doing.

And just put the rules for movie marines in a WD.

Freman Bloodglaive
16-01-2010, 10:04
Rogue trader marines were hard, but they were far from invulnerable. Likewise in 2nd edition, Marines were Angels of Death, dealing out the Emperor's will with their rapid firing boltguns, but they still went down fairly rapidly against lasguns, and don't get me started on shuriken catapults *shudder*. The fluff seemed to follow this, desperate last stands and all. Marines were rock hard, but they could die, even against guardsmen.

In the present game Marines are pretty tough, and would be more so if they weren't so common that every army is designed to kill them. They are not as killy as in second edition (everyone can rapid fire now, and a 12 inch effective range almost guarantees that they'll spend time in combat where one attack doesn't count) but the fluff has become obscene. One marine is the equal of a squad of normal men, one squad of marines is the equal of an army. A space marine can take a lascannon to the chest and dust it off. A space marine can walk on water... and so on.

I think it's time for the fluff marines to reflect the game marines more. Certainly Space Marines are tough, strong, well trained, well armed, and almost fearless. That doesn't mean they charge straight into the enemy guns expecting their armour to save them (unless they're Imperial Fists). Marines plan attacks like any other soldier. They know that they should not throw away their lives unless that is the only way to achieve victory.

Bunnahabhain
16-01-2010, 10:37
No, keep them roughly as they are.

Instead of changing them, have a prominent note in all the marine books ( of which there should be one...) that they have had to be toned down to make them a playable force on the tabletop, and include a URL for the Movie marines list on the GW website.

polymphus
16-01-2010, 10:55
The problem is that everything is going down in pts cost, so we're seeing larger armies take to the field. Back in the 2nd edition a full sized marine force would never be more than 25 models. I always felt that smaller marine armies were much more kosher in keeping with the fluff.

Just remember that if marines get elite, chaos get more. Compared to the standard tactical marine, your standard chaos marine has 8000+ years experience and a whole lot of daemonic blessing behind him. If anything keep C:SM as is and turn CSM into the hilariously tiny elite army. *wanders off to grumble about legions*

Tommygun
16-01-2010, 10:59
I would prefer the space marines (both Chaos and Loyal) to be twice as good and twice as expensive as they currently are.

Ivellis
16-01-2010, 12:01
You can have super marines....

As long as all Eldar have invulnerable saves for being so fast and a minimum WS, BS and I of 5 with the ability to move 6" in every phase of the game and Farseers can make a meteor hit your army.

Every Tyranid unit has without number, after all they're a swarm! Also they're the pinnacle of evolution, so they should hardly ever miss, WS6 BS5 average.

Necrons have T5, 2+ save, we'll be back AND feel no pain, BS5 and with a gun that is AP3, I mean they take anything and keep on coming and their guns disintegrate things right?

etc, etc.

Glabro
16-01-2010, 12:04
Hmm. I'd give marines another attack and and bolt pistol + ccw standard (their combat knives are plenty tough to be ccws, especially with the proliferation of the new STC steel blades), give them an inv. save of 5+ (terminators 4+), rending for both bolters and close combat, and a couple of USRs, at least FNP and whatever it was that allowed you to fire on the move at long range. WS and BS might go up as well.

That's how I see marines based on the fluff. Whether one could create balanced lists out of them that way, who knows. I wouldn't necessarily say all other races would need revamp as well, the improvements could be adjusted only slightly to match up with BL novels (though obviously this varies with each writer: Bill King wrote about very, very mortal Space Wolves who couldn't withstand ork shoota hits let alone bolt pistol hits whereas in the later SW books they could absorb autocannon hits.

PatrikW
16-01-2010, 18:46
No i like them the way they are now, running around with fewer numbers wouldn't feel right to me.

Cognitave
16-01-2010, 19:40
I would like Terminators to be more elite. You'd think them being 1st company and all, WS5 BS5 would be a good representation.

Creeping Dementia
16-01-2010, 20:31
I voted to leave them as they are. As it is I'm always suprised how small marines forces are compared to my own. I'm always asking my opponents if they forgot to place some units. They're elite enough as it is, even though they don't play as stupidly godlike as they are represented in the fluff.

Jaxell
16-01-2010, 20:58
I am amused by how close this poll is running at this moment :p

Askari
16-01-2010, 21:07
Some.

Chaos Space Marine Chosen should be utterly horrifying to face, the sheer experience and skill of these warriors should send nearby troops fleeing back to their mothers, a Khornate Terminator that has lived since the Heresy should be as scary as a Hive Tyrant. Yes, I'm gonna say it, Chaos 3.5 allowed this with Champions and the Armoury... albeit for an incredibly hefty points cost.

Mephiston is a good example of how terrifying a really old, veteran Marine is (a Librarian, granted, but even he is young compared to some Chaos Marines).

As it happens, Chosen are weaker than Sternguard, and Lords aren't up to scratch with standard Captains.

Loyalist Special Characters quite well show their ability of command, leadership and special traits. Although I guess maybe all Marines deserve A2 (except Scouts of course), they are pretty well done I think, having troops that have statlines equivalent or better to most armies Elites is quite nice.

Tymell
16-01-2010, 21:12
Absolutely. Models-wise they're too small, and in game terms they're not powerful enough. Doesn't have to be on quite the same level as movie marines, but I'd really prefer if space marines actually were this tiny yet super-elite fighting force.

One thing in their defence (in their current incarnation) though: bearing in mind that most enemies of theirs will be super-powered alien races or daemons, it's understandable that they suddenly don't seem quite so special.

Toe Cutter
16-01-2010, 21:33
Meh - I don't really think the idea of space marines actually works in the current fluff or on the table top.

A standard chapter has an absolute maximum full strength of 1000 right?

In actuality, they only usually field between 3 and 5 companies worth of battle brothers at any one time and not always as one coherent force.

The Taros campaign where forgeworld covered the Tau showed how epically fail such a small number of warm bodies is when used as anything other than special ops.

Two (?) battle companies worth of marines made planet fall. Of these, two assault squads were used to quickly take out the SAM orbital sites then the rest of the force went in to create a bridge head. The assault marines got their job done pronto but the battle companies were quickly bogged down in urban terrain by nothing more than Tau picket line forces and not only stalled but actually took significant casualties in the engagement - significant enough to reduce their combat effectiveness. Thats between a half and a third of the entire chapters combat resources blunted in little more than very early skirmishing in a military campaign for no real benefit.

Space marines don't work for jobs they're being given in the fluff and on the battle field (what I mean is you can win on the table top with your marine armies but a chapter of marines couldn't afford the kind of casualties that they regularly incur in table top battles). They should be used for covert ops and such like (is asymmetric warfare the term I'm looking for here?)

Helicon_One
16-01-2010, 21:39
You're all seemingly making the mistake of assuming that your typical 40K tabletop fight should equate to your typical engagement.

Marines win most engagements without taking a single casualty as stated in their background, because in most engagements they're not lining up on an open battlefield and staring down battlecannon barrels, they're teleporting terminators out of nowhere into command bunkers and murdering everything in 5 seconds flat or dropping assault squads out of thunderhawks to meltabomb the hell out of defence infrastructure. Much like how most Imperial Guard engagements would involve days or weeks of saturation bombardment to obliterate the enemy before sending the infantry to mop up the tattered remnants, or most Eldar engagements would involve sending a lone Pathfinder to snipe a seemingly random person in the street because their great-great-grandchild was destined to be a powerful Imperial commander one day. Military forces will always attack in a way that plays to their own strengths when they're as certain as they can be of victory, but that would equate to a massively one-sided fight which doesn't necessarily make for an interesting game of 40K.

Askari
16-01-2010, 22:29
You're all seemingly making the mistake of assuming that your typical 40K tabletop fight should equate to your typical engagement.


I agree with this, my vision of a tabletop 40k battle means something has gone wrong...

Why are the Imperial Guard Basilisks and Command Groups so near the fighting?

Why are Eldar even near a solid firing line of enemies?

Why are Space Marines staring down an unimportant Ork Big Mek and his 300 cronies?

Why are Dark Eldar even raiding anywhere that has resistance?

This is why I accept Marine casualties in the game(to most extent), as it means the Marines have been caught flat-footed in a situation they aren't at their best.

Lord_Squinty
16-01-2010, 22:30
There's too many of them. In battles as small in scale as a 1500 pt game, you should not have as many marines running around as you do. (fluff wise, at least)


What? 2 tactical squads and a squad of sternguard is a lot of marines?
:p

Corax
16-01-2010, 22:46
Please don't encourage GW to reinvent the wheel any more often then they do already.

I don't think there is any real need for drastic change. Marines are the balance benchmark of 40k, and if you start messing with them, you are going to have to re-balance the entire thing. Given how long it has taken to get to a point where army-to-army game balance is "not too bad", the last thing we need is for the apple cart to be upset by trying to make marines harder than they already are.

Besides, the problem with Marines is not that they are not hard enough, but that shooting is fairly ineffective most of the time unless you have IG or Ork weight-of-numbers on your side. The shooting of Marines seems slightly ineffectual because everyone and their dog has a 3+ save and shrugs off bolter fire like its a light drizzle. My biggest gripe has been, and continues to be, that the shooting rules discourage movement and force people towards either a gunline or berzerker-change style of play with nothing in between. IMO, "Rapid Fire" is one of the biggest blights on 40k, second only to the irrelevance of the Leadership stat for most armies...

The whole point of marines is that they are good at shooting AND good and fighting in HtH and are able to combine those strengths to overcome opposition that might be better than them at one discipline or the other. As it stands, they are reasonably effective in Hth, but somewhat lackluster in shooting, but I think that has more to do with the shooting mechanics generally than to do with Marines specifically.

Freakiq
16-01-2010, 22:50
I think by making Orks, Guard and Tyranids more horde oriented they've succeeded in making marines more elite by comparison.

Lord_Crull
16-01-2010, 23:05
Two (?) battle companies worth of marines made planet fall. Of these, two assault squads were used to quickly take out the SAM orbital sites then the rest of the force went in to create a bridge head. The assault marines got their job done pronto but the battle companies were quickly bogged down in urban terrain by nothing more than Tau picket line forces and not only stalled but actually took significant casualties in the engagement - significant enough to reduce their combat effectiveness. Thats between a half and a third of the entire chapters combat resources blunted in little more than very early skirmishing in a military campaign for no real benefit.


What book did you read? My copy of Taros has them takign the SAM sites and then being deployed near the end of the war to hold off most of the Tau army to cover the guard's retreat. They suceed too.

Corax
16-01-2010, 23:29
I think by making Orks, Guard and Tyranids more horde oriented they've succeeded in making marines more elite by comparison.

And here I was thinking that it was all a cunning plain by GW to sell more models... Thank you for correcting my error. ;)

Badger[Fr]
17-01-2010, 01:29
I would like Terminators to be more elite. You'd think them being 1st company and all, WS5 BS5 would be a good representation.
Now, that does make sense. Being a Veteran should grant you more than a mere +1A, +1 Cd. Both WS5 and BS 5 would probably be a little bit too much, but a point could be made for at least WS5.


but I think that has more to do with the shooting mechanics generally than to do with Marines specifically.
Indeed. At the moment, automatic weapons are grossly underpowered. Bolters and Heavy Bolters should murder any light infantry unit dumb enough to stay out in the open.

Khorneguy
17-01-2010, 01:43
Don't forget that the casualties in in a 40k game don't mean the men actually die. A failed save could be anything from outright death to being knocked out or even just being wounded so they can't fight.

So whilst the casualty rate in-game may be 20-30 marines, the actual death toll could just be 5-10 marines

That's how I justify the high marine 'death' rate in game. That and a 40k battle is meant to be a turning point in a larger battle or campaign, so casualties would be higher than usual anyway.

Feyaden
17-01-2010, 02:36
It all comes down to setting, if you are at a scale with whole armies being played (read epic) then marines are elite and play like in fluff. If you are playing at a scale with 1 or 2 models (read Inquisitor) marines can punch the head off an inqusitor bare handed and not in power armor. In a game where balance and the hobby side is required (40k) then the game doesn't fit fluff but fits functionaility. Resculpting a whole range of minis because they are too tall or too short is stupid imo. Not to mention a waste of resources when other armies could be reshaped/revisited. Also less models on the table would require over complex rules to make them actually survive long enough thus complicating the rules. As is I am happy with how marines are represented.

borithan
17-01-2010, 02:47
Rogue trader marines were hard, but they were far from invulnerable.Back in their very very firsy incarnation (the rulebook) Imperial "Armies" were 10,000 strong. Space Marine Chapters were considered about comparable, but their main advantage was their mobility (had their own space craft) and greater skill. When something turned up the Chapter (usually most of its strength, not a few squads, or even a company... in the background for a campaign idea in the first expansion for 1st edition the Space Wolves lost 850 guys during a campaign... true, that's over five years, but it wasn't five years of current 40k scale fighting, more raids and small scale skirmishes) would act as a rapid reaction force, quickly going to the scene of the problem, and then probably use guerrilla tactics to keep the enemy off their feet until the larger Imperial Army units arrived. They relied no on being super hard, but by being too quick for the enemy to deal with effectively.



One marine is the equal of a squad of normal men,Well... thats always kinda been the idea... but not in the same way. Not by walking at the squad in the open and taking their fire because he is so 'ard, but more because he would probably surprised and kill them all before they had time to react properly... though if they did react in time he had a reasonable chance of going down, while as now he would walk over to them and stare them to death before anything would happen to him.

Grimbad
17-01-2010, 02:48
So whilst the casualty rate in-game may be 20-30 marines, the actual death toll could just be 5-10 marines

That's how I justify the high marine 'death' rate in game. That and a 40k battle is meant to be a turning point in a larger battle or campaign, so casualties would be higher than usual anyway.

Indeed. Casualties among marines are likely to be marines recognizing they cannot fight further or inducing comas to save themselves, and, confident that the Imperium will push the lines forward, expecting an Apothecary to come along and patch them up in half an hour or so. Guard casualties are unlikely to be so lucky. Ork casualties are likely to be whimpering in pain and trying to crawl away, but probably survive. Etc. Etc.
Think about it in terms of how fast a 40k game is and how many vulnerable spots there are on, say, a cadian (and where they are). The game probably lasts somewhere between a minute and ten minutes. I don't know about Mr. Internets, but if I got shot in an unarmored leg I'd probably not be up for leading the charge for a good quarter of an hour at the very least.

Treadhead_1st
17-01-2010, 02:56
If the army is made more elite, then it becomes smaller (as you simply cannot cut the cost of a Marine as this has knock-on effects down the line of armies).

Even if Marines were made W2, Str5, T5, 2+/5+ they'd still be utterly boned in game-turns when facing 4 Leman Russes/Demolishers or Basilisks. And you'd have less men to take them on, making it harder than it is for the current low-number force.

I think Marines are elite enough - I don't have problems taking on, say, Orks, provided that I am using the correct tactics. You can never engage an Ork army on an extended front, but using local superiority of numbers (not even outnumbering - 20 Marines makes an ungodly mess of even 40 Orks) and support elements to smash one section of the force at a time. The current armylist is *just* cheap enough in terms of Tactical Marines to allow you to field some rather nice specialists to help them out and to achieve the "local superiority" method.

Combined with cheap Mechanisation, Drop Pods, Deepstrike, Infiltrate and nearly every USR in the rulebook; the Marine force is able to rapidly re-deploy or open up second fronts - which is what they tend to do in the fluff, when they actually fight in large engagements.

Skyros
17-01-2010, 03:03
I don't see a compelling reason to go back and change things now. You really shouldn't change the scale of a set of miniatures with many existing and well used models.

vladsimpaler
17-01-2010, 04:53
You can have super marines....

As long as all Eldar have invulnerable saves for being so fast and a minimum WS, BS and I of 5 with the ability to move 6" in every phase of the game and Farseers can make a meteor hit your army.

Every Tyranid unit has without number, after all they're a swarm! Also they're the pinnacle of evolution, so they should hardly ever miss, WS6 BS5 average.

Necrons have T5, 2+ save, we'll be back AND feel no pain, BS5 and with a gun that is AP3, I mean they take anything and keep on coming and their guns disintegrate things right?

etc, etc.

/end thread

trigger
17-01-2010, 05:22
The problem is the stat line only going to 10 and 4 being the main staple.
It just does not fit the fluff.
Marines in fluff have always been super warriors , back in 2nd when they released the card bastion (yes card we wernt lucky enough to have plastic buildings back then) there was a short story about how a squad (10) of blood angles were dispatched to a bastion on a foundering planet ... the 10 marines kept the the PDF and Gov in check through fear.

Marines were the imperiums fear instrament not the Inquistion.
But at the same time other stuff was just as hard fluff wise , Jan zar in the I wars books , kills a squad of marines with out breaking sweat .... marines were rare then because she has a confused look on her face when she first see's them ... she did not knw what they were.
But in GW's defence the game works well as it is ... i dont think armies are that over powered now compared to 3rd.

You want super marines try inquisitor ... there rock hard in that ... when you do get round to slotting one ... happy days :D

hivefleetcarrion
17-01-2010, 05:23
If you want elite marines, then either play with movie marine rules or grey knights....changing the rules would mess with every other army, and at the rate that army books are made, it would be 8 years and 2 ed before everyone had new rules to reflect the new marines.


some sm fluff is great with how they take losses (soul drinkers, early space wolves novels), but other should only be read for entertainment (brothers of the snake ect)

chaos0xomega
17-01-2010, 05:29
They should be more elite, and they should have bigger/truescale models too, maybe then I'd consider playing them.

synapse
17-01-2010, 10:27
i want my marines to be huge 3.5cm tall monsters with Ws, Bs, S, T 5, bolters that are actually worthy of the name, etc. my idea of a cool marine army is 2 10 man squads (splittable into either 5-man combat squad or 1-man specialists), an hq, and maybe a vehicle or land speeder or something like that. super elite, but lots of individual options.

Radium
17-01-2010, 10:31
And I want my Exarchs to be the gods of war they are in the fluff. With the power to see the future and dodge bullets and blows from an entire army :rolleyes:.

Marines are fine, as is everything else. Tabletop fun is far more important than fluff.

GrogDaTyrant
17-01-2010, 10:49
I say that they should be kept as they are now. In fact, I think the latest Marine codices have gone a bit overboard in making them 'too elite'.

As far as the 'They're too small' argument... I disagree 100%. Marine models aren't too small at all. Their current model height is perfectly fine, in comparison to every other race except for Guard. Guard are scaled a bit too tall and bulky, currently. But in comparsion to Eldar, Orks, Nids, Necrons, Tau, etc... Marines are at the right ratio, any taller and they'd have to be retconned to 10' tall. All vehicles are a bit smaller than they should be, though.

Bunnahabhain
17-01-2010, 15:15
Marine models aren't too small at all. Their current model height is perfectly fine, in comparison to every other race except for Guard. Guard are scaled a bit too tall and bulky, currently.

Agreed.

However, unless we can convince GW to release steel legion or any of the FW Guard sets in plastic, without changing their current proportions, there's not much we can do about.

I have a 'if win the lottery type plan' for a true scale guard army using FW resin, and carefully selected and converted real world vehicles.

Tymell
17-01-2010, 15:53
If you want elite marines, then either play with movie marine rules or grey knights....changing the rules would mess with every other army, and at the rate that army books are made, it would be 8 years and 2 ed before everyone had new rules to reflect the new marines.

Everything's got to start somewhere, otherwise nothing changes.

Badger[Fr]
17-01-2010, 17:56
Were Space Marines to be made more elite, Eldar Warriors, Ork Nobz, Chaos Veterans, Necrons, Ogryns, and any other creature that has reliably been stated to be better than an Astartes in some way or another, would have to be improved as well. These changes could result in a huge cost discrepancy between "elite" armies, which would only require a handful of models, and "regular" armies, such as the Tau, the Ork, or the Imperial Guard, that would end up being far more expensive due to the sheer number of models needed.

howlinmonkey
17-01-2010, 18:00
I'd agree with you that they are too weak on the battlefield.Points wise,a marine army is at a disadvantage against nearly every race in the game.
And if your units are hit hard in the first turn,you are on a hiding to nothing for the rest of the game.
If you play a 1000pts game using marines each unit is too closely interlocked with the others,so if one unit cops it in turn 1(happened to me a few times)you've got to question their supposed abilities in the rules to points ratio.
Marines shouldn't be easy to kill,they should be a yard stick by which all other armies are judged,instead of being also rans.
They should have at least 2 wounds,lower points,and each unit should be able to be more effective to the outcome of the battle regardless of damage to other units.Lose 1 marine unit at the moment and it seems to turn into a damage limitation exercise.

bennett_181
17-01-2010, 18:18
I wouldnt like to see marines more elite in terms of less models, as a gamer who doesnt really pay all that much attention to the fluff, i think the armies i see at my local are about right.

However with regards to stats i would like to see them a little thougher and harder hitting, but if this were to happen then the points would have to go up i to keep the supposed balance in 40K.

Vaktathi
17-01-2010, 22:21
I'd agree with you that they are too weak on the battlefield.Points wise,a marine army is at a disadvantage against nearly every race in the game. :shifty:Um, how so?



Marines shouldn't be easy to kill,they should be a yard stick by which all other armies are judged,instead of being also rans. Next to Fire Warriors, Guardians & Dire Avengers, Guardsmen, hormagaunts, sisters of battle & inquisitorial stormtroopers, DE Warriors, Ork Boyz, and any Daemon troop but Plaguebearers, Space Marines *ARE* hard to kill and the yardstick by which they are all measured.



They should have at least 2 wounds,lower points,and each unit should be able to be more effective to the outcome of the battle regardless of damage to other units.:wtf: Doubling wounds and lowering points costs on what is already the benchmark unit? I can tell you my CSM's would basically never lose a game against anything that wasn't another SM army again. That is insane.


Lose 1 marine unit at the moment and it seems to turn into a damage limitation exercise.That's kinda how an elite army plays, you aren't supposed to fight by attrition.

O&G'sRule
17-01-2010, 22:28
Marines should have better equipment than guard. The space marines must be wandering around Saying "I'm the best of mankin..........hey why doesn't my gun do that? His transport can do what?"

Vaktathi
17-01-2010, 22:30
Marines should have better equipment than guard. The space marines must be wandering around Saying "I'm the best of mankin..........hey why doesn't my gun do that? His transport can do what?"

SM tanks are there to be light, mobile, easily transportable, and there to support the infantry. Rhino's are there to deliver SM's to the fight and little else. Chimera's are there to provide heavy fire support for the Imperial Guard. simply put, SM's don't *need* chimeras. Also, side hatches and AV11 side armor adds far more utility in terms of how marines utilize transports than a Chimera would.

Mr Zoat
17-01-2010, 22:34
Though assault ramp rhinos would be nice.

starlight
17-01-2010, 22:48
Marines should have better equipment than guard.


Erm, they *do*. :rolleyes:

Vaktathi
17-01-2010, 22:49
Though assault ramp rhinos would be nice.
They specifically removed the ability to assault from things like Rhino's after 3E because nobody ever bothered to shoot. It was just "move rhino 12, disembark, assault".

UselessThing
17-01-2010, 23:02
Man I'd kill for a range of truescale Marines.

Master Jeridian
17-01-2010, 23:05
Marines are elite because they are expert military soldiers and leaders. They win battles because they outsmarted, outflanked and outmaneouvered the enemy- not because they lined up a few dozen yards away and tried to fight an attrition war.

Unfortunately, the 40k ruleset is to put it bluntly awful for representing modern warfare tactics and strategies. It doesn't represent Suppressive Fire and Pinning that Marines could do by simply putting fire down towards the enemy, whilst using their own discipline and protective armour to not be Suppressed themselves but indeed outflank an enemy position.

Essentially a Marine squad takes fire from an IG unit, the Marines will task a Combat Squad to trade shots- the IG will have to keep their heads down, being lightly armoured. Whilst the Marines rapidly flank around this firefight to hit them from a side.

On a larger scale, Marines would only engage in fights they can win.

Leman Russ Tank Company a few miles away and closing? Get in the Thunderhawks and withdraw.
An isolated ammo dump protected by an under-strength Infantry Company? Swoop in and destroy.

Epic Armageddon represents this 'elite' nature of Marines, their supreme mobility assets compared to IG or Orks, who rely on numbers and grinding forward.


To reiterate, Space Marines are elite because they outhink and outsmart the enemy, 40k Space Marine players aren't- so they want Marines to just walk forward and have bullets bounce off them.

Corax
18-01-2010, 00:11
Unfortunately, the 40k ruleset is to put it bluntly awful for representing modern warfare tactics and strategies.

I probably would have gone without the "...for representing modern warfare tactics and strategies..." part, but to each their own. :angel:

You make two very valid points here:

1. The limitations of 40k mechanics. 40k rules are designed to be streamlined and fast moving, not detailed or factually accurate.

2. The inapplicability to "real world" logic to the 40k setting. Arguing about the relative merits of modern armoured vehicles and comparing them to fictional ones (while interesting from a purely speculative point of view), does not advance the argument in any useful direction.


To reiterate, Space Marines are elite because they outhink and outsmart the enemy, 40k Space Marine players aren't- so they want Marines to just walk forward and have bullets bounce off them.

Harsh, but in many cases, true. Although one could argue about which came first, the simplistic mechanics leading to simplistic play, or vice versa.

Vaktathi
18-01-2010, 00:21
Marines are elite because they are expert military soldiers and leaders. They win battles because they outsmarted, outflanked and outmaneouvered the enemy- not because they lined up a few dozen yards away and tried to fight an attrition war.

Unfortunately, the 40k ruleset is to put it bluntly awful for representing modern warfare tactics and strategies. It doesn't represent Suppressive Fire and Pinning that Marines could do by simply putting fire down towards the enemy, whilst using their own discipline and protective armour to not be Suppressed themselves but indeed outflank an enemy position.

Essentially a Marine squad takes fire from an IG unit, the Marines will task a Combat Squad to trade shots- the IG will have to keep their heads down, being lightly armoured. Whilst the Marines rapidly flank around this firefight to hit them from a side.

On a larger scale, Marines would only engage in fights they can win.

Leman Russ Tank Company a few miles away and closing? Get in the Thunderhawks and withdraw.
An isolated ammo dump protected by an under-strength Infantry Company? Swoop in and destroy.

Epic Armageddon represents this 'elite' nature of Marines, their supreme mobility assets compared to IG or Orks, who rely on numbers and grinding forward.


To reiterate, Space Marines are elite because they outhink and outsmart the enemy, 40k Space Marine players aren't- so they want Marines to just walk forward and have bullets bounce off them.

Great post, and (at least from my point of view) very accurate. SM (and CSM players) too often think of "fluff marines" as essentially being able to take on any foe in extremely limited numbers and emerge victorious, when quite frankly more often than not they would be slaughtered or would avoid such a threat and strike elsewhere (the Leman Russ company is a good example, no sane marine commander would fight such a force directly unless there was little choice and they could set up a very nasty ambush in extremely favorable terrain). I find the current status of marines as relatively realistic to what they really should be. Small arms fire the likes of which most infantry would be equipped with (e.g. lasguns) are almost a non-issue for them, they can walk through it with little risk of casualties. It takes three times as much lasgun fire to kill a space marine as a guardsmen, and that sounds pretty superhuman and resilient to me, taking 300% more firepower to kill. They will fall however when such firepower is massed or heavy weapons are brought to bear against them, as they should.

StefDa
18-01-2010, 00:48
I didn't read through it All... Bir I think Marines are
halfway good as they are. +1A and +1W would make
them more resilient to small arms fire but still just as
fragile versus plasma, melta and battle cannons. I'd LOVE
a Movie Marines army where you don't field much more
than 20-25 Marines! Just like in the books.

Grimbad
18-01-2010, 01:36
I didn't read through it All... Bir I think Marines are
halfway good as they are. +1A and +1W would make
them more resilient to small arms fire but still just as
fragile versus plasma, melta and battle cannons. I'd LOVE
a Movie Marines army where you don't field much more
than 20-25 Marines! Just like in the books.

Movie Marines list had one tactical squad as the entire 1500 points, with assault cannons for bolters, rending combat knives, multi-wound marines, 3+/3+/3+ saves, etc.

Corax
18-01-2010, 02:56
Movie Marines list had one tactical squad as the entire 1500 points, with assault cannons for bolters, rending combat knives, multi-wound marines, 3+/3+/3+ saves, etc.

That would be my best hope for getting a whole army painted, though... :o

carlisimo
18-01-2010, 07:46
Make other models smaller. IG and orks come to mind. Marines shouldn't grow.

GrogDaTyrant
18-01-2010, 08:31
Make other models smaller. IG and orks come to mind. Marines shouldn't grow.

The Ork models are scaled fine in comparison to marines. In fact, Eldar, Necrons, Orks, and Nids are all roughly scaled well in comparison to a marine. Guard on the other hand, are not. If anything needs to be 'true-scaled', it's the over-sized Guard models. The so-called 'True-Scale' marine conversions only look good scale-wise in comparison to Guard. Compared to everything else, it either makes the Marines look like they're 12' tall or it makes 4' tall Ork, Eldar, and Necrons.

Master Jeridian
18-01-2010, 23:30
I probably would have gone without the "...for representing modern warfare tactics and strategies..." part, but to each their own.

You make two very valid points here:

1. The limitations of 40k mechanics. 40k rules are designed to be streamlined and fast moving, not detailed or factually accurate.

2. The inapplicability to "real world" logic to the 40k setting. Arguing about the relative merits of modern armoured vehicles and comparing them to fictional ones (while interesting from a purely speculative point of view), does not advance the argument in any useful direction.


You make good points, but I think it goes deeper than that.

The 40k game and 40k background are worlds apart.

In the 40k background, a machine gun acts like a machine gun- a human shot by one dies horribly. Thousands of other 'realistic' logics like gravity, weather, humans needing food, poverty, suffering, beaurocracy, power-hunger, shades of moral grey, etc are present in the 40k Imperium.
Having this 'grounding' in the real makes the 'fantastical' such as uber-psykers and daemons all the more interesting in the setting. At least for me. My SM heroes where far more gritty, desperate and cunning in a world where a stray machine gun bullet was lethal.

The 40k game however, started as a 'mod' for the existing Fantasy ruleset, although a lot of it has been removed, a little of it has been edited- the core principles haven't changed.
As a result, the game is far closer to Medieval Fantasy with Guns than to 'Modern Warfare'.

Where I'm rambling towards is that people like me (pseudo-historical wargamers) read the 40k background, loved it, and wanted to enact a wargame that played as 'modern warfare' in terms of lots of firepower, tanks, suppression and so on- but with the extra toys of power armour, psychic powers, etc.
I was too young and inexperienced to realise 40k was not this, and for the duration of playing it always felt it wasn't quite for me. Never quite able to justify why battles devolved into rugby scrums in the middle of the board, when both sides had machine guns and artillery.

If your looking for 'heroic' gaming though, where a clash of leaders with swords somehow happens between armies with apocalyptic weaponry and high rate of fire guns, 40k does do that.

The background is catching up with stuff like Brothers of the Snake (sp?) and the ridiculous conquests attributed to various Special Characters.


Harsh, but in many cases, true. Although one could argue about which came first, the simplistic mechanics leading to simplistic play, or vice versa.

Tricky, I'd argue GW are catering to their target market. Threads like this one, which are essentially veiled "Why can't my Marines just walk over the enemy army without effort?" are asking for the available tactics to be reduced so that their Marines don't have to face anything cunning or well-thought out- and don't have to think cunning or well-thought out either.


Great post

Thanks, if you don't play Epic, I highly recommend it to see Guard and Marines as the background reflects them.

I agree with a lot of your posts on the 40k background, at least the 40k background how we'd like to view it.

GrogDaTyrant
18-01-2010, 23:37
Thanks, if you don't play Epic, I highly recommend it to see Guard and Marines as the background reflects them.


Indeed, Epic is a real eye-opener for the background and style differences between armies. There are certain inconsistencies, especially where Orks are concerned... But overall the system is phenomenal to play, and requires quite a lot of tactical forethought.

If I had my way, anytime ANYONE began complaining about how an army in 40k works or operates... I'd have them learn how to play their army in Epic.

Ronin_eX
19-01-2010, 00:46
I've always been of the mind that if the game system can't represent its background then there has been a failure.

In Rogue Trader the fluff and rules were bang on. There was a bit of a divergence in 2nd Edition (though marines tended to cost 2-3 times as much as other troops so you were still the elite army). By the time 3rd hit marines got a 50% price cut and you were seeing a load more of them on the field and they started to become the standard stat line instead of the base human one as had been true in the past.

They simply don't feel elite anymore and I think GW needs to either change the fluff or they need to improve the rules to the point where marines can exist in them as is. I'd actually love it if they went back more to the RT roots with marines not being quite so superhuman but still tough as nails.

But in the end all the talk of the fluff/game divide of marines (and other armies as well come to think of it) tells me that the designers lost sight of what the game system's purpose was a while ago. A game system should emulate your background, it shouldn't be a divorced abstraction that bears little resemblance to what you write as the game's background. Hell all these years later and 40k still feels more like a WFB system kludge than its own game and it tends to better represent Napoleonics than the background of 40k.

They need to redesign the system to emulate the fluff or at least change the fluff so the current system does that. Because right now the two have little in common and that is a major failing of the game line and design philosophy as a whole.

Agreed on Epic as well. That is how marines (and all the other armies) should work. It is a system that does a great job of meshing background and rules and GW should take notes from their own good work for once.

Occulto
19-01-2010, 01:07
Indeed, Epic is a real eye-opener for the background and style differences between armies. There are certain inconsistencies, especially where Orks are concerned... But overall the system is phenomenal to play, and requires quite a lot of tactical forethought.

If I had my way, anytime ANYONE began complaining about how an army in 40k works or operates... I'd have them learn how to play their army in Epic.

"You think Eldar are annoying in 40K? Try facing them in Epic..." :D

(Especially with the original Swordwind rules)

Master Jeridian
19-01-2010, 01:41
Aye, Eldar are a regular opponent of mine. Tricksy, fast creatures- but if you give them nowhere to hide they suffer.

borithan
19-01-2010, 08:37
"You think Eldar are annoying in 40K? Try facing them in Epic..." :D

(Especially with the original Swordwind rules)Are there any other rules for them?

StefDa
19-01-2010, 11:11
Currently my standard Tactical Squad costs 230 with a Rhino. That's a Power Fist, Flamer and Missile Launcher. I'd love if the same costed some 5-600 points.

What do people think about a new standard stat-line for the Marines? Something along the lines of 5 across the line.

WS5 BS5 S5 T5 W2 I5 A2 LD9? SV 3+

I think this represents Marines from the fluff fairly well. Of course, they'd cost 80-90 a piece, at least, but I'd be okay with that. In fact, I'd love that. To death. I'd sleep with it and have its babies.

I think that in the next edition of 40k GW should put the stats of a Guardsman in the rulebook, instead of a Marine. This would further enhance the whole concept of "from the point of view of the Imperium". This would also help make the Marines seem a little more epic, and if GW had any balls, they'd remake the Space Marines to fit their new/current fluff. Back then Marines were hardcore, but they fit their fluff, and all was well. GW then changed the fluff without keeping the rules up to date.

They should either change the fluff or the rules. The rules are probably easier.

It would require a period of difficulties where the regular SM are incredibly hardcore and incredibly limited, as opposed to the Space Wolves, Dark Angels and Black Templars, who would still use the current codices. An awkward situation, for sure, but I personally think it is worth it.

Corax
19-01-2010, 12:41
I think that in the next edition of 40k GW should put the stats of a Guardsman in the rulebook, instead of a Marine. This would further enhance the whole concept of "from the point of view of the Imperium". This would also help make the Marines seem a little more epic, and if GW had any balls, they'd remake the Space Marines to fit their new/current fluff.

If GW had any balls, SMs would be an Elite choice for Imperial Guard! :evilgrin:


It would require a period of difficulties where the regular SM are incredibly hardcore and incredibly limited, as opposed to the Space Wolves, Dark Angels and Black Templars, who would still use the current codices. An awkward situation, for sure, but I personally think it is worth it.

Unfortunately, game balance and rules always play a very distant second fiddle to $$$.

guillaume
19-01-2010, 14:39
As far as making SM more elite, well, no real needs really. That gap is already filled.

Grey Knights from Daemonhunters are SM that cost 25pts with elite rules and weapons.

So there.

Kriegschmidt
19-01-2010, 14:47
I misread the title as, "Would you like Marines to be more polite?"

*cocks bolter* "Sir, I'm afraid I'm gonna have to ask you to remove your implanter tendril from that human..."

:D

OT: I would like to have an alternative, "daft" set of rules where marines were as elite as they're made out to be in the novels, so that you could have 5 of them taking on swarms of aliens, etc. But in normal games of 40k, I think they fit the mechanics nicely.

lanrak
19-01-2010, 16:27
HI all.
Due to the limitation of the 40k rules, and the pressure of corperate marketing .

Realising a strong specific playstyle for each army is NOT going to happen.

I prefer it when each army has a strong identity and play style, with distinct advantages and disagventages.(Not '...here are some disadvantages you can easily work round...':rolleyes:)

But currently 40k lets ALL lists cover all playstyles simply to sell more minatures.

I know I will get flack for mentioning , but back in RT SMs were EXPENCIVE (PV wise,)elite warriors, and you felt each loss keenly.

All armies had strong advantages and disadvantages and destinct play styles.But there was not the same amount of pressure to 'sell toy soldiers to kiddies back' then.;)

Kriegschmidt
19-01-2010, 16:28
HI all.
Due to the limitation of the 40k rules, and the pressure of corperate marketing .

Realising a strong specific playstyle for each army is NOT going to happen.

I prefer it when each army has a strong identity and play style, with distinct advantages and disagventages.(Not '...here are some disadvantages you can easily work round...':rolleyes:)

But currently 40k lets ALL lists cover all playstyles simply to sell more minatures.

I know I will get flack for mentioning , but back in RT SMs were EXPENCIVE (PV wise,)elite warriors, and you felt each loss keenly.

All armies had strong advantages and disadvantages and destinct play styles.But there was not the same amount of pressure to 'sell toy soldiers to kiddies back' then.;)

"....and you needed a whole day just to play a small game"

Corax
19-01-2010, 19:22
"....and you needed a whole day just to play a small game"

....and you needed a slide-rule (and a degree in higher mathematics) to calculate the turning circle of a Leman Russ. :o

PrimeMinistersQ&A
19-01-2010, 21:23
1 question.

Aren't the Grey Knights supposed to be even more elite than the Space Marines? With even better training, armour, weapons and they answer only to the High Lords of Terra themselves.

If a Space Marine chapter turned Heretic and the =I= sent all the Grey Knights to do exterminatus then... aren't they boned?

Mr Zoat
20-01-2010, 07:00
Grey Knights are spread out all over the galaxy, and are among the largest chapters in existence. Just getting a message to all of them might take centuries, and result in massive traffic congestion over a target they have no special ability to deal with.

Occulto
20-01-2010, 07:28
Are there any other rules for them?

They toned down a couple of things for the Eldar - pulse weapons became flat 2 shots, and they lost the Spirit Stones rules.

It's buried in an errata somewhere.


"....and you needed a whole day just to play a small game"

I never even got that far.

One of the crusty vets I used to know wanted to get us playing RT. I looked at the rulebook, started attempting to write an army list and quickly gave up in frustration.

Corax
20-01-2010, 07:54
Rogue Trader - separating the men from the boys since 1987. :D

TheShadowCow
20-01-2010, 10:50
You can have super marines....

As long as all Eldar have invulnerable saves for being so fast and a minimum WS, BS and I of 5 with the ability to move 6" in every phase of the game and Farseers can make a meteor hit your army.

Every Tyranid unit has without number, after all they're a swarm! Also they're the pinnacle of evolution, so they should hardly ever miss, WS6 BS5 average.

Necrons have T5, 2+ save, we'll be back AND feel no pain, BS5 and with a gun that is AP3, I mean they take anything and keep on coming and their guns disintegrate things right?

etc, etc.

This is basically what I was going to post. Every army out there (with the exceptions of Guard and *maybe* Orks?) can make claims of "I'm not being properly represented because XYZ" - Marines are hardly alone in this respect.

Heck, I'll add opposing units constantly needing to take leadership tests whenever they can draw line of sight or try to interract in any way with a Daemon army. Failure results in mass suicide, conversion to Chaos worship or the sudden and unbreakable urge to run away and find that comfort blanket you discarded decades ago :p

GrogDaTyrant
20-01-2010, 11:49
This is basically what I was going to post. Every army out there (with the exceptions of Guard and *maybe* Orks?) can make claims of "I'm not being properly represented because XYZ" - Marines are hardly alone in this respect.

No... Orks can too. Especially with the latest codex and it's emphasis on them being an 'almost-always-strike-last' army of cowardly cannon-fodder. I sorely miss my I4 on the charge, and ability to Mob Up. Watching any non-gretchin Ork unit flee off the table just seems so... wrong.

Griffindale
20-01-2010, 13:30
I think they should be buffed some. I got into space marines for the low model count and ease of painting those power armor surfaces. It seems I'm having to field more and more models here lately. Its honestly getting a little old. If I wanted to field this many models I would have just played imperial guard.

In a game of 2000 pts with my Blood Angels I can field my entire company just shy of 10 guys and still have jump packs on my Death Company.

dante
corbulo
assault squad
assault squad
tactical squad
tactical squad
tactical squad
tactical squad
devastator squad
devastator squad
Total: 1940 pts

borithan
20-01-2010, 22:13
They toned down a couple of things for the Eldar - pulse weapons became flat 2 shots, and they lost the Spirit Stones rules.

It's buried in an errata somewhere.Ok...



One of the crusty vets I used to know wanted to get us playing RT. I looked at the rulebook, started attempting to write an army list and quickly gave up in frustration.Meh, I know they produced army lists (where Space Marines actually didn't cost that much more then Imperial Guardsmen... something like 250 for a Space Marine tactical squad and 200 for a Imperial Guard tactical squad), and they had the rulebook points costs, but RT was really designed for an "RPG wargame", where a GM came up with story, the forces, and dealt with the horrendously detailed rules. It is not really suitable for playing normal battles as such. Would take for ever to work out and for ever to play. I know it was done, but there was a good reason why 2nd edition was quite different in style (even if the actual rules changes were almost certainly less than from 2nd to 3rd).

starlight
24-01-2010, 20:03
The Ork models are scaled fine in comparison to marines. In fact, Eldar, Necrons, Orks, and Nids are all roughly scaled well in comparison to a marine. Guard on the other hand, are not. If anything needs to be 'true-scaled', it's the over-sized Guard models. The so-called 'True-Scale' marine conversions only look good scale-wise in comparison to Guard. Compared to everything else, it either makes the Marines look like they're 12' tall or it makes 4' tall Ork, Eldar, and Necrons.


Sorry, but this is incorrect.

GW uses 28mm Heroic as their scale (although their interpretation is a bit loose) for WFB and 40K, which means that a six-foot tall figure (the average guestamation) would be 28mm tall from the base to the top of the head (or more usually the eyes given the difficulty of measuring with headdress on). Marines (at about seven feet tall in their socks, and about seven and a half feet in Power Armour) and Orks are modelled too short, whereas most of the rest of the lines are fairly accurate.

The *Heroic* part means that heads, hands, and weapons are slightly exaggerated to allow for more detail.

GW's LotR scale is closer to 28mm, or a little less (possibly 25mm).

carlisimo
25-01-2010, 01:36
If we're also talking about gameplay here...

If you just go by background, Necrons and Tyranids sound a lot more unbeatable than Space Marines do. If that was reflected in the game, I'd probably just give up, and anyone playing any other race might as well give up too. No thanks.

GrogDaTyrant
25-01-2010, 04:46
Sorry, but this is incorrect.

GW uses 28mm Heroic as their scale (although their interpretation is a bit loose) for WFB and 40K, which means that a six-foot tall figure (the average guestamation) would be 28mm tall from the base to the top of the head (or more usually the eyes given the difficulty of measuring with headdress on). Marines (at about seven feet tall in their socks, and about seven and a half feet in Power Armour) and Orks are modelled too short, whereas most of the rest of the lines are fairly accurate.

The *Heroic* part means that heads, hands, and weapons are slightly exaggerated to allow for more detail.

GW's LotR scale is closer to 28mm, or a little less (possibly 25mm).

LOTR is true-scale, not heroic. So it's 28mm, just without the exaggerations (for the most part).

In any case, the point of my post was that the 'true-scale' marine nonsense is just that... nonsense. For the scale of 40k's infantry models, they're fine. If anything needs scaling UP, it's vehicles. If anything needs scaling down, it'd be guardsmen. Marines, Eldar, Orks and Nids all look relatively proportionate to one another.

starlight
25-01-2010, 05:12
So....all the fictional races are the right sizes...but the regular humans are wrong...? :shifty:

Unfortunately the vehicle scales are the way they are because making the vehicles bigger would cause issues with board size.