Did Space Marines get what they needed from the Balance Dataslate?

[@BlackJackalGaming]

A new balance dataslate and the same old issues for Space Marines. GW thinks we just need to get good and that the datasheets and detachments are good enough.

[@inquisitorMence]

No, they just don't care.

[@BlackJackalGaming]

@@inquisitorMence eek seems that way.

[@somerton4383]

Definitely feels like Salamanders/Firestorm just took a kick while we're down 😭 Losing free Immolation Protocols, redeemer (already too expensive IMO) going up again, losing actions and grenade strat after advancing, devastating wounds becoming mortal again... Aggressors going up in points in the last points update... I'm honestly just feeling so burnt out of playing them right now...I'm honestly gutted 😞

[@BlackJackalGaming]

Yep, firestorm took a bit of a hit. Losing free immolation protocols is painful. They really needed to review SM to see how the changes would affect them. Rather than just saying yolo

[@rodrigocenturionvargas5380]

@@BlackJackalGaming we need reduce the cost of inmolation protocols to 1

[@somerton4383]

@@rodrigocenturionvargas5380 this, honestly! I might actually my friends if we can house rules that because my whole army just feels a lot more useless than usual now 😅

[@rodrigocenturionvargas5380]

@@somerton4383 yeah i feel the same at least i can use with my agresors a overwatch free or a crisol of battle to add +1 to wound free

[@somerton4383]

@@rodrigocenturionvargas5380 definitely! Vulkan protect you brother! 🔥

[@ancientmariner9460]

Short answer - no. My Sallies are weaker thanks to 1st Aggressors got increased cost and now Gladiator Valiant... There are so many units that are desparate for buffing, not by points shenanigans but actual squad and weapons buff - Terminators, every Phobos unit, Sternguards... GW doesn't care and divergent chapters, or rather lack of separating SM into 9 different chapters with different rules, screw regural Marines over. They should just throw divergent chapters to regular Marines, leave few units for fluff and problem would be solved - at least every egg would be in the same basket and balancing would be much, much more easier.

[@BlackJackalGaming]

Basically it feels like they want to sell you lots of SM and then you pivot into the divergent chapters.

[@ancientmariner9460]

@@BlackJackalGaming Pretty much, yes. That's why I hope for total separation into 9 chapters... The foundations are already there...

[@peterobbo1383]

Really thought they would at least look at First Company. They're terrible.

[@BlackJackalGaming]

You and me both. It's been a Z tier detachment since day 1.

[@marauder340]

Wish they also adjusted Anvil Siege Force. It doesn't feel great that it's the one detachment whose main rule is so conditional compared to the others so it only applies some of the time or else leaning into it sacrifices your board control. Doesn't help that it relies on a keyword that isn't already present on guns you'd think should have Heavy like the Firestrike turrets.

[@MRDALEK-wx7he]

Im fine with the nerfs to iron storm it was sort of a boring play style despite not being broken but wish marines got some minor buffs in addition to say bladeguard, redemptors, storm speeders or other middling units. I think my sword brethren gladius should be fine but I’d like some more variety.

[@Sonof_DRN2004]

I’d only be alright with it if they buffed the other detachments at the same time. I play Anvil and Ironstorm the most, after this i think I’ll stick with anvil. Kinda wish they made it so guns with the heavy keyword in anvil get plus 1 to would regardless of whether they moved or not. Or at least give us a stratagem for 2cp which makes so any unit that made a normal move counts as having stayed stationary during the shooting phase.

[@BlackJackalGaming]

Ironstorm was fine. The rest needed bring up to that level. Now they're all in the mud.

[@BlackJackalGaming]

They should get plus 1 to wound and bolters get additional AP.

[@MRDALEK-wx7he]

@@Sonof_DRN2004 I think they should do something where it’s stationary or on an objective + extra OC maybe for gravis or something like that. Then 1st company should get a whole rewrite and access to advance and charge so terminators won’t still be better in Gladius.

[@BillyBigBollocks-u7g]

Well there's always september...

[@BlackJackalGaming]

Thats the spirit

[@carolineturingds]

Something I like from these changes is that now you can use Adaptive Tactics every turn for free in Gladius. It used to be a minor problem before that perhaps you wanted to give your Fire Discipline unit devastator doctrine just in case you got a good enough advance roll, or in case you got the 2+ teleport from the Librarian Dreadnought. However since it wasn't battle-tactic, you had to pre-pay that CP without knowing whether or not you'll actually make use of it.

[@BlackJackalGaming]

True, that is a perk. There will be a couple more gems to look into

[@michaelpopa5317]

Just played at Teams tourney in otowa and im telling you it was only Ironstorm or Blood angels as the only sm list you would see. Regular sm will be dumpster tier imo still

[@BlackJackalGaming]

Such a shame. The newer codexes are blowing SM out the water with the detachments and stratagems.

[@guruvedra]

Well yea, buy more models and build new armies. As GW intended.

[@adamfehres]

Got the info on vehicles wrong. Models with round bases don't pay to pivot such as dreads and repulsors. All other model pay 2inch to pivot as much as they want.

[@inquisitorMence]

There are different rules for casual an tournament play.

[@adamfehres]

@inquisitorMence core rules explain it and vanguard tactics and tabletop explain as circle no pivot cost. Non circle 2inch pivot cost as much as you want.

[@inquisitorMence]

@@adamfehres Oh for crying out loud. Core rule: "Monster and Vehicle models (excluding models on round bases, and Aircraft models) have a pivot value of 2", unless otherwise stated." Tournament change: "Models that are not on a round base (excluding Aircraft models) have a pivot value of 2", unless otherwise stated." I don't care what KZbin channels say. I can read.

[@adamfehres]

@inquisitorMence I'm so confused by your reply as it says what I had said models with round bases don't pay to pivot. In core and tournament. The video said otherwise. The part in video that's.wrong.is 10mins 30.

[@inquisitorMence]

@@adamfehres You said: "All other model pay 2inch to pivot as much as they want." This is not true in casual rules. Non-vehicle/monster units never pay to pivot in casual, regardless of base.

[@letsgetit792]

I mean dark angles ironstorm which is strong runs two stormravens with a darkshroud. The minus one damage with minus 1 to hit and cover from the dark shroud made them very tough. Add in the lethal aura and they were able to wipe index custodes off the board. What i hope we see is the real spacemarine win rate crater now that ironstorm isnt keeping it afloat. And hopefully GW does something more than points.

[@BlackJackalGaming]

Ah, another case of a non-compliant chapter getting the most out of a unit so it gets nuked for codex SM

[@letsgetit792]

@@BlackJackalGaming yep.

[@matthewsadler5071]

Space Marines have been on a downward slope for ages thanks to poor updates since Index Firstly in the Index, Desolation Marines should have had the ability to be led by a character removed so they didnt get spammed with Fire Discipline and a points increase instead of limiting squad size. Then when the codex dropped, Aggressors went up due to being spammed in Vanguard which had a knockon effect on Firestorm. What should have happened is Blade Driven Deep enhancement should have been made Tacticus or Phobos character only Also how Ventris has stayed 75pts all this time is beyond me due to his Deepstrike Ability and effect in Vanguard. Then Ironstorm took over and has now been nuked when it was Dark Angels & Black Templars being the offenders. IMO, Divergent Marines should have to pay a points cost to use Codex Detachements like 25pts or have a limit on how many of their own units they can use in the detachments

[@Sanguinius]

Pay to use other detachments? Why? That doesn't sound like a good idea- as a Blood Angle player I do enjoy using my own detachment but I also do others because I also love my tanks and and Aircraft like the Stormhawk Limiting unique units I feel is too restrictive. If I have 10 Sang Guard and 10 Death Company- imma use 10 Sang Guard and 10 Death Company

[@helmut5061]

Black Templars at least can't use codex units that are forbidden in their own detachment in codex detachments anymore. How this was possible before confused me all the time. But even with this loophole, the BT as one of the better SM chapters only were at a 50% win-rate. So I doesn't get why SM Codex got nerfed again.

[@BlackJackalGaming]

I totally agree, a unit will be a superstar for 1 detachment and then will be nuked for all of them. If GW took a softer approach like they did for Eldar, we would be in a better position. A points costs for the divergent chapters would be a happy middle ground

[@Paranormal-Stupidity]

I was having the worst week, but felt good because at least the data slate was coming. I thought it was some sort of bad joke when I saw what was in it. It's going to be a long 3 months... Great breakdown, though. Thanks for sharing.

[@BlackJackalGaming]

Sorry to hear you were having a bad week! Hopefully you've recovered from it. Going to be a slog until September. I kinda think they are planning for a 10.5 codex since they are leaving SM alone.

[@MirageMancer]

Space Marines just have a weak core rule that doesn't interact well with detachments or datasheet. Also codex chatacters underpowered.

[@BlackJackalGaming]

It still feels like the codex was written for full Oaths and after they chucked it out, they didn't really re-balance the datasheets/detachments to make up for it

[@letsgetit792]

Yes. If you aren't taking units that have native rerolls you are killing your ability to do damage. Which absolutely limits your ability to select cool and fun units to play with.

[@emdeo]

Iron Hands remain a fictional chapter, but at least the other chapters are also a lot worse at using our signature playstyle I guess?

[@BlackJackalGaming]

Haha well I suppose ironhands are now on 3 editions in the sun for SM.

[@MrMulligan84]

Would the Captain ability override the abilities of models from other armies that raise the cost of stratagems? So if you are playing a Tyranid army, and have a stratagem point increased via "Malign Presence" so if it bumps it from 1-2, does it just negate the penalty ?

[@BlackJackalGaming]

Yep, it is +1 cp and then -1cp so stays the original price

[@shadowywarrior]

hmm correction, the lancer has always been 160 points prior to the june dataslate. Maybe earlier earlier, it was cheaper, but right now. its been 160 for awhile

[@BlackJackalGaming]

Ah, I meant Valiant!

[@WilliamSabio]

Black Templars taking Psykers is heresy in my opinion and I always ran the BT variants also so not too much a loss. Plus adept of the omnissiah is better imo for that aura save

[@BlackJackalGaming]

Aye, but you know what competitive players are like. They will bend the rules to get the gud bitz

[@milcearry]

I guess players have been buying second-hand gunships

[@flint9080]

Where did you find the Black templar could not use psykers when not using black templar detachment, and could not use SM vehicles when BT vehicle is available? The only thing in the BT balance dataslate states changes to vehicle capacity.

[@BlackJackalGaming]

Space marine errata document. Unfortunately there's like 4 documents to check!

[@GitGud40k]

Gunna shadowbox outside your local game store for deleting my comment scrub

[@BlackJackalGaming]

I don't delete comments. YT must have filtered it. Maybe don't be toxic and it won't happen?

[@Lomp_64]

Codex chapters like Raven Guard, IF/CF and Salamanders are really in rough shape. Overcosted characters that are mid at best compared to what UM and divergent chapters have. I was really hoping we’d see some small change to give any little benefit to the codex chapters but no, literally no reason competitively to play anything other than blood angels, space wolves or templars at this point.

[@marauder340]

The chapters that use the codex detachments best are the divergent chapters. Oh the irony lolsob GW should just lock them to their respective detachments. It's rough enough that codex marines balancing keeps paying for their shenanigans. And if GW spent more time attending to the other chapters instead of yet another string of Ultramarines characters and niche units, we'd be better off.

[@the_andertech]

UM are not doing good 33% winrate as of last reports. We got good characters but the core shared units are still dogshit. GW is happy we can only use 4 datasheets so that they have less work to balance and can focus on divergent chapters other factions more.

[@guruvedra]

@@the_andertech also GW try wery hard to kill all useful combos with UM characters.

[@Sonof_DRN2004]

I want buffs to Anvil desperately. Plus 1 to wound regardless whether they’ve moved stationary.

[@BlackJackalGaming]

Yeah, wouldn't be world shaking.

[@JDFirenze]

I'd settle for a 1CP stratagem to be able to treat a unit that performed a normal move as having remained stationary.

[@Skringly]

@@BlackJackalGamingI think having the Iron Storm style vehicle and dreadnought heavy lists moving to Anvil and just having a permanent +1 to wound on all their shooting would be pretty crazy.

[@Sonof_DRN2004]

@@Skringly it wouldn’t be a permanent plus 1 to wound for vehicles? Where’d you get that from? You only get plus 1 to wound if you already have the heavy keyword, provided you remain stationary. Get rid of the remaining stationary part I say.

[@Sonof_DRN2004]

@@JDFirenze a command point for plus 1 to would on a single 5/10 man unit of infantry does not seem worth it to me. On a different comment I suggested a once per battle stratagem for 2cp where all of your units that have moved and advanced but are also eligible to shoot can count as having been made stationary. That would be really good for the first and second turns of games.

[@carolineturingds]

The change to the Impulsor is kinda nice until you remember again that non-primaris characters attached to primaris units cannot, for some reason, go into the Impulsor. It's not like they don't know of this problematic, because they included the opposite case in the Rhino's wording (attaching a Tacticus character to a non-tacticus unit). So you can't attach Gabriel Seth, Ezekiel, Cato Sicarius... to a primaris unit and hop them into an Impulsor.

[@guruvedra]

Like GW even care about non primaris stuff in first place.

[@BlackJackalGaming]

If you attach them to a tacticus unit, they gain the tacticus keyword so can ride in the transport

[@carolineturingds]

@@BlackJackalGaming The unit has the Tacticus keyword, but the character model itself doesn't. The restriction is on a model by model basis.