[40k] Space Marines vs Stargrunts

[Bob the Gunslinger]

For a wargamer, huh? Maybe if the wargamer is illiterate. The opening of the 4th edition rule book states that the rules have been altered from the fluff for game balance. The designers of the game feel that the universe of the game is more important than the rules, hence the rules change to reflect fluff (*cough Codex Dark Angels cough Codex Black Templars cough cough*) rather than the fluff changing to reflect the rules (i.e. remember when that IG command squad totally killed that C'tan Star God in the recent novels? Oh yeah, that can never happen).

Hell, there was a White Dwarf article about "Movie Marines", where they gave the Space Marines the stats they should actually have based on the fluff. Needless to say, they were insanely unbalanced.

Face it, your entire reply would have been based around the argument "the fluff says x, but game mechanics say y and I love game mechanics." Most wargamers are smarter than that.

[Skelron]

Well I had a long reply to that, but my $Q%$% browser crapped out and lost it. Long story short, I am VERY familiar with GW, I own ALL versions of WH40k, and most of the supplements. Untill or unless weapons ranges change on the tabletop, the armies of the 41st millenium give their enemies a volley and then charge. Thats how the game works, nothing the fluff says can change that. I'm not saying the fluff sucks (ok, i'm not saying all of it does) I'm just saying for a Wargamer, the game comes first. Any attempt to reconcile the tabletop with the fluff, or 40k tactics to real life ass rapes the SoD.

And you can say that till you are blue in the face, dosn't change the simple fact that as pointed out the game is a game and as such is balanced. The Fluff overrides the game because the Fluff does not have to be balanced and therefore can give a better idea of the universe.

The game of Warhammer 40K is also a skirmish game, the 40K armies are fighting at close ranges, and do not reflect the scale of war within the universe at all. For that you have to turn to Epic. Where a single engagement between two companies of infantry was said to be a full game of 40K.

Think about that for a moment, and then tell me again 40K the game is meant to be an accurate example of warfare within the universe.

[Ford Prefect]

Hell, there was a White Dwarf article about "Movie Marines", where they gave the Space Marines the stats they should actually have based on the fluff. Needless to say, they were insanely unbalanced.

But insanely awesome. Seriously, that was one of the best articles ever. My squad of hardened nuts (including the Dude), versus your entire army. Bet on me lads.

Well I had a long reply to that, but my $Q%$% browser crapped out and lost it. Long story short, I am VERY familiar with GW, I own ALL versions of WH40k, and most of the supplements. Untill or unless weapons ranges change on the tabletop, the armies of the 41st millenium give their enemies a volley and then charge. Thats how the game works, nothing the fluff says can change that. I'm not saying the fluff sucks (ok, i'm not saying all of it does) I'm just saying for a Wargamer, the game comes first. Any attempt to reconcile the tabletop with the fluff, or 40k tactics to real life ass rapes the SoD.

I'm sorry, but no. That's not how the universe works, that's how the game works. If you'd been paying attention, you'd have noticed NecronLord's citing of a statement by the game designers who believed that their rules did not accurately reflect Space Marines. Unless you believe that armies in 40k take turns shooting at each other or something like that. Or if you believe that a boltgun can only fire twice for a certain period of time (despite that more accurate rules for boltguns have been given, and they ended up assault 4 weapons with twice the range, and a blast marker, as I recall. At the very least they were rending).

You might prefer game mechanics, but as has been said, not just by us but the very designers themselves, they are not the most accurate representation of Warhammer 40,000.

[Typhonis 1]

Movie bolter is range 36" s 6 ap 4 assault 4 rending

[Steel]

Movie bolter is range 36" s 6 ap 4 assault 4 rending

Which white dwarf issue no. was this in?

[The Dark]

Movie bolter is range 36" s 6 ap 4 assault 4 rending

Which white dwarf issue no. was this in?

US WD 300. Wasn't published in the UK version, AFAIK. There's a version up on the German site that translates not too shabbily.

To give an idea, the Sergeant's stat line is:
WS 9, BS 5, S 6, T 6, W 4, I 6, A 5, Ld 10, Sv 3+

Boltpistol: 24", S 6, AP 4, Assault 4, Rending
Chainsword: Power Weapon, double hits of user for determining size of forces in melee
Combat Knife: Rending
Grenades: 6", S 8, AP 3, Assault 1, Explosive

Fleet of Foot, Auspex, Infiltrate, 3+ Invuln save, Reroll failed armor saves

[Academia Nut]

You know what's really scary? 10 Marines with those movie bolters will score 6.667 rending hits on average, which by the rules means that their chance of destroying an armour 14 vehicle outright are greater than 1.

[The Dark]

Standard Marines have a 36" range, with the other gun stats remaining the same.

Of course, Sarge is 200 points, and each Marine is 100 points.

And the army can only take 6 Marines, plus a Hero, a Flamer, and a Missile Launcher, along with either a Rhino or a Razorback. And stunt doubles. Seriously. Stunt doubles.

[Academia Nut]

Oh, okay, if it's just the sarge with the rending bolter that is worse than an assault cannon then it's somewhat more reasonable, seeing as he only has an 12% chance of destroying an A14 vehicle outright in a single turn (30% chance of damaging it at all). This is in comparison to a rocket launcher with S8 fired by a BS5 character having a tiny 2% chance of destroying such a vehicle outright (and a paltry 14% chance of causing any damage whatsoever).

Multiple hits with rending weapons hurt a lot. Thank the Emperor there are no rending meltas, because that just wouldn't be fair.

[GunDoctor]

For a wargamer, huh? Maybe if the wargamer is illiterate. The opening of the 4th edition rule book states that the rules have been altered from the fluff for game balance. The designers of the game feel that the universe of the game is more important than the rules, hence the rules change to reflect fluff (*cough Codex Dark Angels cough Codex Black Templars cough cough*) rather than the fluff changing to reflect the rules (i.e. remember when that IG command squad totally killed that C'tan Star God in the recent novels? Oh yeah, that can never happen).

Hell, there was a White Dwarf article about "Movie Marines", where they gave the Space Marines the stats they should actually have based on the fluff. Needless to say, they were insanely unbalanced.

Face it, your entire reply would have been based around the argument "the fluff says x, but game mechanics say y and I love game mechanics." Most wargamers are smarter than that.

Sigh.

I find the fluff mildy amusing, I find the game mechanics to be outright loathsome. If you'd bother reading what I've written you would see that. It may be the GWs purpose to make a game that reflects it's imagined world (if you believe that, I have a great deal on some bottom land) if so, they fail miserably.

The whole point that of this has been; some people (myself included) find games played in the 40k universe to go more smothly, and to follow the fluff better, when played whith the SGII rules set.

Anyway, I was just trying to clear up the confusion some seemed to be having about the little vignette in the OP. If you would like to play a miniatures wargame that makes cover important, destinguishes between supression and effective fire, has officers that lead rather than swing swords, covers off board artillery, nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons, morale and training, and rewards actual tactics rather than running at the other guy, you might like SGII. If not, feel free to keep playing the 30 years in spaaaaace.

No I don't worship at the altar of skulls and spikey bits, so fucking what? I don't fucking prefer the goddamn game mechanics, i'm saying they suck giant fucking donkey balls. I'm saying that until said mechanics change, all the fucking fluff in the world is as relavent as jerking off to the latest issue of white dwarf.

Take away the wargame and what do we have? A dipshit space opera with magic, and insane fucking cultists ass-raping mankind's future, and those are the good guys. Oh my fucking god, I suppose it is too much to ask that a wargame in some way simulates its supposed source material.

Now I happen to like dipshit space operas with magic, it is a guilty pleasure. But, I would be much more impressed with 40k overall, if a) the fluff actually ment something on table, and b) the gonzo acid trip shit was discarded for a more blood and guts reality, one where professional soldiers act, well, professional.

If this is game balance issue (a weak excuse coming from the company that gave us the original Space Wolf Codex, wold guard anyone?) then fuck game balance, balance is for idiots who think war is fair.

[RazorOutlaw]

I guess not being a wargamer I could give a fuck about the game mechanics or how they might be affected by fluff. I'm sure what you say is true about the rules being retarded so I'll do what I planned to do from the beginning: read the fluff and enjoy the ride.

[defanatic]

Hell, there was a White Dwarf article about "Movie Marines", where they gave the Space Marines the stats they should actually have based on the fluff. Needless to say, they were insanely unbalanced.

The Marines had grossly overpowered stats for marines. One marine seargent should not be able to take on a Carnifex (at least one short story has said so), and Marines should not be able to shoot up a Zoanthrope (same story, marines falling back and being shot up). Indeed, marines in stories tend to be way weaker than the movie marines rules would suggest. They are stats for space marines in movies about space marines.

[The Dark]

Oh, okay, if it's just the sarge with the rending bolter that is worse than an assault cannon then it's somewhat more reasonable, seeing as he only has an 12% chance of destroying an A14 vehicle outright in a single turn (30% chance of damaging it at all).

Sorry, I wasn't clear. The bolters have a 36" range, and the same specials as the boltpistol (A4, Rend).

[MKSheppard]

I guess not being a wargamer I could give a fuck about the game mechanics or how they might be affected by fluff.

Wargames are supposed to simulate the reality of whatever universe they're set in; e.g. a Star Wars wargame would follow the tactics mentioned in fluff; and allow rules for orbital bombardments and TIE Bomber squadron strikes in support of ground troops.

A Normandy 1944 wargame would have special rules for US air support interdicting the German player's units (e.g. he randomly picks 25% of his units, and they're lost or destroyed in the road march to the combat area)

So in following with this, you'd expect the tabletop 40K game to at least simulate the reality of the fluff instead of being in it's own 'special' universe where hand to hand is God.

[Ford Prefect]

The largest table top armies at most have a hundred individual units. Considering that the Sabbat Crusades deployed a billion men in one landing, and that there were tens of thousands of Guardsman at a single location in the first for for Armageddon, and that the number of Tyranids in a single push that it looks like a rolling sea than a bunch of individual aliens ... no, the game does accurately reflect the scale of the universe itself.

The scale is roughly six feet to the inch, which would give boltguns ranges of under a hundred metres, and lascannons less than three hundred - by their own admission, a lascannon should be capable of hitting any object from here to the horizon, and that personal infantry weapons are good out to hundreds of metres - a boltgun can be used as an effective sniper rifle with a good targeter and set to fire single bolts, after all.

[MKSheppard]

The largest table top armies at most have a hundred individual units.

Funny how that doesn't prevent people from playing out individual battles from the Normandy campaign, the North African campaign, and god knows what else in real wargames.

and that the number of Tyranids in a single push that it looks like a rolling sea than a bunch of individual aliens

There's a real simple solution to this problem; cast tyranids as single pieces of mass waves:

Forgeworld does it with their DEATH KORPS OF KRIEG - INFANTRY SQUADS FOR GORGON.

Link

Or simply put in rules for the game that each tyranid really represents a cluster of four; meaning you have to kill each tyranid four times before it goes off the map for players who don't have the money for said mass wave pieces.

[Connor MacLeod]

Wargames are supposed to simulate the reality of whatever universe they're set in; e.g. a Star Wars wargame would follow the tactics mentioned in fluff; and allow rules for orbital bombardments and TIE Bomber squadron strikes in support of ground troops.

A Normandy 1944 wargame would have special rules for US air support interdicting the German player's units (e.g. he randomly picks 25% of his units, and they're lost or destroyed in the road march to the combat area)

So in following with this, you'd expect the tabletop 40K game to at least simulate the reality of the fluff instead of being in it's own 'special' universe where hand to hand is God.

]

You'd think that, wouldn't you? But then again it really depends on who does it and their intentions/dedications to the "accuracy" as it will. Look at WEG and WOTC, I would hardly call them "realistic simulations" of Star Wars in many respects. And the STarship battles game, as I understand it closely follows the other stuff.

I dont know about histroical wargames, but I suspect that if any DO adhere closely to "reality" its because of the people they expect to buy it and the "historical accuracy" bit would be part of the draw.

"Sci fi/fantasy" on the other hand, is generally allowed to be alot lazier because of the whole "its not real" bit, particularily something like Star Wars. 40K is alot like Star Wars, so you can expect similar attitudes to prevail.

And, of course, there are always important issues like "play balance" to consider. Surely you don't expect realism even in a wargame to be overriden by "play balance" do you? I'd imagine there'd be some pretty pissed of players if that were the case.

[Connor MacLeod]

The scale is roughly six feet to the inch, which would give boltguns ranges of under a hundred metres, and lascannons less than three hundred - by their own admission, a lascannon should be capable of hitting any object from here to the horizon, and that personal infantry weapons are good out to hundreds of metres - a boltgun can be used as an effective sniper rifle with a good targeter and set to fire single bolts, after all.

If this were the Rogue Trader era, that might have some merit, because back then they made some effort at that sort of consistency or such as I understand it - they actually did "inches to meterS" conversions or something to that effect and even gave rationalizations.

Such as it is, its more than certainly been retconned.

"They had barely got within 500 paces when a horde of fanged and clawed Hormagaunts leaped from the building's upper windows and bounded at them. The Guardsmen obeyed their training and Seargent clay's terse orders, firing short controlled bursts form their lasguns as the Hormaguants closed."

Guardsman opening fire on Hormagaunts shortly after appearing, given the earlier metnioning of "pace" this can mean anywhere from 300 meters to 750 meters or so in terms of effective range.

With particular regard to the Space Marines, Black Admiral posted this awhile back:

Thumbing the fire selector to semi-automatic, he [Boreas] emptied the magazine in five short bursts, the explosive bolts tearing through a knot of enemy three hundred meters in front of him.

That's a Space Marine firing a bolt pistol. It comes from a novel written by one Gav Thorpe, who was rather a key player behind the 40K game for some time (may still be for all I know.) The novel further implied a possible range of 500 meters for said bolt pistol.

Other incidents (Nightbringer by Graham McNeill) implied ranges of around 70-100 meters or so for a "bolt pistol"

las weapons have varied dramatically in terms of range. Laspistols alone can go from 50 to 100 meters by themselves (soul drinker implies something around 400 meters!) and lasguns easily get within half a kilometer to several kilometers depending on source.

[Imperial Overlord]

Even Rogue Trader (an edition of the game where the merciless slaughter of just about anyone attempting hand to hand was common place) noted that liberties had been taken with such details as weapon range in favor of creating a fun game.

[Connor MacLeod]

Even Rogue Trader (an edition of the game where the merciless slaughter of just about anyone attempting hand to hand was common place) noted that liberties had been taken with such details as weapon range in favor of creating a fun game.

Well yeah, but they did also offer some in-universe rationalizations (even though some of them I thought were kinda silly. I mean they had rifled handguns and machine guns with less range than a modern pistol/SMG, for crying out loud.)

[Azazal]

The largest table top armies at most have a hundred individual units.

Funny how that doesn't prevent people from playing out individual battles from the Normandy campaign, the North African campaign, and god knows what else in real wargames.

and that the number of Tyranids in a single push that it looks like a rolling sea than a bunch of individual aliens

There's a real simple solution to this problem; cast tyranids as single pieces of mass waves:

Forgeworld does it with their DEATH KORPS OF KRIEG - INFANTRY SQUADS FOR GORGON.

Link

Or simply put in rules for the game that each tyranid really represents a cluster of four; meaning you have to kill each tyranid four times before it goes off the map for players who don't have the money for said mass wave pieces.

For what you're talking about Shep, there's EPIC. 40k could be used to do a Normandy type battle, hell the old CODEX: Armageddon had such a senerio in it. But if you want to fight large scale battles in 40k land, it's all about EPIC. Funny thing with EPIC, if you try to do a straight up fight of attrition between marines and the guard, the guard will win. EPIC is much better at showing the flavor of the different armies. WH40K is about squad based action, or in the case of 2nd ed, AKA Hero-Hammer, lone bad asses of doom.

As far as HtH ruling the day in 40K, my Iron Warrior army will gladly sit back and shoot the shit out of some one trying to charge them. Took out and entire Ork HtH horde back at GT Chicago 05 by turn 5, I actually felt dirty after that one, I lost a few models, 5 at the most and his orks had been totally wiped out.

No I don't worship at the altar of skulls and spikey bits, so fucking what? I don't fucking prefer the goddamn game mechanics, i'm saying they suck giant fucking donkey balls. I'm saying that until said mechanics change, all the fucking fluff in the world is as relavent as jerking off to the latest issue of white dwarf.

Take away the wargame and what do we have? A dipshit space opera with magic, and insane fucking cultists ass-raping mankind's future, and those are the good guys. Oh my fucking god, I suppose it is too much to ask that a wargame in some way simulates its supposed source material.

bla bla bla, sounds like a typical emo I hate 40k/GW rant. If you don't like 40K's dipshit space opera and magic, then why are you playing it with other game systems? If you want the game to more reflect the fluff, play Killteam, more details in the base line rules, more options and tactics come into play, or were you to busy knocking the rules and forgot to read them? Hell try Necromunda. The upgrades/skills that are picked up over a campaign in that would allow a gang to own standard 40k marines. (very little in the way of rules for marines in Necro they do not have a lot of the skills and options one would expect them to have, or course you're not really meant to play them.) Even better, play Inquisitor, that clearly gives a better scale of things then 40K table top.

40k is meant to be quick skirmishes on the battle field, patrols that stumble into each other, a small section of the line on the front, etc. Some one said they pictured each turn taking place over few hours, I always looked at it the opposite. To me each turn is maybe a minute. The short ranges of the weapons and movement represent troops scrambling in the heat of battle to try and take an objective. Fire is from quick shot taken at an opportune moment, not from a fixed position with all ranges zeroed in.

[Shroom Man 777]

If he hates the game, the game mechanics, and think the fluff is a bunch of horseshit...why is he playing the game? Is he the type of guy who likes having spark plugs clamped on his ball sacs and saying "I'm such a naughty boy Ursula, please zap my testicles into smoking shriveled prunes and lop off my penis while you're at it!"

[GunDoctor]

bla bla bla, sounds like a typical emo I hate 40k/GW .

Shit, talking to you people is like pounding my head against a brick wall.

I hate one aspect about WH40k. That one aspect. I think some of the Fluff is misguided wanking (and who here doesn't fell that way about SW EU?) but I don't condemn all of it. I just STRONGLY believe that WH40k fails as wargame simulation of its source material. Even as a company or platoon level simulation it fails. It fails because of abstractions introduced for 'balance'.

Attempting to balance a wargame is like trying to make war fair, it misses the fucking point. So what if portraying Space Marines on table the way the are 'supposed to be' would make playing against them more difficult? That's half the fun!

If you don't find the idea trying to win against difficult odds fun, you might think twice about wargaming as a hobby.

I know GW does what it does to sell more units and make money. I respect that. That doesn't mean I can't call a spade a spade. Their game mechanics fucking blow. They're clunky and chart-tastic (finally less so in 4th, although most detail has been lost as well) and DO NOT reflect their supposed background material. I hope GW great success in all things, I just don't like one of their products as much as I would LIKE to like it. If that's 'emo I hate GW BS' then fuck you sir.

In case you can't fucking read english, I like dipshit space operas with magic, it is a failing I have. Given a choice I would rather play a game set in that universe using rules that don't rape my SoD, rahter ones that do.

Oh yes very creative. 'if you don't like GWs company-platoon level wargame' try this small scale skirmish or large scale regimental game instead.

A) I do play those games.

B) What do those other scales have to do with the accuracy of a specific company and or platoon level wargame known as wh40k?

Oh, and why would using a real groundscale and proper weapons ranges (300+ meters for small arms, if you can see it for DEW) make the game unplayable? Oh that's right, you don't want to worry about little things like cover and concealment, bounding overwatch, supressive fire, fixing and flanking, weight of fire, or, you know, tactics. Well some of us do.

All your arguments seem to boil down to; yeah the company and platoon level simulation is a bit off, so go play skirmish or regimental micro armour. Well, sometimes, I want to play company commander, and those options just don't cut it. So I use Strar Grunt II. Got a problem with that?

Oh, does that Shroom guy ever say anything that makes sense?

[Shroom Man 777]

Nope. Nothing I say makes any sense.

Anyway, to me, you seemed to be rambling on about how loathsome the entirety of 40k is and yet sounded like you play it on a regular basis. It seemed kind of nonsensical and masochistic.

[defanatic]

So... Back to the OP. Could the marines win in that situation were they to just shoot up the hill?

My answer: Probably.