Implausible Nature
  • Home
    • Links and Contact Page
    • Site Index
    • Site Primer >
      • Casual vs Competitive Players -- Healing the Divide
      • Laeroth's Take On Building Fluffy Armies
  • Laeroth's Blog
  • The Njesta Crusade
    • Black Templars Army Lists
    • Njesta Crusade Fluff >
      • Black Templars Background Literature
  • Black Templars 101
    • BT 101: Where to Start >
      • BT 101: Unit Analysis
      • BT 101: Building Low-Point BT Armies
      • BT 101: Commonly Used Abbreviations
    • BT 101: Building an 9th Edition List >
      • BT 101: Building A Competitive 9th Edition List
      • BT 101: Building Another Competitive 9th Edition List
    • BT 101: Assembling Your Crusade
    • BT 101: Playing With Your New Army >
      • BT 101: Tactics
      • BT 101: Duality
    • BT 101: The Conclusion
  • Painting and Modeling
    • Black Templars Gallery
    • How To Paint Black Templars

"Old" Marines vs Primaris Marines

10/13/2019

3 Comments

 
Hello everyone!  Its been a little bit of time since my last post, but that is primarily due to the little lull while we wait for our rumored rules drop in Psychic Awakening: Book 2 late November.  However, during that time, I thought I'd touch on a topic that I'm seeing pop up a lot more frequently nowadays:  "Old" Marines vs Primaris Marines.  This isn't a new topic, but with the release of our new codex in the last couple months, the question has been getting asked with more forcefulness.  So we'll do a quick examination on some of the key points of this topic.
As always, I take a competitive stance when I am analyzing anything for our army.  So I think its best to do a quick pros and cons list for each type (not exhaustive by any means).  Note:  "Old" Marines includes the classic vehicles/transports prior to the release of Primaris.

​"Old" Marines:
  • Pros
    • Cheaper than their Primaris counterparts, often significantly.
    • Larger variety of units to choose from.
    • Prevents wound overflow via only having a single wound in most cases.
    • Wide array of weaponry and customization.
    • Can fulfill a number of roles on the battlefield.
    • More transportation/deployment methods.
  • Cons
    • One less wound/attack than Primaris counterparts.
    • Less specialized than Primaris units
    • Doesn't have powerful, shiny new toys.
    • Competes with excellent Primaris units
    • Everyone has played against these units for years. Nothing surprising to opponents.
    • Few impactful stratagems to use during the game.
Primaris Marines:
  • Pros
    • One more wound/attack than "Old" Marines
    • A ton of new weaponry not seen before this edition -- much of it excellent
    • Lots of very specialized units who excel at their featured roles.
    • New and "shiny" unit syndrome.
    • Awesome stratagems to use; at least for Intercessor units.
    • Increasing variety of units to choose from.
  • Cons
    • High prevalence of D2 weaponry in meta exuberates the cost of the 2 wounds for Primaris.
    • High level of specialization can hurt them on battlefield if facing units they are not built to handle.
    • Not many competitive transportation/deployment options; forces them to walk from get-go.
    • Much more expensive than "Old" Marines, especially when reaching for premium weaponry options.
    • Very stringent in their customization.  Very little options for each individual unit to diverge from their specified role.
    • Close combat efficiency isn't there.  No specialized power weaponry beyond occasional sergeant or dreadnought/warsuit.

So, like I said, this isn't anywhere close to an exhaustive list of things but gives us a great starting point to analyze these units.  The biggest thing I want to focus on is the high level of specialization that comes with Primaris vs our more classic astartes marine.  When you take a Primaris unit, it is very obvious what that unit's role is on the battlefield and is often equipped with excellent equipment to help fulfill that.  However, you don't get a whole lot of customization with those units and if you do, you pay a huge premium for it (e.g. Inceptors upgrading their Assault Bolters to Plasma Exterminators).  Meanwhile, you have tons of customizing options for our "old" marines.  You can often take anti-vehicle and anti-infantry weaponry in the same unit, for a marginal increase in points cost.

Why does this matter?  It allows your forces to fulfill duality easier if you are using "old" marines.  This means that you have the potential to at least have some kind of an answer for every kind of threat opposite you on the board.  In a competitive environment, that is critical.  With that being said, such duality often comes at the price of efficiency and execution on the board.  That is where Primaris marines are superior:  role execution.  Here is an example:  "Old" Marines have a devastator squad of plasma cannons that average 8 shots a turn.  Hellblasters are a roughly plasma equivalent, but have 10 shots per turn, albeit in rapid fire range.  However, the Hellblasters weapons hit with AP -4, instead of the AP -3 of the Devastators, which gives them the ability to deal with vehicles and heavy infantry much better.  They are also able to absorb losses better, due to having 5 weapons rather than only 4 with the devastators.  Another example is ability to utilize Concealed Positions.  Primaris marines have access to no less than 6 options for Concealed Positions (2 HQ, 1 Elite, 2 Troops, 1 Heavy), rather than the single option for "Old" marines (Scouts).

While having duality in an unit by unit scale is huge, the Primaris units in your army can also fulfill duality at a macro level.  What do you mean?  Well, you can take specific units in your army to fulfill certain roles on the battlefield.  Considering that the Primaris tend to be superior at specific tasks for their points, this can be a boon if you do it on a large scale.  However, if you don't do it for everything in your list, you risk leaving holes that your opponents can exploit.  Then again, you can create a pretty nice rock list doing it this way.

The other big elephant in the room for this argument is close combat.  While Primaris do have an additional attack, it is usually using basic attacks.  The Primaris marines do not have dedicated close combat units beyond Reivers and those do not have access to power weapons.  They can buff an Intercessor squad up with stratagems, but you still suffer from the same problem:  lack of high AP weaponry.  "Old" marines do not have this problem; in fact, they have an abundance of units that can be dedicated towards close combat.  In addition, Veteran units have an extra attack, so the attack stat advantage of Primaris is a wash.  Some of the most scary close combat units out there are "Old" marines and I do not expect this to change in the near future.

So to me, the argument comes down to two things: How much dedicated close combat do you want/need in you list?  How much of an "all-comers" list are you looking to build?  The classic marine units are still perfectly viable.  Primaris marines have a bunch of cool stuff that is highly specialized and effective, but they aren't replacing our older models.  In many cases, the points cost of Primaris units are prohibitively expensive to field in large numbers.  They are a tool to add into our lists to make them more effective, but I don't see any future where our "Old" marines are going anywhere.
3 Comments
Kontakt
11/19/2019 06:01:14 am

I am of two minds on this. I am really loving primaris for their durability, role focus, and rakish good looks. However, I find their lack of dedicated melee and overcosted (or at least expensive) vehicles to be serious drawbacks, forcing me to mix my forces. I will never choose tactical marines over intercessors, but I feel many of the other "classic" marine options to be completely viable. I am still hoping the cost of crusaders drops to match tactical marines.

Reply
John Russell link
12/14/2019 10:08:53 am

You are under selling the capabilities of Aggressors as a melee unit. No, they are not the dedicated unit Vanguard are but they are more flexible as they are a excellent shooting unit also ... The only issue is delivery. At the moment they are a unit best used by UM, WS, and most notably RG. Unless you are bringing Repulsors then IH but that’s an eggs in one basket situation I’d personally avoid. Still it’s a unit that needs mentioned as deadly in the right Marine players hands.

Reply
Marshal Laeroth (Admin)
12/30/2019 09:45:56 am

Just to clarify, I am looking at units from a BT lens. Don't get me wrong, Aggressors are incredibly powerful and cheap for what they do. But they are very much hamstrung by the weakness you noted: delivery. We have to either take them in a Repulsor, which hurts the points efficiency of the unit...or they walk. That paints a huge target on their backs, when the BT thrive on getting into combat as quickly as possible.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Laeroth's Blog

    This blog is devoted to the Black Templars chapter and the tactics, list building, and general musing associated with them.  Readers will see occasional posts from Marshal Laeroth.

    Check out the Implausible Nature YouTube Channel!

    Follow me on Twitter!

    Like what you see and want to help support Implausible Nature?  Click the link below and donate!

    RSS Feed

    Archives

    December 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    May 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    March 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    March 2016
    November 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    September 2014
    May 2014
    December 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010
    December 2009
    November 2009
    October 2009
    September 2009