Background Image

Can we have a honest talk about the Mark of Nurgle?

Discussion in 'Chaos Space Marines' started by Ecaja, Mar 15, 2017.

  1. IshanDeston Ecaja Steam Early Access

    That is already the case. Just since MoN has no downsides worth mentioning, nobody feels those restrictions. MoN gets grenades, the unique combat knife, just to name two, on top of a hefty toughness bonus, and if you like it or not those 30 points of toughness are 13% of damage reduction.

    I don't care about Orks or Spacemarines... i am not talking about them. I am talking about Chaos Spacemarines and the fact that there is no alternative to mark of Nurgle, because Nurgle gets all the goodies and no downsides. Unless of course you want to make a case for how deliberating a slower Stamina generation is.

    And nothing of that is relevant as we are well into 1.3 and there is no indication that the TTK will change. So... how about we talk about fixing the situation?

    So far all you've done is reject the suggestion of giving MoN a proper downside or buffing the other Marks to make them a viable choice. I am not hearing you makeing any better suggestions on how to fix it... unless of course your idea of a fix is somehow rolling back to the pre 1.3 TTK, which doesn't seem to happen... so...

    So...... bottom line.. we nerf MoN.. and add a 30 Hp trinket. Gotcha. That was a long winded way of saying that.
  2. Belphegor LordSloth Preacher

    The restrictions are already there and they are bad. Why is the defining factor of the Marks that they have to be bad or force players to behave a certain way? The 30 points of toughness are nice, without a question but they don't add anything for us compared to adding armor or health aslong as it is not enough to bring us over the threshold to survive an additional bullet. That is why I (in the current meta) dislike those hybriditems why bring armor and armor regen for a hefty LP cost. Those relations are not realistic anymore which makes those items underperforming and unaffordable. However I do not think that a major LP and subsequently AP revamp of any fashion will be in the cards for the near future.


    So if you are not advertising for another race, why would you want that our only viable Mark gets nerfed instead of requesting a meaningfull buff to others so we actually get a choice? Your suggestion would only leave every Mark in shambles and weaken for our faction the quiet strong Wargear 1 slot which offers a plethora of very clean defensive tools for other factions.

    Restricting goodies to Marks as lorethematically correct as it might be is still a bad idea because there is no such limit on other factions and for the player experience limits the available options. I dont see why there could be a venom knife, a warp fireaxe, a warp (poison) grenade or a chaos rune inscribed heavy bolter for all followers of the dark gods. Especially if the developers dont plan to invest the time to outfit all cults equally (with a grenade a knife an axe and a bolter equally).


    I told you that your idea was bad and i strongly disagree and i gave you my reasons for it aswell. In your first post you basically requested a "chaos" rework, with a full batch of fresh mods/items ontop to support it. This is very unlikely to happen since it would also require to reset our APs again and they have their eyes on so many other things to start with such a radical and big approach.

    Without this rework however there is no point in breaking the only working Mark. Every other Mark you currently can equip (apart from MoN) puts you automatically at a disadvantage (you are 1 hit faster to kill) against the standard LSM or Ork cookie cutter builds. If you advertise that you can also advertise for us to lose our gold armor.

    I am not fixated on this specific mark at all (and in all honesty i am annoyed that it is the only viable option, before 1.3 i had it maybe on 2 loadouts and now i have maybe a total of 5 loadouts without it) if they want to tweak it i am fine with it, but the problem is that they can not fix them in their current form. To tie them into the wargear 1 slot with the surivability options was just bad. Mind you it was ofc as bad as artificially creating huge downsides to allow for a bigger itembudget on the also huge upsides. This always leads to combinations where one or the other is not worth it and hence an item - while on paper totally fine- seems ingame broken. Bigger Budgets allow for landslides. MoT is a prime example for that. The values will LP wise probably work out just fine. Sadly the armor regeneration system and the low TTK don't support the required playstyle anymore and i personally feel all % based LP costs require an adjustment since they are barely noticeable with the small pools they work on and now get compared to and measured against significant survivle options for those sparse LP.

    The truth behind itembudgeting is that in their database they have LP allocated to the Marks by their buffs and debuffs with a slight margin for over- or underbuffing them. A 60% stamina debuff is probably worth a negative 200 LP thats what it would cost to reduce it and those negative LP are most likely added in tankyness. If you would reduce movespeed on your version of the MoN like you suggested earlier (lets say for the for the sake of the argument a negative effect as grave as MoS buffs) you would probably look at a negative effect of ~380 LP (MoS costs 150 and has a negative effect of about 230 on it with the Armor debuff.)

    To add that up in numbers, your new Mark of Nurgle would only reduce our speed by -0.33/-0.15 and would need to give Nurgle tankyness (because thats what Papa Nurgle is known for) for the value of (150+380) 530 LP. The current Sigil of Nurgle has for the sake of comparison just from the defstats a value of 770 while the current MoN has defstats of 350 LP. So your new Mark of Nurgle would need to be even more tanky then the old one to compensate for a Movement speed debuff of the quality of the MoS. To bring the movespeed reduction in fair waters the reduction should be around -0.16 / -0.08 while still maintaining its current toughness and defence buffs - which would be as much of barely noticeable downside in my opinion.

    But let us be realistic here, the devs will never spend the next 5 items they produce to kit out and rebalance chaos marks like you suggested. I personally would rather see all chaos marks beeing valueable and unique or even have the "LSM" options as undivided (yes this includes all those HP and Armor trinkets) then to follow some wild ideas about how we should change our only viable wargear (without a solid idea for an replacement) to the point where it is actually nerfed - because you do not want to accept how item budgeting works.

    My Suggestion:
    Since you asked specifically for my opinion on how to fix them: They should have given them all the same base armor or hp or toughness in the ballpark of around 20 toughness or 30 health or 25 armor ontop of a minor god specific advantage vs disadvantage which is more or less cosmetic (based on their internal LP cost relations) while still leaving them viable for all classes.

    If they would then, in a second step which could theoretically come months later (and i personally dont believe they will for a long time) then invest time and manpower into reworking wargear 2 items for chaos (like they already have shown to be willing to some degree with the sorcerer and raptorspecific synergy items) they could add a bunch of items which require a mark in wargear slot 1 and could bring those flavoured buffs and debuffs for their own itembudget as synergies.

    To make it more clear: MoS in Wargear 1 gives a minor movement speed boost + those 20 toughness, wargear slot 2 offers an item "joyfull feet of slaanesh" with requires WG1 and offers now "the rest of the runspeed boost for an increased old penalty" for ~50-100 LP (increased old penalty to keep the budget even). Of course this would mean MoK, MoN and MoT would require completely new attributes. Since you don't want more tankoptions for the MoN related item, you dont want a HP debuff on MoT WG2 and MoK would if you stick to it at all, require the "no heal debuff" with alot of lifesteal added only on WG2.

    Basically the real Marks would be Wargearslot 2 and Wargearslot 1 would contain "Follower of xy" which is the light version of the Mark with default tankyness baked into it.
    Deathwish, Gravewalker and ash23neuro like this.
  3. Mkoll Oan-Mkoll Steam Early Access

    Mh I think those Marks are pretty balanced as a whole but not for each class

    MoN is like good for every Ranged class
    the MoS works really good on the melee classes and on the tacticals, if you are good with the strafing it provides more ehp than an MoN could

    MoT is only good on regen builds for Veterans but there is real good

    MoK is really good in a paperbag and thrown in a thrashcan afterward, this needs some work :)
  4. Necromancer Rivindesh Subordinate

    Everyone chooses Nurgle because the others are obsolete right now ttk is still low. Khorne is semi decent but awful on ticket maps. Slaanesh was good on melee, but that has since been replaced by the range heavy meta. Tzeentch is just bad in general unless one plan's to do the challenge token sorcerer.

    Nerfing the mark of Nurgle isn't the awnser, rather it should be reworking the other marks. Perhaps we could even have other variations.

    Rune of Tzeentch: Upon death emerge as a Blue Horror with the ability to revive oneself after 30 seconds at the cost of having reduced maximum health.

    Rune of Khorne: Executions grant +10 maximum health at the cost of not being healable by a sorcerer.

    Rune of Slaanesh: Executions restores one to full health and grants a hysteria buff at the cost of armor regen.

    Marks need to have substantial abilities for their costs and right now Nurgle has the ability to give the most without asking for much, just some disease in your lungs.
  5. Aren't Nurgle Marines by default supposed to be sluggish beefcakes?
  6. Khornatian Khornatian Steam Early Access

    Generally I would rather advocate buffs to others, rather than nerfs to things that aren't exactly overpowered. Nurgle bearers are in a good spot and eclipse most others due to the extremity of the meta, but they are far from insurmountable.
    DerelictHeretic and Gravewalker like this.
  7. Put me in the camp of not nerfing MoN, but rather making the other marks more attractive. 1.3 made me switch from using MoT as I was of the duck and cover and recover type mentioned earlier in this thread. But with TTK going down and with the improvements to MoN I had to make the switch in almost all my builds.

    Yet in light of the bolter cannon and the skull of power I feel that I am dying as fast if not faster. Don't just look at this in a vacuum think of what other aspects were added in 1.3. Pen was brought up to be at least 100 for all weapons as well chipping away at that value of that 30 toughness in a lot of situations.

    And yeah we got the nurgle nade.. big whoop. I can count the number of times I have seen it use on one hand. And in reality I don't think it's any better than a good frag. With the number of Apoc's running around with their heal beacons so bloody numerous I wonder how many people have died to it.

    Any way, the MoN's only sin is that it is decent, it's not game breaking and it is not making us OP. unlike the skull of power that the LSM have.

    I am not against changes to the MoN and the gods ruin know that the other marks need more appeal. But it doesn't make sense to nerf MoN which is in a good place at the moment to achieve that goal.
  8. Just posting here for reference but feel free to destroy my ideas.


    MON: + 40hp/+80 toughness/ -25% movement speed/ 100% poison resist/ + 20% poison build up rate/ + 15% heal rate for Incoming and your own healing rate - 60% stamina regen/ -1 stamina/ -50% fire resistance/ -10% melee swing speed/ blight grenades have a 45 second cool down/

    If implemented :

    Trinket/Putrid constitution grants 50% chance of an incoming melee hit to reflect poison back at the attacker attacker.
    Trinket/ Aura of pestilence grants a very slow aoe poison buildup


    MOK: +20 HP/ + 25% melee damage/ 0.10 lifesteal/ 0.15 melee life steal/ -25% accuracy/ No down state and no healing/ +25% damage to your back

    If implemented:
    Trinket: The blood must always flow/ The player cannot equip any ranged weapons and his health constantly drains at a 0.10 rate /melee damage+10%/ +0.10 life steal/ +10% movement speed


    MOT: +80 armour/ - 30% delay / + 50% armour regen rate/ + 25 charge/ + 25% charge regen/ + 20% MOT spell damage / - 60 HP/


    If implemented: Spell/ Daemon summoning, Spell: Flesh Change Grant "gifts of mutation" to other MOT players like leathery wings that act like jumpacks effects may be random but always positive, spell: warp shield 50% damage resistance to the play when channelled.

    MOS: + 25% movement speed/ + 20% swing speed/ + 4 stamina/ + 60% staming regen rate/ -40 hp / - 50 armour/ 50% Friendly fire heals excluding AOE weapons/ - 20 toughness/ - 15% melee damage/

    If implemented: don't know anything about slannesh lore so meh...


    And I would like to revamp the Shard of steel to Mark of the Chosen.
    MOC: + 20HP/ + 20 toughness/ + 25 armour/ - 10% armour delay/ + 5% Melee damage/ + 1 stamina

    Credit goes to @Ecaja for some of the ideas.
    Valrack07 and Ecaja like this.
  9. IshanDeston Ecaja Steam Early Access

    2 reasons...

    First and Foremost, because the entire idea behind the Marks, as they are currently in the game seems to be "You gain something for losing something".

    You gain Armor regeneration, but you lose health. You get speed but you loose Armor regeneration... and so on and so forth.

    And i do not feel that Mark of Nurgle's gains are offset by what you lose for it. Thus i would like a different set of downsides for it.

    Now why it has to be that way? If i'd know that, i'd get paid by the Dev. It wouldn't have been my first approach to it, but i can see why they do that... and that is because....

    Reason two. Much lesser and only really a consideration based on the fact that i do not want to play something overpowered. I want something that is competitive with the other factions and i play all the factions. So ...

    While i would prefer a meaningful buff.. and i have given suggestions for that (see for example moving the Raptor stuff over to Mark of Tzeentch and giving them a few more goodies based on the Lord of Change... maybe Wings instead of jump packs. Maybe the wings could give a limited Swooping Hawk effect allowing for a bit more airtime, before you come crushing down.

    I also suggested a Heat Grenade akin to the poison grenade for Khorne. I suggested a totem that boosts melee in a radius.

    Its not that i do want just nurgle nerfed... at the same time i want the others buffed. Bring Nurgle a bit down, bring the others a bit up, and meet halfway in the middle.. because just overpowering everything by reducing downsides is just not a viable approach.

    Like it or not, but CSM are pretty much comparable with LSM. And while i feel LSM have to many goodies currently, i do at the same time not believe that CSM should just get piled on with goodies. Markes already set them ahead of what LSM are capable, if we disregard the rest of the wargear. LSM doesn't have anything that makes them move faster or gives them such a big Armor regeneration boost as CSM do.

    But i am not here to advocate from the position of a player that doesn't play CSM. I am here from the position of a CSM player that feels its unfair that i am pretty much gatewayed into Mark of Nurgle. I feel its unfair MoN gets a pleague knife and a Plague Grenade.. i feel its unfair they get toughness with barely any downside. I don't want to play MoN and i want goodies too!

    Their spells seems to be better as well... Which admittedly is mostly born out of the fact that i have no means to compare what each spell actually does and if the Boon of Change i am running around with, and the pain i am going through to play a MoT Sorcerer in the current Meta is actually worth it.

    And on the receving end.. it doesn't seem like Flickering Flame is nearly as good as the offensive Spell that MoN gets.

    Slaanesh seems to get an okay offensive spell, downing people in 4ish hits.. but half of the time the heal doesn't seem to work.

    So yeah... ideally i want to bring MoN a bit down and the others up, so that each Mark is a proper choice, with equal amounts of goodies. If Nurgle gets a Plague Knife.. then the other marks should get their equivalent as well. Either everyone gets equally something special, or no one gets something special. And i prefer the former to the later.

    I do not agree. Just like i do not agree with the Eldar complaining about how their Banshee's should get Powerfists and whatnot. I am here to play WH40k. If i want a generic shooter, i'll play a generic shooter. So either its lorethematically correct or bust.

    Yep.. so what? Just a few lines ago, you went all like "Nerfing mark of nurgle would only leave all of them in shambles"... so obviously you agree that the other 3 aren't worth taking... so it needs a rework. You disliking that i suggested the rework, doesn't change the fact that the current meta requires them to look at it again.

    And i do really suggest anything that isn't in the game. You could take the Swooping Hawk wings and give them a basic leather texture. You don't necessarily need them to flap, although i suppose it would be cool. And you can take the Nurgle Grenade, slide the color from green to red, and you have a bloodmist that gives heatdamage... and you can take the servo skull mechanic and, plant 9 of them into a pile, and have everyone entering it have a red waagh SFX to show they have boosted Melee.

    Admittedly the Wings are the biggest thing, but its not like most of the stuff would require a lot of rework.

    2 patches ago, i logged in and had to redo a bunch of my Loadouts because they changed something... if resetting our AP is the worst problem we'll have... then i see no reason not to do it. 5 minutes of inconvience to get 4 worthwhile mark choices instead of one? Yes, please!

    And i am sure they have the same LP figure calculated to how much -0,25% movement speed is. Why? Because they have a value for +0,25% movementspeed on not only Mark of Slaanesh, but also the Eldar Reaper skill that gives movement speed. So they have to have a value for movement speed.

    To me it is a fact that -60% Stamina regeneration is not equal to -60% armor regeneration.

    I think that is a solid suggestion. Thank you for typing it out.

    Pretty much the same reason why i refuse to take MoN. CSM cannot be a faction balanced around MoN!
  10. Belphegor LordSloth Preacher

    Its good that the discussion finally gets to the core of the problem. I think there are 3 different levels of argument in this discussion and not all have an easy fix.

    Level 1: We both agree that every God Mark should be viable, have a purpose and add its own flavour.
    Level 2: We both agree that we are both fed up with the MoN beeing dominant, simply because it is the only one giving defensive stats.
    Level 3: We disagree on how to fix it. You wish to add more downsides to it while buffing the rest to create a chaos wide harmonized playingfield. I don't see much point in that because it would (unless every Mark gets a flat out defensive bonus) still not cure the problem (people take still MoN unless it is really bad) while putting us at a disadvantage against every other faction. Radically thought you could even cut down its bonus and debuff to half and people would still pick a 15 hp 10 toughness MoN over any of the other Marks.

    While i admire your zeal in playing something wh40k'ish down to the last letter of the universe i must say that the game should have some basic balance for all factions. Afterall our Orks are most likely all Nobs since they can go toe to toe with an Astartes.

    The majority of the f2p players and even a good portion of the current playerbase would rather have a fair playingfield instead of beeing 100% loreaccurate. Especially since the wh40k lore is often enough iffy aswell and changes between editions and authors while still leaving 100ths of open loopholes and inconsistancies. Someone on Discord who is one of the biggest lorenerds i know wondered how grav weapons i.e. are such a big thing on this world and how certain weapontypes which are in the lore rare and spare are here on every second tactical. I guess this is part of the compromise beween "how it could be and how it must be in order to work".

    My baseline is: If you change MoN dont break it by tryharding "to make it in line with the rest of the crap" and give us other tankyness options on the other Marks to keep us on eye to eye with Orks and LSM.

    This flat out defence boost to all marks is in the current format hardly possible since MoK has just one value to modify, namely lifesteal while the other is a 0 or 1 value. To compensate for more HP by reducing Lifesteal would break it, so you would need to add another debuff to it - maybe armor reg debuff to compensate for more health. MoT is flat out bad and would need a complete new set of ideas and stats, -HP are a no go. MoS, if it had 20-30 Defstats on it, would probably lose 1/3rd or half its runspeed buff in the process to compensate. This would still rock.

Share This Page