Like them or hate them, there is hardly anyone that would argue grav weapons have heavily affected the game as played today. Virtually making 2+ save units a liability now even more so than the heavy plasma spam days with its built in drawback of gets hot to offset the substancial amount of wounds it could do to a terminator style unit (slot back before grav that is). Now you look around and see them more and more spammed in competative lists, and growing the power gap even more for the haves and have nots.

Is it a symptom of older weapons like lascannons heavy bolters and plasma cannons not being as effective as once before, due to increased model count while GW tries to force 40k to evolve into epic essentially to feed their ever growing sales goals that investors demand? Should instead these aforementioned weapons recieve a much needed upgrade instead? Personally since I see slot of marine lists running nothing but, it's probably a bit of both. Nerf for grav and upgrade the old guard weapons, many unchanged since 3rd ed. And not just marine weapons, but virtually all armies except maybe the newest guns (like skitarii weapons, I feel they are the gold standard of what today's weapons should be balanced like).

So I Don't drown out others opinions and can look at it from a more neutral standpoint, if the devs asked YOU to change grav in some way, and other weapons would be stuck as is for the for see able future, how would you set them? More points? Less shots? Reduced range? Mechanic overall? Some built in drawback ala plasma? A combination of things?

Keep in mind it would also affect cult mechanicus heavy grav, who don't have amps for theirs and a lower BS.

Reduce their rate of fire. 5 shots for an AP2 weapon that wounds most worthwhile units on a 2 or 3 is a massive amount of killing power, especially when a couple 6s from the same weapon will wreck most vehicles.

Drop grav amps from the game entirely, change the immobilized effect on vehiclea to just a glancing hit, and make them Rapid Fire for Grav Guns (too many relentless things running around getting full 3 shot rof after moving 12") and make the Heavy versions Salvo 2/4 or just plain Heavy 3, Drop the price on the grav cannon for tacs and deva down to 25 after that, and you're golden.

As is, they just have too high an rof, and are too effective against too broad an array of targets. They're basically never wasted except against weeny infantry where you're probably not missing much anyway.

Make them AP-. Maybe give them AP2 back on a To Wound roll of 6 or something. Make the Armour Pen roll of 6 do a Stun result with no HP lost.

It's the fact that its a high ROF weapon, with low AP that wounds on a low dice roll against the tough things you want to kill and also screws over Vehicles just because. The simple problem that Grav is good against almost everything, and things its not good against are what Bolters are good against (of which you will naturally have lots of anyway).

I am not really a Space Marine player so take my suggestion with a grain of salt but I would either of the following.

Option 1: Each profile has 1 less shot. So Salvo 1/2 and Salvo 2/4. Less shots = less damage output. Give plasmas some wiggle room as a useful tool, especially when compared to grav guns.

Option 2: Grav Amps give +1 to wound or vehicle roll instead of rerolls and grav weapons cause vehicle stunned results instead of immobilized. Would still be strong against infantry/MCs, less devastating against regular vehicles, same against super heavies. Grav Amp change means it could get stronger if you have shred, preferred enemy, or tankhunter.

Option 3: Combine option 1 and 2. In the event that neither of them have enough impact.

Of course this needs to be play tested to see how much of an impact this would make but I think grav needs to be less of a "do everything" gun and more of a tool for particular targets.

I dunno. My experience with them is primarily as a Dark Eldar player, against whom they aren't that effective.

I don't think I'd really change anything.

(Like I said: admittedly massive bias in experience.)

I would say less shots. Melta are just fine and they used to wound almost everything on a 2+ (not sure anymore, because I stopped caring some time ago).
Also drop grav amp. And make the things they are bad again, i.e. hordes, work better.

Honestly they should never have been introduced into the game as they are now, Grav basically rules all, and is always the superior option when you can choose it.

It needs to be way less effective against vehicles, and not AP2. It is effectively an AP 2 weapon with no risk/reward and high rate of fire. Most AP2 weapons either have a risk associated with it (low or one shot, gets hot, limited range, etc). Grav has none of these.

 ultimentra wrote:
Honestly they should never have been introduced into the game as they are now, Grav basically rules all, and is always the superior option when you can choose it.

It needs to be way less effective against vehicles, and not AP2. It is effectively an AP 2 weapon with no risk/reward and high rate of fire. Most AP2 weapons either have a risk associated with it (low or one shot, gets hot, limited range, etc). Grav has none of these.

If the Grav-Cannon was a single shot weapon you would not be saying such a thing

Its so good because of its massive RoF on relentless units (bikes and cents) and its heavy version always having a grav-amp for rerolls.

It just needs a reduced RoF (1/2 on gravguns, 2/3 on grav cannons) and get rid of the grav amp

What about going back to the original mechanic where it doesn't kill but pins?

Something like S check or be pinned?

I view the main problem with Grav is that it can be taken on relentless platforms very easily. Take it on a foot slogging marine or even the cents it's a great weapon but not broken. Once you factor in bikes and the Skyhammer, it becomes to good.

I would do the following:

-Make Grav Amps an expensive upgrade instead of an auto include
-Take away the auto immobilize on vehicles turn it into an auto glance on a roll of a 6
-Make it AP- unless you roll a 5 or 6 to wound

Make them the 30k equivalent. Small blast, S test or take a wound at AP4, and unit hit moves through Difficult and Dangerous Terrain and Haywire.

I never use Grav and I play marines quite religiously.

Grav Cannons should be 35 on Centurions, and change Grav Guns to Salvo 2/2. Done.

Just make them AP - and were good.

I don't think ap- is a good idea. Then we are back to riptide s having no natural predators again. If we are going to do that we need a rule that says MC's can't get better than a 3+ save.

 Orock wrote:
I don't think ap- is a good idea. Then we are back to riptide s having no natural predators again. If we are going to do that we need a rule that says MC's can't get better than a 3+ save.

MC's having 2+ saves is fine, it's when they've got FNP and invul saves (and can easily get cover saves) on top of 5 or more wounds that it becomes a huge problem.

Grav's great boon here is that it often has the sheer RoF to defeat these other things. I think Grav and the additional overlapping MC resiliency both need to be addressed, in addition to other issues.

Use the 30k rules? They seem to grasp what the Grav Gun is about...

It would make plasma and melta relevant again

I would change their mechanic if wounding. Instead of wounding on the armour save, I would make it a table:

Regular Infantry: 5+
Bulky: 4+
Very Bulky: 3+
Extremely Bulky/Monstrous Creatures: 2+

This way, their original purpose of killing heavy MCs is preserved, while not giving them a huge advantage against all other units.

I would also change the Grav Cannon to Salvo 3/4 and make Grav-Amps re-roll To Hit rather than To Wound.

Made so they cannot ever be fired at Flyers, ap- with 6s as rending. Vehicles are unaffected period.

Welcome to balance you cheesy pieces of loyalist scum!

 GoliothOnline wrote:
Made so they cannot ever be fired at Flyers, ap- with 6s as rending. Vehicles are unaffected period.

Welcome to balance you cheesy pieces of loyalist scum!

I guarantee that a vehicle could not handle having its collective mass amplified and have its mobility components escape intact.

I would reduce the power of MCs and GCs to make them able to be harmed consistently by weapons other than Grav. That is how I would balance Grav weapons better.

 GoliothOnline wrote:
Made so they cannot ever be fired at Flyers, ap- with 6s as rending. Vehicles are unaffected period.

Welcome to balance you cheesy pieces of loyalist scum!

Actually, all you did was create a weapon that NOBODY would take.

I would nerf grav if they also nerf Markerlights and wraithknights. Grav is the great equalizer that gives Imperial armies a chance against those armies.

 jy2 wrote:
I would nerf grav if they also nerf Markerlights and wraithknights. Grav is the great equalizer that gives Imperial armies a chance against those armies.

Bingo. This was exactly my point. When Grav is basically the only way that Imperial armies can even deal with stuff like Riptides or Wraithknights, nerfing THOSE units should come before Grav gets nerfed. Unless those units can be dealt without Grav (which would help the bottom tier armies without any way of dealing with them), Grav needs to stay put.

You said it, brother.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
But assuming Markerlights/riptides and Wraithknights get nerfed, this is how I would nerf Grav: 6's is just a penetrating hit against vehicles. Hey, that's better than auto-immobilized.

Oh, and make it salvo 4/6. Hey, Kataprhons get it, why not Centurions as well?

Nerf the gak out of mcs and gmcs first. Grav is necessary to effectively engage mcs with marines. Lack of grav cannons is a big reason ba suck.

Lower the rate of fire of grav and give sniper weapons rending and instant death or let them do 1d6 wounds.
It is nice to have specific anti monster weapons, but I don't like them to be "anti all" weapons.

 oldzoggy wrote:
Lower the rate of fire of grav and give sniper rifles instant death. It is nice to have specific anti monster weapons, but I don't like them to be "anti all" weapons.

I think giving Sniper Rending back would be nice.

 TheNewBlood wrote:
I would change their mechanic if wounding. Instead of wounding on the armour save, I would make it a table:

Regular Infantry: 5+
Bulky: 4+
Very Bulky: 3+
Extremely Bulky/Monstrous Creatures: 2+

This way, their original purpose of killing heavy MCs is preserved, while not giving them a huge advantage against all other units.

I would also change the Grav Cannon to Salvo 3/4 and make Grav-Amps re-roll To Hit rather than To Wound.

This basically changes nothing as MC usually have the high toughness and infantry have low toughness.

And rerolling to hit in most circumstances would be better than reroll to wound with grav lol

 jy2 wrote:
I would nerf grav if they also nerf Markerlights and wraithknights. Grav is the great equalizer that gives Imperial armies a chance against those armies.

It gives 3 Loyalist Marine armies a chance against such armies, most Imperial armies have no access to Grav weaponry at all.

 jy2 wrote:
You said it, brother.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
But assuming Markerlights/riptides and Wraithknights get nerfed, this is how I would nerf Grav: 6's is just a penetrating hit against vehicles. Hey, that's better than auto-immobilized.

Oh, and make it salvo 4/6. Hey, Kataprhons get it, why not Centurions as well?

While I agree with you two, that MC's super rules are what really started the arms race, I dont agree with the 4/6 like tataprhons for 2 reasons. One, their BS is lower naturally, and cannot benefit from skitarii canticles. Only a once a game (outside convocation) reroll ones or twos usually. And Two, they do NOT have grav amps, meaning no rerolls on failed armor or wounds. Even devastators (assuming no moving or devastator doctrine) put out more damage than them with the similar weapon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

notredameguy10 wrote:

 TheNewBlood wrote:
I would change their mechanic if wounding. Instead of wounding on the armour save, I would make it a table:

Regular Infantry: 5+
Bulky: 4+
Very Bulky: 3+
Extremely Bulky/Monstrous Creatures: 2+

This way, their original purpose of killing heavy MCs is preserved, while not giving them a huge advantage against all other units.

I would also change the Grav Cannon to Salvo 3/4 and make Grav-Amps re-roll To Hit rather than To Wound.

This basically changes nothing as MC usually have the high toughness and infantry have low toughness.

And rerolling to hit in most circumstances would be better than reroll to wound with grav lol

you should go back and reread what he wrote. It would still cripple monstrous creatures, but now things like marines would get saves, terminators would be used (mabye) again, and it would still pierce what it needs to. And rerolls to hit are gained in abundance, anything from doctrines for marines to psychic powers. Rerolls to wound/glance is the big culpret, and often combined with the rerolls to hit from psychic powers to make them devastating. Giving them natural rerolls to hit would be a big nerf actually.

I think it's important to remember when thinking about grav, the issue is the relentless platforms as people have already pointed out. Tactical marines aren't rocking Grav everywhere for good reason.

With that in mind, I'd change the Grav Gun to assault 2. Up the cost of Grav Centurions.

I think a targeted nerf would be better then a straight up one across the board.

How would I change grav weapons?

I wouldn't. Let marines have one good heavy and special weapon.

So psybolt razorbacks and plasma melta pods were bad in the past? From what I heard about 4th ed, 5 man lascanon squads were ok too, as was rending that worked on sixs to hit instead of tow ound.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Drop grav amps from the game entirely, change the immobilized effect on vehiclea to just a glancing hit, and make them Rapid Fire for Grav Guns (too many relentless things running around getting full 3 shot rof after moving 12") and make the Heavy versions Salvo 2/4 or just plain Heavy 3, Drop the price on the grav cannon for tacs and deva down to 25 after that, and you're golden.

As is, they just have too high an rof, and are too effective against too broad an array of targets. They're basically never wasted except against weeny infantry where you're probably not missing much anyway.

This.

Also, as has already been said, a lot of MCs and GCs need toning down.

Makumba wrote:
So psybolt razorbacks and plasma melta pods were bad in the past? From what I heard about 4th ed, 5 man lascanon squads were ok too, as was rending that worked on sixs to hit instead of tow ound.

How is that relevant to the fact that the grav cannon is the one powerful special weapon Marines currently have?

EDIT:

I'm going to shamelessly rip myself off and suggest that, instead of wounding on Armour Save, Grav should wound based on number of wounds or hull points. Let's say we make it an S5 weapon that increases in power by two for each wound or HP beyond the first two. Against a model with W3 or 3 HP it'd be S7, against W4 or 4 HP it'd be S9, against W5+ or 5+ HP it'd be a Destroyer weapon. Tune number of shots accordingly to make sure that the weapon isn't good against hordes despite being S5, and remove the grav-amp.

The thing is, it's not good for an army to have one weapon that's vastly better than all their other weapons. Nor is it good for the game.

I mean, it's all very well to say 'oh, but they're out only answer to Riptides, Wraithknights etc.', but there are two problems with this:

1) What about all the units with good saves that aren't stupidly overpowered? Grav Guns are stupidly over-effective against them, too. But, unlike Wraithknights, Riptides or the like, these units don't have enough advantages to make them worth risking in a Grav-filled meta (and it will inevitably be Grav-filled because Grav is orders of magnitude better than the alternatives). So, you're basically guaranteeing that no one will use anything but the most overpowered MCs. What would be the point? Hell, one of the biggest complaints I see from marine players in the various 'how to fix terminators' threads is that there's too much AP2 in the game. Well gee, if only there was a particular weapon we could tone down to help remedy that.

2) What about the armies who don't have Grav to fall back on (Imperial or otherwise)? I mean, not every Xeno army can spam D-weapons like Eldar, and many Imperial/Marine armies don't have Grav. So, what should they do against WKs?

It just seems more reasonable to address both problems (Grav being too strong and many MCs/GCs being too resilient), rather than letting marines keep their OP toy, letting certain MCs stay OP and basically giving a middle-finger to the armies that have neither.

you guys are nerfing it too hard, just give other armies a (**insert nerdy ass name here**) which ignores the immobilized result on for vehicles

Gravity involves mass so having it wound based on the opponent's armor value never made sense to me.

I think it would be nor befitting if it wounded against base size or unit type, you know, factors that actually indicate the mass of the target.

Ex.

28mm base - 5+
40mm base - 4+
60mm base - 3+
Oval base or larger - 2+

Or,

Infantry and beast - 5+
Jump pack and jet pack infantry - 4+
Bikes and cavalry - 3+
Monstrous Creature and bigger - 2+

As people have said, reduce Rate of Fire. That's what makes them over the top. Their effect is good, sure, and alone is better than Plasma and other heavy weapons. But then on top of that you add firing 3-5 shots makes it an auto include.

nah, leave them alone. With things like the Wraithknight around we need all the grav power we can get!

 Slaphead wrote:
nah, leave them alone. With things like the Wraithknight around we need all the grav power we can get!

Just because the Wraithknight is ridiculous does not mean that you need to also have a ridiculous weapon that outclasses every other heavy weapon in your codex because reasons.

 krodarklorr wrote:

 Slaphead wrote:
nah, leave them alone. With things like the Wraithknight around we need all the grav power we can get!

Just because the Wraithknight is ridiculous does not mean that you need to also have a ridiculous weapon that outclasses every other heavy weapon in your codex because reasons.

Grav is one of the few things that are good in the Blood Angels codex, please don't take that away from us...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Would making them small blast templates with the risk of scatter be a compromise?

 Slaphead wrote:
Would making them small blast templates with the risk of scatter be a compromise?

You mean instead of having multiple shots? Sure, that'd work.

How is that relevant to the fact that the grav cannon is the one powerful special weapon Marines currently have?

The argument given was that they should stay the same, because marines need good special and heavy weapons. As if they never had good weapons of that kind.

Would making them small blast templates with the risk of scatter be a compromise?

So 3 centurions would be droping 15 templates with re-rolls to hit and wounds? No thank you, there is enough weapons that hurt IG.

 Slaphead wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

 Slaphead wrote:
nah, leave them alone. With things like the Wraithknight around we need all the grav power we can get!

Just because the Wraithknight is ridiculous does not mean that you need to also have a ridiculous weapon that outclasses every other heavy weapon in your codex because reasons.

Grav is one of the few things that are good in the Blood Angels codex, please don't take that away from us...

I'm not saying take it away. I'm saying reduce the rate of fire. Plasma guns wound terminators on 2s with no armor save, but can get 2 shots max at half range. Grav wounds on 2s with no armor and (the platforms everyone and their mother takes it on) get anywhere from 3-5 shots at 24" because Salvo.

Lascannons wound a Wraithknight on 3s with no armor allowed, but usually only get a couple of shots out of each unit at best. Grav wounds on 3s with no armor, and gets ~15 shots out of a unit.

Sure, a Lascannon can one shot a Rhino, but most people will agree that one shot weapons, or weapons that roll very few dice, are not reliable. Plus, Grav you just need 2 6s to destroy that Rhino, and you have a lot more room for error because higher rate of fire.

This isn't even taking into account Grav Amps, which lets them reroll everything.

Makumba wrote:

How is that relevant to the fact that the grav cannon is the one powerful special weapon Marines currently have?

The argument given was that they should stay the same, because marines need good special and heavy weapons. As if they never had good weapons of that kind.

Wether Marines have had good special weapons in the past or not is completely irrelevant to what weapons they currently have, I'm not sure what you're aiming for.

Make grav-gun 18" assault 2, grav cannon 30" heavy 1 blast, but reduce grav-cannon w/amp cost by 15 pts. Glance on 4+ instead of immobilise on 6+.

Sonic Keyboard wrote:
Make grav-gun 18" assault 2, grav cannon 30" heavy 1 blast, but reduce grav-cannon w/amp cost by 15 pts. Glance on 4+ instead of immobilise on 6+.

Glancing on a 4+ with rerolls? A command squad shooting out 6-8 grav shots would still have a great chance of wrecking a Land Raider. The 4+ with rerolls is still ridiculous.

 krodarklorr wrote:

Sonic Keyboard wrote:
Make grav-gun 18" assault 2, grav cannon 30" heavy 1 blast, but reduce grav-cannon w/amp cost by 15 pts. Glance on 4+ instead of immobilise on 6+.

Glancing on a 4+ with rerolls? A command squad shooting out 6-8 grav shots would still have a great chance of wrecking a Land Raider. The 4+ with rerolls is still ridiculous.

grav-gun doesn't have grav-amp

4 hp within 5+ cover would need 12 hits, 18 shots = 9 grav guns.

Sonic Keyboard wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Sonic Keyboard wrote:
Make grav-gun 18" assault 2, grav cannon 30" heavy 1 blast, but reduce grav-cannon w/amp cost by 15 pts. Glance on 4+ instead of immobilise on 6+.

Glancing on a 4+ with rerolls? A command squad shooting out 6-8 grav shots would still have a great chance of wrecking a Land Raider. The 4+ with rerolls is still ridiculous.

grav-gun doesn't have grav-amp

Well I suppose that helps a little.

 vipoid wrote:

 Slaphead wrote:
Would making them small blast templates with the risk of scatter be a compromise?

You mean instead of having multiple shots? Sure, that'd work.

Yeah, pretty much working in the same way as Plasma weapons. Standard Grav-guns fire in the same manner as plasma guns (1 shot, 2 if in rapid fire range), and then the grav-cannons have the blast template like the plasma cannons (heavy 1, small blast that is).

All of my friends play mostly Xenos, so I actually haven't run into Grav Guns much... thankfully.

In my opinion, Grav Guns fill a niche in the game to easily wound models with heavy armor. I think that's great, and that is the role they should continue to fulfill. I think making them AP2 on top of that goes too far. Now not only do they easily wound models with heavy armor, they also automatically deny them any save from that armor. This, combined with their high rate of fire just makes them sick to the point where I'm glad I don't run into them... but then again I play Orks mostly so I wouldn't care that much anyways!

If it were me, I'd default to making them AP- with Rending. Maybe give them a special upgraded version of Rending, where it Rends on a 5 or a 6?

Grav is far too OP'd and seems to have been created with little regard to how it effects other options. The overlying problem is a long term tendence by the designers to hand out good AP weapons like candy. 2+ armour is expensive and rare, AP2 weaponry is affordable and common as muck. It makes no f-ing sense in terms of a balanced game, particularely when the majority of those terminator killing guns are perfectly adequate vs other targets too.

Simply remove Grav Amps.

DevCents are already likely to be buffed with twin-linking (Prescience) and probably ignores cover (Perfect Timing) from Tigurius et. al., Having 100% uptime on re-rolling to wound (Shred) means that buffed DevCents convert over 90% of their shots into wounds (at AP2).

 Vaktathi wrote:

 jy2 wrote:
I would nerf grav if they also nerf Markerlights and wraithknights. Grav is the great equalizer that gives Imperial armies a chance against those armies.

It gives 3 Loyalist Marine armies a chance against such armies, most Imperial armies have no access to Grav weaponry at all.

Unfortunately, not everyone gets the goodies due to Codex creep and army playstyle, but Imperial armies have easy access to grav weaponry via Battle Brother allies and formations like Skyhammer. It then becomes just a question of....can you stomach running allies or are you a purist?

 Orock wrote:

 jy2 wrote:
You said it, brother.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
But assuming Markerlights/riptides and Wraithknights get nerfed, this is how I would nerf Grav: 6's is just a penetrating hit against vehicles. Hey, that's better than auto-immobilized.

Oh, and make it salvo 4/6. Hey, Kataprhons get it, why not Centurions as well?

While I agree with you two, that MC's super rules are what really started the arms race, I dont agree with the 4/6 like tataprhons for 2 reasons. One, their BS is lower naturally, and cannot benefit from skitarii canticles. Only a once a game (outside convocation) reroll ones or twos usually. And Two, they do NOT have grav amps, meaning no rerolls on failed armor or wounds. Even devastators (assuming no moving or devastator doctrine) put out more damage than them with the similar weapon.

Just kidding about the Salvo 4/6 for GravCenturions. Grav-Cannons don't need a boost. Instead, what centurions need is to be able to buy Omnispexes for everyone in the unit. HAHAHAHA.....

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
What about going back to the original mechanic where it doesn't kill but pins?

Something like S check or be pinned?

I'd go for something like this.

As I see it grav weapons should be great tools to disrupt your enemy's movement and pin their units down. Is that squad going to capture an objective marker? Shot the grav gun to their faces... and as long as one model in the entire unit gets hit by the small blast template, pass a test or they get pinned down. It should be a crowd control weapon, not an all-powerful weapon able to deal with virtually everything save for armorless units (against whom the bolters are already enough).

It should be also useful to non-permanently inmobilize vehicles and MCs (the "cannot move until next turn" kind).

Not only grav needs to be nerfed, it needs to be changed completely.

There must bev a way to remove riptide and/ir wraithknight at range. You see how good the armies are that can't. Like ba and orks. The standard grav gun is only op against lists that are already overpriced. Scatterlasers are better.

Martel732 wrote:
There must bev a way to remove riptide and/ir wraithknight at range. You see how good the armies are that can't. Like ba and orks. The standard grav gun is only op against lists that are already overpriced. Scatterlasers are better.

No, Grav is busted as feth because it combines huge volumes of accurate ap2 firepower + re-rolls out the wazoo (between amps + psychic supports), and is only objectively worse against the only target type that Marines in general don't need help killing in droves.

Toning down Grav by itself still isn't enough to keep it from being the no-brainer choice however. Even with less shots overall, it's still the standout 'catch-all' option for Loyalists as it will still gun down every threat bar Super Heavies and basic T3-4/5+ grunts.

Instead, you need to also buff the other guns that never see play, such as ramping up the Heavy bolter to something like Salvo 3/4 + Shred.
Now it's the go-to basic cleaner for all forms of T3/4 models, and in numbers, can threaten T5/6 through sheer weight of fire. (plus the change would also filter on through IG and Chaos Marines who are especially poor in the volume of fire department these days!)

I'd leave them alone.

To people who say they're too powerful: they're no more better than the other things that are "too powerful", like distortion weapons, gauss weapons and arc weapons. Unless it's a new game edition that nerfs *everyone* across the board, messing with grav isn't a good idea. Necron, Space Marines, Eldar, Tau, Mechanicus, Imperial Knights, and Dark Angels are all at a nice equilibrium, as far as I'm concerned. Guard have gotten a little boost now; they need a little more love, as well as BA, DE, Grey Knights, Orks, Tyranid, and the game will be nicely externally balanced.

To people who say people will pick grav over other stuff, like heavy bolters and heavy flamers. Well yeah, congrats, you just described the last two decades of 40k. When has there ever been internal balance? There have always been crappy weapon choices and better weapon choices, if your goal was list optimization. When was the last time you saw a heavy bolter in a competitive game? Really, it has nothing to do with grav, and everything to do with GW giving gamers another reason to buy new models with the cool new weapons.

There are also all sorts of nice things in the game like invisibility, allied death stars, drop pods, very hard to kill models, resurrection, JSJ, and so on. They're part of the game. 40k is often (not always) a game of my good stuff against your good stuff, if you're building lists to win. If you want to play a game that strips out all that, either modify the rules (all of them), or play 30k

NOBODY thinks Gauss is too powerful.

Grav guns don't have amps. For the third time or so this thread.

Martel732 wrote:
Grav guns don't have amps. For the third time or so this thread.

The only Grav that really counts does come with an Amp.

SJ

I wouldn't say that grav guns don't count.

At any rate, grav guns aren't as disruptive to the game as the MC rules, so those would have to be changed first. Especially the 2+ armor MCs. There's literally no other good way to get rid of them other than D weapons. Even scatterlasers are relatively ineffective against Riptide/Dreadknight.

They are too good vs to many things.

And all the.talk of they are needed to deal with MC'S and GC is BS iMO

You have access to plasma guns, plasma cannons,, lascannons, melta guns, multi meltas, Assault cannons, missile launchers, all AP2 and AP3. There are plenty of other tools to deal with MC, GC and 2+ armor.

None get used cause grav is too good. It has no draw backs and makes list building easy mode imo.

Making a list should be a choice of sacrifices and balances. Not insert grav to deal with everything.

Armies should have to make a choice to have enough anti armor , MC and infantry weapons in there army. Not 1 gun should cover all 3 areas.

My 2 teef.

P.s. not all armies have grav and deal with MC and GC's just fine. Marines should not get the easy mode gun choice when they have a lot of other weapon choices.

The weapons you listed are all ineffective vs mcs because of low rates of fire or lacking AP 3. The assault cannon particularly made me lol because of the terrible ass platforms it comes on. Missile launchers are similarly a complete joke in 7th ed. The plasma gun is okay vs MCs, but even it can't wound WKs worth a damn. You can call BS, but you'd be completely wrong.

The grav mechanic might be too strong, but just add it to the pile with the MC USR, GMC USR, the scatterbike, the markerlight, etc. There's nothing special about grav in 40K. Plenty of lists out there that can shoot older codices off the table without trying.

Those lists without grav with amps don't deal with MCs and GCs just fine. I have such a list and MCs and GCs stomp all over the BA.

Grav is only efficient vs expensive vehicles, which no one is bringing anyway because of hps and Str D. Grav is not good vs cheap vehicles.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
NOBODY thinks Gauss is too powerful.

I was about to say the same thing. Out of all the weapon special rules (i.e. Bladestorm, Grav, ext) Gauss is probably the worst....

 krodarklorr wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
NOBODY thinks Gauss is too powerful.

I was about to say the same thing. Out of all the weapon special rules (i.e. Bladestorm, Grav, ext) Gauss is probably the worst....

It's better than the bolter special rules.

Martel732 wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
NOBODY thinks Gauss is too powerful.

I was about to say the same thing. Out of all the weapon special rules (i.e. Bladestorm, Grav, ext) Gauss is probably the worst....

It's better than the bolter special rules.

*slaps knee* Gosh darn, that's a good one.

No but really. Bolters aren't supposed to have special rules.

I'd also argue that grav cents are perfectly fair if you take invisibility out of the game. They wreck a unit or two, and then you shoot THEM off the table. T5 2+ W2 no invuln isn't exactly hard to crack in 7th.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
NOBODY thinks Gauss is too powerful.

I was about to say the same thing. Out of all the weapon special rules (i.e. Bladestorm, Grav, ext) Gauss is probably the worst....

It's better than the bolter special rules.

*slaps knee* Gosh darn, that's a good one.

No but really. Bolters aren't supposed to have special rules.

I think Gauss is piling on already horrible vehicle rules. So in that sense, it could be argued as too powerful. I'd rather have a Necron warrior over a marine any day of the week, myself.

Martel732 wrote:
The weapons you listed are all ineffective vs mcs because of low rates of fire or lacking AP 3. The assault cannon particularly made me lol because of the terrible ass platforms it comes on. Missile launchers are similarly a complete joke in 7th ed. The plasma gun is okay vs MCs, but even it can't wound WKs worth a damn. You can call BS, but you'd be completely wrong.

The grav mechanic might be too strong, but just add it to the pile with the MC USR, GMC USR, the scatterbike, the markerlight, etc. There's nothing special about grav in 40K. Plenty of lists out there that can shoot older codices off the table without trying.

Those lists without grav with amps don't deal with MCs and GCs just fine. I have such a list and MCs and GCs stomp all over the BA.

Every gun I named has AP2 or AP3 except the assault cannon, which can have AP2 on a 6. So actually every gun I named is AP2 or AP3.

Again other armies kill MC with out grav or D. I've dropped MC at range with orks and use single shot rokkits and mega blastas.

And I've seen marines wipe people using no grav. Grav is a crutch for marines imo.






Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
The weapons you listed are all ineffective vs mcs because of low rates of fire or lacking AP 3. The assault cannon particularly made me lol because of the terrible ass platforms it comes on. Missile launchers are similarly a complete joke in 7th ed. The plasma gun is okay vs MCs, but even it can't wound WKs worth a damn. You can call BS, but you'd be completely wrong.

The grav mechanic might be too strong, but just add it to the pile with the MC USR, GMC USR, the scatterbike, the markerlight, etc. There's nothing special about grav in 40K. Plenty of lists out there that can shoot older codices off the table without trying.

Those lists without grav with amps don't deal with MCs and GCs just fine. I have such a list and MCs and GCs stomp all over the BA.

Grav is only efficient vs expensive vehicles, which no one is bringing anyway because of hps and Str D. Grav is not good vs cheap vehicles.

Grav has the same effect vs armor 10 as it does vs armor 14. So how is it less effective vs cheap vehicles when is functions exactly the same vs both ?

 Dakkafang Dreggrim wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The weapons you listed are all ineffective vs mcs because of low rates of fire or lacking AP 3. The assault cannon particularly made me lol because of the terrible ass platforms it comes on. Missile launchers are similarly a complete joke in 7th ed. The plasma gun is okay vs MCs, but even it can't wound WKs worth a damn. You can call BS, but you'd be completely wrong.

The grav mechanic might be too strong, but just add it to the pile with the MC USR, GMC USR, the scatterbike, the markerlight, etc. There's nothing special about grav in 40K. Plenty of lists out there that can shoot older codices off the table without trying.

Those lists without grav with amps don't deal with MCs and GCs just fine. I have such a list and MCs and GCs stomp all over the BA.

Every gun I named has AP2 or AP3 except the assault cannon, which can have AP2 on a 6. So actually every gun I named is AP2 or AP3.

Again other armies kill MC with out grav or D. I've dropped MC at range with orks and use single shot rokkits and mega blastas.

And I've seen marines wipe people using no grav. Grav is a crutch for marines imo.

AP 2 or AP 3 with a terrible rate of fire. You simply don't have enough shots to take down a Riptide or WK with these weapons before they have leveled your list or assaulted you in the case of the WK. The assault cannon, as it is currently fielded by the Imperium, is simply a terrible choice because of the platforms it comes on. The cover rules for MCs/GCs are also murder for the weapons you listed off. Your proposed solution is simply not realistic in 7th.

I don't think other armies have the success you claim. I've seen too many games against older codices where MCs and GMCs utter dominate because they are functionally immortal.

I'm sure marines wipe Orks just fine with no grav. Eldar or Tau? Not so much.

Martel732 wrote:

I think Gauss is piling on already horrible vehicle rules. So in that sense, it could be argued as too powerful. I'd rather have a Necron warrior over a marine any day of the week, myself.

The reason Warriors are better than Marines (at certain things) is because Warriors are the backbone of a Necron army. They're how we deal with vehicles half the time. We lack options like Devastators or Twinlinked Meltas on vehicles, or Grav, ext. Our most cost effective method of dealing with scary stuff is our standard troop, and even then it's not entirely reliable.

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

I think Gauss is piling on already horrible vehicle rules. So in that sense, it could be argued as too powerful. I'd rather have a Necron warrior over a marine any day of the week, myself.

The reason Warriors are better than Marines (at certain things) is because Warriors are the backbone of a Necron army. They're how we deal with vehicles half the time. We lack options like Devastators or Twinlinked Meltas on vehicles, or Grav, ext. Our most cost effective method of dealing with scary stuff is our standard troop, and even then it's not entirely reliable.

Except devastators and meltas are now pretty bad in 7th. The vaunted triple melta ASM drop pod from BA has about a 50/50 of popping a Rhino. Really scary, that. Anti-tank is now about high ROF hp stripping, not quality shots. What does that? Scatterlasers and Gauss. Nothing the Imperium has. Non-grav low AP weapons are mostly garbage now. Grav isn't a crutch. It's functional. Xeno commanders complaining about marines having one functional weapon system among a sea of garbage is pretty frustrating.

Pretty sure that Wraiths are good at dealing with scary stuff. And they're cheap for what they do. Like make my entire army concept pointless.

Martel732 wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

I think Gauss is piling on already horrible vehicle rules. So in that sense, it could be argued as too powerful. I'd rather have a Necron warrior over a marine any day of the week, myself.

The reason Warriors are better than Marines (at certain things) is because Warriors are the backbone of a Necron army. They're how we deal with vehicles half the time. We lack options like Devastators or Twinlinked Meltas on vehicles, or Grav, ext. Our most cost effective method of dealing with scary stuff is our standard troop, and even then it's not entirely reliable.

Except devastators and meltas are now pretty bad in 7th. The vaunted triple melta ASM drop pod from BA has about a 50/50 of popping a Rhino. Really scary, that. Anti-tank is now about high ROF hp stripping, not quality shots. What does that? Scatterlasers and Gauss. Nothing the Imperium has. Non-grav low AP weapons are mostly garbage now. Grav isn't a crutch. It's functional. Xeno commanders complaining about marines having one functional weapon system among a sea of garbage is pretty frustrating.

Pretty sure that Wraiths are good at dealing with scary stuff. And they're cheap for what they do. Like make my entire army concept pointless.

More frustrating when marines complain they need grav since their other weapons are "garbage". But compared to most weapons in some xenos armies the "garbage weaons" marines have are better than the xenos weapons.

My orks would kill for a range melta weapon. But in a marine army they are garbage.

They wouldn't work any better for your Orks than they do for marines. Which is not well. These weapons you are talking about are bad because the math says they're bad. Not because I'm being a BA homer or something.

Marines and the Imperium in general certainly have inferior weapons across the board compared to Eldar and Tau, the primary Xenos of interest. Other Xenos are running old codices and so are better compared to the BA armory, which is an even bigger joke at this point. DE are in a similar spot as marines, as the dark lance is now horrid at its purported job.

" But in a marine army they are garbage."

Because MCs laugh at them (lul 1 W) and most vehicles get hped out before they explode. That's why they are bad.

Again, even grav cents aren't OP at all without invisibility, because they become one-shot units that cost a lot.

Martel732 wrote:

 Dakkafang Dreggrim wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The weapons you listed are all ineffective vs mcs because of low rates of fire or lacking AP 3. The assault cannon particularly made me lol because of the terrible ass platforms it comes on. Missile launchers are similarly a complete joke in 7th ed. The plasma gun is okay vs MCs, but even it can't wound WKs worth a damn. You can call BS, but you'd be completely wrong.

The grav mechanic might be too strong, but just add it to the pile with the MC USR, GMC USR, the scatterbike, the markerlight, etc. There's nothing special about grav in 40K. Plenty of lists out there that can shoot older codices off the table without trying.

Those lists without grav with amps don't deal with MCs and GCs just fine. I have such a list and MCs and GCs stomp all over the BA.

Every gun I named has AP2 or AP3 except the assault cannon, which can have AP2 on a 6. So actually every gun I named is AP2 or AP3.

Again other armies kill MC with out grav or D. I've dropped MC at range with orks and use single shot rokkits and mega blastas.

And I've seen marines wipe people using no grav. Grav is a crutch for marines imo.

AP 2 or AP 3 with a terrible rate of fire. You simply don't have enough shots to take down a Riptide or WK with these weapons before they have leveled your list or assaulted you in the case of the WK. The assault cannon, as it is currently fielded by the Imperium, is simply a terrible choice because of the platforms it comes on. The cover rules for MCs/GCs are also murder for the weapons you listed off. Your proposed solution is simply not realistic in 7th.

I don't think other armies have the success you claim. I've seen too many games against older codices where MCs and GMCs utter dominate because they are functionally immortal.

I'm sure marines wipe Orks just fine with no grav. Eldar or Tau? Not so much.

So nerf the select few ridiculous MC's/GMC's out there!
The majority of MC's aren't the problem here, but rather the criminally undercosted Tau & Eldar ones... Tyranid & Chaos Daemons monster mash list aren't game dominating, except for the very specific flying circus versions.

Tone down Grav. Increase the cost of Riptides and *ALL* GMC's so that they're better balanced.



You want to know what real hell is like? Try being the one and only MEQ army that has to deal with all that crap *without* the current crutch that Grav provides!
Chaos Marines have no Deathstar of 'uber doom... no infantry-carried weapons with S6+ and a RoF greater than a paltry 2... Plasma is still our deadliest option... Suicidal characters... everything bar 1 unit is overcosted (and yet daring to bring even a single Hellturkey means you're a WaaC's d-bag somehow?)

At least Daemons can save the day, except that our Str.D stuff is (shockingly) balanced instead of being 'lolz-win!' like Eldar Str.D, nor does it have the cost effectiveness & resilience of Loyalists Grav platforms.

CSM are still better than BA because of better FW support. Grav guns on bikeswith no special rules aren't that great.

"So nerf the select few ridiculous MC's/GMC's out there! "

They just printed those codices. So unless 8th ed nerfs them, this is not an option, making nerfing grav not an option. And you better believe Tyranids MCs will stomp all over BA like chumps. CSM, too. The whole "I fight at full strength until my last wound is gone, unlike vehicles or squads of infantry" is insanely good. Despite what Tyranid players claim. There's not enough ID in the game for that to even be a factor, either.

Even if you nerfed the MCs, those Imperial heavies you listed STILL wouldn't be good because high ROF hp scrubbing would still be better anti-tank. If you play CSM, you should understand how bad Imperial heavy weapons are. At least Havocs and take hp scrubbing weapons in the form of autocannon.

I really feel like Gravs should just be AP3 and wound based on Size categories.

That way it doesn't step on Plasma toes.

(that an a stealth nerf on the riptide type things to a 3+ save since it literally has no reason for being 3+.)

 Desubot wrote:
I really feel like Gravs should just be AP3 and wound based on Size categories.

That way it doesn't step on Plasma toes.

(that an a stealth nerf on the riptide type things to a 3+ save since it literally has no reason for being 3+.)

Clearly, they have no intention of making the Riptide 3+. Most 2+ armor units are boned without grav anyway, so I don't see this as a useful change.

 Dakkafang Dreggrim wrote:
They are too good vs to many things.

And all the.talk of they are needed to deal with MC'S and GC is BS iMO

You have access to plasma guns, plasma cannons,, lascannons, melta guns, multi meltas, Assault cannons, missile launchers, all AP2 and AP3. There are plenty of other tools to deal with MC, GC and 2+ armor.

None get used cause grav is too good. It has no draw backs and makes list building easy mode imo.

Making a list should be a choice of sacrifices and balances. Not insert grav to deal with everything.

Armies should have to make a choice to have enough anti armor , MC and infantry weapons in there army. Not 1 gun should cover all 3 areas.

My 2 teef.

P.s. not all armies have grav and deal with MC and GC's just fine. Marines should not get the easy mode gun choice when they have a lot of other weapon choices.

Well your "2 teef" is incorrect. Let us look at the math to kill a Riptide with Stimulant Injectors, shall we?
A Lascannon in the hands of a Space Marine has a .666 chance to hit, .83 chance to wound, and then there's a .5 to save it under the 5++/5+++. That's a grand total of .28 wounds inflicted.

You need 18 Lascannons shots to kill the Riptide. 18. That's without camping in cover for a better save too.

Now I ask you to prove to me Lascannons are an effective tool to kill Riptides with this information, please.

Most people either don't realize or can't accept how bad non-grav Imperial heavy weapons are. It's really annoying, because lascannons burning holes straight through targets should be pretty deadly. Not in this game. The game is now about ROF and ignoring cover.

Martel732 wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
I really feel like Gravs should just be AP3 and wound based on Size categories.

That way it doesn't step on Plasma toes.

(that an a stealth nerf on the riptide type things to a 3+ save since it literally has no reason for being 3+.)

Clearly, they have no intention of making the Riptide 3+. Most 2+ armor units are boned without grav anyway, so I don't see this as a useful change.

What besides bad luck and people not taking plasma anymore?

2+ armor is not supposed to be unstoppable. its just math.

the problem is that Grav just takes on everything with no repercussion.
leave plasma for 2+ armor save dudes,
make Gravs the anti MC type things
Flamer is anti hoards and swarms
HB: can go cry in a corner

it forces choices and thats a good thing.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Dakkafang Dreggrim wrote:
They are too good vs to many things.

And all the.talk of they are needed to deal with MC'S and GC is BS iMO

You have access to plasma guns, plasma cannons,, lascannons, melta guns, multi meltas, Assault cannons, missile launchers, all AP2 and AP3. There are plenty of other tools to deal with MC, GC and 2+ armor.

None get used cause grav is too good. It has no draw backs and makes list building easy mode imo.

Making a list should be a choice of sacrifices and balances. Not insert grav to deal with everything.

Armies should have to make a choice to have enough anti armor , MC and infantry weapons in there army. Not 1 gun should cover all 3 areas.

My 2 teef.

P.s. not all armies have grav and deal with MC and GC's just fine. Marines should not get the easy mode gun choice when they have a lot of other weapon choices.

Well your "2 teef" is incorrect. Let us look at the math to kill a Riptide with Stimulant Injectors, shall we?
A Lascannon in the hands of a Space Marine has a .666 chance to hit, .83 chance to wound, and then there's a .5 to save it under the 5++/5+++. That's a grand total of .28 wounds inflicted.

You need 18 Lascannons shots to kill the Riptide. 18. That's without camping in cover for a better save too.

Now I ask you to prove to me Lascannons are an effective tool to kill Riptides with this information, please.

I've dropped a riptide with ork shooting with mega blastas At BS2, S8, AP2 in a single turn. So it can be done with out grav. Math hammer isn't exact.

Again armies with out grav and weaker / less shot weapons drop mcs.

Done arguing about grav. It's to strong and needs to be toned down. So other weapons are viable.

Also I feel ya CSM's. I'm glad we can find ways to kill MC witb out the grav crutch.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Desubot wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
I really feel like Gravs should just be AP3 and wound based on Size categories.

That way it doesn't step on Plasma toes.

(that an a stealth nerf on the riptide type things to a 3+ save since it literally has no reason for being 3+.)

Clearly, they have no intention of making the Riptide 3+. Most 2+ armor units are boned without grav anyway, so I don't see this as a useful change.

What besides bad luck and people not taking plasma anymore?

2+ armor is not supposed to be unstoppable. its just math.

the problem is that Grav just takes on everything with no repercussion.
leave plasma for 2+ armor save dudes,
make Gravs the anti MC type things
Flamer is anti hoards and swarms
HB: can go cry in a corner

it forces choices and thats a good thing.

This =) seeing armies composed of all the same weapon kills the game and list building.

In my meta, Heavy Bolters are a better choice over Grav. Thats how. bad it is here.

"Math hammer isn't exact. "

Yes, it is. There are just outliers.

Grav spam is all roses until the demons show up. Or gladius.

"So other weapons are viable. "

The other weapons aren't viable even with grav toned down.

"Again armies with out grav and weaker / less shot weapons drop mcs. "

They kinda don't. That's the problem. I play one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Desubot wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
I really feel like Gravs should just be AP3 and wound based on Size categories.

That way it doesn't step on Plasma toes.

(that an a stealth nerf on the riptide type things to a 3+ save since it literally has no reason for being 3+.)

Clearly, they have no intention of making the Riptide 3+. Most 2+ armor units are boned without grav anyway, so I don't see this as a useful change.

What besides bad luck and people not taking plasma anymore?

2+ armor is not supposed to be unstoppable. its just math.

the problem is that Grav just takes on everything with no repercussion.
leave plasma for 2+ armor save dudes,
make Gravs the anti MC type things
Flamer is anti hoards and swarms
HB: can go cry in a corner

it forces choices and thats a good thing.

Plasma can't stop Riptide because it has to get within 12" and can't stop WK because it can't wound WK. On top of killing your own dudes. I tried all this with the 5th ed BA codex in 6th. Plasma is a fail in 7th.

Martel732 wrote:


Plasma can't stop Riptide because it has to get within 12" and can't stop WK because it can't wound WK. On top of killing your own dudes. I tried all this with the 5th ed BA codex in 6th. Plasma is a fail in 7th.

Did plasma become a 12" str 3 gun while i wasn't looking?

Yeah it wont kill a Riptide or a WK out right which is why i also would push for a MC table.
the game has way too much wrong with it for simple fixes you would have to go through it with a sledge hammer if you want things to be remotely fair.

Martel732 wrote:
"Math hammer isn't exact. "

Yes, it is. There are just outliers.

Grav spam is all roses until the demons show up. Or gladius.

"So other weapons are viable. "

The other weapons aren't viable even with grav toned down.

"Again armies with out grav and weaker / less shot weapons drop mcs. "

They kinda don't. That's the problem. I play one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Desubot wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
I really feel like Gravs should just be AP3 and wound based on Size categories.

That way it doesn't step on Plasma toes.

(that an a stealth nerf on the riptide type things to a 3+ save since it literally has no reason for being 3+.)

Clearly, they have no intention of making the Riptide 3+. Most 2+ armor units are boned without grav anyway, so I don't see this as a useful change.

What besides bad luck and people not taking plasma anymore?

2+ armor is not supposed to be unstoppable. its just math.

the problem is that Grav just takes on everything with no repercussion.
leave plasma for 2+ armor save dudes,
make Gravs the anti MC type things
Flamer is anti hoards and swarms
HB: can go cry in a corner

it forces choices and thats a good thing.

Plasma can't stop Riptide because it has to get within 12" and can't stop WK because it can't wound WK. On top of killing your own dudes. I tried all this with the 5th ed BA codex in 6th. Plasma is a fail in 7th.

I play one too and I kill mcs. Never tell me the odds =)

We can agree to disagree.

 Desubot wrote:

Martel732 wrote:


Plasma can't stop Riptide because it has to get within 12" and can't stop WK because it can't wound WK. On top of killing your own dudes. I tried all this with the 5th ed BA codex in 6th. Plasma is a fail in 7th.

Did plasma become a 12" str 3 gun while i wasn't looking?

Yeah it wont kill a Riptide or a WK out right which is why i also would push for a MC table.
the game has way too much wrong with it for simple fixes you would have to go through it with a sledge hammer if you want things to be remotely fair.

You must double tap the Riptide to have any hope of hurting it. That makes the range 12", not 24". Wounding WK on 5+ with a 15 pt or more expensive weapon is futility incarnate. Especially since you get within assault range to double tap. Plasma is bad against these elite units. Plasma is good against losers like BA. Or people playing "reasonable" marine lists.

"I play one too and I kill mcs. Never tell me the odds =) "

For every one of you, there are five of me. That's what odds mean. I'm glad you can roll out your butt and your opponents have six sided dice with 5 "1s". The rest of us aren't so lucky, and that's the kind of rolling the have-not codices need to deal with these units.

 Tactical_Spam wrote:

 GoliothOnline wrote:
Made so they cannot ever be fired at Flyers, ap- with 6s as rending. Vehicles are unaffected period.

Welcome to balance you cheesy pieces of loyalist scum!

I guarantee that a vehicle could not handle having its collective mass amplified and have its mobility components escape intact.

Firstly, you cant guarantee anything because "Fiction"
Secondly if we're going by mass vs power of the grav field, do you honestly believe that some weenie pistol should be able to take down an entire frigate simply because "Ohh ahhh Amplified gravitational fields" I doubt it highly. Not only would the power needed to affect a massive Tank need to be astronomical, but no where do we see these plebian Timmy-Troopers running around with cold fusion generators small enough to even affect their gimpy little pea shooters.

if you want the claim the argument that perhaps the "Cannon" version of the grav weapons should be able to "Hurt" a vehicle, be my guest, but right now we're focusing on how brokenly stupid the rule is in and of itself being the absolute monstrosity that it is, being superb against anything and everything that isn't 6+ Orks.

 GoliothOnline wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:

 GoliothOnline wrote:
Made so they cannot ever be fired at Flyers, ap- with 6s as rending. Vehicles are unaffected period.

Welcome to balance you cheesy pieces of loyalist scum!

I guarantee that a vehicle could not handle having its collective mass amplified and have its mobility components escape intact.

Firstly, you cant guarantee anything because "Fiction"
Secondly if we're going by mass vs power of the grav field, do you honestly believe that some weenie pistol should be able to take down an entire frigate simply because "Ohh ahhh Amplified gravitational fields" I doubt it highly. Not only would the power needed to affect a massive Tank need to be astronomical, but no where do we see these plebian Timmy-Troopers running around with cold fusion generators small enough to even affect their gimpy little pea shooters.

if you want the claim the argument that perhaps the "Cannon" version of the grav weapons should be able to "Hurt" a vehicle, be my guest, but right now we're focusing on how brokenly stupid the rule is in and of itself being the absolute monstrosity that it is, being superb against anything and everything that isn't 6+ Orks.

There's a reason I like the 30k variant because it scales accordingly. You go from the gun to the bombard. the gun can't scratch a marine, but the bombard erases everything

Honestly grav should have some kind of draw back or possible negative outcome like plasma does.

As far as I see it, there is no need to use any weapon other than grav.

 Konrax wrote:
Honestly grav should have some kind of draw back or possible negative outcome like plasma does.

As far as I see it, there is no need to use any weapon other than grav.

It depends on the meta. As I said before, Heavy Bolters are more useful than Grav-guns and Grav-Cannons in my meta. I have 4 models with grav weapons and I have never used their weapons as Grav.

I find it hilarious that when the Ectoplasma Cannons came out on the Forgefiend (Which we all agree is possibly the worst gun platform in the game for its awful cost if you take said cannons) The stupid things came with 24" range. Thats pretty terrible considering the thing is BS3 and and cost 200 points.

I dont know what kind of moron within the Codex department decided everything within the Chaos books or for that matter most things prior to New C:SM and onward needed a drawback, but this thing was more bad than it was good... And its the only thing that could take the useless Cannon. Mayb If our gakky little havoks could take them and they PERHAPS be on par with Loyalist Cannons with equal Range Id care to more about them existing... Maybe.. lol

Martel732 wrote:

Except devastators and meltas are now pretty bad in 7th. The vaunted triple melta ASM drop pod from BA has about a 50/50 of popping a Rhino. Really scary, that. Anti-tank is now about high ROF hp stripping, not quality shots

The whole hull point mechanic is such crap, it should never have been introduced.

If hull points are going to stay around vehicles need a lot more. If a Rhino had 6 or 7 then there would be much more emphasis on ap1 and one shot vehicle kills again.

I agree with many of the proposals on this thread. I'm advocating for why grav should be the way it is for the game right now. I'd love to tear everything down and build back up. But that seems quite unlikely.

Martel732 wrote:
I'd also argue that grav cents are perfectly fair if you take invisibility out of the game. They wreck a unit or two, and then you shoot THEM off the table. T5 2+ W2 no invuln isn't exactly hard to crack in 7th.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
NOBODY thinks Gauss is too powerful.

I was about to say the same thing. Out of all the weapon special rules (i.e. Bladestorm, Grav, ext) Gauss is probably the worst....

It's better than the bolter special rules.

*slaps knee* Gosh darn, that's a good one.

No but really. Bolters aren't supposed to have special rules.

I think Gauss is piling on already horrible vehicle rules. So in that sense, it could be argued as too powerful. I'd rather have a Necron warrior over a marine any day of the week, myself.

This is really the point. No, Gauss is not uber powerful. It's not Grav. But it's on every freaking model, which also has RP. Just like JSJ, it's an awesome faction perk. And don't get me wrong, Imperium has great perks too, so I'm not whining here.

What I'm saying is that every faction should have unique, significant differentiators and grav just contributes to the pile that Astartes get. Is it really awesome as an offensive perk? Yes! There are also better. But Space Marines aren't supposed to be the most powerful offensive faction, either in cc, short range, or long range, and they have other non-offensive perks to balance that out. They're not an instawin against 2015+ factions, nor are they a lost cause, so why rock the boat on grav?

And yeah, I agree: We all know that invisibility is ridiculously powerful, and like you I think in is is the major contributor to the imbalance of grav cents is this imbalanced spell. But lots of factions can abuse it, and the solution isn't to nerf grav.

Sonic Keyboard wrote:
Make grav-gun 18" assault 2, grav cannon 30" heavy 1 blast, but reduce grav-cannon w/amp cost by 15 pts. Glance on 4+ instead of immobilise on 6+.

I like this opions. But regular gravguns shouldn't glance on 4+. That's better than they are now even with reduced rof. Fine with grav cannons glancing on 5-s. It's gona be almost between 3-s and 4-s counting in re-rolls. Like haywire cannons. Not as good but working against other targets too.

Let's look at traditional special weapons like melta and plazma. Melta is good against vehicles, fine vs MC cause it will still do a couple of wounds but is too low rate of fire against infantry. Plazma is good against MC, fine vs infantry cause it still has decent rate of fire and ignores armor but is not very reliable against vehicles cause it's just s7 and doesn't have enough rate of fire to spam it out. See, this weapons have advantages and disadvantages that balance it out. What about grav...The problem with grav weapons in general that i see is that they are good vs most things that are good in the game. So, good all around. And what grav can't deal with, melts to bolter fire and krak granades. The mechanics itself might be fine, however rate of fire is what spoils it. Rate of fire was supposed to be balanced out by salvo. And it does, in fact, happen when you look at devs and tactical marines. But salvo is basically assault for bikes and centurions, you know, things that are too good in this edition. That's what breaks it really. And immobilized against vehicles. That's so very wrong. I don't care about fluffy explanations - we all know that fluff goes both ways. It is just rediculous to get a battlewagon or a landraider getting immobilized with a couple shots from an all-round good weapon. Yep, i can cope with getting blown up with melta - that's what it is supposed to do good. Fine with it. But grav melting good infantry and mc better than plazma, stopping vehicles more reliably than melta...no. It shouldn't be this way.

So, here are the solutions:
Reduce rate of fire and remove immobilized against vehicles.

What i mean is that If gravguns get reduced to assault 2 or even rapid fire and grav-cannons to assault 3 or small blasts + better glances + cost reduction like Sonic suggests, it's going to be reasonable. Melta and plazma are competing again. Grav takes a place of a specific weapon that's still gona work vs most things but not so extraordinarily good that it surpasses all other weapons. Just like it's supposed to be.

Martel732 wrote:
CSM are still better than BA because of better FW support.

For the upteenth time, almost all the good Chaos units from Forge World are either whole other armies to use as allies or Loyalist FW tanks in spikes that BA also get.

And you have Gravguns (that can be taken on relentless platforms no less).

OT...

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Reduce the rate of fire of all Grav weapons besides the Pistol, while also giving them another special rule that allows them to deal more damage to high-toughness (7+) targets while also fixing the Riptide, WK and other problem MCs/GMCs. (And no Martel not all MCs or GMSc are problem units. Do you ever see people complain about any of the non-flying Chaos, Tyranid, DE MCs being OP? Any complaints about the Wraithlord? Any at all about the Tyranids GMCs? Didn't think so.)

Reduce ROF, make amps an upgrade.

Maybe make it that grav wounds by rolling under the majority toughness of the unit, with 6's always failing.

I don't know, just spitballing.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
CSM are still better than BA because of better FW support.

For the upteenth time, almost all the good Chaos units from Forge World are either whole other armies to use as allies or Loyalist FW tanks in spikes that BA also get.

And you have Gravguns (that can be taken on relentless platforms no less).

OT...

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Reduce the rate of fire of all Grav weapons besides the Pistol, while also giving them another special rule that allows them to deal more damage to high-toughness (7+) targets while also fixing the Riptide, WK and other problem MCs/GMCs. (And no Martel not all MCs or GMSc are problem units. Do you ever see people complain about any of the non-flying Chaos, Tyranid, DE MCs being OP? Any complaints about the Wraithlord? Any at all about the Tyranids GMCs? Didn't think so.)

BA don't get all the loyalist stuff. Because of a fluff hissy fit by the Mechanicum. And standard grav guns on bikers that have no fancy Ravenwing rules aren't that great. The Eldar just gun them down more often than not. The grav just puts a target on their heads.

MCs and GMCs are not getting fixed. In fact, they've only gotten better as time goes on. GMCs weren't even a thing until recently. GW is making grav MORE necessary, not less. And now we have the crazy OP Stormsurge. From someone who has ZERO MCs in their codex, they're pretty damn broken in general. Oh, it's also a codex that has precious few ways to engage them before they step on all my expensive useless ass infantry.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Talys wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I'd also argue that grav cents are perfectly fair if you take invisibility out of the game. They wreck a unit or two, and then you shoot THEM off the table. T5 2+ W2 no invuln isn't exactly hard to crack in 7th.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
NOBODY thinks Gauss is too powerful.

I was about to say the same thing. Out of all the weapon special rules (i.e. Bladestorm, Grav, ext) Gauss is probably the worst....

It's better than the bolter special rules.

*slaps knee* Gosh darn, that's a good one.

No but really. Bolters aren't supposed to have special rules.

I think Gauss is piling on already horrible vehicle rules. So in that sense, it could be argued as too powerful. I'd rather have a Necron warrior over a marine any day of the week, myself.

This is really the point. No, Gauss is not uber powerful. It's not Grav. But it's on every freaking model, which also has RP. Just like JSJ, it's an awesome faction perk. And don't get me wrong, Imperium has great perks too, so I'm not whining here.

What I'm saying is that every faction should have unique, significant differentiators and grav just contributes to the pile that Astartes get. Is it really awesome as an offensive perk? Yes! There are also better. But Space Marines aren't supposed to be the most powerful offensive faction, either in cc, short range, or long range, and they have other non-offensive perks to balance that out. They're not an instawin against 2015+ factions, nor are they a lost cause, so why rock the boat on grav?

And yeah, I agree: We all know that invisibility is ridiculously powerful, and like you I think in is is the major contributor to the imbalance of grav cents is this imbalanced spell. But lots of factions can abuse it, and the solution isn't to nerf grav.

I'm not seeing the great BA perks. ATSKNF is useless in a game of being tabled by scatterlasers.

What if against vehicles, grav weapons merely immobilized on a 4+ and got a weapon destroyed result on a 6+ but does so without removing hullpoints?

 King Pariah wrote:
What if against vehicles, grav weapons merely immobilized on a 4+ and got a weapon destroyed result on a 6+ but does so without removing hullpoints?

That would be even worse then 3, 4s and a vehicle is destroyed and with amps can reroll that. It should just be a 6 glances.

Just tossing 2 cents here...

The real reason Grav is bad for the game is because it's so swingy. Against certain armies, Grav is devastating, with the ability to just delete units. These are other Marine armies, Terminator armies, MC and GMC-heavy armies, and most biker armies. Besides being a sizeable mix, it's also a close match to the mix of top-tier armies out there.

But there are lots of armies against which Grav isn't very good! Grav is pretty terrible against Dark Eldar, Harlequins, Orks, and Knights, and not particularly great (though not terrible) against Necrons either. The last thing a Grav player wants to fight is a Green Tide. Unfortunately, of this list, only the Knights are considered top-tier, and the Necrons are a "you must be this tall to play against competitive lists" army.

So if you rely too heavily on grav, you just demolish some forces, but do pretty terribly against others. While this is fine for a competitive environment, it really hurts casual games. Most people that like playing casual games enjoy a game where their decisions matter. They don't need to win, they need to have a game that doesn't feel like it's over right away. Grav-weapons push things far away from this. Either they're terribly effective and the game feels like it's over right away, or they're terribly non-effective and the game feels like it's over right away. Either way, that's not fun.

 Yarium wrote:

But there are lots of armies against which Grav isn't very good! Grav is pretty terrible against Dark Eldar, Harlequins, Orks, and Knights, and not particularly great (though not terrible) against Necrons either.

Not sure about some of those.

e.g. whilst Dark Eldar usually have poor saves, they have fast transports that rely on mobility and Jinking for defence - so a single 6 from a Grav weapon cripples them utterly (regardless of whether they survive). And, even against the stuff with 5+ saves, Grav has enough shots and rerolls that it's hardly weak against them. Then you have stuff like the Corpsethief Claw and Dark Artisan - which Grav will simply shred.

Orks... depends what they use, really. Grav isn't good against normal ork boys, but what about 'Ard boys, bikers, mega armoured Nobz/Warbosses etc.? Not to mention that Grav can cripple their transports - especially Battlewagons - much like the DE ones.

Necrons - really? Even if Grav doesn't ignore Necro-no-pain, it still ignores their toughness and armour saves.


Here's the thing, it's not just about whether Grav is OP vs every race - it's also about whether it's ever worse than the alternatives. e.g. even if Grav isn't idea against ork boys, would a single lascannon shot be better than 5 Grav Cannon shots? Same goes for shooting Necrons, DE etc. In virtually every case, Grav Cannons will be better through sheer weight of shots. The only exceptions are going to be units with no armour save at all or with immunity to Immobilised (IKs, as you say). And, that's not counting all the situations where Grav Cannons are vastly better than any alternatives.

Grav weapons do not need a nerf, it's just that factions that should have access to them (CSM, Guard, SoB, etc.) don't have them. Any nerf to grav is a huge indirect buff to the WK, which is the last unit that needs it.

Pretty much the only army in the entire game that doesn't care much about Grav are Daemons... And even then, DP's and the new Str.D 'Thirster still run and hide from it due to their typical 3+ saves.

One army out of what, 14-15+ that overall laughs at Grav is pretty damning about just how badly OP the weapon is. What I find even more hilarious, is how Loyalists defend it as being their only option vs. pretty much the entire game, yet Chaos players still get called out for bringing even a single Helldrake.

Pot, meet Kettle.

Why is it that all suggestions to also nerf the WK get ignored?

Experiment 626 wrote:
Pretty much the only army in the entire game that doesn't care much about Grav are Daemons... And even then, DP's and the new Str.D 'Thirster still run and hide from it due to their typical 3+ saves.

One army out of what, 14-15+ that overall laughs at Grav is pretty damning about just how badly OP the weapon is. What I find even more hilarious, is how Loyalists defend it as being their only option vs. pretty much the entire game, yet Chaos players still get called out for bringing even a single Helldrake.

Pot, meet Kettle.

Who is calling out CSM for helldrakes? They are largely ignorable now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:
Why is it that all suggestions to also nerf the WK get ignored?

Because that codex was recently printed and GW is buffing MCs and GMCs at every turn. I'd love to see it nerfed into the ground, but try to get people to agree to that. MCs have no downsides AT ALL and I don't see that changing.

" pretty much the entire game"

Just the parts of the game that get spammed because they are undercosted. Like WK. Arms races are real in both real life and gaming.

I think a good fix would be to make Grav glance on 6s and wound on the reverse of the S7 Damage Table (make it the anti-plasma if you will). So it will be effective against MCs and other high toughness units but relatively bad against lower T foes.

So wounding T10 on a 2+, but T1 on a 6+

So essentially against Terminators it would be S4 AP2, but against a Riptide it is the equivalent of S8 AP2.

As others have said, unless you make other changes to MC/GMC getting rid of grav just boosts some units that are already held to be very powerful even more so.

Breng77 wrote:
I think a good fix would be to make Grav glance on 6s and wound on the reverse of the S7 Damage Table (make it the anti-plasma if you will). So it will be effective against MCs and other high toughness units but relatively bad against lower T foes.

So wounding T10 on a 2+, but T1 on a 6+

So essentially against Terminators it would be S4 AP2, but against a Riptide it is the equivalent of S8 AP2.

An inverted to wound curve, as it is less effective the smaller a target's mas - I like it. I know toughness doesn't always equate to mass, but that's a great balancing solution all the same.

Exactly, it would also make Grav more effective against tougher models in races that don't rely as much on armor (Greater Daemons for example). Also in game I feel like it is a closer relation ship between toughness and size than armor and size. I think if you look at models most things T5 and greater are larger models (at least marine sized, most are monsterous creatures and the like).

It would still make it an effective weapon against Marines with wounding on 4s at Ap2, and the Grav amp might still need some fixing (as it would still wound on 75% of hits). But overall I think that the toughness solution would make it still the best anti-mc weapon, but perhaps not the best at taking out heavy infantry and vehicles as well (I considered making it just an auto stun on a 6 so it does no damage to the vehicle itself, as vehicles need a boost)

Some sort of inverse wounding or wounding based on number of wounds might not be perfect, but it's a lot saner than the current situation, that's for sure.

Experiment 626 wrote:
Pretty much the only army in the entire game that doesn't care much about Grav are Daemons... And even then, DP's and the new Str.D 'Thirster still run and hide from it due to their typical 3+ saves.

One army out of what, 14-15+ that overall laughs at Grav is pretty damning about just how badly OP the weapon is. What I find even more hilarious, is how Loyalists defend it as being their only option vs. pretty much the entire game, yet Chaos players still get called out for bringing even a single Helldrake.

Pot, meet Kettle.

What about horde armies like guard and orks? I've been out of 40k since 5th and am trying to run dark eldar. I don't think they fear grav mostly but the sad bit is the armies that don't fear grav are probably not as feared in the first place. Somehow I don't think anybody seriously thinks to themselves "**** it! How to I beat Dark Eldar?! X is just too strong!"

-----

Perhaps Grav shouldn't hurt gigantic creatures and such as well as it currently does. I mean poisoned weapons don't. You'd think an incredibly massive unit would be harder for a grav weapon to hurt maybe. I mean I wouldn't mind the idea of enhanced grav weapons being similar to Fleshbane weapons but it would help fix things I think.

I'm not entirely sure grav weapons are as bad as they could be but perhaps toughness or strength should help negate the effect of the to wound bit on armor. One possible method would be take the armor being 2+ (5 armor for the 2+ armor save vs t 4 meaning it wounds on a 3+ and 4 armor for the 3+ armor save vs t 4 meaning it wounds on a 4+). It can still go through armor as it already does but it would at least wound certain dudes less. Then you take monsters and it probably only wounds most of them on a 6+. At least at this point plasma, lascannons, rockets and similar would still have a purpose.

The main thing is the few things that grav is not good at, marines can usually handle with bolters or a TFC.

Or Thunderfire Cannons.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

Experiment 626 wrote:
Pretty much the only army in the entire game that doesn't care much about Grav are Daemons... And even then, DP's and the new Str.D 'Thirster still run and hide from it due to their typical 3+ saves.

One army out of what, 14-15+ that overall laughs at Grav is pretty damning about just how badly OP the weapon is. What I find even more hilarious, is how Loyalists defend it as being their only option vs. pretty much the entire game, yet Chaos players still get called out for bringing even a single Helldrake.

Pot, meet Kettle.

What about horde armies like guard and orks? I've been out of 40k since 5th and am trying to run dark eldar. I don't think they fear grav mostly but the sad bit is the armies that don't fear grav are probably not as feared in the first place. Somehow I don't think anybody seriously thinks to themselves "**** it! How to I beat Dark Eldar?! X is just too strong!"

-----

Perhaps Grav shouldn't hurt gigantic creatures and such as well as it currently does. I mean poisoned weapons don't. You'd think an incredibly massive unit would be harder for a grav weapon to hurt maybe. I mean I wouldn't mind the idea of enhanced grav weapons being similar to Fleshbane weapons but it would help fix things I think.

I'm not entirely sure grav weapons are as bad as they could be but perhaps toughness or strength should help negate the effect of the to wound bit on armor. One possible method would be take the armor being 2+ (5 armor for the 2+ armor save vs t 4 meaning it wounds on a 3+ and 4 armor for the 3+ armor save vs t 4 meaning it wounds on a 4+). It can still go through armor as it already does but it would at least wound certain dudes less. Then you take monsters and it probably only wounds most of them on a 6+. At least at this point plasma, lascannons, rockets and similar would still have a purpose.

Except that the principle behind Grav is that the bigger & weightier the target is, the harsher the grav field affects them. So wounding MC's much easer than basic infantry grunts makes perfect sense.
The problem is that it's a huge rate of fire, plus ap2, and smoke's the scariest things in the game with complete ease.

Dark Eldar don't like it much either, simply because of how it can ruthlessly crush all their boats with auto-immobilised results. Orks are likewise affected, plus they've got some heavier units such as Meganobz, 4+ save Nob bikers, etc...

Really, it's only Daemons who laugh at Grav...
Everything we have is at worst a 5++, and between Psychic powers + built-in abilities/wargear we can easily boost those invulns.
Only a very few models can even take a 3+ save - and there's no such thing as a 2+ save in the army. Characters rolling up a 3+ save can simply default it away when faced with mass Grav.
Our troops are cheap as chips, and our scads of multi-wound stuff can't be drowned by even re-rolling to wound cannons before it starts beating face in combat.
The only vehicle we have that's typically fielded typically comes with either a torrent type template or a long ranged battle cannon shot. (and Nurgle Grinder's typically get 2+ cover saves to boot!)

So 1 entire army out of how many doesn't give a rat's fart about the no-brainer weapon option for Vanillas/DA's? That's pretty awful balance in my book.

Grav wounds on armour save. Daemons have Invulns, usually. Grav can't touch basic daemons

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
Grav wounds on armour save. Daemons have Invulns, usually. Grav can't touch basic daemons

Well, it does wound on 6's - scary!

Experiment 626 wrote:

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

Experiment 626 wrote:
Pretty much the only army in the entire game that doesn't care much about Grav are Daemons... And even then, DP's and the new Str.D 'Thirster still run and hide from it due to their typical 3+ saves.

One army out of what, 14-15+ that overall laughs at Grav is pretty damning about just how badly OP the weapon is. What I find even more hilarious, is how Loyalists defend it as being their only option vs. pretty much the entire game, yet Chaos players still get called out for bringing even a single Helldrake.

Pot, meet Kettle.

What about horde armies like guard and orks? I've been out of 40k since 5th and am trying to run dark eldar. I don't think they fear grav mostly but the sad bit is the armies that don't fear grav are probably not as feared in the first place. Somehow I don't think anybody seriously thinks to themselves "**** it! How to I beat Dark Eldar?! X is just too strong!"

-----

Perhaps Grav shouldn't hurt gigantic creatures and such as well as it currently does. I mean poisoned weapons don't. You'd think an incredibly massive unit would be harder for a grav weapon to hurt maybe. I mean I wouldn't mind the idea of enhanced grav weapons being similar to Fleshbane weapons but it would help fix things I think.

I'm not entirely sure grav weapons are as bad as they could be but perhaps toughness or strength should help negate the effect of the to wound bit on armor. One possible method would be take the armor being 2+ (5 armor for the 2+ armor save vs t 4 meaning it wounds on a 3+ and 4 armor for the 3+ armor save vs t 4 meaning it wounds on a 4+). It can still go through armor as it already does but it would at least wound certain dudes less. Then you take monsters and it probably only wounds most of them on a 6+. At least at this point plasma, lascannons, rockets and similar would still have a purpose.

Except that the principle behind Grav is that the bigger & weightier the target is, the harsher the grav field affects them. So wounding MC's much easer than basic infantry grunts makes perfect sense.
The problem is that it's a huge rate of fire, plus ap2, and smoke's the scariest things in the game with complete ease.

Dark Eldar don't like it much either, simply because of how it can ruthlessly crush all their boats with auto-immobilised results. Orks are likewise affected, plus they've got some heavier units such as Meganobz, 4+ save Nob bikers, etc...

Really, it's only Daemons who laugh at Grav...
Everything we have is at worst a 5++, and between Psychic powers + built-in abilities/wargear we can easily boost those invulns.
Only a very few models can even take a 3+ save - and there's no such thing as a 2+ save in the army. Characters rolling up a 3+ save can simply default it away when faced with mass Grav.
Our troops are cheap as chips, and our scads of multi-wound stuff can't be drowned by even re-rolling to wound cannons before it starts beating face in combat.
The only vehicle we have that's typically fielded typically comes with either a torrent type template or a long ranged battle cannon shot. (and Nurgle Grinder's typically get 2+ cover saves to boot!)

So 1 entire army out of how many doesn't give a rat's fart about the no-brainer weapon option for Vanillas/DA's? That's pretty awful balance in my book.

I dunno I last played in 5th and was about to go to 7th. What should they kill then? I suppose you could make it the opposite then. Just make it the more wounds it has or higher toughness/strength with armor then the more damage it takes.

Maybe if something is a monstrous creature or gargantuan creature then it takes extra damage.

Wounds MC's and GMC's on 2's, everything else on 6's and no longer immobilizes vehicles. For those saying grav's power is justified because of the power of MC's (which is a fair point) this makes them even better at that, but it will no longer be so awesome against everything else, which is what I feel makes grav so egregious.

I might agree to some of these ideas for a grav nerf under the following conditions

Sensible and reasonable nerfs to eldar, tau and necrons especially the broken gak like WKs ect. Tau need a few nerfs as do necrons, but pretty much the entire Eldar codex needs toning down, seriously even their bad units are as good as or better than the best stuff other armies bring.

Sensible nerfs to MCs and GMCs and appropriate buffs and balances to vehicles of a ll types.

Effective and useful upgrades to IoM stuff so they don't have to use grav just to compete (not just Space Marines have grav) the most notable change being to plasma (seriously, they aren't effective enough to justify the gets hot!. It was taken in the past because that was all there was). Many of the other upgrade choices aren't taken because they are either cost prohibitive or ineffective and in several cases both.


The thing is, that right now, the only thing keeping a number of IoM armies competitive and relevent IS the grav especially considering the OP nature of Eldar, Tau and Necrons.

Until those changes happen, barring a moronic ruling by GW, I am keeping my grav as is and anyone who wants to change it can just stick it. I at least want a chance at winning in games. I don't mind losing, but I have no chance to win it is no fun.

Just make them heavy or rapid fire weapons. Grav-gun rapid fire and grav cannon heavy 3.

Delete them and replace them with the 2e/30k grav-guns. And then seriously rethink the 2+-armour MCs that necessitated their introduction in the first place instead of going on a swallowing-the-spider-to-catch-the-fly bender with ever bigger guns to fight the bigger things.

Martel732 wrote:

I'm not seeing the great BA perks. ATSKNF is useless in a game of being tabled by scatterlasers.

Right, but that's because we got shafted with a codex before all the factions got perky. Hopefully, when they refresh BA, we'll get something unique and playable, in the same way as Dark Angels. Like I said, almost all the factions pre 2015 either have crappy perks, or don't have perks adjusted to the post 2015.

For example Grey Knights are thematically excellent (all psykers), but the execution is flat because the meta has moved on, leaving them with too little that works. BA are also thematically excellent (close combat, rawr!), and if they were bumped to be competitive with 2015 books, could really work.

how about this, we agree to nerf our grav in a serious discussion when you stop bringing gargantuan monstrous creatures and spamming fortune, markerlights, and invisible..mmk

 ionusx wrote:
how about this, we agree to nerf our grav in a serious discussion when you stop bringing gargantuan monstrous creatures and spamming fortune, markerlights, and invisible..mmk

Done.

Insane Thought: Make the Grav Cannon a Template Heavy 1 Torrent. This makes the Grav Cannon *deadly* against large groups of heavily armored models, but far less dangerous versus MCs/smaller multiwound units.

Marines don't have any Torrents anyway.

I play orks, are these the guns that bounce off my t-shirts and make my opponent face palm?

I like TheNewBlood's suggestion

Graviton:
When rolling to wound with weapon with Graviton special rule, to wound roll needed depends on majority of models in the target unit:
+ Extremely bulky or Monstrous or Gargantuan monstrous creatures (including Flying ones) - wound on 2+
+ Very bulky - wound on 3+
+ Bulky - wound on 4+
+ Swarms - wound on 6+
+ Other non-vehicle models - wound on 5+
If Vehicle get hit from weapon with Graviton rule at least once during the Shooting phase, at the end of phase that vehicle suffer single Haywire hit.

Grav-gun: 18" S* Ap2 Assault 2, Graviton
Grav-cannon w/Grav-amp: 30" S* Ap2 Heavy 2, Graviton, Grav-amp
Heavy grav-cannon: 30" S* Ap2 Heavy 4, Graviton

Grav-amp: weapon with Grav-amp double amount of wounds caused to Monstrous and Gargantuan monstrous creatures (including Flying ones).

You'll never get through a WK in time with only two shots. Remember than they can have 5++/5+++ save.

Martel732 wrote:
You'll never get through a WK in time with only two shots. Remember than they can have 5++/5+++ save.

For about the 50th time, nerf WKs as well.

I'd make them AP4 Rending, remove the immobilization rule, and limit them to either Rapid Fire or Heavy Weapons only.

I guess with Grav-amp doubling the wounds 8 hits will be enough

Sonic Keyboard wrote:
I like TheNewBlood's suggestion

Graviton:
When rolling to wound with weapon with Graviton special rule, to wound roll needed depends on majority of models in the target unit:
+ Extremely bulky or Monstrous or Gargantuan monstrous creatures (including Flying ones) - wound on 2+
+ Very bulky - wound on 3+
+ Bulky - wound on 4+
+ Swarms - wound on 6+
+ Other non-vehicle models - wound on 5+
If Vehicle get hit from weapon with Graviton rule at least once during the Shooting phase, at the end of phase that vehicle suffer single Haywire hit.

Grav-gun: 18" S* Ap2 Assault 2, Graviton
Grav-cannon w/Grav-amp: 30" S* Ap2 Heavy 2, Graviton, Grav-amp
Heavy grav-cannon: 30" S* Ap2 Heavy 4, Graviton

Grav-amp: weapon with Grav-amp double amount of wounds caused to Monstrous and Gargantuan monstrous creatures (including Flying ones).

LOL so basically you not only want it to wound on a 2+ against MC, ignore there armor as it is AP 2, but you want it to also do DOUBLE the wounds with grav amps?

Leaving aside the 'double-wounds' malarkey for now, if we're going by size then I don't see why it should wound GCs and MCs on the same amount. It seems like only GCs should be wounded on 2s, and MCs should be wounded on 3s. After that you'd have Very bulky (4+), Bulky (5+),infantry and anything else (+6).

 vipoid wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
You'll never get through a WK in time with only two shots. Remember than they can have 5++/5+++ save.

For about the 50th time, nerf WKs as well.

Then quantify said nerfs in the grav gun proposal as well. So you can get Eldar hate. I'd settle for a price hike to 500 or 550 pts.

Personally, I'd make it cost a bit less than that but reduce its move to 6".

Then again, I don't think IKs and such should be able to move 12" either.

 vipoid wrote:
Personally, I'd make it cost a bit less than that but reduce its move to 6".

Then again, I don't think IKs and such should be able to move 12" either.

Even with a 6" move, it needs to cost more. It's durability is absolutely NUTS.

Martel732 wrote:
Even with a 6" move, it needs to cost more. It's durability is absolutely NUTS.

I meant less than the 500-550pts you were proposing.

 vipoid wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Even with a 6" move, it needs to cost more. It's durability is absolutely NUTS.

I meant less than the 500-550pts you were proposing.

Oh, that's fine then. With a 6" move, it would focus more on the D-cannon scheme, which is still horrifying for a lot of units.

At least if some of the big fellas like Dreadknights, wraithknight, riptides, stormsurge could only move 6 standard, you wouldn't have to necessarily go all in on them in one turn. I haven't played too many games against such targets as I'm new to marines, but I have faced all of the above in multiples, bar the Wraightknight, and even with Grav, the trick is killing the above targets in one go as Grav is short ranged, if you don't kill them, they can run away or more likely, kick your crap in via shooting and assault.

And you still got to deal with the rest of their armies, my opponents so far at least, haven't left their big guys in the open to get Grav gunned to death, unless they intentionally were drawing fire, because to get the shot, you can end up exposing your marines out in the open.

I know Grav is really good, and maybe I'm doing it wrong, but I haven't found it a point and click solution myself.

 Bryan01 wrote:
At least if some of the big fellas like Dreadknights, wraithknight, riptides, stormsurge could only move 6 standard, you wouldn't have to necessarily go all in on them in one turn. I haven't played too many games against such targets as I'm new to marines, but I have faced all of the above in multiples, bar the Wraightknight, and even with Grav, the trick is killing the above targets in one go as Grav is short ranged, if you don't kill them, they can run away or more likely, kick your crap in via shooting and assault.

And you still got to deal with the rest of their armies, my opponents so far at least, haven't left their big guys in the open to get Grav gunned to death, unless they intentionally were drawing fire, because to get the shot, you can end up exposing your marines out in the open.

I know Grav is really good, and maybe I'm doing it wrong, but I haven't found it a point and click solution myself.

I don't think it is the movement that is the issue myself. All the units you mentioned are extremely durable, with great firepower, for the most part great range, render most weapons outside of grav ineffective against them, can abuse cover rules, and have a really low (in some cases WAY too low) points cost for what they do. And you are absolutely right about grav. It is powerful, but it is not point and click, and it is relatively short range. I might actually see grav as an issue if marines could take it like eldar can take scattbikes. Even if marines could take it on every body it would still be extremely expensive to do so in an army that has to very carefully watch every point they spend.

It was funny to see a stormsurge take a Grav round, move 12, shoot and assault with those lovely stomps. The Dreadknights, fair enough, mobility is their trick, but a wraithknight and stormsurge are surprisenly mobile! You definitely want to at least severely hurt them, or due to Grav range, you can expect to get shot up/charged.

I'd give it to everybody.

Torquar wrote:
I'd give it to everybody.

The Ork version would be the opposite with the weaker the armor the higher the chance to wound, it would be sorta like the bubblechucka except even worse

We can nerf grav when we get rid of GCs and MCs out of standard 40k.

Until then...

 Crazyterran wrote:
We can nerf grav when we get rid of GCs and MCs out of standard 40k.

Until then...

No... Grav is too good against much more than MC/GMC. It is OP toward vehicles, and any 2+ armor save model (including terminators, like they need more to make them suck).

 Crazyterran wrote:
We can nerf grav when we get rid of [...] MCs out of standard 40k.

No.

GK and Tau having broken foot-MCs doesn't mean that every bloody MC in the game (which are either gak or decently balanced) needs to be removed. It just means those 2 need to be nerfed to be balanced.
Flying MCs are a different story, but even then most of them aren't that insane. While Flyers exists FMCs should, too.


Should all Jetbikes/bikes be removed because of Scatbikes? All infantry because of Gravcents? All cavalry because of Thunderwolves? All Independent Characters because of the Buffmander or Smashfether?

I see your point Kingsley, MCs are fine and used to be pretty balanced if you go back far enough, but FMCs, GMCs, and Jetbikes/Skimmers have (most of the time) been pretty overpowered to various degrees. Skimmers not always, same with jetbikes, but more often than not these units are simply too strong for their points.

Question to all those saying grav is needed to kill MC and GC's.

How do the armies witb out grav kill mc's?. Tau, orks, demons, IG, necrons, and tyranids?

Apparently they just auto lose ?

With the various options available to marines. Grav can take a nerf and they will be just fine.

Don't ignore the fact the grav is op vs things other than MC's. Stop focusing on. "With out it we can t kill mcs" cause you can, the other armies with out it can.

 Dakkafang Dreggrim wrote:
Question to all those saying grav is needed to kill MC and GC's.

How do the armies witb out grav kill mc's?. Tau, orks, demons, IG, necrons, and tyranids?

Apparently they just auto lose ?

Tau have ranged D missiles, but that's the most effective thing they have against it.

Orks can't easily take them down.

Daemons can't either, but they don't necessarily need to if they're running Screamerstar/Flying Circus.

IG can't easily.

Necrons have Destroyers, and that's our most effective way. Wraiths can tie it up, as long as they don't roll a lot of 6s for Stomps.

Tyranids...I won't even say they can't easily. They hardly can with their codex. Imperial Knights they can take out if they get lucky and run Pentatyrant. But otherwise? Or if it's a GC? Good luck.

 Dakkafang Dreggrim wrote:
Question to all those saying grav is needed to kill MC and GC's.

How do the armies witb out grav kill mc's?. Tau, orks, demons, IG, necrons, and tyranids?

Apparently they just auto lose ?

With the various options available to marines. Grav can take a nerf and they will be just fine.

Don't ignore the fact the grav is op vs things other than MC's. Stop focusing on. "With out it we can t kill mcs" cause you can, the other armies with out it can.

Tau spam them down with HYMP. Marines have no equivalent weapons system. Or shoot them with D-missiles from the Stormsurge. Which marines don't have.

Orks suffer. They basically have to try to drown them in attacks and get some power claws in there. In return, however, the MC trait that gives them perma AP 2 is largely wasted against Orks making this not such a poor idea. MCs are super efficient against marines in contrast, ignoring all those armor saves.

Demons have their own MCs. And rending daemonettes, etc. Rending is the one rule that is still good against MCs and GMCs because they didn't get immunity to it like everything else in the game.

IG fail. They lack good options for killing MCs and basically autolose.

Necrons have Gauss and Wraiths. They are fine. Marines have no such rules. And they still get their RP saves vs the MCs. I can't understate what a giant pain Wraiths are. Oh, and they Rend, so they are eventually going to win that fight.

Nids have their own somewhat inferior MCs. These MCs ignore the armor saves of the other MCs, just as all MCs ignore the armor of everything in the game. Because reasons.

The bottom line is that most of the other armies you listed have better tools than non-grav marines. Imperial heavy weapons are stuck in 2000 and pretty much universally suck, except grav.

"Don't ignore the fact the grav is op vs things other than MC's."

Mostly units that were already useless; like terminators.

I'll also throw in that whilst DE can deal with most MCs, they're pretty screwed against GCs given their virtual immunity to poison.

 vipoid wrote:
I'll also throw in that whilst DE can deal with most MCs, they're pretty screwed against GCs given their virtual immunity to poison.

I don't think the DE fare well against the 2+ armor MCs in practice.

Martel732 wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
I'll also throw in that whilst DE can deal with most MCs, they're pretty screwed against GCs given their virtual immunity to poison.

I don't think the DE fare well against the 2+ armor MCs in practice.

Yeah, poison starts to becomes really inefficient against them, and you just end up wishing you had Bladestorm or other AP2 stuff or somesuch instead. Even worse if they have FNP.

They don't do badly, if we force saves, you will fail them. Killing a Riptide is like killing 5 Terminators (He will on average wound himself with an overcharge). Dark Lances can even be used to plink off a wound if the 3++ isn't up.

We can handle MC's usually, it's multiple AV 12 vehicles we can't handle. Lances are actually extremely inefficient AV vs these.

 ALEXisAWESOME wrote:
They don't do badly, if we force saves, you will fail them. Killing a Riptide is like killing 5 Terminators (He will on average wound himself with an overcharge). Dark Lances can even be used to plink off a wound if the 3++ isn't up.

We can handle MC's usually, it's multiple AV 12 vehicles we can't handle. Lances are actually extremely inefficient AV vs these.

I don't think the DE can win the model removal race against 2+ MCs. The Riptide is literally blowing chunks out of your army. And Tau have access to ignore cover at will. Riptides also can get FNP which lets the save overcharges and makes powering through the 2+ even worse.

 ALEXisAWESOME wrote:
They don't do badly, if we force saves, you will fail them. Killing a Riptide is like killing 5 Terminators

Except that the Riptide doesn't lose any effectiveness until it loses it's last wound. It can also use its JSJ to get out of range/LoS or such. Plus it can have FNP.

And, that's not even going into the laughable affair of DE trying to out-shoot Tau.

notredameguy10 wrote:

 Crazyterran wrote:
We can nerf grav when we get rid of GCs and MCs out of standard 40k.

Until then...

No... Grav is too good against much more than MC/GMC. It is OP toward vehicles, and any 2+ armor save model (including terminators, like they need more to make them suck).

What isn't OP toward vehicles?

And of course it's "OP towards any 2+ armor save model". That's the kind of crap it's designed to chew through. Really not sure why you're bringing up Terminators though, because outside of Grey Knight Paladins or Deathwing Knights--who really fields them?

Grav is perfectly balanced since its a great SM killer.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
Grav is perfectly balanced since its a great SM killer.

It's a great _____ killer.

 krodarklorr wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
Grav is perfectly balanced since its a great SM killer.

It's a great _____ killer.

It's a great <insert anything with a save that isn't 4, 5, or 6> killer.

Even +4 armor is vulnerable to grav when they have amps. 75% to wound per hit is fairly good damage. Its just when you get down to AP5/6/- when you can start to survive grav (and then the bolters mow you down )

Martel732 wrote:

Nids have their own somewhat inferior MCs. These MCs ignore the armor saves of the other MCs, just as all MCs ignore the armor of everything in the game. Because reasons.

Yeah those tyranid MCs with their armor ignoring attacks are terrifying. Nearly all of them have WS3, 3 attacks, I2, and get around 6" at a time. Then cost 150 to 200+ points
Chilling.

 Vankraken wrote:
Even +4 armor is vulnerable to grav when they have amps. 75% to wound per hit is fairly good damage. Its just when you get down to AP5/6/- when you can start to survive grav (and then the bolters mow you down )

And insert random white scares character with ignotes cover relic. Bye bye bikes and vehicles of all flavors.

If it weren't for Grav eldar and Tau would totally dominate the game.

Rate of fire and low cost (respectively) is my problem with Grav.

I think it's better than a Bright Lance in most circumstances, considering neither is meant to be shot at T3 5/6+ save guys, and it's got more shots for cheaper in most cases.

 Thunderfrog wrote:

I think it's better than a Bright Lance in most circumstances

I think a Grav Cannon is better than a Bright (or Dark) Lance in just about every circumstance you could name.

Arson Fire wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Nids have their own somewhat inferior MCs. These MCs ignore the armor saves of the other MCs, just as all MCs ignore the armor of everything in the game. Because reasons.

Yeah those tyranid MCs with their armor ignoring attacks are terrifying. Nearly all of them have WS3, 3 attacks, I2, and get around 6" at a time. Then cost 150 to 200+ points
Chilling.

Still better than anything in my codex.

 Thunderfrog wrote:

Rate of fire and low cost (respectively) is my problem with Grav.

Personally, I feel that the ROF of a great many weapons should have been adjusted this past edition. Even more so with how "Salvo" weapons function.

Heavy Bolters, Boltguns, Lasguns, and Hellguns(refuse to call them hotshots!) could all stand to be either Salvo or Assault at this point.

I think it's better than a Bright Lance in most circumstances, considering neither is meant to be shot at T3 5/6+ save guys, and it's got more shots for cheaper in most cases.

This is an odd metric for a comparison.
"I know they're not meant to be used like this, but X comes out ahead because it has more shots"?

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Thunderfrog wrote:

Rate of fire and low cost (respectively) is my problem with Grav.

Personally, I feel that the ROF of a great many weapons should have been adjusted this past edition. Even more so with how "Salvo" weapons function.

Heavy Bolters, Boltguns, Lasguns, and Hellguns(refuse to call them hotshots!) could all stand to be either Salvo or Assault at this point.

I think it's better than a Bright Lance in most circumstances, considering neither is meant to be shot at T3 5/6+ save guys, and it's got more shots for cheaper in most cases.

This is an odd metric for a comparison.
"I know they're not meant to be used like this, but X comes out ahead because it has more shots"?

I worded it poorly.

Against heavy targets, Grav is better. Against soft targets, Grav is better as well. It's natural functions are superior vs hard, and it's got more shots vs soft.

 TheNewBlood wrote:
I would change their mechanic if wounding. Instead of wounding on the armour save, I would make it a table:

Regular Infantry: 5+
Bulky: 4+
Very Bulky: 3+
Extremely Bulky/Monstrous Creatures: 2+

This way, their original purpose of killing heavy MCs is preserved, while not giving them a huge advantage against all other units.

Best suggestion in this thread. Anyone who posted after that message and did not congratulate you was wrong. So basically Sonic Keyboard was right .
You totally get my vote.

the big problem with grav is that heavy grav cannons are not like other heavy weapons being salvo and having a high rate of what is essentially either Anti armor or anti personnel.

Other weapons have to choose between anti-armor, or antipersonnel. Or they pay a decent cost for mediocreness (hello missile launchers).

Grav does cost more than most heavy weapons, but the problem is it is usually better against any target than any other individual heavy weapon is better against its specialized target.

Grav pistol - 1 shot
gravgun- rapid fire
heavy gravcannon 2/3 salvo

The other option is increasing the rate of fire or pretty much every other gun in the game.

I agree with TheNewBlood's idea. It helps Termies out by making them a bit more durable against Grav Weapons. I'd be perfectly fine with that.

How would they function against vehicles?

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 TheNewBlood wrote:
I would change their mechanic if wounding. Instead of wounding on the armour save, I would make it a table:

Regular Infantry: 5+
Bulky: 4+
Very Bulky: 3+
Extremely Bulky/Monstrous Creatures: 2+

This way, their original purpose of killing heavy MCs is preserved, while not giving them a huge advantage against all other units.

Best suggestion in this thread. Anyone who posted after that message and did not congratulate you was wrong. So basically Sonic Keyboard was right .
You totally get my vote.

My gripe against this is that bulky/very bulky is such a minor stat that it might get overlooked in some places.

Not only that, but aren't all Jump units Bulky while Bike aren't?

I don't really think Jump Infantry need to be even more worse than Bikes.


I could be wrong though. (About Bikes not having Bulky, I mean).

 Ashiraya wrote:
How would they function against vehicles?

Ideally, they wouldn't. Gotta have a reason to take melta too. I'd be perfectly fine with reducing vehicle movement to 0" for the turn on a 5+ or 6+. Still gives a tactical reason to shoot that grav cent split fire against a land raider, but also means the Las options isn't totally overlooked because grav is still better anti vehicle than normal anti tank guns since 2x 6's means it's game over for anything that isn't a land raider or a monolith.

Grav should be anti MC
Plasma should be general anti-infantry with a bit of all-rounder but a drawback
Melta for AV
Flamers for light infantry
Heavy bolters still desperately need a buff to salvo 2/3 or a points drop to 5 points, possibly both.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Not only that, but aren't all Jump units Bulky while Bike aren't?

I don't really think Jump Infantry need to be even more worse than Bikes.

I could be wrong though. (About Bikes not having Bulky, I mean).

You are, bikes are very bulky, pg 63 of the small rulebook

 Drasius wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
How would they function against vehicles?

Ideally, they wouldn't.

Yeeeah...no. There's problems with vehicles, and Grav ain't it.

Gotta have a reason to take melta too.

There is a reason. It's called an additional D6 for armor penetration within half range.

I'd be perfectly fine with reducing vehicle movement to 0" for the turn on a 5+ or 6+. Still gives a tactical reason to shoot that grav cent split fire against a land raider, but also means the Las options isn't totally overlooked because grav is still better anti vehicle than normal anti tank guns since 2x 6's means it's game over for anything that isn't a land raider or a monolith.

Which, again, is a problem with how vehicle damage works not a problem with grav. Also a problem of legacy weapons not getting buffed/altered to match the new ruleset.

Grav should be anti MC
Plasma should be general anti-infantry with a bit of all-rounder but a drawback
Melta for AV
Flamers for light infantry
Heavy bolters still desperately need a buff to salvo 2/3 or a points drop to 5 points, possibly both.

Grav should be anti-high armor saves and vehicles, plasma should have variable fire modes(one for groups and one for single targets), melta should be anti-high toughness/armor, flamers should be anti-cover, and heavy bolters should be a middle ground of fire rate and variable fire modes.

If grav got nerfed SM will take more plasma and some melta. Black Knights are better than grav gun bikers.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
If grav got nerfed SM will take more plasma and some melta. Black Knights are better than grav gun bikers.

If Black Knights had the option to switch the Plasma Talons into Grav Talons instead... easiest decision ever.

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
If grav got nerfed SM will take more plasma and some melta. Black Knights are better than grav gun bikers.

If Black Knights had the option to switch the Plasma Talons into Grav Talons instead... easiest decision ever.

Hurricane Bolter made of Grav Guns, on a Land Raider profile with a Grav Cannon with Grav Amp turret.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
If grav got nerfed SM will take more plasma and some melta. Black Knights are better than grav gun bikers.

If Black Knights had the option to switch the Plasma Talons into Grav Talons instead... easiest decision ever.

Hurricane Bolter made of Grav Guns, on a Land Raider profile with a Grav Cannon with Grav Amp turret.

Sign me up!

 Crazyterran wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
If grav got nerfed SM will take more plasma and some melta. Black Knights are better than grav gun bikers.

If Black Knights had the option to switch the Plasma Talons into Grav Talons instead... easiest decision ever.

Hurricane Bolter made of Grav Guns, on a Land Raider profile with a Grav Cannon with Grav Amp turret.

Sign me up!

It is how I would balance Grav. Apply Craftworlds level "balance", I.e. balance it by making it even stronger.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
If grav got nerfed SM will take more plasma and some melta. Black Knights are better than grav gun bikers.

If Black Knights had the option to switch the Plasma Talons into Grav Talons instead... easiest decision ever.

Hurricane Bolter made of Grav Guns, on a Land Raider profile with a Grav Cannon with Grav Amp turret.

The LR could be a superheavy too so it's not that easy to blow up. 6 hull points minimum. I'm thinking of points now, would 295 be good? Sounds like a reasonable amount to me.

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
If grav got nerfed SM will take more plasma and some melta. Black Knights are better than grav gun bikers.

If Black Knights had the option to switch the Plasma Talons into Grav Talons instead... easiest decision ever.

Hurricane Bolter made of Grav Guns, on a Land Raider profile with a Grav Cannon with Grav Amp turret.

The LR could be a superheavy too so it's not that easy to blow up. 6 hull points minimum. I'm thinking of points now, would 295 be good? Sounds like a reasonable amount to me.

You're right! Maybe make it on a Baneblade chassis and give it something like a Heavy Grav Burst Cannon, which fires an apocalyptic blast of Grav, has a Grav Cannon with Grav Amp in the front, can can purchase Hurricane Gravgun sponsons.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
If grav got nerfed SM will take more plasma and some melta. Black Knights are better than grav gun bikers.

If Black Knights had the option to switch the Plasma Talons into Grav Talons instead... easiest decision ever.

Hurricane Bolter made of Grav Guns, on a Land Raider profile with a Grav Cannon with Grav Amp turret.

The LR could be a superheavy too so it's not that easy to blow up. 6 hull points minimum. I'm thinking of points now, would 295 be good? Sounds like a reasonable amount to me.

You're right! Maybe make it on a Baneblade chassis and give it something like a Heavy Grav Burst Cannon, which fires an apocalyptic blast of Grav, has a Grav Cannon with Grav Amp in the front, can can purchase Hurricane Gravgun sponsons.

And to top it all off it of course has armoured ceramite.

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
If grav got nerfed SM will take more plasma and some melta. Black Knights are better than grav gun bikers.

If Black Knights had the option to switch the Plasma Talons into Grav Talons instead... easiest decision ever.

Hurricane Bolter made of Grav Guns, on a Land Raider profile with a Grav Cannon with Grav Amp turret.

The LR could be a superheavy too so it's not that easy to blow up. 6 hull points minimum. I'm thinking of points now, would 295 be good? Sounds like a reasonable amount to me.

You're right! Maybe make it on a Baneblade chassis and give it something like a Heavy Grav Burst Cannon, which fires an apocalyptic blast of Grav, has a Grav Cannon with Grav Amp in the front, can can purchase Hurricane Gravgun sponsons.

And to top it all off it of course has armoured ceramite.

So, a Spartan Assault Tank or Achilles Land Raider with grav instead of their usual stuff? I could dig that. Especially the Spartan. 25 man capacity is delicious. I still think all land raiders should be able to carry 4 extra people from what they carry now at no additional cost.

Ideally, they wouldn't. Gotta have a reason to take melta too. I'd be perfectly fine with reducing vehicle movement to 0" for the turn on a 5+ or 6+. Still gives a tactical reason to shoot that grav cent split fire against a land raider, but also means the Las options isn't totally overlooked because grav is still better anti vehicle than normal anti tank guns since 2x 6's means it's game over for anything that isn't a land raider or a monolith.

Grav should be anti MC
Plasma should be general anti-infantry with a bit of all-rounder but a drawback
Melta for AV
Flamers for light infantry
Heavy bolters still desperately need a buff to salvo 2/3 or a points drop to 5 points, possibly both.

Heck no to grav not being able to damage vehicles. At least until melta can be made competitive enough to compete and be decent. Grav not hurting vehicles would mean they don't hurt Super heavies as well.

I don't have an issue with the proposed change to the table. That seems fairly reasonable except for the no way to damage vehicles thing.
Heck no to plasma having a wound chance unless they are much better or drop 5 points. I would even take a str drop to str 6. Plasma still needs a bit more imo to be reliable and decent. Quite frankly plasma as is, is too risky to use unless it has twin-linked or something re-rolling 1s.
Melta NEEDS to be able to strip multiple HP in order for something like grav not hurting vehicles to be a plausible thing. The price shouldn't change.
Flamers are okay as is. Would be nice for there to be a SM flamer with torrent though. I would say on assault squads.
Agreed heavy bolters need a boost. I would say salvo 3/5 pinning. No addition points cost, but maybe a cost drop even with these changes.

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
If grav got nerfed SM will take more plasma and some melta. Black Knights are better than grav gun bikers.

If Black Knights had the option to switch the Plasma Talons into Grav Talons instead... easiest decision ever.

Hurricane Bolter made of Grav Guns, on a Land Raider profile with a Grav Cannon with Grav Amp turret.

The LR could be a superheavy too so it's not that easy to blow up. 6 hull points minimum. I'm thinking of points now, would 295 be good? Sounds like a reasonable amount to me.

You're right! Maybe make it on a Baneblade chassis and give it something like a Heavy Grav Burst Cannon, which fires an apocalyptic blast of Grav, has a Grav Cannon with Grav Amp in the front, can can purchase Hurricane Gravgun sponsons.

And to top it all off it of course has armoured ceramite.

Nope. It would have a new rule called Reinforced Structure. It would make it immune to the Melta, Lance, and glances(any and all hits must be penetrating hits in order to remove a hull point). 12-man capacity. All for 275 pts.

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
If grav got nerfed SM will take more plasma and some melta. Black Knights are better than grav gun bikers.

If Black Knights had the option to switch the Plasma Talons into Grav Talons instead... easiest decision ever.

Not true. Plasma tears up everything equally well.

Just make it unable to hurt vehicles. This way grav still counters Riptides and Wraithknights, but forces more balance.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
If grav got nerfed SM will take more plasma and some melta. Black Knights are better than grav gun bikers.

If Black Knights had the option to switch the Plasma Talons into Grav Talons instead... easiest decision ever.

Hurricane Bolter made of Grav Guns, on a Land Raider profile with a Grav Cannon with Grav Amp turret.

The LR could be a superheavy too so it's not that easy to blow up. 6 hull points minimum. I'm thinking of points now, would 295 be good? Sounds like a reasonable amount to me.

You're right! Maybe make it on a Baneblade chassis and give it something like a Heavy Grav Burst Cannon, which fires an apocalyptic blast of Grav, has a Grav Cannon with Grav Amp in the front, can can purchase Hurricane Gravgun sponsons.

And to top it all off it of course has armoured ceramite.

Nope. It would have a new rule called Reinforced Structure. It would make it immune to the Melta, Lance, and glances(any and all hits must be penetrating hits in order to remove a hull point). 12-man capacity. All for 275 pts.

We have a deal. From now on, I'll take 2-3 in every list! Don't you think it could have an invulnerable save of some sort too? Maybe an optional upgrade?

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
If grav got nerfed SM will take more plasma and some melta. Black Knights are better than grav gun bikers.

If Black Knights had the option to switch the Plasma Talons into Grav Talons instead... easiest decision ever.

Hurricane Bolter made of Grav Guns, on a Land Raider profile with a Grav Cannon with Grav Amp turret.

The LR could be a superheavy too so it's not that easy to blow up. 6 hull points minimum. I'm thinking of points now, would 295 be good? Sounds like a reasonable amount to me.

You're right! Maybe make it on a Baneblade chassis and give it something like a Heavy Grav Burst Cannon, which fires an apocalyptic blast of Grav, has a Grav Cannon with Grav Amp in the front, can can purchase Hurricane Gravgun sponsons.

And to top it all off it of course has armoured ceramite.

Nope. It would have a new rule called Reinforced Structure. It would make it immune to the Melta, Lance, and glances(any and all hits must be penetrating hits in order to remove a hull point). 12-man capacity. All for 275 pts.

We have a deal. From now on, I'll take 2-3 in every list! Don't you think it could have an invulnerable save of some sort too? Maybe an optional upgrade?

I suppose they could probably take a 4++ for 25 pts for an even 300 pts. I even came up with a name for this Wraithknight-level-broken monstrosity. The Land Raider Atlas. It would be a Lord of War. But it would still have a handy-dandy formation that lets you take nine of them.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I suppose they could probably take a 4++ for 25 pts for an even 300 pts. I even came up with a name for this Wraithknight-level-broken monstrosity. The Land Raider Atlas. It would be a Lord of War. But it would still have a handy-dandy formation that lets you take nine of them.

I presume the upgrades don't cost any points in the formation?

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I suppose they could probably take a 4++ for 25 pts for an even 300 pts. I even came up with a name for this Wraithknight-level-broken monstrosity. The Land Raider Atlas. It would be a Lord of War. But it would still have a handy-dandy formation that lets you take nine of them.

I presume the upgrades don't cost any points in the formation?

Obviously. Who pays points for stuff anymore anyway.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Lammikkovalas wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I suppose they could probably take a 4++ for 25 pts for an even 300 pts. I even came up with a name for this Wraithknight-level-broken monstrosity. The Land Raider Atlas. It would be a Lord of War. But it would still have a handy-dandy formation that lets you take nine of them.

I presume the upgrades don't cost any points in the formation?

Obviously. Who pays points for stuff anymore anyway.

Only scrubs who play gak-tier armies who need to get good in the game.