As the title suggests I thought it would be an interesting question to ask you to think about your favourite model/unit (could be for it's fluff, the models looks or if it just captures one of your favourite tactical elements of the game) that just isn't doing much anymore. Maybe it's been overtaken by a newer, shinier choice in its codex, maybe over time its role has just become faaaar too niche or just maybe it's plain bad in the transition to 8th.
This is a challenge to change the unit in as minor way as possible to make it fill it's main role to an acceptable standard, not to make it undeniably crazy/OP.
I'll start - Soul Grinders. I love these damn things, hell I am the only person I know of still who runs multiple of these loveable, overly spikey chaos platypus's. It's just a confused beast with a MONSTEROUS close combat profile... hitting on 4's. And supposed to be a major source of Daemon's firepower but all it's ranged weapons are heavy. and It's BS 4+ with no ability to ignore the -1 to move and shoot. I'm sensing a problem here.
My proposal is simple, change the weapon profiles to assault instead of heavy. This lets you run it forward to engage as it's claw and Sword are far too tasty to leave doing nothing, and it's ranged attacks aren't really enough to justify it standing still and doing nothing.
I ask you dakka, to comment on each others idea's and to come up with your own as minor as possible tweaks to change an underperforming unit! (and please, when the inevitable marine topic gets brought up, +1 wound to all marines isn't a minor tweak!)
Gir Spirit Bane wrote: On the sniper question I could agree on 4+ vs infantry, but a 2+ against all monstrous creatures and bigger seems a little much.
a single wound with 0AP is already easily saved against ... and if you're taking snipers vs. monsters then you're in a bad place lol
but it would make them a threat at least, where currently no-one is afraid of a sniper squad ... at all .. 5 sniper rifles from the top of a building should be straight up killing weak characters ... but they do less than mot bolt guns
Terminators (across the board, Chaos and Loyalist, special versions and base versions, everything that says "Terminator" and predates 8e (ignore for Allarus and Deathshrouds)) +1W/+1A, persistent option for power sword/axe/maul instead of powerfist, no -1 to hit on powerfists. Gravis armour (to keep it in line here) +1W/+1A, no -1 to hit for powerfists.
Custodians: Drop Wardens as a separate unit entry and allow the axes on Troops squads.
(Hard to think up "small tweaks" for most of my favourite units given that a lot of them are 30k models with no 40k rules, or need a ground-up rebuild more than a tweak...)
Allow IG Veteran Squads to be a Troops selection, only if all Troops selections in a detachment are Vets (so you have a Veteran Detachment, sort of thing).
This may not be a slight change at all, but here goes:
Eldar Windriders get moved BACK to Troops, but can only take 1 Shuricannon or Scatterlaser per 3 models. Create a new Fast Attack unit of Windriders (called Wild Riders or something) that must take all take Shuricannons or Scatterlasers.
Everyone wins. Eldar get their bike Troops again, but with limited weapons and GW gets to market the existing kit as another 2 units in 1 box
Space Marine Power armor reduces incoming damage by 1 (to a minimum of 1). That,OR Space Marine Power armor reduces the AP of the incoming attack by 1. So an AP-3 weapon is now Ap-2 etc. That second one might actually be too much, but I feel like one of those would go a long way towards making MEQs worth their points. Especially on the CSM side of things.
Move Reavers to the "Troops" slot. They are intended to be the "Scouts" of the Primaris marines, but significantly under perform next to a lot of the choices in the Elites slot. I think making them a troops choice would not only get them to the table more, it would also help to make an all Primaris army more viable.
boy I can't wait to read all the small buffs people will give space marines (All space marines get +6W, 1+ armor saves, boltguns up to Assault 12, all AP up to -3 is ignored, and +19 attacks - THEN they'd be balanced at 13ppm!)
I got one: Hellions.
Change stunclaw to S: User, AP-, D1 (so, worse than the default weapon), grants the squad No Escape while the bearer is alive.
Change the current ability to take a Phantasm Grenade Launcher to "darkness grenades" and write some absurd fluff about how they temporarily detach the retinas from the synapses or some other such ridiculous Dark Eldar weapon fluff.
15 points, squad cannot be targeted by overwatch attacks while the bearer is alive.
Then, give the Hellglaive AP-1.
I think at that point you have a unit with a niche: they charge out of DS semi-reliably, primarily exist in a support role providing Wych Cult armies the ability to avoid Overwatch and harassing enemy squads who are less scary in cc.
Tycho wrote: Space Marine Power armor reduces incoming damage by 1 (to a minimum of 1). That,OR Space Marine Power armor reduces the AP of the incoming attack by 1. So an AP-3 weapon is now Ap-2 etc. That second one might actually be too much, but I feel like one of those would go a long way towards making MEQs worth their points. Especially on the CSM side of things.
Move Reavers to the "Troops" slot. They are intended to be the "Scouts" of the Primaris marines, but significantly under perform next to a lot of the choices in the Elites slot. I think making them a troops choice would not only get them to the table more, it would also help to make an all Primaris army more viable.
Give reivers sarges option to take power weapons/ power fists. Give them an ability to generate attacks.
godardc wrote: Land Speeders; ignore -1 to hit when moving.
Solved.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
w1zard wrote: IG veterans to troops please... 1000x please. I miss mechanized vet, and aircav vet regiments.
Yeah, stormtroopers as troops but not veterans ? What the hell... I really need vet troops too.
I'd actually be OK with them making vets cost 6 points per model instead of 5 if we could just get them as troops :( A 100% mechanized list would be a lot of fun, but no veteran troops is what's killing it for me.
Increase their dispersion shield save to a 3+ invulnerable
Allow their dispersion shields to cause a MW on a save roll of a 6
Give Warscythes a shooting attack again, same as the Gauss Flayer.
Ice_can wrote: I would really love my sisters of silence to have a FNP rule.
Use it to represent their voidsheen cloaks.
Also for the love of the emperor give us rules for using Jenetia Krole in 40k or atleast an HQ datasheet for her to use.
Is that the forgeworld model where you get the SoS posed with her arm out and the sword, but you pay 70$ for her and get her in bendtastic resin instead of 8$ for plastic?
Terminators, would have all incoming damage reduced by one wound, to a minimum of one wound so D2 weapons do D1, D3 do D2, 1d6 becomes 1d6-1 (min 1) etc
Ice_can wrote: I would really love my sisters of silence to have a FNP rule.
Use it to represent their voidsheen cloaks.
Also for the love of the emperor give us rules for using Jenetia Krole in 40k or atleast an HQ datasheet for her to use.
Is that the forgeworld model where you get the SoS posed with her arm out and the sword, but you pay 70$ for her and get her in bendtastic resin instead of 8$ for plastic?
Jesus you guys are paying some trump tax if GW is scalping you for 70$. Hey I'll take forgeworld resin over failcast any day of the week.
Give Mechanicus either the option to take rhino transports (they make them after all) or the option to have the scout move back (only on skitarii) from 7th ed.
1) Change his useless aura to: "At the beginning of your shooting phase, you may nominate a single enemy unit within 18" of the Archon (or 18" of a transport he's currently embarked on). Until the beginning of your next turn, all friendly Drukhari units reroll 1s to hit when attacking the chosen unit."
(Writ of the Living Muse will be tweaked so that Drukhari units also reroll 1s to wound against the nominated unit.)
This cements the Archon as the leader of the army (not just the Kabal bits) and allows him to buff units in transports and/or while riding in a transport himself. Of course, the downside is that you have to get closer to your target (so no more sitting back with 3 Ravagers 36" away), and you can only give rerolls against 1 unit per turn. The latter part would make additional Archons serve an actual purpose, as opposed to just being dead-weight (as they currently are).
2) Change Shadowfield so that when the Archon fails a save it's reduced to a 5++ save, rather than being lost entirely. It means that, whilst he's still very vulnerable, he's not entirely defenceless once his Shadowfield is lost.
3) Let the Archon take Scourge Wings for, giving him movement 14" and the Deep Strike rule.
Succubus
Give her Archite Glaive Power Fist stats. It's absolutely ludicrous that it has a -1 to hit in spite of being orders of magnitude worse than a power fist (worse strength and just a single point of damage). Blood Glaive remains the same except that it does 3 damage (rather than d3).
Boom. Now our melee HQ is actually worth a damn in melee.
I could also suggest a few other things, like making the Agoniser Poison 3+, giving the Huskblade +1 Strength, taking the person who wrote Drazhar's rules and firing him out of a cannon, and giving the Liquifier Gun rerolls to wound. But I'd be willing to settle for the above.
Kabalite Warriors
2 special weapons per 5. Alternatively, give the Blast Pistol 12" range.
(Not an idea fix but at least this way they can actually bring some meaningful firepower to the table.)
Necron Destroyer Lord.
Change his aura to "Re-roll wound rolls of 1 for friendly <DYNASTY> INFANTRY and BEAST units that are within 6" of this model."
Now you don't have a melee unit who'd stuck trying to buff backfield ranged units.
I'd also consider making Scarabs troops, even if you want to impose some limit on them (e.g. for each unit of Warriors or Immortals in a detachment, you may include a unit of Scarabs as Troops in the same detachment).
I'd give Storm Guardians Lasblasters, or maybe a weaker version (24" assault3 s3 ap0? 18"? Adjust points as necessary ofc).
My reasons are simple; if you're a dying race you don't equip your civilians with gakky close combat weapons! Defenders have a hard enough time making any kind of sense since the range of shuriken catapults was halved (many years ago).
I love Eldar, always have. They were my first army in high school and still my primary army.
Of the things that GW has arbitrarily changed, the removal of Psykers as competent fighters is probably the most insulting one. While never on par with some stronger units, Farseers and Master Warlocks etc. used to actually be able to fight their way out of trouble if needed, with incredibly strong witchblades, singing spears which could hurt vehicles when rolled properly, etc. Farseers were even toughness four because of their body crystalizing over time.
They're now the most comically underwhelming, hapless models in the Eldar army. While possessing good psychic powers, a Farseer is just a joke when anything, from any army gets within slapping range. Now we get a toughness three model with two attacks, and a weapon with no AP.
So, in short...I'd rewrite their stats and bump their costs appropriately.
Primaris/Marines can fit into any space marine transport; Primaris count as 2 models.
Necron Gauss autowounds on a “To Hit” roll of 6.
Lictors can be taken in squads of 1-3.
Canifexes have a WS 3+ (Yes, that means with Living Battering Ram they hit on a 2+ when charging).
Tau Marker Lights don’t use a table and can be fired in addition to regular weapons in place of moving. Place a marker token beside the unit they “hit”. You can spend a token to give a unit a +1 bonus to hit* or increase AP by -1* or fire a Seeker Missile at BS 2+. Token is expended after use (so it only benefits one squad at most).
Kataphron Breachers.
basicly this ad mech troop selection did not transition to 8th all that well (when was the last time you saw them on the table??). it is ment to be elite troop infantry(minimum 3 models per unit) but it is far from it. it lacks survivability and anti horde weps.
ironicly, this unit is ment to be the guys who spearhead and moves in first, while the destroyers hang out in the back, yet the destoyers has all the anti horde weps..........
so, suggestion:
add 1 to the wounds making it W4. (not shure if changing from t5 to t6 would help their survivability..)
then give breacher 1 wep selections that destroyers has, the heavy grav-cannon while giving the destryers the torsion cannon from the breachers.
now atleast the breacher has the tools to be what it is ment to be.
as it is right now, i feel it is very usless in many ways. cant stay in the fight agasint all the plasma, and cant deal enugh dmg to horde as it only has heavy2 weps.
the grav-cannon would be the anti horde wep as it is a heavy5 wep.
idealy i feel that the breachers allso would have more use of the flamer then what the destryer has but that might make them too good, if they can use both a heavy5 and a flamer.
Increase the stealth drone cost by a few points and either make them a character or attatch them to the unit. It makes no sense for them to not be following the ghostkeel around as it is and having to try and achieve LOS shenannigans to stop them from being targeted by everyone and their dog is a losing battle.
I could be talked up to making all such command/utility drones share in this benefit, as all they do is float nearby and keep a low profile rather than actively shoot back and make a nuisance of themselves.
Kroot carnivores
Remove the +1 str that the kroot rifle affords and return +1 attack with the gun. leave all other stats as is.
As it stands, there's no reason to take kroot carnivores over kroot hounds, other than obtaining the models. The old extra attack (presumably for the additional blade on the other end of the rifle) would help the few that actually survive until contact with the enemy do some damage, the +1 to wound against GEQ units is nice but just not enough to help their survivability, their ability to fight back, and to help differentiate them more against their hounds (who get a -1 ap). An argument could be made to swap +1 attack to +1 damage instead at the cost of making the krootox even more obsolete.
The following may make all this obsolete however....
Kroot Shaper
Increase ld to 8, Ritual blade +1 str, move to HQ slot.
The shaper is in an odd spot at the moment, it is meant to help increase the survivability of the kroot and their poor leadership but is shacked up in the already overcrowded elite slots.
Moving it to a HQ slot will free up more space for suits of many flavours as well as relieve some pressure of the 1 commander per detatchment limit.
Increasing the leadership will help his buff bubble, and increasing the str of the ritual blade will help it against the GEQ units and make the kill it needs to activate its ability. You could swap this for -1ap (but would step on the toes of the hounds) or to 2 damage (would step on the toes of the krootox).
Regardless the move to HQ is a must.
The potential exists for changing the wording slightly on the ritual blade to trigger its special ability on the wounding of an enemy model rather than the killing of an enemy model, though most things you would get a shaper to fight would only have one wound anyway.
Am not sure a slight change to GK could fix them.
If they are to cost as much as they do, all GK units need one maybe two extra rules, which have real impact on the game and not something that makes demons re-roll save rolls of 6 within 3" of GK units.
So either a strong offensive rule and some utility or resiliance buff. Or they would have to be super tanky, with specilised lists.
Karol wrote: Am not sure a slight change to GK could fix them.
If they are to cost as much as they do, all GK units need one maybe two extra rules, which have real impact on the game and not something that makes demons re-roll save rolls of 6 within 3" of GK units.
So either a strong offensive rule and some utility or resiliance buff. Or they would have to be super tanky, with specilised lists.
Grey knights require an overhaul that would mean rereleasing their entire codex. There is no slight change they can have right now that would be worth the time invested here.
Eh. I'd simply increase the cost of Tactical Marines back to 3E points, and bump Primaris accordingly. Problem solved! Everybody else automatically gets better!
JohnHwangDD wrote: Eh. I'd simply increase the cost of Tactical Marines back to 3E points, and bump Primaris accordingly. Problem solved! Everybody else automatically gets better!
WraithKnights and Wraithlords, constructions animated by Spirit Stones, should have the option to take Spirit Stones.
Wraithlords should also only be 9Ws, instead of 10, so they don't have a damage chart.
JohnHwangDD wrote: Eh. I'd simply increase the cost of Tactical Marines back to 3E points, and bump Primaris accordingly. Problem solved! Everybody else automatically gets better!
Can't tell if this a joke or a troll comment
Deadly serious. Loyalists are uninteresting to me, and serve as the inexpensive entry army. Every other army should smack them around a bit, like a Worf. Want to win? Spend more on something else.
This has already been said, but having + 1 W on terminator, and maybe with an invulnerable save at 4/5++ should be good (even with an increase in price - they should just be better than regular space marine).
Some great ideas here lads, I did expect the usual marine +1 wound and so (my own personal thoughts aside)
One more for Tyranids -
Either tyrant guard to 4W, or a 5+++ as they're truly AWFUL bodyguard units, they don't do anywhere near enough damage themselves compared to the other dedicated close combat units (and face it, the Tyranid codex has some GOLD STAR level melee punch) for a similar price.
And quick thought again on my beloved Daemons -
Bloodcrushers - Back to T5 please. I don't believe it would invalidate Plaguedrones as the level of support are different and the FLY keyword is a HUGE difference, plus all the shenanigans they can pull with Nurgle support.
(I also miss my old T4 bloodletters to be honest but I came to terms with that 2 editions ago.)
Macharius tank - Make it shoot 4d6. Baneblade shoots 3d6 from a single cannon, Macharius has 2 cannons. Vanquisher has Heavy 4.
Vanquisher Leman Russ - S9, 3D3 damage
Avenger Strike Fighter - Gattling canon is Heavy 12, not Heavy 7. Gattling on a Knight is also 12 and it's virtually the same weapon so, why there is a difference?
Veteran Guardsmen - Access to Doctrines like it had back in 6th. Carapace armor, Camo Cloaks and Demolitions
A slight change for Warp Talons would be to just remove them from Codex so I'm not tempted to get them ever. GW is not really making an honest effort to make them playable, and with the track record of CA17 and CA18 I'm not gonna keep on expecting them to own up their promises of balance anymore.
I'd make them at least 2 wounds on each to give them that special "I can withstand a lot" status. Would mean anti-terminator weapons would be the only thing reliably killing them in one shot. Would also increase the reason to risk overheating on plasma just to kill one.
Space Marine Bikers
I'd make them 3 wound each. Makes them more resilient against high damage weapons.
Scatter Laser
Give the Scatter Laser a reroll on 1s just so it is a bit differentiated from Shuriken Cannons.
Wraithknights
I'd make them have a default Invuln Save against shooting like the Imperial Knights. The Shield in return would give invuln saves in both shooting and melee.
Incubi/Howling Banshees Perhaps a reroll on wounds. At least reroll on wound rolls of 1. Give them that extra lethality they deserve.
Splinter Weaponry Give them a -1 to AP on an unmodified 6. Splinter Weaponry is currently underwhelming.
Space Marine Armor in general Give them an always save on an unmodified 6; a reverse of the always hit on 6 Orks get. It would differentiate Space Marines a bit more in regards to their armor being good and give them a slightly more heroic feel that they need. Would also hopefully make Scouts with their normal armor less attractive.
Bolters Give them a -1, maybe -2, on an unmodified wound roll of 6.
Aeldari Blades I'd just give them the same rule as Chainswords. Currently pointless to take Aeldari swords instead of Chainswords and the blister is limited in selection.
Sniper rifles to Always wound on 2+ vs non vehicles (keeping MW on 6+)
Tesla destructors to Damage 2
Monoliths to get the same guns as Destroyers = worth their points.
Canoptek Spyders to get double their wounds
_________
I'd start on space marines but I think forum posts have a character limit !!
I pretty much agree with this, except i'd give spiders some buff abilities, like improving RP rolls. And make spiders let units wiped out make a RP roll.
Also I'd make deathmark rifles have a special effect on psykers that any wounds caused by them. even if healed later or ignored by FNP, add 1 to all psychic tests thereafter.
Hawky wrote: Macharius tank - Make it shoot 4d6. Baneblade shoots 3d6 from a single cannon, Macharius has 2 cannons.
It's a sad comment on its current state that the massive change of "double its firepower" is just maybe enough to make it semi-viable.
If the Heavy tank was Heavy 4D6 and D3 instead of 2D6D6, I would be happy. Or it should cost about... 30-60 points less.
In case of Vanquisher, It would be Heavy 4 for AP shells and I think I would be comfortable with leaving 2D6 in case of HE shells. Or 4D6 1D. Otherwise again, 30-60 points down from it's cost.
Both Vulcan and Omega would deserve slightly lesser cost, about 20-40 points down, but I'd leave the weapon profiles as they are.
Necrons- General - Make Void Scythes available to Command Barges and Overlords
- Remove every "either-or" option in characters (specifically, Crypteks with Cloaks and/or Chronometrons, Destroyer Lords with Phylacteries and/or Res Orbs)
Destroyer Lord - United in Hatred; make it re-roll 1's in all phases, not just the shooting. Let it impact all friendly <Dynasty> infantry and beasts.
Scarabs - Make them non-ObSec Troops
- A vehicle within 3" of a unit of Scarabs can heal an additional wound through Living Metal each turn. A unit of Scarabs can only heal one vehicle per turn this way
- Make them 15 ppm
Deathmarks - Make the Synaptic Disintegrator inflict Mortal Wounds on a 4+ (6+ against vehicles). (I'm using Drukhari Scourges with Haywire as reference, but reversed)
Flayed Ones - Make them Troops.
Triarch Stalker - Give them <Dynasty>.
Triarch Praetorians - Give them <Dynasty>.
Annihilation Barge - Make Tesla Destructor AP-1
Ghost Ark - Allow it to transport and heal Immortals as well
- Change Transport Capacity to 11 or 12
Tomb Spyders - Make them Characters
Doomsday Ark - Change the Doomsday Cannon to 2D3 shots (a very minor change; it doesn't impact potential maximum damage, but it shrinks the variance and makes the Ark just a little more reliable)
Tomb Sentinel - Change the Exile Cannon to 2D3 shots (same reasoning as above)
Monolith - Give it Quantum Shielding
- Remove Titanic
I'd make them at least 2 wounds on each to give them that special "I can withstand a lot" status. Would mean anti-terminator weapons would be the only thing reliably killing them in one shot. Would also increase the reason to risk overheating on plasma just to kill one.
They are already 2 wounds each. Did you mean 3 wounds? If so, then I agree
Space Marine Bikers
I'd make them 3 wound each. Makes them more resilient against high damage weapons.
Bikes already get +1W and +1T over the rider, and in some cases +1Sv. I don't think giving them yet another bonus is needed. Bikes just need to be cheaper
Scatter Laser
Give the Scatter Laser a reroll on 1s just so it is a bit differentiated from Shuriken Cannons.
I like the idea of Scatter lasers getting some change over Shuricannons, but I'd lean more into the extra shots. Make Scatters Heavy 6, but only S5. Now they are good anti-infantry, while the Shuricannon remains a good all-round weapon
Wraithknights
I'd make them have a default Invuln Save against shooting like the Imperial Knights. The Shield in return would give invuln saves in both shooting and melee.
As I suggested above, I think WKs and WLs should have the option to take Spirit Stones. That wound give them some extra defense that fits more with their fluff and seems less "Imperials get X, so we should too"
Splinter WeaponrySplinter Weaponry is currently underwhelming.
Add a Farseer with Doom to your list. Then see if Splinter Weaponry is "underwhelming". I think many of your opponents will fervently disagree.
Space Marine Armor in general Give them an always save on an unmodified 6; a reverse of the always hit on 6 Orks get. It would differentiate Space Marines a bit more in regards to their armor being good and give them a slightly more heroic feel that they need. Would also hopefully make Scouts with their normal armor less attractive.
So a 6++? Seem unnecessarily convoluted. Space Marines should just have 2W/2As in general at about 15ppm. And if a Space Marine is 2Ws, a Biker could then be 3Ws. Primaris would stay at 2Ws and get some other bonus, like T5 with Gravis armoured models having 3Ws.
Bolters Give them a -1, maybe -2, on an unmodified wound roll of 6.
I support all Bolter weapons having some bonus on 6s to wound. it doesn't matter what, whether being AP-1 (or AP-2 for Heavy Bolters) or Damage 2, whatever. Explosive Rounds needs to be a rule for Bolters!
I also think that Heavy Bolters should be Rapid Fire 2, maybe even RF3. That would make them far more appealing and versatile for regular Marines. I just don't get why the bigger version of a Bolt gun, a RF weapon, would not also be a RF gun
Necron Gauss Flayer & Blaster are both RF Eldar Shuiken Catapults & Cannons are both Assault DE Splinter Rifles and Cannons are both RF Why does every Marine/human weapon that is bigger than a standard infantry sized gun HAVE to be a Heavy Weapon?
FrozenDwarf wrote: Kataphron Breachers.
basicly this ad mech troop selection did not transition to 8th all that well (when was the last time you saw them on the table??). it is ment to be elite troop infantry(minimum 3 models per unit) but it is far from it. it lacks survivability and anti horde weps.
ironicly, this unit is ment to be the guys who spearhead and moves in first, while the destroyers hang out in the back, yet the destoyers has all the anti horde weps..........
so, suggestion:
add 1 to the wounds making it W4. (not shure if changing from t5 to t6 would help their survivability..)
then give breacher 1 wep selections that destroyers has, the heavy grav-cannon while giving the destryers the torsion cannon from the breachers.
now atleast the breacher has the tools to be what it is ment to be.
as it is right now, i feel it is very usless in many ways. cant stay in the fight agasint all the plasma, and cant deal enugh dmg to horde as it only has heavy2 weps.
the grav-cannon would be the anti horde wep as it is a heavy5 wep.
idealy i feel that the breachers allso would have more use of the flamer then what the destryer has but that might make them too good, if they can use both a heavy5 and a flamer.
so, am i on the right path here?
I guess, but I'd suggest you take a look at Breachers post-CA with the new detachment from Vigilus. I've found them to be pretty darn effective in a max sized squad with the cheapest loadout.
JohnHwangDD wrote: Eh. I'd simply increase the cost of Tactical Marines back to 3E points, and bump Primaris accordingly. Problem solved! Everybody else automatically gets better!
Not everybody. GK can't use primaris stuff, and from what GW told they are going to get any primaris, and not even not soon, but just no won't get them.
I have been reading some old GK rules my dad gave me for christmas, and they had an interesting rule at some time. They were untargetable by shoting, unless the opponent rolled 3d6=the distance to GK unit. If they had something like that right now, they would be good too. GW could even replace it with a flat -2/-3 to being hit, above 12". Wouldn't even have to give extra rules or change point costs.
JohnHwangDD wrote: Eh. I'd simply increase the cost of Tactical Marines back to 3E points, and bump Primaris accordingly. Problem solved! Everybody else automatically gets better!
Not everybody. GK can't use primaris stuff, and from what GW told they are going to get any primaris, and not even not soon, but just no won't get them.
I have been reading some old GK rules my dad gave me for christmas, and they had an interesting rule at some time. They were untargetable by shoting, unless the opponent rolled 3d6=the distance to GK unit. If they had something like that right now, they would be good too. GW could even replace it with a flat -2/-3 to being hit, above 12". Wouldn't even have to give extra rules or change point costs.
Man, Daemonhunters codex was golden age of grey knight power. We had grandmasters who could literally one shot anything with their force sword, even things normally immune to instant death. They were also strength 6, so they wounded MEQ units on a 2+. They were just fun.
Bolters Give them a -1, maybe -2, on an unmodified wound roll of 6.
I support all Bolter weapons having some bonus on 6s to wound. it doesn't matter what, whether being AP-1 (or AP-2 for Heavy Bolters) or Damage 2, whatever. Explosive Rounds needs to be a rule for Bolters!
I also think that Heavy Bolters should be Rapid Fire 2, maybe even RF3. That would make them far more appealing and versatile for regular Marines.
I just don't get why the bigger version of a Bolt gun, a RF weapon, would not also be a RF gun
Necron Gauss Flayer & Blaster are both RF Eldar Shuiken Catapults & Cannons are both Assault
DE Splinter Rifles and Cannons are both RF Why does every Marine/human weapon that is bigger than a standard infantry sized gun HAVE to be a Heavy Weapon?
-
Mostly I suspect the Heavy Bolter is 'Heavy' is because Imperial Guard (and SoB, and other Imperials) use it too, and it'd be a touch good at RF3 in a Guard squad (or a guard HWS jumping out of a Chimera, or on a Tank Commander with 3 of 'em, e.g.).
Perhaps Marines should have access to a different weapon, say a 'SAW Bolter' that's RF3, and the regular Heavy Bolter can stay with other Imperial forces at Heavy 3.
I think the 40K weapon design is hampered by how the weapon types work. For example it is impossible to have a weapon that just shoots three shots, without the rules associated with heavy, assault or pistol weapon types. Similarly it is impossible to have a pistol which shoots twice on the half range.
Canoptek Tomb Stalker: 2 extra attacks (total of 8) and 4+ invul. Why? Because it has 'phase tunnelling' and the 'phase shifter' wargear on lords grants a 4++
Flayed Ones: Give them back the 4th attack that was taken away and make them 12 ppm. Troops would be a bonus
Destroyer Lord: 2+ WS and ability to buff all Dynasty units
Crimson wrote: I think the 40K weapon design is hampered by how the weapon types work. For example it is impossible to have a weapon that just shoots three shots, without the rules associated with heavy, assault or pistol weapon types. Similarly it is impossible to have a pistol which shoots twice on the half range.
A pistol that shoots twice at half-range is easy. Just give it two profiles, like 6" Pistol 1, 3" Pistol 2. Identical in all other ways except volume.
Crimson wrote: I think the 40K weapon design is hampered by how the weapon types work. For example it is impossible to have a weapon that just shoots three shots, without the rules associated with heavy, assault or pistol weapon types. Similarly it is impossible to have a pistol which shoots twice on the half range.
A pistol that shoots twice at half-range is easy. Just give it two profiles, like 6" Pistol 1, 3" Pistol 2. Identical in all other ways except volume.
Sure, but it still a bit awkward.
You could just separate the weapon type and number of shots; you could fire rapid fire as '2/1' rapid fire 2 as '4/2' etc. You could also have weapons with just certain number of shots without any extra rules, rapid fire heavy or assault weapons, rapid fire weapons which do three shots in long range and two at short and so forth.
Bolters Give them a -1, maybe -2, on an unmodified wound roll of 6.
I support all Bolter weapons having some bonus on 6s to wound. it doesn't matter what, whether being AP-1 (or AP-2 for Heavy Bolters) or Damage 2, whatever. Explosive Rounds needs to be a rule for Bolters!
I also think that Heavy Bolters should be Rapid Fire 2, maybe even RF3. That would make them far more appealing and versatile for regular Marines.
I just don't get why the bigger version of a Bolt gun, a RF weapon, would not also be a RF gun
Necron Gauss Flayer & Blaster are both RF Eldar Shuiken Catapults & Cannons are both Assault
DE Splinter Rifles and Cannons are both RF Why does every Marine/human weapon that is bigger than a standard infantry sized gun HAVE to be a Heavy Weapon?
-
Mostly I suspect the Heavy Bolter is 'Heavy' is because Imperial Guard (and SoB, and other Imperials) use it too, and it'd be a touch good at RF3 in a Guard squad (or a guard HWS jumping out of a Chimera, or on a Tank Commander with 3 of 'em, e.g.).
Perhaps Marines should have access to a different weapon, say a 'SAW Bolter' that's RF3, and the regular Heavy Bolter can stay with other Imperial forces at Heavy 3.
Which is all well and good, except, Guard and Sisters have their own profile for HBs, which could remain Heavy.
The Marine entry for HB could be RF2/3 due to the Marines themselves being able to actually lift it and use it.
There is even precedence for this "type swapping" in the Dark Eldar Codex. Dark Lances are Heavy on Infantry, but Assault on Vehicles. So why not the HB?
And it's not like "Heavy" in its name matters, just look at Heavy Flamers and Assault cannons. In fact, it would be more consistent with those 2 if it WASN"T a Heavy.
Crimson wrote: I think the 40K weapon design is hampered by how the weapon types work. For example it is impossible to have a weapon that just shoots three shots, without the rules associated with heavy, assault or pistol weapon types. Similarly it is impossible to have a pistol which shoots twice on the half range.
A pistol that shoots twice at half-range is easy. Just give it two profiles, like 6" Pistol 1, 3" Pistol 2. Identical in all other ways except volume.
Sure, but it still a bit awkward.
You could just separate the weapon type and number of shots; you could fire rapid fire as '2/1' rapid fire 2 as '4/2' etc. You could also have weapons with just certain number of shots without any extra rules, rapid fire heavy or assault weapons, rapid fire weapons which do three shots in long range and two at short and so forth.
They actually used to have Salvo that did that. Salvo 2/5. Nothing changed except volume of shots, first value for moving, second for stationary. You could just introduce Salvo 3 as straight up "you shoot 3 times, no other benefit".
I'd make them at least 2 wounds on each to give them that special "I can withstand a lot" status. Would mean anti-terminator weapons would be the only thing reliably killing them in one shot. Would also increase the reason to risk overheating on plasma just to kill one.
They are already 2 wounds each. Did you mean 3 wounds? If so, then I agree
Yes, 3 wounds. Did too many rewrites of the text so I mixed things up.
Space Marine Bikers
I'd make them 3 wound each. Makes them more resilient against high damage weapons.
Bikes already get +1W and +1T over the rider, and in some cases +1Sv. I don't think giving them yet another bonus is needed. Bikes just need to be cheaper
Personally I just want a bit of parity when it comes to resistance to high damage weapons. Also, I don't mind bikers being elite(I like Ravenwing) and a 3W would cement that. For the sake of transparency I am using my experience of AoS riders to compare them with bikers in 40k. AoS Riders tend to have variable wounds(elves tend to have only 2 wounds per rider, with Armored Chaos Riders going up to 5 wounds) and I find that a system that allows itself a bit of variety in a wound pool tends to play better than when every unit has the same wound pool unless they become monsters or bigger.
Scatter Laser
Give the Scatter Laser a reroll on 1s just so it is a bit differentiated from Shuriken Cannons.
I like the idea of Scatter lasers getting some change over Shuricannons, but I'd lean more into the extra shots. Make Scatters Heavy 6, but only S5. Now they are good anti-infantry, while the Shuricannon remains a good all-round weapon
Could work. Only reason I wanted the reroll of 1s is that it would harken back to the Laser Lock idea of 6th edition without becoming the crazy reroll it was.
Wraithknights
I'd make them have a default Invuln Save against shooting like the Imperial Knights. The Shield in return would give invuln saves in both shooting and melee.
As I suggested above, I think WKs and WLs should have the option to take Spirit Stones. That wound give them some extra defense that fits more with their fluff and seems less "Imperials get X, so we should too"
Perhaps if it were a 5+ FnP. 6+FnP on something that is going to focus fired like that and little to no damage gets wasted means that a 6+ FnP is going to do very little. If we stick to 6+ then they are going to need a base invuln save just to be generally survivable. I'd prefer not to reduce their points so much that we'll be seeing 3 Wraithknights in a 1000 point lists. Mind you, the invuln save does not need to be as good as the IK save and there has to be some difference between the shield and non-shield WK to make the upgrade worth it.
Splinter WeaponrySplinter Weaponry is currently underwhelming.
Add a Farseer with Doom to your list. Then see if Splinter Weaponry is "underwhelming". I think many of your opponents will fervently disagree.
I am not against soup, but I dislike that soup should be required to make something work. In one of my earlier post when I was considering overall adjustments I wrote about nerfing Doom as it is currently too universal to not to be taken. But point taken, I should play more soup and am aware that I am effectively nerfing myself for not doing so.
Space Marine Armor in general Give them an always save on an unmodified 6; a reverse of the always hit on 6 Orks get. It would differentiate Space Marines a bit more in regards to their armor being good and give them a slightly more heroic feel that they need. Would also hopefully make Scouts with their normal armor less attractive.
So a 6++? Seem unnecessarily convoluted. Space Marines should just have 2W/2As in general at about 15ppm. And if a Space Marine is 2Ws, a Biker could then be 3Ws. Primaris would stay at 2Ws and get some other bonus, like T5 with Gravis armoured models having 3Ws.
The suggestion was more to give Space Marines something more unique than their ATSKNF and as their power armor is a very unique feature of their fluff/lore it is something I find interesting to experiment with personally. I have argued before that wounds should be played with more.
Bolters Give them a -1, maybe -2, on an unmodified wound roll of 6.
I support all Bolter weapons having some bonus on 6s to wound. it doesn't matter what, whether being AP-1 (or AP-2 for Heavy Bolters) or Damage 2, whatever. Explosive Rounds needs to be a rule for Bolters!
I also think that Heavy Bolters should be Rapid Fire 2, maybe even RF3. That would make them far more appealing and versatile for regular Marines.
I just don't get why the bigger version of a Bolt gun, a RF weapon, would not also be a RF gun
Necron Gauss Flayer & Blaster are both RF Eldar Shuiken Catapults & Cannons are both Assault
DE Splinter Rifles and Cannons are both RF Why does every Marine/human weapon that is bigger than a standard infantry sized gun HAVE to be a Heavy Weapon?
My guess is that there are some legacy issues that GW is afraid of changing.
FrozenDwarf wrote: Kataphron Breachers.
basicly this ad mech troop selection did not transition to 8th all that well (when was the last time you saw them on the table??). it is ment to be elite troop infantry(minimum 3 models per unit) but it is far from it. it lacks survivability and anti horde weps.
ironicly, this unit is ment to be the guys who spearhead and moves in first, while the destroyers hang out in the back, yet the destoyers has all the anti horde weps..........
so, suggestion:
add 1 to the wounds making it W4. (not shure if changing from t5 to t6 would help their survivability..)
then give breacher 1 wep selections that destroyers has, the heavy grav-cannon while giving the destryers the torsion cannon from the breachers.
now atleast the breacher has the tools to be what it is ment to be.
as it is right now, i feel it is very usless in many ways. cant stay in the fight agasint all the plasma, and cant deal enugh dmg to horde as it only has heavy2 weps.
the grav-cannon would be the anti horde wep as it is a heavy5 wep.
idealy i feel that the breachers allso would have more use of the flamer then what the destryer has but that might make them too good, if they can use both a heavy5 and a flamer.
so, am i on the right path here?
I guess, but I'd suggest you take a look at Breachers post-CA with the new detachment from Vigilus. I've found them to be pretty darn effective in a max sized squad with the cheapest loadout.
that detachment may boost their staying power but at the cost of adding alot of sacrificial bots, and it dont spesificly boost breachers since it goes for destryers aswell.
breachers simply need a new profile with a new anti horde wep.
as they are, the destroyers are simply better even if they have 1 wound less.
Bolters Give them a -1, maybe -2, on an unmodified wound roll of 6.
I support all Bolter weapons having some bonus on 6s to wound. it doesn't matter what, whether being AP-1 (or AP-2 for Heavy Bolters) or Damage 2, whatever. Explosive Rounds needs to be a rule for Bolters!
I also think that Heavy Bolters should be Rapid Fire 2, maybe even RF3. That would make them far more appealing and versatile for regular Marines.
I just don't get why the bigger version of a Bolt gun, a RF weapon, would not also be a RF gun
Necron Gauss Flayer & Blaster are both RF Eldar Shuiken Catapults & Cannons are both Assault
DE Splinter Rifles and Cannons are both RF Why does every Marine/human weapon that is bigger than a standard infantry sized gun HAVE to be a Heavy Weapon?
-
Mostly I suspect the Heavy Bolter is 'Heavy' is because Imperial Guard (and SoB, and other Imperials) use it too, and it'd be a touch good at RF3 in a Guard squad (or a guard HWS jumping out of a Chimera, or on a Tank Commander with 3 of 'em, e.g.).
Perhaps Marines should have access to a different weapon, say a 'SAW Bolter' that's RF3, and the regular Heavy Bolter can stay with other Imperial forces at Heavy 3.
Which is all well and good, except, Guard and Sisters have their own profile for HBs, which could remain Heavy.
The Marine entry for HB could be RF2/3 due to the Marines themselves being able to actually lift it and use it.
There is even precedence for this "type swapping" in the Dark Eldar Codex. Dark Lances are Heavy on Infantry, but Assault on Vehicles. So why not the HB?
And it's not like "Heavy" in its name matters, just look at Heavy Flamers and Assault cannons. In fact, it would be more consistent with those 2 if it WASN"T a Heavy.
-
Though why would ours be heavy, and their be assault or rapid fire? After all, we hip fire them and carry them exactly like Marines. That said, as a heavy machinegun analogue, heavy suits the heavy bolter just fine. Storm Bolters are the light machine gun analogues.
As for changes I would make:
Predator to T8 [medium tank, not light tank]
Vindicator to Sv 2+ [siege shield]
Baneblade, Land Raider to T9
Remove the fire twice rule for Leman Russ [and everything else]
Battle Cannon to 2d6 shots naturally.
Demolisher Cannon to 2d6 or 3d6 shots, S10, D2 or D3. It's a giant gun that hurls a trashcan full of high explosive, not an armor piercing shell. It's more like a ISU-152 than a SU-100. It should inflict a lot of hits, each with moderate damage.
Vanquisher Cannon to S16, D2d6. It won't impinge on the Shadowsword because the Shadowsword does that 6 times average. Melta should be 2x strength or something to actually improve ability to hurt a vehicle of close, and the Vanquisher should be single-shot high damage.
Necron Flayed Ones:
Give them the 'Free Move' before the game begins. Having a unit that doesn't shoot held in Reserve until turn 2 is really a gut shot.
It would also be nice to have Ghost Arks work with Flayed Ones since they're just corrupted Warriors.
Agreed. They are so much worse than plasma mathematically it is pathetic, even when accounting for plasma's increased cost.
Hotshot weapons should be Assault (2 in case of lasgun, 4 in case of volley gun, pistol unchanged) in general. It's not that much of an issue in regular 40k as Tempests are usually deepstriked or kicked out of transport, but playing them in Killteam is a horrible experience. They are outgunned by almost every unit.
Bolters Give them a -1, maybe -2, on an unmodified wound roll of 6.
I support all Bolter weapons having some bonus on 6s to wound. it doesn't matter what, whether being AP-1 (or AP-2 for Heavy Bolters) or Damage 2, whatever. Explosive Rounds needs to be a rule for Bolters!
I also think that Heavy Bolters should be Rapid Fire 2, maybe even RF3. That would make them far more appealing and versatile for regular Marines.
I just don't get why the bigger version of a Bolt gun, a RF weapon, would not also be a RF gun
Necron Gauss Flayer & Blaster are both RF Eldar Shuiken Catapults & Cannons are both Assault
DE Splinter Rifles and Cannons are both RF Why does every Marine/human weapon that is bigger than a standard infantry sized gun HAVE to be a Heavy Weapon?
-
Mostly I suspect the Heavy Bolter is 'Heavy' is because Imperial Guard (and SoB, and other Imperials) use it too, and it'd be a touch good at RF3 in a Guard squad (or a guard HWS jumping out of a Chimera, or on a Tank Commander with 3 of 'em, e.g.).
Perhaps Marines should have access to a different weapon, say a 'SAW Bolter' that's RF3, and the regular Heavy Bolter can stay with other Imperial forces at Heavy 3.
Which is all well and good, except, Guard and Sisters have their own profile for HBs, which could remain Heavy.
The Marine entry for HB could be RF2/3 due to the Marines themselves being able to actually lift it and use it.
There is even precedence for this "type swapping" in the Dark Eldar Codex. Dark Lances are Heavy on Infantry, but Assault on Vehicles. So why not the HB?
And it's not like "Heavy" in its name matters, just look at Heavy Flamers and Assault cannons. In fact, it would be more consistent with those 2 if it WASN"T a Heavy.
-
Though why would ours be heavy, and their be assault or rapid fire? After all, we hip fire them and carry them exactly like Marines. That said, as a heavy machinegun analogue, heavy suits the heavy bolter just fine. Storm Bolters are the light machine gun analogues.
As for changes I would make:
Predator to T8 [medium tank, not light tank]
Vindicator to Sv 2+ [siege shield]
Baneblade, Land Raider to T9
Remove the fire twice rule for Leman Russ [and everything else]
Battle Cannon to 2d6 shots naturally.
Demolisher Cannon to 2d6 or 3d6 shots, S10, D2 or D3. It's a giant gun that hurls a trashcan full of high explosive, not an armor piercing shell. It's more like a ISU-152 than a SU-100. It should inflict a lot of hits, each with moderate damage.
Vanquisher Cannon to S16, D2d6. It won't impinge on the Shadowsword because the Shadowsword does that 6 times average. Melta should be 2x strength or something to actually improve ability to hurt a vehicle of close, and the Vanquisher should be single-shot high damage.
I'd go more conservative on the BC to 3D3(also less swingy)
The demolisher cannon is a problem as 8th edition doesn't have the mechanics to represent how it's real life inspiration worked.
Vanquisher at S16 D2d3 maybe but 12 wounds is one shooting most vehicals, which cost more than it does.
IG: Veterans get a option for +1ppm to be troops, lose however out on 1 special weapon. That way mechanised IG actually get's something back worth delivering.
Guardsmen sargents/sargents get lasguns. All Guardsmen suqads are forced to buy a Vox. (45pts now for a squad)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Not Online!!! wrote: R&H Cultists get acess (sic) to generic CSM Stratagems (Tide of traitors, Votwl,etc.)
There are enough complaints about CSM Cultists getting Veterans of the Long War that giving R&H Cultists access to it as well would be a bad move.
I'm 50/50 on Tide of Traitors.
Considering mass assult is and was always one of the themes for r&h and that the demagogue buff is missing now it would not be a problem.
I agree though that VotLW isn't necessary.
However r&h cultists can't reroll and can't be made immune to moral and are max 30.
It should be able to drop units from its Gate of Eternity at the start of the movement phase or "during the movement phase". That way you don't get the silly situation where it's only possible for troops to come out in turn 3 if you deepstrike the Monolith.
Make it Toughness 9
Tesla Destructors should have range 36-48" I think. They are huge cannons, their range should exceed a gauss flayer.
Remove all "Vs specific army" bonuses, rules, and stratagems in matched play. Those are for narrative play, and don't belong in a competitive game.
And codex specific CP. Them GW can sell us tokens, cards, dice or what ever to keep score. (And if keeping track of 1-4 pools of CP is too much for some players, then the game it self should be way too much for them to begin with...)
Wibe wrote: Remove all "Vs specific army" bonuses, rules, and stratagems in matched play. Those are for narrative play, and don't belong in a competitive game.
And codex specific CP. Them GW can sell us tokens, cards, dice or what ever to keep score. (And if keeping track of 1-4 pools of CP is too much for some players, then the game it self should be way too much for them to begin with...)
So Dtfe should go?
I mean i'd like it if it would be against all armies rather then just imperium but i can agree with you.
Wibe wrote: Remove all "Vs specific army" bonuses, rules, and stratagems in matched play. Those are for narrative play, and don't belong in a competitive game.
And codex specific CP. Them GW can sell us tokens, cards, dice or what ever to keep score. (And if keeping track of 1-4 pools of CP is too much for some players, then the game it self should be way too much for them to begin with...)
So Dtfe should go?
I mean i'd like it if it would be against all armies rather then just imperium but i can agree with you.
Yeah, it would hurt my DG a lot to loose it, but I still think they should loose it. Or make it a upgrade you can get against all foes.
Wibe wrote: Remove all "Vs specific army" bonuses, rules, and stratagems in matched play. Those are for narrative play, and don't belong in a competitive game.
And codex specific CP. Them GW can sell us tokens, cards, dice or what ever to keep score. (And if keeping track of 1-4 pools of CP is too much for some players, then the game it self should be way too much for them to begin with...)
So Dtfe should go?
I mean i'd like it if it would be against all armies rather then just imperium but i can agree with you.
Yeah, it would hurt my DG a lot to loose it, but I still think they should loose it. Or make it a upgrade you can get against all foes.
considering 95% of the time no CSM army get's to mellee anyways, i'd think it should just be changed against all enemy units.
JK.
Either against all foes and call it furry of the edgelords or against none.
Bolters Give them a -1, maybe -2, on an unmodified wound roll of 6.
I support all Bolter weapons having some bonus on 6s to wound. it doesn't matter what, whether being AP-1 (or AP-2 for Heavy Bolters) or Damage 2, whatever. Explosive Rounds needs to be a rule for Bolters!
I also think that Heavy Bolters should be Rapid Fire 2, maybe even RF3. That would make them far more appealing and versatile for regular Marines.
I just don't get why the bigger version of a Bolt gun, a RF weapon, would not also be a RF gun
Necron Gauss Flayer & Blaster are both RF Eldar Shuiken Catapults & Cannons are both Assault
DE Splinter Rifles and Cannons are both RF Why does every Marine/human weapon that is bigger than a standard infantry sized gun HAVE to be a Heavy Weapon?
-
Mostly I suspect the Heavy Bolter is 'Heavy' is because Imperial Guard (and SoB, and other Imperials) use it too, and it'd be a touch good at RF3 in a Guard squad (or a guard HWS jumping out of a Chimera, or on a Tank Commander with 3 of 'em, e.g.).
Perhaps Marines should have access to a different weapon, say a 'SAW Bolter' that's RF3, and the regular Heavy Bolter can stay with other Imperial forces at Heavy 3.
Which is all well and good, except, Guard and Sisters have their own profile for HBs, which could remain Heavy.
The Marine entry for HB could be RF2/3 due to the Marines themselves being able to actually lift it and use it.
There is even precedence for this "type swapping" in the Dark Eldar Codex. Dark Lances are Heavy on Infantry, but Assault on Vehicles. So why not the HB?
And it's not like "Heavy" in its name matters, just look at Heavy Flamers and Assault cannons. In fact, it would be more consistent with those 2 if it WASN"T a Heavy.
-
Though why would ours be heavy, and their be assault or rapid fire? After all, we hip fire them and carry them exactly like Marines. That said, as a heavy machinegun analogue, heavy suits the heavy bolter just fine. Storm Bolters are the light machine gun analogues.
As for changes I would make:
Predator to T8 [medium tank, not light tank]
Vindicator to Sv 2+ [siege shield]
Baneblade, Land Raider to T9
Remove the fire twice rule for Leman Russ [and everything else]
Battle Cannon to 2d6 shots naturally.
Demolisher Cannon to 2d6 or 3d6 shots, S10, D2 or D3. It's a giant gun that hurls a trashcan full of high explosive, not an armor piercing shell. It's more like a ISU-152 than a SU-100. It should inflict a lot of hits, each with moderate damage.
Vanquisher Cannon to S16, D2d6. It won't impinge on the Shadowsword because the Shadowsword does that 6 times average. Melta should be 2x strength or something to actually improve ability to hurt a vehicle of close, and the Vanquisher should be single-shot high damage.
I'd go more conservative on the BC to 3D3(also less swingy)
The demolisher cannon is a problem as 8th edition doesn't have the mechanics to represent how it's real life inspiration worked.
Vanquisher at S16 D2d3 maybe but 12 wounds is one shooting most vehicals, which cost more than it does.
2d6 is what the Battle Tank does now, just through the form of a rule, which covers up the fact that the battle cannon is absolutely atrocious by giving it a second one, basically, and ignoring the other carriers of the weapon [Marcharius, Vengeance Battery, Imperial Knight]. And it's still not great unless you can get some dice fixing and improved BS.
WRT the Vanquisher, that's kind of the point. It wouldn't be the only such device, and a dedicate AT gun should be actually effective at antitank, which it isn't because it doesn't do anything meaningful with a single shot that's capped at being entirely unable to degrade a vehicle. With 2d6 damage, the antitank gun would be able to reliably cripple vehicles struck, and sometimes [rarely] would be able to actually finish it off. The Vanquisher should be 1 shot at 2d6, especially considering the vehicle that's supposed to be a weaker stop-gap version made where they can't manufacture the high velocity guns and shells is a twin lascannon that does what is in essence 2d6 [2 shots for 1d6]. It also wouldn't be a change from it's current state, which is the worst Leman Russ variant, since it currently gets 2 shots for 2d6b1 each, the key is being S9+ so it can actually present a capacity for the destruction of enemy heavy armor in excess of the ordinary Battle Cannon. Theoretically.
Agreed. They are so much worse than plasma mathematically it is pathetic, even when accounting for plasma's increased cost.
Disagree, volley guns are actually a good weapon. In fact they are better than heavy bolters in terms of raw damage, and yet are cheaper. (though their range is shorter)
But since you said math:
Spoiler:
1) Stationary, and >12":
vs GEQ:
- VG: 4*2/3*2/3= 1.77 W
- PG: 1*2/3*5/6= .55 W
vs MEQ:
- VG: 4*2/3*1/2*2/3= 0.89 W
- PG: 1*2/3*2/3*5/6= 0.37 W
- Overcharge: 1*2/3*5/6*5/6= 0.46 W
vs TEQ:
- VG: 4*2/3*1/2*1/2= 0.66 W
- PG: 1*2/3*2/3*2/3= 0.3 W
- Overcharge: 1*2/3*5/6*2/3= 0.37 W = 0.74 D
2) Moved, and <12":
vs GEQ:
- VG: 4*1/2*2/3= 1.33 W
- PG: 2*2/3*5/6= 1.1 W
vs MEQ:
- VG: 4*1/2*1/2*2/3= 0.67 W
- PG: 2*2/3*2/3*5/6= 0.74 W
- Overcharge: 2*2/3*5/6*5/6 = 0.92 W
vs TEQ:
- VG: 4*1/2*1/2*1/2= 0.5 W
- PG: 2*2/3*2/3*2/3 = 0.59 W
- Overcharge: 2*2/3*5/6*2/3= 0.74 W= 1.48 D
So, the volley gun ranges from being either 3x better than plasma or only 1/3 as good as plasma, for only 2/3 the cost. Granted, plasma is undoubtedly better against multi-wound models but volley guns are generally better against 1W models, especially at longer range.
Bolters Give them a -1, maybe -2, on an unmodified wound roll of 6.
I support all Bolter weapons having some bonus on 6s to wound. it doesn't matter what, whether being AP-1 (or AP-2 for Heavy Bolters) or Damage 2, whatever. Explosive Rounds needs to be a rule for Bolters!
I also think that Heavy Bolters should be Rapid Fire 2, maybe even RF3. That would make them far more appealing and versatile for regular Marines.
I just don't get why the bigger version of a Bolt gun, a RF weapon, would not also be a RF gun
Necron Gauss Flayer & Blaster are both RF Eldar Shuiken Catapults & Cannons are both Assault
DE Splinter Rifles and Cannons are both RF Why does every Marine/human weapon that is bigger than a standard infantry sized gun HAVE to be a Heavy Weapon?
-
Mostly I suspect the Heavy Bolter is 'Heavy' is because Imperial Guard (and SoB, and other Imperials) use it too, and it'd be a touch good at RF3 in a Guard squad (or a guard HWS jumping out of a Chimera, or on a Tank Commander with 3 of 'em, e.g.).
Perhaps Marines should have access to a different weapon, say a 'SAW Bolter' that's RF3, and the regular Heavy Bolter can stay with other Imperial forces at Heavy 3.
Which is all well and good, except, Guard and Sisters have their own profile for HBs, which could remain Heavy.
The Marine entry for HB could be RF2/3 due to the Marines themselves being able to actually lift it and use it.
There is even precedence for this "type swapping" in the Dark Eldar Codex. Dark Lances are Heavy on Infantry, but Assault on Vehicles. So why not the HB?
And it's not like "Heavy" in its name matters, just look at Heavy Flamers and Assault cannons. In fact, it would be more consistent with those 2 if it WASN"T a Heavy.
-
Though why would ours be heavy, and their be assault or rapid fire? After all, we hip fire them and carry them exactly like Marines. That said, as a heavy machinegun analogue, heavy suits the heavy bolter just fine. Storm Bolters are the light machine gun analogues.
As for changes I would make:
Predator to T8 [medium tank, not light tank]
Vindicator to Sv 2+ [siege shield]
Baneblade, Land Raider to T9
Remove the fire twice rule for Leman Russ [and everything else]
Battle Cannon to 2d6 shots naturally.
Demolisher Cannon to 2d6 or 3d6 shots, S10, D2 or D3. It's a giant gun that hurls a trashcan full of high explosive, not an armor piercing shell. It's more like a ISU-152 than a SU-100. It should inflict a lot of hits, each with moderate damage.
Vanquisher Cannon to S16, D2d6. It won't impinge on the Shadowsword because the Shadowsword does that 6 times average. Melta should be 2x strength or something to actually improve ability to hurt a vehicle of close, and the Vanquisher should be single-shot high damage.
I'd go more conservative on the BC to 3D3(also less swingy)
The demolisher cannon is a problem as 8th edition doesn't have the mechanics to represent how it's real life inspiration worked.
Vanquisher at S16 D2d3 maybe but 12 wounds is one shooting most vehicals, which cost more than it does.
2d6 is what the Battle Tank does now, just through the form of a rule, which covers up the fact that the battle cannon is absolutely atrocious by giving it a second one, basically, and ignoring the other carriers of the weapon [Marcharius, Vengeance Battery, Imperial Knight]. And it's still not great unless you can get some dice fixing and improved BS.
WRT the Vanquisher, that's kind of the point. It wouldn't be the only such device, and a dedicate AT gun should be actually effective at antitank, which it isn't because it doesn't do anything meaningful with a single shot that's capped at being entirely unable to degrade a vehicle. With 2d6 damage, the antitank gun would be able to reliably cripple vehicles struck, and sometimes [rarely] would be able to actually finish it off. The Vanquisher should be 1 shot at 2d6, especially considering the vehicle that's supposed to be a weaker stop-gap version made where they can't manufacture the high velocity guns and shells is a twin lascannon that does what is in essence 2d6 [2 shots for 1d6]. It also wouldn't be a change from it's current state, which is the worst Leman Russ variant, since it currently gets 2 shots for 2d6b1 each, the key is being S9+ so it can actually present a capacity for the destruction of enemy heavy armor in excess of the ordinary Battle Cannon. Theoretically.
I suppose it's more that the battle cannon is more effective than lascannons etc against most vehicals which is just so wrong.
That was why I was suggesting 3D3 it also reduces the amount of a buff being catachan is for tanks 4d3 discard the lowest while still a buff but not a bad as 3d6 discard the lowest vrs 2d6.
Again it's not that I don't see the logic it's just people already take battle cannons because they outperform 4 lascannons shots.
My concern is that your building a tank killer that still no-one takes because it's so swingy.
Drukhari's wyches: they just need to be 6ppm. Close combat oriented troops aren't as effective as shooty ones and kabalites are 6ppm. They just need this I think.
Drukhari's splinter cannons: they can drop to 5ppm or double their shots keeping the current price. At the moment it's impossibile to justify them at 10 points when free splinter and twin splinter rifles are the alternative.
Drukhari's incubi: flat +1A and 4++ in close combat. That's what would make them worthy of their 16ppm being just T3 1W melee dudes with no obsession bonus.
Orks burna boyz: they can go 8-9ppm or get proper D6 flamers. Even something in between at 10ppm and D6 autohits from their burnas.
Orks nauts: they just need a flat 50-60 pts reduction.
Ork killa kanz: flat +1 to their WS.
Ork bikes: points drop to 18-20ppm and 5+ invuln if they moved in the previous turn. Dakkaguns (and also big shootas from other units) imporoved to AP-1.
SW blood claws: since they're SM with BS4+ and pistols they need to be cheaper than the standard dudes. Just this.
SWTWC: drop their shields' cost to 5ppm. Also some of their favorite weapons should go down in points like wolf claws and frost swords.
SM drop pods: just make them 50ppm or allow them to land closer than the standard 9'' limit. If they do so units that disembark cannot charge though.
Blackie wrote: Drukhari's wyches: they just need to be 6ppm. Close combat oriented troops aren't as effective as shooty ones and kabalites are 6ppm. They just need this I think.
I think the real issue with Wyches is that they just don't serve much purpose.
They were good when the game was infantry-based with relatively few tanks.
However, in an age of not just vehicles but super-heavies, they're a solution looking for a problem.
What's more, even if you make them cheap, they'll lack the (intra-army) support to be effective.
Drukhari's splinter cannons: they can drop to 5ppm or double their shots keeping the current price. At the moment it's impossibile to justify them at 10 points when free splinter and twin splinter rifles are the alternative.
Instead of more shots, what about giving them AP-1?
Drukhari's incubi: flat +1A and 4++ in close combat. That's what would make them worthy of their 16ppm being just T3 1W melee dudes with no obsession bonus.
A 4++ seems a bit much, honestly. Or, more accurately, it seems weird that Incubi would have access to better invulnerable saves than 2/3 of our HQs.
I think a 5++ would be reasonable.
Also, instead of giving them more attacks, I'd suggest giving them +1S and letting the whole unit benefit from Lethal Precision.
Horrors: Excempt them from the rule of Smite cost increase. They only Smite with one d6 for the psychic Test and thus are currently unable to Smite if anything else did it before in that Turn.
Blackie wrote: Drukhari's wyches: they just need to be 6ppm. Close combat oriented troops aren't as effective as shooty ones and kabalites are 6ppm. They just need this I think.
I think the real issue with Wyches is that they just don't serve much purpose.
They were good when the game was infantry-based with relatively few tanks.
However, in an age of not just vehicles but super-heavies, they're a solution looking for a problem.
What's more, even if you make them cheap, they'll lack the (intra-army) support to be effective.
Cutting down screeners is a thing in 8th edition. Ok we have grotesques for that role in melee but just them actually. I honestly like how wyches are in this edition, they are already effective against screening units that have a size of 20 dudes at most, with all their possible buffs, but 8ppm for T3 6+ melee dudes is definitely too much.
Drukhari's splinter cannons: they can drop to 5ppm or double their shots keeping the current price. At the moment it's impossibile to justify them at 10 points when free splinter and twin splinter rifles are the alternative.
Instead of more shots, what about giving them AP-1?
I'd like that as well. More shots instead of some AP would be better for fast rolling though.
Drukhari's incubi: flat +1A and 4++ in close combat. That's what would make them worthy of their 16ppm being just T3 1W melee dudes with no obsession bonus.
A 4++ seems a bit much, honestly. Or, more accurately, it seems weird that Incubi would have access to better invulnerable saves than 2/3 of our HQs.
I think a 5++ would be reasonable.
Also, instead of giving them more attacks, I'd suggest giving them +1S and letting the whole unit benefit from Lethal Precision.
4++ only in combat though, basically the same rule that wyches have, not a flat 4++. I wouldn't give incubi a real invuln that works against anything.
+1S is even more powerful than +1A but yeah they need to be more killy in combat.
All Infantry in the Custodes Codex get +1 Attack. Ideally i want some wound spillage like AoS but thats hardly minor! A single Custodian can only kill 3 cultists/guardsman at most, which is disappointing!
I think everything in all Marine codexes could also do with a +1 Attack too
Cutting down screeners is a thing in 8th edition. Ok we have grotesques for that role in melee but just them actually. I honestly like how wyches are in this edition, they are already effective against screening units that have a size of 20 dudes at most, with all their possible buffs, but 8ppm for T3 6+ melee dudes is definitely too much.
Maybe it's because I don't see many screening units.
Hence, I'm more interested in seeing Wyches be a threat in and of themselves, rather than a counter to a niche unit.
+1S is even more powerful than +1A but yeah they need to be more killy in combat.
I'd lean towards more strength or damage simply because i believe they already have a decent number of attacks. Any more and the Klaivex will have more attacks than a Succubus.
Bolters Give them a -1, maybe -2, on an unmodified wound roll of 6.
I support all Bolter weapons having some bonus on 6s to wound. it doesn't matter what, whether being AP-1 (or AP-2 for Heavy Bolters) or Damage 2, whatever. Explosive Rounds needs to be a rule for Bolters!
I also think that Heavy Bolters should be Rapid Fire 2, maybe even RF3. That would make them far more appealing and versatile for regular Marines.
I just don't get why the bigger version of a Bolt gun, a RF weapon, would not also be a RF gun
Necron Gauss Flayer & Blaster are both RF Eldar Shuiken Catapults & Cannons are both Assault
DE Splinter Rifles and Cannons are both RF Why does every Marine/human weapon that is bigger than a standard infantry sized gun HAVE to be a Heavy Weapon?
-
Mostly I suspect the Heavy Bolter is 'Heavy' is because Imperial Guard (and SoB, and other Imperials) use it too, and it'd be a touch good at RF3 in a Guard squad (or a guard HWS jumping out of a Chimera, or on a Tank Commander with 3 of 'em, e.g.).
Perhaps Marines should have access to a different weapon, say a 'SAW Bolter' that's RF3, and the regular Heavy Bolter can stay with other Imperial forces at Heavy 3.
Which is all well and good, except, Guard and Sisters have their own profile for HBs, which could remain Heavy.
The Marine entry for HB could be RF2/3 due to the Marines themselves being able to actually lift it and use it.
There is even precedence for this "type swapping" in the Dark Eldar Codex. Dark Lances are Heavy on Infantry, but Assault on Vehicles. So why not the HB?
And it's not like "Heavy" in its name matters, just look at Heavy Flamers and Assault cannons. In fact, it would be more consistent with those 2 if it WASN"T a Heavy.
-
Though why would ours be heavy, and their be assault or rapid fire? After all, we hip fire them and carry them exactly like Marines. That said, as a heavy machinegun analogue, heavy suits the heavy bolter just fine. Storm Bolters are the light machine gun analogues.
As for changes I would make:
Predator to T8 [medium tank, not light tank]
Vindicator to Sv 2+ [siege shield]
Baneblade, Land Raider to T9
Remove the fire twice rule for Leman Russ [and everything else]
Battle Cannon to 2d6 shots naturally.
Demolisher Cannon to 2d6 or 3d6 shots, S10, D2 or D3. It's a giant gun that hurls a trashcan full of high explosive, not an armor piercing shell. It's more like a ISU-152 than a SU-100. It should inflict a lot of hits, each with moderate damage.
Vanquisher Cannon to S16, D2d6. It won't impinge on the Shadowsword because the Shadowsword does that 6 times average. Melta should be 2x strength or something to actually improve ability to hurt a vehicle of close, and the Vanquisher should be single-shot high damage.
I'd go more conservative on the BC to 3D3(also less swingy)
The demolisher cannon is a problem as 8th edition doesn't have the mechanics to represent how it's real life inspiration worked.
Vanquisher at S16 D2d3 maybe but 12 wounds is one shooting most vehicals, which cost more than it does.
2d6 is what the Battle Tank does now, just through the form of a rule, which covers up the fact that the battle cannon is absolutely atrocious by giving it a second one, basically, and ignoring the other carriers of the weapon [Marcharius, Vengeance Battery, Imperial Knight]. And it's still not great unless you can get some dice fixing and improved BS.
WRT the Vanquisher, that's kind of the point. It wouldn't be the only such device, and a dedicate AT gun should be actually effective at antitank, which it isn't because it doesn't do anything meaningful with a single shot that's capped at being entirely unable to degrade a vehicle. With 2d6 damage, the antitank gun would be able to reliably cripple vehicles struck, and sometimes [rarely] would be able to actually finish it off. The Vanquisher should be 1 shot at 2d6, especially considering the vehicle that's supposed to be a weaker stop-gap version made where they can't manufacture the high velocity guns and shells is a twin lascannon that does what is in essence 2d6 [2 shots for 1d6]. It also wouldn't be a change from it's current state, which is the worst Leman Russ variant, since it currently gets 2 shots for 2d6b1 each, the key is being S9+ so it can actually present a capacity for the destruction of enemy heavy armor in excess of the ordinary Battle Cannon. Theoretically.
I suppose it's more that the battle cannon is more effective than lascannons etc against most vehicals which is just so wrong.
That was why I was suggesting 3D3 it also reduces the amount of a buff being catachan is for tanks 4d3 discard the lowest while still a buff but not a bad as 3d6 discard the lowest vrs 2d6.
Again it's not that I don't see the logic it's just people already take battle cannons because they outperform 4 lascannons shots.
My concern is that your building a tank killer that still no-one takes because it's so swingy.
Wait... I thing you've got it backwards. It would be, and feel very wrong for a tank's primary gun to be weaker than a man-portable tripod fired gun crewed by a team of two. A lascannon is on the scale of like a PIAT or recoilless rifle. A Battle Cannon is like a 120mm tank gun, it should be way better than anything two infantrymen or one space marine can haul around.
Also, the Annihilator is supposed to be a crap version of the Leman Russ, produced where the factories lack the resources and the technical talent to produce the real Vanquisher gun. Which is why, I think that it needs to do at minimum 2d6 damage [so as to be equal in output to the twin lascannon], and be high enough strength to wound heavy armor on a 2, so that it's actually better than a lascannon. Being strength 9-15 and having reliable damage [like 6+D6, as somebody mentioned] would be okay, but I think 6+D6 might be on the scale of "too scary", because it would sextupule the odds of getting 11-12 damage and instakilling a medium tank.
It should not ever be preferable to equip a tank with a man portable light weapon or pair thereof over an actual tank gun.
Anyway, my thoughts on tank guns:
Battle Cannon: 2d6 shots, S8, AP2, D1d3
Executioner Plasma Cannon: 3d3 shots, S7/8, AP3, D1/2
Eradicator Nova Cannon: 2d6 shots, S6, AP2, D1 or 2, Ignores Cover [or maybe "automatically hits". The Eradicator has always been just a crappy Battle Cannon, I don't know what to do with it. Giving it autohits would give it a place targeting things with -1's to hit, though it would still be bad]
Twin Autocannon: 4 shots, S7, AP1, D2. It's a twin autocannon. I can see an argument for being twinned up predator/helverin autocannons so it's also not another crappy forgetable variant, but like, to be honest, with 9 Leman Russ variants, some are going to be crappy, and the one with two autocannons is kind of asking to be that that group.
Vanquisher Cannon: 1 shot, S16, AP3, D2d6.
Twin Lascannons: 2 shots, S9, AP3, D1d6. Similar to the above, but ever so slightly worse.
Demolisher Cannon: ??? shots, S10, AP3, D3. I don't know what I want this thing to have for shot count. My gut feeling, and some logic, says it should have equal to or more than the Battle Cannon, since it has a larger bursting charge and is a much more powerful gun, but like then it would just be super strong with 2d6 shots. Maybe 3d3 shots, or just being highly priced and short ranged are enough.
Punisher Gatling Cannon: 20 shots, S5, AP0, D1. Really, this is fine as is and would be much less ridiculous without the fire-twice rule.
Destroyer Laser Cannon: 1 shot, S16, AP4, D3d6. This is the really big hull gun on the Destroyer.
Predator Autocannon: 2d3 shots, A7, AP3, D2. It doesn't need to be D3, you should prefer the Predator Annihilator for tank-breaking.
I think that covers the Leman Russ, Vindicator, and Predator, and also in the process the Macharius tank.
At the same time, I think the statlines should change a bit too of the base vehicles:
Predator: T8, W12, Sv3+, M10". It should be a tank, not an APC with a turret and a light gun, the fact that the model is a APC with a turret and a light gun notwithstanding.
Vindicator: T8, W12, Sv2+, M10". 2+ for the siege shield.
Leman Russ: T8, W12, Sv2+, M6". 2+ for formerly being AV14/13/10 vs AV13/11/10, trash movement because it's an infantry tank by doctrine and was supposedly heavily armored and very slow.
Land Raider: T9, W16, Sv2+, M10". Heavy-heavy tanks should be T9, Medium tanks should be T8, and light tanks T7. T9 would also make man-portable AT go boink more often, and make heavy tanks special for their heaviness and require big AT weapons to break open.
As for some other ideas:
Turreted tanks might ignore the move-fire penalty for their turret, assault guns might get +1 to hit or something for sitting still. +1 might be too much, maybe re-roll 1's or something.
Maybe it's because I don't see many screening units.
Hence, I'm more interested in seeing Wyches be a threat in and of themselves, rather than a counter to a niche unit.
A niche unit??? The most overpowered imperium lists are all about screeners. Guardsmen are the most effective screening unit in the game and probably the unit that should be hit the most along with knights. The nastiest imperial knights combos can be countered easily without screeners. Even orks use lots of screeners now. Chaos armies screen the superheroes as well. Eldar have them like many competitve drukhari lists since wracks serve no other purpose than mess deepstrikers or chargers as they have no shooting and very little cc ability (way worse than wyches). Competitive 40k in 8th edition is basically just a matter of bringing a few overpowered units that do the heavy work and screeners to protect them.
The problem with wyches is that they are already a threat against pretty much every infantry unit in the game but they cost too many points for that role. A squad of 10 that is equipped with 3 CC special weapons and an agoniser hitting on 2s with on offensive wych cult obsession (cursed blade or strife) and the drug (+1A or +1S) is already extremely deadly. Strife girls can even fight twice. I mean with the proper buffs 10 wyches can already kill a mob of 30 orks.
A 20pts cheaper squad of 10 and a 40pts cheaper squad of 20 could give them more appeal, and I think also blast pistols should drop to 5-7 points like plasma and fusion pistols.
Blackie wrote: A niche unit??? The most overpowered imperium lists are all about screeners.
I thought they were more about getting CPs from cheap units to fuel expensive ones.
Either way, I'm not saying that those lists don't exist, I'm saying that not everyone plays them.
I call them 'niche' because a) not every army has (or uses) screening units. And b) many Imperium players don't want to ally in guardsmen or such to act as screening units.
I'm guessing you see more of them if you go to tournaments, but playing at a club I really don't see them all that often.
The problem with wyches is that they are already a threat against pretty much every infantry unit in the game but they cost too many points for that role. A squad of 10 that is equipped with 3 CC special weapons and an agoniser hitting on 2s with on offensive wych cult obsession (cursed blade or strife) and the drug (+1A or +1S) is already extremely deadly. Strife girls can even fight twice. I mean with the proper buffs 10 wyches can already kill a mob of 30 orks.
A 20pts cheaper squad of 10 and a 40pts cheaper squad of 20 could give them more appeal, and I think also blast pistols should drop to 5-7 points like plasma and fusion pistols.
Do you think that transport costs will still cause issues? Or are you thinking that cheap Wyches will just forego transports altogether and footslog across the table?
The problem with wyches is that they are already a threat against pretty much every infantry unit in the game but they cost too many points for that role. A squad of 10 that is equipped with 3 CC special weapons and an agoniser hitting on 2s with on offensive wych cult obsession (cursed blade or strife) and the drug (+1A or +1S) is already extremely deadly. Strife girls can even fight twice. I mean with the proper buffs 10 wyches can already kill a mob of 30 orks.
A 20pts cheaper squad of 10 and a 40pts cheaper squad of 20 could give them more appeal, and I think also blast pistols should drop to 5-7 points like plasma and fusion pistols.
Do you think that transport costs will still cause issues? Or are you thinking that cheap Wyches will just forego transports altogether and footslog across the table?
No, the transport is already ok. It's actually just the raider, as wyches want to be 10ish or more to do something and raiders are very well costed IMHO. Their transport may also be invaluable to charge a unit before wyches in order to soak overwatch as it should tank very well low S low AP shots, which is what wyches should go after.
Alternatively the 20 man squad should work as well, in fact 10 wyches in a raider and 20 wyches on foot have exactly the same cost. If wyches become cheaper the max mob would be 20 points cheaper than the raider+10 wyches combo which makes sense as the vehicle has a natural invuln against shooting, a good weapon and better movement.
Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:At the same time, I think the statlines should change a bit too of the base vehicles:
Predator: T8, W12, Sv3+, M10". It should be a tank, not an APC with a turret and a light gun, the fact that the model is a APC with a turret and a light gun notwithstanding.
Vindicator: T8, W12, Sv2+, M10". 2+ for the siege shield.
Leman Russ: T8, W12, Sv2+, M6". 2+ for formerly being AV14/13/10 vs AV13/11/10, trash movement because it's an infantry tank by doctrine and was supposedly heavily armored and very slow.
Land Raider: T9, W16, Sv2+, M10". Heavy-heavy tanks should be T9, Medium tanks should be T8, and light tanks T7. T9 would also make man-portable AT go boink more often, and make heavy tanks special for their heaviness and require big AT weapons to break open.
.
So can my Monstrous Creatures which can pay similar points to land raiders and so on get T9? Would certainly help Tyrannofex, Tervigon and other giant 220 pt + monsters.
Also would love the same for Daemon Lords, maybe Nurgle T9 as it damn well should be and the rest T8. Close combat focused giant monsters really don't achieve much this edition with knights, amigers (WHY ARE THEY SO CHEAP?!) and a lot of super heavy weaponry so easily available and cover being basically non existent,
Chimera - Make it BS5+ (turret allows you to fire heavy weapons with no movement penalty) and lower toughness to 6 (open topped chimera go to toughness 5).
Idea is to then drop the cost by a fair amount and make the simple chimera light tank conversion a thing in white dwarf (moving the turret back, cut transport capacity to 6, BS4+, double shots if half move or less from the turreted weapon).
On a similar chimera bent the forgeworld turret chimera would become transport 10 to account for the extra ammo requirements.
Whilst they are not exactly underperforming, I would cancel the FAQ nerf on Canoptek Wraiths. Whilst FLY units probably did need the nerf, Wraiths should be able to move through terrain in all phases of the game including the fight phase. That is their entire gimmick and always has been
Cynista wrote: Whilst they are not exactly underperforming, I would cancel the FAQ nerf on Canoptek Wraiths. Whilst FLY units probably did need the nerf, Wraiths should be able to move through terrain in all phases of the game including the fight phase. That is their entire gimmick and always has been
Oh god where was that written? Jesus h keerist i wish they would stop letting people who hate necron players change the rules!
Oh, you probably meant this:
Page 215 – Sudden Death Change point 2 to read: ‘If at the end of any turn after the first battle round, one player has no models on the battle field, the game ends immediately and their opponent automatically wins a crushing victory. When determining if a player has any units on the battle field, do not include any units with the Flyer Battlefield Role – these units cannot operate within a combat airspace indefinitely and they cannot hold territory without ground support. Furthermore, do not include any units with the Fortification Battlefield Role unless they have a unit embarked inside – even the most formidable bastion requires a garrison if it is to pose a threat.’
Yeah, I was Ok with it, since wraiths are essentially robots I can see them hot really counting as a holding force, you need some real necrons units to hold or control ground. I'm ok with it.
As to an underperforming unit, the monolith is so pathetically under gunned I won;t use one. It's git these huge cannons sticking out of the corners that look som awesome, and it;s firepower is more like a bunch of "ZAP! flags sticking ou the barrels....
Meaning that the Wraith form rule is in line with the FLY keyword, they can only ignore terrain in the movement phase. But thematically it makes absolutely no sense.
Cynista wrote: No I meant this from the September Necron errata
Meaning that the Wraith form rule is in line with the FLY keyword, they can only ignore terrain in the movement phase. But thematically it makes absolutely no sense.
Ok. Hmm, well maybe the wraiths have to "phase in" to attack so they can't pass thru stuff, but you're right, that is a buttpain for trying to see why they can't advance thru stuff.
Still, wraiths are one of a necron army's better units.
Might have already been said earlier (didn't feel like reading the whole thread) but give Deathwing and all other Terminators a damage reduction ability. Like, "All damage taken by this model is reduced by 1 to a minimum of 1". This would mean Termies don't just get blinked out by overcharged Plasma or Autocannons, but weapons with flat 3 damage (like Armiger Helverins and Predators) will still be a good solution to them. And massed small arms will still work if you can get your opponent to roll some 1's for the Termies' saves.
ZergSmasher wrote: Might have already been said earlier (didn't feel like reading the whole thread) but give Deathwing and all other Terminators a damage reduction ability. Like, "All damage taken by this model is reduced by 1 to a minimum of 1". This would mean Termies don't just get blinked out by overcharged Plasma or Autocannons, but weapons with flat 3 damage (like Armiger Helverins and Predators) will still be a good solution to them. And massed small arms will still work if you can get your opponent to roll some 1's for the Termies' saves.
Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:At the same time, I think the statlines should change a bit too of the base vehicles:
Predator: T8, W12, Sv3+, M10". It should be a tank, not an APC with a turret and a light gun, the fact that the model is a APC with a turret and a light gun notwithstanding.
Vindicator: T8, W12, Sv2+, M10". 2+ for the siege shield.
Leman Russ: T8, W12, Sv2+, M6". 2+ for formerly being AV14/13/10 vs AV13/11/10, trash movement because it's an infantry tank by doctrine and was supposedly heavily armored and very slow.
Land Raider: T9, W16, Sv2+, M10". Heavy-heavy tanks should be T9, Medium tanks should be T8, and light tanks T7. T9 would also make man-portable AT go boink more often, and make heavy tanks special for their heaviness and require big AT weapons to break open.
.
So can my Monstrous Creatures which can pay similar points to land raiders and so on get T9? Would certainly help Tyrannofex, Tervigon and other giant 220 pt + monsters.
Also would love the same for Daemon Lords, maybe Nurgle T9 as it damn well should be and the rest T8. Close combat focused giant monsters really don't achieve much this edition with knights, amigers (WHY ARE THEY SO CHEAP?!) and a lot of super heavy weaponry so easily available and cover being basically non existent,
Sure, whatever, if it's appropriate to the monster's role.
I don't think Monster should have been a unit type separate from Vehicle. That said, I might go 6, 7, 8 for monster and walker toughness, since they're on an intrinsically inferior platform in terms of resilience and stability. A legged unit cannot carry as much armor [or as powerful a gun] and presents a less stable firing platform than a tracked vehicle, and with more/less robust moving parts is more prone to being crippled from damage, but it can cross terrain that a tracked vehicle would have to go around.
Give Land Raiders the hability (or a strat at least) to fall back and shoot with a -1 (keeping the POTMS)
Terminators ignore the -1 to hit with PF and TH the turn they charged (only if they charged). If people argue it's OP, make it so it's only on their first attack. That's quite decent. Also, 3-man Terminator units would be very cool!
It wouldn't be crazy to give most Infantry and Necron vehicles a 6++.
Gauss strat to have a +1 to W against vehicles and monsters. 1CP is okay for a single unit.
I'm a classic marine fanboy but recently have been doing some cool conversions with primaris. I'm building a BT "successor" chapter focused on Infantry and melee for officers and sergeants. I'd love to have more options when it comes to melee for them. I know it will eventualy come, but if they just let us make our conversions... Special weapons on regular squads isn't on the horizon so I guess we'll have to stick with the HB squads.
Personally I'd be real careful with introducing T9 stuff since quite a few armies are largely dependent on S8 anti-tank weapons. I feel like the buff tanks need are instead that they get to fire their main gun even if they're in CC (but not at the unit they're in combat with) or that they can fall back and fire at-1.
Can we please make plasma go back up in cost? Like did that weapon type really need to go down?
I think cultists should just lose the heretic astartes keyword and go back to 4ppm.
While I would love for some armies to be able to use bikers as troops I don't think it'll happen. What all bikers should get is the ability that when they complete a charge move, you roll a d6 for every biker in the unit. On every roll of 6 the charged unit suffers a mortal wounds (they get run over) Bikes should also all probably have the ability to fall back and either shoot or charge.
Terminators (and probably Custodes as well) should have the wounds from their multi-damage weapons spill over in CC. Meaning a thunder hammer smacks three cultists instead of just one.
Eihnlazer wrote: I'd give my Xiphons a 2+ save. They are atmospheric reentry capable craft. I'd think their armor was slightly more durable than regular power armor.
Thermal shielding doesn't mean it's inherently tougher. Look at the Space Shuttle, the thermal tiles aren't load bearing at all and are only a fraction of an inch thick. It can withstand atmospheric reentry but a piece of foam can shatter it.
PiñaColada wrote: Personally I'd be real careful with introducing T9 stuff since quite a few armies are largely dependent on S8 anti-tank weapons.
I think there's an issue with some invulns and some points costs which are too low. Just limit the invulns for T8 vehicles/walkers to the 5++, nothing better. A castellan that costs 850 points with a 5++ is still a nasty dude to deal (especially if part of the imperium soup with tons of other undercosted stuff, starting with the troops) with but nothing game breaking. Still cheaper and extremely more deadly than the stompa Which in fact should be 200ish points cheaper than a castellan. But at least they would be equally resilient.
T9 dudes would make the game even more focussed on anti tank, which is something I'd like to see more limited.
Wrydvane Psykers - Have the squad split into characters after deployment (like squadrons and lieutenants) and add the rule where their smites don't get more difficult. Modify the bonus rule to grant +1 to psychic rolls if within 6" of 5+ Wyrdvane Psykers.
Stormravens should just have a transport capacity of 20, with a [DREADNAUGHT] counting for 8.
Primaris transport segregation is stupid. I care a lot more about that on the Stormraven than anything else, but it's stupid all the way around.
Centurions really need at least one more wound if they're going to be so close to Dreads in price. Possibly two.
The Redemptor needs either a 5++ or a 5+++, whichever is worse. It's also frustrating that they pay 50% more for the Heavy Onslaught Gattling Cannon than IG does for the clearly superior Punisher Gattling Cannon, and the Punisher getting Grinding Advance is just rubbing salt in the wound. I'd trade the Onslaught and Heavy Onslaught for a Punisher and Assault Cannon without a second thought, even at the increased cost.
Aggressors should have the option to trade the Fragstorm Launcher for the Krakstorm Launcher. They don't even need to invent a statline for the darn thing, it already exists on the Repulsor. Also, there is no sane reason that the flamer version of the Aggressor shouldn't have access to the grenade launchers or that the bolter version shouldn't have the option to not take them, and the Flamestorm Gauntlet has no business costing more than the Boltstorm Gauntlet.
These are less minor tweaks:
Replace the Autobolter profile with the Fragstorm Launcher profile and bump the Stalker to S5. Adjust points as necessary. Make them different enough that the unit fills a different role if you switch to a different gun.
Edit: I'm on the fence about both of the alternate Plasma Incinerator profiles. The Heavy costs more than a Plasma Cannon and I don't feel like S8 really justifies being Heavy 1 instead of Heavy d3. AP 4 is something, but that would only close the gap if they had the same cost. I'm kind of on the fence about the Assault version as well. I'd say both variants need to come down 1 ppm, but I'd also say the Hellblaster needs to come down to the same price as an Intercessor.
I'll be that guy and say it: tear the bandaid off and just dump Tac Marines from the book already. We all know we'll have to convert them and all the other single-wound Marines to Primaris Something-or-Others eventually, just get it over with. I don't want to invest any conversion work into making my Tacs into Sternguard or Company Veterans while I'm sure those are going to go away too. (Does outright removing an option that isn't competitive count as a minor change?)
PiñaColada wrote: Personally I'd be real careful with introducing T9 stuff since quite a few armies are largely dependent on S8 anti-tank weapons. I feel like the buff tanks need are instead that they get to fire their main gun even if they're in CC (but not at the unit they're in combat with) or that they can fall back and fire at-1.
Can we please make plasma go back up in cost? Like did that weapon type really need to go down?
I think cultists should just lose the heretic astartes keyword and go back to 4ppm.
While I would love for some armies to be able to use bikers as troops I don't think it'll happen. What all bikers should get is the ability that when they complete a charge move, you roll a d6 for every biker in the unit. On every roll of 6 the charged unit suffers a mortal wounds (they get run over) Bikes should also all probably have the ability to fall back and either shoot or charge.
Terminators (and probably Custodes as well) should have the wounds from their multi-damage weapons spill over in CC. Meaning a thunder hammer smacks three cultists instead of just one.
Orks and Sisters, I think, and there's a solution to that too.
The reason I feel that tanks should go 7, 8, 9 rather than 7, 7, 8 is that there isn't really sufficient definition between the classes of tank and the weapons to engage them. There's some effective difference between S8 and S9, but no difference between S9 and S10+. I think they missed an opportunity to add useful detail to the way vehicles work and interact and definition between different vehicles by making them all pretty much T7-8 W10-12 Sv3+. Right now, tank resilience is largely the same across the board.
This might be a discussion for a different thread, but...
Light Tanks: T7 [Rhino, Razorback, Chimera, Manticore]
Medium Tanks: T8 [Leman Russ, Predator]
Heavy Tanks: T9 [Land Raider, Baneblade]
Walkers and Monsters at -1T to their class [legs are complex and less robust], Skimmers and Open Topped at -1Sv [less armor].
Meltaguns could be doubled strength at close range, which would better represent their previous role, and make them good for cracking open Heavy Tanks. Similarly, some single-shot high power AT weapons, like the Vanquisher Cannon and the Railgun, could have received escalated damage, because there's no reason it all should have been capped at D6 damage. 2d6, 3d3, etc wouldn't stray into Super-Heavy territory, since the Shadowsword has 3d3 shots for 2d6, several times the average and potential of a 2d6 Railgun or Vanquisher.
@ Inquisitor Lord Katherine: I think you're really on to something there. I especially like the Melta/Multimelta suggestion, but I shudder at what GW would charge for such a gun.
Edit: Although lethality is already a problem this edition and jumping some single-shot guns up to 2d6 or 3d3 would be the opposite of helping. I'd still give something for my Lascannons to be 2d3 instead of 1d6 though.
Baneblade Chassis Vehicles should have a 5++ save against ranged attacks, to hopefully let it stand up a little more against the Knights it's supposed to counter.
The Newman wrote: @ Inquisitor Lord Katherine: I think you're really on to something there. I especially like the Melta/Multimelta suggestion, but I shudder at what GW would charge for such a gun.
Edit: Although lethality is already a problem this edition and jumping some single-shot guns up to 2d6 or 3d3 would be the opposite of helping. I'd still give something for my Lascannons to be 2d3 instead of 1d6 though.
Not lascannons, but just the big single firing ones like the Vanquisher or the Railcannon. 2d6 vanq wouldn't have more potential than a annihilator, and tank killers need to be able to threaten tanks more than generalists and massed lighter weapons.
A rail gun or vanquisher should be better than 2 lascannons
The Newman wrote: @ Inquisitor Lord Katherine: I think you're really on to something there. I especially like the Melta/Multimelta suggestion, but I shudder at what GW would charge for such a gun.
Edit: Although lethality is already a problem this edition and jumping some single-shot guns up to 2d6 or 3d3 would be the opposite of helping. I'd still give something for my Lascannons to be 2d3 instead of 1d6 though.
Not lascannons, but just the big single firing ones like the Vanquisher or the Railcannon. 2d6 vanq wouldn't have more potential than a annihilator, and tank killers need to be able to threaten tanks more than generalists and massed lighter weapons.
A rail gun or vanquisher should be better than 2 lascannons
You do realize that 2d3 is only marginally better than 1d6 right? 2-6 averaging 4 vs 1-6 averaging 3.5? Slightly less prone to spikes/flubs? If 4d3 is better than a Rail Gun or Vanquisher then 2 Lascannons are already better than a Rail Gun or Vanquisher.
You do realize that 2d3 is only marginally better than 1d6 right? 2-6 averaging 4 vs 1-6 averaging 3.5? Slightly less prone to spikes/flubs? If 4d3 is better than a Rail Gun or Vanquisher then 2 Lascannons are already better than a Rail Gun or Vanquisher.
2D3 is way more reliable. You're almost always doing 3-4 damage, which is better than risking a 1-2. I like Executioner Canons on my russes over Battle Cannons for this reason, doing a flat 2 damage is better than risking rolling a 1.
You do realize that 2d3 is only marginally better than 1d6 right? 2-6 averaging 4 vs 1-6 averaging 3.5? Slightly less prone to spikes/flubs? If 4d3 is better than a Rail Gun or Vanquisher then 2 Lascannons are already better than a Rail Gun or Vanquisher.
2D3 is way more reliable. You're almost always doing 3-4 damage, which is better than risking a 1-2. I like Executioner Canons on my russes over Battle Cannons for this reason, doing a flat 2 damage is better than risking rolling a 1.
Well of course it's more reliable, that's why I want it on my Lascannon. What it isn't is much better turn after turn. You don't see as many 1-2, but you also don't see as many 5-6. It averages out.
The Newman wrote: @ Inquisitor Lord Katherine: I think you're really on to something there. I especially like the Melta/Multimelta suggestion, but I shudder at what GW would charge for such a gun.
Edit: Although lethality is already a problem this edition and jumping some single-shot guns up to 2d6 or 3d3 would be the opposite of helping. I'd still give something for my Lascannons to be 2d3 instead of 1d6 though.
Not lascannons, but just the big single firing ones like the Vanquisher or the Railcannon. 2d6 vanq wouldn't have more potential than a annihilator, and tank killers need to be able to threaten tanks more than generalists and massed lighter weapons.
A rail gun or vanquisher should be better than 2 lascannons
You do realize that 2d3 is only marginally better than 1d6 right? 2-6 averaging 4 vs 1-6 averaging 3.5? Slightly less prone to spikes/flubs? If 4d3 is better than a Rail Gun or Vanquisher then 2 Lascannons are already better than a Rail Gun or Vanquisher.
Huh?
I was opining that a railgun or vanquisher gun should deal something like double their current damage/shot, because they're supposed to be the weapon of choice for tank breaking over a pair of lascannons.
The Newman wrote: @ Inquisitor Lord Katherine: I think you're really on to something there. I especially like the Melta/Multimelta suggestion, but I shudder at what GW would charge for such a gun.
Edit: Although lethality is already a problem this edition and jumping some single-shot guns up to 2d6 or 3d3 would be the opposite of helping. I'd still give something for my Lascannons to be 2d3 instead of 1d6 though.
Not lascannons, but just the big single firing ones like the Vanquisher or the Railcannon. 2d6 vanq wouldn't have more potential than a annihilator, and tank killers need to be able to threaten tanks more than generalists and massed lighter weapons.
A rail gun or vanquisher should be better than 2 lascannons
You do realize that 2d3 is only marginally better than 1d6 right? 2-6 averaging 4 vs 1-6 averaging 3.5? Slightly less prone to spikes/flubs? If 4d3 is better than a Rail Gun or Vanquisher then 2 Lascannons are already better than a Rail Gun or Vanquisher.
Huh?
I was opining that a railgun or vanquisher gun should deal something like double their current damage/shot, because they're supposed to be the weapon of choice for tank breaking over a pair of lascannons.
I said Lascannons should get more reliable without dealing much more damage on average, and you said no they shouldn't get more reliable without dealing much more damage on average because two of them shouldn't be as good as you think a single Vanquisher or Rail Gun should be.
I responded that if 4d3 damage (two of my proposed 2d3 Lascannons) is better than what you think a single Vanquisher or Rail Gun should be, then your proposed change also isn't enough to make a single Vanquisher or Rail Gun better than two Lascannons are right now.
Rail weapons-the"extra mortal wound on 6" rule doesn't fit. its not a sniper, its a high impact cannon. give them these new profile instead
Rail rifle: 30" rapidfire1 S8 Ap-4 Dd3
Heavy Rail Rifle: 60" Heavy2 S10 Ap-4 Dd6
Railgun: 72" Heavy1 S14 Ap-4 D2d6
Supremacy railgun: 72" Heavy2 S14 Ap-4 D2d6
Because we are past the age of max S10. and even with these profiles I'm not sure they are good enough.
On the FW side, tetra speeders are currently non-functional, and easy to fix:
1-give them an ability to ignore penalties to BS shooting heavy weapons when moving. (so it can actually move and shoot as its supposed to do.)
2-replace the high-intensity markerlight with a simple 3-shot markerlight. (so its not all-or-nothing.)
Just been thinking about some of the options for Knights and while they're not bad at all, these changes are more to do with toning them down a bit, making them a bit easier to play against.
House Raven Change to "Heavy Weapons count as Assault when Advancing, but keep the -1 penalty when firing"
Knight Paladin Battle Cannon changes to 3D6 shots, but D2. Very underwhelming at the moment for a 100pt weapon.
Order of Companions Reduce to 2CP (hear me out before you get your pitchforks), but the re-roll effect only affects one type of dice roll:
"Use this Strategem when you select a unit to fire. Nominate either hit, wound or damage rolls. For the remainder of that phase the selected unit can re-roll all failed rolls of the chosen type".
This changes it from a "Spend 3CP and delete everything" strategy to a more tactical one. My Knight's pretty damaged and is only BS5? Use it to re-roll your misses. My Avenger Cannon needs to take out that Russ but it's only S6? Use it to re-roll wounds, etc.
Armigers An option for Heavy Flamers on the carapace would be nice.
Titanic Feet Make it D3 rolls per attack rather than a set 3.
Which in fact should be 200ish points cheaper than a castellan. But at least they would be equally resilient.