Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/20 22:46:40


Post by: _SeeD_


You know, diamantine tip and everything...
Seems kind of lame that the difference between them and a lasgun is 1 str.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/21 08:03:06


Post by: Wyldhunt


Wouldn't be the end of the world, and it would bring us one step closer to rolling primaris and firstborn together. On the other hand, the game is too lethal already. I'd be more inclined to take away the extra point of AP they've been handing out rather than putting it on more weapons.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/21 08:04:54


Post by: AnomanderRake


Yes. More buffs. More stat creep. I see nothing wrong with this.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/21 08:24:32


Post by: Blackie


Absolutely not.

In fact they shouldn't even have AP-1 for 1-2 turns as bolter discipline shouldn't exist and intercessors should have AP0 like regular bolter guys.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/21 08:42:09


Post by: WisdomLS


The AP inflation in the game in 9th is a big problem, it has led to armour saves being a bit pointless and units being considered useless if they don't have an invulnerable save.
This has led to over half the factions in the game having access to army wide invuln saves.

The Ap and armour system is really good and works great if you stick to it, GW have not and thus it has become pointless.
Removing one of the best lethality/durability levers from their game design has led to the proliferation of rubbish non interactive rules like invuls, transhuman and neg 1 damage.

The AP chart should be something like this:
AP:0 All standard weapons
AP:1 Weapons particularly noted as having armour beating properties.
AP:2 Anti-tank weapons
AP:3 Very good anti-tank weapons, noted to melt infantry.
AP:4 Extraordinarily powerful weapons that can fully bypass more or less any armour.
AP:5 Magic stuff!


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/21 08:54:50


Post by: Duskweaver


 WisdomLS wrote:
AP:1 Weapons particularly noted as having armour beating properties.

So... that would include bolters, then.

Those of us who have been around since 2nd edition know regular bolters originally did have AP -1. They're mini-RPG guns, not mere battle rifles.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/21 09:36:59


Post by: Blackie


 Duskweaver wrote:
 WisdomLS wrote:
AP:1 Weapons particularly noted as having armour beating properties.

So... that would include bolters, then.

Those of us who have been around since 2nd edition know regular bolters originally did have AP -1. They're mini-RPG guns, not mere battle rifles.


Ap-1 is fair on anti elite weapons such as heavy bolters, not regular bolters. The former AP4 weapons. Regular bolters were meant to deal with units like ork boyz, kabalite warriors, termagaunts, cultists, etc... bypassing only the worst saves, not the mid armours with 4+ or 5+ saves. With AP-1 they become good against 3+ or 4+ armours which is silly. Anything that carries a bolter would need a price hike then.

Old rapid fire weapons had also some limitations that have been removed, like fire or assault or fire with max shots without moving or fire one shot after moving. And current SM bolters already have AP-1 for 1 or 2 turns.

Ork S5 classic ranged weapons for example don't even have a single pip of AP, unless relying on speedwaaagh which only works on vehicles, for 2 turns and requires a tax HQ.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/21 09:48:17


Post by: WisdomLS


 Duskweaver wrote:
 WisdomLS wrote:
AP:1 Weapons particularly noted as having armour beating properties.

So... that would include bolters, then.

Those of us who have been around since 2nd edition know regular bolters originally did have AP -1. They're mini-RPG guns, not mere battle rifles.


The condescending "I've been playing for longer than you" argument doesn't really work on those of us who still have our original Rogue Trader rulebook

Boltguns are basic weapons and for the AP system to work properly all basic weapons should have zero AP, otherwise what is the point of paying for armour. Comparing back to very old editions is a spurious argument as the system, whilst similar at a casual glace was actually quite different. Boltguns may have had AP-1 but lascannons had -6, there was a far greater scale due to the fact the models could take armour and invuln saves plus the fact that the best armour saved on a total of 2D6.

There needs to be less AP across the board, the basic weapon stats are ok but all the rules that add to it push it over the top - just look at vehicles without invulnerable saves - the are nearly all considered trash as they will just die to the weapons that are out there.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/21 13:41:29


Post by: Duskweaver


Blackie wrote:Ap-1 is fair on anti elite weapons such as heavy bolters, not regular bolters.

In the fluff, regular bolters are "anti-elite" weapons, though. They are the primary weapon used by space marines when shooting at other space marines. In the novels, space marines in full power armour are fairly regularly taken out by single bolter shots. Not like lasguns or autoguns where you empty an entire clip into the marine's helmet and pray you get a lucky shot through an eye-lens.

I should clarify that I'm talking from a 'pure fluff' perspective (and playing Devil's advocate a bit as well). I actually am not in favour of adding even more AP-1 weapons to the game, for balance / game design reasons. But from a 'pure fluff' perspective there are probably a lot of weapons that 'should' have different stats. If 40K was just a simulation of the fluff, then bolters would definitely be AP-1 (at least). But it isn't a simulation, it's a system that has to function as a fun and playable game, so it's OK that they don't have that AP.

WisdomLS wrote:The condescending "I've been playing for longer than you" argument doesn't really work on those of us who still have our original Rogue Trader rulebook

They were -1AP in RT as well, though, weren't they?

Anyway, I didn't intend to come across as condescending.

There needs to be less AP across the board, the basic weapon stats are ok but all the rules that add to it push it over the top - just look at vehicles without invulnerable saves - the are nearly all considered trash as they will just die to the weapons that are out there.

One of these days, I'm going to try allowing vehicles and monsters to roll their saves on 2D6 like Terminators used to do, and see if that fixes anything.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/21 13:54:42


Post by: A Town Called Malus


 Duskweaver wrote:

In the fluff, regular bolters are "anti-elite" weapons, though. They are the primary weapon used by space marines when shooting at other space marines. In the novels, space marines in full power armour are fairly regularly taken out by single bolter shots.


They also fairly regularly run through hails of bolter shots without getting so much as a scratch despite not wearing a helmet.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/21 13:59:16


Post by: Not Online!!!


 A Town Called Malus wrote:
 Duskweaver wrote:

In the fluff, regular bolters are "anti-elite" weapons, though. They are the primary weapon used by space marines when shooting at other space marines. In the novels, space marines in full power armour are fairly regularly taken out by single bolter shots.


They also fairly regularly run through hails of bolter shots without getting so much as a scratch despite not wearing a helmet.


Weren't bolters also created against Orks, a typically tough but only lackluster armoured species?



Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/21 14:07:10


Post by: Blackie


 Duskweaver wrote:

In the fluff, regular bolters are "anti-elite" weapons, though. They are the primary weapon used by space marines when shooting at other space marines. In the novels, space marines in full power armour are fairly regularly taken out by single bolter shots. Not like lasguns or autoguns where you empty an entire clip into the marine's helmet and pray you get a lucky shot through an eye-lens.



In the fluff space marines are also extremely rare, super skilled and tanky, capable of killing several enemies on their own. They should be 40-60 ppm instead of 18-20 if they truly reflect their lore. Then someone could argue in favor of flat AP-1 on bolters.

The game has to make some compromise between lore, fun in listbuilding/collecting the army and balance. I don't think many SM players would love 2000 points armies of 20-30 dudes in power armour.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Duskweaver wrote:

One of these days, I'm going to try allowing vehicles and monsters to roll their saves on 2D6 like Terminators used to do, and see if that fixes anything.


What's to be fixed on terminators? GW already fixed them by giving them 3W. 2D6 saves on top of 3W and maybe even the stormshield bonus sounds crazy. Then you need to cost them at 70-80ppm.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/21 14:11:59


Post by: A Town Called Malus


 Blackie wrote:
 Duskweaver wrote:

In the fluff, regular bolters are "anti-elite" weapons, though. They are the primary weapon used by space marines when shooting at other space marines. In the novels, space marines in full power armour are fairly regularly taken out by single bolter shots. Not like lasguns or autoguns where you empty an entire clip into the marine's helmet and pray you get a lucky shot through an eye-lens.



In the fluff space marines are also extremely rare, super skilled and tanky, capable of killing several enemies on their own. They should be 40-60 ppm instead of 18-20 if they truly reflect their lore. Then someone could argue in favor of flat AP-1 on bolters.

The game has to make some compromise between lore, fun in listbuilding/collecting the army and balance. I don't think many SM players would love 2000 points armies of 20-30 dudes in power armour.


Before the battle, both players roll a d6. If both players don't roll a 6 then the request for Space Marine aid is lost in the bureaucratic nightmare of the Imperium and the Space Marine player may not deploy. The non Space Marine player wins the battle. If both players roll a 6 then the request for Space Marine aid is passed to the Marine chapter leadership. The space marine player now rolls a d6, on a 1-5 they are not able to commit their very limited forces to this theatre of war at this time and the non space marine player wins. On a 6 the game is played as normal.

Got to be true to the lore, after all.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/21 18:50:55


Post by: _SeeD_


I think the standard 4 str 0 ap is a relic of past editions.
The game is being granularized and I don't think this is asking too much
as long as it is reflected in the point cost.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 WisdomLS wrote:
The AP inflation in the game in 9th is a big problem, it has led to armour saves being a bit pointless and units being considered useless if they don't have an invulnerable save.
This has led to over half the factions in the game having access to army wide invuln saves.

The Ap and armour system is really good and works great if you stick to it, GW have not and thus it has become pointless.
Removing one of the best lethality/durability levers from their game design has led to the proliferation of rubbish non interactive rules like invuls, transhuman and neg 1 damage.

The AP chart should be something like this:
AP:0 All standard weapons
AP:1 Weapons particularly noted as having armour beating properties.
AP:2 Anti-tank weapons
AP:3 Very good anti-tank weapons, noted to melt infantry.
AP:4 Extraordinarily powerful weapons that can fully bypass more or less any armour.
AP:5 Magic stuff!


This is my favorite take so far.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/21 21:08:27


Post by: Insectum7


 Duskweaver wrote:
 WisdomLS wrote:
AP:1 Weapons particularly noted as having armour beating properties.

So... that would include bolters, then.

Those of us who have been around since 2nd edition know regular bolters originally did have AP -1. They're mini-RPG guns, not mere battle rifles.

Yeah, but Lasguns ALSO had AP -1.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/21 21:09:50


Post by: JNAProductions


You know Bolters are standard weapons, right? So they’d be AP0?


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/21 21:24:13


Post by: Hellebore


 Insectum7 wrote:
 Duskweaver wrote:
 WisdomLS wrote:
AP:1 Weapons particularly noted as having armour beating properties.

So... that would include bolters, then.

Those of us who have been around since 2nd edition know regular bolters originally did have AP -1. They're mini-RPG guns, not mere battle rifles.

Yeah, but Lasguns ALSO had AP -1.



+1 was going to say. And shuriken catapults were -2 standard.


When I rewrote 8th, I created a set of rules that governed ap rather than Having it as a weapon stat. It went:

Anti infantry (-1)
Anti materiel (-2)
Anti tank (-3)

These were only applied to special and heavy weapons, all basic rifles were ap0.

-4 would only appear on magic or titanic weapons.



Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/21 21:34:44


Post by: _SeeD_


 JNAProductions wrote:
You know Bolters are standard weapons, right? So they’d be AP0?

The Divine Bolter of the Emperor of Mankind
granted only to his most ardent warriors

is NOT a standard weapon.
Stop it.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/21 22:12:01


Post by: Insectum7


 _SeeD_ wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
You know Bolters are standard weapons, right? So they’d be AP0?

The Divine Bolter of the Emperor of Mankind
granted only to his most ardent warriors

is NOT a standard weapon.
Stop it.
So how about Shuriken Catapults and Tau Pulse Rifles? After all, those also had AP 5 back in the 3-7th paradigm.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/21 22:13:26


Post by: JNAProductions


 _SeeD_ wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
You know Bolters are standard weapons, right? So they’d be AP0?

The Divine Bolter of the Emperor of Mankind
granted only to his most ardent warriors

is NOT a standard weapon.
Stop it.
So what are hyper advanced weapons capable of stripping a target to nothing, atom by atom?
What are monomolecular shuriken launchers?
What are specially designed toxins, able to melt through flesh like a hot knife through butter and fired at massive speed?

The baseline unit in 40k is the Marine. The baseline ranged weapon is a bolter.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/21 22:21:18


Post by: _SeeD_


 JNAProductions wrote:
 _SeeD_ wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
You know Bolters are standard weapons, right? So they’d be AP0?

The Divine Bolter of the Emperor of Mankind
granted only to his most ardent warriors

is NOT a standard weapon.
Stop it.
So what are hyper advanced weapons capable of stripping a target to nothing, atom by atom?
What are monomolecular shuriken launchers?
What are specially designed toxins, able to melt through flesh like a hot knife through butter and fired at massive speed?

The baseline unit in 40k is the Marine. The baseline ranged weapon is a bolter.


I'm taking this comment back.
This point is actually pretty good.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/22 04:41:33


Post by: Wyldhunt


For me, it boils down to this:

Mechanically, AP-1 bolters are doable and balancable, but they would also result in an increased lethality in a game that many feel is already too lethal.

In terms of lore, having a diamond-hard armor piercing tip and a rocket booster, impressive as it sounds, probably isn't all that impressive compared to some of the other "basic" weapons in the game. So if a pointy tip and a rocket booster is worth AP-1, how much more should shuriken and gauss tech be worth?

(And a game where gauss and shurikens are AP-2 default does a lot to make marines seem squishier and thus fail to live up to their hyper-durable shtick. It also probably makes marine players cranky.)


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/22 14:48:40


Post by: Grimskul


Wyldhunt wrote:
For me, it boils down to this:

Mechanically, AP-1 bolters are doable and balancable, but they would also result in an increased lethality in a game that many feel is already too lethal.

In terms of lore, having a diamond-hard armor piercing tip and a rocket booster, impressive as it sounds, probably isn't all that impressive compared to some of the other "basic" weapons in the game. So if a pointy tip and a rocket booster is worth AP-1, how much more should shuriken and gauss tech be worth?

(And a game where gauss and shurikens are AP-2 default does a lot to make marines seem squishier and thus fail to live up to their hyper-durable shtick. It also probably makes marine players cranky.)


I feel like this is a case of marine players wanting to have their cake and eat it too. They simultaneously want to be super tanky (somewhat understandbly) but then want a way to bypass some of that tankiness with killiness in their guns. But then forget this isn't HH and they don't live in some marine-only vaccuum and that there's other races who have as much, if not more basis behind having better AP than bolters but conveniently forget them. I feel like Tactical Doctrine is more than capable of showing the extra AP they can get and it's ridiculous enough already with the high AP weaponry floating around in the game.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/22 15:02:53


Post by: _SeeD_


 Grimskul wrote:
Wyldhunt wrote:
For me, it boils down to this:

Mechanically, AP-1 bolters are doable and balancable, but they would also result in an increased lethality in a game that many feel is already too lethal.

In terms of lore, having a diamond-hard armor piercing tip and a rocket booster, impressive as it sounds, probably isn't all that impressive compared to some of the other "basic" weapons in the game. So if a pointy tip and a rocket booster is worth AP-1, how much more should shuriken and gauss tech be worth?

(And a game where gauss and shurikens are AP-2 default does a lot to make marines seem squishier and thus fail to live up to their hyper-durable shtick. It also probably makes marine players cranky.)


I feel like this is a case of marine players wanting to have their cake and eat it too.


That's not it. I want the rules to reflect the lore as best as possible, AS LONG AS IT IS REFLECTED IN THE POINT COST (so important, stop judging me like that).
I retracted the opinion because balancing similarly lethal AP0 weapons across factions makes it not feasible.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/22 15:12:04


Post by: Mr Morden


Its not just Marines who use Bolters.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/22 16:27:50


Post by: Grimskul


 _SeeD_ wrote:
 Grimskul wrote:
Wyldhunt wrote:
For me, it boils down to this:

Mechanically, AP-1 bolters are doable and balancable, but they would also result in an increased lethality in a game that many feel is already too lethal.

In terms of lore, having a diamond-hard armor piercing tip and a rocket booster, impressive as it sounds, probably isn't all that impressive compared to some of the other "basic" weapons in the game. So if a pointy tip and a rocket booster is worth AP-1, how much more should shuriken and gauss tech be worth?

(And a game where gauss and shurikens are AP-2 default does a lot to make marines seem squishier and thus fail to live up to their hyper-durable shtick. It also probably makes marine players cranky.)


I feel like this is a case of marine players wanting to have their cake and eat it too.


That's not it. I want the rules to reflect the lore as best as possible, AS LONG AS IT IS REFLECTED IN THE POINT COST (so important, stop judging me like that).
I retracted the opinion because balancing similarly lethal AP0 weapons across factions makes it not feasible.


I think it's easy for people to forget that when we're playing games of this scale that you will need a level of abstraction for weaponry even if it seems strong on an individual level. If it was a squad based game like Kill Team, then I think it's fine to go into the details of bolter weaponry and how its superior to things like lasguns. However, when you have stuff varying from dinky grot blastas to titan-killing Volcannon Cannons, using a D6 dice basis to show that granularity, you're bound to lose a lot of that nuance.

Basically, if you want lore-accurate feel for SM and all their weapons, I suggest playing something like the Deathwatch RPG or Kill Team.






Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Mr Morden wrote:
Its not just Marines who use Bolters.


Yeah, but you could argue that the bolters used by SoB and IG are usually smaller scale Godwyn-De'az Pattern pattern bolters, so they should be lower in stats rather than equivalent to Astartes level bolters (just like how Astartes Shotguns got a boost in stats compared to the ones used by IG). I'm pretty sure most sisters players wouldn't be happy to have weaker bolters than SM given that you already miss out on bolter discipline.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/22 18:01:44


Post by: A Town Called Malus


 _SeeD_ wrote:


That's not it. I want the rules to reflect the lore as best as possible, AS LONG AS IT IS REFLECTED IN THE POINT COST (so important, stop judging me like that).
I retracted the opinion because balancing similarly lethal AP0 weapons across factions makes it not feasible.


Is that the lore where marines are killed by single bolter shots or the lore where marines run through hails of bolter fire unharmed? Because both exist.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/22 18:05:01


Post by: _SeeD_


 A Town Called Malus wrote:
 _SeeD_ wrote:


That's not it. I want the rules to reflect the lore as best as possible, AS LONG AS IT IS REFLECTED IN THE POINT COST (so important, stop judging me like that).
I retracted the opinion because balancing similarly lethal AP0 weapons across factions makes it not feasible.


Is that the lore where marines are killed by single bolter shots or the lore where marines run through hails of bolter fire unharmed? Because both exist.



...this conversation is over.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/22 18:17:47


Post by: JNAProductions


 _SeeD_ wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
 _SeeD_ wrote:


That's not it. I want the rules to reflect the lore as best as possible, AS LONG AS IT IS REFLECTED IN THE POINT COST (so important, stop judging me like that).
I retracted the opinion because balancing similarly lethal AP0 weapons across factions makes it not feasible.


Is that the lore where marines are killed by single bolter shots or the lore where marines run through hails of bolter fire unharmed? Because both exist.



...this conversation is over.
Why? Malus has a point-the lore is inconsistent. Extremely so.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/22 18:22:08


Post by: _SeeD_


 JNAProductions wrote:
 _SeeD_ wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
 _SeeD_ wrote:


That's not it. I want the rules to reflect the lore as best as possible, AS LONG AS IT IS REFLECTED IN THE POINT COST (so important, stop judging me like that).
I retracted the opinion because balancing similarly lethal AP0 weapons across factions makes it not feasible.


Is that the lore where marines are killed by single bolter shots or the lore where marines run through hails of bolter fire unharmed? Because both exist.



...this conversation is over.
Why? Malus has a point-the lore is inconsistent. Extremely so.


Simply put, because I don't care anymore.
My immediate thought was "I don't f--king know. Pick a spot"
I'm not trying to dive into this.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'd like to make an apology for the aggressiveness.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/22 23:00:00


Post by: RustyNumber


Bolters should be AP -1. They're supposed to be the elitest and bestest, why only give them super-flashlights? (I'm ONLY talking about the feel of the weapon and army compared to others, not any consideration how it fits into the current gameplay environment. As weapons used by the Super Humans Bestest Cool Bros Bolters feel like they should have basic AP.)

But then again all SMs should be powered up and costed appropriately, it has always been ridiculous how the SUPER MEGA ULTRA WARRIORS are deployed en masse on the tt like they're Imperial Guard+. But then GW does like money and selling lots of models, so would never make them play like custodes.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/24 06:20:37


Post by: Insectum7


^Reading all the bolter-porn has made you go blind.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/24 08:43:53


Post by: Manchild 1984


just play Thousand Sons maybe


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/25 07:40:28


Post by: Blackie


Bolters at AP-1 would be OP assuming units that carry those keep the same points cost. But then they'd be overpriced, to the point that no one would bring them anyway .

Jumping from AP0 and AP-1 is a big deal, not easy to balance, especially on weapons that can be spammed. Flat AP0 and AP-1 for 1-2 for SM seems very appropriate to me.

And to be honest considering how many units in the game are equipped with bolters I'd argue that the weapon is the probably the most common one in the entire 40k universe.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/25 10:55:56


Post by: Manchild 1984


 Blackie wrote:
Bolters at AP-1 would be OP assuming units that carry those keep the same points cost. But then they'd be overpriced, to the point that no one would bring them anyway .

Jumping from AP0 and AP-1 is a big deal, not easy to balance, especially on weapons that can be spammed. Flat AP0 and AP-1 for 1-2 for SM seems very appropriate to me.

And to be honest considering how many units in the game are equipped with bolters I'd argue that the weapon is the probably the most common one in the entire 40k universe.


Astartes are overrepresented in the hobby compared to Lore. There Should be more Grey Knights then Astartes I think.

The IG Flashlight might be more common then the Bolter.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/25 11:00:51


Post by: The Deer Hunter


Maybe give to bolters a -1AP on a 6 to wound.

It is in between 0AP and -1AP.
And it is that granularity that most are searching in a D6 system


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/25 12:01:23


Post by: Blackie


 Manchild 1984 wrote:
 Blackie wrote:
Bolters at AP-1 would be OP assuming units that carry those keep the same points cost. But then they'd be overpriced, to the point that no one would bring them anyway .

Jumping from AP0 and AP-1 is a big deal, not easy to balance, especially on weapons that can be spammed. Flat AP0 and AP-1 for 1-2 for SM seems very appropriate to me.

And to be honest considering how many units in the game are equipped with bolters I'd argue that the weapon is the probably the most common one in the entire 40k universe.


Astartes are overrepresented in the hobby compared to Lore. There Should be more Grey Knights then Astartes I think.

The IG Flashlight might be more common then the Bolter.


It's not just astartes and grey knights. Sororitas and chaos SM use bolters too.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/25 15:12:18


Post by: Irbis


 Insectum7 wrote:
^Reading all the bolter-porn has made you go blind.

Gee, what a brilliant reply. Totally not childish ad-personam devoid of any argument or semblance of thought

Maybe if you read anything but straw porn, whatever that is, you'd notice all the laughably and brokenly inflated xeno guns. AP -1 bolters would be problematic in Index era. Now, that we have orkstodes, all the comically OP Tau/Eldar/DE guns, and a lot of xeno infantry buffed from GEQ stats to about MEQ? Giving bolter S5 AP-2 and rapid fire 2 would be just bringing it to parity to some of the above gak - which is sad, the inflation should never have happened to begin with.

The fact the bolter is now less effective against orks than a lasgun is beyond idiotic and a proof how much constant stat and damage pumping (to be fair, SM are also guilty of it with stupid W2 buff to squats) broke the game and fluff into pieces.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/25 15:26:29


Post by: thegreatchimp


Lorewise, they'd probably be S5 -2 save. But neither marines, power armour or bolters have ever been close to their power in the lore. Keeping with practical stats for the gam, S4 -1 was appropriate.

They consistently had armour piercing properties until 8th. They were of course only really debuffed, because the primaris bolt rifles had to be superior.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/25 16:09:33


Post by: JNAProductions


 Irbis wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^Reading all the bolter-porn has made you go blind.

Gee, what a brilliant reply. Totally not childish ad-personam devoid of any argument or semblance of thought

Maybe if you read anything but straw porn, whatever that is, you'd notice all the laughably and brokenly inflated xeno guns. AP -1 bolters would be problematic in Index era. Now, that we have orkstodes, all the comically OP Tau/Eldar/DE guns, and a lot of xeno infantry buffed from GEQ stats to about MEQ? Giving bolter S5 AP-2 and rapid fire 2 would be just bringing it to parity to some of the above gak - which is sad, the inflation should never have happened to begin with.

The fact the bolter is now less effective against orks than a lasgun is beyond idiotic and a proof how much constant stat and damage pumping (to be fair, SM are also guilty of it with stupid W2 buff to squats) broke the game and fluff into pieces.
It takes 4.5 to 5.4 shots from a Tac Marine with a Bolter, with no outside buffs, to kill an Ork Boy outside of cover. The difference in numbers depends on whether or not Tactical Doctrine is active.
It takes 7.2 Lasgun shots from a Guardsman to kill an Ork Boy outside of cover.

Notice how the Marine is, shot per shot, more effective. They might be less points-efficient but they are better on a model-to-model basis.

Also, S5 AP-2 RF2? Really? That'd let four squads of Tactical Marines (max-sized, but still) kill a Knight in one volley.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/25 18:16:50


Post by: alextroy


Remove Space Marine Doctrines. Give Astartes Boltguns and Bolt Pistols AP -1. Call it a day.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/26 07:35:45


Post by: Blackie


Ironically SM already have troops with S5 AP-1 (and AP-2 for 1-2 turns) and 36'' range bolters. Can switch their weapons to S5 AP-2 (and AP-3 for one turn) and D2 or D3 42'' range heavy bolters. They also have T5 and 3W.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 alextroy wrote:
Remove Space Marine Doctrines. Give Astartes Boltguns and Bolt Pistols AP -1. Call it a day.


No AP bonus for heavy and melee weapons then?


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/26 15:32:36


Post by: alextroy


 Blackie wrote:
Ironically SM already have troops with S5 AP-1 (and AP-2 for 1-2 turns) and 36'' range bolters. Can switch their weapons to S5 AP-2 (and AP-3 for one turn) and D2 or D3 42'' range heavy bolters. They also have T5 and 3W.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 alextroy wrote:
Remove Space Marine Doctrines. Give Astartes Boltguns and Bolt Pistols AP -1. Call it a day.


No AP bonus for heavy and melee weapons then?
Correct. Astartes Chainswords already have their AP -1 and it wouldn't be bad to add AP -1 to their other AP 0 melee weapons, but otherwise their non-basic weapons are fine. Astartes are famous for their bolter fire, not for being extra good with Plasmaguns.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/26 15:47:21


Post by: _SeeD_


Killing things with AP0 is abysmally bad. You can't kill anything except really weak units.
I run 10 terminators and I will often advance instead of firing at something I know I'll only do like 5 or less wounds to.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/26 17:00:29


Post by: Kall3m0n


 RustyNumber wrote:
Bolters should be AP -1. They're supposed to be the elitest and bestest, why only give them super-flashlights? (I'm ONLY talking about the feel of the weapon and army compared to others, not any consideration how it fits into the current gameplay environment. As weapons used by the Super Humans Bestest Cool Bros Bolters feel like they should have basic AP.)

But then again all SMs should be powered up and costed appropriately, it has always been ridiculous how the SUPER MEGA ULTRA WARRIORS are deployed en masse on the tt like they're Imperial Guard+. But then GW does like money and selling lots of models, so would never make them play like custodes.


No, bolters are NOT supposed to be the elitest and bestest. Lascannons are far more elitist and bestest. And heavy bolters. And 100+ other weapons.

That's because if you would play this game like the fluff, A Custode model should have 1+ save, 1+ inv, 1+ FNP, 20 attacks and so on.
So, ask yourself if you'd rather play the game the way that makes it fun, or do you want to play it true to the fluff?
Plus, if you choose the fluff, then you need to decide exactöy what fluff to be true to.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/27 00:52:28


Post by: RustyNumber


 Kall3m0n wrote:

No, bolters are NOT supposed to be the elitest and bestest. Lascannons are far more elitist and bestest. And heavy bolters. And 100+ other weapons.

That's because if you would play this game like the fluff, A Custode model should have 1+ save, 1+ inv, 1+ FNP, 20 attacks and so on.
So, ask yourself if you'd rather play the game the way that makes it fun, or do you want to play it true to the fluff?
Plus, if you choose the fluff, then you need to decide exactöy what fluff to be true to.


Don't be ridiculous and strawman, we're talking about comparing standard issue anti-infantry weapons.

Yes, there needs to be a meeting point between fluff and tabletop. I'd LOVE to see SM play more like Custodes or Grey Knights, instead of Super Imperial Guard. But as it stands having the ultra special forces that fire essentially exploding 50cal rounds with bootiful diamondanium tips not have basic AP feels naff. That's my angle of discussion, disregarding whether the entire game system has slowly crept to a point where that would be OP or whatever.

The point about needing to make Primaris ULTRA SPECIAL is also a good one. Shame GW went Primaris instead of the more obvious "eh, SMs are truescale now, we'll gradually roll out updated models also rules that make them tougher on the tt like they ought to be.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/27 02:03:47


Post by: Kall3m0n


 RustyNumber wrote:
 Kall3m0n wrote:

No, bolters are NOT supposed to be the elitest and bestest. Lascannons are far more elitist and bestest. And heavy bolters. And 100+ other weapons.

That's because if you would play this game like the fluff, A Custode model should have 1+ save, 1+ inv, 1+ FNP, 20 attacks and so on.
So, ask yourself if you'd rather play the game the way that makes it fun, or do you want to play it true to the fluff?
Plus, if you choose the fluff, then you need to decide exactöy what fluff to be true to.


Don't be ridiculous and strawman, we're talking about comparing standard issue anti-infantry weapons.

Yes, there needs to be a meeting point between fluff and tabletop. I'd LOVE to see SM play more like Custodes or Grey Knights, instead of Super Imperial Guard. But as it stands having the ultra special forces that fire essentially exploding 50cal rounds with bootiful diamondanium tips not have basic AP feels naff. That's my angle of discussion, disregarding whether the entire game system has slowly crept to a point where that would be OP or whatever.

The point about needing to make Primaris ULTRA SPECIAL is also a good one. Shame GW went Primaris instead of the more obvious "eh, SMs are truescale now, we'll gradually roll out updated models also rules that make them tougher on the tt like they ought to be.


So, if SM are Custodes, what should custodes be like? Knights?
Marines are fine as they are when it comes to actually playing the game.Them having AP would be silly in the system as it stands now. If we went back to the old AP system, they would be AP4. In the current system, they'd have to remove bolter drill or rapid fire.

I DO agree on the point of the nu-marines.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/29 19:59:06


Post by: Insectum7


 Irbis wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^Reading all the bolter-porn has made you go blind.

Gee, what a brilliant reply. Totally not childish ad-personam devoid of any argument or semblance of thought

Maybe if you read anything but straw porn, whatever that is, you'd notice all the laughably and brokenly inflated xeno guns. AP -1 bolters would be problematic in Index era. Now, that we have orkstodes, all the comically OP Tau/Eldar/DE guns, and a lot of xeno infantry buffed from GEQ stats to about MEQ? Giving bolter S5 AP-2 and rapid fire 2 would be just bringing it to parity to some of the above gak - which is sad, the inflation should never have happened to begin with.

The fact the bolter is now less effective against orks than a lasgun is beyond idiotic and a proof how much constant stat and damage pumping (to be fair, SM are also guilty of it with stupid W2 buff to squats) broke the game and fluff into pieces.
No, it's just proof that the previous to-wound chart was superior.

And if you want Bolters to be S5 AP-2 RF2, where would you put Pulse Rifles, Shuriken Catapults and Gauss Rifles/Blasters?

Be careful how you answer, lest my quote above apply


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/29 20:22:39


Post by: Manchild 1984


Bolter > Railgun imo


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/30 07:44:56


Post by: Blackie


Problem with AP-1 bolters is that lethality is already too high and other weapons will be updated shortly after them, becoming more lethal themselves.

AP-1 on the crappiest army weapon seems inappropriate when my orks are AP0 even on their heavy bolters equivalents and the most common anti tank weapon is AP-2.

If bolters are AP-1, then heavy bolters deserve to be AP-2, etc... IMHO the only imperium weapon (and of course all its equivalents for different factions) that could get an additional pip of AP is the autocannon.




Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/30 09:26:40


Post by: tneva82


 _SeeD_ wrote:
You know, diamantine tip and everything...
Seems kind of lame that the difference between them and a lasgun is 1 str.


Seeing GW would then also up the power of primaris bolters...do we need -2 bolters in game? Or auto wound on 3+ bolters or whatever they come up with to ensure primaris bolter is superior to firstborn bolter...


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/30 13:37:33


Post by: Grimskul


You can definitely tell how spoiled marine players are when they keep complaining how they need more rules attention when CSM don't even have their 2nd wound profiles yet and at least 5 armies haven't had their armies updated for 9th edition so far. Plus I bet you they don't factor how this would translate over to things like Inferno Bolters becoming AP-3 in response.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/30 22:09:19


Post by: Bobthehero


 Blackie wrote:
MHO the only imperium weapon (and of course all its equivalents for different factions) that could get an additional pip of AP is the autocannon.


I'd argue for the Hellgun (And the Volley version). No bias whatsoever, no no no, but it was kinda noticeable for it's penetrative quality, and, at the end of they, it's still a STR 3 weapon in the end, not carried by a whole lot of things.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/30 22:13:25


Post by: PaddyMick


 alextroy wrote:
Remove Space Marine Doctrines. Give Astartes Boltguns and Bolt Pistols AP -1. Call it a day.


This.
A spade is AP 0.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/31 07:51:05


Post by: Wyldhunt


 PaddyMick wrote:
 alextroy wrote:
Remove Space Marine Doctrines. Give Astartes Boltguns and Bolt Pistols AP -1. Call it a day.


This.
A spade is AP 0.


Yeah. I think I'm solidly on board with that. AP-1 on bolters is only concerning when it's functionally AP-2 for half the game. So ditch doctrines , and just let bolters be AP-1. And then consider going through and ditching mechancis in the "doctrine slot" for other armies. Doctrines started out as a way of buffing marines when they were underperforming and as a way of discouraging taking allies. 9th edition fixed the latter, and a new codex fixed the former. But instead of ditching Doctrines now that they're not needed, GW has kept them around and started giving other armies a "doctrine slot" too. Which just feels a bit bloated, really.

I'd argue that most of the doctrine slot rules aren't even all that fluffy and don't add a ton to the game. (With some exceptions.)


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/31 08:58:37


Post by: Blackie


What about primaris lovers then, they'd demand AP-2 bolters or what's the point in paying extra points for the Intercessors? Heavy bolters will be AP-2 as well. Custodes' bolt weapons also.

Then players from other factions will start demanding upgrades for their armies as well, including extra pips on S, AP and damage for their weapons. Orks for example have flat AP-1 only on S6+ weapons, not even S5 ones.

I prefer AP0 bolters but cheaper bodies than primaris or anything that carry AP-something bolters. IMHO doctrines should go without being replaced by any other buffs. SM, and all the other factions carrying bolt weapons, are fine as they are. Except CSM, but they need a whole new codex anyway.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/31 18:05:17


Post by: Wyldhunt


 Blackie wrote:
What about primaris lovers then, they'd demand AP-2 bolters or what's the point in paying extra points for the Intercessors?

Frankly, they can probably just hush. Or better yet, we can roll tacticals and intercessors together so that the marine 'dex is a bit less bloated. Feeling compelled to power up marine units because their unit bloat causes them to have limited design space is a bug, not a feature.

Custodes' bolt weapons also.

Not a hill I'll die on, but fluff-appropriate custodes probably make more sense as a couple models you splash into another imperial army rather than being an army in their own right. That way, you could have a single custodes character and/or squad that can get some scary good stats/gear without feeling compelled to directly compare their statline to marines. They'd be something whose presence inspires and buffs imperials and a reasonably good set of killy options; not a thing that competes with marines and marine variants for design space.


Then players from other factions will start demanding upgrades for their armies as well, including extra pips on S, AP and damage for their weapons. Orks for example have flat AP-1 only on S6+ weapons, not even S5 ones.

As someone who plays lots of factions, we can also hush. Childish one-upmanship doesn't lend itself to good game design. Pulse rifles probably shouldn't be getting the extra AP in the new codex. My thousand sons can be happy with being AP-2 compared to marines' AP-1. My shuriken weapons could probably stand to have their AP-3 on 6s rule removed or modified. Necron gauss weapons maybe warrant a redesign as their gauss rule didn't translate very well into 8th/9th.


I prefer AP0 bolters but cheaper bodies than primaris or anything that carry AP-something bolters. IMHO doctrines should go without being replaced by any other buffs. SM, and all the other factions carrying bolt weapons, are fine as they are. Except CSM, but they need a whole new codex anyway.

Pretty much agree with all that with the exception that I'd kind of like primaris and firstborn to just fuse already.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2021/12/31 18:09:47


Post by: Strg Alt


 WisdomLS wrote:
The AP inflation in the game in 9th is a big problem, it has led to armour saves being a bit pointless and units being considered useless if they don't have an invulnerable save.
This has led to over half the factions in the game having access to army wide invuln saves.

The Ap and armour system is really good and works great if you stick to it, GW have not and thus it has become pointless.
Removing one of the best lethality/durability levers from their game design has led to the proliferation of rubbish non interactive rules like invuls, transhuman and neg 1 damage.

The AP chart should be something like this:
AP:0 All standard weapons
AP:1 Weapons particularly noted as having armour beating properties.
AP:2 Anti-tank weapons
AP:3 Very good anti-tank weapons, noted to melt infantry.
AP:4 Extraordinarily powerful weapons that can fully bypass more or less any armour.
AP:5 Magic stuff!


What kind of AP value should be assigned to a fist punch or a combat knife thrust?


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/04 05:14:55


Post by: alextroy


 Blackie wrote:
What about primaris lovers then, they'd demand AP-2 bolters or what's the point in paying extra points for the Intercessors? Heavy bolters will be AP-2 as well. Custodes' bolt weapons also.

Then players from other factions will start demanding upgrades for their armies as well, including extra pips on S, AP and damage for their weapons. Orks for example have flat AP-1 only on S6+ weapons, not even S5 ones.

I prefer AP0 bolters but cheaper bodies than primaris or anything that carry AP-something bolters. IMHO doctrines should go without being replaced by any other buffs. SM, and all the other factions carrying bolt weapons, are fine as they are. Except CSM, but they need a whole new codex anyway.
You tell them no. These weapons are what they are. Bolt Rifles have a longer range. Auto Bolt Guns have more attacks. Stalker Bolt Rifles have more AP and Damage. Any only Astartes Boltguns are AP -1. Those carried by everyone else (even my beloved Sisters) are AP 0. Astartes do Boltguns better. 'Nuff Said.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/04 23:12:45


Post by: Blndmage


 Insectum7 wrote:
^Reading all the bolter-porn has made you go blind.


Blind wargamer here, could you not use us as the butt of the joke, please?


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/05 00:27:39


Post by: AnomanderRake


 _SeeD_ wrote:
Killing things with AP0 is abysmally bad. You can't kill anything except really weak units.
I run 10 terminators and I will often advance instead of firing at something I know I'll only do like 5 or less wounds to.


Are you annoyed about lasguns being AP0?


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/05 01:22:20


Post by: Niiai


Where does shotguns and lasguns fall on this hiarchy of AP? A shotgun is ap0. A chainsword is Ap1. Are you telling me a chainsword is more penetrating then a shotgun blast? I might be genually wrong.

Also, are lasguns just flashlights, or are they actually laser shots? Perhaps lasguns are ap0 because ap0 is actually quite penetrating (like a bolter shell) it just does not reach the heights of Ap1.

I would rather play a well balanced game then having model get priced up because troop choise happen to be designed in the 90s and they kept the same gun for practical reasons.

Make a lasgun have Ap3 and price them accordingly. 11 points for a guard. 2 point up from tempetus scion. Tempestust scion have better lasguns so they should be perhaps AP4 and 13 points. Oh what a world to wear power armour in. Perhaps power armour should be 3+5++? To represent how though they are. Terminator armour could be 2+ 4++. Stormshields gives +1 to both armour and invunerable save of they could be useless, as everything has high AP. So a terminator with shield is 1+ 3++, witch would equilise a 3 wound marine today although move 5 instead of 6. These domino brick changes would of course be spaced out over a couple of years, each a response to the meta.

I kind of like my game be a game. Realismen are for people who joins a real war and come home with pts. (Although thank you for your hard work of you are a veteran, and you defended a cause that benefitted my country.)


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/05 04:19:50


Post by: Wyldhunt


 Niiai wrote:
Where does shotguns and lasguns fall on this hiarchy of AP? A shotgun is ap0. A chainsword is Ap1. Are you telling me a chainsword is more penetrating then a shotgun blast? I might be genually wrong.

Chainswords are probably more penetrating than a shotgun blast. The shotgun blast probably has more force behind it (though that's iffy if a space marine is wielding the chainsword), but those projectiles probably aren't especially good at piercing armor and probably bounce off of sufficiently sturdy plates. The chainsword is literally a mechanical saw that you keep pressed against the target while it does its job. Even if the diamond-tipped teeth of the saw don't have much initial success against the armor you press them against, they're theoretically knicking away at all but the hardest of materials little by little, clearing any chipped away material with the sawing motion, and then continuing to do more of the same to the next layer of armor until they're going through flesh.
Which still isn't that good of armor-penetration by 40k standards, but it does seem like it's probably better at the job than shotgun shot. There's a cool thread about chainswords over in the Background section right now.

Also, are lasguns just flashlights, or are they actually laser shots? Perhaps lasguns are ap0 because ap0 is actually quite penetrating (like a bolter shell) it just does not reach the heights of Ap1.

Their strength definitely seems to vary a lot from author to author, but I get the impression that they're roughly comparable to your average Star Wars blaster. They seem to instantly cook any unarmored flesh they hit (think severe burns, eyeballs popped open and steaming, etc.) making them plenty powerful and gruesome against things like cultists. However, that sort of damage seems to be largely dependent on the trauma caused to the meat. An ork is probably unbothered enough by pain and blood loss to shrug the first few hits off, and a sister of battle's power armor probably dissipates enough of the heat and concussive force of the las bolt to take most of the harm out of it. Which seems pretty well-represented by S3 AP0, I think.

But yes. I think you've nailed it. A bolter is certainly impressive. It's just not necessarily good enough at armor piercing specifically to need an AP boost. (But again, I think making at least Astartes bolters AP-1 and then ditching doctrines is a reasonable way to go.)


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/05 05:00:29


Post by: alextroy


Back in the day, Lasguns and Close Combat Weapons (aka chainswords) were both AP - while Bolters were AP 5 (with means you didn't get a save if you had a 5+ or 6+ armor Save). Now all three are AP 0, unless you are an Astartes when your Chainswords AP -1 (the old AP 4) and you have a better AP at certain points of the game with certain weapons.

So theoretically, Bolters have a higher AP than a Lasgun, but the bottom of the scale was flattened.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/05 07:33:28


Post by: Blackie


AP on chainswords is an abstraction, not a realistic feature. Its only purpose is to buff melee. Since you can shoot from distance typically more times than melee attacks shooting needs to be less powerful than melee. GW wanted to balance shooting and melee.

To fight you need to be into engagement range and to success a charge roll. Sometimes you even have to take the blows from the enemy before fighting, in your turn. Then to hit and wound. To shoot you just need to hit and wound. That's why chainswords and their equivalents have AP-1, it's the reward for managing to get into fight.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/05 09:04:15


Post by: Hellebore


 alextroy wrote:
Back in the day, Lasguns and Close Combat Weapons (aka chainswords) were both AP - while Bolters were AP 5 (with means you didn't get a save if you had a 5+ or 6+ armor Save). Now all three are AP 0, unless you are an Astartes when your Chainswords AP -1 (the old AP 4) and you have a better AP at certain points of the game with certain weapons.

So theoretically, Bolters have a higher AP than a Lasgun, but the bottom of the scale was flattened.


If you want to go back back in the day, in 2nd ed they looked like this:

Boltgun ap-1
Lasgun ap-1
Autogun ap0
Chainsword ap-1
Hotshot lasgun ap-1
Heavy bolter ap-2
Meltagun ap-4
Lascannon ap-6
Shotgun ap0
Autocannon ap-3
Assault cannon ap-3
Stubber ap-1
Laspistol ap0
Power fist ap-5


Shuriken catapult ap-2
Shuriken Cannon ap-3


The penetrative power is relative. A bolter was considered more penetrative than an auto round but equal to a lasgun and interior to a catapult.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/06 03:50:33


Post by: Backspacehacker


After playing 2 editions now with this new AP system, i greatly miss the old AP system now.

Current rending AP system imo has created more problems and balance issues then it solved.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/06 05:27:29


Post by: Jarms48


 Blackie wrote:
Bolters at AP-1 would be OP assuming units that carry those keep the same points cost. But then they'd be overpriced, to the point that no one would bring them anyway .

Jumping from AP0 and AP-1 is a big deal, not easy to balance, especially on weapons that can be spammed. Flat AP0 and AP-1 for 1-2 for SM seems very appropriate to me.

And to be honest considering how many units in the game are equipped with bolters I'd argue that the weapon is the probably the most common one in the entire 40k universe.


A rubic marine is 21 points for an AP-2 bolter. That's only 3 points more than a tactical marine.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/06 05:39:19


Post by: Backspacehacker


More AP on the field only causes more problems


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/06 07:42:44


Post by: Blackie


Jarms48 wrote:
 Blackie wrote:
Bolters at AP-1 would be OP assuming units that carry those keep the same points cost. But then they'd be overpriced, to the point that no one would bring them anyway .

Jumping from AP0 and AP-1 is a big deal, not easy to balance, especially on weapons that can be spammed. Flat AP0 and AP-1 for 1-2 for SM seems very appropriate to me.

And to be honest considering how many units in the game are equipped with bolters I'd argue that the weapon is the probably the most common one in the entire 40k universe.


A rubic marine is 21 points for an AP-2 bolter. That's only 3 points more than a tactical marine.


True, but rubric marines don't have the same layers of rules and all the shenanigans SM have. The point of AP0 on SM bolters is to differentiate them from intercessors. If both had AP-1 they'd be the same unit basically. AP0 works fine for sisters, and even standard marines don't really need to be a bit more killy against infantries. Gamewise there's really no need for boosting AP on bolters. Not to mention that in the turns that matter the most, and the actual turns in which bolters will likely be in range, regular SM bolters already do have AP-1 thanks to doctrines. I'd even argue for removing doctrines completely without compensating in any way instead of flat out buffing bolters.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/08 09:30:53


Post by: Some_Call_Me_Tim


I mean, bolter shells don’t penetrate things right, they stick in and explode before they go through. There you go, I solved the problem.
If you want to tack on ap to stuff that needs it, shootas, big shootas, and splinter weapons could all legitimately use some ap.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/12 03:48:00


Post by: alextroy


Jarms48 wrote:
 Blackie wrote:
Bolters at AP-1 would be OP assuming units that carry those keep the same points cost. But then they'd be overpriced, to the point that no one would bring them anyway .

Jumping from AP0 and AP-1 is a big deal, not easy to balance, especially on weapons that can be spammed. Flat AP0 and AP-1 for 1-2 for SM seems very appropriate to me.

And to be honest considering how many units in the game are equipped with bolters I'd argue that the weapon is the probably the most common one in the entire 40k universe.
A rubic marine is 21 points for an AP-2 bolter. That's only 3 points more than a tactical marine.
A Rubric Marine is more than a Space Marine with an AP -2 Bolter. They also have All Is Dust, Arcane Automata, a 5+ Invulnerable Save, and a Psycher in their unit.

So removing Doctrines and giving Astartes Bolters AP -1 doesn't suddenly make Rubrics not worth 3 points more than a Marine.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/12 07:37:30


Post by: warpedpig


The old AP system was better. That being said a bolter rocket/bullet has an armor piercing tip. Or you can load a magazine up with dedicated AP rounds which have a hardened penetrator which would do even better. You could possibly pay extra points for them or pay CP for a strategy called “Saboted armor piercing ammo” which uses adamantium or tungsten penetrators to bring down hardened targets. Give it a -2 AP.



Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/12 12:49:37


Post by: techsoldaten


I've thought Bolters should have AP-1 for a long time. The argument isn't about lore, it's about making Tacticals / CSMs worth taking on the tabletop. There's a problem with the fact they seem like a troop tax in Loyalist / Traitor armies and that their real value often comes down to ObSec.

At the same time, I understand the mechanics of the game and the complexity of setting points across a range of armies. The idea that an explosive Bolt Shell would have more impact than a beam that splits atoms is absurd. AP -1 can't happen specifically because the game can't be balanced otherwise, the power creep would be impossible to manage.

In general, the points system in 40k fosters a bad sense of proportion. Achieving a sense of relative value for each unit competes with making each one useful and fluffy. It's not possible to always deliver both in a skirmish game, which is why some units seem OP while others seem not worth taking. GW does it's best (power levels were an attempt to decouple from points) but this doesn't seem to be an achievable task.

There's times I wish GW would get rid of points and rebuild the game from the ground up in a way that more substantially reflects the Lore. Bolters would be AP -1, Gauss Flayers could be AP -3, etc, but these benefits would not impact the list. Embrace the factional imbalances and focus on missions with criteria specific to each faction. Like, your Space Marines are inferior to the mighty Necrons, but the mission is to destroy a power node and escape without taking too much damage. The Necrons are much tougher and better equipped, the Space Marine player's opportunity lies in slowing them down enough to achieve the objective.

But that doesn't seem possible in a skirmish game where players come to the table with equally "balanced" armies. Balance just means each side is handicapped in a manner that deviates from the lore, and points are an abstraction meant to make conflicts more fair for one side or the other.

Another way of putting it: points make each side suck in equal measure.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/12 13:43:16


Post by: The_Real_Chris


Well if you want evolution over time, as best I remember it...
Marine vs Guardsman
1st ed Marine, T3, Sv4+ / Bolter 0-12" +1 to hit, S4, AV-1 - Guard T3 Sv6+ / Las 0-12" +1 to hit, S3, AV-1

2nd ed (was it part way through or end of 1st ed?) Then marines went up to T4, SV3+
Then marines get 2 shots if stationary. Was that at half range?

Then 3rd rolled in and I ducked out, but I think that is where the armour system changed and the marine bolter became 2 shots at half range.

Then I think all the weapons, marines or otherwise changed to rapid fire at half range. Marines now get other bonuses. Weapons lose minus armour saves in new system and when it changes back still don't have them.

So now
Marine, T4, W2, Sv3+ / Bolter rapid fire, S4. Then bunch of special rules about stationary fire, chapters, turn of the game etc.
Guard T3 Sv5+ / Las rapid fire, S3, with orders to double shots, re-roll 1's etc.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/12 17:09:36


Post by: Voss


 Some_Call_Me_Tim wrote:
I mean, bolter shells don’t penetrate things right, they stick in and explode before they go through. There you go, I solved the problem.
If you want to tack on ap to stuff that needs it, shootas, big shootas, and splinter weapons could all legitimately use some ap.


That's actually the opposite of how bolter shells 'work.' They're 'mass-reactive'- they penetrate armor and THEN explode afterwards.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/12 18:05:22


Post by: Some_Call_Me_Tim


Voss wrote:
 Some_Call_Me_Tim wrote:
I mean, bolter shells don’t penetrate things right, they stick in and explode before they go through. There you go, I solved the problem.
If you want to tack on ap to stuff that needs it, shootas, big shootas, and splinter weapons could all legitimately use some ap.


That's actually the opposite of how bolter shells 'work.' They're 'mass-reactive'- they penetrate armor and THEN explode afterwards.

I know, I was just channeling my pure rules lawyering to say that they don’t technically go through persay, they go in half way, then detonate. Perfect for delivering their payload, but technically not piercing the target.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/13 01:16:28


Post by: warpedpig


Obviously any kind of projectile is going to penetrate something. The question is how to properly determine what weapons are causing what kind of penetration. It’s not the greatest system we have to work with. An auto gun for example would likely do nothing to power armor but in the current rules there’s a decent possibility it will kill a space marine. Which is pure BS. It can’t even penetrate the armor. You’re talking an extremely minute possibility.

A bolter would 100% defeat a flak vest and explode your chest and the fragments would injure other troopers nearby. It’s a 20mm high explosive


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/13 07:23:58


Post by: Wyldhunt


warpedpig wrote:
Obviously any kind of projectile is going to penetrate something. The question is how to properly determine what weapons are causing what kind of penetration. It’s not the greatest system we have to work with. An auto gun for example would likely do nothing to power armor but in the current rules there’s a decent possibility it will kill a space marine. Which is pure BS. It can’t even penetrate the armor. You’re talking an extremely minute possibility.

Something something abstraction. In practical terms, a single autogun is not a reliable way to kill a marine, but the marine also isn't immune to the autogun. Every now and then, that lucky shot will go through an eye lense and bounce around inside a marine's cranium, killing him in one shot, but the chances are very low. Alternatively, a squad of autoguns is chipping away at the power armor, slowly exposing more weak spots or inflicting minor injuries on weak points until the marine finally succumbs to the blood loss, etc. It's probably not that two specific bullets scored a killing blow; it's that that a thousand bullets managed to make him take a short healing nap.

20 cultists with autoguns land 20 hits = 7.333 ~ wounds. The marine saves 2/3rds of those wounds for about 2.4333~ unsaved wounds. Or in other words, 20 cultists firing on full auto kills about 1 marine. You can't make autoguns much less effective than that without making marines essentially immune to them.

A bolter would 100% defeat a flak vest and explode your chest and the fragments would injure other troopers nearby. It’s a 20mm high explosive

Seems pretty well-represented by AP-1 bolters, right? Guardsmen get almost no armor save against them, but hunkering down in cover provides some meaningful protection.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/13 15:04:57


Post by: The_Real_Chris


warpedpig wrote:
Obviously any kind of projectile is going to penetrate something. The question is how to properly determine what weapons are causing what kind of penetration. It’s not the greatest system we have to work with. An auto gun for example would likely do nothing to power armor but in the current rules there’s a decent possibility it will kill a space marine. Which is pure BS. It can’t even penetrate the armor. You’re talking an extremely minute possibility.

A bolter would 100% defeat a flak vest and explode your chest and the fragments would injure other troopers nearby. It’s a 20mm high explosive


There were some optional rules I think in WD at end of 1st ed I think for alternative bolter fire modes. One was using the explosions for an area effect. Made the gun S3, Save mod none, 1/2" blast.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/13 17:05:26


Post by: Galef


I think too many basic weapons are getting AP-1.
You can justify it for just about every weapon.
It's also all but confirmed that Eldar shuriken weapons are all getting AP-1. I'd like to see that mean S3 on catapults, but that isn't likely.

For bolters, I'd much rather see D2 on 6s to wound representing the exploding round. That would also scale well for all bolter type weapons.

But if every factions' basic weapon is AP-1, why bother giving models good armour? Marines effectively now have 4+ armour or worse 90% of the time.

-


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/13 17:39:26


Post by: Some_Call_Me_Tim


The problem is that just a lot of basic weapons haven’t changed for a while so everything outstrips them. There’s also the whole thing where basic infantry is dissapearing from the battlefield so your basic weaponry just has less targets. Going from older editions, a boy has gone from 6 to 9 points, the shoota has essentially no upgrade, dakka is really just never comes into effect with them. A space marine has gone from 14 to 18 points for a firstborn, and they’ve doubled in durability against them, and those are a weak unit.

In a world of hordes of elites and the like, a basic gun of a faction isn’t going to do anything unless it starts being crazy.

I blame all this on infantry squad level wargear being removed in lieu of super specialist units


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/13 22:36:15


Post by: Hellebore


As far as I'm concerned, the 2nd ed weapon profiles are what all should be compared to.

In that, lasguns and boltguns had identical armour penetration - high energy burning through the target vs heavy fast projectile penetration.

autoguns had no modifier.


shurikens had better penetration.

Whatever way you go, so long as those relative values are maintained it doesn't matter.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/13 23:50:04


Post by: Blndmage


 Hellebore wrote:
As far as I'm concerned, the 2nd ed weapon profiles are what all should be compared to.

In that, lasguns and boltguns had identical armour penetration - high energy burning through the target vs heavy fast projectile penetration.

autoguns had no modifier.


shurikens had better penetration.

Whatever way you go, so long as those relative values are maintained it doesn't matter.


What about the multiple armies/factions that didn't exist in 2nd?


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/14 03:23:17


Post by: Hellebore


 Blndmage wrote:
 Hellebore wrote:
As far as I'm concerned, the 2nd ed weapon profiles are what all should be compared to.

In that, lasguns and boltguns had identical armour penetration - high energy burning through the target vs heavy fast projectile penetration.

autoguns had no modifier.


shurikens had better penetration.

Whatever way you go, so long as those relative values are maintained it doesn't matter.


What about the multiple armies/factions that didn't exist in 2nd?


The only army that didn't have weapon rules in 2nd is the tau.

Necron flayer weapons had their own statline in 2nd ed.


The point is that these values aren't in a vacuum, but relative to one another. The 3rd-7th paradigm completely threw out the book on 40k rules. 8th-9th has actually reverted to something closer to 2nd ed for weapons.

So if you take 2nd ed AP-1 as AP0 in 9th, then catapults being ap-1 makes sense - i'd be all for catapults being their 2nd ed equivalent and dropping the 6s rule, but that's unlikely.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/14 07:09:28


Post by: warpedpig


It would depend where a marine was hit with a bolter obviously. And how battle damaged the armor was already.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/14 15:56:40


Post by: The_Real_Chris


 Hellebore wrote:
As far as I'm concerned, the 2nd ed weapon profiles are what all should be compared to.

In that, lasguns and boltguns had identical armour penetration - high energy burning through the target vs heavy fast projectile penetration.

autoguns had no modifier.


shurikens had better penetration.

Whatever way you go, so long as those relative values are maintained it doesn't matter.


Nah, RT! Then autoguns get range 32" and are a fun decision between them and las...


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/15 02:41:48


Post by: Hellebore


The_Real_Chris wrote:
 Hellebore wrote:
As far as I'm concerned, the 2nd ed weapon profiles are what all should be compared to.

In that, lasguns and boltguns had identical armour penetration - high energy burning through the target vs heavy fast projectile penetration.

autoguns had no modifier.


shurikens had better penetration.

Whatever way you go, so long as those relative values are maintained it doesn't matter.


Nah, RT! Then autoguns get range 32" and are a fun decision between them and las...



Yeah thats cool. Catapults were still ap-2


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/20 21:36:31


Post by: ERJAK


 Backspacehacker wrote:
After playing 2 editions now with this new AP system, i greatly miss the old AP system now.

Current rending AP system imo has created more problems and balance issues then it solved.


Calling what 7th and earlier had a 'system' is incredibly generous. They had a binary. Is this weapon at least AP3? If yes, AP is relevant. If no, AP is irrelevant.

People are arguing about bolters being AP0 vs AP-1 like they weren't ALWAYS AP0.

"Oh, but they ignored guardsman armor!" No, guardsman didn't have armor.

Because the corollary of that system was "Do you have at least a 3+ save? If yes you have a save. If no, you don't have a save." You could count on one hand the number of times in entire multi-day tournaments someone actually got to roll a 4+ armor save.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/20 21:41:10


Post by: JNAProductions


Calling what 8th and later editions have a system is incredibly generous. It’s just simple subtraction from your roll.

Or, put another way, simplicity of a system doesn’t stop it being a system. And 4+ was when saves usually started mattering, not 3+. Since most small arms fire was AP5, you doubled your resilience against it compared to a 5+ save.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/21 06:07:08


Post by: Wyldhunt


 JNAProductions wrote:
And 4+ was when saves usually started mattering, not 3+. Since most small arms fire was AP5, you doubled your resilience against it compared to a 5+ save.

Well, yes and no. I started playing in 5th when most cover saves were a 4+. My craftworlders were squishy enough that I generally tried to keep them in cover as much as I could. So my dire avengers technically got their armor saves against my opponent's AP5 basic rifles, but they generally also had a 4+ cover save that made the 4+ armor save kind of moot. But you're right; 4+ armor was nice enough. My hawks were certainly glad they got saves against bolters after deepstriking in.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/23 00:56:24


Post by: RustyNumber


Hmmm how about a hybrid system?

Weapon AP lower than armour? Normal save. Weapon AP matches armour? -1 save.
Weapon AP higher? No save.

But then you're looking at needing something like cover saves again...


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/23 00:57:49


Post by: JNAProductions


 RustyNumber wrote:
Hmmm how about a hybrid system?

Weapon AP lower than armour? Normal save. Weapon AP matches armour? -1 save.
Weapon AP higher? No save.

But then you're looking at needing something like cover saves again...
That's what Mez did in Prohammer.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/23 07:39:33


Post by: Wyldhunt


 RustyNumber wrote:
Hmmm how about a hybrid system?

Weapon AP lower than armour? Normal save. Weapon AP matches armour? -1 save.
Weapon AP higher? No save.

But then you're looking at needing something like cover saves again...

Don't like it on paper. Under that system, power armor is completely unphased by weapons that are paying for better-than-usual AP. So a heavy flamer or autocannon (AP4) can partially punch through the armor on a swooping hawk or necron warrior (who in turn are paying points to have 4+ saves), but a marine with a 3+ save isn't affected at all. Compare that to the current system where player A pays points for power armor, player B pays points for AP, and both of those values impact what number the marine saves on. Autocannons are still good at punching through armor, but power armor is still better at defending against autocannons than flakk jackets and carapace.

You'd also end up making some anti-marine weapons pretty bad against marines. Howling Banshees are a squad full of power swords (AP3) that are currently pretty meh at hurting their primary target: space marines. Under the proposed system, marines would go from having a 6+ save against banshees to a 4+ save. Ditto inferno bolts for thousand sons, dark reaper launchers, etc. You could theoretically change power swords to be AP2 instead, but then you're making changes to fix the problems created by your changes right out the gate.

The only problem I see with the current AP system is that they've given AP-1 to a few too many things.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/23 10:11:09


Post by: RustyNumber


I guess there's two discussions here - How is AP in the game right now?

and

How is AP best represented on the tabletop at all?

After all the game got along fine with the old AP system for years, albeit with everything balanced around it. But the ability to modify armour instead of a binary system feels more satisfying, though it does lead to the unrealistic "My Heavy Flamer DEGRADES your super heavy tank armour a little bit more than a pistol!"


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/23 20:49:35


Post by: Backspacehacker


If i was game designer for a day, the way i would do it, is the following

Prohammer AP system
AP higher then armor save, you get your save
AP lower then armor save, you dont get a save
AP = Armor save, you get save -1

Then to help with some weapons i would then start giving out a lot more weapons with Rending (x) with X being the AP value if you roll a 6 to hit.
Like a heavy bolter would be rending 3, roll a 6, you get a AP 3 bolter shot.
Chain weapons would be rending 3
Power swords would be rending 2

That way having a rending x system would give you more options to balance weapons. Boltguns under performing? Give it rending 3, oh thats to strong? ok rending 4 now? Yeah that feels better. Lasrifles are fine, but multi las make it rending 4.

I would also be a lot more generous with rending in melee over ranged, to give melee a bigger inceptive to be used.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/23 20:51:25


Post by: Bobthehero


Well let's just be glad it isn't the case


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/24 00:34:22


Post by: Hellebore


In my 8th ed redesign (see lower down the page), i separated AP into 'weight classes'. AP, AM, and TK.


AP - ANTI PERSONNEL (X)
Weapons with this rule subtract the value in parentheses from any Saving throws made by the target if it doesn't have the TITANIC, VEHICLE, or MONSTER keyword.

AM - ANTI MATERIEL (X)
Weapons with this rule subtract the value in parentheses from any Saving throws made by the target unless it has the TITANIC keyword.

TK - TITAN-KILLER (X)
Weapons with this rule subtract the value in parentheses from any saving throws made by the target.


It gives you 3 separate AP design spaces and means that you can balance infantry weapons more easily and means you probably don't need massive Wound scaling on superheavies, because they're going to be pretty tough against AM weapons like missile launchers.

This then also means weapon damage is more controlled, as you don't need to scale it as much.







Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/24 06:20:07


Post by: Wyldhunt


@Hellebore:
I kind of like that. So you can have weapons that are good at penetrating personal armor, but aren't really large, powerful, etc. enough to have that armor piercing capability carry over against tanks.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/24 06:45:38


Post by: Hellebore


Wyldhunt wrote:
@Hellebore:
I kind of like that. So you can have weapons that are good at penetrating personal armor, but aren't really large, powerful, etc. enough to have that armor piercing capability carry over against tanks.



Yeah, it allows you to reflect different scales without changing dice. It means a 4+ save on a tank is different to a 4+ save on infantry.

It puts titans on top and means even 6s wounding everything won't cause as many issues.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/26 04:10:14


Post by: Mezmorki


 JNAProductions wrote:
 RustyNumber wrote:
Hmmm how about a hybrid system?

Weapon AP lower than armour? Normal save. Weapon AP matches armour? -1 save.
Weapon AP higher? No save.

But then you're looking at needing something like cover saves again...
That's what Mez did in Prohammer.


Ya'll rang?

Yes - it works so much better this way. Across the board it's a huge buff to survivability, albeit some benefit from it more than others. We've found it helps get the unit pricing in a better place too. Terminators (for example) always felt way over priced back in the 3rd/4th era (less so in 6th/7th, but still somewhat), since most armies could usually stack enough AP2 weapons that it would cut through terminators pretty quick. That Sv 2+ going to 3+ vs an AP2 weapon makes a big difference (still outta luck vs. AP1 melta, but that makes sense).

The old system was such a better thematic representation of what was going on. Marines vs. lower power / low AP weapons got their full armor save most of the time. Volume of fire (you're going to roll 1's and 2's) was more of the concern than worrying about the AP of the weapon. Likewise, most "advanced" basic weaponry (bolters, shurikens, Tau pulse rifles, etc.) punched through "weak" armor (5+/6+) as you would expect.

For lowered armor armies, the old cover save system works a heck of a lot better for survivability too. Hard cover giving a 4+ cover save (effectively invulnerable), with the ability to Go to Ground and get a +1 on top of that is pretty juicy. Greatly diminished need for all the invulnerable saves getting tossed around.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/26 07:34:52


Post by: Blackie


Terminators felt overpriced in 3rd/4th because at 1W they used to die like flies vs AP-trash weapons with high rate of fire. They might also pay additional points for the shield to get an invuln they never benefit from when targeted by such weapons.

AP2 weapons were typically expensive and not really spammable. Invulns worked against those.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/31 00:14:41


Post by: Jarms48


I'm pretty sure most of the old AP5 factions basic weapons are becoming AP-1 now. Shurikens, pulse rifles, galvanic rifles, etc.

I don't see much of an issue for bolters to become AP-1.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/31 07:57:44


Post by: Blackie


Then all former AP5 weapons need to be AP-1. My former AP5 ork guns are still all AP0 base, including the S5 ones. But also there won't be any purpose in fielding primaris bolter guys then, unless increasing their AP as well.

And then all the former AP4 weapons would feel pointless at just AP-1 (example, Heavy Bolters) and need to be AP-2. And then all former AP3 would feel pointless at just AP-2, etc...

Bolters getting AP-1 for 1-2 turns and flat AP-1 for the primaris version is the best solution IMHO. Alternatively they should be AP0 the entire game, like pretty much all non SM bolters.

Flat AP-1 is the AP of weapons such Heavy Bolters or Autocannons. Do we really want massed AP-1 on basic bolter guys and transports? Note that along with bolters also storm bolters, hurricane bolters, etc... would be buffed to AP-1.

A couple of armies that are supposed to be master of shooting getting flat AP-1 on their grunts shouldn't be the excuse to make AP-1 as the basic AP of other troops.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/01/31 09:03:03


Post by: Wyldhunt


 Blackie wrote:
Then all former AP5 weapons need to be AP-1. My former AP5 ork guns are still all AP0 base, including the S5 ones. But also there won't be any purpose in fielding primaris bolter guys then, unless increasing their AP as well.

It almost sounds like the marine faction is crowded with redundant data sheets that could be condensed down or something. >_> Maybe by just fusing tacticals and intercessors together.

Do we really want massed AP-1 on basic bolter guys and transports? Note that along with bolters also storm bolters, hurricane bolters, etc... would be buffed to AP-1.

A couple of armies that are supposed to be master of shooting getting flat AP-1 on their grunts shouldn't be the excuse to make AP-1 as the basic AP of other troops.

Personally, I kind of want the lethality of the game to go down a bit; I'd rather take some AP away from some units rather than adding it to more units. That said, I do think AP-1 is justifiable on marines (especially if they lose doctrines) if you design their faction as powerful-but-few-in-number rather than treating them as middle of the road guys.

That's probably poorly phrased. It's late here. Basically I think there are reasonable ways to make AP-1 bolters work, but I'll generally lean in favor of design choices that reduce lethality rather than increase it.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/02/01 05:39:42


Post by: EviscerationPlague


Fusing Marine profiles would alleviate the issue a lot. I don't think anyone is gonna complain if all Bolt Pistols had AP-1, really.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/02/06 10:15:19


Post by: The Deer Hunter


Bolters clearly should be AP-1 when looking to all others basic weapons of other codexes, even Kroots have a -1 wood rifle.

But oldmarines must be Primaris-1 for obvious sale reasons, so the bolter is stuck to AP-


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/02/06 13:36:14


Post by: A Town Called Malus


The Deer Hunter wrote:
Bolters clearly should be AP-1 when looking to all others basic weapons of other codexes, even Kroots have a -1 wood rifle.

But oldmarines must be Primaris-1 for obvious sale reasons, so the bolter is stuck to AP-


You mean the Shaper Kroot Rifle, which can only be taken on the Kroot's only HQ option? Nice bit of leaving out that detail to imply that the standard kroot rifle had become AP-1.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/02/06 14:43:37


Post by: The Deer Hunter


 A Town Called Malus wrote:
The Deer Hunter wrote:
Bolters clearly should be AP-1 when looking to all others basic weapons of other codexes, even Kroots have a -1 wood rifle.

But oldmarines must be Primaris-1 for obvious sale reasons, so the bolter is stuck to AP-


You mean the Shaper Kroot Rifle, which can only be taken on the Kroot's only HQ option? Nice bit of leaving out that detail to imply that the standard kroot rifle had become AP-1.


Sorry, I misread the line, it is the melee profile. The wood rifle has still the same statline of the main weapon of the Emperor’s Finest.

But it is the Primaris thing that prevent the bolter to be better.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/02/06 15:59:09


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I just saw this thread. Are we really suggesting AVs for infantry? How about no. I mean, everything in the game is far too deadly as is, and I play Custodes. Plus,If we went by the Prohammer standard, I'd reckon that any force unable to take massive amounts of AP6 shooting would give me 2+ armor rolls on all my bikes. That would be wonderful.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/02/17 13:11:09


Post by: psipso


Well. It seems that shuriken catapults they gonna have a -1 AP besides the Shurkien abilities rule.



Dunno what it will be doing this Shurkien ability but if it does something like extra rend in 6's and given that before shuriken catapults were, like bolters, AP5, I don't see any objective reasons to not make all the bolter guns also to be AP -1.

However, in 40K logic does not be a part of the game.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/02/17 13:42:03


Post by: Blackie


psipso wrote:
Well. It seems that shuriken catapults they gonna have a -1 AP besides the Shurkien abilities rule.



Dunno what it will be doing this Shurkien ability but if it does something like extra rend in 6's and given that before shuriken catapults were, like bolters, AP5, I don't see any objective reasons to not make all the bolter guns also to be AP -1.

However, in 40K logic does not be a part of the game.


SM have doctrines, which basically make bolters AP-1 for turn 2 and 3, the turns that matter the most. In fact thanks to doctrines primaris bolters are actually AP-2 for most of the game.

So in practise bolters are already AP-1 basically.

They aren't for chaos or sisters though. But making bolters flat AP-1 while getting rid of docrines entirely would be a massive nerf for marines.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/02/17 14:25:57


Post by: psipso


 Blackie wrote:
psipso wrote:
Well. It seems that shuriken catapults they gonna have a -1 AP besides the Shurkien abilities rule.



Dunno what it will be doing this Shurkien ability but if it does something like extra rend in 6's and given that before shuriken catapults were, like bolters, AP5, I don't see any objective reasons to not make all the bolter guns also to be AP -1.

However, in 40K logic does not be a part of the game.


SM have doctrines, which basically make bolters AP-1 for turn 2 and 3, the turns that matter the most. In fact thanks to doctrines primaris bolters are actually AP-2 for most of the game.

So in practise bolters are already AP-1 basically.

They aren't for chaos or sisters though. But making bolters flat AP-1 while getting rid of docrines entirely would be a massive nerf for marines.


Primaris Bolt rifles are already AP -1. I don't see it as a big problem as this is already happening.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/02/17 17:38:30


Post by: G00fySmiley


psipso wrote:
 Blackie wrote:
psipso wrote:
Well. It seems that shuriken catapults they gonna have a -1 AP besides the Shurkien abilities rule.



Dunno what it will be doing this Shurkien ability but if it does something like extra rend in 6's and given that before shuriken catapults were, like bolters, AP5, I don't see any objective reasons to not make all the bolter guns also to be AP -1.

However, in 40K logic does not be a part of the game.


SM have doctrines, which basically make bolters AP-1 for turn 2 and 3, the turns that matter the most. In fact thanks to doctrines primaris bolters are actually AP-2 for most of the game.

So in practise bolters are already AP-1 basically.

They aren't for chaos or sisters though. But making bolters flat AP-1 while getting rid of docrines entirely would be a massive nerf for marines.


Primaris Bolt rifles are already AP -1. I don't see it as a big problem as this is already happening.


That depends on how many points they are. A tac squad for 5 is 90 points, a intersessor squad for 5 is 100 points. those 2 points buy 6" range, ap-1, and +1 attack each. The tac squad can get their heavy or special weapon, assuming a grav cannon you add 4 str 5 ap-3 D1 vs 4+ armor or D2 vs armor 3+ shots into the tac squad for the same points. personally I could see ap-1 bolters at another point per tac marine go 95 points for 5 man tac squad.

Even better would be introducing devistator squads of primaris, merge the two. Just say the old marines had some weird primaris gene seed reaction where they got some of the extra gene bonuses but have some kind of space marine dwarfism and can still fit in old armor and old terminator armor, then boom merge profiles and let primaris intercessors buy a special or heavy weapon. Added bonus GW can hilariously troll chaos space marines and keep them 1 wound forever. (that is a joke for people who need that added note, please GW give CSm thier 2nd wound soon kthnx)


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/02/17 17:40:01


Post by: AnomanderRake


psipso wrote:
...given that before shuriken catapults were, like bolters, AP5, I don't see any objective reasons to not make all the bolter guns also to be AP -1...


Objectively on the quick translate table of weapons from 7th-8th AP5 = AP-, AP4 = AP-1, AP3 = AP-2, AP2 = AP-3, and AP1 = AP-4. Bolt rifles are AP-1 where boltguns aren't because they're boltguns with Kraken rounds (30" range/S4/AP4) (and the Stalker bolt rifle is a longer-ranged Vengeance round with its Heavy 1/AP3), not because AP5 translates to AP-1. Any further buffs on top of that are purely AP creep.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/02/17 17:50:38


Post by: Some_Call_Me_Tim


The Deer Hunter wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
The Deer Hunter wrote:
Bolters clearly should be AP-1 when looking to all others basic weapons of other codexes, even Kroots have a -1 wood rifle.

But oldmarines must be Primaris-1 for obvious sale reasons, so the bolter is stuck to AP-


You mean the Shaper Kroot Rifle, which can only be taken on the Kroot's only HQ option? Nice bit of leaving out that detail to imply that the standard kroot rifle had become AP-1.


Sorry, I misread the line, it is the melee profile. The wood rifle has still the same statline of the main weapon of the Emperor’s Finest.

But it is the Primaris thing that prevent the bolter to be better.


Not just a wood rifle, it has t’au tech in there. Be glad it’s not s5 lol.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/02/18 04:01:00


Post by: psipso


 AnomanderRake wrote:
psipso wrote:
...given that before shuriken catapults were, like bolters, AP5, I don't see any objective reasons to not make all the bolter guns also to be AP -1...


Objectively on the quick translate table of weapons from 7th-8th AP5 = AP-, AP4 = AP-1, AP3 = AP-2, AP2 = AP-3, and AP1 = AP-4. Bolt rifles are AP-1 where boltguns aren't because they're boltguns with Kraken rounds (30" range/S4/AP4) (and the Stalker bolt rifle is a longer-ranged Vengeance round with its Heavy 1/AP3), not because AP5 translates to AP-1. Any further buffs on top of that are purely AP creep.


Yes, I've also thought so. But it seems that GW is beginning to grant AP -1 to weapons that before were AP5 so I'm not so sure that this table is valid anymore. Although, to be fair, is just half of the picture because we haven't seen yet which points updates involves the buff to this kind of weapon.

I think that this confusion is a byproduct of what in this thread (https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/802980.page) is defined as "unable to have a cohesive design philosophy".


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/03/08 03:28:59


Post by: Kaied


I think GW needs to introduce AP+1 on the "weaker" weapons.
Not AP-1, AP+1. As in, Lasgun/Shotgun which is AP0 currently goes to AP+1, so a Marine saves on 2+(instead of 3+) and other Guard save on 4+(instead of 5+).

Also, instead of comparing a Rubric Marine, you should compare Sternguard Veteran to Tactical Marine. +2 points, but boltgun is AP-2, +1 Attack, +1 Leadership, and lots of weapon options. Troop with Melta-bomb and Objective Secured vs Elites without.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/03/08 03:39:27


Post by: SergentSilver


Kaied wrote:
I think GW needs to introduce AP+1 on the "weaker" weapons.
Not AP-1, AP+1. As in, Lasgun/Shotgun which is AP0 currently goes to AP+1, so a Marine saves on 2+(instead of 3+) and other Guard save on 4+(instead of 5+).

Also, instead of comparing a Rubric Marine, you should compare Sternguard Veteran to Tactical Marine. +2 points, but boltgun is AP-2, +1 Attack, +1 Leadership, and lots of weapon options. Troop with Melta-bomb and Objective Secured vs Elites without.


I don't see any reason a weapon shooting at you should make your armor better than it not shooting at you unless it's some kind of buff gun. What they should do is fix their system and stop limiting themselves to D6. At this point, D10 would be more appropriate and allow far better variance in stat lines to compensate for perceived differences in weapons.

Or just change everything into massive numbers like KT and WC to allow more nuance in the stats, even if it ends up balancing out roughly the same anyway. (This is semi-sarcastic, since the D6 limiter means that both Armor and AP would have to remain unchanged with the way they currently work.)


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/03/08 05:09:54


Post by: Kaied


 SergentSilver wrote:
Kaied wrote:
I think GW needs to introduce AP+1 on the "weaker" weapons.
Not AP-1, AP+1. As in, Lasgun/Shotgun which is AP0 currently goes to AP+1, so a Marine saves on 2+(instead of 3+) and other Guard save on 4+(instead of 5+).

Also, instead of comparing a Rubric Marine, you should compare Sternguard Veteran to Tactical Marine. +2 points, but boltgun is AP-2, +1 Attack, +1 Leadership, and lots of weapon options. Troop with Melta-bomb and Objective Secured vs Elites without.


I don't see any reason a weapon shooting at you should make your armor better than it not shooting at you unless it's some kind of buff gun.
"Buffing" your enemy's save makes it a terrible weapon, right? That's the point, it just makes it worse than using an AP0 weapon. Instead of "Power Creep" and adding more AP to everything, do the opposite on what are supposed to be weak weapons anyway.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/03/08 07:22:33


Post by: Wyldhunt


Kaied wrote:"Buffing" your enemy's save makes it a terrible weapon, right? That's the point, it just makes it worse than using an AP0 weapon. Instead of "Power Creep" and adding more AP to everything, do the opposite on what are supposed to be weak weapons anyway.

I think I dislike it mostly because it's counter-intuitive. Sure, you technically unlock more gradiations of AP, but explaining to a newbie that their guns are so not lethal that they actually make enemies more likely to survive than usual seems likely to result in both confusion and disappointment. Sort of the opposite of a power fantasy there. Plus, you run into that weird area where an AP +1 weapon against a marine in cover is actually no more effective than an AP0 weapon (he's rolling a 2+ either way), so presumably the lower cost of an AP+1 option actually makes it more powerful in terms of cost-effectiveness.

So the whole thing strikes me as a kind of awkward fix to a pretty straight-forward problem. Lethality is a bit too high. Some units have a bit more AP than they probably warrant. We can pretty much just undo a lot of the power boosts various units/weapons have gotten in the last few years and probably land in an alright place.

SergentSilver wrote:
I don't see any reason a weapon shooting at you should make your armor better than it not shooting at you unless it's some kind of buff gun. What they should do is fix their system and stop limiting themselves to D6. At this point, D10 would be more appropriate and allow far better variance in stat lines to compensate for perceived differences in weapons.

Or just change everything into massive numbers like KT and WC to allow more nuance in the stats, even if it ends up balancing out roughly the same anyway. (This is semi-sarcastic, since the D6 limiter means that both Armor and AP would have to remain unchanged with the way they currently work.)

*Breaks out the stick used to beat dead horses*
Easier solution: Just back off on the extra pip of AP a bunch of ranged weapons have been getting. So pulse rifles and bolt rifles (and bolters) can go back to AP0. Reconsider whether or not heavy bolters, splinter cannons, etc. need to be D2. Make scatbikes 1 heavy weapon per 3 bikes again. Fiddle with the points of 2W marines so that their cost makes sense in a game without all the anti-marine power creep we've been seeing. Anyone with an old version of their faction's codex can pretty well tell you what form the game's lethality creep has taken. What if we just ctrl + z a lot of those from the last few editions?


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/04/11 02:52:28


Post by: Just_Breathe


GW could go a long way to further granularize the game by increasing the max str of most tier 1 weapons to str 16 in order to wound on 2s against the tier 1 toughness of 8,
and then scale everything else up in terms of str.

This would also present a good opportunity to get rid of degrading profiles altogether and just have a lesser profile that is consistent.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/04/21 08:56:02


Post by: I_am_a_Spoon


The lore aspect is a big motivator for me, and I've long-thought that bolt weapons currently get a raw deal. They're supposed to be terrifying weapons – the mightiest small arms in the Imperium, tended to dotingly by master artificers and techpriests, revered as holy emblems, yada yada.

I think bolt weapons need a bigger boost in power, cost and general uniqueness than just AP1. While AP1 would be a good start (and makes sense lore-wise, as stated earlier), I also think they should come with +1 Strength, +1 (or D3) Damage, or a chance of extra mortal wounds.

My preference for a standard boltgun statline would be S4, AP1, Damage 2. Personally, it makes more sense to represent a bolt's internal explosion as extra Damage rather than extra Strength (or by adding more MWs to the game) – first you get the impact from a high-velocity/calibre round (similar to a modern light cannon shell), then upon penetration its delayed explosion pulverises internal organs, ruptures vessels, causes systemic hydrostatic shock, etc. This would give bolt weapons a bit more utility and dynamicism against MEQ or tougher units.. which is exactly what occurred during the Horus Heresy, so fluff points there. Extra damage would also set bolt weapons aside from other basic infantry weapon statlines without infringing on pulse weapons or similar, and would give them a bit extra oomph against the big, scary monsters they're often deployed against in the lore. D3 damage could also achieve that in a way that's both more dynamic and clunky. Heavy bolters could potentially get +1 Damage as well (making them premier anti-Gravis/Custodes weapons), but IMO that's not necessary.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/05/17 01:07:28


Post by: Just_Breathe


Whenever they get around to changing all the profiles, giving ap1 on all bolters and Grey Knights a ThousandSons equivalent called a Psy-Stormbolter, with ap2.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/05/17 11:43:15


Post by: Jarms48


Why should Grey Knights get AP-2 bolters? Just make their stormbolters AP-1 as well. That’d be enough.

TSons already have AP-2 bolters. There’s no need to change them.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/05/17 12:36:13


Post by: Just_Breathe


Jarms48 wrote:
Why should Grey Knights get AP-2 bolters? Just make their stormbolters AP-1 as well. That’d be enough.

TSons already have AP-2 bolters. There’s no need to change them.


Tsons keep the ap2
GK have had "Psybolt Ammunition" equipment before, and it's in a weird place right now. Giving them and TSons ap2 on their bolters stands them apart from the other marines in their own regard.
All relative point costs should be accurate, of course


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/05/17 14:23:11


Post by: Grimskul


 Just_Breathe wrote:
Jarms48 wrote:
Why should Grey Knights get AP-2 bolters? Just make their stormbolters AP-1 as well. That’d be enough.

TSons already have AP-2 bolters. There’s no need to change them.


Tsons keep the ap2
GK have had "Psybolt Ammunition" equipment before, and it's in a weird place right now. Giving them and TSons ap2 on their bolters stands them apart from the other marines in their own regard.
All relative point costs should be accurate, of course


Yeah, but that Psybolt Ammunition upgrade that you could take in 5th only increased the strength characteristic of that weapon's attack by 1, not increasing the AP capability. I don't think there should be too much overlap into what other armies might have, especially when GK already are sporting force weapons and more shots per guy.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/05/17 18:08:48


Post by: Wyldhunt


Honestly, I've considered using the GK rules (possibly with imperial allies) along with Thousand Sons models in the past when GK felt like they were better at the Sons' gimmick than the Sons themselves. Giving GK inferno bolts (which have already been made less special by AP creep) wouldn't help with that.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/05/18 01:41:13


Post by: skysky


Wyldhunt wrote:
Kaied wrote:"Buffing" your enemy's save makes it a terrible weapon, right? That's the point, it just makes it worse than using an AP0 weapon. Instead of "Power Creep" and adding more AP to everything, do the opposite on what are supposed to be weak weapons anyway.

I think I dislike it mostly because it's counter-intuitive. Sure, you technically unlock more gradiations of AP, but explaining to a newbie that their guns are so not lethal that they actually make enemies more likely to survive than usual seems likely to result in both confusion and disappointment. Sort of the opposite of a power fantasy there. Plus, you run into that weird area where an AP +1 weapon against a marine in cover is actually no more effective than an AP0 weapon (he's rolling a 2+ either way), so presumably the lower cost of an AP+1 option actually makes it more powerful in terms of cost-effectiveness.

So the whole thing strikes me as a kind of awkward fix to a pretty straight-forward problem. Lethality is a bit too high. Some units have a bit more AP than they probably warrant. We can pretty much just undo a lot of the power boosts various units/weapons have gotten in the last few years and probably land in an alright place.

SergentSilver wrote:
I don't see any reason a weapon shooting at you should make your armor better than it not shooting at you unless it's some kind of buff gun. What they should do is fix their system and stop limiting themselves to D6. At this point, D10 would be more appropriate and allow far better variance in stat lines to compensate for perceived differences in weapons.

Or just change everything into massive numbers like KT and WC to allow more nuance in the stats, even if it ends up balancing out roughly the same anyway. (This is semi-sarcastic, since the D6 limiter means that both Armor and AP would have to remain unchanged with the way they currently work.)


*Breaks out the stick used to beat dead horses*
Easier solution: Just back off on the extra pip of AP a bunch of ranged weapons have been getting. So pulse rifles and bolt rifles (and bolters) can go back to AP0. Reconsider whether or not heavy bolters, splinter cannons, etc. need to be D2. Make scatbikes 1 heavy weapon per 3 bikes again. Fiddle with the points of 2W marines so that their cost makes sense in a game without all the anti-marine power creep we've been seeing. Anyone with an old version of their faction's codex can pretty well tell you what form the game's lethality creep has taken. What if we just ctrl + z a lot of those from the last few editions?


I have long thought that moving to a D10 AND making things a significant increase in points would be the best way to get granularity. But neither will happen any time soon, points increase would be most likely before the dice change if either were to happen. I think Wyldhunt has the best and most obvious starting point. As someone having old codices of multiple factions back to 3rd edition, (to me at least) the power creep stands out like a pink elephant....playing a trombone.


Bolters should have Ap-1 @ 2022/06/04 19:03:12


Post by: johnpjones1775


no they shouldn't
AP is already way too common, and the game is already way too lethal as it is.
we don't need more small arms becoming better at destroying tanks and killing monsters.