Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Power weapons ignore armor.
But why don't they have any beneficial rules when attacking vehicles?

Against vehicles, power weapons have the same effect as cc weapons.
Power weapons can scythe through the super-dense armor of terminators and astartes, but against the weak, rusted armor of an ork truck, there's still usually only a 1 in 6 chance of glancing (@ S4)

I propose that power weapons, power fists, power klaws, force weapons, and lightning claws are given an AP 1 characteristic (or some form of cc equivilant), that way, when they do glance/pen. they will inflict much more grevious dammage.

Just my oppinion.

I think it'd be good. Power fists might not need it, but power weapons definitely need some sort of bonus over "punch with fist" vs tanks.

ph34r wrote:Power fists might not need quote]
They defiantely don't need it, but I figure, if a power sword should get ap1, then a power fist, which is more expensive (in most if not all circumstances) should get it too.

I'm going to go with a power sword can't cut down a land raider no matter how many times you swing is. I understand that a space marine can glance a wave serpent and a power fist can penetrate a rhino, but they really don't need to be AP 1. AP 1 is reserved (by the looks of it) for the strongest of the strong attacks, i mean plasma is supposively as hot as the sun and is only ap2. While i do agree power weapons deserve a bonus i think ap 1 is a little much.

Even if a powersword was ap1 it still wouldn't be able to penetrate a landraider.

I think it's a good idea. Doesn't increase your chance of damaging a vehicle, but when you do damage it you are likely to do more.

AP 1 I'm not too fond of. However I could see it as "adding 1 or 2 (pending play testing) to rolls to penetrate vehicle armor."

I feel this represents the power weapons ability to cut through armor without making it AP1 which tend to be dedicated anti-armor weapons (Rail gun / Zoanthrope power)

Agree with OP Power weapons should definately get some sort of bonus against vehicles not as good as PF but somewhere in between a chainsword and a powerfist

Ed_Bodger wrote:Agree with OP Power weapons should definately get some sort of bonus against vehicles not as good as PF but somewhere in between a chainsword and a powerfist

Well, since Chainswords do nothing additional, I guess PW could do next to nothing additional? While I agree that Power Swords would likely have some sort of effect, depending on whose fluff you are reading they aren't like Light Sabers that some people think they are. By that I mean, making a quick swipe at a tank probably wouldn't cleave off the barrel. Remember, infantry armor in 40k is still very different from vehicle armor.

I would agree that opponents like Orks, who assemble their vehicles out of scrap material, would be horribly effected by power weapons, which are written as being able to cut easily through this sort of material. But vehicle armor is thick and heavy, even the lightest armor the (fluff) powerful Lasgun is unable to do a thing to! So while Power weapons should, not unreasonably, have some sort of additional effect in the fluff over a chainsword, I would say in practice the strength of the user is more important.

In relation to Powerfists, which are designed for those that are using them, the situation is very different. In fluff, Powerfists do have a finite strength, however that is finite in relation to each Powerfist design! So a Powerfist made for a Space Marine would be just as powerful if it were wielded by a Guardsmen, but the poor Guardsmen would probably be unable to lift the damn thing! Likewise, a Powerfist made for a Guardsmen would be the same strength for a Space Marine, who would probably just use it to open ration tins if they can get their hand inside the weapon!

Giving Melta Bombs AP1 would be better. Then you'd have more reason to take Power Weapon, or Melta Bombs and a Power Fist. Currently you're better off going for Melta Bombs and Power Weapon or paying the premium for a Power Fist.

technically they do.

Weapons with an AP of - get -1 on the damage chart. close combat attacks don't have that

Power weapons don't get that negative modifier.


I might be wrong on this.


It would be nice for PWs to get a bonus

As is, they practically have AP2.

Klawz wrote:As is, they practically have AP2.

Exactly. I can't see a power weapon doing anything near the damage of a melta/multimelta. The way the rule for PW's is written, they pretty much are AP2

I think that some of the posters here may be missing something. A power weapon (not fist) on a space marine would still only glance a rhino on a 6. It would merely give you a 1 in 6 chance to actually wreck the thing. That's after you rolled to hit and penetrate...doesn't seem like such a huge bonus to me.

Against Landraiders, certain leman russ variants and Monoliths it would still be useless.

Lukus83 wrote:I think that some of the posters here may be missing something. A power weapon (not fist) on a space marine would still only glance a rhino on a 6. It would merely give you a 1 in 6 chance to actually wreck the thing. That's after you rolled to hit and penetrate...doesn't seem like such a huge bonus to me.
Against Landraiders, certain leman russ variants and Monoliths it would still be useless.

So basically this would only benefit characters of S4 or better that are equipped with a power weapon..... yeah, I would give this rule suggestion a "no."

There are so precious few weapons in the game that have AP 1, should we really add this ability to one of the most common? Granted, as Lukus mentioned, the [comparatively] low strength would mean that some vehicles would remain out of reach of the marines. More to the point, I think it puts about 3 vehicles out of reach: Land Raider, Monolith and Leman Russ Demolisher variants. The fact that you get to attack rear armor against most vehicles is already taking into account the damage you can do against them when you're up close and personal.

Most of the weapons that have AP1 are those of some serious mass destruction. Meltas, Zoanthrope-Brain-Bolt, Tau Rail-ka-sploder...these are weapons that do such heinous damage that even being grazed by one can potentially wreck a vehicle. Remember, this is the company you have to compare weapons with when you're talking AP1 boosts to anything and I don't see many space marines liquefying a Land Raider with their minds anytime soon.

RxGhost wrote:... I don't see many space marines liquefying a Land Raider with their minds anytime soon.

I did once. It was at Thermopolis... Wyoming. A force of Chaos Space Marines was assaulting the local pharmacy, looking to raid for supplies to make crystal meth. Their Land Raider was about to roll over the ATM and nab the cash as a tertiary objective. But Battle Brother Methuselah put a stop to that with his ability to "liquefy a Land Raider with his mind anytime soon" (tm). It would have been more impressive if he hadn't done the silly cat ear dance thing afterwards.

ph34r wrote:I think it'd be good. Power fists might not need it, but power weapons definitely need some sort of bonus over "punch with fist" vs tanks.

Powerfists already have it.
I like this idea.

Jihallah wrote:
Exactly. I can't see a power weapon doing anything near the damage of a melta/multimelta.

Melta weaponry = Weaponry firing extremely over heated rounds designed to melt armor.

Power weaponry = Weaponry charged with intense energy designed to melt armor...



Other points,

"Power Weapons deserve AP1 but Powerfists/Chainfists do not"

Why would a chainfist not deserve AP1 but a Meltagun does (Chainfist costs much more and doesnt have 6inch <12 inch for multimelta> range)?

And if a power weapon would have AP1 (due to the heated charge of the weapon) why would a powerfist not (it is charged the same way). If the fist were not cahrged the same way, why would it Ignore armor saves?

"Melta Bombs should get +1 on the table"

Yes

"But non-power weapons <Weapons that do not ignore save> don't count as AP-"

They should.

_____
This is kinda a subtopic of a (slightly) older topic http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/60/275811.page

At first I'm like this sounds like a good idea, but after thinking about closely, I'm gonna hae to agree with Skinnattittar on this one and say no.

What the OP is basically saying is that STR 4 power weapons should have AP 1. Because you can glance rear armor 10 on a 6, but what about models with STR 3? Having AP 1 power weapons is useless for them since they can't pen vehicles anyway.

The armies that benefit from this are all types of marines, CSM, Daemons, Orks (on the charge with burnas), Nids
Armies which this does not benefits: Eldar, Dark Eldar, Witch Hunters, Tau, Imperial Guard.
Armies that don't care: Necrons (gauss can already glance everything)

So basically the armies that have crappy technology AKA the imperium can better use power weapons then the most advanced races in the universe Eldar, Tau can't? I'm not sure I like this.

If this change were to be implemented then there would have to be a point cost reduction for armies with only S 3 powerweapons, since the added utility of the weapon does not benefit them. Similar to cheaper power fists for S 3 models compared to S 4 models. 5 point reduction in pw's for all S3 models then maybe otherwise it is just to unfair.

Also a side note: If you look at the USR rending, it says the weapon functions as a power weapon and has AP of 2. Thereby giving some suport of the argument that PWs should be ap 2 and not 1.

Rending is actually AP2 + an additional D6 to pen vehicles. Power + Ap2 makes no sense.

Sorry I may have been unclear. My point was that if rending which also grants power weapon status to a weapon (in addition to the extra penetration) is only AP 2 why would a power weapon by AP1.

dumplingman wrote:
Armies which this does not benefits: Eldar, Dark Eldar, Witch Hunters, Tau, Imperial Guard.
Armies that don't care: Necrons (gauss can already glance everything)


So basically the armies that have crappy technology AKA the imperium can better use power weapons then the most advanced races in the universe Eldar, Tau can't? I'm not sure I like this.

Tau have Powerweapons?!?!?!

I mean, certain Kroot do, but don't they have higher then str3?

Dark Eldar Incubi have Str 4 and powerweapons, Hellglaives are Str 4 Power weapons as well, wyches don't have powerweapons standard (at all?) their troops do not have powerweapons.

Eldar have Str 9 against vehicles with Shining Spears and Scorpions have str 4(or better) IIRC I am almost positive that Banshees are at least str 4.

Repentia are Str 6 powerweapons, and any SoB with a powerfist will also have Str 6.

IG have Ogryns for their melee squads.

The better question is how many Str3 Powerweapons actually exist in 40k...

It would obviously benefit the armies you listed more then armies like Tau due to the fact that armies like Nids, Orks, CSM and SM have alot more Melee options then the other lists...

dumplingman wrote:
Also a side note: If you look at the USR rending, it says the weapon functions as a power weapon and has AP of 2. Thereby giving some suport of the argument that PWs should be ap 2 and not 1.

If you were using the USR of Rending to support PW having AP2 why would the Rule say it functions like a powerweapons AND has an AP of 2, as opposed to simply saying "Functions like a power weapon (e.g. AP2)" the inclusion of AND could insinuate that they are two seperate points to be included into the rule, and if they were two seperate points, then they would not necessarily correlate (typically the contrary)

If you were using the USR of Rending to support PW having AP2 why would the Rule say it functions like a powerweapons AND has an AP of 2, as opposed to simply saying "Functions like a power weapon (e.g. AP2)" the inclusion of AND could insinuate that they are two seperate points to be included into the rule, and if they were two seperate points, then they would not necessarily correlate (typically the contrary)

I can see your point, but I think the reason it says they have AP is specifically for sniper rifles and other long range weapons. But I will concede you do have a point on it being two seperate things.

Dark Eldar Incubi have Str 4 and powerweapons, Hellglaives are Str 4 Power weapons as well, wyches don't have powerweapons standard (at all?) their troops do not have powerweapons.

Eldar have Str 9 against vehicles with Shining Spears and Scorpions have str 4(or better) IIRC I am almost positive that Banshees are at least str 4.

Repentia are Str 6 powerweapons, and any SoB with a powerfist will also have Str 6.

IG have Ogryns for their melee squads.


The better question is how many Str3 Powerweapons actually exist in 40k...

It would obviously benefit the armies you listed more then armies like Tau due to the fact that armies like Nids, Orks, CSM and SM have alot more Melee options then the other lists...

As a dark eldar player I totally forgot about incubi (I hate them lol) Hellglaives give +1 S on the charge but they aren't power weapons (I wish they were). Yeah wychs have S3 and have the option of the character purchsing an upgrade. You also have the option of buying power weapons as well. also dark eldar players get the agonizer specifically for this reason. The agonizer is a power weapon that auto wounds on a 4+ and auto glances a vehicle on a 6+ on the pen roll.

eldar banshees indeed have S 3, scorpions don't have powerweapons (exarch can get pfist) but chainswords that add +1 S, and the singing spears wych blades aren't power weapons so don't enter into the equation.

Sisters of battle do not have S 4. Repentia which are joke have s6 chain fists so they roll 2D6 for ap and sister's characters cannot take power fists they get the eviscorator instead. But again the point isn't comparing powerfists its power weapons. If any model in the army actually had a power weapon it would be str 3.

Ogryn don't have power weapons.

Now to adress what models have S3 power weapons lets look any race with a base statline of S3. Armies include SOB, IG, Eldar, Dark Eldar and tau. I meantion tau even though they don't have any because their base stat line is S 3

dumplingman wrote:

As a dark eldar player I totally forgot about incubi (I hate them lol) Hellglaives give +1 S on the charge but they aren't power weapons (I wish they were). Yeah wychs have S3 and have the option of the character purchsing an upgrade. You also have the option of buying power weapons as well. also dark eldar players get the agonizer specifically for this reason. The agonizer is a power weapon that auto wounds on a 4+ and auto glances a vehicle on a 6+ on the pen roll.

That same succubus can buy a punisher as a powerweapon (making it str 4) and the agoniser's 6 to glance all vehicles makes it the same as Any Str4 Power weapon vs AV 10 but also gives it the benefit of being able to Glace AV11+ (so the +1 would be BETTER for DE then str4 PW armies)

or better yeah, Reaver Jetbike Syberite with Animus Vitai, Punisher and Combat Drugs (Should be 50pts, if not, the drugs can be dropped for a tormentor helm) giving you 5 attacks on the charge of Str 7 AP 1 against vehicles

Also this kinda applies to all races but the only Str 3 powerweapons I know of can be given to Upgrade Characters of squads that are not intended to be piercing armor in melee anyway (with the exception of certain HQs)

The only Tau Powerweapons I know of are found on Kroot (min str 4 to Krootox rider with is Str 6) and Steal/Crisis suits which are Str 4/5 respectively... unless you can give Firewarriors/pathfinders powerweapons (which would be hilarious) they would be MEQ in terms of the AP1 to Powerweapons "buff"

dumplingman wrote:
Eldar banshees indeed have S 3, scorpions don't have powerweapons (exarch can get pfist) but chainswords that add +1 S, and the singing spears wych blades aren't power weapons so don't enter into the equation.

So then outside of Powerfist type weapons, the Eldar don't really have much interms of powerweapons anyway (Maybe they make up for it in ranged untis? Like a squad of meltaguns?!?! )

dumplingman wrote:
Sisters of battle do not have S 4. Repentia which are joke have s6 chain fists so they roll 2D6 for ap and sister's characters cannot take power fists they get the eviscorator instead. But again the point isn't comparing powerfists its power weapons. If any model in the army actually had a power weapon it would be str 3.

What other Witchhunter sqaud is intended for CC?

dumplingman wrote:
Now to adress what models have S3 power weapons lets look any race with a base statline of S3. Armies include SOB, IG, Eldar, Dark Eldar and tau. I meantion tau even though they don't have any because their base stat line is S 3

What Tau are you reading? Only like, 3 units have Str 3 in the list... Firewarriors, Pathfinders and Ethereals...

And of all those lists, with the exception of Ogryns, their primary CC selections have at least some form of dealing with AV10 in melee, or are DRAMATICALLY better in CC against other infantry.

While the change would infact buff lists like Ogryns and Nids (and even Chaos Daemons, kinda) more then say Eldar or Imp Guard, wouldn't that be more because Ork/Nid armies are more Punchy then the Shooty lists of IG/Tau/Eldar as opposed to the factoring of Str3 Powerweapons (which shouldn't really exist anyway)

tau should get power weapons cause they are so rubbich in cc

Kroot are the only tau thing that can acctually kill something in cc

Guys. Think about this.

Tanks are tanks. They have a lot of armor. In 40k many of them are akin to mobile gun bunkers. If you take a sword, no matter how powerful, and stab a tank, it is unlikely to do much. This is not anime, where some dude can exert the necessary leverage to cleave a tank in half effortlessly (a Daemon Prince or a few of the special characters might though).

Even if it penetrates armor, it has only cut a tiny hole. This is pretty unimpressive when compared to the melta, which saturates the interior with liquifying microwaves, the lascannon which scythes right the hell through to the other side while cutting a broad swathe, or the powerfist that causes seismic blunt trauma to whatever is on the other side of that armor plate. The 6 necessary to cause a penetrating hit is reflective of the unlikelihood that you actually hit something vital.

It is a personal weapon designed for use against personal armor. Even if it was AP1 you wouldn't take it as dedicated antitank or even primarily choose it for that purpose.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Shas'O Mont'yr wrote:tau should get power weapons cause they are so rubbich in cc

Kroot are the only tau thing that can acctually kill something in cc

It wouldn't mesh with their play style. If you're in close combat with anything but your kroot then you've already made some kind of tactical error.

to many broken up quotes to requote! I will adress things though!


I'm not saying tau have P weapons, I'm just saying that their S stat is 3 sorry for the confusion.

First of all I think we shouldn't make comparisons to things outside of power weapons really since its off topic. Because it isn't helpful to either of our arguements. quoting specific units that can fulfil the tank destruction outside of power weapons isn't helpful.

And I'm not only looking at dedicated CC units getting power weapons. Giving my sister of battle vet a power weapon fulfils same role as giving my tac squad sarge a power weapon. What I'm stating, is that if PW gave +1 damage results on the vehicle damage table, then models with S3 no not benefit but models with higher S, 4+ do benefit. Just like how S4 + models benefit more from power fists than S3 models. Therefore to keep it in line, either models with lower S need cheaper power weapons or models with S4 need more expensive ones. Just like how S 3 powerfists are 15 points and S4 models with powerfists cost 25 points. This is because the weapon has a vastly different function on models with a higher S

Also every single marine, CSM army has a way of dealing with AV 10 easily! they have Krak grenades on nearly every model. Honestly the more I think about it, the +1 to the damage result to vehiles is too powerful, especially if you include in on anything that is a power weapon and not just basic ones.

Mercurial wrote:Guys. Think about this.

Tanks are tanks. They have a lot of armor. In 40k many of them are akin to mobile gun bunkers. If you take a sword, no matter how powerful, and stab a tank, it is unlikely to do much. This is not anime, where some dude can exert the necessary leverage to cleave a tank in half effortlessly (a Daemon Prince or a few of the special characters might though)...


..It is a personal weapon designed for use against personal armor. Even if it was AP1 you wouldn't take it as dedicated antitank or even primarily choose it for that purpose.

As I understand it, Terminator Armor and Rhinos are made out of the exact same material... (Ceramite over plasteel, or the other way around)

Also, as far as Krak grenades are concerned, they would not get +1 on the table as they are not powerweapons.

I think the endgame point is this

Power weapons counting as AP1 makes sense logically,

While it would make powerweapon melee attacks better against most vehicles, I think the honest answer is try to keep away the guys with powerweapons from your vehicle... It really wouldn't be that much of a game changer.

I just think there is a bit of "Badass" factor to being able to have your Termi-champ with chainfist have the option of carving open a tank-shocking landraider as a 'death or glory move' instead of using the Combi-melta shot "because it gets +1" (Which yes, I also believe you should be able to melee for a 'death or glory')

Daemon-Archon Ren wrote:I think the endgame point is this
Power weapons counting as AP1 makes sense logically,

This is crap logic. Thus far, the "logical sense" behind Power Weapons being AP1 is "because I want them to be." Other posters have pointed out that Power Weapons are effectively AP2 because that is the best armor save on the table. So at a minimum PW are AP2. Next bit of logic is that the very few AP1 weapons out there are basically all high strength firearms, as opposed to low strength close combat weapons. Just by following some simple logic, we can also derive that since PW are being swung by a relatively low strength model (with a few exceptions) its ability to scythe through armor is highly unlikely.

Truth be told, yes, a change like this will have a greater impact on the game than some people are woefully predicting. If my character can attack a vehicle half a dozen times, the chances of doing appreciable damage with +1 on the table is much better. Even if the odds are low, the odds are infinitely better to destroy a vehicle compared to not getting the +1 AP1 bonus (currently it is 0, so anything more than zero is infinitely better). If this were to be seriously considered, I would have to suggest a +10pts increase for power weapons for units S4 or better.

Skinnattittar wrote:

Daemon-Archon Ren wrote:I think the endgame point is this
Power weapons counting as AP1 makes sense logically,

This is crap logic. Thus far, the "logical sense" behind Power Weapons being AP1 is "because I want them to be." Other posters have pointed out that Power Weapons are effectively AP2 because that is the best armor save on the table. So at a minimum PW are AP2. Next bit of logic is that the very few AP1 weapons out there are basically all high strength firearms, as opposed to low strength close combat weapons. Just by following some simple logic, we can also derive that since PW are being swung by a relatively low strength model (with a few exceptions) its ability to scythe through armor is highly unlikely.

Daemon-Archon Ren wrote:

Melta weaponry = Weaponry firing extremely over heated rounds designed to melt armor.

Power weaponry = Weaponry charged with intense energy designed to melt armor...


Other points,

"Power Weapons deserve AP1 but Powerfists/Chainfists do not"

Why would a chainfist not deserve AP1 but a Meltagun does (Chainfist costs much more and doesnt have 6inch <12 inch for multimelta> range)?

And if a power weapon would have AP1 (due to the heated charge of the weapon) why would a powerfist not (it is charged the same way). If the fist were not cahrged the same way, why would it Ignore armor saves?

"Melta Bombs should get +1 on the table"

Yes

"But non-power weapons <Weapons that do not ignore save> don't count as AP-"

They should.

_____
This is kinda a subtopic of a (slightly) older topic http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/60/275811.page

Thank you for reading this thread