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.

Am I the only one who actually thinks Grav Guns are bad for the game? To be honest, I dont see much problems to include a couples of them in your list. However, bringning a cheesy list with full Grav guns and OP Centurions is really killing the power of every unit of 2+ armors, which was a great add to the game in my opnion. At first, you had to pay attention on your moving phase, so you can avoid AP 2 weapons and do your best to get rid of them. Right now? It seems like bringing units with 2+ armors is kind of a waste if you play vs any factions with grav guns cause lets be honest, they are everywhere... I did enjoy playing terminators / grey knights / MC and laugh when i did get some 1s but right now i feel like i should avoid to bring them and focus a little bit more on bringing more models.

What you guys think ?

While it is too strong, Grav guns didn't kill 2+ armor. 2+ armor spam died long ago to just massed bolter/bolter equivalent fire.

Grav guns shoveled the dirt onto 2+ armor's coffin, but they didn't kill it.

There's nothing wrong with bringing a unit or two equipped with Grav. Outside of hyper competitive "Tournament" style games though, it's a dick move to spam the living crap out of Grav, (or any other obnoxious item such as mass D-Scythes or Decurion 'Crons).

The biggest problem I have with Grav though is that it's far too much of an outright, all-or-nothing gimmick. If I'm playing my Daemons for example, I laugh at Grav spam as it tries in vain to wound everything on 6's. But if I want to bring out some CSM's, it's a pointless game as my codex is the oldest book still in the game and has no real way of dealing with an easily spammed weapon that removes almost everything I can field on a 3+ or better...

I dislike Grav, but only because I feel that "thing that kills heavy infantry with ap2" is overused and if they wanted an anti MC weapon it should wound based on high toughness=easier to kill.

the_scotsman wrote:
I dislike Grav, but only because I feel that "thing that kills heavy infantry with ap2" is overused and if they wanted an anti MC weapon it should wound based on high toughness=easier to kill.

I like the idea !


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:
While it is too strong, Grav guns didn't kill 2+ armor. 2+ armor spam died long ago to just massed bolter/bolter equivalent fire.

Grav guns shoveled the dirt onto 2+ armor's coffin, but they didn't kill it.

At least it was based on your luck to not roll 1s and it was different every singles games, which was very funny.

I think the whole point is to crush enemies carrying around too much armor for their own good (ie Centurions). A change to wounding on high Toughness wouldn't make as much sense.

Personally, I like them. As a SM player, they are reasonable enough to put on cents but not game breaking enough for me to switch my combi-meltas over to.

As a Dark Eldar Covens player, I find them laughable and hope my opponents spam the ever loving crap out of them.

 Jimsolo wrote:
I think the whole point is to crush enemies carrying around too much armor for their own good (ie Centurions). A change to wounding on high Toughness wouldn't make as much sense.

Personally, I like them. As a SM player, they are reasonable enough to put on cents but not game breaking enough for me to switch my combi-meltas over to.

As a Dark Eldar Covens player, I find them laughable and hope my opponents spam the ever loving crap out of them.

When it's just a unit of Dev Cents that haven't also allied in the likes of Draigo on top of including Tiggy/Loth, Grav isn't too bad to deal with...

When it's a Gladius Strike Force going full on MSU to spam as much Grav as possible? Sorry but, GTFO. Odds are that's going to be a pointless game for one person.

Grav is (apart from tiggy grav centstar crap) no more effective at killing TEQ than plasma. And the units that can carry grav cannons - the real threat - are typically flimsy and I don't think any of them can get an invulnerable save on their own. So get your Ignores Cover and/or AP2 stuff out of mothballs and blow them away.

Grav's biggest strength is the Graviton rule, which is also its biggest weakness, because it renders the weapon type ineffective against lightly armored foes. I'd like to see more weapons with a similar paradigm, honestly, rather than see anti-tank weapons be trained on infantry.

Grav is indeed bad, it's rate of fire and grav amps make it moderately effective against all targets and capable of deleting others. However, as previous posters have alluded to there is a lot more that is "killing the game" than just grav (though as a GK player, it does cause me an undue amount of pain).

The problem is Salvo, drop that and Grav is fine.

Grav kills Plasma due to RoF and lack of gets hot which removes a lot of the risk. In general the weakness of Grav is carried by the fact it has such high RoF when compared to things like melta and plasma. Its 1 in 6 chance per hit to auto immobilize a vehicle (again its high RoF is problematic for this) works to widen the gap between standard vehicles and super heavies which is something that this game doesn't need.

I think the issue with Grav is that it duplicates the role of plasma, while being even more powerful than plasma against certain armies, and weaker than plasma against others, while also being a hybrid of other weapon roles, thus being an almost "do-it-all" weapon.

Basically, there are three overall categories of ranged weapons SM can carry: anti-light infantry (4+ or worse), anti-heavy infantry (3+ or better), and anti-armor (whether vehicles or MCs); further divided into long and short ranged.

Anti-Light Infantry: Short: Flamers / Long: Heavy Bolters (which generally still suck at that role after all this time)
Anti-Heavy Infantry: Short: Plasmaguns / Long: Plasma Cannons,
Anti-Armor: Short: Meltagun / Long: Lascannon
Hybrid: Missile Launchers for both Light Infantry and Anti-Armor at long range (while being mediocre at both) and Multi-Meltas for short to midrange Anti-Armor

Grav is a hybrid, hitting all three of those categories together. It has enough shots to deal with light infantry (combined with grav-amps on the heavy grav especially), nullifies the armor save of heavy infantry, doesn't care about the toughness of MCs, and also threatens armor, with automatic immobilized results and HP damage to vehicles. This isn't to say Grav is the end-all-be-all, as it does poorly in certain match-ups (demons, for example, where only 6s will do anything). In many ways, Grav is almost the weapon SM should have had all along, as it can handle everything, which is what SM are supposed to be able to do (with varying degrees of success).

Interestingly enough, this is also why Volkite weapons from 30K are considered "OP" at times. With their S5/6 and number of shots, they can threaten light vehicles. The S6 versions have longer ranges (30" and 45"). And Volkite also finally fills that one role that has been missing for SM all these years: effective ranged anti-light infantry. The numerous threads in the Proposed Rules section and elsewhere bemoaning the ineffectiveness of Heavy Bolters and what can be done to make them worth taking are a testament to that fact.

But this is not unique to Space Marines. Any time an army gets something that makes them good at something they've historically been poor at, it is automatically frowned upon until time passes and people get used to it and the next big thing comes along.

 greyknight12 wrote:
Grav is indeed bad, it's rate of fire and grav amps make it moderately effective against all targets and capable of deleting others. However, as previous posters have alluded to there is a lot more that is "killing the game" than just grav (though as a GK player, it does cause me an undue amount of pain).

Well lets say its hard to play GK these days... If you wanna play them, you most allie them with .... Centurions ! hahaha Inquisition is also fine tho


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson Devil wrote:
The problem is Salvo, drop that and Grav is fine.

Didnt you read haha


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
I think the issue with Grav is that it duplicates the role of plasma, while being even more powerful than plasma against certain armies, and weaker than plasma against others, while also being a hybrid of other weapon roles, thus being an almost "do-it-all" weapon.

Basically, there are three overall categories of ranged weapons SM can carry: anti-light infantry (4+ or worse), anti-heavy infantry (3+ or better), and anti-armor (whether vehicles or MCs); further divided into long and short ranged.

Anti-Light Infantry: Short: Flamers / Long: Heavy Bolters (which generally still suck at that role after all this time)
Anti-Heavy Infantry: Short: Plasmaguns / Long: Plasma Cannons,
Anti-Armor: Short: Meltagun / Long: Lascannon
Hybrid: Missile Launchers for both Light Infantry and Anti-Armor at long range (while being mediocre at both) and Multi-Meltas for short to midrange Anti-Armor

Grav is a hybrid, hitting all three of those categories together. It has enough shots to deal with light infantry (combined with grav-amps on the heavy grav especially), nullifies the armor save of heavy infantry, doesn't care about the toughness of MCs, and also threatens armor, with automatic immobilized results and HP damage to vehicles. This isn't to say Grav is the end-all-be-all, as it does poorly in certain match-ups (demons, for example, where only 6s will do anything). In many ways, Grav is almost the weapon SM should have had all along, as it can handle everything, which is what SM are supposed to be able to do (with varying degrees of success).

Interestingly enough, this is also why Volkite weapons from 30K are considered "OP" at times. With their S5/6 and number of shots, they can threaten light vehicles. The S6 versions have longer ranges (30" and 45"). And Volkite also finally fills that one role that has been missing for SM all these years: effective ranged anti-light infantry. The numerous threads in the Proposed Rules section and elsewhere bemoaning the ineffectiveness of Heavy Bolters and what can be done to make them worth taking are a testament to that fact.

But this is not unique to Space Marines. Any time an army gets something that makes them good at something they've historically been poor at, it is automatically frowned upon until time passes and people get used to it and the next big thing comes along.

I guess you are right, next codexes will have a way to counter these guns

Experiment 626 wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
I think the whole point is to crush enemies carrying around too much armor for their own good (ie Centurions). A change to wounding on high Toughness wouldn't make as much sense.

Personally, I like them. As a SM player, they are reasonable enough to put on cents but not game breaking enough for me to switch my combi-meltas over to.

As a Dark Eldar Covens player, I find them laughable and hope my opponents spam the ever loving crap out of them.

When it's just a unit of Dev Cents that haven't also allied in the likes of Draigo on top of including Tiggy/Loth, Grav isn't too bad to deal with...

When it's a Gladius Strike Force going full on MSU to spam as much Grav as possible? Sorry but, GTFO. Odds are that's going to be a pointless game for one person.

In a tailored list against an MEQ opponent mayhaps. But in a tournament where you don't know for sure who you'll be facing? GROPO guard, orks, Dark Eldar, Harlequins, and daemons all giggle and hope they draw this list.

I wouldn't say that grav itself is killing the game, but that certain platforms and weapons are overperforming. Grav Centurions are fine normally, but only become OP with allies.

My biggest pet peeve is that grav weapons are effective against virtually everything, when that's normally the niche of plasma. I think the regular grav gun is fine; Salvo 2/3 at 18" only becomes dangerous when you start to spam it. It's the grav cannon that's overperforming, as most of its platforms ignore the salvo penalty and can go for the full six shots. Add grav amps to let you re-roll wounds and penetration, and grav starts to get ridiculous.

Personally, I would change the grav cannon to Salvo 3/4 and make grav amps do nothing against vehicles.

Being a daemons player, I am rarely bothered by it.
However I don't get to use it.

It is top tier for what it is, but if removed I fear the new top tier would be OTT instead.
Being the best at a role instantly gives something a bad start.

Take out MCs with 2+ armor and the WK and there is no more need for grav.

Martel732 wrote:
Take out MCs with 2+ armor and the WK and there is no more need for grav.

I'm not against the principle of MCs having 2+ armour saves. It's just that the most common ones that do also happen to be undercosted.

 TheNewBlood wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Take out MCs with 2+ armor and the WK and there is no more need for grav.

I'm not against the principle of MCs having 2+ armour saves. It's just that the most common ones that do also happen to be undercosted.

MCs with 2+ armor won't die in a reasonable time to melta/plasma in my experience. The undercosted thing hurts as well, but there is a physical limitation to how many shots you can expect to get off against them and melta/plasma don't cut it.

Martel732 wrote:

 TheNewBlood wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Take out MCs with 2+ armor and the WK and there is no more need for grav.

I'm not against the principle of MCs having 2+ armour saves. It's just that the most common ones that do also happen to be undercosted.

MCs with 2+ armor won't die in a reasonable time to melta/plasma in my experience. The undercosted thing hurts as well, but there is a physical limitation to how many shots you can expect to get off against them and melta/plasma don't cut it.

I'm not sure I follow how melta and plasma don't kill MCs in a reasonable time. They cut through the armour, and wound on a 2 or 3. Sure, one meltagun or plasmagun isn't going to cut it, but that's why you bring multiples of those, both in the army and in specialist squads.

A 2+ armor save on MCs isn't really much of an issue. Most weapons that reliably wound them are already AP2 (not counting poison).

Meltas are a joke for MCs, since they can only be fired from a short distance and only cause one wound and don't get through the FNP of an MC.

Plasma is better, but you still need 12" range to double tap, you kill some of your own guys (regardless of T, so it's double bad for bikers) and S7 only wounds most MCs on a 3+, not a 2+. And it's still one less shot than grav.

It's hard to get the multiples you need of these two weapons into range before CC happens. Or, in the case of the Riptide, you many never get to shoot them at all from 12" away.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
A 2+ armor save on MCs isn't really much of an issue. Most weapons that reliably wound them are already AP2 (not counting poison).

I think it's a huge issue. It makes krak missiles and any kind of wound spam approach not viable on the time scale of a 40K game.

All this being said, I'd say that grav centurions that aren't invisible aren't really a problem. I'd say it's invisibility and the Loth dude that is the problem.

MCs with 2+ saves while walker vehicles can be killed by a single melta shot is actually one of the examples why the current 40k rules (as a whole) are so far from being a reasonably balanced game.

As a CSM player, I have quite an issue with Grav weapons, mostly because they kill both my troops and vehicles with relative ease while I have nothing to counter them. And no, I won't begin a daemon army just to get some allies.

Grav is an all-corners weapon that performs nicely in almost all situations. It outperforms plasma without its drawbacks, it outperforms rapid fire weapons except against light infantry, it can potentially outperform melta when firing at vehicles, and it basically outperforms everything else when trying to deal with MCs. Only exception is when facing foes with little to no armor, but guess what, marines already have bolters to deal with those.

In short, Grav is pure cheese. Not even the fact that even more ludicrous cheese has appeared in other armybooks since its introduction can or will change that.

The problem with Grav is twofold. It's extremely versatile and it's all too often got inbuilt ways to mitigate weaknesses It murders medium & heavy infantry and MC's, and even against vehicles you just need two 6's to kill 98% of the non-superheavy vehicles in the game.

Combined with the fact that it often got rerolls due to grav amps and is taken on Relentless platforms (bikers or Centurions or Skyhammer formations) that make its Salvo downsides pointless, it's a pretty one dimensional point-click-delete weapon option.

Were it just basic Grav Guns & pistols on Tac Squads and the like, Grav wouldn't be a huge problem. When given absurd numbers of shots on platforms that ignore Salvo downsides and rerolls to wound, it's absolutely absurd.

That said, 2+ save units had problems before grav weapons, but has been somewhat wonky for many editions (there were IG armies in 4E that would be packing 40 something plasma guns in 1500pts). Grav is just the latest thing.

Given how often my grav bikers fail to get the job done, I'd say that the cannons w/amps are the objectionable level of firepower. Which the BA don't get, by the way. Do DA have centurions?

And for the above poster, a WK or Riptide will mess up your CSM a lot faster than some BA on bikes with grav guns.

Martel732 wrote:
And for the above poster, a WK or Riptide will mess up your CSM a lot faster than some BA on bikes with grav guns.

This thread is not about WKs or Riptides though.

 Korinov wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
And for the above poster, a WK or Riptide will mess up your CSM a lot faster than some BA on bikes with grav guns.

This thread is not about WKs or Riptides though.

The thing is, grav weapons were given to Space Marines in the 6th edition codex to counter Wraithknights, Riptides, and Dreadknights. All of these are still undercosted for what they bring to the table, especially the Wraithknight. The introduction of Imperial Knights only gave more emphasis to the necessity of grav weapons.

Grav guns themselves are not the problem. They have three shots at 18 inches maximum if you don't move or are relentless. You would need to spam grav weapons to be effective. The problem is the grav cannon + amp on relentless platforms. Between Centstar and Skyhammer, vanilla marines now have an easy way to delete all but the least-susceptible units in the game.

 TheNewBlood wrote:

 Korinov wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
And for the above poster, a WK or Riptide will mess up your CSM a lot faster than some BA on bikes with grav guns.

This thread is not about WKs or Riptides though.

The thing is, grav weapons were given to Space Marines in the 6th edition codex to counter Wraithknights, Riptides, and Dreadknights.

That's a rather bold assumption. GW doesn't have a history of game balance design decisions of this sort of nature. Usually when something is added, it's because it sounded cool to someone and it looked like it could scratch that "whiz-bang" itch. One will notice no other armies were given such a hardcounter to these sorts of units.

 Korinov wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
And for the above poster, a WK or Riptide will mess up your CSM a lot faster than some BA on bikes with grav guns.

This thread is not about WKs or Riptides though.

In my mind the two cant be talked about separately.

Imho grav isn't too powerful alot of the time vs marines for example it's actually worse than plasma as your wounding on a 3+ rather than a 2+