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.

That Grav Weapons are to 7th edition what Assasult Cannons were to 4th is pretty clear. They are, generally speaking, the best generalist weapon for Marines to use in large amounts.

Not only are they dangerous to big monsters, but they're dangerous versus fliers, massed infantry, vehicles, most everything and anything that isn't a Daemon, and whatever the grav weapons don't get, the Bolters have handily covered.

Proposal:

Grav Pistols remain the same.

Grav Guns are 18", assault 1/blast.

Grav Cannons are now heavy 1/large blast.

This lets them serve as a "Heavy Crowd Suppression" weapon that isn't a Vindicator, but punishes elites for lingering in a place for too long. It gives Marines an assault blast weapon that isn't throwing grenades.

Granted, this gives Marines a harder time against Wraithknights and Riptides, but that's a completely different can of worms.

The problem with this proposal, to me, is that grav weapons aren't really intended for crowd-mulching, but rather for monster mashing with a secondary role against MEQ/TEQ.

I would propose instead some kind of exploding hits or exploding wounds mechanic: perhaps something like each hit inflicts multiple hits depending on the size of the model:

Normal - 1
Bulky/Very Bulky - 2
Extremely Bulky - 3
Monstrous Creature - 4
Gargantuan Creature - 5

But then, against vehicles, it should be 1 to 1, but on a 6 to pen, cause a "crew stunned" result instead of "immobilized".


Automatically Appended Next Post:
That said, I think I'd agree that some kind of man-portable blast weapon that can be fired on the move is useful. Maybe give the plasma gun an alt-fire mode that's S6 AP2 Assault 1, Blast, Gets Hot?

Why not just use the 30k rules for gravy?

You need the ROF to kill the MCs and GMCs.

My problems with going to Blast are:
1) While the Grav Gun competes with the PG, going to Blast makes the Cannon compete with the Plasma Cannon. So that doesn't really help.
2) The targets that should be afraid of Grav tend to be the type that care less for Blasts.

Going to Blast could work, but perhaps the right fix is to adjust the ROF?

Wouldn't dropping the ROF do a lot?

The scariest uses of Gray are Grav Cents, Bikes, and Skyhammer.

All 3 of those have Relentless. So, for the SM side, we have a weapon who's main drawback is being Salvo, really only being a problem when Salvo can be ignored.

If Grav Guns were salvo 2/2 and Cannons were salvo 3/3, would Grav still be a problem? Would it be worthless?

As things are now, Grav is Plasma ++ for anything with relentless, and Plasma- for anything with it. With the change, it should be more of a decision between Plasma and Grav.

Using the 30k Grav rules would be an almost instant fix for the OP of 40k Grav. Unfortunately, that would indirectly buff some Monstrous and Gargantuan Creatures since Grav is one of the main things keeping some of those models in check.

I would be happy with just getting ride of immobilization result on vehicles. With the OP'ness of MC's I think the rest can stay the same as they are nearly the only weapon that can respond to them.

I'd be all for just getting rid of them as they have no place in the game to begin with.

 KingmanHighborn wrote:
I'd be all for just getting rid of them as they have no place in the game to begin with.

Grav or mc? Or marines?

 KingmanHighborn wrote:
I'd be all for just getting rid of them as they have no place in the game to begin with.

GCs? I don't think anyone would argue against that.

What if, instead of its current rules, it instead rolled to wound as such:

Infantry
Standard Infantry: 6+
Bulky: 4+
Very Bulky: 3+
Extremely Bulky: 2+

Vehicles: 4+ Glance
Heavy, Tank, or Skimmer: 3+ Glance
MCs: 3+
GMCs/SHV: 2+

The Grav gun is 18" salvo 1/1 Small Blast
The Grav Cannon is 24" salvo 1/1 Large Blast

So much lower ROF, and better against bigger targets.

Might be too complicated, though.

Yeah, no.

The point of Grav weapons is for dealing with high save targets and bypassing Toughness in doing so. Those kinds of high save targets are generally going to be given Invisibility whenever possible, so Blast means that you're not going to be able to do anything to them.


Putting it bluntly though? Salvo weapons are what Rapid Fire weapons should be. You want to see Salvo weapons get a nerf, that's one thing--but leave Grav alone.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Yeah, no.

The point of Grav weapons is for dealing with high save targets and bypassing Toughness in doing so. Those kinds of high save targets are generally going to be given Invisibility whenever possible, so Blast means that you're not going to be able to do anything to them.

Putting it bluntly though? Salvo weapons are what Rapid Fire weapons should be. You want to see Salvo weapons get a nerf, that's one thing--but leave Grav alone.

Nah, Grav has issues. The sheer amount of shots that can be put out, and all of them at AP: 2 is a bit ridiculous. I like the idea of having them wound based on regular, Bulky (bikes thrown in here, unless bikes just give "bulky"), Very Bulky, MC, GMC, etc. since it fits the fluff, still lets it be the stopping point for GMCs, and makes it less of a threat to infantry. If it were to wound based on bulk (or equivalent) grav now has a trade off, and it's no longer "good vs. everything but mobs" If it were to wound on that trak, I'd probably be fine with it's number of shots, but to have as many 'reroll to wound' shots as it does makes it strong vs. almost everything, and that's something that it should not be. By wounding on "bulk" so to speak, it also avoids the fluff issue of "how does this gravity based weapon hurt artificer armor the same way as it hurts terminator armor? doesn't it wound by weight?"

 Brennonjw wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Yeah, no.

The point of Grav weapons is for dealing with high save targets and bypassing Toughness in doing so. Those kinds of high save targets are generally going to be given Invisibility whenever possible, so Blast means that you're not going to be able to do anything to them.

Putting it bluntly though? Salvo weapons are what Rapid Fire weapons should be. You want to see Salvo weapons get a nerf, that's one thing--but leave Grav alone.

Nah, Grav has issues. The sheer amount of shots that can be put out, and all of them at AP: 2 is a bit ridiculous.

Again, the point is to deal with high save targets.

And for the points you pay for Grav-Cannons? Yeah. They damn well better be putting out a high volume of shots.

I like the idea of having them wound based on regular, Bulky (bikes thrown in here, unless bikes just give "bulky"), Very Bulky, MC, GMC, etc. since it fits the fluff, still lets it be the stopping point for GMCs, and makes it less of a threat to infantry.

You do know that Crisis and Stealth Suits are unit type: Jet Pack Infantry, right?

If it were to wound based on bulk (or equivalent) grav now has a trade off, and it's no longer "good vs. everything but mobs"

It already DOES have a trade-off. It is extremely hefty pointswise with Salvo. The higher the target's armor save, the worse Grav gets. Anything above a 4+ save is more or less immune to Grav.

If it were to wound on that trak, I'd probably be fine with it's number of shots, but to have as many 'reroll to wound' shots as it does makes it strong vs. almost everything, and that's something that it should not be.

Grav-Guns don't have "reroll To Wound" shots available to them natively.

Grav-Cannons with Amps are 35 points.

By wounding on "bulk" so to speak, it also avoids the fluff issue of "how does this gravity based weapon hurt artificer armor the same way as it hurts terminator armor? doesn't it wound by weight?"

No, it doesn't "wound by weight". It compresses the material that it is hitting with increased force.

Artificer Armor, while not as bulky as Terminator Armor, is still layers of dense material when compared to the relatively simply made Power Armor.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Brennonjw wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Yeah, no.

The point of Grav weapons is for dealing with high save targets and bypassing Toughness in doing so. Those kinds of high save targets are generally going to be given Invisibility whenever possible, so Blast means that you're not going to be able to do anything to them.

Putting it bluntly though? Salvo weapons are what Rapid Fire weapons should be. You want to see Salvo weapons get a nerf, that's one thing--but leave Grav alone.

Nah, Grav has issues. The sheer amount of shots that can be put out, and all of them at AP: 2 is a bit ridiculous.

Again, the point is to deal with high save targets.

And for the points you pay for Grav-Cannons? Yeah. They damn well better be putting out a high volume of shots.

I like the idea of having them wound based on regular, Bulky (bikes thrown in here, unless bikes just give "bulky"), Very Bulky, MC, GMC, etc. since it fits the fluff, still lets it be the stopping point for GMCs, and makes it less of a threat to infantry.

You do know that Crisis and Stealth Suits are unit type: Jet Pack Infantry, right?

If it were to wound based on bulk (or equivalent) grav now has a trade off, and it's no longer "good vs. everything but mobs"

It already DOES have a trade-off. It is extremely hefty pointswise with Salvo. The higher the target's armor save, the worse Grav gets. Anything above a 4+ save is more or less immune to Grav.

If it were to wound on that trak, I'd probably be fine with it's number of shots, but to have as many 'reroll to wound' shots as it does makes it strong vs. almost everything, and that's something that it should not be.

Grav-Guns don't have "reroll To Wound" shots available to them natively.

Grav-Cannons with Amps are 35 points.

By wounding on "bulk" so to speak, it also avoids the fluff issue of "how does this gravity based weapon hurt artificer armor the same way as it hurts terminator armor? doesn't it wound by weight?"

No, it doesn't "wound by weight". It compresses the material that it is hitting with increased force.

Artificer Armor, while not as bulky as Terminator Armor, is still layers of dense material when compared to the relatively simply made Power Armor.

1. Crisis suits are bulky as well, IIRC
2. Like I said, the only thing grav ISN'T amazing against are things that don't have saves vs. bolters or other small arms fire.
3. The fact that grav is as common as it is, is kinda proof that the point cost is obviously not that much of a trade off.

I think they ought to fire few shots, but those few shots should explode into multiple to-wound rolls against their intended targets - namely, big meatshieldy enemies. MCs, GCs and possibly infantry/beasts/etc that are bigger than usual like Wraithguard/blades, Grotesques, Tyranid medium bugs, Crisis suits and so forth. (This can go by majority in mixed units).

The problem I have with it currently is that it's better than plasma against TEQ/MEQ infantry due to its volume of fire. Now, when you compare a plasma gun to a grav gun, the plasma gun is clearly superior against infantry with weak saves or vehicles with low AV, but against most anything else, grav wins. The grav-cannon, expensive though it is, is even better.

With an exploding hits (each successful to-hit roll generates multiple to-wound rolls)/wounds (each successful to-wound roll deals multiple wounds) mechanic, grav would still be the superior weapon against big stuff, while plasma would be better against smaller infantry with strong saves.

 Brennonjw wrote:

1. Crisis suits are bulky as well, IIRC

Crisis Suits are but Stealth Suits aren't. Nor are Drones, which also fall under the category of "Jet Pack Infantry".
Crisis Suits and Stealth Suits are both 3+ saves though, alongside of Drones being a 4+.

2. Like I said, the only thing grav ISN'T amazing against are things that don't have saves vs. bolters or other small arms fire.

Which doesn't negate my point of Grav having a pretty hefty trade-off.

3. The fact that grav is as common as it is, is kinda proof that the point cost is obviously not that much of a trade off.

The fact that Grav is as common as it is? It points to the fact that the other options are not that great and have not kept up with edition changes. To use the example of Grav-Cannons versus the other Heavy Weapons?
Heavy Bolters: S5 AP4 Heavy 3
Lascannon: S9 AP 2 Heavy 1
Missile Launcher--S4 AP6 Heavy 1 Blast/S8 AP3 Heavy 1/S7 AP4 Skyfire, Heavy 1
Multi-Melta S8 AP 1 Heavy 1, Melta
Plasma Cannon S7 AP2 Large Blast, Heavy 1, Gets Hot
Grav-Cannon with Grav-Amp S* AP 2 Salvo 3/5, Concussive, Graviton

In terms of points costs from 10 points(HB/MM) to 35 points(Grav)?
Heavy Bolter
Multi-Melta
Missile Launcher
Plasma Cannon
Lascannon
Missile Launcher with Flakk Missiles
Grav-Cannon and Grav-Amp

If you had to choose between those options, unless you have easy availability to Ignores Cover or rules specifically boosting certain types of weapons--why would you NOT take Grav-Cannons with Grav-Amps in your dedicated heavy weapon squad, the Devastators?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

jade_angel wrote:
I think they ought to fire few shots, but those few shots should explode into multiple to-wound rolls against their intended targets - namely, big meatshieldy enemies. MCs, GCs and possibly infantry/beasts/etc that are bigger than usual like Wraithguard/blades, Grotesques, Tyranid medium bugs, Crisis suits and so forth. (This can go by majority in mixed units).

The problem I have with it currently is that it's better than plasma against TEQ/MEQ infantry due to its volume of fire. Now, when you compare a plasma gun to a grav gun, the plasma gun is clearly superior against infantry with weak saves or vehicles with low AV, but against most anything else, grav wins. The grav-cannon, expensive though it is, is even better.

With an exploding hits (each successful to-hit roll generates multiple to-wound rolls)/wounds (each successful to-wound roll deals multiple wounds) mechanic, grav would still be the superior weapon against big stuff, while plasma would be better against smaller infantry with strong saves.

Truthfully, I kind of feel that your idea is a better one for Plasma than Grav! Grav having a high ROF is to represent the fact that it is a "pulsed" weapon.

 Brennonjw wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Yeah, no.

The point of Grav weapons is for dealing with high save targets and bypassing Toughness in doing so. Those kinds of high save targets are generally going to be given Invisibility whenever possible, so Blast means that you're not going to be able to do anything to them.

Putting it bluntly though? Salvo weapons are what Rapid Fire weapons should be. You want to see Salvo weapons get a nerf, that's one thing--but leave Grav alone.

Nah, Grav has issues. The sheer amount of shots that can be put out, and all of them at AP: 2 is a bit ridiculous. I like the idea of having them wound based on regular, Bulky (bikes thrown in here, unless bikes just give "bulky"), Very Bulky, MC, GMC, etc. since it fits the fluff, still lets it be the stopping point for GMCs, and makes it less of a threat to infantry. If it were to wound based on bulk (or equivalent) grav now has a trade off, and it's no longer "good vs. everything but mobs" If it were to wound on that trak, I'd probably be fine with it's number of shots, but to have as many 'reroll to wound' shots as it does makes it strong vs. almost everything, and that's something that it should not be. By wounding on "bulk" so to speak, it also avoids the fluff issue of "how does this gravity based weapon hurt artificer armor the same way as it hurts terminator armor? doesn't it wound by weight?"

And yet still not as ridiculous as their targets. The average MC facerolls my entire list if given the opportunity.

If you want to give proper heavy weapons like lascannons multiple wounds, then yeah, you can change grav. If Lascannons did D3 wounds to MCs and D3 hull points, things would be a lot different.

Martel732 wrote:

 Brennonjw wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Yeah, no.

The point of Grav weapons is for dealing with high save targets and bypassing Toughness in doing so. Those kinds of high save targets are generally going to be given Invisibility whenever possible, so Blast means that you're not going to be able to do anything to them.

Putting it bluntly though? Salvo weapons are what Rapid Fire weapons should be. You want to see Salvo weapons get a nerf, that's one thing--but leave Grav alone.

Nah, Grav has issues. The sheer amount of shots that can be put out, and all of them at AP: 2 is a bit ridiculous. I like the idea of having them wound based on regular, Bulky (bikes thrown in here, unless bikes just give "bulky"), Very Bulky, MC, GMC, etc. since it fits the fluff, still lets it be the stopping point for GMCs, and makes it less of a threat to infantry. If it were to wound based on bulk (or equivalent) grav now has a trade off, and it's no longer "good vs. everything but mobs" If it were to wound on that trak, I'd probably be fine with it's number of shots, but to have as many 'reroll to wound' shots as it does makes it strong vs. almost everything, and that's something that it should not be. By wounding on "bulk" so to speak, it also avoids the fluff issue of "how does this gravity based weapon hurt artificer armor the same way as it hurts terminator armor? doesn't it wound by weight?"

And yet still not as ridiculous as their targets. The average MC facerolls my entire list if given the opportunity.

If you want to give proper heavy weapons like lascannons multiple wounds, then yeah, you can change grav. If Lascannons did D3 wounds to MCs and D3 hull points, things would be a lot different.

I agree that grav in its current form is a hard counter to MCs, but it should have some form of penalty so that it doesn't become the single best weapon vs. everything with a 4+ save or better.

 koooaei wrote:

 KingmanHighborn wrote:
I'd be all for just getting rid of them as they have no place in the game to begin with.

Grav or mc? Or marines?

Grav. Either it's A. an ancient weapon like it's reported to be, and thus EVERYONE should have a shot at getting them, from Guard, to Chaos

Or B. Shouldn't even be in the game as technology is supposed to be in a massive quagmire.

But it's still an overpowered, underpriced weapon that doesn't fit the 40k mythos.

Marines just get too many toys. *grumbles*

Grav is the only toy marines have that really matters at this point. It's overpowered and underpriced because MCs and GMCs are overpowered and underpriced.

Its overpowered against everything except GEQ and lighter. So its not just because MCs and GMCs are so game breaking right now.

Marines have Pods, Gladius, Tac Marine stats and gear, decent Psykers, good Bikes that are also troops, Librarius Conclave, etc.

Grav is their nicest toy, but not their only good toy.

As a marine player I wish grav was more limited. Like maybe one or two units per army. I agree GMC need to be reworked but it bothers me that in the background grav weapons are supposed to be super rare and hard to produce and yet you can make an army were everyone has a grav or combi grave weapon.

To nerf Grav, either lower the ROF, or alter the mechanics so that it is still good on MC and other heavier targets but Infantry and the like aren't affected as badly by it.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 KingmanHighborn wrote:
I'd be all for just getting rid of them as they have no place in the game to begin with.

GCs? I don't think anyone would argue against that.

agreed

 Frozocrone wrote:
To nerf Grav, either lower the ROF, or alter the mechanics so that it is still good on MC and other heavier targets but Infantry and the like aren't affected as badly by it.

unless they produce a corresponding nerf to GCs and MCs, Grav has to stay put. It is literally the only reliable way for Marines to deal with stuff like a WK or a Riptide. I would be okay with reducing them to AP3 if anything with the MC or GC type had a maximum save of 3+. The added benefit of this is that Plasma goes back to being the best weapon for dealing with 2+.

I hope the riptide and WK get nerfed, so people stop saying all MCs and GCs are overpowered.
Everytime I read this and then look at the haruspex or maleceptor I break down laughing. It's giving me gas.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:
To nerf Grav, either lower the ROF, or alter the mechanics so that it is still good on MC and other heavier targets but Infantry and the like aren't affected as badly by it.

unless they produce a corresponding nerf to GCs and MCs, Grav has to stay put. It is literally the only reliable way for Marines to deal with stuff like a WK or a Riptide. I would be okay with reducing them to AP3 if anything with the MC or GC type had a maximum save of 3+. The added benefit of this is that Plasma goes back to being the best weapon for dealing with 2+.

I hope that the Guard get access to an easy kill all button like Grav too.

 master of ordinance wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:
To nerf Grav, either lower the ROF, or alter the mechanics so that it is still good on MC and other heavier targets but Infantry and the like aren't affected as badly by it.

unless they produce a corresponding nerf to GCs and MCs, Grav has to stay put. It is literally the only reliable way for Marines to deal with stuff like a WK or a Riptide. I would be okay with reducing them to AP3 if anything with the MC or GC type had a maximum save of 3+. The added benefit of this is that Plasma goes back to being the best weapon for dealing with 2+.

I hope that the Guard get access to an easy kill all button like Grav too.

Grav is hardly a kill all button when it has a hard time killing stuff like guardsman or orks.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:
To nerf Grav, either lower the ROF, or alter the mechanics so that it is still good on MC and other heavier targets but Infantry and the like aren't affected as badly by it.

unless they produce a corresponding nerf to GCs and MCs, Grav has to stay put. It is literally the only reliable way for Marines to deal with stuff like a WK or a Riptide. I would be okay with reducing them to AP3 if anything with the MC or GC type had a maximum save of 3+. The added benefit of this is that Plasma goes back to being the best weapon for dealing with 2+.

I hope that the Guard get access to an easy kill all button like Grav too.

Grav is hardly a kill all button when it has a hard time killing stuff like guardsman or orks.

Remind me again, but when was the last time Guardsmen and Orks where commonplace within the hobby. These days everyone is doing FOTM Tau, Mary Sue marines, Elday or Necrons. Or Nidzilla.