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.

 Crazyterran wrote:
We can nerf grav when we get rid of GCs and MCs out of standard 40k.

Until then...

No... Grav is too good against much more than MC/GMC. It is OP toward vehicles, and any 2+ armor save model (including terminators, like they need more to make them suck).

 Crazyterran wrote:
We can nerf grav when we get rid of [...] MCs out of standard 40k.

No.

GK and Tau having broken foot-MCs doesn't mean that every bloody MC in the game (which are either gak or decently balanced) needs to be removed. It just means those 2 need to be nerfed to be balanced.
Flying MCs are a different story, but even then most of them aren't that insane. While Flyers exists FMCs should, too.


Should all Jetbikes/bikes be removed because of Scatbikes? All infantry because of Gravcents? All cavalry because of Thunderwolves? All Independent Characters because of the Buffmander or Smashfether?

I see your point Kingsley, MCs are fine and used to be pretty balanced if you go back far enough, but FMCs, GMCs, and Jetbikes/Skimmers have (most of the time) been pretty overpowered to various degrees. Skimmers not always, same with jetbikes, but more often than not these units are simply too strong for their points.

Question to all those saying grav is needed to kill MC and GC's.

How do the armies witb out grav kill mc's?. Tau, orks, demons, IG, necrons, and tyranids?

Apparently they just auto lose ?

With the various options available to marines. Grav can take a nerf and they will be just fine.

Don't ignore the fact the grav is op vs things other than MC's. Stop focusing on. "With out it we can t kill mcs" cause you can, the other armies with out it can.

 Dakkafang Dreggrim wrote:
Question to all those saying grav is needed to kill MC and GC's.

How do the armies witb out grav kill mc's?. Tau, orks, demons, IG, necrons, and tyranids?

Apparently they just auto lose ?

Tau have ranged D missiles, but that's the most effective thing they have against it.

Orks can't easily take them down.

Daemons can't either, but they don't necessarily need to if they're running Screamerstar/Flying Circus.

IG can't easily.

Necrons have Destroyers, and that's our most effective way. Wraiths can tie it up, as long as they don't roll a lot of 6s for Stomps.

Tyranids...I won't even say they can't easily. They hardly can with their codex. Imperial Knights they can take out if they get lucky and run Pentatyrant. But otherwise? Or if it's a GC? Good luck.

 Dakkafang Dreggrim wrote:
Question to all those saying grav is needed to kill MC and GC's.

How do the armies witb out grav kill mc's?. Tau, orks, demons, IG, necrons, and tyranids?

Apparently they just auto lose ?

With the various options available to marines. Grav can take a nerf and they will be just fine.

Don't ignore the fact the grav is op vs things other than MC's. Stop focusing on. "With out it we can t kill mcs" cause you can, the other armies with out it can.

Tau spam them down with HYMP. Marines have no equivalent weapons system. Or shoot them with D-missiles from the Stormsurge. Which marines don't have.

Orks suffer. They basically have to try to drown them in attacks and get some power claws in there. In return, however, the MC trait that gives them perma AP 2 is largely wasted against Orks making this not such a poor idea. MCs are super efficient against marines in contrast, ignoring all those armor saves.

Demons have their own MCs. And rending daemonettes, etc. Rending is the one rule that is still good against MCs and GMCs because they didn't get immunity to it like everything else in the game.

IG fail. They lack good options for killing MCs and basically autolose.

Necrons have Gauss and Wraiths. They are fine. Marines have no such rules. And they still get their RP saves vs the MCs. I can't understate what a giant pain Wraiths are. Oh, and they Rend, so they are eventually going to win that fight.

Nids have their own somewhat inferior MCs. These MCs ignore the armor saves of the other MCs, just as all MCs ignore the armor of everything in the game. Because reasons.

The bottom line is that most of the other armies you listed have better tools than non-grav marines. Imperial heavy weapons are stuck in 2000 and pretty much universally suck, except grav.

"Don't ignore the fact the grav is op vs things other than MC's."

Mostly units that were already useless; like terminators.

I'll also throw in that whilst DE can deal with most MCs, they're pretty screwed against GCs given their virtual immunity to poison.

 vipoid wrote:
I'll also throw in that whilst DE can deal with most MCs, they're pretty screwed against GCs given their virtual immunity to poison.

I don't think the DE fare well against the 2+ armor MCs in practice.

Martel732 wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
I'll also throw in that whilst DE can deal with most MCs, they're pretty screwed against GCs given their virtual immunity to poison.

I don't think the DE fare well against the 2+ armor MCs in practice.

Yeah, poison starts to becomes really inefficient against them, and you just end up wishing you had Bladestorm or other AP2 stuff or somesuch instead. Even worse if they have FNP.

They don't do badly, if we force saves, you will fail them. Killing a Riptide is like killing 5 Terminators (He will on average wound himself with an overcharge). Dark Lances can even be used to plink off a wound if the 3++ isn't up.

We can handle MC's usually, it's multiple AV 12 vehicles we can't handle. Lances are actually extremely inefficient AV vs these.

 ALEXisAWESOME wrote:
They don't do badly, if we force saves, you will fail them. Killing a Riptide is like killing 5 Terminators (He will on average wound himself with an overcharge). Dark Lances can even be used to plink off a wound if the 3++ isn't up.

We can handle MC's usually, it's multiple AV 12 vehicles we can't handle. Lances are actually extremely inefficient AV vs these.

I don't think the DE can win the model removal race against 2+ MCs. The Riptide is literally blowing chunks out of your army. And Tau have access to ignore cover at will. Riptides also can get FNP which lets the save overcharges and makes powering through the 2+ even worse.

 ALEXisAWESOME wrote:
They don't do badly, if we force saves, you will fail them. Killing a Riptide is like killing 5 Terminators

Except that the Riptide doesn't lose any effectiveness until it loses it's last wound. It can also use its JSJ to get out of range/LoS or such. Plus it can have FNP.

And, that's not even going into the laughable affair of DE trying to out-shoot Tau.

notredameguy10 wrote:

 Crazyterran wrote:
We can nerf grav when we get rid of GCs and MCs out of standard 40k.

Until then...

No... Grav is too good against much more than MC/GMC. It is OP toward vehicles, and any 2+ armor save model (including terminators, like they need more to make them suck).

What isn't OP toward vehicles?

And of course it's "OP towards any 2+ armor save model". That's the kind of crap it's designed to chew through. Really not sure why you're bringing up Terminators though, because outside of Grey Knight Paladins or Deathwing Knights--who really fields them?

Grav is perfectly balanced since its a great SM killer.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
Grav is perfectly balanced since its a great SM killer.

It's a great _____ killer.

 krodarklorr wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
Grav is perfectly balanced since its a great SM killer.

It's a great _____ killer.

It's a great <insert anything with a save that isn't 4, 5, or 6> killer.

Even +4 armor is vulnerable to grav when they have amps. 75% to wound per hit is fairly good damage. Its just when you get down to AP5/6/- when you can start to survive grav (and then the bolters mow you down )

Martel732 wrote:

Nids have their own somewhat inferior MCs. These MCs ignore the armor saves of the other MCs, just as all MCs ignore the armor of everything in the game. Because reasons.

Yeah those tyranid MCs with their armor ignoring attacks are terrifying. Nearly all of them have WS3, 3 attacks, I2, and get around 6" at a time. Then cost 150 to 200+ points
Chilling.

 Vankraken wrote:
Even +4 armor is vulnerable to grav when they have amps. 75% to wound per hit is fairly good damage. Its just when you get down to AP5/6/- when you can start to survive grav (and then the bolters mow you down )

And insert random white scares character with ignotes cover relic. Bye bye bikes and vehicles of all flavors.

If it weren't for Grav eldar and Tau would totally dominate the game.

Rate of fire and low cost (respectively) is my problem with Grav.

I think it's better than a Bright Lance in most circumstances, considering neither is meant to be shot at T3 5/6+ save guys, and it's got more shots for cheaper in most cases.

 Thunderfrog wrote:

I think it's better than a Bright Lance in most circumstances

I think a Grav Cannon is better than a Bright (or Dark) Lance in just about every circumstance you could name.

Arson Fire wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Nids have their own somewhat inferior MCs. These MCs ignore the armor saves of the other MCs, just as all MCs ignore the armor of everything in the game. Because reasons.

Yeah those tyranid MCs with their armor ignoring attacks are terrifying. Nearly all of them have WS3, 3 attacks, I2, and get around 6" at a time. Then cost 150 to 200+ points
Chilling.

Still better than anything in my codex.

 Thunderfrog wrote:

Rate of fire and low cost (respectively) is my problem with Grav.

Personally, I feel that the ROF of a great many weapons should have been adjusted this past edition. Even more so with how "Salvo" weapons function.

Heavy Bolters, Boltguns, Lasguns, and Hellguns(refuse to call them hotshots!) could all stand to be either Salvo or Assault at this point.

I think it's better than a Bright Lance in most circumstances, considering neither is meant to be shot at T3 5/6+ save guys, and it's got more shots for cheaper in most cases.

This is an odd metric for a comparison.
"I know they're not meant to be used like this, but X comes out ahead because it has more shots"?

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Thunderfrog wrote:

Rate of fire and low cost (respectively) is my problem with Grav.

Personally, I feel that the ROF of a great many weapons should have been adjusted this past edition. Even more so with how "Salvo" weapons function.

Heavy Bolters, Boltguns, Lasguns, and Hellguns(refuse to call them hotshots!) could all stand to be either Salvo or Assault at this point.

I think it's better than a Bright Lance in most circumstances, considering neither is meant to be shot at T3 5/6+ save guys, and it's got more shots for cheaper in most cases.

This is an odd metric for a comparison.
"I know they're not meant to be used like this, but X comes out ahead because it has more shots"?

I worded it poorly.

Against heavy targets, Grav is better. Against soft targets, Grav is better as well. It's natural functions are superior vs hard, and it's got more shots vs soft.

 TheNewBlood wrote:
I would change their mechanic if wounding. Instead of wounding on the armour save, I would make it a table:

Regular Infantry: 5+
Bulky: 4+
Very Bulky: 3+
Extremely Bulky/Monstrous Creatures: 2+

This way, their original purpose of killing heavy MCs is preserved, while not giving them a huge advantage against all other units.

Best suggestion in this thread. Anyone who posted after that message and did not congratulate you was wrong. So basically Sonic Keyboard was right .
You totally get my vote.

the big problem with grav is that heavy grav cannons are not like other heavy weapons being salvo and having a high rate of what is essentially either Anti armor or anti personnel.

Other weapons have to choose between anti-armor, or antipersonnel. Or they pay a decent cost for mediocreness (hello missile launchers).

Grav does cost more than most heavy weapons, but the problem is it is usually better against any target than any other individual heavy weapon is better against its specialized target.

Grav pistol - 1 shot
gravgun- rapid fire
heavy gravcannon 2/3 salvo

The other option is increasing the rate of fire or pretty much every other gun in the game.

I agree with TheNewBlood's idea. It helps Termies out by making them a bit more durable against Grav Weapons. I'd be perfectly fine with that.

How would they function against vehicles?

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 TheNewBlood wrote:
I would change their mechanic if wounding. Instead of wounding on the armour save, I would make it a table:

Regular Infantry: 5+
Bulky: 4+
Very Bulky: 3+
Extremely Bulky/Monstrous Creatures: 2+

This way, their original purpose of killing heavy MCs is preserved, while not giving them a huge advantage against all other units.

Best suggestion in this thread. Anyone who posted after that message and did not congratulate you was wrong. So basically Sonic Keyboard was right .
You totally get my vote.

My gripe against this is that bulky/very bulky is such a minor stat that it might get overlooked in some places.