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.

ThePorcupine wrote:
Why the bloody hell are we bringing real life into a game with chainsaw swords and magical demon wizards.

Because that's a lame excuse for absurdities. There has to be some kind of frame of reference to be relatable. Bigger guns not being good at killing bigger targets is a problem independent of demon wizards and chainsaw swords.

Martel732 wrote:
So reality is not valid? Okay, there's no real comeback to that.

Just because the Germans had 88s, that didn't discourage allied vehicle production.

gak why dont I just launch a nuclear missile to win every game? Real life!

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
So reality is not valid? Okay, there's no real comeback to that.

Just because the Germans had 88s, that didn't discourage allied vehicle production.

gak why dont I just launch a nuclear missile to win every game? Real life!

That's not the same thing and you know it. If low ROF weapons were this poor in practice no one in-universe would even build them.

The trouble is there's no way to make ROF weapons not just flat-out better within GW's D6 paradigm once you throw in rerolls and built in AP bonuses.

In other words, everything that the Space Marine codex revolves around right now.

There may be, actually. Implement a damage bonus vs vehicles and monsters based off how much you beat the to wound number by and by how badly they failed the save.

Martel732 wrote:
There may be, actually. Implement a damage bonus vs vehicles and monsters based off how much you beat the to wound number by and by how badly they failed the save.

Vehicals would all need additional wounds handed out to counter that as they already die pretty quickly, they don't need to die faster.

Yes, I concur. That's the level granulation we would need I think.

Martel732 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
So reality is not valid? Okay, there's no real comeback to that.

Just because the Germans had 88s, that didn't discourage allied vehicle production.

gak why dont I just launch a nuclear missile to win every game? Real life!

That's not the same thing and you know it. If low ROF weapons were this poor in practice no one in-universe would even build them.

They're poor in practice if you go in expecting them to roll above average all the time.

No one is taking HBs to deal with vehicles outside a subset of marines, because they *aren't* good at taking on tanks.

GW isn't going to fix this more than likely, so I guess they agree with you. I'll be over here putting my 30+ models with melta in the garbage can, though.

Martel732 wrote:
GW isn't going to fix this more than likely, so I guess they agree with you. I'll be over here putting my 30+ models with melta in the garbage can, though.

Meltas have a reroll... I think your beef is with invulns?

My beef is that after to hit, to wound, invuln save, and damage roll, meltas average terrible damage output. And that's after the effort of getting to 12" range. Lascannons are better due to their range, but suffer similar problems.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
So reality is not valid? Okay, there's no real comeback to that.

Just because the Germans had 88s, that didn't discourage allied vehicle production.

gak why dont I just launch a nuclear missile to win every game? Real life!

Fill your guard army with death strike missiles? you would need them against orks.

It only just occurred to me that the dramatic reduction in Overwatch can mean great things for my giant collection of Spore Mines.

yukishiro1 wrote:
The trouble is there's no way to make ROF weapons not just flat-out better within GW's D6 paradigm once you throw in rerolls and built in AP bonuses.

In other words, everything that the Space Marine codex revolves around right now.

Exactly. "Shooting" isn't too lethal, it's a very specific type of shooting that has become far too prevalent in 8th that is too lethal. The way single-shot AT works confirms this. Nobody's scared of a Tau railgun, it's the ion blasters and massed missile pods they're worried about. I think the only way to fix it is at the game design stage and cap the ROF and Strength/AP of anti-personnel weapons. There's simply no need for a Storm Cannon Array to put out 20 shots, for example, or a single Aggressor to be firing 30+ shots when they stand still. That's just ridiculous. At a certain point you need to step away from this entirely linear approach to just adding up all your shots.

Sadly 9th doesn't look like it will properly address this. The only hope is there are some adjustments to how auras work to make them less effective and maybe when new Codices are worked on we'll see GW take a look at weapons with high ROFs but given some of the comments on the livestreams so far I'm not hopeful.

Martel732 wrote:
My beef is that after to hit, to wound, invuln save, and damage roll, meltas average terrible damage output. And that's after the effort of getting to 12" range. Lascannons are better due to their range, but suffer similar problems.

And they get no re-rolls.

Stuff like multi meltas, lascanons and other anti tank weapons should have a flat damage stat, not a d6, and probably do extra damage to vehicle and monsters under certain conditions.

A MM could do 6dmg flat, but 12 if it hits something at half range.

Rerolls are not part of the issue. Rerolls contribute in the same percentage to single shot and multiple shot weapons. They are actually better on single shot weapons because if makes them more reliable.

The only type of rerolls which affects them in a different way is the RR all WOUNDS, which favors low strenght weapons. That aura is no longer in SM anymore and will be even less with 9th. Tau missiles and burst cannons on the other hand wouldn't be half as scary without that reroll.

There are 2 factions that can make good use of high ROF Mid Strenght Mid AP weapons.

Tau thanks to wound rerolling.
SM thanks to bonus AP.

All marine reroll auras are not part of the issue. They make all weapons stronger, not specifically high ROF ones.

Slipspace wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
The trouble is there's no way to make ROF weapons not just flat-out better within GW's D6 paradigm once you throw in rerolls and built in AP bonuses.

In other words, everything that the Space Marine codex revolves around right now.

Exactly. "Shooting" isn't too lethal, it's a very specific type of shooting that has become far too prevalent in 8th that is too lethal. The way single-shot AT works confirms this. Nobody's scared of a Tau railgun, it's the ion blasters and massed missile pods they're worried about. I think the only way to fix it is at the game design stage and cap the ROF and Strength/AP of anti-personnel weapons. There's simply no need for a Storm Cannon Array to put out 20 shots, for example, or a single Aggressor to be firing 30+ shots when they stand still. That's just ridiculous. At a certain point you need to step away from this entirely linear approach to just adding up all your shots.

Sadly 9th doesn't look like it will properly address this. The only hope is there are some adjustments to how auras work to make them less effective and maybe when new Codices are worked on we'll see GW take a look at weapons with high ROFs but given some of the comments on the livestreams so far I'm not hopeful.

So you remember when lascannons were like scary to tanks? even land raiders since they had the potential to one shot them, railguns more so.

You are right with the way the mechanic works were everything can hurt big tough multi wound models the random damage makes the massed small arms fire far more dangerous than a gun that gets 1 shot and may only do 1 damage on a poor dice roll.

from what has been released about 9th i don't see that changing.

I think its just a difficult problem to solve.

If las/melta is cheap, it makes vehicles non-viable.
If las/melta is expensive, it makes vehicles viable, but also means higher ROF guns are probably as good - and bring greater utility versus non-vehicle style targets too. Unless you make those really expensive - and then they are just bad and no one takes them.

You could go down the approach of saying give all vehicles 20+ wounds, so they are functionally immune to 1 damage weapons, and give las/melta a fixed 6 damage, but that's just going to result in highly skewed rock/paper/scissors games and I think that would be considerably worse than what you have now.

Things like Railguns/Vanquishers are just badly designed. I think they should buff them - but a weapon which does a lot of damage, but with a huge chance of doing nothing, is always going to skew more Timmy than competitive, unless you make the platform carrying it really cheap. No one is going to pay 130~ points or whatever for what amounts to a long range multimelta that you could get for about half the points elsewhere.

But the simplest solution "okay just give them multiple shots and loads of guns" (see Repulsor Executioner) just results in everything blurring into indistinguishable sea of numbers - and rather silly models.

I honestly like how anti tank weapons perform now, I wouldn't want vehicles to be paper things like in the past and at the same time even without re-rolls vehicles go down against dedicated anti tank weapons with low rate of fire.

I'd just nerf some low-mid strenght combos that a few armies can abuse, that's all. Along with removing aura's re-rolls and free shooting twice abilities and capping the shooting twice stratagems at 3CPs.

Things like the Repulsor Executioner shouldn't even exist.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tyel wrote:


Things like Railguns/Vanquishers are just badly designed. I think they should buff them - but a weapon which does a lot of damage, but with a huge chance of doing nothing, is always going to skew more Timmy than competitive, unless you make the platform carrying it really cheap. No one is going to pay 130~ points or whatever for what amounts to a long range multimelta that you could get for about half the points elsewhere.

Fits the description of the SSAG except for the part that no one is going to take it, as it's one of the most popular choices for orks at the moment. It isn't that cheap (80 points but also 1, probably 2 CPs as it wouldn't likely be the only relic in the list) but also extremely unreliable, even with the triple re-roll (hit, wound and damage). Thing is, there aren't as many alternatitves in the ork roster for that role, while SM have tons of weapons (but also units) of each type making some of them really unworthy because they have too much competition.

 Blackie wrote:
Fits the description of the SSAG except for the part that no one is going to take it, as it's one of the most popular choices for orks at the moment. It isn't that cheap (80 points but also 1, probably 2 CPs as it wouldn't likely be the only relic in the list) but also extremely unreliable, even with the triple re-roll (hit, wound and damage). Thing is, there aren't as many alternatitves in the ork roster for that role, while SM have tons of weapons (but also units) of each type making some of them really unworthy because they have too much competition.

But that's because SSAGs are good. I guess you could argue on 80 points - and it may be different in 9th - but right now that's fine for an HQ slot filler, of which you need plenty, who brings a good gun.

Dark Eldar whinging is boring - but I'd really like Archons to take blasters again, because at least they are contributing something to the game beyond being a buff bot (or, after the first, a fairly explicit tax with mediocre combat ability.)

I've never done the calculation, but various top players reckon the relic SSAG in Deathskulls is up there for being the best 80 points in the game, never mind Orks.
The regular versions are perhaps more random - but as said, you have to fill your slots with something, and after you've taken 3 weird boys your options are not great.

Obviously with (2)D6 shots, 2D6 strength, D6 damage your variance is all over the place - but D6 shots beats having 1, and if you get really lucky, you throw extra mortal wounds all over the place.

I mean I guess you'd argue you are paying for the hull/other weapon choices on a Hammerhead - but would you throw in say an average of 7 (either the relic - or two regular Big Meks) shots to have one shot but with a guaranteed strength 10? I'm pretty sure its a bad trade.
And 8th edition character protection beats having a bit of toughness and armour.

If you do the math you'll find that those 80 points (plus 1-2 CPs, never forget that) will hardly make their points back in a couple of turns unless the player rolls above average. Not even with the deatskullz re-rolls.

In the long run the SSAG is certainly rewarding, but it requires 1-2 CPs just to exist in an army that is extremely CPs hungry and in competitive games that last 2-3 turns anyway an imperium unit with Melta or other anti tank weapons can do more damage than a SSAG for the same points.

At the end of the day the average still gives you a couple hits at S7. Not very different than a couple of lascannon SM dudes, see?

People use SAG and SSAG a lot mostly because, as you also said, they need 6ish HQs and orks are extremely limited in that section, but that's all. In 9th we'll see 0-1 of these. If I was stuck to bring just 2-3 HQ in 8th I wouldn't consider the SAG (and even the SSAG) as a must take, just a legit option.

Spoletta wrote:
Rerolls are not part of the issue. Rerolls contribute in the same percentage to single shot and multiple shot weapons. They are actually better on single shot weapons because if makes them more reliable.

The only type of rerolls which affects them in a different way is the RR all WOUNDS, which favors low strenght weapons. That aura is no longer in SM anymore and will be even less with 9th. Tau missiles and burst cannons on the other hand wouldn't be half as scary without that reroll.

There are 2 factions that can make good use of high ROF Mid Strenght Mid AP weapons.

Tau thanks to wound rerolling.
SM thanks to bonus AP.

All marine reroll auras are not part of the issue. They make all weapons stronger, not specifically high ROF ones.

What Tau wound rerolls all source are you referring to?

They get 2 reroll wounds rolls of 1 sources, on of which requires being within 6 inches.
Marines definataly have strategums to give them full rerolls on hit and wound rolls.
Eldar still have full rerolls to wound.

Your being either intentionally misleading or not understanding the reason 5 shots needing 5+ to wound vrs 1 shot at 3+to wound is better.

The chances of failure for 0 damage is way less with 5 shots that with 1 due to multiple points of failure.
With full rerolls to hit on 3+ and rerolls 1 to wound
Chance of 0 damage before saves
5 shots, 19% chance of doing 0
1 Shot, 22% chance of 0 damage
The ditribution curve for multi shot weapons is way more forgiving on avarages compaired to the huge swing that single shot damage D6 weapons have.

Thats before we get onto the joy of multiple viable targets. Shooting a lascannon at boys spam vrs a leman russ is not efficient.
Shooting Things like Gattling cannons just doesn't care what it's beeing shot at.

Ice_can wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Rerolls are not part of the issue. Rerolls contribute in the same percentage to single shot and multiple shot weapons. They are actually better on single shot weapons because if makes them more reliable.

The only type of rerolls which affects them in a different way is the RR all WOUNDS, which favors low strenght weapons. That aura is no longer in SM anymore and will be even less with 9th. Tau missiles and burst cannons on the other hand wouldn't be half as scary without that reroll.

There are 2 factions that can make good use of high ROF Mid Strenght Mid AP weapons.

Tau thanks to wound rerolling.
SM thanks to bonus AP.

All marine reroll auras are not part of the issue. They make all weapons stronger, not specifically high ROF ones.

What Tau wound rerolls all source are you referring to?

They get 2 reroll wounds rolls of 1 sources, on of which requires being within 6 inches.
Marines definataly have strategums to give them full rerolls on hit and wound rolls.
Eldar still have full rerolls to wound.

Your being either intentionally misleading or not understanding the reason 5 shots needing 5+ to wound vrs 1 shot at 3+to wound is better.

The chances of failure for 0 damage is way less with 5 shots that with 1 due to multiple points of failure.
With full rerolls to hit on 3+ and rerolls 1 to wound
Chance of 0 damage before saves
5 shots, 19% chance of doing 0
1 Shot, 22% chance of 0 damage
The ditribution curve for multi shot weapons is way more forgiving on avarages compaired to the huge swing that single shot damage D6 weapons have.

Thats before we get onto the joy of multiple viable targets. Shooting a lascannon at boys spam vrs a leman russ is not efficient.
Shooting Things like Gattling cannons just doesn't care what it's beeing shot at.

You havn't read the rest of this thread.

The point being made, and to which i'm responding, is that high ROF is better than single shot weapons due to the SM reroll aura effects.

I find it a wrong assumption due to the previously explained reasons. That was the point being discussed.

Tau have a stratagem from commander to reroll all wounds on a unit (command and control node i think).

I admit that I actually forgot about Doom for CWE.

It's also better because it doesn't drop off vs invuln saves.

Martel732 wrote:
It's also better because it doesn't drop off vs invuln saves.

This is the big reason. AP-1 and AP-2 weaponry is generally superior to AP-3 and AP-4 because of the large prevalence of invuln saves within 1-2 sv shifts of the base sv value (i.e. sv4+ and sv3+ units with 5++ and 4++ invulns)

It's a quirk that's not dissimilar to the T7 3+ problem, where the system of wounding itself does not create imbalance, but the fact that an enormous number of units just happen to fall at a particular point in the toughness spectrum so as to make the difference between S3 and S4 and S7 and S8 hugely important, but the difference between S6 and S7 and S9 and S10 basically meaningless.

There are also certain weapons that are geared towards fighting, for example, T4 multiwound targets, but have 0 armor piercing (Hellglaives, for example) and the vast, vast majority of T4/T5 midsize multiwound targets happen to have 3+ and 2+ saves, making those weapons inherently bad for no fault of the system in general.

It also goes in both directions. The reason basic primaris marine bodies and TEQ bodies have to be so massively, absurdly overtuned in order to perform is because there are so many weapons that happen to fall in a mid strength, good ap, flat 2 damage bracket that is perfectly ideal for destroying those units. The second you go to W3, or 3++/4++ invuln, or a 5+ FNP type ability that cuts the efficacy of those D2 instagibs, the reliability of those units massively spikes far beyond the 33% expected by upping say the wounds from 2 to 3.

Martel732 wrote:
It's also better because it doesn't drop off vs invuln saves.

I think you're all missing the mark here. What you're complaining about is based in poor pattern recognition, mental bias, and a way more complex set of variables.

These are weighted averages - a Quad Las Pred vs the "most borked" anti-infantry weapon out there with various reroll buffs below. You get basically two TFCs per Quad Las Pred. Those two do a stellar 1.8 damage whereas the QLP does 3.1 against T7/8 4++.

You just think the lascannon is poor, because you want to avoid those 'feels bad man' moments, but TFCs aren't shooting tanks. The things breaking vehicles are Cent fists, Haywire, Spears, Storm Cannons, Chappy TLC, Mortis Quad Las, SAG, TBs, Mek Gunz, Smash Caps, Skorp Dissie, Grav Drop Pods, etc.

Absolutely no winning lists are leaning on anti-infantry guns (barring IF, but even then not anymore) to beat vehicles.

 Blackie wrote:
If you do the math you'll find that those 80 points (plus 1-2 CPs, never forget that) will hardly make their points back in a couple of turns unless the player rolls above average. Not even with the deatskullz re-rolls.

In the long run the SSAG is certainly rewarding, but it requires 1-2 CPs just to exist in an army that is extremely CPs hungry and in competitive games that last 2-3 turns anyway an imperium unit with Melta or other anti tank weapons can do more damage than a SSAG for the same points.

At the end of the day the average still gives you a couple hits at S7. Not very different than a couple of lascannon SM dudes, see?

People use SAG and SSAG a lot mostly because, as you also said, they need 6ish HQs and orks are extremely limited in that section, but that's all. In 9th we'll see 0-1 of these. If I was stuck to bring just 2-3 HQ in 8th I wouldn't consider the SAG (and even the SSAG) as a must take, just a legit option.

I have a friend who runs the SSAG in Deathskulls, and I was curious about the averages, so I wrote up a simulator in Java to simulate firing under Deathskulls (one free hit, wound, and damage roll reroll). I also threw in some code to simulate having a CP to spend.

I achieved optimal results by CP re-rolling a # of shots roll of 1, CP re-rolling a Strength roll of < 4 (if not already blown on # of shots), and using the Deathskulls damage re-roll on a roll of 1-2.

Average damage:
vs T7- 8.9 wounds
vs T8- 8.0 wounds

Without CP:
vs T7- 7.4 wounds
vs T8- 6.5 wounds

Without Deathskulls, with CP:
vs T7- 5.8 wounds
vs T8- 5.1 wounds

Without Deathskulls or CP:
vs T7- 4.6 wounds
vs T8- 4.0 wounds

So basically, playing as Deathskulls and having a CP to burn on it dramatically increases its damage output. You need six Marines with lascannons to beat it on damage output against either T7 or T8 if the Ork player is spending a CP, or five lascannons to beat it without the CP reroll.

That's some strong shooting.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's also better because it doesn't drop off vs invuln saves.

I think you're all missing the mark here. What you're complaining about is based in poor pattern recognition, mental bias, and a way more complex set of variables.

These are weighted averages - a Quad Las Pred vs the "most borked" anti-infantry weapon out there with various reroll buffs below. You get basically two TFCs per Quad Las Pred. Those two do a stellar 1.8 damage whereas the QLP does 3.1 against T7/8 4++.

You just think the lascannon is poor, because you want to avoid those 'feels bad man' moments, but TFCs aren't shooting tanks. The things breaking vehicles are Cent fists, Haywire, Spears, Storm Cannons, Chappy TLC, Mortis Quad Las, SAG, TBs, Mek Gunz, Smash Caps, Skorp Dissie, Grav Drop Pods, etc.

Absolutely no winning lists are leaning on anti-infantry guns (barring IF, but even then not anymore) to beat vehicles.

Nah, I've elevated lascannon to okayish, but still kinda gakky. These numbers are way too close, and then factor in the reverse scenario, and that's why I think low RoF weapons suck. Also, there are plenty of mid to high RoF weapons that aren't infantry guns. Like the storm cannons you just mentioned.

Bottom line;if you fire a lascannon at a 4++ 3+ target, you just lost 2 points of AP you paid for. Multiply this across multiple lascannons and it adds up fast.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Karol wrote:
Well that is an intersting idea. Would both entice the getting close part of melta weapons, make melta guns and multi melta real options that both have good sides.

Maybe just make it half damge. MM does 12 at 12" and 6 over 12". Meltaguns do 12 at 6" and 6 at over 6". And inferno pistols would do flat damage all the time.

Because shooting sure needed the buff, right?

Make it 3 and 6, for max and half range. And if Melta is still not taken, then nerf things like Lascannons till everything is an option.

My original thoughts were 4 flat damage, decaying to 1 at max range.

As someone else mentioned in the thread, i also hard agree with AT weapons should have flat damage values instead of d6.

Martel732 wrote:

Nah, I've elevated lascannon to okayish, but still kinda gakky. These numbers are way too close, and then factor in the reverse scenario, and that's why I think low RoF weapons suck.

The platform durability plays a lot into it. Mortis Dreads are a way cheaper and safer way to get 4 LC shots into a list. A predator might get away with existing now that it is slightly less stressed about being tied up, but points will still matter a ton.