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.

Allow them to be Rending. I benched an Exorcist in my Sisters army in favor of a HB Retributor squad. You'd be surprised how good Rending HBs are when you fire 4 of them at one target. I've glanced Land Raiders to death with them.

 Nasakenai wrote:
If it can't cut through armor or supress, I dont' see why anybody would take it over plasma or melta or rockets - far more reliable in terms of wounding and also better against vehicles.

Causing a ton of wounds that don't penetrate armor or cover isn't really a big deal in 40k as it stands. One turn of shooting from a thunderfire cannon would probably do more wounds than a heavy bolter would an entire game anyway

When there was a cost difference and before everything could run, I used to run a ton of heavy bolters. There was something very appealing about rolling 12 dice then 6 dice about 8 times and watching a Wraithlord get taken down... While a heavy bolter has no value (limited) in taking out a tank, it is pretty good at taking out MEQs. In a marine's case. 66% hit, 66% , 33% kill a MEQ - that is about 12% chance of killing a MEQ with 3 chances every turn. It is absolutely going to slaughter, scouts, tau, IG and bugs. While a missile launcher can potentially blow up a ton of tight packed infantry, it is almost always going to leave the armor of the opponent in play. The place where it loses out is it costs the same as a ML and a ML gives you 12" of extra range and the potential of taking on tanks.

Mobility through Assault or hybrid Assault2/Heavy3(4) gives it a role that no other heavy has. That and/or a cost reduction gives it a role that no other heavy weapon choice can provide.

Boss GreenNutz wrote:
Allow them to be Rending. I benched an Exorcist in my Sisters army in favor of a HB Retributor squad. You'd be surprised how good Rending HBs are when you fire 4 of them at one target. I've glanced Land Raiders to death with them.

Because that would not be better than an assault cannon, how?

 Scipio Africanus wrote:

Boss GreenNutz wrote:
Allow them to be Rending. I benched an Exorcist in my Sisters army in favor of a HB Retributor squad. You'd be surprised how good Rending HBs are when you fire 4 of them at one target. I've glanced Land Raiders to death with them.

Because that would not be better than an assault cannon, how?

Maybe because not every army has access to an assault cannon??

DAaddict wrote:
In theory, a heavy bolter should be a decent anti-personnel choice however it always loses out to a missile launcher or autocannon based on the fact it just doesn't perform that well. Heck even a sternguard with his special bolter ammo is better. Now I love me some heavy bolters but it just always loses out.

So my question is if everything else stayed the same, what would it take to make you even consider heavy bolters?

1. ROF to 4. ROF 3 is just too low to compare to an autocannon or a ML blast template besides it provides you with a more multi-purpose weapon.

2. Leave it the same but make it cheaper. Say a free include in tacticals or -5 cost. This at least makes it useful.

3. The scout hellfire template makes it good so lets make that a default include on every heavy bolter.

4. I want an overpowered heavy bolter with all of these things otherwise it will always lose out to the higher strength ML or autocannon.

Personnally, I think #1 or #2 would be enough to consider them but I am wondering what others think.

alright;
making it heavy 4 would ruin predators, chimeras and leman russes. Vehicle mounted heavy bolters dont have an issue. Things that can take 2-3 of these things for free or next to no points would be insane. O look my mech guard army which was already pretty good just got 15 additional heavy bolter shots per turn.

Dropping the point cost by 5 points would be ok, but people still arent going to take it, the option to have missile launchers, autocannons, lascannons, plasma cannons or multimeltas are all more interesting, sexy, and useful.

Rasing the strength isnt a good idea, makes it too much like the assault cannon and would have the same problem on vehicles.

My suggestion
IMHO, the bolter is the quinticential marine weapon. Marines should be decked out, spare not expense, lots of bolt pistols, bolt guns, and heavy bolters.

so, my suggestion would be to remove the heavy bolter from the heavy weapon choices on DA, C:SM, BA tactical squads and CSM squads(tit for tat). Any one of those squads numbering 10 or more models may have one member swap his bolter for a take a heavy bolter for 5 points in addition to any heavy or special weapons they may have.

BT combined squads, whatever they are called can also take one heavy bolter if they have 10 models.

If 5 points is too powerful, make it 10 points.

The simplest and least effect to the game is to lower the cost... -5 to current cost and free to tacticals would be the best adjustment.

I like the idea of Assault 2 when moving but I shudder about the thought of Vehicles moving fast or IG heavy weapons squads moving. Perhaps allowing a squad to chose Slow and Purposeful and then be able to fire it?

Rending would be an option but again IG heavy weapon squads or devastators/havocs or Landspeeder squadrons make this a no go. (Hmmm DA RW squadron of 5 with 2 HB on each. Anyone want to face 30 Rending shots?)

Rending and S6 share the same problem.

ROF 4 is good for SM and not a big effect except for against every GEQ army in the book. That is why I would not like this.

I believe the latest codexes - SW, SM, CSM, DA the Heavy Bolter, ML, and MM all have the same cost, This is one reason why it loses out. Hmmm +12" range, S +3 and still the ability to affect hoards or -12" range S +3 Melta and +2 to vehicle damage tables. All for the same cost? I think ML will be first choice with Multi-Meltas being a viable second choice. The Heavy Bolter is just not worth it.

I like a HB as the default choice. Low Tech heavy weapon but limited to anti-infantry and Glancing AV 11 vehicles...

I think the Salvo 2/4 is the best idea so far, it ups its fire rate but allows useful movement and firing. It also means you can Assault after firing, which if you can't when using a boltgun, why should you with a heavy bolter?

 DarknessEternal wrote:
Heavy Bolters already ruin Xenos' lunch. Just because your heavy bolters don't butcher other marines doesn't mean the weapon has no use.

How would you marine folks like a bunch of free weapon that wounded your marines on a 2+ and allowed no armor save? Let me tell you, back when Starcannons were 50 points each and did that, marines cried like little babies. Imagine if they were free like Heavy Bolters are.

Suck it up.

I remember the days of the Starcannon-packed Eldar armies. As a CSM player, those were dark times.

But I agree, the problem isn't the Heavy Bolter, it is very useful against pretty much every army apart from armies with mass 3+ saves. The problem is the disproportionate number of Marine players out there (of which I am guilty of). I think the main problem is that MEQ armies (specifically Marines) have very few downsides, making them not only easy to play (in most cases) but also with an armour save that most armies are going to have problems with. Sadly this is not an easy problem to solve thanks to various factors.

I think one of the biggest problems is with the AP system itself. Not so much how the AP system works at its core (with the focus of no modifiers), but that it's just too simple in its design to the point where it actually becomes a hindrance. It would have worked if saves of 3+ or higher were rare, but sadly they aren't, if anything they are far too common which only does detriment to how the AP system works.

No way should a S3 Guardsmen be able to walk and fire accurately (well at BS3) with a Heavy Bolter, so making it assault 2 on the move is stupid. Snap Shots should be strength relevant, so a S4 BS4 model firing a S5 weapon should get a -1BS modifier so hitting on a 4+, whereas a S3 BS3 model snap firing a S5 should get a -2BS modifier and hitting on a 6, but then all weapons should be point cost adjusted per army so heavy bolters would be far more expensive in a marine list than a guard list.

Also you shouldn't be able to snapshot a weapon that is 3 or more S higher than the models strength, so a Marine couldn't snapfire a S7+ weapon.

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
No way should a S3 Guardsmen be able to walk and fire accurately (well at BS3) with a Heavy Bolter, so making it assault 2 on the move is stupid. Snap Shots should be strength relevant, so a S4 BS4 model firing a S5 weapon should get a -1BS modifier so hitting on a 4+, whereas a S3 BS3 model snap firing a S5 should get a -2BS modifier and hitting on a 6, but then all weapons should be point cost adjusted per army so heavy bolters would be far more expensive in a marine list than a guard list.

Also you shouldn't be able to snapshot a weapon that is 3 or more S higher than the models strength, so a Marine couldn't snapfire a S7+ weapon.

But then that doesn't apply to a lot of weapon types, which fire lasers, or inertialess ammunition.
Or fires explosive shells, which are low-recoil, and do more damage on impact.
Furthermore, a single Guardsman doesn't operate a Heavy Bolter, a team does, so 2 would realistically be able to dump it and fire a few shots.

 Ovion wrote:

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
No way should a S3 Guardsmen be able to walk and fire accurately (well at BS3) with a Heavy Bolter, so making it assault 2 on the move is stupid. Snap Shots should be strength relevant, so a S4 BS4 model firing a S5 weapon should get a -1BS modifier so hitting on a 4+, whereas a S3 BS3 model snap firing a S5 should get a -2BS modifier and hitting on a 6, but then all weapons should be point cost adjusted per army so heavy bolters would be far more expensive in a marine list than a guard list.

Also you shouldn't be able to snapshot a weapon that is 3 or more S higher than the models strength, so a Marine couldn't snapfire a S7+ weapon.

But then that doesn't apply to a lot of weapon types, which fire lasers, or inertialess ammunition.
Or fires explosive shells, which are low-recoil, and do more damage on impact.
Furthermore, a single Guardsman doesn't operate a Heavy Bolter, a team does, so 2 would realistically be able to dump it and fire a few shots.

Exactly! That's why Salvo does the job so nicely! It would also make it the only heavy weapon that is widely available that can be shot on the move, which gives it a nice niche!

Here's a thought, rather than decrease the cost of a HB, increase the cost of the other options, that would make the HB more attractive.

Seriously though, the problem is that just because the one option is better, does not necessarily follow that the other option is bad. HB have their place against 4+ infantry, if you only ever play MEQ armies then, of course, the HB will seem a poor choice, but play against a 4+ army then those HB will be essential.

Cheers

Andrew

Again wanting to make Heavy Bolters a viable choice, I struggle with ROF, Assault or perhaps Rapid Fire and Reducing cost.

ROF 4 - a real plus, it is not going to stomp all over an assault cannon because it doesn't rend and it is -1 S.
The scary part here is the auto-win it might turn into against GEQ.

Giving it assault - gives you max range and a ROF of 2.
This provides maximum mobility but maybe allows too much mobility.

Giving i Rapid Fire, reduces the range to 12" but precludes charging and makes movement a little more limited. Perhaps the best option... Accurate fire out to 12" or Snap Fire beyond.

Finally comes reducing the cost... -5 and free to a tactical squad. I like the cost reduction but what combination would you need beyond this to be tempted to take heavy bolters instead of Missile Launchers- the swiss army knife?

Rate of Fire 4 will break a lotta things, and wreck non-marine armies wholesale.
Assault 2 / Heavy 3 is a way to fix it.

 Static-Cat wrote:
As a SoB player, I don't see any problems with my often rending Heavy Bolters ... But I understand that other armies may find them somewhat lacking...

True, for SoB it's a pretty good gun. I have a Retributor squad with four HBs and they're a regular menace, especially with a relic so they can reroll their Faith power (making their shooting Rending). If I expect to camp objectives I might have one in regular SoB squads too, just so they can throw a few shots down the board in support of the others.

The thing here is that SoB don't have any other options that make sense. Heavy Flamers are nice but you need to be up in someone's face with them. A 4-Hflamer unit would murder something with their alpha strike and then die as everything else in the enemy force opens up on them. I much prefer to have the Hflamers in regular SoB squads, which can have one. Multi-meltas are nice too but four is overkill, especially when you can't split fire. And these two choices are also much more expensive than the HBs.

And that's where it falls down for marines and IG - they have better choices at prices that don't look too bad at all.

 Ovion wrote:
Rate of Fire 4 will break a lotta things, and wreck non-marine armies wholesale.
Assault 2 / Heavy 3 is a way to fix it.

But that would give you Heavy weapons teams that can run about shooting and assaulting people. At least the Salvo option stops people assaulting with them, while reducing the range if your shooting on the move, but means that they can move and shoot without being silly.

Perhaps I am skewed because I am thinking tournament play and the general predominance of 3+ Saves... Any flavor of SM, CSM, Necron Immortals... Given the building of an all-comers list, the ML is going to win out or an AC in the case of IG or CSM. Now if I am going to purpose build against say Dark Eldar or maybe Eldar, I am going to happily spam Heavy Bolters. DE every vehicle has to live in fear or S5 heck even a DE flyer is not going to like facing HB devastators.. 12 shots average 2 hits with a 1/3 chance of glance or pen. Even Tyrannid MC's aren't going to like HBs - almost 3 wounds out of a devastator squad. That is almost an autowound...

But given an all-comers list, I would field a ML as it can take on tanks and almost auto-kill a marine or put an auto-wound on a MC plust it can affect vehicles with an AV higher than 11. That is where this thought process started - making a HB a specific but viable option to take.

 Ovion wrote:
Rate of Fire 4 will break a lotta things, and wreck non-marine armies wholesale.
Assault 2 / Heavy 3 is a way to fix it.

Assault2/H3 or Salvo 2/3?

A lot of this stems from tournament players it seems, so I had an idea (one borrowed from an old card game from the late 90s/early 00s).

Simply make all tournaments start as Round Robin, then for the final phase an elimination-style tournament of 8 players. Now here's the kicker: no two of the same army can be in this final 8 (or 16

For example, if two Grey Knight players would normally be in the Top 8, the Grey Knight player who is lower in final score out of their round robin matches gets bumped. Not only does this help stem people from just playing power armies, it also helps promote the use of lesser-played armies as it will increase that players chance of ending up in the Final 8, where as players trying to play more popular/powerful armies (i.e. the most played armies out there) are essentially competing against each other jockeying for the one spot in the finals for their army.

DAaddict wrote:
Perhaps I am skewed because I am thinking tournament play and the general predominance of 3+ Saves... Any flavor of SM, CSM, Necron Immortals... Given the building of an all-comers list, the ML is going to win out or an AC in the case of IG or CSM. Now if I am going to purpose build against say Dark Eldar or maybe Eldar, I am going to happily spam Heavy Bolters. DE every vehicle has to live in fear or S5 heck even a DE flyer is not going to like facing HB devastators.. 12 shots average 2 hits with a 1/3 chance of glance or pen. Even Tyrannid MC's aren't going to like HBs - almost 3 wounds out of a devastator squad. That is almost an autowound...

But given an all-comers list, I would field a ML as it can take on tanks and almost auto-kill a marine or put an auto-wound on a MC plust it can affect vehicles with an AV higher than 11. That is where this thought process started - making a HB a specific but viable option to take.

Right now, it is somewhat viable. Against every xenos army and guard. Making then slightly cheaper and salvo 2/3 is an excellent way to see them get used, but changing anything other than their type is too much.

 McNinja wrote:

DAaddict wrote:
Perhaps I am skewed because I am thinking tournament play and the general predominance of 3+ Saves... Any flavor of SM, CSM, Necron Immortals... Given the building of an all-comers list, the ML is going to win out or an AC in the case of IG or CSM. Now if I am going to purpose build against say Dark Eldar or maybe Eldar, I am going to happily spam Heavy Bolters. DE every vehicle has to live in fear or S5 heck even a DE flyer is not going to like facing HB devastators.. 12 shots average 2 hits with a 1/3 chance of glance or pen. Even Tyrannid MC's aren't going to like HBs - almost 3 wounds out of a devastator squad. That is almost an autowound...

But given an all-comers list, I would field a ML as it can take on tanks and almost auto-kill a marine or put an auto-wound on a MC plust it can affect vehicles with an AV higher than 11. That is where this thought process started - making a HB a specific but viable option to take.

Right now, it is somewhat viable. Against every xenos army and guard. Making then slightly cheaper and salvo 2/3 is an excellent way to see them get used, but changing anything other than their type is too much.

I dunno, but as a guard player, I'm kinda "meh" when my enemy tries to kill me with HBs (chopping down 2-3 guys from the blob/turn or being completely unusable against AV12/14... yeah, not the biggest threat). Same when I play with Tau (Crisis suits and Broadsides are largely unaffected) and Nids (MCs are mostly unaffected, the horde can take the casualties). So I guess it leaves the Eldar/Dark Eldar as maybe the only real "HB vulnerable" armies... Paint me unimpressed .

 AtoMaki wrote:

 McNinja wrote:

DAaddict wrote:
Perhaps I am skewed because I am thinking tournament play and the general predominance of 3+ Saves... Any flavor of SM, CSM, Necron Immortals... Given the building of an all-comers list, the ML is going to win out or an AC in the case of IG or CSM. Now if I am going to purpose build against say Dark Eldar or maybe Eldar, I am going to happily spam Heavy Bolters. DE every vehicle has to live in fear or S5 heck even a DE flyer is not going to like facing HB devastators.. 12 shots average 2 hits with a 1/3 chance of glance or pen. Even Tyrannid MC's aren't going to like HBs - almost 3 wounds out of a devastator squad. That is almost an autowound...

But given an all-comers list, I would field a ML as it can take on tanks and almost auto-kill a marine or put an auto-wound on a MC plust it can affect vehicles with an AV higher than 11. That is where this thought process started - making a HB a specific but viable option to take.

Right now, it is somewhat viable. Against every xenos army and guard. Making then slightly cheaper and salvo 2/3 is an excellent way to see them get used, but changing anything other than their type is too much.

I dunno, but as a guard player, I'm kinda "meh" when my enemy tries to kill me with HBs (chopping down 2-3 guys from the blob/turn or being completely unusable against AV12/14... yeah, not the biggest threat). Same when I play with Tau (Crisis suits and Broadsides are largely unaffected) and Nids (MCs are mostly unaffected, the horde can take the casualties). So I guess it leaves the Eldar/Dark Eldar as maybe the only real "HB vulnerable" armies... Paint me unimpressed .

Hmm... what would make you fear the Heavy Bolter? I think the problem is a lack of proliferation, though the problems (like being ineffective against AV11+) leave something to be desired, I suppose. Making it cost less would help significantly, I think.

 McNinja wrote:
Hmm... what would make you fear the Heavy Bolter? I think the problem is a lack of proliferation, though the problems (like being ineffective against AV11+) leave something to be desired, I suppose. Making it cost less would help significantly, I think.

I proposed a rule change somewhere above about a "closer the enemy is, more shots you get" rule. I think the HB should get a big anti-infantry boost and a price increase. Say, make it the "anti-infantry Lascannon" - 20 points but dead killy against everything on foot because of high rate of fire (not so fluffy) or maybe Blast (funny and fluffy).

LOL, total rule change but you could actually make it mimic a Machine Gun... Drop a Large Blast Template... Scatter as usual... if there are multiples, you get a reroll. Anything touched by the template is effected at BS 1 - +1 for every additional Heavy Bolter... This Template is persistent and stays down until the following player turn... So a Devastator squad drops a template at BS 4 that hits anything that is under the template and moves through the template in their turn... LOL that means drop a template on the board and you get 2 chances to hit everything under the template. Plus a chance to hit everything that dares to move through the area in the following turn...

DAaddict wrote:
LOL, total rule change but you could actually make it mimic a Machine Gun... Drop a Large Blast Template... Scatter as usual... if there are multiples, you get a reroll. Anything touched by the template is effected at BS 1 - +1 for every additional Heavy Bolter... This Template is persistent and stays down until the following player turn... So a Devastator squad drops a template at BS 4 that hits anything that is under the template and moves through the template in their turn... LOL that means drop a template on the board and you get 2 chances to hit everything under the template. Plus a chance to hit everything that dares to move through the area in the following turn...

this. I will most definitely take 3 dev squads with 4 HB just to block up the movement on the board. Imagine if it was cityfighting and there were only 2-3 "streets" they could walk down.... oh the horror....

I think part of the problem last edition was that AP4 was basically a joke - cover saves were stupid-easy to get and defaulted to 4+. So you could shoot at that 4+ infantry, sure, but it wouldn't matter because they'd get 4+ for hiding their toes behind a rock or for having another unit blocking partial LoS. Now that default cover is 5+, I think HBs regained some of their merit, but people are so scarred from their awful performance last edition that they're not really ready to forgive and forget.

The other problem is that Marines have other AP4 options readily available that are less weak. Whirlwinds (and when a Whirly is less weak than something you've already got problems) drop pie plates that don't roll to hit, and that are Ordnance Barrage, drawing LoS from the template hole. Two whirlwinds put out at least as much damage as a five-man Deva squad with HBs while also being mobile, not needing LoS, and (though this is really an afterthought) Pinning and rolling 2d6 pick highest on Armor Pen rolls. They also have fast-moving Heavy Flamers on multiple platforms, from the Drop Dread to the Land Speeder to the Razorback. Space Marines also have the Assault Cannon, which basically looks like what people seem to want the Heavy Bolter to look like. So they take Assault Cannons instead.

What about this:

Heavy Bolter: S5 AP4 Salvo 2/3

If there is more than one Heavy Bolter in a unit, they all become twin-linked.

This way you benefit from having more than one, plus you can use them on the move.

Here's an outside the box thought:

Make it provide the unit with a +1 to their cover save (or something like that).
It's the idea of a gun emplacement that's set up to cover an area from encroaching infantry, which is exactly what the HB is for. I know I might actually consider it over other weapon options then.

Range 36" S5 AP5, Heavy 4.

You wouldn't total rape 4+ opponents, while doing slightly more to MEQ and GEQ.


-Matt



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Griddlelol wrote:
Here's an outside the box thought:

Make it provide the unit with a +1 to their cover save (or something like that).
It's the idea of a gun emplacement that's set up to cover an area from encroaching infantry, which is exactly what the HB is for. I know I might actually consider it over other weapon options then.

If the heavy bolter gives the cover to the whole unit, it's too good. If it only gives the cover to the heavy bolter, it's worthless.
This of a blob squad that buys 1 heavy bolter. +1 cover save for 50 wounds for 10 points.
Though my Russes would really love the +1 cover save; that would make them more worth taking.

Maybe you could limit the cover to the suppression area; units of Non-Vehicle Non-Monstrous enemies within 36", in the arc of fire. That would make you want to stand off against heavy bolters, which would make for a neat dynamic.

40K really lacks useful suppression and crossfire rules.



-Matt

That's because 40k isn't a combat simulator, though it could and should be. I'll make some. Also, AP5 makes the heavy bolter even worse.