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.

 jy2 wrote:
I would nerf grav if they also nerf Markerlights and wraithknights. Grav is the great equalizer that gives Imperial armies a chance against those armies.

It gives 3 Loyalist Marine armies a chance against such armies, most Imperial armies have no access to Grav weaponry at all.

 jy2 wrote:
You said it, brother.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
But assuming Markerlights/riptides and Wraithknights get nerfed, this is how I would nerf Grav: 6's is just a penetrating hit against vehicles. Hey, that's better than auto-immobilized.

Oh, and make it salvo 4/6. Hey, Kataprhons get it, why not Centurions as well?

While I agree with you two, that MC's super rules are what really started the arms race, I dont agree with the 4/6 like tataprhons for 2 reasons. One, their BS is lower naturally, and cannot benefit from skitarii canticles. Only a once a game (outside convocation) reroll ones or twos usually. And Two, they do NOT have grav amps, meaning no rerolls on failed armor or wounds. Even devastators (assuming no moving or devastator doctrine) put out more damage than them with the similar weapon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

notredameguy10 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.

I would also change the Grav Cannon to Salvo 3/4 and make Grav-Amps re-roll To Hit rather than To Wound.

This basically changes nothing as MC usually have the high toughness and infantry have low toughness.

And rerolling to hit in most circumstances would be better than reroll to wound with grav lol

you should go back and reread what he wrote. It would still cripple monstrous creatures, but now things like marines would get saves, terminators would be used (mabye) again, and it would still pierce what it needs to. And rerolls to hit are gained in abundance, anything from doctrines for marines to psychic powers. Rerolls to wound/glance is the big culpret, and often combined with the rerolls to hit from psychic powers to make them devastating. Giving them natural rerolls to hit would be a big nerf actually.

I think it's important to remember when thinking about grav, the issue is the relentless platforms as people have already pointed out. Tactical marines aren't rocking Grav everywhere for good reason.

With that in mind, I'd change the Grav Gun to assault 2. Up the cost of Grav Centurions.

I think a targeted nerf would be better then a straight up one across the board.

How would I change grav weapons?

I wouldn't. Let marines have one good heavy and special weapon.

So psybolt razorbacks and plasma melta pods were bad in the past? From what I heard about 4th ed, 5 man lascanon squads were ok too, as was rending that worked on sixs to hit instead of tow ound.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Drop grav amps from the game entirely, change the immobilized effect on vehiclea to just a glancing hit, and make them Rapid Fire for Grav Guns (too many relentless things running around getting full 3 shot rof after moving 12") and make the Heavy versions Salvo 2/4 or just plain Heavy 3, Drop the price on the grav cannon for tacs and deva down to 25 after that, and you're golden.

As is, they just have too high an rof, and are too effective against too broad an array of targets. They're basically never wasted except against weeny infantry where you're probably not missing much anyway.

This.

Also, as has already been said, a lot of MCs and GCs need toning down.

Makumba wrote:
So psybolt razorbacks and plasma melta pods were bad in the past? From what I heard about 4th ed, 5 man lascanon squads were ok too, as was rending that worked on sixs to hit instead of tow ound.

How is that relevant to the fact that the grav cannon is the one powerful special weapon Marines currently have?

EDIT:

I'm going to shamelessly rip myself off and suggest that, instead of wounding on Armour Save, Grav should wound based on number of wounds or hull points. Let's say we make it an S5 weapon that increases in power by two for each wound or HP beyond the first two. Against a model with W3 or 3 HP it'd be S7, against W4 or 4 HP it'd be S9, against W5+ or 5+ HP it'd be a Destroyer weapon. Tune number of shots accordingly to make sure that the weapon isn't good against hordes despite being S5, and remove the grav-amp.

The thing is, it's not good for an army to have one weapon that's vastly better than all their other weapons. Nor is it good for the game.

I mean, it's all very well to say 'oh, but they're out only answer to Riptides, Wraithknights etc.', but there are two problems with this:

1) What about all the units with good saves that aren't stupidly overpowered? Grav Guns are stupidly over-effective against them, too. But, unlike Wraithknights, Riptides or the like, these units don't have enough advantages to make them worth risking in a Grav-filled meta (and it will inevitably be Grav-filled because Grav is orders of magnitude better than the alternatives). So, you're basically guaranteeing that no one will use anything but the most overpowered MCs. What would be the point? Hell, one of the biggest complaints I see from marine players in the various 'how to fix terminators' threads is that there's too much AP2 in the game. Well gee, if only there was a particular weapon we could tone down to help remedy that.

2) What about the armies who don't have Grav to fall back on (Imperial or otherwise)? I mean, not every Xeno army can spam D-weapons like Eldar, and many Imperial/Marine armies don't have Grav. So, what should they do against WKs?

It just seems more reasonable to address both problems (Grav being too strong and many MCs/GCs being too resilient), rather than letting marines keep their OP toy, letting certain MCs stay OP and basically giving a middle-finger to the armies that have neither.

you guys are nerfing it too hard, just give other armies a (**insert nerdy ass name here**) which ignores the immobilized result on for vehicles

Gravity involves mass so having it wound based on the opponent's armor value never made sense to me.

I think it would be nor befitting if it wounded against base size or unit type, you know, factors that actually indicate the mass of the target.

Ex.

28mm base - 5+
40mm base - 4+
60mm base - 3+
Oval base or larger - 2+

Or,

Infantry and beast - 5+
Jump pack and jet pack infantry - 4+
Bikes and cavalry - 3+
Monstrous Creature and bigger - 2+

As people have said, reduce Rate of Fire. That's what makes them over the top. Their effect is good, sure, and alone is better than Plasma and other heavy weapons. But then on top of that you add firing 3-5 shots makes it an auto include.

nah, leave them alone. With things like the Wraithknight around we need all the grav power we can get!

 Slaphead wrote:
nah, leave them alone. With things like the Wraithknight around we need all the grav power we can get!

Just because the Wraithknight is ridiculous does not mean that you need to also have a ridiculous weapon that outclasses every other heavy weapon in your codex because reasons.

 krodarklorr wrote:

 Slaphead wrote:
nah, leave them alone. With things like the Wraithknight around we need all the grav power we can get!

Just because the Wraithknight is ridiculous does not mean that you need to also have a ridiculous weapon that outclasses every other heavy weapon in your codex because reasons.

Grav is one of the few things that are good in the Blood Angels codex, please don't take that away from us...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Would making them small blast templates with the risk of scatter be a compromise?

 Slaphead wrote:
Would making them small blast templates with the risk of scatter be a compromise?

You mean instead of having multiple shots? Sure, that'd work.

How is that relevant to the fact that the grav cannon is the one powerful special weapon Marines currently have?

The argument given was that they should stay the same, because marines need good special and heavy weapons. As if they never had good weapons of that kind.

Would making them small blast templates with the risk of scatter be a compromise?

So 3 centurions would be droping 15 templates with re-rolls to hit and wounds? No thank you, there is enough weapons that hurt IG.

 Slaphead wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

 Slaphead wrote:
nah, leave them alone. With things like the Wraithknight around we need all the grav power we can get!

Just because the Wraithknight is ridiculous does not mean that you need to also have a ridiculous weapon that outclasses every other heavy weapon in your codex because reasons.

Grav is one of the few things that are good in the Blood Angels codex, please don't take that away from us...

I'm not saying take it away. I'm saying reduce the rate of fire. Plasma guns wound terminators on 2s with no armor save, but can get 2 shots max at half range. Grav wounds on 2s with no armor and (the platforms everyone and their mother takes it on) get anywhere from 3-5 shots at 24" because Salvo.

Lascannons wound a Wraithknight on 3s with no armor allowed, but usually only get a couple of shots out of each unit at best. Grav wounds on 3s with no armor, and gets ~15 shots out of a unit.

Sure, a Lascannon can one shot a Rhino, but most people will agree that one shot weapons, or weapons that roll very few dice, are not reliable. Plus, Grav you just need 2 6s to destroy that Rhino, and you have a lot more room for error because higher rate of fire.

This isn't even taking into account Grav Amps, which lets them reroll everything.

Makumba wrote:

How is that relevant to the fact that the grav cannon is the one powerful special weapon Marines currently have?

The argument given was that they should stay the same, because marines need good special and heavy weapons. As if they never had good weapons of that kind.

Wether Marines have had good special weapons in the past or not is completely irrelevant to what weapons they currently have, I'm not sure what you're aiming for.

Make grav-gun 18" assault 2, grav cannon 30" heavy 1 blast, but reduce grav-cannon w/amp cost by 15 pts. Glance on 4+ instead of immobilise on 6+.

Sonic Keyboard wrote:
Make grav-gun 18" assault 2, grav cannon 30" heavy 1 blast, but reduce grav-cannon w/amp cost by 15 pts. Glance on 4+ instead of immobilise on 6+.

Glancing on a 4+ with rerolls? A command squad shooting out 6-8 grav shots would still have a great chance of wrecking a Land Raider. The 4+ with rerolls is still ridiculous.

 krodarklorr wrote:

Sonic Keyboard wrote:
Make grav-gun 18" assault 2, grav cannon 30" heavy 1 blast, but reduce grav-cannon w/amp cost by 15 pts. Glance on 4+ instead of immobilise on 6+.

Glancing on a 4+ with rerolls? A command squad shooting out 6-8 grav shots would still have a great chance of wrecking a Land Raider. The 4+ with rerolls is still ridiculous.

grav-gun doesn't have grav-amp

4 hp within 5+ cover would need 12 hits, 18 shots = 9 grav guns.

Sonic Keyboard wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Sonic Keyboard wrote:
Make grav-gun 18" assault 2, grav cannon 30" heavy 1 blast, but reduce grav-cannon w/amp cost by 15 pts. Glance on 4+ instead of immobilise on 6+.

Glancing on a 4+ with rerolls? A command squad shooting out 6-8 grav shots would still have a great chance of wrecking a Land Raider. The 4+ with rerolls is still ridiculous.

grav-gun doesn't have grav-amp

Well I suppose that helps a little.

 vipoid wrote:

 Slaphead wrote:
Would making them small blast templates with the risk of scatter be a compromise?

You mean instead of having multiple shots? Sure, that'd work.

Yeah, pretty much working in the same way as Plasma weapons. Standard Grav-guns fire in the same manner as plasma guns (1 shot, 2 if in rapid fire range), and then the grav-cannons have the blast template like the plasma cannons (heavy 1, small blast that is).

All of my friends play mostly Xenos, so I actually haven't run into Grav Guns much... thankfully.

In my opinion, Grav Guns fill a niche in the game to easily wound models with heavy armor. I think that's great, and that is the role they should continue to fulfill. I think making them AP2 on top of that goes too far. Now not only do they easily wound models with heavy armor, they also automatically deny them any save from that armor. This, combined with their high rate of fire just makes them sick to the point where I'm glad I don't run into them... but then again I play Orks mostly so I wouldn't care that much anyways!

If it were me, I'd default to making them AP- with Rending. Maybe give them a special upgraded version of Rending, where it Rends on a 5 or a 6?

Grav is far too OP'd and seems to have been created with little regard to how it effects other options. The overlying problem is a long term tendence by the designers to hand out good AP weapons like candy. 2+ armour is expensive and rare, AP2 weaponry is affordable and common as muck. It makes no f-ing sense in terms of a balanced game, particularely when the majority of those terminator killing guns are perfectly adequate vs other targets too.

Simply remove Grav Amps.

DevCents are already likely to be buffed with twin-linking (Prescience) and probably ignores cover (Perfect Timing) from Tigurius et. al., Having 100% uptime on re-rolling to wound (Shred) means that buffed DevCents convert over 90% of their shots into wounds (at AP2).

 Vaktathi wrote:

 jy2 wrote:
I would nerf grav if they also nerf Markerlights and wraithknights. Grav is the great equalizer that gives Imperial armies a chance against those armies.

It gives 3 Loyalist Marine armies a chance against such armies, most Imperial armies have no access to Grav weaponry at all.

Unfortunately, not everyone gets the goodies due to Codex creep and army playstyle, but Imperial armies have easy access to grav weaponry via Battle Brother allies and formations like Skyhammer. It then becomes just a question of....can you stomach running allies or are you a purist?

 Orock wrote:

 jy2 wrote:
You said it, brother.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
But assuming Markerlights/riptides and Wraithknights get nerfed, this is how I would nerf Grav: 6's is just a penetrating hit against vehicles. Hey, that's better than auto-immobilized.

Oh, and make it salvo 4/6. Hey, Kataprhons get it, why not Centurions as well?

While I agree with you two, that MC's super rules are what really started the arms race, I dont agree with the 4/6 like tataprhons for 2 reasons. One, their BS is lower naturally, and cannot benefit from skitarii canticles. Only a once a game (outside convocation) reroll ones or twos usually. And Two, they do NOT have grav amps, meaning no rerolls on failed armor or wounds. Even devastators (assuming no moving or devastator doctrine) put out more damage than them with the similar weapon.

Just kidding about the Salvo 4/6 for GravCenturions. Grav-Cannons don't need a boost. Instead, what centurions need is to be able to buy Omnispexes for everyone in the unit. HAHAHAHA.....

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
What about going back to the original mechanic where it doesn't kill but pins?

Something like S check or be pinned?

I'd go for something like this.

As I see it grav weapons should be great tools to disrupt your enemy's movement and pin their units down. Is that squad going to capture an objective marker? Shot the grav gun to their faces... and as long as one model in the entire unit gets hit by the small blast template, pass a test or they get pinned down. It should be a crowd control weapon, not an all-powerful weapon able to deal with virtually everything save for armorless units (against whom the bolters are already enough).

It should be also useful to non-permanently inmobilize vehicles and MCs (the "cannot move until next turn" kind).

Not only grav needs to be nerfed, it needs to be changed completely.

There must bev a way to remove riptide and/ir wraithknight at range. You see how good the armies are that can't. Like ba and orks. The standard grav gun is only op against lists that are already overpriced. Scatterlasers are better.

Martel732 wrote:
There must bev a way to remove riptide and/ir wraithknight at range. You see how good the armies are that can't. Like ba and orks. The standard grav gun is only op against lists that are already overpriced. Scatterlasers are better.

No, Grav is busted as feth because it combines huge volumes of accurate ap2 firepower + re-rolls out the wazoo (between amps + psychic supports), and is only objectively worse against the only target type that Marines in general don't need help killing in droves.

Toning down Grav by itself still isn't enough to keep it from being the no-brainer choice however. Even with less shots overall, it's still the standout 'catch-all' option for Loyalists as it will still gun down every threat bar Super Heavies and basic T3-4/5+ grunts.

Instead, you need to also buff the other guns that never see play, such as ramping up the Heavy bolter to something like Salvo 3/4 + Shred.
Now it's the go-to basic cleaner for all forms of T3/4 models, and in numbers, can threaten T5/6 through sheer weight of fire. (plus the change would also filter on through IG and Chaos Marines who are especially poor in the volume of fire department these days!)