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.

I'm not overly a fan of grav wounding on model size.
Why would a fully armoured Space Marine be just as easy to crush as a Gretchin? Why is a carapace armoured Scion harder to kill than a flak armoured Ogryn? Evidently, some tweaking would be needed.

I would suggest the size of the model conferring a bonus to the wound roll.
Infantry: -1 (Makes it less of a horde weapon)
Bulky: 0
Very Bulky: +1
Extremely Bulky: +2
MC: +3
GMC: +4

Those numbers could be taken down one more in the chart, with Infantry having a -2 and GMC having a +3. Any model is still always wounded on a 6, and fails on a 1. Reduce access to grav-amps on Devastator Squads, and maybe on Centurions too, only allow Sternguard, Devastators, and Devastator Centurions to have grav-cannons, and leave it so that grav-cannons can only cause Immobilised results to vehicles (no way of causing Hull Points) and problem solved.

That's why I added the Strength test... But you thing still works alright.

Why not change it to 30K grav?

pm713 wrote:
Why not change it to 30K grav?

Because that can't kill Riptides or WKs. GW always does this. There is some elite subset of units that have to be handled a specific way. That specific way mulches all non-elite choices because it is only adequate vs the power units and no one can take their foot off the pedal of OP. Go calculate how many LASCANNON shots it takes to bring down a Riptide or WK and then tell me that grav needs a nerf.

Martel732 wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Why not change it to 30K grav?

Because that can't kill Riptides or WKs. GW always does this. There is some elite subset of units that have to be handled a specific way. That specific way mulches all non-elite choices because it is only adequate vs the power units and no one can take their foot off the pedal of OP. Go calculate how many LASCANNON shots it takes to bring down a Riptide or WK and then tell me that grav needs a nerf.

Grav needs a nerf. I shouldn't be able to take a weapon that has no downside.

pm713 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Why not change it to 30K grav?

Because that can't kill Riptides or WKs. GW always does this. There is some elite subset of units that have to be handled a specific way. That specific way mulches all non-elite choices because it is only adequate vs the power units and no one can take their foot off the pedal of OP. Go calculate how many LASCANNON shots it takes to bring down a Riptide or WK and then tell me that grav needs a nerf.

Grav needs a nerf. I shouldn't be able to take a weapon that has no downside.

Well they shouldn't be able to take immortal MCs, either. So it's an empasse.

pm713 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Why not change it to 30K grav?

Because that can't kill Riptides or WKs. GW always does this. There is some elite subset of units that have to be handled a specific way. That specific way mulches all non-elite choices because it is only adequate vs the power units and no one can take their foot off the pedal of OP. Go calculate how many LASCANNON shots it takes to bring down a Riptide or WK and then tell me that grav needs a nerf.

Grav needs a nerf. I shouldn't be able to take a weapon that has no downside.

It technically has downsides when swarm armies become a thing again...

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

pm713 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Why not change it to 30K grav?

Because that can't kill Riptides or WKs. GW always does this. There is some elite subset of units that have to be handled a specific way. That specific way mulches all non-elite choices because it is only adequate vs the power units and no one can take their foot off the pedal of OP. Go calculate how many LASCANNON shots it takes to bring down a Riptide or WK and then tell me that grav needs a nerf.

Grav needs a nerf. I shouldn't be able to take a weapon that has no downside.

It technically has downsides when swarm armies become a thing again...

Except you can put it on Bikers.

You can't put grav cannon on bikers, and that's the one that matters. Trust me. Grav guns are insufficient, as I've fielded 12 before and still got mauled. Not rerolling the wounds makes it not viable vs vehicles and it doesn't have enough shots to threaten the hardest targets like Riptides. Riptide just doesn't care about 3-4 AP2 wounds.

I had an idea for Grav. It's probably too complicated to work though.

It involved making Grav weapons into 'opposite' weapons. Instead of having a strength or AP, to wound the target you have to roll equal to or under the targets toughness. So the lower the targets toughness, the harder it is to wound. If the targets toughness is 6 or higher it'll automatically wound. And it's the same for armor saves. 'Fails' are passes and passes are fails. So a terminator needs to roll a 1 to save themselves, whilst an ork passes on a 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5.

If I've done this right, Grav weapons will be useless at taking out light infantry, but very effective against heavy infantry.

In the face of overwhelming opposition to my opinion, I wish to offer a defense.

Assumption:

All heavy weapons should have a specific role which they play well and other heavy weapons do not. In the SM codex, we have the following options (not counting heavy flamers)

1. Lascannons
2. Multimeltas
3. Missile Launchers
4. Grav-cannons
5. Plasma cannons
6. Heavy bolters

Among special weapons (not counting the flamer), we have the following options:

1. Meltaguns
2. Plasma guns
3. Grav guns

Each of these should have a role which it alone does well, and no other weapon does as well.

Heavy-bolters are a crowd control heavy weapon. They're for thinning hords and putting out a high rate of fire against massed infantry. [Flamers also do this, but in a different way; flamers are close range, heavy bolters long range.] Therefore, grav should not be good at this.

Plasma-cannons are for taking out MEQs and TEQs. Therefore, grav should not be good at this.

Multi-meltas are for taking out vehicles close range. Therefore, grav should not be good at this.

Lascannons are for taking out vehicles and MCs at range: Therefore, grav should not be good at this.

Missile launchers are a generalist weapon which should be average at both AT and anti-infantry firepower. Grav should not do this well.

Grav clearly has a role: taking out GMCs and other really "scary," points intensive, overpowered individual models.

It should be good at that. It should not be good at doing those other things.

If we adopted the proposal of my OP, grav would fill its niche role, and only its niche role, in an optimal manner.

It would become on par with, not superior to, lascannons, multimeltas, etc.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
This rule just makes grav useless. Eg, playing against space marines, and they take a lot of centurions of their own. Yay! I can kill one centurion a turn, even though grav guns should be great against their 2+ armour. Or if you were playing against farsight tau. Yay! I've killed their two riptides. For the next four turns I can kill one crisis suit per round of shooting with my expensive centurion unit.

Yes. Grav should be as "useless" against MEQs and TEQs as plasmaguns are against wraithknights.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Future War Cultist wrote:If I've done this right, Grav weapons will be useless at taking out light infantry, but very effective against heavy infantry.

Grav shouldn't be good against heavy infantry. It should be good against MCs, GMCs and deathstars.

Running with your logic grav shouldn't exist. For eliminating GMC's and such at long range you have the Lascannon and at short range you have Melta. Grav isn't filling some weird gap any more than giving Eldar D spam did.

pm713 wrote:
Running with your logic grav shouldn't exist. For eliminating GMC's and such at long range you have the Lascannon and at short range you have Melta. Grav isn't filling some weird gap any more than giving Eldar D spam did.

Melta and lascannons are primarily AT weapons. Melta and lascannons aren't effective vs. MCs. They'll do. But they're not specifically for that.

Traditio, lascannons can't take out anything anymore. Most Imperial heavy weapons are now quite poor in the game. That's why they put in grav. And to sell models of course.

Traditio wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Running with your logic grav shouldn't exist. For eliminating GMC's and such at long range you have the Lascannon and at short range you have Melta. Grav isn't filling some weird gap any more than giving Eldar D spam did.

Melta and lascannons are primarily AT weapons. Melta and lascannons aren't effective vs. MCs. They'll do. But they're not specifically for that.

"Lascannons are for taking out vehicles and MCs at range" As you say Lascannons for both. Logically the same applies to the Melta as they are almost identical in terms of ability to wound MC's (in fact in almost every case they're the same). Why is a high power weapon not good for eliminating a MC? If it's sufficient to destroy a tank it is sure sufficient to kill a monster. The correct fix is to fix the weapons rather than bloat the game by making up new weapons. Your logic of each weapon having a niche doesn't work unless you want to add "sells more models".

An example of a good fix would be this: Add the Monster Slayer rule to Lascannons and Multi Meltas. Monster Slayer = Weapons with this special rule cause a MC's Wounds to decrease by 2 rather than 1 for each Unsaved Wound. This means that if a single Lascannon dealt an Unsaved Wound to a Wraithlord its Wounds would drop from 3 to 1.

Martel732 wrote:
Traditio, lascannons can't take out anything anymore. Most Imperial heavy weapons are now quite poor in the game. That's why they put in grav. And to sell models of course.

At the very least, Martel, do you agree that the fix I propose would put grav on par with, as opposed to superior to, the other heavy and special weapons?

Let's ignore external balance for a moment.

Would it internally balance SM weaponry?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

pm713 wrote:"Lascannons are for taking out vehicles and MCs at range"

I spoke inaptly. Lascannons aren't an anti-MC weapon. They're an AT weapon.

My bad.

If it's sufficient to destroy a tank it is sure sufficient to kill a monster.

False. Monsters don't go kaboom.

The correct fix is to fix the weapons rather than bloat the game by making up new weapons. Your logic of each weapon having a niche doesn't work unless you want to add "sells more models".

An example of a good fix would be this: Add the Monster Slayer rule to Lascannons and Multi Meltas. Monster Slayer = Weapons with this special rule cause a MC's Wounds to decrease by 2 rather than 1 for each Unsaved Wound. This means that if a single Lascannon dealt an Unsaved Wound to a Wraithlord its Wounds would drop from 3 to 1.

That still wouldn't internally balance SM weapons. Grav would still be OP.

Yeah, Grav-cannons and Assault Cannons are really the only good ones. Lascannons are too expensive for what amount to HP plinkers, Missile Launchers can't kill blobs and have a tough time penetrating armor, Heavy Bolters are waaay too expensive and Multi-meltas are just straight up useless on infantry platforms. I would say that the issue isn't so much that Grav is OP but that the shifting meta has left the other heavies behind.

IMO, the best "fix" for Grav is fix the other heavies and remove Grav's ability to immobilize vehicles.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Yeah, Grav-cannons and Assault Cannons are really the only good ones. Lascannons are too expensive for what amount to HP plinkers, Missile Launchers can't kill blobs and have a tough time penetrating armor, Heavy Bolters are waaay too expensive and Multi-meltas are just straight up useless on infantry platforms. I would say that the issue isn't so much that Grav is OP but that the shifting meta has left the other heavies behind.

IMO, the best "fix" for Grav is fix the other heavies and remove Grav's ability to immobilize vehicles.

Do you think that my fix would internally balance SM heavy weapons?

Again, let's ignore external balance.

Would it impose internal balance?

I think people would still take Grav due to the overabundance of MCs. Besides Grav Space Marines have very few easy counters to them. You kind of have to give people incentive to take other heavies, y'know?

My point about Lascannons is true. If it has sufficient power to damage a vehicle it has sufficient power to damage a monster. Your issue is that the rules fail to reflect this which is dealt with (or at least I tried to deal with it) in my suggested fix which you ignored.

Grav is OP because it got shoehorned in rather than dealing with things properly. You either need to create a new niche for it or remove it. At least following your approach to the weapons.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
I think people would still take Grav due to the overabundance of MCs. Besides Grav Space Marines have very few easy counters to them. You kind of have to give people incentive to take other heavies, y'know?

If a grav cannon could only kill 1 terminator per round of shooting, that wouldn't encourage you to take plasma guns, lascannons, plasma cannons, etc?

If a grav cannon could only immobilize a tank and then do no further damage, that wouldn't encourage you to take melta and lascannons?

pm713 wrote:
My point about Lascannons is true. If it has sufficient power to damage a vehicle it has sufficient power to damage a monster. Your issue is that the rules fail to reflect this which is dealt with (or at least I tried to deal with it) in my suggested fix which you ignored.

Grav is OP because it got shoehorned in rather than dealing with things properly. You either need to create a new niche for it or remove it. At least following your approach to the weapons.

Grav is OP because it's designed for the current climate, not 3E.

 Kanluwen wrote:

pm713 wrote:
My point about Lascannons is true. If it has sufficient power to damage a vehicle it has sufficient power to damage a monster. Your issue is that the rules fail to reflect this which is dealt with (or at least I tried to deal with it) in my suggested fix which you ignored.

Grav is OP because it got shoehorned in rather than dealing with things properly. You either need to create a new niche for it or remove it. At least following your approach to the weapons.

Grav is OP because it's designed for the current climate, not 3E.

The current climate that varies place to place you mean? And from time to time? It was not needed when it first came out and it wouldn't be now if there was a single competent designer at GW. Shoot me if I think solving a problem is better than making it worse. It's OP because it has no significant downside that isn't easily avoided. Which happened because it got shoehorned in.

Traditio wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
I think people would still take Grav due to the overabundance of MCs. Besides Grav Space Marines have very few easy counters to them. You kind of have to give people incentive to take other heavies, y'know?

If a grav cannon could only kill 1 terminator per round of shooting, that wouldn't encourage you to take plasma guns, lascannons, plasma cannons, etc?

If a grav cannon could only immobilize a tank and then do no further damage, that wouldn't encourage you to take melta and lascannons?

The problem is no one really takes those in higher end play. I think you'd see it in more casual games but tournament players would probably just augment their forces with high yield weapon platforms like Stormtalons/Hawks, Sicarans etc. Cent-star is just too good of a counter to the MC heavy meta.

TheCustomLime wrote:The problem is no one really takes those in higher end play. I think you'd see it in more casual games but tournament players would probably just augment their forces with high yield weapon platforms like Stormtalons/Hawks, Sicarans etc. Cent-star is just too good of a counter to the MC heavy meta.

I could provide other examples. If a grav cannon could only kill 1 SM bike, 1 tactical marine, 1 centurion, etc, you wouldn't consider lascannons, plasma guns, etc?

Traditio wrote:

TheCustomLime wrote:The problem is no one really takes those in higher end play. I think you'd see it in more casual games but tournament players would probably just augment their forces with high yield weapon platforms like Stormtalons/Hawks, Sicarans etc. Cent-star is just too good of a counter to the MC heavy meta.

I could provide other examples. If a grav cannon could only kill 1 SM bike, 1 tactical marine, 1 centurion, etc, you wouldn't consider lascannons, plasma guns, etc?

Plasma guns and Lascannons? Yeah, in that case, I would. But it'd feel like an overall nerf to the Codex, y'know?

Nope, because it'd still be a guaranteed kill.

5 shots almost definitely killing 1 guy no matter their unit type, toughness, save etc. Is better than 1 or 2 shots maybe killing 1 or 2 guys but most likely killing no one in many cases..

TheCustomLime wrote:Plasma guns and Lascannons? Yeah, in that case, I would. But it'd feel like an overall nerf to the Codex, y'know?

Yes, and that's my point. Currently, internal balance is lacking in the SM heavy weapons. My proposal would internally balance that. It would be an overall nerf to the codex, but that's fine.

That's a symptom that other things need to be nerfed also.

Traditio wrote:

TheCustomLime wrote:Plasma guns and Lascannons? Yeah, in that case, I would. But it'd feel like an overall nerf to the Codex, y'know?

Yes, and that's my point. Currently, internal balance is lacking in the SM heavy weapons. My proposal would internally balance that. It would be an overall nerf to the codex, but that's fine.

That's a symptom that other things need to be nerfed also.

And I agree with that. My current attitude towards Grav is that I'll give it up when Eldar/Tau players give up their G/MCs.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Nope, because it'd still be a guaranteed kill.

5 shots definitely killing 1 guy no matter their unit type, toughness, save etc. Is better than 1 or 2 shots maybe killing 1 or 2 guys.

Not necessarily. In principle, that plasma cannon shot can hit 5 terminators (say, because they just deepstriked in) and kill all 5.