Switch Theme:

How would you *slightly* change your favourite underperforming units/models?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Stalwart Veteran Guard Sergeant




Gainesville, VA

 Galef wrote:
Bolters
Give them a -1, maybe -2, on an unmodified wound roll of 6.
I support all Bolter weapons having some bonus on 6s to wound. it doesn't matter what, whether being AP-1 (or AP-2 for Heavy Bolters) or Damage 2, whatever. Explosive Rounds needs to be a rule for Bolters!

I also think that Heavy Bolters should be Rapid Fire 2, maybe even RF3. That would make them far more appealing and versatile for regular Marines.
I just don't get why the bigger version of a Bolt gun, a RF weapon, would not also be a RF gun

Necron Gauss Flayer & Blaster are both RF
Eldar Shuiken Catapults & Cannons are both Assault
DE Splinter Rifles and Cannons are both RF
Why does every Marine/human weapon that is bigger than a standard infantry sized gun HAVE to be a Heavy Weapon?

-


Mostly I suspect the Heavy Bolter is 'Heavy' is because Imperial Guard (and SoB, and other Imperials) use it too, and it'd be a touch good at RF3 in a Guard squad (or a guard HWS jumping out of a Chimera, or on a Tank Commander with 3 of 'em, e.g.).
Perhaps Marines should have access to a different weapon, say a 'SAW Bolter' that's RF3, and the regular Heavy Bolter can stay with other Imperial forces at Heavy 3.
   
Made in fi
Chaplain with Hate to Spare






I think the 40K weapon design is hampered by how the weapon types work. For example it is impossible to have a weapon that just shoots three shots, without the rules associated with heavy, assault or pistol weapon types. Similarly it is impossible to have a pistol which shoots twice on the half range.

Only the insane have strength enough to prosper. Only those who prosper may truly judge what is sane. 
   
Made in gb
Been Around the Block




Canoptek Tomb Stalker: 2 extra attacks (total of 8) and 4+ invul. Why? Because it has 'phase tunnelling' and the 'phase shifter' wargear on lords grants a 4++

Flayed Ones: Give them back the 4th attack that was taken away and make them 12 ppm. Troops would be a bonus

Destroyer Lord: 2+ WS and ability to buff all Dynasty units
   
Made in ca
Painting Within the Lines




t.dot

 Crimson wrote:
I think the 40K weapon design is hampered by how the weapon types work. For example it is impossible to have a weapon that just shoots three shots, without the rules associated with heavy, assault or pistol weapon types. Similarly it is impossible to have a pistol which shoots twice on the half range.


A pistol that shoots twice at half-range is easy. Just give it two profiles, like 6" Pistol 1, 3" Pistol 2. Identical in all other ways except volume.

   
Made in fi
Chaplain with Hate to Spare






 DV8 wrote:
 Crimson wrote:
I think the 40K weapon design is hampered by how the weapon types work. For example it is impossible to have a weapon that just shoots three shots, without the rules associated with heavy, assault or pistol weapon types. Similarly it is impossible to have a pistol which shoots twice on the half range.


A pistol that shoots twice at half-range is easy. Just give it two profiles, like 6" Pistol 1, 3" Pistol 2. Identical in all other ways except volume.

Sure, but it still a bit awkward.

You could just separate the weapon type and number of shots; you could fire rapid fire as '2/1' rapid fire 2 as '4/2' etc. You could also have weapons with just certain number of shots without any extra rules, rapid fire heavy or assault weapons, rapid fire weapons which do three shots in long range and two at short and so forth.

Only the insane have strength enough to prosper. Only those who prosper may truly judge what is sane. 
   
Made in us
Awesome Autarch





Dallas area, TX

 Kcalehc wrote:
 Galef wrote:
Bolters
Give them a -1, maybe -2, on an unmodified wound roll of 6.
I support all Bolter weapons having some bonus on 6s to wound. it doesn't matter what, whether being AP-1 (or AP-2 for Heavy Bolters) or Damage 2, whatever. Explosive Rounds needs to be a rule for Bolters!

I also think that Heavy Bolters should be Rapid Fire 2, maybe even RF3. That would make them far more appealing and versatile for regular Marines.
I just don't get why the bigger version of a Bolt gun, a RF weapon, would not also be a RF gun

Necron Gauss Flayer & Blaster are both RF
Eldar Shuiken Catapults & Cannons are both Assault
DE Splinter Rifles and Cannons are both RF
Why does every Marine/human weapon that is bigger than a standard infantry sized gun HAVE to be a Heavy Weapon?

-


Mostly I suspect the Heavy Bolter is 'Heavy' is because Imperial Guard (and SoB, and other Imperials) use it too, and it'd be a touch good at RF3 in a Guard squad (or a guard HWS jumping out of a Chimera, or on a Tank Commander with 3 of 'em, e.g.).
Perhaps Marines should have access to a different weapon, say a 'SAW Bolter' that's RF3, and the regular Heavy Bolter can stay with other Imperial forces at Heavy 3.
Which is all well and good, except, Guard and Sisters have their own profile for HBs, which could remain Heavy.
The Marine entry for HB could be RF2/3 due to the Marines themselves being able to actually lift it and use it.

There is even precedence for this "type swapping" in the Dark Eldar Codex. Dark Lances are Heavy on Infantry, but Assault on Vehicles. So why not the HB?
And it's not like "Heavy" in its name matters, just look at Heavy Flamers and Assault cannons. In fact, it would be more consistent with those 2 if it WASN"T a Heavy.

-

   
Made in ca
Painting Within the Lines




t.dot

 Crimson wrote:
 DV8 wrote:
 Crimson wrote:
I think the 40K weapon design is hampered by how the weapon types work. For example it is impossible to have a weapon that just shoots three shots, without the rules associated with heavy, assault or pistol weapon types. Similarly it is impossible to have a pistol which shoots twice on the half range.


A pistol that shoots twice at half-range is easy. Just give it two profiles, like 6" Pistol 1, 3" Pistol 2. Identical in all other ways except volume.

Sure, but it still a bit awkward.

You could just separate the weapon type and number of shots; you could fire rapid fire as '2/1' rapid fire 2 as '4/2' etc. You could also have weapons with just certain number of shots without any extra rules, rapid fire heavy or assault weapons, rapid fire weapons which do three shots in long range and two at short and so forth.


They actually used to have Salvo that did that. Salvo 2/5. Nothing changed except volume of shots, first value for moving, second for stationary. You could just introduce Salvo 3 as straight up "you shoot 3 times, no other benefit".

   
Made in is
Swift Swooping Hawk




Iceland

 Galef wrote:
 Eldarsif wrote:
Terminators

I'd make them at least 2 wounds on each to give them that special "I can withstand a lot" status. Would mean anti-terminator weapons would be the only thing reliably killing them in one shot. Would also increase the reason to risk overheating on plasma just to kill one.
They are already 2 wounds each. Did you mean 3 wounds? If so, then I agree


Yes, 3 wounds. Did too many rewrites of the text so I mixed things up.

Space Marine Bikers

I'd make them 3 wound each. Makes them more resilient against high damage weapons.
Bikes already get +1W and +1T over the rider, and in some cases +1Sv. I don't think giving them yet another bonus is needed. Bikes just need to be cheaper


Personally I just want a bit of parity when it comes to resistance to high damage weapons. Also, I don't mind bikers being elite(I like Ravenwing) and a 3W would cement that. For the sake of transparency I am using my experience of AoS riders to compare them with bikers in 40k. AoS Riders tend to have variable wounds(elves tend to have only 2 wounds per rider, with Armored Chaos Riders going up to 5 wounds) and I find that a system that allows itself a bit of variety in a wound pool tends to play better than when every unit has the same wound pool unless they become monsters or bigger.

Scatter Laser

Give the Scatter Laser a reroll on 1s just so it is a bit differentiated from Shuriken Cannons.
I like the idea of Scatter lasers getting some change over Shuricannons, but I'd lean more into the extra shots. Make Scatters Heavy 6, but only S5. Now they are good anti-infantry, while the Shuricannon remains a good all-round weapon


Could work. Only reason I wanted the reroll of 1s is that it would harken back to the Laser Lock idea of 6th edition without becoming the crazy reroll it was.

Wraithknights

I'd make them have a default Invuln Save against shooting like the Imperial Knights. The Shield in return would give invuln saves in both shooting and melee.
As I suggested above, I think WKs and WLs should have the option to take Spirit Stones. That wound give them some extra defense that fits more with their fluff and seems less "Imperials get X, so we should too"


Perhaps if it were a 5+ FnP. 6+FnP on something that is going to focus fired like that and little to no damage gets wasted means that a 6+ FnP is going to do very little. If we stick to 6+ then they are going to need a base invuln save just to be generally survivable. I'd prefer not to reduce their points so much that we'll be seeing 3 Wraithknights in a 1000 point lists. Mind you, the invuln save does not need to be as good as the IK save and there has to be some difference between the shield and non-shield WK to make the upgrade worth it.


Splinter WeaponrySplinter Weaponry is currently underwhelming.
Add a Farseer with Doom to your list. Then see if Splinter Weaponry is "underwhelming". I think many of your opponents will fervently disagree.


I am not against soup, but I dislike that soup should be required to make something work. In one of my earlier post when I was considering overall adjustments I wrote about nerfing Doom as it is currently too universal to not to be taken. But point taken, I should play more soup and am aware that I am effectively nerfing myself for not doing so.

Space Marine Armor in general
Give them an always save on an unmodified 6; a reverse of the always hit on 6 Orks get. It would differentiate Space Marines a bit more in regards to their armor being good and give them a slightly more heroic feel that they need. Would also hopefully make Scouts with their normal armor less attractive.
So a 6++? Seem unnecessarily convoluted. Space Marines should just have 2W/2As in general at about 15ppm. And if a Space Marine is 2Ws, a Biker could then be 3Ws. Primaris would stay at 2Ws and get some other bonus, like T5 with Gravis armoured models having 3Ws.


The suggestion was more to give Space Marines something more unique than their ATSKNF and as their power armor is a very unique feature of their fluff/lore it is something I find interesting to experiment with personally. I have argued before that wounds should be played with more.

Bolters
Give them a -1, maybe -2, on an unmodified wound roll of 6.
I support all Bolter weapons having some bonus on 6s to wound. it doesn't matter what, whether being AP-1 (or AP-2 for Heavy Bolters) or Damage 2, whatever. Explosive Rounds needs to be a rule for Bolters!

I also think that Heavy Bolters should be Rapid Fire 2, maybe even RF3. That would make them far more appealing and versatile for regular Marines.
I just don't get why the bigger version of a Bolt gun, a RF weapon, would not also be a RF gun

Necron Gauss Flayer & Blaster are both RF
Eldar Shuiken Catapults & Cannons are both Assault
DE Splinter Rifles and Cannons are both RF
Why does every Marine/human weapon that is bigger than a standard infantry sized gun HAVE to be a Heavy Weapon?


My guess is that there are some legacy issues that GW is afraid of changing.


Cypher | Craftworlds | Drukhari | Dark Angels | Necrons | Emperor's Children(30k/40k) | Tyranids | Orks | Daughters of Khaine | Blades of Khorne | Stormcast Eternals
 
   
Made in no
Dakka Veteran






the_scotsman wrote:
 FrozenDwarf wrote:
Kataphron Breachers.
basicly this ad mech troop selection did not transition to 8th all that well (when was the last time you saw them on the table??). it is ment to be elite troop infantry(minimum 3 models per unit) but it is far from it. it lacks survivability and anti horde weps.
ironicly, this unit is ment to be the guys who spearhead and moves in first, while the destroyers hang out in the back, yet the destoyers has all the anti horde weps..........

so, suggestion:
add 1 to the wounds making it W4. (not shure if changing from t5 to t6 would help their survivability..)
then give breacher 1 wep selections that destroyers has, the heavy grav-cannon while giving the destryers the torsion cannon from the breachers.

now atleast the breacher has the tools to be what it is ment to be.
as it is right now, i feel it is very usless in many ways. cant stay in the fight agasint all the plasma, and cant deal enugh dmg to horde as it only has heavy2 weps.
the grav-cannon would be the anti horde wep as it is a heavy5 wep.

idealy i feel that the breachers allso would have more use of the flamer then what the destryer has but that might make them too good, if they can use both a heavy5 and a flamer.


so, am i on the right path here?



I guess, but I'd suggest you take a look at Breachers post-CA with the new detachment from Vigilus. I've found them to be pretty darn effective in a max sized squad with the cheapest loadout.


that detachment may boost their staying power but at the cost of adding alot of sacrificial bots, and it dont spesificly boost breachers since it goes for destryers aswell.

breachers simply need a new profile with a new anti horde wep.
as they are, the destroyers are simply better even if they have 1 wound less.

darkswordminiatures.com
gamersgrass.com
Collects: Flames of War/Tanks. Wings/Sails of Glory. Warmachine. SW Armada. Adeptus Titanicus. 
   
Made in ca
Heroic Senior Officer





Krieg! What a hole...

Hotshot volley-guns become assault weapons.

Member of 40k Montreal There is only war in Montreal
Primarchs are a mistake
DKoK Blog:http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/419263.page Have a look, I guarantee you will not see greyer armies, EVER! Now with at least 4 shades of grey

Savageconvoy wrote:
Snookie gives birth to Heavy Gun drone squad. Someone says they are overpowered. World ends.

 
   
Made in us
Clousseau





East Bay, Ca, US

Thunderwolf Cavalry get 2 point stormshields, rather than paying character prices in what was an obvious oversight.

Thunderwolf Cavalry get +1 attack and +1 strength.

 Galas wrote:
I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you

Bharring wrote:
He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
 
   
Made in us
Screamin' Stormboy





Long Island, NY

Change the burna boyz burna from D3 to D6 hits.

Bring back drive-by flame throwing.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/03 18:45:22


DA KRIMSON KLAWZ
 
   
Made in us
Pyromaniac Hellhound Pilot





 Galef wrote:
 Kcalehc wrote:
 Galef wrote:
Bolters
Give them a -1, maybe -2, on an unmodified wound roll of 6.
I support all Bolter weapons having some bonus on 6s to wound. it doesn't matter what, whether being AP-1 (or AP-2 for Heavy Bolters) or Damage 2, whatever. Explosive Rounds needs to be a rule for Bolters!

I also think that Heavy Bolters should be Rapid Fire 2, maybe even RF3. That would make them far more appealing and versatile for regular Marines.
I just don't get why the bigger version of a Bolt gun, a RF weapon, would not also be a RF gun

Necron Gauss Flayer & Blaster are both RF
Eldar Shuiken Catapults & Cannons are both Assault
DE Splinter Rifles and Cannons are both RF
Why does every Marine/human weapon that is bigger than a standard infantry sized gun HAVE to be a Heavy Weapon?

-


Mostly I suspect the Heavy Bolter is 'Heavy' is because Imperial Guard (and SoB, and other Imperials) use it too, and it'd be a touch good at RF3 in a Guard squad (or a guard HWS jumping out of a Chimera, or on a Tank Commander with 3 of 'em, e.g.).
Perhaps Marines should have access to a different weapon, say a 'SAW Bolter' that's RF3, and the regular Heavy Bolter can stay with other Imperial forces at Heavy 3.
Which is all well and good, except, Guard and Sisters have their own profile for HBs, which could remain Heavy.
The Marine entry for HB could be RF2/3 due to the Marines themselves being able to actually lift it and use it.

There is even precedence for this "type swapping" in the Dark Eldar Codex. Dark Lances are Heavy on Infantry, but Assault on Vehicles. So why not the HB?
And it's not like "Heavy" in its name matters, just look at Heavy Flamers and Assault cannons. In fact, it would be more consistent with those 2 if it WASN"T a Heavy.

-


Though why would ours be heavy, and their be assault or rapid fire? After all, we hip fire them and carry them exactly like Marines. That said, as a heavy machinegun analogue, heavy suits the heavy bolter just fine. Storm Bolters are the light machine gun analogues.


As for changes I would make:
Predator to T8 [medium tank, not light tank]
Vindicator to Sv 2+ [siege shield]
Baneblade, Land Raider to T9
Remove the fire twice rule for Leman Russ [and everything else]

Battle Cannon to 2d6 shots naturally.
Demolisher Cannon to 2d6 or 3d6 shots, S10, D2 or D3. It's a giant gun that hurls a trashcan full of high explosive, not an armor piercing shell. It's more like a ISU-152 than a SU-100. It should inflict a lot of hits, each with moderate damage.
Vanquisher Cannon to S16, D2d6. It won't impinge on the Shadowsword because the Shadowsword does that 6 times average. Melta should be 2x strength or something to actually improve ability to hurt a vehicle of close, and the Vanquisher should be single-shot high damage.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/03 22:03:28


Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades! 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Bobthehero wrote:
Hotshot volley-guns become assault weapons.

Agreed. They are so much worse than plasma mathematically it is pathetic, even when accounting for plasma's increased cost.
   
Made in us
Deranged Necron Destroyer




Out of my Mind

Necron Flayed Ones:
Give them the 'Free Move' before the game begins. Having a unit that doesn't shoot held in Reserve until turn 2 is really a gut shot.

It would also be nice to have Ghost Arks work with Flayed Ones since they're just corrupted Warriors.

Current Armies
(40k) Primaris Marines / WIP
(40k) Necron
(AoS) Shadowblades - Shelved... 
   
Made in cz
Aspirant Tech-Adept






Fortress world of Ostrakan

w1zard wrote:
 Bobthehero wrote:
Hotshot volley-guns become assault weapons.

Agreed. They are so much worse than plasma mathematically it is pathetic, even when accounting for plasma's increased cost.


Hotshot weapons should be Assault (2 in case of lasgun, 4 in case of volley gun, pistol unchanged) in general. It's not that much of an issue in regular 40k as Tempests are usually deepstriked or kicked out of transport, but playing them in Killteam is a horrible experience. They are outgunned by almost every unit.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/04 07:35:23



4th Neutran Armoured "Ghost Division", Ostrakan 1st Legion, Order of the Silver Hand
A detailed fan-lore article about the Solar system of Europa. Place from which my armies are from. Hot topic: Help with forging of an antagonist faction






 
   
Made in ca
Dakka Veteran






Incubi get strength 5, on the charge unmodified rolls of 6 generate one extra attack. These attacks cannot generate further attacks.

Square Bases for Life!
AoS is pure garbage
Kill Primaris, Kill the Primarchs. They don't belong in 40K
40K is fantasy in space, not sci-fi 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 Galef wrote:
 Kcalehc wrote:
 Galef wrote:
Bolters
Give them a -1, maybe -2, on an unmodified wound roll of 6.
I support all Bolter weapons having some bonus on 6s to wound. it doesn't matter what, whether being AP-1 (or AP-2 for Heavy Bolters) or Damage 2, whatever. Explosive Rounds needs to be a rule for Bolters!

I also think that Heavy Bolters should be Rapid Fire 2, maybe even RF3. That would make them far more appealing and versatile for regular Marines.
I just don't get why the bigger version of a Bolt gun, a RF weapon, would not also be a RF gun

Necron Gauss Flayer & Blaster are both RF
Eldar Shuiken Catapults & Cannons are both Assault
DE Splinter Rifles and Cannons are both RF
Why does every Marine/human weapon that is bigger than a standard infantry sized gun HAVE to be a Heavy Weapon?

-


Mostly I suspect the Heavy Bolter is 'Heavy' is because Imperial Guard (and SoB, and other Imperials) use it too, and it'd be a touch good at RF3 in a Guard squad (or a guard HWS jumping out of a Chimera, or on a Tank Commander with 3 of 'em, e.g.).
Perhaps Marines should have access to a different weapon, say a 'SAW Bolter' that's RF3, and the regular Heavy Bolter can stay with other Imperial forces at Heavy 3.
Which is all well and good, except, Guard and Sisters have their own profile for HBs, which could remain Heavy.
The Marine entry for HB could be RF2/3 due to the Marines themselves being able to actually lift it and use it.

There is even precedence for this "type swapping" in the Dark Eldar Codex. Dark Lances are Heavy on Infantry, but Assault on Vehicles. So why not the HB?
And it's not like "Heavy" in its name matters, just look at Heavy Flamers and Assault cannons. In fact, it would be more consistent with those 2 if it WASN"T a Heavy.

-


Though why would ours be heavy, and their be assault or rapid fire? After all, we hip fire them and carry them exactly like Marines. That said, as a heavy machinegun analogue, heavy suits the heavy bolter just fine. Storm Bolters are the light machine gun analogues.


As for changes I would make:
Predator to T8 [medium tank, not light tank]
Vindicator to Sv 2+ [siege shield]
Baneblade, Land Raider to T9
Remove the fire twice rule for Leman Russ [and everything else]

Battle Cannon to 2d6 shots naturally.
Demolisher Cannon to 2d6 or 3d6 shots, S10, D2 or D3. It's a giant gun that hurls a trashcan full of high explosive, not an armor piercing shell. It's more like a ISU-152 than a SU-100. It should inflict a lot of hits, each with moderate damage.
Vanquisher Cannon to S16, D2d6. It won't impinge on the Shadowsword because the Shadowsword does that 6 times average. Melta should be 2x strength or something to actually improve ability to hurt a vehicle of close, and the Vanquisher should be single-shot high damage.

I'd go more conservative on the BC to 3D3(also less swingy)
The demolisher cannon is a problem as 8th edition doesn't have the mechanics to represent how it's real life inspiration worked.
Vanquisher at S16 D2d3 maybe but 12 wounds is one shooting most vehicals, which cost more than it does.
   
Made in ch
Monstrously Massive Big Mutant





Ehm:

Malcadors -50 pts, same rule as leman russes.

--------------------------------------------------------------
R&H
Militia: same stats as guardsmen sans stable LD.

Mutants 3ppm

Covenants: Nurgle now a 6+fnp, Khorne +1 S, Slaanesh idk needs more rework, tzeentch is fine as is.

R&H Cultists get acess to generic CSM Stratagems (Tide of traitors, Votwl,etc.)

--------------------------------------------------------------
CSM/SM tacticals 11ppm

Possesed drop 1ppm

Terminators need a rework---------------------

GK: drop 3ppm across the board, again.

--------------------------------------------------------------

IG: Veterans get a option for +1ppm to be troops, lose however out on 1 special weapon. That way mechanised IG actually get's something back worth delivering.

Guardsmen sargents/sargents get lasguns. All Guardsmen suqads are forced to buy a Vox. (45pts now for a squad)
--------------------------------------------------------------




   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut







Not Online!!! wrote:
R&H Cultists get acess (sic) to generic CSM Stratagems (Tide of traitors, Votwl,etc.)


There are enough complaints about CSM Cultists getting Veterans of the Long War that giving R&H Cultists access to it as well would be a bad move.

I'm 50/50 on Tide of Traitors.

2019 Plog - Dysartes Twitches - 2019 Output

My Twitch stream - going live at 7pm GMT Tuesday & Thursday, 12pm Sunday (work permitting).

Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
 
   
Made in ch
Monstrously Massive Big Mutant





 Dysartes wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
R&H Cultists get acess (sic) to generic CSM Stratagems (Tide of traitors, Votwl,etc.)


There are enough complaints about CSM Cultists getting Veterans of the Long War that giving R&H Cultists access to it as well would be a bad move.

I'm 50/50 on Tide of Traitors.

Considering mass assult is and was always one of the themes for r&h and that the demagogue buff is missing now it would not be a problem.
I agree though that VotLW isn't necessary.
However r&h cultists can't reroll and can't be made immune to moral and are max 30.

   
Made in gb
One Canoptek Scarab in a Swarm



United Kingdom

Necron Monolith:

Let it still shoot while in combat.

It should be able to drop units from its Gate of Eternity at the start of the movement phase or "during the movement phase". That way you don't get the silly situation where it's only possible for troops to come out in turn 3 if you deepstrike the Monolith.

Make it Toughness 9

Tesla Destructors should have range 36-48" I think. They are huge cannons, their range should exceed a gauss flayer.
   
Made in gb
Fresh-Faced New User




Let Wyvern Psykers cast on 2D6 rather than 1D6, in their current form they are useless.
   
Made in no
Regular Dakkanaut




Norway.

Remove all "Vs specific army" bonuses, rules, and stratagems in matched play. Those are for narrative play, and don't belong in a competitive game.

And codex specific CP. Them GW can sell us tokens, cards, dice or what ever to keep score. (And if keeping track of 1-4 pools of CP is too much for some players, then the game it self should be way too much for them to begin with...)

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/04 14:21:10


-Wibe. 
   
Made in ch
Monstrously Massive Big Mutant





 Wibe wrote:
Remove all "Vs specific army" bonuses, rules, and stratagems in matched play. Those are for narrative play, and don't belong in a competitive game.

And codex specific CP. Them GW can sell us tokens, cards, dice or what ever to keep score. (And if keeping track of 1-4 pools of CP is too much for some players, then the game it self should be way too much for them to begin with...)

So Dtfe should go?
I mean i'd like it if it would be against all armies rather then just imperium but i can agree with you.

   
Made in no
Regular Dakkanaut




Norway.

Not Online!!! wrote:
 Wibe wrote:
Remove all "Vs specific army" bonuses, rules, and stratagems in matched play. Those are for narrative play, and don't belong in a competitive game.

And codex specific CP. Them GW can sell us tokens, cards, dice or what ever to keep score. (And if keeping track of 1-4 pools of CP is too much for some players, then the game it self should be way too much for them to begin with...)

So Dtfe should go?
I mean i'd like it if it would be against all armies rather then just imperium but i can agree with you.


Yeah, it would hurt my DG a lot to loose it, but I still think they should loose it. Or make it a upgrade you can get against all foes.

-Wibe. 
   
Made in ch
Monstrously Massive Big Mutant





 Wibe wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 Wibe wrote:
Remove all "Vs specific army" bonuses, rules, and stratagems in matched play. Those are for narrative play, and don't belong in a competitive game.

And codex specific CP. Them GW can sell us tokens, cards, dice or what ever to keep score. (And if keeping track of 1-4 pools of CP is too much for some players, then the game it self should be way too much for them to begin with...)

So Dtfe should go?
I mean i'd like it if it would be against all armies rather then just imperium but i can agree with you.


Yeah, it would hurt my DG a lot to loose it, but I still think they should loose it. Or make it a upgrade you can get against all foes.


considering 95% of the time no CSM army get's to mellee anyways, i'd think it should just be changed against all enemy units.

JK.

Either against all foes and call it furry of the edgelords or against none.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/04 14:29:40


   
Made in us
Pyromaniac Hellhound Pilot





Ice_can wrote:
Spoiler:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 Galef wrote:
 Kcalehc wrote:
 Galef wrote:
Bolters
Give them a -1, maybe -2, on an unmodified wound roll of 6.
I support all Bolter weapons having some bonus on 6s to wound. it doesn't matter what, whether being AP-1 (or AP-2 for Heavy Bolters) or Damage 2, whatever. Explosive Rounds needs to be a rule for Bolters!

I also think that Heavy Bolters should be Rapid Fire 2, maybe even RF3. That would make them far more appealing and versatile for regular Marines.
I just don't get why the bigger version of a Bolt gun, a RF weapon, would not also be a RF gun

Necron Gauss Flayer & Blaster are both RF
Eldar Shuiken Catapults & Cannons are both Assault
DE Splinter Rifles and Cannons are both RF
Why does every Marine/human weapon that is bigger than a standard infantry sized gun HAVE to be a Heavy Weapon?

-


Mostly I suspect the Heavy Bolter is 'Heavy' is because Imperial Guard (and SoB, and other Imperials) use it too, and it'd be a touch good at RF3 in a Guard squad (or a guard HWS jumping out of a Chimera, or on a Tank Commander with 3 of 'em, e.g.).
Perhaps Marines should have access to a different weapon, say a 'SAW Bolter' that's RF3, and the regular Heavy Bolter can stay with other Imperial forces at Heavy 3.
Which is all well and good, except, Guard and Sisters have their own profile for HBs, which could remain Heavy.
The Marine entry for HB could be RF2/3 due to the Marines themselves being able to actually lift it and use it.

There is even precedence for this "type swapping" in the Dark Eldar Codex. Dark Lances are Heavy on Infantry, but Assault on Vehicles. So why not the HB?
And it's not like "Heavy" in its name matters, just look at Heavy Flamers and Assault cannons. In fact, it would be more consistent with those 2 if it WASN"T a Heavy.

-


Though why would ours be heavy, and their be assault or rapid fire? After all, we hip fire them and carry them exactly like Marines. That said, as a heavy machinegun analogue, heavy suits the heavy bolter just fine. Storm Bolters are the light machine gun analogues.


As for changes I would make:
Predator to T8 [medium tank, not light tank]
Vindicator to Sv 2+ [siege shield]
Baneblade, Land Raider to T9
Remove the fire twice rule for Leman Russ [and everything else]

Battle Cannon to 2d6 shots naturally.
Demolisher Cannon to 2d6 or 3d6 shots, S10, D2 or D3. It's a giant gun that hurls a trashcan full of high explosive, not an armor piercing shell. It's more like a ISU-152 than a SU-100. It should inflict a lot of hits, each with moderate damage.
Vanquisher Cannon to S16, D2d6. It won't impinge on the Shadowsword because the Shadowsword does that 6 times average. Melta should be 2x strength or something to actually improve ability to hurt a vehicle of close, and the Vanquisher should be single-shot high damage.

I'd go more conservative on the BC to 3D3(also less swingy)
The demolisher cannon is a problem as 8th edition doesn't have the mechanics to represent how it's real life inspiration worked.
Vanquisher at S16 D2d3 maybe but 12 wounds is one shooting most vehicals, which cost more than it does.


2d6 is what the Battle Tank does now, just through the form of a rule, which covers up the fact that the battle cannon is absolutely atrocious by giving it a second one, basically, and ignoring the other carriers of the weapon [Marcharius, Vengeance Battery, Imperial Knight]. And it's still not great unless you can get some dice fixing and improved BS.

WRT the Vanquisher, that's kind of the point. It wouldn't be the only such device, and a dedicate AT gun should be actually effective at antitank, which it isn't because it doesn't do anything meaningful with a single shot that's capped at being entirely unable to degrade a vehicle. With 2d6 damage, the antitank gun would be able to reliably cripple vehicles struck, and sometimes [rarely] would be able to actually finish it off. The Vanquisher should be 1 shot at 2d6, especially considering the vehicle that's supposed to be a weaker stop-gap version made where they can't manufacture the high velocity guns and shells is a twin lascannon that does what is in essence 2d6 [2 shots for 1d6]. It also wouldn't be a change from it's current state, which is the worst Leman Russ variant, since it currently gets 2 shots for 2d6b1 each, the key is being S9+ so it can actually present a capacity for the destruction of enemy heavy armor in excess of the ordinary Battle Cannon. Theoretically.

This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2019/01/05 04:08:14


Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades! 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




w1zard wrote:
 Bobthehero wrote:
Hotshot volley-guns become assault weapons.

Agreed. They are so much worse than plasma mathematically it is pathetic, even when accounting for plasma's increased cost.


Disagree, volley guns are actually a good weapon. In fact they are better than heavy bolters in terms of raw damage, and yet are cheaper. (though their range is shorter)

But since you said math:
Spoiler:
1) Stationary, and >12":
vs GEQ:
- VG: 4*2/3*2/3= 1.77 W
- PG: 1*2/3*5/6= .55 W
vs MEQ:
- VG: 4*2/3*1/2*2/3= 0.89 W
- PG: 1*2/3*2/3*5/6= 0.37 W
- Overcharge: 1*2/3*5/6*5/6= 0.46 W
vs TEQ:
- VG: 4*2/3*1/2*1/2= 0.66 W
- PG: 1*2/3*2/3*2/3= 0.3 W
- Overcharge: 1*2/3*5/6*2/3= 0.37 W = 0.74 D

2) Moved, and <12":
vs GEQ:
- VG: 4*1/2*2/3= 1.33 W
- PG: 2*2/3*5/6= 1.1 W
vs MEQ:
- VG: 4*1/2*1/2*2/3= 0.67 W
- PG: 2*2/3*2/3*5/6= 0.74 W
- Overcharge: 2*2/3*5/6*5/6 = 0.92 W
vs TEQ:
- VG: 4*1/2*1/2*1/2= 0.5 W
- PG: 2*2/3*2/3*2/3 = 0.59 W
- Overcharge: 2*2/3*5/6*2/3= 0.74 W= 1.48 D

So, the volley gun ranges from being either 3x better than plasma or only 1/3 as good as plasma, for only 2/3 the cost. Granted, plasma is undoubtedly better against multi-wound models but volley guns are generally better against 1W models, especially at longer range.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
Ice_can wrote:
Spoiler:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 Galef wrote:
 Kcalehc wrote:
 Galef wrote:
Bolters
Give them a -1, maybe -2, on an unmodified wound roll of 6.
I support all Bolter weapons having some bonus on 6s to wound. it doesn't matter what, whether being AP-1 (or AP-2 for Heavy Bolters) or Damage 2, whatever. Explosive Rounds needs to be a rule for Bolters!

I also think that Heavy Bolters should be Rapid Fire 2, maybe even RF3. That would make them far more appealing and versatile for regular Marines.
I just don't get why the bigger version of a Bolt gun, a RF weapon, would not also be a RF gun

Necron Gauss Flayer & Blaster are both RF
Eldar Shuiken Catapults & Cannons are both Assault
DE Splinter Rifles and Cannons are both RF
Why does every Marine/human weapon that is bigger than a standard infantry sized gun HAVE to be a Heavy Weapon?

-


Mostly I suspect the Heavy Bolter is 'Heavy' is because Imperial Guard (and SoB, and other Imperials) use it too, and it'd be a touch good at RF3 in a Guard squad (or a guard HWS jumping out of a Chimera, or on a Tank Commander with 3 of 'em, e.g.).
Perhaps Marines should have access to a different weapon, say a 'SAW Bolter' that's RF3, and the regular Heavy Bolter can stay with other Imperial forces at Heavy 3.
Which is all well and good, except, Guard and Sisters have their own profile for HBs, which could remain Heavy.
The Marine entry for HB could be RF2/3 due to the Marines themselves being able to actually lift it and use it.

There is even precedence for this "type swapping" in the Dark Eldar Codex. Dark Lances are Heavy on Infantry, but Assault on Vehicles. So why not the HB?
And it's not like "Heavy" in its name matters, just look at Heavy Flamers and Assault cannons. In fact, it would be more consistent with those 2 if it WASN"T a Heavy.

-


Though why would ours be heavy, and their be assault or rapid fire? After all, we hip fire them and carry them exactly like Marines. That said, as a heavy machinegun analogue, heavy suits the heavy bolter just fine. Storm Bolters are the light machine gun analogues.


As for changes I would make:
Predator to T8 [medium tank, not light tank]
Vindicator to Sv 2+ [siege shield]
Baneblade, Land Raider to T9
Remove the fire twice rule for Leman Russ [and everything else]

Battle Cannon to 2d6 shots naturally.
Demolisher Cannon to 2d6 or 3d6 shots, S10, D2 or D3. It's a giant gun that hurls a trashcan full of high explosive, not an armor piercing shell. It's more like a ISU-152 than a SU-100. It should inflict a lot of hits, each with moderate damage.
Vanquisher Cannon to S16, D2d6. It won't impinge on the Shadowsword because the Shadowsword does that 6 times average. Melta should be 2x strength or something to actually improve ability to hurt a vehicle of close, and the Vanquisher should be single-shot high damage.

I'd go more conservative on the BC to 3D3(also less swingy)
The demolisher cannon is a problem as 8th edition doesn't have the mechanics to represent how it's real life inspiration worked.
Vanquisher at S16 D2d3 maybe but 12 wounds is one shooting most vehicals, which cost more than it does.


2d6 is what the Battle Tank does now, just through the form of a rule, which covers up the fact that the battle cannon is absolutely atrocious by giving it a second one, basically, and ignoring the other carriers of the weapon [Marcharius, Vengeance Battery, Imperial Knight]. And it's still not great unless you can get some dice fixing and improved BS.

WRT the Vanquisher, that's kind of the point. It wouldn't be the only such device, and a dedicate AT gun should be actually effective at antitank, which it isn't because it doesn't do anything meaningful with a single shot that's capped at being entirely unable to degrade a vehicle. With 2d6 damage, the antitank gun would be able to reliably cripple vehicles struck, and sometimes [rarely] would be able to actually finish it off. The Vanquisher should be 1 shot at 2d6, especially considering the vehicle that's supposed to be a weaker stop-gap version made where they can't manufacture the high velocity guns and shells is a twin lascannon that does what is in essence 2d6 [2 shots for 1d6]. It also wouldn't be a change from it's current state, which is the worst Leman Russ variant, since it currently gets 2 shots for 2d6b1 each, the key is being S9+ so it can actually present a capacity for the destruction of enemy heavy armor in excess of the ordinary Battle Cannon. Theoretically.

I suppose it's more that the battle cannon is more effective than lascannons etc against most vehicals which is just so wrong.
That was why I was suggesting 3D3 it also reduces the amount of a buff being catachan is for tanks 4d3 discard the lowest while still a buff but not a bad as 3d6 discard the lowest vrs 2d6.

Again it's not that I don't see the logic it's just people already take battle cannons because they outperform 4 lascannons shots.
My concern is that your building a tank killer that still no-one takes because it's so swingy.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: