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.

Would the Heavy Bolter be a better weapon if it was Rapid fire 2 instead of Heavy 3?

It would mean several key difference: Only 2 shots at 36" range, but 4 shots at 18" and most importantly, it won't suffer -1 to hit while moving.
It would also set it apart from the flat out superior Assault cannon, while at the same time making all Bolt weapons consistently Rapid fire (or Pistols) in the same way as Dark Eldar Splinter weapons

Thoughts?

HBs have the advantage of being taken in far greater numbers and cheaper than Assault Cannons.

 Valkyrie wrote:
HBs have the advantage of being taken in far greater numbers and cheaper than Assault Cannons.

And who actually takes advantage of that? 95% of the lists I've seen with HBs are only taking them on platforms that have no other choice or just to shave points.
I want to see HBs in lists because the players want to take them, not because they have to.

By making them RF2, you create an interesting balance of less shots at full range, but more are half range rather than a flat 3 shot that might be -1 to hit because you wanted to move.
Marines don't really have a good anti-horde standard gun, aside from Assault cannons, but those are expensive and limited to fewer platforms.

This change is also meant to make Tac squads a bit better. 4 Str5 Ap-1 shots at 18" range is not bad for 75pts and matches much better with the unit's regular bolters.

-

 Galef wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:
HBs have the advantage of being taken in far greater numbers and cheaper than Assault Cannons.

And who actually takes advantage of that? 95% of the lists I've seen with HBs are only taking them on platforms that have no other choice or just to shave points.
I want to see HBs in lists because the players want to take them, not because they have to.

By making them RF2, you create an interesting balance of less shots at full range, but more are half range rather than a flat 3 shot that might be -1 to hit because you wanted to move.
Marines don't really have a good anti-horde standard gun, aside from Assault cannons, but those are expensive and limited to fewer platforms.

-

But why would you want fewer shots at long range?

You don't want fewer shots, but RF3 would mean 6 shots at 18", which is excessive for a 10pt weapon with S5, AP-1. The fact that it is no longer -1 to hit helps negate this.
Splinter cannons can be RF3 because they have no AP, wound vehicles on 6 and can never wound on 3+ like HBVs can

-

 Galef wrote:
You don't want fewer shots, but RF3 would mean 6 shots at 18", which is excessive for a 10pt weapon with S5, AP-1. The fact that it is no longer -1 to hit helps negate this.
Splinter cannons can be RF3 because they have no AP, wound vehicles on 6 and can never wound on 3+ like HBVs can

-

RP3 is a bit much you must admit that.

I like the RF2 idea. RF3 is too much though for the same reason you stated about removing -1 to hit. I think RF2 would blend much better with bolters in tac/scout squads as they would actually complement the mobility and versatility those units are supposed to have.

My only concern is whether or not you have thought about how this impacts Imp. Gaurd and the like? I don't know how weapons squads would handle RF2, prolly just fine in reality. Also you can slap a HB on darn near anything that doesn't come with one in that army, I don't think it would get too crazy but I'm not a IG person so I don't know. I have the feeling this is more about making the weapon useful at its intended purpose which I agree and I think would be beneficial overall.

Even with Guard, RF2 is still ok, as it is essentially a downgrade for them, since most units want to stay still.
For units that want to move, 2 shots at full BS vs 3 shots with -1 to hit are pretty much equal. The bonus comes from getting +1 shot within 18" that aren't -1 for being heavy

Since Guard can spam HBs and moving isn't a desire for them, it balances out. They get 1 less shot outside 18", but 1 more shot within.

-

Sounds like a sensible idea.

I can see heavy bolter platforms (Razorbacks, Leman russ tanks, Land raiders) actually get really scary with these extra half range shots.

For a land raider that has a twin heavy bolter tht would b R4 so 8 shots at half range. Pretty decent as tht's an extra 2 shots from it's standard heavy 6

Razorbacks would also be R4 with this aswell.

The only elephant in the room is when the bigger tanks show up. Like LOW's, but then again. These are LOW's we are talking about.

a baneblade would have a whooping Rapid fire12 with all it's heavy bolter sponsors. That is 24 shots. Yeouch

It affects Guard too much. You'd have no reason to choose it over an Autocannon at that point as, if there's that many enemies close, you're probably gonna be dead anyway. Not that it matters for Guard as everyone is cheap but still.

I know that in the previous edition, one of the most agreed upon fixes for the Heavy Bolter was giving it an additional shot at no cost. I also feel Bolt Weapons need a special rule of some kind, but I'm not getting into that right now.

I'd like to see return of salvo weapon type rather than making HB a rapidfire weapon. Of course, you can have different entries for different types of HB like Astartes HB and imperium HB, and of course Harker's Payback should be something like salvo 3/5.

 skchsan wrote:
I'd like to see return of salvo weapon type rather than making HB a rapidfire weapon. Of course, you can have different entries for different types of HB like Astartes HB and imperium HB, and of course Harker's Payback should be something like salvo 3/5.

This could work. Making Astartes HBs Salvo 3/5 would give them a niche, and respectable firepower, and probably would still be priced about accurately.

Another option, not that anything suggested is bad or unreasonable but if playing with the heavy bolter has too many knock on consequences.
Grav weapons are astartes only weapons that could be modified to give marines a thing to make them better without impacting other imperial armies.

I'd just make them heavy 4. They're not called back breakers because they're light...
Besides, going back to second edition for comparison, heavy bolters had 2 sustained for dice. I.e. 2d3. Assault cannons had 3 dice.
If assault cannons have 6 shots , heavy bolters should have 4.

Zustiur wrote:
I'd just make them heavy 4. They're not called back breakers because they're light...
Besides, going back to second edition for comparison, heavy bolters had 2 sustained for dice. I.e. 2d3. Assault cannons had 3 dice.
If assault cannons have 6 shots , heavy bolters should have 4.

I find that to be the most preferable option. The only reason Marines even take Heavy Bolters on infantry is for the occasional Hellfire Shell Strategem. Heavy Bolters are so much more outclassed by the Autocannon for spam purposes. I want the Heavy Bolter to feel like a weapon capable of hurling out a mass quanitity of shells, right now it just doesn't. I would even be happy with it being S4 Heavy 5.

I like the original proposal. It would give TAC squads an option that doesn't cheat them of their core stats, moving 6" and shooting at bs3+. Marines are supposed to be strong after all, some of the models for heavy bolters don't look too horribly cumbersome to be RF (while certainly not assault).

While looking at chaos marines I keep finding myself wanting more shots and a reason to move. This'll help with that while not being an automatic selection due to the loss of range compared to autocannon.

Rapid fire 2 heavy bolters seems like a decent idea for me, might require tiny adjustments to units with them built in, but would do well to add diversity to the "heavy infantry weapon" lineup that is currently a bit too homogeneous.

They just kinda did that with Splinter Cannons...

This would hurt Sisters extremely.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
This would hurt Sisters extremely.

Please explain. I thought Sisters liked being close to use their flamers and melta and getting HBs with MORE shots that they can move with and not suffer -1 to hit would be a very welcome change.

Side note, I also like the Heavy 4 option. But moreso because it keeps Heavy Bolters as Heavy
Not that mathing names to type matters (looking as you Heavy Flamer and Assault Cannon)

Can we change the title of this thread to snazzguns instead of heavy bolters? Because I would LOVE if snazzguns became rapid fire 2.

 Galef wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
This would hurt Sisters extremely.

Please explain. I thought Sisters liked being close to use their flamers and melta and getting HBs with MORE shots that they can move with and not suffer -1 to hit would be a very welcome change.

Side note, I also like the Heavy 4 option. But moreso because it keeps Heavy Bolters as Heavy
Not that mathing names to type matters (looking as you Heavy Flamer and Assault Cannon)

Heavy Flamers are actually Heavy now to be fair...

 Galef wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
This would hurt Sisters extremely.

Please explain. I thought Sisters liked being close to use their flamers and melta and getting HBs with MORE shots that they can move with and not suffer -1 to hit would be a very welcome change.

Side note, I also like the Heavy 4 option. But moreso because it keeps Heavy Bolters as Heavy
Not that mathing names to type matters (looking as you Heavy Flamer and Assault Cannon)

Not Heavy Bolter Retributors, they want to hang back and AOF spam for MOAR DAKKA

I don't think I really have an issue with the current heavy bolter, but RF2 or heavy 4 would also feel okay too.

Can it have both?

Choose a profile, Heavy 3 or Rapid fire 2. Depending on if you moved and/or the range to the target, one may be a better choice than the other.

 Kcalehc wrote:
Can it have both?

Choose a profile, Heavy 3 or Rapid fire 2. Depending on if you moved and/or the range to the target, one may be a better choice than the other.

Gasp, but that would create the opportunity for players to make interesting decisions in list synergy and gameplay. GW seems to think that kind of situation is not what games are about.

Shas'O'Ceris wrote:

 Kcalehc wrote:
Can it have both?

Choose a profile, Heavy 3 or Rapid fire 2. Depending on if you moved and/or the range to the target, one may be a better choice than the other.

Gasp, but that would create the opportunity for players to make interesting decisions in list synergy and gameplay. GW seems to think that kind of situation is not what games are about.

...I'm sorry but I'm failing to grasp how that's going to create interesting decisions.

My vote goes to heavy 4 instead of rapid fire. Partially because Guard heavy weapon teams should not be agile.

There needs to be rapid fire for every weapon. Just makes sense. The closer you are the more rounds you can quickly put on a target. And assault cannons should have the standard dread sized one with high Strength and -ap. And terminators and other units carrying smaller versions should have many shots with lower strength and ap for clearing hordes. They shouldn’t be the same gun.

warpedpig wrote:
There needs to be rapid fire for every weapon. Just makes sense. The closer you are the more rounds you can quickly put on a target. And assault cannons should have the standard dread sized one with high Strength and -ap. And terminators and other units carrying smaller versions should have many shots with lower strength and ap for clearing hordes. They shouldn’t be the same gun.

This doesn't really feel like it makes sense, why would your gun fire faster just because the enemy is closer to it? It sounds like you'd be better served with a more general bonus to hit within half/third/quarter range. This would apply to all weapons, but it would benefit heavy bolters more than assault cannons since they have longer range.