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.

Another theory thread from me. A lot of ideas will be thrown out, I'm sure some are wrong. I'm interested to hear what people think.

The primary focus here is Marines. But from the opposite side - instead of buffing Marines, lets talk about rebalancing weapons! So, clearly, there'll be a lot of OP gak that this won't fix that's already op.

So, to start, lets look at basic special weapons. Unless otherwise stated, same changes apply to all factions who have the weapon or similar.

Plas:
-Normal fire: S6
-Overcharge: S7 D1. On a 1 to hit, the shooting model takes 1 mortal wound.

Melta:
-Instead of reroll damage within half range, becomes +d3 damage within half range.

Flamer:
-All former templates that became d6 autohits instead become 2d6, cannot generate more hits than there are models in the target unit
-Flamers gain "May fire this weapon during Overwatch regardless of distance." (Just Flamers themselves, for now)

This is just a start. Should I continue or not?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mods - very sorry, meant to post in Proposed Rules. Is there a way I can move this?

(edit - updated based on feedback.)

Still no ideas for Grav.

Plasma needs to be nerfed a bit, but the other "solutions" are way too strong for the cost and would break the meta in other ways.

I actually miss the vehicle damage table, and it might show above. I'd love it if even 1 melta gun were actually scary again, but might be overdoing it. The idea is a Tac squad with 1 or 2 is going to be very scary if not dealt with, but a Fire Dragon or Sternie squad with 10 should be overkill on anything short of a Titan. I'd be intereseted in hearing your thoughts (should be buffed? if so, how much?).

I feel like Flamers need a buff. I'm blanking on Templates that don't. Maybe Scytheguard don't. But the Flamer change is a sidegrade - sure, you're hitting Guardsmen more, but you're hitting vehicles and individuals less. So better at why you should take one. Worse at things you shouldn't take it for.

The flamer stuff seems good enough - they are still expensive, still useless at deepstrike, and the change both buffs them (against hordes) while nerfting them (against everything else).

Melta could perhaps do with something more targeted, such as +1 to wound <vehicle> targets within half distance.

Flamers should get roll 2 dice choose the highest.
Meltas should cause and additional d3 mortal wounds within half range but drop rolling two dice.
Plasma should Get Hot on a natural 1.

I think the flamer change is interesting, because it makes it more powerful against its intended targets (hordes), while weakening it against its unintended targets (vehicles). I don't think melta weapons need a buff, as they are still used in competitive lists, due to being actually very good when they are in the right spot. Their short range is a real penalty, but you do get a very real benefit when you overcome that obstacle. I know that my big heavy hitters are still very scared when those meltas get in range. Two melta hits can kill a light vehicle, or cripple just about any vehicle with degrading profiles. That's pretty awesome.

I agree with Elbows that, right now, Plasma is just too reliable in all situations. I like that the concept of "overcharge" instead of the flat "kills the user on a 1" from previous editions, but the increase to both Strength AND Damage makes Overcharging the right thing to do nearly all the time. I think making it either +1S OR +1 Damage would be good enough. It's at the critical S7/S8 threshold, which is why the +1 Strength is not just useful, but often CRITICAL, and doubling your damage is also immensely helpful. Having both is, frankly, absurd.

The reason I don't like mortal wounds on Meltas is that Storm Shields and demons should give them a very bad day. I like that it can only hurt one model, and ignores any armor, but not invulns.

I like the 'Natural 1' concept, not sure it's enough of a change and might be a bit too wordy?

Melta should double strength inside melta range. It needs reliability in causing damage to heavy targets.

Flamers D6 + 1 per 5 models in target unit. Not a flat buff.

I think the flamers are fine at d6, but the range should be increased. Maybe to 12"? That way it's an actual anti-charge gun, instead of just being...Well, useless..

Melta just needs a price reduction, BADLY. Like, down to 13 or something.

Plasma would be pretty good at strength 6, 7 on overcharge, but keeping its -3 and 1/2 damage. It should be anti-elite, but NOT anti-tank, like it so often is.

Melta fails way too many wound rolls in practice. It's current value is less than 13. A lot less.

Part of why I like bringing it to 1 damage in both profiles is that the D:2 is a large part of why it overshadows melta.

I think there's some concern about templates being used on deepstrike, although the flamer itself isn't what most people would fear on the deepstrike. Not sure if Overwatch shouldn't be considered to be in range regardless, but I think that'd be a long discussion.

I agree that plasma should start at S6 just like Tau plasma, which was always said to be a bit weaker, but stable. Now it's even weaker compared to stable imperial plasma, which doesn't seem very fluffy. Bring it down to S6/S7, keep D1/2. If it's still too strong, adjust points.

Flamers: Keep them as they are but add +1D3 hits for every 5 models in the target unit. OR: simply bring them down to 5points again...

Melta: I like Sim-lifes suggestion. 2D6 damage within half range seems excessive.

Wouldn't d3 mortal wounds be worth more than d6 wounds in a lot of situations where Melta isn't appropriate? Would +d3 wounds make more sense?

I do want to keep Melta as super deadly when it connects, instead of increasing it's probability of connecting. It makes each successive Melta in a unit have a substantially lower expected value. Making a squad with 6-9 Meltas worth much less than triple a squad that has 2-3 Meltas.

Everything overshadows melta. That's a poor standard.

Just as another thought for Melta, but what about a simple +1 to wound rolls at half range? Better reflects the old half-range bonus and gives it back its niche as an anti-big target special weapon compared to Plasma.

Flamers are okay. I think they just need a price reduction. I like their role in overwatch, though having a rule that let them roll an additional D6 against larger units would be good too (Grav Flux Bombard is a good example).

Plasma is certainly powerful, but I'm rather fond of how well it works. Dropping strength would likely be the appropriate solution.

Melta needs some rethinking. I've never really liked it as a gun type as its always felt like it could be a more creative anti-armor solution. Something like when a unit attacks, if the melta hits, the target is at a lower toughness for all the wound rolls for the unit's attacks or something.

I think most plasma is in a good place. It's not cheap to run and as such balances out.

As for the melta i think the within half range, +1 to wound and 6 damage. over half range normal wound and D6 Damage

For flamers. difficult to balance especially with all flamer variants. Buff normal flamers, how much does that buff the giant flamers? I personally think flamers are in a good position if they did change it would be a how many hits thing only.

Why not just flip some rules around? There are lots of weapons that wound troops on X and vehicles on <X. For instance wounds on 2+ unless it's a vehicle then 6+. Why not have meltas wound vehicles on a 2+ and all others on a 5+. And/or make it so meltas do more wounds to vehicles than non vehicles.

As to flamers the biggest thing that I think would help is to allow them to be used against charges regardless of the starting range of the charging unit. Also I think that range should be a function of the weaon's category. Normal assault flamers should be 8", heavy flamers 10" and, vehicle mounted flamers 12".

Flamers: Need the Catachan treatment. 2d6 drop the lower helps to normalize their shots a bit more while also gives a bit more chance at the upside. 2 point stormbolter inside of rapid fire range "averages" about as many hits from a BS 3+ model as a flamer... for like 7 points less?

Melta: Give it a table to increase damage as the weapon closes range:

Meltagun:
> 9" = Str 8
6-9" = Str 12
< 6" = Str 16

Multi-melta:
> 18" = Str 8
12-18" = Str 12
< 12" = Str 16

Plasma:
Needs to be either STR 6/7 or 1 damage. The 8 STR 2 damage profile is just way too good for the "cost". To keep the current profile, though, maybe changing it from rapid fire 1 to assault 1 (or even heavy 1 to add a bit more risk to moving + overcharging) would be enough. The biggest problem I see with plasma comes in the form of the plasma gun.

All flame throwers need a 2" buff and 2D3 instead of D6.

All melta weapons need to be assault D3 instead of assault 1. Multi-Meltas need to be Heavy D3 as well. They are pretty good as is.

Everything else should stay the same.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Purifying Tempest wrote:
Flamers: Need the Catachan treatment. 2d6 drop the lower helps to normalize their shots a bit more while also gives a bit more chance at the upside. 2 point stormbolter inside of rapid fire range "averages" about as many hits from a BS 3+ model as a flamer... for like 7 points less?

This would be cumbersome and ruin the weapons. Storm bolters do exactly what they should do already....

Flamers should work on overwatch regardless of distance or LOS. That should be enough for them.

I personally think melta-guns are fine, but need a point reduction. They are just extremely expensive. Rules-wise they're fine. We have added a single house-rule to our games though which I feel is fluffy/cool. A weapon with the melta rule (i.e. the roll two dice within 1/2 range) adds +1 to the chance of a vehicle exploding, so most explode on a 5+. It's not crazy potent, if anything it's more dangerous to the unit firing, but it seems fun so far.

Flamers should absolutely NOT be in range after deep strike, and this is very obviously why they were designed the range they have. I would actually be okay with heavy flamers having extended range instead of increased damage/strength (after all...fire is fire for the most part). I'd be fine with an addendum which states they cannot target units with the Flyer battlefield role. I'm actually fine with the D6 autohits. I think flamers will a role in the game and aren't insanely expensive.

Plasma is just broken as it is - and is very much "the" gun to take in most situations. This needs fixing, and not just cost-wise. I do believe GW should have instituted 'natural' dice results as it would fix a ton of issues in the game at the moment (somehow exploding and dying more often at night, or while flying, or while shooting a guy in camouflage, etc.). I personally think Plasma should have been Strength 6/7 instead of 7/8. and the default AP should be -2. I'm even okay keeping the 2 damage on the higher setting.

Possible solutions regarding melta:

Solution 1: At half range, it is AP-4, with an additional -2 against invulnerable saves. Being able to pop all of these ridiculous 3++ things running around might make it valuable.

Solution 2: Make it functionally equivalent to rapid fire, in that you get extra dice at half range to hit and wound.

Solution 3: Flat damage, which improves based on range. For instance, outside of melta range it's a flat 3 damage, inside melta range it's a flat 6.

I'm a fan of solution 1, because it gives melta a unique use case and separates it from the rest of the shooting weapons out there.

 sfshilo wrote:
All flame throwers need a 2" buff and 2D3 instead of D6.

All melta weapons need to be assault D3 instead of assault 1. Multi-Meltas need to be Heavy D3 as well. They are pretty good as is.

Everything else should stay the same.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Purifying Tempest wrote:
Flamers: Need the Catachan treatment. 2d6 drop the lower helps to normalize their shots a bit more while also gives a bit more chance at the upside. 2 point stormbolter inside of rapid fire range "averages" about as many hits from a BS 3+ model as a flamer... for like 7 points less?

This would be cumbersome and ruin the weapons. Storm bolters do exactly what they should do already....

I never said stormbolters were bad, it was actually quite the opposite. A stormbolder, firing 4 shots where a flamer even gets an opportunity to shoot, will probably average 3 hits on a BS 3+ model. For 2 points, you're getting a weapon that performs more predictably all the time, and has a LARGE band of usefulness where the other isn't even usable. The only thing that flamers do better than stormbolters is overwatch. You're paying like 5 or 7 extra points for a weapon that is a lot less effective in all scenarios except a very tight one (being assaulted from under 8"). The stormbolter is a good weapon in the context of the game. I was just using it to point out how rough the normal flamer has it.

I would like to see Grey Knight weapons get a +1damage, because the ammo is magical. And their stormbolters getting the stratagem buff permanently.
Also let Grey knight razorbacks and dreadnoughts get hvy psycannons and psylancers, and incinerators.

A.T. wrote:
The flamer stuff seems good enough - they are still expensive, still useless at deepstrike, and the change both buffs them (against hordes) while nerfting them (against everything else).

Let's make flamers 10" so they can actually defend against assault in most cases.

I like Flamers being able to overwatch, but I also like Flamers not being able to fire on DeepStrike.

I think I like "Flamers are automatically in range during Overwatch".

Yeah, deep striking flamers could get nasty, and that is one of the reasons that they were given a range just short of deep strike. Giving them an overwatch works regardless of range rule would be a better way to buff the flamer without turning them into the deep strike death option.

One option for flamers is to give them +2-4" range if the unit didn't move in the previous move phase akin to how Aggressors work.

Bharring wrote:
I like Flamers being able to overwatch, but I also like Flamers not being able to fire on DeepStrike.

I think I like "Flamers are automatically in range during Overwatch".

Oh hell no.

Maybe if it's a flamer on an individual infantry guy. But Plagueburst Crawlers, Chimeras, just no.