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.

Can someone clarify the new beta rules for bolters?

The rules states double the amount of shots if any of three conditions are met.
-within half range
-if your unit hasnt moved
-terminators, centurions, vehicles

So currently the storm bolter is rapid fire 2 putting out 4 shots at half range, do they put out 8 shots now at half range?

Thanks in advance.

The rule just adds more conditions to get double fire with Rapid Fire, and they do not stack. It just means you also get double fire if you stay still or have the right keyword.

They replaced one condition of getting double shots (half range) with three conditions (half range, not moving, and certain units)

So now your terminator with a storm bolter will always get 4 shots, no matter the distance.

Thanks for the clarification guys, i thought my understanding made bolters to OP lol xD

No problem, a lot of people seem to be having that knee-jerk misunderstanding with the rule at first

Just read the sentence preceding, where you use the following INSTEAD of the usual rules.

Yeah it doesn't increase the max # of shots you could get before, it just adds more situations in which you could get double shots.

And I'll repeat this in every thread this come up, but the rule would have been better AND easier to grasp if it just gave +1 to the RF# if any of the 3 conditions are met.

So a RF1 bolter becomes RF2 if:
-Stationary
-in half range
-Keyword Terminator, Biker, etc.

On top or doubling shots in half range (so 4 shots for a Bolter in 12", 6 Shots (RF3x2) for a Stormbolter in 12")
I've emailed this to the WC link they provided. If enough of us do this, they might update it for the final version

-

Too overpowered if they did that

 Galef wrote:
Yeah it doesn't increase the max # of shots you could get before, it just adds more situations in which you could get double shots.

And I'll repeat this in every thread this come up, but the rule would have been better AND easier to grasp if it just gave +1 to the RF# if any of the 3 conditions are met.

So a RF1 bolter becomes RF2 if:
-Stationary
-in half range
-Keyword Terminator, Biker, etc.

On top or doubling shots in half range (so 4 shots for a Bolter in 12", 6 Shots (RF3x2) for a Stormbolter in 12")
I've emailed this to the WC link they provided. If enough of us do this, they might update it for the final version

-

I think overall in order for these units to get play - the maxium damage output of bolters needs to be increased - not just maxium current damage profile made easier to attain. So I like your idea here. It would actually a really nice finalization to the rule.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Galef wrote:
Yeah it doesn't increase the max # of shots you could get before, it just adds more situations in which you could get double shots.

And I'll repeat this in every thread this come up, but the rule would have been better AND easier to grasp if it just gave +1 to the RF# if any of the 3 conditions are met.

So a RF1 bolter becomes RF2 if:
-Stationary
-in half range
-Keyword Terminator, Biker, etc.

On top or doubling shots in half range (so 4 shots for a Bolter in 12", 6 Shots (RF3x2) for a Stormbolter in 12")
I've emailed this to the WC link they provided. If enough of us do this, they might update it for the final version

-

I think overall in order for these units to get play - the maxium damage output of bolters needs to be increased - not just maxium current damage profile made easier to attain. So I like your idea here. It would actually a really nice finalization to the rule.

If you like the suggestion, please use the WC feedback link they provided in the Bolter Discipline article. If enough of us send this suggestion, or similar, it might make it into the final version.

U02dah4 wrote:
Too overpowered if they did that

You're the first person I've seen with this opinion. Care to explain your thoughts?
The vast majority of units this RF+1 suggestion affects are currently considered meh-to-bad units. Tacical Marines, Terminators, Bikes, etc. RF+1 (if conditions are met) improves the usefulness of those unit. But at the end of the day, its still JUST bolter shots.
The RF+1 suggestion also doesn't encourage static castling gunline tactics as much as the current version. Marines are supposed to be Shock Troops. Shock Troops are meant to be more effective at close range.

The only units this change would make "too power" would be DW units with SIA. But the issue there ISN'T Bolter Discipline, but SIA itself. With or without BD, SIA just makes DW better in every way, but the RF+1 version of BD at least make non-DW units more viable.

-

In the abstract, I don't think it's TOO powerful. However I think there would be a lot of discontent from Xenos players, and somewhat justifiably so. Shuriken Guardians would look SO bad by comparison.

I also worry about Stalker and Auto Bolt Rifles. The rule as is really squeezes their niche. Improving Rapid Fire even more makes them laughable. Could it apply to all Bolt Weapons maybe? Well, that would make Aggressors insane, so it needs more nuance than that.

Regardless, this isn't really the place for rules suggestions.

 Galef wrote:

U02dah4 wrote:
Too overpowered if they did that

You're the first person I've seen with this opinion. Care to explain your thoughts?
The vast majority of units this RF+1 suggestion affects are currently considered meh-to-bad units. Tacical Marines, Terminators, Bikes, etc. RF+1 (if conditions are met) improves the usefulness of those unit. But at the end of the day, its still JUST bolter shots.
The RF+1 suggestion also doesn't encourage static castling gunline tactics as much as the current version. Marines are supposed to be Shock Troops. Shock Troops are meant to be more effective at close range.

The only units this change would make "too power" would be DW units with SIA. But the issue there ISN'T Bolter Discipline, but SIA itself. With or without BD, SIA just makes DW better in every way, but the RF+1 version of BD at least make non-DW units more viable.

-

I agree with U0 on this. Law of unintended consequences and all that. While you may be thinking purely of the poor Tac Marine, the knock on effect of your changes would be horrendous. 64 bolter shots from a LR Crusader?. Please remember saying that these are just bolter shots is disingenuous, a humble bolter can still wound / kill / destroy anything with a toughness value in this game.

Let's see where and how these beta rules go before suggesting changes.

Cheers

Andrew

 Stux wrote:
In the abstract, I don't think it's TOO powerful. However I think there would be a lot of discontent from Xenos players, and somewhat justifiably so. Shuriken Guardians would look SO bad by comparison.

I also worry about Stalker and Auto Bolt Rifles. The rule as is really squeezes their niche. Improving Rapid Fire even more makes them laughable. Could it apply to all Bolt Weapons maybe? Well, that would make Aggressors insane, so it needs more nuance than that.

Regardless, this isn't really the place for rules suggestions.

Those are valid points, especially regarding Stalker and Auto weapons. Perhaps it would be better if the rule just added 1 to the number of shots of bolt weapon profiles if one of the three conditions are met. That would allow it to buff the non Rapid Fire bolt weapons as well. Aggressors would probably be too good if it applied to them, so their weapons would be an exception.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AndrewC wrote:

I agree with U0 on this. Law of unintended consequences and all that. While you may be thinking purely of the poor Tac Marine, the knock on effect of your changes would be horrendous. 64 bolter shots from a LR Crusader?. Please remember saying that these are just bolter shots is disingenuous, a humble bolter can still wound / kill / destroy anything with a toughness value in this game.

Let's see where and how these beta rules go before suggesting changes.

Cheers

Andrew

Not sure where you are getting 64 bolter shots from a LR crusader. Max with the suggested change would be 34 shots(14 from each Hurricane Bolter and 6 from a Storm Bolter). Is 6 more shots really going to break the game?!?

Your right, it is only 34, I doubled the HB twice. Ooops.

I still think a wait and see attitude is more beneficial.

Cheers

Andrew

Yeah, but NOW is the time to send suggestions before it is fully implemented for the FAQ in March. Also, some of us are testing the new rule out and are seeing just how little impact the current version adds. I agree that knee-jerk changes should not be made, but if the rule seems lackluster then now is the time to try out other things that could be an improvement.

Overall I think this is going to be pretty powerful a change. I have a player that uses multiple storm ravens against my orks. Those double shots already caused me enough pain when he had to get close but now that he can stay 24" away it's gonna be rough moving across the board. This is just 1 example but I don't think this change hurts more elite armies as bad.

 Galef wrote:
The only units this change would make "too power" would be DW units with SIA.

You know TS exist, right?

And the average competitive TS army has how many bolters? I think the answer is zero.

But I do think it is a nice bonus for Rubrics and SOT.

 Irbis wrote:

 Galef wrote:
The only units this change would make "too power" would be DW units with SIA.

You know TS exist, right?

Yes, I am aware of their existence....

 alextroy wrote:
And the average competitive TS army has how many bolters? I think the answer is zero.

So Bolter Discipline actually giving more actual shots rather than just max shots more often, would make Rubrics and SOT show up a bit more, rather than just spamming cultist & Tzaangors.

And that gets to the heart of what Bolter Discipline COULD be used for: putting the "core" units front and center again for Marines & CSMs, rather than just filling minimums or outright not being taken at all. Marine armies should have lots of Marines, and that just doesn't happen right now.

-

They should (GW) really go all in on this and instead just make a BOLT Type for weapons so you don't get things like Heavy Bolter or Assault Cannon funny names (HB 2.0).
Then retro faq all weapons to have the Bolt type.

I mean if they can give Plague Weapons a special rule, why not Bolt weapons?

Because all other codexes that have bolters would benefit, too. Sisters honestly don't need a buff for their stormbolters

Why does this not apply to Adeptus Custodes? Have GW given a reason?

Because it is designed to make Astartes better. Custodes are just fine as they are, so no need to enhance their bolters.

 alextroy wrote:
Because it is designed to make Astartes better. Custodes are just fine as they are, so no need to enhance their bolters.

1) I understand that GW are trying to enhance the effectiveness of Astartes.

2) You're wrong to say that the Custodes don't need the boost. With their low model count, they arguably need it more than do Space Marines.

3) In-universe, Custodes are far more well trained than are Space Marines. It makes no sense, from a fluff perspective, that Space Marines are more adept with bolters than are the Emperor's elite bodyguard.


Have GW addressed any of this?

 Norchack wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Because it is designed to make Astartes better. Custodes are just fine as they are, so no need to enhance their bolters.

1) I understand that GW are trying to enhance the effectiveness of Astartes.

yes, because the point cost of Marines are grossly high, and they clearly overvalue a 3+ armor save.

2) You're wrong to say that the Custodes don't need the boost. With their low model count, they arguably need it more than do Space Marines.

they do not need a boost, they are fairly well balanced.

3) In-universe, Custodes are far more well trained than are Space Marines. It makes no sense, from a fluff perspective, that Space Marines are more adept with bolters than are the Emperor's elite bodyguard.

Yea, game rules and balance care not for fluff.

Also Custodes, while generally "better", are trained to fight in a completely different way to Astartes. I really don't see a problem with this at all from a lore perspective.

After all, Custodes are still hitting with BS2.

The issue I see is that the same vehicle mounted Bolters perform differently between codexes, which makes little sense. Stormbolters and Hurricane Bolters are now different between armies.

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
The issue I see is that the same vehicle mounted Bolters perform differently between codexes, which makes little sense. Stormbolters and Hurricane Bolters are now different between armies.

SJ

Vehicles still have crews.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
The issue I see is that the same vehicle mounted Bolters perform differently between codexes, which makes little sense. Stormbolters and Hurricane Bolters are now different between armies.

SJ

Vehicles still have crews.

Agreed. A marine gunner will have different training to a Guard gunner. Makes total sense.