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.

It's not candor when it's unconstructive drivel that consists of ridiculous suggestions.

Candor would be saying "bolters are pretty much fine, it's just that the meta is fethed up".

What was displayed is not candor.

In any case, HBs negatively affect infantry unit mobility when trying to leverage HBs in the most effective manner. Yes, you can walk around and haphazardly snapfire into things, for all the good it might do.

This is why Salvo is a good choice for HBs, even if it's generally terrible on all but the Splinter Cannon.

HBs mathematically can't engage as many high priority targets as autocannons. You can call that the meta, but in the range of models that GW produces, S7 is just a much sweeter spot than S5.

Id like to throw my hat into the salvo 2/3 ring so that at the least it has a use in mobile armies.

 Desubot wrote:
Id like to throw my hat into the salvo 2/3 ring so that at the least it has a use in mobile armies.

I'd support his, but I'd still never use the weapon because S5 is too weak for a heavy slot, imo.

Martel732 wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Id like to throw my hat into the salvo 2/3 ring so that at the least it has a use in mobile armies.

I'd support his, but I'd still never use the weapon because S5 is too weak for a heavy slot, imo.

Not if you wern't going to put a heavy in that spot anyways because it's a squad on the move. With salvo it would be my go to heavy weapon on rhino or drop pod tacticals. cause 2 str 5 shots at bs getting out of a transport is way better than 1 shot hitting on 6's.

Still though - I'm not a fan of salvo - savlo effectively makes it's mobile mode complete gak by reducing ROF. Just make its salvo 3/3 and I'll be happy.

Well, something that has been thrown around is actually going Salvo 3/4- RoF isn't reduced on the move (compared to the current), and you basically get a bonus shot for sitting still.

There should, realistically, be some other benefit besides increased range for sitting still with the HB, unless we're intending it to fulfill a pseudo-SAW role in SM squads.

I'll also just throw out there that Martel, based on some comments he's made, is a BA player, so he gets access to the fairly nice HF as a heavy option.

Tacs are still fairly meh, but Tacs with HFs are a bit less meh.

Whiskey144 wrote:
Well, something that has been thrown around is actually going Salvo 3/4- RoF isn't reduced on the move (compared to the current), and you basically get a bonus shot for sitting still.

There should, realistically, be some other benefit besides increased range for sitting still with the HB, unless we're intending it to fulfill a pseudo-SAW role in SM squads.

I'll also just throw out there that Martel, based on some comments he's made, is a BA player, so he gets access to the fairly nice HF as a heavy option.

Tacs are still fairly meh, but Tacs with HFs are a bit less meh.

Let's be real. The things I REALLY want to flame aren't going to let me. They will be in a transport or disable the tac's transport well out of flamer range. Even if I didn't have heavy flamers, I still would never take a heavy bolter. I didn't use heavy bolters in the 5th ed BA codex.

Realistically like the saw it should be a suppressive weapon. much like how its depicted in DOW series

Buuuuuut Gw seems to hate the idea of pinning and stuff so meh :/

Clearly, the real problem is that some genius decided to give Autocannons to infantry models.

 Desubot wrote:
Realistically like the saw it should be a suppressive weapon. much like how its depicted in DOW series

Buuuuuut Gw seems to hate the idea of pinning and stuff so meh :/

I kind of agree with you. I think Heavy Bolters and sniper rifles should have pinning. I would LOVE to have heavy bolters with salvo 3/4 pinning at the current 10 points price. I would however live with salvo 3/4. Would I ever take like say 4 heavy bolters? maybe. If the unit that has them has split fire. Otherwise I would keep them around for better RoF. Something for when I don't really have anything better to sink my points into. Which can happen more than one might think.

Sniper rifles and Ord weapons have pinning.. . In our meta, just change the rules like we do, if it works keep it, if not, change it, 7th is the house rule edition!

 Formosa wrote:
Sniper rifles and Ord weapons have pinning.. . In our meta, just change the rules like we do, if it works keep it, if not, change it, 7th is the house rule edition!

My group already is doing this for the most part, but it would be nice if GW admitted they screwed up and don't know or care about what they are doing gameplay wise.

Well, I'd probably recommending starting off a little bit "lower-level" with Pinning HBs; probably Salvo 2/3 or Salvo 3/3; mass Pinning has a lot of potential to be very un-fun to play against for certain armies.

We don't want Marines to become the next Eldar book, after all.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Clearly, the real problem is that some genius decided to give Autocannons to infantry models.

In all honesty, I would agree that it's quite.... bemusing.... that some armies have infantry-portable ACs. OTOH, it is also the case that, AFAIK, only CSM and IG have the ability to deploy infantry armed with ACs. Of course, I'd honestly say that ACs really belong as vehicle-only weapons, rather than the man-portable and vehicle-mounted variations that currently exist.

infantry carrying vehicle mounted cannons? My CSM has them growing out for an arm!

http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/Mjg3WDEwMjc=/z/ZsYAAOSw8d9Uw~QD/$_3.JPG" border="0" />
http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MzIyWDEwMzk=/z/e34AAOSw2s1Uw~P0/$_3.JPG" border="0" />

pm me if you are interested in buying as to keep this post on subject.

ugggg. I recently made the switch from Sentinels of Terra to DE, and really there is almost no way to buff the heavy bolter with huge ripple effects IMO. I like the idea of H4 pinning, but then that will be SUPER spammed (like if that were to happen, I would take like 3 dev squads with HB and rain hell on all light 4+ save infantry, and then pin them. But as SRSFACE said, that would also be spammed. I think just heavy 4 would be enought of a buff to make them usable.

gummyofallbears wrote:
ugggg. I recently made the switch from Sentinels of Terra to DE, and really there is almost no way to buff the heavy bolter with huge ripple effects IMO. I like the idea of H4 pinning, but then that will be SUPER spammed (like if that were to happen, I would take like 3 dev squads with HB and rain hell on all light 4+ save infantry, and then pin them. But as SRSFACE said, that would also be spammed. I think just heavy 4 would be enought of a buff to make them usable.

True. I just like the idea of sniper scouts with pinning and a hellfire heavy bolter with pinning. Overkill on pinning, probably. Personally I think every arming should have a few "dirty tricks" they can pull like pinning and what not. May armies already have them. And some are easier to pull of than others.