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.

 Charistoph wrote:
Not like fluff doesn't get Retconned regardless of our feelings. Don't let that stop a rule improvement.

Really, you think that the in-universe equivalent of a M2 .50 caliber machine gun should be a Rapid Fire weapon like an M16?

I recall that the Heavy Bolter as been descirbed by GW as like the gun on the Apache helicopter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M230_chain_gun

So a 0.50 cal (12.5mm) is a peashooter compared to this 30mm chain gun.

Bolter calibre/performance varies widely by source. I've seen bolters described as 0.75-calibre and heavy bolters described as 1.0-calibre (25mm) before.

Modern weapons/equipment is usually a pretty poor comparison to 40k, the numbers we're given are always so weird. The tanks have vastly more open space inside, the anti-gravity tech means we've got planes running around with foot-thick wings that exist mostly to mount missiles, weapons with widely varying calibres are described as doing the exact same thing, we've got no way of coming up with a realistic equivalent of the melta weapons...

Martel732 wrote:
There is no justification for making the heavy bolter shoot more than an assault cannon.

depends what you want the HB's niche to be. is it supposed to be simply a dirth cheap option you toss on when you don't wanna spend the points for something better? (if so leave it as is, maybe reduce it to a 5 point cost although I think that;d be a bit nuts) but if you want the HB to be a "lighty infantry clearer" then it makes sense. and I think that isn't a bad idea, the assault cannon is a fantastic option to crack heavy infantry squads, but sometimes you just need something to hose down that 30 man blob. the HB could, easily eneugh, be that option

" the assault cannon is a fantastic option to crack heavy infantry squads"

Not really. ROF is too low.

kirotheavenger wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

Not like fluff doesn't get Retconned regardless of our feelings. Don't let that stop a rule improvement.

Really, you think that the in-universe equivalent of a M2 .50 caliber machine gun should be a Rapid Fire weapon like an M16?

Heavy bolter makes a .50 look like a pea shooter.

1) you messed up the quote.

Skip for 2.

Tygre wrote:I recall that the Heavy Bolter as been descirbed by GW as like the gun on the Apache helicopter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M230_chain_gun

So a 0.50 cal (12.5mm) is a peashooter compared to this 30mm chain gun.

2) The point wasn't the firepower of the weapon, but the widespread use and availability of the weapon. No other weapon sees as much widespread use in the 40K game as the Heavy Bolter. It is carried by super-soldiers, a crew-served "mobile" weapon, and used on Ground Vehicles and Air Vehicles in numerous codices. The Browning M2 .50 caliber has been in use for decades and was used on EVERYTHING in the American military during WWII. It is a single-barrel heavy small arm that provides a better-than-a-rifle rate of fire.

Does that really sound like one hit at range, two a bit closer, effectiveness?

Martel732 wrote:
" the assault cannon is a fantastic option to crack heavy infantry squads"

Not really. ROF is too low.

I don't belvie a single weapon of ANY type should be wiping out entire units save maybe lucky use of blasts

BrianDavion wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
" the assault cannon is a fantastic option to crack heavy infantry squads"

Not really. ROF is too low.

I don't belvie a single weapon of ANY type should be wiping out entire units save maybe lucky use of blasts

I'm saying the assault cannon is lucky to get one or two heavy infantry kills. Not that impressive.

 Charistoph wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Well there you go.
I've only really encountered Rapid Fire on Bolters and simply didn't care after finding out that you couldn't charge after using it - so, you got a cool name for this new mechanic?

It's on a lot of stuff besides Boltguns, like Lasguns and Plasma Guns, but that's neither here nor there.

Still double the shots and no charge without relentless.

More to the point, there is little reason to not be familiar with it if you are familiar with the game, much less familiar with the Boltgun which is in the BRB nwo.

Even judges make mistakes - pretty sure they're more than familliar.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

I was stating that this be the version that Rapid Fire should be. It should either double shots at half range, or improve the stat by +1 or +half. It would require adding a number after Rapid Fire ala Assault or Heavy, but that's nothing new. The alternative is using a #/# system ala Salvo to indicate short/long range rates of fire.

Though, this has nothing to do with Heavy Bolters. Their fluff and setup is far better suited to either a Heavy or Salvo mechanic, such as it is.

Not like fluff doesn't get Retconned regardless of our feelings. Don't let that stop a rule improvement.

Really, you think that the in-universe equivalent of a M2 .50 caliber machine gun should be a Rapid Fire weapon like an M16?

When its usually being lugged about by super soldiers who wield extended and reinforced chainsaws with the dexterity I have with a shinai, no, it's not too big a leap of the imagination to think they have rapid-fire canon calibre weaponry.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

Even judges make mistakes - pretty sure they're more than familliar.

Then why are you treating them as if they are not?

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

Really, you think that the in-universe equivalent of a M2 .50 caliber machine gun should be a Rapid Fire weapon like an M16?

When its usually being lugged about by super soldiers who wield extended and reinforced chainsaws with the dexterity I have with a shinai, no, it's not too big a leap of the imagination to think they have rapid-fire canon calibre weaponry.

But even those same super soldiers don't hold it like an M16. They hold it closer to an underslung M60. That's nothing like an assault rifle. Even the Sisters of Battle carry it the same way with their power armor.

 Charistoph wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

Even judges make mistakes - pretty sure they're more than familliar.

Then why are you treating them as if they are not?

Because my familiarity with that rule was just as I described it and I'd never seen anything to suggest I might need to look further into its wording.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

Really, you think that the in-universe equivalent of a M2 .50 caliber machine gun should be a Rapid Fire weapon like an M16?

When its usually being lugged about by super soldiers who wield extended and reinforced chainsaws with the dexterity I have with a shinai, no, it's not too big a leap of the imagination to think they have rapid-fire canon calibre weaponry.

But even those same super soldiers don't hold it like an M16. They hold it closer to an underslung M60. That's nothing like an assault rifle. Even the Sisters of Battle carry it the same way with their power armor.

Just the fact the Sisters can carry a Heavy Bolter is pretty telling. Power Armour only adds to strength, it doesn't make up for the "natural" strength difference between a Sister and a Marine. If there's any reason a Marine would carry this weapon the way they do I'd blame it on a lousy weapon design - it's DESIGNED to be carried underslung - it's also hardly a design that would stop a person holding the trigger a little longer.

Dakka Wolf I think you're missing the point, rapid fire is small arms fire.Same as ARs.
If we assume a heavy bolter is to a bolt gun what a. 50 is to an M16 (which I think is reasonably accurate) why would the .50 fire like an M16?

I agree with Martel, there is no justification for the heavy bolter to fire faster or stronger than am assault cannon.
If the heavy bolter is like an Apache's 30mm the assault cannon is like the Thunderbolts GAU-8 minigun.

I think a Heavy Bolter would best served as a light-infantry killer

It shouldn't massacre troops like an assault cannon bjut it should be reasonably mobile.
I think Salvo 2/4 would be best.
It gives a mobile tactical squad a reasonable heavy weapon other than grav and is a slight buff if you use it for stationary fire.
It doesn't invalidate assault cannons or autocannons or aything else.
Issues however include Guard heavy weapons lugging and firing a heavy bolter on the got. Perhaps their heavy bolters could instead be heavy 4? Would set Astartes apart. Or maybe a special rule like 'fixed positions' or something, Heavy Weapons Teams treat all weapons without the rapid fire special rule as Heavy, taking the higher number in regards to a Salvo weapon.

Hmmm.

My favorite options so far:
Salvo 2/4, 48" range for 'Astrates' Heavy bolter (for the epicness of space marines walking around and firing heavy bolters on the move (at the same range as their bolters).
EASIEST OPTION, least impact on meta/units with HB as standard: Simply reduce the price of heavy bolters to 5p (in line with Ork big shootas, which are S5 AP5 36" assault 3).

What do you think of this other option to fit the performance expectations.
Heavy bolter = S6 AP4 heavy 3
but then make Multi-laser S5 AP6 heavy 4 (or 5?)

Makari wins wrote:

What do you think of this other option to fit the performance expectations.
Heavy bolter = S6 AP4 heavy 3
but then make Multi-laser S5 AP6 heavy 4 (or 5?)

Not a fan of that one, you're still left with Tactical squads having no mobile heavy weapons and you're encroaching a lot onto auto-cannons and assault cannons, the assault cannon at lest costs 3-4 times as much.

I think if it's kept as-is it should be cheaper, such as for the Imperial Guard, or atleast increase the cost of their auto-cannons.

The moment you increase the cost of the Autocannon it will become useless. It is at the perfect sweet spot at 10 points. Make it 15 and you have no reason to take it over a Lascannon for 5 more points or a ML for the same price.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Issues however include Guard heavy weapons lugging and firing a heavy bolter on the got. Perhaps their heavy bolters could instead be heavy 4? Would set Astartes apart. Or maybe a special rule like 'fixed positions' or something, Heavy Weapons Teams treat all weapons without the rapid fire special rule as Heavy, taking the higher number in regards to a Salvo weapon.

i thought in the fluff guardsmen used slightly lower calibre bolters and heavy bolters?

Also seeing that they have two people for one heavy weapon, would kind of help make up for the disparity. The Imperial Guard already pay the same upgrade costs to field their HW's as space marines do, only to equip them onto far less durable units.

Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

Even judges make mistakes - pretty sure they're more than familliar.

Then why are you treating them as if they are not?

Because my familiarity with that rule was just as I described it and I'd never seen anything to suggest I might need to look further into its wording.

So its so familiar that you never thought to look it up, but not so familiar that you didn't know it has been a low rate of fire constant for the last 4 Editions like Canisfish? Very interesting.

Dakka Wolf wrote:Just the fact the Sisters can carry a Heavy Bolter is pretty telling. Power Armour only adds to strength, it doesn't make up for the "natural" strength difference between a Sister and a Marine. If there's any reason a Marine would carry this weapon the way they do I'd blame it on a lousy weapon design - it's DESIGNED to be carried underslung - it's also hardly a design that would stop a person holding the trigger a little longer.

Again, an underslung carrying and firing position is not the same position that someone uses with an assault rifle. Rapid Fire Weapons are not used underslung as they are aimed down iron sights. While being underslung does allow a person to hold on to the trigger a little longer, which is why Heavy Bolters are currently Heavy 3, instead of 1 shot at range.

kirotheavenger wrote:I agree with Martel, there is no justification for the heavy bolter to fire faster or stronger than am assault cannon.
If the heavy bolter is like an Apache's 30mm the assault cannon is like the Thunderbolts GAU-8 minigun.

Martel's overreacting. Heavy 4 does not make a Heavy Bolter an Assault Cannon, nor does giving it Rending (alone). Assault Cannons are also Str 6 on top of both of those, which adds in a lot more to the scope of targets of the Assault Cannon than would be for the Heavy Bolter.

I do agree with the rest of your points, though.

Makari wins wrote:Hmmm.

My favorite options so far:
Salvo 2/4, 48" range for 'Astrates' Heavy bolter (for the epicness of space marines walking around and firing heavy bolters on the move (at the same range as their bolters).
EASIEST OPTION, least impact on meta/units with HB as standard: Simply reduce the price of heavy bolters to 5p (in line with Ork big shootas, which are S5 AP5 36" assault 3).

What do you think of this other option to fit the performance expectations.
Heavy bolter = S6 AP4 heavy 3
but then make Multi-laser S5 AP6 heavy 4 (or 5?)

Str 6 would make it too close to the Assault Cannon. One thing I do think that IG needs is a Salvo SAW-like weapon. Consider the placements of the Multi-laser, I don't think that this would fit it without making up another pintle weapon for them.

Upgrading it to 4 shots should do the trick. On the subject assault cannons, they should not have a higher S than heavy bolters. They're a little bit too good at everything.

On a related note, it's always baffled me how some weapons and wargear (plasma pistols, teminator armour to name but a few) get shafted for edition after edition, while others remain op'd. If I didn't know better, I would swear there's some serious discrimination going on in the rules department

 Charistoph wrote:

kirotheavenger wrote:I agree with Martel, there is no justification for the heavy bolter to fire faster or stronger than am assault cannon.
If the heavy bolter is like an Apache's 30mm the assault cannon is like the Thunderbolts GAU-8 minigun.

Martel's overreacting. Heavy 4 does not make a Heavy Bolter an Assault Cannon, nor does giving it Rending (alone). Assault Cannons are also Str 6 on top of both of those, which adds in a lot more to the scope of targets of the Assault Cannon than would be for the Heavy Bolter.

I do agree with the rest of your points, though.

I'm okay with it reaching 4 shots, but never 5 shots. It shouldn't fire faster than a minigun.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 thegreatchimp wrote:
Upgrading it to 4 shots should do the trick. On the subject assault cannons, they should not have a higher S than heavy bolters. They're a little bit too good at everything.

Assault cannons also cost ~3 times as much and are only available in limited numbers on certain chassis's.

I think HB should be a free option for devastator squads and vehicles. Since they are at the moment a bit in the wilderness, make them the initial choice for devastators and vehicles.

Gets around the need to give them points values, as they are the initial choice. Points values for other weapons stay the same to make you choose what is more effective for the situation. People might say "oh that is broken because 9 marines with HB is 27 shots!" But is it really? As many have pointed out HB only become effective with massed shots, as their strength and AP is beaten or bested by all other heavy weapon options. Vehicles then become auto infantry hunters, who need to be upgraded to be all rounders or dedicated tank hunters/MC smashers.

I'd personally take 9 HB marines in a devastator squad. Because the amount of dakka would be hilarious!

Making them free for dev squads just makes their cost 0.

Hmm. I think making hb's 5p is the way. Makes them equivalent orice to IG mortar s4 large blast barrage which it competes with for anti inf. In this case it must logically lead to all imperial guard vehicles reducing point cost by 5p. Agreed?

Makari wins wrote:
Making them free for dev squads just makes their cost 0.

Hmm. I think making hb's 5p is the way. Makes them equivalent orice to IG mortar s4 large blast barrage which it competes with for anti inf. In this case it must logically lead to all imperial guard vehicles reducing point cost by 5p. Agreed?

I think he means make it their default weapon.
So all those 5 extra bodies you can stick to the squad get some extra wounds? They're now packing heavy bolters instead of bolters.

 kirotheavenger wrote:

Assault cannons also cost ~3 times as much and are only available in limited numbers on certain chassis's.

True. But I'd advocate balancing weapons better, rather than having expensive decent weapons and cheap cruddy ones.

 thegreatchimp wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:

Assault cannons also cost ~3 times as much and are only available in limited numbers on certain chassis's.

True. But I'd advocate balancing weapons better, rather than having expensive decent weapons and cheap cruddy ones.

I think we should have cheaper, worse weapons and costlier, better weapons.
But it should all be proportional to cost.