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.

I think so much would be better if Bolters were Assault 2 instead of rapid fire. Combi would be twin-linked assault 2 (which is nice) and storm bolters would be assault 3 which is also nice. There, problem solved.

*notes idea for homebrew ruleset

Not quite. Because no one cares if tac marines can assault or not.

 Ashiraya wrote:


No, you can't say 'some game mechanics are fine and some are not.' They are pretty much all bonkers.

I think my bigger point here is that GW fluff is highly variable, painfully contradictory in many respects, and often simply flat out disconnected from itself. Let the game stick to better defined generalities with regards to fluff rather than getting caught up in specifics of things like small arms or how many individual marines die in a game, and adjust things based on gameplay necessity within said generalities.

Fortunately, not only are SM air vehicles heavily armoured (enough to match many ground vehicles), they are also fast. A good pre-emptive orbital strike just to be sure should render this situation very rare.

I find it odd that people assume that SM everything is just so overwhelmingly invulnerable to everything that the idea of losing half a dozen dropships when engaging an entire planet is nearly impossible to believe. For any other faction, Eldar, Tau, Guard, Chaos, etc it wouldn't be, even with vessels of similar speed and armor like Vampires, Orcas or Marauders. Likewise, we have the speed stats for Thunderhawks given to us by GW, which is 2000 km/h, which means a 42 year old F-15 can overtake one with a max speed of ~2650km/h. Hell, an Orca has almost identical armor and is even faster at a quoted 2100kp/h. Nobody would bat an eye at the Tau losing six of them in a planetary assault.

See where it gets rather silly?

You're assuming they are going to send their ships right into the teeth of defenses that heavy? That's what you have Navy support for. SM ships are really, really good, but they are above all designed to transport and support its inhabitants. SM ships don't do things like that, for the very reasons you give.

If the Imperial Navy is with them, sure. The problem here is that the Imperial Navy doesn't typically accompany Marine strike forces unless they're acting in concert with the Imperial Guard, which they very often are not, particularly in BL fluff where it's just Marines going off on their own things. There's tons of fluff on marine ships leading planetary assaults.

Aye, 1 million is a bit small. 10 million would be good. So few as to be legendary for most citizens,

Even 10 million really would be too small. We're talking a galaxy of between 200-400 billion star systems. GW finally wizened up in 2009 and at least gave relatively realistic (if vague) numbers for the Imperial Guard at "billions" of regiments, each containing thousands of troops. That's a force that can conceivable operate on such a scale. Even if we assume the low end estimate of systems a 200 billion, and assume the Imperium of Man only holds about 1% of those, that's two billion star systems. Even with ten million marines, you're talking a single marine per two hundred star star systems, a single Chapter per two million star systems. That's still spread so thin as to simply be nonexistent, not even simply mythical or legendary.

but thanks to their long lifespans + very high power concentration ability + rapid reaction and redeployment speed, they will be able to contribute significantly to the Imperium where it actually matters: worlds like Cadia and Armageddon that are breaking points for the fate of the Imperium.

If that was what they were portrayed as only doing, that would make a lot more sense, But there's tons of fluff where they are fighting at insignificant outposts, or large numbers of marines hanging about their homeworlds for long periods of time (standing around waiting for something to come along, training, etc), simply "standing watch" over vast areas of space or on specific worlds, performing garrison duties of various and/or far flung chapter holds, attacking into xenos empires, or in some cases nobody knows what they're doing.

 The Wise Dane wrote:
Well, looking at it now, there's two kinds of Troop Weaponry in the game - Subpar but plentiful, and Strong and Elite. The Subpar ones are rather rare - I can only think of Lasguns, actually. The others tend to have at least S 4 and AP 5, and then some kind of bonus that make them unique and not just another bolter - Shuriken Catapults has the almost-Rending thing, Shootas are Assault 2, Pulse Rifles have higher S and range and Gauss Flayers can auto-glance... But bolters have none of these properties.

I've begun to think that some sort of unique change to Bolters would be in order to make them stand up to the rest... I know the other weapons are supposed to very advanced, but Bolters aren't exactly basic either.

Shred would be nice, but I think Rending would be a bit too much. The almost-Rending thing is what Eldar does, so maybe we shouldn't steal that, either...

I think the issue here is that everything is based *around* the bolter as the standard baseline against which everything else is measured. The basic Tac marine is the standard against which everything else is measured, unlike say WHFB where it's the guardsmen equivalent that is the baseline. Everything is done in comparison to the bolter and the MEQ. The bolter, while powerful relative to basic human weaponry, is also not the most devastating small arm in the universe even in the fluff and in other things like FFG's 40k roleplaying games (which originated as a GW product under Black Industries before they liquidated it in very early 2008).

Shootas are assault 2, but lower AP and on BS2 dudes and have a shorter max range. Shuriken catapults have quasi-rending, but have half the range except on Dire Avengers which are still shorter ranged than bolters (and generally Eldar infantry are *really* squishy). Gauss Flayers can auto-glance, but their squads also don't have any organic heavy/special weapons upgrade capabilities either.

Shred would drastically increase the killing power of bolters beyond any of these weapons, making them more fearsome than even Pulse Rifles against just about everything except T8 or AV11. That would necessitate a notable price increase, the only unit off the top of my head that can give themselves that capability on a ranged weapon in DKoK Combat engineers (T3 4+sv infantry with S3 12" range shotugns) and it's a 1ppm upgrade (on 8ppm infantry) that then also suffers Gets Hot.

Martel732 wrote:
Look, they are never going to fix the utter crapiness of marine basic gear. Apologists and GW as well use the justification that marines have a lot of standard gear. But having a lot of gear that isnt useful just gives them a bucket of crap for 14 pts.

What do you want out of Tac Marines and still keep to their generalist role? They're already better equipped and cheaper than they've ever been, any cheaper and they'll be in the same range as many T3 4+sv infantry units that are generally far less capable.

I'm just not sure what people want that's going to be reasonable or change their fundamental role.

While I don't play loyalist marines, I do play CSM's with no Cult units, and the only thing I really find lacking is the ability to assault out of a stationary rhino, which kills their versatility, likewise when facing Tac marines with something like IG, it's the primary weakness I generally get to exploit the most.

And even in fluff, bolters are not displayed as that powerful. A fairly powerful infantry weapon, yes, but the weapons here are so freakishly powerful, that it's relatively normal on the battlefield.

I care if tax marines can charge or not.
My blood angels marines can charge turn one with potentially Weapon skill 5(blood chalice)initiative 5 or 6, strength 5 and potentially 3 attacks per marine...depnds on ic

"What do you want out of Tac Marines and still keep to their generalist role?"

Make them capable of carrying out even a single one of their "generalist" roles. Or make them not generalists. Because generalists are not efficacious.

Am I the only one that thinks all power armored armies expect SoB are actually 'too cheap' for what they do?

I mean just basic GK*, SM and the Chapter specific flavors, and CSM base troops are the best base line troops in the game. (Maybe Necron Warriors, but their initiative is still pretty low.)

Not to mention where I play the tables are often 4' x 4' that means more often then not, the bolter is readily used, and if it's not another MEQ army those bolters make anything wearing 5+ or worse dead quick.

The big issue is rapid fire. In 3rd (still best edition) you could assault and fire rapid fire weapons. A Space Marine Rhino rush, jumps out, and blasts out 16-18 shots and a sergeants bolt pistols, followed by a charge and 21 attacks in close combat, would wipe just about any non marine troop unit off the map in that turn. Then sweep into the next chunk of troops and keep from getting shot to pieces.

Just let rapid fire users assault and it's pretty much problem solved but really I'd rather see more stuff cut back then added in to 'balance' what is still the king of basic infantry weapons.

Of course I'd also like to see things like overwatch, being able to purchase buildings, and the current 'run' rules dropped into a lava pit for all eternity.

 Desubot wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:
To represent their heightened skills?

That would be WS4 bs4

That doesn't seem that great. Given your average marine is pretty poor in CC, making WS 3 versus 4 wouldn't have much of an effect.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Then (yet gain) the problem here isn't bolters, but the cost of marines.

Aye. I think Shred on Bolters and Chainswords or a slight reduction in ppm would be awesome.

Thats an issue of antiquated CC system.
But ether way i would like shred on bolters and chainswords as it makes sense that that is what they do.

Yep. Lets all position GW so they'll give it to SM, right?........

Actually i think 3+ armor saves are fine. i think we just need more multi wounds on marines.

I thought bolters were good!? Maybe because I play an Unforgiven Chapter and abuse Dakka Pole???

EDIT: Shred would be good.

 KingmanHighborn wrote:
Am I the only one that thinks all power armored armies expect SoB are actually 'too cheap' for what they do?

I mean just basic GK*, SM and the Chapter specific flavors, and CSM base troops are the best base line troops in the game. (Maybe Necron Warriors, but their initiative is still pretty low.)

Not to mention where I play the tables are often 4' x 4' that means more often then not, the bolter is readily used, and if it's not another MEQ army those bolters make anything wearing 5+ or worse dead quick.

The big issue is rapid fire. In 3rd (still best edition) you could assault and fire rapid fire weapons. A Space Marine Rhino rush, jumps out, and blasts out 16-18 shots and a sergeants bolt pistols, followed by a charge and 21 attacks in close combat, would wipe just about any non marine troop unit off the map in that turn. Then sweep into the next chunk of troops and keep from getting shot to pieces.

Just let rapid fire users assault and it's pretty much problem solved but really I'd rather see more stuff cut back then added in to 'balance' what is still the king of basic infantry weapons.

Of course I'd also like to see things like overwatch, being able to purchase buildings, and the current 'run' rules dropped into a lava pit for all eternity.

They are a rip off with the way the game has moved in terms of battlefield firepower.

 KingmanHighborn wrote:
Am I the only one that thinks all power armored armies expect SoB are actually 'too cheap' for what they do?

I mean just basic GK*, SM and the Chapter specific flavors, and CSM base troops are the best base line troops in the game. (Maybe Necron Warriors, but their initiative is still pretty low.)

Not to mention where I play the tables are often 4' x 4' that means more often then not, the bolter is readily used, and if it's not another MEQ army those bolters make anything wearing 5+ or worse dead quick.

The big issue is rapid fire. In 3rd (still best edition) you could assault and fire rapid fire weapons. A Space Marine Rhino rush, jumps out, and blasts out 16-18 shots and a sergeants bolt pistols, followed by a charge and 21 attacks in close combat, would wipe just about any non marine troop unit off the map in that turn. Then sweep into the next chunk of troops and keep from getting shot to pieces.

Just let rapid fire users assault and it's pretty much problem solved but really I'd rather see more stuff cut back then added in to 'balance' what is still the king of basic infantry weapons.

Of course I'd also like to see things like overwatch, being able to purchase buildings, and the current 'run' rules dropped into a lava pit for all eternity.

4X4 versus 6x4 tables are actually much different. That's 150% more space you have, and guess what? 24" on a 6x4 table is much smaller than on a 4x4 table. This is probably why bolters are so readily used, other than they are auto takes on tactical marines.

One thing I feel I should say, actually.

If we're at the stage where we're considering adding Shred (or even Rending) to one of the most *basic* weapons in the game, does this not speak of problems elsewhere?

I guess I'm just wondering if this is the equivalent of putting a plaster on the patient's knee, whilst he's bleeding out from a massive chest wound.

 vipoid wrote:
One thing I feel I should say, actually.

If we're at the stage where we're considering adding Shred (or even Rending) to one of the most *basic* weapons in the game, does this not speak of problems elsewhere?

I guess I'm just wondering if this is the equivalent of putting a plaster on the patient's knee, whilst he's bleeding out from a massive chest wound.

Well if we list it out, what weapons do we have and what scale of issues do we have with it?

Bolter has be discussed
Lasgun Generally no one has issues with it
Hot shot- bloody expensive for what it does
Eldar- Presudo rending is BS
Gauss- can strip HP which make it strong in an army that doesnt have tooo much specializations so it seems ok
Autoguns- same as las
DE- Lots o poison already, seems fine and has uses
Tau - doesnt really need much as well, kroot sniper rounds are nice though i dont think GW knows how snipers work
Orks be orky no real opinion.

ultimatly what it comes down to is the bolter is SO midline it doesn't feel like it has any character of it's own

 vipoid wrote:
One thing I feel I should say, actually.

If we're at the stage where we're considering adding Shred (or even Rending) to one of the most *basic* weapons in the game, does this not speak of problems elsewhere?

I guess I'm just wondering if this is the equivalent of putting a plaster on the patient's knee, whilst he's bleeding out from a massive chest wound.

So is it one of the most basic weapons? Or is it a relatively good weapon as many are stating? I agree - it is a basic weapon on the table top. It should not be. It's an .75 caliber rifle. The recoil would be so great that no mere man could wield it standing up. On modern battlefields this is a weapon that is fielded on light tanks as a main gun - comparable to a 20mm or .78 cal weapon.

http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Bolter

This is by no means a basic weapon. Its a weapon only a really strong ork nob or a marine could use. (required strength 4) should be in it's profile. And it should be much stronger and it should cost more. If you are wondering what kind of damage this weapon would do to a human being (a guardsman) It would easily blow their body in half and the next 3-4 guardsman behind him. It truely is sad that this weapon has be relegated to something more like a .30 cal weapon on the table top.

 Xenomancers wrote:

So is it one of the most basic weapons? Or is it a relatively good weapon as many are stating? I agree - it is a basic weapon on the table top. It should not be. It's an .75 caliber rifle. The recoil would be so great that no mere man could wield it standing up.

Except they can, and do. Every putz IG sergeant can take a Bolter.







And we won't even get into the sillyness about how recoil would actually work on such a weapon...

On modern battlefields this is a weapon that is fielded on light tanks as a main gun - comparable to a 20mm or .78 cal weapon.

Caliber does not necessarily work that way...we have a direct comparison to a .50cal heavy machinegun in 40k, where the HMG is heavier, but has similar strength. That still makes the bolter *really* powerful, but it's not a light tank gun.

This is by no means a basic weapon.

Relative to what a basic human soldier would typically carry, you are entirely correct. Relative to advanced alien weaponry and bio-engineered monstrosities, it's pretty basic.

Its a weapon only a really strong ork nob or a marine could use. (required strength 4) should be in it's profile.

See above.

And it should be much stronger and it should cost more. If you are wondering what kind of damage this weapon would do to a human being (a guardsman) It would easily blow their body in half and the next 3-4 guardsman behind him.

Not really.

A 2E *heavy bolter* perhaps (when it was a blast weapon) that is more akin in size and role to a 40mm automatic grenade launcher, but a normal bolter has never been described as *that* powerful, and not even modern 20mm autocannons are going to do that kind of insane damage.

It truely is sad that this weapon has be relegated to something more like a .30 cal weapon on the table top.

That would be a Str 3 weapon.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
One thing I feel I should say, actually.

If we're at the stage where we're considering adding Shred (or even Rending) to one of the most *basic* weapons in the game, does this not speak of problems elsewhere?

I guess I'm just wondering if this is the equivalent of putting a plaster on the patient's knee, whilst he's bleeding out from a massive chest wound.

So is it one of the most basic weapons? Or is it a relatively good weapon as many are stating? I agree - it is a basic weapon on the table top. It should not be. It's an .75 caliber rifle. The recoil would be so great that no mere man could wield it standing up. On modern battlefields this is a weapon that is fielded on light tanks as a main gun - comparable to a 20mm or .78 cal weapon.

http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Bolter

This is by no means a basic weapon. Its a weapon only a really strong ork nob or a marine could use. (required strength 4) should be in it's profile. And it should be much stronger and it should cost more. If you are wondering what kind of damage this weapon would do to a human being (a guardsman) It would easily blow their body in half and the next 3-4 guardsman behind him. It truely is sad that this weapon has be relegated to something more like a .30 cal weapon on the table top.

Don't try and apply real life physics to 40k, you'll only end up sad or confused.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

So is it one of the most basic weapons? Or is it a relatively good weapon as many are stating? I agree - it is a basic weapon on the table top. It should not be. It's an .75 caliber rifle. The recoil would be so great that no mere man could wield it standing up.

Except they can, and do. Every putz IG sergeant can take a Bolter.


And we won't even get into the sillyness about how recoil would actually work on such a weapon...

HEY, YES.

Machine guns are strength 4. Bolters are really the correct strength.


Now, Shred is obviously completely ludicrous and terrible. I have no interest in rerolling dice /that do not actually do anything normal s4 doesn't do/ on every single marine unit and imperial vehicle in an entire army.




You'd have to reroll dice every single time you shot a unit. You would not be able to harm any new set of units e.g. t8 or av11, nor would you produce destroyed results, nor would you be able to cause ID or other types of multiple wounds per shot.


Yeah, slap Shred on bolters so that they can kill more Orks. You'd have to, because they are flying orks and bolters are the only weapon, available only on one unit, in the entire marine army, that has skyfire, so they need shred to make good use of the few shots you get.

Wait a minute, that's a mistake. Every single weapon in the army is capable of hurting the things that bolters can hurt. Anyway, you could give them s5 and shred and still hate the tactical squad. A full tactical squad with special can already kill 4-6 Dire Avenger/Fire Warrior equivalents in a round of shooting, it's about as good as it should be. The reason you hate them is the rapid fire rules only give them one real round of shooting before somebody charges. If you get off one round and are still within 12" at the next turn, you had might as well use the extra movement from charging to move up the board.




Hi, anyway, the combination of Vaktathi's IG photo rant and Instant Death have given me an idea. You don't care about this, but I have always thought that "fixing" bolters via special rules was pretty futile/boring. The cool thing is this, you have to introduce the Imperial Guard Officer. An officer has two+ wounds, a basic grunt has one. This doesn't have anything to do with physicality or heroism. It happens instantly on getting a rank assigned, it's actually about how important someone is. A guardsman or battle-brothers job is to point his gun and pull the trigger. If his hand gets mangled, or he suffers a concussion, he can't shoot straight anymore and he gets pulled off the field; he can't do his job. An officer who gets the same mangled hand or the same concussion still has some launch codes to enter, or counterpart to meet, or coordinates to assign, so he stays on the field. It's /not/ /always/ a question of physicality.

However, that guy should still be taken down if an explosive bolt hits him in the head, even just one: bolters have to be able to inflict instant death somehow. Rolls to wound of 6 count as s10 for purposes of instant death. It absolutely has to be rolls to wound. Even though it would be really nice (against armor?) to say "Rolls to hit of six count as s6", you'd have to do an extra set of rolling.

Why is Instant Death a buff that matters? This is the part you especially don't care about which is that for me, in my very specific set of rules, all kinds of armies including marines have FNP. Orks have FNP, Dark Eldar have FNP, all marines have FNP. Marines also have 4+ armor saves, and I had always wanted some way to make bolters somewhat specialized against marines. This has been a really good and productive thread for me to read.

IDGAF about bolters being rapid fire because I allow overwatch against shooting so they get extra rounds of bolter fire. But you, you guys should care about rapid fire.

Martel732 wrote:

 Kosake wrote:
I think so much would be better if Bolters were Assault 2 instead of rapid fire.

Not quite. Because no one cares if tac marines can assault or not.

Marines care. They are too expensive to put units on every part of the field. They need to charge so they can get +9" from assault and consolidate moves. You are also always going to be in a situation where one unit is at an advantage if it gets to keep shooting and the other one will take that away by charging, or where one unit needs to charge and the other one preempts it.

This is before you notice that except against flak armor a marine with a bolter and pistol can kill more by charging than by taking his two bolt shots.

In regards to the bolters recoil, the way they're set up as gyrojet weapons reduces recoil dramatically.

Bolters are good as a basic weapon. They should allow charging after firing, but they really only work well like lasguns-in numbers. DA bolter banner increases their effectiveness dramatically, as does HH 'Fury of the Legion' rule. Sisters of Battle, and Inquisition Acolytes do fine with them, due to their ability to field more of them.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
On modern battlefields this is a weapon that is fielded on light tanks as a main gun - comparable to a 20mm or .78 cal weapon.

Caliber does not necessarily work that way...we have a direct comparison to a .50cal heavy machinegun in 40k, where the HMG is heavier, but has similar strength. That still makes the bolter *really* powerful, but it's not a light tank gun.

Is it worth pointing out that the chaos rhino is a tank, not as heavily armoured as other tanks, and it's gun is a twin linked bolter (even if it is pintle mounted)?

Also, bolters have always been described/ruled as wieldable by (stocky/heroic) humans.

The issue isn't bolters per se, but bolters on Marines. Marines are expensive units that can't be made any cheaper really, that are no better at shooting than Sisters of Battle.

There needs to be something for Marines, and only Marines (including Chaos), using bolt pistols/bolters/storm bolters that makes them slightly better than non-Marine units with bolters.

They used to get "rapid fire" which allowed a stationary Marine to get an extra shot when shooting. Perhaps allowing a stationary Marine to get an additional shot with bolt weapons compared to what others get? That shouldn't be accessible with relentless. Whatever unit it is it has to remain stationary to benefit.

People complaining that marines are overpriced really, really need to have a look at how much a Sister with -1WS, -1S, -1T, -1I, not ATSKNF, no Chapter tactics, no split squad, no whatever the hell cost.

 Ugly Green Trog wrote:
The problem with bolters is not to do with math hammer or fluff or ap values or strength.

The problem is about awesomeness. The vast majority of people who play this game are not number crunchers or min maxers, they play for fun and because genetically engineered super warriors from grim dark land are awesome!

Rolling shooting for bolters it does not feel awesome at all :(, it feels weak when you roll the dice. Rapid fire improves things but not by much. It feels like pissing in the sea.

And this is because the bolter is quite good at mowing down normal infantry, but who fields infantry any more? Now it is all about tanks and monstrous creatures and tanks and…

 Xenomancers wrote:
Its a weapon only a really strong ork nob or a marine could use. (required strength 4) should be in it's profile.

I have a whole army that is making rude gestures towards you now. And incinerating your model collection. And turning you into an arcoflagellant .

Don't sisters get a 6+ invulnerable, meaning that they have a slight chance to survive AP3 / AP2 / AP1 weaponry?

Bolters are fine. It's the standard when it comes to small arms fire. Since it's the standard, it just looks weaker compared to the bolter equivalent in other factions.
You could argue that the standard should be the lasgun, considering how the bolter is meant to be a prized weapon in the fluff, but that would mean that IG would be the flagship army, not Space Marines.

As Hybrid mentioned, the problem with bolters is that it's an anti-infantry weapon in a meta where everyone wants monstrous creatures.

Freman Bloodglaive wrote:
The issue isn't bolters per se, but bolters on Marines. Marines are expensive units that can't be made any cheaper really, that are no better at shooting than Sisters of Battle.

There needs to be something for Marines, and only Marines (including Chaos), using bolt pistols/bolters/storm bolters that makes them slightly better than non-Marine units with bolters.

Why should marines be better at shooting bolters than Sisters?
Okay, give them a rule to make them better at shooting bolter, do not forget to add 5/10 point to the cost of every marine to make up for it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Don't sisters get a 6+ invulnerable, meaning that they have a slight chance to survive AP3 / AP2 / AP1 weaponry?

That can be very useful on tanks, but on basic sisters, it is extremely anecdotal.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Freman Bloodglaive wrote:
The issue isn't bolters per se, but bolters on Marines. Marines are expensive units that can't be made any cheaper really, that are no better at shooting than Sisters of Battle.

There needs to be something for Marines, and only Marines (including Chaos), using bolt pistols/bolters/storm bolters that makes them slightly better than non-Marine units with bolters.

Why should marines be better at shooting bolters than Sisters?
Okay, give them a rule to make them better at shooting bolter, do not forget to add 5/10 point to the cost of every marine to make up for it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Don't sisters get a 6+ invulnerable, meaning that they have a slight chance to survive AP3 / AP2 / AP1 weaponry?

That can be very useful on tanks, but on basic sisters, it is extremely anecdotal.

Give Tac marines special issue ammo
You'd think the Imperium's shock troopers would have more than one type of ammunition on them.
To differentiate them from sternguard though, the tac marines can only take kraken rounds, at 1 ppm.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
You'd think the Imperium's shock troopers would have more than one type of ammunition on them.

Well, you would think that the most elite troop of one of the most powerful and influential organization of the Imperium, and likely the wealthiest too, would also have a few extra gimmick, no?

Have boltguns ever been good? As the game has progressed, the damage done by a boltgun has dropped significantly.

To take two typical examples at different times:
1 Ten marines shoot ten orks.
2 Ten marines shoot ten other marine.

Rogue Trader era
1 Two-thirds of the marines hit (BS4), half of which wound (S4 vs T4), and the orks would typically have mesh or flak armour (6+), which would be ignored by the boltgun's save modifier (-1). That'd result in slightly more than 3 dead orks on average.
2 Two-thirds of the marines hit (BS4), two-thirds of which wound (S4 vs T3), and the marines would have power armour (4+), reduced to 5+ by the boltgun. That'd result in slightly more than 2 dead marines on average.

Later on (and leading into Rogue Trader), marines would be buffed to fire twice if stationary, and have their T boosted to 4.
In both cases, you'd also need to take cover into account (reducing damage), and also remember that you could move and fire to the maximum of 24in (increasing damage); with a +1 to hit below 12in (increasing damage). Since armies mostly started between 24 and 30in apart, boltguns would be used from turn 1 onwards.

Given that info, a squad would likely get two or three shots off in six turns, with the lower damage caused by cover early on balanced out by more damage later on. Typically then, you could expect between a quarter and a fifth of boltgun shots to result in an enemy death.


3rd edition era
This simplified things a lot, and de-powered the boltgun hugely.
1 Two-thirds of the marines hit (BS4), half of which wound (S4 vs T4), and the orks would have a 6+ armour save, which would be ignored by the boltgun's AP (5). That'd result in slightly more than 3 dead orks on average.
2 Two-thirds of the marines hit (BS4), half of which wound (S4 vs T4), and the marines would have a 3+ armour save, which the boltgun won't affect. That'd result in 1 dead marine on average.

On the face of it, the basic results look pretty similar; with the marines looking considerably tougher. The cover rules have changed to provide an unmodifiable save of 5+ for foliage etc. Assuming the orks have even one turn in cover, they benefit a great deal from this.

In addition, range has been reduced to 12in if you move, or 24in if you stand still. With armies still starting between 24in and 30in apart, that means relying on your opponent moving towards you if you want to shoot them in first turn; so the first boltgun casualties aren't going to happen until turn 2 at the earliest (all other things being equal). In addition, if the marines move to achieve their objective, that's a further turn they're unlikely to be firing. If you stay still, you do get two shots at 12in.

Given that info, a squad would be lucky to get three shots off in six turns (decreased damage), with lower damage potentially caused by cover (decreased damage). You do have the potential to double-tap later on, but this is less likely than previously as marines could double tap at full range back in RT (slightly reduced damage). Typically then, you would expect to need more boltgun shots to result in an enemy death than previously.

4th, 5th and 6th editions changed to improve the general rapid fire rules, which gave the boltgun a slight boost, but its stats are, if anything, slightly worse than in late RT – no bonus to hit at close range, the AP system is a bell curve which puts AP5 on the wrong side of effective, and marines now can't fire twice at full range.

TL;DR
Despite their stats remaining nigh-identical, boltguns have got worse as the game has gone on, owing to a creeping improvement in survivability (increases in toughness, armour and light damage-ignoring special rules), and a move away from infantry-based gaming.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
You'd think the Imperium's shock troopers would have more than one type of ammunition on them.

Well, you would think that the most elite troop of one of the most powerful and influential organization of the Imperium, and likely the wealthiest too, would also have a few extra gimmick, no?

Well, the Church isn't meant to have an army, is it?
That said, I am sure there is a faithful staff member of an armory who would be willing to donate to the Church

Seeing a return of anti-psyker ammo would be nice. That was the sister's gimmick in the previous codex, iirc.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Well, the Church isn't meant to have an army, is it?

Which is why they have super-hyper-elite forces only. Since they could not have more soldiers, get them the best gear EVAR!

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Seeing a return of anti-psyker ammo would be nice. That was the sister's gimmick in the previous codex, iirc.

I do not think Sisters need anti-psyker ammo any more than they need anti-mutant ammo or anti-xenos ammo. Certainly they hate those as much as they hate psykers .