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 I will call my upgrade "Ripper Bolts" and say they cost 5pts on characters and 3ppm on units with storm bolters (3pts per model with a storm bolter).

For anti infantry I think "Frag Bolts" would be a good name.

Frag Bolts would have the same cost as Ripper Bolts but would be S4 AP6 Assault 3 and on a to hit roll of 6 generate an additional S4 AP6 hit.

Maybe call this rule Fragmentation.

Fragmentation: When firing a weapon with this special rule, a To Hit roll of 6 causes one additional hit on the target.

Fragmentation is like tesla but weaker in that less hits will be generated.

Ripper bolts would be like gauss but weaker.

TBH I've come to the conclusion that Stormbolters probably shouldn't have some kind of special-snowflake rule that's only for Stormbolters.

Now, some kind of "frag round" for Bolt weapons in general would be cool- there used to be a Deathwatch supplement in White Dwarf, IIRC, that gave "Metal Storm" rounds that were actually 18" Assault 2 S3 AP- 3" Blast, which is pretty chill IMO for a basic gun.

Moreover, I'm not really sure there's any rationale that could be made for a Stormbolter-only special ammo type that's only available to certain squads. I mean, SB-only ammo types that are added as a character upgrade or a special weapon upgrade make sense- the former represents the character's veterancy and influence, while the latter represents a mission-specific consideration.

But something like "this unit with Stormbolters gets these cool bullets" doesn't make much sense to me unless it's army-specific, like GKs/SoB with old-school "no invulns allowed" psybolt ammo (which would have been a great counter to re-rollable 2++ deathstars), or is a general upgrade available to most models that take a particular upgrade.

An example of the latter would be allowing Sternguard to choose a single Special Ammo type to load into Stormbolters, but they only get that ammo type across all Stormbolters taken in the squad. You gain raw firepower of a certain type, but you loose the sheer versatility that the SIA Bolters get. A character doing the same- picking a Stormbolter with one Special Ammo profile to go with it- also makes sense, because it's available to pretty much every character in the army.

Also, what's up with Terminator sergeants not getting access to the armory? I mean, that seems kind of bogus, don't you think?

Whiskey144 wrote:
0Now, some kind of "frag round" for Bolt weapons in general would be cool- there used to be a Deathwatch supplement in White Dwarf, IIRC, that gave "Metal Storm" rounds that were actually 18" Assault 2 S3 AP- 3" Blast, which is pretty chill IMO for a basic gun.

How long would it take to resolve a single shooting phase if all the small arms were blast weapons?

IIRC, the ammo types were extra points and you could only pick one; it was also exclusive to a Deathwatch "Kill Team" squad that SM players could include in their armies. So it was very much the case that only a very small number of weapons would actually use that profile.

Moreso when, again IIRC, there were other ammo options for the DW Kill Team entry in WD, that were much better (though also more expensive).

If Metal Storm rounds were brought back to the table, then I'd make them a special, character-only option for SM armies. It's actually okay, IMO for that to be an option for SM character models to take with any longarm bolt weapon, like a plain bolter, as the ammo type for the bolter part of a combi-weapon, or for a Stormbolter (which would presumably benefit from increased RoF and perhaps range).

Which also brings up an interesting point- what if various character models who are armed with a plain bolter could take a special ammo type to go with it? I mean, in the 5th edition SM book you could give a Captain a Bolter with Hellfire rounds in it. I don't really see that as being particularly broken to include for basic characters for a squad of Tacs.

Moreover, I'm not really sure there's any rationale that could be made for a Stormbolter-only special ammo type that's only available to certain squads. I mean, SB-only ammo types that are added as a character upgrade or a special weapon upgrade make sense- the former represents the character's veterancy and influence, while the latter represents a mission-specific consideration.

I would make the ammo available to all storm bolters. The rational could be the design of the firearm. Weather it be the way it fires, or the housing, or even the ammo size ect. And this change would simulate mission specific consideration. The higher cost for characters is to account for their (usually) better statistics and ability to further optimize with other weapons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

IIRC, the ammo types were extra points and you could only pick one; it was also exclusive to a Deathwatch "Kill Team" squad that SM players could include in their armies. So it was very much the case that only a very small number of weapons would actually use that profile.

What I am talking about is only taking one, and probably only being able to use the upgrade ammo's profile.

How would you fix storm bolters?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Maybe the easiest fix to storm bolters would be to make them S5 AP5 Assault 2, Rending. This would make them a bit better against hordes, MCs, and vehicles without making them crazy. It could remain being a 5 point upgrade. Though I am leary about that point cost being too low. I don't want the basic storm bolter to go above 5 points.

 NorseSig wrote:
Maybe the easiest fix to storm bolters would be to make them S5 AP5 Assault 2, Rending. This would make them a bit better against hordes, MCs, and vehicles without making them crazy. It could remain being a 5 point upgrade. Though I am leary about that point cost being too low. I don't want the basic storm bolter to go above 5 points.

I don't think the Storm Bolter is meant to be an anti-MC, anti-vehicle weapon. Not even the Heavy Bolter is an anti-MC, anti-vehicle weapon.

A better "fix" is just letting every unit with a Krak grenade throw one 8" to replace their shooting attack. Though that has complications too. But leave the SB an anti-infantry weapon.

Yoyoyo wrote:

 NorseSig wrote:
Maybe the easiest fix to storm bolters would be to make them S5 AP5 Assault 2, Rending. This would make them a bit better against hordes, MCs, and vehicles without making them crazy. It could remain being a 5 point upgrade. Though I am leary about that point cost being too low. I don't want the basic storm bolter to go above 5 points.

I don't think the Storm Bolter is meant to be an anti-MC, anti-vehicle weapon. Not even the Heavy Bolter is an anti-MC, anti-vehicle weapon.

A better "fix" is just letting every unit with a Krak grenade throw one 8" to replace their shooting attack. Though that has complications too. But leave the SB an anti-infantry weapon.

Part of the issue is storm bolters aren't very good as anti-infantry and literally do nothing to help grey knights be competitive without allies. Granted they could ally with inquisition and still be grey knights, but even inquisition lacks anti tank. which is why i suggested a special ammo originally.

I'm trying to not look at storm bolters in a vacuum. If storm bolters are ever going to be worth the 5 points they just may need to change their ideal targets. Not like it has never happened before. Heavy bolters could be given rending too imo.

What would you do to fix storm bolters?

Rending. Rending everywhere.

Brace yourselves for more "Armor is useless" threads.

Rending would be a terrible idea.

I think 18", Assault 3 would be a fine place to start testing to see if it makes a significant enough difference to make them worthwhile. Then again, nerfing the range on them really hurts their usability on vehicles. So maybe simply assault 3, no other changes necessary.

 koooaei wrote:
Rending. Rending everywhere.

Brace yourselves for more "Armor is useless" threads.

If you are going to comment could at least try to be constructive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SRSFACE wrote:
Rending would be a terrible idea.

I think 18", Assault 3 would be a fine place to start testing to see if it makes a significant enough difference to make them worthwhile. Then again, nerfing the range on them really hurts their usability on vehicles. So maybe simply assault 3, no other changes necessary.

I think 18" range is a horrible idea. Worse than rending. I know because I have tested 18" assault 3 storm bolters. They were horrible. At the very minimum storm bolters should be 24" s4 ap5 assault 3. That was my original idea and no one seemed to like it, and said it wasn't enough, and what about this unit and that unit.

Honestly, I think they should be assault 3, but There needs to be something somewhere to help out the Grey Knights who have horrible anti vehicle this edition. I personally think every army should have the tools to handle just about anything effectively without having to use allies. But, that is just me I guess.

Referring to OP here-Yes, they should be Assault 3, but more like STR 4 AP 4

 NorseSig wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
Rending. Rending everywhere.

Brace yourselves for more "Armor is useless" threads.

If you are going to comment could at least try to be constructive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SRSFACE wrote:
Rending would be a terrible idea.

I think 18", Assault 3 would be a fine place to start testing to see if it makes a significant enough difference to make them worthwhile. Then again, nerfing the range on them really hurts their usability on vehicles. So maybe simply assault 3, no other changes necessary.

I think 18" range is a horrible idea. Worse than rending. I know because I have tested 18" assault 3 storm bolters. They were horrible. At the very minimum storm bolters should be 24" s4 ap5 assault 3. That was my original idea and no one seemed to like it, and said it wasn't enough, and what about this unit and that unit.

Honestly, I think they should be assault 3, but There needs to be something somewhere to help out the Grey Knights who have horrible anti vehicle this edition. I personally think every army should have the tools to handle just about anything effectively without having to use allies. But, that is just me I guess.

If you want to give GK some anti-tank, then take Salvo off of Psycannons, or at least make them 36" range so they can hit something more than spiting distance away when moving. The Psycannon is supposed to be our anti-tank/MC weapon, but is basically useless on none relentless platforms. Giving evey member of a squad anti-tank capability on their base weapon is a bad idea. As for storm bolters themselves, I think they are fine as they are. If you want to say they should be a point or two cheaper as an upgrade, thats fine but the weapon does the job that it was meant to do well enough.

.....In what world is the Stormbolter doing its job "well enough"? When it's possible to actually take the same amount of Stormbolter shooting from 12-24" on twice as many bodies, in transports, and even get twice as many shots at 0-12", then I'd say that no, Stormbolters are not doing their job "well enough".

In any case, fixing GK anti-vehicle options is off-topic, and should be split off to another thread. No, Stormbolters should probably not get some kind of pseudo-Gauss or pseudo-Tesla.

 KaptinBadrukk wrote:
Referring to OP here-Yes, they should be Assault 3, but more like STR 4 AP 4

They're already S4, and AP4 isn't really going to help against most of the things it'll be pointed out- perhaps bizarrely, there is a comparative lack of 4+ save infantry in the game. I mean sure, you've got the Stormtrooper codex, and SM Scouts, and Ork 'Ard Boyz, and even Tau FWs, but beyond those everything tends to be 5+ or 3+ by an overwhelming majority.

I would give them, and all Space Marine bolt weapons, shred.

Whiskey144 wrote:

They're already S4, and AP4 isn't really going to help against most of the things it'll be pointed out- perhaps bizarrely, there is a comparative lack of 4+ save infantry in the game. I mean sure, you've got the Stormtrooper codex, and SM Scouts, and Ork 'Ard Boyz, and even Tau FWs, but beyond those everything tends to be 5+ or 3+ by an overwhelming majority.

those and two of the most common troops units that exist.

Now, you've said that gauss is too complicated for bolt guns, but you have also recommended stopping the game before it starts to inform opponents about which alternate profile you have chosen for a chaplain's single storm bolter. Is your problem with gauss - which involves no extra rolls, no modifiers, and no pre-game election, still that it is too complicated or is it a newer thing?

I am coming to the conclusion that on the crowded scale dictated by the D6, there is no good place for the storm bolter. Xeno players will have fits if bolters get shred. Bolt weapons in general have just been boned by the meta shifts towards more and more units that just ignore them.

pelicaniforce wrote:
Now, you've said that gauss is too complicated for bolt guns, but you have also recommended stopping the game before it starts to inform opponents about which alternate profile you have chosen for a chaplain's single storm bolter. Is your problem with gauss - which involves no extra rolls, no modifiers, and no pre-game election, still that it is too complicated or is it a newer thing?

[Emphasis Mine]

Firstly, my recommendation was that Stormbolters be made slightly cheaper and Assault 3, with the option to BUY a Special Ammo profile. As in, you must list which ammo type you have picked for a character's Stormbolter assuming that you paid for it. Further, this was also a recommendation intended to make the currently useless option of equipping Sternguard with Stormbolters a more viable option- by allowing Special Issue Ammo to be taken on Stormbolters- again, listing which one in the armylist.

As far as Gauss... part of my distaste, shall we say, is that Gauss is a decidedly Necron shtick. Moreover, there isn't really any sense to giving Stormbolters the Gauss trait- either optional or innate. Gauss is supposed to represent the super-duper magitech gubbins of Necron weapons in that it's some sort of disintegrating beam gizmo, and so it can actually damage anything. Bolt weapons have no history or equivalent of similar feats of literally damaging anything.

So if you want a simple answer, it's because I don't think that Gauss Stormbolters make any damn sense. It's not really a "complication" thing.

pelicaniforce wrote:

Whiskey144 wrote:

They're already S4, and AP4 isn't really going to help against most of the things it'll be pointed out- perhaps bizarrely, there is a comparative lack of 4+ save infantry in the game. I mean sure, you've got the Stormtrooper codex, and SM Scouts, and Ork 'Ard Boyz, and even Tau FWs, but beyond those everything tends to be 5+ or 3+ by an overwhelming majority.

those and two of the most common troops units that exist.

Now, as far as this goes.... I'm working off the assumption that, meta-wise, most infantry on the board will either be massed T3/5+ (IE, GEQ) or very brave MEQs. Necron Warriors, while they are T4/4+, also have RPs, so their durability is notably better. I was also under the impression that Fire Warriors also had longer-ranged guns than most other basic infantry, and tended to either sit at 30" and have a fine time at a turkeyshoot, or hide in a Devilfish.

Martel732 wrote:
I am coming to the conclusion that on the crowded scale dictated by the D6, there is no good place for the storm bolter. Xeno players will have fits if bolters get shred. Bolt weapons in general have just been boned by the meta shifts towards more and more units that just ignore them.

Pretty much. What if we let all infantry models throw their S6 AP4 Krak grenades once in range?

I am thinking in my next game I am going to test some alternate profiles for bolt weapons namely bolt pistols, storm bolters, heavy bolters, and bolters. I will also be testing some alternate ideas to pistols, chainswords, charge, and consolidation.

Pistols no longer grant an extra melee attack and grant full BS during overwatch. Instead they grant an attack at initiative that uses the pistol's profile and rules. This attack takes the place of a melee attack or in case of having a melee weapon grants an extra attack. If you have two pistols you get two pistol attacks using each pistol's profile and rules. In the case of multiple attacks you may make multiple pistol attacks with with a pistol unless you are carrying a melee weapon. Melee weapons are used for all melee attacks except for the bonus attack for having a pistol. For example you have 4 tactical marines charge another unit. The first tactical marine has 2 bolt pistols so he gets 3 s4 ap5 attacks in the fight sub phase (1 for charging, 1 for 2 pistols, and 1 base), The second tactical marine has a bolt pistol and a plasma pistol so he also gets 3 attacks in the fight sub-phase, however he may choose to make either two plasma pistol shots and a bolt pistol shot or two bolt pistol shots and a plasma pistol shot. The third tactical marine has a power sword and bolt pistol, thus he gets 3 attacks but two are with the power sword and the third is with the bolt pistol. The fourth tactical marine only has a bolt pistol so he gets 2 attacks, both with the bolt pistol (1 for the charge, and one base). On the next fight phase, tactical marines 1, 2 and 3 get two attacks and tactical 4 gets 1. Tactical 1 gets 2 bolt pistol attacks, Tactical 2 gets a bolt pistol attack and a plasma pistol attack, and tactical 3 gets a power sword attack and a bolt pistol attack (if he had 2 base attacks he would get 2 power sword attacks and a bolt pistol attack). Tactical 4 gets a single bolt pistol attack.

Chainswords are now S-user AP-5 melee.

Bolters are now assault weapons with the profile s4 ap5 up to 12" assault 2, 12" - 24" assault 1

Storm Bolters are s4 ap5 assault 3, and can fire full bs during overwatch.

Heavy Bolters are s5 ap4 heavy 4.

Charge distance for units with a 6" move is 3+d6.

Charge for units with a 12" or better movement is 5+d6

Slow and Purposeful subtracts an inch from charge, and Relentless adds an inch.

When a unit consolidates they may consolidate into charging another unit (if they roll a high enough movement) once per turn. The new unit being charged gets overwatch unless they are already in melee, and the fight doesn't happen until the next fight sub phase (ie opponent's turn, but the charging unit still gets bonuses for charging).

Martel732 wrote:
I am coming to the conclusion that on the crowded scale dictated by the D6, there is no good place for the storm bolter. Xeno players will have fits if bolters get shred. Bolt weapons in general have just been boned by the meta shifts towards more and more units that just ignore them.

I think the problem is that people see Marines as the "Standard". Marines aren't and shouldn't be the bog-standard infantryman. That is what the Guard is for. Bolters in the lore are really, really good at fething up fleshy targets and that should be better reflected in the rules. Marines pay a premium for their Bolt-weapons which right now are just pop-guns.

Rending sounds good.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
I think the problem is that people see Marines as the "Standard". Marines aren't and shouldn't be the bog-standard infantryman. That is what the Guard is for. Bolters in the lore are really, really good at fething up fleshy targets and that should be better reflected in the rules. Marines pay a premium for their Bolt-weapons which right now are just pop-guns.

You can field a Krak/4+ equipped Vet for about 8pts. A Marine costs 14pts. You're paying extra for a 3+ save, a +1S weapon, a better stat line, ATSKNF so you automatically regroup and can't be swept in assault, and pistol so you can shoot before assaulting.

If you see each upgrade as being worth about 10pts, an AM vet would cost about 13pts each. If you only want inexpensive BS4 caddies for Plasma Guns with abalative wounds, Vets are better. But you're not paying a premium for only the bolters on a Tac.

The issue being is that most of those upgrades have little bearing on the average game. At least, against the lists I face. We're back to the D6 based system not being able to accommodate all the weapons in said system.

 NorseSig wrote:
Bolters are now assault weapons with the profile s4 ap5 up to 12" assault 2, 12" - 24" assault 1

Storm Bolters are s4 ap5 assault 3, and can fire full bs during overwatch.

Heavy Bolters are s5 ap4 heavy 4.

I snipped down a bit because this is what I wanted to focus on. First off, I like the Stormbolter concept. It's simple, neat, and IMO quite elegant. I in fact, like it better than giving Stormbolters Special Ammo options.

I'd also like to say that I'm actually quite liking the split Bolter profile of 12" Assault 2/24" Assault 1. It's surprisingly similar to how I would like to fix Combi-Bolters, which would be as follows:

Combi-Bolter
12" Assault 3 S4 AP5 Twin-Linked
24" Assault 2 S4 AP5 Twin-Linked

It would be a bit better at short range on the "active" turn, and a little bit poorer at 12-24" compared to a Stormbolter. Twin-Linking also means it's not half bad in Overwatch- it's not as nice as a special trait to give full BS in Overwatch like the Stormbolter, but it's better than nothing and is IMO nicely balanced with also being Twin-Linked and thus more accurate during the Shooting Phase.

I do, however, disagree with the Heavy Bolter change. One of the problems HBs have is that they severely limit the mobility of the squads that carry them. For some units it's not a big deal, like if you're objective camping or a dedicated heavy weapon squad. Most Marine forces can also Combat Squad... but that can dilute direct capability, particularly if you want to get ten mans up the field and still have a heavy in the squad.

I'd amend it to, at minimum, Salvo 2/4, or perhaps Salvo 3/4, if HBs become a 4-shot weapon. I'm still very leery of such a change, but it seems like it's a very popular idea and easily accepted idea, so perhaps testing it would actually work. HBs also sit in a "sweet spot" where they can actually work with the Salvo rules- half range is 18", so you still project firepower reasonably well when moving around.

I would like to finally ask what the reasoning between the split profile 12" Assault 2/24" Assault 1 Bolter is? I do like it, don't get me wrong, I'm just curious as to the rationale.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
I think the problem is that people see Marines as the "Standard". Marines aren't and shouldn't be the bog-standard infantryman. That is what the Guard is for. Bolters in the lore are really, really good at fething up fleshy targets and that should be better reflected in the rules. Marines pay a premium for their Bolt-weapons which right now are just pop-guns.

People see Marines as "the Standard" because Marines are "the Standard" in the meta. Certainly, the mechanics seem to indicate that no, Marines are not bog-standard infantry, and the fluff definitely states that... but the unfortunate truth is that the meta has been heavily based- by players to be clear- around facing Marine armies.

 KaptinBadrukk wrote:
Rending sounds good.

Rending doesn't actually fix anything though. It also doesn't really make much sense, IMO.

Yoyoyo wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
I think the problem is that people see Marines as the "Standard". Marines aren't and shouldn't be the bog-standard infantryman. That is what the Guard is for. Bolters in the lore are really, really good at fething up fleshy targets and that should be better reflected in the rules. Marines pay a premium for their Bolt-weapons which right now are just pop-guns.

You can field a Krak/4+ equipped Vet for about 8pts. A Marine costs 14pts. You're paying extra for a 3+ save, a +1S weapon, a better stat line, ATSKNF so you automatically regroup and can't be swept in assault, and pistol so you can shoot before assaulting.

If you see each upgrade as being worth about 10pts, an AM vet would cost about 13pts each. If you only want inexpensive BS4 caddies for Plasma Guns with abalative wounds, Vets are better. But you're not paying a premium for only the bolters on a Tac.

Martel732 wrote:
The issue being is that most of those upgrades have little bearing on the average game. At least, against the lists I face. We're back to the D6 based system not being able to accommodate all the weapons in said system.

As Martel points out, there's a lot of wasted cost on many Marines, because they end up carrying kit that they rarely use. It's also worth noting that said IG Veterans can take three Plasma Guns, instead of just one, on top of having a heavy weapon in the squad, and being able to include the versatile Autocannon.

So yes, you do get a good amount of stuff at a "great" price for the cost difference between an IG Veteran and a Marine of almost every stripe, but the main problem is that the Marine is paying for things that he rarely uses. A Vet has to actually pay for Kraks, and more than likely doesn't want to actually assault anything, and thus isn't likely to buy Kraks anyways.

You could just add a special rule to SBs.

Storm of Fire: any to hit roll of a 6 with this weapon generates one additional shot using the weapons normal strength and ap, this extra shot must still roll to hit. You may only ever gain one extra shot per dice rolled.

Bolter Wrath: For each successful wound caused by this weapon, increase its AP by 1 point to a maximum of ap3. Armour saves against these shots must use the modified AP.

Enfilidating Fire: if a shot from this weapon would negate the armour save of the target then add +1 strength to that shot.

Here are 3 ideas, obviously pick one only. Here are my ideas behind them.

1: this represents the volume of fire from a storm bolter. Get a few extra shots if you're lucky.

2&3: Seems like more bullets would do more damage. These represent both aspects of that in terms of AP and str.

Go hog wild and use all 3 just for fun and watch infantry die in droves

Yoyoyo wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
I think the problem is that people see Marines as the "Standard". Marines aren't and shouldn't be the bog-standard infantryman. That is what the Guard is for. Bolters in the lore are really, really good at fething up fleshy targets and that should be better reflected in the rules. Marines pay a premium for their Bolt-weapons which right now are just pop-guns.

You can field a Krak/4+ equipped Vet for about 8pts. A Marine costs 14pts. You're paying extra for a 3+ save, a +1S weapon, a better stat line, ATSKNF so you automatically regroup and can't be swept in assault, and pistol so you can shoot before assaulting.

If you see each upgrade as being worth about 10pts, an AM vet would cost about 13pts each. If you only want inexpensive BS4 caddies for Plasma Guns with abalative wounds, Vets are better. But you're not paying a premium for only the bolters on a Tac.

You are not looking at whole unit costs. The cost of a Tactical Marine is deceptive. Sure, he seem like a steal in comparison to a Veteran but a full squad of Space Marines cost 140 points with no upgrades. That is why I am saying that Marines are paying a premium for crappy guns. A guard squad can get three Plasmas and a Chimera for only 30 more points. Same Ballistic skill, effective weapons, better protection, a heavy bolter and a multilaser which can fire at full BS on the move and can select different targets.

I snipped down a bit because this is what I wanted to focus on. First off, I like the Stormbolter concept. It's simple, neat, and IMO quite elegant. I in fact, like it better than giving Stormbolters Special Ammo options.

I'd also like to say that I'm actually quite liking the split Bolter profile of 12" Assault 2/24" Assault 1. It's surprisingly similar to how I would like to fix Combi-Bolters, which would be as follows:

Combi-Bolter
12" Assault 3 S4 AP5 Twin-Linked
24" Assault 2 S4 AP5 Twin-Linked

It would be a bit better at short range on the "active" turn, and a little bit poorer at 12-24" compared to a Stormbolter. Twin-Linking also means it's not half bad in Overwatch- it's not as nice as a special trait to give full BS in Overwatch like the Stormbolter, but it's better than nothing and is IMO nicely balanced with also being Twin-Linked and thus more accurate during the Shooting Phase.

I do, however, disagree with the Heavy Bolter change. One of the problems HBs have is that they severely limit the mobility of the squads that carry them. For some units it's not a big deal, like if you're objective camping or a dedicated heavy weapon squad. Most Marine forces can also Combat Squad... but that can dilute direct capability, particularly if you want to get ten mans up the field and still have a heavy in the squad.

I'd amend it to, at minimum, Salvo 2/4, or perhaps Salvo 3/4, if HBs become a 4-shot weapon. I'm still very leery of such a change, but it seems like it's a very popular idea and easily accepted idea, so perhaps testing it would actually work. HBs also sit in a "sweet spot" where they can actually work with the Salvo rules- half range is 18", so you still project firepower reasonably well when moving around.

I would like to finally ask what the reasoning between the split profile 12" Assault 2/24" Assault 1 Bolter is? I do like it, don't get me wrong, I'm just curious as to the rationale.

The rationale behind the change to bolters has do a lot with tactical squads. It gives them a little more firepower and tactical flexibility within 12 inches, and helps solve a lot of issues with space marine shooting in general. The change makes bike upgrades still good but not so OMG good.

I think you may be right about heavy bolters. 4 shots is about right, but I think salvo 3/4 is the way to go. And is certainly better than the assault 4 people where throwing around in my local group (didn't make sense and made them too juicy).

Your idea for combi-bolters is EXACTLY what me and my group decided on. Though we also gave ours the same ability to fire at full bs during overwatch. We are ok with chaos having better shooting inside 12 inches, and arguably better shooting with combi bolters at the 12 to 24 range.

My group is liking the changes so far, but we think we need to tweak space marines a wee bit more.

We are looking at these changes:

Upgrades like when you can take a special or heavy weapon is no longer dependent on squad size (with the exception of you have to have enough models t ocarry the upgrades ie 5 heavy weapons requires 5 models). What this means is tacticals can take a heavy weapon and a special weapon without having to have a unit of 10.

These units may take an additional special weapon Sternguard, Tactical squads, Crusader squads, and Assault squads (this includes equivalents in other space marine chapters with a few exceptions)

These units may take an extra heavy weapon Terminators, Legion of the damned, and Devastator squads (again includes equivalents with a few exceptions)

Power weapons (sword, axe maul) are 10pts, combi-weapons (flamer, grav, melta, plasma) are 5 pts, flakk upgrade is 5pts, and grav-pistol and plasma pistol are 10pts.

For HQs able to take TDA it is a 25pt upgrade

Techmarines and Masters of the Forge are 15 pts cheaper, and chaplains are 5 pts cheaper.

Assault squads and devastator squads are now troop choices, and bike squads no longer exist in fast attack. They are however an upgrade for tactical squads for 7ppm except heavy weapons which are upgraded to attack bikes at 35ppm + cost of heavy weapon. Yes this expands what attack bikes can take for heavy weapons. With the new cost of attack bikes being 35pts + heavy weapon.

Tactical squads, crusader squads, and sternguard may take chainswords for 1ppm (includes sergeant). Includes equivalents with a few exceptions in other space marines

Assault marines, sternguard, and honourguard may take an additional bolt pistol for 1ppm. Again, includes most equivalents.

We are also looking at points drops for certain units and vehicles.

I know this all is a bit off topic from storm bolters, but I wanted to show some of the changes my group is trying in an attempt at fixing many of the problems with space marines and how storm bolters fit into the overall picture. That way a person isn't only looking at a small piece of a fix and they get a full perspective.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
You are not looking at whole unit costs. The cost of a Tactical Marine is deceptive. Sure, he seem like a steal in comparison to a Veteran but a full squad of Space Marines cost 140 points with no upgrades. That is why I am saying that Marines are paying a premium for crappy guns. A guard squad can get three Plasmas and a Chimera for only 30 more points. Same Ballistic skill, effective weapons, better protection, a heavy bolter and a multilaser which can fire at full BS on the move and can select different targets.

Dude, I will spare you my epic wall of math. The basics are:

- 10x Tacs (140pts) and 10x Plasma Vets (105pts) shoot it out comparably well in Rapid Fire range. Effectiveness is about 4 dead Tacs, to 6 dead Vets. Each time the Vets fire they have a 33% to lose a Plasma weapon.
- 5x Tacs (70pts) crush 10x Plasma Vets (105pts) in assault. 2 Vets die to pistol fire. Vet Overwatch is as harmful to themselves as their assaulters with "Gets Hot". 1.04 unsaved wounds on a 14pt Tac, 0.66 unsaved wounds on a 20pt Plasma Vet. But it's worth firing anyways, because they will lose CC by 2W, break at 59%, and are swept at 72%.

So no suprises, right? S4 attacks are not bad against infantry, and assault is powerful. The problem is (as Martel says) what is a naked Tac squad going to do against a T6 Riptide? Well, maybe tie it up in assault and Krak it. I'll look at that too later.

If you want weapons caddies, why not a SM Devastator squad? You can get 4x Multi-Meltas for 110pts, or 4x Plasma Cannons for 130pts. Why isn't this an option?

Yoyoyo wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
You are not looking at whole unit costs. The cost of a Tactical Marine is deceptive. Sure, he seem like a steal in comparison to a Veteran but a full squad of Space Marines cost 140 points with no upgrades. That is why I am saying that Marines are paying a premium for crappy guns. A guard squad can get three Plasmas and a Chimera for only 30 more points. Same Ballistic skill, effective weapons, better protection, a heavy bolter and a multilaser which can fire at full BS on the move and can select different targets.

Dude, I will spare you my epic wall of math. The basics are:

- 10x Tacs (140pts) and 10x Plasma Vets (105pts) shoot it out comparably well in Rapid Fire range. Effectiveness is about 4 dead Tacs, to 6 dead Vets. Each time the Vets fire they have a 33% to lose a Plasma weapon.
- 5x Tacs (70pts) crush 10x Plasma Vets (105pts) in assault. 2 Vets die to pistol fire. Vet Overwatch is as harmful to themselves as their assaulters with "Gets Hot". 1.04 unsaved wounds on a 14pt Tac, 0.66 unsaved wounds on a 20pt Plasma Vet. But it's worth firing anyways, because they will lose CC by 2W, break at 59%, and are swept at 72%.

So no suprises, right? S4 attacks are not bad against infantry, and assault is powerful. The problem is (as Martel says) what is a naked Tac squad going to do against a T6 Riptide? Well, maybe tie it up in assault and Krak it. I'll look at that too later.

If you want weapons caddies, why not a SM Devastator squad? You can get 4x Multi-Meltas for 110pts, or 4x Plasma Cannons for 130pts. Why isn't this an option?

Because they are high-value T4 3+ targets and will not last a hot second in the current meta. There is a sea of marines that can't really hurt you and then this one squad with heavy weapons. They die first.

 NorseSig wrote:
The rationale behind the change to bolters has do a lot with tactical squads. It gives them a little more firepower and tactical flexibility within 12 inches, and helps solve a lot of issues with space marine shooting in general. The change makes bike upgrades still good but not so OMG good.

I see; by allowing them to use the Assault profile it then permits them to actually charge in, if necessary, to clear an objective for example.

 NorseSig wrote:
I think you may be right about heavy bolters. 4 shots is about right, but I think salvo 3/4 is the way to go. And is certainly better than the assault 4 people where throwing around in my local group (didn't make sense and made them too juicy).

Yeah, Assault 4 doesn't make sense for HBs; IIRC even the WD Deathwatch rules that circulated at one point allowed Heavy Bolters to become Assault in weapon type, but also cut range in half- and it was a specific upgrade that you had to pay for (specifically, a Suspensor Web). I'd also say that there is a possible alternative in Salvo 2/3 Pinning- 4 shots and Pinning, particularly when considering the density that Imperial and even CSM forces can throw HBs onto the table would be a bit much, IMO.

That said I quite like Salvo 3/4.

 NorseSig wrote:
Your idea for combi-bolters is EXACTLY what me and my group decided on. Though we also gave ours the same ability to fire at full bs during overwatch. We are ok with chaos having better shooting inside 12 inches, and arguably better shooting with combi bolters at the 12 to 24 range.

I actually had to reread this a couple of times to get a clear grasp on exactly what you meant; for some reason I thought you were saying that you'd made the equivalent of a twin-linked Stormbolter with the changes that have been pretty well settled on in this thread. Once I had actually read more thoroughly, I realized that I suck at reading sometimes.

I do think that I'd probably want to do a lot of testing as to whether or not a Combi-Bolter with Twin-Linked and full-BS overwatch would be a tad much for its cost, but overall I do lean towards it be "nice but not really a big deal". Certainly there's a lot of units that would absolutely hate such a thing (Wyches in particular would sulk over that), but against the especially killy melee units it's really just a nuisance. I could see it becoming a bit problematic on Terminators, due to the fact that at least one dedicated "hard counter" unit- Incubi- is very combat focused, and full-BS overwatch from the squad- even with "only" Stormbolters- could be quite devastating and make Terminators very difficult to deal with even when using a 'hard counter'.

 NorseSig wrote:
We are looking at these changes:

Upgrades like when you can take a special or heavy weapon is no longer dependent on squad size (with the exception of you have to have enough models t ocarry the upgrades ie 5 heavy weapons requires 5 models). What this means is tacticals can take a heavy weapon and a special weapon without having to have a unit of 10.

These units may take an additional special weapon Sternguard, Tactical squads, Crusader squads, and Assault squads (this includes equivalents in other space marine chapters with a few exceptions)

These units may take an extra heavy weapon Terminators, Legion of the damned, and Devastator squads (again includes equivalents with a few exceptions)

Power weapons (sword, axe maul) are 10pts, combi-weapons (flamer, grav, melta, plasma) are 5 pts, flakk upgrade is 5pts, and grav-pistol and plasma pistol are 10pts.

For HQs able to take TDA it is a 25pt upgrade

Techmarines and Masters of the Forge are 15 pts cheaper, and chaplains are 5 pts cheaper.

Assault squads and devastator squads are now troop choices, and bike squads no longer exist in fast attack. They are however an upgrade for tactical squads for 7ppm except heavy weapons which are upgraded to attack bikes at 35ppm + cost of heavy weapon. Yes this expands what attack bikes can take for heavy weapons. With the new cost of attack bikes being 35pts + heavy weapon.

Tactical squads, crusader squads, and sternguard may take chainswords for 1ppm (includes sergeant). Includes equivalents with a few exceptions in other space marines

Assault marines, sternguard, and honourguard may take an additional bolt pistol for 1ppm. Again, includes most equivalents.

Insofar as the "special+heavy at five dudes", "Tacs love CCWs", "Flakk is 5pts", "nice pistols/PWs are 10pts", I generally like these. I particularly approve of 5pt-Flakk Missiles, as costing 10 points for such an upgrade is incredibly stupid. No comments on TDA for HQs and Techmarine/MotF/Chaplain recosting, as I'm not brushed up super well on these units performance on the table.

I do like the Assault Squads as Troops bit, as well as expanding Attack Bike heavy options. I do, however, not quite understand bonus specials for Tacs and ASM; Crusader squads actually make some sense as you can potentially bulk the unit up to a whopping twenty mans- even if half of them use Scout statlines- but I'm not sure of the rationale behind "2x special+1x heavy" Tacs/ASM. I do certainly think that Tacs with the ability to go double special would be an awesome bonus, but I'm not sure of "double special and heavy".

Sternguard I can see that making sense. though. LotD getting double heavy options is a nice buff, particularly since they're SnP so they can fire those heavies on the move. I would, however, say that Terminators should either be "2x heavy per 5 dudes" or "2 heavies, no size limit". I don't quite see the rationale of saying "3 heavies". Similarly, I'm not really seeing how Devastators getting 5 heavies makes a great deal of sense; they seem designed, mechanically speaking, to have either a min-size squad with 4 heavies, or a ten-man squad with 4 heavies that either stays together or splits into two 5-man squads of 2x heavies and 3 bullet catchers, so to speak. Getting 5 heavies kind of throws that off; I'm also not necessarily sold on Devastators in Troops; ASM make more sense, to me, as a Troops choice in general, but I see Devs as being more of a Heavy Support option. What's your reasoning on Troops Devs?

Also, what's up with the bonus bolt pistol for ASM/Sternguard/Honor Guard? For Sternguard it technically could give them a bonus attack in combat (assuming you don't leverage the previously mentioned CCW options), but Honor Guard and ASM already have appropriate weapon combinations to leverage the bonus CCW attack from having two CCWs.

Also, Bikers. I'm really not sold on making them a Tac squad upgrade instead of a Fast Attack choice; especially since Bike Squads seem to, in part at least, fulfill an armed reconnaissance role in SM forces. Land Speeders do as well, but Bikers also seem to be intended to function as forward skirmishers as well. What are your thoughts on the role of Bike squads in SM forces, thematically and mechanically?

Finally, I'd like to make a special mention of combi-weapons: there's some possibility that a combi-weapon's pricing is reflective of the base weapon that is being combined into the bolter component; as an example, I consider a combi-plas/-grav weapon to be reasonably priced at 10 points, but a combi-melta is overpriced- and a combi-flamer criminally expensive- at that same pricepoint. That being said, it's still a single-use armament, and it's a cleaner solution to simply blanket-price all of them at 5 points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So, double-posting, but I thought I'd throw in my two cents.

Yoyoyo wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
You are not looking at whole unit costs. The cost of a Tactical Marine is deceptive. Sure, he seem like a steal in comparison to a Veteran but a full squad of Space Marines cost 140 points with no upgrades. That is why I am saying that Marines are paying a premium for crappy guns. A guard squad can get three Plasmas and a Chimera for only 30 more points. Same Ballistic skill, effective weapons, better protection, a heavy bolter and a multilaser which can fire at full BS on the move and can select different targets.

Dude, I will spare you my epic wall of math. The basics are:

- 10x Tacs (140pts) and 10x Plasma Vets (105pts) shoot it out comparably well in Rapid Fire range. Effectiveness is about 4 dead Tacs, to 6 dead Vets. Each time the Vets fire they have a 33% to lose a Plasma weapon.
- 5x Tacs (70pts) crush 10x Plasma Vets (105pts) in assault. 2 Vets die to pistol fire. Vet Overwatch is as harmful to themselves as their assaulters with "Gets Hot". 1.04 unsaved wounds on a 14pt Tac, 0.66 unsaved wounds on a 20pt Plasma Vet. But it's worth firing anyways, because they will lose CC by 2W, break at 59%, and are swept at 72%.

So no suprises, right? S4 attacks are not bad against infantry, and assault is powerful. The problem is (as Martel says) what is a naked Tac squad going to do against a T6 Riptide? Well, maybe tie it up in assault and Krak it. I'll look at that too later.

If you want weapons caddies, why not a SM Devastator squad? You can get 4x Multi-Meltas for 110pts, or 4x Plasma Cannons for 130pts. Why isn't this an option?

5 Tacs are likely to die before they get to try to punch said PlasVet squad to death. Additionally, Plasma Vets aren't likely to cost 105 points; they're more likely going to sit at 120 to reduce the likelihood of losing one to a bad Gets Hot roll, and to improve their survivability- what little they have, being T3- if/when they disembark. It's also worth noting that said Tacs are still more expensive with no upgrades. The Vet squad gets a squad leader, carapace armor, and 3x Plasma Guns, and still is cheaper than 10x naked Tacs.

Yes, we all know that S4 is reasonably capable at killing infantry models. It's also worth noting that while Assault is powerful, it's generally very difficult to pull off outside of a few particularly stellar units; these days to succeed at assault you need to have a unit that is at a minimum both very fast and very durable, while being reasonably lethal. As an example, there are many things that are deadlier than Necron Wraiths as an assault unit; the problem is that there's very little that is both as fast and as tough as Wraiths, while still being killy enough to be a threat.

BTW, 10 Tacs with Krak grenades can barely push a single wound through onto a T6/3+ armor MC- like a Carnifex, say. But just because I can, I'll run the numbers on 10 Tacs w/ Kraks vs a Riptide with no FNP:

Round 1!

Tacs pop Kraks into the 'Tide, with WS/I 4; they have 10 strikes (using grenades in combat reduces you to one attack), and hit ~6.67 times, wound ~3.33 times, and then... put an amazing ~0.56 wounds onto the Riptide.
Riptide ineffectively slaps the Marines around with WS/I 2, 3 Attacks, and S6/AP2, for a total of 1.5 hits*, ~1.25 wounds, which being AP2 will be unsaved. There are now only 9 Marines left.

Marines lose combat. To a Riptide.

I don't think I even need to continue with this, because it'd be quite pointless.

*IIRC, 7th Ed changed the WS table so that in order to be hit on 5+ rather than 4+, you had to be more than double the WS of the opponent, instead of exactly.

So in the end, the Tacs "tie up" a Riptide for an entire game, mostly on account of being unable to kill the Riptide while the latter is able to only kill the Tacs very slowly in combat. The problem is thus:

How do you get Tacs into combat with a Riptide?!

Oh, and as pointed out, Devs are an "HVT" in a sea of relatively unthreatening T4/3+ mans. This is especially the case when you try and go "min-cost", as this very negatively impacts the survivability of the squad.