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.

Arson Fire wrote:
I hope the riptide and WK get nerfed, so people stop saying all MCs and GCs are overpowered.
Everytime I read this and then look at the haruspex or maleceptor I break down laughing. It's giving me gas.

Still better than anything in C:BA. They ignore armor, they fight at full strength until they die, they can get a toe in cover for awesome saves, they bounce bolters and small arms all day every day. BS.

Grav is good for Marines because it directly negates a good majority of targets, and the targets it *doesn't* do so well against can be dispatched by Bolter or even unaugmented melee. Barring models that have good Invulnerables but no armor (so...Grimoired Daemons?), a grav-bolter army is super-TAC.

One reason I initially suggested Blast was a bit of a sidegrade reason: The models Grav is meant to counter already use the huge oval bases anyway. Another thought could be to give it "Multiplied Hits" based on Bulky/Superbulky, the way that the Tau R'Varna does.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
Grav is good for Marines because it directly negates a good majority of targets, and the targets it *doesn't* do so well against can be dispatched by Bolter or even unaugmented melee. Barring models that have good Invulnerables but no armor (so...Grimoired Daemons?), a grav-bolter army is super-TAC.

One reason I initially suggested Blast was a bit of a sidegrade reason: The models Grav is meant to counter already use the huge oval bases anyway. Another thought could be to give it "Multiplied Hits" based on Bulky/Superbulky, the way that the Tau R'Varna does.

Maybe. Or we could just make older weapons useful again. Because lascannons totally just inflict one wound when they burn a hole straight through that MC.

I like the multiplied hits idea combined with a reduced base ROF. That way grav weapons still do enough damage to big stuff to be useful as monster-mashers, but aren't automatically Just Plain Better against everything else.

Also, as far as making older weapons more useful, I could see exploding wounds being useful there. Maybe make meltas, multimeltas and lascannons cause d3 (or just 2) wounds per successful to-wound roll, saved separately? Separate saves, because that way the shot doesn't bounce because of one low-probability save (6+ cover due to night fighting, say). That would hold for any infantry model hit by them, of course (unless you can think of a good reason why an MC should take multiple wounds but a multi-wound hero shouldn't).

Martel732 wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
Grav is good for Marines because it directly negates a good majority of targets, and the targets it *doesn't* do so well against can be dispatched by Bolter or even unaugmented melee. Barring models that have good Invulnerables but no armor (so...Grimoired Daemons?), a grav-bolter army is super-TAC.

One reason I initially suggested Blast was a bit of a sidegrade reason: The models Grav is meant to counter already use the huge oval bases anyway. Another thought could be to give it "Multiplied Hits" based on Bulky/Superbulky, the way that the Tau R'Varna does.

Maybe. Or we could just make older weapons useful again. Because lascannons totally just inflict one wound when they burn a hole straight through that MC.

"grav doesn't need to be weakened, BUFF EVERYTHING ELSE!"

Because that's what this game needs: MORE things getting ridiculous

"WK and Riptides aren't broken, everything else just needs to get stronger"

See how "off" that sounds in a different context. The older weapons are still usefull, IF you factor out grav since it has so many relentless platforms to spew out 5-20 AP: 2 shots that (usually) have purchased a way to re-roll to wound, making it the single best weapon vs. anything NOT in a 5+ or 6+ save.

The easiest fix for grav is having it wound GMC, MC, and the like on a 2+, extremely bulky on a 2+, very bulky on a 3+, bulky on a 4+, and non bulky on a 6 (or some variation of this)

this lets it stay as an amazing MC killer, lets it do a lot of damage to terminators, and gives people a reason to not spam grav OTHER then cost.

jade_angel wrote:
I like the multiplied hits idea combined with a reduced base ROF. That way grav weapons still do enough damage to big stuff to be useful as monster-mashers, but aren't automatically Just Plain Better against everything else.

Also, as far as making older weapons more useful, I could see exploding wounds being useful there. Maybe make meltas, multimeltas and lascannons cause d3 (or just 2) wounds per successful to-wound roll, saved separately? Separate saves, because that way the shot doesn't bounce because of one low-probability save (6+ cover due to night fighting, say). That would hold for any infantry model hit by them, of course (unless you can think of a good reason why an MC should take multiple wounds but a multi-wound hero shouldn't).

Saved separately is just fine.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Brennonjw wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
Grav is good for Marines because it directly negates a good majority of targets, and the targets it *doesn't* do so well against can be dispatched by Bolter or even unaugmented melee. Barring models that have good Invulnerables but no armor (so...Grimoired Daemons?), a grav-bolter army is super-TAC.

One reason I initially suggested Blast was a bit of a sidegrade reason: The models Grav is meant to counter already use the huge oval bases anyway. Another thought could be to give it "Multiplied Hits" based on Bulky/Superbulky, the way that the Tau R'Varna does.

Maybe. Or we could just make older weapons useful again. Because lascannons totally just inflict one wound when they burn a hole straight through that MC.

"grav doesn't need to be weakened, BUFF EVERYTHING ELSE!"

Because that's what this game needs: MORE things getting ridiculous

"WK and Riptides aren't broken, everything else just needs to get stronger"

See how "off" that sounds in a different context. The older weapons are still usefull, IF you factor out grav since it has so many relentless platforms to spew out 5-20 AP: 2 shots that (usually) have purchased a way to re-roll to wound, making it the single best weapon vs. anything NOT in a 5+ or 6+ save.

The easiest fix for grav is having it wound GMC, MC, and the like on a 2+, extremely bulky on a 2+, very bulky on a 3+, bulky on a 4+, and non bulky on a 6 (or some variation of this)

this lets it stay as an amazing MC killer, lets it do a lot of damage to terminators, and gives people a reason to not spam grav OTHER then cost.

It's totally ridiculous for a anti-tank weapon to cause more than one wound to an MC? News flash: lascannons used to cause 2D6 wounds. If one shot a T-Rex with an Abrams tank, I can assure you that it wouldn't survive, as that's akin to shooting a human with a .50 cal.

Or the problem MCs can be handled.

Wraithlords are APed by Krak missiles, have 3 HP, and no defense beyond T8 3+. For a unit less maneuverable than Termies, with about the same shooting capabilities, at about the same points, it dies much faster to anti-tank. Its one saving grace is invulnerability to many small arms (but not Tau, Necron, CWE, or DE small arms). It makes Termies look good.

DPs are T5. With 3+/5++, Boltguns can help a bit when its on the ground.

The Avatar is a lot of points for T6 3+/5++. Its fairly good, but a little plasma or krak will ruin his day.

Carnifexes. Are you scared?

Squiggy! I love seeing it on the table (the GMC), but its far too easy to kill.

Bloodthirster? That's a lot of points that aren't likely to do much.

The Riptide, the WK, the Flyrant, and maybe the DK, could all be tuned down, certainly. But there are a lot of other MCs that aren't so scary.

 Brennonjw wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Brennonjw wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

3. The fact that grav is as common as it is, is kinda proof that the point cost is obviously not that much of a trade off.

It's must more simple than that - marines have no other viable option. LOL.

You quoted him as saying what I said, and then I'm not sure if I'm quoted as him, or if you were making a joke at my expense?

 Brennonjw wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Brennonjw wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Brennonjw wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

3. The fact that grav is as common as it is, is kinda proof that the point cost is obviously not that much of a trade off.

It's must more simple than that - marines have no other viable option. LOL.

You quoted him as saying what I said, and then I'm not sure if I'm quoted as him, or if you were making a joke at my expense?

Nope just not very good at using the quote feature. can't really figure out why it included my text in the quote - it was outside of the brackets. AAAND it's happening again.

Just remove all the quotes from your post then?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Brennonjw wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
Grav is good for Marines because it directly negates a good majority of targets, and the targets it *doesn't* do so well against can be dispatched by Bolter or even unaugmented melee. Barring models that have good Invulnerables but no armor (so...Grimoired Daemons?), a grav-bolter army is super-TAC.

One reason I initially suggested Blast was a bit of a sidegrade reason: The models Grav is meant to counter already use the huge oval bases anyway. Another thought could be to give it "Multiplied Hits" based on Bulky/Superbulky, the way that the Tau R'Varna does.

Maybe. Or we could just make older weapons useful again. Because lascannons totally just inflict one wound when they burn a hole straight through that MC.

"grav doesn't need to be weakened, BUFF EVERYTHING ELSE!"

Because that's what this game needs: MORE things getting ridiculous

Oh please. The "old school" weapons getting buffed to appropriate levels is far from "more things getting ridiculous". If you want people to actually have to make a choice between Grav and other items, then the other items need to be buffed to the point where people will consider them.

Also worth noting is that those weapons being buffed would mean basically every army in the damn game would be seeing a buff, since the statlines for many guns are shared.

"WK and Riptides aren't broken, everything else just needs to get stronger"
See how "off" that sounds in a different context. The older weapons are still usefull, IF you factor out grav since it has so many relentless platforms to spew out 5-20 AP: 2 shots that (usually) have purchased a way to re-roll to wound, making it the single best weapon vs. anything NOT in a 5+ or 6+ save.

Lascannons, Heavy Bolters, Multi-Meltas and Missile Launchers certainly can be useful when fighting vehicle heavy lists--but why would you field them when you can field Grav instead and still deal with vehicles while not shooting yourself in the foot against MCs/GMCs?

Additionally, there are not "so many relentless platforms". There's Bikes and Centurions. Bikes can only take Grav-Guns, which means they do not have a way to re-roll to Wound outside of bringing in ICs or Formation benefits. Centurion Devastators are the "favored" platform for Grav-Cannons with Grav-Amps because of the way Centurions work. They're what Terminators should be priced at and what Terminators should be statted as.

Also worth noting that they pay 10 points less for Grav-Cannons and Grav-Amps than regular Devastators or Tactical Marine Squads that are given the Grav-Cannon and Grav-Amp upgrade.

The easiest fix for grav is having it wound GMC, MC, and the like on a 2+, extremely bulky on a 2+, very bulky on a 3+, bulky on a 4+, and non bulky on a 6 (or some variation of this)

this lets it stay as an amazing MC killer, lets it do a lot of damage to terminators, and gives people a reason to not spam grav OTHER then cost.

The "easiest fix for grav" is to make the other options COMPETITIVE.

None of this "let's redesign grav from the ground up!" crap.

 Kanluwen wrote:

The "easiest fix for grav" is to make the other options COMPETITIVE.

None of this "let's redesign grav from the ground up!" crap.

So, the easiest fix for 1 broken gun, is to redesign every other gun? I cannot tell if your serious, or just messing with me.

It's not broken, though. Some of its targets require grav, and the other targets it owns are wrecked by lots of other weapons, too. Grav cannons are certainly far worse than mere grav guns.

Martel732 wrote:
It's not broken, though. Some of its targets require grav, and the other targets it owns are wrecked by lots of other weapons, too. Grav cannons are certainly far worse than mere grav guns.

I agree that in certain situations it isn't broken, but it is arguably the single best weapon for killing anything with a 4+ save or better. it's meant to kill big, tough, super units, then go by bulk, or some other qualifying method in order to encourage bringing other weapon options. Afterall:it's leagues easier to redesign 1 weapon that's been in 2 codexs' then it is to redesign the entire Imperial line of weaponry.

 Brennonjw wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

The "easiest fix for grav" is to make the other options COMPETITIVE.

None of this "let's redesign grav from the ground up!" crap.

So, the easiest fix for 1 broken gun, is to redesign every other gun? I cannot tell if your serious, or just messing with me.

Quoting you here:

 Brennonjw wrote:
this lets it stay as an amazing MC killer, lets it do a lot of damage to terminators, and gives people a reason to not spam grav OTHER then cost.

Until you make the other weapons competitive, grav will remain a no-brainer. And I'm saying this as someone whose only Grav is a Devastator Squad with Grav-Cannons/Grav-Amps and a Sergeant with Combi-Grav in a Pinion Battle Demi-Company. I would rather put 220 friggin' points down as a 5 man Devastator Squad with Grav-Cannons/Grav-Amps for my mandatory Devastator Squad choice(can't take Centurion Devastators in Pinion) than use the points on any of the other weapons.

Lascannons? Sure, they have their place hunting vehicles--but why would I when I can instead put Grav on the field?
ML--same thing. The only MLs I field are in Sniper Scout Squads for the Pinion, as I can give them Ignores Cover on demand and Flakk Missiles with Ignores Cover makes a mess of a lot of things.
Heavy Bolters? Meh, I put those in Tactical and Bolter Scout Squads for the Pinion/Shadowstrike Kill-Team.
MM? Nope!
Heavy Flamers are completely omitted from my army, and the only Plasma Cannon I have is on a Venerable Dreadnought because it looks nice and a deep striking Venerable with PE is a nasty proposition for hunting down a key enemy unit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Brennonjw wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's not broken, though. Some of its targets require grav, and the other targets it owns are wrecked by lots of other weapons, too. Grav cannons are certainly far worse than mere grav guns.

I agree that in certain situations it isn't broken, but it is arguably the single best weapon for killing anything with a 4+ save or better. it's meant to kill big, tough, super units, then go by bulk, or some other qualifying method in order to encourage bringing other weapon options.

There is literally nothing that you can do outside of making Grav useless and completely gutting its ROF that will remove its attractiveness. This edition, ROF is king.

Additionally, it's meant to kill well protected enemies. Read the blurb in the BRB under "Graviton" in the special rules section.

Afterall:it's leagues easier to redesign 1 weapon that's been in 2 codexs' then it is to redesign the entire Imperial line of weaponry.

Whether it's easier or not isn't the point.

The "entire Imperial line of weaponry"(and many other books to boot) are still stuck in the 3rd edition mindset that they were last updated in. That is what you seem to not be comprehending.
For example, look at "Rapid Fire" weapons versus "Salvo" or "Assault" weapons.

Imperial heavy weapons suck. Except for grav. People are crying "OP" when the real cry should be "effective". No one bats an eye when Tau or Eldar lay waste to multiple squads a turn with shooting. Why should the Imperium be limited to heavy weapons that the Xenos just laugh at?

Martel732 wrote:

Arson Fire wrote:
I hope the riptide and WK get nerfed, so people stop saying all MCs and GCs are overpowered.
Everytime I read this and then look at the haruspex or maleceptor I break down laughing. It's giving me gas.

Still better than anything in C:BA. They ignore armor, they fight at full strength until they die, they can get a toe in cover for awesome saves, they bounce bolters and small arms all day every day. BS.

We can compare rubbish to garbage if you want. It's still trash.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
That Grav Weapons are to 7th edition what Assasult Cannons were to 4th is pretty clear. They are, generally speaking, the best generalist weapon for Marines to use in large amounts.

Not only are they dangerous to big monsters, but they're dangerous versus fliers, massed infantry, vehicles, most everything and anything that isn't a Daemon, and whatever the grav weapons don't get, the Bolters have handily covered.

Proposal:

Grav Pistols remain the same.

Grav Guns are 18", assault 1/blast.

Grav Cannons are now heavy 1/large blast.

This lets them serve as a "Heavy Crowd Suppression" weapon that isn't a Vindicator, but punishes elites for lingering in a place for too long. It gives Marines an assault blast weapon that isn't throwing grenades.

Granted, this gives Marines a harder time against Wraithknights and Riptides, but that's a completely different can of worms.

This is what grav weapons are in HH. Such better rules for them.

 Glitcha wrote:

This is what grav weapons are in HH. Such better rules for them.

HH is basically an entirely different game, so not worth mentioning in this discussion. The idea might work there, but it won't be worth diddly outside of HH.

 Brennonjw wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's not broken, though. Some of its targets require grav, and the other targets it owns are wrecked by lots of other weapons, too. Grav cannons are certainly far worse than mere grav guns.

I agree that in certain situations it isn't broken, but it is arguably the single best weapon for killing anything with a 4+ save or better. it's meant to kill big, tough, super units, then go by bulk, or some other qualifying method in order to encourage bringing other weapon options. Afterall:it's leagues easier to redesign 1 weapon that's been in 2 codexs' then it is to redesign the entire Imperial line of weaponry.

Weak in comparison to D weapons. I can easily outnumber your Grav Cannons with D weapons in an eldar army if thats what I want to do too. Theres really no point in complaining about grav. Fact of the matter is the game is broken to the extent that the defensive stats you pay for on infantry don't matter at all. The only real defensive stat that means anything in this game anymore is an invulnerable save or FNP. The game has turned into magic the gathering. 90% of everything isn't viable and broken combinations win games.

The only way you get more D weapons than Grav is 32pts for heavy 12" D. With no delivery system. Grav spamming equivalents would be Devs with Grav Cannons. About 15-ish pts more per gun/ but at 24" salvo 3/5, will tear the D spam apart.

With delivery systems (Serpents or WWP), you can have more Grav with Pods. Which would still win.

Not that D should be that cheap anyways. Almost everyone agrees it should be nerfed hard.

And people do complain about Xeno heavy weapons. A lot. That said, comparisons between the "standard" heavies tend to be really, really close. Its just the SL in that category that is broken. Aside from that, the IOM equivalents are on the same level.

IOM has nothing even close to the high yield missile pod. Or immortal ion accelerators. Also, the star cannon is much better than the plasma cannon, etc. IoM heavy weapons are a dumpster fire between their stats and their platforms.

The HYMP is two reaper autocannons. It's too damn cheap, but it's two freaking reaper autocannons.

The IA sure as hell needs to be nerfed. S7 AP4 Heavy 5 at 30" level of nerfing. (Leave the nova blast at S9 AP2, fine, but not the overcharge)

But the starcannon being better than the plasma cannon? It doesn't get hot, I'll give it that. But S7 AP2 Blast vs S6 AP2 Heavy 2? Looks like a wash to me. The only real advantage the starcannon has is being mounted on fast skimmers.

jade_angel wrote:
The HYMP is two reaper autocannons. It's too damn cheap, but it's two freaking reaper autocannons.

The IA sure as hell needs to be nerfed. S7 AP4 Heavy 5 at 30" level of nerfing. (Leave the nova blast at S9 AP2, fine, but not the overcharge)

But the starcannon being better than the plasma cannon? It doesn't get hot, I'll give it that. But S7 AP2 Blast vs S6 AP2 Heavy 2? Looks like a wash to me. The only real advantage the starcannon has is being mounted on fast skimmers.

Most importantly, it can put two wounds on an MC, and the plasma cannon maxes at one. And it can be snap fired. And indirectly it's better through better deployment platforms.

Star Cannon vs Plasma Cannon.
Both are Heavy.
Same range.
Same AP.
SC is one less S in exchange for Gets Hot.
SC is 2 shots instead of Blast.

Neither seems to be better than the other.

The other "heavies" line up similarly.

Scatter Laser? Clearly better than the AC, because it has 12" more range vs actual-rending and AP4.

Oddly, the Shuriken Cannon is "clearly better" than the Heavy Bolter when it has 12" less range and worse base AP to compensate for its not-real-rending and +1S.

Missile Launcher? The EML has AP4 on its blast, but must *always* pay for Flakk missiles - which IOM almost never takes.

Lascannon vs Brightlance is kinda a toss up. BL is marginally better vs AV14, identical vs AV13, and marginally worse against anything else. Which is fine. Except that its got 12" less range.

CWE don't have a MM equivalent. Or Heavy Flamer, unless you count a Warlock power which needs to be manifested and can't overwatch.

Melta Gun vs Fusion Gun? Just a different name.

Flamer vs Flamer? Same name, even.

The platforms are quite different, but the weapons themselves are about equal.

Martel732 wrote:

jade_angel wrote:
The HYMP is two reaper autocannons. It's too damn cheap, but it's two freaking reaper autocannons.

The IA sure as hell needs to be nerfed. S7 AP4 Heavy 5 at 30" level of nerfing. (Leave the nova blast at S9 AP2, fine, but not the overcharge)

But the starcannon being better than the plasma cannon? It doesn't get hot, I'll give it that. But S7 AP2 Blast vs S6 AP2 Heavy 2? Looks like a wash to me. The only real advantage the starcannon has is being mounted on fast skimmers.

Most importantly, it can put two wounds on an MC, and the plasma cannon maxes at one. And it can be snap fired. And indirectly it's better through better deployment platforms.

+12 range too. Only reason that earnt spammed is because scatter lasers are so under costed lol.

"Neither seems to be better than the other. "

Being able to cause two wounds to an MC instead of just one is huge in 7th ed. Small blasts in this game are terrible, too. There's no advantage to the small blast at all in practice.

Bharring wrote:
Star Cannon vs Plasma Cannon.
Both are Heavy.
Same range.
Same AP.
SC is one less S in exchange for Gets Hot.
SC is 2 shots instead of Blast.

Neither seems to be better than the other.

The other "heavies" line up similarly.

Scatter Laser? Clearly better than the AC, because it has 12" more range vs actual-rending and AP4.

Oddly, the Shuriken Cannon is "clearly better" than the Heavy Bolter when it has 12" less range and worse base AP to compensate for its not-real-rending and +1S.

Missile Launcher? The EML has AP4 on its blast, but must *always* pay for Flakk missiles - which IOM almost never takes.

Lascannon vs Brightlance is kinda a toss up. BL is marginally better vs AV14, identical vs AV13, and marginally worse against anything else. Which is fine. Except that its got 12" less range.

CWE don't have a MM equivalent. Or Heavy Flamer, unless you count a Warlock power which needs to be manifested and can't overwatch.

Melta Gun vs Fusion Gun? Just a different name.

Flamer vs Flamer? Same name, even.

The platforms are quite different, but the weapons themselves are about equal.

Platforms + what you pay for the weapons is a huge part of the problem.

An eldar warwalker gets 2 bright lances for 10 total points.
A SM dred gets a twinlinked LC for 35?

A falcon can mount a BL for 5 points
A predator can mount a TLLC for 45?
A razorback for 25?

Its absurd.

And that's why the IoM might as well spam grav.

Since when is an SC not the same range as a PC? I'm fairly sure they are both 36". The only CWE standard heavy with 48" range is the EML.

Odds of an SC hitting twice in one round is 4/9. Less than half the time.

Odds of an SC doing 2 wounds to a WK (pre-saves for simplicity)?
(2/3)(2/3)(1/6)(1/6) just for a wound before saves. That is 1/81. Well below 1%.

The odds of the average SC shot doing a wound (pre saves) is:
(2/3)(1/6), or (1/9). So an EV of 2/9 wounds/round to save against.

A PC has a huge chance to hit (1/3 + (2/3)* odds that 2d6 is less than 4 + Small Blast radius + WK radius). Let's call that (1/3)+(2/3)(2/3), or 7/9ths.

That puts the EV of the PC at (7/9)(1/3), or (7/27).

(7/27) vs (6/27). Even lowballing the PCs chance to hit, its better at killing WKs than an SC.