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.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
The game is incredibly unbalanced, I will agree. But for TAC squads and other things that don't have access to autocannons, the HB is not a bad anti-horde weapon. It could certainly be better, the salvo 4/3 thing that's been suggested sound good. Or maybe just giving it 4 shots and give TACs a special "bracing" ability that allows them to fire as if they had not moved. It's just a pity that horde isn't a particularly strong army type, as big stompy robots have taken over the game, much to my dismay.

A heavy bolter kills 1.33 Orks who are in the open. It kills 0.89 Orks in 5+ cover. That's your anti-horde weapon? It can't glance out AV 12. It's math against most MCs is awful. It literally has no role in this game. I'd be happier if they just admitted it and got rid it.

Ok. 1.33 orks at 36" where you are not getting charged, compared to in the open boltguns in rapid fire doing 0.66 wounds and getting charged...

They're both awful. If you play with as much terrain as most people on here suggest, you'll never even get off 36" shots with a weapon that can't move. The heavy bolter is even terrible on a fast tank; it's unspeakably unusable for infantry.

Martel732 wrote:

Grav guns are spectacularly average.

How so? wounding on armor save @ap2 ?

Martel732 wrote:

I don't see anywhere in the fluff that BA lose every battle, but yet that's basically what happens. Feth the fluff.

BA got canned this past release... which sucks for them, it really does. But with marines having so much building power with all their battle brother options, plus skyhammer and other formations that allow you to grab things that your missing.. you can't just say.. 'we dont have that option'

Martel732 wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
The game is incredibly unbalanced, I will agree. But for TAC squads and other things that don't have access to autocannons, the HB is not a bad anti-horde weapon. It could certainly be better, the salvo 4/3 thing that's been suggested sound good. Or maybe just giving it 4 shots and give TACs a special "bracing" ability that allows them to fire as if they had not moved. It's just a pity that horde isn't a particularly strong army type, as big stompy robots have taken over the game, much to my dismay.

A heavy bolter kills 1.33 Orks who are in the open. It kills 0.89 Orks in 5+ cover. That's your anti-horde weapon?

Better than a bolter. And that's sort of the point. Again, it could (and probably should) be better, but it's purpose is anti-horde, and that's what it does.
And orks are the thing where is has the smallest additional impact on. If you compare two bolters (at 24") and one HB (let's say at 24" because why not), the two bolters kill .666 FWs, whereas the HB kills 2.5 with no cover and 1.666 with 5+.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Grav guns are spectacularly average.

How so? wounding on armor save @ap2 ?

Martel732 wrote:

I don't see anywhere in the fluff that BA lose every battle, but yet that's basically what happens. Feth the fluff.

BA got canned this past release... which sucks for them, it really does. But with marines having so much building power with all their battle brother options, plus skyhammer and other formations that allow you to grab things that your missing.. you can't just say.. 'we dont have that option'

Anyone can ally anything. That's not a valid argument to me. By the time I ally in all the marine stuff, there's no point in fielding any ba at all.

Martel732 wrote:

 Grizzyzz wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Grav guns are spectacularly average.

How so? wounding on armor save @ap2 ?

Martel732 wrote:

I don't see anywhere in the fluff that BA lose every battle, but yet that's basically what happens. Feth the fluff.

BA got canned this past release... which sucks for them, it really does. But with marines having so much building power with all their battle brother options, plus skyhammer and other formations that allow you to grab things that your missing.. you can't just say.. 'we dont have that option'

Anyone can ally anything. That's not a valid argument to me. By the time I ally in all the marine stuff, there's no point in fielding any ba at all.

That makes no sense though.. Lets take a very core part of the current 40k ruleset and just toss it out because I don't want use it ? Marine chapters each excel at something better then others do, which yeah ok maybe in fluff you won't see them working together often, but fluff doesn't always translate to the table... so we are given the opportunity to fill areas of weakness with allies and formations.

If you want to stick to a 100% BA list because you rather stay fluffy then be competitive, then I applaud you for it, I think that has a place in this game; I enjoy playing games where we focus on fluff vs competitiveness and we always have a great time. But you can't use that as a general excuse..

There is literally no reason to field anything from C:BA over C:SM. Furthermore, there's many vanilla models that BA players don't own. I never do anything for fluff reasons, because I think the fluff is gak. I'm not paying GW extra money because they decided that C:SM was going to be strictly superior in all cases.

BA entire concept, assault meqs, is invalidated by armies like Tau. You can't add racing stripes with a few allies and make it work.

Going back to the original thought, I don't think there's anything that can be done to make me take a heavy bolter voluntarily.

 Grizzyzz wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
The game is incredibly unbalanced, I will agree. But for TAC squads and other things that don't have access to autocannons, the HB is not a bad anti-horde weapon. It could certainly be better, the salvo 4/3 thing that's been suggested sound good. Or maybe just giving it 4 shots and give TACs a special "bracing" ability that allows them to fire as if they had not moved. It's just a pity that horde isn't a particularly strong army type, as big stompy robots have taken over the game, much to my dismay.

A heavy bolter kills 1.33 Orks who are in the open. It kills 0.89 Orks in 5+ cover. That's your anti-horde weapon? It can't glance out AV 12. It's math against most MCs is awful. It literally has no role in this game. I'd be happier if they just admitted it and got rid it.

Ok. 1.33 orks at 36" where you are not getting charged, compared to in the open boltguns in rapid fire doing 0.66 wounds and getting charged...

OR you take an Assault Squad with two Flamers and a Deathwind Launcher thingy Drop Pod. Now you kill Orks and create a speed bump instead of killing like 4 Orks a turn OUT of cover with a precious Devastator squad.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Grizzyzz wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
The game is incredibly unbalanced, I will agree. But for TAC squads and other things that don't have access to autocannons, the HB is not a bad anti-horde weapon. It could certainly be better, the salvo 4/3 thing that's been suggested sound good. Or maybe just giving it 4 shots and give TACs a special "bracing" ability that allows them to fire as if they had not moved. It's just a pity that horde isn't a particularly strong army type, as big stompy robots have taken over the game, much to my dismay.

A heavy bolter kills 1.33 Orks who are in the open. It kills 0.89 Orks in 5+ cover. That's your anti-horde weapon? It can't glance out AV 12. It's math against most MCs is awful. It literally has no role in this game. I'd be happier if they just admitted it and got rid it.

Ok. 1.33 orks at 36" where you are not getting charged, compared to in the open boltguns in rapid fire doing 0.66 wounds and getting charged...

OR you take an Assault Squad with two Flamers and a Deathwind Launcher thingy Drop Pod. Now you kill Orks and create a speed bump instead of killing like 4 Orks a turn OUT of cover with a precious Devastator squad.

The heavy bolter's lack of efficacy vs vehicles and MCs is really what makes the above choice better 95% of the time. It's just not good at removing hordes compared to a flamer or blast.

I do use heavy bolters. As others have pointed out, most of the 'problems' with it come down to the opponent's army selection.

I wonder how they would play out if they were heavy 3, blast, shred...

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
I wonder how they would play out if they were heavy 3, blast, shred...

Let's not get crazy here. That fundamentally changes the entire purpose of the weapon. Just adding "shred" would be a huge game-changer. It'd also stop it from being able to overwatch, which I am not in favor of.

Let's also keep in mind that math can only give us probabilities. Something having more shots still provides, however statistically unlikely, more wounds. We're only dealing with D6s here so while probabilities are still what metes out in the end, good luck/bad luck streaks occur often enough that it matters you're getting more shots off. You know what the % chance of a bolter scoring 3 wounds is? Literally 0, against any target ever.

Statistically, Scatter Lasers only cause 1.481 wounds per shooting phase, against a T4 target with a 5+ Save. That's ANY 5+ save, by the way. A unit of Pathfinders in the open actually suffers, on average, more wounds from a heavy bolter than a scatter laser. And you've got 12" more range on the HB. Now, why they'd be in the open I'm not sure, but that's what I mean about gamestate. Recently I caused a unit to fall back and lose their cover, and my HB's ripped the remnants of the squad to shreds.

If there were more 4+ Armor units actually being fielded, more AV10 vehicles seeing play, or more T3 units in general, Heavy Bolters would be great for how cheap and ubiquitous they are. Again, I am not sure the fault is in the weapon so much as it is the current state of Warhammer 40,000.

Changing the weapon doesn't really help the problem. In almost every case of a Heavy Bolter, you can already substitute the weapon for pretty much any other heavy weapon. Making it so there's less reason to pay points to sub the weapon out doesn't really sit well with me, because if it becomes too much like the Scatterlaser, no one bothers ever taking more expensive upgrades, which actually creates a new balance issue.

Heavy bolters I think would be taken if devestators got them for free. The devestator with the heavy bolter is an iconic visual of the devestator. It's what people think of when they see a devestator combat logo. And doing so just for them would help a lot in them being taken more.

However I feel that heavy bolter is a lot like the flamer weapons of the current situation in the game, the whole game around them is such a mess that there isn't a point. Their a weapon for trashing inferior infantry to marines but because grav exists there isn't a point to any of the other items. Prior to the days of grav you brought plasmas and meltas and Flamers and yes even heavy bolters because they were all in their own little corner for tackling problems. They were in perfect harmony a gun for every job. And now there's one gun that has effectively replaced three.

If you want to see heavy bolters and Flamers more you'd need to do a serious price restructuring not only on weapon upgrade but the units that carry them. Here's an example of where I'd go:

Bolter and bp remain free

All pistol upgrades drop to 5ppm

Your flamer and SB remain at 5 ppm

Combi weapons jump up 1ppm except grav which has jumped 5ppm to 15.

In the special weapons slots, melta gun remains unchanged, and the plasma gun drops to 13ppm however grav guns are now 20ppm

In the heavy slot:
Mm is unchanged
Heavy bolters are free for devestators other units pay 8ppm like scouts do but only scouts and stern guard can get hellfires
Plasma cannon drops to 12
Missiles are 15
Lascannon stays at 20
Grav cannons are 25ppm for no amp, if you want the amp that's an extra 5ppm (makin an amp devestator 44ppm).

From there we now move to unit costs:
Devestators, scouts, tacticals, even Angel veterans and command squads go unchanged for points.

Stern guard go up 2ppm in addition kraken bolts are going up 2ppm.

Centurions are going up by 25ppm and their grav cannons no longer come with free amps you pay 5ppm for an amp.

marine bikes lose the ability to take grav weapons period (omitting the pistols).

Basically we gut the ability to buy grav out of the biggest problem child's or we raise the price on models with grav guns or access to them. Make them a very costly weapon to wield and use so losing them really really hurts. This also is a big kick into the groin of bike armies that have grown like weeds over the past two editions and need to be culled back. and one can look at this as a buff to the land raider excelsior which basically went down 5 points as a result of these changes.

Long thread TLDR; but I like Heavy Bolters. I would simply make them have a rapid fire rule. So they double their shots inside half range. Everything else can be the same. Maybe hit on overwatch on a 5 or 6 for extra spice.

 SRSFACE wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
I wonder how they would play out if they were heavy 3, blast, shred...

Let's not get crazy here. That fundamentally changes the entire purpose of the weapon. Just adding "shred" would be a huge game-changer. It'd also stop it from being able to overwatch, which I am not in favor of.

Let's also keep in mind that math can only give us probabilities. Something having more shots still provides, however statistically unlikely, more wounds. We're only dealing with D6s here so while probabilities are still what metes out in the end, good luck/bad luck streaks occur often enough that it matters you're getting more shots off. You know what the % chance of a bolter scoring 3 wounds is? Literally 0, against any target ever.

Statistically, Scatter Lasers only cause 1.481 wounds per shooting phase, against a T4 target with a 5+ Save. That's ANY 5+ save, by the way. A unit of Pathfinders in the open actually suffers, on average, more wounds from a heavy bolter than a scatter laser. And you've got 12" more range on the HB. Now, why they'd be in the open I'm not sure, but that's what I mean about gamestate. Recently I caused a unit to fall back and lose their cover, and my HB's ripped the remnants of the squad to shreds.

If there were more 4+ Armor units actually being fielded, more AV10 vehicles seeing play, or more T3 units in general, Heavy Bolters would be great for how cheap and ubiquitous they are. Again, I am not sure the fault is in the weapon so much as it is the current state of Warhammer 40,000.

Changing the weapon doesn't really help the problem. In almost every case of a Heavy Bolter, you can already substitute the weapon for pretty much any other heavy weapon. Making it so there's less reason to pay points to sub the weapon out doesn't really sit well with me, because if it becomes too much like the Scatterlaser, no one bothers ever taking more expensive upgrades, which actually creates a new balance issue.

The scatterlaser would still dominate at anti-MC and anti-tank.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ionusx wrote:
Heavy bolters I think would be taken if devestators got them for free. The devestator with the heavy bolter is an iconic visual of the devestator. It's what people think of when they see a devestator combat logo. And doing so just for them would help a lot in them being taken more.

However I feel that heavy bolter is a lot like the flamer weapons of the current situation in the game, the whole game around them is such a mess that there isn't a point. Their a weapon for trashing inferior infantry to marines but because grav exists there isn't a point to any of the other items. Prior to the days of grav you brought plasmas and meltas and Flamers and yes even heavy bolters because they were all in their own little corner for tackling problems. They were in perfect harmony a gun for every job. And now there's one gun that has effectively replaced three.

If you want to see heavy bolters and Flamers more you'd need to do a serious price restructuring not only on weapon upgrade but the units that carry them. Here's an example of where I'd go:

Bolter and bp remain free

All pistol upgrades drop to 5ppm

Your flamer and SB remain at 5 ppm

Combi weapons jump up 1ppm except grav which has jumped 5ppm to 15.

In the special weapons slots, melta gun remains unchanged, and the plasma gun drops to 13ppm however grav guns are now 20ppm

In the heavy slot:
Mm is unchanged
Heavy bolters are free for devestators other units pay 8ppm like scouts do but only scouts and stern guard can get hellfires
Plasma cannon drops to 12
Missiles are 15
Lascannon stays at 20
Grav cannons are 25ppm for no amp, if you want the amp that's an extra 5ppm (makin an amp devestator 44ppm).

From there we now move to unit costs:
Devestators, scouts, tacticals, even Angel veterans and command squads go unchanged for points.

Stern guard go up 2ppm in addition kraken bolts are going up 2ppm.

Centurions are going up by 25ppm and their grav cannons no longer come with free amps you pay 5ppm for an amp.

marine bikes lose the ability to take grav weapons period (omitting the pistols).

Basically we gut the ability to buy grav out of the biggest problem child's or we raise the price on models with grav guns or access to them. Make them a very costly weapon to wield and use so losing them really really hurts. This also is a big kick into the groin of bike armies that have grown like weeds over the past two editions and need to be culled back. and one can look at this as a buff to the land raider excelsior which basically went down 5 points as a result of these changes.

Still wouldn't use them. They are terrible weapons.

I think the only change needed is the one FW gave to IW heavy bolters. Make that universal in 40k.

All heavy bolters are pinning weapons. One unsuccessful save and the unit has to take a pinning check.

This change makes the heavy bolter flavorful and doesn't just change it to become like a scatter laser or assault cannon.

DarthDiggler wrote:
I think the only change needed is the one FW gave to IW heavy bolters. Make that universal in 40k.

All heavy bolters are pinning weapons. One unsuccessful save and the unit has to take a pinning check.

This change makes the heavy bolter flavorful and doesn't just change it to become like a scatter laser or assault cannon.

Still useless.

Because ro you, anything that isn't a scatter laser is useless, apprently. Here'e what I want you to do, take eldar out of the game. Eldar no longer exist. Now balencec the weapon, because you aren't going to get anywhere if you keep trying to get them to the blatently overpowered level eldar are at.

I don't think there is a fix for HB. With any given game there's always a cycle of what's "in" and whats "out". 5 short years ago, Grey Knights were the cheesy smelly suckfest. Now they just plain suck. 3.5 years ago Marines were considered a middle-of-the-road codex and now they are top-tier. Before 6th Ed Tau were bang-average. Pre-Wraithknight Eldar were bang-average. Grav-spam AdMech weren't even a thing.

The same is true for weapons. As time goes on certain weapons become useless because of the game changing. As whatever unuts were in favour began to change, certain weapons became useless, while others became viable and others broken. Its just how things go. The same is true of many games. I know Magic has a cycle of sorts (not familiar with how it works though). Yugioh, also went through a similar cycle to 40k. First it was your high-strength cards like Blue Eyes and Dark Magician, they into the GX era it was Fusions. 5Ds era it was Synchros, then Xyz into ZEXAL area and now its 4* monsters and Pendulum cards, and those 1st Ed and GX strategies suck ass.

If you look at any given game you'll find a similar cycle in progress.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Because ro you, anything that isn't a scatter laser is useless, apprently. Here'e what I want you to do, take eldar out of the game. Eldar no longer exist. Now balencec the weapon, because you aren't going to get anywhere if you keep trying to get them to the blatently overpowered level eldar are at.

They're still useless compared to Tau. I'm shooting S5 pop guns, you are lobbing S9 AP 2 ignore cover pie plates. No thanks. Hell, they're still useless against ORKS. The Eldar are more salt in the wound than anything else.

If everyone were Eldar, then it would be balanced.

Are you conparing a five(?) point, troop weilded special weapon, to a overcharged ordinance weapon weilded by a criminally underpriced walking tank? Because that's a bit daft.

As far as everyone being as OP as eldar, while that is technically true, it's also the least efficient way possible. It's better to bring those that are OP down to earth.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Are you conparing a five(?) point, troop weilded special weapon, to a overcharged ordinance weapon weilded by a criminally underpriced walking tank? Because that's a bit daft.

As far as everyone being as OP as eldar, while that is technically true, it's also the least efficient way possible. It's better to bring those that are OP down to earth.

That's not GW's game plan. So there's only one way to go: up.

You call it daft, but that's my reality. With the Tau working they way they work, there's no place for the heavy bolter against them, either. The short answer to the OP is simply "nothing". That's where the game is at right now.

But here's the thing, this is the "Proposed Rules Forum" not the "Best Case Scenario That GW Will Do Forum". This is about what our ideal solutions are.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
But here's the thing, this is the "Proposed Rules Forum" not the "Best Case Scenario That GW Will Do Forum". This is about what our ideal solutions are.

No one wants another scatterlaser in the game, yet that's exactly what this kind of weapon needs to be like to get voluntarily selected in 7th ed. And that doesn't even address the issue of the piss poor Imperium platforms.

Ideally, MCs with 2+ armor would become T5 so they get doubled out by S10 or lose 2+ armor and go to 3+ armor. But this is never happening, so we might as well all be Eldar. As long as T6 2+ exists, and AV 11/12 exists, heavy bolters will be garbage.

Martel732 wrote:

 SRSFACE wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
I wonder how they would play out if they were heavy 3, blast, shred...

Let's not get crazy here. That fundamentally changes the entire purpose of the weapon. Just adding "shred" would be a huge game-changer. It'd also stop it from being able to overwatch, which I am not in favor of.

Let's also keep in mind that math can only give us probabilities. Something having more shots still provides, however statistically unlikely, more wounds. We're only dealing with D6s here so while probabilities are still what metes out in the end, good luck/bad luck streaks occur often enough that it matters you're getting more shots off. You know what the % chance of a bolter scoring 3 wounds is? Literally 0, against any target ever.

Statistically, Scatter Lasers only cause 1.481 wounds per shooting phase, against a T4 target with a 5+ Save. That's ANY 5+ save, by the way. A unit of Pathfinders in the open actually suffers, on average, more wounds from a heavy bolter than a scatter laser. And you've got 12" more range on the HB. Now, why they'd be in the open I'm not sure, but that's what I mean about gamestate. Recently I caused a unit to fall back and lose their cover, and my HB's ripped the remnants of the squad to shreds.

If there were more 4+ Armor units actually being fielded, more AV10 vehicles seeing play, or more T3 units in general, Heavy Bolters would be great for how cheap and ubiquitous they are. Again, I am not sure the fault is in the weapon so much as it is the current state of Warhammer 40,000.

Changing the weapon doesn't really help the problem. In almost every case of a Heavy Bolter, you can already substitute the weapon for pretty much any other heavy weapon. Making it so there's less reason to pay points to sub the weapon out doesn't really sit well with me, because if it becomes too much like the Scatterlaser, no one bothers ever taking more expensive upgrades, which actually creates a new balance issue.

The scatterlaser would still dominate at anti-MC and anti-tank.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ionusx wrote:
Heavy bolters I think would be taken if devestators got them for free. The devestator with the heavy bolter is an iconic visual of the devestator. It's what people think of when they see a devestator combat logo. And doing so just for them would help a lot in them being taken more.

However I feel that heavy bolter is a lot like the flamer weapons of the current situation in the game, the whole game around them is such a mess that there isn't a point. Their a weapon for trashing inferior infantry to marines but because grav exists there isn't a point to any of the other items. Prior to the days of grav you brought plasmas and meltas and Flamers and yes even heavy bolters because they were all in their own little corner for tackling problems. They were in perfect harmony a gun for every job. And now there's one gun that has effectively replaced three.

If you want to see heavy bolters and Flamers more you'd need to do a serious price restructuring not only on weapon upgrade but the units that carry them. Here's an example of where I'd go:

Bolter and bp remain free

All pistol upgrades drop to 5ppm

Your flamer and SB remain at 5 ppm

Combi weapons jump up 1ppm except grav which has jumped 5ppm to 15.

In the special weapons slots, melta gun remains unchanged, and the plasma gun drops to 13ppm however grav guns are now 20ppm

In the heavy slot:
Mm is unchanged
Heavy bolters are free for devestators other units pay 8ppm like scouts do but only scouts and stern guard can get hellfires
Plasma cannon drops to 12
Missiles are 15
Lascannon stays at 20
Grav cannons are 25ppm for no amp, if you want the amp that's an extra 5ppm (makin an amp devestator 44ppm).

From there we now move to unit costs:
Devestators, scouts, tacticals, even Angel veterans and command squads go unchanged for points.

Stern guard go up 2ppm in addition kraken bolts are going up 2ppm.

Centurions are going up by 25ppm and their grav cannons no longer come with free amps you pay 5ppm for an amp.

marine bikes lose the ability to take grav weapons period (omitting the pistols).

Basically we gut the ability to buy grav out of the biggest problem child's or we raise the price on models with grav guns or access to them. Make them a very costly weapon to wield and use so losing them really really hurts. This also is a big kick into the groin of bike armies that have grown like weeds over the past two editions and need to be culled back. and one can look at this as a buff to the land raider excelsior which basically went down 5 points as a result of these changes.

Still wouldn't use them. They are terrible weapons.

at 27ppm + 5 for the amp that makes a single gravestator cost more then a single terminator, heck with the costy jump on centurions cents alone are going up to cost almost as much as a single predator tank per model and the loss of bike grav combo means you have to go back to the drawing board on when to use them and on who

Still wouldn't tempt me to use heavy bolters. Without access to grav bikes, I'd probably just quit at that point. I'd have zero answers to 2+ MCs, even as feeble as regular grav guns are.

BA don't have much of a drawing board anymore and you just took the one we had and trashed it.

So no, making my list unplayable would not make me use heavy bolters.

How on earth are grav guns feeble against anything with a 2+? They wound on a 2+ and ignore armour. They are as good as you can get against them damage-wise.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
How on earth are grav guns feeble against anything with a 2+? They wound on a 2+ and ignore armour. They are as good as you can get against them damage-wise.

24" range and salvo 2/3. You aren't guaranteed a wound on 2+ Armour if you are moving (and don't have relentless) and you only get 1.6~ wounds if you stand still when you don't calculate in another save.

And how is that bad against something that anti-tank weapons struggle to wound?

Because it's still not nearly enough. And the utility from a single cast of perfect timing on a squad of grav cannons gets you so much further than casting it on grav guns. Without ignore cover, you are spitting into the wind vs MCs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
And how is that bad against something that anti-tank weapons struggle to wound?

There should be no units like this in the game to begin with.

Martel732 wrote:
Because it's still not nearly enough. And the utility from a single cast of perfect timing on a squad of grav cannons gets you so much further than casting it on grav guns. Without ignore cover, you are spitting into the wind vs MCs.

Well, I'd assume so, but that's like complaining plasma guns aren't as good as plasma cannons.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
And how is that bad against something that anti-tank weapons struggle to wound?

There should be no units like this in the game to begin with.

Out side of apoc, I agree.