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.

Would Grav still be good but less OP if instead of having AP2, it had AP - and part of it's special rule was that Armour saves taken against Grav wounds was at -2.

It would still wound vs Armour save and Immobilize AV on a 6, just as now, but it would not straight ignore Armour
A model with a 2+ armour, would need a 4+ to save a wound caused by Grav, 3+ needs 5+ and so on.

Is this a concise rule, or too many layers, a good fix or utterly pointless?
The goal is to balance Grav against Melta & Plasma making it still usefull, but not an auto-take over the other choices like it is now.
This might come with a slight points decrease for Grav Cannons
Thoughts?

-

Do this and give Riptides a 3+ and you have something going.

I won't disagree with that. Riptide should have 3+ armour basesd solely on the fact that every other Jet-pack suit is a 3+. Broadsides have a 2+ armour at the cost of NOT being Jet-pack.
It would be interesting if the Riptide could choose between being 2+, or 3+ with Jet-pack

But aside from the external balance of certain units, would this change to Grav keep it still viable yet give Melta & Plasma a reason to be taken as well?


-

I feel that Grav is fine at AP2, but the way it wounds should be different. It should wound base on the actual size of the target:

Infantry & Swarms: 6+
Bulky (Jump Infantry, Terminators, etc.): 5+
Very Bulky (Bikes, Ogryn, etc.): 4+
Monstrous Creatures: 3+
Gargantuan Creatures: 2+

In effect, this makes it be something very unique compared to the other weapons. It's very good (still) against big stuff, but very weak (but still serviceable) against small stuff.

That's an awful chart and makes it effectively useless against even regular Monstrous Creatures.

6+ for swarms
5+ for infantry
4+ for Bulky
3+ for Very Bulky
2+ for anything bigger

 Ashiraya wrote:
Do this and give Riptides a 3+ and you have something going.

And Dreadknights. Or increase both of their costs by a huge amount.

 Galef wrote:
Would Grav still be good but less OP if instead of having AP2, it had AP - and part of it's special rule was that Armour saves taken against Grav wounds was at -2.

It would still wound vs Armour save and Immobilize AV on a 6, just as now, but it would not straight ignore Armour
A model with a 2+ armour, would need a 4+ to save a wound caused by Grav, 3+ needs 5+ and so on.

Is this a concise rule, or too many layers, a good fix or utterly pointless?
The goal is to balance Grav against Melta & Plasma making it still usefull, but not an auto-take over the other choices like it is now.
This might come with a slight points decrease for Grav Cannons
Thoughts?

-

I honestly think it'd be cool to see Rend in 40k. As a universal rule. It'd be uncommon-but I think it'd be a nice addition.

So yes, I think that'd be cool.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
That's an awful chart and makes it effectively useless against even regular Monstrous Creatures.

6+ for swarms
5+ for infantry
4+ for Bulky
3+ for Very Bulky
2+ for anything bigger

How is that useless against Monstrous Creatures? Most, though not all, MC's are armour save 3+. This means this change would make them nearly exactly the same effectiveness against Monstrous Creatures. Besides, I think that Grav is broken anyways, so I'm all for weakening it (and it's fine to give it a points discount in doing so).

Wounding on Armour save is already unique and 40K has enough charts. The reason I am against Grav having AP is that AP is Armour PIERCING value. How do waves of blunt energy "peirce" anything. Weaken the armour, sure, but pierce it, no.

But if you want to wound vs unit type, than I'd base if off Bulky only
5+ against all normal units
4+ if Bulky
3+ if Very Bulky
2+ if Extremely Bulky

That keeps it simple, yet specializes it to large things

-

 Galef wrote:
Wounding on Armour save is already unique and 40K has enough charts. The reason I am against Grav having AP is that AP is Armour PIERCING value. How do waves of blunt energy "peirce" anything. Weaken the armour, sure, but pierce it, no.

But if you want to wound vs unit type, than I'd base if off Bulky only
5+ against all normal units
4+ if Bulky
3+ if Very Bulky
2+ if Extremely Bulky

That keeps it simple, yet specializes it to large things

-

Counter-argument, how does armor protect you from increased gravity?

Depends on the gravity. If your armour is really strong it will just weigh you down, but not actually be crushed.
But I can see the merits your counter-argument and overall, GW chose the simplest possible solution. But AP2 on something that often wounds on 2+/3+ and re-rolls to wound with lots of shots is a bit much.

Maybe Grav-amps are the real problem. Take those away and Grav-cannons suddenly aren't that effective.

-

 Galef wrote:
Depends on the gravity. If your armour is really strong it will just weigh you down, but not actually be crushed.

Can't believe I'm seeing the day I defend grav. I'd agree that your really strong armor is weighing you down, and I'd further say that is what the wound is. Keep in mind, reducing a model to 0 wounds doesn't necessarily mean it's dead, just that it's a casualty and can't fight any longer. Would a space marine really kill itself landing on terrain with a bike? Maybe, but it's more likely he just got some rocks kicked up and damaged the bike, or hit some unevenness and wiped out and messed up the frame or broke a component. The marine is fine, but he's out of action. Same for terminator armor; it's super heavy, and suddenly it's even heavier. That terminator isn't going anywhere the rest of the battle, but he's still alive in there and the armor may even be undamaged and usable again. I'll grant this explanation really only works for 1W models, but that's just the limitation of the game system.

Martel732 wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Do this and give Riptides a 3+ and you have something going.

And Dreadknights. Or increase both of their costs by a huge amount.

Dreadknights at least have to get very close to do their damage. Riptides can shoot you from a table away.

 Galef wrote:

Maybe Grav-amps are the real problem. Take those away and Grav-cannons suddenly aren't that effective.

-

We have a winner.

 Ashiraya wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

And Dreadknights. Or increase both of their costs by a huge amount.

Dreadknights at least have to get very close to do their damage. Riptides can shoot you from a table away.

DreadKnights aren't even in the same class as Riptides. Both cost around 220-225 pts when optimally decked out, yet the DK does NOT have FNP, has 1 less wound and no way to access a 3++
I would agree that DKs are just as deadly in CC as Riptides are at range, and I'd even go so far as to say the DKs are better at range than Riptides are at CC, but the shorter range at which the DK needs to be to do any kind of damage plus the ease at which it can be killed, easily makes the Riptide a better overall choice.

Back on topic though, I concede that Grav being AP2 makes sense, but Grav-amps need to go the way of the Squats.

-

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
That's an awful chart and makes it effectively useless against even regular Monstrous Creatures.

6+ for swarms
5+ for infantry
4+ for Bulky
3+ for Very Bulky
2+ for anything bigger

This is the direction I'd kind of like to see grav weapons go. It steps on plasma's toes less, is still better at killing MCs than melta, but isn't anywhere near as good at hurting small stuff as other weapons. The -2 to armor saves idea might not be a bad thing to mix with this. Sure, carapace armor should basically crumple the guy inside, but I could see something like terminator armor being designed with enough structural integrity to not crush its wearer when in areas of increased gravity.

I'd argue that this chart is not, in fact, all that unwieldy as you basically just start with a base to-wound (6+ in this case), and then add one for every degree of bulky. Are you bulky? +1 to the to-wound roll. Very bulky? +2. Bigger? +3. Although I think I'd go with Galef's chart where you start at 5+ for everything that isn't bulky, but that's mostly a nitpick.

Under this system, how about simply having grav amps count the target as being one size larger?

Any T6 2+ model should be very expensive, but the Riptide should be considerably more than a DK, I agree. FNP Riptide should be around 300 pts easy, if not more.

Wyldhunt wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
That's an awful chart and makes it effectively useless against even regular Monstrous Creatures.

6+ for swarms
5+ for infantry
4+ for Bulky
3+ for Very Bulky
2+ for anything bigger

This is the direction I'd kind of like to see grav weapons go. It steps on plasma's toes less, is still better at killing MCs than melta, but isn't anywhere near as good at hurting small stuff as other weapons. The -2 to armor saves idea might not be a bad thing to mix with this. Sure, carapace armor should basically crumple the guy inside, but I could see something like terminator armor being designed with enough structural integrity to not crush its wearer when in areas of increased gravity.

I'd argue that this chart is not, in fact, all that unwieldy as you basically just start with a base to-wound (6+ in this case), and then add one for every degree of bulky. Are you bulky? +1 to the to-wound roll. Very bulky? +2. Bigger? +3. Although I think I'd go with Galef's chart where you start at 5+ for everything that isn't bulky, but that's mostly a nitpick.

Under this system, how about simply having grav amps count the target as being one size larger?

And if the target is wounded on a 2+ you get the reroll.

Now it just strips HP on a 6 and I'm still taking them always but they're less bad.

Hey, lets make a topic about subtle, or maybe not so subtle changes to grav weapons to make them more in-line with game standard weapons.

RIPTIDES SUCK, YEAH SCREW RIPTIDES! OP undercostsed...

go make another riptides op thread to beat that dead horse.

Personally, Galef, i think your change goes a bit to far on grav, by allowing 2+ armor a 4+ save, it makes it lose its purpose, making it overwhelming versus armor 5+, which doesn't need anymore help beating down 5+ armor.

grav amps maybe could extend the range 3-6" instead of re-rolling wounds?

Riptides are of direct relevance here as they are one of the top justifications for grav being in the game. Along with the WK, DK and Stormsurge. Those models simply aren't vulnerable to regular imperial heavy weapons on the time scale of a 40K game.

Riptides are WHY we can't nerf grav weapons back towards standard weapons, because Riptides are functionally immune to said standard weapons.

I am not so sure that grav need a nerf. As is it is not even a flat upgrade on the bolter like a plasma gun is.

Martel732 wrote:
Riptides are of direct relevance here as they are one of the top justifications for grav being in the game. Along with the WK, DK and Stormsurge. Those models simply aren't vulnerable to regular imperial heavy weapons on the time scale of a 40K game.

Riptides are WHY we can't nerf grav weapons back towards standard weapons, because Riptides are functionally immune to said standard weapons.

Yes, because Plasma, Melta, Assault Cannons, Sniper Rifles, Sternguard SIA all do nothing to a Riptide. Silly us, thinking Riptides are vulnerable to more than just Grav.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Riptides are of direct relevance here as they are one of the top justifications for grav being in the game. Along with the WK, DK and Stormsurge. Those models simply aren't vulnerable to regular imperial heavy weapons on the time scale of a 40K game.

Riptides are WHY we can't nerf grav weapons back towards standard weapons, because Riptides are functionally immune to said standard weapons.

Yes, because Plasma, Melta, Assault Cannons, Sniper Rifles, Sternguard SIA all do nothing to a Riptide. Silly us, thinking Riptides are vulnerable to more than just Grav.

You ever try drowning a 3++ Stimtide with just the weapons you listed? Mathematically it takes a staggering amount.

Also Assault Cannons are terrible against Riptides LOL

Plasma takes 5*1.5*3*1.5*1.5 shots, or 50.625 to take him down. That's 25 Plasma Guns-not really feasible.

Melta takes 5*1.5*3*(6/5)*1.5 shots, or 40.5 shots to take him down. That's 40 Meltas-not really feasible.

Hellfire Rounds take 5*1.5*6*(6/5)*1.5 shots, or 81 shots to take him down. That's 40 Sternguard-actually not bad at all. It's more points than a Riptide, but it'll delete a Riptide a turn, and most other units too.

Assault Cannons and Snipers wound and save the same, and I outsourced that math. But it takes 202.5 shots from them on average. That's 202 Scouts-yeah, not really feasible.

Switching wholesale from AP over to save mods would make almost everything less OP.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Riptides are of direct relevance here as they are one of the top justifications for grav being in the game. Along with the WK, DK and Stormsurge. Those models simply aren't vulnerable to regular imperial heavy weapons on the time scale of a 40K game.

Riptides are WHY we can't nerf grav weapons back towards standard weapons, because Riptides are functionally immune to said standard weapons.

Yes, because Plasma, Melta, Assault Cannons, Sniper Rifles, Sternguard SIA all do nothing to a Riptide. Silly us, thinking Riptides are vulnerable to more than just Grav.

That's actually not too far off the truth. Which is the exact problem. DKs are similar, but lack FNP and 3++, which makes them easier.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Plasma takes 5*1.5*3*1.5*1.5 shots, or 50.625 to take him down. That's 25 Plasma Guns-not really feasible.

Melta takes 5*1.5*3*(6/5)*1.5 shots, or 40.5 shots to take him down. That's 40 Meltas-not really feasible.

Hellfire Rounds take 5*1.5*6*(6/5)*1.5 shots, or 81 shots to take him down. That's 40 Sternguard-actually not bad at all. It's more points than a Riptide, but it'll delete a Riptide a turn, and most other units too.

Assault Cannons and Snipers wound and save the same, and I outsourced that math. But it takes 202.5 shots from them on average. That's 202 Scouts-yeah, not really feasible.

No list will have 40 sternguard survive to double tap range. Out of 40, you'd be lucky to get to shoot with 25 because of interceptor.

That means Riptides are the problem, not Grav. Saying something broken can't be fixed because you need that broken thing to help control another broken thing just proliferates the problem - it doesn't solve it. Fixing grav is fine, AND fixing Riptides would be fine.

 Yarium wrote:
Fixing grav is fine, AND fixing Riptides would be fine.

I think the simplest fix for both (without bumping points cost, games are inflated enough) would be to drop Grav-Amps out of existence and make Riptides have 3+ armour.

Although bumping the cost of EWO for Riptides would also really help. It's a 5pt upgrade that drastically improves the manner at which the Riptide defends itself.
Similar to how Stims cost differently for Riptides, so should EWO. I'm thinking 20pts at least

Grav is the Marine answer to Riptides & WKs. I get that, but it shouldn't be their answer to everything else too. Dropping Grav-Amps would make Meltas/Multi-meltas more appealing since Grav cannons would no longer get to re-roll against Armour.
Grav would still be better than Plasma sadly....unless we find a way to not have Grav be AP2. Oh yeah, AP- & Armour saves -2 since the armour is weakened by the extra gravity.

I love bringing it full circle

-

 Yarium wrote:
That means Riptides are the problem, not Grav. Saying something broken can't be fixed because you need that broken thing to help control another broken thing just proliferates the problem - it doesn't solve it. Fixing grav is fine, AND fixing Riptides would be fine.

Grav is the product of swallow-the-spider-to-catch-the-fly balancing, yes. Given that Riptides and Dreadknights are dramatically more of a problem that Wraithlords, Daemon Princes, and Carnifexes I will hazard a guess and say that the key points of divergence from the MC norm are 2+ armour, Inv. and high mobility put together on a cheap platform with highly-effective ranged weapons.

Quick-and-dirty suggestions: Riptide loses jump/shoot/jump, gets pushed to somewhere between 220-250pts starting, and can't use stimulant injectors. I can't give quick-and-dirty fixes for the Dreadknight since it's in a book with such terrible internal balance, any nerf probably has to come with a more comprehensive overhaul (though pushing it to at least 150pts starting and tearing up the concept of giving it a shunt move would be a great start).

(Addendum: the 1d4chan Angry Initiative's alpha draft made the Riptide a 12-11-11 5-HP Walker with a 6++ and dropped the Dreadknight to T5, both interesting ideas even if not good final answers)

As far as grav if giant armoured MCs and absurdly-cheap GCs (*cough*Wraithknights*coughcough*) didn't exist it would be completely unnecessary in its current form and could be replaced with Forge World/2e grav that actually adds another thing to do with special weapons instead of partially/wholly overriding melta and plasma with a more efficient tool for the same tasks.

Grav Cannons are a "Heavy" and fire a number of shots equal to the unit's majority toughness minus 2; versus Vehicles, Hull Points minus 1. So versus Space Marines, they fire twice. Versus Wraithknights, 6 times. Versus Rhinos, 2 times. Versus Land Raiders, 3 times. Etc.

This makes them more the specialized "Monster-Killer" rather than the "Delete armies" option.