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.

 Blacksails wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:


To say they worked for what they did, even in 5th, is SUPER generous. Then you just wanting to get rid of special rules for all small arms (which only exists for Shuriken Weapons at the moment) is a bit over the top.

They worked as well as nearly every other basic infantry weapon. Any problem the bolter had was experienced by most other basic weapons, with the main exceptions being Pulse Rifles with S5 (pen AV10, glance AV11) and Gauss (auto-glance on 6s).

I don't think removing all the special rules (shuriken, gauss) for basic weapons is over the top at all. As far as I'm concerned, the basic weapons should be basic. By removing the bonuses of other basic weapons, the underwhelming ones are buffed in comparison, and then you differentiate the weapons on S, AP, range, and type.

I think there's a lot of hyperbole about how terrible bolters are and it makes discussions about them difficult. If Shuriken and Gauss were toned down, and bolters had situational AP-1, they'd be on par with every other basic weapon or better. The issue still remains about the general uselessness of all those weapons compared to a handful of heavy and special weapons. Which is why I place a large portion of the blame on scale creep. If there were less models on the table, and those models were generally smaller, infantry fire would matter more.

Of course bolters are gonna look terrible when you're facing an army of giant stomping mechanical death knights.

I'll admit, I don't really know what Gauss weapons do this edition, but aren't Necrons basically balanced around having them? As far as I was aware they don't have any special weapons on their basic infantry, and in exchange their basic infantry weapon is supposed to do some heavy lifting for the army.



I'm not sure if a straight -1ap is a good idea for the bolter, just because it goes back to the old way of the basic infantry weapon of the most common faction completely ignores the armor of the base units of several armies - namely most Orks and the lower Tyranid forms. It would also step on the toes of Primaris Marines, who currently wield better bolters but have less flexibility than Tac Marines. I could see something situational like "on a wound roll of 6, a bolter round gains -1ap". Makes bolters slightly more useful, without outright telling team t-shirt to go home.

Maybe with bolters they could take a page from the ffg rpgs and institute a reroll to wound rolls of 1 on a bolter - that way, while guardsmen and nids and orks still get their saves, the weapon itself is more likely to wound, with the benefit mostly being against low toughness enemies, which fluffwise, a bolter round could splatter.


I still thing Infantry Squads are fine where they are at right now. Vacuum scenarios that allow for perfect positioning by both forces and ignores morale losses favor the Infantry Squad, but once you factor in morale and the fact that the perfect scenario doesn't show up all the time, the actual damage output of the squad drops. Prior to the Commissar nerf I'd have agreed that Infantry should be 5ppm, since before the nerf, you could lose 8 guys, blam the sergeant, and keep a special weapon on the field still. With that synergy gone though, morale becomes a thing for them again.

kurhanik wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:


To say they worked for what they did, even in 5th, is SUPER generous. Then you just wanting to get rid of special rules for all small arms (which only exists for Shuriken Weapons at the moment) is a bit over the top.

They worked as well as nearly every other basic infantry weapon. Any problem the bolter had was experienced by most other basic weapons, with the main exceptions being Pulse Rifles with S5 (pen AV10, glance AV11) and Gauss (auto-glance on 6s).

I don't think removing all the special rules (shuriken, gauss) for basic weapons is over the top at all. As far as I'm concerned, the basic weapons should be basic. By removing the bonuses of other basic weapons, the underwhelming ones are buffed in comparison, and then you differentiate the weapons on S, AP, range, and type.

I think there's a lot of hyperbole about how terrible bolters are and it makes discussions about them difficult. If Shuriken and Gauss were toned down, and bolters had situational AP-1, they'd be on par with every other basic weapon or better. The issue still remains about the general uselessness of all those weapons compared to a handful of heavy and special weapons. Which is why I place a large portion of the blame on scale creep. If there were less models on the table, and those models were generally smaller, infantry fire would matter more.

Of course bolters are gonna look terrible when you're facing an army of giant stomping mechanical death knights.

I'll admit, I don't really know what Gauss weapons do this edition, but aren't Necrons basically balanced around having them? As far as I was aware they don't have any special weapons on their basic infantry, and in exchange their basic infantry weapon is supposed to do some heavy lifting for the army.



I'm not sure if a straight -1ap is a good idea for the bolter, just because it goes back to the old way of the basic infantry weapon of the most common faction completely ignores the armor of the base units of several armies - namely most Orks and the lower Tyranid forms. It would also step on the toes of Primaris Marines, who currently wield better bolters but have less flexibility than Tac Marines. I could see something situational like "on a wound roll of 6, a bolter round gains -1ap". Makes bolters slightly more useful, without outright telling team t-shirt to go home.

Maybe with bolters they could take a page from the ffg rpgs and institute a reroll to wound rolls of 1 on a bolter - that way, while guardsmen and nids and orks still get their saves, the weapon itself is more likely to wound, with the benefit mostly being against low toughness enemies, which fluffwise, a bolter round could splatter.


I still thing Infantry Squads are fine where they are at right now. Vacuum scenarios that allow for perfect positioning by both forces and ignores morale losses favor the Infantry Squad, but once you factor in morale and the fact that the perfect scenario doesn't show up all the time, the actual damage output of the squad drops. Prior to the Commissar nerf I'd have agreed that Infantry should be 5ppm, since before the nerf, you could lose 8 guys, blam the sergeant, and keep a special weapon on the field still. With that synergy gone though, morale becomes a thing for them again.

Gauss just gets an additional AP basically. Flayers have the -1, Blasters -2, Cannons -3, Heavy Cannons -4 etc.
BlackSails also did forget Necrons being balanced around that fact, which honestly doesn't work out terribly well. If you ever ran the math on it, Gauss really only worked as a substitute for actual weapons when the target was 150+ points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also the matter that Bolters weren't good even against their ideal targets in previous editions...

So this thread has served its purpose and is now just bitching and wishlisting about boltguns?

 Melissia wrote:
So this thread has served its purpose and is now just bitching and wishlisting about boltguns?

Every thread lately just turns into the same few marine players moaning about how they have the worst codex ever in the history of wargaming.

Are Boltguns 'R Bad the new Scatbike 'R OP?

Bharring wrote:
Are Boltguns 'R Bad the new Scatbike 'R OP?

Naw, people have been claiming boltguns are bad for a while, even back in 6th/7th era. They just happened to be saying Boltguns were bad because they weren't often fighting against many GEQ/Orks/Gants, because people didn't play them often, because Boltguns ignored their armor.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Are Boltguns 'R Bad the new Scatbike 'R OP?

Naw, people have been claiming boltguns are bad for a while, even back in 6th/7th era. They just happened to be saying Boltguns were bad because they weren't often fighting against many GEQ/Orks/Gants, because people didn't play them often, because Boltguns ignored their armor.

That wasn't the reason, because many marine lists had like 8 boltguns in them.

Martel732 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Are Boltguns 'R Bad the new Scatbike 'R OP?

Naw, people have been claiming boltguns are bad for a while, even back in 6th/7th era. They just happened to be saying Boltguns were bad because they weren't often fighting against many GEQ/Orks/Gants, because people didn't play them often, because Boltguns ignored their armor.

That wasn't the reason, because many marine lists had like 8 boltguns in them.

Mine didn't, so there. #RealSpaceMarineArmy

Clearly, Gladius, Skyhammer, ObSec Spam (pre-Codex in 7th), and Scout Spam never happened in 7th?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sorry, got sucked back into the 'Boltgun' debate by an inaccurate comment.

Why are boltguns bad again? I don't have a problem with mine, though I almost always pay the 2 points to have Storm Bolters.

I suspect it's less that boltguns are actually bad, more that the genetically engineered killing machines aren't being as superior to unaugmented soldiers and able to swat aside dozens of enemies per blow like Sauron in the opening scene of Fellowship of the RIng as the fluff makes it sound.




Anyway, back to FRF-SRF: The orders will never be able to be balanced with each other, because CQC just isn't something the IG does. I do think FRF is on the strong side, but I don't think it's by any means a factor in being overpowered.

I think it's because they kill 33.3% less guardsmen* than they used to.

* Note that guardsmen never left cover previously so it's effectively 16.6% MORE guardsmen. But now power armor is worth less so they need** something to compensate.

** Want

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
Anyway, back to FRF-SRF: The orders will never be able to be balanced with each other, because CQC just isn't something the IG does. I do think FRF is on the strong side, but I don't think it's by any means a factor in being overpowered.

Hey now, I'm no stranger to fixed bayonets!

You are correct, though - skill aside, there isn't much "driving" guard to fight in hand to hand. Maybe if cover was tougher, you'd see more arty -> flame -> bayonet, but still probably more of that first one.

M.

 Infantryman wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
Anyway, back to FRF-SRF: The orders will never be able to be balanced with each other, because CQC just isn't something the IG does. I do think FRF is on the strong side, but I don't think it's by any means a factor in being overpowered.

Hey now, I'm no stranger to fixed bayonets!

You are correct, though - skill aside, there isn't much "driving" guard to fight in hand to hand. Maybe if cover was tougher, you'd see more arty -> flame -> bayonet, but still probably more of that first one.

M.

There doesn't need to be anything driving the guard to fight hand to hand. All things considered, the Imperial Guard possess the raw firepower it does because it can't very effectively employ gimmicks that other forces can. At least, in theory, but scions.

Are scions really that good? I decided against them for thematic reasons, but does that pointlessly cripple my army for it?

M.

They have been nerfed two times (By limiting Command Squads and making Plasmaguns in bs+3 models more expensive). But Deepstriking Scion Plasma-Spam (Or the cheaper Elysian variety) is still very hot and doing his work in tournaments.

 Infantryman wrote:
Are scions really that good? I decided against them for thematic reasons, but does that pointlessly cripple my army for it?

M.

You don't cripple your army for not using them, but by holy crap they're easily one of the best troop choices in the game. They even had potential last edition with just a couple of minor fixes, but I could be in the minority on that.

Hm, if they're still viable when the next escalation tournament starts in my area (June 2018) I will keep them in mind.

M.

Bharring wrote:
Clearly, Gladius, Skyhammer, ObSec Spam (pre-Codex in 7th), and Scout Spam never happened in 7th?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sorry, got sucked back into the 'Boltgun' debate by an inaccurate comment.

It's not an inaccurate statement going back through several editions. Many, many marine lists INTENTIONALLY limited the amount of boltguns in the list. So who's pretending things never happened? Gladius wasn't about boltguns anyway, it was about scouting grav cannons hiding inside free obj sec rhinos.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Are Boltguns 'R Bad the new Scatbike 'R OP?

Naw, people have been claiming boltguns are bad for a while, even back in 6th/7th era. They just happened to be saying Boltguns were bad because they weren't often fighting against many GEQ/Orks/Gants, because people didn't play them often, because Boltguns ignored their armor.

That wasn't the reason, because many marine lists had like 8 boltguns in them.

Mine didn't, so there. #RealSpaceMarineArmy

That was your choice to be suboptimal.

Bharring wrote:
Clearly, Gladius, Skyhammer, ObSec Spam (pre-Codex in 7th), and Scout Spam never happened in 7th?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sorry, got sucked back into the 'Boltgun' debate by an inaccurate comment.

And here's what every thread on Dakka Dakka seems to get drawn into recently - 8th is better than 7th. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 Infantryman wrote:
Are scions really that good? I decided against them for thematic reasons, but does that pointlessly cripple my army for it?

M.

Yes, very. And in this case, Take Aim is actually the order to go for. FRF-SRF on them is also scary good.

They're a troops choice with natural Deep Strike and 2 Special Weapons per squad. They're only 10 points base [9+1], and their Hot-Shot lasguns are pretty decent against medium infantry.

They've been nerfed twice, and they're still one of the more broken things about this edition. They're offset by the need to have some ground presence and no real access to heavy antitank, but it's not like the Imperial Guard is particularly lacking in that department.



The only real reason not to have them is because you don't have enough of them. They should never have been troops choices and should be considerably more expensive. The Deep Strike ability is very powerful, and even more powerful on short-ranged units than it is on assault units.

Sounds like I once the plastidust settles on my current projects, I should pick some up and include them as some kind of Spetnaz reference

Wonder if I can dredge up enough of those old style Stormtroopers...

M.

No FRFSRF, is not overpowered in any sense. Nuff said!

SYKOJAK wrote:
No FRFSRF, is not overpowered in any sense. Nuff said!

There's a lot more to it than that. It's quite likely true that it IS overpowered, especially since its targets are undercosted.

Indeed, FRFSRF do not require tweak of any kind.

It's quite fine as it is, and it's only one order from a mass of them that are as good if not better.

Martel732 wrote:

SYKOJAK wrote:
No FRFSRF, is not overpowered in any sense. Nuff said!

There's a lot more to it than that. It's quite likely true that it IS overpowered, especially since its targets are undercosted.

You need to give up on this nonsense.

Until every Guard squad can benefit from FRFSRF no matter their weapons, your argument is garbage.

Martel732 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Are Boltguns 'R Bad the new Scatbike 'R OP?

Naw, people have been claiming boltguns are bad for a while, even back in 6th/7th era. They just happened to be saying Boltguns were bad because they weren't often fighting against many GEQ/Orks/Gants, because people didn't play them often, because Boltguns ignored their armor.

That wasn't the reason, because many marine lists had like 8 boltguns in them.

Mine didn't, so there. #RealSpaceMarineArmy

That was your choice to be suboptimal.

Are you calling Gladius sub optimal?

6 Tac squads with Grav-Cannon, Combi-Grav, + 2 10 man Devastator Squads w/4 Heavies. Double demi-co rocking 36 bolters minimum for me, not counting Storm Bolters on the obvious Rhinos/Pods.

Gladius was the only acceptable to exception to the boltgun minimization rule. The boltguns in that equation are quite literally along for the ride.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Are Boltguns 'R Bad the new Scatbike 'R OP?

Naw, people have been claiming boltguns are bad for a while, even back in 6th/7th era. They just happened to be saying Boltguns were bad because they weren't often fighting against many GEQ/Orks/Gants, because people didn't play them often, because Boltguns ignored their armor.

That wasn't the reason, because many marine lists had like 8 boltguns in them.

Mine didn't, so there. #RealSpaceMarineArmy

That was your choice to be suboptimal.

Are you calling Gladius sub optimal?

6 Tac squads with Grav-Cannon, Combi-Grav, + 2 10 man Devastator Squads w/4 Heavies. Double demi-co rocking 36 bolters minimum for me, not counting Storm Bolters on the obvious Rhinos/Pods.

gladius was a horde army. It's damage was actually quite lite compared to tau or eldar. It was auto lose vs daemons too. No psychic defense and 2++ deathstars and flyers just rolled it over. Pretty sad it doesn't automatically win with typically about a 400+ point advantage.

They could outlast 2++ deathstars. Literally.

 Xenomancers wrote:
gladius was a horde army. It's damage was actually quite lite compared to tau or eldar. It was auto lose vs daemons too. No psychic defense and 2++ deathstars and flyers just rolled it over. Pretty sad it doesn't automatically win with typically about a 400+ point advantage.

I can only assume you deliberately make completely unjustified, patently false, and hyperbolic claims, and that its not just from not grasping the simple concepts and data.

Your lack of understanding and error riddled analysis is staggering. Its as though you ignore every bit of fact and logic and spew the opposite as the real truth.