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.

The niche for Melta should be that it's the best for doing lots of wounds to well armored targets that are close up.

Plas having D:2 and the same strength while having twice the shots or twice the range means that it's going to outshine Melta.

If you bring Plas back down to what it was before 8E, it becomes inefficient at killing vehicles. Melta is more likely to wound per shot, ignores more armor, and does more than triple the damage to multi-wound models than Plas per shot. But has half or fewer the shots, and much lower maximum range. That sounds like 2 different niches to me. So Plas to kill Tacs and elite infantry, Melta to kill the really big stuff.

Invulns might need punishment, but shouldn't it be tools that aren't designed to punish relying on armor saves?

 SHUPPET wrote:

 vaklor4 wrote:
I think the flamers are fine at d6, but the range should be increased. Maybe to 12"? That way it's an actual anti-charge gun, instead of just being...Well, useless..

Melta just needs a price reduction, BADLY. Like, down to 13 or something.

Plasma would be pretty good at strength 6, 7 on overcharge, but keeping its -3 and 1/2 damage. It should be anti-elite, but NOT anti-tank, like it so often is.

These are the best suggestions on all accounts imo. Nailed it.

I like these too. Fair changes to make all options worth considering.

I think Plasma needs the D2, otherwise it's just too ineffective against so many targets (not just vehicles but infantry with multiple wounds, monsters etc.)

 vaklor4 wrote:
I think the flamers are fine at d6, but the range should be increased. Maybe to 12"? That way it's an actual anti-charge gun, instead of just being...Well, useless..

Melta just needs a price reduction, BADLY. Like, down to 13 or something.

Plasma would be pretty good at strength 6, 7 on overcharge, but keeping its -3 and 1/2 damage. It should be anti-elite, but NOT anti-tank, like it so often is.

These seem like by far the best changes.

However, there is something I feel needs to be said again. The problem with meltaguns has nothing to do with plasmaguns and everything to do with Lascannons. Basically, we now have weapons that can do the same damage as a meltagun from 48" away.

If you want meltas to retain their role, then they need to be much more reliable in terms of damage. Something like '3 damage at long range, 6 damage at half-range' might work. As it stands, even at half-range, they're barely better than a Lascannon firing at 8x the distance.

And that's before we even get into the problem that plasmaguns can deep-strike into optimal range but meltas can't.

Actually, another alternative - what if, instead of the current rule, meltaguns rerolled damage against vehicles regardless of range? Now you've got an anti-vehicle weapon that can be deep-struck into optimal range.

I really liked Vaklor's suggestions, but here's where I'm not sure:

-Flamer still feels weak. I wish it did more.
-With Plas doing 2 wound, and getting twice the shots at 12" range, Melta will still average fewer wounds provided they both wound.

The lower strength and Gets Hot does give the Melta some room, but it looks to me like it'd still be crowded out.

Melta gun is the new plasma pistol - ridiculously expensive for extremely situational situations.

 skchsan wrote:
Melta gun is the new plasma pistol - ridiculously expensive for extremely situational situations.

Plasma pistol's aren't very expensive in the Guard codex at least. 5 points for putting one on an officer seems fair considering it is basically half of a plasma rifle, and those cost 13 points to put on a BS 3 model.

Plasma is obnoxious and needs fixed
Strength needs to be returned to S6 for safe and S7 Overcharged.
If it keeps the D2 it needs to overheat on 1or 2's that would really make people have to think before spaming that overcharge because the model costs nothing compaired to the gun.
Melta and Plasma shouldn't be equal given the difference in range and points cost. Melta should be better.

Flamers need to be 2d6 upto the number of models in the target unit.

Heavy flamers should get 2d6 upto the number of models in the target unit and range pushed out to 10 inch.

Why not make Flame (or other "aoe") weapons have a "splash" factor? Each model removed as a casualty lets you make a follow-up to-wound/to-save sequence or so.

Or admit that maybe slow-play exists independently of whether a game uses aoe weapons...

Ice_can wrote:
Plasma is obnoxious and needs fixed
Strength needs to be returned to S6 for safe and S7 Overcharged.
If it keeps the D2 it needs to overheat on 1or 2's that would really make people have to think before spaming that overcharge because the model costs nothing compaired to the gun.

Also, you have to perform a handstand every time you fire, and if you fall over then the entire unit dies. Plus, for each plasmagun you have in your list, your opponent can take any model from his case and add it to his army for free at the beginning of the game.

That about make plasmaguns fair?

MagicJuggler wrote:Why not make Flame (or other "aoe") weapons have a "splash" factor? Each model removed as a casualty lets you make a follow-up to-wound/to-save sequence or so.

Or admit that maybe slow-play exists independently of whether a game uses aoe weapons...

I like this, there are plenty of similar situations where extra hits are scored for an action so it's not too unique while doing what it's supposed to do. I had wanted flamers to be able to spread to nearby units but this is much more streamlined.

Haravikk wrote:While I agree with the intent behind this thread, I think the proposed fixes are more complex than they need to be.

Flamer and Melta weapons just need to become cheaper; they're both too expensive for what they can do. There's nothing otherwise wrong with their basic stat lines right now, and the big advantage of having the separate points list is that you can more easily rebalance things, it's basically what it's for.

Meanwhile Overwatch should gain the addition that weapons fired during Overwatch are fired at either the charge distance, or the weapon's maximum range, whichever is shorter. This means you can always fire all your weapons, but you will only get half-range bonuses if the enemy charged within that range; i.e- the assumption is that you fire at the first available opportunity before readying melee weapons. Stratagems or abilities can then be used to maximise fire for more disciplined forces.

The overwatch change makes sense and would help other weapons like 6" pistols as well. I don't see why everyone dislikes the better of 2d6 melta rule, but it is a bit too challenging to use on basic meltaguns. I agree that if GW isn't going to mess with profiles some points changes are in order.

 vipoid wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
Plasma is obnoxious and needs fixed
Strength needs to be returned to S6 for safe and S7 Overcharged.
If it keeps the D2 it needs to overheat on 1or 2's that would really make people have to think before spaming that overcharge because the model costs nothing compaired to the gun.

Also, you have to perform a handstand every time you fire, and if you fall over then the entire unit dies. Plus, for each plasmagun you have in your list, your opponent can take any model from his case and add it to his army for free at the beginning of the game.

That about make plasmaguns fair?

If reroll ones didnt exsist in spades, so unless you have a -1 or more to hit modifier the enemy have a 1in 36 chance of overheating with plasma, my suggestions wouldn't be as extreme.
Plasma is cheaper and better thats too much and needs significant changes to make it inline with its points cost.

I don't subscribe to the race to the bottom theory that some propose.

Imo, storm bolters should/are the cheapest upgrades then flamers, grav(it's basically a straight upgrade from a bolt gun), melta then plasma.

Melta just needs to be cheaper or maybe 2 shots to justify the cost.

Flamers need to at minimum ignore cover, then maybe 6 hits against something in cover

Grav is fine-is, I just don't like how swing it is when you actually shoot something with a 3+. Maybe change it to assault 2

Plasma, with it being the most expensive (not necessarily any more expensive) I think people I think people would be more inclined to grab a gravgun or melta instead

Does Grav have a role that plas doesn't do better?

Plasma overheat is a bit of a joke and counter intuitive. I'd much rather see it be 1MW for each roll of 1 before rerolls and modifiers. That way 2W models and characters aren't overpriced for blowing themselves up. Depending on the wording it might not even hurt rerolls (2 rerolled to 1 shouldn't blow up in your face). Couple that with a reduction in str and it generalist nature is reduced enough to get off of meltas toes.

Shas'O'Ceris wrote:
Does Grav have a role that plas doesn't do better?

Plasma overheat is a bit of a joke and counter intuitive. I'd much rather see it be 1MW for each roll of 1 before rerolls and modifiers. That way 2W models and characters aren't overpriced for blowing themselves up. Depending on the wording it might not even hurt rerolls (2 rerolled to 1 shouldn't blow up in your face). Couple that with a reduction in str and it generalist nature is reduced enough to get off of meltas toes.

It's partly the issue of the weapon profile and price. Make it Assault 2 and 13 points, and suddenly it makes a bit more sense.

Shas'O'Ceris wrote:
Does Grav have a role that plas doesn't do better?

Let's go through it!

Shooting at marines seems fine. Plasmas better

Shooting light vehicles is alright (T5). Plasmas better

Shooting most transports? I guess? Plasmas better anyway

So no I don't see a situation where I'd rather take Grav over plasma. Paying more for a more rigid weapon is not ideal

Shas'O'Ceris wrote:
Plasma overheat is a bit of a joke and counter intuitive. I'd much rather see it be 1MW for each roll of 1 before rerolls and modifiers.

That would be even more unintuitive, as it would basically ignore the entire point of a reroll mechainc.


What if plasma overheated on a roll of 6+?

 vipoid wrote:

Shas'O'Ceris wrote:
Plasma overheat is a bit of a joke and counter intuitive. I'd much rather see it be 1MW for each roll of 1 before rerolls and modifiers.

That would be even more unintuitive, as it would basically ignore the entire point of a reroll mechainc.


What if plasma overheated on a roll of 6+?

Not that I would be opposed as I don't run a -1 to hit army but vrs Alitoc overcharge all the plasma as the highest I can roll is a 4+

I get the idea but with the to hit mechanics of 8th edition it would have some odd interactions. Plasma just staight needs its ability brough back to match its points cost.

The abundance of rerolls and to hit modifiers just weren't thought through very well for 8th edition.

Without them, it's okay that plasma is about as good as melta, because a 1/6 chance to lose the shooter is pretty risky and seems fair. I could see being able to spend CP to reroll a failed shot, but just having a captain around is too good.

Flamers ability to be good overwatch seems to be overrated because of how frequently the charging unit is out of range, and when you ignore that aspect of flamers, they are worse than storm bolters. So they either need a price drop or damage buff, or both.

I don't know why they got rid of salvo weapons, but current grav is actually better than normal Plasma against high armor multi wound models. Again it's just the ability to reroll or modify hits that make OC plasma better than grav. I agree that assault 2 would suit it better.

My only issue with current melta (Las as well) is that 1d6 damage is too random. I'd be okay with both of those weapons having a "to wound rolls of 1, 2, or 3 count as 3 damage" rule. This only ups their average damage from 3.5 to 4, but gets rid of those annoying 1s and 2s, especially the 1s rolled against things with only 2 wounds that make plasma once again more reliable than melta.

So in the end I think that the biggest relevant change to fix these weapons would be a change to the space marine auras.

Yet another idea for Meltas - what if they did 2d3 damage at full range, and d3+3 damage at half-range?

It's not that plasma's too strong it, most of the other options are too weak.

My thoughts:
Flamers: Are fine except they are overpriced compared to Storm Bolters. Ignores Cover would be nice, but not critical to balancing
Melta: Need to do it's job better. I'd go with "Within 1/2 Range gain, Damage rolls of less than 3 do 3 Damage."
Plasma: Needs to come down a notch. S 6 normal. S7 D2 MW on Attack roll of 1 when overloaded.

Flamers need 4" more range. Even if the rules only specifically let them do it on overwatch.

 SHUPPET wrote:
Flamers need 4" more range. Even if the rules only specifically let them do it on overwatch.

A lot of people bring up Overwatch, but surely the fact that flamers can be denied the ability to fire is a failing of Overwatch, rather than flamers? Overwatch really needs to be modified to allow a weapon to fire at either its maximum range, or the enemy charge distance, whichever is shorter, so that weapons can always fire.

Of course it would need to be balanced by fixing Fall Back, which is another major complaint of this edition; make Fall Back D6", with unengaged enemies getting a D6" consolidate (that counts as having charged if you get within 1", but doesn't trigger Overwatch) and you've largely fixed this edition, barring Codex-specific fixes at least.

Why does Overwatch need to always be able to hit? having the choice between making a longer, riskier charge to avoid certain weapon, vs taking more damage for better chances to get stuck in is a nice bit of tactical choice that this game is sorely lacking in.

Since Overwatch was first implemented it's specifically been a role Flamers excelled at. Now they can't reach the range to actually do it. Being that they are lacking as a weapon, they could at least let them reliably do their role, that they now only sometimes get to do. It's really awkward play if you are moving your models AWAY from your enemy to charge from outside the range of their 8" anti-assault guns.


And yeah it could be fixed by changing the Overwatch rule slightly, but I think the game having weapons to short to overwatch is fine, I just don't think that should be the case with Flamers, and similar weapons either honestly.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
Why does Overwatch need to always be able to hit? having the choice between making a longer, riskier charge to avoid certain weapon, vs taking more damage for better chances to get stuck in is a nice bit of tactical choice that this game is sorely lacking in.

Because the squad flame trooper not shooting his flamethrower at the charging horde of xenos because they were too far away when they started the charge is stupid. The flamer is the only weapon that I know if this edition that has this issue.

Additionally, mortars and artillery pieces being able to fire overwatch is equally stupid.

w1zard wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
Melta gun is the new plasma pistol - ridiculously expensive for extremely situational situations.

Plasma pistol's aren't very expensive in the Guard codex at least. 5 points for putting one on an officer seems fair considering it is basically half of a plasma rifle, and those cost 13 points to put on a BS 3 model.

See, this irritates me. For plasma, you pay for the gun. Why do guard get plasma pistols at 5 points, and marines get them for 7. Why do marines get plasma rifles for 13, when stormtroopers get them for like, what, 9?

This should be made consistent as well.

Otherwise, best options I've seen for these weapons are..

Flamers -2 points, 2d6 shots take the highest, ignores cover
Melta -4 points, +1 to wound at half range, change damage to 2d3 damage
Plasma Str 6/7, AP-3, d1/2 (still overheat on overcharge as normal)

 iGuy91 wrote:

See, this irritates me. For plasma, you pay for the gun. Why do guard get plasma pistols at 5 points, and marines get them for 7. Why do marines get plasma rifles for 13, when stormtroopers get them for like, what, 9?

Plasma rifles in the guard dex are 13 points for BS 3 units.

You have to take into account the platform you are buying the weapon for. T4 and 3+ is a better than T3 and 5+. Sure weapons have the same damage output, but because of their durability they last longer so they need to be more expensive.

Having flat costs for weapons was tried in the guard dex and it benefited the elite units so much they were forced to change it.

The problem is, marines pay too much for their durability. Too much of the points they are spending are going towards this "durability" that they end up lacking in damage output.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
Why does Overwatch need to always be able to hit? having the choice between making a longer, riskier charge to avoid certain weapon, vs taking more damage for better chances to get stuck in is a nice bit of tactical choice that this game is sorely lacking in.

Deep striking asaulters will be charging from 10" away without giving you any opportunity to shoot at them. This is the perfect chance for flamers to do something useful except they don't get to fire overwatch in this circumstance.

From the 40k Rules Blooper Reel:

Anti-Air Flamethrowers: Flamethrowers in 8th edition no longer use an AoE "teardrop" template, but instead inflict a random number of automatic hits on a unit. For example, a Hellhound's Inferno Cannon inflicts D6 automatic hits. Due to these changes, regular flamers are less important as a crowd control weapon, and more as an anti-hitmod (and anti-aircraft) weapon; this is especially true of weapons that have a multi-damage value like the aforementioned Inferno Cannon. Where it gets silly though is how Flamers interact with "ambush/deepstrike" abilities. See, regular flamers have an effective range of 8 inches, but most "strike from Reserve" powers require you to set up more than 9 inches away. This means that flamers are useless when you appear from Reserves, but it also means they're useless for defending against units Charging from Reserves, since the flamers are out of range and thus unable to actually lay down a Wall of Death like in 6th-7th Edition, or interrupt movement like in 2nd Edition.