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.

Not Online!!! wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
I'm trying to follow the logic here as to why have people become so looked in on a stormbolter vrs a big shoota as a comparison it's not even close to having the same role.

It's an Assualt Heavy Bolter,
Guard pay 8 points on a heavy weapon on BS4+
Orks pay 5 points on an assualt weapon on BS5+
Guard pay 8 points for a heavy bolter move and hit on 5+
Orks pay 5 points for a big shoota move and hit on 5+
Guard advance and can't shoot
Orks Advance and hit on 6's

That single Ap-1 cost 3 points

That doesn't make a big shoota look super over costed?

issue is, the big shota looks not overcosted compared to a Heavy bolter because the heavy bolter is overcosted aswell.

Also application, again. the Big shoota is more like a souped up heavy stubber, which at 2 pts is actually a decent gun, personally don't belive +1 S is worth 3pts more.

Marine's pay 10 points per heavy bolter that is fun.

Ok a heavy bolter is overcosted but by how much then?
Is a heacy bolter a 6 point or 7 point weapon or 5? You could then argue that a big shoot should be 1 or 2 points less but making it 2pts like some are calling for is a gw level overcorrection

CSM do too pay 10 pts / HB.
And how often do you see them? Especially when the Reaper chaincannon has 2 more shots for the same price for one equipment slot?

I'll refer to the Heavy stubber, it's targets are the same, light squishy infantry, same applies to the Big shoota, same to the heavy bolter, same to the Reaper.

The reaper has one significant advantage, it is in a dex that can double it's rate and a singular weapon, meaning saturation is easily achievable. This is what makes the reaper work. (and also the reason for the rather steep pricing but atleast it is playable)

The heavy bolter and big shootason the other hand suffer for beeing too expensive and lacking saturation options. Meaning that for the output of 1 reaper, you need 2 Heavy bolters in the same squad + additional 2/3'rds of one to just equate the ammount of shots. 1 Havoc with reaper is 34 pts. 2. havocs alone are 28 pts + 20 for the heavy bolters. And we have not yet talked about VotWL which would make Heavy bolters actually decent against medium tanks, were it not for the fact that reapers again stack up better.

Ig has another issue. They pay a fairer price for the heavy bolter, but pay more for a heavy bolter then for a mortar. Which beats the heavy bolter in terms of range and LOS usage. (also averages more shots and with certain traits alot more of them)
Targets are again the same. So why pay 3 pts more for +1 S and -1 AP when you can generate more shots overall?

Now the heavy stubber shows up. And for regiments that can field them (or armies ) on line infantry, the job is the same. Now however you pay 1/8th for the equal ammount of shots, one less S and no armor penetration. The targets you want to shoot with it however remain the same, and virtually T3 targets (75% off all infantry really) treat it the same as the heavy bolter.
It isn't even a competition there.

This is also why i belive, if the stubber is worth 2 pts, which it is, the Big shoota should be 3 and the heavy bolter 4 /5 respectively. And precedence was created by the heavy stubber itself, which got it's price cut in half.

Regarding the Heavy Bolter vs Chaingun comparison, including Autocannons, keep in mind that for the points you're looking at:
24" S5 Heavy 8 D1
36" S5 Heavy 6 D1
48" S7 Heavy 4 D2

In this way, 2 shots less for an extra foot of range isn't exactly a bad deal for someone that might be camping. However, Chaos Marines don't have a shortage of ways to get close, and the opportunity cost for taking up a weapon slot is there. The real tragedy is the comparison to the Autocannon. Looking at the points, the Chaincannon and Autocannons have distinctive roles. The Heavy Bolter tries to be a TAC weapon and really isn't one.

No Slayer-Fan, you need to incorporate the carriers price imo.

Meaning that taking up 1 slot is a lot cheaper overall then two slots since i pay then additionally for another carrier.

Making the reaper a lot more points effective. If I were to field 5 reaper havocs that would be 150 pts.
10 hb havocs would be 240 pts.
The single slot makes it distinct enough.

As for the AC.
As a long term Chaos player it is the equivalent of a swiss army knife. It is usefull, decent, provides good baseline damage and firerate, add in VotLW and profit from the rather broken flat wound Chart aswell as cacophony and you got a unit that reliably can deal with heavy infantry and vehicles.

I would however consider fielding heavy bolters if they were cheaper.
Or available in higher saturarion beyond havocs.

Edit: and assuming the guns were costed for that flater wounding then all S5 weapon upgrades will remain suffering from beeing in a bad spot.

Not Online!!! wrote:

Spoiler:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
I'm trying to follow the logic here as to why have people become so looked in on a stormbolter vrs a big shoota as a comparison it's not even close to having the same role.

It's an Assualt Heavy Bolter,
Guard pay 8 points on a heavy weapon on BS4+
Orks pay 5 points on an assualt weapon on BS5+
Guard pay 8 points for a heavy bolter move and hit on 5+
Orks pay 5 points for a big shoota move and hit on 5+
Guard advance and can't shoot
Orks Advance and hit on 6's

That single Ap-1 cost 3 points

That doesn't make a big shoota look super over costed?

issue is, the big shota looks not overcosted compared to a Heavy bolter because the heavy bolter is overcosted aswell.

Also application, again. the Big shoota is more like a souped up heavy stubber, which at 2 pts is actually a decent gun, personally don't belive +1 S is worth 3pts more.

Marine's pay 10 points per heavy bolter that is fun.

Ok a heavy bolter is overcosted but by how much then?
Is a heacy bolter a 6 point or 7 point weapon or 5? You could then argue that a big shoot should be 1 or 2 points less but making it 2pts like some are calling for is a gw level overcorrection

CSM do too pay 10 pts / HB.
And how often do you see them? Especially when the Reaper chaincannon has 2 more shots for the same price for one equipment slot?

I'll refer to the Heavy stubber, it's targets are the same, light squishy infantry, same applies to the Big shoota, same to the heavy bolter, same to the Reaper.

The reaper has one significant advantage, it is in a dex that can double it's rate and a singular weapon, meaning saturation is easily achievable. This is what makes the reaper work. (and also the reason for the rather steep pricing but atleast it is playable)

The heavy bolter and big shootason the other hand suffer for beeing too expensive and lacking saturation options. Meaning that for the output of 1 reaper, you need 2 Heavy bolters in the same squad + additional 2/3'rds of one to just equate the ammount of shots. 1 Havoc with reaper is 34 pts. 2. havocs alone are 28 pts + 20 for the heavy bolters. And we have not yet talked about VotWL which would make Heavy bolters actually decent against medium tanks, were it not for the fact that reapers again stack up better.

Ig has another issue. They pay a fairer price for the heavy bolter, but pay more for a heavy bolter then for a mortar. Which beats the heavy bolter in terms of range and LOS usage. (also averages more shots and with certain traits alot more of them)
Targets are again the same. So why pay 3 pts more for +1 S and -1 AP when you can generate more shots overall?

Now the heavy stubber shows up. And for regiments that can field them (or armies ) on line infantry, the job is the same. Now however you pay 1/8th for the equal ammount of shots, one less S and no armor penetration. The targets you want to shoot with it however remain the same, and virtually T3 targets (75% off all infantry really) treat it the same as the heavy bolter.
It isn't even a competition there.

This is also why i belive, if the stubber is worth 2 pts, which it is, the Big shoota should be 3 and the heavy bolter 4 /5 respectively. And precedence was created by the heavy stubber itself, which got it's price cut in half.

Regarding the Heavy Bolter vs Chaingun comparison, including Autocannons, keep in mind that for the points you're looking at:
24" S5 Heavy 8 D1
36" S5 Heavy 6 D1
48" S7 Heavy 4 D2

In this way, 2 shots less for an extra foot of range isn't exactly a bad deal for someone that might be camping. However, Chaos Marines don't have a shortage of ways to get close, and the opportunity cost for taking up a weapon slot is there. The real tragedy is the comparison to the Autocannon. Looking at the points, the Chaincannon and Autocannons have distinctive roles. The Heavy Bolter tries to be a TAC weapon and really isn't one.

No Slayer-Fan, you need to incorporate the carriers price imo.

Meaning that taking up 1 slot is a lot cheaper overall then two slots since i pay then additionally for another carrier.

Making the reaper a lot more points effective. If I were to field 5 reaper havocs that would be 150 pts.
10 hb havocs would be 240 pts.
The single slot makes it distinct enough.

As for the AC.
As a long term Chaos player it is the equivalent of a swiss army knife. It is usefull, decent, provides good baseline damage and firerate, add in VotLW and profit from the rather broken flat wound Chart aswell as cacophony and you got a unit that reliably can deal with heavy infantry and vehicles.

I would however consider fielding heavy bolters if they were cheaper.
Or available in higher saturarion beyond havocs.

Edit: and assuming the guns were costed for that flater wounding then all S5 weapon upgrades will remain suffering from beeing in a bad spot.

I already mentioned about that opportunity cost of the models + weapon slots. I simply didn't elaborate on it much as I thought this comparison to be more important.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Spoiler:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
I'm trying to follow the logic here as to why have people become so looked in on a stormbolter vrs a big shoota as a comparison it's not even close to having the same role.

It's an Assualt Heavy Bolter,
Guard pay 8 points on a heavy weapon on BS4+
Orks pay 5 points on an assualt weapon on BS5+
Guard pay 8 points for a heavy bolter move and hit on 5+
Orks pay 5 points for a big shoota move and hit on 5+
Guard advance and can't shoot
Orks Advance and hit on 6's

That single Ap-1 cost 3 points

That doesn't make a big shoota look super over costed?

issue is, the big shota looks not overcosted compared to a Heavy bolter because the heavy bolter is overcosted aswell.

Also application, again. the Big shoota is more like a souped up heavy stubber, which at 2 pts is actually a decent gun, personally don't belive +1 S is worth 3pts more.

Marine's pay 10 points per heavy bolter that is fun.

Ok a heavy bolter is overcosted but by how much then?
Is a heacy bolter a 6 point or 7 point weapon or 5? You could then argue that a big shoot should be 1 or 2 points less but making it 2pts like some are calling for is a gw level overcorrection

CSM do too pay 10 pts / HB.
And how often do you see them? Especially when the Reaper chaincannon has 2 more shots for the same price for one equipment slot?

I'll refer to the Heavy stubber, it's targets are the same, light squishy infantry, same applies to the Big shoota, same to the heavy bolter, same to the Reaper.

The reaper has one significant advantage, it is in a dex that can double it's rate and a singular weapon, meaning saturation is easily achievable. This is what makes the reaper work. (and also the reason for the rather steep pricing but atleast it is playable)

The heavy bolter and big shootason the other hand suffer for beeing too expensive and lacking saturation options. Meaning that for the output of 1 reaper, you need 2 Heavy bolters in the same squad + additional 2/3'rds of one to just equate the ammount of shots. 1 Havoc with reaper is 34 pts. 2. havocs alone are 28 pts + 20 for the heavy bolters. And we have not yet talked about VotWL which would make Heavy bolters actually decent against medium tanks, were it not for the fact that reapers again stack up better.

Ig has another issue. They pay a fairer price for the heavy bolter, but pay more for a heavy bolter then for a mortar. Which beats the heavy bolter in terms of range and LOS usage. (also averages more shots and with certain traits alot more of them)
Targets are again the same. So why pay 3 pts more for +1 S and -1 AP when you can generate more shots overall?

Now the heavy stubber shows up. And for regiments that can field them (or armies ) on line infantry, the job is the same. Now however you pay 1/8th for the equal ammount of shots, one less S and no armor penetration. The targets you want to shoot with it however remain the same, and virtually T3 targets (75% off all infantry really) treat it the same as the heavy bolter.
It isn't even a competition there.

This is also why i belive, if the stubber is worth 2 pts, which it is, the Big shoota should be 3 and the heavy bolter 4 /5 respectively. And precedence was created by the heavy stubber itself, which got it's price cut in half.

Regarding the Heavy Bolter vs Chaingun comparison, including Autocannons, keep in mind that for the points you're looking at:
24" S5 Heavy 8 D1
36" S5 Heavy 6 D1
48" S7 Heavy 4 D2

In this way, 2 shots less for an extra foot of range isn't exactly a bad deal for someone that might be camping. However, Chaos Marines don't have a shortage of ways to get close, and the opportunity cost for taking up a weapon slot is there. The real tragedy is the comparison to the Autocannon. Looking at the points, the Chaincannon and Autocannons have distinctive roles. The Heavy Bolter tries to be a TAC weapon and really isn't one.

No Slayer-Fan, you need to incorporate the carriers price imo.

Meaning that taking up 1 slot is a lot cheaper overall then two slots since i pay then additionally for another carrier.

Making the reaper a lot more points effective. If I were to field 5 reaper havocs that would be 150 pts.
10 hb havocs would be 240 pts.
The single slot makes it distinct enough.

As for the AC.
As a long term Chaos player it is the equivalent of a swiss army knife. It is usefull, decent, provides good baseline damage and firerate, add in VotLW and profit from the rather broken flat wound Chart aswell as cacophony and you got a unit that reliably can deal with heavy infantry and vehicles.

I would however consider fielding heavy bolters if they were cheaper.
Or available in higher saturarion beyond havocs.

Edit: and assuming the guns were costed for that flater wounding then all S5 weapon upgrades will remain suffering from beeing in a bad spot.

I already mentioned about that opportunity cost of the models + weapon slots. I simply didn't elaborate on it much as I thought this comparison to be more important.

Fair point, but the issue is the oppurtunity cost is just really in that case something Chaos has to worry about.
The heavy bolter itself is just overpriced for the Imperial side and that has probably to do with my last point.
Just as the big shoot which imo falls into the same rabid hole.

Not Online!!! wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Spoiler:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
I'm trying to follow the logic here as to why have people become so looked in on a stormbolter vrs a big shoota as a comparison it's not even close to having the same role.

It's an Assualt Heavy Bolter,
Guard pay 8 points on a heavy weapon on BS4+
Orks pay 5 points on an assualt weapon on BS5+
Guard pay 8 points for a heavy bolter move and hit on 5+
Orks pay 5 points for a big shoota move and hit on 5+
Guard advance and can't shoot
Orks Advance and hit on 6's

That single Ap-1 cost 3 points

That doesn't make a big shoota look super over costed?

issue is, the big shota looks not overcosted compared to a Heavy bolter because the heavy bolter is overcosted aswell.

Also application, again. the Big shoota is more like a souped up heavy stubber, which at 2 pts is actually a decent gun, personally don't belive +1 S is worth 3pts more.

Marine's pay 10 points per heavy bolter that is fun.

Ok a heavy bolter is overcosted but by how much then?
Is a heacy bolter a 6 point or 7 point weapon or 5? You could then argue that a big shoot should be 1 or 2 points less but making it 2pts like some are calling for is a gw level overcorrection

CSM do too pay 10 pts / HB.
And how often do you see them? Especially when the Reaper chaincannon has 2 more shots for the same price for one equipment slot?

I'll refer to the Heavy stubber, it's targets are the same, light squishy infantry, same applies to the Big shoota, same to the heavy bolter, same to the Reaper.

The reaper has one significant advantage, it is in a dex that can double it's rate and a singular weapon, meaning saturation is easily achievable. This is what makes the reaper work. (and also the reason for the rather steep pricing but atleast it is playable)

The heavy bolter and big shootason the other hand suffer for beeing too expensive and lacking saturation options. Meaning that for the output of 1 reaper, you need 2 Heavy bolters in the same squad + additional 2/3'rds of one to just equate the ammount of shots. 1 Havoc with reaper is 34 pts. 2. havocs alone are 28 pts + 20 for the heavy bolters. And we have not yet talked about VotWL which would make Heavy bolters actually decent against medium tanks, were it not for the fact that reapers again stack up better.

Ig has another issue. They pay a fairer price for the heavy bolter, but pay more for a heavy bolter then for a mortar. Which beats the heavy bolter in terms of range and LOS usage. (also averages more shots and with certain traits alot more of them)
Targets are again the same. So why pay 3 pts more for +1 S and -1 AP when you can generate more shots overall?

Now the heavy stubber shows up. And for regiments that can field them (or armies ) on line infantry, the job is the same. Now however you pay 1/8th for the equal ammount of shots, one less S and no armor penetration. The targets you want to shoot with it however remain the same, and virtually T3 targets (75% off all infantry really) treat it the same as the heavy bolter.
It isn't even a competition there.

This is also why i belive, if the stubber is worth 2 pts, which it is, the Big shoota should be 3 and the heavy bolter 4 /5 respectively. And precedence was created by the heavy stubber itself, which got it's price cut in half.

Regarding the Heavy Bolter vs Chaingun comparison, including Autocannons, keep in mind that for the points you're looking at:
24" S5 Heavy 8 D1
36" S5 Heavy 6 D1
48" S7 Heavy 4 D2

In this way, 2 shots less for an extra foot of range isn't exactly a bad deal for someone that might be camping. However, Chaos Marines don't have a shortage of ways to get close, and the opportunity cost for taking up a weapon slot is there. The real tragedy is the comparison to the Autocannon. Looking at the points, the Chaincannon and Autocannons have distinctive roles. The Heavy Bolter tries to be a TAC weapon and really isn't one.

No Slayer-Fan, you need to incorporate the carriers price imo.

Meaning that taking up 1 slot is a lot cheaper overall then two slots since i pay then additionally for another carrier.

Making the reaper a lot more points effective. If I were to field 5 reaper havocs that would be 150 pts.
10 hb havocs would be 240 pts.
The single slot makes it distinct enough.

As for the AC.
As a long term Chaos player it is the equivalent of a swiss army knife. It is usefull, decent, provides good baseline damage and firerate, add in VotLW and profit from the rather broken flat wound Chart aswell as cacophony and you got a unit that reliably can deal with heavy infantry and vehicles.

I would however consider fielding heavy bolters if they were cheaper.
Or available in higher saturarion beyond havocs.

Edit: and assuming the guns were costed for that flater wounding then all S5 weapon upgrades will remain suffering from beeing in a bad spot.

I already mentioned about that opportunity cost of the models + weapon slots. I simply didn't elaborate on it much as I thought this comparison to be more important.

Fair point, but the issue is the oppurtunity cost is just really in that case something Chaos has to worry about.
The heavy bolter itself is just overpriced for the Imperial side and that has probably to do with my last point.
Just as the big shoot which imo falls into the same rabid hole.

That's why one of my fun lists uses 3 Autocannon Havocs and 3 squads of six Chosen all with Combi-Bolters and a Chaincannon (add Warpsmiths if you like to be stupid like me) all coming out of Termites. Expensive but FUN for a Beta Strike list. Use The Purge for hilarity or Alpha Legion to be reasonable.

I'm terribly off topic though. I will say Heavy Bolters are reasonable on Tarantula Sentry Guns.

ITT: Ork players complain about Big Shoota prices, Marine players make it about space marine heavy bolters.

 Eonfuzz wrote:
ITT: Ork players complain about Big Shoota prices, Marine players make it about space marine heavy bolters.

That's not what happened. Someone asked what would a justification be for 6 points, to which you could like at the Heavy Bolter. Then the discussion kinda naturally talks about everything like usual here.

It's probably overcosted. But lots of other factions have equipment costed far worse.

Martel732 wrote:
It's probably overcosted. But lots of other factions have equipment costed far worse.

Exactly. I even suggested 4 points was a fair cost...nope...they say it should cost 1 or 2.

Whatever. Shall we discuss what everything in my codex should cost?

 Xenomancers wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's probably overcosted. But lots of other factions have equipment costed far worse.

Exactly. I even suggested 4 points was a fair cost...nope...they say it should cost 1 or 2.

Special thanks to Xenomancer for generously saying that the big shoota should cost twice as much as a more efficient weapon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Whatever. Shall we discuss what everything in my codex should cost?

Make a seperate thread for it and sure. Fire away.

Why pick out this particular weapon? Cant you just not use it? Like i do with 90% of my codex? I cant even really use my signature units because they are so miscosted.

Martel732 wrote:
Why pick out this particular weapon? Cant you just not use it? Like i do with 90% of my codex? I cant even really use my signature units because they are so miscosted.

Why not have a codex where all options are viable? Semper (Who created this thread) plays orks, and wants the same thing you do.

Honestly the problem with this forum is it's filled with armchair designers, some with good ideas and opinions and the others with hot garbage.
But no matter what we say or craft on these forums it essentially amounts to nothing, aside from pointless and aimless drama.

Not armchair designers. Most of us play our faction far more than the playtesters. GW has shown how not to design for 20 years.

Martel732 wrote:
Not armchair designers. Most of us play our faction far more than the playtesters. GW has shown how not to design for 20 years.

Sadly anyone not a part of the design team is an armchair designer

 Eonfuzz wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's probably overcosted. But lots of other factions have equipment costed far worse.

Exactly. I even suggested 4 points was a fair cost...nope...they say it should cost 1 or 2.

Special thanks to Xenomancer for generously saying that the big shoota should cost twice as much as a more efficient weapon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Whatever. Shall we discuss what everything in my codex should cost?

Make a seperate thread for it and sure. Fire away.

The weapons are not comparable. Long range assault weapon vs a short ranged machine gun.

Long range assault on units that want to be in close range vs short range machine gun on units that, strangely enough, also want to be in close range. You're right, they aren't comparable. One of them actually improves the area that the unit excels at, while the other costs 2.5x as much and gives a slight buff to an area the unit is weak in.

 Eonfuzz wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's probably overcosted. But lots of other factions have equipment costed far worse.

Exactly. I even suggested 4 points was a fair cost...nope...they say it should cost 1 or 2.

Special thanks to Xenomancer for generously saying that the big shoota should cost twice as much as a more efficient weapon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Whatever. Shall we discuss what everything in my codex should cost?

Make a seperate thread for it and sure. Fire away.

Most people voted for 3 pts.
Some justified it with maths other with deduction.

As someone said, how many points do you put into big shootas? To some extent this is a debate on how many angels are on the head of a pin.

With that said, from an academic standpoint its obviously a crap upgrade for boys at 5 points. I don't see why "there are lots of crap options, suck it up" should be a reasonable response.

In theory yes, the ability to shoot 36" is worth "something". But in the game as missions currently work, its not worth very much.

Lets say you blaze away with 3 big shootas:
Shooting Marines:
9*1/3*7/6*2/3*1/3=0.777 wounds go through
Shooting Guardsmen:
9*1/3*7/6*2/3*2/3=1.555 wounds go through
Shooting a Rhino:
9*1/3*7/6*1/3*1/3=0.3888 wounds go through.

In other words if you are taking your big shootas to apply long range pressure, or plink off some remaining wounds, or menace models on distant objectives, then... its probably not going to work out.

If you can get regular shootas into range (not necessarily difficult, because you are probably Evil Sunz like everyone else) then you are getting a fractional increase in damage output, for a lot of points.

Shooting marines (about as good a target as you can get).
You get:
With shootas for 210 points.
60*1/3*7/6*1/2*1/3 wounds.
With big shootas for 225 points.
((54*1/3*7/6*1/2*1/3)+(9*1/3*7/6*2/3*1/3)) wounds.

With wounds being worth 13 points, this works out at paying 7% more (225/210) to do just 2.6% more damage. Against T3 its even worse. Against T5+ its a bit better, but as the rhino example shows above, bigshootas against vaguely cheap wounds with T6 and a reasonable save is pretty awful.

If you break these numbers down, purely for shooting marines (yes yes, I know), you get a higher upgrade to your shooting potential than the cost when big shootas are 3 points. I am not convinced they would be an autotake at that level.

With a storm bolter its more obvious. For a regular marine, you double his shooting output in exchange for less than 1/6th additional points. While there are potentially issues with making your units "softer", this level of damage increase per point is a non brainer.

The humble Heavy Bolter is in a different position. With its 3 shots, S5, AP-1, it may not appear a terrible gun. Really though its only "good" against T4, 3-4+ armour saved units. And unfortunately the meta has evolved in such a way that such units are not especially relevant (because they die to everything). Its not very good against T6+ models with a reasonable save and multiple wounds. Its not good against T3 chaff models.

I guess you can just knock it down in points to the point where it "is" efficient versus those two targets - but that would in turn make it exceptionally good versus regular marine stat lines.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Eonfuzz wrote:
ITT: Ork players complain about Big Shoota prices, Marine players make it about space marine heavy bolters.

That's not what happened. Someone asked what would a justification be for 6 points, to which you could like at the Heavy Bolter. Then the discussion kinda naturally talks about everything like usual here.

Martel732 wrote:
Why pick out this particular weapon? Cant you just not use it? Like i do with 90% of my codex? I cant even really use my signature units because they are so miscosted.

Comedy that writes itself

Just waiting for Karol to show up to tell the marine players that they are fine compared to GK.

For the marines whose argumentation is similar to "no one deserves a buff until I get one": You deserves to have gakky codex until the end of time.

I think Orks have gotten enough buffs for a while. Their suffering factor is pretty low atm.

Compared to marines, we still have four years of buffs left, and marines haven't had enough nerfs yet.

In addition the next Marine codex should nerf all currently viable builds and have a new unit mandatory for any semi-viable build that costs $2 per point spent.

Afterwards, you get a supplement that requires you to buy 12 boxes of tactical marines to compete at all.

If you want blind justice, go all the way.

Played a game today where I brought for fun units. I included 3 Scrapjets which come stock with 2 Twin Big Shootas. I also included Big shootas on my boyz mobz because again, this was strictly a for fun game.

The game ended after Turn 4 due to my opponent giving up, The Scrapjets managed to shoot a grand total of 6 times before they were all dead in turn 3, about 72 shots. Those 72 shots managed to plink 4 wounds TOTAL off of a T7 3+ Save model....thats it. The rest of the weapons didn't fair much better mind you, 1 more reason why the scrapjets and the new buggies in general are all trash units.

The Boyz mobz had 9 big shootas total, they survived until turn 4, literally all of them. These put out 108 shots, in 4 turns they managed to kill 3 Space Marines.

Overall, the Big shootas were a waste of points, if I could have taken the Scrapjets for 20pts cheaper (No Big Shootas) i would have. On the boyz units, they did nothing to add to the unit and in fact, since all 3 mobz got into combat, those weapons actually HURT the unit's ability to damage its opponents by taking away 3 attacks each turn.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jidmah wrote:
Compared to marines, we still have four years of buffs left, and marines haven't had enough nerfs yet.

In addition the next Marine codex should nerf all currently viable builds and have a new unit mandatory for any semi-viable build that costs $2 per point spent.

Afterwards, you get a supplement that requires you to buy 12 boxes of tactical marines to compete at all.

If you want blind justice, go all the way.

LMAO! The Mek Gun and the Green Tide God that was a terrible supplement, strictly designed to get people to buy models by the boatload. Sad they forgot that orkz either A: Already have boatloads OR B: Will spend 1/3rd the money to just Kustom make the new unit Never underestimate an orkz desire to "Git Loot'n"

Martel732 wrote:
I think Orks have gotten enough buffs for a while. Their suffering factor is pretty low atm.

Hey guys, I'm an edgy and grimdark and goth soul.
My Ork army doesn't enough suffering to sate my sadomasochistic nature, does anyone have any good recommendations?

Build your list around Burnas, Stompas, and Killa Kanz. Can't get more masochistic than that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Don't forget to bring some Trukkz for your Burnas, and grab a Mek workshop.

Why bring Trukks? You can load the Burnaz into the Stompaz. ;-)

Mek workshop+stompa is probably the best combo in the game.

SemperMortis wrote:
Played a game today where I brought for fun units. I included 3 Scrapjets which come stock with 2 Twin Big Shootas. I also included Big shootas on my boyz mobz because again, this was strictly a for fun game.

The game ended after Turn 4 due to my opponent giving up, The Scrapjets managed to shoot a grand total of 6 times before they were all dead in turn 3, about 72 shots. Those 72 shots managed to plink 4 wounds TOTAL off of a T7 3+ Save model....thats it. The rest of the weapons didn't fair much better mind you, 1 more reason why the scrapjets and the new buggies in general are all trash units.

The Boyz mobz had 9 big shootas total, they survived until turn 4, literally all of them. These put out 108 shots, in 4 turns they managed to kill 3 Space Marines.

Overall, the Big shootas were a waste of points, if I could have taken the Scrapjets for 20pts cheaper (No Big Shootas) i would have. On the boyz units, they did nothing to add to the unit and in fact, since all 3 mobz got into combat, those weapons actually HURT the unit's ability to damage its opponents by taking away 3 attacks each turn.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jidmah wrote:
Compared to marines, we still have four years of buffs left, and marines haven't had enough nerfs yet.

In addition the next Marine codex should nerf all currently viable builds and have a new unit mandatory for any semi-viable build that costs $2 per point spent.

Afterwards, you get a supplement that requires you to buy 12 boxes of tactical marines to compete at all.

If you want blind justice, go all the way.

LMAO! The Mek Gun and the Green Tide God that was a terrible supplement, strictly designed to get people to buy models by the boatload. Sad they forgot that orkz either A: Already have boatloads OR B: Will spend 1/3rd the money to just Kustom make the new unit Never underestimate an orkz desire to "Git Loot'n"

I get heavy deja-vu feelings from my humble begginings as a yoff in 40k.

feels man, feels.

I still remmber people in 6th and 7th telling me orks were fine and that it was ok that our shooting was super over costed and suppossed to be worse than other armies. Also that our vehicles and units were suppossed to be weaker and die in droves. Also that it was ok for use to not be as good in combat becasue we had so many models.

7th was bascally designed to put our codex at the bottom of the pack. the casualties from the front meant your nobz never got in combat because they had to be in the back for protection.

Good ol' Orkz.

It was fine that their shooting was overcosted, because they were a CC army.

It was fine that their CC wasn't great, because they could do great stuff with shooting.

Or something like that...