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:
Tbf more skewed thematic lists should be facilitated by rites of war and not the inverse, where certain unit types dominante so much (cue dreads) that many rites just are obsolete, cue armored spearhead rite...

Ya exactly, if the baseline core rules aren't balanced any help from rites will be affected.

 Crablezworth wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Tbf more skewed thematic lists should be facilitated by rites of war and not the inverse, where certain unit types dominante so much (cue dreads) that many rites just are obsolete, cue armored spearhead rite...

Ya exactly, if the baseline core rules aren't balanced any help from rites will be affected.

As an adendum though, terminators are not really overpowered, it is certain types of terminators (mostly ws 5 ones with access to brutal weapons) that dominate due to a failure in the to hit chart and brutal being a bit restrictive aswell as formerly dangerous weapons being made ap noodles.
That said melta has pretty heavily taken over plasmas job and one could add brutal 2 to plasma and autocannons to allow for those weapons to be effective once again against dreadnoughts.

You could even go so far, when you are creative, that you tie the brutal to the triggering of breaching.

Edit @smudge there should totaly be forces that are built around artillery though as a core of their faction, Like solar and militia.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Tbf more skewed thematic lists should be facilitated by rites of war and not the inverse, where certain unit types dominante so much (cue dreads) that many rites just are obsolete, cue armored spearhead rite...

Ya exactly, if the baseline core rules aren't balanced any help from rites will be affected.

As an adendum though, terminators are not really overpowered, it is certain types of terminators (mostly ws 5 ones with access to brutal weapons) that dominate due to a failure in the to hit chart and brutal being a bit restrictive aswell as formerly dangerous weapons being made ap noodles.
That said melta has pretty heavily taken over plasmas job and one could add brutal 2 to plasma and autocannons to allow for those weapons to be effective once again against dreadnoughts.


Edit @smudge there should totaly be forces that are built around artillery though as a core of their faction, Like solar and militia.

It's also them all going multi wound instead of just the rare elite termie units like prior edition, and re-rolling saves. They could have just given termies a toughness bump without going nuts.

Tbf the wound additional to terminators is a better solution to the brittleness issue inherent to terminators than the increased toughness, that said the weapons that were supposed to hurt terminators like: plasma, melta, arguably breaching high calibre guns from the autocannon onwards and krak rocket/nades should have also got a triggered version of brutal...

It's kind of interesting to see where we're at.

When the changes dropped, we saw a lot of comments that it wasn't fun to have your units wholesale removed in the context of 7ths terrain rules. The Scorpius was always lurking to kind of put that claim to the test, but with the new book we can see the full impact of the changes, as all the unit archetypes are basically out now.

So custodes. They super didn't like getting scooped as a super-elite faction with low model count. The thing was, they kind of broke the game in their initial version, and the Medusa/Typhon/vindicator were more like necessities when dealing with them. In 2nd they've returned with a roughly 50% increase in speed, a 100% increase in attacks, and constant AP 2. Theyre way better and the same cost; they win every trade against an equivalent amount of marine points and need to be shot. But those old tools are gone, and even the mighty lascannon heavy support squad only averages 4.5 unsaved wounds per volley of 10, against the invul. Custodes players get to have even more fun than marine players now, since it's really hard to scoop them all.

In the same book, we have the solar auxilia. 4+ armour save units died in droves in 1st, and these guys definitely had no fun as a result. Now, they're locked to 1" coherency, the units are encouraged to be within 3" of each other, and....all the weapons still scoop them. All the blasts remove solar aux in the same un-fun way that marine and custodes get to avoid. And this is compounded by the solar aux being largely armed with weapons that now bounce off those other two factions.

Now I'll admit to never really playing a horde faction, but I don't think my friends that played Tyranids, or guard, or orks thought that yanking their models was part of the fun of the faction. I was always under the impression that the horde of models served to either put pressure via melee, or were a buffer for the big guns. But the big guns don't really exist any more for the aux.

I don't think the "it's not fun" argument really holds up. It's not fun to be unable to remove 10 guardians. It's not fun to have your models scooped while the opposing armies never gave to worry about it.

Aecus Decimus wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:
blast weapons are the worst part of any game system they are involved it, if i can get a 30k game in without ever needing a scatter dice my enjoyment goes up. So i support anything making them not present on the table.

So you think it's a good thing to have various units nerfed to the point of uselessness and have a game that is advertised with "BLAST TEMPLATES ARE BACK ITS AMAZING" actually have those weapons be so weak they don't ever appear on the table?

honestly yes. if anything the Ap is still too high and they should be ap6 or ap- they are useless against marines but absolutely table solar auxilia who are already in an uphill battle. Also on advertised, I am assuming you mean a community post or youtubers. I considered it a tick in the negative column I loved the HH novels and have read each (including echos of eternity) at least 3 times each and almost didn't jump in to the game because templates are still there. they are too clunky, take to much time to resolve, and its often cheated on angles i find from players who use them to "just barley" clip an extra 1 or 2 models that clearly should not be under the template but they just change the angle a little bit off what the dice was, or the starting point a little farther back . Replacing blasts with set number of shots (or D3/6 assigned)was the best thing gamesworkshop ever did ruleswise.

 G00fySmiley wrote:

Aecus Decimus wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:
blast weapons are the worst part of any game system they are involved it, if i can get a 30k game in without ever needing a scatter dice my enjoyment goes up. So i support anything making them not present on the table.

So you think it's a good thing to have various units nerfed to the point of uselessness and have a game that is advertised with "BLAST TEMPLATES ARE BACK ITS AMAZING" actually have those weapons be so weak they don't ever appear on the table?

honestly yes. if anything the Ap is still too high and they should be ap6 or ap- they are useless against marines but absolutely table solar auxilia who are already in an uphill battle. Also on advertised, I am assuming you mean a community post or youtubers. I considered it a tick in the negative column I loved the HH novels and have read each (including echos of eternity) at least 3 times each and almost didn't jump in to the game because templates are still there. they are too clunky, take to much time to resolve, and its often cheated on angles i find from players who use them to "just barley" clip an extra 1 or 2 models that clearly should not be under the template but they just change the angle a little bit off what the dice was, or the starting point a little farther back . Replacing blasts with set number of shots (or D3/6 assigned)was the best thing gamesworkshop ever did ruleswise.

Its funny that you say the ap is too high, but then claim blasts were too clunky and took too long.

The games have only gotten longer and longer since the days of 7th, and the big culprit is rolling tons of dice to hit, wound, and then some amount of saves. High ap blasts speed up the game, especially after you do things like roll the scatter as close to the target unit as possible to circumvent drifting angle syndrome.

But ya, always get a kick of "it takes too much time" in the context of 9th. The slowest edition since they moved away from rpg elements and hyper-granularity of 1st and 2nd.

 Skimask Mohawk wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:

Aecus Decimus wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:
blast weapons are the worst part of any game system they are involved it, if i can get a 30k game in without ever needing a scatter dice my enjoyment goes up. So i support anything making them not present on the table.

So you think it's a good thing to have various units nerfed to the point of uselessness and have a game that is advertised with "BLAST TEMPLATES ARE BACK ITS AMAZING" actually have those weapons be so weak they don't ever appear on the table?

honestly yes. if anything the Ap is still too high and they should be ap6 or ap- they are useless against marines but absolutely table solar auxilia who are already in an uphill battle. Also on advertised, I am assuming you mean a community post or youtubers. I considered it a tick in the negative column I loved the HH novels and have read each (including echos of eternity) at least 3 times each and almost didn't jump in to the game because templates are still there. they are too clunky, take to much time to resolve, and its often cheated on angles i find from players who use them to "just barley" clip an extra 1 or 2 models that clearly should not be under the template but they just change the angle a little bit off what the dice was, or the starting point a little farther back . Replacing blasts with set number of shots (or D3/6 assigned)was the best thing gamesworkshop ever did ruleswise.

Its funny that you say the ap is too high, but then claim blasts were too clunky and took too long.

The games have only gotten longer and longer since the days of 7th, and the big culprit is rolling tons of dice to hit, wound, and then some amount of saves. High ap blasts speed up the game, especially after you do things like roll the scatter as close to the target unit as possible to circumvent drifting angle syndrome.

But ya, always get a kick of "it takes too much time" in the context of 9th. The slowest edition since they moved away from rpg elements and hyper-granularity of 1st and 2nd.

honestly 9th can be pretty quick its just to complicated to get there as you need to know your strats plus the other armies strats and secondaries etc. I think it needs a more simplistic design in 10th. I don't think its good for the game to have speed from who brought the most model deleting pie plates. speeds up the game sure, but its why i didn't buy into the original horus heresey and played less in 7th edition than any other edition. index 8th brought me back as the game was in a much better place

I like Infinity's answer of having pie plates, but not rolling scatter. You don't need to worry about scatters causing issues, and the game is deadly by default. Most of my first turn is deciding on how to even approach the enemy, then setting it up. Templates matter a lot for making me think "this is real," rather than "this is dumb." But it's just a roll to hit, with templates being a characteristic. It's less realistic than scatter, though more realistic than some scatter results, like firing a cannon behind yourself. But you can have templates and not use scatter. AP4 and AP-3 have no meaningful difference to a save of 4+, the only thing it affects are 2+ and 3+ saves, instead of getting full, get partial. Having a Heavy d6 blast with AP-3 versus a Large Blast at AP 4 isn't much of a difference, but hitting every model under the template is much more fun for me than rolling a 1 and getting one hit, or even rolling a 6 and getting six hits.

Also, flamer templates should have stayed. Their removal is the biggest blow to 40k in my opinion. They're cool as hell.

This was a mess of a ramble, sorry, I slept like two hours. Hope it was understandable.

It is an issue of scale. Templates make sense in skirmish games with a few dozen models per side. They don't make sense in a company sized game with potentially hundreds of models per side.

And they will slow down the game regardless of AP, as anyone with an infantry force has to spread their models to maximum coherency.

G00fySmiley wrote:

 Skimask Mohawk wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:

Aecus Decimus wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:
blast weapons are the worst part of any game system they are involved it, if i can get a 30k game in without ever needing a scatter dice my enjoyment goes up. So i support anything making them not present on the table.

So you think it's a good thing to have various units nerfed to the point of uselessness and have a game that is advertised with "BLAST TEMPLATES ARE BACK ITS AMAZING" actually have those weapons be so weak they don't ever appear on the table?

honestly yes. if anything the Ap is still too high and they should be ap6 or ap- they are useless against marines but absolutely table solar auxilia who are already in an uphill battle. Also on advertised, I am assuming you mean a community post or youtubers. I considered it a tick in the negative column I loved the HH novels and have read each (including echos of eternity) at least 3 times each and almost didn't jump in to the game because templates are still there. they are too clunky, take to much time to resolve, and its often cheated on angles i find from players who use them to "just barley" clip an extra 1 or 2 models that clearly should not be under the template but they just change the angle a little bit off what the dice was, or the starting point a little farther back . Replacing blasts with set number of shots (or D3/6 assigned)was the best thing gamesworkshop ever did ruleswise.

Its funny that you say the ap is too high, but then claim blasts were too clunky and took too long.

The games have only gotten longer and longer since the days of 7th, and the big culprit is rolling tons of dice to hit, wound, and then some amount of saves. High ap blasts speed up the game, especially after you do things like roll the scatter as close to the target unit as possible to circumvent drifting angle syndrome.

But ya, always get a kick of "it takes too much time" in the context of 9th. The slowest edition since they moved away from rpg elements and hyper-granularity of 1st and 2nd.

honestly 9th can be pretty quick its just to complicated to get there as you need to know your strats plus the other armies strats and secondaries etc. I think it needs a more simplistic design in 10th. I don't think its good for the game to have speed from who brought the most model deleting pie plates. speeds up the game sure, but its why i didn't buy into the original horus heresey and played less in 7th edition than any other edition. index 8th brought me back as the game was in a much better place

If you know the the mission ahead of time, the terrain is already set up, and both players are intimately familiar with both armies, then ya, 9th can be played at an alright speed. And it's still a lot longer than the older editions; a 2000 point tournament game of heresy 1st averaged us about an hour for 5 turns of gameplay. The only time 9th gets that close is a blow out when someone concedes in turn 2; its just a very slow system due to the mass of dice rolling and interruption mechanics. Maybe blasts were slow for casual players to resolve, but at least the games speed more than made up for it.

Its also important to point out that Heresy 1st was designed around 5th and 6th edition, and not 7th. The Typhon and medusa might have been a scourge of the edition by the end, but on release, you could split a unit throughout ruin levels and be extremely resilient to the former and immune to the latter. Blasts used to be powerful, but with very real limitations; they killed the terrain rules and they became oppressive; now theyre limited to the point of uselessness, with a few notable exceptions.

Tyran wrote:It is an issue of scale. Templates make sense in skirmish games with a few dozen models per side. They don't make sense in a company sized game with potentially hundreds of models per side.

And they will slow down the game regardless of AP, as anyone with an infantry force has to spread their models to maximum coherency.

40k/30k has always had the issue of promoting both hyper-elite, low model count armies and horde armies. Quality weapons were an option to mitigate the former, while blast weapons helped with the latter. A solar auxilia player could theoretically have over 600 models with an ultramar cohort at 3k and you can only really deal with it with blasts; it would be a skewed solution, but in proportion to the list it's trying to address. That's just the point of large explosive weapons, to kill as many people as efficiently as possible.

And, at least in my example, the SA player only has 1" coherency, is encouraged to have the models in base to base, and have their units all within 3" of each other; all the blasts will hit a huge density of models with their ap 4. But what do you do to clear through 200 Marines at 30k? A list that can actually attempt to have some versatility as well.

If the system allows for a skewed build, it should allow for an option to deal with it. This largely exists across the factions, except Marines somehow got the pass from ranged attacks with their infantry and dreads lol (with custodes tagging along).

It's actually quite rare that marines are all spaced out exactly 2" apart. Sure it happens in theory land on the internet but in actual games marines bunch up due to reactions, sweeping advances, trying to take cover, emergency disembarks, leaving a vehicle. Etc etc.

I find my gravguns and rad missile launchers are always very effective at what they do. Scorpion are insanely strong, gravis plasma cannons are very powerful, normal plasma cannons and the thousand sons warpfire cannons are also very deadly.

For solar I would imagine it is pretty grim in the world of large ap4 blasts. Being a human in the heresy is truly a dangerous time.

To be fair it should be though. They should really be dying in droves fluff wise. Is it balanced and fair? I'm not sure yet. Not had enough game experience with solar yet. They're still rare among my games group and I've only been to one event since they were released abd I didn't play against them

Custodes are absolutely broken. The problem isn't with templates though. It's with custodes. They could probably have a 30% price increase and still be strong to be honest

Bobug wrote:


For solar I would imagine it is pretty grim in the world of large ap4 blasts. Being a human in the heresy is truly a dangerous time.

To be fair it should be though. They should really be dying in droves fluff wise.

So should marines tho, and terminators and dreadnoughts and even custodes. The problem is they don't. Custodes get to be king of ap2 among other things. A combined arms turn based wargame doesn't function well with auto take unit types that are always better or undercosted or both.

Blast having good AP shouldn't be an issue, handing out blast with good ap that ignores cover should be the line crossed rarely.

It's only auto take if you care about winning over telling a story tho...which I feel is the entire point of the 30k.

I don't WANT to lose, but winning is like 3rd or 4th on list of things I want to get out of 30/40k.

Racerguy180 wrote:
It's only auto take if you care about winning over telling a story tho...which I feel is the entire point of the 30k.

I don't WANT to lose, but winning is like 3rd or 4th on list of things I want to get out of 30/40k.

That's a copout, are you inferring a more balanced game somehow would effect one's ability to write a narrative over its results? Right now it's an objectively worse narrative in terms of the blast weapons portion of the story, hearing how some sgt survived 5 battle cannon hits isn't exactly a good story when one knows battle cannons in this edition may as well sub for "our hero was hit with a bunch of pillows".

There is also the other problem of the equation, that the all or nothing AP system means that AP4 apparently is "being hit with a bunch of pillows".

 Tyran wrote:
There is also the other problem of the equation, that the all or nothing AP system means that AP4 apparently is "being hit with a bunch of pillows".

It def is for marines/termies. Unlike 7th ed 40k there isn't that much range in armour saves to begin with in 30k cuz there aren't as many factions. The bulk is like 2+/3+ in terms of marines being the more likely faction, the worse saves are more the edge case factions.

To me it's simple though, most blasts regardless of being ap6 or ap1 don't ignore cover, so if people just played with either more terrain or agreed with their opponent to make the cover saves more robust, like more 4+ cover instead of 5+ or 6+. I get people didn't like it when a 5 termies in the open got roasted by a lucky vindicator shot, but there was no need to up end all blast weapon's ap or size on account of it.

 Crablezworth wrote:

Racerguy180 wrote:
It's only auto take if you care about winning over telling a story tho...which I feel is the entire point of the 30k.

I don't WANT to lose, but winning is like 3rd or 4th on list of things I want to get out of 30/40k.

That's a copout, are you inferring a more balanced game somehow would effect one's ability to write a narrative over its results? Right now it's an objectively worse narrative in terms of the blast weapons portion of the story, hearing how some sgt survived 5 battle cannon hits isn't exactly a good story when one knows battle cannons in this edition may as well sub for "our hero was hit with a bunch of pillows".

The only auto take units for me are ones I like the look of, performance on tabletop does not matter to me. If it does to you, rock on.

Would a more balanced game be better, yes. But then we wouldn't be talking about a GW product.

I understand where you're coming from but it is in no way a cop out.

Racerguy180 wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:

Racerguy180 wrote:
It's only auto take if you care about winning over telling a story tho...which I feel is the entire point of the 30k.

I don't WANT to lose, but winning is like 3rd or 4th on list of things I want to get out of 30/40k.

That's a copout, are you inferring a more balanced game somehow would effect one's ability to write a narrative over its results? Right now it's an objectively worse narrative in terms of the blast weapons portion of the story, hearing how some sgt survived 5 battle cannon hits isn't exactly a good story when one knows battle cannons in this edition may as well sub for "our hero was hit with a bunch of pillows".

The only auto take units for me are ones I like the look of, performance on tabletop does not matter to me. If it does to you, rock on.

Would a more balanced game be better, yes. But then we wouldn't be talking about a GW product.

I understand where you're coming from but it is in no way a cop out.

A worse narrative then. Literal plot armour in terms of blasts being like pillow fight in terms of ap value. This is why you can't divorce balance from narrative, having everyone survive the opening scene of saving private ryan not only makes less sense but robs tension and drama, if explosions are greatly mitigated to the point of not being deadly but a nuisance, that's a worse narrative at the cost of worse ap values and arguably worse blast rules on account of that change.

Expanding out from just blasts, inordinate amounts of terminators or dreadnoughts also make for a worse narrative. I'd don't want to watch or read or even really look at a game where one side is mostly dreadnoughts. The dreadnought terminator war not a book I wanna read.

1.0's blast rules make for better stories.

Blast also killing everyone withing the blast radius is also poor narrative, because explosions do not function that way.

The farther you are from the center of detonation, you receive exponentially less energy. So the guy directly under the center of the blast? that guy should be dead, but the guy at the edge of the blast? that guy gets the pillow hit to use this thread's language.

There did used to be a mechanic like that if i recall. Being partially under the template meant you only got hit on a 4 or something similar. That could be as far back as 4th edition 40k though.

Honestly Plasma blasts have some bite to them, but also don't feel like like an auto wipe if you get a direct hit. I was using two of the plasma russes the other day, large blast breaching 4+. They wound marines on a 2+ but cut through armour only sometimes while hitting a handful of models in a squad regardless. It feels like what a blast weapon should be. Though damn I wanted a nuncio vox at the time. Two large scatters changed hitting 7 marines bunched up because of a charge to hitting none. Paaaaaain.

Maybe a lesser version of breaching?

Something like "piercing (x): on a wound roll of x+, improve this attack's AP characteristic by 1 (to a maximum of 1)".

That way you could have battlecannons that do not immediately delete squads of marines but still get the chance to bypass their armor without suddenly becoming anti TEQ.

I think some of them do have rending right? I can't remember which one though. But str8 does have utility all on it's own. Lob them at a 2 wound model and there'll be tension every time they roll those saves. And you can try to punch through AV of light vehicles.

 Tyran wrote:
Maybe a lesser version of breaching?

Something like "piercing (x): on a wound roll of x+, improve this attack's AP characteristic by 1 (to a maximum of 1)".

That way you could have battlecannons that do not immediately delete squads of marines but still get the chance to bypass their armor without suddenly becoming anti TEQ.

a battlecannon should bypass a marine no questions asked.
Same with a basilisk.

If the marine is in cover or a building now that is a diffrent story.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Tyran wrote:
Maybe a lesser version of breaching?

Something like "piercing (x): on a wound roll of x+, improve this attack's AP characteristic by 1 (to a maximum of 1)".

That way you could have battlecannons that do not immediately delete squads of marines but still get the chance to bypass their armor without suddenly becoming anti TEQ.

a battlecannon should bypass a marine no questions asked.
Same with a basilisk.

If the marine is in cover or a building now that is a diffrent story.

Bingo, agreed, everyone also seems to leave out cover from the equation and there are very few blast weapons with no cover usr.

How is it worse narrative. I have gak die all the time to blasts and kill plenty with them in return.

Are people really playing more than one squad of Terminators? With Dreads I can understand bringing more than one. And by that I mean 2...total. if players are playing with tons of dreads/termis I think that's a fundamental failure on the player part. It's a two-way street, if players are on purpose listbuilding for maximum advantage(irrespective of story), I can see where these things might be an issue. An easy way to mitigate this is to play with those that are likeminded. I'll play everyone once, but some that's all they get out of me.

Racerguy180 wrote:
I think that's a fundamental failure on the player part.

Having a different opinion about what is fun is not a failure.

But if your coices actively make you not enjoy the game...?

Racerguy180 wrote:
How is it worse narrative. I have gak die all the time to blasts and kill plenty with them in return.

Are people really playing more than one squad of Terminators? With Dreads I can understand bringing more than one. And by that I mean 2...total. if players are playing with tons of dreads/termis I think that's a fundamental failure on the player part. It's a two-way street, if players are on purpose listbuilding for maximum advantage(irrespective of story), I can see where these things might be an issue. An easy way to mitigate this is to play with those that are likeminded. I'll play everyone once, but some that's all they get out of me.

Many, many, many people are playing with multiples of both. Either they owned them from 1st and have them as part of their collection, or they bought multiple boxes of AoD and have 2-4 units of terminators and 2 contemptors. That's before any standalone different contemptors and leviathans got released too.

And it's not players fault for extraordinarily contrived nerfs, coupled with the advertisement of "use units that showcase how gak the blast weapons are".

This whole nonsense of heresy being about the story didn't used to be peddled back in 2015-2016 when balance concerns came up. If stuff sucked it'd get called out, not answered with "players should use worse units to make the complaint unit feel better to use".

Aecus Decimus wrote:
Solar auxilia LRBT battle cannon: H1 S8 AP4 3" blast, pinning

Solar auxilia LRBT twin lascannon, for the same price: H4 S9 AP2, sunder

Is there some unwritten rule in 30k that you're a WAAC TFG if you space out your models to minimize blast weapon hits? Does GW not know how few hits 3" blasts get in normal circumstances and balance them based on that one time they packed everything into base contact and lost a whole unit to a single plasma cannon? Or am I missing something here? Because to me it seems like 99% of the time the four lascannon shots are going to do more damage than a 3" blast that will usually only hit one model and allows armor saves against the vast majority of targets. And if I'm accurate in this analysis WTF is the point of "bringing back templates" only to make them all so terrible that nobody uses them?

Yes, they’ve massacred template weapons.

This is intentional. They want to encourage mass infantry and big melee fights. Clearly they’ve decided ordinance was preventing players taking big blocks of infantry so they were nerfed to push the game towards that close combat infantry heavy playstyle. So you can buy enough lascannons to kill terminators but you can’t buy weapons to hoover up 3 up armour tacticals.

For example even the Fellblade a 625 point Lord of War only gets a small blast AP2 weapon. It does get a big 7 pie plate with AP3 but that’s on a £200 model which points wise is like an army. It had to have something.

It’s quite simple. They don’t want you to use templates and have truly shafted Solar Auxilia players.

So I lean on it being by design rather than incompetence. They know your small blast is only hitting two guys.