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.

Personally I think twin linked is a bit rubbish and should be revamped but maybe I am just biased (heavy rail rifles that get 2 shots and reroll is not OP) so I thought I would get a broader opinion.

There's a number of things that make a distinction between "rerolls failed to-hit rolls" and "gets double as many shots" already, with the latter almost always being valued more highly.

Now, I do think the HRR is somewhat underpowered considering what it costs to get it, and would be better off as Salvo 1/2, but I think making twin-linked double the fire rate of any weapon it's applied to is too broad a brush.

Since you brought up the Tau example, think of this for a moment.

Currently, a twin-linked Plasma Rifle costs 20 points to equip.

However, 2 Plasma Rifles cost 30 points to equip.

If Twin Linked simply doubles the shots, there is no reason for it to be cheaper than two weapons. So the cost of the twin-linked weapons we do have (and as Tau we can have a virtual boatload of them) would have to go up by 10 or more points each weapon system.

That would mean you average Broadside would cost 20 points more.

Gun Drones would cost an additional 5 to 10 points a pop.

Most of our tanks would see a 10 to 20 point increase just for the secondary weapons. Heck, even the lowly Piranha would see this bump.

Ghostkeels, Riptides and Stormsurges all have one or more twin-linked weapon too.

How about this to tickle your fancy:

Any twinlinked weapon that has three shots or less(including rapid fire weapons) adds 1 shot to the weapons firing profile.

Any twinlinked weapon that has four or more shots adds 2 shots to the weapons firing profile.

Personally I think that it should revert back to its 2nd edition self:
Make a single roll to hit per shot. Each shot that hits is multiplied into 2.

That's actually pretty cool MoO! One roll to hit, but two hits if you succeed! For once in my life the Land Raider actually makes sense why it's armed like it was.

Well, it is how TL was originally concieved and it does make sense like that. Sadly for whatever reasons GW decided to change it in 3rd edition to the weirdness we have today.

Now *that*, I could go for. Then have some other modification for weapons that are supposed to be extra-accurate, and we're good here.

I think I would rather TL confered Shred as well...

Currently:
>you roll to hit and miss
>you reroll to hit

I would like:
>roll to hit successfully
>fail to wound/pen
>make a second shot
OR
>you roll to hit and miss
>you reroll to hit

What about an either or type rule as in

Twin linked-a weapon with this special rule may
• may fire one more shot than is normally allowed, and re-roll a single failed to hit roll
Or
•may fire the normal number of shots, and may re-roll all failed to hit rolls

Some armies wish they had twin linked even as it currently exists. This sounds like a case of a rich person crying because they free trip they got only comes with a coach seat.

gungo wrote:
Some armies wish they had twin linked even as it currently exists. This sounds like a case of a rich person crying because they free trip they got only comes with a coach seat.

Bingo. Twin-linked is a pretty good rule as it is.

Well a quad gun barreled anti air machine cannon isn't four gun barrels because it needs to do four times the normal damage, it's because it needs to hit, and so when it's fired usually only one of the gun barrels hit. Going by this logic it's reasonable that a weapon can't do more damage than if it were a single gun barrel/single weapon.

Lot's of shooting in 40k is against ground units which surely are slower than flyers, but you still need to imagine (for so many reasons besides this one) that it's a dynamic battlefield and everything is constantly moving even though something didn't move in the movement phase. So bottom of line I think it's okay, though for the sake of time using on rerolls I could do without them.

Edit: Grammar.

The question is, what to you expect from the change.

Changing it just because Laser Cannons or Heavy Bolters suck is not a solution to the problem.
Changing it because Immolaters with Heavy Bolters suck is a good reason but 6 shots or 3 shots with re-roll to hit is the same result in the end.

Keep twin linked as it is and change the rules of the weapon itself (eg. remove D3 wounds for lasercannons or rail guns)

Have a choice mid game

When you have a weapon that is twin linked you have two options

Option one is a tight burst of accurate fire giving rerolls as the rule currently stands.

Option two is you change the tight link to a faster fire at reduced accuracy (so no rerolls) but you can fire twice

Twin linked should have 2 options

1; get the re roll to hit

2; snap fire 2 times as many shots at bs1 no bonus allowed. absolutely no bonuses allowed of any kind!!! ABSOLUTELY NO BONUS TO BS OR RE ROLL OF ANY KIND OF SPECIAL RULES. LOOKING AT YOU TAU.

twin linked template weapons.
option 1 is only available.

A twin-linked BS3 weapon is more accurate than a BS4 weapon. It is only rubbish by very exacting standards.

You want to hit 100% of the time or something?

Personally, I like the 2nd ed system of "Double the number of successful hits", and would rather write rules around that. However, a simple lazy "fix" that wouldn't over-break most stuff would just be to remove the reroll, and make it that a Twin-Linked Weapon fires an extra shot beyond its normal profile. So, a twin-linked plasma fires 2 shots at long range, 3 within rapid-fire, etc.

There may be some odd shifts as a result of this (mostly related to single-shot Tau Crisis options, so Fusion/Flamers really), but nothing too dramatic (Let's face it, you probably never give your Warbuggies/Deffkoptas Big Shootas anyway, right?)

Re-roll to hit, hit rolls of 6 count as two hits, a-la Tesla.

The only issue I have with twin-linked weapons is that in many models, twin-linked weapons have two barrels making you naturally believe you also get two shots.

I like the idea of bringing back the old rule that the original shot is multiplied with two if it hits.

I think twin-linked weapons born as something in the middle between having one or two of the same weapon, and the actual rule is just tailored for this purpose.
the game as it is now doesn't need more firepower, it has too much yet, so the TL rule imo should be worsened.

TL weapons may reroll failed to hit, but the second result of 1,2 or 3 is always a miss.

Gone with just give the extra shots, have seen T/L in a few games, the concept has never felt right though I see whats its trying to do - give you a higher chance of an average number of hits, a lower chance of nothing but no chance of a silly number.

Personally prefer more shots, you will tend to the average anyway, and allows a re-roll for 'another' rule to be used, plus on occasion you will get lucky.

Justification.. firing two guns doesn't make the first more accurate. Also for game resolution, it allows such weapons to roll alongside normal ones - as you're not retooling just pick em up and roll.

back to 40k, T/L as it is isn't a problem, but shouldn't be automatic, the idea that some models have what amounts to one weapon on two mounts is fine, but allow others to have two weapons.

leopard wrote:
Justification.. firing two guns doesn't make the first more accurate. Also for game resolution, it allows such weapons to roll alongside normal ones - as you're not retooling just pick em up and roll.

back to 40k, T/L as it is isn't a problem, but shouldn't be automatic, the idea that some models have what amounts to one weapon on two mounts is fine, but allow others to have two weapons.

It's one gun because firing two guns that are mounted side by side means they won't hit the same target. The bullets will travel a foot apart from each other because twin-linked guns have no convergence point. You can say it works against squads of tightly packed guys but then the guy firing the gun isn't actually aiming at anyone, he's just getting lucky on his failures by accidentally hitting someone with the second stream. Twin-Linked re-rolls already represent this.

The idea behind Twin-Linked is that you roll for the first stream of bullets. If it hits, the second stream automatically misses because both can't hit the same target. If the first one misses though, you get to roll to see if the second stream hit instead, and likewise automatically means the first one didn't hit anything. If both miss then you were way off target. Both can never hit the same guy is the idea behind twin-linked.

For guns that have twin-linked guns strapped together with a very tight spread like Storm Bolters, GW has already made them Assault 2 instead of Twin-Linked. So you can actually hit multiple targets with those. Any gun that can potentially hit the same target with both shots should be Assault 2 or Heavy 2 whatever. But bigger stuff tends to be twin-linked. Army special rules that grant twin-linked are just reusing an existing special rule to mean "better accuracy".

Twinlinked is suppose to represent double-barreled weapons that increase the spread of fire to increase odds of hitting. Problem is they dont represent the possibility of both barrels hitting the target.

How about on a to hit of 5+ (6+ overwatch), both weapons hit which double the amount of Hits generated. A FLAKK Cannon fires a barrage of crap at planes because theyre hard to hit otherwise, but theres very low odds that literally only one barrel that fired the FLAKK hits the plane. If they hit it at all, they hit it a LOT

Twin Linked Weapons are supposed to solve the problem that models are equipped with more weapons they could use.
So re-roll to hit was the easiest way to solve the problem without making the "can only fire X weapons" obsolete.

double the shots for twin linked lasers on dreadnought would be the same to allow him to fire 3 weapons

The main problem with twin linked in current edition is, that single shot weapons are not worth it any more.
Increasing the rate of fire (double the number of hits on 6+) would only make the already good weapons better and not affect the worse weapons.
Reroll to hit & to wound while increasing the damage of singe shot weapons would be better

I always preferred the option of having a single re-roll available during whichever phase the weapon is used in. If you miss when rolling to hit, you re-roll to hit. If you hit on your to hit roll, assuming you didn't re-roll, you could then use the re-roll on either the to wound or penning. if you make both the hit and wound\pen without rerolls, you could force a reroll on a successful saving roll or reroll the vehicle\structural damage roll.

It is a single weapon, so no double result, but one wound results, one void shield is dropped, or a single damage result is rolled, even if you successfully roll everything the first time without re-rolling any of the rolls. Sensible, yes?

Master crafted should be the one that needs a revamp, because right now, roll-wise, there is no difference between a single-shot weapon that is Master crafted, or Twin-linked, since there is only one failed roll to be re-rolled.

i think that for twin-linked the second shoot should always hit on a min of 4+, so ridiculous that BS5 gets twin-linked almost guaranteing auto-hit