Switch Theme:

Boltgun : an Astartes story  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in fr
Fresh-Faced New User




Hello dakkanaut.

We can all agree that tactical marine got shafted in 8th by the armor penetration change. And I think one big problem lies in the decrease in power of the boltgun against squishy targets.
I was toying a bit with stats and the kill rate of the boltgun vs different targets and came up with this special rule :

Explosive round :
For each unsaved wound made with this weapon against a target that weapon generate an additional shot against the same target. Resolve the shot as usual. Extra shot cannot generate more shot from this rule.

Application to the boltgun

damage per shot vs T3/5+ (Guard)
boltgun (2/3)(2/3)(2/3)=0.296
Astartes boltgun (2/3)(2/3)(2/3)+[(2/3)(2/3)(2/3)]²=0.384
damage variation in % +30%

damage per shot vs T4/6+ (Ork)
boltgun (2/3)(1/2)(5/6)=0.278
Astartes boltgun (2/3)(1/2)(5/6)+[(2/3)(1/2)(5/6)]²=0.355
damage variation in % +28%

damage per shot vs T3/4+ (Aspect warrior)
boltgun (2/3)(2/3)(1/2)=0.222
Astartes boltgun (2/3)(2/3)(1/2)+[(2/3)(2/3)(1/2)]²=0.272
damage variation in % +22%

damage per shot vs T3/3+ (Sister)
boltgun (2/3)(2/3)(1/3)=0.148
Astartes boltgun (2/3)(2/3)(1/3)+[(2/3)(2/3)(1/3)]²=0.170
damage variation in % +15%

damage per shot vs T4/3+ (Marine)
boltgun (2/3)(1/2)(1/3)=0.111
Astartes boltgun (2/3)(1/2)(1/3)+[(2/3)(1/2)(1/3)]²=0.123
damage variation in % +11%

etc.

As you can see the buff against squishy targets is bigger than the buff against durable targets. (e.g +30% more effective vs a guardman but barely better at +4% vs a leman russ)
Note that it makes the boltgun a bit better than the boltrifle against low armor value but still weaker against high armor value.
I would also make it exclusive to the Astartes (and equivalent) to show the difference between the marine boltgun and the scaled down version available to the guard.

It might not be enough to make the tactical marine worth it though. Also, this rule make you roll a lot more dice.
And I know we already roll and reroll a ton of dice. So this needs to be considered.

Thanks for reading.
Discuss.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/15 18:10:18


 
   
Made in gb
Deranged Necron Destroyer




Not a bad idea, but probably seen as a bit complex by GW because it generates the extra shots out of sequence.

I honestly just think Guard/other gak units need to go down to a 6+ save. Maybe let them keep the 5+ if they didn't move as they 'dig in' or something. Problem solved.
   
Made in gb
Norn Queen






Personally I think Marines just need better traits for them to work. Give one chapter the ability to make bolt weapons be -2AP on a 6+ to wound, give another the ability to be -1 to wound against AP0 and AP-1 weapons, etc.
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle





In My Lab

Needlessly complicated. You're already resolving the entire round of shooting, then adding more.

It's not a horrible idea by any means, just seems irksome to implement.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in gb
Lord of the Fleet






London

 JNAProductions wrote:
Needlessly complicated. You're already resolving the entire round of shooting, then adding more.

It's not a horrible idea by any means, just seems irksome to implement.


Compared to Orks where almost every model has this rule? It's not clunky or complicated at all, you just roll an extra shot for every 6 you rolled.
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle





In My Lab

 Valkyrie wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Needlessly complicated. You're already resolving the entire round of shooting, then adding more.

It's not a horrible idea by any means, just seems irksome to implement.


Compared to Orks where almost every model has this rule? It's not clunky or complicated at all, you just roll an extra shot for every 6 you rolled.


Orks have it on HIT rolls. So you just see how many 6s you roll and then roll that many extra dice.

This requires you to hit, wound, save, and possibly FNP, and THEN you roll extra dice.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in gb
Hungry Ork Hunta Lying in Wait





Give all astartes handheld bolters (bolter, combi, storm, twin linked bolter, all primaris equiv bolters) +1 shot, problem solved. Notably do not do this to heavy bolters, they're fine.

   
Made in gb
Lord of the Fleet






London

 JNAProductions wrote:
 Valkyrie wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Needlessly complicated. You're already resolving the entire round of shooting, then adding more.

It's not a horrible idea by any means, just seems irksome to implement.


Compared to Orks where almost every model has this rule? It's not clunky or complicated at all, you just roll an extra shot for every 6 you rolled.


Orks have it on HIT rolls. So you just see how many 6s you roll and then roll that many extra dice.

This requires you to hit, wound, save, and possibly FNP, and THEN you roll extra dice.


Ah fair enough. Didn't notice that difference there.

I would either just give it exploding 6's, or "wound rolls of 6 count as Ap-1".
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Failed saves cause a extra hit is better as it allows toughness and armour to matter while being faster and skipping the can't exactly miss what you have already hit weirdness of Alitoc minus,minus, minus OP BS.

-1AP on 6's why not just use bolt rifles they and heavy bolters become -2AP on 6's and that would have some seriously wonky interactions with deathwatch special issue ammo. -4 or -5 AP? Thats kinda crazy.
Also are you really struggling against MEQ with bolters or GEU though do keep in mind that balance agaibst 4ppm IS is OP to most other infantry in the game. Balance against 5ppm IS. Or it will be marines in single digit PPM.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






Got to add to the consensus that generate extra shots at the end of the whole round of shooting is needlessly time consuming.

Giving an effect of a 6+ to either hit or wound would be enough - each wound roll of a 6+ inflicts 1 additional hit being my favourite mechanic, as it makes them much more effective against infantry but it's less effective against high toughness units. inflicting extra wounds on 6's skews towards hurting big things, not little ones. resolving a whole new round of a few shots also hurt infantry more than high toughness units, but for a lot more time.

12,300 points of Orks
9th W/D/L with Orks, 4/0/2
I am Thoruk, the Barbarian, Slayer of Ducks, and This is my blog!

I'm Selling Infinity, 40k, dystopian wars, UK based!

I also make designs for t-shirts and mugs and such on Redbubble! 
   
Made in us
Never Forget Isstvan!






All bolter weapons should just be +1 damage on a 6 to wound.

Marines don't have things that give them +1 to wound in shooting phase so it cant be combo'd and it helps them againgst vehicles and monsters.


Its fluffy and helps them were they need it.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/19 01:50:10


JOIN MY CRUSADE and gain 4000 RT points!
http://www.eternalcrusade.com/account/sign-up/?ref_code=EC-PLCIKYCABW8PG 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 Eihnlazer wrote:
All bolter weapons should just be +1 damage on a 6 to wound.

Marines don't have things that give them +1 to wound in shooting phase so it cant be combo'd and it helps them againgst vehicles and monsters.


Its fluffy and helps them were they need it.

They have weapons to deal multiple wounds and that proc is already a gimmick for Skitarii Vanguard.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut





Gir Spirit Bane wrote:
Give all astartes handheld bolters (bolter, combi, storm, twin linked bolter, all primaris equiv bolters) +1 shot, problem solved. Notably do not do this to heavy bolters, they're fine.

So you want to make six shots storm bolter better heavy bolter for less?

 Eihnlazer wrote:
All bolter weapons should just be +1 damage on a 6 to wound.

Marines don't have things that give them +1 to wound in shooting phase so it cant be combo'd and it helps them againgst vehicles and monsters.

Its fluffy and helps them were they need it.

Fluffy how?

Bolters are anti-infantry weapons. Not anti-tank. That's why they carry melta/plasma guns. Extra hit would work and be fluffy. More damage? No, just no, it would warp the fluff into pretzel and made bolters even worse against their primary target, hordes...
   
Made in ca
Junior Officer with Laspistol





London, Ontario

*sing-song voice*

Marines just need to be chee-eeper
That’s all they really need to do!
Drop them to eleven points,
The math is really easy, too!

Marines just need to be chee-eeper
Bolters are fine as they are!
No need for special rules,
They set a fine median bar!

Marines just need to be chee-eeper
Reduces the value of good AP
Less efficient plasma - hoo-rah!
Levels things out, you’d see!

Marines just need to be chee-eeper
Gives them a role to play,
More efficient offence is good times,
Trades pieces more defensive-lay!

Everybody!

Marines just need to be chee-eeper...
   
Made in gb
Hungry Ork Hunta Lying in Wait





 Irbis wrote:
Gir Spirit Bane wrote:
Give all astartes handheld bolters (bolter, combi, storm, twin linked bolter, all primaris equiv bolters) +1 shot, problem solved. Notably do not do this to heavy bolters, they're fine.

So you want to make six shots storm bolter better heavy bolter for less?


True, maybe making stormbolter assault 4? or I can be really unpopular and suggest yes rapid fire 3 but 18" range so no insta 6 shot on deepstrike maybe make bolters rapid fire 2 and stormbolters assault 4 but shorter range.

Main issue is marine cost vs other option, I agree in no world is a guardsmen 4 points, same as my damn termagants. They get so much built in they really need to be increased.

I find marine durability is fine, you both lost and gained durability in area, you now get a save vs plasma, battlecannons and many other previous 'marine killer' nasties and in return you're a little less durable than used to be vs small arms fire.

Post coffee fix- wow this post was a damn mess, but I posted it and expect to be grilled for it. I still believe marines need an additional shot, or hell maybe a extra rule for tacts that bolt guns get an extra shot when they are within X distance (explosive rounds, bolts going through at short range and detonating in someone else, and so on). Please lets not make marines cheaper, this has a bigger knock on effect to all other similarly costed models, and I hate the game getting cheaper.

The table is still only 6x4 foot, tactics can go out the window when everyone can afford to field silly amount of models.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/19 09:43:26


 
   
Made in it
Waaagh! Ork Warboss




Italy

Rapid fire 2 storm bolters for 2 points is already a steal.

An assault 4 fairly priced one should be 4-5 points. And then you don't probably want it anymore.

Don't turn SM tacticals into guardmen or firewarriors, basically all the proposals I've read go into those directions. Tacs way more cheap or with better bolters. SM don't need that, it's not what they really lack. Bolters are fine, drukhari have poison which is way less effective and yet they work very well.

SM need other stuff: better characters' auras, chapter traits, close combat combos, stratagems and psychic powers. Points costs, durability, ranged weapons... these are not issues for SM. Unless you want to play them as AM but this way they will always suck because AM is simply too overpowered.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/19 10:35:24


 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






I disagree about them needing more Auras - I think they need less. A space marine should be a formidable opponent all the time, not just when his boss is watching.

I do agree that space marines need more tricks, though. Perhaps having the option to buy a single specialist ammunition in the list-building stage, and then either using it once per battle, or being stuck with it for the duration. Sternguard (if they're still like they used to be) will have the ability to switch ammo for each target, but regular marines can either have regular bolt guns as is, or a variety of more specialised ammos, with pros and cons (EG strong single shot at 18" range (anti heavy) low strength high AP rounds (anti elite), low strength extra shot (anti-horde). Each with it's own weakness and each with it's own points cost - just put it as 3 different bolter profiles and let them pick one to use for the whole game.

If marines had extra flexibility to tailor themselves to a battlefield role, they would be much more fun to use.

12,300 points of Orks
9th W/D/L with Orks, 4/0/2
I am Thoruk, the Barbarian, Slayer of Ducks, and This is my blog!

I'm Selling Infinity, 40k, dystopian wars, UK based!

I also make designs for t-shirts and mugs and such on Redbubble! 
   
Made in us
Shrieking Traitor Sentinel Pilot




USA

 greatbigtree wrote:
*sing-song voice*

Marines just need to be chee-eeper
That’s all they really need to do!
Drop them to eleven points,
The math is really easy, too!

Marines just need to be chee-eeper
Bolters are fine as they are!
No need for special rules,
They set a fine median bar!

Marines just need to be chee-eeper
Reduces the value of good AP
Less efficient plasma - hoo-rah!
Levels things out, you’d see!

Marines just need to be chee-eeper
Gives them a role to play,
More efficient offence is good times,
Trades pieces more defensive-lay!

Everybody!

Marines just need to be chee-eeper...


Ah yes, because you copy pasting this everywhere is adding something to the discussion!

Anyway, Marines just need 2W, 2A, and -1 AP. That's all.

"For the dark gods!" - A traitor guardsmen, probably before being killed. 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






Not so sure about marines getting 2W. I know that it would make sense, and would accurately portray their ability to withstand more small arms fire than guardsmen - from this point of view it works well. But I worry about the bookkeeping aspect - not only remembering that a unit has a model with 1 wound in it, but remembering which one it is - which is important when it comes to charge ranges etc. I think that the majority of any army should comprise of single-wound grunts.

But, then again, it would reflect their supernatural resilience really well.

12,300 points of Orks
9th W/D/L with Orks, 4/0/2
I am Thoruk, the Barbarian, Slayer of Ducks, and This is my blog!

I'm Selling Infinity, 40k, dystopian wars, UK based!

I also make designs for t-shirts and mugs and such on Redbubble! 
   
Made in us
Shrieking Traitor Sentinel Pilot




USA

I'm saying they should just become Primaris. It's not that hard to manage, just a simple little counter next to the dude. There shouldn't be a difference between Mini marines and Primaris. Fluff/Models? Sure. Rules? No.

"For the dark gods!" - A traitor guardsmen, probably before being killed. 
   
Made in ca
Junior Officer with Laspistol





London, Ontario

@ Sir Heckington

(That's the best part, I didn't copy paste. Those are new verses! There are just that many reasons that solve the issues of MEQ not performing. Because...)

*sing-song voice*

Marines just need to be chee-eeper!
Why not just have more bolter shots?
Decreasing cost equals more output,
That would help out lots!

We can get a chorus!!

Marines just need to be chee-eepr...
   
Made in us
Deathwing Terminator with Assault Cannon






 some bloke wrote:
Not so sure about marines getting 2W. I know that it would make sense, and would accurately portray their ability to withstand more small arms fire than guardsmen - from this point of view it works well. But I worry about the bookkeeping aspect - not only remembering that a unit has a model with 1 wound in it, but remembering which one it is - which is important when it comes to charge ranges etc. I think that the majority of any army should comprise of single-wound grunts.

But, then again, it would reflect their supernatural resilience really well.
It's not about making sense fluff wise. Even if a 13 ppm marine gained 2W, 2A and -1AP on boltgun, it would STILL leave them worse than guardsmen per point.

GW needs to admit that Space Marines are not their poster child anymore and balance the game around their new poster child that is Imperial Guard.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/12/19 16:35:17


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 greatbigtree wrote:
@ Sir Heckington

(That's the best part, I didn't copy paste. Those are new verses! There are just that many reasons that solve the issues of MEQ not performing. Because...)

*sing-song voice*

Marines just need to be chee-eeper!
Why not just have more bolter shots?
Decreasing cost equals more output,
That would help out lots!

We can get a chorus!!

Marines just need to be chee-eepr...

And how much cheaper would that be before you get that many more Marines? You said 11 points earlier, but that's only an additional Marine after 5-6 Marines.

What's that doing, exactly?

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Deathwing Terminator with Assault Cannon






Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 greatbigtree wrote:
@ Sir Heckington

(That's the best part, I didn't copy paste. Those are new verses! There are just that many reasons that solve the issues of MEQ not performing. Because...)

*sing-song voice*

Marines just need to be chee-eeper!
Why not just have more bolter shots?
Decreasing cost equals more output,
That would help out lots!

We can get a chorus!!

Marines just need to be chee-eepr...

And how much cheaper would that be before you get that many more Marines? You said 11 points earlier, but that's only an additional Marine after 5-6 Marines.

What's that doing, exactly?
You're not adding additional marines. You're making the Astartes' verison of Loyal 17 (2x Techmarine + 3x 5-man tac squad) more viable by putting them at about 250 points.
   
Made in ca
Junior Officer with Laspistol





London, Ontario

Very ballpark, you're getting 20% more marines.

20% more Wounds.

20% more attacks.

20% more board control.

So, 20% better offence, defence, and board presence. Alternatively, more points to spend elsewhere, or take a plasmagun upgrade, or whatever. Your choice... the beauty of points adjustments.
   
Made in us
Shrieking Traitor Sentinel Pilot




USA

It's also the wrong fix, imo. Sure, that statline works, but Instead for a 2 point increase we can have cool marines! They have the toughness everyone wants with 2 Wounds, the CC everyone wants with 2 Attacks, and the Output everyone wants with -1 AP! It's almost like that's what they should have been at the start of 8th!

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/19 17:28:57


"For the dark gods!" - A traitor guardsmen, probably before being killed. 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Just play Kill Team.

Honestly, that's the answer to every "marines aren't good enough" complaint.

40k is about titans, not infantry men.

"'players must agree how they are going to select their armies, and if any restrictions apply to the number and type of models they can use."

This is an actual rule in the actual rulebook. Quit whining about how you can imagine someone's army touching you in a bad place and play by the actual rules.


Freelance Ontologist

When people ask, "What's the point in understanding everything?" they've just disqualified themselves from using questions and should disappear in a puff of paradox. But they don't understand and just continue existing, which are also their only two strategies for life. 
   
Made in us
Shrieking Traitor Sentinel Pilot




USA

 DarknessEternal wrote:
Just play Kill Team.

Honestly, that's the answer to every "marines aren't good enough" complaint.

40k is about titans, not infantry men.


Well, 40k shouldn't be about titans imo. I think the 1250 game scale should be what it's aimed for. Titans, knights, and huge models like that should be on their way out into Apoc games or their own thing.

"For the dark gods!" - A traitor guardsmen, probably before being killed. 
   
Made in ca
Junior Officer with Laspistol





London, Ontario

That ship sailed 2 editions ago with the Knight codex.

2 wound marines still get gunned down by the plethora of high-volume anti-tank weaponry. A battle cannon takes out 2-wound MEQ just as easily as 1 wound Guardsmen. We can balance troops against the man-portable weapons they carry, but not against Volcano Cannons and the like. There are sooooo many Weapon profiles that don’t care about the difference between MEQ and GEQ stats. The only fix for that is more dudes, and that’s strictly a points issue.

Vs Guardsmen, as an example, MEQ need to trade favourably against grunts with lasguns because they always trade worse against Battle Cannons. No amount of cool rules fixes that.
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle





In My Lab

 greatbigtree wrote:
That ship sailed 2 editions ago with the Knight codex.

2 wound marines still get gunned down by the plethora of high-volume anti-tank weaponry. A battle cannon takes out 2-wound MEQ just as easily as 1 wound Guardsmen. We can balance troops against the man-portable weapons they carry, but not against Volcano Cannons and the like. There are sooooo many Weapon profiles that don’t care about the difference between MEQ and GEQ stats. The only fix for that is more dudes, and that’s strictly a points issue.

Vs Guardsmen, as an example, MEQ need to trade favourably against grunts with lasguns because they always trade worse against Battle Cannons. No amount of cool rules fixes that.


Really? Because while S8 AP-2 Dd3 wounds T3 and T4 the same, it allows for a 5+ save on Marines and no save on Guardsmen (4+ and 6+ respectively, in cover) and has a 1/3 chance of an unsaved wound not killing a 2W Marine.

You're looking at, to take down a squad of 10 Guardsmen, 24 BS 4+ Battlecannon shots. (28.8 in cover.)
To take down 5 Marines with 2W each, you need 25.2 BS 4+ Battlecannon shots, assuming two Marines are not killed instantly out of the five. (33.6 in cover.)

But wait! Guardsmen don't get defensive traits. Marines do.

Ravenguard increases the number of shots needed to 37.8 out of cover (50.4 in cover) and Iron Hands gives them about a 30% chance of surviving two points of damage and about a 7.5% chance of surviving a full 3 damage blast.

So yeah. A Battlecannon is, on a model to model basis, only half as good as killing Primaris as it is Guardsmen at BEST. At worst, it drops to less than a third as effective.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K Proposed Rules
Go to: