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.

First of all, this is more approached with more of a narrative mindset than a competitive one. So before anyone starts quoting numbers, just bear that in mind

In regards to plasma, its never made much sense to me that weapons overcharging every volley and not overheating because a commander of some description is nearby yelling at the guns not to explode.
I had a thought recently that to represent the weapon cooling down after a hazardous overcharge, the weapon cannot be fired in the following turn if it fired on overcharge.

In my head at least, it sounds like a reasonable balancing act between making plasma very powerful for a turn, and not spamming overcharge like crazy when theres access to rerolling 1s nearby.
Giving plasma on vehicles the ability to overcharge every turn would be alright to represent the more capable and advanced cooling systems available on a vehicle.

It's more of case that the commander is ordering them to fire more disciplined, preventing them from going a bit nuts and risking overcharging.

... And firing at a slightly stealthy unit doubles your chance of overheating!

I'd rather it stated 'natural 1s', and/or 'cannot reroll overheats'.

Plasma fix is straight and simple: natural rolls of 1 may be re-rolled but the bearer is slain anyway. If the model suffers a mortal wound instead of dying because it's a vehicle or its profile says so it may re-roll that 1 but suffers the mortal wound anyway.

Is Plasma even an issue that it's necessary to nerf it? I'd rather it went back to being 13 points to be honest.

Yeah supercharging plasma should have the following rule:
"Unmodified rolls of 1 to hit cause the bearer 1 Mortal Wound"
Simple, easy fix. Plasma cannons can be D3 MWs.

But outright killing yourself because the target is wearing camouflage is just silly.

 Galef wrote:
Yeah supercharging plasma should have the following rule:
"Unmodified rolls of 1 to hit cause the bearer 1 Mortal Wound"
Simple, easy fix. Plasma cannons can be D3 MWs.

But outright killing yourself because the target is wearing camouflage is just silly.

Fluff justification might be that the wielder is firing more wildly and therefore more prone to making the weapon malfunction.

It isn't a GREAT justification but there ya go, fluff bunnies. It's a starting point.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Fluff justification might be that the wielder is firing more wildly and therefore more prone to making the weapon malfunction.

So to justify "firing wildly", Plasmas that are supercharging should also get to fire as many shots until they get a hit, right? Because that's what's happening in the fluff.

No, harder to hit targets should not increase the chance of weapon malfunction.
But what does make sense if the model is "holding the charger" too long while trying to get a good aim on the target. There's your fluff reason.

But for balance, it should just be unmodified 1s. And it should only be 1MW, not outright slain

-

Plasma Cannons wouldn't need a variant. It fires d3 times, so should provide twice the MW already.

"Unmodified rolls of 1 cause 1 Mortal Wound to the bearer." or "Unmodified rolls of 1 cause 1 Mortal Wound to the bearer. Rolls of 1 may not be rerolled."

I agree Plas isn't the biggest problem with the game (even if you consider non-IoM Plas like Dissies and Reapers). But it would be nice to fix this.

Plasma went from "cause an armour save" to "Kill your 7 wound model outright" because re-roll 1's are a thing now. Remove the re-roll 1 safety net and you need to return plasma to causing a wound (even if it's a mortal wound) rather than slaying outright. But that causes issues with wound allocation, so who knows anymore.

No, it didn't.

Plasma went from "cause an armor save" to "".

As in, they learned how to make safe Plas like CWE and T'au did. Only better. Because it was still S7. Because apparently the IoM is more technologically advanced than T'au or CWE or something.

Then, at the same time, they added a "Basically Melta with longer range" profile that got EVEN HOTTER than Plasma used to. Because the Plasma Gun needed to be good enough anti-tank to make the MG redundant.

Rant aside, it's more a fluff thing about Plasma that pisses me off than the mechanics.

All that said, for simplicity and removing some really backwards interactions, I'd rather this rule:

"Unmodified rolls of 1 cause 1 Mortal Wound to the bearer" - a sidegrade over the previous version. Could even be non-Mortal if it's too much of a nerf, but I'm fairly sure that's actually a buff.

Bharring wrote:
No, it didn't.

Plasma went from "cause an armor save" to "".

As in, they learned how to make safe Plas like CWE and T'au did. Only better. Because it was still S7. Because apparently the IoM is more technologically advanced than T'au or CWE or something.

Then, at the same time, they added a "Basically Melta with longer range" profile that got EVEN HOTTER than Plasma used to. Because the Plasma Gun needed to be good enough anti-tank to make the MG redundant.

Rant aside, it's more a fluff thing about Plasma that pisses me off than the mechanics.

All that said, for simplicity and removing some really backwards interactions, I'd rather this rule:

"Unmodified rolls of 1 cause 1 Mortal Wound to the bearer" - a sidegrade over the previous version. Could even be non-Mortal if it's too much of a nerf, but I'm fairly sure that's actually a buff.

Just get rid of the overheat version on basic Plasma Guns.

Bharring wrote:
No, it didn't.

Plasma went from "cause an armor save" to "".

As in, they learned how to make safe Plas like CWE and T'au did. Only better. Because it was still S7. Because apparently the IoM is more technologically advanced than T'au or CWE or something.

Then, at the same time, they added a "Basically Melta with longer range" profile that got EVEN HOTTER than Plasma used to. Because the Plasma Gun needed to be good enough anti-tank to make the MG redundant.

Rant aside, it's more a fluff thing about Plasma that pisses me off than the mechanics.

All that said, for simplicity and removing some really backwards interactions, I'd rather this rule:

"Unmodified rolls of 1 cause 1 Mortal Wound to the bearer" - a sidegrade over the previous version. Could even be non-Mortal if it's too much of a nerf, but I'm fairly sure that's actually a buff.

The caveat of the previous edition Plasma was that it had higher Strength compared to the Tau and Eldar ones because it was not manufactured as safe. So who cares it had S7? The S6 ones didn't overheat.

The S6 didn't overheat, but couldn't pen AV12, and couldn't even glance AV13.

S7 was a big deal over S6 in 6th/7th.

Regardless, more advanced tech produces safe weapons at S6, and the reckless tech-backwards race now produces the same safe weapons but at S7, with the *option* to go S8 and risk overcharging.

In other words, the IoM has better tech than T'au and CWE for some reason?

Bharring wrote:
The S6 didn't overheat, but couldn't pen AV12, and couldn't even glance AV13.

S7 was a big deal over S6 in 6th/7th.

Regardless, more advanced tech produces safe weapons at S6, and the reckless tech-backwards race now produces the same safe weapons but at S7, with the *option* to go S8 and risk overcharging.

In other words, the IoM has better tech than T'au and CWE for some reason?

Plasma Gun was orginally S7 but you had to have it cool down for 2 whole turns then 2nd ed it was charge for 1 turn - in fact looking back throuh various rule books it was pretty much always S7 with some downside.

Why they had to boost it to make Melta guns obsolete i donlt know.

Because Primaris have more Plas than Melta. Gotta push everything Primaris!

I'm not 100% kidding with that explaination.

The IOM should have better tech than Tau.

 Bobthehero wrote:
The IOM should have better tech than Tau.

They already do but they don't use it for all front line troops

 Bobthehero wrote:
The IOM should have better tech than Tau.

Then what's the point of the T'au rules wise?

Their role in the game is generally more advanced weaponry (Their base guns being strength 5 ect, though the Imperium's big stuff that they can't mass produce is better.), but losing in 2 whole phases of the game. To make up for those losses, they have better tech and MLs.

 Sir Heckington wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
The IOM should have better tech than Tau.

Then what's the point of the T'au rules wise?

Their role in the game is generally more advanced weaponry (Their base guns being strength 5 ect, though the Imperium's big stuff that they can't mass produce is better.), but losing in 2 whole phases of the game. To make up for those losses, they have better tech and MLs.

Different use of tactics and their tech, if you want the superior tech race vs the IOM, that's what Necrons and Eldar do, Tau shouldn't. And arguably, STR isn't the only measure of tech advancement on basic weapon, hotshot lasgun high AP allow a squad of Stormtroopers to match the shooting of a FW squad.

I always saw T'au as ahead of IoM on the whole by a wide margin, but ahead of the best of IoM by only a little, and behind DAoT.

But, in this conversation, it's about IoM tech being better than CWE tech. Because reasons.

Bharring wrote:
I always saw T'au as ahead of IoM on the whole by a wide margin, but ahead of the best of IoM by only a little, and behind DAoT.

But, in this conversation, it's about IoM tech being better than CWE tech. Because reasons.

Getting way OT but Tau tech is quite good in specific areas - importantly they tend to focuss their tech very dffrently and more effectively compared to the IOM, and to a lesser extent than the Necrons or the Eldar all of whom have tech that would scare the Tau stupid if they knew about it.

Would Plasma work better if it just had the overheat version.....or at least just that on the Plasma gun or similar small scale versions.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Bharring wrote:
The S6 didn't overheat, but couldn't pen AV12, and couldn't even glance AV13.

S7 was a big deal over S6 in 6th/7th.

Regardless, more advanced tech produces safe weapons at S6, and the reckless tech-backwards race now produces the same safe weapons but at S7, with the *option* to go S8 and risk overcharging.

In other words, the IoM has better tech than T'au and CWE for some reason?

Plasma Gun was orginally S7 but you had to have it cool down for 2 whole turns then 2nd ed it was charge for 1 turn - in fact looking back throuh various rule books it was pretty much always S7 with some downside.

Why they had to boost it to make Melta guns obsolete i donlt know.

They completely mispriced Melta as they decided:
1. You're always using the Assault rule but:
2. You're always hitting with a one shot weapon.
3. Your target doesn't have an Invul

Here's an interesting idea:

What if instead of 1s doing anything on the turn you Supercharge, what if failed hits on the following turn, whether supercharging or not would slay the bearer.

Basically, you supercharge the weapon for a volley (turn) but it becomes unsafe to first for a few moments (the next turn) regardless of firing mode.
So you have to choose whether to risk it, or let them cool down for a turn.

But I agree the cost on Meltas is backward. Melta should be cheaper than Plasma in every case

-

Here's a question: Is dying when you miss with a plasma gun fun? I get that it adds character to the weapon, but it always felt really suspension of disbelief breaking that a space marine, survivor of his indoctrination, genetic modification, and untold battles, had a 1 in 6 chance of blasting his face off every time he pulled the trigger.

Could you get a similar amount of flavor out of the weapon by saying that they can't be fired the turn after they were overcharged? Or maybe just say that the weapon becomes unusable when an overcharged shot rolls a natural 1 to-hit?

Wyldhunt wrote:
Here's a question: Is dying when you miss with a plasma gun fun? I get that it adds character to the weapon, but it always felt really suspension of disbelief breaking that a space marine, survivor of his indoctrination, genetic modification, and untold battles, had a 1 in 6 chance of blasting his face off every time he pulled the trigger.

Could you get a similar amount of flavor out of the weapon by saying that they can't be fired the turn after they were overcharged? Or maybe just say that the weapon becomes unusable when an overcharged shot rolls a natural 1 to-hit?

Because currently thats his tactical choice if he chooses to use it in the the dangerous overheat setting rather than normal setting?. Get rid of the OP setting or increase the cost.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Wyldhunt wrote:
Here's a question: Is dying when you miss with a plasma gun fun? I get that it adds character to the weapon, but it always felt really suspension of disbelief breaking that a space marine, survivor of his indoctrination, genetic modification, and untold battles, had a 1 in 6 chance of blasting his face off every time he pulled the trigger.

Could you get a similar amount of flavor out of the weapon by saying that they can't be fired the turn after they were overcharged? Or maybe just say that the weapon becomes unusable when an overcharged shot rolls a natural 1 to-hit?

Because currently thats his tactical choice if he chooses to use it in the the dangerous overheat setting rather than normal setting?. Get rid of the OP setting or increase the cost.

Right, but does the choice have to be between using the standard profile and blowing your face off? if the goal of having the choice is to...

* Be fluffy/characterful
* Give the gun the flexibility to be pretty good against tanks when needed
* Give the wielder a reason not to use the more powerful profile at all times...

Then wouldn't all that still be accomplished by changing the "tactical choice" to something like:

* Risking making the gun unusable for the rest of the game or...
* Guaranteeing that the gun can't be fired at all in the following turn?

Instead of making Gets Hot! casualties the cost of doing business, you present the player with a question. "Do I need the extra strength and damage right now against the unit I'm about to shoot, or will the normal profile do? Am I better off firing more shots over the course of this turn and next, or should I do fewer, stronger shots right now?"

You'd still have a characterful weapon that presents the player with a choice. You just don't have to perform mental gymnastics to explain why guys like space marines would risk having such volatile weapons in their hands. Plasma's lethality to its wielder feels like one of those joke rules that got passed along through the ages even though 40k is typically less comical than it once was.

Plasma was useful in previous editions even when on ones it killed your character or unit. It was always an active risk, but we didn't have -1 to hit in spades, if its only on natural 1s then it should be fine.

It would be a drawback to an already cheap weapon. Melta weapons are supposed to be the "MAKE SURE THIS CHARACTER IS DEAD!" while the plasma gun was the anti-MEQ or infantry weapon. Now it is slotted as the most powerful weapon in the game bare none in cost-effectiveness.

That's because of how ineffective Melta was made in this edition.

Bharring wrote:
... And firing at a slightly stealthy unit doubles your chance of overheating!

I'd rather it stated 'natural 1s', and/or 'cannot reroll overheats'.

I mean, congrats, you just made it so no one will ever over charge anything