War Kitten wrote:
I agree something needs to be done to Storm Bolters. Perhaps more shots at a 18" like you said, but I'm not sure that just giving them more shots will do much. S4 shooting is unimpressive these days when StrD is being passed out like candy. Perhaps bump it up a point in strength?

 NorseSig wrote:
Maybe stormbolters could be a salvo variant where they are 2/4 but keep their range and assault profile otherwise. I feel power weapons (and most likely a large number of melee weapons) should be 5 points cheaper. Heavy bolters should at the very least have pinning (sniper rifles should have that back too).

 The Wise Dane wrote:
Okay, guys. Heavy Bolter. AP 4. S 4. Salvo 3/5. I solved the world guys.

Martel732 wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:
Okay, guys. Heavy Bolter. AP 4. S 4. Salvo 3/5. I solved the world guys.

Still useless. S6 or bust. You have to keep up with the Eldar or lose. If your "heavy" weapon can't be used to glance out vehicles, it's not a heavy weapon in 7th.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Just make it 4 shots, that's the same thing they did to burst cannons. 5/4 at 36" is great against anything less than MEQs (gaurd, tau, ect). And that's the role they are made to fill, anti-infantry.

 The Wise Dane wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:
Okay, guys. Heavy Bolter. AP 4. S 4. Salvo 3/5. I solved the world guys.

Still useless. S6 or bust. You have to keep up with the Eldar or lose. If your "heavy" weapon can't be used to glance out vehicles, it's not a heavy weapon in 7th.

Do we want that? Do we want to go to other people's cheese to fight cheese?

I dunno, I like the idea of the Heavy Bolter being a weapon that actually shoots more bullets.

 The Wise Dane wrote:
Yeah, I'm not trying to make the Heavy Bolter an Anti Everything gun. It just kinda need to be better at that job by a small margin.

Martel732 wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:
Yeah, I'm not trying to make the Heavy Bolter an Anti Everything gun. It just kinda need to be better at that job by a small margin.

Well, technically, there are targets the scatterlaser struggles against. It's just SO GOOD against so many things. The heavy bolter is not really good against anything in the game, even its intended targets because it trades ROF and S for AP 4. AP 4 that is rendered moot most of the time by cover. 7th ed is about wound generation in most cases, not AP of said wounds.

 The Wise Dane wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:
Yeah, I'm not trying to make the Heavy Bolter an Anti Everything gun. It just kinda need to be better at that job by a small margin.

Well, technically, there are targets the scatterlaser struggles against. It's just SO GOOD against so many things. The heavy bolter is not really good against anything in the game, even its intended targets because it trades ROF and S for AP 4. AP 4 that is rendered moot most of the time by cover. 7th ed is about wound generation in most cases, not AP of said wounds.

True dat - So if you made the shots S 5, AP 5 instead, but let it shoot, like, Salvo 3/6.

Martel732 wrote:
Having more useless shots is just that, useless. There is also the compounded problem that Imperial platforms for heavy weapons are consistently inferior.

"Then, shockingly enough, the heavy bolter is not what you want."

No truer words. There is no role for a heavy bolter in an Imperial heavy slot.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Having more useless shots is just that, useless. There is also the compounded problem that Imperial platforms for heavy weapons are consistently inferior.

"Then, shockingly enough, the heavy bolter is not what you want."

No truer words. There is no role for a heavy bolter in an Imperial heavy slot.

But it's not useless, it's anti-infantry. The problem is you are comparing it to something that is way to good for it's cost and availability, the scatter-laser.

And you can also drop their cost, and the cost of the base units. But making the HB S6 isn't going ti solve anything, and will simply contribute to the power creep.

edit: it's also a probelm with the base game, med S high RoF weapons are better against vehicles than single shot anti-vehicle weapons because of the horribly deigned HP system.

 NorseSig wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Having more useless shots is just that, useless. There is also the compounded problem that Imperial platforms for heavy weapons are consistently inferior.

"Then, shockingly enough, the heavy bolter is not what you want."

No truer words. There is no role for a heavy bolter in an Imperial heavy slot.

But it's not useless, it's anti-infantry. The problem is you are comparing it to something that is way to good for it's cost and availability, the scatter-laser.

And you can also drop their cost, and the cost of the base units. But making the HB S6 isn't going ti solve anything, and will simply contribute to the power creep.

edit: it's also a probelm with the base game, med S high RoF weapons are better against vehicles than single shot anti-vehicle weapons because of the horribly deigned HP system.

I think the heavy bolter at most should be salvo 3/5 pinning. That would make it decent at anti infantry.

 NorseSig wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Having more useless shots is just that, useless. There is also the compounded problem that Imperial platforms for heavy weapons are consistently inferior.

"Then, shockingly enough, the heavy bolter is not what you want."

No truer words. There is no role for a heavy bolter in an Imperial heavy slot.

But it's not useless, it's anti-infantry. The problem is you are comparing it to something that is way to good for it's cost and availability, the scatter-laser.

And you can also drop their cost, and the cost of the base units. But making the HB S6 isn't going ti solve anything, and will simply contribute to the power creep.

edit: it's also a probelm with the base game, med S high RoF weapons are better against vehicles than single shot anti-vehicle weapons because of the horribly deigned HP system.

I think the heavy bolter at most should be salvo 3/5 pinning. That would make it decent at anti infantry.

 The Wise Dane wrote:
When it comes to Power Weapons, the only two weapons I really mind is the Power Maul and the Power Fist.

The thing I don't like about the Power Maul is that it's basically extremely strong against one kind of unit, but unusable in all other instances, where most Power weapons are sorta general use. Also, why is it that the weapon you'd usually use to break armour and bones is the weakest in AP?

I'd take away the two points of S, leaving it at S - , and leave the AP, but give it Rending in addition to Concussive. I think that shows the effect a good hit with a mace can do to innards, but that it can't just break Power Armour by itself.

When it comes to Power Fists, I mostly hate the fact that it's basically the Thunderhammer with less style, so I'd rather reflect the fact that it's more flexible than most weapons.

I think it should have two profiles: Standard and Charged. Standard would be S + 1, AP 3, Concussive, but not specialist weapon, as it isn't powered, while the Charged statline would be S x2, AP 2, Concussive, Specialist Weapon, Unwieldy, as we know it.

Martel732 wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:
Yeah, I'm not trying to make the Heavy Bolter an Anti Everything gun. It just kinda need to be better at that job by a small margin.

Well, technically, there are targets the scatterlaser struggles against. It's just SO GOOD against so many things. The heavy bolter is not really good against anything in the game, even its intended targets because it trades ROF and S for AP 4. AP 4 that is rendered moot most of the time by cover. 7th ed is about wound generation in most cases, not AP of said wounds.

True dat - So if you made the shots S 5, AP 5 instead, but let it shoot, like, Salvo 3/6.

Hmmm. That's an interesting proposal. Of course, at that point, the assault cannon should have like 18 shots, since a multi-barreled autocannon fires about three times faster than a machinegun.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Bolter weapons as a whole need something to make them stand out. Gauss can glance vehicles to submission (though everyone on here grossly overestimates how well it works), Eldar get Bladestorm, which is Rending on things that matter (since Monstrous Creatures are more dangerous than vehicles) and Tau just get much better range on their guns.

So maybe there's a way to create a "Bolt" rule, but as it stands:
Pistol stays the same
Bolter stays the same
Storm Bolter is S5 AP5
Heavy Bolter is S5 AP4 Heavy 4 or 5
THEN the Bolt rule is peppered in. Either that, or we make it so Legendary Marksman is a universal special rule for all Marines, and all Marines standing still gain Rending. Of course, that leads to the discussion of how to differentiate the Raptors.

pelicaniforce wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:
Yeah, I'm not trying to make the Heavy Bolter an Anti Everything gun. It just kinda need to be better at that job by a small margin.

Well, technically, there are targets the scatterlaser struggles against. It's just SO GOOD against so many things. The heavy bolter is not really good against anything in the game, even its intended targets because it trades ROF and S for AP 4. AP 4 that is rendered moot most of the time by cover. 7th ed is about wound generation in most cases, not AP of said wounds.

True dat - So if you made the shots S 5, AP 5 instead, but let it shoot, like, Salvo 3/6.

Hmmm. That's an interesting proposal. Of course, at that point, the assault cannon should have like 18 shots, since a multi-barreled autocannon fires about three times faster than a machinegun.

Ofc, the scatter laser is a multi barreled laser cannon, especially the classic kind:

http://www.solegends.com/citrt/rt403eldarwarwalkerwd1028806.jpg

So I know you are mainly just trying combinations of numbers but it seems like four shots is kind of a maximum for anything less than a Russ main weapon or a forge world contemptor dreadnought.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I don't see that fixing anything, it'll only matter against GEQs, and guard are hurting enough as it is.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Only if you made them not allowed to assault with it. You don't charge into assault with a LMG. Which is why many people are suggesting Salvo.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Only if you made them not allowed to assault with it. You don't charge into assault with a LMG. Which is why many people are suggesting Salvo.

Martel732 wrote:
There's all kinds of changes that could be made and marines would still be wiped off the board by Eldar and Tau with a squeegee.

 The Wise Dane wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Bolter weapons as a whole need something to make them stand out. Gauss can glance vehicles to submission (though everyone on here grossly overestimates how well it works), Eldar get Bladestorm, which is Rending on things that matter (since Monstrous Creatures are more dangerous than vehicles) and Tau just get much better range on their guns.

So maybe there's a way to create a "Bolt" rule, but as it stands:
Pistol stays the same
Bolter stays the same
Storm Bolter is S5 AP5
Heavy Bolter is S5 AP4 Heavy 4 or 5
THEN the Bolt rule is peppered in. Either that, or we make it so Legendary Marksman is a universal special rule for all Marines, and all Marines standing still gain Rending. Of course, that leads to the discussion of how to differentiate the Raptors.

I got a few problems with this. First of all, I'm not the first one to say that we should go to Fluff first, but nowhere is a Storm Bolter described as having the strength of a Heavy Bolter. I think it's the wrong place to change things.

The other thing is that Bolt rule. Rending... Why exactly? What makes that the most natural rule for a Bolter to have? It will mow down bloody everything!

Martel732 wrote:There's no way to differentiate bolt weapons at this point. The D6 system is killing the game for me. There is literally no mathematical niche for bolt weapons.

Martel732 wrote:
I don't care what gw is wiling to put up with. D6 is too limiting.

 McNinja wrote:

If the SB has a bigger caliber, we could also make it AP4 instead of S5. I don't think that they are a larger caliber, as lexicanum or the 40k wiki don't mention that they do or do not.

The only thing consistent with both entries is that SBs are capable of delivering a huge rate of fire. Making Storm Bolters S4 AP5 Assault 3, Shred would work. They aren't more powerful than bolters on a bolt-to-bolt comparison, but taken together it's a pretty powerful weapon.

So the bolter family would look like
Bolter: R24" S4 AP5 Rapid Fire
Storm Bolter: R18" S4 AP5 Assault 3, Shred
Heavy Bolter: R36" S5 AP4 Salvo 2/4, Rending
Assault Cannon R24" S6 AP4 Heavy 4, Rending
Kheres Assault Cannon R24" S6 AP4 Heavy 6, Rending
Autocannon S7 AP4 Heavy 2

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
That might be interesting. 10 might be a tad much, IMO, but some play-testing would have to be done to really get the number down correctly.

 The Wise Dane wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
That might be interesting. 10 might be a tad much, IMO, but some play-testing would have to be done to really get the number down correctly.

I suppose, but the only other gatling gun I can think of is the Punisher Gatling Cannon, which is Heavy 20, and that's not so powerful again.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
That might be interesting. 10 might be a tad much, IMO, but some play-testing would have to be done to really get the number down correctly.

I suppose, but the only other gatling gun I can think of is the Punisher Gatling Cannon, which is Heavy 20, and that's not so powerful again.

Well, even my idea is only two off (8), so it's not that big of a difference. It would do very well against light/medium infantry, and reasonable against heavy, but at the same time looking pretty balanced. .

jade_angel wrote:
How about this:

Krak: An armour penetration roll of 6 from a weapon with this special rule always inflicts at least a glancing hit. Additionally, if a penetrating hit is inflicted, it is resolved at AP1. To-wound rolls of 6 inflict two wounds.

 The Wise Dane wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
That might be interesting. 10 might be a tad much, IMO, but some play-testing would have to be done to really get the number down correctly.

I suppose, but the only other gatling gun I can think of is the Punisher Gatling Cannon, which is Heavy 20, and that's not so powerful again.

Well, even my idea is only two off (8), so it's not that big of a difference. It would do very well against light/medium infantry, and reasonable against heavy, but at the same time looking pretty balanced. .

... "Balance". I completely forgot how pleasent that word is.

Also, can we just examine the Missile Launcher for a moment? I don't mind the Frag Missile, but the Krak Missile should really be AP 2. It's an anti-vehicle missile, and the fact that it's an actual missile... That means blown up whatever.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Well...

They were made to withstand industrial plasma generators, not weaponzied plasma. Assuming there is a difference, of course.

It's also a problem with out all or nothing AP system.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Although the problem with that is it just makes 2+ invincible to anything less than melta without modifiers.

 krodarklorr wrote:

 McNinja wrote:

If the SB has a bigger caliber, we could also make it AP4 instead of S5. I don't think that they are a larger caliber, as lexicanum or the 40k wiki don't mention that they do or do not.

The only thing consistent with both entries is that SBs are capable of delivering a huge rate of fire. Making Storm Bolters S4 AP5 Assault 3, Shred would work. They aren't more powerful than bolters on a bolt-to-bolt comparison, but taken together it's a pretty powerful weapon.

So the bolter family would look like
Bolter: R24" S4 AP5 Rapid Fire
Storm Bolter: R18" S4 AP5 Assault 3, Shred
Heavy Bolter: R36" S5 AP4 Salvo 2/4, Rending
Assault Cannon R24" S6 AP4 Heavy 4, Rending
Kheres Assault Cannon R24" S6 AP4 Heavy 6, Rending
Autocannon S7 AP4 Heavy 2

Uh, if Storm Bolters are just higher rate of fire Bolters, than Shred is unneeded. Assault 3 would work fine.

Also, why give Heavy Bolters Rending when they'd be too similar to Assault Cannons? I say just make Heavy Bolters Salvo 3/5 and be done with it.

Martel732 wrote:
Assault 3 is useless because S4 shooting with no special rules is mostly worthless unless you have IG-level of shots. Which marines never will.

Martel732 wrote:Assault 3 is useless because S4 shooting with no special rules is mostly worthless unless you have IG-level of shots. Which marines never will.

Martel732 wrote:
Things I care about. TWC, Riptides, IKs, GMCs. Of course, those aren't the intended targets for bolters, but it's funny how the intended targets for bolters just never seem to show up. Or if they do, I have many other ways to kill them. Bolters suck because no one uses many of the units they are actually effective against. Because those units aren't good. Making the bolter weapons not good. They're a lot worse than "not amazing". They are gak because their intended targets don't have a place in the game that much anymore.

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Things I care about. TWC, Riptides, IKs, GMCs. Of course, those aren't the intended targets for bolters, but it's funny how the intended targets for bolters just never seem to show up. Or if they do, I have many other ways to kill them. Bolters suck because no one uses many of the units they are actually effective against. Because those units aren't good. Making the bolter weapons not good. They're a lot worse than "not amazing". They are gak because their intended targets don't have a place in the game that much anymore.

And yet, as a Necron player, my main source of firepower is from a Bolter equivalent.

Martel732 wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Things I care about. TWC, Riptides, IKs, GMCs. Of course, those aren't the intended targets for bolters, but it's funny how the intended targets for bolters just never seem to show up. Or if they do, I have many other ways to kill them. Bolters suck because no one uses many of the units they are actually effective against. Because those units aren't good. Making the bolter weapons not good. They're a lot worse than "not amazing". They are gak because their intended targets don't have a place in the game that much anymore.

And yet, as a Necron player, my main source of firepower is from a Bolter equivalent.

I find this incredibly hard to believe. Although if my models never died, it might change my perspective a bit.

Martel732 wrote:
But the riptide is in the game now. We can't put that genie back.

 The Wise Dane wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
But the riptide is in the game now. We can't put that genie back.

Neither can we change the rules for Bolters, Autocannons, Power weapons and the like, but that doesn't stop us from speculating.

Martel732 wrote:
Imperial heavy weapons sans grav cannon are bad. Just accept it. I dont think it can be fixed on a d6 system.

Martel732 wrote:
Still bad, though. Even ap1 single shot weapons are ineffective in 7th ed.

 The Wise Dane wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Still bad, though. Even ap1 single shot weapons are ineffective in 7th ed.

Also when it almost surely will do a HP or W?

In fact, what is an effective 7th Ed anti-tank weapon, then?

 raverrn wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Still bad, though. Even ap1 single shot weapons are ineffective in 7th ed.

Also when it almost surely will do a HP or W?

In fact, what is an effective 7th Ed anti-tank weapon, then?

Anything with Melta or Destroyer.

 raverrn wrote:
Melta is still solid because it's cheap, mobile (making cover saves less of an issue), and can come in arge numbers.

Martel732 wrote:

 raverrn wrote:
Melta is still solid because it's cheap, mobile (making cover saves less of an issue), and can come in arge numbers.

So hp stripping with melta? If you get enough, that's legit I guess.

 raverrn wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 raverrn wrote:
Melta is still solid because it's cheap, mobile (making cover saves less of an issue), and can come in arge numbers.

So hp stripping with melta? If you get enough, that's legit I guess.

That's how you see it fielded nowadays. Crisis suits with double-fusion, Chaos terminators with combi-meltas, Vet squads with triple melta... You hedge your bets on rolling an explodes and HP things to death even if you don't.

Lascannons are three times as expensive as a Melta weapon, they need to be three times as effective to see play.

Martel732 wrote:

 raverrn wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 raverrn wrote:
Melta is still solid because it's cheap, mobile (making cover saves less of an issue), and can come in arge numbers.

So hp stripping with melta? If you get enough, that's legit I guess.

That's how you see it fielded nowadays. Crisis suits with double-fusion, Chaos terminators with combi-meltas, Vet squads with triple melta... You hedge your bets on rolling an explodes and HP things to death even if you don't.

Lascannons are three times as expensive as a Melta weapon, they need to be three times as effective to see play.

Three BS 4 meltas have almost no chance of causing 3 HP damage, though.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
"Or if you're Eldar," since Fire Dragons get to explode things on 4+...

 The Wise Dane wrote:
The very fact that a unit has to be able to remove three HP in a turn to be considered "decent" makes me loose faith in this bloody game.

 The Wise Dane wrote:
The very fact that a unit has to be able to remove three HP in a turn to be considered "decent" makes me loose faith in this bloody game.

 raverrn wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:
The very fact that a unit has to be able to remove three HP in a turn to be considered "decent" makes me loose faith in this bloody game.

It's not all bad. That same unit kill a Wraithknight in just under 14 consecutive, uninterrupted shooting phases.

Martel732 wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
But the riptide is in the game now. We can't put that genie back.

Neither can we change the rules for Bolters, Autocannons, Power weapons and the like, but that doesn't stop us from speculating.

It just sounded like a call to ban riptides. The reality is that more and more things are being put in the game much stronger than you think is appropriate. This means that soon power swords and berserkers will be the outlier not the riptide.

 krodarklorr wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Things I care about. TWC, Riptides, IKs, GMCs. Of course, those aren't the intended targets for bolters, but it's funny how the intended targets for bolters just never seem to show up. Or if they do, I have many other ways to kill them. Bolters suck because no one uses many of the units they are actually effective against. Because those units aren't good. Making the bolter weapons not good. They're a lot worse than "not amazing". They are gak because their intended targets don't have a place in the game that much anymore.

And yet, as a Necron player, my main source of firepower is from a Bolter equivalent.

Alcibiades wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:
The very fact that a unit has to be able to remove three HP in a turn to be considered "decent" makes me loose faith in this bloody game.

This is only because for some reason (unknown to me) people think that units should be removable reliably in a turn of shooting.

Martel732 wrote:

Alcibiades wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:
The very fact that a unit has to be able to remove three HP in a turn to be considered "decent" makes me loose faith in this bloody game.

This is only because for some reason (unknown to me) people think that units should be removable reliably in a turn of shooting.

Maybe that reason is that it happens to me all the time. Also, I don't want to take the return fire if I should fail to kill it. The real question is why would you shoot something and not expect to take it out?

 The Wise Dane wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Alcibiades wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:
The very fact that a unit has to be able to remove three HP in a turn to be considered "decent" makes me loose faith in this bloody game.

This is only because for some reason (unknown to me) people think that units should be removable reliably in a turn of shooting.

Maybe that reason is that it happens to me all the time. Also, I don't want to take the return fire if I should fail to kill it. The real question is why would you shoot something and not expect to take it out?

Because that's the danger of large or powerful models - They take many hits to kill, and have very dangerous weapons who can do horrible damage if let alone for too long. If you want a game where every hit gives you a kill, you might as well play Chess.

Anyway, on the topic of the Riptide, I don't mind it being in the game, I just want it to be reserved to one model per 1000 pt., or even just one model per army, kind of like a Lord of War. I dunno, the average walker is the Dreadnought to me, not big-ass apocalypse style gundams, though they certainly have their place here and there. Doesn't help that they are lazily written, either.

Martel732 wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Alcibiades wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:
The very fact that a unit has to be able to remove three HP in a turn to be considered "decent" makes me loose faith in this bloody game.

This is only because for some reason (unknown to me) people think that units should be removable reliably in a turn of shooting.

Maybe that reason is that it happens to me all the time. Also, I don't want to take the return fire if I should fail to kill it. The real question is why would you shoot something and not expect to take it out?

Because that's the danger of large or powerful models - They take many hits to kill, and have very dangerous weapons who can do horrible damage if let alone for too long. If you want a game where every hit gives you a kill, you might as well play Chess.

Anyway, on the topic of the Riptide, I don't mind it being in the game, I just want it to be reserved to one model per 1000 pt., or even just one model per army, kind of like a Lord of War. I dunno, the average walker is the Dreadnought to me, not big-ass apocalypse style gundams, though they certainly have their place here and there. Doesn't help that they are lazily written, either.

I want threats removed as soon as possible. I'm going to use the weapons that do that. Lascannons and other single shot weapons aren't them. Period.

Martel732 wrote:
Well, that's not the reality, because D weapons exist.

Martel732 wrote:
If only that were true.

 raverrn wrote:
D weapons aren't unbalancing, not by themselves, especially not after the 7th Ed. rework.

Armies that can take dozens of them cheaply, that's an issue.

 raverrn wrote:
D weapons aren't unbalancing, not by themselves, especially not after the 7th Ed. rework.

Armies that can take dozens of them cheaply, that's an issue.

 raverrn wrote:
D weapons aren't unbalancing, not by themselves, especially not after the 7th Ed. rework.

Armies that can take dozens of them cheaply, that's an issue.

 krodarklorr wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:

 raverrn wrote:
D weapons aren't unbalancing, not by themselves, especially not after the 7th Ed. rework.

Armies that can take dozens of them cheaply, that's an issue.

I suppose... Still, would much rather have "multiple wounds" from Fantasy instead on select weapons.

There's a lot of mechanics I'd rather have from Fantasy. The Magic phase, Cover, Armor modifiers, ext.

 raverrn wrote:
Nobody saw much of an issue when it was just a Sanctic power and a chainsword on the Knights.

Because it wasn't an issue. It was extremely powerful, but you had to pay an appropriate cost both in point an in the game to deliver it.

jade_angel wrote:
Yeah, I'd like to see Wraithcannons (and Heavy Wraithcannons) knocked back down to S10. It's not too bad when there's just one or two, but a mess of them is nasty. (I don't feel right using Ion Accelerators or Heavy Wraithcannons anymore, honestly...)

 krodarklorr wrote:
Of all the things!

 raverrn wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

jade_angel wrote:
Of all the things!

Deathstrike Missile says hi.

jade_angel wrote:
Well-armored vehicles hold up reasonably well - my main complaint is that weapons capable of one-shotting them by dumb luck are much more common than weapons with Instant Death. Light vehicles - AV10/AV11 - tend not to be much harder to "wound" than T6 creatures, but significantly less resilient once you start pointing scary stuff at them. Medium (AV12) vehicles can go both ways - you need serious firepower to hurt AV12, but on the other hand, large-volume S6/S7 is around, and fairly common.

Compare those same lascannons against, say, a Carnifex and a Falcon. You need an average of 7 lascannon hits to reliably remove 3 hull points from a Falcon with a holo-field (with a 12% chance of getting an Explodes! sometime during that; I did not calculate the probability of a double-immobilize). If we assume that the Carnifex is in a forest, or is Shrouded from a nearby Venomthrope while remaining in the open (to match the Falcon's save), you need 7-8 lascannon hits to reliably kill it on average, and there's a 0% chance to instantly kill it. Carnifexes are not one of the more durable MCs out there.

Make it a Trygon (W6), with the same 5+ cover save, and you need 11 hits.

For heavy bolters, the point is well taken that the Carnifex and Trygon are vulnerable to them while the Falcon is not, but it requires 36 heavy bolter hits (not shots, but hits) to kill a Carnifex on average.

Those, however, are among the best examples of how it's supposed to work. MCs were intended, by design, to be vulnerable to weaker weapons but not subject to the various sorts of crippling that vehicles can suffer. In practice that doesn't work out especially well, though. A big part is pathological cases on both sides - AV10 2HP open-topped vehicles, or T6/W5/2+/3++/FNP MCs, say. You don't see too many T5/5+/W2 MCs or AV14/4++/IWND/Immune to melta, lance and haywire vehicles...

 The Wise Dane wrote:

jade_angel wrote:
Well-armored vehicles hold up reasonably well - my main complaint is that weapons capable of one-shotting them by dumb luck are much more common than weapons with Instant Death. Light vehicles - AV10/AV11 - tend not to be much harder to "wound" than T6 creatures, but significantly less resilient once you start pointing scary stuff at them. Medium (AV12) vehicles can go both ways - you need serious firepower to hurt AV12, but on the other hand, large-volume S6/S7 is around, and fairly common.

Compare those same lascannons against, say, a Carnifex and a Falcon. You need an average of 7 lascannon hits to reliably remove 3 hull points from a Falcon with a holo-field (with a 12% chance of getting an Explodes! sometime during that; I did not calculate the probability of a double-immobilize). If we assume that the Carnifex is in a forest, or is Shrouded from a nearby Venomthrope while remaining in the open (to match the Falcon's save), you need 7-8 lascannon hits to reliably kill it on average, and there's a 0% chance to instantly kill it. Carnifexes are not one of the more durable MCs out there.

Make it a Trygon (W6), with the same 5+ cover save, and you need 11 hits.

For heavy bolters, the point is well taken that the Carnifex and Trygon are vulnerable to them while the Falcon is not, but it requires 36 heavy bolter hits (not shots, but hits) to kill a Carnifex on average.

Those, however, are among the best examples of how it's supposed to work. MCs were intended, by design, to be vulnerable to weaker weapons but not subject to the various sorts of crippling that vehicles can suffer. In practice that doesn't work out especially well, though. A big part is pathological cases on both sides - AV10 2HP open-topped vehicles, or T6/W5/2+/3++/FNP MCs, say. You don't see too many T5/5+/W2 MCs or AV14/4++/IWND/Immune to melta, lance and haywire vehicles...

This guy gets it.

In general, if you give something a big save, some way to ignore hits or so on, you have to take away in equal measure some other place, but that doesn't happen - The Riptide is a prime example, with six bleeding Wounds and Termi-grade saves, plus the opportunity for FNP and 3++, and with extremely powerful weaponry, we have a cocktail that can't compare to any point value; not that it can't be priced somewhat happen, issue is that it gets insanely more tough against a few armies, and somewhat managable against others. The Carnifex, for example, is an example of a beast that can actually be realistically beaten by almost all armies. The Rip simply can't. As an Ork Player, who often plays with large formations of Lootas, I'd just ignore it. I'd go for a Carnifex any day, though.

MCs with those kinds of saves simply break the game's already liberal take on balance, and it took D weapons to counter them. That's not a good sign.

Martel732 wrote:
And usually irrelevant.

 The Wise Dane wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
And usually irrelevant.

Exactly; the thing can jump around like a freaking bunny, so catching it isn't just something you do, plus the fact that it's pretty damn hard to hurt, too.

jade_angel wrote:
I'll attest as a Tau player, Praetorians and Wraiths are pretty much big trouble for a Riptide. Vanguard Vets are a fair threat, too, as are Tyranid Shrikes or Raveners.

 krodarklorr wrote:


It is, in fact, the only MC that is not Fearless.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Well, it depends on if it has the TL fusion (which they usually don't from my experience, but yeah). Tau struggle against heavy armour in general. The only effective tactics we have are DS duel fusion crisis, or the occasional EMP dash with FW.

Part of why I suggested WS1 and I1. Though to be fair, the Vanguard Vets pretty much either hit first, with either Shred or +1A (admittedly, a bad option against 2+), or have a 3++ themselves. Assuming the Riptide charges (I will assume the few bolt pistols and krak grenades don't do much on Overwatch; statistically they won't): 2 hits, plus one from HoW, then I'll be optimistic and assume they all wound for 2 AP2 and one AP- wound. Without Storm Shields, and assuming you're not Iron Hands (or have Endurance, or have Forewarning, or have Sanctuary, etc) that's two dead vets. Doesn't look good if they have power swords. But, if they have thunder hammers, they shrug off 2/3 of the wounds (storm shields are good stuff, although often too expensive), so one dead vet. Then that's (assuming an initial group of 5, no Chaplain, Captain, Sanguinary Priest, Librarian, Techmarine or other special character) 8 swings back. 6 hit. 5 wound. 3 unsaved (5++/FNP). Lost combat, leadership at ld 7. Fail, and probably dead. Success, and they're tied up another turn but probably kill it the next. This looks much better if the vets charge, which they probably will.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Vanguard worse than Terminators? Have you lost your mind?

 Marik Law wrote:
I always thought that Assault Cannons would make for great Salvo weapons. Was disappointed when GW didn't make them Salvo after it was introduced, great opportunity missed right there.

 NorseSig wrote:

Part of why I suggested WS1 and I1. Though to be fair, the Vanguard Vets pretty much either hit first, with either Shred or +1A (admittedly, a bad option against 2+), or have a 3++ themselves. Assuming the Riptide charges (I will assume the few bolt pistols and krak grenades don't do much on Overwatch; statistically they won't): 2 hits, plus one from HoW, then I'll be optimistic and assume they all wound for 2 AP2 and one AP- wound. Without Storm Shields, and assuming you're not Iron Hands (or have Endurance, or have Forewarning, or have Sanctuary, etc) that's two dead vets. Doesn't look good if they have power swords. But, if they have thunder hammers, they shrug off 2/3 of the wounds (storm shields are good stuff, although often too expensive), so one dead vet. Then that's (assuming an initial group of 5, no Chaplain, Captain, Sanguinary Priest, Librarian, Techmarine or other special character) 8 swings back. 6 hit. 5 wound. 3 unsaved (5++/FNP). Lost combat, leadership at ld 7. Fail, and probably dead. Success, and they're tied up another turn but probably kill it the next. This looks much better if the vets charge, which they probably will.

Don't know why you are mentioning the iron hands chapter tactics here. It is literally useless on everything except T5 multiwould (ideally multi-save models) with the one exception being command squads with bikes, storm shields and apothecaries. And if you are against an army with a lot of D weapons and stomps the rule is again utter crap. And if you are giving storm shields and thunder hammers to vanguard vets you are wasting points. In fact it is a waste of points to even take vanguard. Vanguard would need better rules and better base gear for me to even consider them. They are even worse than Terminators of any variety which is a serious achievement.

 MagicJuggler wrote:

 Marik Law wrote:
I always thought that Assault Cannons would make for great Salvo weapons. Was disappointed when GW didn't make them Salvo after it was introduced, great opportunity missed right there.

I personally feel that Salvo was just unnecessary clunkiness; 40k is really at that point of bloatedness where it just might be easier to consolidate all the different weapon types into a single "Rate of Fire" statistic, and have "Move or Fire" as a rule for some weapons.

Iron hands gets real cheesy when you give them a librarian w/ the Endurance power. 3+ FnP is god like, especially on terminators

 NorseSig wrote:

Iron hands gets real cheesy when you give them a librarian w/ the Endurance power. 3+ FnP is god like, especially on terminators

You are still wasting points taking terminators as Iron Hands. they lack the dakka needed to be a true threat. Plus from a fluff standpoint IH aren't supposed to have Terminator SQUADS. Yes, a librarian with endurance is good, but it is a waste on terminators or anything not a bike, and then it isn't army wide.

I know, a 6+ sucks. But you still need ID to get around it, so it's not quite nothing. Ask any Sisters player about times when that mostly-useless 6++ led to surviving something unlikely...

It doesn't just suck, it is worthless. Most armies have a surplus of S8 S9 shooting which completely negates the 6+ (or better) unless you on a bike or have increased toughness form some other source. In the 100+ games I would say I have played as IH I have not once made a 6+ FNP save. Worst part about the IH rules is it practically forces you to run bikes (that aren't anywhere near as good as the armies that are supposed to run them) in an army that isn't supposed to have many of them. I believe in fluff and building armies around that army's fluff. Not that it really matters much with IH anymore. They are basically Ultramarine wannabes with worse rules now.

But, to get back on subject. I think there is a lot of changes to be made to the "old" weapons. Heck there is a lot that needs to be done to most every aspect of the game. Anymore I just wonder if it would be better to start from scratch.

I don't think starting from scratch would be ideal, there's already a good template, although if i were in charge there would be so many changes that after a while the game would be a quite different.

 NorseSig wrote:

Iron hands gets real cheesy when you give them a librarian w/ the Endurance power. 3+ FnP is god like, especially on terminators

You are still wasting points taking terminators as Iron Hands. they lack the dakka needed to be a true threat. Plus from a fluff standpoint IH aren't supposed to have Terminator SQUADS. Yes, a librarian with endurance is good, but it is a waste on terminators or anything not a bike, and then it isn't army wide.

Clearly you haven't tanked 1000+ points of tau shooting for three turns. The squad gives a middle finger to high volume, low strength shooting. Plus, if you are using Termies without loading up on chain fists to kill tanks, you are doing it wrong and if you are running vanilla terminators w/o chainfists instead of TH/SS terminators, you done goofed.

On a side note, have you used psykers? None of their powers confer to multiple units, however, they can get reall nasty with the new Librarius Conclave.