What would you do to fix some weapons rules?

[FormelyKnownAsSmashyPants]

Title says it all, what would people do to make some weapons better.

Instead of the rule melta currently gets where you roll 2d6 and pick the highest result at half range, I'd personally make it so that melta is a flat 6 damage against vehicles at half range and d6 damage in all other circumstances, so that its really brutal against vehicle close up, and depending on luck brutal in other circumstances.

I'd make scout sniper rifles utilise some sort poison rule so devastating against non-vehicle models but useless against, vehicles. Basically I'd like to further differentiate between scout sniper rifles and those carried by eliminators as fluff wise they're different with one having toxin rounds (scouts) and the other a selection of solid or explosive rounds (eliminators), where both are feasible weapon, and therefore unit options, but they behave differently.

Give grav back its own bespoke rule where the wound roll is based on the unit's armour save. This would mean it would compete with plasma as being a viable option, but they'd both behave differently to each other and have their own optimal target.

Heavy bolter could do with another shot or two.

I'd also make hellfire rounds and flakk missiles something you buy as an option for the unit, it would need a hefty price tag as it would no longer chew up CP, and could be utilized more than one at a time.

 

Edit:something else I would change would be the way "blast" weapons work, where instead of rolling forthe number of shots made, and then rolling that number of hit dice, I'd make it so that you roll to hit and then roll another die to see how many hits are made. The way it works ATM seems counter intuitive to how a blast would work, and TBH, seems more clunky than one hat I've suggested. I have no idea which would work out more advantageous from a crunch perspective, maybe someone could do the math.

[Grotsmasha]

Shuffled over to Amicus, this is neither News, a Rumour, or an Announcement

[FormelyKnownAsSmashyPants]

Sorry about that meant to put it Amicus.

[Grimdark_Garage]

There is definately an argument in regards to Random Damage wepaons. Generlaly you are paying a premium for a weapons MAXIMUM output rather than average.

before the repulsor Executioner, i thought changing a Lascannon to minimum damage 3 would work but that spot has now been taken.

 

The Melta rule i think works well. Rolling 2, pick the highest generlaly works well.

 

Outside of that, Blast Weapons need a look at. There is alreday a discussion here : 

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/356519-another-go-at-blast-weaponsagainsimpler-this-time/

 

You could look at Apocolypse as a new blueprint for the game.

Each weapon has a profile when targetting Light or Heavy units. But on a standard D6, im not sure you could really make it work.

[Trevak Dal]

Multi meltas should get 2+ shots. All tank mounted weaponry should get double their current shots (not dreds).

 

Tau plasma rifles need 30" range rapid 2, or 24" rapid 1 damage 2. Either or.

 

Tau carbines should be able to fire in close combat (yes including on drones).

 

Tau flamers either need 10" at s4 or be s5 at their current range (presuming they 'tau up' flamer tech.

[Grimdark_Garage]

Multi meltas should get 2+ shots. All tank mounted weaponry should get double their current shots (not dreds).

 

Tau plasma rifles need 30" range rapid 2, or 24" rapid 1 damage 2. Either or.

 

Tau carbines should be able to fire in close combat (yes including on drones).

 

Tau flamers either need 10" at s4 or be s5 at their current range (presuming they 'tau up' flamer tech.

 

Multi-Meltas getting 2 shots is intriguing

 

The issue with making them HEAVY 2 are non-tank units.

EG: a dev squad can take 4 of them.

Heavy 8, S8, -4, Dmg D6 would be very powerful indeed.

Although, i can only think of Attack Bikes and Speeders that can also field them in numbers....so it might be a nice boon for the lowly Dev Squad.

 

22 points would also be cheap for such a wepaon. Perhaps making it 30 points would work.

 

But ultimately, the issue here is a single shot wepaon on a tank that more often that not does sweet eff all.

At 22 points..... thats probably quite reasonable really.

 

Some tanks (not all) should not suffer the penalty to hit when they move rather than doubling their shots.

I'm basically looking at well disciplined and reliable battle tanks (All marines, Leman Russ varients, FLY tanks etc)

Your BS already drops when your get bracketed so it makes sense.

[okonomiyakimarine]

A flat 6 for the Melta takes away too much ‚randomness‘ that exists in this game to ‚model what cannot be simulated in a more precise way‘. If you want a beefier weapon (flat 6) you can take a base of 3 + d3 (toll two, pick highest result). Unsure if such a change is really needed, just wanted to say that taking out all randomness is no good.

[Grimdark_Garage]

It's a good point. For reliable AT, I take a butt load of plasma for more shots with reliable damage. Running DA i have Dmg3 plasma

[MARK0SIAN]

All weapons that currently roll D6 for their number of shots should instead have 3 + D3 shots. It still caps it at six but gives a minimum of four, a much more acceptable and reliable range, especially given the cost or drawbacks of many of those types of weapons.

 

It might require a points adjustment but I think most people are willing to pay a bit more for reliability.

[Slasher956]

with 1 exception (that I know of) all the weapons with D6 shots where template weapons.... so giving them a fix number of shots is another step away from unit formations (so lets just shove them on the table in a heap)

 

edit - personally ... bring back templates and do away with DX shots

 

(except for the exorcist which is a temperamental old girl  )

[Exilyth]

The astra militarum leman russ vanquisher variant is barely viable even with grinding advance (shoots twice when moving less than half movement).

Since the vanquisher is the dedicated tank hunter variant, a +1 (or reroll) to-hit vs vehicles (or titanic units) would be nice to have.

[dreadmad]

All weapons that currently roll D6 for their number of shots should instead have 3 + D3 shots. It still caps it at six but gives a minimum of four, a much more acceptable and reliable range, especially given the cost or drawbacks of many of those types of weapons.

 

It might require a points adjustment but I think most people are willing to pay a bit more for reliability.

I'd be happy with D3+2 - so your low roll is 3, your average is 4 (just above the current average) and the high point is 5. Lower the ceiling to increase reliability, shouldn't make anything too OP.

[Kaldoth]

This is more about a faction I guess, but Necron Gauss weapons really need a change. You rarely ever see Immortals with Gauss blasters or anything less than 20 man Warrior blobs because Tesla Carbines are just so effective. If you didn't play against Necrons back in the day, Gauss weapons used to cause wounds/glancing hits on a wound roll of 6 regardless of toughness. That rule needs to come back in my opinion. It's fluffy (I mean, even the lightest Gauss weapons take the target apart at the atomic level after all) and would give Necron players a reason to actually take Gauss over tesla.

[MARK0SIAN]

 

All weapons that currently roll D6 for their number of shots should instead have 3 + D3 shots. It still caps it at six but gives a minimum of four, a much more acceptable and reliable range, especially given the cost or drawbacks of many of those types of weapons.

 

It might require a points adjustment but I think most people are willing to pay a bit more for reliability.

I'd be happy with D3+2 - so your low roll is 3, your average is 4 (just above the current average) and the high point is 5. Lower the ceiling to increase reliability, shouldn't make anything too OP.

Yeah I’d be happy with that too. Anything that makes the performance of these weapons more consistent.

 

The major gripe I have is that a lot of these D6 shots for D6 damage are on quite expensive (relatively speaking) platforms. It’s fine to get unreliable performance if you haven’t got to sink a lot of points into something but the risk of unreliable performance on high cost stuff is unreasonable.

[MARK0SIAN]

The astra militarum leman russ vanquisher variant is barely viable even with grinding advance (shoots twice when moving less than half movement).

Since the vanquisher is the dedicated tank hunter variant, a +1 (or reroll) to-hit vs vehicles (or titanic units) would be nice to have.

I’d go even further and say that if the target is a vehicle that has more than 10 wounds and is not a flyer then the Vanquisher always hits it on a 3+ regardless of modifiers.

[chapter master 454]

So the main mission statement here is that a lot of weapons have issues competing or just outright fail their design brief.

 

Heavy Burst Cannons and Ion Accelerators are my personal favourite for this as by all accounts you would think the Ion should be a good Anti-tank gun but just outright fails at the job. Unless you nova-charge it it just doesn't cut mustard and even then you are giving up defence when that 3++ is extremely valuable and the Heavy Burst Cannon (HBC) with Advanced Targeting System (ATS) do a comparable job and handles more targets.

 

Shouldn't Leman Russ Battle Cannons be terrifying all rounders? Able to take down enemy armour and threaten infantry, while not perfectly having to see a full squad of these bad boys should make ANY target think twice about what cereal they have for digestive health. The Vanquisher should be a de facto tank/monster killer, putting holes in them with ease.

 

Ultimately it comes down to GW unlocking stats but not using them or just having their own soft-locks.

 

Key notes: Reluctance to use more than 1D6 in any damage profile for weapons that aren't on a super-heavy, reluctance to set damage floors for weapons like the neutron laser (seriously, that effect is extremely effective), reluctance to using D3 damage and similarly multiple D3s and those notes go about any weapon in the game. Random is fine but when there is so much variance and points put to when it high rolls, they just end up feeling bad to use (Even vindicators, rolling the fat 6 is great until you flub the shots or you roll a skinny 1 for shots).

[The Yncarne]

I'd like to see Tau railguns be worth taking. I remember when they were the most powerful weapon in the game.

 

With the changes on wound rolls, the ability to only take them on a single model, and d6 damage, they're more rare than a Tau psyker. Also, the submunitions profile is a punch to the gut. Give it a roll two damage dice, pick the highest or make its damage 3 +d3. Then you can consider dropping the d6+ wound roll does extra mortal wounds rule. 

 

I'd also consider changing the heavy rail rifle profile, but not sure how to do that other than increasing the damage to a flat number.

[Volt]

One simple solution would be AT weapons getting D3 shots against infantry but D3+3 against vehicles or monsters while anti infantry weapons get D3 shots against vehicles and D3+3 shots against infantry.

[Lord Raven 19]

Change all D6 to 2D3

Unmodified hit and wound rolls of 6 always succeed - stops Tau and AM being unable to hit Alaitoc flyers and the like

[MARK0SIAN]

Change all D6 to 2D3

Unmodified hit and wound rolls of 6 always succeed - stops Tau and AM being unable to hit Alaitoc flyers and the like

Hit rolls of 6 should always hit definitely but wound rolls of 6 already always wound the target. Even a laspistol will wound a warlord Titan on a 6 currently.

[Slasher956]

One simple solution would be AT weapons getting D3 shots against infantry but D3+3 against vehicles or monsters while anti infantry weapons get D3 shots against vehicles and D3+3 shots against infantry.

 

A simple solution which means everyone has to buy this years CA...

 

give each weapon an AT & AI stat line... so you have different number of shots, S, T, AP etc.... like GW have already done in appocalypse  

[sairence]

Change all Get's Hot-rules to unmodified 1s and all exploding hits to unmodified 6s.

[Guest Triszin]

Imho, like 60% of the weapons in the game need overhaul to make them worth it

[Ishagu]

The game is so deadly at the moment, do you want stronger weapons? Lol

 

Also lots of talk about removing all random elements, I don't particularly agree with this.

 

As for Meltas - they'll be effective and deadly in the hands of Salamanders. Re-rolling a hit and wound roll, alongside +1 to hit and wound modifier? That's pretty substantial efficiency.

[burningsky25]

I had just articulated this in the FAQ Speculation thread so I'll add it here as well:

 

A lot of people have complained about the adaptation of blast weapons and flamer weapons in 8th, and I agree they need improving.  The current system for flamer weaponry espcially is way too swingy and doesn't provide any of the same benefits that last edition had with a natural counter against hordes.  Now they're just as good against single models as they are against groups, basically the antithesis of their previous role. 

 

One idea to change them would be to have them auto-hit all models within the range of the weapon that are in the target unit.  It would regain all of the natural advantages and disadvantages that flamer weapons had in the last edition, with you naturally wanting to get closer to get more hits, and being better against large groups of models than against small units.  It's admittedly not as 'simple' as the current set of rules in terms of models in range, but people have to measure weapons ranges all the time in the game, it can't be that controversial or the whole game would break down.

 

Just an idea I had, doubt they'll actually make the change though.

 

Edit: Realized this is basically just Jain Zar's Storm of Silence special rule except on a ranged weapon with auto-hits that is limited to one unit, in case I was unclear on the mechanic.