What would you do to fix some weapons rules?

[Lexington]

I’ve come around to the general idea that templates should come back, unlikely as that is to actually happen. Without some weird, complicated additions to the rules, I just don’t think the random shots idea has done very well by AoE weaponry.

[Ratherdashing]

Given the "opportunity cost" that is meltaguns reduced range (how many more times in a game will a given lascannon shoot compared to a meltagun?) I absolutely think you could make a meltagun just do 2d6 in half range. I know that makes it even more swingy, but if you can get a meltagun there I think you should have a chance of dealing a really severe blow to a vehicle--especially since it used to be they would regularly oneshot tanks and it wasn't really a problem (chipping down hill points was a lot more common than exploding with a meltagun even though you had a pretty good chance of doing so).

[Claws and Effect]

I’ve come around to the general idea that templates should come back, unlikely as that is to actually happen. Without some weird, complicated additions to the rules, I just don’t think the random shots idea has done very well by AoE weaponry.

Do you really want that horde player to go back to taking forever in their movement phase because they want to ensure that every one of over 100 models is exactly 2" apart?

 

I don't.

 

Besides, random number of shots does a pretty good job of replicating it. No one who sees or hears a mortar shell coming in is just going to stand there and get hit by it. They are going to make their best guess where it's going to land and dive out of the way. When it rolls low they guessed correctly, when it rolls high they didn't.

 

Edit:

 

How about this as a compromise:

 

D3 weapons get +1 shots and D6 weapons get +2 shots if the unit being targeted did not move during its last movement phase.

 

Would nicely replicate the fact that it's easier to land an effective shot against a stationary target than a moving one.

[MARK0SIAN]

 

I’ve come around to the general idea that templates should come back, unlikely as that is to actually happen. Without some weird, complicated additions to the rules, I just don’t think the random shots idea has done very well by AoE weaponry.

Do you really want that horde player to go back to taking forever in their movement phase because they want to ensure that every one of over 100 models is exactly 2" apart?

 

I don't.

 

Besides, random number of shots does a pretty good job of replicating it. No one who sees or hears a mortar shell coming in is just going to stand there and get hit by it. They are going to make their best guess where it's going to land and dive out of the way. When it rolls low they guessed correctly, when it rolls high they didn't.

 

Edit:

 

How about this as a compromise:

 

D3 weapons get +1 shots and D6 weapons get +2 shots if the unit being targeted did not move during its last movement phase.

 

Would nicely replicate the fact that it's easier to land an effective shot against a stationary target than a moving one.

The problem with that compromise is that horde units (the ones template weapons should be really good against) rarely stay still. Nids, Orks, cultists, plaguebearers and pretty much any other blob type unit tend to move most turns.

[Claws and Effect]

How about something like the grav flux bombards rules that add an extra die of shots per every X models in the unit?

[MARK0SIAN]

How about something like the grav flux bombards rules that add an extra die of shots per every X models in the unit?

Yeah, I think the grav flux has done it the best so far so it’s a good base to start from.

 

I’d probably go with D6 to start then +d3 for every five models for larger blasts.

[Tyriks]

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

Tesla going off on 5s is about the only army synergy Necrons have going for them right now, so I can't agree with this.

[Claws and Effect]

 

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

Tesla going off on 5s is about the only army synergy Necrons have going for them right now, so I can't agree with this.

I concur.

 

Being able to buff exploding dice to go off on lower rolls is the only reason some units are even viable. If you take that away those units collect dust because something does their job better.

 

It does cause outliers like Raven Guard Eliminators being really strong right now, but I don't want to see a tweak to that result in things that really need that buff getting left out in the cold.

[sairence]

 

 

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

Tesla going off on 5s is about the only army synergy Necrons have going for them right now, so I can't agree with this.

I concur.

 

Being able to buff exploding dice to go off on lower rolls is the only reason some units are even viable. If you take that away those units collect dust because something does their job better.

 

It does cause outliers like Raven Guard Eliminators being really strong right now, but I don't want to see a tweak to that result in things that really need that buff getting left out in the cold.

And I would like Scion Hotshot Volleyguns, a unique weapon of theirs, to be able to benefit from their regimental doctrine when they deepstrike or drop out of a plane. You know, the maneuver they are made for. But I can't, because for some reason they're Heavy Weapons.

 

It swings both ways. As soon as someone slaps on a neg hit modifier, your Tesla goes back to normal or never triggers in the first place. And there's plenty of those.

 

The silliness of these effects don't just affect Necrons, so using one army, that is in need of an overhaul in general, against it doesn't really help in my view.

[Tyriks]

But why use a blanket change when not everyone needs it? That's exactly the kind of poor decision GW keeps landing in hot water for doing. It would make more sense to do on a case by case basis, not changing the whole game to fix one unit.

[sairence]

Because it's merely an example. The rule I'm talking about isn't the one for Hotshot Volleyguns, but rather the effect of hit-modifiers. They've already gone that way in more recent Codexes anyway, they just need to update everyone else to get the same wording now.

[Lemondish]

 

 

 

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

Tesla going off on 5s is about the only army synergy Necrons have going for them right now, so I can't agree with this.

I concur.

 

Being able to buff exploding dice to go off on lower rolls is the only reason some units are even viable. If you take that away those units collect dust because something does their job better.

 

It does cause outliers like Raven Guard Eliminators being really strong right now, but I don't want to see a tweak to that result in things that really need that buff getting left out in the cold.

And I would like Scion Hotshot Volleyguns, a unique weapon of theirs, to be able to benefit from their regimental doctrine when they deepstrike or drop out of a plane. You know, the maneuver they are made for. But I can't, because for some reason they're Heavy Weapons.

 

It swings both ways. As soon as someone slaps on a neg hit modifier, your Tesla goes back to normal or never triggers in the first place. And there's plenty of those.

 

The silliness of these effects don't just affect Necrons, so using one army, that is in need of an overhaul in general, against it doesn't really help in my view.

How about the basic Scion weapon benefiting when they perform their drops? Iirc, it's an 18" weapon, no?

[TorvaldTheMild]

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.

Are you joking... shooting has never been stronger and you think it needs to be better.  

[The Unseen]

Torvald, most of those buffs he wants are on weapons that aren't used much because they aren't very good.

Making subpar choices in line with the better ones won't raise the overall lethality of shooting much, if at all.

It'll just mean you get shot at by something other than overcharged plasma for once.

[Tyriks]

Because it's merely an example. The rule I'm talking about isn't the one for Hotshot Volleyguns, but rather the effect of hit-modifiers. They've already gone that way in more recent Codexes anyway, they just need to update everyone else to get the same wording now.

But again updating everyone invalidates some options that are at present already not performing particularly well. Making blanket changes is almost never a good idea when the specific weapons that need changes can be addressed individually.

[TorvaldTheMild]

Torvald, most of those buffs he wants are on weapons that aren't used much because they aren't very good.

Making subpar choices in line with the better ones won't raise the overall lethality of shooting much, if at all.

It'll just mean you get shot at by something other than overcharged plasma for once.

No I've got multi meltas as well.  I also collect every main faction apart from tau as well as a lot of sub factions, so I have shooty armies as well.  I mean to moan about dakka in this edition is a bit much.

[The Unseen]

I mean, multimeltas are bad?

I use them too, but they're objectively bad.

1 shot, short ranged, movement penalty

And if you do manage to get that hit in despite all that, it's damage is the same/worse than a lascannon with twice the range.

[Ficinus]

As someone who uses a lot of flamers and a lot of melta, I feel confident in saying both are too unreliable, especially melta against T8.

 

For flamers, nothing is more disheartening than having four heavy flamers jump out of a rhino and get 10 hits on a hoard unit where last edition I could have gotten 30 hits. I'd love to see the template come back, but if that can't happen, something needs to be done to make it better against hoards and more reliable. I like the idea of auto hitting every model within 8", but that might be too powerful. At least let it scale.

 

For melta, I don't think the issue necessarily is the damage profile (though I'd love to see it changed to 3+D3 or 2D6 at close range as others have suggested), but the S8. It makes the melta gun terrible at killing Leman Russes, Repulsors, Land Raiders, Knights, etc. These are the things it should be great at killing. This problem is compounded when facing doesn't matter, so there is no reward to outflanking or surrounding it. I think melta needs either S9 all the time or to double strength (in addition to a damage buff) in close range. I want my Sisters to put the fear of the Emperor in knights again and I want a reward for ambushing and baiting knights instead of the let down of failing a bunch of 4+ to wound rolls.

[Slasher956]

Add a rule to melta weapons that works against the keywords Vehicle & monster allowing them to add an extra D6 to the wound & damage rolls if in half distance....

 

so a melta gun against a Leman russ is needing a 4+ on 2D6 and is rolling 3D6, dropping the lowest at 6" or less range.

 

For flamers I'd say it does D6 hits per 6 models in range rounding down....however rolls of a 1 are discounted, with heavy flamers being +1 to the amount of hits generated and hand flamers being -1 (to a min of 1).  I'd also allow flamers to ignore range restrictions on overwatch shooting

[mel_danes]

Do we have a template for how GW have handled these weapons?

The Apocalypse rules gave each weapon 2 profiles.

1 for infantry and 1 for vehicles and monsters.

I don't own the game, how are Melta and Flamers treated in that system?

[Special Officer Doofy]

Booooo templates. Templates were one of the reasons I quit and lack of templates one of the reasons I came back to 8th. And this is from a death guard player with 1-3 drones and 1-3 crawlers with spitters in every list, among Foul blight spawns and other flamers. I don't want any extra reasons to argue who's hit and who isn't or watch someone spend that much time moving hordes again. It's good for the anti charge. I say increase the range to 12" so 95% of chargers can get caught in them. If number of hits is an issue instead of D6 they could beta rule flamers to 3+d3 so it's 4-6 instead of 1-6 and try them out.

 

And multi meltas I feel need a flat 6 in half range or increase to S9. Something to make them worth it. Just my opinions though, I understand things will never be perfect.

[Slasher956]

from the free downloads.....

 

weapon - type - range - shots - Anti Inf - Anti Tank - special rules

  heavy flamer - heavy  - 8"  -1- 6+ - 9+ - Inferno

Multi melta      - heavy - 24" - 1 - 10+ 4+ 

[Halandaar]

Here's how I'd fix flamers and their like:

 

Flamer - Assault 1 - This weapon automatically hits its target a number of times equal to the number of models in the targeted unit, up to a maximum of 6 times.

 

Makes them reliable against squads, but doesn't make them better than their current maximum potential, reduces their effectiveness against single models, whilst steering clear of range measuring shenanigans that will see a return to the arguments templates used to bring up.

 

You can then differentiate different kinds of flame weapons further by increasing the maximum number of possible hits. You could also make them more effective against unit sizes over 20 or something like that.

[Grimdark_Garage]

Add an overcharge option to flamers.

 

Roll the number of D6 equal to the models in range of the target unit. On 2+ its a hit.

 

Any 1's is a mortal wound back.

 

Wouldn't necessarily use against MSU but against hordes you'd take that risk.

[FormelyKnownAsSmashyPants]

 

 

Torvald, most of those buffs he wants are on weapons that aren't used much because they aren't very good.

Making subpar choices in line with the better ones won't raise the overall lethality of shooting much, if at all.

It'll just mean you get shot at by something other than overcharged plasma for once.

No I've got multi meltas as well. I also collect every main faction apart from tau as well as a lot of sub factions, so I have shooty armies as well. I mean to moan about dakka in this edition is a bit much.

.

 

To be clear, I don't think shooting as whole needs to be changed. I realize that this edition favours shooting more than any other edition to have come previously, at least in my opinion. I merely lament the fact that if I some how manage to get a meltagun within six inches of a tank, I end up with the potential of taking a whopping total of one one wound off the :cuss ing thing. I have to brave more enemy shooting, which as you've pointed out is brutal this edition, to get in range, and that's if I'm not charged before I fire the :cuss ing thing (I'm not saying its bad I have the potential to get charged, I just see it being the case at the moment that taking melta, seems to be a great deal of risk with the potential of very little reward). Compare that to plasma, where if I get in rapid fire range, just within twelve inches, and overcharge, I have a realistic liklyhood of doing a flat four damamge, provided I hit and wound. As has been mentioned I'm not saying shooting is bad, merely that some weapons seem pretty :cuss y compared to others. There should be a dilemma that a player faces when choosing which special/heavy weapon to take in there squads, rather than just 'moar plasma'.

 

Also there are improvements that could be made to melee weapons. How often do we see eviscerators? Apart from me, I don't think anyone fields them, which is a terrible, terrible shame as they are freaking awesome from a fluff and modelling point of view. They should be better than hammers at taking on tanks, not worse. Also what about a rule akin to Seth's where he can swing the thing in an arc and do less damage, but to everyone he's in base contact with. There are some no-brainer choices when it comes to which melee weapons to take over another as well.

 

I do believe shooting is a lot stronger than melee this edition, but the problem with melee, I feel lies with the core rules, rather than the weapons themselves. I don't know how to fix melee, I know it has to be done, just don't know how.