Should aggressors be allowed to shoot in melee?

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

Yeah I kinda assumed from the OP that it was treating the guns like pistols which is quite a bit different than shooting in the fight phase. Not sure how I feel about that one. Captain Idaho's suggestion is interesting but I actually thought it was better than pistols. Mainly because your opponent can either fall back and respond to threat of aggressors, or pile in more units to try and finish them before your turn. Shooting during the fight phase would just give them back the shoots twice except they'd be able to move and get it. 

 

My experience with aggressors tends to involve them having to advance through no-mans land for a turn and getting shot up. So I think they need the extra damage efficiency over termies (who can set up some pretty devastating deep strikes). So the pistol buff would make sense to me I still think they would be probably be at least 8 elite choices that are better than them (VV, BGV, Assault Termies, Company Vets, Apothecary, Redemptors, Contemptors. and Leviathans). 

[Captain Idaho]

I'm not even convinced Terminators are outclassed by Aggressors to be honest even after the buff of shots into combat. 3+ saves are sucky for an Elites unit that can't teleport and hitting on 4s in melee is equally as bad.

 

Personally I think Aggressors need a buff of some sort to be viable.

 

I otherwise agree, they do need more damage efficiency for being more vulnerable as they close. And the other Elites units do outclass them as priority picks to be honest.

 

What I don't like about shooting twice is the endless rolling of dice. It's boring and slows the game down. So if they're shooting twice, it needs to be in the melee phase at least to cut down on rolled (melee) attacks.

 

-1 to hit helps a little but not with the flamers which is a bit of a problem in power. What else could we do?

Edited October 26, 2021 by Captain Idaho

[Blindhamster]

i think they need their old move+advance+shoot with no penalties rule back.

 

what if they had a reduce damage taken by 1 (minimum 1) rule? :D

Couple it with the strat to make small arms less effective against them and they'd suddenly be very durable despite only having a 3+ save.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

Here is some napkin math of what Captain Idaho's suggestion of the shooting in melee instead of using the fists would look like, with the fists included as a baseline. I didn't include saves, I also listed a max damage for fists to account for multi-wound profiles. It doesn't use chapter tactics, stratagems, or doctrine buffs. I did use shock assault for the fists, and without it I don't know if the fists would be worth it. I also think there would need to be a restriction on the ability so you couldn't use stratagems to buff their shoots. 

 

flamer 21 hits (3.5x2x3)

bolters 18 shots (6x3) + 11 shots (3.5x3 = 10.5, I rounded up to 11)

Fists 7 hits (13x.5 = 6.5 rounded up to 7)

 

T3

flamer 21 hits = 14 wounds

bolters 19.314 hits = 12.74 wounds rounds up 13 

fists 7 hits = .583 rounded up to 6 wounds, 12 damage max

T4

Flamers 21 hits = 10.5 wounds round up to 11

Bolters 19.314 = 9.657 wounds rounds up to 10

Fists 7 hits = 5.83 rounded up to 6 wounds, 12 damage max

T5-T7

Flamers = 21 hits = 7 wounds

bolters 19.314 =6.4 round down to 6 wounds

fists 7 hits = 4.62 rounded to 5 wounds, 10 damage max

 

I think it would be an interesting change, you'd have to consider their save, number of wounds and what doctrine your in to decide what to do, but I don't think its nearly as busted as the old shoot twice. That said after the first round of combat you'd pretty much always want to shoot.

 

[Helias_Tancred]

Would this also apply to the flame storm gauntlets? Or is that a bit too messy to be used in melee without fratricide?

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Would this also apply to the flame storm gauntlets? Or is that a bit too messy to be used in melee without fratricide?

its point blank so I don’t think there’s a reason to limit it just boltstorm

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

They don’t need to be able to shoot in melee imo.

[XeonDragon]

To clarify, what I wrote earlier was about allowing Aggressors to shoot whilst in engagement range (i.e. let the auto boltstorm gauntlets act as pistols), not shooting in addition to or instead of melee attacks. I'll edit for clarity. 

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

As a stratagem yes, as an in-built ability, no. Aggressors are already pretty darn good in terms of shooting and melee output compared to terminators or relic terminators. I did a bunch of mathhammer comparing them and TL;DR, relic terminators with chainfists with whirlwind of rage, born heroes and fury of the first almost do as much combined shooting and melee damage on a points efficiency basis as aggressors with WOR/BH. Comparing ordinary terminators/relics terminators to aggressors and the gap is not insubstantial. Yes, terminators get a 5++ and teleport, but really, aggressors are already very good in terms of overall damage output compared to terminators.

 

Allowing Aggressors to shoot their Auto boltstorm gauntlets natively in combat in addition to melee attacks, even at a -1 to hit, would make them bonkers again.  If it was instead of making melee attacks, maybe not so much. Allowing them to shoot their Auto boltstorm gauntlets as pistols as an in-built ability would be bonkers, but allowing it as a stratagem would be OK. 

 

The pistol option would be worse than allowing them to use guns instead of fists in melee. Your going to have two opportunities too activate it before you could fire pistols in most cases. For example a t3 unit with a 5+ save would lose 9 models before the charge to the bolters, 9 during the first combat, and then 9 during CC on their turn. Compared to losing 6 the first turn from fists, and then maybe 4 more once shock assault wears off based on my earlier numbers. Those additional early kills help protect the unit, and force two difficult morale tests. I really doubt the squad stays locked in unless they're charging something better to kill off the aggressors. 

 

TL:DR - The things the guns are good against are dead or running before the pistol change would be relevant. That said its still substantially worse than what aggressors had before shooting twice for not moving was really easy for some chapters. Shooting once at range and second time after a successful charge is more difficult (and its much more difficult to buff the unit in both phases). I still wouldn't run them in a tournament list with either change. 

 

 

They don’t need to be able to shoot in melee imo.

 

Most stuff in 40k can do stuff it doesn't need to. Aggressors using their fist guns makes a lot more sense than flamers hitting flyers.

 

That said this isn't the type of change that I'd fight for it just makes sense and is entertaining. Really think Tanks are what GW needs to fix.