Fixing Melta

[Closet Skeleton]

On 3/17/2023 at 6:58 PM, Firedrake Cordova said:

As back far as I can remember (2nd Ed), it used to be described as the most potent (albeit short-ranged) infantry-portable anti-tank weapon the Imperium had, capable of slicing through structures and tanks with ease.  Back in 2nd Edition, a lascannon hit to the hull of a Predator or Land Raider would on-average not cause damage, whereas the same hit from a multi-melta would on-average penetrate.

 

Quote

2nd edition wargear book:

The melta-gun is also known as the melter, cooker or vape gun. It works by sub-molecular thermal agitation in a manner comparable to microwave irradiation. The target gets very hot and eventually cooks, melts or just evaporates. A melta-gun can melt plasteel or plascrete, and its effects upon living tissue are impressive to say the least. The weapon has only  a short range, so it is used mostly for close assault and support.

 

The melta gun makes no noise when fired, but the super heating of the air produces a distinctive hiss which becomoes a roaring blast as living targets are hit and their bodies' moisture vapourises explosively.

 

Doesn't say anything about it being a man portable buster bunker.

 

Rapier Laser Destroyer was 1d6+2d10+9 averaging 23.5 while a multi-melta was 1d6+2d12+8 so average 24.5. Regular meltagun was 2d6+8 so only averaging 15 and identical to an autocannon except for an extra point of anti-infantry AP while a lascannon was 3d6+9 so way superior to either. On the other hand melta weapons only had -4 AP while lascannons were -6 but that basically only mattered with terminators and their saving throw on 2d6. No short range rule existed other than a common +1 to hit shared with other weapons like plasma guns and bolters.

 

So the multi-melta was definitely the best infantry portable gun if you ignore its move or fire and short range but 2nd edition wasn't like 3rd-7th where the only difference between multi-melta, meltagun or an inferno pistol was the optimum range.

[Evil Eye]

Melta is a tricky one to do under the current system because it was really meant for a system where vehicles had their own rules separate from other units. In theory, long range anti-tank like lascannons are effective and have good range, but not 100% guaranteed to destroy heavier tanks, whilst melta weapons are very short ranged but if they get close enough to a vehicle, it is fethed, and I like that setup. Actually translating that into rules where tanks are effectively just very big infantry, however, is difficult. Go too far one way and vehicles become utterly useless, too far the other and melta becomes pretty redundant.

 

It's also a bit tricky with super-heavies like Knights, as obviously a Knight should be considerably tougher than a Predator, but at the same time needs not to be totally invincible. There's definitely a conversation to be had on having to balance around such gigantic units as part of regular gameplay, but anyway. Speaking on Xenith's example, I feel like whilst they shouldn't completely disintegrate it, the inferno pistols should have been able to do some damage to it- even if they are baby meltaguns, they're still meltaguns and 8 of them at close range would do damage to a Knight (the wielders presumably blasting between the armour panels, a Knight being a very big target!). Obviously bad rolling comes into it but I do agree with the sentiment that something should have happened. For sure, having your Knight being kneecapped by close-range melta fire is annoying, but at the same time, the whole point of melta weapons is that you're not supposed to let them get too close to your vehicles!

 

The more I think about it, the more I get the feeling the problem is less melta and more meta (if you'll pardon the pun). The direction the game's been taken has resulted in weirdly counter-intuitive balancing where things don't really work the way they're supposed to. There's always been cases of this sort of thing happening, though I do think the rise of metagaming has made that worse, but it's particularly egregious at the moment.

 

So in answer to the question, I do think melta weapons are in a bit of a sticky situation but I feel it's not going to be fixed unless 10th takes a substantially different approach to game design and balancing (specifically treating vehicles as fundamentally different units).

[Lord_Ikka]

As a Knights player, I wish I had your opponent's luck! 

 

As far as meltas go, their performance for me has been decent across the three armies that I have that use them (SM Primaris, Knights, Scions). I can't say that there have been many times where I would have traded the extra damage at half range for something like +1 S at half range- the increase of minimum damage/limiting of d6 damage swingy-ness for me is more important that a potential increase in probability of wounding. 

 

I have an example of such a thing a Necrons player- the frustration of swingy d6 damage has made me all but disregard units like Doomsday Arks/Doomstalkers, which have weapons have the extra S that meltas "lack" and indeed better AP than meltas as well. I generally go for the flat d2/d3 damage of melee units like Skorpekh that "might" get up to S8 when they are boosted but don't necessarily always get there. There are other issues with the Doomsday weapons (not a fan of the swingy d6 shots numbers), but I think even if they had the set number of shots that meltas do I would still not take them if they kept the d6 damage. Its the same when I have to choose between meltaguns/multimeltas or lascannons- the extra S of a lascannon is nice but I prefer the lesser strength but more reliable damage of a melta, even if I'm going against T8+ units. For me the flat/increased minimum damage profile is better than the increased chance of wounding- in quite a few armies there are ways to either increase to Wound rolls or get re-rolls to Wound of some kind, there are very rarely any sort of increases/re-rolls on damage rolls. This is purely personal, of course, so my preference could definitely not be in the majority. 

[Xenith]

1 hour ago, Evil Eye said:

In theory, long range anti-tank like lascannons are effective and have good range, but not 100% guaranteed to destroy heavier tanks, whilst melta weapons are very short ranged but if they get close enough to a vehicle, it is fethed

 

Thanks for putting that in such an eloquent manner that I've been failing to do for two pages! Melta was the high risk high reward option, where if it managed to get it in range, you were screwed. Currently lascannons are better at damaging tanks at all ranges. 

 

1 hour ago, Lord_Ikka said:

As a Knights player, I wish I had your opponent's luck!

 

The only hit on a 4+upgrade, no rerolls allowed and 4++ relic upgrade went a lot of the way to making that thing invulnerable! Actually thinking about it, and contrary to what a lot of folks in this thread are saying, is that my rolling was actually just about average, maybe a tiny bit less. The 4+/4+/4+ rolls needed to get a point of damage through on the knight, followed by potential CP reroll mean that you statistically need 8+ melta shots to get one unsaved wound, so my 9 shots were just below average rolling. 

 

1 hour ago, Lord_Ikka said:

For me the flat/increased minimum damage profile is better than the increased chance of wounding

 

Reasoned responses, thank you! Taking melta out of the equation, more reliable damage is always preferable, and better, which is why a lot of stuff now has been removing the random from the game, like D3+3 lascannons and bright lances - as rolling that 1 on the damage meant that these weapons simply weren't doing what they were meant to be doing.

 

Looking at that reliability aspect, what about:

 

MELTA weapons always wound VEHICLES on a 4+ at over half their range, and on a 2+ at or within half range?

 

I'm just braindumping game design ideas here, but more complex, but more fluff accurate would be that an inferno pistol wounds VEHICLES on a dice roll equal to or greater than the distance to the target model. Melta guns wound if a roll of 2d6 is greater than the range to the target model, Multimeltas wound if they can roll higher than the distance to the model on 4d6. J

[Lord_Ikka]

14 minutes ago, Xenith said:

The only hit on a 4+upgrade, no rerolls allowed and 4++ relic upgrade went a lot of the way to making that thing invulnerable! Actually thinking about it, and contrary to what a lot of folks in this thread are saying, is that my rolling was actually just about average, maybe a tiny bit less. The 4+/4+/4+ rolls needed to get a point of damage through on the knight, followed by potential CP reroll mean that you statistically need 8+ melta shots to get one unsaved wound, so my 9 shots were just below average rolling. 

Hmm- maybe its me but I don't know what they were using to make you not able to re-roll anything. I know the Ion Bulwark Warlord Trait (4++ vs Ranged) and it must be an Imperialis House to use Strike and Shield Tradition (4+ required to Hit), but I'm not seeing anything that can stop an opponent from re-rolling. I'm pretty much a Mechanicus House player, so not really up on the Imperialis/Freeblade stuff, but would like to know that specific bit of info.

27 minutes ago, Xenith said:

MELTA weapons always wound VEHICLES on a 4+ at over half their range, and on a 2+ at or within half range?

That is interesting. I don't know how that would work out mathematically, but it is at least an intriguing idea. Haywire weapons wound vehicles on a 4+ regardless of Strength, so there is a precedent for something similar occurring. 

30 minutes ago, Xenith said:

I'm just braindumping game design ideas here, but more complex, but more fluff accurate would be that an inferno pistol wounds VEHICLES on a dice roll equal to or greater than the distance to the target model. Melta guns wound if a roll of 2d6 is greater than the range to the target model, Multimeltas wound if they can roll higher than the distance to the model on 4d6.

Fortunately or unfortunately (depending on your personal views on complexity in game design), GW has shown with the last two editions that they do not want to make complex rules for individual weapons. Requiring each meltagunner's shot to be measured from the individual model wouldn't be an option, it would slow down the game too much. I can see something like that working in a Kill Team-style skirmish game though. 

[Karhedron]

2 hours ago, Lord_Ikka said:

I have an example of such a thing a Necrons player- the frustration of swingy d6 damage has made me all but disregard units like Doomsday Arks/Doomstalkers, which have weapons have the extra S that meltas "lack" and indeed better AP than meltas as well. I generally go for the flat d2/d3 damage of melee units like Skorpekh

 

I am inclined to agree. I fought against Knights yesterday with my Space Wolves and my melta whiffed horribly. A drop pod full of MM Long Fangs with all the trimmings landed next to a Knight Valiant. While I scored a respactable 8 hits, only 2 of those wounded and my opponent then passed one of his 5++ Ion shield saves, I rolled so badly he didn't even bother rotating.

 

My MVPs were definitely the Wulfen. Massed Thunder Hammer attacks tore apart a Gallant with the flat 3 Damage and fighting on death meant they got to deal their damage even though the Gallant charged (next time I need to keep the Armour of Russ handy to inflict Strike Last).

[Karhedron]

2 minutes ago, Lord_Ikka said:

Hmm- maybe its me but I don't know what they were using to make you not able to re-roll anything. I know the Ion Bulwark Warlord Trait (4++ vs Ranged) and it must be an Imperialis House to use Strike and Shield Tradition (4+ required to Hit), but I'm not seeing anything that can stop an opponent from re-rolling.

 

I think they were Chaos Knights. There is an ability called BLESSING OF THE DARK MASTER which means you cannot reroll hits, wounds or damage rolls against that Knight.

 

That can be stacked with abilities to boost its save to a 4++ and straight away you have model that is harder to shift than curry stains on a white shirt.

[Lord_Ikka]

2 minutes ago, Karhedron said:

 

I think they were Chaos Knights. There is an ability called BLESSING OF THE DARK MASTER which means you cannot reroll hits, wounds or damage rolls against that Knight.

 

That can be stacked with abilities to boost its save to a 4++ and straight away you have model that is harder to shift than curry stains on a white shirt.

Ah, that would make sense- yeah, fought a Chaos Knight in a tournament two weeks ago and it was hellishly hard to take down- survived my whole Knights list shooting the first turn and a charge by a Paladin. Took three Fight Phases (and the intervention of a Warglaive), to finally smash it.

 

11 minutes ago, Karhedron said:

I am inclined to agree. I fought against Knights yesterday with my Space Wolves and my melta whiffed horribly. A drop pod full of MM Long Fangs with all the trimmings landed next to a Knight Valiant. While I scored a respactable 8 hits, only 2 of those wounded and my opponent then passed one of his 5++ Ion shield saves, I rolled so badly he didn't even bother rotating.

 

Had that happen more times than I've wanted- some times the dice love you and sometimes they hate you. Technically, he should have used Rotate when you targeted the Knight, you can't use it after seeing how your opponent rolls for Hits/Wounds.

[Xenith]

24 minutes ago, Lord_Ikka said:

Requiring each meltagunner's shot to be measured from the individual model wouldn't be an option, it would slow down the game too much.

 

You already have to do that though, to check which models are in melta range, same with rapid fire - unless it's actually on a unit basis and I've been doing it wrong all this time! Overcharged plasma models like Inceptors also already have to roll individually, so it's no more than already exists in the current rules. 

[Lord_Ikka]

28 minutes ago, Xenith said:

 

You already have to do that though, to check which models are in melta range, same with rapid fire - unless it's actually on a unit basis and I've been doing it wrong all this time! Overcharged plasma models like Inceptors also already have to roll individually, so it's no more than already exists in the current rules. 

That is true, didn't think about that. My guess is that something like that still wouldn't happen, as it is or would seem to be by some players as more complicated than a simple to Hit -> to Wound - > Save/Damage style series of rolls that can be accomplished once range is figured out. Not saying it is worse or a bad idea, just that I think most players would view that sort of interaction as an unnecessary complication. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

5 hours ago, Evil Eye said:

Melta is a tricky one to do under the current system because it was really meant for a system where vehicles had their own rules separate from other units. In theory, long range anti-tank like lascannons are effective and have good range, but not 100% guaranteed to destroy heavier tanks, whilst melta weapons are very short ranged but if they get close enough to a vehicle, it is fethed, and I like that setup. Actually translating that into rules where tanks are effectively just very big infantry, however, is difficult. Go too far one way and vehicles become utterly useless, too far the other and melta becomes pretty redundant.

 

It's also a bit tricky with super-heavies like Knights, as obviously a Knight should be considerably tougher than a Predator, but at the same time needs not to be totally invincible. There's definitely a conversation to be had on having to balance around such gigantic units as part of regular gameplay, but anyway. Speaking on Xenith's example, I feel like whilst they shouldn't completely disintegrate it, the inferno pistols should have been able to do some damage to it- even if they are baby meltaguns, they're still meltaguns and 8 of them at close range would do damage to a Knight (the wielders presumably blasting between the armour panels, a Knight being a very big target!). Obviously bad rolling comes into it but I do agree with the sentiment that something should have happened. For sure, having your Knight being kneecapped by close-range melta fire is annoying, but at the same time, the whole point of melta weapons is that you're not supposed to let them get too close to your vehicles!

 

The more I think about it, the more I get the feeling the problem is less melta and more meta (if you'll pardon the pun). The direction the game's been taken has resulted in weirdly counter-intuitive balancing where things don't really work the way they're supposed to. There's always been cases of this sort of thing happening, though I do think the rise of metagaming has made that worse, but it's particularly egregious at the moment.

 

So in answer to the question, I do think melta weapons are in a bit of a sticky situation but I feel it's not going to be fixed unless 10th takes a substantially different approach to game design and balancing (specifically treating vehicles as fundamentally different units).

Those inferno pistols should have done something statistically. The only reason they didn’t is bad luck. 
just like statistically 10 lasguns shouldn’t really do anything to a knight but I’ve been lucky enough to take two wounds off a knight with lasguns(no born soldiers) with good luck.

[Xenith]

24 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

Those inferno pistols should have done something statistically. The only reason they didn’t is bad luck. 

 

Incorrect bud:

 

3 hours ago, Xenith said:

Actually thinking about it, and contrary to what a lot of folks in this thread are saying, is that my rolling was actually just about average, maybe a tiny bit less. The 4+/4+/4+ rolls needed to get a point of damage through on the knight, followed by potential CP reroll mean that you statistically need 8+ melta shots to get one unsaved wound, so my 9 shots were just below average rolling. 

 

My rolling was about average, or maybe only slightly worse against the target model - 50% chance to hit with no rerolls, 50% chance to wound with no rerolls, 50% chance to save with CP reroll is about 0.0625% chance of a single melta shot causing damage. 

 

8 melta shots is 4 hits, is 2 wounds, is one initial failed save, which could be rerolled for 0.5 damaging hits. To 'guarantee' at least a single wound on that knight, you'd need ~16 melta shots.

 

The fact that you say:

 

24 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

Those inferno pistols should have done something statistically

 

just drives home my point further: Those inferno pistols should have done something. But they didnt. Which is why I'm suggesting that they've been left behind in codex creep, and are not even functioning the way they should do according to the fluff. 

Edited March 22, 2023 by Xenith

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

4 hours ago, Xenith said:

 

Thanks for putting that in such an eloquent manner that I've been failing to do for two pages! Melta was the high risk high reward option, where if it managed to get it in range, you were screwed. Currently lascannons are better at damaging tanks at all ranges. 

 

 

The only hit on a 4+upgrade, no rerolls allowed and 4++ relic upgrade went a lot of the way to making that thing invulnerable! Actually thinking about it, and contrary to what a lot of folks in this thread are saying, is that my rolling was actually just about average, maybe a tiny bit less. The 4+/4+/4+ rolls needed to get a point of damage through on the knight, followed by potential CP reroll mean that you statistically need 8+ melta shots to get one unsaved wound, so my 9 shots were just below average rolling. 

 

 

Reasoned responses, thank you! Taking melta out of the equation, more reliable damage is always preferable, and better, which is why a lot of stuff now has been removing the random from the game, like D3+3 lascannons and bright lances - as rolling that 1 on the damage meant that these weapons simply weren't doing what they were meant to be doing.

 

Looking at that reliability aspect, what about:

 

MELTA weapons always wound VEHICLES on a 4+ at over half their range, and on a 2+ at or within half range?

 

I'm just braindumping game design ideas here, but more complex, but more fluff accurate would be that an inferno pistol wounds VEHICLES on a dice roll equal to or greater than the distance to the target model. Melta guns wound if a roll of 2d6 is greater than the range to the target model, Multimeltas wound if they can roll higher than the distance to the model on 4d6. J

No.

wounding on a 4+ for S8 vehicles is plenty strong.

 

this whole thread is because of some extremely unusually bad set of rolls.

 

that is not indicative of a problem that needs to be fixed.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

57 minutes ago, Xenith said:

 

Incorrect bud:

 

 

My rolling was about average, or maybe only slightly worse against the target model - 50% chance to hit with no rerolls, 50% chance to wound with no rerolls, 50% chance to save with CP reroll is about 0.0625% chance of a single melta shot causing damage. 

 

8 melta shots is 4 hits, is 2 wounds, is one initial failed save, which could be rerolled for 0.5 damaging hits. To 'guarantee' at least a single wound on that knight, you'd need ~16 melta shots.

 

The fact that you say:

 

 

just drives home my point further: Those inferno pistols should have done something. But they didnt. Which is why I'm suggesting that they've been left behind in codex creep, and are not even functioning the way they should do according to the fluff. 

No, bad luck doesn’t mean they’ve been left behind. It’s a dice game and luck will play a massive roll(pun intended). 
 

i support removing random shots and random damage because it speeds up the game and ensures weapons are likely to fill the role theyre supposed to fill.(1 shot for a flamer sucks, 1 damage for a lascannon sucks)

 

you can make lore arguments until you’re blue in the face but the game’s rules are not lore based enough to make that a valid argument.

 

is the melta class of weapons actually falling behind the rest of the anti-tank weapons available? No, not really, they just require you to get closer than lascannons or missiles, and they reward you for doing so.

 

does SG need fixed with a buff because they miserably underperformed in my last game during the fight phase? No, they’re plenty good, I just got unlucky, just like you got unlucky.

[Rogue]

4 hours ago, Xenith said:

Looking at that reliability aspect, what about:

 

MELTA weapons always wound VEHICLES on a 4+ at over half their range, and on a 2+ at or within half range?

 

Ad Mech arc rifles always wound on 4+ into vehicles, and always inflict 3 damage (instead of their usual d3).

 

Maybe you could have melta weapons always wounding on 4+ (which isn't much of a change, as they wound most things on 4s currently), but wounding on 4+ with 6 damage at half range.

 

Edited March 22, 2023 by Rogue
Abhor the grammatical error

[Karhedron]

1 hour ago, Xenith said:

Those inferno pistols should have done something. But they didnt. Which is why I'm suggesting that they've been left behind in codex creep, and are not even functioning the way they should do according to the fluff. 

 

In a game based on dice, there is always the chance to do zero damage. Nothing is ever guaranteed. Against the buffed up Knight you describe, the average damage from 9 melta pistols is about 6 wounds but that is only ever an average. You are as likely to do 12 wounds as you are to do zero. Those pistols are currently a free upgrade but even previously they only cost 45 points. 45 points of upgrades  to put an average of 6 wounds per firing phase onto one of the toughest models in the game is not bad. Also the Knight costs about twice as many points as the Sanguinary Guard.

[jaxom]

I think it;s a divergence of tabletop and lore because of two big changes that occurred in 8th edition. All squads can split fire and a desire (on the designers' parts) that larger models are on the table longer (and that just led to an arms race, and it a whole other can of worms). There was a very similar conversation around plasma at the time. Lore (and previous editions) had plasma guns killing light vehicles like Rhinos, Hellhounds, and Vypers with a single hit. White box calculations don't help as much in looking at the design space because there are too many ways to frame the discussion. This is what led to the "kill a Knight in one turn" arms race. 

[sairence]

2 hours ago, Rogue said:

 

Ad Mech arc rifles always wound on 4+ into vehicles, and always inflict 3 damage (instead of their usual d3).

 

Maybe you could have melta weapons always wounding on 4+ (which isn't much of a change, as they wound most things on 4s currently), but wounding on 4+ with 6 damage at half range.

 

 

I feel at a time when GW is fibally brave enough to open up the statline and go past T8 for really big models to make them more durable and compensate for the massive size, making a weapon that is widely available to a huge number or armies in the game ignore that may be counterproductive. 

 

As a Guard and occasional Imperial Knights-player, I can tell you that I find lots of Melta about the scariest ranged weapon in the game for my big units.