What about tweaking the Autofire rules a bit? As far as I see it, you've got two lines of thought:

1. Cinematic: levelling an autofire weapon and stiching a target with hot lead.
2. Realism: an automatic weapon is used primarily to create an AoE kill-zone.

I am of the mind that Autofire doesn't make you more accurate, but I can see how they designed the rule with that hefty bonus to include abstract cinematics and realism all in one easy rule.

So, here's my suggestions:

1. Reduce the bonus to +10 BS
2. Unless I'm mistaken, bonuses to hit stack in DW. Maybe 'Highest bonus applies' would work better for balance. In this case, reducing the Autofire bonus to hit would not be necessary. I've had situations where the Dev is getting a BS of well over 100, so no wonder he gets 7 hits on a Tyrant and demolishes the poor bastard in a round or two of shooting.
3. Heavy Bolters fire heavier versions of the normal bolt shell. Maybe the HB stats need a tiny amount of tweaking. Looking in the book, though, I can't see much to tweak, so maybe the Autofire and bonus system needs some tinkering instead.

Also might be worth considering that HB's are not essentially machine guns. Not to get too anal about it, but in a sense, Bolt weapons pretty much fire straight-line grenades, hence the low RoF. Doesn't make much sense compared to what we have nowadays, but I guess you have to oversee those small artistic licenses, for the flavour of the game.

ak-73 said:

Seems like a cool idea. Gonna try it out. I just think its disgusting how easy it is to get 20 magnitude damage as a tactical by simply using metal storm in a storm bolter. All you need is the talent for 1 extra bolt shot with full auto :S.

So first, this system was spawned by BI, yes?

Second with TT, a stormbolter does Assault 2, versus a boltgun which has rapid fire. So storm bolter can be shot on the run twice. A boltgun can fire twice at half it's range if you don't move. To me that's a nice advantage. Then the HB is stronger, has better armor penetration, and does heavy 3.

After that I think you have to remember that TT is even MORE abstracted from combat than the RPG is. Each roll of the dice doesn't necesarily represent a single shot, each 'death' on the field doesn't represent a killing blow but a casualty, meaning that person may be disabled enough to not fight for the moment. Take a look at AK's page on 'bringing weapons in line with TT' and the logic there is pretty sound. Also, the stormbolter in the RPG isn't exactly free, you have to pay for it, so if it came down to it why not just up the req cost?

At 12" when you dont want to charge, it doesnt matter if you bring a Storm Bolter or a Bolter.

At long range you gain twice the firepower.

When you want to charge a SB is better.

BUT! Space Marines carry Bolt pistols.

When charging, you dont care it is marginally better to have a SB than a normal Bolter, unless you have a Power Fist, which is highly constructed and hardly carries over to the RPG (Power weapons dont have that problem and actually suffer if you equip a Storm Bolter). For the rank and file getting a Storm Bolter is really meh.

So SBs are good at long range, and if you carry a Power Fist. Not twice as good at everything the Bolter does. On the TT its a nice tactical choice (if you have the points leftover for PF+SB). In the RPG its pretty much a single track lane.

Im only griping about the lost opportunity.

The core rule system is fine. Not just fine for DH and RT, but fine for what DW could have been. What went wrong was how FFG used it with their version of DW.

Simple fixes I saw from the beginning:

Ditch Squad modes.

Power Armour is AP 8.

Reduce starting stats to 25+2D10.

Make TB count as primitive armour.

Implants could have been summed up easily as "These Implants give Space Marines Unnatural Toughness (x2) and Unnatural Strength (x2)" and maybe through in a few talents they simulate, instead of the page of mechanical rule text we got.

Now the Space Marine is going to have roughly 11-12 points of damage soak against non primitive attacks. And a respectable 14-16 against primitive attacks.

Take your Pen 4 or 5 normal bolter doing 1D10+5 damage and they soak about 6 or so points of damage, making the bolter able to hurt a standard marine.

Scale from there.

Charmander said:

I think this is an important true point. a storm bolter seems to be like a bolter that has been modified to have the capacity to fire on the run easily. It almost seems like an approximation to table top would be to make a storm bolter an autostabilized bolter. The only issue with this would be that a terminator would have no reason to have a storm bolter rather than a bolter, but I dont think that a terminator can have a standard bolter anyway.

or alternatively replace storm from the book with

Storm: When firing a weapon with the storm quality on full automatic a half move can be made as part of the action with no penalty.

Narkasis Broon said:

In the terms of an abstracted wargame, yes. Back in 2nd edition 40k, the Storm Bolter had a sustained fire dice (1-3 shots each time you fired), while a Bolter only fired once (not once if you moved... just once), with Space Marines (including Traitors) able to fire twice with any Bolter, Bolt Pistol or Storm Bolter if they stayed still (Rapid Fire was a special rule for Space Marines, not a standard feature of the guns).

In background terms, a Storm Bolter is the end result of many centuries of development, starting with the combi-bolter still employed by the Traitor Legions. In its original form, the Storm Bolter was two bolters stuck together to increase firepower. The Storm rule represents that quite nicely - it literally doubles the firepower of a Bolter, as its twin chambers allow it to fire twice as many shells in the same space of time. It might not represent what the wargame does, but I personally can't fault the representation of the background.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

It does cause scaling problems though. It leads to the Heavy Bolter having this very high ROF and high damage which outshines all other weapons in the right hands.

Alex

N0-1_H3r3 said:

While I would have been very happy if the wargame had never moved on from 2nd ed i will point out that as the sustained fire die also had a jam, which if I remember correctly meant no shots this turn or the following turn as the jam was cleared, the average fire rate of a 2nd ed storm bolter was only 1.5 shots per turn, with an additional 1/6 probability that its fire rate would be 0 next turn. I have to admit im slightly at a loss as how to represent this mathematically. but I would say that over 7 attacks, if each result occured evenly you would only fire 9 shots, (2*0's 2*1's 2*2's 1*3) which is only 9/7ths per turn

N0-1_H3r3 said:

And yet for some reason, a twin linked weapon doesn't work the same way, despite being pretty much the same thing. They never really explained how a storm bolter is different enough from a twin linked weapon that it somehow is better. Two barrels firing shots at the enemy? Two bolters stuck together will do that. A storm bolter is just a custom built twin linked bolter, there is no operational difference between a storm bolter and two bolters stuck together fired sided by side. The only thing that might be different is that a combi bolter is less reliable and weighs more. The actual firing mechanism can't be different enough that it warrants such different rules.

Hellebore

Except, there IS a difference between a twin-linked bolter and a storm bolter. The fluff says it's a better version, if you need Gamesworkshop to hype up a bunch of technobabble to have that sink in, I don't know what to say. You could go as far as to say, the Machine Spirit of a Stormbolter is a single spirit that controls the firing of two bolt shells at precisely the same moment and target, as opposed to a twink-linked bolter, where two machine spirits must work in tandem, and thus, may not work together as well (or at all). On the tabletop, the stormbolter is simply more effective than a bolter, and more effective than twin-linked bolter. It is a fair representation (especially now that one degree of success on dodge dodges a double hit from storm).

BrotherHostower said:

Ok it is better, and it is supposed to be better, but it is not and never has been (as far as I know) twice as good as a bolter on the tabletop.

in second ed a combi bolter was arguably better, but (and correct me if I'm wrong I haven't played tabletop in a long time) in more recent version twin linked has been reroll misses? which means that it is effectively two shots, but only a maximum of one can hit so storm bolter is superior to a twin linked bolter. but only if the space marine is on the move? is that right? I guess this makes sense as is it not a weapon for "storm"ing defenses? this is basically the logic behind my idea for giving the storm bolter auto stabilised or at least the ability to half move+full auto without penalty

BrotherHostower said:

It can be better without having to shoot better. Lighter because it's custom built to work that way, reliable for the same reason. But there is absolutely NO reason that two bolters with their barrels side by side 1" apart won't fire and hit exactly the same times as another one where those bolters were welded together.

Machine spirits in guns? Really? You're going to take the relgious ignorance of the Imperium as gospel truth? Two triggers being pulled simultaneously will shoot two shots simultaneously, it only takes a small rod of metal to join them together. Pulling the trigger has nothing to do with any machine spirit, superstitious or computer.

A storm bolter is a custom built combi bolter. The only functional difference between the two is that a combi bolter is two separate weapons side by side (like what Ripley did in Aliens with the pulse rifle and flame thrower, albiet a bit more sophisticated) whilst a storm bolter is a custom built gun body that encloses two barrels.

Two barrels side by side firing at the same time. One built that way specifically so it can lose a lot of weight and be designed to function that way, the other two guns side by side.

The way they fire will not change no matter how you bull it away.

A storm bolter historically was just a permanent combi bolter. It wasn't ever anything special, just the official model of combi bolter prototypes. It fires the same rounds down the same barrels the same distance apart at the same time.

EDIT: If you want to get technical the 'storm' rule in the RPG is exactly the same as the 'twin linked' rule in 2nd ed 40k - fire once and hit twice. Which makes sense because you're firing two guns at the same time a few inches apart - the shots will land a few inches apart so they will almost always hit the same thing.

Hellebore

Peacekeeper_b said:

But doesn't this scale marines back to essentially being marginally better than a mid-level Dark Heresy character? Isn't part of the theme of DW that you're better than that? Alternately don't you end up making DH characters (with no UT and TB only being primitive armor) even more vulnerable to gettting wasted than they already are?

Don't get me wrong, I get that some people don't like that the marines are as tough as they are, and I totally agree that some of the rules are just kind of broken in general, and maybe that's the theme you're going for, but this seems to reduce 'elite' marines to little more than moderately experienced acolytes.

BrotharTearer said:

Nice catch, I haven't had any players use this so I haven't seen this, but yeah you're looking at a world eating warp hole there . I'd give it something like on a 1 it decreases by 2m, 2-5 decreases by 1m, 6-9 increases by 1m, and 10 increases by 2m. Or give it a tiered system, where it's more likely to increase on rounds 1-3, then more likely to decrease after that.

Hellebore said:

Except, it is better, and on the tabletop it DOES shoot better (24inch range, all the time, 2 shots able to hit, where the bolter, and twin linked bolter, can only ever get 1 hit at 24 inches if they do not move, though it has better accuracy since you can reroll your to-hit, which is nicely represented with the +20 to hit from twin-linking).

I'm not actually taking the Imperial Religion dogma as truth, I'm saying that you, and I, are not gunsmiths in the 41st millenium, we do not deal in weapons that fire .75 calibur explosive shells some 38,000 years in the future. The setting tells us that the Stormbolter, for whatever reason (I was simply giving you a possible in-game reason), IS better than a twin-linked bolter, and has been since 3rd edition. It's a setting where there's psychic powers and magic and demons, so yes, I can "bull" it away as the guns have magical spirits in them that make them better if I so choose, and the rules in every instance back it up (since 3rd ed, I never played 2nd or original RT), just like you can BS plenty of stuff in say, the Star Wars future-past setting with space wizards can explain things away with the Force. This isn't Star-Trek where everything absolutely must align with psuedo-science or physics.

On the Heavy Bolter issue: how about using dice other than d10s for damage? Now, I suck at maths, averages etc, but using different dice for different weapons could be the solution? or not. For example for HB not 2d10+10,but 3d6+10 or something?

Yeah, I still strongly disagree with ditching Squad Mode stuff. It might not be totally balanced or useful, but it's a unique system component of this game, and represents a specific aspect of Space Marine warfare.

five things to say

1. I agree with korvass, squad mode is enjoyable, makes the battles more tactical and I don't think is actually that broken. personally I like to make the squad modes apparent in actual game play. for example I make it clear to my ultra's that if they want to lead by example they better be leading by example in actual combat. or if they want to strongpoint they need some form of cover to turn into a strong point.

2. @Skie using other dice is a nice idea from a variational point of view. it would be a compromise between a large variance (2d10) and a small variance (1d10) and 3d6 has a mean of 10.5 compared to 2d10's average of 11 so I would say you hit the dice required perfectly. BUT and this is a big but, I dont think it would ever be implemented because part of the gimic of the game is that it requires only d10's to play and is simpler. With this in mind I propose. What about the 2d10 idea but instead of 2d10 throw 4d5. this keeps the potential for epic and awful shots, but makes them less likely and average shots become more likely.

3. I agree that a storm bolter is definitely different from twin linked bolters, I always thought that the difference was that a twin linked bolter could only fire on single shot. because the bolters couldn't rapid fire together without shaking themselves apart wheras storm bolter can rapid fire because they were designed to fire together.

4. +20 to represent twin linking is fine for representing current tabletop, however twin linking is +20 and has a chance of two hits which current tabletop does not have. I still like twin linked in the rpg I'm just pointing out a disparity with TT

5. on my continuing point that a storm bolter should not be twice as good as a bolter I think that the rules BrotherHostower has cited are out of date. anyone correct me if I am wrong but I think the modern rules for rapid fire are just 2 shots if you stand still 1 shot if you move. but even using the 3rd edition rules when you compare a storm bolter under those rules with a bolter the storm bolter does not always fire twice as much. both guns can fire a maximum of 2 times. its just that the storm bolter can do it over a longer range even if the firer is on the move.

[edit] btw i have started a thread here for discussion of Storm Bolter rather than continue to hijack this thread [/edit]

Charmander said:

The average DH character will have a TB 3 of, halved become 2, so the average DH character is losing 1 point of soak to non primitive attacks. Not a huge change of direction, And I hardly call it nerfing space marines, they will still be in the TB/SB 6-8 range at start.

A 5 point loss on all stats is huge, I agree, but with a starting set of 25+2d10 as oppossed to 30+2d10 would allow the game to be a bit less strict on advances, which on average cost a marine what? 500 XP or so? Adding in your chapter bonuses, advances, talents, skills and gear and a rank 1 DW marine is still going to kick some serious **** out of acolytes and regular joes. Sure his TB if 8 is cut to 4 against a bolt gun, but so is that orks TB. So is the nids TB, so is everyones TB.

And by creating a new trait that removes the primitive quality to TB allows you to open up new levels of toughness for advanced characters and critters.

And as I said, you scale from there.

The biggest issue with what I suiggested, was that those ideas would have worked if you started at ground zero not by interjecting them all into the midst of the game as is.

Though I am strongly inclined to start using the primitive quality on TB from now on. I mean is grox hide is primitive armour, why wouldnt a human being's skin be the same?

Actually, a twin-linked bolter does have an advantage over the storm bolter at <12" range, as it has the same number of shots but increased accuracy (50% more accurate at BS3, 33% more accurate at BS 4).

Assault X, where X is greater than 1, is difficult (in my opinion) to represent in Dark Heresy with its S/X/Y format, and is made moreso by the confusion in the length of time that Assault X is supposed to represent.

Skie said:

Except that the game is designed around solely using d10s. Therefore it should probably remain that way. You could reduce it from 2d10+10 to 1d10+16 or something, as it removes one of the chances you get for Righteous Fury (since then you'd only be rolling 2 dice due to Tearing, not 3).

Personally I have taken a full 6 turn 40k game to be about 15-30 minutes. That would make each turn about 2.5 to 3 minutes.

And while Twin-linked is better at shooting at 12" or less, you can't charge at the same time. It is an interesting little interaction of the rules, which is slightly odd, but just makes storm bolters a little but not masssively better.

From the way the background suggested, twin-linked weapons should work how storm works now, and storm should be different. Twin-linked weapons are thos designed to fire at the same time at the same target. They are meant to do more damage to the same target. Storm weapons didn't fire the rounds at the same time. They were a dedicated weapon designed to increase the total RoF, to what I would say is roughly twice that of a normal bolter (it probably fires them in a staggered fashion, one barrel, then the other, and then back to the first etc). Basically, according to the previously established behaviour of the weapons storm doesn't even need a weapon type. It would just have s/4/8 as the Roate of Fire. Now, not being a big number cruncher I don't know if this really works mechanistically (as I feel it may end up being worse than twin linked in many cases... and definitely so in the case of twin-linked bolters), and it does feel it steps on the heavy bolter's toes even further, but that is apparently how it SHOULD work according to the established fluff.

borithan said:

While I do not wish to enter this conversation heavily, I would like to point out that this value is completely relative.

The battles I used to have where each side has 2,000 points, and was the standard battle size for my groups, ended up taking several hours to get to 6 turns. A single turn could last 20 minutes for each participant.

SpawnoChaos said:

Umm... but the post you quoted has nothing to do with how long it takes to play a 2,000 point game of 40k, but rather with how long a single turn in a game of 40k represents in 'game time'

BrotherHostower said:

Better is a relative term and the basis of your argument uses abstract games mechanics that differ throughout editions. Combi bolter and storm bolter background has not changed, but the rules representing them have.

In 2nd ed a combi bolter rolled once to hit and if it did, caused two wound rolls and two armour rolls. In 2nd ed a storm bolter rolled once to hit and rolled a sustained fire dice to see how many hits were caused, which was a 33% chance of 1 shot, 33% chance of 2 shots and a 16.6% chance of 3 or Jam. The combi bolter had the same statistics in every other way. It was guaranteed to produce 2 hits, whilst the storm bolter was not. The storm bolter gave up reliability in order for the potential to produce more shots.

The background for the combi bolter/storm bolter was:

"Over the course of the Horus Heresy the combi-bolter emerged as the most dependable and tactically flexible weapon. It was subsequently fitted with better ammo hoppers and its rate of fire was increased to create the storm botler"

So using one edition of abstract mechanics to represent background is just as subjective as another edition. In the current edition the only thing Frag grenades do is stop you counting as behind an obstacle when charging. So should Deathwatch just chuck the damage of frag grenades and make them a bonus to charging enemies in cover? No, because abstraction is no basis for objective conclusions.

The Storm rule in the RPG is a far better representation of how a twin linked weapon works in function (two shots fired at the same tine within close proximity of each other) than the Twin-Linked rule is. The Storm bolter is designed as a faster firing twin linked weapon effectively.

Therefore, the Twin-linked mechanics should be dropped entirely as it doesn't represent a twin linked weapon particularly well, the Storm mechanics should be used instead and a Storm Bolter should then just be a twin-linked S/3/6 bolter that weighs less. A combi bolter is then just a bolter with the twin-linked rule that weighs twice as much and is probably unreliable due to the non specific construction.

Because that's what combi-bolters and storm bolters are described as.

Hellebore