Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

-Flamer: PCS + PIS; The template is the best way to mitigate Guardsman’s BS3 while still putting out some serious hurt on the enemy. Veteran Squads are not an awful choice as they can carry 3 or carry a Heavy Flamer+ 2 Flamers for Template redundancy, but are best kitted with direct-fire weaponry.

-Plasma Gun: CCS, Veterans, and Storm Troopers; Both of the first options can take Carapace armor, and the third comes with it standard which drastically improves survivability in the event of an overheat. Both of these options also have a BS4 improving the probability of a Hit with the plasma gun. PIS will do if the squad is equipped with a Lascannon as well as these two weapons paired are incredibly powerful (and when targeting Vehicles/MCs can be twin-linked to avoid over-heat/increase the chances to hit)

-Grenade Launcher: Anyone; The single most versatile weapon in the guard armory, it is both direct-fire and has the option to Blast-fire. Veterans and PCS can go Light Vehicle/light MC/Multi-wound character hunting with a Grenade Launcher while still being able to effectively deal with Horde-type units. This weapon is best used in numbers and/or Paired with an Auto-Cannon, Missile Launcher, or Heavy Bolter. Finally this is one of the cheapest special Weapons.

-Melta Gun: CCS, PCS, Veterans, and Storm Troopers; The key to a Melta Gun is to fire as many as possible at the enemy Vehicle/MC, Twin-linking them under Bring it down if possible. Beware the temptation to take too many as this will leave you with too little in the way of fire-power to deal with large numbers of enemy infantry.

-Sniper Rifles: Ratlings, maybe Veterans; You want sniper rifles in numbers and with BS4. Ratlings have both for the best points cost. Veterans can take 2 and a Heavy Weapon but the only good pairs for a Sniper rifle is an Auto-cannon, Mortar, or Heavy Bolter; and you often want your Vets mobile anyways.

-Mortars: Combined PIS + Heavy Weapons Squads; Due to the Fragile nature of a Heavy Weapons Squad this is the only desirable choice for them. You can hide Mortars behind LOS blocking terrain and Rain multi-template death down on your advancing enemy. They also have excellent Range.

-Missile Launchers: Combined PIS, PIS, and CCS; A very versatile weapon System, the missile launcher can mitigate Guard BS3 via Frag Blast markers, or threaten light-medium vehicles/MC via the “bring it down” order. A static CCS loves the Missile Launcher just as much as it loves the auto-cannon due to its versatile nature.

-Lascannon: Combined PIS, PIS; Dedicated Anti-tank/MC, the Lascannon is best taken in Combined squads of 2-3 and under the Bring it down order, this will allow you to hit more reliably and ensure heavy damage to your chosen target. In a Pinch it can be used on Heavy Infantry such as TEQs but the IG have no way of ensuring you can even hit reliably with the weapon, multi shot weapons actually work better on Heavy infantry based on the pure number of shots sent out, and number of saves forced. Static CCS Like them too, and hit more reliably, but the nature of the weapon limits the CCS to a single role.

-Heavy Bolters: Combined PIS + PIS; A dedicated Anti-infantry weapon, the Heavy Bolter is also best used in combined squads of 2-3, but with the “fire on my Target” or “First Rank Fire, Second Rank Fire” orders. They may not have the Range nor the Strength of an Autocannon but the additional shot gives you a better chance to hit more enemy infantry and the AP denies all but MEQs their armor save altogether. With proper target allocation you can take out entire squads (even large ones) of close combat troops well before they ever hit your lines.

-Autocannon: Combined PIS, PIS, and CCS; Arguably the best Heavy Weapon available to the guard, the Autocannon is a Transport hunter that can easily and reliably be turned on the contents of the now disabled/destroyed transport. The Guard have access to large numbers of autocannons on various platforms but as this guide is dealing with infantry I will say this: Static CCS Love the Autocannon, it is so Versitile, and dangerous that no enemy can ignore it but has such range that few enemies can get close to it. If I am outfitting my Infantry squads with Lascannons and Heavy Bolters I often outfit my CCS with Autocannons, this allows the to have multiple shots that hit more often then miss, crack open enemy transports, and threaten any infantry that oppose them.

The other nice thing about the autocannon in ccs/pcs is being able to have 2 GL's to back it up.

I think the vets can take 3 SR's, no?

Sometimes I throw a mortar in a CCS, just so it can hide behind something and safely issue orders to the gunline, while still firing something. Nice and cheap.

Good analysis.

I kinda Touched on the AC+GL in the GL entry but should have reiterated it in the AC entry, especially with the CCS love for them.

Yeah Vets can take 3 Sniper rifles that is why I listed them as the other good choice, they are just significantly more expensive for it and do not come with stealth for free(as ratlings do), they have to pay even more for it; and do not have infiltrate(unless it is Harker's squad).

A Mortar in a CCS is a good idea(for reasons you stated) but wastes their BS4.

Thank you for your feedback and additional information(also for taking the time to read all this).

Spoiler: Forthcoming; Vehicle loadouts!

One other thing I just thought of: SWS's. No love? I've taken them with SR's when my platoons are maxed out or I just have some models/pts left over. They get use in lists on Dakka, often with 2xflamer/demo in a valk/vend. I think the cheaper specials (flamer/SR/GL) work best, but I've seen them as suicide melta squads as well.

I guess they just aren't as good at delivering any special weapon's payload as any of the other choices. The only real reason to take them is because you're short on points, maxed your platoons, plan them for suicide, or want the demo.

I actually forgot all about SWS;

And Demo-charges for that matter.

I will meditate on them and edit both in where they need to be.

I will say this: without adequate transport all Flamer SWS squads do is suck and die(although not as bad as Direct-fire HWS).

A good, well-reasoned and well-written piece of advice. I can't find one thing that I disagree with you on. SWS do need including, but due to their small squad size maybe just as an addendum and listing some of the more effective builds? (Flamer and Demo is my personal favourite!)

Good job!

L. Wrex

FRFSRF is for lasguns only, isn't it? (So won't work with heavy bolters).

I don't know if I'd be quite so picky. To me, a regular infantry squad pairs well with every one of its options except the lascannon and meltagun (which conflicts with the lasguns). Likewise, there is a use for every kind of kitout of special wepaons for command squads (so long as you don't mix weapons and create conflict.

That said just note a couple of things. Firstly, the grenade launcher's real strength is that it is a small blast lasgun, as such, it really only pairs best with lots of other lasguns (like regular infantry squads). If you're using them to take down armor, you've just wasted 50 points.

Secondly, autocannons are NOT the best weapon the guard arsenal has to offer. Against light infantry, it is massively outclassed by flamers, anything in the fast attack slot, and anything in the heavy support category. Against heavy infantry, autocannons are comically bad (just do the math), and are WAY outclassed by anything that begins with "plasma" or ends in "cannon" (other than the autocannon, that is). They are totally ineffective against heavy armor.

So the autocannon, straight out of the gate is worse at 3/4 of the big target types than other weapons. The only category left is transports. Straight away, we can throw out AV12 transports (once again, do the math). This means that the autocannon has ONE use: AV10 vehicles. Even here, the autocannon loses to several options elsewhere in the guard arsenal.

As the autocannon is worse than several other specialized guns in every possible category, the only strength possible is its versatility. While it does lots of things, it does them all POORLY, so it's not really an advantage. Sure, you can chuckle smugly to yourself when you've got an autocannon vs. MCs and all of your plasma guns died, but that laughter will end when the MC smashes into your lines in the face of inneffective autocannon fire.

For comparison, autocannons are like lasguns: they have the ability to be effective against several kinds of targets, but that doesn't change the fact that they are bad against them all. In the case of lasguns, this is mitigated by the absolute throng of them you can take, but autocannons don't have that luxury unless you're willing to put down a lot of points, at which point you might as well build your army list properly and doll out those points to guns that can actually get their respective jobs done.

The guard is about specialization. We are not space marines. It behooves us not to think like we are.

Ailaros wrote:...

I don't think I could disagree more with this.

Autocannons are one of, if not the best, option for PIS heavy weapons. Why? Multiple shot, high Str, long range weaponry at cheap prices. Firstly, let's look at the alternatives;

Lascannon: Single shot, 50% chance of a hit, High S, Long Range, no way to twin-link via (ill-advisably) ordering with CCS, expensive.
Lascannons are too expensive and too inaccurate to be recommended to PIS in an en masse basis. These are far better suited on HWS that can then 'Bring it Down' much more effectively. If you have the points to burn, you may want to buy some of these.

Heavy Bolter: Multiple shot, Mid S, Mid Range.
Good choice if you face lots of horde. Not so effective vs MEQ. THIS if anything is the gun that piddles around the mid-field. Neither strong enough to target vehicles, MC or MEQ it really only works well vs its chosen target; horde infantry. You get these for free on 90% of your vehicles anyway.

Missile Launcher: Choice of shot, Long Range, High S OR Blast, one shot.
Another 'one shot' weapon that in a Guardsman's hands simply won't hit enough times to justiify its point cost. It's krak round is only marginally better than an autocannon, which gets two chances when compared to the ML's one. It can multi-task but this is not recommended. If you're buying this for your PIS you may as well invest the extra points and upgrade to lascannons.

Those are the major three people usually decide upon, now let's consider the autocannon.

Autocannon: Multiple shot, High S, Long Range, good vs transports, MC and throwing wounds at heavy infantry. CHEAP!
An autocannon is one of the cheapest heavy weapons available to PIS, it throws multiple shots which increased the liklihood of hitting. It has a good all round S which makes putting wounds on MC/MEQs easy as well as being able to effectively knock out AV11 (Rhinos and Trukks). It is CHEAP and so you can take lots of them!

You claim the autocannon isn't very good because it does lots of things poorly. I completely disagree. An autocannon performs above average in a variety of battlefield roles and can alter its target depending upon what you shoot at. No, you can't negate MEQ armour, but you can throw so many wounds at them that some will eventually stick. No you can't effectively target AV12/13 but you CAN knock out transports, which is far more important to line Guard than killing Predators. Plasma cannons are not very common in Guard armies, and when you can get them they eat into your points allowance massively. I'd rather take quantity over quality any day, which is both far more characterful and a FAR better utilization of your points balance anyway.

In short: More shots, for cheaper is far better than hoping you'll get lucky with that expensive, one-shot gun. Autocannons are the one weapon that allows PIS to effectively engage a multitude of targets and at least have the possibility of causing wounds/damage.

L. Wrex

I agree, the only standard for judging the autocannon should be its actual effectiveness. It's easy to get confused when looking at statlines. Furthermore, it is very easy to make the mistake that because a weapon is BETTER against certain targets than other weapons, that we should assume that they are GOOD against those targets.

So, let's run some numbers:

Against heavy infantry, an autocannon shoots twice, hits once, wounds 5/6, and gets through armor 1/3. This means for every round of shooting, you kill .27 marines. Is this better than a lasgun or a heavy bolter or a flamer? Yes. Is it GOOD? If you think that shooting for over half the game just to kill ONE MODEL is a sign that it is effective, I have to seriously question your definition of "good".

Now, let's look at AV12. A single autocannon will stun, immobilize, wreck, or explode (that is, stop) a transport that has AV12 at its front is .15. If they have cover (smoke or are moving fast), or are strategically positioned behind terrain relative to the gunner, they operate at .075. Even under the best circumstance, you need to shoot the autocannon for SEVEN turns just to STOP the transport (and if it's stunned, it still gets to move the turn after). Given that transports give you, at most, TWO turns of shooting before they've unloaded their cargo (thus making stopping them moot), are you really going to tell me that autocannons are "good" at stopping transports? Are they better than heavy bolters? Sure. Are they good? Absolutely not.

But what about AV10? of course the autocannon is going to do better than they would at AV12. In fact, a 3x autocannon battery is, I dare say, "effective" at stopping AV10 vehicles within that two turn time frame. Of course, they don't do it better than other weapons, but that's not the argument here.

And lastly, what about MCs? Assuming T6 3+, a single cannon does .22 wounds per turn. That means it takes FOUR TURNS to get ONE wound on an MC. Don't you think they might be able to do some damage in the meantime? No, autocannons are pathetic against MCs, regardless of how good they may first appear when looking at the statline.

Of course, I could go over things like light infantry, or heavy armor, or buildings, but it is self-evident that the autocannon is not only "worse" than other weapons, but it is patently "bad".

So, what does this leave us with? With the exception of AV10, the autocannon is BAD AT EVERYTHING, regardless of how much "better" it is than certain other weapons at certain other targets.

So, if you're fighting a crap-ton of dark eldar, then fine, take some autocannons. Few other armies have AV10 nowadays, and those that do can spam it WAY harder than you can deal with because AV10 vehicles in those armies are cheaper than are the autocannons which you brought to kill them. The only solution, then, is to bring lots, and lots of autocannons, thereby sacrificing points spend on other stuff, while playing deeper into the fact that they are less points effective to filed more cannons than is your opponent in fielding more AV10. Plus, the odds of a single cannon in a single infantry platoon are so long against any target that the sheer badness of the autocannon can't be mitigated by taking a lot of them (in the best possible circumstance, a single guard squad autocannon holds about a 33% chance of stopping a DE raider, and that's assuming that it's stationary, and in the open, etc.).

So, if the autocannon is, as stated, bad, then what do you take instead? I agree that lascannons are also bad (see my comments from the earlier post). Missile launchers are OK if you are planning to face a lot of multiwound T4 (tau suit spamming of doom, or picking off force commanders), but otherwise they're basically the same as a 48" flamer with a smaller template (still useful, but only in limited circumstances (and way worse than artillery)).

If you take these weapons out, you're left with heavy bolters and mortars. Both of these are actually good against the targets they're designed to shoot against, but they're also good against targets that the weapons of the other 9 dudes in the squad are holding. Sure, they don't pair all that great with meltaguns, or to a lesser extent, plasma, but if I were running those special weapons on my squads, I wouldn't bother taking heavy weapons at all.

Now, if you're only taking heavy bolters and mortars (or plasma guns/meltas), does that mean that there are certain kinds of targets that the squad can't engage? Of course. But that doesn't give you the excuse to waste time and potential making them BAD at those targets (rather than not at all). The guard is all about combined arms, not the versatility of individual units (like space marines).

In short, make the squads good at what the squads are good at, and bring in other units with other guns that are actually GOOD at what the autocannon is BAD against. The guard has the options, and the cheapness of upgrades to be able to specialize. It is this advantage which gives the guard the edge, not looking at statlines and making silly statements like "autocannons are great against marines!" just because they're S7.

If you're trying to craft some form of synergy between the heavy weapons wielded by a PIS and *lasguns* then I think you're missing the entire point of fielding PIS. The sole reason you take PIS is to include heavy and special weapons, not to increase the effectiveness of a S3 AP- rifle.

Heavy and specials are the guns that cause the damage, any additional casualties caused by lasguns are simply a nice bonus or, as is more often the case, ablative wounds that allow those heavy weapons to keep firing.

If you're suggesting I'm better off taking heavy bolters or mortars in a PIS because they'll make my lasguns more cost-effective (as they are 'good against targets that the weapons of the other 9 dudes in the squad are holding') then may I humbly suggest you ignore Platoons entirely and stick with Vets?

Obviously cold, hard maths is a strong argument, and admittedly I can't really compose an effective counter other than I don't simply fire one autocannon at a target, I fire three, four, even five to ensure the job gets done. This coincides with my previous argument of quantity > quality.

I think you may be trying to over-specialise your PIS to the extent that you're trying to squeeze every ounce of effectiveness out of them, down so far as to making even the lasguns effective. Whilst this is commerable, it is more certainly not advised, as you'll end up with an understrength unit that only comes into its own when the enemy gets to 24".

Finally, I never said that autocannons are great against marines due to their S7, I merely said that due to their afforability and shot volume COUPLED with their propensity to land wounds on infantry, they are more likely to force more and more armour saves until the inevitable does happen.

L. Wrex


Automatically Appended Next Post:
'Now, if you're only taking heavy bolters and mortars (or plasma guns/meltas), does that mean that there are certain kinds of targets that the squad can't engage? Of course. But that doesn't give you the excuse to waste time and potential making them BAD at those targets (rather than not at all). The guard is all about combined arms, not the versatility of individual units (like space marines).'

I have to quote this bit as well as, again, you're failing to see that having SOME CHANCE of dealing with those targets is better than having no chance at all. Take your above calculations and swap in a heavy bolter, and see how the results churn out that way. At least the autocannon creates a decent playing field to actively engage a multitude of targets, rather than shoehorning you down a particular path.

It allows some flexibility, some versatility, some adaptability, all of which are essential when composing an all-comers list, rather than reserving 2-3 PIS armed with heavy bolters and then realising, too late, your folly when you come up against a mech army.

L. Wrex

Ailaros wrote:....

I think your logic is quite flawed. So, instead of taking AC's you recommend the Heavy Bolter on the grounds that it is more effective against its chosen targets.

Let's look at how much more effective:

Against a toughness 4 defender (and there are bunches of those) a heavy bolter gets approximately 1 kill per turn (sans armor). (3 shots * .50 to hit * .66 to wound). An AC gets approximately .83 kills per turn (2 shots * .50 to hit * .83 to wound). Thus, over the course of a six turn game the heavy bolter gets a measly one extra kill over the AC at the price of being substantially worse against transports as well as MC's. Moreover, if the enemy is running a mech list the HB may do absolutely nothing for the first turn or two of the game, while a lucky hit from an AC can really put a crimp in the opponent's plan.

I think the trade off between 1 kill over the whole game (maybe) vs. a much better capacity to engage MC's and light armor is well worth it.

I am more interested in how people think the IG should deal with enemy armor at long range short of the Vendetta/Valk melta suicide run. As we've seen LC's aren't worth it, most IG long range blasts won't reliably hit/penetrate armor 13/14 vehicles. As Air support doesn't really fit the theme of my force, I am looking for other solutions...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
P.S. I also think you underestimate the usefulness of simply slowing one or two transports down for a turn. This really impacts how coherently the enemy hits your line which can make a huge difference, giving your better weapons, ie meltas, plasma, and ordnance a chance to engage fewer incoming targets at once.

Argument largely seems to be based around av12 transports, but what about av11 rhinos? Autocannons stop them good! You can even glance up preds with them, and if I'm trying to neutralize a shooty tank im generally happy just to glance them till the cows come home (crew shaken, yes please). And when you are pumping out 6+ shots a turn twin-linked with BID! they become fairly good at smashinh up av12.

Also, you are assuming front armour. The presence of autocannons can restrict an enemy's movement, forcing him to keep his vehicle facing forward instead of turning to engage a juicier target. There is value simply in the 'threat' of a weapon.

I don't think the options are so cut and dry, and I would never give carapace to veterans even if kiting them out with plasmaguns.

I give meltas to almost everything. PCS with meltas are just as effective as veterans at popping vehicles, and more so if you have an order. If I'm running a 30-man combined squad for close combat (outflanking), I'll give them meltaguns so they can deal with encroaching dreadnoughts or monstrous creatures, or even for popping transports before assaulting the contents.

Plasmas I reserve for Inquisitor retinues, and only occasionally will consider giving them to veterans/CCS. Stormtroopers can make good use of them too, but I don't use stormtroopers. They aren't a terrible choice for firebase infantry squads either, since they are almost always benefiting from orders.

Flamers I will use in infantry squads occasionally, but I prefer to use them in PCSs and/or SWSs. A PCS with 4x flamers is probably the best-spent 50 points in the game, and my standard SWS load-out is 2x demo + 1 flamer.

GLs are the default weapon for combined firebase squads (except the rare instances when I give them plasmas or flamers), or for mechanized infantry squads (giving me 4 S6 shots while moving, and adding an autocannon and maybe heavy bolter when stationary).

I never give sniper rifles to anyone, ever. Waste of time, IMO, as you really need volume of shots to make them worth it. If I wanted sniper rifles, I would grab ratlings and think nothing further of it.

I give autocannons pretty much to anyone that can take them, except never to command squads (giving up two special slots for a heavy weapon is not my idea of a good trade). I do not bother with other heavy weapons, as the price/performance ratio is not satisfactory.

Time for Math!

T4, 3+, (5+ cover) Cost per wound, (cost per wound in cover)
Lascannon: .42 W, (.28) 48, (71)
Missile Launcher: .42 W, (.28) 36, (54)
Autocannon: .28 W, (.28) 36, (36)
Heavy Bolter: .33 W, (.33) 30, (30)
Lasgun Fire, per 6 shots: .33 W, (.33) 152, (152)

T4, 6+, (5+ cover) Cost per wound, (cost per wound in cover)
Lascannon: .42 W, (.28) 48, (71)
Missile Launcher: .42 W, (.28) 36, (54)
Autocannon: .83 W, (.56) 12, (18)
Heavy Bolter: 1 W, (.66) 10, (15)
Lasgun Fire, per 6 shots: .83 W, (.66) 60, (60)

T3, 5+, (5+ cover) Cost per wound, (cost per wound in cover)
Lascannon: .42 W, (.28) 48, (71)
Missile Launcher: .42 W, (.28) 36, (54)
Autocannon: .83 W, (.56) 12, (18)
Heavy Bolter: 1.25 W, (.83) 8, (12)
Lasgun Fire, per 6 shots: 1 W, (1) 50, (50)

As we can see, the Heavy Bolter is the clear winner for killing infantry of all non-2+ non-WBB kinds. In return, it is pretty much incapable of harming vehicles. And it turns out the gap between the HB and the AC isn't that big, while the AC does threaten AV 10 & 11 fairly well. Your comments on how the AC doesn't synergize well with the squads lasguns is deceptive considering that you failed to give % for them. Lasguns suck. Without the Lasgun Order they will contribute less to the squad's shooting than the heavy & special weapon will unless the weapon match is pretty bad. And it is unlikely that the lasguns will fire more than once, maybe twice, per game. And then there is attrition too, while the heavy just keeps blazing away.

Yes, autocannons aren't that effective at dropping AV 12. But nothing much will work better except airborne lascannons and meltaguns.

Special Weapons are a much thornier problem with more externalities. Flamers and meltas are meant to be mobile or you run into the fire or move problem when they conflict with your heavy weapon, so I'd keep them in SWT/Vets/CS units. Taking a line squad without a heavy seems silly to me unless you are desperate for walking bodies or are using some strange melee blob. That leaves plasma, snipers, and GLs. I don't like GLs. They are cheap, but you get even less. Plasma is three times the price for three times the MEQ killing, plus better strength and the possiblity of rapid fire at 12. Snipers also tend not to do anything, but at least they have range. 25% chance for a wound before armor saves?

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:If you're trying to craft some form of synergy between the heavy weapons wielded by a PIS and *lasguns* then I think you're missing the entire point of fielding PIS. The sole reason you take PIS is to include heavy and special weapons, not to increase the effectiveness of a S3 AP- rifle.

Heavy and specials are the guns that cause the damage, any additional casualties caused by lasguns are simply a nice bonus or, as is more often the case, ablative wounds that allow those heavy weapons to keep firing.

This is actually a common mistake I see. You pay half a hundred points for 9 lasguns, and then you spend some more points to make the lasguns ineffective due to confusion of their role. Space marine players are also especially adept at ignoring their small-arms, which is why they are often trashed so badly.

Consider a basic 2 PIS platoon with three autocannons and 18 lasguns. The three autocannons, in a single turn, kill .83 marines. The 18 lasguns (without orders, mind you), kill .99. Sure, both of these are bad at killing marines, but it still stands to say that those "big, killy heavy weapons" you brought do LESS damage than do small arms fire. That's right, taken the list as a whole, autocannons are worse at killing marines than are lasguns.

But even this misses the point. Lasguns have a role. Lasguns kill light infantry. A squad of dudes with nothing but lasguns kills 5 light infantry models per turn (with orders) PER PIS. If you have the minimum of 4 squads, they kill 20 infantrymen PER TURN of fire. One of the dirty secrets about the new lasguns is that they are the best anti-horde weapon in the guard arsenal (next to possibly manticores). Do you really want to compromise all of this light infantry killing power by giving it something bad against light infantry? Even if it means that you make it bad at killing something else?

Of course, lasguns are bad at taking out lots of target types, but that is no excuse for compromising its effectiveness against those things which it IS good at handling.

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:
If you're suggesting I'm better off taking heavy bolters or mortars in a PIS because they'll make my lasguns more cost-effective (as they are 'good against targets that the weapons of the other 9 dudes in the squad are holding') then may I humbly suggest you ignore Platoons entirely and stick with Vets?

individual special and heavy weapons are worthless. Spreading around a lot of individual bad weapons by themselves in PIS is therefore a bad idea. Might I humbly suggest you put heavy and special weapons in HWS and SWS? Not only does this actually give things like autocannons the CHANCE of being effective, but it doesn't screw up all of those other PISs out on the field.

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:
Obviously cold, hard maths is a strong argument, and admittedly I can't really compose an effective counter other than I don't simply fire one autocannon at a target, I fire three, four, even five to ensure the job gets done. This coincides with my previous argument of quantity > quality.

But this violates a fundamental of list-building. Of course 200 autocannons could put a dent in a marine squad, but the opportunity cost is staggering. Just because that quantity CAN kill lots of marines does not mean it's a GOOD way to kill marines.

I mean, if I told you that my conscripts were having a problem taking out marines, would your answer be to add more conscripts (add more quantity)? Of course not, you'd tell me to add plasma guns or some artillery. The doctrine of quantity can't be used to crucify quality. Otherwise, every single imperial guard army would be a horde of lasgun-toting infantry with frag grenades without any special or heavy weapons at all.

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:
you're trying to squeeze every ounce of effectiveness out of them, down so far as to making even the lasguns effective. Whilst this is commerable, it is more certainly not advised, as you'll end up with an understrength unit

Understrength against some targets, but strong against others. That's the POINT of specialization. Rather than being bad at everything, you're good at some things and not effective at all against others. The whole job of the commander on the field is to position their units so that they always face their most effective targets. non-specialization is just a way to overcome sloppy movement and deployment.

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:
I have to quote this bit as well as, again, you're failing to see that having SOME CHANCE of dealing with those targets is better than having no chance at all. Take your above calculations and swap in a heavy bolter, and see how the results churn out that way. At least the autocannon creates a decent playing field to actively engage a multitude of targets, rather than shoehorning you down a particular path.

Firstly, I never said that heavy bolters were good against transports. My point was that autocannons are BAD against them. The quality of the heavy bolter is independent of these numbers.

Secondly, what's the point of being able to engage multiple target types if you're not effective against any of them?

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:
It allows some flexibility, some versatility, some adaptability, all of which are essential when composing an all-comers list, rather than reserving 2-3 PIS armed with heavy bolters and then realising, too late, your folly when you come up against a mech army.

Yes, an army list AS A WHOLE needs to be able to cover all the bases. You're talking about UNIT-level stuff here. It's almost like you're assuming that there isn't the whole rest of the army outside of a single unit. I mean, if I have 4 PISs with heavy bolters and I'm up against a mechanized unit, does that mean I'm screwed because those 4 units are bad against transports? By no means! You see, BEHIND those 4 squads are 3 manticores, ABOVE them are vendettas with melta vets, AROUND them are outflankers and fast units. The REST of my army that is composed of things which are GOOD against transports are there to handle the transports.

The guard, due to the poor quality and inexpense of any one given unit means that the only way to play guard properly is to take lots of units and use combined arms. Space marines, on the other hand, aren't that way, and they benefit from versatility at the unit level (in part because they have no choice). The guard already need to overlap fire, and they have the specialization opportunities to overlap specialized firepower. Put another way, the guard has the ability to always have the best guns on the right target. Why throw this advantage away, and try to play the guard like an army it's not?

AaronG wrote:

Ailaros wrote:....

I think your logic is quite flawed. So, instead of taking AC's you recommend the Heavy Bolter on the grounds that it is more effective against its chosen targets.

Let's look at how much more effective:

Against a toughness 4 defender

Woah, woah, woah. Space marines are NOT a heavy bolter's chosen target. Are heavy bolters bad against MEq's? Of course. Does that make autocannons GOOD against them? Not in the slightest.

AaronG wrote:

Ailaros wrote:....

I am more interested in how people think the IG should deal with enemy armor at long range short of the Vendetta/Valk melta suicide run. As we've seen LC's aren't worth it, most IG long range blasts won't reliably hit/penetrate armor 13/14 vehicles. As Air support doesn't really fit the theme of my force, I am looking for other solutions...

I'm not advocating heavy-weapons anti-tank, actually. It's one of the reasons I don't advocate autocannons for use against transports.

great debate here.

I am a long time IG player and I think that both sides make great points, but in the end I disagree that autocannons are the worst choice for a PIS. I actually feel they are one of the two best choices, the other being the heavy bolter.

Tossing out the idea that this is a Mech IG list, because they don't follow the traditional approach of IG list building, we can assume that its either a hybrid list using some tanks, some transports and a different types of squads, including HWS and combined squads, or a pure gunline choice that isn't using many, if any vehicles and countless squads in various forms.

The autocannon belongs is the lone PIS, one which you don't plain on combining with other squads, one that is basically in the game to hold an objective, maybe kill something, and if it gets run over or shot to pieces, hell, you got 2 more of things nearby.

As soon as you take that PIS and intend on combining it, or moving it, or mounting it up, I quickly shift away from the autocannon. Combined, you definitely need to look to lascannon or heavy bolters. FRFSRF with a 2 or 3 combined squad w/ HBs is, as pointed out, amazing anti horde work for IG. 3 combined lascannon PIS is reliable, steady AT firepower with a nearby CCS. The autocannon quickly loses its effectiveness because of being waterdown compared to the other heavy weapons.

And interestingly enough, as long as your KPs are reasonable, autocannons are excellent selections for HWS, they remain cheap and because of their flexiblity, they can engage numerous types of targets and prove effective, while not sacrificing a lot of lasguns or needing to receive an order to be effective.

1. The autocannon versus AV11 and 12 performs equally well as the lascannon for 15 fewer points, and substantially better than the missile launcher or heavy bolter.

2. Heavy bolters doing statistically 1 more kill over 6 turns assumes you get to shoot for 6 turns. If your enemy is safe inside of his transports for 3 of those turns because your heavy bolters are banging away at AV11 trying to glance rhinos to death, the "one more wound over 6 turns" analysis fails horribly.

3. Autocannons are substantially better than HB versus MCs. If the MC has cover, the AC is substantially better than lascannons and missile launchers as well.

4. And, finally, you don't need the heavy bolter because you've already got 10+ S5-6 weapons on your transports. The platoon heavy bolter simply adds redundancy while the autocannon fits well into the niche between your multilasers and your Vendetta lascannons.

Stop looking at it in a vacuum.

Dainty Twerp wrote:great debate here. I disagree that autocannons are the worst choice for a PIS.

I didn't read the whole thread, but someone actually said that!? That's enough for me to ignore everything that person says forever. If anything, the autocannon the best heavy weapon choice for IG, given its cost and good performance against a wide variety of targets, particularly under the vehicle-heavy 5th edition rule set.

Yeah, a couple people have said it now. People who are patently crazy.

Dainty Twerp wrote:
...maybe kill something, and if it gets run over or shot to pieces, hell, you got 2 more of things nearby.

If the point of autocannons is to "maybe kill something", that sort of implies that the heavy weapon is there to support the rest of the lasguns in the squad (rather than some other specific purpose). If that's the case, why not do it right with a heavy bolter or mortar?

Dainty Twerp wrote:
3 combined lascannon PIS is reliable, steady AT firepower with a nearby CCS.

True, but it costs far and away more than 3x lascannons in a heavy weapons team. Also true for autocannons.

Dainty Twerp wrote:
because of their flexiblity, they can engage numerous types of targets and prove effective

But, see, that's the point. Autocannons AREN'T effective. If they were a weapon that could engage multiple targets effectively, I'd be all for them. As it is, they engage mutliple targets very poorly. If they can't reliably be effective against anything, what is the benefit of flexibility?

sourclams wrote:1. The autocannon versus AV11 and 12 performs equally well as the lascannon for 15 fewer points, and substantially better than the missile launcher or heavy bolter.

neither "equally well" and "substantially better" imply "good".

sourclams wrote:
2. Heavy bolters doing statistically 1 more kill over 6 turns assumes you get to shoot for 6 turns. If your enemy is safe inside of his transports for 3 of those turns because your heavy bolters are banging away at AV11 trying to glance rhinos to death, the "one more wound over 6 turns" analysis fails horribly.

HEAVY BOLTERS AREN'T TRANSPORT BUSTERS. Furthermor, just because they're not doesn't mean that autocannons do much more then "try to glance rhinos to death". Flamers are much better at taking down AV10 than are lasguns. Does that mean that you should take flamers if you are concerned about transports?

sourclams wrote:
3. Autocannons are substantially better than HB versus MCs. If the MC has cover, the AC is substantially better than lascannons and missile launchers as well.

but they are still BAD against MCs. A single flamer is substantially better than a laspistol when it comes to taking down MCs. Does that mean that flamers should be the anti-MC weapon of choice?

sourclams wrote:
4. And, finally, you don't need the heavy bolter because you've already got 10+ S5-6 weapons on your transports. The platoon heavy bolter simply adds redundancy while the autocannon fits well into the niche between your multilasers and your Vendetta lascannons.

That implies that every guard commander is bringing hordes of transports. If you are, you're not bringing hordes of guys, and it's all moot. If you're not, then were else is the anti-light infantry? In PISs, which are only helped by heavy bolters.

Lasguns. Suck. Sad but true. I dont pay 'half a hundred points' for my 9 lasguns, I pay it for the objective-capping bodies and wounds to wrap around my special heavy and power weapons. Whenever I shoot with a pis, it's the heavy and special weapons do the damage. Any lasgun kills are a happy bonus. The only time this isn't true is when engaging a squad of very light infantry (say orks) within rapid fire range, when the lasguns do about the same damage as the other slots. In those cases I often prefer to charge anyway, as I've found its better to charge orks than be charged by them. It is true that a good frfsrf can punch out a fair bit of firepower on the right targets, but its often hard to pull off with everyone all up in your face in transports.

Pretty much every army I play against is mech heavy, either meqs in rhinos or orks in trukks, so my opinion is biased towards anti-transport. If I was up against a foor horde army, I would pile on the hbs for sure (I've got a bunch of them sitting on the shelf) but short of that, no thanks.

Don't get me wrong, the HB is a good gun, but I think its overcosted when compared to the AC because the AC can do everyhting the HB can do (although not as well) but can also do a hell of a lot that the HB can't. Flexibility rules.

with the autocannons price And ability, i don't even bother bringing Heavy Bolters any more.

why does everyone think the auto cannon sucks at AV12 its just as good as a lascannon at AV12 and better at everything below that

so thats why you SHOULD take the auto cannon in your platoons and remember you don't take one you take 4

auto cannon shooting at av 12- 1 hit .33pen so when you fire 4 of them you get - 4 hits 1.33 pens so for the sake of 40 points you are looking at disturbing your opponents battle plan from the first turn

what exactly do heavy bolters do --- well they shoot the infantry once after it gets out of its transport 2 bloody inches away from your lines

HEAVY BOLTERS = FAIL
AUTO CANNONS = WIN WINNITY WIN WIN

Ailaros wrote:neither "equally well" and "substantially better" imply "good".

well know I have you figured out.

Every gun for the IG suck unless you apply them to their perfect situation and thank god you are a good enough general to always be able to do so.

In this case, you are right, autocannons suck because they don't kill LR like lascannons, don't mince hordes like HB. So in you're world its either white or black because that's how you play, always the right tool to get the job done.

that's a fine theory until you hit the table top and play armies that don't just sit there.

Dainty Twerp wrote:
3 combined lascannon PIS is reliable, steady AT firepower with a nearby CCS.

Ailaros wrote:True, but it costs far and away more than 3x lascannons in a heavy weapons team. Also true for autocannons.

and here we prove Sourclams observations. You do live in a vacuum and apparently base your game theory in the same setting.

Have you ever played a lascannon HWS? Have you ever had anybody try to kill a 30 man combined squad w/ commissar? I think you need to push more models around the table top and theorize less, experience is key.

Ailaros wrote:

AaronG wrote:
I think your logic is quite flawed. So, instead of taking AC's you recommend the Heavy Bolter on the grounds that it is more effective against its chosen targets.

Let's look at how much more effective:

Against a toughness 4 defender ......

Woah, woah, woah. Space marines are NOT a heavy bolter's chosen target. Are heavy bolters bad against MEq's? Of course. Does that make autocannons GOOD against them? Not in the slightest.

How about every orc in creation and a lot of Tyranids...?

You don't get 9 lasguns in a line squad. You get 6 after sergeant, special weapon, heavy weapon team.

And this guy is really good at presenting skewed examples. Those autocannons are firing every turn. The lasguns get one volley, maybe two.

Troll?

You get 9 before any upgrades, and while his example said 2 squads, he was talking about three autocannons, so I can only assume the 2 was a typo.

Three combined squads indeed have 18 lasguns. The sarges not having the option to buy lascannons is the dumbest thing in the codex, even more so than the RR downgrade character, the Stormtroopers, and the cost of all the Ogryn models (character or otherwise). But yes, all his examples assume the opponent is presenting the optimum target for whatever weapon he brings and isn't shooting back.

Terminus wrote:But yes, all his examples assume the opponent is presenting the optimum target for whatever weapon he brings and isn't shooting back.

BINGO!

Ailaros wrote:

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:...

This is actually a common mistake I see. You pay half a hundred points for 9 lasguns, and then you spend some more points to make the lasguns ineffective due to confusion of their role. Space marine players are also especially adept at ignoring their small-arms, which is why they are often trashed so badly.

Consider a basic 2 PIS platoon with three autocannons and 18 lasguns. The three autocannons, in a single turn, kill .83 marines. The 18 lasguns (without orders, mind you), kill .99. Sure, both of these are bad at killing marines, but it still stands to say that those "big, killy heavy weapons" you brought do LESS damage than do small arms fire. That's right, taken the list as a whole, autocannons are worse at killing marines than are lasguns.

But even this misses the point. Lasguns have a role. Lasguns kill light infantry. A squad of dudes with nothing but lasguns kills 5 light infantry models per turn (with orders) PER PIS. If you have the minimum of 4 squads, they kill 20 infantrymen PER TURN of fire. One of the dirty secrets about the new lasguns is that they are the best anti-horde weapon in the guard arsenal (next to possibly manticores). Do you really want to compromise all of this light infantry killing power by giving it something bad against light infantry? Even if it means that you make it bad at killing something else?

Of course, lasguns are bad at taking out lots of target types, but that is no excuse for compromising its effectiveness against those things which it IS good at handling.

No. Simply, no. Lasguns are a dreadful weapon. As stated above me I do not take a PIS for the lasguns, I take it for the ablative wounds and the scoring bodies that those 10 Guardsmen provide me with and the ability to take heavy/special weapons. There are also a few flaws in your argument. The most obvious one is range. That autocannon can fire 2, 3 maybe even 4 times prior to the enemy assaulting the unit, the lasguns may only get to fire once, perhaps twice. That needs to be factored into your working.

Lasguns may indeed have a role targeting light infantry but they perform so utterly POORLY at this role that trying to improve it is simply a waste of resources. Furthermore, if an enemy is silly enough to charge light infantry at my line PIS so that I can get those potential 20 kills then he is playing right into my hands.

Ailaros wrote:

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:...

individual special and heavy weapons are worthless. Spreading around a lot of individual bad weapons by themselves in PIS is therefore a bad idea. Might I humbly suggest you put heavy and special weapons in HWS and SWS? Not only does this actually give things like autocannons the CHANCE of being effective, but it doesn't screw up all of those other PISs out on the field.

If you put autocannons in HWS then there's something you're not doing quite right. I DO take HWS (SWS not so much) but I take them with 3 lascannons which, when ordered to BiD, are fantastic at popping armour. Yes, individual heavy and special weapons are worthless, but thats why you dont take the minimum two PIS and expect them to perform, I keep re-iterating my point about shot volume and I will do so again here. Furthermore, if you're scared of screwing up your PIS by pattering heavy weapons in amoungst the squads then by all means, field purely 9 lasguns sans upgrades, and let me know how effective and useful that squad is for you.

Ailaros wrote:

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:...

But this violates a fundamental of list-building. Of course 200 autocannons could put a dent in a marine squad, but the opportunity cost is staggering. Just because that quantity CAN kill lots of marines does not mean it's a GOOD way to kill marines.

I mean, if I told you that my conscripts were having a problem taking out marines, would your answer be to add more conscripts (add more quantity)? Of course not, you'd tell me to add plasma guns or some artillery. The doctrine of quantity can't be used to crucify quality. Otherwise, every single imperial guard army would be a horde of lasgun-toting infantry with frag grenades without any special or heavy weapons at all.

This may violate a fundamental of list-building with MEQ and other high BS units which are expensive points-wise, but it is exactly the path that Guard should follow. Our units are expendable, our weaponry cheap, therefore we can fit an obscene amount of it in for a fraction of the cost. Consider a 5-man Devestator squad with lascannons compared to a HWS with lascannons, the points chasm is huge and rightly so. This means that to achieve the same effectiveness we are entitled and encouraged to take more, which offsets to a certain degree the reduction in killing power.

If you told me your conscripts were having trouble killing marines I'd tell you to stop taking conscripts, and take PIS. With autocannons.

Ailaros wrote:

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:...

Understrength against some targets, but strong against others. That's the POINT of specialization. Rather than being bad at everything, you're good at some things and not effective at all against others. The whole job of the commander on the field is to position their units so that they always face their most effective targets. non-specialization is just a way to overcome sloppy movement and deployment.

No. Lasguns are incompetent and barely effective against anything. Putting 'lasguns' and 'strong' in the same sentence is laughable. See above where I ask you to take range into your calculations coupled with the possibility of you getting FRFSRF; lasguns. Suck. And to spend resources trying to rectify this is, I'm afraid, an exercise in futility.

I also disagree on your second point. Non-specialisation allows you to adapt and alter your battle plan dependant upon how your enemy reacts to yours. What commander in his right mind will sit there with his scissors opposite your rock? What if he deploys second? How do you counteract this? Yes, you could move, but that stops heavy weapons firing anyway, rendering the entire PURPOSE you brought the unit along for moot. Again, this over-specialisation at the expense of allowing yourself to engage multiple targets will only hinder you in the long run.

Ailaros wrote:

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:...

Firstly, I never said that heavy bolters were good against transports. My point was that autocannons are BAD against them. The quality of the heavy bolter is independent of these numbers.

Secondly, what's the point of being able to engage multiple target types if you're not effective against any of them?

At least it gives you the OPTION to engage them. You can prioritise your fire, focus on one target before switching to a more optimal one (crack a transport then engage the passangers). My point is, if you cannot engage that primary target with a chance, however slim, of doing damage in the first place, then your PIS is doing nothing. This game works on luck, and a small possibility is better than no possibility at all.

Ailaros wrote:

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:...

Yes, an army list AS A WHOLE needs to be able to cover all the bases. You're talking about UNIT-level stuff here. It's almost like you're assuming that there isn't the whole rest of the army outside of a single unit. I mean, if I have 4 PISs with heavy bolters and I'm up against a mechanized unit, does that mean I'm screwed because those 4 units are bad against transports? By no means! You see, BEHIND those 4 squads are 3 manticores, ABOVE them are vendettas with melta vets, AROUND them are outflankers and fast units. The REST of my army that is composed of things which are GOOD against transports are there to handle the transports.

This I agree with. BUT I think you're target priority is wrong. Vendettas and Meltas are wasted on transports, bar LR and Battlewagons. These are much more powerful weapons and should be given more important targets to facilitate this. If you're shooting a Rhino with a Vendetta for example, so that your PIS can than shoot the occupants, then thats one less Vendetta shooting a LR or a Vindicator. My PIS, on the other hand, has the potential to knock out that transport (even preventing it moving for a turn is good enough) allowing my bigger guns to shoot more important targets.

Ailaros wrote:The guard, due to the poor quality and inexpense of any one given unit means that the only way to play guard properly is to take lots of units and use combined arms. Space marines, on the other hand, aren't that way, and they benefit from versatility at the unit level (in part because they have no choice). The guard already need to overlap fire, and they have the specialization opportunities to overlap specialized firepower. Put another way, the guard has the ability to always have the best guns on the right target. Why throw this advantage away, and try to play the guard like an army it's not?

You're not. You're merely open to, and accepting the, very likely possibility that your enemy will do his utmost to foil you. Over-specialising means you have a complete lack of a back-up in case plan A fails. To take your above hypothesis, what if your Vendettas with melta vets get shot down Turn 1? How do you stop those transports then? Your heavy bolter PIS cannot do it, and your meltas will spend the entire game running into range, thus ensuring your enemy gets to pick his fights and automatically handing him the initiative. If the above happened to me, however, I still have 5 PIS able to target those transports and hopefully delay them to allow me better guns to get into position.

L. Wrex