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.

Yer. da lascannuns has to be da anti-tank munstah!

Well, it says, in the SM codex, 'no finer anti-tank weapon' yet... really, they're quite poor on anything other then AV11-12.

there is some problem with it.

It can't really do much to a land raider:

Space marine, say devastator. [5 man, 4 cannons, = 230 points]

3 hit @ 3+, 1 @ 2+ [signum]
2.83 hit.
1.16 pens
0.39 vehicle gone
0.38 immobilised / weap destroyed
0.39 stun/shaken.
1.16 glances.
0.19 immobilized.
0.19 weapon destroyed
0.77 stunned / shaken

so, you can see, really there is no point in taking on a land raider with lascannons, even with so many cannons.

It is my belief, that if it had AP1, it would effectively be the same against infantry, while drastically improoving the tank damaging role it is meant for.

again, same situation.
3 @ 3+, 1 @ 2+
2.83 hits
1.16 pens
0.58 Explode/wreck
0.39 immobilization, weap destroyed
0.19 stunned
1.16 glances
0.19 wrecked
0.38 weapon destroyed/immobilization
0.58 Stunned/Shaken

you can see, even though it is effectively the same weapon, it is much better against tanks.
At 35 points per weapon, lascannon squads are OK against monsterous creatures, taking around two turns to kill a hive tyrant.

Whats the verdict?

This is plausible, maybe even lower the points cost to 30 as IMHO they are way overpriced.

Hmm, certainly a good suggestion.

Yes, lascannons should be ap1.
Maybe only portable down to 30 pts ( -5 ) in general, whilst vehicle mounted TL las stays as is.

I agree great idea, this would make it a viable option as people might acctually start to respect it's range. I've always thought that the change in AP from 1 to 2 had something to do with the Melta changing from 2 to 1 so would your suggetion change the Melta back as well?

Land Raiders are supposed to be tough. Deal with it.

Take overlapping anti-tank for Land Raiders and Monoliths, and you'll bring them down.

Che-Vito wrote:Land Raiders are supposed to be tough. Deal with it.

Take overlapping anti-tank for Land Raiders and Monoliths, and you'll bring them down.

Have to agree with this.

Sm's already have damn near the best of everything... lets not make them any 'ier.

Make a new S9 AP1 Weapon, and give it to chaos! We already get blastmasters to your Missle Launchers, why not give us some more? god knows our codex is gak ATM

Lascannons are twice as effective against AV14 as Melta weapons beyond Melta range. They're good enough.

that really depends on your definition of "enough". Also, it fails to account how so many other things do the same job for much better. Combimelta sternguard? Anything in assault?

The simple fact is that lascannons have 1 advantage - the number of shots they put out (because they have a longer range, so start shooting earlier), unfortunately, this can be seriously mitigated by an opponent (shenanigans with reserve, parking out of LOS, etc.), or can be shut down completely if your opponent targets your lascannoners as a target of priority. What's the point of having a weapon that can shoot a dreadnought for an extra turn or two if it's just going to pop out of a drop pod turn 1 and kill the lascannoners?

The weapons that do the most damage against vehicles are things that do the damage close in. The drawback used to be that it took awhile to get them into range. With all the mobility 5th ed has to offer, this is no longer the drawback it once was. Add to that things like vehicles getting real cover saves, and the lascannons aren't "good enough" unless you have really loose tolerances with what counts as "good".

AP 1 would definitely help, but what they really could use is for their price to go down to reflect their newfound crapulance, rather than their quality going up.

id rather pay 15 less points for a missile launcher that has 1 less strength and still glance a raider to death if i have to.

actually bucket, it can be impossible to glance kill a land raider.

if it has 2 Sponson weapons, a heavy bolter, storm bolter, Multi-melta? You'd not only have to get a 6 to pen, a 5,6 to destroy a weapon

So, here:
4 missiles, firing at one LR [150 vs 250]
3+ to hit
2.67 hit
6 to glance
0.45 glance
0.15 chance to do weapon damage/immobilization
0.30 chance to stun/shake

so? it will take you, on average, 7 turns to do 1 weapon destroyed, and thats if you even glance once.

Of course, you could be a dice god.

This would make guard very powerful, with the ability to take lots of lascannons on the cheap

HWTs would be godly, vendettas better than they already were and make Pask the single most deadly SC to tanks (more than he already is)

Melta guns should be 2 D6 at 6"

Multi-Meltas should be 2D6 at 12"

Lascannons should be 2D6 at 24"

Corennus wrote:Melta guns should be 2 D6 at 6"

Multi-Meltas should be 2D6 at 12"

Lascannons should be 2D6 at 24"

No. This is (sorry for being impolite) just plain stupid. There is no longer any point to taking a multi-melta which is also Heavy 1 and makes no sense fluff-wise.

I'm perfectly happy for Lascannons to go to S:9 AP:1 30 points.
But i'm getting my brightlances at S:8 AP:1 35 points.

Corennus wrote:Melta guns should be 2 D6 at 6"

Multi-Meltas should be 2D6 at 12"

Lascannons should be 2D6 at 24"

...

doesn't that kinda make multi-meltas rediculously useless.

Lascannons, with AP1 would be plausable.

alright. but then multi-melta should be 2D6 at 18"

Multi meltas are already 2D6 at 12"

I think the lascannons should just be cheaper, about 25 - 30pts each.

How about scrapping the ability for tacticals to take lascannon and make the devs lascannon cheaper.

eg instead of 35 points make them 20 points each

dayve110 wrote:I'm perfectly happy for Lascannons to go to S:9 AP:1 30 points.
But i'm getting my brightlances at S:8 AP:1 35 points.

And you treat an AV:14 as an AV:12, I see what you tried to do there for effort though.

ComputerGeek01 wrote:

dayve110 wrote:I'm perfectly happy for Lascannons to go to S:9 AP:1 30 points.
But i'm getting my brightlances at S:8 AP:1 35 points.

And you treat an AV:14 as an AV:12, I see what you tried to do there for effort though.

what? All i did was lower the price and change AP:2 to 1... same as what people are trying to do to the lascannon...

Corennus wrote:alright. but then multi-melta should be 2D6 at 18"

No, a MM should be on a vehicle, preferably fast, or bikes. This means they can move 12 then shoot giving them an effective range of 36" & an effective melta range of 24" which is HALF the short edge of the board.

We should not be changing rules because your tactics aren't working.

Shas'O Dorian wrote:
We should not be changing rules because your tactics aren't working.

*Looks at Solon*

I'd be careful with changing too much at once (mr brick, say hello to mr glasshouse), changing a high strength weapon to AP1 is a large difference in performance, and I can't help but feel 35 points for the Lascannon is somehow cheap when it's a BS4 model shooting it.

@ EmilCrane: It wouldn't be the first time GW made one codex have a weapon with name X that had completely different stats than the same named weapon in another codex.

ComputerGeek01 wrote:

dayve110 wrote:I'm perfectly happy for Lascannons to go to S:9 AP:1 30 points.
But i'm getting my brightlances at S:8 AP:1 35 points.

And you treat an AV:14 as an AV:12, I see what you tried to do there for effort though.

I'd take S9 before lancing, thank you very much. What dayve hasn't told you is whether he upped point cost for BS3 by 5 or downed it for BS4 by the same... Oh, and it's shorter ranged

We're discussing an old codex, though, so the comparison is invalid - but it does highlight that currently Eldar pay a premium for certain/many weapons.

Personally I feel that Sm's should pay a premium more for stuff then what they currently do, mainly cause they are so good at what they do.

Dakkier Lascannon: gets 5 shots, but can only fire at BS 2.

Your Lascannon is now Orkified.

Iur_tae_mont wrote:Dakkier Lascannon: gets 5 shots, but can only fire at BS 2.

Your Lascannon is now Orkified.

I would take that deal!

Chaosy Lascannons get 4 shots at BS 4, but any rolls to hit of 1 hit the nearest friendly unit (or the firing unit if none are visible)

Personally the only problem I have with them is the cost, otherwise I think they're ok.