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.

Exactly what it says in the can.

I have two boxes of devastators up for painting, and have chosen to paint 4 Lascannons. Given that split fire is now a thing, I was wondering what to fit to the other 4 dudes.

Maybe two lascannons, two heavy bolters? That make the two ablative wounds for the Devastators a bit more expensive, but also useful to shoot something in 1st turn and the like.

Are Multimeltas viable now? I also think it's maybe interesting to have combi-something on the Sarge. I think 2 lascannons with 2 Grav by squad is too many points. I don't see the utility of the ML over the lascannon given the price, so I am discarding that option. Any other ideas?

Isnt there only 2 lascannons per box.

Anyway.

Honestly finding that Missile launchers do work. D6 damage is very nice and having the option to switch to frag opens up options.

personally dont like the other weapons on devs and prefer them on tactical as they are often moving up.

I actually think the missile launcher is generally a better choice than the las due to its versatility. It's pretty rare that a weapon is good at killing literally everything. I plan on running 12 of them my first few games.

That being said, I'd say you should go heavy bolter if you plan on mixing heavy weapons.

jcd386 wrote:
I actually think the missile launcher is generally a better choice than the las due to its versatility. It's pretty rare that a weapon is good at killing literally everything. I plan on running 12 of them my first few games.

That being said, I'd say you should go heavy bolter if you plan on mixing heavy weapons.

That -2ap just doesn't compare to -4 on consistency when dealing with high armor saves.

 Coyote81 wrote:

jcd386 wrote:
I actually think the missile launcher is generally a better choice than the las due to its versatility. It's pretty rare that a weapon is good at killing literally everything. I plan on running 12 of them my first few games.

That being said, I'd say you should go heavy bolter if you plan on mixing heavy weapons.

That -2ap just doesn't compare to -4 on consistency when dealing with high armor saves.

The flip to that nowadays is how many big multi wound things with decent armor have decent invul. the save cap makes it interesting so does cover.

 Desubot wrote:

 Coyote81 wrote:

jcd386 wrote:
I actually think the missile launcher is generally a better choice than the las due to its versatility. It's pretty rare that a weapon is good at killing literally everything. I plan on running 12 of them my first few games.

That being said, I'd say you should go heavy bolter if you plan on mixing heavy weapons.

That -2ap just doesn't compare to -4 on consistency when dealing with high armor saves.

The flip to that nowadays is how many big multi wound things with decent armor have decent invul. the save cap makes it interesting so does cover.

Sure, but a majority of things don't, but last thing you want is that key razorback to laugh off your shots with 4+ saves (assuming cover)

 Coyote81 wrote:

jcd386 wrote:
I actually think the missile launcher is generally a better choice than the las due to its versatility. It's pretty rare that a weapon is good at killing literally everything. I plan on running 12 of them my first few games.

That being said, I'd say you should go heavy bolter if you plan on mixing heavy weapons.

That -2ap just doesn't compare to -4 on consistency when dealing with high armor saves.

There are definitely some thing the Las cannon is better against. No argument there. However, i think the Missile Launchers are "good enough" against the high wound stuff, and the ability to alternately be really good at putting wounds on infantry is worth the trade off.

A lot of this stuff depends on what the general meta ends up being like, but I am a big proponent of the "all-comers list" and tend to shy away from things like Las Cannons that are only good at one thing and end up being kind of useless against horde lists and so on. Of course by not having them, I may need to include more anti-tank elsewhere in my list, but that is of course just part of the list building process, and i prefer my devastators to be a more flexible unit in my lists.

I'm seconding the 'good enough' argument. Sure, a missile launcher is far from ideal against an Imperial Knight compared to a Lascannon, but it's good against a wider variety of things.

Plus let's say you've removed all of your opponent's armour. Now you're shooting lascannons at infantry, not the most effective.

I almost think there might be a rebalancing of the points for Lascannons vs. Missile Launchers once Chapter Approved hits. MLs seem to be an all around superior weapon. Same with the Grav Cannon. It can't really compete with either of these two weapons, yet it costs more.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I almost think there might be a rebalancing of the points for Lascannons vs. Missile Launchers once Chapter Approved hits. MLs seem to be an all around superior weapon. Same with the Grav Cannon. It can't really compete with either of these two weapons, yet it costs more.

Missile launchers are not the superior weapon. They are a generalist weapon. They are a fair bit warse for dealing with armor, specifically toughness 8 armor.

Lascannons are better for armour, big creatures, and multiwound models. If all those are dead, then mission accomplished, vaporize a few bugs and act as shields.

.The difference 3+ makes over 4+ over big and scary things, not and to mention the extra point of ap, is quite important when shooting tanks that can get any kind of cover.

Keeping in mind the entire list, having dedicated anti tank can only be a good thing if you have things like twin assault cannons to deal with chaff.

I think i just prefer to take las and melta in other parts of my army and leave the devastators more versatile. I don't think las canons are bad by any means, but the missile launcher should not be written off as bad in my opinion.

No, the missile launcher has largely been desuckified. Being down a str and an ap is about right right for the krak missile. -2 ap is way more effective than ap3, yet still has a tendency to fail vs heavy armor. I will also consider missile launchers now.

Another tick in the box for missile launchers is overwatch.

ofc if it gets to that point something is probably going wrong anyway but its a bonus. Speaking of which its almost worth blowing a few pts on a power weapon on the serg now that they are cheap.

with the signum i wonder if you pick the model before or after it rolls the d6 for a frag missile... with the cherub thats a potential 12 s4 shots hitting on 2's coming from one model. So that said maybe at least one ML is perhaps a decent idea

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I almost think there might be a rebalancing of the points for Lascannons vs. Missile Launchers once Chapter Approved hits. MLs seem to be an all around superior weapon. Same with the Grav Cannon. It can't really compete with either of these two weapons, yet it costs more.

I dont know the heavy weapons all have fairly specific purposes with a little bit of overlap but in general they all do what they need to do with the exception of the ML which is the only real generalist weapon. and -2 ap is not really that good. and it is on the priceyer side.

Plasma cannons i feel like an all rounder as well though i hate that its only 2 damage max which kinda makes it a little subpar for big multi wound models like dreads. (though with massive luck you could knock out 6 wounds. i just dont like the inconsistency)

I still like grav cannons a lot.

Martel732 wrote:
I still like grav cannons a lot.

It is nerfed to all hell now. Because given its new S5, and Grav amp lost the ability of rerolling to wound, and only 4 shots. Well, good luck using it to take down a Heirophant And I am quite sure it will now have problem to kill Wraith Knights now which was the Grav cannons most preference target. Now it is only good at taking down large units of Terminators, Primaris Marines, Obliterators, and maybe TWCs without SS, and other T4 2+/3+ save multi wounds models. With these units price hiked to sky high (except the Primaris Marines), I really doubt the probabilty to see them on board in large numbers.

I've been liking the ML loadout just fine so far. The versatility has been useful, especially in smaller games.

Neophyte2012 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I still like grav cannons a lot.

It is nerfed to all hell now. Because given its new S5, and Grav amp lost the ability of rerolling to wound, and only 4 shots. Well, good luck using it to take down a Heirophant And I am quite sure it will now have problem to kill Wraith Knights now which was the Grav cannons most preference target. Now it is only good at taking down large units of Terminators, Primaris Marines, Obliterators, and maybe TWCs without SS, and other T4 2+/3+ save multi wounds models. With these units price hiked to sky high (except the Primaris Marines), I really doubt the probabilty to see them on board in large numbers.

I won't use it for stuff its not good at in 8th. However, its quite good against a lot of units I fear and it picked up anti-horde utility.
By nerfed to hell, you mean it is now a reasonable weapon.

Neophyte2012 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I still like grav cannons a lot.

It is nerfed to all hell now. Because given its new S5, and Grav amp lost the ability of rerolling to wound, and only 4 shots. Well, good luck using it to take down a Heirophant And I am quite sure it will now have problem to kill Wraith Knights now which was the Grav cannons most preference target. Now it is only good at taking down large units of Terminators, Primaris Marines, Obliterators, and maybe TWCs without SS, and other T4 2+/3+ save multi wounds models. With these units price hiked to sky high (except the Primaris Marines), I really doubt the probabilty to see them on board in large numbers.

Well im glad it got nerfed

it was far to good 7th

it mussled away pretty much every other heavy weapon out because it was soooooooooooooo good against literally everything.

Still brutal vs anything T5 and lower, imo. The armor save penalty basically negates cover for light units. There are no no-brainers so far, and that's a good thing. Even the plasma cannon has me thinking at least.

Neophyte2012 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I still like grav cannons a lot.

It is nerfed to all hell now. Because given its new S5, and Grav amp lost the ability of rerolling to wound, and only 4 shots. Well, good luck using it to take down a Heirophant And I am quite sure it will now have problem to kill Wraith Knights now which was the Grav cannons most preference target. Now it is only good at taking down large units of Terminators, Primaris Marines, Obliterators, and maybe TWCs without SS, and other T4 2+/3+ save multi wounds models. With these units price hiked to sky high (except the Primaris Marines), I really doubt the probabilty to see them on board in large numbers.

The grav cannon is superior to the missile launcher for nearly every possible target. The only real advantage for the missile launcher is range.

Sincollector wrote:
The grav cannon is superior to the missile launcher for nearly every possible target. The only real advantage for the missile launcher is range.

And strength... Krak Missiles wound 7 toughness on 3's instead of 5's. And they wound T4 on 2's.

 wtwlf123 wrote:

Sincollector wrote:
The grav cannon is superior to the missile launcher for nearly every possible target. The only real advantage for the missile launcher is range.

And strength... Krak Missiles wound 7 toughness on 3's instead of 5's. And they wound T4 on 2's.

Right but the grav cannon has 4 shots and most T7 targets will have a 3+ armor save giving you D3 damage with the grav cannon. When you run the math, it comes out ahead. Check out this article:

http://www.3plusplus.net/2017/06/space-marine-weapon-options-8th-edition-warhammer-40k/

Well regardless, they are brutal vs T5 and less. If will have other toys to take out T7/T8.

Ya, the grav-cannon will do more damage on average against targets they can both reach. But as you mentioned, missiles have a range advantage. Normally, range might not be a dealbreaker, but on a devastator loadout, the difference between 24" and 48" is a really big deal. If they were 36" instead, I think the comparison would be much closer. But a 24" range on a unit that's intended to function as a stationary long range gun unit isn't great.

Grav cannons are a mid-field dominance weapon. I will still use them, because I'm trying to get my army in the enemy deployment zone stat.

 wtwlf123 wrote:
Ya, the grav-cannon will do more damage on average against targets they can both reach. But as you mentioned, missiles have a range advantage. Normally, range might not be a dealbreaker, but on a devastator loadout, the difference between 24" and 48" is a really big deal. If they were 36" instead, I think the comparison would be much closer. But a 24" range on a unit that's intended to function as a stationary long range gun unit isn't great.

When you REALLY need to kill that rhino full of angry berserkers you tend to want them walking instead of being in charge threat range

also missile base is a safe space for your lieutenant for those sick rerolls of 1 to wound or even a captain.

With Grav while you can have them walking on foot since 24" is a nice distance, you ususally want to roll those in pods. at least that way you can dump it on an objective which is nice.

lots of options

The Rhino full of berserkers is eating lascannons. Accept no substitutes there.

 Desubot wrote:

 wtwlf123 wrote:
Ya, the grav-cannon will do more damage on average against targets they can both reach. But as you mentioned, missiles have a range advantage. Normally, range might not be a dealbreaker, but on a devastator loadout, the difference between 24" and 48" is a really big deal. If they were 36" instead, I think the comparison would be much closer. But a 24" range on a unit that's intended to function as a stationary long range gun unit isn't great.

When you REALLY need to kill that rhino full of angry berserkers you tend to want them walking instead of being in charge threat range

also missile base is a safe space for your lieutenant for those sick rerolls of 1 to wound or even a captain.

With Grav while you can have them walking on foot since 24" is a nice distance, you ususally want to roll those in pods. at least that way you can dump it on an objective which is nice.

lots of options

Completely agree that the missile launcher has a place when you want a pure firebase unit but still want some versatility. I was responding to the guy who seemed to think it was no longer good for high toughness targets. It is. The real weakspots of the grav cannon would be 25" and anything T6+ with lots of wounds and a 4+ save.