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.

So looking at the humble Autocannon. A little too humble, at least for a Main Battle Tank like the Predator. Maybe (not altogether):

- Make it Blast

- Vanquisher-rize it, having it roll two dice to penetrate and select the highest (not how the Vanquisher works, I know, just avoid duplicating the Lascannons).

- Make it AP3

- Give it Rending (had to say it...)

How about allow it to be fired with heavy bolter sponsons on the move

In a few months not even those will be able to fire on the move, so it's hardly going to matter.

That said, in our rules the Predator Autocannon can always fire regardless of distance moved. Makes it quite nice when paired with HBs that, again, in our rules can move and fire. Tanks are fun in our rules. They act like tanks, and not like bunkers. Go us.

BYE

I actually wish/hope the next space marine codex will allow you to kit out predators in one of three roles: anti-infantry, anti-tank and dual purpose. It would be simple:

Predator Annihilator: Main gun: Twin-Linked Lascannon
Side Sponson options: Lascannons, Krak Missile Launcher Pods, and Autocannons
Pintle-mounted options: Krak Grenade Launcher, Multi-Melta

Predator Destructor: Main gun: Autocannon
Side Sponson options: Autocannons, Plasma Cannons, Assault Cannons
Pintle-mounted options: Storm Bolter and Krak Grenade Launcher

Predator Eliminator: Main gun: Dual Heavy Bolters
Side Sponson options: Hurricane Bolters, Heavy Bolters, Assault Cannons and Heavy Flamers
Pintle-mounted options: Storm Bolter, Heavy Flamer

Obviously certain weapon combinations will add a ton in point costs and I see the destructor almost being a no-brainer unless it were cost prohibitive and I see the Eliminator being the bane of Orkses. No since in worrying too much about it though, as it will never happen

themandudeperson wrote:Predator Annihilator: Main gun: Twin-Linked Lascannon
Side Sponson options: Lascannons, Krak Missile Launcher Pods, and Autocannons
Pintle-mounted options: Krak Grenade Launcher, Multi-Melta

Predator Destructor: Main gun: Autocannon
Side Sponson options: Autocannons, Plasma Cannons, Assault Cannons
Pintle-mounted options: Storm Bolter and Krak Grenade Launcher

Predator Eliminator: Main gun: Dual Heavy Bolters
Side Sponson options: Hurricane Bolters, Heavy Bolters, Assault Cannons and Heavy Flamers
Pintle-mounted options: Storm Bolter, Heavy Flamer

These three sound like really good combinations for the predator to me

But they can be kitted out for those roles (at least in the Dark Angels, Blood Angels, and Chaos Space Marine lists)...

Yea but can you have Auto, Plasma, or Assault cannon sponsons? Krak missile and grenade launcher pods? multi-melta pintle weapons? Hurricane-bolter sponsons or Twin-linked Heavy bolter turret weapons? This is only suggesting some positive upgrades to the Predator.

Yeah, that's nice, but this thread is about the Autocannons that Predators can mount, not what sort of weapons munchkins might want to glue onto Predators.

I guess this thread is for munchkins who don't even want to go through the trouble of gluing extra stuff on, then. Yes, rending ACs! The game doesn't have enough of those!

Ah, tegeus-Cromis, once again enriching us with your wisdom.

The Rending suggestion was what we call a "joke". These "jokes", as they are known, are sometimes appended to constructive posts.

This thread is for considering changes to the Predator Autocannon regardless of whether one chooses to take sponsons or not. After all, if a suggestion does not gel with the option to take sponsons, then it's hardly a good suggestion now is it?

But you knew that and just wanted to spam the thread with a snide comment because you're a troll.

Back on topic: I'm inclined to like the Blast idea the best, mainly because it makes the Autocannon more like a cannon than an upscaled machine gun, and slightly enhances the Autocannons' anti-light vehicle while emphasizing its anti-infantry roll. The Vanquisher option intrudes on the territory of the Twin-linked Lascannon option. Tuning it up to AP3 emphasizes the greater punch that the longer barrel and higher caliber might give, but it's rather army-specific. Still, as gets mentioned there's a dearth of AP3 weapons out there.

Nurglitch, the point--which you always succeed in missing no matter how sincerely or snidely I express it, which is why I always choose the snider, more satisfying option now--is that it is absolutely absurd to dismiss another poster's suggestions for sponson weapons as talk of "what sort of weapons munchkins might want to glue onto Predators." Off-topic for this thread? Sure, fair enough. Munchkin-ish? No more than your desire to buff what is already a decent (in fact the better) option.

destructors could use a long range version autocannon,
upgrading from 48" to 72", to fight earlier against light
and antigrav vehicles.

Nurglitch wrote:But they can be kitted out for those roles (at least in the Dark Angels, Blood Angels, and Chaos Space Marine lists)...

They can? The Dark Angels Predator has no additional weapon options than the C: SM Predators do. Yeah, the Blood Angels have the Baal Predator and Chaos has all sorts of options for their pintle-mounted weapons, but C: SM Predators don't have any real anti-infantry tank that performs as a "dakka mobile". The autocannon has 2 shots.. But that's two shots that's probably better spent on light armor, not infantry and with the rules the way they are, you can't split fire you have to dump shots into a vehicle that may not even be harmed by them to get the best effect from the autocannon or you have to use the autocannon which amounts to overkill vs the 1-2 infantry. Really, the Destructor functions very well as a flexible threat, not specifically anti-tank and not specifically anti-infantry which is as much of an advantage as a disadvantage in my opinion.

Brother-Sergeant Vlixle wrote:Yea but can you have Auto, Plasma, or Assault cannon sponsons? Krak missile and grenade launcher pods? multi-melta pintle weapons? Hurricane-bolter sponsons or Twin-linked Heavy bolter turret weapons? This is only suggesting some positive upgrades to the Predator.

Nooo, not twin-linked heavy bolters.. DUAL heavy bolters.. 6 strength 5 AP 4 shots ftw!

Nurglitch wrote:Yeah, that's nice, but this thread is about the Autocannons that Predators can mount, not what sort of weapons munchkins might want to glue onto Predators.

Uhm.. munchkins? Are we talking about the card game or is that a veiled insult directed toward my level of maturity? Because I don't see how either really contribute to the thread

tegeus-Cromis wrote:Nurglitch, the point--which you always succeed in missing no matter how sincerely or snidely I express it, which is why I always choose the snider, more satisfying option now--is that it is absolutely absurd to dismiss another poster's suggestions for sponson weapons as talk of "what sort of weapons munchkins might want to glue onto Predators." Off-topic for this thread? Sure, fair enough. Munchkin-ish? No more than your desire to buff what is already a decent (in fact the better) option.

Amen, brother..

As far as "fixing the autocannon" what's there to fix?
If we toy with it's range, it doesn't make much impact as most "casual" games take place on a 4'x6' table, so outside of being able to make awesome corner to corner shots, that won't help much.. not to mention, if you used any decent amount of cover, you wouldn't be able to get a shot off from that far anyway.
The AP value? Well, the step from 4 to 3 is a big one, bordering on overpowering. Imagine how dangerous most other AP 4 weapons would be if they became AP 3
The strength? If we turn it up to 8, you'll have a weapon that will outshine missile launchers in an anti-tank role, due to the extra shot.
Add an extra shot? ...Possible, but 3 strength 7 shots would border on cheese, especially if Predator Destructors remained as cheap as they are compared to Annihilators.
Offer better weapon options to pair with the autocannon? well.. you've already poo pooed on that idea..
Twin-linked could be a worthwhile option, but that would mean converting an extra barrel on to the turret. Point-wise, there would have to be a small increase, but it'd be well worth it.
So, besides that we're left with special rules. How's about an ammo choice similar to missile launchers? Something like:
High Explosive Airburst: Heavy 2, Range 36", Strength 4, AP 4 Large Blast Marker
Armor Penetrating Shells: Heavy 2, Range 48" Strength 7, AP 4

to use it with different ammunition makes sense for me.
firing explosives like AA-guns wich use timed shells?
what types available do you think? Massive,pyro,acid?

I don't really see the Predator as an MBT but I do agree that its gun could do with an upgrade. Giving it (5th ed) Rending isn't a totally stupid idea. Giving it blast has president, the Autocannon had blast in Rogue Trader. I dislike same weapon two profiles situations (e.g. Shotgun) so any change should be available to all Autocannons. While you're looking at the Autocannon you should also consider the Conqueror cannon too.

themandudeperson: Yes, Predators can be outfitted for anti-infantry, anti-tank, or dual purpose. You use the combinations of autocannon, lascannons, and heavy bolters to do so.

The munchkin comment was not a comment about your maturity, it was a comment about your bizarre and off-topic suggestions for over-equipping Predators. I like if it you contributed to the thread by staying on topic (Predator Autocannons), rather than using it as a dumping ground for your munchkin fantasies.

Now, you may notice that this thread isn't about fixing the Autocannon. That's indicated by the complete lack of the term 'fix' in any post but yours. No point in fixing something that's not broken. This thread is about ways that the Predator Autocannon can be modified to make it more appropriate to a Main Battle Tank. One might say that the point is to make it different, yet maintain its relative value.

George Spiggott: It's described in the background as the Space Marine's Main Battle Tank, but I agree that it doesn't really look like one. I've never seen a Main Battle Tank with sponsons (plenty of Infantry Support tanks like the WWI originals).

The Rogue Trader precedent for Blast is why I'm inclined to think that giving Predator Autocannons Blast. I think that it's appropriate to attribute these improvements just to the Predator version of the Autocannon, but practicality does suggest spreading it to all weapons of the same name.

Nurglitch wrote:themandudeperson: Yes, Predators can be outfitted for anti-infantry, anti-tank, or dual purpose. You use the combinations of autocannon, lascannons, and heavy bolters to do so.

Eh, I guess what I consider as a dedicated anti-infantry threat is different than what you consider.. Like I said before, I think an autocannon is less useful against infantry and should be pointed at light armor instead, but it still fulfills an anti-infantry role adequately.

Nurglitch wrote:The munchkin comment was not a comment about your maturity, it was a comment about your bizarre and off-topic suggestions for over-equipping Predators. I like if it you contributed to the thread by staying on topic (Predator Autocannons), rather than using it as a dumping ground for your munchkin fantasies.

Sorry, my view hasn't been that the Autocannon needs changing, it's that the Predator needs changing and that was my half-baked attempt to do so. I consider both inter-related issues and it's hard to discuss one without the other..

Nurglitch wrote:Now, you may notice that this thread isn't about fixing the Autocannon. That's indicated by the complete lack of the term 'fix' in any post but yours. No point in fixing something that's not broken. This thread is about ways that the Predator Autocannon can be modified to make it more appropriate to a Main Battle Tank. One might say that the point is to make it different, yet maintain its relative value.

Purely semantics.. We're toying with how GW originally designed the weapon to fit into the game because we believe it's lackluster for a MBT for various and differing reasons.

Now, if you're done trying to play the hardass line we can go back to talking about the Autocannon that you're so fervently arguing we should stay on subject about. Outside of your first post, you really haven't done much outside of a quick reference to AP 3 and/or blast while doing nothing but blasting me and others.
Anyways, do you have an opinion to contribute to my multiple ammunitions solutions? And when you said make it a blast, was it still going to be a Strength 7 AP 4 blast marker?

Predators are called MBT? They build the "Main" part of
Tanks for SM,but they are only light battle tanks,not
medium as MBT is understood today .
for them ,a autocannon as turret weapon fits and
blast ability will see at shrapnell strength, 5-4 / 4 ?

well.. I've always thought MBT was MAIN battle tank, not medium.. It IS what the Space Marines use the majority of the time so I suppose it would be considered their main battle tank by that definition. Apparently, what characteristics Space Marines consider important for their tanks are very different than what modern militaries consider important.
Besides, I always thought vehicles needed AV 12 to be considered light tanks while heavies needed AV 14 so there's not much room in between for a "medium tank".

I really do like the idea of a large blast marker, but I think the 2 shots would make it overkill, personally.

Nurglitch wrote:It's described in the background as the Space Marine's Main Battle Tank, but I agree that it doesn't really look like one. I've never seen a Main Battle Tank with sponsons (plenty of Infantry Support tanks like the WWI originals).

It's more the way that it fails to fit up to the pattern for an Imperial MBT supplied by the Leman Russ Battle Tank. The Predator (Destructor) is under armed and under armoured compared to the Leman Russ. The Destructor's closest historical analogy that springs to mind is the WWII German Sturmgeschultz.

I do remember in RT the Predators role was described as being infantry support back when the Sabre was the Space Marines dedicated tank hunter. Many of its configurations are unsuited to tank hunting from a rules and practicality perspective, giving it blast wouldn't change that (not to suggest that giving it blast would be a bad idea).

Perhaps the new rules for the Autocannon should take the form of single shot 'special' ammunition types bought at extra cost rather than changing the basic profile. Not taking the wind out of the Missile Launchers sails would also be important if the rule would apply to all Autocannons. A fair compromise would be to have the extra profile apply only to vehicle based Autocannons, in a similar fashion to how the rail gun works. This would limit the change to just Destructors and Sentinels (ignoring Forgeworld for a moment).

George Spiggott: I agree that the Predator isn't a Main Battle Tank in either the conventional sense or the Warhammer 40k Imperial Guard sense. I would suggest, however, that the background indicating that the Space Marines use it as a Main Battle Tank is accurate. While a Leman Russ is loaded down with ordnance, the Predator can be mobile and not sacrifice its main weapon.

It strikes me that the Annihilator configuration, that of Twin-Linked Lascannons with Lascannon sponsons is well-equipped for tank-hunting from a rules perspective (let's leave references to 'practicality' out of this...).

But giving its Destructor configuration Autocannon the Blast rule would emphasize its ability to hunt light vehicles and infantry - the Blast makes it more effective against open-topped vehicles and so on.

Making it Heavy Blast would make it into a more reliable, but slightly less effective, Plasma Cannon. I think this change would be subtle enough that it could be applicable to all Autocannons.

Going the vehicle route, I wouldn't extend this to Sentinels since they seem to mount a version of the man-portable Autocannon - they wouldn't have the room for two different types of ammunition.

turn weapon profile to choose from
7/4 2 shots or 5/5 1 blast ?
Strength of blast as missiles used
By typhoon,or Frag , or heavy flamer?

ive always enjoyed the twin linked las canon with heavy bolter sponsons always worked well for me

Nurglitch wrote:I agree that the Predator isn't a Main Battle Tank in either the conventional sense or the Warhammer 40k Imperial Guard sense. I would suggest, however, that the background indicating that the Space Marines use it as a Main Battle Tank is accurate.

I'm unable to find any such references although I found a couple of references to its fire support role. Since the Space Marines have no formal organisation for Predators and the bulk of their forces are infantry companies such a role makes sense.

Nurglitch wrote:Making it Heavy Blast would make it into a more reliable, but slightly less effective, Plasma Cannon.

Heavy blast 1 or 2? Heavy Blast (1) makes it a conqueror cannon I'll be interested to see how that weapon plays out come the summer. Heavy blast (2) two could be interesting in 5th edition. Twice as many hist would be (more than) fair pay back for the loss of Space Marine killing AP.

The question remains, why would you want to load a predator down with so many weapons you take away it's true strength, low points cost.

Page 32, Codex: Dark Angels:

"Predators fill the role of a main battle tank within the Dark Angels Chapter."

Page 43, Codex: Chaos Space Marines

"The Predator is the main battle tank of the Space Marines,"

i give you on us/english version of those c:da,c:csm it is
spelled so. Codex dark angels : the same in german(translated by word); codex Csm:different(translated by Sense);
If predators typed as MBT, autocannon is lame.call it
Standard battle tank and be happy with it.
they base on rhinoAPC (because STC origin) and will
never reach leman russ tanks in anti-tank ability.
i've tested it pointbased,sending predators against
leman russ and every predator config losed.
upgrade autocannon to blast and hunt light armor!

Nurglitch wrote:So looking at the humble Autocannon. A little too humble, at least for a Main Battle Tank like the Predator. Maybe (not altogether):

- Make it Blast

- Vanquisher-rize it, having it roll two dice to penetrate and select the highest (not how the Vanquisher works, I know, just avoid duplicating the Lascannons).

- Make it AP3

- Give it Rending (had to say it...)

While I've thought the same thing many a time (coming to many of the same ideas), I think it applies to autocannons across the board, not just for the Predator autocannon. As an anti-infantry weapon the heavy bolter is better, when it comes to killing tanks the lascannon and ML are generally better. Against light vehicles the Autocannon becomes decent, but other weapons can suffice in those areas as well.

The problem with actually fixing the autocannon is the missile launcher. most things which would make the autocannon what it should be would make the missile launcher useless.

Honestly I'd like the autocannon to become AP3 *or* roll 2d6 pick the highest for armor pen w/AP2 on a to-wound roll of 6 (making it Blast obliterates any reason to take a heavy bolter). That would make the autocannon a distinct choice from the heavy bolter and the lascannon, while retaining the effectiveness of these weapons, while increasing the autocannons power in a much needed manner. The problem is this makes the missile launcher redundant.

If predators typed as MBT, autocannon is lame.call it
Standard battle tank and be happy with it.
they base on rhinoAPC (because STC origin) and will
never reach leman russ tanks in anti-tank ability.
i've tested it pointbased,sending predators against
leman russ and every predator config losed.

What? Leman Russ tanks are very poor anti-tank platforms. A triple lascannon (or AC/LC sponson) predator will kill a Leman Russ far more quickly than a Leman Russ will kill the Predator. If you are taking it purely as AC/HB's then yeah the Leman russ is better at killing tanks, but the Predator has better BS and is a better muppet mower at a much cheaper cost.

Well, we could chalk this all up to WH needing to be D10 based.. Then our missile launchers could be stronger without being as strong or as our lascannons which would allow room for adjustments for autocannons. Then again, taht's more than just beating a dead horse.. it's beating a pile of bloody pulverized equine mush..

leman russ =poor anti-Tank? Dont use the las,take battlecannon! Ordnance killes earlier than heavy and
i expierenced many Hits scattering to side/backarmor
where of is 8-11/10 .your las vs 14/13 or battlecannon
vs 13/11/10? I tested as mentioned Tank fights on
company level with comparision in points and the greater
numbers or lascannons didnt save the predators from
total destruction.