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.

Simple enough, the autocannon (S7 AP4 R48 Heavy 2) is either over priced (not insanely, but there is a reason it is not used over the HB) or just doesn't really fill a role. Yes, it does have light anti-tank duty and it increases your ability to knock down MQs, but it doesn't do either very well at all. If you knocked down the range to 36" it is pretty much an alternative to the HB, so is the extra 12" really worth 5 more points? I was hoping that with the new Space Marine Codex that their auto-cannon would be S7 AP3 R36 or 48 Heavy 2. But it didn't turn out that way. So the IG needs a new alternative, since they aren't going to have the IG with the same weapon but different stats in a new "era" of Codices. But the Imperial Guard still need their own anti-heavy infantry/MEQ weapon, and perhaps a new version of the Autocannon will be that?

Long Stubber : S7 AP3 R48 Heavy 2
Essentially something like a "Mega Stubber" or what not.

Long Heavy Bolter [LHB] : S6 AP3 R48 Heavy 3
Not the name I would prefer, maybe stick with "Long Stubber" to make a new class of weapons (Stubber=Lasgun, Heavy Stubber=Alt. HB, Long Stubber=Mega Stubber) like how "Autoguns" and Lasguns were the same thing in the last edition of the IG Codex.

Easy suggestion, likes and dislikes, pros and cons. Still need to be priced, I was thinkings something around how the autocannon is priced now.

to be honest the AP is too low for a solid shot weapon, prehaps making the heavy bolter 4 shots and the auto cannon 3 and keeping the same stats that would seem like a better fix

Autocannon vs heavy bolter:

i think the additional 12" and the additional S +2 is worth 5 points

The only "autocannon-issue" i could see is the predator destructor.
This Tank should have a TL-autocannon like a dread or LR-exterminator.

So where is your IG problem?
-the heavy weapon team?
-the sentinel?
-salamander scout vehicle?


the next generation IG will have 2x autocannons per team because a autocannon is a autoloader and won't need the second
team-member anymore, so you get 2x AC at the cost of 3 to balance this.

@ Ihadhq : First, you forget that Autocannon are Heavy 2 while Heavy Bolters are Heavy 3, so for +5pts you lose an extremely valuable extra shot, but gain an extra 12" and +2S. The +2S is usefull for knocking out tanks, not really useful for knocking down infantry, the +12" isn't useful for knocking down infantry, since you're not going to be shooting at the farthest infantry models from you, but the closest, which will be within 36" 95% of the time. So, no, I don't think it's worth it, and seeing how often the AC is bought, I don't think many other people think it is either.

It is too late to fix the Destructor, and I don't see it used much either, but I'm talking about for the Imperial Guard. Though I agree, the Destructor isn't used much compared to the Annihlator.

Your next part is sort of confusing.... I don't follow your logic.... how is the autocannon as an autoloader, like all but the Missile Launcher and the Mortar, mean it doesn't need the assistant gunner, who helps lug the weapon and ammunition around, like how these sorts of weapons have operated for the past 100+years. Also, 3x the cost for only 2x the weapons? That doesn't help at all! It makes it worse!

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and think you don't own any of the codices and the rule book and haven't been playing long, or haven't played 40k at all....

I think you ignored just =>
Could such emoticon have a meaning?

And i do know what i'm talking about.
Your idea of an autocannon as anti-infantry is far from:
a)the real use of such weapon
b)the 40k use for such weapons

i have stated examples of units and vehicles fielding autocannons.
You have said nothing that shows me you have ever used one of those units.
So i could also say "you don't have a codex or BRB or played 40k ". I think yours is a almost ultra-crappy argument.

everyone seems to be throwing around new rules for AP3 guns these days. autocannon dont need to be AP3.

AP3 is a missile hitting you in the face, exploding bolts infused with the power of chaos or a flamethower that can melt steel. An autocannon is not, nor should it ever be AP3. It is used for killing high toughness creatures and light vehicles. When you come up against a mech army or nidzilla you would wish you had brought autocannon. they are a nice inbetween of anti-tank weapons and anti-horde weapons. they dont need to be impoved, they are good at what they do. not to mention that if they were AP3 they would be ridiculously undercosted or have to have a massive price hike.

@1hadhq : emoticons are not forms of communication, they are additions for entertainment. That "soapbox" emoticon is not a word or actual statement, it is a representation of an idea. "Getting on a soap box" does not really work for what you are talking about.... are you making an exageration? I don't know, because your followed statement was completely outrageous.
a) There is nothing like an autocannon in real life. This statement is stupid.... really, I mean, there is no 40mm machine gun type infantry based weapon in the real world. Maybe a 50cal, but that is what the Heavy Stubber and Heavy Bolter are, the autocannon is something even more. There aren't any super-heavy infantry in tank level power armor walking around either... second defeat of this arguement. The weapons we use for "light vehicles" is the 40mm grenade and AT4 (US) and RPG7 (Warsaw Pact/Cheapo supply), neither of which have a high rate of fire (except for the Mk19 and similiar weapons which usually are too lagre for infantry use). Now you are in the grenade and missile launcher territory and we have several of those for the Imperium. For example, the Grenade Launcher and the Missile Launcher. OMG! Three times the charm! YOU LOSE!
b) The Eldar have the Star Cannon, Reaper Launcher, Tempest Launcher, and Pulse Laser, and the Tau have Ion Cannon. Some of these are vehicle mounted, I know, but they are used the same way as the AC would be with AP3.

Lastly, you have not done so either. I am not arguing that point. The facts hold up, however, that the autocannon is lacking, as it is rarely fielded. The Exterminator is only used by the Space Wolves and is their only available Leman Russ (I believe, I haven't seen a Space Wolves army fielding a Leman Russ of any varient in years) and Autocannons in general are not fielded, pretty much at all, among the Guard, because we (where I have played in the past ten years) feel it is not worth it compared to Heavy Bolters, Missile Launchers, and Lascannons.

@ Regwon : Autocannons can't go down in stats, then they would only be a beefier Heavy Bolter, and when priced correctly, would either completely replace the HB or be redundant, depending on the benefit. Going up is really the only option. Why go to S8? You are already wounding just about everyone on 2+ anyhow and then you are elbowing in on the ML and LC territory, and able to knock out Armor 14 vehicles, at S7 you are limited to AV13, and limited at best.

As for fighting SM armies, I use more ML, Lascannons, and Plasma weapons. For Tyranids, I use more HB, Lascannons, ML and Flamers. Same thing for Orks. Why? ML, LC, and Plasma weapons all have 3 or lower AP, cuts through SM armor, simple enough. My MLs can handle the big ugly Tyranid models with Krak, and the swarms with Frag, fill two holes with one shovel. The Lascannon bumps off the even tougher ones, flamers and HB for the hordes. Works pretty much the same for Orks, except I usually use more HB than LC.

Points cost? Well, we're looking at something between a Missile Launcher and a Lascannon, which are 15pts and 25pts respectively. At S6 we can lean towards ML and the middle area, and with S7 lean back towards middle and lascannon. So 20pts min, in my opinion.

The quandry of why people are moving towards AP3? The reason? The motion of people towards units with SV3+, duh! It sucks to roll fifty dice and only to knock down one or two of your opponent's models, it just takes a lot of dice and a lot of time. Why not spend more points on a weapon that negates their armor and use fewer models? Dang, that makes life a lot easier! I agree, however, that too many of these weapons will discourage SM players.... oh, my, god! People have been complaining "why are there so many Space Marine players?!" Well perhaps it is because of that super affective SV3+ armor! Maybe more weapons out there pushing them over and watching their arms and legs flail will help people think "well... if I have more models, it would take them longer to wittle down my army... I should look at armies other than the Space Marines then..."

I completely disagree. Autocannons are one of the most consistant and well-performing weapons a Guard Commander can get. 2 shots a turn at S7 is fantastic, perfect for knocking skimmers from the sky (and anything AV12 or less), and can lend a hand against any type of infantry as it wounds on a 2+.

Comparing them to the Heavy Bolter makes about as much sense as comparing the Heavy Bolter to the Lascannon - they have different roles and are good at their respective roles.

And making them AP3? In 5th everyone has Cover Saves, so who cares about AP. Furthermore, as someone who has tested them with AP3 (not with 5th's silly cover system), let me say that it makes them the mandatory weapon. You take nothing else.

Autocannons could go to 12 points (and Heavy Bolters to 8), but otherwise they don't need to change.

But what about the AP4? In our rules we have a weapon special rule called 'High Impact', basically a -1 to armour saves. That's how we get around the armour thing without resorting to AP3.

BYE

HBMC, I've heard a lot about your 40k gaming system, and really, your testing can't be used for those of us who play WH40k : Standard. It would be interesting to attend one of your battles, and it seems like it is more interesting (from what i understand, your store seems to be more open to the old style of actually GMing battles and bending the rules where they should be bent). The problem is, using your battle assesments for everyone would be like the Real World miltaries consulting Counter Strike players for battle field tactics. Apples and Cabbages really. They're both food, but besides that the comparisons end... In my experience, autocannons are "okay," not broken, but the other options nullify them, or else they would be seen more often. As you have said many times before, HBMC, lascannons, lascannons, lascannons. Me? I'm a ML guy, I like their dual purposing ability.

Also, 4+ is less than 3+, and not all battefields are ripe with 4+ cover saves.

P.S. : When are you going to get back to me on that PM I sent you?

"I'm a ML guy, I like their dual purposing ability."

Which is why you don't see Autocannons as useful. I, on the other hand, don't use ML's because Guard can afford to specialise, we don't need multi-purpose weapons because we can bring so many mono-focused weapons to the table.

We don't need Krak and Frag Missiles when Lascannons (and Autocannons for that matter, if you want to get into the number crunching) are better than Kraks and Heavy Bolters are better than Frags.

And our rule system is based off 3rd and 4th. The core rules themselves are the same, it's just minor differences (like taking an Ld test for a unit to shoot at two targets, that sort of thing). The only major difference in our rules is the way vehicles/walkers/Monstrous Creatures are dealt with, but even that has a lot of similarities (the glancing/penetrating 'Mechanics, the speed gands, defensive and main weapons, armour values, etc.).

Our ruleset is an elaorate patch for 3rd and 4th Edition. It is to current 40K what 4th was to third, not what 3rd was to 2nd.

BYE

The best use of an autocannon, in my opinion, is countering mech armies: Kult of Speed, Rhino Ruch, Mech Eldar, Mech Tau, Dark Eldar etc.

These armies have lots of vehicles with AV 10-12, and these vehicles need to be taken down reliably before the player using them can put their plans in motion. If you can take down two or three transports on the first turn your opponent is going to have a hard time recovering.

Just gonna say, I prefer autocannons over heavy bolters. The question is between the extra 5pts and loss of a shot and the gain of strength and range can it make up the difference? The extra 12" mean if you position them correctly, you can get another round of shooting in before your enemy gets up close and personal. Which means, in my book, if you use them correctly they will have an equal opportunity to get their points worth. Its straight forward reasoning to say that +2 strength adds to its lethality, its fair points and a fair trade off. So I think it really comes down to what your targets are.

@ HBMC : There is a lot more different with just the rules I have heard you use than you are giving credit for. Even still, a little can make a lot, for instance your -1SV of AP4 against SV3+ makes a big difference in how a battle goes and how one would build their armies. Basically, 3+ save compared to 4+ cover is not as big a difference, as you say a lot, however if you aren't knocking down that 3+ save, 4+ cover is not nearly as good. I would much more prefer a 3+ save to a 4+ save, and the math typically agrees.

I'm a ML Guy because I also play SL, which a) doesn't have an autocannon model, so I've had to make my own, and b) I'm not wealthy, I can't afford every weapon for every squad for every contingency. ML are a good supplement for that, and prove to be highly combat affective for their points cost. I know you may not like them, but my oppenent seems to dislike them even more, which works for me. For some reason, the poor missile launcher is often overlooked by IG players... Except for attacking AV14, I usually don't have a small problem with the S8 of the Krak, I can still take on mobs/hordes with the Frag, and I don't have to invest $100 in rearming all my squads any time my opponent changes.

@

I think one of the issues with weapons is that there are gaps between the IG and marines. That if you were to look at them as continuum weapons the IG are missing the "marine" weapons that would fill the gap that you're trying to make the autocannon fill. If you wanted to get down to it, what the IG really "need" based on your demands are plasma cannons.

With a 5+ save? I would lose all my cannons in two games! Not only that, but it would be far over priced for what the Autocannon may fill.

Has anyone been looking at the "Long Heavy Bolter" option? Or just the "Long Stubber" version?

Skinnattittar wrote:@ HBMC : There is a lot more different with just the rules I have heard you use than you are giving credit for.

In the Codices we've written, yes - some even have alternate FOC's (like 'Nids, Eldar and Orks). But the core rules, no. The major differences, as I said, relate to how vehicles/walkers/MCs operate. Everything else is a few bits added here and there, and an expanded set of 'universal special rules' to cover weapon types (so we avoid having loads of extra and redundant rules in Codices).

BYE

What about the extended and modified weapons rules? I believe in the past you have stated that you have given Hellguns S(something) AP3 R36 Rapid Fire (or something like that) among other weapons modifications? This would drastically affect which other weapons are good and bad choices, and which weapons should be/need to be changed?

As I said, the Codices have large differences, but the core rules themselves don't. An S6 AP4 Rapid Gets Hot! gun in our rules functions in the same way as S6 AP4 Rapid Gets Hot! in 5th - the roll To Hit, To Wound and Armour Save are all the same.

BYE

Except you have also applied a -1SV against SV3+ for weapons with AP4. This would affect how one builds their army, on both sides. I would be less inclined to forfeighting my additional shot with HBs to Heavy 2 AP3 Autocannons if it means knocking down SM armor saves to their cover saves. As you said, SV3+ armor is not as big a deal with 4+ cover saves.

EDIT : Obviously, AP3 Autocannons of any sort, price, or other modification is seen as heretical among the Dakka-ites. My purpose was to provide the Imperium with an anti-MEQ weapon at reasonable cost while still not losing the weapons core purpose.

My initial thoughts after using ACs for a while is that they should be rending. I'm not sure this wouldn't make them overpowered for guard, who can take more of them.

My key issue when using them in CSM armies is that they eat up slots that are either better served by having a special weapon or using a different heavy weapon. When I could take tank hunter, they were great weapons, allowing glancing hits on AV 14. They also gave me some anti-troop that other weapons aren't as good at. With the latest trashdex that CSM received, I loose tank hunter, fair enough. This removes the weapon from being basically a 2 shot ML, down to having no chance against AV14. I don't use them because MLs are the same points and are better for the most part.

They work well with guard because they have 2 shots and thus make up for the lower BS AND guard has points to waste for the most part. By taking a squad with an autocannon with guard, it takes 85 points. I can basically get 2 heavies with Guard for every 1 MEQs can take. Guard is also a volume of fire army, making the AC a very good weapon.

I think the AC issue can be solved 2 ways.

1) Allow 2 lists at tournaments, choose one prior to playing each opponent.
2) Come up with some tweak to make them better for MEQs.

Whatever is done, the Reaper needs A LOT of love. The thing isn't even a shadow of the Asscannon.

Skinnattittar wrote:
a) There is nothing like an autocannon in real life.

This is quite frankly absurd. Not only are there weapons "like" autocannons in real life, they're called autocannons in real life. WOULD YOU LIKE TO KNOW MORE?

i don't know why people have such a hard time about autocannons. I have used them exclusively over heavybolters in my IG army for over 10 years now and have never had an issue with its rate of fire nor its AP value. It has great range and the S7 allows it to take out rhino rushes like nobodies business. I normally field 9-12 of them in my IG army and they are the bane of all my enemies, as they punch into infantry and troop carriers, plucking wounds from squiggoths and Demons alike...sure the heavybolter fires one more shot, but it does not allow me the extra reach to fire down the line of attack from either board edge and trying to roll a 6 just to glance a rhino sucks...its hard enough to hit with Imps let alone have problems wounding with the weapon... Leave it the way it is, a great general purpose heavy weapon with reach and strength, but so-so rate of fire and AP...

I also agree that the weapon on the stock SM Pred should at least be TL...It seems either the vehicle is over priced with just one AC in the turret or the weapon just isn't big enough for its role as the SM MBT...

@ Fetterkey : Only one of thsoe weapons is man-portable and it is experimental (it hasn't even seen field testing yet, last I heard), since similiar weapons have been in development since the 1960's, I'm not too sure it will see action. All the others are big carrier based weapons on vehicles, trailers, and drag-behinds.

@ Jep'ray : You are one of three Guard players I have heard who has praise for the autocannon, and I do not disagree that is has potential and when used en-masse it is affective. Same thing goes for Lascannons and Missile Launchers, however.

Skinnattittar wrote:Except you have also applied a -1SV against SV3+ for weapons with AP4.

No I never said that. I said we created a Universal Special Rule called High Impact, which is applied to weapons that should be cracking armour a bit more, but we can't justify giving them a better AP. The Autocannon falls into this category, as do things like Whirlwinds, Inferno Cannons, and so on. It is also usually applied to weapons S7 and above (so something like a Krak Missile, that can kill a vehicle in a single hit, can do something to a Terminator despite being AP3 (he takes his save on a 3+)).

AP4 is still AP4 and will act like AP4 in every instance. Further special rules may be applied to it, but AP4 is still just AP4.

BYE

Skinnattittar wrote:With a 5+ save? I would lose all my cannons in two games! Not only that, but it would be far over priced for what the Autocannon may fill.

My point was you're effectively trying to get a plasma cannon without any of the draw backs. That if you look at the Imperium armory the plasma cannon already fill the niche your trying to put the Autocannon into.

An autocannon represents the advanced versions of the 25-35mm cannons you see today. Made futuristic by the fact its made man portable. I think Autocannons are easily better than heavy bolters. It has the versatility of a missle launcher, but without having two distinct profiles, it can fill both roles all the time.

Now if you wanted to make autocannons more interesting make them have the option to be made howitzers; where their projectile archs down, requiring no line of sight.

Also on your original post... a name other than "stubber" would be better. In the family of weapons stubbers are below autoguns and denotes a less sizable round. If you're set on this concept, it might be better to reimagine your concept as more of a large caliber hyper-velocity anti-material rifle.

Skinnattittar wrote:@ Ihadhq : First, you forget that Autocannon are Heavy 2 while Heavy Bolters are Heavy 3, so for +5pts you lose an extremely valuable extra shot, but gain an extra 12" and +2S. The +2S is usefull for knocking out tanks, not really useful for knocking down infantry, the +12" isn't useful for knocking down infantry, since you're not going to be shooting at the farthest infantry models from you, but the closest, which will be within 36" 95% of the time. So, no, I don't think it's worth it, and seeing how often the AC is bought, I don't think many other people think it is either.

It is too late to fix the Destructor, and I don't see it used much either, but I'm talking about for the Imperial Guard. Though I agree, the Destructor isn't used much compared to the Annihlator.

Your next part is sort of confusing.... I don't follow your logic.... how is the autocannon as an autoloader, like all but the Missile Launcher and the Mortar, mean it doesn't need the assistant gunner, who helps lug the weapon and ammunition around, like how these sorts of weapons have operated for the past 100+years. Also, 3x the cost for only 2x the weapons? That doesn't help at all! It makes it worse!

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and think you don't own any of the codices and the rule book and haven't been playing long, or haven't played 40k at all....

To me, the Autocannon is a peculiar, yet essential piece of kit.

Absolutely ideal for taking out light to medium vehicles, as it combines healthy S with a fair rate of fire. Get a squad of them to open up on Buggies, Sentinels, Vypers, Landspeeders etc, and you should be doing some damage.

It's also a viable alternative to the Missile Launcher in terms of flexibility. It's higher strength means it wounds T4 *twice* as often as a Heavy Bolter, and it's longer range means you can pull off long ranged attacks should they be needed. Unlike the Heavy Bolter, it is also capable of Instant Killing some characters, a useful trait I'm sure you will agree.

The Heavy Bolter is a dedicated anti-infantry weapon which can be turned on Light Vehicles in a pinch. The Lascannon is a dedicated anti-armour weapon which can be used to deliver the coup de grace to a character if better target do not present themselves. In the middle are the Autocannon and a Missle Launcher. Give BS3, I'd plump for the two shots every single time I'm afraid!