Switch Theme:

Which Would You Prefer: 10th ed Reset, or More of the Same?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Poll
Which would you prefer?
10th is more of the same
10th is a larger reset
No opinion - want to see results

View results
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Water-Caste Negotiator




Hecaton wrote:
Bull, don't try and claim there'd be fluff problems. If a Melta gun is beaming radio waves it'd be incredibly efficient at energizing metal, hence the bonus against vehicles.


So why doesn't it get a bonus against power armor, crisis suits, etc? Those are all made of metal too.
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






^exotic composites maybe. Not saying they are, just could be.

Although one could easily say vehicles use a similar array of materials.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/11/25 18:51:50


And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in gb
Mighty Brass Scorpion of Khorne




 Insectum7 wrote:
^exotic composites maybe. Not saying they are, just could be.

Although one could easily say vehicles use a similar array of materials.


Early tau fluff (not up to speed personally) had them using ceramic compounds, so no metal at all.
   
Made in us
Water-Caste Negotiator




Dudeface wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^exotic composites maybe. Not saying they are, just could be.

Although one could easily say vehicles use a similar array of materials.


Early tau fluff (not up to speed personally) had them using ceramic compounds, so no metal at all.


So melta wouldn't get the damage bonus against a Hammerhead then?
   
Made in us
Keeper of the Flame





Monticello, IN

Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
Hecaton wrote:
Bull, don't try and claim there'd be fluff problems. If a Melta gun is beaming radio waves it'd be incredibly efficient at energizing metal, hence the bonus against vehicles.


So why doesn't it get a bonus against power armor, crisis suits, etc? Those are all made of metal too.


In 3rd-5th they did. It was called AP 1

www.classichammer.com

For 4-6th WFB, 2-5th 40k, and similar timeframe gaming

Looking for dice from the new AOS boxed set and Dark Imperium on the cheap. Let me know if you can help.
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Its AoS, it doesn't have to make sense.
 
   
Made in us
Water-Caste Negotiator




 Just Tony wrote:
Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
Hecaton wrote:
Bull, don't try and claim there'd be fluff problems. If a Melta gun is beaming radio waves it'd be incredibly efficient at energizing metal, hence the bonus against vehicles.


So why doesn't it get a bonus against power armor, crisis suits, etc? Those are all made of metal too.


In 3rd-5th they did. It was called AP 1


Which, against non-vehicle targets, was exactly equivalent to the AP 2 of plasma.
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




The dark hollows of Kentucky

Dudeface wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^exotic composites maybe. Not saying they are, just could be.

Although one could easily say vehicles use a similar array of materials.


Early tau fluff (not up to speed personally) had them using ceramic compounds, so no metal at all.

And then you have Eldar vehicles/armour. Would Wraithbone have similar properties to metal? I kinda doubt it would.
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
 Just Tony wrote:
Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
Hecaton wrote:
Bull, don't try and claim there'd be fluff problems. If a Melta gun is beaming radio waves it'd be incredibly efficient at energizing metal, hence the bonus against vehicles.


So why doesn't it get a bonus against power armor, crisis suits, etc? Those are all made of metal too.


In 3rd-5th they did. It was called AP 1


Which, against non-vehicle targets, was exactly equivalent to the AP 2 of plasma.
Yah, but incidentally it also caused Instant Death against T4 targets anyways, so suitably catastrophic.

Good Damage otherwise provides it's capability against monstrous creatures etc. Damage was really what the 3-7 eds missed, and it showed through the MCs.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/11/25 21:05:24


And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

Tyel wrote:
Hmmm. I kind of remember them being bad. I guess respectable enough for popping rhinos (AV 11) but that's about it. Once you hit AV12 they dropped off considerably - and sufficient bolters could pop AV10 light vehicles (most of which were bad anyway from memory).
How many Guard armies had "sufficient bolters"?

As I said, the Autocannon was the best weapon for the Guard. It would take out incoming Rhinos, and eliminate all the various speedy AV10 vehicles out there, and because Guard squads were so cheap weight of firepower could help you with AV12 Eldar units. And, because they fired 2 shots, and Guard hit 50% of the time, they were remarkably consistent.

You have to factor in the context of the weapon. Autocannons were rare in Marine armies, but also not especially useful. In a Guard army? Absolutely wonderful. Paired with a Plasma Gun for when things got closer, you could rip incoming forces apart, leaving them exposed for your bigger guns.

Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in us
Water-Caste Negotiator




 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Tyel wrote:
Hmmm. I kind of remember them being bad. I guess respectable enough for popping rhinos (AV 11) but that's about it. Once you hit AV12 they dropped off considerably - and sufficient bolters could pop AV10 light vehicles (most of which were bad anyway from memory).
How many Guard armies had "sufficient bolters"?

As I said, the Autocannon was the best weapon for the Guard. It would take out incoming Rhinos, and eliminate all the various speedy AV10 vehicles out there, and because Guard squads were so cheap weight of firepower could help you with AV12 Eldar units. And, because they fired 2 shots, and Guard hit 50% of the time, they were remarkably consistent.

You have to factor in the context of the weapon. Autocannons were rare in Marine armies, but also not especially useful. In a Guard army? Absolutely wonderful. Paired with a Plasma Gun for when things got closer, you could rip incoming forces apart, leaving them exposed for your bigger guns.


Of course this was all before GW started pushing their idiotic pseudo-PL system and turned an emergency "how do we buff guard without a new codex" change into a permanent thing. Purely looking at the stat lines ACs were seldom a good choice, but the fact that they were cheaper than LCs made them a viable option.
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Tyel wrote:
Hmmm. I kind of remember them being bad. I guess respectable enough for popping rhinos (AV 11) but that's about it. Once you hit AV12 they dropped off considerably - and sufficient bolters could pop AV10 light vehicles (most of which were bad anyway from memory).
How many Guard armies had "sufficient bolters"?

As I said, the Autocannon was the best weapon for the Guard. It would take out incoming Rhinos, and eliminate all the various speedy AV10 vehicles out there, and because Guard squads were so cheap weight of firepower could help you with AV12 Eldar units. And, because they fired 2 shots, and Guard hit 50% of the time, they were remarkably consistent.

You have to factor in the context of the weapon. Autocannons were rare in Marine armies, but also not especially useful. In a Guard army? Absolutely wonderful. Paired with a Plasma Gun for when things got closer, you could rip incoming forces apart, leaving them exposed for your bigger guns.

Rare in loyalist marine armies. Autocannon + plasma gun was also a common combo for CSM squads back in the day, for the same reasons. Give those boys Stealth Adept and Infiltrate so that they could get straight up the board and into cover and start causing problems ASAP. Then let the Raptors and the Chosen go hunting. Oh yeah, good times.
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

Ah, yes, Chaos Marines. They slipped my mind.

Autocannons got a lot of use in my Chaos armies. I usually brought two Havoc squads, and sometimes I'd go 2 AC/2ML, and with Tank Hunters you're putting out 4 S8 and 2 S9 shots down range. At BS3.

Very spicy!

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/11/26 03:52:04


Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in ca
Discriminating Deathmark Assassin





Stasis

My Renegades and Heretics army has 6 Autocannon, 6 Missile Launchers, and 6 Mortar Heavy Weapon Teams.

213PL 60PL 12PL 9-17PL
(she/her) 
   
Made in us
Water-Caste Negotiator




 Blndmage wrote:
My Renegades and Heretics army has 6 Autocannon, 6 Missile Launchers, and 6 Mortar Heavy Weapon Teams.


Deliberately taking bad weapons for lore or aesthetic reasons doesn't address the question of what the best option is. We know you can take sub-optimal choices under any rule system, the question here is how to make them all viable or consolidate options under the assumption that everyone takes the best tool for the job.
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
 Blndmage wrote:
My Renegades and Heretics army has 6 Autocannon, 6 Missile Launchers, and 6 Mortar Heavy Weapon Teams.


Deliberately taking bad weapons for lore or aesthetic reasons doesn't address the question of what the best option is. We know you can take sub-optimal choices under any rule system, the question here is how to make them all viable or consolidate options under the assumption that everyone takes the best tool for the job.

Or maybe they're the right options for the army context in which they're deployed, because other people might make different composition decisions and play in different local metas?

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in us
Water-Caste Negotiator




 Insectum7 wrote:
Or maybe they're the right options for the army context in which they're deployed, because other people might make different composition decisions and play in different local metas?


I doubt it, given that R&H are a bottom-tier "army", autocannons are equal or worse than heavy bolters against virtually ever target type now that they're both D2, and frag missiles are horribly ineffective even against the things they're supposed to be good at killing. Those choices may be 100% appropriate based on lore or having models that look cool but there's no competitive argument for them regardless of meta.
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Or maybe they're the right options for the army context in which they're deployed, because other people might make different composition decisions and play in different local metas?
There was never a reason to take Missile Launchers in a Guard army. Autocannons were more effective than an S8 Krak against every target up to a certain point (because they fired 2 shots a turn to the Krak's 1 shot), equal to Kraks at one point, and then after that a Lascannon was better the Krak for what the AC couldn't hurt.

Literally a purposeless weapon in 3rd-7th-era Guard.

My competitive period was brief, but it focused mostly on Guard (and a bit of 3.5 Chaos), so I've put a lot of energy into this. I'm very strict when it comes to Guard weapons. Efficiency and fire order was very important, and the missile launcher played no role whatsoever.


This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2022/11/26 09:53:39


Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




The dark hollows of Kentucky

If we start eliminating weapons just because they aren't currently "competitive", then we'll quickly be left with nothing, considering how quickly gw swings their "Balance Pendulum". Just because something isn't competitive now, doesn't mean it won't be in another edition (or even a few months), or vice-versa.
   
Made in us
Water-Caste Negotiator




 Gadzilla666 wrote:
If we start eliminating weapons just because they aren't currently "competitive", then we'll quickly be left with nothing, considering how quickly gw swings their "Balance Pendulum". Just because something isn't competitive now, doesn't mean it won't be in another edition (or even a few months), or vice-versa.


We can only deal with the game as it exists now, not as it might in a hypothetical future edition. And under the current rules ACs are just worse HBs. There's a clear failure to make both weapons viable, no obvious path to fixing the problem, and therefore no real argument against consolidating them into a single weapon.
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




The dark hollows of Kentucky

Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
If we start eliminating weapons just because they aren't currently "competitive", then we'll quickly be left with nothing, considering how quickly gw swings their "Balance Pendulum". Just because something isn't competitive now, doesn't mean it won't be in another edition (or even a few months), or vice-versa.


We can only deal with the game as it exists now, not as it might in a hypothetical future edition. And under the current rules ACs are just worse HBs. There's a clear failure to make both weapons viable, no obvious path to fixing the problem, and therefore no real argument against consolidating them into a single weapon.

Fix the current wounding table. Done. Dang. That was hard.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
If we start eliminating weapons just because they aren't currently "competitive", then we'll quickly be left with nothing, considering how quickly gw swings their "Balance Pendulum". Just because something isn't competitive now, doesn't mean it won't be in another edition (or even a few months), or vice-versa.


We can only deal with the game as it exists now, not as it might in a hypothetical future edition. And under the current rules ACs are just worse HBs. There's a clear failure to make both weapons viable, no obvious path to fixing the problem, and therefore no real argument against consolidating them into a single weapon.

Fix the current wounding table. Done. Dang. That was hard.

Ya know, a D12 would help with more granular wounding to give certain weapons defined roles again
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Or maybe they're the right options for the army context in which they're deployed, because other people might make different composition decisions and play in different local metas?
There was never a reason to take Missile Launchers in a Guard army. They were move effective than an S8 Krak against every target up to a certain point (because they fired 2 shots a turn to the Krak's 1 shot), equal to Kraks at one point, and then after that a Lascannon was better the Krak for what the AC couldn't hurt.

Literally a purposeless weapon in 3rd-7th-era Guard.

My competitive period was brief, but it focused mostly on Guard (and a bit of 3.5 Chaos), so I've put a lot of energy into this. I'm very strict when it comes to Guard weapons. Efficiency and fire order was very important, and the missile launcher played no role whatsoever.

I'd argue that the Missile Launcher could be useful especially in the 3-7 era because it's got the blast option (that used a real blast!), and the Heavy couldn't fire at a different target than the squad. Firing at a tank meant your squad Lasguns are wasted. But if your Infantry are on "kill-gaunts-duty", the frag has a place, and you still have a serviceable AT option. Depending on the foes you're facing, having that option could be really useful. Not every meta is marine-saturated.

For a time in 3rd I used more Flamers than the norm because I fought a lot of Orks, Guard, Nids and Dark Eldar, for example. The weapon met the opponents I was encountering. It was more optimal for me than the typical Las/Plas of the time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Or maybe they're the right options for the army context in which they're deployed, because other people might make different composition decisions and play in different local metas?

I doubt it, given that R&H are a bottom-tier "army", autocannons are equal or worse than heavy bolters against virtually ever target type now that they're both D2, and frag missiles are horribly ineffective even against the things they're supposed to be good at killing. Those choices may be 100% appropriate based on lore or having models that look cool but there's no competitive argument for them regardless of meta.

Maybe, but you don't know how the rest of the army is outfitted and what roles they're expected to play. Nor do you know the opponents being fought against. There's probably a niche the MLs and ACs still fill. For example, if they're seeing a lot of action against hordes, having access to that Blast could be very useful.

For example, they vould be fighting against a lot of Harlequins and Daemons. Armies with lots of invulnerable saves but low toughness, even on vehicles. The usual advantages of Plasma and Lascannons are kinda wasted there.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2022/11/26 08:30:19


And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in us
Water-Caste Negotiator




 Insectum7 wrote:
Maybe, but you don't know how the rest of the army is outfitted and what roles they're expected to play.


There is nothing about the rest of the army that can make ACs viable. GW failed at math and/or didn't care that the HB buff would make ACs obsolete, probably because space marines don't have any ACs, and now they're just worse HBs. Looking at it purely from a rules point of view, without considering any lore or aesthetic factors, you should never put any ACs in your list if you can take a HB instead.

Plus, like I said, R&H aren't even a real army. They're a legends-only pseudo-army with few units, no updates since early 9th, and no stratagems/WLTs/etc to keep up with real armies. By even putting a R&H army on the table at all you're conceding that you aren't interested in list optimization. Which is absolutely fine! Not all games need to be competitive matches where you try to win in the list building phase. But taking sub-optimal units and armies for lore or aesthetic reasons isn't relevant to the rule issues we're talking about.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/11/26 09:49:28


 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

 Insectum7 wrote:
I'd argue that the Missile Launcher could be useful especially in the 3-7 era because it's got the blast option (that used a real blast!), and the Heavy couldn't fire at a different target than the squad.
Frags? In what world did 3rd/4th/5th Guard need Frags? And wasting lasguns? Firing Lasguns was a waste of time. I spend most of my games never using my Lasguns. Guardsmen were ablative wounds for the Special/Heavy. Their weapons weren't ornamental like Officer weapons, but they certainly shouldn't be used if things were going well.

 Insectum7 wrote:
But if your Infantry are on "kill-gaunts-duty", the frag has a place...
Heavy Bolters were cheaper and better at it. Frag Missiles needed mass to work, it's why 4 Grenade Launchers was almost passable, and why 4 Missile Launchers was the de factor default for most Devastator squads at the time.

 Insectum7 wrote:
... and you still have a serviceable AT option.
The point is it was a compromise - it was kinda ok at two things rather than being good at one thing. You had 6 turns to make your mark, meaning you would fail 3 of those turns, and weapons that were jack of all trades didn't really belong. You needed things that worked when they hit, or were consistent. Missile Launchers were neither of those things.

 Insectum7 wrote:
For a time in 3rd I used more Flamers than the norm because I fought a lot of Orks, Guard, Nids and Dark Eldar, for example. The weapon met the opponents I was encountering. It was more optimal for me than the typical Las/Plas of the time.
I used a lot of flamers as well. 4 of them. In 2 Command Squads. With Drop Troops. Eliminated far more than they were ever worth.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/11/26 09:58:36


Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in dk
Loyal Necron Lychguard






Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Maybe, but you don't know how the rest of the army is outfitted and what roles they're expected to play.


There is nothing about the rest of the army that can make ACs viable.

A pts change will do it. A bolter being better than a lasgun is okay if the pts reflect it.
   
Made in us
Water-Caste Negotiator




 vict0988 wrote:
Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Maybe, but you don't know how the rest of the army is outfitted and what roles they're expected to play.


There is nothing about the rest of the army that can make ACs viable.

A pts change will do it. A bolter being better than a lasgun is okay if the pts reflect it.


That's not the point. The claim was that ACs could be a viable choice (ignoring fluff or aesthetic factors) right now in Blindmage's existing army. You could fix the problem by changing point costs but right now they both have the same cost and hypothetical re-balancing of legends rules that do not get updates has nothing to do with the post you quoted.
   
Made in gb
Mighty Brass Scorpion of Khorne




Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
 vict0988 wrote:
Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Maybe, but you don't know how the rest of the army is outfitted and what roles they're expected to play.


There is nothing about the rest of the army that can make ACs viable.

A pts change will do it. A bolter being better than a lasgun is okay if the pts reflect it.


That's not the point. The claim was that ACs could be a viable choice (ignoring fluff or aesthetic factors) right now in Blindmage's existing army. You could fix the problem by changing point costs but right now they both have the same cost and hypothetical re-balancing of legends rules that do not get updates has nothing to do with the post you quoted.


Autocannons are better vs t6 and the same vs t7, not saying it justifies their existence but if you play into a lot of t6 monsters/transports then autocannons are better (working on bs4+).

T5 hits, wound roll, converted
Hb 1.5 x 0.5 = 0.75
Ac 1 x 0.67 = 0.67

T6
1.5 x 0.33 = 0.5
1 x 0.67 = 0.67

T7
1.5 x 0.33 = 0.5
1 x 0.5 = 0.5

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/11/26 11:11:03


 
   
Made in dk
Loyal Necron Lychguard






Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
 vict0988 wrote:
Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Maybe, but you don't know how the rest of the army is outfitted and what roles they're expected to play.


There is nothing about the rest of the army that can make ACs viable.

A pts change will do it. A bolter being better than a lasgun is okay if the pts reflect it.


That's not the point. The claim was that ACs could be a viable choice (ignoring fluff or aesthetic factors) right now in Blindmage's existing army. You could fix the problem by changing point costs but right now they both have the same cost and hypothetical re-balancing of legends rules that do not get updates has nothing to do with the post you quoted.

I was trying to comment on a broader level, we know that usually either plasma or melta is better, but how much better one is will be decided by pts. Instead of getting caught up in whether heavy bolters are too good against vehicles relative to autocannons the question should be does it feel good to shoot heavy bolters and does it feel good to shoot autocannons and do the stats adhere to the fluff? If they do then the stats don't need to be changed. All that needs to be changed is pts costs to make the autocannon more pts-efficient in some situations while the heavy bolter is more pts-efficient in other situations.
   
Made in hu
Pyromaniac Hellhound Pilot





 vict0988 wrote:
the question should be does it feel good to shoot heavy bolters and does it feel good to shoot autocannons and do the stats adhere to the fluff?

Which fluff? Pick up 5 different lore pieces involving heavy bolters and/or autocannons and you get 5 different iterations (and 2 will completely oppose each other) of how they work.

My armies:
14000 points 
   
Made in dk
Loyal Necron Lychguard






 AtoMaki wrote:
 vict0988 wrote:
the question should be does it feel good to shoot heavy bolters and does it feel good to shoot autocannons and do the stats adhere to the fluff?

Which fluff? Pick up 5 different lore pieces involving heavy bolters and/or autocannons and you get 5 different iterations (and 2 will completely oppose each other) of how they work.

Larger versions of the boltgun, heavy bolters are deadly weapons that fire fist-sized bolts at the enemy. With a staggering rate of fire and shells even more lethal than the standard boltgun, heavy bolters put the fear of the Dark Gods into enemy infantry.

The heavy bolter is an effective anti-personnel cannon that fires hails of mass-reactive bolts into the enemy and blows them apart from within

...cutting down hordes of enemy infantry with a staggering rate of fire.

An enormous version of the bolter, the heavy bolter fires fist-sized bolts at the enemy with a staggering rate of fire.

Auto cannon are automatic, self-loading weapons that fire large calibre, high velocity explosive shells. A masterful unification of rate of fire and destructive power, autocannon rounds are most effectively used against light vehicles or particularly tough infantry.They are the weapon of choice when facing the larger of the Tyranid bioconstructs, as well as the ramshackle buggies utilised by the Ork tribes.

...The most common patterns of Predator are the anti-infantry Destructor – notable for its long-barrelled autocannon...

Autocannons fire large calibre, high velocity shells at a prodigious rate. They are the heavy weapon of choice for commanders facing large infantry formations and lightly armoured vehicles.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: