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.

Hey everyone, this is my first post on dakkadakka so I want to start a discussion about the humble infantry squad and veteran squads. This discussion will help me and hopefully other people in what units, upgrades, strategies, tips, tricks, and etc. on how to complete my IG army.

So I've been slowing rebuilding my IG army and have been running a lot of different styles of IG. My main opponents are MEQ armies (mainly BA and CSM). Our normal point games are between 800pts and 1500pts as several of us are building a new army.

The Humble Infantry
Now with my experiences with the humble infantry why does everyone go with the GLAC format, personally I this to be a bad combo as all the mathhammer I've seen on the autocannon against the missile launcher and lascannon is that it has roughly around 3% better chance at destroy/wreck AV10 vehicles which really who takes AV10 vehicles other then guard?!

Out of all the heavy weapons opened to the infantry I found from my experience that the heavy bolter is better for anti-infantry because of the sheer volume of wounds you can put out there, it complements the humble lasgun well, and everything and their mom has 4+ cover saves now so the AP4 is pretty much useless.

For the anti-tank role of the squad I would never make a basic infantry squad to fulfill the anti-tank department but if I did I would go with lascannons all the way! I know that the norm of meta game is AC because it does decent against infantry and has the ability to hurt AV12 vehicles but as guard don't we try to stay away from this crap as trying to fulfill multiple roles in a squad causes us to spend more points and have to decides "well do I want squad A to kill a few enemy infantry or attempt to stop that AV12 vehicle..."? I say if you're going to be tank hunting then bring the proper gear to get the job done. The autocannon can't even hurt AV14, can only glance on 6's against AV13, and 5's to glance/6's to penetrate against AV12. Personally I find most heavy weapons not that great for line infantry unless you're going for the anti-infantry role with the heavy bolter.

What heavy weapons do you guys take or don't take for your infantry squad and why?

Next we have the special weapons of the infantry. I know each weapon has it own special purpose and role to play but I would like to discuss about which special weapon is ideal for a footslogging squad. I've played around with the grenade launcher, plasma gun, and flamer and I've found the grenade launcher to be the best for kill-to-point ratio. The grenade launcher so versatile in the role that it can play and the damage output for only 5pts is amazing. Last game I played I had a infantry squad with a grenade launcher lobbed a frag into a 5man space marine squad and killed 3 of them! Now I know that’s super amazing and usually can't pull that off with every grenade but so far the grenade launcher does give me an average of 1-2 MEQ kills a turn which in my book is awesome for 5pts.

So what special weapons do you guys take or don't take for your infantry squad and why?


The Veterans
There are so many different uses, configurations, and roles that veterans can fulfill that I just love them so much! I want to focus on footslogging veterans as well since I’m not huge fan of the chimera as I still think they are cheap metal coffins as most of my chimera’s are either destroyed or wreaked by turn 2 or 3, only once have I had 1 chimera survive to turn 6 (I still don’t know how I pulled that off )

Now with doctrines the only experience I have with them is the grenadier doctrine. The most common lay out I play with my veterans is 2-3 plasma with grenadier and out of all the games I’ve played carapace armor has only save one guardsmen out of 20+ overheats which probably has to do with a lot of bad luck on my part but the 30pts to have a 4+ armor save hasn’t earned its price. In most games I’ve played carapace will only save 2-3 guardsmen per game from bolter fire which I would rather have them die out right then waste 30pts per unit on something that doesn’t work well.

So with a veteran unit what layout do you take/would you take?

Also I would love to hear your input on all things infantry and veterans so if you go mechanized infantry I would love to hear the reason why and your experience with it as that will give me more reasons to try out different builds.

First off, welcome to Dakka.

Secondly, as a longtime Guard player myself I love tanks. I love gunships. I love artillery. However, my first and most enduring love has been the infantry.

I usually play airborne guard in Vendettas and I used to give them carapace but for the same points I was getting way more mileage out of demolitions. It just gives them a huge boost in their maximum damage output. Plus flinging satchel charges at tanks and MEQs is always fun.

Mechanized has worked well simply because Chimeras, though prone to spectacular explosions, are a good fire support base and allows your vets to move around quickly. Backed up with some tanks and arty and they can be a really nasty force.

I've been kicking around an all infantry assault engineering company with flamers, meltas, krak and demo charges only backed up by autocannons and lascannons for transports/tanks.

>I say if you're going to be tank hunting then bring the proper gear to get the job done.

What is the proper gear, so far as you're concerned?

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:>I say if you're going to be tank hunting then bring the proper gear to get the job done.

What is the proper gear, so far as you're concerned?

To me the proper gear would be vets with melta guns from either a valk or chimera or heavy weapon teams with lascannons.

I'm considering starting a guard army comprised of vets and armour myself. I'm not a fan of mega-hordes; I find superior stats and weapons are much better. I think the forward sentries doctrine is a great idea, seeing as how you can get your veterans a 3+ cover save with it (2+ if you put Harker in the same squad ). This combo, with maybe plasma guns, if you infiltrate them nice and close in cover, could really put out some hurt. My friend once took veterans with forward sentries, snipers and an autocannon and they lasted nearly all game.

I'm also considering Vets with the grenadiers doctrine and Sergeant Bastonne (with or without 2 plasma guns and a heavy flamer I'm yet to decide). Get them nice and close then have Bastonne give a "First Rank Fire! Second Rank Fire!" order (probably better with only lasguns) and they could probably take a decent chunk out of a squad.

That's just my idea/2 cents. I hope you find them tactically inspiring.

I personally don't like using any special weapons in my combined squads. They're either too expensive, too situational, or simply not useful enough. I love the FRFSRF order too so simply saving points and having an extra lasgun fire appeals to me. On mounted infantry squads, I typically take only a flamer. It sets out what the unit is going to do, makes it better at it and is cheaply priced.

ishanmaster wrote:Now with my experiences with the humble infantry why does everyone go with the GLAC format, personally I this to be a bad combo as all the mathhammer I've seen on the autocannon against the missile launcher and lascannon is that it has roughly around 3% better chance at destroy/wreck AV10 vehicles which really who takes AV10 vehicles other then guard?!

Out of all the heavy weapons opened to the infantry I found from my experience that the heavy bolter is better for anti-infantry because of the sheer volume of wounds you can put out there, it complements the humble lasgun well, and everything and their mom has 4+ cover saves now so the AP4 is pretty much useless.

For the anti-tank role of the squad I would never make a basic infantry squad to fulfill the anti-tank department but if I did I would go with lascannons all the way! I know that the norm of meta game is AC because it does decent against infantry and has the ability to hurt AV12 vehicles but as guard don't we try to stay away from this crap as trying to fulfill multiple roles in a squad causes us to spend more points and have to decides "well do I want squad A to kill a few enemy infantry or attempt to stop that AV12 vehicle..."? I say if you're going to be tank hunting then bring the proper gear to get the job done. The autocannon can't even hurt AV14, can only glance on 6's against AV13, and 5's to glance/6's to penetrate against AV12. Personally I find most heavy weapons not that great for line infantry unless you're going for the anti-infantry role with the heavy bolter.

Ailaros is going to love you.

Right...*cracks knuckles*...the GLAC combination is, quite simply, the most efficient damage output:points cost squad that can be created from the PIS. That combo runs at 65 pts. That 65 pts can throw out 2 S7 and 1 S6 shot per turn at 48"/24" ranges. Granted, those shots aren't at AP2, or at a higher S enough to warrant shooting AV13, but for the points you are spending you gain the ability to engage all armour at AV12 and below as well as MCs and, if your desperate, medium/light infantry. No other gun grants you this flexiblity. Period.

Your mathhammer is incorrect. The autocannon is superior to the other heavy weapons upto AV12. I don't have the time or the patience to bash it out but I'll let my other Dakka-ites fill that in. Orks and DE primarily use AV10, open-topped transports. The vast, vast majority out there are Rhino hulls (AV11) which the autocannon simply has a better chance of stopping that than a lascannon.

Personally, I would never, ever, EVER cause the lasgun to dictate my choice of heavy weapon. It is the massed heavy/special weapons of the Guard that do the damage, any wounds thrown on by lasguns at the end of it are a happy bonus. Lasguns are garbage, and I wouldn't recommend factoring them into your desicion making. At all.

PIS *can* deal with anti-armour, but they'd need to be combined and given the BiD order. It's normally much better to get a Vendetta as you get all the advantages of multiple TL lascannons on a fast skimmer, and it wouldn't cost you as much in points either.

ishanmaster wrote:but as guard don't we try to stay away from this crap as trying to fulfill multiple roles in a squad causes us to spend more points and have to decides "well do I want squad A to kill a few enemy infantry or attempt to stop that AV12 vehicle..."?

This would be true, if the combination in question costed a huge amount of points to begin with. Your heavy bolter costs the same as my autocannon, and for that I get extra range, a higher S, can target vehicles and the ability to pick and choose my targets. You are stuck with targeting light/medium infantry all game. The ability for a unit to fulfill multiple roles on the battlefield is important. As a Guard player we can bring an obscene amount of special and heavy weapons to the fight, allowing us to be more selective in which squad we specialise to do what. However, being able to have a squad or a number of squads, that retain a bit more fluidity and adaptability on the battlefield is important as you never know exactly what your going to come across in any given game.

Welcome to Dakka by the way!

L. Wrex

Some mathhammer for the discussion, weapons listed in most-to-least effective.

Heavy weapons
vs AV10 - AC, LC, ML, HB
vs AV11 - AC, LC, ML, HB
vs AV12 - LC, AC, ML
vs AV13 - LC, AC, ML
vs AV14 - LC, ML
vs GEQ - HB, AC, ML, LC, MT
vs MEQ - ML/HB/LC, AC, MT
vs Termie - LC, HB, AC, ML, MT
Note that mortars improve substantially when used in multiples in a single unit.
Note that ACs improve more than LCs when given to vet squads.

Special weapons
vs AV10 - MG, PG, GL, FL
vs AV11 - MG, PG, GL
vs AV12 - MG, PG, GL
vs AV13 - MG, PG
vs AV14 - MG
vs GEQ - FL, PG, GL, MG
vs MEQ - PG, FL, MG, GL
vs Termie - PG, MG, FL, GL
PGs and FLs look good there but PGs are expensive and FLs are short ranged. TBH, I don't think there's a clear winner there. They're all good in their own way.

Don't forget that the Autocannon instant-kills any multiwound t3 unit *coughcoughheavyweaponsteamscoughcough*. Also, Autocannons wound Marines on a 2+, do the same to orks but penetrate their armour, devastate transports and artillery (AV 10 back armour on their artillery? Thats 2/3 chance that the shots that hit will stop 'er from shootin'.).

For a vet squad, as long as its not on the usual suicide objective, harker + HB/AC +plasma/flamers is quite a good choice as long as you get them into good cover they can last a while. (the is a thread around here on that somewhere)

I'm thinking of rewriting my list to include both mechanized veterans for offense and PIS squads on foot, perhaps combined, for defense. I'm actually starting to think that it could work. I only have one autocannon, but that wouldn't be a problem if I combine them with a commisar and give them all power weapons.

If you want to use this as a reference I'm trying this out tonight its a mixed vet/mech/platoon list with not too much repetition. I'll post a link with the battle report and you can see how I did.

HQ
CCS 150pts
3 plasma, Chimera

Elites

Pysker Battle Squad, Chimera (8)pyskers
155pts

Troops
PCS, PF, (4)flamers
(2) Infantry squads, Autocannon, (1)Commisar
225 points

Veteran squad 155pts
Chimera, 3 meltas

Veteran Squad 155pts
3 meltaguns, Chimera

Veteran Squad 100pts
3 meltaguns

Fast Attack
Valkyrie, Missle Pods
130pts

(2) Scout Sentinels Autocannons, HK
100pts

Heavy support

Leman Russ Demolisher 165pts
Leman Russ Demolisher 165pts

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:Ailaros is going to love you.

Yes I will He even called it a "GLAC" squad rather than spelling it out. I love how dirty it sounds when you say it out loud.

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:
Right...*cracks knuckles*...the GLAC combination is, quite simply, the most efficient damage output:points cost squad that can be created from the PIS. That combo runs at 65 pts. That 65 pts can throw out 2 S7 and 1 S6 shot per turn at 48"/24" ranges. Granted, those shots aren't at AP2, or at a higher S enough to warrant shooting AV13, but for the points you are spending you gain the ability to engage all armour at AV12 and below as well as MCs and, if your desperate, medium/light infantry. No other gun grants you this flexiblity. Period.

Your mathhammer is incorrect. The autocannon is superior to the other heavy weapons upto AV12. I don't have the time or the patience to bash it out but I'll let my other Dakka-ites fill that in. Orks and DE primarily use AV10, open-topped transports. The vast, vast majority out there are Rhino hulls (AV11) which the autocannon simply has a better chance of stopping that than a lascannon.

See, here's the thing. The Autocannon, on a per-unit basis may technically be more points efficient. The problem is that a single autocannon is not effective. What do you gain by being efficient if you're not effective?

In order to make them effective, you need to take a LOT of them. This costs a lot. This costs so much, in fact, that you're spending way more on autocannons than they are on transports. As such, this makes the autocannon NOT points effective in the slightest, regardless of how it stacks up to other low-effective weapons like heavy bolters and the like. For more on this, click here.

As such, I agree with the idea of taking bolters, although I personally prefer mortars as they can cause your opponent to spread out, and have a long-shot chance of pinning, sometimes at very inopportune times (or especially when combined with a psyker squad).

As for the squads v. vets. The thing is that regular PISs paired with SWSs are more efficient (and somewhat more effective) at their respective roles than are veterans. The problem is that their net cost is much higher, despite their efficiency. Thus it's sort of like buying meat and shortening. You get a better price by buying a pound of hamburger and a pound of shortening, but if you don't have enough money in your pocket, you can buy bacon instead, which only gives you a half a pound of each, but is cheaper up front (and allows you to get both on a budget).

As such, if you're playing an infantry swarm, there isn't a whole lot of purpose in taking veterans (other than their coolness factor), but if you're playing an army where you have scant points to spend on infantry (because you're spending it on transports or armor, or whatever), then vets are the better value way to go.

what's glac?

Grenade Launcher and Autocannon

Ailaros wrote:In order to make them effective, you need to take a LOT of them. This costs a lot. This costs so much, in fact, that you're spending way more on autocannons than they are on transports. As such, this makes the autocannon NOT points effective in the slightest, regardless of how it stacks up to other low-effective weapons like heavy bolters and the like. For more on this, click here.

Unfortunately, this is plain wrong, Ailaros. I have run the numbers, and to mathematically expect to keep a Rhino pinned down, you pay an average of 36 points on PIS Autocannon upgrades - that is, for every 36 points spent on autocannons, you expect one result of Stunned, Immobilised, Wrecked or Destroyed. If they have extra armour, no biggy - it's 51.5 points per expected Immobilised, Wrecked or Destroyed result. Yes, you're paying more for the Autocannons than the transport, but no more than 103% of the transport's cost. And if the neutralisation is a Wrecked or Destroyed result, or Immobilised in turns 1 or maybe 2, then they guns can happily do something else all game.

The problem with your link is that you seem to be labouring under the assumption that those autocannons exist solely to stop transports before they hit your lines, that those autocannons are the only response to transports you have, and that the rest of the points spent on the PIS is purely spent to allow you to take the autocannons. This is plain not true, and is roughly equivalent to decrying Missile Launchers in Tactical squads because that means you're spending 150ish points for a 1/3 chance to penetrate a Rhino.

One question though - would a missile launcher go well with a grenade launcher?

It's possible, it you really love blast tokens like I do . I've got to be honest, I don't use Heavies with my infantry platoons.
You can't fire them when moving and then they only help once you've taken an objective and decided to hunker down. Otherwise, they are just a single 2 wound guardsmen that can't shoot. This turns into a problem when trying to root out MEQ's from a city. You can use heavies well by grouping them in teams, but short of that stick with lasguns (I know they suck, but with FRFSRF they can do some damage) and use assault weapons.
But if you really want some all purpose killing machine nothing tops a Russ against MEQ's. While you kill two or three guys with an infantry squad, you can stop a 10 man SQUAD with a 5in S8 AP3 blast.

JSK-Fox wrote:One question though - would a missile launcher go well with a grenade launcher?

Yeah, they are both anti-infantry weapons. The problem is that a mortar does the same thing as the missile launcher, but for much cheaper. Yes, you don't get to insta-splat librarians, but you get to shoot out of LOS and can pin. If you're facing off against lots and lots of space marines or tau suits, or whatever, then perhaps, but otherwise there are cheaper options.

Aelyn wrote: I have run the numbers, and to mathematically expect to keep a Rhino pinned down, you pay an average of 36 points on PIS Autocannon upgrades.

on UPGRADES. Those 36 points buy you 7 autocannons, but in order to have those 7 autocannons you need to spend 385 points for both autocannons and carriers.

But you're already taking the squads, you say? Then you're sitting there, immobile, packing 7 autocannons into one tiny space in order to keep LOS just to stop ONE rhino, then you've got some serious problems going on with movement and deployment.

Aelyn wrote:
The problem with your link is that you seem to be labouring under the assumption that those autocannons exist solely to stop transports before they hit your lines, that those autocannons are the only response to transports you have, and that the rest of the points spent on the PIS is purely spent to allow you to take the autocannons. This is plain not true, and is roughly equivalent to decrying Missile Launchers in Tactical squads because that means you're spending 150ish points for a 1/3 chance to penetrate a Rhino.

Why do you take autocannons? To stop transports? What does it matter if you stop a transport after it's dropped off its banshees or ogryn or tac squads? If it's not to stop transports BEFORE they fulfill their purpose, then why is it to stop them at all?

And no, I don't think that autocannons are the only response to transports. That's what the whole point of that article is. There are better ways, so why take them at all?

As for missile launchers in tac squads, we're talking about guard here, not marines. To compare between these two armies isn't useful.

Sandman wrote:First off, welcome to Dakka.

I usually play airborne guard in Vendettas and I used to give them carapace but for the same points I was getting way more mileage out of demolitions. It just gives them a huge boost in their maximum damage output. Plus flinging satchel charges at tanks and MEQs is always fun.

Thanks! I've been playing around idea of demolition in my head so I might actually have to try it out. How effective have you had with your demolition layout on your veterans?

ultramarinelord wrote:I'm considering starting a guard army comprised of vets and armour myself. I'm not a fan of mega-hordes; I find superior stats and weapons are much better. I think the forward sentries doctrine is a great idea, seeing as how you can get your veterans a 3+ cover save with it (2+ if you put Harker in the same squad ). This combo, with maybe plasma guns, if you infiltrate them nice and close in cover, could really put out some hurt. My friend once took veterans with forward sentries, snipers and an autocannon and they lasted nearly all game.

I agree with you and that I find superior stats to be better thats why I love my vets so much! Foward sentries seems to me to be kinda of a gamble, spending 30pts for +1 to your cover saves. Yes thats amazing against shooting but playing against MEQ armies that have a minium of a quarter of there army as dedicated assault units will do nothing to help me against them unlike carapace armor but with my luck with carapace armor recently, what do I have to lose

Also I thought Harkers ability doesn't stack with foward sentries, am I wrong?

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:Right...*cracks knuckles*...the GLAC combination is, quite simply, the most efficient damage output:points cost squad that can be created from the PIS. That combo runs at 65 pts. That 65 pts can throw out 2 S7 and 1 S6 shot per turn at 48"/24" ranges. Granted, those shots aren't at AP2, or at a higher S enough to warrant shooting AV13, but for the points you are spending you gain the ability to engage all armour at AV12 and below as well as MCs and, if your desperate, medium/light infantry. No other gun grants you this flexiblity. Period.

Your mathhammer is incorrect. The autocannon is superior to the other heavy weapons upto AV12. I don't have the time or the patience to bash it out but I'll let my other Dakka-ites fill that in. Orks and DE primarily use AV10, open-topped transports. The vast, vast majority out there are Rhino hulls (AV11) which the autocannon simply has a better chance of stopping that than a lascannon.

I agree with you that for 10pts the autocannon is the most flexiable heavy weapon you can get but not as effective. With the autocannon you have the ability to engage vehicles of AV12 or lower but they can't effectively take care of AV12 like a lascannon can. Say you play your standard 5 turn game, with a single lascannon going against an AV12 vehicle you'll average on about 2.5 hits a game and with those hits you'll have around a 67% of able to hurt that vehicle (of which 33% is a vehicle destroyed or wreak). Now with your single autocannon you'll average 5 hits a game with only around 34% of hurting that vehicle of which less then 8% is a vehicle destroyed or wreak.

Now will the meta game and tourneys I understand why players take autocannons but with the group I play with all the MEQ armies, none of them have more then 2 rhino's in there list as most of them are excepting autocannons, multi-lasers and the sorts so they just footslogg it out with there troops.

Scott-S6 wrote:Some mathhammer for the discussion, weapons listed in most-to-least effective.

Heavy weapons
vs AV10 - AC, LC, ML, HB
vs AV11 - AC, LC, ML, HB
vs AV12 - LC, AC, ML
vs AV13 - LC, AC, ML
vs AV14 - LC, ML
vs GEQ - HB, AC, ML, LC, MT
vs MEQ - ML/HB/LC, AC, MT
vs Termie - LC, HB, AC, ML, MT
Note that mortars improve substantially when used in multiples in a single unit.
Note that ACs improve more than LCs when given to vet squads.

Thanks Scott-S6 for that, so unless Scott, myself, and a ton of other players mathhammer is wrong this proves that the Autocannon isn't superior over all other heavy weapons. Yes it does well against AV10 and AV11 but thats it, period.

JSK-Fox wrote:Don't forget that the Autocannon instant-kills any multiwound t3 unit *coughcoughheavyweaponsteamscoughcough*. Also, Autocannons wound Marines on a 2+, do the same to orks but penetrate their armour, devastate transports and artillery (AV 10 back armour on their artillery? Thats 2/3 chance that the shots that hit will stop 'er from shootin'.).

Yes the autocannon can instant kill any multiwound T3 unit but face it, the only armies that has a unit with t3 multiwounds are eldar, DE, and IG CCS. So if you want to outright kill that CCS you'll need to invest around 100pts worth of autocannons to even pull that off (thats not including all the points you'll have to spend to field that many autocannons).

Now I agree with you in that the autocannon would be the perfect weapon for a outflanking sentinel (Mmm all those rear armor shots lol) but you'll almost near get a rear armor shot with an autocannon in a PIS unless your enemy doesn't know what they are doing, just extremely cocky, or your a tactical genius (CREEEEED!).

The Odessey wrote:It's possible, it you really love blast tokens like I do . I've got to be honest, I don't use Heavies with my infantry platoons.
You can't fire them when moving and then they only help once you've taken an objective and decided to hunker down. Otherwise, they are just a single 2 wound guardsmen that can't shoot. This turns into a problem when trying to root out MEQ's from a city.

I've been notice that with my PIS in that with them I will either sit down and shoot my heavies for 3 turns and then make a mad dash to the objectives or i'll make a mad dash to the objectives right away and then try to hunker down which neither have been working well for me. I'm removing all heavies from my PIS for my next game and see how that works out.

--------------------

Ok so now I just love my veterans so much its crazy! Has anyone had experience with veterans other then the standard melta gun/chimera rush layout or the plasma gun/carapace layout?

With my current list I want my veterans to be the main troops of my army and would prefer them to be on foot as I love the image of infantry running across a battlefield with tanks blowing the crap out of buildings

Now i've been tossing this idea in my head for when I build my 1500pts list. What do you guys think of having an Platoon lead by Al'Rahem with 2-3 squads equipped with melta's or another special weapon for outflanking objective grabbing?

@ishanmaster; i guess it may not stack, after all, you're just giving them Stealth twice, my bad.

And the good thing about not using massive blob squads is that you have more points with which to but heaps of amazing IG armour!

And if your FS squad is assaulted, they have defensive grenades.

personally i like to grab a good mix. ill usually run a few inf squads with hev bolters, a few more with AC, then some hev wep teams with lazcannons, mortars and missles. yea its expensive, but it allows you to specifically asign roles. laz - shoot tanks, hev bolts and mortars go for the inf, and the missles and AC can dual purpose. back it up with some lemun russ, or my personal fave of a 3 strong basilisk battery, and maybe 2-3 units of storm troops or vets in a valk/chimera and you've got a decent force. with my basic infantry platoons, i generally avoid any special weapons or squad upgrades other then the weapon, as i prefer to sit back and shoot, and send conscripts vets or storm troopers to grab and contest objectives.

that said ive been acused of being full of Sh!t so take it or leave it at face value of my just offering a set of pennies to the mix.

Just had an amazing brainwave (thanks Darth).

Have several squads of vets advance behind a couple of russes or hellhounds and have some basilisks sit back and shoot.

Sh!t loads of infantry alone isn't going to win you a game; using combined arms was basically how they were able to win WWI.

Here's a nice little quote along those lines by General Monash, the guy who basically won the war:

"The true role of infantry is not to expend itself upon heroic physical effort, nor to whither away under merciless machine gun fire... but, on the contrary, to advance under the maximum possible array of mechanical resources... to be relieved as far as possible of the obligation to fight their way forward..."

Ta da! even history books say "don't use blob squads!"
I hope that was an interesting history lesson.

Ailaros wrote:

Aelyn wrote: I have run the numbers, and to mathematically expect to keep a Rhino pinned down, you pay an average of 36 points on PIS Autocannon upgrades.

on UPGRADES. Those 36 points buy you 7 autocannons, but in order to have those 7 autocannons you need to spend 385 points for both autocannons and carriers.

But you're already taking the squads, you say? Then you're sitting there, immobile, packing 7 autocannons into one tiny space in order to keep LOS just to stop ONE rhino, then you've got some serious problems going on with movement and deployment.

Why are you packing the autocannons in to one tiny space, precisely? It makes it much harder to ensure LOS and makes your army incredibly vulnerable. It's much better to spread them out in such a way that you have firing arcs across the entire board, ideally with a large number of crossfire points so it's less likely an opponent will be able to restrict your firing and it's more likely that, if relevant, you'll be able to hit side armour.

Ailaros wrote:

Aelyn wrote:
The problem with your link is that you seem to be labouring under the assumption that those autocannons exist solely to stop transports before they hit your lines, that those autocannons are the only response to transports you have, and that the rest of the points spent on the PIS is purely spent to allow you to take the autocannons. This is plain not true, and is roughly equivalent to decrying Missile Launchers in Tactical squads because that means you're spending 150ish points for a 1/3 chance to penetrate a Rhino.

Why do you take autocannons? To stop transports? What does it matter if you stop a transport after it's dropped off its banshees or ogryn or tac squads? If it's not to stop transports BEFORE they fulfill their purpose, then why is it to stop them at all?

The primary reason to take Autocannons is to take down transports. The secondary reason is to take down other light vehicles at range, and the tertiary reason is to give your unit more bang for its buck against infantry.

Ailaros wrote:And no, I don't think that autocannons are the only response to transports. That's what the whole point of that article is. There are better ways, so why take them at all?

Actually, I said that you're assuming those are the only response to transports that you have. I understand that maybe this wasn't clear enough, so let me elaborate: You're assuming that those PIS Autocannon teams are the only answer to transports you have in the army you are bringing to the table. This is not necessarily the case - I would assume most Guard lists also have a few multi-lasers on their Chimeras, a bunch of Lascannons on Vendettas and Leman Russes, and more than likely some fast-hitting Melta troops, all of which help out. However, while you're 36" away and your PIS is set up to defend your objective, I would much rather have them taking some shots and having a reasonable chance to deal with transports than just... twiddling their fingers.

A large part of the reason Autocannons are good is because they're the most cost-effective way of ensuring your PIS have something to do while the enemy is approaching. If one PIS has three Autocannons, and they even stun a Rhino turn 1 (which your Vendetta shoots down on turn 2), those autocannons have turned a wasted unit (early-game) to a useful one. It's true that you could have spent that turn moving around, redeploying and so forth, but for the most part that could have been done simply by deploying better in the first place. And if you're countering the opponent's deployment because they came down second, well, there's no harm in running the unit even then.

Ailaros wrote:As for missile launchers in tac squads, we're talking about guard here, not marines. To compare between these two armies isn't useful.

If you notice, all I'm doing is pointing out that you are calling an option a terrible choice because you're completely ignoring all possible uses except one, then arguing that that one use is not worth the points by ignoring the uses of what it comes with. This is not related to codexes - and yes, I deliberately used an example which was extrapolating your point into a somewhat sillier one. It's still the same fundamental argument.

ishanmaster wrote:

Scott-S6 wrote:Some mathhammer for the discussion, weapons listed in most-to-least effective.

Heavy weapons
vs AV10 - AC, LC, ML, HB
vs AV11 - AC, LC, ML, HB
vs AV12 - LC, AC, ML
vs AV13 - LC, AC, ML
vs AV14 - LC, ML
vs GEQ - HB, AC, ML, LC, MT
vs MEQ - ML/HB/LC, AC, MT
vs Termie - LC, HB, AC, ML, MT
Note that mortars improve substantially when used in multiples in a single unit.
Note that ACs improve more than LCs when given to vet squads.

Thanks Scott-S6 for that, so unless Scott, myself, and a ton of other players mathhammer is wrong this proves that the Autocannon isn't superior over all other heavy weapons. Yes it does well against AV10 and AV11 but thats it, period.

Quite so. In my mind this is one of things they did best with this codex - there are no infantry weapons that as clearly the best. This discussion is evidence of that.

Which weapons are best for your squad depends on the rest of your army. My current army has lots of high strength weapons and big blasts so I use the autocannons. Four autocannons firing from the black of the chimera and four autocannons from the chimera's turret (IA1) is pretty effective against light transports. The difference between AC and LC is very small (1% vs AV11, 3% vs AV12). They'll probably only get to fire them on turn one as the chimera's will move to midfield after that making the cost saving even more prounounced. In this role Lascannons are both less efficient and less effective.

For other army compositions this may not be the case - the more stationary the squad will be and the less high S weaponary available elsewhere, the more valueable the LC will be.

In order to get value for the extra 10pts of the LC it needs to fire several shots. Squads in chimeras which plan to advance don't get to do this. Backfield objective sitters do. In both cases though the heavy weapon does not justify the purchase of the squad - you have to have a purpose for the squad regardless and that plan should not be compromised by trying to employee the upgrade weapon.

I think people are mis-reading what I said. I never stated autocannons were the BEST heavy weapon to use in a PIS, rather they are the most EFFICIENT use of the points you can put into them.

As stated above, a lot of your desicion-making will rely upon what other heavy-hitters populate your army list, and you should equip your PIS to fll in the gaps. This is fine. If you need lascannons, throw lascannons onto your PIS. I'm not arguing against this.

I am simply arguing in favour of the combination, YMMV dependant upon your gaming group, but a lot of people here play, or are interested in playing, tournaments and I like to offer advice that best suits an all-comers list.

L. Wrex

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:I think people are mis-reading what I said. I never stated autocannons were the BEST heavy weapon to use in a PIS, rather they are the most EFFICIENT use of the points you can put into them.

Right, and my point is that efficiency does not matter if you don't have effectiveness, and in order to be effective it's terribly inefficient, not compared to other PIS weapons upgrade choices, but compared to your opponent's list.

ultramarinelord wrote:And the good thing about not using massive blob squads is that you have more points with which to but heaps of amazing IG armour!

Right, this is basically the reason to take veterans. If you want miles of treads in your army then you're just not going to have enough points to put a bunch of proper infantry down. Likewise, if you've got the boots, you don't have the treads.

If you're going to be taking lots of armor, just remember to take enough infantry to still be able to win objectives games.

ultramarinelord wrote:Sh!t loads of infantry alone isn't going to win you a game; using combined arms was basically how they were able to win WWI.

I beg to differ. Just infantry can definitely win games. Furthermore, combined arms was a strategy for infantry units, as the number of non infantry units were very few and unreliable. WWII was about combining tanks and bombers and troops. WWI's idea of combined arms was making sure that every squad had a light machine gun and a flame thrower.

ultramarinelord wrote:
Here's a nice little quote along those lines by General Monash, the guy who basically won the war:
...
Ta da! even history books say "don't use blob squads!"
I hope that was an interesting history lesson.

Firstly, Hutier and Foch won world war I (of course, avoiding the more obvious reason of the central powers losing the materialshcaft).

Secondly, Monash was complaining about the 1914 tactic of running lines of densely packed infantry into machine guns and artillery fire, not about the futility of large formations of infantry. Once infantry tactics improved, huge piles of infantry became effective again. Monash isn't saying "don't use blobs", he's saying "don't use blobs wrong".

Aelyn wrote:If you notice, all I'm doing is pointing out that you are calling an option a terrible choice because you're completely ignoring all possible uses except one,

Well, that's because there AREN'T possible other uses. Seriously, do the math on all other possible uses and then bask in their wretched ineffectiveness. I'm ignoring their use against space marines, because they're all but completely useless against space marines. I'm ignoring their use against light infantry because big blobs of guys are going to be able to laugh off an autocannon kill here and there. I'm ignoring heavy vehicles because they're literally ineffective against them. Name me something that they're effective against that isn't trivial (like a single unit in a single army), and perhaps I'll expand my scope.

Aelyn wrote: It's much better to spread them out in such a way that you have firing arcs across the entire board, ideally with a large number of crossfire points so it's less likely an opponent will be able to restrict your firing and it's more likely that, if relevant, you'll be able to hit side armour.

This assumes that there isn't cover on the board. Furthermore, it assumes that your opponent is just going to waltz straight into an obvious trap. As well, it assumes that all autocannons are going to be shooting at a single transport, when several are likely to be threatening various key places simultaneously. Even assuming all of these things, you're still taking down exactly one transport, while the rest of their stuff hits your lines anyways. This would be fine if you were prepared to take whatever hit your lines, but instead your squads are wasted with autocannons, which AREN'T effective against what pops out of transports.

Aelyn wrote:

Ailaros wrote:
Why do you take autocannons? To stop transports? What does it matter if you stop a transport after it's dropped off its banshees or ogryn or tac squads? If it's not to stop transports BEFORE they fulfill their purpose, then why is it to stop them at all?

The primary reason to take Autocannons is to take down transports. The secondary reason is to take down other light vehicles at range, and the tertiary reason is to give your unit more bang for its buck against infantry.

Right, so they fail their primary purpose unless you spend hundreds of points to take down tens of points of transports. The only way their primary purpose can be fulfilled is if you can make a good argument for gross inefficiency.

The secondary purpose assumes that the vehicles aren't fast enough to avoid being in LOS and out of cover of a lot of autocannons. Furthermore, your infantry are likely already going to have much more pressing issues (like being assaulted) than taking pot shots and war walkers in cover on the other side of the board.

And thirdly the autocannon is pathetic against infantry. Against heavy infantry it doesn't kill jack, and against light infantry it doesn't kill nearly enough dudes to make a big blob o' guys break a sweat.

Aelyn wrote:However, while you're 36" away and your PIS is set up to defend your objective, I would much rather have them taking some shots and having a reasonable chance to deal with transports than just... twiddling their fingers. A large part of the reason Autocannons are good is because they're the most cost-effective way of ensuring your PIS have something to do while the enemy is approaching. If one PIS has three Autocannons, and they even stun a Rhino turn 1 (which your Vendetta shoots down on turn 2), those autocannons have turned a wasted unit (early-game) to a useful one. It's true that you could have spent that turn moving around, redeploying and so forth, but for the most part that could have been done simply by deploying better in the first place.

Right, so here it is. If your army is already sitting there twiddling its thumbs, why not give it an autocannon? After all, they're just wasting their time otherwise.

This argument would make sense if you were running a static gunline, but this is 5th ed - the edition of mobility. You can't just take a bunch of guardsmen and sit there and hope for the best anymore.

Furthermore, while it may have been true in the past that the only purpose of infantry squads was its firepower (and thus when it wasn't shooting it was being wasted), that is NOT true now. The purpose of infantry squads is to take and hold objectives. This means that you need to move them. This means that you're NOT shooting heavy weapons. What does it matter if you're not shooting heavy weapons turn 1 because their heavy weapon is out of range (or whatever), when it's already not shooting its heavy weapons because it's "run run run"ing towards an objective?

Secondly, assuming that it's a stay-put squad. Why buy an autocannon and grenade launcher and do basically nothing for two turns when you can buy a flamer and a meltabomb and do literally nothing for the first turn, but then a whole lot of hurt the second turn? Just because you're objective camping doesn't mean you need to bring cruddy weapons. Furthermore, even if the squad shot nothing the entire game, it wouldn't matter if they still took an objective. As for kill-points, well, a GLAC squad is very unlikely to ever claim one of those. It stands a chance, though, if it has the ability to be good at whatever comes out of transports, or is actually GOOD against vehicles that stray too close.

The point I'm making is that it's not a matter of "given that PISs are immobile, how is it best to arm them?", but rather it's a question of "is there anything worth taking if you need to sacrifice the mobility of a PIS?" I believe the answer to the latter question is "yes", but autocannons are a distinct "no".

Ailaros wrote:

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:I think people are mis-reading what I said. I never stated autocannons were the BEST heavy weapon to use in a PIS, rather they are the most EFFICIENT use of the points you can put into them.

... in order to be effective it's terribly inefficient, not compared to other PIS weapons upgrade choices, but compared to your opponent's list.

You're not given the luxury of seeing your opponent's list pre-game, so in reality you're making the best choice with the tools that you have got. If you start preparing pre-game to take on a specific opponent then you're tailoring your list.

Without this prior knowledge, having a weapon that can target and engage a multitude of threats that your opponent can POTENTIALLY bring is far, far better than putting all your eggs into one basket, crossing your fingers, closing your eyes and hoping for the best. At least if I take autocannons over mortars or heavy bolters I'm not forcing myself down a particular avenue, or putting myself at a disadvantage if I'm facing an army that slants heavily in any particular direction.

L. Wrex

Ailaros wrote:

Aelyn wrote:If you notice, all I'm doing is pointing out that you are calling an option a terrible choice because you're completely ignoring all possible uses except one,

Well, that's because there AREN'T possible other uses. Seriously, do the math on all other possible uses and then bask in their wretched ineffectiveness. I'm ignoring their use against space marines, because they're all but completely useless against space marines. I'm ignoring their use against light infantry because big blobs of guys are going to be able to laugh off an autocannon kill here and there. I'm ignoring heavy vehicles because they're literally ineffective against them. Name me something that they're effective against that isn't trivial (like a single unit in a single army), and perhaps I'll expand my scope.

Autocannon PIS squads get a better points-to-kill ratio than the equivalent PIS without an Autocannon against anything less than Space Marines, assuming two shots per lasgun (whether due to being within 12" or due to FRFSRF).

Autocannons are perfectly respectable against most vehicles' side armour and are still almost as good as Heavy Bolters against most infantry units. I agree there's nothing they're perfect against, but they're the best all-round option out there.

Ailaros wrote:

Aelyn wrote: It's much better to spread them out in such a way that you have firing arcs across the entire board, ideally with a large number of crossfire points so it's less likely an opponent will be able to restrict your firing and it's more likely that, if relevant, you'll be able to hit side armour.

This assumes that there isn't cover on the board. Furthermore, it assumes that your opponent is just going to waltz straight into an obvious trap. As well, it assumes that all autocannons are going to be shooting at a single transport, when several are likely to be threatening various key places simultaneously. Even assuming all of these things, you're still taking down exactly one transport, while the rest of their stuff hits your lines anyways. This would be fine if you were prepared to take whatever hit your lines, but instead your squads are wasted with autocannons, which AREN'T effective against what pops out of transports.

Um, no. It assumes that the cover is not so ubiquitous that there aren't any sort of firing lanes. Furthermore, it assumes that the terrain is set up in such a way that, once you have set up these firing lanes, the opponent will have to divert his forces to avoid his transports being easy targets (which still accomplishes the aim of pinning them down, albeit in a less effective fashion) and it is done specifically to ensure that all the autocannons are not forced to fire upon one target, but are instead able to move from one target to the next as they are disabled, whether this is by earlier autocannons or by your other anti-tank.

Also, you're not just taking down one transport - not unless you're talking about a 1500 pt army (for example) which has four Autocannons in PIS and no other anti-armour whatsoever.

And you should be very much prepared to deal with what comes out of transports - whether with sheer combined fire (in which case, as I pointed out before, the autocannon PIS is still more effective against most foes than the equivalent non-heavied squad) or with dedicated squads like Ogryns, Rough Riders or SWS with twin flamers and a Demo charge.

Basically, I'm assuming your PIS are part of an army, not sitting there by themselves crapping their pants over three Rhinos.

Aelyn wrote:

Ailaros wrote:
Why do you take autocannons? To stop transports? What does it matter if you stop a transport after it's dropped off its banshees or ogryn or tac squads? If it's not to stop transports BEFORE they fulfill their purpose, then why is it to stop them at all?

The primary reason to take Autocannons is to take down transports. The secondary reason is to take down other light vehicles at range, and the tertiary reason is to give your unit more bang for its buck against infantry.

Right, so they fail their primary purpose unless you spend hundreds of points to take down tens of points of transports. The only way their primary purpose can be fulfilled is if you can make a good argument for gross inefficiency.

It seems that people are really split over whether or not Infantry squads should be viewed primarily as anti-infantry units using their Lasguns or as SW and HW spammers.