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.

Zaephyr wrote:

BoxANT wrote:I have not been impressed by AC/Plasma.

For the sizable investment for Plasma, I feel that between the BS3 and the GetsHot!, it isn't bringing enough to the table.

AC are awesome at popping transports at range, once they get within 24", they are targets for meltaguns vets/ccs.

In addition, since cover saves are so common, the ap2 on the plasma does not often come into effect. And lets be honest, LR Exec does plasma much better.


What threatens your fire base?

Transports bringing troops close.
AC help against the tranports at range.

MC/Dreads getting stuck in and wreaking havoc.
meltas help aginst MC/dreads up close. Have a CCS near to throw some BiD!s arounds.
GL just lack the punch to handle these targets imo.

But you do think that GLs are better than plasma guns?

In a line squad with an AC?

Assuming that I have a good amount of ap2 on my tanks (demo, exec, ect) and assuming that I have a healthy amount of meltaguns elsewhere.

I would rather save the points and take a GL.


10pts adds up very quickly.

Which would you rather have? A line squad with a GL and a chimera with a HS, or a line squad with a PG? Personally I feel the GL & HS will give be better results than a BS3 plasmagun.

Why? It's never been an issue before this. What's changed? Guard are 100% expendable. The odd death to Gets Hot! has never been a big deal, and I don't see why it is more of a big deal now especially when the squads have, overall, become cheaper.

I don't want to step into the GL/plasma controversy directly, but I do take some issue with this statement. Things have changed. The first thing is that the plasma guns get hot does only affect the plasma gunner, thus the price increase of the gun is marginally more relevant. You lose over 25% of the value of the squad when the gunner dies now, besides the loss of all subsequent shots. And statistically this happens nearly every game. Now, this is only a minor increase in relevance until you consider the second thing. This is not 4th edition anymore. You are not taking pot shots at marines standing in the open (or at best 5+) where each round had a ~50% chance of killing a marine (and thus regaining the points of the guy and gun). You must kill 2 marines, who will be taking cover saves or utilizing an alternate form of movement from hoofing it in order to gain back the same points. Its efficacy against vehicles has also minorly decreased with the new vehicle damage tables, thus making its points increase further a blow against it.

The price increase has caused the plasma gun to become less effective against its preferred targets and the shift of the metagame has made it less relevant as a staple.

That being said the plasma gun is still an incredible weapon that is capable of killing damn near everything. But the inclusion of it now must be weighed on its merits, instead of the almost no brainer inclusion that was formerly the mentality. Will the gun be fulfilling an actual role in the army that justifies a 300% increase in the guardsman's price? This question now must be asked, when in previous editions and codices it was unnecessary.

Well it seems that I have opened pandora's box. I'm happy I have though since this discussion has become way more interesting than I thought it was going to be.

I'm now leaning towards GLs on my PCS just so they have the mobility they need so I'll be voting on depends.

Continue if you please, you are giving a guard noob some valuable information .

A plasma gun will maybe hit once.

A sniper rifle will maybe hit once

A meltagun will maybe hit once.

A lasgun will maybe hit once

A frag grenade launcher will probably hit multiple targets.

That alone is worthy of it being concidered. The fact that the krak-grenade varient can glance AV12 means it be used in conjuction with anti-armor lascannons or autocannons (which then means it can be used in conjunction with BiD) . Its also one of the cheapest. A ratling costs just as much as a standard guardsmen with a sniper-rifle but does the job better. All the others have either prohibative ranges and/or have a better comparison and/or have prohibative costs. It is by far the best special weapon for an imperial guardsmen.

I'm sorry to be mean. But this is a very silly way of demonstrating a weapons ability.

Razerous wrote:A plasma gun will maybe hit once.

Per game? Per turn? How many times will it wound or penetrate? Did you issue an order? Are you in rapid fire range?

Razerous wrote:A sniper rifle will maybe hit once

A meltagun will maybe hit once.

A lasgun will maybe hit once

Same questions.

Razerous wrote:A frag grenade launcher will probably hit multiple targets.

Ok, but what about the next roll? The to wound roll. My plasma gun gets 1 hit every two turns. That hit will wound a space marine 0.84 times, the space marine will save all but 0.42 of that wound if he has a cover save. I'll be generous here, and I'll let your frag grenade get one hit for 2 and one scatter for 1 in the two turns, so your 3 hits generate only 1 wound, and the space marine saves all but .34. Not even as good as a long range plasma shot on a space marine in cover. Light vehicles, targets within 12", T5, terminators, feel no pain, all end up as prime plasma gun targets. your best bet with the frag grenade would be T3 5+ armor save models, that happened to be within 24", that you somehow are going to have a problem killing. But you have an autocannon in your line squad so why are you shooting at them.

Razerous wrote:That alone is worthy of it being concidered. The fact that the krak-grenade varient can glance AV12 means it be used in conjuction with anti-armor lascannons or autocannons (which then means it can be used in conjunction with BiD) . Its also one of the cheapest. A ratling costs just as much as a standard guardsmen with a sniper-rifle but does the job better. All the others have either prohibative ranges and/or have a better comparison and/or have prohibative costs.

Never shoot a weapon that can only glance at a vehicle in 5th edition unless you have nothing else to do. half your shots hit then 16% of those glance. 8% of the time you'll have a damage roll at -2. Thats just terrible odds.

Just say "I really hate that feeling when my model carrying a 15 point upgrade dies to my own bad luck" I can't really refute that. But saying....

Razerous wrote:It is by far the best special weapon for an imperial guardsmen.

is just ridiculous. The grenade launcher does nothing. It just happens to do nothing very affordably.

Again I'm sorry for cross-posting like this, but you made a pretty big claim with some funny math.

I was going to pick 'no', but decided to pick 'it depends' in the end, since I still think if you have a few points left over in your line infantry squads they arent terrible, but I just hate the fact they are so mediocre at everything they shoot at apart from a very small band of targets-to me the guard list is about getting a bunch of specialist units with very specialist jobs and try to merge them into a force which works well together. Leave the multipurpose squads to marines imo :/.

DarkHellion wrote:Things have changed. The first thing is that the plasma guns get hot does only affect the plasma gunner, thus the price increase of the gun is marginally more relevant.

Emphasis on 'marginally' I think. As I said, the increase in the cost of the Plasma Gun is offset by the fact that the Autocannon has gone down 5 points. The cost of a Plasma Gun and Autocannon in the last Codex was 25 points. The cost of a Plasma Gun and an Autocannon in the current Codex is also 25 points. So, ok, things have changed, but the net effect is no change because you're paying the same 25 points for a Plas/AC combo as we have been doing for the past 6 years (or however long the second 3rd Ed Codex was around for).

Actually, overall, it has become cheaper to take such a squad - 5 points cheaper - and get got Ld8 for to boot! So actually, you're right here, things have changed - for the better. Our Plas/AC and even Las/Plas squads are cheaper than they were before, and get the same Ld8 we used to get with Officers without needing an officer.

DarkHellion wrote:You lose over 25% of the value of the squad when the gunner dies now, besides the loss of all subsequent shots.

The loss of 'points' from an overheating plasma gun means nothing in a game that doesn't use VPs any more. Yes, you lose the subsequent shots, but you lost them last edition and you lost them in the edition before. Actually, come to think of it, in the previous edition you died more often thanks to the Gets Hot! vs Rapid Fire stupidity. So, I will concede, you are again correct. Things have changed - for the better. Our Plasma Guns die less of the time because we don't Get Hot! on a roll of a 2 when we Rapid fire. It's a difference of quite a bit actually - 53% chance of an overheat in 4th when you Rapid Fired down to a 31% chance in 5th. That's a great change!

DarkHellion wrote:And statistically this happens nearly every game. Now, this is only a minor increase in relevance until you consider the second thing. This is not 4th edition anymore. You are not taking pot shots at marines standing in the open (or at best 5+) where each round had a ~50% chance of killing a marine (and thus regaining the points of the guy and gun). You must kill 2 marines, who will be taking cover saves or utilizing an alternate form of movement from hoofing it in order to gain back the same points. Its efficacy against vehicles has also minorly decreased with the new vehicle damage tables, thus making its points increase further a blow against it.

This is where I will conceed that the Grenade Launcher now has its place. Because 5th is about the quantity over quality (Assault 3 is better than AP3), the Grenade Launcher finds itself in the position the Multi-Laser has been in for quite some time - a weapon that is favoured by the law of averages. In previous editions people would mock the Multi-Laser for being 'only' AP6. I and a lot of other Guard commanders laughed at this because it was also 'only' S6, wounded everything bar Deathguard on a 2+, and forced lots of armour saves - and as we all know, the more saves you force, the more they fail, and the more the law of averages turns in your favour.

Now ignore Frag Grenades - they're a waste of time (both literally and in-game) and the Flamer is superior in every way - but the Krak Grenade has the virtue of being Strength 6, meaning it wounds on a 2+ against most things. This is a big deal, but as I said, this needs to be about quantity, not quality. A GL in an Infantry Squad has never been the best idea because Guard Squads need to be focused - the special weapon should compliment the Heavy Weapon and if you're bringing Autocannons the best weapon for that will always be the equal-strength Plasma Gun - but for Command Sections, those that aren't meltagunning themselves (like ones who want to give orders and not die) the Grenade Launcher has its place. Four of them is a R24 S6 Assault 4 Multi-Laser (AP4 doesn't really matter), and while lacking in range, it is a nice alternative. Stick them in a Chimera, and suddenly at 24" you've got 7 S6 shots. Let's be generous and say 4 hit, that's 3-4 wounds and 1-2 failed saves - law of averages working for you.

So there is a role for the Grenade Launcher (one of the reasons why I voted 'Depends'), I just don't see it being in line squads because it is too much of a general weapon, whereas squads should be specific to a certain role. A squad armed with nothing but Grenade Launchers is specific, and that's where it works. Remember that the Guard can afford to specialise, so if we're going to bring GL's to the table, bring a stack of them, in a single unit, and get some use out of them.

DarkHellion wrote:The price increase has caused the plasma gun to become less effective against its preferred targets and the shift of the metagame has made it less relevant as a staple.

In a vacuum perhaps. It's about context and role. If your Infantry Squads are doing the 'generalist' role with Autocannons, then the Plasma Gun is the staple because it is the best weapon to pair with it. If they're doing something else (like being cheapy throwaway HB/Flamer units), then the Plasma Gun is not an appropriate weapon. If you're not taking Infantry Squads, and are going the H-Vet route, then Plasma Guns don't work there as spending 15 points per gun in a squad probably isn't a good idea (and Meltas are cheaper). If you're bringing 3 Hydras to the table and some other similar items, then you probably don't need AC/Plas squads anyway.

The presence of the Plasma Gun has to be looked at as a whole, and with what it works alongside.

DarkHellion wrote:That being said the plasma gun is still an incredible weapon that is capable of killing damn near everything. But the inclusion of it now must be weighed on its merits, instead of the almost no brainer inclusion that was formerly the mentality. Will the gun be fulfilling an actual role in the army that justifies a 300% increase in the guardsman's price? This question now must be asked, when in previous editions and codices it was unnecessary.

Again, it's a 5.8% (or so) reduction in price, not a 300% increase. You can't isolate the Plasma Gun and look at it as a single solitary weapon in a vacuum. You have to look at how it works with the rest of the army, the context of where it will appear in the army, and the role that it will play in the army. Our AC/Plas Squads went from 85 points in the last Codex to 80 points in this one (21 points actually if you count the Vet Sergeant and Frags). Our chances of killing ourselves with over-heat dropped from last edition to this one. Things have improved for these squads. Yes, the Plasma Gun is overpriced at 15 points just as it was overpriced at 10 points, but it's role hasn't changed, it's compatibility with the Autocannon hasn't changed and the net overall change is actually in our favour, with things getting cheaper.

Shep wrote:I'm sorry to be mean.

Razerous wrote:A plasma gun ..etc

Per game? ..etc

Razerous wrote:A sniper rifle...etc

Same questions.

Razerous wrote:A frag grenade ..etc

Its cool. Your werent. Im sure that was pretty obvious - as it was a generalized comparison of all four weapon - that it was a per-turn basic.

A single-shot weapon will never hit more-than-once per turn. A blast weapon, on the other hand, could hit multiple targets per turn. Sorted?

Now I fully agree with what you are saying H. Those caveats are such minor parts of the actual effectiveness of the plasma gun.

While victory points don't matter, guard now have so many different powerful options that I do not believe they can afford price increases upon normal guardsmen that will not have some guarantee of effectiveness. Now, while anecdotal at best, I just witnessed the way new plasma interacts with 5th edition. Given the fact that most everything will be getting a descent cover save, guardsmen attempting to slug it out with marines is not a winning fight.

Frankly, I think I have even less respect for the grenade launcher than you. It does increase the versatility of the guard squad, but if you wanted versatility in each squad you shouldn't be playing platoon heavy guard. While the platoons can have a variety of weapon selections on a squad by squad basis, you are completely correct that they need to use weaponry selections that are focused upon dealing with a specific threat.

Really, I don't see the use of the guard platoon in the current edition and metagame, regardless of weaponry selection. With BS 3 and no survivability outside of cover or a transport, they cannot deliver firepower in an effective manner against most armies they will face.

DarkHellion wrote:Given the fact that most everything will be getting a descent cover save, guardsmen attempting to slug it out with marines is not a winning fight.

But was it ever? Thing of a Marine gunline, in cover. The Autocannon always gave a save anyway, and the Plasma Gun would reduce them from 3+ to either 4+ or 5+. That was normal. The other thing to remember is that Guard Squads were never the great MEQs to begin with, they either hunted transports with AC/Plas or they went after tanks and MCs with Las/Plas. There was never an Anti-MEQ Guard Infantry Squad because they don't have access to an actual real anti-MEQ weapon (the Missile Launcher was overkill and worthless in a Guard army given it was a generalist weapon in an army that can afford to specialise, and that's even more true now given that the AC is cheaper!!!).

Guard killed Marines, be they in cover or otherwise, with weight of fire or Battlecannons. The change in 5th is now Battlecannons don't work any more (everything gets a cover save against everything, so why bother with AP3, especially expensive AP3 that can scatter 9"). I know that most of the Marines I killed were through massed flamer fire, massed Multi-Laser/Heavy Bolter fire and the odd Demo Charge. Plasma Guns never really factored into it as they were stopping the Rhinos from hitting my lines, and attacking Terminators (because a Guard gunline can fight off Marines in HTH... it can't fight off Terminators... especially not 20 of them... that was a brutal game *shudder*).

Slugging it out with Marines is never idea as they're just better, but given that we're going to be bringing far more quantity than quality in the future thanks to the way 5th Ed works (or doesn't work, IMO), it should be easier with the law of averages in our favour even more than it was previously.

DarkHellion wrote:Frankly, I think I have even less respect for the grenade launcher than you. It does increase the versatility of the guard squad, but if you wanted versatility in each squad you shouldn't be playing platoon heavy guard. While the platoons can have a variety of weapon selections on a squad by squad basis, you are completely correct that they need to use weaponry selections that are focused upon dealing with a specific threat.

Oh don't worry, I've had nothing but contempt for the Grenade Launcher for a long while now. 8 points? Eight???? What planet were they from? I mean, I use them occasionally because I like the Mordian and Tallarn models I have, and I still get nostalgia from 2nd Ed when they had a 60" range (!), but they were terrible. As I've said a couple of times now, Guard are an army that can afford to specialise. We don't have to be jacks of all trades because our units are (generally) so much cheaper. We can make units do one thing and do one thing well. The Grenade Launcher (and Missile Launcher) did not fit this mould. They are weapons specifically designed to be versatile in an army that does not need versatile units.

I often use the example of two pairs of Predators. One pair has a 3 Lascannon and an AC/2 HB Predator, and the other has two Lascannon/2 HB Predators. Which pair is more versatile, the one with the specific Anti-Tank and specific Anti-Infantry/Transport firepower, or the pair that has two tanks that can take on either target types? The answer is the pair with two different Predators, because they're never going to be wasting fire - you fire HBs at infantry that Lascannon is overkill, you fire a Lascannon at a vehicle the HBs are doing nothing. Because 40K units can't fire at different targets during a single turn (another major failing of the rules, especially the vehicle rules), it doesn't make any sense to have weapons that do different things. It's why whenever GW does example armies that have Dev Squads packing a single Lascannon, Heavy Bolter, Plasma Cannon and Multi-Melta it annoys me because no one in their right mind would ever field a unit like that.

But bringing this back to Guard, there's a limited scope of what Infantry Squads can do. They can go after three target types - GEQs and other Guard-like horde types, Transports or Tank. The Grenade Launcher honestly doesn't help them with any of these types, as the other special weapons do a better job or are better matched with the Heavy Weapons that they have available to them.

DarkHellion wrote:Really, I don't see the use of the guard platoon in the current edition and metagame, regardless of weaponry selection. With BS 3 and no survivability outside of cover or a transport, they cannot deliver firepower in an effective manner against most armies they will face.

That's why Infantry as a whole should be given a specific role. I don't think it should ever be a case of wanting one squad to do this, and another squad to do that, and so on. It should be "This platoon does this", "That platoon does that". You could even go so far as to say "All my infantry does Role X and Roles Y, Z and W are done by other unit types" You're right in that infantry are never going to be able to put out heaps of firepower - I usually bring 60-80 men (I'm talking just 10-man infantry squads, not extras like Command and Vets or whatever), and that's only 6-8 heavy weapons. It's not a lot, not by anyone's standards (except maybe Tau, as they get no HW's in squads). But it is enough to complete a single role each turn. If you treat all 8 of your Infantry-based Heavy Weapons as a single squad, then that firepower is quite good. Most squads don't get 8 Autocannons. Most squads don't get 80 wounds. Think of Platoons as squads (even without the amoeba blob platoon rules) and they start to work a bit better.

Oh, and a note about survivability. I'm quite a ruthless Guard Commander, one of the Objective Complete w/90% Casualties = just Objective Complete in my book - who cares how many died? - so the survivability of Guard is kind've a 'meh' issue with me. I accept that they're going to die - probably most of them - so I'll take units that are designed to die (my cheapy HB/Flamer squads which I love) and as long as they die so the better units can keep firing, all the better. I wouldn't look at the fragility of the Guardsmen as a weakness in the army but as more of a given. Every army has a quirk like that (or should), and the benefits we get as a horde army that doesn't have to run across the table at the enemy's guns (like Orks and 'Nids do) I think outweigh the fact that we very rarely use the basic weapons that most of our army is equipped with.

Is there any mileage to be had from a HB/GL squad?

HB's are purely their for taking down infantry given their high ROF. For 5pts you get an extra S6 AP4 shot to complement the 3x S5 AP4 shots of the HB (in practice you've made the HB a heavy 4 weapon) and if you do come up against T3 infantry you can always lob out a small blast to get more hits.

Just a thought...

As much as possible I try to keep Heavy Weapon teams out of my line squad because you never know where you are going to deploy on the battlefield and what sort of mission you are going to get. Thus I have a GL (assault) and no heavy weapon team. This keeps the cost of my infantry low but still packs a special weapon that can fire once it has moved and the GL is versatile.

This will probably start another arguement but ho hum...

The OC-D

3 krak shots have the exact same chance to kill a power-armoured Marine as one plasma shot (0.417 casualties). These chances improve against 4+ saves and drop dramatically against 2+ saves. They can contribute at up to 24" all the time, and they can do it regardless of cover. If these three GL's are spread over multiple platforms, they cannot be taken out in one fell swoop as well. Only in rapid fire range against Marines in the open does plasma become better again.

Shep wrote: Putting it on a unit that you know will have to do some moving, and not losing its ability to do some shooting can work. A PCS with 3 or 4 grenade launchers can shuffle up and down the lines, issuing FRFSRF while still firing some decent shots.

This. I think they are now affordable enough to have a few. It's glaringly obvious that they won't kill Terminators (AP) or Ork hordes (S3), so if something needs to die,right here, right now, one will be extremely glad to have spent the points on plasmaguns, but in a PCS intended to move a lot, a couple of GL's are in order. With other specials, they might not be in range.

This notwithstanding, I'd only use a moderate amount and only when every other base has been covered one way or another. One absolutely needs low AP guns for Terminator-class infantry and one needs ways to deal with hordes.

Dave47 wrote:
When you can upgrade an existing Veteran squad to take a demo charge and melta bombs for +30 points, or buy Sly Marbo for 65 points, it's hard to justify paying 15 points for BS 3 plasma.

Hu? Sly Marbo is a guaranteed kill point, while a single demo charge doesn't guarantee anything. Melta bombs have nothing to with it because they have a completely different role than plasma.

DarkHellion wrote:
Things have changed. The first thing is that the plasma guns get hot does only affect the plasma gunner

When did it ever affect another model?!?

You lose over 25% of the value of the squad when the gunner dies now

But value isn't important (as has been pointed out). The relevant questions are: "Can X do the job" and "Is the target neutralized". It's value in points is irrelevant.

Regaining points wasn't an overly convincing concept in 4th, and it doesn't mean squat in 5th.

H.B.M.C. wrote:I mean, I use them occasionally because I like the Mordian and Tallarn models I have, and I still get nostalgia from 2nd Ed when they had a 60" range (!)

But they were move-or-fire weapons!

I often use the example of two pairs of Predators. One pair has a 3 Lascannon and an AC/2 HB Predator, and the other has two Lascannon/2 HB Predators. Which pair is more versatile, the one with the specific Anti-Tank and specific Anti-Infantry/Transport firepower, or the pair that has two tanks that can take on either target types? The answer is the pair with two different Predators, because they're never going to be wasting fire

This isn't the whole story though. That single unit might be wasting fire or not but the first layout is more resilient. Shake the Las Pred and there goes the AT capability.

But bringing this back to Guard, there's a limited scope of what Infantry Squads can do. They can go after three target types - GEQs and other Guard-like horde types, Transports or Tank. The Grenade Launcher honestly doesn't help them with any of these types, as the other special weapons do a better job or are better matched with the Heavy Weapons that they have available to them.

Which of the other special weapons will help them against GEQ's? Flamers? When will they be in range, or how many extra points will you have to spent on them getting there?

Chimera_Calvin wrote:Is there any mileage to be had from a HB/GL squad?

HB's are purely their for taking down infantry given their high ROF. For 5pts you get an extra S6 AP4 shot to complement the 3x S5 AP4 shots of the HB (in practice you've made the HB a heavy 4 weapon) and if you do come up against T3 infantry you can always lob out a small blast to get more hits.

Just a thought...

Short answer: no. Maybe in an all infantry list, but most IG lists have no real shortage of anti-horde firepower in their vehicles. Chimeras, Valks w/ rocket pods, hellhounds, Griffons, etc. all do a good job of putting out anti-infantry fire power, as do four flamer PCSs in a chimera. The autocannon does nearly as many wounds to T4 as the HB (5/6 per turn as opposed to 1 per turn), has an extra foot of range and can seriously threaten up to AV12. Against T3 the HB does 1.25 wounds a turn, which is 50% more than the HB, but everybody who is seriously worried about T3 models charging a couple dozen lasguns needs to question what they're doing with their army. Outside of highly specific needs (maybe a fire support squad with three heavy bolters, say), I probably will not field any of my heavy bolters in serious play for the forseeable future. The AC is simply that much better for EXACTLY THE SAME COST.

This is the whole reason I'm trying to talk myself into grenade launchers: the old cheap IG squad was heavy bolter/flamer. Now that you can get AC/GL for the same cost, I feel that should be the new cheap skirmish line. I mean, I played IG for years, and the HB/F squads rarely accomplished much, they provided cover and tried to take objectives and every now and then killed a few models with the flamer. The AC/GL isn't exactly optimized for anti-transprt (AC/PG does it better), but it's still the cheap choice, and it's hard to turn down cheap.

As has been stated, however, the GL is an afterthought, the PG makes a squad dangerous. If you're buying a squad to actually kill something, give it the tools to do it's job. Now, not every squad is designed to kill, some are designed to die. That's fine, and that's where I recommend AC/GL, but I'd stick to one or two of them in an 1850, non-man spam list.

I agree, with polonius. In my play testing so far, I tend to use three plasma lascannon sqads, and two GL AC squads. The GL squads were used in the exact same way as I used to use HB flamer squads. The difference is that they had a bit more long range punch.

foil7102 wrote:I agree, with polonius. In my play testing so far, I tend to use three plasma lascannon sqads, and two GL AC squads. The GL squads were used in the exact same way as I used to use HB flamer squads. The difference is that they had a bit more long range punch.

A lot of IG players didn't use the HB/f squads, so maybe this is just residual distate for low cost, low output squads. I figure, if you're going to have a fire base, have something to protect it. And if you pop a transport or two as well, bully for them.

The real question is if the IG even need a fire base anymore. I played a game last night in which I combined up my two platoons, and giving "on my target" to a blobbed up squad with four lascannons and four plasma guns is pretty sweet, but I was shocked at the performance of the Vets in a good way, and Heavy weapon squad in a bad way.

I think the IG fire base is going to be become smaller and more of a pivot point for the army than the main course, although two small platoons are still worth buying for the Four flamer PCS in Chimera (a squad I have a huge man crush on).

I try not to use any special weapons in my line squads at all. I use 4 GL's in the CnC squad though, as he walks up and down the line to give orders I have 4 GL shots at BS 4. It's a good deal.

BoxANT wrote:
Which would you rather have? A line squad with a GL and a chimera with a HS, or a line squad with a PG? Personally I feel the GL & HS will give be better results than a BS3 plasmagun.

I feel the same way.

In a game a couple days ago I had an Eversor killed in 1 turn by grenade launchers from across the freakin map, by a squad dropping from a valk.

I was not happy.

I have mixed MC and Horde Nids, and my regular Guard opponent is a big fan of GLs.
They never really do much. One can kill maybe three gaunts in a shot, but there's plenty more where that came from, and they lack the stopping power to make my MCs worried.
So it's a no from me.

H.B.M.C. I think at this point we are just arguing nitpicks while agreeing. I will defer to your judgment on this. I think you have summed up all the arguments against the GL quite well and arguments about the use of special weapons in guard line squads is another topic entirely.

Razerous wrote:The stock-standard imperial guardsmen should not have to try and deal with T5, fnp and so on.

I completely disagree. In fact the line squad is in a great position to do that. It is much better at killing infantry than heavy tanks. You can and probably should find tank kill in either the BS4 guardsmen with meltaguns, or in fast attack and heavy support. You can make your unit a dedicated guardsman/gaunt/eldar guardian unit if you want. but I just don't see a point in doing that when none of those units are particularly difficult to kill.

Razerous wrote:I think ive proven that it does, infact, do somthing. Somthing > nothing. Affordably > suicidally expensive.

Yeah, you've proven that it kills 4-6 point models better than a plasma gun... "suicidally expensive" sounds like kind of a subjective term. I'll take a weapon that gets some respect over something that is slightly better than a FRFSRF lasgun. Its not about the points, its about your squad being able to answer an imminent threat.

Drop pod full of sternguard, bloodcrushers, deep striking obliterators, bloodthirster, great unclean one, a chimera rushing towards you with a hull heavy flamer, dreadnoughts, a partially whittled down nob biker unit, a carnifex... I can keep going.

If 15 points is too expensive for a good gun. Why isn't 5 points too expensive for a bad gun?

If they were 36 inch range I'd seriously consider taking them. They'd be a good match with a HB then, especially against hordes that moved or charged 12.

Now I just have to find a good way to convert Mordian grenade launchers into plasma guns that doesn't involve buying sprues.

Shep wrote:
If 15 points is too expensive for a good gun. Why isn't 5 points too expensive for a bad gun?

I think Shep has cut to the quick with that analysis.

I voted depends because its cheap and a extra blast always helps

Shep wrote:If 15 points is too expensive for a good gun. Why isn't 5 points too expensive for a bad gun?

Its too expensive for the given platform. Its too expensive beacuse it doesnt mesh well with lasguns & its too expensive because it can kill the shooter.

5pts isnt too expensive, its actually quite cheap & can be scaled happily. 5pts vs 15pts is not huge. 20pts vs 60pts is more. Also take into account the amount of lasguns that will be aiming at all these FNP/t5/etc targets to basically no effect.

There are soft targets in most armies. There is armor is most armies. I stand by the use of GL/lascannons.

Sorry.. what? Line squads. Imperial guardsmen @ t3/5+/bs3? Better at killing infantry or heavy infantry? Plasma is complete overkill if aimed at weaker infantry (like ive said) and equipping them to deal with heavy infantry will just make them targets.

Yes, okay.. none of those units (gaunts/guardains. Oh, & when they start becoming fearless, they become a major threat) are particularly hard to kill, there ares lots and lots of them. In terms of no.size & squad size. If you would like to point heavy tanks at weak infantry, go ahead.

I spam str6 weapons, plasma cannons, and command squads with melta guns. Grenade launchers and multi-lasers are easy to spam and in my 1850 list I have 36 str 6 shots a turn, while plasma guns are great weapons, grenade launchers are assault 24 and have the ability to continue to fire their str 6 shots each turn constantly, giving them more opportunities to do damage as compared to the one round of rapid fire that you usually get from the plasma gun.

Plasma guns are used as a defensive weapon/re-active weapon. Plasma guns are great when something deepstrikes near by or when that assault unit wipes out a unit leaving them vulnerable to your plasma guns, it makes your squad capable of damaging a threat. However, when you use a large amount of them you tend to kill your own men. Even if the plasma gun kills one or maybe even two marines it is not enough to remove the threat. I love plasma weapons, its just that a player can save enough points by not using plasma guns to buy plasma cannons . I have 14 plasma cannons in my 1850 list that do what the plasma guns can do better and at a safer distance.

If you measure the grenade launcher effectiveness on pure kill power it is not a great weapon. I use my grenade launchers to provide a constant barrage of str 6 shots, if a 5 point gun glances a rhino and prevents it from moving has it earn its points back? To me the answer is yes, it might be different for others, the job of the str 6 stuff is to harm light vehicles, commmand squads or vets with melta guns can handle the few vehicles that dont slow down, plasma cannons do the majority of the dirty work.

I know that this post is difficult to read because I have information about my list and the role grenade launchers play in it. Thats however is the point of the post a weapon should be judge based on how the weapon is used and does that weapon do what it is intended to do. In my list grenade launchers provide cheap high str shots that slow down the advance of transports allowing small waves of attackers to reach my lines which my 4 squads inside chimeras with meltaguns and str 7 ap2 blast weapons can handle.

Its not always about killing stuff, there are objective based missions.

This is a little off topic, but how do you guys feel about AC/Sniper combos? I tried it yesterday and it seemed to work, but I wasn't really taking notes on how well they did.

Gunline armies don't work anymore so I see absolutely no value to taking GLs.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:Gunline armies don't work anymore so I see absolutely no value to taking GLs.

G

Gunline armies don't work any more.... Maybe.

So you don't see the value in a long range assault weapon?

Your logic baffles me.