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.

Ailaros wrote:

-Nazdreg- wrote:I think the most important factor using grenade launchers are, that they are highly mobile ad you dont have to close in on your opponent.

Actually, they're equally mobile to all other special weapons (except sniper rifles, but...). The only advantage they have is range.

You could note that the other advantage they have is their cheap cost, but don't let that fool you, their cost TO EFFECTIVENESS ratio is pretty low. No point in spending few points if they rack up even fewer kills...

A meltagun costs twice as much a grenade launcher, a plasma gun thrice as much. Now, whilst you could say that the plasma/melta will do more damage when it fires, they had better do, as they will only be firing once, maybe twice a game (not taking into account that plasma can overheat and kill your wielder).

The GL's advantage over the other special weapons are its range, flexibility and price. For an objective-camping PIS in a Chimera (a al, how I run mine), the GL provides me access to another S6 shot, supplemented by the AC's S7, and the Chimera's multi-laser and heavy bolter. Alternatively, it gives me access to a blast lasgun, which is supplemented just as effectively by the aforementioned weapons.

I'm not hunting MCs, nor am I hunting tanks, therefore spending extra points on 'better' weapons is a waste. The GL is the most effective weapon for the role I am looking to employ. Are they the go-to weapon for every unit in the IG 'dex? No. But there are occasions where affordability and flexibility can trump out-and-out destructiveness.

L. Wrex

They're good against other T3 armies with the blasts and the S6 isn't bad. They really do work against Dark Eldar after they've fallen out of their transport and if they have FNP, just get try for a kill with the S6.

I personally use them because they are cheap and wound MEQs on 2+. granted, they might waste CCS BS 4, but I like having some non-standard stuff in my list.

UG

It might seem expensive, but what about a squad of vets in a chimera with 3x GL and Harker? You'd get to outflank and unload 6 str 6 shots and 3 str 4 shots at a target withing 24in out. Sure it's not as powerful as melta, but you've got some nice range and mobility/protection from your transport. It might not be as competitive, but it would be fun and you'd get to give those forsaken GLs some love.

I look at their ability to put wounds on mec, which is pretty good with krak grenades.

I run 4 on a PCS in a chimera with a multilaser and then use it as a slow moving gunboat, its not worthwhile to attack it but pumping out 7 S6 shots can prove quite annoying if ignored compleetly, and it scores.

what is everyones opinion on having 1 pcs with camo cloaks and GL's camping on an objective? is it cheap enough to warrant?

Its a nice idea but if youre camping take snipers and/or a HB, also 5 wounds is not a big deal even with a 3+, ask any razorback spammer.

TheMicah25 wrote:what is everyones opinion on having 1 pcs with camo cloaks and GL's camping on an objective? is it cheap enough to warrant?

That costs what, 70 points? Enough to seriously consider just using an infantry squad. That plan doesn't speak to me as making use of the unit's strengths.

a pcs doesn't seem tough enough, even with CCloaks.

Less tough for anyone who knows the options for a PCS off hand; they cannot even get Cammo Cloaks.

Cost to Effectiveness on a GL: 5 points is he Same as a basic guardsman; for that your 1 guardsman gets a Blast Lasgun(with an actual AP), Now That blast Lasgun should net you 2-3 hits per shot, the Extra guardsman would net you 1 Lasgun hit @ >12", or 2 @12" or <. that alone would make it worth it; but then you get the added bonus of a Str 6 Shot when you need something a little stronger. I had a Krak grenade penetrate and destroy a Razorback yesterday; now i am not saying that is a typical result, but I took the Shot knowing it could happen.

Kommissar Kel wrote:Less tough for anyone who knows the options for a PCS off hand; they cannot even get Cammo Cloaks.

Cost to Effectiveness on a GL: 5 points is he Same as a basic guardsman; for that your 1 guardsman gets a Blast Lasgun(with an actual AP), Now That blast Lasgun should net you 2-3 hits per shot, the Extra guardsman would net you 1 Lasgun hit @ >12", or 2 @12" or <. that alone would make it worth it; but then you get the added bonus of a Str 6 Shot when you need something a little stronger. I had a Krak grenade penetrate and destroy a Razorback yesterday; now i am not saying that is a typical result, but I took the Shot knowing it could happen.

I agree with this, also if you have a squad sitting on an objective with an AC and GL it can use those weapons every turn. A flamer might be better under some circumstances but I find the GL/AC setup very reliable in the long run for regular infantry squads.

The main reason I take grenade launchers is in Blobs. If I've got the points, I'll toss a few in a blob squad to add damage to an assault.

They're situational though, and not for everyday use. That said, you put enough small templates down from a PCS, you're going to get some wounds.

The problem is, that practically anything else you can put in a special weapon slot (Aside from sniper rifles), is a better choice than a grenade launcher. There is nothing it does, that cannot be done better... often SIGNIFICANTLY better, by another special weapon.

Sure, Krak greandes wound on a 2+ vs MEQ, but they still get their save. Plasma guns also wound on a 2+, can get 2 shots in rapid fire range, and deny MEQ their save. It's even better for hunting light armour than the GL, thanks to it's extra point of strength. While it's three times as expensive, it's considerably more than three times as effective against MEQ's or MC's.

Against enemy armour, it should be obvious that the melta gun is vastly superior, for just 5 points more. Not only can it destroy light armour, it also destroys heavy armour with almost equal ease. While it's short range means it may only get one shot in the entire game, it's capable of destroying more in that single shot than a GL can in an entire game, leaving aside astounding luck. And you should NEVER rely on luck. Meltas also have a secondary role if your enemy has no armour to hunt, in that at S8 it can instant death T4 multi-wound. Like say, Marine characters, Tyranid mid-size bugs, etc. It kills elite troops just as well as it kills tanks, and a hell of alot better than a GL.

Against enemy light infantry, the flamer is unquestionably better for the exact same points as a GL. And even more terrifying when used in multiples. (I'm sure anyone who's seen a quad-flamer PCS in action can attest to this one). It'll get more under it's template, and ignores cover to boot! And lets face it, if your enemy runs light infantry, then like every guardsman, he'll be looking for cover saves. Again, yes the short range means it'll probably get one shot in an entire battle, but that one shot will kill more than the GL could in an entire game's worth of shooting.

Dont waste your command squads performing tasks that an infantry squad could do just as well, or better, or by giving them mediocre firepower. Command squads are a golden opportunity to concentrate special weapons fire. Make the most of it. Quad flamer PCS will annihilate virtually anything that gets into your lines, even MEQ's, by sheer volume of wounds. For the CCS with their BS4, plasma or melta are your friends. I find it hard to believe you'll ever be facing an opponent where either weapon will find absolutely NOTHING to shoot at. Even against nids, melta has plenty of targets. MC's, Nid Warriors, Hive Guard, Raveners and the like all make excellent melta gun targets. Plasma has even wider range of options. If your enemy has NO MC's, NO elite infantry, NO MEQ, and NO light vehicles by some miracle, plasma will still murder basic infantry with contemptuous ease, and still far better than a GL. I suppose, if you KNOW in advance that your opponent has nothing at all worth shooting plasma at, you could go quad-flamer on your CCS but for general list building, give 'em plasma or melta and not something as pathetic as the GL.

People keep bringing up plasma - yes, plasma is good. But the GL is twice as mobile (moving-fires 24", plasma-moving-fires 12"). On a guard squad, where only one of those two shots should hit, you're paying 15 points for a chance of doubletapping. You're probably going to get, what, one doubletap off, then eat it?

Still the big caveat: GL are good for line squads, bad for PCS/CCS - PCS get flamers, CCS get melta or plasma, depending on the rest of your army.

Furycat: Lets take a Quick Walk through the Special armory shall we.

The Flamer: Great choice for a Power Blob(never denied this); limited Range so you must get close to use it. You are not likely to get more than 1 or 2 shots per game out of each.

Sniper Rifle: Garbage, skip it.

Melta gun: Limited range, and a primary anti-tank weapon; this is why it is usually given to Vets. Sure it is more likely to cause a Single wound(if it hits) to any enemy, but if you are in range to fire it an a non-vehicle model, you are going to get charged in their turn. Leave it to the vets.

Plasma: a good all-rounder, well paired with an Autocannon for transport popping and when the enemy closes to within 12" you get 4 S7 shots out of each AC/Plas squad, assuming your operator survived long enough for the enemy to get within 12". It also costs 3x the amount of the Grenade Launcher.

Grenade Launcher: Fires a Single shot at all ranges, up to 24". Has 2 different firing modes. In the Krak mode you can use it alongside your AC to help attempt a glance(or pen on light) against transports. When Firing Frag you effectively get 3 more las-shots from it at any range-band. It is dirt Cheap.

Is the plasma Better than the Grenade launcher: sorta; it is slightly stronger than a Krak grenade at the ranges you will fire krak grenades, but it certainly scores more hits when you fire the frags; also you can get 3 for the price of 1, and firing it wont kill your own model.

All that said I do use Plasma in my lascannon Blobs, but that is mostly because I have been playing since 3rd edition and have not forgotten the usefulness of las/plas squads(5-man las-plas marine squads was all the rage back in the day); My autocannon and heavy bolter Squads use Grenade launchers.

Oh, I wasn't suggesting that plasma was something you want to put in regular squads, I included plasma for comparison for people who were discussing giving GL's to vets or command squads. As far as I'm concerned the only special weapons I give to regular squads are flamers, or MAYBE melta guns under certain circumstances. But general use, it's a flamer every time.

Here's the thing. Unless your opponent is clustering his troops together, which most competent players wont if they can at all help it, the GL is probably only going to hit 1-2 models per shot, and may hit none at all with poor scatters. Of those models it does hit, it's chances of actually inflicting a kill are fairly poor for pretty much anything you could concievably shoot at with frag. Krak obviously has a better chance, but only 50/50 chance of scoring a hit. The sum total of all this, is that generally speaking GL's wont really inflict much damage at all even across the course of an entire game. Of course, you could get lucky and kill loads, but that's a statistical outlier, and not something to be expected.

While it's true, the GL is a paltry 5 points, it is also taking up that special weapon slot, and you have something far, far better you can put in there... the flamer. Granted, the flamer might never get a chance to fire, but if it doesn't then all you've lost out on is the rather puny firepower of a grenade launcher. However if the flamer DOES get to fire, it can be counted on to cause a decent number of casualties, and potentially save the squad in question. (Or another, more important target if you sacrifice the squad to save something else). In my mind, the real cost of a GL is not 5 points. It costs you the ability to field a flamer there.

Furycat wrote:snip

I shall respond by re-posting what I said at the start of this page of the thread:

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:The GL's advantage over the other special weapons are its range, flexibility and price. For an objective-camping PIS in a Chimera (a al, how I run mine), the GL provides me access to another S6 shot, supplemented by the AC's S7, and the Chimera's multi-laser and heavy bolter. Alternatively, it gives me access to a blast lasgun, which is supplemented just as effectively by the aforementioned weapons.

I'm not hunting MCs, nor am I hunting tanks, therefore spending extra points on 'better' weapons is a waste. The GL is the most effective weapon for the role I am looking to employ. Are they the go-to weapon for every unit in the IG 'dex? No. But there are occasions where affordability and flexibility can trump out-and-out destructiveness.

The bolded bit is the important bit.

L. Wrex


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Furycat wrote: it is also taking up that special weapon slot, and you have something far, far better you can put in there... the flamer. Granted, the flamer might never get a chance to fire, but if it doesn't then all you've lost out on is the rather puny firepower of a grenade launcher. However if the flamer DOES get to fire, it can be counted on to cause a decent number of casualties, and potentially save the squad in question. (Or another, more important target if you sacrifice the squad to save something else). In my mind, the real cost of a GL is not 5 points. It costs you the ability to field a flamer there.

So its preferably to spend points on weapons that have a chance of doing absoloutely nothing all game in favour of spending points on weapons that have the potential to do something? That makes sense...

Also, you seem to be under the assumption that if a GL fires a blast it'll only catch 1-3 enemy models considering proper spacing, whilst a flamer will hit loads more. I hate to break it to you, but against properly spaced models a flamer only hits ~4 models which isn't that great of an improvement, especially when the GL can start raining blasts at 24" away as opposed to 8". Flamers are not the ultimate cheap special weapon I'm afraid, they are damn hard to use effectively, and their short range permits you a single shot per game to make the most out of them, otherwise they are gone.

L. Wrex

I'm pretty much undecided on this issue. I like the range that GLs give a pcs, so that they can fire over squads that are in the way and also stay mobile. However, a flamer pcs can do some terrible things.

I feel the need to correct the people who are saying things like "GLs are 5 pts" or "PGs are 3x the cost of GLs". What people are forgetting is that you pay points for the man carrying the gun too. A GL armed troop costs 10pts and a PG armed troop costs 20pts, so they are only twice as much really. Not a big point I know but something that needs to be considered. For instance, a MG gunner is only 50% more than a GL gunner. I am one of the "MG/PG need BS4" types though.

Trickstick wrote:I feel the need to correct the people who are saying things like "GLs are 5 pts" or "PGs are 3x the cost of GLs". What people are forgetting is that you pay points for the man carrying the gun too. A GL armed troop costs 10pts and a PG armed troop costs 20pts, so they are only twice as much really. Not a big point I know but something that needs to be considered. For instance, a MG gunner is only 50% more than a GL gunner. I am one of the "MG/PG need BS4" types though.

This issue has been brewing in my head for a while, so I'm glad you posted this.

Actually, I'd take your analysis a step further: rather than looking at the cost of the gunner, look at the cost of the squad.

Three vets with GLs cost 85pts, while three vets with meltas cost 100. Thus, meltas are really only 17.6% more for vets. In a PIS, even without a heavy, a squad with GL costs 55, a squad with melta 60, making the melta 9% more. For the PCS, four GLs costs 50pts, four meltas 70pts, or 40% more.

Plus, points spent on plasma, melta, or flamer are points spent on killing. All three weapons do quite well against their intended targets, while GLs have no intended target, and give up a lot of power for their versitility.

I think you also have to take into account that even if a flamer PCS can be devastating, you have to realize if you are playing against a competent opponent, he's not going to let you get it to go off. He's going to avoid their chimera or group and just annihilate their tiny squad from range. On the other hand, if you have GLs, you might not be causing as many wounds, but you have the mobility and the range. Not only that, but your opponent will most likely ignore them giving you ample opportunity to dish out some hurt. I'm with Wrex on this one, causing some wounds is better than causing no wounds at all...

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:
I shall respond by re-posting what I said at the start of this page of the thread:

I'm not hunting MCs, nor am I hunting tanks, therefore spending extra points on 'better' weapons is a waste

As I pointed out earlier, the discussion of melta/plasma was aimed at people discussing vets/CCS loadouts. I would never give a platoon plasma, and only very very rarely melta, under specific circumstances.

So its preferably to spend points on weapons that have a chance of doing absoloutely nothing all game in favour of spending points on weapons that have the potential to do something? That makes sense...

Also, you seem to be under the assumption that if a GL fires a blast it'll only catch 1-3 enemy models considering proper spacing, whilst a flamer will hit loads more. I hate to break it to you, but against properly spaced models a flamer only hits ~4 models which isn't that great of an improvement, especially when the GL can start raining blasts at 24" away as opposed to 8". Flamers are not the ultimate cheap special weapon I'm afraid, they are damn hard to use effectively, and their short range permits you a single shot per game to make the most out of them, otherwise they are gone.

L. Wrex

Getting 4+ hits with a flamer is really not that difficult, getting more than 1 or 2 hits with a small blast routinely is unless your opponent has bunched up way too much. The difference is not between spending points on a weapon that might do absolutely nothing, vs one that has the potential to do something. It's the difference between a weapon that might never fire, but will have a fairly significant impact if it does, vs a weapon that will have no significant impact all game.

Leaving aside those anecdotal 'Well, in this one game I killed XYZ with a [insert normally terrible weapon here], so they're actually really good!', statistically grenade launchers are simply terrible. They cant defeat MEQ armour, their low strength means they struggle to wound even light infantry, they are not exactly wonderfully accurate, and they will generally only get a small number of hits even when they ARE on target, and adding cover to their poor strength for blast further compounds their inability to hurt anything. They are poor weapons in absolutey every single category, there is nothing they are actually good at killing. Why spend points on something that is terrible at everything, over a weapon that's actually GOOD at killing SOMETHING?

I run three GLs and one laspistol in one of my PCS. It runs behind a powerblob cheering them onward and firing frag mode over their heads. I think that everyone has heightened expectations of what the grenade launcher should be doing. You spend 5 points to get a lasgun that if you fire into a horde it hits at a minimum one person, sometimes two, VERY occasionally three. Spreading out does reduce the number of guys hit, but it makes it harder to miss at least one guy. On top of that, it's AP6, so it's killing Orks and you can fire it on the move 24".

Here's how I look at it:

3 GLs in a PCS = 50 points
1 infantry platoon = 50 points

At 12.01-24" range at a horde sufficently large and spread out such that completely missing at least something is near impossible with 9 lasguns at BS 3 nets you 4.5 hits.

This means that all you have to do with the GLs is to get two people 50% of the time (assuming you're hitting one person the rest of the time--see my admittedly cherry picked scenario above) and you're hitting with the GLs as much as you would the lasguns.

Now, here's where you insert all manner of questions on whether or not one actually NEEDs more lasguns, but given that you can issue orders to the platoon even as you're doing all of this, I think it makes for a fine support unit. Plus frag mode is nasty for infantry just leaving a wrecked vehicle. This is the situation where I see them rack up kills most.

So, in conclusion: Are grenade launchers great? Not really. Are they alright? Yes. Do they have their place? In my mind, yes.