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.

xxBlazinGhostxx wrote:

mercer wrote:I think those are probably the best setups. Plasma gun and cannon aren't much use these days thanks to cover plus gets hot, not forgetting the expense of the plasma cannon. Lascannon is just waaaay too expensive.

Not going to argue about the plasma gun, it's hard to make it cost-effective (Command Squad with 4 PG is scary as hell for your MEQ opponent though... and Gets Hot! is less of a concern since you effectively have a 2+ save).

Though I found that plasma cannons are actually pretty alright in a Tac Squad. Or at least the way I was playing them. When I played vanilla marines, I bought the plasma cannon (it's literally 5pts, which is the cheapest one in the entire book) for efficient (cept when it gets hot... which doesn't happen often, or at least shouldn't) anti termie/MEQ work.

I admit that cover is a problem, but the 5pts to me is worth it to make marines cry the one time they're out of cover.

Plasma guns are cool on anything with feel no pain, so Command Squads like you said and on certain Blood Angel units. Best on vehicles as no risk at all .

Plasma cannons, a S.W player recently used these against me. They did hardly anything to vehicles though seriously messed up infantry. The points cost of it isn't bad, but the missile launcher just out shines it as all round purpose jack of all trades weapon.

azreal13 wrote:

mp40guy wrote:Yes I think combat squading 1 tac squad between 2 Razorbacks is the way to go. One will have twin lazcannons and the support team, 5 marines one with a multi melti and the other will have twin assault cannons plus the Sergent plasma gun and the 3 other marines.

Thanks guys

Not that this is impossible, but you know that you can't buy two transports for one unit right?

You could buy a RB for another unit, deploy it empty and then move on combat squad into it on turn 1, but you cannot buy two for one Tac squad.

If you read the rules they say that if you combat squad you treet both 5 man squads as separate units. Therefore you can put both in separate vehicles.

The rule is on pg 51 of the codex for reference.

mp40guy wrote:
If you read the rules they say that if you combat squad you treet both 5 man squads as separate units. Therefore you can put both in separate vehicles.

The rule is on pg 51 of the codex for reference.

You combat squad when you deploy, not when you build your list. Each troop choice can only buy a single transport. You can embark into an empty vehicle on turn 1, but you can not buy extra rhinos.

Kevlar wrote:

mp40guy wrote:
If you read the rules they say that if you combat squad you treet both 5 man squads as separate units. Therefore you can put both in separate vehicles.

The rule is on pg 51 of the codex for reference.

You combat squad when you deploy, not when you build your list. Each troop choice can only buy a single transport. You can embark into an empty vehicle on turn 1, but you can not buy extra rhinos.

Yeah, this all seems highly fishy to me. Your list needs to be legal in the list building phase - it can't just be MADE legal only after you deploy.

Kevlar wrote:

Ailaros wrote:I'd just note that no other troops choice in the game has access to multimeltas, and multimeltas (and their analogues) in general are actually pretty rare outside of the vanilla marine codex. Having never really used multimeltas (as I've not spent any time playing marines, and thus haven't had access to many of them), I can't say if multimelta spam (of sorts) is viable, but I do think it's interesting that only marines can do it.

They aren't as good as meltaguns on infantry. Not being relentless like all vehicles limits their range and makes them very easy to avoid. With a meltagun you can jump out of a rhino or drop pod and fire away. Multimelta has to be stationary. Multimeltas are usually found on speeders or dreads.

Yeah, but a multimelta has a pretty big threat range, even without moving it. Meltaguns may be better for storming objectives, but multimeltas are better for holding them. Plus, even if it's -1S compared to the lascannon, it's still Ap1, which means against most targets it's just as good when it shoots. The only difference is cutting half the range to be twice as good at half that range again. Rather analogous in my mind.

Ailaros wrote:
Yeah, but a multimelta has a pretty big threat range, even without moving it. Meltaguns may be better for storming objectives, but multimeltas are better for holding them. Plus, even if it's -1S compared to the lascannon, it's still Ap1, which means against most targets it's just as good when it shoots. The only difference is cutting half the range to be twice as good at half that range again. Rather analogous in my mind.

Its only 12" range for the melta effect, and most vehicles can move at least 12. So as a melta weapon it will almost never get a shot on a vehicle unless your opponent is an idiot. I'd rather have a lascannon on a troop than a multi-melta. It isn't just the +1 str, its the 48" range and the +1 str. Getting inside 24" to shoot a weapon leaves you vulnerable to a lot more stuff. Like Psycannons.

Kevlar wrote:Its only 12" range for the melta effect, and most vehicles can move at least 12. So as a melta weapon it will almost never get a shot on a vehicle unless your opponent is an idiot.

... or you're using them defensively. If you've got a multimelta on an objective, your opponent needs to get close to take it.

Also, while they only get +D6 out to 12", they still are S8 Ap1 out to 24".

mercer wrote:

xxBlazinGhostxx wrote:

mercer wrote:I think those are probably the best setups. Plasma gun and cannon aren't much use these days thanks to cover plus gets hot, not forgetting the expense of the plasma cannon. Lascannon is just waaaay too expensive.

Not going to argue about the plasma gun, it's hard to make it cost-effective (Command Squad with 4 PG is scary as hell for your MEQ opponent though... and Gets Hot! is less of a concern since you effectively have a 2+ save).

Though I found that plasma cannons are actually pretty alright in a Tac Squad. Or at least the way I was playing them. When I played vanilla marines, I bought the plasma cannon (it's literally 5pts, which is the cheapest one in the entire book) for efficient (cept when it gets hot... which doesn't happen often, or at least shouldn't) anti termie/MEQ work.

I admit that cover is a problem, but the 5pts to me is worth it to make marines cry the one time they're out of cover.

Plasma guns are cool on anything with feel no pain, so Command Squads like you said and on certain Blood Angel units. Best on vehicles as no risk at all .

Plasma cannons, a S.W player recently used these against me. They did hardly anything to vehicles though seriously messed up infantry. The points cost of it isn't bad, but the missile launcher just out shines it as all round purpose jack of all trades weapon.

I agree that in MOST lists, the ML is clearly superior. But say that you got anti-tank covered and are in need of a good anti-infantry weapon, the plasma cannon would do nicely.

Kevlar wrote:

Ailaros wrote:I'd just note that no other troops choice in the game has access to multimeltas, and multimeltas (and their analogues) in general are actually pretty rare outside of the vanilla marine codex. Having never really used multimeltas (as I've not spent any time playing marines, and thus haven't had access to many of them), I can't say if multimelta spam (of sorts) is viable, but I do think it's interesting that only marines can do it.

They aren't as good as meltaguns on infantry. Not being relentless like all vehicles limits their range and makes them very easy to avoid. With a meltagun you can jump out of a rhino or drop pod and fire away. Multimelta has to be stationary. Multimeltas are usually found on speeders or dreads.

Yes, because Tac marines spend the whole game moving.
Multimelta's are undervalued on tac squads for some good reasons. Shorter range than other HW, is hard to milk it for the "melta" special rule etc... but how often do your tac marines spend all game running around? And how effective is 2-3 missiles on the first/second turn really going to be?

An Interesting thing you can do with tac MM's is create 24" bubbles of threat. Giving said squad a rhino, you move 12" on the first turn up the board and pop smoke if cover is not available. With 2-3 squads, you can cover a surprisingly large part of the board in "you will be hit by 1 or 2 S8 AP1 shot" zones. Of course, you could do this with a ML- but a missile launcher after penetrating needs a 5+ to destroy a vehicle, a MM needs a 4+ due to AP1. The closer the enemy get to you, the higher the chance they've stepped into the 12" bubble of 2d6. If the MM can fire 24" in any direction, this means the bubbles are 4 feet across- 2 feet (24") in either direction. For those at home- go get a rhino, put it on the table, measure 24" in 360 degrees around the top hatch. It's a surprisingly big area.

Now I'm sure (since we are told, are we not, that MM's are a subpar choice on tac squads) that someone is going to say/think "3 MM's are not a fearsome AT force". But this is in addition to your dreads, speeders, preds... the rest of your army. These tac squads are simply presenting the opponent with a choice- "In the area around these rhino's, you will be shot at if you move in here by S8 AP1 shot. If you step here where they overlap, you will be hit by multiple S8 AP1 shots. If you step closer, I get bonus pen dice. If you sit back because of this, I have forced you to give up a movement phase for 1 or more units. If you step forward, you need to carefully consider if my MM will fire or not, and if you are presenting front/side/rear armor to it, or to my fast AT moving up the flanks, or my slow long range AT sitting in my line."

Part of the beauty of this is that you don't have to fire the MM. It is a weapon of opportunity. If moving onwards, or even backwards is a better way to spend the next turn- do it. You use the multimelta to put pressure on the enemy- do you want to give me a chance to use my weapon of opportunity? The opponent might feel good about not moving their dreadnought into one or more of the bubbles, but they feel sour very quickly when the tac squads move on after using the multimelta to waste the dreads movement phase.

Now, If you think that's a neat way to use a tac squad/MM.... then add Vulkan to the list. Suddenly, those bubbles just became twin linked

Jihallah wrote:Part of the beauty of this is that you don't have to fire the MM. It is a weapon of opportunity.

Well put.

This is actually true about all heavy weapons (and to some extent, all upgrades), as well as other things. I played with CC power blobs for so long that I got a few stares of incredulous disbelief when I said I was going to FRF. Just because I had power weapons didn't mean I needed to use them EVERY TURN, EVERY TIME, or it was just an utter waste.

Plus, how much does a multimelta cost in a tac squad anyways? I was under the impression that if you took a 10-man squad that heavy weapnos were practically free. Not like it's a big loss if a 10 point upgrade didn't get to fire every turn...

Free

I have found in my experience (normally 6x4 boards) that i prefer to have the longer range.

main thing is though, i'd rather have +1 strength, i know that the ap1 gives +1, and on a good (high) roll its awesome, but a glance from the multi-melta would be a pen from the lascannon.

On the subject of the 2d6, its just a shame that its not able to fire on the move, i never got to use 2d6. but to be fair i never even thought of Jihalla's trick of using it as a mind game.

Luckily for me, i normally use chaos, so i run:
10 Marines, 2 Melta, Champ, PF, Combi-melta. Icon, Rhino.
Epic.

Multimeltas on tac squads could also be used aggressively on drops.

Ajroo wrote:I have found in my experience (normally 6x4 boards) that i prefer to have the longer range.

Right, which is why I'd still be tempted to take a lascannon...

Ajroo wrote:main thing is though, i'd rather have +1 strength, i know that the ap1 gives +1, and on a good (high) roll its awesome, but a glance from the multi-melta would be a pen from the lascannon.

Hmm..

Against AV12 the lascannon pens on a .5 and then wrecks on a .333, for about a 1 in 6 chance. The multimelta does a glance kill on a .277 and then pens on a .333 with a .5 to wreck for a 1/6+1/36. Technically, at 24" or closer, the multimelta is better, even without the melta range. Put another way, they're basically the same. The only real difference between the lascannon and the multimelta is against AV14 at over 12" away.

Still, they seem to be roughly equivalent - worse at longer range but better at closer with about the same in the middle.

Ailaros wrote:

Ajroo wrote:main thing is though, i'd rather have +1 strength, i know that the ap1 gives +1, and on a good (high) roll its awesome, but a glance from the multi-melta would be a pen from the lascannon.

Hmm..

Against AV12 the lascannon pens on a .5 and then wrecks on a .333, for about a 1 in 6 chance. The multimelta does a glance kill on a .277 and then pens on a .333 with a .5 to wreck for a 1/6+1/36. Technically, at 24" or closer, the multimelta is better, even without the melta range. Put another way, they're basically the same. The only real difference between the lascannon and the multimelta is against AV14 at over 12" away.

Still, they seem to be roughly equivalent - worse at longer range but better at closer with about the same in the middle.

yeah similar chances but but i'd rather thave the longer range than the small chance of 2d6, considering the amount of melta-guns i'd normally take anyway, also i tend to prefer the push foward rather than defend, so anyone sitting on my base is more likely to prefer the range

Ajroo wrote:yeah similar chances but but i'd rather thave the longer range than the small chance of 2d6, considering the amount of melta-guns i'd normally take anyway, also i tend to prefer the push foward rather than defend, so anyone sitting on my base is more likely to prefer the range

Sure, but if you're moving forward, you're not firing ANY heavy weapon, regardless of its range. Sure, the melta threat range of a marine in a rhino is 18", while a marine with a multimelta is only 12", but as Jihallah mentioned, it's more of an insurance policy for when you don't want to jump forward to shoot melta (like you're on an objective), or you get blown out of your transport, where the foot meltagun threat is actually less than the multimelta.

Multimeltas basically make a meltagun squad meltier by making its coverage more comprehensive. I think I'd rather take a lascannon for a squad that had two different purposes, like a sit-and-shoot early game anti-vehicle volley and then spending the rest of the game running around trying to flamer something, or something.

Ailaros wrote:

Ajroo wrote:yeah similar chances but but i'd rather thave the longer range than the small chance of 2d6, considering the amount of melta-guns i'd normally take anyway, also i tend to prefer the push foward rather than defend, so anyone sitting on my base is more likely to prefer the range

Sure, but if you're moving forward, you're not firing ANY heavy weapon, regardless of its range. Sure, the melta threat range of a marine in a rhino is 18", while a marine with a multimelta is only 12", but as Jihallah mentioned, it's more of an insurance policy for when you don't want to jump forward to shoot melta (like you're on an objective), or you get blown out of your transport, where the foot meltagun threat is actually less than the multimelta.

Multimeltas basically make a meltagun squad meltier by making its coverage more comprehensive. I think I'd rather take a lascannon for a squad that had two different purposes, like a sit-and-shoot early game anti-vehicle volley and then spending the rest of the game running around trying to flamer something, or something.

i mean advancing with other things and leaving the cannon behind as objective holding fire support.
I wouldnt tend to run around with the heavy weapon. But as jihallah said it has the uses and as its free and better than a bolter its not all that bad. Even at 24 its more of a threat certainly than a missile launcher.

Personally though, not for me.

Ajroo wrote:

Ailaros wrote:

Ajroo wrote:main thing is though, i'd rather have +1 strength, i know that the ap1 gives +1, and on a good (high) roll its awesome, but a glance from the multi-melta would be a pen from the lascannon.

Hmm..

Against AV12 the lascannon pens on a .5 and then wrecks on a .333, for about a 1 in 6 chance. The multimelta does a glance kill on a .277 and then pens on a .333 with a .5 to wreck for a 1/6+1/36. Technically, at 24" or closer, the multimelta is better, even without the melta range. Put another way, they're basically the same. The only real difference between the lascannon and the multimelta is against AV14 at over 12" away.

Still, they seem to be roughly equivalent - worse at longer range but better at closer with about the same in the middle.

yeah similar chances but but i'd rather thave the longer range than the small chance of 2d6, considering the amount of melta-guns i'd normally take anyway, also i tend to prefer the push foward rather than defend, so anyone sitting on my base is more likely to prefer the range

the MM isn't about 2d6 penetration.
If you want to pay for your lascannons, you do that. the MM is free. The MM is also twinlinked when taken with an mass produced SM named character that is extremely popular and thus quite common.
You are saying you prefer to push forward than defend, but the free MM is much happier rolling upfield than the lascannon who wants to earn his points back.

The only thing the LC has over the MM is, as ailaros said, is its better at AV14 at over 12" away, and much better from 24" away So I'm assuming you want to pay the premium to get a weapon that doesn't really mesh with the squads boltguns just on the grounds that it shoots 48"? Why not pay nothing for a ML and have 1 less strength for savings across the board?

See, the above trick is for the first turn only. I'm hoping we can all figure out fun things to do afterwards. But why do we have to put MM's on meltagun squads? I've found plasma to be a better partner to the MM, especially when you have lots of MEQ/TEQ players

If its the choice between lascannon or free twin-linked multi-melta then yeah id take the melta anyday.

Jihallah wrote:
You are saying you prefer to push forward than defend, but the free MM is much happier rolling upfield than the lascannon who wants to earn his points back.

The only thing the LC has over the MM is, as ailaros said, is its better at AV14 at over 12" away, and much better from 24" away So I'm assuming you want to pay the premium to get a weapon that doesn't really mesh with the squads boltguns just on the grounds that it shoots 48"? Why not pay nothing for a ML and have 1 less strength for savings across the board?

See, the above trick is for the first turn only. I'm hoping we can all figure out fun things to do afterwards. But why do we have to put MM's on meltagun squads? I've found plasma to be a better partner to the MM, especially when you have lots of MEQ/TEQ players

Not really true at all. If you push the multi-melta upfield it can't shoot. If you leave it in your deployment zone it can't shoot. If you take a lascannon or missile launcher it can shoot every turn because there is no need to push it forward. You can pop enemy transports turn 1 in their own deployment zone. Or pop a tank before it ever gets to fire.

And if you do push the MM forward turn one to try and get it someplace useful, chances are that squad is just going to be assaulted, since a tac squad is no threat to anyone outside of shooting. So your heavy weapon will not get a shot off all game. That lascannon or missile launcher is pretty much guaranteed 3-4 shots every game no matter what your opponent does.

Kevlar wrote:if you do push the MM forward turn one to try and get it someplace useful, chances are that squad is just going to be assaulted, since a tac squad is no threat to anyone outside of shooting.

The chances are my tac squads are going to be assaulted on turn 1 by moving up in a rhino?







just

In the begining I said the best squad is a 5 man squad that has a RazorBack in close support. It can fire on the first and every turn and can also carry the troops. Keep it close to the troops and make a true grunt tank team. I like the twin linked assault cannons the best.