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.

 Formosa wrote:
I usually run 2 devs at 7 men, 1 with 4 plasma cannons and the other with 4 lascannons, I back these with 3 rifleman dreads and 3 las plas tacticals, and then throw in 3 typhoons, and finally 2 level 2 div libys, does me well this army

Now that's some fearsome shooting. This lists pays more for the firepower than the ML lists, but it is far more versatile in what it can effectively engage. This list will probably get a lot better after the new codex drops and C:SM gets DA pricing.

I also run
2 level 2 libys
5 5 Man tacs with plasma cannons
3 lascannon devs
8 lasplas razorbacks
Zzzzzap

Martel732 wrote:
Please do so. So far, the main reason I see to use them is that they are cheap.

That being said, if you really think they solve your heavy support issues, by all means keep bringing them. But I don't see any other lists falling all over themselves to bring MLs, and that includes CSM and Eldar. Just because the marines have bad devastator options doesn't make the ML good.

Eldar don't bring MLs because they are horribly overcosted. Bad argument point there.

I didn't even know that. I don't know that Eldar pay for MLs. I do know what the different marine books pay for them, but I'm really talking about game effect. No matter how cheap the ML may be in any given book, I still find it to be a waste of heavy support, since they fail at the tasks I expect heavy support to be able to accomplish.

 Formosa wrote:
I also run
2 level 2 libys
5 5 Man tacs with plasma cannons
3 lascannon devs
8 lasplas razorbacks
Zzzzzap

Ouch. My 180-strong Ork Horde is so scared.
Seriously though, that's a crapload of points that is fairly fragile and has no way of killing a lot of things. By my math you're spending a minimum of 1605 points. (That's assuming no extra models in the devy squad and no gear on the libbys.)
You also aren't dealing a very efficient or effective wall of firepower. These are all examples based off of armies I play with, but what will you do against Lootas and Dakkajets? (Who rip apart your Razorbacks like butter and don't care about your Lascannons.)
Or maybe against a Drop Pod assault with a half dozen meltas and an equal quantity of plasma guns? (Once again: Razorbacks are gone, and your basic Marines will be shredded.)
Or what if I drop in a few mycetic spores filled with Devilguants? Maybe alongside the Doom of Malantai and a flyrant?
Or maybe if I bring Nob Bikers? (Who laugh at your Lascannons as they take cover and then FNP.)

Don't do this if you want to win.

This entirely depends on what you want out of your devastators. they can either be a waste of points because of your expectations or they can be a key point in your army if they have a job to fulfill.

A lot of arguments against units boils down to what people expect of them.
Some say vanilla assault marines suck. I think they are fantastic. but then again I don't have a fantasy of them rampaging through terminators like many people seem to do. same asI don't spend most of my time comparing them to other similar units.

I agree with a lot of what has been said so far, missile launchers for all around use, lascannons for heavy armour and plasma cannons for TEQ.

Now as to whether they are "worth it" depends on what you want to get out of them. They certainly provide heavy fire and can be often more difficult to remove than a vehicle (Heldrake aside)
They can also make good use of an Aegis line gun, due to the squads naturally high range. Furthermore a prescience divination psyker can work wonders with the squad. Re-rollable cover ignoring missiles anyone?

So overall yeah point for point, when compared with the price of getting heavy weapons another way, they can certainly be worth it IMO.

The one thing I do not expect them to do well at is anti-air. I play DA so of course my anti air options are limited, but I would still never use a devastator squad. 10 points for flak missiles is a joke, and (presuming 4 missile launchers are taken with 5 men) will increase the cost of the squad by nearly 33%. Also at str 7 the missiles will still have a hard time doing much to the heavy AV12 flyers around the place. I would go elsewhere (read: forgeworld) for AA.

" missile launchers for all around use"

People keep saying this, but I still am thinking that the ML is a weapon for tailored lists.

Against lists without access to high AV (Dark Eldar) or very many 2+ saves (Tyranids), the ML seems good. But in a TAC list, it just seems like an incredible risk to have your heavy support not be able to engage 2+ armor, or AV 13+.

Missiles are for all round use. Of all the weapons available they are the most cost effective and deal with the widest rage of targets. Having things to target av 14 and 2+ armour, such as lascannons, is more tailored because not every list has them.

Again it depends on what you want from your squad and the composition of the rest of your army. A lascannon team backed up with a psyker is a threat to any vehicle in the game. But it will totally fail vs horde armies.
In the same way a missile Dev squad will get rolled by a landraider, but will be useful vs most things against them.

Personally I like melta bikes to get the job of anti armour done, and massed t4 fire vs TEQ guys.

But this doesn't add anything to the discussion on are dev squads worth it, as they can do both missiles and lascannons.

I guess the list with the strongest argument for these guys are DA and SW. C:SM has thunderfire cannons and horrendous pricing, and BA have fast vehicles. The only dev squad I'd even consider for BA would be plasma cannons. And I've quit using those.

It seems we have different ideas of what should go into a TAC list.

New dex is rumored to be coming in September so ask again in a month.

Durable comparative to predators and vindicators.

I agree that missile devastators are the best all-round squad since they can, but will not always be successful, deal with the widest range of targets (horde to AV14) for the lowest cost of all of the heavy weapon options.

I'm beginning to feel like Ailaros on this topic. I think the issue is that I have specific expectations from heavy support. I either want to crack high AV and 2+ armor, have skyfire, or ignore cover. BA and C:SM ML teams do none of that. I find the krak missile prohibitively slow for even killing units like Rhinos.

Without prescience support, you are looking at

2.666 hits (weighted Gaussian average) * .667 (chance to pen or glance) = 1.78 hull points.

Granted, you'll get 1.33 pens, but this has a lousy 0.22 chance to explode the Rhino. (AP 3 sucks)

It only gets worse when going against the fronts of Chimeras. I don't see how this can be seen as "taking care" of transports.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Now imagine if you are counting on your heavy slot to act as a counter battery against, say, a vindicator. It can be hard to get to melta range against the thing without being instagibbed by the demolisher cannon.

So it seems logical to use 48" guns against it. But if your 48" guns are MLs, you are in for a long day. Now, if those MLs are on speeders threatening side shots, it gets better (speeders have 6 shots instead of 4), but on static devastators you are probably hosed.

Martel, I started this thread kind of rolling my eyes at your negativity but these last few posts with the math and well articulated points seem really helpful. Thanks for going into detail.

It's not random negativity. It's because the weapon doesn't kill anything fast enough in practice to warrant a heavy slot. Trust me, I wish what people said about the ML were true. I'd use it.

With a second look at prescience support:

0.89 (weighted to hit with prescience) * .667 to glance/pen * 4 shots = 2.37

From this, you'll get 1.78 pens with a 0.30 chance to explode the Rhino.

So by adding a 100 pt babysitter, the Gaussian average is still pretty far from killing a *Rhino* in one volley. So who here wants to dedicate a heavy slot and an HQ to failing to kill a Rhino?