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.

 Daba wrote:

However, the main problem is that in practice, you're not bearing that many Multimeltas in Melta range (where they do have an advantage), so there's a significant risk your units fail to connect at all and sitting dangerously close.

Not to disregard the rest of Daba's excellent post, but this portion is a big part of the issue for me. It's the feels bad potential for your dedicated anti-tank guns to bounce off their target entirely.

Shooting a meltagun at a tank used to be really satisfying. Now, just the idea of taking meltaguns and pointing them at tanks feels like an awkward gamble. Personally, my end user experience is worse when meltas are a gamble you have to spam to be effective.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Yeah because monsters shouldn't feel that burn more at half range

Monstrous Creatures shouldn't have a privilege vs Melta

And then Plasma gets Anti-Monster.

Each weapon gets its niche.

That makes just as little sense.

Yeah, I love me some niche protection, but at that point you'd be divorcing the mechanics from the fluff so thoroughly that the rules would no longer be useful for telling a story. Unless there's fluff I'm not aware of that makes tanks impervious to plasma but weak to heat rays and giant bugs the opposite.