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.

Hi there this is my IG tactic I havnt tried this out yet but I thought ide find out what you think

2 x heavy weapons teams with 2 x lascannons and 1 mortar each.

All infantry squads with grenade launcher.

So basically Firing grenades and blast weapons until the enemy is thinned down enough.

With lascannons sorting out any tank problems.

It's usually a bad idea to mix-n-match heavy/special weapons.

what makes you say that?

Well, when your lascannons are firing, they are anti-tank and it means your mortar is not doing what it should, being anti-infantry. Vice versa. Lascannons are wasted against infantry as you want a weapon that removes lots of bodies at once, not just one very effectively.

If your squads could split fire, then yes, it would make sense because your squads could fire at what they needed to. In the game, it just makes more sense to have a squad of lascannons pounding away at tanks all game rather than trying to super flexible and not doing so hot.

Now, as for your other idea of giving grenade launchers to lots of infantry platoons, I like this one. I've always really liked the idea of an all infantry army with lots of mortars and grenades flying over the board. You may not always win (cause enemies will get to those mortar positions quickly) but your first round or two of shooting would be a blast. Literally.

I didnt really think the whole flexible heavy weapons teams.

I am however going through with the grenade launchers for all approach.

Yep, I'm also big fan of granade launchers on infantry squads. I've never left home without them. It gives them ability to take down AV 10 and threat transports. And as others said: Mixed heavy weapon teams, are a bad idea.

Don't mix heavy weapons. Grenade launchers are cheap, fun, flexible and useful and so are a good all-round choice, especially for Platoons.

L. Wrex

Don't mix heavy weapon teams

Im going for a squad of 3 lascannons and 3 mortars

The only way I have found to mix heavy wpn teams are 2 ML and an Autocannon. You rarely fire missles at anything that the autocannan cannot hurt armour wise, both do a bang up job against light armour and transports, MC's are also hurt by both and simply switch to frag rockets and you can start hurting infantry. It does work.

I never really thought of rocket launchers. Maybe I should go 2 rocket launchers and 1 lascannon then a squad of mortars to keep price down

Even then I'd say 'eh' simply because missile launchers should be going after medium vehicles like Chimeras, Hellhounds and Razorbacks. Maybe do some Skimmer hunting too. Lascannons get to hunt the heavy tanks that missile launchers have trouble going up against like Predators Leman Russes and Land Raiders.

Infantry-based heavy weapons tend to have narrow roles. As they don't overlap well, it means you're designing inefficiency and local ineffectiveness into your list... on purpose.

As for grenade launchers, meh. They are blast lasguns. Whoop-dee-doo. If you want a real anti-infantry weapon, take a flamer. Otherwise, it's points that drain from the rest of your list. Two GLs get you a meltagun, which will likely do you much more, or a pair of meltabombs, or something.

I made several of them back in the day to go with heavy bolters in infantry squads, but after dozens of games of doing literally nothing, I dropped them (along with the heavy bolters), despite a few attempts to reinclude them, they very rarely last more than a few games. They're just crappy weapons, end of.

What ailaros said. Gls are pffffffff. Sure their cheap, but their not actually going to be much of a force multiplier. Its a weapon you can have without breaking the budget, but against meq its quite useless. flamers are my prefered choice, remove problem of BS, extra damage, and no skimpy krak option (which isnt actually very useful)

GLs makes sense for objective holding squads. I want my two infantry squads to stay alive. That's about it. Shooting a five pt GL is gravy. I certainly dont' want them getting close enough to use a melta or flamer effectively.

Polonius wrote:GLs makes sense for objective holding squads. I want my two infantry squads to stay alive. That's about it. Shooting a five pt GL is gravy. I certainly dont' want them getting close enough to use a melta or flamer effectively.

As one whose used that tactic (or tried to) trust me. It does not work. The grenade launcher is simply not strong enough to do anything with one shot. I'd rather take the 3 lasgun shots fro FRFSRF than the one krak grenade shot from the grenade launcher, and the 5 points you just spent on the grenade launcher could easily go to become something more useful elsewhere. A flamer in a squad meant to be out fighting for example.

ChrisWWII wrote:

Polonius wrote:GLs makes sense for objective holding squads. I want my two infantry squads to stay alive. That's about it. Shooting a five pt GL is gravy. I certainly dont' want them getting close enough to use a melta or flamer effectively.

As one whose used that tactic (or tried to) trust me. It does not work. The grenade launcher is simply not strong enough to do anything with one shot. I'd rather take the 3 lasgun shots fro FRFSRF than the one krak grenade shot from the grenade launcher, and the 5 points you just spent on the grenade launcher could easily go to become something more useful elsewhere. A flamer in a squad meant to be out fighting for example.

I've actually run a PCS that all i shot was Krak grenades and had alot of success with it. you don't have to shoot the Frag rounds...

ChrisWWII wrote:

Polonius wrote:GLs makes sense for objective holding squads. I want my two infantry squads to stay alive. That's about it. Shooting a five pt GL is gravy. I certainly dont' want them getting close enough to use a melta or flamer effectively.

As one whose used that tactic (or tried to) trust me. It does not work. The grenade launcher is simply not strong enough to do anything with one shot. I'd rather take the 3 lasgun shots fro FRFSRF than the one krak grenade shot from the grenade launcher, and the 5 points you just spent on the grenade launcher could easily go to become something more useful elsewhere. A flamer in a squad meant to be out fighting for example.

Well, you're making a critical error in your argument: assuming that there is something better I could spend the 5pts on. My list is pretty tight, and there really isn't much I'd rather have. If the GL stuns a rhino every six games, I'm pretty happy with my investment. Near the end of a game, i'd rather have a slim chance of knocking out a vehicle than no chance.

As always, if there is someplace you can better spend those pts, than do so. As for comparing to FRFSRF, the frag grenade only needs to hit 1.5 models on average to score as well as three lasgun shots. Yes, the krak grenade doesn't do as well as three lasgun shots, but it does better than two (firing at long range while stationary) or zero (long range while moving).

So, while I trust that it may not have worked for you, with all due respect I'm going to keep running them as long as I keep winning far more games than I lose.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

alarmingrick wrote:

ChrisWWII wrote:

Polonius wrote:GLs makes sense for objective holding squads. I want my two infantry squads to stay alive. That's about it. Shooting a five pt GL is gravy. I certainly dont' want them getting close enough to use a melta or flamer effectively.

As one whose used that tactic (or tried to) trust me. It does not work. The grenade launcher is simply not strong enough to do anything with one shot. I'd rather take the 3 lasgun shots fro FRFSRF than the one krak grenade shot from the grenade launcher, and the 5 points you just spent on the grenade launcher could easily go to become something more useful elsewhere. A flamer in a squad meant to be out fighting for example.

I've actually run a PCS that all i shot was Krak grenades and had alot of success with it. you don't have to shoot the Frag rounds...

This is a really fun unit in a footslogging force. its' a lotta dakka for not a lot of points.

Well yes, PCS work more with GL just because you can take alot of them, so the volume of fire makes up for the lack of individual power per shot. IS don't have that, so that's why GLs IN Infantry Squads don't work. Massed GLs work much better.

i'm not sure what you mean by "dont' work"

They don't accomplish much, but they cost almost nothing.

They do cost almost nothing, but for those same 5 points I could take a vox caster instead which I view as a much better deal. I say 'they don't work' understanding it to mean 'it's not a viable tactic'. Or if I can find 5 extra points somewhere, I can take a heavy bolter or autocannon, all of which are superior to a Grenade Launcher.

Just because an upgrade is dirt cheap doesn't mean its an autotake.

well actually I see some point in taking a grenade launcher in a defensive infantry squad.
Its just for the difference of having a S6 shot on the move or having nothing. Its much better than the single plasmagun and much more likely to get used than a flamer.
If the infantry is armed for assault, meltas should be the better choice, but if you dont plan to engage anything closer than 12" the grenade launcher is imho the best special weapon available.

Well, i run my Infantry squads with an AC and a GL, so I've already bought a heavy weapon. In my list the GL enjoys a small amount of synergy with the AC.

There are two kinds of cheap upgrades: ones that do very little, but do it often; and those that can do a huge thing, but only rarely. I look at a GL the opposite of how I'd look at, say, Melta Bombs. Bombs come up huge for me on my Platoon commander: knocking out drop pods and being awesome. But that's one game in five. My GLs force saves, shake rhinos, and generally give me a tiny bit of punch a couple times every game.

Ailaros wrote:Infantry-based heavy weapons tend to have narrow roles. As they don't overlap well, it means you're designing inefficiency and local ineffectiveness into your list... on purpose.

I agree, so the common consensus is not to mix heavy weapons right?

Ailaros wrote:As for grenade launchers, meh. They are blast lasguns. Whoop-dee-doo.

No. They are blast lasguns 50% of the time. The other 50% they have the potential to penetrate Rhino armour at 24" away. Stop making judgements based on half of the weapon's capabilties.

Ailaros wrote:If you want a real anti-infantry weapon, take a flamer.

The flamer gets a single shot before you are assaulted, you'd best make damn sure you get your positioning right otherwise that's 5pts of waste you've just thrown into your list for a whole lot of 'meh'. As I stated above, a GL has the potential to worry both infantry and armour, at a decent range and at a very good price. You want to sacrifice that for a situational, one-shot weapon? Be my guest.

Ailaros wrote:Otherwise, it's points that drain from the rest of your list. Two GLs get you a meltagun, which will likely do you much more, or a pair of meltabombs, or something.

Depends upon where your putting that meltagun. I give my PIS GLs as they sit on my backfield in Chimeras pumping shots out all game. Why should I pay 100% more points for a gun that won't grant me any more effectiveness? Why should I pay to give my PIS meltabombs when they are hiding in boxes and not assaulting? How is that an effective use of points? Your making gigantic assumptions that I'm putting GLs in...I don't know, Veteran squads or CCSs, when in reality only a fool puts a BS4 to waste like that.

Ailaros wrote:I made several of them back in the day to go with heavy bolters in infantry squads, but after dozens of games of doing literally nothing, I dropped them (along with the heavy bolters), despite a few attempts to reinclude them, they very rarely last more than a few games. They're just crappy weapons, end of.

And here we come to the crux. You seem to pigeon hole weapons and units down one dedicated path time and time again; "They are either A or they are B, they can never, ever perform C as well" and this, I feel, is one of your limitations as a general. You may not see any use in firing a single S6 shot at a Rhino, as you see a GL as a pure anti-infantry weapon and thus choose a flamer as it is a 'better investment of points'. However, I see that single S6 shot as a potential stun on that enemy Rhino, which in turn scuppers my opponent's plans and makes that 5pt investment pay for itself 50x over (points cost for the Rhino + the unit inside).

I feel you make sweeping generalisations on all aspects of the Guard codex and, ultimately, fall short in identifying those select weapons that can perform both roles, if not neccesarily well, but at the very least with a passive chance of securing a favourable outcome.

L. Wrex

Good post LW.

Polonius wrote:Well, i run my Infantry squads with an AC and a GL, so I've already bought a heavy weapon. In my list the GL enjoys a small amount of synergy with the AC.

There are two kinds of cheap upgrades: ones that do very little, but do it often; and those that can do a huge thing, but only rarely. I look at a GL the opposite of how I'd look at, say, Melta Bombs. Bombs come up huge for me on my Platoon commander: knocking out drop pods and being awesome. But that's one game in five. My GLs force saves, shake rhinos, and generally give me a tiny bit of punch a couple times every game.

I suppose here we've run into a difference that we can't get over. My grenade launchers have almost never done anything worthwhile other than take up 5 points, and be generally useless. Of course, I've labeled my ISs anti infantry, and focus them fully on infantry hunting, with anti transport as things get closer. That's part of why I view a gl as not very good. With a GL you get a one shot chance at maybe stunning that charging Rhino. With an autocannon, you can be stunning (or even destroying) that Rhino from much further away, and I'd rather spend the 5 points from the Grenade Launcher on a vox caster so that my autocannon can twin link, or force re-rolls on cover save. To me that's something that will be making a larger contribution in almost every single game as opposed to melta bombs (major impact in few games) or the launcher (minor impact most games)

Really? Re-rolling the dice to see if you can re-roll the dice to hit is more valuable to you than an extra S6 shot? Hey, to each their own.

I mean, I guess I can see it. I dont' want to give up the special weapon in my command squads to take a vox either though.

ChrisWWII wrote:
I suppose here we've run into a difference that we can't get over. My grenade launchers have almost never done anything worthwhile other than take up 5 points, and be generally useless. Of course, I've labeled my ISs anti infantry, and focus them fully on infantry hunting, with anti transport as things get closer. That's part of why I view a gl as not very good. With a GL you get a one shot chance at maybe stunning that charging Rhino. With an autocannon, you can be stunning (or even destroying) that Rhino from much further away, and I'd rather spend the 5 points from the Grenade Launcher on a vox caster so that my autocannon can twin link, or force re-rolls on cover save. To me that's something that will be making a larger contribution in almost every single game as opposed to melta bombs (major impact in few games) or the launcher (minor impact most games)

What if your PISs are meched and you can't order them (as per my example above)? That 5pt vox is now doing nothing all game, whilst my 5pt GL can happily shoot out of the hatch with impunity.

As with 99.99% of all aspects in the IG codex; the effectiveness of a single option is dependant upon the constitution of the rest of your list. You can't take a single weapon and view it in a vacuum, as how you employ your special/heavy weapons may very well differ from mine. We can argue about this until the sun burns out, but neither of us will be right or wrong, we just play differently with our respective armies. You place a high value in orders, I personally hardly ever use them; apples and oranges my friend. And this, more than anything else, highlights the major strength in our shared codex; that we can both take vastly different selections and still triumph with them on the table

L. Wrex

I think L. Wrex did hit it on the head. We've all probably got widely different lists, which is why we're getting such different answers to the grenade launcher question. I run a gunline+armored Imperial Guard list, so the long reach and twin-linking that vox casters+autocannon gives me is something I value highly. Of course, you all probably run a vastly different army than me, and I think we're all going to have to agree to disagree here. For me, grenade launchers don't have the reach or punch to be worth their value, and the points are better spent on making my long range shooting more reliable. Of course, that's not how everyone will run it, so....we've reached an impasse.

Good debate, everyone.

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:I agree, so the common consensus is not to mix heavy weapons right?

Right.

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:No. They are blast lasguns 50% of the time. The other 50% they have the potential to penetrate Rhino armour at 24" away. Stop making judgements based on half of the weapon's capabilties.

Fine - GL's are basically just blast lasguns unless you want a 5% chance to stop a rhino (assuming it doesn't just fix itself the next turn) or a 1% chance of stopping a chimera...

Seriously, GL's are terrible against vehicles. The only good use of a krak grenade is instakilling T3 guys, but that's a pretty narrow role.

As compared to a meltabomb, or other upgrades elsewhere (depends on what the list looks like, of course), I dont' see the value of spending points to always do very poor damage compared to something that often does literally no damage, but can easily be a game-changer when it is effective. I mean, you don't see people buying insurance policies where they pay in and constantly get a pitiful dribble out. You buy insurance policies because sometimes there is disaster - a melta weapon being your million-dollar payout policy and your GL being not all that much better than the insurance guy calling you up and saying "you're on your own".

I have found that GL's in my army tend to go in Harker's squad which is normally babysitting an objective or at a forward post with ample view of the battle field.

Harker
AC
3x GL
5x Infantry

That is 3-6 S6 shots 2 S7 shots, + Lasguns. Plus if the unit is in cover (which it should be) they have a 3+ save. I tried using plasma guns, but if there is no medic they tend to kill themselves more often than not.

Yes they are situational, and yes they do have a multi-purpose role. But you cant rule them out just because you don't use them or like the synergy.