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.

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.

Meanwhile, crappy weapons that are always crappy benefit little from skill and learning to play well on the field. A GL is just as crappy in the hands of a noob as a master. While certain weapons will never get better, others will, and are also very useful when they come through in those times when they are used against their intended targets.

I would argument to the contrary. You mention your own mastery, but you seem to forget about the opponent. Yes you have control about what you do and maybe skill doing this, but the opponent has the same. And long range shooting has a preparing effect during the first 2 turns. It is the key to deny the opponent his mobility, which is good for your own positioning. If I stun rhinos the whole game I wont kill anything, but neither does my opponent. And above that he will not be able to move.

The weapons you define crappy work through numbers. 1 Grenade launcher does nothing, but 6 of them have a good chance doing something interesting to a rhino. (30p: 3 hits -> 1 result -> about 50% chance to do more than shaken. And grenade launchers are only secondary weapons.)

And crappy mass shooting is statistically better than good elite shooting. You see this with Orks and BS5.

6 BS5 Rokkits are better than 3 BS4 Krak Missiles. Both normally hit 2 times, but the orks have the possibility to hit 6x. The bs4 guys havent.
So the argument bs5 is crappy so dont shoot with orks is not valid.
The same applies to the grenade launcher and his comrades.
If you have many bad weapons, you are normally as good as with few good weapons, but the many weapons may perform better than the good weapons, because of their numbers.
(A guy with 8 arms can hit 8 enemies. A guy with 1 arm can only hit 1 enemy even though he is the master of kung fu...)

Of course you need meltas, but grenade launchers still have their value. I personally like it, if I can stop the enemy from turn 1 on.

Taking better or worse weapons won't make your opponent better or worse.

We dont talk about good or bad weapons, but about different kinds of weapons.
A meltagun gets 1 shot per game (perhaps even not a single shot at all). It needs some turns to get to a target, which is not sitting. After that it has to survive to get another shot.
Therefore this shot must be absolutely devastating or it is useless.
The grenade launcher I promise will fire 5-7 rounds per game if any target is present and if you have any knowledge about positioning (if not, its your advantage because you created a 30" zone of no opponents because of 20p spent in weapons...). So you get 5-7 chances to do something interesting.

Aside from that, a melta stunning a rhino is not important because you are already close.
A grenade launcher stunning arhino is very useful for you because you steal the opponent one turn of proper use with his unit. And this without much effort on your side.
(again compared to the melta which has to be brought to target despite enemy actions)

Furthermore, I'd like to see more statistics, because when I run the numbers 2 meltaguns kills chimeras way deader than 4 GLs for the same price.

OK lets compare 2 meltaguns with 4 GL against opposing guard infantry. Ah pointless? Yes. But no one shoots into chimera front with GL either if not desperate.
Rhinos should be the better comparison. Or we assume chimera side and we will see about the statistics...

But we're not comparing ork rokkits to guard missile launchers. We're comparing guard taking crappy weapons to guard taking good ones.

This was an example. GL shooting 5x compared to Meltaguns shooting once is the same story. GL have the possibility to to more damage due to more shooting.

Really, it's a question of if YOU are good with weapons, because your weapons have no bearing on what your opponent is good with.

If your opponent knows your weapon inside out (and meltaguns are used excessively lately) he does not care what you do with your weapon, he will predict it. Meltas are not that hard to defend. Especially footmeltas with 12" effective range. Just keep out of 12" and you are fine in most cases. And again once the melta shot, he will get the counter. So the melta must be on some mighty user. I assume a guardsman is not really mighty even if backed up by 20 others (I know you will tell me the contrary, but this will be pointless circling, I just claim people not knowing how to fight blobs properly, you claim you invented them and so on )

Clearly some weapons require more skill than others. Are you really going to say that a lascannon HWS requires the same skill to use as a melta SWS

Depending on the situation. A melta SWS sitting behind terrain at a decisive spot is not too hard to use. Going with 6 men through open ground is insanity, so where are the options? 1 stormbolter may be deadly.
Lascannon team has to sit in terrain, same as the melta SWS, the only difference is it has to be visible due to the nature of its weapon. So you must be even more careful about the position because you must target the enemy without the enemy targetting you. This is not very easy. Most players simply pt them in a position where they observe many spots. But seem to forget that many spots observe back...

So it all depends on opponent, terrain, your army composition, enemy army composition, mission and so on.

Comparing weapons to each other by comparing their damage potential they can offer if shooting one round is absolutely nonsense. (I dont mean this in an insulting manner, so please dont take this expression personally )