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.

So everything should have a strength and a weakness...but it seems like there's not really a defense against meltas. So I propose (for a price of course) that there be buyable force fields...and they should provide extra AC against meltas...because other than the Avatar I really don't know of anything that has a defense against them...and that shouldn't be!

There's a defense against meltas.

Stay out of 6" range.

waveserpents, monoliths, night shields.

Also, any large infantry unit. Melta has a short range, with sufficient infantry protection and wannabe tank-hunting melta man will have trouble destroying a tank and living to tell the tale

Agreed. Their range is really pitiful. You would have to get into within 12" (for multimeltas) at least to have any reliable change of penetrating anything significant.

There are some ways around it with, say, melta equipped speeders and their equivalents. But they can be brought down by a squads bolter fire, so that speedy melta awesomeness could only be used perhaps once.

In short, it would be kind of a waste of points IMO.

Shenra wrote:So everything should have a strength and a weakness...but it seems like there's not really a defense against meltas. So I propose (for a price of course) that there be buyable force fields...and they should provide extra AC against meltas...because other than the Avatar I really don't know of anything that has a defense against them...and that shouldn't be!

There are a lot of things that have a defense against them......

Monoliths...
StormRavens...
Black Templar Land Raiders...

For what army are we talking?

If it's one of the armies that already has this ability, I'd say it may be a possibility as they obviously already have the tech. It makes sense that Necrons and Eldar could outfit their other vehicles with an anti-melta shield.

But, if you're talking across the board, this seems a bit silly. Melta weapons exist for a reason and already have drawbacks.

Shenra wrote:So everything should have a strength and a weakness...

And the problem with the current weakness of meltas is...

Bookwrack wrote:

Shenra wrote:So everything should have a strength and a weakness...

And the problem with the current weakness of meltas is...

As previously said... short range

He wasn't asking what its weakness is, but what the problem with said weakness is.

i think that there should be a force filed that dose protect against mealtas only as mealtas are over powered

Meltas aren't overpowered...

It's just they're the only thing the game has at the moment for close range anti-tank...

grayspark wrote:
Black Templar Land Raiders...

What?

Hey, I want a shield meltas too.
I liked it more when lascannons were really a viable option.
But, give vehicles cover saves, combined with the increase in cost of picking up lascannons, and point blank becomes the better option.
Maybe a better solution is to make lascannons better. Something like no obscurement from lascannons, as they blast through the cover.
Then your tanks can die the way the emperor intended. In smoking craters across the battle field.

-Matt

Meltas aren't OP, they're incredibly short range makes them a bit harder to be used to pop a tank.

Now if a player is making good/proper use of a melta equipped model, that doesn't make the weapon OP that makes the commander a wise and prepared general.

ie. Sternguard with Combi-Melta in a drop-pod landing behind your vehicle and giving it the good one-two in the rear armor. Or anything equivalent to this.

It's not the weapons fault the player made a smart commanding decision to make the best use of his weapons. That's just strategy.

This is just my opinion though.

HawaiiMatt wrote:I liked it more when lascannons were really a viable option.

So you like it right now?

As said many times, meltas are not OP at all. You just can't buy your way to safety from them...you just have to be a good enough general to stop enemy melta units from getting close enough to use the damn things.

Heck, even popping smoke is a viable anti melta defense.

Edit: MOre importantly, why the hell would the Imperium be giving fancy shield generators to anything short of a superheavy? It really doesn't make fluff sense to have such a thing on Chimeras and Leman Russes at all. Not even on Rhinos or Predators.

/\ I agree.

Shield Generators are barely seen on Special Characters in the Imperium as it is, now you want to make them readily available to all vehicles?

Thought they were part of the lost tech stuff. (lore wise) ?? Anyone feel free to correct this if I'm wrong.

Melta's don't concern me much, what with myself being an ork player and all.
But Idon't think they are OP'd, the tiny range means that you need to be good to use one to good effect.
Meltashields... I don't know, just seems a bit dodgy to me. I mean, how can something block melta's and not block anything else?
Feel free to administer constructive criticism on me as you feel the need.


- Mo-orks rule.

well true every one has different points of view me being a space marine player would love to see so anti melta stuff

Cost of a Rhino 35pts
Cost of a Wave Serpent 90pts
Look on the face of your opponent when he rolls 1 and 6 for damage against your Wave Serpent - PRICELESS

I have no problem with melta-shields. But the point cost needs to be balanced. As an SM player are you willing to pay 35+ points for a sheild on a vehicle of the same price?

It is good design to have weapons in the game that are utterly devestating when used in the right circumstances, against the right targets. Melta weapons fit this perfectly as they are utterly devestating against heavy armour at extreme close range, and fairly useless otherwise.

Inventing special rules to nullify this because you don't like your tanks exploding seems to me to be missing the point of the game.

Slightly OT, but this thread got me thinking. Shouldn't Land Raiders and Rhino, and their variants, have Ceramite Armor, ala Storm Ravens and Thunderhawks? I mean, they can be put on Thunderhawk transports and brought through the atmosphere. Since they are exposed while in transport, shouldn't they have the appropriate shielding?

Ceramite plating prevents the extra d6 from melta attacks, yes? To me, letting all Space Marine vehicles have that would be slightly OP in a game sense...especially with Land Raiders. Of course, some kind of modification that makes it kind of like reactive armor could be conceivable...

As for a fluff justification, maybe their ceramite is primarly concentrated on their undersides for the transit? Or maybe the thickness of ceramite needed for transit isn't the same as the thickness needed to dispel melta shots?

Oh, no doubt it'd be incredibly OP. Its just a case of the rules not lining up with the fluff to prevent cheese. I'd be happy paying 50 points for such and upgrade, though.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

grayspark wrote:
Black Templar Land Raiders...

What?

you mean you play BTs and don't know?

look at the upgrades avaliable to your LRs.

look up what Blessed Hull does for you.

Grey Templar wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

grayspark wrote:
Black Templar Land Raiders...

What?

you mean you play BTs and don't know?

look at the upgrades avaliable to your LRs.

look up what Blessed Hull does for you.

Page 29: "Weapons with the Lance special rule do not count a Land Raider Crusader with a Blessed Hull's armour as 12, it is always treated as 14."

I say again, what?

EDIT: It's also only available for LRCs, thought I'd point that out.

i knew only LRCs could get it, but i was sure it ignored Melta too.

If only...

Oh well, one can dream.

Still Feths with DE

Melissia wrote:

HawaiiMatt wrote:I liked it more when lascannons were really a viable option.

So you like it right now?

Lascannons are a bit overcosted in 5th - they really didn't consider fully how cover and the change to the damage table would hurt them.

A slight reduction in cost is all that's required to fix that though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Commander Endova wrote:Slightly OT, but this thread got me thinking. Shouldn't Land Raiders and Rhino, and their variants, have Ceramite Armor, ala Storm Ravens and Thunderhawks? I mean, they can be put on Thunderhawk transports and brought through the atmosphere. Since they are exposed while in transport, shouldn't they have the appropriate shielding?

No. The thunderhawk powers it's way in nose first which would protect the transported vehicles.

Well, I made that up.

Judging from how GW think drop pods work (point at the ground and fire a big rocket upwards) I guess that's how they think thunderhawks would work.

(orbital dynamics - it really isn't intuitive)