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

and before i say anything, i know most people will instantly go to Sternguard in a droppod with melta's to some high priority targets.

That isn't the question per say, Instead of the answer being what would you choose in your list to get a better sense i'l pose a hypothetical.

Say you have a 5 man squad , barebones except for this ONE choice. More importantly , you have absolutely no idea what the opponent has or what army they are playing. What would you, in a tactical/personal choose that you would feel do best against whatever it is that your facing, be it MC's, Walkers, Beasts, Infantry - you don't know, it could be anything. I know there will be "if its vehicles then: Melta, but try and think about it as not against a specific target , so balance it out as getting points for against vehicles but maybe losing some for non vehicles, does it still beat the other choice?

I hope people understand that the question's trying to ask about the raw weapons, not the squads that carry them, as obvious the Sternguard tactic is effective but lets put them out of the picture and talk about the guns alone.

I voted Plasmagun because I assumed barebones meant the unit is taking no DT. If you are throwing them in a pod then take a melta.

Its hard to pose the question in a way that focus's on the weapons themselves rather than DT or otherwise.

Maybe it would be better to say , you yourself was suddenly transported into the midst of a 40k Battle, choose.

That's just the thing, though. With marines the type of dedicated transport you throw your marines in changes the whole shebang. You wouldn't generally equip your marines in a pod or in a rhino the same because they are fighting in different environments. However, as I said, if we are assuming a generalist approach for the squad then take a Plasma gun.

It does but then the discussion becomes the DT + Plasma/Melta rather than the gun's alone.

Kinda surprised the Plasma is winning tbh.

Even if you do base it on what's carrying it, I say Melta all the way.

Better on Ignores Cover Dominions (not that they can take plasma), better on drop-podding Sternguard, better on Deepstriking Elysians... Meltas kill things dead without a risk of exploding.

Plus, they're cheaper.

Plasma works with the extra guys in the squad, as you are normally shooting at things that can also be brought down due to weight of fire.

Melta does something the rest of the squad can’t do, and that’s take out tanks. But if you are useing the melta for what it does best, the rest of the squad are reduced to cheerleaders.

That said, in a blind vacuum, I vote for melta. Squads generally want to be within 12” anyway, and while you get less shots, melta kills things just as dead as plasma.

On the weapons merits alone I still vote plasma. Plasma is a beefed up version of your squads basic weapon which means the plasma gunner can engage a target when the rest of your guys can. Melta suffers from short range and one less shot in that range.

Really, it comes down to how you will use it. Plasma is a good all rounder while melta is an excellent assault or defensive weapon. It can also make mincemeat out of battlesuits which is always nice. I had a vet squad kill Farsight the turn after he dropped in with mass melta.

I usually take 2x Melta in CSM units, they don't get hot and can destroy the things the squad can't deal with themselves.

My Plague marines are run in 3 units, one with 2 plasma, one with 2 melta, and one with one of each. Plasma unit usually stays back on a mid-to-backfield objective, while the double melta and the mixed unit move forward.

Meltaguns are great, but mostly pretty situational. Plasma is defiantly a better TAC weapon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
...then again, plague marines have extra insulation against Gets Hot! Rolls, so I have less risks to running heavy plasma...

**edit: fixed multiple spelling issues. Damn phone keyboard

I am a plasma kind of guy.

In 5th edition 40k, take the melta, leave the plasma.

In 6th edition 40k, take the plasma, leave the melta.

In 7th edition 40k, take the flamer, since everything (including rhinos) will be MCs.

I still have to go with the meltagun for this one. It can't explode on you, it does more things than a plasma gun (doubling out T4 models, taking on even heavily armored tanks), and when it comes down to it, I think that I'd take a more flexible unit over an extra shot. Even if firing it makes the rest of the squad useless for a round, I think odds are fair (though entirely situational, of course), I think the odds are fair that it wasn't a critical, game-changing shot anyway.

Of course, with that said, I like to take a mix of weapons. I tend to run a couple of melta squad with a couple of plasma squads - like I said, I enjoy flexibility, and I don't think I'd want to run a ton of one type of weapon just in case the other winds up being more useful.

6th ed made plasma better, but I'm still on meltas, and will be for the foreseeable future.

The reason is pretty simple: What plasma guns do, other weapons can do too, whereas there are way fewer substitutes for melta guns (and they're often the best weapon in their class to boot).

Because think about it, what do you use plasma guns for? Killing terminators? Mass fire also kills terminators, and you already need to bring some amount of it for your compulsory troops choice. Plus, RoF spam weapons don't get any worse when those terminators pick up storm shields. Plasma guns start faring better when we start talking about MCs and light vehicles, but once again, unless you're facing vast quantities of these units, odds are you can take them down with weapons you're already bringing.

Meanwhile, no amount of bolter fire will kill AV12+, a class of targets against which plasma guns struggle. Meltaguns, though, do not, what with their serious strength, and Ap1 (before even considering those few times you'll get into melta range). They also work against real heavy targets that you might well not be able to stop in time without melta. Trying to take down AV14 with nothing but lascannons always feels like an exercise in futility.

They also have a nice strategic advantage when you take a lot of them. Much moreso than plasma, meltaguns are zone denial weapons. A plasma weapon can hit me if I'm close or far, but a meltagun only hits if I stray into a certain area, and if I stray into certain other areas, then he's getting melta range melta on me. In a way, meltaguns are sort of like pikemen - they keep the baddies at bay better than plasma guns.

The TLDR is that you don't need plasma, but you will sometimes need melta. That's why I take melta.

If I only had one squad, I'd take Melta. If I had 4 Squads, I'd take 2 Plasma and 2 Melta. As Ailaros said, the Meltagun rounds the squad out better, giving it the ability to hurt things that the squad otherwise couldn't. The Plasma Gun increases damage against things that they're already good against.

Perfect 50-50, hah!

Mhm is pretty surprising the scores are nearly exactly 50/50 with a decent amount of votes, maybe it speaks to some good rule writing that they can make rules for two guns and there is no unanimous opinion one is far better.

Anyone who chose plasma is crazy.

The ONLY situation where plasma is required is VS units with 2+ armor save, units who tend to come in such small numbers that the melta would usually be decent enough.

Anything with a 3+ or worse falls under the special-issue ammo the sternguard has.

Anything with an AV value-you will want to have that melta, your SI ammo got nothing to hit it.

I voted meltagun. Then again, I play Salamanders, so I'm biased.

In a squad that has a dedicated anti-vehicle role, I'd go meltagun. In every other situation, I think plasma gun would be preferable.

I helped the Meltagun inch it out.

As previously mentioned, it covers a 'gap' that infantry have a hard time with, and can help instakill troublesome enemies like Battlesuits. Plus, its like some sort of turbo-heatray that atomises people which is just bada$$.

Meltagun.
I just love being able to kill pretty much anything in the game. Not to mention you can kill most of those things in one shot.

I always found "gets hot" to be very risky. Ive seen chapter masters fall to their own weapons.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Anyone who chose plasma is crazy.


Anything with a 3+ or worse falls under the special-issue ammo the sternguard has.

Good thing everyone in the world plays SM then I suppose...

Forgetting about what the target is as you say, we must think of the unit taking it. Is it a BA ASM squad - well definitely not plasma! Is it a nurgle havoc squad - probably plasma. Is it a khornate havoc squad with extra ccw - certainly melta! Just a few examples of units that would choose one over the other.

In my opinion, if you have to use a melta on something which bolters cannot harm, then you are wasting a whole squad of bolters who must then sit there and twiddle their thumbs.


I prefer plasma for the additional range and firepower, plus you more or less target the same units as the rest of the squad, except you are more likely to shot to kill.

Plamsa-Gun is good for moast everything, but AV14. However they have Twice the Range and RoF
Melta-Guns is only better at 6"

I prefer Melta guns over Plaz. They can work against AV14 AND MC's. Plaz Guns don't scratch AV14 and there's a chance to kill yerself

I play Sisters so have great choice for getting melta weapons (ignore cover doms sporting 4 meltas? hell yes!). I also run BA who will usually want to assault after so plasma is not so great. I have being running some inqusition forcesfor te plasma henchmen which are great workhorses who certainly have a place in my armies, but I've got a soft spot for the melta.

D

welshhoppo wrote:In my opinion, if you have to use a melta on something which bolters cannot harm, then you are wasting a whole squad of bolters who must then sit there and twiddle their thumbs.

This used to be a concern of mine until I started thinking about this problem relative to time.

A squad with 9 bolters and a meltagun does not need to spend all 6 turns firing bolters, nor does it need to spend all 6 turns firing the meltagun in order to make those weapons be worth their points. The question isn't "is it worth wasting those bolters to shoot a meltagun", but is actually "is it worth wasting those bolters FOR ONE TURN to blow up a tank".

The answer is plainly yes, then. Odds are, whatever I was going to do with bolters that turn isn't going to be more important than killing that tank. You lose a little bit of value (from the opportunity cost of not boltering), but you gain more than you lost (by blowing up that land raider, or whatever).

For lower points game its definetly plasma for me. And so far, my experience proved me right Im not saying melta would do the work, but longer range and rapid fire proved crucial in few moments where melta would do the job. But for my IG was better with Plasma and LC than melta. Plasma gives me more versatility in hunting MEQ, transports, exposed vehicles and in time of need can spit storm of fire...eer...plasma.
On the other hand, in higher points games I will take both...dedicated units FTW.