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.

alarmingrick wrote:Compairing the AC with the Lascannon is like compairing my house key with my shoe.

UMGuy wrote:I disagree with the comparison made above, it is more like comparing your bike lock keys to your car keys. Both give you access to transportation, but one is more expensive to use than the other.

Yeah, I also disagree, but for a different reason. ACs and lascannons actually have some overlap to them as far as what they're explicitly good at, and I can't think of many things an autocannon can seriously threaten that a lascannon can't.

schadenfreude wrote:For me cost is a factor. AC are half the cost, and the 10 points per squad can add up.

Yes, but it's what you get for those points that make them worth taking. Autocannons may be roughly twice as good against AV10 PER POINT than lascannons, but it's not like lascannons are BAD against AV10. Anything the autocannon can do, the lascannon can also do.

Meanwhile, the reverse certainly isn't true. There are plenty of targets that a lascannon can threaten quite a bit more seriously than an autocannon, what with it being much higher strength, ignoring every armor save in the game, and causing instant death to T4 models. Even when you take into account that you can take twice as many autocannons, there are still things I'd much rather take a single lascannon for than two autocannons.

Because lascannons can do whatever autocannons can do, and can do a bunch of stuff that autocannons can't, there's a good reason they cost more, but despite this it's still worth it to take them. You're probably going to get a lot more use against a lot more targets with two lascannon HWSs than three autocannon ones.

It's like when I used to run my PCSs with grenade launchers. They scarcely ever did anything. Eventually I switched them to meltaguns. Several times when I fielded grenade launchers, I'd wished I'd had more powerful guns, while not once running meltaguns did I ever think "boy, I wish I had some grenade launchers instead of these stupid meltaguns".

Ailaros wrote:

alarmingrick wrote:Compairing the AC with the Lascannon is like compairing my house key with my shoe.

UMGuy wrote:I disagree with the comparison made above, it is more like comparing your bike lock keys to your car keys. Both give you access to transportation, but one is more expensive to use than the other.

Yeah, I also disagree, but for a different reason. ACs and lascannons actually have some overlap to them as far as what they're explicitly good at, and I can't think of many things an autocannon can seriously threaten that a lascannon can't.

schadenfreude wrote:For me cost is a factor. AC are half the cost, and the 10 points per squad can add up.

Yes, but it's what you get for those points that make them worth taking. Autocannons may be roughly twice as good against AV10 PER POINT than lascannons, but it's not like lascannons are BAD against AV10. Anything the autocannon can do, the lascannon can also do.

Meanwhile, the reverse certainly isn't true. There are plenty of targets that a lascannon can threaten quite a bit more seriously than an autocannon, what with it being much higher strength, ignoring every armor save in the game, and causing instant death to T4 models. Even when you take into account that you can take twice as many autocannons, there are still things I'd much rather take a single lascannon for than two autocannons.

Because lascannons can do whatever autocannons can do, and can do a bunch of stuff that autocannons can't, there's a good reason they cost more, but despite this it's still worth it to take them. You're probably going to get a lot more use against a lot more targets with two lascannon HWSs than three autocannon ones.

It's like when I used to run my PCSs with grenade launchers. They scarcely ever did anything. Eventually I switched them to meltaguns. Several times when I fielded grenade launchers, I'd wished I'd had more powerful guns, while not once running meltaguns did I ever think "boy, I wish I had some grenade launchers instead of these stupid meltaguns".

Kindof goes back to a point I already made, LC v AC largely depends on the rest of the list. Your foot guard for example needs it's LC. My mech guard doesn't.

I'll use my 1750 list as a sample.

HQ
Quad melta CCS with an astropath and a ML/HF Chimera

Elites
Marbo
PBS with 6 psychers PBS on foot
PBS with 6 psychers PBS and a ML/HF Chimera

Fast attack
1 Vendetta
1 Vendetta
1 Vendetta

Heavy support
1 Hydra
1 Manticore

Troops
Melta vets with an AC and a ML/HF Chimera
Melta vets with demo doctrine and a ML/HF Chimera
Platoon with the following:
Quad flamer PCS with a ML/HF chimera
Infantry squad with an AC
Infantry squad with an AC
SWS with 3 demo charges

I see the merit of infantry based LC, especially in a foot list where I too would recommend them, but I see no need for them in my mechanized list.

Against AV14 I have melta guns and a manticore
Against AV12 and AV13 I have melta guns, a manticore, and the trio of vendettas
Against T4 multi wound models (like paladins) I have melta guns and 5 demo charges.
Against AV10 and AV11 I have a manticore, 3 vendettas, melta guns, and lots of multilasers. Technically I don't need dedicated anti AV11 firepower, but having those 3 infantry based AC + the hydra helps a ton. It's optimized firepower at minimal cost against what I consider to be the most common and deadliest threat to my army in the current meta. If MEQ or wyches start running amok in my deployment zone the game is pretty much over. The ways I usually stop that from happening is blowing up transports early at long range, and devastating short range firepower followed by weaken resolve.

Also my list isn't even considered an "optimized net list" because the large scale use of demo charges is a bit of controversial subject among guard players. The real reason I have them in my army is I modeled them as suicide bombers, and traitor guard needs to be at least 10% more grimdark than loyalist guardsmen.

lledwey wrote:That really is not true. One autocannon has the exact same chance of getting a penetrating result on a rhino as one lascannon, at both BS3 and BS4, due to having twice the shots. The autocannon is also more likely than the lascannon to get a glancing hit.

Autocannon BS3:
2 shots, 1 hits, .166 glances, .33 pens
Lascannon BS3
1 shot, .5 hits, .083 glances, .33 pens

You get similar results at BS4. So against most vehicles, an autocannon is actually MORE likely to do something than the lascannon, and is also more effective against certain types of infantry. Lascannons are more effective against certain targets like Paladins and MCs of course, however looking at MCs in particular you can see that the difference is not huge.

BS3 shooting at a standard T6 3+ sv MC:

Autocannon:
2 shots, 1 hit, .66 wounds, .22 unsaved

Lascannon:
1 shot, .5 hit, .42 wounds, .42 unsaved

And at BS4:

Autocannon:
2 shots, 1.33 hit, .88 wounds, .295 unsaved

Lascannon:
1 shot, .66 hit, .55 wounds, .55 unsaved

It really is not as cut and try as you seem to think. The lascannon is better against some things, and the autocannon is better against others. For the extra points you pay, you LOSE some effectiveness against light vehicles, gain the ability to hurt AV14, and gain some effectiveness against MCs and Paladins. However, you probably also have a ton of meltaguns in your army, which are going to be filling that same role, because armies with lots of MCs dont have heavy tanks for melta to focus on.

Fair point, totally forgot about the AC's 2 shots.
I still think they're poor though, can only glance the front of predators, can do nothing at all vs AV14 (not that lascannons should be but anyway).

Has anyone mentioned the fact that for your 20 pts, you're either getting 4 autocannon shots or 1 lascannon shot? That weight of fire from the AC s helpful, especially on weaker/expendable units like a PCS that can only take one and only have Bs3. What's the comparison between 4 ac shots vs 1 lascannon shot?

For example, the way I tend to divy up Heavy weapons is PCS, cheap infantry squads, and when i'm taking a low amount of HWS's(like only 1 or 2) I will give them mostly AC's. they'll put out more shots for a chance to hit, and they'll be cheap enough that if they die its no big deal. With lascannons, I only put them on vets, CCS, blobs, and when i field a lot of HWS's (at least 3) that way they have more durability and more of a chance to hit something, either through orders, higher BS, or weight of fire. Ymmv though on how well that works for you

Again i think it comes down to what your facing and where the HW is placed for there to be a apples to apples argument.

HWS i think lascannons benefit a great deal from their own volume of fire and BiD masking the drawback of just one shot. averaging 1 hit per lascannon makes a big difference.

individual squad HW i tend to gravitate more towards AC as they should be shooting at other transports and the additional shot lends to more stunned/shaken results.

again though my list is 3x vendettas 2x Demolishers Chimelta vets, and manticores so for me i like to prioritize variable range threats and not have to "waste" lascannon shots on Rhino's/Razorbacks/Chimera's/trukks/ etc.

in addition 4 AC shots vs. one LC shot is a much bigger argument for me.

average game your hitting 2-3 shots per LC / 10 shots per AC

I've said it before and I will say it again. You need both, in some form. LC have a different role than AC. AC are for (IMO) light vehicals, skimmers and MC. LC are for the things that you really want to die fast, AV12+ or vehicals you DO NOT want to get near your guardsman.

I generally run a 30 man blob with AC and GL. It throws a lot of dakka and can take a beating. And then I will run 1 or 2 x 20 man blobs with PG and LC.

I see the break down in the same way I break down my Tac squad roles. Either they are hunting vehicals, or they are hunting troops and MC. Different roles, different weapons.

I think what people need to consider is what they have in their army and what roles said units are playing. If you have an abundance of multi lasers or Missile launchers or even Dakka LRBTs then you may find you need AC less than you need LC.

Having a HWT with AC provides your opponent with a difficult choice. Ignore the unit with AC to shoot at higher priority target (letting the HWT with AC plink away) or shoot 3 models with 6 wounds in cover. Put LC in a HWT you can bet your bottom dollar that they are going to be high priority to take out due to low wound count and high threat. Its all about balance.

The other thing to consider (not taking orders into consideration here) is that your AC guardsmen are statistically going to hit with 1 shot every time they fire. Your LC guardsmen are only going to hit 50% of the time. There are plenty of instances in game where it is better to throw a lot of at the wall and see what sticks, especially as a guard player. I take the WW2 Russian approach, quantity (of wounds/models) has a quality all its own.

MrMoustaffa wrote:Has anyone mentioned the fact that for your 20 pts, you're either getting 4 autocannon shots or 1 lascannon shot? That weight of fire from the AC s helpful, especially on weaker/expendable units like a PCS that can only take one and only have Bs3. What's the comparison between 4 ac shots vs 1 lascannon shot?

It's been mentioned repeatedly but is severely oversimplified. The choice isn't between two autocannons or one lascannon. The choice actually facing players is a unit equipped with lascannon or a slightly cheaper one with autocannon. As as example using heavy weapon squads to minimize the influence of the unit's base cost, lascannon squads cost as much as 1.4 autocannon squads, not 2, and that's as favorable towards the autocannon as it gets. The comparison is less in the autocannon's favor in units other than heavy weapon squads. In an army centered around infantry squads downgrading six lascannons to autocannons will free up enough points to buy all (or most if you use additional upgrades) of one additional squad.

Beyond cost counting there's the matter of what you're trying to do with your heavy weapons. Autocannons are in fact superior to lascannons against AV 10 and 11. If you intend your autocannons to counter razorspam while the other tools at your disposal handle other stuff that could be a valid approach. Lascannons can engage heavier armor while being only marginally less effective than autocannons against light armor so the choice there is basically to pay extra to widen the list of viable targets for your heavy weapons.

Autocannons are awesome...with their intended purpose. If they are falling by the wayside it's because you are either not using them as intended or overestimating them.

How can you compare 1 LC shot to 4 AC shots? Again, the cost of LC upgrade is 20 and AC upgrade 10 (HW in squad or HWT), but you WILL NOT have 2 ACs for one LC. You would have to buy another carrier to take another AC. Why do people not understand this...?

Lothar wrote:How can you compare 1 LC shot to 4 AC shots? Again, the cost of LC upgrade is 20 and AC upgrade 10 (HW in squad or HWT), but you WILL NOT have 2 ACs for one LC. You would have to buy another carrier to take another AC. Why do people not understand this...?

Your logic is sound if the subject is HWS. The squad is being purchased for the heavy weapons so the total cost should be looked at.

If on the other hand we're talking infantry squads of vet squads that are not always going to be shooting their heavy weapon the squad is not being purchased for the heavy weapon.

Example #1: Throwing 40 points of heavy weapons into 4 squads of melta vets where the heavy weapons fire is a secondary function of the squad the player will have 2 ACs for one LC. It's literally a choice between 4ACs with 8 shots or 2 LC with 2 shots.

Example #2: Trowing 20 points of heavy weapons into 2 infantry squads in a hybrid foot/mech list. In some hybrid styles the platoon is purchased for the PCS and 2 SWS with the 2 infantry squads being used as backfield objective holders. Then the choice literally is between 4AC shots and 1 LC shot.

It all depends on the context of the list. If we're talking about adding HWS to a foot list then the ratio is 7AC(14AC shots) to 5LC for HWS. If we're talking about using the last few points on a list to fill out some unused heavy weapons slots on mechanized melta vets or infantry squads then the ratio is 2AC (4shots) to every 1LC

The amount of terrain on a battlefeild I'd be surprised if it was even possible to field more than half a dozen HWTs effectively.
The number of natural "firing points" as dictated by terrain is something baring in mind.

Coverhammer.

A 20 blob half in cover can screen multiple hws behind them.

The 7/5 was more of a talk of ratios than a recomendation to field mass hws

I mean places where they can physically see the enemy. You should have plenty of LOS blocking stuff on your board, to the extent that there are probably less than half a dozen viable fields of fire on a board.

It really depends on the platform. I can only speak from a Mechanized IG standpoint.

In terms of Mech IG, I'm getting my Lascannons from Vendettas, and my Autocannons from Hydras and the occasional Melta Vet squad, if I have 10 pts left over and want to increase T1 potential target engagement from each Chimera in a very low-AV meta.

Vendettas get me 3 Fast TL-Lascannon shots at 43.3 pts ea.

Hydras get me 4 slow TL-Longbarrel Autocannon shots at 18.75 pts ea. These ignore flat out saves for skimmers, but are only really threatening when the thing is stationary.




For the occasional skimmer that really needs to die, light armored transports, and target saturation, a pair of Hydras really does a great job that I don't think I'd be getting from a third Manticore.

The Lascannons are obviously better transport poppers, but they're mounted on VERY exposed units (same AV, but you can't get them cover saves nearly as easily), and they cost over twice as much as the Hydra Autocannons.



In summary: Both are cool. Regular Autocannons are pretty underwhelming. Obviously, if given a choice, Lascannons are superior. But, on the platforms on which they're available to Mech IG players, taking a mix of both is prudent. You get some advantages from taking a pair of Hydras that you wouldn't get from simply taking a third Vendetta. Considering the main selling points of both platforms are Autocannons and Lascannons respectively, it's not out of context to compare these two units.