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.

Xyrael wrote:
You want to upgrade the Space Marines most diverse weapon while destroying the efficacy of the lascannon and plasma gun. Who would take those weapons if the ML could do their job almost as good. Firing 2 shots with a modest probability that one fails and causes a wound to the shooter is the price plasma pays for AP2. It's not even capable of wounding outside 24", and at 12-24" it doesn't get volume of fire. Now make it AP3, and see how many people want to take a gun whose sole purpose is then to kill MEQ equivalent units at the cost of a chance to kill themselves.

Now, I could see adding a Armorbane missile or some such, like the Flak missile adds skyfire, but I can not see upgrading the ML to AP2 without a similar points increase.

Also, a ML beat out AC's because they are instead death to multiwound T4.

Maybe armorbane missiles are the ticket, leaving everything else alone.

Instant death to multiwound T4 is a nice trick, but I find that it doesn't come up that often enough to put it ahead of the autocannon. Torrent is too useful.

Literally every time in 6th edition I have brought MLs, I have regretted it as they just don't cause enough damage.

Martel732 wrote:

Xyrael wrote:
You want to upgrade the Space Marines most diverse weapon while destroying the efficacy of the lascannon and plasma gun. Who would take those weapons if the ML could do their job almost as good. Firing 2 shots with a modest probability that one fails and causes a wound to the shooter is the price plasma pays for AP2. It's not even capable of wounding outside 24", and at 12-24" it doesn't get volume of fire. Now make it AP3, and see how many people want to take a gun whose sole purpose is then to kill MEQ equivalent units at the cost of a chance to kill themselves.

Now, I could see adding a Armorbane missile or some such, like the Flak missile adds skyfire, but I can not see upgrading the ML to AP2 without a similar points increase.

Also, a ML beat out AC's because they are instead death to multiwound T4.

Maybe armorbane missiles are the ticket, leaving everything else alone.

Instant death to multiwound T4 is a nice trick, but I find that it doesn't come up that often enough to put it ahead of the autocannon. Torrent is too useful.

Literally every time in 6th edition I have brought MLs, I have regretted it as they just don't cause enough damage.

What are you shooting at? The Frag missiles are effective against Boyz, Gants, and other hordes with 5/6+ saves. The Krak is for AV10-12. If you are using Kraks against AV13, and you're not spamming them in a Devastator unit, you are actually doing it wrong.

The effectiveness of the ML isn't lessened because it is a Heavy 1 weapon; its effectiveness lies in its ability to be spammed, or in the case of Scout squads, fired at BS6 via Telion. Sure, autocannons can be taken on predators and Dreadnoughts, but compared to the spammably cheap ML, they are less useful. A unit of 5 Devastators with MLs and a Dreadnought with 2 TL autocannons firing at two targets of equal AV (say, AV12) leaves then roughly equal. The Dread has 4 S7 shots that can be re-rolled, a ML Dev unit has 5 that can't. The ML is designed to faceroll the same type of armor that Autocannons do; Mls just do it with fewer shots.

As for AP affecting Vehicle pen, deal. In 5th, only AP1 affected vehicle pen rolls, and now that 6th allows both AP1 and 2 to add damage, you can't have Mls be AP2 because you think explosives work that way. They don't in the game, and they don't in real life.

"The Frag missiles are effective against Boyz, Gants, and other hordes with 5/6+ saves."

No, because they are off target quite often. Frag mode wastes a good deal of marine BS.

So by your logic, a bad weapon can be made better by taking lots of them? So why not spam a good weapon instead? Or just not use the bad weapon at all?

Last time I checked, most dev squads get 4 heavies, not 5. I assume you are referring to Space Wolves with that number.

"The ML is designed to faceroll the same type of armor that Autocannons do; Mls just do it with fewer shots. "

Check the math; it's not that many fewer shots, because they are no more likely to cause an "explode". And they have half the ROF.

"As for AP affecting Vehicle pen, deal."

Yeah, I'll deal by not using MLs, thanks. It's too bad because have like 10 guys modeled from the 90s with the damn things. All useless.

Martel732 wrote:

Xyrael wrote:
You want to upgrade the Space Marines most diverse weapon while destroying the efficacy of the lascannon and plasma gun. Who would take those weapons if the ML could do their job almost as good. Firing 2 shots with a modest probability that one fails and causes a wound to the shooter is the price plasma pays for AP2. It's not even capable of wounding outside 24", and at 12-24" it doesn't get volume of fire. Now make it AP3, and see how many people want to take a gun whose sole purpose is then to kill MEQ equivalent units at the cost of a chance to kill themselves.

Now, I could see adding a Armorbane missile or some such, like the Flak missile adds skyfire, but I can not see upgrading the ML to AP2 without a similar points increase.

Also, a ML beat out AC's because they are instead death to multiwound T4.

Maybe armorbane missiles are the ticket, leaving everything else alone.

Instant death to multiwound T4 is a nice trick, but I find that it doesn't come up that often enough to put it ahead of the autocannon. Torrent is too useful.

Literally every time in 6th edition I have brought MLs, I have regretted it as they just don't cause enough damage.

wait, why are you talking about torrent. you realise that is for things like flamestorms right?

Torrent of wounds, not the torrent ability of a weapon. I guess another term would be weight of wounds or forcing saves.

Martel, you cannot have one weapon that is good against everything.

Plasma is designed to eat through High T/Sv units like Termies. Krak missiles are designed to punch a hole in the side of a transport.

as for why wont an AT Rocket go through Terminator armour, well, I dont know, but theres a reason it'll remove anything mulitwound and not T5+ with that one failed save.

The only way to get a gun that is Anti-everything-at-once, is to play Necrons

Yes, I've pretty much conceded my fix sucks. But I'm still not convinced to ever use MLs in 6th. I still don't see why I would ever use heavy support slots to field these things.

4 MLs will put a dent in whatever you point them at, be it anything other then AV14.

Also, the few times ive used them, Ive found it easier to target Termies and the like with frag rounds, as you will hit more, so you can force more saves.

what you want to be doing is taking ML's in tac squad's, that's where they really shine

"4 MLs will put a dent in whatever you point them at, be it anything other then AV14. "

Not true. People fire whole squads of these things at AV 13 and get nowhere. I see it constantly. By the time they've taken the target out, the game is over. I need more than that from heavy support slots.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 matapata98 wrote:
what you want to be doing is taking ML's in tac squad's, that's where they really shine

Why? So the whole squad can not move to fire a single rocket?

4 BS4 krak missiles do around 1 damage result to AV13, either a glance or a pen.

They do have their place, other things can do their job of course, but that applies to everything in warhammer.

 Grey Templar wrote:
4 BS4 krak missiles do around 1 damage result to AV13, either a glance or a pen.

They do have their place, other things can do their job of course, but that applies to everything in warhammer.

If I'm trying to clear out a vindicator or two before my ASMs get mulched, that's not cutting it. See, the devs can't move to get side shots on the Vindis or Preds or Hammerheads for that matter, so they usually are going against the AV. My heavy support slots need to be able to do more than remove a single HP from AV 13.

Well lascannons arn't doing much better, only averaging around 1.3 damage results.

The way to kill vehicles is to get rid of their hull points, you can't rely on getting a pen to neutralize the vehicle.

"Well lascannons arn't doing much better, only averaging around 1.3 damage results.

The way to kill vehicles is to get rid of their hull points, you can't rely on getting a pen to neutralize the vehicle. "

Rely on, perhaps not. But the lascannon has quadruple the chance of causing an explodes. It only needs to happen once or twice in a game to get ahead of the HP stripping curve.

Also, lascannons have the added benefit of shooting other dangerous things in the face like oblits and having them actually give a crap. This is why I think they are a better TAC choice.

Again, you are failing to take cost into consideration. You are paying additional points for the lascannon.

If they were the same cost, yes there would be no question, but as the missiles are cheaper they still have their place.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Again, you are failing to take cost into consideration. You are paying additional points for the lascannon.

If they were the same cost, yes there would be no question, but as the missiles are cheaper they still have their place.

For the price chaos and DA pay, I will never take the ML. All this being said, I never BA devs because the Predator is a more economical and versatile way to field lascannons. I'll be using the tri-las pred when we pay DA prices for that, too.

There is not only the cost of the weapon, but the opportunity cost of the heavy support slot and the up front cost of the marine himself. I'll pay more points to have a better weapon in my precious heavy slots. Cheap does not mean better necessarily. However, I agree that C:SM is overcharged too much for lascannons for consideration. But I still don't understand the philosophy of filling a heavy slot with cheap, crappy weapons.

Well nobody is taking devastator squads period.

I do take missiles on Tactical marines and Typhoon Landspeeders. Plus the occasional Las/missile dreadnought.

Quite your bitching, there is no god weapon that destroys everything. There's always something better at one thing our the other. What everyone is telling you, is that for the free if not extremely cheap price of a M . it can do a lot of things, but not everything. That's why theres different weapons in the game.

"Typhoon Landspeeders"

Those are exempt from my complaints. They shoot krak at ROF 2. Totally cool. Of course, speeders themselves got kicked in the balls, but that's not the typhoon's fault.

"Tactical marines"

I'm still waffling what to do here. Sometimes, I omit the heavy weapon to give them uniform shooting profiles. Other times, I combat squad off a cheap lascannon and put the rest in a razor. I don't feel a single ML is worth the temptation to not move my troops when they should be moving.

" Las/missile dreadnought."

I forgot these existed. Most dreads I see are riflemen. And BA don't get shooty dreads in the elite slot.

"Well nobody is taking devastator squads period. "

I see people post BA lists with these things again and again. With ML, of course. Drives me nuts.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"Quite your bitching, there is no god weapon that destroys everything."

I'm discussing something with Grey Templar. Not bitching. Where did I ask for a weapon that destroys everything? What am I? A Necron player?

Martel732 wrote:
"Typhoon Landspeeders"

Those are exempt from my complaints. They shoot krak at ROF 2. Totally cool. Of course, speeders themselves got kicked in the balls, but that's not the typhoon's fault.

"Tactical marines"

I'm still waffling what to do here. Sometimes, I omit the heavy weapon to give them uniform shooting profiles. Other times, I combat squad off a cheap lascannon and put the rest in a razor. I don't feel a single ML is worth the temptation to not move my troops when they should be moving.

" Las/missile dreadnought."

I forgot these existed. Most dreads I see are riflemen. And BA don't get shooty dreads in the elite slot.

"Well nobody is taking devastator squads period. "

I see people post BA lists with these things again and again. With ML, of course. Drives me nuts.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"Quite your bitching, there is no god weapon that destroys everything."

I'm discussing something with Grey Templar. Not bitching. Where did I ask for a weapon that destroys everything? What am I? A Necron player?

That's what you're asking for. You come off as wanting an anti-transport weapon to be an anti-heavy tank weapon.

Martel732 wrote:
I'm discussing something with Grey Templar. Not bitching. Where did I ask for a weapon that destroys everything? What am I? A Necron player?

Martel732 wrote:
Very simple: make plasma AP 3 and krak missiles AP 2

My man, everytime someone points out that every weapon has it's place, you demand that the ML gets buffed to take every other weapons place.

I know you're having issues getting past the front armour, but consider taking small assault squads containing meltabombs for the AV14s. Or drop pod melta CC dreads in your opponents rear. Then your MLs are freed up for weaker targets.

Or take lascannons.

I vote that if you death or glory with a space marine holding a plasma gun, you use it as a meltabomb and remove the model, but he uses it as a plasma torch, cuts the armor, jams it in, and detonates it.

Also, on the serious note of missiles versus plasma, I've found that missiles work best in dev squads with other devvies helping, where theres an actual chance to hit with them all (although I do have a special place in my rage organ for my devastators who miss 4 times with prescience re rolls.)

for example, I personally run 3 dev squads in my current list. 1 heavy bolter unit, 1 cannon unit, and 1 missile unit. This allows Anti horde, anti termi/horde/ and anti armour 12/horde/doubleduty

Plus, my missiles love hunting swarmlords. If you really feel the squad can't hunt a tank well, lascannon razorback support is not a terrible idea, nor that expensive of a buy for your points.

"I know you're having issues getting past the front armour, but consider taking small assault squads containing meltabombs for the AV14s. Or drop pod melta CC dreads in your opponents rear. Then your MLs are freed up for weaker targets. "

But its better to fire autocannons at weaker targets if I'm going to use melta on everything tough.

Also, I've had some people claim that ML must be spammed to be good, and others claim that devs are not used and they shine in tac squads. So which is it? Or neither as I assert?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 McNinja wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
"Typhoon Landspeeders"

Those are exempt from my complaints. They shoot krak at ROF 2. Totally cool. Of course, speeders themselves got kicked in the balls, but that's not the typhoon's fault.

"Tactical marines"

I'm still waffling what to do here. Sometimes, I omit the heavy weapon to give them uniform shooting profiles. Other times, I combat squad off a cheap lascannon and put the rest in a razor. I don't feel a single ML is worth the temptation to not move my troops when they should be moving.

" Las/missile dreadnought."

I forgot these existed. Most dreads I see are riflemen. And BA don't get shooty dreads in the elite slot.

"Well nobody is taking devastator squads period. "

I see people post BA lists with these things again and again. With ML, of course. Drives me nuts.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"Quite your bitching, there is no god weapon that destroys everything."

I'm discussing something with Grey Templar. Not bitching. Where did I ask for a weapon that destroys everything? What am I? A Necron player?

That's what you're asking for. You come off as wanting an anti-transport weapon to be an anti-heavy tank weapon.

So going from AP 3 to AP 2 is now super anti-heavy tank? Sorry that's an insane assertion. Even with that profile, it would have the same problems the Tau heavy rail rifle does. Neither can even utilize their AP bonus against AV 14. If you read my previous posts, I have pretty much dropped this idea as something like this will never happen anyway. I just feel plasma has too much utility and MLs not enough.

Martel732 wrote:
"I know you're having issues getting past the front armour, but consider taking small assault squads containing meltabombs for the AV14s. Or drop pod melta CC dreads in your opponents rear. Then your MLs are freed up for weaker targets. "

But its better to fire autocannons at weaker targets if I'm going to use melta on everything tough.

Also, I've had some people claim that ML must be spammed to be good, and others claim that devs are not used and they shine in tac squads. So which is it? Or neither as I assert?

It depends on the list and whether or not you know how to prioritize your targets. As a poster above said, he uses 3 Dev squads, and his MLs do a good job of taking down the Swarmlord. Honestly, it all about the list and whether or not you know how to use each weapon in your arsenal effectively.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Well nobody is taking devastator squads period.

Space Wolves are!

3+ armor MCs are very juicy targets for MLs So are the 2W 4T Tau suits. But in a TAC list, I can't be guaranteed of those targets.

I started noticing this problem specifically with Vindicators. Melta is not a good answer, because you don't want to get that close to the thing. MLs don't cut it on the front armor.

Then I started also noticing that most times, I don't want to get to melta range vs 2+ armor save units either.

 Wilytank wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Well nobody is taking devastator squads period.

Space Wolves are!

Long Fangs aren't Devastators. They're Long Fangs.

All that plasma counts for nothing when you're faced with no 2+ armour units, swamping DA with Cultists can be pretty fun if he's prepped for Chaos Terminators (why would I take them vs DA lol)

Bet you'd be crying out for a ML in a situation like that. Sounds like you want the ML to be a lascannon with an option to use a template but retain the same price. Do you play Marines by chance?

MarsNZ wrote:
All that plasma counts for nothing when you're faced with no 2+ armour units, swamping DA with Cultists can be pretty fun if he's prepped for Chaos Terminators (why would I take them vs DA lol)

Bet you'd be crying out for a ML in a situation like that. Sounds like you want the ML to be a lascannon with an option to use a template but retain the same price. Do you play Marines by chance?

I play BA, but MLs won't save you from cultists they miss too much and don't cause enough damage when they do hit. I'm not a jellohead and I pack in template weapons for those situations. Cultists are the least of my problems against CSM.

Would it totally break the ML mechanics to make them Heavy 2 instead of Heavy 1? Which would solve the math of not enough shots vs how accurate they are. OR perhaps make them able to shoot at full BS after moving? Which would solve the issue of getting into LOS of side armor values more viable for Devs. Thoughts?