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.

I'm trying to get a new guy into the hobby, and he wants to try IG because he likes tanks. I figured we'd try a 750 point game and made him a list. How do you think this would be?

CCS - 50
2 Leman Russ - 300
Vet Squad - 3x plasma, Chimera - 170
PCS - 30
3x Infantry Squads, each with an AC - 180

Gives him 20 points left over, and I'll let him decide if he wants to switch out 1 of the tanks or take different weapons in his squads or CCS. Fliers will be introduced in later games. I figure this list would give him a feel for different aspects of the game and his army. He's got 2 big tanks, a good amount of foot guard, a transport with special weapons, and he can also take advantage of the Orders system.

Give the CCS and PCS a AC each to make up those 20 points.

If you think that he's not going to face any AV14 it'll be fine.

Edit: Done some more maths, not sure if I've done it right if only due to the matching % at places. Possibly have, it looks like it'll match my efficiency charts if we were to factor in cost.

This is for 5 HW bases against a 3HP thing.

 Blaggard wrote:
Give the CCS and PCS a AC each to make up those 20 points.

If you think that he's not going to face any AV14 it'll be fine.

Edit: Done some more maths, not sure if I've done it right if only due to the matching % at places. Possibly have, it looks like it'll match my efficiency charts if we were to factor in cost.

This is for 5 HW bases against a 3HP thing.

Thanks. It's my dad, and he won't be playing unless I'm around since it's not something he has the free time to fully commit to (modelling, painting, etc). But I'll show him the chart to explain LC vs AC.

The chart was for another argument we were having about "effectiveness vs efficiency".
I ain't going to do one for toughness/save tonight, might be interestan.

Ok I don't want to stir the pot here. But. What would that chart look like VS an AV14 Vehicle?

Sinji wrote:
Ok I don't want to stir the pot here. But. What would that chart look like VS an AV14 Vehicle?

The stats for firing at AV14 are already on that chart

Well who would have thought clicking on it would have made it bigger. I guess Lascannons are obviously better then.

Note that the figures aren't exact, there's no way to get >=100%. I can't be buggered to make it correct atm so just use them as a scalar comparison.

EDIT:

Done the proper maths.


I thought I didn't do this right until I increased the weapon bases to like 100 of each, it still doesn't reach 100% for either result.
Now for toughness and various saves :(

Im building a list that features four mech vet units, a plasma ccs and a mechanised flamer-heavy al'rahem platoon. Would you say that a pair of manticores, a quad gun and a vet squad with AC is a good addition for ~500 points?

Can i put special squad with 3 demos in vendetta and with order to twin link it after i disembark if im in range for order?

Get demolitions veterans in a vandetta and blow up any tank, including titans.

RatGod wrote:Can i put special squad with 3 demos in vendetta and with order to twin link it after i disembark if im in range for order?

Absolutely.

c18ka wrote:Get demolitions veterans in a vandetta and blow up any tank, including titans.

Eh; ymmv. Often they just get shot to bits after disembarking.

I think it's probably best to leave the demolition delivery to SWSs and Marbo. Both of which show up, do their thing and usually die. I would probably only put one demo charge in a SWS to keep them cheap.

Can't you assault after getting out of a vandetta?

Does it say "assault vehicle"?

"Vandetta" just screams "rapevan with lasers on it" to me.

Just a heads up original poster, when people bag on AC's dont listen to them whole heartedly. (lascannons have their place, but AC shine a bit brighter in my opinion)

for anti vehicle AC's
av10-11 they are better
av12 lascannon by slim margin
av13+ lascannon by large margin

(so what are you expecting to have trouble with??)

against infantry AC's will kill more of (most) ANY type of dudes that dont have 2 wds T4.

what people fail to realize is that for every 1 lascannon shot i get 4 AC shots.

 RegulusBlack wrote:
Just a heads up original poster, when people bag on AC's dont listen to them whole heartedly. (lascannons have their place, but AC shine a bit brighter in my opinion)

for anti vehicle AC's
av10-11 they are better
av12 lascannon by slim margin
av13+ lascannon by large margin

(so what are you expecting to have trouble with??)

against infantry AC's will kill more of (most) ANY type of dudes that dont have 2 wds T4.

what people fail to realize is that for every 1 lascannon shot i get 4 AC shots.

What you don't realize is that AP2 on a lascannon makes it better, and that for every 1 lascannon shot, you get 2 AC shots and 10 more points.

but isnt that kind of the point ( and that for every 1 lascannon shot, you get 2 AC shots and 10 more points)

as stated in the Autocannon thread earlier, AC vs. the majority of all ground "dudes" wins out. 4xAC shots kills more than 1xLC shot.

i would probably concede that if i had only 1 Heavy weapon upgrade available and 20 points to spend why not get a LC.

The whole autocannon thing always devolves to people looking at them in a vacuum against just one or two target types and then mysteriously declaring them to be better weapons over all.

If you're willing to ignore what Ap2 means and are willing to forget what a carrier cost is, and are willing to believe that a kill made on any turn is equal in quality to a kill made on any other turn, and are willing to pretend like the game consists of only two different units, then the autocannon can start to look good, but it only looks great when you can do all of that AND don't understand how math works.

 RegulusBlack wrote:
but isnt that kind of the point ( and that for every 1 lascannon shot, you get 2 AC shots and 10 more points)

as stated in the Autocannon thread earlier, AC vs. the majority of all ground "dudes" wins out. 4xAC shots kills more than 1xLC shot.

i would probably concede that if i had only 1 Heavy weapon upgrade available and 20 points to spend why not get a LC.

A guardsman costs 5 points. A heavy weapons team will cost you 30 points with a lascannon. 20 points with an autocannon.

An infantry squad costs 50 points. An infantry squad with a lascannon will cost you 70 points, or 60 points with an autocannon.

Lascannons are marginally more expensive if you look at it correctly. Not twice.

Futhrermore,

BS3 Autocannon vs. MEQ.

Hits once. Wounds 5/6. Kills .2777 Marines.

BS3 Lascannon vs. MEQ

Hits .5, wounds 5/12, kills .416 marines.

Autocannons are only worth it against Sv4+ and above, which guard has Manticores, Punishers, Basilisks, Lasguns, Heavy Bolters, Multilasers, and the like to deal with.

Never, ever, ever waste your heavy weapon slots on a weapon that excels at killing Sv4+ guys. There is so much else that could do it less wastefully.

Ailaros, i respect your opinion, you have some of the best battle reports out there, and are one of the reasons i play mech vs. foot

but when comparing the AC's based on cost vs. the Lascannon based on cost AC wins. (comparing 40 points of AC's vs. 40 points of LC's)

AC = 8 shots x.66 (BS 4)
5.28 Hits x .83 (WD 2+)
4.38 Wds x .33 (Armor Save)
1.45 Dead Marines.

LC = 2 shots x .66 (BS4)
1.32 Hits x .83 (WD 2+)
1.1 Wds
1.1 Dead Marines.

In cover it gears much higher to AC’s

LC = (1.1 x .66 [cover save fail] =
.726 Dead Marines. (half of the Autocannon kills)

Alright lets do some numbers again. vs. Terminators

AC = 8 shots x.66 (BS 4)
5.28 Hits x .83 (WD 2+)
4.38 Wds x .17 (Armor Save)
0.744 Dead Terminators

LC = 2 shots x .66 (BS4)
1.32 Hits x .83 (WD 2+)
1.1 Wds x .66 (5++ invul)
0.726 Dead terminators

now if you want to compare a single model HWT of AC's vs. single model HWT of LC's, sure i concede LasCannons are going to be better, undoubtedley better because your paying double what you are paying for the AC's
(200 points of SW librarians is better than 100 points of SW librarians)

Captain grey brought up the point of 2W models, (instagibbing T4 dudes) and i agree that vs. : 2W, T4 models that do NOT have EW/4++/3++/higher Toughness factor, LC's are better.
but in comparison AC's kills average of 4 dudes in 4+ armor.

so in summation if ALL you ever see in your local game is Paladins, and ?Mega Nobz? (these are the only things in saturation that i can think of that fall into that category of 2W/T4) by all means take LC's
but if you face off against: SM/CSM/GK/IG/DE/E/SoB/O/Tau, your much better off For The Points in taking AC's (dunno about Nids cause i have never faced em, and well if your up against demons... well good luck)

 RegulusBlack wrote:
Ailaros, i respect your opinion, you have some of the best battle reports out there, and are one of the reasons i play mech vs. foot

but when comparing the AC's based on cost vs. the Lascannon based on cost AC wins. (comparing 40 points of AC's vs. 40 points of LC's)

AC = 8 shots x.66 (BS 4)
5.28 Hits x .83 (WD 2+)
4.38 Wds x .33 (Armor Save)
1.45 Dead Marines.

LC = 2 shots x .66 (BS4)
1.32 Hits x .83 (WD 2+)
1.1 Wds
1.1 Dead Marines.

In cover it gears much higher to AC’s

LC = (1.1 x .66 [cover save fail] =
.726 Dead Marines. (half of the Autocannon kills)

Alright lets do some numbers again. vs. Terminators

AC = 8 shots x.66 (BS 4)
5.28 Hits x .83 (WD 2+)
4.38 Wds x .17 (Armor Save)
0.744 Dead Terminators

LC = 2 shots x .66 (BS4)
1.32 Hits x .83 (WD 2+)
1.1 Wds x .66 (5++ invul)
0.726 Dead terminators

now if you want to compare a single model HWT of AC's vs. single model HWT of LC's, sure i concede LasCannons are going to be better, undoubtedley better because your paying double what you are paying for the AC's

You have to account for carrier cost, man. That's what you're both missing, and not getting. Like I said:

A guardsman costs 5 points. A heavy weapons team will cost you 30 points with a lascannon. 20 points with an autocannon.

An infantry squad costs 50 points. An infantry squad with a lascannon will cost you 70 points, or 60 points with an autocannon.

Lascannons are marginally more expensive if you look at it correctly. Not twice.

You can't just compare a lascannon to an autocannon. That's unrealistic.

By that same logic, I would be able to compare infinity Lasguns against zero autocannons, because they cost the same.

You have to account for carrier cost; that's what Ailaros and I are saying.

If you can find me a guard unit that can put an autocannon on the field for 10 points, full price for the unit, then color me impressed.

sorry i am not understanding carrier cost (not trying to sound combatative, i honestly dont get it)

an upgrade is an upgrade.

i thought we were comparing points to points, for instance: 4 LC's vs. 8 AC's within an armywide infrastructure.

 RegulusBlack wrote:
sorry i am not understanding carrier cost (not trying to sound combatative, i honestly dont get it)

an upgrade is an upgrade.

i thought we were comparing points to points, for instance: 4 LC's vs. 8 AC's within an armywide infrastructure.

Well, the unit carrying the weapon costs something. The weapons cost something, but the weapon can't shoot by itself. Even HWS's cost 60 points base (if I remember correctly), that's the carrier cost. In order to put 3 plasmaguns on a Vet Squad, you still have to pay for the 7 other lasguns in the squad even if you don't want them. That's carrier cost.

The HWS gets a 5 point discount per heavy weapon. It'd be more accurately described as a 45 point carrier cost.

Thank you for the interpretation washout, however that seems like flawed logic, (and maybe i'm just not smart enough to see the bigger picture, which is possible)

if your going to desaturate the cost of something by blanketing it in with the unit cost, then perhaps i can sorta see why LC's can be better.

however.....

i think thats disengenuous to the upgrades (all upgrades for that matter)
6 AC's in vet squads vs. 3 LC's in vet squads. in math dont you remove like variables??? (been years since college)

against MEQ 1 AC vs. 1 LC hits/wds/sv divided by total carrier cost = .005 kills per point on AC vs. .006 kills per point LC

so sure if you take into account the cost of the unit, LC's are better. but again that seems flawed to me, i either have the unit or i dont, and if i upgrade to 1 item vs. the other the only variance is the item upgraded.

I can't believe we are still on the AC vs LC debate. I feel like this has been going on for months now. We obviously aren't coming to a consensus. Personally I am of the opinion that each has their place in a guard army in the correct ratios. I think however we should put this AC vs LC debate down for a while and move on to new tactics and tricks (what this thread is for). For instance I for one would like to know how Ailaros' experience has been fielding vanquisher's?

 TheLionOfTheForest wrote:
I can't believe we are still on the AC vs LC debate. I feel like this has been going on for months now. We obviously aren't coming to a consensus. Personally I am of the opinion that each has their place in a guard army in the correct ratios. I think however we should put this AC vs LC debate down for a while and move on to new tactics and tricks (what this thread is for).

There are thousands of IG players.

Every time someone brings up the comparison, its going to be discussed.

Such is life.

I see what's going on here. One camp is comparing guardsmen price + gun vs guardsmen price + gun and the other is just looking at the fact that the Las costs more than the AC.

I still think it would be better to debate which ratio to use rather than which one is better in some kind of vacuum.

AP 2 does really come in handy quite a bit in 6th edition, I must admit.