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 like how you are advocating reliability of a weapon that A) requires 12 inches of range and B) can kill the user as being more useful than a weapon that can fire every turn without killing its user. I do run static gun line CCS (2). I also do not use mech spam, or MoO for that matter.
PP have entirely no use to me in my army and would be 30 points completely wasted where as a MoO would be less of a waste.

But If we want to argue what's best for the specific list we need to consider what is useul in that list, not blanket statements.


@ peregrine - if your relying on plasma pistols to kill termies for you, then your list must be deficient in other areas.

 TheLionOfTheForest wrote:
I like how you are advocating reliability of a weapon that A) requires 12 inches of range and B) can kill the user as being more useful than a weapon that can fire every turn without killing its user.

I like how you're advocating reliability of a weapon that C) has horrible scatter that makes the spot where you aim it the safest place on the table.

@ peregrine - if your relying on plasma pistols to kill termies for you, then your list must be deficient in other areas.

How could you possibly read what I wrote and think that I said that I'm relying on plasma pistols to kill terminators?

First off I never advocated the use of MoO. I stated myself that I don't use one. However this is a MoO thread. You were the one toting the awesomeness of pp specifically against terminator targets.

You also have a habit of specifically only addressing parts of what people say. You have intentionally misquoted me in other threads to perpetuate your arguments.

But if you don't expect to be moving your CCS very much then why not give it a MoO? Also as has been noted the MOO shot is also rather situational, but with a great payback. I think it probably comes down a particular player's percieved risk on plasma pistols in this case. What if we made it a bit more neutral. Another couple of options for 30 points are heavy stubbers or HK missiles on tanks. These will also reliably make shots during the game, but without the potential extreme payback you get from a MoO. What thinks Dakka?

 TheLionOfTheForest wrote:
First off I never advocated the use of MoO. I stated myself that I don't use one. However this is a MoO thread. You were the one toting the awesomeness of pp specifically against terminator targets.

You also have a habit of specifically only addressing parts of what people say. You have intentionally misquoted me in other threads to perpetuate your arguments.

The definition of irony: complaining about misquoting in the same post that you misquote me.

(Hint: I never said anything about terminators at all, only that dual plasma pistols is 25% more plasma in a CCS. Perhaps you should pay more attention to the names next to each post?)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Flinty wrote:
But if you don't expect to be moving your CCS very much then why not give it a MoO? Also as has been noted the MOO shot is also rather situational, but with a great payback.

Except it's not really great payback. Even when it hits it's still just a Basilisk shot, mediocre against vehicles and infantry in area terrain and only really effective against MEQs in the open.

What if we made it a bit more neutral. Another couple of options for 30 points are heavy stubbers or HK missiles on tanks.

How is changing the comparison to useless upgrades "more neutral"? How about instead of comparing the MoO to something you're never going to buy we compare it to 3x melta guns?

@peregrine I apologize. It was griddlelol who was talking about terminators. Not you.

TheLionOfTheForest wrote: You were the one toting the awesomeness of pp specifically against terminator targets.

Firstly, you're referring to me, and also ignoring that I was talking a plasma in general. Not just plasma pistols. 8 plasma shots (thanks to a gun-slinger and 3 plasma guns) is devastating. Frankly if you're not relying on plasma to kill TEQ, what are you relying on? Massed lasguns?

Flinty wrote:But if you don't expect to be moving your CCS very much then why not give it a MoO?

Well for one I didn't specify that the CCS would be the unit not moving. They tend to be moving a lot. 4 special weapons is too important to keep still in my opinion.

What if we made it a bit more neutral. Another couple of options for 30 points are heavy stubbers or HK missiles on tanks.

The difference is that plasma pistols will do something, the stubbers, HK and MoO probably won't. gak =/= neutral, gak = gak.

Peregrine wrote:How about instead of comparing the MoO to something you're never going to buy we compare it to 3x melta guns?

My issue with this comparison is that if I have 3 special weapon slots spare, my list building was wrong in the first place. The plasma pistol and MoO are after thought items. Something you throw on when you have 30pts left over. The plasma pistol is just the better option.

Griddlelol - I never ignored anything. We were discussing MoO and CCS and you stated you would rather have 3 PP than a MoO. You never stated in that post where you would put them. And I assumed you were talk my about the CCS. My bad for assuming.

I think he is one of the weaker advisors personally, I tend to take the astropath instead. Then again, my list depends on maneuverability and reserves so my opinion might not carry too much weight with regards to a static weapon.

My problem with the MoO isn't one of effeciency but one of synergy. Unless I'm missing something, you still have to shoot at the same target as the rest of the squad. That means that either A) your plasmaguns or meltaguns are going to be hamstringed by shooting at a target too far away too be effective or B) your plasmaguns/meltaguns will be shooting at a target that's too close to risk the orbital bombardment. This means that you are left with the option to field a stripped-down CCS with no upgrades, or ditch the MoO completely.

I've had SOME success with the MoO. It seems very hit-or-miss. The occassions it has served well were vs. parking lots full of Rhinos/Razorbacks. Otherwise it seems like a waste.

DMDaddy0 wrote:
My problem with the MoO isn't one of effeciency but one of synergy. Unless I'm missing something, you still have to shoot at the same target as the rest of the squad. That means that either A) your plasmaguns or meltaguns are going to be hamstringed by shooting at a target too far away too be effective or B) your plasmaguns/meltaguns will be shooting at a target that's too close to risk the orbital bombardment. This means that you are left with the option to field a stripped-down CCS with no upgrades, or ditch the MoO completely.

I've had SOME success with the MoO. It seems very hit-or-miss. The occassions it has served well were vs. parking lots full of Rhinos/Razorbacks. Otherwise it seems like a waste.

If/when I use a MoO (mostly fun games over more competative) I find he does nice in a static CCS, with LC magic flag and either camo or a camo netted chimera behind an aegis. 2 of these HQ units provided survivability through redundancy, can dish out 4 orders a turn and are great for holding a couple blobs in place.

Griddlelol wrote:Just FYI, long range and blast templates aren't exactly difficult to obtain in a guard army. The HS section is full of 'em, they're more accurate too.

but not for just 30 points, and on a unit you're already needing to take.

I don't think I'd rather have 3 plasma pistols. Remember, if you're bringing a stationary CCS, that means you're bringing a foot list, and foot guard generally doesn't pack BS4 plasma pistols.

It isn't bad to have.
I've run one with Creed. His 24" orders lets me hide and use 4 orders a turn, then I drop a 30 point basilisk shot somewhere.
Sure, it only connects every other shot, but what do you expect for 30 points.

I find that scatter 3D6 is better than 2D6. 3D6 means it scatters far enough to hit another unit.
Just aim center mass. You don't need many kills to cover the 30 point cost.

-Matt

And that's really it. You only need to expect 30 points out of him. I think that this particular upgrade suffers badly from overexpectations.

All he needs to do is throw two hull points off of chimeras, or kill a couple of space marines to be worth taking. Odds are, you're using him with BiD against a vehicle, and if he manages to, say, take a hull point off of a land raider, then he's WAY, WAY more than made his points back.

make thread amazing. 4 MoO

 Ailaros wrote:
Remember, if you're bringing a stationary CCS, that means you're bringing a foot list, and foot guard generally doesn't pack BS4 plasma pistols.

I'm not happy with the idea of a stationary CCS in general. I've tried them out and they just die too fast. When in a chimera they are a fair amount more durable and don't have to remain stationary.
Although yes, the plasma pistols would be poor in a non-vet list, I agree. However I would even say camo-netting for an artillery piece or Russ would be a better choice.

Guard is still divided by two play styles. Mobile and stationary.

For those who have a ccs which moves, the MoO is a really bad idea, after all he can't shoot if he moves.

If you are stationary, I find he works well in a cheap ccs camped out on a quad gun behind an agis. Add an auto cannon or las cannon for more synergy. I don't bother with plasma on the other guys. The squad always takes heavy fire, and it's useful to have two extra wounds that you don't miss when they're gone. (going to ground for 2+, with the first two wounds you do suffer not even making you blink can be rude)

This often means that you opponent has to face unloading a lot of firepower into the squad (only around 100pts) and thus leaving my vets alone, or ignore the squad to have an obnoxious large blast dropping all the place.

He is a great addition to any non tank based army. And in tourneys is a cheap insurance against chimera/truk/rhino/razorback/raider transport spams. (great for an all comers list, but if you are tailoring to face flyers... Leave him at home)

Ignore the haters, MOO is a great addition to an IG gunline list. It only needs to kill two basic MEQ, or one Rhino, to get its points back, something that it will often do. Obviously though it's dependant on the sort of enemy that you face.

I think that it has been said several times, for a stationary CCS he is not a bad investment as he gives some additional use.

For a mobile one he is useless, a 30 pt T3 wound.

One interesting use for him that I have used from time to time is to fire the quad gun/lascannon in the CCS at a vehicle with BiD and the MoO also fires but his goal is not the tank but to scatter into the "bubble" wrap infantry around the tank. With BiD you can reroll the scatter and have improved chance to clip it. It is not something to count on but it can put a decent dent into bubble wrap units on a valuable tank.

If you use him count on a scatter and try to fire him into the center of a knot of units. Orks and tyranids are probably his best targets (same strategy as above for the tyranid MC).