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.

Poly Ranger wrote:

 th3maninblak wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's not a stretch at all, because this game punishes "catch all" units very harshly. Heavy bolters are bad, and 24" guns on a predator hull are bad as well.

This is hilarious. Not so long ago people were talking about how awful the lascannon was and how a TL lascannon is statistically worse than a TL assault cannon against every target and every AV. Now that a couple bloggers have mentioned "oh the baal pred isnt as good anymore" everyone and there mother is suddenly shouting "zomg the baal sux hurdcurr!!!" Im betting half of you have never played with or against one =p

I own 6 baals:
2 solo flamestorms
1 flamestorm/heavy flamers
1 flamestorm/heavy bolters
1 solo assault cannon
1 assault cannon/heavy bolters

The flamestorms are useless now. The assault cannon baals are okish. But why choose okish when you can choose great?

And the tl AC over tl lascannon debate you have taken out of context. That was always (as far as I've seen it) a discussion on a raven, where 24" doesn't matter, and it is on a vehicle with both ceremite and is a flyer, so is not worried about melta and is hard to hit. None of which applies to a baal.

The LC is even a better choice on a storm raven which has no issue with the weapons range or getting close to the enemy. LC is almost always chosen over it. Cause AP2 can blow up a tank and instant death to T4.

Ap2 has very low chance of one shotting a tank. Most vehicle kills are caused by glancing to death. The AC is better againt almost every av than a lascannon and those that it is not better against it is literally on par with.
I have very rarely seen the lascannon taken over the assault cannon by experienced players. This debate has been done to death and maths has proved the advantages of the assault cannon (on a raven) over a lascannon quite comprehensively... multiple times.
It is a very rare circumstance when a non EW t4 character is not accompanied by a squad.

Assault cannon on a raven, sure. But not a predator hull.

Poly Ranger wrote:
Ap2 has very low chance of one shotting a tank. Most vehicle kills are caused by glancing to death. The AC is better againt almost every av than a lascannon and those that it is not better against it is literally on par with.
I have very rarely seen the lascannon taken over the assault cannon by experienced players. This debate has been done to death and maths has proved the advantages of the assault cannon (on a raven) over a lascannon quite comprehensively... multiple times.
It is a very rare circumstance when a non EW t4 character is not accompanied by a squad.

The LC is better against heavy infantry or even something like enemy DC that would normally get 3+ and then 5+. So 1 kill per wound vs. 2/9ths is a pretty good edge that having twice the shots won't make up for. The gap is smaller against something like a Riptide but still an advantage for the LC. I guess it's a question of whether the rest of your army can take out light vehicles and how many your local meta requires you to deal with.

I always give my Ravens sponsons, so the AC is a no brainer. Being versatile is key for a unit that expensive.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
It's not that the Sicaran is that good, it's just that the rest of Space Marine tank options are fairly mediocre to bad.

So the forge world choice is better than the rest? This is why so some locales play without forge world. Some of the stuff is decent, some of it is better than anything else you can take.
Oddly, I almost never see people show up with the average forge world stuff, only the undercosted stuff. Which would be why I'd rather play without it.

Poly Ranger wrote:
Ap2 has very low chance of one shotting a tank. Most vehicle kills are caused by glancing to death. The AC is better againt almost every av than a lascannon and those that it is not better against it is literally on par with.
I have very rarely seen the lascannon taken over the assault cannon by experienced players. This debate has been done to death and maths has proved the advantages of the assault cannon (on a raven) over a lascannon quite comprehensively... multiple times.
It is a very rare circumstance when a non EW t4 character is not accompanied by a squad.

armor 11+ I'm taking the laz cannon. Taking hull points off of priority targets on a storm raven is not an option - destruction or bust. At armor 12 - 13 the odds of any damage result are identical and 14 the LZ is undeniably better. At armor and at 12 and 13 a laz cannon can always get the job done with 1 shot.

Not really.
Most AV 12/13 has a weaker rear-armour, which means you can fly to the back and shoot it down with TL-AC.
If you are fighting AV14, you are screwed anyway and you should rely on the Melta.

Can anyone tell me how the Sicaran could actually take TL-AC or TL-LC? I'm not seeing that in my book..
I'm almost suspecting people were going offtopic.

Kangodo wrote:
N

Can anyone tell me how the Sicaran could actually take TL-AC or TL-LC? I'm not seeing that in my book..
I'm almost suspecting people were going offtopic.

They went on a side rant regarding the stormraven!

but who would want to replace the Herakles with either a AC or LC? its straight up better then both of those options! xD

Here we go again... (assuming no cover)
AV 14
Lascannon average hps.
8/9 x 1/3 = 0.296
Assault cannon average hps
4 x 8/9 x 1/6 x 2/3 = 0.395
Undeniably better eh?

AV 13
Lascannon
8/9 x 1/2 = 0.444
Assault cannon
4 x 8/9 x 1/6 = 0.593

AV12
Lascannon
8/9 x 2/3 = 0.593
Assault cannon
4x 8/9 x 1/6 = 0.593

AV11
Lascannon
8/9 x 5/6 = 0.741
Assault cannon
4 x 8/9 x 1/3 = 1.185
Always take the lascannon against av11 eh?

AV10
Lascannon
8/9 x 1 = 0.889
Assault cannon
4 x 8/9 x 1/2 = 1.778

Chance of tl lascannon exploding av14
8/9 x 1/6 x 1/6 = 2.47%
Av13
8/9 x 1/3 x 1/6 = 4.92%
Av12
8/9 x 1/2 x 1/6 = 7.41%
Av11
8/9 x 2/3 x 1/6 = 9.88%
Av10
8/9 x 5/6 x 1/6 = 12.35%

All tge above is without cover note.


So you say boom or bust in the first turn it shoots as glancing off hps is not an option? Are you honestly telling me that you would rely on the lascannon exploding an av11 vehicle out of cover less than 1 in every 10 games? That's a weak game plan.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mavnas wrote:

Poly Ranger wrote:
Ap2 has very low chance of one shotting a tank. Most vehicle kills are caused by glancing to death. The AC is better againt almost every av than a lascannon and those that it is not better against it is literally on par with.
I have very rarely seen the lascannon taken over the assault cannon by experienced players. This debate has been done to death and maths has proved the advantages of the assault cannon (on a raven) over a lascannon quite comprehensively... multiple times.
It is a very rare circumstance when a non EW t4 character is not accompanied by a squad.

The LC is better against heavy infantry or even something like enemy DC that would normally get 3+ and then 5+. So 1 kill per wound vs. 2/9ths is a pretty good edge that having twice the shots won't make up for. The gap is smaller against something like a Riptide but still an advantage for the LC. I guess it's a question of whether the rest of your army can take out light vehicles and how many your local meta requires you to deal with.

That is a good point. Fnp models and 2+ MCs will indeed suffer more from the lascannon. But if you are equipping it to hunt 2+ or large 3+ fnp squads then there is a tl plasma cannon. If you are equipping it to hunt vehicles, the AC is completely mathmatically better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The is the point about versatility if you know you will be facing these and vehicles though.

 HawaiiMatt wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
It's not that the Sicaran is that good, it's just that the rest of Space Marine tank options are fairly mediocre to bad.

So the forge world choice is better than the rest? This is why so some locales play without forge world. Some of the stuff is decent, some of it is better than anything else you can take.
Oddly, I almost never see people show up with the average forge world stuff, only the undercosted stuff. Which would be why I'd rather play without it.

In this case, it's better than most things in various Space Marine codexes that fit a similar role (being a tank), but I see that as balancing out a weakness rather than giving an unfair advantage. It's not that the Sicaran is so incredibly good, it's just that much of the standard codex is so weak that it won't be seen in semi-competitive scenes. The Wave Serpent argument is over-used, I know, but I can't help but think that if Eldar can get a tank with as much dakka as the WS that is also able to jink, be ObSec and fast, isn't it fair to give SM armies a fast tank that's competing with a lot of other units in the HS section? Stuff that breaks with netlists is nice, in my view.

Many armies seem to stand a lot better chance at being considered competitive if they use more sources than their primary codex, be it formations, dataslates or forgeworld, all of which are created by Games Workshop to make people spend more money, at least FW makes cool models and not just charging for rules Maybe I am a bit biased towards FW right now as my primary army is CSM, a codex with only a small handful of units that can be called good, and IA:13 opens up a lot of opportunities for them to do well.

Sorry for contributing to the off-topic debate about why/why not FW is good/bad to the game, I'll (try to) stop.

On-topic: thanks for sharing that math Poly Ranger, it's interesting to see how well the AC does. The shorter range is still very important to take into consideration though, as there are a lot of things that want to get close to you (Knights?). What is the range of the AC? 24 or 30"?

Could someone please do the math to compare the Sicaran to the Tri-Las Predator? (6 TL-Autocannon shots with Rending iirc, don't have my IA books on me vs. 3 LC shots, one being TL'd). Math is not my strongest side Ideally against the fistful of untits that seem to make up 40k nowadays (Knights/Riptides/Centurions/Wraithknights/Wave Serpents)

So the way this convo is going, i think we have reached an agreement.

The assault cannon Baal pred is a solid tank for the cost. Heavy bolter sponsons bring it to a cool 135 points, which is good for a fast av13 vehicle.

That being said, in areas where forgeworld is common or accepted, the sicaran is far better due to it being an undercosted cheeseball.

GrafWattenburg wrote:


Could someone please do the math to compare the Sicaran to the Tri-Las Predator? (6 TL-Autocannon shots with Rending iirc, don't have my IA books on me vs. 3 LC shots, one being TL'd). Math is not my strongest side Ideally against the fistful of untits that seem to make up 40k nowadays (Knights/Riptides/Centurions/Wraithknights/Wave Serpents)

Why bother with the math?

It's been proven that TL-Assault cannon > TL Lascannon.....and the accelerator autocannon is WAY better than the assault cannon (50% more shots, ignore jink, higher strength) and you get the hull mounted heavy bolter, extra side and rear armor to boot.

And fast!

 th3maninblak wrote:
So the way this convo is going, i think we have reached an agreement.

The assault cannon Baal pred is a solid tank for the cost. Heavy bolter sponsons bring it to a cool 135 points, which is good for a fast av13 vehicle.

That being said, in areas where forgeworld is common or accepted, the sicaran is far better due to it being an undercosted cheeseball.

Yup. It is fairly good for dealing with infantry and light vehicles. Still not spectacular, but serviceable. Rending can make it ruin people's day though. If I had the cash I would take the Sicaran in a heartbeat though.

Doesn't giving something sponson weapons synergise poorly with being Fast?

Mavnas wrote:
Doesn't giving something sponson weapons synergise poorly with being Fast?

No. They can fire more weapons when they have moved.

 erinil0905 wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
A few reasons.
1. Not all tournaments allow FW. Even some casual clubs don't care for FW.
2. Money
3. You can only field one Sicaran vs. up to three Baals.

The whole ¨ No FW ¨ is something I think of as a bit silly but that debate is already covered in another post!
( FW does carge you the soul of your firstborn! )

But I am talking from a purely gameplay perspective/ rule.

For the very reason you are stating. You arent looking to increase your collection for something fluffy or fun, you want a straight up superior to the codex in every way alternate, which forgeworld has in spades. Those kind of people are know as the WAAC group, and give forgeworld the mixed love/hate it has today.

Being competetive is not being WAAC. Not in the slightest.

According to your logic, every tyranid player who takes a flyrant over a normal tyrant is WAAC.

You can have more than one Sicaran, you just need a MotF fielded.

Not as BA anymore unfortunately. IA:2 allows relics taken in multiples for BA if taking a reclusiarch not a MotF. We no longer have access to a reclusiarch.

Poly Ranger wrote:
Not as BA anymore unfortunately. IA:2 allows relics taken in multiples for BA if taking a reclusiarch not a MotF. We no longer have access to a reclusiarch.

You can go unbound and include as many detachments with sicarans as you want, no?

 erinil0905 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Rephrase the question - why take any space marine vehicle over a Sicaran? Oh yeah cause forge world isn't really part of the game. thanks.

What is your reasoning behind saying that FW isn't really a part of the game?

My opinions on the matter can be summed up in this entire thread http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/629916.page

Lolz! I been arguing in that thread. Was going to buy fw stuff but these 2 guys quoting me who already own fw are telling me fw is no more op than gw and is mediocre. Also fw has been officially part of the game so i shouldnt disallow anyone playing fw.

Many FW are fine, but the thing is if they put out things that are just 10%-20% better than GW, that's enough to make a game unbalanced.

Also apparently I want to field a Sicaran now ;(

 Filch wrote:
Lolz! I been arguing in that thread. Was going to buy fw stuff but these 2 guys quoting me who already own fw are telling me fw is no more op than gw and is mediocre. Also fw has been officially part of the game so i shouldnt disallow anyone playing fw.

That is true, Forgeworld is legal.
But some people just want to ban everything from FW, not because it's overpowered but because they think it is overpowered.
It's also legal for the opponent to refuse to play against FW. So it's always smart to ask players.

 koooaei wrote:
You can go unbound and include as many detachments with sicarans as you want, no?

No, you can go unbound OR include as many detachments as you want.
Unbound armies don't have Detachments.

I was really disappointing that the Baal lost its scout move. I think it was the only flame tank that actually had enough going for it that it was worth taking.

I'd probably still do the flame thing if I was going to bring one, but probably not in a tourney style list.

And, as others have said, Sicarans are better in almost every way.

You're braver than me. I have absolutely no idea now how to run the flamestorm varient successfully now. It would work I suppose if all the following conditions applied to the game:
-You are running BA as a counter attacking allied force for a mainly gunline army
-Your main army is imperial so you don't suffer from one eye open.
-You know in advance that your opponent will be running a heavy assault army
-You know your opponent is bringing a meq army
-You know your opponent will not have the opportunity to deploy melta close range to obliterate your Baal before it shoots.
-You deploy it and manoeuvre it in a way so that once it has fired once, no assault unit with anything as strong as or stronger than a krak granade can get to it in the opponents next assault phase.

IF all the above apply, it would be useful.

You forgot one. If its immobilized then it becomes a volcano that can be easily avoided. So the opponent can't have much grav in the area.

Cities of death. Also can be put in reserve to come on and hit a unit in your backfield. Those are about the only ways I would run on now that they lost scout.

You dont take a baal over a sicaran, at least not the first. From there if you want more than 1 you need to pay the tax or at that point consider a baal or two to saturate av13. What's the issue?
It's a great tank straight from 30k man and while good it's hardly cheesy. Honestly the only thing it's really that good at killing is jinking skimmers.. like wave serpents which it is a godsend against.
I faced 2 the other night with GKs and they did squat to me before dying. People need to get over the forge world hang up. GW is less balanced.