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.

None of those are common because they suck.

Well, that's because its 3+ that you need to crack usually, not 4+.

And what in this game is more ubiquitous than a Krak Grenade? It may suck, but it is common.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To put it more clearly:
Those weapons excel at removing things that *aren't* t4 3+ or better. And so nobody cares about them. Because generally, without a 3+ or t4 or better, its not hard to remove anyways.

They certainly do a number on Fire Warriors or Dire Avengers, though.

...a unit can throw ONE Krak grenade. So a unit of 5 where each unit pays for Krak grenades actually doesn't get to use them. Don't try to play it off and it isn't like they get to use them in melee against infantry.

Assault cannons cannot be massed, except on two platforms that are not good. Razorbacks and Terminators.

Force Staff is melee and on a Librarian so that person is using it wrong.

Power Mauls are much more common than the above, but not as common as Power swords. Also melee again. I'm not sure where Power mauls would be standard on a unit except Grimauldus, Chaplains etc.

Heavy Flamers cannot be taken en masse. Actually I'm having a hard time thinking what can take them besides Sternguard and Devs. Why would you give up special ammunition though?

Heavy Bolter, this is as common as Devastators, which until recently was not at all. Even now though with Skyhammer they take Grav. Much more common as a sponson on a vehicle.

Autocannon, used to be the most common, was pretty good. It still IS a good ranged weapon. Solid all around is frequently twin-linked native. But nothing except goddamn Predators have it (This is also where Heavy Bolters can be found) and most armies don't build around armor anymore.

Bharring wrote:
@Aki - what Xenos, out of curiosity?

Necrons have warriors and flayed ones.
Eldar have Aspect warriors, most of them have a 4+
Tau have Fire warriors
Dark Eldar I think have a few? Our DE player stopped playing a while ago and has moved on.

Orks and Nids do not, they tend to have worst saves.

Note that, with all of these armies, none of these units are considered competitive for the most part (Fire warriors aren't bad, but their defense is the range of their guns). You also mention a few of them later, so I assume you're aware of them?

Bharring wrote:

When I field ally 4+ bodies, it frequently goes like this:
Opponent - Ok, take X armor saves
Me - isn't that AP4?
opponent - Really?
*someone looks it up*
Me - removes models from table (or takes cover/invuln)

Okay? Not sure what you're trying to say here. Are you implying that you have 4+ models and forget what weapons are Ap4? Or that the cover save is usually good enough that you don't mind losing the armor save?

Bharring wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Some SM AP4 weapons:

-Assault Cannon
-Autocannon
-Heavy Bolter
-Heavy Flamer
-Krak Grenades
-Power Maul
-Force Staff

And that's just the reasonably common stuff.

I wouldn't call most of those reasonably common, but earlier 2 options were considered vast so it could very well be semantics.
Assault cannons aren't available on many platforms that want to take them, or that are useful at all.
I can possibly see the Autocannon being taken, but its more for the TL Str 7 shots against armor, rather then the AP.
Heavy bolters are never taken. They need a rule, more shots, or another strength. Something.
Heavy Flamer I see taken sometimes in BA or Sisters but not often in imperial armies.
Krak grenades are the only ones I would consider common (Common being, you may see 4 per army at 1500) and I don't see them used much except against tanks (where their AP doesn't matter much).
Power maul? Only if forced. Swords and Axes are taken more frequently, though I personally like the maul.
Force Staff can, I believe, only be taken by 1 HQ choice. Not really common.

None of this addresses the fact that marines lose 2 points of armor if attacked by the more commonly taken AP 1/2/3 weapons, and often cost 1.5-2x the cost of another solider.

Okay? Not sure what you're trying to say here.

I feel you're being disingenuous here.

The point was, quite obviously, that most people-- his opponents, most notably-- play MEQ or better,and forget that AP4 is even relevant... as most of the time, it's not, because most armies are MEQ. So most marine players, yourself included, forget that 3+ saves are REALLY FETHING GOOD.

As someone who doesn't play marines, but DOES play both Guard and Sisters, I can confirm that 3+ saves make a HUGE difference in survivability.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Quickjager wrote:
Heavy Flamers cannot be taken en masse. Actually I'm having a hard time thinking what can take them besides Sternguard and Devs. Why would you give up special ammunition though?

Every single squad of Sisters probably has a heavy flamer unless they have two meltaguns. It's kind of how they're built.

 Quickjager wrote:
Heavy Bolter, this is as common as Devastators, which until recently was not at all. Even now though with Skyhammer they take Grav. Much more common as a sponson on a vehicle.

Imperial Guard takes a lot of them on their vehicles, and can take them on their infantry squads. If 3+ saves weren't so common, they'd actually be a lot more common to be taken.

 Quickjager wrote:
But nothing except goddamn Predators have it (This is also where Heavy Bolters can be found) and most armies don't build around armor anymore.

... Imperial Guard can take them, both in infantry squads and on sentinels. They're not bad light anti-tank, putting out a greater volume of fire than most other anti-tank weapons.

After saying that, I have to ask-- you realize that things other than Space Marines exist, right?

He said SM, not Sisters of Questionable Existence and Imperial Guard. Come on that was just 4 posts back, sorry you can't take the time to read.

 Quickjager wrote:
He said SM, not Sisters of Questionable Existence and Imperial Guard. Come on that was just 4 posts back, sorry you can't take the time to read.

I did read, but just because people like to try to alter the conversation and move the goalposts doesn't mean I have to give a damn.

Lol whatever, he said SM, I replied with the perspective of the SM armory. If you can't realize that then you really shouldn't be jumping into a argument you don't want to be part of.

 Melissia wrote:

Okay? Not sure what you're trying to say here.

I feel you're being disingenuous here.

Rest assured that is not the case. You can call him out on asking what xenos have 4+ saves and then later mentioning such units, or referring to force staves of all weapons as common as being disingenuous, but nothing I said was anything of the sort.

 Melissia wrote:

The point was, quite obviously, that most people-- his opponents, most notably-- play MEQ or better,and forget that AP4 is even relevant... as most of the time, it's not, because most armies are MEQ. So most marine players, yourself included, forget that 3+ saves are REALLY FETHING GOOD.

What exactly is better then MEQ? TEQ? Because in actual game play, TEQ are terrible, by and large.
Caps lock, and your hostility, will not make you correct. 3+ saves are not good when the point cost is as high as it is for such. They are in a similar, but better, boat than the previously mentioned TEQ find themselves in.

 Melissia wrote:

As someone who doesn't play marines, but DOES play both Guard and Sisters, I can confirm that 3+ saves make a HUGE difference in survivability.

And I play nids and orks as well as marines. I find that my orks and nids can foot slog across the board and reach enemy lines against all but the most competitive lists (though I do make it across against Necron formations, it just doesn't help much), but my marines do not. They just don't have the numbers. There is a reason that, for a long time, spamming ork boyz has been viable but spamming foot marines has not. Not since 5th anyway.
Again, caps lock doesn't make you right.
Also, you are appealing to authority here. Other posters have mentioned how much higher marines are costed, how they benefit little from cover when compared to other armies, and other points.
Your argument boils down to "I play 2 whole armies, none of which are marines".

 Melissia wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Quickjager wrote:
Heavy Flamers cannot be taken en masse. Actually I'm having a hard time thinking what can take them besides Sternguard and Devs. Why would you give up special ammunition though?

Every single squad of Sisters probably has a heavy flamer unless they have two meltaguns. It's kind of how they're built.

Right, how does this effect 3+ saves? Sisters would do more damage against marines if they had a 4+ save, sure, but are they taking 2 meltas to shoot 3+ saves currently?
No one plays sisters locally...no one has in years actually. This is an honest question, but a melta against a marine seems like a bad buy.

 Melissia wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
Heavy Bolter, this is as common as Devastators, which until recently was not at all. Even now though with Skyhammer they take Grav. Much more common as a sponson on a vehicle.

Imperial Guard takes a lot of them on their vehicles, and can take them on their infantry squads. If 3+ saves weren't so common, they'd actually be a lot more common to be taken.

Would they? You'd move from a 4+ save to a 4/5+ cover save. That's not a big leap in defense.

 Melissia wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
But nothing except goddamn Predators have it (This is also where Heavy Bolters can be found) and most armies don't build around armor anymore.

... Imperial Guard can take them, both in infantry squads and on sentinels. They're not bad light anti-tank, putting out a greater volume of fire than most other anti-tank weapons.
They are awful anti-tank weapons. 36" range and a low strength. You really want to be str 6/7 to pop medium tanks. IG tanks aren't fast enough to get the side or rear armor shots either.

It depends on how you are using the word most. My most common opponent is Eldar, and let me assure you, the HB seems god awful next to the scatter laser.

 Melissia wrote:

After saying that, I have to ask-- you realize that things other than Space Marines exist, right?

The conversation clearly moved to marines. Now who's being disingenuous?

I feel that for the vanilla SM codex CTs usually makes up for any lack of cost per ppm.

Consider Ravenguard. Tactical squads ( or assault squads as they would want) get a pretty good chance of a 3+ cover save.

Imperial Fists and Ultramarines get a pretty good damage boost from rerolls. Salamanders get a damage boost to flamers and meltas too.

Iron hands gets stacking FNP and IWND.

The garbage SM units are really the GK, and BA ones IMO.

 Melissia wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Actually I'm fairly certain that if I could wound those units relatively easily with heavy bolters and heavy flamers because 4+ save, I'd not have much problem facing them. All three of my armies can output vastly more AP4 firepower than AP3 or better.

Really? I mean, I know sisters can take a lot of Heavy Flamers but I can't think of many instances where I see AP4..

Not JUST heavy flamer,s but also heavy bolters. If more enemies were 4+ saves, I'd take a ton more heavy bolters, and take my enemies out at long range before having to worry about flamers to begin with. As it is they're not that useful because too many 3+ saves, so no one really thinks about them (heavy flamers are used more often because flamer template and ignores cover saves). But drop a lot of 3+ units to 4+ and suddenly heavy bolters rip them new arseholes regularly, and become far, FAR more worth it.

And that's just the ones Sisters have. My IG can have even more AP4 firepower.

And THEN you realize how EASY it is to get a cover save. That's another issue with the 3+ save: you can pay less and just stick to cover. You're paying through the nose for that 3+, and that's easy to get to fail with weight of fire. You'd think the 5+ and 4+ would be the same way until you play with decent terrain.

Cover should never have been a save. It just nerfs the models that pay for saves in the first place.

Why is my guys in 3+ not benefiting from my Aegis? Why is he as survivable as a Ork now? I can tell you that Ork isn't crouching behind the wall, he is standing on top of it yelling WAAAAAAGGGGHH! I can tell you the SM is standing behind it with his bolter ready.

Cover should always have been a "save" like FNP. All of a sudden Marines (every infantry model really) become better and encourages terrain to be more prevalent. Flamers become more useful and have an actual tradeoff with Plasma and Grav.

I'd be cool with that, but you'd still have to make jinking ' either or' for armor or bikes get better again which is not necessary.

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:
I'd be cool with that, but you'd still have to make jinking ' either or' for armor or bikes get better again which is not necessary.

Bikers already lose a lot of firepower unless they're Ravenwing.

 Ghazkuul wrote:

 sub-zero wrote:
I don't understand how the 3+ 4++ of the 1K sons is not relevant here? Anything that is AP3 or lower, I get to take a 50% save against.....How is that not winning. lol

because they are expensive models and they don't put out much dakka in return for their great invul save.

They are expensive at 23 pts. per model, but in terms of dakka, anything not in terminator armor is killed with no armor save allowed thanks to my inferno bolt ammo. Pair that with a 3+ 4++ and I'd say they are worth the points.

 sub-zero wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:

 sub-zero wrote:
I don't understand how the 3+ 4++ of the 1K sons is not relevant here? Anything that is AP3 or lower, I get to take a 50% save against.....How is that not winning. lol

because they are expensive models and they don't put out much dakka in return for their great invul save.

They are expensive at 23 pts. per model, but in terms of dakka, anything not in terminator armor is killed with no armor save allowed thanks to my inferno bolt ammo. Pair that with a 3+ 4++ and I'd say they are worth the points.

No, they're not. Not even close.

 sub-zero wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:

 sub-zero wrote:
I don't understand how the 3+ 4++ of the 1K sons is not relevant here? Anything that is AP3 or lower, I get to take a 50% save against.....How is that not winning. lol

because they are expensive models and they don't put out much dakka in return for their great invul save.

They are expensive at 23 pts. per model, but in terms of dakka, anything not in terminator armor is killed with no armor save allowed thanks to my inferno bolt ammo. Pair that with a 3+ 4++ and I'd say they are worth the points.

They have basically a 50 pt crappy aspiring sorcerer tax and their ap3 is only decent when they are in rapid fire range and their target isn't getting a cover save

Tacticals are 14p (T4, Sv3+) and scouts are 11p (T4, Sv4+). Which one is better and is more common?

Chaos have Plague marines, 24p each. They are excellent unit (sv3+ but T5 and FNP), five can take two special weapons. PM are what elites should be.

 sub-zero wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:

 sub-zero wrote:
I don't understand how the 3+ 4++ of the 1K sons is not relevant here? Anything that is AP3 or lower, I get to take a 50% save against.....How is that not winning. lol

because they are expensive models and they don't put out much dakka in return for their great invul save.

They are expensive at 23 pts. per model, but in terms of dakka, anything not in terminator armor is killed with no armor save allowed thanks to my inferno bolt ammo. Pair that with a 3+ 4++ and I'd say they are worth the points.

AND once again I must repeat myself on how easily you can acquire a cover save. They might as well be firing Bolters for most intents and purposes. A Chaos Space Marine squad with 2 Plasma Guns will more easily kill Marines for the cost of 6 Rubrics. Outside of cover, at max range, x5 Rubrics and their Sorcerer (who doesn't even have a frickin Bolt Gun) kill about 1.6 Marines. At max range, x9 Vanilla Marines, and their Champion + 2 Plasma Guns, kill exactly 2 Marines.
When we get into 12" and under, x5 Rubrics and their Sorcerer will kill 3.6 Marines. That's a significant improvement. However, the same Vanilla loadout I gave earlier at the same range kills exactly 4.

That's not even taking into account TEQ (.3 compared to 1.5 at max range), GEQ (2.2 compared to 4.6 at max range), or Fire Warriors (2.2 compared to 2.9 at max range).

So spreading nonsense about Rubrics being "worth the points" is literally ignorant of numbers. None of these numbers took into account cover either, which could easily cut losses in half. The thing they should be GOOD against fails to a Vanilla squad. We could throw in Psychic Powers, though we don't know what we'll get, or Warp Charges, where 10 more points gets you a new CAD with a Sorcerer and 2 Cultist squads, but that's an entirely different topic.

My cheapass Rhino also completely foils your 23 pt losers. That's more expensive than sternguard!

Sternguard are 22 ppm, and get special ammo and 2 attacks each. Despite the lack of an Invuln, they are outright better than TSons.

Off the top of my head, 4+ armour saves are sported by

Necron Warriors, Flayed Ones
All Skitarii
Mechanicus Destroyers
Tomb Blades w/o Shieldvanes
All Imperials in carapace (SM scouts, carapace veterans, Bullgryns, Scions)
Fire Warriors
Tau Drones of all sorts
Tyranid Warriors, Pyrovores, Biovores
'Ard Boyz
Scourges
Harpies and Hive Crones
Banshees, Dire Avengers, Swooping Hawks

Is that right?

@Alec,
My question was really more idle curiosity about what armies you played, I am very familiar with a lot of 4+ save units. Many of my favorite weapons (Assault Cannons, Heavy Flamers, Grenade Packs, Ion Rifles) are AP4

To clarify other points:
I had limited that list to SM. The intention was just to show what options the army most discussed under this topic has.

Their relative lack of attraction comes from why they aren't "good". I was arguing that they weren't "good" in large part due to only handling weaker saves.

And my point in that anecdote was, as suggested, pointing out that AP4 and worse is AP "Doesn't Matter" to most people. Because, typically, it doesn't.

To rehash the core of what I was saying:
Look at the Baleflamer. Look at the Heavy Flamer. Baleflamers on moderately-expensive Helldrakes are scary as feth. Heavy Flamers on cheapo Land Speeders are meh.

The Baleflamer is a Torrent, and the Helldrake is more survivable and mobile, but the cost difference is huge.

Their killiness, though, only varies as you move from T3 4+ to T4 3+. So, if that weren't a substantial jump, wouldn't the Heavy Flamer on the spammable Land Speeder be much, much better than the comparably expensive Baleflamer? Other differences exist, but not enough for that points difference.

Similarly with most of the other weapons there.
Why throw a Krak when you dont care much about one more 4+ guy? (Also, most of the time if you can throw a Krak, you can assault. And most targets lose to Marines. Heck, for DAvengers, don't you only need 3-4 Marines to make it in to kill 10 equally-expensive DAs? Less if you're BA, or assaulting Tau?)

Why take a Heavy Bolter that kills on 2s with no save, when you don't care about 2-3 more dead 4+ wearers?

Why take a Heavy Flamer when most things you care about still get their 3+ armor?

(Assault Cannon is different. Equal to or better than both the Lascannon * and * Scatter Laser against all targets in 24" range, but its platforms generally suck)

So I'm saying that these weapons would be good if 3+ (and T4) weren't so much better than 4+ (and t3).

maybe we should play AP as an armor modifier? Or perhaps anyone who thinks 3+ is an awful save should consider other things that contribute to the survivability of the model? 'Oh I want Iridium Armor to become standard equipment so that my suits gain a 2+ save and T5.' Actually, no I don't. My suits are plenty survivable already with an engagement range of 36" and JSJ.

And access to FNP, whether from Stim Injectors or Ethereal support.
And access to Stealth & Shrouded from Shadowsun.
And larger threats than themselves like Riptides.

Give power armour a 5+ FnP, give Plague Marines 3+ FnP

 Selym wrote:
Give power armour a 5+ FnP, give Plague Marines 3+ FnP

What? No!
the point was that you can build your lists one of two ways. you can take nothing but Power Armored Space Marines, which while it doesn't make the individual model any more durable, it will make your opponent want to tear his\her hair out (unless (s)he's bald). Or you can field other threats on the field, which will make the targeting of your PASM an actual choice, 'Do I target the squishy PASMs or do I target the thing that will wreck my force (IK, Vindicator, Terminators, Centurions, etc). You seem to think that we should make them more durable by themselves, I say that if you want them more durable, bring some support to the table.

Unless you want FNP to be intrinsic to an armor save, (ex: 2+ gets 4+FNP, 3+ gets 5+FNP, 4+ gets 6+FNP,) in which case that is something that I could get behind.

Bharring wrote:
@Alec,
My question was really more idle curiosity about what armies you played, I am very familiar with a lot of 4+ save units. Many of my favorite weapons (Assault Cannons, Heavy Flamers, Grenade Packs, Ion Rifles) are AP4

Favorites aside (personally my favorite weapons are the nid weapons. So fluffy!) none of the AP 4 weapons outside of heavy bolters/flamers are even available to most armies in amounts that can be considered "common".

Bharring wrote:

To clarify other points:
I had limited that list to SM. The intention was just to show what options the army most discussed under this topic has.

Their relative lack of attraction comes from why they aren't "good". I was arguing that they weren't "good" in large part due to only handling weaker saves.

Fair point. I think the reason they aren't good is that as your save gets weaker, cover becomes more attractive. Guard lose no armor moving into cover, orks actually gain armor. 4+ saves lose a point, marines lose 2...cover is actually more attractive the weaker your save, meaning weapons that ignore the lower saves but don't ignore cover are useless.
After all, if my stormbolters are AP 5 and you are in 5+ cover, does it really matter where your save comes from?

Bharring wrote:

And my point in that anecdote was, as suggested, pointing out that AP4 and worse is AP "Doesn't Matter" to most people. Because, typically, it doesn't.

Is this because AP4 weapons are not widely taken/available to most armies, or because 4+ saves are not common? Or both?

Bharring wrote:

To rehash the core of what I was saying:
Look at the Baleflamer. Look at the Heavy Flamer. Baleflamers on moderately-expensive Helldrakes are scary as feth. Heavy Flamers on cheapo Land Speeders are meh.

The Baleflamer is a Torrent, and the Helldrake is more survivable and mobile, but the cost difference is huge.

Their killiness, though, only varies as you move from T3 4+ to T4 3+. So, if that weren't a substantial jump, wouldn't the Heavy Flamer on the spammable Land Speeder be much, much better than the comparably expensive Baleflamer? Other differences exist, but not enough for that points difference.

Heldrakes haven't been good since the nerf. They are still okay, mainly because they are in the incredibly bad CSM dex, but meta wise they aren't a strong unit anymore.
What made them powerful was that you could drop strong flamer templates where you wanted turn after turn and be on an immensely difficult to kill flyer base. If land speeders were flyers, I'd take them over heldrakes.
Keep in mind that Chaos has a weapon that is an AP 3 flamer as well, and that was not taken as commonly as the heldrake. It was still seen, but not as much as the black mace or other kits available to lords. This suggests that while AP 3 flamers are good, it was the immense toughness and ability to pick any target on the board that made the drake so good.

Bharring wrote:

Similarly with most of the other weapons there.
Why throw a Krak when you dont care much about one more 4+ guy? (Also, most of the time if you can throw a Krak, you can assault. And most targets lose to Marines. Heck, for DAvengers, don't you only need 3-4 Marines to make it in to kill 10 equally-expensive DAs? Less if you're BA, or assaulting Tau?)

Well 4 marines get what, 3 attacks on the charge? Only 6 will hit, so no, I don't think 4 marines kill 10 avengers.
You don't throw a krak because of the short range, only getting one shot for each marine, and most times you are better off charging (if only so you don't get charged). If the enemy is going to get a cover save, kraks are useless.

Bharring wrote:

Why take a Heavy Bolter that kills on 2s with no save, when you don't care about 2-3 more dead 4+ wearers?

Heavy bolters only kill on 2's against T3 troops. You'd most likely still get a cover save, so a heavy bolter might as well read "possibly -1 save". Not to mention the 36" range on what is usually immobile platforms. When the platform can move and shoot, you do see HBs taken.
I would care about killing 2-3 more Avengers/Tau if that was remotely close to, on average, what a heavy bolter does.
In reality its 3 shots, 2 hit (assuming marines) ~1.7 wounds, ~1.1 after cover saves. Do I care about killing 1 guy in a horde army? No.

Bharring wrote:

Why take a Heavy Flamer when most things you care about still get their 3+ armor?

Heavy flamers are still taken by some armies. Most armies just don't have access to heavy flamers on platforms that can make good use of them. This is a shooty edition, and a short ranged weapon on a platform that can't move fast is garbage.

Bharring wrote:

(Assault Cannon is different. Equal to or better than both the Lascannon * and * Scatter Laser against all targets in 24" range, but its platforms generally suck)

Agreed. If assault cannon were available to marines or scouts, you'd see it taken more often.

Bharring wrote:

So I'm saying that these weapons would be good if 3+ (and T4) weren't so much better than 4+ (and t3).

And we are saying that there are many reasons these weapons aren't taken.
Compare any of those weapons to a scatter laser. More shots, higher strength (so the T4 doesn't matter much), lower AP. Still seen as the most powerful weapon in the game currently (well, them and D-weapons).

 carldooley wrote:

Unless you want FNP to be intrinsic to an armor save, (ex: 2+ gets 4+FNP, 3+ gets 5+FNP, 4+ gets 6+FNP,) in which case that is something that I could get behind.

That's a better idea than the one I was having. But then you'll need to rethink the PM's schtick, and rework the guys who already have FnP.

Inability to stack saves definitely diminishes the value of higher AP values.

(I had meant beat 10 DAs, not kill. 3 Marines vs 10 DAs? 10x1/2x1/3x1/3 is about half a dead Marine, then 2.5x2x1/2x2/3x/1/2 kills about 1 DA, so you only need 3 Marines to make it into CC to beat 10 DAs - certainly won't kill them in one round unless they sweep, which is probably something like 12% on the first round.)

I think AP4 being AP "Doesn't Matter" not because either people don't take a lot of 4+ or because people don't take a lot of AP4, but because they don't generally factor it in, because targets with a 4+ don't take noticeably more AP- shots to kill than AP4- shots, whereas AP3 can take up to 3 times as many shots.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Krak Grenades outperform Bolt Pistols on all targets, and Boltguns on some.

You can charge after throwing a grenade.

Its not a major weapon, but it has its uses. More so on vehicles than on 4+ save models, though.

Akiasura wrote:

Bharring wrote:

Bharring wrote:

(Assault Cannon is different. Equal to or better than both the Lascannon * and * Scatter Laser against all targets in 24" range, but its platforms generally suck)

Agreed. If assault cannon were available to marines or scouts, you'd see it taken more often.

That USED to be true, when Psycannons (which are, for all intents and purposes, assault cannons with +1S) had an Assault profile and a Heavy profile. Now that they are salvo, they're never taken on Power Armor bodies. I assume that an exclusively Heavy profile would make them even less desirable on marines and scouts.