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 can't remember the last time I saw grenade launchers or missile launchers taken in an IG list. For what they do, a mixture of flamers, plasma, or melta is always better. While they will always suffer a bit due to being generalist weapons rather than fitting a specific rule, here's my proposal:

Grenade Launcher:

Frag grenade
Range - 24"

S - 3

AP - 6

Type - Assault 1, Blast, Shred

Krak grenade
Range - 24"

S - 6

AP - 4

Type - Assault 2, Krak

Krak: To Wound rolls of a 6 are resolved at AP3.

Missile Launcher

-10 pts, comes with Flakk Missiles for free.

What are your thoughts?

Just allowing them to double tap would fix a lot of the GL's problems.

Point cost reduction would be enough to make them viable again.

oldzoggy wrote:
Point cost reduction would be enough to make them viable again.

Making grenade launchers 10pts but assault 2 would make them a viable option to plasma.

Missile launchers have more competition. Lacannons for antitank, auto cannons for anti transport and general utility, and heavy boaters and mortars for anti infantry. Balancing five options is tough. I'd propose the following:
Mortars: 5pts, heavy 2
Heavy bolster: 5pts
Auto cannon: 10pts
Missile launcher: 15pts with frag, krak, and flak
Lascannon: 20pts

I gave the missiles claim upgrade for free for all armies in my houserules and they seen to work out fine.

I see grenade launchers in my meta quite often, they do some pretty good work en masse against necrons and most army's troop units.

As primarily a Guard player, I find this thread to be entirely full of win. I want to be able to bring Grenade Launchers as a relatively cheap option to add a bit of power to troops on the cheap but I can never justify the points. Making them simply Assault 2 with a 24" range would increase their use immensely (at least by me), and adding the Krak rule would be useful just all around for all Krak grenades.

To be fair, the Krak rule for both GL and ML would be pheomenal. The rule would just have to read "To wound rolls of 6 with this weapon are resolved with an addition +1 to its AP value. When striking vehicles, an armor penetration roll of 6 that results in a penetrating hit are resolved at +1 to its AP value." This would give a Krak grenade or Krak missile fired at a vehicle a chance at some serious damage, albeit at a random chance. Just a thought though.

I like what you've done here, if the rules were like this I would bring more grenade launchers

GL don't need buffing, they're cheap enough and do what you'd expect a 5pt weapon to do. Escalating every seemingly underpowered weapon is the reason so many guns are at a spastic level of firepower already.

ML would be fixed if it came with Flakk standard across all factions with access to them.

In 30k, the Solar's Grenade Launchers have a third ammo type available with 'Haywire'. That is enough of a reason to take them over other weapons IMO while avoiding stat inflation or invalidating other weapons.
To me, that's exactly what the missiles and grenades should be doing; never the best weapon for the job, but so versatile that you are never caught out.

So I'd simply give them 3 ammo types each:
Missiles get Krak (S8/AP3), Frag (S4/Blast) and Flakk (S7/Skyfire) as part of the base cost.
Grenades get Krak (S6/AP4), Frag (S3/Blast) and Tempest (Haywire).

 MarsNZ wrote:
GL don't need buffing, they're cheap enough and do what you'd expect a 5pt weapon to do. Escalating every seemingly underpowered weapon is the reason so many guns are at a spastic level of firepower already.

ML would be fixed if it came with Flakk standard across all factions with access to them.

Seemingly underpowered? Both the ML and GL don't do enough to justify their points when other weapons fulfill their roles better.

An Autocannon when compared to a Missile Launcher firing Krak rounds fires an additional shot, which for Guard shooting means a much greater chance to hit, which is at only one lower strength and AP. The only reason the AP ever really matters on a Krak missile is firing at MEQs, but why are you firing a S8 missile at Marines? They're both much more useful against light armor where the autocannon's higher rate of fire (and therefore, accuracy) becomes much more attractive. When it comes to Frag missiles they're lackluster at best. The poor BS of a Guardsman shows here as well with the scatter, and though it has S4 the AP6 very rarely comes into play here. A Heavy Bolter or Multi-Laser is usually a more effective anti-infantry choice for less points, higher strength, and the same (or for the heavy bolter, better) AP.

The Grenade Launcher is even worse. It's easily outpaced by the Plasma Rifle in terms of anti-armor capability. S6 AP4 doesn't really have a strong niche of targets to work against that would justify its use over the Plasma Rifle, even at the increased cost and risk of use due to failed Gets Hot! rolls. The ability to vaporize a Terminator is hard to pass up for one of the Guard's valuable special weapons selections. Not to mention that a single Plasma Rifle shot has an outside chance of outright exploding any vehicle with AV12 or lower. The Frag Grenade simply doesn't have the ability to match up well. S3 AP6 is again, not much to go on, as its still pitiful Lasgun strength and the AP6 doesn't impact a large majority of targets. Against Orks sure, but then you're only wounding on a 5+. But in that case for the same points cost I can purchase a flamer, which can reliably hit a larger number of targets and has the added bonus of blunting enemy charges.

The point is that for their prices they are outstripped by other weapons in terms of effectiveness. I am all for the idea of a generalist weapon but from a balance perspective if a weapon is never being purchased, then that weapon's stats need to be addressed. I agree that the addition of Flakk missiles for free would make the ML a significantly more attractive option. To be honest, adding special rules to the Grenade Launcher probably isn't necessary. Changing them to Assault 2 weapons and perhaps dropping their range to 18" would do worlds of good to incentivize their use.

I'm not advocating making them do more than their cost warrants. But right now other options are simply so much better that to spend the points and fill a special or heavy slot with either weapon makes little sense.

Make them Assault 2 and maybe a "Rerolls 1 to wound" would make them capable for performing their role as an inexpensive ranged light infantry killer.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Make them Assault 2 and maybe a "Rerolls 1 to wound" would make them capable for performing their role as an inexpensive ranged light infantry killer.

that's a bit fiddly. I think Assault 2 is almost enough. I've toyed with the idea of making the Grenade Launcher not require LOS, allowing it to plink out shots from behind cover.

 ThaliasRatheron wrote:

 MarsNZ wrote:
GL don't need buffing, they're cheap enough and do what you'd expect a 5pt weapon to do. Escalating every seemingly underpowered weapon is the reason so many guns are at a spastic level of firepower already.

ML would be fixed if it came with Flakk standard across all factions with access to them.

Seemingly underpowered? Both the ML and GL don't do enough to justify their points when other weapons fulfill their roles better.

An Autocannon when compared to a Missile Launcher firing Krak rounds fires an additional shot, which for Guard shooting means a much greater chance to hit, which is at only one lower strength and AP. The only reason the AP ever really matters on a Krak missile is firing at MEQs, but why are you firing a S8 missile at Marines? They're both much more useful against light armor where the autocannon's higher rate of fire (and therefore, accuracy) becomes much more attractive. When it comes to Frag missiles they're lackluster at best. The poor BS of a Guardsman shows here as well with the scatter, and though it has S4 the AP6 very rarely comes into play here. A Heavy Bolter or Multi-Laser is usually a more effective anti-infantry choice for less points, higher strength, and the same (or for the heavy bolter, better) AP.

The Grenade Launcher is even worse. It's easily outpaced by the Plasma Rifle in terms of anti-armor capability. S6 AP4 doesn't really have a strong niche of targets to work against that would justify its use over the Plasma Rifle, even at the increased cost and risk of use due to failed Gets Hot! rolls. The ability to vaporize a Terminator is hard to pass up for one of the Guard's valuable special weapons selections. Not to mention that a single Plasma Rifle shot has an outside chance of outright exploding any vehicle with AV12 or lower. The Frag Grenade simply doesn't have the ability to match up well. S3 AP6 is again, not much to go on, as its still pitiful Lasgun strength and the AP6 doesn't impact a large majority of targets. Against Orks sure, but then you're only wounding on a 5+. But in that case for the same points cost I can purchase a flamer, which can reliably hit a larger number of targets and has the added bonus of blunting enemy charges.

The point is that for their prices they are outstripped by other weapons in terms of effectiveness. I am all for the idea of a generalist weapon but from a balance perspective if a weapon is never being purchased, then that weapon's stats need to be addressed. I agree that the addition of Flakk missiles for free would make the ML a significantly more attractive option. To be honest, adding special rules to the Grenade Launcher probably isn't necessary. Changing them to Assault 2 weapons and perhaps dropping their range to 18" would do worlds of good to incentivize their use.

I'm not advocating making them do more than their cost warrants. But right now other options are simply so much better that to spend the points and fill a special or heavy slot with either weapon makes little sense.

You don't need to quote the weapon stats, I know them. You compare a GL with a Plasma gun, kinda makes your point rather moot imo, of course the weapon that costs 3x more is better. If you want to add that cost to your BS3 guardsman go right ahead, 5ppm options are what I tend to stick with.

It's people clamouring for weapon creep that don't see how damaging this has been for the game up till now.

The problem is opportunity cost. For every 5 pt Grenade Launcher you stick in a infantry squad you're burning a 50pt carrier who could've otherwise used a more effective weapon. Even if the Grenade Launcher was free I still wouldn't take it. It's a weapon that does what a Lagun does but takes up a precious special weapon slot.

Let's dispense with hyperbole for a moment. Strength 6 ap4 assault is a pretty good gun for 5 points, much less free. There are a lot of units where it would be better for the guard to assault as opposed to being assaulted. Anything below init 3 and anything with rage or furious charge the guard would be better off taking the fight to them. I always have a veteran squad with 2 grenade launchers, a flamer, carapace armor, and shotguns midfield to hold back anything comming my way.

Giving missile launchers flak will make it more then adaquette.
Giving grenade launchers so frag has shred and krak is assault 2 is good enough without points reductions.

MarsNZ wrote:

 ThaliasRatheron wrote:

 MarsNZ wrote:
GL don't need buffing, they're cheap enough and do what you'd expect a 5pt weapon to do. Escalating every seemingly underpowered weapon is the reason so many guns are at a spastic level of firepower already.

ML would be fixed if it came with Flakk standard across all factions with access to them.

Seemingly underpowered? Both the ML and GL don't do enough to justify their points when other weapons fulfill their roles better.

An Autocannon when compared to a Missile Launcher firing Krak rounds fires an additional shot, which for Guard shooting means a much greater chance to hit, which is at only one lower strength and AP. The only reason the AP ever really matters on a Krak missile is firing at MEQs, but why are you firing a S8 missile at Marines? They're both much more useful against light armor where the autocannon's higher rate of fire (and therefore, accuracy) becomes much more attractive. When it comes to Frag missiles they're lackluster at best. The poor BS of a Guardsman shows here as well with the scatter, and though it has S4 the AP6 very rarely comes into play here. A Heavy Bolter or Multi-Laser is usually a more effective anti-infantry choice for less points, higher strength, and the same (or for the heavy bolter, better) AP.

The Grenade Launcher is even worse. It's easily outpaced by the Plasma Rifle in terms of anti-armor capability. S6 AP4 doesn't really have a strong niche of targets to work against that would justify its use over the Plasma Rifle, even at the increased cost and risk of use due to failed Gets Hot! rolls. The ability to vaporize a Terminator is hard to pass up for one of the Guard's valuable special weapons selections. Not to mention that a single Plasma Rifle shot has an outside chance of outright exploding any vehicle with AV12 or lower. The Frag Grenade simply doesn't have the ability to match up well. S3 AP6 is again, not much to go on, as its still pitiful Lasgun strength and the AP6 doesn't impact a large majority of targets. Against Orks sure, but then you're only wounding on a 5+. But in that case for the same points cost I can purchase a flamer, which can reliably hit a larger number of targets and has the added bonus of blunting enemy charges.

The point is that for their prices they are outstripped by other weapons in terms of effectiveness. I am all for the idea of a generalist weapon but from a balance perspective if a weapon is never being purchased, then that weapon's stats need to be addressed. I agree that the addition of Flakk missiles for free would make the ML a significantly more attractive option. To be honest, adding special rules to the Grenade Launcher probably isn't necessary. Changing them to Assault 2 weapons and perhaps dropping their range to 18" would do worlds of good to incentivize their use.

I'm not advocating making them do more than their cost warrants. But right now other options are simply so much better that to spend the points and fill a special or heavy slot with either weapon makes little sense.

You don't need to quote the weapon stats, I know them. You compare a GL with a Plasma gun, kinda makes your point rather moot imo, of course the weapon that costs 3x more is better. If you want to add that cost to your BS3 guardsman go right ahead, 5ppm options are what I tend to stick with.

It's people clamouring for weapon creep that don't see how damaging this has been for the game up till now.

I'm not clamoring for it, I'm just trying to point out that there is rarely a situation in which a Grenade Launcher, even at 5 points, is a better option than any of the other special weapons. I'm not trying to compare the effectiveness of a Grenade Launcher to a Plasma Gun, or even advocating that the GL should be on par with it, simply that even on a poor BS3 platform like a Guardsman the Plasma Gun is more useful than the GL by far. The extra 10 points feels *worth* it, while with the Grenade Launcher the points often feel wasted.

TheCustomLime wrote:The problem is opportunity cost. For every 5 pt Grenade Launcher you stick in a infantry squad you're burning a 50pt carrier who could've otherwise used a more effective weapon. Even if the Grenade Launcher was free I still wouldn't take it. It's a weapon that does what a Lagun does but takes up a precious special weapon slot.

And this is exactly what I was trying to point out. It just doesn't feel worth the points cost. And that fact is bothersome to me. Obviously some things will be more effective than others, but to have one option *never* taken is an issue to me.

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
Let's dispense with hyperbole for a moment. Strength 6 ap4 assault is a pretty good gun for 5 points, much less free. There are a lot of units where it would be better for the guard to assault as opposed to being assaulted. Anything below init 3 and anything with rage or furious charge the guard would be better off taking the fight to them. I always have a veteran squad with 2 grenade launchers, a flamer, carapace armor, and shotguns midfield to hold back anything comming my way.

If you gave them Meltaguns they would be far better off in terms of assaulting things. That five extra points gives them the ability to instakill MEQ, pierce 2+ saves and do a number on vehicles. That's the problem with the GL. The extra utility gained by just adding 10-20% extra of the whole unit cost makes them obsolete. If I gave a Veteran squad 3 Grenade Launchers and had them shoot at a squad of Tac Marines causes 0.27 unsaved wounds. Meanwhile, if that same squad had 3 Plasma Guns they would waste 3 marines on average. I think killing 42 points per turn is worth the extra 30.


I get the appeal of Grenade Launchers. Grenade Launchers IRL are awesome and the idea of cheaply lobbing explosives at your foes is appealing. Not to mention that Grenade Launchers come on the Cadian sprues which means equipping your guy with them is considerably less burdensome on the wallet than giving them actual weapons. But they just aren't good. If you must go cheap points and money wise give them a Flamer. Flamers ignore cover, can get much more hits on average and ignore the guardsman's BS.

But grenade launchers have a longer range, meaning for those extra points I can more effectively kill things like scouts, dire avengers, and fire warriors from 24" away. And the small blast has the chance to do significantly more damage against things like tyranid 'gaunts and ork boyz. If you are taking melta to kill marines, you are wasting points, and again the melta is more expensive it better be more capable as a weapon. Flamers have their place, but the grenade launcher lets my assault based squad threaten things with a decent range without forcing me to forfeit my shooting with said weapon when I choose to assault.

That's a very narrow selection of targets for you to be blasting with a Grenade launcher. To be useful against light infantry they'll have to be out of cover and clustered together. Most players spread out their forces. To be useful against medium infantry they'd have to be close and out of cover. Again, not many are going to do that. I'm not saying the GL is utterly useless. My argument is that the extra points is enough of a worthwhile investment to boost the squad's killing power that getting a GL, however cheaply, is a waste of a special weapon slot.

Flakk missiles being built in doesn't strike me as too bad.

They always strike me as a bit overpriced anyway, and there's a pretty decent chance they'll be wasted points.


The grenade launcher doesn't really need tuning up. As noted, 5 points does not really justify an especially lethal gun - it shouldn't be much more effective than a heavy stubber or storm bolter.

Assault 2 is a bit much - because you're not far short of a snub autocannon with a frag option at that point, and assault 2 with frag grenades is essentially a mortar but slightly better in your special weapons slot.

If I was going to up the grenade launcher, I'd try to keep in line with existing stats. The one thing that suggests itself is taking the statline of the astartes grenade launcher - which is 24" range rapid fire, not 24" range assault 1. The lost of the ability to charge isn't going to upset guardsmen units that often*, but being able to double-tap with grenades at short range provides some serious crowd control.

* You'll notice that the space marines have the sense to normally use it off the back of a ravenwing black knight or scout bike.

 ThaliasRatheron wrote:


An Autocannon when compared to a Missile Launcher firing Krak rounds fires an additional shot, which for Guard shooting means a much greater chance to hit, which is at only one lower strength and AP. The only reason the AP ever really matters on a Krak missile is firing at MEQs,

or at any of the numerous 3+ Monstrous Creatures. Most of them actually.

Autocannon vs Carnifex: 1/2 x 2/3 x 1/3 = 1/9 x 2 = 2/9

Krak missile vs. Carnifex: 1/2 x 5/6 = 5/12

What about not changing the GL's profile, but instead make it free?

I mean, yes, it's obviously better than a lasgun, but you've got only a few special weapon slots: what if they had grenade launchers by default, for free, unless you paid for something else.

Incidentally, that's pretty much what I think should be done with Tactical Marines/Battle Sisters and storm bolters, too.

If you are going to argue that every unit of marines should be able to swap bolts for storm bolters for free, you are nuts. Storm bolters are about 10 better than a bolters, same range, always two shots, and assault.

jade_angel wrote:
What about not changing the GL's profile, but instead make it free?

I mean, yes, it's obviously better than a lasgun, but you've got only a few special weapon slots: what if they had grenade launchers by default, for free, unless you paid for something else.

Incidentally, that's pretty much what I think should be done with Tactical Marines/Battle Sisters and storm bolters, too.

I think if you made them free, you would marginally increase their usage, but still only in PCS. 30 points for an order and four S6 shots is pretty decent, I guess.

Veteran and infantry squads still have too great an opportunity cost to take the GL.

Not all of this is the fault of the GL. The plasma gun is simply too good in the special weapon slot, no matter the price. It has the same or as many shots as the other specials, it is the best against light vehicles, it has the best AP, and it has good range. The only area the GL really shines is being assault, which is of very minimal advantage.

Making the GL assault 2 would actually make it a reasonably effective weapon against light vehicles and high toughness models, while keeping the unit mobile. I'd rather pay 5 (or even 10) points for an assault2 GL than get an assault 1 GL for "free"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

danny1995 wrote:
If you are going to argue that every unit of marines should be able to swap bolts for storm bolters for free, you are nuts. Storm bolters are about 10 better than a bolters, same range, always two shots, and assault.

I imagine he meant only in the special slot. A storm bolter can't compete with a flamer for five points, so allow a squad to take one storm bolter for free instead of another special.

Yeah, that's exactly what I mean: the two models eligible to swap their bolter for a special or heavy weapon, subject otherwise to the usual restrictions, can take a storm bolter free instead of at 5 pts. If they all could, that would actually be really powerful (because, as you point out, they're assault, and even the bog-standard Tactical Marine is dangerous enough in CC that having the option helps a lot.)

Okay, i thought you meant ALL of the squad.

Alcibiades wrote:

 ThaliasRatheron wrote:


An Autocannon when compared to a Missile Launcher firing Krak rounds fires an additional shot, which for Guard shooting means a much greater chance to hit, which is at only one lower strength and AP. The only reason the AP ever really matters on a Krak missile is firing at MEQs,

or at any of the numerous 3+ Monstrous Creatures. Most of them actually.

Autocannon vs Carnifex: 1/2 x 2/3 x 1/3 = 1/9 x 2 = 2/9

Krak missile vs. Carnifex: 1/2 x 5/6 = 5/12

Fair point. But with the Missile Launcher them poor Guardsmen still have to *hit* the damned thing. They'll let you down 50% of the time.

However in the case of MC why take the Missile Launcher at all when a Lascannon does the same job better? The chance to explode vehicles alone with AP2 and more reliably damage AV14 is well worth the difference in points.

But, for veteran squads the grenade launcher will fire three shots for the price of a single plasma gun. I'll take three shots at str6 without gets hot at 24" than on shot at str7.

 ThaliasRatheron wrote:

Alcibiades wrote:

 ThaliasRatheron wrote:


An Autocannon when compared to a Missile Launcher firing Krak rounds fires an additional shot, which for Guard shooting means a much greater chance to hit, which is at only one lower strength and AP. The only reason the AP ever really matters on a Krak missile is firing at MEQs,

or at any of the numerous 3+ Monstrous Creatures. Most of them actually.

Autocannon vs Carnifex: 1/2 x 2/3 x 1/3 = 1/9 x 2 = 2/9

Krak missile vs. Carnifex: 1/2 x 5/6 = 5/12

Fair point. But with the Missile Launcher them poor Guardsmen still have to *hit* the damned thing. They'll let you down 50% of the time.

However in the case of MC why take the Missile Launcher at all when a Lascannon does the same job better? The chance to explode vehicles alone with AP2 and more reliably damage AV14 is well worth the difference in points.

The whole point of missile launchers is that they are versatile. The LC is better against MCs, but nearly useless against hordes. The missile launcher can do both, depending on circumstances.

Against the great majority of MCs (which are T6 3+), missile launchers and lascannons are identical, actually.

My math included the BS3 of Guardsmen (or any other BS3 unit), by the way.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Another minute, another edit

The Monstrous/Gargantuan Critters that the lascannon performs better against are

Taloi/Chronoi
Tyrannofexes
Wraiththings
C'tan Shards/T-C'tans
Kastellan Robots
Dreadknights
Riptides
Great Unclean Ones

Thus, against Canoptyk Spyders, almost all the Tyrannid critters, the Avatar of Khaine I think, and almost all big Daemon things they are the same. So "great majority" was an overstatement on my part. A couple of years ago, it wouldn't have been though.