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.

No opponent is going to be afraid of the Arqeubus. You'll on average just glance a Rhino, and chances are those Rhinos or Razorbacks are free.

Otherwise, you're dealing with either Wave Serpents or Ghost Arks, or the opponent has no transports and you're wounding something on a 4+. It isn't a good weapon for 25 points. The Arc Rifle is going to ensure something is dead.

I can vouch that a single squad with arc rifles can kill vehicles dead, though if your rolling is as bad as mine you usually need two squads shooting at the same target. Breachers will never help you if your rolling 1's on a 2+ roll. Even against marines they force armor saves.

Also, I love the dominus maniple to peaces. It hits hard when the TL'd is combined with Ballistic skill 5 and up. count on almost all of your shots hitting, so if your running 3 special weapons in your squad that would be close to 21 hits!

Neutron lasers are great too, no doubt. They are like the illicit love child between vindicators and lascannons. But there will definatly be times where your heavy stubber does more than the Str10 Ap1 blast, as silly as it sounds. Other times though the blast is the king of the battlefield, destroying heavy tanks and getting enough damage down field to really make a difference.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Yeah I'm currently on painkillers for a foot injury; chill out. I posted the wrong numbers.

To be fair, you didn't just post the wrong numbers, you calculated the required rolls and argued the statistics of those rolls as well. it's one thing to make a simple mistake, but that was quite a bit of misinformation you were spreading. Not only that, but when several people (very politely) pointed out your error, you were dismissively defensive rather than apologetic. That's pretty rude.

With all due respect, perhaps you should refrain from posting and arguing rules questions if your medication causes issues like that?

On Topic, it's pretty clear that Arquebuses are statistically and anecdotally a poor choice of special weapon for Rangers, especially given the cost. As others have (literally) mentioned, the only thing really going for them is the 60" range. Their ability to 'pop' two Landraiders in two turns is about as statistically significant as my 5 man squad of Ratlings killing a SmashFucker in a single assault phase. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely (such that one should rely on those tactics in an average game), no.

Armorbane is nice, but the reason Meltas are good is because they're S8 AP1 with armorbane. S4 AP3 armorbane (even with rending) isn't very impressive.

The one thing I agree with is that people should try using them in their own games. I definitely did. After a dozen or so games (where I was pretty disappointed in their performance) I shelved them. I think most people will have similar experiences.

DoW

 DogOfWar wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

The one thing I agree with is that people should try using them in their own games. I definitely did. After a dozen or so games (where I was pretty disappointed in their performance) I shelved them. I think most people will have similar experiences.

DoW

I think I shelved it after two games, personally... but that gun model is damn fine. I think I'm going to use it as a vindicare assassin one of these days because it just fits so well.

Also find it pretty hilarious that Kan thinks autocanons are awesome in 7th ed. S7 with zero chance at exploding vehicles on a weapon without a high rate of fire is rubbish. Even worse when it's the only weapon on a very expensive model that can be built instead as a Dragoon, one of the most point efficient models in the entire damn book.

Then there is the dismissively rude response to people when he is flat wrong.

I like devils advocate but sometimes Kan you seem to argue for the sake of hearing your own voice as they say. Usually in a curt manner at that.

 DogOfWar wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Yeah I'm currently on painkillers for a foot injury; chill out. I posted the wrong numbers.

To be fair, you didn't just post the wrong numbers, you calculated the required rolls and argued the statistics of those rolls as well. it's one thing to make a simple mistake, but that was quite a bit of misinformation you were spreading. Not only that, but when several people (very politely) pointed out your error, you were dismissively defensive rather than apologetic. That's pretty rude.

With all due respect, perhaps you should refrain from posting and arguing rules questions if your medication causes issues like that?

With all due respect, maybe you should realize that it's pretty easy to sit down and work out the simple math necessary for figuring out Armor Penetration rolls--whether it's done correctly or incorrectly?

I didn't actually "argue the statistics of those rolls", mind you, but I did try to make a point that rather than just taking whatever the "in thing" is for netlists people should realize that their local meta is going to affect how/what they can play for their lists a lot more than people on the internet that they'll likely never play.

On Topic, it's pretty clear that Arquebuses are statistically and anecdotally a poor choice of special weapon for Rangers, especially given the cost. As others have (literally) mentioned, the only thing really going for them is the 60" range. Their ability to 'pop' two Landraiders in two turns is about as statistically significant as my 5 man squad of Ratlings killing a SmashFucker in a single assault phase. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely (such that one should rely on those tactics in an average game), no.

Then there's no reason to ever take Rangers aside from when required for formation benefits by your logic. Just take Vanguard and play netlists.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Red Corsair wrote:
Also find it pretty hilarious that Kan thinks autocanons are awesome in 7th ed. S7 with zero chance at exploding vehicles on a weapon without a high rate of fire is rubbish. Even worse when it's the only weapon on a very expensive model that can be built instead as a Dragoon, one of the most point efficient models in the entire damn book.

Just so we're clear: I never once said they're "awesome". I said the following, in reply to your post about Dragoons:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
Yea but at 50 dollars per model you definitely get way more bang for your buck out of dragoons then ironstriders. Autocanons suck in this edition and even cognis won't help change that fact. Don't forget that the dragoons also come with a cover save.

"Autocannons suck in this edition"? We must be playing entirely different games then, because Autocannons are far from sucking in this edition.

Autocannons are considered one of the better non-Grav heavy weapon options. They have a relatively high ROF, decent Strength, and decent AP.
Cognis as well is something that comes into play not when we're talking about simply firing the weapon, but when we're talking about firing at things like FMCs, Flyers, or units that have been Invis'd or other things only allowing Snap Shots.

If you don't have access to Grav, Autocannons are considered a fairly decent option.

Can they explode things? No, but generally they're on a platform where they are:
A) Twin-Linked(Hydras, Onagers with Icarus Arrays, Ironstriders)
OR
B) Able to be taken in relatively large numbers (Guard Heavy Weapon Squads or Teams in Combined Squads) and be buffed by Orders/Psykers.

Those two factors allow for a weapon that is underwhelming when compared to the "big daddy" garbage that is currently floating around(Grav, Arc, etc) to do reasonably well.

The twin links platforms you listed are skyfire only though, which makes them even worse then none twin linked types at normal AT.

Also you are listing guard heavy weapon teams, a unit that has been horrible for a great some time since they have no ablative wounds, are doubled out from the ubiquitous s6 and have awful LD for taking orders, and orders are the only way to make them remotely useful.

Now aside from all that you are relying on Guard units to make your point. I'll give you a better example but demonstrate how bad autocanons have become. the rifleman dreadnought. In 5th edition this was the most common dreadnought and for good reason, volume of fire, high BS and on a 5+ on a pen you wrecked a tank. Then 6th made that 6's to explode only, and now in 7th you literally can't kill a tank with a pen. Autocanons were never good antiinfantry, they were better then las canons, for sure. It was the fact that you had reliable AT that COULD also do something to infantry that made it a good pick. It's the same reason why the manticore sucks now, it doesn't get through power armor and literally strips HP's off from vehicles.

Further more, what is the hostility toward arc weapons? You lump them in with grav like they are some sort of naughty word or something. Actually arc weapons are a perfect analog to what autocanons were in 5th. They can engage things with toughness, but they also are great against AT because they excell BETTER at the hull point game. Especially when you realize this is a skitarii tactica meaning your hitting more often then not, another reason why the TL of auto canons point you made is rather moot.

Also in regard to the Transonic Arq nobody was saying it was a dumb weapon, I actually think they are some of the most fluffy weapons in the whole game, but this is a tactica thread and by the numbers they really are not reliable or efficient for their cost. If anyone wants to field them because they are cool I'd support their decision 100% Don't confuse by the numbers calculations on efficiency with bashing on a particular weapon system. We just want to give the OP an objective response.

 Red Corsair wrote:
The twin links platforms you listed are skyfire only though, which makes them even worse then none twin linked types at normal AT.

Ironstriders aren't Skyfire only.

My point in any case was that in many instances where Autocannons make an appearance, they're twin-linked.
I did forget to add in Leman Russ Exterminators and Rifleman Dreadnoughts, as they're more instances of twin-linked Autocannons but you get the picture.

Also you are listing guard heavy weapon teams, a unit that has been horrible for a great some time since they have no ablative wounds, are doubled out from the ubiquitous s6 and have awful LD for taking orders, and orders are the only way to make them remotely useful.

Now aside from all that you are relying on Guard units to make your point. I'll give you a better example but demonstrate how bad autocanons have become. the rifleman dreadnought. In 5th edition this was the most common dreadnought and for good reason, volume of fire, high BS and on a 5+ on a pen you wrecked a tank. Then 6th made that 6's to explode only, and now in 7th you literally can't kill a tank with a pen. Autocanons were never good antiinfantry, they were better then las canons, for sure. It was the fact that you had reliable AT that COULD also do something to infantry that made it a good pick. It's the same reason why the manticore sucks now, it doesn't get through power armor and literally strips HP's off from vehicles.

The reason I'm "relying on Guard units to make my point" is because I'm trying to showcase how in an army with no native Grav(Skitarii), Autocannons aren't the worst option in the book.

Do Dragoons outclass Ballistarii? Sure. But what the hell is the point of discussing the army and units if you're just going to boil it down to "what units make their points back consistently"?

At that point, just copy/paste the person a netlist and be done with the thread. Maybe we should sticky it!

Further more, what is the hostility toward arc weapons? You lump them in with grav like they are some sort of naughty word or something. Actually arc weapons are a perfect analog to what autocanons were in 5th. They can engage things with toughness, but they also are great against AT because they excell BETTER at the hull point game. Especially when you realize this is a skitarii tactica meaning your hitting more often then not, another reason why the TL of auto canons point you made is rather moot.

My hostility towards Arc weapons is that they're a crutch, just like Grav.

Those two weapon systems are in my opinion the two biggest reasons why Imperial armies still fare well, since it's a joke to ally them in.

Also in regard to the Transonic Arq nobody was saying it was a dumb weapon, I actually think they are some of the most fluffy weapons in the whole game, but this is a tactica thread and by the numbers they really are not reliable or efficient for their cost. If anyone wants to field them because they are cool I'd support their decision 100% Don't confuse by the numbers calculations on efficiency with bashing on a particular weapon system. We just want to give the OP an objective response.

The whole thing that kicked off this line of discussion wasn't a "by the numbers calculation on efficiency". It was the following post:

Tenzilla wrote:The armorbane sniper is a terrible gun, I would not recommend assembling them. The arcrifle is much more point efficient and is much better at popping tanks of all AV.

I have no issue with people discussing the merits of different systems. What I take issue with is people just parroting the same crap over and over and over and over again.

Alright wow, this got out of hand. how about we all calm down before someone shuts the thread down?

Look, some things work, some things don't really work. the point of the tactics threads are to find out what works and what doesn't and share it. If you hear something repeated that's because they work consistently for everyone when they use it. Arc rifles works for people repeatedly, grav works for people repeatedly, dragoons do work and onagers do work.

Did I have games when they didn't work? Yes, so I can share with people to help them understand what not to do.

Did I have games where they were amazing? Yes, so I can share with people to understand what to do by giving advice.

We all have units that we think work really well and don't, but arguing to this degree doesn't really help anyone.

It seems to me a huge number of players don't understand statistical variance or anecdotal evidence.

Did someone just make the "netlisting is terrible" statement?

That's literally THE "I'm a special snowflake" argument. If you'd like to be taken seriously, Kanluwen, I highly suggest you stop saying the term "netlist" and focus on math and tying in evidence to that.

I'm going to agree with Kan on the arquebus Ranger thing here. Against most transports, two 5 man Ranger teams kitted with arquebus will drop at least 1 transport per turn. Against light transports they are excellent. Because, if you are shooting your Vanguard at transports you're wasting 70% of your manpower. Arquebus rangers pop the transport, vanguard sweep the contents.

Something I've begun making great use of is trios of neutron onagers. Brutal unit, most people tend to forget the concussive bit about it.

Last I've had good luck with a vanguard squad with just carbines, goad, lumigen and pater radium on the leader. Does serious work on choppy hordes.

StarHunter25 wrote:
I'm going to agree with Kan on the arquebus Ranger thing here. Against most transports, two 5 man Ranger teams kitted with arquebus will drop at least 1 transport per turn. Against light transports they are excellent. Because, if you are shooting your Vanguard at transports you're wasting 70% of your manpower. Arquebus rangers pop the transport, vanguard sweep the contents.

Something I've begun making great use of is trios of neutron onagers. Brutal unit, most people tend to forget the concussive bit about it.

Last I've had good luck with a vanguard squad with just carbines, goad, lumigen and pater radium on the leader. Does serious work on choppy hordes.

This is still incorrect. Even if the transport you are trying to wreck is AV 10 without cover and assuming all 4 shots hit...there is still less than a 22% chance to inflict 3 HPs.

that is the most liberal estimate I can give you..using weakest armor, giving all 4 shots auto hit and giving no cover saves.....and they will still not remotely reliably pop a transport in one turn.

So for you to claim "At least" one a turn is silly. also shooting any special weapons at tanks in most cases is a waste of the rest of the squads fire power. That is just how things work.

I use Arquebus's to handicap myself when playing against CSM, Orks, or IG fluffy lists. They are great for that, they look cool, and when they actually do something its great!

Arquebusses are okay if you aren't just using them for trying to blow up vehicles. All the usual cons of other armies' sniper rifles (can't hurt vehicles, can't move and shoot, kinda poor range for a sniping gun, shots negated by cover saves) are gone with this thing. It's got mini turbo penetrator rounds and synergizes with the ranger unit that's camped backfield on objectives. It's also nice to have an anti-MC weapon that's not on a unit that has to be in charge range of the monsters themselves.

The problem is that, while in any other army this thing would be great, in Skitarii/Cult it pales in comparison. It's not a bad gun, there's just better stuff available.

Ok so I've got a few friends that 4un Skittari and while they are far from a mobile army, bar the chicken walke4s. Every unit and weapon has a use and purpose and isn't crap in other situations. Their plasmas are dick even with 3/4 range of SM ones but it's assault so you can still change that turn, Arc rifles are the best anti armor in the game and candidates still punch MEQ's reliably, radium carbines got rad poisoning, phosph3x only needs to hit to make cover saves worse, Galvanic rifles are meh to me but precision shots makes them useful, and the super sniper takes down key parts of hell is squads like librarians and apothecaries.

THe army in question is one that requires you to synergize heavily as no one unit is amazballs by itself but as a whole they are flat out scary all comers.

Alright, so I double checked at the FLGS and the Dunecrawler is $53 (still saving $26 and avoiding the hassle of assembly) and what I thought was the Ironstrider is actually a Dragoon and it's $40. Should I get both of these as well as the Start Collecting! kit? That would leave me with 20 Skitarii, a Dominus, a Dragoon and 2 Onagers. Is the Dragoon better off in multiples or is a single one ok?

 Lord Corellia wrote:
Alright, so I double checked at the FLGS and the Dunecrawler is $53 (still saving $26 and avoiding the hassle of assembly) and what I thought was the Ironstrider is actually a Dragoon and it's $40. Should I get both of these as well as the Start Collecting! kit? That would leave me with 20 Skitarii, a Dominus, a Dragoon and 2 Onagers. Is the Dragoon better off in multiples or is a single one ok?

Personally I've never seen a single dragoon survive on its own but a squad of 3 will generally make it into combat with at least two of them. The Onagers I would grab a second get started just for a full squad and it's 4+ invul. Depending on what you want another 10 skittari wouldn't be a bad idea, even if it's only for extra arc rifles and plasma.

 Tenzilla wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

The first time I played with my Skitarii against Khorne Daemonkin, I smoked two Land Raiders with 2 squads of Rangers with 2x Transauranic Arqeubi in as many turns. Popped one LR on turn one, popped a second on turn two. Forced his Terminators to walk across the board, then started using them to pop his Helbrutes.

Could I have done the same thing with Arc Rifles? Sure--but then I would have been within a reasonable charge range.

Since that first game, I don't leave home without multiple units of Rangers toting Arqeubi.
Are they expensive? Yes. But they have a HUGE impact on the game when you don't think of them as simple snipers.

The Arquebus is not very good....You seem to have had amazing luck with them but it cannot be counted on.

I would like to point out how improbable this is....that means you hit said landraiders with all 4 shots each turn, and rolled well above average 8 times in a row....and they either got no cover...or failed every save.

Average rolls for one puts it at glancing AV11.

At AP 3 it will never explode an vehicle, meaning you need several of them to reliably kill a light vehicle.

Against AV11 a plasma caliver does 3 times the hull points per turn on average rolls.

And if there are no tanks to shoot at? They cause a wound 50% of the time...for a 25pt upgrade. They are far and away the worst weapon option.

60" range is the only thing it has going for it.

I would have agreed with you back when I first started playing skits, but two things changed that greatly. (except for the plasmas. You're absolutely right bout them. They're nuts. I take those as well.)

First, it's beyond me why people run arquebus teams as rangers. In a 5 man squad you pay an extra 10 points for things you'll never use. Oh boy 10 points for 3 s4 ap4 shots... and half the time no one ever gets in range of them. The buffalo hunters already have precision shot so whatever. Move through cover isn't worth 10 points either. Who actually has had a game changer happen because their arqebus team that deployed w/ scout needed to rapidly move 'through cover'. Let's be honest, they park for the whole game and only ever make minor adjustments if any. During deployment, the biggest and farthest possible firing lane should be set up from the get go. And run them as vangaurds. 10 points can get shiny stuff elsewhere.

The second point is more of a preference but man it's done wonders. I prefer making that vanguard alpha of the buffalo hunters my WL. Preferred enemy has given those guns some great kills/wounds. Plinking walkers, skimmers, carnifexes, wraithlords and wraithknights both. I know lots of people hate the idea of an alpha as WL, so the other idea I've done is the dominus maniple. That 5 man of vangaurd now rerolls all failed to hits once per shooting phase on the chosen target. With a doctrina, thats two 2+'s. Attach your tech priest to any unit in a skit maniple and he gets a scout move on top to get down field quicker. Personally i like a normal naked 10 man of vangaurd for that formation, but it's still there.

And for the OP, vanguard and more vanguard. Sicarians are also great but make them count because they'll die from a stiff breeze. I've killed a wraithknight w/ rustalkers and i've also lost almost an entire unit of them to gaurdians (half of which was from a failed charge's over watch *facepalm*)

Alright, so I bought the Get Started! bundle and dug out my older set of Skitarii. Seems like I've lost one pair of legs somewhere along the way, so my units are looking like this:

10 Vanguard; 2 plasma calivers
9 Rangers; 2 arc rifles

Is that optimal?

 Lord Corellia wrote:
Alright, so I bought the Get Started! bundle and dug out my older set of Skitarii. Seems like I've lost one pair of legs somewhere along the way, so my units are looking like this:

10 Vanguard; 2 plasma calivers
9 Rangers; 2 arc rifles

Is that optimal?

for most situations, you'll want units of 5 models.

5 vanguard, 2 arc rifle
5 rangers, 1 or 2 arquebuses
9 vanguard, 2 plasma

I thought the Arquebus is gak though?