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've been wargaming for 25 years, on Dakka and the old Portent for 17.
Sooooo.

A mini bee in the bonnet rant!

The below will hopefully illustrate a point:

Hello all, i was just wondering what are the best special weapons are for a standard IG squad of cadian shock troops?
Thanks for the help

Grenade launchers are either inferior boltguns or blast lasguns. Flamers are too short ranged to be useful as weapons in an army that prefers long ranged shooting. Plasma Guns synergize better with Guard's gunline tactics and will actually accomplish something. Remember, a Grenade Launcher may be cheaper than a Plasma Gun but the Plasma Gun has a chance of actually accomplishing something of value.



Not singling you out TCL but this is my exact point.

What if one is not playing an IG gunline?

What if one is playing Chimera rush?

Or Elysians?

Or combined arms?

Or tank heavy?

My point is, the OP's point is so utterly moot as to be meaningless unless we know what he wants said squad to do / build and his ideas.
These type of threads pop up weekly if not daily.

Rhino Vs Razor
Mekguns Vs Lootas
Grav VS Melta squads
2 Carnis VS Tyranno
etc etc etc

pfffff I dunno, meaningless is all I can say.

These builds would involve using veterans at their core who are still best equipped with Plasma and Melta anyway. I mean, if you're using an assault infantry heavy horde backed up with priests/commissars then I could see the flamer as being valuable. But you're right. The OP should state what list he is planning on running for the best advice.

There are hundreds if not thousands upon thousands of questions like these on multiple wargaming forums and no one seems to ask the basic question?

"What do you want you squad / unit to do / accomplish / its tactical role / whom might it be facing / what are your weaknesses?"

The point is. With such an open, non defined question, all you are going to get as an answer that is random, non-objective and sometimes bonkers.

DEFINE and FRAME your question tactically before jumping in!

Rattys Rant over

How DARE you!

Ill defined questions with qualifier barren answers and pr0n are why the internet continues to exist. Well, mostly pr0n, but darnit, vagueness has it's share too.

The answer to life, the universe, and everything, is 42.

As I replied to that particular question, regardless of the tactical situation, an Infantry Squad should take a Plasma Gun. There is no situation where any other weapon is practical or more useful.

Even giving a Meltabomb to a Sarge is more useful than giving a Meltagun to a single trooper.

So there. Regardless of how the question would be framed, the answer is Plasmagun.

You can now relax.

[ PS: It's totally cheating to say, "That's just an example," because per your own rant, you needed to define and frame your question. Therefore, your rant was unjustified, per my response. ]

But this is 40k and meta tourney list, you don't think on best build for a given job you think in best overall, take all corners and cheese list so most of people don't need to think and just roll the dice to win!.

 greatbigtree wrote:
As I replied to that particular question, regardless of the tactical situation, an Infantry Squad should take a Plasma Gun. There is no situation where any other weapon is practical or more useful.

Even giving a Meltabomb to a Sarge is more useful than giving a Meltagun to a single trooper.

So there. Regardless of how the question would be framed, the answer is Plasmagun.

You can now relax.

[ PS: It's totally cheating to say, "That's just an example," because per your own rant, you needed to define and frame your question. Therefore, your rant was unjustified, per my response. ]

Regardless of the tactical situation? I...No. a plasma gun in an infantry squad is almost never worthwhile.

Grenade Launchers are indeed worthless. There is no situation where adding a flamer or adding a second Lasgun trooper is not better than a GL. Meltas on bs3 guardsmen, again not really a niche for that.

But plasma guns I would pretty much only take in a lower points value game, where you're only running like 2 squads. If you're doing a blob squad, 5 flamers outperform just by making the blob nigh impossible to tie up with small light infantry units. 5D3 overwatch hits means you need something big and high quality to engage the blob, and that's exactly what you want a blob to do.

So no, "what do you want the unit to do" is entirely a valid question here. Of course the problem with the question in the first case is that there are a LOT of situations where the best special weapon is "none".

No... if your Guardsmen get charged by anything, they're going to lose. So having the extra flamers is just wasted points. Having Plasmaguns that can reach out and kill things is always better than wasted points. Or simply having your duders get killed. Math supports this in basically any meaningful situation, as I explained. If your lasguns will be effective against your target, then a GL isn't doing much. If your lasguns aren't effective against your target, the Plasma will be, so you aren't wasting the points on a squad that can't do anything.

The only reason to not put Plasma in your Infantry squads is that they're an active speed bump, or you simply can't shave the points from elsewhere.

So, yes, the Plasmagun is always the correct special weapon to give an infantry squad. If you give it a special weapon. Like I said. Which returns to the OP's rant regarding open questions... except this question does have a single correct answer, regardless of tactical situation. If you give your Infantry Squads a special, it should be a Plasmagun.

Not the way I run guardsmen. Rad+Psychotroke Inquisitor and a Priest with Litanies gives you a solid melee blob that will kill anything but a deathstar several times its cost, and even then it's easy to use make them last several turns while the artillery beats down the supporting units.

Though I guess if you're completely convinced that the math so completely supports the idea of spending 3x the cost of the trooper holding the gun a weapon that will kill him 1/3 of the time he fires it just so you can give up 9/10 of your lasguns, I expect you're just going to say that doesn't work or can't happen.

I am personally offended by the quote used in OP. For a non-veteran IG squad, grenade launchers are so much better than plasma guns. A S6 AP4 oral grenade is much better than a bolt gun, is far from useless, is much cheaper than a plasma gun, and does not have a 1/9 chance of killing the user per shot.

Sometimes people are just wrong regardless of context

EDIT: Leaving it in there for the sake of posterity, but oh my holy God did autocorrect mess up "krak grenade."

And for the record, I only take plasma guns if the guy holding it has at least a 4+ save, preferably with FnP.

A standard unit of shock troops should have nothing more than lasguns as they're not expected to last the fight and thus such valuable munitorum equipment is better regulated to veteran squads in their cosy chimeras. The standard troops are then a meat shield to further protect the precious weapons.

 KommissarKiln wrote:
A oral grenade is much better than a bolt gun

Somewhere out there a commissar has said this.

 KommissarKiln wrote:
I am personally offended by the quote used in OP. For a non-veteran IG squad, grenade launchers are so much better than plasma guns. A S6 AP4 oral grenade is much better than a bolt gun, is far from useless, is much cheaper than a plasma gun, and does not have a 1/9 chance of killing the user per shot.

Sometimes people are just wrong regardless of context

EDIT: Leaving it in there for the sake of posterity, but oh my holy God did autocorrect mess up "krak grenade."

And for the record, I only take plasma guns if the guy holding it has at least a 4+ save, preferably with FnP.

The problem with GLs is you have to compare them to 2 guys carrying lasguns (2 5-point guys vs a 5-point guy with a 5-point upgrade.)

Really the GLs only benefit is it can theoertically hurt vehicles, but even vs AV10 you've only got a 25% chance of taking a HP off. The only time the krak grenade is superior vs infantry is if you're between 13-18" away and don't have FRFSRF on. And even then, you're not taking into account the fact that the two guys...well..they have 2 wounds, 2x the close combat attacks etc.

Obviously (I'm going to commit the biggest sin possible on Dakkadakka!) wasting 5 points on an upgrade that probably wont be worth it if you think grenade launchers are cool is pretty safe.

the_scotsman wrote:

 KommissarKiln wrote:
Ramble ramble oral grenade ramble

The problem with GLs is you have to compare them to 2 guys carrying lasguns (2 5-point guys vs a 5-point guy with a 5-point upgrade.)

Really the GLs only benefit is it can theoertically hurt vehicles, but even vs AV10 you've only got a 25% chance of taking a HP off. The only time the krak grenade is superior vs infantry is if you're between 13-18" away and don't have FRFSRF on. And even then, you're not taking into account the fact that the two guys...well..they have 2 wounds, 2x the close combat attacks etc.

Obviously (I'm going to commit the biggest sin possible on Dakkadakka!) wasting 5 points on an upgrade that probably wont be worth it if you think grenade launchers are cool is pretty safe.

Very minor nitpicks that are not meant to invalidate your argument: GLs also have 24" range; if they were limited to 18" I would indeed reconsider bringing them. Although I agree it is a powerful order, I generally don't use FRFSRF with my command squads unless I can't get much from Fire on My Target/Bring it Down on a HWS or something (meanwhile my PCS jumps out planes onto backfield objectives like the suicidal maniacs they are, way out of orders range )

And now for the main points: I've noticed enemy units are very frequently T4, sometimes 5 or 6, as I like to send my blob after their scariest/largest infantry unit. I'd much rather have a S6 shot than 2 or sometimes 4 S3 shots simply because the chance to wound is so much better. Lasguns wound Marines on 5+, Marine bikers on 6, but a couple krak grenades thrown in there wound on 2+ and 3+, respectively. For every hit, the rolls of 4, 3, and 2 against the Marine, and rolls of 5, 4, and 3 against the bike to wound actually mean something, and that's 50% of your possible outcomes in both situations. Even against T3, that's a 33% addition to your probability of wounding. And sometimes, even the AP will be useful (Scouts, Fire Warriors, Necron Warriors), turning 4+ armor to a 5+ cover or an unsaved wound, whereas lasguns give the target unit the luxury of their best available save. And perhaps you only have a 50% chance to glance/pen a AV 10 vehicle, but it's far superior to a 0% chance.

Similarly, I greatly value several Assault 1 shots for those times where it's necessary to fix bayonets, be it trying to tarpit their death star and have the opportunity to cause a wound, or attempting to finish a vehicle with melta bomb sergeants (and seeing as a melta bomb won't always cause an Explodes!, stripping a HP or two can make all the difference).

TL;DR I argue that for standard platoon infantry squads, grenade launchers are cheap and versatile enough to be considered objectively good special weapon choices, better than taking nothing or taking something else.

P.S. I'm so terribly sorry if this is too tangential from your original point, Ratius

power axes are better