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.

There are so many ways to reroll missed shots now it makes overcharging plasma almost risk free.

At strength 8 rapid fire 2 -3 ap and 2 damage these are way more effective then melta in my opinion. Because you want to get your melta close you'll most likely deepstsirke/drop pod the model carrying it which means a guaranteed out of melta range shot. Plasma is guaranteed to be in plasma range so 2 shots per plasma, with rerolls with orders or a captain nearby etc. You can do 4 damage per plasma gun. Melta ususally needs to hit on 3s with one shot, wound on 3s with one shot against any vehicle if not 4s, and then if you're not in melta range it's only 1d6 damage, 3.5 average.

And then there's the points cost. Plasma being 7 points, melta being 12 almost double. You get pretty much 4 plasma shots for the price of one melta. And you don't always have to overcharge. If you want to kill a devastator team, or a techmarine or any character for that matter that's positioned himself wrongly, strength 7, 2 shots, ap-3 with no chance of dying is also really convenient.

What are your thoughts?

The 9' deepstrike rule kind of nerfed melta - not that that's a bad thing, having someone deepstrike next to your big stuff and just evaporate it with melta is a real downer.

No joke. Just ask anyone playing against Tau Commander spam.

Plasmagun having the ability to overcharge str 8 was a poor decision. Instead of making plasmaguns the anti MC (str6/7)it use to be they made it the anti tank weapon melta is suppose to be. Toughness 8 is what most tanks are toughness 7 is what most light vehicles are as well. Plasmagun should have never been str8. They would have the perfect niche at str6 overcharged 7 instead it's the anti MC, anti tank, even elite infantry killing weapon choice for every situation. The only time melta is better is vs t8 vehicles with 2+ saves and no invul and the melta is in 6inches. That is such a niche target it's no wonder everyone just chooses plasma gun. Plasma also completely obliterates grenade launchers for +2ppm. I hope gw doesn't just increase the cost of plasma. Even if it cost the same as melta it would likely still be chosen over meltaguns and just make everything cost more. However I hope gw makes plasma guns and plasma pistols str6 base str7 over charged. That would solve a lot of balance problems. It to mention shooting is still too strong in 8th.

I also think frag grenades needs to be changed to 2d3 instead of d6 and krak grenades to 2 damage instead of d3 damage.
These are subtle changes but it makes a grenade launcher an actual upgrade over lasgun and choice against the nerfed plasmagun profile Mentioned. 2d3 frag means a grenade launcher is doing a min 2 str3 shots and avaergae of 4 str 3 shots which is comparable to a lasgun 2 rapid fire str 3 shots and 4 shots w an order. However the grenade launcher can shoot this out to 24in and has a chance for more shots.
At str 6 ap-1 2 dam assault for 5ppm a krak grenade at 24in
Would be comparable to
Str6 ap-3 1 dam rapid fire for 7ppm at 24in
However the plasmagun would pull ahead in rapid fire range and overcharged as it should, but be worse vs light vehicles and toughness 8 vehicles as it should be be meltaguns.

gungo wrote:
Plasmagun having the ability to overcharge str 8 was a poor decision. Instead of making plasmaguns the anti MC (str6/7)it use to be they made it the anti tank weapon melta is suppose to be. Toughness 8 is what most tanks are toughness 7 is what most light vehicles are as well. Plasmagun should have never been str8. They would have the perfect niche at str6 overcharged 7 instead it's the anti MC, anti tank, even elite infantry killing weapon choice for every situation. The only time melta is better is vs t8 vehicles with 2+ saves and no invul and the melta is in 6inches. That is such a niche target it's no wonder everyone just chooses plasma gun. Plasma also completely obliterates grenade launchers for +2ppm. I hope gw doesn't just increase the cost of plasma. Even if it cost the same as melta it would likely still be chosen over meltaguns and just make everything cost more. However I hope gw makes plasma guns and plasma pistols str6 base str7 over charged. That would solve a lot of balance problems. It to mention shooting is still too strong in 8th.

I also think frag grenades needs to be changed to 2d3 instead of d6 and krak grenades to 2 damage instead of d3 damage.
These are subtle changes but it makes a grenade launcher an actual upgrade over lasgun and choice against the nerfed plasmagun profile Mentioned. 2d3 frag means a grenade launcher is doing a min 2 str3 shots and avaergae of 4 str 3 shots which is comparable to a lasgun 2 rapid fire str 3 shots and 4 shots w an order. However the grenade launcher can shoot this out to 24in and has a chance for more shots.
At str 6 ap-1 2 dam assault for 5ppm a krak grenade at 24in
Would be comparable to
Str6 ap-3 1 dam rapid fire for 7ppm at 24in
However the plasmagun would pull ahead in rapid fire range and overcharged as it should, but be worse vs light vehicles and toughness 8 vehicles as it should be be meltaguns.

Believe it or not I actually think Plasma should have had a bigger gap between neutral and overcharge.
I think neutral should have been S4 ap-2 and the overcharge at S7 ap-3, probably around the same price to boot.
At the moment it is kind of doing the same thing Grav was in the last edition.

gungo wrote:
Plasmagun having the ability to overcharge str 8 was a poor decision. Instead of making plasmaguns the anti MC (str6/7)it use to be they made it the anti tank weapon melta is suppose to be. Toughness 8 is what most tanks are toughness 7 is what most light vehicles are as well. Plasmagun should have never been str8. They would have the perfect niche at str6 overcharged 7 instead it's the anti MC, anti tank, even elite infantry killing weapon choice for every situation. The only time melta is better is vs t8 vehicles with 2+ saves and no invul and the melta is in 6inches. That is such a niche target it's no wonder everyone just chooses plasma gun. Plasma also completely obliterates grenade launchers for +2ppm. I hope gw doesn't just increase the cost of plasma. Even if it cost the same as melta it would likely still be chosen over meltaguns and just make everything cost more. However I hope gw makes plasma guns and plasma pistols str6 base str7 over charged. That would solve a lot of balance problems. It to mention shooting is still too strong in 8th.

I also think frag grenades needs to be changed to 2d3 instead of d6 and krak grenades to 2 damage instead of d3 damage.
These are subtle changes but it makes a grenade launcher an actual upgrade over lasgun and choice against the nerfed plasmagun profile Mentioned. 2d3 frag means a grenade launcher is doing a min 2 str3 shots and avaergae of 4 str 3 shots which is comparable to a lasgun 2 rapid fire str 3 shots and 4 shots w an order. However the grenade launcher can shoot this out to 24in and has a chance for more shots.
At str 6 ap-1 2 dam assault for 5ppm a krak grenade at 24in
Would be comparable to
Str6 ap-3 1 dam rapid fire for 7ppm at 24in
However the plasmagun would pull ahead in rapid fire range and overcharged as it should, but be worse vs light vehicles and toughness 8 vehicles as it should be be meltaguns.

I think you've summed it up perfectly. We'll wait to see what the new codexes say about plasma because right now my scions are obliterating everything out of this planet with their access to cheap plasma and shot rerolls. They all have deepstrike in their profile and to make sure I have half my models on the board to start there are so many cheap guard units I can take, overload on command points and position my plasma wherever I want to

They buffed plasma but made it cheaper and effectively nerfed melta by taking away vehicle explosions/damage but nearly doubled its cost. Actually, now that I think about it, melta was effectively nerfed by having its two dice to pen turned into roll two keep highest for damage. The two weapons were reasonably balanced last edition. What they did with them is quite inexplicable .

In the previous edition you pretty much guaranteed that a vehicle that got hit was losing at least 1/3rd its HP (Less so at AV14), but now you might hit a T8 and only have a 50% chance to do an average of one third its HP. Sure, two melta hits could do 12 damage to something, but they could also do 0. Previous edition, two melta hits were likely exploding something.

Melta's are still exploding transports in two hits. Everything else... well, Melta should take a bit longer to eat through my Leman Russ, Land Raider, or Monlith then you might like... You still pop the majority vehicles in 3 hits. Most tanks will take 6 Overcharged plasma wounds to do so. And most will still get a 5+/6+ Armor save. only 2+ vehicles save anything vs Melta

Yeah Meltas can do up to 6 damage, and in half range you get a better chance of it. Plasma can do at most 4 if you overcharge, otherwise 2. Melta also ignores more armor.

Not that I don't agree Melta is over costed. It should be the same or less than Plasma. And it is a joke that Multi meltas are more expensive than Lascannons.

I think a few things have been missed here. In general plasma is pretty great. However melta is a more situational weapon and more target specific, and under its preferred conditions out performs melta.

So looking at 2 command squads fully armed with thier preferred special weapon:

The plasma AM command squad will put out 4.44 woulda against a T7/3+ vehicle at 12" for 52 points.

A melta AM command squad will dish out 6.222 at same vehicle and range for 62 points. In this situation the melta is better already. However if you can get close the melta smokes the plasma pretty handsomely putting out an average 4.4 damage for every successful would.

Now your delivery method really matters here. If you deep striking its okay if your target is T7/9, or T5/6 with multiple wounds you'll be fine points wise, but with out needing to risk killing your models or having to keep a reroll bit nearby.

Where plasma shines is that It can bully little stuff and big stuff pretty well, but how well??

Against meq a plasma command will do 2.6 wounds with out overcharge or 3.33 wounds while over charging again for 52 points. This is .0511 or 0.064 wound per point.

Where as a command squad with Las guns will do 1.33 for 24 pts. Which is. 055 meq wound per point.

In this situation you can do as well or better the. Your standard weapon, but either you risk you models lives in the process. Or your paying for you hurt yout army resilience as you could bring almost twice as many models for the points (hard to kill 8 guard than 4 basicly).

In any event to mitigate losses you'll pay a tax by bringing something that lets you reroll 1s to.mitgwte loss that usually kills the advantages plasma brings unless you can get alot of units to be affected by this mitigating effect.

I equate plasmas to middle launchers or grenade launchers. Either you pat for the draw back in points, In dead models, or in some form of mitigating effect.

Mitigating effect get more difficult to use if your deep strike as the mitigating effect needs a way to target your unit from far away or needs to fit in your transport.

gungo wrote:
Plasmagun having the ability to overcharge str 8 was a poor decision. Instead of making plasmaguns the anti MC (str6/7)it use to be they made it the anti tank weapon melta is suppose to be. Toughness 8 is what most tanks are toughness 7 is what most light vehicles are as well. Plasmagun should have never been str8. They would have the perfect niche at str6 overcharged 7 instead it's the anti MC, anti tank, even elite infantry killing weapon choice for every situation. The only time melta is better is vs t8 vehicles with 2+ saves and no invul and the melta is in 6inches. That is such a niche target it's no wonder everyone just chooses plasma gun. Plasma also completely obliterates grenade launchers for +2ppm. I hope gw doesn't just increase the cost of plasma. Even if it cost the same as melta it would likely still be chosen over meltaguns and just make everything cost more. However I hope gw makes plasma guns and plasma pistols str6 base str7 over charged. That would solve a lot of balance problems. It to mention shooting is still too strong in 8th.

I also think frag grenades needs to be changed to 2d3 instead of d6 and krak grenades to 2 damage instead of d3 damage.
These are subtle changes but it makes a grenade launcher an actual upgrade over lasgun and choice against the nerfed plasmagun profile Mentioned. 2d3 frag means a grenade launcher is doing a min 2 str3 shots and avaergae of 4 str 3 shots which is comparable to a lasgun 2 rapid fire str 3 shots and 4 shots w an order. However the grenade launcher can shoot this out to 24in and has a chance for more shots.
At str 6 ap-1 2 dam assault for 5ppm a krak grenade at 24in
Would be comparable to
Str6 ap-3 1 dam rapid fire for 7ppm at 24in
However the plasmagun would pull ahead in rapid fire range and overcharged as it should, but be worse vs light vehicles and toughness 8 vehicles as it should be be meltaguns.

They should have made Plasma be S5 AP1 natural, and overcharge into S7 AP3
Most Standard Tanks are T7, Heavy Tanks are T8, Light Tanks are T6

If overcharge was S7 then it would be 4+ on Standard Tanks, Bad at Anti Heavy Tank, Ideal for Light Tanks... as it should be
Currently it's Good Against Everything... Okay against Heavy Tanks. Which is definitely overbuffed.

They both have their uses, and even if plasma on average does do more than melta for the points, you still have the chance at high end damage output, Especially with CP re-rolls, that's an important tool to have.

ravenerioli wrote:
There are so many ways to reroll missed shots now it makes overcharging plasma almost risk free.

At strength 8 rapid fire 2 -3 ap and 2 damage these are way more effective then melta in my opinion. Because you want to get your melta close you'll most likely deepstsirke/drop pod the model carrying it which means a guaranteed out of melta range shot. Plasma is guaranteed to be in plasma range so 2 shots per plasma, with rerolls with orders or a captain nearby etc. You can do 4 damage per plasma gun. Melta ususally needs to hit on 3s with one shot, wound on 3s with one shot against any vehicle if not 4s, and then if you're not in melta range it's only 1d6 damage, 3.5 average.

And then there's the points cost. Plasma being 7 points, melta being 12 almost double. You get pretty much 4 plasma shots for the price of one melta. And you don't always have to overcharge. If you want to kill a devastator team, or a techmarine or any character for that matter that's positioned himself wrongly, strength 7, 2 shots, ap-3 with no chance of dying is also really convenient.

What are your thoughts?

I thought this at first too but after getting several games I feel like melta is absolutely still essential for IG, just not on deepstriking units. Yes, there the plasma absolutely is the perfect weapon for stormtroopers, especially since most valuable targets will be bubble wrapped a bit, meaning even if you had to land outside of the 12" sweet spot on the intended target you're fine.

With melta, I've found it come into its own on units that are going to be on the table, especially if they've got a ride or are on a mobile platform. For example, I've had good luck with a melta vet squad and a heavy flamer riding around in a chimera as a fireteam to plug a gap in the line. My meta isn't super competitive but I've found that if something has broken through you often need those powerful melta hits, especially as I see so many hive tyrants, death guard, and other invuln/FNP types of units that are monsters to take down. They take a lot of fire just to get through their saves (For example, a lord of contagion with a 4+ invuln, 5+Disgusting, 6+ warlord trait), so when you get a hit in you need to do as much damage as possible. Plasma/Autocannons, which was what I initially went with, were consistent, but often lacked against these extremely hard targets. They just don't have the rate of fire to get through the enemy's saves, even at double the shots. I ended up using more lascannons/krak missiles/meltas because when you finally got a hit through, you could ensure it did damage and even command point if you really wanted to make it stick.

Not saying other weapons don't have a purpose, I've found a niche for almost every weapon I've tried so far and as long as you're not doing tournament play I think a solid argument could be made for a mix of pretty much every weapon infantry can carry (except grenade launchers of course )

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

ravenerioli wrote:
There are so many ways to reroll missed shots now it makes overcharging plasma almost risk free.

At strength 8 rapid fire 2 -3 ap and 2 damage these are way more effective then melta in my opinion. Because you want to get your melta close you'll most likely deepstsirke/drop pod the model carrying it which means a guaranteed out of melta range shot. Plasma is guaranteed to be in plasma range so 2 shots per plasma, with rerolls with orders or a captain nearby etc. You can do 4 damage per plasma gun. Melta ususally needs to hit on 3s with one shot, wound on 3s with one shot against any vehicle if not 4s, and then if you're not in melta range it's only 1d6 damage, 3.5 average.

And then there's the points cost. Plasma being 7 points, melta being 12 almost double. You get pretty much 4 plasma shots for the price of one melta. And you don't always have to overcharge. If you want to kill a devastator team, or a techmarine or any character for that matter that's positioned himself wrongly, strength 7, 2 shots, ap-3 with no chance of dying is also really convenient.

What are your thoughts?

I thought this at first too but after getting several games I feel like melta is absolutely still essential for IG, just not on deepstriking units. Yes, there the plasma absolutely is the perfect weapon for stormtroopers, especially since most valuable targets will be bubble wrapped a bit, meaning even if you had to land outside of the 12" sweet spot on the intended target you're fine.

With melta, I've found it come into its own on units that are going to be on the table, especially if they've got a ride or are on a mobile platform. For example, I've had good luck with a melta vet squad and a heavy flamer riding around in a chimera as a fireteam to plug a gap in the line. My meta isn't super competitive but I've found that if something has broken through you often need those powerful melta hits, especially as I see so many hive tyrants, death guard, and other invuln/FNP types of units that are monsters to take down. They take a lot of fire just to get through their saves (For example, a lord of contagion with a 4+ invuln, 5+Disgusting, 6+ warlord trait), so when you get a hit in you need to do as much damage as possible. Plasma/Autocannons, which was what I initially went with, were consistent, but often lacked against these extremely hard targets. They just don't have the rate of fire to get through the enemy's saves, even at double the shots. I ended up using more lascannons/krak missiles/meltas because when you finally got a hit through, you could ensure it did damage and even command point if you really wanted to make it stick.

Not saying other weapons don't have a purpose, I've found a niche for almost every weapon I've tried so far and as long as you're not doing tournament play I think a solid argument could be made for a mix of pretty much every weapon infantry can carry (except grenade launchers of course )

Yeah I agree IG do well with the melta. The body is cheap, and you can get some good BS for cheap really. On top of that they tend to have the most and best transports for the job. For instance i run a valk with a special weapons team, command squad, Astropath, and Company commander that allows for some pretty devasting turn 1 melta shots and threatening most of the table as the special weapons squad brings a few extra bodies to soak wounds from the disembark if i need to fly far.

As you say most deepstrikers won't care much for thier usual weapons of choice flamers/melta, but they do enjoy charging more than they did before.

gatebuster202 wrote:
Melta's are still exploding transports in two hits. Everything else... well, Melta should take a bit longer to eat through my Leman Russ, Land Raider, or Monlith then you might like... You still pop the majority vehicles in 3 hits. Most tanks will take 6 Overcharged plasma wounds to do so. And most will still get a 5+/6+ Armor save. only 2+ vehicles save anything vs Melta

2 hits from a melta gun is 4-5 damage on average, 6 if in melta range against a T7 transport. I don't think any transports are that squishy. Sure, you could roll a couple sixes, but you could just as easily roll 1s and 2s on your wound rolls or damage rolls.

Yeah Meltas can do up to 6 damage, and in half range you get a better chance of it. Plasma can do at most 4 if you overcharge, otherwise 2. Melta also ignores more armor.

Yeah, so 3.5 average if not in range and 4.5 if it's in range. Roughly equivalent, except plasma basically has twice the range and can deep strike in its optimal range.

I think the issue isn't the rules for plasma - it's the delivery options.

The new deep strike rules mean that you can never get into melta-range when coming in from reserves (even with a drop pod) - but you can be within rapid-fire plasma range.

Similarly, transports have gotten significantly more expensive and you now have to disembark before the transport moves (which can also really hamper your ability to get within melta range of an enemy).

Finally, I'm not sure melta is even competing with plasma anymore. It might look like it (since they're both special weapons), but I'd argue that melta is actually competing with stuff like Lascannons. You no longer need meltas to reliably destroy/explode vehicles and Lascannons (along with other weapons like Missile Launchers) have gained massive buffs in their ability to destroy vehicles and other hard targets. Meltas have one extra AP over Lascannons and get to roll 2d6 (picking highest) for damage when within 6". Lascannons get +1S and +36" range. They still do 1d6 damage, even if they never get to roll 2 and pick the highest.

Hence, I think the question isn't 'melta or plasma?' but rather 'melta or lascannon?'.

Plasma is defintely the issue I have no idea how people keep defending it. The numbers completely prove plasma is busted at its current profile. Again plasma should not be str8 that is anti tank profiles. Plasma was never an anti tank weapon until this edition.


https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/731278.page

gungo wrote:
Again plasma should not be str8 that is anti tank profiles. Plasma was never an anti tank weapon until this edition.

That's complete rubbish. In previous editions, plasma was very much an anti-tank weapon. Not necessarily a great one, but you could get quite a few shots with it and S7 could penetrate anything up to the front armour of a Chimera (this was especially important back when penetrating hits stood a very good chance of obliterating a vehicle outright).

What's more, plasma *is* supposed to be an anti-MC weapon (as well as an anti-heavy-infantry weapon). And since vehicles have been given MC statlines, it only stands to reason that plasma is not good against those as well.

 vipoid wrote:
I think the issue isn't the rules for plasma - it's the delivery options.

The new deep strike rules mean that you can never get into melta-range when coming in from reserves (even with a drop pod) - but you can be within rapid-fire plasma range.

Similarly, transports have gotten significantly more expensive and you now have to disembark before the transport moves (which can also really hamper your ability to get within melta range of an enemy).

Finally, I'm not sure melta is even competing with plasma anymore. It might look like it (since they're both special weapons), but I'd argue that melta is actually competing with stuff like Lascannons. You no longer need meltas to reliably destroy/explode vehicles and Lascannons (along with other weapons like Missile Launchers) have gained massive buffs in their ability to destroy vehicles and other hard targets. Meltas have one extra AP over Lascannons and get to roll 2d6 (picking highest) for damage when within 6". Lascannons get +1S and +36" range. They still do 1d6 damage, even if they never get to roll 2 and pick the highest.

Hence, I think the question isn't 'melta or plasma?' but rather 'melta or lascannon?'.

The core of the issue feels like they priced and balanced based on 7e (and previous edition) rules... then changed the rules...
I would have made it...
Plasma - S5 AP-1 1D
OH Plasma - S7 AP-3 2D

Plasma previous stat line was a strong Statline, it overheated because it was that strong. It costed a lot of points and overheated because it was a fairly good statline.
We really need to go back to that Statline now that Plasma has had a significant cost decrease. The ability for it to not overheat should mostly cripple the gun, but it should still be better than a standard Bolter.
Against Space Marines, for how little Plasma costs, S5 AP-1 is still a 2 improvements over the Bolter. That's a fair deal.

Lascannon 30pts
Lascannons have become one of the most useful weapons in the game, and a lot of lists are Spamming it.
The low cost Lascannon is what is really invalidating the Melta Gun. Being able to cover the table with length, shoot from safety of cover, and the massive increase in Tank costs makes the Lacannon absolutely insane.
A 5 point cost increase is completely justified and would help bring it in line with similar weapons.

I think the problem is that elite armies with small model count are already at huge disadvantage in this edition, and cheap plasma on cheap bodies (i.e. Scions) is hurting them even more. The problem with melta drop was effectively eliminated with new deep strike rules, but new threat appeared.

Grey Knights, primaris marines, necrons, to some extent tau and all vehicle heavy armies are at great pressure.

IG, Orks, Nids and other horde armies strive on flamers nerf and don't care about plasma or other D>1 weapons.

The solution is very clear, making plasma expensive enought to reconsider its usefullness. I'd eyeball it at 24pts.
But it won't solve the problem if other substitutes like lascannon won't be adjusted as well.

 Talamare wrote:

The core of the issue feels like they priced and balanced based on 7e (and previous edition) rules... then changed the rules...
I would have made it...
Plasma - S5 AP-1 1D
OH Plasma - S7 AP-3 2D

The first one seems stupidly weak.

 Talamare wrote:

Plasma previous stat line was a strong Statline, it overheated because it was that strong.

That was true once. However, by the time 7th rolled around, the plasmagun's statline was mediocre at best. There were a plethora of weapons that far outclassed plasma, yet weren't afflicted with the same risk.

Also, bear in mind that the risk has increased - especially for multi-wound models and models with invulnerable saves.

 Talamare wrote:

Against Space Marines, for how little Plasma costs, S5 AP-1 is still a 2 improvements over the Bolter. That's a fair deal.

But you don't buy special weapons for tiny improvements over the Bolter. There's a reason why the Grenade Launcher (which actually has a *better* profile than the one you're suggesting for non-supercharging plasma) is considered absolute garbage. Because the whole point of special weapons is that they're very effective against some/all targets - not just that they're very slightly better than the default weapon.

I think plasma just needs a small increase in price.

 Talamare wrote:

Lascannon 30pts
Lascannons have become one of the most useful weapons in the game, and a lot of lists are Spamming it.
The low cost Lascannon is what is really invalidating the Melta Gun. Being able to cover the table with length, shoot from safety of cover, and the massive increase in Tank costs makes the Lacannon absolutely insane.
A 5 point cost increase is completely justified and would help bring it in line with similar weapons.

If you increased its cost by 5pts, wouldn't that bring it to 25pts (not 30)? That aside, I agree. I think the current price of the Lascannon also invalidates the Missile Launcher (since the reduction in strength and AP isn't worth the rarely-used Frag mode).

 vipoid wrote:

gungo wrote:
Again plasma should not be str8 that is anti tank profiles. Plasma was never an anti tank weapon until this edition.

That's complete rubbish. In previous editions, plasma was very much an anti-tank weapon. Not necessarily a great one, but you could get quite a few shots with it and S7 could penetrate anything up to the front armour of a Chimera (this was especially important back when penetrating hits stood a very good chance of obliterating a vehicle outright).

What's more, plasma *is* supposed to be an anti-MC weapon (as well as an anti-heavy-infantry weapon). And since vehicles have been given MC statlines, it only stands to reason that plasma is not good against those as well.

Av 12 front and av10 side chimera wasn't a tank it was a light transport.
The fact was plasma never had a chance to even touch av14 and barely any chance at av13 in7th. .It wasnt a tank weapon and it's broken now because it competes to strongly w melta. It is horribly unbalanced this edition and would be better for all other special weapons if plasma was reduced to str7 max on overcharged and str6 max base becuase even if it costs the same as meltagun it's still worse then it in most circumstances.

I might go on huge offtopic, BUT making flamers-like weapons more efficient (like adding d6 hit per 5 or 10 models in target units) is IMO a necessary follow up if GW decides to nerf plasma and lascannon weapons.

gungo wrote:

Av 12 front and av10 side chimera wasn't a tank it was a light transport.

AV12 was not 'light'. Transport or not, it was still a tank.

gungo wrote:

The fact was plasma never had a chance to even touch av14 and barely any chance at av13.

I never said otherwise. But there are still plenty of tanks that it could (and did) hurt.

Fan67 wrote:
I might go on huge offtopic, BUT making flamers-like weapons more efficient (like adding d6 hit per 5 or 10 models in target units) is IMO a necessary follow up if GW decides to nerf plasma and lascannon weapons.

It might also help if they gave them an extra ~2" of range - so that they could actually be fired after deep striking.

Given how many predators and leman russes i killed with plasma on obliterators I disagree it lacked anti-tank potential.

Rogues do it from behind.

Something else worth mentioning - whilst plasma is looking good on infantry, most plasma weapons on tanks are terrible atm.

This would seem to indicate that the profile of plasma isn't the issue (and indeed, I'd be wary of nerfing plasma's profile as it would make those weapons even worse than they already are).

I think an increase in points for infantry plasma is the way to go.


Out of interest, do you think we could also do with decreasing the cost of meltaguns or are they about right atm?

Given how much extra you need to pay for the means to deliver melta in-range I think it's fine. I could even advocate slight increase in S up to 9, but because of aforementioned problems elite armies have right now it's fine as is.

No one talking about why guard plasguns are half the cost of everyone elses?

How so? Most of the replies revolve around unfair price tag.
Ubiquous price for all fractions is unlikely to solve issue, because even the most expensive plasma gun for infantry is still too cheap.

 vipoid wrote:

 Talamare wrote:

The core of the issue feels like they priced and balanced based on 7e (and previous edition) rules... then changed the rules...
I would have made it...
Plasma - S5 AP-1 1D
OH Plasma - S7 AP-3 2D

The first one seems stupidly weak.

 Talamare wrote:

Plasma previous stat line was a strong Statline, it overheated because it was that strong.

That was true once. However, by the time 7th rolled around, the plasmagun's statline was mediocre at best. There were a plethora of weapons that far outclassed plasma, yet weren't afflicted with the same risk.

Also, bear in mind that the risk has increased - especially for multi-wound models and models with invulnerable saves.

 Talamare wrote:

Against Space Marines, for how little Plasma costs, S5 AP-1 is still a 2 improvements over the Bolter. That's a fair deal.

But you don't buy special weapons for tiny improvements over the Bolter. There's a reason why the Grenade Launcher (which actually has a *better* profile than the one you're suggesting for non-supercharging plasma) is considered absolute garbage. Because the whole point of special weapons is that they're very effective against some/all targets - not just that they're very slightly better than the default weapon.

The first one I suggest is INTENDED to be fairly weak.
Using IG costs since they are the ones that get Grenade Launchers.
Plasma Gun costs 7 points, Grenade costs 5. So straight from the door we get an understanding that one weapon shouldn't massively outclass the other.
Krak Grenade should be stronger than non Overheat Plasma.
Plasma has the potential to shoot 2 shots after all.

Then if you take a Risk you get a gun that is significantly more powerful than Krak Grenades.
With not only the potential to shoot 2 shots, but also 1 Higher STR which is massive when using it against Light Tanks
2 Higher AP, which is incredibly useful against most targets.
Reliable 2 damage, which is at least a personal preference (I rather rely on 2 damage, than risk on d3 damage)

Finally the GL is crap because comparable options are better. If you bring down the comparable option (IE the Plasma Gun), then you also indirectly buff the GL.

I agree that Plasma Gun was mediocre by 7th, but not because of a bad stat line. But because of the high costs.
If Plasma costed 7~10 points in 7th it would have been still been quite popular.