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.

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

You mean aside from me saying at least twice now that cost is the issue, not their profile?

Just glancing between SM and IG, the pricing of the weapons is rather odd:

SM Flamer 9 IG Flamer 7
SM Plasmagun 13 IG Plasmagun 7
SM Melta 17 IG Melta 12

Can anyone work out what formula they were using here?

I'm also curious to know why they're different in the first place. If it's to do with the relative cost of the models, fair enough, but why then aren't IG power swords/axes/mauls also cheaper? Also, why has plasma been given a larger discount than melta?

 Talamare wrote:

The first one I suggest is INTENDED to be fairly weak.

Making a weapon intentionally bad is still making a weapon bad.

 Talamare wrote:

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.

Sure. But what you're ignoring are that grenade launchers are bad period. You shouldn't be using one as the basis for a balanced plasmagun.

 Talamare wrote:

Krak Grenade should be stronger than non Overheat Plasma.

Sure. But, again, part of the problem is that Krak is incredibly weak to begin with (hence why people still aren't using grenade launchers). So if you want to make non-overcharging plasma weaker than Krak, fine, but you first have to buff Krak rounds to the point where they're not complete garbage.

 Talamare wrote:

Finally the GL is crap because comparable options are better.

No. It's crap because its Frag statline is barely better than the standard plasmagun and its Krak statline is bloody awful.

If you're going to make non-overcharging plasma worse than a horribly underpowered weapon , you might as well just show some honesty and delete that statline altogether.


Also, have you considered how vehicles will suffer as a result of your proposed changes? Your solution will make all plasma weapons on vehicles completely unusable.

Would it not be more sensible to just increase the cost of plasma on infantry - rather than nerfing vehicle weapons that are already suffering?

Reroll auras should be a factor in the pricing of plasma weapons. Increase cost of plasma weaponry somewhat and give melta weaponry S9.

 vipoid wrote:

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

You mean aside from me saying at least twice now that cost is the issue, not their profile?

Just glancing between SM and IG, the pricing of the weapons is rather odd:

SM Flamer 9 IG Flamer 7
SM Plasmagun 13 IG Plasmagun 7
SM Melta 17 IG Melta 12

Can anyone work out what formula they were using here?

I'm also curious to know why they're different in the first place. If it's to do with the relative cost of the models, fair enough, but why then aren't IG power swords/axes/mauls also cheaper? Also, why has plasma been given a larger discount than melta?

 Talamare wrote:

The first one I suggest is INTENDED to be fairly weak.

Making a weapon intentionally bad is still making a weapon bad.

Also, have you considered how vehicles will suffer as a result of your proposed changes? Your solution will make all plasma weapons on vehicles completely unusable.

Would it not be more sensible to just increase the cost of plasma on infantry - rather than nerfing vehicle weapons that are already suffering?

I believe their idea was that it's a better platform with better BS, while ignoring the fact that IG has access to equal BS.

2 Shots at S5 and AP-1 is a decent shot, it's a little disingenuous to claim it isn't.
S5 is high enough to roll against nearly every infantry at a 3+, and even against super light vehicles at a 4+.
The point is so that you have a better than average profile when you're firing safely, but to have a pretty great profile when you're taking the risk.
Krak is bad because it never does 2 shots.

Also, Plasma GUNS and Plasma Cannons can have different statlines
Plasma GUNS on Vehicles are already complete garbage since Plasma GUNS states the "Bearer is Slain". So a Vehicle with a dozen wounds would auto die on a 1.
Also... which Vehicle even carries a Plasma GUN?

Bottom line is plasma is busted in the current edition. You can argue how it being overpowered is needed all you want however compared to equivilant special weapons plasma is completely unbalanced with every other special weapon in 8th.

 Talamare wrote:

I believe their idea was that it's a better platform with better BS, while ignoring the fact that IG has access to equal BS.

Even then though, it makes no sense to price the flamer differently. Nor to give the plasmagun a larger discount than the meltagun.

 Talamare wrote:

2 Shots at S5 and AP-1 is a decent shot, it's a little disingenuous to claim it isn't.

On the contrary, it's disingenuous of you to claim that it's decent.

 Talamare wrote:

S5 is high enough to roll against nearly every infantry at a 3+, and even against super light vehicles at a 4+.

Sure. But 2 shots isn't enough to inflict meaningful damage to either of those - especially with a poor AP and only 1 damage.

 Talamare wrote:

The point is so that you have a better than average profile when you're firing safely, but to have a pretty great profile when you're taking the risk.

Sure. But why is that necessary in the first place?

 Talamare wrote:

Krak is bad because it never does 2 shots.

No, Krak is bad because it has middling strength, poor AP and pitiful damage.

 Talamare wrote:

Also, Plasma GUNS and Plasma Cannons can have different statlines

Perhaps, but they've only ever differed in number of shots. Plasma has always had a consistent damage profile, regardless of whether it is being fired from a pistol, gun or cannon.

What's more, even if you only change the infantry weapons, there's still the issue of characters or other expensive models using plasma pistols or combi-plasma.

 Talamare wrote:

Plasma GUNS on Vehicles are already complete garbage since Plasma GUNS states the "Bearer is Slain". So a Vehicle with a dozen wounds would auto die on a 1.

So do plasma cannons. And the Executioner Plasma Cannon inflicts d6 mortal wounds on a roll of 1.

Anyway, I think you missed my point - the fact that basic infantry with plasmaguns is expendable does not mean that all models carrying plasma are equally expendable. This is why its so important for plasma to have an effective non-overcharge statline. Because for many models the risk of overheating is exceptional.

 Talamare wrote:
Also... which Vehicle even carries a Plasma GUN?

Razorbacks for one.

Also, you still haven't said why this change is even remotely necessary compared with just increasing the price of plasmaguns.

sossen wrote:
Reroll auras should be a factor in the pricing of plasma weapons. Increase cost of plasma weaponry somewhat and give melta weaponry S9.

Reroll auras are tricky. On the one hand, they do make plasma less risky. On the other hand, they're not always going to be available/in range. What's more, whilst the chance of an overheat has potentially been decreased, the cost of an overheat has been drastically increased for most models. Before, a character firing a plasmagun would take a single wound on a roll of 1 and could still take his invulnerable save against it. Now, he's dead with no save of any kind.

It's interesting actually as it's basically the opposite problem to the issue of melee weapons. The less expensive/valuable the model, the more effective plasma is.


I am curious though: to those saying plasma is overpowered, is this based entirely on your experiences with IG or is plasma equally problematic in armies like SMs?

I'm just interested as to whether plasma is as much of a problem on more elite armies.

I agree that plasma guns are too cheap - especially on scions. They need to introduce a separate price for guns on scions. A model with a better BS, better armour, the ability to deep strike and no tax on guys with lasguns in the unit should pay more for his gun - much more.

Arguably, they are also too good - and/or meltas are too expensive. Point for point, overcharged plasma is at least as good for killing tanks as melta is - and this is wrong.

Melta is also in trouble because of lascannons. A lascannon hit used to be less dangerous than a melta hit, but that's no-longer the case.

I would propose that melta guns get to reroll to wound within half range, rather than reroll damage if they do wound. That's a much more significant buff. It would be closer to the high chance of penetrating that they had through armourbane in previous editions.

I think bringing plasma into a consistent price range (Maybe 15 pts per gun, rather than the current value) would go a long way to reduce the spamming of it.

Additionally, taking away overcharged plasma's extra point of damage would help. Get more strength, better AP, but no extra damage damage. Singe shot high damage is the realm of melta.

Let try to answer these,
For the Flamer it's still a better (tankier) platform so that's their justification for it.
Balance is best achieved with good design, just adjusting points doesn't change the initial design philosophy behind an item.
@Razorback... cool, imo should probably be a Cannon... and Plasma Cannons should probably not outright Slain a model.
Similar named weapons having slightly different Profiles is fine if they convey the core idea. Also isn't the Plasma Incinerator slightly better AP than the rest of the Plasma Weaponry?\

Krak is bad because it has middling strength, poor AP, low damage... AND 1 SHOT... If you give Krak 50 Shots its 100% Overpowered. You can't just say "No" to the 1 shot argument. You can say "Yes, but also ... list"
Also, Krak is only bad in relation to how insanely godly Plasma is in it's current state. When compared to other Special Weapons. GLs fill a unique niche of having decent range, mobility, and anti tank potential.

On the contrary to the your contrary, It's not dissimilar to the many S6 AP0 weapons that people call amazing. Except that it's BETTER against infantry, and for a low cost.
So yea, you're doubling down on the disingenuous. Not mention as I have said before, it's INTENDED not to be Godly. Which seems to be what you want.
I guess if it isn't AP-3 for 7 points, it's garbage huh?
Find me another weapon that comes close to that.

Points values for weapons are tricky. There's always a unit that is much better with any given gun than others. Today it's plasma scions, getting obscenely cheap plasma anywhere you like. Last edition it was grav bikers, getting 3 shots on the move when a guy on foot only got two, with half the range.

The only really fair way to do it would be to charge a different price for more or less every unit. The only practical way to do that would be to stick the options and prices on each datasheet... and honestly I can't see what would be wrong with that. It works in 30k.

Something I've noticed is that units with very high concentrations of special/heavy weapons become difficult to put a price on. Scion HQs, predators, Tau commanders and similar get to spam guns that would otherwise only exist on far more diluted platforms - say in a squad of 5 scions with 2 special weapons or a crisis suit with 3 hardpoints and BS4+ instead of 4 hardpoints and 2+.

So my recommendation would be to avoid having these units, wherever possible. Make a command squad be a medic, a standard bearer and two guys who are allowed special weapons. Allow battlesuits to have two guns each and no more, but cut their price. The problem would go away.

 Talamare wrote:

Balance is best achieved with good design, just adjusting points doesn't change the initial design philosophy behind an item.

That's somewhat true, but the entire purpose of points is to balance weapons. I'd argue that they should be the default thing to change if a weapon seems over/underpowered. Especially when many variations of that weapon (which use identical profiles save for weapon type and shots) are severely underpowered.

 Talamare wrote:

@Razorback... cool, imo should probably be a Cannon... and Plasma Cannons should probably not outright Slain a model.

I think it's a plasmagun because it's taken along with a lascannon. Having both a lascannon and plasmacannon would probably be a bit OTT - especially compared to other options.

 Talamare wrote:

Similar named weapons having slightly different Profiles is fine if they convey the core idea. Also isn't the Plasma Incinerator slightly better AP than the rest of the Plasma Weaponry?\

I don't know. What's the plasma incinerator and what model(s) is it on?

 Talamare wrote:

Krak is bad because it has middling strength, poor AP, low damage... AND 1 SHOT... If you give Krak 50 Shots its 100% Overpowered. You can't just say "No" to the 1 shot argument. You can say "Yes, but also ... list"

But that's a useless argument. Yeah, anything can become stronger if you give it a ridiculous number of shots (especially in this edition). How exactly is that relevant? Especialy when the weapon in question is of the single-shot variety and highly unlikely to ever get a second shot (since that is the whole point of its frag mode).

 Talamare wrote:

Also, Krak is only bad in relation to how insanely godly Plasma is in it's current state. When compared to other Special Weapons. GLs fill a unique niche of having decent range, mobility, and anti tank potential.

Again, no. GLs suck period. If plasma wasn't available, people would either take flamers or meltas (or, if available, Grav) or else just not use those units at all.

 Talamare wrote:

On the contrary to the your contrary, It's not dissimilar to the many S6 AP0 weapons that people call amazing. Except that it's BETTER against infantry, and for a low cost.

Okay, I'm calling you out here. Which S6 AP0 weapons are you referring to here? Because the only ones I can think of are the Scatter Lazer (considered outstanding in 7th) and the Multilaser (considered okay in 7th). Both of which are now considered completely worthless. But please enlighten me as to all these amazing S6 AP0 weapons that "people" are apparently calling amazing in stark contrast to what they're calling every other S6 AP0 weapon.

 Talamare wrote:

So yea, you're doubling down on the disingenuous. Not mention as I have said before, it's INTENDED not to be Godly. Which seems to be what you want.

Yes, because not wanting a weapon to be utter trash obviously means I want it to be Godly.

You clearly haven't pait attention to anything I've said so I'm going to bid you farewell. Have fun burning that strawman.

I think it depends on who is carrying that plasma. If I choose to equip combi plasma on my chaos terminators, each Termi plus combi plasma costs me close to 50 points. Would I want to risk losing that Termi from plasma overcharge? Probably only in the most desperate of situations.

Same if I put a combi plasma on a Rhino or a Land raider. Would I want to overcharge? Only if I am truly desperate. On the other hand, if its on a relatively cheap raptor or chosen, then yes, I would probably use overcharge pretty often.

I think plasma is fine, except that it doesn't look like they thought the overcharge penalty through very well.

Being able to re-roll 1s makes losing a guy happen so much less it is almost a non issue.
Having -1 modifiers to hit shouldn't cause you to blow up more.
Vehicles like the razorback, and characters with plasma shouldn't die on a single overcharge failure.

I think the easiest fix might be to make overcharged plasma do a mortal wound on a roll of a natural 1 to hit before any re-rolls or modifiers. You can still apply the modifiers and even re-roll the dice and resolve shots, but you still have to take the mortal wound.

Melta is not bad, it just isn't needed in most marine and IG armies because we have las cannons, missiles, and other ways to do D6 damage. Multi-meltas do feel a bit underpowered, and i sort of feel like they should have been heavy 2. But, if what you want to do is get close to stuff and kill vehicles, Melta is still the way to go over plasma, every single time. Sisters and Tau have ways of getting in close enough to use it, and it works really well for them. IG and marines don't have as many ways, so Plasma seems like the better choice for them. I don't really see this as a problem, to be honest.

 vipoid wrote:

 Talamare wrote:

Also, Krak is only bad in relation to how insanely godly Plasma is in it's current state. When compared to other Special Weapons. GLs fill a unique niche of having decent range, mobility, and anti tank potential.

Again, no. GLs suck period. If plasma wasn't available, people would either take flamers or meltas (or, if available, Grav) or else just not use those units at all.

Yes, because not wanting a weapon to be utter trash obviously means I want it to be Godly.

You clearly haven't pait attention to anything I've said so I'm going to bid you farewell. Have fun burning that strawman.

Ah classic!
Uses Strawman then claims the other person for using Strawman then tries to perform the mic drop walk out!
Plasma is /currently/ Godly.
Just a point cost increase is a bad way to fix that because there is no good way to do it without changing how everything works.
If you make Plasma more expensive, then platforms that don't want to risk it. Like the Terminator in a previous post, or as you said the Razorback would want it EVEN LESS.
If you make the unit carrying Plasma more expensive then you're also directly nerfing the other weapons that unit can carry. Especially nerfing it's default no weapon options.

More explanation for you to understand Balance.
You don't only balance in relation to Special Weapon vs Special Weapon
You also need to understand the cost of a Special Weapon vs Ignoring the Special Weapon and just getting more normal Weapons.
So yes, Bolters and Lasguns matter when figuring out the Balance Spectrum.

So let's take Veterans here for example, since they can hold 4 Special weapons and are BS3.
As well as lets consider a target you would want to use Special Weapons on, but would feel Heavy Weapons might be a little excess.
So a Light Vehicle (T5, Multiple Wounds, 4+ Armor) should suffice.
Establish a Base Line and We get...
24" Lasgun/Bolter - 1 * 2/3 * 1/3 * 1/2 = 0.11
12" Lasgun/Bolter - 2 * 2/3 * 1/3 * 1/2 = 0.22


Now the first few Special Weapons
8" Flamer - 3.5 * 1/3 * 1/2 = 0.58
24" Frag - 3.5 * 2/3 * 1/3 * 1/2 = 0.38
24" Krak - 1 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 2 = 0.59
Flamer is obviously not suited for this task, but performs decently well. It however carries the penalty of 8" range. While GLs have the advantage of being fully effective at 24"
But regardless, these weapons perform better than adding an additional standard Trooper, meaning they are both worth their points.
So straight on any claims that the GL is 100% Garbage is instantly false.

Next move on to a more Anti Tank Weapon.
12" Melta - 1 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 3.5 = 1.55
and this definitely has some powerful potential! Who would have guessed a weapon designed to be Anti Tank would be pretty good at it.
Regardless, we carry a similar 12" penalty for using it.

So where does Plasma stand?
Let's understand where it currently stands.
24" Standard Shot - 1 * 2/3 * 2/3 = 0.44
12" Standard Shot - 2 * 2/3 * 2/3 = 0.88
24" Overheat - 1 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 2 = 0.88
12" Overheat - 2 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 2 = 1.77
This is part of the problem people bring up when they acknowledge that Plasma is Godly, the fact that it's capable of being better than every other option
At 12" this gun is essentially worth 24 points worth of Veterans for only 7 points. That shows it's efficiency.
Not to mention you have the option to overcharge for it to perform better than the Anti Tank Weapon that costs significantly more points.
Finally, it's still a fairly effective weapon at 24".

24" Proposed Plasma SS - 1 * 2/3 * 1/2 * 2/3 = 0.22
12" Proposed Plasma SS - 2 * 2/3 * 1/2 * 2/3 = 0.44
24" Proposed Plasma OH - 1 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 2 = 0.88
12" Proposed Plasma OH - 2 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 2 = 1.77

Proposed Plasma = (S5, AP1, OH - S7 AP3 2D)

We can see that the standard profile is still worth in effectiveness. Since it only costs a single point more than adding another Model.
While we can also see that you keep the option to make the Weapon VASTLY more cost effective if you're willing to risk the overcharge.

Finally, 1 more example using a T7, 3+ Armor Tank. A Standard Tank stat line. (T8 are Heavy Tanks)
12" Current OH - 2 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 2 = 1.77
12" Melta - 1 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 3.5 = 1.55
12" Proposed Plasma OH - 2 * 2/3 * 1/2 * 2 = 1.33

We managed to also nerf it so that Melta is clearly define that Melta is a better Anti Tank gun than Plasma.
So Plasma would best target's would be Light Vehicles, While Melta would perform better against Tanks.

So to recap...
The new Standard Profile is minimally efficient enough to still be useful to use as a default profile.
The nerf to Plasma's default Profile provides a SIGNIFICANT buff to Grenade Launchers (and Krak are now the best profile to use safely against Light Vehicles, especially with some Range)
Plasma Overheat provides an ideal weapon specialized against Light Vehicles.
Basically... it's like...
Everything is significantly better with this change...

*drops the mic*

Eldenfirefly wrote:
I think it depends on who is carrying that plasma. If I choose to equip combi plasma on my chaos terminators, each Termi plus combi plasma costs me close to 50 points. Would I want to risk losing that Termi from plasma overcharge? Probably only in the most desperate of situations.

Same if I put a combi plasma on a Rhino or a Land raider. Would I want to overcharge? Only if I am truly desperate. On the other hand, if its on a relatively cheap raptor or chosen, then yes, I would probably use overcharge pretty often.

Well, yeah. Nobody is complaining about something like a space marine tactical squad bringing a plasma gun (though actually it's the obvious choice for them). The problem is those units that are able to bring loads of the things.

Scion command squads are probably the worst offenders; combining low cost, good accuracy and the ability to get anywhere for free. You get similar issues elsewhere, say for example with SoB dominions. Why take battle sisters when for 3ppm extra you get a scout move in your immolator and everyone has a storm bolter?

It also makes a bit of a mockery of power levels. A guy in a SM command squad might have a bolt pistol and chainsword, or he might have a combi-plasma gun and a thunder hammer.

One other thought. People are saying that melta works for Tau and SoBs. It does - but they don't have access to plasma (or at least not overcharged plasma). If a dominion squad could take plasma guns instead of meltas, they probably would.

Mandragola wrote:
One other thought. People are saying that melta works for Tau but they don't have access to plasma (or at least not overcharged plasma).

Actually, for Tau they get the CIB which is basically the same profile as Plasma Guns.
It's considered their best weapon.

Melta is slightly more efficient against Heavy Tanks
CIB is SIGNIFICANTLY more efficient against Everything Else.

It makes more sense for a Tau player to bring maybe 1 or 2 Melta Commanders, and basically twice as many CIB Commanders. Than just Melta Commanders.

I also like melta because its assault, which gives it an edge on fast moving or close combat units

Melta is slightly more efficient against Heavy Tanks
CIB is SIGNIFICANTLY more efficient against Everything Else.

Actually, the tables Aeri put together would disagree and instead point to fusion being the most effective option against anything with T4+ and more than 1 wound. For anything else, there's Gun Drones. I haven't checked his math, so take it for what it's worth. Aaaaaanyway...

I'm not really sure why plasma needs an overcharge mode at all. What was wrong with it just always getting hot? I've always thought that was just part of the deal; you get a relatively cheap but powerful weapon that may kill you. Leave it as is with the basic mode getting hot but no overcharge.

Plasma is still pretty terrible at killing vehicles. You basically have to have some way to do d6 damage if you want to kill knights or land raiders, and even rhinos take a lot of plasma guns to kill.

It's just not great for Maines and IG, who lack a way to spam it on a fast / mobile unit to get in that 6" range like tau or sisters do. I really don't think there is anything wrong with that as they can still take it if they want to, and have other options that do a similar job in their armies. I really don't think the problem is plasma, other than the overcharge being too easy to get around with rerolls and it one shotting razorbacks on a fail. If anything meltas might use a boost, but it's not as if they aren't still the best anti tank special weapon.

 Talamare wrote:

 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.

Making the plasma crappier isn't going to make IG players take Grenade Launchers, it just means we're going to take other weapons instead, in this case the most likely choices would become sniper spam and melta spam, depending on the unit. If you're wondering why I'm ignoring flamers, well, anything that can take a heavy flamer is taking one, but for regular flamers they really don't offer much to IG that we can't cover with things like FRFSRF and frag grenades that all our units carry.

I don't think you understand IG players very well, the Grenade Launcher has never been lamented over it's cost, it's been lamented because it is a truly awful special weapon and as far as I'm aware always has been. It's about one of the only things that many players could agree on, that bringing grenade launchers hurt you in just about every instance you could think of, not just because it was an incredibly mediocre weapon, but because it actively ate up slots that would be better served carrying plasma, melta, snipers, etc. etc. I honestly probably wouldn't even bring them unless they were free, and even there only if I was being lazy and had a command squad that I wanted to cut some points on.

The reason IG players care so much about our special weapons is because our basic weapons (lasguns) are so terrible. We NEED to bring proper heavy and special weapons because otherwise we can't do anything significant to most targets, even with the updated FRFSRF. The Grenade Launcher could be 1pt and I still think you would see most IG players ignore it because it is terrible for what it needs to be, a special weapon that deals with targets lasguns can't. What does a Grenade launcher offer over any other weapon we can take? D6 frag shots? I could literally leave the guardsman with a lasgun and with FRFSRF probably deal more S3 shots. Dealing with hard targets at range? Snipers and plasma both offer far more damage potential, snipers with the mortal wound capability as well as picking out characters and plasma with just consistent raw damage. This is ignoring heavy weapons as well, with the heavy bolter and mortars hilariously outdoing it in the anti horde department despite being in the same area in price and pretty much every other weapon massively outclassing it in range and ability to kill hard targets.

Plasma just needs a points increase. Rough eyeballing it I would say around 10-12pts at least would be a good happy area, 15 at absolute max. Even just a few points adds up across an army, especially with IG where you're normally talking dozens of special weapons and potentially over 10 heavy weapons in the average list. I think when GW was writing our special weapons prices, they only accounted for BS 4+ guardsmen, as if Vets, stormtroopers, company command squads, and various other things didn't exist. This is where the issue comes in. 7pts plasma for BS 4+ Guardsmen without orders and a massive access to rerolls sounds pretty decent. Still cheap, but not so bad. The issue pops up when we have surefire deepstrike, reroll 1's out the wazoo, and a base BS 3+ for many of our dedicated special weapon carriers that can often carry a high percentage of special weapons per unit.

 Talamare wrote:

Mandragola wrote:
One other thought. People are saying that melta works for Tau but they don't have access to plasma (or at least not overcharged plasma).

Actually, for Tau they get the CIB which is basically the same profile as Plasma Guns.
It's considered their best weapon.

Melta is slightly more efficient against Heavy Tanks
CIB is SIGNIFICANTLY more efficient against Everything Else.

It makes more sense for a Tau player to bring maybe 1 or 2 Melta Commanders, and basically twice as many CIB Commanders. Than just Melta Commanders.

CIBs have an ap of -1, not -3. A typical vehicle with a 3+ save will take a hell of a lot less damage from a CIB than it would from a crisis commander firing 4 overcharged plasma guns - if he had access to them.

CIBs are good on crisis suits that can pack an ATS. They are flexible with a good 3-shot normal mode to hose 1-wound infantry and an overcharged mode for tanks. They just don't offer anything comparable to the output/cost of a scion plasma squad.