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.

So me and my Tau friend have been looking at our Melta/fusion weapons and we both agree that Melta is kinda meh.

He was pretty shocked that my main Melta weapon only had a Melta range of 6", but I told him I had a bigger one with a 12" Melta range. His only other fusion weapon could be put on a ghostkeel which he was a fan of and would rather have a triple fusion commander.

Anyway does anyone else have gripes about Melta? (The multi Melta mechically irritates me, shouldn't it be 2 shots at 12"?)

Yeah, melta is bad. TO make melta viable, the str needs to double inside half range as well.

If you want long range meltas use lascannons. I think meltas are ok. I use em to kill daemons or monsters which attack me in CC. Why bother getting close to them, when they come close to me ?

LOL, try a fusion pistol, rng 6, melta at rng 3. Now that is wicked short.

Well as far as meltas and lascannon esque weapons go. They're alright but pretty much anything you shoot them at is gonna trigger invuln saves

I'd rather see the damage be less swingy, and yeah, as Martel said, double strength within half range - unlike in 7e, there's no S10 cap or instant-death threshold to cause unintended consequences here. S16 at half range is not OP. In fact, it mostly just means "2+ to wound". Maybe 3+ on T9 and better, of which there isn't much.

As for less swingy, maybe something like 2d3 damage, changing to d3+3 at half range. You don't want meltas getting close, then - S16 and does a minimum of 4 damage - even titans are slightly worried about enough of those.

Melta is sorta meh, agreed. But it is a special weapon that does D6 wounds, or 2D6 taking the highest. Not sure how to do the math on the 2D6, but there's a lot of potential there.

Overall I think the biggest problem is the cost of the Meltagun.

 fraser1191 wrote:
Well as far as meltas and lascannon esque weapons go. They're alright but pretty much anything you shoot them at is gonna trigger invuln saves

Pretty much anything with AP-2 or better triggers invuln saves.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Melta is sorta meh, agreed. But it is a special weapon that does D6 wounds, or 2D6 taking the highest. Not sure how to do the math on the 2D6, but there's a lot of potential there.

Overall I think the biggest problem is the cost of the Meltagun.

(It bumps the average damage up from 3.5 to around 4.5, if you're curious.)

p5freak wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Well as far as meltas and lascannon esque weapons go. They're alright but pretty much anything you shoot them at is gonna trigger invuln saves

Pretty much anything with AP-2 or better triggers invuln saves.

Most vehicles don't have invulns, and Melta is an anti-vehicle weapon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Melta is sorta meh, agreed. But it is a special weapon that does D6 wounds, or 2D6 taking the highest. Not sure how to do the math on the 2D6, but there's a lot of potential there.

Overall I think the biggest problem is the cost of the Meltagun.

(It bumps the average damage up from 3.5 to around 4.5, if you're curious.)

Ah, ty.

#imperialproblems

Come on guys, 17 points for a str 8, AP4, D6 weapon you can hide in infantry squads, many of whom can deep strike?

Or putting 4 on a tau commander who can fly, deep strike, and abuse character targeting rules?

Let me break out the tiny violin:

In some fairness, I would actually agree with a higher strength when in melta range. But I'd probably say you get to pick 2D6 pick the highest damage, OR better strength within melta. Not both.
But I am just a salty ork player who hasn't had a melta ability since 5th. Don't mind me too much.

Melta is still good, but doesn't matter much when you have plasma as good as it is. I still get plenty of use out of melta-weapons in 8th.

Melta weapons in general are... okay (except the heat lance). My fire dragons still threaten vehicles pretty well, albeit less so than in any other edition I've played.

It's just that the "melta rule" itself is kind of meh. Rolling a 1 on the first die and getting a 6 is always nice, but that only happens 1 in 36 times. Rolling a 6 the first time round makes it completely pointless. Rolling a 3 and getting a 4 is meh.

Even in the best case scenario (turning a 1 into a 6), you're still not taking out anything heftier than a star weaver with a meltagun. Which is intentional. This is an edition where vehicles are designed to be harder to take out in a single volley. But that means weapons whose job is to take out vehicles can easily feel underwhelming.

Doubling the weapons strength while within melta range sounds nice, but I'm not that worried about rolling 2's to wound. What I'd like to see is something like +2 or +3 damage instead of the roll 2 take the highest mechanic. This makes your damage both more reliable (minimum damage 4) and increases your max damage (9). Granted, this is probably contrary to the "vehicles should feel tough" direction they're going at the moment.

Meltas were broken in 7th edition, when they could instant kill a vehicles with a single shot and could deep strike in melta range. Now they're ok.

Melta is great but you have to get up close to deliver it. It's currently overcosted but still ace. A couple can wreck big things, but the damage is swingy and delivery is tricky. It doesn't synergise with Deep Strike wonderfully as the '2D6 pick highest' only comes into play at 6" for meltaguns. Multi Meltas lose accuracy when they move. I've had some success with a couple of Meltaguns on my Ravenwing Bikers as they can Advance 20" and still shoot them, but my Guard MeltaVets are languishing in their box, and I rarely stump up the points to add one to my SM tanks as 27 points buys another dude somewhere else, instead of one shot a turn, if close enough, that might miss and might only do 1 Damage. The -4 save is super tasty, as no save allowed for Guard tanks is a major bonus.

Plasma has range, Rapid Fire and multiple modes on its side. Oh, and better pricing.

The melta rule isn't that great. Going withing half range only increases your average damage output by 28%. It also reduces the variance, but still, not the huge benefit it used to have.
It's the kind of rule that has great potential, because it can lead to risk vs reward decisions. You can either get close, to increase your damage output, which also leaves you more exposed, or stay back and safe but not pack as much punch.
Better damage and/or better AP at half range could help a lot, especially if the stats at > half range were lowered at the same time.

 Elbows wrote:
Melta is still good, but doesn't matter much when you have plasma as good as it is. I still get plenty of use out of melta-weapons in 8th.

S7 AP-3 D1 is not even close to S8 AP-4 D6 damage. A plasmagun must be overcharged at 12", hit both shots, and wound both shots to reach the level of a meltagun.

p5freak wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
Melta is still good, but doesn't matter much when you have plasma as good as it is. I still get plenty of use out of melta-weapons in 8th.

S7 AP-3 D1 is not even close to S8 AP-4 D6 damage. A plasmagun must be overcharged at 12", hit both shots, and wound both shots to reach the level of a meltagun.

(at BS3+ vs T7/Sv3+)

From 12-24"
Plasma (OC): 0.74 wounds
Melta: 0.00 wounds

From 6-12"
Plasma (OC): 1.48 wounds
Melta: 1.55 wounds

From 0-6"
Plasma (OC): 1.48 wounds
Melta: 2 wounds

Considering that melta is significantly more expensive, its benefits are pretty poor in comparison to the damage output. Meltas can do decently at 6", but 8th edition is a game that revolves around 9-12" for its short range shooting. Moreover, plasma does infinitely more damage outside of 12", which means it's harder to kite, and easier to get further utility after a quick pump and dump. Tempestus scions, the most notable abusers of special weapons, also get more out of plasma's higher rate of fire, since it gives them a better chance of rolling 6s for more shots (mathematically, it averages out to the same, but it's more consistent and therefore reliable to use plasma for this). Plasma also has much greater utility, since the more granular nature of its damage output means that it is much more effective at killing most elite infantry (and even hordes in a pinch, although that's not what you'd want to be pointing them at either way).

The downsides to overcharging are mostly negligible. The units that you want using plasma weaponry will usually come with some support system that lets them reroll 1s, and will often want delivery systems that mitigate most negative shooting modifiers.

Melta sucks.

I think the multi-melta should have S9 on both modes. They are risky to use compared to lascannons yet have more trouble to wound T8, something they're supposed to counter. Don't really see the problem with meltaguns and fusion pistols, they offer incredible firepower for being a small Assault type gun.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Fafnir wrote:

p5freak wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
Melta is still good, but doesn't matter much when you have plasma as good as it is. I still get plenty of use out of melta-weapons in 8th.

S7 AP-3 D1 is not even close to S8 AP-4 D6 damage. A plasmagun must be overcharged at 12", hit both shots, and wound both shots to reach the level of a meltagun.

(at BS3+ vs T7/Sv3+)

From 12-24"
Plasma (OC): 0.74 wounds
Melta: 0.00 wounds

From 6-12"
Plasma (OC): 1.48 wounds
Melta: 1.55 wounds

From 0-6"
Plasma (OC): 1.48 wounds
Melta: 2 wounds

Considering that melta is significantly more expensive, its benefits are pretty poor in comparison to the damage output. Meltas can do decently at 6", but 8th edition is a game that revolves around 9-12" for its short range shooting. Moreover, plasma does infinitely more damage outside of 12", which means it's harder to kite, and easier to get further utility after a quick pump and dump. Tempestus scions, the most notable abusers of special weapons, also get more out of plasma's higher rate of fire, since it gives them a better chance of rolling 6s for more shots (mathematically, it averages out to the same, but it's more consistent and therefore reliable to use plasma for this). Plasma also has much greater utility, since the more granular nature of its damage output means that it is much more effective at killing most elite infantry (and even hordes in a pinch, although that's not what you'd want to be pointing them at either way).

The downsides to overcharging are mostly negligible. The units that you want using plasma weaponry will usually come with some support system that lets them reroll 1s, and will often want delivery systems that mitigate most negative shooting modifiers.

Melta sucks.

You should also consider the costs of said support system when calculating plasma vs. melta damage however. I mean, I use plasma Blightlord termies but to make maximum use of them I have to spend another ~120 points on a Terminator lord, which is a lot.

One example for the "support system" for rerolling 1s for your overcharged plasma is a SM captain. He alone is 77 points. You cant ignore that.

5 veterans with plasmaguns are 29 each. Plus the captain 77 is 222 pts.
5 veterans with meltaguns are 33 each, no captain needed, 165 pts.

Now your plasmaguns are significantly more expensive. However, i dont see plasma comparable to meltas. To me Plasma is an offensive weapon with its longer range, and meltas are defensive weapons for taking out enemy CC units.

The issue is the significant expense more than plasma. Melta went from better than plasma, and 5 points cheaper to worse/similar and 4 points more expensive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

p5freak wrote:
One example for the "support system" for rerolling 1s for your overcharged plasma is a SM captain. He alone is 77 points. You cant ignore that.

5 veterans with plasmaguns are 29 each. Plus the captain 77 is 222 pts.
5 veterans with meltaguns are 33 each, no captain needed, 165 pts.

Now your plasmaguns are significantly more expensive. However, i dont see plasma comparable to meltas. To me Plasma is an offensive weapon with its longer range, and meltas are defensive weapons for taking out enemy CC units.

This does assume the captain only benefits that one unit. Say I take 2 such units. Now it is 367 for plasma, and 330 for melta. Also the plasma is going to hit far more often.

If we look at your original example at 12" where both hit. The plasma + captain are going to hit 7.8 times, vs 3.3 for the melta. This means at most melta is going to kill 3 models, plasma may kill 8.

Melta's extra damage is also often wasted, and it can fail to kill a 2 wound model.

Put simply a melta gun is not worth 17 points, when a lascannon is 25, and a plasma gun is 13. It has poor range, few shots, and its advantage is negligible. It probably should have been 12-13 points.

p5freak wrote:
One example for the "support system" for rerolling 1s for your overcharged plasma is a SM captain. He alone is 77 points. You cant ignore that.

5 veterans with plasmaguns are 29 each. Plus the captain 77 is 222 pts.
5 veterans with meltaguns are 33 each, no captain needed, 165 pts.

Now your plasmaguns are significantly more expensive. However, i dont see plasma comparable to meltas. To me Plasma is an offensive weapon with its longer range, and meltas are defensive weapons for taking out enemy CC units.

My Imperial Guard Company commander is only 30pts, however, and has quite a abit of utlity outside just re-rolling my plasmashots.
Plasma gets better and better the cheaper dudes you give it to. [Given it's downside is you die, which you care about progressively more the more expensive the carrier.]

Metlaguns issue is that they're a one shot weapon. Appearing within Melta range and firing means that you'll either be dead or in melee the following turn, 17pts is a lot to pay for a single shot that might miss and might fail to wound and might bounce of an Inv save.

Furthermore, as 8th becomes a game of hoards and screening models, melta's lack of rapid fire really shows. With a plasma gun I _can_ kill 2 models. With a meltagun I can only ever kill one. If my opponent only brings big tanks, my melta does okay. If they don't bring any tanks however, my plasma has a lot more utlity forming a 24 inch away gunline, or rapid firing up close and the meltaguns suddenly become almost useless.

Normally you pay for more flexibility. With melta you seem to pay more for _less_ flexibility.

I also see a ton of "re-roll 1's" stuff and see Plasma overcharged far more often than was probably intended. When it becomes 8/-3/2 and potentially two shots if within half range it really does call the Melta into question.

As I said, I have plenty of melta/fusion weapons in my armies because I model them simply based on "cool" factor, but yes they are rarely doing amazing things. I would take plasma all day if I was that boring.

My issue with Meltaguns is that last edition you were more or less guaranteed damage against most vehicles if you got within melta range, even a roll would still be a glance against AV10. Against a Rhino this edition though you have a 1/3 chance of flubbing the wound roll completely. I'd really appreciate if the melta rule was 2D6 take highest to wound, rather than for the damage, because it'd let you consistently at least do SOME damage, rather than having to go through a wonky to-wound roll. I guess double S at melta range would achieve a similar result.

Agree it could use some tweaking. At the moment, I'd say the drawbacks massively outweigh the benefits. The simplest solution would be to drop the points cost, but personally, I'd rather see it become utterly terrifying to armour (but only under the right circumstances, i.e. you've got to be clever about how you manoeuvre yourself into position) and costed accordingly.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
My issue with Meltaguns is that last edition you were more or less guaranteed damage against most vehicles if you got within melta range, even a roll would still be a glance against AV10. Against a Rhino this edition though you have a 1/3 chance of flubbing the wound roll completely. I'd really appreciate if the melta rule was 2D6 take highest to wound, rather than for the damage, because it'd let you consistently at least do SOME damage, rather than having to go through a wonky to-wound roll. I guess double S at melta range would achieve a similar result.

I like this suggestion. Also think the flat modifier to the damage roll is good. Or how about this: give it the 2D6 Pick Highest rule at any range, plus a bonus if you're in half range? At least then a multimelta isn't outright worse than a Lascannon until you're right up close to something?

Melta didnt get meh. Plasma just good really good for it's cost

especially since an overcharged plasma is just as good, if not better than a melta (minding the potential 'insta kill' for your unit)

2 dmg @ str 8 compared to D6 dmg @ str 8. Sure the D6 sounds better, but it's way to unreliable to consistently rely on steady dmg. While the plasma doesnt have that problem

That's why i prefer weapons with flat values, even if the str and ap is worse than a harder hitting D6 weapon. Consistency is better than potential in this edition

Overcharged Plasma weapons shouldn't be allowed to re-roll 1s (and always overheat on a natural 1), period.

This alone would make Melta worth their cost, and would end this "overheat all the time" non-sense that makes Plasma the end-all be-all weapons of 8th edition.

A strategy game should always be about risk / reward. Want to overcharge ? Ok, take a risk. Want to get in Melta range ? Take a risk.

mchammadad wrote:
Melta didnt get meh. Plasma just good really good for it's cost

especially since an overcharged plasma is just as good, if not better than a melta (minding the potential 'insta kill' for your unit)

2 dmg @ str 8 compared to D6 dmg @ str 8. Sure the D6 sounds better, but it's way to unreliable to consistently rely on steady dmg. While the plasma doesnt have that problem

That's why i prefer weapons with flat values, even if the str and ap is worse than a harder hitting D6 weapon. Consistency is better than potential in this edition

Not to mention that within the max range of a melta gun, you're getting two shots with a plazzy, so you can potentially do up to 4 damage. Sure there's the risk of frying yourself, but getting close enough to the enemy that you get the Melta damage bonus isn't without its risks either.

 Nym wrote:
Overcharged Plasma weapons shouldn't be allowed to re-roll 1s (and always overheat on a natural 1), period.

This alone would make Melta worth their cost, and would end this "overheat all the time" non-sense that makes Plasma the end-all be-all weapons of 8th edition.

A strategy game should always be about risk / reward. Want to overcharge ? Ok, take a risk. Want to get in Melta range ? Take a risk.

NO it wouldn't. I would rather overcharge Plasma without rerolls every time rather than go into Melta range. The Melta Gun is that bad.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

NO it wouldn't. I would rather overcharge Plasma without rerolls every time rather than go into Melta range. The Melta Gun is that bad.

Melta guns arent bad. You are using them wrong.