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 just bought 8 Chaos marines with heavy bolters (which I could convert into autocannons using HWT bits).

With heavy bolters being 2 damage now I figured they'd be a solid all around choice to deal with MEQ and vehicles, especially with Endless Cacophony (I run them as EC).

My question is whether this loadout would be better for the role of a MEQ and vehicle killer than autocannons?

HB is Heavy 3 S5 AP-1 D2. AC is Heavy 2 S7 AP-1 D2. MEQ in gravis armor have T5 and W3. Light vehicles/bikes have T5/6 and W3-8. Do you still think HB is better ?

 p5freak wrote:
HB is Heavy 3 S5 AP-1 D2. AC is Heavy 2 S7 AP-1 D2. MEQ in gravis armor have T5 and W3. Light vehicles/bikes have T5/6 and W3-8. Do you still think HB is better ?

I was thinking about that. My issue is it seems that outside that window HBB is better a lot of the time. Against non-Gravis MEQ HBB is superior, against T8 HBB is superior too. Even against T5 I think the extra shot might offset the fact it would wound on 4's instead of 3's. Same against T7 with the difference between wounding on 4's instead of 5's. Unless autocannons have been bumped to D3 andI've not heard about it I don't think this is as clear cut as you seem to, which is why I asked the question.

The heavy bolter is a far more versatile choice. That doesn't mean the best, just that it will be better in far more circumstances than the Autocannon. Do the math. The two weapons have the same damage and AP, so Strength is the factor (there is a range difference, which could matter but probably won't, since Havocs can move so even the heavy bolter's range is 40+").

I feel the Heavy bolter's utility and massive increase in damage at T4 T5 makes up for the slight decrease in damage at T6 and T7. Below is your math. The extra shot from the heavy bolter really makes up for the strength. Something GW still seems to not understand fully. More shots is worth more than strength. Not always damage or AP, but usually strength.

We will assume the same save, as MEQ and most vehicles have the same save. so the only number that matters is the wound chance.
the formula can be simplified. Both weapons hit 2/3, both are saved 50% and both do 2 damage, for a multiplier of:
Heavy bolter: 1.98
Autocannon: 1.32
Take these numbers, multiply by the wound chance, and number of weapons being shot and you have your damage per...
T4
Heavy bolter: =1.3068
Autocannon =0.8712
I wont repeat the formula, but here's the numbers adjusted for toughness changes.

T5
Heavy Bolter: .99
Autocannon: .66

T6:
Heavy Bolter: .6534
Autocannon: .872

T7
Heavy Bolter: 6534
Autocannon: .66
T8, T9
Heavy Bolter: .6534
Autocannon: .4356

Edited for some typos. I believe my mathhammer is correct but hey, I may not be perfect.

edwardmyst wrote:
The heavy bolter is a far more versatile choice. That doesn't mean the best, just that it will be better in far more circumstances than the Autocannon. Do the math. The two weapons have the same damage and AP, so Strength is the factor (there is a range difference, which could matter but probably won't, since Havocs can move so even the heavy bolter's range is 40+").

I feel the Heavy bolter's utility and massive increase in damage at T4 T5 makes up for the slight decrease in damage at T6 and T7. Below is your math. The extra shot from the heavy bolter really makes up for the strength. Something GW still seems to not understand fully. More shots is worth more than strength. Not always damage or AP, but usually strength.

We will assume the same save, as MEQ and most vehicles have the same save. so the only number that matters is the wound chance.
the formula can be simplified. Both weapons hit 2/3, both are saved 50% and both do 2 damage, for a multiplier of:
Heavy bolter: 1.98
Autocannon: 1.32
Take these numbers, multiply by the wound chance, and number of weapons being shot and you have your damage per...
T4
Heavy bolter: =1.3068
Autocannon =0.8712
I wont repeat the formula, but here's the numbers adjusted for toughness changes.

T5
Heavy Bolter: .99
Autocannon: .66

T6:
Heavy Bolter: .6534
Autocannon: .872

T7
Heavy Bolter: 6534
Autocannon: .66
T8, T9
Heavy Bolter: .6534
Autocannon: .4356

Edited for some typos. I believe my mathhammer is correct but hey, I may not be perfect.

Yeah just did some quick maths myself, seems autocannon only has a significant edge at T6. Thanks for laying it out though, good point of reference. Seems quantity beats quality on this one.

 Banzaimash wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
HB is Heavy 3 S5 AP-1 D2. AC is Heavy 2 S7 AP-1 D2. MEQ in gravis armor have T5 and W3. Light vehicles/bikes have T5/6 and W3-8. Do you still think HB is better ?

I was thinking about that. My issue is it seems that outside that window HBB is better a lot of the time.

You did ask about MEQ and light vehicles, not outside of that window.

 p5freak wrote:

 Banzaimash wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
HB is Heavy 3 S5 AP-1 D2. AC is Heavy 2 S7 AP-1 D2. MEQ in gravis armor have T5 and W3. Light vehicles/bikes have T5/6 and W3-8. Do you still think HB is better ?

I was thinking about that. My issue is it seems that outside that window HBB is better a lot of the time.

You did ask about MEQ and light vehicles, not outside of that window.

I asked about MEQ and vehicles (which are mostly T7 and T8). You made it about T5 troops and light vehicles for some reason. Doesn't matter anyway, turns out HB win out or draw against autocannons at every Toughness except 6. So again, not as obvious as you seem to think. Thanks for your contribution I suppose.