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.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Why should a Commissar be able to survive a direct hit from a Missile Launcher?

Because a commissar is always behind an ogryn, or a space marine, or at the very least a squad of conscripts. As long as something big and meaty is in between that krak missile and the hero of the Imperium, Ciaphas Cain.

I still think the best way to go about balancing AT weapons is by making it easier to hit a big target. For example, +1 to hit vehicles, monsters, units with 10+ wounds, etc. That way you'd risk missing a commissar on a failed BS since you only get 1 or 2 shots.

Might also add a LORD Commissar has an invuln Mcguffin device. A Regular one doesn't, but I still don't think it's far to consider anything below a T7 as a Vehicle.

To that point, if you are wasting LC shots on my standard Commissar, go nuts, I'm not going to stop my opponent from a bad move.

 kingpbjames wrote:
Not sure what the the random damage on explosives is supposed to represent. Explosions are great big balls of fire and force. If you're in it you're in it.

It is to increase variance. The likelihood 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 missile launcher hits scoring a kill against a Rhino is different depending on whether the damage is flat or random. In 7th there was a lot of variance, even a single krak missile could destroy a Rhino, in 9th there is much less, but it is possible to destroy a Rhino with 2 krak missiles. Flat 3 damage makes it impossible to kill a Rhino with less than 4 krak missiles. It would change the krak missile from the anti-vehicle profile to the anti-Terminator option. If anything I could see lascannons being flat 4 damage to make them better against Cents and Termies. Bolter Discipline and FRFSRF makes it hard for frag missiles and frag grenades to compete, mortars have their no-LOS niche, but in 9th with the terrain and table size the extra range of frag missiles is worth little and with krak grenades being a total joke due to Hammer of the Emperor grenade launchers are worth 0 at best.

Does the missile launcher need improving?

Many moons ago when I actually played IG, it was a decent "jack of all trades" option. It wasn't the best at either of it's jobs, but it did okay and more importantly it was cheap. This was also around the time that the basic autocannon was king and the IG leaf blower was the tournament standard for them, for anyone that can help me out dating my frame of reference.

I'm aware that autocannons are kind of eh now, and that special/heavy weapons for guard are free, but is the missile launcher still not a cheaper option than the others for things like Marines or Eldar?

To me it looks like more of an IG issue and they just need an up to date codex. But I'm behind the curve for anything that isn't Orks nowadays, so please correct my assumptions.

 Afrodactyl wrote:
Does the missile launcher need improving?

Many moons ago when I actually played IG,

And many moons ago it wasn't good then either unless you got them ABSURDLY cheap.

For guard, they don't really do much that other weapons do better. For Space Marines, they are still slightly valuable.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
For guard, they don't really do much that other weapons do better. For Space Marines, they are still slightly valuable.

In theory yes. When a model is expensive to begin with, if paying for an upgrade you want to ensure you not terribly off against an improper target.

The culprit becomes that Frag blast. In older editions, you lucky if you hit two dudes under it, and the S4 AP6 meant it wasn't hurting to the point that often times the Krak Missile wasn't very far off mathematically against that same exact target. So at that point.....why not just get the S9 AP2 from the Lascannon?

If it got the LC profile, we'd need to boost the LC. Why do we need the ML at all?

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
If it got the LC profile, we'd need to boost the LC. Why do we need the ML at all?

It is in the fluff and there are models for it. The fluff should fit the models and the rules should fit the fluff. Points need to make the faction externally balanced and make every option reasonably viable.

ML S8 -2 Dmg2+d3
LC S9 -3 Dmg3(4)+d3
All have roles.

Then we have to make the AC damage more, because THAT is now worthless, and we can start a 5 page thread on buffing the AC. Once that's buffed, there is no reason to take HBs. See? Stop being part of the tide. Can we go one codex without some new stupidly broken change? The Las rifle is already outperforming the Bolter for every target above T3.

The only purpose I could foresee the ML getting is some form of anti-flyer role. Heatseekers give it +1 vs anything with aircraft keyword.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Then we have to make the AC damage more, because THAT is now worthless, and we can start a 5 page thread on buffing the AC. Once that's buffed, there is no reason to take HBs. See? Stop being part of the tide. Can we go one codex without some new stupidly broken change? The Las rifle is already outperforming the Bolter for every target above T3.

The only purpose I could foresee the ML getting is some form of anti-flyer role. Heatseekers give it +1 vs anything with aircraft keyword.

Well actually the Autocannon does need a buff due to the Heavy Bolter taking away its role when it got D2. That has nothing to do with the ML being a useless weapon.

Lets make the ML a MAGIC MISSILE LAUNCHER. No attack role needed, it auto-hits at S8 AP2 D2, but can only be fired once per game. Sorta a man portable HK Missile?

Just watched Auspex Tactics' latest video, in which he states that Militarum HWTs may be getting a rework that includes a bigger, meaner missile/rocket weapon option.

Would love if it came with additional anti-flyer missiles or some kind of aim-assist, as suggested previously.

I like the idea of a one shot man portable rocket launcher that’s very potent but only gets one shot

A real issue with the game though is how infantry don’t get awesome bonuses for being in buildings for cover/save boosting. Otherwise then urban combat would be more dynamic with people holding buildings with heavy weapons

Then having to send in assault troops to clear buildings in close combat.

Ok, so the new Votann ML is S9 AP1 D6 Blast

Am I reading this wrong? What good is a blast on a 1 shot weapon?

It’s a penalty-you can’t fire it in Close Combat.

 JNAProductions wrote:
It’s a penalty-you can’t fire it in Close Combat.

That's...one way to do it. GW should probably take inspiration from 4th and introduce Defense weapons for vehicles or whatever it was called and update it for 9th.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
It’s a penalty-you can’t fire it in Close Combat.

That's...one way to do it. GW should probably take inspiration from 4th and introduce Defense weapons for vehicles or whatever it was called and update it for 9th.

Agreed, although I think the current state of affairs is a response to the sentiment that vehicles were too easy to shut down by tagging them in melee in 8th. So Now you can still shoot your railgun or prism cannon or what have you; but you take a to-hit penalty, and your target options are reduced to whatever's tickling your armor. But again, I agree. It would probably be better to let little guns shoot into melee and make big guns stay quiet.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Ok, so the new Votann ML is S9 AP1 D6 Blast

Am I reading this wrong? What good is a blast on a 1 shot weapon?

I think you misread the weapon profile.

It has 2 stat lines, one called "focused" and is Type HunTR 1, without the Blast ability; the other profile is called "Blast" is Type HunTR D6 and does have the Blast ability.

Thank you! I only saw it on my phone today when riding the train home. When I looked at it on Google it was much more clear.

Still, ML is now basically better than the LC.

Anyone see them making this the standard for ML across the board? I can see Devestators getting out of hand.

This entire edition is out of hand. May as well buff it all to 9/10 and say GL.

I don't see how they don't just release 10th at this point, and do a complete reset.

How is AP1 better than AP3? I am not even sure S9 AP1 is better than S8 AP2.

 vict0988 wrote:
How is AP1 better than AP3? I am not even sure S9 AP1 is better than S8 AP2.

It's a typo.

Looking at Google, I found stats for the "L7 missile launcher", which has the following stats;

Focused 30" HunTR1 S9 AP -2 Dd6
Blast 30" HunTRd6 S5 AP -1 D1 blast


So it looks like they have increased strength at the cost of range.

Can't they run those with judgement tokens or whatever to give them auto-wounds and extra damage? I mean, it's STILL a troop unit doing stupid levels of shenanigans. If this were a heavy weapon or whatever, that limits them to a specific role, that would be one thing. This is the best part of the guard's flexibility with the worst parts of creep.

I don't want to see guard squads being able to take this sort of profile, in every squad on the board.