How do you use Multi-Meltas effectively?

[Reclusiarch Darius]

Attack bikes and land speeders (and to a lesser extent, dreads) are the answer to the range problem.

 

Exactly. On those platforms, you essentially make the multi-melta a range 36" weapon, which is bloody scary. Especially because melta range becomes 24" by the same token.

 

 

I don't know if people are playing on extra wide tables, but all the games I've played have 24" end up being a decent range. People often have to move toward objectives.

 

Fair enought, but anything with 30" or more is going to be able to shoot up your multi-melta squad with impunity. Tau will especially love your heavy weapon selection, cos it means less anti-tank into their skimmers and battlesuits.

melta's + multi melta's + drop pod = death to all tanks excluding the dirty 'crons monlith

 

Erm, dude, the multi-melta is Heavy 1. Have fun landing, firing the meltagun once, then getting shot to hell.

[maniclurker]

I play Salamanders, and I don't even use multimeltas on devastators. Why? It's retarded, that's why. 24" range isn't cool. Devastators are supposed to provide your army with effective heavy fire support, not win your army the prize for least useful unit. Seriously, all this non-sense of "spamming mm's is where it's at" is about to make me dizzy.

 

Also, to whoever argued against the plasma cannons... dude, have you ever used them? Are you just making up stuff? No matter how hard a 'quad-multmelta' devastator squad tries, it's never going to knock out 18 ork boys, 8 terminators, or an entire squad of marines, in one round of shooting. You know what can, and will? My devastator squad with 4 plasmacannons. These things are BRUTAL. In fact, 4 multimeltas would be hard pressed to keep up with 1 plasma cannon vs. infantry. A grey hunter squad drop podded right by one of my 5 man devvy squads, and rapid-fired it to death. However, they failed to kill 1 of the 2 plasma cannons in that squad, and he didn't fall back. Next turn, they paid dearly. That one plasma cannon hit dead on, 7 models. And I didn't roll a single 1 to wound. You'd have to be using some crazy jacked-up rules for a multimelta to be anything CLOSE to that effective.

 

In the new dex, I'll be taking the free multimelta in my tac squads. 3 reasons: 1. It's FREE. 2. It'll be TWIN-LINKED. 3. If I do ever happen to stop to shoot, I'll probably be in my opponents deployment zone. As such, it'll probably only be used about as much as I would a missile launcher in a tac squad... almost never.

 

 

Simply put, multimeltas don't belong in devastator squads, people. It might be an option, but it is most likely not the BEST one. You'd have to develope some radical tactics to utilize something like that, and I doubt most people would trouble themselves to do so. Also, I'm pretty sure most of the people arguing for the use of multimeltas don't even field one regularly. Especially not in devvy squads. I bet you have a lot of missile launchers, however.

[Octavulg]

Also, to whoever argued against the plasma cannons... dude, have you ever used them? Are you just making up stuff?

 

No. I worked it out mathematically. Say what you will about mathhammer, it's not open to the vagaries of luck or anything like that. And a Plasma Cannon has a 1/3 chance of getting a hit on the scatter die, then some pathetically low chance of rolling low enough for distance to still have the template touch the original target. It works out to about fifty-percent, in total.

 

No matter how hard a 'quad-multmelta' devastator squad tries, it's never going to knock out 18 ork boys, 8 terminators, or an entire squad of marines, in one round of shooting.

 

True. OTOH, the Plasma Cannon won't necessarily do so either. In fact, in several games, I believe my Plasma Cannon killed one Terminator. Total.

 

Yes, I realize I should be using more of them if I want to see them shine. Still. One Terminator. In about fifteen turns. Of constant shooting.

 

Luck is luck. You can't claim Plasma Cannons are awesome because you do well with them. Much as I can't claim they suck for the same reason. OTOH, I can claim they suck because they are expensive and have a lousy chance to-hit.

 

In fact, 4 multimeltas would be hard pressed to keep up with 1 plasma cannon vs. infantry.

 

Four multi-meltas kill an average 2.24 marines per turn. A plasma cannon needs to touch five and one-third marines to match that. After that, the Plasma Cannon is indeed superior.

 

While the utter death-to-swarms effect you mention can be done in some circumstances, it can't always. Plasma Cannons are win-big/lose-big weapons, IMO. While the multi-melta is nice and consistent.

 

That one plasma cannon hit dead on, 7 models. And I didn't roll a single 1 to wound. You'd have to be using some crazy jacked-up rules for a multimelta to be anything CLOSE to that effective.

 

Let's see your Plasma Cannon kill a Land Raider. Go on. I'll wait.

 

Simply put, multimeltas don't belong in devastator squads, people. It might be an option, but it is most likely not the BEST one. You'd have to develope some radical tactics to utilize something like that, and I doubt most people would trouble themselves to do so.

 

Funnily enough, it might seem that this forum would be the place to do such.

 

Also, I'm pretty sure most of the people arguing for the use of multimeltas don't even field one regularly. Especially not in devvy squads. I bet you have a lot of missile launchers, however.

 

My multi-melta/heavy bolter squads are not long in coming, I assure you. I just have so many damn missile launchers (which are going to get converted, since my luck with them is worse than that with my Plasma Cannons).

[maniclurker]

Octavulg, maybe you should give an example of how to mathammer a plasma cannon hitting the middle of a pack of 20 boys. That would be interesting to see indeed. After you said that, I knew you were making stuff up. A plasma cannon can HARDLY MISS 20 boys. Don't overheat, and you're pretty much set to clear some space.

 

Also, 4 MM's don't kill 2.24 marines a turn... they kill 2.22 marines that decided to get within RANGE of your MM's a turn. 4(2/3)(5/6) = 2.222(infinity). So, you are interjecting situational data (a player wandering a squad into range of a multimelta), and you're calculating it wrong as well (2.22, not 2.24).

 

Also, my argument was against you calling out plasma cannons, and somehow trying to justify that MM's are better than plasmacannons at killing infantry, not vehicles. And, as very cleary shown in my argument, I'm specifically referring to devastators armed with MM's or PC's. As such, let's see your MM's kill a Land Raider when they are being toted by devastators. Good luck trying to find a player dumb enough to drive a LR that close to them without knowing that he will be able to get an assault on them. As such, I'll just start taking things out of context, and force you to deal with lascannons. Oh, well, I guess MM's don't stack up there, do they? Lascannons definitely have a better chance at killing a LR than MM's, when toted by devastators.

 

Also, I'm glad to see you proved my point about the missile launchers...

 

If you'll notice, this whole thread is about advertising MM's as a solution to many battlefield problems, instead of being specific anti-tank weapons, regardless of the fact that is what they are obviously supposed to be. And, very specifically, was referring to the use of devastators equipped with MM's. As an infantry-toted AT weapon, it's crap do to it's status as a heavy weapon, and it's short range. As an infantry-toted anti-infantry weapon, it's crap due to it's few shots, and it's short range. There are other weapons, that quite frankly, have better ranges and kill potential. Reguardless of the difference in points cost, and especially when used in multiple numbers by the same squad, PC's far out-match MM's. All in all, devastator squads armed with MM's are rather inneffective compared to other weapons, and just plain inneffective when you stop and actually think about it. There are better things to spend points on.

 

I, however, do agree that MM's one true calling is allowed to be fulfilled when mounted on a bike or speeder. However, you didn't state that, so I'm just agreeing with someon else.

[Vaaish]

they kill 2.22 marines that decided to get within RANGE of your MM's a turn. . . Good luck trying to find a player dumb enough to drive a LR that close

 

I've been following this debate for a bit as a friend of mine is planning on fielding a melta heavy army and your statements caught me. I don't really care to get into all the math, so I'll leave that to y'all but the same situational issue you call him on multi-meltas holds true for your beloved plasma cannons as well. While you have a greater range of operations, you are severely limiting your tactical flexibility by assuming that the only useful situation is when an enemy wanders into range, something that most players won't do on purpose. Your goal shouldn't be to wait for the enemy to meander accidentally into range of either your plasma cannon or your multi melta, but to place your unit in such a way that the enemy has no choice but to enter the field of fire if he wishes to win the match. I should also state that obvious use does not make alternate uses illegitimate. The german 88's were originally antiaircraft weapons but I'm pretty certain the germans weren't complaining when they were found to be very effective anti-tank weapons as well nor were the tankers throwing hissy fits about how a dedicated anti-air weapon shouldn't be used against their tanks. The same holds true here, the alternative use of a primarily AT platform as AP doesn't make it any less effective. It retains the same range as your bolters, has much greater killing power, and is extremely effective at forcing an opponent to either deal with a nonscoring unit or avoid it's area of operations.

[maniclurker]

You're exactly right, Vaaish. It CAN be used as an anti-infantry weapon, and it will knock them down cold. However, my point is that there are BETTER anti-infantry weapons, especially when it comes to weapons carried by infantry. I, myself, have 4 multimeltas in my army. 2 on landspeeders, and 2 in tac squads. The landspeeders perform admirably. I take MM's with the tac squads because they are both fluffy, free, and twin-linked. Now, my tac squads are all mechanized, and I move them around quite a bit, so I won't be using the MM's that often. However, if (and when) my tac squads end up point blank to the enemy, and it is an opportune time to use it, I'll stand and shoot that sucker. However, I'll weigh the option of firing it against the option of moving and accomplishin some other goal. Only if it's better to shoot it will I do so.

 

Octavulg: I did some mathammering last night, and I worked out the EXACT chance that a plasma cannon will hit a target. I'll give you the math.

 

F = the chance that any one face of a dice is rolled.

O = the chance that I don't overheat

S = the chance that I still hit if I scatter

 

F = 1/6 = .166(infinite), about 16% chance of any one face

 

O = 5(1/6) = .833(infinite), and 83% chance I don't overheat

 

Because all of the faces added together equal the grand total of rolling a face (100%) then we can deduce that the chance of rolling a face is

 

(F + F + F + F + F + F) = 6(F) = 1.00 or 100%

 

2 of the faces are a hit immediately, so are calculated to be 100% chance of hitting multiplied by the chance of rolling those faces:

2(F)(1) = .33, a 33% chance that a HIT is rolled

4 of the faces are a scatter, so are calculated to be the percent chance of not scattering too far multiplied by the chance of rolling those faces:

4(F)(S)

S equals the farthest distance I can scatter and hit divided by the highest possible result

given that an average model's base is .5" radius, and a blast template is 1.5" radius, and scatter is correct by 4" for BS4 we can conclude:

12 - 4 - .5 - 1.5 = 6, I can scatter 6" and still hit

S = 6/12 = .5

 

as such:

 

4(F)(S) = .33(infinite)

 

the equasion (spelling?) for determing is such:

 

O(2F + 4(F)(S)) = .55, about a 55% chance that a plasma cannon will hit it's target.

 

Now, you have to keep in mind that you generally aim plasma cannons at the center of a formation, and the chance of hitting SOMETHING in that formation is actually pretty good. In fact, the chance of hitting MULTIPLE models in that formation are very good, barring your opponent is maintaining coherency and hasn't spread out too far, which may not be combat efficient given a situation.

 

You will then realize that devastators with multiple plasma cannons stand a very good chance of hitting QUITE a few models in a standard formation, and will often do so, when placed in a central location with good LOS.

 

MM's just can't stack compared to that.

 

When I play the mathammer game, I show my results...

[Vaaish]

math hammer aside for the time, it really comes down this:

 

MM's provide AP1, the capability to deal with av14, the +d6 special rule, and wounds high toughness creatures easier at the expense of range and the number of targets it can engage.

 

Plasma cannons are capable of engaging more targets per turn, have longer range but at the expense of killing ability vs. high toughness creatures and AV13+ (could even argue av12+)

 

both weapons much be stationary to fire and neither are disadvantaged with range vs the range of the rest of the squad. So the question is, do you want to trade versatility and strength against all units for range and enhanced efficiency against most units?

 

Again though I think that's a little too polarized and somewhat of overkill. How many s7ap2 templates do you need before things start getting redundant? Or how many s8ap1 hits does it take to kill a vehicle? perhaps the better solution is a mix of weapons. Two MM and two Plasma Cannons will provide you with the range and templates to deter most infantry and even out shoot tau while retaining the capability to punch a hole in any armor that gets too close or engage a threatening high toughness creature effectively. It could be argued that specialization is better because sometimes you will waste shooting with one weapon or the other, but honestly I think that is an oversimplification. It's like saying I should have only one wrench because the others are rarely used, but it doesn't change the fact that they ARE used. If you have the tools you need to deal with whatever comes, in the end you only trade a little range for versatility that will give opponents pause unless they should find themselves with no options save face the guns no matter what they might bring to the table.

[bystrom]

4 of the faces are a scatter, so are calculated to be the percent chance of not scattering too far multiplied by the chance of rolling those faces:

4(F)(S)

S equals the farthest distance I can scatter and hit divided by the highest possible result

given that an average model's base is .5" radius, and a blast template is 1.5" radius, and scatter is correct by 4" for BS4 we can conclude:

12 - 4 - .5 - 1.5 = 6, I can scatter 6" and still hit

S = 6/12 = .5

While the above isn't quite correct (should be 15/36, prob of 2D6 is out of 36, 1/36 for rolling sum of 2, 2/36 for sum of 3, etc. to maximum 6/36 for sum of 7, then down to 1/36 for sum of 12 :blink: Also note that while the model's base and blast template is .5" and 1.5" in radius, it still has to touch the model, therefore it has to be less than 6". Since you only get whole numbers on dice, it can only scatter 5" and still hit the original model; prob: 10/36), the idea, I'd still agree, the plasma cannon is better at killing infantry (not including monstrous creatures) than a multi-melta.

 

This is because the STR difference has no effect (for T5 or less infantry), the AP difference has no effect; the only difference is the hitting and the price. Since a blast has avg. 1/3 + 2/3*10/36 = 14/27, approx. 50% chance of hitting the original model, but can hit more than one infantry model, it'll usually hit more models than a multi-melta. While a PC (plasma cannon) is slightly more expensive, it is usually better than a MM (multi-melta) at killing infantry.

 

That said, I've always viewed the MM as an AT weapon, that can also put a dent in MCs (monstrous creatures). The biggest problem, as stated above is that its difficult to bring the MM to bear against vehicles, since they usually can move and still be useful to some effect (shoot, transport a squad etc.) compared to, for example an infantry squad, which usually will be unable to shoot rapid-fire weapons (over 12") and heavy weapons. MCs are also more maneuverable than an infantry squad since they can move and shoot as well.

 

This is why a multi-melta is such an attractive choice for attack bikes and land speeders, since they're faster than most vehicles and MCs, and can move and shoot, making it easier to get the shot off, as well as get the bonus die from the Melta-rule.

 

While I think a multi-melta carried by infantry is limited in their use, I still think they can be used. For example, I've considered a tactical squad with flamer, multi-melta, power weapon and melta bombs in a rhino, which are quite adept at killing infantry and taking objectives, but are also able to destroy the odd vehicle that might be thrown their way (walkers for example). Since the squad is almost always going to close on the enemy, the choice was between a lascannon, multi-melta and missile launcher (the AT heavy weapons available). I don't think there is a too much difference in efficiency between a lascannon and multi-melta against an average vehicle at 13"+ range (up to 24"), and while the missile launcher is better against infantry, I wanted the heavy weapon as a safeguard against vehicles, where the lascannon and multi-melta excel. I chose the multi-melta because it was cheaper, to test it and for coolness factor.

[maniclurker]

If it scatters 6", it is still touching the base. Not overlapping it, but touching it. As such, it is a hit.

 

I can't seem to wrap my mind around the dice rolls for the scatter right now, so I can't much refute that. What's the equation to find how many different numbers combinations can be rolled on 2D6? It's something like 12 + 11 + etc, etc or 12 x something, right? Damn, I can't think right now. I'm operating on little sleep.

 

Anyways, as you agreed with me, there is no comparison someone can really make to justify MM's being better than PC's at an anti-infantry roll. PC's are just too ridiculously good at kill infantry.

 

Vaaish: You are once again taking things out of context. We are NOT discussing the best ways to army a devastator squad to be generalists... we are discussing the virtues of devastators armed with either 4 MM's or 4 PC's, and their effectiveness against infantry. Also, 4 ST7 AP2 blasts aren't REDUNDANT to get the job done. That many blasts are REQUIRED to get the job done on a regular basis. Also, we aren't taking in accout of the bolters in the squad, because that's not what we are comparing. Reguardless of that fact, I don't take devastators for the bolters. I have tac squads and sister squads for those. I want devs for multiple heavy weapons.

 

To your question as to whether or not I want generalist or specialists:

 

How are MM's generalists? They aren't. They are specialists. They are specifically meant to kill big things. Yes, they can kill small things. But then against, so can everything in a SM army. As such, it is a waste of resources to be using MM's on infantry. Arguing that MM's are good at killing small things is exactly like arguing that heavy bolters are good at killing big things. Can HB's kill a carnifex? Yes. Is it the best option? No.

 

I would actually view PC's as generalist compared to MM's. There high strength and decent range can deal with light armor and monsters, and they obviously excel at clearing infantry.

 

But, to answer your question in the spirit of what you were asking, I'd say that I would rather have the enhanced efficiency specialized against one thing (infantry). Why? Well, take a look at what army I play, and guess what I equip my tac squads with... melta weapons. I don't want the meltas in my devvie squads, because I have plenty of other, more versatile means of killing armor and monsters. These include MM speeders, TH termies, meltguns, and lascannons on my landraider.

 

As such, I believe devastators should fill that space that is missing in my tool bag. I have plenty of ways to deal with tanks. So I want more anti-infantry, and a solid means of dealing with tough infantry (read: termies and MEQ). If I had plenty of that, I would want my devvies to fill an anti-tank niche. But, I don't think that MM devvies fill that niche compared to other weapons. Lascannon devvies, for example, are better at it because of their range. MM bikes or speeders, as stated above, are better at it because of their mobility.

[bystrom]

If it scatters 6", it is still touching the base. Not overlapping it, but touching it. As such, it is a hit.

Actually, it says that you look above, and then see if the blast marker covers a base, not just touches a base (just checked it in the rulebook to make sure).

I can't seem to wrap my mind around the dice rolls for the scatter right now, so I can't much refute that. What's the equation to find how many different numbers combinations can be rolled on 2D6? It's something like 12 + 11 + etc, etc or 12 x something, right? Damn, I can't think right now. I'm operating on little sleep.

You have a total of 6*6 combinations. Rolling for example a sum of 6 on 2D6 would equate to: 1,5 2,4 3,3 4,3 5,1 ; 5 combinations out of a total of 36 (6*6).

 

What I find intriguing is how we're discussing the differences between a multi-melta toting devastator squad with one toting plasma cannons. They aren't really competing with each other since they're uses are different. A more useful comparison seems to be, as said, between a lascannon toting squad and a multi-melta toting squad with a rhino and power fist (should be about the same cost, more so probably in the new codex). Not having fielded either, I can't say how effective any of them are. My preference lies with the ubiquitous 4 missile launcher dev. squad. They're able to handle most threats, while I leave my dedicated AT in melta guns, bombs and multi-meltas on move-and-shoot platforms.

 

I do think that while a 4 lascannon dev. squad is better as AT weapons in a dev. squad compared to MMs, because of their larger range, I think the above-mentioned MM-squad used correctly is able to exhibit more of a control-factor as well as be slightly more versatile than the LS-squad, by holding the centre and not being totally useless in assault.

[Octavulg]

Octavulg, maybe you should give an example of how to mathammer a plasma cannon hitting the middle of a pack of 20 boys.

 

Depends on how the boyz are distributed, now doesn't it? Mathhammer admittedly cannot do everything. If they're in a nice maximally spaced line, I'd still prefer the MM.

 

That would be interesting to see indeed. After you said that, I knew you were making stuff up.

 

I have made up nothing. I look forward to your apology, or your prolonged explanation of what, exactly I made up. An apology for your later snarky remarks about my math would be nice as well, but I suspect I'm not going to get either.

 

The plasma cannon has approximately a fifty percent chance, when fired, of hitting its original target. You will notice that I used this phrase in my original post. If you fire it at the middle of a densely packed crowd, that inaccuracy will make less difference - but it still exists, and not everyone is so kind as to pack their troops up tight for your guns.

 

A plasma cannon can HARDLY MISS 20 boys. Don't overheat, and you're pretty much set to clear some space.

 

True. OTOH, the most common enemy faced is not boyz - it's marines (in some variation). Generally, most players don't bunch their marines up to make them better template fodder.

 

And it can miss them if they're in a line or spaced out to any degree. Which you could do, and many players likely would. Hell, if they're arranged in a circle that circle will still be less than 5" in radius - it's more than possible for the Plasma Cannon to scatter completely away from that. ((2/3)*(

 

Also, 4 MM's don't kill 2.24 marines a turn... they kill 2.22 marines that decided to get within RANGE of your MM's a turn. 4(2/3)(5/6) = 2.222(infinity). So, you are interjecting situational data (a player wandering a squad into range of a multimelta),

 

And you're assuming a player will move in range of your Plasma Cannon! We're both making assumptions. You also assume that players are kind enough to bunch up for your plasma cannons, so I think we can both bear some guilt here.

 

and you're calculating it wrong as well (2.22, not 2.24).

 

True. I worked out the individual chance and then rounded it. It has been too long since I was forced to be cautious with such things. I'm very sorry for the horrible consequences which may have resulted to you, your family, and your sense of personal honor.

 

Also, my argument was against you calling out plasma cannons, and somehow trying to justify that MM's are better than plasmacannons at killing infantry, not vehicles.

 

Which I did. Hit more than five targets with that Plasma Cannon, and you've outperformed that group of multi-meltas. Otherwise...

 

And, as very cleary shown in my argument, I'm specifically referring to devastators armed with MM's or PC's.

 

Did I say you were referring to something else?

 

As such, let's see your MM's kill a Land Raider when they are being toted by devastators.

 

Um...

 

What, you want the percentage chance of them doing so? (2/3)(1/6)(1/6) of them killing it outright (about 2%). Of course, a lascannon has (2/3)(1/6)(1/3) (about 4%). Any other weapon under STR 9 has a 0% chance.

 

Under 12", they get better than the Lascannon, but the Lascannon's longer range and better chance probably balances that out.

 

Good luck trying to find a player dumb enough to drive a LR that close to them without knowing that he will be able to get an assault on them.

 

By definition, a Land Raider has to be in minimum range of an MM for a turn before it can get an assault. Them's the rules. Land Raider's can't move more than 12". Even if the unit in question were to assault out of the Land Raider after it moved twelve inches, they can't get a twelve inch assault - hence, they're in range for a turn before they assault because otherwise they can't get close enough.

 

As such, I'll just start taking things out of context, and force you to deal with lascannons. Oh, well, I guess MM's don't stack up there, do they? Lascannons definitely have a better chance at killing a LR than MM's, when toted by devastators.

 

True. Never said otherwise. Indeed, I stated the contrary in Post #22 of this very thread: "Lascannon's twice as effective vs. AV14."

 

Also, I feel obligated to point out that your unremitting hostility toward me is both unbecoming and uncalled for.

 

Also, I'm glad to see you proved my point about the missile launchers...

 

I have a lot of missile launchers because they come in virtually every box. This does not mean I use them all. I don't even like the ones I have. However, I cannot get the damned glue apart.

 

As an infantry-toted AT weapon, it's crap do to it's status as a heavy weapon, and it's short range.

 

Not necessarily. They can kill things which approach them. The key is in forcing things to approach them.

 

As an infantry-toted anti-infantry weapon, it's crap due to it's few shots, and it's short range. There are other weapons, that quite frankly, have better ranges and kill potential.

 

There's one. The Lascannon. Everything else is inferior. Trust me, I've worked this out repeatedly. And before you bring up my rounding error, that totals out to about 1% - which is actually better than many scientific documents.

 

Reguardless of the difference in points cost, and especially when used in multiple numbers by the same squad, PC's far out-match MM's.

 

Multiple Plasma Cannons are probably more effective than multiple multi-meltas. In a one-to-one comparision, the PC will be more damaging to infantry.

 

OTOH, the Multi-melta is cheaper, more effective vs. heavy armor (and lighter armor, at that), and has rather more cachet. And you can't fry yourself with it. If you buy four multi-meltas, the option you proposed, the multi-melta is superior. Furthermore, it's less reliant on random chance, which is generally a good thing.

 

* * *

 

In regards to your snarky comments regarding my math: You confirmed my results (55% is approximately 50%, believe it or not, especially since, as bystrom pointed out, your results are actually slightly too high) - and I stopped showing my work when nobody bloody read it. If you wanted my math, all you had to do was ask for it, and I would have either recalculated it or dug it up.

 

Your condescension is both uncalled for, unjustified, and as bystrom points out, ill-founded. Well done.

[Bannus]

Alright gentlemen, enough.

 

Let's get back to the topic at hand.

[Vaaish]

You are once again taking things out of context. We are NOT discussing the best ways to army a devastator squad to be generalists... we are discussing the virtues of devastators armed with either 4 MM's or 4 PC's, and their effectiveness against infantry.

 

True, I have diverged into a slightly different topic, but, if I recall correctly, the topic is how to use MM effectively not if they do better or worse than PC; to that end my conclusion was that while all MM can be effective against practically any threat a mix of weapons would make the squad most effective so I don't believe I'm out of context here. As to how they can be used effectively, I've mentioned area denial on critical objects and I can further expand that to bottleneck areas that the enemy must pass through. As was already mentioned, the key is making the enemy pass into range.

[Bannus]

I play Salamanders, and I don't even use multimeltas on devastators. Why? It's retarded, that's why. 24" range isn't cool. Devastators are supposed to provide your army with effective heavy fire support, not win your army the prize for least useful unit. Seriously, all this non-sense of "spamming mm's is where it's at" is about to make me dizzy.

I have experimented with - and continue to experiment with multi-meltas in Devastator Squads with some mixed results (I have a Salamaners army also). It isn't that it is a 'retarded' concept - but one that requires a complete rethink of the roles that the units in your army play. I would not call them the least useful unit in my army either and expect them to perform even better in the coming edition. With He'stan in the army, a Devastator Squad with four multi-meltas will rarely miss their intended target.

[legoss]

I'm not one for numbers, and I'm well aware that the gamers i play are odd in that we only have one horde player, but i've experimented with most of the weapon fits for a dev squad, and i've found two things out. First, that i roll a lot of ones with my heavy weapons when i need them. Second, but the more important, is that against everything but an Avatar of Khaine, multi meltas make for a great weapon choice to stick in some piece of terrain near the center of the board and just hold ground. In my usual army list i run three dev squads, 4HB, 4LC, and 4MM. And this is just personal experience mind you, I make no claim about general situations, but i have similar results with my LCs and MMs. Honestly my MMs do more damage, but that is due to the dice gods. The only problem i have with the blast weapons is that the scatter nearly always takes my template off anything i can hit, but this is due more to playing a group of gamers who all tend to favor small elite armies i think.

[SeattleDV8]

If it scatters 6", it is still touching the base. Not overlapping it, but touching it. As such, it is a hit.

Actually, it says that you look above, and then see if the blast marker covers a base, not just touches a base (just checked it in the rulebook to make sure).

.

 

BRB pg. 30 " whose bases are completely or partially covered" are hits. Touches are hits.

[Lord Melvin]

If your looking for a fast way to kill tanks, use Lascannons. 48" range, S9, AP2. Its one of the best non-ordinance weapons around. MMs are good if you can get close enough to use em. I would suggest Lad Speeders/ Attack Bikes(because they can both move 12" and shoot). Using them in tac squads has never worked for me because after getting into range, i always either get blasted in my enemies shooting phase or assaulted by fleet armies. I find Lascannons are much better because very few weapons can reach the squad in question in one turn, giving them a chance to shoot the next time around. Basically, moving into range is the major issue with MMs, as well as surviving once in range.

[Ming]

One has to consider point efficiency. Id rather have for PCs or 4 MMs in 4 tac squads for the price with 4 HBs in a dev squad than the other way around. That said, unless the new codex evens the pricing for heavy weapons between SM unit types, the MM in a tac squad may be better than a PC in the same squad (1 for 1). That said, yesterday I was glad for a PC and a HIT roll to take out 3 of 5 terminators in a deep-strike clump. The MM would have killed one for sure, but in that case the result was just better because of the luck that I rolled the hit, and the luck the other player determined to stay clumped and prevent the target.

[Mal]

Standard board setups... Taking the pitched battle setup as it starts you further than any of the others if you start as close as possible...

 

The board is 4 foot wide... you each start 1 foot in... meaning as soon as you take 1 step forward you will be within 2 foot of those pesky MM's... ohh and for those of you who dont know... 2 foot is 24 inches!

 

But personally I prefere the missile launcher/meltagun route. The only difference between the meltagun and multimelta is that the meltagun is cheaper and has a reduced range... Well when you have a dozen of them out ther in your cc tac squads range is a no brainer.

Im not even going to try to keep track of the amount of 'Raiders I have poped in 1 shot with a meltagun.... get in close and its easy.

[rmoody100]

I haven't read the whole thread (got half way through the first page and the arguments got too heated to follow) so someone may have brought this up already.

 

There seems to be a fascination with the 24" range and not being able to kill outside of that area. i.e. having longer range will give you more targets per turn etc. There is more to a weapon than having to kill it's own points worth of targets each turn.

 

No one has mentioned the tactical uses of a very powerful but short ranged gun - both singular and in multiples. There is the fear factor, funneling of troops and vehicles and area denial. It is using that fear of getting within 24 (or 12") to your advantage, holding positions etc. Footslogging it closer each turn means that your opponent can't afford to ignore it. It may be the difference between your lascannons in the back line surviving another turn for example.

 

Take them, try them and think outside the box.

[Iron_Chaos_Brute]

There is the fear factor, funneling of troops and vehicles and area denial. It is using that fear of getting within 24 (or 12") to your advantage, holding positions etc. Footslogging it closer each turn means that your opponent can't afford to ignore it. It may be the difference between your lascannons in the back line surviving another turn for example.

 

This is the use of the squad.

 

A related example...

In a game against =I= once, my opponent had a 4 psycannon squad on an objective with a clear line of fire down two roads. Since I had daemons, I could avoid the GK like the plague or send most of my army trekking through 1' of difficult terrain to reach them. Long story short, the GK killed an impressive total of 0 models the entire game, but even though I crushed him on the other side of the board, I couldn't even approach the GK and was forced to a draw. Since it was 4th, I couldn't even run closer, they would kill a squad a turn (basically) on the approach, and I would have had to charge into cover. Because of the area denial factor, I drew when I would have otherwise won.