Why aren't we using more plasma?

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I like all melta to wreck mech. I never use any plasma.

 

G :)

[breng77]

I find it interesting that most people say, Melta is better against mech armies. Doing the math a plasma gun is a better against AV 11 or less at any range above 6", and nearly equal against AV 12 (off by about 1%). That said for assault marines I would go with the melta guns for a few of reasons.

 

1.) You can assault after firing.

2.) You cannot move and fire more than 12" with a plasma gun which loses a good portion of the plasma gun advantage.

3.) The rest of your squad cannot fire more than 12", which means you have 4 guys standing around for every plasma gun in an assault squad, if you choose to sit back and fire.

 

To me plasma guns really come into their own when used on bikers who can move 12" and still fire 24", as well as assault after rapid firing. As for mentions of the plasma syphon,I really don't think you will see it played, most people don't expect much plasma, and so they won't shell out the points for it.

[Morollan]

I find it interesting that most people say, Melta is better against mech armies. Doing the math a plasma gun is a better against AV 11 or less at any range above 6", and nearly equal against AV 12 (off by about 1%).

 

The problem is with allcomers lists you won't just face AV 11 and 12. Plasma is no use whatsoever against AV14 and doesn't have much chance against 13. And of course, the best availability of plasma is in assault squads which cannot assault if you fire them.

 

Plasma has its place but I prefer melta in general.

[JamesI]

To me plasma guns really come into their own when used on bikers who can move 12" and still fire 24", as well as assault after rapid firing. As for mentions of the plasma syphon,I really don't think you will see it played, most people don't expect much plasma, and so they won't shell out the points for it.

Plasma on bikes is great, and plasma works for units like HG where you can load up on them (only the novitiate's shooting is wasted).

 

I don't care for plasma in RAS, due to the assault issues.

 

Too bad we can't have 2 plasmaguns in a Tac squad.

[breng77]

The problem is with allcomers lists you won't just face AV 11 and 12. Plasma is no use whatsoever against AV14 and doesn't have much chance against 13. And of course, the best availability of plasma is in assault squads which cannot assault if you fire them.

 

I certainly don't advocate all plasma, and never in an RAS, but I see more lists running all melta. There are very few armies that run lots of AV13 and 14. Only Leman Russes, Monoliths and Land raiders have AV 14 at all, melta does not help against monoliths, every other vehicle has side armor of 12 or less, which is why I said plasma is good on bike squads so you can move and get side shots.

 

Too bad we can't have 2 plasmaguns in a Tac squad.

 

I agree, that would actually make tactical squads worth taking, as being able to move and shoot is huge.

[Cpt. Blood Donator]

The problem is with allcomers lists you won't just face AV 11 and 12. Plasma is no use whatsoever against AV14 and doesn't have much chance against 13. And of course, the best availability of plasma is in assault squads which cannot assault if you fire them.

 

I certainly don't advocate all plasma, and never in an RAS, but I see more lists running all melta. There are very few armies that run lots of AV13 and 14. Only Leman Russes, Monoliths and Land raiders have AV 14 at all, melta does not help against monoliths, every other vehicle has side armor of 12 or less, which is why I said plasma is good on bike squads so you can move and get side shots.

 

Too bad we can't have 2 plasmaguns in a Tac squad.

 

I agree, that would actually make tactical squads worth taking, as being able to move and shoot is huge.

 

Besides, if someone has brought a monolith, they're just going to lose faster. Russes are fairly easy to plasma-kill from the rear. So are most other veichles. Land Raider is the only real problem for plasma guns, especially 12" move plasma guns.

[breng77]

Besides, if someone has brought a monolith, they're just going to lose faster.

 

Well seeing as how playing a monolith = playing necrons, I would have to agree, though for Necrons, monoliths are not a bad choice.

[knife&fork]

I certainly don't advocate all plasma, and never in an RAS, but I see more lists running all melta. There are very few armies that run lots of AV13 and 14. Only Leman Russes, Monoliths and Land raiders have AV 14 at all, melta does not help against monoliths, every other vehicle has side armor of 12 or less, which is why I said plasma is good on bike squads so you can move and get side shots.

 

Give it a try before you dismiss it, not being assault weapons are far less of an hindrance than you might think.

 

Ironically there's almost no land raiders in play in my area, because everyone runs so many meltas. I might even say that one of the reasons DoA currently works so well is because everyone currently leaves the plasma at home. It's all about missile launchers and melta, and they just can't kill marines quickly enough. If people brought out the plasma cannons and guns like in the old days I probably wouldn't win a game.

[SamaNagol]

Meltaguns will not only increase the probability of penetrating the armour of whatever you want to shoot at vastly, they also give you a 50% chance of destroying it when you do pen it. That is the other benefit of Melta. It is AP1.

[knife&fork]

Meltaguns will not only increase the probability of penetrating the armour of whatever you want to shoot at vastly, they also give you a 50% chance of destroying it when you do pen it. That is the other benefit of Melta. It is AP1.

 

Seriously, why are we still having posts like this after 4 pages?

 

"Hey man in case you have never opened a rule book or codex, the melta is S8 AP1!"

 

We all know what the melta does and what the plasma does, it's about application.

[breng77]

Meltaguns will not only increase the probability of penetrating the armour of whatever you want to shoot at vastly, they also give you a 50% chance of destroying it when you do pen it. That is the other benefit of Melta. It is AP1.

 

This is only really true at 6" range or less or against av 13 and 14. At above 12" a Plasma gun is infinitely better at damaging armor 13 and below. Between 7"-12" inches Plasma is better at penetrating most vehicles. Melta being better at killing vehicles overall is somewhat of a myth. AP 1 Helps, and within 6" melta is king, beyond that it is really not all that much better, if at all.

[JamesI]

Be gone vile Xenos talk!

 

Seriously, how did a plasmagun thread become Necron strategy talk?

 

Edit: Also be gone vile spelling errors!

[Cpt. Blood Donator]

Be gone vile Xenos talk!

 

Seriously, how did a plasmagun thread become Necron strategy talk?

 

Edit: Also be gone vile spelling errors!

 

Ehum, I guess by... seeing what disadvantages we get form not picking meltaguns. Apart from not being able to assault, there's not that many. So far.

[Isryion]

Seriously, why are we still having posts like this after 4 pages?

 

This is pretty much true of this entire thread at this point. I guess plasma with assault squads may work for some players and their styles of play, and I think that's the reason there's even a debate on this.

 

There's no way I'd take them on assault squads because 80-90% of the time, I want to assault whatever it is that is inside the vehicle I just cracked open. Even if I simply want to destroy it, I might fail to do that (with a melta or plasma). Failing with a means I can at least assault and hit it with grenades and a fist and destroy it that way. Heck, even if it's not about destroying vehicles and simply killing infantry, melta is far better on my assault troops. It beats standing and shooting them with a couple plasma shots and then getting assaulted the next turn.

 

So, for my style of play and builds, lack of ability to assault (with my assault troops) on the same turn I shoot is a huge drawback.

 

seeing what disadvantages we get form not picking meltaguns. Apart from not being able to assault, there's not that many. So far.

 

Cost, lack of versatility (in use against armor in addition to the well documented lack of maneuver), and Gets Hot! -- all of which have been mentioned. But, imo, even without cost and Gets Hot, there's no way I'm putting a non-assault weapon on my assault troops.

 

The only place I put a plasma in my assault type units is on my chaplain/reclusiarch who runs w/ DC. I cringe even at the cost for that, but there are two upsides and that's that he has multiple wounds and BS 5 as a reclusiarch.

[AbusePuppy]

For those touting Plasma as an effective (or superior to Meltagun) anti-tank weapon:

 

Against AV11 and Rapid Firing, a Plasmagun averages .14 kill results. Against AV12, it averages .08 kill results.

 

Against those same targets, a Meltagun yields .19 and .13 average kills respectively (assuming 6.1-12" range.)

 

A Plasmagun is only superior against AV10 or AV11 Open Topped; against all other armor values at 0-12", a Meltagun is more better. Of course, Plasmaguns can shoot to 24" if you sit still, but a single S7 shot is pretty unreliable against armor and isn't really something you ought to be worrying about with your units- for one, why on earth are you that far away from the enemy? BA are a mobile, assault-oriented army, you should be trying to get in closer.

 

Plasma does have uses, but Melta is a better "default" choice because many of our units, especially ASM, are already excellent against infantry units by simple virtue of the assault phase. Vehicles, on the other hand, require specialized guns to kill, so taking them gives your unit the ability to handle both types of targets effectively- and having that duality on your troop squads is a very, very good thing to have.

 

Edit: Plasma Pistols are just terrible, there is no reason to take them in 5E other than fluff.

[Isryion]

For those touting Plasma as an effective (or superior to Meltagun) anti-tank weapon:

 

Edit: Plasma Pistols are just terrible, there is no reason to take them in 5E other than fluff.

 

As I mentioned, mine on a reclusiarch has been useful, but that's the only place and even then it's not really ideal.

[Ash]

I find it interesting that most people say, Melta is better against mech armies. Doing the math a plasma gun is a better against AV 11 or less at any range above 6", and nearly equal against AV 12 (off by about 1%).

 

As a thought there are several armies I know fielding skimmers/vehicles with AV 12 ceramite armour or its equivalent which deny the extra penetration dice to Melta.

 

Storm ravens and that Eldar thingy with all the trouble makers in it denies melta dice at AV 12. Does anyone know any others, or take this into consideration.

[breng77]

For those touting Plasma as an effective (or superior to Meltagun) anti-tank weapon:

 

Against AV11 and Rapid Firing, a Plasmagun averages .14 kill results. Against AV12, it averages .08 kill results.

 

Against those same targets, a Meltagun yields .19 and .13 average kills respectively (assuming 6.1-12" range.)

 

FOr killing power you are correct, for the ability to damage vehicles plasma is better. Though I do agree for BA melta is usually the better default choice.

[knife&fork]

Cover saves, and there is a lot of them in 5th ed, will also push the odds in favor of the 2 shot plasma. An interesting situation came up today in a small game vs regular marines, will post about it after dinner.

 

EDIT: Ok, let me just say that the main reason I like plasma is because they do such a good job killing MEQ, something RAS can struggle with. FC tips the scales in your favor but it's still not amazing.

 

What happened today was that my opponent was sitting on an objective late game, not quite in range for a charge on my turn. It was an objective I needed to win, contesting is not enough. What has happened before is that he shoots at me a bit, then I move up and shoot him and he uses combat tactics to double back, auto rally and then comes back in the next turn. While jump infantry is very good at chasing squads off the table it was not an option if I wanted to avoid a draw. Having those plasmas put him in a very difficult position. Charge off the obective to deny me FC? Stay and shoot it out with the dual plasma or face a charge? Fall back to deny me the charge, but risk getting shot in the back and not being able to pull back and contest the objective? None of these options are good to him. Some worse than others, but if my squad had used the dual melta there's no way I'd been able to deal the number of casualties that made it such a difficult decision.

[Decoy]

See, problem is, most BA armies are shoehorned into -needing- to assault. If they don't, they lose, pure and simple. Therefore, they need to keep that mobility on most of their squads.

 

 

That said, I would say that Plasma is a superior weapon on the whole. Hence, why my Sunwolf army has... close to... fifty plasma weapons? Closer to forty, I think, actually.

 

As a general rule: More shots=Better results. I'd sooner take ten S4/AP5 shots over one or two S8/AP1. Especially when on something like a Lasplasback, where antitank and anti-infantry go hand in hand.

 

Unfortunately, B.A. really don't have the option to sit and fire the way Wolves do. At least, not to anywhere near as great a respect. With an army that is damned near obligated to move, the rapidfire goodness of a Plasmagun just can't do the job that needs to be done.

 

 

Plasmaguns are still the better weapon, though. Who doesn't fear the Sunwolf's eye? B)

[knife&fork]

Unfortunately, B.A. really don't have the option to sit and fire the way Wolves do. At least, not to anywhere near as great a respect. With an army that is damned near obligated to move, the rapidfire goodness of a Plasmagun just can't do the job that needs to be done.

 

Sometimes you want to, sometimes you have to.

 

If you play against someone who is better than you in assault, wouldn't you make it a point to deny him that possibility whenever possible? If you had to fight him, wouldn't you make sure that you used a unit that had a good chance of taking him out?

[Decoy]

Unfortunately, B.A. really don't have the option to sit and fire the way Wolves do. At least, not to anywhere near as great a respect. With an army that is damned near obligated to move, the rapidfire goodness of a Plasmagun just can't do the job that needs to be done.

 

Sometimes you want to, sometimes you have to.

 

If you play against someone who is better than you in assault, wouldn't you make it a point to deny him that possibility whenever possible? If you had to fight him, wouldn't you make sure that you used a unit that had a good chance of taking him out?

 

 

You obviously don't know who I am.

 

To answer your questions:

 

1.) No.

2.) Nope.

 

I long ago learned that long odds don't apply to me. Which is why you'll see my Long Fangs charge into Berzerkers, my Grey Hunters take on Dreadnaughts with naught but Mark of the Wulfen, and my Lords go toe to toe with Hive Tyrants with no support.

 

However, I do understand your sentiment. Tactically, it is sound, and I wasn't particularly saying it wasn't.

[Gv0zD]

I wouldn't say that BA can not effevtively play with shooty lists. Tacts, Sternguards, Baals, Devs and Dakka Preds are all good units for outgunning an opponent.

 

So, even though jumpy RAS with plasmas may not be the best loadout, I see certain utility in taking mechanized RAS with plasmas. When there are lascannons, autocannons, assault cannons and multi-melta bikes in the list, RAS are likely to score objectives, so having two S8 AP2 shots per squad of 5 marines are something that will keep opponent's units at bay, or at least will thin their number a bit. At least I find it useful in theory ;)

[AbusePuppy]

Cover saves, and there is a lot of them in 5th ed, will also push the odds in favor of the 2 shot plasma.

 

Actually it affects both of them the same- however, Plasma, getting multiple shots, will be less "all or nothing" than Melta will be, so that's an advantage of sorts. On the other hand, Melta is reasonably likely kill if even a single hit goes through- and when you can easily have three of them in an ASM squad (2 Meltaguns, Infernus) you are looking at fairly decent odds.

 

*snip story*

 

If you were ASM, why not just charge into him without shooting? You don't really need to get those extra 1-2 casualties to win that fight, so just relying on getting three times as many attacks, striking first, and wounding on threes should be more than enough. A full squad should kill 3-4 of his dudes on the charge and take effectively no casualties in return, even without a PW/PF. If contesting it wasn't enough, how would using Plasma force "a hard decision" on him? He HAD to stick around for it, no matter the cost, because it was key to winning the game, and if he was small enough to wipe out with Plasma in a turn, you could also kill him with just a charge as well. I guess I'm just not seeing what your line of reasoning is here.

 

 

That said, I would say that Plasma is a superior weapon on the whole. Hence, why my Sunwolf army has... close to... fifty plasma weapons? Closer to forty, I think, actually.

3x6 Plasma Cannon in HS, 6x3 max in in Troops... you have 10+ Plasma weapons in your EL, FA and HQ? I guess that's possible, but geez that is a lot of points. How the heck would you even kill a Chimera or Wave Serpent?

[Isryion]

@AbusePuppy,

 

He mentioned he wasn't in charge range, though later it seems he says he is. I'm a bit confused on it. Either way it seems like a very unique situation, and hard to tell if he made all the moves up until that point -- maybe he had---(I start looking where I'm at in terms of objectives turn 3 so I'm not moving out of range turn 4 and am in range to assault and take them turn 5).