The AV14 issue

[thade]

haveing redundancies is great and all, but every unit has a priority/main job.. tacticals excel at anti-infantry.. give them the tools to benefit them in this role and they become worth taking.

otherwise your spending 200-250 points on a couple of melta shots

This is precisely my stance. 200+ points on a single MM + Melta gun is wasting 190ish points worth of bolter-fire.

 

There are other units in each codex which excel at decimating heavy armor; even some that use meltas if you like them so much. Land Speeders, Dreads, and LRs to name a few.

[d@n]

I dont think melta guns are the answer. as its not easy to get to within 6" unless our opponant wants you too. massed Psycannon for grey knights and assault cannons with BA have killed more av14 armour then melta ins in games i have witnessed.

[Roland Durendal]

Brother Tual knows what he's talking about.

 

My opponent sticking your scoring units mid-table as a "MM Bunker" is my dream come true...I will gladly feed him my Land Raider there, plowing it in to melta range and sitting there for you to shoot it. Because at that point my massive Rhino has served it's purpose: it's delivered the payload and will now kill your Tacticals on a multiple-unit assault charge. Or, if you're very unlucky, I will envelope one Rhino and auto-kill the contents when I open it up.

 

But it's okay though, right? I mean "what else would you do with tacticals"? Other than hold an objective? :P Or rapid-fire the crap out of an exposed infantry unit.

 

I use Vindicators, Assault Cannons, and my Str 10 Psychic power to deal with AV14. I also have several combi-meltas in my Sternguard. If no other target presents itself, I'll shoot missiles at the beast; I've immobilized LRs with a missile launcher before. Is it statistically the best, shot for shot? Of course not. But I've got lots of missile launchers and 48" is a long way for you to get to them...as opposed to 6" to 12", which is delicious assault range.

 

I'm sorry Thade, but did you say you use Assault Cannons, Vindis, and a Psy power for main AT? Assault cannons, which might get one lucky 6 to pen, and allow you to roll a d3, and then again you need a 2 or 3 for it to even hurt AV14? And the ubiquitous scatter of a Vindi? I guess the Vindi is the most reliable of the 3 listed, seeing as average scatter is 7", so with BS4 that's only 3" off, which on a large model like a LR means it may still hit full force.

 

And with the prevalence of psychic hoods out there, IDK how relying on a psychic power for AT is...reliable.

 

I won't lie I've had luck with Assault Cannons before too (immob'd a LR full of Berzerkers on turn 1 in my last tourney), as well as having luck with massed krak missiles....it's not the most effective means.

 

Also apologies if I came off sounding like a rude ***, it wasn't my intention.

[thade]

I do use those things. They have worked for me. As I said, I also have combi-meltas on the sternguard, and usually one on either the Land Raider itself or one of the assault marines it carries. There are other ways of dealing with Land Raiders, like pinning them with Rhinos (no, really) surrounding them when they're alongside a building/terrain piece (bonus if their guns are facing an awkward way); and good old Krak Grenades and Power Fists still open up Rhinos like can opens.

 

I wasn't asserting that those things are somehow superior to melta weaponry; I was asserting that they are often overlooked alternatives.

[spartan249]

I'll pitch in from the perspective of a double land raider user.

 

The anti AV-14 weapons I'm most afraid of are Assault Cannons and Lascannons. Why? Range is the primary reason. Those two weapons have the ability to engage my raiders from a range and have notable chances at delaying/destroying my land raider. This is a problem for my terminator surprise package inside, as they have to then either retreat or advance and endure a lot of shooting to reach their intended target.

 

Meltas, on the other hand, don't concern me as much because I know how short ranged they are. If a melta is within double range of my LR, then it is most certainly either too late or very suicidal. It does make me keep my distance from the melta wielders, but that's never really a problem given the weapon ranges on the LR is quite a bit larger then meltas.

 

I pack my own dedicated anti heavy armor weapons on my speeders and LRs themselves in the form of multi-meltas. The other 8 TL Lascannons and 7 Missiles do most of the dirty work at range.

[DarkGuard]

I think there should be a distinction between "mobile melta" and "fast melta". Mobile melta is anything that can move and shoot a melta weapon. So while it includes fast melta platforms such as Land Speeders it also includes Dreads, infantry held melta etc. This is the melta that should be last resort against vehicle like Land Raiders, as if you're that close to them then you're at least in midfield, and your enemy is upon you!

 

Fast melta on the other hand is a genuine threat in that it could take out Land Raiders while they're still trying to get across the board. Thanks to flat out movement, inherent 12" movement and a 12" melta range they have a surprising reach. The other thing to look out for in melta terms is "drop melta", which are alpha strike melta units coming in on a Drop Pod. Of course, there's something for the contents to attack, but as it's a sacrificial unit I doubt it'd matter much to the person who just took out a Land Raider and forced the contents to foot slog.

 

And let's not forget the Orbital Bombardment, which if it hits is a deadly anti-AV14 weapon, able to hit from across the battlefield, has ordnance pen and AP1, plus S10, not bad. And of course, new C:GK players now have a shiny new Vindicare Assassin with AP1 and 4D6 armour pen, which can easily prove the bane of Land Raiders. And his range is longer than that of an assault cannon's.

 

So there's a lot to fear for AV14, but I suppose the question is do we fear AV14 enough to put the fear in them? I find that I do, which is why I try and make sure I've got a source of fast melta in my list at all times, with some back up melta. At the moment the fast melta is the melta Speeders/Attack bikes, while my back up melta is provided by my Sternguard.

[ninjaturtlethug]

I think the reason we have so much disagreement here is that both parties are correct. Have any of the people naysaying that Melta should not be used in tac squads given it a shot? I personally have not, but I've been meaning to, and there are two reasons why.

 

The first is that it is only objective missions that I care my tactical squads survive, (for capture and control missions, I only need to control my objective and contest the other, so only one needs to survive.) For the 1/3 of the missions where I need more tacticals, I can opt to keep my tacticals away from the enemy, on objectives. and while I may wish that I had missile launchers, It probably won't make or break me. For the rest of the games, I'll be happy if my tacticals are targeted over my other units, because it means my killier units are in better shape.

 

Second, if it is capture and control, and I send my tacticals into midfield anyway, and that deathstar unit in a Land Raider is in assault range already, as long as that Land Raider is gone I'm not too worried about a scoring unit getting assaulted, I have two more (three at higher point games, my personal preference though I understand many people stick with two total). Because those terminators are now stuck where they are, if I send my forces elsewhere while they are locked in I don't have to worry about them again, They will only attack what I allow them from now on.

 

On the other hand, My opponent is sure to have more threats than his land raider and terminators, so if things don't go to plan I may have a catastrophe. I would probably have to make sure that I have plenty of troops choices, which are expensive, while not being very killy, and make my army less threatening on paper.

(I'm hoping that I will learn my units are better able to support each other in the middle, where combat tactics is actually usefull.)

 

While none of this is very closely related to the original question, my opinion is that both lists have their pro's and con's, but are untimately equal. It comes down to personal taste, I challenge people on both sides to try the other way, and see if they can't make it work for them.

 

In a nutshell, melta is good, but so are many other AT weapons. It all depends on how the rest of your army is created, and how you use your army.

[Brother Tual]

Ninjaturtlethug. I have used melta armed troops extensively. It looks like a sound weapon. Its one of the strongest (str8) weapons available with the best AP. It has some other dastardly rules (+2D6 - assault version etc) I played using multiple meltas and MM bunkers the way others have posted. I used 4 x MM devistators etc. I read, I played, I experimented but I could not get the unit to work properly. I have tried and tested everything I have posted in both friendly games and in tournaments. I dont give idle advice or copy/paste the internet.

 

In a nut shell I was getting one of 5 results with melta on troops.

 

1) move to a tank, shoot, miss, die.

 

2) move to a tank, shoot, hit, poor damage roll - either die or have a second go next turn (using up a second turn is a serious concern for me)

 

3) move to a tank, shoot, hit, kill, get killed by something else (mostly the unit inside the tank destroys my unit)

 

4) move to a MC, shoot, take one wound, get killed by the MC in combat this turn or next.

 

5) move to a infantry unit, shoot (miss), kill a negligable amount of enemy troops (overkill v guard/tau/orks/eldar/DE etc) stuck in combat for the rest of the game or dying slowly.

 

I moved to using plasma weapons. These have better results than Melta however I didnt like the restrictions on assault. I failed the gets hot roll about 1/3 times too. This included Plasma cannons. More frustrating than fun. I play to enjoy the game.

 

I moved to using HB spam mixed with plasma specials. I enjoyed this immensly. Very good at option 5) and ok at option 4). I soon realised the advantage was not the actual weapon stats but its range. Being at range allowed flexability in approach but also negated the high risk of failure. I still had restrictions on assault however I desired not to be in assault at this stage in my gaming.

 

I developed my style and moved into a more aggressive style. Flamers came to the fore as a natural choice. HB became less effective for no other reason than they were only firing once or twice per game. Over 5-6 turns at 3 shots per turn x 3 units with supporting plasma this volume becomes measurable. In firning only a limited times the volume is much less telling.

 

I moved back to MM as a heavy with a flamer special. This works OK but the restriction on range meant I was firing 0-1 times per game. The biggest disappointment comes on the last turn, holding an objective and being out of range then watching your other tactical squad being pulled off an objective by a dread or similar otherwise having a perfect rear armour shot should I have had the range.

 

The obvious choice for a weapon fired 0-1 times per game was the ML. It has the range, 0 cost and ability to take out armour making that one shot count. I developed my playstyle to counter my loss of melta armed units. I either deploy it through different means (LS) or I use different weapons with similar abilities (vindicators etc) The melta rule is only profound when shooting at a landraider. Every other tank has weaker armour or vulnerabilities (rear armour) or is immune to the melta rule completly.

 

The benefit of using marines in the above manner also meant I was able to reduce their cost. I removed the PF from the unit as I was no longer targetting or getting close to units beyond the average statline of a marine. I wasnt getting stuck in combat with wraithlords, dreads, IC's or other MC's simply because I wasnt getting close to them. This was partly because I wasnt going towards such units because I was never tempted to target them at a range enabling them to assault my marines, but because I wasnt afraid to move away. A mech tactical squad is faster than most MC's/walkers/IC's barring a few choice selections. Having mobility ensures the survival of my unit and makes my opponent work hard/smart to otherwise destroy my units rather than me serving them in a blue rhino shaped box to his front line offense. Melta weaponry is not flexible in this style of gaming. Melta weaponry more or less requires your marines to be in the centre of the table and in range of the biggest threats. Saving points on two PF gives me another MM attack bike for example. This further reduces the need for melta armed troops and further enhances my play style.

 

The benefits of a flamer speak for themselves. They are obvious. Single turns provide multiple hits and good results against common infantry targets. I dont require otherwise expensive wargear to perform well in this role. Whilst similar limitations on range exist with the flamer as with the meltagun, the self imposed restriction on target means I am never suffering from conditions 1, 2, 3 or 4. I source these means elsewhere at a reduced risk/cost. You can argue a meltagun does not force you to suffer from these conditions either. After all it is only 5 points and its not going to hurt should you not use it in a game. This is a fair claim. But why double up on a method or means best sourced elsewhere? it just makes more sense to have your marines killing infantry and equipped to do so at the most efficient level. Not used as an 'insurance' policy often costing more than the target you are trying to claim. You are paying 200+ points for a result otherwise sourced at 60+ points with less risk involved. Why fight this?

[MagicMan]

Flamers and Missile launchers are my weapons of choice, for the exact above reasons pretty much.

 

 

But i have had reasonable success with a combat-squadded Tactical squad with Rhino using Melta weapons.

 

Five men with the missile do whatever, since they can be useful back - midfield, while the melta-combi / meltagun other half rush forwards, to leap out and take out a tank. It doesn't work every time, but when you wreck or even take the main gun off of a 200 something point Executioner Plasma tank it definitely seems worth losing that half squad.

[ninjaturtlethug]

Good to hear you post with integrity Brother Tual, and thank you for your detailed experiences. I have to imagine it was hard addressing me with such a professional tone, given my name is Ninjaturtlethug.

 

At 1500 points I'll usually have 3 autocannon preds with lascannon sponsons, and by endgame I've got at least one left, usually two. Because of this I've never had a problem with a tac squad being left unsupported, and therefore, missile launchers aren't as important to me, although they are always a good choice for my rear troops. Generally I'll use plasma cannons because I play a lot of deathstars, and this is also why I feel multimelta's will work for me also, its not uncommon for me to face a land raider supported by vindicators, and at higher points I may face two landraiders.

 

I also take more tactical squads than your average player, and am not as worried about losing one here or there, I have them get right in there to support my army, in fact I have to, they are such an investment in points .

 

Ultimately my point is still that what works for one person may not work for another, there are so many variables in this game that there is no one true way to play.

[angry man]

i have to say, im suprised to see that so many people havent figured out that, even with all the logic and statistics and belief in the world, your arguments are as unlikely to change most other posters minds on the situation as they are to change yours, because they are as stubborn as you and have as much belief in their own arguement...

 

that said, ill throw in my opinion anyway ;)

 

the way i see it there are some facts:

balanced lists, more often than not, trump unbalanced lists

to consider your list balance you MUST consider facing av14 in either small or large quantities

the best anti-av14 weapon (in terms of pure str[+2d6] vs armour) is the meltagun/multimelta

therefore, for a marine list to be balanced, it should have melta. and there really is no excuse/reason not to - its cheap and available in EVERY foc slot.

 

throughout the thread i have seen many alternatives to melta mentioned, all with different advantages over melta. i wont disagree that these options do have advantages, but for the most part, said advantages are outweighed by the disadvantages. compared to a meltagun, most options boast superior range and slightly better strength (but this outside of 6"). The meltagun is cheap, doesnt have to account for scatter and is AP1(the most important bit). Compared to a multimelta, the range advantage is decreased (as is the distance at which the strength is superior). in fact, dependent on the chosen platform, a multimelta has superior or equal range to almost anything else marines can bring to the table.

 

i have read the discussion about the melta bunker rhino deal it has its pros and cons also. i confess i used to do the same thing, but MM and flamer. that said, i also used to take sternguard with combi melta and i used to take vindicators. i used to consider all of these effective ways to deal with high value armour. but i found that their strengths were outmatched by their weaknesses. the tactical squads never contributed much, getting the vindicators in range opened up the side armour, and the sternguard were just a little pricey to go suiciding after a tank with. over the last year or two, my 'all-comers' list has changed drastically, based on what i found worked and what i thought didnt.

 

everything in the above paragraph is now gone. my army doesnt really struggle with light tanks - i have more that enough missiles and autocannons. but i am also capable of dealing with the higher AVs as well. 8 mobile melta shots from 4 seperate locations seems to be plenty at 1500pts. i have 2 of the highly recommended land speeders (they also pack a HF so they arent completely wasted against foot/horde lists). their MMs have an effective 48" range, trumping your vindicator and equalling your lascannons. the 2d6 armour pen range is 36", still trumping your assault cannons and your vortex of dooms. yeah they only have av10, but if my opponent wants to shoot them rather than my other units then who am i to complain?? i also take melta in my tactical squads. They cost me 220 points a go and i run 3. combat squadded so that i can sit on objectives in my deployment zone (or turn one movement range) and send missiles out or go to ground every turn. the other half has a melta and combi melta mounted in a rhino. as long as their rhinos are moving they can do what they like. they can be scoring boxes/mobile anti av14/tank shock off objectives/shoot or assault small units etc. they are units i try not to be too precious about; if they die, they die. if they do nothing then they have provided cover/a distraction from the rest of my force. but they are very rarely wasted.

 

people will argue that using them just for the specials and heavies are a waste of their true potential. but having played countless games i know full well that i can pump an entire squad of rapid firing bolters in to a unit with a 3+ save (or even 4+) and kill one or 2 models. thats not what i call good use out of 200-250 points.

 

so i think that melta is definately the way to go with regards to av14. other stuff just isnt reliable enough and costs too much. and, at the end of the day, if you brought melta, and your opponent didnt bring av14, then yay, you get to throw it at av13 or less. i dont see a downside to that

 

AM

[Marshal Wilhelm]

In a nut shell I was getting one of 5 results with melta on troops.

 

1) move to a tank, shoot, miss, die.

 

2) move to a tank, shoot, hit, poor damage roll - either die or have a second go next turn (using up a second turn is a serious concern for me)

 

3) move to a tank, shoot, hit, kill, get killed by something else (mostly the unit inside the tank destroys my unit)

 

4) move to a MC, shoot, take one wound, get killed by the MC in combat this turn or next.

 

5) move to a infantry unit, shoot (miss), kill a negligable amount of enemy troops (overkill v guard/tau/orks/eldar/DE etc) stuck in combat for the rest of the game or dying slowly.

 

The benefits of a flamer speak for themselves. They are obvious. Single turns provide multiple hits and good results against common infantry targets. I dont require otherwise expensive wargear to perform well in this role. Whilst similar limitations on range exist with the flamer as with the meltagun, the self imposed restriction on target means I am never suffering from conditions 1, 2, 3 or 4. I source these means elsewhere at a reduced risk/cost. You can argue a meltagun does not force you to suffer from these conditions either. After all it is only 5 points and its not going to hurt should you not use it in a game. This is a fair claim. But why double up on a method or means best sourced elsewhere? it just makes more sense to have your marines killing infantry and equipped to do so at the most efficient level. Not used as an 'insurance' policy often costing more than the target you are trying to claim. You are paying 200+ points for a result otherwise sourced at 60+ points with less risk involved. Why fight this?

 

Without wanting to sound mean, this post doesn't strike me as being written by the same Brother Tual that posted sound thinking in the DraigoWing thread in the UM forum.

 

It looks like you are either being somewhat dramatic to get your point across, or you were doing silly things with melta and then throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Considering the DraigoWing posts, I am quite confused!

 

Hopefully I can point these out without coming across as rude, but given the nature of B&W text, who knows?

 

1) move to a tank, shoot, miss, die.

Why were you attacking something that demanded only success from your unit, and failure condemned it to death?

What on earth where you attacking that you could kill with one melta shot, yet would see your unit pwned with failure?

What was the rest of your list doing?

"Bob's squad is off doing something with the melta gun again, let's hope he doesn't end up in the M*A*S*H again.... but in the meanwhile lets do something in completely the other direction."

 

2) move to a tank, shoot, hit, poor damage roll - either die or have a second go next turn (using up a second turn is a serious concern for me)

Why are you expecting success whenever you do something? That seems more like hope than being reasonable about what dice can achieve for you.

It didn't just happen, the unit must be bad....

 

Why is it so bad if you fluff the melta roll, and using up a second turn ensues, but with a Flamer unit, it is acceptible for them to wait for some other unit to pop the target AV?

That does not make any sense.

Flamer unit doing nothing - fine. Melta unit whiffing dice rolls - terrible, terrible, terrible.

^_^

 

3) move to a tank, shoot, hit, kill, get killed by something else (mostly the unit inside the tank destroys my unit)

Similar to '1'; so now you actually succeed with the melta unit, but somehow this is just failure?

What is the rest of your army doing?

How is a unit coming from a wreckage now destroying your transport AND killing the unit inside?

Keep some distance with your unit in the first place, say 4", then if the enemy unit blows up your tansport (because the shooting from the rest of your list wasn't sufficient, but you did actually coordinate your attack) you deploy on the far side of it, so that his unit now needs to attack through a wreckage.

 

4) move to a MC, shoot, take one wound, get killed by the MC in combat this turn or next.

Why are you attacking a Monster unsupported?

I know you would not rush at it with the Flamer squad, so why does the Melta squad earn such foolhardy treatment?

 

5) move to a infantry unit, shoot (miss), kill a negligable amount of enemy troops (overkill v guard/tau/orks/eldar/DE etc) stuck in combat for the rest of the game or dying slowly.

So your Melta squad is overkilling weak units, but would not be overkilling them with the AI Flamer....?

Then, your Melta squad is doing not much with its bolters against MEq, but then the Flamer comes in and pwns them. Even though the Flamer has the same statline as the Bolter in hurting Marines....?

 

+++

 

It genuinely comes across as you having a blindspot with regards to Melta on TROOPS, Tual.You do silly things with them, at least in your post examples, and wonder why they suck. But you then use the Flamer unit with a bit more thought, get better results, and conclude: "HaHAA! Melta is wrong!"

Huh?

 

That you prefer not-Melta is fine. But to say that Melta on TROOPS is bad, is just incorrect. Your examples do nothing to show otherwise.

If that was the way you were using them (yet you were far more thinking with the Flamer squad, for some reason) then I can see why you don't like them - you're using them very poorly. That is not something I really enjoy saying, and so I usually refrain from it. But when you are either coming up with dramatised examples to make a point (which are shown to be bad examples) or actually making bad choices, and using this as a proof of the inferiority of Melta on TROOPS, you reasons against Melta just don't work.

 

Its like you had a fever with the melta units.

"These units can be really killy. I must rush them forwards unthinkingly. Cannot.... resist.... RAAARGH!"

 

If anyone acted like that with even the great units in 40K, such as Hammernators, etc. then those units would look daft too.

 

Is Melta the only way to go in 40K? No way.

But to dismiss them out of hand, because of your examples, just seems like a big blindspot.

 

You are paying 200+ points for a result otherwise sourced at 60+ points with less risk involved. Why fight this?

I can also grandstand too:

You are paying 200+ points for a result leading to them sitting around doing nothing until your AT spoon feeds them. Why fight this?

 

And again, I am not quite sure why the Flamer unit to gets out and pwn squad X, yet the opposition doesn't actually do anything to the dismounted Flamer squad.

 

I am not sure why your lone Missile Launcher can one-shot that Dreadnought, yet in my experience, even the superior Las Cannon does not do it consistently.

Meanwhile, the few shots from the MM Bunker either do not blow up their target, or even if the do so, it is actually a failure.

Huh?

 

But when the non-TROOPS AT pops enemy AV, it is timely and/or effective.

Huh??

 

Very uneven scenario painting, again.

 

Is Melta on TROOPS > melta elsewhere? No. But I don't think anyone was saying that....?

That Melta on the TROOPS is in addition to all the other AT your list is bringing anyway.

 

Your arguments for non-Melta TROOPS are fine. Your arguments against Melta TROOPS don't work.

[greatcrusade08]

Is Melta on TROOPS > melta elsewhere? No. But I don't think anyone was saying that....?

I was, its been my stance all along than melta does better with its own platform, of course every thing we advocate can only be considered within an average gaming environment, if a person reads this and all his friends play heavy mech or paladins, then of course meltaguns on troops is the only sensible option

 

That Melta on the TROOPS is in addition to all the other AT your list is bringing anyway.

this is where i disagree with most people, if youve got AT elsewhere in the list, then where do you get your anti infantry from?

tactical marines bolters may not be great vs other MEQ, but taken in numbers or taken against hordes, then bolters can turn a game.. assuming youve got a few good AT elements elsewhere why not build up your tac squads to face the hordes.. i.e with dual flamers and a ML/plasmacannon

 

the ability of the plasmacannon/ML to kill MEQ is about the same as a meltagun/MM (moreso with Pc), the only real difference is the melta weapons are better up close aainst vehciles.. the dual flamers can put lots of wounds onto MEQ and kill them with lots of rolls

[Meatman]

i have 2 of the highly recommended land speeders (they also pack a HF so they arent completely wasted against foot/horde lists). their MMs have an effective 48" range, trumping your vindicator and equalling your lascannons. the 2d6 armour pen range is 36"

 

Sorry, just saw this bit and it doesn't add up.

48" would be from moving flat out, and just being in the 24" multimelta... Which means you cannot shoot, similarly with the 36" 2D6.

I believe you mean 36" and 24" 2D6 range respectively.

 

At this point I'm just nitpicking.

[angry man]

woops my bad. apparently basic maths is a weak point of mine :teehee:

but you are indeed correct - i did mean that

apologies

 

AM

[DarkGuard]

In my experience it doesn't matter how much anti-AV14 you pack into your list. Be it melta, demo cannons, lascannons or xenos equivalents, after 6 years of gaming I can still count the amount of times I've killed a Land Raider on one hand. They're just too tough and I prefer to go for the squishy things.

[spartan249]

Well... in my experience, LRs are pretty darn fragile when the right tools are thrown at it (Thinking multiple meltas and such, as well as lascannons/broadsides galore). Some just don't bring it, and suffer when they fight armies like mine.

 

As rare as 2+ raiders are in play... if you are planning on expanding your horizons beyond a local playgroup, be prepared, because people like me are out there who bring a lot of AV14.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

That Melta on the TROOPS is in addition to all the other AT your list is bringing anyway.

this is where i disagree with most people, if youve got AT elsewhere in the list, then where do you get your anti infantry from?

tactical marines bolters may not be great vs other MEQ, but taken in numbers or taken against hordes, then bolters can turn a game.. assuming youve got a few good AT elements elsewhere why not build up your tac squads to face the hordes.. i.e with dual flamers and a ML/plasmacannon

 

the ability of the plasmacannon/ML to kill MEQ is about the same as a meltagun/MM (moreso with Pc), the only real difference is the melta weapons are better up close aainst vehciles.. the dual flamers can put lots of wounds onto MEQ and kill them with lots of rolls

 

I think I have, unsuccessfully, :) discussed this with Tual before.

 

I think it is far safer to have units with a degree of AT and AI built into them, regardless of the ratio, due to the dangers of the Specialist getting caught out.

 

Grey Hunters with Mg are the usual.

Sang Guard with melta pistols.

Termies with both Hammers and Claws. Whilst only Hammernators works [with TH being AI and AT] you can get caught out running only Clawnators. It is far safer running both in the unit, rather than just Claws. Otherwise, even a Killa Kan might make the unit look foolish.

etc.

 

Now I am not totally anti-Specialists, but I think if you are getting them to work consistently, something else is going on.

 

Specialists assume that you are in control of the show. Generalists are not shown up as much if you are not.

 

If you are consistently in control of the show:

• You are already a very good player, and so it wouldn't matter what you took in your list. *Within reason, of course.*

• You are somewhat superior to your fellow gamers, which means you can do whatever* and still win. I have played a couple of dudes, and it was apparent that I was more able than them on the table. So I just rushed my list at them 'unthinkingly'. I would not be able to do that against people on par [or better than] me.

• There is a luck disparity between you and your fellow gamers. My oldest brother is unlucky, over several decades. I will win more than 50% of my games against him, just because of that.

 

When Specialists turn up, you are making it easier for for the other guy to rock-scissors you.

For example: The Eldar player has Fire Dragons and Dark Reapers.

I am meched up, so I kill the Dragons. The Reapers are all but ineffective, despite the horrific ease that they take Marines out with.

I am on Foot [by list choice or by being de-meched], so I kill the Reapers. The Dragons still kill Marines handily enough, but are more localised in their effect, and must put themselves in harms way to do so. The Reapers have far greater impact in reach and in actual effect.

 

Now this is a simplification, but it generally holds true. Scenarios can be made where this is not the case, but I can tell you that chocolate is bad for your health and then I can tell you chocolate is good for your health, so.... yeah ;)

 

Yes Specialists outperform Generalists at job X. But if this is happening often enough, like I said before, there is a power difference between you and your opponent.

 

For example, taking a 3Las Pred and a Dakka Pred instead of 2 AutoLas Preds, is similar specialisation, and makes the choices obvious and easy for your opponent.

 

I have had a game where my opponent took out three AV pieces on T1. Imagine if that had've been my SpecialistAT dudes, now all gone?

Generalists mitigate against bad luck. It is a cop out to say "yeah, he got lucky and that is why I practically folded." No, your list-fu compounded bad luck. If a Generalist list was made, you still be frustrated, but able to carry on.

 

Specialists, in effect, are just like trying to guess the meta of a tournament. If it "doesn't go to plan" then the anti-MEq list who happened to play four Tyranid lists gets undone.

"Oh, but I was just unlucky. there should have been 50% of my games against MEq, due to Codex ratio." You gambled and, unfortunately for you, you lost.

 

Now not every unit in an all-comers list has to be an all-comer itself, but it is that thinking carried through that builds in compartments to mitigate damage.

 

After the Titanic sunk, having gouged itself against that iceberg, they decided to compartmentalise ships.

You can view it like this:

A specialist unit is assuming/hoping/gambling that you are not going to come close to that iceberg. Just like the anti-MEq list. They save weight by not having the compartments, and so save both fuel and time with there design.

A generalist unit [and all-comers list] would prefer to stay away from that iceberg, but doesn't have to let out the cry of "women and children first" whenever it doesn't go to plan. ;)

 

With cars, they are heavier now than ever. This is due to all the safety features built in, besides luxury things like electric seats and windows, etc. Now you can say "well I don't drive like a turkey, so why would I waste the extra fuel heaving around 12 airbags, anti-lock brakes, etc.?" Because you crashing isn't just up to you and your actions.

Just like the Specialist getting shown up.

 

Of course everything would progress like clockwork if it were only up to you and mathammer ruled the dice rolls. But it isn't and doesn't.

 

+++

 

So, that is why I don't recommend Specialists. :P

 

+++

 

Generalists of note:

Speeders with HF and MM

Typhoons

Dreadnoughts with Assault cannons and HF

Claw and Hammer-nators

AutoLas Preds.

 

Even in that list, you can see some, such as the Pred, are more AT oriented. But whist it may never pwn men, it is far less poor at it that the 3Las Pred.

[DarkGuard]

Well... in my experience, LRs are pretty darn fragile when the right tools are thrown at it (Thinking multiple meltas and such, as well as lascannons/broadsides galore). Some just don't bring it, and suffer when they fight armies like mine.

 

As rare as 2+ raiders are in play... if you are planning on expanding your horizons beyond a local playgroup, be prepared, because people like me are out there who bring a lot of AV14.

 

My gaming group have one or two people who will use two or Raiders, and loads of people who will use one. And despite packing fast melta and mobile melta and demo cannons etc etc into my lists it never, ever, ever works as it should, making Land Raiders one of my most hated units. You say their fragile, I say their tough, even with melta. All it takes is one bad dice roll, and I get plenty of those over a game, and typically at the worst possible times.

[ninjaturtlethug]

Generalists of note:

Speeders with HF and MM

Typhoons

Dreadnoughts with Assault cannons and HF

Claw and Hammer-nators

AutoLas Preds.

 

This is most of my all comers list, minus the terminators.

 

My gaming group have one or two people who will use two or Raiders, and loads of people who will use one. And despite packing fast melta and mobile melta and demo cannons etc etc into my lists it never, ever, ever works as it should, making Land Raiders one of my most hated units. You say their fragile, I say their tough, even with melta. All it takes is one bad dice roll, and I get plenty of those over a game, and typically at the worst possible times.

 

I've had the same problem, my current tactic is to avoid the land raider and feed the terminators a tarpit, but I'm hoping some more melta in my list will allow me to take the deathstars out.

[spartan249]

While meltas work decently at killing all kinds of things, I think the longer range AV solutions shouldn't be forgotten when it comes to dealing with heavy armor. When range becomes your advantage instead of a limitation to work around, your target has much less in the way of options when it comes to dealing with it.

 

Case in point: My regular gaming buddy put meltas in all of his squads after a while of playing me due to my armor heavy army, but found that I was still coming out of battles with most of my army intact. After growing a little frustrated with the failure of his melta tactics, he started bringing lascannon havocs instead of meltas, and I have been having a much more difficult time fighting his list recently because of it. When my army is staring down the barrels of 14 lascannons, it starts to sweat profusely because there's nowhere for me to hide without negatively affecting my combat efficiency. This sparked a little side strategy involving Khan and outflanking terminators and such, but that's another story.

 

The point of that spliel? Don't forget that we have lascannons in the codex. Bring em in some capacity. I swear they'll make heavy armor guys like me cringe.

[Destaro]

The MM Dreadnought in a Drop Pod has proven to be an efficient AV 14 solution for me. At 140 points, it's cheap and a pretty nasty speed bump. Normally, two squads of CC Scouts in LSS (with a MM and a HF) provide additional support. Granted this works better if you're going first, but dumping my MM Dreadnought/Drop Pod in front of a Land Raider has been effective for me a number of times (especially when my Scouts then assault the tasty morsels that fall out).

 

Note that a Tactical Squad with MM/PG/Combi-Plasma is usually floating around in case things go badly and Lascannons/Vindicators provide additional insurance.

 

Generally, a balanced approach is best. Having a number of solutions to deal with the potential of AV 14 without overspecializing has never let me down.

[greatcrusade08]

CC Scouts in LSS (with a MM and a HF) provide additional support.

 

just a quick note.. an LSS can only have a single weapon, youve got two

[Captain Idaho]

CC Scouts in LSS (with a MM and a HF) provide additional support.

 

just a quick note.. an LSS can only have a single weapon, youve got two

 

Silly greatcrusade08! He was referring to 2 Landspeeder Storsm with MM and HF...

 

I'm late to the party here, but I prefer to have longer ranged punch with a meltagun/combi-melta in one of my Tactical squads as a reserve. I have gone off the dedicated Melta platforms because they die so easily and have acheived nothing in my past 8 or so games! At least in a Tactical squad the opposing Landraider is generally moving towards my infantry so the Tactical squad will be about to use their melta weapons, and 10 Tactical Marines don't die too easily.

 

As for whether this is efficient or not? I don't care really, it's flexible instead. My army seldom, if ever, has needed a flamer over the capacity to pop a transport or Walker, including late game. Melta guns are important for this. Bolter fill in for these duties well enough, considering I have Honour Guard and other stuff to target infantry. Or just assault if they are light enough.

 

In my army I now use 3 Tactical squads, 2 with Plasma guns and a Lascannon and Plasma Cannon, and one with Missile Launcher and Melta gun, plus a Sergeant with combi-melta.

 

I have since changed my list so it now has more Lascannons (and a Landraider) because of the issue with 1,750pts being so much more dangerous with firepower than 1,500pts, resulting in a lower life expectancy for my Rhinos than use.

 

I have an Assault Cannon, 4 Lascannons (3 are twin linked), potentially a 5th (if I want to swap out the missile Launcher for the Plasma Cannon and put the Lascannon in the other Tactical) and 2 Dread CCW all of which can bust a Landraider, so the last 2 Melta weapons in the Tactical squad are still there as back up, just in case. So in this case I have lost dedicated anti-infantry specialist Tactical squad but retained flexibility from them.

 

Incidently, in my example weapon listing for my 1,750pts list (which isn't all my weapons either!) I have 8 Dice a turn to shoot at AV14 in the hopes of destroying it. I'm also seldom scared of what is inside of the Landraider since my Honour Guard can normally take them, barring Halberd weilding GKs.

 

Hope my rambling makes sense as my son has been jumping up and down on me and typing is difficult!

[greatcrusade08]

CC Scouts in LSS (with a MM and a HF) provide additional support.

 

just a quick note.. an LSS can only have a single weapon, youve got two

 

Silly greatcrusade08! He was referring to 2 Landspeeder Storsm with MM and HF...

 

 

oh yeah.. see thats what nurgles rot does to you.. ruddy man-flu