Is the missile launcher reliable anti infantry?

[minigun762]

We often quote the missile launcher as being a flexible weapon and if it has a drawback it's that it doesn't have the same anti tank capabilities as the lascannon.

But I'm questioning it's perceived anti infantry firepower as well.

 

The issue is mainly due to the weakness of small blasts as you can spread out sufficiently to minimize damage. Coupled with a weak weapon profile and you're looking at killing around 1/2 a Guardsmen out of cover per shot. Not very impressive.

[Captain Idaho]

It's not brilliant but it's far from rubbish.

 

Consider the Typhoon. It's a quality weapons platform because it has so many missiles shots. This hasn't changed in 7 edition from previous but it's capacity to net outright kills on tanks has so people dropped it rather harshly. If I was more inclined towards Rhinos over Drop Pod squads I'd still take a squadron (target saturation of course).

 

So the conclusion I come to is it's a weapon that gets better the more you have of it. A couple spread across a few units just won't do much as it is too average. Fire 4 at a time and the opponent gets wary of them really quickly.

 

Personally I prefer more potent but specialised weapons for my squads. Lascannon and plasma cannons are order of the day. But I know I hate opposing Devastator squads with missile launchers when they line up against me.

[BassWave]

I'm in agreement with Idaho. I use a squadron of typhoons often and they rarely disapoint. Is it annoying when opponents spread out? Yes. However that tactic doesn't work 100% of the time. Tank schocks, terrain, getting out of transports, etc. are all times when the opponent has no choice but to keep models packed together. As for tanks, sure you can't one-shot th em with kraks anymore but bring enough and you'll hull point them to pieces anyway. Besides Im happy with weapon destroyed, shaken or stunned anyway as it means that vehicle won't be effective next turn anyway.

 

Best platform for rockets is definitely the speeder. For 150 points you get two highly mobile weapons that fire four rockets and 6 heavy bolter shots a turn. They can also jink, and in the IH's case they can regenerate lost hull points. Because of this I never bother with devestators, although I can see the appeal for Ultras and Fists due to their tactics.

[minigun762]

With speeders specifically, I'd be more tempted to just run dual heavy bolters if I wanted pure anti infantry firepower.

Saves some significant points and I have more faith in multi shot weapons over small blasts.

 

I have more faith in the plasma cannon due to the big jump in strength and AP and by firing still expensive heavy infantry, it's easier to "make your points back" if that logic appeals to you.

[incinerator950]

I remember someone mentioning a havok squad in a rhino with two mls, and the rhino had a havok launcher.

 

My response was baby got havokback.

[Venemox]

12 strength 8 AP 3 Krak missiles aren't anything to sneeze at for combined firepower at MEQ units.  With the quality of Missile Luanchers, I always prefer quantity.  I routinely fill my Heavy Support slots with ML Devestators with a  few ablative wounds thrown in.

[Axagoras]

i love playing vs missile spam space wolfs with my artificers armor master :D

[Toldavf]

I do love my typhoons the number of missiles makes them amazing, while its true the new rules hit them a bit they are still cheap and plentyful in the army and often now ignored, yet they continue to deliver hull points reliably in my games.

 

Last game the missiles bagged a few paladins ones happen.

[Captain Idaho]

i love playing vs missile spam space wolfs with my artificers armor master :D

Yes it highlights it is an average weapon. Lesson to learn is not take a single weapon and rely on it!

[DasPanzerIstUber]

For me, Land Speeder Typhoons are auto include. They end up in all sorts of awkward positions so to be able to switch to blasts or high strength single shot is handy. I use the krak rockets way more even against Guard, heavy weapon squads and weak vehicles mostly.

Of course they are most useful due to quantity of shots. I never had much luck with infantry mounted versions.

[Gideon999]

I loved missile launchers back in 5th, used to run mine as SW long fangs in squads of 6 guys with 5 launchers, and if I had the pts I could sneak in WG in TDA with a cyclone.   Cheap and evil and made just a NASTY unit, though very vulnerable if targetted by the right units as well.

 

In 6/7ed I have dropped off using them a bit.   I think mainly as lascannons got so much cheaper that they became viable for massed AV fire, allowing me to use more specialized AI fire as well which changed my doctrine a bit.

 

Are they still effective?   Sure!   They are nice and flexible as krak missiles are still S8 and have 48" range, which threatens almost anything in the game barring units with 2+ armour.    But when the codex lists a missile launcher for only 5pts less than a lascannon, its hard for me to justify them anymore when I can take las instead.

[minigun762]

Land Speeder Typhoons aside,,I don't see the niche where I'd take the missile launcher (for either AT or AI) over another weapon. Right now, the plasma cannon seems to be the take all comers choice as it's solid against most everything except heavy armor.

[Captain Idaho]

Yeah unless you can take them in Typhoons it is hard to justify. However the Imperial Fists are fairly good at making solid use out of the missile launcher in their Devastator squads.

[minigun762]

Yeah unless you can take them in Typhoons it is hard to justify. However the Imperial Fists are fairly good at making solid use out of the missile launcher in their Devastator squads.

True.

Imperial Fists is the only time I'd consider the flakk missile upgrade as it boosts them enough to make a legitimate difference.

[Kaedes Nex]

The problem with 6E and 7E ML is how many points it costs. It's REALLY expensive. Back when they were free you'd have plenty of them just from taking tactical squads, so there was your massed firepower a la TML. I mean, Long Fangs only claim to fame is the MLs.

 

The problem isn't the ML's stats, its the price. This is why the TML is a good weapon, it's cheap AND multi shot.

[minigun762]

The problem isn't the ML's stats, its the price. This is why the TML is a good weapon, it's cheap AND multi shot.

I feel that it's especially obvious with the missile launcher arm for Dreadnoughts. 

That really should be a TML, or at least TL'd or something. A single missile scares nobody, especially when you're giving up a S10 DCCW for it. 

[Azash]

The ML is OK but 7th really hurt it without helping vehicles all that much. In reality my Rhinos are still getting glanced to death but now my ML which about once every 3 games got a lucky pop and eexplode on a high value piece of armor (I.e. wave serpent, etc) can't do that now.

 

I'm still not sold on PC's. Army's with horrible ballistics skill use templates (orks) to compensate for it. Consequently blast scatter reduces the accuracy of your marines.

 

The math; a ml has a 66% chance of hitting and a 50+% chance of getting a glance or penetrate on 12 or lower. A PC has a 25% chance of hitting without a scatter via the scatter die. The most common result on 2d6 is 7. So on a BS 4 marine that means the most likely result is a scatter of 3" on a 3" template. Seriously that sucks folks. One of the reasons I'm paying 14 pts for the model is to have that BS 4 matter. Oh and let's not forget...no snap firing blast weapons and no shooting at fliers.

 

I'd rather take a LC its only 5 pts more and I don't invalidate my own BS in the process.

 

Its two pricing options really. You have the low rent Heavy Weapons and the high rent heavies. All the low rent now have some glaringly obvious flaw (low str, low Ap, or short range) while the high rent have high str, range, and low ap. Of the low rent the MM is situational if your not taking pods leave it at home. The ML's competition is actually the Heavy Bolter. I'll take a ML over a Heavy Bolter as it really needs more shots to be effective it needs a redoo on its rules (3/5 Salvo??).

 

The question for me is if I'm going to commit more than 10 pts towards a heavy weapon do I want one that has a slight chance of hitting multiple targets but overall reduced capacity vs a one shot relative sure thing. For me I'll take the sure thing.

 

Also we play in a world of grav cannons now. So plasma blast isn't our only real option of getting mass ap2. In the 5th ed codex PC's were the only game in town...not so much anymore.

[Kilofix]

I look at it like this:

 

3 Missile Launchers are better than 3 Bolters against Infantry at range and while stationary.

 

3 Missile Launchers are better than 2 Las Cannons against Infantry at range and while stationary.

 

3 Missile Launchers are better than 3 Bolters against vehicles at range and while stationary.

[shandwen]

Each heavy weapon has a niche. The ML has had it's shrink due to not being ap2. Str 8 ap3 is still highly useful against meq forces, and light mech forces, but can't strait up kill armor like it used to. I still run MLs due to a lack of LC models and the fact that it is the best jack of all trades (but I doubt if I have fired a frag missile in 6 months).

Edit: I stink at typing on my fone.

[Brother Navaer Solaq]

Same here. I have mostly missile launchers and since most of the players in our group are MEQ type then the AP3 is sufficient for most cases.

 

Frag missles have been meh. for me. Only good if i see targets clumped together really close.

[Kilofix]

Btw, had one game past where the opposing HQ TDA IC decided to tank for the unit. And lucky rolls from my ML Instant Death'ed his 3W 200 pt model. It was funny.

 

Edit - The funnier thing was that when it happened, he was looking high and low for the Eternal Warrior entry and it was like nope.... That doesn't necessarily make MLs worth it but it could happen.