Dreadnought missile launcher

[rye0006]

I've just sent the following email to the FAQ email address - it's something that's always bothered me. What do other people think?

 

Hi,

There's something I've been pondering whilst waking my venerable dreadnoughts for my Black Templars Crusade. If a Sword Brethren terminator wearing tactical dreadnought armour can mount and fire a cyclone missile launcher, and various space marine vehicles can mount typhoon missile launchers, why is a space marine Dreadnought only able to mount a normal missile launcher (despite it being roughly the same size as a terminator's cyclone one)? Surely the mighty techmarines can upgrade the launchers of such venerable entombed brethren to fire at an improved rate?

I'd love to see this FAQ'd and give such an iconic unit an improved offensive output.

[Machine God]

What you mean having your Techmarines actually improve upon an established STC?

This is Tech Heresy!

 

You'll have to use Contemptor Dreadnoughts as they can take Cyclone Missile Launchers.

[The Unseen]

Contemptor can take a cyclone AS A 3RD WEAPON.

But the humble castaferrum has to replace a whole damn arm for half a cyclone.

 

Dread weapons have always needed a look at, cause you have stuff like a twin lascannon, twin autocannon, or assault cannon, which are obviously a full blown vehicle weapon mount, and then you have a single missile launcher, multi-melta, or plasma cannon, which are all weapons a normal marine can pack around, which has definetely contributed to dreads anemic damage output and lack of variety on the table over the years.

 

Especially GW'S apparent favorite loadout, fist, storm bolter, and multi melta: it has the shooting output of 3 whole tactical marines!

[BitsHammer]

What you mean having your Techmarines actually improve upon an established STC?

This is Tech Heresy!

So no Land Raider Crusaders or Reedeemers for you, no Razorbacks (they're based on the idea of the Immolator, but basically a Tarantula gun mounted on a Rhino and then that was mucked with so you could have multiple other choices outside of just Heavy Bolters), no MkV armour (which was mixed from MkII-IV armour, and had extra armor basically bolted on), ect, ect.

 

The Marines are basically the posterboys of tech heresy (just behind the Dark Mechnicus and every Xenos tech thing ever).

 

[Eddie Orlock]

An improved rate of fire would not be without precedent. In 2nd edition, all the dreadnought weapons had a perk over ordinary versions. For missile launchers it was sustained fire capability.

[Trevak Dal]

Yeah I've had a big problem with that since I got into the game in 5th edition, and panned dreds as garbage units because of it.

 

Like many things I've come around (I hate the plethora of skulls and have a world eater army...), And they back up my World Eaters.

 

Such a big thing and only one standard missile shot?

[sebs_evo7]

Without trying to sound picky I believe faqs are for explaining how rules function and interact in situations

What you are asking should have been submitted to whoever does the errata as you are asking them to change a rule

As I said not trying to be a dick, I want them to update the profile as well, just making sure you email the right section

Edited January 21, 2018 by sebs_evo7

[Machine God]

 

What you mean having your Techmarines actually improve upon an established STC?

This is Tech Heresy!

So no Land Raider Crusaders or Reedeemers for you, no Razorbacks (they're based on the idea of the Immolator, but basically a Tarantula gun mounted on a Rhino and then that was mucked with so you could have multiple other choices outside of just Heavy Bolters), no MkV armour (which was mixed from MkII-IV armour, and had extra armor basically bolted on), ect, ect.

 

The Marines are basically the posterboys of tech heresy (just behind the Dark Mechnicus and every Xenos tech thing ever).

 

 

The LR Crusader and Redeemer STC were found though as was the Razorback, even the Baal Predator has an STC although the Blood Angels won't give it to Mars. I don't count Mk V as tech-heresy as to go by that route Mk III is too, just up armoured Mk II.

 

I believe that we have Alan Bligh to thank for the Contemptor's Cyclone Missile Launcher, but to wish for a Better Missile Launcher for the Dreadnought just will never happen.

 

Its been that way too long.

 

Its like trying to get the Autocannon to be given a proper amount of stopping power - the Autocannon is what Main Battle Tanks use as their main gun and in 40K its Str 7?

[BitsHammer]

I'm pretty sure when we first saw the Crusader it was because the Black Templars had wired bolters up onto a Land Raider only for it to be retroactively approved by the Mechanicus sometime later. Likewise, the Razorback was explicitly a point of contention with the Mechanicus because it wasn't an STC. Perhaps that got retroactively changed, but older fluff had these things as changes chapters came up with that ever eventually approved by the mechanicus after the fact.

[Race Bannon]

I thought The Razorback was from a STC ...

[Stormxlr]

Razorback is from STC discovered in M.36 IIRC.

GW will most likely not change the stats of Dread missile launcher because they need to sell that new Primaris dreadnought thing. They actually might nerf it further like they did with Whirlwind by splitting its load out. Oh wait they already did it with dreadnoughts by removing twin autocannon and such. CML is way overcosted at 50 points. 2 str8 shots at d6 dmg at ap-2 is worth 50 points? yes lets make 2 wound terminator worth almost 100 points.

 

The removal of weapons options that GW does not make plastic for is one of the most idiotic things they have done.

[BitsHammer]

I thought The Razorback was from a STC ...

The original HB version is, but all the other guns that the Space Marines swapped in later were not as far as I know.

[Rogue]

Didn’t the original version have the lascannon/twin-plasma set-up?

[Lord_Caerolion]

 

 

What you mean having your Techmarines actually improve upon an established STC?

This is Tech Heresy!

So no Land Raider Crusaders or Reedeemers for you, no Razorbacks (they're based on the idea of the Immolator, but basically a Tarantula gun mounted on a Rhino and then that was mucked with so you could have multiple other choices outside of just Heavy Bolters), no MkV armour (which was mixed from MkII-IV armour, and had extra armor basically bolted on), ect, ect.

 

The Marines are basically the posterboys of tech heresy (just behind the Dark Mechnicus and every Xenos tech thing ever).

 

 

The LR Crusader and Redeemer STC were found though as was the Razorback, even the Baal Predator has an STC although the Blood Angels won't give it to Mars. I don't count Mk V as tech-heresy as to go by that route Mk III is too, just up armoured Mk II.

 

I believe that we have Alan Bligh to thank for the Contemptor's Cyclone Missile Launcher, but to wish for a Better Missile Launcher for the Dreadnought just will never happen.

 

Its been that way too long.

 

Its like trying to get the Autocannon to be given a proper amount of stopping power - the Autocannon is what Main Battle Tanks use as their main gun and in 40K its Str 7?

 

 

The Crusader was a field-modification, not STC. MkV as well was basically an official stamp of approval given to what was essentially a collection of jury-rigged armour made from a hodge-podge of whatever was available, rather than specifically designed.

 

We can at least hope that eventually they'll give us a Dreadnought Missile Launcher, just like how we have the Predator Autocannon now.

[KhorneHunter57x]

For some time, the Typhoon, Cyclone, and Dreadnought MLs all fired one shot - IIRC, it was 5th Edition's C:SM that gave the Speeder and Termie launchers two shots.

I'm a little surprised that the Dreadnought version has been the way it is for so long, especially after they gave the Predator's autocannon its own fancy profile in 8th.
 

*snip* stuff about the Land Raider Crusader */snip*

The Land Raider Crusader is implied to have been a recovered STC.

From pg. 43 of the venerable Codex: Black Templars:
"...it was not until the discovery of ancient techno-arcana in the long-forgotten depths of a captured hive that the tide of battle was to turn. Amidst the tattered scrolls and flickering holo-schematics, Marine Artificer Simagus discovered the means to develop one of the most feared battle tanks in the Imperium, the Land Raider Crusader."

It certainly wasn't just some Templar deciding that he liked bolters, frag launchers, and transport capacity better than lascannons.

[CCE1981]

Suggested fixes for the problematic weapons:

 

1) Double Twin autocannons back in codex at ~30 pts each

2) Heavy Plasma Cannon - make it base damage 2 or d6 shots (Redemptor Macro Plasma Cannon get both) ~27 pts

3) Heavy Multi-melta - 36” range, 2 shot, d6+2 damage, or combination of the above ~32 pts

4) Heavy Missile Launcher - 2 shots ~40pts, Cyclone Missile Launcher with its shorter range ~ 33 pts

Edited January 22, 2018 by CCE1981

[BitsHammer]

5th Edition Marine Codex said the Crusader was "developed" by the Black Templars. For all we know the STC information he found was how to build the Hurricane Bolters and nothing else (really should have put some on their Predators too. Autocannon and Hurricane Bolter Sponsons? Now THAT is a Dakka Pred).

 

I went back to the 5th edition Codex last night because I was trying to figure out where I got the idea of the Razorback being a field mod, but no such luck. MkI was Las/Plas (which despite the designation never saw a true kit as far as I can recall) and it was a real STC, just one that wasn't adopted universally by all chapters.

 

With Guilliman's reorganization of the codex to permit 5 man units though I could see the Razorback potentially replacing the Rhino in most chapters.

[Race Bannon]

You know ...

 

I think the discussion not involving the OPs points probably needs a new thread.  Besides, it'll much cooler to see a thread titled something like, "Where did the Crusader come from?" or "Razorback Origins and Development" of "Dreadnought missile launcher". 

 

Does that make sense?

[BitsHammer]

Sorry for dragging the topic off topic, I was trying to make a point that the Marines have a history of mucking with things as needed, so changing the settings from "1" to "2" missiles per shot wouldn't be out of the question honestly.

 

Dreadnought Missiles have long suffered the problem of not quite meeting the level of impact that their carrier is costed for. It's a common problem, in my opinion at least, for high point base models, to have low output weapons. Durability alone shouldn't be the only thing we get out of such a high points cost, especially when some of the weapons are more expensive than infantry versions for the exact same weapon.

[Claws and Effect]

Suggested fixes for the problematic weapons:

 

1) Double Twin autocannons back in codex at ~30 pts each

2) Heavy Plasma Cannon - make it base damage 2 or d6 shots (Redemptor Macro Plasma Cannon get both) ~27 pts

3) Heavy Multi-melta - 36” range, 2 shot, d6+2 damage, or combination of the above ~32 pts

4) Heavy Missile Launcher - 2 shots ~40pts, Cyclone Missile Launcher with its shorter range ~ 33 pts

Double twin autocannon is still a legal option via the Index. The only reason it isn't in the codex is because it has never been an option included in the box.

 

But it's still an option because Forgeworld sells twin autocannon arms and they are owned by GW. It would likely have gone away if the only way to get it was 3rd party bits.

[Captain Idaho]

I'd love the Dreadnought missile Launcher to have a modest points increase and get a salvo special rule. Like D3 missiles at shorter range.

 

Alas it's unlikely a priority in the Codex but it would be cool to bring the Dreadnought weapons back to the old 2nd edition superior versions.

 

Back then a Multi Melta could fire as a Heavy flamer, twin Lascannons could modify their hit locations and Plasma Cannons never had to recharge if the Dreadnought remained stationary.

 

Whilst not directly applicable it would be cool to see some perks for the Dreadnought versions of weapons. Multi Melta can still fire as a Heavy flamer, Twin Lascannons could get a +1 to the Damage roll, Missile Launchers 2 shots, Assault Cannons don't receive a minus to hit if moving.

 

Stuff to make a basic Dreadnought/other weapons worthwhile over a Lascannon/Missile Launcher Venerable. I know I'd save points if I could take a Dreadnought with an assault cannon that didn't receive a minus to hit when actually moving etc, or a Multi Melta that could be a Heavy flamer if I chose so people actually bothered with it.