Do infantry krak missiles/grenades deserve a buff?

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Watched a video from a channel im not familiar with, but they were discussing the short falls of the missile launcher, primarily from the SM perspective, and he mentioned how the krak missile is just a worse lascannon, and that got me thinking.

 

how could you make it better, without requiring a major pts increase to balance it, but give it some sort of advantage over a lascannon?

 

my answer, more reliable damage. D6+1, so any unsaved wounds kill a standard SM, but on average will also kill a termie or gravis marine with a single unsaved wound. It’s nothing crazy, may not even justify a pt increase at all, but does give a very solid reason to take the ML or a GL.

 

it wouldn’t be better at damaging medium or heavy armor, but when the damage happens it’s more damage, and makes it a better choice against most medium/heavy infantry options.

[Jolemai]

Originally, the whole point of a missile launcher was versatility due to a variety of different ammunition types. From 3rd edition onwards, there's still been 2-3 types available (krak/frag/flakk). The versatility in 10th remains and that is its strength over a lascannon, the only difference is a lack of balance given every option is free.

[gaurdian31]

The advantage of a missile launcher is it can fire both krak and frag missiles. You get versatility out of it so you can choose to do either anti-infantry or anti-tank. A lascannon is anti-tank. I would like it to be a little less, swingy, but a lascannon should be better at killing single infantry targets and tanks than the krak missile.

[TheArtilleryman]

3 minutes ago, Jolemai said:

Originally, the whole point of a missile launcher was versatility due to a variety of different ammunition types. From 3rd edition onwards, there's still been 2-3 types available (krak/frag/flakk). The versatility in 10th remains and that is its strength over a lascannon, the only difference is a lack of balance given every option is free.

This. I’ve taken missile launchers and grenade launchers for all my guard infantry squads because of exactly this. The missile launcher is not as good for anti-tank as a lascannon because you have the option of the different ammunition to give it utility in different situations. If it was made stronger then it would become unbalanced. 
 

Also, they’ve already had a buff against infantry this edition as the krak grenades and missiles are now S9. Slight buff for the missile from S8-9 but a massive jump for the grenade launchers from S6-9.

Edited February 19 by TheArtilleryman

[TheArtilleryman]

Also, slightly off-topic but ever since I started out in 40K I’ve found the lascannon to be a bit of an anomaly.

Most heavy guns are very similar or slightly upgraded versions of their pistol/rifle equivalents. A heavy bolter is just a bit stronger than a bolter with longer range. A multi-melta is like a melta but a bit longer range. A plasma cannon is the same profile as a plasma pistol or gun but with more hits and longer range. Missile launchers and grenade launchers also very similar. Same with other races’ guns like shuriken or rail weaponry.
 

However a laspistol/lasgun is a peashooter while a lascannon is a turbocharged, nuke-a-tank, most-powerful-man-portable-thing-in-the-game S12 wipeout cannon. 

 

Edited February 19 by TheArtilleryman

[Trokair]

1 hour ago, TheArtilleryman said:

Also, slightly off-topic but ever since I started out in 40K I’ve found the lascannon to be a bit of an anomaly.

Most heavy guns are very similar or slightly upgraded versions of their pistol/rifle equivalents. A heavy bolter is just a bit stronger than a bolter with longer range. A multi-melta is like a melta but a bit longer range. A plasma cannon is the same profile as a plasma pistol or gun but with more hits and longer range. Missile launchers and grenade launchers also very similar. Same with other races’ guns like shuriken or rail weaponry.
 

However a laspistol/lasgun is a peashooter while a lascannon is a turbocharged, nuke-a-tank, most-powerful-man-portable-thing-in-the-game S12 wipeout cannon. 

 

That impression may in part be because the Lascannon is not actually the heavy lasgun the way the heavy bolter is a ‘heavy’ bolter or heavy flamer is the next tier up from the flamer

 

The Multilaser is the heavy version of a lasgun.

 

The Lascannon is one step up from that, it just happens to be conveniently small and hand able to just  about count as a heavy weapon in the weight classes of say a plasma cannon or a heavy bolter.

 

The Lascannon is to the lasgun what the flamestorm cannon is to the flamer or the Vulcan Mega Bolter* is to the bolter. Same principle but much large.

 

 

*Ok the Vulcan might be four steps up from the bolter and not three as the other examples, so perhaps Psycannon or a avenger bolt cannon or such.

[TheArtilleryman]

9 minutes ago, Trokair said:

 

That impression may in part be because the Lascannon is not actually the heavy lasgun the way the heavy bolter is a ‘heavy’ bolter or heavy flamer is the next tier up from the flamer

 

The Multilaser is the heavy version of a lasgun.

 

The Lascannon is one step up from that, it just happens to be conveniently small and hand able to just  about count as a heavy weapon in the weight classes of say a plasma cannon or a heavy bolter.

 

The Lascannon is to the lasgun what the flamestorm cannon is to the flamer or the Vulcan Mega Bolter* is to the bolter. Same principle but much large.

 

 

*Ok the Vulcan might be four steps up from the bolter and not three as the other examples, so perhaps Psycannon or a avenger bolt cannon or such.

See the flamestorm cannon to the flamer isn’t even close to the orders of magnitude that there is between lasgun and lascannon. And yeah, the Vulcan is on the same level as a turbo laser destroyer or something - way bigger than a lascannon. Psycannon is a different weapon, like related to a bolter but in a different branch of the tree.

 

Multi-laser is a midway step I hadn’t thought of so I’ll give you that, but it has to be mounted in the turret of a tank. The lascannon is still literally a big lasgun - in design it is almost identical. 

Edited February 19 by TheArtilleryman

[roryokane]

5 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

Watched a video from a channel im not familiar with, but they were discussing the short falls of the missile launcher, primarily from the SM perspective, and he mentioned how the krak missile is just a worse lascannon, and that got me thinking.

 

how could you make it better, without requiring a major pts increase to balance it, but give it some sort of advantage over a lascannon?

 

my answer, more reliable damage. D6+1, so any unsaved wounds kill a standard SM, but on average will also kill a termie or gravis marine with a single unsaved wound. It’s nothing crazy, may not even justify a pt increase at all, but does give a very solid reason to take the ML or a GL.

 

it wouldn’t be better at damaging medium or heavy armor, but when the damage happens it’s more damage, and makes it a better choice against most medium/heavy infantry options.

Time was when Instant Death was a thing (hit by a weapon double your toughness? bye-bye!), and marines were all toughness 4, a Krak Missile (S8, AP3) was just as good at killing Marines as a lascannon (S9 AP2)- only difference was that Terminators and Artificer armour would get you a save against Krak missiles, but not a lascannon (better hope you had an invulnerable!), so they were basically just as good at killing MEQs. Lascannons had an edge against vehicles (and that was before AP2 got you a bonus on the damage chart),  and the missile launcher had Frag (+/- Flakk in some later editions) to add flexibility. but both would simply BLAT a marine without some kind of invul with no trouble, Plus they were costed differently. So there was a time when the differences *made sense*.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

5 hours ago, TheArtilleryman said:

See the flamestorm cannon to the flamer isn’t even close to the orders of magnitude that there is between lasgun and lascannon. And yeah, the Vulcan is on the same level as a turbo laser destroyer or something - way bigger than a lascannon. Psycannon is a different weapon, like related to a bolter but in a different branch of the tree.

 

Multi-laser is a midway step I hadn’t thought of so I’ll give you that, but it has to be mounted in the turret of a tank. The lascannon is still literally a big lasgun - in design it is almost identical. 

The multilaser doesn’t have to be mounted on a vehicle any more than the lascannon, GW just haven’t given us a non-vehicle version.

[Noserenda]

The Lasgun is the bolt action rifle to the lascannons pak40, same basic technology, just a lot bigger!

Its worth mentioning that as originally envisioned waaaaaay back, a lot of the shoulder mounted heavy weapons we have now were tank weapons that space marines/orks carried on their shoulders because they were badass but the weedier types like humans or Eldar ran as crewed support guns. 

Theyve just been adding stuff for near 40 years :D 

[LSM]

Las-weapons could just have exponential returns, depending on the power supplied.

 

Imperial Navy Lances are las-based, right? 

[Helias_Tancred]

No. These are my reasons.

 

1. Missiles have the advantage of being able to be anti-armor/anti-monster or anti-infantry. 

 

2. The various primaris missile launcher systems are, IMO, at a good place being S10 for one and S5 for the other. "Jack of all trades but master of none." 

 

[Evil Eye]

Yeah, missile launchers' strength is their versatility. One weapon slot gives you anti-infantry and anti-tank capability, balanced out by not excelling at either. Obviously, in editions prior to the baffling decision to remove wargear costs this was a lot more beneficial, but anyway.

[AutumnEffect]

15 hours ago, TheArtilleryman said:

See the flamestorm cannon to the flamer isn’t even close to the orders of magnitude that there is between lasgun and lascannon. And yeah, the Vulcan is on the same level as a turbo laser destroyer or something - way bigger than a lascannon. Psycannon is a different weapon, like related to a bolter but in a different branch of the tree.

 

Multi-laser is a midway step I hadn’t thought of so I’ll give you that, but it has to be mounted in the turret of a tank. The lascannon is still literally a big lasgun - in design it is almost identical. 

In various 40k novels, Lasguns can be equipped with 'Hot-Shot' power cells which use an entire charge pack to power a single shot.
These are typically used by LongLas snipers and the effect on a target is significant. The entire charge pack needs to be ejected and another entered after that single shot though.
Larkin from Gaunts Ghosts uses them a lot.

This is your proto-lascannon. Lasguns in lore and the RPG's are extremely flexible weapons, with a variety of power settings, charge packs and firing modes, to say nothing of variations across production lines. You can even set them low enough that it does, literally, become a flashlight. This is used for training in Guns of Tannith.

A physical missing link between lasgun and lascannon would be the las fusil used by Space Marine Eliminators.

Edited February 20 by AutumnEffect

[AutumnEffect]

My turn for an off topic take, but multi-lasers should really be a lot more prevalent in the Imperial Guard and should really take the place of the Heavy Bolter in most, if not all situations.

From a lore perspective, I imagine it would be very likely that a multi-laser could use the same large charge packs that infantry portable lascannons use which would obviously ease logistics significantly. They would also probably use the same charging stations. 
The basics of maintaining and servicing a multi-laser would probably be similar to that of maintaining other weapons in the las family so that's less time and energy spent training on a weapon the fundamentals of which aren't really applicable to anything else in the arsenal.
Finally, the charge packs would probably take up far less space in a vehicle than the corresponding amount of shells for a heavy bolter, and could possibly even be powered by the vehicle's engine itself.

From a modeling perspective, I think it would add something to the Imperial Guard. Separate them from the more specialist branches of the Imperium and really define them as 'the Las' faction.

Anyway, that's my soapbox.

[Xenith]

 

22 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

Watched a video from a channel im not familiar with, but they were discussing the short falls of the missile launcher, primarily from the SM perspective, and he mentioned how the krak missile is just a worse lascannon,

 

I mean, this just shows the ignorance of the youtuber?

 

Different weapons, different roles, different rules. When it comes to shooting a horde of 20 gaunts, is a lascannon a worse missile launcher?

 

With that logic, a bolter is a worse lascannon, a Guardsman is a worse marine, a marine is a worse terminator? Is a ferrari sportscar a better tractor than their tractors, because they go faster? The list goes on. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

1 hour ago, Xenith said:

 

 

I mean, this just shows the ignorance of the youtuber?

 

Different weapons, different roles, different rules. When it comes to shooting a horde of 20 gaunts, is a lascannon a worse missile launcher?

 

With that logic, a bolter is a worse lascannon, a Guardsman is a worse marine, a marine is a worse terminator? Is a ferrari sportscar a better tractor than their tractors, because they go faster? The list goes on. 

You’re strawmanning the argument now.

 

you cannot compare weapons that fill different roles. 
krak missile and lascannon fill the same role, and as such have a similar statline, with the big difference being the S.

[gaurdian31]

14 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

You’re strawmanning the argument now.

 

you cannot compare weapons that fill different roles. 
krak missile and lascannon fill the same role, and as such have a similar statline, with the big difference being the S.

The thing is you are only taking one part of the missile launcher into account. That's like saying frag missiles and plasma cannons fill the same role with the difference being the S. The reason krak missiles are what they are and not as strong as a lascannon is that they can also be fired as frag missiles. What you should be comparing are missile launchers and lascannons as then you are looking a the whole weapon profile.

[Karhedron]

I get that a missile launcher is a compromise weapon and it never going to be as good vs tanks as a lascannon or as good vs hordes as an assault cannon.

 

However the problem at the moment is that it is so weak as to be not worth taking at all. You are always better with a lascannon embedded in a squad with anti-infantry guns. If you kept the S and AP of the missiles the same but made the number of attacks 3+D3 for Frag and the damage 3+D3 for Krak then it is still weaker on average than a missile launcher but at least now it is worth considering.

 

GW seem to overprice a lot of multi-role weapons and units. I understand the value of flexibility but the fact you cannot usually leverage the different capabilities at the same time naturally weakens them.

[Helias_Tancred]

Is this really about the firstborn marine missile launcher being underpowered? As in a devastator squad, tactical squad, or a black templar crusader squad?

 

I got news for ya, this is ALL of their last jog around the block! They're gone next edition. If I were GW I'd be like whatever, I have more important rules issues t work on. 

[gaurdian31]

21 minutes ago, Helias_Tancred said:

Is this really about the firstborn marine missile launcher being underpowered? As in a devastator squad, tactical squad, or a black templar crusader squad?

 

I got news for ya, this is ALL of their last jog around the block! They're gone next edition. If I were GW I'd be like whatever, I have more important rules issues t work on. 

Chaos Marines say hello, we aren't going anywhere and we are keeping our missile launchers.

[TheArtilleryman]

1 hour ago, gaurdian31 said:

Chaos Marines say hello, we aren't going anywhere and we are keeping our missile launchers.

As do guardsmen :)

[Helias_Tancred]

3 hours ago, gaurdian31 said:

Chaos Marines say hello, we aren't going anywhere and we are keeping our missile launchers.

 

There were costs to be paid when you turned traitor! ;)

[The Unseen]

Yeah, the problem is that the versatility you're supposedly awarded isn't actually worth anything, because Frag Missiles haven't been relevant since like 5th edition. A marine, Guard, or Chaos army does not need more Str4 AP0 shooting, but they all need good AT at range. So you shoot Krak missiles 99% of the time, and they are just worse lascannons, ESPECIALLY when all the weapons cost the same. 

[AutumnEffect]

There would also be a use case if missile launchers were a cheap weapon system compared to their more specialized competition. It would make some sense too as (at least for the Imperial Guard) they were given to militia and regiments that appreciated it being technologically unadvanced. After all we've been using some variant of 'tube that shoots projectile' for about a thousand years already.

But with all weapons being equal in cost...