Missile launchers, worth their weight? - Warhammer 40K Fantasy
 

Welcome to Librarium Online!

Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!

Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!


Register Now!

User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29
  1. #1
    Member sonu236's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    142
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    8 (x1)

    Missile launchers, worth their weight?

    hey guys, i've been modeling my guardsman with missile launchers (to get away from the massive bases) and now i'm getting some doubts.

    sure they look cool running around with tread fethers and all that but how would they perform on the table? i tend to see people either limiting the amount of heavy weapons in their squads or using autocannons instead.

    will someone shed some light?

    "In the kingdom of the blind, the one eyed man is king"
    "Pray to the emperor, but keep rowing to the shore!"

  2. Remove Advertisements
    Librarium-Online.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Member Technique13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Age
    27
    Posts
    81
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputation
    34 (x1)

    they used to be really bad but now i dont mine running some misile launchers given the bring it down order or the fact that your command squads get a higher ballistic skill.

    But yeah generally - autocannons best for av 10-12, otherwise you want a lascannon, missile launchers can only glace av 14 which is really annoying and means that your going to have a longshot in taking down your target. I dont think the missile launchers versatility makes up for its inaccuracy and lack of strength

  4. #3
    Hellhounds are good tanks Dakka,Dakka,Dakka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    733
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputation
    41 (x2)

    the missile launcher fills the same role as a autocannon or a mortar, personally i prefer it against av 12, and against infantry, a str 4 blast is better than 2 shots with bs 3
    Hellhounds are good tanks

    Satan - "**** you Kage! And **** you Jables! I'll get you Tenacious DDDDdddddddeeeeee!!!!!!"

  5. #4
    A 51st Century Man Marrius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Indiana State University (NOT IU)
    Age
    26
    Posts
    1,806
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    105 (x5)

    Frankly, I think whatever anyone tells you will be useless crap to you. Many will say to go with the autocannons but a few will say that the missile launcher is worth their weight. Honestly, people could argue about the missile launcher and the other heavy weapons for a long time which does get annoying. If you want my opinion (which you dont have to take at all) you should first try playing a few games and switch between each of the heavy weapons and see which one complements your army the most.

  6. #5
    Member YounGunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    611
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputation
    71 (x2)

    Missile launchers FTW

  7. #6
    Son of LO kevin vanrooyen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,884
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    452 (x8)

    Personally I like missile launchers, they have marine killing AP, marine instant killing strength, they can throw around frag shots to damage vehicles. Against anything with an armour of 12+ I'd rather use a few krak missiles than twice as many autocannon shots.
    IG Best Gen 1st overall of 10 DE 4th overall of 6
    Eldar 3rd Overall/Best General of 26--2nd Overall/Best General of 7--1st Overall/Best General of 11

  8. #7
    Member SimSnow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Age
    34
    Posts
    177
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    22 (x1)

    I like 'em both. If you wanted to get down to it, I'd say that the Autocannon's ability to reliably destroy enemy transports outweighs the Missile launcher's ability to possibly glance AV 14.
    Formerly known as SimulatedSnowman

  9. #8
    Torn ACL FTL ==Me=='s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Age
    28
    Posts
    4,404
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    431 (x8)

    Missile Launchers FTL

    Autocannons perform better against AV12 and below and lascannons/melta perform better against AV13 and up and MCs.
    Check out ==My== blog: www.bnhblog.blogspot.com

  10. #9
    Senior Member Darguth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    582
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputation
    60 (x2)

    Quote Originally Posted by ==Me== View Post
    Missile Launchers FTL

    Autocannons perform better against AV12 and below and lascannons/melta perform better against AV13 and up and MCs.
    True, I suppose if you only take vehicles and MCs into account. MLs have the same average kill-per-point ratio against MEQ as ACs do (~0.056 kills per point), though the rate of killing is superior which is certainly advantageous. They can do similarly well against weaker infantry and swarms due to the frag. Also, many MCs can only get to T6 with a 3+ save, such as greater demons/demon princes etc. or un-upgraded carapace Tyranids. Unless they get to T7 or a 2+ save the ML is more cost effective than a LC.

    More importantly is if you roll up against Necrons or a fair number of T4 FNP units with any frequency. MLs will deny them their bonus saving rolls and have excellent killing power against such units. Against any marine army, except perhaps Dark Angels, MLs are the clear victor in efficiency due to their effectiveness across the board on nearly any infantry unit or non-LR vehicle your opponent can field. Even when they perform similarly point-for-point with ACs the ML often kills faster, which is very important because it mitigates your own losses.

  11. #10
    Member YounGunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    611
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputation
    71 (x2)

    Quote Originally Posted by Darguth View Post
    True,
    Darguth and I are on the same page. You have to look at the big picture. Autocannons are great too but missile launchers are certainly "worth their weight." I also love the models so I am partial to them.

    *edit a melta/missile launcher comparison is irrelevant. There is nothing stopping you from taking both. I don't think they are a great combination, one being specialized and another flexible, but you are still comparing a heavy to a special.
    Last edited by YounGunner; July 29th, 2009 at 15:43.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts