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!
Because it does not have a solid niche to fill. Other weapons do the job better.
I WANNA GET STUCK IN WIT DA BOYZ
What we competitive players don't like about them is that they're horribly overcosted as an anti-tank weapon. They're roughly 30% less effective at killing light armor than an autocannon. Yet they're 50% more expensive points-wise.
Here's the stats:
the back 40k: What Are The Odds?
Their cost really needs to drop by 5-10 points to be worth taking.
Come visit my blog at: www.warstrike.org
There are a couple of reasons, but I think the foremost is that the most a missle launcher can pull off is a single S 8 hit. If you're entrusting that one-hit wonder to BS 3, you're going to find yourself sorely disappointed. If it's a vehicle that can be hurt significantly by that, you'll get a more certain result out of two S7 shots, making shooting with BS 3 statistically reliable. If you're playing against something that you'll be using lots of single-shot, high strength weapons against, it's better to go whole-hog and get a lascannon for S9. The only thing the missle launcher affords you is versatility; you can use it as anti-armor or anti-infantry. but in exchange for that versatility, it becomes less effective at either role than the weapons specifically designed for them (Heavy Bolter and Lascannon, respectively).
However, I found that missle launchers may be a perfect fit against the new tyranid list, where that versatility actually comes in handy for shooting both hordes and monstrous creatures. You only need S8 to get a 2+ to wound, and most MC's only have a 3+ save, so a lascannon is overkill. So I would say the missle launcher has only a very narrow application; against most other armies there are better options.
I agree with the above post. I've originally went with missile launchers, but after I started using autocannons I completely gave up on missiles. The only reason I'm starting to consider missiles are the new Tyranids as most of the MCs only have a 3+ save and S8 wounds most on a 2+.
But for an all-comers list? Go with the choice that does the most for the lowest cost: autocannons
I've found the same thing here, but with my Marines. Most 'Nid MC's a Toughness 6 and now have a 3+ save at best so Mass Krak Missile Fire can seriously slay these big boys, more effectivly that Autocannons.
If you're fighting Nids go with M-Launchers. Anything else? Go with Autocannons.
I actually quite like Missile Launchers. While I'm well aware that Meltaguns are better at anti-armour and Autocannons are better anti-infantry, I do quite like the versatility of a Missile Launcher. My two most fought armies are Tyranids and Space Marines. Both have a good number of T4 3+ units and the ML is great for beating down multi-wounds and scoring an instant death.
A nice combination is ML/GL, so you can drop two high strength shots or two small blasts. It's not optimal, but I like it. And isn't that the point?