Tactica Imperial Guard

[SanguinaryDan]

Don't forget Demolitions Vets. They can handle any armor with ease and their higher BS makes them deadly with Melta Guns.

Even Dreadnoughts and Land Raiders are afraid of them. After all, 10 guys with a Demo Charge, Melta Bombs and special weapons for less than the cost of an un-upgraded Dreadnought is bloody scary. Heck you get 70 points of explosives for less than half price! By itself that's a pretty sweet deal.

I'm building one right now with a Plasma Pistol, Melta Gun and 2x Grenade Launchers. I plan on dropping them off from a Valkyrie, but they should still be pretty effective on foot.

[Ariobarzanes]

But, what about missile launchers???

We have been centered these days, in posting our thoughts about: horde guard, foot guard and the prudent and efficient use of HWS and SWS and now, that we aproach the themes of AT I see (read?) in all the imput a lack of mention to our ATGMs/RPG/bazookas

is their only shot an isue that, can not be mitigated by orders of ths CCS?
their imposiblity to crack AV 14 makes them undesirable?
their ability to punish MEQ and GEQ to bland?? (krak and frag shot)
too expensive?? too generalist?? Too 4th edition nato themed armies??
Too expensive??

It Cthulu to be blamed??

post scriptum
In order o bring some civilised argument and their proofs (besides my doubst here presented) I woul be using 18 in 20 games 12 in HWS 6 on Inf plats.

[Volandum]

Too expensive. In other lists they're more efficient anti-mech than Lascannon. Not so in the Guard, where Autocannon and Lascannon outdo them and are cheaper.

[ColShaw]

I personally like Missile Launchers, Autocannons, and Lascannons all.

Volandum, Lascannons are not cheaper than Missile Launchers.

My lists don't focus on one single heavy weapon. I spread out the love among the above three. Thus, at 2000 points, I field 6 Lascannon, 12 Autocannon, and 8 Missile Launchers (and 3 Mortars, but they don't enter into this equation). I find the Autocannon to be the best all-round weapon, the Lascannon is essential for enemy heavy armor, and the Missile Launcher is much more effective than the AC against Armor 13, has at least a hope of suppressing Armor 14 (though that's a desperation move), and has a dual-purpose anti-horde use. Frag Missiles and Frag Grenades from Grenade Launchers can also lay down a LOT of templates.

[Volandum]

I know Lascannon are not cheaper than Missile Launchers. They are cheaper per penetrate on AV12 and equal on AV11, so I don't find that missiles have a niche.

[ColShaw]

I agree that versus mechanized enemies, Lascannons are more effective. However, they're also basically worthless versus infantry, and MLs are cheaper and therefore more cost-effective against MEQ infantry, or anything where a blast template is more useful.

[Volandum]

I add grenade launchers or flamers for this purpose in large numbers. Lascannon have a very specific role and I need them. Once I have lascannon I do not need S8 shots, so I settle for S7 (which also kills infantry to some extent).

[Ariobarzanes]

@Volandum: So, your enviromet of gaming shuns the missile launcher?? because lascanon is 5+ more expensive than the misile launcher and the grenade launcher together. I do understand that a "sure" AV penetration must be seeked but, what about versatility??

[Lord Cook]

@Volandum: So, your enviromet of gaming shuns the missile launcher?? because lascanon is 5+ more expensive than the misile launcher and the grenade launcher together. I do understand that a "sure" AV penetration must be seeked but, what about versatility??

Remember there are plenty of high value models where the missile launcher is useless and the lascannon invaluable. Obliterators, Broadsides, and Terminators for example. Versatility is about more than just tanks or infantry hordes.

[Rhaivaen]

But missile Launchers do have rule of cool imo, Panzerschreck is just to cool not to take when you build a theme ,

I know, its not efficient often, lol.

[jamesgurney100]

@Volandum: So, your enviromet of gaming shuns the missile launcher?? because lascanon is 5+ more expensive than the misile launcher and the grenade launcher together. I do understand that a "sure" AV penetration must be seeked but, what about versatility??

Vendetta!!!

[Ariobarzanes]

Vendetta!!!

Riposta!!!

now, would you care to clarify why a vendetta?

If I have been offensive, I gladly apologise.

[elite_dannux]

For 25 more points (compared to HWS Lascannons) you get 3 TL lascannons, transport, skimmer, scout, deepstrike.

Thats a vendetta.

[Crazy Ivan]

OK, that has to be the most hilarious GW-induced language confusion I've seen on this site...


(Admittedly, it's a rather specific category.)

[Volandum]

Lascannon is same price as missile + grenade launcher, no? What did you mean by 5+?

[laudarkul]

Remember there are plenty of high value models where the missile launcher is useless and the lascannon invaluable. Obliterators, Broadsides, and Terminators for example. Versatility is about more than just tanks or infantry hordes.

I'm totally in. I would add also the MC which hurt from a TL LC HWS shots.
Ok Vendetta seems more perfect but can also be more easily destroyed.

[Asymmetric]

I'm totally in. I would add also the MC which hurt from a TL LC HWS shots.
Ok Vendetta seems more perfect but can also be more easily destroyed.

Compared to what else with lascannons, HWT's? Sentinels? An AV12/12/10 fast flying skimmer with 48" range that can outflank or deepstrike is hardly easy to destroy.

The vendetta's only real handicap is it can be hard to keep it out of line of sight due to it's height and size.

[Okuto]

question: Would you guys have a problem if I feielded a mortar as the following:
the mortar itself and loader on termi base and carrier on second infantry base.

I just find that it makes the mortars fit better in terrain but just wanted other people
s thoughts, I've always done it with mixed results, some people call it beardy and some people have no probs with it at all

[freddieyu]

question: Would you guys have a problem if I feielded a mortar as the following:
the mortar itself and loader on termi base and carrier on second infantry base.

I just find that it makes the mortars fit better in terrain but just wanted other people
s thoughts, I've always done it with mixed results, some people call it beardy and some people have no probs with it at all

As in fielded as per the previous edition???

Actually for friendly games no problem for me..if I was the TO for a tourney it would also be OK as long as they are right beside each other...

To be honest it's not difficult to make a 60 mm base for the team..looks better too as that size of a base makes for a good mini diorama...

[Bunnahabhain]

As in fielded as per the previous edition???

Actually for friendly games no problem for me..if I was the TO for a tourney it would also be OK as long as they are right beside each other...

To be honest it's not difficult to make a 60 mm base for the team..looks better too as that size of a base makes for a good mini diorama...

Unless you're being cheap...

60mm base, build up with modelling putty sandbags, use some camo cloth over the top, poke a bit of plasti-card tubing out through a slit in the camo and you have yourself a mortar team..... 0 models used.

Heavy weapon base sizes- anything that looks sensible normally works fine. If you wish to idiot proof yourself, have a number of 60mm circles with you (paper, plasticard, etc) you can put under bases of your teams, for that 1 in 100 rules lawyer nit...