# Why Missile Launchers are useless (at least for Chaos)



## Truthteller (Sep 2, 2009)

If you're a CSM player you have a choice of 3 heavy weapons, all with 48" range, that can be taken for your Havocs (and larger CSM squads);Lascannons, Missile Launchers, and Autocannons. The latter both come in at 35 points (including bearer) and the Lascannon at 50. So in the spirit of curiosity I thought I'd look at which was the most cost effective against which armour. (I assume the primary role for heavy weapons is taking out armour)

I took a fairly crude approach in that I ignored glancing hits. I won't bore you with the logic (unless you ask:grin but I think it's reasonable.

So at AV14 the Las is tops as it's the only one that penetrates
At AV13 - The Las again comes out top. It penetrates twice as often as the ML but costs only 50% more making it 33% more efficient.
At AV12 - The Las just sneaks it. 2 Lascannons shooting have a 67% chance of scoring a penetrating hit. 3 Missile Launchers has the same chance, but the 3 MLs cost 5 points more than the 2 Lascannons. Interestingly the Autocannon is on a par with the ML; the higher rate of fire compensating for the lower strength. 
At AV11 and below the AC takes over. It scores 33% more penetrating hits than a ML. 

So why would I take MLs in my Havoc squads? I think many people take them because of their perceived flexibility - they can be used effectively against infantry. The Frag round can in theory hurt hordes and the krak round is good v heavily armoured opponents. However that logic isn't overwhelming when you compare them with ACs. Frag rounds scatter and even when they hit are unlikely to get more than a couple under the template. Str4 isn't that high when you're dealing with Orks or Stealers., and AP6 means anything with real armour has a save. ACs OTOH are better at converting hits to kills because of their Str and AP4. The only time the ML really shines is shooting down guys with a 3+ armour save with Krak missiles. Granted there are quite a few of these boys around, but trying to take them out with Krak seems a bit wasteful.

Anyone want to defend the ML?

The bizarre thing is that the Codex Marines have Autocannons but only use them on vehicles. Proof, if it were needed, that the Emperor's rule is causing a diminution in human intelligence:shok:.

TT


----------



## Devinstater (Dec 9, 2008)

Truthteller said:


> The bizarre thing is that the Codex Marines have Autocannons but only use them on vehicles. Proof, if it were needed, that the Emperor's rule is causing a diminution in human intelligence:shok:.
> 
> TT


We will not tolerate such heresy here. Oh wait...


----------



## ItsPug (Apr 5, 2009)

Its not the Emperor, its tha fact that all the mareenz are thick as pig s**t from the steroids they munch, case in point...Guard still use autocannons. (and as a Chaos Marine player you know guardsmen have brains...its that sticky stuff your berzerkers clean off their chainaxes :laugh

All joking aside, I'd take an autocannon over a missile launcher even if they were the same price.


----------



## Bushido (Sep 22, 2009)

> I assume the primary role for heavy weapons is taking out armour


Usually I would have to agree with you but not when considering the missile launcher I dont equip it in order to pop tanks if I wanted to do that I would take lascannons or meltas on a squad of chosen. However missile launchers are the bane of marines and tau crisis suits.

Against a crisis suit a missile launcher ignores their armour and causes instant death making their advantage of 2 wounds useless, or another example is killing off a beefy marine captain with a single shot agian ignoring armour and number of wounds.

As for the frag missiles... a total waste of time in my opinion if you want to get rid of hordes then give some flammers to terminators or something. 

So again just to repaeat what I said sure when assuming that heavy weapons are used only for anti tank then missile launcher is the last thing I would go for, but when taking out some MEQs there is nothing better. An autocannon although more shots it still does not cause instant death or ignore the armour saves of MEQ and although a lascannon achieves the same results it does cost more (but being able to ignore 2+ saves is also nice)

But thanks Truthteller you have highlighted something that I havent really understood and that is WHY THE HELL WOULD YOU USE MISSILE LUNCHERS AGAINST TANKS:threaten:


----------



## Crimzzen (Jul 9, 2008)

Lascannons are definitely better at taking out armour vs. anything else, its obvious that higher str results in more pens, etc etc.

I think you miss a lot in ruling out glances though. IMO, I am still very happy when I glance a vehicle, because at the very least, that unit is now not firing or moving, or both. This lends strength to the missile launcher as being able to achieve a glancing hit for less points is, again, an obvious better choice. 

The real deal lies in the fact that missile launchers have the magic str 8 at much less than a LC. Being that a majority of the units out there, are t4 with a 3+ armour save, its instant death on a 2+ with no armour save OR FNP. This really comes into its own on 2 wound models, the most important one coming to mind would be nob bikers. Missiles, as cheap as they are, are a really good option against models like nob bikers. Fail a save, model is gone. An autocannon cannot match this, at the same point cost. 

Personally, I don't bother shooting anything armour 13 or 14 with anything but meltas, as the odds really are too low for my liking. My heavy weapons (for space wolves) currently consists of 3 squads of LF's with 5 missile launchers each. That works out to 15 missiles, able to target 6 squads, for a mere 140 points a squad. More than enough to take out rhinos, 2 wounds nasties, and MEQS.


----------



## Lash Machine (Nov 28, 2008)

You should change the question to "why take havoc squads when you can take obliterators?"

More seriously, in my marine army I did try an eight man, four missile launcher squad, but I found that a 2 Las Canon Pred with auto cannon is far more effective for weapons and points and gave me enough spare to chuck in a Vindicator.

One demolisher shot is a bit more effective than four frag rounds.


----------



## Truthteller (Sep 2, 2009)

I agree with most of these comments particularly the fact that MLs are good at taking out models with 3+ armour saves. I just felt that 35 points for a model which is going to be shooting down infantry one at a time is not very cost effective. That said I had assumed that most of the time multi-wound characters with 3+ armour would hide in a unit and so you'd be shooting 1 wound grunts. Nobs are obviously an exception to this, although of course bikers are likely to get a cover save. 

If you build in glancing hits you have to give them an equivalence to penetrating hits. I reckoned that a glancing hit was worth 1/3rd of a penetrating on the basis that (a)one 1/3rd of damage rolls do nothing and (b) you never get to destroy the target unless you get a positive modifier (eg shooting at an open-topped vehicle). On that basis the only part of the table that flips is the order against AV12 where ACs become top dog because they get twice as many glancing hits as MLs.

TT


----------



## Despoiled (Aug 23, 2009)

Lash Machine hinted what i was going to say, I think havoc with 4 ML is nice for the all around weapons (at the very least to slow armor down) for killing MEQ but Obliterators and meltas are my tank killers. 

four Srt 8 ML is hard on anyone and at a lower price. I do however use 2 ML and 2 auto's at times in my havocs. I use Havocs as Insurance, its a good srt weapon at lower pice to handle something that may pop up that my CSM cant handle, or my Obliterators and meltas dont have time for.


----------



## DarKKKKK (Feb 22, 2008)

Since, as Chaos players, we can take Obliterators, I would generally never bother to equip my Havocs with Lascannons. If anything just 4 MLs or 4 ACs, depending on the army I'm facing (if I have that knowledge). Leave the Lascannons to the Obliterators I say :mrgreen:

Overall though, I do agree with your point. Personally, I've never had too much success with MLs in general. I know they are cheaper than most of the heavy weapons, but I just feel I need a decent amount of them to be effective, which by the time my usual list gets set in and extra points left over, there just isnt enough to add in MLs


----------



## Flakey (Sep 24, 2008)

Truthteller said:


> I agree with most of these comments particularly the fact that MLs are good at taking out models with 3+ armour saves. I just felt that 35 points for a model which is going to be shooting down infantry one at a time is not very cost effective. That said I had assumed that most of the time multi-wound characters with 3+ armour would hide in a unit and so you'd be shooting 1 wound grunts. Nobs are obviously an exception to this, although of course bikers are likely to get a cover save.


I think the heading (at least for CSM) is the telling part of this. When you can buy them for 20 or 30 points (IG) or 25 points (SW), the equations change in relation to cost against infantry.

Where they really come into their own though, for most armies, is the Tourney, or I don't know what I am facing lists. The magic numbers of STR 8 and AP 3 (and frag option) makes them the most versitile heavy weapon, and one of the cheapest to equip your troops with.

As an afterthought though, while people have mentioned their ability to stop FNP rolls, no one has yet mentioned the stop the WWB rolls of the necron warriors too.


----------



## Crimzzen (Jul 9, 2008)

Truthteller said:


> I agree with most of these comments particularly the fact that MLs are good at taking out models with 3+ armour saves. I just felt that 35 points for a model which is going to be shooting down infantry one at a time is not very cost effective. That said I had assumed that most of the time multi-wound characters with 3+ armour would hide in a unit and so you'd be shooting 1 wound grunts. Nobs are obviously an exception to this, although of course bikers are likely to get a cover save.
> 
> If you build in glancing hits you have to give them an equivalence to penetrating hits. I reckoned that a glancing hit was worth 1/3rd of a penetrating on the basis that (a)one 1/3rd of damage rolls do nothing and (b) you never get to destroy the target unless you get a positive modifier (eg shooting at an open-topped vehicle). On that basis the only part of the table that flips is the order against AV12 where ACs become top dog because they get twice as many glancing hits as MLs.
> 
> TT



I guess my point sorta is, why take a LC when you can take a melta? 

A melta has over a LC:
Cheaper
Better chance to pen and to blow up
Ap1

However you lose a good deal of distance.

That being said, I'm sure you can infiltrate a squad of chosen with a gross # of meltas for less than it costs to buy an equal amount of penetration power in LC.

Then, pick up a squad of missile launchers and watch your enemies HQ unit go bye bye very quickly - more than making up for the cost.


----------



## Inquisitor Einar (Mar 6, 2009)

Well, with Necrons, they are usually near an orb, so they get their WBB anyway.

The necrons that aren't near an orb are usually destroyers, and they have T5, so magic 8 won't cut it.
You can shoot scarabs with them though. Kraks do instant death on them.

Against SoBs, the krak missiles aren't very effective, while you will negate that 3+ armour save, the fact remains that SoBs have
numbers on their side, and will outshoot you.

To negate FNP from plague marines and such, I rather trust in Divine Awesomeness turning my bolters, flamers, heavy bolters and heavy flamers into AP1 monsters.


----------

