# Spanner's Thoughts on why Lascannons are Overrated



## spanner94ezekiel (Jan 6, 2011)

OK, so the lascannon - by many it's viewed to be the defining weapon in anti-tank shooting with its high strength and long range. However, I think this view is completely and utterly foolish. _Note: I am taking this more from a Space Marine PoV rather than Guard or Chaos.
_
So, why is it so bad at tank hunting? Well basically think about it:

1. You only get one shot, so 33% of the time you're missing and wasting your time and effort. "But missile launchers are the same" I hear you cry. Well...
2. They are insanely expensive for what is essentially a missile launcher with +1S, upgraded AP, and the inability to use blast templates.
3. The upgraded strength is essentially useless. You ID T4 models at S8, and wound anything below T8 on a 2+ anyway. "But what about against vehicles?" you cry. Well...
4. Against anything above AV12 you are still wasting your time, as basic mathhammer proves:




> *Shooting Vs Vehicles*
> 
> *Lascannon Devastator Team vs Defender Group*
> 
> ...




In all seriousness, if you're trying to take out AV13/14 with a lascannon, there's something wrong with you, and anything less than that is easily dealt with by autocannons or missile launchers.

5. "But the better AP is good for taking out those with 2+ armour saves" is your final plea. Well seriously, that isn't going to make a shade of difference as a) the abundance of terrain in 5th ed means that they'll probably get a cover save anyway, if you can see them at all, and b) if they have a 2+ armour save, they're likely to have an invulnerable save anyway. You want something better? Try plasma cannons or vindicators.

Therefore, I say don't waste however many points on a lascannon, whether in a tactical squad/Grey Hunters, devastator/Long Fangs, sternguard etc etc because it is really just not worth it for a glorified missile launcher. You want anti-tank? Take melta. You want to deny 2+ saves? Take plasma. The sole place you want lascannons is on your predator, simply because they're better than heavy bolters. Even on dreads it isn't worth it because there are better alternatives e.g. twin-autocannons, MM/HF, plasma cannons. 

TL;DL don't take lascannons.
Thoughts?


----------



## Antonius (Jan 10, 2012)

I definitely agree that the LC is generally an overcosted and underpowered weapon for the points, although i run a dread with TLLC / HF in a DP that drops, using the high strength main weapon and medium auxilliary weapon, for that first turn, hit kill alpha strike on rear armour. I must say that even the double ML/ rifleman combo probably does sooo much better (and is cheaper by 25pts if i were to knock off the HF and LC) for that first turn. I guess the lack of cheap twinlinking or spamming ability (*cough* vendetta *cough*) makes it so prohibitively expensive at doing even the job its designed to do (hit high AV tanks and MCs). I guess its a weapon from the era of the near invincible monolith, and now melta is a lot more accessible to SM players (and IG i must add), so the older weapon is now a bit obsolete. Only real uses are those special vehicles with ceramite plating (ie no 2d6 melta  ), where the extra strength can help somewhat (stormravens), but then that's a very game specific use. I also think SM players are restricted to using LCs and MLs as their high strength weapons, because of the lack of readily available autocannons (unlike IG), so there is little difference between the two and there is a lot of redundancy (MLs can do what LCs can do except pierce AV14 or ignore 2+ saves).

Autolas preds and TLas Preds and Las/plas 'Backs are probably the only real exception (the last one because of the cheapness of having two weapons).


----------



## Uveron (Jun 11, 2011)

I dissagree with you, but agree with your conclusion that C:SM should not use Lascannons

I think that the Lascannon IS the defining weapon in anti-tank shooting with its high strength and long range, it is the perfect Anti Armour Gun. 

But that's the problem with it. That is all it does, Space Marine armys do not have the numbers to have such single minded weapons, everything has to be multi-purpose, and then as soon as you try and use it for something thats not AT all its little advantages it has becomes way less important. 

And because of the need for versatility, the premium you pay for "the best AT gun in the game" becomes to inefficient. (and given that the Price is normally twice as much as other middle range guns, the maxim of quantity over quality wins)


----------



## spanner94ezekiel (Jan 6, 2011)

So essentially anything the lascannon can do at range, the melta can do close up and for cheaper and 9/10 times more effectively due to the 2D6 penetration and AP1.


----------



## Uveron (Jun 11, 2011)

spanner94ezekiel said:


> So essentially anything the lascannon can do at range, the melta can do close up and for cheaper and 9/10 times more effectively due to the 2D6 penetration and AP1.


Sure but you have to be CLOSE UP, within at least 12". That in its self is a major weakness, now with the current rules set that weakness is not as big as it once was, but it does impose tactical restrictions on you.


----------



## spanner94ezekiel (Jan 6, 2011)

Indeed. But as you sort of mentioned, melta is necessary in any list, so only a fool wouldn't take a speeder, dread or even tactical squad with flamers designed to take out armoured threats. Lascannons on the other hand cannot fulfil the flexible role, and so the long range option is rarely used against such targets.


----------



## Uveron (Jun 11, 2011)

spanner94ezekiel said:


> Indeed. But as you sort of mentioned, melta is necessary in any list, so only a fool wouldn't take a speeder, dread or even tactical squad with flamers designed to take out armoured threats. Lascannons on the other hand cannot fulfil the flexible role, and so the long range option is rarely used against such targets.


Oh Indeed. Though on the other hand In C:SM armys its only perhaps Dreads that anyone realy has the argument over if to give them lascannons or meltas. 

On Tactical Squads, its Melta+ Lascannon or ML... Multi-melters on infantry, suffer from the heavy weapon issue.


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

Okay, infantry based lascannons suck, vehicle based lascannons en-masse are the way to got. If you consider the main transport in the game at the minute is the rhino, with AV 11, so as long as you don't roll a 1, you are doing fine. They work against light armour, heavy armour is the main problem for lascannons.


----------



## spanner94ezekiel (Jan 6, 2011)

^^ Indeed. I think that predators and razorbacks with lascannons are pretty good at transport killing or providing a psychological threat, but infantry have no use for them. again though, the issue lies in the fact you have a 1 in 3 chance of missing the target completely unless it's twin-linked.


----------



## Sephyr (Jan 18, 2010)

A friend of mine placed second on a large tournament here using Ultramarine massed lascannons.

While melta is more reliable antitank and plasma is cleaper and faster shooting, lascannons have the advantage of range. You can be firing away at that Stormraven, Ravager, Battlewagon or Ark from turn 1, and maybe not destroying it outright with 2d6 pen but already scoring results like destroying weapons, stunning and immobilizing that keeps the threat level manageable. A melta from 6 inches will likely pop that Wagon, Land Raider or Venom, and then leave your guys right there to be charged/shot up. If they made it so close to your lines, you'll be doing damage control even after nuking their ride. 

1-3 lascannons? That's unreliable. Facing 6-9 of them, some twin-linked on predators and razorbacks? That's a steady threat, especially if the map has little LOS cover that can hide vehicles. Also, I'd rather be shooting at GK paladins, Nob bikers, defilers and C'tan shards from 40" away rather than 12" if I can help it.


----------



## Doelago (Nov 29, 2009)

The Lascannon is there to pop open transports and taking pot shots at the rear armor of MBTs, while the melta gun is there to take Land Raiders and such.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

I have to agree with Doelago - Lascannons are great for killing transports (as opposed to Autocannon, which are very good at supressing them). Meltaguns and Str 10 Ordnance (Manticores, Medusae) are AV13/14 counters, Str 9 doesn't really cut it reliably (although as my gleeful colleague is fond of reminding me, even Basilisks can wreck Land Raiders). One of the biggest problems with using the Lascannon to deal with heavy vehicles is the lack of AP 1 - AV 14 is hard to get through, so you want to be able to destroy it in the one or two shots you get (Strength D, AP1 etc.)

I will, however, say that Lascannons on foot are most definitely worthwhile in an army led by Tarnus Vale, as are the Phobos' Godhammers. The extra point of strength makes a surprising amount of difference.

Midnight

EDIT: I will give the Lascannon credit for kiling Characters, though.


----------



## ohiocat110 (Sep 15, 2010)

OP makes some decent points, but also misses on a few.

The short argument is you're paying for range. If you want the long reach of a LC, it's worth the points. 

A TLLC dread can become a big threat if it can sit back and pop transports, while the enemy tries to drive into melta range. Multi-meltas won't do Devestators or Long Fangs in a fire support role a lot of good unless the enemy drives vehicles within range. 

Maybe melta is better for taking out that Land Raider, but that means sitting a unit close to it...when usually something nasty like Assault Terminators are waiting to jump out. Why not blow it up with LCs from a few feet away and leave those Termies sitting in the middle of nowhere?

A balanced army should probably have some of both LCs and melta. Going all-in with one can leave you vulnerable, or force you into some bad situations.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

I find this thread slightly depressing, in that people are disagreeing, even in part, with the OP.

It comes down to this, folks:
If a gun isn't AP1, then it isn't a reliable tank-killer. Doesn't fucking matter what S value it has, because it's only going to kill a target on 1/3 successful Penetrating hits, so a single non-Twin-Linked Lascannon shooting a Rhino requires something like 5 attempts, ignoring the prospect of accumulated damage (ie, Weapon Destroyed, then Immobilised, then Wrecked) on average to kill it.

That's with the Rhino outside Cover, so you can often double that. Approximately 9 Lascannons to kill a single Rhino? That's crap, because you paid twice as much (or more) than you would have for Missile Launchers or Autocannons, both of which have increased versatility as well.

While having no ranged anti-tank firepower is a good way to unbalance and even cripple a list, paying a premium for AP and S over Rate Of Fire is equally bad, or even worse.

WRT the earlier assertion that Tacticals should carry Lascannons, this is so horribly false that the only worse option is the Heavy Bolter, which should not only be free, but give you a whole bunch of points back!

Tacticals are strongest with a Multi-Melta, because as everyone knows, Objectives are rarely conveniently inside your deployment zone waiting to be held. Advancing a big fat bubble of 'go here and get melted' is a good way to protect Tacticals from things that'd remove them from the Objective otherwise (most things, really) and if they actually DO get called into action (24" isn't actually THAT short a distance on a 6'x4') the AP1 is invaluable, irrespective of the double-dice factor.

It's commonly held that MLs are just as good within 24" as MMs, or rather that MMs are only better within 12", but that's by idiots who still cannot grasp that the single most beneficial stat for an antitank gun to have is AP1.

Finally - someone described the Lascannon as the definitive anti-tank at range. I'd like to introduce you to a Railgun, or infact even the Leman Russ Vanquisher...


----------



## Keen4e (Apr 19, 2010)

TheKingElessar said:


> It comes down to this, folks:
> If a gun isn't AP1, then it isn't a reliable tank-killer. Doesn't fucking matter what S value it has, because it's only going to kill a target on 1/3 successful


Regardless of the topic, I think you are exaggerating the importance of AP 1 over S. Sure AP 1 is a big help if you want to completely obliterate the vehicle, but often just immobilizing the vehicle (what is a transport good for, if it's unable to move?), or destroy a key weapon (an artillery vehicle, without artillery weapon is useless) Also AP 1 won't help you much, if you only cause glancing hits or no hits at all, so having a decent strength (or even better a 2D6 penetration) is still very important.
As for the lascanons, I will speak from the point of view of the Imperial guard. It's really frustrating to see all my lascanons miss, just because of IG's BS 3. If I want to make them at least somehow reliable, I need to give out the order "bring it down", but considering how orders are useful, it is a waste to use them on heavy weapon's squad that has no vox and no sergeant, thus a big chance to fail.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Vendettas.

Midnight


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

Hurray peaple are realizing how retarded las cannons are compared to real anti-at guns (DE pay a fraction for a better version, GK's have 4 shot rending auto-cannon equivalents).

In all honesty I have been saying for years now that no way in hell is a las cannon worth 30-35 points on infantry, and its a complete points sink on vehicles.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Keen4e said:


> Regardless of the topic, I think you are exaggerating the importance of AP 1 over S. Sure AP 1 is a big help if you want to completely obliterate the vehicle, but often just immobilizing the vehicle (what is a transport good for, if it's unable to move?), or destroy a key weapon (an artillery vehicle, without artillery weapon is useless) Also AP 1 won't help you much, if you only cause glancing hits or no hits at all, so having a decent strength (or even better a 2D6 penetration) is still very important.
> As for the lascanons, I will speak from the point of view of the Imperial guard. It's really frustrating to see all my lascanons miss, just because of IG's BS 3. If I want to make them at least somehow reliable, I need to give out the order "bring it down", but considering how orders are useful, it is a waste to use them on heavy weapon's squad that has no vox and no sergeant, thus a big chance to fail.


Not at all. I'm not going to say, of course, that S and extra pen dice have no place - but the thing is, if you roll 1s all day, you won't kill things whether you're AP1 or not...but being AP1 means that when you DO roll above 1, you're doing a hell of a lot more damage.

Leaving as a given that you don't get a Kill Point without rolling a 5/6 unless AP1, and that's the only way to win 1/3 games, Transports can sometimes repair Immobilised results (Rhino) or can be on an Objective/between you and an Objective/close enough to protect a squad inside until the last turn, then they disembark and steal an Objective...

Immobilising Transports is great, and at range as good as you should hope for. Up close, though (ie, in Melta distance) and you NEED to kill it, especially if it has a unit inside being shielded from your fire by that metal bawks.

As for Artillery and similar 1-gun tanks...well, apart form a distinct lack of popularity (because they can be neutered as you describe) chances are you won't really GET to Melta these things, as they tend to stay back out of the way - and in cases where they don't (Demolisher, Vindicator etc) the AP1 means you have a 66% chance of putting it out of commission, rather than the 50% you'd have normally. That's a significant difference.

[66% due to rolling; 2 = Weapon Destroyed, 4 = Wrecked, 5, 6 = Explodes. 50% due to rolling; 3 = Weapon Destroyed, 5 = Wrecked, 6 = Explodes.]

@Luke - a Lascannon is usually around 25 on infantry in Loyalist books. That's the same as the vastly inferior Lances to which you refer. 

Dark Lances and Bright Lances are stupidly overcosted, unless Lances get a HUGE boost in 6e.


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

Last time I checked 3 dark lances was under came with a free vehicle for under 125poitns.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Ravager? Sure.

But compare it to a Vendetta then. 3 BS4 Dark Lances vs 3 Twin-Linked BS3 Lascannons.
AV11/11/10 Open-Topped vs 12/12/10 with free Extra Armour.
Fast, Skimmer with Aerial Assault vs Fast Skimmer with Scouts and Transport 12.
Ability to claim Cover easily vs ability to deny Cover easily.
36" range vs 48" range.

Don't get me wrong, Ravagers are good. VERY good. But Vendettas, on paper at least, are far better.


----------



## MaidenManiac (Oct 2, 2008)

TheKingElessar said:


> Ravager? Sure.
> 
> But compare it to a Vendetta then. 3 BS4 Dark Lances vs 3 Twin-Linked BS3 Lascannons.
> AV11/11/10 Open-Topped vs 12/12/10 with free Extra Armour.
> ...


Thats not the Ravagers blame though. They are totally ace for their just over 100 pts cost.
Its yet again Throbin Cruddance thats the villein here. Even a blind man can read out that the Vendetta is ridiculously good for its points and should have costed a lot more:wacko:


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

I don't think a lot more, no. About 10-15 points. More than that it starts to be too much.


----------



## MidnightKid333 (Feb 2, 2011)

I would say it is more useful against tough 2+ As monstrous creatures because of its exceptional range and AP.

but yes, lascannons are starting to get out-shined by the latest gadgets to become available these days. 

Free meltaguns, split-shot missile launchers, melta pistols, blood lances, even necron tachyon arrows... the list is starting to get a bit long. Maybe in some new muhreen codexes we will see a few changes in points costs for lascannons. I wouldn't be surprised if they got boosted to strength 10 or AP1. They need a buff to still compete with the new stuff.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

MK333 - it's not a case of 'starting' lol. It's been inferior since 5e started.


----------



## zacktheRipper (Jan 23, 2012)

I agree, there are several weapons that replace the Lascannon for infantry squads. Meltaguns perform much better, in my limited experience, and in my CSM army I tend to couple them with plasmaguns so its a nice deterrent for any SM army I may face. A squad of 10 can't afford the casualties these awesome weapons can cause!

As for their use on vehicles, I'd say they are a little more worth it. I enjoy running an Autocannon/Lascannon combination on my Predator, because I feel it gives it a good choice of weaponry for any situation. Yet, for the IG, they can take much heavier options that really defeat a Lascannon.  In the end, I think we can all agree that it runs down to personal taste and tactics if somebody wants to field them.


----------



## MaidenManiac (Oct 2, 2008)

The main problem for the lascannon isnt its stats, its the cost and the carrier of said gun. In the SM book they are too expensive on all except tac's. On various IG units they cost much more reasonable numbers and sees a lot more table time. But then again there is that Valkyrie which most likely sees inf carrying autocannons.


S9 isnt a reliable AV14 killer for sure, but tbh nothing (barring warp lance) is a reliable AV14 killer with 1 attack.
Since the chance of killing a vehicle is rather low in 5th everyone plays volume fire to crack tanks and lascannons are rarely worth all those extra points for volume fire.
If the vehicle damage chart were to change in 6th to something like tanks die on 4+ and glancing is -3 and 0 is shaken lascannons would see a lot more use since they will score penetrating hits from a safe range a lot more then other imperial guns.


----------



## Skari (Dec 20, 2011)

But one can't overlook the use of at least 1 or 2 lascannons in a list. Sometimes that extra range and str can make the difference. The increase of av13 means that at range the missile just does not cut it anymore (at least in my current meta). It is very important to make it twin linked, and to have it on a move+shoot platform. Razorbacks, Land raiders, Predators. All key in using a lascannon.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

@MM - Railguns are fairly reliable 14 Killers.  And the new gun on the Triarch Stalker, I forget the name, the Heavy 2 Multi-Melta. :wink:

@Skari - indeed you can. One or 2 Lascannons won't statistically do much, so they're rarely an improvement. If you have an issue with AV13 then it's probably Blood Angles and Necrons. BA need to advance most of their AV13 in order to get in range [Baals, Furiosos etc] and Necrons need to advance Ghost Arks in order to actually Score Objectives, so simply park Meltaguns as close as possible, and let rip.


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

TheKingElessar said:


> Necrons need to advance Ghost Arks in order to actually Score Objectives, so simply park Meltaguns as close as possible, and let rip.


Ignoring teleporting, walking through monoliths, and night scythes dropping people off. Also the stalker may have nice at-weapon, but the reason they do is the vast amount of suck found on a walker with no DccW so still won't see them spammed much.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Monoliths are now easier to kill than ever. *Shrug* - If I saw one plonked (because they're too clunky to be 'set') on the table opposite me, I'd have to stifle laughter.

As for teleporting - it's fine enough as a tactic - but you aren't Fearless, and if you teleport in my way, I Tank Shock you. What is it, 1/9 to fail? Worth a go.


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

actually its 3/36 so around a 8.3% chance, as simply allowing you to separate the unit will still only allow you to contest, but the real question is how the hell do expect to have any fully functioning vehicles on turn 4-5 if your playing against crons? Besides your suggesting a tactic to counter the deep striking that is even less reliable then las cannons, so why bother even mentioning it?


----------



## pathwinder14 (Dec 27, 2006)

I disagree with your principles...to a certain extent. Lascannons are awesome at their job and actually have SOME versatility. They are great at taking out armor, monstrous creatures, and high T/W units like Paladins. 

I agree that taking them for tactical squads (who need versatility) is a problem, an all Las pred or 50/50 ML Las Dev squad is nice. So is a Twin Linked Lascannon Razorback (redundancy). 

Your argument about melta is wrong once you consider all the factors. Yes melta has a higher probability of taking out armor, but at what cost? How does the melta get there? It has to be taken by either a unit or a Dreadnought. Even if the melta is successful and takes out its target, it runs the risk of being assaulted next turn, essentialy removing it (and the unit carrying it) from the game, where as my Lascannon Pred can keep firing at range across multiple turns. Range (and cover) keeps the Lascannon alive.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

LukeValantine said:


> actually its 3/36 so around a 8.3% chance, as simply allowing you to separate the unit will still only allow you to contest, but the real question is how the hell do expect to have any fully functioning vehicles on turn 4-5 if your playing against crons? Besides your suggesting a tactic to counter the deep striking that is even less reliable then las cannons, so why bother even mentioning it?


The point was that I have many options to deal with you Deep Striking. Necrons Teleporting doesn't faze me, any more than Daemons, or Terminators, or most Jump Troops, or anything else that Deep Strikes but doesn't have Melta shots.

@pathwinder - how do you figure they're awesome? Are they twice as good as a ML? Because they commonly cost that much.

All Las Preds suck, as they're horribly overcosted. A TLLC is NOT 45 points better than an AC.


----------



## Vashtek (Nov 2, 2007)

This thread is silly. Lascannons and meltaguns both have their places. What determines what you take isn't 'what is better', but what you are trying to achieve with your specific list, and what you need to fill in that list, and the metagame (i.e. what armies you expect to face). Neither choice is wrong and neither is right. It all just depends.


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

TheKingElessar said:


> The point was that I have many options to deal with you Deep Striking. Necrons Teleporting doesn't faze me, any more than Daemons, or Terminators, or most Jump Troops, or anything else that Deep Strikes but doesn't have Melta shots.


I think I see your underlying perspective on this matter, and it seems to be marine centric, which is ok, but most armies do not need ap1 to kill av 11-13 vhicles....marines however do.

You see you do in fact have much to fear from deep striking necron immortals, as they have a fundamental difference from regular armies. The ability to generate 6-8 results if they face none av11-14 rear armor facing. As 10 immortal behind a average tank will cause 4 regular results (2 pen, 2 glance), and 2 auto glances. Hence making them even more reliable for destroying tanks, crippling tanks then the 1-2 ap1 results a double melta squad will get. They also pose a threat to any vehicle in the game mind you, but for suiciding to try and gauss a vehicle still I tend to use 20 man bricks of teleporting warriors.

GK work a similar way in that their average squad on a good role can cause up to 2-5 results on av11 vehicles, or even more if they jump behind to weak av 10 rear armor. Or just shred vehicles with 12 str8 twin linked shots.

In short blanket statements are always profoundly stupid. A better way to frame your argument would be to say that most armies desperately need ap1 to reliably kill vehicles.

Also your statement earlier about rail guns being good is also a bit strange as they are still a hell of a toss up as any limited, expensive, 1 shot gun suffers from the potential to be a retarded waste. For instance say a tau player a fires 6 rail guns, at say a rhino's which poped smoke (Honestly most people other then guard don't have anything worth shooting a rail gun at these days). On average six broadside rail guns will kill one rhino with smoke. Considering the cost of the rail guns units and their accuracy they are only slightly better then las cannons in that they are designed to hurt big expensive vehicles which are a rarity in competitive play (Due to transport spam).

Mind you we may be just not sharing the same underlying experiences in game as my necron csm based perspective on the matter tends to favor multiple reliable results to kill things rather then relying on 1-2 focused anti tank results. That and I tend to roll well above average in most games, so maybe my view on the matter is checkered.


----------



## pathwinder14 (Dec 27, 2006)

TheKingElessar said:


> [email protected] - how do you figure they're awesome? Are they twice as good as a ML? Because they commonly cost that much.
> 
> All Las Preds suck, as they're horribly overcosted. A TLLC is NOT 45 points better than an AC.


I said they were awesome at their job. I was discussing Las Vs Melta. Lascannons main job is taking out armor. They excel at this because their range (and +1 S) gives them more survivability. The rest of my previous post explains why I think so. However that is just my opinion. 


Hmmm....Well I play BA and can drive my las preds 6" and still shoot everything. However I also use a dev squad with 4 missile launchers and two 10 man assault squads with Meltaguns. Usually my las pred and ML devs last the whole game. The assault squads shoot their melta and get into assault. Once they are tied up in assault their melta is useless. 

Basically IMO 48" Range and S9+1d6 > 12" range and 8+2d6 (if under half range).


----------



## gally912 (Jan 31, 2009)

pathwinder14 said:


> Basically IMO 48" Range and S9+1d6 > 12" range and 8+2d6 (if under half range).


Just keep in mind, that you'll get 2 of those 12"-ers for every one of the other, as well as having the ability to move, shoot, and assault with them.


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

pathwinder14 said:


> I said they were awesome at their job. I was discussing Las Vs Melta. Lascannons main job is taking out armor. They excel at this because their range (and +1 S) gives them more survivability. The rest of my previous post explains why I think so. However that is just my opinion.
> 
> 
> Hmmm....Well I play BA and can drive my las preds 6" and still shoot everything. However I also use a dev squad with 4 missile launchers and two 10 man assault squads with Meltaguns. Usually my las pred and ML devs last the whole game. The assault squads shoot their melta and get into assault. Once they are tied up in assault their melta is useless.
> ...


I actually see Kinds point on the inferiority of the possed options as taking melta's is something that you can fit into your already existing lists. While tanking lascannons and the like require specific units that do nothing, but sit and try and use there lasscannons.


----------



## pathwinder14 (Dec 27, 2006)

LukeValantine said:


> I actually see Kinds point on the inferiority of the possed options as taking melta's is something that you can fit into your already existing lists. While tanking lascannons and the like require specific units that do nothing, but sit and try and use there lasscannons.


Oh I see your point and I agree. However the thread was a discussion of the properties of why Las is overated. I was simply sticking to the parameters of the argument.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Luke - re Railguns, if there are 6, they'd be twin-linked, and fired in batches of 3, meaning they'd more likely damage 1 thing and move on but also they'd ignore a Smoked target in favour of another, even if given Cover by the Smoked one. If a Rhino hasn't used Smokes, but is in cover, and the cover is generated by another closer Rhino that HAS smoked, shoot the one with more options in its next turn as a priority.

Anyway - a full LasPred costs around 180 for BA? For that cost, you can have 2 Typhoons instead, with MM and CML. Same speed, lower S and AP weaponry (ish), same range, lower overall survivability, better against infantry, more flexible as can target two enemies, less vulnerable to Wolf Scouts... Is it cut and dried? Perhaps not. But the key is - luck is less of a factor, as you can't be popped by a single lucky shot.

Plus, drawing LoS to stuff is easier from 3" up than through the Hulls of your forward elements via sponsons.

For their cost though, I will never agree that Lascannons are awesome at their job, no.
Capable, yes. Scary to Paladins and crap like that? Yes. Meltaguns, though, ARE awesome at their job - and if they weren't, then they'd be largely useless.

Fine balance.

Overall though, I think it's fair to say that most of the internet goes all "Lazcanunz omfgwtfbbq aw3sumz" as though they were the definitive anti-tank gun, and that simply is not the case.


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

Yah las cannons a fairly failtastic for what they are supposed to be.


----------



## MaidenManiac (Oct 2, 2008)

TheKingElessar said:


> @MM - Railguns are fairly reliable 14 Killers.  And the new gun on the Triarch Stalker, I forget the name, the Heavy 2 Multi-Melta. :wink:


As a Tau player I really cant say I agree. Or that actually depends on what you define as a "reliable" av14 killer (As evertything else in this game its subject to personal evaluation of stuff).

A railgun with optimal shooting platform (TA Broadside) has roughly 17,5% chance to wreck an ass raider on each shot, presuming no cover but also ignoring marker lights. Comparing that to all other long range guns of the game its a good chance yea, but its not even 1/5 which really doesnt count for a reliable chance imo.
The only thing talking for the Railgun here is that Tau have access to makerlights that can annihilate that far too common cover save thus letting your numbers stay at said values.

Warp Lance spices this up to 23% (presuming no hood and yet again no cover) which is 1% higher then a melta shot and thus as reliable as it gets. Both of these weapons will require danger close proximity though, the lance can be used at safe range if you wreck the raider, meltas can not regardless of everything.

Then again LRs arent supposed to be wrecked easily. Its more or less the iconic tank of the game and it should rampage a while before dying...


----------



## pathwinder14 (Dec 27, 2006)

TheKingElessar said:


> ...Anyway - a full LasPred costs around 180 for BA? For that cost, you can have 2 Typhoons instead, with MM and CML. Same speed, lower S and AP weaponry (ish), same range, lower overall survivability, better against infantry, more flexible as can target two enemies, less vulnerable to Wolf Scouts... Is it cut and dried? Perhaps not. But the key is - luck is less of a factor, as you can't be popped by a single lucky shot.


I agree two heads can be better than one. And I appreciate that you point out the frailty of the typhoons.



TheKingElessar said:


> ...Plus, drawing LoS to stuff is easier from 3" up than through the Hulls of your forward elements via sponsons.


Haha...that works both ways. It's also easier for the enemy to draw LOS to you. 



TheKingElessar said:


> ...For their cost though, I will never agree that Lascannons are awesome at their job, no.


I agree totally, but the original thread was not about cost.



TheKingElessar said:


> ...Capable, yes. Scary to Paladins and crap like that? Yes.


And that's where their cost pays off. Their diversity to deal with Armor, MC, and painfully tough troops like Paladins, bikers, and Plague marines makes them invaluable. I see so many people come to the table now a days with lots of melta and ML but no Las. It's almost like the world stopped using them. I show up with melta, ML, and Las and I have the edge. 



TheKingElessar said:


> ...Overall though, I think it's fair to say that most of the internet goes all "Lazcanunz omfgwtfbbq aw3sumz" as though they were the definitive anti-tank gun, and that simply is not the case.


I've been playing since 2nd edition. I am biased. The lascannon has always been the definitive anti-tank gun. Maybe I see it through rose colored glasses. Even so, it has versatility that ofsets the cost. People only see it as expensive anti-tank and toss it by the wayside.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

I would never say Lascannons are not worth it universally.

Indeed, my present list uses 10 of them - but if I could have a cheaper ML Razorback turret, or a cheaper CML Predator Sponson, I'd probably opt for more units and using those.

Sometimes, such as for IG, they can be the best tool available, but it's less common than not - and to me, that's enough to recommend against them in most circumstances; certainly to recommend against one or two.

As for remembering the unbridled power of the Las in 2e...well, those were fun times. But, the game's moved on.


----------



## MaidenManiac (Oct 2, 2008)

TheKingElessar said:


> As for remembering the unbridled power of the Las in 2e...well, those were fun times...


Hell yea.
But Assault Cannons were the black of black back then :smoke:


----------



## Haskanael (Jul 5, 2011)

I largely agree except for with the Vendetta where the twinlinked rule realy pays of.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

MaidenManiac said:


> Hell yea.
> But Assault Cannons were the black of black back then :smoke:


Oh, Sustained Fire dice... /nostalgia


----------



## pathwinder14 (Dec 27, 2006)

MaidenManiac said:


> Hell yea.
> But Assault Cannons were the black of black back then :smoke:


Yeah when you took them with CML on top of Wolf Guard Terminators. Who remembers that cheese? mmwwhhaaaa....... They weere more broken than 2nd ed Eldar eldritch storm or Vortex grenades. But Terminators also saved on 3+ on 2d6. :king:


----------



## Antonius (Jan 10, 2012)

I guess part of the problem is that some SM units and builds lack mass melta (unlike chimeltavets - does anyone ever run devastator units in any abundance) and lack lots of infantry anti-tank save a single SW and HW per tac squad, so the individual choice is difficult (and all long range AT weapons squander some bolter fire). Lascannons are an attempt to "fill a gap" in the SM army style not covered by mass melta or Missile Launchers, but are way too specialised and too rare for the purpose. They're not good in small numbers, but are prohibitively expensive to spam on infantry units. Missile Launchers are free in tac squads, so more free HW => More points to spend on units (Meltas are cheap too). Vindicators and plasma family weapons do better at MC and anti TEQ duties due to the blast profile or multishot type, not a single shot ID weapon that somehow happens to be deflected by an SS. 
Predators are probably a different beast, but i can't see why they are worth that much for a TLLC turret, compared to the cost of two separate ones (I'd rather have an extra shot than a reroll for the cost).


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

pathwinder14 said:


> Yeah when you took them with CML on top of Wolf Guard Terminators. Who remembers that cheese? mmwwhhaaaa....... They weere more broken than 2nd ed Eldar eldritch storm or Vortex grenades. But Terminators also saved on 3+ on 2d6. :king:


That's a legal loadout for a Wolf Guard Terminator nowadays, too...


----------



## dbgoldberg323 (Sep 10, 2010)

Call it anecdotal, but I just played a game against a guy that hasn't played since 3rd ed. He brought out some generic Space Marines armed with 7 Lascannons (5 of which were twin-linked) and proceeded to shake/stun/weapon-destroy/wreck my Blood Angels armored company list turn after turn. NEVER in my entire 16 year run of 40k have I EVER seen an average amount of Lascannons do so much. Again, it might be anecdotal, but on the receiving end I felt helpless. The mission was kill points, and within the first turn or two he had 5 or 6. I had him all but tabled at the end of the game (couldn't kill Sicarius) but still, man, I have a new-found respect for S9 48" weapons in 5th. I wonder how many I could spam with the Blood Angels codex...


----------

