Tac missile launcher

[Cheekie Monkie]

I rarely feel the need to get these things, really.

Pros
High burst from a single model
Versatility in weapon switching
Speed of upgrade
Mobility - no setup time required and is therefore better for chasing and kiting

Cons
Inefficient in terms of damage to cost ratio
No snare
Reduces anti infantry damage
Did I mention this thing costs a bomb?

However, despite this seemingly balanced list, it's a rare game indeed which makes me think, "I need a missile launcher!" as the pros are often outweighed by the cons. Furthermore, missile tacs have had increased competition in the form of buffed vengeance devs, sternguard, as well as more accurate plasma devs since retail, leaving them lagging in the dust. High burst is tackled by devs of both flavours, sternguard readily switch from AI dakka to shieldwall tyrant guard killing firepower in seconds. Hell, even buffed psychic hoods, transports and melee resist have made devs more resistant to being ganked by stikkbombs and jump squads.

The only time in which I've seriously considered grabbing a ML is when you need to quickly pull a rocket launcher out of your ass to kill a low hp vehicle, though if you had to spend 40 power to kill it, at least it didn't die in vain.

Suggestion
Reduce cost of the missile launcher upgrade to 30 power
Increase build time of the missile launcher to 25 seconds to compensate

[Torpid]

This is an interesting topic. I'm unsure of the best response.

I must admit when I feel forced to go for a missle tac, or God forbid, two missle tacs I half-accept that I've lost the game at that point right there. They're so damn bad at AV yet so expensive.

Yet on the other hand as a niche purchase they do alright, especially vs things that can't really kite you, so melee walkers or stuff like bloodcrushers, plus they have good utility vs generators which in 1v1 is quite nice. In the game linked below Toil really shows the prowess of missle tacs, but that doesn't mean they're fine at 40 power, it just means they're a viable weapon purchase - they still might be UP for 40 power. They do seem to have extra good synergy with the apothecary since he can keep them out on the field for longer and therefore keep some AV presence out on the field for longer - the problem of being too easily forced off the field is the main aspect in which las-devs are inferior to missle tacs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w53e8oey_48

[Kithrixx]

Could give them a Melta Gun instead.

[VanDietsland]

What about giving them a krak and frag option then

[Toilailee]

It's fine. The upgrade time reduction from 40s to 15s was the only buff it needed, and even that might be a bit too short.

[Triple d]

Wait it usee to be 40s to get the launcher out?

Jeez.

Anywho I agree that 40 power is way too much.

Now if it worked like the sentinel missile launcher and could switch between frag and krak rounds...now THAT would be worth 40 power.

I have a feeling it would over perform though, unless the build time went up too

[HandSome SoddiNg]

35 energy?
30 secs

[saltychipmunk]

the missile is not supposed to be good, you buy it do deal with lighter vehicles like chimera class vehicles , sentinels and manticores or to bolster the power of your current av against some one who is spamming. so you don't need to invest 12 pop and 325 req/ 30 power into making a las dev .

[lolzarz]

If you absolutely have to grab a missile launcher in order to prevent (insert transport/walker here), you're going to lose anyway because you should have seen the vehicle coming and gotten a better weapon. The missile launcher should be a weaker alternative to something like a lascannon devastator because you want to keep the heavy bolter to suppress that commander/(insert melee unit here). Devastators have lascannons for a reason; no one should be using the missile launcher as their only weapon to kill vehicles.

[saltychipmunk]

not really, grabbing a missile can be quite useful if you bought a librarian and have asm (which is a decent setup) if you veilof time a tac , then you have a fast 1000 hp heavy infantry squad that can out run vehicles and has spike av damage.

it is very useful if one absolutely does not want a las dev . is it 40 power good , probably no but i don't think we can drop its power cost too much given how much mobility the librarian can give any squad in the game.

i can see 35, but 30 is pushing it.

[Torpid]

not really, grabbing a missile can be quite useful if you bought a librarian and have asm (which is a decent setup) if you veilof time a tac , then you have a fast 1000 hp heavy infantry squad that can out run vehicles and has spike av damage.

it is very useful if one absolutely does not want a las dev . is it 40 power good , probably no but i don't think we can drop its power cost too much given how much mobility the librarian can give any squad in the game.

i can see 35, but 30 is pushing it.

The libby with VoT = 80power, missle launcher = 40power, melta bomb= 25power. You're paying 145power to be unable to scratch a walker whatsoever?

In typical SM fashion this is none of this is hard AV and all of these purchases are still somewhat ok vs infantry.

You really do not go for missle tacs alongside a libby, that's very expensive and not worth it. Libby is made for synergy with dev plays. I mean, if you have a libby you get rid of the biggest downside of the las-devs, namely their set-up time. Why would you ever want missle tacs in that instance???

I can still see a slight buff to 35 power, especially if the purchase time is increased by 5second or so.

[saltychipmunk]

well keep in mind you dont always get a libby for your devs .

i usually get my libby just because he is a spell caster that can tie up another unit. versatility is the key word here. its a terrible investment if i was going for just the walker. but you can do a crap-load of other things with that libby.

so if you dont already have devs , and need av .. then why not get a rocket tac , you tend to always have at-least one anyway.

[Torpid]

I think that not getting devastators after getting a libby is extremely cost-inefficient. It is definitely part of his whole cost that you are meant to use him with either devs or termies.

I've already said why not a rocket tac - you pay well over 100 power for that combo and you won't even dent a walker.

[Cheekie Monkie]

After playing a few more games with the missile launcher I do concede the fact that it does have its uses, mainly in engaging light melee walkers i.e. bloodcrushers and killa kans. The burst, mobility and the range of the ML really does it justice in these parts. Furthermore, the ML also offers a decent transition from the flamer, due to its good gen bashing potential.

However, my point was to keep in mind the increased competition missile tacs have had since retail, namely vengeance devs, lascannon devs, sternguard and to a smaller extent, plasma devs. Compared to the other choices, effectively spending 530/40 for a meh dedicated AV platform becomes a lot less appetising. Let's take a look at some of the light vehicles in which the ML has traditionally been purchased in:

Trukk: Vengeance devs are often enough to deter a headlong charge. Sternguard offer a better long term purchase as they also pressure the ork infantry.
Razorback: The ML puts you in a strict disadvantage in tac vs tac firefights.
Chimera: GM repair is often enough to negate most of the damage from the ML, at least long enough for your tacs to take some serious damage due to the fact that you're no longer pressuring the IG hero or infantry. Sternguard will offer better bang for your buck, especially if you're expecting orgryns too.

All in all, I have to revise my original post. It does have its occasional moments, though Elite has given the ML some serious competition. 35 power pls.

P.S. I also have a huge crush on the libby. Get him for errything.

[lolzarz]

Veil of Time, due to removing set-up times on heavy weapons, effectively converts lascannon devastators into missile launcher tactical space marines, except more damage, faster, snare, you get the idea. Therefore, if Veil of Time is present, lascannon/advanced targeting devastators should be the automatic choice. Defensive situations, where you are trying to defend are obviously the devastators' element, seeing as they don't need to move.

This leaves chasing retreating vehicles and launching assaults. Given the tactical space marines' durability and (relative) mobility, this is in my opinion where the missile launcher should be employed; somewhat like a predator, in that you use them to push forward and cover other units. But in general, the various types of devastators should be the first choice in anti-vehicle weaponry; they are, after all, the heavy weapons squad and should outperform the basic ranged squad in terms of damage.

[saltychipmunk]

yeah its best sold with devs , but i have found situations where i have a Libby and don't have a dev. Maybe that particular situation is too exotic to warrant the cost of a rocket launcher .

but the situations do exist , that is all i am saying

[egewithin]

Well, if you want to keep it at 40 power, at least frag and krak missile change option looks necessery. But if this will hurt balance, we should decrease the cost to 30 power because 40 is just too much.

[saltychipmunk]

personally i am not at all against a modest cost decrease. but sm has so many good things going for them as is. I can go either way on this .

[Dark Riku]

Missile launcher tacs are a waste of your tacs imo, you're always better of with a lasdev.
Costs you less power too.

[Daddy]

Missile Launcher tacs give you a very quick AV response to vehicles. No extra population needed. It is a very very convenient extra AV damage. To be used in conjunction with other AV of course.

I think that is why the 40power seems reasonable.

Of course at 40 power, it is a make or break decision, to respond to a vehicle threat. But it is the convenience you are purchasing.

[Sub_Zero]

Wow, just wow, I read the initial post and some replies to it. I am quite surprised. I personally like this upgrade so much and this is the thing I usually have on my tacs in any game (due to the fact I use Apo whose AV-capabilities are non-existent). I don't even care that much about that arguably huge power cost. 35 power may be more appropriate as well as 25 power plasma guns and on top of that half of these prices when the upgrade is already bought and you want to switch to it again. And now they are "tactical" marines. If I recall correctly it has already been brought up and received positive feedback.


P. S. I see a lot of players who don't understand how much potential lays in these missile launchers. If a vehicle pushes forward then you fire a missile and get back to mitigate incoming damage, if a vehicle flees from you then you fire a missile and immediately start chasing after. The same applies to plague marines and vindicare assassin (who is just a mental rapist of vehicles) and other similar units I might have missed. Razorback + missile tacs also form a really interesting union when you can do the same but with faster speed and tacs will take damage only when one of them fires his missile launcher. So if your enemy has a dreadnought (about 100 or more power spent on it), this combo (about 100 power too) will be flawless until further responses to this from your enemy. But you have your trusty assault marines who can tie up anything in a second as well as providing vehicle snare.

P. P. S. If you get a librarian and you don't have/get devastators with any weapon setup then you just lose the potentially best synergy in the game. Devs with their default setup are an ultimate unit against almost any infantry-based target, they can even counter their counters. And devs with their lascannon get close to the mental rapist of vehicles - Vindicare Assassin. IMO the librarian is only worth buying for this synergy.

[saltychipmunk]

yes yes , i know most of the times i do have the devs and the libby , but some times i lose the devs or t1 really did not warrant them etc. i really really like the libby.

[Sturnn]

Well, I would say that Plague Marines or Vindicare are totaly different type of units. PM has snare and they are kinda dedicated as AV Infantry. Tacs are multipurpose.

Maybe it is worth to consider to give them sth like weapons kit which is giving 3 models 3 different weapons - missile launcher, plasma gun and for example melta (just an idea). It couldnt be switched again like present add ons. It would be big investment, like upgrade to Stenguard or even more.

It would bring sth like Tacs idea from DoW 1.

But if it is totaly stupic, please just ignore my post

[saltychipmunk]

i think it might be better if buying one weapon on the tacs makes buying other weapons a little cheaper or something like that so that it is somewhat easier to re-purpose them 40 power for a rocket is a steep investment but adding another say 30 on that for a plasma gun or 20 for a flamer can be untenable.

maybe reduce the cost of other upgrades by 10 power if the tacs already have one like a trade -in kind of deal? just a thought.

[Sub_Zero]

Well, I would say that Plague Marines or Vindicare are totaly different type of units.

I united them in one group because all of them function similarly when it comes to dealing with vehicles. They fire one shot that deals massive damage and then they can relocate. Such a pattern is actually invaluable for an AV-unit, honestly for any unit (rangers and sniper scouts are like that, stormtroopers to some extent can be put here too as well as warriors with a barbed strangler or flash gitz with their blastaz).

Maybe it is worth to consider to give them sth like weapons kit which is giving 3 models 3 different weapons

I thought about it too. And this way it really makes them a multi-purpose unit. Now they can't deal with say vehicles and HI at the same time. They either become an AV-specialist or anti-HI/SHI-specialist. 2 plasma guns and 1 rocket launcher plust their sergeant to add a little bit of damage and charge up ATSKNF, sounds pretty amazing, doesn't it?

[Sturnn]

i think it might be better if buying one weapon on the tacs makes buying other weapons a little cheaper or something like that so that it is somewhat easier to re-purpose them 40 power for a rocket is a steep investment but adding another say 30 on that for a plasma gun or 20 for a flamer can be untenable.

maybe reduce the cost of other upgrades by 10 power if the tacs already have one like a trade -in kind of deal? just a thought.

Or buy one kit for sth like 100/40 and then switch weapons freely?

[Sturnn]

I thought about it too. And this way it really makes them a multi-purpose unit. Now they can't deal with say vehicles and HI at the same time. They either become an AV-specialist or anti-HI/SHI-specialist. 2 plasma guns and 1 rocket launcher plust their sergeant to add a little bit of damage and charge up ATSKNF, sounds pretty amazing, doesn't it?

This way we could have very codex looking TSM and balance wise it could be good also - you pay a lot but you get really usefull unit.

[saltychipmunk]

it .. sounds a little too good, the whole point of the tactical marines design was to have the option of going anti heavy infantry or anti vehicle or anti building , not to have all 3 or 2.

if such a suggestion were to actually be implemented the damage of the rockets and plasma guns would have to be dramatically reduced to accommodate for the added versatility much in the same way the current psi cannon on the GK strike squad does an embarrassingly low amount of damage as its trade off for having a damage type that is effective vs all targets.

[lolzarz]

Or buy one kit for sth like 100/40 and then switch weapons freely?

And why would anyone want to buy sternguard?

[Sturnn]

Or buy one kit for sth like 100/40 and then switch weapons freely?

And why would anyone want to buy sternguard?

Becasue stenguard has totaly different type of kit? Tacs with Plasma/LR/Flamer wont fight vs light infantry or units in cover like Stenguard will. The same you have now, you can switch from one weapon to another - probobly it will be quite the same as Stenguard. So why you even use them?