Come on, who wouldn't want to fire all weapon systems the second they get into range with those things? Bearing in mind this is probably turn 3 or if you are lucky turn 2. The problem comes because most likely they are not all in range. So some fire, some don't. Yes there are a multitude of ways of tracking it (turn it round which looks bad, give it a marker that can get knocked, etc etc but it would be far easier if you didn't have to.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

The issue is probably less about the Demolisher Plasma Cannon Sponsons and more about the current Dark Angel lists having Tactical squads carrying them.

TRC's DA Tacticals have the AP5+/AT5+ Mk.V Plasma Cannon
Blacklegions DA Tacticals have the AP4+/AT4+ Slow Firing Plasma Cannon (as per the sponson).

I like the AP4+/AT6+ version (for the DA Tacticals at least, maybe under the Mk.V name) as Plasma cannons aren't any better than Missile Launchers or even equal to Lascannons at popping tanks.

How would Range:30cm, Firepower:AP5+, Notes:Macro-Weapon read as a weapon option. I think it conveys AP only MW in a form that is recognised by the rules and players know how to use it.

You could also do an unorthodox split weapon mode option (like Eldar Titan weapons) for the AT component. Would be listed as Range:30cm, Firepower:AP5+, Notes:Macro-Weapon OR Range:30cm, Firepower:AT6+, Notes:-

KISS!

Whatever gets done, don't introduce different versions of the same gun (addition of Mark Whatever alone doesn't cut it) with different profiles without a damn good reason.

I just wanted to call the new version a heavy plasma gun, but no, everyone keep telling me about this game 40k that I haven't played for 16 years.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

I vote for keeping the current Plasma Cannon stats exactly as they are myself, it's a little bit extra book keeping, but it's characterful and fits in with the plasma weapons from the titans.  

(I also think it's silly to give Dark Angel's Tacticals and Devestators Plasma Cannons as the mix of heavy weapons they use should be abstracted to shoot as Missile Launchers just as all other Marines ones are - there's no need to exaggerate difference for the sake of change).

But not strangely with the plasma gun on the stormtroopers.

For the DA no, I dissagree, swapping range for AT makes for a different tactical experience that helps differentiate the army.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

I was against giving Dark Angels Infantry any Plasma weapons because of the same reason GlynG said. But there was wailing and moaning thats not characterful because DarkAngels where renown for fielding Plasma Cannons (in earlier editions of Wh40k they where the only Chapter which could field Plasma Cannons in Tactical Squads).
So i give in and added the option to switch some (not all) Tacticals for Plasma Cannon Tacticals.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Plasma cannons (or heavy plasma guns, as they used to be called) were available to any Space Marine Tactical Squad in 2nd edition, and I'm pretty sure they have been ever since. Not sure if the DA had their own army list in 1st edition; if they did, I don't have a copy.

_________________
"Good ale, the true and proper drink of Englishmen. He is not deserving of the name of Englishman who speaketh against ale, that is good ale."
- George Borrow

Hmm then it was 3rd edition where all big-4 chapters got their mini-codex.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

I can't find my 3rd-ed. Codex at the moment, so I'll have to assume you're right on that one.  

_________________
"Good ale, the true and proper drink of Englishmen. He is not deserving of the name of Englishman who speaketh against ale, that is good ale."
- George Borrow

For the DA issue, it's either drop the plasma cannon as an option or alter it to a non-slow-firing variant. It has wormed it's way in with no real reason to be there anymore (Both DA lists here and EpicUK's Dark Angel Dev's have 2 but not on tacticals).

If the Demolisher isn't a problem then leave it alone.

In the 3rd Edition Marine Tactical Squads had only heavy bolters, missile launchers and lascannons.  Dark Angels had Plasma Cannons as well in their minidex.

The Heavy Plasma Gun on minimum power in 2nd Ed 40k are approximately like current plasma cannons in 40k.
It shouldn't need to wait to shoot.  To me it seems wierd that weapons of this size are slow firing in the epic time scale.  Having to wait to 15min between firing is a bit excessive, 15 min is a long time.  I would think that the Plasma Cannons overheating problem should be represented as the weapon not being as lethal as it could be.

I don't care if keeping track of which one has fired or not is easy or hard.  It just doesn't seem consistent with the way plasma cannons / heavy plasma guns have been described and used from 2nd ed onwards.  I would advocate changing it to 30cm AP5+/AT5+.  It definately does not diserve MW.

Leave slow firing to super heavy weapons.

As we in germany would say "Butter bei die Fische"  
What is the NetERCs view of the state of the Plasma Cannon?

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Translation, please. My German is a bit (make that a lot) rusty.  

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart