What if a large battle between the Imperils and Modern humans of the 21st centry, what do you think will happed?

Um, we'd get royally ed. I mean, even Guardsmen can beat the hell out of us, Lasguns blow limbs off normal humans.

marines would kick some serious ass. Modern armies are NOT used to hand to hand, with infantry wearing armor that their bullets bounce off of charging into them. After the first few battles, modern soldiers would be SO demoralized about the prospect of being slashed into bits, they would loose effectiveness.

They would march to war expecting to fight someone similar to them, and they would be torn into bits by the ferocity of the imperial forces.

OH FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, NOT THI............

*breathes deep*


Chuck Norris would suddenly appear and kick the entire Earth's forces butt single handedly with a pack of hobnob biscuits. Then, he would kick the Imperials butt using a pencil sharpener. Then he would challenge Marbo to a game of chess that lasts for 34,018 years because they are both so epically awesome that neither of them can ever lose. When Chuck finally gets Marbo into check the entire universe implodes and results in the start of another "the Big Bang" and Chuck and Marbo set about to repopulate the entire universe ... just don't ask how, you don't wanna know!


On a more serious note, Imperium is very much on par with modern day humans. However as we are not afraid to adapt our technology, on an even playing field in terms of forces. I think Humans would win overall, but would be costly, hellishly costly

titans, long rang guns(the big guns) baneblades, shadow swords if the guardsmen were cadians it would be even worse for modern militarys

raptor8 wrote:titans, long rang guns(the big guns) baneblades, shadow swords if the guardsmen were cadians it would be even worse for modern militarys

The only thing IG don't seem to have is nukes... Modern Humans win!

Jesus christ these threads. Never again.

Nukes are fire crackers compared to what an Imperial ship can shoot down at us.

Luke_Prowler wrote:Nukes are fire crackers compared to what an Imperial ship can shoot down at us.

Title said land only, therefore we can ignore the obvious truth of the butt-licking we would get form battle barges

Okay, fair point. However, I'd like to say that nukes do cause fallout, so we'd hurt ourselves as much as them if we used a bunch of them.

braindeadmonkey wrote:

Luke_Prowler wrote:Nukes are fire crackers compared to what an Imperial ship can shoot down at us.

Title said land only, therefore we can ignore the obvious truth of the butt-licking we would get form battle barges

but nukes launch into high altitude, if they don't (because the enemy is close) then you'd probably be hitting the launching bay. they are not classified as being part of a ground battle. I mean, why don't they just fire some Deathstrike Missile rounds and blow the silo to pieces. besides, every superpower in the world is capable of blowing a barrage of nukes and stealth bombers out of the air before they can even reach thier borders, what makes you think the Imperium can't?

anyway, Imperial Commanders are schooled in how to deal with every threat they face, we keep trying to make new wepons to counter what our enemies use. every time we face something that causes overwhelming damage we try to work around it with something new, the Imperium attempts to crush all enemies in an unstoppable wave of might. an Imperial army works like a well oiled machine (once it gets to the field) with a competent commander, we give our troops vague army wide commands and let the sergents figure out the details. we are trained to fight in melee, many Guardsmen would be dead without it.

in the end, I don't believe we are experience enough to take them

if you disagree then I'll say they DO have the experience to take us

Oh holy emperor not this tread type again

40k wins by a landslide.
All counterarguments have been crushed a billion times in a million threads on a thousand forums.
Just... don't.

They'd land...we'd be like ALIENS!!! Then once they start shooting at us, we'd be like rest of the world we need your help...sweden would be like no way those guys are intense! South America would be like no way they're just after our oil now. America would be like Oh noes!?!? we're spread too thin! China would be like we'll worry about it once they invade our soil. Korea would try and fail a missle test. Then we'd give up and join the imperium and be used as stock for guardsmen and a few for space marines. Then they'd leave and life would go on.

You know who'd win?

noone.

the guard/SM would be too afraid to shoot, lest they taint holy terra.

The human infantry would be scared shitless by those 75mm guns


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You know who'd win?

noone.

the guard/SM would be too afraid to shoot, lest they taint holy terra.

The human infantry would be scared shitless by those 75mm guns

The fact that that the Imperium can land Billions of troops on the planet, with much better armour, weapons and tanks kinda answers the question really. We'd be crushed. If we sent nukes at them, sure we'd probably kill a lot, but then the Imperials would just send more guys.

If the Imperium invades? We lose. Badly. Like "everyone gets burned with holy napalm and dies" kind of losing. Stop posting these threads, goombas.

This is silly.

Imperium wins. Numerical advantage would be their biggest advantage. Titans would be another. Having an emperor class titan shooting vortex weapons at anything that remotely looks like it could harm it. The lack of concern for collateral damage would be to their advantage. The Imperiums willingness to use flamethrowers and other weapons that by modern standards are not appropriate for the battlefield.

The anachronisms of Imperial technology leaves only some areas of technology inferior to modern day technology, but the vast majority of the Imperiums technology is still superior.

Grimm wrote:The fact that that the Imperium can land Billions of troops on the planet, with much better armour, weapons and tanks kinda answers the question really.

Wait! no one said anything about Billions of troops. The OP said 'a large (land only) battle' and the sides would be equal because all 40k battles are equal (2000pts each lol)

And I don't know if they really are better equipped or more advance. Some of the technology in the 41s millennium is way more advanced than what we have, but the human understanding of their technology seems to be less advanced. And things that imperium employ like rough riders and melee troops would just get owned in a real battle, which is why they aren't used by modern armies.

Also are their tanks really better? A Basilisks has an effective ingame range of 240 inches... We all know that in 40k 1 inch equals about 6 feet (man height). So the Basilisks has an effective range of 1440 feet, which is about 0.2 miles.

I don't know what the effective range of a modern tank like a Challenger 2 is... but I bet it's waaaaay more than 0.2 miles.

I don't think 40k IG army has anything that a modern army couldn't deal with in one way or another. In many ways they seem quite evenly matched. Las rifle = Assault riffle, flak armour = Kevlar etc....

He never said fair, only large. I'm sure large by Imperial standards is in the billions.

And I'm pretty sure Lasguns and Flak armour are far better than anything we have today. I don't have a clue about Modern day tanks, so I can't judge on that, but thy have titans as well. We'd be screwed.

modern tanks dont have any thing close LR fire power, In table top every thing is scaled down by a lot, I agree with grimm on lasguns and flak armor it might such on table top and in fluff but its atleast 10,000 years more advanced than any body armor we have today

Flak armor alone would mean the Imperium wins. It's lighter, protects better, covers more, and is cheaper than any body armor produced on modern Earth. And its' especially effective against blasts and shrapnel too (which our body armor tends to be weak against).

HellsGuardian316 wrote:Chuck Norris would suddenly appear and

Get his pompous, arrogant ass handed to him, and therefor this needs to happen.

which would mean that modern armor is 6+


Automatically Appended Next Post:
and the current assult rifles would be S2 AP-?

Then of course there's the lasgun, which has hundreds of shots in a single clip, which can be recharged by leaving out in the sun for a day or by plugging it into a wall socket or a chimera.

The Leman Russ is faster, more nimble, and has typically more firepower than modern vehicles. Imperial aircraft are similarly better armed than most modern aircraft (arguably the A-10 has some damned good armament, but that isn't the most common military aircraft today).

Finally, walkers and titans would have no equivalent, giving the Imperial army more mobility and firepower in rough terrain with sentinels and simply more firepower that we cannot counter short of nukes in titans.

I think we'd surrender rather quickly. Within a few generations we'd be loyal Imperial citizens. And it is quite possible our lives might even be improved by the experience with the various technological advances and the unification of governments into one central government. Depending of course on how the governor handles the situation.

*FACEPALM*
NOT THIS DAMN THING AGAIN!
Its like a bloody Zombie. Now i need my shotgun!
Ok guys this is the stupidest topic ever!
Imperial would win. Like a piece paper vs the Sun win.

raptor... I put to question.

an abrahams, no, a sherman. to start.
costs a couple 10k's.

a LR equiviates to what is 15 billion, at least.

the sherman has one minicannon, (75mm, I believe?) whereas a leman russ has a battle cannon (150 mm.)

Sherman would easily be able to use it's special power, 'outflank' and shoot into rear armour. assuming all things are considered, a 75 mm cannon would be at least S6. whereas, though much more powerful, a Leman russ is nerfed to S10. it has a far superior range, but, is more like a walking toadstool. (bad image.) compared to the Sherman.

Second.
Tiger Mk2.
Equivical weapons. 150mm cannon vs. 100 mm cannon. the Tiger is at least BS5, and is so strong that in a slogging match, it could pump out three S8 shots. (better then an autocannon, yes.) into front armour, and take it out.

thirdly.
Abrahams, the most powerful slogger availible to humans today.

AV? 14, 12 11. BS? americans, so at least BS4. it has a .50 cal HMG on top, which could do some damage, would be a heavy stubber on steroids.

Abrahams would loose. why? it would run out of fuel on third turn.
shoots at S9. equivical to battle cannon.

Solved it in game terms.

as for troops:
Soldier of the imperium:
WS3 BS3 S3 T3 W1 I3 A1 Ld8 Sv 5+
Human (American marine and equivalents)
WS2 BS4 S3 T3 W1 I2 A1 Ld7 Sv 6+

weapons?
Lasgun:
24" S3 AP- RF
M4
18" S3 AP6 Assault 1.
Lascannon
48" S9 AP2 Heavy 1
Stinger/AT4
36" S8 AP1, Heavy 1 blast.

heavy bolter
S5AP4
THMG
S6 AP1 Heavy 4. (true heavy machine gun, minigun, chainrail.)

You can't jsut say land only. If you look at the dominant army in the world today, the United States, you will see that air support is integral to its fighting strategy. All of the top notch armies of today do the same thing.

If somehow the skies were unflyable -
-What are the numbers of Imperium vs today's armies? Are we outnumberd 10-1, 20-1? If it is at all close, we win.

Modern day tanks would shrug off most of the weapons shot at them. Sloped armour, ablative armour, longer and far more accurate main weapons plus the ability to shoot accurately while moving would result in us winning the tank war.

I think we would have the advantage as far as infantry also. We have the ability to call in close range fire support from artillery to keep the masses down. And we have numbers - India and China alone could field enough troops (albeit poorly trained) that would make a Imperial Guard commander jealous.

Asherian Command wrote:*FACEPALM*
NOT THIS DAMN THING AGAIN!
Its like a bloody Zombie. Now i need my shotgun!
Ok guys this is the stupidest topic ever!
Imperial would win. Like a piece paper vs the Sun win.

I don't know. those peices of paper have T6.

Alternatively, you give them SPF30+ and they then have sv 2+.

God. don't you read your Forgeworld releases?

We all know that space marines would own us. No mercy no respite.
OK Imperial vehicles are made from Adamantium, not our steel from earth. So basically we would get owned.

Asherian Command wrote:We all know that space marines would own us. No mercy no respite.
OK Imperial vehicles are made from Adamantium, not our steel from earth. So basically we would get owned.

Badly of course.

Captain Solon wrote:Sherman would easily be able to use it's special power, 'outflank' and shoot into rear armour. assuming all things are considered, a 75 mm cannon would be at least S6. whereas, though much more powerful, a Leman russ is nerfed to S10. it has a far superior range, but, is more like a walking toadstool. (bad image.) compared to the Sherman.

The sherman is outdated even by modern times. It's slow (30 mph or 48 km/h on-road speed), it's armor is nothing but perpendicular slabs of metal with no complexity or sloping, its armament is not capably designed to penetrate tank armor, and it has a very low operational range.

The Abrams is faster, better armored, better armed, has better operational range, and better electronics. Don't even begin to compare the Sherman to an Imperial tank of any kind.

the Tiger is at least BS5

No.

Abrahams, the most powerful slogger availible to humans today.

No, it's Abrams, named after General Creighton Abrams. Do your research if you're going to do arguments such as this.

Hitting 2 out of every 3 shots would be miraculously good aim for an American soldier.

The Leman Russ Battle Tank is an efficient, reliable, cheap tank capable of handling any type of terrain and environment short of ocean or molten lava, has a ridiculously powerful engine and is roughly as nimble as the Abrams while carrying more armament. And then there's the varieties of Leman Russ that are available.

The Destroyer Tank Hunter would wipe out every single modern tank in existence in a single shot. The Thunderer and Demolisher tanks would decimate any barricades or buildings we tried to hide in. The Punisher could wipe out entire infantry regiments in a few seconds. The Executioner could likely melt cars and destroy entire squads with each blast, and there's no guarentee our modern armor could actually protect against it so it oculd very well melt away tank armor as well.

And we have no working equivalent for the Baneblade and all its variants. Sentinels would be a mechanical wonder, and a single titan would decimate the armies of entire nations.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Vrakk wrote:Modern day tanks would shrug off most of the weapons shot at them. Sloped armour, ablative armour, longer and far more accurate main weapons plus the ability to shoot accurately while moving would result in us winning the tank war.

I think we would have the advantage as far as infantry also. We have the ability to call in close range fire support from artillery to keep the masses down. And we have numbers - India and China alone could field enough troops (albeit poorly trained) that would make a Imperial Guard commander jealous.

1: Shrug off MODERN armaments. There is no proof that they could shrug off a lascannon shot, melta weaponry, battlecannon shot, autocannon shot... etc. Hell, there's no guarantee that they could shrug off plasma weaponry, either, and even multilasers might do some serious damage to modern tanks.
2: So can the Guard.
3: No, they wouldn't be jealous. Chenkov sacrifices millions of Guardsmen as a matter of course. Just tosses them into battle to grind away at the enemy, and there's always more where they came from.

I think we should let this thread just die its not at all be hard to see who would win

raptor8 wrote:and the current assult rifles would be S2 AP-?

S2! no way. A stub gun is the exact same as a modern day pistol and it's S3. An assault rifle is way more powerful than a pistol. It would be at least S3.

OK Imperial vehicles are made from Adamantium, not our steel from earth. So basically we would get owned.

If an AutoCannon can open a LR then an A10 would tear it to pieces.

Soldier of the imperium:
WS3 BS3 S3 T3 W1 I3 A1 Ld8 Sv 5+
Human (American marine and equivalents)
WS2 BS4 S3 T3 W1 I2 A1 Ld7 Sv 6+

Heh these are cool, but I don't know if I can agree with a modern day soldier being WS2, I2.

WS3 BS3 S3 T3 W1 I3 A1 LD7 is the basic human profile. That is the profile allowed to hive gangers, servitors, tech priests, arbirators and most other humans who aren't particularly battle hardened.

I think anyone with basic training should have at least those stats, and I don't really see why guardsmen should be any tougher or better trained than modern career soldiers... I would have thought the opposite really since IG are essentially just conscripted cannon fodder.

Assault rifles are roughly equivalent, strength-wise, to autoguns. Autoguns are R24", S3 AP-, Rapid Fire.

SmackCakes wrote:If an AutoCannon can open a LR then an A10 would tear it to pieces.

An A10's weapon would tear any modern tank to pieces even faster. But you'd really have to have air superiority for it to manage to get close enough, even with its legendary toughness.

Imperial Guard constantly face off against far deadlier foes than modern humans do. I think any Guard regiment with even a single battle under its belt would find fighting humans a relief compared to what they normally fight.

Captain Solon wrote:

Asherian Command wrote:*FACEPALM*
NOT THIS DAMN THING AGAIN!
Its like a bloody Zombie. Now i need my shotgun!
Ok guys this is the stupidest topic ever!
Imperial would win. Like a piece paper vs the Sun win.

I don't know. those peices of paper have T6.

Alternatively, you give them SPF30+ and they then have sv 2+.

God. don't you read your Forgeworld releases?

Win!

O-T....
Doesn't the Imperium still use rivites???

Imperium would just send the space marines.
Land Raiders would shred them, and the Termies with Thunder Hammers and Storm shield would make them swiss cheese.
Not to mention they could get a Commander with a Relic Blade, who would be able to pop open even the strongest tank like a tin can.
And since we are talking about Fluff Marines(tm), the bolter would be at least S5 AP4 Assault 2 with the ability to cause multiple wounds (lets say 2) wounds per hit. This would be the average marine statline:
WS:5 BS:5 S:5 T:5 W:2 I:4 A:3 Ld:10
Commander:
WS:9 BS:7 S:6 T:6 W:5 I:6 A:5 Ld:10
They would spit acid at tanks, and melt them.

Assuming they deemed the invasion important enough to send Space Marines.

Remember, Space Marines are incredibly rare. There are well over six times as many people in just the D/FW metroplex (north-central Texas) as there are Space Marines. There are several times more Imperial Worlds, at least, than there are Space Marines. I doubt our military could put up such a fight that they'd need any Marines.

thunder hammers cuting like swiss cheese thats lightning claws and powersord, they would be more like a red smear from a TT

JSK-Fox wrote:And since we are talking about Fluff Marines(tm), the bolter would be at least S5 AP4 Assault 2 with the ability to cause multiple wounds (lets say 2) wounds per hit. This would be the average marine statline:
WS:5 BS:5 S:5 T:5 W:2 I:4 A:3 Ld:10
Commander:
WS:9 BS:7 S:6 T:6 W:5 I:6 A:5 Ld:10
They would spit acid at tanks, and melt them.

No. Marines are nowhere NEAR that statline even inside of Matt Ward's deranged little skull.

Like a Rash on everyones backside, these threads flare up again and again!

I would say the Imperium would win. We have too much red tape, and a fair amount of our people would probably join the Imperium just because their there.

That and, Imperium life is cheap, they could send in wave after wave at us while we can't. The Guard is meant to hold things in a battle of attritian, which is one thing that few current armies on the world are meant to do.

braindeadmonkey wrote:Title said land only, therefore we can ignore the obvious truth of the butt-licking we would get form battle barges

Deathstrike missiles are basically ICBMs.

I honestly can't believe some people are even taking this comparison seriously. Earth would be a smoldering ruin filled with death camps before the UN finished squabbling over who gets to negotiate with the invaders.

SmackCakes wrote:Also are their tanks really better? A Basilisks has an effective ingame range of 240 inches... We all know that in 40k 1 inch equals about 6 feet (man height). So the Basilisks has an effective range of 1440 feet, which is about 0.2 miles.

I don't know what the effective range of a modern tank like a Challenger 2 is... but I bet it's waaaaay more than 0.2 miles.

I don't think 40k IG army has anything that a modern army couldn't deal with in one way or another. In many ways they seem quite evenly matched. Las rifle = Assault riffle, flak armour = Kevlar etc....

GW game designers have talked about how the ranges of the table top game are not meant to be considered linearly. Such that at the start of the game when you're 4ft away, that might represent a mile, but that as you close the range represented by an inch shifts. Thus their isn't any good way of extrapolating range from the table top. If you look at Forge World's Imperial Armor I believe it places Basilisk cannons as being effective in the 15-20kM range.

Next, Las-rifle doesn't equal Assault Rifle. Autoguns are equal to Las Rifles but autogun's descriptions place them outside the realm of capabilities of modern assault rifles. An autogun, which is equal to a lasgun, was originally described as a 10mm caseless machinegun... no doubt going off of "Aliens." Point is a lasgun is equivalent to whatever sort of assault rifle we see decades from now or maybe a higher powered assault rifle, like a 7.62 as opposed to a 5.56.

Obviously the Imperium has Heavy Bolters, Autocannons, Plasma Guns, Meltagun, Flamers, and Lascannons, that the modern military has no similar infantry weapon to. A heavy bolter is a fully automatic 75mm guide assisted shell, an autocannon by todays standards is equivalent to whats in Bradly fighting vehicle which isn't man portable... plasma guns and meltaguns are going to burn holes through everything, and lascannons burn through tanks easily.

When a .50cal is equivalent to a heavy stubber and thats most readily available heavy weapon, Imperium out guns any modern force.

Titan walks on to the battlefield. Game over for humanity. now close this thread, i think we've all had enough of these

Titans with vortex weapons and cannons that make everything dead.

Joetaco wrote:Titan walks on to the battlefield. Game over for humanity. now close this thread, i think we've all had enough of these

Ah, if only nosferatu was here. "YOUR ALL STUPEED! HUMENS WOULD JUST USE PICARD MANEUVER! PICARD MANEUVER! PICARD MANEUVER! AND IMPERIUM WOULD ALL DIE!"

Carpet bomb the troop ships as they open up

i dont read the rules

aka_mythos wrote:post

Okay well your argument is convincing and I am inclined to agree with your points. Perhaps I am playing devils advocate somewhat here. I realise that the imperium is colossal planet conquering machine that could steam roll earth in days, but that isn't what the OP asked. He asked about a battle with IG Versus modern day troops and land only (which made it sound like he wanted to make it a fair test) And suddenly people are posting about how much IG would destroy everything, and how weak modern weapons and soldiers are... While I agree that modern troops don't have the futuristic wargear that IG have, I have to point out that does not mean that modern weapons would be ineffective.

For completeness sake: the description for the Heavy Stubber in my wargear book reads:

"old fashioned weapon ... To all intents the heavy stub gun is similar to a twentieth century heavy machine gun"

My Necromunda Rule Book describes Stub Gun as:

"Primitive type of hand gun ... is recognisable as a revolver or small automatic of the kind used since the twentieth century "

Given these explanations I think it is only fair that an Assault Rifle be considered equivalent to Autogun at S3, which gives us a frame of reference for the strength of modern weapons.

I can't really see any frame of reference for comparing tanks other than how easily they die in game... which is perhaps unrealistic. this makes it hard to draw conclusions.

But needless to say if I had to play a regular 2000 pt IG army, and I had 33331317 troops with autoguns, and something like a few razor backs (just for simplicity). I don't think I would feel too underhanded at all... not like people have been making out.

I think the biggest advantage/disadvantage is that unlike modern forces IG carry weapons that are designed to take out heavy armor. The modern army has Javelin missiles but thats a krak missile doesn't compare to a lascannon shooting a modern tank. Modern military relies on joint arms strategy, infantry doesn't carry much in the way of true heavy weapons because they rely on tanks or air support or artillery to take out armored targets. IG tanks would only have to worry about other tanks and artillery. A leman russ can be made of a variaty of materials depending on the planet it comes from but its suppose to be a type of plastisteel adamantine material... what ever that futuristic mumbo jumbo means thats seemingly more advanced than chobim and may not need to rely as heavily on the geometric tricks modern armor uses to optimize its strength. Against a Russ' front armor an Abram would really struggle.

When it comes to comparing lasguns to autoguns to modern assault rifles, even if you insist on that comparison the simple fact is a lasgun has more shots than a modern rifle man carries bullets. IG would out shoot modern infantry and be able to protract a battle beyond the capabilities of a modern force. IG would use attrition tactics where even if they lost 10 men for every 1 the killed they'd come out on top, since the perception on the value of life in the imperium is lower.

Playing devils advocate, the advantage of modern military over IG would be the ability to more accurately call shots and relay communications of enemy positions; battlefield awareness. Modern forces would have a better utilization of inteligence and indiginous forces. Modern forces because they are volunteer forces would tend to have a higher leadership value. The modern forces pack a lot more special roles into a squad, they have all the defensive grenades, vox, special and heavy weapons formationally that IG wouldn't. An IG squad has a heavy weapon, a special weapon, and 6 rifleman. A modern army squad is 8-16 with a designated marksmen, 2 machineguns, a number of auxiliary grenade launchers, at least two portable missiles, radios, hand grenades and a dedicated transports. In a battle they could do a little bit of everything even if they were eventually worn down.

Tactically the modern army would make use of suppressing fire to pin down enemy forces and then rely largely on heavier assets to clean up, thus without a large use of vehicles IG would be made less mobile.

SmackCakes wrote:Given these explanations I think it is only fair that an Assault Rifle be considered equivalent to Autogun at S3, which gives us a frame of reference for the strength of modern weapons.

Stub gun != autogun.

A Stub weapon is inferior to an Autoweapon. Effectively, a stub weapon is pretty much exactly like modern weapons, while an autogun is far more advanced, a caseless fully automatic and highly reliable weapon of the future.

Melissia wrote:

SmackCakes wrote:Given these explanations I think it is only fair that an Assault Rifle be considered equivalent to Autogun at S3, which gives us a frame of reference for the strength of modern weapons.

Stub gun != autogun.

A Stub weapon is inferior to an Autoweapon. Effectively, a stub weapon is pretty much exactly like modern weapons, while an autogun is far more advanced, a caseless fully automatic and highly reliable weapon of the future.

I completely agree but in game terms they still both have S3. Which is why I said equivalent.

Yes, and a scout outside of power armor has the same strength as a Marine inside it. So does a human in power armor and a human out. Even though power armor DOES enhance strength in both cases. And Orks are S3 standard unless they're charging, even though an Ork can easily rip a man's arms out of their socket and then pull his head off with a nice pop afterwards without breaking a sweat. "Strength 3" is a huge range. "Roughly" equivalent would be right... VERY roughly.

As said in another thread, if there were point fives, it would probably be 3.5 for ork strength, 2.5 for stub gun strength, and maybe 3.5 for autogun strength (don't quote me on this. I know somebody is gonna quote this and put it in their signature, just to spite me.)

after watching the military channel im 100% certain that our Artillery outclasses anything in the 40k universe though. Given the various gps targeting and techno sorcery surrounding them they can pick out targets quickly and accurately. Several pieces can be set up, place several rounds, pack up and leave in 15 minutes or less.

Ennkay wrote:after watching the military channel im 100% certain that our Artillery outclasses anything in the 40k universe though. Given the various gps targeting and techno sorcery surrounding them they can pick out targets quickly and accurately. Several pieces can be set up, place several rounds, pack up and leave in 15 minutes or less.

Imperial Guard artillery is also known for its accuracy and mobility. The difference is mostly that IG artillery has a far deadlier payload and has less care if they cause friendly casualties.

aka_mythos wrote: An IG squad has a heavy weapon, a special weapon, and 6 rifleman. A modern army squad is 8-16 with a designated marksmen, 2 machineguns, a number of auxiliary grenade launchers, at least two portable missiles, radios, hand grenades and a dedicated transports. In a battle they could do a little bit of everything even if they were eventually worn down.

Except, of course, there are about 40,000x more guard squads than Earth squads, and even going by the codex you could easily have a "squad" be a mob of 50 men with 5 heavy weapons, 5 assault weapons, and 5 tanks to rival the best Israeli offerings.

Melissia wrote:

Ennkay wrote:after watching the military channel im 100% certain that our Artillery outclasses anything in the 40k universe though. Given the various gps targeting and techno sorcery surrounding them they can pick out targets quickly and accurately. Several pieces can be set up, place several rounds, pack up and leave in 15 minutes or less.

Imperial Guard artillery is also known for its accuracy and mobility. The difference is mostly that IG artillery has a far deadlier payload and has less care if they cause friendly casualties.

they definitely do not care as much about friendly casualties, however the deadliness of the payload is arguable

No it isn't. Earthshaker rounds are quite well known for their incredible destructive power.

SmackCakes wrote:

raptor8 wrote:titans, long rang guns(the big guns) baneblades, shadow swords if the guardsmen were cadians it would be even worse for modern militarys

The only thing IG don't seem to have is nukes... Modern Humans win!

*slaps in the face with a deathstrike missile*

Yep. The Deathstrike missile is effectively an ICBM.

And the God-Emperor save you if they pull out a vortex deathstrike missile.

Humanity would probebly join the imperium within about a minute of them landing. Humans with better technology, see no reason why not.

And if there was combat, it would end similarly to the seven hour war from half life 2. But the A10 would hurt things. Good thing I am gunna try to fly one.

Melissia wrote:No it isn't. Earthshaker rounds are quite well known for their incredible destructive power.

while that may be, things like the M982 Excalibur can deliver a shell within 13 feet of a target from 25 miles away can be quite devastating, not to mention if you fire it out of something like a PzH 2000 which can put 3 rounds out in 9 seconds which even when dropping dumb ordinance can blanket a large area of ground pretty successfully on its own. with proper recon you could probably just pick out all of the Basilisks and earth shakers pretty easily


edit*

Catachans would kick our asses in the jungles

Ennkay wrote:

Melissia wrote:No it isn't. Earthshaker rounds are quite well known for their incredible destructive power.

while that may be, things like the M982 Excalibur can deliver a shell within 13 feet of a target from 25 miles away can be quite devastating, not to mention if you fire it out of something like a PzH 2000 which can put 3 rounds out in 9 seconds which even when dropping dumb ordinance can blanket a large area of ground pretty successfully on its own. with proper recon you could probably just pick out all of the Basilisks and earth shakers pretty easily

Yes, and?

With proper recon-- IE, orbital scans, scout sentinels, or just plain recce platoons-- earthshakers could just blanket all Earth forces' artillery with ease, and do a better job of it because of the superior firepower.

And Cadians would own us everywhere else. The Imperial Guard is fighting far deadlier opponents than mere humans every day on countless worlds at any given time. Assignment to invade Earth would be seen as light duty and rightfully so.

Earth would lose because I would betray you all in the name of the Emprah!

Frankly I bet losing would be better for us than winning anyway...

That's good, since there's no way in hell we're winning anyway.

And as an added benefit, they would probably mindwipe/servitor all the psycho religious fanatics who don't accept the Emprah's worship.

I played this battle once at are store....

1,500 pts of Space Wolfs vs. 1,500 pts US Army 5th Armored Infantry....

6 turns of savage shooting Space Puppies hit what they were shooting at the US Army hit mostly terrain features, by the time turn 6 came around Space Puppy termies got in close combat and slaughtered the Army guys. A lone Army vet Sgt with missle launcher did manage to take out the Space Marine Commander in Termi armor and 5 other termies at long range and survived till turn 6. US Army was wiped out, but had only 1 survivor. Space Puppies were killed to the man a hard win that I will never play again.

US Army trooper
flak armor
stub gun
stub pistol
combat knife
frak an krak grenade.

hvy / support weapons
hvy stubber
missile launcher
grenade launcher
mortar

vehicles
predator type armed with auto cannon, hvy stubber

LordWynne wrote:flak armor
krak
missile launcher
grenade launcher
mortar
predator type armed with auto cannon, hvy stubber

Yeah, all of these are wrong. There's no proof that our krak nades, krak missiles, mortars, or tanks are equivalent to any of these, and I KNOW that our body armor isn't equivalent to Flak Armor.

The earthshaker is good for putting a large shell in the general area of an enemy position or charge pulping pretty much anything. However, were it so easy for the guard to neutralize enemy artillery you would not have have situations like in 'First and Only' where they do get shelled on a regular basis(and actually know the general area of where the guns are iirc) yet did not neutralize the batteries, or situations like in fifteen hours where they are engaged in trench warfare where both sides come under heavy artillery bombardment on a regular basis. yet for 10 years could not place shells to neutralize the ork artillery positions.

The Imperial Guard is terrible at neutralizing Artillery. And given the likeness of the earthshaker to a classic ww1 ww2 era artillery piece with the added bonus of a large shell(which is not even the case as the forgeworld basilisk sheet states that the earth shaker shell is a 132MM shell as opposed to the 155 utilized by the PzH 2000 and M982 Excalibur systems) . It also states that the shell can travel 15 KM (9 miles)

lets recap

the basilisk fires a smaller shell, less accurately, and with a shorter range

while modern artillery is capable of putting a larger sized shell to a target 25 miles away within 13 yards of the target with a faster rate of fire.


*friend asked me to throw this tidbit in here(no dakka account)

The Earthshaker is barely equivalent to modern short range artillery. The stats given for it in the FW datasheet indicate that it fires 132mm shells up to 15km. Though there's no figures given for accuracy, its short range and small shell size (even assuming a more powerful charge with more effective chemical explosive as compared to modern chemical explosives) in no way compensate for modern artillery's longer range, precise fire (with GPS guided rounds landing within meters of their targets), and higher rates of fire. It's unthinkable that Earthshakers could possibly clear out a modern artillery regiment when the modern artillery has four times the range and more than sufficient firepower to wipe the Earthshakers off the field.

Ennkay wrote:[snip]

A good author may sacrifice realism for the sake of drama.

Compare it to the Cain books, where they demolish a small group of city blocks and leave them in ruin, but none of the neighboring blocks are harmed (Very minimal damage). Effectively, Earthshakers as well as any other artillery in fiction are as precise as the plot demands them to be.

Decimating one city block and leaving nearby blocks "minimally damaged" is insufficient when you compare it to modern artillery's ability to decimate a specific building and leave nearby structures unharmed. Beyond which, even assuming that Earthshakers can just match (nevermind exceed) a modern artillery piece's accuracy, its range means it will never be able to place sufficient counter-battery fire on modern artillery before being destroyed by the accurate, powerful, and long-ranged fire of modern artillery. The sad fact is that modern towed, small artillery pieces and mortars can meet or exceed the range of an Earthshaker, which is the longest ranged artillery piece that the IG seem to field (the US's M119 Howitzer, which is light enough to be air-dropped via parachute, can reach out the nearly 20km).

Main question is, who cares? Earth still loses.

Terminus wrote: Earth still loses.

yes, i figure the whole situation is pretty null given one of the usual methods of bringing a planet into the fold of the imperium is just dropping an imperator titan in, we'd probably give the whole imperium thing a shot once there is one chilling outside of washington D.C

but i wanted to point out that we arent as helpless as you might think against the guard( i chose not to expand into other areas because thats too much gak to talk about)

Again, range is not really specified

aka_mythos wrote:GW game designers have talked about how the ranges of the table top game are not meant to be considered linearly. Such that at the start of the game when you're 4ft away, that might represent a mile, but that as you close the range represented by an inch shifts. Thus their isn't any good way of extrapolating range from the table top. If you look at Forge World's Imperial Armor I believe it places Basilisk cannons as being effective in the 15-20kM range.

So that means they have a range of at LEAST 20 kilometers, which is not inferior to modern artillery (~24km is about average for normal rounds-- rocket assisted rounds can go longer, but then we get in the realm of special ammunition which you have no proof the Imperium doesn't have itself). In fact, the codex notes that the Earthshaker Cannon's range is supposed to be one of its most well known features.

Furthermore, the Basilisk is extremely mobile with no need to set up before firing-- they just need to stop to point the vehicle in the right direction, aim and fire, then they can move again a few moments later, unlike the most modern artillery piece in common use today (M777 howitzer) which requires it be towed by a truck or airlifted by a helicopter. Neither of which have as good armor as the basilisk itself does.

IG will just spam AV12 FTW.

On a somewhat related note, I wish they included the specialized rounds in the codex to make Basilisks more interesting/fieldable.

Vrakk wrote:And we have numbers - India and China alone could field enough troops (albeit poorly trained) that would make a Imperial Guard commander jealous.

This is SO going into my book of qoutes.

Also you are comparing self-propelled guns to emplacements, which its already given that modern self prepared guns outclass the basilisk, you can go ahead and compare earthshaker emplacements to the m777 but this still retains the same range and firepower attributes.

The Witchhunters would just have no mercy.Power armour vs. kevlar.Bye bye

Four words: Cobalt Bombs and bunkers.

Buh-bye

Ennkay wrote:its already given that modern self prepared guns outclass the basilisk,

No, it's not.

Space Marines win because their armor is prettier colors than ours.

In all honesty, we wouldn't stand a chance.

When you delve into our BEST of weaponry, we are still outclassed by that of IGs "standard issue"

When talking numbers, Earth has a population of 6 billion the IG considers a world-battle in which infantry losses alone double that to be "Insignificant casualties"

When talking Tech, Its the year 40k for a reason. Nothing we have right now compares to Plasma, Melta, Ceramite, or anything of the like, and thats not counting Psykers and the Machine Spirit...

Saying that "Modern forces would stand a chance against the IG" is effectively saying "The Roman Legions would stand a chance against Modern Forces" without one MAJOR element... Modern Forces aren't fictional... They can't be dramatically 'powered up' with a simple keystroke, they don't have magical abilites that allow them to shoot lightning from their fingertips, or summon Daemonic entities, or the ability to Teleport anything at all.

The entire premise behind this thread can only be described as 'unfair'... and the concept is about as debatable as the topic "Does Water contain Oxygen?"

/thread

~DAR

How the battle would go would depend on how the Imperium presents to the world. Would it show up, have peace talks, and take their time? Or much more likely, would it show up, sawy bow or die, and attack? Are they trying to preserve the world, or just wipe it?

In the first option, the Imperium would have time to learn our language, determine who is in charge and when the attack came they would know where to send their elite elements to take out the world's command structure.

In the 2nd option the world's forces would have to time to prepare and get organized. Our air power would play havoc with troop and vehicle transports trying to land. Eventuall thru weight of nubmers and advanced technology, the Imperium would gain the upper hand. Now consider this.
Do you really thinkg countries like N Korea, Iran, Russia, Israel, Saudia Arabia, etc. would just say "ok, you win." Of course not. They would nuke their own lands before giving it to the Imperium - rememeber, France is not in charge - surrender is not an easy choice.

Given how much arable land the world has, it could very well be that they would want to convert this world into an aggri-world.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Vrakk wrote:In the 2nd option the world's forces would have to time to prepare and get organized. Our air power would play havoc with troop and vehicle transports trying to land..

I doubt it. The vehicles in Aeronautica Imperialis are pretty damn fast and tough, and a lot better armed than our own.

It'd be just a case of:

"WE'VE got Nukes!"

"Yeah? Well WE'VE got Imperator Titans!"

"Oh Yeah? Well WE'VE got huge numbers of tanks!"

"Really? We'll WE'VE got Space Marines"

"Oh. Damn."

imperium has nukes anyway
adrams are not the best tank in earth
leopard and NEW russian tanks are even/better than that tincan

anyway you only need to spook the civilians=hysteria and it ends with surrender
imperium wins

Ardensfax wrote:It'd be just a case of:

"WE'VE got Nukes!"

"Yeah? Well WE'VE got Imperator Titans!"

"Oh Yeah? Well WE'VE got huge numbers of tanks!"

"Really? We'll WE'VE got Space Marines"

"Oh. Damn."

More like:

"We've got nukes!"
"Yeah, so do we, what about 'em? We've got Titans."
"Oh yeah? Well we've got huge numbers of tanks!"
"So we'll just deploy a few more armour batallions than normal, big deal."
"Yeah, but we have lots of artillery!" "You, too? Cool. We've got powered armor which is nigh-invulnerable to your weaponry."
"Crap."

argh double post

No, I think that conversation ends with Imperial Titans.

Alternatively, the Imperium can just send in Sanguinor, and a solid chunk of the world will go "OMG ANGELZ!! *grovel*"

[edit: delete, thought this post had vanished.]

Terminus wrote:IG will just spam AV12 FTW.

On a somewhat related note, I wish they included the specialized rounds in the codex to make Basilisks more interesting/fieldable.

+1 on both counts.

Melissia wrote:

LordWynne wrote:flak armor
krak
missile launcher
grenade launcher
mortar
predator type armed with auto cannon, hvy stubber

Yeah, all of these are wrong. There's no proof that our krak nades, krak missiles, mortars, or tanks are equivalent to any of these, and I KNOW that our body armor isn't equivalent to Flak Armor.

Rouge Trader stats that this gear is equivlant to todays modern weaponry, If I were a commanding officer of the US Army against Imperial Army or Marines. I would order a multi-cruise missile attack with heavy cluster warhead, that will effect both infanrty and armor, use the same cruise missle to lay mine fields on my flanks and have the 5th Armored infantry spear head the attack with Bradley's and Abrams. Everything will be given air to ground support from Appachie choppers and F-21 Raptor fighter craft, "Steel Rain" baby.....nothing would survive, along with 2,000 lb smart bombs and satalite imaging the forces of the Imperium will take a second thouhgt on invasion after that.

LordWynne wrote:Rouge Trader stats that this gear is equivlant to todays modern weaponry

Yeaaaaah... and Rogue Trader was released 23 years ago. Its fluff is no longer necessarily accurate now.

Melissia wrote:

LordWynne wrote:Rouge Trader stats that this gear is equivlant to todays modern weaponry

Yeaaaaah... and Rogue Trader was released 23 years ago. Its fluff is no longer necessarily accurate now.

More importantly, how would 23 year old fluff be accurate to TODAYS modern weaponry. Keep in mind how "modern" our weaponry was in the 80s vs today....

When it comes to personal arms, our weaponry hasn't changed much. The best handgun is still Browning's century-old design. The M16 series and equivalent rifles were introduced in the 60s.

We've seen great advances in optics, some minor strides in cartridge design, and there have been some upgrades to these weapons to make them suitable for competition, but the average soldier's standard issue is the same gak they were issued in the 80s.

LordWynne wrote:

Melissia wrote:

LordWynne wrote:flak armor
krak
missile launcher
grenade launcher
mortar
predator type armed with auto cannon, hvy stubber

Yeah, all of these are wrong. There's no proof that our krak nades, krak missiles, mortars, or tanks are equivalent to any of these, and I KNOW that our body armor isn't equivalent to Flak Armor.

Rouge Trader stats that this gear is equivlant to todays modern weaponry, If I were a commanding officer of the US Army against Imperial Army or Marines. I would order a multi-cruise missile attack with heavy cluster warhead, that will effect both infanrty and armor, use the same cruise missle to lay mine fields on my flanks and have the 5th Armored infantry spear head the attack with Bradley's and Abrams. Everything will be given air to ground support from Appachie choppers and F-21 Raptor fighter craft, "Steel Rain" baby.....nothing would survive, along with 2,000 lb smart bombs and satalite imaging the forces of the Imperium will take a second thouhgt on invasion after that.

Disqualified, you're forgetting that this is land only.

You mention cruise missiles, which are fired from a 1) UAS, 2) fast moving flyer, 3) Naval vessel.
You also mention Apaches and F-21s. You could argue that AH-64s could be comparable to skimmers in that they move low to the ground and provide close fire support, so I'd allow that, but F-21s are right out, that's air supremacy.

The Raptor is actually the F22. F21 is an Israeli craft.

The F22 also had a limited production run and was cut of funding by the hippies in Washington for being too badass and expensive. Its avionics are already considered out of date, too, and probably wouldn't be able to handle Imperial aircraft. After all, even crappy watered-down STC copies of Dark Age tech outstrips ours by several tens of thousands of years.

Terminus wrote:When it comes to personal arms, our weaponry hasn't changed much. The best handgun is still Browning's century-old design. The M16 series and equivalent rifles were introduced in the 60s.

Right. They even released a new version of the M1911A1 about ten years ago (referred to as the Colt M1991). It's basically just the same design with updated materials and manufacturing methods.

All that changed was to lengthen the grip safety (beavertail still way better) and tuned the ejection port to be more reliable with hollowpoints and other modern ammo (although the army still won't use JHP).

A few manufacturers also offer the 2011 variant, which is basically the same gun with a high capacity frame, but it's used exclusively in competition. One of my 1911s is based on this frame and chambered for 10mm. 22+1 bear-stopping rounds, bitches!

Aside from the stupidity of arguing modern day army vs and fictional futuristic army...

You can't just say land only. As I and several others have posted, modern day armies do not fight land only. In the US military, groudn forces train to work with the Air Force. The marines are supported by the Navy. All of the forces are supported by intelligence services.

Right. And when the Imperium invades, the Imperial Navy provides space-support and air support to ground forces. I doubt we'd be able to manage to maintain air superiority against the aerospace craft of Aeronautica Imperialis. If it's a major battle, Adeptus Titanicus provide siege support (not that there'd be any need for titans against modern forces). Similarly, the Adeptus Astartes might be involved (low chance of this in such a minor battle, but stranger things have happened), as might the Adepta Sororitas-- either of which ave armor that would require anti-tank rounds to penetrate, and thus we'd have a rather hard time dealing with them. We have nothing that can properly counter a drop pod assault, and the Sisters would likely reign supreme in an urban environment. The Adeptus Mechanicus could also be involved if they believe we have tech worth studying (doubtful, but not entirely impossible). And there's always the threat of superheavies such as baneblades and thunderhawks.

Even just land-only it's nowhere near a fair fight, but add everything else in...

Vrakk wrote:All of the forces are supported by intelligence services.

Bad I.N.T.E.L.L.I.G.E.N.C.E.! Very bad I.N.T.E.L.L.I.G.E.N.C.E.!

Just to weigh in on the "Earth is doomed" side of the argument, even if we stick to the ground only rule, I'd like to point to current conflicts for evidence of the guardsman outmatching our forces.

Now as far as I know, the current wars being fought tend to be NATO countries against those armed with AK's and the 5.56 rifles we use are suffering against their better range 7.62 rounds. Basically any non urban combat by infantry tends to lean in favour of those with overall superior ranged firepower and the Guardsman has this in abundance over modern soldiers, even with the basic Lasgun.

So yeah, I'm fairly certain we'd be going down hard in this fight.

The 7.62 has its own set of problems. Hopefully the current inquiry by the Army will result in the adoption of the 6.5 grendel or 6.8 SPC, which by all indications seem to be the "perfect" battle rifle cartridge.

The irony is that Britain proposed just such a round over 50 years ago, but the U.S. was busy waving their dicks around demanding the bigger 7.62 be adopted as the NATO standard. Then barely a decade later the 7.62's issues surfaced in Vietnam, and the U.S. pushed for the adoption of the 5.56, again ignoring everyone else's complaints. Now we have the issue of reports coming in from our various battlefields about the 5.56 being inadequate (for whatever reason, none of the tests used as basis for the adoption of the lighter round considered cover in their comparison).

Terminus wrote:The Raptor is actually the F22. F21 is an Israeli craft.

The F22 also had a limited production run and was cut of funding by the hippies in Washington for being too badass and expensive. Its avionics are already considered out of date, too, and probably wouldn't be able to handle Imperial aircraft. After all, even crappy watered-down STC copies of Dark Age tech outstrips ours by several tens of thousands of years.

Yep. Because it has a vulnerability to rain. Read the instruction manual.

ALSO FOR THE LOVE OF GOD PLEASE CLOSE THIS STUPID THREAD

Terminus wrote:The Raptor is actually the F22. F21 is an Israeli craft.

The F22 also had a limited production run and was cut of funding by the hippies in Washington for being too badass and expensive. Its avionics are already considered out of date, too, and probably wouldn't be able to handle Imperial aircraft. After all, even crappy watered-down STC copies of Dark Age tech outstrips ours by several tens of thousands of years.

Surprised I didn't catch this one myself.

Oh well. It's all Chair Force junk, who gives a crap?

LOL, Chair Force, I'm going to have to remember that one.

Well we currently field assault rifles....sounds like an Autogun....what are the stats of an Autogun? (I always wanted to field an AK armed squad of IG....)

The willingness of the IG closing in and getting into Bayonet and Chainsword range is what probably beats us....our modern weapons are accurate and have great range but we suffer if the range closes. Plus have you ever seen the Bayonet issued for modern M4 carbines.....its about the size of a steak knife.....not intimidating at all.

Dogface 76 wrote:Well we currently field assault rifles....sounds like an Autogun....what are the stats of an Autogun? (I always wanted to field an AK armed squad of IG....)

The willingness of the IG closing in and getting into Bayonet and Chainsword range is what probably beats us....our modern weapons are accurate and have great range but we suffer if the range closes. Plus have you ever seen the Bayonet issued for modern M4 carbines.....its about the size of a steak knife.....not intimidating at all.

Probably because bayonets are completely worthless, especially when attached to an M4. The M4's barrel and plastic stock can't handle the kind of force necessary to stab a man with the pointy bit on the end, and even if they could, when the hell are you going to use them? The idea of IG infantry closing to bayonet range is actually pretty ridiculous. It's far too easy to shoot someone before they get close enough to stab you. This applies to lasgun-toting Guardsmen as well as it does to M4-wielding Marines.

assault rifles sounds like autoguns but its nothing close autoguns fire 10mm caseless rounds and the IG uses lasguns, artillary wise modern forces would get oblitterated tank wise we dont stand a chance infantry wise modern forces would get wiped out by guardsmen even it doesnt seem like its worse if modern forces are fighting cadians led by creed...

now just let this thread die



Automatically Appended Next Post:
assault rifles sounds like autoguns but its nothing close autoguns fire 10mm caseless rounds and the IG uses lasguns, artillary wise modern forces would get oblitterated tank wise we dont stand a chance infantry wise modern forces would get wiped out by guardsmen even it doesnt seem like its worse if modern forces are fighting cadians led by creed...

now just let this thread die

Modern day rifles (battle rifles I should note, not assault rifles) are equivalent to an autogun/lasgun. An assault rifle would be equivalent to an autocarbine/lascarbine (the latter of which does indeed exist, as shown in Dark Heresy). I say this because an assault rifle does not use a full powered rifle cartridge. I'm talking about rifles such as a Mosin Nagant, M1 Garand, and so on which use very large caliber. Imagine something like that, only more reliable, with a full auto setting, and extremely sturdy-- plenty sturdy enough to use a bayonet.

And use of a bayonet is often necessary for the Guard, because of the nature of their opponents. Keep in mind that many of the Imperium's enemies rush into melee, and are sturdy or fast enough to get into melee reliably.

Dogface 76 wrote:what are the stats of an Autogun?

They've always been identical to that of the lasgun, so 24" range S3 AP - rapid fire weapon.

raptor8 wrote:assault rifles sounds like autoguns but its nothing close autoguns fire 10mm caseless rounds and the IG uses lasguns, artillary wise modern forces would get oblitterated tank wise we dont stand a chance infantry wise modern forces would get wiped out by guardsmen even it doesnt seem like its worse if modern forces are fighting cadians led by creed...

now just let this thread die

Why let it die? We now have quite an interesting discussion on weapons going on, although perhaps now the thread belongs in off-topic rather than 40k general.

If autoguns really use 10mm rounds, than they make modern battle rifles look like toys by comparison. A 10mm cartridge would have an entry wound 73% larger than that of the Mosin Nagant/Garand, or AK47/M14's 7.62mm, so our best rifles would be sporting S2. The M16/M4/AR15 would be like S2 and you get +1 to your armor against them.

Melissia wrote:Modern day rifles (battle rifles I should note, not assault rifles) are equivalent to an autogun/lasgun. An assault rifle would be equivalent to an autocarbine/lascarbine (the latter of which does indeed exist, as shown in Dark Heresy). I say this because an assault rifle does not use a full powered rifle cartridge. I'm talking about rifles such as a Mosin Nagant, M1 Garand, and so on which use very large caliber. Imagine something like that, only more reliable, with a full auto setting, and extremely sturdy-- plenty sturdy enough to use a bayonet.

And use of a bayonet is often necessary for the Guard, because of the nature of their opponents. Keep in mind that many of the Imperium's enemies rush into melee, and are sturdy or fast enough to get into melee reliably.

Yes, but if the enemy can survive a lasgun that can rip the limbs off an unarmored human... are they really going to go down to a dinky little bayonet?

Unless the enemy is too small or too fast or the Guardsmen just can't hit them.

And the truth is, if you can't hit a moving target at less than twenty meters, you don't belong in any armed forces.

A slashing or stabbing wound can be quite deadlier than a bullet wound. The forces behind both kinds of wounds are quite different. Take a bullet to the gut compared to a knife to the gut-- the bullet will cause a lot of damage, possibly hydrostatic shock... but the slash across the gut will directly injure more organs and cause far more bleeding. A bullet has a set amount of kinetic force, while a close combat weapon has a constant supply of kinetic force applied by the user holding the weapon.

Melissia wrote:A slashing or stabbing wound can be quite deadlier than a bullet wound. The forces behind both kinds of wounds are quite different. Take a bullet to the gut compared to a knife to the gut-- the bullet will cause a lot of damage, possibly hydrostatic shock... but the slash across the gut will directly injure more organs and cause far more bleeding. A bullet has a set amount of kinetic force, while a close combat weapon has a constant supply of kinetic force applied by the user holding the weapon.

How much "damage" a type of wound can do to the body is irrelevant on the battlefield. Any soldier will tell you that if you get shot in the gut, even if it's not immediately fatal, you're out of the game. That's it. You're done. You get shot in the leg, you're done. Unlike tabletop games and video games, if you wound an enemy, even nonfatally, they're down for the count. Besides that, unlike video games and tabletop games, there is no such thing as a nonfatal bullet wound. Forget what you see and hear in movies, there is no such thing as a "flesh wound," and there is no such thing as getting shot "through and through." Rather, there is, but they have just as good a chance of being fatal. If you shoot someone in the leg, miss the femoral artery, miss the bone, hit nothing but muscle, they'll still bleed out in a matter of minutes. And through-and-through is infinitely worse than a bullet lodged in your thigh... through-and-through means a huge exit wound, therefore more bleeding. Of course, a bullet lodged in your thigh will still do the trick, just not as quickly.

That said, I'm not talking about bullet wounds, I'm talking about lasgun shots, which are much more powerful than your standard 5.56 NATO round. There are instances in fluff where a laspistol shot can rip off an unarmored limb.

Terminus wrote:

Vrakk wrote:All of the forces are supported by intelligence services.

Bad I.N.T.E.L.L.I.G.E.N.C.E.! Very bad I.N.T.E.L.L.I.G.E.N.C.E.!

I can just see Marneus Calgar shouting as he takes out some present day troops "Surprise Cockfags!".

In reality though the best bet for our troops is if they turn up to the Battlefield with a large tube of KY Jelly each and then assume the position.

SaintHazard wrote:How much "damage" a type of wound can do to the body is irrelevant on the battlefield. Any soldier will tell you that if you get shot in the gut, even if it's not immediately fatal, you're out of the game. That's it. You're done. You get shot in the leg, you're done.

I don't buy that, and amusingly enough I have my own anecdotal evidence: I've heard plenty of horror stories from veterans in the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts that say otherwise about their opponents' ability to endure pain and continue fighting. Religious fanaticism and adrenaline can go a long way in ensuring that a wounded opponent keeps fighting.

And indeed, that's one of the problems that is causing debate over whether or not the military's current weaponry is truly sufficient, especially with the growing prevalence of body armor.

Melissia wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:How much "damage" a type of wound can do to the body is irrelevant on the battlefield. Any soldier will tell you that if you get shot in the gut, even if it's not immediately fatal, you're out of the game. That's it. You're done. You get shot in the leg, you're done.

I don't buy that, and amusingly enough I have my own anecdotal evidence: I've heard plenty of horror stories from veterans in the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts that say otherwise about their opponents' ability to endure pain and continue fighting. Religious fanaticism and adrenaline can go a long way in ensuring that a wounded opponent keeps fighting.

And indeed, that's one of the problems that is causing debate over whether or not the military's current weaponry is truly sufficient, especially with the growing prevalence of body armor.

I'd agree that there are exceptions to the rule, but by and large if you get shot, you're out of the action.