Which army's standard service rifle is the best in fluff? Go go go go go.

In what terms and role? The shuriken catapult and pulse rifle could be considered decent all round. The bolter is best out of those for shock troops though.

Pulse Rifle I'd say. As fast to fire as any other rifle in the list, lightweight, powerful and good at penetrating armour too.

Having said that, the Bolter fluff wise is so nasty on impact that it actually does more damage in Deathwatch. from a fluff perspective, the Gauss flayer was also mean fluff wise (at least before retcon; don;t know about after). I used to flay the target alive, reducing them to atoms via magnetic fields. Quite a horrific way to die.

Pulse rifle, probably, but I voted splinter rifle, because it ignores toughness entirely.

Also, as n0t-u said, they all have slightly different roles, so it is also circumstantial.

The Lasgun. It's powerful, durable, easy to use, easy to make, and can be recharged anywhere there is sunlight.

A basic gun that can stop tanks and reduce an enemy into individual molecules? How is this even a competition? I don't even play Necrons, and I know their basic weapon beats out the other guys. Tau are a close second with the enhanced strength of the blast. Splinter cannons could be a close competition as well, because they work well against monsters. But the weapon, fluff and gameplay, that works against all targets is the flayer.

I had actually forgotten the gauss flayer, that wins hands down.

Shoota = Unlimited Ammo
If you throw enough bullets into something, it'll kill it

Gauss Flayer: "Get Over Here!" on a subatomic level

The shoota. If it wasn't for the fact that Orks don't bother to aim in the first place, it'd be the nastiest standard weapon in the galaxy, even more than gauss flayers.

Keep in mind as nasty as it is, the gauss flayer still doesn't have a better chance (at least, not much better) to kill the average human than, say, a boltgun does.

The shoota however has a much better rate of fire than either of them while doing similarly respectable damage.

Melissia wrote:The shoota. If it wasn't for the fact that Orks don't bother to aim in the first place, it'd be the nastiest standard weapon in the galaxy, even more than gauss flayers.

Keep in mind as nasty as it is, the gauss flayer still doesn't have a better chance (at least, not much better) to kill the average human than, say, a boltgun does.

The shoota however has a much better rate of fire than either of them while doing similarly respectable damage.

True, but it won't take down a tank!

Castiel wrote:

Melissia wrote:The shoota. If it wasn't for the fact that Orks don't bother to aim in the first place, it'd be the nastiest standard weapon in the galaxy, even more than gauss flayers.

Keep in mind as nasty as it is, the gauss flayer still doesn't have a better chance (at least, not much better) to kill the average human than, say, a boltgun does.

The shoota however has a much better rate of fire than either of them while doing similarly respectable damage.

True, but it won't take down a tank!

Then Big shoota?? (but that's not a basic weapon)

Well for Fluff I go with the Bolter it's a frickin machine-gun rocket launcher!!!!

Coolyo294 wrote:The Lasgun. It's powerful, durable, easy to use, easy to make, and can be recharged anywhere there is sunlight.

Or even direct heat, such as a fire. It's also easy to clean & maintain.

I like the lasgun myself.

Castiel wrote:True, but it won't take down a tank!

Sure it will if you hit the tank in a weak spot. Most in-fluff depictions of shootas have them be explosive shells which are very much capable of hurting light vehicles or damaging tanks on weak armor, just as bolters can.

Melissia wrote:The shoota. If it wasn't for the fact that Orks don't bother to aim in the first place, it'd be the nastiest standard weapon in the galaxy, even more than gauss flayers.

Keep in mind as nasty as it is, the gauss flayer still doesn't have a better chance (at least, not much better) to kill the average human than, say, a boltgun does.

The shoota however has a much better rate of fire than either of them while doing similarly respectable damage.

Where do you get the info that the Gauss Flayer doesn't have a better chance to kill a Human than a Boltgun?


Gauss Flayer, hands down.

Diassembling things on a Molecular layer, including Land Raiders, is just impossible to beat.

Sasori wrote:Where do you get the info that the Gauss Flayer doesn't have a better chance to kill a Human than a Boltgun?

Because they've never been depicted as such.

A boltgun hitting a human in the chest is practically a guaranteed kill (even if it misses all vital organs!), you realize?

Melissia wrote:

Sasori wrote:Where do you get the info that the Gauss Flayer doesn't have a better chance to kill a Human than a Boltgun?

Because they've never been depicted as such.

A boltgun hitting a human in the chest is practically a guaranteed kill (even if it misses all vital organs!), you realize?

Yes, I do realize. I guess it's a completely moot point in the end. If both hit, they are going to kill a Human.

Regardless, The Gauss Flayer can destroy a Land Raider, so it wins even if it can't put out the volume of fire a shoota can.

Sasori wrote:Regardless, The Gauss Flayer can destroy a Land Raider, so it wins even if it can't put out the volume of fire a shoota can.

Unless of course you're not facing a land raider, but instead a horde of Orks/Tyranids/Humans.

Land Raiders are rare, most living beings in 40k haven't ever heard of them more likely than not, nevermind seen one.

Melissia wrote:

Sasori wrote:Regardless, The Gauss Flayer can destroy a Land Raider, so it wins even if it can't put out the volume of fire a shoota can.

Unless of course you're not facing a land raider, but instead a horde of Orks/Tyranids/Humans.

Land Raiders are rare, most living beings in 40k haven't ever heard of them more likely than not, nevermind seen one.

Most living beings don't encounter a Necron either, so what's your point?

The Shoota may be better at Killing Humans and things of a weaker nature by nature of rate of fire, but the Flayer is better at killing anything that has the armor to resist the shootas, including heavily armored vehicles.

Melissia wrote:

Sasori wrote:Regardless, The Gauss Flayer can destroy a Land Raider, so it wins even if it can't put out the volume of fire a shoota can.

Unless of course you're not facing a land raider, but instead a horde of Orks/Tyranids/Humans.

Land Raiders are rare, most living beings in 40k haven't ever heard of them more likely than not, nevermind seen one.

Saying if doesn't change the fact that it is more powerful. Sure the rate of fire might be more useful against a horde, but what if you are facing a marine mech assault mounted in Land Raiders?

As far as killing what you hit goes the Flayer has more stoping power.

Shoota

The question is going to be impossible to answer unless you define far more criteria than just 'best'.

For example, are we talking about 'best weapon for a normal human to use?' Bolters can do more damage, may have better armor penetration, and are generally more psychological, but they are bulky, maintenance intensive, costly, and the ammo is large and you can't carry very much of it. Gauss flayers and Shuriken weapons might be more destructive or better penetration, but they are also alien weapons and a typical human would have no way to maintain or reload/replace them. so once you use up it's power it's useless. Also there's a question of ergonomics (less so for shuriken weapons but Gauss weapons are not exactly designed for squishy organics to use and they look front-heavy.) Pulse rifle is in the same boat, and I'm not exactly sure how it is maintenance wise.

Lasguns might be 'best' in some ways (reliability, ammo capacity and availability, accuracy, versatility, etc.) but it invariably also relies on a certain level of techbase to create and maintain (someone has to provide the plug-and-play parts you use to maintain the weapon, and not everyone will know how to make those parts easily.) so it could be a drawback.

Under all those considerations, you could actually make an argument for something like an autogun or stubber as being 'best'.

Castiel wrote:Sure the rate of fire might be more useful against a horde, but what if you are facing a marine mech assault mounted in Land Raiders?

Which is irrelevant because that almost never happens.

The rate of fire makes the shoota mroe powerful because it's putting out more firepower over the same period of time.

Think about the difference between a bolt action sniper rifle and an assault rifle. The assault rifle is the more powerful weapon because it can do more damage faster, even though the sniper rifle does more more per shot due to greater individual firepower. Sure, the sniper rifle can potentially disable a vehicle, but it's unlikely to do so in the first place-- just like gauss flayers.

Melissia wrote:

Castiel wrote:Sure the rate of fire might be more useful against a horde, but what if you are facing a marine mech assault mounted in Land Raiders?

Which is irrelevant because that almost never happens.

The rate of fire makes the shoota mroe powerful because it's putting out more firepower over the same period of time.

It's every bit as relevant, you never know what your going to face, so a gun that can put down everything from grunts to tanks is an advantage.

And rate of fire doesn't neccessarily make a weapon more powerful, especially as the majority of the shots are likely to miss or bounce off. With the flayer a hit will do damage.

Not to mention that as you aren't an Ork the shoota won't work!

Lasgun. Easy to produce and maintain and kills what it is designed to do just fine. It doesn't matter if your anti-infantry weapon can kill tanks or not, that's not what it's supposed to do!

And technically speaking, the Storm Bolter is the "standard service rifle" of the Grey Knights...

Melissia wrote:

Castiel wrote:Sure the rate of fire might be more useful against a horde, but what if you are facing a marine mech assault mounted in Land Raiders?

Which is irrelevant because that almost never happens.

The rate of fire makes the shoota mroe powerful because it's putting out more firepower over the same period of time.

This isn't true at all. You can put out as many bullets as you want, but that doesn't mean you are going to be able to scratch the paint on a Land Raider.

The fact of the Matter is, that the Shoota is useless in some circumstances, while the Gauss Flayer can be used in all instances of combat to varying effectiveness. This makes the Flayer a better weapon, period.

Gauss Flayers do lack anything resembling a stock however. This isn't a problem when you're a robot wielding the weapon (or perhaps in power armor) but it can make it hard for a normal person to use properly.

Sasori wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Castiel wrote:Sure the rate of fire might be more useful against a horde, but what if you are facing a marine mech assault mounted in Land Raiders?

Which is irrelevant because that almost never happens.

The rate of fire makes the shoota mroe powerful because it's putting out more firepower over the same period of time.

This isn't true at all. You can put out as many bullets as you want, but that doesn't mean you are going to be able to scratch the paint on a Land Raider.

The fact of the Matter is, that the Shoota is useless in some circumstances, while the Gauss Flayer can be used in all instances of combat to varying effectiveness. This makes the Flayer a better weapon, period.

It's not a better weapon if you're facing a horde of Guardsmen/Nids/whatever. More versatile doesn't equal "better".

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Sasori wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Castiel wrote:Sure the rate of fire might be more useful against a horde, but what if you are facing a marine mech assault mounted in Land Raiders?

Which is irrelevant because that almost never happens.

The rate of fire makes the shoota mroe powerful because it's putting out more firepower over the same period of time.

This isn't true at all. You can put out as many bullets as you want, but that doesn't mean you are going to be able to scratch the paint on a Land Raider.

The fact of the Matter is, that the Shoota is useless in some circumstances, while the Gauss Flayer can be used in all instances of combat to varying effectiveness. This makes the Flayer a better weapon, period.

It's not a better weapon if you're facing a horde of Guardsmen/Nids/whatever. More versatile doesn't equal "better".

True, but it is better if you are facing a mech assault. If is irrelevant. You don't know what you're going to face, so bring a weapon that can kill everything.

Sasori wrote:The fact of the Matter is, that the Shoota is useless in some circumstances

So is the flayer.

The Gauss Flayer cannot handle its wielder being outnumbered, but the shoota can.

The best basic weapon? The choppa. It's just a chunk of roughly-sharpened metal, being swung by a gorilla-sized madman who's having the time of his life. It can hack through the most advanced armor in the universe; or if it can't, it can just deliver enough blunt trauma to bludgeon the guy inside the armor to death. And best of all, even a pretty fancy one can be made in a few hours by any ork with a little time on his hands, or bought for a few teef from any mek. Easy to get, easy to maintain, and easy to crack heads with. And there ARE no situations in which it loses its effectiveness; fighting one guy? Bash his head! Fighting a TON of guys? Bash ALL their heads! Fighting a tank? Find a hatch, smash it open, then get inside and BASH THEIR HEADS!


. . . oh, wait. We're only talking about GUNS?! Lame! The lasgun then, for sheer reliability and ease of manufacture.

Melissia wrote:

Sasori wrote:The fact of the Matter is, that the Shoota is useless in some circumstances

So is the flayer.

The Gauss Flayer cannot handle its wielder being outnumbered, but the shoota can.

Not neccessarily. For all its rate of fire it is a wildly inaccurate weapon , whereas I think the Flayer is rapid fire (correct me if I'm wrong). Therefore it has the same rate of fire(ish) as a bolter, lasgun etc. More killing power per shot = more dead for the rate of fire.

To make my point: http://wobblymodel.weebly.com/comic-21.html

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Sasori wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Castiel wrote:Sure the rate of fire might be more useful against a horde, but what if you are facing a marine mech assault mounted in Land Raiders?

Which is irrelevant because that almost never happens.

The rate of fire makes the shoota mroe powerful because it's putting out more firepower over the same period of time.

This isn't true at all. You can put out as many bullets as you want, but that doesn't mean you are going to be able to scratch the paint on a Land Raider.

The fact of the Matter is, that the Shoota is useless in some circumstances, while the Gauss Flayer can be used in all instances of combat to varying effectiveness. This makes the Flayer a better weapon, period.

It's not a better weapon if you're facing a horde of Guardsmen/Nids/whatever. More versatile doesn't equal "better".

And the Shoota is worse facing any type of Space Marine/Necron/Any Vehicle.

Guardsman Still employ Vehicles, in which case the Shoota isn't nearly as effective.

In the case of you having no idea, what kind of armament your opponent may bring, the more versatile weapon, is better. The fact that there are things that the Shoota can't even touch While the Gauss Flayer can reduce everything to consitutant atoms, means it IS better.



EDIT

Sasori wrote:The fact of the Matter is, that the Shoota is useless in some circumstances

So is the flayer.

The Gauss Flayer cannot handle its wielder being outnumbered, but the shoota can.

This isn't' true at all. Necrons are almost ALWAYS outnumbered, and the Flayer works fine. Space Marines are outnumbered almost Every time as well, Can the bolter not handle that?

Havent read the new cron codex (have no current plans to)

However, regarding somethining as mighty as a bolter, in the chaos space marine codex it talks about a IG sgt catching a bolter in the shoulder, resulting in him losing it. and pretty much collapsing, but still very much alive until the chaos marine who shot him puts a bolter round in his head (I could be sketchy on the facts here but it basically went like that.

Now compare that to an electrical arc that flays you layer by layer the second it touches you, and I would imagine where it touches you doesn't matter too much.

sooooo yeah, oop gauss flayer would prolly be the most brutal.

When we think of the best basic weapon, are we talking about those weapons being fired from all races? Like if a tau shot a gauss flayer etc etc?

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

It's not a better weapon if you're facing a horde of Guardsmen/Nids/whatever. More versatile doesn't equal "better".

Um...yes, it does. If you're equipped for any situation, you're more likely to win than guessing for a single situation. Something that can do everything well is far better than something that excels at only one thing. Real life example: Would you rather get B's in all school subjects (college, HS, whatever) or get an A in math and flunk everything else? The Gauss Flayer is a B in everything. The shoota is an A in hordes and an F in everything else. So is the boltgun. And the lasgun. I can go on. Previous edition Gauss was effective against everything. This edition loses the pseudo-rending it had last edition, but is still highly effective against vehicles and performs as well as boltguns and better than lasguns against infantry.

And Melissia, even if land raiders are rare, what happens if they happen to show up at the battle? You can't say the "best" gun is the one that is only effective against hordes. The best one is the one that fills all roles.

Depends entirely on what you want it for and the circumstances under which you're using it (particularly what you're shooting at)

In terms of versatility, though, it's probably the boltgun - there's a billion kinds of specialist ammo for it, it can be used against prettymuch anything except armoured vehicles. (I agree the gauss is still a better all-purpose, all-comers weapon though)

Castiel wrote:Not neccessarily. For all its rate of fire it is a wildly inaccurate weapon

It's not really more inaccurate than, say, an autogun. The reason Orks are so inaccurate is because Orks like the sound of their guns too much to bother aiming.

The flayer is also worse off facing power armor, because it also cannot reliably penetrate power armor.

And no, the shoota does not stop working in the hands of a non-Ork.

timetowaste85 wrote:Um...yes, it does. If you're equipped for any situation, you're more likely to win than guessing for a single situation.

You are if you know your probabilities.

The average soldier is unlikely to ever hear of, never mind face off against, a Land Raider full of Space Marines. The chance of them facing this is so tiny that that feature is effectively useless compared to a feature which is far more likely to be used (see: rate of fire, because in 40k you're billions of times more likely to face off against Orks, humans, or tyranids than you are to ever catch a glimpse of even a single Astartes). Therefor the rate of fire is more important than armor penetration.


The thread asks "best basic weapon". A basic weapon in 40k is a weapon handed out to every soldier in an army. Other soldiers are still given specialized equipment depending on the army-- what the basic weapon of the infantry needs to deal with is what the infantry will most commonly face, otherwise it is a craptacular choice for a basic weapon.

Melissia wrote:

Castiel wrote:Not neccessarily. For all its rate of fire it is a wildly inaccurate weapon

It's not really more inaccurate than, say, an autogun. The reason Orks are so inaccurate is because Orks like the sound of their guns too much to bother aiming.

The flayer is also worse off facing power armor, because it also cannot reliably penetrate power armor.

And no, the shoota does not stop working in the hands of a non-Ork.

I don't follow-how is a flayer worse than a slugga when facing power armor-neither will reliably penetrate better than the other. Flayers, in fluff, were supposed to pretty much disintegrate their targets. That's better than denting armor, last I checked. But even at equal strength value in game the flayer isn't worse, except its rapid fire, instead of assault. Both have the same penetrating ability, or lack thereof.

Melissia wrote:

timetowaste85 wrote:Um...yes, it does. If you're equipped for any situation, you're more likely to win than guessing for a single situation.

You are if you know your probabilities.

The average soldier is unlikely to ever hear of, never mind face off against, a Land Raider full of Space Marines. The chance of them facing this is so tiny that that feature is effectively useless compared to a feature which is far more likely to be used (see: rate of fire, because in 40k you're billions of times more likely to face off against Orks, humans, or tyranids than you are to ever catch a glimpse of even a single Astartes). Therefor the rate of fire is more important than armor penetration.


The thread asks "best basic weapon". A basic weapon in 40k is a weapon handed out to every soldier in an army. Other soldiers are still given specialized equipment depending on the army-- what the basic weapon of the infantry needs to deal with is what the infantry will most commonly face, otherwise it is a craptacular choice for a basic weapon.

So, you're saying those orks and guardsmen are going to hoof it across the battlefield and not come in chimeras, buggys, trucks or anything else and won't bring any kinds of vehicles? Sorry, but no. A flayer allows the army to not worry about taking specialized weapons-this basic weapon is a jack of all trades. The argument doesn't have to be just for land raiders-it can be for all vehicles in general. What basic weapon, besides flayers, can stop a rhino, chimera, truck, buggy, etc before it reaches your lines? Slugga? No. Bolter? No. Lasgun? HAHAHAHAH...no. I'll grant that a slugga is a better weapon against tyranids, because they don't have vehicles. But planning on only bugs is like your example of planning against Land Raiders-it's not going to happen as often as every other possiblity, therefore you take the best weapon to handle every job-what has the capability to kill infantry and vehicles? One item. And it ain't a slugga.

I don't know about the defense you won't see a landraider. From the fiction theres plenty that is awful dang durable. Chaos beasts who skin turns away bolters, carnifexes, etc Id rather have a gauss flayer then a gun that only really works for orkz..

I voted Guass flayer, due to it's desintigrative powers...

However, the fleshborer comes in close second, because it doesn't matter if it is overly effective, it just has to scare the out of you. A rifle that shoots maggots that eat you alive? does this not sound like the ultimate child's nightmare rifle?

Well I thought of "best" as most destructive so the Flayer hands down. I honestly can't see how someone would argue against a weapon that disintegrates anything on the molecular level. A lot of the other weapons can be stopped by a suitable amount of armour, but as long as you're made of matter you're vulnerable to a Flayer.

timetowaste85 wrote:I don't follow-how is a flayer worse than a slugga when facing power armor-neither will reliably penetrate better than the other.

Because one fires more often and though it still won't reliably penetrate, it has more chances of penetrating than the other.

Melissia wrote:So, you're saying those orks and guardsmen are going to hoof it across the battlefield and not come in chimeras, buggys, trucks or anything else and won't bring any kinds of vehicles?

Frequently, yes, and more to the point (in case you didn't read), they have special weapons that deal with equipment their standard weapons aren't designed for.

Because the thread asks for the best basic weapon. Not the best overall weapon. Basic weapons are supported by other weapons in the army. If an Ork needs a vehicle destroyed, they bring one of their rocket-propelled hammers or a rokkit launcha, or just tear it apart with their bare hands for that matter...

Sense when is the botler a basic weapon?

nomotog wrote:Sense when is the botler a basic weapon?

It is a basic weapon when use by Space Marines and Sisters, and a special weapon when used by Guard.

Melissia wrote:

timetowaste85 wrote:I don't follow-how is a flayer worse than a slugga when facing power armor-neither will reliably penetrate better than the other.

Because one fires more often and though it still won't reliably penetrate, it has more chances of penetrating than the other.

Melissia wrote:So, you're saying those orks and guardsmen are going to hoof it across the battlefield and not come in chimeras, buggys, trucks or anything else and won't bring any kinds of vehicles?

Frequently, yes, and more to the point (in case you didn't read), they have special weapons that deal with equipment their standard weapons aren't designed for.

Because the thread asks for the best basic weapon. Not the best overall weapon. Basic weapons are supported by other weapons in the army. If an Ork needs a vehicle destroyed, they bring one of their rocket-propelled hammers or a rokkit launcha, or just tear it apart with their bare hands for that matter...

Okay, this thread is also fluff perspective-I'm trying to think of it that way, as it should be: meaning 'rapid fire' vs 'assault' type means very little. And a beam that disintegrates its target is definitely better than a bullet. And I did read your point about special weapons (and ignored it)-the point of the thread isn't about the special weapons, it's about the basic weapons. A flayer fulfills all roles-what happens if the one special weapon was destroyed anyway-missile, grenade, etc (remember, fluff-not gameplay). That unit is screwed against vehicles. You can't always count on that one special weapon making it through the battle. Guass flayers don't need special weapons-they do both jobs, and do just as well as a bolter against infantry, and a helluva lot better than any other basic weapon against vehicles. Versatility is king here.

The sisters and the SMs aren't basic troops though. They are elite troops. If you include them, you might as well include all the other elite troops.

Lasgun.
'Nuff said.

Squidmanlolz wrote:Lasgun.
'Nuff said.

Can you say how? Sure, there are plenty of them, but what else does it bring to the table?

It takes guts to bring a weapon like the lasgun into a firefight. Ultimately, it's the man behind the gun.

So then gauss flayer wins since necron is better then a guardsman. lol

timetowaste85 wrote:Okay, this thread is also fluff perspective-I'm trying to think of it that way, as it should be: meaning 'rapid fire' vs 'assault' type means very little.

Ork weapons are more rapid fire in the fluff.

timetowaste85 wrote:And a beam that disintegrates its target is definitely better than a bullet.

It does not instantly disintegrate the entire target. And Ork shootas fire explosive shells by most accounts, not mere bullets-- there's a reason why they're in the same damage category as bolters and gauss flayers.

timetowaste85 wrote:And I did read your point about special weapons (and ignored it)-the point of the thread isn't about the special weapons, it's about the basic weapons.

Funny, considering you aren't actually bothering to look at what makes a good basic weapon. See below:

timetowaste85 wrote:A flayer fulfills all roles-what happens if the one special weapon was destroyed anyway-missile, grenade, etc (remember, fluff-not gameplay).

However, it is inferior as a basic weapon because it is less useful in the role of the basic weapon, which has nothing to do with taking down vehicles.

Versatility isn't king. Versatility gets its ass handed to it by specialists who play to their strengths.

timetowaste85 wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

It's not a better weapon if you're facing a horde of Guardsmen/Nids/whatever. More versatile doesn't equal "better".

Um...yes, it does. If you're equipped for any situation, you're more likely to win than guessing for a single situation.

Which is why you don't send out a platoon of Guardsmen; you send out a platoon of guardsmen with anti-tank grenades and a meltagun.

For a real-life example, take the AK47. It's not the "best" in any of the traditional categories, other weapons outclass it in ROF, accuracy and stopping power. What it DOES do is work, almost all the time. Reliability cranked up to 11, combined with extreme ease of use. You don't make "all-round" weapons (or "all-round ammo" in the case of bigger stuff), you specialize it to take one thing down really effectively and then issue special weaponry to deal with the (relatively speaking) more uncommon threats. If one army's grunts are equipped with .50 sniper rifles, do you honestly expect them to win over an army whose grunts are equipped with AK47s, just because the .50 can take down vehicles?

For another example, take the Panzerfaust anti-tank weapon used by the Germans during WWII. They didn't bother giving their troops weapons that COULD damage tanks, if the shooter got lucky, they gave them the forerunner to the RPG.

The pulse rifle. The ability to send thin line of plasma far further than a normal rifle, with such power that even being close to it would probably burn somone to death, is better than even the shorter-ranged, heavier, less powerful gauss blaster that can only kill what it hits (even if it does slightly better at killing them).

Coolyo294 wrote:The Lasgun. It's powerful, durable, easy to use, easy to make, and can be recharged anywhere there is sunlight.

/thread

I think a gun should be judged by its destructive capabilities. Every gun on the list even the Pulse Rifle has certain defenses/targets they just cannot take down. A Flayer is a threat to anything with molecular bonds, there really isn't a defense againt a Flayer except to be just so massive that it takes a while to disintegrate.

And just because that's one way to circumvent, or really just delay, a Flayer's power does not make it somehow weak, all the other weapons have far more counters. The only counter to the Flayer, (the huge chunk of mass) is also a counter to all the other guns, yet given time the Flayer can destroy it.

Melissia wrote:

Castiel wrote:Not neccessarily. For all its rate of fire it is a wildly inaccurate weapon

It's not really more inaccurate than, say, an autogun. The reason Orks are so inaccurate is because Orks like the sound of their guns too much to bother aiming.

The flayer is also worse off facing power armor, because it also cannot reliably penetrate power armor.

And no, the shoota does not stop working in the hands of a non-Ork.

timetowaste85 wrote:Um...yes, it does. If you're equipped for any situation, you're more likely to win than guessing for a single situation.

You are if you know your probabilities.

The average soldier is unlikely to ever hear of, never mind face off against, a Land Raider full of Space Marines. The chance of them facing this is so tiny that that feature is effectively useless compared to a feature which is far more likely to be used (see: rate of fire, because in 40k you're billions of times more likely to face off against Orks, humans, or tyranids than you are to ever catch a glimpse of even a single Astartes). Therefor the rate of fire is more important than armor penetration.


The thread asks "best basic weapon". A basic weapon in 40k is a weapon handed out to every soldier in an army. Other soldiers are still given specialized equipment depending on the army-- what the basic weapon of the infantry needs to deal with is what the infantry will most commonly face, otherwise it is a craptacular choice for a basic weapon.

From the Ork codex, pg 10:

"Many captured Ok weapons and items of equipment do not work unless wielded by an Ork."

Also, shootas are assault weapons - in game turns 2 shots over short range. The gauss flayer is rapid fire 1 shot at long range and 2 shots at close range, so you begin putting enemies down further away, and then at the same rate closer. And Ork guns aren't exactly well built. they are not accurate to the same degree as other weapons, this is only exacerbated by the fact that the Orks don't aim.

As for the not facing Land Raiders point, as the Cadians about that one, I'm sure Abbadon brought plenty on his Black Crusades. Also, aside from the pulse rifle it is the only basic weapon that can put down a vehicle with an AV of 11 or higher.

I use SM but dont like bolters, i prefer gause flayers

Melissia wrote:text

I'd love to keep up with this, but at some point I'm going to reach levels that cause me to have a couple day ban-and disagreeing with you isn't worth it. I'll let the poll speak for me, and you can keep being happily deluded with your ork weaponry, that, according to fluff, probably breaks down all the time too. Last thought-who makes a better weapon? The most advanced race in the universe that was old when man was still new? Or fungus that just throws scrap together and hopes for the best. Yeah...that's a REAL tough call. At least if you truly believe something, you don't give up at it.

Castiel wrote:"Many captured Ok weapons and items of equipment do not work unless wielded by an Ork."

Only according to an unreliable narrator-- a Magos Biologi (IE, studies human genetics, not Ork technology) of the Adeptus Mechanicus (whom believes that non-human technology shouldn't technically work anyway).

The ork weapons and technology used in black library books are serviceable enough in human hands, and in FFG's roleplays, they simply don't jam in Ork hands while they have a chance of jamming in human hands.

Castiel wrote:As for the not facing Land Raiders point, as the Cadians about that one, I'm sure Abbadon brought plenty on his Black Crusades.

"Plenty" by comparison to the usual "one or two" that might participate in the one in a thousand battles that involve Space Marines that require them; even then, space marines are so rare that you'd only see them in one in a billion chances. Even on Cadia if they need to take down a land raider, it's a rare occasion indeed.

I would like to say "Shuriken Catapult", but it's not. As a basic and standard weapon, maintainance, reliability, and versatility are the key factors. Damage per shot or specialization is, by far, the least contributing factors since those two are provided by specialized units.

The lasgun is a good example of a good basic weapon, but it's trumped in most ways by the Shuriken Catapult. Sure, a cooking fire will reload the lasgun and you can't really break it, but that's also the case with the Shuriken Catapult (except it's advanced enough not to need the fire and is in a small way self-repairing.)

The Catapult is trumped by the gauss weapons, though, since the catapult is just a hail of metal-ish discs. The flayer will get the job done regardless what the job is, most of the time, without suffering from extreme lack of accuracy like the Shoota (no, putting a Shoota in the hands of a competent user doesn't make a weapon that's too poorly made to be accurate accurate) or lacking in stopping power like the lasgun.
Need to take care of extreme amounts of zer... I mean Tyranids? Bring a different support weapon.

Throughout history we've seen that it's not the weapons with the best specs that are the best. In the category of assault rifles, it's the easiest to maintain. In the category of anti-tank well... in some wars it's the anti-aircraft gun. In terms of best possible melee weapon - the spade, preferably sharpened, which can also be used to dig the latrine.
Veratility is king, even if it will be trumped by specialized weapons in specialized hands - but those aren't basic weapons.

That said, I'd still want the weapon that has 0 reaction time, very very high stopping power, and very low need to aim (although it's got a built-in weapon-to-helmet optical feed with zoom capabilities). Let's just hope ricochets aren't a problem the way it is for shotguns. Although I'm excessively pro-Eldar.

Melissia wrote:

Castiel wrote:"Many captured Ok weapons and items of equipment do not work unless wielded by an Ork."

Only according to an unreliable narrator-- a Magos Biologi (IE, studies human genetics, not Ork technology) of the Adeptus Mechanicus (whom believes that non-human technology shouldn't technically work anyway).

The ork weapons and technology used in black library books are serviceable enough in human hands, and in FFG's roleplays, they simply don't jam in Ork hands while they have a chance of jamming in human hands.

Castiel wrote:As for the not facing Land Raiders point, as the Cadians about that one, I'm sure Abbadon brought plenty on his Black Crusades.

"Plenty" by comparison to the usual "one or two" that might participate in the one in a thousand battles that involve Space Marines that require them; even then, space marines are so rare that you'd only see them in one in a billion chances. Even on Cadia if they need to take down a land raider, it's a rare occasion indeed.

Your whole argument centres around the whole idea that you are facing a horde army. But if you are facing a horde army abolter would be better. Similar rates of fire for close range, but the bolter can shoot further as well, so you put down more over a greater distance.

And you say that other weapons are for dealing with the armour. What if you are on your own, or just in a squad with no heavy weapons and a tank appears? I'd love to see you fight a Leman Russ (which are ten a penny in 40k) with a shoota! As we don't knpw what the situation is it is clearly better to choose the weapon that can handle all comers as opposed to the one that does one thing well. Sure horde armies might be common, but I'd love to see you fight an armoured division just by shouting at them that they are very uncommon, so they don't matter.

Without knowing the situation the Gauss flayer is the best weapon to have. When we know the exact situation we can debate the best weapon for that, but if you don't know what you're going to face you'd better take something that can kill anything!

Also, my source for the weapons jamming comes from a codex, verified as canon. Black Library convienience and FFG are not. (Also, where is Ork weaponry used by humans, its not a story I'm familiar with! )

Castiel wrote:Your whole argument centres around the whole idea that you are facing a horde army.

Because I pay attention to the lore.

The number of battles which do not involve a horde army in the lore are less than one percent of one percentage point of the total amount.

Melissia wrote:

Castiel wrote:Your whole argument centres around the whole idea that you are facing a horde army.

Because I pay attention to the lore.

The number of battles which do not involve a horde army in the lore are less than one percent of one percentage point of the total amount.

But that 0.0001% is so much cooler.

Am I arguing this right?

Nitros14 wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Castiel wrote:Your whole argument centres around the whole idea that you are facing a horde army.

Because I pay attention to the lore.

The number of battles which do not involve a horde army in the lore are less than one percent of one percentage point of the total amount.

But that 0.0001% is so much cooler.

Am I arguing this right?

Yep, which is why Space Marines are popular. Everyone wants to be elite.

@mahtamori, the zerg are a rip off of the tyrinids. Just an fyi

I like how everyone says necrons are so advance blah blah blah, when they cant even go FTL. So scary that an invasion fleet is on its way, too bad its gonna take thousands of years to get where its going.

Best basic gun would be the lasgun. Accurate, reliable, easy to maintain, and reasonably powerful. It is extremely easy to supply with ammo.

Melissia wrote:

Castiel wrote:Your whole argument centres around the whole idea that you are facing a horde army.

Because I pay attention to the lore.

The number of battles which do not involve a horde army in the lore are less than one percent of one percentage point of the total amount.

That figure is false for a start. Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons,SM and CSM aren't horde armies.

And even if that were the case, what if today you happen to be on that point?

Castiel wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Castiel wrote:Your whole argument centres around the whole idea that you are facing a horde army.

Because I pay attention to the lore.

The number of battles which do not involve a horde army in the lore are less than one percent of one percentage point of the total amount.

That figure is false for a start. Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons,SM and CSM aren't horde armies.

And even if that were the case, what if today you happen to be on that point?

Tau are pretty much a horde army.

But also consider that 99% of the battles in the Warhammer 40k galaxy involve the Imperial Guard or Orks.

Castiel wrote:That figure is false for a start. Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons,SM and CSM aren't horde armies.

They also are all incredibly rare.

A basic weapon does not need to be able to destroy everything it comes across, it needs to be able to efficiently defeat what the infantryman is most commonly going to fast.

Nitros14 wrote:

Castiel wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Castiel wrote:Your whole argument centres around the whole idea that you are facing a horde army.

Because I pay attention to the lore.

The number of battles which do not involve a horde army in the lore are less than one percent of one percentage point of the total amount.

That figure is false for a start. Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons,SM and CSM aren't horde armies.

And even if that were the case, what if today you happen to be on that point?

Tau are pretty much a horde army.

But also consider that 99% of the battles in the Warhammer 40k galaxy involve the Imperial Guard or Orks.

That point is still irrelevant. Given that we don't know the number of troops being deployed, the availability of special weapons and the enemy we face the Gauss Flayer is clearly the superior choice of weapon to take into battle. Yes, the chances are that you'll be facing Guard or Orks so the shoota might seem like a good idea (although you'd still be better with a bolter in that situation IMHO), but that doesn't help you when the Leman Russ squadron or Land Raider appear and theres diddly squat you can do to hurt it.

Fluff wise I would say bolter or gauss flayer as they are reliable and used in (relativley) large numbers

Castiel wrote:SA and CSM aren't horde armies.

50.000 Khorne Berserkers and Chaos Space Marines LEGIONS have something to add to this, Black Templars to.
Just look at 13'th Black Crusade at number of Chaos Space Marines and Imperial Space Marines deployed and tell me that they are not horde.

Brother Coa wrote:

Castiel wrote:SA and CSM aren't horde armies.

50.000 Khorne Beserkers and Chaos Space Marines LEGIONS have something to add to this, Black Templars to.
Just look at 13'th Black Crusade at number of Chaos Space Marines and Imperial Space Marines deployed and tell me that they are not horde.

Stop being obtuse. You know damn well what I meant.

Brother Coa wrote:

50.000 Khorne Berserkers and Chaos Space Marines LEGIONS have something to add to this, Black Templars to.
Just look at 13'th Black Crusade at number of Chaos Space Marines and Imperial Space Marines deployed and tell me that they are not horde.

Compared to trillions of Orks and Imperial Guard? They're not Horde armies.

Looking back at my poll, I feel sorry for the Tyranids :(. I find the Flesh Borer the most gruesome way to go at least.

Nitros14 wrote:

Brother Coa wrote:

50.000 Khorne Berserkers and Chaos Space Marines LEGIONS have something to add to this, Black Templars to.
Just look at 13'th Black Crusade at number of Chaos Space Marines and Imperial Space Marines deployed and tell me that they are not horde.

Compared to trillions of Orks and Imperial Guard? They're not Horde armies.

No, but compared to everyone else they are.
Not big but mini-horde army.

Nitros14 wrote:

Castiel wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Castiel wrote:Your whole argument centres around the whole idea that you are facing a horde army.

Because I pay attention to the lore.

The number of battles which do not involve a horde army in the lore are less than one percent of one percentage point of the total amount.

That figure is false for a start. Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons,SM and CSM aren't horde armies.

And even if that were the case, what if today you happen to be on that point?

Tau are pretty much a horde army.

But also consider that 99% of the battles in the Warhammer 40k galaxy involve the Imperial Guard or Orks.

The larges force of tau ever assembled so far was 9000 (+5000 kroot). the tau are not a horde army. Some forces are as small as 12 people.

If I can't reload for a long time, lasgun.

If I am in a war where I have supplies, Pulse Rifle or Splinter Rifle. Both of these weapons allow me to shoot tougher nastier foes that could eat me. I'm not a fan of Gauss weapons at all, I'm not a robot and I am pretty sure they are heavy as hell. Pulse and Splinter are both probably really lightweight in comparison.

ObliviousBlueCaboose wrote:I like how everyone says necrons are so advance blah blah blah, when they cant even go FTL. So scary that an invasion fleet is on its way, too bad its gonna take thousands of years to get where its going.

Well they have (or maybe used to have?) inertialess drives which are pretty boss, and the BFG book pretty unequivocally states they have the best ships. However the most recent codex seems to indicate that they use the Webway for FTL. So they really aren't all that slow.

again how are we defining 'best'. Consider the 'versatility' option. Lasguns can be versatile in some ways, but so can bolters. Bolters can come in compact varieites, heavy varieties, 'storm' variants, and the like. There are countless kinds of special ammunition - varying in means of propulsion (cased, caseless, reactionless, nuclear, etc.) payload (high density AP slugs, fragmenting charges, high explosive, incendairy, and more exoitc stuff up to and including miniature fusion, plasma and antimatter payloads) They can be subsonic or supersonic. They can be silenced and/or otherwise made into a sniper variant. THey can accept various add on weapons. It's entirely context.

And Tyranid weapons have some advantages. They can take over the host for one thing (IIRC there was some fluff bit in some old 1st or 2nd edition stuff, epic I think, where some psyker was trying psychometry on a tyranid gun, and it ended up overwhelming his mind and turning him into a living gun platform.) They can self repair. Their means of firing is pretty simple/straightforward and redundant, and maintenance or training are not issues. I even (vaguely) recall that at least some kinds can grow their own ammo (and if they can't they probably can adapt a way to do so.)

Gauss flayer for sure, it literally rips the molecules of the target apart! The brief fluff written in the 3rd edition codex for the flayer is a fantastic little piece of what it does to the target.

Not to mention its nice special rules for the actual game play!

Gauss flayer, a weapon that can demolish Terminator armor

Melissia wrote:

Nitros14 wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Castiel wrote:Your whole argument centres around the whole idea that you are facing a horde army.

Because I pay attention to the lore.

The number of battles which do not involve a horde army in the lore are less than one percent of one percentage point of the total amount.

But that 0.0001% is so much cooler.

Am I arguing this right?

Yep, which is why Space Marines are popular. Everyone wants to be elite.

I hate to say this, but this is why we must eventually consider the bolter to be the greatest weapon according to fluff (at least compared to the shoota).
GW creates four types of army: good elite, bad elite, good horde, bad horde. Elites always have better weapons in fluff than hordes, even if the hordes are hordes of great shooters. Good guys tend to have better weaponry than bad, as well. Therefore, there is no way that GW would ever consider making an ork weapon that they considered to be better than the space marine equivalent.

Take krak and shell for example. Though they may be the same in-game, their background will show how the marine one is better.

Castiel wrote:but that doesn't help you when the Leman Russ squadron or Land Raider appear and theres diddly squat you can do to hurt it.

It doesn't need to.

Melissia wrote:

Castiel wrote:but that doesn't help you when the Leman Russ squadron or Land Raider appear and theres diddly squat you can do to hurt it.

It doesn't need to.

I like that you're using the arguement if, but when I use it you refuse to accept it!

Castiel wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Castiel wrote:but that doesn't help you when the Leman Russ squadron or Land Raider appear and theres diddly squat you can do to hurt it.

It doesn't need to.

I like that you're using the arguement if, but when I use it you refuse to accept it!

You haven't used the argument yet. Your argument is that it needs to be good against everything.

A basic weapon does not need to e good against everything. It needs to be good at what it will primarily be used for.

Melissia wrote:

Castiel wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Castiel wrote:but that doesn't help you when the Leman Russ squadron or Land Raider appear and theres diddly squat you can do to hurt it.

It doesn't need to.

I like that you're using the arguement if, but when I use it you refuse to accept it!

You haven't used the argument yet. Your argument is that it needs to be good against everything.

Have you even been reading my posts? I've said on several occasions things like: what if you're dropped in against tanks, and don't have any support weapons? then having a gun that can take out tanks is pretty damn useful.

Orks stuff is never the best cause no matter what it does.. it only does it for orkz. Thats not a good weapon unless YOU are an ork. lol

Melissia wrote:You haven't used the argument yet. Your argument is that it needs to be good against everything.
A basic weapon does not need to e good against everything. It needs to be good at what it will primarily be used for.

This.
Take AK-47 for example - basic weapon of most Earth military forces.
It's good against infantry, but can it take down an M1 Abrams or F-22 Raptor?
Basic weapons are made just for troops, not vehicles.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Castiel wrote: I've said on several occasions things like: what if you're dropped in against tanks, and don't have any support weapons? then having a gun that can take out tanks is pretty damn useful.

Same for Necron warriors, it have a CHANCE to go trough vehicle armor.
It's not build for vehicles, Blaster and Tesla carbines are.

Brother Coa wrote:

Melissia wrote:You haven't used the argument yet. Your argument is that it needs to be good against everything.
A basic weapon does not need to e good against everything. It needs to be good at what it will primarily be used for.

This.
Take AK-47 for example - basic weapon of most Earth military forces.
It's good against infantry, but can it take down an M1 Abrams or F-22 Raptor?
Basic weapons are made just for troops, not vehicles.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Castiel wrote: I've said on several occasions things like: what if you're dropped in against tanks, and don't have any support weapons? then having a gun that can take out tanks is pretty damn useful.

Same for Necron warriors, it have a CHANCE to go trough vehicle armor.
It's not build for vehicles, Blaster and Tesla carbines are.

The whole point that I am making is you don't know what you are facing and what kind of support you have. With the information we have the Flayer is the best choice on offer, as it can kill everything. Sure you can play the percentages, but if your luck is out then that armoured division is going to squash you without breaking a sweat.

I'm not saying it is the best in all situations, just that with the information available at this point the Flayer is the more sensible choice.

If a squad of necron warriors is dropped in front of a few leman russ tanks,that's a dead squad of necron warriors, flayers or no.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Castiel wrote:The whole point that I am making is you don't know what you are facing

We know what we are overwhelmingly more likely to face.

Do you bring 500 dollars in cold hard cash with you as you walk down a dark alleyway thinking "hey, there might be someone selling me something here taht's really good for 500 dollars!"?

Melissia wrote:If a squad of necron warriors is dropped in front of a few leman russ tanks,that's a dead squad of necron warriors, flayers or no.

Depends on how many there are in the squad and how close you are to said tank , rapid fire range(so a CQB environment) and I would say the Necrons would win that fight, remember every shot past the first from each unit reduces the AV by 1, so 20 warriors in rapid fire range would melt a Leman Russ, however if it was any good distance at all the Leman Russ would win.........that said how the did tanks get brought up in this, this is about basic weapons, not heavy weapons.

I'm a bit curious as to what a Gauss Flayer wound would look like after reading this thread. If you're hit in the shoulder or something what happens, do you just have a clean but big gapping hole in your body?

Wardragoon wrote:
Depends on how many there are in the squad and how close you are to said tank , rapid fire range(so a CQB environment) and I would say the Necrons would win that fight, remember every shot past the first from each unit reduces the AV by 1, so 20 warriors in rapid fire range would melt a Leman Russ, however if it was any good distance at all the Leman Russ would win.........that said how the did tanks get brought up in this, this is about basic weapons, not heavy weapons.

Ehhh.....in fluff all Leman Russ fire at once and blow them sky-high. They don't even hat to hit them directly - just near them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Castiel wrote:
The whole point that I am making is you don't know what you are facing and what kind of support you have. With the information we have the Flayer is the best choice on offer, as it can kill everything. Sure you can play the percentages, but if your luck is out then that armoured division is going to squash you without breaking a sweat.

I'm not saying it is the best in all situations, just that with the information available at this point the Flayer is the more sensible choice.

That all stand, our point is that basic weapon doesn't have to be good for anything.
Gauss Flyer are good but they are slow firing and have shorter range then most basic weapons.

Lasgun is the best. Reliable, easy to maintain, good damage, excellent accuracy, ability to kill most tough troops with few shots ( HIGH setting ) and ability to blow up armored vehicle by overcharging ( you destroy the weapon, but hey - you destroy a vehicle to ).

Ehhh.....in fluff all Leman Russ fire at once and blow them sky-high. They don't even hat to hit them directly - just near them.

Then, they stand back up, and melt the Russ.

That all stand, our point is that basic weapon doesn't have to be good for anything.
Gauss Flyer are good but they are slow firing and have shorter range then most basic weapons.

Lasgun is the best. Reliable, easy to maintain, good damage, excellent accuracy, ability to kill most tough troops with few shots ( HIGH setting ) and ability to blow up armored vehicle by overcharging ( you destroy the weapon, but hey - you destroy a vehicle to ).

What? The only basic weapon with a longer range than the Flayer, is the Pulse Rifle. The Gauss Flayer has a longer range, or is equal to the rest of the choices. It's also rapid fire, which is the same as Bolters, Lasguns, Pulse rifles, etc etc.

Melissia wrote:If a squad of necron warriors is dropped in front of a few leman russ tanks,that's a dead squad of necron warriors, flayers or no.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Castiel wrote:The whole point that I am making is you don't know what you are facing

We know what we are overwhelmingly more likely to face.

Do you bring 500 dollars in cold hard cash with you as you walk down a dark alleyway thinking "hey, there might be someone selling me something here taht's really good for 500 dollars!"?

Until they stand back up.

And there's a difference between carrying money and bringing a weapon to a fight. Gauss flayers have the same rate of close in fire as a shoota, are more accurate (an ork weapon is still an ork weapon no matter who's wielding it, they aren't accurate at all) and can start putting down opponents further away, with less chance of them getting back up. Your arguement is shaky at best.

And yet again you can't provide a good reason as to why in the unknown situation a shoota is a better choice. All forces have tanks. If you''re fighting in the 41st millenium a tank is probably not that far away. Saying you are likely to be facing a horde army doesn't change the fact that there is still a chance that you are going up against an armoured unit. And even so, there are still APCs and tanks in horde armies that need to be taken down. I'll say again: You don't know what you are facing, the support available, or the odds against you. Therefore you want the weapon that can cope with anything. And even if its a horde army, you are still better off with a bolter for accuracy, Rate of fire and range. The shoota is short ranged and inaccurate. You wouldn't want to face a horde with that.

Is it odd that the shoota's biggest mentioned strenght is vs hordes when it a weapon used by and only works for hordes(orkz)..

Flesh borer. They fire bugs that will eat you from the inside out. Reminds me of the s scarabs in the mummy.

Draigo wrote:Is it odd that the shoota's biggest mentioned strenght is vs hordes when it a weapon used by and only works for hordes(orkz)..

That is a very good point.

xXSir MontyXx wrote:Flesh borer. They fire bugs that will eat you from the inside out. Reminds me of the s scarabs in the mummy.

Fleshboerers fire a beatle that burrows through flesh/armor/whatever in the last few moments of it's life. Devourers are the ones that fire Worm like Parasites that eat you from the inside out.

Siriously the gauss flayer,........desintegration at atomic level.....doesn't matter if you wear a super-thick-adamantiun-neutronium-1meter-whide-power-armour plate or go naked..................you end up bad....................who can argue with that?? (and with a shoota!!.....pffff......please be (a bit) sirious,.........)

An image is worth more than 1000 words.......



As you can see it goes through some tiranid creature,.............and instantaneously.........as you can deduce with the posture of the daying bug,........

Lasgun, because of its reliability and power.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Castiel wrote:

Brother Coa wrote:

Melissia wrote:You haven't used the argument yet. Your argument is that it needs to be good against everything.
A basic weapon does not need to e good against everything. It needs to be good at what it will primarily be used for.

This.
Take AK-47 for example - basic weapon of most Earth military forces.
It's good against infantry, but can it take down an M1 Abrams or F-22 Raptor?
Basic weapons are made just for troops, not vehicles.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Castiel wrote: I've said on several occasions things like: what if you're dropped in against tanks, and don't have any support weapons? then having a gun that can take out tanks is pretty damn useful.

Same for Necron warriors, it have a CHANCE to go trough vehicle armor.
It's not build for vehicles, Blaster and Tesla carbines are.

The whole point that I am making is you don't know what you are facing and what kind of support you have. With the information we have the Flayer is the best choice on offer, as it can kill everything. Sure you can play the percentages, but if your luck is out then that armoured division is going to squash you without breaking a sweat.

I'm not saying it is the best in all situations, just that with the information available at this point the Flayer is the more sensible choice.

You could kill a tank crew with a bolt action if you had the shooting skill and were concealed.

Well if you have the skill any weapon can be lethal, however to an average joe, I would say the Flayer would be a good weapon, followed closely by the lasgun.

What context is the discussion even supposed to be in? Best weapon to equip a military force or best weapon to outfit, say, your bodyguards with?

Fluff gauss flayer wins the latter hands-down, but the former is trickier.

No contest, There is only one basic weapon that kill just about any thing in less than 5 seconds, destroys tanks AND, never needs reloading/recharging. The Gauss Flayer. IT. IS. THE. BEST.

Oh I also forgot; no maintenance, each one comes with a close combat attachment, never runs out of ammo, only works in the hands of your army, has -afaik- a continuous beam of fire, phases out if the one wielding it is destroyed/incapacitated and many more reasons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Harriticus wrote:I'm a bit curious as to what a Gauss Flayer wound would look like after reading this thread. If you're hit in the shoulder or something what happens, do you just have a clean but big gapping hole in your body?

In the old Codex -which is what I have- if your caught under the destructive power of the Gauss Flayer then in the first second your torso is merely a rib cage and the next...what torso?

Not in the poll, but I'd say the storm bolter for Grey Knights. Much better than a bolter, and with the addition of psybolt ammo it can even be a threat to light vehicles.

The shoota is out for me, as they only work with an ork holding it, Mork (or Gork) keeping the thing from exploding.

I straight up looked at lethality, there are so many factors any other comparison would be too subjective and situational.
Ultimately it was between bolter and flayer for me and in the end went with bolter because it has a greater 1-shot kill chance;
Hit to torso or head:
- Flayer: end of story
- Bolter: end of story

Hit to limb:
- Flayer: the flayer's molecular dissembly will stop before being lethal and will leave a relatively clean wound. (source: Ciaphas Cain getting half his hand vaporised in Echoes of the Tomb)
- Bolter: will leave a nasty ragged wound and give shrapnel damage to head and torso.

Therefore, bolter wins it for me.

Harriticus wrote:I'm a bit curious as to what a Gauss Flayer wound would look like after reading this thread. If you're hit in the shoulder or something what happens, do you just have a clean but big gapping hole in your body?

There is nothing at all. Your molecules are stripped away, until tere is nothing left of what is hit AFAIK.

yup, no trace besides a pile of dust, usually all equipment held by the user is disintegrated as well so you can't loot their ammo when a teammate gets hit. From what I understand this was why the novel, Dead Men Walking, was heavy with flayed ones until the situation became more or less hopeless. The flayers made it feel even more hopeless because they destroyed the smallest traces of their targets. I'm still saying lasgun though.

A pulse rifle seems to be as reliable and easy to use as a lasgun and hits much harder. So I picked that.

That being said, there's something sexy about a 90mm automatic RPG launcher that can be loaded with variable ammunition for any situation.

TiB wrote:The shoota is out for me, as they only work with an ork holding it, Mork (or Gork) keeping the thing from exploding.

I straight up looked at lethality, there are so many factors any other comparison would be too subjective and situational.
Ultimately it was between bolter and flayer for me and in the end went with bolter because it has a greater 1-shot kill chance;
Hit to torso or head:
- Flayer: end of story
- Bolter: end of story

Hit to limb:
- Flayer: the flayer's molecular dissembly will stop before being lethal and will leave a relatively clean wound. (source: Ciaphas Cain getting half his hand vaporised in Echoes of the Tomb)
- Bolter: will leave a nasty ragged wound and give shrapnel damage to head and torso.

Therefore, bolter wins it for me.

There is one flaw in that logic, If you got hit in the hand with a bolter the bolt would go right through leaving a rather large but relatively clean wound. just as a flayer would -well, with a flayer you'd probably loss most your hand rather than having a hole- where as if a bolter hit your arm/leg you would receive wounds as stated above, however if you got hit in the arm/leg by a flayer you would lose the limb and probably bleed out almost immediately -more so with the leg.-

Pulse rifle is pretty good, with its extra range you won't be anywhere close that silly gauss flayer short range and the shoota will hit you once in a blue moon.

The main problem I see with the Pules Rifle is, if they get to close then your screwed. after all that's one big and probably very heavy rifle to try and whack things with. And in 40k people get REALLY close REALLY fast.

Bolter. Running around with a LMG that fires fires rockets that are easily capable of blasting a man-sized target to bits is AWESOME!

Shoota are the beast bc thay just are and pules rile is just a poor gun sure it has a good rang and if a ork
Gets to close and he will one way or a nother the tau will die a pain full death and a good one

NL_Cirrus wrote:The main problem I see with the Pules Rifle is, if they get to close then your screwed. after all that's one big and probably very heavy rifle to try and whack things with. And in 40k people get REALLY close REALLY fast.

I though we were comapring basic ranged weapon vs eachother, IMO being able to punch a hole though many thing while still being out of range of retaliation is a pretty good thing.

Bobthehero wrote:

NL_Cirrus wrote:The main problem I see with the Pules Rifle is, if they get to close then your screwed. after all that's one big and probably very heavy rifle to try and whack things with. And in 40k people get REALLY close REALLY fast.

I though we were comapring basic ranged weapon vs eachother, IMO being able to punch a hole though many thing while still being out of range of retaliation is a pretty good thing.

true as that may be, it is somewhat -if not completely- mitigated by the fact if you get charged or caught in melee combat you'd either have to just die or drop your gun and pull a knife or something and since the pulse rifle is so big and-presumably- heavy you can't just slap a melee weapon on it with duck tape as it would be to unwieldy. so with such a weapon you'd be effectively crippled in CC and seeing as charges and close combat encounters are common place among the battle fields of the far future it should not be taken lightly.

NL_Cirrus wrote:

Bobthehero wrote:

NL_Cirrus wrote:The main problem I see with the Pules Rifle is, if they get to close then your screwed. after all that's one big and probably very heavy rifle to try and whack things with. And in 40k people get REALLY close REALLY fast.

I though we were comapring basic ranged weapon vs eachother, IMO being able to punch a hole though many thing while still being out of range of retaliation is a pretty good thing.

true as that may be, it is somewhat -if not completely- mitigated by the fact if you get charged or caught in melee combat you'd either have to just die or drop your gun and pull a knife or something and since the pulse rifle is so big and-presumably- heavy you can't just slap a melee weapon on it with duck tape as it would be to unwieldy. so with such a weapon you'd be effectively crippled in CC and seeing as charges and close combat encounters are common place among the battle fields of the far future it should not be taken lightly.

Wouldn't a simple bayonet or spike on the end of the weapon suffice, wouldn't affect the weapon's balance terribly and enemies would fall onto the blades as they charge.

If you had a spike/bayonet on the end of the gun you might, with a phalanx type strategy, be able to kill or injure a couple of guys but when they get past that then, like all pike-men or spear users, your guys would be helpless and would get slaughtered lest they abandon their weapons. like I said for actual CC fighting they'd be useless.

I would have to go with the gauss flayer. Instant kill on a direct hit. It will literally strip you molecule from molecule.

Closely followed by the trusty bolter ofcourse.

NL_Cirrus wrote:The main problem I see with the Pules Rifle is, if they get to close then your screwed. after all that's one big and probably very heavy rifle to try and whack things with. And in 40k people get REALLY close REALLY fast.

IIRC Pulse Rifles are lighter than Lasguns. A bolter would be far heavier than a Pulse rifle. Source: Firewarrior.

Weight isn't an issue for the Pulse rifle, but it does make a bad CC weapon.

No duh ok tau suck at close rang the oley live bc of the krout to keep them far away

Skull snatcher wrote:No duh ok tau suck at close rang the oley live bc of the krout to keep them far away

Would you please do something about your spelling and punctuation, your posts are very difficult to read.

liquidjoshi wrote:

NL_Cirrus wrote:The main problem I see with the Pules Rifle is, if they get to close then your screwed. after all that's one big and probably very heavy rifle to try and whack things with. And in 40k people get REALLY close REALLY fast.

IIRC Pulse Rifles are lighter than Lasguns. A bolter would be far heavier than a Pulse rifle. Source: Firewarrior.

Weight isn't an issue for the Pulse rifle, but it does make a bad CC weapon.

Really? Well, that doesn't make any sense, you'd think they'd be much heavier, but then again this is GW and they're not known for making sense.

Lasgun. It's small, efficient and easy to keep clean.

All in all, it gets the job done.

You don't think the AK-47 is so popular because it looks good, do you?

Sasori wrote:Then, they stand back up, and melt the Russ.

they stand back up....aaaand get blown back up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Scipio Africanus wrote:You don't think the AK-47 is so popular because it looks good, do you?

In the western world, it's popular because of memetic devices.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Weirdly enough, the DW rules don't have weights for Tau weapons. Must not be intended to be used by player characters?

Bolter. Caliber size: .998

For those of you with real firearms knowledge... that is a massive massive round. That gets my vote.

IronSnake wrote:Bolter. Caliber size: .998

For those of you with real firearms knowledge... that is a massive massive round. That gets my vote.

Meh, the modern world has bigger, Next!

IronSnake wrote:Bolter. Caliber size: .998

For those of you with real firearms knowledge... that is a massive massive round. That gets my vote.

Heavy Bolters aren't a basic weapon. Boltguns/Boltpistols use a .75 calibre round.

Id say a shoota.
Its all the weapons combined with some wire and one trigger!

Too inacurate and short ranged IMO.

Sparks_Havelock wrote:

IronSnake wrote:Bolter. Caliber size: .998

For those of you with real firearms knowledge... that is a massive massive round. That gets my vote.

Heavy Bolters aren't a basic weapon. Boltguns/Boltpistols use a .75 calibre round.

Ohhh that's right. I forgot. Still... .75 is a huge round.

IronSnake wrote:

Sparks_Havelock wrote:

IronSnake wrote:Bolter. Caliber size: .998

For those of you with real firearms knowledge... that is a massive massive round. That gets my vote.

Heavy Bolters aren't a basic weapon. Boltguns/Boltpistols use a .75 calibre round.

Ohhh that's right. I forgot. Still... .75 is a huge round.

And on that topic, how the hell does an average human shoot the Bolt Pistol, with augmetics the handling of said pistol makes sense, but without those I would think most operators would end up with a pistol shaped indent on their forehead.

Wardragoon wrote:

IronSnake wrote:

Sparks_Havelock wrote:

IronSnake wrote:Bolter. Caliber size: .998

For those of you with real firearms knowledge... that is a massive massive round. That gets my vote.

Heavy Bolters aren't a basic weapon. Boltguns/Boltpistols use a .75 calibre round.

Ohhh that's right. I forgot. Still... .75 is a huge round.

And on that topic, how the hell does an average human shoot the Bolt Pistol, with augmetics the handling of said pistol makes sense, but without those I would think most operators would end up with a pistol shaped indent on their forehead.

With boths hands, in the prone, with a buttstock, and a tripod mount.

That's no joke too. My .45 caliber 1911 provides quite a bit of kick. The Desert Eagle .50 caliber is even worse.

.75 in a pistol would be... not good on the wrists.

I think that the bolt pistols normal humans use are a lot smaller than those used by marines!

I'm sure that there is a marine one in the Soul Drinkers books that is captured and it is too big for the normal people to use.

Melissia wrote:

Sasori wrote:Then, they stand back up, and melt the Russ.

they stand back up....aaaand get blown back up.

Only if they stand around and stair at the Russ waiting for them to reload, otherwise the Russ is nothing but dust.

Castiel wrote:I think that the bolt pistols normal humans use are a lot smaller than those used by marines!

I'm sure that there is a marine one in the Soul Drinkers books that is captured and it is too big for the normal people to use.

There are definitely boltguns/boltpistols made for humans hands - several Guard sprues have them, the Sororitas use them and some Commissars/Inquisitor models have them. From the BL Eisenhorn recieves a specially crafted bolt pistol as a gift from the Deathwatch, I think it was.
At Warhammer World in Nottingham, England, there is a scale model Stormbolter in a case. From the size of its grip and the trigger I'd personally need to use at least three fingers on the trigger with the other (aching) hand/arm to support it. They're big ol' things and even humans with huge hands would have trouble using them, I think.

Some are not really getting the question.

Which is the the best for service NOT which is the most powerful.

Bolter Big,heavy must carry large amounts of ammo that can only come from supply.

Shoota Fluff wise not really a weapoan more a psy. focus

Shuriken Catapult ammo that can only come from supply.

Splinter Rifle ammo that can only come from supply.

Gauss Flayer large,glows in the dark unknow power not easy to replace.

Flesh Borer not a weapon but a phy ability like spiting

Pulse Rifle unknow power not easy to replace.

lasgun light weight, easy to sevice, can be adjusted to be a sniper rifle to the power of a bolter. can be recharged with anything from the sun to your morning cook fire. Cheaper to make.

And the bolter still gets my vote. Uses simple ammunition and is very powerful. I also can't imagine them needing much maintenance. During the entire months long war of Helsreach not once is it mentioned that a bolter malfunctioned. The servo's in the Black Templars' power armor started to wear before their weapons did.

Steel Angel wrote:Some are not really getting the question.

Which is the the best for service NOT which is the most powerful.

Bolter Big,heavy must carry large amounts of ammo that can only come from supply.

Shoota Fluff wise not really a weapoan more a psy. focus

Shuriken Catapult ammo that can only come from supply.

Splinter Rifle ammo that can only come from supply.

Gauss Flayer large,glows in the dark unknow power not easy to replace.

Flesh Borer not a weapon but a phy ability like spiting

Pulse Rifle unknow power not easy to replace.

lasgun light weight, easy to sevice, can be adjusted to be a sniper rifle to the power of a bolter. can be recharged with anything from the sun to your morning cook fire. Cheaper to make.

Remember, that power is a very important thing, also remember that with lasguns yes they can be recharged with fire, however it is VERY bad for the magazine (iirc magazines can only be charged that way a few times, and also it takes time to do so), also remember that many lasguns don't have power settings. Gauss flayer would not be easily replaced, however there is something to be said that with millions of years of inactivity that the weapons still operate, also it can pierce armor, from Flak armor to Land Raiders.

Steel Angel wrote:Some are not really getting the question.

Which is the the best for service NOT which is the most powerful.

Bolter Big,heavy must carry large amounts of ammo that can only come from supply.

Shoota Fluff wise not really a weapoan more a psy. focus

Shuriken Catapult ammo that can only come from supply.

Splinter Rifle ammo that can only come from supply.

Gauss Flayer large,glows in the dark unknow power not easy to replace.

Flesh Borer not a weapon but a phy ability like spiting

Pulse Rifle unknow power not easy to replace.

lasgun light weight, easy to sevice, can be adjusted to be a sniper rifle to the power of a bolter. can be recharged with anything from the sun to your morning cook fire. Cheaper to make.

You seem to be making the assumption that we are picking the best weapon for guardsmen to use, and that is as illogical assumption because most of the weapons listed CAN'T be used by guardsmen. Not to mention at no point did the original poster say who we were selecting the weapons for and as three of the choices -gauss flayer, flesh bore, and shoota- would only work in the hands of the group that originally made them it would be a logical to assume that the OP meant "Which is the best basic weapon in the hands of the original owners," therefore the majority of your arguments are invalid. Ex: a bolter would be neither big nor heavy in the hands of a SM, The power source of a pulse rifle would not be unknown to tau and so on and so forth.

I can see how you would think that. But I'm choosing and list by if I was forming an army.

If you go by "Which is the best basic weapon in the hands of the original owners," then you have to break it down to what the units job is.

IE: All SM are shock troopers not Infantry so their weapon is for that.

Dark Eldar are raiders so their weapon is disigned for quick in and out actions .........ect ect

so I'm not going by which unit has the best gun.

I'm choosing the best rifle alone not in anyones hands, But as if they are sitting on a table and I need to buy one.

gauss flayer, flesh bore, and shoota- would only work in the hands of that one group. To me anyway means it';s a good weapon ,But not the best cause noone else can use it.

So if G.I. grunt,Ellen Eldar,And tom Tau are shopping in a market which would be the best rifle to choose.

But thats just my 2cents on it.

But what do I know I'm still playing with toy Armies going pew pew all the time

the question as presented is pretty much up in the air and open ended as to what it means. It basically amounts to 'what you think is the best weapon' and it doesnt really ask or expect any logic, because of how open ended it is. You can't compare 'best weapon for Eldar/Dark Eldar' 'best weapon for Ork' 'best weapon for Necron' 'best weapon for Space Marine' or 'Best weapon for guardsmen' because they're all different and they have different abilities and requirements.

For the arguments to go anywhere in this thread some sort of framework has to be set up.

Agreed all answers are right all are reading the question different. Lol

It's not a matter of 'right/wrong' its a matter of appropriateness. Bolter or shuriken weapons don't suit Dark Eldar needs generally because they are meant to subdue and capture, often with great pain. And when they do kill, that is also designed to be deliberately painful (which is rather inefficient) because pain is something the Dark Eldar want and desire. It suits their purposes for that. But for most anyone else (except maybe Adeptus Arbites) DE weapons would be inappropriate and ineffective, because it does not suit the roles to which those forces are employed.

Harriticus wrote:Which army's standard service rifle is the best in fluff? Go go go go go.

Is this even a question? A bolter is of course! They freekin explode when they hit their target.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Steel Angel wrote:Some are not really getting the question.

Which is the the best for service NOT which is the most powerful.

No dude, the question says "Which is THE BEST"

Not the best for service, which service gun is the best.

In that case I'll stand by what I said, pick the pulse rifle and outrange everything with a very respectable fire power.

Remulus wrote:

Harriticus wrote:Which army's standard service rifle is the best in fluff? Go go go go go.

Is this even a question? A bolter is of course! They freekin explode when they hit their target.

I thought they exploded after a time delay. Either way that could be a bad thing. Like if they do in fact explode on contact they wouldn't be as good at penetrating armor as explosions don't do penetration, and if they explode after a time delay they could ricochet and damage/injure friendlies. I suppose they could have both, like explode on contact after a time delay, which would still have the latter problem.

NL_Cirrus wrote:

Remulus wrote:

Harriticus wrote:Which army's standard service rifle is the best in fluff? Go go go go go.

Is this even a question? A bolter is of course! They freekin explode when they hit their target.

I thought they exploded after a time delay. Either way that could be a bad thing. Like if they do in fact explode on contact they wouldn't be as good at penetrating armor as explosions don't do penetration, and if they explode after a time delay they could ricochet and damage/injure friendlies. I suppose they could have both, like explode on contact after a time delay, which would still have the latter problem.

They may explode when they are a certain distance from an object, that way, they create an airburst, increasing penetration, the same way the bushmaster cannon works.

Squidmanlolz wrote:

NL_Cirrus wrote:

Remulus wrote:

Harriticus wrote:Which army's standard service rifle is the best in fluff? Go go go go go.

Is this even a question? A bolter is of course! They freekin explode when they hit their target.

I thought they exploded after a time delay. Either way that could be a bad thing. Like if they do in fact explode on contact they wouldn't be as good at penetrating armor as explosions don't do penetration, and if they explode after a time delay they could ricochet and damage/injure friendlies. I suppose they could have both, like explode on contact after a time delay, which would still have the latter problem.

They may explode when they are a certain distance from an object, that way, they create an airburst, increasing penetration, the same way the bushmaster cannon works.

It seems to me that the airburst would increase saturation not penetration So wouldn't that mean against heavily -well decently- armored targets it -the bolter not the bushmaster- would be almost use less as it would have practically no armor penetration against the heavier stuff.

They are described as "mass-reactive" rounds. I have always interpreted that as meaning that they had someway of detecting when they were moving through or stuck in a solid like flesh or metal and would explode when in these solids. Again, this is just my interpretation of what it means, it is quite probably wrong!

Castlel wrote:They are described as "mass-reactive" rounds. I have always interpreted that as meaning that they had someway of detecting when they were moving through or stuck in a solid like flesh or metal and would explode when in these solids. Again, this is just my interpretation of what it means, it is quite probably wrong!

Pretty much it. In nearly all of the BL books I've read bolts enter a body (or other object) and explode on the inside.

AH, so they like Crag shot from Monster Hunters. That would make more sense.

Gauss Flayer.

When you're going out not knowing what you will face, having a gun which'll deal with damn near anything is pretty great for a basic gun.

Haven't noticed if the TC has clarified as to what's meant by 'best', but to just to expand on my original reply:

I think it's fair to place gauss flayer as 'best' in terms of lethality. I just can't imagine myself being in an army in 40k and wanting to go up against a group of gauss flayer -wielding enemies and not have myself and allies equipped with anything but gauss flayers, bolters, or perhaps pulse rifles.

In terms of the ability to stop a threat, you really can't beat a gauss flayer or bolter. It's not even a fair competition.

As far the logistics surrounding the flayer(or really all gauss weapons), we can only speculate. I'm fairly certain there's no fluff or depiction indicating that these weapons even *need* to be recharged or reloaded(Necron infantry apparently carry absolutely nothing on their person, at least nothing that's visible), and if they do, it would be in between battles...or it's just an oversight on the part of the fluff writers and artists.

Bobthehero wrote:In that case I'll stand by what I said, pick the pulse rifle and outrange everything with a very respectable fire power.

Until Grey Knight arrive with plasma resistant armor.

Ronin-Sage wrote:Haven't noticed if the TC has clarified as to what's meant by 'best', but to just to expand on my original reply:

I think it's fair to place gauss flayer as 'best' in terms of lethality. I just can't imagine myself being in an army in 40k and wanting to go up against a group of gauss flayer -wielding enemies and not have myself and allies equipped with anything but gauss flayers, bolters, or perhaps pulse rifles.

In terms of the ability to stop a threat, you really can't beat a gauss flayer or bolter. It's not even a fair competition.

As far the logistics surrounding the flayer(or really all gauss weapons), we can only speculate. I'm fairly certain there's no fluff or depiction indicating that these weapons even *need* to be recharged or reloaded(Necron infantry apparently carry absolutely nothing on their person, at least nothing that's visible), and if they do, it would be in between battles...or it's just an oversight on the part of the fluff writers and artists.

I always thought that Gauss weapons were powered by the necron using them. which is why the Immortals have they're gauss blasters attached to the cord that attaches to they're back. Same for Destroyers & Heavy Destroyers except they are a little more direct and just replace they're arm with it. AFAIK any major weapon wielded by Necron infantry is attached to them in some way which supports my theory.

If I remember correctly, the pulse rifle out-ranges the Gauss flayer by a solid 12 inches ( I may be mistaken, if I am: diregard everything) but if you have a pulse rifle and stand over 6-12in away from someone with a Gauss flayer, you could shoot while they would have to move forward or even run just to close the gap before being able to hit you, that gives you a lot of valuable time and distance from the enemy. (I realize that I was using game stats, but I think they should scale proportionately to fluff equivalents)

Brother Coa wrote:

Bobthehero wrote:In that case I'll stand by what I said, pick the pulse rifle and outrange everything with a very respectable fire power.

Until Grey Knight arrive with plasma resistant armor.

Plasma shypon only makes plasma stuff inaccurate and its not intergrated in their armor.

That means you won't hit anything with your plasma weapons.
That's 90% of Tau army

Re-read the part where I said it is not integrated in their armor.

The Inquisitor is carrying it.

Gauss Flayer. And thats not just because I play necrons. If you can pull things apart at the atomic level, than yes, you have a winner. The shuriken catapult is a close second I guess.

Squidmanlolz wrote:If I remember correctly, the pulse rifle out-ranges the Gauss flayer by a solid 12 inches ( I may be mistaken, if I am: diregard everything) but if you have a pulse rifle and stand over 6-12in away from someone with a Gauss flayer, you could shoot while they would have to move forward or even run just to close the gap before being able to hit you, that gives you a lot of valuable time and distance from the enemy. (I realize that I was using game stats, but I think they should scale proportionately to fluff equivalents)

The problem is rules =/= Fluff. IF they did all gauss weapons would have S∞ to represent their unparalleled raw power and bolters would have 2 roles to wound to represent the exploding round and Eldar weapons would have AP1 to represent their supreme sharpness and Ork weapons would make you re-roll any hits to represent their terrible accuracy and so on and so forth. So since this goes by fluff you can't really say what out ranges what unless you have a source IN FLUFF that gives ranges.

not that it pertains to this discussion, but the rang difference it 6in not 12.

The fluff does say that the pulse rifle have a gyroscope that gives it a greater effective range, out of many other things.

Well since With Necrons Immortals are now Troop, I'm now going with Gauss Blaster.

NL_Cirrus wrote:So since this goes by fluff you can't really say what out ranges what unless you have a source IN FLUFF that gives ranges.

As far as I remember from the Necron stuff I read (most importantly Caves of Ice and Dead Men Walking) Gauss Flayers are relatively close range. Guardsmen were able to fire upon the Necrons with lasguns a short time before the Flayers were in range (not that it really helped them of course).

TiB wrote:

NL_Cirrus wrote:So since this goes by fluff you can't really say what out ranges what unless you have a source IN FLUFF that gives ranges.

As far as I remember from the Necron stuff I read (most importantly Caves of Ice and Dead Men Walking) Gauss Flayers are relatively close range. Guardsmen were able to fire upon the Necrons with lasguns a short time before the Flayers were in range (not that it really helped them of course).

But did it actually say they were short ranged? because they could choose not to fire until they are close enough to aim easily and thus scoring more hits faster

King Pariah wrote:Well since With Necrons Immortals are now Troop, I'm now going with Gauss Blaster.

True, they are troops, but the Gauss Blaster isn't their basic army weapon.

Bobthehero wrote:The fluff does say that the pulse rifle have a gyroscope that gives it a greater effective range, out of many other things.

That's a bit ambiguous, as it doesn't say how far it out ranges things -after all a greater effective rang of 1 in is still out ranging- nor what exactly it out ranges.