Fair enough, but if others say it can shrug off LMG or even MMG rounds then I'm inclined to agree with the majority. Being more effective against energy based weapons makes a lot of sense though. They just have the advantage that every part of the uniform is their armour, right down to their socks (probably).
Indeed. Flak armor itself doesn't need to be rigid (there are greatcoat style flak armor sets), but the best flak armor (That used by Cadians) has rigid sections.
Melissia wrote:Lexicanum itself is not a source. Much like wikipedia, it is fan-made, and many of its explanations are as well.
Not necessarily, I give an example of that.
I once changed some words on Wikipedia article, after 15 minutes it was changed back.
Later I discovered that that kind of sites have many people who's only job is to read the articles and if someone change something fix it.
And lately, they added programs that indicates when someone has been tampering with the system. Same if for the Lexicanum.
But I did sometimes read some thread that does not exist anymore ( like the sentence that "Emperor is the most powerful psyker the universe" ).
And Wikipedia's got a lot of flak shot at it for that, and has a lot of controversy about it. Lexicanum is far less reviewed. It's a fan work . It's a GOOD fan work, but it's still a fan work . A real source is better, so go look up what sources lexicanum cites, read them, then cite those sources instead.
"Comprised of layers of impact-absorbent and ablative material, Flak Armour is effective against small arms, shrapnel, and blasts." from Dark Heresy. DH uses a different style of armor penetration than tabletop, where armor penetration reduces the amount of protection the armor gives, instead of the more flat system used in tabletop. Guard Flak Armor gives protection even against heavy stubbers in this game as well, and this is with a D100 system.
And that even includes the fact that heavy stubbers have notably better penetration than an autogun with special armor piercing ammunition.
Emperors Faithful wrote:
They were reffered to as Guardsmen throughout, and the IG codex notes that conscripts don't receive that title until they've earnt it.
You're thinking of Whiteshields which are Cadian youth brigades, that are often dragged into combat when needed. Regular conscripts would indeed be called Guardsmen.
They'd have to be extremely poor quality for the Imperium to notice, and even then...
You going to take that risk?
Another point I disagree on. Western troops in and of themselves are not overly impressive. They owe much of their credence to air support and a great deal of firepower behind them.
Western troops are often considered the best based on both their equipment and their training. Sure if you took a standard US Army grunt, gave him a knife and put him in the ring with a Kenyan grunt, the American would have no appreciable advantage, except maybe training in hand to hand combat. However, take a US Army company with its attendant weapons and equipment and put it up against a Kenyan company, and the AMerican company will kick ass and take names. You're right in that basic troops aren't much different, however they do have the best equipment and the best training since their militaries have the most money.
Melissia wrote:The AK47 is dainty compared to the ruggedness of the Autogun or Lasgun, and has inferior firepower and rate of fire to both.
But it has some equal attributes. Easy to maintain, produce, hand and it has powerful attack.
If I had to equip our troops to fight against IG - I would gave them AK-47.
Melissia wrote:The AK47 is dainty compared to the ruggedness of the Autogun or Lasgun, and has inferior firepower and rate of fire to both.
But it has some equal attributes. Easy to maintain, produce, hand and it has powerful attack.
If I had to equip our troops to fight against IG - I would gave them AK-47.
I'd give them white flags, except that the Guard doesn't know what "surrender" means.
Melissia wrote:The AK47 is dainty compared to the ruggedness of the Autogun or Lasgun, and has inferior firepower and rate of fire to both.
But it has some equal attributes. Easy to maintain, produce, hand and it has powerful attack.
If I had to equip our troops to fight against IG - I would gave them AK-47.
No, it doesn't have equal attributes to the lasgun. This has been covered so many time now.
Melissia wrote:The AK47...has inferior firepower and rate of fire to both.
Cite, please? Honestly, you keep saying that the Autogun has superior hitting power, but what is your evidence? Also, where do you get a superior rate of fire from?
How is this discussion still going?
The modern day army would clearly lose, as it does not have the extra 30,000 or so years of technological advancement that the Imperial Guard does.
Even if, at a stretch, the technology was comparable, which I'll grant that in the most advanced cases it almost is, the IG has sheer weight of numbers on it's side. Modern armies would struggle to field hundreds of millions of soldiers in a single warzone.
iproxtaco wrote:
No, it doesn't have equal attributes to the lasgun. This has been covered so many time now.
Lasgun is easy to maintain, use, train with and it has average damage with excellent accuracy.
AK-47 is easy to maintain, train with, use, it has excellent damage with average accuracy.
Of course the Lasgun is more advanced - but it is clear where they get the idea from...
Melissia wrote:The AK47...has inferior firepower and rate of fire to both.
Cite, please? Honestly, you keep saying that the Autogun has superior hitting power, but what is your evidence? Also, where do you get a superior rate of fire from?
Because it has a superior caliber size. Not necessarily THAT much superior (slightly over 8mm, as opposed to 7.62mm) mind, but still.
As for its rate of fire, that one's simpler. The AK47 is not caseless, while the Autogun is. Removing the need to dispose of spent bullet casings after each shot dramatically speeds up the rate of fire and reduces the chance of a jam. And unlike our caseless technology, theirs is much safer and much less prone to becoming unreliable in non-ideal situations such as high-temperature locations.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Brother Coa wrote:
iproxtaco wrote:
No, it doesn't have equal attributes to the lasgun. This has been covered so many time now.
Lasgun is easy to maintain, use, train with and it has average damage with excellent accuracy.
AK-47 is easy to maintain, train with, use, it has excellent damage with average accuracy.
Of course the Lasgun is more advanced - but it is clear where they get the idea from...
The lasgun does superior damage to an AK47. It disembodies limbs regularly in the lore...
Brother Coa wrote:Lasgun [...] has average damage with excellent accuracy. ( average in 40k, very powerful against 2k ) AK-47 [...] has excellent damage with average accuracy. ( powerful against 2k, next to useless compared to 40k )
Fixed
Maybe I have said in the past something outrage, but I am not that stupid.
ChrisWWII wrote:The barrel of the auto gun is visually reminiscent of the AK-47 to be honest....
It doesn't to me looking at the two side by side. There are some superficial similarities, but I could say the same about the autogun and the XM8 as well. Or... pretty much almost any other modern firearm really.
Automatically Appended Next Post: You can have a lasgun that looks like anything really. In Dark Heresy,one of my characters had a lasgun that looked like a Garand. And a hand cannon that looked like an M1911A1.
hemingway wrote:IG wins. Better weapons, better tech and a lifetime of nothing but war.
,,,the life time of war does NOT apply to ever single guardsman ever to don a uniform, if that's what you mean.
And water and dirt have almost no effect on dragonskin, it is only heat that is able to affect the adhesive holding the scales in place.
And also, If were comparing it to flak armour, then we have to have both of the same type: either we consider both full-body, or both vest.
If the dragonskin were to be applied to a full body suit, it would offer MUCH more protection, considering that the reason it is so amazing is that it spreads the kinetic energy, this effect would be amplified (squared rather than multiplied) for every inch more that it covers.
As to the railrifles, the logistics would be the easy part. All you need are well shaped magnetic bullets, as opposed to bullets filled with explosive powder, which also frees up more room for ammunition.
iproxtaco wrote:
No, it doesn't have equal attributes to the lasgun. This has been covered so many time now.
Lasgun is easy to maintain, use, train with and it has average damage with excellent accuracy.
AK-47 is easy to maintain, train with, use, it has excellent damage with average accuracy.
Of course the Lasgun is more advanced - but it is clear where they get the idea from...
You say they have EQUAL attributes when clearly, the lasgun is generally superior. Its easier to maintain, easier to train with, has better damage with better accuracy.
iproxtaco wrote:
No, it doesn't have equal attributes to the lasgun. This has been covered so many time now.
Lasgun is easy to maintain, use, train with and it has average damage with excellent accuracy.
AK-47 is easy to maintain, train with, use, it has excellent damage with average accuracy.
Of course the Lasgun is more advanced - but it is clear where they get the idea from...
You say they have EQUAL attributes when clearly, the lasgun is generally superior. Its easier to maintain, easier to train with, has better damage with better accuracy.
hemingway wrote:IG wins. Better weapons, better tech and a lifetime of nothing but war.
,,,the life time of war does NOT apply to ever single guardsman ever to don a uniform, if that's what you mean.
And water and dirt have almost no effect on dragonskin, it is only heat that is able to affect the adhesive holding the scales in place.
And also, If were comparing it to flak armour, then we have to have both of the same type: either we consider both full-body, or both vest.
If the dragonskin were to be applied to a full body suit, it would offer MUCH more protection, considering that the reason it is so amazing is that it spreads the kinetic energy, this effect would be amplified (squared rather than multiplied) for every inch more that it covers.
As to the railrifles, the logistics would be the easy part. All you need are well shaped magnetic bullets, as opposed to bullets filled with explosive powder, which also frees up more room for ammunition.
Dragonskin might, keyword, might, be more effective against kinetic weapons than standard IG flak armor. But pound for pound, flak armor is the better armor.
The energy required for railrifle to be an effective weapon and be man portable requires technology we don't have.
,,,the life time of war does NOT apply to ever single guardsman ever to don a uniform, if that's what you mean.
And water and dirt have almost no effect on dragonskin, it is only heat that is able to affect the adhesive holding the scales in place.
And also, If were comparing it to flak armour, then we have to have both of the same type: either we consider both full-body, or both vest.
If the dragonskin were to be applied to a full body suit, it would offer MUCH more protection, considering that the reason it is so amazing is that it spreads the kinetic energy, this effect would be amplified (squared rather than multiplied) for every inch more that it covers.
As to the railrifles, the logistics would be the easy part. All you need are well shaped magnetic bullets, as opposed to bullets filled with explosive powder, which also frees up more room for ammunition.
Why are you still thinking that we would win against the Imeprium in all out Crusade?
im2randomghgh wrote:And water and dirt have almost no effect on dragonskin, it is only heat that is able to affect the adhesive holding the scales in place.
Results of various tests done by the US Army:
Half of all tested vests failed their tests, with one fourth of all bullets fully penetrating them in all but very low temperature with a dry vest. Oil, diesel fuel/gasoline, water, dirt, temperature, etc all negatively effected the vests, making them less useful for a real combat situation. To top it off,Dragonskin armor is twice as heavy as interceptor armor (and about three times as heavy as flak armor). In fact, even at ambient temperature in a dry environment with a completely clean vest, it did not reliably block even two bullets per vest.
Conclusion: Dragon Skin does not meet required protection standards for Soldier use.
hemingway wrote:IG wins. Better weapons, better tech and a lifetime of nothing but war.
,,,the life time of war does NOT apply to ever single guardsman ever to don a uniform, if that's what you mean.
And water and dirt have almost no effect on dragonskin, it is only heat that is able to affect the adhesive holding the scales in place.
And also, If were comparing it to flak armour, then we have to have both of the same type: either we consider both full-body, or both vest.
If the dragonskin were to be applied to a full body suit, it would offer MUCH more protection, considering that the reason it is so amazing is that it spreads the kinetic energy, this effect would be amplified (squared rather than multiplied) for every inch more that it covers.
As to the railrifles, the logistics would be the easy part. All you need are well shaped magnetic bullets, as opposed to bullets filled with explosive powder, which also frees up more room for ammunition.
Water and dirt DO have an effect on its protectiveness, its one of the main reasons it will never be adopted in its current form, because it's too damn unreliable.
If you were to apply it to a whole suit, you would collapse, never be able to move without help. To move even with extra strength you would have to separate the surfaces into chest, fore arms, greaves etc.... meaning each part can only absorb the impact that hits it and the force is not spread over the whole body. For that, you would need to manufacture a whole body suit with no joints, which even then probably wouldn't work as the human body is not a constant flat surface. It would be too heavy, and you would have no joints to even try to move.
Its not the ammunition, its the power source. The experimental rail-cannon needs a large building to power it, only a large battleship has the room for a generator right now. Are you saying that this massive machine will be reduced to infantry portable in ten years? Just no, not going to happen. And my point still stands. Is it available now? No not even close.
hemingway wrote:IG wins. Better weapons, better tech and a lifetime of nothing but war.
,,,the life time of war does NOT apply to ever single guardsman ever to don a uniform, if that's what you mean.
And water and dirt have almost no effect on dragonskin, it is only heat that is able to affect the adhesive holding the scales in place.
And also, If were comparing it to flak armour, then we have to have both of the same type: either we consider both full-body, or both vest.
If the dragonskin were to be applied to a full body suit, it would offer MUCH more protection, considering that the reason it is so amazing is that it spreads the kinetic energy, this effect would be amplified (squared rather than multiplied) for every inch more that it covers.
As to the railrifles, the logistics would be the easy part. All you need are well shaped magnetic bullets, as opposed to bullets filled with explosive powder, which also frees up more room for ammunition.
Water and dirt DO have an effect on its protectiveness, its one of the main reasons it will never be adopted in its current form, because it's too damn unreliable.
If you were to apply it to a whole suit, you would collapse, never be able to move without help. To move even with extra strength you would have to separate the surfaces into chest, fore arms, greaves etc.... meaning each part can only absorb the impact that hits it and the force is not spread over the whole body. For that, you would need to manufacture a whole body suit with no joints, which even then probably wouldn't work as the human body is not a constant flat surface. It would be too heavy, and you would have no joints to even try to move.
Its not the ammunition, its the power source. The experimental rail-cannon needs a large building to power it, only a large battleship has the room for a generator right now. Are you saying that this massive machine will be reduced to infantry portable in ten years? Just no, not going to happen. And my point still stands. Is it available now? No not even close.
On the topic of joints at least, it's not a problem. the scales move when you do (shocker).
hemingway wrote:IG wins. Better weapons, better tech and a lifetime of nothing but war.
,,,the life time of war does NOT apply to ever single guardsman ever to don a uniform, if that's what you mean.
And water and dirt have almost no effect on dragonskin, it is only heat that is able to affect the adhesive holding the scales in place.
And also, If were comparing it to flak armour, then we have to have both of the same type: either we consider both full-body, or both vest.
If the dragonskin were to be applied to a full body suit, it would offer MUCH more protection, considering that the reason it is so amazing is that it spreads the kinetic energy, this effect would be amplified (squared rather than multiplied) for every inch more that it covers.
As to the railrifles, the logistics would be the easy part. All you need are well shaped magnetic bullets, as opposed to bullets filled with explosive powder, which also frees up more room for ammunition.
Water and dirt DO have an effect on its protectiveness, its one of the main reasons it will never be adopted in its current form, because it's too damn unreliable.
If you were to apply it to a whole suit, you would collapse, never be able to move without help. To move even with extra strength you would have to separate the surfaces into chest, fore arms, greaves etc.... meaning each part can only absorb the impact that hits it and the force is not spread over the whole body. For that, you would need to manufacture a whole body suit with no joints, which even then probably wouldn't work as the human body is not a constant flat surface. It would be too heavy, and you would have no joints to even try to move.
Its not the ammunition, its the power source. The experimental rail-cannon needs a large building to power it, only a large battleship has the room for a generator right now. Are you saying that this massive machine will be reduced to infantry portable in ten years? Just no, not going to happen. And my point still stands. Is it available now? No not even close.
On the topic of joints at least, it's not a problem. the scales move when you do (shocker).
It's a very heavy and thick suit of titanium, rigid and definitely not flexible. Therefore yes, not having joints would be a MASSIVE problem. What's the point in armour if you can't move in it?
hemingway wrote:IG wins. Better weapons, better tech and a lifetime of nothing but war.
,,,the life time of war does NOT apply to ever single guardsman ever to don a uniform, if that's what you mean.
And water and dirt have almost no effect on dragonskin, it is only heat that is able to affect the adhesive holding the scales in place.
And also, If were comparing it to flak armour, then we have to have both of the same type: either we consider both full-body, or both vest.
If the dragonskin were to be applied to a full body suit, it would offer MUCH more protection, considering that the reason it is so amazing is that it spreads the kinetic energy, this effect would be amplified (squared rather than multiplied) for every inch more that it covers.
As to the railrifles, the logistics would be the easy part. All you need are well shaped magnetic bullets, as opposed to bullets filled with explosive powder, which also frees up more room for ammunition.
Water and dirt DO have an effect on its protectiveness, its one of the main reasons it will never be adopted in its current form, because it's too damn unreliable.
If you were to apply it to a whole suit, you would collapse, never be able to move without help. To move even with extra strength you would have to separate the surfaces into chest, fore arms, greaves etc.... meaning each part can only absorb the impact that hits it and the force is not spread over the whole body. For that, you would need to manufacture a whole body suit with no joints, which even then probably wouldn't work as the human body is not a constant flat surface. It would be too heavy, and you would have no joints to even try to move.
Its not the ammunition, its the power source. The experimental rail-cannon needs a large building to power it, only a large battleship has the room for a generator right now. Are you saying that this massive machine will be reduced to infantry portable in ten years? Just no, not going to happen. And my point still stands. Is it available now? No not even close.
On the topic of joints at least, it's not a problem. the scales move when you do (shocker).
It's a very heavy and thick suit of titanium, rigid and definitely not flexible. Therefore yes, not having joints would be a MASSIVE problem. What's the point in armour if you can't move in it?
It is NOT rigid. If it was, it would not disperse the kinetic energy as effectively.
The point is that human beings are a lot more flexible than dragon skin could ever hope to be. Stop toting like it's some kind of magic armor that will stop everything thrown at it.
More importantly, I once again ask you...the logistics of arming everyone with a railgun, training them to use a completely new weapon, creating the production facilities to make the railguns, their ammo and spare parts for the railguns, etc. etc. How much time and money is that going to take? It's far easier to just keep using standard small arms until those problems are solved.
ChrisWWII wrote:The point is that human beings are a lot more flexible than dragon skin could ever hope to be. Stop toting like it's some kind of magic armor that will stop everything thrown at it.
More importantly, I once again ask you...the logistics of arming everyone with a railgun, training them to use a completely new weapon, creating the production facilities to make the railguns, their ammo and spare parts for the railguns, etc. etc. How much time and money is that going to take? It's far easier to just keep using standard small arms until those problems are solved.
...except for the need for blackpowder just to make these weapons work. All you need for railguns is pieces of conductive metal and electricity.
And as for the new weapon/production facilities, it happens everytime they introduce a new weapon. The soldiers in WW2 adjusted to the new "wunderwaffens" they were issued (assault rifles).
Yes, some people DID buy the false hype behind the armor. And yet, the government did research on the armor and found that it sucked. Hard. Dragonskin is an inferior form of armor to modern body armor-- bulky, unreliable, ludicrously heavy, expensive, and doesn't really provide better protection.
im2randomghgh wrote:
...except for the need for blackpowder just to make these weapons work. All you need for railguns is pieces of conductive metal and electricity.
And as for the new weapon/production facilities, it happens everytime they introduce a new weapon. The soldiers in WW2 adjusted to the new "wunderwaffens" they were issued (assault rifles).
And the power source to generate enough electricity in a man portable fashion to power the railgun for prolonged combat. You don't just need conductive metal, you need superconductors that work reliably at room temperature (possibly much higher than room temperature). You're oversimplifying the process, by your thinking all a firearm needs to work is regular metal and gunpowder. Obviously, that's a gross simplification of the issue, and it's true for railguns as well.
The 'wunderwaffen' you are referring to the Stg-44 was still a standard firearm. It was slightly different but it worked on the same mechanisms as a gun. A firing pin hits a bullet which sends a projectile through the barrell. It was more advanced, and slightly different, but the basic principle was still the same.
Now, imagine switching from the standard 'firing pin hits a detonator which fires the bullet' to a completely new system involving electricity and rails. You need to retrain your soldiers how to use the rifle, how to maintain it etc. As for the production facilities, again your oversimplifying. A factory that makes guns can easily make different types of guns. However, it might not be able to make railguns thanks to the need for different materials, different supplied different conditions than a firearm.
Besides, what advantage would a railgun give that a normal firearm could not? WHy go through all the expense to make and issue a new railgun when standard firearms co uld do the same job quicker, easier and cheaper? Rule of Cool does not apply in reality.
...It is currently used by privatised militaries, SWAT teams, high-profile civilians, 9 Iraqi generals, and I forget all the others.
And the South African government bought into the AIDS is fake hype, and thousands of Americans bought into the vaccines gives your kids autism scare. Doens't mean it's true.
Besides, railguns would need to be specially designed, otherwise they would have the problem of collateral damage as they'd go through non-armored targets easily, putting civilians at risk.
Melissia wrote:Besides, railguns would need to be specially designed, otherwise they would have the problem of collateral damage as they'd go through non-armored targets easily, putting civilians at risk.
They would need especially long barrels, meaning they would be used exclusively as snipers due to amazing range and fantastic accuracy/power. Modern Snipers also have the problem of coming out the other side, but they ARE used extensively.
If you're talking about things like the Barret .50 cal then note that is usually aimed at things that you either don't care if what's on the other side gets hit or if you want what's on the other side to get hit.
And if it's going to be used extensively as a sniper rifle, then you've just surrendered the idea that 'in 10 years every soldier will have a railgun'. Clearly that is not true for the reason you just listed. It's going to be a specialist werapon, if anything.
Melissia wrote:Besides, railguns would need to be specially designed, otherwise they would have the problem of collateral damage as they'd go through non-armored targets easily, putting civilians at risk.
They would need especially long barrels, meaning they would be used exclusively as snipers due to amazing range and fantastic accuracy/power. Modern Snipers also have the problem of coming out the other side, but they ARE used extensively.
No, it would be used as an anti-materiel rifle, because what we have now covers anti-personnel.
ChrisWWII wrote:If you're talking about things like the Barret .50 cal then note that is usually aimed at things that you either don't care if what's on the other side gets hit or if you want what's on the other side to get hit.
...just like with the railrifle. They are used for HS on the TT.
Fair enough, but the point remains that you've admitted that it's unlikely that railguns will be in the hands of your average grunt on the groun any time in the near future.
Melissia wrote:Lexicanum itself is not a source. Much like wikipedia, it is fan-made, and many of its explanations are as well.
Which is why its comment on Penal Legions is dubiously supported at best.
ChrisWWII wrote:
Emperors Faithful wrote:
They were reffered to as Guardsmen throughout, and the IG codex notes that conscripts don't receive that title until they've earnt it.
You're thinking of Whiteshields which are Cadian youth brigades, that are often dragged into combat when needed. Regular conscripts would indeed be called Guardsmen.
The official name of conscripits is Probitor. On Cadia Concscript are called Whitshields. The IG Codex states that neither gain the right to use the title gaurdsmen until they have earned it. This was not the case in 15 hours. They were indeed Gaurdsmen.
Conscripts don't tend to have sergeants either.
They'd have to be extremely poor quality for the Imperium to notice, and even then...
You going to take that risk?
If my position was politically murky or unstable? Yes. I wouldn't be sending my best troops off into the IG because I'm never going to see them again, in fact I'd be sending off dissenters and possible opponents, to the extent that IG induction is a punishment rather than an honour.
However, take a US Army company with its attendant weapons and equipment and put it up against a Kenyan company, and the AMerican company will kick ass and take names.
Without Air Support and in unfamiliar territory? The outcome is a lot more dubious.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Heh, conscripits.
Conscripts are not standard infantry for the Imperial Guard. Dunno where you keep pulling that idea out of (or at least you appear to be pushing that idea).
Snogs wrote:or you can upgrade your bolter to a pulse rifle and forget this debate...
So true.
Yet two sources(Last Chancers and Blood Gorgons novels) show them as being somewhat better than lasguns.Bolters are stronger than Pule Rifles.
Blood Gorgons doesn't even mention pulse rifles. Haven't read last chancers.
Anyway, one example is the being str5 on the TT.
Time for wiki quotes!
"Compared to other infantry weapons, the Pulse Rifle trades firing rate for damage; when compared to a Space Marine Bolter, it appears to work more like a hand held artillery piece, firing at one-third the rate but doing significantly more damage and having a much longer range"
Also, in the intro to the first Ravenor book, there is a pulse rilfe that is referred to as being more powerful than any standard Imperial small arms-including the bolter.
Please get your facts straight.
Blood Gorgons, pgs 89-90
'How is your knee?' Sargaul asked, flexing his own.
Barsabbas stretched out his right leg, the thick cords of his thigh rippling. 'Better today.' he shrugged.
'I thought so', nodded Sargaul, flexing his own right leg. 'They were ferocious, those Tau. Much better at war-making than I expected.'
They engaged on the tundra, trading shots between dwarf shrubs and sedges, low grass and lichens. By the hundreds, the Tau had come, their firing lines disciplined and their shots overwhelming in sheer volume. Pulsating blue plasma hammered them so hard their armour systems had been pushed to failure, and Barsabbas's power suit had reached seventy percent damage threshold within the first few volleys.
As for the Ravenor provide the quote.
I wouldn't use the tabletop as a source of anything since after all,it's game mechanics.Also why do you use wiki,the thing can be edited by anyone.
Melissia wrote:Conscripts are not standard infantry for the Imperial Guard. Dunno where you keep pulling that idea out of (or at least you appear to be pushing that idea).
I've never said anything of the sort. I was simply pointing out that the main character from 15 hours, and his compatriots, wasn't a conscript. He was a normal guardsman, inducted from the main populace rather than the PDF (apparently to meet some extended tithe, or perhaps the planet's PDF was virtually non-existent).
Automatically Appended Next Post: Hey, I get it. That was a strawman!
im2randomghgh wrote:...except for the need for blackpowder just to make these weapons work. All you need for railguns is pieces of conductive metal and electricity.
And constant replacement rails, since the process of firing rapidly degrades them and turns the surface to non-conductive oxides, due to the heat of the electrical arc and the ionization of air. At the level of the Naval railguns, you've got a one shot barrel, because the rails are effectively destroyed by a single firing. I don't know how great the problem is in smaller rails, at a power level comparable to the more powerful modern rifles, but the military obviously doesn't think it would work, or be a logistically feasible idea in any case.
ChrisWWII wrote:If you're talking about things like the Barret .50 cal then note that is usually aimed at things that you either don't care if what's on the other side gets hit or if you want what's on the other side to get hit.
...just like with the railrifle. They are used for HS on the TT.
Point still stands. It's come down from 'every grunt will have a railrifle in 10 years' to 'aw, hm ok, maybe some specialist sniper teams will have them in 10 years'.
These sniper teams will probably include 7 - 10 guys, a small transport and a lot of equipment. It's better used on a vehicle and as a Heavy anti-armour weapon rather than anti-personnel, or mounted on a battle-ship as they are currently thinking of doing (think Transformers 2). I've seen computerised demonstrations of what they want to do with it, it could cover several hundred kilometres and explode before hitting the ground, sending a massive payload of shrapnel over a massive area at very high speeds or they could use it as a pinpoint target hitter. Either way, it will be fearsome.
Melissia wrote:Conscripts are not standard infantry for the Imperial Guard. Dunno where you keep pulling that idea out of (or at least you appear to be pushing that idea).
I've never said anything of the sort. I was simply pointing out that the main character from 15 hours, and his compatriots, wasn't a conscript. He was a normal guardsman, inducted from the main populace rather than the PDF (apparently to meet some extended tithe, or perhaps the planet's PDF was virtually non-existent).
Automatically Appended Next Post: Hey, I get it. That was a strawman!
Brother Coa wrote:Where is KillKrazy to shut down this tread? You are talking about conscription, armor, weapon and totally gone off topic...
How is any of that off-topic?
Asinine it may be from our point of few, but however stupid the opposing argument is in our opinion, we have remained on-topic and relatively polite through-out.
Brother Coa wrote:Where is KillKrazy to shut down this tread? You are talking about conscription, armor, weapon and totally gone off topic...
All three of those are on-topic. The thread should have been shut down a long time ago, but because the entire thing is asinine.
What is that have to do with 100 IG against 100 our troops?
We would lose, most of us agreed.
Let's move on...
I'm sorry, but you can't see how armor and weaponry would factor in to an armed conflict?
Not everyone agrees that we would lose; and this thread will continue until they either run out of half-baked arguments or the thread gets locked.
As much as I would love to talk about how much force can Dragon armor take or witch caliber is the best for assault rifle or what shell M1 Abrams fire or what is the speed of F-22 Raptor or what is the range of artillery I think that after 22 pages we have clear all things...
And those who think that we can defeat an army from 38.000 years from the future armed with lasers and more fanatical than suicide muslims are mostly Americans or British who thinks that their army's are unbeatable and that they can just walk in another country, kill someone and go out...
I will say it again: We won't have any chance against IG, they are better trained ( even the lowest of the Guard are better than our Special Forces ), better equipped and better disciplined. Those who say otherwise don't know anything about military and should watch History Channel to see how solders act in desperate times and how they act when they are under fire ( More Americans died in Iraq in 2003 by friendly fire than by enemy fire ).
Let's move on...
People still don't agree with that though, hence why talking about modern armour and the capabilities of out tanks and weapons versus those of the Imperial Guard is completely relevant.
Hey hey hey, I am American and have been around our military most of my life (dad was special forces in vietnam then went for his 20 count in the army to retire. Spent most of my adult life working with the military, unable to join due to health issue not qualified, so working ended up working for the military... and have a ton of friends in SF, most of whom I have known since I was a kid.) and I have been one of the ones saying we would lose. I know our militaries strenghts and weaknesses, and frankly how the IG is listed in the fluff of the codex, etc.. means we are in trouble.
Talking about experiemental weapons/armor (or ones our militaries actually rejected) does not change that 100 of our modern military as they are against 100 IG troops as they are listed... means we would lose.
Sir Pseudonymous wrote:The Imperial Guard are primarily drawn from the best of Planetary Defense Forces, who could probably be considered roughly equivalent to a modern soldier from a first world country. They then receive further training, and are kitted out with a more advanced version of modern body armor and a perfectly accurate weapon that both strikes instantly and is capable of blasting molten holes in solid rock. At this point, they're expected to be able to take entire planets held and fortified by hundreds of thousands to millions of mutants or cultists, who are armed with weapons and armor roughly equivalent to modern ones, with only a few tens of thousands of soldiers.
I think it's safe to say that man for man, the Guard is a more elite, better equipped force than any modern army.
.
How do you make that out?
The best regiments such as Cadians and Mordians, are certainly elite, but the rest of them are the sweepings of the gaols, asylums and political prisons, shipped out to fill an Imperial quota by getting rid of some dross.
Their equipment and training is so basic that it's a step up to carry a plasma gun, a weapon which kills one in six operators. Their training is so minimal that they rely totally on rigid obedience to orders for their tactics, and morale is so low that they can only be driven into battle by the threat of instant death from their own superiors.
Thanks to all this, despite being spearheaded by nine-feet-tall supermen, advancing behind a curtain of fire thrown up by astonishing artillery and overwhelming orbital support, they struggle to overcome starving, disorganised civilian cultists who have no training and are armed only with captured and improvised weapons.
Their commanders care nothing for their lives, and will happily order them to jump into ditches and fill them with their broken bodies to facilitate the passage of holy, irreplaceable tanks. A single Baneblade is worth more than divisions of Guard.
I think it's safe to say that man for man, the Guard is a desperate, demoralised and incompetent force compared to any modern army.
I think your view of the Imperial Guard is a caricature. Sure, Imperial Guard regiments make use of attached penal legions who are the demoralised cannon fodder you describe, but actual members of most IG regiments are highly trained and well equipped. You can't use game stats to argue your point, because you're working within a system with no proper scale. Just because in game terms plasma weapons get hot & kill the operator 1 in 6 times, it doesn't mean that in the fluff a plasma gun literally has a 1 in 6 chance of blowing up & killing the operator, its just a game mechanic. They're unstable: they *can* overheat, and injure the user, but in reality the plasma specialists would probably receive training on how best to avoid over-heating. In fact, come to that, I can't recall a single piece of fluff I've ever read where a plasma weapon has actually over heated.
Likewise, just because IG potentially take hundreds of thousands of casualties in war, it doesn't mean they're walking across open ground into a storm of enemy fire every single time they fight. Just because some commanders of some Imperial Guard regiments in some battles have ordered massed charges, it doesn't mean thats the only thing they know how to do. I find it hard to imagine a Cadian commander ordering his men to jump into ditches to allow the passage of tanks like you're suggesting.
The IG *have* to be highly trained, competent soldiers to fight enemies like tyranids, demons, and corrupt astartes. Their weapons, equipment and tactics are designed to combat exceptionally dangerous opponents. I don't think they'd struggle with the 2nd rate PDF modern militaries are comparable to. (I say second rate, because the really top notch PDF regiments have knock offs of IG weapons and gear, which are presumably comparable in terms of performance).
Brother Coa wrote:Where is KillKrazy to shut down this tread? You are talking about conscription, armor, weapon and totally gone off topic...
All three of those are on-topic. The thread should have been shut down a long time ago, but because the entire thing is asinine.
What is that have to do with 100 IG against 100 our troops?
We would lose, most of us agreed.
Let's move on...
Even though I've been praising modern technology this entire thread, even I know we'd lose. I was just arguing about HOW BADLY we'd lose.
I agree. This thread has become useless.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Brother Coa wrote:
Nerivant wrote:
Brother Coa wrote:
Nerivant wrote:
Brother Coa wrote:Where is KillKrazy to shut down this tread? You are talking about conscription, armor, weapon and totally gone off topic...
All three of those are on-topic. The thread should have been shut down a long time ago, but because the entire thing is asinine.
What is that have to do with 100 IG against 100 our troops?
We would lose, most of us agreed.
Let's move on...
I'm sorry, but you can't see how armor and weaponry would factor in to an armed conflict?
Not everyone agrees that we would lose; and this thread will continue until they either run out of half-baked arguments or the thread gets locked.
As much as I would love to talk about how much force can Dragon armor take or witch caliber is the best for assault rifle or what shell M1 Abrams fire or what is the speed of F-22 Raptor or what is the range of artillery I think that after 22 pages we have clear all things...
And those who think that we can defeat an army from 38.000 years from the future armed with lasers and more fanatical than suicide muslims are mostly Americans or British who thinks that their army's are unbeatable and that they can just walk in another country, kill someone and go out...
I will say it again: We won't have any chance against IG, they are better trained ( even the lowest of the Guard are better than our Special Forces ), better equipped and better disciplined. Those who say otherwise don't know anything about military and should watch History Channel to see how solders act in desperate times and how they act when they are under fire ( More Americans died in Iraq in 2003 by friendly fire than by enemy fire ).
Let's move on...
Now we have something to argue about again
The lowliest guard is the lowliest guard. Not a special forces operative.
When you join the army, you get a minimum 6-months training, and then continue to train until you die or leave the military. No different than guard, except that our soldiers live longer and so train longer.
Special forces operatives are chosen from the best of the best of the army/marines. You have to have flawless eyesight, perfect physique, myriad general traits, extreme skills with your gun, an additional 8-months of special training that most soldiers couldn't finish even if they weren't weeded out, and they even decide based on personality traits.
Guard are just paid as tithe. In one of the books from "the lost" (cant remember which) one guardsman named boulder was being punished, when asked why, he answered "for fixing a bayonet to a rocket launcher"...
Don't even start with the guard and friendly fire.
sekerra wrote:Hey hey hey, I am American and have been around our military most of my life (dad was special forces in vietnam then went for his 20 count in the army to retire. Spent most of my adult life working with the military, unable to join due to health issue not qualified, so working ended up working for the military... and have a ton of friends in SF, most of whom I have known since I was a kid.) and I have been one of the ones saying we would lose. I know our militaries strenghts and weaknesses, and frankly how the IG is listed in the fluff of the codex, etc.. means we are in trouble.
Talking about experiemental weapons/armor (or ones our militaries actually rejected) does not change that 100 of our modern military as they are against 100 IG troops as they are listed... means we would lose.
Although the American special forces are elite, they are recruited in greater quantity and so are not as well trained as other special forces (SAS, JTF2, CSOR).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Brother Coa wrote:
im2randomghgh wrote:Don't even start with the guard and friendly fire.
And you don't start page 24, PLEASE!!!
If you are so down on this thread at this points, why don't you unsubscribe?
sekerra wrote:Hey hey hey, I am American and have been around our military most of my life (dad was special forces in vietnam then went for his 20 count in the army to retire. Spent most of my adult life working with the military, unable to join due to health issue not qualified, so working ended up working for the military... and have a ton of friends in SF, most of whom I have known since I was a kid.) and I have been one of the ones saying we would lose. I know our militaries strenghts and weaknesses, and frankly how the IG is listed in the fluff of the codex, etc.. means we are in trouble.
Talking about experiemental weapons/armor (or ones our militaries actually rejected) does not change that 100 of our modern military as they are against 100 IG troops as they are listed... means we would lose.
Although the American special forces are elite, they are recruited in greater quantity and so are not as well trained as other special forces (SAS, JTF2, CSOR).
I did not say which groups my father, or my friends were in... And I would thank you not to make insults on their training... Some of the U.S. SF teams are just as well trained as the other armies SF, if not more so. I would love to hear someone say that a member of SEAL team 6 is not well trained.
sekerra wrote:Hey hey hey, I am American and have been around our military most of my life (dad was special forces in vietnam then went for his 20 count in the army to retire. Spent most of my adult life working with the military, unable to join due to health issue not qualified, so working ended up working for the military... and have a ton of friends in SF, most of whom I have known since I was a kid.) and I have been one of the ones saying we would lose. I know our militaries strenghts and weaknesses, and frankly how the IG is listed in the fluff of the codex, etc.. means we are in trouble.
Talking about experiemental weapons/armor (or ones our militaries actually rejected) does not change that 100 of our modern military as they are against 100 IG troops as they are listed... means we would lose.
Although the American special forces are elite, they are recruited in greater quantity and so are not as well trained as other special forces (SAS, JTF2, CSOR).
I did not say which groups my father, or my friends were in... And I would thank you not to make insults on their training... Some of the U.S. SF teams are just as well trained as the other armies SF, if not more so. I would love to hear someone say that a member of SEAL team 6 is not well trained.
Uh, he didn't insult their training, and he didn't say that they weren't well trained. You're trying to make something out of nothing.
On topic; you can't compare the training of a Guardsman and a SF soldier; because their role is completely different.
sekerra wrote:Hey hey hey, I am American and have been around our military most of my life (dad was special forces in vietnam then went for his 20 count in the army to retire. Spent most of my adult life working with the military, unable to join due to health issue not qualified, so working ended up working for the military... and have a ton of friends in SF, most of whom I have known since I was a kid.) and I have been one of the ones saying we would lose. I know our militaries strenghts and weaknesses, and frankly how the IG is listed in the fluff of the codex, etc.. means we are in trouble.
Talking about experiemental weapons/armor (or ones our militaries actually rejected) does not change that 100 of our modern military as they are against 100 IG troops as they are listed... means we would lose.
Although the American special forces are elite, they are recruited in greater quantity and so are not as well trained as other special forces (SAS, JTF2, CSOR).
I did not say which groups my father, or my friends were in... And I would thank you not to make insults on their training... Some of the U.S. SF teams are just as well trained as the other armies SF, if not more so. I would love to hear someone say that a member of SEAL team 6 is not well trained.
Uh, he didn't insult their training, and he didn't say that they weren't well trained. You're trying to make something out of nothing.
On topic; you can't compare the training of a Guardsman and a SF soldier; because their role is completely different.
+1
SF are trained for special missions, whereas guardsmen are trained for a role more similar to that of 17/18th century line infantry.
sekerra wrote:Hey hey hey, I am American and have been around our military most of my life (dad was special forces in vietnam then went for his 20 count in the army to retire. Spent most of my adult life working with the military, unable to join due to health issue not qualified, so working ended up working for the military... and have a ton of friends in SF, most of whom I have known since I was a kid.) and I have been one of the ones saying we would lose. I know our militaries strenghts and weaknesses, and frankly how the IG is listed in the fluff of the codex, etc.. means we are in trouble.
Talking about experiemental weapons/armor (or ones our militaries actually rejected) does not change that 100 of our modern military as they are against 100 IG troops as they are listed... means we would lose.
Although the American special forces are elite, they are recruited in greater quantity and so are not as well trained as other special forces (SAS, JTF2, CSOR).
I did not say which groups my father, or my friends were in... And I would thank you not to make insults on their training... Some of the U.S. SF teams are just as well trained as the other armies SF, if not more so. I would love to hear someone say that a member of SEAL team 6 is not well trained.
Uh, he didn't insult their training, and he didn't say that they weren't well trained. You're trying to make something out of nothing.
On topic; you can't compare the training of a Guardsman and a SF soldier; because their role is completely different.
+1
SF are trained for special missions, whereas guardsmen are trained for a role more similar to that of 17/18th century line infantry.
Which is wrong. Guardsmen are trained for the majority of environments and pitched battles backed up by Armour, not at all similar to 17/18th century infantry.
sekerra wrote:Hey hey hey, I am American and have been around our military most of my life (dad was special forces in vietnam then went for his 20 count in the army to retire. Spent most of my adult life working with the military, unable to join due to health issue not qualified, so working ended up working for the military... and have a ton of friends in SF, most of whom I have known since I was a kid.) and I have been one of the ones saying we would lose. I know our militaries strenghts and weaknesses, and frankly how the IG is listed in the fluff of the codex, etc.. means we are in trouble.
Talking about experiemental weapons/armor (or ones our militaries actually rejected) does not change that 100 of our modern military as they are against 100 IG troops as they are listed... means we would lose.
Although the American special forces are elite, they are recruited in greater quantity and so are not as well trained as other special forces (SAS, JTF2, CSOR).
I did not say which groups my father, or my friends were in... And I would thank you not to make insults on their training... Some of the U.S. SF teams are just as well trained as the other armies SF, if not more so. I would love to hear someone say that a member of SEAL team 6 is not well trained.
Uh, he didn't insult their training, and he didn't say that they weren't well trained. You're trying to make something out of nothing.
On topic; you can't compare the training of a Guardsman and a SF soldier; because their role is completely different.
+1
SF are trained for special missions, whereas guardsmen are trained for a role more similar to that of 17/18th century line infantry.
Which is wrong. Guardsmen are trained for the majority of environments and pitched battles backed up by Armour, not at all similar to 17/18th century infantry.
Stand in a line, fire your guns en masse and hope that the enemy doesn't shoot you back.
im2randomghgh wrote:Stand in a line, fire your guns en masse and hope that the enemy doesn't shoot you back.
Not at ALL similar.
See, this is why it's pointless to discuss the lore with people like random who haven't actually read any of it.
I have read almost every single WH40K book ever released, just sayin'.
The IG's training is obviously more in-depth that what I wrote above, but that is pretty much the core of it. 3/4 of the time, after deploying into a hot-zone, the Guard just stumble about randomly and shoot when they see tentacles unless they can link up with the main force or the pistol of a commissar.
Basing that on The Lost and on Criid's first battlefield experience, amongst other sources.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And accusing people of not knowing lore whenever their opinion is different than yours is not O.K.
I have read almost every single WH40K book ever released, just sayin'.
The IG's training is obviously more in-depth that what I wrote above, but that is pretty much the core of it. 3/4 of the time, after deploying into a hot-zone, the Guard just stumble about randomly and shoot when they see tentacles unless they can link up with the main force or the pistol of a commissar.
Then you obviously didn't absorb much.
The Guard are not just trained to "stand around and shoot stuff."
the Las-gan is more accurate, more powerful, has more "ammo" and is lighter.
while flak armour may only be able to take two are three modern shots, body armour these days has NO defence against a las-round.
Think about this logically there is NO way a modern army can beat the Guard who have nearly 40k years more experience technilogical advance medical understanding and even if by some magical feat of heroics they beat a hundred guard they cannot win as there are billions of guard
It's like saying a modern day army could lose against cave men
JamesMclaren123 wrote:IG win there is no dought about it
i'll assume 100v100 no tanks no air power ect
the Las-gan is more accurate, more powerful, has more "ammo" and is lighter.
while flak armour may only be able to take two are three modern shots, body armour these days has NO defence against a las-round.
Think about this logically there is NO way a modern army can beat the Guard who have nearly 40k years more experience technilogical advance medical understanding and even if by some magical feat of heroics they beat a hundred guard they cannot win as there are billions of guard
It's like saying a modern day army could lose against cave men
JamesMclaren123 wrote:IG win there is no dought about it
i'll assume 100v100 no tanks no air power ect the Las-gan is more accurate, more powerful, has more "ammo" and is lighter.
while flak armour may only be able to take two are three modern shots, body armour these days has NO defence against a las-round.
Think about this logically there is NO way a modern army can beat the Guard who have nearly 40k years more experience technilogical advance medical understanding and even if by some magical feat of heroics they beat a hundred guard they cannot win as there are billions of guard
It's like saying a modern day army could lose against cave men
In the article, it even SAID that they are weaker than projectile weapons. It didn't specify which, so we have to assume all.
Also, if you look at the RoF at the bottom of the page, it is about 40% of most modern assault rifles.
AND it's physically impossible to bleed out from a lasgun wound.
I bolded the part where everything was wrong and/or not backed up by any sources.
first of all it has to be more accurate it is a laser based weapon therefore it dosen't tumble. This article just supports my argument granted the rate of fire is less but you will very rarely find a modern day assult rifle fireing on full auto. though yes it is not as powerful as projectile they are fighting normal humans and will do horrible things to the human body
the fact is this will never be properly resolved because all the facts about the las-gun are fictional
somecallmeJack wrote:*snip* Just because in game terms plasma weapons get hot & kill the operator 1 in 6 times, it doesn't mean that in the fluff a plasma gun literally has a 1 in 6 chance of blowing up & killing the operator, its just a game mechanic. They're unstable: they *can* overheat, and injure the user, but in reality the plasma specialists would probably receive training on how best to avoid over-heating. In fact, come to that, I can't recall a single piece of fluff I've ever read where a plasma weapon has actually over heated.
Actually there is fluff where a plasma gun over-heats, but it is done on purpose (to try ans kill a specific target while being overwhelmed) and the operator throws the weapon at the enemy before it explodes. Come to think of it, there are 2 where this happens: Brothers of the Snake, Sons of Dorn.
On-Topic, We wouldn't stand a chance. Period. @im2randoomghgh. If it doesn't specify which projectile weapon, then why assume they are weaker than modern weapons? The most common projectile weapons in use in 40k are Bolters and Autoguns, it makes perfect sense for lasguns to be weaker than the SM standard weapon, but not weaker than the Imperial Army standard weapon (as the lasgun was introduced to be a replacement for the autogun due to logistics and ease of use/maintenance), not because it is weaker, they are the same pretty much. And not being able to bleed out isnt necessarily a good thing, the force being expelled into your body fuses all the blood vessels therefore causing internal bleeding (which is a well-known reason for people dying today), which in turn causes pressure on internal organs (for example, if hit in the chest, you will lose the ability to breath as you cannot create low pressure in your chest and hence cannot draw air into your lungs.
JamesMclaren123 wrote:IG win there is no dought about it
i'll assume 100v100 no tanks no air power ect
the Las-gan is more accurate, more powerful, has more "ammo" and is lighter.
while flak armour may only be able to take two are three modern shots, body armour these days has NO defence against a las-round.
Think about this logically there is NO way a modern army can beat the Guard who have nearly 40k years more experience technilogical advance medical understanding and even if by some magical feat of heroics they beat a hundred guard they cannot win as there are billions of guard
It's like saying a modern day army could lose against cave men
In the article, it even SAID that they are weaker than projectile weapons. It didn't specify which, so we have to assume all.
Also, if you look at the RoF at the bottom of the page, it is about 40% of most modern assault rifles.
AND it's physically impossible to bleed out from a lasgun wound.
I bolded the part where everything was wrong and/or not backed up by any sources.
first of all it has to be more accurate it is a laser based weapon therefore it dosen't tumble. This article just supports my argument granted the rate of fire is less but you will very rarely find a modern day assult rifle fireing on full auto. though yes it is not as powerful as projectile they are fighting normal humans and will do horrible things to the human body
That doesn't stop it from tumbling, it only makes you not have to take into account the Coriolis Effect, but if you are firing a las-gun from far enough away for the Coriolis Effect to matter, than it's beam is going to be pathetically diminished by the time it reached it's target.
It WILL do horrible things to the human body, but make it bleed is not one of them.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Revenent Reiko wrote:
somecallmeJack wrote:*snip*
Just because in game terms plasma weapons get hot & kill the operator 1 in 6 times, it doesn't mean that in the fluff a plasma gun literally has a 1 in 6 chance of blowing up & killing the operator, its just a game mechanic. They're unstable: they *can* overheat, and injure the user, but in reality the plasma specialists would probably receive training on how best to avoid over-heating. In fact, come to that, I can't recall a single piece of fluff I've ever read where a plasma weapon has actually over heated.
Actually there is fluff where a plasma gun over-heats, but it is done on purpose (to try ans kill a specific target while being overwhelmed) and the operator throws the weapon at the enemy before it explodes.
Come to think of it, there are 2 where this happens:
Brothers of the Snake,
Sons of Dorn.
On-Topic,
We wouldn't stand a chance. Period.
@im2randoomghgh. If it doesn't specify which projectile weapon, then why assume they are weaker than modern weapons?
The most common projectile weapons in use in 40k are Bolters and Autoguns, it makes perfect sense for lasguns to be weaker than the SM standard weapon, and also weaker than the Imperial Army standard weapon (as the lasgun was introduced to be a replacement for the autogun due to logistics and ease of use/maintenance)
And not being able to bleed out isnt necessarily a good thing, the force being expelled into your body fuses all the blood vessels therefore causing internal bleeding (which is a well-known reason for people dying today), which in turn causes pressure on internal organs (for example, if hit in the chest, you will lose the ability to breath as you cannot create low pressure in your chest and hence cannot draw air into your lungs.
On the flip side of that, you could theretically survive having your juggular lacerated, as long as it is minor, and done by a lasgun.
And that happens to cause internal bleeding whether it is solid-slug or not, except that with the laser, you DON'T need to have extensive bandaging. As long as nothings missing, all you would really need is painkillers and back to the frontline you go.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Melissia wrote:
im2randomghgh wrote:According to this it is slightly weaker than an auto-gun
This being your mind, which has repeatedly demonstrated that it possesses almost no knowledge of the lore of 40k?
Lasguns are not weaker than autoguns.
This being a sister-site of wikipedia, which happens to be as accurate as encyclopedia brittanica.
And it's funny, I was just about to say the EXACT SAME THING about you.
JamesMclaren123 wrote:IG win there is no dought about it
i'll assume 100v100 no tanks no air power ect
the Las-gan is more accurate, more powerful, has more "ammo" and is lighter.
while flak armour may only be able to take two are three modern shots, body armour these days has NO defence against a las-round.
Think about this logically there is NO way a modern army can beat the Guard who have nearly 40k years more experience technilogical advance medical understanding and even if by some magical feat of heroics they beat a hundred guard they cannot win as there are billions of guard
It's like saying a modern day army could lose against cave men
In the article, it even SAID that they are weaker than projectile weapons. It didn't specify which, so we have to assume all.
Also, if you look at the RoF at the bottom of the page, it is about 40% of most modern assault rifles.
AND it's physically impossible to bleed out from a lasgun wound.
I bolded the part where everything was wrong and/or not backed up by any sources.
first of all it has to be more accurate it is a laser based weapon therefore it dosen't tumble. This article just supports my argument granted the rate of fire is less but you will very rarely find a modern day assult rifle fireing on full auto. though yes it is not as powerful as projectile they are fighting normal humans and will do horrible things to the human body
That doesn't stop it from tumbling, it only makes you not have to take into account the Coriolis Effect, but if you are firing a las-gun from far enough away for the Coriolis Effect to matter, than it's beam is going to be pathetically diminished by the time it reached it's target.
It WILL do horrible things to the human body, but make it bleed is not one of them.
Light travels in striaght lines and from a las-gun the beam will hit exactly where the rifle is pointing due to the properties of light. yes the light will spread out but the margine is very small over hundreds of meters the beam diamiter will only increase by a few centimeters. Granted it won't bleed but you don't have to bleed to die, if a las-round hits a helment (and doesn't go through) then the heat will cook the brain and the victim will die.
JamesMclaren123 wrote:IG win there is no dought about it
i'll assume 100v100 no tanks no air power ect
the Las-gan is more accurate, more powerful, has more "ammo" and is lighter.
while flak armour may only be able to take two are three modern shots, body armour these days has NO defence against a las-round.
Think about this logically there is NO way a modern army can beat the Guard who have nearly 40k years more experience technilogical advance medical understanding and even if by some magical feat of heroics they beat a hundred guard they cannot win as there are billions of guard
It's like saying a modern day army could lose against cave men
In the article, it even SAID that they are weaker than projectile weapons. It didn't specify which, so we have to assume all.
Also, if you look at the RoF at the bottom of the page, it is about 40% of most modern assault rifles.
AND it's physically impossible to bleed out from a lasgun wound.
I bolded the part where everything was wrong and/or not backed up by any sources.
Weaker than 40K projectile weapons, which are a lot more powerful than ours.
WE KNOW the lasgun is lighter. WE KNOW is has more ammo. ITS A LASER, therefore, more accurate than any infantry projectile weapon we have, except of course sniper rifles who are vastly outclassed by their 40k counterparts in every way.
Why have we just suddenly started talking about the effectiveness of a lasgun? There is not a single infantry rifle that comes close to it.
Yeah maybe you can't bleed out, but when a guardsmen puts a hole through your chest you can fit your arm through and melts you're super awesome not at all effective body armour to your chest and then does that to most of your freinds without reloading, whilst taking hits from all around him whilst running forwards shouting praise to the Emperor with 99 similarly capable friends, will it matter? No. You will be dead from that single wound. Or in so much pain and suffering that you just lie there screaming as a Commissar puts a bolt round into you're skull.
This being a sister-site of wikipedia, which happens to be as accurate as encyclopedia brittanica.
No it's not.
In this case, it is wrong. Lasguns are, and have long been, equal to autoguns in damage capability . They are in tabletop, they are in inquisitor, they are in dark heresy, they are in rogue trader, they are in deathwatch. They are in the Cain series, they actually do MORE damage than autoguns in the Gaunt's Ghosts series, etc etc etc.
The editor of that wiki article is not an expert. He or she is a fan. A fan who is wrong. Much like you.
On the flip side of that, you could theretically survive having your juggular lacerated, as long as it is minor, and done by a lasgun.
And that happens to cause internal bleeding whether it is solid-slug or not, except that with the laser, you DON'T need to have extensive bandaging. As long as nothings missing, all you would really need is painkillers and back to the frontline you go.
Huh?how can you survive having your Jugular lacerated?
This is the closest thing i have found and it basically says you cant (or you have a really low chance of survival even with a Doctor present and being near a Hospital. Yeah theoretically its possible, but not in RL (and if it did you are the luckiest in the world). If it was a lasgun wound, then how the Feth are they going to cut out the fused flesh and replace it with....what? I was talking about damage to internal organs due to internal bleeding, however even with a throat wound, the blood loss caused by ruptures veins and arteries (caused by the force of the shot not being enough to fuse the flesh, but to damage capillaries/veins/arteries) would still cause you to die.
Actually lasguns would theoretically flash-boil blood at the location, which would have pretty distastrous effects on the human body (which is mostly liquid). This would cause a lot of damage similar to the impact of high-velocity rounds.
Melissia wrote:Actually lasguns would theoretically flash-boil blood at the location, which would have pretty distastrous effects on the human body (which is mostly liquid).
Good point. (i was more thinking of the stopping power of the shot)
Either way, its all bad things if you get hit by a lasgun shot.
in the world). If it was a lasgun wound, then how the Feth are they going to cut out the fused flesh and replace it with....what? I was talking about damage to internal organs due to internal bleeding, however even with a throat wound, the blood loss caused by ruptures veins and arteries (caused by the force of the shot not being enough to fuse the flesh, but to damage capillaries/veins/arteries) would still cause you to die.