I wondered today-- why do SM use bolters instead of Hotshot Volley Guns? They don't seem easier to manufacture or maintain, and the ammo is a major drag, where volley guns can both carry much more ammo and replenish it over time, as I understand it. Plus, although we don't have a direct in universe comparison that I know of, Volley guns are much deadlier.
Aside from tradition, is there any reason that SM aren't running around with Hotshot volley guns? And is there anything to stop a particular chapter from ditching the boltgun, at least in some situations, to arm the rank and file with Volley guns?
Bolters in fluff are nasty. Shock and awe as the person next to you has a lmb severed or entire torso is turned to a flying pink mass. Fired on automatic if needed.
Also they can penetrate power armour and fire hellfire bolts etc.
I get that bolters are probably better in the background than on the tabletop, but there is a wide, wide gulf in performance between bolters and volleyguns, a volley gun is well over twice as lethal against all target types and four times as lethal against enemy elites, the notional targets of most SM raids.
As far as the rule of cool goes, a Hotshot Volley Gun is just a fallout gatling laser. Which are pretty damn awesome.
Fear tactics. A lot of what SM's do works because of fear. It's one thing for a man next to you to be hit by a laser and die. It's another for him to explode all over you.
jhe90 wrote: Bolters in fluff are nasty. Shock and awe as the person next to you has a lmb severed or entire torso is turned to a flying pink mass. Fired on automatic if needed.
Also they can penetrate power armour and fire hellfire bolts etc.
I imagine seeing someone get instantly superheated to the point of just exploding in a cloud of meat-scented steam is not a great morale booster either.
Bolts can occasionally penetrate power armor, especially the joints or what have you, but a volley gun shot just zips right through the main ceramite plates, and can suppress with more than twice the rate of fire, without ever needing to reload. That's an insurmountable advantage.
There are cool specialty bolts available, but even a standard bolt, which a Marine might discharge hundreds of, takes at least a week of labor for a servitor to assemble one. Uno. That's compared to a volley gun which slays a CSM every time you pull the trigger. Unlimited ammo, no servitor needed. Imagine the advantage a SM chapter would have over it's equivalent if it was able to dedicate all that manufacturing power that normally goes into bolt production into making ships, tanks, thunderfire cannons, whatever. You'd have a huge advantage.
jhe90 wrote: Bolters in fluff are nasty. Shock and awe as the person next to you has a lmb severed or entire torso is turned to a flying pink mass. Fired on automatic if needed.
Also they can penetrate power armour and fire hellfire bolts etc.
I imagine seeing someone get instantly superheated to the point of just exploding in a cloud of meat-scented steam is not a great morale booster either.
Bolts can occasionally penetrate power armor, especially the joints or what have you, but a volley gun shot just zips right through the main ceramite plates, and can suppress with more than twice the rate of fire, without ever needing to reload. That's an insurmountable advantage.
There are cool specialty bolts available, but even a standard bolt, which a Marine might discharge hundreds of, takes at least a week of labor for a servitor to assemble one. Uno. That's compared to a volley gun which slays a CSM every time you pull the trigger. Unlimited ammo, no servitor needed. Imagine the advantage a SM chapter would have over it's equivalent if it was able to dedicate all that manufacturing power that normally goes into bolt production into making ships, tanks, thunderfire cannons, whatever. You'd have a huge advantage.
Got a fluff quote for the laser vs ceramite?
as well bolters do shoot really fast as well. just cant be shown in game.
additional point. maybe the munitorium just doesnt want them to have it hmmm?
Its also a science fantasy game. its not meant to be realistic. otherwise it would just be easier to bombard the enemy for weeks first then every game played would be 1000 points marine vs maybe 500 points of anything else.
Desubot wrote: Probably because fluff =/= crunch. those bolters are capable of straight taking out a primarch. but in game it basically wont happen.
also volley guns cant get coated in poison or explosive shells like the sternguard get
The only fluff reason I can picture is that the bolter is just as intrinsic to the SM as power armor, so dropping it, even for an obviously superior weapon, would be just as radical as expanding beyond chapter size limits, or building a bunch of chapter fleet ships with lances and nova cannons. Probably a non-starter for political reasons.
It's also possible that a HSVG can only be carried by a Storm Trooper because they don't have any extra cooling requirements. SM already have significant heat sink requirements for their PA, and maybe adding a HSVG is just a bridge too far for heat dispersal. I doubt that though.
jhe90 wrote: Bolters in fluff are nasty. Shock and awe as the person next to you has a lmb severed or entire torso is turned to a flying pink mass. Fired on automatic if needed.
Also they can penetrate power armour and fire hellfire bolts etc.
I imagine seeing someone get instantly superheated to the point of just exploding in a cloud of meat-scented steam is not a great morale booster either.
Bolts can occasionally penetrate power armor, especially the joints or what have you, but a volley gun shot just zips right through the main ceramite plates, and can suppress with more than twice the rate of fire, without ever needing to reload. That's an insurmountable advantage.
There are cool specialty bolts available, but even a standard bolt, which a Marine might discharge hundreds of, takes at least a week of labor for a servitor to assemble one. Uno. That's compared to a volley gun which slays a CSM every time you pull the trigger. Unlimited ammo, no servitor needed. Imagine the advantage a SM chapter would have over it's equivalent if it was able to dedicate all that manufacturing power that normally goes into bolt production into making ships, tanks, thunderfire cannons, whatever. You'd have a huge advantage.
Got a fluff quote for the laser vs ceramite?
as well bolters do shoot really fast as well. just cant be shown in game.
additional point. maybe the munitorium just doesnt want them to have it hmmm?
Its also a science fantasy game. its not meant to be realistic. otherwise it would just be easier to bombard the enemy for weeks first then every game played would be 1000 points marine vs maybe 500 points of anything else.
The HSVG is described as being specifically designed to the punch through ceramite plate in the armory section of the MT codex.
I've never seen bolters described as having an exceptional rate of fire, do you have a quote for that? In the fluff and in the crunch they just have an average rate of fire, which is further limited to generally utilizing 20 to 30 round magazines.
The munitorum may well not want the SM to have them, but barring some sort of prohibition (and good luck getting the SM to honor that) there would be nothing to stop chapter forges from producing them. Additionally I'm pretty sure that would fall under the Schola Progenium specifically, not the overall munitorum, since nobody outside the MT has volley guns.
If there is not a veneer of reality on top of the fantastic setting, it would not be appealing. It doesn't benefit anyone to reduce things to absurdities.
Shock and awe, lets say you splatter someone's brains over a entire room, its shock as a 8foot giant closes on you rapidly turning humans to flying chunks of flesh and bone.
Fear, fear causes enemies to break and thus the attacker advantage. Its extreme concept of violence of action, highly controlled but extreme force applies to cause the most fear a d shock.
jhe90 wrote: Shock and awe, lets say you splatter someone's brains over a entire room, its shock as a 8foot giant closes on you rapidly turning humans to flying chunks of flesh and bone.
Fear, fear causes enemies to break and thus the attacker advantage. Its extreme concept of violence of action, highly controlled but extreme force applies to cause the most fear a d shock.
Okay. So being blown up by a rapid chemical reaction is somehow scarier than being blown up by an even faster transfer of coherent light energy into your body? You still end up in little chunks all over. The only factor may be the report of the weapon. We know bolters are loud (although the sound varies from author to author) but a HSVG may be quieter or even (although I think this is unlikely) silent.
But the tactical applications of a totally silent weapon far outweigh the demoralizing effect of a loud one.
I think it mostly comes down to the same reason the Legions went away from mass issue of Volkite Weaponry (other than production difficulties) and that is the wide array of different ammo you could issue for a boltgun to fit different mission requirements. The fallacy of that how ever is they never issue the Special Issue Ammo to anyone beyond special squads, ie the Seekers of the Legions and the Sternguard of the Chapters.
The munitorum may well not want the SM to have them, but barring some sort of prohibition (and good luck getting the SM to honor that) there would be nothing to stop chapter forges from producing them. Additionally I'm pretty sure that would fall under the Schola Progenium specifically, not the overall munitorum, since nobody outside the MT has volley guns.
Tomato potato its a government agency suppressing information. which in addition is possible that they are suppressing that info from the space marine as IIRC the scions where specifically there to stop rogue marines anyway.
Also i forget if taurox can come in volleygun flavors for IG.
its still science fantasy even if it can contain some nuggets of realism.
jhe90 wrote: Shock and awe, lets say you splatter someone's brains over a entire room, its shock as a 8foot giant closes on you rapidly turning humans to flying chunks of flesh and bone.
Fear, fear causes enemies to break and thus the attacker advantage. Its extreme concept of violence of action, highly controlled but extreme force applies to cause the most fear a d shock.
Okay. So being blown up by a rapid chemical reaction is somehow scarier than being blown up by an even faster transfer of coherent light energy into your body? You still end up in little chunks all over. The only factor may be the report of the weapon. We know bolters are loud (although the sound varies from author to author) but a HSVG may be quieter or even (although I think this is unlikely) silent.
But the tactical applications of a totally silent weapon far outweigh the demoralizing effect of a loud one.
Stalker pattern if you need quiet, combat blades and such... Plenty of options. There's quiet too. And versatile. Space marines face many fies, weapons must be flexible
As stated bolter was easy to make by thousad but also is a very effective weapon to cause panic.
Silverthorne wrote: I wondered today-- why do SM use bolters instead of Hotshot Volley Guns? They don't seem easier to manufacture or maintain, and the ammo is a major drag, where volley guns can both carry much more ammo and replenish it over time, as I understand it. Plus, although we don't have a direct in universe comparison that I know of, Volley guns are much deadlier.
Aside from tradition, is there any reason that SM aren't running around with Hotshot volley guns? And is there anything to stop a particular chapter from ditching the boltgun, at least in some situations, to arm the rank and file with Volley guns?
Volley Guns aren't "really" that much deadlier, the rules for Rapid Fire are just crap.
VictorVonTzeentch wrote: I think it mostly comes down to the same reason the Legions went away from mass issue of Volkite Weaponry (other than production difficulties) and that is the wide array of different ammo you could issue for a boltgun to fit different mission requirements. The fallacy of that how ever is they never issue the Special Issue Ammo to anyone beyond special squads, ie the Seekers of the Legions and the Sternguard of the Chapters.
That never made sense to me either. If you figure how rare even an individual SM is in the big scheme of things it is crazy how miserly they are with the special issue ammo. Of course, the HSVG can be affected by orders that make it more versatile in the way that different ammo types can make the bolter more versatile. This to me indicates that it must have different firing modes or different tuning settings available to it.
I just think it is interesting to imagine the type of face-melting that would occur if an entire chapter of marines used the HSVG as the default infantry weapon.
Silverthorne wrote: I wondered today-- why do SM use bolters instead of Hotshot Volley Guns? They don't seem easier to manufacture or maintain, and the ammo is a major drag, where volley guns can both carry much more ammo and replenish it over time, as I understand it. Plus, although we don't have a direct in universe comparison that I know of, Volley guns are much deadlier.
Aside from tradition, is there any reason that SM aren't running around with Hotshot volley guns? And is there anything to stop a particular chapter from ditching the boltgun, at least in some situations, to arm the rank and file with Volley guns?
Volley Guns aren't "really" that much deadlier, the rules for Rapid Fire are just crap.
Do you mean in the fluff or the crunch? Because on the tabletop a HSVG totally outclasses a bolter in virtually every metric. I don't see any way how a tac squad armed with bolters could overcome a tac squad armed with HSVG.
VictorVonTzeentch wrote: I think it mostly comes down to the same reason the Legions went away from mass issue of Volkite Weaponry (other than production difficulties) and that is the wide array of different ammo you could issue for a boltgun to fit different mission requirements. The fallacy of that how ever is they never issue the Special Issue Ammo to anyone beyond special squads, ie the Seekers of the Legions and the Sternguard of the Chapters.
That never made sense to me either. If you figure how rare even an individual SM is in the big scheme of things it is crazy how miserly they are with the special issue ammo. Of course, the HSVG can be affected by orders that make it more versatile in the way that different ammo types can make the bolter more versatile. This to me indicates that it must have different firing modes or different tuning settings available to it.
I just think it is interesting to imagine the type of face-melting that would occur if an entire chapter of marines used the HSVG as the default infantry weapon.
It would be really cool for them to have all HSVGs, just like it would be cool for them all to have Special Issue Ammo or at least the option to take SIA.
Silverthorne wrote: I wondered today-- why do SM use bolters instead of Hotshot Volley Guns? They don't seem easier to manufacture or maintain, and the ammo is a major drag, where volley guns can both carry much more ammo and replenish it over time, as I understand it. Plus, although we don't have a direct in universe comparison that I know of, Volley guns are much deadlier.
Aside from tradition, is there any reason that SM aren't running around with Hotshot volley guns? And is there anything to stop a particular chapter from ditching the boltgun, at least in some situations, to arm the rank and file with Volley guns?
Volley Guns aren't "really" that much deadlier, the rules for Rapid Fire are just crap.
Do you mean in the fluff or the crunch? Because on the tabletop a HSVG totally outclasses a bolter in virtually every metric. I don't see any way how a tac squad armed with bolters could overcome a tac squad armed with HSVG.
If you want to go by fluff:
The HSVG is mentioned as being potentially fatal for its operator, with the power source being able to detonate if struck or if fired too long.
For tabletop, like I said:
Rules for Rapid Fire are crap. HSVG comes out ahead because Salvo is huge. Try playing Lias Issodon from the Raptors Chapter sometime to see what a Salvo boltgun can do. 30" S4 AP5 Salvo 2/4 is nice.
There's no source for that. It says its has penitent class heat sink, and that it can '' maintain a punishing rate of high powered fire '' They had the Gets Hot! rule, but it was a misprint/typo and was fixed.
Don't hotshot volley guns tend to melt down over time, due to the intense heat? Basically, use your gun for a while and it becomes slag, so you have to get it replaced? That was at least the old fluff. Nothing near as extreme as with a plasma gun, and it's offset by cooling systems, but enough to make them less resource-friendly than they appear at a glance.
But any weapon being fired too much will get damage, so its nothing special or extra ordinary, its just that in its supreme stupidity, the Imperium thinks changing a barrel is hard (its not)
Bobthehero wrote: There's no source for that. It says its has penitent class heat sink, and that it can '' maintain a punishing rate of high powered fire '' They had the Gets Hot! rule, but it was a misprint/typo and was fixed.
"Tempestus" novella had that blurb I mentioned, actually.
It's not a question of it "getting hot" in the Plasma Gun sense, but strapping a reactor to your back generally can be hazardous to your health.
But any weapon being fired too much will get damage, so its nothing special or extra ordinary, its just that in its supreme stupidity, the Imperium thinks changing a barrel is hard (its not)
Again, "Tempestus" actually discusses this.
It's not the barrel that is damaged. During the course of a firefight the HSVG operator swaps barrels while the other Scions lay down covering fire.
The connections for the wires running from the backpack reactor to the gun get fused when fired for too long, as do the focusing lenses inside of the gun itself.
So basically when you do abusive use of the weapon it will break, okay, that sounds like any other weapons I know about, except marine stuff, of course, because good forbid something bad happens to them.
Bobthehero wrote: So basically when you do abusive use of the weapon it will break, okay, that sounds like any other weapons I know about, except marine stuff, of course, because good forbid something bad happens to them.
unless they forget to pray 3 times a day to it before battle.
Bobthehero wrote: So basically when you do abusive use of the weapon it will break, okay, that sounds like any other weapons I know about, except marine stuff, of course, because good forbid something bad happens to them.
Yeah yeah yeah, we get it. "Stormtroopers are better than Marines" or whatever.
"Abusive use of the weapon" need not apply when you have your backpack reactor explode, thanks to a sniper hitting a power regulator.
How many times have people been killed by having pouches with spare bolter magazines getting shot?
In any regards, it really all boils down to:
Volley Guns are better because they were written in later. They benefit from being Salvo rather than Rapid(lol) Fire.
Bobthehero wrote: So basically when you do abusive use of the weapon it will break, okay, that sounds like any other weapons I know about, except marine stuff, of course, because good forbid something bad happens to them.
Got a bit of an axe to grind?
Marine stuff is probably more valuable than the Scion himself - given the relic level of some bolters.
The main reasons Marines have them is because of their multi-use and effectiveness (against most xenos and heretics, bolters are reliable, deadly, and modular). When Chaos Space Marines raise their horns, bolters do just as good a job as they did back in the heresy, and can be loaded easier with other rounds.
They are iconic and have been in circulation longer - it's a much a part of them as their power armour.
They're not that much worse than the HSVG - in fluff, they have a huge impact, and if you're going to compare the tabletop stats, the FFG portrayal of bolt weapons in Deathwatch are monstrous. That's a weapon for Astartes. After all, bolters are mini rapid fire grenade launchers. They'll pack a hell of a punch too.
After all, they've got to be pretty good - the Space Marines aren't the Imperium's Elite for nothing.
Never because Marines apparently never carry spare ammo and because their armor would probably protect them from the worse of it. But Marines also have a huge generator on their back you could detonate, adding a bunch of batteries to power up a more powerful weapon would add very little danger to them.
Not as portable or as versatile as either a boltgun or HSVG, I also assume the backpack needed to keep the lascannon firing would be much bigger and much more potent than the HSVG one.
Bobthehero wrote: Not as portable or as versatile as either a boltgun or HSVG, I also assume the backpack needed to keep the lascannon firing would be much bigger and much more potent than the HSVG one.
True, but that lascannon is FAR stronger at piercing armour.
Also, meltas, plasmas, gravs and all their combi's are just as portable as bolters, and still stronger.
Melta's have poor range and rate of fire, plasma is unreliable, grav tends to work well on heavily armored targets. HSVG could replace the bolters in the combi mix.
the problem is you're looking for the bestest killiest gun for space marines, and that's not the IoM's style. the boltgun, the lasgun, they're the AK-47 of their setting, they're prefered because they're stupidly reliable.
pm713 wrote: Fear tactics. A lot of what SM's do works because of fear. It's one thing for a man next to you to be hit by a laser and die. It's another for him to explode all over you.
Actually, the effects of a lasbolt on an organic surface is supposed to be pretty visceral. You are basically causing a part of a human body to flash boil, vaporise and explode.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ashiraya wrote: The boltgun has never been described as particularly reliable.
It depends. IIRC they aren't that reliable in necromunda , but then again the boltguns there are being used by gangsters with minimal military training, and they are probably poor quality, black market ones too. They are probably more reliable when they are from a reputable manufacturer and in the hands of an experienced soldier who knows how to maintain them. Like a Space Marine supplied by a forge world.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote: the problem is you're looking for the bestest killiest gun for space marines, and that's not the IoM's style. the boltgun, the lasgun, they're the AK-47 of their setting, they're prefered because they're stupidly reliable.
The lasgun, yes. Boltguns, not so much. They are considered to be top of the line, rare weapons, at least in necromunda.
Anyway, boltguns are probably more effective against unarmored but tough opponents like orks. I would imagine the lasgun's method of operation would not be too effective against them, due to their body composition and resistance to pain. As such, you need something that can quickly penetrate deep enough and shred their organs to take them down. A bolt round does that exactly. Space Marines appear to be deployed mostly against orks and heretics, so them being armed with boltguns makes sense
Whilst the HSVG is good at piercing armor, it lacks that capability as its just another lasweapon, and really, the armor piercing power is wasted against orks. In game, anyway. Not sure about the fluff. The S / AP system is kind of odd to visualise. I guess it kind of makes sense, as in IRL you have things like FMJ rounds and Hollowpoints, which have different penetrative power but have different effects on the human body, but its still odd to imagine.
Canonically:
You cannot spend your free time writing litanies of hate on laser bolts.
Hotshot bolts penetrate and perforate without distributing damage over a wider area- passing right through and cauterising. They are unsuitable for attacking targets larger than mansized, or mansized targets with above Astartes toughness such as plague marines, obliterators, tyranid warriors, Nobs, ogryns, large mutants, chaos spawn, and myriad other horrors of the 41st millenium.
They also are less efficient against mansized targets who are unarmoured or use less than carapace- Orks, grots, 'gaunts, daemons, cultists, zombies, rogue guardsmen/pdf, Eldar, mutants, beastmen, ratlings, genestealer hybrids.
(Unlike tabletop, Marines aren't typically fighting other marines.)
Orks do not respect laser weapons. The pyyyyyewpewpewpewpah pew of the gatling laser will not cow them. Similarly, many humans prefer auto weapons for the intimidation of hard rounds. Dakka is the preferred acoustic of war.
Speculation:
The Stormtrooper corps being armed with weapons that can defeat marine armour is no accident. After the heresy, hellguns were developed from existing technologies and Stormtrooper cadres were established by the Inquisition, given extensive anti marine training and then deployed against heretical uprisings etc- onhand whenever CSM were revealed to be the cause.
Stormtroopers working in conjunction with assassins have brought down many Chapters, off the books and quietly, the assassins remaining to clean up any loose ends.
They have been training and recruiting in recent years for the big push on Ultramar.
the reason they use boltguns is that the fluff writers at the time of the inception of marines gave them bolters (at the time some also had laspistols as side arms if IRC)
and today the current fluff writers and developers wanted something cool to give to scions and came up with a laser doodad that had to sound cool and effective so they said it can do this and it can do that and didnt think of it in comparison to other weapons already extablished in the fluff nor think of its justification for use or equally jusitifcation for NOT using it by other groups than the small bit of the fluff they were looking at.....
Automatically Appended Next Post: ----
for a completely not interested in further justification or arguement
bolters are better and more effective in everyway so marines have them
=Angel= wrote: Canonically:
You cannot spend your free time writing litanies of hate on laser bolts.
Hotshot bolts penetrate and perforate without distributing damage over a wider area- passing right through and cauterising. They are unsuitable for attacking targets larger than mansized, or mansized targets with above Astartes toughness such as plague marines, obliterators, tyranid warriors, Nobs, ogryns, large mutants, chaos spawn, and myriad other horrors of the 41st millenium.
They also are less efficient against mansized targets who are unarmoured or use less than carapace- Orks, grots, 'gaunts, daemons, cultists, zombies, rogue guardsmen/pdf, Eldar, mutants, beastmen, ratlings, genestealer hybrids.
(Unlike tabletop, Marines aren't typically fighting other marines.)
Orks do not respect laser weapons. The pyyyyyewpewpewpewpah pew of the gatling laser will not cow them. Similarly, many humans prefer auto weapons for the intimidation of hard rounds. Dakka is the preferred acoustic of war.
Speculation:
The Stormtrooper corps being armed with weapons that can defeat marine armour is no accident. After the heresy, hellguns were developed from existing technologies and Stormtrooper cadres were established by the Inquisition, given extensive anti marine training and then deployed against heretical uprisings etc- onhand whenever CSM were revealed to be the cause.
Stormtroopers working in conjunction with assassins have brought down many Chapters, off the books and quietly, the assassins remaining to clean up any loose ends.
They have been training and recruiting in recent years for the big push on Ultramar.
I agree and disagree with you. I think you're analysis of the weapon is totally off. The HSVG outclasses the boltgun in every way. But I think you are on to something with the employment.
I don't agree that hot shots do not deal massive bodily damage. The rate of fire alone is comparable to an assault cannon, which turns people into hamburger. Even basic, mass produced flashlights can blast a meter diameter hole through concrete walls. It has a pretty messy effect against an unarmored human or xeno. And this is the flashlight turned up to 11. I've never seen a reference in the background to HSVG stuggling with tougher targets, although I have seen the opposite. So if you could cite where you are getting that I could try to see what you are saying.
Where are you getting that HSVG are less effective against rank and file troops? Just because the gun is good at penetrating armor doesn't mean is bad at killing unarmored things. If I shoot you with a sabot round from a 120mm smoothbore and a 5.56, guess which one is more likely to kill you, even though it's designed to open up armor. Lasguns of all varieties work by instantaneously superheating the tissue of the target. If you are a target like an Ork, very fleshy and watery without a lot of armor, it stands to reason the HSVG would be even MORE effective, not less. And I've never heard of one piece of background stating that orks ran away because the noise of a bolter scared them. That sounds like the most unorky situation I can imagine, actually.
However, it makes sense that the IoM wouldn't be keen on too many SM chapters switching to HSVG. Can you imagine if the Astral Claws had carried HSVG instead of boltguns? Maybe not the best example, because if they had won at Badab they would have likely remained loyal, but you get the idea. If SM are issued SM-killing gear in mass, it becomes very hard to take them down. Still, without a law prohibiting it, as a Chapter master I would absolutely be decking my dudes out with HSVG.
I agree and disagree with you. I think you're analysis of the weapon is totally off. The HSVG outclasses the boltgun in every way. But I think you are on to something with the employment.
I don't agree that hot shots do not deal massive bodily damage. The rate of fire alone is comparable to an assault cannon, which turns people into hamburger. Even basic, mass produced flashlights can blast a meter diameter hole through concrete walls. It has a pretty messy effect against an unarmored human or xeno. And this is the flashlight turned up to 11. I've never seen a reference in the background to HSVG stuggling with tougher targets, although I have seen the opposite. So if you could cite where you are getting that I could try to see what you are saying.
Ok, I'm basing this on what I understand hellguns to be.
Lasguns deliver light energy to a targets surface but are bad at dealing with armour ( probably because most armour in-universe is designed to beat LAS). They are the equivalent of dum dum rounds. Hellguns deliver super focused light energy that cuts through a target- the equivalent of high velocity Armour penetrating rounds.
The assault cannon doesn't fire more powerful rounds than a heavy bolter. It doesn't have merely 4 times the rate of fire of a missile launcher. When we see heavy 4, we understand that each of those 4 attacks represent many, many rounds, tearing apart the target. The sheer mass of space lead filling the air is what gives the gun strength 6.
The volley gun is the hellgun equivalent. Individually, each blast is a single hellgun shot, weaker than a bolter round but with better penetration. En masse, those rounds add up to 'bolter strength' shots ingame.
Silverthorne wrote: Where are you getting that HSVG are less effective against rank and file troops? Just because the gun is good at penetrating armor doesn't mean is bad at killing unarmored things. If I shoot you with a sabot round from a 120mm smoothbore and a 5.56, guess which one is more likely to kill you, even though it's designed to open up armor. Lasguns of all varieties work by instantaneously superheating the tissue of the target. If you are a target like an Ork, very fleshy and watery without a lot of armor, it stands to reason the HSVG would be even MORE effective, not less. And I've never heard of one piece of background stating that orks ran away because the noise of a bolter scared them. That sounds like the most unorky situation I can imagine, actually.
Consider shooting a deer with a bullet designed to defeat armour plate and it passing right through the leg muscle at high speed.
I don't have a quote at hand for the Ork thing- but I remember reading that's the rationale for why Orks don't use las weapons. The Human bit is from the Inquisitor rulebook- the solid slug weapons tables in the armoury.
Again, what I'm working with here is that HSVG doesn't deliver significantly more energy(per shot) 'to' the target than a regular lasgun. That was what the old hotshot guns used to do back in the day when they were just +1 lasguns (S4)
The shots focus energy on penetration rather than surface level damage.
It would deliver significantly more energy per second to the target because it has a high rate of fire.
I imagine that a lasgun shot burns or blasts an area the size of a golfball into a human chest. I imagine that hellguns bore a needle-thin hole all the way through a the chest of an unarmoured individual in an instant, leaving surrounding tissue relatively un-cooked. (HSVG would pepper the individual with such holes)
Bolter rounds being advanced mass-reactive rockets, detonate within unarmoured targets, shredding them or explode on the surface of armour they fail to penetrate, weakening it.
Another point is that the bolter is rifle form and the HSVG is support weapon form- designed to be fire from the hip and hose down targets.
The reason SM don't all take heavy bolters is so that other squadmates can cover the SAW guy with their rifles. So the real comparison is between the HSVG and
Plasmaguns which threaten vehicles
Meltaguns which are for killing vehicles
Flamers which kill more infantry
grav guns which are effective aginst vehicles and terminators
missile launchers which have range and AV power
plasmacannons which outperform HSVG in most situations and have AV power
Grav cannons which again, outperform HSVG in lost of circumstances.
And between the bolter and hellgun.
Silverthorne wrote: However, it makes sense that the IoM wouldn't be keen on too many SM chapters switching to HSVG. Can you imagine if the Astral Claws had carried HSVG instead of boltguns? Maybe not the best example, because if they had won at Badab they would have likely remained loyal, but you get the idea. If SM are issued SM-killing gear in mass, it becomes very hard to take them down.
This is really the best reason. The HSVG is essentially a specialist man portable weapon for killing armored elites. The Admech don't use it, meaning they likely think they've a better solution (involving radiation, no doubt) and there's no reason that Astartes would be equipped with it considering their regular enemies and the tools they have already.
The Inquisition/Tempestus arm of the Munitorum monopolising the hell out of hellguns ( ) makes complete sense from a background perspective, especially considering Inquisitors tend to use power armour themselves.
Silverthorne wrote: Still, without a law prohibiting it, as a Chapter master I would absolutely be decking my dudes out with HSVG.
And you'd be within your rights to do so, assuming you found some store of them in your travels.
However, the Admech arent obliged to supply you with high energy lasers any more than they are obliged to supply you with Death Strike ICB(vortex)M launchers and asking might earn you the same Inquisitorial attention as looting fallen Tempestus allies.
pm713 wrote: Fear tactics. A lot of what SM's do works because of fear. It's one thing for a man next to you to be hit by a laser and die. It's another for him to explode all over you.
Actually, the effects of a lasbolt on an organic surface is supposed to be pretty visceral. You are basically causing a part of a human body to flash boil, vaporise and explode.
Full disclosure: I ran a narrative campaign that never finished, combining killteam and combat patrol elements.
An Iron warriors killteam were to sneak past the patrols of a hive's wall and infect the water treatment facilities with obliterator virus.
They triggered a patrol and Admech (counts as stormtroopers ) swung by and rappelled down from rapid response craft ( counts as valkyries)
After a shootout resulted in victory, the first thing my friend's Iron Warriors did was loot the hellguns.
Ashiraya wrote: The boltgun has never been described as particularly reliable.
It's never been described as unreliable.
Indeed. It is in the middle.
Reliable. Requires a well trained user to be so however.ie a space marine.
A lot of this 'reliability' comes from Necromunda where you'd have weapons in the hand of violent gangs- played at the scale where reliability became an issue.
The weapons themselves were not the best examples of their craft in the first place, having been produced in some shop on necromunda itself and finding its way to the underhive either by being a reject or passing through many hands.
Then you had violent nut jobs with pointed metal teeth not maintaining them.
Bolter weapons in this environment were unreliable and prone to jam but powerful enough to take the risk. Even handguns were somewhat unreliable. Lasguns however were very reliable- requiring as they do almost no maintenance to keep running.
A marine knows how to strip and clean his bolter- and he has serfs and tech adepts to repair any damage.
A hive ganger has none of these things, and may have difficulty finding ammo for it!
Ashiraya wrote: It should be noted that game stats do not equal lore capabilities.
Sure. But you have to take that conceit pretty dang far to get to a place where a gun that on the table top is the same strength and range, with double the penetrating quality and rate of fire is not better. Otherwise you could say that grot blasters are actually better than lance batteries, it's just not reflected well on the table top.
pm713 wrote: Fear tactics. A lot of what SM's do works because of fear. It's one thing for a man next to you to be hit by a laser and die. It's another for him to explode all over you.
Actually, the effects of a lasbolt on an organic surface is supposed to be pretty visceral. You are basically causing a part of a human body to flash boil, vaporise and explode.
Is the part the same size as the entire torso?
In gaunt's ghosts a regular lasgun blows a hole through a concrete wall big enough to step through. So yeah. Entire torso. Head flying, you name it.
The problem with the deer analogy is rate of fire. The ROF on this gun is insane, and I'm no corpsman, but I have a hard time believing someone nailed 4 times by green tips is more likely to survive than someone hit by regular ball once. And as you point out, that's a crude equivalence. In all likelyhood, the HSVG has a ROF considerably higher than 4x a bolter.
My impression of Hellguns in general and HSVG in particular isn't that the beam is more focused, it is that more power is being dumped into each shot, which scales up penetrating power exponentially and strength only marginally. It would be cool if they did an exploded diagram in the next Tempestus book explaining the tech, but that seems unlikely. A long las seems to work with more focused light, but the MT stuff just seems to throw more power downrange.
I don't really buy the support weapon team idea from what I've seen of real world militaries. If it was practical to outfit every rifleman with a LMG and 800 rounds of ammo without weighing him down and degrading his mobility, we would. (Except for grenadiers, marksmen, engineers, etc who have specialist weapons). SEAL Platoons in Vietnam followed this approach-- every guy except the corpsman and the LT pretty much carried a stoner unless they had some reason to carry something else. So in the case of SM and the HSVG-- they wouldn't have a tactical reason to stick with the bolter. They can easily manage the additional weight of the HSVG. If we had examples of SM firing into CC where other SM are engaged, expecting the PA to save them, then we might have a good tactical reason for them not to lug around HSVG, but as it is, I don't see one. Really SM and MT both should all carry HSVG if the table top mechanics are any way grounded in reality. Both the standard hellgun and the boltgun are outclassed. Specialist weapons could still be issued, especially to deal with armor or monstrous creatures. Something like 7 SM w/ HSVG, 2 SM w/ Melta, SG with power fist. Obviously this is all just do to GW not having totally reconciled everything within their own background, which I totally understand given the scale of that. Still, LRRP SM with HSVG instead of bolters is a kickass idea.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ashiraya wrote: Shoot said oh-so-dangerous HSVG two times, point blank, into your average IG Major.
He will survive.
Game mechanics yay!
Um, no.
8 S4 AP 3 shots is enough to kill an IG major.
however, 4 St 4 AP 5 shots from your beloved boltgun won't reliably put him down, especially if he has upgraded to carapace.
Isn't the damage from a lasgun comparable to a .50 round? Can a .50 round obliterate a torso? I suppose it is possible; there is a lot of liquid to flash boil, and I would imagine the amount of steam being generated would have an...unfortunate effect.
The problem with the deer analogy is rate of fire. The ROF on this gun is insane, and I'm no corpsman, but I have a hard time believing someone nailed 4 times by green tips is more likely to survive than someone hit by regular ball once. And as you point out, that's a crude equivalence. In all likelyhood, the HSVG has a ROF considerably higher than 4x a bolter.
My impression of Hellguns in general and HSVG in particular isn't that the beam is more focused, it is that more power is being dumped into each shot, which scales up penetrating power exponentially and strength only marginally. It would be cool if they did an exploded diagram in the next Tempestus book explaining the tech, but that seems unlikely. A long las seems to work with more focused light, but the MT stuff just seems to throw more power downrange.
I don't really buy the support weapon team idea from what I've seen of real world militaries. If it was practical to outfit every rifleman with a LMG and 800 rounds of ammo without weighing him down and degrading his mobility, we would. (Except for grenadiers, marksmen, engineers, etc who have specialist weapons). SEAL Platoons in Vietnam followed this approach-- every guy except the corpsman and the LT pretty much carried a stoner unless they had some reason to carry something else. So in the case of SM and the HSVG-- they wouldn't have a tactical reason to stick with the bolter. They can easily manage the additional weight of the HSVG. If we had examples of SM firing into CC where other SM are engaged, expecting the PA to save them, then we might have a good tactical reason for them not to lug around HSVG, but as it is, I don't see one. Really SM and MT both should all carry HSVG if the table top mechanics are any way grounded in reality. Both the standard hellgun and the boltgun are outclassed. Specialist weapons could still be issued, especially to deal with armor or monstrous creatures. Something like 7 SM w/ HSVG, 2 SM w/ Melta, SG with power fist. Obviously this is all just do to GW not having totally reconciled everything within their own background, which I totally understand given the scale of that. Still, LRRP SM with HSVG instead of bolters is a kickass idea.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ashiraya wrote: Shoot said oh-so-dangerous HSVG two times, point blank, into your average IG Major.
He will survive.
Game mechanics yay!
Um, no.
8 S4 AP 3 shots is enough to kill an IG major.
however, 4 St 4 AP 5 shots from your beloved boltgun won't reliably put him down, especially if he has upgraded to carapace.
Great job, you played yourself.
Knowing a Vietnam Era SEAL I can tell you that they did not all carry Stoners, they carried what worked for them most of the time and that often wasnt the Stoner as it was over complicated. Plus you know havign everyone weighed down with a SAW is a bad idea in the Jungle when you need to move quickly on long patrols.
And you are failing to take into account Shields the IG Major would have on the TT.
Shields? Like what, a refractor field or something? Because that would stop a bolt round just as well as a HSVG round.
Yes-- I said not all SEALs carried stoners. Hell, they occasionally carried crossbows and wore blue jeans. Many carried cut down M-60s as well. My point was that if you are conducting an assault and only expect to be out a few hours, and have your mobility provided for you, there isn't much reason to take a rifle over an LMG. Or any reason, really. Compare the heavy weapon density in a SEAL platoon (especially ST 2, late war) to a regular platoon of legs. A detachment of 8-10 SEALs frequently had as many MMG and LMGs as an entire platoon of regular grunts. I'm sure if you ask your friend he can confirm this. And they didn't carry that much iron for their health-- if mobility and ammo aren't an issue (and for SM carrying a HSVG they wouldn't be) then you want a MG. The MG is a casualty producing weapon-- the rifles are just to keep the MG protected.
Ashiraya wrote: It should be noted that game stats do not equal lore capabilities.
Sure. But you have to take that conceit pretty dang far to get to a place where a gun that on the table top is the same strength and range, with double the penetrating quality and rate of fire is not better. Otherwise you could say that grot blasters are actually better than lance batteries, it's just not reflected well on the table top.
Except there's no canon precedent for it. We know roughly the capabilities of grot blastas as worn down scrap pistols - possible air rifle strength. Certainly not lance battery equivalents.
pm713 wrote: Fear tactics. A lot of what SM's do works because of fear. It's one thing for a man next to you to be hit by a laser and die. It's another for him to explode all over you.
Actually, the effects of a lasbolt on an organic surface is supposed to be pretty visceral. You are basically causing a part of a human body to flash boil, vaporise and explode.
Is the part the same size as the entire torso?
In gaunt's ghosts a regular lasgun blows a hole through a concrete wall big enough to step through. So yeah. Entire torso. Head flying, you name it.
Could I see a quote from that? I have the books, but I don't recall seeing a single shot do that.
Overloading the magazine and destroying it, yes, but that's not quite shooting, is it?
And I only need to point to the myriads of data about bolters to prove how devastating bolters are, and always have been.
Spoiler:
“‘Form a firing line!’ he ordered.
The closest of the corpses was only five metres away. As the eight remaining Astartes rushed forward to stand shoulder-to-shoulder beside Zahariel and Astelan, the Librarian called out. ‘Change magazines!’
As one, nine pairs of hands went to work, releasing nearly-empty clips from their bolt pistols and slapping fresh ones home. Charging handles racked home with a well-oiled clatter.
The shambling mob was two metres away, almost close enough to touch. ‘Squad!’ Zahariel yelled. ‘One step back! Five rounds rapid. Fire!’
In lockstep, ten pairs of boots crashed upon the permacrete. Bolt pistols barked in a rolling volley. Green clad bodies jerked and blew apart in the storm of mass-reactive rounds. The first rank of corpses disintegrated under the fusillade.
‘One step back. Five rounds rapid. Fire!’
The bolt pistols thundered again. Each round found its mark, and fifty more bodies were reduced to bloody fragments. The rest of the mob staggered on, their outstretched hands little more than a metre away.
At Zahariel’s command, the squad took one last step back and fired five more rounds into the press. Firing bolts locked back on empty magazines as fifty more bodies erupted into gory mist. The mob had been cut in half in the span of twenty seconds, but the remainder pressed their advance.” - Fallen Angels
Spoiler:
“With a small movement, the warrior raised the barrel of his bolter and shot the Governor at point-blank range, blasting his body apart.” - Nemesis
Spoiler:
“The Astartes walked, slow and steady, across the plaza with their bolters at their hips, firing single shot after single shot into the people. The missile-like bolt shells could not fail to find targets, and for each person they hit and instantly killed, others fell dead or near to it from the shared force of impact. The blasts rippled out through flesh and bone, the crowds were so closely packed together.” - Nemesis
Spoiler:
“Ogvai drew his bolt pistol, pressed the muzzle up under Eada’s chin, and vaporised his head with a single mass-reactive round.” and “I saw one of the red-coated figures burst as a bolt from Aeska’s gun struck him.” - Prospero Burns
All a few quotes I could find with minimal effort.
Silverthorne wrote:@ Angel
The problem with the deer analogy is rate of fire. The ROF on this gun is insane, and I'm no corpsman, but I have a hard time believing someone nailed 4 times by green tips is more likely to survive than someone hit by regular ball once. And as you point out, that's a crude equivalence. In all likelyhood, the HSVG has a ROF considerably higher than 4x a bolter.
Evidence? Also, the green tips at a fast rate might do better than the single ball, but balls firing at the same rate as green tips? Now that's something.
My impression of Hellguns in general and HSVG in particular isn't that the beam is more focused, it is that more power is being dumped into each shot, which scales up penetrating power exponentially and strength only marginally. It would be cool if they did an exploded diagram in the next Tempestus book explaining the tech, but that seems unlikely. A long las seems to work with more focused light, but the MT stuff just seems to throw more power downrange.
I don't really buy the support weapon team idea from what I've seen of real world militaries. If it was practical to outfit every rifleman with a LMG and 800 rounds of ammo without weighing him down and degrading his mobility, we would. (Except for grenadiers, marksmen, engineers, etc who have specialist weapons). SEAL Platoons in Vietnam followed this approach-- every guy except the corpsman and the LT pretty much carried a stoner unless they had some reason to carry something else. So in the case of SM and the HSVG-- they wouldn't have a tactical reason to stick with the bolter. They can easily manage the additional weight of the HSVG. If we had examples of SM firing into CC where other SM are engaged, expecting the PA to save them, then we might have a good tactical reason for them not to lug around HSVG, but as it is, I don't see one.
Really SM and MT both should all carry HSVG if the table top mechanics are any way grounded in reality. Both the standard hellgun and the boltgun are outclassed. Specialist weapons could still be issued, especially to deal with armor or monstrous creatures. Something like 7 SM w/ HSVG, 2 SM w/ Melta, SG with power fist.
Obviously this is all just do to GW not having totally reconciled everything within their own background, which I totally understand given the scale of that. Still, LRRP SM with HSVG instead of bolters is a kickass idea.
Bolters are the Astartes thing. It's as iconic as their armour, and just as fearsome to their dedicated targets. Bolters are just as efficient tactically, with a variety of different modifications that can be made to the weapon and the economical strengths it has against the Space Marines' desired targets.
And of course, we know the TT mechanics are not grounded in reality.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ashiraya wrote: Shoot said oh-so-dangerous HSVG two times, point blank, into your average IG Major.
He will survive.
Game mechanics yay!
Um, no.
8 S4 AP 3 shots is enough to kill an IG major.
however, 4 St 4 AP 5 shots from your beloved boltgun won't reliably put him down, especially if he has upgraded to carapace.
Great job, you played yourself.
Then I pull out FFG's Deathwatch, and show how a single bolter round severely wounds a Guard Senior Officer (Majors, Generals, etc)
Bolters can fire either 1, 2 or 4 shots. In this, I'll use the single shot, and disregard the bonuses I again from not going semi/full auto.
That shot does 2d10+5 Explosive Damage, with the Tearing trait and AP5. Using a bell curve, I'd roll an 11 most of the time, and I'll not go into Tearing (lets me roll an extra dice and discard the lowest, which should bring my average up). I cause 16 HP of damage, and 5 points of my target's armour can be ignored.
Assuming this Guard guy has carapace, and that the marine hits him in that carapace, the AV6 carapace will only help remove a single point from my damage output, and the officer's Toughness Bonus of 4 would remove another 4 points of damage. Therefore, I instead do 11 damage to this guy.
A normal guardsman would be outright killed by this, with only 10 HP. However, officers are made of stronger stuff - they have 16(?) HP.
He lives, but that's assuming a single unaimed shot. Mow thing about an aimed shot, or with perks, or even a single other round - that officer is pulped, even in carapace, which he doesn't get by default.
Game mechanics don't always make sense, but the FFG ones are of a far better scale than the tabletop.
Didn't there used to be the whole "Holy Bolter" thing where a SM's bolter had some religious significance. I know the weapon is revered as part of a trinity by the SoB but I'm pretty sure the SM had something similar.
I believe that is the entire point of Ashiraya's argument, that with a Shield the HSVG is just as useless as the Boltgun.
Your argument wasn't that they carried them for specific missions, but that they carried them. Even still on a short fast assault, you want your guys to be fast, having alot oh heavy weapons is going to prevent you from striking as quickly as you want. So for specific missions perhaps they would have more, most of what I have heard is three per patrol since SEALs were mostly doing LRRP and Secret Squirrel stuff, not heavy assaults. Though there was a time and a place.
The MG, while one of the Main killing methods, is not just there for killing its for suppression. Just as the Riflemen is not just there to protect the MG, but to maneuver and eliminate as the MG keeps the enemy pinned. So Nam Seals with their lets say 3 MGs for this LRRP would have more power if they needed to get hot, but alot more power for keeping themselves covered to with draw or maneuver. Its never as simple as you think. Today we have the M27 IAR for the Marines, and their Special Troops aren't all loaded out with them and the biggest weapons, they are there to support the primary MG, like the Stoner supported the M60. Some goes for the Russians and the RPK, it supports the PKM. If there isnt the bigger MG, its there to support the Squad.
So do you claim that one on one, against say, a CSM, that a bolter is just as good, or in fact, superior to a HSVG? Yes or No.
Do you claim that a weapon which fires a limited store of hand-made ammo is as tactically viable as a weapon that never needs to have it's ammo replenished? Yes or No
What is your evidence that the Bolter is better at killing elite troops than a HSVG? You state examples of bolters doing well, but none comparing the two directly. These examples likely do not exist, as the HSVG is not nearly as established a weapon in the lore as the Bolter. So we have to compare them on TT stats. And there the Bolter is wildly outclassed by the HSVG. While I can understand a marginal difference in power being reflective of just a poor transition from lore to table, this is a shellacking, as I am sure you know.
The facts are straightforward. On one hand, you have a lightweight support weapon, easily portable by a marine, that effortlessly penetrates the armor of CSM, a very common marine target, as well as the armor of Nid Warriors, Ard Boys, Aspect Warriors, Tau crisis and FW units, etc etc etc, never needs to be reloaded, and can fire at a rate comparable to miniguns,
On the other hand, you have an automatic .75 cal rocket launcher using a hybrid gyro-jet type ordnance. It feeds from a 20 to 30 round magazine, has a much lower rater of fire, dramatically worse penetrating qualities unless potentially user-lethal vengeance shells are chambered, an enormous logistical tail requiring more than 1 man-week of labor to produce a single, non-specialist bolt, and a radically worse rate of fire.
And you're trying to sell option 2 as the way to go. Aside from being a logistical nightmare, having worse suppressive qualities and virtually nill penetrative qualities against enemy elites, being entirely outclassed in rate of fire, and when chambered so as to match the HSVG's penetrating ability, routinely kills it's operator. That sounds a lot like an emotional decision and not a rational one.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @ Victor-- LRRPs were (and still are) an unusual mission for SEALs. That's more Army territory. SEALs were (and still are) very much about the assault. Navy SPECOPS have always been tailored to direct action, unlike the ODAs. SEALs in Vietnam operated mainly in the South on missions of attrition-- these were set piece gunfights designed to bag huge numbers of VC and were straight up, top to bottom assaults. SEALs rarely did LRRP in Vietnam because that's not their specialty, and they didn't have anyone organizationally to pass off LRRP data to. Plus, they were almost entirely specced for counterinsurgency, and LRRP isn't a big player in that type of mission. I'm sure that you are knowledgeable enough to be aware that statistically MGs stack far more bodies than rifles in a gunfight. Combined with the suppressive effect, and the way that it causes the enemy to think that they've run into a much larger force (common phenomenon in Vietnam when ST and Charlie met up) if you are capable of wielding a MG without sacrificing any mobility (and I don't think it is unreasonable at all to assume an 8 ft astartes could do so with a puny MT HSVG) then there isn't any good reason not to. Especially if you take ammo concerns out of the picture, which the HSVG does.
As for the shield argument-- it's false. If you can block 1/3 of all my shots, then the HSVG is still twice as good as a bolter, since it is putting out twice as many shots in the same range band. He made a worse case scenario for the HSVG and still outperforms the bolter in wounds inflicted by at least 2:1.
So do you claim that one on one, against say, a CSM, that a bolter is just as good, or in fact, superior to a HSVG? Yes or No.
I've never made that claim? I have no idea where you pulled that from.
Do you claim that a weapon which fires a limited store of hand-made ammo is as tactically viable as a weapon that never needs to have it's ammo replenished? Yes or No
Yes I do. The hand made ammo is of a typically higher quality shot per shot, and can be adjusted to a variety of different situations. The typical engagement of an Astartes is so fast and rapid that the replenishing ammo is useless, as the marine only needs x amount of rounds. They don't fight protracted battles - they strike hard and fast, regroup on an ammo point, and do it again. No need for replenishing ammo that eventually fuses the gun's cables together.
What is your evidence that the Bolter is better at killing elite troops than a HSVG? You state examples of bolters doing well, but none comparing the two directly. These examples likely do not exist, as the HSVG is not nearly as established a weapon in the lore as the Bolter. So we have to compare them on TT stats. And there the Bolter is wildly outclassed by the HSVG. While I can understand a marginal difference in power being reflective of just a poor transition from lore to table, this is a shellacking, as I am sure you know.
You just proved the point. HSVG are not established in the lore like the bolter is - so GW having Space Marines swap out all their bolters for HSVG is a pretty radical move, not to mention a rather stupid one.
TT stats are biased, as we could easily infer that HSVG only have such a profile to make them appealing to take, a la power creep. Indeed, they are a Salvo weapon - a type that did not exist prior to 6th. Not to mention that you're comparing an infantry rifle to a squad special weapon.
And FFG's stats portray the bolter in a far more favourable light than their mediocre tabletop equivalents.
The facts are straightforward. On one hand, you have a lightweight support weapon, easily portable by a marine, that effortlessly penetrates the armor of CSM, a very common marine target, as well as the armor of Nid Warriors, Ard Boys, Aspect Warriors, Tau crisis and FW units, etc etc etc, never needs to be reloaded, and can fire at a rate comparable to miniguns.
I'm going to need sources on the weight of the gun, and that fire rate.
Most of those armour types are then dealt with by the special weapons of the Space Marines, leaving the infantry to be cut down by propelled grenades. And I already addressed the issue on reloading.
Another issue is the compartmentalisation of IoM forces. By giving Marines weapons that kill other Marines and never need supplying as an ammo source, you create a huge issue if those Marines go rogue. At least with bolters, they can be starved out of resources and forced to scavenge.
On the other hand, you have an automatic .75 cal rocket launcher using a hybrid gyro-jet type ordnance. It feeds from a 20 to 30 round magazine, has a much lower rater of fire, dramatically worse penetrating qualities unless potentially user-lethal vengeance shells are chambered, an enormous logistical tail requiring more than 1 man-week of labor to produce a single, non-specialist bolt, and a radically worse rate of fire.
Again, you're running off of TT stats for the RoF. Could I see a fluff source of the RoF?
Worrying about the labour to produce a bolt shell is unnecessary when you have a Forge World dedicated to pumping them out. And marines make their shots count - no need for ten shots when one strong one will do the trick. And the armour penetrating is perfectly capable when you're going up against hordes of lightly armoured foes and traitor guard forces - the vast majority of SM targets.
And you're trying to sell option 2 as the way to go. Aside from being a logistical nightmare, having worse suppressive qualities and virtually nill penetrative qualities against enemy elites, being entirely outclassed in rate of fire, and when chambered so as to match the HSVG's penetrating ability, routinely kills it's operator. That sounds a lot like an emotional decision and not a rational one.
You're missing my points.
1) Issue of Renegade Astartes
2) Dedicated support from Forge Worlds
3) Tradition - an element the IoM is based on
4) Logistics are actually very well handled with SM, seeing as the Departmento Munitorum don't control them as such.
5) I still want that fluff source of RoF.
6) The HSVG also kills it's operator? Only a marine is more likely to survive the overheat, due to his armour and innate toughness.
7) Power armour can withstand a hell of a lot. Given that a Battle Cannon has the same AP as your HSVG, this can stand counter to it carving through marines.
Spoiler:
"Nemiel heard the battle cannon fire and watched the corner of the building Cortus was standing at disintegrate in the space of a single heartbeat. The two Astartes disappeared in a blizzard of pulverised stone and fragments of structural steel. A billowing cloud of dust and smoke enveloped the intersection and rolled down the street towards the rest of the squad.
The squad took cover on reflex, crouching behind rubble piles or pressing close to a building wall. Nemiel checked his helmet display and saw the status icon for Brother Cortus flash from green to amber. He was wounded, perhaps seriously, but still functional." - Fallen Angels
I'll run some tests on a FFG bolter on a CSM vs a hellgun on a CSM later, if that helps you.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
MarsNZ wrote: Didn't there used to be the whole "Holy Bolter" thing where a SM's bolter had some religious significance. I know the weapon is revered as part of a trinity by the SoB but I'm pretty sure the SM had something similar.
More than likely. They are holy instruments of the Emperor's divine wrath, and have been since their inception, IIRC.
So do you claim that one on one, against say, a CSM, that a bolter is just as good, or in fact, superior to a HSVG? Yes or No.
Do you claim that a weapon which fires a limited store of hand-made ammo is as tactically viable as a weapon that never needs to have it's ammo replenished? Yes or No
What is your evidence that the Bolter is better at killing elite troops than a HSVG? You state examples of bolters doing well, but none comparing the two directly. These examples likely do not exist, as the HSVG is not nearly as established a weapon in the lore as the Bolter. So we have to compare them on TT stats. And there the Bolter is wildly outclassed by the HSVG. While I can understand a marginal difference in power being reflective of just a poor transition from lore to table, this is a shellacking, as I am sure you know.
The facts are straightforward. On one hand, you have a lightweight support weapon, easily portable by a marine, that effortlessly penetrates the armor of CSM, a very common marine target, as well as the armor of Nid Warriors, Ard Boys, Aspect Warriors, Tau crisis and FW units, etc etc etc, never needs to be reloaded, and can fire at a rate comparable to miniguns,
On the other hand, you have an automatic .75 cal rocket launcher using a hybrid gyro-jet type ordnance. It feeds from a 20 to 30 round magazine, has a much lower rater of fire, dramatically worse penetrating qualities unless potentially user-lethal vengeance shells are chambered, an enormous logistical tail requiring more than 1 man-week of labor to produce a single, non-specialist bolt, and a radically worse rate of fire.
And you're trying to sell option 2 as the way to go. Aside from being a logistical nightmare, having worse suppressive qualities and virtually nill penetrative qualities against enemy elites, being entirely outclassed in rate of fire, and when chambered so as to match the HSVG's penetrating ability, routinely kills it's operator. That sounds a lot like an emotional decision and not a rational one.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @ Victor-- LRRPs were (and still are) an unusual mission for SEALs. That's more Army territory. SEALs were (and still are) very much about the assault. Navy SPECOPS have always been tailored to direct action, unlike the ODAs. SEALs in Vietnam operated mainly in the South on missions of attrition-- these were set piece gunfights designed to bag huge numbers of VC and were straight up, top to bottom assaults. SEALs rarely did LRRP in Vietnam because that's not their specialty, and they didn't have anyone organizationally to pass off LRRP data to. Plus, they were almost entirely specced for counterinsurgency, and LRRP isn't a big player in that type of mission.
I'm sure that you are knowledgeable enough to be aware that statistically MGs stack far more bodies than rifles in a gunfight. Combined with the suppressive effect, and the way that it causes the enemy to think that they've run into a much larger force (common phenomenon in Vietnam when ST and Charlie met up) if you are capable of wielding a MG without sacrificing any mobility (and I don't think it is unreasonable at all to assume an 8 ft astartes could do so with a puny MT HSVG) then there isn't any good reason not to. Especially if you take ammo concerns out of the picture, which the HSVG does.
As for the shield argument-- it's false. If you can block 1/3 of all my shots, then the HSVG is still twice as good as a bolter, since it is putting out twice as many shots in the same range band. He made a worse case scenario for the HSVG and still outperforms the bolter in wounds inflicted by at least 2:1.
I'll concede, while not always doing LRRPs they still frequently did patrols of their AOs so they could find their targets and hit them, so it would be more appropriate to refer to them as Hunter Killer missions, which would support the 2 Stoners and 1 M60, but still those weapons would not be the main focus even with their boat's or helicopters. They'd use the guns on those craft when raiding with those craft until dismounted, at which point if applicable the crew of those vehicles would provide the bulk of the fire support. Leaving the SEALs still wanting to move and engage and setting up a good MG point doesnt always lend to that, a plus of the light weight Stoner to be sure, but they were not always the most reliable weapons do to their complex nature. Hunting and Killing (a key function of Vietnam Counter Insurgency in the areas the SEALs operated) still favors light weight, assassination missions which also were conducted by the SEALs again a light weight fast moving function. Additionally Navy SEALs can pass off Recon Data to someone, The Marines, as they are all part of the same over all command of the Department of the Navy and would operate in support of one another, though Marines do have their own Recon Elements for LRRP.
Im not saying they (MGs) dont rack up more kills, Im saying that they are not always the primary focus of the Team, for Regulars yes, for Special Operators, not always. I don't believe that you will ever properly make a MG where you wont sacrifice maneuverability, you will always need spare barrels adding to the weight the Soldier Carries, the Pork Chop or Nutsack will also be cumbersome to work around compared to the magazine, and in the case of the HSVG the Cables would get themselves in the way. And again there is the easy of modularity provided, Grenade Launchers for Modern Rifles, and Combi attatchments for boltguns.
Plus in the case of the Boltgun vs HSVG, the special ammo types. Yes, as we've covered only on specific forces in the Marines. But rather than the amount of time it would take to re-equip and train Marines on the HSVG they could put that effort into making the SIA more widely available to Marines to help them further with their missions.
@ smudge I don't see what that would prove as a hellgun does not equal a HSVG, even remotely. That's like comparing an autogun to an assault cannon. Points 1, 2 and 3 are valid, and I would agree with. Although as I mentioned earlier, from the perspective of a Chapter Master, I wouldn't care-- that's more a high-lord level of consideration. On the ground I would want my 1000 marines to have HSVG. If the HLoT is miffed by that, well okay, but from the perspective of the SM I know I would want the better weapon. 4-- Logistics are not really well handled, actually. They require an entire planet generally to support 1000 fighters. That's a lot of REMFs backing up your super soldiers. I'm not saying it doesn't work, but I am saying that it could work better. Switching to HSVG frees up a lot of dudes to work on artificer armor, etc. 5-- Are you expecting me to give you a rounds per minute calculation with some kind of barrel life extrapolation? Because shockingly, that information doesn't exist. I know, crazy. For ROF the gun can only be evaluated on it's TT stats (double a bolter) and on a background snippet from the armory page that says it fires so quickly the individual shots blend together into a single, continous note, like a minigun. I don't know at what ROF the human ear can no longer distinguish individual reports, but it is somewhere between 900 RPM (which I have heard, and you can still detect different firings) and 3,500 RPM (which I have heard, and you cannot). I'm very confident that a bolter can't push over 900 RPM, if for no other reason than a smg that pushes 900 RPM with 20 round magazines is a terrible design. 6-- The HSVG does not get hot, or kill it's operation in any other form. Bolters, on the other hand, do kill their operators when they are modified to only be half as bad as HSVG. 7--Plot armor much? Are you saying that battle cannons can't punch through marine armor? Because that is what it sounds like. If we are taking plot armor into consideration, then it will be impossible to make any kind of comparison.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @Victor
As much as I like talking about Vietnam-- the comparison is getting pretty stretched. Stoners and M60s still need ammo, and still need replacement barrels. A HSVG doesn't need either. A SEAL will likely be as well conditioned as the top 1-5% of infantrymen, whereas a SM is an entirely different species, with radically enhanced strength, and endurance. A SM could wield a human special weapon effortlessly as seen by the way that in the case of heavy weapons, it takes at least 2 humans to operate the same system as 1 astartes. I find that there would be materially very little loss of mobility when a SM is using a system designed to be used by a regular human without impairing their mobility. Remember, as HSVG is considerably more portable than even a heavy stubber. I find it pretty unrealistic that the cabling of the weapon will be a major mobility impediment as they can just be loosely fitted to the torso and firing arm of the marine, or integrated into a 3 point harness.
Currently SM once they reach the tactical squad have been trained in how to use Bolt Pistols, Bolters, Sniper Rifles, Plasma Guns, Melta Guns, Flamethrowers, Missile Launchers, Plasma Cannons, Heavy bolters, Chainswords, Eviscerators, Lascannons, Multimeltas, combat shotguns, meltabombs, grenades, and jump packs to list a few just off the top of my head. I don't think training them to use the HSVG is going to be the limiting factor.
Also SEALs are only organizationally under the same umbrella as the USMC. Operationally they work under SOCOM, whereas all non-MARSOC Marines would be under the CoCom region commander. The only time I know of where SEALs were tasked with doing a major recon for the USMC during Vietnam was for Operation Starlite. And that was a hydrographic survey preparatory to an amphib assault, which is a ST specialty.
Silverthorne wrote: I don't see what that would prove as a hellgun does not equal a HSVG, even remotely. That's like comparing an autogun to an assault cannon.
Not quite that much, but I see your point.
Points 1, 2 and 3 are valid, and I would agree with. Although as I mentioned earlier, from the perspective of a Chapter Master, I wouldn't care-- that's more a high-lord level of consideration. On the ground I would want my 1000 marines to have HSVG. If the HLoT is miffed by that, well okay, but from the perspective of the SM I know I would want the better weapon
If the HLoT or Mechanicus don't want you to have that weapon, you don't get that weapon. If you defy them, you'll be branded a heretic, just like the Badab Wars. You wouldn't be able to acquire the weapons if you don't parlay with the Mechanicus or DM, who I doubt would fulfil that request.
4-- Logistics are not really well handled, actually. They require an entire planet generally to support 1000 fighters. That's a lot of REMFs backing up your super soldiers. I'm not saying it doesn't work, but I am saying that it could work better. Switching to HSVG frees up a lot of dudes to work on artificer armor, etc.
Artificer armour is a labour of love - it usually requires older suits of armour which are better constructed, not remaking new sets.
Bolter rounds are far easier constructed, and again, the Marines can hold off on how many rounds they fire due to each round's strength and their own skill.
Seeing as Marines are not directly supplied by the DM, they are far more centralised than the AM and Tempestus. Compared to the TM, they are far more well organised logistically.
5-- Are you expecting me to give you a rounds per minute calculation with some kind of barrel life extrapolation? Because shockingly, that information doesn't exist. I know, crazy. For ROF the gun can only be evaluated on it's TT stats (double a bolter) and on a background snippet from the armory page that says it fires so quickly the individual shots blend together into a single, continous note, like a minigun. I don't know at what ROF the human ear can no longer distinguish individual reports, but it is somewhere between 900 RPM (which I have heard, and you can still detect different firings) and 3,500 RPM (which I have heard, and you cannot). I'm very confident that a bolter can't push over 900 RPM, if for no other reason than a smg that pushes 900 RPM with 20 round magazines is a terrible design.
So, the only real data is game stats (a flawed metric) and a small bit of fluff, compared to the myriads of bolter quotes of it piercing power armour?
Bolters are also noted (as per FFG) to be able to put down 4 rounds at full auto - assault cannons put down 10. So if we assume HSVG fall at 10 at max, I can use the damage output of the typical hellgun round and use that as our metric for HSVG.
That would put it at 1d10+4 E AP7 -/-/10 Volatile weapon, compared to the 2d10+5 X AP5 S/2/4 Tearing bolter.
Of course, you could put down a hell of a lot more shots, but you'd need to be stationary to make them count, whereas the marine doesn't. The bell curve of Marine shots would put out a lot of damage on unarmoured targets, and a reasonable amount on armoured ones. Considering everything, the only good perk of the HSVG here is the rate of fire, which is compounded by the lack of precision fire and weight.
This would support the HSVG as a squad support weapon, much like the grav gun which it could be integrated as, but not as the mainstay weapon.
6-- The HSVG does not get hot, or kill it's operation in any other form. Bolters, on the other hand, do kill their operators when they are modified to only be half as bad as HSVG.
My mistake - I saw hot-shot and assumed Get's Hot. I will be bearing that in mind when I finish off my Scions.
As for the Vengeance rounds point, it's valid, except that bolters are still capable of bringing down a traitor's armour, and squad special and heavy weapons would most likely go for these targets.
7--Plot armor much? Are you saying that battle cannons can't punch through marine armor? Because that is what it sounds like. If we are taking plot armor into consideration, then it will be impossible to make any kind of comparison.
This devolves into the main issue with 40k lore. Plot armour is so abundant (carving starships in two) but the TT mechanics make little sense (grots killing Terminators). It's so varied, and you are absolutely correct in that plot armour can bring anything. Lasguns blowing holes in concrete can be seen as plot armour in the same respect as my quote of marines walking through battle cannon fire.
At the end of the day, I wouldn't mind seeing HSVG as only limited to the Tempestus, who are only trained with them, or as squad special weapons for marines, like the Rotor Cannon. As a rifle though, the bolter should stay.
Silverthorne wrote: @ smudge I don't see what that would prove as a hellgun does not equal a HSVG, even remotely. That's like comparing an autogun to an assault cannon.
Points 1, 2 and 3 are valid, and I would agree with. Although as I mentioned earlier, from the perspective of a Chapter Master, I wouldn't care-- that's more a high-lord level of consideration. On the ground I would want my 1000 marines to have HSVG. If the HLoT is miffed by that, well okay, but from the perspective of the SM I know I would want the better weapon.
4-- Logistics are not really well handled, actually. They require an entire planet generally to support 1000 fighters. That's a lot of REMFs backing up your super soldiers. I'm not saying it doesn't work, but I am saying that it could work better. Switching to HSVG frees up a lot of dudes to work on artificer armor, etc.
5-- Are you expecting me to give you a rounds per minute calculation with some kind of barrel life extrapolation? Because shockingly, that information doesn't exist. I know, crazy. For ROF the gun can only be evaluated on it's TT stats (double a bolter) and on a background snippet from the armory page that says it fires so quickly the individual shots blend together into a single, continous note, like a minigun. I don't know at what ROF the human ear can no longer distinguish individual reports, but it is somewhere between 900 RPM (which I have heard, and you can still detect different firings) and 3,500 RPM (which I have heard, and you cannot). I'm very confident that a bolter can't push over 900 RPM, if for no other reason than a smg that pushes 900 RPM with 20 round magazines is a terrible design.
6-- The HSVG does not get hot, or kill it's operation in any other form. Bolters, on the other hand, do kill their operators when they are modified to only be half as bad as HSVG.
7--Plot armor much? Are you saying that battle cannons can't punch through marine armor? Because that is what it sounds like. If we are taking plot armor into consideration, then it will be impossible to make any kind of comparison.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @Victor
As much as I like talking about Vietnam-- the comparison is getting pretty stretched. Stoners and M60s still need ammo, and still need replacement barrels. A HSVG doesn't need either. A SEAL will likely be as well conditioned as the top 1-5% of infantrymen, whereas a SM is an entirely different species, with radically enhanced strength, and endurance. A SM could wield a human special weapon effortlessly as seen by the way that in the case of heavy weapons, it takes at least 2 humans to operate the same system as 1 astartes. I find that there would be materially very little loss of mobility when a SM is using a system designed to be used by a regular human without impairing their mobility. Remember, as HSVG is considerably more portable than even a heavy stubber. I find it pretty unrealistic that the cabling of the weapon will be a major mobility impediment as they can just be loosely fitted to the torso and firing arm of the marine, or integrated into a 3 point harness.
Currently SM once they reach the tactical squad have been trained in how to use
Bolt Pistols, Bolters, Sniper Rifles, Plasma Guns, Melta Guns, Flamethrowers, Missile Launchers, Plasma Cannons, Heavy bolters, Chainswords, Eviscerators, Lascannons, Multimeltas, combat shotguns, meltabombs, grenades, and jump packs
to list a few just off the top of my head. I don't think training them to use the HSVG is going to be the limiting factor.
Also SEALs are only organizationally under the same umbrella as the USMC. Operationally they work under SOCOM, whereas all non-MARSOC Marines would be under the CoCom region commander. The only time I know of where SEALs were tasked with doing a major recon for the USMC during Vietnam was for Operation Starlite. And that was a hydrographic survey preparatory to an amphib assault, which is a ST specialty.
If they could do that with the cabling, would they have not done that for the Las Cannon, Plasma Cannon, Multi-Melta and to an extent the Flex Belt of the Heavy Bolter? Im not gonna disagree that the HSVG is more portable than the Heavy Stubber, but it still doesnt look incredibly more portable for the men and women using it.
If the HSVG was added to the standard training of Marines, no it wouldn't be that difficult to do, but if you just did a whole sale change over, that could be an issue.
Well in the 60s USSOCOM and JSOC didn't exsist, but you have a point.
Space Marines are shock assault infantry first and foremost. The HSVG is an unwieldy squad support weapon which would be unsuitable for the close quarters combat Astartes find themselves in. Plus, Bolters can fire a variety of ammunition including the deadly Hellfire rounds.
Smudge, the Deathwatch bolter is ridiculously overpowered, you're also using an outdated version, they cut them to 1d10+9 with an errata. And in every other FFG game, bolters are 1d10+5, even Black Crusade. So if you're going to claim to use the ''FFG'' bolter, use the one that shows up in four games out of fives, not the one where there's no point in taking any other weapon than a bolter because its ridiculously OP.
Furthermore, the Hotshot lasgun is 1d10+4, the Volley rifle will be at least 1d10+5, if not +6, with 7-8 AP, not sure if it should have any other firing modes than full auto.
Bobthehero wrote: Smudge, the Deathwatch bolter is ridiculously overpowered, you're also using an outdated version, they cut them to 1d10+9 with an errata. And in every other FFG game, bolters are 1d10+5, even Black Crusade. So if you're going to claim to use the ''FFG'' bolter, use the one that shows up in four games out of fives, not the one where there's no point in taking any other weapon than a bolter because its ridiculously OP.
Furthermore, the Hotshot lasgun is 1d10+4, the Volley rifle will be at least 1d10+5, if not +6, with 7-8 AP, not sure if it should have any other firing modes than full auto.
Wasn't aware of this errata, I'll bear that in mind.
Still, I don't see how the volley rifle shouldn't have the same AP - it only seems to be a higher RoF, and a marginally higher strength.
I stand by my point that HSVG should be a squad weapon, not as standard, given how the marines operate.
Bobthehero wrote: And in every other FFG game, bolters are 1d10+5, even Black Crusade
Untrue, not entirely untrue, but it is untrue. In Black Crusade there are two distinct versions of the Boltgun (among other weapons) where the Legion (Astartes) Boltgun is the 1d10+9 which is shared by the Errata'd Deathwatch Boltgun and then there is the "Mortal" Boltgun, which is the 1d10+5 of Dark Heresy, Rogue Trader and Only War.
The 1d10+9 Boltgun is also in Dark Heresy, where it was added to the game for use by Grey Knight characters.
So the 1d10+9 Boltgun is in 3 out of 5 Games and the argument could be made that it is also in Rogue Trader as with the Killmarine Specialty from Rites of Battle, you may use an Astarte in Dark Heresy and Rogue Trader.
however, 4 St 4 AP 5 shots from your beloved boltgun won't reliably put him down, especially if he has upgraded to carapace.
Great job, you played yourself.
I said two shots.
You can't say 'no, two shots won't kill him, look eight shots can easily kill him!'
That makes no sense.
2 S4 AP3 shots cannot in any situation kill the Major.
Actually, you said 'shoot two times'. Since the HSVG activates for 4 shots in a shooting phase at point blank range I took that to meant two rounds of shooting with it's given profile. Not to arbitrarily cut the number of shots in half for no sensible reason. Hey, if you reduce the bolters strength to 1, and add 'get's hot' it would be the worst gun in the game! Making up a totally arbitrary set of conditions that limit a gun's profile doesn't make for accurate comparisons. I can do that too. If you raise the number of shots a HSVG has to 10^80 and give the bearer the sniper order, it can kill any unit in the game, 100% of the time! WOWZERS! That is just as 'useful' of an observation as your little brain secretion.
The funny thing was even with your nonsensical limitations, it still does better than the bolter. So.... great job.
Seriously what did you intend on proving? "I arbitrarily limited the ROF of a gun profile to less than the number of wounds a random model has, and in so doing, observed that a gun with the imaginary new profile would't be able to finish the random model off!" I'm guessing I'm not talking to a future field's medal winner.
I didn't read everything, but I think you focus WAY TOO MUCH on the "marine vs marine" fight.
Ok, volley gun is BETTER against heavy armored armor, but boltgun are better against orks etc...
Example:
1 bolt hit an ork, say his arm.
The bolt explodes and tears it appart .
If a volley gun hit the same ork in the same arm, it won't cut his arm.
You can pierce an armor with it, but not EXPLODE and kill a heavy target like an ork or a tyranid warrior easily with it.
At least, this is what I think.
And don't forget: Space Marines miss very, very rarely, so even if they have a limited count of bolts, it isn't a problem for them.
Points 1, 2 and 3 are valid, and I would agree with. Although as I mentioned earlier, from the perspective of a Chapter Master, I wouldn't care-- that's more a high-lord level of consideration. On the ground I would want my 1000 marines to have HSVG. If the HLoT is miffed by that, well okay, but from the perspective of the SM I know I would want the better weapon
If the HLoT or Mechanicus don't want you to have that weapon, you don't get that weapon. If you defy them, you'll be branded a heretic, just like the Badab Wars. You wouldn't be able to acquire the weapons if you don't parlay with the Mechanicus or DM, who I doubt would fulfil that request.
The Dark Angels (jetbike, Nephilim, Plasma dobob on the LS Vengeance), and Blood Angels (overcharged engines, Storm Raven) would disagree, as they have both routinely flouted Mechanicus demands to rellinquish or stop the use of certain weapons and told the technophiliacs to get stuffed, without serious consequences. Even if Mars ices you out, there are lots of other Forge Worlds in the galaxy that can broker a deal in exchange for pledges of loyalty from the SM chapter. As I mentioned, the DA and BA have gotten away with rather flagrant breeches of using proscribed tech, so I doubt that protests about the HSVG from the AdMech would amount to much, honestly. It would take something from the HLoT, and even then, SM chapters aren't obligated to follow instructions from the HLoT. It feel it would be pretty difficult to get other SM chapters or Inquisitors onboard to purge a chapter because they switched to a different, but still sanctioned, primary weapon. And without them onboard, it's unlikely the HLoT would prosecute.
godardc wrote: I didn't read everything, but I think you focus WAY TOO MUCH on the "marine vs marine" fight.
Ok, volley gun is BETTER against heavy armored armor, but boltgun are better against orks etc...
Example:
1 bolt hit an ork, say his arm.
The bolt explodes and tears it appart .
If a volley gun hit the same ork in the same arm, it won't cut his arm.
You can pierce an armor with it, but not EXPLODE and kill a heavy target like an ork or a tyranid warrior easily with it.
At least, this is what I think.
And don't forget: Space Marines miss very, very rarely, so even if they have a limited count of bolts, it isn't a problem for them.
A pointblank hotshot lasbolt shot decapitated a CSM, helmet include, I doubt a volley of the same shots would not cut an Ork arm off, regular lasgun shots can also blow limbs away from humans, no reasons for a more powerful version of that weapon to be able to blow limbs of Orks.
That two rounds from your superdeadly space gun can't possibly in any way kill a naked human just because he's a CO.
I hope that what that means is obvious - ie, game mechanics =/= lore.
Marines probably use bolters because they are not that much worse in the lore. In fact, they may well be better. It is understandable why they are not in the game. Imagine how meaningless it would be to have a special weapon worse than S4 Ap5 rapid fire.
Simple. Back when Games Workshop came out with the basic profile of a bolter in Rogue Trader (which was used by both Space Marines AND Orks) they didn't have to make it the new hotness to sell a new army armed with them. And thatnbasically has held for every edition since, as Space Marines sell themselves.
Fluffwise, bolters are shock and awe weapons scaled to be wielded by 8ft tall supersoldiers., not known for their efficiency.
That two rounds from your superdeadly space gun can't possibly in any way kill a naked human just because he's a CO.
I hope that what that means is obvious - ie, game mechanics =/= lore.
Marines probably use bolters because they are not that much worse in the lore. In fact, they may well be better. It is understandable why they are not in the game. Imagine how meaningless it would be to have a special weapon worse than S4 Ap5 rapid fire.
Why are you so hostile?
Actually, a standard burst from a HSVG can kill a company commander. (Who would be a captain, by the way, not a major). 4 S4 AP3 shots are sufficient to blot a T3 3W model. So yeah-- seems like the game mechanics and lore are matching up pretty well to me.
That two rounds from your superdeadly space gun can't possibly in any way kill a naked human just because he's a CO.
I hope that what that means is obvious - ie, game mechanics =/= lore.
Marines probably use bolters because they are not that much worse in the lore. In fact, they may well be better. It is understandable why they are not in the game. Imagine how meaningless it would be to have a special weapon worse than S4 Ap5 rapid fire.
Why are you so hostile?
Actually, a standard burst from a HSVG can kill a company commander. (Who would be a captain, by the way, not a major). 4 S4 AP3 shots are sufficient to blot a T3 3W model. So yeah-- seems like the game mechanics and lore are matching up pretty well to me.
Why are you so delicate?
Are you intentionally missing the point she's trying to make to fit with your narrative? Two shots point blank from your super gun can't kill a regular guard officer despite him just being a squishy human because it only takes two out of his three wounds. It would take three. It does not take three shots point blank to kill a regular human with a bolt gun in the lore. So, therefore, either lore=/=gameplay or the Volleygun is inferior.
That two rounds from your superdeadly space gun can't possibly in any way kill a naked human just because he's a CO.
I hope that what that means is obvious - ie, game mechanics =/= lore.
Marines probably use bolters because they are not that much worse in the lore. In fact, they may well be better. It is understandable why they are not in the game. Imagine how meaningless it would be to have a special weapon worse than S4 Ap5 rapid fire.
Why are you so hostile?
Actually, a standard burst from a HSVG can kill a company commander. (Who would be a captain, by the way, not a major). 4 S4 AP3 shots are sufficient to blot a T3 3W model. So yeah-- seems like the game mechanics and lore are matching up pretty well to me.
Why are you so delicate?
Are you intentionally missing the point she's trying to make to fit with your narrative? Two shots point blank from your super gun can't kill a regular guard officer despite him just being a squishy human because it only takes two out of his three wounds. It would take three. It does not take three shots point blank to kill a regular human with a bolt gun in the lore. So, therefore, either lore=/=gameplay or the Volleygun is inferior.
Do you actually think the HSVG fires 'four shots'? Or a bolter fires two? The profiles indicate the damage that can be done in a single burst, they don't actually mean the boltgun spits out two bolts and the HSVG 4 freems. So messing with the profile doesn't mean that the target only gets shot by 2 las beams, it means nothing at all. A single burst from the HSVG can kill the second toughest, and most important figure in an AM force. A single burst from a boltgun can't. And you are both trying to spin that as somehow invalidating the superiority of the HSVG over the bolter. You're comparing apples to oranges here-- comparing a TT stat with Lore narrative. The Salvo 4 means that it is a very quick firing weapon, not that it fires exactly 4 shots. Obviously the burst of fire represented by the HSVG Salvo-4 profile doesn't mean the Tempestus dude carefully counts 1 2 3 4 and stops pulling the trigger. Same with Rapid Fire 2 on a bolter. So your comparison is totally dead and the water, and honestly, must seem pretty shaky even to you. Lore-- HSVG can shred a human, even a HSO, instantly. TT-- HSVG shreds a human, even a HSO, in a single burst of fire in 1 shooting phase.
So in both the lore and the tabletop, a single burst of fire from the HSVG kills a HSO. You have had to artificially change the stats to try to hide that.
You're trying to cross too many wires here in your comparison to obfuscate how weak your narrative is. You reduce the number of shots the HSVG gets, just to ensure that mechanically it can't top 3 wounds (when it would always get 4 shots at that range....) then say that it is inferior to a boltgun firing three times... in the fluff. You're just literally making things up now to patch up your badly fractured narrative. If you want to say bolters are OmG Wonderful than go ahead, there are plenty of ridiculous plot armored SM that have one-shotted Warbosses with their bolt pistols for you to say that. As far as I'm aware, there are only a few pieces of fluff where a guy with a HSVG goes up against a dude with a bolter that allow for a direct comparison. Want to guess who wins?
Silverthorne wrote: I wondered today-- why do SM use bolters instead of Hotshot Volley Guns?
Because Hotshot Volley Guns are special weapons and Space Marines can't have an entire squad of Troops equipped with special weapons. We aren't fething Eldar.
Honestly though, Bolters have remained the same for nearly 30 years whereas the Hotshot Volley Gun was influenced by years of power creep. That's why.
Space Marine bikes are just chunky motorcycles but they make the Marine tougher and faster. They aren't that difficult to produce, so why don't all Marines have them by default? Because it wouldn't benefit the balance of the game.
There are only a million Space Marines in existence. There *HAVE* to be more Guard heavy weapons teams than that, so why don't all Marines carry a lascannon or autocannon? Clearly the capabilities are there to produce that many. Because basic infantry should have a basic infantry weapon, not a tank killer.
Wouldn't a bolters internal workings be insanely simpler than a HSVG, id think that should be considered. High reliability and general ruggedness are very important.
Zognob Gorgoff wrote: Wouldn't a bolters internal workings be insanely simpler than a HSVG, id think that should be considered. High reliability and general ruggedness are very important.
Maybe maybe not
i think a lot of them have additional built in equipment that increase accuracy or stability, and i think some have smart targeting or the like that makes the bolter shell able to hit things better or what not.
On the TT:
As has previously been mentioned, we can't have an entire army armed with Special Weapons. The only way that this could happen is if they decided to make the tabletop match the fluff - this means hugely upping ppm, giving some new special rules base, buffing the statline of each Marine, etc. etc.
In the fluff:
Bolters, in the fluff, were designed to eliminate fleshy targets. It is a machinegun grenade launcher that blows up inside the target. It is the consummate shock 'n awe weapon, and would terrify many foes into outright surrendering. Now, HSVGs might do something similar, but the fluff isn't in total agreement on this - I've seen some sources that portray Lasguns as exploding human flesh, others as burning it away.
Because of this, we see Bolters as being great against most targets, while HSVGs are more specialized for taking down heavily armoured targets (like Space Marines).
Also, you really don't need to be that hostile when you're arguing. Going the "your arguments are bad and you should feel bad!" route doesn't exactly credit your own side of the argument.
That two rounds from your superdeadly space gun can't possibly in any way kill a naked human just because he's a CO.
I hope that what that means is obvious - ie, game mechanics =/= lore.
Marines probably use bolters because they are not that much worse in the lore. In fact, they may well be better. It is understandable why they are not in the game. Imagine how meaningless it would be to have a special weapon worse than S4 Ap5 rapid fire.
Why are you so hostile?
Actually, a standard burst from a HSVG can kill a company commander. (Who would be a captain, by the way, not a major). 4 S4 AP3 shots are sufficient to blot a T3 3W model. So yeah-- seems like the game mechanics and lore are matching up pretty well to me.
Why are you so delicate?
Are you intentionally missing the point she's trying to make to fit with your narrative? Two shots point blank from your super gun can't kill a regular guard officer despite him just being a squishy human because it only takes two out of his three wounds. It would take three. It does not take three shots point blank to kill a regular human with a bolt gun in the lore. So, therefore, either lore=/=gameplay or the Volleygun is inferior.
Do you actually think the HSVG fires 'four shots'? Or a bolter fires two? The profiles indicate the damage that can be done in a single burst, they don't actually mean the boltgun spits out two bolts and the HSVG 4 freems. So messing with the profile doesn't mean that the target only gets shot by 2 las beams, it means nothing at all. A single burst from the HSVG can kill the second toughest, and most important figure in an AM force. A single burst from a boltgun can't. And you are both trying to spin that as somehow invalidating the superiority of the HSVG over the bolter. You're comparing apples to oranges here-- comparing a TT stat with Lore narrative. The Salvo 4 means that it is a very quick firing weapon, not that it fires exactly 4 shots. Obviously the burst of fire represented by the HSVG Salvo-4 profile doesn't mean the Tempestus dude carefully counts 1 2 3 4 and stops pulling the trigger. Same with Rapid Fire 2 on a bolter. So your comparison is totally dead and the water, and honestly, must seem pretty shaky even to you.
The point ----->*
Where you hit------->
You just missed the point entirely.
I never claimed that the Hotshot Volleygun only fires two shots. Only that two shots won't outright kill a Guard commander which doesn't make any sense lore wise if the HSVG was superior lore-wise. It would only take one. So, therefore, you can't equate the TT rules to the rules.
You're trying to cross too many wires here in your comparison to obfuscate how weak your narrative is. You reduce the number of shots the HSVG gets, just to ensure that mechanically it can't top 3 wounds (when it would always get 4 shots at that range....) then say that it is inferior to a boltgun firing three times... in the fluff. You're just literally making things up now to patch up your badly fractured narrative. If you want to say bolters are OmG Wonderful than go ahead, there are plenty of ridiculous plot armored SM that have one-shotted Warbosses with their bolt pistols for you to say that. As far as I'm aware, there are only a few pieces of fluff where a guy with a HSVG goes up against a dude with a bolter that allow for a direct comparison. Want to guess who wins?
Oh, so when it's about Space Marines kicking ass with bolt guns you just can write it off as "Ridiculous plot armor" but when a Stormtrooper with a Volleygun does it it's a fair comparison. How is this not hypocrisy?
We can't directly equate TT rules with fluff, but they do give us a good standing for a *relative* background comparison, even if they're not perfect reflections. For example, the tabletop stats tell us that a Pulse Rifle is more powerful and longer ranged than a Boltgun, but they don't give us direct explosive yields or kinetic energy counts in Joules or what exactly 30" range means vs a 24" range.
It should also be noted that the more reality one tries to inject here, the more both weapons start to break down very quickly. The fundamental concept of a boltgun is both fundamentally flawed and overcomplicated, while real life laser weapons have a huge host of environmental issues that will rapidly degrade their performance (e.g. fog or smoke will have a major impact on the lethality of a laser weapon) and would likely not function anything near how they're portrayed in 40k (i.e. they're not shooting light-bullets, it'd be a continuous beam or pulsing so fast it might as well be firing for an extremely short duration).
Vaktathi wrote: We can't directly equate TT rules with fluff, but they do give us a good standing for a *relative* background comparison, even if they're not perfect reflections. For example, the tabletop stats tell us that a Pulse Rifle is more powerful and longer ranged than a Boltgun, but they don't give us direct explosive yields or kinetic energy counts in Joules or what exactly 30" range means vs a 24" range.
I keep telling you that this is BS and I still think it is. Straken isn't stronger than an Ogryn just because he has a bionic arm, nor does said arm offer Ork toughness and PA-equivalent protection. Nor does a singing priest next to him make its PA-level protection three times stronger.
The rules are very good for cherrypicking examples out of to justify one's own bias but that is it. They should be kept very far away from here, for this is the background forum.
Vaktathi wrote: We can't directly equate TT rules with fluff, but they do give us a good standing for a *relative* background comparison, even if they're not perfect reflections. For example, the tabletop stats tell us that a Pulse Rifle is more powerful and longer ranged than a Boltgun, but they don't give us direct explosive yields or kinetic energy counts in Joules or what exactly 30" range means vs a 24" range.
I keep telling you that this is BS and I still think it is. Straken isn't stronger than an Ogryn just because he has a bionic arm
He might be, certainly we can make hydraulic devices today which could deliver more force in a punch or keep a tighter grip or whatever than anything biological. In terms of what the game uses the S stat for, largely physical blows, that could be perfectly possible. Either way, this is delving into the minutae of a specific character, not the broad generalities of ubiquitous and faction defining wargear.
nor does said arm offer Ork toughness and PA-equivalent protection
He's got more bionics than just the arm, that's just all that's showing. Not saying it's always perfect, and especially with individual characters things get fuzzy, but that doesn't mean the information is completely worthless, otherwise it wouldn't function at any extent as a reflection of the the background universe, which is clearly false because otherwise nobody would be bothering to play.
The rules are very good for cherrypicking examples out of to justify one's own bias but that is it. They should be kept very far away from here, for this is the background forum.
If we're cherry picking through one particular character's stats, sure. When we're talking the general broad characteristics of widespread infantry wargear such as infantry small arms, it suits just fine. Again, the fact that a Pulse Rifle in game has a longer range than a Bolter tells us that, in the background universe, Pulse Rifles probably have a longer effective range than bolters. It doesn't tell us exactly how many meters that might be or whatnot, but it's enough for it to be represented in the game stats as a reflection of the larger universe's background.
TL;DR it's good for giving us *relative* information about *broad* characteristics of longstanding staple items, not the tiny details (that vary from edition to edition) of any particular character.
You can't make a blanket statement like that. Bolters vary vastly (especially between human and Astartes bolters) and their game equality is an abstraction. Remember the 3W Company Commander I have been talking about here? How does that, even in general terms, make any sense? Oh, but I am sure you will disregard that. What about how a SM punches harder than his melon-sized frag grenade, and how his fist can damage a Leman Russ but his frag can't? Even in general terms. But you will disregard that too, and we can continue that dance all night.
Come on. The game falls apart, even in the most general of contexts, very quickly. Picking out the parts you think make sense is not an omission you can make here. The game is consistent with nothing but itself, and usually not even that.
The bolter is inferior to the hot shot lasgun. Back in 3d ed the stormtroopers used to have hellguns. Theese had str 3 ap 5 and where replaced in 5th ed by the hotshot lasgun. I hated this change so much since it does not represent the lore and even contradicts it. There is no justifiable fluff reason for this. In the book series Schaffers last chancers (13th penal legion) the main character Kage picks up a certain lasgun that is remarkably similar to the hotshot. It's insanely powerfull but can only last for 100 shots, after that the weapon breaks apart and therefore it's never used by the military.
Also hot shot lasguns has existed in the lore for the longest time as a way for the lasgun to empty the mag in a single powerfull shot. A shot that is still weaker then a bolt shell mind you. It appeared both in Necromunda, Inquisition and Dark Heresy.
There's also an overcharged pack, which pakes a slightly heavier punch at the cost of reliability.
As a side note the space marines scouts use long las as their sniper rifle so space marines clearly are not above using las-weapons.
EDIT: Most weapons rate of fire, maximum range, Magazine size, reliability, availability and ammo types can be found in the fantasy flight games books (DH, RT, OW, BC and DW). Including the diffrences between human sized and astartes sized equipment.
What you're referring to, Nerak, is just the Cruddacing of Stormtroopers.
The Hot-Shot Lasgun thing is literally just them redoing the stats of the Hellgun to be better, and renaming it. The 5th edition book actually has an instance where you can see that they just used "Find and Replace" on the Stormtrooper entry to remove mentions of Hellgun with Hotshot Lasgun.
They removed "Hellguns" because of the stupid Ordo Hereticus weapon, the "Hellrifle"(the stupid Jezzail styled weapon that was in the first Grey Knights codex dunno if it's in the new one) and the idea that somehow people would confuse the two.
Ashiraya wrote: You can't make a blanket statement like that. Bolters vary vastly (especially between human and Astartes bolters) and their game equality is an abstraction. Remember the 3W Company Commander I have been talking about here? How does that, even in general terms, make any sense? Oh, but I am sure you will disregard that. What about how a SM punches harder than his melon-sized frag grenade, and how his fist can damage a Leman Russ but his frag can't? Even in general terms. But you will disregard that too, and we can continue that dance all night.
Again, you're delving into details here, not the broad generalities. For instance, Bolters vary vastly, but not enough to be distinguishable in game terms vs between a Lasgun or Pulse Rifle, same reason an Autopistol and Autorifle both have S3, despite that there's a vast difference in kinetic energy between a pistol and rifle round. Likewise, a Frag Grenade doesn't really have all *that* much oomf against any one target, its goal is to try and throw a bunch of metal splinters about that only need to go an inch or two into a human body to kill, it's entirely conceivable that a Space Marine could delver more force in a punch to a single target than a frag grenade's shrapnel. I'm not getting into things like Character wounds because they're clearly exaggerated (same thing with SM's, a Captain isn't really 3x as hard to kill physically as a Tac marine) for game effects and we can identify and acknowledge that in those cases.
I'm not saying its perfect or always useful, the game rules are absolutely full of absurd stuff, but if it wasn't *broadly* reflective of the background, it wouldn't function at all as any sort of reflection of it and nobody would play the game at all.
They removed "Hellguns" because of the stupid Ordo Hereticus weapon, the "Hellrifle"(the stupid Jezzail styled weapon that was in the first Grey Knights codex dunno if it's in the new one) and the idea that somehow people would confuse the two.
Hey, I thought the Hellrifles were kinda cool. Not a big fan of the "jezzail" style described in the book, but I liked that they used Dark Eldar tech. Gear like that helps give radical Ordo Xenos Inquisitors some flavor. It is kind of annoying that they thought that fans are too stupid to tell the difference between a Hellgun and a Hellrifle.
It was Dark Eldar tech? I thought it was demon tech, hence the hell. If its Dark Eldar, then shouldn't it have been called a pain rifle or something? Also, wasn't it an Ordo Malleus thing?
They removed "Hellguns" because of the stupid Ordo Hereticus weapon, the "Hellrifle"(the stupid Jezzail styled weapon that was in the first Grey Knights codex dunno if it's in the new one) and the idea that somehow people would confuse the two.
Hey, I thought the Hellrifles were kinda cool. Not a big fan of the "jezzail" style described in the book, but I liked that they used Dark Eldar tech. Gear like that helps give radical Ordo Xenos Inquisitors some flavor. It is kind of annoying that they thought that fans are too stupid to tell the difference between a Hellgun and a Hellrifle.
On the other hand, they think we're smart enough to remember the difference between a Stormblade, a Stormhammer and a Doomhammer super heavy tank.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: It was Dark Eldar tech? I thought it was demon tech, hence the hell. If its Dark Eldar, then shouldn't it have been called a pain rifle or something?
Also, wasn't it an Ordo Malleus thing?
There's no mention of it being Dark Eldar tech. I think fallinq is just making an assumption because the gun fires "razor sharp shards".
I'm not saying its perfect or always useful, the game rules are absolutely full of absurd stuff, but if it wasn't *broadly* reflective of the background, it wouldn't function at all as any sort of reflection of it and nobody would play the game at all.
And I am saying that 'the game stats are accurate and good except all this fethton of stuff I don't like, just ignore that' is not very convincing.
The nature of 40k's canon lets you cherrypick but do not try to pass it off as anything else than your own headcanon.
It is broadly reflective in the sense that Marines wear relatively heavy armor and operate in squads of 5 or 10 just as in the lore, but anything more detailed and it falls apart faster than you can cobble it together again.
I'm not saying its perfect or always useful, the game rules are absolutely full of absurd stuff, but if it wasn't *broadly* reflective of the background, it wouldn't function at all as any sort of reflection of it and nobody would play the game at all.
And I am saying that 'the game stats are accurate and good except all this fethton of stuff I don't like, just ignore that' is not very convincing.
thats...not what I'm saying. My point was that for ubiquitous and general stuff, like say Boltguns vs Pulse Rifles, it gives us an idea of their *relative* capabilities.
I'm not sure how much more I need to repeat that. Im not talking about wounds on X character or the minutae of Bolter variants, but how the game treats entire classes of things. For example, bolters as a whole are S4, more powerful than Lasguns and Autoguns as a whole are at S3, but are weaker and shorter ranged than Pulse Rifles as a whole, and that this tells us how these classes of weapons broadly rank within the 40k background universe. It tells us that a Leman Russ is better armored than a Predator, that a Lascannon is a more capable anti tank weapon than a Krak missile, or that an Ogryn is stronger and hardier than a naked Space Marine, or that a Space Marine is better armor than a Stormtrooper, or that a Rhino lacks the speed and armor of a Wave Serpent, that an Eldar has faster reflexes than a Guardsmen, who in turn is generally a bit more on the ball than an Ork or Tau Fire Warrior. Big picture stuff.
It is broadly reflective in the sense that Marines wear relatively heavy armor and operate in squads of 5 or 10 just as in the lore, but anything more detailed and it falls apart faster than you can cobble it together again.
I believe thats pretty much exactly the kind of thing I was saying. These stats reflect that Space Marines as a whole are tougher and better armored than say, Dire Avengers as a whole. It tells us theres enough differences to matter and be be relevant enough to reflect on a tactical level, but I'm not saying it tells us in detail how each would survive an axe wound or how much faster an SM heals than an Eldar or anything like that.
The game doesn't match the fluff because the game needs BALANCE we don't have that. This applies to HSVG and Bolters. Bolters, by the fluff, EASILY one shot things that are multi-wound on the table top. HSVG both a) suffer from power creep, and b) aren't as demoralizing/destructive as bolters are in the fluff. we're we to actually go "yeah, marines should have HSVG," then the balance of the game would be stupid (because now your 10-man squad pumps out 40 AP: 3 shots per turn).
to expand on this, let's look at the 'movie marines' list (arguably the closest table-top equivalent to fluff accurate marines):
a regular dude has: WS/BS of 5, S/T of 6, 2 wounds, 3 attacks base, and I of 5. They have a 3+ re-rollable armour save, and a 3++ invuln. Their knives are rending, their chainswords are AP: 3 and cause double wounds. All still accurate to what we see in the fluff. Then we get to the bolters: 36" range, S: 6 AP: 4 Assault 4, rending. Not perfect, but LEAGUES more accurate to what we see in the fluff. Would a full army (40+ models) of this be fun to play against? No, hence why it's toned down.
the point of this was to just clarify WHY bolters are so weak on the table top: not representative of the fluff AND not effected by power creep over the years.
@Vaktathi I don't think the game numerics are reliable enough to even tell that.
To take an example similar to the boltgun-pulse, a veteran Tempestus Scion is WS3, whereas a Marine Scout is WS4. Now, the Marine may have the advantage due to raw strength, resilience and speed, but the sheer veterancy disparity should not leave the Scion behind in skill too! The Scout may have more melee time in his training schedule but he also needs training in heavy weapons usage, bike riding etc. so it evens out.
Brennonjw wrote: The game doesn't match the fluff because the game needs BALANCE we don't have that. This applies to HSVG and Bolters. Bolters, by the fluff, EASILY one shot things that are multi-wound on the table top. HSVG both a) suffer from power creep, and b) aren't as demoralizing/destructive as bolters are in the fluff. we're we to actually go "yeah, marines should have HSVG," then the balance of the game would be stupid (because now your 10-man squad pumps out 40 AP: 3 shots per turn).
to expand on this, let's look at the 'movie marines' list (arguably the closest table-top equivalent to fluff accurate marines):
a regular dude has: WS/BS of 5, S/T of 6, 2 wounds, 3 attacks base, and I of 5. They have a 3+ re-rollable armour save, and a 3++ invuln. Their knives are rending, their chainswords are AP: 3 and cause double wounds. All still accurate to what we see in the fluff. Then we get to the bolters: 36" range, S: 6 AP: 4 Assault 4, rending. Not perfect, but LEAGUES more accurate to what we see in the fluff. Would a full army (40+ models) of this be fun to play against? No, hence why it's toned down.
the point of this was to just clarify WHY bolters are so weak on the table top: not representative of the fluff AND not effected by power creep over the years.
To be honest that'd be better than how Space Marines are represented now. If GW made a codex like that, it'd be fun
the point of this was to just clarify WHY bolters are so weak on the table top: not representative of the fluff AND not effected by power creep over the years.
To be honest that'd be better than how Space Marines are represented now. If GW made a codex like that, it'd be fun
Except for one thing.
When the Movie Marines list was released, part of the article explicitly stated that it was not supposed to be Fluff Accurate, and that they were far, far more powerful than fluff Space Marines are supposed to be, but that they had plot armour because they were supposed to be how Marines would be represented in an action movie, like Predator or Die Hard.
the point of this was to just clarify WHY bolters are so weak on the table top: not representative of the fluff AND not effected by power creep over the years.
To be honest that'd be better than how Space Marines are represented now. If GW made a codex like that, it'd be fun
Except for one thing.
When the Movie Marines list was released, part of the article explicitly stated that it was not supposed to be Fluff Accurate, and that they were far, far more powerful than fluff Space Marines are supposed to be, but that they had plot armour because they were supposed to be how Marines would be represented in an action movie, like Predator or Die Hard.
yet the movie marines STILL more closely match up to what marines are in the books, (it's been a while on this next one) RPGs, and fluff overall. Point in case: in horus rising we have it shown that loosing 5-6 marines is something that was rare at best against normal humans, and loosing 2 smaller squads to a single daemon was something that was devastating (both the shock of the marines dying and, you know, the daemon). this has been something thats constant through the fluff when they are not trying to make something look extra spooky (i.e. the 'marines die in droves' approach to make a warboss look better, etc.)
If you want a more accurate representation of marines then play Epic or try the deathwatch rpg out. In 40k the most accurate marines I got was actually when we played kill team back in 4th ed. The smaller scale made the marines surprisingly tough. When all you have are some 6 marines vs 30 orcs they suddenly become more badass.
In the fluff the marines are warrior monks that sleep 4 hours a night and devote all other time ('cept for 15 minutes a day...) to perfecting their combat prowess. A beast that can spit acid, devour your brain to learn all there is to know about you, resist any disease or toxin and has all his senses hightened to superhuman levels. With duplicates of almost every major organ and the ability to regenerate and recover from almost any wound they are war incarnate. Give this monster the toughest and most advanced armour produced by a galaxy spinning empire and arm him with a small rpg launcher. Yet the strongest weapon of this being is his undying will and fanatical faith in the Emperor and the Imperium he serves. This does not mean they can't have an unlucky day next to a meltagun or die from slipping and breaking their neck. It does not mean they can go toe to toe with a greater deamon and expect all to be swell. It does however mean that where humans can perform outstanding feats the space marines can perform deeds worthy of legends.
to expand on this, let's look at the 'movie marines' list (arguably the closest table-top equivalent to fluff accurate marines):
a regular dude has: WS/BS of 5, S/T of 6, 2 wounds, 3 attacks base, and I of 5. They have a 3+ re-rollable armour save, and a 3++ invuln. Their knives are rending, their chainswords are AP: 3 and cause double wounds. All still accurate to what we see in the fluff. Then we get to the bolters: 36" range, S: 6 AP: 4 Assault 4, rending. Not perfect, but LEAGUES more accurate to what we see in the fluff. Would a full army (40+ models) of this be fun to play against? No, hence why it's toned down.
There is a slight balancing point between the two - I do quite like the Knights Errant in the Horus Heresy game - their custom-made 'Paragon Bolters' are Assault 4, Master-Crafted, and Rending.
Why don't marines all run around with lascannon? The Admech obviously can churn enough of them out to arm the billions of tanks they make a year. 40k marines have always had bolter and as bolter are fundamentally the benchmark for small arms in the game everything else just gets better.
True, but whilst there aren't points costs, there is an actual cost implication.
At the same time, we don't really know how rare stuff is. Plasma guns are supposedly rare, but guard squads are issued with them.
Even if they're a lot rarer in the universe than the game implies (say....of a regiment, 90% of special weapons are common stuff like grenade launchers or flamers and only one in ten get a plasma gun), clearly there are a hell of a lot more astra militarum plasma guns than there are astartes bolters.
But are hotshot volley guns rarer and more expensive than astartes bolters?
(You could ask why the Militarum Tempestus don't use volley guns as their standard weapon - I'd bloody love it if they did!)
The Tempestus are obviously more common than the Astartes, but we've no metric for how much more common.
The supposed 'thousand chapters' means there are probably a million or so astartes. There's no real definition of the tempestus' net fighting strength that I'm aware of. Obviously it's more but is it ten times? A hundred times? A million times?
Hotshot weaponry is common enough that whilst their numbers are restricted, it's the standard weapon of scions, and there's no indication that the Volley gun is in any way rarer or massively more complex to produce than the standard rifle or pistol.
Also, since we're talking background forum, it's worth pointing out the 'astartes weaponry' argument. I know people often disagree on this, but one thing that has been a thing in the RPGs (and not just FFG, even when Black Library published Dark Heresy is was still a concept) is the idea of "astartes calibre weaponry" - whilst in the simplified version of 40k a bolter is a bolter is a bolter, in the more narrative and detailed universe (and rules) of the RPG, believe me you bloody well know the difference between a bolt round from a commissar's weapon and a 1.0 Astartes mass-reactive.
In RPGs, Hotshot weapons fall into a nice bracket - better at punching through armour than bolt rounds, but worse at doing organic damage (which makes a certain amount of scientific sense; the human body is 90% water, which has 10 times the specific heat capacity of steel).
Astartes bolt rounds, by comparison, are much, much scarier and frankly a lot closer to 'normal' heavy bolter rounds.
The bolter is very mobile and more useful in melee than heavy weapons, which is why Astartes don't all use heavy bolters. The bolter's high ROF while maintaining devastating power is why they use it over mass plasmas, to help them deal with renegade and ork hordes they often face.
The bolter is lightweight (...relative to things like assault cannons), powerful, more reliable than plasmas, have a high rate of fire and a decent ammunition capacity while also doing quite well as clubs in melee.
IOW they do not suck as much as their tabletop equivalent. They are the perfect counterpart to the lasgun for Astartes use, trading reliability for raw power.
Personally from my experience of the FLuff the bolter is the better weapon.
However to play devils advocate lets say on a gun v gun with everything else being equal the volley gun IS better....
Its clearly not being used by everyone , or any marines.
Therefore we can safely assume that there is a reason, perhaps one we are not, and cannot be aware of becuase of our limited real insight into the setting that means its not issued out as a general arm ahead of the bolter. vis a vis the bolter is better its just that we dont know why....
) makes complete sense from a background perspective, especially considering Inquisitors tend to use power armour themselves.
