26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
So according to information online, Tau pulse weaponry fires plasma projectiles (accelerating and ionising solid matter cartridges in order to do so). Unlike other plasma weapons in the game though, pulse weapons lack serious AP (the blaster can achieve AP2 at short-range, but is otherwise AP1 alongside the pulse rifle, and weapons like the pulse carbine, pulse pistol and burst cannon are AP0).
They also fire much more slowly in the lore, yet this isn't really reflected on the tabletop either.
Part of me wonders (especially with AoC) if pulse weapons should gain AP to represent the fact that they're firing high-velocity plasma... so pulse rifles, carbines, pistols, burst cannons and long-range blasters would all be AP2 (or at least AP1), close-range blasters could be AP3, etc. These AP values would still fall short of Tau plasma rifles (Strength 8, AP4).
They could also have their RoF reduced. E.g. pulse rifles could go back to Heavy 1 (not as big a deal in 9th Ed., since you can still move and fire), pulse carbines and blasters could be Assault 1, burst cannons could lose a shot or two, etc.
124182
Post by: Mariongodspeed
Aren't Ion weapons the Tau equivalent of Plasma weapons, not pulse weapons? (stat-wise not lore wise).
91640
Post by: Wyldhunt
A few things:
* "Plasma" in 40k doesn't really act like plasma. If it did, you'd expect it to "wound" a slapped together ork truk more reliably than it does. It's just abstract "pretty lethal but not melta lethal" stuff.
* Despite the weapon description, tau pulse weapons aren't really treated like plasma. They're more like generic Star Wars blasters. Just like how lasguns don't seem to operate on the same principles as lasers. Tau plasma rifles *are* treated like plasma and are consistent with other "safe" plasma profiles like that of the eldar starcannon.
* Please, please, please do not give an AP buff to pulse weapons. Maybe consider taking away the AP buff they just got. This is classic arms race stuff. Marines ignore some AP because there's too much AP-1/-2 floating around. There's a bunch of AP-1/-2 floating around probably partly because marines got a power (and wounds) boost in early 9th/late 8th. We must break the cycle, noble spoon. We must.
130394
Post by: EviscerationPlague
Yes, Tau should be even deadlier at range combat. Add AP to everything!
91640
Post by: Wyldhunt
Mariongodspeed wrote:Aren't Ion weapons the Tau equivalent of Plasma weapons, not pulse weapons? (stat-wise not lore wise).
Pretty much. Ion weapons can be overcharged and "get hot" like imperial plasma. Plasma rifles are the actual "plasma" weapons and are treated similarly to eldar plasma weapons.
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
Mariongodspeed wrote:Aren't Ion weapons the Tau equivalent of Plasma weapons, not pulse weapons? (stat-wise not lore wise).
Apparently ion weapons function more like particle beam weapons.
Tau have actual plasma rifles, and they're more powerful than Imperial plasma guns (higher Strength, AP, and Damage... 1 Damage higher than even supercharged plasma guns).
Wyldhunt wrote:"Plasma" in 40k doesn't really act like plasma. If it did, you'd expect it to "wound" a slapped together ork truk more reliably than it does. It's just abstract "pretty lethal but not melta lethal" stuff.
Why a trukk? Aren't most plasma weapons already wounding trukks on 3s?
Wyldhunt wrote:Despite the weapon description, tau pulse weapons aren't really treated like plasma. They're more like generic Star Wars blasters. Just like how lasguns don't seem to operate on the same principles as lasers. Tau plasma rifles *are* treated like plasma and are consistent with other "safe" plasma profiles like that of the eldar starcannon.
I know, that's the problem.  But you get hit by a pulse weapon, you're being hit by high-velocity plasma. They're 100% plasma weapons in practice.
How are lasguns not lasers?
Wyldhunt wrote:Please, please, please do not give an AP buff to pulse weapons. Maybe consider taking away the AP buff they just got. This is classic arms race stuff. Marines ignore some AP because there's too much AP-1/-2 floating around. There's a bunch of AP-1/-2 floating around probably partly because marines got a power (and wounds) boost in early 9th/late 8th. We must break the cycle, noble spoon. We must.
EviscerationPlague wrote:Yes, Tau should be even deadlier at range combat. Add AP to everything!
If that better represents them on the tabletop, why not?  Also compensated by a reduction in shots, surely?
95410
Post by: ERJAK
 I_am_a_Spoon wrote:Mariongodspeed wrote:Aren't Ion weapons the Tau equivalent of Plasma weapons, not pulse weapons? (stat-wise not lore wise).
Apparently ion weapons function more like particle beam weapons.
Tau have actual plasma rifles, and they're more powerful than Imperial plasma guns (higher Strength, AP, and Damage... 1 Damage higher than even supercharged plasma guns).
Wyldhunt wrote:"Plasma" in 40k doesn't really act like plasma. If it did, you'd expect it to "wound" a slapped together ork truk more reliably than it does. It's just abstract "pretty lethal but not melta lethal" stuff.
Why a trukk? Aren't most plasma weapons already wounding trukks on 3s?
Wyldhunt wrote:Despite the weapon description, tau pulse weapons aren't really treated like plasma. They're more like generic Star Wars blasters. Just like how lasguns don't seem to operate on the same principles as lasers. Tau plasma rifles *are* treated like plasma and are consistent with other "safe" plasma profiles like that of the eldar starcannon.
I know, that's the problem. But you get hit by a pulse weapon, you're being hit by high-velocity plasma. They're 100% plasma weapons in practice.
How are lasguns not lasers?
Wyldhunt wrote:Please, please, please do not give an AP buff to pulse weapons. Maybe consider taking away the AP buff they just got. This is classic arms race stuff. Marines ignore some AP because there's too much AP-1/-2 floating around. There's a bunch of AP-1/-2 floating around probably partly because marines got a power (and wounds) boost in early 9th/late 8th. We must break the cycle, noble spoon. We must.
EviscerationPlague wrote:Yes, Tau should be even deadlier at range combat. Add AP to everything!
If that better represents them on the tabletop, why not? Also compensated by a reduction in shots, surely?
No, double the shots. If we're doing something stupid for a purely fluff reason, then go all the way with it.
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
ERJAK wrote:No, double the shots. If we're doing something stupid for a purely fluff reason, then go all the way with it.
You're going the wrong way tho. Zero shots maybe?... 
127462
Post by: Hecaton
It's because they're lower-yield (and much safer) then Imperial plasma tech.
22150
Post by: blood reaper
Jesus Christ AP-2 on standard infantry? The game is already in a terrible state because of AP madness.
91640
Post by: Wyldhunt
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:
Wyldhunt wrote:"Plasma" in 40k doesn't really act like plasma. If it did, you'd expect it to "wound" a slapped together ork truk more reliably than it does. It's just abstract "pretty lethal but not melta lethal" stuff.
Why a trukk? Aren't most plasma weapons already wounding trukks on 3s?
Went with trukk to take super special space metal out of the equation and to give an example of a vehicle that's vaguely similar to a real-world vehicle we're all familiar with. Plasma wounds on 3s. Meaning that whatever 40k "plasma" is, it fails to burn a hole through the scrap metal that a trukk is made of 1 out of 3 times. And like, sure, abstraction is a thing. But non-overcharged imperial plasma is apparently low-energy enough that it only does 1 damage meaning it isn't sufficient to kill something like a drukhari grotesque or a kroot rider in a single shot. So while in-universe it's "plasma," what that means doesn't have to line up with our expectations of real-world plasma. Like how pistol rounds in some movies can send people spinning off into the distance or how normal people in superhero settings can survive seemingly lethal harm or kick each other across the room. Basically, 40k "plasma" behaves however the writers want it to at that moment, so exactly how a tiny bit of pulse rifle plasma behaves can be wildly inconsistent with other real-world and in-universe plasma.
Wyldhunt wrote:Despite the weapon description, tau pulse weapons aren't really treated like plasma. They're more like generic Star Wars blasters. Just like how lasguns don't seem to operate on the same principles as lasers. Tau plasma rifles *are* treated like plasma and are consistent with other "safe" plasma profiles like that of the eldar starcannon.
I know, that's the problem. But you get hit by a pulse weapon, you're being hit by high-velocity plasma. They're 100% plasma weapons in practice.
See above. Basically, plasma's behavior is wildly inconsistent in-universe. We don't need pulse weapons to match imperial plasma weapons. And if we do, then we should probably talk about overhauling all plasma-fluffed weapons. (Although that might be bad for gameplay.)
How are lasguns not lasers?
They're described as shooting discrete "bolts" of energy similar to Star Wars blasters. A laser would be more about keeping a continuous beam focused on more or less the same spot. Like a sentinel beam from Halo. That's just not how lasguns are depicted as working.
If that better represents them on the tabletop, why not? Also compensated by a reduction in shots, surely?
Basically, 40k is full of weapons whose rules don't necessarily match the hypothetical physics of the weapons' lore if you think about them too hard. The pulse rifle is meant to be a pew pew Star Wars style blaster rifle that fire warriors are comfortable firing while on the move. You could change them to Heavy 1 weapons that pack more of a punch and make it balanced. Heck, you could maybe even argue that that makes pulse rifles and pulse carbines more interesting, but it's clearly not the behavior the designers had in mind nor does it necessarily lead to better gameplay. (It could, but we're kind of in don't fix it if it ain't broke territory. And error injection is always a consideration.)
105694
Post by: Lord Damocles
 blood reaper wrote:Jesus Christ AP-2 on standard infantry? The game is already in a terrible state because of AP madness.
Just buff Armour of Contempt more, IDK. /s
105713
Post by: Insectum7
blood reaper wrote:Jesus Christ AP-2 on standard infantry? The game is already in a terrible state because of AP madness.
Intercessors have been firing at AP-2 in Tactical Doctrine for a while now.
Yes it's bad. Just pointing it out.
128304
Post by: Kaied
 Insectum7 wrote: blood reaper wrote:Jesus Christ AP-2 on standard infantry? The game is already in a terrible state because of AP madness.
Intercessors have been firing at AP-2 in Tactical Doctrine for a while now.
Yes it's bad. Just pointing it out.
You mean AP-3 with Stalkers in Devastator?
105713
Post by: Insectum7
Kaied wrote: Insectum7 wrote: blood reaper wrote:Jesus Christ AP-2 on standard infantry? The game is already in a terrible state because of AP madness.
Intercessors have been firing at AP-2 in Tactical Doctrine for a while now.
Yes it's bad. Just pointing it out.
You mean AP-3 with Stalkers in Devastator?
I guess so. 
105418
Post by: John Prins
"Plasma" covers a lot of ground.
Modern scientists have managed to create plasma at 1 degree above absolute zero.
So plasma can exist at a great range of temperatures. Presumably Tau pulse weapons are fairly low temperature plasma weapons - safe and reliable, but mostly for shooting infantry. Imperial plasma is high temperature plasma - dangerous to the user due to barely contained energies.
51866
Post by: Bobthehero
blood reaper wrote:Jesus Christ AP-2 on standard infantry? The game is already in a terrible state because of AP madness.
Scions called, lol. Though I guess low/high, whatever, good AP were always the Scion thing ever since they became their own thing.
91640
Post by: Wyldhunt
 John Prins wrote:
Modern scientists have managed to create plasma at 1 degree above absolute zero.
So that's what they put in the Baja Blast Mountain Dew!
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
Hecaton wrote:It's because they're lower-yield (and much safer) then Imperial plasma tech.
Well the Tau have actual plasma rifles too, and they're basically Imperial plasma guns on steroids (additional Strength, AP and damage than even supercharged plasma, without any risk to the wielder).
blood reaper wrote:Jesus Christ AP-2 on standard infantry? The game is already in a terrible state because of AP madness.
Why is AP on basic infantry necessarily a bad thing, rather than a characterful and faction-defining one)? And as others have said, it's already a thing elsewhere (and less deservedly so IMO).
Let's not shy away from AP just because power armour doesn't give a 2+ Sv (yet).
John Prins wrote:"Plasma" covers a lot of ground.
Modern scientists have managed to create plasma at 1 degree above absolute zero.
So plasma can exist at a great range of temperatures. Presumably Tau pulse weapons are fairly low temperature plasma weapons - safe and reliable, but mostly for shooting infantry. Imperial plasma is high temperature plasma - dangerous to the user due to barely contained energies.
That's a good point. The article I linked in the OP though does specify that pulse weapons "do a great deal of damage on impact, mostly due to the extreme thermal energy of the plasma mass and the speed with which the projectile impacts, which helps ensure that armoured targets are more heavily damaged".
Wyldhunt wrote:Plasma wounds on 3s. Meaning that whatever 40k "plasma" is, it fails to burn a hole through the scrap metal that a trukk is made of 1 out of 3 times. And like, sure, abstraction is a thing. But non-overcharged imperial plasma is apparently low-energy enough that it only does 1 damage meaning it isn't sufficient to kill something like a drukhari grotesque or a kroot rider in a single shot. So while in-universe it's "plasma," what that means doesn't have to line up with our expectations of real-world plasma.
Ya, but wounding on a 3 essentially means that it has a 67% chance of a hit damaging votal components. A 1-2 could represent you hitting the bumper, or melting the chassis in a way that doesn't affect the vehicle's function, etc. Plasma is dangerous enough that ⅔ of all impacts will damage your vehicle in a way that impedes its function (if not blocked by armour on heavier vehicles).
Wounds represent the number of redundant systems you have to knock out to fully incapacitate something (although they can be very arbitrary at times, I'll give you that).
Wyldhunt wrote:We don't need pulse weapons to match imperial plasma weapons. And if we do, then we should probably talk about overhauling all plasma-fluffed weapons. (Although that might be bad for gameplay.)
Which would be very cool.
Also it's not just Imperial weaponry; as I've said above, Tau have plasma rifles that already behave similarly to Imperial plasma guns (on steroids).
Wyldhunt wrote:
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:
How are lasguns not lasers?
They're described as shooting discrete "bolts" of energy similar to Star Wars blasters. A laser would be more about keeping a continuous beam focused on more or less the same spot. Like a sentinel beam from Halo. That's just not how lasguns are depicted as working.
Isn't this a point of contention? Most sources ( including wikis) seem to depict them firing an actual laser.
Wyldhunt wrote:
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:
If that better represents them on the tabletop, why not? Also compensated by a reduction in shots, surely?
The pulse rifle is meant to be a pew pew Star Wars style blaster rifle that fire warriors are comfortable firing while on the move. You could change them to Heavy 1 weapons that pack more of a punch and make it balanced. Heck, you could maybe even argue that that makes pulse rifles and pulse carbines more interesting, but it's clearly not the behavior the designers had in mind nor does it necessarily lead to better gameplay. (It could, but we're kind of in don't fix it if it ain't broke territory. And error injection is always a consideration.)
What's funny though is that pulse rifles and carbines used to be Heavy and Assault 1 respectively IIRC. And the lore around pulse rifles certainly depicts them as more stationary, slow-firing weapons than something like a lasgun or bolter.
91640
Post by: Wyldhunt
Isn't this a point of contention? Most sources (including wikis) seem to depict them firing an actual laser.
Maybe? I'm not aware of any contention. Every visual depiction of them that I can recall ( DoW video games, the 9th edition trailer, the recent hammer and bolter animation) seems to treat them like SW blasters. Pretty sure I recall mentions multiple firing modes and having fewer shots if you amp up your guns power in the Gaunt's Ghosts books. Which all makes me think that they fire individual projectiles rather than continuous beams. I think scatter las (the "shotgun laz variant) as described in the Fantasy Flight RPG books fired a spread of projectiles. Which seems like an odd description if the weapon is functionally creating half a dozen continuous beams or something.
From what I recall, lasgun wounds are generally described as "craters" in the target's flesh or as though the area around the impact burst or got fried by the energy. Which seems like the sort of thing you'd see from a SW blaster rather than a continuous beam of heat energy.
I definitely don't remember descriptions of panicked guardsmen holding down on the trigger and having the result be described as a continuous beam. I guess it's possible that the gun intentionally turns off the beam after a split second to avoid creating hazards when guardsmen die with death grips or something.
If they could, I imagine that guardsmen facing astartes would just sort of... hold down on the trigger and keep their laser pointers glued to the marine's face until damage happened. I don't recall anyone ever doing that, but I do recall marines losing eyes to lucky that go through their eyelenses. If a lasbolt is capable of puncturing an eyelense, then you'd think even a briefly continuous beam would be relatively "easy" to drag across your target's helmet. I mean, it would still be a carefully aimed shot, but I'd expect trenches full of guardsmen to be popping marine eyeballs at a pretty quick pace.
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
Wyldhunt wrote:I_am_a_Spoon wrote:Isn't this a point of contention? Most sources (including wikis) seem to depict them firing an actual laser.
Maybe? I'm not aware of any contention. Every visual depiction of them that I can recall ( DoW video games, the 9th edition trailer, the recent hammer and bolter animation) seems to treat them like SW blasters.
This... just isn't true? In both DoW1 and DoW2 for example, Guardsmen fire coherent laser beams, not blaster-like projectiles (I haven't played DoW3, so not sure if lasguns appear in that at any point). It's the same in the Space Marine game(s). The 9th Ed trailer seemed to depict them that way too (or at the very least, inconclusively). I haven't seen the Hammer and Bolter animation.
Wyldhunt wrote:Pretty sure I recall mentions multiple firing modes and having fewer shots if you amp up your guns power in the Gaunt's Ghosts books. Which all makes me think that they fire individual projectiles rather than continuous beams. I think scatter las (the "shotgun laz variant) as described in the Fantasy Flight RPG books fired a spread of projectiles. Which seems like an odd description if the weapon is functionally creating half a dozen continuous beams or something.
Yeah, they have adjustable power levels (i.e. the energy draw of each shot). There's no reason this makes less sense with laser beams than projectiles though (more, probably). I haven't read the RPG books, but they seem like an outlier.
Wyldhunt wrote:From what I recall, lasgun wounds are generally described as "craters" in the target's flesh or as though the area around the impact burst or got fried by the energy. Which seems like the sort of thing you'd see from a SW blaster rather than a continuous beam of heat energy.
I definitely don't remember descriptions of panicked guardsmen holding down on the trigger and having the result be described as a continuous beam.
I think depictions of wounds vary... sometimes lasguns puncture neat little cauterised holes in things, sometimes they blast off limbs as the laser explosively vapourises the target's flesh.
And a laser doesn't have to be continuous. To my understanding, a lasgun 'shot' is a split-second discharge. It might even comprise a rapid-fire sequence of pulses.
102537
Post by: Sgt. Cortez
Well Bolters are basically rapid firing rocket launchers but of course they're not as deadly as an actual missile, so I guess they should be 3 shots 36", S6 and Ap-2.
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
Sgt. Cortez wrote:Well Bolters are basically rapid firing rocket launchers but of course they're not as deadly as an actual missile, so I guess they should be 3 shots 36", S6 and Ap-2.
Bit of Poe's law here, but yep, boltguns should be more powerful/characterful than they currently are. I've been posting elsewhere about them being S4 AP1 Damage 2 (or even Damage D3)... less outright powerful and penetrating than a pulse weapon, but capable of causing grievous internal wounds when they do penetrate via their delayed detonations.
This would also give them a lot more function as anti- MEQ weapons, which makes sense lore-wise in the context of the Horus Heresy.
127462
Post by: Hecaton
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:
Well the Tau have actual plasma rifles too, and they're basically Imperial plasma guns on steroids (additional Strength, AP and damage than even supercharged plasma, without any risk to the wielder).
Yes, I'm aware of that. Pulse weapons are still plasma though.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
What's funny though is that pulse rifles and carbines used to be Heavy and Assault 1 respectively IIRC. And the lore around pulse rifles certainly depicts them as more stationary, slow-firing weapons than something like a lasgun or bolter.
Pulse Rifles have been rapid fire since they were introduced, you're incorrect about the lore depicting them as more cumbersome than Imperial weapons.
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
Hecaton wrote: I_am_a_Spoon wrote:
Well the Tau have actual plasma rifles too, and they're basically Imperial plasma guns on steroids (additional Strength, AP and damage than even supercharged plasma, without any risk to the wielder).
Yes, I'm aware of that. Pulse weapons are still plasma though.
That's been my entire argument here... Could you clarify what you mean?
Hecaton wrote: I_am_a_Spoon wrote:What's funny though is that pulse rifles and carbines used to be Heavy and Assault 1 respectively IIRC. And the lore around pulse rifles certainly depicts them as more stationary, slow-firing weapons than something like a lasgun or bolter.
Pulse Rifles have been rapid fire since they were introduced, you're incorrect about the lore depicting them as more cumbersome than Imperial weapons.
According to the 40k Wiki:
"Compared to other infantry weapons, the Pulse Rifle trades rate of fire for damage. When compared to a Space Marine Bolter, it fires at a far slower rate but does significantly more damage and possesses a greater effective range. Pulse Rifles also have significant recoil, which requires that the user be stationary to fire most effectively. This, combined with the Pulse Rifle's long range, means that Tau troops are best served by staying more or less stationary. Pulse Rifles still retain most of their effectiveness on the move nonetheless, and can be utterly devastating weapons when used correctly."
Sounds like the epitome of Heavy 1 to me.
(I might be wrong about past Heavy 1 status; that was based on my own memories from yonks ago).
74088
Post by: Irbis
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:Tau have actual plasma rifles, and they're more powerful than Imperial plasma guns (higher Strength, AP, and Damage... 1 Damage higher than even supercharged plasma guns).
Which is utter gak nonsense because Tau plasma is supposed to be A) far more primitive than even Imperial version, B) never overcharged because Tau supposedly care about safety of their troops (though this was retconned away given they literally give weapon cells to infantry irradiating and killing them faster than even supposedly callous admech approach to rad weapons of 'disposable' skitarii LOL) 
I know, that's the problem. But you get hit by a pulse weapon, you're being hit by high-velocity plasma. They're 100% plasma weapons in practice.
They are about as much ""plasma"" weapons as flamers are. Since fire is a plasma, therefore all flamers in the game should have -7 AP by your logic
Wyldhunt wrote:They're described as shooting discrete "bolts" of energy similar to Star Wars blasters. A laser would be more about keeping a continuous beam focused on more or less the same spot. Like a sentinel beam from Halo. That's just not how lasguns are depicted as working.
Eh, real life lasers also tend to fire pulses because continuous beam would melt it. Not to mention it's easier to gather energy for a single strong shot with capacitors and such than it is to output such energy continuously, which would melt battery and wiring, too.
From what I recall, lasgun wounds are generally described as "craters" in the target's flesh or as though the area around the impact burst or got fried by the energy. Which seems like the sort of thing you'd see from a SW blaster rather than a continuous beam of heat energy.
No, that's actually a thing you see in RL as the spot hit by laser turns into steam. Which is another reason why you do pulses, because lasers lose most of their effectiveness firing though a cloud of vaporized material so it's better to give it a time to disperse.
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
 Irbis wrote: I_am_a_Spoon wrote:I know, that's the problem. But you get hit by a pulse weapon, you're being hit by high-velocity plasma. They're 100% plasma weapons in practice.
They are about as much ""plasma"" weapons as flamers are. Since fire is a plasma, therefore all flamers in the game should have -7 AP by your logic
And laser pointers are lasers... so lasguns should be S1? Blind anything on a 6! 
Nice strawman, but pulse weapons are certainly more like 'conventional' plasma guns (with projectiles in the thousands of degrees Kelvin, possible tens of thousands) than flamers are. Something else I found online:
"The bottom line is that a flame only becomes a plasma if it gets hot enough. Flames at lower temperatures do not contain enough ionization to become a plasma. On the other hand, a higher-temperature flame does indeed contain enough freed electrons and ions to act as a plasma.
For example, an everyday wax candle has a flame that burns at a maximum temperature of 1,500 degrees Celsius, which is too low to create very many ions. A candle flame is therefore not a plasma. Note that the vibrant red-orange-yellow colors that we see in a flame are not created from the flame being a plasma. Rather, these colors are emitted by incompletely-burnt particles of fuel ("soot") that are so hot that they are glowing like an electric toaster element. If you pump enough oxygen into a flame, the combustion becomes complete and the red-orange-yellow flame goes away. With this in mind, it should be clear that a candle flame gives off light even though it is not a plasma. In contrast to candle flames, certain burning mixtures of acetylene can reach 3,100 degrees Celsius, with an associated Debye length of 0.01 millimeters, according to the Coalition for Plasma Science. Such flames are therefore plasmas (as long as the flame is much larger than 0.01 millimeters, which is usually the case). Other flames, including flames from campfires, propane stoves, and cigarette lighters, have temperatures that lie somewhere between these two extremes, and therefore may or may not be plasma. Everyday flames such as from the burning of wood, charcoal, gasoline, propane, or natural gas are typically not hot enough to act like a plasma."
(Ironically, laser weapons would probably create more plasma upon impact than flamers would).
108295
Post by: kirotheavenger
Irbis wrote:Tau supposedly care about safety of their troops (though this was retconned away given they literally give weapon cells to infantry irradiating and killing them faster than even supposedly callous admech approach to rad weapons of 'disposable' skitarii LOL)
The progression of Ion is a strange one.
It started with the Ion Cannon on Hammerheads and various Forgeworld things. This used the large power capacity of the vehicle to charge the ions, was totally safe.
There was also the rare prototype cyclic ion blaster - which miniaturised the technology in a less powerful but higher RoF package capable of being run from a battlesuit. Still totally safe.
Then, come 6th, they added the Riptide.
This had effectively a slightly lighter ion cannon, which the Riptide could overcharge with it's novareactor. Still, the ion gun was totally safe, it was the novareactor that was harmful.
They also added the ion rifle - allegedly to give Pathfinders more firepower they needed a powersource for the ion rifle. They found some unstable cancer neutron crystal malarky. It was quite explicit that this was purely to get the ion rifle to work in such a small package.
I do agree it's a bit weird - why not just give it to a drone? But Pathfinders have always been described as more reckless and willing to sustain casualties, being outriders without support.
Fast forward to 9th - it seems they either didn't care or didn't realise how it worked, and decided Tau needed their own overcharging "not-plasma" weapons. So now I guess all the weapons cause be overcharged to cause space cancer, but also fired safely if they want?
127462
Post by: Hecaton
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:
According to the 40k Wiki:
"Compared to other infantry weapons, the Pulse Rifle trades rate of fire for damage. When compared to a Space Marine Bolter, it fires at a far slower rate but does significantly more damage and possesses a greater effective range. Pulse Rifles also have significant recoil, which requires that the user be stationary to fire most effectively. This, combined with the Pulse Rifle's long range, means that Tau troops are best served by staying more or less stationary. Pulse Rifles still retain most of their effectiveness on the move nonetheless, and can be utterly devastating weapons when used correctly."
Sounds like the epitome of Heavy 1 to me.
(I might be wrong about past Heavy 1 status; that was based on my own memories from yonks ago).
That's because the old Rapid Fire rules required you to stay stationary to fire at full effect. They have more recoil because boltguns are gyrojet rockets and actually have very low recoil compared to the size of the projectile, since it accelerates all the way to the target. Recoil from plasma based weapons occurs because the magnetic field needed to impel the projectile towards its target pushes back on the weapon as well, creating a recoil effect. Automatically Appended Next Post: Irbis wrote:
Which is utter gak nonsense because Tau plasma is supposed to be A) far more primitive than even Imperial version, B) never overcharged because Tau supposedly care about safety of their troops (though this was retconned away given they literally give weapon cells to infantry irradiating and killing them faster than even supposedly callous admech approach to rad weapons of 'disposable' skitarii LOL)
I thought Tau were portrayed as having awesome plasma tech, even with a tech deficit compared to the Imperium's looting of their DAoT precursors.
Irbis wrote:
They are about as much ""plasma"" weapons as flamers are. Since fire is a plasma, therefore all flamers in the game should have -7 AP by your logic
Yeah there's no reason why different types of plasma weapons wouldn't have different armor penetrating capabilities.
Irbis wrote:
Eh, real life lasers also tend to fire pulses because continuous beam would melt it. Not to mention it's easier to gather energy for a single strong shot with capacitors and such than it is to output such energy continuously, which would melt battery and wiring, too.
Yup. And that means that something like a multi-laser would look like a flickering beam if there was enough smoke to show it. But because lasers shoot lased light, you wouldn't see it unless there was a lot of moisture in the air (fog basically) or it was shot right into your eye. At the emitter you might see a slight burst of light and energy, and then at the point of impact you'd see the same.
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
Hecaton wrote: I_am_a_Spoon wrote:
According to the 40k Wiki:
"Compared to other infantry weapons, the Pulse Rifle trades rate of fire for damage. When compared to a Space Marine Bolter, it fires at a far slower rate but does significantly more damage and possesses a greater effective range. Pulse Rifles also have significant recoil, which requires that the user be stationary to fire most effectively. This, combined with the Pulse Rifle's long range, means that Tau troops are best served by staying more or less stationary. Pulse Rifles still retain most of their effectiveness on the move nonetheless, and can be utterly devastating weapons when used correctly."
Sounds like the epitome of Heavy 1 to me.
(I might be wrong about past Heavy 1 status; that was based on my own memories from yonks ago).
That's because the old Rapid Fire rules required you to stay stationary to fire at full effect. They have more recoil because boltguns are gyrojet rockets and actually have very low recoil compared to the size of the projectile, since it accelerates all the way to the target. Recoil from plasma based weapons occurs because the magnetic field needed to impel the projectile towards its target pushes back on the weapon as well, creating a recoil effect.
Well Rapid Fire used to benefit from being stationary at long range, but at short range movement didn't matter. Now, going by the decriptions of pulse weapons in the lore, and current rules (where Heavy weapons can actually move and fire, unlike those earlier editions), Heavy 1 fits more appropriately IMO.
And bolters (Astartes ones anyway) supposedly have enough recoil to prohibit regular humans from using them. Combine colossal recoil with gyrojet acceleration and you get an idea of the projectile energies involved.
108295
Post by: kirotheavenger
In most depictions pulse rifles aren't shown to be *slow* to fire, just slower.
Heavy 1 would be way too much.
127462
Post by: Hecaton
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:And bolters (Astartes ones anyway) supposedly have enough recoil to prohibit regular humans from using them. Combine colossal recoil with gyrojet acceleration and you get an idea of the projectile energies involved.
Citation on that? I thought it was just they were big and cumbersome to carry.
126787
Post by: Lord Zarkov
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:Hecaton wrote: I_am_a_Spoon wrote:
According to the 40k Wiki:
"Compared to other infantry weapons, the Pulse Rifle trades rate of fire for damage. When compared to a Space Marine Bolter, it fires at a far slower rate but does significantly more damage and possesses a greater effective range. Pulse Rifles also have significant recoil, which requires that the user be stationary to fire most effectively. This, combined with the Pulse Rifle's long range, means that Tau troops are best served by staying more or less stationary. Pulse Rifles still retain most of their effectiveness on the move nonetheless, and can be utterly devastating weapons when used correctly."
Sounds like the epitome of Heavy 1 to me.
(I might be wrong about past Heavy 1 status; that was based on my own memories from yonks ago).
That's because the old Rapid Fire rules required you to stay stationary to fire at full effect. They have more recoil because boltguns are gyrojet rockets and actually have very low recoil compared to the size of the projectile, since it accelerates all the way to the target. Recoil from plasma based weapons occurs because the magnetic field needed to impel the projectile towards its target pushes back on the weapon as well, creating a recoil effect.
Well Rapid Fire used to benefit from being stationary at long range, but at short range movement didn't matter. Now, going by the decriptions of pulse weapons in the lore, and current rules (where Heavy weapons can actually move and fire, unlike those earlier editions), Heavy 1 fits more appropriately IMO.
And bolters (Astartes ones anyway) supposedly have enough recoil to prohibit regular humans from using them. Combine colossal recoil with gyrojet acceleration and you get an idea of the projectile energies involved.
In 3rd when Tau were introduced Rapid Fire was only 1 shot at 12” if you moved, it wasn’t until 4th that you got 2 shots at 12” regardless.
So Pulse Rifles were much better stationary as they got 1 shot at 30” or 2 at 12” vs only 1 at 12” if they moved.
Incidentally it’s why GW considered the 12” assault 2 shuricats not that much worse than a bolter (or better than the S3 splinter rifle) - rapid fire got 1 shot at double the range if they stayed still, but shuricats got double the shots if they moved.
51866
Post by: Bobthehero
Hecaton wrote: I_am_a_Spoon wrote:And bolters (Astartes ones anyway) supposedly have enough recoil to prohibit regular humans from using them. Combine colossal recoil with gyrojet acceleration and you get an idea of the projectile energies involved.
Citation on that? I thought it was just they were big and cumbersome to carry.
It's hogwash to make the Marines appear cooler, there's examples of people firing Marine bolters with no ill effect other than having to deal with the massive weight (One of them being a pudgy, unaugmented noble of sorts, who fired two rounds from a bolt pistol). And it makes sense, a heavy weapon will have less recoil than a light weapon firing the same round, so a big, beefy Marine bolter made to fit their big armored gauntlets and reinforced so they can smack things without breaking the weapon, would impart less recoil than a human sized one firing a round of the same type.
127462
Post by: Hecaton
Lord Zarkov wrote:
In 3rd when Tau were introduced Rapid Fire was only 1 shot at 12” if you moved, it wasn’t until 4th that you got 2 shots at 12” regardless.
So Pulse Rifles were much better stationary as they got 1 shot at 30” or 2 at 12” vs only 1 at 12” if they moved.
Incidentally it’s why GW considered the 12” assault 2 shuricats not that much worse than a bolter (or better than the S3 splinter rifle) - rapid fire got 1 shot at double the range if they stayed still, but shuricats got double the shots if they moved.
Shurikens should go back to range 24" rapid fire tbh.
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
kirotheavenger wrote:In most depictions pulse rifles aren't shown to be *slow* to fire, just slower.
Heavy 1 would be way too much.
It probably lies somewhere in-between Rapid Fire 1 and Heavy 1, but happy to let this one rest.
Lord Zarkov wrote:In 3rd when Tau were introduced Rapid Fire was only 1 shot at 12” if you moved, it wasn’t until 4th that you got 2 shots at 12” regardless.
So Pulse Rifles were much better stationary as they got 1 shot at 30” or 2 at 12” vs only 1 at 12” if they moved.
Incidentally it’s why GW considered the 12” assault 2 shuricats not that much worse than a bolter (or better than the S3 splinter rifle) - rapid fire got 1 shot at double the range if they stayed still, but shuricats got double the shots if they moved.
I didn't know that, first started playing in 4th. So basically -1 attack at all ranges if you moved? (Not sure why any weapon would get double shots if it moved... what was the rationale there?)
 Bobthehero wrote:Hecaton wrote: I_am_a_Spoon wrote:And bolters (Astartes ones anyway) supposedly have enough recoil to prohibit regular humans from using them. Combine colossal recoil with gyrojet acceleration and you get an idea of the projectile energies involved.
Citation on that? I thought it was just they were big and cumbersome to carry.
It's hogwash to make the Marines appear cooler, there's examples of people firing Marine bolters with no ill effect other than having to deal with the massive weight (One of them being a pudgy, unaugmented noble of sorts, who fired two rounds from a bolt pistol). And it makes sense, a heavy weapon will have less recoil than a light weapon firing the same round, so a big, beefy Marine bolter made to fit their big armored gauntlets and reinforced so they can smack things without breaking the weapon, would impart less recoil than a human sized one firing a round of the same type.
"Hogwash"? Not according to this at least (backed up by this):
"The Space Marines are not the only warriors of the Imperium to carry Boltguns into battle, but the version carried by the Adeptus Astartes, the Mark Vb Godwyn Pattern Boltgun, is by far the largest and most devastating. By comparison, the smaller patterns of boltgun carried by the Adeptus Sororitas or the champions of the Astra Militarum are pale reflections. So large is the Godwyn Pattern that no normal man could heft one, let alone survive its unforgiving recoil."
"Like other Space Marine weaponry, Astartes Bolters are designed to be handled by their superhuman physique. The weight of each Godwyn Pattern Bolter means that most normal humans cannot handle the weapon comfortably without the aid of a supporting brace, and the weapon's handgrips are too large for a mortal to grasp without assistance. However, even if a mortal were to fire the Bolter, the resulting recoil would most likely rip his or her arm from its socket."
"However, the Space Marines wear massive suits of Power Armour that further enhance their already prodigious genetically-enhanced strength and allows them to control the powerful recoil of the weapon."
51866
Post by: Bobthehero
Yeah, as I said, hogwash, there's also lore of regular, unaugmented humans firing a Space Marine boltgun, the weight is the bigger issue, not the recoil.
20mm/.75 cal is nothing to write home about as far as caliber goes, and a gun that weight as much as a general purpose machinegun would kick while firing the round, but none of that overblown flowery text made to make people ''Space Marines are soooo cool''.
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
Bobthehero wrote:Yeah, as I said, hogwash, there's also lore of regular, unaugmented humans firing a Space Marine boltgun, the weight is the bigger issue, not the recoil.
Show me something that trumps what I just posted.
Lolwat? 20mm is a light cannon.
Bobthehero wrote:a gun that weight as much as a general purpose machinegun would kick while firing the round, but none of that overblown flowery text made to make people ''Space Marines are soooo cool''.
Disliking something doesn't magically make you right, you know.
51866
Post by: Bobthehero
20mm is also the caliber of 12 gauge shotguns, and I fired about a hundred of those last month. There's a solid argument to be made bolters don't even need too much recoil, they're rocket bullets, as such, the initial recoil felt to push the bullet outside of the barrel would be minimal, and then the main charge fires. Elephant guns, chambered in .700 are a thing, people don't near smash their shoulders apart when they fire those, and the guns are about .05 of an inch small in caliber than bolters. We also have actual 20mm Anti Material rifle, which are usually fired prone due to their bulk, although people have been fired .50 with little troubles.
Here's a bit from Shadowsword, it's cut because a few things happen between the moment Dostain (an unaugmented noble) picks up a Marine bolt pistol (which would kick massively more than a regular bolt gun, because it's lighter than a normal bolt gun and fires the same round), and fires the first and second shots:
Dostain reached for the bolt pistol with his right hand. It slipped free from its holster easily enough, but he nearly dropped it when he lifted it up. Sized for a Space Marine, the bolt pistol was too massive for a normal man to wield comfortably.
Snip Snip, jumping ahead.
Somehow , Dostain pulled the trigger without yanking the gun off target. The shot rang out.
More cutting extra text, none of which mentions the state of Dostain's arms, or how shattered they are.
'I am Planetary Governor. This is my world' said Dostain , and fired again. The second bolt hit Trastoon in the side, and his sword fell from nerveless fingers
100848
Post by: tneva82
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:
I didn't know that, first started playing in 4th. So basically -1 attack at all ranges if you moved? (Not sure why any weapon would get double shots if it moved... what was the rationale there?)
Well -1 attack if you were rapid fire 1. If you were rapid fire 2 it would be -2 attack(2 if you move, 4 if you were within 12" and didn't move).
And shuriken didn't get double shots as such. It was assault 2 weapon so it fired 2 shots either way. Bolt gun was rapid fire 1 so 2 shots if enemy was within 12" and you didn't move. If you did one shot. 2 shots double to 1.
Assault weapon was more mobile in that it didn't care did you move or not. Rapid fire very much cared
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
Bobthehero wrote:20mm is also the caliber of 12 gauge shotguns, and I fired about a hundred of those last month. There's a solid argument to be made bolters don't even need too much recoil, they're rocket bullets, as such, the initial recoil felt to push the bullet outside of the barrel would be minimal, and then the main charge fires.
Sure, but we're talking about 20mm armour-piercing shells. They need range and penetrating power. Same reason a 7.62mm rifle kicks more than a 9mm handgun, despite the latter being higher calibre.
Looking at something like the Anzio 20mm, it has 4x the muzzle energy of a 12.7mm round fired by a comparable rifle, and probably 15-20x the energy of a 12-gauge shotgun slug. Which is fine, it can be fired by a regular human... but not standing up, unbraced. That's consistent with the boltgun articles I linked earlier. 20mm rifles may not be perfect 1:1 analogues for a boltgun, but they're a good start.
And secondary propulsion is fine, but what if a Khorne Beserker is trying to mash your brains up close? The rounds need to be powerful at any distance.
Plus, if a Marine and their armour can handle huge recoil, why not take advantage of that and crank up the energies involved? That's why Astartes versions are so much bigger and heavier in the first place.
Bobthehero wrote:Shadowsword excerpts
Admittedly he seems to be able to fire the bolt pistol, but it is just a bolt pistol (not a full boltgun), and at the end of the day is contradictory at best... it doesn't invalidate the other core articles.
108295
Post by: kirotheavenger
Personally I wouldn't look too closely at individual exerts from novels - authors are very inconsistent.
My favourite example is from the same book - in one of the Gaunts Ghosts novels one guy catches a lasgun round in the shoulder and it blows his arm off. The next guy catches a round in this throat and survives (albeit with a bionic voicebox later).
You can find some part of some novel to justify just about any particular weapon capability you want.
Personally I believe Space Marine bolters work more like large calibre rifles with a rocket assist for improved performance at range.
IE, the rocket is more the secondary propulsion method.
Whereas human bolters might be slightly lower calibre, rate of fire, and have less initial propellant. All to reduce the size and recoil of the weapon to manageable levels.
95410
Post by: ERJAK
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:Bobthehero wrote:20mm is also the caliber of 12 gauge shotguns, and I fired about a hundred of those last month. There's a solid argument to be made bolters don't even need too much recoil, they're rocket bullets, as such, the initial recoil felt to push the bullet outside of the barrel would be minimal, and then the main charge fires.
Sure, but we're talking about 20mm armour-piercing shells. They need range and penetrating power. Same reason a 7.62mm rifle kicks more than a 9mm handgun, despite the latter being higher calibre.
Looking at something like the Anzio 20mm, it has 4x the muzzle energy of a 12.7mm round fired by a comparable rifle, and probably 15-20x the energy of a 12-gauge shotgun slug. Which is fine, it can be fired by a regular human... but not standing up, unbraced. That's consistent with the boltgun articles I linked earlier. 20mm rifles may not be perfect 1:1 analogues for a boltgun, but they're a good start.
And secondary propulsion is fine, but what if a Khorne Beserker is trying to mash your brains up close? The rounds need to be powerful at any distance.
Plus, if a Marine and their armour can handle huge recoil, why not take advantage of that and crank up the energies involved? That's why Astartes versions are so much bigger and heavier in the first place.
Bobthehero wrote:Shadowsword excerpts
Admittedly he seems to be able to fire the bolt pistol, but it is just a bolt pistol (not a full boltgun), and at the end of the day is contradictory at best... it doesn't invalidate the other core articles.
Everything about this tells me 40k might not be the best fit for you, as far as settings go. 40k is a heavy metal album cover, not a mil-sim. Physics mean nothing, recoil is fake, armor is only as relevant as the plot. Something doesn't make sense? Space magic. Automatically Appended Next Post:  kirotheavenger wrote:Personally I wouldn't look too closely at individual exerts from novels - authors are very inconsistent.
My favourite example is from the same book - in one of the Gaunts Ghosts novels one guy catches a lasgun round in the shoulder and it blows his arm off. The next guy catches a round in this throat and survives (albeit with a bionic voicebox later).
You can find some part of some novel to justify just about any particular weapon capability you want.
Personally I believe Space Marine bolters work more like large calibre rifles with a rocket assist for improved performance at range.
IE, the rocket is more the secondary propulsion method.
Whereas human bolters might be slightly lower calibre, rate of fire, and have less initial propellant. All to reduce the size and recoil of the weapon to manageable levels.
Every gun in the setting fires space magic with some mumbo jumbo to make it sound vaguely plausible. Getting any deeper than that is asking for frustration.
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
ERJAK wrote:
Everything about this tells me 40k might not be the best fit for you, as far as settings go. 40k is a heavy metal album cover, not a mil-sim. Physics mean nothing, recoil is fake, armor is only as relevant as the plot. Something doesn't make sense? Space magic.
I feel like you're telling this to the wrong guy. I want these weapons to feel metal. 
40k is military sci-fi. It's fun to talk and hypothesise about the tech in it. That's half the fun of all science fiction IMO. A boltgun is based on existing firearms. Las, plasma and melta weapons try fairly hard to align themselves within the realm of scientific possibility (if not probability). So do most non-Imperial weapons (Tau, Tyranid, Eldar, etc). Not to say there isn't space magic and handwavium aplenty, but there are also practical concepts that aren't too hard to visualise in reality.
51866
Post by: Bobthehero
ERJAK wrote:
Everything about this tells me 40k might not be the best fit for you, as far as settings go. 40k is a heavy metal album cover, not a mil-sim. Physics mean nothing, recoil is fake, armor is only as relevant as the plot. Something doesn't make sense? Space magic.
Then space magic means bolters don't kick back and don't break arms, I guess. And you can drop the condescending '' 40k isn't for you'' bit.
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:Bobthehero wrote:
Bobthehero wrote:Shadowsword excerpts
Admittedly he seems to be able to fire the bolt pistol, but it is just a bolt pistol (not a full boltgun), and at the end of the day is contradictory at best... it doesn't invalidate the other core articles.
Which only supports my argument, bolt pistols fire regular bolt rounds, and would be lighter, and therefore kick more, than a full sized bolter.
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
Bobthehero wrote:I_am_a_Spoon wrote:
Admittedly he seems to be able to fire the bolt pistol, but it is just a bolt pistol (not a full boltgun), and at the end of the day is contradictory at best... it doesn't invalidate the other core articles.
Which only supports my argument, bolt pistols fire regular bolt rounds, and would be lighter, and therefore kick more, than a full sized bolter.
As a counterpoint, how much additional recoil would the longer barrel of a boltgun produce? I.e. more length for the bolt's primary propellant to accelerate it within the barrel and exert an opposing force on the gun.
51866
Post by: Bobthehero
My guess would be that it wouldn't matter as much, a bolter has much more mass over the pistol. Compare a .50 Beowulf and a .500 S&W, one is fired from a full sized rifle, the other from a revolver, the rifle takes in the recoil a lot better. I've seen people fire the Beowulf full auto, meanwhile, I know from personal experience that a S&W .500 requires a certain moment to recover after shooting, it's not long, but it's certainly more unpleasant to shoot than other big guns.
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
Is that just how much the weapon bucks off-target though, or how much actual force is imparted back into the firer?
The wikis clearly state that Astartes boltguns are outright dangerous for regular humans to fire due to their recoil. I assume that the excerpt from the book was an oversight, or that bolt pistols impart less force despite firing the same round.
51866
Post by: Bobthehero
A bit of both, short barreled rifles have a tendency to kick more, there's less weight to absorb recoil. It's the same principle with a bolt pistol vs a bolt, I am just chalking it to GW writers not knowing squat about guns in general and just writing up bit of lore that sound cool but don't work at all.
108295
Post by: kirotheavenger
I disagree - I find the idea that Astartes bolters kick much harder than human bolters entirely reasonable.
It's like saying a battletank cannon kicks harder than a rifle. Of course it does, it's defined to be carried by a battle tank!
I think it's novels like Shadowsword that is the fault of writers not knowing or caring about the lore and picking what sounds good for their story.
51866
Post by: Bobthehero
Kicking harder is fine. It's a bigger round (but then again, the weapon is bigger, and thus would lessen the recoil felt), I just disagree with the whole breaking an arm or a shoulder off thing, which just sounds hyperbolic and senseless.
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
That is what the wikis describe happening though.
51866
Post by: Bobthehero
And I have an example that is the ideal conditions for such to happens that says otherwise.
83210
Post by: Vankraken
The biggest problem for a non power armored human using a bolter would be the lack of a stock on the weapon. It would have absolutely terrible recoil control and aiming the thing (especially after the first shot) would be borderline impossible.
The mechanics of the bolter rounds is like a hybrid of a bullet and an RPG where the initial charge expels the round down the barrel but the rocket propellant kicks in to drive it the rest of the way. At .75 cal its basically slightly smaller than a 20mm grenade which can be fired from a rifle (either as its own sort of weapon system or as an underslung weapon). Doing some googling, some reference material said a SM bolter is around 40lbs and somebody calculated the force of a bolter around to be just under 30k joules of force. I suspect the travel speed that they used is slower than what a bolter round would probably be doing but a bolter is also rocket propelled with that calculated joule force being on the receiving end and not the pre-rocket assisted force. S I would say that 30K joules of force out the barrel is probably a decent baseline. With that as a rough ballpark, there is video of somebody firing a PTRS-41 (38lb gun with a 14.5mm bullet that expels about 30k joules of force) from the shoulder which isn't causing any immediate harm to the user.
Now this is obviously with a gun that probably has a better muzzle brake than what a SM bolter looks to have and (most importantly) has a stock to disperse the recoil force to the shoulder/torso. SM bolters lack a stock and are relatively short barreled impractical monstrosities of ergonomics so its probably more likely that the weapon would cause arm/wrist injury compared to a proper shoulder fired rifle design.
I have zero clue how the non SM bolters are somehow safer when they are supposedly a fraction of the weight but firing a bolter round with the same amount of lethality. Only way it would work is if they somehow made special ammo that was much weaker initial discharge and relied much more on the rocket propulsion to achieve the same amount of force delivery to the target. Then if that is the case then why not just do that for all bolter rounds?
As for the OP topic. Pulse weapons are suppose to be a similar sort of tech to plasma weapons but not the same level of oomph as the plasma used by the IoM or even the Tau's actual proper plasma weapons (which their proper plasma weapons are designed to be slightly less destructive with the trade off being that it doesn't kill the user).
108295
Post by: kirotheavenger
What's the basis for saying human bolters fire the same rounds? Just that they're both S4 AP0 in 40k?
I've always just put that down to rounding in the game stats. In the RPGs Space Marine bolters are more powerful iirc and they're often described as being more powerful.
62565
Post by: Haighus
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:
Tau have actual plasma rifles, and they're more powerful than Imperial plasma guns (higher Strength, AP, and Damage... 1 Damage higher than even supercharged plasma guns).
When did this change? For many editions Imperial plasma guns were S7 AP2 Gets hot! (so dangerous), and Tau plasma rifles were S6 AP2 without exploding on 1's. The trade-off was supposed to be lower damage for safety, even though Tau plasma weapons were larger than plasma guns.
108295
Post by: kirotheavenger
Tau plasma rifles changed as of the recent 9th ed codex.
They're now Assault 1, 30", S8, AP4, Dmg 3.
This profile is quite different from their old profile and plasma guns in general.
So they hit a lot harder, but are lower rate of fire. This was presumably done to differentiate them from the Cyclic Ion Blasters, which now essentially have the same sort of profile as Imperial plasma (S7/D1 or S8/D2 gets hot).
62565
Post by: Haighus
kirotheavenger wrote:Tau plasma rifles changed as of the recent 9th ed codex.
They're now Assault 1, 30", S8, AP4, Dmg 3.
This profile is quite different from their old profile and plasma guns in general.
So they hit a lot harder, but are lower rate of fire. This was presumably done to differentiate them from the Cyclic Ion Blasters, which now essentially have the same sort of profile as Imperial plasma (S7/D1 or S8/D2 gets hot).
Huh, I see. I think I would have preferred it if they had made them more like Starcannons but anyhow. I suppose Tau plasma rifles are more equivalent to plasma cannons being larger weapons carried by exosuits and vehicles, so making them into anti-materiel rifles does work.
21358
Post by: Dysartes
...whichever member(s) of the 40k Design Team has a hard-on for anime mecha really needs escorting from the building.
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
Guess they made a breakthrough somewhere/found the on switch for their plasma rifles.
Bobthehero wrote:And I have an example that is the ideal conditions for such to happens that says otherwise.
1. A bolt pistol, not a full-sized boltgun.
2. One random excerpt from one random novel, as opposed to central wiki articles that support my argument.
Also Astartes bolt weapons are supposed to be gene-encoded to their firer... a fact the writer also overlooked (unless I'm missing something?).
Vankraken wrote:Doing some googling, some reference material said a SM bolter is around 40lbs and somebody calculated the force of a bolter around to be just under 30k joules of force. I suspect the travel speed that they used is slower than what a bolter round would probably be doing but a bolter is also rocket propelled with that calculated joule force being on the receiving end and not the pre-rocket assisted force. S I would say that 30K joules of force out the barrel is probably a decent baseline.
This one? Yeah, the muzzle velocity does seem a bit low.
He also could have factored in weapons like the Anzio 20mm I mentioned above, which fires a 20mm armour-piercing round that doesn't seem too dissimilar to how a 19mm bolter round might behave. That rifle fires at ~65,000 joules: about 4x the muzzle energy of a comparable 12.7mm rifle like the Barrett. A regular human can fire it... but not standing up, and it does need to be braced. That seems to gel pretty well with the wiki articles on bolters:
"The weight of each Godwyn Pattern Bolter means that most normal humans cannot handle the weapon comfortably without the aid of a supporting brace, and the weapon's handgrips are too large for a mortal to grasp without assistance. However, even if a mortal were to fire the Bolter, the resulting recoil would most likely rip his or her arm from its socket."
Vankraken wrote:I have zero clue how the non SM bolters are somehow safer when they are supposedly a fraction of the weight but firing a bolter round with the same amount of lethality.
They're much weaker than full-sized Astartes bolters in the lore, but tabletop doesn't reflect that.
"The Space Marines are not the only warriors of the Imperium to carry Boltguns into battle, but the version carried by the Adeptus Astartes, the Mark Vb Godwyn Pattern Boltgun, is by far the largest and most devastating. By comparison, the smaller patterns of boltgun carried by the Adeptus Sororitas or the champions of the Astra Militarum are pale reflections. So large is the Godwyn Pattern that no normal man could heft one, let alone survive its unforgiving recoil."
Vankraken wrote:As for the OP topic. Pulse weapons are suppose to be a similar sort of tech to plasma weapons but not the same level of oomph as the plasma used by the IoM or even the Tau's actual proper plasma weapons (which their proper plasma weapons are designed to be slightly less destructive with the trade off being that it doesn't kill the user).
Well the wiki articles on pulse weapons have this to say:
"Pulse Weapon rounds do a great deal of damage on impact, mostly due to the extreme thermal energy of the plasma mass and the speed with which the projectile impacts, which helps ensure that armoured targets are more heavily damaged."
That sounds a lot like conventional 40k plasma weaponry to me (if a lighter version of it). Would love to see some AP on pulse rifles/carbines/etc.
And yeah, as stated above, GW dropped that angle for Tau plasma. Now it's just straight up way more powerful that Imperial plasma.
51866
Post by: Bobthehero
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:Guess they made a breakthrough somewhere/found the on switch for their plasma rifles.
Bobthehero wrote:And I have an example that is the ideal conditions for such to happens that says otherwise.
1. A bolt pistol, not a full-sized boltgun.
2. One random excerpt from one random novel, as opposed to central wiki articles that support my argument.
Also Astartes bolt weapons are supposed to be gene-encoded to their firer... a fact the writer also overlooked (unless I'm missing something?).
A boltpistol would kick far more than a boltgun. See a SW 500 vs a Beowulf .50, similar rounds, one from a pistol and the other from a rifle. The exerpt is actually a description of an event that is happening, the wiki quote is just fluff, there's no proof it's even the truth to begin with (theory vs practice) let alone using a wiki as a source over an actual novel.
Never heard of the gene coded thing, I can think of another example of a Guardsman firing a dead Marine weapon, but that one has a cybernetic arm, so it obviously doesn't shatter, but there's no gene coding or security system to prevent him from shooting the boltgun.
124882
Post by: Gadzilla666
A bolter round is not the 40k equivalent to the a 20mm cannon. That would be an autocannon.
51866
Post by: Bobthehero
I've assumed autocannons are 40+ mm like the BOFORS and the likes, considering a Heavy Bolter is a 25mm weapon, the same caliber as many modern IFV main gun.
124882
Post by: Gadzilla666
Bobthehero wrote:I've assumed autocannons are 40+ mm like the BOFORS and the likes, considering a Heavy Bolter is a 25mm weapon, the same caliber as many modern IFV main gun.
Bolters are .75 caliber, slightly smaller than my 10 Guage shotgun. If bolters were firing shells the size of a 20mm cannon then the magazines on every model, and in every piece of artwork are too short. And even if they were lengthened, they'd only hold about 5 rounds. Not good for a select fire infantry assault weapon.
51866
Post by: Bobthehero
On that we fully agree.
62565
Post by: Haighus
Yeah, bolter rounds have very different proportions to anti-materiel rounds, and are shaped much more similarly to the 25mm grenade launcher rounds used in the OICW/XM25. I think that is a better starting point for comparisons.
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
Bobthehero wrote: I_am_a_Spoon wrote:Guess they made a breakthrough somewhere/found the on switch for their plasma rifles.
Bobthehero wrote:And I have an example that is the ideal conditions for such to happens that says otherwise.
1. A bolt pistol, not a full-sized boltgun.
2. One random excerpt from one random novel, as opposed to central wiki articles that support my argument.
Also Astartes bolt weapons are supposed to be gene-encoded to their firer... a fact the writer also overlooked (unless I'm missing something?).
A boltpistol would kick far more than a boltgun. See a SW 500 vs a Beowulf .50, similar rounds, one from a pistol and the other from a rifle. The exerpt is actually a description of an event that is happening, the wiki quote is just fluff, there's no proof it's even the truth to begin with (theory vs practice) let alone using a wiki as a source over an actual novel.
Never heard of the gene coded thing, I can think of another example of a Guardsman firing a dead Marine weapon, but that one has a cybernetic arm, so it obviously doesn't shatter, but there's no gene coding or security system to prevent him from shooting the boltgun.
The wikis reference official sources, which in my mind take precedence (or are at the very least, are as credible as a random novelist). Scroll down each page.
Unlike Astartes bolters, the use of bolt pistols by regular humans is fairly commonplace. With full boltguns, it's clear from these articles that Astartes versions are much larger and more powerful than human-sized ones... however it seems less definitive with bolt pistols. They might be smaller for regular human use, they might not be. They might fire a cartridge with less propellent (which would explain their shorter range), they might not.
Gadzilla666 wrote: A bolter round is not the 40k equivalent to the a 20mm cannon. That would be an autocannon.
Regular bolter rounds are literally 19mm, lol. And a heavy bolter round is .998 calibre, or 25.35mm... significantly larger than a 20mm round.
The articles on autocannons don't really specify any calibers (they probably vary quite a bit), but as suggested by Bob above, 20mm would probably be the lower limit rather than the norm. There are plenty of 30mm and 40mm historical/modern cannons that would fit the criteria. I've even seen 40k autocannons described as "similar to twentieth-century tank guns"... the calibers of which can go anywhere up to 105/120/125mm (although I think that was in Rogue Trader).
Gadzilla666 wrote:If bolters were firing shells the size of a 20mm cannon then the magazines on every model, and in every piece of artwork are too short. And even if they were lengthened, they'd only hold about 5 rounds. Not good for a select fire infantry assault weapon.
Probably worth noting that they're supposed to be caseless IIRC? And models aren't necessarily consistent with the lore. According to tabletop, Firstborn Marines are Guardsman-sized or shorter with skeleton thighs.
124882
Post by: Gadzilla666
Bolters are .75 caliber, that puts them in between a 12 Guage (.72) and a 10 Guage (.77) shotgun. I'd start at the Frag-12 explosive 12 Guage shotgun round. Though a bolter would probably have a higher velocity and range because of the rocket propelled part of the round.
Edit: @I_am_a_Spoon: You can't judge a round based solely on its bore diameter. .30 Carbine and 30-06 are the same bore diameter. Go Google those, compare the sizes of the cartridges, and their relative power.
51613
Post by: warmaster21
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:kirotheavenger wrote:In most depictions pulse rifles aren't shown to be *slow* to fire, just slower.
Heavy 1 would be way too much.
It probably lies somewhere in-between Rapid Fire 1 and Heavy 1, but happy to let this one rest.
Salvo would be a good weapon type to bring back in that case. Which was a combination of rapid fire and heavy.
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
Haighus wrote:Yeah, bolter rounds have very different proportions to anti-materiel rounds, and are shaped much more similarly to the 25mm grenade launcher rounds used in the OICW/XM25. I think that is a better starting point for comparisons.
Nah, they're more penetrative than a round-nosed projectile like the XM25's. Look how similar their shape is to the 20mm round on the left (excluding the case, bolter rounds are caseless).
Gadzilla666 wrote: Bolters are .75 caliber, that puts them in between a 12 Guage (.72) and a 10 Guage (.77) shotgun. I'd start at the Frag-12 explosive 12 Guage shotgun round. Though a bolter would probably have a higher velocity and range because of the rocket propelled part of the round.
Don't know why people keep picking shotguns as the best analogue for a bolter. Look at the image above, 20mm rounds are a much better match.
124882
Post by: Gadzilla666
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:Gadzilla666 wrote: Bolters are .75 caliber, that puts them in between a 12 Guage (.72) and a 10 Guage (.77) shotgun. I'd start at the Frag-12 explosive 12 Guage shotgun round. Though a bolter would probably have a higher velocity and range because of the rocket propelled part of the round.
Don't know why people keep picking shotguns as the best analogue for a bolter. Look at the image above, 20mm rounds are a much better match.
Because the actual cartridges are closer in size. It has to do with how ballistics work. Again, you can't judge a round based on bore diameter alone.
Edit: Look at your own example picture. That .22 and the 5.56×45mm are the same bore diameter. Do you think they have the same power?
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
Can you please show me an example? Because every pic of a shotgun slug Google gives me looks extremely far removed.
And yes, look at the picture I showed you. The bolt and the 20mm round are near identical in shape (unlike the two rounds you pointed out), and but for the casing on the 20mm round are visually identical. Who knows what kind of primary charge the bolter uses, but it clearly contains enough power to be lethal and penetrating at point-blank range.
It seems strange for you to dismiss my comparison... while spruiking much less similar shotgun shells and airbursting grenades instead.
47547
Post by: CthuluIsSpy
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:Mariongodspeed wrote:Aren't Ion weapons the Tau equivalent of Plasma weapons, not pulse weapons? (stat-wise not lore wise).
Apparently ion weapons function more like particle beam weapons.
Tau have actual plasma rifles, and they're more powerful than Imperial plasma guns (higher Strength, AP, and Damage... 1 Damage higher than even supercharged plasma guns).
Tau plasma is no longer S6?
Ah nevermind, found my answer.
kirotheavenger wrote:Tau plasma rifles changed as of the recent 9th ed codex.
They're now Assault 1, 30", S8, AP4, Dmg 3.
This profile is quite different from their old profile and plasma guns in general.
So they hit a lot harder, but are lower rate of fire. This was presumably done to differentiate them from the Cyclic Ion Blasters, which now essentially have the same sort of profile as Imperial plasma (S7/D1 or S8/D2 gets hot).
Well that's dumb. Tau plasma being weaker but more reliable than Imperial plasma had been a thing for years. Now it's just better.
51866
Post by: Bobthehero
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:
Unlike Astartes bolters, the use of bolt pistols by regular humans is fairly commonplace. With full boltguns, it's clear from these articles that Astartes versions are much larger and more powerful than human-sized ones... however it seems less definitive with bolt pistols. They might be smaller for regular human use, they might not be. They might fire a cartridge with less propellent (which would explain their shorter range), they might not.
It all depends on what this line means: ''A Bolt Pistol magazine carries only 6 to 10 rounds of standard Bolter Ammunition, each weighing about 0.08 kilograms and with a diameter of .75 calibre (19.05 millimetres). '' That's straight from your wiki link. If it's a standard Marine round (which, based on the caliber alone, seems to support that, imo) then the pistol lower range would be explain by the short barrel giving less accuracy and making the weapon less accurate at the range a boltgun would be. Would it mean the difference between a boltgun and a bolt pistol firing the same round be the same gap as a 9mm pistol and a 5.56mm rifle? Unlikely, but we can chalk that one up to GW writers having no clue how guns work.
I also pointed out the existence of a .700 Nitro Express round.
47547
Post by: CthuluIsSpy
Or maybe bolt pistols are just light enough for humans to carry around comfortably?
51866
Post by: Bobthehero
That was a Marine bolt pistol in my exerpt, it's described as heavy and unwieldy, furthermore, as I've said, a lighter weapon shooting the same round as a heavy weapon would result in more felt recoil, as such, everything within that was in favor of the breaking arm/ripping arm of socket thing.
As for what takes priority, I personally go for specifics over broad descriptions.
47547
Post by: CthuluIsSpy
No I meant that perhaps that perhaps there's no human version of bolt pistol because humans can still use it even though its heavy and unwieldy.
If they can avoid having to create a special version of a weapon, then they would, so as to ease logistical and manufacturing burdens.
The Imperium having issues with logistics is a common theme of the setting, after all.
How heavy is a loaded bolt pistol supposed to be anyway?
124882
Post by: Gadzilla666
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:Can you please show me an example? Because every pic of a shotgun slug Google gives me looks extremely far removed.
And yes, look at the picture I showed you. The bolt and the 20mm round are near identical in shape (unlike the two rounds you pointed out), and but for the casing on the 20mm round are visually identical. Who knows what kind of primary charge the bolter uses, but it clearly contains enough power to be lethal and penetrating at point-blank range.
It seems strange for you to dismiss my comparison... while spruiking much less similar shotgun shells and airbursting grenades instead.
You're comparing an entire bolter shell, casing, projectile and all, to just the projectile from the 20mm. The 20mm has way more mass in the projectile, that alone means more power, even if you're assuming that the bolter has some kind of "space magic" propellant inside of it. And I never mentioned "airbursting grenades". You can't just assume that rounds are the same because they "look alike", especially when they don't.
And before you say that bolter shells are "caseless" again: explain the ejection port on every boltgun ever, and both the artwork and fiction that depicts them ejecting casings.
102719
Post by: Gert
Human scale Bolt Pistols are the same as Astartes variants.
As for the part about regular humans finding Astartes Boltguns difficult to use, it comes from Index Astartes III pg.58 according to Lexicanum (which BTW should be used over the 40k Wiki because it actually uses citations). It specifically says difficult though, not impossible. The tradeoff for a human between a Laspistol and Bolt Pistol seems to come down to the Laspistol being weaker but easier to use and the Bolt Pistol being more unwieldy for most users but comes with much greater killing power, as well as the fear factor when in the hands of a Commissar.
62565
Post by: Haighus
 Gert wrote:Human scale Bolt Pistols are the same as Astartes variants.
As for the part about regular humans finding Astartes Boltguns difficult to use, it comes from Index Astartes III pg.58 according to Lexicanum (which BTW should be used over the 40k Wiki because it actually uses citations). It specifically says difficult though, not impossible. The tradeoff for a human between a Laspistol and Bolt Pistol seems to come down to the Laspistol being weaker but easier to use and the Bolt Pistol being more unwieldy for most users but comes with much greater killing power, as well as the fear factor when in the hands of a Commissar.
I second this- Lexicanum is the better wiki.
The model range also supports this somewhat- whilst human bolt pistols come in a variety of sizes and there are smaller ones, the commonest pistols are virtually indistinguishable from Marine pistols. I recently was building a veteran guardsmen confidant for Kill Team, and the GSC cult neophyte bolt pistol, Scion bolt pistol, and Space Marine scout bolt pistol are sized identically and very similar in structure. The Baneblade commander bolt pistol is smaller, but likely represents a finely crafted weapon intended to be handy for tank use.
In another example- a Space Marine gifts their bolt pistol to Inquisitor Eisenhorn, who uses it just fine.
Laspistols do also have a reliability and logistics edge, having rechargeable ammunition.
129388
Post by: Jarms48
Bolts are rocket propelled grenades.
You can see here that the Neopup which is a 20mm grenade launcher has shorter rounds. About the same as 12.7mm
47138
Post by: AnomanderRake
Given that a "pulse rifle" and a "plasma rifle" are distinct weapons with distinct stats is it possible that "plasma" as in "hot ionized gas" in the lore description for pulse rifles doesn't mean exactly the same thing as "plasma" in the name of "plasma rifle"? Perhaps the hot ionized gas from one is hotter than the other. Perhaps the one fires a higher-velocity plasma bolt than the other.
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
Possibly, but there's no indication of that and the wiki specifically mentions its armour-piercing capabilities.
Bobthehero wrote:It all depends on what this line means: ''A Bolt Pistol magazine carries only 6 to 10 rounds of standard Bolter Ammunition, each weighing about 0.08 kilograms and with a diameter of .75 calibre (19.05 millimetres). '' That's straight from your wiki link. If it's a standard Marine round (which, based on the caliber alone, seems to support that, imo) then the pistol lower range would be explain by the short barrel giving less accuracy and making the weapon less accurate at the range a boltgun would be.
Sounds like it does carry proper bolter ammo. The shorter barrel would also give the rounds much less time to accelerate before leaving the muzzle.
Bobthehero wrote:I also pointed out the existence of a .700 Nitro Express round.
I didn't know about that (must have missed your comment). Its energy is definitely much lower. The only things that make me think this isn't a better fit than the 20mm Vulcan is that:
- It's a big game round that isn't designed to penetrate armour (and in fact, wouldn't want to overpenetrate targets).
- It's a bit further away from the calibre of a bolter. The wikipedia article says that one version of the round has 10x the recoil of a Winchester .308?
Gadzilla666 wrote: I_am_a_Spoon wrote:Can you please show me an example? Because every pic of a shotgun slug Google gives me looks extremely far removed.
And yes, look at the picture I showed you. The bolt and the 20mm round are near identical in shape (unlike the two rounds you pointed out), and but for the casing on the 20mm round are visually identical. Who knows what kind of primary charge the bolter uses, but it clearly contains enough power to be lethal and penetrating at point-blank range.
It seems strange for you to dismiss my comparison... while spruiking much less similar shotgun shells and airbursting grenades instead.
You're comparing an entire bolter shell, casing, projectile and all, to just the projectile from the 20mm. The 20mm has way more mass in the projectile, that alone means more power, even if you're assuming that the bolter has some kind of "space magic" propellant inside of it. And I never mentioned "airbursting grenades". You can't just assume that rounds are the same because they "look alike", especially when they don't.
And before you say that bolter shells are "caseless" again: explain the ejection port on every boltgun ever, and both the artwork and fiction that depicts them ejecting casings.
I know my comparison doesn't take the full casing size of a 20mm Vulcan into account, but:
- I was also talking about the shape of the round. Bolter ammo isn't blunt-nosed, it has pointed tips for armour penetration. And if you look at the nose shape of those rounds, they're extremely similar.. because they have the same purpose.
- The full casing size of the 20mm round is just to contain the proplellent. The projectile that strikes a target would be a similar mass (or at least, shape) to a bolter round. My point about handwavium propellent is that the same mass might only require a much smaller volume of 41st- Millennium propellent to accelerate to similar velocities.
My bad about the "airbursting grenade" remark; the comment I was referring to was actually from Haighus.
Jarms48 wrote:
Bolts are rocket propelled grenades.
You can see here that the Neopup which is a 20mm grenade launcher has shorter rounds. About the same as 12.7mm
Well as said above, they're not just rocket-propelled grenades IMO. I think that's an oversimplification. Think higher velocity (the Neopup only fires at 310m/s?), greater penetration, possibly less of an explosion (I certainly don't think a detonating bolter round would have much of a kill radius).
My guess would be somewhere between this and the Vulcan 20mm.
As an aside, that's an extremely cool weapon.
47547
Post by: CthuluIsSpy
 AnomanderRake wrote:Given that a "pulse rifle" and a "plasma rifle" are distinct weapons with distinct stats is it possible that "plasma" as in "hot ionized gas" in the lore description for pulse rifles doesn't mean exactly the same thing as "plasma" in the name of "plasma rifle"? Perhaps the hot ionized gas from one is hotter than the other. Perhaps the one fires a higher-velocity plasma bolt than the other.
Its probably to make the distinction between a "true" plasma weapon (one that uses ionized superheated gas as its primary source of ammunition) and what is basically a rail gun (it uses a magnetic field to propel a projectile at high velocities that just happens to generate plasma due to friction). Didn't the US navy rail gun tests also generate plasma around the projectile?
51866
Post by: Bobthehero
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:Possibly, but there's no indication of that and the wiki specifically mentions its armour-piercing capabilities.
Bobthehero wrote:It all depends on what this line means: ''A Bolt Pistol magazine carries only 6 to 10 rounds of standard Bolter Ammunition, each weighing about 0.08 kilograms and with a diameter of .75 calibre (19.05 millimetres). '' That's straight from your wiki link. If it's a standard Marine round (which, based on the caliber alone, seems to support that, imo) then the pistol lower range would be explain by the short barrel giving less accuracy and making the weapon less accurate at the range a boltgun would be.
Sounds like it does carry proper bolter ammo. The shorter barrel would also give the rounds much less time to accelerate before leaving the muzzle.
[
But the force of the initial explosion to propel the bolt out of the pistol would be the same as that of a bolter, except the pistol is light than the bolt and would thus kick harder than the full sized bolter.
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
CthuluIsSpy wrote: AnomanderRake wrote:Given that a "pulse rifle" and a "plasma rifle" are distinct weapons with distinct stats is it possible that "plasma" as in "hot ionized gas" in the lore description for pulse rifles doesn't mean exactly the same thing as "plasma" in the name of "plasma rifle"? Perhaps the hot ionized gas from one is hotter than the other. Perhaps the one fires a higher-velocity plasma bolt than the other.
Its probably to make the distinction between a "true" plasma weapon (one that uses ionized superheated gas as its primary source of ammunition) and what is basically a rail gun (it uses a magnetic field to propel a projectile at high velocities that just happens to generate plasma due to friction).
Didn't the US navy rail gun tests also generate plasma around the projectile?
I guess that's the main point of contention. I definitely wouldn't call it a typical railgun... the projectile seems to be composed of plasma once it leaves the weapon. Besides, the Tau already have an actual rail rifle, with a different (and somewhat terrifying) profile of R30", Heavy 1, S8, AP4, D3.
What's really intriguing to me though is that "pulse" weapons span an unusual range of AP values (from AP0 on most of the pulse infantry weapons to AP4 on others). I guess this isn't too much different from the range of AP values on las weapons, but that doesn't make much sense either tbh.
The 40k wiki says this:
"The Pulse Rifle works by electromagnetically accelerating a plasma shell down its barrel. In effect, it is a miniature mass accelerator. On firing, a ferromagnetic, solid slug is chambered from the magazine and turned into plasma by electromagnetic induction, as it would be relatively easy to alternate the coil current at frequencies sufficient enough to heat the coil to an extreme temperature while keeping it in the chamber. The solenoid is then charged fully, propelling the newly produced plasma out of the gun at an extreme velocity while keeping it cohesive."
...
Though this electromagnetic field continues to keep the plasma together until impact, residual plasma is expelled from the barrel to produce the weapon's considerable muzzle flash."
...
"Pulse Weapon rounds do a great deal of damage on impact, mostly due to the extreme thermal energy of the plasma mass and the speed with which the projectile impacts, which helps ensure that armoured targets are more heavily damaged. The electromagnetic field that holds the charge together flattens on impact slightly before breaking, which causes the resulting impact to spread over a wider area than would otherwise be possible. The speed at which the plasma projectile is launched is so extreme, that in some cases, it has been known to 'light the air on fire'."
Lexicanum says something a little different:
"It fires a plasma pulse, which is generated when an induction field accelerates a particle which breaks down as it leaves the barrel." ... which makes them a little like ion weapons.
I know people say that Lexicanum is the better wiki, but the former does tend to have more info, and lists its sources at the bottom of each page.
126787
Post by: Lord Zarkov
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:CthuluIsSpy wrote: AnomanderRake wrote:Given that a "pulse rifle" and a "plasma rifle" are distinct weapons with distinct stats is it possible that "plasma" as in "hot ionized gas" in the lore description for pulse rifles doesn't mean exactly the same thing as "plasma" in the name of "plasma rifle"? Perhaps the hot ionized gas from one is hotter than the other. Perhaps the one fires a higher-velocity plasma bolt than the other.
Its probably to make the distinction between a "true" plasma weapon (one that uses ionized superheated gas as its primary source of ammunition) and what is basically a rail gun (it uses a magnetic field to propel a projectile at high velocities that just happens to generate plasma due to friction).
Didn't the US navy rail gun tests also generate plasma around the projectile?
I guess that's the main point of contention. I definitely wouldn't call it a typical railgun... the projectile seems to be composed of plasma once it leaves the weapon. Besides, the Tau already have an actual rail rifle, with a different (and somewhat terrifying) profile of R30", Heavy 1, S8, AP4, D3.
What's really intriguing to me though is that "pulse" weapons span an unusual range of AP values (from AP0 on most of the pulse infantry weapons to AP4 on others). I guess this isn't too much different from the range of AP values on las weapons, but that doesn't make much sense either tbh.
The 40k wiki says this:
"The Pulse Rifle works by electromagnetically accelerating a plasma shell down its barrel. In effect, it is a miniature mass accelerator. On firing, a ferromagnetic, solid slug is chambered from the magazine and turned into plasma by electromagnetic induction, as it would be relatively easy to alternate the coil current at frequencies sufficient enough to heat the coil to an extreme temperature while keeping it in the chamber. The solenoid is then charged fully, propelling the newly produced plasma out of the gun at an extreme velocity while keeping it cohesive."
...
Though this electromagnetic field continues to keep the plasma together until impact, residual plasma is expelled from the barrel to produce the weapon's considerable muzzle flash."
...
"Pulse Weapon rounds do a great deal of damage on impact, mostly due to the extreme thermal energy of the plasma mass and the speed with which the projectile impacts, which helps ensure that armoured targets are more heavily damaged. The electromagnetic field that holds the charge together flattens on impact slightly before breaking, which causes the resulting impact to spread over a wider area than would otherwise be possible. The speed at which the plasma projectile is launched is so extreme, that in some cases, it has been known to 'light the air on fire'."
Lexicanum says something a little different:
"It fires a plasma pulse, which is generated when an induction field accelerates a particle which breaks down as it leaves the barrel." ... which makes them a little like ion weapons.
I know people say that Lexicanum is the better wiki, but the former does tend to have more info, and lists its sources at the bottom of each page.
40k Wiki has more info because it is frequently dubiously sourced and often includes a lot of interpolation or even flat out fan fiction. Yes it lists sources at the bottom, but it’s not uncommon for them to be completely misrepresented. The fact that the inaccurate stuff is liberally mixed it with some direct quotes and also paraphrasing of whole novels doesn’t help either. Great for flavour on a lot of topics, but not really an authoritative source.
Lexicanum is much stricter on accurately presenting what the sources say (hence people say it is the better wiki), but the downside of that is there is less in it. Great for lore discussions (as it is usually very accurate), but fairly restricted in what it actually has.
129552
Post by: Some_Call_Me_Tim
I_am_a_Spoon wrote:ERJAK wrote:
Everything about this tells me 40k might not be the best fit for you, as far as settings go. 40k is a heavy metal album cover, not a mil-sim. Physics mean nothing, recoil is fake, armor is only as relevant as the plot. Something doesn't make sense? Space magic.
I feel like you're telling this to the wrong guy. I want these weapons to feel metal.
40k is military sci-fi. It's fun to talk and hypothesise about the tech in it. That's half the fun of all science fiction IMO. A boltgun is based on existing firearms. Las, plasma and melta weapons try fairly hard to align themselves within the realm of scientific possibility (if not probability). So do most non-Imperial weapons (Tau, Tyranid, Eldar, etc). Not to say there isn't space magic and handwavium aplenty, but there are also practical concepts that aren't too hard to visualise in reality.
You’re the one who wants things to feel metal but then you say ork bullets are supposed to be s3…
I’ve noticed your threads have this sort of inconsistency with stuff like that.
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
 Some_Call_Me_Tim wrote: I_am_a_Spoon wrote:ERJAK wrote:
Everything about this tells me 40k might not be the best fit for you, as far as settings go. 40k is a heavy metal album cover, not a mil-sim. Physics mean nothing, recoil is fake, armor is only as relevant as the plot. Something doesn't make sense? Space magic.
I feel like you're telling this to the wrong guy. I want these weapons to feel metal.
40k is military sci-fi. It's fun to talk and hypothesise about the tech in it. That's half the fun of all science fiction IMO. A boltgun is based on existing firearms. Las, plasma and melta weapons try fairly hard to align themselves within the realm of scientific possibility (if not probability). So do most non-Imperial weapons (Tau, Tyranid, Eldar, etc). Not to say there isn't space magic and handwavium aplenty, but there are also practical concepts that aren't too hard to visualise in reality.
You’re the one who wants things to feel metal but then you say ork bullets are supposed to be s3…
I’ve noticed your threads have this sort of inconsistency with stuff like that.
Shootas? Yep, I did casually suggest that at one point... and now, keep having to explain myself over and over because people don't read my posts properly. Or provide any decent rebuttal other that "boo hoo, you're biased", despite the new profile demonstrably not being a nerf (can't help but notice that you declined to mention all the other factors that made it an overall buff mathematically  ).
As for 'metalness', S3 is the strength at which I picture human limbs potentially being blasted off (aka high-powered bullets, lasguns, etc.). Maybe your head-canon is different.
106383
Post by: JNAProductions
I ran the math.
It’s a nerf against pretty much anything besides T8 models.
47547
Post by: CthuluIsSpy
Yeah, S3 is pretty weak.
Yes, fluff wise S3 is apparently enough to dismember humans.
Game wise S3 is a wet noodle, and keep in mind that whole dismemberment thing is supposed to showcase just how tough some creatures in the 40k setting can be.
26186
Post by: I_am_a_Spoon
JNAProductions wrote:I ran the math.
It’s a nerf against pretty much anything besides T8 models.
Repeating a statement ad infinitum doesn't actually make it true. This is the post of yours I assume you're referring to (I removed the stuff about bolters):  JNAProductions wrote:Against the following profiles, here's how the math shakes out.
MEQ are assumed to have Armor of Contempt, but the T7 and T8 profiles are NOT.
Current Shoota, 2 Shots at BS 5+ S4 AP0 D1
GEQ: .29 damage
MEQ: .11 damage
T7 3+: .07 damage
T8 3+: .04 damage
Current Shoota, 3 Shots at BS 5+ S4 AP0 D1
GEQ: .44 damage
MEQ: .17 damage
T7 3+: .11 damage
T8 3+: .06 damage
Suggested Shoota, 4 Shots at S3 AP0 D1
GEQ: .44 damage or about a 50% improvement at 18", and a statistically insignificant improvement at 9"
MEQ: .15 damage or about a 35% improvement at 18", and a 10% loss at 9"
T7 3+: .07 damage or no change at 18", and a 35% loss at 9"
T8 3+: .07 damage or about a 100% improvement at 18", and a 33% improvement at 9"
Note that the improvement percentages might not match the exact numbers given-that's because of rounding. The percentages should be pretty accurate.
Notice how the Shoota got buffed moderately against GEQ and MEQ at full range. If you got Dakka Range (which you can get from Deepstrike if you're Bad Moons) you're actually LOSING damage.
The only place you do better consistently is against T8 targets, since the reduced Strength is irrelevant. But so is the damage dealt-it would take over 1,000 shots at BS 5+ S3 or S4 AP0 D1 to kill a Knight.
Gaining the most function against T8 3+ targets ≠ being nerfed against others. Not saying it's a straight-up buff either, just that there's way more nuance than you and others keep claiming. The only type of target (out of those above) it definititively didn't get any buff against was the T7 3+ profile. Or maybe if you're Bad Moons? But for every argument about deepstriking into 9" range, there's an opposing argument about the 9"-18" radius actually comprising way more of the weapon's range (a circle with an 18" radius has 4x the area of a circle with a 9" radius, so buffing that 'long range' bracket therefore buffs 75% of the weapon's actual tabletop coverage). I don't hear anybody bringing that up though, strangely enough. 
Also everyone conveniently ignored the buff from Dakka to Assault (or got mad at me because "that's not a buff, it's what it should have been all along"... like wat? Get angry at GW, not me). Being able to advance and fire is the opposite of a nerf, whichever way you look at it.
My own maths, colour-coded to highlight the diffs: I_am_a_Spoon wrote:New shoota:
0.44 wounds vs GEQ ( 50% higher than current shoota at 18", equal at 9").
0.15 wounds vs MEQ ( 33% higher than current shoota at 18", 11% lower at 9").
0.07 wounds vs TEQ ( 33% higher than current shoota at 18", 11% lower at 9").
0.07 wounds vs T7 3+ ( equal to current shoota at 18", 33% lower at 9").
0.07 wounds vs T8 3+ ( 100% higher than current shoota at 18", 33% higher at 9").
If we average out the current shoota's 9" and 18" profiles:
0.37 wounds vs GEQ ( the new shoota is 20% better).
0.14 wounds vs MEQ ( the new shoota is 7% better).
0.07 wounds vs TEQ ( the new shoota is 7% better).
0.09 wounds vs T7 3+ ( the new shoota is 20% worse).
0.05 wounds vs T8 3+ ( the new shoota is 60% better).
Plus it could fire after advancing...
And since this has been dragged into a new thread, I'll clarify again that the original comment was just me casually suggesting an alternative profile for the shoota that I thought would be more fluffy, i.e.:
- More shots.
- Blasted full dakka at any range (none of this 3/2 stuff).
- Would continue to be blasted at full dakka even if the Ork advances (again, none of this 3/2 stuff).
- Bullet impact would probably be similar to a lasgun shot (which in my mind is fairly powerful, even if it doesn't stack up that way in the 40k universe).
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:Yeah, S3 is pretty weak.
Yes, fluff wise S3 is apparently enough to dismember humans.
Game wise S3 is a wet noodle, and keep in mind that whole dismemberment thing is supposed to showcase just how tough some creatures in the 40k setting can be.
It's weaker than higher strengths, sure, but there are multiple stats to any weapon. 100 lasgun hits will wound anything (even without HotE). And if fluff-wise a weapon logically belongs at S3, and with other adjustments can go there without being worse overall (or actually being better), then why not consider it?
|
|
