Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

There will be aspects of this discussed before I guess, but I love the way SM's would be barely able to function effectively due to the design of the power armour.

Just looking at the Dreadknight for example.
He cannot see to the sides as his head is blinkered by the machinery.

His left arm movement would be restricted by his shoulder guard.

Not sure how the pilot's legs operate the machinery. His hips have been excessively and it widened looks painful to me. *winces*

I realise that there will be protestation: It's a fictional game, suspension of etc etc
But sometimes I just wish the rule of cool could actually synthesise with function

And no before any one says it, it doesn't overly bother me, I lose no sleep over this and no, there is no hate.
Just mild amusement.

However the SM stats should be downgraded if WYSIWYG on the basis of what you get doesn't work very well!

Most eldar vehicle guns fire from an off center point... Now that is generally not such a good idea, but if your platform is LEVITATING it means you'll have an ever harder time compensating the recoil.

Not exactly ergonomics, but chainswords, axes, what have you, are probably the worse idea ever... They simply can't withstand impacts, they'll fracture on the first hit...

Oh, and... Plasma. 'nuff said.

GeckoOBac wrote:Most eldar vehicle guns fire from an off center point... Now that is generally not such a good idea, but if your platform is LEVITATING it means you'll have an ever harder time compensating the recoil.

Not exactly ergonomics, but chainswords, axes, what have you, are probably the worse idea ever... They simply can't withstand impacts, they'll fracture on the first hit...

Oh, and... Plasma. 'nuff said.

Who says eldar weapons have recoil at all? Considering how advanced they are, they've probably fixed it...

And that's why the Rule of Cool exists. Otherwise 40k wouldn't work.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

GeckoOBac wrote:Most eldar vehicle guns fire from an off center point... Now that is generally not such a good idea, but if your platform is LEVITATING it means you'll have an ever harder time compensating the recoil.

Not exactly ergonomics, but chainswords, axes, what have you, are probably the worse idea ever... They simply can't withstand impacts, they'll fracture on the first hit...

Oh, and... Plasma. 'nuff said.

Who says eldar weapons have recoil at all? Considering how advanced they are, they've probably fixed it...

Possible, at least for those that fire energy... Though turning a turret with an axis off center is still hard to compensate. Not saying it isn't possible, it's just not wise to do so, so: bad ergonomics.

And yeah ofc rule of cool prevails, not arguing that 40k should be realistic

Saw the new Forgeworld Eldar flyer today which has the big lamce cannon thingy right along side the cockpit
off centre and totally blocking (the starboard iirc) view.

looks cool but would probably annoy the warp out of the pilot
Would have looked equally cool slung underneath though like a WW2 tank buster. Maybe that would be too priapic and bring on a fit of the vapours in the ladies?

All of the observations in this thread are true. That's why I have an army featuring creatures from another dimension, some of which possess vehicles. It's because I'm in it for the realism.

When they killed off Science in the Grim Darkness of the 41st Millennium, they must have gotten her friends Realism, Plausibility and Anatomy.

Gravitic technology exists therefore any load-bearing or weight distribution effects are negligible I'm sure... even for the imperium. I would also imagine that even as 'low-tech' as some things seem on the surface that LOS hinderances would also be compensated for by superior optics, even direct 3d.

I think I read a 40k description long ago where a marine used a holographic control for a vehicle or weapon system. I believe it was a source book I think. I'm sure all the ergonomics can be compensated for in some fashion.

It's far more than just the rule of cool here. It's insinuated that everything at this level of technology takes the form it does because the creators want it to be that way. There are very few or no limitations to design philosophy. Again, even in the Imperium.

Efficiency or physics at this point is not a hinderance to design esthetics.

I mean, why do soldiers need to clean their weapons as is shown at many points at least in the books? Surely they have nano-tech sufficient to handle such mundane tasks. they clean their weapons because they want to is the simple answer. There could be many more examples I'm sure.

I don't think it's the Rule of Cool so much as the Rule of Heavy Metal.

Nope I'm sure anatomy is still alive and kicking... Isn't that the reason for all those bodies found split open or in multiple pieces?

Everybody, everywhere shoots from the hip. Some Guardsmen aim down their sights, but almost every model has their gun at waist level.

However the SM stats should be downgraded if WYSIWYG on the basis of what you get doesn't work very well!

+1 from me for that suggestion!^^

vik

How about bolters having no stock?

Also pulse rifles with sights on the outside of the gun, away from the shooter's eyes?

Orks full stop. They're basically a walking lampshade of the issue XD

snake wrote:How about bolters having no stock?

Also pulse rifles with sights on the outside of the gun, away from the shooter's eyes?

Please don't mention bolters...
Many people have died over that argument...

the old 2E bolters had stocks. you had to cut them off to get the model to fit, it was the most pointless thing ever.

how about the fact that lasguns have stocks even though they almost certainly wouldn't have recoil? (although i suppose a stock can be used to other things...)

the other thing that gets to me - it doesn't occur in 40K so this is a general rant, but it is something that appears occasionally in science fiction - when people say "laser rifle". a rifle is so-called because the inside of the barrel is rifled, imparting spin on the projectile when it's fired, making it accurate. a laser weapon would need no such feature, therefore a "laser rifle" would not exist.

snake wrote:Also pulse rifles with sights on the outside of the gun, away from the shooter's eyes?

Given the fact that apparently everybody is shooting from the hip, this bears absolutely no weight

GeckoOBac wrote:

snake wrote:Also pulse rifles with sights on the outside of the gun, away from the shooter's eyes?

Given the fact that apparently everybody is shooting from the hip, this bears absolutely no weight

Given the fact that each model supposedly represents only a point in time of a battle then anything about stance or position is irrelevant.
And it makes sense for Tau firewarriors to have some kind of HuD linked to their weapons sights making it pointless to shoot down the sights anyway.

In this universe human lives are considered worth less than the ammo rounds you spent. I think they'd be more concerned with the comfort of their weapons rather than the operators

I liked how the old DE models would poke their own eyes out on their pauldrons, if they lifted their arms. Hell if you just trip and fall on to your kabalite friend chances are his cod pice would impale you.

Plasma guns would make a little more sense if it worked more like a flame thrower, just spraying plasma everywhere.

Death by codpiece
What a way to go!
Though I guess it all depends whose codpiece pricks your heart

The Emperor's will guids the rounds to their target.

seejay wrote:
the other thing that gets to me - it doesn't occur in 40K so this is a general rant, but it is something that appears occasionally in science fiction - when people say "laser rifle". a rifle is so-called because the inside of the barrel is rifled, imparting spin on the projectile when it's fired, making it accurate. a laser weapon would need no such feature, therefore a "laser rifle" would not exist.

because "Laser Rifle" rolls off the tongue better than "Laser Smoothbore" or "Laser Beam Shootery Thing of Death" (not relevant in 40k). Anyway, the word "rifle" refers more to its length these days. Rifling is so common, anything that isn't rifled is referred to as a smoothbore. The more appropriate name, given the current enthusiasm for acronyms and names that have to accurately pigeon hole what it is, would be something along the lines of "Man-Portable Energy Based Assault Weapon", and that just sounds plain stupid. Feel free to make up more.

Oh yeah, anyone with SM wet dreams should check this out

Laser machine gun sounds pretty badass. Or just Lasergun. Or lasgun.

*feels witty yet oddly trollish*

We already had the lasgun/lasrifle debate elsewhere so we needn't rebore that particular barrel again.











(but it's not a rifle)
tum te tum te diddly dee

purplefood wrote:

GeckoOBac wrote:

snake wrote:Also pulse rifles with sights on the outside of the gun, away from the shooter's eyes?

Given the fact that apparently everybody is shooting from the hip, this bears absolutely no weight

Given the fact that each model supposedly represents only a point in time of a battle then anything about stance or position is irrelevant.
And it makes sense for Tau firewarriors to have some kind of HuD linked to their weapons sights making it pointless to shoot down the sights anyway.

Now don't you start making sense!

We are the ones being hood winked
oh sorry HUD Linked

getting old, hearing is going.
brain already gone

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:Death by codpiece
What a way to go!
Though I guess it all depends whose codpiece pricks your heart

thats downright nasty and naughty... behave...

papathrax wrote:because "Laser Rifle" rolls off the tongue better than "Laser Smoothbore" or "Laser Beam Shootery Thing of Death" (not relevant in 40k). Anyway, the word "rifle" refers more to its length these days. Rifling is so common, anything that isn't rifled is referred to as a smoothbore. The more appropriate name, given the current enthusiasm for acronyms and names that have to accurately pigeon hole what it is, would be something along the lines of "Man-Portable Energy Based Assault Weapon", and that just sounds plain stupid. Feel free to make up more.

I'm sure there are many justifications that could be dreamt up to defend the term. Such as, for example, the fact that antiquated military terms are often kept in use for purposes of tradition rather than their descriptive powers. E.g., the British army still deploys troops called "lancers" who are referred to as "cavalry", even though in these modern times they neither carry lances nor ride horses, but are in fact a mechanized infantry unit.

But my rant was based on the fact that it offends my sense of aesthetics. It's like when people say "PIN number". It annoys the hell out of me.