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.

Ever seen nids sharpening a talon? or a daemon? And ever seen either one get an infection?

So what?
Moot point!
I´we never seen a marine change bolter magazines for that matter so it proves absolutely nothing.

Soladrin wrote:Ever seen nids sharpening a talon? or a daemon? And ever seen either one get an infection?

Now you are doing the same as the other guy.

You have taken the game rules, extrapolated them into reality, and said that reality reflects the game so the game must be right.

the point made a little way back was best.

The development of body armor has a major effect on if close combat is utilized as a main way of battle.

At this moment in time (2010) Body armor is ineffective against most Military grade firearms. Body armor focuses on making wounds less severe and even then only works on low powered weaponry(pistols, glancing shots, Grenades(in some cases)

Fast Forward to the 41st millenium. Space Marines have the best armor avaliable, they don't need to worry about ranged weapons. Why do they use bolters instead of chainswords as standard armorment. Because they are immune to small arms fire (exaggeration yes, but generally true) they will shoot you from a safe distance not up close where a chink may be exploited.

T'au have a different approach. They abhore close combat and so develop high powered ranged weaponry and a type of armor only slightly worse then the space marine. they know they are vulnerable to CC and so fight in the element that is better for them.

If the space marine fights a fire warrior he will think. I am super strong and while my armor may protect me that FWs gun is better then mine so i should probably fight him up close and punch him instead of playing his game and shooting him.

I could advance arguments against your SM theory, however I will just ask why Orks are so keen on melee when they have crappy armour.

I think making it an issue of armor is going down the wrong path. In general, a projectile like a firearm is going to have a lot more ability to pierce a whatever than a blade is going to (power weaponry excepted, of course).

What I think those arguing for melee weapons are neglecting is a look at the results of piercing weaponry and slashing weaponry on the actual body of the target. A bullet usually kills by piercing vital organ, or by putting someone into shock. There have been many incidents, though, of regular humans (possibly on drugs of some sort) taking quite a few shots without dying. When you extend this to something like orks, necrons, or tyranids, you can see that causing death through the piercing of vital organs is going to be a lot more difficult than doing so would be against a human (and they're probably not going to go into shock or bleed out at all).

A choppa, however, or a chainsword might have no more ability to actually kill this type of enemy, but more ability to disable them (through severing limbs and so forth), and to defend yourself against them (by knocking away their close combat weapons). This is hardly going to be enough to make melee weapons amazing, but I think it's one thing going for them.

I could advance arguments against your SM theory, however I will just ask why Orks are so keen on melee when they have crappy armour.

Orks are super tough, dont care about shot of limbs and most important of all, there is a nearly limitless supply of them.

So when you have a raging, fearless horde that just doesnt give a damn about bullets that would mow down guardsmen and it almost without numbers, well...

Kilkrazy wrote:

Soladrin wrote:Ever seen nids sharpening a talon? or a daemon? And ever seen either one get an infection?

Now you are doing the same as the other guy.

You have taken the game rules, extrapolated them into reality, and said that reality reflects the game so the game must be right.

No, I haven't. What part of an Infection is even present in the rules? I base this on novel's i've read. Daemons don't even abide by the rules of our plane so it's impossible to even explain them with logic, Nids are from a different galaxy and they are bred to be and remain deadly and utilize poison, acid and other such things as weapons, i doubt they will fall prey to gangreen....

Novels used for explaining things is very thin ice to thread!
Remember, in one novel marines are treated like big humans with cardboard armour while in another five can take over an entire fully manned emperor class battleship.
Its pure folly to take novel examples.
If anything written in story form is ever to be taken it has to be pure GW canon fluff from rulebooks, codexes or IA, those are fairly consistent and written by the very source of the fluff.

Soladrin wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

Soladrin wrote:Ever seen nids sharpening a talon? or a daemon? And ever seen either one get an infection?

Now you are doing the same as the other guy.

You have taken the game rules, extrapolated them into reality, and said that reality reflects the game so the game must be right.

No, I haven't. What part of an Infection is even present in the rules?

What part of running out of ammo is even present in the rules?

Kilkrazy wrote:

Soladrin wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

Soladrin wrote:Ever seen nids sharpening a talon? or a daemon? And ever seen either one get an infection?

Now you are doing the same as the other guy.

You have taken the game rules, extrapolated them into reality, and said that reality reflects the game so the game must be right.

No, I haven't. What part of an Infection is even present in the rules?

What part of running out of ammo is even present in the rules?

None either, because typically it's small engagements. Anyhow, this discussion seems a little pointless... I mean no one seems to accepting anyones arguments. Point is, 40k isn't logical...

Soladrin wrote:Ever seen nids sharpening a talon? or a daemon? And ever seen either one get an infection?

Did see a nurgle themed nid army once, surely they have an infection?

Kilkrazy wrote:I will just ask why Orks are so keen on melee when they have crappy armour.

A mixture of stupidity and religion (ironically redundant...)

It's obvious that orks are stupid, they make no claim to be otherwise, their gods Gork and Mork are similar to Khorne in that they demand you kill your enemy with your fist if you can, and also, orks use Teeth for currency, so effectively, for them, melee combat is an ATM.

Daemon-Archon Ren wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:I will just ask why Orks are so keen on melee when they have crappy armour.

A mixture of stupidity and religion (ironically redundant...)

It's obvious that orks are stupid, they make no claim to be otherwise, their gods Gork and Mork are similar to Khorne in that they demand you kill your enemy with your fist if you can, and also, orks use Teeth for currency, so effectively, for them, melee combat is an ATM.

Only Ork Teeth. human teeth are too fidly.

Did see a nurgle themed nid army once, surely they have an infection?

I keep asking myself: How come no commander ever shelled nurgle armies that he fought, with soap?
I know I would.

And ork armies with plant/algae poison gas?
Its even working in one occurrence in the fluff for crying out.

in 2nd ed. Orks were nice and invulnerable to a little gas/weed killer. It was fun to watch whole units get zapped-unless you were the ork player of course.

Frazzled wrote:in 2nd ed. Orks were nice and invulnerable to a little gas/weed killer. It was fun to watch whole units get zapped-unless you were the ork player of course.

Curse you and your virus grenade!

Soladrin wrote:
Only Ork Teeth. human teeth are too fidly.

It's small change

I never really thought of ork society where a smile is an invitation to a mugging

Andrew

Most people do not die instantly when shot or struck; that is to say, the blow itself does not kill you. You die from the secondary effects. In the case of modern firearms, this means hydrostatic shock and bleed-out; this can be extrapolated to energy weapons, which would vaporize some portion of flesh (magnifying the shock effect but also cauterizing the wound and lessening bleeding), and explosive rounds like bolter shells.

However, the majority of warriors in 40k are basically immune to these secondary effects, which drastically lowers the efficiency of ranged weapons.

Space Marines are genetically engineered to ignore pain, have multiply-redundant organs, blood that coagulates instantly, hyper-tough bones, best armour known to Man, and so on and so forth. Basically, they won't bleed out and they won't die from shock unless you literally score a direct hit with an artillery shell, and the direct damage of the shot itself is also lessened a great deal. Since even high-powered weapons actually make relatively small holes, a Space Marine will probably still be functional even after taking a LOT of hits from a lasgun. This means they can still shoot at you, still move, etc, and if they can still do all that, all your fire has accomplished nothing.

An Ork is basically the same, but not quite as much so and without the armour. Also, there are a bajillion times more of them.

A Chaos Space Marine is a Space Marine, but spiky and, perhaps, horrifically mutated into something even tougher.

Daemons ignore the laws of reality, and as such are not subject to petty things like shock and blood loss.

A Tyranid is a mindless predator, forced forward by a psychic compulsion which will not allow it to stop while it lives. Even modern-day terrestrial predators can show a remarkable faculty for ignoring pain and injury when enraged; Tyranids would be even worse.

Against all of these things, small arms fire would be fairly ineffective. Ork codex fluff, as an example, talks about an Ork assault on an Imperial position. The lasfire is really more an annoyance than anything else; every now and then an Ork falls from a lucky shot, but really the Orks are capable of largely ignoring it. To a race of inhuman monsters tough enough to survive decapitation long enough for a full-body transplant to take hold (once again, codex fluff), little cauterized holes simply aren't very threatening.


A bladed weapon, however, does damage of a more effective kind. Why? Because it does NOT make a small hole. A strong slash from a bladed weapon, or a strong thrust from a piercing weapon (such as a bayonet) will, assuming it gets through armour, rip up muscle fibers, nick bones, and cut tendons, all of which degrade the effectiveness of a fighter even if they don't actually kill him. An Ork or Space Marine who has just taken a bayonet through the shoulder is much worse off than one who has taken a lasbolt in the shoulder, because they probably cannot use that arm very well. In neither case are they in any danger of death, but the bayonet lowers their effectiveness more than the lasgun.

Then we come to the subject of power weapons/fists. One argument I've seen here is "if you can do it to a blade, you can do it to a bullet". Well, maybe. Power weapons have to be powered BY something; that is, they have an energy source built in. It's difficult to build an effective energy source into a bullet. And when the Imperium DOES apply power-weapon equivalent tech to ranged weapons, we end up with plasma guns. Unfortunately, we can't give everyone a plasma gun, meaning small-arms remain ineffective against the kind of monstrous opponents you face out in the galaxy of 40k.

This also goes further to explain why many elite troops (such as Space Marines) prefer close-combat; they have access to things like power weapons and power fists. This makes them incredibly potent in close combat, because they can ignore all that stuff about shock and bleed-out and tearing muscles and just cut people in half with a flick of the wrist. However, it does exactly jack squat good at any distance longer than arm's reach. Ergo, we want to get within arm's reach, so we can deal out the pain with our glowing blades of death.

In addition, being in close combat is paradoxically excellent protection for elite troops. A single Space Marine can probably bludgeon ten or twenty humans to death with his bare hands, while his armour makes him basically immune to their counter-attacks, and while he's doing that he's got a meat-shield in between himself and any nasty armor-piercing heavy weapons the enemy might be trying to bring to bear.

BeRzErKeR wrote:
Most people do not die instantly when shot or struck; that is to say, the blow itself does not kill you. You die from the secondary effects. In the case of modern firearms, this means hydrostatic shock and bleed-out; this can be extrapolated to energy weapons, which would vaporize some portion of flesh (magnifying the shock effect but also cauterizing the wound and lessening bleeding), and explosive rounds like bolter shells.

However, the majority of warriors in 40k are basically immune to these secondary effects, which drastically lowers the efficiency of ranged weapons.

Space Marines are genetically engineered to ignore pain, have multiply-redundant organs, blood that coagulates instantly, hyper-tough bones, best armour known to Man, and so on and so forth. Basically, they won't bleed out and they won't die from shock unless you literally score a direct hit with an artillery shell, and the direct damage of the shot itself is also lessened a great deal. Since even high-powered weapons actually make relatively small holes, a Space Marine will probably still be functional even after taking a LOT of hits from a lasgun. This means they can still shoot at you, still move, etc, and if they can still do all that, all your fire has accomplished nothing.

An Ork is basically the same, but not quite as much so and without the armour. Also, there are a bajillion times more of them.

A Chaos Space Marine is a Space Marine, but spiky and, perhaps, horrifically mutated into something even tougher.

Daemons ignore the laws of reality, and as such are not subject to petty things like shock and blood loss.

A Tyranid is a mindless predator, forced forward by a psychic compulsion which will not allow it to stop while it lives. Even modern-day terrestrial predators can show a remarkable faculty for ignoring pain and injury when enraged; Tyranids would be even worse.

Against all of these things, small arms fire would be fairly ineffective. Ork codex fluff, as an example, talks about an Ork assault on an Imperial position. The lasfire is really more an annoyance than anything else; every now and then an Ork falls from a lucky shot, but really the Orks are capable of largely ignoring it. To a race of inhuman monsters tough enough to survive decapitation long enough for a full-body transplant to take hold (once again, codex fluff), little cauterized holes simply aren't very threatening.


A bladed weapon, however, does damage of a more effective kind. Why? Because it does NOT make a small hole. A strong slash from a bladed weapon, or a strong thrust from a piercing weapon (such as a bayonet) will, assuming it gets through armour, rip up muscle fibers, nick bones, and cut tendons, all of which degrade the effectiveness of a fighter even if they don't actually kill him. An Ork or Space Marine who has just taken a bayonet through the shoulder is much worse off than one who has taken a lasbolt in the shoulder, because they probably cannot use that arm very well. In neither case are they in any danger of death, but the bayonet lowers their effectiveness more than the lasgun.

Then we come to the subject of power weapons/fists. One argument I've seen here is "if you can do it to a blade, you can do it to a bullet". Well, maybe. Power weapons have to be powered BY something; that is, they have an energy source built in. It's difficult to build an effective energy source into a bullet. And when the Imperium DOES apply power-weapon equivalent tech to ranged weapons, we end up with plasma guns. Unfortunately, we can't give everyone a plasma gun, meaning small-arms remain ineffective against the kind of monstrous opponents you face out in the galaxy of 40k.

If you think a knife puncture does more than large caliber or high velocity round you are sadly, sadly mistaken. lasguns are noted as being equal to autoguns which are compared to assault rifles in older fluff. Give me something like a .308 (7.62 NATO to you Euros) and the internal damage is going to be traumatic and incredibly more substantial than a glorified spork.

The argument utterly lacks merit.

saw that coming from frazzled a mile away. i disagree with one part of the argument, so I will discount the entire argument rather than considering anything in it.

Frazzled wrote:If you think a knife puncture does more than large caliber or high velocity round you are sadly, sadly mistaken. lasguns are noted as being equal to autoguns which are compared to assault rifles in older fluff. Give me something like a .308 (7.62 NATO to you Euros) and the internal damage is going to be traumatic and incredibly more substantial than a glorified spork.

The argument utterly lacks merit.

Actually, your understimating how many ranged weapons (especialy the energy based ones) make clean wounds, unless you hit something vital (spleen, intestine, liver etc.) Lasguns are often described to instantly cauterize the wound thus preventing bleeding to death. Also, ballistic fire arms have chance of the bullet simply passing through a body, inflicting minimal damage(if the bullet stays in the wound it is much more dangerous). Also, your argument only uses the large caliber high velocity round, it's not the only round used.

And also, yes, a knife puncture does a lot more damage then a bullet, since you can twist and turn the blade whilst doing so, damaging all surrounding tissue, instead of just the thing immediately in its path.

GundamMerc wrote:saw that coming from frazzled a mile away. i disagree with one part of the argument, so I will discount the entire argument rather than considering anything in it.

Thats because the argument lacks merit.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Soladrin wrote:

Frazzled wrote:If you think a knife puncture does more than large caliber or high velocity round you are sadly, sadly mistaken. lasguns are noted as being equal to autoguns which are compared to assault rifles in older fluff. Give me something like a .308 (7.62 NATO to you Euros) and the internal damage is going to be traumatic and incredibly more substantial than a glorified spork.

The argument utterly lacks merit.

Actually, your understimating how many ranged weapons (especialy the energy based ones) make clean wounds, unless you hit something vital (spleen, intestine, liver etc.) Lasguns are often described to instantly cauterize the wound thus preventing bleeding to death. Also, ballistic fire arms have chance of the bullet simply passing through a body, inflicting minimal damage(if the bullet stays in the wound it is much more dangerous). Also, your argument only uses the large caliber high velocity round, it's not the only round used.

And also, yes, a knife puncture does a lot more damage then a bullet, since you can twist and turn the blade whilst doing so, damaging all surrounding tissue, instead of just the thing immediately in its path.

Er no. Empirically, stab something. Then shoot it. You'll see a world of difference.
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/1993/10/knives-00000.php

Warning-icky icky icky rifle shot to the head. Knives don't do that.
http://www.suicidemethods.net/pix/30_30.jpg

Soladrin wrote:

Frazzled wrote:If you think a knife puncture does more than large caliber or high velocity round you are sadly, sadly mistaken. lasguns are noted as being equal to autoguns which are compared to assault rifles in older fluff. Give me something like a .308 (7.62 NATO to you Euros) and the internal damage is going to be traumatic and incredibly more substantial than a glorified spork.

The argument utterly lacks merit.

Actually, your understimating how many ranged weapons (especialy the energy based ones) make clean wounds, unless you hit something vital (spleen, intestine, liver etc.) Lasguns are often described to instantly cauterize the wound thus preventing bleeding to death. Also, ballistic fire arms have chance of the bullet simply passing through a body, inflicting minimal damage(if the bullet stays in the wound it is much more dangerous). Also, your argument only uses the large caliber high velocity round, it's not the only round used.

And also, yes, a knife puncture does a lot more damage then a bullet, since you can twist and turn the blade whilst doing so, damaging all surrounding tissue, instead of just the thing immediately in its path.

Whilst this is all completely correct and true, real medical statistics from hospitals in the USA and South Africa, etc, consistently show that gunshot wounds are vastly more dangerous and lethal than edged weapons.

Frazzled, good job disregarding what I said, I said unless you hit something vital, the head is pretty damn vital.

Oh, and since we'r talking 40k melee weapons vs ranged weapons, let me show you what melee weapons can do.

Stupid as this show is, they do accurately show the damage these weapons do.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdWQYnBtJI8

That's a regular sword and flail, nothing fancy.

I'm not specifically denoting the head. I'm talking about the general level of damage. More importantly:

1. That damage is hitting you 200 to 600 yards out from you getting in range with a flail. + I can do 600 times in a minute doing it.

2. I can punch through armor with that shot.

Frazzled wrote:
If you think a knife puncture does more than large caliber or high velocity round you are sadly, sadly mistaken. lasguns are noted as being equal to autoguns which are compared to assault rifles in older fluff. Give me something like a .308 (7.62 NATO to you Euros) and the internal damage is going to be traumatic and incredibly more substantial than a glorified spork.

The argument utterly lacks merit.

You are conflating primary effects with secondary effects.

A rifle does do a great deal more damage than a knife, yes. . . TO A HUMAN. Why? Because a bullet, traveling at extremely high speed, creates a number of secondary effects which a blade does not. If a knife stabs into someone, it pushes muscle out of the way, cuts veins, etc. on a plane, inflicting a gash. Secondary effects are minimal.

A bullet, however, does some of that PLUS some other nasty things. Hydrostatic shock from the high-velocity impact is a major one, and that arguably kills more people than the bullet itself. Bullets commonly drag organic shrapnel behind them as they pass through the body, inflicting even more trauma. So yes, against a human a gun is better than a sword. No contest.

But I wasn't talking about humans, now was I? I was talking about Space Marines, Orks, and Tyranids. Space Marines, for instance, are quitre literally designed to resist all those secondary effects that gives a bullet its potency. Hydrostatic shock? Not an issue, for Space Marines. Their bones won't break under anything but a truly obscene force, making shrapnel a non-issue.

What does this mean? Basically, with the side-effects eliminated, all a small-arm can do to a Space Marine is make a little hole. THe wepaon that's so lethal to humans is relatively impotent against the superhuman. Blades, however, don't rely on secondary effects to do their damage. This means that against humans, where secondary effects are important, they are less powerful than guns, but against people who can ignore such secondary effects they become more effective.

I don't see why it is a good idea if you are bad at H2H and want to fight creatures which are really good at H2H, to fight them with H2H weapons.

Who's doing that?

What, is no-one doing it?

What are they doing instead?