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.

foil7102 wrote:Actually for a firearm to disable a human 50% of the time it hits is pretty good. You have to remember, a lasgun shot that grazes an arm or a leg is a shot that hits, but does not wound. In addition watch the history chanel, specifically the "shoot out" series. Plenty of tails about people taking multiple hits to the chest area from battle rifles and still being effective. Remember the most dangerous weapon of WWII was the machine gun, not because they were generally shooting larger caliber bullets, but because if you got hit by one you usually got hit 3-7 times.

That is a great show, I used to watch it when I still got cable.

First off, I don't think the weapons in 40k were strictly designed to simulate real world or even hard SF weapons, especially in 3rd and 4th edition. 40k is not a simulationist game. I think the reasoning in the design is this: "ok, we want this squad to be able to do this much damage when they shoot. Ok, that is their standard infantry weapon. The fluff says that for IG that is called a lasgun or autogun. For marines it is called a boltgun. The boltgun is better because it is carried by spase marinez.". I also recall that the previous editions of the rules stated that a model that loses all of its wounds may or may not be dead, all that matters is that they are out of action. A good example of rules like that that are expanded some are the Necromunda rules. A hit is most likely to take the target "down", which basically means you can crawl around and moan, and an equal chance (1 in 6 if I recall) of either taking the fighter "out of action" ( removed from the table) or just pinning it ( pretty much the same as pinning in 40k). After the game is when you determine if the model died or not, which is a 1 in 6 chance ( probably unrealistic, but no one really wants to lose half of their army or so because they lose one scenario).

I don't know how effective weapons fire is against infantry in modern warfare. However, it is worth mentioning that jacketed military bullets are specifically designed to be less lethal than homogeneous lead or expanding bullets. This is due to certain treaties. It is done for genuinely humanitarian reasons, and probably also because wounded soldiers cause a lot more trouble than dead ones. In my state at least, it is illegal to hunt big game with a military style jacketed bullet, for the same reason. It is not that it is "more effective", but it is the fact that such bullets are designed to not transfer all of their energy to the target, but to pass through in one piece.

Conspiracy theorists love to bring up the "pristine" bullet that was found on a stretcher after the Kennedy assassination, and say that it could not have wounded two people and remained in "perfect" condition. Incidentally, it was not in perfect condition, but more importantly it did exactly what it was designed to do, that is, pass through a target without deforming a great deal. Same idea here.

Grignard wrote:

foil7102 wrote:I don't know how effective weapons fire is against infantry in modern warfare. However, it is worth mentioning that jacketed military bullets are specifically designed to be less lethal than homogeneous lead or expanding bullets. This is due to certain treaties. It is done for genuinely humanitarian reasons, and probably also because wounded soldiers cause a lot more trouble than dead ones. In my state at least, it is illegal to hunt big game with a military style jacketed bullet, for the same reason. It is not that it is "more effective", but it is the fact that such bullets are designed to not transfer all of their energy to the target, but to pass through in one piece.

Grignard brings up a good point. There are a bunch of treaties that outlaw hollowpoint and similiar ammunition because it is seen as inhumane. They hit a target and expand inside the body, blowing chunks out and messing with internal organs. Jacketed ammunition is just meant to pass through. I dunno how this pertains to 40k, but it's an interesting topic to talk about, so I don't care. ^^

Haronen Tyr wrote:

Grignard wrote:I don't know how effective weapons fire is against infantry in modern warfare. However, it is worth mentioning that jacketed military bullets are specifically designed to be less lethal than homogeneous lead or expanding bullets. This is due to certain treaties. It is done for genuinely humanitarian reasons, and probably also because wounded soldiers cause a lot more trouble than dead ones. In my state at least, it is illegal to hunt big game with a military style jacketed bullet, for the same reason. It is not that it is "more effective", but it is the fact that such bullets are designed to not transfer all of their energy to the target, but to pass through in one piece.

Grignard brings up a good point. There are a bunch of treaties that outlaw hollowpoint and similiar ammunition because it is seen as inhumane. They hit a target and expand inside the body, blowing chunks out and messing with internal organs. Jacketed ammunition is just meant to pass through. I dunno how this pertains to 40k, but it's an interesting topic to talk about, so I don't care. ^^

Crap. Sorry about the confusing double post. Tried to edit and accidentally made another.

Only really pertains to the comparison between 40k and real world weapons. Of course, in the grim darkness of the far future (TM) we can assume there are no such treaties limiting the damage weapons can do....however, I don't think it is terribly unreasonable the way it is. I mean, ideally a lasgun might be effective, but nothing ever works the way it does in theory.

I think if a discussion of weapon strength and effectiveness is made, two things must be considered:

1. All aspects of a model's statline pertaining to a certain action must be considered.

Sure, a Guardsman with a monomolecular bayonet is S3, same as a Space Shroom with a Choppa, but the Shroom has Furious Charge and WS4, which means he may be using a much cruder weapon that more often than not involves him swinging last, but he's able to use that weapon with terrible effectiveness, whereas Joe Guardsman is using his meager WS3 to stab and skewer, certainly creating serious wounds, but definitely not lethal for an Ork.

2. Game mechanics should only be used as a guideline, not as the end-all factor.

The mechanic is a streamlining, representative system, designed to allow a single person's brain to simplify the countless calculations required of a simulator to play out the minutiae of a full-scale battle into a reasonable ruleset that can be completed as quickly as possible without requiring hundreds of pages of paper and unlimited time. I'm sure that if someone wanted to, they could use Dark Heresy rules for every single model in their IG army as it battled the Chaos Demons on the other side of the board, but that would be borderline insane for most. The 40K ruleset is, as it says in the BGB itself, a turn-based wargame simulation based upon a thousand subtle agreements to make the system work. That said, I think it is more important for the sake of comparison to pay more attention to the fluff than to the rules when trying to understand a weapon.

* * * * *

Now that I've said that, let me give my two cents on the weapons of 40K:

Lasgun/Autogun
21st Century Equivalents: AK-47, M249 (lower rpm), 0.50 CAL (lower rpm)

Boltgun
21st Century Equivalent: Automatic Shotgun (with manstopper rounds) with extended range

Heavy Stubber
21st Century Equivalent: 0.50 CAL (equivalent rpm)

Heavy Bolter
21st Century Equivalent: Bushmaster 25mm Cannon (main armament of M2A3 Bradley) with higher rpm.

* * * * *

CK

I just have to throw it out there, the lasgun in game is dumbed down a *lot* from the fluff.
In theory, a lasrifle with a good charge can take off an average human's arm in one shot.



And I really disagree with giving bolters the shotgun's role.
It's a step up from a standard rifle, without venturing necessarily into heavy weapon territory.


The round, in itself a high-penetration large-caliber affair, a'splodes. I agree with the shotgun in comparison in that you may produce quite a nice splattery effect upon impact, but it's far more powerful over distance. All a bolt round needs to do full damage is penetrate: after that, the aforementioned splat.

In layman's terms: IT'S A F'N ROCKET MACHINE GUN.