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.

As many have said it's an abstraction based on a game filled with them.

40k is not about 'realism' it's about the miniatures. The game rules are incidental.

Comparing a Las weapon to other weapons in the fluff is ridiculous for obvious reasons. Firing a Laser weapon is nothing like firing and aiming a kinetic weapon. Nothing even remotely like it.

A marksman with a 'Laser' weapon shouldn't miss all that much if you think about it. It's a laser, and as such firing the weapon and damage should be near instantaneous. Which lends support to the idea that Las weapons seem to be more than they appear. Perhaps they aren't really lasers at all. Who knows.

Uhlan wrote:As many have said it's an abstraction based on a game filled with them.

40k is not about 'realism' it's about the miniatures. The game rules are incidental.

Comparing a Las weapon to other weapons in the fluff is ridiculous for obvious reasons. Firing a Laser weapon is nothing like firing and aiming a kinetic weapon. Nothing even remotely like it.

A marksman with a 'Laser' weapon shouldn't miss all that much if you think about it. It's a laser, and as such firing the weapon and damage should be near instantaneous. Which lends support to the idea that Las weapons seem to be more than they appear. Perhaps they aren't really lasers at all. Who knows.

Actually, you may be right about that. I know that on the cover of the IG codex, the Lasguns appear to be making a more ballistics-like explosion at the end of the barrel, not an actual laser. The only pictures that seem to support the laser idea are the ones of the storm troopers.

With a mix between adrenaline coursing through your veins from fighting in an often, revolutionary war, gun-line exposed warfare environment, coupled with the fear of watching you're friends die around you and fighting unimaginable horrors of the warp or strange alien races with different rules of confrontation, the fact that any of them can hit anything bigger than a titan is pretty good.

Seaward wrote:DoD studies found that, in Vietnam, only 10% - 15% of soldiers aimed to kill, even when under fire themselves; the overwhelming majority aimed high. It's a natural instinct.

What was the training/experience level of those soldiers? Were they experienced/trained troops or are we talking more in the line of conscripts?

DarknessEternal wrote:The coalition forces in Iraq/Afghanistan expend a quarter million rounds of ammunition for every enemy killed.

Vaktathi wrote:That's actually a rather well known number, Vietnam was a much more direct conflict and even there it was 50,000 rounds expended per enemy killed. The vast majority of bullets fired are for suppression or area clearing where only the tiniest fraction will ever hope to hit anything. Even when fired with direct intent to kill a specific target, rounds are usually expended in bursts where many shots are fired and often none may hit or if they do it's usually only one or two of many.

I've heard both numbers before, but I would be careful about using them. Modern militaries don't really have much in the way of benchmarks in which to judge individual soldier accuracy, so they just sort of fudge it by taking the total number of casautlies (known or predicted) and divide it by the ammo expended. It's a very clumsy, haphazard figure, because it doesn't take into account various factors (how many bullets to kill a person, how were the individual soldiers fighting and firing, engagement ranges and enviroment, timeframe, etc.) Hell as I have had those quotes explained to me, they factor in ammo expended in training.
I'm also note exactly certain that soldiers would just be spraying suppressive fire willy-nilly. Your average soldier carries only a few hundred rounds of ammo tops (ammo is heavy) and some rifles (like in the US) don't have fully automatic modes. Just shooting it off like that would leave you dry pretty quickly.

Uhlan wrote:A marksman with a 'Laser' weapon shouldn't miss all that much if you think about it. It's a laser, and as such firing the weapon and damage should be near instantaneous. Which lends support to the idea that Las weapons seem to be more than they appear. Perhaps they aren't really lasers at all. Who knows.

You can still miss with a laser. Lasers eliminate some problems - the beam moves at lightspeed so it is not influenced by wind or gravity or other ballistic concerns. Recoil will be little to none (lasers DO have mass, and recoil, it is just so minor that you need huge numbers of photons in order for it ot be noticable. Disregarding other factors you'd need close to a gigajoule of energy (half a million 7.62mm rounds KE equivalent) just to equal the recoil of a 9mm pistol.) But none of those things take the human equation out of it. People twitch and tremble. They blink. They can sweat and be distracted and feel cold. They breathe. There are lots of things that can still thrwo off accuracy, especially at long ranges. And beyond certain ranges you need some sort of enhancement (a scope or other sighting mechanism) because your eyesight won't be enough to target.

Laodamia wrote:Concerning the issue of the quality of guardsmen, it depends on the regiment we are considering. Take Cadians, and you'll have elite soldiers that have been trained from birth, seen an insane lot of action, and are the best of the best their own planet can provide the Imperium.
Take Krieg or Valhalla, and you'll have massive (usually 200 000 strong) regiments of mass-produced conscripts, with relatively poor equipment (at least compared to cadians) that rely purely on the strength of numbers to beat their enemy.

Equipment matters to a point (although in terms of small arms there's not a huge lot of difference between an AK-47 and a M-16 for all practical purposes), and training helps, but training is not all that crucial either. I've had it pounded into my head by military people I know that training a competent soldier is onyl a matter of weeks or months if you do it right - the whole "train for war from birth" idea is a bit wasfeul and silly given that (and as I understand things can even be harmful - you can go too far training yourself and lose whatever edge you develop.)
What matters most, from what I have learned, is the experiences you get to prepare you for battle - nothing can truly perpare a person for their first fight. Now a place like Cadia DOES get an edge in that respect, becaues they are used to constant warfare. It's populace has constant exposure to the horrors and conditions of warfare, so they are physically AND mentally prepared for it. Krieg and Valhalla are probably similar, they have traditions of having to fight on their home world (and I bet Valhalla still gets Ork problems.) Elysians (as well) get experience in anti-piracy operations as I recall the fluff. And hive gangers develop quite a bit of exposure to conflict, especially of the small unit variety, when you consider most Necromunda hive gangs are little more than slightly less well equipped IG squads for all intents and purposes (how many RL gangs get access to antipersonnel and anti-tank weaponry in addition to small arms? )

As to the numbers ref 10-15%...they are drawn from a survey of US forces in total in Vietnam. Similar numbers were found for both World Wars. In a more modern environment with smaller numbers of more trained soldiers its is likely that the % is far greater...but no matter how much time you spend at the range you cannot get someone to shoot to kill until they are in a position of such desperation that they must...and even then they still may not. As well, rounds are expended in rapid fire to win the fire fight so that the enemy may be closed with and destroyed. Winning the fire fight does not even require killing a single enemy, it only requires suppressing their ability to return fire until such time as you are able to effect their demise at close range or secure their surrender. Combining this with the concept of using 3 times the force to achieve any task (ie a Platoon is used to fight a Section of dismounted infantry, Coy for a Pl, etc) You will wind up with alot of rounds expended, most of which will hit nothing important, and all with the aim of keeping their heads down. Its like the employment of my 25mm, you see infantry engaging you throw some HE at them, if they are dumb enough to keep standing or remain in my line of fire, then they die...if they are smart, keep their heads down and get out of my way...I report it and keep on rolling down the road.

All the super-cool laser guns in the world won't make up for humans being crappy shots. An amateur with a halfway decent rifle, braced and aiming, can probably hit a static 1 meter square (larger than an average human torso) target at 20 yards more often than not.

That same amateur with a halfway decent rifle firing bursts while leapfrogging from cover to cover at a 1 meter target which is also moving and shooting back? Accuracy drops dramatically.

Make the rifle better and you've still got some terrified average joe firing aimlessly, hoping his shots will convince the enemy not to aim at him, running, screaming, possibly with his eyes closed (or at least full of tears). Oh, and did I mention that if he stops he's got a commissar behind him who will blow his brains out through his forehead?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Aaaand Connor beat me to it and said it better. Well played, sir.

They are brilliant shots I full squad under wartimes condtions will will hit 50% of the time far ahead on any other real squad.

I think what you mean is that you have played marines for years and think BS4 is the norm.

Jubear wrote:They are brilliant shots I full squad under wartimes condtions will will hit 50% of the time far ahead on any other real squad.

People need to read the whole thread...

How much time passes in between turns? Anywhere between 30 minutes to 2 hours (depending on the mission/turn I imagine)? A single roll of a dice represents a lot of shots - are you really telling me an assault cannon is going to fire 4 measly shots in 30 minutes? That 50% hit rate is basically saying that the squad is going to hit its target once every half hour or so, while the majority of their ammunition is used to suppress them.

Andilus Greatsword wrote:

Jubear wrote:They are brilliant shots I full squad under wartimes condtions will will hit 50% of the time far ahead on any other real squad.

People need to read the whole thread...

How much time passes in between turns? Anywhere between 30 minutes to 2 hours (depending on the mission/turn I imagine)? A single roll of a dice represents a lot of shots - are you really telling me an assault cannon is going to fire 4 measly shots in 30 minutes? That 50% hit rate is basically saying that the squad is going to hit its target once every half hour or so, while the majority of their ammunition is used to suppress them.

It was totally a joke about folk thinking 1 shot equals 1 bullet...

And there is no hard fast about how long a term represents or if a shot equals a burst or whatever at the end of the day in a game that uses D6s there cant be that much variation between units so someone has gotta be BS3 just to make all the marines look uber.

As a wargame 40k is as abstract as they come so its up to the players to fill in the gaps, like when your melta guy misses at 2 inch range I like to think hes had a weapon jam and not actually gotten to fire.

Lightcavalier wrote:As to the numbers ref 10-15%...they are drawn from a survey of US forces in total in Vietnam. Similar numbers were found for both World Wars. In a more modern environment with smaller numbers of more trained soldiers its is likely that the % is far greater...but no matter how much time you spend at the range you cannot get someone to shoot to kill until they are in a position of such desperation that they must...and even then they still may not. As well, rounds are expended in rapid fire to win the fire fight so that the enemy may be closed with and destroyed. Winning the fire fight does not even require killing a single enemy, it only requires suppressing their ability to return fire until such time as you are able to effect their demise at close range or secure their surrender. Combining this with the concept of using 3 times the force to achieve any task (ie a Platoon is used to fight a Section of dismounted infantry, Coy for a Pl, etc) You will wind up with alot of rounds expended, most of which will hit nothing important, and all with the aim of keeping their heads down. Its like the employment of my 25mm, you see infantry engaging you throw some HE at them, if they are dumb enough to keep standing or remain in my line of fire, then they die...if they are smart, keep their heads down and get out of my way...I report it and keep on rolling down the road.

Actually those numbers are more or less correct for every war except Vietnam. Coming out of the back of WW2 when Military Science and psychology took off, they addressed this issue directly with their training methods and their studies showed a 95% "Fire Rate" rather than the 10-15% Fire Rate found in previous wars.

This entire topic is covered in exhaustive and very revealing detail in the book "On Killing" by Lt. Colonel Dave Grossman, who is a retired US Army Psychologist and was Professor of Psychology at West Point Academy.

Humans don't like fighting and killing, generally. If you wanted to make the tabletop game "Realistic", all of your -models- should be rolling Leadership at like leadership 2-3 in order to fire at the enemy. In the real world, in the examples given in the book I quoted above, the vast majority of trained soldiers wouldn't even kill to save their own lives.

To be 100% fair though, it wasn't like 85% of them sat there and did nothing, most of them just found "Non-Killing" things to do, i.e.:

- Run ammunition and supplies
- "Tend" to the wounded
- Run messages between officers
- Reloading weapons for people who actually were firing
- And finally, if all else fails, fire your weapon at nothing so you at least look like you're fighting

I always thought of normal guardsmen as fresh-faced soldiers new to the field. Sure they may have had a battle or two under their belts, but most are dead before they gain any actual combat experience. It's why vets have a different BS.
Just my two cents to the conversation.

TrenchMartin1 wrote:I always thought of normal guardsmen as fresh-faced soldiers new to the field. Sure they may have had a battle or two under their belts, but most are dead before they gain any actual combat experience. It's why vets have a different BS.
Just my two cents to the conversation.

Guardsmen represent an individual trained to what the Imperium deems a militarily competent level.
Normal humans are BS2 and veterans are BS4.

Laodamia wrote:Take Krieg or Valhalla, and you'll have massive (usually 200 000 strong) regiments of mass-produced conscripts, with relatively poor equipment (at least compared to cadians) that rely purely on the strength of numbers to beat their enemy.

I won't answer for the Valhallans, but the Death Korp of Krieg are as far from being conscipts as you could imagine, their kit is actually rather good and for masters of attrition there are no other regiments of any planet or army or race that can match their success and dedication to grinding their enemy down, even if they themselves suffer heavy casualties.

So far as training goes they're masters of the bayonet and close combat*, are superbly drilled soldiers who obey orders to the letter without question or thought for their own safety, are experts at siege warfare and fighting in hazardous conditions which would leave a Cadian, even in a fully enclosed enviroment suit, looking weedy. Their advances through fog and smoke covered battlefields, silent with bayonets presented, have beeen known to put enemies to flight and their training is so hard that the weak perish during it. Their training ends with live fire exercises, drills and fighting mock battles upon the ruined surface of their world, which sustained a 500-year atomic purge - hardly a friendly or safe place to be for days on end yet they do it willingly.

When Krieg soldiers go to war, they expect to be going to their deaths for their God-Emperor, to atone for their ancestors crimes which led to the punishment their planet, in their eyes, rightfully deserved. Officers fight on the frontlines with their men, Krieg soldiers who are picked for the Grenadier companies go willingly, even though the Grenadiers will suffer the highest number of casualties in engagements. Krieg commanders don't view their soldiers as men, but as numbers and equipment to be spent in a way that will reduce the numbers of the enemy they face. It's this philosophy that makes them unpopular with other Regiments from different worlds, as Krieg soldiers just won't retreat, no matter what and they expect the same from the rest of the Guard - makes them rather scornful of other Regiments, especially when their soldiers wear medals, which the Krieg believe are a waste of time, rewarding a soldier for doing what he is meant to be doing.

Sorry if that sounds a bit like a rant, but Krieg are the only 'standard GW' army I've ever liked and I will always stick up for them.

*Imperial Armour: Siege of Vraks Part 1 Krieg army list has -all- soldiers with WS4.

Andilus Greatsword wrote:

Jubear wrote:They are brilliant shots I full squad under wartimes condtions will will hit 50% of the time far ahead on any other real squad.

People need to read the whole thread...

How much time passes in between turns? Anywhere between 30 minutes to 2 hours (depending on the mission/turn I imagine)? A single roll of a dice represents a lot of shots - are you really telling me an assault cannon is going to fire 4 measly shots in 30 minutes? That 50% hit rate is basically saying that the squad is going to hit its target once every half hour or so, while the majority of their ammunition is used to suppress them.

I figure each turn is about 10 seconds of battle time, and the average game lasts about a minute.

So, yes, each die roll represents a single shot.