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.

I would venture that against armour a mono molecular blade like a Catatchan blade would be more effective.

But yes against flesh the Chainsword would be entertaining.

I miss third edition choppas! (armor saves better then 4+ became 4+).. Sooo many terminators fell to boyz with choppas!

Demigod wrote:I mean come on, wouldn't a huge screeching chainblade with Adamantium teeth be a more formidable weapon that say a...."sharpened stick?" LOL.

I think it's important here to consider that the game may well intend for "sharpened sticks" to simply not be represented. I mean, would you expect to have to roll for power armour protection if you get attacked with "sharpened sticks"?

In 40k, every weapon that appears on the battlefield is capable of killing anyone, and punching through any armour. That seems to be one of the core principles of the game. The simplest way to rationalise this would be to assume that there is a certain minimum level of killiness that applies to whatever weapons are carried onto the battlefield. Meaning, no sharpened sticks. Perhaps the worst close combat weapon is at least sub-atomically honed plasteel? I mean, everyone gets at least las weaponry, there's no reason to assume that there's absolutely zero tech in their melee weapons as well.

 lilgammer123 wrote:

 Gangrel767 wrote:
Striking Scorpion Chainswords give a +1 Str and are AP 6. It's just the weakness of the imperium. lol

I read somewhere that they lodge into armor and flesh then the chain starts; the imperial chainswords are running when they touch the target making them jam and less effective.

That doesn't make any sense.

 Psienesis wrote:

 lilgammer123 wrote:

 Gangrel767 wrote:
Striking Scorpion Chainswords give a +1 Str and are AP 6. It's just the weakness of the imperium. lol

I read somewhere that they lodge into armor and flesh then the chain starts; the imperial chainswords are running when they touch the target making them jam and less effective.

That doesn't make any sense.

agreed! as a tree climber who saws things for a living.. i would be fired if I threw the saw onto a log and THEN started to try to cut. The chain would pull the bar forward and the body of the saw would slam into the wood. I always give it some gass off the wood then sink it in. OBVIOUSLY chainswords and the like are a different beast.. but the basic philospogy is the same. I think that the scorpion chainswords are probably just more rippy.

 Psienesis wrote:

 lilgammer123 wrote:

 Gangrel767 wrote:
Striking Scorpion Chainswords give a +1 Str and are AP 6. It's just the weakness of the imperium. lol

I read somewhere that they lodge into armor and flesh then the chain starts; the imperial chainswords are running when they touch the target making them jam and less effective.

That doesn't make any sense.

It is easier to stick into targets since the chain wont start unless It is in the target meaning the chain wont stop until it exits the target meaning the chain doesn't starts running until its lodged into you and doesn't stop running until its out of your flesh/ armor making it slightly more effective; on the other hand imperial chainswords make a fast downward striking motion making them more likely to lodge into armor and jam (while you can leave the eldar chainsword in their armor and it will still run until it falls out) and your not likely to sit their for however long it takes to cop a man in half in a heated fight but the imperium doesn't care enough to do anything about it.

In second edition chainswords were quite a nice upgrade over a normal close combat weapon. But then GW decided to dumb down the rules so larger games could become the norm.

Maybe they just want you to be able to model guys with chainswords without having to pay a surcharge for the coolness factor. It would be kind of lame if Assault Marines came with a combat knife because chainswords were an upgrade, wouldn't it?

Thats how it worked in 2nd edition. You had to buy chainswords (even for assault marines) at 2pts a piece. They were worth it.

Sorry but "sharpened sticks" do not exist in the 41st millenium

You need to realize that chainswords arent competing against combat knives the way we know them in the 21st century, but monomolecular blades that can cut through a block of steel with ease.

In the same way a space marine who doesnt have any cc-weapon doesnt throw punches or jab the enemy with the butt of his bolter in close combat, but actually fires his weapon at the enemy's face. The reduction from weapon profile to his own strength AP - profile is understood as inaccuracy in the hectic of close combat.

So in effect, you have a chainsword competing against a monomolecular blade, competing against hectically fired bolters in close proximity.

This is why they all have the same generic S user AP - profile.

Bludbaff wrote:Maybe they just want you to be able to model guys with chainswords without having to pay a surcharge for the coolness factor. It would be kind of lame if Assault Marines came with a combat knife because chainswords were an upgrade, wouldn't it?

There is definitely a "coolness factor"....good point.

Sir Arun wrote:Sorry but "sharpened sticks" do not exist in the 41st millenium

You need to realize that chainswords arent competing against combat knives the way we know them in the 21st century, but monomolecular blades that can cut through a block of steel with ease.

In the same way a space marine who doesnt have any cc-weapon doesnt throw punches or jab the enemy with the butt of his bolter in close combat, but actually fires his weapon at the enemy's face. The reduction from weapon profile to his own strength AP - profile is understood as inaccuracy in the hectic of close combat.

So in effect, you have a chainsword competing against a monomolecular blade, competing against hectically fired bolters in close proximity.

This is why they all have the same generic S user AP - profile.

Yeah, the sharpened stick thing is just an exaggeration to make a point. I also like your point on combat knives, I forgot they are not your average knife lol, I need to brush up on my Astartes Combat knife lore. /nod

Lol, worse off, Kroot rifles pointy bits are S-user AP5...

NauticalKendall wrote:
Lol, worse off, Kroot rifles pointy bits are S-user AP5...

Kroot also have the power of the waaaagh directed by intelligent thinking minds. :p

 AegisGrimm wrote:
In second edition chainswords were quite a nice upgrade over a normal close combat weapon. .

Well, yes and no. Chainswords were S4, so all they added to a Space Marine over his combat knife was the ability to parry. Most of my assault Marines in 2nd ed wound up with regular swords instead, as they were 1 point cheaper for the same effect.

The extra point of strength was handy for Guard, though.

I thought they were also -1 to armor saves?

 AegisGrimm wrote:
I thought they were also -1 to armor saves?

Yes, because they were S4, and S4 was a -1 modifier.

A Space Marine is S4 anyway.

It would be nice if there was an Astartes Pattern Chainsword which granted Shred. Make Sergeants and Assault Marines a bit more of a threat.

 Eldarain wrote:
It would be nice if there was an Astartes Pattern Chainsword which granted Shred. Make Sergeants and Assault Marines a bit more of a threat.

yeah, if they cost 23 points each...


no seriously, it's way overpowered. Chainswords granting S4 and AP6 would be perfect as that way Guard sergeants would marginally suck less, and it would bring them in line with scorpion chainswords, and Schpess Muhreenz lore fans would also feel like there's something to the whole idea of a chainsaw destroying lightly armored opponents, while it wouldnt really have a game breaking effect compared to chainswords as they currently are.

 Sir Arun wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
It would be nice if there was an Astartes Pattern Chainsword which granted Shred. Make Sergeants and Assault Marines a bit more of a threat.

yeah, if they cost 23 points each...


no seriously, it's way overpowered. Chainswords granting S4 and AP6 would be perfect as that way Guard sergeants would marginally suck less, and it would bring them in line with scorpion chainswords, and Schpess Muhreenz lore fans would also feel like there's something to the whole idea of a chainsaw destroying lightly armored opponents, while it wouldnt really have a game breaking effect compared to chainswords as they currently are.

I love it.

In a game which heavily favors shooting. In which Guard can throw 8 twin-linked ignores cover S4 Shred
Blasts for the price of an un-upgraded Assault Squad, giving said squad Shred would somehow be overpowered and require a hefty price increase.

 Demigod wrote:
I've noticed something that previously didn't catch my attention on Chainswords. Unless I'm reading it wrong, it looks like a Chainsword offers no statistical advantage over wielding nothing at all. According to the "Rules" even if a model has no melee weapon at all, then it is considered having a "Close Combat" weapon that is STR - User and AP -

Yes, but make that chainsword just a bit bigger… BANG Sx2 AP2 (and Unwieldy+specialist weapon) BABY!
Makes so much sense…

Eldarain wrote:It would be nice if there was an Astartes Pattern Chainsword which granted Shred. Make Sergeants and Assault Marines a bit more of a threat.

Chainswords are chainswords. Let's not start this silly +1 crap in the TT, too.

 Eldarain wrote:
It would be nice if there was an Astartes Pattern Chainsword which granted Shred. Make Sergeants and Assault Marines a bit more of a threat.

It would be nice if there was an Astartes Pattern Chainsword that granted “You loose ATSKNF forever”, and it was mandatory on every sergeant .

Both fair points. All Chainswords getting Shred would be ok with me.

Also I already have those Chainswords on my Chaos Marines Hybrid... Not a fan

Whilst combat knives may be monomolecular blades or whatever, aren't chainswords dozens of monomolecular blades powered by a 41st century motor? However good the blades are - chainswords are as good and then a lot better again.

Well first of all I think the Wyvern is undercosted, especially compared to the Hydra. That being said, what you also need to realize is that you cannot just compare shooting with close combat. Because being in close combat does two things. one, it prevents the target squad from shooting *something that doesnt happen if you merely shoot at it, and top on top of that, remembre that there are 2 rounds of close comat for every round of your shooting, so the damage done in cc is actually often underestimated.

 Sir Arun wrote:
Well first of all I think the Wyvern is undercosted, especially compared to the Hydra. That being said, what you also need to realize is that you cannot just compare shooting with close combat. Because being in close combat does two things. one, it prevents the target squad from shooting *something that doesnt happen if you merely shoot at it, and top on top of that, remembre that there are 2 rounds of close comat for every round of your shooting, so the damage done in cc is actually often underestimated.

Ok. So the premise of your argument is that Melee units should pay a higher premium than shooting units because they can prevent a unit from shooting if engaged and get to swing twice per game turn.

My retort to that is as follows:

Shooting far more effectively silences enemy shooting by murdering it at extreme range.

Shooting begins doing far more efficient damage per point from the other side of the table from turn one. Without any of the extra hoops to jump through that melee has (random charge, overwatch, closing the distance etc) any dual rounds of melee pales in comparison.

I'm not a big fan of the "40K is mostly a shooting game" philosophy. I refuse to see it like that, then again I'm not out to find the most efficient and winniest way to play the game. What would be the fun of sitting on two sides of a table plinking each other to death? Gotta have some in your face carnage imo.