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.

Some rounds are also longer, as well. Makes it important to check before trying to chamber rounds in a gun that aren't what the gun manufacturer recommends.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Soo'Vah'Cha wrote:
But generally the saying is..if you are down to your sidearm...something very bad has happened.

So this being 40k, that probably happens a lot.

The question isn't if people have sidearms in 40k. The question is if they're actually useful or there to just comfort you before you die horribly.

My guess is in a fantasy world where charging screaming across open ground with a weaponized chainsaw is a standard tactic..with many races...

Sure a sidearm is useful..its the 40k just go with it!

 Wyzilla wrote:
The question isn't if people have sidearms in 40k. The question is if they're actually useful or there to just comfort you before you die horribly.

The literature suggests that they are, especially for officers and heavy weapons crews.

It is my personal experience, that only Heavy Weapons crews, NCOs (Sergeant and above), and Officers can be "issued" pistols from a units armory. Understand that any unit's armory only carries a limited amount of weapons to be stored there. Within that unit, the highest ranking officer, is going to have first right of choosing his weapon. Then weapons get assigned to individuals as dictated by the commanding officer in charge.

The higher the command unit is, the larger the armory will be to store weapons needed. Hence, it will also have access to a greater selection of weapons to choose from. For example, a Regimental Armory is far superior in the amount of weapons as well as diversity of weapon type it may carry, than a simple platoon armory.

With this all being said, there are plenty of instances where individual soldiers/marines are able to acquire weapons of all manner of types. I can personally state that while I was on active duty, I kept over a half dozen knives/blades of various lengths on my person. And that includes what I bought personally, besides being issued a heavy weapon. Another fellow serviceman preferred his Sig Sauer along with his M203. Where there is a need there is a way.

It seems to me that the differences between 40k and modern militaries in this regard are that pistols are closer to rifles in effectiveness (identical stopping power at half the range instead of reduced stopping power at a tenth the range), guns are lighter (at least given the weight figures Dark Heresy gives), and the odds of running into environmental conditions or enemies that might damage or destroy your primary weapon are higher. It makes sense to me that a sidearm would be more useful in standard kit in 40k than in the real world.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I was just think about the equipment of troops. when I thought something that was always bugged me. Things like a backup pistol are almost never mentioned. It makes sense that the armies would give their troops sidearms. Bolt pistols for SM and SoB, las pistols for guard (although not always, think the "give them a gun and send them out" method). pulse pistols for tau, shuriken pistols for eldar, and shard? pistols for DE.

So, after my rambling, does anyone know of any fluff that actually mentions this?

Space Marines in 40k are universally equipped with pistols in terms of wargear for squads.

That said, pistols are not generally standard-issue as others have noted. In an actual military engagement, they're about the least capable, shortest ranged, and least likely to be used weapon on the battlefield, and often are simply a badge of rank and/or a method of avoiding capture via suicide (unofficially of course...) or issued to soldiers not typically equipped with rifles (artillery gunners, heavy machine gun crew, tankers, officers, etc). A lot of those don't even get pistols anymore, In US service for example sidearms for many, if not most, of these kinds of troops have been replaced by carbines instead, or by "PDW's" (pistol caliber small submachine guns with compact 30 round magazines) in other nation's armies.

Typically, you're supposed to have squad members there to cover you in "oh gak" situations, so as not to need a sidearm. In terms of economics of warfare, sidearms often cost as much to produce as rifles and carbines or nearly so, and thus are seen as an inefficient use of resources and thus not as widely produced for general issue as well. It's also an extra few pounds of gun and ammo each guy needs to carry and watch after, so there's that to consider as well.

For ultra elite units typically operating at close quarters and who can be equipped as lavishly as possible, pistols are often used. In real life you'll see special operations commonly carrying sidearms, and in game you'll see Space Marines with them universally. That said, for most armies and regular line troops, they're largely unnecessary.

Orblivion wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Not sure if they still do it, but if I recall correctly, the US Army gave every soldier a pistol. Back in World War 2, that is.
I recall reading something about the Colt 1911 being very commonplace in their ranks.

No idea if they still do it now. The 1911 is most likely out of commission.

Actually it's pretty damn popular amongst servicepeople and civilians. Probably the most popular handgun in the USA.

Yup, the M9 replaced the 1911 for standard issue but a lot of serviceman prefer the 1911, and some branches such as the Marine Corps are actually phasing the 1911 back into standard issue.

The Marine Corps didn't initially switch over, but they do use the M9 now. 1911's are very rare still in military service. Special Operations units can still opt to carry it, but that's largely it.

Melissia wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Not sure if they still do it, but if I recall correctly, the US Army gave every soldier a pistol. Back in World War 2, that is.
I recall reading something about the Colt 1911 being very commonplace in their ranks.

No idea if they still do it now. The 1911 is most likely out of commission.

Actually it's pretty damn popular amongst servicepeople and civilians. Probably the most popular handgun in the USA.

Hrm, I'd probably venture the Glock 17 is. 1911's are generally very expensive relative to most Wonder 9's, and have less than half the capacity most 9mm double-stack's have. Wonder 9's are much more practical for use (and as such are ubiquitous in police, military, and competition use), even though typically not as cool looking/historic. 1911's are very much a "cool factor" piece.

TheCustomLime wrote:.45 ACP vs 9mm. The former has better stopping power than the later.

Not anymore. Modern and commonly available civilian 9mm ammo actually has more kinetic energy than US army standard issue .45acp ball ammo due to newer powders. Even when the .45 was "more" powerful, the difference wasn't huge, maybe a 5-10% difference in kinetic energy, today the differences between 9mm, .45, and .40 in terms of killing power are largely irrelevant, particularly when you look at the kinetic energy difference between say 9mm or .45ACP and a rifle round like .223 usually being ~300% that of the pistol round, the differences become very small very quickly.

Wyzilla wrote:

 Orblivion wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Not sure if they still do it, but if I recall correctly, the US Army gave every soldier a pistol. Back in World War 2, that is.
I recall reading something about the Colt 1911 being very commonplace in their ranks.

No idea if they still do it now. The 1911 is most likely out of commission.

Actually it's pretty damn popular amongst servicepeople and civilians. Probably the most popular handgun in the USA.

Yup, the M9 replaced the 1911 for standard issue but a lot of serviceman prefer the 1911, and some branches such as the Marine Corps are actually phasing the 1911 back into standard issue.

Probably because the 1911 doesn't fall apart like the M9 can.

Although personally I'd prefer a magnum as a backup weapon, simply because if you need a backup, you'll want something that has almost zero chance of jamming like semiautomatic pistols can.

To be fair, most M9's that fall apart don't do so of their own accord, but because they've been issued to two dozen people over thirty years, most of whom never bothered to do any maintenance or cleaning, and the US army refurbished and rebuilt most of their stock of 1911's on several occasions (particularly after WW2) and haven't really done the same for the M9's to anything near the same extent. That and the military for some reason insists on buying magazines 3rd party instead of from Beretta. The 1911 also has its own issues (extractor weakening, plunger tube snapping its retaining studs, etc) that often get overlooked. Plus I've never seen a Wonder-9 with an "idiot" mark the same way you see many (possibly most) 1911's

Just to clarify from real world experience.
Currently enlisted in the USMC, the standard Marine is given the M16/M4 service rifle. If they are a SAW gunner or officer or truck driver ect ect ect they get a pistol.
Pistols are given to people who might "need them" while your standard Marine is only given his service rifle.
So in lamens terms. Tactile Marines wouldn't get anything, along with the average guardsmen.

Just remember that Close Combat represents close range shots with sidearms (or the main ranged weapon being carried), not just hand-to-hand weapons. Maybe not in 7th, but many of the editions' rulebooks have expressly stated that.

But generally the saying is..if you are down to your sidearm...something very bad has happened.

That's generally the idea of the defenders in a close combat phase!

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Not sure if they still do it, but if I recall correctly, the US Army gave every soldier a pistol. Back in World War 2, that is.
I recall reading something about the Colt 1911 being very commonplace in their ranks.

No idea if they still do it now. The 1911 is most likely out of commission.

Dunno about the army, but the 1911 is still one of the two standard issue pistols used by the marine corps.

Also pistols are only issued to officers, and certain jobs that make the M4 uneffective

 Wyzilla wrote:
The question is if they're actually useful or there to just comfort you before you die horribly.

If the laws of realism were applied to 40k, then yeah, a laspistol would be more useful a weapon than a thunder hammer!

 thegreatchimp wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:
The question is if they're actually useful or there to just comfort you before you die horribly.

If the laws of realism were applied to 40k, then yeah, a laspistol would be more useful a weapon than a thunder hammer!

thegreatchimp takes aim at an Ork with his laspistol and fires.

The Ork is mildly inconvenienced and protests - look where you're pointing that thing, someone might get hurt!

Ashiraya swings her Thunder Hammer at a bunch of Orks.

Result: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRmiqaB-Fe4&t=39s

 Ailaros wrote:
Yeah, sidearms are sort of the bayonet of contemporary time. They may be issued out of nostalgia, protocol, or vague fears of situations that will never actually happen, but they're not serious weapons in warfare anymore.

Not to say that I have anything, personally, against either pistols or bayonets, and of course they have their place in the world of 40k (which has WWI tanks after all), but, well, on the battlefield, they are a bit of a relic, at best.

Interestingly enough, bayonets (and sidearms) were still very much a part of combat of WW1. And in the pacific front of WW2, bayonets were used often against the Japanese due to their tactics and the general terrain.

Agree about sidearms in the modern age though.

Well, with regards to bayonets and WW1, it wasn't so much that they really were a major killing weapon, as just they went into the war thinking it was still relevant and tried to keep using it long after it should have been clear that bayonet charges against machineguns were dumb.

In the pacific in WW2, the Japanese were typically massacred when they attempted mass bayonet charges. Bayonets were used when opposing forces managed to get close and visibility was extremely limited, but they weren't particularly responsible for any meaningful number of casualties.

I mean, even today, bayonets have seen use, it's just that it's rare enough that it's a news item when it occurs. Primarily they're retained for training purposes and for looking really scary when something needs to be intimidating.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
It seems to me that the differences between 40k and modern militaries in this regard are that pistols are closer to rifles in effectiveness (identical stopping power at half the range instead of reduced stopping power at a tenth the range), guns are lighter (at least given the weight figures Dark Heresy gives), and the odds of running into environmental conditions or enemies that might damage or destroy your primary weapon are higher. It makes sense to me that a sidearm would be more useful in standard kit in 40k than in the real world.

Depends on the firearm. Lasguns obviously are going to be fairly light given their lack of need for mechanical parts- it's a high powered beam of light, there's no gas blowback or gears at all to power the thing. Bolters however are completely incapable of being wielded by normal humans unless they're the reduced mortal human version. And even then they're freaking heavy, especially the ammo.

There is standard issue for troops now, a Rifleman will have his Rifle, bayonet, frags, and maybe a light anti-tank weapon/LAW. The light machine gunners carry their machinegun, bayonet, and as much ammo as he can carry. Grenadiers have their carbine/rifle with an under slung grenade launcher or one he carriers along side, his bayonet, and hand held frags. Heavy machine gunners will have a pistol as well as that beastly machinegun, bayonet and loads of ammo... Etc etc. the pistols are considered as a backup weapon if and when your main gun is down, ie malfunctions or stuff is going down fast and you need to shoot but the main gun is out of ammo and a reload isn't an option to survive. You could name a hundred reasons why a pistol is needed. Special troops will have a pistol along with whatever tool/main gun they are using. Knives and hatchets are still used by American troops ever since the French and Indian Wars, technically we were British then right, but you get my point.
Now as Warhammer 40K fluff goes if you're running a pristine IG unit that runs by the book then keep your models that carry pistols down to the officers, and maybe heavy weapons teams.

I say if you want then arm your troops with pistols, but if someone asks during or before a game then mention that its just for looks because it does look good but close combat happens and I do believe going to knives, pistols and bayonets would be what was happening in that brawl of models if they were real. I will place a pistol on a few regular Space Marines, along with magazine pouches, knives etc. I've even used Space Wolf knives on a Blood Angel or two, because trading with brother Infantrymen happens in real life so I figure a Blood Angel carrying a pistol on his hip yet in the list he's only armed with a bolt gun, and the wolf tooth adorned Space Wolf combat knife is just cool.
i understand it says a model is armed as it is on its army list, so I wouldn't model him wielding the pistol in his hand but just in its holster.
As far as the troops go in real life, it has been allowed by some units for the fighting men to bring pistols, and even keep ones they find on the battlefield for themselves. I know most non-Infantry units won't allow this, but when I say Infantry that includes units like the 101st, 173rd, 82nd, Ranger Battalion, 3/5 SOG, etc etc.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 thegreatchimp wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:
The question is if they're actually useful or there to just comfort you before you die horribly.

If the laws of realism were applied to 40k, then yeah, a laspistol would be more useful a weapon than a thunder hammer!

thegreatchimp takes aim at an Ork with his laspistol and fires.

The Ork is mildly inconvenienced and protests - look where you're pointing that thing, someone might get hurt!

Ashiraya swings her Thunder Hammer at a bunch of Orks.

Result: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRmiqaB-Fe4&t=39s

I don't know, I think thegreatchimp is onto something here. The most common soldier of the IoM, the PDF trooper/Guardsman, is most likely going to fight against other regular humans. Against regular humans a Laspistol is much more useful than a Thunderhammer since the Laspistol is lighter, easier to maintain, doesn't carry the risk of hurting the wielder, not as power intensive and not nearly as unwieldy. It also kills regular people dead better than a modern guns do. Given the choice, I'd take the Laspistol every time.

Even if I was a Space Marine I'd go for a Bolt Pistol over the Thunderhammer. Less risk of being killed and all.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
It seems to me that the differences between 40k and modern militaries in this regard are that pistols are closer to rifles in effectiveness (identical stopping power at half the range instead of reduced stopping power at a tenth the range), guns are lighter (at least given the weight figures Dark Heresy gives), and the odds of running into environmental conditions or enemies that might damage or destroy your primary weapon are higher. It makes sense to me that a sidearm would be more useful in standard kit in 40k than in the real world.

Depends on the firearm. Lasguns obviously are going to be fairly light given their lack of need for mechanical parts- it's a high powered beam of light, there's no gas blowback or gears at all to power the thing. Bolters however are completely incapable of being wielded by normal humans unless they're the reduced mortal human version. And even then they're freaking heavy, especially the ammo.

Was incorrect on the weight front, I went back and checked. A lasgun is, in fact, the same weight as an M16 when loaded (about 4kg), a human-scale bolter is much heavier (7kg).

 Ashiraya wrote:

thegreatchimp takes aim at an Ork with his laspistol and fires.

The Ork is mildly inconvenienced and protests - look where you're pointing that thing, someone might get hurt!

Ashiraya swings her Thunder Hammer at a bunch of Orks.

Result: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRmiqaB-Fe4&t=39s

Smashy smashy! How I had fun with that thing in Space Marine.

And with a good shot the Ork is going to die, its just... a bit more tricky.