Switch Theme:

Why ranged combat is impractical  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in nl
Longtime Dakkanaut





 BlaxicanX wrote:
 Galas wrote:

Most 40k battles are of three types: Urban or close quarters fighting: Jungles, space hulks, etc...

Where did you pull this out of? What are you talking about? 40K literally consists of millions of worlds. You're just as likely to fight on an open plain with no cover for hundreds of miles in every direction as you are a bombed out city or space hulk.

Melee combat is as prolific in 40K as fire fights for no reason other then rule of cool. And that's fine. But let's not pretend that it makes sense either in real life or even within the setting itself.
Sure. Armies fight in open plains with nothing in a 100 miles. But those are the battlefields where the guard army just shells their opponent into complete oblivion. Not the one where assault troops actually do anything and not the one that a 'normal' game of 40k is trying to represent.
   
Made in us
Witch Hunter Undercover in a Cult







 BlaxicanX wrote:
 Galas wrote:

Most 40k battles are of three types: Urban or close quarters fighting: Jungles, space hulks, etc...

Where did you pull this out of? What are you talking about? 40K literally consists of millions of worlds. You're just as likely to fight on an open plain with no cover for hundreds of miles in every direction as you are a bombed out city or space hulk.

Melee combat is as prolific in 40K as fire fights for no reason other then rule of cool. And that's fine. But let's not pretend that it makes sense either in real life or even within the setting itself.


And considering various Deep Strike mechanics how often do you suppose two people set up in lines in open terrain and run at each other?

The general use of teleporters/Drop Pods seems a better argument for melee than dense cover on all the battlefields. It doesn't matter how open the battlefield is if you're always starting the scale-equivalent of 9" away.

Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using. 
   
Made in gb
Instigating Incubi




The dark behind the eyes.

Something else to consider would be that (if you're invoking realism), the effective range of guns is likely to be a hell of a lot further than 100m.

I mean, this is an advanced setting where the combatants have access to all manner of bionic implants, genetic enhancements etc. It's not hard to imagine bionic eyes or helmets containing advanced targeting systems - allowing soldiers to effectively engage enemies at ranges far beyond normal human sight (as well as negating smoke, darkness etc.).

Obviously this isn't represented on the table for the same reason that every movie depicts advanced fighter jets or spacecraft dog-fighting like WW2 aircraft - because it's a lot more visually interesting than a jet blowing up a target with a guided missile from several miles away. But if you're pulling the realism argument then it's something you really have to consider.


Cronch wrote:
See its this kind of thinking that was used during WW1 with men running over the tops of trenches at machineguns. It didn't work.

It's not even that. A lot of people assume those mass charges happened before the generals were all old fools. The sad truth is, at the level of technology of 1910s, once the war of maneuver (which Germans did try in 1914) settles down, there is no way to circumvent the trenches. There's no paratroopers or armor to break through, there's only amassing enough infantry that simple statistics ensure some of them make it to the other side.


Another aspect is that this form of warfare was very new, so generals were basically having to learn a whole new set of tactics.

It used to be that wars simply couldn't last very long because, even in the event of a stalemate, one side would simply run out of supplies (due either to lack of resources or lack of money) and would be forced to withdraw. However, mechanised warfare between countries changed all that by allowing troops to be constantly resupplied and which were also far more economically resilient. So suddenly the stalemates were lasting almost indefinitely.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/02/04 23:24:38


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.
 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"



 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in es
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain




Vigo. Spain.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
 Galas wrote:

Most 40k battles are of three types: Urban or close quarters fighting: Jungles, space hulks, etc...

Where did you pull this out of? What are you talking about? 40K literally consists of millions of worlds. You're just as likely to fight on an open plain with no cover for hundreds of miles in every direction as you are a bombed out city or space hulk.

Melee combat is as prolific in 40K as fire fights for no reason other then rule of cool. And that's fine. But let's not pretend that it makes sense either in real life or even within the setting itself.


Why did you cut out the rest of that phrase where I literally said that?

 Crimson Devil wrote:

Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.

ERJAK wrote:
Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut



NE Ohio, USA

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 Excommunicatus wrote:
Yeah. The main battle-armament of the Adeptus Astartes has a maximum effective range that is shorter than a tennis court (78').

An Earthshaker's much-vaunted range translates, in reality, to less than a quarter of a kilometre.


I think they're mentioned in Vraks as shelling targets at least like 30km out. I think we can assume range compression so that it fits on the tabletop. Basically every tabletop miniatures game has fairly intense range compression.


Yeah.
I've never seriously worried about "realistic" ranges in my minis gaming.
1) Because, well, it's a game. If everything simply had range to everything else it'd make things pretty boring. And I can't generally play this stuff on a large enough area to represent "realism". I'm constrained to 4'x? table tops for the most part. So if a rifle is supposed to be longer range than a pistol, but shorter range than a cannon.... Then you have to make that fit in a space 4' across.
2) When people go on about the "real" ranges being too long & the lethallity to great to allow forces to reach a 3-4 turn mv distance away from the other groups table edge?
I (mentally) shrug & assume that the action taking place represents those forces that did make that far. Probably a very small %. If the table streched out 20' feet behind me? It'd be strewn with thousands & thousands & thousands of pts worth of both our dead.
   
Made in gb
Wicked Warp Spider






All ima say there's a reason people shoot at each other, rather than stab each other with swords in war and have been since gunpowder became reliable..
However in very close qurters like bunkers, ship innards etc. Id take a pistol and a ballistic knife over a rifle...

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/02/04 23:59:11


https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/772746.page#10378083 - My progress/failblog painting blog thingy

AngryAngel80 wrote:
I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
 
   
Made in us
The Last Chancer Who Survived




On moon miranda.

While I cannot claim to have ever been a soldier in a combat zone, I do have more than a few years of experience in owning, training with, and competing with both firearms and bladed weapons. I do HEMA Longword, Italo-Hungarian Sabre, Dussack, multiple different forms of wrestling/grappling and some more modern combatives, and will be in Prague later this year for a military sabre competition. I also own most major modern service rifles (or close commercial derivatives thereof) and have been shooting my entire adult life, including some action/dynamic competition like 3gun.

From that experience, I will say this. It is possible to close very quickly with a melee weapon and inflict a lethal wound. Without doubt, that is absolutely true. However, there is a reason projectile weapons dominate combat. Unless you are already within essentially "advance-lunge" distance with an opponent when armed with a blade, if they have a firearm at the ready (i.e. loaded and not in a holster) and are aware they are being attacked, you will die. Simple as. Likewise, within that distance, the firearm armed opponent can still use their weapon, and while you can block, parry, or void a blade, the same cannot be said of a bullet.

If we are going with realism, that is the simple reality of things. 40k however is Space Fantasy, a Tolkien-esque world with a Scifi texture pack, and it's best to just accept that for what it is.

More to the point, there is more to ranged weapons than just bullets. Explosive shells and crew served heavy weapons for instance.


EDIT: spelling

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/02/05 02:50:44


IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.

Heavy Gear Painting Log, Northern Guard, Southern Republican Army, and Terrain
The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.  
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






ccs wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 Excommunicatus wrote:
Yeah. The main battle-armament of the Adeptus Astartes has a maximum effective range that is shorter than a tennis court (78').

An Earthshaker's much-vaunted range translates, in reality, to less than a quarter of a kilometre.


I think they're mentioned in Vraks as shelling targets at least like 30km out. I think we can assume range compression so that it fits on the tabletop. Basically every tabletop miniatures game has fairly intense range compression.


Yeah.
I've never seriously worried about "realistic" ranges in my minis gaming.
1) Because, well, it's a game. If everything simply had range to everything else it'd make things pretty boring. And I can't generally play this stuff on a large enough area to represent "realism". I'm constrained to 4'x? table tops for the most part. So if a rifle is supposed to be longer range than a pistol, but shorter range than a cannon.... Then you have to make that fit in a space 4' across.
2) When people go on about the "real" ranges being too long & the lethallity to great to allow forces to reach a 3-4 turn mv distance away from the other groups table edge?
I (mentally) shrug & assume that the action taking place represents those forces that did make that far. Probably a very small %. If the table streched out 20' feet behind me? It'd be strewn with thousands & thousands & thousands of pts worth of both our dead.


You mean b.c of this?


15k+
:harlequin: 4k
Beastmen 9500

Reading/Writing LD, be kind!

https://maddpaint.blogspot.com 
   
Made in us
Battlewagon Driver with Charged Engine




Douglasville, GA

 Argive wrote:
All ima say there's a reason people shoot at each other, rather than stab each other with swords in war and have been since gunpowder became reliable..
However in very close qurters like bunkers, ship innards etc. Id take a pistol and a ballistic knife over a rifle...


Last I checked, military forces have started using carbines for close quarters combat. What I was taught in the military was "if they're in too close to use your gun, create enough space to use your gun."
   
Made in us
Powerful Phoenix Lord






Soldiers armed with carbines or sub-machineguns are also likely carrying a sidearm and/or knife....so you go to them when needed (which would be exceptionally rare).

 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




Annandale, VA

 Argive wrote:
All ima say there's a reason people shoot at each other, rather than stab each other with swords in war and have been since gunpowder became reliable..
However in very close qurters like bunkers, ship innards etc. Id take a pistol and a ballistic knife over a rifle...


A handgun is strictly the weapon you use to fight your way to your rifle and a knife is suicide with more steps. Things were different circa, oh, 1916, when a rifle was a meter-long manually-operated bulky monstrosity and trench raiders needed lighter and more mobile weaponry for confined spaces, but modern intermediate-caliber carbines are small, lightweight, far more lethal than a handgun, easier to manipulate, easier to manage recoil, easier to reload, and with a much higher capacity.

Anyone who would choose a weapon other than a carbine (or, in a pinch / for the sake of their vision and hearing, a submachine gun) for CQB/MOUT does not know what they are doing. Naval boarding teams and SWAT officers alike favor carbines. You have to get into tunnel rat territory for a handgun to become the optimal choice.

 Elbows wrote:
Soldiers armed with carbines or sub-machineguns are also likely carrying a sidearm and/or knife....so you go to them when needed (which would be exceptionally rare).


I cannot think of any modern military forces which issue sidearms to regulars. Bayonets, sure, and it goes somewhere in the pack where you can get to it when you need to pry open a can or extract a stuck casing, not for combat.

But handguns are overwhelmingly for officers and specialists who don't carry long arms, and for SF who are armed to the teeth. Your basic infantryman has zero need for a handgun, and there is nothing that it does better than his rifle.

Regarding ranges: 40k's rules cannot be evaluated while assuming a 1:1 ground scale. That way lies madness- beyond the ludicrously short ranges it implies for ranged combat, it gives you infantry who panic when more than an arm's length from their compatriots, turns measured in seconds, and supersonic aircraft that move around 20mph.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/02/05 02:01:30


 
   
Made in us
Confessor Of Sins




Can we add the fact that 40k should theoretically have MASSIVELY superior weapons in terms of effective ranges, accuracy, and lethality?

2500pts
2500
3000


 
   
Made in ca
Eternally-Stimulated Slaanesh Dreadnought





Hamilton, ON

FWIW, I'm not at all complaining about the ranges.

It's just funny.

The Fall of Kronstaat IV
Война Народная | Voyna Narodnaya | The People's War - 2,898pts* painted (updated 11/01/20)
Волшебная Сказка | Volshebnaya Skazka | A Fairy Tale (updated 29/12/19, ep10 - And All That Could Have Been)
Kabal of The Violet Heart (updated 02/02/2020)
* as of Chapter Approved: 2018. Not a typo.

All 'crimes' should be treasured if they bring you pleasure somehow. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut



NE Ohio, USA

 Amishprn86 wrote:
ccs wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 Excommunicatus wrote:
Yeah. The main battle-armament of the Adeptus Astartes has a maximum effective range that is shorter than a tennis court (78').

An Earthshaker's much-vaunted range translates, in reality, to less than a quarter of a kilometre.


I think they're mentioned in Vraks as shelling targets at least like 30km out. I think we can assume range compression so that it fits on the tabletop. Basically every tabletop miniatures game has fairly intense range compression.


Yeah.
I've never seriously worried about "realistic" ranges in my minis gaming.
1) Because, well, it's a game. If everything simply had range to everything else it'd make things pretty boring. And I can't generally play this stuff on a large enough area to represent "realism". I'm constrained to 4'x? table tops for the most part. So if a rifle is supposed to be longer range than a pistol, but shorter range than a cannon.... Then you have to make that fit in a space 4' across.
2) When people go on about the "real" ranges being too long & the lethallity to great to allow forces to reach a 3-4 turn mv distance away from the other groups table edge?
I (mentally) shrug & assume that the action taking place represents those forces that did make that far. Probably a very small %. If the table streched out 20' feet behind me? It'd be strewn with thousands & thousands & thousands of pts worth of both our dead.


You mean b.c of this?



No, that's just a cute picture. I mean because of exactly what I wrote.
   
Made in gb
Wicked Warp Spider






 catbarf wrote:
 Argive wrote:
All ima say there's a reason people shoot at each other, rather than stab each other with swords in war and have been since gunpowder became reliable..
However in very close qurters like bunkers, ship innards etc. Id take a pistol and a ballistic knife over a rifle...


A handgun is strictly the weapon you use to fight your way to your rifle and a knife is suicide with more steps. Things were different circa, oh, 1916, when a rifle was a meter-long manually-operated bulky monstrosity and trench raiders needed lighter and more mobile weaponry for confined spaces, but modern intermediate-caliber carbines are small, lightweight, far more lethal than a handgun, easier to manipulate, easier to manage recoil, easier to reload, and with a much higher capacity.

Anyone who would choose a weapon other than a carbine (or, in a pinch / for the sake of their vision and hearing, a submachine gun) for CQB/MOUT does not know what they are doing. Naval boarding teams and SWAT officers alike favor carbines. You have to get into tunnel rat territory for a handgun to become the optimal choice.

 Elbows wrote:
Soldiers armed with carbines or sub-machineguns are also likely carrying a sidearm and/or knife....so you go to them when needed (which would be exceptionally rare).


I cannot think of any modern military forces which issue sidearms to regulars. Bayonets, sure, and it goes somewhere in the pack where you can get to it when you need to pry open a can or extract a stuck casing, not for combat.

But handguns are overwhelmingly for officers and specialists who don't carry long arms, and for SF who are armed to the teeth. Your basic infantryman has zero need for a handgun, and there is nothing that it does better than his rifle.

Regarding ranges: 40k's rules cannot be evaluated while assuming a 1:1 ground scale. That way lies madness- beyond the ludicrously short ranges it implies for ranged combat, it gives you infantry who panic when more than an arm's length from their compatriots, turns measured in seconds, and supersonic aircraft that move around 20mph.


Yeah I was imagining like crawl/duct spaces in bunkers and ships etc.
Certainly some sort of rifle or SMG is what Id take to war rather than a pistol and knife

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/772746.page#10378083 - My progress/failblog painting blog thingy

AngryAngel80 wrote:
I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
 
   
Made in gb
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets





Cardiff

I’d thought no WWI Generals were alive today, but apparently the OP is one!

 Stormonu wrote:
For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
 
   
Made in ch
Revered Rogue Psyker





 JohnnyHell wrote:
I’d thought no WWI Generals were alive today, but apparently the OP is one!


Tbf, cqc assauls can work, infiltraiton tactics can work, but, BUT, slave fodder is not capable of These and amassing enough of them to Make up for their shortcoming makes them a prime target for any artillery in range.
Not to mention that logistics, especially for such mass armies and their Drive forward, play a gigantic role and the exemple here does not make sense due to the exemple here beeing chaos, which bluntly has logistical issues to the very core.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page

A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
_______________________________

Who would win:
10'000 + years of veterancy, or some raidy Boys?
Trick Question, of course it's the loyalists!

(Not Online in regards to the new Red Corsair battalion CP boost and 8th edition.) 
   
Made in fi
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 AnomanderRake wrote:
 BlaxicanX wrote:
 Galas wrote:

Most 40k battles are of three types: Urban or close quarters fighting: Jungles, space hulks, etc...

Where did you pull this out of? What are you talking about? 40K literally consists of millions of worlds. You're just as likely to fight on an open plain with no cover for hundreds of miles in every direction as you are a bombed out city or space hulk.

Melee combat is as prolific in 40K as fire fights for no reason other then rule of cool. And that's fine. But let's not pretend that it makes sense either in real life or even within the setting itself.


And considering various Deep Strike mechanics how often do you suppose two people set up in lines in open terrain and run at each other?

The general use of teleporters/Drop Pods seems a better argument for melee than dense cover on all the battlefields. It doesn't matter how open the battlefield is if you're always starting the scale-equivalent of 9" away.


Bad idea to use 40k rules to assume that's how things are fought in 40k in universum. 40k makes abstract game with oddities. Ranges, reliability of stuff(like always appearing exact same distance with teleport...) etc are not how things would actually work(and don't as shown in fluff)

https://middleagedstrategybattlegamers.home.blog/2019/12/31/tneva82-december-moria/<- lotr painting blog

12 factions for Lord of The Rings
11772 pts(along with lots of unpainted unsorted stuff)
5265 pts
5150 pts
~3200 pts Knights

 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka




 BlaxicanX wrote:
 Galas wrote:

Most 40k battles are of three types: Urban or close quarters fighting: Jungles, space hulks, etc...

Where did you pull this out of? What are you talking about? 40K literally consists of millions of worlds. You're just as likely to fight on an open plain with no cover for hundreds of miles in every direction as you are a bombed out city or space hulk.

Melee combat is as prolific in 40K as fire fights for no reason other then rule of cool. And that's fine. But let's not pretend that it makes sense either in real life or even within the setting itself.

I've always been annoyed a little by people insisting melee makes no sense within the setting. Between things like Orks and Tyranids, Dark Eldar need for suffering, Craftworlder culture, the fact that Marines are meant to be terror troops and the weird technologies melee does make a degree of sense within the setting.

tremere47-fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate, leads to triple riptide spam  
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka




UK

I think the key to realise is that in the 40K world the arms race has resulted in not just an insane development of weapons, but also armours and shields.

The result is that close combat becomes a viable tactic for many of the 40K forces because their armour is good enough to allow them to survive into close combat.


Meanwhile forces like orks, guard and tyranids make it into close combat through two aspects:
1) Numbers - they just throw meat at the wall

2) The fact that their opponents are tough enough to survive into close combat means that close combat is part of the battle style that has evolved between the factions.


In the end its a fantasy setting and the game is highly abstract to reality. Trying to work it out would break your brain especially as things like unit representation are not uniform. Eg a single marine model on the table could be anything from an actual single marine to a squad. Meanwhile a guardsman or Tyranid gaunt is likely going to represent dozens to hundreds (to perhaps thousands for the tyranid). Yet at the same time the Hive Tyrant behind the gaunts might well represent only one.

A Blog in Miniature - now featuring reviews of many new Black Library books (latest Novellas) 
   
Made in fr
Trazyn's Museum Curator





on the forum. Obviously

Are guard even that orientated towards close combat? They seem more shooty to me, especially compared to marines. Which makes sense; guard aren't power armored shock troops.
Apparently bayonet charges are a thing, but it seems to me that most of the fighting is done with artillery and fusilades of las gun fire. Its not really modern tactics, more WW1 - WW2 tactics, but then again we haven't really seen a full scale war in modern times.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/02/05 10:37:05


What I have
~4100
~1660
: LM

Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!

A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble

 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka




UK

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Are guard even that orientated towards close combat? They seem more shooty to me, especially compared to marines. Which makes sense; guard aren't power armored shock troops.



They've some closecombat variations, but yes by the large part they are ranged. They have bayonets and some units, like Catachans, are more skirmishers. However their lore aspect is that they are sneaky so they cover the 100m dash by sneaking up on you rather than running bold in your face at you.

That said they've also got rough-riders who are trained to charge the enemy in a lancers style level of combat. Of course rough riders have also vanished over the years and there's a questionmark on if we'll see them reappear. GW even teased us a few months back with the idea of releasing dogs within the Imperial Guard (it was around the time that Blackstone came out and they had one of the rouge trader groups with a dog).

A Blog in Miniature - now featuring reviews of many new Black Library books (latest Novellas) 
   
Made in us
Boom! Leman Russ Commander





 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Are guard even that orientated towards close combat? They seem more shooty to me, especially compared to marines. Which makes sense; guard aren't power armored shock troops.
Apparently bayonet charges are a thing, but it seems to me that most of the fighting is done with artillery and fusilades of las gun fire. Its not really modern tactics, more WW1 - WW2 tactics, but then again we haven't really seen a full scale war in modern times.



Bayonet charges are still a thing. In 2011, IIRC, a British platoon fixed bayonets and charged the enemy when caught in an ambush in Afghanistan.

While charging in mass to stick 'em with the pointy end is no longer the premier battle tactic, it's still valid and useful when the situation calls for it, and very effective at dislodging the enemy from a position.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/02/06 03:24:04


Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades! 
   
Made in fr
Trazyn's Museum Curator





on the forum. Obviously

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Are guard even that orientated towards close combat? They seem more shooty to me, especially compared to marines. Which makes sense; guard aren't power armored shock troops.
Apparently bayonet charges are a thing, but it seems to me that most of the fighting is done with artillery and fusilades of las gun fire. Its not really modern tactics, more WW1 - WW2 tactics, but then again we haven't really seen a full scale war in modern times.



Bayonet charges are still a thing. In 2011, IIRC, a British platoon fixed bayonets and charged the enemy when caught in an ambush in Afghanistan.

While charging in mass to stick 'em with the pointy end is no longer the premier battle tactic, it's still valid and useful when the situation calls for it, and very effective at dislodging the enemy from a position.


Huh, I did not know that. Interesting little fact there.
I especially didn't know modern rifles could still take bayonet attachments. I thought that got phased out.

What I have
~4100
~1660
: LM

Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!

A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble

 
   
Made in lt
Regular Dakkanaut





 G00fySmiley wrote:
"Yet Tau relies on damn precision weapons as their main battle rifle! Their pulse rifle which they hand out to every Tau grunt is extremely poor weapon. It has relatively low ammo count, low fire rate which is limited to single shot only. It also has a massive recoil for such gun. Sure, it has a great bite and a properly aimed shot will hit like a truck charging beast with its kinetic energy to stop him in his tracks and plasma damage to do actual damage on his flesh. Yet, the moment something doesn't go their way we can see entire battlelines quickly overwhelmed under mass assaults or ambushes."

what? its an ion pulse rifle, a tau rifle shoots energy. a laser rifle is shooting light, neither likely has any recoil. as to "slow fire" you are confounding game mechanics for lore. they shoot quite fast hard and are very accurate. btu it would nto be tabletop appropriate to say ok 30 shots per tau or guardsman.. then again it is represenative. that 30 man boy squad is likely much more numerous.

as to the idea that 100 yards is a difficult shot... it isn't with minimal training. I could take a novice and my dialed in rifle and get them to put them on a man sized target in an afternoon at 500 yards


A lot of people are unaware how Tau pulse rifle operates so I will make just one reply here.

Compared to other infantry weapons, the Pulse Rifle trades rate of fire for damage. Pulse Rifles also have significant recoil, which requires that the user be stationary to fire most effectively.


https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Pulse_Rifle

Pulse rifles are more akin to battle rifles in our world. A single shot weapon can fire as quickly as you can properly aim and press a trigger, but this doesn't change a fact that you have something akin to pathetic 1 shot/s vs 200 shots/s of lasgun. Machine guns for comparison can reach 600 shots per second. Though, it depends on a weapon for how long it can maintain such rate of fire. Miniguns are designed to fire really fast while machine guns while being capable of that, will probably jam or overheat if you do not control your fire rate.

I do not know what you mean by it being a difficult shot. What I was saying is that organizing your infantry squad in a heat of battle is difficult. Everyone is doing something else and are concerned with something different. For example, Death Guard while doing little more than marching through open ground will always begin their marches with extremely heavy artillery bombardment prior to that. This will easily disturb unit cohesion and it will be a lot more difficult to efficiently coordinate your squad in a heat of battle. Especially when you have 10 seconds before you all are dead.

"If the path to salvation leads through the halls of purgatory, then so be it."

Death Guard = 728 (PL 41) and Space Marines = 831 (PL 50)
Slaanesh demons = 460
Khorne demons = 420
Nighthaunts = 840 points Stormcast Eternals = 880 points. 
   
Made in gb
Mekboy Hammerin' Somethin'





UK

can't believe the fact tanks are a crap form of modern warfare hasn't come up yet .

Lets face it 'real' 40k would be drones fighting drones or worse invisible nano swams wiping everything out

 
   
Made in lt
Regular Dakkanaut





Tyel wrote:
I know its a jokey thread - but the logic never really works.

We have urban combat in real life. We don't fight with swords though because sure, you may only have a few seconds or whatever to shoot....
But you have guns that have over 600 RPM. You can unload a whole clip of 30 or whatever shots in 3 seconds.

You can then say "aha! they are immune to bullets" - but this just raises the question of "why wouldn't they be immune to swords?" If a 5.56mm bullet doesn't cut it, arm everyone with automatic elephant guns.

Ultimately 40k is an abstraction and a game. It should be a relatively short range scramble, because that's more fun that setting our armies up 3 feet away from each other and then just rolling dice until everything is dead.

And guardsmen get flashlights because thats what they get.


Yes, but you miss one important thing. People are not running like madman to your lines being completely oblivious to casualties, injuries or what is before them, but in W40k they will. In real life you hit person once he goes down. You open fire with machine gun and everybody ducks and are suppressed. These things do not exist in W40k. 5.56 mm bullet is really laughable and just cute in W40k setting. Even in our world it has well known issues with killing people and we have reports where shot people just ignore it and keep on fighting.

Now imagine same thing with frenzone! This chemical overloads human body allowing it to function over its maximum potential and on top of it, it prevents body from figuring out what damage was inflicted upon it. In other words, if a person is charging you drugged with frenzone, it will take more than a dozen such bullets to take it down. He will simply won't care how many holes there are in his stomach or arms. Drugs will keep pushing him for dozen more seconds before body will be forced to shut down and those seconds will allow him to get into melee with you. What you need to stop such maniac is kinetic energy to stop his charge and pin point accuracy to person's head or heart to shut him for good. You know, just like with orks. These are just basic combat troops in w40k, anyone else who is going to charge you will be LOT worse than these mere slaves.

This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2020/02/06 10:24:01


"If the path to salvation leads through the halls of purgatory, then so be it."

Death Guard = 728 (PL 41) and Space Marines = 831 (PL 50)
Slaanesh demons = 460
Khorne demons = 420
Nighthaunts = 840 points Stormcast Eternals = 880 points. 
   
Made in fr
Trazyn's Museum Curator





on the forum. Obviously

 Ernestas wrote:
 G00fySmiley wrote:
"Yet Tau relies on damn precision weapons as their main battle rifle! Their pulse rifle which they hand out to every Tau grunt is extremely poor weapon. It has relatively low ammo count, low fire rate which is limited to single shot only. It also has a massive recoil for such gun. Sure, it has a great bite and a properly aimed shot will hit like a truck charging beast with its kinetic energy to stop him in his tracks and plasma damage to do actual damage on his flesh. Yet, the moment something doesn't go their way we can see entire battlelines quickly overwhelmed under mass assaults or ambushes."

what? its an ion pulse rifle, a tau rifle shoots energy. a laser rifle is shooting light, neither likely has any recoil. as to "slow fire" you are confounding game mechanics for lore. they shoot quite fast hard and are very accurate. btu it would nto be tabletop appropriate to say ok 30 shots per tau or guardsman.. then again it is represenative. that 30 man boy squad is likely much more numerous.

as to the idea that 100 yards is a difficult shot... it isn't with minimal training. I could take a novice and my dialed in rifle and get them to put them on a man sized target in an afternoon at 500 yards


A lot of people are unaware how Tau pulse rifle operates so I will make just one reply here.

Compared to other infantry weapons, the Pulse Rifle trades rate of fire for damage. Pulse Rifles also have significant recoil, which requires that the user be stationary to fire most effectively.


https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Pulse_Rifle

Pulse rifles are more akin to battle rifles in our world. A single shot weapon can fire as quickly as you can properly aim and press a trigger, but this doesn't change a fact that you have something akin to pathetic 1 shot/s vs 200 shots/s of lasgun. Machine guns for comparison can reach 600 shots per second. Though, it depends on a weapon for how long it can maintain such rate of fire. Miniguns are designed to fire really fast while machine guns while being capable of that, will probably jam or overheat if you do not control your fire rate.

I do not know what you mean by it being a difficult shot. What I was saying is that organizing your infantry squad in a heat of battle is difficult. Everyone is doing something else and are concerned with something different. For example, Death Guard while doing little more than marching through open ground will always begin their marches with extremely heavy artillery bombardment prior to that. This will easily disturb unit cohesion and it will be a lot more difficult to efficiently coordinate your squad in a heat of battle. Especially when you have 10 seconds before you all are dead.


Yeah, the thing about Pulse rifles is that they aren't quite energy weapons like las weapons or necron gauss weapons.
They are basically rail guns - they use induction to fire a solid project that breaks down and turns into plasma upon leaving the barrel, due to it being heated and accelerated at high velocities. They are not true plasma guns, which uses gas or fluid as ammunition or even laser based, which uses light.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Ernestas wrote:
Tyel wrote:
I know its a jokey thread - but the logic never really works.

We have urban combat in real life. We don't fight with swords though because sure, you may only have a few seconds or whatever to shoot....
But you have guns that have over 600 RPM. You can unload a whole clip of 30 or whatever shots in 3 seconds.

You can then say "aha! they are immune to bullets" - but this just raises the question of "why wouldn't they be immune to swords?" If a 5.56mm bullet doesn't cut it, arm everyone with automatic elephant guns.

Ultimately 40k is an abstraction and a game. It should be a relatively short range scramble, because that's more fun that setting our armies up 3 feet away from each other and then just rolling dice until everything is dead.

And guardsmen get flashlights because thats what they get.


Yes, but you miss one important thing. People are not running like madman to your lines being completely oblivious to casualties, injuries or what is before them, but in W40k they will. In real life you hit person once he goes down. You open fire with machine gun and everybody ducks and are suppressed. These things do not exist in W40k.

5.56 bullet is really laughable and just cute. Even in our world it has well known issues with killing people and reports where shot people just ignore it and keep on fighting. Now imagine same thing with frienzone! This chemical overloads human body allowing it to function over its maximum potential and on top of it, it prevents body from figuring out what damage was inflicted upon it. In other words, if a person is charging you drugged with frienzone, it will take more than a dozen such bullets to take it down. He will simply don't care how many holes there are in his stomach or arms. Drugs will keep pushing him for dozen more seconds before body will be forced to shut down and those seconds will allow him to get into melee with you. What you need to stop such maniac is kinetic energy to stop his charge and pin point accuracy to person's head or heart to shut him for good. You know, just like with orks. These are just basic combat troops in w40k, anyone else who is going to charge you will be LOT worse than these mere slaves.


And that is why lasguns, autoguns and bolters don't use 5.56.
Lasguns can sever limbs on an unarmored target, because apparently it super heats the area and causes any moisture to flash boil, causing a small explosion. Or something like that, 40k science is weird.

Autoguns are chambered in 8mm rounds, iirc, although it varies by model.

Bolters fire armor piecing explosive rounds that are more comparable to rockets than bullets.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/02/06 10:26:56


What I have
~4100
~1660
: LM

Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!

A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble

 
   
Made in lt
Regular Dakkanaut





CthuluIsSpyMade,

You did not understood me. In my original point I had mentioned that Tau rifles are like battle rifles of today. They are single shot weapon (it doesn't mean that there is some real delay between shots, but do not have rate of fire). I also had said that they operate on kinetic and plasma principle. Kinetic energy provides penetration and accuracy while plasma provides damage. Tau rifles hit hard and are accurate. They also possess quite a lot of inherent armor penetration.

As for 5.56 point, it is a real life comparison. The thing is, our calibers are poor at stopping power. 5.56 will not stop charging Ork. In Warhammer all armaments are a lot bigger and heftier. What we use today, mere 2 kilogram rifles 3 kg if they are loaded are children's toys. Even bolt pistol have more stopping power than burst from M16. It is not about W40k technology being all that better, but about that infantry weapons in W40k are of entirely different level in terms of weight. In W40k they would consider AK47 as lacking on stopping power and we use one level weaker gun all together.

This is how I see Tau pulse rifles in terms of use and rate of fire. They have superb accuracy, range and hitting power. Though they are mediocre to crap at everything else as weapons. They are long, unwieldy with high recoil. They are poor close quarters weapons. They are complex weapons which makes them heavy on maintenance and very demanding on resupply. They have low rate of fire and are difficult to effectively use them when ranges are 100 meters and below.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragunov_sniper_rifle

If I'm wrong, please direct me to lore where they behave differently.


Also, I had double checked on pulse rifle lore. While they do have automatic function, due to recoil of a weapon and that plasma temperature taxes barrel and it requires to cool off, these weapons are fired in single shot mode. In fact, precisely due to cooling difficulties of this rifle, it has separate barrel to alternative shots while unused barrel cools off.

This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2020/02/06 10:46:11


"If the path to salvation leads through the halls of purgatory, then so be it."

Death Guard = 728 (PL 41) and Space Marines = 831 (PL 50)
Slaanesh demons = 460
Khorne demons = 420
Nighthaunts = 840 points Stormcast Eternals = 880 points. 
   
Made in fr
Trazyn's Museum Curator





on the forum. Obviously

Yeah, I agree with you on pulse rifles. People have this idea that they are true plasma / energy weapons with high rates of fire, but they are a little more complicated than that and don't actually shoot as fast as you'd think. Lasguns, bolters and pulse rifles may be all rapid fire in game, but in fluff they are supposed to have different firing rates.

We can also agree that 40k weapons on a different level to our weapons, but as that's the case, then would enemies being hopped up on space PCP really be that much of a factor? I'd argue that the reason why 40k weapons are so power is because of the likes of space PCP and orks, and as such ranged combat should still be quite practical against those targets.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/02/06 10:43:40


What I have
~4100
~1660
: LM

Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!

A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble

 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: