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.

What is realy the point though, honastly
I mean yes in some respects they do make the modle look more appiling
and yes most of the time they come with a pistol which, I'l admit, gives you one more attack
But personaly I'd prefer to take anouther gun.
but what do you think?

Agree or die!

Because I'd really rather bayonet that Ork rather than to have to punch it.

Because in the grim darkness of the far future, melee>shooting.

Because GRIMDARK.

And because sometimes it's easier to hack an Ork in half, killing him instantly, than to pepper him with boolets that he'll ignore for a bit before going down.

Not to mention, reloading. Chainswords don't need clips put in.

Besides, you're a Speed Freak. You should understand the importance of choppy fings.

Its the total opposite (unless your really fast or are nids) the more guns you have the more you kill, the more you kill the less need for melee, the less need you have for melee the more pointless your close combat weapons become.

Violence isn't the answer, Guns are.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ok I enjoy Melee as much as the next ork.
I just think that the rules for close combat weapons are terrible and considering most of my army caryes a ccw of some sort I just think the rules need improving!

Fire a warning Shot. Aim for the head.

double attacks in melee (marines)
1/3 more attacks in melee (orks)

40k drive-by's (Crons)

DA SPEED FREEK wrote: Its the total opposite (unless your really fast or are nids) the more guns you have the more you kill, the more you kill the less need for melee, the less need you have for melee the more pointless your close combat weapons become.

You must be new to 40k. In the grim darkness of the grimdark, punching someone in the face does more damage than a mini missile to the face.

-Loki- wrote:

DA SPEED FREEK wrote: Its the total opposite (unless your really fast or are nids) the more guns you have the more you kill, the more you kill the less need for melee, the less need you have for melee the more pointless your close combat weapons become.

You must be new to 40k. In the grim darkness of the grimdark, punching someone in the face does more damage than a mini missile to the face.

But only you punch with:




and suddendly it makes sense.

What is the point of these rambling, mind-numbing, and misspelled threads? Most of the OP's threads are the same, complaining about nothing that is controllable or feasible.

Pleaee come back when you have something constructive to say...

The OP may not be whining necessarily. I had a similar thought the other day! Say a SM tactical squad, i prefer to give the sergeant a bolter as the the shots get used more than using the BP and CCW. I would much rather have a rapid fire weapon than the extra attack in CC

TH3FALL3N wrote:The OP may not be whining necessarily. I had a similar thought the other day! Say a SM tactical squad, i prefer to give the sergeant a bolter as the the shots get used more than using the BP and CCW. I would much rather have a rapid fire weapon than the extra attack in CC

That makes sense, and is fine.

But the OP seems to be saying he would rather have an additional gun than his CCW. Like, 2 pistols > pistol and CCW...

Which, if is the case, he should look at a different army seen as he obviously favours shooting and wants less CC...


Or he is trolling

Von Chogg

Yet another thread whining about rubbish, full posts ending in offensive tat.
Let me put it this was, say we're charging through some buildings at eachother and you have your three hundred seven desired guns, I, on the other hand have a small pistol and a large knife. You're running around trying to aim at a moving target, switching between your assortment of weapons, trying to find which one would work best in such a confined space, as we've now met in a ruined building, full of rubble, with plenty of barriers and mounds to hide behind. Sure you'll get a good few shots from a distance in an empty plain, but up close I'm going to hide behind a rock, shoot you in the knees as your trying to blow me apart with your guns, then stroll over and stab you in the face.
This is the setting of many 40k battles, sure guns are good, but only at a distance, most of 40k is set in an urban, or densely covered environment, rendering your too many guns useless, and getting you stabbed in the face. Does that answer your question?
Also, please stop ending your posts in things such as "Obey or die!!!1one" , it's making you seem like either a ten year old or a troll, and detracts from any good points you may put forward in any future posts.

Chainswords look awesome. Rule of cool!

DA SPEED FREEK wrote:What is realy the point though, honastly
I mean yes in some respects they do make the modle look more appiling
and yes most of the time they come with a pistol which, I'l admit, gives you one more attack
But personaly I'd prefer to take anouther gun.
but what do you think?

Agree or die!

I would imagine the point is for use in close combat...though I might be wrong.

Skriker

Sir Samuel Buca wrote:Yet another thread whining about rubbish, full posts ending in offensive tat.
Let me put it this was, say we're charging through some buildings at eachother and you have your three hundred seven desired guns, I, on the other hand have a small pistol and a large knife. You're running around trying to aim at a moving target, switching between your assortment of weapons, trying to find which one would work best in such a confined space, as we've now met in a ruined building, full of rubble, with plenty of barriers and mounds to hide behind. Sure you'll get a good few shots from a distance in an empty plain, but up close I'm going to hide behind a rock, shoot you in the knees as your trying to blow me apart with your guns, then stroll over and stab you in the face.
This is the setting of many 40k battles, sure guns are good, but only at a distance, most of 40k is set in an urban, or densely covered environment, rendering your too many guns useless, and getting you stabbed in the face. Does that answer your question?
Also, please stop ending your posts in things such as "Obey or die!!!1one" , it's making you seem like either a ten year old or a troll, and detracts from any good points you may put forward in any future posts.

I'd just burn you too death with a scorcha!

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:What is the point of these rambling, mind-numbing, and misspelled threads? Most of the OP's threads are the same, complaining about nothing that is controllable or feasible.

Pleaee come back when you have something constructive to say...

Please come back when you have something constructive to say...

Stop repeating yourself and please come back when you have something constructive to say!

DA SPEED FREEK wrote: Its the total opposite (unless your really fast or are nids) the more guns you have the more you kill, the more you kill the less need for melee, the less need you have for melee the more pointless your close combat weapons become.

Violence isn't the answer, Guns are.

The problem with your position is that the number of ranged weapons a model carries has zero impact on the amount of times he can shoot in the shooting phase. Your wolf lord can be carrying a bolt pistol, a bolter and a plasma pistol, but still only gets to shoot once in a round. Better to keep that close combat weapon in hand and spend the points on other models since that is the only way you get more shots.

Skriker

DA SPEED FREEK wrote:

Sir Samuel Buca wrote:Yet another thread whining about rubbish, full posts ending in offensive tat.
Let me put it this was, say we're charging through some buildings at eachother and you have your three hundred seven desired guns, I, on the other hand have a small pistol and a large knife. You're running around trying to aim at a moving target, switching between your assortment of weapons, trying to find which one would work best in such a confined space, as we've now met in a ruined building, full of rubble, with plenty of barriers and mounds to hide behind. Sure you'll get a good few shots from a distance in an empty plain, but up close I'm going to hide behind a rock, shoot you in the knees as your trying to blow me apart with your guns, then stroll over and stab you in the face.
This is the setting of many 40k battles, sure guns are good, but only at a distance, most of 40k is set in an urban, or densely covered environment, rendering your too many guns useless, and getting you stabbed in the face. Does that answer your question?
Also, please stop ending your posts in things such as "Obey or die!!!1one" , it's making you seem like either a ten year old or a troll, and detracts from any good points you may put forward in any future posts.

I'd just burn you too death with a scorcha!

This sounds like the trolling of a teenager... lock time?