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.

Except as we explained, these arent chainsaws. They're weapons of war created 30,000 years in the future

The reason the rapier and similar swords were so great during their time was the quality of armor was poor and had those exposed joints made of leather and cloth that a blade could get through. Future armor and even most current armor doesn't have that problem.

Science time!! Take your kevlar vest(I am assuming everybody has a spare) and place it on your test dummy(might have to buy one). Now stab it with your rapier. You will penetrate, but it will be nowhere near as good a cut or penetration as you would expect against leather/cloth/hopes and dreams.

I am working on the assumption that 40k armor is at least at the quality of basic body armor today. It won't stop the blade but it also won't get rended by it. They make anti-stab vest today that will stop a knife, but do bullocks all for bullets/lasers. A chainsaw with oversized teeth, however, will do a massive amount of damage to the kevlar vest and a fair amount to the anti stab vest if used properly. Key there is the oversized teeth. A standard chainsaw will have large problems tackling plates of any kind, not to mention ceramic ballistic plates.

When the weapon is designed to tear through the lowest common denominator of armor, it will do it. In fact, any weapon designed for a singular purpose(long range shooting, armor piercing, light them on fire) will excel at that if it gets out into the field MOST of the time and will pale in comparison in other aspects(rapid shooting, hunting, snuggling).

-cgmckenzie

Stella Cadente wrote:straight swords have a thin piercing point for a very very good reason, you can probably guess what that piercing point is used for.

Imperial chainswords (not necessarily the double sided ones used by chaos) tend to also have a point.

And don't forget, though the basic CCW of the 41st millenium is pretty much the same as the basic CCW from now, the Chain-weapons don't just use normal blades, but instead, I think, monomolecular blades, whirring about with an engine as strong as a diesel trukk's powering them.

That, and with a single blade, you manage to hit a soft spot, you do one hit of damage. With a chainsaw blade, you manage to hit a soft spot, you're hitting it at 200 hits per minute.

Anvildude wrote:And don't forget, though the basic CCW of the 41st millenium is pretty much the same as the basic CCW from now, the Chain-weapons don't just use normal blades, but instead, I think, monomolecular blades, whirring about with an engine as strong as a diesel trukk's powering them.

That, and with a single blade, you manage to hit a soft spot, you do one hit of damage. With a chainsaw blade, you manage to hit a soft spot, you're hitting it at 200 hits per minute.

It could be better said that it makes a soft spot.

-cgmckenzie

Stella Cadente wrote:

cgmckenzie wrote:Against armor it would still be more helpful than a straight blade.

except no, straight swords have a thin piercing point for a very very good reason, you can probably guess what that piercing point is used for.

if anything a basic straight sword should have rending because of that, while a chainsword should have -1 to hit and wound and give +1 to armour saves for being so utterly pathetic as a weapon of war, it would be more effective to turn it off and use it as a club with lots of teeth

The **** man?

A chainsword is not just a chainsaw. A real world chainsaw is bad as a weapon of war because it's a goddamned gardening tool. A chainsword is not: those teeth are way more than just regular chain; they're designed specifically to rip through armor and flesh, whereas a chainsaw is designed to rip through wood. The chainsword is a weapon. The chainsaw is a tool. Do not confuse the two.

Melissia wrote:

Stella Cadente wrote:straight swords have a thin piercing point for a very very good reason, you can probably guess what that piercing point is used for.

Imperial chainswords (not necessarily the double sided ones used by chaos) tend to also have a point.

and that point is moving, fat and covered in a shell, that won't do squat since its got maybe an inch of penetration at the point, at least it would if it wasn't moving, its a slashing weapon, and armour is made to stop slashing better than it is stabbing, heck Vostroyans would technically be almost immune to chainswords, and would probably bugger it up when it hits the chainmail.

Stella Cadente wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Stella Cadente wrote:straight swords have a thin piercing point for a very very good reason, you can probably guess what that piercing point is used for.

Imperial chainswords (not necessarily the double sided ones used by chaos) tend to also have a point.

and that point is moving, fat and covered in a shell

And yet, swordsmen in 40k are using chainswords are able to quickly bisect opponents-- literally cutting tough opponents such as Orks in half-- in one swift blow.

Don't use the models as a basis for judging the width of a chainsword.

Chain edged weapons LOOK like they should be better in assault than CCW.
The RULE of COOL makes them worth an upgrade to thier abilities.IMO.

I think rending is a bit too much...(Concidering the frequency in the game.)

But giving them the ability to allow you to re roll to wound dice, OR force the oponent to re roll thier armour save....Is about where they should be.IMO.

This could simply be a house rule, for those that want chain edged weapons to be a bit better than plain ones.

We just need to agree on the increase in PV for this sort of effect....

If chain swords also rended. I would take units with them in my Eldar army. Since all they do at the moment is give a +1 to STR, plus whatever goes on with those units, I've never bothered to take them.

So yea, +1 STR AND Rending? I will bring them

Except if you give scorps rending, what's the point of Banshees?

loota boy wrote:Except if you give scorps rending, what's the point of Banshees?

Banshees ALWAYS ignore armor saves, and usually strike first, and have Fleet.

Scorps have higher strength, and enough attacks to reliably rend pretty often. They have a better save too, and don't need fleet as much, because they have infiltrate and can get stealth, so they are more survuivable too. I'd take scorps over banshees any day if they rended.

Hmm speaking of banshees, I know this is about CHAIN weapons but does anyone else think that Power weapons should also get benefits against vehicles?

They should get +1 damage, just like AP 1 weapons.

I'd been fine with chainswords having or not having rending. Depending on the strength and quality of the chainsword rending and nonrending are possible. However, you'd need to have a pointcost increase for all the guys with chainswords, so its just easier to keep chainswords the way they are.

Chainswords, as has been pointed out before are terrible weapons. The cutting surface is less wide than the sword and you have blocky sides that would actually prevent penetration of the weapon into anything. Secondly, chainsaws and weapons built on the same ideas have issues with the blade binding and sticking in things as soft and unmoving as wood, let alone moving people wearing thick armor.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:Don't use the models as a basis for judging the width of a chainsword.

Okay, we'll use the art then that shows that same thing. We can also safely assume that the marine is cutting people in half in spite of his weapon not because of it. You can't just ignore basic physics because you don't like them, that's not how analyzing things works.

Norade wrote:Okay, we'll use the art then that shows that same thing. We can also safely assume that the marine is cutting people in half in spite of his weapon not because of it. You can't just ignore basic physics because you don't like them, that's not how analyzing things works.

Who said anything about Marines? Mere humans manage it.

And doing it to creatures far tougher than humans.

Melissia wrote:

Norade wrote:Okay, we'll use the art then that shows that same thing. We can also safely assume that the marine is cutting people in half in spite of his weapon not because of it. You can't just ignore basic physics because you don't like them, that's not how analyzing things works.

Who said anything about Marines? Mere humans manage it.

Which shows that Orks aren't as tough as people think they are. The point is the weapon as shown is frankly slowed beyond all belief and it's for really simple reasons too.

1) If chainsaws made such effective weapons why are they so rarely used in violent crime today with normal knives and guns being favored to such a high degree?

2) Why would you want a weapon where you can potentially snap the chain, bind the blade, blow the motor, or run out of fuel leaving you with a slightly pointy club?

3) Looking at the design of the weapon they have a blocky outer casing which should actually hinder it penetrating anything, this is based on the pictures as well as the models.

4) They can't be stealthy weapons given that they always make more noise than a solid blade.

Orks are toughness 4, same as a Marine, meaning ungodly tough. I'm not sure about their Deathwatch stats(which are usually more accurate) but I bet you it's somewhere in the 40s to 50s.

1: Cost, weight, noise, etc. More importantly, criminals rarely have to cut through anything harder than Kevlar, while a Chainsword is good for cutting through Genestealers,

2: Because it's got much more cutting and ripping power than a real world chainsaw.

3: It'd only hurt penetration with the spine of the blade, which a swordsman can tell you you shouldn't cut with anyway.

4: Which is why stealth troops like SM scouts use regular blades.

Orks are as tough as Marines, if not tougher.

Norade wrote:1) If chainsaws made such effective weapons why are they so rarely used in violent crime today with normal knives and guns being favored to such a high degree?

Why are you talking about chainsaws? I thought this was a thread about chainswords.

Norade wrote:2) Why would you want a weapon where you can potentially snap the chain, bind the blade, blow the motor, or run out of fuel leaving you with a slightly pointy club?

Because it's more effective.

Norade wrote:3) Looking at the design of the weapon they have a blocky outer casing

apparently they don't, because they can bisect incredibly tough creatures.

Norade wrote:4) They can't be stealthy weapons given that they always make more noise than a solid blade.

Which is why recon regiments don't use them, duh?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Your Friend Doctor Robert wrote:Orks are toughness 4, same as a Marine, meaning ungodly tough. I'm not sure about their Deathwatch stats(which are usually more accurate) but I bet you it's somewhere in the 40s to 50s.

They have Unnatural Toughness just like Marines, with a toughnesss value ranging between 40 and 50 depending on your source.

Norade wrote:2) Why would you want a weapon where you can potentially snap the chain, bind the blade, blow the motor, or run out of fuel leaving you with a slightly pointy club?

Because it's more effective.

Considering that this is 40,000 years into the future, and the Mechanicum generally likes creating effective cheap things, I'm pretty sure they've found certain kinds of materials (adamintine maybe? Something readily available and powerful.) that would keep this from happening... There are AV 14 Land Raiders afterall, and Power Weapons.

grayspark wrote:

Norade wrote:2) Why would you want a weapon where you can potentially snap the chain, bind the blade, blow the motor, or run out of fuel leaving you with a slightly pointy club?

Because it's more effective.

Considering that this is 40,000 years into the future, and the Mechanicum generally likes creating effective cheap things, I'm pretty sure they've found certain kinds of materials (adamintine maybe? Something readily available and powerful.) that would keep this from happening... There are AV 14 Land Raiders afterall, and Power Weapons.

I agree with the grayspark's opinion.

1: Cost, weight, noise, etc. More importantly, criminals rarely have to cut through anything harder than Kevlar, while a Chainsword is good for cutting through Genestealers,

So all these things are still a factor for a space marine as well. Not to mention that we see normal swords work just fine in the hands of space marines.

2: Because it's got much more cutting and ripping power than a real world chainsaw.

I'm going to call BS on that given that we have 8.5 horsepower commercial chainsaws and even more powerful vehicle mounted chainsaws. The real reason we don't use them is there's no point. A knife kills just as well and you're always better of engaging at range when you can.

3: It'd only hurt penetration with the spine of the blade, which a swordsman can tell you you shouldn't cut with anyway.

No, seeing as the raised edge goes all the way around I'd say that it hurts penetration all over. Also, you want to strike with the last third of the blade for a slashing sword which on all models and pictures still has that wide edge. So try again moron.

4: Which is why stealth troops like SM scouts use regular blades.

At least somebody is willing to use the logical option.

Melissia wrote:Orks are as tough as Marines, if not tougher.

Norade wrote:1) If chainsaws made such effective weapons why are they so rarely used in violent crime today with normal knives and guns being favored to such a high degree?

Why are you talking about chainsaws? I thought this was a thread about chainswords.

A weaponized chainsaw is still a chainsaw. They operate under the same principles and you can't just wave your hands and yell 'the chainswoord is not a chainsawz'. You try pitching the idea of a chainsword to any real life fighting force military or mercenary and see how far you get.

Melissia wrote:

Norade wrote:2) Why would you want a weapon where you can potentially snap the chain, bind the blade, blow the motor, or run out of fuel leaving you with a slightly pointy club?

Because it's more effective.

Care to explain exactly how it's more effective or do you not have an answer because you haven't given this a lick of rational thought?

Melissia wrote:

Norade wrote:3) Looking at the design of the weapon they have a blocky outer casing

apparently they don't, because they can bisect incredibly tough creatures.

You're going to deny the art and models that depict chainswords then?

Melissia wrote:

Norade wrote:4) They can't be stealthy weapons given that they always make more noise than a solid blade.

Which is why recon regiments don't use them, duh?

Ah, so the purpose of the melee weapon, utility and stealth is lost for any unit carrying chainswords over regular knives and seeing as a marine with a normal sword kills just as well in most sources they actually have no advantages.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

grayspark wrote:

Norade wrote:2) Why would you want a weapon where you can potentially snap the chain, bind the blade, blow the motor, or run out of fuel leaving you with a slightly pointy club?

Because it's more effective.

Considering that this is 40,000 years into the future, and the Mechanicum generally likes creating effective cheap things, I'm pretty sure they've found certain kinds of materials (adamintine maybe? Something readily available and powerful.) that would keep this from happening... There are AV 14 Land Raiders afterall, and Power Weapons.

That's wonderful, now take a chainsaw and try to cut through a bar made of the same metal as the teeth. Didn't work? Then try cutting through a softer metal like aluminium. Still didn't work? Try against something like thin sheet metal. Once you're done with that try a saw made for the job along with things like an axe and a heavy mace.

You'll soon find that there are reasons we don't normally use chainsaws versus metal and that knights prefered axes, maces, and hammers against armored foes. If SM used things like cutting saws against their enemies that would make a ton more sense, but sadly GW are morons who struggle to do anything even part way constantly as evidenced in the many ways bolters are depicted in canon.

You really seem to be forgetting that chainswords are not modern chainsaws. Not even close, so trying to use the fact that we don't use chainsaws in the military today as reasoning for chainswords being bad is wrong. And here's why!

1) Chainsaws are designed for cutting through wood. That means small teeth made of a lightweight material moving quickly is good enough. Chainswords are designed to cut through armor and people. Much bigger teeth made of a much stronger material moving slower with more torque.

2)The chain for the chainsword will also be beefed up to prevent jamming/breaking.

3)The soldiers of today can think of a multitude of things that they can carry for the 15-20 lbs that is a chainsaw. Stuff like more water, more ammo, more rations, or clean socks/scivvies. SM really don't have that problem.

4)Melee is by no means there for the stealthy kills. For a tabletop example, think back to an assault that happened in the middle of the table. For a real world example, I have personally gotten into a number of hand to hand situations with insurgents, not because I wanted to keep it quite but because I couldn't level my rifle on them before they closed on me from around a corner.

Comparing the two and using today's chainsaws as the point of measurement is like using the very first man-portable firearms as justification as to why my M4 is ineffective compared to a bow. Or even why the classic spear point knife is better than my more modern Bowie style point knife. Technology changes, and in 40,000 years chainswords could very well be a viable weapon.

-cgmckenzie

cgmckenzie wrote:1) Chainsaws are designed for cutting through wood. That means small teeth made of a lightweight material moving quickly is good enough. Chainswords are designed to cut through armor and people. Much bigger teeth made of a much stronger material moving slower with more torque.

All the torque in the world won't keep you chain from binding against hard materials. There is a reason that nobody in real life would ever develop a chain driven melee weapon. You can also say that the materials they use are stringer, well so is the armor of their enemies not to mention things like a spindly Necron arm made of living metal that is sure to bind your blade.

2)The chain for the chainsword will also be beefed up to prevent jamming/breaking.

A chainsword will still jam 100% more than a static blade.

3)The soldiers of today can think of a multitude of things that they can carry for the 15-20 lbs that is a chainsaw. Stuff like more water, more ammo, more rations, or clean socks/scivvies. SM really don't have that problem.

If the brass thought that a chainsaw would help they would stuff it on them. We've seen how the brass love to stuff extra weight on soldiers.

4)Melee is by no means there for the stealthy kills. For a tabletop example, think back to an assault that happened in the middle of the table. For a real world example, I have personally gotten into a number of hand to hand situations with insurgents, not because I wanted to keep it quite but because I couldn't level my rifle on them before they closed on me from around a corner.

Yes, troops need a melee weapon, no they don't need a slowed chainsword when we've seen that regular weapons work just as well. Not to mention that the melee weapons most soldiers carry are more likely to be used for things other than combat that a chainsword would be useless for. As for melee in the current theater, yes it does happen, but more often people switch to pistols or in rare cases fix bayonets).

Comparing the two and using today's chainsaws as the point of measurement is like using the very first man-portable firearms as justification as to why my M4 is ineffective compared to a bow. Or even why the classic spear point knife is better than my more modern Bowie style point knife. Technology changes, and in 40,000 years chainswords could very well be a viable weapon.

-cgmckenzie

Sorry, but that's just plain BS. Ask anybody today if they think developing a chainsaw weapon for the cases we use melee weapons today would be a smart idea. Then ask them if going back to the days of grenadiers being armed with melee weapons and short range firearms makes any sense. I think I know what your answer will be.

Also, yes, I know that the armor in 40k is supposed to somehow make melee effective again, but you'll always be safer firing back at the enemy from cover rather than rushing in at him where you run the risk of them getting a clear shot off. In the cases where ammo runs out, a las weapon with bayonet would be a more effective use of the weight than a melee weapon.

wow a page arguing about a fictitious weapons, ok sure. I didn't intend this thread to be in the fluff section, but now, I think it qualifies.

Augustus wrote:wow a page arguing about a fictitious weapons, ok sure. I didn't intend this thread to be in the fluff section, but now, I think it qualifies.

Thread was worthless anyway, just do a search and see how often the idea gets shot down by everybody...

I think we went over the pointlessness of chain weapons a few pages ago. There are so many other things that are utterly stupid in 40k. Like Titans and any sort of big walking robot thing. The concept is ridiculous. But it still exists, doesn't it? That's because this is 40million years in the future, with space orks and robot skeletons. It's not supposed to be realistic at all! The chainsword is a purely "rule of cool" scenario, and this is a thread discussing introducing rending to chainswords, due to the "rule of cool."

Do you seriously think that in 38,000 years, we won't develop a better chainsaw? Because if you do, you embody every little thing that is horrible about science fiction fans.