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.

Samus_aran115 wrote:which for all intensive purposes

This phrase doesn't actually mean anything. "For all intents and purposes" is what you're looking for. Common mistake, up there with "irregardless" and "a whole nother thing" and similar phrases.

Or "It's not perfect, but it's complete"

and Intensive purposes does mean something it means something that is focussed on for a long time, the purpose of that.

Yes, but ironically the intent of "all intensive purposes" is "all intents and purposes!"

Actually I read the whole thread, and couldnt resis. Sorry mate.

Brother SRM wrote:Yes, but ironically the intent of "all intensive purposes" is "all intents and purposes!"

Just nitpicking now (because I can. ;D) The exclimation mark should go outside the quotes, as it is not part of the quote.

ObliviousBlueCaboose wrote:Actually I read the whole thread, and couldnt resis. Sorry mate.

Couldn't resist what?

Scipio Africanus wrote:

Brother SRM wrote:Yes, but ironically the intent of "all intensive purposes" is "all intents and purposes!"

Just nitpicking now (because I can. ;D) The exclimation mark should go outside the quotes, as it is not part of the quote.

I believe you meant "exclamation" there, too.

I agree with several of the other posters in here in regard to the fact that GW made lascannons AP2 for game balance. But, I'd take it one step further and go (somewhat) scientific on it.

If you think about what a laser is, and how much energy it requires to burn through something, you're presented with sort of a quandry. Sure, there are lasers capable of burning through metal (some at extremely fantastic rates), but this occurs at very close range. A laser is a coherent beam of light, and thusly is subject to diffusion over distance as it collides with particles present in the atmosphere. This means it requires more and more energy to reach out further (obviously). Now, consider that this energy is transferred by radiation (which is rather inefficient), and you realize that a laser loses much of its energy due to the simple facts of diffusion and this inefficient means of transferring its destructive power.

Now, take a railgun for instance...its energy is contained in the form of kinetic energy, and when it contacts another object, its energy is transferred directly, which is much, much more efficient than radiated energy. As for meltas, I kind of picture them akin to a shaped charge in energy weapon form; a jet of molten, superheated gas that punches through armor much like a HEAT round from a tank.

Just my (overly analytical) two cents...

Meltaweapons superheat the air. Simple.

If there was really a way to balance Las Cannons (and a few other weapons as well), well, here's my idea:

If the Las Cannon (Or any other S9-8, single shot, non-blast weapon, twin-linked or not) is turreted on a vehicle as its main armament, is considered AP 1. This represents the weapon being combined on a stable platform (the turret) and better targeters and augurs for a more well-placed shot (window slits, tracks, doors, etc.). This rule does not extent to any hull or sponsoned weaponry of the same type.

I think it would give players a better option than spamming meltas and throwing them in the face of the enemy and adds a little more flexibility into the army(s) as a whole.

why arent Void Lances AP1? Read the fluff and tell me how anythign is supposed to survive that?

Wazzdakka Gutsmek should be AP1 too. He destroyed a Warhound Titan by driving into it.

I didn't read the whole thread, so apologies if this has been said-what if they went down to S8, but became AP1? Yes, I realize that is the stat-line of a meltagun without the melta rule and a better range. But S9 only makes it better able to stun a Land Raider or equivalent, and the S8 will still be able to kill the same things, but with better distance. And costs could even go down a bit, to something only a few points higher than a Multi-Melta. Just my thoughts. I'm not saying it's necessarily better...just possible.

Jidmah wrote:Wazzdakka Gutsmek should be AP1 too. He destroyed a Warhound Titan by driving into it.

Gauss weapons should be AP1too. They flay everything in the Fluff (and tabletop in the old codex. Haven't played against the new one)