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.

@Melissia: Well that muddies the waters a bit...

Per the above, it would appear that calibers are the same. Presumably the difference in penetration is some sort of combination of firing mechanism and bolt construction...

Is there a difference in weapon range? Is there a penalty for firing a bolter single handed without strength augmentation?

Are military bolters same damage profile as Astartes/Sororitas bolters? The IG issues bolt weapons to specialist troops and officers. They don't have strength augmentation either.

What damage do autoguns use in that system?

Civilian pattern bolters have a 90 meter effective range (long range being double this distance, and extreme range being at least three times this distance) regardless of make. Asatrtes pattern bolters are at 100 meters. Bolt pistols have a 30 meter range for both types. Bolt pistols do the same damage as boltguns, but heavy bolters do notably more damage in both cases (2d10+10 for Astartes pattern, and 2d10 for the civilian pattern, with each d10 being rolled twice and picking the highest for both). Astartes pattern bolters can also fire in full auto, whereas civilian pattern bolters can't.

There's a penalty for firing any basic weapon single-handedly without a specific trait, "bulging biceps", which does have a strength requirement for it and obviously indicates particularly strong arms. Having an Extra Grip/Pistol Grip (Same thing) lowers this penalty, as does the weapon being a carbine (there are lascarbines and so on).

There doesn't appear to be any difference between military-grade "human" bolters and civilian grade ones save for cost and weight. There's an illegal pattern of bolt carbine (the Angelus, likely the inspiration for or inspired by the name of the Blood Angels carbine) that fires Astartes shells, which has the Astartes damage profile. And the Spitfire, which is not really a proper bolter at all, made by gangers and incredibly unreliable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

gendoikari87 wrote:What damage do autoguns use in that system?

Both lasguns and autoguns are 1d10+3 (earlier I was apparently looking at the pistol variants, which do 1d10+2) without a re-roll on the 1d10.

I don't know about str augmentation on a genetic level but the sororitas are wearing power Armor. So presumably it has some strength augmenting abilities, otherwise the suits would be more like coffins. at least the normal human ones, sororitas look much slimmer.

Sororitas armor in actual artwork doesn't look very slimming. Boobcups and corsets aside, it's a protective piece of armor, not a fashion statement

also why would you need a str requirement to singly wield a lasweapon they have no recoil.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:Sororitas armor in actual artwork doesn't look very slimming. Boobcups and corsets aside, it's a protective piece of armor, not a fashion statement

I meant more that it looks thin in comparison to astartes versions.

But not compared to other human armors such as Inquisitors.

Keep in mind that Astartes are muclebound freaks, they do not have a normal human outline to begin with.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

gendoikari87 wrote:also why would you need a str requirement to singly wield a lasweapon they have no recoil.

Try wielding a battle rifle in one hand without a pistol grip.

Melissia wrote:Civilian pattern bolters have a 90 meter effective range (long range being double this distance, and extreme range being at least three times this distance) regardless of make. Asatrtes pattern bolters are at 100 meters. Bolt pistols have a 30 meter range for both types. Bolt pistols do the same damage as boltguns.

Emphasis mine

This has always bothered me immensely.

We've already postulated that the rocket motor portion of the bolt is for speed maintenance only, and is used to maintain lethal force over the duration of its flight. Ergo, lower effective range would be dependent on the operating period of the rocket motor. Hence, in a bolt pistol, due to the smaller format, the motor duration is less. Makes sense so far. However, as the pistol has the same calibre (20mm) and since damage is stated to be the same as the long-arm version, this means that the speed of the projectile once it exits the muzzle is the same in the bolt pistol as the bolter. However, as the bolt pistol has a drastically shorter profile - it would appear that acceleration to the needed velocity happens irrespective of mechanism size OR barrel length. This part makes no sense.

It makes even less sense if part of the volume savings in smaller bolt pistol ammunition includes a reduction in the size of the solid core - as this would necessitate an INCREASE in exit (and maintained flight) speed to match the AP characteristic of its larger and heavier cousin... all from a smaller firing mechanism. I can see that -maybe- the full size bolter needs additional mechanism to enable fire in auto-mode (which was noted, doesn't exist in civilian bolters!), but the added barrel would appear to not contribute anything to performance.

Finally - if it has the same calibre and exit speed as a regular bolter (to maintain damage parity) - this would suggest (and I'm not entirely sure about this) that the pistol has a similar recoil profile as the bolter - but in a single handed form factor!

keezus wrote:

Melissia wrote:Civilian pattern bolters have a 90 meter effective range (long range being double this distance, and extreme range being at least three times this distance) regardless of make. Asatrtes pattern bolters are at 100 meters. Bolt pistols have a 30 meter range for both types. Bolt pistols do the same damage as boltguns.

Emphasis mine

This has always bothered me immensely.

We've already postulated that the rocket motor portion of the bolt is for speed maintenance only, and is used to maintain lethal force over the duration of its flight. Ergo, lower effective range would be dependent on the operating period of the rocket motor. Hence, in a bolt pistol, due to the smaller format, the motor duration is less. Makes sense so far. However, as the pistol has the same calibre (20mm) and since damage is stated to be the same as the long-arm version, this means that the speed of the projectile once it exits the muzzle is the same in the bolt pistol as the bolter. However, as the bolt pistol has a drastically shorter profile - it would appear that acceleration to the needed velocity happens irrespective of mechanism size OR barrel length. This part makes no sense.

It makes even less sense if part of the volume savings in smaller bolt pistol ammunition includes a reduction in the size of the solid core - as this would necessitate an INCREASE in exit (and maintained flight) speed to match the AP characteristic of its larger and heavier cousin... all from a smaller firing mechanism. I can see that -maybe- the full size bolter needs additional mechanism to enable fire in auto-mode (which was noted, doesn't exist in civilian bolters!), but the added barrel would appear to not contribute anything to performance.

Finally - if it has the same calibre and exit speed as a regular bolter (to maintain damage parity) - this would suggest (and I'm not entirely sure about this) that the pistol has a similar recoil profile as the bolter - but in a single handed form factor!

Everything makes sense if you assume bolts accelerate through their trajectory being more powerful at longer ranges and the initial charge only sends it out the end of the barrel, with it only being str 4 due to an averaging of the bolts abilities along its path. The difference won't be enough to write home about but technically speaking it would be significant, accounting for the lack of it coming up in the fluff as the rocket motor would burn out quickly leaving the maximum velocity at about 100-300ft.

it even takes into account why boltguns and pistols are the same str (due to most of the acceleration being from the rocket.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Try wielding a battle rifle in one hand without a pistol grip.

You mean like the patriot the 5.56 ar15 pistol with double helix mag? it's about as effective as singly wielding a normal pistol... and by that I mean not at all. For any true control over a firearm you need two hands, unless your a god of ballsitics. and even then one handed is for tricks only.

oh and dual wielding is for idiots who want to be shot. even the exposition shooters I've seen dual wield took considerable time to aim at their targets, during which in any combat situation you'd have been shot.

We've already postulated that the rocket motor portion of the bolt is for speed maintenance only, and is used to maintain lethal force over the duration of its flight. Ergo, lower effective range would be dependent on the operating period of the rocket motor. Hence, in a bolt pistol, due to the smaller format, the motor duration is less. Makes sense so far. However, as the pistol has the same calibre (20mm) and since damage is stated to be the same as the long-arm version, this means that the speed of the projectile once it exits the muzzle is the same in the bolt pistol as the bolter. However, as the bolt pistol has a drastically shorter profile - it would appear that acceleration to the needed velocity happens irrespective of mechanism size OR barrel length. This part makes no sense.

i think the inconsitency in books/others is because they can't really decide what this gun is.
iirc it was at first (in earlier versions of warhammer) always described as case-less weapon. Means they shoot and the bullet is gone. No shell ejects because there is none.

Which makes sense for a bullet using a rocketengine. Rocketlaunchers have no shells either^^
Problem: rocketengines make no BANG. they are loud but they don't "bark" (seems to have become the common description of bolter sound).

Then someone thought it would be way cooler if the thing ejects shells like mad if you fire on fullauto (with hollywood ammo cheat of course-> shoot until reloading would produce the most dramatic situation) and makes BANG. And of course it is a big weapon so it must have a huge recoil to look cool.

You mean like the patriot the 5.56 ar15 pistol with double helix mag?

that one has a pistolgrip... The thing is meant for cqc where accuracy is not of much importance. standard M14 for example have no pistolgrip (ok there's a fugly stock and EBR kit to get one).

Whatever it is, it's bad physics all around.

By a battle rifle I mean an M14, an FN FAL, etc.

Actually an M1 Garand would be equally appropriate as well.

Who the hell is dumb enough to wield a full battle rifle in one hand? The only reason I can see is if you are missing an arm.

Then there's your answer to your question about lasguns in one hand.

Lasguns are full sized battle rifles, they aren't easy to aim in one hand. Lascarbines are assault rifle sized, they're easier to use in one hand.

I would say that it's different, since lasguns have no recoil. Sure it'll be difficult to hold, but it's not as impossible as it would be today.

Lasguns are full sized battle rifles, they aren't easy to aim in one hand. Lascarbines are assault rifle sized

There's almost no difference in assault rifles and "battle rifles" (never seen this term in military stuff before)... FN FAL is as well an assault rifle (yeah i know, Wikipedia says otherwise) as M16, G36, etc. Same size: ~1m, only larger calibre.
None of both are properly usable one handed, period.

The only weapons you can use onehanded are pistols and few submachineguns, although it is still more efficient to use both hands, except perhaps in 40k Closecombat.

edit:
It's not the recoil that makes it impossible, it's the weight of the weapon. You can't aim if you have to balance 3,5kg (top-heavy) or more in your single hand. Your "aimpoint" shakes as if you have parkinson

The difference between "battle rifle" and "assault rifle" is mostly a matter of caliber. The terminology originates from when two different calibers of ammunition were selected as the standard rounds for NATO. A "battle rifle" was a standard issue rifle, one that used a more traditional full powered rifle round, while and "assault rifle" was a lighter rifle that used an intermediate cartridge between the traditional rifle round and pistol round. The terminology originates from when there was more of a distinction between fighting from a great stand off distance and moving in close to fight or "assaulting." In general, but not necessarily, assault rifles tend to have both standard length and carbine forms, while battle rifles tend only to have a full length.

In the western world, more simply, a rifle firing a 5.56mm round is an assault rifle and a rifle firing a 7.62mm round is battle rifle.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
When it comes to all the previous pages discussion on different bolter recoils and such... I think it can be simply settled by the fact that just as in real life with rifle rounds there are so many types of bolter rounds... and without fluff specifying exactly what was fired there is no way to really say. The civilian bolters could very well only be capable of firing a lower recoil round. That the different contradictions of fluff on bolter shells can simply be written off as different types of shells.

That the different contradictions of fluff on bolter shells can simply be written off as different types of shells.

I think a better answer is that the writers have different levels of fluff/ physics knowledge and use the rule of cool to fill in what they don't know. Source is CS Got and the multi laser marines.

Quit bringing up CS Goto and other particularly low-quality works if you want to have a serious discussion. Nobody really takes his work seriously or as canon.

He's lumped in with the rest of them so if you want to take the others seriously, then you have to take him seriously as well. After all he does have a few Black library books. Unless that's another goto I was reading the other day.

No he's not.

Just because the fluff is there does not mean it needs to be of equal value to everyone else as far as the discussion goes.

Melissia wrote:No he's not.

Just because the fluff is there does not mean it needs to be of equal value to everyone else as far as the discussion goes.

um, YES he is.

Menshad Korum - Originally published in Inferno! #46, January 2005, Reprinted in the anthology Bringers of Death (Black Library, 2005).
Vindicare - Published in Tales from the Dark Millennium anthology (Black Library, 2006)

He Also wrote the dawn of war and deathwatch series.

Hmm.

Melissia wrote:Just because the fluff is there does not mean it needs to be of equal value to everyone else as far as the discussion goes.

Check this out.

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/01/sci-fi-weapons/

Melissia wrote:Hmm.

Melissia wrote:Just because the fluff is there does not mean it needs to be of equal value to everyone else as far as the discussion goes.

yes and your "fluff" about bolters being equally effective at all ranges is invalid to me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
and on that note, meet the father of the future battlefield soldiers




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Even so, you’ve got to be careful when handling the thing. Over a few months in Iraq, a dozen soldiers were wounded in dazzler “friendly fire.” Several troops may have been injured while monkeying around with laser target designators, which are substantially more powerful than the less-lethal devices.

you know something comes to mind, the heavy stubber or .50bmg Equivalent and the bolter are the same str value so I guess you could crudely equate the twos terminal energy if you wanted to get a feel for the power of the explosive warhead.

That is a good point... though by virtue of 40k being abstract the comparison leaves a wide margin for variation. This doesn't invalidate the general notion, just requires a discussion that is pretty general. A .50bmg round compared to a .75cal bolter round, if in fact generally similar in ballistic effect would mean that assuming similar density and proportional mass means a bolter shell needs only travel at a little under 1/2 the velocity of a .50bmg. Thats a velocity of ~1500ft/s or still double the velocity of a 7.62NATO.

Even without a warhead thats pretty nasty. With a warhead it is reasonable that the shell could be fired at a lower velocity. While one might argue the details, this still paints a pretty reasonable picture in a modern context of a bolters capabilities. That to be as effective in the 40k setting, it would only need to be that effective today.

This all ignores the possible developements in technology bolter rounds would have beyond the present day. I think its scales well in this comparisson; that the above is a modern day conventional version compared to modern day weapons analogous to 40k ones, that in the context of the 40k setting those different weapons and armor would all be proportionately better than their modern counterparts.

TO STOP ALL THIS HAS ANYBODY READ THE FIRST WARHAMMER 40K WARGEAR BOOK.

Because in there tells you all this information (comparisons to modern day weapons as well).

Bolters are compact shell launchers which are effective up close BUT not at far distances

bronzemonkey wrote:TO STOP ALL THIS HAS ANYBODY READ THE FIRST WARHAMMER 40K WARGEAR BOOK.

Why should we stop? And yes I have.

We know time and time again that GW fluff writers are often writing things without any actual experiance in that area of expertise. So when GW says something is the same as something else or the equivalent to something else and then contradicts it with descriptions of function and capability you have to decide between the two and specifity over generality becomes the driving force. Stats are specific and other descriptions have been more specific than your quote.

bronzemonkey wrote:...effective up close BUT not at far distances

This is subjective what's "up close" and what are "far distances?" Those aren't numerical values and in comparison to the 40k ranges its quite contradictory. Unless its part of the deteriorated technology the abstract 24" range is something similar to rifle ranges in real life, or 300 yards for standard rifles.

The advantage of a bolter or any weapon having a warhead at all is that the weapon is less reliant on velocity to do damage. No mater how little ballistic force (to a point) the bolter shell has when it reaches the target it will always have "X" amount of explosive force. High velocity missiles are great for evading counter measures but even when they reach their target they have to slow down to give enough time for propegation through the explosive train; this is often accomplished by making the nose of grenades and rockets out of soft materials, even when they're intended to penetrate armor. The crumpling gives enough time for propegation.

Bolters are compact shell launchers which are effective up close BUT not at far distances

well yeah after the rocket cuts out it will start to loose velocity. like mythos said you can't really use that as a comparison without numerical values.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Unless its part of the deteriorated technology the abstract 24" range is something similar to rifle ranges in real life, or 300 yards for standard rifles.

well except that scaled to 28mm 24" is something like 60 yards,

also on missiles don't forget the stand off distance they need a, a shaped charge is uselss if the jet doesn't form or forms improperly