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.

The one intriguing sidebar I never understood. Why didn't they make multi lasers the standard infantry support weapon in stead of heavy bolters?

 Frazzled wrote:
The one intriguing sidebar I never understood. Why didn't they make multi lasers the standard infantry support weapon in stead of heavy bolters?

I assumed it was that the multi-lasers required a single large generator/capacitor to be dragged alone, whereas the heavy bolter can be fed by several bite sized mags or belts.
Why isn't the multi-laser a standard mount in vehicle chassis? Pass. Maybe it has something to do with the HE and shrapnel of the heavy bolter?

 Frazzled wrote:
The one intriguing sidebar I never understood. Why didn't they make multi lasers the standard infantry support weapon in stead of heavy bolters?

Probably because the Heavy Bolter offers vastly superior performances than the Multilaser and since both weapons are heavy weapons used in much smaller amount than lasguns, logistical and maintenance problem are more acceptable. At some point performance becomes more important than ease of use. It's also possible that Heavy Bolters are more reliable and easy to maintain and produce then their miniaturised version. That's why it has become the most popular anti-infantry weapon in the Astra Millitarum.

 kirotheavenger wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
The one intriguing sidebar I never understood. Why didn't they make multi lasers the standard infantry support weapon in stead of heavy bolters?

I assumed it was that the multi-lasers required a single large generator/capacitor to be dragged alone, whereas the heavy bolter can be fed by several bite sized mags or belts.
Why isn't the multi-laser a standard mount in vehicle chassis? Pass. Maybe it has something to do with the HE and shrapnel of the heavy bolter?

Multilasers are available as hull/pintle and sometimes as sponson options for vehicles in the 30k era on Russ', Malcadors, Basilisks, Medusas etc. Their lack of presence in the 40k era can probably be chalked up to the tech-regression of the Cult Mechanicus.

The Krieg Storm Chimera is also said to swap their multilaser both for increase of firepower and ease of munition resupply.

That's weird, I would have assumed that vehicle mounted las weapons would have run off of the vehicle's power plant.

 Dakka Flakka Flame wrote:
That's weird, I would have assumed that vehicle mounted las weapons would have run off of the vehicle's power plant.

That only works if the vehicle actually has a power plant and doesn't run on hydrocarbons. Most guard vehicles run on hydrocarbons. which likely dont give enough excess power to run a energy weapon on top of normal functions.

That's a fair point.

Typically, tanks carrying the snackiest Las weapons (Super Heavies etc) tend to have onboard Plasma Reactors - though I'm not sure if that's in place of or alongside regular engines for the rest of its power needs?

Wouldn't be surprised if super heavies like baneblades had hybrid systems. Reactors and internal combustion engines.

In Necrumunda there is a on table benefit for lasgun reloading.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
That's a fair point.

Typically, tanks carrying the snackiest Las weapons (Super Heavies etc) tend to have onboard Plasma Reactors - though I'm not sure if that's in place of or alongside regular engines for the rest of its power needs?

Er...Leman Russes don't have plasma reactors.

I did say those with the snackiest Las weapons

Another thought....

Variable power settings. That's actually an odd advantage, when you consider suppressive fire.

With a modern weapon or pretty much any other 40k infantry weapon, it's the one type of shot. So your suppressive fire is eating through your ammo reserves.

But with the Lasgun (at least on some patterns), one could flick it to the lowest power setting, buying your more shots. That seems ideal for suppressive fire - you force the enemy to keep their heads down, and at a lower ammo consumption rate.

Sure you're more likely to miss out on lucky kill shots, but the trade off is a far longer sustained volley. And should the enemy make a break for it, flick of a switch and you're back to proper killing power to take advantage.

Again, I can see that being appealing to any military, 40k or modern.

That's a brilliant idea fantastic tactical flexibility. They could be shooting low power shots, or Hot Shots. Can you risk it?

I really want to read a properly in-depth story about an elite squad of Guardsmen/Scions/Elysians doing proper SAS-style missions with all that sort of clever tactical use of futuristic equipment now

Not all Lasguns have the power settings though. Only a few lasgun variants have this functionality because some regiments aren't trusted not to "waste" ammunition by cranking up the power unnecessarily.

 Ynneadwraith wrote:
That's a brilliant idea fantastic tactical flexibility. They could be shooting low power shots, or Hot Shots. Can you risk it?

I really want to read a properly in-depth story about an elite squad of Guardsmen/Scions/Elysians doing proper SAS-style missions with all that sort of clever tactical use of futuristic equipment now

Play a tactical squad level Only War with a good GM.

I'm playing in one right now, highest rank is a Sergeant who's in charge of the squad. All las weapons come with different settings and we switch those when needed -- low for suppression or ammo conservation, overcharge/overload for kill shots, burning cover or pumping damage into a hard target. What's great is that all Las weapons come with that; Multilasers, Longlas etc.

A multilaser overloading can harm light vehicles as well, adding even more flexibility to that squad automatic weapon.

That sounds kickass brilliant ideas!

Isn't an Ork Shoota superior in ease of construction, reliability, and ammo consumption?

Only works because the Ork believes it works though

 EmpNortonII wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 EmpNortonII wrote:
The Tau Empire is able to mass-manufacture a far more powerful weapon.

The pulse rifle is also an incredibly widely-available, standardized weapon... that also shoots farther and harder than a bolter.

A single Imperial Hive world probably manufactures more lasguns than the entire Tau Empire's production of pulse rifles. Heck, the Imperium probably manufactures more plasma guns than the Tau do pulse rifles.

I doubt the plasma part. The Tau certainly have more pulse rifles than the Imperium has bolters. The Imperium can only afford to field a million or so Space Marines. I'm not sure there's any data on the size of the Sororitas, but given the difficulties of equipping 1 million Space Marines with bolters, power armor, and other weapons, there's no way the Imperium fields more than 10 million Sororitas. The Tau sure as hell have more than 10 million Fire Warriors.

I know I'm a bit late responding here, but if you follow the 2E codex numbers(the only numbers GW ever gave us) each of the 6 Adepta Sororitas Orders Majoris usually has 3-4 thousand Sisters Militant, with peak numbers sometimes reaching 7000 in one order. I can't imagine that there are more Sisters in minor Orders than in major orders, so I tend to think that on overage there are maybe 40,000 Sisters Militant in the galaxy. Of course, I've seen other people estimate their numbers to be in the billions using different logic, but I stick with the codex numbers.

 Servant of Dante wrote:

 EmpNortonII wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 EmpNortonII wrote:
The Tau Empire is able to mass-manufacture a far more powerful weapon.

The pulse rifle is also an incredibly widely-available, standardized weapon... that also shoots farther and harder than a bolter.

A single Imperial Hive world probably manufactures more lasguns than the entire Tau Empire's production of pulse rifles. Heck, the Imperium probably manufactures more plasma guns than the Tau do pulse rifles.

I doubt the plasma part. The Tau certainly have more pulse rifles than the Imperium has bolters. The Imperium can only afford to field a million or so Space Marines. I'm not sure there's any data on the size of the Sororitas, but given the difficulties of equipping 1 million Space Marines with bolters, power armor, and other weapons, there's no way the Imperium fields more than 10 million Sororitas. The Tau sure as hell have more than 10 million Fire Warriors.

I know I'm a bit late responding here, but if you follow the 2E codex numbers(the only numbers GW ever gave us) each of the 6 Adepta Sororitas Orders Majoris usually has 3-4 thousand Sisters Militant, with peak numbers sometimes reaching 7000 in one order. I can't imagine that there are more Sisters in minor Orders than in major orders, so I tend to think that on overage there are maybe 40,000 Sisters Militant in the galaxy. Of course, I've seen other people estimate their numbers to be in the billions using different logic, but I stick with the codex numbers.

... that's not very impressive. If you're looking to wipe out a Space Marine chapter, that'd work just fine. A Sept world would drown the sum total of the Sororitas in just Fire Warriors. The Tau can leave the Crisis Suits and Riptides at home.

Hence why I take any hard numbers given in codices as propaganda/ignorance/lies. They flat-out just don't work on a galactic scale, but GW specifically states that anything they write in codices is to be looked at with skepticism, which offers us a unique opportunity to ignore stuff that doesn't make sense

 Frazzled wrote:
The one intriguing sidebar I never understood. Why didn't they make multi lasers the standard infantry support weapon in stead of heavy bolters?

Actually, the standard infantry support weapon was originally the lascannon and the grenade launcher.

The multi-laser was originally described, IIRC, as being far too heavy to be man-portable - its use was mostly restricted to vehicles (such as the Sentinel).

Of course, the other vehicle models available to Guard armies were the Land Raider, Rhino and Predator, which all mounted bolt weapons as secondary anti-infantry weapons, so the models drove the background in a slightly different direction.

LAsguns suffer the same cruel fate as 99% of stuff in 40k: the writers fethed up and plot has more relevance that sense.

A lasgun in modern warfare would be a gamechanger due to allthe reasons listed in the OP, certainly in terms of ammo and ease of maintenance.

The issue of it being weak comes from the fact 99% of things in 40k are tougher than humans. Space Marines, Orks, most of the bigger Tyranids, Necrons. Eldar and Tau are as durable but also come with armour capable of taking rounds from 75mm armour penetrating explosive rounds. Then you also have literal Daemons.

Then the main issue comes from writers not being able to decide consistantly how much damage a weapon actually does. Some sources have lasguns shearing off limbs with ease, and in other cases they might as well be Nerf guns (and ironically, my brother has a Nerfgun that disassembles and is modular, and looks exactly like the image on Pg1) for all the damage they do, and it entirely depends on who is being shot at. Random helper character?


https://youtu.be/O2u1lHC-2C0?t=2m56s

Main, semi-main, or sort-of-a-main character?


https://youtu.be/CbZDMGeNY4s?t=1m13s

 Deadshot wrote:
Lasguns suffer the same cruel fate as 99% of stuff in 40k: the writers fethed up and plot has more relevance that sense.

A lasgun in modern warfare would be a gamechanger due to allthe reasons listed in the OP, certainly in terms of ammo and ease of maintenance.

The issue of it being weak comes from the fact 99% of things in 40k are tougher than humans. Space Marines, Orks, most of the bigger Tyranids, Necrons. Eldar and Tau are as durable but also come with armour capable of taking rounds from 75mm armour penetrating explosive rounds. Then you also have literal Daemons.

I quite like that as a method for aiding suspension of disbelief when it comes to a lot of things in 40k. Close Combat being one of them.

Modern humans are comparatively weak, comparatively slow, lack sophisticated personal body armour, and puncture easily. Thus, a single bullet can often do irreparable damage, or at least sufficient damage to remove them as a threat on the battlefield. Hitting someone with a really sharp axe will do a lot more damage than a bullet, but seeing as the bullet is entirely sufficient and has the benefit of range it doesn't make much sense to hit someone with an axe as a primary combat tactic.

In 40k, we have many, many fighting forces that are tough enough to shrug off small arms fire without losing combat effectiveness, have sophisticated personal body armour that allows them to do the same and/or are significantly faster at closing the distance between them and the enemy (either through biology or technology like jump packs). In that context, hitting them with a bullet might not stop them, but hitting them with the axe (backed up by a genetically enhanced arm swinging it) might just do the trick.

So, Close Combat in the 40k universe is more believable than you think. If you want to find out how good regular human CC is take a couple of Guard blobs, shout 'affix bayonets!' in your best General Melchett voice and footslog them across the board until they can hit the enemy over the head.

Guarantee they'll be slaughtered to a man

As for the relative power of a Lasgun in the fluff, I've always worked under the impression that all fluff stories are told to us by a random drunk who sidled up to you unsolicited in a bar. Could well be true. Could well be utter fiction. This is the 40k universe. There's no internet to verify their claims so it could all be hearsay.

The cold hard arbiter of a weapon's effectiveness is its stats on the tabletop there's no hiding behind different interpretations there

 Ynneadwraith wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:
Lasguns suffer the same cruel fate as 99% of stuff in 40k: the writers fethed up and plot has more relevance that sense.

A lasgun in modern warfare would be a gamechanger due to allthe reasons listed in the OP, certainly in terms of ammo and ease of maintenance.

The issue of it being weak comes from the fact 99% of things in 40k are tougher than humans. Space Marines, Orks, most of the bigger Tyranids, Necrons. Eldar and Tau are as durable but also come with armour capable of taking rounds from 75mm armour penetrating explosive rounds. Then you also have literal Daemons.

I quite like that as a method for aiding suspension of disbelief when it comes to a lot of things in 40k. Close Combat being one of them.

Modern humans are comparatively weak, comparatively slow, lack sophisticated personal body armour, and puncture easily. Thus, a single bullet can often do irreparable damage, or at least sufficient damage to remove them as a threat on the battlefield. Hitting someone with a really sharp axe will do a lot more damage than a bullet, but seeing as the bullet is entirely sufficient and has the benefit of range it doesn't make much sense to hit someone with an axe as a primary combat tactic.

In 40k, we have many, many fighting forces that are tough enough to shrug off small arms fire without losing combat effectiveness, have sophisticated personal body armour that allows them to do the same and/or are significantly faster at closing the distance between them and the enemy (either through biology or technology like jump packs). In that context, hitting them with a bullet might not stop them, but hitting them with the axe (backed up by a genetically enhanced arm swinging it) might just do the trick.

So, Close Combat in the 40k universe is more believable than you think. If you want to find out how good regular human CC is take a couple of Guard blobs, shout 'affix bayonets!' in your best General Melchett voice and footslog them across the board until they can hit the enemy over the head.

Guarantee they'll be slaughtered to a man

As for the relative power of a Lasgun in the fluff, I've always worked under the impression that all fluff stories are told to us by a random drunk who sidled up to you unsolicited in a bar. Could well be true. Could well be utter fiction. This is the 40k universe. There's no internet to verify their claims so it could all be hearsay.

The cold hard arbiter of a weapon's effectiveness is its stats on the tabletop there's no hiding behind different interpretations there

Well I 110% agree with everything up until the last two parts. I've always found the "WHO KNOWS IT MIGHT BE TRUE MIGHT NOT" as a lazy excuse for inconsistancy and retconning. GW just doesn't have the balls to straight up say "this is canon, this is not," because they think giving that freedom to choose appeases everyone and will get more sales.

Also, I hate to say Fluff doesn't equal rules, but unfortunately, due to the nature of the fluff, it doesn't. From a purely gameplay perspective, especially with Imperials, the stats do a good job in terms of physical stats in comparison with others. For example, for Str, T and I, a human = 3, a Space Marine = 4, Custodes = 5 and Primarch 6+. But in comparison with the fluff, T6 is arguably too low for a Primarch, and in other cases like with WS and BS, there seems to be no consistancy. The 40K Guilliman has WS9 but so does Angron in 30K who is among, if not the, best fighter in the setting. Sgt Telion is supposed to be the best shot among all the Space Marines, able to curve bullets round rounds and fire off three shots from a bolt-action in less than a second, but only has BS6 so is only the tiniest bit better, and on par with Grey Knight Grand Masters and Autarchs of 5th Ed, while you have things like Carnifexes which have armour just as tough as Power Armour, yet Marines' best weapon against it has the same penetrative capactity as bolters which don't go through PA, and yet it somehow works. Then the Avatar of Khaine is supposed to be a shard of the God of War, but gets pummelled by any chump with a Thunder Hammer. The simple issue is that the stats aren't consistant and can't be used as a guideline for the fluff except in the general sense of "A human is tougher than a Grot, a Space Marine is tougher than a Tau, a Fleshborer is on par with a Bolt Pistol, a Pulse Rifle is more damaging than a bolter," etc

 Deadshot wrote:

Well I 110% agree with everything up until the last two parts. I've always found the "WHO KNOWS IT MIGHT BE TRUE MIGHT NOT" as a lazy excuse for inconsistancy and retconning. GW just doesn't have the balls to straight up say "this is canon, this is not," because they think giving that freedom to choose appeases everyone and will get more sales.

You see, perhaps it's because I've been used to 40k before anything else, but I always view absolute 'canon' and 'non-canon' as being utterly inimical to the enjoyment of something. As far as I can tell, its only function is to cause massive flame wars between people who like Star Wars and people who like Star Wars: The Expanded Universe or whatever it is.

Or, more relevant, causes intense and largely pointless debate over which convoluted timeline a particular superhero does a particular thing in, which is what happens when you have a poorly managed canon that is still 'canon'. Managing canon is a massive (and expensive) PITA. George Lucas set up an entire internal division of Lucas Arts purely for managing canon conflict.

Plus, it's a founding pillar of the most genius thing that 40k has, and what I'm sure is the secret to its success: that the stories that we make up are just as much canon as the stuff in the books. That single assertion is utterly brilliant. It actually involves us, the consumers, in the very fabric of the universe. It gives us the freedom to create our own homebrew units, characters, armies, worlds and have them be just as legitimate as the 'official' versions. There's no stigma against 'fanfiction' as there is in other IPs. Make some things 'canon' and some things not is a great way to make people who add their own twist to the 40k universe feel inferior/insignificant.

I genuinely believe that that is the foundation for 40k's success. It certainly isn't game mechanics anyway

 Deadshot wrote:

Also, I hate to say Fluff doesn't equal rules, but unfortunately, due to the nature of the fluff, it doesn't. From a purely gameplay perspective, especially with Imperials, the stats do a good job in terms of physical stats in comparison with others. For example, for Str, T and I, a human = 3, a Space Marine = 4, Custodes = 5 and Primarch 6+. But in comparison with the fluff, T6 is arguably too low for a Primarch, and in other cases like with WS and BS, there seems to be no consistancy. The 40K Guilliman has WS9 but so does Angron in 30K who is among, if not the, best fighter in the setting. Sgt Telion is supposed to be the best shot among all the Space Marines, able to curve bullets round rounds and fire off three shots from a bolt-action in less than a second, but only has BS6 so is only the tiniest bit better, and on par with Grey Knight Grand Masters and Autarchs of 5th Ed, while you have things like Carnifexes which have armour just as tough as Power Armour, yet Marines' best weapon against it has the same penetrative capactity as bolters which don't go through PA, and yet it somehow works. Then the Avatar of Khaine is supposed to be a shard of the God of War, but gets pummelled by any chump with a Thunder Hammer. The simple issue is that the stats aren't consistant and can't be used as a guideline for the fluff except in the general sense of "A human is tougher than a Grot, a Space Marine is tougher than a Tau, a Fleshborer is on par with a Bolt Pistol, a Pulse Rifle is more damaging than a bolter," etc

The neatest solution to that is just 'the fluff lies'

I always thought that god-level Primarchs was a stupid idea. Having them as T6 makes them a lot more believable to me Sgt Telion thinks he's the mutt's nuts, but when the chips are down he's not as good as he (or his mates) think he is...

That is on the understanding that the crunch is pretty flawed itself, what with vast power imbalances between pre and post-Necron codices, some rules that don't do a unit justice, and some rules that simply produce awful units. It's just less flawed than pure fluff comparisons so a more solid basis for debate

While a weapon's value in warfare is determined by a balance of factors, its effect against the intended target is among the most important.

You don't hunt elephants with the same gun that is used to hunt doves (and, oddly enough, vice versa). A modern 5.56/5.45 assault rifle issued to infantry represents an adequate balance between man-portability, ammo weight, penetration and the ability to kill and more importantly maim the enemy.

If lasguns were introduced to modern military, and assuming they are about as powerful as a modern assault rifle, they would indeed be an excellent weapon. Absence of recoil, superior accuracy and larger and lighter ammo supply (which can be replenished from a variety of power sources) would be the main factors here, because "standard issue" is already a thing.

In 40K setting though, lasguns are inadequate because they appear to be reliably lethal only against regular humans and lesser targets. It is not quite, but almost like an army of guys with dove-hunting guns fighting an army of elephants.

The lasgun in 40K, therefore, is not a "miracle weapon", it is a sad and inadequate leftover from the days when human soldiers faced other human soldiers on the battlefield. And that is perfectly grimdark...

 Olgerth Istaarn wrote:

The lasgun in 40K, therefore, is not a "miracle weapon", it is a sad and inadequate leftover from the days when human soldiers faced other human soldiers on the battlefield. And that is perfectly grimdark...

Now that's a really interesting insight could even shed some light on the state of the galaxy during the Dark Age of Technology.

What is the history of the Lasgun? I'm assuming it's an STC design. I wonder what it was originally designed for.

As most of the actual warfare was done by the Men of Iron, the most logical use is as a sort of side-arm for people in low-danger frontier colonies. Sort of like civilian shotguns used in the wild. Useful for self defence, but not really a suitable weapon of war. The fact that humanity's footsoldiers are essentially armed with hunting rifles and sent off to face forces armed with automatics is definitely grimdark

Furthermore, if Dark Age of Technology Mankind was as technologically proficient as we're told, then surely they could have made something easily with more punch than a Lasgun. So, we can deduce that the threats encountered by mankind in these days were nowhere near as deadly as the threats encountered in 40k, otherwise they'd have made more impressive self-defence firearms (which is pretty grimdark too!).

Either that or Dark Age of Technology mankind wasn't as supremely technologically capable as the modern Ad Mech cargo-cult leads us to believe. Judging by the other STC constructs we know about (things like Rhinos and Terminator armour) they were more advanced, but certainly not beyond the bounds of current 40k technology.

Perhaps their main advantage was the fact that they were actually structured sensibly. Like a macrocosm version of the Lasgun itself. Technologically they lacked punch, but succeeded due to supreme logistics afforded by the STC.

That definitely seems believable to me.

 Olgerth Istaarn wrote:
While a weapon's value in warfare is determined by a balance of factors, its effect against the intended target is among the most important.

The Imperium mostly fights Orks and other human (Chaos-influenced or not) forces. The lasgun is effective against the majority of those targets. If more powerful weapons are harder to supply they could be less efficient especially considering the numbers of their primary foes.

 Ynneadwraith wrote:

 Olgerth Istaarn wrote:

The lasgun in 40K, therefore, is not a "miracle weapon", it is a sad and inadequate leftover from the days when human soldiers faced other human soldiers on the battlefield. And that is perfectly grimdark...

Now that's a really interesting insight could even shed some light on the state of the galaxy during the Dark Age of Technology.

What is the history of the Lasgun? I'm assuming it's an STC design. I wonder what it was originally designed for.

As most of the actual warfare was done by the Men of Iron, the most logical use is as a sort of side-arm for people in low-danger frontier colonies. Sort of like civilian shotguns used in the wild. Useful for self defence, but not really a suitable weapon of war. The fact that humanity's footsoldiers are essentially armed with hunting rifles and sent off to face forces armed with automatics is definitely grimdark

Furthermore, if Dark Age of Technology Mankind was as technologically proficient as we're told, then surely they could have made something easily with more punch than a Lasgun. So, we can deduce that the threats encountered by mankind in these days were nowhere near as deadly as the threats encountered in 40k, otherwise they'd have made more impressive self-defence firearms (which is pretty grimdark too!).

Either that or Dark Age of Technology mankind wasn't as supremely technologically capable as the modern Ad Mech cargo-cult leads us to believe. Judging by the other STC constructs we know about (things like Rhinos and Terminator armour) they were more advanced, but certainly not beyond the bounds of current 40k technology.

Perhaps their main advantage was the fact that they were actually structured sensibly. Like a macrocosm version of the Lasgun itself. Technologically they lacked punch, but succeeded due to supreme logistics afforded by the STC.

That definitely seems believable to me.

Dark Age humans were definitely insanely technologically advanced. As for why lasguns aren't that impressive, well. Lasguns were largely designed for killing, and currently largely used against, humans. And lasguns are still capable of killing Astartes, they just have less killing power vs these types of targets.

I wouldn't say DAOT humans faced lower caliber enemies, more that they faced different enemies. Mostly other humans. And the vast majority of alien races in the galaxy are not any tougher than humans. Countless alien species have been exterminated by humanity during its 30k years of roaming around the galaxy. Even Orks, who all things considered are the toughest individual threat humans face, aren't immune to lasguns. They're perfectly acceptable for killing orks.

Even today, most of the foes the Imperium faces are human or just of similar toughness and threat. Fighting chaos? 99% of the dudes you face will be random human cultists, armed with lasguns and autoguns. Occasionally you'll face some Chaos Space Marines, but the guard has numbers and enough weapons that can deal with power armor its not a big deal that you'll face heavy casualties, since individual human lives are practically worthless. Fighting Tau? They're no tougher than humans, and again you can drown them in numbers. Eldar? again, no tougher than humans. Tyranids? the swarms aren't any tougher than humans, lasguns will mow down gaunts just fine. While the tanks deal with the big monsters.