The efficiency of melee in Warhammer 40K

SF: discuss futuristic sci-fi series, ideas, and crossovers.

Moderator: NecronLord

User avatar
NecronLord
Harbinger of Doom
Harbinger of Doom
Posts: 27384
Joined: 2002-07-07 06:30am
Location: The Lost City

Re: The efficiency of melee in Warhammer 40K

Post by NecronLord »

Connor MacLeod wrote:
NecronLord wrote:Imperial Army Grav Attack Tanks are in The Horus Heresy Artbook. They are based on a scratchbuilt model by Rick Priestly Here

Though that is painted to match blue painted space marines (Crimson fists, IIRC); the Imperial Army version was coloured in a more camoflaged colour. It mounts some kind of beam weapon, and three missile tubes. Additionally, the Custodes and Sisters of Silence fielded a hovering form of rhino, which they used in their attempt to claim part of the webway.

The last evidence of Imperial grav tanks in production comes from mention of a 'grav tank factory' on Stalinvast in the Inquisition War trilogy.
I bleieve they were mentioend in the later "Vehicle design rules" too in the Chapter approved books (and were still considered "canon" as far as I could tell from there.)

We know the Guard does make use of grav-tech in other ways (Grav chutes, Dropships from Tactica imperialis, as well as jump packs like in Guns of Tanith) so its probably not impossible for the Guard to be running around with Grav vehicles of some kind, but they're probably going to be rarer due to the fact they'd likely come from older/more techy worlds (veryr old civilized/industrial/hive worlds likely, or more likely forge worlds.) Hell, there are Guard regiments that have valkyries, Vultures, and even Predators/Rhinos depending on your source :D

There's going to be another reason why grav attack vehicles wouldn't be frequently employed and that's maintenance and logistics. Treads and Tires will be easy to replace/rebuild, and

I'm also going to go out on a limb and note that the "Codex" speeds indicated in the Imperial Armour books aren't always "the defining line" - There are examples of Thunderhawks going near-hypersonic or reaching drop pod insertion velocities (the Deathwatch books and the recent Blood angels novel), of Thunderbolts going over their top speed (Double Eagle) as well as Russes exceeding their own top speed (Storm of Iron, Honour Guard, the Gunheads short story in Planetkill etc.) Hell, the older IA books had a short story by Gav Thorpe mentioned that Russes could be uprated for higher speeds (though the AdMech would shit a brick if they found out.) - as Thanatos has noted to me before, Russes are clearly governed for maintenance purposes but they can be boosted to FAR higher speeds.

There's also the fact Conquerors are supposed to be a lighter, faster variant desinged to keep up with Titans, ,yet are somehow still as slow as a Russ (slightly slower in fact, despite carrying a lighter gun) as well as the Destroyer Tank Hunter variant (Russ pattern hull, nearly the same mass as a Russ, but can pull far higher top speeds.)

I'll note as well that Chimeras can be and have been converted into tanks (A pseudo-predator in that context.)

Edit: Besides, I'd also add that most "grav tanks" tend to be more of a hybrid "tank/gunship" idea... just a much heavier version of a land raider (or Vulture.) I imagine if you upgunned a Vulture you'd get similar results.

(I presume you mean Land Speeder) Yeah, they're in the VDR, but it's not clear what use that's for. Presumably some built for the Imperial Army could still be in service ten thousand years later, especially with Space Marines.
Superior Moderator - BotB - HAB [Drill Instructor]-Writer- Stardestroyer.net's resident Star-God.
"We believe in the systematic understanding of the physical world through observation and experimentation, argument and debate and most of all freedom of will." ~ Stargate: The Ark of Truth
User avatar
Ryan Thunder
Village Idiot
Posts: 4139
Joined: 2007-09-16 07:53pm
Location: Canada

Re: The efficiency of melee in Warhammer 40K

Post by Ryan Thunder »

Ah, fuck it. I read it wrong, of course.
Connor MacLeod wrote:<snip>
Blasting them apart would be roughly botler like firepower (grenade level damage in other words) at least, but with cauterization it could be more (say 20-30 kg for the torso alone would probably at least raise the calc to double digit MJ).
I saw this first after reading the fluff bit and thinking, "Yeah, that's about what I'd expect it to do," then "Oh, you'd say that's the same as blasting it apart? Alright..."
Slicing someone in half, the observed feat... assuming it affects 2/3 of the torso (say 20 cm diameter cylinder through the torso) means 5 or so kg at least affected.. so 5-6 MJ.
Then, I somehow managed to read this as a calculation supporting the first scenario (blasting the body apart like a grenade.) Which is completely wrong, as you're calculating for vapourizing a 20 cm diameter hole in said body, unless I'm again mistaken, which is quite a bit less energetic than blasting apart the whole torso like a bomb and therefore not really comparable to what a boltgun would do at all.

So, I'm just going to concede this one before I go and make myself look like any more of a retard than I have already. :banghead:

Actually, while I'm at it, I might as well just go through all the ground that I'm inevitably going to give up on this topic all at once and just get it over with. So, here goes;

Fire Warriors have few, if any advantages over Guardsmen, pulse rifles are perhaps comparable to hellguns if not worse, and offer little to nothing in the way of advantageous features (pointless stabilizers, for example.)

A lone Space Marine armed solely with a boltgun and a power weapon has the firepower at his disposal to easily kill literally any singular Fire Caste unit I've ever fielded on the table top, short of a Hammerhead (and even then...), and this all makes perfect sense because Imperial materials science is ridiculously superior to anything the Tau have, and gives them the capability to produce 'power armour' that is actually virtually immune to Tau weapons, which, by the way, turn out to be generally even more useless for putting down heavy infantry in the fluff than they already are on the table top, where they've had to adjust their stats up (where they usually adjust things down) to make them viable as a shooting army in a universe where rayguns can vapourize you outright. (personal favourite, that one.)

I might not like it, or even be convinced otherwise, but I can't conclusively say anything to contradict it, either, dammit. :x
SDN Worlds 5: Sanctum
User avatar
Ford Prefect
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 8254
Joined: 2005-05-16 04:08am
Location: The real number domain

Re: The efficiency of melee in Warhammer 40K

Post by Ford Prefect »

Well, that's positive. I'm too hungry to put together another reply to you. :wink:
What is Project Zohar?

Here's to a certain mostly harmless nutcase.
legio mortis
Redshirt
Posts: 17
Joined: 2007-09-08 12:19am

Re: The efficiency of melee in Warhammer 40K

Post by legio mortis »

Ryan Thunder wrote:You're stuck with nothing more interesting than ironsights, if the models are any indication.
I've never seen a Lasgun, much less an Imperial Guard one, with ironsights. They've all had some sort of scope integrated in with the weapon.
User avatar
NecronLord
Harbinger of Doom
Harbinger of Doom
Posts: 27384
Joined: 2002-07-07 06:30am
Location: The Lost City

Re: The efficiency of melee in Warhammer 40K

Post by NecronLord »

legio mortis wrote:
Ryan Thunder wrote:You're stuck with nothing more interesting than ironsights, if the models are any indication.
I've never seen a Lasgun, much less an Imperial Guard one, with ironsights. They've all had some sort of scope integrated in with the weapon.
What?

That thing on the cadian pattern plastics has never been depicted as a scope.
Superior Moderator - BotB - HAB [Drill Instructor]-Writer- Stardestroyer.net's resident Star-God.
"We believe in the systematic understanding of the physical world through observation and experimentation, argument and debate and most of all freedom of will." ~ Stargate: The Ark of Truth
User avatar
Ryan Thunder
Village Idiot
Posts: 4139
Joined: 2007-09-16 07:53pm
Location: Canada

Re: The efficiency of melee in Warhammer 40K

Post by Ryan Thunder »

NecronLord wrote:
legio mortis wrote:
Ryan Thunder wrote:You're stuck with nothing more interesting than ironsights, if the models are any indication.
I've never seen a Lasgun, much less an Imperial Guard one, with ironsights. They've all had some sort of scope integrated in with the weapon.
What?

That thing on the cadian pattern plastics has never been depicted as a scope.
I wouldn't be surprised that there are lasgun patterns that do feature any number of different scopes, much like modern weapons, but the only artwork I can find is either from unverifiable sources or depicts the weapon without the part that I believe Legio is referring to.

For some bizarre reason, I can't find my codex to look it up, either.
SDN Worlds 5: Sanctum
User avatar
Ryan Thunder
Village Idiot
Posts: 4139
Joined: 2007-09-16 07:53pm
Location: Canada

Re: The efficiency of melee in Warhammer 40K

Post by Ryan Thunder »

Oh, blast, forgot to add;

It actually seems reasonable that there would be some kind of scope, when we consider the engagement ranges Connor's spoken of before. 500 m sounds like a pretty crazy long shot, even with something like an acog or reflex scope, never mind ironsights...
SDN Worlds 5: Sanctum
User avatar
NecronLord
Harbinger of Doom
Harbinger of Doom
Posts: 27384
Joined: 2002-07-07 06:30am
Location: The Lost City

Re: The efficiency of melee in Warhammer 40K

Post by NecronLord »

There most certainly are lasgun scopes. And lasguns with inbuilt scopes.

But the most common model doesn't have one (the 3rd Ed rulebook featured one with, though, saying it was the galactic standard in M35 onwards) as can be seen by taking out the IIUP, and observing that the bar thingy on the top does not represent a scope. It does mention integral optics as an option, but it is by no means present on all models.

Certainly, the IG plastic models do not have sights.
Superior Moderator - BotB - HAB [Drill Instructor]-Writer- Stardestroyer.net's resident Star-God.
"We believe in the systematic understanding of the physical world through observation and experimentation, argument and debate and most of all freedom of will." ~ Stargate: The Ark of Truth
User avatar
Todeswind
Jedi Knight
Posts: 927
Joined: 2008-09-01 07:16pm

Re: The efficiency of melee in Warhammer 40K

Post by Todeswind »

The lasgun is similar to the AK-47 in many ways, it is the standard weapon for the bulk of military forces largely because it is easy to use/mantain and hard to do lasting harm to. It is also comparitavely easy to produce and requires a minimum of training to use. It is the IoM's "idiotproof" weapon.

I would assume that there is a scope for the lasgun.
User avatar
NecronLord
Harbinger of Doom
Harbinger of Doom
Posts: 27384
Joined: 2002-07-07 06:30am
Location: The Lost City

Re: The efficiency of melee in Warhammer 40K

Post by NecronLord »

Todeswind wrote:I would assume that there is a scope for the lasgun.
NO ONE is saying there isn't. It's indisputable that there are scopes.

The point is that not all models (and not the standard ones depicted in the plastic IG models) of lasgun have an integrated sight as standard.
Superior Moderator - BotB - HAB [Drill Instructor]-Writer- Stardestroyer.net's resident Star-God.
"We believe in the systematic understanding of the physical world through observation and experimentation, argument and debate and most of all freedom of will." ~ Stargate: The Ark of Truth
User avatar
andrewgpaul
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2270
Joined: 2002-12-30 08:04pm
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Re: The efficiency of melee in Warhammer 40K

Post by andrewgpaul »

That one you mentioned, in the 3rd ed rulebook (page 61) appears to replace the top rail/bar/whatever on the Cadian-pattern gun.

IIRC, that picture is copied from the 1st edition Necromunda rulebook; it's possible that is a weapon native to there, and not generally issued.
"So you want to live on a planet?"
"No. I think I'd find it a bit small and wierd."
"Aren't they dangerous? Don't they get hit by stuff?"
Post Reply