PDA

View Full Version : Lasguns, Power armor, and training.



Lord_Crull
29-08-2009, 00:13
I was reading in a magazine about how soldiers naturally tended to shoot at the chest of an enemy soldier, as it being the largest part of the human body. This is susposed to be instinctive.

I have a question, does this mean that when a traitor PDF soldier shoots at an Astartes in power armor, does that mean that he always shoots at the chest or pauldrons? the largest target? To me this seems the reason why power armor is virtually immune to lasfire (Other than it's protection) they always shoot at the thickest part of the armor.

DeathTyrant
29-08-2009, 00:16
I think it depends on the situation. Unless the traitor soldier has lost his mind to Chaos insanity, he would know to adjust his tactics somewhat for Astartes. Hell, I'm not even from that Universe but if I were faced with a giant enemy in powered armour, I'd be aiming for eyes and weak points.

Unless he was being assaulted in close combat, in which case panic might set in, and aiming for the Centre of Mass would be the natural reaction.

Grimbad
29-08-2009, 00:20
The old ork codex had a story where orks swung their choppas targeting the soft joints on marines, explaining the old 4+ choppa rule.

Argastes
29-08-2009, 00:29
I think it depends on the situation. Unless the traitor soldier has lost his mind to Chaos insanity, he would know to adjust his tactics somewhat for Astartes. Hell, I'm not even from that Universe but if I were faced with a giant enemy in powered armour, I'd be aiming for eyes and weak points.

Unless he was being assaulted in close combat, in which case panic might set in, and aiming for the Centre of Mass would be the natural reaction.

I think you may be underestimating how hard it is to make that kind of judgement in a firefight. Real-life military studies show that many soldiers are too scared and panicked to even fire their weapons at all during battle, and of those that do manage to fire them, many just squeeze off shots without aiming. It would certainly take a hardened, steely-nerved veteran to deliberately pick out the eyes, joints, etc., especially in the chaos and uproar of a firefight against Space Marines. No offense, but if you (or I) were really faced with a giant enemy in powered armor, the last thing we'd probably be able to do is coolly aim for his eyes and joints. It's easy to talk tough like that, but in an actual combat situation, that tough talk goes out the window and it becomes quite a bit harder.

Not to mention the fact that even if you are cool-headed enough to aim for them, actually hitting those kind of small targets under combat conditions, on a moving target, is practically impossible even for a skilled marksman at close range. Think of it this way: An AK47 in good condition is theoretically capable of putting it's shots into a 3"-6" circle at 100 yards... IF aimed very carefully by a competent marksman.... at a static target... with the shooter and weapon supported on a benchrest or in the prone position.

So, bottom line, it is probably unrealistic to expect most Guardsmen and other soldiers to be able to shoot for the weak spots in SM power armor during combat.

Askil the Undecided
29-08-2009, 00:31
If I was being faced across the battlefied by a 9 foot tall bugger in brightly coloured armour holding a rapid firing mini missile launcher I'd just shoot him as much as possible and hope I hit something fatal because frankly I'd be bricking it, but maybe I'm just honest.

Considering most Imperial citizens (and thus rebels and cultists chaotic or ortherwise) have never even seen power armour apart from in devotional artwork I doubt they'd be spending time thinking about where it might be weaker. Orks on the other hand fight gitz in big armoured suits all the time and have learned "ta chop dem in da squishy bitz."

DeathTyrant
29-08-2009, 00:32
I suppose that's where the good old massed Lasgun fire comes into play hehe.

Urath
29-08-2009, 00:35
Aye, it's true. In the novels, enemies don't just break rank and flee because they're faced with the "Space Marines!": they break rank and flee because they're looking at giants in armour thicker than bones, glowing eyes, adorned with symbols of death and aiming a gun bigger than your torso at you, or revving up a chainsaw in their hands.

Condottiere
29-08-2009, 00:42
I think you may be underestimating how hard it is to make that kind of judgement in a firefight. Real-life military studies show that many soldiers are too scared and panicked to even fire their weapons at all during battle, and of those that do manage to fire them, many just squeeze off shots without aiming. It would certainly take a hardened, steely-nerved veteran to deliberately pick out the eyes, joints, etc., especially in the chaos and uproar of a firefight against Space Marines. No offense, but if you (or I) were really faced with a giant enemy in powered armor, the last thing we'd probably be able to do is coolly aim for his eyes and joints. It's easy to talk tough like that, but in an actual combat situation, that tough talk goes out the window and it becomes quite a bit harder.

Not to mention the fact that even if you are cool-headed enough to aim for them, actually hitting those kind of small targets under combat conditions, on a moving target, is practically impossible even for a skilled marksman at close range. Think of it this way: An AK47 in good condition is theoretically capable of putting it's shots into a 3"-6" circle at 100 yards... IF aimed very carefully by a competent marksman.... at a static target... with the shooter and weapon supported on a benchrest or in the prone position.

So, bottom line, it is probably unrealistic to expect most Guardsmen and other soldiers to be able to shoot for the weak spots in SM power armor during combat.I think those are WWII and Vietnam era studies, which involved conscripts.

That's why training methods were altered, in order to make soldiers a great deal more cold-blooded when it comes to fire-fights.

Dexter099
29-08-2009, 01:27
As Condiotterre says. If you're a trained soldier like a guardsman, your survival instinct will take over, allowing you to think surprisingly cool-headed, since you know that death is the only other alternative.

Argastes
29-08-2009, 02:49
I think those are WWII and Vietnam era studies, which involved conscripts.

That's why training methods were altered, in order to make soldiers a great deal more cold-blooded when it comes to fire-fights.

The problem was even more severe in 20th-century "mass armies", but even today, it persists. Anyhow, aren't IG conscripts, along with most PDF forces (which is what the OP was talking about)?


As Condiotterre says. If you're a trained soldier like a guardsman, your survival instinct will take over, allowing you to think surprisingly cool-headed, since you know that death is the only other alternative.

Even accepting this dubious generalization for the sake of argument, it's not really going to allow the average soldier to effectively fire at tiny targets such as eyes and joints on a moving target at combat ranges.

Condottiere
29-08-2009, 03:09
The idea is to turn your average grunt into an automaton, despite wanting to over equip him with the latest technical gadgets to fight "smarter".

I think we have to conclude there are just various grades of IG and PDF, which are raised and assigned according to need and availability. Cadians may all be conscripts, but they're well trained.

I suspect that I would be uneasy if the neighbouring unit was raised from freshfaced conscripts from some secure upper-middle class planet that hasn't seen war in millenia, as opposed to the badly equipped volunteer yeoman's sons from a planet that has to fight off raiders.

Argastes
29-08-2009, 03:18
Yeah, I'd agree with that. I'm just saying that shooting at the eyes, etc. of a power-armored Marine in combat conditions would be a tall order even for a modern Special Forces trooper with good optics on his rifle and plenty of combat experience, so expecting it from rogue PDF or IG is basically a pipe dream.

BrotherMoses
29-08-2009, 03:43
The old ork codex had a story where orks swung their choppas targeting the soft joints on marines, explaining the old 4+ choppa rule.

That rule didn't make a lick of sense...

And I have to disagree with Condo. That level of accuracy in any sort of adrenaline filled combat situation is going to be... improbable.

Argastes
29-08-2009, 03:46
That rule didn't make a lick of sense...

I actually kind of liked it, but yeah, a -1 save modifier would probably have been a bit fairer. I know 3rd Edition wasn't supposed to have save modifiers built into the general rules, but since they obviously had no problem introducing a special rule just for choppas, they could have at least gone with one that didn't specifically target MEQs.

BrotherMoses
29-08-2009, 03:51
I actually kind of liked it, but yeah, a -1 save modifier would probably have been a bit fairer. I know 3rd Edition wasn't supposed to have save modifiers built into the general rules, but since they obviously had no problem introducing a special rule just for choppas, they could have at least gone with one that didn't specifically target MEQs.

I was new to this game when I first learned about that rule and my buddy that got me into the game tried to explain it. "Yeah, they just swing SO hard that it doesn't really matter what kind of armour you're wearing." I used to always say dude that doesn't make any sense... lol.

Bouncl
29-08-2009, 04:47
Yeah, I'd agree with that. I'm just saying that shooting at the eyes, etc. of a power-armored Marine in combat conditions would be a tall order even for a modern Special Forces trooper with good optics on his rifle and plenty of combat experience, so expecting it from rogue PDF or IG is basically a pipe dream.


Although, IIRC, a well trained IG Regiment (Cadians or the like) has soldiers where everyone is on par with A Special Forces trooper.

Cane
29-08-2009, 04:50
We all know Space Marines don't wear helmets anyway so just aim for the head :chrome:

One of those hot-shot lasguns should put a pretty nice hole in power armor too, hopefully the upcoming Stormtrooper novel will shed more light on this.

Even though the lasgun is a pretty pitiful weapon in the game, its still a freaking laser so its got the potential to punch through all sorts of armor but then again I haven't read any of the 40k novels but I'd imagine the Gaunts Ghost series goes into further detail. Space Marines are also pretty big targets and many regular lasguns can set their power to various levels IIRC.

BrotherMoses
29-08-2009, 05:08
thankfully, "lasers" don't function like light sabers in 40k. The energy from lasguns is diffused by the ceramite armour of the Space Marine.

Poseidal
29-08-2009, 07:43
The old ork codex had a story where orks swung their choppas targeting the soft joints on marines, explaining the old 4+ choppa rule.

Boss Gratznork carefully mettled with his armoured foe, keeping his trusty Choppa at his side while his slugga fired off shots to control the movement of the battlefield.

He knew he was at a disadvantage, because although he was the larger fighter and certainly tougher, he had not the armour of astartes warrior he was duelling.

He slowed his movements as he anticipates the lunge from his foe; there it was! the weak chink in his armour, underneath the shoulder armour between the arm and chest plate.

Gracefully, he swerved around like a dance of an acrobat evading the blow of the primitive weapon the armoured warrior swung at him. He lifted his custom built Choppa, a weapon that had been painstakingly built by his meks to be the fastest and choppiest weapon they could (it had a red trim). He pinpointed this area and thrust with the grace of an acrobat.

The weak point of the armour was struck, and the strength and power of the choppa combined with the graceful strike had done damage to the power cables in the way he wanted.

He jumped back as his armoured foe staggered.

"Yoo iz already dead." he proclaimed, as the Space Marine's power pack exploded.

The proud green victor stood triumphant again; he looked back at his brethren, worn but not beaten. He knew the day could be won, as he contemplated the shadow's edge he walked on now. In a rallying cry he screamed:

"WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!"

StormWulfen
29-08-2009, 07:44
thankfully, "lasers" don't function like light sabers in 40k.

no we have power weapons for that:p

Lord-Caerolion
29-08-2009, 08:33
no we have power weapons for that:p

And Dark Heresy gives rules for an actual 40k "lightsaber"! Basically, a contained projection of plasma, so it's incredibly, incredible, 'shield-your-eyes' bright, loud as all hell, and you're kinda screwed if the containment field flickers. Oh yeah, and it also requires a plasma flask to work.
Rather nasty if you can get one, but expensive as hell, and if it has a glitch, your arm is probably gone.

Argastes
29-08-2009, 13:52
Although, IIRC, a well trained IG Regiment (Cadians or the like) has soldiers where everyone is on par with A Special Forces trooper.

:eyebrows: ....Source? Anyhow, as I said, it would a stretch even for them.


Even though the lasgun is a pretty pitiful weapon in the game, its still a freaking laser so its got the potential to punch through all sorts of armor but then again I haven't read any of the 40k novels but I'd imagine the Gaunts Ghost series goes into further detail.

Being a laser doesn't make it inherently good at punching through armor. Kind of the opposite, in fact. Guardsmen would have a much more effective weapon if the energy that their lasgun powerpacks put into each lasgun shot was put into electromagnetically accelerating a solid projectile instead.

Makiaveli
29-08-2009, 14:30
I think those are WWII and Vietnam era studies, which involved conscripts.

That's why training methods were altered, in order to make soldiers a great deal more cold-blooded when it comes to fire-fights.

Probably, but volunteering so you can get away from a small town, or to get money for college doesn't make you a better fighter once the feces hits the air circulating device.

T_55
29-08-2009, 14:32
Wheres the source which says they aren't equivalent to special forces? :p

Gaunts ghosts goes into some detail, occasionally guard units are faced with space marines, in which more often that not, marines are killed using methods without lasguns. For the ones killed with lasguns, some people choose to take this as face value, others don't. To be honest i don't really care.

Makiaveli
29-08-2009, 14:36
Wheres the source which says they aren't equivalent to special forces? :p

Gaunts ghosts goes into some detail, occasionally guard units are faced with space marines, in which more often that not, marines are killed using methods without lasguns. For the ones killed with lasguns, some people choose to take this as face value, others don't. To be honest i don't really care.

Hmm well since they are trained from an early age (IIRC as everyone on the planet is drafted right?) then they would be "special" from the standpoint they showed up for basic knowing the ropes so to speak as opposed to having to be told don't use the barrel of your rifle as a crowbar (true story...recruit didn't realize if the barrel bent "it's just a little bit!" it might impact accuracy or safety :wtf:)

Cane
29-08-2009, 14:40
Being a laser doesn't make it inherently good at punching through armor. Kind of the opposite, in fact. Guardsmen would have a much more effective weapon if the energy that their lasgun powerpacks put into each lasgun shot was put into electromagnetically accelerating a solid projectile instead.

Well of course the lasgun (and the SM standard issue weapon, the bolter) isn't the optimal weapon against power armor but its still got the potential to punch through it especially hotshot lasguns and other such lasguns that can change their power settings. I'd imagine not all armor is created equally either and there are significant portions of power armor where it looks vulnerable to small arms fire like the joint areas and helmet all of which are relatively big targets compared to a regular human.

korskarnkai
29-08-2009, 15:07
Modern soldiers are indeed trained to aim for the "centre of seen mass". The theory is that the bigger the target, the more likely you are to hit it and drop it.

Condottiere
29-08-2009, 15:07
Never having had the joy of being under unfriendly fire, I can't speculate what I'd do if the faeces really did impact the ventilator, most casualties being from artillery rounds.

The concept is to place a lot of bullets in the general area where the nearest unfriendly forces are hanging out, which you can't do if you're shooting blindly (unless you believe in writing random common names on your bullets of the people you happen to be fighting), so training is to prevent either panic or over-excitement, to make it routine.

Argastes
29-08-2009, 15:48
Hmm well since they are trained from an early age (IIRC as everyone on the planet is drafted right?) then they would be "special" from the standpoint they showed up for basic knowing the ropes so to speak as opposed to having to be told don't use the barrel of your rifle as a crowbar (true story...recruit didn't realize if the barrel bent "it's just a little bit!" it might impact accuracy or safety :wtf:)

I'm not sure in what way that would make them "on par" with modern US Army special forces, which is what Bouncl alledged. The thing that makes special forces 'special' is that they have training in special skills and techniques that regular soldiers don't get or need; and that the training is intensive and demanding enough that only a small fraction of people--even people who have already been selected for excellence from infantry and Ranger units--have what it takes to make it through.


Probably, but volunteering so you can get away from a small town, or to get money for college doesn't make you a better fighter once the feces hits the air circulating device.

He's talking about training methods, not recruitment. Today, trainees who branch infantry can expect to go through "simulated firefights" and other types of training intended to acclimate them, to some degree, with the chaos of actual combat. The idea is that when they do actually get into a firefight, the environment isn't a total shock to them, and they will hopefully be less likely to freeze up or not fire their weapon. In contrast, before these methods came into use, infantry training did basically nothing to mentally prepare soldiers for actual combat. They learned to shoot on a range, march, dig slit trenches, maintain their kit, etc., but when they actually started getting shot at, it was unlike anything they had done or experienced in training, so you get figures like 85% of soldiers never even fired their weapons.

It's not that modern soldiers are more likely to shoot because they're volunteers rather than draftees, it's that they're more likely to shoot because their training means that the experience of having machine-guns firing over their head as they crawl through the mud isn't 100% new to them.

That said, no type of training can really replicate the stress of real combat, so again, even today, the problem of soldiers not firing their weapons persists. Just not as severely as it did during, say, WW2.


Gaunts ghosts goes into some detail, occasionally guard units are faced with space marines, in which more often that not, marines are killed using methods without lasguns.

This seems to make the most sense to me. Just as soldiers confronted with a tank don't rely on their rifles to engage it, IG confronted with Marines probably wouldn't rely mainly on their lasguns to engage them. More powerful weapons would be the main Marine-killer for IG.


I'd imagine not all armor is created equally either and there are significant portions of power armor where it looks vulnerable to small arms fire like the joint areas and helmet all of which are relatively big targets compared to a regular human.

As has already been pointed out ITT, expecting soldiers to effectively shoot for the joints, etc. is wildly unrealistic. Why do you think the helmet is vulnerable? I'd imagine that, like the breastplate, it's effective protection against small arms fire, including lasguns.

massey
29-08-2009, 16:21
Although, IIRC, a well trained IG Regiment (Cadians or the like) has soldiers where everyone is on par with A Special Forces trooper.

IIRC, Marines spread joy and happiness with golden rays of rainbow sunshine.

Oh, wait, no, that's not true either. :)

There's nothing to indicate that any guard regiment is comprised of only special forces. That's why they have veterans and stormtroopers, to represent those guys. None of the special forces guys I knew would let a Commissar gun someone down. He'd just wake up dead.



Even though the lasgun is a pretty pitiful weapon in the game, its still a freaking laser so its got the potential to punch through all sorts of armor but then again I haven't read any of the 40k novels but I'd imagine the Gaunts Ghost series goes into further detail. Space Marines are also pretty big targets and many regular lasguns can set their power to various levels IIRC.

My CD player has a laser in it. It doesn't seem to cut things very well though.

Really, the average trooper is not a sniper. You'd need a sniper to hit a marine in the eye, and then only when he's standing still. While you're wasting time aiming at the eye of a guy running towards you, he's spending a fraction of the time aiming that you are, and he's just aiming for your head. He'll fire first, you'll be dead.

Besides, who says marines have weak points in the eyes? My recollection is that marines have auto-senses, those "eyes" are really miniaturized cameras, not glass lenses. You shoot him in the "eye" and you're just going to hit a camera, and then a solid armor plate.

Argastes
29-08-2009, 16:38
Besides, who says marines have weak points in the eyes? My recollection is that marines have auto-senses, those "eyes" are really miniaturized cameras, not glass lenses. You shoot him in the "eye" and you're just going to hit a camera, and then a solid armor plate.

This is true too, it seems likely that the helmet optics are housed in concavities or "sockets" in a solid armor faceplate, rather than there being holes in the armor for them. The same is probably true of the "grill" or whatever over the Marine's mouth. Though I suppose that shooting out one of his auto-senses imagers, and at least partially blinding him, would be better than nothing...

tuebor
29-08-2009, 17:04
There's nothing to indicate that any guard regiment is comprised of only special forces. That's why they have veterans and stormtroopers, to represent those guys. None of the special forces guys I knew would let a Commissar gun someone down. He'd just wake up dead.

He's not saying there are whole regiments of Special Forces, although the Guard being such a huge organization I'm sure that's bound to happen somewhere or another, he's saying that some regiments, like the Cadian regiments, are likely trained in combat techniques to a similarly high standard as western Special Forces.

Your SF buddies wouldn't put up with a Commissar shooting someone, but that's because your buddies are modern westerners with modern western sensibilities, whereas Guardsmen most decidedly aren't.

Argastes
29-08-2009, 17:07
He's not saying there are whole regiments of Special Forces, although the Guard being such a huge organization I'm sure that's bound to happen somewhere or another, he's saying that some regiments, like the Cadian regiments, are likely trained in combat techniques to a similarly high standard as western Special Forces.

This really seems like a stretch... again, any source on this? I've never seen anything in the fluff to support this claim. Bearing in mind that US Army SF training, for instance, is so demanding that only a small fraction of candidates pass, and almost all the candidates are Airborne-qualified infantry and Rangers who typically excel in their own units.

Cane
29-08-2009, 17:17
As has already been pointed out ITT, expecting soldiers to effectively shoot for the joints, etc. is wildly unrealistic. Why do you think the helmet is vulnerable? I'd imagine that, like the breastplate, it's effective protection against small arms fire, including lasguns.

News flash: this entire universe is incredibly unrealistic including the technology, tactics, just about everything about it :chrome:

In the universe of 40k where just about anything happens, yes a Guardsman can shoot and aim at weak points of the relatively large target that is a Space Marine. Hell he might not even have to if the power armor isn't up to spec or already damaged. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying that a Guardsman with a lasgun isn't screwed in a fight against a SM -- just that its well within the realm of 40k possibility especially with a charged up lasgun.


IIRC, Marines spread joy and happiness with golden rays of rainbow sunshine.

Oh, wait, no, that's not true either. :)

There's nothing to indicate that any guard regiment is comprised of only special forces. That's why they have veterans and stormtroopers, to represent those guys. None of the special forces guys I knew would let a Commissar gun someone down. He'd just wake up dead.



My CD player has a laser in it. It doesn't seem to cut things very well though.

Really, the average trooper is not a sniper. You'd need a sniper to hit a marine in the eye, and then only when he's standing still. While you're wasting time aiming at the eye of a guy running towards you, he's spending a fraction of the time aiming that you are, and he's just aiming for your head. He'll fire first, you'll be dead.

Besides, who says marines have weak points in the eyes? My recollection is that marines have auto-senses, those "eyes" are really miniaturized cameras, not glass lenses. You shoot him in the "eye" and you're just going to hit a camera, and then a solid armor plate.

Right and modern tanks and aerodynamic principles render their 40k counterparts in the realm of fiction...because it is. Lasguns, especially ones that can have a high power settings in the fashion of a hot-shot lasgun, wouldn't necessarily need a lot of precision as long as the guy is lucky or has skill (or both).

Also, anyone know how big of a 'caliber' a lasgun would be? Might be easier to shoot with than you think since I'd imagine there'd be almost no recoil and 40k weapons are freaking huge.

Argastes
29-08-2009, 17:34
News flash: this entire universe is incredibly unrealistic including the technology, tactics, just about everything about it :chrome:

So we're just supposed to say "Yeah, screw it, Guardsmen are inhumanly good marksmen who can pop the eyes off a moving target in combat conditions, and who cares cause it's 40K"? Yeah, like most sci-fi settings, 40K is unrealistic in many ways, but is that a license to make up any nonsense we want? Maybe Guardsmen can fly. Maybe they all have telepathic powers! Maybe they're all actually Olympic gymnasts. It doesn't matter because this is 40K and 40K is unrealistic, right? Where do you draw the line?

I think the proper approach is to accept 40K's lack of realism at face value wherever it crops up, but not to use that lack of realism as an excuse to make up an unlimited amount of fantastical crap in areas of the setting where we don't have explicitly unrealistic stuff being presented. In other words, if the setting doesn't give us any reason to assume that the normal rules of realism don't apply to something mundane like marksmanship skills, we shouldn't make that assumption anyhow and say it's okay because 40K is unrealistic in other areas.


Right and modern tanks and aerodynamic principles render their 40k counterparts in the realm of fiction...because it is. Lasguns, especially ones that can have a high power settings in the fashion of a hot-shot lasgun, wouldn't necessarily need a lot of precision as long as the guy is lucky or has skill (or both).

So you mean that hotshot lasguns are capable of effectively penetrating SM power armor?


Also, anyone know how big of a 'caliber' a lasgun would be? Might be easier to shoot with than you think since I'd imagine there'd be almost no recoil and 40k weapons are freaking huge.

"Caliber" is meaningless in the context of lasers, obviously.... the meaningful figures when it comes to a laser are beam power in watts, wavelength, and, if the beam is pulsed, the pulse frequency in hertz (this can make a HUGE difference in the beam's penetration abilities). Lasers have no recoil, either. What do you mean, 40K weapons are "freaking huge"? I'd think a lasgun would be about the size of a modern automatic rifle. Not that "hugeness" makes a weapon easier to shoot accurately anyhow. The limitations on accuracy are generally human, not inherent to the weapon. An M16 in good condition with issue ammo shoots with an inherent mechanical accuracy of about 1-3 MOA, but good luck actually shooting a 1"-3" group at 100 yards in combat.

tuebor
29-08-2009, 17:36
This really seems like a stretch... again, any source on this? I've never seen anything in the fluff to support this claim. Bearing in mind that US Army SF training, for instance, is so demanding that only a small fraction of candidates pass, and almost all the candidates are Airborne-qualified infantry and Rangers who typically excel in their own units.

The great thing about 40k is that the printed and official fluff is not the entirety of the setting. The fluff itself only portrays an infinitesimally small portion of what's going on in the galaxy. The Codex only goes into detail on a dozen or so regiments out of the hundreds of thousands, if not millions of regiments in the galaxy. A hive world with a population in the tens of billions would certainly be capable of producing regiments of soldiers trained to such hard standards.

Cane
29-08-2009, 17:49
So we're just supposed to say "Yeah, screw it, Guardsmen are inhumanly good marksmen who can pop the eyes off a moving target in combat conditions, and who cares cause it's 40K"? Yeah, like most sci-fi settings, 40K is unrealistic in many ways, but is that a license to make up any nonsense we want? Maybe Guardsmen can fly. Maybe they all have telepathic powers! Maybe they're all actually Olympic gymnasts. It doesn't matter because this is 40K and 40K is unrealistic, right? Where do you draw the line?

No Mr. Hyperbole, it does not. Simply adding more to the discussion about very legitimate possibilities and criticizing the logic you used. Well actually kinda, this is a universe where just about anything goes.



I think the proper approach is to accept 40K's lack of realism at face value wherever it crops up, but not to use that lack of realism as an excuse to make up an unlimited amount of fantastical crap in areas of the setting where we don't have explicitly unrealistic stuff being presented. In other words, if the setting doesn't give us any reason to assume that the normal rules of realism don't apply to something mundane like marksmanship skills, we shouldn't make that assumption anyhow and say it's okay because 40K is unrealistic in other areas.

Right. Point me to a real world countepart to Catachan where each human is likely to die than survive since each day is filled with battles to stay alive. Or Cadians, what other society has people training to be warriors from day one and submitting them to the harshest environments that mankind has ever faced? :chrome:


So you mean that hotshot lasguns are capable of effectively penetrating SM power armor?

Again it would be far from the optimal weapon to use against a SM, ditto with the standard SM weapon, the bolter -- but yea hotshot lasguns have even more of a chance than their regular lasgun countepart to kill a SM with armor but the upcoming ST novel should shed some more light.

Again don't get me wrong I'm not saying that a Guardsmen isn't screwed in a fight against a SM especially if all he has is a lasgun; just that its well within the realm of possibility in 40k.



"Caliber" is meaningless in the context of lasers, obviously.... the meaningful figures when it comes to a laser are beam power in watts, wavelength, and, if the beam is pulsed, the pulse frequency in hertz. Lasers have no recoil, either. What do you mean, 40K weapons are "freaking huge"? I'd think a lasgun would be about the size of a modern automatic rifle. Not that "hugeness" makes a weapon easier to shoot accurately anyhow. The limitations on accuracy are generally human, not inherent to the weapon. An M16 in good condition shoots with an accuracy of about 1-3 MOA, but good luck actually shooting a 1"-3" group at 100 yards in combat.

SM's are again larger targets than the human sized ones used in today's marksmanship training. As for why I quoted the word Caliber and mentioned the huge size of 40k weapons; its to demonstrate and ask how big a lasgun's laser actually is. From the artwork and such I'd imagine they make much bigger holes and marks than any standard issue rifle today. The bigger the hole you make, the less accurate you need to be.

Lasguns also can be fired rapidly and enough of 'em could kill a SM. Lasguns can also be charged up and the skills and marksmanship that many of the renowned Guard forces are famous for would make hitting targets as big as a SM relatively easy (wounding is another story but definitely possible).

Again not saying that the average Guardsman isn't screwed but like the pages of our own history has shown, humans can be quite capable and skilled and overcome incredible odds.

Argastes
29-08-2009, 18:04
Seems to me that when you're shooting for the eyes/joints of a suit of power armor, you would indeed have to hit those points directly in order to penetrate them and inflict an injury on the guy inside. If you missed them a few inches but your gun "makes a big hole" without actually penetrating the armor (i.e. inflicts surface damage), you're still not going to get penetration through that eye/joint weak point. So no, that doesn't really make it easier to pick out those weak points.

Of course I do agree that massed lasgun fire has a chance of bringing down a Marine. I'm not arguing with that, I'm arguing with the assertion that a soldier--even a skilled marksman--would be able to effectively aim for a Marine's eyes, joints, etc., under most combat conditions. Anyone who thinks that they could has probably never fired a rifle, and definitely doesn't know much about shooting.


SM's are again larger targets than the human sized ones used in today's marksmanship training.

Yes, obviously an SM, being 7 feet tall and quite bulky, would be a somewhat easier target to hit than a 5'10" human... but that doesn't really matter, the question at hand is how easy it would be to hit their eyes and joints, not their whole body. The whole body is, of course, mostly quite well-protected.

Cane
29-08-2009, 18:12
I'm an injured Marine so I like to think I know a little about firearms and marksmanship. Guardsmen make modern day Marines and elite forces look wimpy by comparison since the context of the 40k universe has incredible threats to face along with much longer training and combat experience for a typical soldier (especially in Cadia).

Also I don't think you'd necessarily have to hit the relatively large SM eyes or joints even though that is definitely possible in the 40k context and realworld; if the power armor is weak enough or the lasgun strong enough - it could punch through anywhere. But more often that not it won't.

And then to add more fuel to the fire, SM Scouts. These guys would be eve more susceptible to lasgun fire. :chrome:

As for Guardsman marksmanship - if 'Veterans', commissars, stromtroopers, officers, Marbo, etc are any indication than humans can be excellent shots in 40k. 40k weapons like the lasgun seem like it'd be easier to use than modern day weapons since a lasgun likely has almost no recoil and can put a larger hole than a modern counterpart. Not to mention it doesn't have the drawbacks of bullets flying in air.

Argastes
29-08-2009, 18:27
Guardsmen make modern day Marines and elite forces look wimpy by comparison since the context of the 40k universe has incredible threats to face along with much longer training and combat experience for a typical soldier (especially in Cadia).

Whoa, first we had "some IG regiments are on par with modern SF", which was questionable in it's own right, and now we have the claim that Guardsmen in general--not "some regiments" or anything like that, just "Guardsmen"--make modern Special Forces "look like wimps"? Where are you GETTING this nonsense?


Also I don't think you'd necessarily have to hit the relatively large SM eyes or joints even though that is definitely possible in the 40k context and realworld; if the power armor is weak enough or the lasgun strong enough - it could punch through anywhere. But more often that not it won't.

Well sure... If you take the given properties of the weapon and armor in question, and change them entirely, then anything is possible. A rifle bullet can penetrate six inches of steel if the rifle bullet is "strong enough" and the steel is "weak enough". The properties of lasguns and power armor have been defined in the fluff, and although they haven't been defined very precisely, I think it's safe to say that a lasgun powerful enough, or power armor weak enough, that the former could punch through the latter "anywhere" is pretty much nonexistent in 40K.


As for Guardsman marksmanship - if 'Veterans', commissars, stromtroopers, officers, Marbo, etc are any indication than humans can be excellent shots in 40k. 40k weapons like the lasgun seem like it'd be easier to use than modern day weapons since a lasgun likely has almost no recoil and can put a larger hole than a modern counterpart. Not to mention it doesn't have the drawbacks of bullets flying in air.

As you can see by reading back over my posts, I certainly never said that humans can't be excellent marksmen in 40K; so that point is more or less unnecessary. What I'm saying is that expecting human soldiers to hit eye-sized targets at combat ranges is not generally realistic, and trying to train for it is not a practical way to increase the effectiveness of Guardsmen vs. Marines, as the OP and others suggested.

As for lasguns being easier to use than modern rifles due to the lack of recoil, I find that questionable. If you are really a Marine, you have plenty of experience shooting an M16, and are certainly aware that it's recoil is mild enough that it doesn't exactly make the rifle harder to use (and doesn't degrade accuracy unless you are trying to fire extremely rapidly). As for making a bigger hole, exactly how big a hole (and in what material) are lasguns allegedly making? Anyhow, I don't disagree that lasers are inherently more accurate than projectile weapons due to propagation speed, etc., but that doesn't tell us much about how practically accurate they are in a soldier's hands, since again, most inaccuracy comes from the shooter.

Cane
29-08-2009, 18:43
Whoa, first we had "some IG regiments are on par with modern SF", which was questionable in it's own right, and now we have the claim that Guardsmen in general--not "some regiments" or anything like that, just "Guardsmen"--make modern Special Forces "look like wimps"? Where are you GETTING this nonsense?

Mr. Hyperbole, calm down....its okay that regular humans can destroy Space Marines, they're all toys after all. Don't take things so personally, I make points for the sake of making 'em --- don't get your ego hurt! :angel:

How about the various IG codices which I'm beginning to think you'e never read? Cadia, Catachan, Valhalla, Commissar/Stormtrooper schools; these guys are all basically born and bred into war and have an incredible amount of expertise, training, and experience compared to today. Many of the more renowned Guardsmen regiments are elite by nature - and imo its a common misperception that Guardsmen are all conscripts or ill-trained although that can definitely be the case.



Well sure... If you take the given properties of the weapon and armor in question, and change them entirely, then anything is possible. A rifle bullet can penetrate six inches of steel if the rifle bullet is "strong enough" and the steel is "weak enough". The properties of lasguns and power armor have been defined in the fluff, and although they haven't been defined very precisely, I think it's safe to say that a lasgun powerful enough, or power armor weak enough, that the former could punch through the latter "anywhere" is pretty much nonexistent in 40K.


Right, where is the fluff and properties for hot shot lasguns? Oh right they didn't exist until the new 'dex. Unlike rifles, many lasguns have the option to set their power levels and for whatever reason you give the impression that all power armor is created equally and can't be damaged. Feel free to give fluff examples as well however in terms of 'fluff' I believe Space Marines were killed in close combat by peasants with pitchforks in one of the numerous novels available.



As you can see by reading back over my posts, I certainly never said that humans can't be excellent marksmen in 40K; so that point is more or less unnecessary. What I'm saying is that expecting human soldiers to hit eye-sized targets at combat ranges is not generally realistic, and trying to train for it is not a practical way to increase the effectiveness of Guardsmen vs. Marines, as the OP and others suggested.


Of course thats all well and good and makes sense but you have to keep in mind just about anything goes in 40k.



As for lasguns being easier to use than modern rifles due to the lack of recoil, I find that questionable. If you are really a Marine, you have plenty of experience shooting an M16, and are certainly aware that it's recoil is mild enough that it doesn't exactly make the rifle harder to use (and doesn't degrade accuracy unless you are trying to fire extremely rapidly). As for making a bigger hole, exactly how big a hole (and in what material) are lasguns allegedly making? Anyhow, I don't disagree that lasers are inherently more accurate than projectile weapons due to propagation speed, etc., but that doesn't tell us much about how practically accurate they are in a soldier's hands, since again, most inaccuracy comes from the shooter.

Good questions and ones I already asked :chrome: However its probably safe to say that a lasgun is a superior weapon than real world counterparts and more than likely have next to no recoil (especially helps in rapid fire like you mentioned), likely more accurate since its a laser weapon, likely to leave bigger holes if artwork is any indication, and easier to maintain since its been designed to be used in conditions that have no real counterpart in the modern day world.

Argastes
29-08-2009, 19:05
Mr. Hyperbole, calm down....its okay that regular humans can destroy Space Marines, they're all toys after all.

You can stop calling me Mr. Hyperbole now. There was no hyperbole in what I said. Your exact words were "Guardsmen make modern day Marines and elite forces look wimpy by comparison". You don't need to try and pretend that I'm exaggerating what you said. I'm only asking what makes you think that. You made the statement, you can't expect not to be called out on it. When you make a claim and then get called out on it, you should probably explain the claim instead of just trying to come up with a cute insult for the person asking you.

Of course regular humans can kill Marines. But that's not the claim you made, and that's not the claim I'm questioning. So it's what we call a straw-man argument. Please don't make those.


How about the various IG codices which I'm beginning to think you'e never read? Cadia, Catachan, Valhalla, Commissar/Stormtrooper schools; these guys are all basically born and bred into war and have an incredible amount of expertise, training, and experience compared to today. Many of the more renowned Guardsmen regiments are elite by nature - and imo its a common misperception that Guardsmen are all conscripts or ill-trained although that can definitely be the case.

No, I own each IG codex starting from 2nd Edition, I'm perfectly familiar with the regiments you are talking about. There's no doubt they are tough bastards; I'm not accusing them of being ill-trained conscripts, I'm expressing my skepticism at the idea that they (again, in your own words) make modern-day elite forces look like wimps. If anything here is "hyperbole", I'd say that is.


Right, where is the fluff and properties for hot shot lasguns? Oh right they didn't exist until the new 'dex. Unlike rifles, many lasguns have the option to set their power levels and for whatever reason you give the impression that all power armor is created equally and can't be damaged. Feel free to give fluff examples as well however in terms of 'fluff' I believe Space Marines were killed in close combat by peasants with pitchforks in one of the numerous novels available.

Now I am beginning to question whether YOU have read the various IG codices. Hotshot lasguns have existed since long before the new codex, they date back to 2nd Edition days when stormtrooper models were all identical plastics with berets.

No, I never said that all power armor is created equal, and I certainly never said that it can't be damaged, I don't know why you are trying to put that claim into my mouth. What I said is that the fluff seems to make it pretty clear that SM power armor can't be penetrated "anywhere" by a lasgun, so saying that such a thing might be possible "if the armor was weak enough" is rather pointless; the armor ISN'T weak enough, we know this. Could you cite some fluff examples of power armor that was weak enough to be penetrated "anywhere" by lasguns, even hotshot lasguns?


Good questions and ones I already asked :chrome: However its probably safe to say that a lasgun is a superior weapon than real world counterparts and more than likely have next to no recoil (especially helps in rapid fire like you mentioned), likely more accurate since its a laser weapon, likely to leave bigger holes if artwork is any indication, and easier to maintain since its been designed to be used in conditions that have no real counterpart in the modern day world.

Lasers have no recoil, that is a fact, I stated it several posts ago. It's not "likely", it's just true*. I also already agreed that yes, a laser is inherently more accurate than a projectile weapon for several reasons. Again, that doesn't make much of a practical difference in how accurate it really is in combat, because most inaccuracy comes from the shooter rather than the weapon. This seems like it should be easy to grasp, I've pointed it out several times. If an M16 has a mechanical accuracy of, say, 2 MOA and a lasgun's mechanical accuracy is 0.1 MOA due to it's light-speed propagation and such, but the soldier holding the weapon introduces 6 MOA of inaccuracy, then the superior theoretical accuracy of the laser doesn't really make the weapon much more accurate, does it?

Yeah, it's also probably much easier to maintain. That's not relevant though.

*Light does have momentum but you need roughly three hundred megawatts of beam power to get one newton of recoil force because F = P/c, so for practical purposes, laser weapons are recoilless.

Cane
29-08-2009, 19:22
No, I own each IG codex starting from 2nd Edition, I'm perfectly familiar with the regiments you are talking about. There's no doubt they are tough bastards; I'm not accusing them of being ill-trained conscripts, I'm expressing my skepticism at the idea that they (again, in your own words) make modern-day elite forces look like wimps. If anything here is "hyperbole", I'd say that is.

Haha I see where you're coming from but the tone, language, and caps you used indicates that you seem to be getting emotional about it - sorry if thats not the case.

I see what you mean but imo you're downplaying several factors guardsmen encounter: military training from birth, much superior equipment and likely training as well than modern day forces since they've been landlocked in a context of never-ending war, much more deadly and crazy foes in 40k than found in the real world, living in a world like Catachan that makes even the worst parts of Earth look like paradise, much more experienced than a typical Marine or SF unit, dealing with Commissars, etc. All of these combined make real world counterparts look wimpy by comparison - Catachans would make US Marines look small and relatively weak.



Now I am beginning to question whether YOU have read the various IG codices. Hotshot lasguns have existed since long before the new codex, they date back to 2nd Edition days when stormtrooper models were all identical plastics with berets.

2nd edition was past my time (came into 3rd), what were they like back then? This also introduces a new point that fluff is constantly changing since I doubt the hot-shot lasguns were the same thing as they are now and they were MIA during 3rd and 4th.



No, I never said that all power armor is created equal, and I certainly never said that it can't be damaged, I don't know why you are trying to put that claim into my mouth. What I said is that the fluff seems to make it pretty clear that SM power armor can't be penetrated "anywhere" by a lasgun, so saying that such a thing might be possible "if the armor was weak enough" is rather pointless; the armor ISN'T weak enough, we know this. Could you cite some fluff examples of power armor that was weak enough to be penetrated "anywhere" by lasguns, even hotshot lasguns?

Nope I can't especially hotshot lasguns since the only real fluff about them will exist in the upcoming ST novel, however as it stands now they can take down SM's in gameplay and have a brief description in the dex. Just simply giving out multiple scenarios in which a lasgun could punch through power armor or scout armor.



Lasers have no recoil, that is a fact, I stated it several posts ago. It's not "likely", it's just true*. I also already agreed that yes, a laser is inherently more accurate than a projectile weapon for several reasons. Again, that doesn't make much of a practical difference in how accurate it really is in combat, because most inaccuracy comes from the shooter rather than the weapon. This seems like it should be easy to grasp, I've pointed it out several times. If an M16 has a mechanical accuracy of, say, 2 MOA and a lasgun's mechanical accuracy is 0.1 MOA due to it's light-speed propagation and such, but the soldier holding the weapon introduces 6 MOA of inaccuracy, then the superior theoretical accuracy of the laser doesn't really make the weapon much more accurate, does it?

I don't know, I'll bring my lasgun to the firing range and you bring your AR-15 and we'll see. However in the never-ending war that is 40k I'd imagine the lasgun would be a vastly superior weapon than modern firearms.

And in worlds like Vostroya, nearly all the GM are supposed to be elite and damn good shots :chrome:

Argastes
29-08-2009, 19:38
I don't know, I'll bring my lasgun to the firing range and you bring your AR-15 and we'll see. However in the never-ending war that is 40k I'd imagine the lasgun would be a vastly superior weapon than modern firearms.

No doubt about it, it has many advantages over a modern rifle. I'm not denying that. I'm just saying that markedly superior accuracy, in practical terms, is probably not one of those advantages, because the shooter has far more to do with accuracy than the weapon does, and the theoretically superior accuracy of a laser beam is going to get lost in the inaccuracy imposed by hand jiggle, iron sights, and so forth. Many rifles are already mechanically accurate enough to, say, shoot out a Space Marine's eye at 100 yards (again, 1-3 MOA on an M16), but the problem is that the shooter is almost certainly not able to shoot as accurately as his rifle theoretically allows him to. Do you see what I mean here? Take your service rifle, which is (probably) mechanically capable of shooting a two-inch group at 100 yards, and see if you can achieve that kind of accuracy in the middle of a firefight rather than off a benchrest at the range.

Lord_Crull
29-08-2009, 23:32
How about the various IG codices which I'm beginning to think you'e never read? Cadia, Catachan, Valhalla, Commissar/Stormtrooper schools; these guys are all basically born and bred into war and have an incredible amount of expertise, training, and experience compared to today. Many of the more renowned Guardsmen regiments are elite by nature - and imo its a common misperception that Guardsmen are all conscripts or ill-trained although that can definitely be the case.


I will point out that not all Guard regiments are going to be like that.



Feel free to give fluff examples as well however in terms of 'fluff' I believe Space Marines were killed in close combat by peasants with pitchforks in one of the numerous novels available.


It was Grey Knights, and the marines where outnumbered literally a thousand to one and the ''peasants'' where also Chaos mutants enhanced by magic.

And they only managed to kill one marine, tens of thousands of peasants vs. 5 marines and only a single one fell.

Condottiere
30-08-2009, 07:40
If I can use a Fantasy comparison, Warriors of Chaos have both Marauders, who are essentially ordinary humans surviving in a rather hostile environment, and Chaos Warriors, who have been enhanced into super human beings whose only purpose is war.

While somewhat puny in comparison to Chaos Warriors, Marauders are tough SOBs who have had to fight practically all their life, with a rather unforgiving chain of command. Veteran Guardsmen who weren't lucky enough to get comfortable garrison slots should be like that.

Lord_Crull
30-08-2009, 15:52
If I can use a Fantasy comparison, Warriors of Chaos have both Marauders, who are essentially ordinary humans surviving in a rather hostile environment, and Chaos Warriors, who have been enhanced into super human beings whose only purpose is war.

While somewhat puny in comparison to Chaos Warriors, Marauders are tough SOBs who have had to fight practically all their life, with a rather unforgiving chain of command. Veteran Guardsmen who weren't lucky enough to get comfortable garrison slots should be like that.


And I will point out to you that there are Guard regiments who have never fired a shot in anger. Guard regiments whose sum total of combat experiance is supressing riots. And Guard regiments who have barely seen combat at all.

Shrapnel
30-08-2009, 17:05
And I will point out to you that there are Guard regiments who have never fired a shot in anger. Guard regiments whose sum total of combat experiance is supressing riots. And Guard regiments who have barely seen combat at all.
These are referred to as "PDF".

BrotherMoses
30-08-2009, 17:33
I never understood why the pdf forces are always left to be so wimpy. Surely there should be some sort of temporary tour of duty they could rotate these guys on to get them some experience? Maybe a 2-4 yr tour as a guardsmen after which time they are to return to their home planet to serve as pdf and be replaced by a new recruit.

Speaking of which, when do guardsmen get to retire. Thats retire not expire either. Are they all just in it for life or is their like a 20 year goal they're shooting for or something?

ScItRiX
30-08-2009, 18:00
I think the comparison is a little unfair. Were taught today to aim for center mass. However there is no modern body armor compareable to power armour. None of are tactics or training today are worried about some super powered dude who can wade through fire without a hint of concern. If there were such things, modern tactics would adapt.

Lord_Crull
30-08-2009, 18:05
These are referred to as "PDF".

No, there are Guard regiments raised and sent several sectors away for guard duty and supressing riots.

Not every single offworld Guardsman is going to be a highly-elite, trained badass who can shoot off the wings of a fly at 500 paces.

StormWulfen
30-08-2009, 18:30
*Light does have momentum but you need roughly three hundred megawatts of beam power to get one newton of recoil force because F = P/c, so for practical purposes, laser weapons are recoilless.

so the only laser weapons with any form of recoil would be turbo lasers or volcanoe cannons? (they seem like they could generate that sort of power) *serious question*

also you do realise that you and cane have been argueing for almost two pages now?

Shrapnel
30-08-2009, 18:53
No, there are Guard regiments raised and sent several sectors away for guard duty and supressing riots.

Not every single offworld Guardsman is going to be a highly-elite, trained badass who can shoot off the wings of a fly at 500 paces.

sorry, I intended it to be a simple facetious remark.

Perhaps the intent would be better conveyed with the addition of a smilie, but I don't like using them.

JHZ
30-08-2009, 19:27
Guard regiment training to kill Marines? Sounds like something the Inquisition might want to check out. After all, I doubt traitor Marines are paraded around much. No one wants to be reminded of how the mighty have fallen. Besides, the main enemies of the Imperium are still non-Marine (and in some cases non-Chaos) traitors and various aliens. No need to train the soldiers for the nigh impossible, when there's very real dangers out there.

But yes, I do think they aim for the torso, since it's still the best chance of hitting something. If you can't hit it, you can't kill it. Only thing I can think of right now that would get guns aimed at its head, would be the Zoanthrope, since it has one massive cranium, an obvious target to aim for.

Fluff has shown lasguns to pack enough punch to pierce power armour. At least a straight hit. It seems power armour is more like heavy body armour, and not some fanboy wet dream of an adamantium clad warrior. The armour is rather modular and pieces of it are intended to be replaced when damaged, so it's only natural to assume they also get damaged often enough to need such a service. And it also means they're not some shiny piece of hardware that can take everything that gets thrown at it, but more of a good overall protection from various types of damage.

BrotherMoses
30-08-2009, 19:28
Yeah, I don't think that in-universe they face quite so many MEQ armies.

massey
30-08-2009, 19:37
To answer the original question, I think guardsmen do aim for the weak spots (or places they assume to be weak -- see the point about armored eye slits). Part of aiming for those spots is represented by the 3+ save. If they always shot at the thickest part of the armor, they'd never get through.

Specialized weapons, like plasma guns, hotshot lasguns, etc, are different and guys with those weapons have their own tactics.

However, it is unrealistic to expect even the best soldier on earth, with the best rifle and the most accurate aim ever to shoot a guy in the eye at combat ranges. That is simply a very difficult shot. There were people in the Old West who would go on tours, displaying their incredible accuracy by performing all sorts of trick shots. But they didn't do it when people were trying to shoot at them.

Simply, any guardsman who is a good enough shot to drop a marine by shooting him in the eye at 300 yards with his lasgun will not be a guardsman very long. He'll get yanked out of his unit and sent on for special training. He'll be given a better weapon than a lasgun. Or if he's young enough, he'll get picked up by a chapter and turned into a marine.

The idea that every guardsman is a badass, because they were generally raised in some hellhole and have fought since they were kids is ridiculous. So a Cadian can field strip his rifle by the time he's 12? Wuss. That's nothing compared to kids in real world Africa. In the Sudan, if you haven't butchered a family by the time you're 7, then you're probably one of the ones getting butchered. Child warfare doesn't actually produce the best soldiers ever. It just tends to produce people with severe emotional trauma. You can see what happens when western armies go to war in places like that. The western soldiers get 100 to 1 kill ratios, until the western country inevitably withdraws because the place is simply not worth conquering.

The average IG soldier will never see an eldar, a space marine, or a tyranid. The average IG soldier may fight orks (they're just like humans, except their tech is more ramshackle, they're a little bigger and tougher, and a lot more straightforward), but primarily he'll fight other humans. He might fight rebels, maybe a PDF, maybe just some weird cultists who have strange symbols cut into their foreheads. While the IG itself regularly faces aliens with lots of weird powers and weapons, individual guardsman don't. And when those individuals do end up fighting eldar, or marines, or whoever, many of them end up dead.

"Yeah, I remember when a genestealer attacked our squad. We were hoofing it through the jungle, headed for an extraction point. All we knew was that the bugs were coming. Didn't know what to expect until this thing came at us. Like a wall of razorblades. Six guys died before I could even point my gun at it. Hawkins' head flopped across the ground, rolled to a stop, and his eyes just stared up at me. He had this confused expression on his face, like he wasn't sure what had just happened. He blinked twice, and then his face went slack. I emptied my gun at the thing, and kept pulling the trigger even when it just made little 'click click' noises cuz the battery was empty. I guess one of my shots hit it in the brain, because it dropped to the ground and laid there twitching. When all was said and done, there was just me and Johnson left. We heard more rustling in the bushes, so we ran like hell until we got to the Valkyries. We were the last ones on, and two minutes after we took off, the whole jungle exploded in flames from all the arty they called in. Teach those bastards to mess with the guard."

precinctomega
30-08-2009, 19:52
I think those are WWII and Vietnam era studies, which involved conscripts.

That's why training methods were altered, in order to make soldiers a great deal more cold-blooded when it comes to fire-fights.

Point of information: you are referring to the findings that many soldiers in the wars cited (and even moreso before those) deliberately aimed their rifle to not hit the enemy. It is true that modern military training has more or less eliminated this tendency (although it is still cited occasionally). Modern soldiers are trained to shoot for the centre of mass (i.e. torso), reinforcing what is, in any case, a natural tendency. However, when engaging the enemy at a decent range (more than 200m, say) or in the case of an ambush, there is plenty of opportunity to line up a head-shot or to aim for a perceived "weak point".

Applying this to the Dark Millennium, then, it is reasonable to assume that well-trained guardsmen (regardless of their "elite" status) will similarly take the time to aim at weak spots or heads given the opportunity. But at close range (Assault), they are more likely to aim mostly for the torso.

R.

Argastes
30-08-2009, 21:00
so the only laser weapons with any form of recoil would be turbo lasers or volcanoe cannons? (they seem like they could generate that sort of power) *serious question*

Well, no, even they wouldn't have any appreciable recoil. Remember, even 300 megawatts of beam power only gets you 1 lousy newton of recoil force. One newton is about a fifth of a pound of force, while any laser that can put out a 300-megawatt beam is going to weigh at least dozens of tons; so a single newton of recoil force acting against such a weapon is totally negligible. If you make the laser a hundred times more powerful (30 gigawatts, pretty absurd) so that it produces a hundred times as much recoil force (100 newtons, still only about 20 pounds of force), then it's also going to be about a hundred times bigger and heavier too. So basically, lasers--no matter how powerful--are effectively recoilless. No matter how large you scale them up, the amount of recoil force generated will be insignificant compared to the mass of the laser required to generate it.


Fluff has shown lasguns to pack enough punch to pierce power armour. At least a straight hit. It seems power armour is more like heavy body armour, and not some fanboy wet dream of an adamantium clad warrior. The armour is rather modular and pieces of it are intended to be replaced when damaged, so it's only natural to assume they also get damaged often enough to need such a service.

Does the fluff really show this? I always thought it was pretty clear that the main elements were effectively proof against small arms fire, including lasguns. That doesn't mean it's a "fanboy's wet dream of an adamantium-clad warrior", but if power armor plate thicknesses averages, say, an inch, and it has material properties similar to modern high-strength steel (which is probably quite an underestimation, actually), then it should definitely be proof against lasgun shots unless each lasgun shot is equivalent to, like, a 30mm autocannon shell. That seems a little ridiculous. If a lasgun shot is capable of punching through power armor, even if only on a "straight hit", then it should also be an effective light anti-tank weapon, and should also be capable of basically blowing an unarmored person in half with one shot.

Of course power armor can be damaged by lasgun fire (and other things), but that's not the same thing as it being penetrated by lasgun fire. If a piece of the armor has suffered surface damage--little craters, pockmarks, whatever--then you'd want to replace it even if wasn't penetrated and thus did it's job of successfully stopping the lasgun shot.


However, when engaging the enemy at a decent range (more than 200m, say) or in the case of an ambush, there is plenty of opportunity to line up a head-shot or to aim for a perceived "weak point".

Applying this to the Dark Millennium, then, it is reasonable to assume that well-trained guardsmen (regardless of their "elite" status) will similarly take the time to aim at weak spots or heads given the opportunity. But at close range (Assault), they are more likely to aim mostly for the torso.

R.

You generally need pretty good optics to try for headshots at 200 yards, let alone eye shots or neck-joint shots or whatever. Lasguns seem to generally have iron sights only, so again, I would consider it unrealistic to expect Guardsmen to aim for those weak spots at that sort of range. Even headshots would be stretching it without optics, and headshots alone won't do you much good against Marines, you have to get even more precise than that.

StormWulfen
30-08-2009, 21:57
Well, no, even they wouldn't have any appreciable recoil. Remember, even 300 megawatts of beam power only gets you 1 lousy newton of recoil force. One newton is about a fifth of a pound of force, while any laser that can put out a 300-megawatt beam is going to weigh at least dozens of tons; so a single newton of recoil force acting against such a weapon is totally negligible. If you make the laser a hundred times more powerful (30 gigawatts, pretty absurd) so that it produces a hundred times as much recoil force (100 newtons, still only about 20 pounds of force), then it's also going to be about a hundred times bigger and heavier too. So basically, lasers--no matter how powerful--are effectively recoilless. No matter how large you scale them up, the amount of recoil force generated will be insignificant compared to the mass of the laser required to generate it.

hmm, interesting.

ok completely absurd now but what if abbadon's planet killer armageddon gun (as the name suggests it a very powerful laser:skull:) was (somehow) mounted on a warhound titan and it (somehow) was able to support its weight, if it fired a) would it visably recoil and b) would it cause the titan to fall over or obliterate itself?

NOTE: i know this is completely ridiculous but you seem to know a lot about lasers so i would like your opinion on what would happen (other opinions welcome too;))

to the OP: sorry for posting this in your thread but this will be the last question:angel:

Argastes
30-08-2009, 22:04
hmm, interesting.

ok completely absurd now but what if abbadon's planet killer armageddon gun (as the name suggests it a very powerful laser:skull:) was (somehow) mounted on a warhound titan and it (somehow) was able to support its weight, if it fired a) would it visably recoil and b) would it cause the titan to fall over or obliterate itself?

NOTE: i know this is completely ridiculous but you seem to know a lot about lasers so i would like your opinion on what would happen (other opinions welcome too;))

to the OP: sorry for posting this in your thread but this will be the last question:angel:

Hahah, that is a pretty ridiculous question, but it is also interesting, so I'll do what I can to take a stab at it. Unfortunately, in order to begin, I'd need to know a couple of things.

Firstly, I'd have to be able to take a guess at the weapon's beam power in watts. For me to guess at this, I'd need to know what it's capable of, and we can try to calculate a (very) rough wattage from there. Does anyone have on hand, or clearly remember, fluff descriptions of what this weapon can do? I seem to remember it being mentioned in a story in the previous CSM codex, but I don't have that book with me where I'm living right now, so I can't check. I'd appreciate it if anyone reading this thread could give a description of what the planet-killer can actually do.

Secondly, we'd have to know the rough mass of the weapon system. Isn't it mounted on a ship that is, at least in BFG figure scale, about the size of a battleship? How large/massive would such a ship be?

Thirdly, how much does a Warlord titan weigh? I always figured it was somewhere in the 10,000 to 20,000 ton range, but is there an official figure on this?

canucklhead
30-08-2009, 22:10
All of this assumes that the guardsman in question is getting one key shot off, and this one shot decides the life or death of said armoured foe.

This of course is patently incorrect. Lasguns are rapid fire, comparable to a modern assault rifle or carbine, and are used by fire teams, not individual snipers. The idea is that the sheer volume of fire directed at a small unit of superior enemies is likely to find a weak point or two.

On a further note, the idea of aiming for the center of body mass has a second and more important reason. Any penetrating shot along the center of a human's torso will result in that human's death most of the time. Aiming for extremeties even if they are more vulnerable, is a poor choice considering the likelyhood that a Space marine could keep fighting effectively without an arm or a leg.

So it's doubtful that a guardsman is trained to shoot at the 'weak' point of a marine or CSM's armour. Rather they are trained to saturate individuals with fire, confirming that the target has been taken down, before concentrating on new targets. This would differ from fire discipline vs unarmoured foes like Orcs, where the policy would be to volley into as many targets as possible. Further training might include aiming for the equivalent of center of mass on non humanoid targets, based on their internal physiology.

AndrewGPaul
30-08-2009, 22:11
Abaddon's planet-killer is several miles long, and all we know is it's some kind of energy weapon - it may not even be a laser.

Someone asked about the effects of hot-shot lasguns in 2nd ed 40k. In answer to that, look in Necromunda. It was identical in effect to a boltgun (back then, bolters and lasguns both had a -1 save mod).

StormWulfen
30-08-2009, 22:12
Hahah, that is a pretty ridiculous question, but it is also interesting, so I'll do what I can to take a stab at it. Unfortunately, in order to begin, I'd need to know a couple of things.

Firstly, I'd have to be able to take a guess at the weapon's beam power in watts. For me to guess at this, I'd need to know what it's capable of, and we can try to calculate a (very) rough wattage from there. Does anyone have on hand, or clearly remember, fluff descriptions of what this weapon can do? I seem to remember it being mentioned in a story in the previous CSM codex, but I don't have that book with me where I'm living right now, so I can't check. I'd appreciate it if anyone reading this thread could give a description of what the planet-killer can actually do.

Secondly, we'd have to know the rough mass of the weapon system. Isn't it mounted on a ship that is, at least in BFG figure scale, about the size of a battleship? How large/massive would such a ship be?

Thirdly, how much does a Warlord titan weigh? I always figured it was somewhere in the 10,000 to 20,000 ton range, but is there an official figure on this?

ok heres what i know,

1)it can literaly destroy a planet (thats what the story in the old chaos dex is about, extracted from the book execution hour, good book;))
it sort of fires at it, punctures the crust and causes it to explode!

2)it pretty much is the ship, which i belive is a little bigger than a battleship

3)a lot?


Abaddon's planet-killer is several miles long, and all we know is it's some kind of energy weapon - it may not even be a laser.

lets just assume that for this scenario it is ;)

Argastes
30-08-2009, 22:15
Lasguns are rapid fire, comparable to a modern assault rifle or carbine, and are used by fire teams, not individual snipers. The idea is that the sheer volume of fire directed at a small unit of superior enemies is likely to find a weak point or two.

Yeah, I would agree with this. I've never been saying that lasgun fire can't take down Marines; I've been saying that Guardsmen are not going to be able to effectively, deliberately aim for the eyes and other weak points. That doesn't mean that Marines couldn't still be taken down by hits on those weak points that happened by chance in a hail of lasgun fire.


ok heres what i know,

1)it can literaly destroy a planet (thats what the story in the old chaos dex is about, extracted from the book execution hour, good book;))
it sort of fires at it, punctures the crust and causes it to explode!

2)it pretty much is the ship, which i belive is a little bigger than a battleship

3)a lot?

Okay, so the planet actually explodes... Does it EXPLODE explode a la the Death Star, with the debris flying off in all directions at high speed, or does it kind of break up more slowly (in which case, wouldn't gravity cause the debris to re-amalgamate into a planet, albeit one with no solid crust, soon afterwards?)

And how big is a 40K Imperial/Chaos battleship? Anyone know an approximate length in meters, or better yet, an actual mass figure? If we can get an approximate length we can guesstimate volume and, assuming a density comparable to that of a real-life naval battleship, mass.

Apparently the scale diagram in Apoc shows a Warlord to be 33 meters tall, smaller than I thought (a lot of artwork seems to make them look as tall as skyscrapers), so let's guesstimate 3,000 tons.

JHZ
30-08-2009, 22:37
Does the fluff really show this? I always thought it was pretty clear that the main elements were effectively proof against small arms fire, including lasguns. That doesn't mean it's a "fanboy's wet dream of an adamantium-clad warrior", but if power armor plate thicknesses averages, say, an inch, and it has material properties similar to modern high-strength steel (which is probably quite an underestimation, actually), then it should definitely be proof against lasgun shots unless each lasgun shot is equivalent to, like, a 30mm autocannon shell. That seems a little ridiculous. If a lasgun shot is capable of punching through power armor, even if only on a "straight hit", then it should also be an effective light anti-tank weapon, and should also be capable of basically blowing an unarmored person in half with one shot.
I've come across various cases, where a power armour is pierced by a straight shot to the shest plate. In most cases this has been a Chaos Marine (since loyalists are protected by plot armour), but since loyalist Marines use same pattern armour as Chaos ones (on top of the newer mk. 6, 7 and 8, which were developed around the same era, so it's not like there's some magical super upgrade there, just little tweaks here and there), so I doubt the loyalist armour is somehow noticably stronger, especially in the general sense of protection.

And don't forget, lasguns aren't your average rifles either. Lasguns used to, and still do, have the advantage of armour piercing (even today Necromunda lasguns have a -1 ASM) over conventional solid slug weapons. This naturally doesn't reflect into 40K terms, but even in Inquisitor you have lasguns that can up their output without any fancy power packs, and hot-shot lasguns go through power armour like a hot piece of cake through butter. Even in Inquisitor the average power armour gives you 10pts. of protection (carapace gives 6, flak 3), and your average lasgun does 2D6pts. of damage, so on 11 and 12 you do damage.

I never said each and ever lasgun shot goes through power armour, but it doesn't seem to be impossible either or considered to be somehow magical ("the Emperor must have guided my shot"). There's even cases of Marines getting killed by mortars while in power armour. One case is in Storm of Iron, where an Iron Warrior gets killed by the frags of an air bursting mortar, and the old GW site had a story where a Marine was mortally wounded when a mole mortar came from below. Well, the second story did indicate that the Marine was in quite a bad condition, but simple frags turning a Marine from ok to dead? After all, flak jacket are designed to stop shrapnel, but not bullets, where as the mighty power armour yielded to flak...

Maybe it's a case of GW/BL writers not doing their homework, or just using Michael Bay as their source.

In any case, even if a power armour didn't stop small arms fire 100%, it's still better than a simple vest. You get a sealed environment, so you're not choking/freezing/boiling/etc. to death. You get full body protection, which even carapace doesn't provide. It does give plating on majot parts of the body, but there's still more that can be protected, but the power armour protects even those bits. It boosts your strenght, so where as the carapace slows you down (Ever tried to move around in full modern combat gear with vest, helmet, vest, etc.? Not the same as a track suit, I tell you what.), the power armour not only carries itself, it carries even you. So you can operate longer and with more agility. It also provides you with an army of different little perks over simple protection.


As for the thickness of the power armour, you have to remember that even an inch of armour is quite thick. 10mm of armour can protect a tank from small arms fire, mines and IEDs (or so they told us). And you know how much a 10mm plate of armour weighs? We had these half an inch cast iron plates in the army we used to protect target mechanics from live fire (normal 7.62mm rounds didn't even put a dent in them). Those sucker weighed a ton (as in "a helluva lot"). Now imagine building an armour out of something like that. Yes, power armour has servos to carry it, but even those servos have a load limit.

Power armour is made of ceramite, which is used in carapace armour as well, so it's not some ultimate material and doesn't weight a ton. On the other hand, terminator armour and it's adamantium is rather resilien. These days it isn't just 2+, but the 5++ save comes also from the fact that it's so frikken tough, or at least I can't remember any talk of a shield generator in it, just that it's a really tough piece of machinery.

And lets not forget that flak armour is not modern day armour vests either. They're more like flak jackets, designed to protect against shrapnel and such, not direct hits. So going from there, having an armoured suit that offers good protection against small arms fire and explosives, even if not total, is a great improvement. After all, this game was made in the 80s when the future held flying cars and all that. It's not like they could have predicted stuff like Dragon Skin back then. It was still the Cold War where war meant nuclear war and no armount of body armour could have protected you.


Uh, can't think of anything else at the moment.

Condottiere
30-08-2009, 22:38
And I will point out to you that there are Guard regiments who have never fired a shot in anger. Guard regiments whose sum total of combat experiance is supressing riots. And Guard regiments who have barely seen combat at all.I think that qualifies under comfortable garrison slots.

guillimansknight
30-08-2009, 22:49
The concept is to place a lot of bullets in the general area where the nearest unfriendly forces are hanging out, which you can't do if you're shooting blindly (unless you believe in writing random common names on your bullets of the people you happen to be fighting), so training is to prevent either panic or over-excitement, to make it routine.

Check out this video on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9A_31-osm8

balrick at 30 seconds

Bouncl
30-08-2009, 22:55
So, I've missed this thread when browsing Warseer, and it seems my comment has sparked a huge debate. If I had thought the discussion was going to be this serious, I would have clarified. What I meant to say was that there are Imperial Guard Regiments (Cadians, etc.) that have soldiers with marksmanship abilities, and morale on par with soldiers in the Rangers, Special Forces, etc.

I understand that there a guard regiments that are not like this at all, and that some are even just thousands of men from Iron Age planets that are given a gun, and thrown into battle.

But on the other hand, there are regiments out there that certainly qualify for as a "Badass Normal".

Argastes
30-08-2009, 23:02
Maybe it's a case of GW/BL writers not doing their homework, or just using Michael Bay as their source.

This seems most likely. I'm not saying that Marines ought to be 100% immune to small arms fire, but through the chest plate? That's a bit silly. In real life, armor penetration isn't decided by die roll, it's decided by physics; if a projectile doesn't have enough penetrative ability to punch through the thickness of armor that it's hitting, then it WON'T penetrate, period. It's not like it will have a 10% chance to penetrate or anything like that... it's just not going to make it through. An RPG that will penetrate up to ~300mm of RHA is not going to penetrate 500mm of RHA no matter how many times you try. So if a lasgun bolt is shown penetrating the breastplate of SM power armor (which is supposed to be one of the thickest parts), that implies that lasgun bolts should be punching through power armor all the time, and that power armor is actually no meaningful protection against lasgun fire. If that were true, Marines should be getting mowed down by Guardsmen like it's no big deal; they would be as vulnerable as a policeman in a Class II vest getting hit with a .308 rifle round. So those authors seem to be putting "plot before thought" when they have a Guardsman drill a CSM straight through the breastplate with a lasgun bolt.


As for the thickness of the power armour, you have to remember that even an inch of armour is quite thick. 10mm of armour can protect a tank from small arms fire, mines and IEDs (or so they told us). And you know how much a 10mm plate of armour weighs? We had these half an inch cast iron plates in the army we used to protect target mechanics from live fire (normal 7.62mm rounds didn't even put a dent in them). Those sucker weighed a ton (as in "a helluva lot"). Now imagine building an armour out of something like that. Yes, power armour has servos to carry it, but even those servos have a load limit.

Yeah, I know that an inch of armor is quite thick and would be quite heavy; but the art and whatnot seems to make it clear that the protective elements of SM power armor are at least that thick on the chest, shoulders, and so forth. Even if we ignored that and figured that the protective elements of SM power armor were substantially less than an inch thick, they are also made of materials that are supposedly better than steel, so they could easily equate to several times their thickness in RHA. A 2.5x thickness RHAE figure would, for instance, make 10mm of ceramite equal to an inch of steel, in which case my previous point would stand: A lasgun shot would have to be equivalent to an armor-piercing automatic cannon shell in order to penetrate. 2.5x thickness RHAE is possible with modern-day ceramic materials.

BTW, no given thickness of armor can be said to protect against "mines and IEDs", since those things don't have a fixed size, and it totally depends where they are in relation to the vehicle (plus there are many different types of anti-tank or anti-vehicle mines, many of which will penetrate a LOT more than 10mm RHA). 10mm RHA may protect against, say, a 10-kg IED detonated at a distance of 10 meters, but not against a 10-kg IED at a distance of 1 meter, or a 100-kg IED at 10 meters. Plus the shock could effectively kill the crew or disable the vehicle even if the armor isn't physically penetrated. Were you, by any chance, told this in the context of being assured that Strykers are survivable?

w00tm0ng3r
30-08-2009, 23:07
In Gaunt's Ghosts Larkin can shred an Iron Warrior's upper (face/neck/chest) armor with his long-las. I'm not sure how a long-las compares to other types of lasguns, but it is mentioned that they use "hotshot" power packs like hotshot lasguns. Zeezo then takes its head off with a single shot from a regular lasgun.

Hotshot lasguns are supposed to surpass even bolters as far as armor penetration is concerned since they were explicitly designed for that purpose.

Argastes
30-08-2009, 23:12
Ahh the firepower-boosting effects of needing to make your protagonists look badass for the fans, coupled with a dash of not caring how little sense it makes.

Shrapnel
30-08-2009, 23:14
In Gaunt's Ghosts Larkin can shred an Iron Warrior's upper (face/neck/chest) armor with his long-las. I'm not sure how a long-las compares to other types of lasguns, but it is mentioned that they use "hotshot" power packs like hotshot lasguns. Zeezo then takes its head off with a single shot from a regular lasgun.

Hotshot lasguns are supposed to surpass even bolters as far as armor penetration is concerned since they were explicitly designed for that purpose.

But Zeezo's gun was set to full power.

I'm going to weigh in behind precintomega on this one. A guardsman would indeed aim naturally at the centre of mass (due to training) when firing on a moving target or an alerted target, or while they themselves are moving in combat. Given a stationary and unaware target I'm sure they'd have ample opportunity to target weak points and make their first shot count.

Argastes
30-08-2009, 23:19
I would concede that, assuming a stationary target and the absence of firefight-related stress, this isn't entirely implausible... IF shooting at fairly short range. At, say, 200 yards (which is a pretty normal combat range), it's probably still a pipe dream, at least over open sights.


Hotshot lasguns are supposed to surpass even bolters as far as armor penetration is concerned since they were explicitly designed for that purpose.

I know they were designed for superior penetration, but do we have a background source stating that they are actually better than bolter shells in this respect?

Condottiere
30-08-2009, 23:41
Check out this video on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9A_31-osm8

balrick at 30 secondsI believe that's a Talisman of Protection 6+.

hlaine larkin
30-08-2009, 23:46
I think you may be underestimating how hard it is to make that kind of judgement in a firefight. Real-life military studies show that many soldiers are too scared and panicked to even fire their weapons at all during battle, and of those that do manage to fire them, many just squeeze off shots without aiming. It would certainly take a hardened, steely-nerved veteran to deliberately pick out the eyes, joints, etc., especially in the chaos and uproar of a firefight against Space Marines. No offense, but if you (or I) were really faced with a giant enemy in powered armor, the last thing we'd probably be able to do is coolly aim for his eyes and joints. It's easy to talk tough like that, but in an actual combat situation, that tough talk goes out the window and it becomes quite a bit harder.

Not to mention the fact that even if you are cool-headed enough to aim for them, actually hitting those kind of small targets under combat conditions, on a moving target, is practically impossible even for a skilled marksman at close range. Think of it this way: An AK47 in good condition is theoretically capable of putting it's shots into a 3"-6" circle at 100 yards... IF aimed very carefully by a competent marksman.... at a static target... with the shooter and weapon supported on a benchrest or in the prone position.

So, bottom line, it is probably unrealistic to expect most Guardsmen and other soldiers to be able to shoot for the weak spots in SM power armor during combat.


i agree. i would be on full auto- close my eyes- i know he is over that way somewhere. cue screaming (unless he is in terminator armour- we all knwo termys suck against lasguns)

hlaine larkin
30-08-2009, 23:48
I would concede that, assuming a stationary target and the absence of firefight-related stress, this isn't entirely implausible... IF shooting at fairly short range. At, say, 200 yards (which is a pretty normal combat range), it's probably still a pipe dream, at least over open sights.



I know they were designed for superior penetration, but do we have a background source stating that they are actually better than bolter shells in this respect?

i like to think of it as the vitrian dragoons in gaunts ghosts books- they haev there las packs turned up to full power. while its the same weapon, it has better armour penetration because its a more focused laser- its common knowledge the same amount of force fired on a more focuses point will penetrate better than slightly more spread out blast- but tis no stronger just better penetration. (i hope im not wrong haha) thats my take on things anyways

Lord_Crull
30-08-2009, 23:56
Fluff has shown lasguns to pack enough punch to pierce power armour. At least a straight hit.

Where? All the fluff I have read has las-fire being deflected like rain-drops.

I think you are confusing this with hotshot lasguns.


I've come across various cases, where a power armour is pierced by a straight shot to the shest plate. .

Please show me where this is. I have never seen this.


Well, the second story did indicate that the Marine was in quite a bad condition, but simple frags turning a Marine from ok to dead? After all, flak jacket are designed to stop shrapnel, but not bullets, where as the mighty power armour yielded to flak...


And I think you underestimate exactly how powerful a morter is at that kind of range. Even a flak jacket is not going to protect you at that kind of range. The Guard clearly posses more powerful weaponry in that regard.




The armour is rather modular and pieces of it are intended to be replaced when damaged, so it's only natural to assume they also get damaged often enough to need such a service.

No it's not, power armor is repeatedly referred to as a revered relic and venerated by the chapter fluffwise. It's made it clear that power armor is not easily replaced at all.

Argastes
31-08-2009, 00:05
i like to think of it as the vitrian dragoons in gaunts ghosts books- they haev there las packs turned up to full power. while its the same weapon, it has better armour penetration because its a more focused laser- its common knowledge the same amount of force fired on a more focuses point will penetrate better than slightly more spread out blast- but tis no stronger just better penetration. (i hope im not wrong haha) thats my take on things anyways

But turning up the power pack wouldn't make the laser "more focused", it would just increase beam power. Which would increase penetration, but not because of beam focus. Changing the beam focus would involve manipulating the mirror geometry inside the laser. And in either case, whether it's upping beam power or reducing the size of the incidence spot (which is what you'd do by making the beam "more focused), you'd increase "strength" (target damage) as well as armor penetration. With a laser they are basically the same thing, because the beam inflicts damage on the target BY penetrating it. There's no way to make the beam penetrate better but not do more damage.

I know this is 40K and the guys who wrote the fluff don't even know what a laser really does or how it works, but there you have it. Just info for anyone who's interested.

JHZ
31-08-2009, 00:44
This seems most likely. I'm not saying that Marines ought to be 100% immune to small arms fire, but through the chest plate? That's a bit silly. In real life, armor penetration isn't decided by die roll, it's decided by physics; if a projectile doesn't have enough penetrative ability to punch through the thickness of armor that it's hitting, then it WON'T penetrate, period.
But in real life there are variables. Sloped armour is the strongest then the projectile comes to it in an angle, but if you get to shoot it, say from an elevated position, negating the sloping, then it's lowers the effectiveness of the armour. And not all armour is entirely uniformal in real life. Exhausts, view ports, hatches, etc. are weaker than the armour around them, and there is always a chance of hitting said spots. In Iraq an unknown weapons, possibly an anti-tank rifle, pierced the joint between the turret and hull of an Abrams, and almost hit the commander in the buttocks, if he had been sitting down in his seat.

Penetration is not ultimates. I've seen a steel box, shot with an anti-material rifle. Out of 10 shots 7 came through, 2 made a dent on the other side and one was lost somewhere inside it. So even if the gun is suppose to be able to penetrate something like that, it doesn't mean it always will, and just because something is suppose to give protection from certain things, doesn't mean it always will. Yes, a .22 vs. a Leopard 2 is a no go (unless you hit the driver in the eye), but if you have a shape charge capable of piercing 100mm of steel and a steel plate 110mm thick, it's not an universal fact that the charge will never pierce it. Maybe the steel happened to be a little lower grade than usual, maybe the charge has a little more punch in it or maybe the reaction worked just a little better this time.

It's not like every shot to the head is fatal. In general it is, but there are cases of people surviving a bullet to the brain. Hell, I just read an article about a guy who was run over by a train, and cut in half, yet still survived. Not only survived, he himself called the paramedics and then made some calls to family and loved ones to let them know. This lasted almost an hour until he was finally freed from under the train and rushed to the hospital. I doubt many would survive being sliced in half by a speeding train, but it can happen.


So if a lasgun bolt is shown penetrating the breastplate of SM power armor (which is supposed to be one of the thickest parts), that implies that lasgun bolts should be punching through power armor all the time, and that power armor is actually no meaningful protection against lasgun fire.
Except that power armour is curved in many places (limbs, shoulders, etc.), so a hit on a curvy part will deflect the shot and get added protection from the curviness (like how sloped armour works), where as a direct impact on a flat surface offers less support behind it.
68483
Direct hit into the center of the chest. The thickness is 26 pixels. The slightly deviated shot is 27 pixels. Could be that extra millimeter that saves our Marine's life. Not to forget that as it's sloped away from his body, there's a chance the projectile will glance off, where as the direct shot has no where else to go but forwards, putting more pressure upon the center of the chest.


Even if we ignored that and figured that the protective elements of SM power armor were substantially less than an inch thick, they are also made of materials that are supposedly better than steel, so they could easily equate to several times their thickness in RHA.
Better than steel in what ways? As in being lighter? More durable? Easier to produce?

Even if durable and more lightweight, doesn't mean they go slapping ceramite dy the truck load onto the armour. More durable material also means that you don't have to put so much on there to have the same protection. After all, Marines of ye olde were more universal soldiers than what they are today, so their equipment was made that in mind, and it's not like they've done much to it after that.


A 2.5x thickness RHAE figure would, for instance, make 10mm of ceramite equal to an inch of steel, in which case my previous point would stand: A lasgun shot would have to be equivalent to an armor-piercing automatic cannon shell in order to penetrate. 2.5x thickness RHAE is possible with modern-day ceramic materials.
Lasguns also blow chunks out of reinforced concrete (or so some novels claim), so it's safe to assume they pack a punch.


BTW, no given thickness of armor can be said to protect against "mines and IEDs", since those things don't have a fixed size, and it totally depends where they are in relation to the vehicle (plus there are many different types of anti-tank or anti-vehicle mines, many of which will penetrate a LOT more than 10mm RHA).
Probably the same with "small arms", which range from .22 pistols to machine guns. So when something offers protection from small arms fire, does it mean all possible guns that can be classes as small arms in every possible situation, or just that when facing most common types you have a good chance of surviving the encounter?


But all in all, we're not talking solid slug projectiles here. Laser weapons, how ever they might work in 40K, work on a totally different principle, and as such we can't totally reflect real life solid slug physics into it.


But Zeezo's gun was set to full power.
In Storm of Iron Harken (or what ever his name was) grabbed his lasgun and took a snapshot at an attacking CSM through its chest plate and wounded it without even second ago knowing there were CSM on the planet, so I doubt his lasgun was ready in the AP3 mode at that point.


I would concede that, assuming a stationary target and the absence of firefight-related stress, this isn't entirely implausible... IF shooting at fairly short range. At, say, 200 yards (which is a pretty normal combat range), it's probably still a pipe dream, at least over open sights.
At 150m the post of my rifle pretty much covered majority of the human size target down range. So it's not easy aiming for those sweet spots from there, but it's not unheard of. During WW2 Simo Häyhä shiped over 500 soviets with a stock bolt action rifle and iron sights.


Where? All the fluff I have read has las-fire being deflected like rain-drops.

I think you are confusing this with hotshot lasguns.

Please show me where this is. I have never seen this.
Storm or Iron for one (stock IG guardsman and his lasgun puts a hole through the torso of a CSM). Then there was one in one of the Gaunt novels (I think it has already been mentioned here). Those are the two I'm sure of. Have to check the rest, but there are such. In Storm of Iron there should be more cases of CSM being cut down by lasfire (hell, when I was reading it I began to think that the Iron Warriors were the new Eldar).


And I think you underestimate exactly how powerful a morter is at that kind of range. Even a flak jacket is not going to protect you at that kind of range. The Guard clearly posses more powerful weaponry in that regard.
No, of course not, but an air bursting mortar is still and air-bursting mortar, and it shoots off shrapnel. You're nowhere near the actual explosion (as it's high in the air), you just get hit by a rain of metal fragments, which aren't as powerful as good rifle bullets, though as they're jagged and sometimes larger, can do more damage when they hit soft tissue.

And the Marine in Storm of Iron that died from said air-bursting mortar while being carried. So the frags had to go through his backpack as well, since I doubt arm and leg damage is enough to kill a Marine (especially as it had at least one bionic leg, maybe more).


No it's not, power armor is repeatedly referred to as a revered relic and venerated by the chapter fluffwise. It's made it clear that power armor is not easily replaced at all.
So the whole stuff about Techmarines, 13th Company, etc. using spare parts from broken armour to fix still functional ones into operational condition, and several of the armour marks having interchangeable parts is just poppycock?

Back in the day when the power armours were made, they weren't relics, they were weapons of war and when they broke down, they were fixed or replaced. Power armours were designed to fight wars. They didn't have any mystical qualities to them back then. Replacing the armour doesn't replace the stuff under it. It just takes the broken armour plate off and puts a new one there. All the delicate internal workings that are so hard to replicate are not touched.

hlaine larkin
31-08-2009, 00:50
i agree with the guy who said the 3+ save is there for the variety of hits- besides i think this question is unanswerable as each situation would vary- over a 200 yard shot when you havent been seen- aim for weak spots
10 yards charging at you blindly fire

its a moot point people.

Lord_Crull
31-08-2009, 01:16
In Storm of Iron Harken (or what ever his name was) grabbed his lasgun and took a snapshot at an attacking CSM through its chest plate and wounded it without even second ago knowing there were CSM on the planet, so I doubt his lasgun was ready in the AP3 mode at that point.


Where? I don't recall reading that.



Storm or Iron for one (stock IG guardsman and his lasgun puts a hole through the torso of a CSM). Then there was one in one of the Gaunt novels (I think it has already been mentioned here). Those are the two I'm sure of. Have to check the rest, but there are such. In Storm of Iron there should be more cases of CSM being cut down by lasfire (hell, when I was reading it I began to think that the Iron Warriors were the new Eldar).


Again, where? Give me a quote please, I cannot seem to find it.

And even with those two examples we have many, many more examples of power armor being far more durable. Like it or not, power armor is portrayed as being almost immune to lasguns far more often than you present them as.

In fact, practically every other space marine novel has them deflecting lasgun shots with ease.



No, of course not, but an air bursting mortar is still and air-bursting mortar, and it shoots off shrapnel. You're nowhere near the actual explosion (as it's high in the air), you just get hit by a rain of metal fragments, which aren't as powerful as good rifle bullets, though as they're jagged and sometimes larger, can do more damage when they hit soft tissue.


No, the mortar was clearly very powerful. Not all mortars are going to be created equal. and air-bursting mortar in the 41 millenium could be far stronger than the other modren type. Whatever it was it was clearly very powerful, It's implied that Honsou only survived because of the extra body he had. The distance was only five meters. Which is not that far for an explosion.

In fact we don't even know if it would even be a hand mortar, or a Griffon mortar, or a seige mortar.

In fact we don't know if it was even an air-bursting one, or a regular one that detonated early.



And the Marine in Storm of Iron that died from said air-bursting mortar while being carried. So the frags had to go through his backpack as well, since I doubt arm and leg damage is enough to kill a Marine (especially as it had at least one bionic leg, maybe more).


No, go back and read it again,he took a massive hit to the head as well. Which seemed to be the one that killed him.



So the whole stuff about Techmarines, 13th Company, etc. using spare parts from broken armour to fix still functional ones into operational condition, and several of the armour marks having interchangeable parts is just poppycock?

Back in the day when the power armours were made, they weren't relics, they were weapons of war and when they broke down, they were fixed or replaced. Power armours were designed to fight wars. They didn't have any mystical qualities to them back then. Replacing the armour doesn't replace the stuff under it. It just takes the broken armour plate off and puts a new one there. All the delicate internal workings that are so hard to replicate are not touched.

And so the stuff about power armor being hard to replicate and being teated as holy relics is poppycock then?

You can still repair armor even if it offers very good protection. I don't understand your point at all here.

Argastes
31-08-2009, 02:33
But in real life there are variables. Sloped armour is the strongest then the projectile comes to it in an angle, but if you get to shoot it, say from an elevated position, negating the sloping, then it's lowers the effectiveness of the armour. And not all armour is entirely uniformal in real life. Exhausts, view ports, hatches, etc. are weaker than the armour around them, and there is always a chance of hitting said spots. In Iraq an unknown weapons, possibly an anti-tank rifle, pierced the joint between the turret and hull of an Abrams, and almost hit the commander in the buttocks, if he had been sitting down in his seat.

A space marine's breastplate doesn't have exhausts, view ports, or hatches in it. We can't say for sure without diagrams from GW, but it seems to be a pretty homogeneous piece. So what you say may be quite valid when it comes to shooting at a tank, but the example in question here involves a Marine's breastplate, not a tank.

BTW, sloped armor is great when your armor is made of steel, but with modern ceramic armors, sloping is not as desirable for several reasons. Ceramite is presumably a ceramic material. You'll note that in a number of modern MBTs, the turret armor is not very sloped, but instead has a boxy, slab-faced arrangement. This is because it incorporates ceramic elements and thus sloping isn't so important.


Penetration is not ultimates. I've seen a steel box, shot with an anti-material rifle. Out of 10 shots 7 came through, 2 made a dent on the other side and one was lost somewhere inside it. So even if the gun is suppose to be able to penetrate something like that, it doesn't mean it always will, and just because something is suppose to give protection from certain things, doesn't mean it always will. Yes, a .22 vs. a Leopard 2 is a no go (unless you hit the driver in the eye), but if you have a shape charge capable of piercing 100mm of steel and a steel plate 110mm thick, it's not an universal fact that the charge will never pierce it. Maybe the steel happened to be a little lower grade than usual, maybe the charge has a little more punch in it or maybe the reaction worked just a little better this time.

Right, obviously this stuff is not precise down to the millimeter; there is some variation due to finite manufacturing tolerances and whatnot (although the designers of both weapons and armor always strive to minimize variation for obvious reasons). The point is, though, that lasgun bolts are going to penetrate X thickness of Y type of armor, give or take a certain percentage, and if the armor is thicker than X by more than a small increment, forget it; no dice. I'll finish this thought below....


Except that power armour is curved in many places (limbs, shoulders, etc.), so a hit on a curvy part will deflect the shot and get added protection from the curviness (like how sloped armour works), where as a direct impact on a flat surface offers less support behind it.

...

Direct hit into the center of the chest. The thickness is 26 pixels. The slightly deviated shot is 27 pixels. Could be that extra millimeter that saves our Marine's life. Not to forget that as it's sloped away from his body, there's a chance the projectile will glance off, where as the direct shot has no where else to go but forwards, putting more pressure upon the center of the chest.

Uhh, we aren't talking about projectiles here, we're talking about laser beams. There's nothing to deflect or ricochet, they heat a spot on the target via incident radiation. They do reflect off of surfaces to a degree, but unlike with a ricocheting projectile, that has nothing to do with their angle of incidence upon the target surface; light hitting a surface at a slant isn't somehow more likely to reflect off of it than light hitting the same surface at 90 degrees.

Increased effective thickness due to angling/sloping is a fair point, but as your picture illustrates, the slope on, say, the side of a Marine breastplate is going to be fairly minimal in terms of the added effective thickness. So for it to make a difference between successful and unsuccessful penetration, a lasgun beam's penetrating power would have to be barely more than the minimum needed to get through power armor (through the breastplate in this example) when striking perpendicularly. This would still mean that Guardsmen should have little trouble mowing down Marines, especially since most other parts of the armor are thinner than the breastplate. It just doesn't add up. I understand that you read this novel where Gaunt's guys were popping off Marines with lasgun fire left and right, but that just doesn't square with what the rest of the fluff tells us. I don't think it's that hard to realize that this book was playing fast-and-loose for the sake of the plot, and that it's liberties don't need to be defended as realistic and reasonable.


Better than steel in what ways? As in being lighter? More durable? Easier to produce?

As in being harder and/or stronger, thus more difficult to penetrate. Although when it comes to lasers, a high heat of vaporization is also important. Fortunately high-strength/hardness ceramics typically have this trait as well.


Even if durable and more lightweight, doesn't mean they go slapping ceramite dy the truck load onto the armour. More durable material also means that you don't have to put so much on there to have the same protection. After all, Marines of ye olde were more universal soldiers than what they are today, so their equipment was made that in mind, and it's not like they've done much to it after that.

Yes, obviously, if ceramite is better than steel, you can use less and achieve the same level of penetration. I already said exactly that in my previous post. Nevertheless we can see from the artwork that the protective elements of Marine power armor are quite thick. So power armor must be really effective stuff if ceramite is stronger than steel AND there is a thick layer of it! Which makes this business about lasguns punching through the chestplate even more silly. If that's possible, why aren't lasguns good light anti-tank weapons? Why aren't they good demolition weapons? If power armor is equivalent even to only, say, 15mm RHA and lasguns can penetrate it, then every Guardsman is running around with the firepower of a .50-caliber AMR in their hands.


Lasguns also blow chunks out of reinforced concrete (or so some novels claim), so it's safe to assume they pack a punch.

Modern rifle bullets can also blow good-sized chunks out of concrete, so that is not necessarily an indication that lasguns should be able to punch through Marine power armor, which is equivalent to several centimeters of RHA. A 7.62x39mm M1943 bullet (AK round) is easily capable of blowing a 3-4" wide crater around the actual bullet hole when hitting concrete.


Probably the same with "small arms", which range from .22 pistols to machine guns. So when something offers protection from small arms fire, does it mean all possible guns that can be classes as small arms in every possible situation, or just that when facing most common types you have a good chance of surviving the encounter?

In the context of military vehicle armor, the term "small arms" is usually implicitly understood to mean 7.62mm rifle fire. When someone says a vehicle is small arms protected, you know he doesn't mean against .22-caliber pistols; he means against centerfire rifle rounds. There is no such automatic understanding of what "IED" implies though. There is no understanding that "IED protected" means against, say, a 10-kg IED or a 20-kg IED or whatever. So yes, it is meaningless to say that 10mm RHA is protection against IEDs. Whoever told you that was either lying or misinformed.


At 150m the post of my rifle pretty much covered majority of the human size target down range. So it's not easy aiming for those sweet spots from there, but it's not unheard of. During WW2 Simo Häyhä shiped over 500 soviets with a stock bolt action rifle and iron sights.

Yeah, but he didn't snipe them in the eyes and the insides of their elbows and knees and armpits. No-one is debating whether it's possible to accurately shoot people at 200m with iron sights, obviously it is. The question is whether it's reasonable to accurately shoot at the small weak points on power armor with iron sights at anything other than quite close range. Read back over it, you will find that my comment you responded to here was in specific regard to shooting for the weak spots on Marine power armor, not shooting at human-sized targets.


Storm or Iron for one (stock IG guardsman and his lasgun puts a hole through the torso of a CSM). Then there was one in one of the Gaunt novels (I think it has already been mentioned here). Those are the two I'm sure of. Have to check the rest, but there are such. In Storm of Iron there should be more cases of CSM being cut down by lasfire (hell, when I was reading it I began to think that the Iron Warriors were the new Eldar).

:eyebrows: Sounds like even you kind of sense how goofy it is for these Guardsmen to be gunning down power-armored chaos marines with their lasguns. There is no shame in simply admitting that the novel's description of lasfire was silly and doesn't jive with established fluff, you know. It is obvious that the writer was ignoring that stuff for the sake of telling his story.


No, of course not, but an air bursting mortar is still and air-bursting mortar, and it shoots off shrapnel. You're nowhere near the actual explosion (as it's high in the air), you just get hit by a rain of metal fragments, which aren't as powerful as good rifle bullets, though as they're jagged and sometimes larger, can do more damage when they hit soft tissue.

And the Marine in Storm of Iron that died from said air-bursting mortar while being carried. So the frags had to go through his backpack as well, since I doubt arm and leg damage is enough to kill a Marine (especially as it had at least one bionic leg, maybe more).

Now this is even more ridiculous, and even more of an indication that the author of this book didn't consider the implications of what he was writing about the protective capability of power armor. Shell fragments--generally which have less penetrating ability than even a modern 9mm pistol bullet--are supposed to have penetrated not only the power armor itself, but it's backpack too? This should really make us roll our eyes.

EDIT: Just out of curiosity, what sort of RHA equivalency do you think that the main protective elements of SM power armor--the breastplate and pauldrons, say--might have? In rough terms of course, I'm only asking for a guesstimate. I want to know roughly what kind of penetrative power you ascribe to lasgun fire if you think it can punch through a Marine breastplate, even if only when striking perpendicularly.

Firaxin
31-08-2009, 03:36
Okay. Note that I agree entirely with Crull, Argastes, etc.

However, I am a proponent of the 'low-powered' lasgun being ~ to a .50 cal weapon.


Which makes this business about lasguns punching through the chestplate even more silly. If that's possible, why aren't lasguns good light anti-tank weapons? Why aren't they good demolition weapons? If power armor is equivalent even to only, say, 15mm RHA and lasguns can penetrate it, then every Guardsman is running around with the firepower of a .50-caliber AMR in their hands.
Obviously, because the tanks/bunkers/etc are all built with more advanced materials (like ceramite, adamantium, wraithbone, etc) too; meaning that while the lasgun is an exceptional light anti-tank/materiel/etc rifle by modern standards, in 40k it is simply equivalent to a small arm in the grand scheme of armor and armor penetration.

That said, a lasgun shouldn't normally be able to penetrate a power-armored chest, and any incident where such an event occured is likely because the laser impacted a part of the chest that was already damaged.

Argastes
31-08-2009, 05:00
I think that's questionable, though. Firstly, I don't think it's actually true that all structures/vehicles in 40K are built out of these advanced super-materials. Certainly some are, but all? And what about obstacles/cover like trees, earthworks, etc.? Lasguns don't seem to tear into them like HMG or autocannon fire, which is what they would do if they were that potent. Secondly, if lasguns did pack this sort of destructive power, it seems like their effect on living flesh and unprotected human targets (other Guardsmen, etc.) would be a lot more spectacular than it is shown to be in the fluff. I remember a story, from one of the 2E core books (can't remember which) where a Guardsmen shot an Ork in the arm with his lasgun and the Ork basically just shrugged it off. Thirdly, aren't lasguns supposed to be fairly comparable in power to autoguns, which GW has explicitly stated are similar to 20th-century automatic rifles? And they're clearly less powerful than heavy stubbers, which GW has explicitly stated are similar to 20th-century HMGs. So that right there would seem to debunk this theory quite well. I dunno, I just don't buy it. It's not supported by the bulk of the descriptions that we have of their effects. I know it's cool to imagine that everything is extra-uber in 40K, but there seems to be very little evidence behind the idea that every Guardsmen has that kind of firepower in his hands.

EDIT: I'm glad you agree about the power armor though. Not trying to bust your balls, just stating why I don't agree with the idea that lasguns are that powerful.

Condottiere
31-08-2009, 06:38
I have a question, which may already have been answered - is there an official explanation of what the Lasgun is and how it works?

StormWulfen
31-08-2009, 06:59
Okay, so the planet actually explodes... Does it EXPLODE explode a la the Death Star, with the debris flying off in all directions at high speed, or does it kind of break up more slowly (in which case, wouldn't gravity cause the debris to re-amalgamate into a planet, albeit one with no solid crust, soon afterwards?)

And how big is a 40K Imperial/Chaos battleship? Anyone know an approximate length in meters, or better yet, an actual mass figure? If we can get an approximate length we can guesstimate volume and, assuming a density comparable to that of a real-life naval battleship, mass.

Apparently the scale diagram in Apoc shows a Warlord to be 33 meters tall, smaller than I thought (a lot of artwork seems to make them look as tall as skyscrapers), so let's guesstimate 3,000 tons.

1)it kinda explodes and burns up at the same time, the way its described the planet first begins to crack and break up, then the atmosphere ignites, then at some point between then and the end of the extract the planet explodes vapourising a ship in the process, its seems to be a gassy vapour like explosion with very little debris (possibly because the planet still has enough gravity to keep the solid matter together?)

2)going by descriptions i've heard they seem to get up to 5-6 miles long and 2 miles deep at an absolute push (more likley 1/2-1 1/2 miles deep)

any of that help?

imperial90
31-08-2009, 07:36
Um havent autocanon shells been described as the equivilant of modern tank rounds? They cant penetrate power armor so how on earth is a las gun suppose too?

StormWulfen
31-08-2009, 08:08
Um havent autocanon shells been described as the equivilant of modern tank rounds? They cant penetrate power armor so how on earth is a las gun suppose too?

autocannons actually do quite well against power armour, just because in-game they don't kill marines instantly doesn't mean they can't penetrate the armour, the way i have seen autocannon rounds described they explode on impact with the target thus they have little penetrating power thus the AP of 4 not 3 or 2, if they were to impact power armour i'd imagine they would do substantial damage to the armour and repeated shots would go through.

imperial90
31-08-2009, 08:10
Well yah, but an auto canon packs a hell of alot more of a punch then a lasgun, and even then like you said it would take a few rounds to penetrate something like the chest armor, as such, what chance would a comparitivly measly lasgun have?

StormWulfen
31-08-2009, 08:54
well its the same concept with a lasgun it has minimal penetrating power so repeated shots will go through the armour (eventually:rolleyes: ) then consider that you will generally have 10-20 even possibly 30 gaurdsmen firing at the marines, some of those shot will kill.

JHZ
31-08-2009, 11:02
Where? I don't recall reading that.
Pg. 15-16.
"Hawke screamed and snatched up Hitch's fallen rifle... / He fired the rifle, laughing as his shot punched into the figure's chest. / ...Honsou stepped across the shattered threshold... / Blood clotted on his chest where the Guardsman had shot him."


Again, where? Give me a quote please, I cannot seem to find it.
One I already gave, the second should be here somewhere in this thread about the Ghost that sniped the CSM through the chest or something. I'm not gonna go digging through my novels for that one or some of the others, as I'm not sure which ones they was. The SoI one I remembered more clearly, which is why I could find it in a hurry.

Oh, another one: Dawn of War intro. Ok, not chest, but there's plenty of sluggas and choppas digging into power armour in that little clip. You got the flying leg in one scene and then the sarge takes more than his share of shots through him as he hurries up the hill. By GW law, if it has the 40K tag it's official as any codex or novel.


And even with those two examples we have many, many more examples of power armor being far more durable. Like it or not, power armor is portrayed as being almost immune to lasguns far more often than you present them as.
I'm not denying that, just that it can get pierced as well, so it's not a 100% protection.


In fact, practically every other space marine novel has them deflecting lasgun shots with ease.
Does "with ease" mean they walk upright into enemy fire, or that as they take cover, the shots are already obscured and the armour just deflects the ones that do hit from odd angles?

Just because you have armour that can take a licking, doesn't mean you yourself will keep on ticking. Even modern day tanks don't have to be penetrated to stop them. A good big bomb might not damage the armour, but will turn the crew into goo inside it (Ever had a metal bucket on your head and have someone hit it with a stick? Same idea, except a bigger bucket and a bigger stick.) and render the vehicle dead in the water. This is why even modern day super tanks with their super armour and all that use cover.

So should Marines, as even if that shell hitting you doesn't penetrate your armour, doesn't mean it won't liquefy your insides. This whole walking tall with bling into battle that the artwork pushes is retarded macho BS. The sad thing is that quite often reality still tops fiction (http://www.cracked.com/article_17019_5-real-life-soldiers-who-make-rambo-look-like-pussy.html), and without any deep voices, heavy armour and compensating firearms.


And so the stuff about power armor being hard to replicate and being teated as holy relics is poppycock then?
No, because all you're doing is replacing the armour itself, nothing else. Ceramite is not a holy relic no one knows how to make. It's used in carapace armour, etc. So when you do take that beating that leaves your armour looking like the surface of the moon, you just strip away the armour off the servos and internal gimmicks, and put up new ones.

They fix old paintings by simply painting over them where they've suffered damage. Same here. Doesn't mean it doesn't include plenty of religious stuff when doing it, but if you didn't replace broken parts, you'd have Marines running around in Swiss cheese armour, which I haven't seen much of.


You can still repair armor even if it offers very good protection. I don't understand your point at all here.
I've noticed.

Look at a bike helmet. When you finally fall off, you want that thing to crack and break, because it means it has absorbed all the skull crushing energy that would have gone into your head. It protects you by breaking. So just because a power armour offers protection (to you, the user), doesn't mean it itself won't get damaged in the process of protection. Ceramite is, after all, a ceramic material, and you can't just hammer that stuff back into shape once it's damaged, and in a world of fantastic weapons, it will get damaged.


A space marine's breastplate doesn't have exhausts, view ports, or hatches in it. We can't say for sure without diagrams from GW, but it seems to be a pretty homogeneous piece. So what you say may be quite valid when it comes to shooting at a tank, but the example in question here involves a Marine's breastplate, not a tank.
Mk. 3 has that little vent looking piece on the chest, maybe for power cables or something. Several marks have cabling running on top of the chest plate, which in later editions have been secured beneath the armour, etc.

In Rogue Trader you had a cutaway of a power armour (Mk. 6 I believe), but I seem to have misplaced that image. If I'm not mistaken, there's a lot of stuff between the user and the outside air, so it's not all armour. Have to see if I can find it somewhere.


BTW, sloped armor is great when your armor is made of steel, but with modern ceramic armors, sloping is not as desirable for several reasons. Ceramite is presumably a ceramic material. You'll note that in a number of modern MBTs, the turret armor is not very sloped, but instead has a boxy, slab-faced arrangement. This is because it incorporates ceramic elements and thus sloping isn't so important.
Fair enough. All they really taught us about tanks was "aim between the turret and the hull".


Right, obviously this stuff is not precise down to the millimeter; there is some variation due to finite manufacturing tolerances and whatnot (although the designers of both weapons and armor always strive to minimize variation for obvious reasons). The point is, though, that lasgun bolts are going to penetrate X thickness of Y type of armor, give or take a certain percentage, and if the armor is thicker than X by more than a small increment, forget it; no dice. I'll finish this thought below....
In the grimdark of the far future, there's like a billion manufacturers of power armour and lasgun. Even =][= lists 3 different ones: Necromunda, Mars and Triplex(?), which all have different firepower. So industry standards are only in the dreams of Munitorum clerks and Admech magoses.


Uhh, we aren't talking about projectiles here, we're talking about laser beams. There's nothing to deflect or ricochet, they heat a spot on the target via incident radiation. They do reflect off of surfaces to a degree, but unlike with a ricocheting projectile, that has nothing to do with their angle of incidence upon the target surface; light hitting a surface at a slant isn't somehow more likely to reflect off of it than light hitting the same surface at 90 degrees.
I know, but since we have little to no idea how 40K lasguns work, it's not that easy to draw real life exsamples. The added thickness of a sloped surface would make it a little more resilient to the heat and all that.

But there is one added bonus of firing from the side to a sloped surface: surface area. As you said, lasers heat a spot. Take a laser pointer and a piece of white paper. From head on the dot is small and round, but tilt or curve the paper and move the pointer to the side. The dot becomes more and more oval shaped. The energy of the beam is distributed on a larger area, which would decrease efficiency.


Increased effective thickness due to angling/sloping is a fair point, but as your picture illustrates, the slope on, say, the side of a Marine breastplate is going to be fairly minimal in terms of the added effective thickness. So for it to make a difference between successful and unsuccessful penetration, a lasgun beam's penetrating power would have to be barely more than the minimum needed to get through power armor (through the breastplate in this example) when striking perpendicularly. This would still mean that Guardsmen should have little trouble mowing down Marines, especially since most other parts of the armor are thinner than the breastplate. It just doesn't add up. I understand that you read this novel where Gaunt's guys were popping off Marines with lasgun fire left and right, but that just doesn't square with what the rest of the fluff tells us. I don't think it's that hard to realize that this book was playing fast-and-loose for the sake of the plot, and that it's liberties don't need to be defended as realistic and reasonable.
I decided to shoot myself in the leg here:
68493
In one hand we have all the arguments for realism (or just people, myself included, applying real world phsycis to the different things in the world), but then again, it's a fictional world with laser phaser guns and frikken demons! That alone should be enough to act as a deterrent against any reason.

In the words of Marc Gascoigne:
"But is it all true? Yes and no. Even though some of it is plainly contradictory? Yes and no. Do we deliberately contradict, retell with differences? Yes we do. Is the newer the stuff the truer it is? Yes and no. In some cases is it true that the older stuff is the truest? Yes and no. Maybe and sometimes. Depends and it varies."

So, can a lasgun penetrate the chest plate of a power armour? Yes and no.

Easy, ain't it?


If that's possible, why aren't lasguns good light anti-tank weapons?
Because in the grimdarkness of the far future tanks are much tougher than before.


Modern rifle bullets can also blow good-sized chunks out of concrete, so that is not necessarily an indication that lasguns should be able to punch through Marine power armor, which is equivalent to several centimeters of RHA. A 7.62x39mm M1943 bullet (AK round) is easily capable of blowing a 3-4" wide crater around the actual bullet hole when hitting concrete.
Military grade reinforced concrete? Something you'd find in a bunker that's designed to take artillery strikes and just shrug it off. And didn't you just say lasers didn't work like projectiles? This thread is going round and round like a mad little carousel. Now all we need is a hairy fat guy in clown makeup sobbing and juggling doll heads.

Anyway, can't say for myself, as I don't think I've ever shot my rifle at concrete. Wood, dirt, steel, etc. But never concrete. Through I've seen bullets hitting rocks and pretty much blowing to bits while the rock just sat there.


In the context of military vehicle armor, the term "small arms" is usually implicitly understood to mean 7.62mm rifle fire.
7.62x39mm, 7.62x51mm, 7.62x53R...?


Whoever told you that was either lying or misinformed.
Well, that would be the army. I'll be sure to pass on the notion. It's not like they know what they're talking about.

Lord_Crull
31-08-2009, 11:58
Pg. 15-16.
Oh, another one: Dawn of War intro. Ok, not chest, but there's plenty of sluggas and choppas digging into power armour in that little clip. You got the flying leg in one scene and then the sarge takes more than his share of shots through him as he hurries up the hill. By GW law, if it has the 40K tag it's official as any codex or novel.



Dawn of War? The one with 100 Banbeblades? Really?

And no, the GW law applies only to codices, novels and comics, not a single word was said about video games.


Pg. 15-16.
Does "with ease" mean they walk upright into enemy fire, or that as they take cover, the shots are already obscured and the armour just deflects the ones that do hit from odd angles?


Yes they do, the Word Bearers in Dark Apostle walk right into enemy fire with ease and the Space Wolves do the same in the Ragnar novels. It's exactly what it sounds like.

A guardmsan even notes that it takes dozens and dozens of shots from ann entire platoon just to fell a few chaos marines. Another soldier notes his lasgun is virtually useless even when eh shoots a chaos marine in the head.

Do you want to me to use Brothers of the snake's example? Of a marine taking autocannon fire point blank and laughing it off like nothing.

EDIT: Here it is. Dark Apostle


Dark Apostle Pg.78: With a roar that was at once his own and the daemon's, Burias-Drak'shal leapt from his crouch, launching straight at a terrified PDF soldier who ineffectually fired off a frantic las-blast at the creature. Burias-Drak'shal smashed the icon down onto the man's head, killing him instantly. Nevertheless, the daemonically possessed warrior punched his fist

Pg 79: The battlements were almost clear. A blast from a lasrifle struck Marduk's helmet, and his head was jerked to the side. Snarling, he turned to face the attacker that had dared to shoot him.
VARNUS SWORE AS he waited for the las-lock to re-power. Though they fired powerful single bursts of energy, the weapons were painfully slow between firing. Still, the shot had done little more than irritate the towering monster that was leading the power armoured killers, so one more blast would be unlikely to do anything but stall the inevitable.

Pg 149: Colonel Boerl was spared this fate as a platoon of Elysians swept into the area, las-fire pounding into the Chaos Marines. It took dozens of shots before any of the traitors fell, and they exacted a heavy toll on the Guardsmen, killing more than ten for each one of their own that succumbed to the weight of fire.

Pg 153: He blasted a Chaos Space Marine in the head with his lasgun as he moved, the shot striking the warrior's helmet, rocking him backwards but failing to pierce


Dark Disciple


Dark Disciple: pg 99 ‘’Las-rounds impacted with Marduk’s chest and shoulders, knocking him back half a step. They left blackened scorch marks on his armored plates

Pg 100: ‘’More las-rounds pinged off his armor as he closed the distance’’

Pg 102: ‘’And those few Word Bearers who where hit struck shrugged off the lasfire as if they where irritatig mosqeuito bites’’

Pg 103’’A las-blast struct him, scorching his pristine alabaster helmet’’

As you can see direct las-fire is almost useless here.


Pg. 15-16.
Just because you have armour that can take a licking, doesn't mean you yourself will keep on ticking. Even modern day tanks don't have to be penetrated to stop them. A good big bomb might not damage the armour, but will turn the crew into goo inside it (Ever had a metal bucket on your head and have someone hit it with a stick? Same idea, except a bigger bucket and a bigger stick.) and render the vehicle dead in the water. This is why even modern day super tanks with their super armour and all that use cover.
.

Good thing marines are not normal human by any stretch. The fact is, 40k has nothing to do with reality at all.


Pg. 15-16.
So should Marines, as even if that shell hitting you doesn't penetrate your armour, doesn't mean it won't liquefy your insides. This whole walking tall with bling into battle that the artwork pushes is retarded macho BS. The sad thing is that quite often reality still tops fiction (http://www.cracked.com/article_17019_5-real-life-soldiers-who-make-rambo-look-like-pussy.html), and without any deep voices, heavy armour and compensating firearms.


Guess what? That's how it works. Space marines really do shurg off las-fire like it's nothing, far more often then they are wounded by it. You saying ''but that's stupid, I don't like it'' is still not going to change the fact that the majority of marine fiction is like that.


Pg. 15-16.
Ceramite is, after all, a ceramic material, and you can't just hammer that stuff back into shape once it's damaged, and in a world of fantastic weapons, it will get damaged.


Actually you can, Brothers of the snake had them hammering entire plates back into shape.

JHZ
31-08-2009, 12:26
Dawn of War? The one with 100 Banbeblades? Really?
Guess what, you can have a 100 baneblades on the table too. I've seen 10 baneblade "armoured companies". The table top game can be as unfluffy as any computer game, so that proves nothing.


And no, the GW law applies only to codices, novels and comics, not a single word was said about video games.
"Let's put it another way: anything with a 40K logo on it is as official as any Codex... and at least as crammed full of rumours, distorted legends and half-truths."
-Marc Gascoigne

Hey, look (http://www.pwned.com/gamecovers/pc/27d5eab46dab69be5cd918c1856605e2-Warhammer_40_000__Dawn_of_War.jpg), a 40K logo.


Yes they do, the Word Bearers in Dark Apostle walk right into enemy fire with ease and the Space Wolves do the same in the Ragnar novels. It's exactly what it sounds like.

Do you want to me to use Brothers of the snake's example? Of a marine taking autocannon fire point blank and laughing it off like nothing.
Don't forget the one where the Marine gets shot in the face with a bolt pistol and lives. I think there's two such cases. One was in some novel, and another was in a 40K comic.


Good thing marines are not normal human by any stretch.
No, but those fancy upgrades don't make their internal organs any more resilient to being turned into mush. They get more muscle and bone mass, thicker blood that seals up wounds more quickly, etc. But nothing about tougher internal organs. When that tissue liquefies, it liquefies and that's that.


The fact is, 40k has nothing to do with reality at all.
Which means a lasgun going through a Marine's torsos like a bullet through a wet piece of paper is as plausible as a Marine taking a melta-torpedo to the chest and laughing if off.


Actually you can, Brothers of the snake had them hammering entire plates back into shape.
Potters around the world roll in their graves.

Lord_Crull
31-08-2009, 12:32
Guess what, you can have a 100 baneblades on the table too. I've seen 10 baneblade "armoured companies". The table top game can be as unfluffy as any computer game, so that proves nothing.


fluff for the Baneblade states that most amries are lucky to get one, let alone three.

And no, Babeblade compaines consist of three baneblades, not ten.



"Let's put it another way: anything with a 40K logo on it is as official as any Codex... and at least as crammed full of rumours, distorted legends and half-truths."
-Marc Gascoigne

Hey, look (http://www.pwned.com/gamecovers/pc/27d5eab46dab69be5cd918c1856605e2-Warhammer_40_000__Dawn_of_War.jpg), a 40K logo.
.

You realize he just contridicted himself in the larger context that you took it from?

Look at this.


The BL editors work with the GW studios to keep the fiction the way that it should (very hard might I add! - RK), though due to the sheer volume of detail involved there can be the odd discrepancy here and there. If you want to consider anything "canonical" then both BL fiction - be it novel, graphic novel, art or background book - and GW fiction - be it White Dwarf, Codex, Army book or rulebook - are such.

Straight fron the actual site. Says nothing about video games.

http://forum.blpublishing.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=71


Besides nobody here takes Dawn of War seriously as a fluff source.



Don't forget the one where the Marine gets shot in the face with a bolt pistol and lives. I think there's two such cases. One was in some novel, and another was in a 40K comic.


As you can clearly see, we have much more examples than you do.



No, but those fancy upgrades don't make their internal organs any more resilient to being turned into mush. They get more muscle and bone mass, thicker blood that seals up wounds more quickly, etc. But nothing about tougher internal organs. When that tissue liquefies, it liquefies and that's that.


I don't understand your point, a lasround is not going to liquify someone's insides if they hit, a tank shell maybe, but not a lasgun. What's your point?




Which means a lasgun going through a Marine's torsos like a bullet through a wet piece of paper is as plausible as a Marine taking a melta-torpedo to the chest and laughing if off.


Except I have never seen them taking a melta torpedo and shurgging it off, But I have plenty of examples of them shurgging off lasfire.

Argastes
31-08-2009, 12:36
7.62x39mm, 7.62x51mm, 7.62x53R...?

Usually x51. But all three rounds have roughly comparable RHA penetration with ball ammo, though--6 to 8mm. And that's what "smalls arms protection" generally means in terms of military vehicles. Obviously it's not precise but it does refer to a fairly narrow band of protective capability. Unlike saying "IED protected", because IEDs range from a hand grenade in a tin can, to a dozen 152mm artillery shells wired together.

Just to be clear, are you still trying to claim that your "10mm of steel armor will protect against IEDs" statement is accurate or meaningful? Just because you heard it in the Army doesn't make it so. If you were in the Army, in fact, you probably know that a huge number of urban legends and misconceptions about weapons circulate there, getting passed on from DIs to credulous privates as if they were solid fact and so forth. Ever been told that a .50-caliber round can still kill you even if it misses you, or that it's illegal under the rules of war to use a .50-cal. against personnel but you can still "shoot at the radio on his back, *wink wink*"? Or that the 5.56mm round was designed to "wound, not kill"? These are only a few of the total falsehoods that I've heard experienced NCOs pass on to their guys.


Potters around the world roll in their graves.

Ceramite doesn't have to a pure ceramic, it could be a composite material incorporating ceramics, such as an MMC (metal-matrix composite, ceramic whiskers in an alloy matrix) or cermet (ceramic particles in a metal matrix). Cermets are specifically designed to take advantage of ceramic properties while still being able to deform like metal, so it would make a lot of sense because ceramite really does seem to behave like a metal in many cases (deforming/bending instead of shattering, etc.).


And didn't you just say lasers didn't work like projectiles?

Yes, I did, what's the point? You said that lasguns must be more powerful than modern rifles, and more capable of penetrating power armor, because they can blow chunks from concrete; I'm pointing out that modern rifle bullets can also blow chunks from concrete so your argument there is a non-starter. Lasers do work differently from bullets, yes. That doesn't make your argument about lasguns blowing chunks out of concrete any more viable. Unless you think you can offer a scientific explanation of why it should be otherwise?


So should Marines, as even if that shell hitting you doesn't penetrate your armour, doesn't mean it won't liquefy your insides. This whole walking tall with bling into battle that the artwork pushes is retarded macho BS.

I do agree with this in a way; realistically, no amount of personal armor would let you fight the way Marines fight without being wiped out quickly. It is silly, and yes, realistically, Marines should make use of cover and other modern infantry tactics instead of charging forward like medieval warriors. But... that retarded macho BS is one of the setting's central conceits. The setting sacrifices realism for image in many cases, and that's only one of them. 40K is not a simulator for realistic infantry tactics. If you think it's such retarded BS, there is a hole world of historical tabletop games out there waiting for you where such things don't happen.

Anyhow, even accepting that Marines should make more use of cover, it's not primarily lasguns that make this necessary; it's all the other, nastier, weapons that exist on the battlefield. Just like AFVs should make use of cover, not because of the risk of small arms fire (which they can more or less shrug off), but because there are more dangerous things than AKs on the battlefield.


I have a question, which may already have been answered - is there an official explanation of what the Lasgun is and how it works?

I believe several official sources clearly state that it is indeed a handheld laser weapon. Solid-state, chemical, gas-tube, free-electron, we don't know the specific type of laser, nor do we know the frequency it operates on, though it does seem to be in the visible-light range. But what we do know is since it's a laser, it operates by exciting a lasing medium inside the gun, causing it to emit a beam of coherent light. The beam rapidly heats a small spot on the surface of the target, causing it to explosively vaporize. This is what we know for sure.

Additionally, we can postulate that the beam is probably pulsed rapidly to repeat this effect many times on the target, because otherwise lasguns would just create surface wounds; in order to get a substantial wound channel, it would have to pulse numerous times, blowing out a little more material each time. One lasgun "shot" would therefore actually consist of many extremely rapid pulses in a fraction of a second (it would happen so quickly that, to an observer, the effect would seem to be as rapid as the impact of a bullet--there would be a "bang" and the target would have a hole blown in it). This is speculation, but it would be the only way to make a comparatively small laser inflict effective wounds.

Speculating a little further, I would guess that lasguns are diode-pumped solid-state lasers, since those are compact, sturdy, mechanically simple, and efficient. We can probably rule out chemical lasers, since lasguns don't consume chemical fuel, and free-electron lasers since those require lots of big magnets and a particle acclerator. But all we know for certain is that they are some sort of handheld laser.

tuebor
31-08-2009, 13:18
I will point out that not all Guard regiments are going to be like that.

Agreed, for every regiment that is the equivalent to western SF in capabilities there's going to be a regiment of conscripted hive workers that hardly knows one end of the lasgun from the other. Of course, the vast, vast majority of the Guard would be comprised of regiments that are "merely" competent. With the vast scale of the Guard and the decentralized nature of the Imperium I'd find it quite hard to believe that Guard regiments didn't represent an enormous range of competency levels.

Condottiere
31-08-2009, 13:30
I believe several official sources clearly state that it is indeed a handheld laser weapon. Solid-state, chemical, gas-tube, free-electron, we don't know the specific type of laser, nor do we know the frequency it operates on, though it does seem to be in the visible-light range. But what we do know is since it's a laser, it operates by exciting a lasing medium inside the gun, causing it to emit a beam of coherent light. The beam rapidly heats a small spot on the surface of the target, causing it to explosively vaporize. This is what we know for sure.

Additionally, we can postulate that the beam is probably pulsed rapidly to repeat this effect many times on the target, because otherwise lasguns would just create surface wounds; in order to get a substantial wound channel, it would have to pulse numerous times, blowing out a little more material each time. One lasgun "shot" would therefore actually consist of many extremely rapid pulses in a fraction of a second (it would happen so quickly that, to an observer, the effect would seem to be as rapid as the impact of a bullet--there would be a "bang" and the target would have a hole blown in it). This is speculation, but it would be the only way to make a comparatively small laser inflict effective wounds.

Speculating a little further, I would guess that lasguns are diode-pumped solid-state lasers, since those are compact, sturdy, mechanically simple, and efficient. We can probably rule out chemical lasers, since lasguns don't consume chemical fuel, and free-electron lasers since those require lots of big magnets and a particle acclerator. But all we know for certain is that they are some sort of handheld laser.Thanks, because I was wondering if anyone got around to making X-Ray lasers, with continuous beams.

Argastes
31-08-2009, 13:40
Thanks, because I was wondering if anyone got around to making X-Ray lasers, with continuous beams.

I'd consider it entirely possible that some naval laser weapons (never played BFG so I don't really know what to call them) are of that type. It is possible for a free-electron laser, if properly designed, to emit in the X-ray spectrum. The biggest problem is probably the mirrors and lenses, but you can use diffraction effects to focus the beam instead. X-ray lasers are astoundingly more destructive than longer-wavelength lasers at the same wattage. As in, punching through inches of armor plate in, literally, a microsecond.

JHZ
31-08-2009, 13:55
fluff for the Baneblade states that most amries are lucky to get one, let alone three.

And no, Babeblade compaines consist of three baneblades, not ten.
And the fluff is gonna stop me from doing a 100 baneblade company... how? So surely as I can brake the fluff in the table top game also means that all fluff associated to said game is false, right?


Straight fron the actual site. Says nothing about video games.

http://forum.blpublishing.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=71
Maybe because it's BL, and BL does only novels and such. As you might see that they say nothing about Fantasy Flight Games either, which would indicate that Dark Heresy is not "canonical" either. Same goes for Specialist Games, Forge World, etc.


Besides nobody here takes Dawn of War seriously as a fluff source.
But there's novels of it, surely that's canonical as it's BL made, right?


As you can clearly see, we have much more examples than you do.
And this somehow negates the lesser exsamples?


I don't understand your point, a lasround is not going to liquify someone's insides if they hit, a tank shell maybe, but not a lasgun. What's your point?
Marines walking into lasfire to shrug it off expose themselves to every other gun out there, more powerful than a lasgun.


Just to be clear, are you still trying to claim that your "10mm of steel armor will protect against IEDs" statement is accurate or meaningful? Just because you heard it in the Army doesn't make it so. If you were in the Army, in fact, you probably know that a huge number of urban legends and misconceptions about weapons circulate there, getting passed on from DIs to credulous privates as if they were solid fact and so forth. Ever been told that a .50-caliber round can still kill you even if it misses you, or that it's illegal under the rules of war to use a .50-cal. against personnel but you can still "shoot at the radio on his back, *wink wink*"? Or that the 5.56mm round was designed to "wound, not kill"? These are only a few of the total falsehoods that I've heard experienced NCOs pass on to their guys.
Well, at least the XA-180 with 10mm armour has been in use around the world for decades and by claims has a good protection against small arms fire, mines and IEDs. Make what you will out of it, but that's the claim and I can't change that no matter how much science I can muster. It's been in use and that's what they say about it.


Ceramite doesn't have to a pure ceramic, it could be a composite material incorporating ceramics, such as an MMC (metal-matrix composite, ceramic whiskers in an alloy matrix) or cermet (ceramic particles in a metal matrix). Cermets are specifically designed to take advantage of ceramic properties while still being able to deform like metal, so it would make a lot of sense because ceramite really does seem to behave like a metal in many cases (deforming/bending instead of shattering, etc.).
Surely it is a composite ceramic, but who knows. In the wonderful world of 40K anything can happen.


Yes, I did, what's the point?
There's a difference between concrete your average and reinforced concrete used in bunkers. Which one was the AK firing at?


If you think it's such retarded BS, there is a hole world of historical tabletop games out there waiting for you where such things don't happen.
Or maybe I just pretend Marines aren't as retarded and be happy with 40K as it is? Just because I might not like Chinese food doesn't mean I can't travel to China.

As a whole, 40K ain't that bad and a litte macho BS is always good, but sometimes the fluff goes a little over the top in grimdark and rule of cool, and that's the time when I'll just shut my eyes to it and go to my happy place. Pawns of Chaos, Shira Calpurnia trilogy and Farseer alone have been a good indication that there truly is more to 40K than what the tag line and general fluff leads us to believe. Laid back, even friendly Chaos worshipers? Justice within the Imperium? People not being oppressed 24/7? Love? Friendship between a man and daemon? Heresy I say!

Then to go from that into a b-grade action novel about how awesome Marines are is like and how grimdark the world is... It makes me a saaaad panda. Sometimes GW pushes the grimdark of 40K into emo state where everything is so black and cold and sad and no one loves you and your soul is picked on by ravens and stuff. Without light, dark is just dark. Pawns of Chaos with all the positive things made the negatives 10 times more real. No one will feel sorry for some skinned hell spawn of teeth and talons a guardsman guns down, but how about when that same guardsman rips an innocent baby - whose only crime was to be born on the wrong planet - from the arms of its mother and whacks it against a tree, and then rapes the mother... $£!% just got real. Makes skulls and blood look like candy and soda pop.

Lord_Crull
31-08-2009, 14:22
And the fluff is gonna stop me from doing a 100 baneblade company... how? So surely as I can brake the fluff in the table top game also means that all fluff associated to said game is false, right?


No, where did you ever get that idea at all?

Oh, and the fluff won't stop you. Your wallet will.;)



Maybe because it's BL, and BL does only novels and such. As you might see that they say nothing about Fantasy Flight Games either, which would indicate that Dark Heresy is not "canonical" either. Same goes for Specialist Games, Forge World, etc.


Exactly my point. Thank you for proving it. And I will note that some of those compaines, are more tied to GW than Relic was. Certainly the Imperial armor books got far more support from GW fluffwise than Dawn of War.



But there's novels of it, surely that's canonical as it's BL made, right?


No, the novels are different than the games.



And this somehow negates the lesser exsamples?


In a way yes, there is clearly a great precedence of marine ignoring lasfire than what you have.



Marines walking into lasfire to shrug it off expose themselves to every other gun out there, more powerful than a lasgun.


That's not the point, the marines are not going ot be dropping to that kind of effect from lasguns anytime soon.



Then to go from that into a b-grade action novel about how awesome Marines are is like and how grimdark the world is... It makes me a saaaad panda. Sometimes GW pushes the grimdark of 40K into emo state where everything is so black and cold and sad and no one loves you and your soul is picked on by ravens and stuff. Without light, dark is just dark. Pawns of Chaos with all the positive things made the negatives 10 times more real. No one will feel sorry for some skinned hell spawn of teeth and talons a guardsman guns down, but how about when that same guardsman rips an innocent baby - whose only crime was to be born on the wrong planet - from the arms of its mother and whacks it against a tree, and then rapes the mother... $£!% just got real. Makes skulls and blood look like candy and soda pop.


Go cry me a river. Nobody is forcing you to read it or play the game.

Argastes
31-08-2009, 14:41
Well, at least the XA-180 with 10mm armour has been in use around the world for decades and by claims has a good protection against small arms fire, mines and IEDs. Make what you will out of it, but that's the claim and I can't change that no matter how much science I can muster. It's been in use and that's what they say about it.

Ahh, the "IED protection" of vehicles like that comes mainly from hull shaping and other features like that, not armor thickness. When they say they have good protection against IEDs, what it means is that they are more likely to survive a given IED detonation than, say, a truck being attacked with the same IED, due to the way their hull deflects the blast shockwave. It doesn't mean that because they have X thickness of armor, they are "IED protected" I don't know whether the Pasi has hanging seats, but that's another feature that contributes to IED survivability (German Puma IFV has them). So no, while armor thickness certainly helps, 10mm RHA (or any other given RHA thickness) does not necessarily provide IED protection. Hull shaping and vehicle weight provide IED protection.


There's a difference between concrete your average and reinforced concrete used in bunkers. Which one was the AK firing at?

It was the concrete of an embankment retaining wall, which could be any of several different types of "normal" concrete. But let's talk about "reinforced concrete". What the term normally refers to is concrete that has had it's tensile strength improved by the addition of reinforcing bars (rebar) embedded in the concrete. This type of concrete isn't going to resist bullet impacts any more than unreinforced concrete, because the steel bars don't make the concrete material itself tougher, they just make the overall concrete structure less likely to crack under tensile stress. Sometimes concrete is reinforced with glass fibers instead. This has the same effect, and again, wouldn't make the concrete more resistant to bullet impacts. Then there are ways to actually increase the compressive strength of concrete, like using special cements, and adding materials like titanium oxide, and using high-hardness aggregate like quartz, and so forth. These techniques are SOMETIMES used in the construction of bunkers, but it's far from universal. Some bunkers are built using conventional reinforced concrete, which is structurally stronger (and more resistant to blast overpressure), but not more resistant to bullet impacts. Some bunkers are even built using conventional unreinforced concrete, just Portland cement and gravel. A bunker isn't automatically built of the toughest specialty concrete. It's probably fair to assume that a similar situation persists in 40K. With a whole galaxy of warfare, I doubt that every bunker is built with the same materials. Do we have any textual evidence to suggest what type of concrete this was, or what special properties it possessed? Or are you just assuming that it was made of high-strength specialty concrete because that would support your case about lasguns being more powerful?


As a whole, 40K ain't that bad and a litte macho BS is always good, but sometimes the fluff goes a little over the top in grimdark and rule of cool, and that's the time when I'll just shut my eyes to it and go to my happy place. Pawns of Chaos, Shira Calpurnia trilogy and Farseer alone have been a good indication that there truly is more to 40K than what the tag line and general fluff leads us to believe. Laid back, even friendly Chaos worshipers? Justice within the Imperium? People not being oppressed 24/7? Love? Friendship between a man and daemon? Heresy I say!

Then to go from that into a b-grade action novel about how awesome Marines are is like and how grimdark the world is... It makes me a saaaad panda. Sometimes GW pushes the grimdark of 40K into emo state where everything is so black and cold and sad and no one loves you and your soul is picked on by ravens and stuff. Without light, dark is just dark. Pawns of Chaos with all the positive things made the negatives 10 times more real. No one will feel sorry for some skinned hell spawn of teeth and talons a guardsman guns down, but how about when that same guardsman rips an innocent baby - whose only crime was to be born on the wrong planet - from the arms of its mother and whacks it against a tree, and then rapes the mother... $£!% just got real. Makes skulls and blood look like candy and soda pop.

I agree with all of this, actually. I do agree that 40K often goes over-the-top with the grimdark stuff, and it just becomes silly and tiresome (maybe if the writers were more talented they could pull it off, but I feel like the quality of the fluff writing has declined since 2nd Edition). I do agree that if they really want to add genuine grimness and horror to the setting, the way to do it isn't by just adding more skulls and demons and ****, but with skillful writing and exposition of the terrible human misery that the setting entails. I do agree that it's silly when every planet in the Imperium is a comically oppressive dystopia with bad weather, bad food, and unjust government. It's silly when, because the tagline is "Grim darkness, only war", people try to paint every square inch of an entire galaxy with the same grim-darkness-war brush. There are many ways in which I, too, roll my eyes at a lot of stuff in 40K and have to just tell myself that it's not really like that, and that the fluff writers are just churning out nonsense.

Ironically, though, your whole argument about lasguns seems to stem from sequences in the very "B-grade action novels" you are expressing disdain for, except instead of being about how awesome Marines are, they are about how awesome Guardsmen are. Are you really going to complain about "rule of cool", and then turn around and assert that lasguns should be able to punch through power-armor breastplates because they did so in a novel that is obviously trying to portray the Guardsmen protagonists as extra-badass CSM slaughterers so the fans will be happy about it?


EDIT:
Okay, regarding the question of the planet-killer's recoil. Apparently (http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tech/Beam/DeathStar.html), the amount of energy required to blow up a planet like the Death Star did, accelerating it's entire mass to escape velocity in order to permanently blow it apart, is about 2.4x10^32 joules. This guy's math looks legit, at least I didn't see any problems in it, so we'll accept his figure for the sake of discussion. It sounds like Abaddon's planet killer isn't nearly that powerful and only breaks up the target planet, rather than providing enough energy to hurl the debris out at escape velocity (this does mean that the target planet would reform shortly after being "killed", albeit with a magma ocean surface instead of a solid crust). Let's say it only puts out one-tenth as much energy as the figure given above, 2.4x10^31 joules. Assuming it fires for one second, that's a beam power of 2.4x10^31 watts as well. Dividing by 3x10^8 (remember, one newton of force per 300 megatts) gives us 8x10^22 newtons of recoil force. This comes to, very roughly, 10^19 tons of recoil force, or ten quintillion (ten billion billion) tons of recoil force. So yes, I think our 3,000-ton warlord titan would be knocked flat on it's ass (that's a bit of an understatement, really) if this weapon could somehow be mounted on it and fired. This also means that when it's fired from Abaddon's bigass battleship, it applies the same ten quintillion tons of force to the ship in the form of thrust a la a photon rocket, which would send it zipping away in the opposite direction at a ridiculous speed (probably very close to light speed, but the math to figure decreasing acceleration returns for thrust at relativistic speed is over my head). Of course this is taking for granted that an object the size and presumed weight of the planet killer could generate a laser beam of that power, which is absurd. A laser with that beam power is probably many orders of magnitude beyond the limits of the physically possible. It would also suck down, in one second, about as much energy as Earth's sun produces in a thousand years. Which raises the question of power supply.

All this, of course, assumes that the planet-killer really is a conventional laser, which it probably isn't.

Shrapnel
31-08-2009, 17:30
I would concede that, assuming a stationary target and the absence of firefight-related stress, this isn't entirely implausible... IF shooting at fairly short range. At, say, 200 yards (which is a pretty normal combat range), it's probably still a pipe dream, at least over open sights.


200 yards? over open sights? no chance. I was talking about ambush distance or pistol range, certainly no more than 50 yards.

At 200 yards you'd be lucky to pick out details.

Argastes
31-08-2009, 17:33
Yes, as stated earlier, the sight blade/post covers most of a human target at that range. I know you weren't saying it should be possible at 200 yards, I was just pointing that out for people who might not realize that and think that your statement justified the idea that Guardsmen shooting for eyes/joints, etc., was reasonable under general combat conditions.

canucklhead
31-08-2009, 19:02
Ok. Just because I'm in a silly mood today, I'll get my inner geek on and contribute to this Abaddon and lasgun discussion.

I've already made my point pretty clear on lasguns. I'll add that novels often take some liscense with things that make people who understand the true nature of them shudder. This is magnified in a novel based on a game, where the details are so hotly contested to begin with. Add to which, the poorer the quality of the written story, the more liscense is likely to be taken, to create those BOOYAH moments.

As for Abaddon's planet killer, let's not try comparing it to the death star, since that whole series was way more fiction than science. Star Trek makes genuine sense compared to Lucas's 'vision', of laser swords of ultimate badassery. I imagine that the planet killer fires a beam weapon capable of drilling through the crust of nearly any world, and deep into the mantle. This needn't be a massive whole by planetary standards, perhaps a kilometer in diameter. The key to this weapon is the frequency of the beam, which would likely impart a sympathetic wave effect to the molten mantle, or even perhaps the core itself. These bodies contain more that enough energy to destroy themselves, if some clever Dick like Abaddaba could master a way to turn it against itself. Sounds almost Chaos like, doesn't it?

Argastes
31-08-2009, 19:36
Uhh, speaking of "more fiction than science"..... That "drilling a hole" and "sympathetic wave effect" and "frequency is the key" stuff is total turkey-talk, it's no more scientifically meaningful than the Death Star's uber-laser beam. In what way do planets contain "more than enough energy" to destroy themselves? What type of energy is this, in what fashion is it stored? There is absolutely no remotely plausible explanation for the planet-killer, what I posted was just a thought experiment in response to the guy who asked, if the planet killer was a laser, how much recoil it would have. I didn't "compare" it to the Death Star either, I only used a figure from a Star Wars website to guesstimate one of the numbers going into the calculation.

EDIT: You know that 40K is even more scientifically absurd than Star Wars, right? I mean I love 40K and don't really care about Star Wars, but that's how it is.

JHZ
31-08-2009, 20:27
Exactly my point. Thank you for proving it.
So in your words, Forge World, Specialist Games, etc. are not official "canon", only BL and GW.


No, the novels are different than the games.
Ah, but Fire Warrior isn't. There are something that are different, but the overall story is the same.


In a way yes, there is clearly a great precedence of marine ignoring lasfire than what you have.
There's also plenty of people who have died from getting shot in the head, but it's still not a 100% surefire way to get killed, as there are people who have survived it. I'm I remember correctly, only 70% of suicides by shooting oneself in the head actually end up in death.

In other words, the fact that more often a power armour will protect from a las shot than let it through, does not mean it cannot penetrate. It happens, but not all the time.


That's not the point, the marines are not going ot be dropping to that kind of effect from lasguns anytime soon.
Well, except that part that is used to kill people, including Marines. You know, the hot laser stuff. Only thing standing in the way of high power laser surgery is some ceramite plating. And even that doesn't cover everything, like joints, etc.


Go cry me a river. Nobody is forcing you to read it or play the game.
Oh, aren't we the sweet one. Lets just kick everyone who has any problems with something, because they're being a whiny little wuss.

I've been a fan of this game since Rogue Trader and I've seen a lot of fluff and a lot of changes. Some of them good, some of them bad. If I don't like Marines, then I don't. 40K is more than Marines and I like that part a lot, thank you very much. So don't come telling me what to do and how to think.


(maybe if the writers were more talented they could pull it off, but I feel like the quality of the fluff writing has declined since 2nd Edition).
I doubt it's that much about the overall talent these days. As Christian Dunn of BL said about their latest contest:

"...if you can show that you can write in the same kind of style and tone we'd expect from a 40K story then that's good enough for me."

In other words, don't get J. J. Abrams to do a prime time sitcom or teen sex comedy. Stuff like that. He might be good, but might not be what you're looking for.


Ironically, though, your whole argument about lasguns seems to stem from sequences in the very "B-grade action novels" you are expressing disdain for, except instead of being about how awesome Marines are, they are about how awesome Guardsmen are. Are you really going to complain about "rule of cool", and then turn around and assert that lasguns should be able to punch through power-armor breastplates because they did so in a novel that is obviously trying to portray the Guardsmen protagonists as extra-badass CSM slaughterers so the fans will be happy about it?
Well, there's my personal preference and then there's the fluff as written.

And in Storm of Iron, while the Iron Warriors get killed in a pace that makes me wonder if it's suppose to be a Guard novel or a CSM novel, when the Imperial Fists arrive, their armour mostly shrug off enemy fire without a problem, so once again it's to show that Marines (not Chaos Marines) are awesome. Whoop-dee-doo! It takes 3 great companies of IW to roll over the fort, but it takes only a handful of Fists and one disobedient, play-by-his-own-rules Guardsman to decimate the IW ranks more than an armoured battalion and some titans.

w00tm0ng3r
31-08-2009, 20:40
I believe the average lasgun is on the power level of a .50 cal HMG because it's stated to be able to take off unarmored human limbs with a single shot... which just underscores how over the top this universe is when that kind of firepower is called a "flashlight".

As for lasguns, while by no means am I suggesting that they can always or even reliably penetrate power armor, I certainly believe it is at least possible, especially if a weak spot gets hit. Hotshot lasguns and long-las in particular should be able to penetrate power armor as they're tricked out versions with external power packs (meaning it's too big to fit inside the weapon unlike the standard version), especially since only stormtroopers and snipers respectively use them and the former are special forces trained from childhood to be the best non-Astartes soldiers the Imperium has to offer and the latter has "outstanding accuracy" in the job description.

canucklhead
31-08-2009, 20:41
wow, there's a lot of anger in the room. uhmmm, you did hear me say that I was being silly, RIGHT? That's enough of this nerd scrap for me thanks.

JHZ
31-08-2009, 21:02
On hot-shot lasguns, hellguns or what ever you might call them, in Legacy it was stated that they're not that great vs. soft tissue targets. At least not as good as shotguns. And not some executioner shotgun, just your average pellet popper/solid slugger.

Lord_Crull
31-08-2009, 21:57
So in your words, Forge World, Specialist Games, etc. are not official "canon", only BL and GW.


Actually I myself personally consider Forge World to be canon, but if I am debating and we are going strictly with absolutely no exceptions then we go with what they say.

Of course I will state that I greatly prefer Forge world over Dawn of War and I greatly prefer it over some actual GW publications. (My personal opinion).

Althought it baffles me how you can think that Dawn of War trumps Imperial Armor in a canon relevency contest.



Well, except that part that is used to kill people, including Marines. You know, the hot laser stuff. Only thing standing in the way of high power laser surgery is some ceramite plating. And even that doesn't cover everything, like joints, etc.


I point out two things.

1. Dark Disciple.

2. Honsou got his armor pentrated by lasrounds and did not die. In your own example.


In other words, the fact that more often a power armour will protect from a las shot than let it through, does not mean it cannot penetrate. It happens, but not all the time.

Where did I say it could not? I was simply pointing out that it was nowhere near the amount of times you implied.



And in Storm of Iron, while the Iron Warriors get killed in a pace that makes me wonder if it's suppose to be a Guard novel or a CSM novel, when the Imperial Fists arrive, their armour mostly shrug off enemy fire without a problem, so once again it's to show that Marines (not Chaos Marines) are awesome. Whoop-dee-doo! It takes 3 great companies of IW to roll over the fort, but it takes only a handful of Fists and one disobedient, play-by-his-own-rules Guardsman to decimate the IW ranks more than an armoured battalion and some titans.

Wow did you actually read the novel rather than skim it? It's explained quite clearly how they do it, and I never saw the Fists getting better protection than the Iron Warriors.

Plus if you think Iron warriors die to easily you seriously need to read the novel again. When shot at by heavy weapons and artilliry (not lasguns) marines tend to die, you know what I mean?



Oh, aren't we the sweet one. Lets just kick everyone who has any problems with something, because they're being a whiny little wuss.

I've been a fan of this game since Rogue Trader and I've seen a lot of fluff and a lot of changes. Some of them good, some of them bad. If I don't like Marines, then I don't. 40K is more than Marines and I like that part a lot, thank you very much. So don't come telling me what to do and how to think.


Where did I say that? You are puttting words in my mouth.

I was simply telling you not to force your opinion on other people. That's how you came off as.

Israfael
31-08-2009, 22:27
.Wow did you actually read the novel rather than skim it? It's explained quite clearly how they do it, and I never saw the Fists getting better protection than the Iron Warriors.

Plus if you think Iron warriors die to easily you seriously need to read the novel again. When shot at by heavy weapons and artilliry (not lasguns) marines tend to die, you know what I mean?

I considered Storm of Iron to not only be one of the better WH novels ever written, but to be one of the most fair. Neither army came across as only being there for cannon fodder. The guardsman were cunning, well trained and brave which is refreshing considering the role they play in most other books.

The marine fights were pretty well balanced as well, Forix is really the only one who came across as a monster - when he jumped on that warhound titan and beat its leg joints until it collapsed at which point he butchered the crew - that was a little crazy.

JHZ
31-08-2009, 23:01
Althought it baffles me how you can think that Dawn of War trumps Imperial Armor in a canon relevency contest.
And I said that where? If everything with a 40K logo is as official, then by an objective stance, they all should get the same treatment. Subjectively you can do what ever you feel like.

Besides, at least I'm not giving Goto the power over Forge World.


2. Honsou got his armor pentrated by lasrounds and did not die. In your own example.
Which wounded him. After passing through the armour. Theodore Roosevelt was shot with a revolver through his eyeglass case, speech and into his chest, just shy of his lung. After that he stood up and without any treatment held a 90 minute speech, after which he went to the hospital. Does this mean revolvers are useless in killing a man, or just that by the time the shot touched flesh, it had lost most of its energy along the way.

Now imagine if Honsou had been without his armour and had been shot a few dozen times with a lasgun. Nothing to shrug those las bolts off now. Or do they have las proof skin as well? Good thing those daemon womb Iron Warriors are born without skin.


Where did I say that? You are puttting words in my mouth.
Let me refresh your memory:
"Go cry me a river. Nobody is forcing you to read it or play the game."

How am I suppose to take something like this? If I have a problem with something, and express it, and get told that no one is forcing me into it, then I get the image of "STFU & GTFO".

Lord_Crull
31-08-2009, 23:08
And I said that where? If everything with a 40K logo is as official, then by an objective stance, they all should get the same treatment. Subjectively you can do what ever you feel like.



Which, as I pointed out in a link, was not exactly the case.

Besides, Imperial Armor is clearly more fluff-adherant than Dawn of War.



Besides, at least I'm not giving Goto the power over Forge World.


At least we can agree there.



Which wounded him. After passing through the armour. Theodore Roosevelt was shot with a revolver through his eyeglass case, speech and into his chest, just shy of his lung. After that he stood up and without any treatment held a 90 minute speech, after which he went to the hospital. Does this mean revolvers are useless in killing a man, or just that by the time the shot touched flesh, it had lost most of its energy along the way.

Now imagine if Honsou had been without his armour and had been shot a few dozen times with a lasgun. Nothing to shrug those las bolts off now. Or do they have las proof skin as well? Good thing those daemon womb Iron Warriors are born without skin.


Does that mean marines should automaticly die when they get shot with a lasgun? No.



Let me refresh your memory:
"Go cry me a river. Nobody is forcing you to read it or play the game."

How am I suppose to take something like this? If I have a problem with something, and express it, and get told that no one is forcing me into it, then I get the image of "STFU & GTFO".

What's wrong with that? We have already known about your personal onpinions. However is was not relvent to the discussion and thereofre I saw it as off-topic.

You want to complain about the over-the-top nature of GW? Please start a new thread then. Or I may have to close this one.

Argastes
31-08-2009, 23:11
In other words, the fact that more often a power armour will protect from a las shot than let it through, does not mean it cannot penetrate. It happens, but not all the time.

.....

Well, except that part that is used to kill people, including Marines. You know, the hot laser stuff. Only thing standing in the way of high power laser surgery is some ceramite plating. And even that doesn't cover everything, like joints, etc.

Well yeah, obviously SM power armor does not confer complete 100% immunity from lasgun fire; if you read back over the thread you will find that no-one ever said that it did. I didn't say that, Crull didn't say that, no-one said that. Of course there are weak points like joints and so forth. The insides of the thighs must also be pretty thin in order to allow for natural walking motion (although from the poses of the models Marines have no need for that...). No-one is saying power armor has no weak points and is invulnerable to lasguns. We are questioning the idea that even the main pieces that are supposed to be thickest--such as the breastplate--can be penetrated. Which is what you have been arguing for, remember.


I believe the average lasgun is on the power level of a .50 cal HMG because it's stated to be able to take off unarmored human limbs with a single shot... which just underscores how over the top this universe is when that kind of firepower is called a "flashlight".

I would question this taking-off-limbs business, I don't seem to see a lot of people getting dismembered by lasfire in the fluff. I don't read much BL so maybe I'm out of date, but I've never seen any indication in stories that lasguns are that powerful. But even so, let's accept for the sake of argument that a lasgun beam is equivalent to a 12.7mm round; I would think this would still be insufficient to penetrate a Marine's breastplate. A .50-cal BMG bullet can penetrate about 10-20mm of modern steel plate (depending on the type of round you have in mind). SM breastplates seem to be not only quite thick (say, an inch), but also made of a material that we can probably presume is equivalent to more than it's thickness in steel. I would say that an SM breastplate should be presumed to be equivalent to, at a minimum, 25-30mm of RHA. Probably more. Which means it should stop modern small arms and HMG fire, but could be penetrated by automatic cannon shells of the right type. Which is why it's so ridiculous to have lasguns punching through; lasguns are clearly not as powerful as automatic cannons! Obviously other parts of the armor are not as thick as the breastplate, but the breastplate seems to be what's at stake here.

Shrapnel
31-08-2009, 23:29
I believe the average lasgun is on the power level of a .50 cal HMG because it's stated to be able to take off unarmored human limbs with a single shot... which just underscores how over the top this universe is when that kind of firepower is called a "flashlight".

Assuming that a lasgun would have to be on a par with a .50 cal just because it takes off limbs is a little disingenuous. The 'de-limbing' ability of a round is by no means dependent on its size. Speaking as an eyewitness, a 5.56mm round is perfectly capable of removing an arm.

starlight
01-09-2009, 03:01
I was reading in a magazine about how soldiers naturally tended to shoot at the chest of an enemy soldier, as it being the largest part of the human body. This is susposed to be instinctive.

I have a question, does this mean that when a traitor PDF soldier shoots at an Astartes in power armor, does that mean that he always shoots at the chest or pauldrons? the largest target? To me this seems the reason why power armor is virtually immune to lasfire (Other than it's protection) they always shoot at the thickest part of the armor.

The magazine was wrong, but hey, not the first time...

Until very recently soldiers (even those who were excellent on the range) tended to aim *high* because they had difficulty with the idea of actually killing another person. This led to the use of targets with human graphics on them, increasing soldier's tendency to aim for the centre of mass, because that's where the high points are for your shooting score. Nothing instinctive about it, it's all training and conditioning.

Ironically the two factors which have seen the biggest leaps in marksmanship both on the range and in the field are:

1) optical sights/scopes
2) video games

The first is somewhat obvious - if you can see the target better, you can hit it more reliably. The second point is more controversial... Basically the belief is that we are raising a generation (those who play FPS games at least) of people with much less resistance to killing than those who came before...and people who are likely to join western militaries are much more likely to be exposed to FPS games, giving them the opportunity to try *games* such as America's Army and the more mainstream actual games.

Argastes
01-09-2009, 03:14
It is true, though, that when you aim a gun at someone (assuming you aren't deliberately aiming high because of reluctance to kill), the natural point of aim tends to be the chest. Bracket the human form with iron sights, and that is where the tip of the front post will usually end up. That may have been what the magazine meant about "instinctually" aiming for the center of mass.

Novice shooters also tend to shoot high even if they are just punching paper.

starlight
01-09-2009, 03:51
They also fail to properly anticipate recoil and have a tendency to snatch the trigger rather than squeezing it, both of which lead to shooting high...

JHZ
01-09-2009, 06:48
Does that mean marines should automaticly die when they get shot with a lasgun? No.
Depends on where you hit them and how. Remember that one story where a Guardsman took out a dread by shooting it through the view slit and killing the Marine inside? And I do think that Gaunt sniper did kill his CSM target. You know, the one who got shot through the chest plate.

So does it happen? Yes. 100% of the time? No.


What's wrong with that?
Other than sounding like an utter jerk?


Well yeah, obviously SM power armor does not confer complete 100% immunity from lasgun fire; if you read back over the thread you will find that no-one ever said that it did. I didn't say that, Crull didn't say that, no-one said that. Of course there are weak points like joints and so forth. The insides of the thighs must also be pretty thin in order to allow for natural walking motion (although from the poses of the models Marines have no need for that...). No-one is saying power armor has no weak points and is invulnerable to lasguns. We are questioning the idea that even the main pieces that are supposed to be thickest--such as the breastplate--can be penetrated. Which is what you have been arguing for, remember.
But the breast plate has been penetrated in the fluff by lasguns, so it too ain't 100% protection.


Speaking as an eyewitness, a 5.56mm round is perfectly capable of removing an arm.
Speaking as an army medic, I concur. Even a single shotgun pellet can pretty much total a bone in your arm, which basically means your arms is hanging by some rendered flesh and skin. A good shot from a rifle could tear an army off.


2) video games
As Solid Snake would say:
"War as a video game-- what better way to raise the ultimate soldier?"

Condottiere
01-09-2009, 07:00
The second point is more controversial... Basically the belief is that we are raising a generation (those who play FPS games at least) of people with much less resistance to killing than those who came before...and people who are likely to join western militaries are much more likely to be exposed to FPS games, giving them the opportunity to try *games* such as America's Army and the more mainstream actual games.It's conditioning, and can potentially remove a lot of inhibitions regarding shooting at humans.

MadDoc
01-09-2009, 08:51
Depends on where you hit them and how. Remember that one story where a Guardsman took out a dread by shooting it through the view slit and killing the Marine inside?

You wouldn't be meaning Mkoll overloading his lasguns power cell and the resultant explosion which caused a breach in the sarcophagus of an already blinded and damaged Chaos Dreadnought, which was then punctured by several steel-like toxic spines from a spike spitting alien cactus killing its Chaos Marine pilot, now would you? :eyebrows:

Because thats the only story even close to what you're suggesting, that I can recall off the top of my head.

Lord_Crull
01-09-2009, 12:53
Depends on where you hit them and how. Remember that one story where a Guardsman took out a dread by shooting it through the view slit and killing the Marine inside? And I do think that Gaunt sniper did kill his CSM target. You know, the one who got shot through the chest plate.
[/I]

Go back and read it again, MadDoc has already refuted the Dreanought one. And Larkin, to my knowledge, only ever got headshots, I never read him doing a chest shop.



Other than sounding like an utter jerk?


How? I did not use any worse tone than you did.

StormWulfen
01-09-2009, 18:25
EDIT:
Okay, regarding the question of the planet-killer's recoil. Apparently (http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tech/Beam/DeathStar.html), the amount of energy required to blow up a planet like the Death Star did, accelerating it's entire mass to escape velocity in order to permanently blow it apart, is about 2.4x10^32 joules. This guy's math looks legit, at least I didn't see any problems in it, so we'll accept his figure for the sake of discussion. It sounds like Abaddon's planet killer isn't nearly that powerful and only breaks up the target planet, rather than providing enough energy to hurl the debris out at escape velocity (this does mean that the target planet would reform shortly after being "killed", albeit with a magma ocean surface instead of a solid crust). Let's say it only puts out one-tenth as much energy as the figure given above, 2.4x10^31 joules. Assuming it fires for one second, that's a beam power of 2.4x10^31 watts as well. Dividing by 3x10^8 (remember, one newton of force per 300 megatts) gives us 8x10^22 newtons of recoil force. This comes to, very roughly, 10^19 tons of recoil force, or ten quintillion (ten billion billion) tons of recoil force. So yes, I think our 3,000-ton warlord titan would be knocked flat on it's ass (that's a bit of an understatement, really) if this weapon could somehow be mounted on it and fired. This also means that when it's fired from Abaddon's bigass battleship, it applies the same ten quintillion tons of force to the ship in the form of thrust a la a photon rocket, which would send it zipping away in the opposite direction at a ridiculous speed (probably very close to light speed, but the math to figure decreasing acceleration returns for thrust at relativistic speed is over my head). Of course this is taking for granted that an object the size and presumed weight of the planet killer could generate a laser beam of that power, which is absurd. A laser with that beam power is probably many orders of magnitude beyond the limits of the physically possible. It would also suck down, in one second, about as much energy as Earth's sun produces in a thousand years. Which raises the question of power supply.

All this, of course, assumes that the planet-killer really is a conventional laser, which it probably isn't.

so in other words yes it would recoil and yes the titan would fall over (and its arm would probably be ripped off and propelled across the univers at near light speed?):cool:

Argastes
01-09-2009, 19:36
so in other words yes it would recoil and yes the titan would fall over (and its arm would probably be ripped off and propelled across the univers at near light speed?):cool:

Yep, theoretically. If it were actually a laser, of course. Actually if you applied that much force that quickly, rather than ripping off the titan's arm and sending it hurtling away at near light speed or whatever, you would probably just get a stupendous explosion. Accelerating anything that quickly is going to disintegrate it, and if it's in an atmosphere, a lot of the kinetic energy involved will be converted into heat very rapidly via aero-frictional heating.

Remember also that my analyis overlooks the fact that, realistically, the relationship between the mass of the physical apparatus of the laser and the beam power (thus recoil force) will always be such that recoil forces upon a laser are negligible no matter how powerful the beam is. In other words, a laser with the beam power I guesstimated for the planet killer would actually be many, many orders of magnitude more massive than the planet-killer ship is, and thus would NOT in fact be accelerated to extreme velocity by the recoil force imparted from it's beam; it wouldn't budge because that recoil force would be minuscule in comparison to the mass of the device. The bit about the acceleration to near light speed takes for granted the ludicrous idea that a laser of such beam power could be generated by something as small as Abbadon's planet-killer. It also takes for granted the idea that such a laser is even possible, which is probably ludicrous too. And again, of course, it takes for granted the fact that the planet-killer is just a giant laser, which is unlikely itself.

guillimansknight
01-09-2009, 20:34
It's conditioning, and can potentially remove a lot of inhibitions regarding shooting at humans.

Till they do it


And about the rounds taking off An arm. The elbow joint would probably result in your lower arm going off even if it was only hit by a small round

StormWulfen
01-09-2009, 20:34
yeah... but my way sounds cooler:D


And about the rounds taking off An arm. The elbow joint would probably result in your lower arm going off even if it was only hit by a small round

hmm, i prefer fallout 3 style where you shoot them in the leg and an arm comes off, or they explode:D

Argastes
01-09-2009, 22:36
And about the rounds taking off An arm. The elbow joint would probably result in your lower arm going off even if it was only hit by a small round

Your arm might have to amputated if there was too much damage, and it's true that the joints are especially susceptible to this (not because it's easier to damage them per se, but because it's harder for a doctor to repair whatever damage is done), but the arm isn't going to come off then and there unless it gets hit with a fairly powerful bullet (in the elbow or otherwise). Plenty of modern centerfire rifle rounds certainly can do it though.

Condottiere
01-09-2009, 23:08
Ironically, while I doubt it's openly discussed, modern combat training involves severely wounding, not killing, soldiers, so that they are no longer combat capable and create a casualty burden on the enemy.

Argastes
01-09-2009, 23:12
Ironically, while I doubt it's openly discussed, modern combat training involves severely wounding, not killing, soldiers, so that they are no longer combat capable and create a casualty burden on the enemy.

Total myth, started in the 1960s with the 'army urban legend' that the 5.56mm round was designed to wound rather than kill. Modern soldiers (at least in the US Army) are trained to shoot for the center of mass, and to drop their targets.

JHZ
01-09-2009, 23:40
Total myth, started in the 1960s with the 'army urban legend' that the 5.56mm round was designed to wound rather than kill. Modern soldiers (at least in the US Army) are trained to shoot for the center of mass, and to drop their targets.
We were told to shoot the enemy in the belly, as there's a chance he'll survive yet disabled, take out two of his buddies as they carry him away, and keep sucking resources in the field hospital. And a recent documentary talked about ways of evacing wounded soldiers without resulting in other soldiers having to carry him away and reducing the fire and man power of the unit.

It is true that the 5.56mm is not designed to wound (it just sucks at killing stuff outside its comfort zone), but the idea of aiming to wound instead of kill enemy combatants is no urban legend. Might not be something armies likes to parade around ("oh, we don't want to kill anyone, just shoot them in the belly and make their life miserable and possibly give them disabilities or make them poop in a bag for the rest of their life.") or something the troops in the field practice much (Hell, if someone is shooting at me, I'll shoot back, not caring an inch if he lives or dies), but the concept is no BS.

Argastes
01-09-2009, 23:44
We were told to shoot the enemy in the belly, as there's a chance he'll survive yet disabled, take out two of his buddies as they carry him away, and keep sucking resources in the field hospital. And a recent documentary talked about ways of evacing wounded soldiers without resulting in other soldiers having to carry him away and reducing the fire and man power of the unit.

It is true that the 5.56mm is not designed to wound (it just sucks at killing stuff outside its comfort zone), but the idea of aiming to wound instead of kill enemy combatants is no urban legend. Might not be something armies likes to parade around ("oh, we don't want to kill anyone, just shoot them in the belly and make their life miserable and possibly give them disabilities or make them poop in a bag for the rest of their life.") or something the troops in the field practice much (Hell, if someone is shooting at me, I'll shoot back, not caring an inch if he lives or dies), but the concept is no BS.

???? What country's army were you in?! And do you know that this is official D&T, or is it something a DS told you? The US Army definitely doesn't train for that.

EDIT: You mentioned the Pasi earlier, I'm guessing you are Finnish? Or Swedish or Estonian?

Condottiere
01-09-2009, 23:55
HAMLET:
Ay, marry, is't:
But to my mind, though I am native here
And to the manner born, it is a custom
More honour'd in the breach than the observance.

JHZ
02-09-2009, 00:03
???? What country's army were you in?! And do you know that this is official D&T, or is it something a DS told you? The US Army definitely doesn't train for that.
There's a lot of "official" training, and then there's "unofficial" training. Back in the day during WW2, local scout units were given amphetamine derivatives to boost their ability to work weeks on end behind enemy lines (and later was hushed, because no one likes to be reminded of their 70+ pops still hooked on meth). A friend of mine who was in a scout unit told that if he was to go to war, he'd be getting a goodie bag. When I asked about it from the trainers, I never got a clear "no" for an answer.

But you'll never find any of that in any army brochures or training manuals.

Argastes
02-09-2009, 00:15
So, I'm going to guess Finnish. Yeah, I know drill sergeants pass on a lot of stuff that isn't in the D&Ts. We got plenty too. But never anything, official or unofficial, about shooting to wound; just the opposite, in fact. I suppose the Finns are training for a different type of war than the US Army is, though.

Interestingly the US military, specifically the USAF, doesn't make any secret of the fact that it will give amphetamines (Dexedrine, AKA 'go pills') to personnel who request them.

Condottiere
02-09-2009, 00:25
You're also more likely to get caught, whereas an actual self-defence force is fighting a last ditch effort around their homes and families.

JHZ
02-09-2009, 00:46
I suppose the Finns are training for a different type of war than the US Army is, though.
The type that has an army base 70 klicks from the Russian border fitted with mostly light and outdated equipment (I only ever saw two tanks there, old T-72s, of which one was always covered and the other was used to run over troops), where as the far smaller airforce base few hudred miles inland gets much heavier and better troop transports (for troops it doesn't have, just MPs and fligh tech) and such. Maybe because when Ivan comes calling, we'll slow them down about 5 minutes.

I also doubt your average homebrew insurgent has much resources to suck on after being wounded, not to forget that he's likely to die quite soon after being hit, as he probably won't be getting any quality healthcare to treat those funky gut shots. And since shooting them will only make them leave and return to fight another day, killing the target will mean there's one less bad guy to worry about.

But that's just me. Don't know about the actual US doctrine.

Argastes
02-09-2009, 00:55
The type that has an army base 70 klicks from the Russian border fitted with mostly light and outdated equipment (I only ever saw two tanks there, old T-72s, of which one was always covered and the other was used to run over troops), where as the far smaller airforce base few hudred miles inland gets much heavier and better troop transports (for troops it doesn't have, just MPs and fligh tech) and such. Maybe because when Ivan comes calling, we'll slow them down about 5 minutes.

I also doubt your average homebrew insurgent has much resources to suck on after being wounded, not to forget that he's likely to die quite soon after being hit, as he probably won't be getting any quality healthcare to treat those funky gut shots. And since shooting them will only make them leave and return to fight another day, killing the target will mean there's one less bad guy to worry about.

But that's just me. Don't know about the actual US doctrine.

That's exactly what I meant. Finnish defense policy is still centered around the idea of repelling Russian invasion, which is probably understandable. So you'd be be looking at a more or less conventional land battle, FDF regulars against RGF regulars. So you can expect the enemy to carry off their wounded, and you can expect them to provide them with care, and you can definitely expect that it will beneficial to do whatever is possible to put as much of a drain on Russian manpower and resources as you can. None of that applies to the type of counterinsurgency warfare the US military is involved with and will probably continue to be involved with. That's not even a type of warfare where winning firefights is particularly significant, for multiple reasons, so taking "three guys instead of one" (two to carry a wounded one) out of a firefight isn't so significant.

canucklhead
02-09-2009, 00:56
All of this is misquoted information, stemming from the standard guerilla tactic of using booby traps designed to wound an enemy, causing his side to have to deal with him.

This is not a standard tactic of the current western powers, at least not an official one. It paints a brutal image of you that you do not want spread on CNN.

The 5.56 was put into use, as a replacement to the 7.62, after it was discovered that the 7.62 was far too powerful a round for the urban warfare likely to take place in the latter half of the 20th centurey. I remember early in my days with the PPCLI, when we still had the FN's, that a 7.62 from it could easily punch a perfect hole through 5 guys in a file, or punch through a 12" tree, your body armour, your body, and out the back. The problem was that a perfect hole like that wasn't necessarily a good thing.

A 5.56m which is not much bigger than a 22 long rifle, has a tendency to bounce off dense tissue and bone, leading to more grievous damage to the body, despite its lighter mass.

This data gets reversed when dealing with soft lead civilian counterparts, of course.

Before handing me various pshaws and bs claims, I was 5 years as a training NCO for small arms, and the science of ballistics was a pretty significant part of the learning curve.

Argastes
02-09-2009, 01:08
Well I respect your experience but nevertheless I have to point out that the 5.56mm round's good wounding ability stems from it's tendency to fragment as it tumbles (due to a deep canelure) if moving about a certain velocity threshold upon impact, not due to difficulty penetrating dense tissue or bone. Obviously it won't penetrate those things as well as a 7.62x51mm round (55-62 grains vs. ~150), but that's not the reason it's effective in tissue. Interestingly, by the same token, the reason the 7.62x51mm round will "punch a perfect hole through 5 guys in a file" is because the bullet used in the standard M80 ball cartridge doesn't fragment well (thick jacket with a shallow cannelure, you see). The old West German 7.62x51mm load, on the other hand, had a thinner jacket and a well-cut cannelure and it DID fragment just like an M193 5.56mm round despite being an x51, meaning it wouldn't overpenetrate and inflicted very impressive wounds. Unfortunately I can't remember the designation they used for this round, I don't know whether it's still in use with their MGs and sniper rifles. Anyhow, it's really all about bullet construction, not just the caliber in question.

Again, your experience is to be respected, but the terminal ballistics of 5.56mm vs. other rifle rounds is one of the most misunderstood fields of ballistics, even among military personnel with small arms expertise. I have heard small arms instructors pass on some ridiculous misconceptions as gospel truth. This stuff gets into the Army's collective consciousness and just keeps on circulating for decades as it takes on the air of fact.

bigcheese76
02-09-2009, 01:13
when an Imperial Guard regiment is sent to a planet guardsmen are deployed quickly and are there to slow a Chaos force down before either Imperial Marines arrive or the Guard's big guns are ready. as is widely beleived a chaos marine has the instinct of 'kill everything' and would therefore use time killing the guardsman unit withouut the chaos taking much damage at all, after which the chaos would be confronted with the likes of a battle tank, where the Imperial Guard relly flourish.

Argastes
02-09-2009, 01:14
Oookay. Didn't really read the thread before posting?

JHZ
02-09-2009, 01:31
That's exactly what I meant. Finnish defense policy is still centered around the idea of repelling Russian invasion, which is probably understandable.
What other options are there? Estonia? Norway?


This stuff gets into the Army's collective consciousness and just keeps on circulating for decades as it takes on the air of fact.
Which is why it's best to leave the science for the egg heads and just remember the basic fact that the human body does not like fast moving small metal objects.

Argastes
02-09-2009, 01:39
What other options are there? Estonia? Norway?

I guess if you had XA-180s and share a land border with Russia those are the only other two. Care to divulge? I'm an American if you want me to go first.


Which is why it's best to leave the science for the egg heads and just remember the basic fact that the human body does not like fast moving small metal objects.

The science is accessible to anyone who reads up on it...

JHZ
02-09-2009, 01:59
I guess if you had XA-180s and share a land border with Russia those are the only other two. Care to divulge? I'm an American if you want me to go first.
I somehow figured it out a loooong time ago. And what is there for me to divulge? I think the evidence would be enough for a jury already.


The science is accessible to anyone who reads up on it...
Which is why we all know exactly how bullets work and never have to argue about our sources, right? I am a big fan of science and do follow up on different developments, but I've also noted that many theories and studies have also been debunked later on. So what makes the latest theory somehow the right one? Will it not be debunked in the future?

I don't care what's the science is behind a speeding bullet when it hits a person. All I know is that when it happens, I'm the one who's gonna have to put a bandage on it. And if I think the bone's broken, I have to put a splint on it as well. If the guy dies 10 seconds after he's out of my hands, not my problem anymore, I'll have fresh ones coming in.

Argastes
02-09-2009, 02:05
If you want to keep it to yourself that's fine, I was just curious. You may not care about how ballistics works but I think a lot of people do find it interesting. I guess that is a discussion for myself and canucklhead if you're not interested.

Condottiere
02-09-2009, 06:27
I'm not a ballistics expert, but I do know that certain bullets are designed to penetrate body armour but not exit the body, preferably to make the wounded person incapable of further participation in combat, but remain conscious.

In 40K fighting insurgents, rebels and xenos, who might not be considered an intelligence source, might make the option of ensuring that their continued participation in either their Movement or this life is terminated as a more attractive long term option for Imperium forces.

Shrapnel
02-09-2009, 11:24
I am a big fan of science and do follow up on different developments, but I've also noted that many theories and studies have also been debunked later on. So what makes the latest theory somehow the right one? Will it not be debunked in the future?


Dangerous territory friend. New theories are never that different from old theories, especially in established areas like ballistics. Even revolutionary ideas don't differ wildly from their predecessors. The essence of the old theory is valid, the new theory refines it. New theories are sensationalised in order to drum up interest - news flash: scientific endeavour isn't sexy.

Argastes
02-09-2009, 12:45
I'm not a ballistics expert, but I do know that certain bullets are designed to penetrate body armour but not exit the body, preferably to make the wounded person incapable of further participation in combat, but remain conscious.

I'm not aware of any bullet designed with this purpose in mind. I know that it's not the design philosophy between any major military service round. Where did you hear this?

Astrotrain
02-09-2009, 12:54
I'm not aware of any bullet designed with this purpose in mind. I know that it's not the design philosophy between any major military service round. Where did you hear this?

I believe hes thinking of hollow point rounds.If he is,the only military entity allowed to use those is military law enforcement.

Makiaveli
02-09-2009, 13:12
I believe hes thinking of hollow point rounds.If he is,the only military entity allowed to use those is military law enforcement.

And they aren't designed to penetrate body armor, just to dump as much kinetic energy inside the body as possible before exiting (if they do).

Not arguing mind you, just pointing that out for those that may not know....


PS: XA-180s??

Argastes
02-09-2009, 13:43
I believe hes thinking of hollow point rounds.If he is,the only military entity allowed to use those is military law enforcement.

Hollow point rounds are designed to expand in tissue due to hydrostatic pressure in the eponymous hollow of the bullet's point, so that they create a wound channel with a larger diameter. They definitely aren't designed to "make the wounded person incapable of further participation in combat, but remain conscious", or to penetrate body armor (they do so no better than normal ball ammunition).

Furthermore, it's not true that only MPs can use them. The military use of hollowpoint bullets and other bullets designed to expand or flatten in human flesh is regulated by the Hague Convention, which only prohibits their use by the troops of one signatory against the troops of another signatory during declared wartime. As a matter of policy, many countries abide by the Hague Convention bullet restrictions at all times, but no country is actually obliged to do so unless they signed the Hague Convention and they are at war with another country that signed the Hague Convention. For example, the US Army could be using hollowpoint bullets against insurgents in Iraq/Afghanistan if it wanted to (and in fact there has been some use, by some units, of the Mk.262 5.56mm round, which is a hollowpoint or "open-tip" match-grade round).

The fact is, with proper bullet design, hollowpoints are mostly unnecessary in a military context (or at least the armies of the world seem to have reached this conclusion). The same end effect (i.e. a larger wound cavity) can be achieved by using bullets designed to fragment inside the target, such as current 5.56mm rounds (the M855 and before it the M193) and that West German 7.62x51mm round I mentioned earlier. The only problem with these bullets is that their wounding effects are much more sensitive to terminal velocity than hollowpoints, meaning they won't fragment if they are moving too slowly when they hit, making them less effective at long range (since bullets lose velocity as they fly) or from short-barreled weapons (which give a lower muzzle velocity). That's why the terminal effectiveness of M4 carbines drops off sharply at beyond close range, btw... from a 14.5" barrel, an M855 bullet is only traveling fast enough to fragment until it gets 50-100 yards downrange.

EDIT: XA-180 is one of the model designations of the Sisu Pasi, a six-wheeled AFV made by the Finns and used by them as well as several other countries. It's roughly similar to a German Fuchs in terms of layout and mission.

JHZ
02-09-2009, 17:00
Dangerous territory friend. New theories are never that different from old theories, especially in established areas like ballistics. Even revolutionary ideas don't differ wildly from their predecessors. The essence of the old theory is valid, the new theory refines it. New theories are sensationalised in order to drum up interest - news flash: scientific endeavour isn't sexy.
Before the first flying machine, it was said that something heavier than air could not fly and it was a scientific fact. Before the first steel ships it was said that they could not float and it was a scientific fact. Before the atom was split, it was considered unsplittable. The list goes on.

Even today we have "hard facts" that everyone passes on, even when there's more evidence to the contrary. For exsample the LNT model, the one of the damage caused by ionizing radiation. It's still used, though not only theories, but practice is starting to debate it. By LNT model there should have been hundreds of thousands of deaths from Chernobyl. There was 56 and a possible increase in thyroid cancer, but even that's not totally tied into the incident. 100mSv should be dangerous, but in Iran there's a city that has almost tripple that amount in natural background radiation and everyone is fine.

Hell, some studies are even showing that some amounts of radiation are actually good for the body.


What I mean, is that I do not take old "proven" data as absolute truth (they're just theories, after all), just as things that work for now until someone can give us a better explanation. Like how Einstein upgraded Newtonian physics. Nor do I take new wild theories as something that'll revolutionalize the world (but there's always the fun "what if" factor in them). I'm not desputing anything, merely keeping an open mind on things.

Just look at stuff like quantum mechanics. We have pretty much no idea how it works, other than it does. Much like how a caveman knew that "Fire. Hot.", but not why it was hot. We have whole technologies based on something we don't know how it really works. So how can I suddenly have some blind faith in modern science, when it can't even explain something that's happening (just throw up its hands and go "dunno lol")?


PS: XA-180s??
http://www.military-today.com/apc/sisu_xa_180.jpg
A six wheeled amphibious armoured personel carrier, designated XA-180. Also goes by the nickname "Pasi" (a somewhat common man's name), which derives from "Panssari Sisu" (armour(ed) Sisu). Some have probably seen it like so:
http://www.geocities.com/irisharmoredvehicles/Sisu_XA180.jpg

It now being replaced by the new Patria XA-360 (http://tietokannat.mil.fi/kalustoesittely/media/1112794713_patria_xa-360_p1_1pieni.JPG).

Shrapnel
02-09-2009, 17:06
(just throw up its hands and go "dunno lol")?
And this is why it's dangerous territory.
I'm not arguing this. You misunderstand the scientific method.
I'm going no further off topic.

Enjoy comparing the length of your "service record" with Argastes.

Bookwrak
02-09-2009, 17:25
Before the first flying machine, it was said that something heavier than air could not fly and it was a scientific fact.
I forget, when were birds invented again? Also, that bit about steel ships is certifiable bull. If you're going to try and make examples, at least attempt to make ones that actually existed (although at least you didn't say anything silly about people thinking the earth was flat).

I'm not a ballistics expert, but I do know that certain bullets are designed to penetrate body armour but not exit the body, preferably to make the wounded person incapable of further participation in combat, but remain conscious.
You're going to need to name the actual bullet, because the qualities that make a round optimized for penetrating body armour are pretty much opposite of the ones that would ensure it's contained inside a soft body.

Astrotrain
02-09-2009, 18:09
Hollow point rounds are designed to expand in tissue due to hydrostatic pressure in the eponymous hollow of the bullet's point, so that they create a wound channel with a larger diameter. They definitely aren't designed to "make the wounded person incapable of further participation in combat, but remain conscious", or to penetrate body armor (they do so no better than normal ball ammunition).

Furthermore, it's not true that only MPs can use them. The military use of hollowpoint bullets and other bullets designed to expand or flatten in human flesh is regulated by the Hague Convention, which only prohibits their use by the troops of one signatory against the troops of another signatory during declared wartime. As a matter of policy, many countries abide by the Hague Convention bullet restrictions at all times, but no country is actually obliged to do so unless they signed the Hague Convention and they are at war with another country that signed the Hague Convention. For example, the US Army could be using hollowpoint bullets against insurgents in Iraq/Afghanistan if it wanted to (and in fact there has been some use, by some units, of the Mk.262 5.56mm round, which is a hollowpoint or "open-tip" match-grade round).

The fact is, with proper bullet design, hollowpoints are mostly unnecessary in a military context (or at least the armies of the world seem to have reached this conclusion). The same end effect (i.e. a larger wound cavity) can be achieved by using bullets designed to fragment inside the target, such as current 5.56mm rounds (the M855 and before it the M193) and that West German 7.62x51mm round I mentioned earlier. The only problem with these bullets is that their wounding effects are much more sensitive to terminal velocity than hollowpoints, meaning they won't fragment if they are moving too slowly when they hit, making them less effective at long range (since bullets lose velocity as they fly) or from short-barreled weapons (which give a lower muzzle velocity). That's why the terminal effectiveness of M4 carbines drops off sharply at beyond close range, btw... from a 14.5" barrel, an M855 bullet is only traveling fast enough to fragment until it gets 50-100 yards downrange.

EDIT: XA-180 is one of the model designations of the Sisu Pasi, a six-wheeled AFV made by the Finns and used by them as well as several other countries. It's roughly similar to a German Fuchs in terms of layout and mission.

I'm Pretty sure in the U.S. military the only force that gets hollow-point rounds is military police.Unless the Army is has a different LOAC policy (I'm a USAF Security Forces member and were the only arming group that gets them in the Air Force).Anyway my understanding of hollow points is that your target drops faster than normal 9mm/556 rounds and you don't need to be aware of your target's backdrop as appose to M855 rounds.

Also on the topic of a lasgun having the stopping power of a .50 cal round,I'm sure thats not the case as it would be on par with a heavy stubber witch looks like a carbon copy of a M-2 heavy machine gun.

guillimansknight
02-09-2009, 19:28
I forget, when were birds invented again? Also, that bit about steel ships is certifiable bull. If you're going to try and make examples, at least attempt to make ones that actually existed (although at least you didn't say anything silly about people thinking the earth was flat).

You're going to need to name the actual bullet, because the qualities that make a round optimized for penetrating body armour are pretty much opposite of the ones that would ensure it's contained inside a soft body.

Surely it would have to be armour specific to do that?
Penetrate and then not be able to penetrate out the back
so a slightly thiner/ weaker armour and it would go staight through and viceversa

Argastes
02-09-2009, 20:11
JHZ, we're talking about terminal ballistics, not quantum mechanics or radiology. The terminal behavior of the 5.56mm round is perfectly well understood. If you want to ignore that fact because "but we don't know how quantum mechanics works!" or whatever, be my guest. But I think Shrapnel is right, you don't seem to understand that scientific method.


I'm Pretty sure in the U.S. military the only force that gets hollow-point rounds is military police.Unless the Army is has a different LOAC policy (I'm a USAF Security Forces member and were the only arming group that gets them in the Air Force).Anyway my understanding of hollow points is that your target drops faster than normal 9mm/556 rounds and you don't need to be aware of your target's backdrop as appose to M855 rounds.

Again, the Mk.262 Mod 0/1 5.56mm round has been used by US Army Special Forces and others, and it utilizes a hollowpoint bullet. So yes, there are non-MP units in the Army that get hollowpoints.

At least with 5.56mm, whether your target drops faster with hollowpoints than with issue ball rounds (M855) depends on range and target characteristics and many other factors. If the M855 fragments properly, then it will create a wound cavity that is just as large, if not larger, than that created by the Mk.262. If it doesn't, which can happen for several reasons, then yes it will create a much smaller wound cavity and thus is less likely to quickly incapacitate. The same is true of overpenetration. M855 poses little or overpenetration risk when it fragments. If it doesn't fragment, though, then yes it poses more of an overpenetration risk than a hollowpoint would. This has been a problem in Iraq and Afghanistan (the failure to wound effectively more so than the overpenetration) because a lot of the guys we're shooting at are skinny little dudes, and M855 may not have enough time to yaw enough to fragment before leaving their body.


Surely it would have to be armour specific to do that?
Penetrate and then not be able to penetrate out the back
so a slightly thiner/ weaker armour and it would go staight through and viceversa

You've really got clarify what you're talking about if you want a meaningful answer from anyone who understands ballistics.


Enjoy comparing the length of your "service record" with Argastes.

Come on, seriously? Was this kind of childishness needed?

guillimansknight
02-09-2009, 20:36
You've really got clarify what you're talking about if you want a meaningful answer from anyone who understands ballistics.



I meant that the bullet would have to be designed for one type of body Armour


Ie it will penertrate the first 5mm of X at the front of the armour but bounce off of the 5mm of X at the back

So if the armouR. Was slightly thicker / tougher the bullet wouldn't get through the front of the armour

And if it was weaker armour the bullet would go straight through front and back

Argastes
02-09-2009, 20:49
I meant that the bullet would have to be designed for one type of body Armour


Ie it will penertrate the first 5mm of X at the front of the armour but bounce off of the 5mm of X at the back

So if the armouR. Was slightly thicker / tougher the bullet wouldn't get through the front of the armour

And if it was weaker armour the bullet would go straight through front and back

Ahh I see. Well, it's a complicated subject, but essentially you are correct to say that it's not possible for a bullet to be designed to behave a certain way in regard to "body armor" in general, since that covers such a wide range of equipment ranging from low-profile police vests that will stop a 9mm bullet, to the SAPI plates in Interceptor vests that can stop a 7.62mm rifle round. Of course I think that what Condotierre said about this putative type of bullet stems from misinformation anyhow.

canucklhead
02-09-2009, 21:24
The fact being that a bullet of any design will likely perform in a number of reasonably predictable way when it impacts a living target, resulting in what was at least standard practice during my service time, teaching our lads to shoot for the center of mass, and to fire either twice on semi, or better yet a 3 round burst when your weapon was capable. Only dedicated snipers rely on one bullet one kill as a methodology.

This leads back to the original topic of this extrememly convoluted thread, would it be realistic for guardsmen to be trained to shoot for known weak points when firing on heavily armoured foes like sm's and CSM's?

The answer would be no, for the truly simple reason that a lasgun is not designed, going by its basic description, to function as a single shot accurate killer of such targets. It is, but its description, a standard infantryman's ranged weapon, purpose built to require little training, little support, and to generate its own ammunition given a short time of inactivity. Given that IG infantry use similar fire team tactics to the western powers of the 20th century, it can be reasonably inferred that their fire discipline would be the same. Against eqally armoured foes, such as traitor guard or Orcs, suppression fire would deny movement and hold the enemy to a given patch of cover, allowing heavy support to take them out. Against small elite armoured forces, like Marines, conentrated fire by supperior numbers would thin the enemy through sheer mass of fire, mostly as support for specialist heavy weapon teams.

That's about as technical and scientific as I get for a game about plastic toys.

JHZ
02-09-2009, 22:30
JHZ, we're talking about terminal ballistics, not quantum mechanics or radiology. The terminal behavior of the 5.56mm round is perfectly well understood. If you want to ignore that fact because "but we don't know how quantum mechanics works!" or whatever, be my guest. But I think Shrapnel is right, you don't seem to understand that scientific method.
Look, this has gone the whole nine yards now. That statement was not intended to way it came out during the few posts, each one of them moving the topic further and further away.

Here's how it goes:
My post:
"Which is why it's best to leave the science for the egg heads and just remember the basic fact that the human body does not like fast moving small metal objects."

What I mean, is that while I can read up on all the 5 billion pages of studies and tests on bullet behavior, what the hell does that affect me shooting at someone. Do I suddenly not shoot, because I'm at a range or position that would not give my the full potential of my round, or do I just shoot the bastard until he stops shooting at me?

In other words, I'll be just fine with the fact that whether I hit someone with a .22 or a 12.7mm, he'll get damaged by it. What knowledge can I get from those tests that will help in such situation. That info is mostly good when designing and testing weapons (or spreading it amongs the public), not when you're finally on the field. Just like you don't need to know how a piston engine works to drive a car (good to know when fixing, building or tuning it), or have to think about the optimal performance ratio thingies while driving to work (good to know when you have to get everything out of the car, not when you take that 10 mile drive through town).

And again:
"Which is why we all know exactly how bullets work and never have to argue about our sources, right? I am a big fan of science and do follow up on different developments, but I've also noted that many theories and studies have also been debunked later on. So what makes the latest theory somehow the right one? Will it not be debunked in the future?"

This actually breaks up into two parts, which seemingly doesn't show, and mostly probably goes to me being very busy and tired and sometimes the end result on screen doesn't reflect the image in my head.

I'm not desputing that there haven't been studies on bullets, but there's a lot of variables, and quite often lab tests and field experiences might not go together. I have read a lot of reports and scientific jargo on the matter of bullets and such, and while usually the bottom line is the same, there are also variables in there. Not every test is a carbon copy of another. So this does make it hard to find the absolute truth, when one study can come to one conclusion on something and another one to a slightly different one. Which one is more right?

Even if 99.99% of tests on 5.56mm rounds provided similar results, and the rest 0.01% something different (not a whole lot different, but still not the same as the rest), and all was done scientifically, can we ignore the 0.01% for not being up to par with 99.99%? In the end even science has to come to some conclusion and write it down as the probable result.

That's the first part of the whole thing.

The rest is just about science in general, not about the bullet thingy anymore.


Oh, and by the way, quantum mechanics are suppose to be tied to everything, so that means 5.56mm rounds as well.

Argastes
02-09-2009, 22:57
I see what you mean now, but the terminal behavior of bullets isn't useless knowledge for anyone except ballistic scientists. Anyhow, we were discussing it because it's interesting, not because it's essential knowledge. If you don't want to hear about anything that isn't practically useful to you--if you want to just say "leave it to the eggheads" and shut your ears to any discussion of technical issues, and content yourself with nothing but the simplest platitudes like "bodies don't like being hit by pieces of metal"--that's fine; but this is a discussion forum and some people here enjoy discussing all manner of issues--history, science, whatever--that aren't necessarily of immediate practical use to them. You don't have to participate if that's not your bag. No-one is forcing you to take part in such discussions.

Similarly, if you want to view scientific questions as intractable and unresolvable and therefore pointless to talk about because there might be two different studies out there giving different results, that's fine (although I challenge anyone to find a reputable study suggesting that yaw-induced fragmentation when impacting at >2700 fps isn't the main wounding mechanism of the M855 round). But there are posters here who are willing and able to look at the evidence, see what the experts have to say, and discuss it with like-minded people. Again, no-one is forcing you to participate.


Oh, and by the way, quantum mechanics are suppose to be tied to everything, so that means 5.56mm rounds as well.

Isn't the same true of all theories that seek to explain the behavior of physical objects and forces, such as Newtonian physics and all the rest?

JHZ
03-09-2009, 00:12
Again, no-one is forcing you to participate.
Hey, so far I haven't been able to keep out of it. I'm not saying talk is cheap or anything, just that at the end of the day, the fire is still hot whether we know thermodynamics or not. No matter how the bullet works, getting hit by it is not good (unless it's somesort of healing bullet gun of enlightenment).

It was just a throw, a personal statement not directed and anyone or anything. Something Lord_Crull might suggest me to cry a river over because it was a personal onpinion and not relvent to the discussion.

Then again, how relevant is the physics of real life projectiles in a thread about lasguns, power armours and IG training? Dunno, but who cares anymore? Lets just get all the miles we can out of this before The Man takes it away. Again.