PDA

View Full Version : What idiot is designing Assault Cannons?



EDMM
14-07-2012, 08:54
Why are Assault Cannons totally stupid looking?

If you don't know what I mean, look at the diagram of the Assault Cannon on page 54 of the new Rulebook.

There is a "choke point" in the middle of the ******** gun, between the ammo feed and the barrels. Due to the rotary nature of the gun, there is absolutely no possible way to get ammunition in to any of the barrels so it can be fired out of the gun.

I have edited a picture of a plastic model to show the choke point I mean. All the Terminator portable Assault Cannons have this stupid choke point, and none of them would function at all. The vehicle ones fare better, so why the hell are the infantry Assault Cannons designed so badly?

Does anyone have any clue why GW would make them look so stupid?

145193

Lord Damocles
14-07-2012, 09:03
Why is there not room in a Leman Russ to reload the main gun?
Why does the Vindicator have a huge shell hanging on the back next to the weakest armour?
Why do high level Necrons like Lords not have armoured power cores/accelerator chambers on their weapons, but Ghost Arks do?
Why does one of the Ork Looters have a literal bucket of bullets to reload his gun?
Why is the Stormraven/Talon as aerodynamic as a brick?

Col. Tartleton
14-07-2012, 09:28
Assault Cannons shoot Assault Lasers.

Retcon complete.

TheCaptain
14-07-2012, 09:33
It might explain why they must pray to make their gear work.... either that or its magic. But it is set in the far future in a fantasy setting, best not to look too closely at such things

yabbadabba
14-07-2012, 09:37
Nerd rage at make believe not looking like reality.

Don't care, its not important, certainly not important enough to get yourself all over excited EDMM.

Necronartum
14-07-2012, 09:40
In a game set in the year 40,000, where human's have colonised a large portion of the galaxy. Where genetically enhanced humans fight battles with devouring aliens. Where psykers set entire battlefields ablaze, alter time and are able to divine the future. I think you should safely assume that the Mechanicum, a collection of biotic human beings. Who build battle Titans the size of cities. Have overcome the problem of 'choke points' on rotary barrelled weaponry.

Zeroth
14-07-2012, 10:10
Way to attack the OP guys.

Contriary to most of the flawed designs in the Warhammer 40k universe, this one is really hard to explain your way out of. It is a straight forward mechanical f-up. The gun can not fire.

Examples:
Why is there not room in a Leman Russ to reload the main gun? There is, you just can't see it. It's the future, they are more efficent
Why does the Vindicator have a huge shell hanging on the back next to the weakest armour? It's a dud. It's there for show, like a wolf tooth neckles vindicator version
Why do high level Necrons like Lords not have armoured power cores/accelerator chambers on their weapons, but Ghost Arks do?They have access to better technology
Why does one of the Ork Looters have a literal bucket of bullets to reload his gun?They are Orks.
Why is the Stormraven/Talon as aerodynamic as a brick? It doesn't need to be aerodynamic, it needs to survive. It's updrift is not supported by it's wings like a little birdie, but with anti-gravity generators and jeg engines thrusting the oposite direction

EDMM
14-07-2012, 10:13
In a game set in the year 40,000, where human's have colonised a large portion of the galaxy. Where genetically enhanced humans fight battles with devouring aliens. Where psykers set entire battlefields ablaze, alter time and are able to divine the future. I think you should safely assume that the Mechanicum, a collection of biotic human beings. Who build battle Titans the size of cities. Have overcome the problem of 'choke points' on rotary barrelled weaponry.
But it looks stupid.

The Assault Cannon has a pansy ass hourglass figure. A pansy ass hourglass figure that guarantees it could not be fired. The whole point of the game is to have cool looking figures with awesome looking weapons killing each other. The Terminator portable Assault Cannon looks like a piece of crap that is impossible to fire.

"I'll shoot you with my lady shaped girly gun! Pew Pew! Girlfriend, it's got hips that don't quit! Pew Pew!"

It should have a blunt attachment from the barrels to the ammo feed. You know, so bullets can actually get into the barrels so they can go out the other end. Most of the Vehicle Ass cannons do, and they look much better, so why don't these ones?

lantzkev
14-07-2012, 10:18
it loads them through a single barrel feed, and then they get slung by centrifugal forces into the appropriate barrels =P

Bad monkey
14-07-2012, 10:19
I take it that we don't have a lot on today?

If its that much of an issue just model it so it looks like the extension of spes mahreen ego as intended.

Personally, I don't mind it and think it looks pretty good.

Charax
14-07-2012, 10:25
OP is correct, that is a hideous, impractical design that has no logical way of working.

Why? because GW doesn't give a damn if its designs would work, they're trying to sell lumps of plastic to kiddies, and adding pointless bits of detail apparently helps with that, even when that detail detracts from the utility or plausibility of the design.

yabbadabba
14-07-2012, 10:29
Way to attack the OP guys. The OP set the tone, a robust and frank expression of opinion.

Contriary to most of the flawed designs in the Warhammer 40k universe, this one is really hard to explain your way out of. It is a straight forward mechanical f-up. The gun can not fire.

Examples:
Why is there not room in a Leman Russ to reload the main gun? There is, you just can't see it. It's the future, they are more efficent
Why does the Vindicator have a huge shell hanging on the back next to the weakest armour? It's a dud. It's there for show, like a wolf tooth neckles vindicator version
Why do high level Necrons like Lords not have armoured power cores/accelerator chambers on their weapons, but Ghost Arks do?They have access to better technology
Why does one of the Ork Looters have a literal bucket of bullets to reload his gun?They are Orks.
Why is the Stormraven/Talon as aerodynamic as a brick? [I]It doesn't need to be aerodynamic, it needs to survive. It's updrift is not supported by it's wings like a little birdie, but with anti-gravity generators and jeg engines thrusting the oposite direction[/I I think what you do not address is none of this is important. It is important if you design a T34 for a WW2 game and then get the details wrong, but not for game like this. GW make great models but realism is not what they do with their IP, never have done, and probably never will do. This is the wrong aspect of wargaming to get over excited about the application of 21st Century weapon design and 21st Century Laws of Science.

TheDungen
14-07-2012, 10:30
Every time someone has an issue you do this, "Oh but its a sci-fi universe so it doesn't have to make sense you're so stupid OP" it doesn't contribute anything to the discussion you're just beating down on someone else to make yourself look smart and please stop it cause its kind annoying. You don't look smart you're just being unpleasant.

yes i realise the OP didn't set a very friendly tone but I've seen a few of you do this when there has been no problem with the OP too.

As for the issue, they do have a point, the guys that model gw miniatures are hardly mechanical engineers. I'm guessing its supposed to be a rotation point with a ball-bearing. The real problem isnt that part but the fact that the ammo is fed to the gun on the wrong side of that portion.

And they do care they just made a mistake, when they designed the current generation of bolter and the current generation of rhinos and other STC vehicles they researched a lot on modern weapons and apcs, i remember reading the interview with the designer in WD (Jes Godwin right?).

yabbadabba
14-07-2012, 10:37
Every time someone has an issue you do this, "Oh but its a sci-fi universe so it doesn't have to make sense you're so stupid OP" it doesn't contribute anything to the discussion you're just beating down on someone else to make yourself look smart and please stop it cause its kind annoying. You don't look smart you're just being unpleasant. First, the OP set the tone, and as EDMM as tended to do recently it is abrupt and confrontational with little balance or discussion. Second, this is not an issue for 40K, its a modelling issue so arguably should be in MP+T, not here. Finally you have no idea of people's motivations; using your argumental basis here we could tear your above paragraph apart leaving holes like a Swiss Cheese.

I suppose something else that can be added is that there have been many threads about this so why hasn't EDMM just looked those up?

In short it is a bad tempered and confrontational thread, a tone set by the OP, and its going to go nowhere fast. With that, I am off.

chromedog
14-07-2012, 10:39
(Jes Godwin right?).
Goodwin.

A godwin is one of those "you said hitl..." things.

EDMM
14-07-2012, 10:43
In short it is a bad tempered and confrontational thread, a tone set by the OP, and its going to go nowhere fast. With that, I am off.


I bet it gets lots of comments and discussion. But thanks for your enlightening and incredibly useful comments, as usual.

Exactly who do you think I was trying to "confront?"

This isn't the GW forums, I don't expect any replies from the person responsible for designing/drawing/sculpting the damn thing. I just wanted to point out a poorly sculpted miniature (actually a series of miniatures, since it's been repeated on all the Termi variations) that lessens my enjoyment of the game.

I bet, now that I've pointed it out, this is going to bother quite a few people, and I bet they won't be able to "un-see" the silly little waist on Assault Cannons now.

I'm hoping that people start converting their guns so they at least look like they could possibly, maybe, perhaps, actually fire.

MarkNorfolk
14-07-2012, 11:22
I think you were confronting the "idiot" who designed the AC. And you're over 20 years late. I've been looking at Assault Cannons for that time, and have had no problem with them. Doesn't bother me at all. No conversion necessary. Besides what next? Making all the marines TRU-scale? Remodelling all transports so their passangers can fit? Is it really that big a deal?

Cheers
Mark

Athlan na Dyr
14-07-2012, 11:27
it loads them through a single barrel feed, and then they get slung by centrifugal forces into the appropriate barrels =P

There is no centrifugal force :shifty:

To the OP, if it annoys you beyond all reason, convert the terminator ones or use a vehicle version.
Alternatively, do as lantzkev has and assume unseen tech or this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0yQg8kHVcI).

Another example of this is how to reload a Falcon grav tank's twin shuriken catapult mid battle. The gun is outside of the main hull and the tank is exerting a great deal of force beneath it to stay afloat. If I cared enough to be annoyed by a supposed failing (and I don't. The Falcon is a wonderful kit and a pleasure to paint) I could always assume that the Farseers mystically know how much ammunitions is needed and attach extra ammo packs as appropriate/ the housing contains substantially more ammo/ magic/ some random eldar machine reloads it.

edit: As Mark (great name, if I do say so myself :D ) said above, realism is a non-issue to be honest

lantzkev
14-07-2012, 11:30
It'd go in the appropriate forum for modelling, but then it wouldn't provoke any reactions by people that would care to answer it.


I'm hoping that people start converting their guns so they at least look like they could possibly, maybe, perhaps, actually fire.

yes just what I want people to worry about is making something that's maybe a 24 gauge metal pipe and make it realistic and workable...

I'm guessing next up will be that ghelar fields can in no way work on interceptors like they are pictured, that plasma guns could in no way work appropriatly as they are pictured, and that the caliber of the ammo in a bolters clip doesn't match the bore of the bolters barrel?

I'm guessing you need to get to work making new magazines for all your bolters now? Before you start throwing stones in glass houses and all that?

wolverine3-2
14-07-2012, 11:36
In regards to the design of the Assault Cannon, it is a single barrel feed into the 'six' (correct?) barrels are feed individually from a single feed, if you notice there is a single snub barrel on the bottom most rotation, this indicates that a single bullet is fired down entering one of the six barrels such that on the bottom of the rotation it precisely exits the barrel through the snub. The single feed into six barrels insures that the weapon can maintain a high rate of fire without overheating after a short burst.

Well, that's just my theory in an attempt to cool the situation

ChrisMurray
14-07-2012, 11:36
I personally like it. I don't want my models to be confined by what can be done in real life, I want them to look cool. It's the same thing when people say that a tank doesn't have enough ground clearance to perform it's job, or a flyer would never fly in real life etc. It looks cool who cares if it would work. In a fiction galaxy where super human warriors can spit acid, have nucular reactors in their backpacks and your emotions feed beings in another dimension, real life functionality is not something that I strive for.

Abaraxas
14-07-2012, 11:50
Chainswords wouldnt work either...but they do look really bloody cool! :skull:

Chem-Dog
14-07-2012, 11:53
Assault Cannons pack superposed ammunition, the central line (the choke point) is used to feed new ammo cores into the barrels in sequence when needed (weapon cannot be fired during this procedure, this is evident in Space Hulk's ability to reload the weapon) by way of a serried cyclic chambering mechanism.
Not fluff, I just made it up, but it's a lot more fun to work out a halfway feasible explanation as to how these things operate than to rage about how they can't possibly work. We are, after all, talking about technology that uses materials and processes that the most modern bleeding edge of science isn't even aware of. Imagine the disbelief of a person at the beginning of the 10th Century being shown a working smart phone, now multiply that by 10-15 times. That's why when you look at stuff in 40K it doesn't make sense.

OR

It doesn't have to work, it just has to look cool.

Harwammer
14-07-2012, 11:54
Only the bottom barrel works. Ammunition is delivered by maglev then fired. The other barrels are just there to give orks 'Dakka Envy'.

Memnon
14-07-2012, 11:56
In regards to the design of the Assault Cannon, it is a single barrel feed into the 'six' (correct?) barrels are feed individually from a single feed, if you notice there is a single snub barrel on the bottom most rotation, this indicates that a single bullet is fired down entering one of the six barrels such that on the bottom of the rotation it precisely exits the barrel through the snub. The single feed into six barrels insures that the weapon can maintain a high rate of fire without overheating after a short burst.

Well, that's just my theory in an attempt to cool the situation


What he said ^ exactly how I would imagine it. Personally it's these little details I tend to overlook (as I have no idea how real guns work). Having said that the Imperial Guard command squad heavy Flamer has always bothered me because that pipe on the top seems to go nowhere....

elmo23
14-07-2012, 12:01
I agreed with the OP. Look guys... there is a different in rule of cool such as chainsword or SM flying craft that shape like a brick... they all look cool.

The AC can look just as cool if GW didn't have that "chock" point. This is just stupid design and the chock point doesn't make it look cooler, it just stupid.

So if the chock point doesn't add the "rule of cool", then I have to say it is stupid and just bad design.

Chaos SM have those unrealistic spikes and horns, but does it add to rule of cool? Yes.. so I don't mind it. Does SM flying brick looks cool? Yes, so I don't mind it.


Does the chock point the alpha of coolness? No... so .... it is stupid design.

AndrewGPaul
14-07-2012, 12:09
Simple fix; cut the barrels off and re-attach them so the bottom barrel, not the axis of rotation, lines up with that narrow section.

Oppressor
14-07-2012, 12:44
145211


Funny, I'm looking at the above pic and specifically see a barrel between the choke point (the two disks) that matches the bottom most barrel of the multiple barrels which is also the barrel position that would have a bullet fired through it.

Different pictures from different sculpts, different sculptors and different times. Someone at some points got it right, others seem to have missed it.


Not that big a deal IMO.

Yodhrin
14-07-2012, 12:57
The OP set the tone, a robust and frank expression of opinion.
I think what you do not address is none of this is important. It is important if you design a T34 for a WW2 game and then get the details wrong, but not for game like this. GW make great models but realism is not what they do with their IP, never have done, and probably never will do. This is the wrong aspect of wargaming to get over excited about the application of 21st Century weapon design and 21st Century Laws of Science.

Sorry, not important to you; an important distinction to make. Suspension of disbelief is an extremely personal thing, trying to cast the OP as unreasonable because this particular thing bothers him is pretty disingenuous, I'm quite certain that you've been bothered by some particular element of a film, novel, or game in the past that your friends have thought you daft for caring about, and this is the same thing.

For example, I can watch Star Trek without wanting to give myself a lobotomy through my eyesocket despite being a physicist, and I don't know why because some of their technobabble moments -hell sometimes the whole premise for an episode- should make me facepalm so hard I backflip. On the other hand, I turned off the BSG revamp in disgust the first time they had an episode with a HumVee, because it was just too ridiculous. Neither of those is rational, but they are the case regardless.

I would agree with the OP that it's just daft, I intend to remedy it by adding additional cowling detail to cover the gap.

Thrax
14-07-2012, 14:43
The AC's ammo is a molten alloy under high pressure, and the multiple barrels allow for sufficient cooling of the ready-made projectiles. The single exit point fine tunes the shape of the bullet. Spent casings? Uh...you got me there!

Wait! I know. The ammo is teleported from the hopper to the barrels by an modulated tri-phase nano-wave inversion field, to reduce weight and friction! That's the ticket!

Knifeparty
14-07-2012, 15:06
Man just take a hobby knife and cut out the part that bothers you and glue the two sides together. Problem solved, technically there's no hole for the bullets to come out of either, you have to bore one out with an auger bit.

Mini77
14-07-2012, 15:09
I thought for a minute the sky was about to fall down. Then I remembered this was Waseer.

Thoth62
14-07-2012, 15:17
If it really bugs you, just cut it out or use some green stuff. Seriously. It's not a big deal.

Veteran Sergeant
14-07-2012, 15:39
I think what you do not address is none of this is important.
I love how there's always some TFG who comes into these threads to say "It's not important!"

Maybe not to you. Some people want at least the basic technology to be believable. It's the same reason I dislike the bolters that come with the Chaos marines that have a belt feed. The fantastech like power weapons or warp travel, you know, the things we can't explain and don't know how they work, that's fine if we hand wave it. The basics of projectile weapon design are things that we actually know.

Maybe let others decide what is, or isn't, important to them.

zippy77
14-07-2012, 16:07
I love how there's always some TFG who comes into these threads to say "It's not important!"

Maybe not to you. Some people want at least the basic technology to be believable. It's the same reason I dislike the bolters that come with the Chaos marines that have a belt feed. The fantastech like power weapons or warp travel, you know, the things we can't explain and don't know how they work, that's fine if we hand wave it. The basics of projectile weapon design are things that we actually know.

Maybe let others decide what is, or isn't, important to them.

Hooray now we have devolved into a meta-thread on meta-thread ethics on posting on the interwebz about plastic toy soldiers ...

Formerly Wu
14-07-2012, 16:11
Maybe let others decide what is, or isn't, important to them.

Why start a thread on a forum then? This isn't a mutual validation club. It's fine if you're bothered by something, but if you put yourself out there you have to be be prepared for others to disagree and to say so.

Johnnyb
14-07-2012, 16:42
me? i love threads like this that point out 'things that shouldn't work in 40k' like why do black templars become good friends with xenos breeds according to the allies list? why can a 'veteran' human unit pack more special weapons than the heroes of the imperial? why dont the space marines have access to demo charges and also use less usefull tanks? this list can go on and i find it hilarious!

elmo23
14-07-2012, 17:00
me? i love threads like this that point out 'things that shouldn't work in 40k' like why do black templars become good friends with xenos breeds according to the allies list? why can a 'veteran' human unit pack more special weapons than the heroes of the imperial? why dont the space marines have access to demo charges and also use less usefull tanks? this list can go on and i find it hilarious!


This isn't some abstract ideas like SM w/demo charges or BT w/ allies....this is a toy sculpture design flaw. Any designs in a fantasy fiction universe still has to follow the basic rules with in the universe. Such as a shotgun should project the bullets from the barrel, not the side or the shoulder stock. Same with chain/machine gun.... the barrels should be realistic to for the sake of realism in fantasy setting... to make us know that if you jump off a plane... you will still die because gravity is the same in 40K universe.

Again, rule of cool works... but this choke point on the gun serves no purpose or enhance the coolness... so the choke point is just bad design or a better word is IDS - Ignorance Design Syndrome.

Slowpoke
14-07-2012, 17:09
I have always loved the Assault Cannon and this "idiot design" has never ever put me off. I do agree that it is a bit silly to have a choke point in the middle but I wouldn't get my knickers in a twist because of it...

elmo23
14-07-2012, 17:33
I have always loved the Assault Cannon and this "idiot design" has never ever put me off. I do agree that it is a bit silly to have a choke point in the middle but I wouldn't get my knickers in a twist because of it...





Well.... I don't want 40K to turned into this....

http://www.swlegos.com/arf-trooper-with-chaingun-lego-star-wars-clone-wars-minifigure-clone-trooper-with-rotary-lego-chaingun/




I have to start drawing the line somewhere!!!!!

Sotek
14-07-2012, 18:06
Maybe the ammo gets loaded diagonally downwards through the central spindle into the lower-most barrel and then gets ignited when it reachers the uppermost position.
Some ultra-modern 'recoil-less' guns load ammo in a similar way (though not into a rotating barrel!)

Veteran Sergeant
14-07-2012, 18:41
Why start a thread on a forum then? This isn't a mutual validation club. It's fine if you're bothered by something, but if you put yourself out there you have to be be prepared for others to disagree and to say so.
That's not the point. If he doesn't think it's important, present it as "It hasn't really made a difference to me" as opposed to how he came off, suggesting the OP was "wrong" for disliking it. That's just being TFG, and has nothing to do with a discussion forum.

Hendarion
14-07-2012, 19:10
I'm hoping that people start converting their guns so they at least look like they could possibly, maybe, perhaps, actually fire.
Haha. I hope ppl start converting all their Space Marines to have proper proportions.
(You made a joke, didn't you?)

Clarkson
14-07-2012, 19:48
Haha. I hope ppl start converting all their Space Marines to have proper proportions.
(You made a joke, didn't you?)

maybe convert guardsmen to look ridiculously small carrying boltguns or even bolt pistols.. or visibly strain carrying them.

as far as the question asked.. the idiot who desgined the assault cannon.. doesnt care that 1 detail on a random bitz makes the model look stupid.. when not many field the units that can take them.. beacuse tbh a heavy flamer is better for the fact its 5pts... asscannons are 20-30pts, everyone can spare 5pts.. not many can spare an extra marine or even a rhino.

Lord Damocles
14-07-2012, 19:50
Contriary to most of the flawed designs in the Warhammer 40k universe, this one is really hard to explain your way out of. It is a straight forward mechanical f-up. The gun can not fire.
So we can handwave away anything, with the exception of the Assault Cannon being a bit funky? :eyebrows:

xxRavenxx
14-07-2012, 19:55
There is no centrifugal force :shifty:

Perhaps the bullets are dispersed through centripetal force?


Sorry, not important to you; an important distinction to make. Suspension of disbelief is an extremely personal thing, trying to cast the OP as unreasonable because this particular thing bothers him is pretty disingenuous, I'm quite certain that you've been bothered by some particular element of a film, novel, or game in the past that your friends have thought you daft for caring about, and this is the same thing.

He wasn't saying the OP was unreasonable, just that the OP was needlessly confrontational in his presentation.

Anyway. I don't agree on the suspension argument. For the same reason as yabbadabba, which is that barely ANYTHING in 40k would work. Its not an assault cannon that may or may not use a futuristic design to operate that should ruin someone's suspension of disbelief, its a flying robot pyramid, or a gun that works because its green owner believes it does.

Moreso, while I fully agree that by a modern standard, the gun wouldn't work its in the future. Who knows how *that* gun works anyway?

Clarkson
14-07-2012, 19:58
anyone else notice OP hasnt posted in here for almost 9.5hours.. and that his statements seem like they were trying to incite an argument?

I know personally ive been told off for less on here...

Clarkson
14-07-2012, 20:01
Who knows how *that* gun works anyway?

Why the "omnissiah" ofc. The giant dragon C'Tan locked under Mars..

EDMM
14-07-2012, 20:19
anyone else notice OP hasnt posted in here for almost 9.5hours.. and that his statements seem like they were trying to incite an argument?

I know personally ive been told off for less on here...

Lol. You've been told off for sleeping? :wtf:

You think someone has to keep posting in a thread all the time just for the hell of it? As if the number of posts they make is equal to the validity of the point they've raised?

FashaTheDog
14-07-2012, 20:25
Now you guys know why assault cannons used to explode in 2nd edition.

As for a few of the explanations thus far presented:
Loaded diagonally from center
Loaded from center laterally into spinning through some force or means
Teleported
Molten alloy ammo
Only one barrel works, the rest are for "Dakka Envy"
Barrels are loaded and the reload transfers ammo from center to barrels
Magic - psychic power in 40K, perhaps imbued at the Forgeworld as the more the Techpriests believe, the better it works and if the Magos believes real hard, then it becomes master crafted
C'Tan/Tzeentch did it

Egaeus
14-07-2012, 20:40
Different pictures from different sculpts, different sculptors and different times. Someone at some points got it right, others seem to have missed it.

Yeah, it really looks like all one needs to do to fix it is put a bit of green stuff in the bottom open section and now you have your ammo feed.

As others have said the miniature designers aren't engineers, they're making things that "look cool". While it would be nice if they also looked like they might be functional that's merely icing on the cake. And while I think some things are more easily justified with handwavium science (this is the future after all) there is still that expectation that at least to some extent the natural laws still apply...not everything is antigravity, superalloys and teleportation.


Wait! I know. The ammo is teleported from the hopper to the barrels by an modulated tri-phase nano-wave inversion field, to reduce weight and friction! That's the ticket!

Or this. :D

Dangersaurus
14-07-2012, 21:00
Assault Cannons pack superposed ammunition, the central line (the choke point) is used to feed new ammo cores into the barrels in sequence when needed (weapon cannot be fired during this procedure, this is evident in Space Hulk's ability to reload the weapon) by way of a serried cyclic chambering mechanism.
Not fluff, I just made it up, but it's a lot more fun to work out a halfway feasible explanation as to how these things operate than to rage about how they can't possibly work. We are, after all, talking about technology that uses materials and processes that the most modern bleeding edge of science isn't even aware of. Imagine the disbelief of a person at the beginning of the 10th Century being shown a working smart phone, now multiply that by 10-15 times. That's why when you look at stuff in 40K it doesn't make sense.

Nice. Best way to deal with "WTF" moments in sci-fantasy: imagine the hell out of it.

The autocannon has never bothered me, but like someone above said the design actually breaks the rule of cool. Chem-Dog's explanation is best. Now it would be nice if someone could give me an explanation to fix the "spin-up" that every rotary cannon does in movies and TV... the guns they're portraying don't need to warm up, cycling them without shooting just drops unspent shells all over the place.

TheDoctor
14-07-2012, 21:28
"If you're wondering how he eats and breaths, and other science facts, you should tell yourself it's just a show, I should really just relax"

As for me, I know the designers aren't Mechanical engineers, so if they get details that I never pay attention to wrong, well, I never paid attention to them.

chamelion 6
14-07-2012, 21:57
I dunno.... I think the OP has finally explained the fact that my AC's only seem to roll 1's and 2's.

I'm gonna remodel the darn things at once and see if it improves ther hit dice!!!!

MarcoSkoll
14-07-2012, 22:08
Now it would be nice if someone could give me an explanation to fix the "spin-up" that every rotary cannon does in movies and TV...
A similar reason to why many heavy machine guns are open-bolt. Because of the heat built up by firing, a round left in the chamber can get hot enough to fire unintentionally, even if the weapon's safety is on.

As such, open bolt weapons only chamber the round after the trigger is pulled (as opposed to closed bolt, which chambers a round before the trigger is pulled). Similarly, spooling up and spooling down would let you clear all the chambers after firing and only re-chamber again when you wanted to be firing, avoiding any possible accidents.

I can't remember if there are any actual gatling guns that do this though.

Nurgling Chieftain
14-07-2012, 22:09
I haven't read the entire new book yet. Do boltguns still use ammunition with deuterium penetrator cores? Deuterium being an isotope of hydrogen, basically just a proton and a neutron, is one of the lightest gasses (heavier than basic hydrogen, of course, and if I'm not mistaken, in practice it's very close in density to helium, as it will form binary molecules).

Battleworthy Arts
14-07-2012, 22:33
I get where the OP is coming from. Where as I do like the aesthetics of ACs, a small shift in the barrel mount could have given it a bit of verisimilitude.

Dont get me started on the grey knights.

Battleworthy Arts
14-07-2012, 22:37
I get where the OP is coming from. Where as I do like the aesthetics of ACs, a small shift in the barrel mount could have given it a bit of verisimilitude.

Dont get me started on the grey knights.

Egaeus
14-07-2012, 22:39
As for me, I know the designers aren't Mechanical engineers, so if they get details that I never pay attention to wrong, well, I never paid attention to them.

Well some of us are mechanical engineers, which is probably why such things bother us more than they should. ;) That said, I don't expect GW to hire a technical consultant because it isn't meant to be a simulation game. Of course the suspension of disbelief can kick in at different levels for different people...there's quite a bit you have to "buy into" just to get into the basics of the setting (aliens, warp travel, psykers) but a lot of it is pretty standard "sci-fi" or "space opera" fare so it's easy to give it a bye. I suppose one could go the alternative route and just see it as "pure fantasy" (by applying Clarke's 3rd Law) but GW has another game for that...:p

Clarkson
15-07-2012, 00:39
Lol. You've been told off for sleeping? :wtf:

You think someone has to keep posting in a thread all the time just for the hell of it? As if the number of posts they make is equal to the validity of the point they've raised?

No i think someone who posed a question... caused arguments to be raised and then buggered off to "sleep", should be more forethought of what they post...

and as i said.. ive been personally told off for less.. as in.. trying to start an argument.. you managed to start one.. and getting away scot free

Commissar Davis
15-07-2012, 00:50
I don't get. There is quite a lot that shouldn't work in the game, so why worry? Central chamber works as like a pump action shot gun to refill the chamber in a empty barrel. Problem solved... like anyone here can say different and be proven right.

Hawthorne
15-07-2012, 00:57
Well damnit you just shattered the believability of Warhammer 40,000 for me.

EDMM
15-07-2012, 01:00
I like guns. I like the look of many of the weapons in the game, even the weird sci-fi ones that don't shoot bullets.

Some of the Assault Cannon models do shoot bullets, but couldn't. It is weird and off-putting.

Glen_Savet
15-07-2012, 01:10
Having looked at all my assault cannons, I don't see the "wasp waist" you point out on your assault cannon. Do you have space wolf cannons? If that's the case, I gloat at your misfortune. ;) My vanilla marines don't have that issue.

EDMM
15-07-2012, 01:12
Yeah, it's not all of them. All the vehicle cannons are fine, and some of the Terminator ones have a sufficiently thick bottom housing as well as the wasp waist to have rounds go through.

I believe the one in the image I posted was a Dark Angels AC.

Havock
15-07-2012, 02:26
Way to attack the OP guys.

Contriary to most of the flawed designs in the Warhammer 40k universe, this one is really hard to explain your way out of. It is a straight forward mechanical f-up. The gun can not fire.

Examples:
Why is there not room in a Leman Russ to reload the main gun? There is, you just can't see it. It's the future, they are more efficent

Nope, check the hatch and the barrel calibre. The 'only' explanation is that the ingame models are 'caricatures' and not really representing the actual vehicles. Unless the Leman Russ would be shooting plates or something, nope, either there is nobody in the turret or no gun in the turret. It's not about reloading, it is about the actual firing mechanism, even if you take the supposed shell and assume the mechanism is only a wee bit larger... it still doesn't fit :p

Then again I would prefer a leman russ variant with a low profile, sloped armor and a 'dual-action' cannon like the old Vanquisher. A true 'main battle tank'.


Why does the Vindicator have a huge shell hanging on the back next to the weakest armour? It's a dud. It's there for show, like a wolf tooth neckles vindicator version

Obviously a fake shell to entice enemies into wasting their ammo. Or the prime reason the rear is so weak ;)


Why is the Stormraven/Talon as aerodynamic as a brick? It doesn't need to be aerodynamic, it needs to survive. It's updrift is not supported by it's wings like a little birdie, but with anti-gravity generators and jeg engines thrusting the oposite direction

Better one: why is the stormraven ugly as sin? :p

The prime reason behind all of this is because the sculptors are miniature makers, not tank engineers or gunsmiths. They make something that looks cool, not because a tiny percentage of the population that even knows enough about these things. See also the laughably low armor steel equivalents, it isn't that 40k stuff is ridiculously weak, it is just that the guys making this stuff have no affinity with the actual hardware.

Beppo1234
15-07-2012, 03:46
there are more important things to gripe over, than this, **** pour desing of the SR, lack of variability on some of the larger kits, repetitive bits on sprues. Maybe the barrels of the assault cannon pump in and out like a jack hammer, absorbing and using recoil and picking up ammo.

Bookwrak
15-07-2012, 03:57
As for me, I know the designers aren't Mechanical engineers, so if they get details that I never pay attention to wrong, well, I never paid attention to them.
I would at least still have a bit of respect for the OP's opinion if the opening post hadn't been quite so awful. I know people who always paint parts of models that can never physically be seen, or the insides of their rhinos and their land raiders, because despite the fact no one ever looks in a model on the table, the fact that it'd be unpainted would bug them. That's fine, so long as they don't start expecting me to do the same. I can understand why a detail as insignificant as this one might bother some one, but unleashing that much vitriol on something that you can't even see at table top distances just comes across as so relentlessly pedantic and hopelessly silly.

and as i said.. ive been personally told off for less.. as in.. trying to start an argument.. you managed to start one.. and getting away scot free
Curse that dastardly dastard, sneaking off and getting away with it! Next time, OP, we'll get you next time!

Clarkson
15-07-2012, 04:09
I would at least still have a bit of respect for the OP's opinion if the opening post hadn't been quite so awful. I know people who always paint parts of models that can never physically be seen, or the insides of their rhinos and their land raiders, because despite the fact no one ever looks in a model on the table, the fact that it'd be unpainted would bug them. That's fine, so long as they don't start expecting me to do the same. I can understand why a detail as insignificant as this one might bother some one, but unleashing that much vitriol on something that you can't even see at table top distances just comes across as so relentlessly pedantic and hopelessly silly.

Curse that dastardly dastard, sneaking off and getting away with it! Next time, OP, we'll get you next time!

all i can think of is "I'LL GET YOU HE-MAN!"

FashaTheDog
15-07-2012, 04:23
Nope, check the hatch and the barrel calibre. The 'only' explanation is that the ingame models are 'caricatures' and not really representing the actual vehicles. Unless the Leman Russ would be shooting plates or something, nope, either there is nobody in the turret or no gun in the turret. It's not about reloading, it is about the actual firing mechanism, even if you take the supposed shell and assume the mechanism is only a wee bit larger... it still doesn't fit :p

The Leman Russ employs the same technology buildings in most RPGs and the TARDIS does; they're bigger on the inside. I mean if you look at the official fluff, a Leman Russ has a greenhouse, a library, numerous bathrooms, a pool, ample living quarters for the crew, a medical bay, and several squash courts among the numerous corridors and rooms within it.

RBLFunk
15-07-2012, 04:25
This is a discussion forum for discussing things. If you think something is trivial, not an issue, and doesn't need to be discussed, then don't post in the thread, stop cluttering up discussion between people that care.

No matter how you look at it, the design of a terminator's assault cannon is either mechanically infeasible or mechanically convoluted and inefficient to a ridiculous degree.

To answer the OP's question; Jes Goodwin as far as I know.
I talked to him for a bit at a games day years ago. Suffice to say, he is not a mechanical engineer or a gunsmith. One of the elements common to his designs I find the most bizarre is the enormous block of a front sight on boltguns, shuriken catapults, etc.

Is this what you had in mind?
145264
Shorter, lighter, mechanically feasible, no loss of barrel length, and a lot handier in the confines of a space hulk.
If I owned a plastic terminator assault cannon, I would do that to it.

I find the design of most assault cannons on vehicles only slightly less ridiculous. They generally feature six barrels rotating in front of one breech. If you don't understand why that is mechanically convoluted and inefficient to a silly degree, study the principles and purposes of gatling weapons harder.

Freakiq
15-07-2012, 08:07
Why does the Vindicator have a huge shell hanging on the back next to the weakest armour?


I doubt it's just a shell filled with blackpowder, just shooting at it is unlikely to set it off.

Thommy H
15-07-2012, 10:28
One day, when hyper-intelligent aliens land on Earth and decide whether to give us the secret of immortality or turn us into livestock for their bone marrow farms based on our past behaviour as a species, this thread will help them to make up their minds.

Lord Damocles
15-07-2012, 12:44
I doubt it's just a shell filled with blackpowder, just shooting at it is unlikely to set it off.
Even if it is a dud/not very explosive etc. why is it there? It's outside the tank. Are the Marines supposed to stop in the middle of forcing a breach in the enemy fortifications, get out of their tank, and lug a massive great shell in through the back hatch?
If it is a real shell, why do they only have one? If there are more inside (which would be only logical), why is this one hanging outside?
What's the point of the winch? Where are they planning to winch that shell to/from?


Also, it's just occured to me that Zeroth's explanation for the variation in Necron weaponry is the exact opposite of that given by the designer(s) (UK WD 383); so that probably doesn't work.

Veteran Sergeant
15-07-2012, 14:34
and getting away scot free
I don't think he was worried about going to discussion forum prison.

Nostro
15-07-2012, 18:33
To lightly derail:

While the AC never bugged me (but now it does, thanks :mad:), for me it's the combi-meltas where the melta muzzle is on top (sternguard etc): the ejection port and the bolter muzzle are then completely unaligned making bullet travel impossible. When teh combi part is underslug, it looks less cool but believable.

As to why we do have this thread: your suspension of disbelief always stop somewhere. For some people it is here. Why not?

EDMM
15-07-2012, 18:34
I find the design of most assault cannons on vehicles only slightly less ridiculous. They generally feature six barrels rotating in front of one breech. If you don't understand why that is mechanically convoluted and inefficient to a silly degree, study the principles and purposes of gatling weapons harder.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9h_bbMvApCg
At 1:07 for those who don't understand what he's talking about.

AndrewGPaul
15-07-2012, 18:39
I think you missed a video link there ...

Azazel
15-07-2012, 18:44
Who knows what technological advancements will be made between now and 38 thousand years in the future. A hundred years ago it was unthinkable that a man could walk on the moon.

TheDungen
15-07-2012, 21:32
Actually it was 'proven' impossible for a craft to leave earth's atmospehere =P

darthslowe
15-07-2012, 21:48
In all fairness, no man ever did walk on the moon. The whole thing was staged. Seriously, the video feed that was shown was filmed in the badlands down in Arizona (Same area as the Grand Canyon for those not familiar with the geography of the United States). The idea was that the United States needed to convince the Soviets that they had beat them to the moon, and, thereby, win a great "moral" victory in the Cold War. Also, the moon doesn't have an atmosphere, so why was the flag waving? There really are too many things that were out of sorts for it to be real.

Thommy H
15-07-2012, 21:53
Seriously. This is what will doom us. This thread.

xxRavenxx
15-07-2012, 23:03
In all fairness, no man ever did walk on the moon. The whole thing was staged.

Did you also know that Jews sunk the Titanic? (http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=af07)

Dylius
15-07-2012, 23:25
... Also, the moon doesn't have an atmosphere, so why was the flag waving? There really are too many things that were out of sorts for it to be real.

The flag was supported by a pole along the top. The flag had been a bit crumpled up and had wrapped itself around the pole a bit, so it just looked like it was waving.

Also, how do you explain all the photographs taken from orbit, and the fact that there is a reflective dish on the moon that we can use to find out how far away the moon is (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_experiment)? It had to be put there somehow. I'm not really sure why I'm responding to this...

Back in the realm of On-Topicness, it doesn't really bother me - but that's just me.

Egaeus
15-07-2012, 23:58
Who knows what technological advancements will be made between now and 38 thousand years in the future. A hundred years ago it was unthinkable that a man could walk on the moon.

Watched an episode of NOVA the other night that was explaining the origins of String Theory. It was interesting because they went though a brief history, basically Newtonian physics -> Einstein's relativity -> Quantum mechanics -> String theory. I expect that at some point we will discover how woefully inadequate our understanding of "natural law" really is :p.

And we went to the moon because Transformers crashed there (just watched this movie last night). :p:rolleyes:

TheWarmaster
16-07-2012, 01:09
I don't get why OP got his knickers in a twist over that. I think it looks cool. Sure it wouldn't probably work, but it looks good nevertheless.

FashaTheDog
16-07-2012, 02:57
Actually it was 'proven' impossible for a craft to leave earth's atmospehere =P

Yeah and I got this bridge between Brooklyn and Manhattan for sale, only used once by a little old lady on her way to church.

Nostro
16-07-2012, 03:07
Did you also know that Jews sunk the Titanic? (http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=af07)

Well, thank you captain obvious: the guy who sunk that ship was called Eisberg. I think this is common knowledge.

insectum7
16-07-2012, 03:39
I bet, now that I've pointed it out, this is going to bother quite a few people, and I bet they won't be able to "un-see" the silly little waist on Assault Cannons now.


I've been seeing it for at least 18 years, hasn't bothered me a bit. I can actually scan in a drawing of a terminator I did when I was in high-school, and it's got the same piece of detail. Looks the nutz.



r. Also, the moon doesn't have an atmosphere, so why was the flag waving?

A: The flag is waving they way it does when the guy mounts it BECAUSE the moon has no atmosphere.

B: You're an idiot.


Well, thank you captain obvious: the guy who sunk that ship was called Eisberg. I think this is common knowledge.

I'm mildly ashamed that I lol'd at it. But I did.

Voss
16-07-2012, 04:44
In all fairness, no man ever did walk on the moon. The whole thing was staged. Seriously, the video feed that was shown was filmed in the badlands down in Arizona (Same area as the Grand Canyon for those not familiar with the geography of the United States). The idea was that the United States needed to convince the Soviets that they had beat them to the moon, and, thereby, win a great "moral" victory in the Cold War. Also, the moon doesn't have an atmosphere, so why was the flag waving? There really are too many things that were out of sorts for it to be real.
Ah, good. You fell for the conspiracy theory. The fact is the 'Moon mission' didn't land on our moon, but Ganymede. It was a test of the hybrid 'area-51' tech developed out of the interstellar trade and passed off as a 'crashed alien craft.' The Lunar landing explanation was fed to the world so as to not upset the other major powers here on Earth. Where do you think this rapid evolution of technology came from? American innovation? Really now.

wolverine3-2
16-07-2012, 09:25
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9h_bbMvApCg
At 1:07 for those who don't understand what he's talking about.

Although that is true for gatling weapons, like the punisher gatling cannon, the assault cannon only fires one round at a time through the snub barrel on the bottom most rotation of the barrels, as i said before, it would seem that the assault cannon fires one round into a single barrel at a time while that barrel is rotating, the barrels rotate at a speed such that the bullet leaves the barrel through the snub barrel on the bottom of the rotation, meaning more barrels will be empty than have a round in them, this increases the rate of fire while decreasing the potential for overheating. hey if they could time machine guns on ww1 aircraft to fire only when the prop blade is horizontal, then i think in the 41st millennium they can time the rotation on the assault cannons barrels for the above mechanic

Azrothan
16-07-2012, 11:13
Just because you're not smart enough to think of a way for it to fire doesn't mean the one designing the weapon is an idiot. It just means you are. ;)

Memnos
16-07-2012, 11:35
Why are Assault Cannons totally stupid looking?

If you don't know what I mean, look at the diagram of the Assault Cannon on page 54 of the new Rulebook.

There is a "choke point" in the middle of the ******** gun, between the ammo feed and the barrels. Due to the rotary nature of the gun, there is absolutely no possible way to get ammunition in to any of the barrels so it can be fired out of the gun.

I have edited a picture of a plastic model to show the choke point I mean. All the Terminator portable Assault Cannons have this stupid choke point, and none of them would function at all. The vehicle ones fare better, so why the hell are the infantry Assault Cannons designed so badly?

Does anyone have any clue why GW would make them look so stupid?

145193

Oh! I see where your confusion is. No, the Assault Cannon isn't a belt-loader. It uses a hyper-acceleration chamber in the central bore to sheer off bits of metal and send them at extremely high speeds towards the target. This coil is centrally located and allows the magnetic force to accelerate not one but several barrels at once, resulting in the assault cannons prodigious rate of fire. This is also why it has 'rending' when no regular Boltgun has it.

*nods sagely*

*checks BS meter* WHOOP! Personal best.

Seriously - If you think something doesn't make sense, just make up stuff in your head until it does.

Iskandar
16-07-2012, 11:45
Did you also know that Jews sunk the Titanic? (http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=af07)

No way! That slipped under even the Nazis' radar! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic_%281943_film%29)

There should be a health warning on this thread for brain cancer.

Poseidal
16-07-2012, 14:19
It would be funny if the gun fired actually through the centre, and those six 'barrels' were actually cooling rods for the central barrel.

Konovalev
16-07-2012, 14:53
Clearly assault cannons are muzzle loaded and the chokepoint you refer to is merely the point from which powder is delivered.

elmo23
16-07-2012, 16:13
http://www.swlegos.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/fd2a2_LEGO_Clone_Wars_4182vLzHZ0L.jpg
How about this dude.

Havock
16-07-2012, 21:07
Clearly assault cannons are muzzle loaded and the chokepoint you refer to is merely the point from which powder is delivered.

Considering the other guy generally had his turn before you could shoot again, this was a perfectly viable strategy. However, with stand & shoot, all of a sudden you have to rush things.

FashaTheDog
16-07-2012, 21:16
Havock, those floating skulls are capable of an emergency reload, so it works out.

Captain Ventris
16-07-2012, 23:25
Actually only the Space wolves ass.cannon is like that, cause Spacewolves are too busy butting heads with dragons and eating bullets so they develop an immunity to lead to actually follow good mechanical design, all the other ass.cannons have a breach-barrel at the bottom of the rotary like its supposed to

Oh wait that's the DA ass cannon... Those fools...

ehlijen
17-07-2012, 05:44
Considering the other guy generally had his turn before you could shoot again, this was a perfectly viable strategy. However, with stand & shoot, all of a sudden you have to rush things.

That's why you have speed muzzle loaders, similar to those on revolvers.

Zeroth
17-07-2012, 06:40
No way! That slipped under even the Nazis' radar! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic_%281943_film%29)

There should be a health warning on this thread for brain cancer.

Another win for Godwin's Law.

Wikipedia says

Godwin's law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies or Godwin's Law of Nazi Analogies[1][2]) is an observation made by Mike Godwin in 1990[2] that has become an Internet adage. It states: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."[2][3] In other words, Godwin observed that, given enough time, in any online discussion—regardless of topic or scope—someone inevitably makes a comparison to Hitler and the Nazis.

Konovalev
17-07-2012, 17:50
Alright so after considering the mechanisms of Imperial technology I have figured out how this version of the assault cannon works. To put it simply, it functions on the inverse of Occams Razor. That is to say the more complex, less efficient, relying on more assumptions, and often highly heretical a theory is it approaches closest to the truth or solution of the issue.

Therefore the bottleneck version of the assault cannon works by means of orkoid subconcious psychic influence much like ork shootas and trukks. After a bottleneck assault cannons is produced and a candidate for the honor of wearing terminator armor is elected to carry it, the weapon is "activated" by way of ork shokk attack gun. Snotlings are fired through the shokk attack gun into the terminators armor until the astartes inside is incapacitated but a snotling survives with some degree of sentience remaining. The snotling then, being an orkoid and a particularly dumb one at that, is psychically influenced, abused verbally via radio, has scary faces painted onto the eye holes of the armor, or is otherwise incentivized to operate the nonfunctional weapon in a combat environment. After the battle has concluded the snotling is evacuated from the armor by the waste disposal system, and the astartes is removed and his geneseed is reclaimed. After this a new terminator armor candidate is selected and the process begins again before the bottleneck assault cannon is deployed to battlefield.

onidemon
17-07-2012, 18:35
Hi everyone. I'm a bit late to this thread, but I have a Dark Angel assault cannon, and it does not match up with the picture in the original post. I don't believe the OP intentionally modified the picture, as that image shows up frequently on bits sites and ebay. However, compare it with the image at this site:

http://www.ecrater.co.uk/p/9401303/space-marine-dark-angel-deathwing

Notice how there's something along the bottom there? It's the barrel where the bullets go. So, they feed from the back, it ejects shells from the side, and the bullets travel through rotating barrels exactly like you would expect.

My final impression is that the image in the OP was cleaned up in Photoshop by someone who did not recognize the shadow under that part and whited it out as background shadow.

So, there you go. Have a nice day.

Konovalev
17-07-2012, 19:00
http://www.ecrater.co.uk/p/9401303/space-marine-dark-angel-deathwing

Good find! But as damning as that is, I don't think there was every any confusion about the OP and this thread is quite evident of that.

Egaeus
17-07-2012, 20:18
Notice how there's something along the bottom there? It's the barrel where the bullets go. So, they feed from the back, it ejects shells from the side, and the bullets travel through rotating barrels exactly like you would expect.

Honestly in the photo you provided it looks like that could just be some flash from the casting...although while I was writing I realized that I actually have a DA battleforce that I've never done anything with...so I went and looked at the AC and it appears to have the "missing bit", so either the OP's picture was a bad cast or as you say it could have been a Photoshop edit.

I might try to post a picture but I don't have a decent digital camera handy at the moment...

t-tauri
17-07-2012, 20:37
Several posts removed. Any more breaches of the posting guidelines and this thread will be closed.

Captain Ventris
17-07-2012, 20:37
You are rapidly becoming the most obnoxious person on this board. If you want to affect an air of high-handed superiority and world-weariness, please reserve it for when you actually have something to contribute to the discussion.

+1 to this


Spoken like a religious apologist.
'It is not possible for the text to be wrong. If you perceive an error in the text, you are at fault.'

No matter what, the assault cannon design is convoluted. It is unnecessarily mechanically complex to an extreme degree. It cannot work under conventional gatling principles, and it is incredibly inefficient for it to operate under another principle.
The alternative explanation I like the best is that the assault cannon is actually a single barrelled weapon and what appear to be six barrels are actually a cooling shroud for the single central barrel. Unfortunately the assault cannon is specifically described as having six barrels rotated by a motor.

This is why the weapon used to have the Jam rule (no I'm not talking about delicious strawberry preserves)



Honestly in the photo you provided it looks like that could just be some flash from the casting...although while I was writing I realized that I actually have a DA battleforce that I've never done anything with...so I went and looked at the AC and it appears to have the "missing bit", so either the OP's picture was a bad cast or as you say it could have been a Photoshop edit.

I might try to post a picture but I don't have a decent digital camera handy at the moment...

Yeah I looked at all my Ass.Cannon bits and they all have the breach barrel at the bottom... So much for my fanciful jab at the Space Wolves ;)

onidemon
17-07-2012, 21:14
Honestly in the photo you provided it looks like that could just be some flash from the casting...although while I was writing I realized that I actually have a DA battleforce that I've never done anything with...so I went and looked at the AC and it appears to have the "missing bit", so either the OP's picture was a bad cast or as you say it could have been a Photoshop edit.

I might try to post a picture but I don't have a decent digital camera handy at the moment...

That was my experience too - all DA assault cannons I can find have the missing barrel right where it should be. I still maintain that the store that created the original image just cleaned it out while whiting the background. So, rejoice gamers, our models still look good!

(and to answer the original question: The "idiot" is most likely a guy working in photoshop who wasn't especially worried with how Assault Cannons work, as he had to photoshop every bit in a dark angel terminator set on a deadline)

Now then, I still don't care for how GW doesn't drill out the barrel holes on thier Dreadnought assault cannons. It always draws my eye to where they've painted silver right over the ends of the barrels. But, that's the great strength of tabletop games over videogames - if something really doesn't look right for our tastes, we can change it :D