are shootas more precise weapons than shuriken?

[OgreBattle]

Now in the game rules, a shoota shoots further than a catapult
a big shoota shoots a lot further than a shuriken cannon.
Eldar have to compensate for this in the avenger catapult to use hyper-sophisticated targetters and psychic uplinks to bring their weapon up to the precision of your standard shoota.

the in-unverse explanation is shuriken are innacurate weapons that rely on weight of fire to hit targets at short range, because of lack of rifling.
A big shoota fires as far as a heavy bolter, so I an assume orky know-wots involves the knowledge that making things spin stabilize their flight.

That is an assumption though.

So, in universe, is a shoota a more precise weapon than the shuriken?

[Sheena Easton]

No its not.

[Grimbad]

So, in universe, is a shoota a more precise weapon than the shuriken?

No, with 3rd edition the Shuriken Catapult became the basic Eldar weapon and its range was cut to 12" in order to force them into a distinctive play style with strengths and weaknesses, according to the game design philosophy of the day.

[Memnos]

If you have to come up with a logical explanation:

Orks fire a lot of bullets. A lot more than Eldar do.

So, yes, while Eldar won't fire until close range and then will use controlled bursts, Orks have the following conversation:

"Yer wants big guns? Dakka dakka dakka! I gots big guns fer ya! Dakka dakka dakka! Really big fraggin' guns! Dakka dakka dakka dakka! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA"

And they have held down the trigger for that full amount of time. When Guardians fire 2 shots, they fire a couple of short bursts from the shuriken catapult. When Orks fire shootas, they stop when the clip is empty, and then they only stop long enough to slap another clip in.

[AndrewGPaul]

Since you're basing this on game rules, what do Epic Armageddon, Inquisitor or any of the RPGs say about relative ranges? Each of those is just as relevant to the discussion as the 40k stats.

I bet they're not consistent, though.

[ftayl5]

Memnos is exactly right.
When an orc fires 1 shot in game, he's actually firing 10, but the other 9 were so wildly off that we don't even count them.
When an eldar fires 1 shot in game, he's probably actually fired about one shot.

[Spetulhu]

Ork weapons are generally smoothbore too - they either don't bother with rifling or don't have the materials/tools to produce it. They compensate with volume of fire as already said. ;-)

[daveNYC]

Ork firearm design focuses on two important elements, noise and size. In fact, I'd say that the top ten list of things Orks look for in their guns are noise and size.

[Gorbad Ironclaw]

Memnos is exactly right.
When an orc fires 1 shot in game, he's actually firing 10, but the other 9 were so wildly off that we don't even count them.
When an eldar fires 1 shot in game, he's probably actually fired about one shot.

But the whole idea behind shuriken weapons is that the shoot a huge number of tiny (almost mono-molecular) projectiles very fast. Its a very rapid fire ring weapon, its not a single shot bolt action sniper weapon.

So by the in-universe explanation introduced to explain the current (crappy) rules for the Shuriken Catapult the Ork Shoota does have a longer effective range, and hence is more accurate.

[The_Klobb_Maniac]

Larger heavier bullet + more powder (or propulsion) = longer range. I don't consider the ork to fire *that* many. Look at his bullets? do you consider SM to fire that many? He'd have to switch out his ammo *every turn.*

An Ork weapon may well be accurate and just isn't because the orks do a more run'n'gun style. I'll have you notice that almost all of their targeters don't line up in such a way to actually help.

Also, the game rules are rough. You'd want an amalgam of rules to get an idea. You're also only using the standard catapult, which is disingenuous.

[Still Standing]

Range does not mean accuracy. Range means the bullet travels further.

[FarseerMatt]

the in-unverse explanation is shuriken are innacurate weapons that rely on weight of fire to hit targets at short range, because of lack of rifling.

This explanation has always bugged me, and I'm rather glad that they quietly omitted it from the 4th edition codex.

Shuriken weapons fire by electromagnetic acceleration. That makes them a railgun, or possibly coilgun. Railguns don't need rifling. Moreover, shuriken weapons fire discs, not bullets. Yes, an individual shuriken's low weight would make it unstable, but its high muzzle velocity (presumably supersonic) and very low drag (it presents a very thin cross-section to the air it's cutting through) should mean that it flies a significant distance before veering off. And each squeeze of the trigger is firing dozens if not hundreds of discs. Recoil is unlikely an issue because of the lack of moving parts and tiny projectile weight relative to the weapon.

Shootas are generally big bore and fully automatic, so they presumably generate pretty hefty recoil. In strong hands (and Orks are damn strong), they might well be quite accurate in short bursts. Of course, I imagine most Orks prefer to simply hold down the trigger and enjoy the noise, so that the recoil quickly causes most of the shots to go all over the place.

[Kakapo42]

Range does not mean accuracy. Range means the bullet travels further.

This. A howitzer cannon has a much longer range than a sub-machine gun, but that does not necessarily mean it is more accurate.

Ork munitions generally pack as much explosive/propellant as physically possible, so they are generally much higher powered, and travel further.

[La'mour Le Breton]

In response to the "longer" range = accuracy. A griffon mortar has what? 48 inch range? but it scatters, therefor, its not accurate.
Same with ork "shootas", just because they have a larger shell, and more propellant, does in no way mean they are accurate.
Same goes for accuracy and range, the shuriken shoots this little tiny razor that probably falls to the ground after 20 feet, its not heavy enough to retain enough speed to be effective after an extended distance. think of it like a spitball vs throwing a stone. your spitball maybe more accurate, more delicate, whatever, but its not going to go very far, your stone on the other hand, not very accurate, but you can probably chuck that sucker a good distance.
The whole thing with eldar shuriken not being rapid fire, the idea I got, either from the rules, or from reading BL books is that the shuriken weapons are SUPER rapid fire, which is why they are s 4 ap 5 like a bolt gun. You think that a tiny little razor, regardless of how fast you shoot it, is gonna cause as much damage as a bolt round? Shuriken's must be putting out a huge volume of fire to produce that type of damage, I guess I could see how a tiny super sharp projectile bouncing around inside of you could make a mess of a person's torso though...
Again from reading the BL books, whenever space marines are shot at with shurikens, they always seem to remark on being covered in these tiny little razor things.

[FarseerMatt]

I wouldn't advise using any set of tabletop rules to answer this question - gun profiles and rules change with different editions and different codexes, even if the fluff for them remains exactly the same.

I guess I could see how a tiny super sharp projectile bouncing around inside of you could make a mess of a person's torso though

I would have thought shuriken would be too high velocity to tumble much.

The effect depends on the size of the projectile I guess. Various BL novels have scaled individual shuriken from being the size of a thumbnail (for which I picture the target folding with virtually no marks on him apart from the mist of blood dragged out behind him by the shurikens as they exit) up to several inches across (for which the target would simply vanish in dozens of pieces). Different "patterns" of shuriken can explain the differences, but given that a shuriken is a cross-section of the ammo core and most of the ammo cores in artwork (in guns, on belts etc) are about the right size to close your hand around, I'd say a two or three inch diameter makes the most sense.

So a single metal or plasticrystal shuriken is:

• big enough to take a limb half off, sever an artery or bisect a vital organ
• supersonic and very thin, so likely exerts enough point pressure along its leading edge to punch through a fair thickness of armour (unless it's made of harder material than the shuriken)
• fired at such a rate that you're never going to be hit by just one of them but more likely dozens at once

Shuriken weapons, fluffwise, are damn scary.

[Eumerin]

One thing to keep in mind -

The Shurikan Catapult is the primary weapon of a unit of militia (i.e. Guardians) who only ever touch the weapons when they go to war. And the members of that militia manage to engage in shooting that's roughly equivalent to veteran human (i.e. Guard, not Marine) troops. Some of that inexperience is compensated for by the superior reflexes and agility of the Eldar race. But that'll only get you so far when dealing with weapons that the Guardians in question likely haven't touched in years (if not longer).

Based on that, it appears that the Shurikan Catapult is reliable (Guardians wouldn't have lots of experience maintaining their weapons in the event of a campaign that lasted more than a couple of days), easy to use, and fairly accurate. If it wasn't accurate, then the Guardians wouldn't be able to hit the broad side of a barn with it.

[FarseerMatt]

By the same token, Ork weapons are certainly easy to use, (surprisingly) reliable and possibly fairly accurate - it's just in this case the inability to hit the broad side of a barn is more the fault of the Ork than the gun.

[Eumerin]

By the same token, Ork weapons are certainly easy to use, (surprisingly) reliable and possibly fairly accurate - it's just in this case the inability to hit the broad side of a barn is more the fault of the Ork than the gun.

Is it?

There's literally no way to be certain. Yes, orks are horrible shots. That's a part of the fluff. But the problem is trying to seperate how much of that is the fault of the ork and how much is the fault of the shoota.

The fact that Eldar can pick up a weapon that they haven't touched in years (if ever) and perform quite respectably with it is a testament to the quality of that weapon. But the reverse (i.e. trying to determine the quality of a weapon used by lousy shooters who use their weapons pretty much all the time) doesn't automatically apply.

[OgreBattle]

When an eldar fires 1 shot in game, he's probably actually fired about one shot.

shuriken description says something like a hundred discs are fired in a burst though.


As for Dark Heresy and such, in those games the shuriken catapult has a super high rate of fire, but shorter range compared to a shoota.

[Idaan]

Is it?

There's literally no way to be certain. Yes, orks are horrible shots. That's a part of the fluff. But the problem is trying to seperate how much of that is the fault of the ork and how much is the fault of the shoota.

It's used by Armageddon Ork Hunters. They wouldn't throw aside their lasguns for a weapon that's worse than that.