The Heavy Stubber in the main rules weighs in at a massive 35Kg, and is supposed to be a main stay support weapon for a military squad. For starters heh weight of the weapon is way over the top (the standard aussie SAW (squad support weapon) weights only 9Kg and is belt fed), but lets compare the Hvy Stubber to a example autofrifle from the Dark heresy

Range ROF DMG Clip Pen Weight

Autogun 90m S/3/10 1D10+3 40 0 3.5Kg

Hvy Stubber 120 -/-/10 1D10+4 200 belt 3 35Kg

40 Clip

Even with the extra Penetration of the weapon it doesnt seem to do as much dmg as you would except and from a game mechanics point fo the view it seems grossly over weight for what it is, 10x the weight of a autogun, and if you load AP (man stopper rounds) rounds in the autogun it gets the penetartion of 3 and is Identical pretty much to the hvy Stubber at 1/10th the wieght with a mroe felxible Rate of Fire. My suggestion is that the weight of the Heavy stubber be drastically reduced to say at least 1/2 so lets say a weught of 17.5Kg. Otherwise from a purely game and "in game tactical" view I dont see why ANYONE would use a hvy stubber over a standard autogun (and I am ignoring the better autoguns in the Inquisitors handbook which have a average or better availability.like say Creed-9, the Vanahiem (which does MORE dmg then the stubber and weights only 8Kg and has a comparable rate of fire).

PS-Unless I missed somthing in the errata about the hvy stubber?

Abhoth said:

Well the heavy stubber is supposed to represent heavy machineguns, and thus the weight is not wrong at all. However, I agree the damage is sub-par, compared to other weapons especially the IH ones. Still my party found a good use for one and actually managed to take down several genestealers mostly thanks to the heavy stubber. Manstopper rounds also do the job, but are much more expensive per bullet.

As for why one would use a heavy stubber, you cannot ignore ammuntion, being able to fire 20 suppressive fire actions without having to reload. Other than that, nope.

The point of a heavy stubber is that it can get through armour better than basic weapons, at low levels it really makes the difference when taking on guys wearing full flak. Yes, compared to other heavy weapons it is not so good but then again its cheaper and more readily available, which is the case in the background where not only is it mounted on most IG tanks as a backup weapon it is also utilised by most gangs throughout the Imperium.

And yes there are many guns out there that out do the Heavy Stubber but you have to remember that your PCs when IC dont have a copy of the IH on them to refer to and say 'Heavy stubbers are crap, I want one of those', they do however know what is popular within the Imperium, available and works, so if a basic heavy weapon is needed, IC most people should go 'lets get the heavy stubber out and go frak those guys.'

The Vanahiem is a shotgun remember so not really a comparison, it also has a third of the range and a tiny fraction of the clip size.

You are overlooking range and clip size as to why it is used. the only comparible autogun for damage is the Armageddon but it has a clip of 15. A Squad Automatic Weapon would simply be a faster firing autogun with a larger clip but that doesnt really fit in to the DH rules as the autogun already has a FA rate of 10. The best way to do a SAW would to give it a special rule to do with suppresive fire but up its ammo consumtion beyond what is useful (15 probably) representing the vast spray of bullets majority of which will miss.

If you want a readily avalailable weapon that can lay down a good volume of fire over a long period of time then the Heavy Stubber really is the only option. In one game our heavy stubber wielding guardsman, bunkered down in a house we were defending held one entire side of the house against a musketter regiment as we delt with the other side.

Kaihlik

Friend of the Dork said:

Man-Stopper rounds for the Heavy Stubber are useless, the HS has a Penetration of 3 and the Man-Stopper Round adds penetration up to 3...

Aren't stub weapons supposed to represent inferior versions of auto weapons? In the original Rogue Trader game, they were basically 20th Century firearms (.45s, M60s, etc.) and were supposed to be the crud you used if you couldn't get decent weapons...

That said, the heavy stubber stats are pretty poor (if its supposed to perform like, say an old Vickers or Maxim, or possibly a lighter weapon such as an MG42 or Bren?), but really, i think you're better off accepting whats there unless you want to rethink and restat all the weapons available.

I'm presuming that there was some sort of design philosophy behind the original statting of the weaponry (??) so to keep everything in balance a re-stat on one has to neccesitate a restat to the others...doesn't it?

Kaihlik said:

My mistake I was thinking of the Spectre or the Creed-9 or the Alcher Mark IV. the clip size in all honesty does not make enough of a difference imho.

Our group takes the view that the heavy stubber is broadly equivalent to an M60 in modern terms. The only thing that we objected to was the weight. 35kg is over the top for a man-portable support weapon. I would imagine that most people plump for an armageddon with manstoppers and a fire selectors. Far more flexible.

S.K.

Luddite said:

Luddite said:

From what I understand the Heavy Stubber is just a big, nasty version of a autogun because of the new errata rules for man-stoppers (MAX Pen of 3 not +3), it means a autogun with a barrel clip and manstopper rans is superior to a Heavy Stubber that Weights 36 Kgs, I think the best thing to do is to reduce the weight of the Heavy Stubber to 15 kg or somthing like, as in real life SAW's are around that weight anyway.

Solomon Kane said:

Agree, which is why (and remember the M60 weights about 10kg in real life) I think the there shuold be updated errata which lowers the Heavy Stubber to 10kg.

10kg is a little too light, i think, given the Armageddon weighs 8.5kg or summat like that. 15-20kg would be about right.

But given the most likely char to tote about with one of these weapons is gonna be a guardsman... how many player groups actually have one/make use of one on a regular basis? its not like its concealable or anything!!

S.K.

Solomon Kane said:

yeah I agree 15Kg or so is probably more likely weight. Ironically I have 3 Guards man all wth heavy stubbers lol.

Well the Heavy Stubber is based off of the M2 HMG, that is what it is supposed to reperesent. Maybe you could up the damage by 1 but it doesn't seem to be much of a problem to me the way it is. Its meant to be a stationary weapon. Maybe d10+5 thought would give it enough of a punch to make it worthwhile.

Kaihlik

Kaihlik said:

Really?

Where'd you get that info from?

'Heavy stubber' has always (from 1st Ed 40k) seemed to be a 'generic' weapon type to me, originally being basically an M60 in 1st Ed., through to sort of '40k-ed up' MG34 in Necromunda, through to the M2 look-a-like on the current IG tank models...

In any case, it seems to be a bit of a problem for many people in the way DH has modelled its stats.

Personally, since DH is supposed to be an 'investigation' game, i can't see much point in acolytes carrying more than a decent pistol. A bolt pistol does more damage than a heavy stubber so why bother with the heavy artillery???

2 Reasons really ammunition costs and full auto. It costs 10 thrones for a full clip of Heavy Stubber ammo, it costs 16 thrones for a bolt shell, bullets are common, bolt rounds are rare.

I read it somewhere but I cant remember where, if you look at the picture, all of the current models, most of the current depictions of its operation and the weight which is only 3 kg off of the M2 its pretty obvious what they are currently meant to represent in the 40k background. I think 1 more damage is suitable to make it fit for people who feel it is underpowered.

Kaihlik

A TB3 guardman in Flak Armour will take an average of 5.5 + 3 = 8.5 - 4 (AP) - 3 (TB) = 1.5 Wounds from an autogun bullet. 4.5 if the bullet used is a Man-Stopper.

A TB3 guardman in Flak Armour will take an average of 5.5 + 4 = 9.5 - 1 (AP) - 3 (TB) = 5.5 Wounds from a heavy stubber.

It's basically a full auto hand cannon with man-stopper ammo, 200 rounds and really long range.

It's not underpowered.

For one it looses something because there is nothing stopping an autogun from fireing full auto everyturn (with a fire selector for 9 turns) which is just not acheivable with assault rifles today, they heat up too quickly, become inaccurate on full auto etc.

The Auto gun does not suffer these problems which obviously makes balancing a HMG against one difficult.

So assuming it's a lot lighter than it is a good way as you say.

But I think the main issue with the Heavy subber is it's short range. A heavy machine gun should have a way higher effective range than an autogun. While it doesn't seem that that would make much of difference if the range was 200m instead of 120m you could suppress up to 100m rather than 60m and being able to suppress at longer ranges makes it a lot harder to get nearer to it although it wouldn't help unless you were on open battlefields other than being more accurate at longer ranges.

Or add a new trait to Heavy stubbers: Sustain (for want of a better name)

A user of a weapon with this trait can elect to lay down 'sustained fire' this is treated as 'Suppressing fire' but is extended. The amount of ammunition used is tripled (if it ends early additional ammunition is wasted) and while it is in effect targets who enter the area after the initial round of suppressing fire are potentially hit by the firer who makes a BS -20 test (as per sustained fire). During this time the maximum of hits can be achieved is equal to twice the weapons clip size.
The sustained fire ends if the firer is forced to take any other action (including reactions) or the firers next turn starts.

Of course some other weapons should be capable of it if the heavy stubber is.

FYI, i was referring to manstopper bullets in Autoguns compared to regular bulllets in the heavy stubber, I know the errata nerfs the manstopper+penetration guns.

Although it's an interesting debate, and you could really make alot of rules to make the heavy stubber more realistic compared to historical weapons with special rules, I really don't think it's worth the hassle. I say, keep it as it is or maybe add +1 damage.

Even with the damage boost it's still inferior to other heavy weapons, which it should be, but at least it will be more useful and closer to a heavy machinegun and not a medium machinegun (which basically uses the same ammunition as hunting rifles).

I'd maybe introduce a special round for the heavy stubber: Armor Piercing SLAP. Essentially like Manstoppers but with other uses and reserved for heavy stubbers:

"The SLAP design incorporates a polymer sabot, which allows for the use of a tungsten penetrator projectile of a lesser diameter than the original bore. By using the casing of a large cartridge with a lightweight projectile, the velocity of the projectile is greatly increased.

SLAP rounds have been designed for use against lightly armored vehicles and aircraft"

Doesen't this seem to fit into the arsenal of the Imperial Guard? I'd give it Penetration 5 (not+5) and same cost as manstopper. Usuable by heavy stubbers and equivalent only.

Well, it sure looks like a .50 cal to me, at least on the GW models. It seems to serve in a similar capacity (turret mounted support weapon, tripod-mounted infantry heavy machine gun). That said, the damage does seem a bit low for a .50 cal -which, in real life, slays pretty much anyone unfortunate enough to wander in front of it. And the range is way low. A heavy machine gun can supress out to a kilometer if one is registered and has a decent position.

If one were to assume it represents a standard platoon support weapon, i.e. a 'medium' machine gun, the the m240 golf, or the new m240 bravo would serve as a good example of the species. In this case, the stats are perfectly adequate, although I'd agree its a bit heavy. The 240 only weighs about 13 kilos plus a further ten for the tripod. Even with the added weight of bulky 40k tech, the weight seems excessive. And Its certainly not supposed to be a weapon like the m249. It far too big for a fire-team support weapon, let alone a man portable assault weapon.

Although the other weight consideration would be ammo. Assuming the stubber fires something in the range of a 7.62 round, carrying enough ammo to supress for more than a round or two would be problematic for a normal man.

Ammunition is, per volume, far heavier than just about anything else you can carry into combat. If one allows that extra ammo accounts for a lot of the weapon s extra weight, then the stat makes some sense.

Luddite said:

Clearly, you've never achieved 7 degrees of success on full auto, either inflicting something stupid like 50+ points of damage in one attack or dropping four guys in one blow.

And then realizing you have 19 more bursts like that.

There is an added benefit too to the relative low damage per hit. You have several hits on different body locations that quickly rack up critical damage, doing all kinds of different things. One NPC survived (somehow) a massive attack with a heavy stubber, but it was a null point, since due to some interesting rolls one arm was useless, the other blown off.

Nullius said:

Nope, the ammunition weighs one tenth of the weapon in addition, thus those 200 bullets weighs 3-4 kg extra... hmmm better not think to much about it, the system does not stand up that well to realism.

Just to be clear my MAIN issue with the heavy stubber is the weight, I think its so overwiegh tis to be silly and immersion breaking for my group (and I sorta agree) so I guess im going with 15Kg for the weight of the gun.

Well i totally agree with you. At that weight it is by deffinition a heavy machingun. The stats suggest more of large rifle round than a 50 cal and that's fine.

But even a GPMG (for which I'd suggest 15kg with a bipod, 20 kg with a tripod) would be a lot lighter with a lot longer range (even considering that ranges in this system are never as long as they could be).

Abhoth said:

Remember that the Squad Automatic Weapons is a really light and compact machine gun compared to other machine guns throughout history. When we play Dark Heresy, the heavy stubber has always been more akin to a hybrid between an M60 and man-portable version of the M2 Browning machinegun.

They would weigh quite alot, but then again they are not intended to be used by only one gunner, but two. Only the real beefcakes of the group would be able to operate it alone. And the damage and penetration issue do make the heavy stubber a lot more intimidating than an autogun. That Pen 3 does make a real difference when facing armoured opponents. Also add to the fact that you can fire 20 consecutive full auto bursts without having to reload, it does outclass the autogun. Which mean that it has to have a downside as well, and that downside is the weight. Then again have you looked at some of the illustrations of weapons in the forty-first millenium? Somehow the Imperium of man seems to prefer a chunky and weighty design when building firearms rather than trying to make them as light and easy to carry as possible. (I mean even the standard stub revolvers look more like the revolver that Hellboy uses, rather than a conventional revolver). Perhaps there is a reason to this, like making sure that the structural integrity of the weapon can take a real beating by being reinforced with more metal, but at the same time making it heavier. But you'd have to ask the Adeptus Mechanicus about that.

Another reason for the weight might be game balancing issues. Meaning that a PC armed with a Heavy Stubber isn't supposed to be able to carry other weapons along with his primary weapon. But that's just a speculation.