ZillaPrime said:

I tend to disagree, Zilla. I mean, how many Imp. Guard do you think are going to take the time to Aim on Single-Shot when being rushed by a horde of eager Orks? That extra range means you don't have to let them get "in your face", after all.

But like I said, it was hastily put together, and will require some deal of polishing. My goal is simplicity as well, but without nerfing Lasweapons in comparison to SP and others. I know it's not perfect ... I don't know that there is a perfect solution. I'd just like to see Lasweapons take a more rightful place in DH. I haven't had a player yet who picked up a Lasweapon if something else was available.

"Las weapons that have "fluff" supporting full-auto modes gain full-auto modes (usually about double the burst rate). This leaves stubs and autos with a higher potential ROF in most cases and so possibly a few more hits on an extremely accurate/lucky shot, but the lasgun holds it's own due to longer combat endurance and lower odds of malfunction. In short: Gangers looking for fast, brutal shootouts pack solid guns. Professional thugs pack solid guns with fancy specialist ammo. Professional soldiers pack Lasguns.

In some cases I have also increased the Lasgun's penetration by one (they have a Pen 6 on the Tabletop. Good enough to ignore flimsy protection, but IG flak still has a chance to stop it)

Example:

Kantrael Pattern Lasgun (the ubiquitous Cadian IG rifle) Basic 100m 1/3/6 1D10+3 E Pen 1 Clip:60 Reliable

This plus the Mark III Lasgun are easily the most common rifles in the Imperium. They are in use for a reason.

Also of note: Lasguns in 40K have recoil. Pretty much all of the novels support this and the wargame makes no mention of recoil on ANY weapons. The common presence of massive armatures, bracing, support systems, massive hydraulic shocks and so on on the various models would tend to indicate that anything macho enough for 40K has recoil. Trooper Larkins (one of the snipers in the Gaunt's Ghosts series) even has a permanent bruise on his shoulder due to his routine use of hotshot packs in his Longlas. Adding "Accurate" to all lasguns renders sniper weapons obsolete except for a bit more range, so that is absolutely NOT a solution IMO."

Alright, while the inadvertent hijacking is going on, I'll comment on this solution.

First of all, in table top, Lasguns actually do not have any penetration value. They are Strength 3, AP 0.

Second even if it were justified by TT, +1 Penetration, and the Reliable trait/ammunition edge that is common but non-standard on Las weapons is hardly enough to compensate for many of the upgrades available for SPs in the form of things like Manstoppers and Fire Selectors (which more than eliminate the ammo and penetration advantages). The Reliability edge of Lasguns in the meanwhile is defeated by simply upgrading the quality of an SP weapon by one step, or purchasing something like the Armaggedon (an _excellent_ starter SP weapon). While this incurs additional expense, by and large the SP weapon will remain highly affordable.

That said, I do agree that awarding all Lasers the Accurate quality is a bit much for the reasons you've mentioned, and doubly so if they're to get an accuracy bonus _in addition_.

Again, I personally feel the best solution overall is to grant a limited accuracy bonus that decreases as higher fire rates are selected (partially compensates for relative lack of customizability), variable charge settings (compensates for special ammo) with higher power and penetration at the cost of greater charge use and lower reliability, and grant choice Las weapons Full-Auto capabilities (to establish Full-Auto parity).

Lastly, while Lasguns in 40k may have recoil, an accuracy bonus is justified by the fact that laser beams travel at the speed of light, go exactly where you fire, and are essentially unaffected by wind and gravity.

Lasers said:

Here's the problem. You're ignoring the difference in scale - the benefits of a lasgun over an autogun vary based on scale.

For an individual mercenary or lone combatant type, an autogun is superior to a lasgun - rate of fire and versatility outweigh ammunition capacity and reliability, particularly if you can afford a higher-quality weapon.

But when you have to equip an army of hundreds or thousands... the lasgun comes out on top.

Assuming a force of 100 Guardsmen, and over thirty days of conflict, an average of 100 shots is fired every day.

If those Guardsmen are armed with Autoguns, then that represents 3.33 magazines a day, or 100 magazines in total. This costs 150 Thrones per soldier (plus the 100 Thrones for the gun), and weighs 38.5 kilos, again per soldier. For all 100 men to be equipped identically, it costs 25,000 Thrones and takes up 3,850 kilos of cargo capacity, just for basic firearms. Even if you fork out extra for ammo selectors, you'll still use the same amount of ammunition - all you've saved is time spent reloading.

On the other hand, if those Guardsmen are equipped with Lasguns, then 100 shots is 2 charge packs a day. Assuming a third and fourth charge pack as spares (to account for high-usage days), and that each charge pack takes a few hours to recharge (so that every soldier can reuse at least two packs a day), it costs 150 Thrones per soldier including the weapon (75 Thrones for the Lasgun, 15 Thrones each for the Charge Packs) and weighs 5.6 kilos, again per soldier. For all 100 men to be equipped identically, it costs 15,000 Thrones and takes up 560 kilos of cargo space.

Better yet, while every thirty days of conflict the Autogun-equipped men face, it costs a further 150 Thrones (and 3,500 kilos of cargo space) to supply them with ammunition, it costs essentially nothing extra to keep the Lasgun-equipped men equipped - so long as they've got chargers (which are fitted inside every Chimera as standard, for example) or even just sunlight (I'm avoiding the 'recharge in fire' trick, as it damages the charge packs and thus will necessitate replacements), those same charge packs will continue to function in those Lasguns for longer then their owner is likely to survive. The difference grows bigger with longer and longer conflicts.

The reliability issue is a sidenote here, as is the versatility. It would cost a small fortune to equip a large army with specialist ammunition for Autoguns, or to buy good-quality Autoguns for them, so that sort of thing gets left for well-supplied elite units, wealthy mercenary groups, etc. Similarly, an Autogun, with a higher rate of fire, is likely to go through more shots in a given period than a lasgun, adding wastage to the calculations above, which further increases the chance of jamming (7% chance per full auto burst as opposed to 5% for single shot, compared to 0.7% chance per semi-auto burst and 0.5% per single shot for a lasgun).

Simply put, it's easier and cheaper to equip armies with Lasguns and a few charge packs each, than to stuff supply ships with all the bullets needed to keep those armies operational.

Individual performance is far less of a deciding factor when you're trying to equip thousands of men per regiment. It is, amongst other reasons, why Stormtroopers use Hellguns (maintenance and reliability are bigger factors for them, though they can still be recharged which prevents the issue of long-term sustainability) and why the Adeptus Astartes and the Orders Militant of the Adepta Sororitas use bolters (they can afford the expense and difficulty of such powerful, costly weapons, due to lack of numbers and generally shorter missions).

Sure, if equipping an army, the logistics and expense involved make the Lasgun superior, but that is far beyond the scale of DH (nearly always anyways). Because this is true, and because the fluff actually allows for and justifies several improvements to their RAW incarnations, Lasguns (indeed las weapons in general) should be brought up to par with their SP counterparts so that they constitute an interesting choice, rather than being summarily disregarded.

Lasers said:

Thing is, the logistics of equipping an army are what makes the Lasgun the standard weapon of the Imperial Guard; that is the primary reason they're used. The point being that, if you can afford the time and expense involved in obtaining and using something flashier, then you do so. The lasgun isn't preferred because it's a better gun, it's preferred because it can be produced in vast quantities extremely cheaply and with little stress upon supply chains. It's simple, functional, reliable and easy to keep charged and useful... but if you're not getting stuck in situations where you have to scrounge for every last throne and ammunition is in limited supply, then there are better options, quite deliberately.

As for the background justifying it... there's enough background floating around, from a wide range of authors and sources, and (especially in the case of the novels) each presenting a different perspective on how things 'should' be, that you can justify pretty much anything.

"Thing is, the logistics of equipping an army are what makes the Lasgun the standard weapon of the Imperial Guard; that is the primary reason they're used. The point being that, if you can afford the time and expense involved in obtaining and using something flashier, then you do so. The lasgun isn't preferred because it's a better gun, it's preferred because it can be produced in vast quantities extremely cheaply and with little stress upon supply chains. It's simple, functional, reliable and easy to keep charged and useful... but if you're not getting stuck in situations where you have to scrounge for every last throne and ammunition is in limited supply, then there are better options, quite deliberately.

As for the background justifying it... there's enough background floating around, from a wide range of authors and sources, and (especially in the case of the novels) each presenting a different perspective on how things 'should' be, that you can justify pretty much anything."

I'm aware of and acknowledge the primary reasons why the Lasgun is preferred by the IG. This is not in dispute. What I am saying is that with respect to DH, essentially the entire roster of basic Las weaponry, not just the standard armament of the guard, is by and large blatantly inferior to their SP counterparts despite an abundance of fluff (variable charge settings and full-auto capabilities are not what I would describe as inconsistent properties of Lasguns) that actually enables parity, which is simply objectionable design, and should be amended. In short, there is no sound justification for FFG/BI making them so contemptible, and largely uninteresting/non-viable in contrast to alternate options; in fact there is actually a wealth of reasons for setting them on roughly even mechanical footing with Autoguns.

Lasers said:

That was the entire point of my earlier post. Rather than rewriting the game or adding several pages of "how to make using a lasgun slow down gameplay" I posted an example of how I have dealt with this situation in my game. I made the weapons fit the fluff without going overboard and making other weapons look like crap. Almost every single Black Library book has lasguns getting kicked over to full auto during dramatic scenes. There are also assorted references (usually disparaging commentary from one of the characters) to solid projectile weapons being "inferior crap" being used by amateur warriors and primitive screwheads. It is true that the last 2 IG codexes have removed the AP value of lasguns, but historically they have had a moderate penetration factor. Back in 2nd edition the lasgun had a -1 save modifier... The SAME as a boltgun! So since in DH the boltgun has a Pen4 (sufficient to ignore flak, which is about right) it did not seem that big a stretch to give the lasgun a mighty Pen1. The game already has SP PISTOLS that can top this. Second was the addition of an autofire mode: Good enough to be useful but also a bit slower than a SP gun doing the same. This keeps up the "lasguns last longer" theme and allows the bullet-slinger the chance to really light something up on those rare "Holy crap I just got 8 degrees of success on my autogun attack!" moments without the lasgunner stealing ALL their thunder. The book is burried in a box somewhere but I seem to recall in 3rd ed. the lasgun had AP6. Just enough to ignore the rather questionable "armour" worn by regular orks and gretchin... And hey, if you are willing to cut your ammo in half you can load your lasgun with overchage packs and kick your weapon up to Pen2: This is exactly half of a "generic, non-Astartes" boltgun (AP5) so again, it seems about right.

Nice thing about this being under Houserules: You can use it or ignore it as you see fit. Just offering my "how I made lasguns not suck without making other guns obsolete in the process" solution to the stack. I suspect it will be more popular than crafting a whole new "Codex: Lasgun" for DH gameplay since the game mechanics are designed to be fast and fluid. Trying to avoid lasguns from causing situations like the ban on mass-quantities of cluster-munitions in Battletech tournaments: "Oh crap, Bob just hit with 4 LB20-X Autocannons and 30 SRMs! Lunchbreak everybody!"

"That was the entire point of my earlier post. Rather than rewriting the game or adding several pages of "how to make using a lasgun slow down gameplay" I posted an example of how I have dealt with this situation in my game. I made the weapons fit the fluff without going overboard and making other weapons look like crap. Almost every single Black Library book has lasguns getting kicked over to full auto during dramatic scenes. There are also assorted references (usually disparaging commentary from one of the characters) to solid projectile weapons being "inferior crap" being used by amateur warriors and primitive screwheads. It is true that the last 2 IG codexes have removed the AP value of lasguns, but historically they have had a moderate penetration factor. Back in 2nd edition the lasgun had a -1 save modifier... The SAME as a boltgun! So since in DH the boltgun has a Pen4 (sufficient to ignore flak, which is about right) it did not seem that big a stretch to give the lasgun a mighty Pen1. The game already has SP PISTOLS that can top this. Second was the addition of an autofire mode: Good enough to be useful but also a bit slower than a SP gun doing the same. This keeps up the "lasguns last longer" theme and allows the bullet-slinger the chance to really light something up on those rare "Holy crap I just got 8 degrees of success on my autogun attack!" moments without the lasgunner stealing ALL their thunder. The book is burried in a box somewhere but I seem to recall in 3rd ed. the lasgun had AP6. Just enough to ignore the rather questionable "armour" worn by regular orks and gretchin... And hey, if you are willing to cut your ammo in half you can load your lasgun with overchage packs and kick your weapon up to Pen2: This is exactly half of a "generic, non-Astartes" boltgun (AP5) so again, it seems about right.

Nice thing about this being under Houserules: You can use it or ignore it as you see fit. Just offering my "how I made lasguns not suck without making other guns obsolete in the process" solution to the stack. I suspect it will be more popular than crafting a whole new "Codex: Lasgun" for DH gameplay since the game mechanics are designed to be fast and fluid. Trying to avoid lasguns from causing situations like the ban on mass-quantities of cluster-munitions in Battletech tournaments: "Oh crap, Bob just hit with 4 LB20-X Autocannons and 30 SRMs! Lunchbreak everybody!""

See, I find it funny that you are attempting to (erroneously) argue that those rules (I assume you are referring to the Competitive Las Weapons house rules) 'rewrite' or necessarily 'slow the game down', when I've personally used them, and can tell you first hand that they do not. The only time they have ever manage to do the latter is when I've attempted to calculate the precise effects of thick smoke/fog on the damage of Las weaponry. In these cases I have found it better to simply estimate. Other than that, the Las weapon ruleset works superbly, gives the players many more options which they both enjoy, and have used to creatively address a number of issues and obstacles. In the meanwhile, Autoguns generally retain a respectable edge with respect to pure killing prowess and thus are not made obsolete, so I find your assessment without justification and simply wrong.

Now, concerning Armour Penetration; the current fluff and stating of the Lasgun for the past two codexes designates it as AP0, so it is AP0; I do not think ancient stats and codexes are valid as a premise for improvement, while the argument that certain SP Pistols feature AP (and thus so should Lasguns) is irrelevant since those that do are essentially handcannons. Further, I do not find that Pen 1 actually closes the gap between Las and SP weapons in any meaningful way. So you've increased the average damage by 1 versus armoured opponents? The Autogun user can do it by as much as 3 without impacting his ammo capacity, and his munitions are probably paid for by the big I, while the Armaggedon starts out with a bonus point of damage. In RT, the discrepancy gets even worse due to the addition of even more and better custom munitions. At best, the penetration increase, assuming it is used in conjunction with Full Auto as you have recommended, provides only a very temporary and easily surmounted edge.

Now does Full Auto close the game? Mostly certainly, it is something also supported with the fluff, and something I completely support.

In all, an accuracy bonus (not the Accurate Quality), Full Auto, and variable power settings are all either strongly fluff or science supported, and help close the gap between Las and Autoguns in a way that is meaningful and lasting, thus achieving a true, albeit rough overall parity with minimal complexity.

If I could just get back to the original post.

The only thing I agree with is (as you say the move rule is already in RT):

Semi-Auto now hits an additional time per degree of success up to the maximum number of shots fired.

Or you could have FA score additional hits at a rate of 1 per 2 degrees of success. But thats a bit rubbish.

I don't like that you don't get to hit bonus's (or only at short range for FA). That's only really nerfing heavy weapons seeing as basic auto weapons will also have a single shot setting, and at low levels bonus to hit are the most important thing. With a sight SS is already more accurate than SA. And you can't tell me that a trained person is not going to increase their chances of hitting by firing more than one bullet at anything but the farthest ranges.

"I don't like that you don't get to hit bonus's (or only at short range for FA). That's only really nerfing heavy weapons seeing as basic auto weapons will also have a single shot setting, and at low levels bonus to hit are the most important thing. With a sight SS is already more accurate than SA. And you can't tell me that a trained person is not going to increase their chances of hitting by firing more than one bullet at anything but the farthest ranges."

You don't burst because it's more accurate, you burst because it's a good tradeoff between accuracy and fire power. If you want accuracy, you fire individual shots on semi-auto (real semi-auto), although I think it's a little silly that the Laser Sight does not benefit burst fire/Semi-Auto (it really should).

As for Heavy Weapons, while they are nerfed somewhat, the loss of power is not especially meaningful. They have ridiculous ranges, which means that in most cases they will have at least the close range bonus (+20) to hit. In the meanwhile, they are by far the deadliest manportable weapons in the game, and many do have single shot settings (Autocannon, Multmelta, Lascannon, etc...).

You don't burst because it's more accurate, you burst because it's a good tradeoff between accuracy and fire power. If you want accuracy, you fire individual shots on semi-auto (real semi-auto)...

What real semi auto?

As for Heavy Weapons, while they are nerfed somewhat, the loss of power is not especially meaningful. They have ridiculous ranges, which means that in most cases they will have at least the close range bonus (+20) to hit. In the meanwhile, they are by far the deadliest manportable weapons in the game, and many do have single shot settings (Autocannon, Multmelta, Lascannon, etc...).

The most numerous heavy weapons are going to be heavy stubbers and heavy bolters which would be good up to 60m.

More bullets = more chances to hit. You need a lot of accuracy to make up for that.

"What real semi auto? "

As in, each individual trigger pull is reciprocated by a shot; the real definition of Semi-Auto action.

"The most numerous heavy weapons are going to be heavy stubbers and heavy bolters which would be good up to 60m.

More bullets = more chances to hit. You need a lot of accuracy to make up for that. "

More bullets may equal more chances to hit, but your way of looking at it is far too simplistic. The problem with full-auto for most weapons is that the longer it goes on, the exponentially less likely your chances are to hit, because recoil and muscle shock will completely destroy your accuracy. Say a single bullet had a 50% chance to hit versus a target at a moderate distance, and now you're firing a 10 shot burst resulting in lots of confounding recoil. Suddenly that 50% chance is now more of a 3% chance per bullet. Granted, this is not true of specific heavier weapons that are explicitly designed to absorb recoil, but for virtually every assault rifle and lighter weapon out there, it most certainly is save at the very closest ranges (this was repeatedly demonstrated in Vietnam and lead to the M16A2 design with a burst limiter). Again, this is why standard military doctrine in most cases when it comes to the use of such weapons is to commit to burst fire rather than spray and pray when the intent is to kill (as opposed to suppress).

As for Heavy weaponry, as much as I agree that they (when properly braced) wouldn't be affected by recoil to nearly the same extent, for the sake of mechanical balance and to a lesser extent simplicity, I feel it's best they be treated similarly. Believe me, Heavy weapons do _ not _ need to be made more powerful.

As in, each individual trigger pull is reciprocated by a shot; the real definition of Semi-Auto action.

That's how i've been playing it and I don't remember it being descibed anywhere else.

Granted, this is not true of specific heavier weapons that are explicitly designed to absorb recoil, but for virtually every assault rifle and lighter weapon out there...

The current rules do seem to be ignoring the downsides of but I have that down to fairly advanced weapons + same rules for all weapons. To be honest if the number of successes needed for additional hits were the same for both SA and FA then the +10 bonus to hit for x3 ammo usage would actually be a choice.

As for Heavy weaponry, as much as I agree that they (when properly braced) wouldn't be affected by recoil to nearly the same extent, for the sake of mechanical balance and to a lesser extent simplicity, I feel it's best they be treated similarly.

I think that's what the original designers thought.

Believe me, Heavy weapons do _ not _ need to be made more powerful.

There's already been several descussions about weather the Heavy Stubber is any good at all on these forums (which I think led them to puttting it up to +5 damage in RT).

"That's how i've been playing it and I don't remember it being descibed anywhere else."

FFG seems to have confused true Semi-Auto with burst fire as per its entry on page 191.

"The current rules do seem to be ignoring the downsides of but I have that down to fairly advanced weapons + same rules for all weapons. To be honest if the number of successes needed for additional hits were the same for both SA and FA then the +10 bonus to hit for x3 ammo usage would actually be a choice."

I don't buy the advanced design argument because there is no mention of this sort of thing anywhere, fluff or otherwise, and even lower grade automatic firearms enjoy bonuses to hit from Semi and Full-Auto alike, besides the unlikelihood of the tech involved (making Full-Auto accurate enough that it's preferred to hit at range rather than a single shot). I might understand if these bonuses existed for good quality or better weapons, but they're universal!

Also, I don't think Semi-Auto with merely the same degrees of success would be competitive with Full-Auto. A +10 difference in BS and more hit chances means the SA mode still gets overlooked in a majority of cases, especially given the fact that the Fire Selector largely negates ammo conservation as a problem for SP/Bolt weapons.

I think that's what the original designers thought.

That because Heavy Weapons should be treated in one way, all ranged weapons should be treated in the same way for the sake of simplicity and balance? Maybe, but I think it's better to default to everything being weaker, as I've described it, than everything being stronger. To be entirely honest though, I think the designers were under the mistaken impression that more bullet spam = more likely to hit, which is definitely not true barring some insanely advanced recoil absorbent tech (outside of Heavy weapons) that the 40k fluff has made no mention of.

"There's already been several descussions about weather the Heavy Stubber is any good at all on these forums (which I think led them to puttting it up to +5 damage in RT). "

The Heavy Stubber is basically bottom of the barrel as far as Heavy Weapons go. There's that, then there's Autocannons, Assault Cannons and the like, which are absurdly powerful.

FFG seems to have confused true Semi-Auto with burst fire as per its entry on page 191.

"Semi-Auto Burst (Full Action)"

LoL. What's more likely, that they used the phrase 'Burst' rather than a slightly less amibiguous synonym, like volley, barrage, salvo, etc, or they were typing words like Semi-Auto with out knowing what it means?

I don't buy the advanced design argument because there is no mention of this sort of thing anywhere, fluff or otherwise...

Other than, i don't know, 40 thousand years into the future? Also:

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Autogun

Caseless ammo, synthetic rounds?

...Fire Selector largely negates ammo conservation as a problem for SP/Bolt weapons.

No it just stops the reload time, you still carry the weight and pay for the ammo.

The Heavy Stubber is basically bottom of the barrel as far as Heavy Weapons go. There's that, then there's Autocannons, Assault Cannons and the like, which are absurdly powerful.

Despite your protestations that Lasguns NEED to be = autoguns but heavy stubbers can be worse than a autogun with manstoppers? And what's absurd about the best anti-heavy infantry weapons in the game being deadly absolutly deadly.

Basically your rules seemed cool but it doesn't balance. Decent automatic weapons are huge advantage in all but the farthest shots and even then it's a well aimed shot with good sights not the -30 difference between auto firing and an unaimed snap shot which your rules currently amount to.

"LoL. What's more likely, that they used the phrase 'Burst' rather than a slightly less amibiguous synonym, like volley, barrage, salvo, etc, or they were typing words like Semi-Auto with out knowing what it means?"

To be honest? I've got to go with the latter, because the word burst is used completely incorrectly, and again appears in the description itself. Further, if that _wasn't_ the case, why on earth would different weapons have different rates of Semi-Auto fire? That doesn't make sense. Semi-Auto by definition shoots as fast as you can tap the trigger.

"Other than, i don't know, 40 thousand years into the future? Also:

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Autogun

Caseless ammo, synthetic rounds?"

40 thousand years into the future where a great deal of tech from man's golden age has been lost, resulting in a thouroughly patchwork and inconsistent levels of technology. I also do not see the super-advanced recoil eliminating tech. Furthermore this does not address substandard junk guns benefitting from the Semi and Full-Auto rules as they do.

"No it just stops the reload time, you still carry the weight and pay for the ammo."

Ammo is cheap and light, while your ammo capacity is tripled. Where's the _real_ down side?

"Despite your protestations that Lasguns NEED to be = autoguns but heavy stubbers can be worse than a autogun with manstoppers? And what's absurd about the best anti-heavy infantry weapons in the game being deadly absolutly deadly."

To be at the bottom of the barrel with respect to Heavy weapons is to be an objectively strong weapon amongst the deadliest weapons in the game (btw, the Heavy Stubber would still generally be a deadlier weapon than a Manstopper loaded Autogun). Further, _why_ on earth would you compound the already overwhelming power of the best weapons as a design decision?

"Basically your rules seemed cool but it doesn't balance. Decent automatic weapons are huge advantage in all but the farthest shots and even then it's a well aimed shot with good sights not the -30 difference between auto firing and an unaimed snap shot which your rules currently amount to."

How do they not balance? Most combat takes place at short range, thus; in exchange for a Half Action of bracing, Full Auto becomes every bit the killer it was prior to my rules with _both_ a +20 bonus to hit, and additional hits per degree of success. Further, it can be used unbraced at short range without any effective penalties. The ability to hit multiple times is certainly competitive with a somewhat higher chance of hitting once. To illustrate my point, here is a statistical comparison, assuming an 1d10+3 damage (average 8.5) Autogun, and BS 40 at the most common ranges:

Close Range:

• Single Shot (Half Action Aim): 8.5 * (0.4 + 0.2) = 5.1 Expected Average Damage
• Singe Shot (Half Action Aim, Laser Sight): 8.5 * (0.4 + 0.1 + 0.1 + 0.1) = 5.95
• Semi-Auto: (8.5 * 0.1) +( 8.5 * 2 * 0.1) + (8.5 * 3 * (0.2 + 0.1)) = 10.2
• Full-Auto (Unbraced): (8.5 * 0.1) + (8.5 * 2 * 0.1) + (8.5 * 3 * 0.1) + (8.5 * 4 * 0.1) = 8.5
• Full-Auto (Braced): (8.5 * 0.1) + (8.5 * 2 * 0.1) + (8.5 * 3 * 0.1) + (8.5 * 4 * 0.1) + (8.5 * 5 * 0.1) + (8.5 * 6 * 0.1) = 17.85

Medium Range:

• Single Shot (Half Action Aim): 8.5 * (0.4 + 0.1) = 4.25
• Semi-Auto: (8.5 * 0.1) +( 8.5 * 2 * 0.1) + (8.5 * 3 * 0.2) = 7.65
• Full-Auto (Unbraced): (8.5 * 0.1) + (8.5 * 2 * 0.1) = 2.55
• Full-Auto (Braced): (8.5 * 0.1) + (8.5 * 2 * 0.1) + (8.5 * 3 * 0.1) + (8.5 * 4 * 0.1) = 8.5

Long Range:

• Single Shot (Half Action Aim): 8.5 * (0.4) = 3.4
• Semi-Auto: (8.5 * 0.1) +( 8.5 * 2 * 0.1) + (8.5 * 3 * 0.1) = 5.1
• Full-Auto (Unbraced): Automatic miss.
• Full-Auto (Braced): (8.5 * 0.1) + (8.5 * 2 * 0.1) = 2.55

As you can see, out to Medium Range for a BS 40 character, Braced Full-Auto remains an obvious powerhouse, and its strength only increases as the user's BS increases. While Semi-Auto seems clearly superior to Single Shot at first glance, it should be noted that it requires a mandatory Full Action, whereas Single Shot has more flexibility, and can be paired with a move or other action instead of an aim. Single Shot also synergizes with the Accurate Quality for a substantially higher Average damage from bonus accuracy and damage, and synergizes with sights such as the Telescopic, which make it useful in many circumstances Semi and Full Auto modes would not.

In our campaign we tried changing the bonus for semi and full auto, so full auto has +10 and semi auto has +20. This means that it is first at the third bullet that full auto is superior to semi auto.

And in our campaign the manstopper bullets are rare and expensive to come by so it leaves plenty of situations where semi is preferred to full auto.

We have talked about if this change is enough to bring balance to the game, but so far it works out for us.

It should be noted that we have also modified aimed single shot to be hard to dodge, -10 per degree of success. So aimed single shots are attractive too!

The Autogun has S/3/10. Pretty common weapon. You can't really fire just 5-6 bullets with it, as the Full Auto Bonuses require you to fire the full 10 bullets (otherwise you will be assumed to be firing in either Single Shot or Semi-auto Mode).

These are the House Rules for Full Auto Weapons we use when playing:

• No bonuses for Mighty Shot or Crack Shot beyond Point Blank range, when firing a weapon on Full Auto.
• The required BS Test to see if additional RF damage is caused is halved, reducing the chance of causing significant amount of additional RF damage dramatically.
• We also use the RT rule for Semi-Auto weapons, which allows for some movement at the same time.

These House Rules are pretty simple to use and remember, and they help to balance out some of the issues with Full Auto vs. Semi Auto nicely.

We look at Full-Auto as being very "sloppy" and unprofessinal, and something which only the less skillfull usually prefers to do. It is still dangerous though, but not overly so vs. Tough and armoured opponents (at least not without a proper heavy weapon).

In our game we still give +10 to hit for semi-auto and +20 to hit for full-auto (except when you move your Ag-bonus as in RT), but for semi-auto fire you get an extra hit for every DoS and for full-auto fire you get an extra hit for every 2 DoS IF a single target is shot at. But if you shot at a group of targets you get an extra hit for every 2 DoS in case of semi-auto fire and you get an extra hit (allocated throughout the group) for every DoS in case of full-auto fire. Works fine with us, and every option is used from time to time (with semi-auto the most used option (as it should be imho)).

I think Semi-Auto should be the most comon way to go as well, especially as the Acolytes get more "professional". I'm also toying with the idea to make the BS Test for RF a flat 25%. I can't really see the logic that you claim any kind of bonuses that you would get for spending a little time to line up your shot. The +20 to BS for Full auto is more than enought already.

Luthor Harkon said:

First off, any talk of current and near-future weapons tech doesn't really belong anywhere near WH40K discussions.

Its pretty clear that the inspiration for most WH40K base line combat troopers is WW2 soldiers. Everything from basic Imperial Guard to Eldar Guardians or Tyranid Termagants is pretty obviously just a variation on the WW2 rifleman. This inspiration is also reflected in the tech used by every WH40K army...tech that necessitates close ranged, bloody and brutal warfare. Modern real-world armies have been steadily evolving away from large formations and massive numbers. Infantry is still very necessary, but a mechanized platoon of 2010 carries more firepower, has more range and greater flexibility then WW2 rifle companies.

In short, modern and near-future developments do not really belong in the WH40K world. If that's the kind of game you wish to play you should really take a look at Shadowrun, Cyber Punk or Heavy Gear. Those games more closely embody the near-future evolution of one man armies.

As concerns las weapons, the fluff is pretty clear that they aren't true laser weapons, in accordance with real world physics. They have recoil. They also have actual impact velocity (the books are rife with people getting knocked down or tossed back from las fire hits). These things would seem to indicate that las weapons somehow manage to give the las bolts they fire some of the physical characteristics of matter...this would also explain why things like smoke, gas or reflective armor aren't generally considered las weapon counters. Las bolts are also visible, somewhat like the blasters in Star Wars are visible or bullets are visible...again something that lasers as we know them are not.

I don't care how or even if its possibly or what pseudo technical magi-science you choose to explain it away with. The bottom line is still that mechanically las weapons and SP weapons really aren't all that different...and in the interests of keeping the game light weight I for one am pretty happy with the current system. If a boost is needed, you could always just make the Overcharge Pack a baseline function of the las weapon, similar to the fire selector function on an auto-gun. IE you choose to boost the power output (Gaunts Ghosts books already has the guardsmen doing this) at the expense of ammo efficiency. The overcharge pack Larkin uses could then be one step further up and offer the equivalent of manstopper rounds. You could even balance it by saying that overcharge packs are non-rechargeable and price them accordingly.

To be on topic, I think that Chaplain Uziel's house rules are good changes. They're easy to remember and they address some of the basic balance issues with semi-auto versus full auto. In my game I also allow the use of red dot laser sights with semi auto bursts, since my own experience with assault rifles is that a 3 round burst isn't much different from single shot. Oh sure the last shot is usually a bit off from the first, but having a red dot laser sight at short-to-medium ranges would still be a boon and help considerably in rapid and accurate target acquisition.

In my games this has made semi-auto a much more viable alternative to full-auto, which means most fire fights are dominated by short, controlled but still lethal bursts...which fits with my real world experience so I'm happy. Full-auto generally is reserved for suppressive fire, meaning its good to have for tactical reasons, but isn't generally the first choice for killing things.

I use the houserule that Las weapons Halve their negative BS penalties due to range. Removing any negative range modifiers completly I think would be going a bit far, as it is always harder to "aim" properly at a target that appear to be much smaller in the distance than one that is much closer., even though compared to a bullet, which will drop 9.8m towards the ground (assuming similar gravity to Terra) every second the bullet is in flight.

Reducing any penalties by half, does in my opinion support the idea as to why this is the weapon of choice in the Imperial Guard (in addition to reliability and a very good ammo count, etc), since it allows their soldiers to be reasonably accurate even at longer ranges (I am assuming that there are precious few Marksmen to be found among the "common Soldiers" of the IG.

Also, in regards to what Bladehate sais above, I think he is absolutly right when WW2 is the inspiration for typical warfare in the 40k universe. "Hight tech" weaponry, comaparble to that which we now start seeing in the likes of the Future Weapons series on discovery, are not the pre-stage to common weapons in 40K the way I see it, but rather representing highly advanced adeptus Mechanicus weapons or Advanced Xeno Weaponry.

Melee combat would be an outdated form of combat if we are assuming that we take the weapons from today, and add 38,000 years of development on top of that. Personally that is one of the reasons why I love 40k. It is not too advanced to understand for new players (easy to relate to from a futuristic game perspective), and for those who have played a lot of various furure RPG's, you know that Melee is rarely an option you would go for. I love the idea that if your're going to take down a tough opponent, it is time to drop your Autopistol, and bringh forth the Chain-Axe. In my mind, it simply makes a game A LOT more enjoyable.

Also, as a comment on the recoil of lasguns. I can't remember that on the spot, but Bladehate might very well be right (probably is). He is right that people are described as being knocked back from lasgun shots and similar as well, but I always imagined that that was because the laser making the armour it hit to react and cause what is essentially a miniature explotion, and not from the light itself having a mass as it were. I am not entirely sure, but I think that was what it looked like in the Dawn of War game when lasguns hit. Still, the result is the same, and I am not saying that he is wrong here either. Just my thoughts on the matter. It would feel like an small impact to a soldier anyway.

Long thread and lots of discussions that does not seem to actually be about semi vs full-auto, so I must admit I haven't read it all. But has anyone tried rules along the following lines?

Full-auto: When using full-auto, the character looses his reaction for the round. (Similar to how an all out attack prevents your from defending yourself).

That might actually work. Have you game tested this yourself Honn? Haven't spendt long considering it yet, but at first glance it seems like it might be a valid option. It will sure force people to actually use Semi-auto fire more, and also the use of cover would be increasingly important for those with Full-auto weapons.

Honn said: