Hey guys, what do you think about marines using autocannons?? I havent seen any rules for them, besides the Dreads. Do you think it would be alright to let a marine take one?

Ahh the good old days....

I used to call scouts an excuse to infiltrate an autocannon. Long story short, the 3rd ed codex allowed Scouts to take autocannons... In fact, I just suggested them to our Devastator. according to the conversion chart, they are 15 Req. and will do unspeakable things to a Boss.

Autocannon on single shot makes an improvised anti-material rifle.

A homebrewed autocannon that only fires single shot with Accurate makes for a deadly anti-material rifle.

Meh, accurate on an autocannon is a waste. sure the +10 BS is NICE, but it's not a gamechanger

True. But if the new sniper rifle can be Heavy and it's supposed to get the damage bonus, then perhaps the converted autocannon could too. Personally, I'd rather just keep the basic model with S/2/5.

WOAH WOAH WOAH, THE ULTRA GETS THE DAMAGE BONUS?

Space Marines have not autocannons in Devastator squads since 2nd edition. Though they can have lascannons and Guard lascannons and autocannons are about the same size. Also Chaos Space Marine Havoc squads can have Autocannons.

I would have no problem with Deathwatch with Autocannons. Similar to Dreadnought Autocannons but not twin linked and 20 ammo not 200.

The game has rules for requisitioning things from the DH/RT, and they are in the Inquisitor's HB, they fall in the 9-4 Req. range.

Fenrisnorth said:

Technically the rule for accurate says "Accurate Basic Weapon," so unless the Ultra specifically states it benefits from that portion of the accurate quality, no.

But the +10BS cuts your called shot penalty in half. Often times it's not about a single given bonus, be it +10 or +20, it's about stacking them together to get something nice and meaty.

To the subject of toting around autocannons, I don't see why not. They're classified (IIRC) as a mounted only weapon, so I'd expect them to be on Terminators or require bracing against some kind of terrain to be used without penalty or to use with autofire (bulging arms wouldn't help if you ask me). I'd also be in the ammo limit in the 20 range.

But they aren't mounted in the TT, they are on as many tripods and shoulder mounted as on vehicles.

If the Ultra didn't get the damage bonus from being Accurate it would be a slightly better Lasgun, and a much worse Bolter. Felling is generally weaker than Pen 5, and Toxic is certainly weaker than 1d10+3 damage.

And it doesn't so it does suck, hard. The only upside is it isn't Exotic to Astartes

Evilgm said:

Can't argue with the fact the damage from it being a heavy weapon does seem off, especially since the base sniper rifle does 1d10 and gains the accurate damage bonnus. But Felling is a scaling version of penetration, and is more potent the tougher the opponent is. A marine with 4N toughness only loses 4 from his soak, but a marine with 5N toughness loses 5 from his soak. And Toxic is also scaling- I'll admit you have to do damage to get the toxic quality but remember once you do take toxic damage your toughness and armor doesn't matter, you just take damage. So the more damage your gun does, the more damning toxic becomes.

All said and done, the damage feels straight misprinted given the description and weapon classification (heavy, really?).

Fenrisnorth said:

In TT, no, I think you're right. But in TT they're also the same strength as a plasma but less strength than a melta, and the only folks I know of that carry them around are CSM for some reason or another. But hell, the lexicanum describes them as vehicle mounted and carried around by hand by a particular Guardsman at the same time (though I think that's a naming issue rather than a true contradiction issue), so I guess it's up to how you feel about it. The only thing consistent about it is that it is inconsistent

Personally I'd give it a low rank requirement (like 1 or 2), moderate req cost (20, similar to a HB, maybe 15), and offset it being available early by requring it to be braced or mounted. But now that I think of it, you're gonna get 250 rounds for it because all heavy weapons get a handy dandy backpack ammo supply.

Personally I feel that the Ultra rifle not getting the damage bonus must be a mistake. otherwise its useless against tyranids, and how many big things are going to fail toughness tests anyway?

personally I will rule that it does in spite of the raw just like I have ruled that even though astartes scout armour states it has 7 armour on the chest and the rulebook states anything with 7+ armour gives a -30 to sneaking. the scout armour is specially designed/the developers made a mistake

also the really interesting thing is I swear an assault cannon is supposed to be just an autocannon that fires faster? I havent played in a long time but in 2nd ed I think they were both strength 7 ish. shouldnt they do about the same damage? or have I made that up?

'Autocannon' covers a whole lot of ground in 40k: Anything from a 20mm automatic up to tank main-guns. So you can pretty make up stats depending on how big a shell you want them to fire. I don't think comparisons with TT are very worthwhile. Some will be full-auto and comparable to the Heavy Bolter and Assault Cannon (though they should certainly be weaker than both), whereas some are single shot and do more damage.

Assault cannons are indeed rapid fire Autocannons. The reason that Chaos terminators pack Autocannon rather than assault cannons was that the assault cannon was new technology during the Heresy (or might not even have been invented), so that the traitor chapters simply didn't have them, and have never developed them.

For me the autocannon simply isn't 'marine tech'. Granted, there might be some in the vaults of the Deathwatch, but generally the weapon has no place in the armoury of normal marines. Want to mow people down with a light autocannon? Use a heavy bolter: It's better, because the technology is more advanced. Want to REALLY mow people down? Use an assault cannon, which is a technological step forward from the mere autocannon. Want a medium-sized weapon? Use a missile launcher: It's far more versatile, thanks to the wide array of ammunition. Want to kill a tank? Use a las cannon. Really, the only reason that the Autocannon is 'better' is because it's 'cheaper'. And that's a moot point for marines, who are simply equipped with the best.

Fenrisnorth said:

Fenrisnorth said:

Technically a DH player can swing one around on his own with the right talents (although a fair few people consider that flying under radar so to speak) so a marine definately can, see Chaos Space Marines. The TT basically says they have fallen out of favour but are still used by some chapters.

I'd make the backpack ammo supply good for 125 at most if used with an Auto cannon.

Siranui said:

It's hasn't been described as single shot tank cannon since Rogue trader era, battle cannon's are very much the mans tank gun of choice and rightly so, but there are already stat's in DH and RT for the average AC and being a heavy weapon it's still completely valid.

As for marines not using them, I'd say it's not Codex for Marine Infantry issue, but not unheard of.

Siranui said:

No, hitting some shmuck with up to 5 rounds that each do 4d10+5 damage Pen 4 is the point. it's a halfway marke between a krak missile and a lascannon AFAIC.

Oh right: The normal guns just aren't good enough. Power creep. I get it.

The Emperor is my shepherd and he KNOW what I want!

In my opinion, I don't really see why the Death Watch might not have a few marine portable autocannons laying around, really. They fall into a very particular role on the battle field, after all, being that they're capable of laying penetrating light armor and laying down a sufficient hail of gunfire as to be useful against larger Tyranid bio constructs while not necessarily being as destructive as say... an errant missile might be. It also beats the Heavy Bolter for power and range in the table top, by a fair degree I might add, and is actually stronger than the assault cannon though it lacks the same rate of fire and the rending special rule and, lest we forget, Havocs can also hump them around four to a squad. It's only the reaper autocannon, specifically made for terminators and possessing the twin linked quality that's stated to no longer be in service by the Imperium and in that case it's obvious that the reason is BECAUSE of the invention of the Assault Cannon. I honestly just believe that the only reason marines CAN'T give their Devs autocannons is the table top is simply because it gives Chaos something that's unique, since their Havocs can't take Plasma Cannons or Multi-Meltas. Otherwise... why, in a universe like Warhammer 40k, would the Imperium NOT devote the resources to giving their finest warriors a weapon for every single possible combat role they could possibly think of. Would that not make them potentially better at their duties?

Brigandier said:

Same reason they don't get Leman Russ tanks, Basilisk artillery guns, etc.?

Just make sure you give it a fair req and renown requirement and there is no reason not to have them.

Brigandier said:

If i had to give the Codex reason I would say that for an army like loyalist space marines, who basically spent an age fighting chaos space marines, given the choice in the TT you'd go for the plasma cannon any time. You can hit the same number of guys in the enemy squad but they don't get the save. It's a very specific situation where the Auto cannon is actually better.

I really want to get an Autocannon for our Dark Angels Devastator Marine. The ability to fire both a Standard Attack and a Semi-Auto Burst let it work well with Sustained Suppression. The Standard Attack alone is great for those times when you need to move and fire, and the range of 300m is simply awesome. Until I see something official, I'll go with this:

Name: Astartes Autocannon

Class: Heavy

Range: 300m

RoF: S/2/5

Dmg: 4d10+5 Impact

Pen: 4

Clip: 20

Rld: 2 Full

Special: -

Wt: 60

Req: 25

Renown: Respected

So a conventional firearm that's far more effective than 25mm HEAP rockets?

I love autocannons. It's just that they shouldn't be as effective on a man-portable scale as HBs, which fire 25mm shells that are going to be more effective that the equivalent cannon shells. Not unless you want to start firing 40mm shells. At which point it stops being something that can be fired on fully automatic.

Marines get tooled with HBs because they are awesome weapons and better than conventional firearms, as a rule.