Higher RoF is utterly moot if you're not hitting by more than 50%. One could easily argue that a lower rate was better against everything except large hordes, because of the ammunition saving. (Indeed, the real drawback with the HB is how quickly it consumes that back-pack full of ammunition).

Bolter drill merely adds to that fire rate, making it almost a penalty against anything other than targets with a large to-hit number. For the talent (which costs XP...) to be of use with a HB, you need to hit with 11 degrees of success. So with a very respectable BS of 65, with the maximum +60 modifier, it results in an additional hit 15% of the time. In fact, you need at least a 111% chance of hitting for the talent to do anything at all. Big whoop.

If you read it, storm of iron is effective with ACs as well as bolters. You can use it with pretty much anything.

There is more special ammunition, but it costs requisition to use. You pay for it. And I imagine that anyone with an AC is going to try to talk the GM into allowing some of the specialist ammunition to be AC compatible/available anyway.

Bolter specialisation firstly requires the tactical marine to be using a heavy bolter (a fairly unusual situation, or a generous watch captain) and for the tactical marine to have taken the ability (charitably a 50% chance, given how good the other ability is), AND for the marine to be spurning squad mode for some reason in order to use it. So it's pretty moot the majority of times, too.

Bolter Assault is available under 2 oaths out of 6, making it entirely moot for the majority of missions. If you do happen to have the relevant oath, then it's hardly a game changer, as it's likely to see use a handful of times during the scenario. And you can still use it to throw a crack grenade, should you have an AC in your hand, rather than a bolter.

Explosive damage does not make a weapon a horde killer. It adds 1 point of damage to hordes. The HB is better against hordes predominantly because it's fully automatic. 'X' is just icing.

As we can see, your reasoning why the HB is better is highly situational, flawed in places, dependant on great dice rolls, and/or requires the investment of XP and Req. So as a general case, the AC remains demonstrably better. The HB really has three areas of weakness (damge v armour, range, limited ammo) and it would be a bit more bearable if the AC covered one of these weakness, but instead it is superior in all three ways: It does more damage to non-hordes (heavily armoured or not), uses ammunition at a more conservative rate, and has *twice* the range. The last one is pretty hard to swallow: An automatic weapon dependant on velocity for it's damage, firing in an arc, has the same range as a straight-firing, highly accurate las-cannon...

Sure: The HB is better against hordes, but the AC -as statted- just seems better in *every* other circumstance. That's not a tool for special situations.

Siranui said:

Sabot rounds are not going to be short range. Self propelled ammunition only has constant maximum velocity until it's fuel runs out, and I don't think that would be long. Yes, conventional ammunition will be slowing down all the while, but with a much higher initial velocity there is no guarantee that a solid autocannon round wouldn't still be going faster than the heavy bolter round when the rocket engine cuts out. They are also pretty much guaranteed to be much more accurate than the rocket propelled round (which is the real limiter of range in the 40k system. Most of the non-energy weapons can hurl projectiles further than the maximum range of the weapon would suggest, but they are going to be next to impossible to accurately hit anything with.

Increased RoF is actually very important. Against things like Hordes and the like I have commonly seen 5-10 degrees of success scored (when rolling with modified stats of 115 odd that's not surprisng). At that point firing more rounds matters a great deal (how many times have I wished my boltgun fired more than 4 rounds a burst?).

Heavy Bolters really shouldn't be better 90% of the time. They are mainly an anti-infantry weapon, which is reflected in their high RoF. They are aimed at being good for taking out tough living creatures, so get higher damage than a heavy stubber (They should be statted about what Space Marine bolters are at the moment, but that's another discussion entirely). They can take on very light armour, but otherwise are not anti-vehicle weapons at all. They are best at mowing down large numbers of squishies, or the occasional singluar large squishy by virtue of hitting them with several shots. However, against ALL vehicles Autocannons should massively outshine them, and anyone hit by one should pretty much be reduced to red mist (so it should get high damage). They can moonlight on infantry duty (due to being more than single shot weapon) but they shouldn't be as good at that (so I am increasingly coming to the conclusion that autocannons shouldn't have a full-auto setting). Storm is excessive for the twin-linked ones on the Dreadnaught though.

I would say keep damage and range as it is and give it S/4/- Twin-linked, and a special rule saying it can choose to fire any number of shots between 2 and 4 when firing at semi-auto.

Leaving aside real-world ballistic debate on discarding sabot ammunition, They're not going to compare with a las-cannon range, either. I'm not sure why a self-propelled munition is going to be less accurate, given that they are both spin-stabilised, and one of them has a flatter initial trajectory. Again: Leaving aside HB/RL comparisons and working inside the game, I'm not sure why the weapon merits the (equal) longest range in the (non-RoB) game.

RoF is indeed crucial when facing hordes, when you get a nice big to hit bonus. No argument from me, there. The HB is still better against hordes, given decent dice rolls. Although of course you still need those decent to-hit modifiers and dice rolls. If you consistently roll '55' with a BS of 55 and a +60 modifier, the HB is only 1 horde damage better off: 50% of the time the HB is only 1 point 'better' due to the Explosive damage.

I really disagree that the HB is just an anti-infantry weapon: It fires 25mm high explosive, armour piercing rockets, after all. It does seem to get overlooked in the light anti-armour role. Maybe the HB shouldn't be the weapon of choice 90% of the time, but nor should the AC be the weapon of choice 50% of the time. As statted, I'd take an AC over a HB half the time... which is clearly just plain wrong.

Eh? Twin linked? Why?

If we want to make it more effective against armour, why not just give it good AP at the expense of damage?

Sorry, I meant twin-linked for the Dreadnought version (which it most certainly is), not as a standard thing for the weapon.

And I don't think it needs to be any more effective against vehicles. Its stats look fine to me. It just should be better against vehicles than a heavy bolter. If I was going to trade away dice I would do it for flat damage increases, not penetration. Autocannons are fearsome weapons against anything they hit.

I don't see the problem with an autocannon vs heavy bolter being a 50% of the time choice. You trade better horde killing equipment for getter performance against vehicles or visa versa. That's pretty much the choice on the table top for those things that can take them. As for equal range as a lascannon, that again matches the table top. Now, they shouldn't slavishly follow the table top in all things, it being a different beast of a game, but an autocannon is clearly meant to outrange a heavy bolter (why? I don't know how they would explain it, but it has always been the case).

The "armour piercing" is in reference to their ability to pierce infantry armour easily. The ability to penetrate lighyt vehicle armour as well is a little bonus. They have never really been good anti-vehicle weapons. In 2nd edition they had a chance against things like sentinels and bikes (maybe trukks?) but nothing else really. Chimeras were immune. If you maxed out your damage roll you could maybe ding the lighter elements of a rhino (but that would be a 6 and a 4 on the d6 and d4 you rolled). Heavy Bolters have never been intended as anti-vehicle weapons. They are the prime infantry killers of the Imperial Guard and Space Marines, but that is it. Yes, third edition onwards has made it that they now can deal with light armour, but it still doesn't change their primary role (there are so much better tools out there) and is pretty much a quirk of the system used.

To be honest, I stopped paying attention to the TT after RT. At that point ACs had a long range because they were supposed to be tank guns, and were capable of indirect fire. I suspect that the greater range followed on from that in later editions, long after the AC stopped representing one large shell and came to represent a deluge of smaller ones. For that reason, I really don't see the logic in retaining such a high range.

Likewise; they might not be any use against vehicles in TT, but 25mm HEAP rockets are in reality pretty darned useful against anything short of an MBT. And according to the RoB rules, the HB (as I recall, I could be wrong) is certainly no slouch against Chimera... as it should well be, in my opinion. Basically the HB has been designed as a flexible weapon for use by Astartes against anything and everything short of things that you should be using a las-cannon/plasma cannon/missile launcher with super-crack for killing.

If ACs were the answer 50% of the time, then they'd be toted by Marines a lot more than they are...

Basically, there's a TON of threads on here with people complaining the HBs are 'too good'. And yet here we have the autocannon; which has been statted so that -except against hordes- it's actually better than the HB in every single way! I'm frankly astounded that in the wake of complaints about power, people are happy for the staple weapon of mankind' finest troops to be supplanted in a wide variety of roles by something that's technologically inferior and when used (by chaos forces) has to be mounted on terminator armour.

If the AC was superior in a small niche and traded down in a few more areas, I wouldn't have so much of an issue. But as written it's better against heavy targets AND at range AND where ammunition is a concern... all for being a little bit worse against hordes. For me; that's poor balance, especially in the light of all the 'the heavy bolter is too good' feelings.

Siranui said:

So you don't like the HB or the AC?

The AC is a big table top gun, it's normal it should be part of the RPG either as CSM weapons or as PDF/IG/Hertic weapons and as SM vehicle gun (base twinlink on the predator).

AC should be stronger then a HB since it's the TT rules (the game this RPG is based on, yep sorry it's the thrut). AC should have about the same PEN as a HB since it is that way in the TT and should have more range but a lower RoF.

AC are made for light vehicles, walker, MC counters, sorry if you don't like it but it's been like that for at least 10 years on the TT which as I said the base of the RPG.

crisaron said:

No: I like the HB. I haven't experienced balance issues with it, and furthermore I believe that it's given to Mankind's finest warriors because it's the finest tool for the job. It should be brilliant, and a no-brainer for most missions, or if the uncertain of what's going to be involved. I consider statting rapid-fire autocannons for marine use akin to statting Lee Enfield rifles for use in a modern special forces game. In my opinion, the reason Marines don't use man-portable rapid-fire autocannons is because HBs are simply better. They are the next generation of weapon.

I got told off for suggesting that the AC was a big gun. Apparently it's not: It's a normal (for astartes) size heavy weapon that's better than the HB, but with a lower rate of fire. I wouldn't be whinging at it being better if it was a 'mounted' class weapon.

The RPG is based on the TT only to an extent. Certainly Marines are 100% completely different from the TT. Heck: Even HBs are, as the Astartes one is better than the guard one, yet that isn't part of the TT. Likewise, I don't believe that we should carry on with absurdities simply because a poorly written skirmish wargame primarily aimed at a teenage audience takes them as a given.

When you say 'AC are made for', do you mean 'shooting at' or 'mounting on'? I'm with you on the count of 'mounting on', and I believe that if we *have* to have them, that their ideal target should be medium armour, and that they should be optimised for that role, rather than stealing the 'jack of all trades' title from the HB.

all Big guns are the same, a Marine can have a Plasma canon, missile launcher, AC, HB, Multi-Melta, etc...

Those weapon are all 2 man teams on the IG/PDF side.

see www.forgeworld.co.uk/Warhammer-40000/Imperial_Guard/Death-Korps-of-Krieg/DEATH-KORPS-OF-KRIEG-AUTOCANNON-TEAM-1.html

Siranui said:

Wow you sure rent like a teen for a none teen games player! Anywaho just a jab...

In thrut the the bolters are very baddly implemented in the 3 games (chacke the forums) and just don't scale well, the HB is the best example, it shoudl be the same through all the 3 games maybe just have quality standard. HB for imperial gurads should be as good as the one for the Astartes since they use teams.

Anywho the AC is the same size as a misile launcher, plasma canon, HB, etc. They are heavy weapon but they are protable like the lazor Cannon!

I think you are mistaken with the battle canon, the main leman russ weapon.

The Autocannon can definitely be astartes portable, chaos space marines in power armour use autocannons from time to time. Admittedly they are not often seen in the hands of loyalist space marines, but then again of the weapons listed in the rites of battle book the only one I can think of having seen on a mini is the crozius arcanum so thats not really an issue, when was the last time you saw a squad of marines with assault shotguns. As a GM I would say if a guy wants it he can have it, but it has to be balanced.

Therefore, here is my crack at the Astartes Autocannon

Heavy 200m s/2/5 4d10+5 I pen 5 clip 20 reload 2full Reliable weight 80 req 20 respected

a backpack ammo supply for autocannon holds 150 rounds

When compared with the Heavy Bolter this weapon is superior at long range, although it is less accurate over long range than its vehicle mounted counterpart.

I will compare the weapons using the following marine, someone who was born average (for a space marine) but has since specialised in shooting. An initiate of the ultramarines who has chosen the devastator class and chosen one of his +5 attributes to be BS. He also spent 200 of his 1000 xp on a simple BS upgrade. This marine rolled 41 for his BS and has since raised it to 51.

I will fire this marine against a Horde, A group of Elites, and then a big Monster/Tank

1. Horde: My marine gets +20 for full auto, +30 for firing at a Horde, +10 for a motion predictor (I know he is only an initiate but given that he needs respected to get the auto cannon he can get the motion predictor as well).

With a Heavy Bolter (including explosive damage) this results in a 6% probability of 0 hits, a 3% probability of 3 hits, 10% probabilities of 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 hits and an 11 % probability of 11 hits. This gives an expectation of 12.4 mag damage including unrelenting devastation.

With an Autocannon this gives 6% chance of 0 hits, 3% chance of 2 hits, 10% chances of 3 and 4 hits and a 61% chance of 5 hits. this gives an expectation of 7.62 mag damage with unrelenting devastation. clearly a heavy bolter is significantly better against hordes

2. Elites: I will choose standard chaos space marines as my foe. +20 for full auto, +10 for motion predictor.

With a Heavy Bolter this results in a 19% no hits, 10%1,2,3,4,5,6,7 or 8 hits, 1% 9 hits, expectation of 3.69 hits. As I showed above a heavy bolter does 31.131155 per hit. -8 armour, -8 toughness -8cover (assume the CSM aren't stupid enough to stand in the open). This gives 7.131155 per hit of damage, for an average damage of 26.314 through cover or 55.8 damage if you catch the marines in the open, (this will significantly wound several CSM's)

With an Autocannon this gives 19% no hits, 10% 1,2,3,4 hits, 41% 5 hits. expectation = 3.05 hits. Autocannon does 33.101091 damage per hit, -8 for armour -8 for toughness -8 for cover. expectation of 27.76 through cover or 52.16 in the open. Autocannon is superior against space marines hiding behind brick walls. not bad balance for what is supposed to be anti light tanks, a space marine is basically a tank anyway

3. Daemon Prince +20 for full auto, +10 for motion predictor, +20 for firing at an enormous bad guy

With a Heavy Bolter 6% no hits, 3% 1 hit, 10% 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, 11% 10 hits. Expectation of 5.53 hits. damage is 31.131155 -12 armour -12 toughness. expectation of 39.44 damage

With an Autocannon 6% no hits, 3% 1 hit, 10% 2,3,4 hits 61% 5hits. Expectation of 3.98 hits. damage is 33.101091 -12 -12 per hit, expectation of damage is 36.22 damage.

This Autocannon is a fun different weapon which is better at longer ranges than a heavy bolter but worse in almost every damage dealing way unless the enemy has at least 24 armour and toughness (like light vehicles). and a little note about ammo conservation, the Autocannon fires fewer rounds but if for example your character is permitted the backpack ammo supply and then 3 standard reloads (thats what I do in my games) he has 210 autocannon rounds compared to a heavy bolter's 430 so they have a comparable number of full auto bursts

So in summary

bad versus hordes, check

good versus armour, check

not stupidly long ranged, check

not stupid amounts of ammo, check

interesting weapon which is in no way better than a heavy bolter but could still be useful in some situations, check

any advice?

Siranui said:

None of us are really inventing anything - the stats I used, barring the weight and clip size, are taken from the official Autocannon stats from RoB.

I actually LIKE the thought of an autocannon as Signature Wargear. Think the chick's sniper rifle from Hellsing. Bad frickin arse!

And yeah, no one needs to "Have a take" on the Autocannon, the core book has a chart for Requisitioning stuff from the other games. and DH has one stated out.

Siranui said:

The flexible weapon of choice for the Space Marine is not actually the Heavy Bolter, but the rocket launcher. You choose heavy bolters if you are focussing on infantry, lascannons for anti-tank work, and rocket launchers for a bit of both. This applies across the table top and Deathwatch. The reason that space marines don't use Autocannons much is because it doesn't suit their role. They are an extremely mobile assault force. They don't usually need the range of an autocannon and the extra weight and bulk that the longer barrel, heavier ammunition and greater recoil compensation of the autocannon would require just interferes with their mobility.

The reason I don't see a problem with the Autocannon just plain being better in most regards is because it simply is. It does more damage, it has a greater range and it is more flexible. The reason I am one of those that thinks the HB is overpowered though is because it makes many of the similar leveled choices (like plasma guns, melta guns, and even the humble normal bolter) seem largely pointless (ie, why would you ever take them over a heavy bolter if you could?), it doesn't scale well with the other heavy weapons, and I don't like the difference between "Space Marine" and "normal" bolt weapons. Now, as I said, I could see an argument to making autocannons semi-auto only, so that it will usually generate fewer hits on hordes (though I do think they should be able to do supressive fire which requires being full auto). Infantry killing (which constitutes into high RoF in Deathwatch, mashing up hordes and generating multiple hits on individual human targets) is the only area that the Heavy Bolter has ever surpassed the autocannon.

Fenrisnorth said:

Thats true, but the autocannon in inquisitors handbook does specifically say it requires a gun carriage and 2 crew. so if you did req it you would have to a. convince your GM you can wield it on your own. and b. get him to set a req value (21-30 is suggested by the DW core book.

personally my autocannon was on the cheap side (20 req) but also less accurate over long ranges due to not being on a mount

We take the AC from th DH Inquisitor's Handbook.
For Req we use the rules from DW Core rulebook depending on rarity.
While for the AC there are two different rarity ratings there is a clarification about it in the errata.

And I don't think there is anything in the IH that states that for example a guardsman with bulging biceps may not use one alone.

I don't have the book on me so I can't remember the exact wording but at the very least it says it requires a gun carriage, a gunner and a loader to fire effectively. Its in the actual description section of the autocannon in the warzone section of IH

Narkasis Broon said:

So does a Missile laucher, mortar, Heavy Bolter, Lazor Canon, etc...

Astartes have a one man portable version that is all, remeber astartes can manage weight beyong normal humans.

There's no mention of a carriage in either the IH or the errata.

The description of the autocannon says it needs a gunner and a loader.

In the DH errata, it says the Autocannon should be scarce availability and I see no mention of table 5-1 in the DW errata.

So... The autocannon should be 9-14 req and marine-portable with no modification, shouldn't it?

bmaynard said:

That a SM can get a common quality IH Autocannon for 9-14 requisition is RAW.
And I would say that the possibility that a SM can use it like a Lasercannon or HB is RAI.

I will be taking a good quality AC as signature wargear.
Reliable rulz

crisaron said:

I think it's more the issue of the 2.5m+ long barrel that's perhaps the issue...

borithan said:

Apart from heavy bolters, obviously...

You're saying that 25mm rockets are inferior to 25mm cannon? So why make a heavy bolter?

I really wouldn't have such an issue if the crew-served version was Mounted, but somehow it's become a mere heavy class weapon. Reaper Cannon are autocannon, are they not? And they need a terminator to fire. Astartes heavy bolters have too much recoil and are too big to be fired by mere mortals, but if we step up the calibre and do away with the low-recoil bolter design for a heavy recoil conventional munition, then the marine can still use it as easily as other heavy weapons? Meh.

I'll be interested to see the stats of Reaper ACs when they're released.

Siranui said:

A Reaper auto-cannon is terminator only weapon simply by the virtue of being a twin linked auto-cannon.

And the auto-cannon stat's have been in soo 40K rpg books, DH, RT, RoB, almost certainly into the Storm although I don't have that book. Most people are very familiar with it. And for heavy weapons at least they tend to have been ported from the TT proportianally. Seeing as the Autocannon is larger more damaging but much slower firing assault cannon which is 3d10+5 what else would the damage be?

That being said a lot of the weapons lost a lot in the translation, the assault cannon for one. Plasma guns and cannons too. In the TT the Autocannon and the cyclone both have the same rate of fire but the Cyclone ended up with SA 2, the AC = FA 5. Perhaps, although it's supposed to be automatic it wouldn't be quite so stand out good if it was only SA? Would it seem so good if plasma guns did the same damage like they do in the TT? (but have the fantastic pen to go with it).

I'm considering allowing Devastators to select the heavy weapon gained as a part of their starting gear. Obviously the available choices include Heavy Bolter, Heavy Flamer, and Missile Launcher. I'm considering adding the Autocannon into the list too.

An "Astartes Autocannon" using the stats from the DH Inquisitor's Handbook needs to have its Wt adjusted up to 75kg (the same proportionate increase as the Lascannon) and the be assigned appropriate Req and Renown stats. I'd be inclined to make the Req 15 or 20 (one category higher than the non-Astartes Autocannon based upon being Scarce). Renown is the hard one. It's quite possible for this weapon to be available at Initiated, but an argument could be made for pushing it up to Respected.

Siranui said:

1) The HB has a higher RoF.

2) The HB has a greater range of specialty ammo.

3) The HB is a Bolt weapon and some Space Marine talents and abilities specifically aid in the use of Bolt weapons.

Siranui said: