This change happened in Black Crusade and was carried over to OW, and I'm wondering how people are feeling about it. While I understand that the intent was to move things away from 'all auto burst all the time' heavy weapon primacy situation, it seems to make high ROF weapons somewhat anemic, especially at the BS of 30-40 that troopers in OW seem to operate at. Thoughts?

I've found that it works alright for standard and semi-auto. In fact, in my experience, it seems to speed the game. However, it does tend to discourage full auto except at close range and/or in circumstances where you can pile on the bonuses (Short Range, Aim & Comrade Ranged Volley = +25). For Heavy Gunners the Stabilize Comrade Advance is a no-brainer.

Of course, if my experience with Call to Duty: Modern Warfare is anything to go by, single shots and short controlled bursts are usually more effective than spray and pray.

This should be the expected number of hits you get with a particualr base to hit and fire mode:

Base
to hit  S    -/2/-  -/3/-  -/-/4  -/-/5  -/-/6  -/-/7+
0.2    0.3    0.2    0.2    0.1    0.1    0.1    0.1
0.3    0.4    0.4    0.4    0.3    0.3    0.3    0.3
0.4    0.5    0.6    0.6    0.6    0.6    0.6    0.6
0.5    0.6    0.8    0.9    1.0    1.0    1.0    1.0
0.6    0.7    1.0    1.2    1.4    1.5    1.5    1.5
0.7    0.8    1.2    1.5    1.8    2.0    2.1    2.1
0.8    0.9    1.4    1.8    2.2    2.5    2.7    2.8

So semi and full auto are marginally more effective when you get to a base to hit of 40%.

The ideal gun looks something like S/2/4 which gets you most of the advantages of semi and autofire without running you of out ammuntition that quickly.

It got changed because (from what I recalled) of the incredible amount of people whining about 'realism' and how having a +20 to full auto was not 'realist enough', and how everyone appeared to have been sniper qualified and holding doctorates in gunsmithing, mathematics and ballistics enough to give almost eye witness accounts on how firing full auto is so hard to do.

I guess some people wanted realism in their sci-fi fantasy setting for some reason and yelled loud enough that it happened. It's not like they're the ones holding the gun and shooting...Reminds me of that whole "Astartes Bolter controversy" in Deathwatch, forcing FFG to errata'd them to do weaker damage to please some who were, again, bound within a concept of realism or that Marines are somehow equal to a normal human....it is optional, yes, but really, you're playing genetically modified demi-gods, why would you go with a weaker weapon? Humility? Anyways, I'm diverting here...To me, it is removing options for the players to have..well, not removing it per se, just making it harder to be viable, doing an 'all or nothing' single shot seems like that'll lengthen combat.

I prefer the Dark Heresy way of +0 single, +10 semi and +20 full auto. Way more chance of hitting our mark when there's 10 bullets going down its way than shooting only one and putting all your eggs in the same basket, so to speak. Plus semi and full are full action, so it is not like it is not without incontinent.

I've found that it works alright for standard and semi-auto. In fact, in my experience, it seems to speed the game.

LuciusT, How does it speed up your game? Would it be because there's only a single hit, maybe 2 when one fires single shot or semi, rather than having 4-7 average hit with full auto? I am curious to know about that.

I love it! Makes for variety in weapons, full auto is still very viable. Our heavy gunner went heavy stubber and has had no trouble keeping up damage wise with his full auto. He DOES have to stack bonuses in order pull off really amazing shots, but he mostly prefers it for the suppression firing.

It's kind of ironic the way the math works - shouldn't high ROF weapons be better for everyone except a trained marksman? After all, the reason why high volume fire weapons are so popular in real life is because they're effective, more effective than single shots.

But they mostly fire bursts no? Full auto more for suppression. Think I read somewhere it's 1000 bullets per kill, which probably is due to suppression then poor marksmanship.

It's better the new way. The old way made single shot weapons a waste of time. Now there's a choice involved.

BYE

I wouldn't say they were a waste H.B.M.C. but they had to be accurate. Unless we start talking about stuff like meltaguns but I assumed we were talking about lower end stuff like autoguns, in which case accurate was a musthave.

edit: typo.

It got changed because (from what I recalled) of the incredible amount of people whining about 'realism' and how having a +20 to full auto was not 'realist enough', and how everyone appeared to have been sniper qualified and holding doctorates in gunsmithing, mathematics and ballistics enough to give almost eye witness accounts on how firing full auto is so hard to do.

I guess some people wanted realism in their sci-fi fantasy setting for some reason and yelled loud enough that it happened. It's not like they're the ones holding the gun and shooting...Reminds me of that whole "Astartes Bolter controversy" in Deathwatch, forcing FFG to errata'd them to do weaker damage to please some who were, again, bound within a concept of realism or that Marines are somehow equal to a normal human....it is optional, yes, but really, you're playing genetically modified demi-gods, why would you go with a weaker weapon?

I prefer the Dark Heresy way of +0 single, +10 semi and +20 full auto. Way more chance of hitting our mark when there's 10 bullets going down its way than shooting only one and putting all your eggs in the same basket, so to speak. Plus semi and full are full action, so it is not like it is not without incontinent.

Well, I am not sure that the complaint was really due to realism, except when people misunderstood a "full-auto burst" as to mean "spray and pray". Firing a controlled burst downrange makes you more likely to hit, rather than less, and the bursts in Dark Heresy are certainly controlled (10 rounds in 5 seconds? A totally average weapon would be expected to fire 50 if it was really "spray and pray"). Not personally keen on the "hit for every DoS", prefer the original (misprinted) every two degrees of success.

However, the real problem was that it came to be considered that full-auto just became the go to option, almost always the best choice. Semi-Auto was never worth the bother unless you had no other option (less bonus to hit, fewer hits possible and it was harder to hit with more shots), and the only reason to single shot rather than full auto was so you could move (which led to some people experiencing fights which were just static). The only real reason not to was to waste ammunition and that only really mattered in Dark Heresy, if you happened to have a bolter. In that regard single shot was probably better (you could just get a red dot for +10, and then you had total ammunition control).

The change (which I am not really keen on) was to introduce more mobility (all are half actions, meaning you always have a half action left over to move), and to make the different modes more of a choice (potential to inflict more damage, but less chance to hit overall), consequently giving semi-auto it's own purpose as an intermediate step.

The Deathwatch Bolter problem is seperate from "realism" but one of internal consistancy and play balance. The bolter was far more powerful that what had already been stated to be Space Marine Bolters (2d10), they were just generally better than all the other weapons available, and they tended to waste anything they were pointed at, particularly when combined with the change to the RF rules (the Heavy Bolter in particular was particularly guilty of this). Basically the weapons were 1) entirely incompatible with the rest of the 40k RPG range (personally I still feel they are) and 2) They didn't make for a good game, as you saw Epic threats of doom exploding rediculously to one burst of Heavy Bolter fire, and there was little reason to take anything except bolter weapons.

I've found that it works alright for standard and semi-auto. In fact, in my experience, it seems to speed the game.

LuciusT, How does it speed up your game? Would it be because there's only a single hit, maybe 2 when one fires single shot or semi, rather than having 4-7 average hit with full auto? I am curious to know about that.

I think it's a matter of play style. My players have always relied more on single shot and moving, or single shot and aiming, rather than doing full round full auto fire. (I know, not mechanically advantageous under the old rules, but that's my players.) Now they can do a semi-auto burst and move/aim. For whatever reason, it just seems more intuitive for them and makes the game flow better.

Ah ok..yeah every group got its thing: mine uses pistols+knives and a lasgun (for the Sollex Tech-Priest) rather than long range rifles.

Think we might as well take the discussion here Braddoc

I like that your group does that, but the rules do favour full auto weapons in DH for instance an that's a shame. The autogun is flatout better then the lasgun, even with identical stats (exept RoF) simply due to the rules for full auto.

Full auto should be an option, but not the flatout best option and the OW rules do that in my opinion.

I find it to be the most unambiguously positive change wrought onto the 40k RPG rules.

Under the old rules, the only reason to use single shot was the Accurate quality, and the only reason to ever use Semi-Auto was, you couldn't get your hands on a Full Auto weapon instead.

Under the new rules, there is choice involved - do I hit once with better chance to nail the shot, or do I spray in hopes of getting more bullets through? Do I stand and aim to increase my chances or do I move to take advantage of the terrain? Right now, neither of these choices is automatically and indisputably superior to the others. I see no way how anyone can not find it a good thing.

I again fail to see the almost automatic superiority of full auto fire.

let's say you and your cell are walking in Hive City, then boom, ganger ambush!

Acolyte #1 ducks behind cover, begins an aiming action.

Acolyte #2 ducks behind cover gets off a shot with his revolver.

Acolyte #3 ducks behind cover and fires off a shot with his lasgun.

You stand and fire full auto, kill a ganger outright, and remain in the middle of the street, with no cover but your clothes.

Now who will the ganger target come their round?

Now, with all firing modes being half actions, there is not real disadventage or difference between firing a burst, full auto or a single shot, if only some added bonus/malus, nothing stopping you to fire off 10 rounds and ducing into cover...in the old system, you'd better think it throught because you'll be a sitting duck if you don't dive for cover right off that bat.

And really, you got an autogun: you get 3 auto burst before changing your mag, if you start with only the starting gear, that means the scum got 3 "shot", then 3 other with his autopistol and then he's down to using brass knuckles and a knife...if people always got full auto, all the time, then really, they're imposing their own lack of options onto themselves.

And the autogun's full auto capabilites is overshadowed by its dependence on industrial capabilites, i.e actually getting more ammo that you just shot; the lasgun need a plug in the wall, sunlight or even a fire to work...not to mention have double mag capacity right off the bat

Strawman argument as you give the full auto guy the worst option. You could have easily said the same about semi auto, exept he might not have killed the guy. Or aim and singleshot, same thing.

Let's say the BS is 30 (roughly average for a new character). First round they all move into cover, let's say full action move. Second round they all fire.

Let's say the enemies are also in cover, for the sake of argument. Singelshot aims and shoots, semi and full auto fire.

Both singelshot and semi auto have a 40% chance to hit, full auto has 50%. HOWEVER, full auto has a 40% chance that he'll get two hits which is way better then 1 for three reasons.

Number one: It's more difficult to dodge, at least all of them
Number two: More hits = more damage, and more chance to get rightous fury.
Number three: More hits = higher chance you'll get a hit in an bodypart not behind cover, even a decent chance of getting a headshot.

Talents may migiate some of this, but the same exp can be spent to improve full auto, or investigation skills.

Don't get me wrong, I don't WANT full auto to be the best in DH and I'd prefer if my characters DID go lasguns and whatnot, but I have to houserule to get them to do that because otherwise they go with full auto or accurate.

Ok, not a fair example, but stil, if the player wants to get into it quickly, he'll fire full auto and pray they miss during thier turn.

Houseruling for them to pick a certain weapon is limiting their options, not to mention, for me, robbing them of a tool they can use to better do thier job...I see that you would like them to use something else than the 'classical' autogun+fire selector+silencer+manstopper rounds. But I say play with thier fear, so to speak....make'em face a hidden sniper outside of thier range who's shooting to wound...sneaky gangers who love thier knives and got the silent move\concealment to get to use them. As the GM it's your task\duty\job to find solution to challenge the players within the written rules...

In one game, where they were on a feudal world, with knowledge that thier Inquisitor was issing, and that sesessionists forces were hidden in the populace, my players didn't bother with diguises or a cover story, went 'as is' (keeping in mind the cell was: a sollex Tech-Priest, a bodysuit wearing assassin, a Sister of Battle Seraphim with the power armour, jetpack and bolt pistols and a Psyker with a force scythe) so the logical way was to bring characters from further down the road (local Triplets bowmen assassins) who ambushed them in broad daylight (with bows, of all things)...ok, the Sister and Tech-Priest had to burn a fate to survive, but at least they learned the value of discretion.

The bowmen had a 75% chance (IIRC) to get headhsots on them, as:

They had surprise (they weren't detected until round 3-4)

They had the high ground (so bonus)

They aimed and had composite bows (which means accurate and bonus damage)

They had deadeye shot, so called shot to the head to go around the non-primitive armour; granted thier arrows were non-primitive as they were made with modern Imperial material...but that doubled as to who was thier employer and proved to be clue #1 into thier investigation (rather than the usual path I originally thought of)

Even now, when faced into a special situation, one of them always go "Hey, at least they don't have bows"

..sorta like how the Tech-Priest was not allowed to have any type of grenades ever since he failed a throw and one blew up in the cell's face 'round mission #2...

If they lock themselves into a role and method of doing things, I believe you MUST find a way to move around their method, if only to bring them something challenging and draw them more into the game..that cult who managed to get around thier full auto gimmic will be a more memorable foe and way more satifying when they'll be defeated with a new method of doing things...Or just go classic, drop'em in a feudal\feral world: sure they can cut down a few hordes of barbarians or lice filled peseants, until their autoguns is suddenly transformed into a club with lots of useless bells&whistles.

Here's the table estimating how many shots by different weapons it will take to kill something.

1. Table does not take Righteous fury into account.

2. Table does not take the accurate weapon quality into account.

3. Table does take the tearing quality of the bolter into account.

I assume that any critical damage will kill a troop or minion.

For the elite targets, the first number shots how many shots it would take to get them to zero wounds, and the number in parenthesis shows how many more shots it would take to get them to critical 8, where all the explicitly lethal effects seem to be.

Had they been firing autoguns on fully automatic instead, it would have taken them around 28 rounds of shooting. Though

                              ork      ork            Sorcerous   Chaos Ren.   Hulking Chaos
                   gretchen   boy      nob            Pawn        Militia      Mutant
lasgun                2        8     83.33 (+26.67)     2           5          41.67 (+13.33)
lasgun (overcharge)   1        6     41.67 (+13.33)     2           4          25    (+ 8)
lasgun (overload)     1        3     11.9  (+ 3.81)     2           2           8.93 (+ 2.86)

long las              1        4     11.9  (+ 3.81)     2           4          11.9  (+ 3.81)
long las (overcharge) 1        3      8.93 (+ 2.86)     2           3           8.93 (+ 2.86)
long las (overload)   1        3      5.56 (+ 1.78)     2           2           4.55 (+ 1.45)

hotshot lasgun        1        4     16.67 (+ 5.33)     2           2           8.93 (+ 2.86)

triplex Burst mode    1        4     10    (+ 3.2)      2           4          16.67 (+ 5.33)

sniper rifle          1        4     16.67 (+ 5.33)     2           2           8.93 (+ 2.86)

Boltgun               1        2      7.6  (+ 2.43)     2           2           4.84 (+ 1.55)

So, for example, you want to have an idea how long it would take 4 PCs with lasguns set to overload to take down an orc nob.

Assuming they have BS of 30 each, and are aiming and firing on semi-automatic, they'd have a 50% chance to hit him. That means that each shooting action can expect to hit the nob .9 times, on average. So it would take 4 PCs around 4 rounds of continuous firing, on average, (Base BS 30, aimed, semi 3, lasgun (overload)) to kill the nob

Note that the long las preforms very well, even without taking accurate into account. I'm sure that the effects of the bonus damage make it far better than anything else but the sniper rifle. This probably means that the accurate trait is very over powered, and it should either be toned down, or regular weapons should get a (smaller) amount of bonus damage for good hits.

Some math says that an accurate lasgun (1d10+3, S/-/-, accurate) fired by someone with BS 30 is roughly 10-20% more effective against ork boys and nobs than a bolter, assuming you have the time to aim and fire. Of course, the bolter is much more effective on the move, and causes righteous fury more often (19% of the time).

Ok...thanks for the info..just that I do not see what it brings to the "full auto autogun" and the old/new methods of shooting bonuses debate...

I again fail to see the almost automatic superiority of full auto fire.

let's say you and your cell are walking in Hive City, then boom, ganger ambush!

Acolyte #1 ducks behind cover, begins an aiming action.

Acolyte #2 ducks behind cover gets off a shot with his revolver.

Acolyte #3 ducks behind cover and fires off a shot with his lasgun.

You stand and fire full auto, kill a ganger outright, and remain in the middle of the street, with no cover but your clothes.

Now who will the ganger target come their round?

Now, with all firing modes being half actions, there is not real disadventage or difference between firing a burst, full auto or a single shot, if only some added bonus/malus, nothing stopping you to fire off 10 rounds and ducing into cover...in the old system, you'd better think it throught because you'll be a sitting duck if you don't dive for cover right off that bat.

The only thing your hypothetical scenario proves is that even having a superior weapon doesn't save one from acting like a retard.

Here's what a non-moronic Acolyte #4 would do:

Round 1: Duck behind cover, either fire off a single shot (which, unless he's toting one of a few Heavy weapons that only fire full-auto, he can still totally do) or quick-draw and throw a grenade.

Round 2: Take full advantage of both cover and having a better gun than anyone else.

And really, you got an autogun: you get 3 auto burst before changing your mag, if you start with only the starting gear, that means the scum got 3 "shot", then 3 other with his autopistol and then he's down to using brass knuckles and a knife...if people always got full auto, all the time, then really, they're imposing their own lack of options onto themselves.

And the autogun's full auto capabilites is overshadowed by its dependence on industrial capabilites, i.e actually getting more ammo that you just shot; the lasgun need a plug in the wall, sunlight or even a fire to work...not to mention have double mag capacity right off the bat

A starting Scum gets 10+d5 Thrones to spend. That won't buy him a new weapon, or a better armor, or any good piece of equipment. It can, though, buy him between 220 and 300 autogun bullets. The choice is pretty obvious. Two hundred spare bullets is more than enough to kill some autogun-toting heretics and take their spares, along with everything else they have, and create a sustainable ammo supply.

Eventually, you'll surely come across lasgun-toting heretics as well. It's a great opportunity to take their weapon as well and have a weaker but more sustainable spare.

That's for those poor sods who actually have to care about their ammo budget in the first place - Clerics and Noble-Born can literally swim in autogun ammo.

Heh..y'know sometimes something seems quite clever to pull, until you get shot on the flank by a Dark Eldar..

At any rate, I'm still for the DH method of shooting bonuses (+0/+10/+20) rahter than the new one (+10/+0/-10), and that auto fire is situationnal rahter than an automatic way of doing things.

Okay, but is it the bonuses or the move from full to half action you're talking about? Because I don't see how taking full auto from +20 to -10 makes it the automatic way of doing things.

I meant in the old method, not the new one.

Heh..y'know sometimes something seems quite clever to pull, until you get shot on the flank by a Dark Eldar..

People make bad calls, sometimes because they seemed like good calls at the moment, yes. The nearest piece of cover might as well be booby-trapped with melta-bomb, at which point the guy not diving for cover is the winner even if he eats a few shots at the moment.

This has zero bearing on gun effectiveness, though.

At any rate, I'm still for the DH method of shooting bonuses (+0/+10/+20) rahter than the new one (+10/+0/-10), and that auto fire is situationnal rahter than an automatic way of doing things.

You overstate the importance of action economy for tactical variance and ignore how the new modifiers actually contribute to the tactical variance and full auto being situational.

Under the old rules, every turn you had just one choice to make - either you stood and unloaded the most lead your gun could release at the moment, or you had to move and do a single shot because something about the scene made the former choice ill-advised. This generally locked everyone up in a very static paradigm where anyone was only moving when it was absolutely crucial for their survival, but other than that everyone just stood and shot. Yes, even the guys with single shot only weapons, because why wouldn't you take advantage of the aim action when you're already shafted by your weapon choice? At least this way, you can match the (also shafted) semi-auto guy in accuracy, if not in damage. Meanwhile, the full auto guy was always on top - he either used the only option available at the moment (single shot + move or just move) or he used the best option available in the game.

In the new paradigm, a ton of situational modifiers influence your choices of movement and firing modes, and unless your character is a hardcore shooter, full auto may become so situational, it's not worth bothering. You need to move behind cover, do you shoot single or full auto, or maybe semi if the gun allows all three? Right now, that actually depends on your overall BS level, as well as range modifiers and the enemy's evasion ability level and you have to weigh the relatively safe option of landing a single accurate hit (which can be dodged more easily) versus the greater risk and greater reward of spraying him and hoping more bullets connect. And sometimes, you're just lucky to catch an enemy in point blank with enough time to aim, in which case you unload like there's no tomorrow - it's a no-brainer under both rulesets.