I think for balance sake everyone should be equally as old, so either the Orkz are decades old like the marines and therefore God like and could kill a marine with one had (most War Bosses are only around 30) or the the marines need to be as young as Orkz and all the marine players can sit around and look out of the glass of their incubation/geneseed tanks....

personally I dont care if someone wants to one hand a bolter/chainsword combo,

theyre going to get an accuracy penalty on the bolter if they do it as opposed to not getting a penalty for using a bolt pistol,

and unless chainswords are waay more powerful then combat knives (which they probably should be lol) theyre not getting a huge benefit by doing so

Yes. But you've also never been augmented to the status of a demigod, train about four hours a day at the firing range, wear power armor that mitigates recoil and acts as a literal extension of your body due to the armor being connected completely to your nervous system. Plus CSM with heavy weapons can't take a CCW, and IIRC have the bulky rule to boot.

Strength doesn't compensate for weight, it multiplies the bare astartes strength by ten. They're not bulky at all due to the nature of the black carapace, and the synthetic muscles that allow power armor to move in the first place.

Except they do kill common enemies consistently with one shot. I'd question if you actually have ever read anything produced by the Black Library, considering even astartes can be dropped by one bolt to the head, as the vox-grille isn't armored.

If you actually had read any of the fluff, you'd know my claims are only as baseless as the Petronas Towers.

Except it's not needed, and Astartes can shoot just fine one-handed with no seeming reduction in accuracy. Just at best there might be a slight reduction in maneuverability due to having to perform more precise motor function to aim the barrel.

I've also never fired a bolter. If you can't see that using an Ak47 as my example was due to relative size/weight/recoil to strength of a normal man ratio then you might be a lost cause.

Both wrong.

The nature of the black carapace does not make the suits not bulky. Nothing can make the suits not bulky. It makes the wearer move as if it's not bulky, because of the additional strength. Not the same thing.

Why are scouts and tacts the same strength, if the suit makes so much difference?

Men can be dropped by one shot, and yet our armed forces still use fully automatic weapons, missiles, tanks and all sorts of other things.

You managed to still ignore me asking what a heavy/storm bolter is for if the bolter itself is so perfect. And, worse yet, you're now attacking my lore knowledge with no basis, despite the fact you've ignored a multitude of questions I posed and have offered no source to back your claims up.

Conjecture on your part.

2500km? LOL. That's the distance from London to Moscow.

That quote doesn't specifically even state he's holding it in one hand, either.

They can be fired with one hand, much like an AK47 can, much like a claymore can be swung in one hand, that doesn't mean they're usable to their full capability in one hand. Meaning they're not one handed weapons.

Saying a bolter is a one handed weapon is bollocks, you've shown nothing to back up your statement, you're ignoring real world gun physics and common sense, as well as ignoring the fact the rules don't back you up, the fact the models don't back you up and the fact the art doesn't back you up, the fact that video games don't back you up and this very game we're on the forum off won't back you up, as accuracy penalties for wielding it one handed already already confirmed.

Unless you have something to offer beside petty attacks on my lore knowledge, and your own sourceless claims, then I'd say we're about done here.

Interestingly in the rules the chainsword and knife are the same. But yea, I agree with having a penalty on accuracy.

You're right only about one thing, as far as I can see. The fact that Bolters can apparently be used relatively effectively in one hand doesn't mean that they aren't more effective when held with two hands. There seems to be no evidence that definitely proves that power armor reduces recoil to such a high degree as to make the usage of both hands while firing completely irrelevant.

If a marine had a Chainsword and a Bolter and was firing at something that's 150 meters away he would have no benefit of holding both in each hand, but could conceivably have a benefit to actually holding the Bolter with both hands.

You're kind of horribly wrong with a whole lot of other things. First of all, Bolters can obviously be used effectively enough with one hand to be considered "one-handed" weapons, despite perhaps being more effective with two.

I actually don't want to continue. Think about it and try to figure out what you've botched on your own. qq

Perhaps it's an issue of semantics, but as I see it if a weapon being used in one hand diminishes its capability over it being used in two - that is to say that if it's best used in two hands - then it's a two handed weapon. A bolter would suffer in accuracy when used in one hand, meaning it can't be used to its full capability in one hand, making it a two handed weapon. Calling something a one handed weapon suggests it's used as well in one as it is in two, like most pistols tend to be, or an arming sword is. Bolters can't be used as effectively in one hand, at range, as in two, based on real world gun physics, and nothing shown has disproved that.

The 40k PnP games specifically state that these weapons normally require two hands, but can be fired in one hand with an accuracy penalty. This game will be doing that exact same thing. Obviously I'm not that only one who sees things as I do.

It's about that simple in my books.

Now, if I got stuff wrong, I'm always willing to admit it when shown the mistake. But your last sentence was patronising and immature, and there's no need for such things.

That was altered, back in the 2nd edition of the TT chain weapons added +1 str to the profile and all swords (basic, chain and power) gave you a parry which negated one of your opponents attacks (vastly different CC rules back then as well).

I suppose the difference between you and me then is if I had been reading that book and saw those figures and distances I'd have put it down as a pile of dross for going above and beyond suspension of belief into the realms of the ludicrous.

Also from the quote from that book, I just noticed it was this bit:

It reads like the book is saying that the marine's boltgun has a longer range than a sniper rifle?!?

That just out and out BS.

We all know that the BL publishes some real BS, though I mean, that same bit you quoted appears to have him skim a bolt off the ground, under a vehicle and in to its target.

It seems to me that a lot of these arguments/heated discussions are due to some confusion over the Lore/Background, Table-top stuff, and what a videogame needs.

For example.

Lore:
Boltguns have full auto, generally for those cool moments of blazing away at something large.
SM carry a general close-combat-weapon usually a combat knife, something which in a SM hand is just a knife but in ours would be a short sword.
Bolt weapons are very accurate with a marine being able to do a "one shot, one kill" with an entire magazine against humans.
SM can wield a boltgun in one hand and a chainsword (or better) in the other but only after a good deal of training or experience.
Powered Armour in conjunction with the Black Carapace negates the weight of the armour, weapons, and wargear carried, allowing the SM to move unencumbered by them. Which explains how a marine can flip up onto his feet from a prone position whilst wearing power armour, weapons and wargear (I believe Ragnar Blackmane has done this).

Tabletop:
Boltguns have two fire modes, single for distance shooting and a two shoot burst for close range (there may actually be more shots that automatically miss).
Combat Knives are not listed in the wargear as any boost to combat is negligible in comparison to their punch/kick or a whack from their boltgun.
SM Boltgun fire has a 2 in 3 chance of hitting, which also means a third of the time they miss. So their fire is not that accurate, and it is the same as the highly trained Storm Trooper.
A pistol is considered a CCW, and when used in conjunction with a weapon like the Chainsword the wielder gets a bonus when attacking. But the boltgun isn't a CCW, so when used in conjunction with a Chainsword they lose a bonus.
All infantry models on the tabletop have a measure Weapons Skill, a Ballistics Skill, and Strength.
Weapon Skill is for how well you can handle a CCW.
Ballistics Skill is for how well you can handle a gun.
Strength is for how hard you can hit in CCW.
So Strength has no bearing on how well you can shoot.

Videogames:
Boltguns in such a scenario usually have one fire mode, generally because most games only give you one.
A Combat Knife does give a buff, but not as great as a basic CCW like a Chainsword.
How a projectile weapon is held can effect their accuracy. Submachine guns in most games are most accurate when sighted down the barrel (Iron sights), good to great accuracy when held two handed, but only poor to good when held one handed even when dual-wielding. This reflects real-life.
Using a pistol and CCW would probably give a CQC bonus for an Assault-type, but a Tactical using a boltgun with a CCW would negate that Assault bonus and probably incur some accuracy penalty on the boltgun.


I know that some will disagree with the above, and that's alright. Some of the supporting evidence (quotes, etc.) have already been posted, so you can check them.

But if you do have contradictory evidence please quote it, as that will best support a counter-argument.