Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
What's the point? Even standard lasguns have the same strength and are rapid fire, which would mean that they're the same at the shotgun's max range of 12. What's the point of a shotgun? I really don't see one, but maybe I'm missing something?
You can charge after firing it.
It's still a poor option, I'll admit, especially since any guard general worth his leman russ probably values the extra shooting enabled by the longer range lasgun over getting the charge.
I think it would be awsome if guard got shotguns for squads and light transports. You could have a crazy assault armored guard army. That would be really great.
"When one man dies it is a tragedy. When thousands die its a statistic."
Shotguns allow for much more mobile troops. If you have any guys that are going to be moving around a whole lot I would suggest shotguns. They still aren't that good for that but there are two cases that I can think of that they are good in:
Shotguns can be good for cc vets because your vets are ussually not going to be in cc for more than 1 or 2 assault phases in my experience and the shotgun is as strong as their cc attack except that they will hit on the 3+, the gun can kill the opponents guys before your even in cc so they can't strike back and you get one more strength 3 attack on the charge than if you have a cc weapon.
The other thing that they're good for is for catachans. Since in the jungle the max range is 12" anyway, you get more shots and more mobility.
I think that the main reason people believe shotguns are so underrated is they have a liking of shotguns. We know how they work and how much damage they can do and they're just a known gun. (When I first started I thought the lasgun was horrible because I was comparing them to the ones in Dune which can cut through a plasteal wall:shifty: ) I bet if a gun with the same stats had been put out instead not as many people would talk about how they are underrated.
In ye olde 40k rules of the early 90s, shotguns had sweet rules. They could either fire a slug or buckshot, and the slug was longer and powerful while the buckshot actually had a tiny template.
I need the bugger so I can see!
Actually if you read about the fluff of a Dune lasgun is supposed to work, then compare that to the fluff of how a 40K melta gun is supposed to work, you'll notice some striking resemblances in both fake physics and actual effect of weapon. In Dune a Lasgun is not exactly a conventional laser.Originally Posted by Warrior47
but that's besides the point, I was under the assumption that the lasgun was pretty much the same effectiveness as our modern assault rifle, but didn't have as much of an ammo constraint.
So wich is better a machine gun or a shotgun: they both have some serious up close damage potential, but the machine gun can shoot further. I think the stats are accurate, but that doesn't keep the shotgun from being the inferior choice most of the time.
Votewar MKV 2nd place. . .
Back from internet limbo, and glad to be here.
shotguns are good at CQ especially in catachans or deathworld armies where they can do serious damage to enemy infantry up close. I saw them in action and yes, they are definitely worth it in the forest terrains.