Heavy Stubbers

[Maverek]

Are there infantry rules for heavy stubbers, because I see them on the Death Korps of Krieg models on forge world and I've always liked them. Any one know anything about rules if there are any?

[angelusmortis]

I know if you turn to page 63 of you IG codex you will see the stats right there. And ironicly, the rules are on page 36.

[Maverek]

But those are for vehicles, I want infantry stubbers, like the ones ofted seen with DKoK models from forgeworld, s I was wondring if there are rules for infantry ones.

[angelusmortis]

The only way to get them for your Infantry is through IA5 and Imperial Update 2006. In IA5 you would have to be playing DKoK Siege Army list or Vraksian Renegades. The ones in IU 06 are on Sabre platforms which is an immobile gun platform.

[Cadian 117]

Thats depressing really. I cant wait for the new guard codex to allow stubbers in squads.

[Mabus]

Where did you hear we're gonna be allowed to do that Cadian?

[angelusmortis]

mabus said:

Where did you hear we're gonna be allowed to do that Cadian?

A hedgehog told it to him in a dream after a heavy night of drugs and alcohol so its pretty solid.

In other words, I highly doubt it. Beside, Heavy Stubbers are not all that great. A Heavy Bolter is way better in all aspects.

[Mabus]

LOL, The IG have plenty of anti-infantry guns, we don't need heavy stubbers too.

[mccaptain]

We always need more guns. Period.

[Yeti's Yell]

No reason why you can't include a suitably converted stubber nest for an autocannon if you are desiring looks, not stat.

[kyron]

Gw could add the heavy stubber as a specialweapon. Then you would be able to have both a heavy bolter and heavy stubber in one squad.

[angelusmortis]

mccaptain said:

We always need more guns. Period.

You missed the point though Bro. What were saying is for just a few points more you can get a Heavy Bolter which is far superior.

However, that being said, I would like to see a new doctrine in the IG codex thats basically a Low Tech Regiment. Replace the Lasgun with Autoguns (give it a rule where if the unit rolls 5 or more 1s then its out of ammo and the rest of the fire is negated) and then you could replace Heavy Bolters with Heavy Stubbers. Maybe limit energy weapons overall, like no Meltas, Plasma or Lascannons. The benefit would be to make all models slightly cheaper. But I digress, as that would fit in a "what I want for the Guard thread".

[skizoman333]

to be honest, does the guardsman need to be that much cheaper than he already is? considering that they dont officailly have ppm.

heavy stubber as a special weapon would be excelent really, ud get an extra 3 str4 shots with an ap value, so it would be a breath of fresh air from dealing with the usual flashlight.
tho would have to be heavy or assualt with a decreased range to make it fair(ish)

[Cadian 117]

angelusmortis said:

mabus said:

Where did you hear we're gonna be allowed to do that Cadian?

A hedgehog told it to him in a dream after a heavy night of drugs and alcohol so its pretty solid.

In other words, I highly doubt it. Beside, Heavy Stubbers are not all that great. A Heavy Bolter is way better in all aspects.

I didnt, but I want it, because...well I like stubbers.

[kyron]

Skizoman333, I don't see why it would have to be a decrease in range. The fact that it is a heavy-weapon is penalty enough.

[skizoman333]

no, what i mean is that it could have the stats is has now as a heavy weapon OR it becomes an assault weapon, only it has reduced range to make up for it

tho to be honest considering what the gaurd has up against it, one assualt 3 with r36 isnt TOO much to ask is it?

[angelusmortis]

I dunno, I think it would be tinkering with the play style of standard IG too much. Its supposed to be more of a "set up the big guns and stand and shoot" than an "assault with heavy weapons" style. I mean, thats what tanks are for. Stubber should just simply be a gimmick weapon. Sure, they are in DKoK and Vraksian renegade lists, but I dont have a single one in my entire DKoK list personally. Everytime I would take one, I take a HB instead. The only possible exception to that would be the TL Heavy Stubber. Now that is a bit attractive even though its simply a low AP longer range Boltgun is the fact that it allows you to re-roll misses. Still, its not screaming "BUY ME" to me. But if it was a default replacement due to some sort of "Low Tech" doctrine I think it would be very cool, as it would add character to your army.

[Rolling Thunder]

Move-and-fire, like a real-world LMG (like in the lost and the damned list.)

[angelusmortis]

See now thats a common misconception. Real world LMGs cannot be accurately fired on the move. Sure you can spray and pray, but you are not going to hit jack unless its about 10 feet in front of you. Real world LMGs must be supported by something to fire, be it a bipod/tripod or a wall you rest it against or just laying prone, but from the hip, you wont hit crap. Trust me on this, I didnt spend 14 years in the US Army as a Cavalry Scout and not pick up a few things.

Now that being said, I know Hollywood would lead us to believe otherwise, and it looks cool. So, being as 40k is not a game based on realism (at all I might add), if you wanted to argue from a coolness/Hollywood heroic standpoint, I can live with that. But from a realism standpoint I'm going to have to say "no ahh-ahh".

[Cadian 117]

I totally agree, I just kinda want them for some house rules we have(squad on squad large scale battles) but ya whatev. I personally like to have the chance for more shot than for more penetration. I usually fight tau anyway.

[Deleted]

angelusmortis said:

See now thats a common misconception. Real world LMGs cannot be accurately fired on the move. Sure you can spray and pray, but you are not going to hit jack unless its about 10 feet in front of you. Real world LMGs must be supported by something to fire, be it a bipod/tripod or a wall you rest it against or just laying prone, but from the hip, you wont hit crap. Trust me on this, I didnt spend 14 years in the US Army as a Cavalry Scout and not pick up a few things.

True, but its pretty hard to accurately hit anything on the movie with an assault rifle as well. Its also important to take into consideration that the movement distance represented in 40k rules isn't the equivalent of sprinting, rather its a slow advance, taking time to fire shots off and keep an eye open for ambushes. So I don't think its beyond the realm of reality to have some sort of squad automatic weapon being represented in the rules as an assault 2 or 3 weapon. Obviously heavy bolters fill the niche of a heavy machine gun, being hugely more powerful than a modern .50 cal. (Which takes time to set up and begin firing - obviously far less mobile than a SAW or equivalent)

[kyron]

There is no reason to make the heavy stubber assault... it should still be heavy. It would just be a supliment to the heavy bolter. The heavy stubber as a special weapon and the heavy bolter as the heavy weapon. If you want the assault benefit you should have a vet sgt with a storm bolter instead.

[Mabus]

Hang on. I'm confused. Why do you guys want to move an imperial guard infantry squad? They are meant to sit still and blast away and not move throughout the game. You want mobile warfare, use Armoured fist squads or Storm troopers.

Heavy stubbers are cool yes, but froma gaming point of view they suck. They have a good range, that's it.

Don't get me wrong, all my tanks have Heavy stubbers, it's just I can't see the point in taking one when you could have a heavy bolter.

[knight (M.I.A)]

If you want Heavy Stubbers on infantry, start playing Necromunda, but in normal 40k they have no real sense except they're mounted on a tank...

[Commissar]

Well if you could make different rules for them. a bolter is more like a HMG while the stubber would kind of fill the role of a LMG by its stats.