# Why wouldn't you wear a helmet?



## Turkeyspit (Jun 11, 2010)

I just don't understand this...

From everything that I've read, the helm of a Space Marine's armor only serves to _enhance_ their already superior senses. I couldn't find any mention of a helmet hindering a SM's hearing/eyesight/etc...

eg. Even though SM's have gene-enhanced vision, the optics of their helm boost it even further.

The helm also offers (meager) protection from the enemy (why do helmets always get 'knocked off'..wtf) and the environment.

So aside from trying to look _badass_, why would a SM decide to not wear their helmet?

NB: I should say that I've noticed more SM's wearing their helm in recent BL books, but in pics and video games you see bareheaded SM Sgts. etc..

NBB: Librarians are the exception because of the psychic-hood-thingy.


NINJA EDIT: I believe the Space Wolves have an even superior sense of smell (a geneseed mutation iirc) compared to other SM's, so perhaps they get a 'bye' for not wearing a helmet in combat.


----------



## locustgate (Dec 6, 2009)

From something's I've read it said they wouldn't wear it if it didn't protect them from something,i.e. Laer's bullets.


----------



## yanlou (Aug 17, 2008)

i think its just the "cool factor",


----------



## Tim/Steve (Jan 25, 2009)

Its not always beneficial to wear the helmet- it enhances their senses in most cases but sometimes it doesnt help, eg non-comm communication and taste/feel of the atmosphere.
Mainly though I recon that the main fluff argument for a marine not wearing their helmet is that they feel they dont need to and want to 'experience' the situation more fully: that they prefer not to wear them all the time. I know someone who I've never ever known to not wear his cap... playing sports, at his job, in the pub he is always wearing it... but I bet he doesnt sleep in it (well, possibly).


----------



## Major Strombardt (Feb 22, 2009)

If I had to think like Space Marine Chapter Members one reason why helmets would not be worn IS the leadership factor. The eye-to-eye contact in up close battle is not just to intimidate the enemy but to inspire your troops and mates!

On the table-top of course it's "Faces and Bases" of course!


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

If you are a space wolf your senses are better then the ones in the helm... For any other answers, ask Carmine.


----------



## Supersonic Banana (Jul 23, 2010)

I think its because GW wanted to add a personal touch to some models and then the fluff got written around that.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

In the Ultramarine omnibus, one of the Deathwatch (a Space Wolf) takes off his helmet to better smell his intended target. He did say he could use his sense of smell through his helmet, but apparently the helm filters or distorts the smell somehow.


----------



## Turkeyspit (Jun 11, 2010)

hailene said:


> In the Ultramarine omnibus, one of the Deathwatch (a Space Wolf) takes off his helmet to better smell his intended target. He did say he could use his sense of smell through his helmet, but apparently the helm filters or distorts the smell somehow.


IIRC, that marine was a Space Wolf - see the NINJA EDIT in my original post :grin:


----------



## Davidicus 40k (Jun 4, 2010)

Some armies in WWI thought helmets were a sign of cowardice; maybe some Space Marines do, too? Some helmets are uncomfortable and bulky, or, like with Space Wolves, don't really add anything. Sometimes they fail to do their job, so there's no point wearing them (though I don't think that's the case with Space Marines). Sometimes, you just want people to see your smiling face as you cut them in half with your chainsword, or give your flowing goldie-locks some fresh air (like in my sig pic). 

Lots of reasons.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

I never see the point of non helmeted people. I always model helmets on every model in my army as it makes them look more badass. I would be more scared of the guy since I can't see his face.

Also lets face it those Mk 6 Beekee helmets are soo much better than current ones (I modelled all 18 Sternguad to have them)


----------



## Khorne's Fist (Jul 18, 2008)

I really think it's just a modelling thing. Even if they take them off every now and then, they'd still carry it with them. However, if you take the SWs, I think it's because they can't get all that hair into the helmet. Imagine Ragnar trying to get that topknot into a helmet, and Grimnar wouldn't be able to breathe if he had to shove that beard into one.


----------



## Supersonic Banana (Jul 23, 2010)

I always model my HQs with helmets as it helps me imagine that I am them (sad I know):so_happy:


----------



## ROT (Jun 25, 2010)

Supersonic Banana said:


> I always model my HQs with helmets as it helps me imagine that I am them (sad I know):so_happy:


Thats not sad Supersonic! 

When i play against my friend, we all put ourselves as one of the characters (no-named chars) and sometimes do crazy things to save ourselves XD.

Like i always put myself as my Daemon Prince, and when i ravage his puny Dark Reapers from behind, i like make growling noises and say cool catch phrases, while hes like NOOOOOOOO!! 

We're so cool. 
__________________________________

I wouldn't wear a helmet, because i'm a bad-ass. :mrgreen: But in honesty, sure it's probably extra armour, but if a well aimed Las-shot or missile hits your helmet dead on, It won't make a difference how good it makes your eyesight.

Because you'll be dead.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

@ ROT,

But then how would urial be able to catch the sniper round in his teeth?


----------



## deathbringer (Feb 19, 2009)

Space wolves its about scent, they have more keen senses so they like to expereinc battle without the cold sterility of a helm. The wolf within can find the helmet constricting, the lack of scents irritating and disconcerting. Thus many shun there helmets to give better sensory pereception of the battle and slaughter.


----------



## ROT (Jun 25, 2010)

OMG OMGOMGOMG THAT WOULD LOOK EVEN SWEETER.

SNIPER ROUND STRAIGHT THROUGH HIS HELM; 

EVERYONE IS LIKE: "NOOOO!!!"

THEN HE TAKES OFF HIS HELM AND SPITS OUT THE ROUND AND SAYS LIKE :

"It's gunna take more than that to kill me"

./Excited 

D


----------



## deathbringer (Feb 19, 2009)

Na have him spit it back out through the hole into the face of an enemy
The acid spit melts the guys face off.


----------



## Varakir (Sep 2, 2009)

deathbringer said:


> Na have him spit it back out through the hole into the face of an enemy
> The acid spit melts the guys face off.


I think you've just hit the nail on the head. With the helmet off it must be much easier to run around gobbing on people :grin:


----------



## Brother Subtle (May 24, 2009)

The same reason cricketers don't always wear helmets?


----------



## gauntsghost025 (Apr 9, 2009)

A helmet can be stifling. Open air, looking at a situation with your own eyes may enhance things. And Space Marines have thick skulls 

Wasn't the Space Puppy in the Deathwatch rebuked for removing his helm? So maybe it's not like they are "allowed" to go helmet-less if they choose.


----------



## Azezel (May 23, 2010)

There is an upper limit to just how thick a helmet can be and still be practical.

How thick is that? For a Space Marine, I don't know. I do know that it is very likely the thinest armour of the whole suit.

However, if 90% of the stuff that they're being shot with can pass straight through a Helmet then there's very little point in wearing it - and let's face it, 90% of the stuff Space Marines get shot with is very powerful.

That's about the size of it - I believe that Power Armour provides almost the same degree of protection with or without a helmet, due to the weakness of the helmet and the power of the incoming fire.


There is however, an alternate point of view. In the real universe, the sphere is the strongest shape possible. In the 40k universe, the strongest shape is that of the human skull. People don't need helmets because the skull is so strong that bullets cannot penetrate it. This also explains why engineers incorperate the skull-shape into everything - for its structural strength!

Or maybe Space Marines actually have their brains in their shoulders, not their heads, and their armour is designed with this in mind...


----------



## shaantitus (Aug 3, 2009)

Sm's won't look so clever if they get a shrapnel round in the eye. In much of the fluff the sm helmet will stop lasrounds and bolt shells regularly. I do recall instances of maines removing their helmet after a hit has damaged or scrambled their autosenses. Much better than if it had damaged or scrambled your face. Lets talk about terminator helmets. They can take anything and people still remove them.I would also like to make this point. Kharn is 10000 years old and has spent the entire time fighting and he still deems his helmet necessary. As does ahriman and typhus.


----------



## WarlordKaptainGrishnak (Dec 23, 2008)

shaantitus said:


> I would also like to make this point. Kharn is 10000 years old hand has spent the entire time fighting and he still deems his helmet necessary. As does ahriman and typhus.


lol i dont think Typhus could take his helmet off if he wanted to.


----------



## chromedog (Oct 31, 2007)

Azezel said:


> There is however, an alternate point of view. In the real universe, the sphere is the strongest shape possible. In the 40k universe, the strongest shape is that of the human skull. People don't need helmets because the skull is so strong that bullets cannot penetrate it.


This is why SM heroes have those 'studs' in their heads.
They aren't a reward for service.
They are bullet rounds that failed to penetrate their skulls.

So that snipers can go all "Boom! Headshot!" and the SM can go "Izzat all you got?" and grin, before getting all medieval on their arse like a grimdark Lobo.


----------



## WhoHitJohn? (Jul 3, 2010)

i think it would bepend on what race the space marine is fighting, because if they are taking on daemons then the helmets vison sensors can't pick up the daemon ( brothers of the snake) or it could be a nod towards the space marines knightly orders thing as knights would fight open faced (non-helmed in this case) agaist a foe that they deemed was an equal

and in a modeling point of veiw the face gives more personality to the model, and can give a background of its own, the arnie styled sargent head for exaple ( you know the one with half a bionic face................yes you do)


----------



## Warlock in Training (Jun 10, 2008)

SWs are covered for why they dont where a helmet.

In Fulgrim the EC take their helmets off a few times cause it wouldnt provide any additional protection, and I belive in that same book it was explain the helmet has Blind Spots. So wearing it gives you less veiw too look out for cheap shots and snipers.

The last big reason is head shots are often encourage in a war. As such a SM helmet shot too hell with mess up senses is hindering in a fight, thus they take the helmet off.


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

Brother Subtle said:


> The same reason cricketers don't always wear helmets?


Corky =/= 0.75 Calibre RPG.

Reduces periferal vision. When looking at a screen, you have no periferal vision in that screen in itself. If you do, you've not got full vision on the screen. No matter how big the screen, you'll still have reduced vision compared to a similar sized field in which natural eyesight can be used.

When spotting anything against a background, I always find it easier in the field to turn myself 30-60 degrees of where I'm looking - a) it reduces the enemies awareness that I'm looking in the right place, so allows me to search in peace for one of the five target indicators (noise, reflection, contrast, movement, and outline) and b) it allows my peripheral vision to come into play more.

Although I can't pick out the details, I'll see slight movement easier, such as the raising of a head, or shift of a leg to straighten the body when firing prone, to even more subtle signs, such as lack of animal noise, or populace etc. This allows me to then line myself up and take a shot, or put down some fire to get the targets head down, and let a designated sharpshooter to then make the score.

Edit: @ Warlock in Training, since when are head shots encouraged for? Christ, my SOP for firing is two in the chest, and one in the head when they're down. The chest is a big target, and when we're dealing with solid slugs, (i.e not lasers), something hitting you at 2 and half times the speed of sound will result in you going down, whether Hollywood wants you to or not. Very often, the final head shot comes into account when we're virtually over the combatants body and they're still showing signs of fighting.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Warlock in Training said:


> The last big reason is head shots are often encourage in a war. As such a SM helmet shot too hell with mess up senses is hindering in a fight, thus they take the helmet off.


Really? I was under the impression that our troops were trained to aim for the center of mass.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

I thought hitting the target was a good start-let alone headshots, thats just sad Halo players who spend faaar too much time on their xboxes. Although maybe I am bitter since I play SSB:B on my wii far too much.


----------



## gauntsghost025 (Apr 9, 2009)

WarlordKaptainGrishnak said:


> lol i dont think Typhus could take his helmet off if he wanted to.


We wouldn't want him to. Imagine how ugly he must be?


----------



## Major Strombardt (Feb 22, 2009)

Vaz said:


> Corky =/= 0.75 Calibre RPG.
> 
> Reduces periferal vision. When looking at a screen, you have no periferal vision in that screen in itself. If you do, you've not got full vision on the screen. No matter how big the screen, you'll still have reduced vision compared to a similar sized field in which natural eyesight can be used.
> 
> ...


Easy Vaz...you are not SAS and this is Space Marine stuff!

::too many vid games::

:nono:


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

Major Strombardt said:


> Easy Vaz...you are not SAS and this is Space Marine stuff!
> 
> ::too many vid games::
> 
> :nono:


I'm not 100% sure but I think Vaz is a member of the military, so it's not a case of too many video games in this case.


----------



## Tim/Steve (Jan 25, 2009)

Vaz is military... think it was royal marines or something but Im sure he'll let us know...


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Even if he wasn't, which he is, he is right. It is smarter to aim for center of mass. I asked my great uncle who was a ranger and he said they trained them to aim for the center of mass.


----------



## deathbringer (Feb 19, 2009)

Major Strombardt said:


> Easy Vaz...you are not SAS and this is Space Marine stuff!
> 
> ::too many vid games::
> 
> :nono:


Yeah dont mess with vaz he will ring you out like a hot flannel

I'm not in the sas but i have heard rumours that squads of britains elite do employ a little man to run behind them in missions keeping score and shouting boom "headshot" at appropriate intervals. Sometimes the truth is so much more exciting

As i said I wouldnt know as my combat experience is below a fat bastard who competed in an office paintball match and spent the entire time in the hut chomping at a doughnut but surely the momentum of a bullet in the chest even if it didnt pierce the kevlar chest armour would inflict enough force to knock the bastard down, skew his aim or generally keep him from shooting you?


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

Tim/Steve said:


> Vaz is military... think it was royal marines or something but Im sure he'll let us know...


Correct. And there are also several others serving currently, so should have been taught the same things during a Thursday War - daggy, and LTP I know of, djinn24 is US Transportation/Logs, so would have been at least told about that.

But in all respects, he's right. I'm not SAS. Don't hate the guy for telling the truth. I mean, what do I know? I've not been taught how to shoot to save my life, because you know, I'm not SAS.


----------



## Major Strombardt (Feb 22, 2009)

Well...I suppose I better keep my helmet* 'ON' for the time being as it seems there will be some 'Snipers' out there...:grin:

It's a game...It's a drama...It's fun...It's...It's...well, It's NOT real that's for sure!

Loads of people have military and combat experience here and they play the game as well...including me. If we took all the sage advice about helmets and armour and certain kill shots and applied them into the game...what do we have dice for?...Od course then I would hate to be Catachan on certain battlefileds!

*...Mines a Cadian by the way...:biggrin:


----------



## chromedog (Oct 31, 2007)

Centre of body mass is where most militaries train people to shoot.

Headshots are for when it's the only visible target and you happen to be sniping. 

The majority of hits will be body hits with extremities next. The objective is not to kill the enemy, it is to make them lay down and stop bothering you.


----------



## Warlock in Training (Jun 10, 2008)

Vaz said:


> Edit: @ Warlock in Training, since when are head shots encouraged for? Christ, my SOP for firing is two in the chest, and one in the head when they're down. The chest is a big target, and when we're dealing with solid slugs, (i.e not lasers), something hitting you at 2 and half times the speed of sound will result in you going down, whether Hollywood wants you to or not. Very often, the final head shot comes into account when we're virtually over the combatants body and they're still showing signs of fighting.





gen.ahab said:


> Really? I was under the impression that our troops were trained to aim for the center of mass.





Stephen_Newman said:


> I thought hitting the target was a good start-let alone headshots, thats just sad Halo players who spend faaar too much time on their xboxes. Although maybe I am bitter since I play SSB:B on my wii far too much.


First off I use to be a MA and now a Seabee. I have my Expert Medals in Rifles and Pistol. Its true you (in America and any common sense SOP) to aim center chest, larger target. However as some have said, 2 in the chest, 1 in the head. The Head shot is the sure kill. The chest shot is gaurante to hurt something. Snipers shoot to kill, ask any Marine Recon Sniper, thus LOTS of Head shots.When Im facing a guy in full body armore your wasting your time with a 9mm or 5.56, thats what Im issued, so in short me (and others) will aim for the head. I dont know how other countries do this, thats how we roll.

I cant belive so many nit pick head shots, like shooting the Power Armore at its thickets (minus the Pauldrons) is pretty surprising. My bad.



chromedog said:


> Centre of body mass is where most militaries train people to shoot.
> 
> Headshots are for when it's the only visible target and you happen to be sniping.
> 
> The majority of hits will be body hits with extremities next. The objective is not to kill the enemy, it is to make them lay down and stop bothering you.


Everything you say is true, however the last part not how it is. Theres a saying when I was taught by Blackwater, "Its better to come home to a Court Martial than a Body Bag." I firmly belive that SOPs and silly ROE get your ass killed.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Never liked 5.56... Don't like the whole " smaller round so able to take more" school of thought. If I were ever to join the armed forces as a combat troop, I plan on being a doc in the navy, I would much rather use the 7.62x51 round.


----------



## Khargoth (Aug 5, 2010)

Have any of you guys actually worn a gasmask or full-face helmet? It's stifling. Even with gene-enhanced eyes, staring point-blank at a video screen would still make you feel blind. Your directional hearing is distorted because it's replayed through the helmet speakers, your peripheral vision is all but bust, and you can't feel environmental warnings like hot air or that faint _whoosh_ disturbance as something misses you by millimeters.

It's probably an enforceable procedure to wear your helm, footslogging marines would get slapped for forgoing it. Higher-ranking marines have the privilege of ignoring certain procedures, and may decide to sacrifice the helmet's protection for purer sensory input. Of course it really is just Rule of Cool but you can at least put a fluff justification on it.


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

gen.ahab said:


> Never liked 5.56... Don't like the whole " smaller round so able to take more" school of thought. If I were ever to join the armed forces as a combat troop, I plan on being a doc in the navy, I would much rather use the 7.62x51 round.


When you're carrying 3 weeks of equipment in one bergen, you'll want 200 rounds of 556 instead of 200 762.

When you going on patrol in Helmand, or Hindu Kush, you'll want 300 556 instead of 200 762.

I've been in use of the new L129A1 in the last couple of months, and hated lugging all the other kit around with it. Yeah, II, and the 6x ACOG are awesome pieces of kit, but the ammunition was the worst. To carry the same amount of ammunition, I'm carrying half as much weight as usual.

@ Warlock in training - double tapping the chest will knock someone down, and allow the third round to hit them in the neck or head, as you allow the rifle to rise.

I have my marksman badge (Crossed Rifles), and have always preferred the use of the 5.56 etc - trained with it through CTCRM, and spent 10 years this winter with them. Might just be familiarity of using the L85, and the C7/8, but placing your first shot just below the Sternum at around 200-300 metres, you don't need to fight the weapon pulling up, only when it pulls to the right, as the next 3 shots will hit neck/head, or chest/neck. At longer distances, repetition is needed, so you can't really accurate fire at that range.

But yes, to targeting Space Marines, the chest is a solid piece of metal. Hitting that with equivalent weaponry in 40K (An autogun) would do one of two things - knock the marine down (unlikely due to the recoil compensators), or stitch upwards, and nail the fucker in the neck/face.

However, you can't really use todays battle logic against something which has been developed by a group of people (with no knowledge of how to even fire anything more realistic than a Playstation controller) to counter every single potential battle tactic - i.e the ability to withstand rounds from the equivalent of a 30mm HEDP round.


----------



## Khargoth (Aug 5, 2010)

Vaz said:


> I have my marksman badge (Crossed Rifles), and have always preferred the use of the 5.56 etc - trained with it through CTCRM, and spent 10 years this winter with them. Might just be familiarity of using the L85, and the C7/8, but placing your first shot just below the Sternum at around 200-300 metres, you don't need to fight the weapon pulling up, only when it pulls to the right, as the next 3 shots will hit neck/head, or chest/neck.


Yikes. L85A2 or the old SA80 version? You'd probably grow to love any other 5.56 bullpup in the world because they wouldn't break all the time...


----------



## Turkeyspit (Jun 11, 2010)

Khargoth said:


> Have any of you guys actually worn a gasmask or full-face helmet? It's stifling. Even with gene-enhanced eyes, staring point-blank at a video screen would still make you feel blind. Your directional hearing is distorted because it's replayed through the helmet speakers, your peripheral vision is all but bust, and you can't feel environmental warnings like hot air or that faint _whoosh_ disturbance as something misses you by millimeters.


Except...by all reports of what I've read, the 'video screen' proffers _superior_ vision compared to a SM's gene-enhancement, and the audio is _superior_ to a SM's gene-enhanced hearing. That is also to say nothing of the HUD, target reticules, squad status, and the myriad of other things displayed on a Space Marine's visor.

_That_ is what doesn't make sense to me. With the exception of the Space Wolves mutated sense of smell, the helmet upgrades all of a SM's senses, provides additional tactical information, as well as (however meager) physical protection to a vital part of their physiology.

*Space Marine Captain:* Why did you take off your helmet?
*Space Marine in trouble:* Because I wanted to look cooler
*Space Marine Captain:* So now you can hear less, see less, have less tactical information, and are more vulnerable to the attacks of your enemies?
*Space Marine in trouble:* ......yeah, but I look cooler


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

Khargoth said:


> Yikes. L85A2 or the old SA80 version? You'd probably grow to love any other 5.56 bullpup in the world because they wouldn't break all the time...


Yeah. We always go on the rob for the Pathfinders stores. Apparently they've got access to some of the new SFW's, so we might be seeing some of the C8's coming our way in bulk.

To be fair, they're not bad, provided you take care of them, although just the smell of sand will fuck them up.

@ Turkeyspit - Perifphery senses are something which auto-senses can't pick up. Periphery vision is the most obvious - you can only see what the lens can see - and your eyes have an almost 20% increase in viewing area to the typical flat screen lens.


----------



## Khargoth (Aug 5, 2010)

Turkeyspit said:


> Except...by all reports of what I've read, the 'video screen' proffers _superior_ vision compared to a SM's gene-enhancement, and the audio is _superior_ to a SM's gene-enhanced hearing. That is also to say nothing of the HUD, target reticules, squad status, and the myriad of other things displayed on a Space Marine's visor.


It may be superior in that it allows the Marine to see in infra-red, low light zoom etc, but the view screen will have a lower resolution than human vision, _especially_ gene-enhanced vision, meaning at a glance you have less eye for detail. The 2D screen also means your depth perception is flawed.

It's a similar case for hearing. It may be 'superior' in that you can adjust the volume, filter out certain sounds, hear sounds you wouldn't normally be able to, but having the sound replayed to you through speakers eliminates quality, which may be needed to pick out that crucial sound. The shortcomings of speakers would be even more apparent to a Space Marine's enhanced hearing. Lastly, even if they were very advanced arrays of speakers, directional hearing would still be flawed.

The helmet is probably superior for options and seeing/hearing things not normally detectable, but the lower quality of 'raw' senses may prove to be too annoying for some marines.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

I hate bullpups in general. They have an auto shooting range about 30 mins away from here and my dad has a simi bullpup and I didn't really like the thing. It took more time to reload and I couldn't hipfire it worth a damn, something I can do fairly well with an AR.

I think I would still prefer 7.62x51, 5.51 doesn't seem to have enough kick to it.

Back on topic, what all is on the HUD of a SM helm?


----------



## Turkeyspit (Jun 11, 2010)

Vaz said:


> @ Turkeyspit - Perifphery senses are something which auto-senses can't pick up. Periphery vision is the most obvious - you can only see what the lens can see - and your eyes have an almost 20% increase in viewing area to the typical flat screen lens.


That makes sense. k:



Khargoth said:


> It may be superior in that it allows the Marine to see in infra-red, low light zoom etc, but the view screen will have a lower resolution than human vision, _especially_ gene-enhanced vision, meaning at a glance you have less eye for detail. The 2D screen also means your depth perception is flawed.
> 
> It's a similar case for hearing. It may be 'superior' in that you can adjust the volume, filter out certain sounds, hear sounds you wouldn't normally be able to, but having the sound replayed to you through speakers eliminates quality, which may be needed to pick out that crucial sound. The shortcomings of speakers would be even more apparent to a Space Marine's enhanced hearing. Lastly, even if they were very advanced arrays of speakers, directional hearing would still be flawed.
> 
> The helmet is probably superior for options and seeing/hearing things not normally detectable, but the lower quality of 'raw' senses may prove to be too annoying for some marines.


That makes even more sense. :good:

Ty both!


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

Just a quick quote from the Lexicanum on the Mark 2 (thus older and inferior) power armor:

"The helmet is fitted with automatic sensory devices developed on Mars, this allows the wearer to see and hear as though not wearing a helmet, and, since all information is transmitted to a computer in the helmet before being transmitted directly to the wearer's brain via neural link, blinding lights and deafening noises can be muted so that they don't harm the wearer. The wearer is also able to see in the infra-red and ultra-violet spectrum, and images can be zoomed in and magnified."

Looks like it's a win/win for the helmet.


----------



## Warlock in Training (Jun 10, 2008)

I have no clue how L85s handle (always like the look of it) but the M16 is really accurate in Semi Auto with little to know kick until you hit Full Auto. M14s are even better. If I could I just walk with a MK19 paking HE rounds but Im not Rambo.... that would be so cool, the super Bolter. 

Back on topic, I know the Helmet has alot of kickass benefits with the HUD display. In Night Haunter, with older Helmets they can determin weak spots in armore, have Predator Vision Modes, can give full readouts of their body, and the ever usful retinal scanning Vox channels is down right invaluable. 

Some Marines dont wear it cause it does get easly mess up from gunfire, hits, ect. Then everything is reduce or not working. Some Marines rather use their own senses to the fullest, the Helmet has sound enhancers if activated but seems to auto sound/visual reducers that can mess with your senses. Hell in the far futur where WW1 and WW2 tanks are high tech really makes me wonder the helmets real capabilities.Some Marines just dont think they need it, or discard it thru the battle.

Now CSMs is another matter, their mutations and gifts can make the Helmet obselote or not pratical.


----------



## Khargoth (Aug 5, 2010)

hailene said:


> Just a quick quote from the Lexicanum on the Mark 2 (thus older and inferior) power armor:


I thought the older armours were generally more advanced and venerated pieces of equipment? Also explains why Typhus, Ahriman and Kharn wear helmets; they've still got the good stuff.


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

Khargoth said:


> I thought the older armours were generally more advanced and venerated pieces of equipment? Also explains why Typhus, Ahriman and Kharn wear helmets; they've still got the good stuff.


MKs.1-5 are definitely inferior to the later types.


----------



## Boganius Maximal (Oct 31, 2009)

Maybe some of them just plain like the smell of promethium and alien/heretic/daemonic offal and other assorted warzone byproducts before breakfast?????


----------



## Waaagh_Bong (Aug 10, 2010)

SM helmets come in a variety of colors; a real plus for the more ostentious Warboss.


----------



## Captin Falcon (Aug 16, 2010)

The reason they were helmets is because if you get hit a glance with a boltgun shell it will protect you. also you can now see in the dark, get tactical info and go in space/underwater/airless worlds when you were a helmet. space wolfs are the only exeption because they can't smell their prey with their helmet on, not saying they don't have helmets, they don't were them.


----------



## hippypancake (Jul 14, 2010)

Captin Falcon said:


> space wolfs are the only exeption because they can't smell their prey with their helmet on, not saying they don't have helmets, they don't were them.


Not true...Helmets dampen ALL of the space wolves senses including sight. they can pretty much already see in the dark with their enhanced senses as well. Also they don't wear helmets except for situations that you listed Underwater, In Space ect.


----------



## Belthazor Aurellius (Jan 16, 2009)

I seem to recall reading stories from the Ultramarines Omnibus and from the Horus Heresy wherein heroic officers would enter the fight, wearing their helmet, drawing on tactical information fed back to them through the vox network, and make tactical decisions based on that input. These officers at some point, after suffering a very severe shot to the face, discarded their half-burnt/fractured/shattered/static-vision helmet, in favor of being able to see, hear and still communicate with vox.

I would imagine that the models are depicted without their helmets, for various reasons, ranging from possibly being a pre-battle badassery or that they were talking to their commander/subbordinate and wanted to have the full range of facial expressions.

I model some of my commanders with helmets, and some without. I also put helmetless heads on various random troopers in tactical, assault and elite squads to represent the fact that it's not just the officers who get their helmet shot to sh*t. The power armor (especially the pauldrons) still provides significant cover for the head, and yes, to some extent, the space marine's black carapace does cover the skull, providing it with a somewhat bullet-proof armor (lasguns and bolter glancing hits would fail to kill a marine, but might still send him reeling in pain).

There's a lot to why they might take it off, but for the most part, it's simply when the helmet is broken too much to be functional. Not simply malfunctioning (see Starship Troopers, to find out why you don't remove a helmet simply because it's malfunctioning...), but outright broken, in half or shards.


----------



## Sangus Bane (Jun 17, 2009)

You want to let your enemy see your face while he dies...

It's either that or the feeling you are far more involved in the fighting around you.

An about games: you can relate yourself way better when the characters arent wearing helmets and you can actually see their faces.


----------



## dewn_moutain (Aug 7, 2010)

two schools of thought on the helmet issue.

1) a SM will wear it cuz it imputs all the spatial information onto the built in HUD, location icons for fellow marines, red icons for enemy, when someone speaks, it shows an image showing Xmission. so, aside from enhancing senses and all that other stuff, its for target location

the other thought
2) look at the new armor, the MIX, it has a high neck guard. its supposed to protect the neck area, or "the bullet catcher". the round would bounce off of the highly armored breast plate, and go up under the chin of the helmet, piercing the jaw line and bouncing around the brain pan. So some marines would pull their helmet off to prevent "bullet catch".

and just to be that guy...

I would rather have 300+ rounds of 5.56 ammo for my m16a4 (was offered an M4, but refused, didnt like it), which had your basic iron sights (i refused my ACOG, felt it hindered my shoot grouping, which it did.). I also shot in my helmet, cuz you should train how you fight.

little known fact, the kevlar helmet is actually designed to catch a bullet, not stop it.

i could go on, but thats enough for now. Ive done my part for freedom, im not one to preach it.


----------



## 5tonsledge (May 31, 2010)

i think its another one of those GW using those old Red coat military style fighting. old school fighting in the 1800's you had a sergant with a sword and a pistol who instructed when the troops sent a volley of shots. the pistol and sword was all for flash because in practical warfare it makes no sense. so i think its just for show. and you never know some veterans just chose to do things their own way and besides who knows it could be a peripheral vision thing. maybe those helments narrow their 180 degree eye sight.


----------



## dewn_moutain (Aug 7, 2010)

you know, i read an article about Jack Malcolm Thorpe Fleming Churchill, during WWII he actually used a longbow and a claymore in battle, saying "any officer who goes into action without his sword is improperly dressed."
It is a good read, and i encourage everyone to read it

id post the website link, but i think i read somewhere that its verboten to do that. (if someone has the yeas and nays, just let me know please)


----------



## Belthazor Aurellius (Jan 16, 2009)

Jack Malcolm Thorpe Fleming Churchill you say? And that's Fleming, not Flemming, right? Sounds like an interesting bloke. But, did he wear his helmet?


----------



## Turkeyspit (Jun 11, 2010)

Belthazor Aurellius said:


> Jack Malcolm Thorpe Fleming Churchill you say? And that's Fleming, not Flemming, right? Sounds like an interesting bloke. But, did he wear his helmet?


His friends called him 'Mad Jack' - might have had something to do with carrying bagpipes alongside his claymore and bow :shok:


----------



## Endymion (Jul 19, 2010)

This guy? Is awesome.


----------



## Tensiu (Aug 15, 2009)

Dear God, he's gonna be one of mah next army's commander. Taking bow and a sword to a gunfight? What the bloody hell? He was either mad or epically badass. Oh no, wait, he might be both...


----------



## Endymion (Jul 19, 2010)

Tensiu said:


> Dear God, he's gonna be one of mah next army's commander. Taking bow and a sword to a gunfight? What the bloody hell? He was either mad or epically badass. Oh no, wait, he might be both...


The thing is he went into WWII using a sword and bow and actually *survived*.

Anyway, on topic... Maybe the helmets are just uncomfortable...

I think a lot of it is simply a choice made by the sculptors to show "badassness". I know all my marines have helmets as I personally think it makes them look more... Professional.

I suppose that some of the higher ranking marines may also think it's safer to remove it due to having an Iron Halo or Storm Shield perhaps. 

To be honest I think it's all been said for the most part.


----------



## Warlock in Training (Jun 10, 2008)

Wow, I heard the name but never knew the sword/bow deal. Badass.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Thats so stupid it is badass. I love it.


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

Jack Churchhill at No.3
http://www.cracked.com/article_17019_5-real-life-soldiers-who-make-rambo-look-like-pussy.html


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Thank you baron.... The story of Audie Murphy made my day.


----------



## Belthazor Aurellius (Jan 16, 2009)

Indeed. But he wore his helmet!


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

Baron Spikey said:


> Jack Churchhill at No.3
> http://www.cracked.com/article_17019_5-real-life-soldiers-who-make-rambo-look-like-pussy.html


"If it wasn't for those damn Yanks, we could have kept the war going another 10 years!"

Ahaha!


----------



## ThaPinkPownerFatty (Aug 12, 2010)

Davidicus 40k said:


> Some armies in WWI thought helmets were a sign of cowardice; maybe some Space Marines do, too?


so if they think that wearing a helmet is for cowards , what the hell would they think about power armour? so in the eyes of those space marines imperial guardsmen are like fearless guys like rambo? no that wouldnt make sens.


----------



## Tensiu (Aug 15, 2009)

Remember, we're talking about univerce where Imperial commander can run into fight before his men, first start slaying enemies with sword, stay in battle for the longest time and survive largely unscratched... Besides, if you can die with metal, non-powered sword standing out your chest, with your tank-like armour pierced...


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Well im a squaddie, and my helmet really grips my shit at times. It's stiffling, uncomfortable at times, collects sweat all round your forehead and chin, can be bulky and get in the way at times. I realise my helmet doesnt enchance my senses in anyway or on the same level or comparison as a marine helmet. but hey there you go


----------



## stormvermin123 (Aug 20, 2010)

Ive learned that its just to see snipers easier :victory:


----------

