Frazzled wrote:

Catyrpelius wrote:A Rocket Powered Power Point Stick would be to powerful and break the game.

A Sword or an Axe has more Kinetic energy then a bullet.

Do you have stats on the foot pounds of a sword or axe? Lets then compare that to a .308 round (7.62 NATO for you Eurodudes). That would be interesting. The intranets are showing all over the place for a sword from 70 to 2000 (what the?) need to investigate more.

Catyrpelius wrote:The bullet is deflected by the GG armor and he chops your head off with his axe. He then feasts on Roast Weiner dog.

Melissia wrote:Yes, assuming that you can actually hit at 600 meters, which most people can't, and assuming you and the enemy have 600 meters of flat, open terrain between you, which is unlikely.

Frazzled wrote:Well thats the best possible scenario for him. Otherwise we're talking something much more interesting, like my guy calling artillery on the fool running at him with a pointy stick, or having a gun with a whole lot of bullets, after all even in the far future mankind has evolved beyond...flintlocks.

Catyrpelius wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Catyrpelius wrote:A Rocket Powered Power Point Stick would be to powerful and break the game.

A Sword or an Axe has more Kinetic energy then a bullet.

Do you have stats on the foot pounds of a sword or axe? Lets then compare that to a .308 round (7.62 NATO for you Eurodudes). That would be interesting. The intranets are showing all over the place for a sword from 70 to 2000 (what the?) need to investigate more.

The problem is though, that the sword or axe has alot more weight behind it where as the bullet is fairly light... It sort of balances, but not quite.

Catyrpelius wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Well thats the best possible scenario for him. Otherwise we're talking something much more interesting, like my guy calling artillery on the fool running at him with a pointy stick, or having a gun with a whole lot of bullets, after all even in the far future mankind has evolved beyond...flintlocks.

Yupp, now some PDF's fight with Laslocks.

Catyrpelius wrote:The majority of the 40k universe isnt CC oriented though. There are many forces that get owned in CC if they cant stop the enemy from reaching them.

Frazzled wrote:Well thats the best possible scenario for him.

Melissia wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Well thats the best possible scenario for him.

Him who is the one being fired at, no.

It's an ideal situation for the one actually doing the firing.

Thus the lower demands on supply lines for the later in a universe of scarce resources promotes it as a viable means of fighting. The fact that any army in the 40k universe uses close combat units would then demand the capability to fend off or counter attack those units, such that some like nids and orks use it as a matter of principle while marines may have first used it more reactionary.

As for the rest, no, I wasn't tlaking about penetration. Nice for you to notice. But actually in many cases modern body armor isn't really all that good against knives and etc compared to bullets... not without much heavier armor.

Frazzled wrote:

Catyrpelius wrote:The majority of the 40k universe isnt CC oriented though. There are many forces that get owned in CC if they cant stop the enemy from reaching them.

Yep. Tau, your average guard dude against many of his opponents, humans against those nefarious demon dudes.

Melissia wrote:Cleaner cut wounds, maybe, but also much larger wounds, and cutting more of the body as the weapon goes in then out. I never doubted the lethality of hydrostatic shock, but when one considers somethign with the strength of a raging ork slashing its huge, heavy, and sharp choppa across a person's body, it has the potential to literally cut them in half through sheer brute force.

(mind you, humans have survived really peculiar wounds, like having a pickaxe stuck in one's head and still managing to live a normal life after it was pulled out...).

Frazzled wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:One battle axe vs one bullet... the bullet needs only miss once to be rendered inconsequential. We can go into all the reason a bullet that optimized hitting an unarmored target is better, but against armor it would knock the guy down and he'd get back up. In 40k every time you roll a hit but fail to wound thats exactly whats happend. Depending on armor and the bullet the armor may still be good or rendered useless. In a close combat fight an axe would shatter a modern balistic plate, much like a powersword through a guardsmen.

From a lethality stand point, axes have more mass and more contact area, in an engagement causing a larger volume of superficial wounds, to armored areas: blunt force trauma and broken bones and unarmored: disemboweling and loss of limb.

1. Of course my real point was that a bullet will penetrate better than an axe, but going with this topic:

2. I have a bullet and the good guy ("GG") has an axe. I shoot GG from 600 meters away. I miss. GG charges

I run away laughing, or

I wait.
I wait some more.
I make breakfast.
drink some coffee.
ponder the ultimate greatness that is the Emperor's wisdom.
I reload.
I shoot the good guy.

Catyrpelius wrote:The bullet is deflected by the GG armor and he chops your head off with his axe. He then feasts on Roast Weiner dog.

Catyrpelius wrote:My bad, I havent had much interaction with Eldar.

Either way my work day is over so I'm going to head to a FLGS and start working on some Flames of War stuff. So later guys.

Frazzled wrote:

Catyrpelius wrote:A Rocket Powered Power Point Stick would be to powerful and break the game.

A Sword or an Axe has more Kinetic energy then a bullet.

Do you have stats on the foot pounds of a sword or axe? Lets then compare that to a .308 round (7.62 NATO for you Eurodudes). That would be interesting. The intranets are showing all over the place for a sword from 70 to 2000 (what the?) need to investigate more.

Catyrpelius wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Well thats the best possible scenario for him. Otherwise we're talking something much more interesting, like my guy calling artillery on the fool running at him with a pointy stick, or having a gun with a whole lot of bullets, after all even in the far future mankind has evolved beyond...flintlocks.

Yupp, now some PDF's fight with Laslocks.

Crantor wrote:Melissa: Modern body armour incorporates kevlar plating over vital areas. No knife is getting through that. And 600m is the effective range for a section of infantry soldiers. 300-400m as individuals.

There is a reason why we don`t use swords and lances anymore. You just don't win against people with guns.

Crantor wrote:Melissa: Modern body armour incorporates kevlar plating over vital areas. No knife is getting through that. And 600m is the effective range for a section of infantry soldiers. 300-400m as individuals.

There is a reason why we don`t use swords and lances anymore. You just don't win against people with guns.

Crantor wrote:Melissa: Modern body armour incorporates kevlar plating over vital areas. No knife is getting through that. And 600m is the effective range for a section of infantry soldiers. 300-400m as individuals.

There is a reason why we don`t use swords and lances anymore. You just don't win against people with guns.

Frazzled wrote:You have a point there....get it..

Of course if blades were still and issue we'd go to hard plate ceramics, or even high tech mail from advanced materials. That would be kind of cool...

ChrisWWII wrote:

Frazzled wrote:You have a point there....get it..

Of course if blades were still and issue we'd go to hard plate ceramics, or even high tech mail from advanced materials. That would be kind of cool...

Then RPPPS (Rocket Propelled Powered Pointy Sticks) would become the standard issue infantry weapon.

Melissia wrote:HEAP rockets basically are pointy sticks with explosives in them.

Melissia wrote:That's just a model, it's not representative of how the weapon looks in the fluff.

If the weapon was as thin as it was in the fluff it would snap easily on the model.

Also, for most weapons it's quite necessary to have the center of the blade, length-wise, to be thicker than the edges... it just isn't necessarily to a huge degree.

Melissia wrote:Which is overly stylized, but I don't particularly pay much attention to space marine art as representative of how things are in the universe. Especially seeing as to me Space Marines aren't really all that important in 40k to begin with (as opposed to 30k).

gendoikari87 wrote:

Crantor wrote:Melissa: Modern body armour incorporates kevlar plating over vital areas. No knife is getting through that. And 600m is the effective range for a section of infantry soldiers. 300-400m as individuals.

There is a reason why we don`t use swords and lances anymore. You just don't win against people with guns.

unfortunately as someone else said, kevlar is defeated by the humble knife (good knives but still knives) 100 something pounds going into a thrust at the tip of a knife just cuts right though the stuff. The problem is actually getting into knife range. Dragon skin however stops both. But it's only good as a civilian/police vest. if it ever hits 150 Degrees F it permanently fails.

ChrisWWII wrote:Not to mention, half of the images of Space Marines are no doubt Imperial Propaganda trying to make them look cool and awesome so the citizens remained utterly terrified of the Angels of Death coming to them if they even think about rebelling.

Range will always be an advantage to a rifle over an axe. Just realize even in WWI soldiers were given axes and swords

StarGate wrote:I dont know if any one menton this before, In fluff and in a codex, they mention what a bolter fires a .75 cal( yes larger then a 50cal) caseless projectile. Why do they show shell casing ejecting for effect... why is there a ejection port( possile for clearing a jam..) but modern caseless rounds would be just pushed out of the way by the following round..(like in the weapon system of steel rain).

Melissia wrote:Considering Ciaphas Cain used his chainsword to bisect Orks in his third book,I'd say it is certainly capable of bisecting a human as well.

As for bolters... they are not caseless. Spent shell casings from bolters are considered good luck charms even, especially Astartes or Sororitas bolter shell casings.

Melissia wrote:Considering Ciaphas Cain used his chainsword to bisect Orks in his third book,I'd say it is certainly capable of bisecting a human as well.

As for bolters... they are not caseless. Spent shell casings from bolters are considered good luck charms even, especially Astartes or Sororitas bolter shell casings.

Melissia wrote:As for bolters... they are not caseless. Spent shell casings from bolters are considered good luck charms even, especially Astartes or Sororitas bolter shell casings.

GamzaTheChaos wrote:How does the "fluff" describe a chainsword then? and even if that guard is half as thick it still won't work. how can something thicker then a saw edge cut and follow through at all?

ChrisWWII wrote:No, we get what you're saying completely. There is a guard on top of a chainsword, which SHOULD make it impossible for the chainsword to go up to the guard, but no further. However, Melissia was pointing out that there are fluff examples where chainswords cleanly go through things that you say they shouldn't, and the fluff overpowers what you say should happen, and we have to work with what happened.

That means, that there is obviously SOMETHING that makes it possible for chainswords to slice through things even though the guard (to our eyes) makes it impossible. We just don't have enough information to know what that thing is. THink about it this way. If you were standing in a room and you watched a man appear out of a swirling portal and walk straight past you, would you assume that since you can't figure out the mechanism for how the guy did that, it's obviously physically impossible, or would you assume that there was some kind of mechanism that made the impossible possible that you just don't know about?

We get what you're saying. You're just wrong.

B) GW has no idea what they're saying actually means.

Melissia wrote:HEAP rockets basically are pointy sticks with explosives in them.

aka_mythos wrote:Bolter shells are described as "caseless,"

GamzaTheChaos wrote:I don't even understand how you guys can't even grasp the concept haha how can a skinny blade cut a grove much thicker than itself allowing the bulk on the chainsword frame too pass through.

I am literally laughing right now xD

let me give this one more try with an example.

a chainsaw can cut a tree in half yes? now put a guard on the back end of that chainsaw and and tell me how the hell you would cut that tree in half with that guard on it. even if the guard is half an inch thick that chainsaw will only cut UP TO the guard not completely through

if this doesn't work I am going to draw a disgusting microsoft paint picture for you guys.

Frazzled wrote:

GamzaTheChaos wrote:I don't even understand how you guys can't even grasp the concept haha how can a skinny blade cut a grove much thicker than itself allowing the bulk on the chainsword frame too pass through.

I am literally laughing right now xD

let me give this one more try with an example.

a chainsaw can cut a tree in half yes? now put a guard on the back end of that chainsaw and and tell me how the hell you would cut that tree in half with that guard on it. even if the guard is half an inch thick that chainsaw will only cut UP TO the guard not completely through

if this doesn't work I am going to draw a disgusting microsoft paint picture for you guys.

You're right. As noted, chainswords are stupid.

aka_mythos wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:

Crantor wrote:Melissa: Modern body armour incorporates kevlar plating over vital areas. No knife is getting through that. And 600m is the effective range for a section of infantry soldiers. 300-400m as individuals.

There is a reason why we don`t use swords and lances anymore. You just don't win against people with guns.

unfortunately as someone else said, kevlar is defeated by the humble knife (good knives but still knives) 100 something pounds going into a thrust at the tip of a knife just cuts right though the stuff. The problem is actually getting into knife range. Dragon skin however stops both. But it's only good as a civilian/police vest. if it ever hits 150 Degrees F it permanently fails.

Just to add to that... do you know what they use to cut kevlar when they make things out of it? Scissors. A knife is better than that.

Range will always be an advantage to a rifle over an axe. Just realize even in WWI soldiers were given axes and swords for the inevitable melee you end up in when you climb into someone elses trench. The point isn't so much that gun beats axe as it is gun and axe beat just gun (given the right circumstance). The "right circumstance" almost never happens because of the consistent and persistent levels of fire support modern infantry are provided. The modern tactic being suppress and allow fire support to kill.

40k can justify the right circumstances with its setting where the quality of persistent support isn't consistent; where instead of relying on accurate fire support to drive an enemy out or wipe them out infantry are more often forced into such close quarter fighting as to be hand to hand.

GamzaTheChaos wrote:flesh sure! because it has some give it can stretch in can tear. but solid armor? and no just because fluff states it doesn't mean I am instantly wrong we aren't talking about some crazy thing like porting through walls etc.

the ONLY way its possible for it to cut completely though a solid object is for it to simply not be there! a chainsword is not ultra advanced technology
we can make one with todays limits. its not filled with powers of the warp it doesn't have any crazy design we can't replicate except MAYBE what powers it.
they don't have some tricky design that allows it to do the otherwise impossible.

I am simply saying its a problem they never seen. if it was possible I am sure all chainsaws would have a fixed guard. but no none of them do because its simply impossible and it defeats the whole purpose of making a complete cut.


its not about something complicated its about common sense that its simply not possible by the means they apply it.


soooooooooo =P

we don`t carry swords and we do not carry chainsaws either.

Crantor wrote:My mistake. I meant to say Ceramic plating is incorporated into modern body armour. Cisors and knives are not getting through that...

My guess is the bolter, looking at it from a scale perspective looks more like a 20-40mm barrel. The magazines on the weapons look like they could hold 10-12 rounds max.

gendoikari87 wrote:
Problem is chainswords obey the laws of cool not physics and we know nothing about how the laws of cool work except that they're cool.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

we don`t carry swords and we do not carry chainsaws either.

yeah we do, army corp of engineers. they just don't swing them at the enemy they swing them at trees to get them out of the way.

Catyrpelius wrote:the Astartes version.

aka_mythos wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:

Crantor wrote:Melissa: Modern body armour incorporates kevlar plating over vital areas. No knife is getting through that. And 600m is the effective range for a section of infantry soldiers. 300-400m as individuals.

There is a reason why we don`t use swords and lances anymore. You just don't win against people with guns.

unfortunately as someone else said, kevlar is defeated by the humble knife (good knives but still knives) 100 something pounds going into a thrust at the tip of a knife just cuts right though the stuff. The problem is actually getting into knife range. Dragon skin however stops both. But it's only good as a civilian/police vest. if it ever hits 150 Degrees F it permanently fails.

Just to add to that... do you know what they use to cut kevlar when they make things out of it? Scissors. A knife is better than that.

Catyrpelius wrote:We've moved on to Jet packs now. Chainsaws are soooooooo 5 minutes ago.

Catyrpelius wrote:Im not sure what your space marines fly around on, but the packs on my plastic men look nothing like that.

Anidem wrote:Though based on gameplay in Dawn of war II, im under the impression it was just made for a really big "hop" of sorts to get up/down cliffs or on/off transports. So this flight-suit maybe waaaay out of the scope of space-marine packs, and more akin to the Battle Suits employed by Tau

Melissia wrote:http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1252489_99120101034_SMAssaultSqdmain_873x627.jpg

Viewed from the side, I Can see why he said that. Mind you, these are obviously more advanced than that.

Crantor wrote:

Catyrpelius wrote:Im not sure what your space marines fly around on, but the packs on my plastic men look nothing like that.

Ok, I thought the thread was about modern comparisons? key word here is comparisons.

So if we are going by what your little plastic men look like when they fly around in your hand while you make whooshing noises then yeah I guess we can make no comparisons at all. In fact nothing in the 40K universe that`s worth mentioning is comparable.

Though all of the above would do diddly squat from a .50 Barret Sniperifle (or an intervention for that matter) which uses rounds desinged to peirce modern tank armor.

gendoikari87 wrote:

Melissia wrote:http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1252489_99120101034_SMAssaultSqdmain_873x627.jpg

Viewed from the side, I Can see why he said that. Mind you, these are obviously more advanced than that.

You know the packs fairly accomodating maybe they have a small anti grav ening in there, and the jets are just for forward thrust.

Anidem wrote:

Catyrpelius wrote:We've moved on to Jet packs now. Chainsaws are soooooooo 5 minutes ago.

CURSE MY SLOW TYPING SKILLS!

on the subject of jump jets, give the guy below a few melta-bombs to drop. . . and we have a more viable one-man infantryman thats more mobile then curret spacemarine jump-jets.




Though based on gameplay in Dawn of war II, im under the impression it was just made for a really big "hop" of sorts to get up/down cliffs or on/off transports. So this flight-suit maybe waaaay out of the scope of space-marine packs, and more akin to the Battle Suits employed by Tau

gendoikari87 wrote:

Though all of the above would do diddly squat from a .50 Barret Sniperifle (or an intervention for that matter) which uses rounds desinged to peirce modern tank armor.

No, a barret .50bmg will not defeat modern tank armor, IFV's and APC's and other LIGHT vehicles yes.

Catyrpelius wrote:Depends on the round used, there are some wicked .50 Cal Depleted Uranium Sabot rounds out there.

Anidem wrote: on the subject of jump jets, give the guy below a few melta-bombs to drop. . . and we have a more viable one-man infantryman thats more mobile then curret spacemarine jump-jets.




Though based on gameplay in Dawn of war II, im under the impression it was just made for a really big "hop" of sorts to get up/down cliffs or on/off transports. So this flight-suit maybe waaaay out of the scope of space-marine packs, and more akin to the Battle Suits employed by Tau

Catyrpelius wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:

Though all of the above would do diddly squat from a .50 Barret Sniperifle (or an intervention for that matter) which uses rounds desinged to peirce modern tank armor.

No, a barret .50bmg will not defeat modern tank armor, IFV's and APC's and other LIGHT vehicles yes.

Depends on the round used, there are some wicked .50 Cal Depleted Uranium Sabot rounds out there.

gendoikari87 wrote:also



There are real jet packs there were just shot down as militarily effective..... now wheres my shotgun?

gendoikari87 wrote:

Catyrpelius wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:

Though all of the above would do diddly squat from a .50 Barret Sniperifle (or an intervention for that matter) which uses rounds desinged to peirce modern tank armor.

No, a barret .50bmg will not defeat modern tank armor, IFV's and APC's and other LIGHT vehicles yes.

Depends on the round used, there are some wicked .50 Cal Depleted Uranium Sabot rounds out there.

Still won't cut trough modern TANK armor. M1 and challenger and the likes with chobham armor. and reactive armor.

Catyrpelius wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:

Catyrpelius wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:

Though all of the above would do diddly squat from a .50 Barret Sniperifle (or an intervention for that matter) which uses rounds desinged to peirce modern tank armor.

No, a barret .50bmg will not defeat modern tank armor, IFV's and APC's and other LIGHT vehicles yes.

Depends on the round used, there are some wicked .50 Cal Depleted Uranium Sabot rounds out there.

Still won't cut trough modern TANK armor. M1 and challenger and the likes with chobham armor. and reactive armor.

Not through the front armor, but it sure will through the side and the turret. There are very few things that will penetrate the front armor of some tanks. We just gained the ability to defeat the front armor on an Abrams tank reliably recently.

Catyrpelius wrote:
Have you seen a Space Marine jump pack?

Yeah, thanks for that Tips.

I know what it looks like. Like I said we are comparing things from one universe to this one. If we are talking capabilities (which I thought was the purpose) then yeah the T-73 or the exoskeleton may be the closest thing.

Also have you seen Rogue Trader versions of jump packs? They look like turbo props, hensce the exo skeleton version included.

Reply by: Catyrpelius - click to view full reply 

28292

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 17:54:01

Post by: Catyrpelius

Not true, the exact makeup of Chobham armor is classified, however it is known that there are ceramic bars in it, but there are other things to.

Heat rounds are not effective against things with reactive armor, which the front of an Abrams has. Rocket propelled sabot rounds are actually less effective then there balistically launched cousins.

Saying the Tandem systme could defeat an Abrams is like saying a Daisy Cutter could defeat an infantry man. Sure it will work, but your talking extreme overkill.

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 18:01:32

Post by: aka_mythos

Crantor wrote:I`ve dropped my plates alot, even thrown them around. Never broke them. They don`t break as easily as you think. The newer gen versions are designed to take several impacts before shaterring. Like I said, a knife isn`t going to go through a plate. Place it on a anvil and smash it with a hammer several times maybe.
...
You might be to smash the plates with a very big sword taking a very big swing but I doubt you`ll get a kill with the first strike. Aim for the head, you`ll get better results.

The ballistic plates for body armor include warnings that say if its been dropped to replace the plate. That warning is there because even if it didn't shatter upon being dropped it makes it very suceptable to it latter on. Axes and hammers main advantage is the ability to deliver a blunter heavier broad surfaced force than a sword and I was speaking of them rather than a sword.

The thing is cermaics are hard, but hard means when the material fails it shatters. There is little or no intermediate form of failure. A metal which is more malliable fails when its dented but only completely failss when its completely penetrated.

What I've been saying about the failure of ceramic body armor is based on broad surface trauma on the ceramic plate as opposed to the single point failure induced by a bullet. Ceramics body armor deals with one type alot better than the other. One well placed hit from an axe would cause the armor to sustain a force across a large enough area that the plate couldn't stop it. Kevlar will protect against piercing but not slicing or slamming. A 5lbs axe with 2ft handle and the head traveling 40mph (59fps)... would induce 17405 pounds force across a ~1/4" thick 8 inches long axe head would see half that at any given point of the axe, or 8700psi. Class 3 armor is meant to stop a 7.62 round, thats a .017lbs bullet with a diameter of .308. traveling 2400fps, with an approximate surface contact of .075 in^2... the plate must minimally stop 7350psi. 8700psi is greater than 7350psi, so unless the plates have a high margine of safety a modest battle axe would break the ceramic in one good blow.

Crantor wrote:
As for the ammo, let`s say it would be comparable to something like a shotgun shell, maybe similar to Frag-12 HE-AP ammo. Not too sure on the range, but the explosive charge is armed after only 3m. Closest thing I could find.

Assuming a Space marine had a 24-30 round magazine, he'd also be carrying anywhere from 10-20 of those bad boys on his person. Looks silly on a model but let`s say his backpack has some.

Range is meant to be about 100 yards accurately, but even well beyond that it will explode on impact. It is a simple explode on impact design, though it needs to achieve a duration of acceleration to arm. Once it leaves the barrel its armed and it would begin to negatively accelerate.

Space marine are said to carry 3 magazines. They've been depicted as latching to their belt... by no visible means of restraint (magnets?).

Reply by: Crantor - click to view full reply 

33200

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 18:08:52

Post by: Crantor

gendoikari87 wrote:

Catyrpelius wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:

Catyrpelius wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:

Though all of the above would do diddly squat from a .50 Barret Sniperifle (or an intervention for that matter) which uses rounds desinged to peirce modern tank armor.

No, a barret .50bmg will not defeat modern tank armor, IFV's and APC's and other LIGHT vehicles yes.

Depends on the round used, there are some wicked .50 Cal Depleted Uranium Sabot rounds out there.

Still won't cut trough modern TANK armor. M1 and challenger and the likes with chobham armor. and reactive armor.

Not through the front armor, but it sure will through the side and the turret. There are very few things that will penetrate the front armor of some tanks. We just gained the ability to defeat the front armor on an Abrams tank reliably recently.

not sure about the sides I'm sure you could find some weak spots but the best bet would be to go for the tracks. and we've had the ability to defeat the front armor for a while Tandem warheads do quite easily. if it wasn't for the reactive armor a simple RPG-7 would make short work of an abrams. <-- not 100% on that as Its been a while since I looked up the armor equivalents of the abrams and the penetration capabilities of the RPG-7 and it's probably close. Chobham armor as a ceramic does a good job at stopping HEAT better than similar strength steel. but the bigger HEAT rounds are definately going to defeate it save for the reactive armor.


also Javelin kills everything dead quick.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And then theres this:



Worlds first Sabot Rifle, I have NO idea as to the armor penetration capabilities of this thing, but it's cool.

Like I said earlier- the Frag 12 HE-AP shotgun shell will penetrate 4 inches of aluminum armour and 1/2 inch of steel. Then explode. sounds as close to bolters shells as they come.

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 18:15:17

Post by: aka_mythos

Catyrpelius wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:

Catyrpelius wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:

Though all of the above would do diddly squat from a .50 Barret Sniperifle (or an intervention for that matter) which uses rounds desinged to peirce modern tank armor.

No, a barret .50bmg will not defeat modern tank armor, IFV's and APC's and other LIGHT vehicles yes.

Depends on the round used, there are some wicked .50 Cal Depleted Uranium Sabot rounds out there.

Still won't cut trough modern TANK armor. M1 and challenger and the likes with chobham armor. and reactive armor.

Not through the front armor, but it sure will through the side and the turret. There are very few things that will penetrate the front armor of some tanks. We just gained the ability to defeat the front armor on an Abrams tank reliably recently.

Reactive armor wouldn't react to something as small as a single .50cal round especially if the shot were placed where it had a hopes of going through the conventional armor.

The point of an anti-material rifle is to focus on large targets with soft armor. IFV and APC's predominantly. A .50cal with depleted uranium bullet could defeat an Abrams armor if it knew where to shoot. If a sniper with such a rifle climbed a tree or hill and shot down on the tank and into the engine bay cover they could disable the tank by damaging the engine. The armor across the top rear of an abrams is relatively thin to allow that weight in armor to be distributed across the front, thats its achilles heal.

Reply by: Catyrpelius - click to view full reply 

28292

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 18:15:38

Post by: Catyrpelius

1/2" of steel is nothing.

It is not self propelled. We've already had this argument in this thread.

Reply by: Crantor - click to view full reply 

33200

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 18:18:02

Post by: Crantor

aka_mythos wrote:

Crantor wrote:I`ve dropped my plates alot, even thrown them around. Never broke them. They don`t break as easily as you think. The newer gen versions are designed to take several impacts before shaterring. Like I said, a knife isn`t going to go through a plate. Place it on a anvil and smash it with a hammer several times maybe.
...
You might be to smash the plates with a very big sword taking a very big swing but I doubt you`ll get a kill with the first strike. Aim for the head, you`ll get better results.

The ballistic plates for body armor include warnings that say if its been dropped to replace the plate. That warning is there because even if it didn't shatter upon being dropped it makes it very suceptable to it latter on. Axes and hammers main advantage is the ability to deliver a blunter heavier broad surfaced force than a sword and I was speaking of them rather than a sword.

The thing is cermaics are hard, but hard means when the material fails it shatters. There is little or no intermediate form of failure. A metal which is more malliable fails when its dented but only completely failss when its completely penetrated.

What I've been saying about the failure of ceramic body armor is based on broad surface trauma on the ceramic plate as opposed to the single point failure induced by a bullet. Ceramics body armor deals with one type alot better than the other. One well placed hit from an axe would cause the armor to sustain a force across a large enough area that the plate couldn't stop it. Kevlar will protect against piercing but not slicing or slamming. A 5lbs axe with 2ft handle and the head traveling 40mph (59fps)... would induce 17405 pounds force across a ~1/4" thick 8 inches long axe head would see half that at any given point of the axe, or 8700psi. Class 3 armor is meant to stop a 7.62 round, thats a .017lbs bullet with a diameter of .308. traveling 2400fps, with an approximate surface contact of .075 in^2... the plate must minimally stop 7350psi. 8700psi is greater than 7350psi, so unless the plates have a high margine of safety a modest battle axe would break the ceramic in one good blow.

Crantor wrote:
As for the ammo, let`s say it would be comparable to something like a shotgun shell, maybe similar to Frag-12 HE-AP ammo. Not too sure on the range, but the explosive charge is armed after only 3m. Closest thing I could find.

Assuming a Space marine had a 24-30 round magazine, he'd also be carrying anywhere from 10-20 of those bad boys on his person. Looks silly on a model but let`s say his backpack has some.

Range is meant to be about 100 yards accurately, but even well beyond that it will explode on impact. It is a simple explode on impact design, though it needs to achieve a duration of acceleration to arm. Once it leaves the barrel its armed and it would begin to negatively accelerate.

Space marine are said to carry 3 magazines. They've been depicted as latching to their belt... by no visible means of restraint (magnets?).

LOL. 3 Mags makes for a short fight. I guess they never miss.
Magnets sounds like a reasonable way of doing it.

Reply by: Catyrpelius - click to view full reply 

28292

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 18:20:18

Post by: Catyrpelius

Space Marines don't miss. Troops that are ment to be a rapid deployment force dont need large ammunition caches.

Reply by: Crantor - click to view full reply 

33200

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 18:26:54

Post by: Crantor

Catyrpelius wrote: Troops that are ment to be a rapid deployment force dont need large ammunition caches.

They need more than 3 Mags if they want to win.

Reply by: Catyrpelius - click to view full reply 

28292

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 18:31:52

Post by: Catyrpelius

Crantor wrote:

Catyrpelius wrote: Troops that are ment to be a rapid deployment force dont need large ammunition caches.

They need more than 3 Mags if they want to win.

Why? A Space Marine is just as likely to crush your head with his fist as he is to shoot you, why does he need more then 50 rounds?

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 18:34:00

Post by: aka_mythos

Crantor wrote:
Like I said earlier- the Frag 12 HE-AP shotgun shell will penetrate 4 inches of aluminum armour and 1/2 inch of steel. Then explode. sounds as close to bolters shells as they come.

As the guy sitting across the room from the guy who designed that... let me say is not going through both those. Its enough to go through one or the other. Its a shaped charge that allows it to do that, so its the explosion that makes the 2cm hole on the back end of those plates.

Its really meant to give a marine carrying a shotgun for entires more flexibility. As it is now the marine with a shotgun has to also carry a rifle. This is meant to extend his lethality out to a similar range as the rifle, while giving him the ability to defeat armored enemy infantry and hardened positions with the goal of allowing him to leave the rifle behind. Though technically a grenade it shouldn't be thought of in quite the same way, its more just an explosive bullet. If you stacked about 15 pennies thats about all the C4 is in it.

Reply by: Anidem - click to view full reply 

24919

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 18:36:32

Post by: Anidem

Crantor wrote:

Catyrpelius wrote: Troops that are ment to be a rapid deployment force dont need large ammunition caches.

They need more than 3 Mags if they want to win.

they are 8 foot tall supersoldiers in head-to-toe powerarmor. They could rifle-butt their enemies into submission.


But you are right, this is actually far from the US troop standard. . . which is about 180-210 rounds total, the M14A1 has a capacity of 30+1, and most soldiers carry on mag in, and three combi-mags on their person. Not to mention a side-arm, which is the M9 with a capacity of 15+1 with a mag in, and 2 more on their person. Not to mention grenades, some fire-team members may also carry an entry shotgun as well.


Given US Armed forces shun Full-auto, and prefer semi or burst to it in a shootout i would think they'd be more effective tactically than spacemarines, as they can dig-in for longer periods and wait for support

Reply by: Crantor - click to view full reply 

33200

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 18:39:01

Post by: Crantor

Do I really need to explain this?

Reply by: Catyrpelius - click to view full reply 

28292

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 18:40:43

Post by: Catyrpelius

Space Marines don't dig in though. If they are standing still they are doing something wrong.

Reply by: Crantor - click to view full reply 

33200

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 18:43:13

Post by: Crantor

aka_mythos wrote:

Crantor wrote:
Like I said earlier- the Frag 12 HE-AP shotgun shell will penetrate 4 inches of aluminum armour and 1/2 inch of steel. Then explode. sounds as close to bolters shells as they come.

As the guy sitting across the room from the guy who designed that... let me say is not going through both those. Its enough to go through one or the other. Its a shaped charge that allows it to do that, so its the explosion that makes the 2cm hole on the back end of those plates.

Its really meant to give a marine carrying a shotgun for entires more flexibility. As it is now the marine with a shotgun has to also carry a rifle. This is meant to extend his lethality out to a similar range as the rifle, while giving him the ability to defeat armored enemy infantry and hardened positions with the goal of allowing him to leave the rifle behind. Though technically a grenade it shouldn't be thought of in quite the same way, its more just an explosive bullet. If you stacked about 15 pennies thats about all the C4 is in it.

Sorry for the language my intent wasn't to state it would go through both at once. The steel and aluminum should be seperate examples. So what would be the effective range?

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 18:45:47

Post by: aka_mythos

Crantor wrote:

Catyrpelius wrote: Troops that are ment to be a rapid deployment force dont need large ammunition caches.

They need more than 3 Mags if they want to win.

The standard load out for the modern army is about 180 rounds per soldier, though they'll take more if they can carry it.

If a space marine's magazine is 30~40 that would be 90-120 rounds.

Things to remember is that bolter shells are rarer and take an individual techpriest a year to make just one. A bolter though automatic isn't likely to blaze away at the same rate of fire as an M16 since a space marine is a better shot and doesn't rely as much on placing suppressing fire. Each "bang" of an assault rifle is 3 rounds, with the "wizz-bang-boom" of bolter shells, they are at least 3 times more effective and with the superior aim coupled with the bolter shell target correcting brain a marine only needs one bolter shot for every three "autogun" shot. So its a combination of "waste not the emperor's munitions" with the marines well placed shots.

This just adds to the fitting nature of Space Marines carrying close combat weapons, since if they're carrying less ammo the likely hood of close combat goes up the more out numbered they are.

Reply by: Crantor - click to view full reply 

33200

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 18:48:25

Post by: Crantor

Catyrpelius wrote:Space Marines don't dig in though. If they are standing still they are doing something wrong.

Wrong for so many reasons.

The Imperial Fists excel at defensive works.
The Ultramarines have dug in several times both at the Fortress of Hera and on other missions.
At the battle Istvaan Loyalists landed to fight dug in traitors.
There are plenty of other examples.

Marines are good at planetary drops and surgical strikes. This makes them vulnerable and isolated more times than not. Meaning they need all the ammo they can carry since there may not be a re-supply for some time.

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 18:52:03

Post by: aka_mythos

Space Marines in the 41st millenium do not generally dig in. They will if it is necessary but the vast majority of their fighting is surgical strikes. Imperial fists carry over the skills from the time when Space Marines were the only military force of the imperium and dealt with all fighting. Now that sort of thing is mostly relegated to the Imperial Guard. Marines will still do but I'd say they'd take it as strategic failure of planning that it came to it.

Reply by: Anidem - click to view full reply 

24919

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 18:54:19

Post by: Anidem

Catyrpelius wrote:Space Marines don't dig in though. If they are standing still they are doing something wrong.

Read the current Nid codex and what happened to Calgar on Macragge. Hes even retreated to other more fortified positions to defend against the swarm

aka_mythos wrote:Space Marines in the 41st millenium do not generally dig in. They will if it is necessary but the vast majority of their fighting is surgical strikes. Imperial fists carry over the skills from the time when Space Marines were the only military force of the imperium and dealt with all fighting. Now that sort of thing is mostly relegated to the Imperial Guard. Marines will still do but I'd say they'd take it as strategic failure of planning that it came to it.

Again, when the nids popped up, thats all the imperium did until they got a feel for their new enemy

Reply by: Crantor - click to view full reply 

33200

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 18:55:02

Post by: Crantor

aka_mythos wrote:

Crantor wrote:

Catyrpelius wrote: Troops that are ment to be a rapid deployment force dont need large ammunition caches.

They need more than 3 Mags if they want to win.

The standard load out for the modern army is about 180 rounds per soldier, though they'll take more if they can carry it.

If a space marine's magazine is 30~40 that would be 90-120 rounds.

Things to remember is that bolter shells are rarer and take an individual techpriest a year to make just one. A bolter though automatic isn't likely to blaze away at the same rate of fire as an M16 since a space marine is a better shot and doesn't rely as much on placing suppressing fire. Each "bang" of an assault rifle is 3 rounds, with the "wizz-bang-boom" of bolter shells, they are at least 3 times more effective and with the superior aim coupled with the bolter shell target correcting brain a marine only needs one bolter shot for every three "autogun" shot. So its a combination of "waste not the emperor's munitions" with the marines well placed shots.

This just adds to the fitting nature of Space Marines carrying close combat weapons, since if they're carrying less ammo the likely hood of close combat goes up the more out numbered they are.

And normally a soldier carries just as much in his small pack or squirrelled away anywhere they can.

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 19:10:53

Post by: aka_mythos

Crantor wrote:And normally a soldier carries just as much in his small pack or squirrelled away anywhere they can.

Given the general scarcity and the fact that waste would generally be frowned on, a Space Marine that unneccesarily horded bolter shells would likely be turned on by his battle brothers. The modern mentality that there is always enough ammo to go around and even enough to have extra doesn't fit the 40k setting where bolters are one of the pinnacles of technology in a empire thats barely holding its self together having been in a constant state of war for millenia.

A single bolter shell takes as much if not more energy, effort, and man power to make than a lasgun. So to give a marine even 100 shells is to place the expectation that he perform better than 100 guardsmen.

Reply by: Crantor - click to view full reply 

33200

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 19:19:53

Post by: Crantor

aka_mythos wrote:

Crantor wrote:And normally a soldier carries just as much in his small pack or squirrelled away anywhere they can.

Given the general scarcity and the fact that waste would generally be frowned on, a Space Marine that unneccesarily horded bolter shells would likely be turned on by his battle brothers. The modern mentality that there is always enough ammo to go around and even enough to have extra doesn't fit the 40k setting where bolters are one of the pinnacles of technology in a empire thats barely holding its self together having been in a constant state of war for millenia.

Modern mentality isn`t that there is always enough ammo to go around, it's you can never have enough. And it isn't wasted either. modern mentality is to make every shot count. I`ve had friends charged for ditching blank ammo.
I can guarantee you that the double frontline ammo is far from un-necessary.

And besides, a marine should be able to acrry much more than three mags. Tactically, logistically and realistically it makes no sense to only have 3 mags.

Anyway, Fluff seems to point that Bolter mags are 12-20 rounds depending on the type of mag used. With Bolt pistols being 6-12.

Here`s a good web page describing the Bolter. http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Bolter

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 19:34:04

Post by: aka_mythos

That fluff may say 12-20... geometry says otherwise. 12-20 was mentioned before, but given the size of bolter ammo that is about as much as normal person might carry. A marine could easily carry more and would probably put it to better use. I'm pretty sure the Deathwatch RPG game has it at 30. As an aside they also reinforce the notion of 2 magazines, with requisition point allowing a higher leveled marine to take more.

One more thing to point out its never been completely addressed but there would appear to be some distinction between the bolter rounds fired by Imperial Guardsmen off of vehicles and those fired by space marines. Bolter shells are suppose to have some level of guidance, which maybe the guardsmen stormbolters don't have... contributing to the difference in BS.

When I say modern mentality, I'm really just refering to the fact that the modern military tends not to have the sort of supply line issues when it comes to ammo, that past militaries and 40k militaries tend to have. That the notion of suppressing fire, spraying a hail of bullet not necessarily to kill but to force your enemies heads down to allow other assets to kill wouldn't be as common. That even with a modern well trained army, we provide rifles that fire three bullets at a time to give the best odds of a single one hitting, while the reliability of a marine is to accomplish as much with each individual shot of an automatic weapon.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 19:39:45

Post by: gendoikari87

Catyrpelius wrote:Not true, the exact makeup of Chobham armor is classified, however it is known that there are ceramic bars in it, but there are other things to.

Heat rounds are not effective against things with reactive armor, which the front of an Abrams has. Rocket propelled sabot rounds are actually less effective then there balistically launched cousins.

Saying the Tandem systme could defeat an Abrams is like saying a Daisy Cutter could defeat an infantry man. Sure it will work, but your talking extreme overkill.

well we know they have ceramics and I think I heard someone say resins.

Rocket propelled sabots? That's a new one, do you mean APFSDS? cause they're a lot better than the standard ballistic cousins.... mostly because they cheat.

I loled at the tandem, so true, but that's what they're there for. Without active protection theres not much you can't do with linear shaped charges, pretty much anything moving at 15 km/s is going to slide through most materials.

Reply by: Frazzled - click to view full reply 

221

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 19:40:13

Post by: Frazzled

Catyrpelius wrote:The only ones anyone cares about, the Astartes version.

i don't know, but I bet Arkham Land knows. He knows everything!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Anidem wrote:

Catyrpelius wrote:We've moved on to Jet packs now. Chainsaws are soooooooo 5 minutes ago.

CURSE MY SLOW TYPING SKILLS!

on the subject of jump jets, give the guy below a few melta-bombs to drop. . . and we have a more viable one-man infantryman thats more mobile then curret spacemarine jump-jets.




Though based on gameplay in Dawn of war II, im under the impression it was just made for a really big "hop" of sorts to get up/down cliffs or on/off transports. So this flight-suit maybe waaaay out of the scope of space-marine packs, and more akin to the Battle Suits employed by Tau

Wow its Swooping Hawk version 1.0!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Catyrpelius wrote:Space Marines don't miss. Troops that are ment to be a rapid deployment force dont need large ammunition caches.

Thats what they thought in Mogadishu...

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 19:50:13

Post by: gendoikari87

aka_mythos wrote:

Crantor wrote:
Like I said earlier- the Frag 12 HE-AP shotgun shell will penetrate 4 inches of aluminum armour and 1/2 inch of steel. Then explode. sounds as close to bolters shells as they come.

As the guy sitting across the room from the guy who designed that... let me say is not going through both those. Its enough to go through one or the other. Its a shaped charge that allows it to do that, so its the explosion that makes the 2cm hole on the back end of those plates.

Its really meant to give a marine carrying a shotgun for entires more flexibility. As it is now the marine with a shotgun has to also carry a rifle. This is meant to extend his lethality out to a similar range as the rifle, while giving him the ability to defeat armored enemy infantry and hardened positions with the goal of allowing him to leave the rifle behind. Though technically a grenade it shouldn't be thought of in quite the same way, its more just an explosive bullet. If you stacked about 15 pennies thats about all the C4 is in it.

Jesus, it really is a shaped charge? I thought it had to be to have those kinds of capabilities but dang, I didn't know they could be made that small. How does penetrative capabilities scale with the round being so small?

also Am I the only one thinking GW should change fluff to give marines these things?

The point of an anti-material rifle is to focus on large targets with soft armor. IFV and APC's predominantly. A .50cal with depleted uranium bullet could defeat an Abrams armor if it knew where to shoot. If a sniper with such a rifle climbed a tree or hill and shot down on the tank and into the engine bay cover they could disable the tank by damaging the engine. The armor across the top rear of an abrams is relatively thin to allow that weight in armor to be distributed across the front, thats its achilles heal.

Lol give a good sniper enough time and he'll find a way to bring down a titan. Everything has a weakpoint. you can't be clad in 12inches of ultratough steel/armor/ceramic/adamantium everywhere.

also correct me if i'm wrong but the top of the tank is one of the weak points on most tanks these days right, that's why the javelin has that top down attack mode.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not to mention a side-arm, which is the M9

Be a good friend, if you know someone over in Iraq, get them a glock! I have heard no good stories about the reliability of the M9 in desert conditions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Things to remember is that bolter shells are rarer and take an individual techpriest a year to make just one.

are you sure about this one, that seems a bit excessive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

they are at least 3 times more effective and with the superior aim coupled with the bolter shell target correcting brain a marine only needs one bolter shot for every three "autogun" shot.

I still suspect bolts to be a guided weapon of sorts. It'd fit space marines.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 22:06:48

Post by: Melissia

The Astartes attitude on bolter shells is: "Waste not what the Emperor provides".

Also, bolter shells are manufactured by factories just like all other ammunition. Yes, including Astartes shells.

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/03 23:57:14

Post by: aka_mythos

What is an Imperial factory but a bunch of tech priests, servitors, and acolytes crafting these things. You'd have to work at turn of the century manufacturing to get an idea of it. You're talking about moderate tech people producing things without all the technology needed to do it easily. How long does it take to build the micro brain that assists the bolter shells targeting. The imperium doesn't have automation, and the machine spirits of munitions for the astartes wouldn't be trusted to some average Imperial citizen. There are however tens of millions of techpriests and servitors toiling away at the most mundane constructions while more skilled ones focus on larger constructs.

When I say it takes a year for a techpriest to produce a shell that a start to finish effort, that doesn't include parallel efforts assisted by servitors.

gendoikari87 wrote:
Jesus, it really is a shaped charge? I thought it had to be to have those kinds of capabilities but dang, I didn't know they could be made that small. How does penetrative capabilities scale with the round being so small?

also Am I the only one thinking GW should change fluff to give marines these things?

Yes, but Jesus has little to do with it.

It scales because most grenades and explosive contain very little high grade explosive and instead use the high grade to initiate the low grade. This just high grade funneled to a very focused jet.

I think this is only comparable to a basic bolter shell. Its meant to crack body armor and light vehicles. In other words glance on a 6 and ignore 5+ saves. You could make an arguement that sternguard ammo takes it and runs with it further.

gendoikari87 wrote:
Lol give a good sniper enough time and he'll find a way to bring down a titan. Everything has a weakpoint. you can't be clad in 12inches of ultratough steel/armor/ceramic/adamantium everywhere.

also correct me if i'm wrong but the top of the tank is one of the weak points on most tanks these days right, that's why the javelin has that top down attack mode.

That's correct.

gendoikari87 wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

Things to remember is that bolter shells are rarer and take an individual techpriest a year to make just one.

are you sure about this one, that seems a bit excessive.

Imagine producing electronics without a clean room or automation. All the "rites" of purity to insure a healthy machine spirit. Think of it as a quality control. Also a skilled techpriest may have multiple servitors who would allow him to work on multiple things at once. So while it may take him a year he could easily be working on other things as well.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 00:01:43

Post by: Melissia

aka_mythos wrote:What is an Imperial factory but a bunch of tech priests, servitors, and acolytes crafting these things.

You seriously think that all factories are staffed entirely by techpriests?

No, manufactorums make good use of the Imperium's largest resource-- manpower. Human labor is abundant and cheap.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 00:06:46

Post by: gendoikari87

Melissia wrote:The Astartes attitude on bolter shells is: "Waste not what the Emperor provides".

Also, bolter shells are manufactured by factories just like all other ammunition. Yes, including Astartes shells.

I thought so, a single techpriest wasting a year of his life on a single bolter shell seems absurd on so many different levels.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:What is an Imperial factory but a bunch of tech priests, servitors, and acolytes crafting these things.

You seriously think that all factories are staffed entirely by techpriests?

No, manufactorums make good use of the Imperium's largest resource-- manpower. Human labor is abundant and cheap.

Dawn of war II and angel forge attest to this. Basically angel forge is a giant city staffed by ... well basically guardsmen, and I think ordinary citizens.

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 00:14:50

Post by: aka_mythos

It may not be the sole focus of his efforts, he has servitors to assist him and may work on a number of things as once. Just that when you attempt to make a sophisticated electronic or advanced piece of technology without a clean room or automation it requires added care. Think of it more in terms of man hours, that it takes 6000 man hours to build it. Well a techmarine with the aid of servitors might be able to do 3 or 4 or 5 times that in a year, allowing the hours of labor not to be consecutive.

While I am sure there are things that are produced in ways to exploit large bodies of labor they are probably not things destined to go to space marines or things believed to have machine spirits or anything sufficiently advanced.

We are talking about going into a factory with a pre-WWI mindset and asking them to build a miniature electronic or similar. Those sorts of things are what the Forgeworlds and Techpriests build. The more mundane like helmets and armor, maybe sub-components that's what less sophisticated factories would deal with.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 01:58:30

Post by: Melissia

There's a story in Dark HEresy - Inquisitor's Handbook about Astartes bolter shells being snuck out unstamped by smugglers, for use by bounty hunters (highly illegal mind you).

A techpriest wouldn't do that, but a common worker? Oh yes.

Reply by: Asherian Command - click to view full reply 

17923

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 02:05:56

Post by: Asherian Command

Do people want me to post pictures of my marines with chainsword + bolters?
but anyway chainswords are kinda useless hence why I take power weapons.
And another thing that keeps popping up to mind is the Iron Men's STC machine thingy how exactly could that work?

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 02:14:22

Post by: Melissia

No, because noone cares

The stats of a chainsword in tabletop don't represent its effects in fluff. The Dark Heresy / Deathwatch depiction is much better.

Reply by: Asherian Command - click to view full reply 

17923

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 02:15:15

Post by: Asherian Command

And in the Horus Hersey fluff XD.
Remember loken owned everyone with that chain sword.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 10:11:18

Post by: gendoikari87

Melissia wrote:No, because noone cares

The stats of a chainsword in tabletop don't represent its effects in fluff. The Dark Heresy / Deathwatch depiction is much better.

STill doesn't matter nothing beats the pure awesome that is a power axe XP

Reply by: Frazzled - click to view full reply 

221

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 11:51:56

Post by: Frazzled

aka_mythos wrote:What is an Imperial factory but a bunch of tech priests, servitors, and acolytes crafting these things. You'd have to work at turn of the century manufacturing to get an idea of it. You're talking about moderate tech people producing things without all the technology needed to do it easily. How long does it take to build the micro brain that assists the bolter shells targeting. The imperium doesn't have automation, and the machine spirits of munitions for the astartes wouldn't be trusted to some average Imperial citizen. There are however tens of millions of techpriests and servitors toiling away at the most mundane constructions while more skilled ones focus on larger constructs.

When I say it takes a year for a techpriest to produce a shell that a start to finish effort, that doesn't include parallel efforts assisted by servitors.

So you don't actually have anything to back that up from a codex. That makes the statement only your supposition.

Reply by: Catyrpelius - click to view full reply 

28292

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 12:29:10

Post by: Catyrpelius

The Imperium has automation, its just not always nessacary to use it. Think of manufacturing in the Imperium like manufacturing in China. Sure China could automate all of its factories and acheive the same level of productivity with 1/4th of the total workforce, but automation is expensive while workers willing to work cheaply are plentiful.

In the actual fluff Space Marines have portable "forges" that can travel with them and produce among other things, bolter ammuntion. The Space Marines on average don't suffer from a lack of equipment, they have just over time personanified the equipment that they have and treat it with the respect that its "acceavements" have earned. For example in Courage and Honor, Captain Ventris could have taken a new set of Power Armor, he instead chose a suit of armor that had protected Ultra Marines for 1000s of years. Its the same way with everything for a Space Marine.

Space Marines and there equipment do not translate well from the fluff to actualy game play, in the fluff very rearly are more then a Squad of Spacec Marines needed for anything. In the fluff Bolt Guns take out tanks.... And the list goes on.

Reply by: Crantor - click to view full reply 

33200

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 14:01:29

Post by: Crantor

The problem too is that the fluff is so inconsistant. Save for maybe the HH series but even then...

I always thought of the Imperium as more stagnant in terms of tech. And that would include manufacturing. They know how to make bolters, power armour, rhinos whatever. They just need a template to do it. Without an STC they won`t build new/old things. they rarely improve on a design because if it isn't in the specs they don't improve on it. Plus I assume that due to the religious aspect of tech it also takes longer to produce because of the rites and stuff. Also I'm pretty sure the mechanicum has its secrets, thus delaying production and advancement etc.

I would go further than say it's pre-ww1. It`s more along the lines of a slave based economy not unlike the Roman Empire that requires specialists to make any piece of tech.

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 14:57:11

Post by: aka_mythos

Melissia wrote:There's a story in Dark HEresy - Inquisitor's Handbook about Astartes bolter shells being snuck out unstamped by smugglers, for use by bounty hunters (highly illegal mind you).

A techpriest wouldn't do that, but a common worker? Oh yes.

Just because a techpriest may work on more sophisticated pieces of tech doesn't mean he deals with the meanial task of boxing it up.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:So you don't actually have anything to back that up from a codex. That makes the statement only your supposition.

Its an opinion based on the passing remarks with regard to the works of techpriests. Is their fluff yes, is it literally what I said no. It is supposition made on my experiance with manufacturing and design of something as complex as what a bolter shell is supposed to be coupled with statements about what the techpriest do.

The simple fact of it is that anything with a complex machine spirit is the realm of the adeptus mechanicus, that while Imperial factories may produce equipment and components it is unlikely that techpriest would allow something as complex as bolter shell be built by a common worker.

It was one reason I said that maybe there are different grades and qualities of bolter shells, that the ones used by Imperial Guard and shot from their stormbolters are not as complex or sophisticated as the Space Marine's shell. Fluff in the past has said bolter shells contain some sort of guidance, a difference in shells could contribute to why marines are BS4, that maybe IG bolter shells are just .75cal cannons without the guidance. One is simply ballistic while the other is guided. Nothing has said they are 100% identical.

I picture marines bolter shells, as opposed to everyone else being handled just like US marine scout snipers where each and every bullet they fire is hand assembled at a marine facility and calibrated to the individual rifle of the individual sniper. With bullets and powder measured out to the exact grain weight. The casing and bullet are individually matched up to allow the exact fit out to four decimals of the difference between the bullets diameter and the casing neck diameter. They are hand pressed to depths that varies no more than 3 decimals. All components are required to come from the exact same production line, to reduce unseen variability. The assembled bullets are marked, cataloged, and stored for the specific snipers.

Now imagine that same level of effort going into something orders of magnitude more complicated, for a special force that is many times more elite, in a universe of generally uneducated citizens who have minimal exposure to anything as sophisticated. What ever certification process the marine personnel who do that job, the Techpriest or artisans or Imperial worker would have to exceed by leaps and bounds.

I was once in China and I couldn't even get some of them to grasp the concept of a robot. Let alone automation.

Imperial technology shows no signs of automation being used. That even if GW stated it, it would be a hollow statement.

Also page 60 of the 3rd edition rule book it says a standard sickle bolter magazine holds 30 rounds.

Reply by: AbaddonFidelis - click to view full reply 

30949

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 16:16:10

Post by: AbaddonFidelis

a modern rifle can kill a man a couple hundred yards a way. a bolter cant hit anything more than 100 feet away at the most. its pretty sad.

Reply by: Catyrpelius - click to view full reply 

28292

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 16:27:48

Post by: Catyrpelius

AbaddonFidelis wrote:a modern rifle can kill a man a couple hundred yards a way. a bolter cant hit anything more than 100 feet away at the most. its pretty sad.

What makes you say this? Becuase it isnt true.


Anything that cna be built in an STC is built throguh complete automation.

Reply by: Frazzled - click to view full reply 

221

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 17:14:08

Post by: Frazzled

Catyrpelius wrote:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:a modern rifle can kill a man a couple hundred yards a way. a bolter cant hit anything more than 100 feet away at the most. its pretty sad.

What makes you say this? Becuase it isnt true.


Anything that cna be built in an STC is built throguh complete automation.

He's going by game rules? 24 inches * 6ft per inch=144 feet.

Reply by: Catyrpelius - click to view full reply 

28292

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 17:27:46

Post by: Catyrpelius

I always thought that range in 40k got more abstract the farther away something was.

Reply by: ChrisWWII - click to view full reply 

27848

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 17:44:10

Post by: ChrisWWII

And going off of the official GW scale, a piece of field artillery (Basilisk) can hardly shoot a 1/3 of a mile. The tabletop game isn't really an accurate source of capabilities.

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 17:55:27

Post by: aka_mythos

Catyrpelius wrote:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:a modern rifle can kill a man a couple hundred yards a way. a bolter cant hit anything more than 100 feet away at the most. its pretty sad.

What makes you say this? Becuase it isnt true.


Anything that cna be built in an STC is built throguh complete automation.

Except no complete working STC machines are known to still exist. Even when the Adeptus Mechanicus build a Rhino from an STC template, they are following blue prints. Finding an STC template is like finding the G-code for a CNC machine, it gives you the coordinates and would allow you to back track to an original design, but with out the machine to run it you can't make anything with the program itself.

Catyrpelius wrote:I always thought that range in 40k got more abstract the farther away something was.

That is correct. 120" is supposed to corresponds to 10km. Its also why vehicle speeds are wonky in comparison to real vehicles; that the distances move in an entire game average out but on a turn to turn basis it abstractly represents their movement.

Reply by: Frazzled - click to view full reply 

221

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 19:05:31

Post by: Frazzled

Except of course pistol distances (12inch * 6 = 72 feet or 24 yards) is a comprable to maximum effective pistol distances (even slightly long) for trained shooters with good sidearms.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 19:44:59

Post by: Melissia

Which is fine, but I seriously doubt that GW designed it to be that way.

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 20:10:34

Post by: aka_mythos

I don't think they built it with any sort of concrete graduated scale, but they have said as much about it representing an abstract distance beyond 6-12 inches.

Reply by: AbaddonFidelis - click to view full reply 

30949

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 20:16:20

Post by: AbaddonFidelis

In 40k flying across the galaxy is no problem but building a laser guided bomb is something only the most advanced races can do. IIRC we've had those since the 60s. The most advanced troopers in the imperium with the best training are fighting with..... swords...? Its silly and I love it, just wanted to be clear that it is, in fact, silly.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 20:29:59

Post by: gendoikari87

Except no complete working STC machines are known to still exist. Even when the Adeptus Mechanicus build a Rhino from an STC template, they are following blue prints. Finding an STC template is like finding the G-code for a CNC machine, it gives you the coordinates and would allow you to back track to an original design, but with out the machine to run it you can't make anything with the program itself.

They use print outs scanned into a computer to whatever their equivalent of a CNC is. I'm not 100% sure a bolter is guided but even if it is, it's only the micro computer that's built by the techpriests and even that is probably some sort of assembly or automated procedure, the imperium is not wasteful. The wouldn't waste the time of their techpriests on making ammunition for the astartes. In fact wasting any of the emperors resources be they metal, gunpowder, or manpower is a high crime.

just refrence the blue chair.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:In 40k flying across the galaxy is no problem but building a laser guided bomb is something only the most advanced races can do. IIRC we've had those since the 60s. The most advanced troopers in the imperium with the best training are fighting with..... swords...? Its silly and I love it, just wanted to be clear that it is, in fact, silly.

oh it's EXTREMELY silly, Highly Moronic, Illogical, and it's also ridiculous, However...

it is also UBER MEGA FREAKING COOL!!!!!!!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
That being said they could have done more homework and

A) let That which uses real technology in which case it should be represented accurately

B) let that which can NOT be represented with real technology in which case they should use complete and utter bs to describe not quasi realistic physics, because that just makes you look like an idiot.

in contrast to the warhammer world, Gundam does a really good job of this in some of the later UC gundams. like 0083, 08th MS team and 0080


Automatically Appended Next Post:
here's another question: with all the CC focus in 40k Why don't they have gunblades?

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 23:12:57

Post by: aka_mythos

gendoikari87 wrote:

Except no complete working STC machines are known to still exist. Even when the Adeptus Mechanicus build a Rhino from an STC template, they are following blue prints. Finding an STC template is like finding the G-code for a CNC machine, it gives you the coordinates and would allow you to back track to an original design, but with out the machine to run it you can't make anything with the program itself.

They use print outs scanned into a computer to whatever their equivalent of a CNC is. I'm not 100% sure a bolter is guided but even if it is, it's only the micro computer that's built by the tech-priests and even that is probably some sort of assembly or automated procedure, the imperium is not wasteful. The wouldn't waste the time of their tech-priests on making ammunition for the astartes. In fact wasting any of the emperors resources be they metal, gunpowder, or manpower is a high crime.

There are lower levels of "tech-priests," "Artisans" and "Acolytes," I imagine its those guys who would do that sort of work. I also don't think tech-priests would see it as a waste of time to equip the top 1,000,000 soldiers at the imperiums disposal with the best equipment possible. Also Mars and the other Forgeworlds have populations in the hundreds of millions, all machine cult members who are either some rank of tech-priest or training to be tech-priest, that is with the exception of the Skitarii, but still you're talking millions of techpriest with the aid of servitors toiling away.

Reply by: purplefood - click to view full reply 

27391

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 23:16:41

Post by: purplefood

gendoikari87 wrote:
here's another question: with all the CC focus in 40k Why don't they have gunblades?

Because copyright is a
Also IMO they look stupid.
Though so does loads of other stuff so go figure.

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 23:20:21

Post by: aka_mythos

AbaddonFidelis wrote:In 40k flying across the galaxy is no problem but building a laser guided bomb is something only the most advanced races can do. IIRC we've had those since the 60s. The most advanced troopers in the imperium with the best training are fighting with..... swords...? Its silly and I love it, just wanted to be clear that it is, in fact, silly.

Its because the advanced pieces of technology are long lost, the Imperium doesn't build new ships, they utilize remnant technology that surpasses the current state of the art. All the laser guided bombs from that era of humanity have long since been used.

Look at something like Stargate (err stargate) or Babylon 5 (jumpgates) where the primary means of transportation through space are gateways built by long dead civilizations. Its no different, that in those instances and 40k its technology that is only partially understood and can't be duplicated. B5 they could jump with their ships but that had its own explanation of differences.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

purplefood wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:
here's another question: with all the CC focus in 40k Why don't they have gunblades?

Because copyright is a
Also IMO they look stupid.
Though so does loads of other stuff so go figure.

Copyright has little to do with it. Gun-blades existed at the end of the medieval into the Renaissance, they just weren't widely adopted.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/04 23:36:44

Post by: gendoikari87

yeah but Final Fantasy VIII made them cool.

Reply by: purplefood - click to view full reply 

27391

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/05 01:23:36

Post by: purplefood

I would prefer a traditional axe or a sword.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/05 01:55:44

Post by: Melissia

aka_mythos wrote:There are lower levels of "tech-priests," "Artisans" and "Acolytes," I imagine its those guys who would do that sort of work.

No, they use common citizens.

Forgeworlds are not populated entirely by techpriests you know.

Dark Heresy - Inquisitor's Handbook gives examples of non-techpriest forgeworlders, and it makes it quite clear that most of the workers are not initiated themselves... while they believe in the Omnissiah, they are but citizens under the Omnissiah's rule.

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/05 02:29:47

Post by: aka_mythos

"Bolter ammunition is expensive and difficult to manufacture."

I'm not ruling out the involvement of common citizenry of the Imperium from the process, just saying that at a minimum, based on whats known about the nature of the Imperium, it wouldn't be likely that the average citizen could do this job, that to ensure a healthy machine spirit some greater scrutiny by some level techpriest, acolyte, or artisan would be necessary. That the common citizenry would be relegated to the most medial tasks in supporting a techpriest's effort, which would certainly speed up the process.

Everything in the fluff describes bolter shells as being sophisticated pieces of technology, they are effectively more difficult than a lasgun to make. So while lasguns maybe entrusted to lower level initiated, bolter shells final assembly wouldn't be. A bolter shell isn't a big bullet, there is more going on there. That when you then take the elite status of marines whatever they receive would be given an even higher level of scrutiny than it would otherwise.

I do realize that their is more than just tech-priests, I have said as much. There are initiates, there are acolytes, there are skitarri, and yes their are citizens, but on a given forge world there are a heck of alot of techpriests. That within the Imperium they'd be the only ones qualified to oversee something that is so sophisticated as to be regarded a pillar of Imperial technology. If I had to say, the vast majority of a Forge World's common citizenry is involved in the mining and processing of raw materials. Anyone more skilled than that would likely enter training as an initiate to become an Artisan or Techpriest.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/05 02:38:50

Post by: Melissia

The reason for bolter shells, especially astartes bolter shells, being so expensive is because of the material used more than the complexity of the design, though certainly that helps. Keep in mind that the material used in Astartes shells makes them extremely economically unfeasible for mass production-- common bolter shells, those used by civilians and Imperial Guard officers, are far cheaper and easier to produce (though still expensive compared to normal ammunition, for sure).

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/05 10:42:33

Post by: gendoikari87

aka_mythos wrote:"Bolter ammunition is expensive and difficult to manufacture."

I'm not ruling out the involvement of common citizenry of the Imperium from the process, just saying that at a minimum, based on whats known about the nature of the Imperium, it wouldn't be likely that the average citizen could do this job, that to ensure a healthy machine spirit some greater scrutiny by some level techpriest, acolyte, or artisan would be necessary. That the common citizenry would be relegated to the most medial tasks in supporting a techpriest's effort, which would certainly speed up the process.

Everything in the fluff describes bolter shells as being sophisticated pieces of technology, they are effectively more difficult than a lasgun to make. So while lasguns maybe entrusted to lower level initiated, bolter shells final assembly wouldn't be. A bolter shell isn't a big bullet, there is more going on there. That when you then take the elite status of marines whatever they receive would be given an even higher level of scrutiny than it would otherwise.

I do realize that their is more than just tech-priests, I have said as much. There are initiates, there are acolytes, there are skitarri, and yes their are citizens, but on a given forge world there are a heck of alot of techpriests. That within the Imperium they'd be the only ones qualified to oversee something that is so sophisticated as to be regarded a pillar of Imperial technology. If I had to say, the vast majority of a Forge World's common citizenry is involved in the mining and processing of raw materials. Anyone more skilled than that would likely enter training as an initiate to become an Artisan or Techpriest.

I don't think bolts have a machine spirit, maybe a computer but that's it. Machine spirit specifically refers to the AI well... in this case AI means ACTUAL intelegence, but the AI systems they use, which are really just brains made into computers, something about automotons enslaving humanity in the distant past or some other, I never got the details. I'd be willing to believe a tech priest would act as an overseer of sorts of the factory but the imperial guard use heavy bolters so at the very least those bolts have to be made En MASS and I mean En MASS

I have to agree with melissa here, both the Dawn of war games and the sheer logistics have to point towards common citizenry doing 99% of the work here. Besides we don't KNOW they have any sort of guidance at all. and that would make them fairly easy to make if they don't. I mean if they aren't guided they're basically a model rocket engine tipped with a small hardend tip grenade affixed to a small kicker charge. That's not THAT difficult to make, a lot more than most ammunition though, but not something you'd need a techpriest for.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/07 23:55:12

Post by: gendoikari87

so what about the reverse of this thread, what would modern weapon equivalents be. I came up with a few a while back let me know what you guys think

Javelin: Str 8 AP 2 range 48" Heavy 1 *always hits side armor

Barret .50 Cal M95: Str X Ap 4 Range 48" heavy 1, Sniper

Mark 19: Basically a heavy 3 version of the IG grenade launcher

RPG-7: Str 7 AP 2 Range 36"


So what do you guys think some modern weapons would rate in terms of stats?

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 00:05:03

Post by: Melissia

gendoikari87 wrote:Javelin: Str 9 AP 2 range 48" Heavy 1 *always hits side armor

S8 at best, maybe S7 even.

S8 is the strength of a meltagun, which can be used to cut through the hull of an Imperial battleship. It's really hard to believe the javelin is stronger than that. Definitely not AP2, as I don't believe this would be able to entirely penetrate terminator armor.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 00:19:16

Post by: gendoikari87

Str 9 was a typo, It's got over 600mm of penetration WELL more than enough to make a terminator say good bye in fact all modern shoulder launched rocket systems would tell terminators to go to sleep.

We do have this, the armor on a Land Raider Prometheus:

ARMOUR: 91-95mm
(2 Ceramite layers,
1 Titanium/Plasteel layer,
1 Adamantium layer,
1 Thermoplas layer.
Equivalent of 365mm of
conventional steel)

So Technically all modern shoulder launched rocket launchers should be able to penetrate a land raider but I think the ceremite layers would far increase the effectiveness of the land raider armor over modern rocket launchers, but a terminators armor if it has ceremite at all isn't going to be enough to stop something that SHOULD in all correctness be able to penetrate twice the armor of a land raiders armor in pure adamantium.

Reply by: ChrisWWII - click to view full reply 

27848

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 00:21:26

Post by: ChrisWWII

RPGs are DEFINITELY not AP2. AP2 is punching clean through modern MBT armor without a problem. I'd rank them AP3 at best...maybe even AP4. Other than that....I'd say it's pretty accurate overall.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 00:21:53

Post by: Melissia

That's Imperial Armour 1, which I think is horrendously outdated by now.

I mean the effectiveness of a mere 14 inches of steel? The Abrams, which is a much lighter tank which the Land Raider is pretty obviously intended to be better armor than, has armor equivalent to roughly sixty inches.

Reply by: freecloud - click to view full reply 

35775

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 00:26:00

Post by: freecloud

On a sligtly different tack, my IG are Praetorians and I built them as a Steampunk/Victorian Sci Fi outfit, so they have some of the weapons of that era, anmd it was interesting to map them out.

(i) The lasgun (aka flashliht) is IMO more like the modern 5.65mm round than the much more powerful c 7-8mm rounds of 1900

(ii) The Heavy Bolter is best seen as the Medium Machine Gun, probably 7 - 8mm calibre (Maxims etc).

(iii) Autocannons - this sort of weapon was new in 1900, the 12 (25mm) pom-pom is probably the closest equivalent. Another option is the 3pdr Quick-Fire gun.

(iv) Missiles - the British used Hales Rockets from the 1870s, so having Missiles is reasonably accurate if used in HW squads (but not with the troops) but the Hales ones were notoriously inaccurate.

(v) Mortars and Grenade launchers - came out in WW1 more than the Victorian world.

(vi) Lascannon - seems to be the pretty ubiquitous 6-7 pounder field guns of the era.

(vii) The bigger artillery are basically then just biggr field guns.

(viii) Sentinels and tanks/APC are a bit harder, so it's time for ingenious Steam LandShips etc etc. Helps that the Leman Russ is basically a WW1 tank design.

(ix) The Bengal lancers appreciate the new-fangled Fire Lance. Similarly, power weapons need various Steampunk infernal devices to be invented.

(x) Who needs a Vox when you have a Heliograph.....

Reply by: Mr Nobody - click to view full reply 

34644

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 00:26:05

Post by: Mr Nobody

Don't the tau have a javelin?

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 00:33:54

Post by: gendoikari87

Melissia wrote:That's Imperial Armour 1, which I think is horrendously outdated by now.

I mean the effectiveness of a mere 14 inches of steel? The Abrams, which is a much lighter tank which the Land Raider is pretty obviously intended to be better armor than, has armor equivalent to roughly sixty inches.

Volume II actually. and it makes sense, back when 40k was made no one knew anything about chobham armor so they just made it some reasonable high effectiveness, little did they know what we were actually making in the R&D labs.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 00:39:29

Post by: Melissia

freecloud wrote:On a sligtly different tack, my IG are Praetorians and I built them as a Steampunk/Victorian Sci Fi outfit, so they have some of the weapons of that era, anmd it was interesting to map them out.

1: The Lasgun is comparable to battle rifles, IE, 7.62x51mm. It actually has a variant equivalent to modern 5.65mm assault rifles, called the Lascarbine, which is given to assault units or purchased by mercenaries because the standard lasgun is, well, a full battle rifle rather than an assault rifle (source on this is Dark Heresy).

2: A heavy stubber is equivalent to an HMG (even directly compared to one I believe), and a Heavy Bolter is better than a Heavy Stubber.

3: It varies from source to source, but I would say no, it's more akin to a small, rapidly firing tank cannon. Keep in mind that a mere step up from it is the Leman Russ Battle Cannon, which is one of the best tank cannons in the 40k galaxy. The LRBT can, in a single shot, knock down a heavily armored orbital lander designed to carry a mechanized company of infantry and destroy everything and everyone inside (source: third Ciaphas Cain book).

4: It's not unreasonable to see anti-tank rocket/missile launchers in a squad when you're expecting tanks. There's also a wide variety of rocket/missile launchers, including more traditional RPG types.

5: WWI and beyond. Grenade Launchers are still used now, though they're more commonly underslung on the rifle nowadays rather than their own weapon.

6: No. Just no.

7: The basilisk is one of the most powerful mobile battlefield weapons anyone in 40k has at their disposal. Why in the name of Holy Terra would something so powerful, in a setting that is thirty eight thousand years in the future, be equivalent to our own artillery pieces?



If you're saying you represent them with such models, sure, that's fine... hell even probably rather cool to look at across the table and all. But fluffwise? They're FAR more powerful than these things you've mentioned.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 00:41:26

Post by: gendoikari87

ChrisWWII wrote:RPGs are DEFINITELY not AP2. AP2 is punching clean through modern MBT armor without a problem. I'd rank them AP3 at best...maybe even AP4. Other than that....I'd say it's pretty accurate overall.

no they're all pretty much going to be ap 2 maybe save for some of the disposable ones, The Javelin, the Panzerfaust 3 and their equivalents are so far ahead of our current armor technology we had to get creative to protect against them. Basically, without the APS's and ERA you're toast without a foot of adamantium between you. And I don't think the Leman russ is ever described as having either, but it and the landraider both have the adamantium, but a terminator with only 2-3 inches of adamantium, not going to stand a chance. Now that refractor field the terminators have, that might do the job.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 00:43:22

Post by: Melissia

I would think Terminator suits have far more than that. They're insanely bulky and huge suits of armor on already insanely bulky and huge soldiers.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 00:51:28

Post by: gendoikari87

1: The Lasgun is comparable to battle rifles, IE, 7.62x51mm. It actually has a variant equivalent to modern 5.65mm assault rifles, called the Lascarbine, which is given to assault units or purchased by mercenaries because the standard lasgun is, well, a full battle rifle rather than an assault rifle (source on this is Dark Heresy).

2: A heavy stubber is equivalent to an HMG (even directly compared to one I believe), and a Heavy Bolter is better than a Heavy Stubber.

3: It varies from source to source, but I would say no, it's more akin to a small, rapidly firing tank cannon. Keep in mind that a mere step up from it is the Leman Russ Battle Cannon, which is one of the best tank cannons in the 40k galaxy. The LRBT can, in a single shot, knock down a heavily armored orbital lander designed to carry a mechanized company of infantry and destroy everything and everyone inside (source: third Ciaphas Cain book).

4: It's not unreasonable to see anti-tank rocket/missile launchers in a squad when you're expecting tanks. There's also a wide variety of rocket/missile launchers, including more traditional RPG types.

5: WWI and beyond. Grenade Launchers are still used now, though they're more commonly underslung on the rifle nowadays rather than their own weapon.

6: No. Just no.

7: The basilisk is one of the most powerful mobile battlefield weapons anyone in 40k has at their disposal. Why in the name of Holy Terra would something so powerful, in a setting that is thirty eight thousand years in the future, be equivalent to our own artillery pieces?

1. Yeah pretty much.

2. Close enough if you actually use them like the guy at our store.

3. I still side with the 30mm DU interpretation, only the first versions of rouge trader refers to it as a tank cannon, everywhere else it's it's described as an ... well an autocannon. Which can still be thought of as a tank gun if you don't know a lot about tanks and see a bradley.

4. lol Our praetorian/history buff uses those as mortars.

5.

6.Yeah the first true lascannon equivialent would be the abrams main gun or some of the tank launched HEAT warheads.

7. I think he means just from a looks like, actually I think he means all of this as a counts as and looks like. which the LRBT really IS just a british WWI tank with a turret put on the top.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:I would think Terminator suits have far more than that. They're insanely bulky and huge suits of armor on already insanely bulky and huge soldiers.

Trust me what's behind the armor isn't going to matter, and if they do have a foot of adamantium then yeah they have a chance of stopping most Shoulder launched weapons... there was one that had a 1000mm penetration though, that's 40 inches of steel. I still need to find the tank guns versions most shoulder weapons are 80mm warheads most tanks are about 120-152mm well... 120-125mm... god rest your epic soull Chiorny Oriol

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 00:56:09

Post by: Melissia

I wouldn't even give it that much credit. I'd say the Abrams tank gun is equivalent to the LRBT's gun minus the blast portion. It's a great gun, the one of if not the best in the modern world...

... but the key here is the last two words.

Reply by: freecloud - click to view full reply 

35775

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 01:00:07

Post by: freecloud

Melissia wrote:
If you're saying you represent them with such models, sure, that's fine... hell even probably rather cool to look at across the table and all. But fluffwise? They're FAR more powerful than these things you've mentioned.

The idea was to use models from that era, exactly - match the red coats and pith helmets. So I have Maxim guns, PomPoms, Hales Rockets, 6 Pounder QF's and a bloody great naval 6 incher on Her Majesty's Land Ship "Basilisk". The GW weapons were put into the contet relative to the time, when a 6" nBval gun was very powerful piece of ordnance. (Actually, looking at what a Basiisk does on table I'd say it wasn't much more than a 20th century 6 incher)

Reply by: ChrisWWII - click to view full reply 

27848

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 01:01:55

Post by: ChrisWWII

gendoikari87 wrote:
no they're all pretty much going to be ap 2 maybe save for some of the disposable ones, The Javelin, the Panzerfaust 3 and their equivalents are so far ahead of our current armor technology we had to get creative to protect against them. Basically, without the APS's and ERA you're toast without a foot of adamantium between you. And I don't think the Leman russ is ever described as having either, but it and the landraider both have the adamantium, but a terminator with only 2-3 inches of adamantium, not going to stand a chance. Now that refractor field the terminators have, that might do the job.

Javelin and fancy Panzerfaust potentially yes. And of course we had to get creative. That's been the case since the first caveman swung with a rock, and another caveman held up a flat rock to protect himself. Firepower versus defense, over and over and over again. Sooner or later someone has to come up with a bright idea be it star forts, explosive shells, sloped armor or HEAT to break even or pull ahead.

But yes.....as far as real life goes, the RPG-7 is not a MBT killer. It's, at best, a light vehicle killer. Comparing it to the Javelin and Panzerfaust is like comparing an antitank rifle to a Flak 88. They both have the same general job description, but one is far better at it than the other. But, even asssuming the RPG-7 is a 40k light vehicle killer, that puts it at most at AP4 or so like an autocannon. Which, to be honest, I see very little wrong with calling a round from an RPG roughly equivalent to a round from an autocannon.

The point is, the RPG isn't going through termie armor. Space Marine armor, maybe, but Termie armor? No way.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 01:06:27

Post by: gendoikari87

Melissia wrote:I wouldn't even give it that much credit. I'd say the Abrams tank gun is equivalent to the LRBT's gun minus the blast portion. It's a great gun, the one of if not the best in the modern world...

... but the key here is the last two words.

The KEP on the abrams Supposedly (not sure on that, as I have never been able to see any specs on the round) is much better than most Shoulder launched weapons and if 40k krak missiles really are Gen II and not III like it seems, well theyd have to be ap2 as they're several times better than their gen II counterparts..... but also better than their Gen IV coutnerparts.... don't ask it's a long drawn out story of branching technologies that are superficially similar.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 01:06:54

Post by: Melissia

freecloud wrote:(Actually, looking at what a Basiisk does on table I'd say it wasn't much more than a 20th century 6 incher)

Aside from the Basilisk having deadlier ammunition, better range, being designed to hit against targets with futuristic and even alien armor protected by things which are unknown to modern science...

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 01:14:17

Post by: gendoikari87

ChrisWWII wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:
no they're all pretty much going to be ap 2 maybe save for some of the disposable ones, The Javelin, the Panzerfaust 3 and their equivalents are so far ahead of our current armor technology we had to get creative to protect against them. Basically, without the APS's and ERA you're toast without a foot of adamantium between you. And I don't think the Leman russ is ever described as having either, but it and the landraider both have the adamantium, but a terminator with only 2-3 inches of adamantium, not going to stand a chance. Now that refractor field the terminators have, that might do the job.

Javelin and fancy Panzerfaust potentially yes. And of course we had to get creative. That's been the case since the first caveman swung with a rock, and another caveman held up a flat rock to protect himself. Firepower versus defense, over and over and over again. Sooner or later someone has to come up with a bright idea be it star forts, explosive shells, sloped armor or HEAT to break even or pull ahead.

But yes.....as far as real life goes, the RPG-7 is not a MBT killer. It's, at best, a light vehicle killer. Comparing it to the Javelin and Panzerfaust is like comparing an antitank rifle to a Flak 88. They both have the same general job description, but one is far better at it than the other. But, even asssuming the RPG-7 is a 40k light vehicle killer, that puts it at most at AP4 or so like an autocannon. Which, to be honest, I see very little wrong with calling a round from an RPG roughly equivalent to a round from an autocannon.

The point is, the RPG isn't going through termie armor. Space Marine armor, maybe, but Termie armor? No way.

actually the RPG-7 is more powerful than a panzerfaust if your using the PG-7VR round. but even the other versions can get through the armor at the right point without reactive armor which no 40k tank has. and it's only what 85mm warhead. Modern armor had to rapidly evolve to counter RPG threats in the last half of the 20th century. When they used the munroe effect just sloping the armor and thickening it worked but as soon as we started to use the neumann effect metal became obsolete, and even ceramic is vulnerable.

also 40k autocannons don't use solid slugs they fire the equivalent of Anti personel rounds, HE not DU. a DU autocannon would.... well maybe chew through space marine armor but I'm mostly speculating there.


point being Gen III is so far advanced that short of really thick armor or APS or ERA you don't stop it, you just die. It's as if someone were to go back in time and give .50bmg rifles to the egyptians. IRL I don't see any armor being possible that could stand up to a reasonable HEAT round with a reasonable thickness.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 01:18:07

Post by: Melissia

gendoikari87 wrote:also 40k autocannons don't use solid slugs they fire the equivalent of Anti personel rounds, HE not DU.

Source?

They don't seem very HE to me. A grenade launcher has more explosion than the autocannon does.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 01:21:49

Post by: gendoikari87

Melissia wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:also 40k autocannons don't use solid slugs they fire the equivalent of Anti personel rounds, HE not DU.

Source?

They don't seem very HE to me. A grenade launcher has more explosion than the autocannon does.

Warhammer 40,000: Wargear the new one. I think the IG codex says the same thing, but i'm not sure.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Imperial guard codex page 51

Besides do you really think GW would put ap3 autocannons into the game, no, it'd break things bad. Some things are done with game balance in mind and some fluff gets hammered to fit the game to where it's balanced.

Reply by: freecloud - click to view full reply 

35775

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 01:26:24

Post by: freecloud

Melissia wrote:

freecloud wrote:(Actually, looking at what a Basiisk does on table I'd say it wasn't much more than a 20th century 6 incher)

Aside from the Basilisk having deadlier ammunition, better range, being designed to hit against targets with futuristic and even alien armor protected by things which are unknown to modern science...

Umm...Basilisk has a 6' range and a 4" blast circle in the game - now, given that an Imperial Guardsman is 30mm tall, that gives the Basilisk a range of about 150m and a 6m blast radius.

I've changed my mind - a Victorian 18 pounder is better than that, I'd better take that naval 6 incher off the Basilisk pronto

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 01:28:01

Post by: gendoikari87

This brings another good question what would the grid square removal service's main weapon be seeing as it can wipe out a square kilometer.

also the armor would be weaker but here's a good baneblade equivalent

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landkreuzer_P._1500_Monster

and yes it was going to have an 800mm Gun on it.

one of these, and yes thats a T-34 beside it:

thankfully the germans didn't understand what a tank was supposed to be, granted theirs were some fierce war machines but true infantry supporters they were not, but great mechanized beasts they were.

Reply by: ChrisWWII - click to view full reply 

27848

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 01:39:53

Post by: ChrisWWII

No. OBviously, autocannons are firing some kind of solid round. If they were firing HE, there would be some kind of blast rule included. Originally, yes autocannons were mini tank guns, but now they're firing a single slugs at a high rate. Melissia...what do the RPGs say on this, as I trust those sources more than the base rules. Do autocannons act like HE rounds or more like solid slug?

More importantly, we know 40k tanks use composite armor. Composite armor exists to stop HEAT rounds from penetrating effectively, and given that ceramite is basically described in all the fluff as being a ridiculously heat resistant material, I have extreme doubts about the ability of HEAT weapons to do significant damage to a 40k tank. At least a heavily armored one like a Leman Russ....

Edit: I just checked your source, and it was the Hydra flak tank page, and the only piece of evidence is the wording 'filling the skies with a seething curtain of high velocity explosive rounds'. However, on page 68 where the autocannon is described in depth, it is firing 'large calibre, high velocity shells at a prodigious rate'. This says to me that even if the shells are explosive, they rely mostly on theri velocity to get through armor, and the explosion is just an effect to increase damage, kind of like a bolter shell, or a bunker-buster bomb.

Edit 2: The P.1500 isn't the best as the Schwer Gustav gun was much more an artillery piece than tank. A better example might be the Panzer VIII, or the P.1000 Ratte if you want to streatch it.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 01:53:45

Post by: gendoikari87

ChrisWWII wrote:No. OBviously, autocannons are firing some kind of solid round. If they were firing HE, there would be some kind of blast rule included. Originally, yes autocannons were mini tank guns, but now they're firing a single slugs at a high rate. Melissia...what do the RPGs say on this, as I trust those sources more than the base rules. Do autocannons act like HE rounds or more like solid slug?

More importantly, we know 40k tanks use composite armor. Composite armor exists to stop HEAT rounds from penetrating effectively, and given that ceramite is basically described in all the fluff as being a ridiculously heat resistant material, I have extreme doubts about the ability of HEAT weapons to do significant damage to a 40k tank. At least a heavily armored one like a Leman Russ....

Edit: I just checked your source, and it was the Hydra flak tank page, and the only piece of evidence is the wording 'filling the skies with a seething curtain of high velocity explosive rounds'. However, on page 68 where the autocannon is described in depth, it is firing 'large calibre, high velocity shells at a prodigious rate'. This says to me that even if the shells are explosive, they rely mostly on theri velocity to get through armor, and the explosion is just an effect to increase damage, kind of like a bolter shell, or a bunker-buster bomb.

Edit 2: The P.1500 isn't the best as the Schwer Gustav gun was much more an artillery piece than tank. A better example might be the Panzer VIII, or the P.1000 Ratte if you want to streatch it.

your point? they're still not going to make them ap 3 due to game balance issues or rather they'd be too expensive for their role. and modern shoulder launched RPGS are much better than the Gen II's of 40k so they're still likely ap 2 but well never know because we don't have adamantium.

also ceramic only does so much to stop RPG's I think only the abrams front armor can reliably stop most. side and top, not so much.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

The P.1500 isn't the best as the Schwer Gustav gun was much more an artillery piece than tank. A better example might be the Panzer VIII, or the P.1000 Ratte if you want to streatch it.

Unfortunately the moster and ratte were never made, a shame cause we would have won that much earlier.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 02:05:03

Post by: Melissia

freecloud wrote:Umm...Basilisk has a 6' range and a 4" blast circle in the game - now, given that an Imperial Guardsman is 30mm tall, that gives the Basilisk a range of about 150m and a 6m blast radius.

I do not believe how ridiculous this post is...

I mean, do you seriously expect measurements in 40k tabletop to be directly representative of fluff?

Reply by: ChrisWWII - click to view full reply 

27848

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 02:21:05

Post by: ChrisWWII

.....And I'm not sure of your response. Where in Terra's Holy Name did I say autocannons should be AP3? I don't think I did....I conceded that Javelins would pen Termie armor. That's not a problem. My bone of contention is that RPGs won't go through Termie armor, and I don't see any new compelling reason why they should.

Additionally, a few minutes of research shows that no Abrams has been 'lost' to enemy RPG fire. Damaged, yes. Immobilized, yes. But not lost. Heck, most Abrams tanks losses were due to getting accidentally shot by other Abrams tanks, and even then, their armor shrugged off direct hits by APFSDS rounds.

Reply by: freecloud - click to view full reply 

35775

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 02:36:16

Post by: freecloud

Melissia wrote:

freecloud wrote:Umm...Basilisk has a 6' range and a 4" blast circle in the game - now, given that an Imperial Guardsman is 30mm tall, that gives the Basilisk a range of about 150m and a 6m blast radius.

I do not believe how ridiculous this post is...

I mean, do you seriously expect measurements in 40k tabletop to be directly representative of fluff?

Good Lord - we are talking about about plastic toy soldier weaponry set in a fictional universe 38,000 years hence, made up by a bunch of people from the rainy British midlands over the last 20 years - how can anyone take all this seriously?

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 03:24:36

Post by: Melissia

"blah blah blah, plastic toy soldiers, blah blah blah"

You may not give a damn about the lore, but the only reason I even care about 40k is because fo the setting. I couldn't give a damn less about the models except as an expression of the setting.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 10:39:45

Post by: gendoikari87

.And I'm not sure of your response. Where in Terra's Holy Name did I say autocannons should be AP3? I don't think I did....I conceded that Javelins would pen Termie armor. That's not a problem. My bone of contention is that RPGs won't go through Termie armor,

ah okay I get your point now. thing is the javelin is rated at only 600mm penetration the rpg 7 with the proper warhead is rated at over 700mm penetration. The javelin is really good but it doesen't need to be as good due to the top down attack mode. at least against vehicles.

Additionally, a few minutes of research shows that no Abrams has been 'lost' to enemy RPG fire. Damaged, yes. Immobilized, yes. But not lost. Heck, most Abrams tanks losses were due to getting accidentally shot by other Abrams tanks, and even then, their armor shrugged off direct hits by APFSDS rounds.

yes, because as I have said ERA screws with RPG's. once that ERA is gone RPG's can still go through the side armor. Frontal armor though is still a no even without it. But this is the abrams most RPG's remain great anti-tank weapons, they aren't just for Light armored vehicles. The challenger is also in the same realm of protection. pretty much if it still uses steel it'll get around it, you need chobham armor and copious amounts of it to stop Heat, even relatively small warheads.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
also on the Grid square removal service I'm not sure about the stats for the vehicle but i'm pretty sure that it's main weapon is going to be a "every model on the field takes a str 3-4 ap 5 hit."

Reply by: ChrisWWII - click to view full reply 

27848

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 12:52:27

Post by: ChrisWWII

Trust me. We aren't taking this as seriously as the people over at SD.net take Star Wars and Star Trek. Besides, the fluff is what got me into this, and I love cross-over fanfic. So yes, this kind of comparison is important to me.

But yes....that's true, but then again there's only one warhead that can do that for the RPG, and remembering the whole top attack thing for Javelins, I'm beginning to question if they could even successfully lock onto or hit a Terminator. An RPG would have to be a lucky shot too, I doubt it could go through Termie armor predictably regularly.

Also, we have to note that in 40k, infantry armor pen, and vehicle armor pen are considered totally different things. They've developed weapons specifically for the purpouse of getting through Terminator and other forms of heavy armor (plasma weapons). This leads me to believe that there's something about infantry armor that makes it subtly different from tank armor for the purpouses of penetration.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 13:05:42

Post by: Melissia

For Flak armor, it's a complex series of ablative and impact absorbent layers. It is an incredibly light, yet effective set of armor that can cover the entire body while not weighing the soldier down or limiting their freedom of movement.

What modern armies would give to have Flak Armor or equivalents.

Carapace is even better, made from densely layered plates of highly durable material whose only real weakness is at the joints. It offers roughly 1.5x the protection of Flak Armor, which itself would be considered a miracle armor in modern times, while increasing the weight for a full, military-grade suit (bootsbracers, pauldrons, chest/back/abdomen plate, graves, helmet) from 11kg for flak armor to 17 kg for carapace armor. A significant increase, but still about the same as a large IOTV used by the US army today. And it is able to absorb impacts and rounds from heavy machineguns.

Reply by: Catyrpelius - click to view full reply 

28292

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 13:34:42

Post by: Catyrpelius

I was suprised this thread had still been chugging along.

I postulate that no weapon except nuclear weapons in any arsenel today could penetrate terminator armor.

Reply by: Frazzled - click to view full reply 

221

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 13:59:46

Post by: Frazzled

Modquisiiton on:

Private warnings have been given. Posters are starting to attack other posters. Lets cease that or this thread will be closed and suspensions given. You can have opinions, strongly defended, but not attack other posters. Thanks!

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 14:55:59

Post by: gendoikari87

Hey mellissa do you think a full body suit of dragonskin be akin to carapace armor?

as for javelins actually hitting a terminator, probably not, I don't know for sure however.

also as an off topic note missile launchers in 40k as gen II shaped charges are lesser versions of plasma weapons. the warhead compresses the hollow cavity compresses the gas to such a high degree it turns it into a plasma.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Catyrpelius wrote:I was suprised this thread had still been chugging along.

I postulate that no weapon except nuclear weapons in any arsenel today could penetrate terminator armor.

I don't know, IF IG missile launchers are actually gen II then a good Gen III would probably do the trick as they are several times more effective. Course if you make a big enough blast the armor might survive but the person inside might not if the armor transmits enough of the blast wave.

Reply by: Catyrpelius - click to view full reply 

28292

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 15:38:29

Post by: Catyrpelius

Except that this is the 41st millenium where the Emperors finest are encased in powered ceramite suits. Your not talking about penetrating steel, your talking about penetrating the best armor that the Imperium or the rest of the galaxy for that matter has ever created.

To compare a modern missile to the ones used by the Imperium and its enemies is like saying that a model T is the same thing as a Mclaren F1, sure they both have 4 tires and a steering wheel and run on gasoline, so they must be the same.

Also the person inside that armor isnt a normal person, its a Space Marine, Defenders of the Universe!

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 15:51:18

Post by: aka_mythos

The Javelin I think is fine with caveat that its strength value would be relative to modern armor and not necessarily representative of its performance in 40k.

The barret I think is hard to represent. Its designed as a multipurpose anit-materiale rifle, but the sniper rules I don't think convey that well enough. I think it have an extra rule, you might attribute it to a depleted uranium or AP round, that just automatically gives it that second die for armor penetration. Once again with the caveat of its representation relative to modern armor.

Mark 19, spot on.

The RPG 7 does have a number of grenades it can launch, so I think the IG missile launcher profile is actually quite suitable.

I think It would be interesting to try and build rule set to represent a modern military and see how well you could translate modern doctrine into 40k, to then see how well different 40k armies would fare.

I think it would be interesting, as a 40k army the units would tend to be more heavily loaded equipement, things that other lists have as upgrade would be standard. They would tend to have Imperial Guard stats, maybe with higher leadership values. They would tend to be pricey to pay for a bunch of stuff, but stuff you wouldn't always need. They would likely need special rules that incoporate modern practices to balance that out... say for example, they might cause pinning or improve their own cover saves to represent laying down suppressive or covering fire. They would tend to have more flexible unit size and composition as well as a large number of transport choices. For example 15 models taking 3 humvees or 12 models taking a Bradley. I think you would also tend to see more specialized modes of fire for vehicle mounted weapons, different ammunition.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Catyrpelius wrote:Except that this is the 41st millenium where the Emperors finest are encased in powered ceramite suits. Your not talking about penetrating steel, your talking about penetrating the best armor that the Imperium or the rest of the galaxy for that matter has ever created.

I think for the sake of a conversation, as opposed to a non-conversation that stops immediately with "its fiction," we should discuss this with a sense of relativity. Where these modern strength values and any armor values are based relative to modern arms and armor; where the front of an Abrams is a AV14 and class 3 body armor is a 5+ and class 4 a 4+ save.

Reply by: freecloud - click to view full reply 

35775

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 16:12:35

Post by: freecloud

Catyrpelius wrote:Except that this is the 41st millenium where the Emperors finest are encased in powered ceramite suits. Your not talking about penetrating steel, your talking about penetrating the best armor that the Imperium or the rest of the galaxy for that matter has ever created.

To compare a modern missile to the ones used by the Imperium and its enemies is like saying that a model T is the same thing as a Mclaren F1, sure they both have 4 tires and a steering wheel and run on gasoline, so they must be the same.

Also the person inside that armor isnt a normal person, its a Space Marine, Defenders of the Universe!

Bear in mind that in the 41st meillenium much know-how has been lost, and living conditions are pretty poor so:

(i) what the Imperium thinks is sh*t hot tech is probably pretty meh by earlier standards. If you take the dark ages as an example, Western Europe was pretty primitive by Byzantine and Arab standards but had been far more sophisticated in Roman times before. The "best" Western Europe had to offer was pretty laughable until about the 1300's, and there was a net reduction in capability compared to the Greeks and Romans of 1500 years before

(ii) In times of poor living conditions, humans are a lot shorter - so the average Hive city IG trooper could be a 5'0" midget and a Space Marine stands a magnificent 6' (This is pretty much the size diiffs between a noble night and a peasant in much the middle ages).

And Ceramite could just be a fairly easy to make armour because Humanity doesn't know how to manufacture advanced hardened steels anymore.... I mean, given that Humaniy's best tank is about 1920's drive technology.....

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 17:38:38

Post by: aka_mythos

I mean to give a sense of the extent of humanities technology, a Rhino wasn't originally a military vehicle, just a piece of mining equipment and now the basis for almost every marine vehicle. Before the Dark Age and the emergence of the Emperor the average military vehicle was probably on par with Land Raiders with specialized vehicles exceeding it.

@Freecloud, while I can see what you're getting at though I don't know if you're quiet expressing it the best way. I think a good example of advancements beyond lost technologies is say something like Damascus steel which through nano-carbon structures, we're just beginning to understand, existed but was lost, and despite modern technology eclipsing that civilization has yet to be able to reproduce that technology.

The way to put 40k technology in a modern context is no to think of it as anyone period of technology. The setting is inherently anachronistic and different aspects of their technology and understanding of it are comparable to different eras. For example, it isn't that Chimeras and Leman Russes are built with 1920's technology its that the battle tactics that employ them have that mindset and that their construction reflects that. The fact is that components of a leman russ exceed the technologies of the 1920's and even with blue prints in that period wouldn't be buildable. Examples are material strength and the technologies to make them surpass that periods capabilities. Few large tanks of the WWI era had large turrets because given the weight restrictions due to engine capabilities turrets exceeded the weight the roof of a tank could support and more supports couldn't be added to bolster that. Also given a battle cannons size, despite large calibre cannons existing, would have been impossible to make in as compact a size at that point in history. IG tanks utilize engines that exceed the technological limits of modern engines.

Aside from anachronism, the other way to look at the Imperiums technology is to consider, that just because they build Chimeras and Leman Russes does not mean those are the best vehicles they could give the guardsmen, just the cheapest, most expendable while battle worthy vehicles suppliable in sufficient numbers. An example of this is the M16 rifle, when design it was envisioned as the best rifle we could supply each soldier; with a number of the M16's advantages over the AK47 tied into its manufacturing process that allowed for a more precision made weapon that fires more stabley and thus more accurately. Well after the M16 was designed there was another effort that was done as a contingency incase we ever went to all out (conventional) war with China or the USSR. It was a variant of the M16 that shared many common parts but was stamped and not milled and sacrificed all the advantages of the M16 over the AK47 in favor of cheaper mass producability, in time of war. That second design is the equivalent of all Imperial military technology, with the exception of space marines. The Adeptus Mechanicus probably make the more fine tuned versions of those vehicles for themselves while supplying to the Imperial Guard the versions for the cheapest highest prouction rates.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/08 18:04:11

Post by: gendoikari87

I would still like more in depth data on the imperial missile launcher so if any body can find a more in depth description of krak warheads it would be much appreciated. if it's just a gen II then modern shaped charges are much more powerful, but I can't seem to believe that such a simple advance as a coper liner to the cone wouldn't come across in the what, 10,000 years since? I mean even with imperial dogma surely some tech adept has experimented with krak warheads.

Reply by: keezus - click to view full reply 

1795

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/09 14:05:08

Post by: keezus

There seem to be a number of assumptions that are always made about technology of the 41st millenium. These all center around the school of thought that everything is better because there is access to better technology. While nobody is claiming that advanced technology doesn't exist in the 41st millenium - it must be noted that this technology is not uniformly distributed. Examples of low tech in 40k includes:

The continued use of Cavalry - i.e. rough riders.
The continued use of projectile weapons despite las-weapons being commonplace. In particular - autoguns / stubguns.
The continued use of run of the mill close combat weapons.

While STCs themselves are very advanced, the things they produce range from the mundane to the super advanced. Example: Rhino STC was originally a utility vehicle as opposed to a AFV.

Regarding flak armor. Unless the human anatomy has changed a lot between now and the 41st millenium, while materials become more durable, the limits of body armor is directly related to how much concussive force a human can withstand without sustaining debilitating (or fatal) injury. Marines get around this weakness of the flesh by being fully encased. Flak armor in particular doesn't seem to offer much advantage over modern counterparts as the oft depicted Cadian pattern flak armor leaves significant portion of the arms, side of the torso and legs largely unprotected - (unless IG fatigues are manufactured out of some balistic resisting material like Eldar mesh armor). As the balistics resisting (armored) portions appear to be fastened overtop of the fatigues, they would likely transmit concussive force directly to the body behind, making this sort of armor not much better than modern varieties when something delivering lots of KE, be it bullets or blasts - especially the high powered variety of the far future.

I'm not sure how this could be considered miracle armor - considering that while the armored portions may be proof against conventional 21C small arms, while the guardsman might not die from getting shot burst fire, nothing is stopping them from being maimed by said primitive weapons.

Regarding bolter shells. It is my understanding that bolter shells are consecrated. This would suggest that these aren't made by run-of-the mill peons.

Reply by: Chongara - click to view full reply 

25990

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/09 14:18:13

Post by: Chongara

keezus wrote:Regarding bolter shells. It is my understanding that bolter shells are consecrated. This would suggest that these aren't made by run-of-the mill peons.

Some are but not most. Even those considered Lucky or "Holy" by some (such as those used by Marines & Sisters) don't necessarily have some particularly special consecration process applied to them. The majority of Bolter Shells are just very expensive, very effective but not particularly efficient bullets. Consecrated Bolter Shells do exist but they require special workers/process/materials whatever and are generally reserved for very specific applications... generally Chaos, and used only by the elite of elite.



EDIT: That said trying to frame the Technology of 40k (or just about anything in the 40k universe) in a "Realistic" context is really kind of silly. The universe is just so OTT that noting really works when closely examined, the entire thing basically runs on rule of cool. Better to just suspend disbelief than really try and justify/explain everything.

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/09 15:40:10

Post by: aka_mythos

keezus wrote:Regarding flak armor... Flak armor in particular doesn't seem to offer much advantage over modern counterparts ...

I'm not sure how this could be considered miracle armor - considering that while the armored portions may be proof against conventional 21C small arms, while the guardsman might not die from getting shot burst fire, nothing is stopping them from being maimed by said primitive weapons.

Stubbers and autoguns are the equivalent to modern submachineguns and assault rifles and when you consider their strength values and the flak armors ability to resist their armor penetration, it shows flak armor is at least equivalent to modern armor.

Flak armor I wouldn't exactly call it a "miracle" but I'd guess its equivalent to modern armor in some ways and superior in ways not immediately apparent. One is that it could very well be lighter than modern equivalents. That would be fairly signicant from a fatgiue stand point. The next could be that unlike modern balllistic armor, it is designed to protect equally well against blows from close combat weapons. Next most ballistic vest even though they will protect against repeated shooting will eventually fail from it; IG Flak armor may simply fail at a much higher threshold of wear. Those things would make it similar but better than modern armor.

As far as the concusive force of weapons killing the wearer, those are represented by a high strength weapon more easily wounding coupled with the failed armor save. Just because their is a failed save doesn't mean the armor was destroyed. It can mean a number of lethal things: concusive hit, the wound in an unarmored location, or the armor completely being punctured. The joints on a marines armor are probably only as armored as flak armor but the protection from concusive hits and hits in unarmored locations are as much a part of the 3+ armor save as the blocks of armor.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/09 16:06:42

Post by: gendoikari87

I don't know I've alwasy thought that armor saves should be two part, first the penetrative ability protection and the coverage of the armor. Blast weapons being given appropriate penetrations based on how much force can be transferred by the armor.

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/09 16:29:21

Post by: aka_mythos

40k is just more abstract than that and that would certainly add alot more dice rolling.

Your already hit, your already "wounded," at the point you're rolling your armor save you're rolling to see if the armor did enough to allow you to ignore what ever wound you've taken. A successful armor means your bruised or knocked on your back or have broken limb, but are still able to go on. That whatever wound there was wasn't enough to constitute a full "wound" point. You could even go further and say the abstract level of 40k means that even when you fail your marine isn't dead just so severely incapacitated as to be incapable of continuing to fight.

Its just the abstract level of detail a game of this sort has to take.

Reply by: keezus - click to view full reply 

1795

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/09 18:49:41

Post by: keezus

I'd like to revisit bolters for a minute here. No matter the type of bolt weapon, all of them should function using the same mechanism. I'm not a physicist nor a ballistics expert, so I'm only going to look at this using the most basic comparisons.

Melissia has posited that:
1. Bolt rounds exit the muzzle at maximum velocity and the rocket motor merely sustains said velocity until propellant is expended - maintaining uniform lethality within the weapon's range.

This is corraborated by the background as all depictions of weapon effect doesn't vary between close and distant targets. Bolt pistols appear to fire the same calibre rounds as bolters. The damage is described as comparable. The only difference is that a bolt pistol has less range. Assuming that Melissia's statement is true: This suggests that both the bolt pistol and bolter ammunition have comparable exit speeds, with the only difference being that the bolt pistol ammunition has less propellant - which fits in line with the smaller profile of the weapon (with range scaling upwards with regards to larger calibre heavy bolters and mega bolters). This is interesting as it would suggest that the length of barrel appears to makes no difference with regards the round exit speed - suggesting no rifling or any barrel related mechanisms to increase round velocity. If anything, it would appear that the round is immediately acclerated to exit velocity by some voodoo charge contained within the shell casing portion of the round and the added length of the (frictionless!) bolter barrel is only there to provide for more accurate two handed long range fire. This is of course, counter-intuitive and probably why gendoikari87 was so adamant that there must be some rocket assisted acceleration associated with the firing process after the bolt round leaves the muzzle.

Also, as bolt pistol rounds are smaller and lighter - by extension they should provide less KE (unless the rounds have a faster exit speed than from a bolter - which is really stretching it), so it would also stand to reason that the kills generated from standard bolt rounds can be mostly attributed to the HE warhead behind the adamantine tip.

40k. The more you try and rationalize it, the stranger it gets.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/09 19:06:46

Post by: gendoikari87

This is interesting as it would suggest that the length of barrel appears to makes no difference with regards the round exit speed - suggesting no rifling or any barrel related mechanisms to increase round velocity. If anything, it would appear that the round is immediately acclerated to exit velocity by some voodoo charge contained within the shell casing portion of the round and the added length of the (frictionless!) bolter barrel is only there to provide for more accurate two handed long range fire. This is of course, counter-intuitive and probably why gendoikari87 was so adamant that there must be some rocket assisted acceleration associated with the firing process after the bolt round leaves the muzzle.

yes because it breaks the laws of physics. for one it doesn't matter what kind of voodoo charge you have, the longer the barrel the more powerful your round is going to be unless most of the energy comes from the rocket.

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/09 19:09:40

Post by: aka_mythos

The bolt pistol assertions fall apart if you take the advantages of rockets into account. That they can vary their acceleration profile. A bolt pistol may achieve equivalent lethality, despite a shorter barrel diminishing exspulsion power transference to the shell, because the rocket motor initially applies a higher rate of acceleration upon leaving the barrel which would acocunt for a burn off of more fuel resulting in reduced range.

Regardless of being fired from a bolter or bolt pistol, internally the bolter shell would have some way of measuring its speed and acceleration simplely cranking up the rocket motor if it started to slow down, in an attempt to maintain velocity. In a bolt pistol it would simply be measureing that threshold for opening up on the rocket burn right out the barrel to achieve an ideal speed it never initially met. While out of a bolter it achieves that ideal speed and as forces act to decelerate the round the it burns the rocket harder and harder till it runs out of fuel.

That is the only way I can think it could work, while retaning interchangability between bolt weapons and consistent performance.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/09 19:21:55

Post by: gendoikari87

well I worked it out a page or two back that bolt rounds in order to ONLY maintain their velocity instead of accelerating them would need to be go going about mach 1-2 at muzzel and that was with a small model rocket motor, I recently went down to the local hobby lobby and looked at these the propellant doesn't even fill a quarter of the casing so something with as much propellant with a bolter would actually probably need to be going about mach 3-4 possibly more before the rocket wouldn't do any more.

For something as large as a bolter shell that's extremely fast and extremely high energy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

40k. The more you try and rationalize it, the stranger it gets.

becaue the people writing your fluff have no clue about physics, but that's okay, their job isn't to be physicists.

Reply by: Catyrpelius - click to view full reply 

28292

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/10 13:56:50

Post by: Catyrpelius

gendoikari87 wrote:

40k. The more you try and rationalize it, the stranger it gets.

becaue the people writing your fluff have no clue about physics, but that's okay, their job isn't to be physicists.

If they let engineers write the ruels and fluff no one would play the game as there would be complex differential equations and calculus involved every turn. While the technology behind everything would be air tight the spelling and grammer would be atrocious!

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/10 14:09:11

Post by: aka_mythos

How many engineers does it take to screw in a light bulb?
...When we're done you won't have to.

Reply by: Catyrpelius - click to view full reply 

28292

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/10 14:18:16

Post by: Catyrpelius

An architect, an artist and an engineer were discussing whether it was better to spend time with the wife or a mistress. The architect said he enjoyed time with his wife, building a solid foundation for an enduring relationship. The artist said he enjoyed time with his mistress, because of the passion and mystery he found there. The engineer said, "I like both." "Both?" Engineer: "Yeah. If you have a wife and a mistress, they will each assume you are spending time with the other woman, and you can go to the lab and get some work done."



Automatically Appended Next Post:
The graduate with a Science degree asks, "Why does it work?"
The graduate with an Engineering degree asks, "How does it work?"
The graduate with an Accounting degree asks, "How much will it cost?"
The graduate with a Liberal Arts degree asks, "Do you want fries with that?"

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/10 14:52:49

Post by: gendoikari87

aka_mythos wrote:How many engineers does it take to screw in a light bulb?
...When we're done you won't have to.

wow I've never laughed so hard I got a headache before....


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Catyrpelius wrote:An architect, an artist and an engineer were discussing whether it was better to spend time with the wife or a mistress. The architect said he enjoyed time with his wife, building a solid foundation for an enduring relationship. The artist said he enjoyed time with his mistress, because of the passion and mystery he found there. The engineer said, "I like both." "Both?" Engineer: "Yeah. If you have a wife and a mistress, they will each assume you are spending time with the other woman, and you can go to the lab and get some work done."



Automatically Appended Next Post:
The graduate with a Science degree asks, "Why does it work?"
The graduate with an Engineering degree asks, "How does it work?"
The graduate with an Accounting degree asks, "How much will it cost?"
The graduate with a Liberal Arts degree asks, "Do you want fries with that?"

actually that first one is an architect an artist and a physicist, because the physicist is supposed to be schrodinger who had both, in fact schrodingers cat came out of a weekend trist with his mistress.

Reply by: keezus - click to view full reply 

1795

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/10 15:07:11

Post by: keezus

Catyrpelius wrote:If they let engineers write the ruels and fluff no one would play the game as there would be complex differential equations and calculus involved every turn. While the technology behind everything would be air tight the spelling and grammer would be atrocious!

Technical writing was mandatory when I studied engineering. One of the things that they hammer into your head is that there can be no ambiguity whatsoever in proper engineering documentation and report writing. I make no such promises about spelling though.

Reply by: Catyrpelius - click to view full reply 

28292

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/10 15:12:40

Post by: Catyrpelius

Technical writing is still big, but no one other then someone required to writes like they do in a tech doc. I think most people heads would explode if they had to read them with any regularity.

Reply by: freecloud - click to view full reply 

35775

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/10 18:30:31

Post by: freecloud

keezus wrote:There seem to be a number of assumptions that are always made about technology of the 41st millenium. These all center around the school of thought that everything is better because there is access to better technology. While nobody is claiming that advanced technology doesn't exist in the 41st millenium - it must be noted that this technology is not uniformly distributed. Examples of low tech in 40k includes:

The continued use of Cavalry - i.e. rough riders.
The continued use of projectile weapons despite las-weapons being commonplace. In particular - autoguns / stubguns.
The continued use of run of the mill close combat weapons.

While STCs themselves are very advanced, the things they produce range from the mundane to the super advanced. Example: Rhino STC was originally a utility vehicle as opposed to a AFV.

Regarding flak armor. Unless the human anatomy has changed a lot between now and the 41st millenium, while materials become more durable, the limits of body armor is directly related to how much concussive force a human can withstand without sustaining debilitating (or fatal) injury. Marines get around this weakness of the flesh by being fully encased. Flak armor in particular doesn't seem to offer much advantage over modern counterparts as the oft depicted Cadian pattern flak armor leaves significant portion of the arms, side of the torso and legs largely unprotected - (unless IG fatigues are manufactured out of some balistic resisting material like Eldar mesh armor). As the balistics resisting (armored) portions appear to be fastened overtop of the fatigues, they would likely transmit concussive force directly to the body behind, making this sort of armor not much better than modern varieties when something delivering lots of KE, be it bullets or blasts - especially the high powered variety of the far future.

I'm not sure how this could be considered miracle armor - considering that while the armored portions may be proof against conventional 21C small arms, while the guardsman might not die from getting shot burst fire, nothing is stopping them from being maimed by said primitive weapons.

Yes, that is about my take - The 40K Human Grunts are operating with something like 2000's technology (probably due to cost effeciceincy considerations) with a few "better than todays" (laser weapons, walkers), some "worse thans" (no squad SMG/LMG for eg) and some arcana from the Ancients that they have to have a religious rite to run, but some quite old fashioned stuff is still "good enough" eg Cavalry. The Space Marines clearly have access to a more advanced battlesuit armour than we can build today, but everything else is pretty much available. Their ordnance (based on its blast circle sizes, impact etc - re the point on concussive force) is not much different to modern medium to heavy artillery - as keezus points ot, the physics of a human is about concussive fiorce, and there is no way that a few plates of strap on armour are going to save one from a nucleaar blast, so it calibrates the gun on a Basilisk as a modern c 155mm calibre (and lower range, else you would never see them on a table) .

In fact, as a World War 1/2 player, I am amazed by how easily one can adapt 40K into 1940K! The 1940's Lee&Grant/Sherman tank is a close analogy to the Leman Russ for example. Baneblades etc remind me a lot of the 1930's supertanks in concept.

Some of the Xenos have skimmer technology (humanity does not) and energy weapons that Humans don't, but they are not super-powerful, so clearly there is some implied max energy/portability tradeoff going on.

This doesn't stop game enjoyment - in fact to my mind the backstory of a declining civilisation which had better technology but is largely forgetting it unless it is run with religious rite instead of know how (blessed be the the Holy Service Manual) is compelling, and the physics of the figures is then more believable.

Reply by: Catyrpelius - click to view full reply 

28292

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/10 18:40:18

Post by: Catyrpelius

freecloud wrote:Some of the Xenos have skimmer technology (humanity does not) and energy weapons that Humans don't, but they are not super-powerful, so clearly there is some implied max energy/portability tradeoff going on.

This doesn't stop game enjoyment - in fact to my mind the backstory of a declining civilisation which had better technology but is largely forgetting it unless it is run with religious rite instead of know how (blessed be the the Holy Service Manual) is compelling, and the physics of the figures is then more believable.

Have you ever seen a game of 40k played?

Space Marines employ anti gravity technology on a regular basis and to great effect in their Land Speeders.

The standard weapon of the Imperial Guard is the Las Rifle, which is an energy weapon.

This is a universe that has been in an almost constant state of war for the last 1000 years. All of the "civilised", technologicaly advanced cultures are on the brink of being overrun, no one, with the exception of the Tau are advanceing in technology. When your backs against the wall good enough is good enough.

Reply by: keezus - click to view full reply 

1795

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/10 19:14:08

Post by: keezus

@Catyrpelius - Just because a lasgun requires a higher level of technology than present day arms doesn't make it a better weapon.

Example: A crossbow firing a steel tipped bolt has better armor piercing qualities than flintlock pistols, despite the latter being the product of a "more advanced" technology. It is not inconceivable that a steel AP bolt, loaded into an 18th century 2 handed crossbow might outperform even modern small arms vs modern balistic armor.

The lasgun in particular has always bothered me as it is the most common weapon of the Imperium. Descriptions of its effects vary from being somewhat more powerful than a conventional rifle to being many magnitudes more powerful. Defenders of the higher numbers will gleefully point to examples of stated effect when turned against inorganic targets, conveniently ignoring the fact that the human body's capacity to sustain damage doesn't scale with advances in technology like armor does - and while armor might be able to survive these new weapons of the 41th millenium, it is doubtful the human body behind could survive even a fraction of the hit's side effects - be it KE transfer, heat transfer or other.

Finally, despite advances in armor technology, a Guardsman will still die if he's forcefully stabbed in the face with the most primitive of stone-age weapons - a pointy stick.

Reply by: IvanTih - click to view full reply 

20700

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/10 19:14:58

Post by: IvanTih

Catyrpelius wrote:This is a universe that has been in an almost constant state of war for the last 1000 years. All of the "civilised", technologicaly advanced cultures are on the brink of being overrun, no one, with the exception of the Tau are advanceing in technology. When your backs against the wall good enough is good enough.

The Imperium also advances just slowly,we have experimental torpedoes from Execution Hour,Hellfire bolter shells(variant which uses acids and poisons which are effective against Tyranids who have very,very good immune system).
They reverse engineer personal cloaking device from Tau(Deathwatch),they also had cloak technology long before Tau(Horus Heresy and Kill Team(They cloak five metre shuttle)).
Then we have new space ships classes and advances which happened after Horus Heresy.Power Armor has also improved by little,vehicles also advanced,advances in lance(perfected in M37) and plasma weaponry(they actually innovated and discovered a lost technlogy from Golden Age of Technology).
Adeptus Mechanicus aren't so stangnant(we have planet named Tesla which was full of new experimental weaponry,Codex:Tyranids 5th edition).

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/10 19:33:49

Post by: gendoikari87

Example: A crossbow firing a steel tipped bolt has better armor piercing qualities than flintlock pistols

before anyone starts flaming this is actually true.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/20 12:27:39

Post by: gendoikari87

also I'd like to know where are the A-10's in 40k, they're still going to be around arent they?

Reply by: ChrisWWII - click to view full reply 

27848

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/20 13:07:17

Post by: ChrisWWII

While the A-10 is awesome, it's not THAT awesome. It seems to me that the closest thing would be the Vendetta gunship, or failing that a Marauder Destroyer.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/20 15:35:03

Post by: gendoikari87

They still have the ma duce why not the A-10

Reply by: ChrisWWII - click to view full reply 

27848

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/20 15:52:10

Post by: ChrisWWII

They don't have the Browning .50 Calibre Heavy Machine Gun. They posess a weapon that has very similar charactheristics to said weapon, but they don't have that weapon persay.

Hence, they will not have A-10s flying around. They will, however, have a plane that fulfills the A-10s mission, and maybe even looks the same, but it won't be the Fairchild A-10 Thunderbolt II

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/20 19:37:17

Post by: Melissia

aka_mythos wrote:Flak armor I wouldn't exactly call it a "miracle" but I'd guess its equivalent to modern armor in some ways and superior in ways not immediately apparent. One is that it could very well be lighter than modern equivalents.

There is no "could". It IS lighter, as shown by Dark Heresy's weight measurements for a full body suit of Flak armor (boots, greaves, chest, back, helmet, shoulders, and arms) being lighter than merely the vest alone that is used in modern armies.

Also, flak armor is designed to be highly protective against blasts and shrapnel, and the Dark Heresy rules represent this with an increase in armor value against those kinds of weapons.

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/20 20:53:00

Post by: aka_mythos

That's semantics. Since nothing that has yet to be made can be an "is".

The point of the post was to show and lead people, through example, how differences are not immediately apparent; those who are not immediately aware of every minutia of fluff. I know the fluff, I was explaining the subtlety of unapparent.

Just saying something "is" in the fluff isn't always enough, as it doesn't explain the subtler ways how two seemingly similar things are different. While you've run through that it is a full body armor system and its better against shrapnel... I think you've missed the point that this fictional armor could be more than just heightened protection and lapses that keezus brought up.

Reply by: Mr Nobody - click to view full reply 

34644

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/20 22:47:47

Post by: Mr Nobody

Any armor that is both lighter and stronger is a miracle, since body has defined the tactics of war.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/20 22:50:47

Post by: gendoikari87

Don't modern body armors have those large ceramic plates in them. I'd say if those were full body they'd at least be a 4+.But as it is, even the dragon skin and interceptor aren't full they just cover the super vitals... odly enough they don't cover the lower vitals. Dragon skin does a better job but is much more fragile to the environment. I don't know if the flak armor have any hard kill inserts in them but they do look kinda soft, and as such they won't be as good as the interceptor as even if the round doesn't make it in, it's still going to transfer some force making whatever miraculous strength it has redundant, I could be wrong though, it might be a hard plate. I'm not that well versed in the armors of 40k, just real world ones.

also on the subject of armors, what do you guys who have served say about the ceramic plate incerts, I know they're much lighter but once they've been hit it looks like a second strike in the same spot would penetrate, The steel plates just stop the rounds. I'd personally have a reliable armor that could stand up to multiple hits even if i had to sacrifice other things, you can always design a lighter weapon or take a smaller one. but I'm no tactical genious, that's just my thoughts on the matter I'd be interested in hearing what you guys thought.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/20 23:35:49

Post by: Melissia

Why do you say flak armor looks soft? Depictions of it look just as metallic as Marine armor is depicted, to me.

And no, flak armor is a solid armor that is made up of "layers of ablative and impact-absorbent material" (Dark Heresy, page 144).

A full set of military-grade flak armor-- plated gauntlets/vambraces, an armored helmet, a vest (Front and Back plates), plated shoulder pads/pauldrons, and plated boots/greaves weighs 11 kg (24.2 lbs).

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/21 00:04:32

Post by: gendoikari87

A flak vest consists of a skeleton of lightweight, flexible metal. This skeleton is then wrapped in multiple layers of a high-tensile fabric that is the main protective component of the armour. After multiple layers of fabric are affixed to the skeleton,the vest is given its toughened outer shell. The same principle is used in the production of Guardsman helmets and bracers. Guards for knees and legs are also produced.

it's basically akin to kevlar over a wire frame.

Source New warhamer 40k: wargear

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/21 00:14:11

Post by: Melissia

That's older and somewhat out of date fluff.

The "layers of ablative and impact-absorbent material" quote is from fairly recent. While flak armor CAN be in a softer material, standard flak armor is definitely made of a harder material (as seen on Cadian armor).

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/21 00:48:51

Post by: gendoikari87

no the NEW warhammer wargear I think it came out around the same time as 5th

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/21 01:58:27

Post by: Melissia

It was published in 2005. Dark Heresy was published in 2008.

Frankly, the "layers of ablative and impact-absorbent materials" condensed into a solid piece of armor makes far more sense given flak armor's design (it's supposed to protect against energy weapons as well as bullets) than kevlar wrapped around a steel frame. Kevlar isn't exactly proven to work against energy weapons (Because they aren't used in modern times). Or knives for that matter, while Flak Armor is good against monomolecular edged blades.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/21 13:01:14

Post by: gendoikari87

aren't monomolecular blades counted as power weapons in game?

also hardness has nothing to do with protection against energy weapons, that would be the specific heat of the material. water for example makes a great energy weapon barrier.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/21 13:47:34

Post by: Melissia

Monomolecular blades are probably closer to AP6.

Basically, Flak Armor gives an armor value of 4 (five against blasts), while monomolecular edges have a penetration value of 2.

No, it's the ablative layers that are good against lasers.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/21 14:13:18

Post by: gendoikari87

Ablative works but not as good as specfic heat. Balsa wood could be considered ablative but it won't offer much protection. Try it yourself dip your hand in water and then in molten lead. you'll be fine. just don't keep your hand in there.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/21 14:15:07

Post by: Melissia

Which is fine, but Kevlar is not good against melee weapons, while Flak Armor is. Hardness has its use.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/21 14:17:14

Post by: gendoikari87

if it's usefull against CC it might be hard but where do you get that it's effective V close combat.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/21 14:51:10

Post by: Melissia

Because the armor gives its save against close combat weapons?

Both in tabletop AND in DArk Heresy.

Actually, it's almost impossible for a knife to go through flak armor in Dark Heresy. The knives do 1d5 damage, and the armor value of Flak Armor is doubled against primitive weapons (unupgraded close combat weapons count as this), leaving it with an armor value of 8. Combined with a human's average toughness bonus of 3, this means that knives would only penetrate flak armor on a critical hit, or when an inordinately strong user wielded it. Even a Space MArine, whose average strength bonus is 8, would have a hard time actually killing a guardsman with a knife.

Reply by: stompydakka - click to view full reply 

31375

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/21 15:03:53

Post by: stompydakka

which is lame and unrealistic, IMHO.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/21 15:07:01

Post by: Melissia

Or it just means that the armor is incredibly effective against standard close combat weapons.

Mind you, an Astartes' combat blade does not count as a primitive weapon, and does more than 1d5 damage to begin with. I sincerely doubt an astartes would even bother to pull out a human-sized switchblade.

Reply by: stompydakka - click to view full reply 

31375

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/21 15:19:43

Post by: stompydakka

all right, that makes more sense.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/21 15:30:52

Post by: Melissia

This is actually the entire purpose behind the "monomolecular" upgrade. Basically its biggest benefit is that it removes the primitive quality, allowing the blade to actually stand a chance against non-primitive armors.

But then, monomolecular upgrades are rather expensive, sometimes costing up to eight times the cost of the weapon itself.

Reply by: Mr Nobody - click to view full reply 

34644

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/21 18:24:07

Post by: Mr Nobody

Is tau armor flak armor, or something diffferent?

Reply by: ChrisWWII - click to view full reply 

27848

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/21 22:13:36

Post by: ChrisWWII

It's the equivalent of carapace armor with a 4+ save. Eldar mesh armor is the equivalent of flak armor...

I'm sure the RPG rulebooks go into much more detail.

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/22 00:58:43

Post by: aka_mythos

Mr Nobody wrote:Any armor that is both lighter and stronger is a miracle, since body has defined the tactics of war.

With regards to flak its only a miracle in a modern context... when you put it into a 40k context, its nothing special.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 18:56:24

Post by: Melissia

Heck even in 40k it's a pretty damned good armor-- so long as you realize that most things which ignore flak armor are actually kinda rare.

Boltguns and shuriken cannons aren't exactly common items.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ChrisWWII wrote:It's the equivalent of carapace armor with a 4+ save. Eldar mesh armor is the equivalent of flak armor...

I'm sure the RPG rulebooks go into much more detail.

Eldar Mesh is actually pretty damned good, about halfway between flak and carapace while weighing less than either (Weighs like a heavy cloth basically). Humans actually have their own mesh technology, but it's nowhere near as advanced as Eldar mesh.

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 20:36:11

Post by: aka_mythos

Melissia wrote:Heck even in 40k it's a pretty damned good armor-- so long as you realize that most things which ignore flak armor are actually kinda rare.

This kinda plays to a hypothesis of mine... the reason the individual guardsmen is equiped so poorly to take on aliens and chaos is because the Imperial Guard primary role is in fighting other humans. That if you looked at the size of the Imperium relative to the galaxy the vast majority of conflicts across the galaxy would tend to be Imperial Guard versus different rogue human factions... like chaos cultist.

In that context, just as "Dark Heresy" shows, Flak Armor and Lasguns are damned good. When the threat of tyranids or Orks or Eldar etc strike they are very big deals but just tend not to happen as often, given the millenia that seemingly pass between those major conflicts.

I also think its twofold; I think the Imperium to a degree purposefully underequips guardsmen out of a paranoia that if a senior commander went rogue they would not be so well equipped as to pose to great a threat to other guardsmen regiments. For example, I think if the High Lords of Terra were less concerned of rebellion they could tend to equip a higher number of guardsmen more similarly to stormtroopers, or even some guardsmen like Sisters of Battle. Cadia's Karsikins are an example of that, where Cadia's loyalty and importance is such that they are allowed non-stormtroopers, never trained in the Schola Progentia, to be equipped as stormtroopers. This is not to say the Imperium isn't pragmatic enough to allow specialized regiments to have superior equipment just that there is some degree of healthy paranoid driven suppression of technology.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 20:55:02

Post by: gendoikari87

Melissia wrote:Or it just means that the armor is incredibly effective against standard close combat weapons.

Mind you, an Astartes' combat blade does not count as a primitive weapon, and does more than 1d5 damage to begin with. I sincerely doubt an astartes would even bother to pull out a human-sized switchblade.

or it could just mean that the game system is incredibly bad at representing the fluff as if you stab someone in the arm, leg, lower abdomen, neck, head or face, the armor isn't going to do anything to stop it. heck even most of the lower back is exposed.

Reply by: ChrisWWII - click to view full reply 

27848

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 21:46:58

Post by: ChrisWWII

Only on Cadian Guardsmen. On Valhallans it's said that the flak armor is contained within their coat.

And who says those fatigues aren't part of the armor? They could very easily be Kevlar, or whatever fancy 40k equivalent.

Reply by: IvanTih - click to view full reply 

20700

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 21:57:49

Post by: IvanTih

aka_mythos wrote:*snips*

No,the guardsmen are equiped like that because of the logistics(Warp) and because the problem of arming trillons of soldiers(Hive Worlds and there's 32k+ of them).



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mr Nobody wrote:Is tau armor flak armor, or something diffferent?

Well common sources point to Carpace equaliment,while Kill Team makes it little better than Flak Armor.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 22:14:20

Post by: Melissia

gendoikari87 wrote:or it could just mean that the game system is incredibly bad at representing the fluff as if you stab someone in the arm, leg, lower abdomen, neck, head or face, the armor isn't going to do anything to stop it. heck even most of the lower back is exposed.

Which is represented by rolling high on damage (10 on 1d10 means you roll a second 1d10), and therefor overcoming the armor value. Similarly, the wounds system in DH and indeed 40k in general is abstract, and has always been.

It's assumed that combatants are moving around and attempting to avoid being struck in critical areas, and anyone who is dedicating themselves to close combat is using at LEAST a mono-edged weapon, if not a chainweapon or power weapon.

Reply by: keezus - click to view full reply 

1795

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 22:14:47

Post by: keezus

Melissia wrote:Eldar Mesh is actually pretty damned good, about halfway between flak and carapace while weighing less than either (Weighs like a heavy cloth basically). Humans actually have their own mesh technology, but it's nowhere near as advanced as Eldar mesh.

I don't think that Eldar Mesh can be compared in any way shape or form to Flak armour as Eldar Mesh covers the entire body. Flak armor has gaps in coverage - unless the arguement can be made that the fatigues are part of the armour system. Eldar Mesh also includes a self contained breathing apparatus. Other than the aforementioned increased balistics resisting properties - considering that it also covers the whole body means that the average guardian will be able to avoid otherwise incapacitating (or fatal) injuries which the corresponding guardsman may suffer to unarmored areas: upper arms, thighs, sides, face etc.

Granted the 40k ruleset is not very granular in terms of weapon and armour statistics - but considering that a Guardsman's armor has a 1/3 chance of saving him from an otherwise lethal blow from primitive arms and the common human small arms of the 41st millenium - and is outright fragged by most xenos small arms - I wouldn't go so far as to say that flak is "pretty good" - IMHO, it is "adequate" at best.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 22:17:10

Post by: Melissia

keezus wrote:Flak armor has gaps in coverage

That depends on the armor style.

There is actually a flak cloak and flak trenchcoat style armor in Dark Heresy, so it CAN be given in softer material (that material typically has as slightly lower protective value, however).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

keezus wrote:Granted the 40k ruleset is not very granular in terms of weapon and armour statistics - but considering that a Guardsman's armor has a 1/3 chance of saving him from an otherwise lethal blow from primitive arms and the common human small arms of the 41st millenium - and is outright fragged by most xenos small arms - I wouldn't go so far as to say that flak is "pretty good" - IMHO, it is "adequate" at best.

Most xenos small arms can't penetrate it either. Kroot rifles can't, Ork sluggas/shootas can't, most Termagant weapons can't, and most other types of xeno weapons can't as well. The ones that CAN penetrate the armor-- Eldar, Necrons, Tau-- have extremely advanced technology.

Mind you, that doesn't mean these weapons are ineffective, I'm saying they don't penetrate the armor regularly. Even power armor can be penetrated.

Reply by: keezus - click to view full reply 

1795

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 22:19:28

Post by: keezus

Melissia wrote:It's assumed that combatants are moving around and attempting to avoid being struck in critical areas, and anyone who is dedicating themselves to close combat is using at LEAST a mono-edged weapon, if not a chainweapon or power weapon.

Moving about is good to stop damage from direct sources. Indirect sources and ricochets are equally likely to hit an unprotected area. Close-combat heavily depends on the skill of the combatants themselves.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 22:22:55

Post by: Melissia

And it's ricochets, blasts, and shrapnels that flak armor is specifically stated to protect against best.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 22:24:44

Post by: gendoikari87

Melissia wrote:

keezus wrote:Flak armor has gaps in coverage

That depends on the armor style.

There is actually a flak cloak and flak trenchcoat style armor in Dark Heresy, so it CAN be given in softer material (that material typically has as slightly lower protective value, however).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

keezus wrote:Granted the 40k ruleset is not very granular in terms of weapon and armour statistics - but considering that a Guardsman's armor has a 1/3 chance of saving him from an otherwise lethal blow from primitive arms and the common human small arms of the 41st millenium - and is outright fragged by most xenos small arms - I wouldn't go so far as to say that flak is "pretty good" - IMHO, it is "adequate" at best.

Most xenos small arms can't penetrate it either. Kroot rifles can't, Ork sluggas/shootas can't, most Termagant weapons can't, and most other types of xeno weapons can't as well. The ones that CAN penetrate the armor-- Eldar, Necrons, Tau-- have extremely advanced technology.

Mind you, that doesn't mean these weapons are ineffective, I'm saying they don't penetrate the armor regularly. Even power armor can be penetrated.

given that orks weapons don't actually work usually and they're basically firing low grade "mind bullets, and tyranids fire bugs out of their guns I'm going to assume here that they both have very low penetrative qualities. Maybe a high damage ability but low on the penetration. like a broadaxe as opposed to 5.56


Automatically Appended Next Post:
also have you ever actually seen a kevlar vest, it's fairly stiff, about as stiff as cadian armor looks. Granted flak uses a better fiber but i'd still put my money on it being a wire frame wrapped in a super thread. and the non rigid forms to have that frame taken out.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 22:29:03

Post by: Melissia

gendoikari87 wrote:given that orks weapons don't actually work usually and they're basically firing low grade "mind bullets

No. Ork weapons are compared to low-grade bolters in most fiction, and they fire real, actual exploding rounds.

gendoikari87 wrote:, and tyranids fire bugs out of their guns

Bugs, spikes, needles, etc.

gendoikari87 wrote:like a broadaxe as opposed to 5.56

I guarantee you that, swung by sufficiently strong creature (IE, an Ork), a battleaxe would easily cleave through most modern armor with ease.

Reply by: Keep - click to view full reply 

36395

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 22:30:25

Post by: Keep

Wasn't flak armor the thing catachan (and several other,not-cadian-environment) units get with 6+ Armor save?
That is the thing that is light (comparably) and offers minimal protection. It's also noted in The Imperial Guards Uplifting primer, that a Flak armor and a Helmet is the minimal protection you get in every imperial Guard regiment (Propaganda of course but a source nonetheless)

The cadian body armor is what i would see as more comparable to todays bodyarmor although (for the cadian version) it is more of a rigid cuirass then a flexible bodyarmor.

Cadian Carapace armor is for me the same body armor just with additional armor plates to protect the most of the exposed bodyparts (frontside), making it cumbersome to wear in longer engagements.

While it may offer equivalent protection in game terms to eldar suits it can only be worse because it's cumbersome and not covering the hole body.

in Dark Heresy

It's nice to use as inspiration but i wouldn't personally take it as source to prove something.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 22:34:23

Post by: Melissia

gendoikari87 wrote:also have you ever actually seen a kevlar vest, it's fairly stiff, about as stiff as cadian armor looks.

Yes, I have. No, it isn't.

The reason cadian armor doesn't look metallic is because it's a plastic model that has to be painted afterwards. In official artwork it tends to be drawn with a painted metallic look to it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Keep wrote:It's nice to use as inspiration but i wouldn't personally take it as source to prove something.

Andy Hoare says otherwise, given that this is his material I'm quoting, amongst other high-level GW writers and artists.

Reply by: Keep - click to view full reply 

36395

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 22:38:17

Post by: Keep

I guarantee you that, swung by sufficiently strong creature (IE, an Ork), a battleaxe would easily cleave through most modern armor with ease.

It doesn't need him to cleave through armor... you would still be dead because of the physical force. No bodyarmor can prevent you from getting knocked of your feets if the kinetic energy is big enough or crushing you internally

Andy Hoare says otherwise, given that this is his material I'm quoting, amongst other high-level GW writers and artists.

i just wanted to say that if something is not in Dark Heresy rules, or simplified (because it is just a game) it does not mean that it can/can not exist

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 22:38:55

Post by: gendoikari87

No. Ork weapons are compared to low-grade bolters in most fiction, and they fire real, actual exploding rounds.

Funnily enough the ork codex says most (most not all) are actually non functional. Giving specific examples of guardsmen not being able to use them when they picked them up.

Bugs, spikes, needles, etc.

and yet the bugs are still ap 5

I guarantee you that, swung by sufficiently strong creature (IE, an Ork), a battleaxe would easily cleave through most modern armor with ease.

and if I stick an 800mm cannon down the throat of a carnifex he's not going to have a very good day.

either way Flack armor is still about the equivalent of the interceptor. or maybe dragon skin.

Reply by: Keep - click to view full reply 

36395

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 22:47:39

Post by: Keep

either way Flack armor is still about the equivalent of the interceptor. or maybe dragon skin.

well... i'll wait for a ballistic test until i believe it.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 22:52:51

Post by: Melissia

gendoikari87 wrote:Funnily enough the ork codex says most (most not all) are actually non functional.

Cite your source (Which Ork codex?) and page number then.

Rogue Trader: Into the Storm (pages 56-58, then the Mekboy section on 94-96) rather specifically states that Ork technology is incredibly sophisticated, and that the science behind their function is sound even if the Mechanicus believes that they should not work at all because of certain flaws and unreliable elements. Orks have some of the most advanced technology in 40k. Note that this is a recent piece of fluff that is worked on by GW authors such as Andy Hoare and Tim Huckleberry.

and yet the bugs are still ap 5

You don't know what you are talking about.
Fleshborer: AP5
Devourer: AP-
Spike Rifle: AP-
Spinefists: AP5

So basically two weapons which are specificaly engineered to penetrate body armor can do so-- the fleshborer designed to eat through armor in order to get to flesh to start eating it, and the spinefists launching ludicrously sharp spines for the purpose. Both of these can penetrate through metal plates as well (which is what Orks wear). Just because they are bio-engineered doesn't mean that htey aren't actually designed for the purpose.

and if I stick an 800mm cannon down the throat of a carnifex he's not going to have a very good day.

Actually there's a very good chance he'll live through it and then kill you out of rage.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 23:03:21

Post by: gendoikari87

Note that this is a recent piece of fluff that is worked on by GW authors such as Andy Hoare and Tim Huckleberry.

GW sanctioned novels even black library ones are not a good source for stating your sources unless you also believe marines carry multilasors arounds as their standard weapon and throwing rocks at waveserpents is a good idea because their tank commanders surf them onto the battlefield.

Yes, I have. No, it isn't.

Really? cause mine has more the feel of a black life vest. Denser and thinner but about the same.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 23:06:42

Post by: Melissia

gendoikari87 wrote:GW sanctioned novels even black library ones are not a good source for stating your sources unless you also believe marines carry multilasors arounds as their standard weapon and throwing rocks at waveserpents is a good idea because their tank commanders surf them onto the battlefield.

Dark Heresy is better than Black Library as far as both consistency within the 40k setting and internal consistency. Therefor I rank it far higher. In fact, given the large number of high-ranking GW writers, including codex writers, that work on Dark Heresy, Rogue Trader, Deathwatch and their various supplements, I would say that it is a damned good source for more in depth information than you would find in the codices.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 23:14:09

Post by: gendoikari87

Melissia wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:GW sanctioned novels even black library ones are not a good source for stating your sources unless you also believe marines carry multilasors arounds as their standard weapon and throwing rocks at waveserpents is a good idea because their tank commanders surf them onto the battlefield.

Dark Heresy is better than Black Library as far as both consistency within the 40k setting and internal consistency. Therefor I rank it far higher. In fact, given the large number of high-ranking GW writers, including codex writers, that work on Dark Heresy, Rogue Trader, Deathwatch and their various supplements, I would say that it is a damned good source for more in depth information than you would find in the codices.

and yet we still find multi-laser carrying marines and wave serpents being used as surf boards.

Actually there's a very good chance he'll live through it and then kill you out of rage.

Really? a Carnifex is going to survive something several times larger than a demolisher shell? Something far bigger than it's own head....

Actually, it's about as big as a carifex.

Reply by: Keep - click to view full reply 

36395

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 23:16:20

Post by: Keep

Really? cause mine has more the feel of a black life vest. Denser and thinner but about the same.

Kevlar is still flexible (you can still arch the back for example) and not solid. Every Artwork containing Cadian Bodyarmor and the made-up of the models suggests that it is solid material, not flexible at all

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 23:16:50

Post by: Melissia

gendoikari87 wrote:Really? cause mine has more the feel of a black life vest. Denser and thinner but about the same.

Given that flak armor is often depicted with a painted metallic texture (IE metal that has been painted), and made of various layers of "armaplas alloys" (Imperial Infantryman's Uplifting Primer-- Alloys, I should note, have a base metal compound and other compounds added to them, in this case likely advanced plastics) and is worn in curved plates, I would say it does not.

Reply by: Jubear - click to view full reply 

33550

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 23:19:38

Post by: Jubear

If its not official GW then its little better then fan fiction. If its not in a current rulebook,codex or supplement then its not current IP and not valid. That being said this argument is only a tiny bit less nerdy/sad then 40k vs starwars arguments. The 40k setting is just an excuse for us to roll gak loads of dice and push little toy soldiers about we dont need to make the hobby look any sadder by having arguments over fluff.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 23:20:38

Post by: gendoikari87

Keep wrote:

Really? cause mine has more the feel of a black life vest. Denser and thinner but about the same.

Kevlar is still flexible (you can still arch the back for example) and not solid. Every Artwork containing Cadian Bodyarmor and the made-up of the models suggests that it is solid material, not flexible at all

I never said it was like metal, but it does hold it shape somewhat.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 23:21:42

Post by: Melissia

gendoikari87 wrote:and yet we still find multi-laser carrying marines and wave serpents being used as surf boards.

It is possible to do both of those things in a roleplay environment, as the roleplays themselves are not canon. However, neither of those are mentioned in Dark Heresy/Rogue Trader/Deathwatch.

Really? a Carnifex is going to survive something several times larger than a demolisher shell? Something far bigger than it's own head....

Yes.

40k is full of insanely durable creatures. Orks can suffer insanely deadly wounds (such as blowing a hole through their body, removal of all four limbs, decapitation, etc), and still be ready for battle a few days later, with a Dok really only needed to replace lost limbs or re-attach heads. And Orks are only T4.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 23:22:18

Post by: gendoikari87

Melissia wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:Really? cause mine has more the feel of a black life vest. Denser and thinner but about the same.

Given that flak armor is often depicted with a painted metallic texture (IE metal that has been painted), and made of various layers of "armaplas alloys" (Imperial Infantryman's Uplifting Primer-- Alloys, I should note, have a base metal compound and other compounds added to them, in this case likely advanced plastics) and is worn in curved plates, I would say it does not.

There you go, you win. also does anyone know where I can get a copy of Imperial infantry mans uplifting primer, I lost mine about a year ago when I re-imaged my computer.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 23:22:50

Post by: Melissia

Jubear wrote:If its not official GW then its little better then fan fiction. If its not in a current rulebook,codex or supplement then its not current IP and not valid. That being said this argument is only a tiny bit less nerdy/sad then 40k vs starwars arguments. The 40k setting is just an excuse for us to roll gak loads of dice and push little toy soldiers about we dont need to make the hobby look any sadder by having arguments over fluff.

If you dont' like it, get out of the thread. Yes, it's nerdy.

Well guess what? I'm a fething nerd. Deal with it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

gendoikari87 wrote:There you go, you win. also does anyone know where I can get a copy of Imperial infantry mans uplifting primer, I lost mine about a year ago when I re-imaged my computer.

I think BL still sells its Damocles Gulf edition. Been a while since I checked though.

Reply by: Keep - click to view full reply 

36395

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 23:23:31

Post by: Keep

Ebay...

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 23:26:24

Post by: gendoikari87

also I should note that demolisher shells are str 10, and AP 2 which is good enough to remove wounds from a fex easily, and it's at most 400mm the 800mm big bertha shells are much larger, just shy of being a meter wide and several meters long.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 23:29:32

Post by: Melissia

Cite your source.

Also yes. It would remove ONE wound from the creature. You would have to hit it at least four times in order to kill it.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 23:31:36

Post by: gendoikari87

If you dont' like it, get out of the thread. Yes, it's nerdy.

Well guess what? I'm a fething nerd. Deal with it.

What she said.

I have the damoclese gulf version but it doesn't have any of the weapons specs like the original did, just info on the tau.

also, just because it's an awesome photo I have to post it again.




photographic evidence is my source a demolishers cannon is about as wide as the from your foot to your knee (if guardsmen are the same hieght as us) while the 800mm goes up to about my waist.

Also if a demolisher were proportioned to the gustav guns shells the shell would stick out of the barrel. So I think its safe to say the 800mm is about str D. not that it matters as nothing in 40k is immobile enough to hit it with the railway guns.

Reply by: Keep - click to view full reply 

36395

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 23:40:11

Post by: Keep

I can tell you where the Demolisher/Vindicator/Thunderer thing came from...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturmtiger

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 23:43:03

Post by: gendoikari87

Keep wrote:I can tell you where the Demolisher/Vindicator/Thunderer thing came from...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturmtiger

HOLY gak ON A STICK that IS a baneblades shells or at least it looks like them.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 23:45:27

Post by: Melissia

gendoikari87 wrote:photographic evidence is my source a demolishers cannon is about as wide as the from your foot

I don't see a demolisher up there.

A demolisher tank is designed for three astartes in power armor-- already massive beings in massive armor, approaching 3 meters in height-- to crew it. Not humans. Astartes can stick their bodes up the top hatch, including their massive shoulders and shoulder plates, to man the pintle mount. The model is nowhere near scaled properly.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 23:48:39

Post by: gendoikari87

your thinking vindicator, DEMOLISHERS are a leman russ variant. If the 800mm shell were to be scaled down to 28mm scale even heroic it would be as long as most IG tanks are wide. Even the shorter AP shell would be about 2 inches long.

also lookie

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 23:52:09

Post by: Melissia

gendoikari87 wrote:your thinking vindicator, DEMOLISHERS are a leman russ variant. If the 800mm shell were to be scaled down to 28mm scale even heroic it would be as long as most IG tanks are wide.

No it wouldn't, because heroic scale isn't at all to scale.

I'm certain if it's an LR variant there's an IA entry on it that will give the info you want.

gendoikari87 wrote:also lookie

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Images/Product/DefaultFW/xlarge/bbtankshells.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a7/Sturmtiger_frontal.jpg/300px-Sturmtiger_frontal.jpg

Which is a nice coincidence, but doesn't matter.

Reply by: Keep - click to view full reply 

36395

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/23 23:54:32

Post by: Keep

A demolisher tank is designed for three astartes in power armor

Two astartes says forgeworld (and it makes sense, because the ammo has to be loaded by a mechanism anyway, then you need a commander/gunner and a driver). Except you add pintle mounted stuff, which can also be controlled by the driver, supported by augurs (?). And it makes perfectly sense if they try to reduce crew as far as possible, Marines are just to valuable to man pintle mounted poopguns or load ammo into a gun

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 00:43:51

Post by: gendoikari87

you know I'd bet this would kill anything in the 40k universe. Titans, Space marines, Trygons, Heirophants if you hit them right Pretty much anything that's NOT a true godlike being

Reply by: ChrisWWII - click to view full reply 

27848

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 00:52:31

Post by: ChrisWWII

They do indeed still sell the Damocles Gulf Edition....I never had an original though, so I don't know how it compares.

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 02:06:55

Post by: aka_mythos

IvanTih wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:*snips*

No,the guardsmen are equiped like that because of the logistics(Warp) and because the problem of arming trillons of soldiers(Hive Worlds and there's 32k+ of them).

You say that as if the High Lords of Terra aren't paranoid of insurrection; you say that as if choices can't have multiple rationals. Besides that I did say "to a degree" and I was saying that its not as much a matter of how they equip every guardsmen, as it is about which planets they trust with more Storm Troopers and Storm Trooper equivalent units. That the Imperium could probably equip more units like that, then they do; one reason they don't is logistics another is that too often planets go rogue and you don't want someone you didn't trust running around with way more storm troopers to your average guard. I'm not saying this is how it is, just that its part of my hypothesis that guardsmen are equipped to be best suited to fighting other humans.

gendoikari87 wrote:you know I'd bet this would kill anything in the 40k universe. Titans, Space marines, Trygons, Heirophants if you hit them right Pretty much anything that's NOT a true godlike being

One of the guys who designed the nice explosive part on the end is my boss. He was telling me they also developed a version of the warhead to fit on a mortar. It was kept quiet because it was intended as a weapon of last resort, where if your position was being overrun and there was no way out you could launch it as a suicide move to take as many of them out with you. With the Crockett and the mortar the simple danger of it is even at maximum range you were still in the area of effect.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 11:52:52

Post by: gendoikari87

I'm taking it, your munitions job is for the high explosive kind? Also tell your boss I want to have his babies. jk jk

but yeah, both versions blast radius exceeds the maximum range. it really is something of a last ditch weapon, but one that can see swaths of the enemy destroyed.

anybody know if annies blast radius exceeded it's range?

Reply by: Catyrpelius - click to view full reply 

28292

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 12:34:45

Post by: Catyrpelius

gendoikari87 wrote:anybody know if annies blast radius exceeded it's range?

It didn't, in that you wouldnt be killed directly by the blast, however you were still exposed to a rediculues level of radiation.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 12:51:48

Post by: Melissia

The Imperium also has various forms of nuclear weapons, easily more than enough to wipe Earth clean of humanity and leave it a poisoned wasteland for longer than it needs to to destroy the survivors.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 13:02:12

Post by: gendoikari87

Melissia wrote:The Imperium also has various forms of nuclear weapons, easily more than enough to wipe Earth clean of humanity and leave it a poisoned wasteland for longer than it needs to to destroy the survivors.

yes, we know, they also have voodoo bombs.

Reply by: ChrisWWII - click to view full reply 

27848

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 13:59:16

Post by: ChrisWWII

Catyrpelius wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:anybody know if annies blast radius exceeded it's range?

It didn't, in that you wouldnt be killed directly by the blast, however you were still exposed to a rediculues level of radiation.

Not necessarily true. There would be a lot of fallout, yes, thanks to the ridiculously inefficient warhead design that they used, but the direct radiation from the device itself would be spent far away from the cannon.

The worst you'd have to worry about if you were manning the gun would be the flash, and maybe the heat. You wouldn't have to worry about the fireball or blast at all.

Remember, even the biggest nukes anyone has in service today is only 20 megatons, with that you'll be dead if you're within 7.5 km, severely burned up to 30 km away, and will get a nasty dose of direct radiation 5 km away.But that's literally the biggest bomb anyone has....Atomic Annie would have fired a 15 KILOton shell. With that, you're dead within a mere 684 meters, and severely burned up to 2 km away, and get 500 rems of radiation a mere 1.4 km away.

Nukes are scary, but you have to remember they have limits.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 14:20:48

Post by: Melissia

gendoikari87 wrote:

Melissia wrote:The Imperium also has various forms of nuclear weapons, easily more than enough to wipe Earth clean of humanity and leave it a poisoned wasteland for longer than it needs to to destroy the survivors.

yes, we know, they also have voodoo bombs.

No, but they do have psyk-out warheads, which lliterally explode and attack the victims' minds.

Reply by: IvanTih - click to view full reply 

20700

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 14:36:13

Post by: IvanTih

Andy Hoare says otherwise, given that this is his material I'm quoting, amongst other high-level GW writers and artists.

Well Andy Hoare fails when he writes about space combat,he give hundreds of kilometres(range of weapons),when every other source gives tens of thousand kilometres or more.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:

Melissia wrote:The Imperium also has various forms of nuclear weapons, easily more than enough to wipe Earth clean of humanity and leave it a poisoned wasteland for longer than it needs to to destroy the survivors.

yes, we know, they also have voodoo bombs.

No, but they do have psyk-out warheads, which lliterally explode and attack the victims' minds.

Hellfire torpedoes,560 gigatons(official calc).Enough said.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

aka_mythos wrote:

IvanTih wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:*snips*

No,the guardsmen are equiped like that because of the logistics(Warp) and because the problem of arming trillons of soldiers(Hive Worlds and there's 32k+ of them).

You say that as if the High Lords of Terra aren't paranoid of insurrection; you say that as if choices can't have multiple rationals. Besides that I did say "to a degree" and I was saying that its not as much a matter of how they equip every guardsmen, as it is about which planets they trust with more Storm Troopers and Storm Trooper equivalent units. That the Imperium could probably equip more units like that, then they do; one reason they don't is logistics another is that too often planets go rogue and you don't want someone you didn't trust running around with way more storm troopers to your average guard. I'm not saying this is how it is, just that its part of my hypothesis that guardsmen are equipped to be best suited to fighting other humans.

Also that is part of the reasons why AdMech are dicks,because of the Chaos,IoM builds things Chaos turns against them.

gendoikari87 wrote:you know I'd bet this would kill anything in the 40k universe. Titans, Space marines, Trygons, Heirophants if you hit them right Pretty much anything that's NOT a true godlike being

Wow,you really haven't read any source on titan's firepower.

Reply by: Melissia - click to view full reply 

29408

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 14:41:18

Post by: Melissia

Better yet, multi-stage cyclonic torpedoes, enough to rip a planet apart from the inside

No that they'd ever use either of those against an earth-type planet. Too useful for aggriculture.

Reply by: keezus - click to view full reply 

1795

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 14:44:27

Post by: keezus

@Melissia: Flak seems to be a catch all, since CATACHANS are also equipped with flak - and jungle fighter flak armor CLEARLY has less coverage than Cadian flak unless someone wants to claim that the bare arms of the 41st millenium have better ballistics resisting properties than modern bare arms. To claim that wearing flak provides a high degree of protection without acknowledging that the different "patterns" of flak offer varying degrees of coverage constitutes a dishonest arguement - as Catachan flak is clearly less efficient than the Cadian pattern.

Reply by: IvanTih - click to view full reply 

20700

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 14:47:58

Post by: IvanTih

Melissia wrote:Better yet, multi-stage cyclonic torpedoes, enough to rip a planet apart from the inside


No that they'd ever use either of those against an earth-type planet. Too useful for aggriculture.

Unfortunately those torpeoes work on chain reaction(and they can carry a variety of payloads),well the Nemesis says that Vengeful Spirit had warstrikes capable of atomising continets in single shots and energy cannon capable of boiling oceans(and those weapons were restrain when used against one planet,otherwise they would destroy it totally with cyclonic torpedoes).

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 14:58:54

Post by: gendoikari87

Actually mellissa by Voodoo I was talking about Vortex warheads. Voodoo as in scientific mumbo jumbo magic.

Wow,you really haven't read any source on titan's firepower.

so? a 20 ton warhead on the cockpit is still going to kill you, if the blast doesn't the intense heat will, and if that doesn't the extreme radition will, and a void shiled might be able to block the blast, I have no doubt on this, but the heat, probably not, and the extreme radiation, that's a joke, for it to block either the shield would have to be opaque meaning you can't see out.

Reply by: IvanTih - click to view full reply 

20700

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 15:01:45

Post by: IvanTih

gendoikari87 wrote:Actually mellissa by Voodoo I was talking about Vortex warheads. Voodoo as in scientific mumbo jumbo magic.

Wow,you really haven't read any source on titan's firepower.

so? a 20 ton warhead on the cockpit is still going to kill you, if the blast doesn't the intense heat will, and if that doesn't the extreme radition will, and a void shiled might be able to block the blast, I have no doubt on this, but the heat, probably not, and the extreme radiation, that's a joke, for it to block either the shield would have to be opaque meaning you can't see out.

C'mon Titans have resisted stronger things than nuclear warhead with 20 ton yield.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 15:05:14

Post by: gendoikari87

Did they also have the radiation behind them? force of the blast doesnt' matter much when you get hit with 2000 rems of radiation. The shields are at least translucent to visible light so that the titans can see out, so they are at least translucent to higher wavelengths of light, like x-rays and gamma rays. and those will destroy pretty much anything gamma rays even penetrate solid steel.

Reply by: IvanTih - click to view full reply 

20700

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 15:07:24

Post by: IvanTih

gendoikari87 wrote:Did they also have the radiation behind them? force of the blast doesnt' matter much when you get hit with 2000 rems of radiation.

Void shields.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 15:08:54

Post by: gendoikari87

IvanTih wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:Did they also have the radiation behind them? force of the blast doesnt' matter much when you get hit with 2000 rems of radiation.

Void shields.

again Void shields won't protect you from radiation, they are at least translucent to visible light and there fore at least translucent to x-rays and gamma rays. and gamma rays will pretty much go through anythig you can think of.

Reply by: IvanTih - click to view full reply 

20700

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 15:11:18

Post by: IvanTih

gendoikari87 wrote:

IvanTih wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:Did they also have the radiation behind them? force of the blast doesnt' matter much when you get hit with 2000 rems of radiation.

Void shields.

again Void shields won't protect you from radiation, they are at least translucent to visible light and there fore at least translucent to x-rays and gamma rays. and gamma rays will pretty much go through anythig you can think of.

Yes they will(points to Space ships).

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 15:18:07

Post by: gendoikari87

No they won't, points to physics books. and anyone who says otherwise wheather they write fluff or not is a fething [Redacted]. GW is wrong on this account or those aren't actually lasers. And I have my suspcions they aren't. but rather a form of plasma weapon.

oh and lasers don't have recoil.

Reply by: keezus - click to view full reply 

1795

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 15:21:25

Post by: keezus

IvanTih wrote:Unfortunately those torpeoes work on chain reaction(and they can carry a variety of payloads),well the Nemesis says that Vengeful Spirit had warstrikes capable of atomising continets in single shots and energy cannon capable of boiling oceans(and those weapons were restrain when used against one planet,otherwise they would destroy it totally with cyclonic torpedoes).

Why the hell are we talking about this Gak again. Clearly, these weapons have no modern analogue. Your oft quoted source Connor has already conceeded that he considers this description to be outside the normal range of power by a huge magnitude - even for 40k - being that they single to double digit petaton range*. Can we stay on topic and leave out weapons with energy requirements outstripping the energy resources of the Earth??!?

Edit 2: Considering that void shields are voodoo technology with no modern analogue (meant to defeat equally vodoo high tech super guns), and given that all descriptions of their action suggest that they ignore the laws of physics - given the original scope of this thread, I don't see how they enter into the equation.

*Ref: Size of Europe ~ 10x10^7 square km. Assuming vaporization down to 100m - that's 10x10^6 cubic km or 10x10^15 cubic meters.
Per the handy Stardestroyer.net asteroid destruction calculator - to vaporize that much rock, we're looking at between 3-14 petaton yield.

Reply by: IvanTih - click to view full reply 

20700

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 15:26:10

Post by: IvanTih

gendoikari87 wrote:No they won't, points to physics books. and anyone who says otherwise wheather they write fluff or not is a fething ignorant tool. GW is wrong on this account or those aren't actually lasers. And I have my suspcions they aren't. but rather a form of plasma weapon.

oh and lasers don't have recoil.

Warhammer 40k bashes physics with Warp.
I point to ships in space who need Void shields(besides space is full of radiation) to protect them when they fight very close to a star(we even have an example from Eisenhorn when a civilian clipper basically stands in sun's corona for over 70 hours with no ill effects).
Also Andy Chamber has stated that lances are not laser weapons.I'll present the quote later.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

keezus wrote:

IvanTih wrote:Unfortunately those torpeoes work on chain reaction(and they can carry a variety of payloads),well the Nemesis says that Vengeful Spirit had warstrikes capable of atomising continets in single shots and energy cannon capable of boiling oceans(and those weapons were restrain when used against one planet,otherwise they would destroy it totally with cyclonic torpedoes).

Why the hell are we talking about this Gak again. Clearly, these weapons have no modern analogue. Your oft quoted source Connor has already conceeded that he considers this description to be outside the normal range of power by a huge magnitude - even for 40k - being that they single to double digit petaton range*. Can we stay on topic and leave out weapons with energy requirements outstripping the energy resources of the Earth??!?

Edit 2: Considering that void shields are voodoo technology with no modern analogue (meant to defeat equally vodoo high tech super guns), and given that all descriptions of their action suggest that they ignore the laws of physics - given the original scope of this thread, I don't see how they enter into the equation.

*Ref: Size of Europe ~ 10x10^7 square km. Assuming vaporization down to 100m - that's 10x10^6 cubic km or 10x10^15 cubic meters.
Per the handy Stardestroyer.net asteroid destruction calculator - to vaporize that much rock, we're looking at between 3-14 petaton yield.

That was sustained firepower range.Broadsides are to my opinion are single to double digit teratons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also I point to Skopios Incident where Imperial Navy vaporises a large planetoid.
I'll try to find the quote.
I don't use his Nova cannon calc anymore.

Reply by: gendoikari87 - click to view full reply 

17213

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 15:36:45

Post by: gendoikari87

Warhammer 40k bashes physics with Warp.
I point to ships in space who need Void shields(besides space is full of radiation) to protect them when they fight very close to a star(we even have an example from Eisenhorn when a civilian clipper basically stands in sun's corona for over 70 hours with no ill effects).
Also Andy Chamber has stated that lances are not laser weapons.I'll present the quote later.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree then.

Reply by: mwnciboo - click to view full reply 

22413

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 15:50:41

Post by: mwnciboo

Melissia wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:that your sources don't mention this weakness does not proove your point

I don't need to prove my point. I just need to watch as you fail to prove yours.

The onus is on you to prove that the supposed weakness exists.

Hold on Melissa your argument on Page 1 of this thread, is the ultimate stupid Argument for Religion over Science.

"Darwin is wrong, evolution is flawed" Religious man
"Why, on what rational basis?" Scientist
"Because the Planet is only 6,000 years old" Religious man
"What do you mean? What about Carbon Dating? Or Fossils ?" Scientist
"Hey man, its upto you to disprove me, I take no responsibility for my own claims" Religious man

Anyway back to the thread, I think that Lasguns are interesting item. Powerpacks that can be recharged in an emergency by putting them in fire!
I have always thought that Heavy Bolters were a little ridiulous if a normal bolter is 19mm (give or take!) then HB shells must be 40mm or larger plus given the rate of fire a Belt of Heavy Bolter rounds would have to be massive to give even a short burst. A weight of the Ammo would be ridiculous...


Oh this is an Anti personnel round (120mm) its for clearing infantry off a friendly tank without damaging it, I want this in W40K especially against 'nids!

Reply by: keezus - click to view full reply 

1795

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 15:51:46

Post by: keezus

IvanTih wrote:That was sustained firepower range.Broadsides are to my opinion are single to double digit teratons.

"Unfortunately those torpeoes work on chain reaction(and they can carry a variety of payloads),well the Nemesis says that Vengeful Spirit had warstrikes capable of atomising continets in single shots and energy cannon capable of boiling oceans(and those weapons were restrain when used against one planet,otherwise they would destroy it totally with cyclonic torpedoes)." -your quote - emphasis mine.



How is a single shot considered sustained firepower? Assuming TT level "broadsides", that's 1000+ broadsides! That hardly qualifies as a single strike - unless you are suggesting that the Vengeful Spirit crapped out a 1000x power single super broadside. Anyhow - I don't see how this has any bearing on the original topic.

Reply by: IvanTih - click to view full reply 

20700

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 15:55:50

Post by: IvanTih

keezus wrote:

IvanTih wrote:That was sustained firepower range.Broadsides are to my opinion are single to double digit teratons.

"Unfortunately those torpeoes work on chain reaction(and they can carry a variety of payloads),well the Nemesis says that Vengeful Spirit had warstrikes capable of atomising continets in single shots and energy cannon capable of boiling oceans(and those weapons were restrain when used against one planet,otherwise they would destroy it totally with cyclonic torpedoes)." -your quote - emphasis mine.



How is a single shot considered sustained firepower? Assuming TT level "broadsides", that's 1000+ broadsides! That hardly qualifies as a single strike - unless you are suggesting that the Vengeful Spirit crapped out a 1000x power single super broadside. Anyhow - I don't see how this has any bearing on the original topic.

I wasn't reffering to Cyclonc torpedoes,but to combined output of all weapons on the broadside(weapon batteries,lances,non cyclonic torpedoes ).
Sustained firepower or salvo and it wasn't done by one ship.

Reply by: ChrisWWII - click to view full reply 

27848

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 16:13:18

Post by: ChrisWWII

I think Melissia is going for a Occam's Razor explanation. Basically, we have two possibilities: 1) Bolters efficiencey decreases at close range, or 2) Bolters are equally effective throughout their entire range.

Option 2 is the less complicated explanation, as it has fewer things to prove. As such, we go with 2 until someone can definitively prove 1.

This argument does not work for religion vs. science, as in order for the '6,000 years' argument to work, the religious person will have to explain how his mechanism works....that adds more complication to his theory, and since the scientist has his mechanism for establishing the date of the Earth well established, we default to that until the religious person can provide proof for his.

So basically, by failing to prove his point, gendokari helped to support Melissia's

Reply by: aka_mythos - click to view full reply 

686

Weapons of 40k and modern comparisons ... if any can be made @ 2010/11/24 16:24:02

Post by: aka_mythos

Catyrpelius wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:anybody know if annies blast radius exceeded it's range?

It didn't, in that you wouldnt be killed directly by the blast, however you were still exposed to a rediculues level of radiation.

It had a 20 mile range, though was only accurate at ranges less than 10 miles... but its a nuke so "close" is good enough. The warhead was of the same number of kilotons as the Hiroshima bomb, Littleboy, 15kT with a blast radius of 1.6km or 1 mile and area of effect of a 2 mile radius. As for radiation and fallout, the operators were trained to take particular care in considering windage.

gendoikari87 wrote:

Warhammer 40k bashes physics with Warp.
I point to ships in space who need Void shields(besides space is full of radiation) to protect them when they fight very close to a star(we even have an example from Eisenhorn when a civilian clipper basically stands in sun's corona for over 70 hours with no ill effects).
Also Andy Chamber has stated that lances are not laser weapons.I'll present the quote later.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree then.

Ships in the 40k universe would need some means of protection against radiation and I'm rather doubtful that such protection could be purely a matter of structural design, particularly given the expected service life of Imperial ships. It is reasonable that even if Void shields are not protecting against radiation, some other form of shielding is.

I tend to believe a void shield or atleast something utilizing the same technology does protect from radiation. The fluff only says that void fields work by displacing the effect of an attack into the warp. Given the amounts of different kinetic, ballistic, and energy weapons that the sheilds are expected to hold up to they should be able to deal with some degree of radiation.

Lances are suppose to be a plasma based weapon. Plasma gives off significant electromagnetic radiation. If Void shields can defend against those they should be able to block radiation... unless there is some specific explanation saying otherwise.

◄ 1 2 3 ► Pg# Go to page...