Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 13:12:10


Post by: Jarms48


It’s a question that’s just dawned on me.

In-game many Inquisitors, Tech-priests, Guard Company Commanders and even lowly Platoon Commanders have them. If the Imperial Guard numbers in the Quadrillions then there must be Trillions of Lieutenants with refractor fields.

That begs the question, why doesn’t space marine power armour have them inbuilt? Take the Halo universe as an example and their Spartan armour. It’s basically power armour, but also has energy shielding. Refractor fields are uncommon to be given to individual soldiers, but common enough to be given to every junior officer and above.

Refractor fields could tank a lascannon or krak missile hit, while the power armour absorbs everything else. It could be a sensible middle ground between power armour and terminator armour. Terminator armour doesn’t even need it, and marine captains/chapter masters have their iron halos so they don’t need them either.

Just thought it was interesting.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 13:25:00


Post by: endlesswaltz123


This isn't official lore, but imagine how much of a problem a rogue marine chapter would be in fluff if they had refractor fields... Certain guard formations rely on melta to put down rogue marines when needed (let alone heavier weaponry), and a third of the time that doesn't even get through the field....


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 13:28:11


Post by: Gert


Yeah, let's make the nigh-unstoppable super-soldiers with amazing armour and toughness even more unstoppable by giving them forcefields.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 13:28:32


Post by: Insectum7


Bit o trivia (iirc): Some very early descriptions of Terminator Armor said they han an incorperated Refractor Field.

Possibly the fields emit some sort of noise or light, or use a lot of power, in a way that would be detrimental. Or they're still just too rare, despite being available here and there.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 13:31:13


Post by: CthuluIsSpy


Because it's bloody expensive. The Imperium is already having problems with supply lines and manufacturing. Having to upgrade every suit of power armor with a refractor field is going to be a logistical nightmare, especially when you have bureaucrats and the Ad mech to deal with.
Also, are refractor fields really that common in the fluff? Don't guard commanders just have them in-game so they don't die instantly?


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 13:32:26


Post by: ccs


I'm sure that {ruleswise} it's to show how special the characters who have ++ saves are vs everyone else who just has thier normal Save value.

And from there it just kinda paints the lore into a corner.
Because sure, it might seem logical to have it standard on a SM. But if you do that then everyone will scream for it to be represented play-wise.
Do you REALLY want every SM to have an invuln save? And characters & termites stronger ones?
What about the poor CSM?

I guess you could look at the loyalist SM 2nd wound as representing this though.
I mean, how else do you explain the regular tac squad member just becoming 100% harder to kill?


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 13:35:40


Post by: Quasistellar


It is an interesting question and I often think of it myself.

I know intuitively it's a game balance thing, but there are some situations where it just doesn't make much sense.

I understand the game balance reason for not giving every space marine an invuln -- I'm 100% on board with stuff like that.

But, then there's things like SM Librarians not having an invuln -- seems so strange that psykers wouldn't all have some sort of kine shield. Novels talk about this stuff all the time.

Or your basic inquisitor gets a refractor field 5++, but Eisenorn only gets an inferior FnP 6+++, presumably because it's never mentioned in the fluff that he has a refractor field.

Just some interesting things to think about really -- nothing I get upset over, mind you.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 14:01:48


Post by: Tygre


In the 2nd edition Wargear book the refractor field "... produces a hazy band of light of light around the subject which makes it impossible for the wearer to hide." Which my be a setback for some. As a side-note - terminator armour does not mention any fields at all, just thick armour. Lieutenants did not come with refractor fields in 2nd. But could take 1 wargear card, which could be a refractor field.

I guess the main reason that they don't have refractor fields is the same reason they don't all have plasma guns.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 17:02:56


Post by: Daedalus81


Tygre wrote:
In the 2nd edition Wargear book the refractor field "... produces a hazy band of light of light around the subject which makes it impossible for the wearer to hide." Which my be a setback for some. As a side-note - terminator armour does not mention any fields at all, just thick armour. Lieutenants did not come with refractor fields in 2nd. But could take 1 wargear card, which could be a refractor field.

I guess the main reason that they don't have refractor fields is the same reason they don't all have plasma guns.


Correct me if I'm wrong - wasn't refractor field the one that would randomly move the model D6" if they got a save? It was pretty goofy.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 17:08:24


Post by: Mr Morden


 Daedalus81 wrote:
Tygre wrote:
In the 2nd edition Wargear book the refractor field "... produces a hazy band of light of light around the subject which makes it impossible for the wearer to hide." Which my be a setback for some. As a side-note - terminator armour does not mention any fields at all, just thick armour. Lieutenants did not come with refractor fields in 2nd. But could take 1 wargear card, which could be a refractor field.

I guess the main reason that they don't have refractor fields is the same reason they don't all have plasma guns.


Correct me if I'm wrong - wasn't refractor field the one that would randomly move the model D6" if they got a save? It was pretty goofy.

Thats a Displacer Field

Inquisitors used to have access to a wide range of powerful energy fields including this and still do in the lore.



Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 17:16:28


Post by: Saber


Yeah, the refractor field would makes it harder for the bearer to hide. Since hiding is the best way to survive on the battlefield (at least in the real world) the refractor field would probably be a net-negative.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 17:27:26


Post by: A Town Called Malus


 Saber wrote:
Yeah, the refractor field would makes it harder for the bearer to hide. Since hiding is the best way to survive on the battlefield (at least in the real world) the refractor field would probably be a net-negative.


But the best way to successfully hide in the battlefield is to make your profile as small as possible and utilise camouflage. Needless to say 8 foot tall slabs of beef wearing brightly coloured bulky armour which features zero designs to disrupt the silhouette are gonna find that quite hard.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 17:28:38


Post by: leerm02


I also seem to remember some early bit of terminator armor mentioning "layers of refractor fields" in some way... maybe way back in 2nd ed?


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 18:12:42


Post by: AnomanderRake


If everyone was using the best tech their faction had access to all the time you'd probably see more Eldar with 3+ or 4+ saves (Scourges and Corsairs, two of the sub-cultures with the least resources and backing, can both have everyone in 4+ armour), 'Ard Boyz would have models, GK would have whole squads with wrist-mounted flamers for clearing hordes of lesser daemons, and the Mechanicum wouldn't have stopped building all their coolest stuff just because the models are resin.

The out-of-universe explanation is either balance (and the inevitable "why do just Space Marines get this, why can't I have (e.g.) Kabalites in ghostplate?" complaints) or inertia (Refractor fields have been character wargear for thirty years!).

The in-universe explanation could be some combination of: a) economic inefficiency; the Guard officers with refractor fields are using personal resources to buy refractor fields rather than government funds (like pre-WWI military officers having stupidly fancy custom uniforms because they were rich people buying them with their own money); b) the use of refractor fields to protect the chain of command across all of the Imperium is seen as more important than the use of refractor fields to protect everyone in a small strike force; c) if you use refractor fields to protect your officers who are supposed to stay in the back and coordinate things from stray shots they probably get destroyed a lot less than if you put refractor fields on your Forlorn Hope shock-assault strike teams, so you don't need to keep re-building them; or d) the inevitable "stupid Mechanicum and their single-purpose STCs!" argument where the Imperium knows how to build small refractor fields to protect an unarmored guy moving at human speeds cheaply but a big refractor field that'll protect something the size of a Space Marine moving at Space Marine speeds is a horribly expensive relic of the dark age of technology.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 21:07:31


Post by: Iracundus


 AnomanderRake wrote:
the inevitable "stupid Mechanicum and their single-purpose STCs!" argument where the Imperium knows how to build small refractor fields to protect an unarmored guy moving at human speeds cheaply but a big refractor field that'll protect something the size of a Space Marine moving at Space Marine speeds is a horribly expensive relic of the dark age of technology.


This, or the technobabble rationale of something about the refractor field used by Guard officers interferes with the power system of power armor, so fields cannot be used unless they are customized (i.e. Character level rarity).

This kind of thing wouldn't be unheard of either. We see the Imperium have ship plasma reactors and giant plasma weapons on starships without too much trouble. They have smaller plasma reactors on Warlords, again without too much trouble with containment or cooling. However miniaturizing everything and putting it all into a package small enough to hand carry (plasma gun or pistol) apparently is hard and dangerous (since the Imperium refuses to have a lower power plasma weapon).


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 21:12:59


Post by: Gert


I mean starship and Titan plasma reactors aren't easy things to produce or maintain. If you push it just a little bit too far it atomises everything within a fairly large radius.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 21:32:10


Post by: Karol


The imperium is able to produce really small and powerful powerfield generators, but it is never taken in to account. In lore it may matter that a NDK powerfield is more efficient and that the pilot may even enhance its power himself, but in the rules it is just a regular inv. Same with stuff like ammo for weapons or reload speed depending on weapon type. Chaos plasma guns are different design then imperial ones, but the stats are the same.

Plus there are forces in the w40k world that use powerfields for all their members, the necromunda spyres rig users or the cardinal guard of the imperial church.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 21:33:21


Post by: Curvaceous


The master of the most stealthy sniper chapter, does not wear an iron halo force field. In the rules he has a cover save of 4+ but no special save in close combat. Force fields do seem to be relevant for stealth.


 A Town Called Malus wrote:
best way to successfully hide in the battlefield is to make your profile as small as possible and utilise camouflage. Needless to say 8 foot tall slabs of


For air strikes and artillery, the things that actually threaten marines, the would have to use concealment. A company of man-size slow moving guard is easy to target with these things. The equivalent of marines is only about 20 tall-man-sized targets who can jog at 20 mph through rough terrain is very difficult to target with air or artillery support. And the only hard number the current codexes give is an average 7 feet, which is rounding up according to this picture. If that is true that sub-seven number, and let’s say that’s only hypothetical so we stay on topic, then they’re as easy to hide as a guardsman in combat boots and a fur shako, but with far fewer and more skilled marines.

(Fixed link)


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 21:37:36


Post by: Lord Zarkov


Curvaceous wrote:
The master of the most stealthy sniper chapter, does not wear an iron halo force field. In the rules he has a cover save of 4+ but no special save in close combat. Force fields do seem to be relevant for stealth.


Given an Iron Halo is a conversion field which produces giant flashes of light, that does not surprise me!


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 21:41:35


Post by: Vatsetis



Sorry mate, but SM are as concept quite stupid if you thing about their feasibility, because they are too big, heavy and loud to be efectively concealed or to trasverse by dense terrain... So they are basically useless as infantry troops beyond poster boy propaganda duty.

BTW hitting with artillery a target moving at 20MPH was not complicated in 1940...so imagine for Eldar, Taus or Necrons.

The best way to defend your space ship from a Marine assault is to have human size doors and corridors.

If you go beyond bolter porn marines make no sense.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 21:48:55


Post by: Karol


Yes, because those tanks had to stop to shot. Plus a PzkW IV is a bit bigger then a space marine. If war ships were able to use dazzle camo, then I am sure marines can do it too. From the last time I checked they are still smaller then a light cruiser or a destroyer.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 21:59:36


Post by: xerxeskingofking


Karol wrote:
Yes, because those tanks had to stop to shot. Plus a PzkW IV is a bit bigger then a space marine. If war ships were able to use dazzle camo, then I am sure marines can do it too. From the last time I checked they are still smaller then a light cruiser or a destroyer.


dazzle camo was only partially effective, and provided zero concealment, but was mainly intended to confuse the visual sighting of torpedos fired form subs (ie an observer with a poor viewpoint) by masking the exact coruse and heading of the ship. it bears no relation to the use of camo for protecting a space marine in combat form being seen.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 22:12:10


Post by: Nevelon


We should also remember that from a lore POV, power armor is WAY better than it is on the tabletop.

It’s walking tank level, shrugging off anything less then AV firepower. Why would you need a refractor field on top of that? Most of the time your armor is going to laugh off anything the battle tosses at you.

Officers and specialist might need that extra protection, as they tend to be at the pointy end of things, and tangle with things like ork warlords and hive tyrants.

--

Yes, I know plot armor is variable. One day you are a god on the battlefield, untouched by any foe. The next you and your squad are scythed down like wheat in one volley. And what will happen on any given day is up to the author and the focus characters. So it’s hard to pin down exactly how “good” SM power armor is.

But it’s supposed to be really darn good stuff. Top of the line, best of the best.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 22:30:04


Post by: BrianDavion


xerxeskingofking wrote:
Karol wrote:
Yes, because those tanks had to stop to shot. Plus a PzkW IV is a bit bigger then a space marine. If war ships were able to use dazzle camo, then I am sure marines can do it too. From the last time I checked they are still smaller then a light cruiser or a destroyer.


dazzle camo was only partially effective, and provided zero concealment, but was mainly intended to confuse the visual sighting of torpedos fired form subs (ie an observer with a poor viewpoint) by masking the exact coruse and heading of the ship. it bears no relation to the use of camo for protecting a space marine in combat form being seen.


we do see examples of marines in camo so we know they'll use it when nesscary (just as often as not they want you to see them coming as they can tank most infantry weapons and would thus be absolutely terrifying rushing at you at likely ~30 MPH)

people constantly claim camo wouldn't work on marines, but I question that, seriously question it.

we camoufloge TANKS, and apparently the camo works so there's no reason it'd not work on Marines.



Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 23:01:21


Post by: Vatsetis


Camo works on tanks because tank combat engagement ranges are huge (1km or even further)... SM are supposed to engage at close quarters... Basic Camo on them will be mainly for aesthetic use... Even if they use some sort of high tech invisibility cloaking device the SM need to supress the huge noise a 300kg metal monster is going to produce when moving rapidly... Also SM use as a basic weapon an automatic high caliber self propelled rocket launcher (bolters) which also create huge noise, so every time they fire they will be inmediatly located from far away.

Basically a SM has the concealment and mobility capabilitiea of a Hummbee armed with a 50 cal... Imagine 10 of those doing a stealth mission... They are useless as infantry in a tactical sense.

From any feasible military POV SMs are a joke... All their "strenghts" (speed and durability) are surpass by far by their noisiness and inhability to conceal properly due to their huge size (not counting on their huge thermal and energy signal)... you shouldnt not overthink or take them seriously.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 23:04:15


Post by: Insectum7


^Tanks and vehicles be used in urban combat, yo.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 23:11:07


Post by: Gert


Vatsetis wrote:
Camo works on tanks because tank combat engagement ranges are huge (1km or even further)... SM are supposed to engage at close quarters... Basic Camo on them will be mainly for aesthetic use... Even if they use some sort of high tech invisibility cloaking device the SM need to supress the huge noise a 300kg metal monster is going to produce when moving rapidly... Also SM use as a basic weapon an automatic high caliber self propelled rocket launcher (bolters) which also create huge noise, so every time they fire they will be inmediatly located from far away.

Weird considering Chapters like the Raven Guard and Raptors somehow manage to specialise in stealth warfare even before Primaris Phobos units were introduced. There are also weapons like Stalker Bolters that are specifically designed for sniper and stealth work.

Basically a SM has the concealment and mobility capabilitiea of a Hummbee armed with a 50 cal... Imagine 10 of those doing a stealth mission... They are useless as infantry in a tactical sense.

Yes because all infantry are stealth infantry.

From any feasible military POV SMs are a joke... All their "strenghts" (speed and durability) are surpass by far by their noisiness and inhability to conceal properly due to their huge size (not counting on their huge thermal and energy signal)... you shouldnt not overthink or take them seriously.

Almost like Astartes are used as rapid strike units intended for decapitation/seek and destroy missions rather than wandering through a jungle waiting for Genestealers to jump out of the trees.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/02 23:20:54


Post by: Platuan4th


 AnomanderRake wrote:
(Scourges and Corsairs, two of the sub-cultures with the least resources and backing, can both have everyone in 4+ armour)


Not sure where you're getting that Scourges, the sub-faction that goes through a self-funded exceedingly expensive procedure to become how they are, that is used by every faction of Drukhari society as messengers, who are illegal to kill, and are all given rare and expensive Ghostplate to protect them while doing their job, have the least resources and backing.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 01:21:54


Post by: Canadian 5th


 Insectum7 wrote:
^Tanks and vehicles be used in urban combat, yo.

Yes, but usually only with infantry cover as they tend to be blind, easy to roadblock, and not well suited to dealing with attacks fired into their roofs from nearby rooftops and balconies.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 02:44:50


Post by: Saber


 A Town Called Malus wrote:
 Saber wrote:
Yeah, the refractor field would makes it harder for the bearer to hide. Since hiding is the best way to survive on the battlefield (at least in the real world) the refractor field would probably be a net-negative.


But the best way to successfully hide in the battlefield is to make your profile as small as possible and utilise camouflage. Needless to say 8 foot tall slabs of beef wearing brightly coloured bulky armour which features zero designs to disrupt the silhouette are gonna find that quite hard.


However, logic does have a role to play in 40K. And even when it doesn't have a role, the setting possesses a certain sort of logic all its own. Consider the following:

1) It's not too difficult to hide tanks and artillery pieces in the real world, so hiding something the size of a Space Marine would be fairly easy.

2) However, Space Marines generally don't try to hide; they wear fancy colors and make lots of noise in order to terrify their foes (and because the 40K setting allows for that sort of madness).

3) Sometimes, though, they do try to hide, and use technology and psychic powers to camouflage themselves. Almost every kind of Space Marine does this.

4) Some Space Marines even emphasize stealth above all else. Some (e.g. Night Lords, Alpha Legion) combine being sneaky with being scary.

5) Almost every kind of Space Marine makes use of other sorts of real world battle tactics that would seemingly run contrary to their identity as scary shouting space clowns, such as setting ambushes, using fortifications, and employing massed barrages from (orbital) artillery.

6) In the early editions of the game, when the lore for the refractor field was penned, it was possible for troops to "hide" and sneak around the battlefield unseen. Even Space Marines could do this.

What does it all add up to? Damned if I know, but I have my opinions.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 03:37:57


Post by: Stormonu


If marines all got refractor fields, it's likely the Herbert estate might finally take notice.

Seriously though, if they were pointed accordingly, I could see it being a squad option.

However, conservatively, it would probably fit being limited to veteran squads and terminators, though both already have access to storm shields...

Fluffwise, it's probably a bit too much upkeep to give them to every marine, and would likely put strain on the battery life on their power suits. Would provide a short-term gain, but marines wouldn't be able to remain afield as long in combat areas.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 04:05:02


Post by: alextroy


In the Imperium of Man, equipment isn't just a tool. It is also often a badge of office, honors, or rank. Marines don't get Refractor Fields because that is not an honor bestowed on Marines. They can eventual earn either an Iron Halo (Captain) or a Rosarius (Chaplain), but otherwise must depend upon their armor for protection, along with the role-specific Combat and Storm Shields.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 04:08:27


Post by: Insectum7


 Canadian 5th wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^Tanks and vehicles be used in urban combat, yo.

Yes, but usually only with infantry cover as they tend to be blind, easy to roadblock, and not well suited to dealing with attacks fired into their roofs from nearby rooftops and balconies.
Sure but
A: Marines have none of those problems
And
B: Tanks still employ camouflage


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 04:29:19


Post by: Jarms48


Tygre wrote:
In the 2nd edition Wargear book the refractor field "... produces a hazy band of light of light around the subject which makes it impossible for the wearer to hide." Which my be a setback for some. As a side-note - terminator armour does not mention any fields at all, just thick armour. Lieutenants did not come with refractor fields in 2nd. But could take 1 wargear card, which could be a refractor field.

I guess the main reason that they don't have refractor fields is the same reason they don't all have plasma guns.


Presumably you could just switch it off though, right? Turn it on only when combat has only begun.

Having an energy shield has the added benefit of less maintenance on the power armour itself. Also it could be a second layer of defence on what would typically be a weak point on the armour.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Fluffwise, it's probably a bit too much upkeep to give them to every marine, and would likely put strain on the battery life on their power suits. Would provide a short-term gain, but marines wouldn't be able to remain afield as long in combat areas.


I have to doubt the former. If every Imperial Guard Lieutenant gets one, then there’s literally trillions across the universe. If we discount Lieutenants and say every Captain (aka Company Commander) gets one there’s still single trillions rather than hundreds of trillions. If we dial that back, skip Majors and move straight to Colonels. There’s likely still billions in circulation.

It can’t be a manufacturing bottleneck of the refractor fields themselves. I doubt it’s a power supply issue either. If a marines armour can power a jump pack then it should be able to use that energy to power a personal shield. Just make it so a jump pack or shield is an either/or option.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 05:44:22


Post by: Vatsetis


 Gert wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:
Camo works on tanks because tank combat engagement ranges are huge (1km or even further)... SM are supposed to engage at close quarters... Basic Camo on them will be mainly for aesthetic use... Even if they use some sort of high tech invisibility cloaking device the SM need to supress the huge noise a 300kg metal monster is going to produce when moving rapidly... Also SM use as a basic weapon an automatic high caliber self propelled rocket launcher (bolters) which also create huge noise, so every time they fire they will be inmediatly located from far away.

Weird considering Chapters like the Raven Guard and Raptors somehow manage to specialise in stealth warfare even before Primaris Phobos units were introduced. There are also weapons like Stalker Bolters that are specifically designed for sniper and stealth work.

Basically a SM has the concealment and mobility capabilitiea of a Hummbee armed with a 50 cal... Imagine 10 of those doing a stealth mission... They are useless as infantry in a tactical sense.

Yes because all infantry are stealth infantry.

From any feasible military POV SMs are a joke... All their "strenghts" (speed and durability) are surpass by far by their noisiness and inhability to conceal properly due to their huge size (not counting on their huge thermal and energy signal)... you shouldnt not overthink or take them seriously.

Almost like Astartes are used as rapid strike units intended for decapitation/seek and destroy missions rather than wandering through a jungle waiting for Genestealers to jump out of the trees.


And all of this is just wishfull thinking or simply fantasy... Imagine a SWAT team that is unable to trasverse a simple corridor because its members are just too big... Those are the SM.

40K is all about juvenile rule of cool power fantasies... it sound very "tactical" to speak about a stalker bolter which apparently wont make noise when fired ... until you realice that it cannot be a true bolter since those have incorporated selfpropelled ammunitions specifically designed to be noisy and conspicuous.

Is there any artwork of a marine doing something as simple as remaining prone and crawling? it is even possible with their stupidly oversized armour and muscled bodies?

After 1914 all infantry are either stealth infantry or dead infantry

Stealth SM make the same sense that Chainswords as a functional weapon... IE none... Infantry unable to trasverse dense terrain and remain conceal are mostly useless.

If a chaos or genestealer cult spreads on a hive city how are marines ment to fight them if they arent even able to exit the cargo bay for heavy equipment liftting areas... a simple staicase would be an uncoquerable tactical challenge.

The biggest plot armor of all 40K media is the fact that the universe (including hive cities, spaceships and forge worlds) seem to be designed specifically to allow 7ft and 500+ kg monsters to move arround with ease... even doe in universe SM are a tiny minority of human population.

From a combat perspective... Its irrelevant if you are tough, quick and strong if you arent unable to reach the area of operations without alerting everybody in a mile radious.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 08:00:45


Post by: mrFickle


Isn’t the crux terminatus some sort of force field?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To be fair though with all the resources of the imperium you could probably equip a thousand SM with lascannons with no issue.

It would just be a boring story, probably.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 08:23:36


Post by: Vatsetis


mrFickle wrote:
Isn’t the crux terminatus some sort of force field?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To be fair though with all the resources of the imperium you could probably equip a thousand SM with lascannons with no issue.

It would just be a boring story, probably.


Canon size of SM forces makes no sense ( a 1000 strong force would be insignificant in a planetary scale war).

Since they are a power fantasy rather than a sensible concept... SM are portrayed simultaneously as special forces super soldiers that can defeat even in small groups whole enemy armies (because reasons) and also as sort of mass produce and standarice military unit (at least the basic types such as Tacticals and Intercessors).

There is even a complete cognitive disonance between the tabletop and fluff representation of the SM´s.

If taken to practice the SM´s would be a complete military liability (not speaking in abstract, Im speaking in universe).

Exactly which work can be done better by the SM that cannot be tackled in a more efficient and economic manner by Scions and/or Assassins? Im speaking of special forces/strike stuff... for attritional warfare regular AM armies are 100 times better than marines.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 08:54:22


Post by: mrFickle


Vatsetis wrote:
mrFickle wrote:
Isn’t the crux terminatus some sort of force field?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To be fair though with all the resources of the imperium you could probably equip a thousand SM with lascannons with no issue.

It would just be a boring story, probably.


Canon size of SM forces makes no sense ( a 1000 strong force would be insignificant in a planetary scale war).

Since they are a power fantasy rather than a sensible concept... SM are portrayed simultaneously as special forces super soldiers that can defeat even in small groups whole enemy armies (because reasons) and also as sort of mass produce and standarice military unit (at least the basic types such as Tacticals and Intercessors).

There is even a complete cognitive disonance between the tabletop and fluff representation of the SM´s.

If taken to practice the SM´s would be a complete military liability (not speaking in abstract, Im speaking in universe).

Exactly which work can be done better by the SM that cannot be tackled in a more efficient and economic manner by Scions and/or Assassins? Im speaking of special forces/strike stuff... for attritional warfare regular AM armies are 100 times better than marines.


Yeah you just can’t analyse 40K like this. To use your assassins example, if you wanted to take down an ork army just snipe the war boss and the Orks will fight amongst themselves to determine a new warboss. Then take that one out and so on until they have destroyed themselves and no need for bolters, chain swords and heroic deeds of 1 thousand SM vs 1 million Orks


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 09:13:28


Post by: kirotheavenger


I imagine Space Marines don't have refractor fields because any weapon weak enough to be stopped by a refractor field is weak enough to be stopped by the armour. Of course, on tabletop it doesn't work like that due to the divergence of armour and invulnerable saves.

Space Marines in canon are a whole other discussion to themselves.
I like to imagine them as shock assault troops. They can get away without camouflage because their operational tempo and intense armour renders it redundant.
This is undermined by the existence of factions like Raven Guard or Phobos in general, but such is life.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 09:27:37


Post by: Vatsetis


And how usefull is a shock assault troop that cant cross a doorway without blowing up half of the building in doing so?

Im curious as to when did the SM in the fluff gain their superspeed and reflexes... because I dont remember this gimmick (another layer of absurdity to make super agile a type of troop anatomically unable to simply lay prone) was in place in the old days of 2/3 edition. Just curious.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 09:29:22


Post by: BrianDavion


 kirotheavenger wrote:
I imagine Space Marines don't have refractor fields because any weapon weak enough to be stopped by a refractor field is weak enough to be stopped by the armour. Of course, on tabletop it doesn't work like that due to the divergence of armour and invulnerable saves.

Space Marines in canon are a whole other discussion to themselves.
I like to imagine them as shock assault troops. They can get away without camouflage because their operational tempo and intense armour renders it redundant.
This is undermined by the existence of factions like Raven Guard or Phobos in general, but such is life.


onl;y undermined if you assume the space marines only ever use one tactic and don't occasionally vary them as the situation requires. your average marine tactics are indeed shock based, but it's pretty clear they're willing to do things differant if it's required.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 09:39:22


Post by: kirotheavenger


Vatsetis wrote:
And how usefull is a shock assault troop that cant cross a doorway without blowing up half of the building in doing so?

Im curious as to when did the SM in the fluff gain their superspeed and reflexes... because I dont remember this gimmick (another layer of absurdity to make super agile a type of troop anatomically unable to simply lay prone) was in place in the old days of 2/3 edition. Just curious.

Are you deliberately using ridiculous hyperbole or do you actually think it's impossible for a Space Marine to walk through an average doorway?
Where does "anatomically unable to simply lay prone" come from? They're humanoid, not inverted tortoises.

BrianDavion wrote:

onl;y undermined if you assume the space marines only ever use one tactic and don't occasionally vary them as the situation requires. your average marine tactics are indeed shock based, but it's pretty clear they're willing to do things differant if it's required.

I agree. But what I was referencing in regards to Raven Guard is that they're a chapter that specialises in stealth tactics who wears black and white armour. Huh. Or Scouts and Phobos, who are explictly stealth troops who maintain their chapter's standard bright blue or red or whatever armour.

GW recently showed off a Blood Angels army, whom had painted their phobos in 100% camo colours. This is much more realistic than the traditionally depicted bright red phobos that Blood Angels would be using.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 11:02:40


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


In older Rogue Trader publications (and even in some later Forge World ones), they depicted Space Marine Chapters as having and using camouflage patterns. It could be perhaps that the big bright colours we see on things like Phobos Marines and such are just parade uniforms.

Or, you can handwave any of it and just say that it works. If you want camo Space Marines, there's room for that, and if you want bright bold Astartes, there's also room for that!


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 11:13:07


Post by: Vatsetis


 kirotheavenger wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:
And how usefull is a shock assault troop that cant cross a doorway without blowing up half of the building in doing so?

Im curious as to when did the SM in the fluff gain their superspeed and reflexes... because I dont remember this gimmick (another layer of absurdity to make super agile a type of troop anatomically unable to simply lay prone) was in place in the old days of 2/3 edition. Just curious.

Are you deliberately using ridiculous hyperbole or do you actually think it's impossible for a Space Marine to walk through an average doorway?
Where does "anatomically unable to simply lay prone" come from? They're humanoid, not inverted tortoises.



I really wish I was joking, but is the plain truth... the doorway of my room is 70cm wide and 200cm high, a basic tactical Space Marine would have to crawl to get through and a Primaris will get stuck in it. I really doubt that my staircase will be able to put up with the 500kg plus with the high ground pressure of their combat boots without collapsing when the Marine comes storming upwards... so if this SM marine (and we are talking here of the tactical base smaller marine) wanted to engage me in hand to hand combat when Im in the second floor of my home (a regular joes place) the easiest way to do so would be to demolish the hole building. Seems quite a tactical liability to me.

SM are indeed humanoids but their armour dosent seem to be designed to do some thing as basic as allowing them to get prone without great effort.

https://images.app.goo.gl/ZbWZicpZvHfRm6gi7

SM are not practical to fight in any sensibly made human habitat. If you think about them for more than 10 seconds they are absurd. They go against basic physics and combat experience.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 11:17:09


Post by: CthuluIsSpy


 kirotheavenger wrote:
I imagine Space Marines don't have refractor fields because any weapon weak enough to be stopped by a refractor field is weak enough to be stopped by the armour. Of course, on tabletop it doesn't work like that due to the divergence of armour and invulnerable saves.

Space Marines in canon are a whole other discussion to themselves.
I like to imagine them as shock assault troops. They can get away without camouflage because their operational tempo and intense armour renders it redundant.
This is undermined by the existence of factions like Raven Guard or Phobos in general, but such is life.

Yeah, Marines make a lot more sense if you consider them as close quarters shock troops and limit their activities to boarding actions (I mean, they are Space Marines) and assaulting bunkers.
They are roughly comparable to knights assaulting castles, where the heavy armor would certainly give them an edge when trying to assault the walls.

To me, Raven guard being stealth specialists were more of an exception rather than a rule, to give them an idea just how skilled they are at stealth. You'd have to be pretty damned skilled to sneak in power armor, which gives the Raven Guard a certain amount of prestige.
In my opinion, Phobos completely ruins that prestige; in trying to make a tactikewl faction to appeal to the Call of Duty crowd, GW released something not only illogical (complete with a big dumb stealth mech) but also undermines a characteristic of a well known chapter.
It would be like if everyone started fielding Death Company; Blood Angels wouldn't be so special now, would they?


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 11:18:03


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:I really wish I was joking, but is the plain truth... the doorway of my room is 70cm wide and 200cm high, a basic tactical Space Marine would have to crawl to get through and a Primaris will get stuck in it. I really doubt that my staircase will be able to put up with the 500kg plus with the high ground pressure of their combat boots without collapsing when the Marine comes storming upwards... so if this SM marine (and we are talking here of the tactical base smaller marine) wanted to engage me in hand to hand combat when Im in the second floor of my home (a regular joes place) the easiest way to do so would be to demolish the hole building. Seems quite a tactical liability to me.
I wasn't aware that the doors, stairs, and rooms of the 41st millennium were built according to 21st century building guidelines.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 11:19:38


Post by: CthuluIsSpy


Vatsetis wrote:
 kirotheavenger wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:
And how usefull is a shock assault troop that cant cross a doorway without blowing up half of the building in doing so?

Im curious as to when did the SM in the fluff gain their superspeed and reflexes... because I dont remember this gimmick (another layer of absurdity to make super agile a type of troop anatomically unable to simply lay prone) was in place in the old days of 2/3 edition. Just curious.

Are you deliberately using ridiculous hyperbole or do you actually think it's impossible for a Space Marine to walk through an average doorway?
Where does "anatomically unable to simply lay prone" come from? They're humanoid, not inverted tortoises.



I really wish I was joking, but is the plain truth... the doorway of my room is 70cm wide and 200cm high, a basic tactical Space Marine would have to crawl to get through and a Primaris will get stuck in it. I really doubt that my staircase will be able to put up with the 500kg plus with the high ground pressure of their combat boots without collapsing when the Marine comes storming upwards... so if this SM marine (and we are talking here of the tactical base smaller marine) wanted to engage me in hand to hand combat when Im in the second floor of my home (a regular joes place) the easiest way to do so would be to demolish the hole building. Seems quite a tactical liability to me.

SM are indeed humanoids but their armour dosent seem to be designed to do some thing as basic as allowing them to get prone without great effort.

https://images.app.goo.gl/ZbWZicpZvHfRm6gi7

SM are not practical to fight in any sensibly made human habitat. If you think about them for more than 10 seconds they are absurd. They go against basic physics and combat experience.

Why would they bother fighting you in a house though? They'd just blow it up. It is bloody hilarious though imagining a bunch of marines trying to storm a bunker, come across a tiny door and go "awww dammit. Brother Titus get out the lube, this one is going to be a squeeze."


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 11:20:55


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
To me, Raven guard being stealth specialists were more of an exception rather than a rule, to give them an idea just how skilled they are at stealth. You'd have to be pretty damned skilled to sneak in power armor, which gives the Raven Guard a certain amount of prestige.
In my opinion, Phobos completely ruins that prestige; in trying to make a tactikewl faction to appeal to the Call of Duty crowd, GW released something not only illogical (complete with a big dumb stealth mech) but also undermines a characteristic of a well known chapter.
It would be like if everyone started fielding Death Company; Blood Angels wouldn't be so special now, would they?
Well, the Raptors Chapter existed long before Phobos did, as well as 30k Recon teams. If we're going to complain about tacticool Marines being bad or taking away from the Raven Guard, we ought to levy it in the right place.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 11:26:52


Post by: CthuluIsSpy


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
To me, Raven guard being stealth specialists were more of an exception rather than a rule, to give them an idea just how skilled they are at stealth. You'd have to be pretty damned skilled to sneak in power armor, which gives the Raven Guard a certain amount of prestige.
In my opinion, Phobos completely ruins that prestige; in trying to make a tactikewl faction to appeal to the Call of Duty crowd, GW released something not only illogical (complete with a big dumb stealth mech) but also undermines a characteristic of a well known chapter.
It would be like if everyone started fielding Death Company; Blood Angels wouldn't be so special now, would they?
Well, the Raptors Chapter existed long before Phobos did, as well as 30k Recon teams. If we're going to complain about tacticool Marines being bad or taking away from the Raven Guard, we ought to levy it in the right place.

Weren't they a Raven Guard successor though? Successor chapters take after their progenitors, don't they?


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 11:30:02


Post by: Lord Zarkov


mrFickle wrote:
Isn’t the crux terminatus some sort of force field?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To be fair though with all the resources of the imperium you could probably equip a thousand SM with lascannons with no issue.

It would just be a boring story, probably.


The crux itself is not no, it’s just a badge with a sliver of the Emperor’s armour.

The confusion comes from the 3rd Ed Chapter Approved article that first granted them an invulnerable save being named ‘Crux Terminatus’, but the article itself just said it was because the armour was legendarily thick rather than due to a force field.

The issue was that they changed from 3+ on 2D6 in 2nd to 2+ in 3rd to simplify things, but then the designers decided they were being killed to easily by banshees and the like so added the 5++.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 11:35:41


Post by: Vatsetis


 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:
 kirotheavenger wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:

Why would they bother fighting you in a house though? They'd just blow it up. It is bloody hilarious though imagining a bunch of marines trying to storm a bunker, come across a tiny door and go "awww dammit. Brother Titus get out the lube, this one is going to be a squeeze."


Yes it is hilarious and it is what would happen most of the time in universe. Why do human size enemies of the Spacemarines need to build their defences complexes in a scale that allows the SM to traverse their instalations with ease?

Space Marines as currently depicted by cannon arent unable to fight in 90% of the surface in human made instalations of a hivecity, spaceship or industrial complex... because of their stupidly big size, weight and footprint.

A Scion unit or an Assassin can do it without any problem.

Woa... Its very practical and "steallthy" to use a ton of bolter ammo or half a dozen of lascanon shoots just to reduce a small house into rubble... if instead of a detached building I live in an apartment block, would they call a battle barge to launch a planetary bombardement to tackle with me?

If SM exist only to mark the position for big guns, the Ratlings are the best SM in the galaxy.

SM are a joke outside Bolter Porn.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 11:58:37


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


CthuluIsSpy wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
To me, Raven guard being stealth specialists were more of an exception rather than a rule, to give them an idea just how skilled they are at stealth. You'd have to be pretty damned skilled to sneak in power armor, which gives the Raven Guard a certain amount of prestige.
In my opinion, Phobos completely ruins that prestige; in trying to make a tactikewl faction to appeal to the Call of Duty crowd, GW released something not only illogical (complete with a big dumb stealth mech) but also undermines a characteristic of a well known chapter.
It would be like if everyone started fielding Death Company; Blood Angels wouldn't be so special now, would they?
Well, the Raptors Chapter existed long before Phobos did, as well as 30k Recon teams. If we're going to complain about tacticool Marines being bad or taking away from the Raven Guard, we ought to levy it in the right place.

Weren't they a Raven Guard successor though? Successor chapters take after their progenitors, don't they?
A Raven Guard successor, yes, but not all Raven Guard successors (or even all successors) take after their forebears - after all, the Carcharadons aren't exactly much like their ancestors.

All I'm saying is that tacticool didn't start with Primaris.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 12:21:28


Post by: Gert


Plus the Raptors are more special forces than just plain stealth like the Raven Guard.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 12:53:58


Post by: Jarms48


 kirotheavenger wrote:
I imagine Space Marines don't have refractor fields because any weapon weak enough to be stopped by a refractor field is weak enough to be stopped by the armour. Of course, on tabletop it doesn't work like that due to the divergence of armour and invulnerable saves.

Space Marines in canon are a whole other discussion to themselves.
I like to imagine them as shock assault troops. They can get away without camouflage because their operational tempo and intense armour renders it redundant.
This is undermined by the existence of factions like Raven Guard or Phobos in general, but such is life.


But it could stop something like a lascannon, krak missile, etc. Whereas typically power armour cannot.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 13:00:01


Post by: kirotheavenger


I don't view refractor fields like that (flat chance to stop anything, that's just how they're depicted in games to give them an interesting gameplay distinction from armour.

I view them more like shields in video games. They're a regenerating layer of defence but they're not random, they stop a predictable level of firepower.

So a refractor field might reliably turn away a bolt round, but a lascannon will easily just overload it and blow through.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 13:09:46


Post by: Vatsetis


Err, no mate.

A Refractor Shield is not just anti-frag armor with a different name.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 13:26:13


Post by: Gert


I mean, the biggest issue here is conflating game with background.
Platoon Commanders needed Refractor Fields so they wouldn't be utterly worthless in game, they still are but that's besides the point.
In novels, Refractor Fields are super rare and not handed out to every PC in the Guard. And as defence, a RF will keep the bearer safe from small arms but heavy weapons with high rate of fire or damage output will overload the shield and shut it down just like Void Shields.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 13:42:43


Post by: Vatsetis


Lexicanum says a refractor field is useful against plasma guns and lasscannons.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 13:45:28


Post by: The_Real_Chris


In short, lowly Guard officers shouldn't get invulnerable saves.

Also all my worlds spaceships have corridors too small for Primaris marines, making us untouchable!


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 15:02:08


Post by: Karol


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:I really wish I was joking, but is the plain truth... the doorway of my room is 70cm wide and 200cm high, a basic tactical Space Marine would have to crawl to get through and a Primaris will get stuck in it. I really doubt that my staircase will be able to put up with the 500kg plus with the high ground pressure of their combat boots without collapsing when the Marine comes storming upwards... so if this SM marine (and we are talking here of the tactical base smaller marine) wanted to engage me in hand to hand combat when Im in the second floor of my home (a regular joes place) the easiest way to do so would be to demolish the hole building. Seems quite a tactical liability to me.
I wasn't aware that the doors, stairs, and rooms of the 41st millennium were built according to 21st century building guidelines.

Facilities and hard ware are always build for most common denominator. Try buyings shoes or sports were when you are a woman over 190cm or a guy who is big, at 16. I have to buy my stuff in the adult section. Small people very tall people all have the problems. And not even the biggest humans are close to the size of an armoured space marine. Termintor armour, has to have some high grade grav plates tech, becuase with the weight it has, a running termintor suddenly stopping would start sliding even on hardened ground. And fighting on something like dirt on undergrowth would be totaly out of the question.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 15:28:26


Post by: Vatsetis


Are people really arguing against the simple fact that having at least 3 times more volume and being at least 5 times the weight than the regular human trooper the Space Marines are going to be in a clear tactical disadvantage when fighting in a human constructed settlement (not to mention a hivecity or spaceship)???

40k is fantasy in space, its satirical and nonsencical... Please dont try to give a cientific explanation to what is simply absurd if you think about it for 10 seconds.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 15:41:03


Post by: Gert


I mean Imperial architecture is supposed to be grandiose and colossal. An Astartes might not fit in a hab suite but a mission in the Underhive or in the corridors of a ship wouldn't be a problem.
And just for the record, it's mentioned all the time from Astartes POV that regular human vehicles/ships/dwellings are often cramped.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 15:55:37


Post by: Vatsetis


The Galaxy is very diverse, not everthing or even most of it has to be build so that Astartes can traverse it with ease. Certainly the Astartes enemies wont do that.

I dont know why secundary and mainteinance corridors in a hive city or a spacecraft would allow an Astartes to trasverse it... This is basic engineering.

To be clear, a facility must be built on porpouse so that Astartes can use it... And in doing so it would probably make things much larger and cost much more in time an resources.

Astartes are useless as infantry because they have the weight and manouvrebility of a vehicle/car... They are not of human scale, and thats a huge problem when figthing other non astartes humans.

If instead of Astartes we were talking about the stealth capabilities of Ogryns things would be clear... An a Primaris volume and weight is much nearer to an Ogryn than to an standard human.

So due to their stupid size and weight the SM are really handicapped for the sort of close quarters boarding action the lore says they excell in.

If things make any sense in 40K, the SM squad in the astartes fan made film would be stuck in the first room they arrive inside the ship.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 16:43:40


Post by: Broadway


So some good points about have been made, some bad points have been brought up. However I think peopel are missing the most fundamental reason, and this because Magic is for wizards, not knights. Lets not be mistaken about what space marines are, they are space knights mixed in with various historical or pop culture icons.

Blood angels = space knights + vampires
Thousand Sons = space knights + mummies
Space wolves = space knights + vikings


Knights swing swords and wear armor, maybe have a holy relic because of thier devotion to king, country, and god. But their bread and butter is sword and armor, not force fields which is totally sci-fi wizardry at its finest. So giving all space marines force fields would break thier trope. As for why all the 2nd lueys having refractor fields.... I'm going to go with game design not meeting the realities of game play as my two cents.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 17:50:41


Post by: Karol


Templars had no problem with performing magical ritual. Oddly enough their marine version don't have psykers.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 17:55:29


Post by: Insectum7


Vatsetis wrote:
Are people really arguing against the simple fact that having at least 3 times more volume and being at least 5 times the weight than the regular human trooper the Space Marines are going to be in a clear tactical disadvantage when fighting in a human constructed settlement (not to mention a hivecity or spaceship)???

40k is fantasy in space, its satirical and nonsencical... Please dont try to give a cientific explanation to what is simply absurd if you think about it for 10 seconds.

I agree that the "embiggening" of Marines is dumb, but also despite being large, a horse can move around inside a building. I'm pretty sure I've seen a movie with that exact thing happening.

Plus Marines have Scouts. If they need to clear tighter spaces they can send in the Nubs. They're also bringing a Strike Cruiser, so they can just level the thing from orbit too.



Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 18:03:54


Post by: Vatsetis


So marines make as much sense as a SWAT team that try to take by storm horse mounted a two height suburban house and therefore the only one in the group that is able to actually enter the objective room is the newbie that still havent earned his cavalry honors yet.

Yeap, perfectly reasonable.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 18:04:24


Post by: Karol


Well I doubt hive worlds have the gigantic houses that exist in the US as an avarge size of place to move and live. Try moving a Persheron in an asian city and you won't be able to move him. Even where I live a ton places from the old times are made for the smaller communist era people, and I can tell you that getting out to the roof is hard for me and I am not 7 feet tall plus mr olympia build dude in a suit of armour.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 18:17:07


Post by: IanMalcolmAbs


Vatsetis wrote:
Are people really arguing against the simple fact that having at least 3 times more volume and being at least 5 times the weight than the regular human trooper the Space Marines are going to be in a clear tactical disadvantage when fighting in a human constructed settlement (not to mention a hivecity or spaceship)???

40k is fantasy in space, its satirical and nonsencical... Please dont try to give a cientific explanation to what is simply absurd if you think about it for 10 seconds.
Which enemy of the space marines has human sized soldier running around in their ships?

Orks? Nope...
Eldar? Nope...
CSM? Nope...
Tyranids? Nope...
Necrons? Nope...

I am struggling to think of any enemy of the imperium that has exclusively human size soldiers...The only enemy would be other humans...Guess what you don't need to fight other humans? Astartes. Which are essentially the imperium's best troops reserved for their toughest enemies and situations. Not to mention...a space marine can easily break through a narrow doorway...It is true the game is fantasy - you don't seem to be enjoying the fantasy though...

The answer to the OP though. Marines have power armor - they don't need a refractor field. Though...what do you think an Ironhalo is? Essentially it is a better version of one. Giving every marine an ironhalo would be to resource intensive.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 18:18:02


Post by: RaptorusRex


Remember the MST3K mantra.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 18:56:41


Post by: Vatsetis


Eldar are human size... Taus are smaller than humans... A variety of xenos races probably dont build their ships and installations oversized with the sole porpouse of allowing SM assaults.

In fluff SM are constantly fighting Genestealer cults and chaos cults that life concealed among the regular IOM population...

Yes the SM can easily break a narrow doorway, but if it has to slowly crawl along a regular corridor in some of the most tipical fluff battlefields (hive cities, forge worlds and space ships) all his superhuman abilities are rendered useless.

The ones that dont seem to enjoy the fantasy are those hellbent in overthinking all this nonsense and trying to find a justification for Marines oversize and overweight... It dosent exist, its very silly for marines to be so huge... Its over the top and impractical... I have no problem with that because I understand marines are just avatars for a power fantasy and with no regard to their obvious military drawbacks


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 19:04:21


Post by: Insectum7


Vatsetis wrote:
So marines make as much sense as a SWAT team that try to take by storm horse mounted a two height suburban house and therefore the only one in the group that is able to actually enter the objective room is the newbie that still havent earned his cavalry honors yet.

Yeap, perfectly reasonable.
Well that's a not very thoughtful response.

Bigger things than people can fit through doorways. Stronger things than people can go through walls. Some Marines don't wear such bulky armor. Not every building needs to be stormed, and Marines can always opt to just level the thing because they might not give a fuuuu.

But yes, if you built a hardened structure that was made of tight tunnels, Marines would have a problem. But again, you can use Scouts, Marines without armor, or make the tunnels bigger. Or just teleport inside like a boss.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Vatsetis wrote:
Eldar are human size... Taus are smaller than humans...
MArines are smaller than Tau battlesuits and Wraithguard. . . well, at least they were until Heavy Intercessor and related nonsense. . .


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 19:17:27


Post by: IanMalcolmAbs


Vatsetis wrote:
Eldar are human size... Taus are smaller than humans... A variety of xenos races probably dont build their ships and installations oversized with the sole porpouse of allowing SM assaults.

In fluff SM are constantly fighting Genestealer cults and chaos cults that life concealed among the regular IOM population...

Yes the SM can easily break a narrow doorway, but if it has to slowly crawl along a regular corridor in some of the most tipical fluff battlefields (hive cities, forge worlds and space ships) all his superhuman abilities are rendered useless.

The ones that dont seem to enjoy the fantasy are those hellbent in overthinking all this nonsense and trying to find a justification for Marines oversize and overweight... It dosent exist, its very silly for marines to be so huge... Its over the top and impractical... I have no problem with that because I understand marines are just avatars for a power fantasy and with no regard to their obvious military drawbacks

Eldar are as tall as a marine...nor would they inconvenience themselves with tiny doorways at the chance brutish Mon keigh entered their ship.
GSK are not only exceptionally rare - they also don't have ships - the ships steal also...don't have tiny doorways because the imperium doesn't do that - specifically so large things can be moved about the ship.

Sure the melee aspect of combat when units have ranged weaponry is unrealistic. The marine being large though is all part of the formula for making a super soldier. Want it to be Harder/ better/ faster / stronger? It must be bigger. It makes a lot of sense.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 19:26:22


Post by: Insectum7


 IanMalcolmAbs wrote:
. . .The marine being large though is all part of the formula for making a super soldier. Want it to be Harder/ better/ faster / stronger? It must be bigger. It makes a lot of sense.

I'll push back on that and say that better-faster-stronger isn't necessarily correlated to size. Chimps have wild power to weight ratios, and gorillas are CRAZY strong. It's hard to find a scientific measurement but I see online claims anywhere from 4 - 27x times as strong as a human. Even assuming the upper 3/4ths of those estimations are nonsense, a gorilla packs power that is way off the human scale for its size.

"According to the Guinness Book of Records, a silverback gorilla can lift up to 815 kg (1800 lbs) of dead weight."

" In 1924, a rare experiment was conducted to compare ape and human strength. A 165 lb male chimpanzee named ‘Boma’ was able to pull a force of 847 lb on a dynamometer, whereas a human of the same weight could only pull 210 lb"




Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 19:33:57


Post by: panzerfront14


 Insectum7 wrote:
 IanMalcolmAbs wrote:
. . .The marine being large though is all part of the formula for making a super soldier. Want it to be Harder/ better/ faster / stronger? It must be bigger. It makes a lot of sense.

I'll push back on that and say that better-faster-stronger isn't necessarily correlated to size. Chimps have wild power to weight ratios, and gorillas are CRAZY strong. It's hard to find a scientific measurement but I see online claims anywhere from 4 - 27x times as strong as a human. Even assuming the upper 2/3ds of those estimations are nonsense, a gorilla packs power that is way off the human scale for its size.


Of note is that the human body is capable of more strength then it is allowed. The human brain itself limits muscle output because that would be damaging at the high end and it is difficult to manipulate tools at that level when using more strength. A major thing to notice is while Chimps are much more capable of using their muscle, they don't have the same motor control as us or the ability to adjust their strength as needed to a task to the same degree that we can.

A huge issue is that the Marine not only is bigger, but might well have more access to his own muscle mass, particularly if the fibers of the muscle, the tendons and ligaments are themselves reinforced to withstand the extra strain.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 19:40:09


Post by: Insectum7


^well at least chimps can hold a banana without crushing it, lol. I wonder at the motor control thing, really, considering grooming behavior and ability to cradle baby chimps. I mean they may not be able to build a Space Marine model but they seem to get by alright.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 19:40:48


Post by: Galas


Gorillas and chimps and other primates are stronger than humans because they have much more muscle fiber density.

If you have both better fiber density and bigger muscles than thats even better than just being a normal sized human with better density in your muscles.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 19:50:56


Post by: Vatsetis


Modern day guerrillas find ways to get advantage everytime over Western armies that are heavily dependant on their vehicules due to the restricted mobility this means for the high tech faction in tight enviroments. The 40k guerrillas would surely do the same.

In Spite all the handwaving and adhoc justifications many battlefields in the 40k galaxy are probably more tight and packed that the most dense areas of nowadays Hing Kong or Manila... Good luck organising a cavalry charge in those streets.

Eldar aspect warriors have a similar ptotection level to marines, also SOB... But this units have mostly human sizes and weights... Astartes on the other side are oversized and overweight just for the rule of cool... They might be good parade and terror troops but this gimmick renders them useless in most of the elite infantry roles. Just a moderate amount of rain and mud would put a lot of stress on their ability to move over open ground.

BTW scouts are being phased out of rules and fluff due to the primarization process which means doubling on this dumb "bigger is better" concept.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 20:03:08


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:
BTW scouts are being phased out of rules and fluff due to the primarization process which means doubling on this dumb "bigger is better" concept.
Actually, Scouts still exist in all-Primaris Chapters. Just to clarify that.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 20:25:18


Post by: BrianDavion


Vatsetis wrote:
Modern day guerrillas find ways to get advantage everytime over Western armies that are heavily dependant on their vehicules due to the restricted mobility this means for the high tech faction in tight enviroments. The 40k guerrillas would surely do the same.

In Spite all the handwaving and adhoc justifications many battlefields in the 40k galaxy are probably more tight and packed that the most dense areas of nowadays Hing Kong or Manila... Good luck organising a cavalry charge in those streets.

Eldar aspect warriors have a similar ptotection level to marines, also SOB... But this units have mostly human sizes and weights... Astartes on the other side are oversized and overweight just for the rule of cool... They might be good parade and terror troops but this gimmick renders them useless in most of the elite infantry roles. Just a moderate amount of rain and mud would put a lot of stress on their ability to move over open ground.

BTW scouts are being phased out of rules and fluff due to the primarization process which means doubling on this dumb "bigger is better" concept.


Maybe if you wanna argue about space Marines you should read up a bit. scouts still exist,

as for urban battlefields, you seem to have this idea that an urban battlefield involves a bunch of people running around through buildings shooting small arms.

yeah thats not how it works. Marines need to get into a building but the doorway's to small? THEN THEY BLOW OPEN A BIGGER HOLE (which has the added advantage of allowing them to bypass any defences of the doorway) this isn't even some made up tactic, it's used in real life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mouse-holing

Marines would likely do that. likewise, warfare like what you might see in pictures of modern war where small teams are used and damage is minimal? yeaaah that's not what M.41 war is gonna be like. they practice total war we can see it from the very terrain pieces GW sells.

any "thick dense city" is going to be turned into smouldering ruins fast.


less of a worry about doorways and narrow corridors when they're mostly all rubble eh?





Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 20:29:52


Post by: epronovost


To answer the question of the OP as to why all Space Marines don't have access to refractor fields like officers in the Imperial Guard do, I would say because they don't need them really. Your average Space Marines already has excellent protection thanks to their very nature and their armor. They don't require that sort of sophisticated equipment since a regular Space Marine is less important both from a tactical and from a logistical point of view than a Imperial Guard officer. Their officers already have even stronger force field for that matter. Even elite veteran Space Marines have access to better forcefield tech.

As for size and weight of Space Marines being a disadvantage in urban combat or combat in rough terrain, this is of course a huge problem for them and it doesn't make much sense to invest so much energy in making physically mighty super-soldiers instead of more practical military skills than raw strength, but it's a fantasy setting where, much like in Transformers, bigger is always better.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 20:36:05


Post by: Insectum7


Vatsetis wrote:
Modern day guerrillas find ways to get advantage everytime over Western armies that are heavily dependant on their vehicules due to the restricted mobility this means for the high tech faction in tight enviroments. The 40k guerrillas would surely do the same.

Guerillas are driven to the tactics they use because of the overwhelming conventional forces that will meet them in any other form of combat, so conventional forces are already being effective in the way they are meant to be effective. In the modern world though, conventional forces aren't politically free to virus bomb whole continents to eradicate guerillas, whereas in 40K the Imperial forces don't have the same restrictions. Besides, you can always send in the Guard.

Space Marines can be effective without being "tunnel-rats", because the Imperial army isn't limited to Space Marines. It's like saying the Air Force is dumb because airplanes cant dig a trench. Space Marines can be effective enough to justify their existence without being able to do everything.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote:
Marines need to get into a building but the doorway's to small? THEN THEY BLOW OPEN A BIGGER HOLE (which has the added advantage of allowing them to bypass any defences of the doorway) this isn't even some made up tactic, it's used in real life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mouse-holing


I always felt like this was part of the traditional Sergeant w/Powerfist "thing". They just punch through walls.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 20:41:01


Post by: Vatsetis


I know scouts "still" exist and that SM have a lot of firepower at their dispossal... I wasnt arguing against those points.

If a Space Marine force needs to used a specialiced unit as scouts or massive firepower to overcome an obstacle as simple as a narrow staircase my point is solidly established.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 20:43:38


Post by: Insectum7


Vatsetis wrote:
I know scouts "still" exist and that SM have a lot of firepower at their dispossal... I wasnt arguing against those points.

If a Space Marine force needs to used a specialiced unit as scouts or massive firepower to overcome an obstacle as simple as a narrow staircase my point is solidly established.
They need a Powerfist which any traditional SM unit could carry. Or meltabomb, even Krak grenades maybe for lighter obstacles.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 20:49:10


Post by: mrFickle


Lord Zarkov wrote:
mrFickle wrote:
Isn’t the crux terminatus some sort of force field?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To be fair though with all the resources of the imperium you could probably equip a thousand SM with lascannons with no issue.

It would just be a boring story, probably.


The crux itself is not no, it’s just a badge with a sliver of the Emperor’s armour.

The confusion comes from the 3rd Ed Chapter Approved article that first granted them an invulnerable save being named ‘Crux Terminatus’, but the article itself just said it was because the armour was legendarily thick rather than due to a force field.

The issue was that they changed from 3+ on 2D6 in 2nd to 2+ in 3rd to simplify things, but then the designers decided they were being killed to easily by banshees and the like so added the 5++.


Is that still Supposed to be true, that the crux is made with a bit of the emperors armour? Back when terminator armour was rare and couldn’t be reproduced it might make sense but I think terminators are 10 a penny now in 40k. There can’t be enough armour to go around


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 20:52:41


Post by: Vatsetis


And if they need to move upwards??

Even if they only need to move horizontally not all walls can be just breached... Buildings can colapse if done carelessly, you cant simply punch holes through an unknown enemy ship with out risking a major explosion... Some goes for many industrial instalations... Then again the origin if this debate was that marines could not be shealthy and all of your "solutions" require the use of noisy brute force... Thanks fir conceding on that point.

Having to breach holes of 2x2 meters wide in every wall sort of defeats the porpouse of a "fast" superhuman strike force.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:
I know scouts "still" exist and that SM have a lot of firepower at their dispossal... I wasnt arguing against those points.

If a Space Marine force needs to used a specialiced unit as scouts or massive firepower to overcome an obstacle as simple as a narrow staircase my point is solidly established.
They need a Powerfist which any traditional SM unit could carry. Or meltabomb, even Krak grenades maybe for lighter obstacles.


Sorry how those a meltabomb allows a 750kg armored monster that dosent fit a narrow stairway to reach the fith floor of a building?


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 21:00:24


Post by: Insectum7


Vatsetis wrote:
And if they need to move upwards??

Even if they only need to move horizontally not all walls can be just breached... Buildings can colapse if done carelessly, you cant simply punch holes through an unknown enemy ship with out risking a major explosion... Some goes for many industrial instalations... Then again the origin if this debate was that marines could not be shealthy and all of your "solutions" require the use of noisy brute force... Thanks fir conceding on that point.

Having to breach holes of 2x2 meters wide in every wall sort of defeats the porpouse of a "fast" superhuman strike force.
No concession happened, Marines can still stealth about when not breaching. Meltabombs are supposed to be pretty quiet too, iirc the old Wargear book. If they need to go upwards they use stairs like everyone else, or knock a hole and do a pull-up.

What's your purpose here really . . . ?


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 21:00:44


Post by: Gert


Because Hab Blocks aren't made out of wood.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 21:02:17


Post by: AnomanderRake


 Insectum7 wrote:
...What's your purpose here really . . . ?


*bad Vatsetis voice impression* "To explain to you how I'm right and you're WRONG!"


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 21:06:17


Post by: Gadzilla666


Vatsetis wrote:
I know scouts "still" exist and that SM have a lot of firepower at their dispossal... I wasnt arguing against those points.

If a Space Marine force needs to used a specialiced unit as scouts or massive firepower to overcome an obstacle as simple as a narrow staircase my point is solidly established.

What point was that again? That you don't like space marines or the rules of the fictional universe that they reside in? If so, maybe you should find a fictional universe more to your liking. You sound like you would enjoy hard sci-fi of the military bent.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 21:15:27


Post by: BrianDavion


 Gert wrote:
Because Hab Blocks aren't made out of wood.



TBH I'd not be tooo suprised if a Marine could punch through a concrete wall.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 21:18:47


Post by: Insectum7


The scenario has gotten narrower and narrower . . .


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 21:19:13


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


BrianDavion wrote:
 Gert wrote:
Because Hab Blocks aren't made out of wood.



TBH I'd not be tooo suprised if a Marine could punch through a concrete wall.
Punch? They could *walk* though those walls.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 21:24:28


Post by: Insectum7


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
 Gert wrote:
Because Hab Blocks aren't made out of wood.



TBH I'd not be tooo suprised if a Marine could punch through a concrete wall.
Punch? They could *walk* though those walls.
Let's not get too power-fantasy crazed here.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 21:26:53


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


 Insectum7 wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
 Gert wrote:
Because Hab Blocks aren't made out of wood.



TBH I'd not be tooo suprised if a Marine could punch through a concrete wall.
Punch? They could *walk* though those walls.
Let's not get too power-fantasy crazed here.
The force of an Astartes shoulder-bashing through a wall? I don't think that's too outlandish.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 21:30:25


Post by: Galas


Shoulder-bashing at full speed is more the juggernaut and realistic for a marine.

When you say walking I'm thinking more of:


Spoiler:


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 21:30:48


Post by: Insectum7


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
 Gert wrote:
Because Hab Blocks aren't made out of wood.



TBH I'd not be tooo suprised if a Marine could punch through a concrete wall.
Punch? They could *walk* though those walls.
Let's not get too power-fantasy crazed here.
The force of an Astartes shoulder-bashing through a wall? I don't think that's too outlandish.
Shoulder bashing ain't "walking." Cinderblocks-filled-with-concrete? maybe. Legit hardened concrete? nah. I think if a Humvee will have trouble going through it, so will a marine.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 21:32:09


Post by: epronovost


BrianDavion wrote:
less of a worry about doorways and narrow corridors when they're mostly all rubble eh?


That's a bit of stupid argument. Navigating those rubbles and unstable ruins is going to be very difficult. Being big and heavy could make those things collapse under you as you try to navigate them and at that point, you might as well regress to "war by mass artillery".


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 21:33:42


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


My point was more that the sheer force of an Astartes body will get through those walls - walking is a tad hyperbolic, but I have very little doubt that an Astartes with even a slight degree of directed force would struggle with a civilian-tier wall.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 21:34:34


Post by: BrianDavion


 Insectum7 wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
 Gert wrote:
Because Hab Blocks aren't made out of wood.



TBH I'd not be tooo suprised if a Marine could punch through a concrete wall.
Punch? They could *walk* though those walls.
Let's not get too power-fantasy crazed here.


yeah concrete has a HIGH strength, punching through it by itself is actually pretty impressive, still with power armor I could see it possiable,



Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 21:41:37


Post by: Insectum7


epronovost wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
less of a worry about doorways and narrow corridors when they're mostly all rubble eh?


That's a bit of stupid argument. Navigating those rubbles and unstable ruins is going to be very difficult. Being big and heavy could make those things collapse under you as you try to navigate them and at that point, you might as well regress to "war by mass artillery".
I think the point is that it's more of an option in the 40K universe than it often is in our modern one. Collateral damage is much less important to the Imperium in general.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 21:52:47


Post by: Lord Zarkov


mrFickle wrote:
Lord Zarkov wrote:
mrFickle wrote:
Isn’t the crux terminatus some sort of force field?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To be fair though with all the resources of the imperium you could probably equip a thousand SM with lascannons with no issue.

It would just be a boring story, probably.


The crux itself is not no, it’s just a badge with a sliver of the Emperor’s armour.

The confusion comes from the 3rd Ed Chapter Approved article that first granted them an invulnerable save being named ‘Crux Terminatus’, but the article itself just said it was because the armour was legendarily thick rather than due to a force field.

The issue was that they changed from 3+ on 2D6 in 2nd to 2+ in 3rd to simplify things, but then the designers decided they were being killed to easily by banshees and the like so added the 5++.


Is that still Supposed to be true, that the crux is made with a bit of the emperors armour? Back when terminator armour was rare and couldn’t be reproduced it might make sense but I think terminators are 10 a penny now in 40k. There can’t be enough armour to go around


I believe so, though presumably there’s not very much of it in each given cross. Cut small enough slivers and you could probably split it 100,000 ways (and we know it should be less than that as only the DA have an all terminator 1st company and only Indominus suits seem to have it).


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 21:58:27


Post by: epronovost


 Insectum7 wrote:
Collateral damage is much less important to the Imperium in general.


It depends. The Imperium isn't all that careful about people being victims or their regular amenities, but it's very sensitive to its landmarks, monuments, temples and factories being damaged. In some it's absolutely vital because they have the technical knowledge to maintain and use the factory, but not rebuild it from scratch. In a sense, to the Imperium, its factories are even more precious to the war effort than ours. The Imperium is also fiercely religious. If there is a sliver of bones of a saint in a church destroying that church becomes a tragedy that must be avoided at all cost. The Imperium is also a society of Orders. The Imperium doesn't care about most people, but noble born people's lives and housings might be considered essential and not to be destroyed or damaged if possible because those same nobles happen to be your generals.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 22:00:27


Post by: BrianDavion


Lord Zarkov wrote:
mrFickle wrote:
Lord Zarkov wrote:
mrFickle wrote:
Isn’t the crux terminatus some sort of force field?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To be fair though with all the resources of the imperium you could probably equip a thousand SM with lascannons with no issue.

It would just be a boring story, probably.


The crux itself is not no, it’s just a badge with a sliver of the Emperor’s armour.

The confusion comes from the 3rd Ed Chapter Approved article that first granted them an invulnerable save being named ‘Crux Terminatus’, but the article itself just said it was because the armour was legendarily thick rather than due to a force field.

The issue was that they changed from 3+ on 2D6 in 2nd to 2+ in 3rd to simplify things, but then the designers decided they were being killed to easily by banshees and the like so added the 5++.


Is that still Supposed to be true, that the crux is made with a bit of the emperors armour? Back when terminator armour was rare and couldn’t be reproduced it might make sense but I think terminators are 10 a penny now in 40k. There can’t be enough armour to go around


I believe so, though presumably there’s not very much of it in each given cross. Cut small enough slivers and you could probably split it 100,000 ways (and we know it should be less than that as only the DA have an all terminator 1st company and only Indominus suits seem to have it).


IIRC the sliver of the emperor's armor was always sort of a "myth" anyway, I can readily belive it';s not true at all


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Insectum7 wrote:
epronovost wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
less of a worry about doorways and narrow corridors when they're mostly all rubble eh?


That's a bit of stupid argument. Navigating those rubbles and unstable ruins is going to be very difficult. Being big and heavy could make those things collapse under you as you try to navigate them and at that point, you might as well regress to "war by mass artillery".
I think the point is that it's more of an option in the 40K universe than it often is in our modern one. Collateral damage is much less important to the Imperium in general.


exactly. modern military tactics is concerned about colatorial damage, it's VERY clear the Imperium of Mankind does not.

if the only way to get marines into an area is to flatten it with artillery? they will flatten it with artillery


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 22:09:25


Post by: Insectum7


epronovost wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Collateral damage is much less important to the Imperium in general.


It depends. The Imperium isn't all that careful about people being victims or their regular amenities, but it's very sensitive to its landmarks, monuments, temples and factories being damaged. In some it's absolutely vital because they have the technical knowledge to maintain and use the factory, but not rebuild it from scratch. In a sense, to the Imperium, its factories are even more precious to the war effort than ours. The Imperium is also fiercely religious. If there is a sliver of bones of a saint in a church destroying that church becomes a tragedy that must be avoided at all cost. The Imperium is also a society of Orders. The Imperium doesn't care about most people, but noble born people's lives and housings might be considered essential and not to be destroyed or damaged if possible because those same nobles happen to be your generals.
Yeah sure, they'll recover the sacred bones of person Holy-McImportantALot, and then use cyclonic torpedoes on the planet.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 22:59:20


Post by: Vatsetis


 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:
I know scouts "still" exist and that SM have a lot of firepower at their dispossal... I wasnt arguing against those points.

If a Space Marine force needs to used a specialiced unit as scouts or massive firepower to overcome an obstacle as simple as a narrow staircase my point is solidly established.

What point was that again? That you don't like space marines or the rules of the fictional universe that they reside in? If so, maybe you should find a fictional universe more to your liking. You sound like you would enjoy hard sci-fi of the military bent.


Ahh the classy... "If you dont like some isolated element of the setting or the game you should walk away" answer... I really like the empathy of 40k fanboys.

I enjoy the 40k for what it is (a young adult satire)... But I can also appreciate the absurdity of a setting where Space Marines are so big and heavy that they wouldnt be able to use a regular size human stairway or a lift and therefore would need to blow away half of the building just to arrive to the upper levels... Which makes them tactically dumb in many situations despite being the poster boy super soldiers.

Its funny and over the top if you think about it.

What I really cant understand is why some people seem to be so attached to their bolter porn preconceptions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
My point was more that the sheer force of an Astartes body will get through those walls - walking is a tad hyperbolic, but I have very little doubt that an Astartes with even a slight degree of directed force would struggle with a civilian-tier wall.


Which seems the perfect "tactic" to rush into an obvious trap (BTW the name of a classical 40k comic full of over the top action).

SM are not the MCU Iron Man, they can be dealt reasonably by a direct hit from a krak grenade launcher which in universe is a low tech and sort of common weapon system.

Space Marines dont have any particular advantage when delivering indiscriminate and raw firepower... Thats more the strenght of the AM or the Knight Houses... Yet again, "turning the building into rubble" is the default propossed solution when I put forward the most basic tactical challenge.

The use of this very underwhelming arguments just show how lackluster SM really are in universe.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 23:06:21


Post by: Gadzilla666


Vatsetis wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:
I know scouts "still" exist and that SM have a lot of firepower at their dispossal... I wasnt arguing against those points.

If a Space Marine force needs to used a specialiced unit as scouts or massive firepower to overcome an obstacle as simple as a narrow staircase my point is solidly established.

What point was that again? That you don't like space marines or the rules of the fictional universe that they reside in? If so, maybe you should find a fictional universe more to your liking. You sound like you would enjoy hard sci-fi of the military bent.


Ahh the classy... "If you dont like some isolated element of the setting or the game you should walk away" answer... I really like the empathy of 40k fanboys.

I enjoy the 40k for what it is (a young adult satire)... But I can also appreciate the absurdity of a setting where Space Marines are so big and heavy that they wouldnt be able to use a regular size human stairway or a lift and therefore would need to blow away half of the building just to arrive to the upper levels... Which makes them tactically dumb in many situations despite being the poster boy super soldiers.

Its funny and over the top if you think about it.

What I really cant understand is why some people seem to be so attached to their bolter porn preconceptions.

And I can't understand why someone would want to argue with them about it for four pages straight. If you enjoy the absurdity, then don't complain about it, enjoy it!


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 23:19:21


Post by: Vatsetis


Im just answering those that pretend that the oversize and overweight of SM wont be a severe handicap in many feasible tactical situations.

Im not "complaning" nor demanding anything in this post... I have no problem with GW current depiction of marines in this regards, Im just stating that the whole concept cannot be taken seriously.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 23:23:54


Post by: Insectum7


Vatsetis wrote:
Spoiler:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:
I know scouts "still" exist and that SM have a lot of firepower at their dispossal... I wasnt arguing against those points.

If a Space Marine force needs to used a specialiced unit as scouts or massive firepower to overcome an obstacle as simple as a narrow staircase my point is solidly established.

What point was that again? That you don't like space marines or the rules of the fictional universe that they reside in? If so, maybe you should find a fictional universe more to your liking. You sound like you would enjoy hard sci-fi of the military bent.


Ahh the classy... "If you dont like some isolated element of the setting or the game you should walk away" answer... I really like the empathy of 40k fanboys.

I enjoy the 40k for what it is (a young adult satire)... But I can also appreciate the absurdity of a setting where Space Marines are so big and heavy that they wouldnt be able to use a regular size human stairway or a lift and therefore would need to blow away half of the building just to arrive to the upper levels... Which makes them tactically dumb in many situations despite being the poster boy super soldiers.

Its funny and over the top if you think about it.

What I really cant understand is why some people seem to be so attached to their bolter porn preconceptions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
My point was more that the sheer force of an Astartes body will get through those walls - walking is a tad hyperbolic, but I have very little doubt that an Astartes with even a slight degree of directed force would struggle with a civilian-tier wall.


Which seems the perfect "tactic" to rush into an obvious trap (BTW the name of a classical 40k comic full of over the top action).

SM are not the MCU Iron Man, they can be dealt reasonably by a direct hit from a krak grenade launcher which in universe is a low tech and sort of common weapon system.

Space Marines dont have any particular advantage when delivering indiscriminate and raw firepower... Thats more the strenght of the AM or the Knight Houses... Yet again, "turning the building into rubble" is the default propossed solution when I put forward the most basic tactical challenge.

The use of this very underwhelming arguments just show how lackluster SM really are in universe.
I dunno man, you've been reduced to claiming "Marines are dumb because I pretend Scouts dont exist."


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 23:26:14


Post by: Galas


By this metric Ratlings should be the best troopers of the Imperium of Mankind.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 23:31:43


Post by: Niiai


Imagine painting that! Just file down the mold lines before undercoating!


[Thumb - FilmShields.gif]


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 23:34:05


Post by: CthuluIsSpy


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:
BTW scouts are being phased out of rules and fluff due to the primarization process which means doubling on this dumb "bigger is better" concept.
Actually, Scouts still exist in all-Primaris Chapters. Just to clarify that.

What is the fluff reason for Phobos anyway?
Scouts are already meant be stealth and recon assets available to all chapters, so why have Phobos?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Niiai wrote:
Imagine painting that! Just file down the mold lines before undercoating!



Wasn't there a troll post from years about about putting a thick bubble over the miniature to prevent them from hard? A refractor field modeled like that would basically be the same sort of thing.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 23:37:47


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
What point was that again? That you don't like space marines or the rules of the fictional universe that they reside in? If so, maybe you should find a fictional universe more to your liking. You sound like you would enjoy hard sci-fi of the military bent.


Ahh the classy... "If you dont like some isolated element of the setting or the game you should walk away" answer... I really like the empathy of 40k fanboys.
Funny - I seem to remember those arguments being used elsewhere.

But I can also appreciate the absurdity of a setting where Space Marines are so big and heavy that they wouldnt be able to use a regular size human stairway or a lift and therefore would need to blow away half of the building just to arrive to the upper levels... Which makes them tactically dumb in many situations despite being the poster boy super soldiers.

Its funny and over the top if you think about it.

What I really cant understand is why some people seem to be so attached to their bolter porn preconceptions.
What I can't understand is the fervent need of folks to cry about how unrealistic Space Marines are that all of their achievements in lore have to be propaganda, to the point where they seem to miss all of that "funny and over the top" stuff in favour of bludgeoning home how unrealistic they are.

We know. Space Marines are unrealistic. But so is *all* of 40k. Pointing out how they'd be useless in a "realistic" war is pointless because nothing in 40k is "realistic".


SM are not the MCU Iron Man, they can be dealt reasonably by a direct hit from a krak grenade launcher which in universe is a low tech and sort of common weapon system.
In some material, yes. And in others, they shrug off battle cannon rounds. If there's anything we know about how much damage a Space Marine can take, it's that we don't know how much damage a Space Marine can take.

Space Marines dont have any particular advantage when delivering indiscriminate and raw firepower... Thats more the strenght of the AM or the Knight Houses... Yet again, "turning the building into rubble" is the default propossed solution when I put forward the most basic tactical challenge.
Since when was anything in 40k considered rational by any metric of "basic tactical challenges"?

Again, you mention Knights, but fail to mention how utterly impractical *they* are as war machines - like most things in 40k, Space Marines included.

The use of this very underwhelming arguments just show how lackluster SM really are in universe.
Except Space Marines are only lacklustre if you ignore, well, everything else about the setting.

We all know that Space Marines are ridiculous. But you seem to be working under the impression that everything else isn't as well.

Vatsetis wrote:Im just answering those that pretend that the oversize and overweight of SM wont be a severe handicap in many feasible tactical situations.
The thing is, 40k isn't "feasible tactical situations". It's 40k.

You're in the wrong setting for "feasible tactical situations", so I don't see why "feasible tactical situations" were brought up.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 23:38:27


Post by: Vatsetis


 Insectum7 wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:
Spoiler:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:
I know scouts "still" exist and that SM have a lot of firepower at their dispossal... I wasnt arguing against those points.

If a Space Marine force needs to used a specialiced unit as scouts or massive firepower to overcome an obstacle as simple as a narrow staircase my point is solidly established.

What point was that again? That you don't like space marines or the rules of the fictional universe that they reside in? If so, maybe you should find a fictional universe more to your liking. You sound like you would enjoy hard sci-fi of the military bent.


Ahh the classy... "If you dont like some isolated element of the setting or the game you should walk away" answer... I really like the empathy of 40k fanboys.

I enjoy the 40k for what it is (a young adult satire)... But I can also appreciate the absurdity of a setting where Space Marines are so big and heavy that they wouldnt be able to use a regular size human stairway or a lift and therefore would need to blow away half of the building just to arrive to the upper levels... Which makes them tactically dumb in many situations despite being the poster boy super soldiers.

Its funny and over the top if you think about it.

What I really cant understand is why some people seem to be so attached to their bolter porn preconceptions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
My point was more that the sheer force of an Astartes body will get through those walls - walking is a tad hyperbolic, but I have very little doubt that an Astartes with even a slight degree of directed force would struggle with a civilian-tier wall.


Which seems the perfect "tactic" to rush into an obvious trap (BTW the name of a classical 40k comic full of over the top action).

SM are not the MCU Iron Man, they can be dealt reasonably by a direct hit from a krak grenade launcher which in universe is a low tech and sort of common weapon system.

Space Marines dont have any particular advantage when delivering indiscriminate and raw firepower... Thats more the strenght of the AM or the Knight Houses... Yet again, "turning the building into rubble" is the default propossed solution when I put forward the most basic tactical challenge.

The use of this very underwhelming arguments just show how lackluster SM really are in universe.
I dunno man, you've been reduced to claiming "Marines are dumb because I pretend Scouts dont exist."


Thats a very gross misreading of my POV.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 23:40:56


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:
BTW scouts are being phased out of rules and fluff due to the primarization process which means doubling on this dumb "bigger is better" concept.
Actually, Scouts still exist in all-Primaris Chapters. Just to clarify that.

What is the fluff reason for Phobos anyway?
Scouts are already meant be stealth and recon assets available to all chapters, so why have Phobos?
Phobos Marines are more experienced and have better equipment than Scouts. Additionally, they have more durability, and vacuum protection. Another reason as well is that Scouts are, for the most part, only in the 10th Company, with only minor cases where existing Astartes would don Scout armour. With Phobos Marines, any Astartes can wear Phobos armour, no matter which company, as and when the combat doctrine requires it.

It wouldn't be the first time that Space Marine Chapters had multiple units that fulfilled the same battlefield roles.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 23:48:26


Post by: Vatsetis


So it seems that Sgt_Smudge and I agree on the basics... But they are being confrontational just because they assume I have some sort of hidden agenda.

Im not here to win any fight, I simply like to debate and give my POV. Also its a good way to practice Eglish during the holidays

But simply stating that SM are silly because everything in the setting is silly is a very poor argument. If anything the SM background is very detailed so their silliness is much more visible.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:
BTW scouts are being phased out of rules and fluff due to the primarization process which means doubling on this dumb "bigger is better" concept.
Actually, Scouts still exist in all-Primaris Chapters. Just to clarify that.

What is the fluff reason for Phobos anyway?
Scouts are already meant be stealth and recon assets available to all chapters, so why have Phobos?
Phobos Marines are more experienced and have better equipment than Scouts. Additionally, they have more durability, and vacuum protection. Another reason as well is that Scouts are, for the most part, only in the 10th Company, with only minor cases where existing Astartes would don Scout armour. With Phobos Marines, any Astartes can wear Phobos armour, no matter which company, as and when the combat doctrine requires it.

It wouldn't be the first time that Space Marine Chapters had multiple units that fulfilled the same battlefield roles.


The real question would be why would marines used anything rather than phobos armor in most battlefield situations.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 23:55:55


Post by: CthuluIsSpy


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:
BTW scouts are being phased out of rules and fluff due to the primarization process which means doubling on this dumb "bigger is better" concept.
Actually, Scouts still exist in all-Primaris Chapters. Just to clarify that.

What is the fluff reason for Phobos anyway?
Scouts are already meant be stealth and recon assets available to all chapters, so why have Phobos?
Phobos Marines are more experienced and have better equipment than Scouts. Additionally, they have more durability, and vacuum protection. Another reason as well is that Scouts are, for the most part, only in the 10th Company, with only minor cases where existing Astartes would don Scout armour. With Phobos Marines, any Astartes can wear Phobos armour, no matter which company, as and when the combat doctrine requires it.

It wouldn't be the first time that Space Marine Chapters had multiple units that fulfilled the same battlefield roles.

Why use scouts if Vanguards are better equipped and trained then? I get that scouts are marines in training, but wouldn't Vanguard marines effectively change them into acting more like black templar neophytes?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Vatsetis wrote:


The real question would be why would marines used anything rather than phobos armor in most battlefield situations.

Apparently phobos armor is less protective than standard power armor, so when it comes to a direct assault it's not the best option.
It's also probably a bastard to produce and maintain too.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/03 23:59:52


Post by: Gert


Different missions though. Scouts do just that, Phobos Astartes are used for much more specialised spec ops missions. If you need recon you send Scouts but if you need a HVT eliminated quickly and relatively quietly then you'd use Phobos.
Phobos armour would be no more difficult to make than normal PA.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 00:02:15


Post by: CthuluIsSpy


 Gert wrote:
Different missions though. Scouts do just that, Phobos Astartes are used for much more specialised spec ops missions. If you need recon you send Scouts but if you need a HVT eliminated quickly and relatively quietly then you'd use Phobos.

Oh so if you want recon you use scouts, but if you want to ambush/assassinate/blow up and actually make sure there's no friendly losses in the event of discovery you use phobos. That makes sense I guess.

 Gert wrote:

Phobos armour would be no more difficult to make than normal PA.

Doesn't it use special lightweight materials and servo motors though? That's another component they would have to manufacture and install.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 00:05:12


Post by: Vatsetis


Just pray that it havent rain too much and those phobos primaris dont get stuck up to the chest in mud.

Just kidding... Astartes are great ;D


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 00:05:43


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:So it seems that Sgt_Smudge and I agree on the basics... But they are being confrontational just because they assume I have some sort of hidden agenda.
No hidden agenda, it's just your points seems needlessly reductive of how *all* of 40k is ridiculous, not just Space Marines, and so making claims on how ridiculous Space Marines are is just... short sighted.

But simply stating that SM are silly because everything in the setting is silly is a very poor argument.
Why?
The real question would be why would marines used anything rather than phobos armor in most battlefield situations.
As CthulusSpy said, I believe it is because it is less protective than Tacticus pattern armour, and if you're in a combat situation where stealth isn't going to be a foreseeable factor, why risk damaging your Phobos suits when you can deploy frontline suits instead.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Why use scouts if Vanguards are better equipped and trained then? I get that scouts are marines in training, but wouldn't Vanguard marines effectively change them into acting more like black templar neophytes?
I believe that is it used because they are still getting accustomed to their Black Carapace, and so the full suit of power armour wouldn't work. Scouts are used as neophyte induction, and the reason why they're not used on the front lines like Black Templar neophytes is the same reason why most Chapters don't use the BT system even back before Primaris - because they'd rather induct their recruits as Scouts, away from the immediate front-lines, but still getting that juicy combat experience.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 00:10:09


Post by: Vatsetis


I was under the impression that Primaris marines didnt pass a scout phase. Was I wrong? If not, are new scouts being currently trained in most SM chapters?

BTW stealth is a foreseable advantage in most combat situations... If phobos armor can be built en masse... They should be the standard pattern armor for SM.

With the exception of an already stablished melee extra speed and sealth is always going to be more usefull than extra protection.

It seem that also on the 40K universe offensive systems have won the race over defensive ones.



Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 00:30:43


Post by: epronovost


 Galas wrote:
By this metric Ratlings should be the best troopers of the Imperium of Mankind.


In many instance they would be. They are small, excellent shot and can eat literal garbage. In any claustrophobic environment or difficult environment to navigate, they are ideal. The ideal soldier will vary depending on circumstances, objective, weaponry and a variety of other factor. Space Marines are basically great in the same environments where mass tanks are great since they are themselves little tanks and you can have them support those tanks.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 00:41:28


Post by: Gert


 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Doesn't it use special lightweight materials and servo motors though? That's another component they would have to manufacture and install.

Maybe? It's all a variance on Mk.X which is a modifiable suit that can be adapted to a specific battlefield. So if the Company needed to be outfitted with stealth gear their Mk.X would be retooled by Techmarines into Phobos. In fact a Company would go to war with all the gear it could need in a given situation so it can refit and reorganise its forces mid-campaign if need be.

Vatsetis wrote:
I was under the impression that Primaris marines didnt pass a scout phase. Was I wrong? If not, are new scouts being currently trained in most SM chapters?

Scouts is just the generic Codex battlefield term for a Neophyte. A Primaris won't go through the Companies the same way as a Firstborn would (i.e. Devastator, Assault, Tactical) but they still have to go through training as a Scout.

BTW stealth is a foreseable advantage in most combat situations... If phobos armor can be built en masse... They should be the standard pattern armor for SM.

Not when you need to defend a fortress or conduct a boarding action. Plus Mk.X is a modifiable suit of armour, Phobos is a variant of the basic pattern.

With the exception of an already stablished melee extra speed and sealth is always going to be more usefull than extra protection.

Not if stealth isn't an option and instead you need the extra armour. A full-frontal assault on an enemy position is going to fail if all you use is stealth.

It seem that also on the 40K universe offensive systems have won the race over defensive ones.

The Imperial Fists would disagree.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 00:44:42


Post by: epronovost


 Gert wrote:
A full-frontal assault on an enemy position is going to fail


That's actually a more accurate statement. A full frontal assault on an entrenched enemy is most often ruinous even in the event you actually succeed. An assault requires surprise, field preparation (which requires plenty of stealth) or an overwhelming amount of force that's why it's most often considered a stupid strategy.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 00:59:44


Post by: Gert


epronovost wrote:
That's actually a more accurate statement. A full frontal assault on an entrenched enemy is most often ruinous even in the event you actually succeed. An assault requires surprise, field preparation (which requires plenty of stealth) or an overwhelming amount of force that's why it's most often considered a stupid strategy.

Of course, assaulting an entrenched position is going to cause a lot of casualties, it's warfare 101 but I'm not talking about running at a bunker complex with overlapping machine guns and mortars. We're also not talking about your bog-standard Lasman, we're talking about Space Marines who can sustain and dish out significantly more damage than most things they're assaulting and we have the psychological impact a SM assault will have to consider as well. An Astartes commander isn't going to order a dangerous maneuver unless they know they can win or it is absolutely necessary. Charging 30 humans with Lasguns with 10 Astartes isn't a big risk.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 01:11:05


Post by: Jarms48


In novels, Refractor Fields are super rare and not handed out to every PC in the Guard. And as defence, a RF will keep the bearer safe from small arms but heavy weapons with high rate of fire or damage output will overload the shield and shut it down just like Void Shields.


I covered that in an earlier post though. Even if they aren't given to every PC. If they're given to every CC, and above, then there's still likely to be trillions across the galaxy. If they're only give to every RC (regiment commander/colonels), and above, then there's likely to still be billions. Even if we go so far as saying only Guard Generals, and above, there'd likely still be millions across the galaxy.

That's just the ridiculous numbers of the Guard alone. That's not even factoring in organisations like the Commissariat, Militarum Tempestus, Inquisition, etc.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 01:16:11


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:I was under the impression that Primaris marines didnt pass a scout phase. Was I wrong? If not, are new scouts being currently trained in most SM chapters?
In the Ultramarines supplement (or Codex, I don't quite remember), it outlines the lifetime of a Space Marine who is given the Primaris treatment. They go through life as a Scout first, and then take up their first power armoured role in an Eliminator or Infiltrator Squad, if I'm not mistaken? However, as has been outlined regarding squad placement and armour configurations for Primaris Marines, unit designations are very flexible. An Astartes can serve as an Eliminator in one battle, and then shift into Hellblaster in the next, and then Intercessor, and so on. Unit type is far more based on the actual combat scenario than pre-determined roles.

Long story short, yes, Scouts are absolutely still trained, and even in Primaris only Chapters.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 01:51:38


Post by: Curvaceous


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Why use scouts if Vanguards are better equipped and trained then? I get that scouts are marines in training, but wouldn't Vanguard marines effectively change them into acting more like black templar neophytes?
I believe that is it used because they are still getting accustomed to their Black Carapace, and so the full suit of power armour wouldn't work. Scouts are used as neophyte induction, and the reason why they're not used on the front lines like Black Templar neophytes is the same reason why most Chapters don't use the BT system even back before Primaris - because they'd rather induct their recruits as Scouts, away from the immediate front-lines, but still getting that juicy combat experience.


Getting used to implants etc has almost nothing to do with it; the scouts themselves have almost nothing to do with it. The full marines are the reason that neophytes are used as scouts.

Marines do high pressure missions. When they regularly send a Demi-company of fewer than 50 marines against many hundreds enemies, every marine has to be covering every other marine, all the time. A given marine’s main defense is that any enemy that’s a threat is already being shot at and charged by another unit of marines. They also can’t afford to take cover, because if they’re not constantly killing a path through the enemy, the enemy will be able to direct heavy ordnance and huge numbers of troops at them. If a marine isn’t in exactly the right place at exactly the right time shooting exactly the right enemy, then another squad has to slow down and defend itself, and potentially the entire unit gets compromised and fails the mission. It’s not like guard where there are a dozen companies to the left right and in reserve.

So while scouts can be individually capable of taking down any enemy, they haven’t been battle tested and integrated into the system yet. They’re given missions that have low engagement and where it’s possible to fumble the mission a little bit without compromising a whole company or a whole campaign. They can afford the kind of tempo that allows the use of cover. This is also the reason that they’re different than Phobos armored units. The vanguard company might sneak but it’s still doing a full press on a strong target.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 02:27:06


Post by: BrianDavion


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:I was under the impression that Primaris marines didnt pass a scout phase. Was I wrong? If not, are new scouts being currently trained in most SM chapters?
In the Ultramarines supplement (or Codex, I don't quite remember), it outlines the lifetime of a Space Marine who is given the Primaris treatment. They go through life as a Scout first, and then take up their first power armoured role in an Eliminator or Infiltrator Squad, if I'm not mistaken? However, as has been outlined regarding squad placement and armour configurations for Primaris Marines, unit designations are very flexible. An Astartes can serve as an Eliminator in one battle, and then shift into Hellblaster in the next, and then Intercessor, and so on. Unit type is far more based on the actual combat scenario than pre-determined roles.

Long story short, yes, Scouts are absolutely still trained, and even in Primaris only Chapters.


it's coidex 8.5. which from a LORE point of view was one of GW's better codices


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 02:49:40


Post by: Gert


Jarms48 wrote:
I covered that in an earlier post though. Even if they aren't given to every PC. If they're given to every CC, and above, then there's still likely to be trillions across the galaxy. If they're only give to every RC (regiment commander/colonels), and above, then there's likely to still be billions. Even if we go so far as saying only Guard Generals, and above, there'd likely still be millions across the galaxy.

That's just the ridiculous numbers of the Guard alone. That's not even factoring in organisations like the Commissariat, Militarum Tempestus, Inquisition, etc.

You're still conflating game with background far too much.
If you read any novels that feature officers of any rank they rarely if ever have any kind of protection higher than Carapace Armour. In Gaunt's Ghosts I think two people have them, both are Blood Pact and one is second only to the supreme leader of the Pact.
Guard characters sometimes have invuln saves in game because of how weak they are and how bad their armour save is. If CC's didn't have an invuln they'd die to bolt pistols, which while accurate isn't exactly fair.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 03:51:58


Post by: Curvaceous


They wouldn’t die, there’s no way for a bolt pistol to one-shot a human officer even with perfect rolls.

That’s just kind of a foible of the rules though.

Pater Sin wasn’t in the pact but had dozens of officers in his Infardi forces with bulky personal refractor fields.

The illustrations promotinf the 2003 guard codex also gave the typical cadian officer a brass gorget covering a small refractor field generator at his manubrium.

While refractor fields are almost totally absent from all other guard in the background including from senior officers, a chapter has the resources to issue refractor fields to all of its personnel. Compared to the resources for gene seed and the lifetime of chemical therapy it requires, power armor, and thousands of recruits per finished marine, a chapter can easily afford a power sword for all of its marines too.

And the fact that they don’t give them power swords is instructive. The power sword would be actually counter productive. It would be extra weight, obstruction, and maintenance, and when marines are doing their job they never use them. It’s Lanchester’s square law, the marine is supposed to be shooting, not using a sword. For most marines, the sword is a net negative due to the aforementioned weight, obstruction, maintenance, and distraction from their designated tasks. So it must be the same for the refactor field. In some way, refractor fields are net negative to the performance of marines.

There’s no way to know if ten refractor fields next to each other interfere with the marines’ abilities to shoot, or maintain formation, or use equipment like vox, auspex, or transports. Maybe it just makes them over confident. Whatever it is, there is an in-universe reason that refractor fields hurt more than they help.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 06:10:57


Post by: Vatsetis


Thats a very complex way to say that SM dont use refractor fields because of reasons.

Its also imply that all SM formations act under a perfect utilitarian military rationality, which is not the case.

Also if MkX armour is fully modular and costumizable then the inclusion of a refractor field option would be obvious.

In the old days the explanation might just be that refractor fields are not an easily reproduce technology for the IOM... (and that guards officers only afford them rarely through personal contacts)... Now that the IOM has gone through the Cawl industrial revolution its makes little sense.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 07:32:59


Post by: kirotheavenger


So what we learnt today folks is that 40k is inconsistent.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 11:21:45


Post by: Gert


Vatsetis wrote:
Thats a very complex way to say that SM dont use refractor fields because of reasons.

Literally every answer ever given can be boiled down to that. You're not being smart just smarmy.

Its also imply that all SM formations act under a perfect utilitarian military rationality, which is not the case.

No it doesn't.

Also if MkX armour is fully modular and costumizable then the inclusion of a refractor field option would be obvious.

Mk.X is modular in that it can be swapped between Tacticus, Phobos and Gravis fairly easily.

In the old days the explanation might just be that refractor fields are not an easily reproduce technology for the IOM... (and that guards officers only afford them rarely through personal contacts)... Now that the IOM has gone through the Cawl industrial revolution its makes little sense.

I'm not sure you understand what an industrial revolution is. An industrial revolution would be a massive change from largely agricultural and small scale manufacturing (such as blacksmiths or cobblers) into huge scale industrial manufacturing.
If anything the Imperium has had a period of scientific enlightenment but even then I'd argue that finding old tech in STC's and using that doesn't count since the knowledge was already discovered, the Imperium just didn't have the blueprints. This scientific "advancement" only applies to SM as well, the Guard, Mechanicus, Knights and SoB didn't benefit from Cawl's works nor did any civilian sector.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 11:23:50


Post by: BrianDavion


people also make waaaaaaaaay too big a deal over cawl. he advanced some stuff sure but it's hardly the "technological revolution" some people make it out to be


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 11:26:59


Post by: kirotheavenger


How does swapping between the marks of armour work?
Just looking at the models, very little is shared. If they swap out every armour section individually what exactly is the point of this modularity?
This would only be a benefit if there was significant overlap between armour components, which visually just isn't the case.

It's also worth pointing out that there isn't one singular industrial revolution. At least when you get deeper into academia.
I think we're on like the 4th or 5th industrial era now? Each revolution is taken as a huge step up. So the steam engine was the first, but digital robots was another, for example.
So I can agree with the notion that Cawl has revolutionised the Imperium's technology. Almost literally overnight.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 12:18:32


Post by: Gert


 kirotheavenger wrote:
How does swapping between the marks of armour work?
Just looking at the models, very little is shared. If they swap out every armour section individually what exactly is the point of this modularity?
This would only be a benefit if there was significant overlap between armour components, which visually just isn't the case.

There is quite a lot of overlap in design especially in the chest, backpack, legs and to a degree the arms. The idea is that Mk.X is the base (which you wouldn't go into combat wearing) then you add specific combat enhancements to make it Tacticus (all-rounder standard loadout), Phobos (sneakier with specialised gear) or Gravis (heavy armour and firepower). At least that's my interpretation.

It's also worth pointing out that there isn't one singular industrial revolution. At least when you get deeper into academia.
I think we're on like the 4th or 5th industrial era now? Each revolution is taken as a huge step up. So the steam engine was the first, but digital robots was another, for example.
So I can agree with the notion that Cawl has revolutionised the Imperium's technology. Almost literally overnight.

There's been three (steam, mass production and age of science, and digital tech) and Cawl's advancements aren't as massive in the technological area as they seem either.
Anti-grav tech already existed and was used on tanks, these tanks were just restricted to the Cutsodes for "reasons".
A Bolt Rifle is just better Boltgun which itself has been tinkered with and seen multiple variations over its lifetime (Godwyn, Angelus, Artifex, Umbra).
Again, Cawl's new things aren't as much a deviation from previous designs it just seems worse because of the "new thing bad, old thing good" attitude many within the hobby have. The Imperium isn't as bad at innovation as it's made out to be either otherwise SM would still be wearing Crusade armour, using Umbra Boltguns and riding around in Deimos pattern vehicles. You just need to look at the variants of Lasgun to know that innovation isn't dead.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 12:37:08


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Technological development isn’t entirely stagnant in 40K. Just incredibly slow.

Even a complete STC needs to be tested and sanctified. My theory for that fastidiousness is the Ad Mech knowing Abominbal Intelligence is Bad - but not really knowing where a clever programme starts crossing that line.

The Men of Iron almost certainly stemmed from STC stuff. But was it a single iteration/upgrade, or the early Men of Iron designing and building their successors.

So every recovered design has to be probed, proven, measured and tested. Typically by a single Forgeworld as well, as they don’t like to share.

Cawl however has existed for over 10,000 years. And for most of that, he’s been beavering away on Guilliman’s orders.

So all those fabulous new toys? There’s nothing to suggest they’re Heretek in nature, because Cawl has had the time and the authority to research and test the STC templates involved.

Sure, anti-Grav is rare. But so are the Primaris Tanks. And he’s again had 10,000 years to gather the resources, build and stockpile the finished products.

Give any Tech-Priest a similar timescale, and they too could stockpile jet bikes, Land Speeders and so on.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 12:38:18


Post by: kirotheavenger


I do agree with you to a point. Afterall the landspeeder was a common sight for Space Marines before Cawl, I have no problem with the grav tech.

But stuff like the bolter and particularly the geneseed in general is huge. Although I think GW has backed off the whole test tube thing though?

I actually think Cawl's advances have been greater in non-militaristic contexts.
For example, he has developed the ability to terraform worlds from Tyranid-stripped rock to almost a garden world in a few years.
As comparison, the Dark Age of Technology mankind took 5000 to terraform Taros from a totally inhospitable desert to a mostly inhospitable desert.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 12:48:13


Post by: Gert


 kirotheavenger wrote:
But stuff like the bolter and particularly the geneseed in general is huge. Although I think GW has backed off the whole test tube thing though?

The Bolt Rifle is just a more powerful Boltgun, hardly a quantum leap.
By test-tube I assume you're meaning the cryo-pods the first batches of Primaris were kept in? Also, the whole purified gene-seed thing was dropped by the time the first "mutant" Codex arrived and the Primaris BA suffered the Black Rage and Red Thirst (I think it was even mentioned that it manifested stronger due to the gene-seed being purer).

I actually think Cawl's advances have been greater in non-militaristic contexts.
For example, he has developed the ability to terraform worlds from Tyranid-stripped rock to almost a garden world in a few years.
As comparison, the Dark Age of Technology mankind took 5000 to terraform Taros from a totally inhospitable desert to a mostly inhospitable desert.

When did this happen?


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 12:53:36


Post by: kirotheavenger


The first Primaris were definitely grown in tubes and emerged fully formed.

The planet he terraformed was in some novel, involved a chapter with a name like silver dragons or something? The details are hazy as I didn't care to remember those.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 12:53:38


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


I thought his De-Nidification thing was mostly theoretical? Will need to re-read Cawl.

The Geneseed thing I’ve waffled on about before, specifically that Astartes were originally a bodge job, a rough and ready salvaging of the Primarch programme post abduction. Rather than being The Emperor’s finest work, they were “oh sod it, good enough and I’m out of time”.

Given He has a long and storied history of refining his gene science, it seems perfectly credible that without the Heresy occurring, he’d have revisited the Astartes programme once he’d sorted the web way access.

I assume Cawl was working from the same blueprints, trying to get the process as close as possible to The Emperor’s original intent. Certainly he has unique knowledge and insight.

The improve Bolt Rifle is again likely a matter of “what could’ve been originally had their not been a war on”, with the original Boltgun again being a “it’ll have to do” settling over more complex alternatives.

With Cawl not needing to dispatch any of his creations to war whilst he awaited Guilliman’s return, he could indulge in the creation of more complex weapons.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 13:04:34


Post by: Gert


 kirotheavenger wrote:
The first Primaris were definitely grown in tubes and emerged fully formed.

The first Primaris might have been Martian children who are pod people but the actual Primaris had the normal surgery then got put in suspended animation/cryo sleep. Many others of the first wave were full Firstborn recruited just after the Heresy who were then turned into Primaris and put into cryo.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 13:15:31


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:Thats a very complex way to say that SM dont use refractor fields because of reasons.
Congratulations, you described every plot element in 40k!

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Technological development isn’t entirely stagnant in 40K. Just incredibly slow...
So all those fabulous new toys? There’s nothing to suggest they’re Heretek in nature, because Cawl has had the time and the authority to research and test the STC templates involved.

Sure, anti-Grav is rare. But so are the Primaris Tanks. And he’s again had 10,000 years to gather the resources, build and stockpile the finished products.

Give any Tech-Priest a similar timescale, and they too could stockpile jet bikes, Land Speeders and so on.
Absolutely. I think a lot of people are mistaking Cawl's hasty introduction in the lore (which I'll fully agree was very rapid) with him literally only just inventing the Primaris on a whim. That's not how we're told it happened.

kirotheavenger wrote:The first Primaris were definitely grown in tubes and emerged fully formed.
No, they weren't. The "test tubes" that we see in that one animation are cryo-pods, housing Astartes recruits gathered from across the Imperium dating back as far as the Heresy. They weren't cloned, they weren't vat-grown. They are normal Astartes recruits, just trained via hypno-induction and implanted memories (which is why they were incredibly tactically inflexible and could only perform the roles they had been assigned to do during the early Indomitus Crusade).


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 13:22:08


Post by: kirotheavenger


I'm pretty sure they mentioned sending the cloning tech to random chapters they couldn't be bothered to have Girlyman visit in person?


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 13:28:31


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


 kirotheavenger wrote:
I'm pretty sure they mentioned sending the cloning tech to random chapters they couldn't be bothered to have Girlyman visit in person?
Not cloning tech - they gave away the tech required to make Primaris Marines.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 13:36:35


Post by: Gert


 kirotheavenger wrote:
I'm pretty sure they mentioned sending the cloning tech to random chapters they couldn't be bothered to have Girlyman visit in person?

It's not cloning tech. Kiro, have you actually read any background pertaining to Primaris or do you just get your info from second hand sources and memes?


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 13:52:44


Post by: kirotheavenger


I read the WarCom articles at the time, although what I know of the actual novels is mostly second hand.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 14:02:56


Post by: Iracundus


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I thought his De-Nidification thing was mostly theoretical? Will need to re-read Cawl.


He gave an outline of the plan to the Scythes and it started at the end of the novel, though it is never stated whether it actually went through to completion. From what I recall there was a one line hint that Cawl went off elsewhere after the novel and it is implied he did not personally see the plan through to completion (possibly implying that it only progressed partway).

The actual plan is actually not that far fetched from what we know of science today, just it is of a scale and magnitude that we cannot actually enact it. Basically Cawl was saying that though the Tyranids had stripped the surface layers from the world, the remaining bulk of the planet had enormous reserves of gases and water within it (something we know holds true for Earth today as well). He had already generated a very thin atmosphere in the course of the novel over a very specific small area at Cawl's initial landing site, by processing and outgassing this stored gas from the rocks. His idea was to do this at a larger scale, to restore an atmosphere and get it to a pressure where water would remain liquid, and then use icy asteroids or comets from the system to help restore the oceans and set up the hydrological cycle again. That was to be followed by re-seeding of plant life from Cawl's bio-bank of stored genetic material and samples.

It's basically terraforming the world all over again. Cawl admitted doing so to Sotha was not efficient, when it might be easier to find other habitable worlds, but he seems to have seen the task as a challenge, not just to do but to do it so quickly.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 14:52:55


Post by: Vatsetis


 Gert wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:
Thats a very complex way to say that SM dont use refractor fields because of reasons.

Literally every answer ever given can be boiled down to that. You're not being smart just smarmy.

Its also imply that all SM formations act under a perfect utilitarian military rationality, which is not the case.

No it doesn't.

Also if MkX armour is fully modular and costumizable then the inclusion of a refractor field option would be obvious.

Mk.X is modular in that it can be swapped between Tacticus, Phobos and Gravis fairly easily.

In the old days the explanation might just be that refractor fields are not an easily reproduce technology for the IOM... (and that guards officers only afford them rarely through personal contacts)... Now that the IOM has gone through the Cawl industrial revolution its makes little sense.

I'm not sure you understand what an industrial revolution is. An industrial revolution would be a massive change from largely agricultural and small scale manufacturing (such as blacksmiths or cobblers) into huge scale industrial manufacturing.
If anything the Imperium has had a period of scientific enlightenment but even then I'd argue that finding old tech in STC's and using that doesn't count since the knowledge was already discovered, the Imperium just didn't have the blueprints. This scientific "advancement" only applies to SM as well, the Guard, Mechanicus, Knights and SoB didn't benefit from Cawl's works nor did any civilian sector.


Gert, I perfectly understand the meaning of an industrial revolution and was ussing it in an ironic manner.

Framing other posters word in such a manner as you do (IE butchering the words so they lost sense) just because you want a dialectic fight is sort of rude. If you find my POV annoying you are free to ignore my posts.

Since the thread continues, somebody described marines as man sized tanks that can support bigger tanks... This would be accurate but unfortunatly the ground pressure of a Marine is similar to street bike (IE much higher than a proper tank) , which means it is very limited as to which terrain it can traverse safely at speed.

GW made the aesthetic option of turning SM into giants to make them more anatomically proportioned, unfortunatly that makes them impractically oversized in universe.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 15:00:50


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:Since the thread continues, somebody described marines as man sized tanks that can support bigger tanks... This would be accurate but unfortunatly the ground pressure of a Marine is similar to street bike (IE much higher than a proper tank) , which means it is very limited as to which terrain it can traverse safely at speed.

GW made the aesthetic option of turning SM into giants to make them more anatomically proportioned, unfortunatly that makes them impractically oversized in universe.
The same applies to literally every large creature in 40k, any sort of walker, and honestly, just most things in the setting.

If everything is "impractically oversized", perhaps the mechanics of that universe don't regard it as impractical in the first place, and rule of cool is more important than "but it wouldn't work in our world"?


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 15:22:20


Post by: Gert


Vatsetis wrote:
Gert, I perfectly understand the meaning of an industrial revolution and was ussing it in an ironic manner.

You understand text alone has no tone right? I'm basing my replies entirely on previous experience in discussion with you which has been combative and misrepresentative consistently.

Framing other posters word in such a manner as you do (IE butchering the words so they lost sense) just because you want a dialectic fight is sort of rude. If you find my POV annoying you are free to ignore my posts.

If you feel like I am breaking Rule 1 then report it to the mods. I'm not having a "dialect fight" because I have no idea what tone you are using and as I said above, am basing my replies on previous experience.

GW made the aesthetic option of turning SM into giants to make them more anatomically proportioned, unfortunatly that makes them impractically oversized in universe.

Only if everything else in said universe was explicitly proportioned to a baseline human perfectly, which it isn't especially within the Imperium due to its design aesthetics.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 15:24:57


Post by: Vatsetis


Not every thing in the setting is oversized like the marines... Regular size humans are 99% of the IOM population, Taus or Eldars have mostly reasonably sized designs.

SM have a comedic size and weight not only for the real world but also in universe... Please just compare them with the SOB design.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 15:33:22


Post by: Gert


And this impacts on the Imperium having huge fancy buildings with huge fancy doors how exactly? An Astartes isn't going to sit around in a Militarum billet so a barracks having baseline human-scaled doors isn't an issue and even if the Astartes did need to go into those barracks, they can just go through the door with difficulty.
But again this is going to be so rare that it's not an issue.
On top of that, how do we know what T'au or Aeldari building scales are? They aren't mentioned in detail in any novel/Codex I've read. Surely the T'au would take steps to ensure their buildings are suitable for the many other Xenos races that have joined the Empire so the doors wouldn't necessarily be scaled to a Fire Warrior. What about Battlesuits? Don't they need to be present at briefings or to protect high-ranking officials?


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 15:35:35


Post by: Vatsetis


I have no idea what you are talking about.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 15:39:50


Post by: Gert


Vatsetis wrote:
I have no idea what you are talking about.

You complained that SM are too big and wouldn't be able to fit in most buildings. Here's you saying it:
But I can also appreciate the absurdity of a setting where Space Marines are so big and heavy that they wouldnt be able to use a regular size human stairway or a lift and therefore would need to blow away half of the building just to arrive to the upper levels... Which makes them tactically dumb in many situations despite being the poster boy super soldiers.

I'm arguing against your point and providing evidence to support mine.
If you're talking about size and weight in regards to movement through certain types of terrain then that's different and then we're discussing very specific instances of terrain that a SM would perform badly in which is a waste of time.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 16:27:13


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:Not every thing in the setting is oversized like the marines... Regular size humans are 99% of the IOM population, Taus or Eldars have mostly reasonably sized designs.
The Imperium? Reasonable designs?

Weren't you just saying in another thread how the Imperium is supposed to be all big and exaggerated, as some kind of "satire"?

Also, Eldar - taller than humans, nearly Space Marine in height, with all their Wraith constructs, and known for their grandiose architecture to show their superiority and magnificence compared to the "inferior" races of the galaxy? I don't believe that Space Marines would have any issue moving through there (and in the cases we *do* see of Space Marines and other factions boarding Craftworlds, they are never shown as having difficulties traversing).

Tau - the faction known for having auxiliary forces like Kroot who come near Astartes height, and Battlesuits which well dwarf them? Any major Tau military structure would likely have access for Battlesuits. Unless you're talking about Tau civilian structures, which will hardly be built for combat, and so a Space Marine can likely make their own doorways inside.

SM have a comedic size and weight not only for the real world but also in universe...
Sorry, but you can't claim that it's "comedic in-universe" when we never see Astartes weight or size being a problem.

If you're going to make an appeal to how something doesn't make sense with internal logic, it would help to know the setting you're talking about.
Please just compare them with the SOB design.
You mean the way-too-thin armour designs, that only stand up to scrutiny because Rule of Cool?


There is not a single flawless or logically designed 40k faction, because 40k is not a logical setting at it's core. Making this big fuss about how Space Marines are, by their nature, illogical is missing the forest for the trees, and is even more egregious when you claim how Space Marines are incapable of things that we literally see them do.

What next, "psychic powers are just propaganda because that's unrealistic"?


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 17:34:35


Post by: Vatsetis


Men really, stop it.

Try to understand what your fellow posters are trying to state before answering in such a polemistic manner.

You cannot argue against the fact that SM are oversized in regards to regular humans becouse that is how they are depicted. The art also tend to show open spaces and architecture because is epic looking and if SM were portrayed interacting with human size buildings they would look comedic.

But if you think about it there is no reason why most of the galaxy human settlement need to be adapted to Astartes oversized and overweight, after all they are but a drop of water in a galaxy of trillions upun trillions of humans. Thats why in practical terms SM design is quite moroonic.

Physic powers are somwthing explain in lore. But the 40k galaxy is ment to follow real life natural laws (unless otherwise stated).

I understand that fanboys react violently to anyone pointing out the contradictions of rheir beloved myths... You can simply argue that you "believe because it absurd" or otherwise ignore my remarks, but dont try to enter into pseudological arguments that only reibforce the simple fact that under 1G abd nearby gravity conditions the oversize and overweight of SM design would be a liability in many instances.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 17:51:08


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:Men really, stop it.
That's not necessary, is it?

Try to understand what your fellow posters are trying to state before answering in such a polemistic manner.
I know what you're saying. The thing is, what you're saying simply is either redundant (yes, we all know that Space Marines are ridiculous from a real life perspective, as is everything else in 40k), or simply wrong (that Space Marines are ineffective within 40k).

Am I mistaken?

You cannot argue against the fact that SM are oversized in regards to regular humans becouse that is how they are depicted. The art also tend to show open spaces and architecture because is epic looking and if SM were portrayed interacting with human size buildings they would look comedic.
But what "human" sized buildings? We aren't shown any, because the setting makes it pretty clear that the Imperium doesn't exactly *do* "human" sized like we do. Sure, civilian quarters might be small, but we've never seen Space Marines struggle with that.

They might be large compared to humans, but Imperial architecture is large and oversized compared to humans too. You can't cite lore in one place and ignore it in another.

But if you think about it there is no reason why most of the galaxy human settlement need to be adapted to Astartes oversized and overweight, after all they are but a drop of water in a galaxy of trillions upun trillions of humans. Thats why in practical terms SM design is quite moroonic.
As you said yourself the Imperium isn't rational, it isn't logical, and it's entirely absurd. In real life terms, SM design is moronic - but practically, within the 40k universe, it isn't.

So, I ask again - are you claiming that Space Marines are stupid IRL (which we all know), or are they stupid in 40k's own internal logic?

Physic powers are somwthing explain in lore. But the 40k galaxy is ment to follow real life natural laws (unless otherwise stated).
Space Marines being superb combatants and not getting stuck in doorways is explained in lore. You just like ignoring that.

You can claim all you like that Space Marines would get stuck in doors, but that simply doesn't happen in the setting.

I understand that fanboys react violently to anyone pointing out the contradictions of rheir beloved myths...
As, the good old "I'm not wrong, you're just a fanboy" argument. It's never been a good one, you know.
You can simply argue that you "believe because it absurd" or otherwise ignore my remarks, but dont try to enter into pseudological arguments that only reibforce the simple fact that under 1G abd nearby gravity conditions the oversize and overweight of SM design would be a liability in many instances.
All I can tell you is that none of the issues you describe occur in 40k. How would you go about explaining that?

And as you so kindly mentioned gravity, need I remind you that nearly any walker in 40k would struggle with their own centres of gravity being so high, that most tanks in 40k would have pathetic ground clearance and traversal abilities, and generally, most things in 40k would be a liability or outright non-functional in most real life instances.
But here's a little secret I'll clue you in on - 40k isn't real life.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 18:07:05


Post by: Halfton


Andre the Giant was around 224 cm tall and weighed about 236kg.

He lived and worked, largely in discomfort in 1960s - 1990s France and US.

The average height of a French male is 177cm - 180cm. as of 2019 which would probably be a little taller than 1960 but not sure.

Space Marines can fit through doors and walk up stairs in the 41st millennium.
And probably should have Refractor Fields


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 18:10:39


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


On Imperial Architecture.

It’s….grandiose, to sum it up in a word. Like Gothic Churches, their sheer scale and extravagance is a statement. A way to easily cow the masses and show the power of the institution that built them.

And it always has been. None of it is designed for average human height. It’s architectural bombast.

Tau and Eldar etc? Yeah, you kinda need to design any building in 40K with defence in mind. That means Battlesuits and Wraith Constructs - not to mention any civilian vehicles.

End result? No problems for Astartes in terms of head height.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 18:19:13


Post by: Vatsetis


The Galaxy and the Empire are diverse there are many savage, dead, feudal worlds... Many human worlds outside the Empire... Many places were oversized and overweight marines will be hampered.

The lore is marine centric it obviously isnt going to portray the poster boys unable tobdo their superhuman feats because of naive things such as a narrow stairway or some heavy rain turning soft ground into mud.

If you dont take bolter porn at face value and take a small step sideways you can see things under a different light.

Andrew the Giant didnt work as a SWAT and wasnt fix into a broad and solud 140cm armor.



Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 18:41:23


Post by: Halfton


Its weird that this keeps coming back to SWAT since that's not really what space marines are closest too, but if the statement is SMs are not the ideal military infantry to send into every single conceivable scenario then I agree,

Militaries have always employed specialized troop or equipment. Doesn't make them totally unreasonable as a concept.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 18:44:11


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:The Galaxy and the Empire are diverse there are many savage, dead, feudal worlds... Many human worlds outside the Empire... Many places were oversized and overweight marines will be hampered.
Tell me, why are Space Marines being deployed to savage and feudal worlds? Suppressing insurrections? Guardsmen can handle those sorts of low-tech environments. And, if it *was* necessary to deploy Astartes, I'd pretty sure that the housing of savage and feudal worlders would be no match for an Astartes barging through your wall.

The lore is marine centric it obviously isnt going to portray the poster boys unable tobdo their superhuman feats because of naive things such as a narrow stairway or some heavy rain turning soft ground into mud.
So now we're going full on "the lore only portrays Marines as capable because it's biased!!" Like, at this point, you're outright just saying "the lore is wrong" - and don't get me wrong, that's fine, if it serves a purpose. What purpose does whatever you're doing have?

At what point do you just accept that Space Marines *can* do the things they'd described as doing?

If you dont take bolter porn at face value and take a small step sideways you can see things under a different light.
Sure - and what about the pulse rifle porn, and the shuriken cannon porn, and the giant lumbering knight titan porn?

You seem to be under this illusion that we don't all agree that the lore is unrealistic and stupid. We're all in agreement on that. The difference is that the rest of us are *fine* with the lore being illogical and taken with a suspension of disbelief in favour of player enjoyment, and you instead prefer to keep saying how illogical it all is, while ignoring that the setting itself is illogical.

Andrew the Giant didnt work as a SWAT and wasnt fix into a broad and solud 140cm armor.
And Space Marines don't exist in the real world.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 20:03:40


Post by: Vatsetis


Suspension of desbelief should have a limit... Or else we end in the "a wizard did it" department.

Im not putting forward a convoluted scenario... Space Marines are fail miserably as an infantry concept because they are so oversized and overweight that they cannot deploy effectively in a standard human world or instalation.

You can assume that Marines have some sort of (unexplained) antigrav equipment in their armour to compensate for the huge weight and ground pressure... But they are so high and so wide and so rigid that they will very limited on any dense terrain.

Pretending that the whole 40k galaxy is build to allow the SM to manouvre with ease is like stating "I believe because its absurd".

Perhaps thats true and thats the main issue why the IOM is full of rebellions... Citizens are feed up of living in a world design for SM oversized bodies were even going to the toilet is an adventure.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 20:15:00


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Again, the standard human planet is filled with the Imperium’s trademark gothic grandeur. Soaring columns, massive doors and so on and so forth.

As for Astartes being rigid? Sorry chap. Power Armour, combined with the Black Carapace is specifically said to be almost entirely unencumbering to its wearer. They can move as if they were wearing nothing at all.



Given the strength enhancement of their post-human biology, added to that granted by Power Armour? Mud is not going to slow them down.

As for the citizens? Rebellions happen because life is ugly, brutal and short.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 20:22:14


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:Suspension of desbelief should have a limit... Or else we end in the "a wizard did it" department.
So, psychic powers, the literal instance of "a wizard did it" aren''t canon?

Why are psychic powers easier for you to believe than "Space Marines are functional and effective within all the other horrendously impractical and unrealistic features of the 41st millenium"?

Im not putting forward a convoluted scenario... Space Marines are fail miserably as an infantry concept because they are so oversized and overweight that they cannot deploy effectively in a standard human world or instalation.
Evidently, this is untrue in 40k.

Space Marines are shown to deploy not just effectively, but powerfully, in suppressing human rebellions and combat environs. Sorry, but that's simply just what we are shown. Do you want to change that material?

You can assume that Marines have some sort of (unexplained) antigrav equipment in their armour to compensate for the huge weight and ground pressure... But they are so high and so wide and so rigid that they will very limited on any dense terrain.
The same could be said for most walkers of any faction, and many tanks, especially Imperial Guard ones, are horrendously impractical from a traversing perspective.

Welcome to 40k.

Pretending that the whole 40k galaxy is build to allow the SM to manouvre with ease is like stating "I believe because its absurd".
I mean, yes - because the 40k universe *is* absurd, and unrealistic, and oversized, and illogical.

We you not just claiming that 40k was supposed to be "satire"?


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 20:34:33


Post by: Vatsetis


... But the breaking point for rebellion is not being able to go to the toilet with confort.

Thinks are not so complicated, yes 40K is full of over the top absurdities... But GW dont need to double down on the dumbest elements of the setting.

For example the Leman Russ turret is impractical and cartoony... There is no point in pretending that "in universe it works because its all fantasy and magic science"... Its a bad design decision. Next time they work on that model give it a more sensible turret like the SOB castigator. Easy.

Space Marines getting bigger and bigger in fluff and modelwise can be cool and apealing for some... But is reaching a point were is starting to get weird (just try to show that with my posts). No need to double down on the bigger is better trope.

Also the multiplication of weapon systems in general and in SM vehicules in particular is also reaching the point of stupidity... This of course is just MHO.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:

We you not just claiming that 40k was supposed to be "satire"?


Well from my POV the fact that a super strong, super durable, super fast, super tech, super inteligent, etc... Space Marine is unable to achieve its mission because it is unable to traverse a narrow staircase is the climax of satire.






Automatically Appended Next Post:
I might seem a little intense on this topic (I like to debate obviously) and sometime ago I might think otherwise but the inflexion point for me was viewing side by side a big scale Mcfarlane model from an Intercessor and a Sister of Battle, the latter look awesome while the Marine looked comically out of scale and weird compared with the SOB.

Also, apart from 40K I play infinity... And that gives an alternative perspective towards the design of futuristic armor. And infinity is also filled with cheesy and absurd concepts like 40K..


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 21:50:33


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:Thinks are not so complicated, yes 40K is full of over the top absurdities... But GW dont need to double down on the dumbest elements of the setting.
But... why?

Have you perhaps considered that 40k doesn't need to be practical and sensible? After all, isn't that why many people love the setting?

For example the Leman Russ turret is impractical and cartoony... There is no point in pretending that "in universe it works because its all fantasy and magic science"... Its a bad design decision. Next time they work on that model give it a more sensible turret like the SOB castigator. Easy.
Why is there no point in pretending it does? What is the alternative? That right now, Leman Russ tanks just don't exist, because their design is nonsensical? Am I right in assuming that they just... don't exist?

As for sensible - I'd like to see how a chainsword is at any point a sensible weapon.

Space Marines getting bigger and bigger in fluff and modelwise can be cool and apealing for some... But is reaching a point were is starting to get weird (just try to show that with my posts). No need to double down on the bigger is better trope.
But that's not what you were talking about. You're saying that *any* Space Marine is impractical, not just Primaris.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Were you not just claiming that 40k was supposed to be "satire"?

Well from my POV the fact that a super strong, super durable, super fast, super tech, super inteligent, etc... Space Marine is unable to achieve its mission because it is unable to traverse a narrow staircase is the climax of satire.
... that's not how satire works, because the lore clearly shows that Space Marines *are* able to achieve their missions.

Satire would be Space Marines being all of those things, clearly being ineffective within the setting, and still touted as being effective. That is not what we are shown, ergo, it is not satirical.


I might seem a little intense on this topic (I like to debate obviously) and sometime ago I might think otherwise but the inflexion point for me was viewing side by side a big scale Mcfarlane model from an Intercessor and a Sister of Battle, the latter look awesome while the Marine looked comically out of scale and weird compared with the SOB.
That's because Space Marines *are* weird. They're genetically engineered freaks, not "ideal humans". I actually prefer them being somewhat warped and inhuman.

Also, apart from 40K I play infinity... And that gives an alternative perspective towards the design of futuristic armor. And infinity is also filled with cheesy and absurd concepts like 40K..
And Infinity is a very different setting to 40k, in the same way that Halo and Star Trek are very different settings to 40k.

The whole point of this is to show that it is inappropriate to use metrics of "rationality" and "logic" in a setting that happily eschews both in favour of wacky, rule of cool shenanigans. Who cares if Space Marines are impractical when everything else in the setting is equally ridiculous?


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 22:01:23


Post by: jeff white


Because this sort of tech was and should be rare for humie scum. Ancient terminator armor and relic or artisan armor might still be operational but… at least until the great Mary Sue-ification with the heretic Cawl and Prince Girlyman, the empire of humankind was living on the remnants of a past before a fracture and a fall.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/04 22:30:58


Post by: BrianDavion


 jeff white wrote:
Because this sort of tech was and should be rare for humie scum. Ancient terminator armor and relic or artisan armor might still be operational but… at least until the great Mary Sue-ification with the heretic Cawl and Prince Girlyman, the empire of humankind was living on the remnants of a past before a fracture and a fall.


yet they managed to give one to every Imperial guardsman at the rank of captain and above?

yeaaaaah maybe rein in your psychalogical hatred of primaris marines and understand what's being asked


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/05 00:34:20


Post by: Insectum7


BrianDavion wrote:
 jeff white wrote:
Because this sort of tech was and should be rare for humie scum. Ancient terminator armor and relic or artisan armor might still be operational but… at least until the great Mary Sue-ification with the heretic Cawl and Prince Girlyman, the empire of humankind was living on the remnants of a past before a fracture and a fall.


yet they managed to give one to every Imperial guardsman at the rank of captain and above?

yeaaaaah maybe rein in your psychalogical hatred of primaris marines and understand what's being asked
As implied by the post, protective fields being handed to every platoon commander was not always the case.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/05 00:59:40


Post by: Gert


So for like the third time in this thread, stop conflating game with background. Guard HQ's need the RF so they can survive more than one turn and be useful. They're the cheapest and I believe weakest HQ's in the game and need to have something to keep them alive.
Can anyone actually find me multiple examples of any rank of officer that has a RF in the background? None of the Ghosts officers have RF nor do any of the officers mentioned in the entirety of the Ghosts series. The second Dawn of Fire novel has a regiment of Mordians where none of the officers have a RF. Helsreach features many officers, none of which have a RF.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/05 01:41:28


Post by: Jarms48


 Gert wrote:
So for like the third time in this thread, stop conflating game with background. Guard HQ's need the RF so they can survive more than one turn and be useful. They're the cheapest and I believe weakest HQ's in the game and need to have something to keep them alive.
Can anyone actually find me multiple examples of any rank of officer that has a RF in the background? None of the Ghosts officers have RF nor do any of the officers mentioned in the entirety of the Ghosts series. The second Dawn of Fire novel has a regiment of Mordians where none of the officers have a RF. Helsreach features many officers, none of which have a RF.


Whilst that might be true, even if you go to the highest levels of the chain of command there's still millions of Major Generals, Lieutenant Generals, Generals, Field Marshals, etc. Are you telling me that even the most prestigious, upper echelons of the Imperial Guard don't have refractor fields?

What about army group level commissars? Sure maybe a company level, or regiment level commissar might lack one but the highest level?

Obliviously there is some level that has them, otherwise they wouldn't be represented in-game. GW would have given them carapace armour instead.

The point being, irrespective of what level does have them, there's bound to be many millions of them existing across the universe.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/05 02:14:45


Post by: Insectum7


 Gert wrote:
So for like the third time in this thread, stop conflating game with background. Guard HQ's need the RF so they can survive more than one turn and be useful. They're the cheapest and I believe weakest HQ's in the game and need to have something to keep them alive.
They could have achieved that in other ways, like a bodyguard mechanic. Or they could have done like in past editions and just let them die. The amount of apparently readily avilable force fields it implies is weird.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/05 02:30:06


Post by: epronovost


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Given the strength enhancement of their post-human biology, added to that granted by Power Armour? Mud is not going to slow them down.


And that's why mud cannot stop or slow down tanks... oh wait that's completely wrong d'ho!


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/05 07:30:54


Post by: Vatsetis


I suppose that some people really believe their frozen nuggets are "100% free-range chicken" because thats what it says on the front picture and never take a minute to look at the nutritional information at the back of the package... after all "ignorance is hapiness" is a very appropiate motto for the 40K setting.

Space Marines having to deal with the liability of their huge size is not a party pooper obsesion... it is an interesting part of the setting. For instance in the game Space Hulk (4th edition released in 2014) the Terminators enjoy a huge advantage in firepower and protection but are hampered by their overweight and oversize and therefore they are unable to quickly trasverse or react in the narrow corridors of the space hulk, giving the much more nimble Genestealers the home field advantaje... game wise this creates a masterfull asymetric game full of tactical challenges... story wise it creates a sense of dread and desperation in which even the "best of the best" that humanity have to offer are pitched in a hopeless battle against and uncaring universe.

But apparently nowadays Nu-marines can combine the strenght of Hulk and the stealth of Batman with absolutely no drawbacks... its boring and childish.


Why Don’t Marines Have Refractor Fields Built Into Their Armour? @ 2021/08/05 10:38:00


Post by: Insectum7


Well you'll get no argiment from me that Primaris are dumb.