Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Eclno wrote:

Brother Coa wrote:Why am I even trying......

What this thread should have said is "100 of some army from 40k against us because that is what it will turn in to in the end."

From what I have read in this thread is two things , "USA USA USA" and "SPEHSS MAHREENS!"

So true... . That was in fact my little experiment, to see hiw long it will take users to get completally off topic.

As for 100 vs 100 I say that we would lose in terms of;

Armor vs Armor - fast skimmers with a railgun, A RAILGUN. An M1A1 would be dead before it could get it's main gun pointed at a Hammerhead.

Air Support - Manta anyone? (It does have shield read IA3 I think)

Air to Air - stealth drones and Barracudas would do a fair bit of damage to us.

Troops - FW are not push overs when it comes to a fight. Many have seen REAL combat (Orks, IoM, Eldar?), as well as have advance tech that out classes ours by how many years? As for the fight it depends on the location, the Commander may fight using Mont'ka (Killing Blow). Plan the attack then strike swiftly when the opportunity show (like our forces). Or he may fight using Kauyon (Patient Hunter), which is to lure the enemy into a trap. (I have my codex beside me)

Well thats my 2 cents

I concur, however we may be able to break down Manta. Maybe it has shields but it doesn't have numbers. After enough attacks shields would fail and pretty soon the Manta itself.
As for troops, we would certainly lose in this scenario - but mabe win in the long run since Tau are pitiful in Partizan warfare.

StormRaven wrote:Hate to point this out but technologically inferior foes have stopped world powers before. Tau might have tech but they really don't seem to have a lot of different strategy's. What would happen if none of there advanced tech worked due to an EMP burst, something we use now to disrupt our enemy's.

Yeah, because 100 random soldiers carry around man-portable nukes to set off EMPs all the time...


If we get to use stuff like that, the Tau destroy us from orbit. And there's nothing we can do to stop them, unless we get that LHC black hole to work.

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:Tau battlesuits are basically just large, low-tech suits of power armor, so anti-materiel against power armor is still relevant.

You mean stronger, flight-equipped, equally armoured, shield-generator toting, muliple heavy-weapon armed, hugely upgradeable suits of power armour?

Shadowsword8 wrote:

master of ordinance wrote:Actually are equitment isnt all that bad.
I reall shouldnt mention this but i can build a rail pistol out of a camera and a car battery-rail tech is actualy quite easy and if it came to it then they do have atleast 2 railgun tank prototypes in Britain. we have rail tech already their just scared to use it...
and i am also think you should know about that new SAS armour-they emptied 10 .50 round from a sniper into the same spot on it and it was undamaged...(this was leaked a while back)

And we get into the usual issues of immature technology. To get an effective rail weapon, we need lots of power, so big batteries. Which weight a ton. I heard of one US destroyer, with one of it's turrets replaced by a 8 Megajoules mass driver prototype, which make it a workable weapon. BUT, the thing need so much power that it couldn't be installed in anything smalller than a warship.

An infantry railgun? It would certainly require more batteries that an human can carry on his back, or it wouldn't be more advantageous than a gunpowder weapon due to lack of power.

finaly if i can ever get hold of the equitment i am quite capable of building a form of power/termie armour aswellas dreadknight equilvalents.

Without your powered armor being leashed with a power cable to an (big) external energy source, or without it being so slow and clumsy it would be a big, fat target and nearly useless? Sorry, not gonna happen anytime soon.

We do have the tech to make rail canons and powered armor. But it's not nearly refined enough to be more than prototypes and concept models for the moment.

Yes-and thats U.S. tech for you. but i have spoken with people whom have been priveliged to see these in action on the test range.
and remember this-the rail pistol fires a shot smaller than a pea...

and as for the power/termie armour stuff its quite easy once you have the stuff-a sheilded and armoured nuke generator on the back and some basic hydrolics and a more advanced form of power steering.
the dread knight-hydrolics and electro sensor suits-more like a titan knight really.

Interesting thread, but it has gotten a little off topic.

100 modern infantry vs 100 Tau Fire Warrirors... Fire Warriors win hands down

The basic FW weapon outranges assault rifles (40k range is abstract and normal small arms range is 24"), would do a LOT more damage (S5 vs S3) and would ignore modern body armor (which would not be better than 5+). The FW lack a long ranged suppressive weapon LMG equivilent, but have the carbine which is good for short-medium range suppression. LMGs are stopped by FW armor, which at 4+ is far better than anything available to modern infantry. Tau armor would mitigate most of the effects of the suppressive fire from LMGs.

A .50 cal is a Heavy Stubber in 40k (specifically stated in 2nd edition fluff). Even if the anti-material rifles had better stats (probably just rending and better AP), they would not be autocannon equivelents, which is what it takes to negate the Tau armor advantage.

In close combat, trained humans would have the advantage, EXCEPT for the Tau armor. By 40k standards modern armor would probably be 6+, but even if it is considered 5+, the fire warriors still have better armor and would not be total pushovers.

The Tau are not stupid, and both sides would utilize various tactics, which would probably be a wash.

If the Tau have access to markerlights, they can make cover less useful to the humans.

Many things such as thrown grenades, scanners, electronic warfare, etc are simply not covered in 40k because they are abstracted and subsumed in the streamlined rules.

If you add transports and tanks into the equation, the Tau tanks would be slightly more mobile and have better anti-armor systems. The Tau could outflank and destroy M1 Abrams tanks a lot more easily than vica versa, and their railguns could penetrate the frontal armor of Earth's best battle tanks anyway.

Most of the arguments here are real-life humans vs the 40k game stats of the Tau. This isn't really a fair comparison. Just because something isn't covered in 40k (missile defense, etc) doesn't mean the Tau wouldn't have a solution for it fluff wise. The Tau codex probably doesn't mention logistical capabilities or maintenance plans but it doesn't mean their vehicles would all run out of fuel and break down.

If you go codex vs codex, the modern Earth military would be something like:

WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
3 3 3 3 1 3 1 7 6+ (possibly 5+ for some armies)

autogun: as IG lasgun
LMG R: 30" S: 4 AP: 5
various SMGs would be 40k autopistols as described in Necromunda and 2nd edition.
AT-4, LAW, RPG R: 48: S: 8 AP: 3 heavy 1, 1 shot (possibly weaker, see below)
M203, etc: as IG grenade launcher
shotgun: as IG shotgun
javelin/TOW/etc would probably be like 40k missile launchers in power, which may bump the light AT weapons down to a 1 shot autocannon in power.

I wouldn't give a Bradley more than 11 armor in 40k terms,which means it could be glanced by the Tau basic weapon. I would guess that the Abrams would be AV 13 in 40k, with less side and poor rear armor. All the Forge World steel equivelents were basically assigned arbitralily, I am guessing these values based on SM/IG tank fluff and how the game would play out.


edit: The above assumes we are not allowing modern Earth special chacacters such as Walker Texas Ranger, Rambo, Alan "Dutch" Schaefer, etc, and that Codex: Earth 11.M2 is not written by Mat Ward. We already had enough codex creep when Codex: Warsaw Pact went 10 years straight without an update (most people stopped playing them).

Our LMGs would be equivalent or inferior to the Heavy Stubber, which is equivalent to our modern MMG/HMG.

Modern RPGs are actually equivalent to the krak grenade launched by the Guard grenade launcher, not the missile launcher (it should be noted that RPGs can actually be used in dark heresy, and they are equivalent to said grenade launcher). So S6 AP4, not S8 AP3. The M203 would be the frag launcher.

Javelin-tow MAY be equivalent to modern missile launchers.

I would give the Abrams the same armor as a Chimera.

I agree Melissia. Good call on the RPG = krak grenade launcher. I am generous with the AV of the Abrams because I am a tanker.

edit: The above assumes we are not allowing modern Earth special chacacters such as Walker Texas Ranger, Rambo, Alan "Dutch" Schaefer, etc, and that Codex: Earth 11.M2 is not written by Mat Ward. We already had enough codex creep when Codex: Warsaw Pact went 10 years straight without an update (most people stopped playing them)

LOL Thats good stuff right there.

I like