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.

KingDeath wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
IOW, assume that the LRBT is great and then discard any evidence that shows otherwise?

No, assume that the artists don't do their research (I mean FFS one of them is Blanche, what do you expect, quality?), and instead take a look at the tank's actual track record in the lore (the Imperial Guard's MBT; and using it, the Imperial Guard has generally held the line against all comers for ten thousand years) to determine its effectiveness.

Given the Imperium's rather "unique" approach when it comes to technology, the fact that the Russ has been used for 10000 years is probably not going to support that the Russ is actualy a good tank but rather that the imperial guard had the skill and mettle to work around the tanks many limitations and that the Imperium's many enemies aren't particularly efficient either when it comes to designing engines of war.

What it shows is that the Imperium's engineers and scientists aren't smart enough to come up with something better.

 EmpNortonII wrote:

What it shows is that the Imperium's engineers and scientists aren't smart enough to come up with something better.

Tell it to a battlecannon shell that's gona paste you and your vehicle. Tell it that it's not good enough.

Anywayz, that's the whole purpose of IoM. That's the reflection of our own failures.

Can the IoM produce something better? Sure, it has vast possibilities. Why doesn't it do so? For various reasons. So, LR remains as is untill it's in DIRE need of being changed.
Can the IoM improve the life of an average citizen? Sure, it has access to technology that can make a regular forgeworld's inhabitant's life not a paradise, maybe not even good for the average standards but better than it is now - for sure. Why doesn't it do so? For various reasons. So, the life of a forgeworld's inhabitant is gona remain a horrible struggle for survival.
Can you aid people in need deal with famine and disieses? Sure, you have spare money and time. Even a couple of bux is enough to feed them for half a week. Why don't you do so? For various reasons. So, they'll proceed to starve and die.

 EmpNortonII wrote:

What it shows is that the Imperium's engineers and scientists aren't smart enough to come up with something better.

You could say that of most 40K factions. The tau for example can't figure out how to make indirect fire artillery, even though their technology should make it trivial for them even though this would give them a colossal advantage and play to their strengths (not to mention preserving lives.) After all, modern forces have had gun-launched anti tank missiles and guided shells in various forms for decades. And that isn't even factoring in their under-utilization of their AI and drone technology in warfare despite it having the potential to give them a big advantage and overcome numerical disparities.

About the only one I'd give a pass are, as mentioned earlier, the Eldar, and thats because they are actual Renegade-Legion style gravtanks (unlike Imperium or Tau.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
and nowhere near as thick of armor plating as they state earlier in the book

Real-world tank armor is often given in equivalent inches/mm of plain steel armor, so that you can compare overall protection levels instead of a meaningless thickness number. The cutaway drawing shows relatively thin armor compared to the numbers, but that's ok as long as you're willing to assume that the LRBT has better armor than the reference material.

RHA equivalent isn't the same thing as RHA. For one thing, its often rated against a specific threat (kinetic energy, like APFDS) or chemical energy (which is HEAT), and modern composites and reactive armors are far better at mitigating HEAT weapons than kinetic (see here - I've been getting lots of use out of that page recently.) It gets even more complicated if you throw energy weapons into the mix.

Moreover, a great many tank armours are add on modules or panels (such as the kontakt reactive armours used on Soveit tanks and its derivatives) and they substantially bolster the protection. Actually 'bare' hull thicknesses (usually steel I believe) are actually much, much thinner because of weight limitations, especially on sides and rear without the add ons. Comparing 'bare' hull without extra armour to tanks that have the addons is not quite fair.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but:

In Gunheads, there is an impact in the side armor from a round powerful enough to move the entire bulk of the Leman Russ sideways two meters in the desert sand. Not only did this round fail to penetrate, but the crew seem unperturbed, as if this was a routine occurrence.

Whatever that material is, it has more hardness/pound than diamond.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Bad writing? Or space magic technology?

The same book has a Leman Russ Conqueror using tractor beams as part of its gun recoil system, IIRC.

1.) I think you're confusing honour Guard with Gunheads. Gunheads has a scene similar (but its a LR tank taking a hit and getting shoved 3 meters by an Ork cannon shot) It was 2 metres for a Conqueror in Gunheads.

2.) The 'tractor beam' you mention is presumably the reference to interial dampers, but we don't really know if they were gravitic or some other system (like mechanical) it didn't really specify how they were 'damping' inerita or how they worked, and its not really possible to extrapolate from just a name.

3.) Penetrating armour with tank rounds is way more complicated than just having a large KE/momentum number, especially when it comes to stuff like APFSDS and HEAT rounds, they work far differently in mechanism than something akin to WW2 era guns (including naval guns.) So much so that modern tank rounds actually penetrate comparable thicknesses of armour as WW2 era battleships, despite the fact the former have a fraction of the KE and momentum of the latter.

Connor MacLeod wrote:

 EmpNortonII wrote:

What it shows is that the Imperium's engineers and scientists aren't smart enough to come up with something better.

You could say that of most 40K factions. The tau for example can't figure out how to make indirect fire artillery, even though their technology should make it trivial for them even though this would give them a colossal advantage and play to their strengths (not to mention preserving lives.) After all, modern forces have had gun-launched anti tank missiles and guided shells in various forms for decades. And that isn't even factoring in their under-utilization of their AI and drone technology in warfare despite it having the potential to give them a big advantage and overcome numerical disparities.

... seeker missiles can be fired at targets the attacker can't see when forward observers use markerlights. What the Tau don't like is equipment that is a risk to their own forces... and artillery is that, when troops are close to the enemy. Indirect fire in 40k means you take what is on the scatter die without modification, even if it's smack dab in the middle of your own troops.

On the other hand, the LR is just slow.

 EmpNortonII wrote:


What the Tau don't like is equipment that is a risk to their own forces...

Yet they certainly seem to have a lot of equipment that is just that. A risk to the wielder. I'm noticing a lot of their weapons profiles that have a "Gets Hot" rule attached to them when they over-charge. Then there is the Riptide, whose early prototypes endangered the planet they were standing on and even now, in its more re-fined form, has a 1/3 chance of endangering at-least the pilot should they nova-charge unsuccessfully.

 EmpNortonII wrote:
... seeker missiles can be fired at targets the attacker can't see when forward observers use markerlights.

So can real life forces. amazingly this hasn't lead to the outcome it does with the Tau.

What the Tau don't like is equipment that is a risk to their own forces..

There is that fluff blurb from Chapter approved 2004 where the tau try to do some MIU on a rail rifle and it burns out the dude's brain. 6th edition's codex introduced plenty of 'risky' technologies as well (like the ion rifle, or the fission-powered battlesuits.)... I'm not exactly convinced by your claim.

... and artillery is that, when troops are close to the enemy. Indirect fire in 40k means you take what is on the scatter die without modification, even if it's smack dab in the middle of your own troops.

Except that real life modern forces aren't restricted to 40K tabletop silliness, and we have had guided rounds for a long time that can be fired out of artillery. Like Excalibur. Tanks have their analogues in the proposed XM-1111 and the LAHAT.
There was even experiments with gun-launched anti tank missiles as far back as the 50's by both the US and the Russians. Are you telling me the Tau can't do what modern forces can, despite their awesomely greater tech base? This isn't really countering my 'compared to RL 40K factions are pretty silly militarily' contention. Its even worse in some respects because you can't even use the excusse the Imperium does to handwave it (the tau supposedly being so progressive and dynamic and technophillic and above superstition and dogma.)

On the other hand, the LR is just slow.

Yes, I'm well aware you've made this point before and you strongly believe this. It doesn't really invalidate my point though about how factions in a tabletop game can be made to look like utter idiots compared to the way modern warfare operates.

The Imperial Answer wrote:

 EmpNortonII wrote:


What the Tau don't like is equipment that is a risk to their own forces...

Yet they certainly seem to have a lot of equipment that is just that. A risk to the wielder. I'm noticing a lot of their weapons profiles that have a "Gets Hot" rule attached to them when they over-charge. Then there is the Riptide, whose early prototypes endangered the planet they were standing on and even now, in its more re-fined form, has a 1/3 chance of endangering at-least the pilot should they nova-charge unsuccessfully.

Like a lot of recent codices, the 6th edition Tau codex took a bit of a hatchet to the fluff.

Important to point out, however, is that all of the gets hot rules come from the deliberate overcharging of the weapon, ie operating it beyond its standard setting. So it's less a case of the weapon being a risk to the wielder in the sense of the IoM Plasmagun and more that it can, when pushed beyond its safety limits to gain more power, be a risk to the user.

It still has safety in its baseline. It's just that the user can choose to exceed that, at risk to themselves.

I am sure that if you take an Imperial plasma gun and fire single shots with a fair pause between each, it won't overheat either.

 Ashiraya wrote:
I am sure that if you take an Imperial plasma gun and fire single shots with a fair pause between each, it won't overheat either.

And you can fire an ion cannon or ion rifle as fast as it is capable of with no risk of overheating. It's only once you increase the charge of each individual shot to the point that the projectile explodes that it becomes dangerous to the user.

Its a risk that they can take. and not to forget that just because gets hot causes a wound, doesn't necessarily mean that the person dies.

Its just as probable that the gun because inoperable in combat and so the warrior takes it off the field. or is near by fixing it but will not be fixed for the next 30min of 6 rounds.

also can we move away from the tau Jircle Cerking? it always happens when a thread about tech comes up.

No it happens when Norton shows up.

Oh dear Bobthehero is here, now we are just waiting for Swastakowey and then the IG circlejerking can begin fully!



*Totally innocent*

And with you there we can have a triple circlejerk and throw Marines in there, yes?

It's not circlejerking if you're solo.

What about an Eldar circlejerk? I mean, clearly their tanks are superior because they can fly and they can turn invisible and they have the best shields and their pilots have better reflexes and they are totally awesomer than your tanks.

Don't we have a guy for that already? I am pretty sure we do but I've forgot his name.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
What about an Eldar circlejerk? I mean, clearly their tanks are superior because they can fly and they can turn invisible and they have the best shields and their pilots have better reflexes and they are totally awesomer than your tanks.

Don't forget to include that their armor is lower than that of other race's tanks as well.

Uhhh... Wyzilla dipped into that territory for a bit but I wouldn't call him the Eldar guy. But this isn't relevant to the topic in the slightest so... back on topic.

From what I can tell the Leman Russ battle tank is a very durable vehicle with a solid gun, an average sensor suite and a crappy engine. In the right hands it can destroy Titans and Stompas but it can suffer from the quality from it's crew or more accurately the lack thereof. It's vulnerable to dedicated AT platforms but... that's sort of just how the cookie crumbles. So, basically, it can be as survivable as the plot demands. Gets blown up by the thousands? Crappy crew walking into an ambush. Taking out monsters? Tank aces at the command. I hope that answers whatever question the OP had.

 Ashiraya wrote:
I am sure that if you take an Imperial plasma gun and fire single shots with a fair pause between each, it won't overheat either.

No, you can't. It overheats, period.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Connor MacLeod wrote:

 EmpNortonII wrote:
... seeker missiles can be fired at targets the attacker can't see when forward observers use markerlights.

So can real life forces. amazingly this hasn't lead to the outcome it does with the Tau.

The US Army has a laser-guided ground-launched missile? Really? Can you provide the name of the weapon system? I'm pretty sure you're making gak up.

I guess not

The Hellfire missle AGM-114..is basically the seeker missle..and mounted on gunships..sorta like the tau..
and has been tested on some ground based platforms but not deployed as such.

We use to have copperhead laser guided munitions for artillery..but now use GPS guided munitions..I was a 13F and that was my bag.

 EmpNortonII wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
I am sure that if you take an Imperial plasma gun and fire single shots with a fair pause between each, it won't overheat either.

No, you can't. It overheats, period.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Connor MacLeod wrote:

 EmpNortonII wrote:
... seeker missiles can be fired at targets the attacker can't see when forward observers use markerlights.

So can real life forces. amazingly this hasn't lead to the outcome it does with the Tau.

The US Army has a laser-guided ground-launched missile? Really? Can you provide the name of the weapon system? I'm pretty sure you're making gak up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FGM-148_Javelin

Not exactly Laser guided but something similar.

I'm pretty sure that they have guided ground based missiles, but I'm also pretty sure that they are not as small. Anyway, the main thing about seekers that's actually most impressive Is their ability to navigate terrain.

Edit: ninjas at it again

 EmpNortonII wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Connor MacLeod wrote:

 EmpNortonII wrote:
... seeker missiles can be fired at targets the attacker can't see when forward observers use markerlights.

So can real life forces. amazingly this hasn't lead to the outcome it does with the Tau.

The US Army has a laser-guided ground-launched missile? Really? Can you provide the name of the weapon system? I'm pretty sure you're making gak up.

well the US dose have laser guided bombs and missiles but those are air to ground.

Connor MacLeod wrote:
You could say that of most 40K factions. The tau for example can't figure out how to make indirect fire artillery, even though their technology should make it trivial for them even though this would give them a colossal advantage and play to their strengths (not to mention preserving lives.) After all, modern forces have had gun-launched anti tank missiles and guided shells in various forms for decades. And that isn't even factoring in their under-utilization of their AI and drone technology in warfare despite it having the potential to give them a big advantage and overcome numerical disparities.

To be fair, some of this has to do with game rules, not fluff. Tau only lack indirect fire artillery because the game mechanics ignore the blast effect of various Tau weapons. Seeker missile game stats pretend they just obliterate a single guardsman and are no threat to the guardsman next to him, railgun submunition shots are treated as laser weapons instead of a projectile that could easily be fired in a high arc, etc. Similarly, we do see Tau using drones in the background (IA3, for example), and we can pretty easily assume that their lack of presence in the fluff has more to do with the story focusing on the interesting events than with any lack of use in the "real" Tau army. Drone turrets/Tigersharks dropping gun drone blobs/etc just aren't very interesting without some characters around, so that all happens off-camera.

There's a bunch of thing the game does wrong when it comes to indirect weapon and big explosions.

 EmpNortonII wrote:


The US Army has a laser-guided ground-launched missile? Really? Can you provide the name of the weapon system? I'm pretty sure you're making gak up.

I like how I said 'real life forces' and you somehow interpreted this to narrowly mean 'US only'. There are other countries with other competent, well equipped armies, out there. And in caes you forgot, I already mentioned LAHAT. Which they can launch out of gun tubes as well as in other ways. And there seems to be the Nimrod missile. The russians seem to have a similar gun launched ATGM in the Refleks. The US had the Copperhead gun launched projectile as well. Hellfire seems to be able to be launched from the ground as well as the air too. Of course looking at all the missile options it does seem the modern forces use a wider variety of guidance methods than the Tau do, so that could also help explain the lack of expliclty one and only one kind of guidance (and using only missiles as opposed to other forms of stuff.)

But as you say, I could be just hallucinating all those examples just to make stuff up and win arbitrary internet points

 Peregrine wrote:
To be fair, some of this has to do with game rules, not fluff. Tau only lack indirect fire artillery because the game mechanics ignore the blast effect of various Tau weapons. Seeker missile game stats pretend they just obliterate a single guardsman and are no threat to the guardsman next to him, railgun submunition shots are treated as laser weapons instead of a projectile that could easily be fired in a high arc, etc. Similarly, we do see Tau using drones in the background (IA3, for example), and we can pretty easily assume that their lack of presence in the fluff has more to do with the story focusing on the interesting events than with any lack of use in the "real" Tau army. Drone turrets/Tigersharks dropping gun drone blobs/etc just aren't very interesting without some characters around, so that all happens off-camera.

Sure, and theres lots of ways to interpret or analyze this stuff that doesn't neccesarily invoke '40K people are idiots.' Which is actually kind of the point, since what you can rationalize with one faction you can just as easily rationalize in the others... its just a matter of whether a person is willing to or not. The whole 'making things interesting for reasons other than super-realism' applies to the Russ as well for example, since there's a strong thematic/creative reason for why things are so utterly variable in the Imperial Guard (so the player can field anything from feral tribesmen and horse cavalry to cyborg supersoldiers and futuretanks.) Just as by the same token alot of the 'bad' things attributed to the Tau to demonize them may get blown out of proportion or only be 'bad' from a certain point of view.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
From what I can tell the Leman Russ battle tank is a very durable vehicle with a solid gun, an average sensor suite and a crappy engine. In the right hands it can destroy Titans and Stompas but it can suffer from the quality from it's crew or more accurately the lack thereof. It's vulnerable to dedicated AT platforms but... that's sort of just how the cookie crumbles. So, basically, it can be as survivable as the plot demands. Gets blown up by the thousands? Crappy crew walking into an ambush. Taking out monsters? Tank aces at the command. I hope that answers whatever question the OP had.

If the Russ suffers from one definite thing, its lack of standardization. Much like the Rest of the Guard. Lack of a uniform, standardized tech base, difficulties in centrally administering to worlds, and hundreds of thousands of different cultures, industrial levels, etc. leads to alot of variation (and modelling opportunties), but also the potential for a wide divergence in capability based on availability of materials and resources, technology level, and even military doctrines. Whereas with most other factions (except maybe the Orks, who are even less standardized than the Imperium) they do have standards - you aren't going to find hammerheads or Falcon grav tanks with a steam engine in them.. but you could do so for the Russ. I wouldn't be surprised if you had Leman Russes built to WW1/early 20th century tech base levels in some regiments. Conversely, you could find some very advanced Russes, like the Solar Auxilia modesl which Conquest mentions are built to Astartes levels (which leads to interesting conclusions when you couple Leman Russ armour thicknesses with the multilayered composites used by a Predator... 450-600 mm of 'conventional steel' equivalnet comes to mind, and that's on top of being faster. And this still doesn't factor in stuff like extra armour. Funny how utterly mutable numbers are depending on how you interpret stuff.)

Connor MacLeod wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
From what I can tell the Leman Russ battle tank is a very durable vehicle with a solid gun, an average sensor suite and a crappy engine. In the right hands it can destroy Titans and Stompas but it can suffer from the quality from it's crew or more accurately the lack thereof. It's vulnerable to dedicated AT platforms but... that's sort of just how the cookie crumbles. So, basically, it can be as survivable as the plot demands. Gets blown up by the thousands? Crappy crew walking into an ambush. Taking out monsters? Tank aces at the command. I hope that answers whatever question the OP had.

If the Russ suffers from one definite thing, its lack of standardization. Much like the Rest of the Guard. Lack of a uniform, standardized tech base, difficulties in centrally administering to worlds, and hundreds of thousands of different cultures, industrial levels, etc. leads to alot of variation (and modelling opportunties), but also the potential for a wide divergence in capability based on availability of materials and resources, technology level, and even military doctrines. Whereas with most other factions (except maybe the Orks, who are even less standardized than the Imperium) they do have standards - you aren't going to find hammerheads or Falcon grav tanks with a steam engine in them.. but you could do so for the Russ. I wouldn't be surprised if you had Leman Russes built to WW1/early 20th century tech base levels in some regiments. Conversely, you could find some very advanced Russes, like the Solar Auxilia modesl which Conquest mentions are built to Astartes levels (which leads to interesting conclusions when you couple Leman Russ armour thicknesses with the multilayered composites used by a Predator... 450-600 mm of 'conventional steel' equivalnet comes to mind, and that's on top of being faster. And this still doesn't factor in stuff like extra armour. Funny how utterly mutable numbers are depending on how you interpret stuff.)

Steam powered stuff can be pretty effective so it may not be a draw back if a Russ is steam powered assuming it still functioned the same.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Spetulhu wrote:

 EmpNortonII wrote:
It does. The Tau codex indicates that Hammerheads win against LRs when outnumbered 5 to 1.

The western Allies used crappy Sherman tanks against German tanks that had better armor and guns and still won. Six Shermans to a Panther, but of those six one was working (it got the kill), three could be repaired and new ones were being shipped in faster than the Germans could replace their losses. Quantity is a quality all of it's own.

Right but that wouldn't have worked so well if they were sending 6 Shermans against an Abrams which could outrange, outgun and outmanoeuvre them so that they were all burning wrecks before ever actually getting in range.

You could have just inserted a tiger tank to keep things realistic and you'd have the same results. Except the russ and hammerhead are both heavy tanks with armor penetrating rounds on certain load outs. The sherman was a medium tank not designed to take down heavy armor so that's why shermans got wrecked by tigers. Russ vs Hammerhead realistically shot be determined by who shoots first and who shoots more accurately because both are capable of penetrating their armor.

Indeed. Both in the fluff and in the game, Leman Russ tanks are at least on par with Hammerheads.

Of course, it depends whose fluff you're reading - main character Guard: Leman Russ tank regiments do very well. Main character Tau: Leman Russ tank regiments do very poorly. I suspect it's somewhere in between, which is why I said "at least on par."

In the game, IMO the Russ tank company is way better than the (unbound, admittedly) Hammerhead company, which speaks to the phenomenal endurance and flexibility of the Russ on the table.