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.

Because they have stuff thats more reliabel, takes less time to build. AND they can teach almost everyone to use a Las cannon, or how to crew a Leman Russ, unlike rail tech whitch is way more complicated and prone to fail. If you had a horde of Blood Pact troops bearing down on you would you like your weapon to jam because because a bit of dirt?. I would gladly have a LRBT as backup and a lasgun any day over rail weaponry.

agnosto wrote:

BeefCakeSoup wrote:

Tau railguns utterly break the notion that the weapon isn't durable. It's equipped on Suits, Soldiers, Aircraft, and Tanks. It sees deployment on all fronts and is if anything one of the most reliable weapons out there. Saying railguns are all limited to one standard of quality, is like saying all modern day rifles are the same quality and craftsmanship.

Shhh. Kan doesn't like to believe that any tech other than IoM tech is worthwhile.

I love my broadsides, they kill Titans ded, there's no "a" because the titan's dead before spell check can fix it.

Well no. I have no issues with the idea that the Tau have miniaturized it, however what I take issue with is the idea that it is somehow superior simply "because it's more high tech"...when it clearly isn't. It's superior in one aspect(killing armor) to the standard Leman Russ. A Vanquisher Cannon or Laser Destroyer do just as well against armor as a railgun, and the Laser Destroyer is arguably more "high tech".

Going back to what I said earlier though:
The principle behind a rail gun is a solid one, but the execution is the problem. The Hammerhead, at least, makes it clear that the reason it loses the transport capacity is to provide space for the generators powering the weaponry.

We don't hear enough about the maintenance of Tau equipment(what? no information on the Tau?! SHOCKER! ) for us to say one way or the other that it is more reliable than a Battle Cannon though.

For all we know, that half hour of battle represented by our 40k games is then immediately followed by a day in the Earth Caste workshops being refitted with a new cannon, the magnets being depolarized, etc.

That is my beef with this whole argument of "The Tau are so much more high tech than the Imperium as a whole!".
We see a few examples of "high technology", but the Imperium has them as well...just not widely distributed.

Why? We have no real reasoning why, but we can make some reasonable assumptions.
Namely, in the case of railguns, they were found to be more maintenance and logistics heavy than what was wanted.

Why can we make that assumption? Because we can look at the Lasgun to provide an example. It's simple to manufacture, it's easy to maintain, and what's more it's easy to standardize.

Railguns are prone to shattering and raining high velocity metal fragments in all directions.


Now the Tau and IoM have probably fixed the problem with the gun doing that when fired, but if the gun takes a hit from an enemy attack it will shatter with deadly consequences. this just isn't represented on the table top.

Nearly all 1st world countries issue night vision at the individual or fireteam level, yet I have to roll 2D6x3 to see if an armor clad future warrior can see an enemy tank 12" away.

40k doesn't make any sense. Trying to make sense of it is an exercise in futility.

NuggzTheNinja wrote:Nearly all 1st world countries issue night vision at the individual or fireteam level, yet I have to roll 2D6x3 to see if an armor clad future warrior can see an enemy tank 12" away.

40k doesn't make any sense. Trying to make sense of it is an exercise in futility.

for all we know the 12" could be a hundred meters. you don't expect them to be that close?

The rail gun is expensive and really hard to maintain that is the big thing about the tau we don't know anything about what happens after the battles.

So

Didn't plasma weapons use EMF rail to drive a hot plasmaball?
Plasma weapons have a 'coil' visible ya know

i think the Imperium just want to simplify logistic problems. ammunition for railguns are consisted of Fusion cell and a slug. while plasma weapons only require fusion cell to work. given that the railgun has a size of conventional plasma gun. hot plasma still do better penetration compared to railgun slug. while its ammunition requires less space,

now this could be a reason. but the Imperium MIGHT have one but limited uses.

=^.^=

The Imperium has Ordinatus Mars. Battlefield scale railguns are so freakishly behind their tech level that it may as well be banging rocks together.

They simply have deployment and maintenance issues with their tech. This is why they use lasguns. No moving parts, no ammunition, no supply lines, carried by TRILLIONS of soldiers. As presented already, nova cannons are railguns. They are miles long and on battle ships with a dedicated crew of thousands. When the Imperium rolls out high tech, it needs to commit gigantic resources to ensuring that tech's functioning.

agnosto wrote:
Shhh. Kan doesn't like to believe that any tech other than IoM tech is worthwhile.

I love my broadsides, they kill Titans ded, there's no "a" because the titan's dead before spell check can fix it.

Silly Tau

A Moderator wrote:No swearing in pictures, please.

Also, don't troll Tau players.

Kanluwen wrote:
Well no. I have no issues with the idea that the Tau have miniaturized it, however what I take issue with is the idea that it is somehow superior simply "because it's more high tech"...when it clearly isn't. It's superior in one aspect(killing armor) to the standard Leman Russ. A Vanquisher Cannon or Laser Destroyer do just as well against armor as a railgun, and the Laser Destroyer is arguably more "high tech".

Aren't Laser Destroyers relics from the DAoT, and therefore not IoM tech (since the IoM neither created or understands them)?
And Vanquishers are also extremely rare (only produced on one forge world), and I highly doubt that they have the penetrative power of a railgun. They rely on conventional propulsion systems, therefore can't match the momentum of a railgun shot and don't have the explosive power to make up for it. They do better on the tabletop simply because if they didn't they would be even more useless.
Although if you can find a description of how a Vanquisher shell works that would be good.

TrollPie wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
Well no. I have no issues with the idea that the Tau have miniaturized it, however what I take issue with is the idea that it is somehow superior simply "because it's more high tech"...when it clearly isn't. It's superior in one aspect(killing armor) to the standard Leman Russ. A Vanquisher Cannon or Laser Destroyer do just as well against armor as a railgun, and the Laser Destroyer is arguably more "high tech".

Aren't Laser Destroyers relics from the DAoT, and therefore not IoM tech (since the IoM neither created or understands them)?

Negative.
Laser Destroyers are, quoting here, "cannot be easily reproduced, and only a few Forge Worlds have the skills to be able to hand-craft each weapon. This is a painstaking and laborious process, resulting in demand far outstripping supply".

It is considered a relic, in that it was once a common vehicle amongst Imperial Guard armoured regiments. The hull can be mass produced, but the gun can't.

And Vanquishers are also extremely rare (only produced on one forge world),

Two(Gryphonne IV and Stygies VIII) actually, with more working on their own versions that will be adopted.

and I highly doubt that they have the penetrative power of a railgun.

I didn't say penetrative power. I said Vanquisher Cannons do just as well against armor as a railgun. They do this because of their shells. It's a strange concept, I know.

They rely on conventional propulsion systems, therefore can't match the momentum of a railgun shot and don't have the explosive power to match it.

What? Railguns don't rely on explosive power. They rely on kinetic energy. It's why another descriptor for a railgun is a "mass driver".

They do better on the tabletop simply because if they didn't they would be even more useless.

Although if you can find a description of how a Vanquisher shell works that would be good.

Since you asked so nicely, page 206 from Imperial Armour Volume One.

This is an advanced version of the basic anti-tank round. Also called sub-calibre munitions, high velocity anti-tank shells or 'Vanquisher' shells (because they are only fired by the Leman Russ Vanquisher tank). A Vanquisher shell is a solid dart of super dense metal contained within a lightweight exterior 'shoe' or case. The dart is only about a third of the calibre of the actual shell (hence sub-calibre). Once fired, the case will drop away leaving just the speeding dart.

The Vanquisher shell is fired by a super charge of high energy propellant powder to generate increased velocity down the Vanquisher's long barrel. The combined effect of the heavy dart and high velocity creates massive kinetic energy upon impact. A Vanquisher round is capable of penetrating any known armour.

Who needs rail weaponry? They have swords!

Who needs rail weaponry when you already have it on ships, and have a more effective delivery system on tanks!

The IoMs use or not use of railguns has little to do with how well rail guns work. The IoM dosen't really get to pick and chose what they can make. Odds are that only one frogeworld knows how to make them (probably less).

Kanluwen wrote:Who needs rail weaponry when you already have it on ships, and have a more effective delivery system on tanks!

And swords!

Personally, I think enough armies have the same type of weaponry as it is. Diversity is far more interesting. Plus, the Imperium having it's very set ideas about what and how technology is used is part of it's appeal. Otherwise it'd just be another generic sci-fi faction, rather than the glorious pseudo-medieval setting that it is.

Kanluwen wrote:

TrollPie wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
Well no. I have no issues with the idea that the Tau have miniaturized it, however what I take issue with is the idea that it is somehow superior simply "because it's more high tech"...when it clearly isn't. It's superior in one aspect(killing armor) to the standard Leman Russ. A Vanquisher Cannon or Laser Destroyer do just as well against armor as a railgun, and the Laser Destroyer is arguably more "high tech".

Aren't Laser Destroyers relics from the DAoT, and therefore not IoM tech (since the IoM neither created or understands them)?

Negative.
Laser Destroyers are, quoting here, "cannot be easily reproduced, and only a few Forge Worlds have the skills to be able to hand-craft each weapon. This is a painstaking and laborious process, resulting in demand far outstripping supply".
It is considered a relic, in that it was once a common vehicle amongst Imperial Guard armoured regiments. The hull can be mass produced, but the gun can't.

Kanluwen wrote:Who needs rail weaponry when you already have it on ships, and have a more effective delivery system on tanks!

The five smoking tank crews on the battlefield who got one shot off before being ranged down by a Hammerhead with a RAIL GUN.

BeefCakeSoup wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Who needs rail weaponry when you already have it on ships, and have a more effective delivery system on tanks!

The five smoking tank crews on the battlefield who got one shot off before being ranged down by a Hammerhead with a RAIL GUN.

Yeah, it's a pity about the other thirteen tanks, really. Poor, poor Mr. Hammerhead.

htj wrote:

BeefCakeSoup wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Who needs rail weaponry when you already have it on ships, and have a more effective delivery system on tanks!

The five smoking tank crews on the battlefield who got one shot off before being ranged down by a Hammerhead with a RAIL GUN.

Yeah, it's a pity about the other thirteen tanks, really. Poor, poor Mr. Hammerhead.

I lol'd, I think that probably sums up the engagement between Tau and Imperial tanks.

htj wrote:

BeefCakeSoup wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Who needs rail weaponry when you already have it on ships, and have a more effective delivery system on tanks!

The five smoking tank crews on the battlefield who got one shot off before being ranged down by a Hammerhead with a RAIL GUN.

Yeah, it's a pity about the other thirteen tanks, really. Poor, poor Mr. Hammerhead.

What? Since when was this thread about IoM's numerical superiority over the Tau? It's about their general lack of use of Rail technology. The fact that Tau have been brought up now means that we have at most, 2, 3 pages until threadlock?

So you're complaining about htj's retort rather than the fact that BeefCakeSoup, as was predictable, brought up the Tau and the hammerhead in the first place. Pitiful attempt at trolling deserves nothing less than what was given.

TrollPie wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

TrollPie wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
Well no. I have no issues with the idea that the Tau have miniaturized it, however what I take issue with is the idea that it is somehow superior simply "because it's more high tech"...when it clearly isn't. It's superior in one aspect(killing armor) to the standard Leman Russ. A Vanquisher Cannon or Laser Destroyer do just as well against armor as a railgun, and the Laser Destroyer is arguably more "high tech".

Aren't Laser Destroyers relics from the DAoT, and therefore not IoM tech (since the IoM neither created or understands them)?

Negative.
Laser Destroyers are, quoting here, "cannot be easily reproduced, and only a few Forge Worlds have the skills to be able to hand-craft each weapon. This is a painstaking and laborious process, resulting in demand far outstripping supply".
It is considered a relic, in that it was once a common vehicle amongst Imperial Guard armoured regiments. The hull can be mass produced, but the gun can't.

Nevertheless, they're an extremely rare weapon. Also, shouldn't the title of this thread be AdMech, not Imperium?

Probably, but meh.

And Vanquishers are also extremely rare (only produced on one forge world),

Two(Gryphonne IV and Stygies VIII) actually, with more working on their own versions that will be adopted.

Gryphonne IV was nom'd by the Tyranids IIRC

I would be very surprised if the STC wasn't removed before then.

They rely on conventional propulsion systems, therefore can't match the momentum of a railgun shot and don't have the explosive power to match it.

What? Railguns don't rely on explosive power. They rely on kinetic energy. It's why another descriptor for a railgun is a "mass driver".

I meant the Vanquisher doesn't have the explosive power to make up for the lack of momentum.

The Vanquisher Cannon or Round? Because I'm fairly sure the round has enough power to make up for the perceived 'lack of momentum' from the Tau player perspective.

They do better on the tabletop simply because if they didn't they would be even more useless.

Although if you can find a description of how a Vanquisher shell works that would be good.

Since you asked so nicely, page 206 from Imperial Armour Volume One.

This is an advanced version of the basic anti-tank round. Also called sub-calibre munitions, high velocity anti-tank shells or 'Vanquisher' shells (because they are only fired by the Leman Russ Vanquisher tank). A Vanquisher shell is a solid dart of super dense metal contained within a lightweight exterior 'shoe' or case. The dart is only about a third of the calibre of the actual shell (hence sub-calibre). Once fired, the case will drop away leaving just the speeding dart.

The Vanquisher shell is fired by a super charge of high energy propellant powder to generate increased velocity down the Vanquisher's long barrel. The combined effect of the heavy dart and high velocity creates massive kinetic energy upon impact. A Vanquisher round is capable of penetrating any known armour.

So it damages in the same way as a Railgun; with kinetic energy, rather than thermal energy. Unfortunately, there is no description of the speed at which the Vanquisher dart or Railgun shot travels, or their mass, so we can't arrive at any accurate measurement of their momentum.

This seems like a copout. The Tau do not have a premium, so clearly we can't arrive at any accurate measure of their momentum? That has never stopped Tau fanboys before from claiming their stuff is better "because".

What I will say is that the schematics on p.40 show that the tank carries what appears to be 9 High Explosive rounds, and 12 Vanquisher rounds.
So maybe the Hammerheads carry more rounds more efficiently or something of that nature, but eh.

htj wrote:Yeah, it's a pity about the other thirteen tanks, really. Poor, poor Mr. Hammerhead.

To be fair, they wouldn't all be Vanquishers--but I wouldn't be surprised if come the next Tau v. Imperial showdown the Imperium starts using Vanquishers with groups of Leman Russ MBTs as ablative armor.

It was a flippant response to a flippant comment, Trollpie, sorry if it caused offence.

One thing that bugs me most about this: Why would the Imperium need tank mounted rail weaponry? They have the Vanquisher, the Devil Dog, and most importantly of all, the Vendetta Gunship. Three twin-linked lascannons are going to perform just as well as one tank mounted railgun.

@Kanluwen. Yes, the Imperium may be set in it's ways, but they know well enough not to bring a knife to a gunfight twice. Nor are they adverse to sacrificing huge numbers of expendable troops in order to allow the killing blow to be struck by the right tool for the job. Which, as I say, they already have.

nomotog wrote:The IoMs use or not use of railguns has little to do with how well rail guns work. The IoM dosen't really get to pick and chose what they can make. Odds are that only one frogworld knows how to make them (probably less).

frogworlds?

Mars gets a copy usually so it should be always a minimum of 2 forgeworlds in the know.

The Imperium surely has no pick, its the choice of GW to give them the theme of weapons they field.
Necrons have their theme, as have nids orks, etc and railguns weren't used and felt techy enough to give to the new guys.
IoM is always about big explosions, massive hail of rounds, hot and smoking death by fire and laser weapons to make it a bit more sci fi.

The list of imperial weapons is long enough IMO. Some have to be left for the rest.

htj wrote:It was a flippant response to a flippant comment, Trollpie, sorry if it caused offence.

One thing that bugs me most about this: Why would the Imperium need tank mounted rail weaponry? They have the Vanquisher, the Devil Dog, and most importantly of all, the Vendetta Gunship. Three twin-linked lascannons are going to perform just as well as one tank mounted railgun.

No, it didn't cause offense at all. I was just worried that, now Tau have been mentioned, all traces of off-topicness must be stamped out immediately.
And you're right, the IoM doesn't really need Rail tech. But seeing how rare the Vanquisher is, the Vendetta is really their most reliable tank-hunter. It doesn't matter how good a tank killer you are, if you can't spare enough to get to a warzone then it doesn't matter.

TrollPie wrote:

htj wrote:It was a flippant response to a flippant comment, Trollpie, sorry if it caused offence.

One thing that bugs me most about this: Why would the Imperium need tank mounted rail weaponry? They have the Vanquisher, the Devil Dog, and most importantly of all, the Vendetta Gunship. Three twin-linked lascannons are going to perform just as well as one tank mounted railgun.

No, it didn't cause offense at all. I was just worried that, now Tau have been mentioned, all traces of off-topicness must be stamped out immediately.
And you're right, the IoM doesn't really need Rail tech. But seeing how rare the Vanquisher is, the Vendetta is really their most reliable tank-hunter. It doesn't matter how good a tank killer you are, if you can't spare enough to get to a warzone then it doesn't matter.

Ah, yes, zero-tolerance is probably the best way to go then. These things do have a tendency to break down into the same old subjects.

I think a lot of it stems from the way the Imperium goes to war. The Guard tend to use numbers and attrition with cheap, mass produced weaponry that will get the job done with enough quantity (in general, anyway, there are always exceptions), and the Space Marines favour surgical strikes at a very close range, where Melta weaponry is portable enough to be brutally effective. Now, unless there was any way in which tank or even man portable rail weaponry surpassed the (already formidable) anti-tank weapons the Imperium use, there would be no justifiable reason to engage in research of this new technology. Simply put, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

The thing is, most tanks aren't going to require a Vanquisher to bust.

The Vanquisher is what's used for punching above a Leman Russ Company's weight class, usually taking down things like superheavies.

It's not going to take a Vanquisher to bring down a Hammerhead or a Falcon, for example. It's going to take a guy with an autocannon or a lucky missile shot.

Now, if we're talking about Land Raiders, renegade superheavies, Titans, etc?

Then yeah. Vanquishers, take your marks!

1hadhq wrote:railguns weren't used and felt techy enough to give to the new guys.

From what I can think of, when the Imperium's "tech" level was established by GW--railguns weren't really talked about in scifi much.

We've kind of seen this before, where things get talked about later on in fiction because the real world is beginning to talk about it as well.

Kanluwen wrote:

And Vanquishers are also extremely rare (only produced on one forge world),

Two(Gryphonne IV and Stygies VIII) actually, with more working on their own versions that will be adopted.

Gryphonne IV was nom'd by the Tyranids IIRC

I would be very surprised if the STC wasn't removed before then.

The Shadow in the Warp would block out the Astronomican. It would have very little chance of escaping.

They rely on conventional propulsion systems, therefore can't match the momentum of a railgun shot and don't have the explosive power to match it.

What? Railguns don't rely on explosive power. They rely on kinetic energy. It's why another descriptor for a railgun is a "mass driver".

I meant the Vanquisher doesn't have the explosive power to make up for the lack of momentum.

The Vanquisher Cannon or Round? Because I'm fairly sure the round has enough power to make up for the perceived 'lack of momentum' from the Tau player perspective.

The round. I was answering from the top-down and hadn't read the IA quote when I answered that, sorry.

They do better on the tabletop simply because if they didn't they would be even more useless.

Although if you can find a description of how a Vanquisher shell works that would be good.

Since you asked so nicely, page 206 from Imperial Armour Volume One.

This is an advanced version of the basic anti-tank round. Also called sub-calibre munitions, high velocity anti-tank shells or 'Vanquisher' shells (because they are only fired by the Leman Russ Vanquisher tank). A Vanquisher shell is a solid dart of super dense metal contained within a lightweight exterior 'shoe' or case. The dart is only about a third of the calibre of the actual shell (hence sub-calibre). Once fired, the case will drop away leaving just the speeding dart.

The Vanquisher shell is fired by a super charge of high energy propellant powder to generate increased velocity down the Vanquisher's long barrel. The combined effect of the heavy dart and high velocity creates massive kinetic energy upon impact. A Vanquisher round is capable of penetrating any known armour.

So it damages in the same way as a Railgun; with kinetic energy, rather than thermal energy. Unfortunately, there is no description of the speed at which the Vanquisher dart or Railgun shot travels, or their mass, so we can't arrive at any accurate measurement of their momentum.

This seems like a copout. The Tau do not have a premium, so clearly we can't arrive at any accurate measure of their momentum? That has never stopped Tau fanboys before from claiming their stuff is better "because".

What I will say is that the schematics on p.40 show that the tank carries what appears to be 9 High Explosive rounds, and 12 Vanquisher rounds.
So maybe the Hammerheads carry more rounds more efficiently or something of that nature, but eh.

Their is no mention in any 40k books I know off, of the exact speed & mass of a Railgun shot or a Vanquisher dart, therefore we can't arrive at the momentum of a shot in flight and by extension the kinetic energy they transfer on impact.
And at the risk of embarressment, I'm going to say I'm not a Tau fanboy. They're an insignificant race which would be crushed like bugs under any sizeable crusade and their tech, while advancing, still isn't at the same level as the IoM.

htj wrote:Yeah, it's a pity about the other thirteen tanks, really. Poor, poor Mr. Hammerhead.

To be fair, they wouldn't all be Vanquishers--but I wouldn't be surprised if come the next Tau v. Imperial showdown the Imperium starts using Vanquishers with groups of Leman Russ MBTs as ablative armor.

I doubt the IoM would risk such valuable tanks exterminating such an insignificant race.

TrollPie wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

And Vanquishers are also extremely rare (only produced on one forge world),

Two(Gryphonne IV and Stygies VIII) actually, with more working on their own versions that will be adopted.

Gryphonne IV was nom'd by the Tyranids IIRC

I would be very surprised if the STC wasn't removed before then.

The Shadow in the Warp would block out the Astronomican. It would have very little chance of escaping.

Pretty sure there's more warning than "Hey we can't get a dial tone!" to an invading hive fleet.

Plus, like was said, the STC is on Mars as well.

They rely on conventional propulsion systems, therefore can't match the momentum of a railgun shot and don't have the explosive power to match it.

What? Railguns don't rely on explosive power. They rely on kinetic energy. It's why another descriptor for a railgun is a "mass driver".

I meant the Vanquisher doesn't have the explosive power to make up for the lack of momentum.

The Vanquisher Cannon or Round? Because I'm fairly sure the round has enough power to make up for the perceived 'lack of momentum' from the Tau player perspective.

The round. I was answering from the top-down and hadn't read the IA quote when I answered that, sorry.

Fair play then.

They do better on the tabletop simply because if they didn't they would be even more useless.

Although if you can find a description of how a Vanquisher shell works that would be good.

Since you asked so nicely, page 206 from Imperial Armour Volume One.

This is an advanced version of the basic anti-tank round. Also called sub-calibre munitions, high velocity anti-tank shells or 'Vanquisher' shells (because they are only fired by the Leman Russ Vanquisher tank). A Vanquisher shell is a solid dart of super dense metal contained within a lightweight exterior 'shoe' or case. The dart is only about a third of the calibre of the actual shell (hence sub-calibre). Once fired, the case will drop away leaving just the speeding dart.

The Vanquisher shell is fired by a super charge of high energy propellant powder to generate increased velocity down the Vanquisher's long barrel. The combined effect of the heavy dart and high velocity creates massive kinetic energy upon impact. A Vanquisher round is capable of penetrating any known armour.

So it damages in the same way as a Railgun; with kinetic energy, rather than thermal energy. Unfortunately, there is no description of the speed at which the Vanquisher dart or Railgun shot travels, or their mass, so we can't arrive at any accurate measurement of their momentum.

This seems like a copout. The Tau do not have a premium, so clearly we can't arrive at any accurate measure of their momentum? That has never stopped Tau fanboys before from claiming their stuff is better "because".

What I will say is that the schematics on p.40 show that the tank carries what appears to be 9 High Explosive rounds, and 12 Vanquisher rounds.
So maybe the Hammerheads carry more rounds more efficiently or something of that nature, but eh.

Their is no mention in any 40k books I know off, of the exact speed & mass of a Railgun shot or a Vanquisher dart, therefore we can't arrive at the momentum of a shot in flight and by extension the kinetic energy they transfer on impact.
And at the risk of embarrassment, I'm going to say I'm not a Tau fanboy. They're an insignificant race which would be crushed like bugs under any sizeable crusade and their tech, while advancing, still isn't at the same level as the IoM.

It's not directed solely at you. By this point in any argument involving the Tau, we usually have someone pull out an argument refuting the fact of the matter that amounts to a very very wordy "Because!" like a five year old who just was told that Batman can, in fact, put down Superman because of this and this and this.

htj wrote:Yeah, it's a pity about the other thirteen tanks, really. Poor, poor Mr. Hammerhead.

To be fair, they wouldn't all be Vanquishers--but I wouldn't be surprised if come the next Tau v. Imperial showdown the Imperium starts using Vanquishers with groups of Leman Russ MBTs as ablative armor.

I doubt the IoM would risk such valuable tanks exterminating such an insignificant race.

Maybe, maybe not. The Tau are insignificant in terms of their military, but they are considered one of the biggest threats to the Imperium because of their ideology.

Insignificant in terms of their military?! But, they took out a Scout Titan, remember!?

iproxtaco wrote:Insignificant in terms of their military?! But, they took out a Scout Titan, remember!?

So what?
Imperium took out Tyranid Hive Fleet, Massive Ork Warghhh and 1 Chaos Black Crusade in the same time.Tau took down 1 Warhound ( of 4 ) and now thinks that Warhound = Imperator. And again, why do Imperium need rail technology at all? They already have a problem equipping the massive amounts of Guardsman available, Plasma cannons are doing job very well and Astartes have so excellent guns that they don't need Rail at all...
The only ones who can use Rail are assassins, to all others it's' pointless ( to much expensive gun ).