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.

Looking at the Forge World MKV Heresy Armour, I'm thinking "What is the point of having the studs on the armour?" Is it purely a decorative measure, or do the studs increase the durability of the armour, maybe that the studs being made of a denser alloy would prevent the armour being penetrated by blades, as a swipe would strike the stud and be deflected. If so, why don't they cover the whole suit in studs rather than just some areas?



Seriously, you would think that if the studs provide some sort of protection then they would cover the entire suit in them?

It probably had a practical use when the MkV came out, but as newer techniques for working ceramite and plasteel became available the same result could be achieved without the more time-consuming application of studs (or giant rivets).

In fact, the superior craftsmanship and maybe even the better grade materials that became available later during the Crusade might have even made riveting too difficult to even attempt.

I like this explanation it that it explains how models in different Marks of Power Armour can still have the same stats in game terms

Mace emulation?

1. it's mounted on one shoulderpad
2. it's mounted on your leg and HEAD


so when you tackle/kick/headbutt someone the effects is larger?, and spikes are to chaos-y?

I think I've heard them called reactive studs so I think they work in the same way reactive armour on tanks works, but more modern techniques means this is no longer needed and nowadays it is purely decorative (see FW's description of the MkVI)

I thought it was because the armour underneath was of lower quality, so they stuck high quality studs in to increase the protection.

That is the Mark V Heresy Armor, named so because it was popularized during the Horus Heresy. Due to the rebelling Ad Mech forge worlds, the Imperium was forced to develop a stop-gap to deal with the fact that many of their manufacturers and supply lines were gone. THeydeveloped the Mark V, which, instead of using the stronger alloys in the earlier marks, simply made them into metal studs so they coulld retain similar levels of protection without using as many resources...

How does that work?

studs having the same ammount of protection compared to the full alloy?

I always thought it was result of construction techniques for old versions of power armor, just built in a more austere fashion so the studs still showed. I never bothered to think why. I like Lupe's explanations though.

Klawz wrote:That is the Mark V Heresy Armor, named so because it was popularized during the Horus Heresy. Due to the rebelling Ad Mech forge worlds, the Imperium was forced to develop a stop-gap to deal with the fact that many of their manufacturers and supply lines were gone. THeydeveloped the Mark V, which, instead of using the stronger alloys in the earlier marks, simply made them into metal studs so they coulld retain similar levels of protection without using as many resources...

Some of this.

The basic idea was they had lots of low grade materials, so made the armor of it, then added studs of harder material to help protect.

Similar to studded leather armor in principal.

skrulnik wrote:[...] then added studs of harder material to help protect.

As I understand it, the studs were used to bond a heavier layer of material over the top of the older components, they didn't provide any protection by themselves. The additional weight of the extra plates was one of the weaknesses of the armour, since retaining full mobility required more power, which overloading the heatsinks. Another weakness was the mass of exposed cables on the chest, since they couldn't fit older and bulkier cables under the smaller Mk IV chest plates.

Well, the explanation saying they didn't had a lot of good armour ressources leads me to think that they had to make layers of lesser materials, and the stoods, as someone mentioned, are the rivet's heads.

Much like on a brigantine, where you could see studs on the velvet or leather jacket, but they where rivets holding inner steel pieces.

I always thought the studs were the heads of bolts, because it was cheaper to leave out the overall negligible protection provided by covers. I read it on Lexicanum, and the official Wiki.
This always made sense to me.

Grimm wrote:I thought it was because the armour underneath was of lower quality, so they stuck high quality studs in to increase the protection.

Grimm's got it!

At least, that's always been the 'official' explanation.

The studs were added to the armor as it was a 'rush job' due to the outbreak of the Heresy.

It is a rather cool looking Mark of armor though, so, whatever explanations works for you, go with it!

I had always thought that it was because they just decided "NEED MORE ARMOR", so they basically just bolted extra plating/layers on existing armor and left the studs/bolts exposed
Either way, i love the studdly armor (and the overlapping plates on techmarine legs and stuff! That looks awesome!!)

I'm going to go with a similar vein to the studded leather armour arguement, in that the addition of studs of a more protective material increases protection without also increasing cost. However I am also going to add that the roundness of the studs provides a large number of 'bumps' that a bladed weapon is likely to be deflected by. Think of attacking a melon with a blunt knife (think butter knife, or even blunter), if you bring the knife down at an angle perpendicular to the melon, the most likey occurence (unless it's a lightsaber) is going to be that the roundness of the melon will cause the angle of the knife to skew off, so instead of cutting the melon in half you end up removing a thin slice from the surface. Thus instead of a bladed weapon cutting through the shoulder pad and into the wearer (messy!) it simply removes a much thinner slice from the shoulder pad (much less messy) or nothing at all if it is further skewed by impacts with further studs!

Leigen_Zero wrote:I'm going to go with a similar vein to the studded leather armour arguement, in that the addition of studs of a more protective material increases protection without also increasing cost. However I am also going to add that the roundness of the studs provides a large number of 'bumps' that a bladed weapon is likely to be deflected by. Think of attacking a melon with a blunt knife (think butter knife, or even blunter), if you bring the knife down at an angle perpendicular to the melon, the most likey occurence (unless it's a lightsaber) is going to be that the roundness of the melon will cause the angle of the knife to skew off, so instead of cutting the melon in half you end up removing a thin slice from the surface. Thus instead of a bladed weapon cutting through the shoulder pad and into the wearer (messy!) it simply removes a much thinner slice from the shoulder pad (much less messy) or nothing at all if it is further skewed by impacts with further studs!

And because the studs are as strong as Mrk. II or III, it allows for much cheaper construction for little loss of effect.

GruntBuster7 wrote:I read it on Lexicanum, and the official Wiki.

AFAIK, there is no 'official' wiki. Wiki content is user edited, and so should never been taken as a source by itself. Instead, you should always check whatever sources the wiki article cites. If no sources are cited, take it with a heavy pinch of salt.

In that vein, Warhammer 40k Wiki and Lexicanum both cite White Dwarf 129 / White Dwarf Compilation, which describes the studs as attaching additional layers of material.

A distinguishing feature of the Mark 5 armour were the heavily studded armour plates. This was an attempt to reinforce the Mark 4 pattern plates when inferior materials were used due to a lack of proper supplies. An extra skin plate was fitted around the armour using molecular bonding studs.

Leigen_Zero wrote:I'm going to go with a similar vein to the studded leather armour arguement, in that the addition of studs of a more protective material increases protection without also increasing cost.

Issue: In "studded leather armour" the studs are nail/rivets used to hold layers together (like in the case of the brigandine, which Dark mentioned earlier), or were just used for decoration. The fantasy version of studded leather (i.e., leather armour reinforced by putting a bunch of rivets in it) did not exist. It would increase weight without a respectable increase in protection, and the rear of the studs could be driven into the wearer by a blow, lowering the effectiveness of the armour further.
The fantasy studded leather armour was founded on misunderstood drawings of warriors wearing brigandines, since the only visible part of the interior metal plates is the studs holding them on.

Leigen_Zero wrote:Think of attacking a melon with a blunt knife (think butter knife, or even blunter), if you bring the knife down at an angle perpendicular to the melon, the most likey occurence (unless it's a lightsaber) is going to be that the roundness of the melon will cause the angle of the knife to skew off, so instead of cutting the melon in half you end up removing a thin slice from the surface.

But what if you're not using a butter knife, but rather a chainsaw or a power-sword? The 'melon' wouldn't stand a chance, and any deflection would just direct the strike between the studs.

Æscholt wrote:

skrulnik wrote:[...] then added studs of harder material to help protect.

As I understand it, the studs were used to bond a heavier layer of material over the top of the older components, they didn't provide any protection by themselves. The additional weight of the extra plates was one of the weaknesses of the armour, since retaining full mobility required more power, which overloading the heatsinks. Another weakness was the mass of exposed cables on the chest, since they couldn't fit older and bulkier cables under the smaller Mk IV chest plates.

Space Marine in new armour: "I hate these new 'rushed' suits, they're bulky, heavy, not very mobile and there are a ton of cables hanging from my chest...."
Guardsman: ".... "

@Æscholt
It's more the principle of it's better to lose a slice of your arm than to allow the chainsword/power weapon to be buried into your arm/torso completely. Deflecting the angle of attack simply to reduce the trauma as stopping it altogether is not feasible.

and yes to all who pointed it out, I too am using the fantasy not-real description of studded leather armour, simply for ease of discussion.

@ Wizard12: That joke is win all around .

Although I can see the argument of the exposed cables on the chest and thigh as being 'weaknesses', I would like to point out that in a kneeling firing position (right-handed) all of the points exposed to enemy fire have these studs on them so I want to think that there was once more to this fluff then GW now supports.

With the exception of the groin plate, and assuming the knuckles are the same way, all of the studded parts of this mark armor are striking points in armed close combat. You just have to imagine that the off-hand shoulder guard is used like a buckler, which has been suggested numerous times, while the other arm is 'cocked back' to follow up with a weapon. I thought I would add this to say that Retrias may be on to something.

This is simply a matter of GW artists who looked at real world armor for inspiration. As a cost saving measure many medieval armor suits weren't full plate, they used studded leather on non critical areas such as the shoulder pauldron that usually faced away from an opponent.
GW copies and pastes, and there have probably been umpteen technical "explanations" for it in the 40k story

Brotherjulian wrote: This is simply a matter of GW artists who looked at real world armor for inspiration. As a cost saving measure many medieval armor suits weren't full plate, they used studded leather on non critical areas such as the shoulder pauldron that usually faced away from an opponent.
GW copies and pastes, and there have probably been umpteen technical "explanations" for it in the 40k story

I have no evidences of historical studded leather armours. What I do know that existed, as I've mentioned before, most of the depicted "studded armours" where brigantines or similar and what you saw where the rivets holding the plates inside.

To be more graphical, this is what you see:



And this is what you don't see (the inside):

great pic.

So, from my vague recollection, I seem to recall that the fluff once stated that part of the reason marines had such good armor saves was because they had "deflector fields" (this was also the reason they had beakie helmets). The studs were part of the "power" of the power armor in that they worked like electrodes, turning otherwise carapace armor into power armor through the use of these minor refractor fields.

Of course, this was way, way back in the rouge trader days, which I'm not personally old enough to remember, but I was told this yarn by someone once.