40k (Imperium of Man) vs. Anything - What is actually up to the task?

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.

**IvanTih**

About plasma reactors.
It is strongly implied that they are powered by the warp (if not outright stated, but i don't recall such a source right now). They are certainly not fusion reactors - the Imperium has those as normal power generators (Astartes Power Armor is powered that way), and they are nowhere near as violent and actually behave like actual fusion reactors (albeit very compact ones). They are not creating giant explosions or any of the other sci-fi brainworms regarding reactors. Unlike plasma reactors, who do just that if sufficiently damaged.

Fuel consumption and exact mechanism are pretty much unknown, but the former appears to be low and the plasma is not actually used up but merely used to channel power from the warp trough it.

**Grey Templar**

IvanTih wrote:About plasma reactors.
It is strongly implied that they are powered by the warp (if not outright stated, but i don't recall such a source right now). They are certainly not fusion reactors - the Imperium has those as normal power generators (Astartes Power Armor is powered that way), and they are nowhere near as violent and actually behave like actual fusion reactors (albeit very compact ones). They are not creating giant explosions or any of the other sci-fi brainworms regarding reactors. Unlike plasma reactors, who do just that if sufficiently damaged.

Fuel consumption and exact mechanism are pretty much unknown, but the former appears to be low and the plasma is not actually used up but merely used to channel power from the warp trough it.

No, power armor has a high density battery not a generator(dreadnoughts are powered by fusion)

IoM star ships have 2 drives.

Warp drives for traveling through the warp(these are powered by plotdust)

and Fusion reactors(called plasma because its cool) for in-system propulsion.

the theorized power output of fusion is massive, but the actual output isn't fully known as we have never made a real one that has a sustained reaction.

Yes, they do require alot of fuel, but only every 20 years or so.

**IvanTih**

@Grey
It is specified that Power Armor uses subatomic core.-White Dwarf #129
They don't behave as fusion reactors.
Power output is in stellar level.

**Grey Templar**

Lexicanum says a Power Plant is the source of power.

if that indeed is a fusion plant then the IoM reacters on their ships must be unbelivable in their output.

**IvanTih**

Grey Templar wrote:Lexicanum says a Power Plant is the source of power.

if that indeed is a fusion plant then the IoM reacters on their ships must be unbelivable in their output.

Again they don't behave as fusion reactors.

**Melissia**

Jolrael wrote:
Melissia wrote:
Commissar Agro wrote:Flack armour is terrible
Flak armor is NOT terrible by any means. It's infinitely superior to anything we have in the modern world, and extremely light to boot (an entire suit of Guard flak armor, protecting almost the entire body, weighs far less than merely the chest piece of the best modern armor available).

The problem is that tabletop is an MEQ-oriented game.

And how many body armours besides kevlar from late sixties do you actually know?

I was comparing it to the Improved Outer Tactical Vest used by the US Army and Marines Corps.

edit: Some notes:

The IOTV body armor vest used by the US Army weighs about 30-35 depending on which version. The MTV body armor vest used by the Marine Corps weighs about thirty pounds. These do not include the weight of the helmets used, or any other equipment or clothing.

A full set of Guard Flak Armor (gauntlet, helmet, chest/stomach/back armor, greaves, boots, pauldrons) weighs 11 kilograms, or 24 pounds. This doesn't include clothing. Flak armor is INCREDIBLY light for the amount of protection it gives, which is enough to stop most modern weapons from penetrating and doing any real damage more often than not.

edit2: More stuff on Flak Armor:

In the Dark Heresy system, Guard Flak Armor provides 4 armor value across the entire body. This combined with the average Human's toughness bonus of 3 (humans commonly have 25-35 toughness in the setting) and average total wounds of 10-12 means that with Guard Flak Armor, most characters can resist multiple direct hits from lasguns/autoguns without serious injury.

Lasguns/autoguns do 1d10+3 damage. So 4-13. The armor and toughness reduce this by seven to 0-6 damage (with four chances to roll zero out of ten) barring a lucky shot. Stub weapons (the equivalent of modern weaponry) do typically one less damage except for "hand cannons", IE, magnum weapons, and "hunting rifles", IE bolt action rifles.

And against anything which is a blast, such as a frag grenade, this is increased to armor value 5-- so a frag grenade does 0-5 damage, with 1/2 of all frag grenades doing no damage whatsoever.

This is an incredibly good piece of armor compared to modern armor if this level of effectiveness is intended-- and it is not counteracted by other pieces of fluff, so I do believe it is.

**IvanTih**

Another note.
Warhammer 40K plasma reactors explicitly tap into the warp, which is known to be a power source. No such external source exists for Star Trek, nor is it ever mentioned. Nor does it have to be assumed, since the observed effects can be readily explained by matter-antimatter reactions.
In the end, you can NOT disprove observed effects by talking about how realistic they are. By that logic,Ii could throw out pretty much all of sci-fi - but by suspension of disbelief, i have to accept that an observed effect is possible in that specific sci-fi universe.

Lets take the lasgun. 13MJ of energy hits the target so the initial enrgy to create that shot will be higher. How many shots does a lasgun pack hold? One of the facts proffered is that such a powerpack can be recharged in a wood fire. How much energy does a fire give off? I bet you that it doesn't even reach enough to make one shot let alone recharge an entire powerpack.

Let's do a calculation. Take a large fire and several hours (at least 8.). Place the object (about as large as a modern rifle magazine, but a cube) into the hottest place of the fire. Calculate the energy put into the power pack.
Note that this does not necessarily recharge the power-pack fully.

**keezus**

Grey Templar wrote:The theorized power output of fusion is massive, but the actual output isn't fully known as we have never made a real one that has a sustained reaction.

The theorized power output of fusion is only massive compared to our current levels of power generation. Fusion is markedly inferior when compared to other theoretical processes such as antimatter/matter drives and singularity engines.

@Grey Templar / Ivan: With all due respect: Even if the IoM fusion process were somehow more efficient to generate a greater quantity of energy from each reaction, no matter what fuel is used, the base system still involves smashing two atoms together into a larger one. One might expect that due to the nature of the process, a probable fuel would have a the low atomic weight (in order to have the most atoms to fuse), just like how Fission uses atoms with a high atomic weight to smash into smaller atoms. The sun uses H, which is an abundant and naturally occuring element with -you guessed it- the number 1 spot in the peroidic table meaning that it has the lowest atomic weight of all known elements. Considering that the sun uses a staggering amount of fuel (by weight - this means that more reactions are generated by weight than if other fuel was substituted), absent any "magic" (read WARP) interactions, all calcs for IoM reactor outputs are complete bull-pucky.

**IvanTih**

keezus wrote:
Grey Templar wrote:The theorized power output of fusion is massive, but the actual output isn't fully known as we have never made a real one that has a sustained reaction.

The theorized power output of fusion is only massive compared to our current levels of power generation. Fusion is markedly inferior when compared to other theoretical processes such as antimatter/matter drives and singularity engines.

@Grey Templar / Ivan: With all due respect: Even if the IoM fusion process were somehow more efficient to generate a greater quantity of energy from each reaction, no matter what fuel is used, the base system still involves smashing two atoms together into a larger one. One might expect that due to the nature of the process, a probable fuel would have a the low atomic weight (in order to have the most atoms to fuse), just like how Fission uses atoms with a high atomic weight to smash into smaller atoms. The sun uses H, which is an abundant and naturally occuring element with -you guessed it- the number 1 spot in the peroidic table meaning that it has the lowest atomic weight of all known elements. Considering that the sun uses a staggering amount of fuel (by weight - this means that more reactions are generated by weight than if other fuel was substituted), absent any "magic" (read WARP) interactions, all calcs for IoM reactor outputs are complete bull-pucky.

They're not considering the use of warp(that's not any magic,but technology).
The reactors aboard ships, titans etc. are called plasma reactors, NOT fusion reactors. Just because something involves plasma, it does not have to be fusion. We also know that they effectively draw energy from the warp - therefore, no fuel consumption has to be necessary.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here are some Imperial combat speeds.

Page 893/894 of the Saint Omnibus, by Dan Abnett.

“They did not slow down. They were moving at cruise speed. Attack Speed.”

“Four Ships, one of them very large. And they were moving. Point seven five light at least, cutting straight toward Herodor ”

A Frigate crossed 9 AU in about 93 Minutes, from geostationary orbit. It is also mentioned a few pages later that there were no visuals and that it was a “striated blur” all navigation etc was done by sensors.

**AndrewC**

Okay, the fusion reactors seems to have come from my side of the fence, but the argument that plasma reactors are fueled by warp energy seems a ... grasping.

Since all the authors seem to be 'english' speakers by birth normal convention would be ingrained into them. An engine is described primarily by what powers it. Petrol, diesel, electric, steam etc. By convention the authors are stating it is a plasma reactor, not a warp reactor. It is fueled using plasma.

Cheers

Andrew

**Kilkrazy**

Has anyone mentioned The Culture?

**KamikazeCanuck**

IvanTih wrote:The Stormtrooper syndrome

The Stormtrooper, the elite shock troopers of the Galactic Empire, the right hand of the Emperor himself; trained in a gravity well that could crush the average human, these bad boys of the Empire are the toughest, meanest and most zealously loyal troops in the Imperial military. Numbering in the trillions and carrying the deadliest weapons into battle, the Stormtrooper Corps is the furled fist of the Empire, coiled and ready to sucker punch the Galaxy in her Ovaries.

Yet despite their unit-for-unit reliability, detractors continue to lambaste the performance of the overall Corps for one distinct reason known by all as the Teddy Bear incident™. The Battle of Endor proved to be a disaster for the Empire, which despite only a limited loss in material and manpower sparked an internal power struggle that came close to toppling the regime only until recently. Yet despite her continued perseverance, despite the countless successful engagements and occupations; the storming of Hoth, the capture of the Tantive IV and the occupation of a Galaxy over 120,000 light years in diameter, the Stormtrooper Corps will never live down the single blemish known colloquially by cynics and fans alike as “That bit with the Teddy Bears”. In fact the overall incident came to be known as the Stormtrooper effect, also called Stormtrooper syndrome, an expression used to describe the cliché phenomenon in works of fiction of minor cannon fodder characters being completely ineffective in combat against characters important to the plot (protagonists). This ineffectiveness is typically visible as an inability to successfully strike the target with ranged weapons, even at close range. Though obviously unrealistic, the effect is common in many stories and movies.
Ultimately this leads us to narrow down the phenomenon to only a few select properties:

A) Are Stormtroopers incompetent? No, they’ve repeatedly demonstrated their title as elite shock troopers.

B) Are Stormtroopers well equipped/trained? Of course, they receive the best possible training/equipment available to a military unit several trillion strong.

C) Are Stormtroopers human? Mostly, thus the mistakes that they make are dependent on naturally occurring flaws, despite their intensive training.

During the Endor battle, the most likely reason for their loss is simple overconfidence. Outside the bunker, they were felled by simple plain old Jane overconfidence, no tricks or techno babble, they were simply destroyed by their underestimation of enemy strength. Their light armament reveals deplorable overconfidence (The scout troopers had handguns, the Stormtroopers had carbines, and they didn’t bother carrying any of the heavy weapons we saw in previous films), so it’s really no surprise that they were so easily ambushed and overwhelmed when a third of their military forces were armed with nothing more than Pistols.

But before we leap to the conclusion that such foolishness is impossible in the Emperor’s “finest troops”, I would urge readers to study the example of the US Army’s elite Rangers, S.E.A.L., and Delta Force commandos in Somalia. Think back to 1993, the 1980’s was long gone, Jurassic Park had just been released and the Berlin wall saw some new and interesting renovations; the world was a better place for it. Yet during a disastrous mission in which two Blackhawk helicopters were shot down, U.S. Special Forces units demonstrated exactly the kind of overconfidence that bought disaster to Endor. They arrogantly performed what should have been a night operation in broad daylight, and they didn’t bother bringing any “unnecessary” dead weight, such as water canteens, bayonets, or night-sight equipment. Some of them even removed the armour plates from their flak jackets, so they would be more comfortable in the heat. Worse yet, mission security was horrendous; Somali staff at the U.S. Embassy easily discovered the time and place of the mission, and forwarded this information to Somali militia. The entire mission was a mess long before Delta Force could pick the Camel turds from their boots.

Unfortunately for those men lost in the fray of poor military planning, the problems didn’t even stop there; they had no heavy reinforcements or armour in case of serious resistance, and they only had one rescue team, which became a huge problem when not one, but two choppers went down. They couldn’t even co-ordinate their activities; the Rangers and Delta Force commandos continuously butted heads over tactics and chain of command, and an Orion spy plane wasn’t permitted to give direct instructions to the men on the ground even though it was the only platform with a clear view of what was happening. The litany of mistakes continued with the rescue convoys, which literally got lost and ambushed en route to the crash site because of unfamiliarity with the city streets and poor direction from the helicopters above. In the confusion, the Americans fired on anyone with a gun, and then anyone who was around someone with a gun, and eventually, at anything that moved, thus causing thousands of civilian casualties. A simple mission to kidnap two men turned into a chaotic twelve hour firefight, in which nearly a hundred American soldiers were killed or wounded. If this were a fictional war story, it would have been lambasted for being hopelessly unrealistic. People would say “no real soldiers would be so incompetent”. But these men were not incompetent; they were overconfident and inadequately prepared. They demonstrated to the world (At least, the part of the world that reads books instead of getting all their information from action movies) that even the best trained, best equipped soldiers can still can be stymied by poor preparation and the inherent difficulties of combat in difficult and unfamiliar terrain.

Likewise the forces at Endor were deployed in an effort to ambush Rebel forces attempting to seize the bunker facility. They did not anticipate that the native inhabitants (Who up until that point appeared to be Neolithic mammals of little intelligence) could possibly deploy traps ahead of time, they could not even fathom that Rebel Commandos would work in conjunction with said primitives and at no point would it have been practical to employ planetary suppression forces for a relatively simple ambush. Thus they were greatly outnumbered, underequipped, unprepared and were being ensnared by an enemy who knew the terrain intimately, utilized this knowledge to great effect and garnered assistance from heavily armed Commando units. In retrospect we should be even more impressed by the fact that the heavily outnumbered and surrounded Imperial forces managed to go on the offensive and rout the enemy until one of their support vehicles was hijacked by a famous Wookie veteran.

Callously, history only ever recalls our greatest failures, but should we chastise the entire Roman Military for their losses at Teutoburg? Should U.S. Special Forces be held accountable for time immemorial for the failure in Somalia? Likewise should the reputation of the Stormtrooper Corps, an organization composed of billions of men, be tarnished due to the overconfidence of a vastly small minority?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Golden Sabres wrote:We need to remember though, a 13 megajoule laser is ap - in the 40k universe...

What about 19 Megathule range?It seems like a corrupted version of Megajoule.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Grey Templar wrote:you can't pit the entire ST universe vs the IoM.

2 reasons

1) the different ST factions would never unite. and assuming they did they wouldn't support each other very well. little to no cordination of forces, "failing" to come to the others aid( , we had to, um, refuel the fleet. sorry the 3rd fleet and those star systems got boned )

2) the IoM is 1, very diverse, faction so no fair using multiple factions.

Not to mention that they suck on space and on ground.

In Somalia the Rangers were outnumbered 5000-1. On Endor I think The stormtroopers actually outnumbered the teddy bears. So I don't think that really explains it.

**keezus**

@Ivan: GW publications appear to use the terms interchangably. They describe plasma reactors as "fusion based". Ergo, even if they aren't fusion reactors - (which the term "fusion based" seems to imply) they at least have some fusion component. While I don't have the books to verify, this seems to suggest that plasma/fusion is interchangable in GW canon.

http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Imperial_Navy wrote:Every Imperial starship is equipped with a fusion-based plasma drive for normal propulsion through the depths of space. Running up to a third of the ship's length, the aft section is a mass of drive tubes, engine compartments and plasma reactors.

Torpedoes are long-range missiles carried by many Imperial Navy vessels. From ~60 feet (on destroyers) to ~200 feet (on cruisers) to ~300 feet (on battleships) in length, these weapons are powered by a fusion-based plasma reactor which also doubles as its warhead.

I will stand by my statement that IoM plasma reactors are MAGIC per Clarke's Third Law. GW publications make no attempts to explain how any of it works. This is compounded by standardized misuse of actual scientific terms by the GW writers - e.g. gauss rifles that have nothing to do with gauss technology.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kilkrazy wrote:Has anyone mentioned The Culture?

Indeed they have.

They also mentioned the ensuing bootstomp.

**AndrewC**

IvanTih wrote:Let's do a calculation. Take a large fire and several hours (at least 8.). Place the object (about as large as a modern rifle magazine, but a cube) into the hottest place of the fire. Calculate the energy put into the power pack.
Note that this does not necessarily recharge the power-pack fully.

I am completely speechless.

1kg of a hardwood completely converted to energy, does actually provide enough power

(for one shot

)

However, from what I could find, (and understand) an open fire is not that efficient. 70% seemed to be the top figure I could find. eg charcoal fires, cremation bonfires.

Then of course there would be the efficiency of transfer of energy against lost/radiated energy. But yes a lasgun pack could be recharged from a fire.

Speechless....

Cheers

Andrew

**Melissia**

And it damages the laspack, which pisses off the munitorum, so I imagine Guardsmen don't typically do it. Gangers probably would though.

**Kilkrazy**

keezus wrote:@Ivan: GW publications appear to use the terms interchangably. They describe plasma reactors as "fusion based". Ergo, even if they aren't fusion reactors - (which the term "fusion based" seems to imply) they at least have some fusion component. While I don't have the books to verify, this seems to suggest that plasma/fusion is interchangable in GW canon.

http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Imperial_Navy wrote:Every Imperial starship is equipped with a fusion-based plasma drive for normal propulsion through the depths of space. Running up to a third of the ship's length, the aft section is a mass of drive tubes, engine compartments and plasma reactors.

Torpedoes are long-range missiles carried by many Imperial Navy vessels. From ~60 feet (on destroyers) to ~200 feet (on cruisers) to ~300 feet (on battleships) in length, these weapons are powered by a fusion-based plasma reactor which also doubles as its warhead.

I will stand by my statement that IoM plasma reactors are MAGIC per Clarke's Third Law. GW publications make no attempts to explain how any of it works. This is compounded by standardized misuse of actual scientific terms by the GW writers - e.g. gauss rifles that have nothing to do with gauss technology.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kilkrazy wrote:Has anyone mentioned The Culture?

Indeed they have.

They also mentioned the ensuing bootstomp.

That's all right then.

It's nice to know that people understand there are some things the Isle of Man wouldn't stand a rat in Hell's chance against.

**keezus**

The whole lasgun pack thing is a perfect example of the GW writer's "it's cool - so I'll write it" mentality. So while AndrewC has shown that energy from an ongoing fire CAN generate equivalence to a lasgun bolt we have the following problems:

1. To maximize energy transfer, we need a highly localized, (preferably lasgun pack sized), continuous, intense fire. Unfortunately, fires aren't usually that localized, nor are they that continuous, due to consumable fuel - suggesting a less than optimum charging situation, lowering efficiency. S'ok though. We'll assume an ideal fire.

2. A fire generates energy mostly through HEAT and LIGHT. Considering that a lasgun pack doesn't seem to have any light capturing properties, we'll have to go with HEAT transfer as the primary mode of recharge. This means the process is less than 100% efficient as energy from light is lost... S'ok though... we'll assume that the amount of light energy is negligible.

3. As we've established that the lasgun pack recharges through heat transfer - this clearly happens through the entire surface area of the pack as having it perform heat transfer over a portion would lower efficiency. For sake of arguement, we will assume that the lasgun pack can not be damaged by the heat generated through this process. We'll also assume that the shell contains all necessary components for lossless conversion of heat energy (though no "scrubbing" of the power seems to take place, as this dirty power damages the capacitors), as to assume otherwise would also lower efficiency by a significant amount.

Unfortunately, the process is probably taking significant hits at each stage of the above list, meaning that the actual amount of energy being generated would probably be a small percentage of the ideal case... But over time, it will recharge. There's no instances of Guardsmen throwing their packs into a fire, and then using them hours later (or possibly even less) is there? Oh wait...!

**Ledabot**

Kilkrazy wrote:
keezus wrote:@Ivan: GW publications appear to use the terms interchangably. They describe plasma reactors as "fusion based". Ergo, even if they aren't fusion reactors - (which the term "fusion based" seems to imply) they at least have some fusion component. While I don't have the books to verify, this seems to suggest that plasma/fusion is interchangable in GW canon.

http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Imperial_Navy wrote:Every Imperial starship is equipped with a fusion-based plasma drive for normal propulsion through the depths of space. Running up to a third of the ship's length, the aft section is a mass of drive tubes, engine compartments and plasma reactors.

Torpedoes are long-range missiles carried by many Imperial Navy vessels. From ~60 feet (on destroyers) to ~200 feet (on cruisers) to ~300 feet (on battleships) in length, these weapons are powered by a fusion-based plasma reactor which also doubles as its warhead.

I will stand by my statement that IoM plasma reactors are MAGIC per Clarke's Third Law. GW publications make no attempts to explain how any of it works. This is compounded by standardized misuse of actual scientific terms by the GW writers - e.g. gauss rifles that have nothing to do with gauss technology.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kilkrazy wrote:Has anyone mentioned The Culture?

Indeed they have.

They also mentioned the ensuing bootstomp.

That's all right then.

It's nice to know that people understand there are some things the Isle of Man wouldn't stand a rat in Hell's chance against.

And thats pritty much what the conclusion was.

**IvanTih**

Kilkrazy wrote:
keezus wrote:@Ivan: GW publications appear to use the terms interchangably. They describe plasma reactors as "fusion based". Ergo, even if they aren't fusion reactors - (which the term "fusion based" seems to imply) they at least have some fusion component. While I don't have the books to verify, this seems to suggest that plasma/fusion is interchangable in GW canon.

http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Imperial_Navy wrote:Every Imperial starship is equipped with a fusion-based plasma drive for normal propulsion through the depths of space. Running up to a third of the ship's length, the aft section is a mass of drive tubes, engine compartments and plasma reactors.

Torpedoes are long-range missiles carried by many Imperial Navy vessels. From ~60 feet (on destroyers) to ~200 feet (on cruisers) to ~300 feet (on battleships) in length, these weapons are powered by a fusion-based plasma reactor which also doubles as its warhead.

I will stand by my statement that IoM plasma reactors are MAGIC per Clarke's Third Law. GW publications make no attempts to explain how any of it works. This is compounded by standardized misuse of actual scientific terms by the GW writers - e.g. gauss rifles that have nothing to do with gauss technology.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kilkrazy wrote:Has anyone mentioned The Culture?

Indeed they have.

They also mentioned the ensuing bootstomp.

That's all right then.

It's nice to know that people understand there are some things the Isle of Man wouldn't stand a rat in Hell's chance against.

IOM loses against Galactic Empire from Star Wars.
@AndrewC/keezus
You:Claim that these limits therefore apply to 40K-technology. Ignores all possible way they could circumvent those.
Claim that the observed feats of 40K are therefore impossible. Doesn't work, technological conjecture does not override observation.
These power generation feats are consistent with Cyrene crust melting and Caves of Ice bombardment.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nemesis describing the armaments of the Vengeful Spirit as "torpedo arrays filled with warshots capable of atomising continents in single strikes, energy cannon capable of boiling off oceans", to take the nearest book to hand.
So power feats are meshing good.

**keezus**

IvanTih wrote:@AndrewC/keezus
You:Claim that these limits therefore apply to 40K-technology. Ignores all possible way they could circumvent those.

Please. Enlighten me on how they circumvent these "imposed limits". Actual processes please, and not some "advanced technology" argument.

All I've stating is that given the limits of fusion technology, IoM reactors can NOT be completely reliant on fusion as a process. As long as you can't produce any counterargument as to how the "demonstrated yields" are achieved - I stand by my statement that the IoM plasma reactors are magic.

**IvanTih**

keezus wrote:
IvanTih wrote:@AndrewC/keezus
You:Claim that these limits therefore apply to 40K-technology. Ignores all possible way they could circumvent those.

Please. Enlighten me on how they circumvent these "imposed limits". Actual processes please, and not some "advanced technology" argument.

All I've stating is that given the limits of fusion technology, IoM reactors can NOT be completely reliant on fusion as a process. As long as you can't produce any counterargument as to how the "demonstrated yields" are achieved - I stand by my statement that the IoM plasma reactors are magic.

Then we have an agreement.I have misunderstood you.
Basically a lot of Imperial tech shows middle finger to the science,again we have warp.

**keezus**

IvanTih wrote:energy cannon capable of boiling off oceans", to take the nearest book to hand.

Please. The energy needed for this "power feat" as you state - using figures from your posted "EXTERMINATUS" thread put the total energy needed is on the magnitude of the energy produced by the sun per second - even if it took a sustained 6 hours to achieve this, this would put the gun's output at 0.001% solar outputs / second - or around 100x the total power annual generation of Earth, circa 2005.

Considering that this gun, and other weapons are all powered off the weapon systems grid (ships systems stated as separate power grid), unless the reactors are MAGIC, the fuel expenditures should be enormous, considering that the most efficient known reaction: antimatter/matter would need 3x10e^10kg (1.5x10e^10 of each type) of reagents to generate the same energy output (assuming 100% efficiency).

**IvanTih**

keezus wrote:
IvanTih wrote:energy cannon capable of boiling off oceans", to take the nearest book to hand.

Please. The energy needed for this "power feat" as you state - using figures from your posted "EXTERMINATUS" thread put the total energy needed is on the magnitude of the energy produced by the sun per second - even if it took a sustained 6 hours to achieve this, this would put the gun's output at 0.001% solar outputs / second - or around 100x the total power annual generation of Earth, circa 2005.

Considering that this gun, and other weapons are all powered off the weapon systems grid (ships systems stated as separate power grid), unless the reactors are MAGIC, the fuel expenditures should be enormous, considering that the most efficient known reaction: antimatter/matter would need 3x10e^10kg (1.5x10e^10 of each type) of reagents to generate the same energy output (assuming 100% efficiency).

You've read the analysis,the guy posted the evidence and calcs.
We know that Plasma reactors can't rely on fusion(there are references on warp plasma somewhere).

**keezus**

IvanTih wrote:Then we have an agreement.I have misunderstood you.

The only agreement is with respect to the stated yields based on effect.

I have a huge problem when anyone tries to justify these huge yields by falling back on the "advanced technology" argument. Given that the writers have given the "middle finger" to physics as you state - no limits have been stated, and any suggested limits can not be proven or dis-proven. As such, in my view,it is all inadmissible as supporting evidence. Putting the onus on other posters to provide a proof of the unprovable belittles the intelligence of the other debaters and is usually the last resort of the uneducated. You are better than this.

-edit-

This cuts both ways. All that gak about how ST couldn't improve the yields of their torpedoes? Maybe they can... through the miracle of ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.

**Golden Sabres**

IvanTih wrote:[Automatically Appended Next Post:

Golden Sabres wrote:We need to remember though, a 13 megajoule laser is ap - in the 40k universe...

What about 19 Megathule range?It seems like a corrupted version of Megajoule.

Yeah it does actually... woah. Thats on par with a... Nuclear Reactor (Energy produced every second) ... omg. Ok, so these guys are running around with something that is on par with the main turret of a main battle tank.

I love the Future!!!

**IvanTih**

keezus wrote:
IvanTih wrote:Then we have an agreement.I have misunderstood you.

The only agreement is with respect to the stated yields based on effect.

I have a huge problem when anyone tries to justify these huge yields by falling back on the "advanced technology" argument. Given that the writers have given the "middle finger" to physics as you state - no limits have been stated, and any suggested limits can not be proven or dis-proven. As such, in my view,it is all inadmissible as supporting evidence. Putting the onus on other posters to provide a proof of the unprovable belittles the intelligence of the other debaters and is usually the last resort of the uneducated. You are better than this.

There's an official yield from Space Hulk 610 gigaton Hellfire torpedo.That's from 1st edition of Space Hulk.
I know,but Connor took a lot of 40k material and calced it.
Ask the Connor if you want to solve the issue.

**keezus**

Oh, there are calcs alright... it just turns all to crap soup as soon as you start to put all the different yields together. The differing weapon systems on an Imperial Cruiser are evidence of this, considering that they're ALL designed to battle ships of similar class, but have yields MAGNITUDES apart - like massed ordinance being at GT level (meaning that the individual guns are probably at low GT/high MT) and main guns being at TT level.

And don't even start with that cumulative damage crap. You can shoot a tank all day long with an AK47 but cumulative damage isn't going to do GAK to it.

**IvanTih**

keezus wrote:Oh, there are calcs alright... it just turns all to crap soup as soon as you start to put all the different yields together. The differing weapon systems on an Imperial Cruiser are evidence of this, considering that they're ALL designed to battle ships of similar class, but have yields MAGNITUDES apart - like massed ordinance being at GT level (meaning that the individual guns are probably at low GT/high MT) and main guns being at TT level.

And don't even start with that cumulative damage crap. You can shoot a tank all day long with an AK47 but cumulative damage isn't going to do GAK to it.

I asked Connor himself and he said that the evidence is the problem.To quote him.

The calcs themselves? Well that depends on whether you're asking me for what I think, or what the evidence can show. My belief leans towards 40K being around SW level of firepower (which IMHO means petaton range) based on my own analysis, but that isnt the same as what it COULD be. In theory you could argue 40K firepower as gigaton range teraton range, or petaton range. Hell you probably could go higher (I never really cared to bother trying to work it higher than somewhere in petaton range.. that's insanely high enough for 40K.) Most people I know tend to settle just for teraton range at that so for whatever common opinion is worth.

Anyhow, the evidence itself has enough leeway for the possibility of lower yields, and anyone making firepower claims is well advised to keep that in mind when debating (The same should be true with Star wars firepower. Far too many people mindlessly just assume a certain firepower level without actually digging, even though there's still a fair bit of variation and problems associated there. The ICS did not "fix" everything, or hell even most things.)

Ground firepower.. is a whole nother story.

**Melissia**

keezus wrote:Considering that a lasgun pack doesn't seem to have any light capturing properties

What?

The primary method of recharging a laspack in the field is through exposing it to sunlight. It absorbs both heat and light energy. Secondary is by charging it inside of a Chimera, I believe (it can be hooked up to any electrical outlet and charged up that way). Recharging it via fire is a risky and ill-advised maneuver.

**Ledabot**

I cant quite see the arguement about how such weapions work. this discussion is about how SW would or would not defeat IOM regardless of how BS weapions behave