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.

I will try to find a page number for you later tonight. Until then, have a look at this if you are interested in gathering data - there's a lot more than just heights, but it's a series of interesting quotes.

http://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/40k-source-and-feats-thread.235176/#post-8614291

"If you have the technology to create a giant combat robot, you can spend fewer resources to create a tank that is better than your giant robot."

What magic technology do you need to create a combat walker (they are crewed, not AI controlled)? Other then good energy supply it only requires a controll pattern that can keeps it stable and thats it. Once solved there is no additional prerequisite that is not already available. Bipedal walking has advantages and dissadvantages over tracks. Advantages are it doesnt care so much about terrain obstacles. There's always 2 sides to a coin, tracks do not make walkers obsolete, same as tracks didnt make wheels obsolete.

 Keep wrote:

"If you have the technology to create a giant combat robot, you can spend fewer resources to create a tank that is better than your giant robot."

What magic technology do you need to create a combat walker (they are crewed, not AI controlled)? Other then good energy supply it only requires a controll pattern that can keeps it stable and thats it. Once solved there is no additional prerequisite that is not already available. Bipedal walking has advantages and dissadvantages over tracks. Advantages are it doesnt care so much about terrain obstacles. There's always 2 sides to a coin, tracks do not make walkers obsolete, same as tracks didnt make wheels obsolete.

Unfortunately, this is not true.

The advantage of terrain becomes a lot less relevant when you are operating on a Titan scale, and even when you are not the drawbacks of a walker are significant - loss of a stability and thus can carry less armour and weaponry, a hit to a leg can topple and thus make a walker useless whereas a hit to a tread will just immobilise a tank, the walker is a lot harder to repair, a higher profile makes it far easier to hit for its mass... Hell, wheeled and tracked vehicles are also faster.

Do you think 30k marines were bigger than 40k marines?

 Icculus wrote:
Do you think 30k marines were bigger than 40k marines?

One of the Fallen Dark Angels, Attias the Untamed is said to dwarf a power armoured marine and be closer to terminators in height.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Keep wrote:

"If you have the technology to create a giant combat robot, you can spend fewer resources to create a tank that is better than your giant robot."

What magic technology do you need to create a combat walker (they are crewed, not AI controlled)? Other then good energy supply it only requires a controll pattern that can keeps it stable and thats it. Once solved there is no additional prerequisite that is not already available. Bipedal walking has advantages and dissadvantages over tracks. Advantages are it doesnt care so much about terrain obstacles. There's always 2 sides to a coin, tracks do not make walkers obsolete, same as tracks didnt make wheels obsolete.

Unfortunately, this is not true.

The advantage of terrain becomes a lot less relevant when you are operating on a Titan scale, and even when you are not the drawbacks of a walker are significant - loss of a stability and thus can carry less armour and weaponry, a hit to a leg can topple and thus make a walker useless whereas a hit to a tread will just immobilise a tank, the walker is a lot harder to repair, a higher profile makes it far easier to hit for its mass... Hell, wheeled and tracked vehicles are also faster.

Why does it become less relevant ? It's of the same relevance as on smaller scale. A titan can step over walls/ ditches that are not too high. Tanks have way lower ditch crossing/step climbing ability for obvious reasons. Also, you cant operate large tanks in mountainous terrain. They also have hard limits on maximum slope they can climb. Tanks get stuck. And you need at least 1-2 other tanks to pull it free. That means they have to operate together all the time. Titans also have way longer reach because they are higher. A superweapon with gazillions of kilometer is of no use if you mount it on something that's just 10m large. Because the surface of a planet isnt shaped like a pizza. There's a maximum range for weapons that require LOS for example lasers) by planet curvature. 1km high titans are silly, yes. But their size has been given consistently as ~45m for warlords and so on. Artworks have always have been inconsistent. Size figures not.

i'm still waiting for a explicit proof of 9' marines, that hasnt been a vague quote and an explanation why it would make more sense to have marines that big to justify having them considerably larger then the "between 7 and 8 foot" mark given by so many sources. So far all the sources repeat the goodwin figure, apart from individual space marines who are said to be taller then their brethren.

Well my quote earlier in the thread puts a marine at 8.2' tall. So not quite 9 but definitely over 8.

 Icculus wrote:
Well my quote earlier in the thread puts a marine at 8.2' tall. So not quite 9 but definitely over 8.

Saying "Two and a half" is often vague, just as "half something" is. The former would be fitting for a size between 2.3 and 2.7 meters, because "two and a half" is closer then "two meter" and "three meter" in both cases. Therefore it is not a definite that he is over 8'. 8' would be 2.44m ... mathematically rounded 2.5m

 Keep wrote:

i'm still waiting for a explicit proof of 9' marines, that hasnt been a vague quote and an explanation why it would make more sense to have marines that big to justify having them considerably larger then the "between 7 and 8 foot" mark given by so many sources.

To be fair, the number given by the largest number of sources right now is "Marines are 7 feet tall" and not "between 7 and 8 feet tall." That would imply that a 7 foot marine is the average, not that a seven and a half foot marine is average.

However, most people on this thread seem to think that a seven and a half average is better (and clearly some of the minis are larger than others). I'm actually not sure why that is (there seem to be no references putting them at seven and a half feet).

So far, it does look like the Black Library has marines at a larger scale than the other fluff sources as well (I've no doubt that our preferences depend a bit on where we prefer to get our fluff).

Most of the more reliable sources say 7 feet. Any larger than that and it just becomes silly and extremely impractical. If they're bigger than that then all you need to halt a marine crusade is a reinforced door frame.

There's many drawbacks to creating huge soldiers and not many advantages. They were most likely created big just for psychological reasons, not practical reasons. Or just "rule of cool"

 Gargantuan wrote:
rule of cool

Isn't this the reason we have Marines to begin with? It's the same reason you would put a cathedral on the back of your battle titan.

I mean, you can counter them easily by having a guardsman on a nuke kill-switch.

 Gargantuan wrote:
Most of the more reliable sources say 7 feet. Any larger than that and it just becomes silly and extremely impractical. If they're bigger than that then all you need to halt a marine crusade is a reinforced door frame.

There's many drawbacks to creating huge soldiers and not many advantages. They were most likely created big just for psychological reasons, not practical reasons. Or just "rule of cool"

"Why have you stopped battle-brother?"

"I can't get in the bloody door!"

 Keep wrote:

Saying "Two and a half" is often vague, just as "half something" is. The former would be fitting for a size between 2.3 and 2.7 meters, because "two and a half" is closer then "two meter" and "three meter" in both cases. Therefore it is not a definite that he is over 8'. 8' would be 2.44m ... mathematically rounded 2.5m

I think you're overanalysing. When they write two and a half, I think it's pretty likely they mean two and a half, and not two and a third.

 Keep wrote:

 Icculus wrote:
Well my quote earlier in the thread puts a marine at 8.2' tall. So not quite 9 but definitely over 8.

Saying "Two and a half" is often vague, just as "half something" is. The former would be fitting for a size between 2.3 and 2.7 meters, because "two and a half" is closer then "two meter" and "three meter" in both cases. Therefore it is not a definite that he is over 8'. 8' would be 2.44m ... mathematically rounded 2.5m

Hey, it is a legit reference that gives us a precise number. It is as precise as most of the other numbers given here, and deserves to be represented in the list.

A quick question- is there any reason to believe that the 2.5 meter marine was exceptional?

In the books he is in, Loken is not at any point described as special in size compared to his fellow Astartes.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
"Why have you stopped battle-brother?"

"I can't get in the bloody door!"

Let's be honest, it's not like the IoM really builds anything on a small scale lol. I really don't think doorways would be a problem!

 Ashiraya wrote:
I think you're overanalysing. When they write two and a half, I think it's pretty likely they mean two and a half, and not two and a third.

Its equally likely they wrote two and a half because blody nobody writes two and a third or two and a fifth, or two and eleven twentyfifths ( = 8').
Please show me where a BL wrote that a marine/human is something else then either full meters or half meters without giving the precise number (2.4 for example)

Let's be honest, it's not like the IoM really builds anything on a small scale lol. I really don't think doorways would be a problem!

not everything is a church or huge in 40k. It doesnt make sense to build fortifications that have 4m tall rooms and huge doorways. You want them as small as possible and thick as possible to reduce hitting propability. And large doors are harder to defend then smaller doors where just one human can enter. Just look at WW2 bunker designs. They are all cramped and small for reasons.

Horus Rising wrote:
"Vipus shrugged. He was a little taller than Loken, and his shrug made the heavy ribbing and plates of his armour clunk together."

So Vipus is taller than Loken. Then later in the book, when the best of the Luna Wolves meetup, the 4 top dogs, Abaddon included, we get this passage.

Horus Rising wrote:"The trio stepped forward into the water to face Loken. Tarik Torgaddon was the tallest of them, his trickster grin never leaving his face."

So just in the first several chapters of the book we have Loken at "Two and a half metres tall" and already two other marines are states as being taller than him. But again, this is all from one author, and this is pre-heresy 30k.

Icculus wrote:

Horus Rising wrote:"The trio stepped forward into the water to face Loken. Tarik Torgaddon was the tallest of them, his trickster grin never leaving his face."

So just in the first several chapters of the book we have Loken at "Two and a half metres tall" and already two other marines are states as being taller than him. But again, this is all from one author, and this is pre-heresy 30k.

The 4 of them are pretty special though, dont you think? They are the highest ranks, apart from horus, in their legion. They are not the average marine from their skills, and strength. So its not unlikely that their size is exceptional as well. Aren't they even described as beeing closest to their primarch? I remember that note, that one almost looks like a clone. So it would not be surprising if the extreme similarity also had a slight effect on heigth. It's been a while since i read it though.

Well Vipus wasn't exceptional. He was one of the standard guys.

ok then i remembered it wrong... i was thinking of horus advisory trio and later quartett

 Keep wrote:
ok then i remembered it wrong... i was thinking of horus advisory trio and later quartett

Well the first passage was not the horus advisory group.

The second passage is though. The first passage is just Vipus, another member of Loken's tenth company. Torgaddon is one of the Mournival though, a long with little Horus, Loken, and Abaddon.

The 'Sons of Horus' are not described as being special in height. They are described as being facially similar to their Primarch but nothing else.

It just comes back to weedy young guys making a mind game. 7' is huge. If your the size of jes.

You've got 2 line ups, both from gw. Which is probably as good as it's going to get, otherwise its he said, she said.
Though gav thorpe might eat 2 marines for breakfast now.

Though it is possible 30k marines were bigger than 40k, Like the thunder warriors

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

"Why have you stopped battle-brother?"

"I can't get in the bloody door!"

Someone is playing Space Hulk.

the ancient wrote:


Though it is possible 30k marines were bigger than 40k, Like the thunder warriors

Unlikely. We've never seen anything implying this.

On the contrary, 30k Marines were mass-produced compared to the slow and careful Marine creation of 40k.

kveldulf wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:


Power armor is made of a first layer of various medical equipment, including life support, stims, stored food, drugs, water, and feedback cables that plug into the Astartes' body. Around/above that is a set of synthetic muscles and nanotech guts that allow the suit to move in the first place. Then there's the soft armor that goes over some parts such as the joints and neck. Next is the armor player, which begins with a mixture of plasteel, durasteel, and sometimes adamantium, followed up by a final ablative layer of ceramite for heat absorption and protection from energy weapons.

It is incredibly thick. This has always been one of the few consistent things about Power Armor, dating all the way back to rogue trader. Thickness would probably be close to around MBT armor, at least two inches. Also, Sibbering's picture you posted is non-canon fanart made for Sibbering's alternate 40k fan verse that he works on. Or did you even bother to read the source?

This is power armor.

You know looking at that diagram I again, and I wonder if its hovering close to the 2" mark. Regardless, I really don't see how you would need 2" inches to accommodate all of these things; sounds like too much of a modern perspective than 'futuristic' one (even warhammer size). To elaborate, I would argue that you are making these layers sound way bigger than they need to be. 'Synthetic muscles' surely wouldn't need so much space to operate. Medical systems could be nothing more than small capillaries...

I've been playing since the 90's and it would be news to me that power armour must be 2" thick (I guess I may have missed that). Maybe at the pauldrons where it is connected to second plate its much thicker, but the rest, in place like the smooth areas of the vambrace, rerebrace, cuisses then no, surely it would not. Even the couter wouldn't be composed so uniformly with each layer necessarily.

Then source it where it was stated. Power armor has never been described as thin, it's always been portaryed as thick, incredibly heavy armor to the point that humans couldn't even lift the suit. In armor Astartes weigh an imperial ton, and that weight doesn't come from hilariously thin armor. Not to mention that Sibberin's picture is FAN FICTION and not actual canon material produced for GW.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Keep wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

.75/20mm is more then enough for your supersoldiers. Just for an example, somebody trying to shoulder and fire a browning or one of those Cartel assault rifles that fire .50 would likely break their shoulder. The only way a human can even physically fire .75/20mm rounds is either with a mounted bipod dug into the ground, a pintle mounted turret, or holding it at the hip and dropping it when the recoil hits.

.75 caliber is an autocannon round in real life that does very, very nasty things to people trying to fire a bolt action rifle chambering such rounds. Let alone an automatic .75/20mm rifle. That would just destroy anything not made of muscle or wearing reinforced armor suits.

.75 caliber is .75 caliber. It doesnt give away its power or recoil. I don't see them having problems with firing 25mm from their shoulder. And that's an ordinary round opposed to boltrounds that are selfpropelled projectiles. Bolt rounds are enough for mansized enemies, yes. But their guns would fire ridiculously small rounds for their size, if the marines that are holding them would be 9 feets tall.

9' (ish, it could be 9'1" or 8'11" or something around there) is canon

Source for 9' ? "The" book doesnt give an explicit number, you made that number up.

Which makes perfect sense to me. Looks suitably heroic/mythic without going OTT

So "looking heroic" is the only criterium you go by for a size to make sense for a supersoldier?

I'm talking about something able to chamber actual gunpowder and rocket fuel. .75/20mm long, similar to the rounds used in anti tank rifles in WWII or anti aircraft autocannons. Or the crazy (South American Cartels are Orks!) Brazilian .50 BMG assault rifles they picked off some Cartel dudes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Gargantuan wrote:
Most of the more reliable sources say 7 feet. Any larger than that and it just becomes silly and extremely impractical. If they're bigger than that then all you need to halt a marine crusade is a reinforced door frame.

There's many drawbacks to creating huge soldiers and not many advantages. They were most likely created big just for psychological reasons, not practical reasons. Or just "rule of cool"

"Why have you stopped battle-brother?"

"I can't get in the bloody door!"

Well, you can always bring a meltagun. You don't need a door when you can just slag the wall down.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ashiraya wrote:
The 'Sons of Horus' are not described as being special in height. They are described as being facially similar to their Primarch but nothing else.

Ehhh. Abadon was renowned for being so bloody tall and overall huge in size that people were spreading rumors of him being a Primarch.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Keep wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Keep wrote:

"If you have the technology to create a giant combat robot, you can spend fewer resources to create a tank that is better than your giant robot."

What magic technology do you need to create a combat walker (they are crewed, not AI controlled)? Other then good energy supply it only requires a controll pattern that can keeps it stable and thats it. Once solved there is no additional prerequisite that is not already available. Bipedal walking has advantages and dissadvantages over tracks. Advantages are it doesnt care so much about terrain obstacles. There's always 2 sides to a coin, tracks do not make walkers obsolete, same as tracks didnt make wheels obsolete.

Unfortunately, this is not true.

The advantage of terrain becomes a lot less relevant when you are operating on a Titan scale, and even when you are not the drawbacks of a walker are significant - loss of a stability and thus can carry less armour and weaponry, a hit to a leg can topple and thus make a walker useless whereas a hit to a tread will just immobilise a tank, the walker is a lot harder to repair, a higher profile makes it far easier to hit for its mass... Hell, wheeled and tracked vehicles are also faster.

Why does it become less relevant ? It's of the same relevance as on smaller scale. A titan can step over walls/ ditches that are not too high. Tanks have way lower ditch crossing/step climbing ability for obvious reasons. Also, you cant operate large tanks in mountainous terrain. They also have hard limits on maximum slope they can climb. Tanks get stuck. And you need at least 1-2 other tanks to pull it free. That means they have to operate together all the time. Titans also have way longer reach because they are higher. A superweapon with gazillions of kilometer is of no use if you mount it on something that's just 10m large. Because the surface of a planet isnt shaped like a pizza. There's a maximum range for weapons that require LOS for example lasers) by planet curvature. 1km high titans are silly, yes. But their size has been given consistently as ~45m for warlords and so on. Artworks have always have been inconsistent. Size figures not.

i'm still waiting for a explicit proof of 9' marines, that hasnt been a vague quote and an explanation why it would make more sense to have marines that big to justify having them considerably larger then the "between 7 and 8 foot" mark given by so many sources. So far all the sources repeat the goodwin figure, apart from individual space marines who are said to be taller then their brethren.

Dude. Titans are insane. The square cube law alone would probably kill one, let alone the power generation to make one move, coupled with the resources to build it and how it will just die if it falls over. Then you've got to get over other hurdles, like it being so large it's simply ICBM bait. The second that thing shows its ugly mug, it's going to be blown away by a nuclear arsenal until the void shield folds. Unless you live on a low-grav world, giant robots are one of the downright dumbest things you can possibly build, especially when you already have ships in orbit that should be able to sort the entire battle out with precision lance strikes.

Titans are one of the major things in 40k you should never think about rationally, otherwise your mind will break when you realize how nonsensical they are.

Abaddon was a special case and there is no evidence of his height being linked to his status as being a Son.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Abaddon was a special case and there is no evidence of his height being linked to his status as being a Son.

Unless he as a child suffered from giantism, I would generally put the blame of becoming a giant among giants on the genetic engineering he underwent that hijacked his puberty.

Abaddon was known for his overall size, but we have a quote from Horus Rising describing Torgaddon as the tallest of the Mournival. So I think in Abaddon's case his extraordinary size may have been mostly in reference to bulk.