Switch Theme:

What do you think of battle suits?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut





I'd play it.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Gert wrote:
I for one propose a new game, Beetlehammer 40'000.


I’m in
   
Made in gb
Preparing the Invasion of Terra






The people have spoken. All hail Beetlehammer!
   
Made in us
Ancient Venerable Dark Angels Dreadnought





Tbh, an insect based tabletop wargame would actually be pretty good, fighting on an oversized garden.
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut




Beetles beat humanoid walkers for sure. better stability, lower profile, less frontal space to armor up, and losing one leg doesn't turn you into a fancy roadblock.
   
Made in us
Powerful Pegasus Knight





They're fine when they're not the focus of an army. Tau in particular focus way too much on their walkers, when they would fit the setting and aesthetic of 40k much more of they emphasized the "covenant" aspects of their army.
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare






Play Tyranids?

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




 Sledgehammer wrote:
They're fine when they're not the focus of an army. Tau in particular focus way too much on their walkers, when they would fit the setting and aesthetic of 40k much more of they emphasized the "covenant" aspects of their army.


But people like their suit armies. Having regular battle suits as actually valid options or even base of the army, seemed to have been an argument from tau players throught out all 8th ed.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in ca
Drop Trooper with Demo Charge



Canada

I'm not generally a fan, I make an exception for the Sentinels (They remind me of AT-STs) and the Dreadnoughts (very grimdark) the rest... meh.

Just things to shoot.

Imperial Guard - 1500 GSC - 250  
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





Cronch wrote:
Beetles beat humanoid walkers for sure. better stability, lower profile, less frontal space to armor up, and losing one leg doesn't turn you into a fancy roadblock.


There’s a big beetle tank thing in starship troopers, I’m suprised GW never borrowed that idea
   
Made in us
Monster-Slaying Daemonhunter





 Insectum7 wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Second, there's maneuverability, with a bunch of points:
A combat vehicle exerts a ground pressure equal to the quotient of it's weight divided by it's ground contact area. For a tracked tank, this is the area where the tracks are touching the ground, for a 'mech this is the soles of the feet [specifically, the sole of one of it's feet, because even though it has two, it supports it's entire weight on one when moving]. Ground pressure determines what terrain a vehicle can cross, higher ground pressure is bad and means you'll sink into soft ground and become bogged, this is one of the reasons tanks have tracks in the first place instead of wheels. So a 'mech would have a smaller ground contact area [or one foot would need to be the size of the entire ground contact area of both tracks of a tank], and thus a higher ground pressure, and be less capable in off-road terrain.

Dinosaurs be like: Am I a joke to you?

Plainly big heavy things walk/walked around. Maybe not Abrams 70 ton things, but certainly Bradley 25 - 30 ton things. At that scale ground pressure doesn't seem like much of an issue.


If we're acquiescing that a 'mech won't substitute for a tank and are now discussing other combat vehicle options:

A cavalry recon vehicle/scout car may be the one thing that a 'mech might be a valid selection for. Most of the areas that a 'mech is comparatively deficient next to a tracked or wheeled system aren't massively concerning to a scout vehicle, since it's not well armored anyway, is fairly light, and actually want to be somewhat taller in general [at least, height isn't a disadvantage]. The bugbear is speed, but current wheeled systems don't operate well at all in rough terrain, so it might be an alternative to tracks, since there is somewhat a minimum weight and size for tracks to start paying off over other mobility solutions.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
There's also speed. A wheeled or tracked vehicle has the capability to be a lot faster. It's fairly simple to visualize. A walker's speed is governed by it's stride length, and it needs to take discrete steps. It can't carry it's inertia, and is in a process of continously accelerating and decelerating to a stop and then reversing it's various parts to move. A wheeled or tracked vehicle spins a thing in a continuous smooth motion for a much more efficient movement. And the top speed; the whole striding thing is a drastic limiter on the speed of a 'mech, and while a tracked vehicle is also limited by the dynamics of the belt-of-links [which will experience significant stress and also absorb a lot of energy vibrating and whipping around at high speed], and wheeled vehicle is essentially limited in speed by the torque of the motor.


There are legged animals that are faster than tracked tanks. Well, maybe just one? A Cheetah can get reportedly 70-80 mph. I'm betting humans will be able to make legged robots that hit such speeds. MIT is already on the case.
Spoiler:



None of those are 30-70 ton combat vehicles. A Cheetah is approximately 150 pounds, which is in fact substantially less than a tank, and takes a lot less power to accelerate to high speeds.


 Insectum7 wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
Obstacle crossability is the primary "reason" that is proposed for why someone would desire a large bipedal combat walker, but it's not a very good one. It's largely less proficient in slope climbing, is more limited in where it can actually put it's feet down making it less capable on uneven ground, etc. A tracked or wheeled system is a lot better at navigating rubble and broken ground than footpads due to a greater ability to shape to the ground. The supposed ability to "step up" like it's ascending a staircase in its scale is it's only theoretical advantage, but such environments only really exist in the minds of imaginative people who want giant robots to fight. They don't even occur in human-constructed environments because to the surprise of nobody, we don't generally build staircases sized for giants.
Staircase for giants:
Spoiler:


Great, we found the staircase built for a giant. We should design and adopt a specialist "mountain rice paddy combat vehicle" for use explicitly here, because this is where WWIII will be fought.

This isn't a common type of terrain. Also it's essentially a bog, if a tank can't go there, neither can a 'mech, see exhibit A: ground pressure. Almost no heavy vehicle can go there anyway, except a boat.

Theoretically, a 'mech could have great deep wading capability. That is, it can operate in deeper water than a tank. At the very least, a tank would need to be fitted before swimming while a 'mech might walk right in, so if the rivers are very deep and have a hard bottom [Generally, hard bottom rivers are shallow, and deep rivers have soft bottoms. It has to do with hydrodynamics. But, maybe we've paved the bottom of rivers with concrete like LA in the future!], then we have another extremely specific [but a little more general than the stair steps to Giantess!Katherine's house and some rice paddies].


 Insectum7 wrote:

Other rough terrain that legs might work better than treads on:
Spoiler:




It's a not really true that rough terrain would be a good terrain for legs over tracks. The ground would have to be rough in a very specific way at a very specific scale [see, the giant's staircase] The broken slope is actually substantially better for the tracked tank, or even wheels when deflated somewhat, because of their greater ability to conform to the ground, and steep terrain also favors the conventional form factor due to a lowered center of gravity. A walker requires a smooth [ish, it can manipulate it's toes for a rock or something, but that only goes so far] surface to step on, and is limited in slope by the high center of gravity. We're still "same or worse" on this performance metric.

A tracked vehicle has better torque and powertrain flow to push trees down that a 'mech. As for trench/obstacle cross distance, a tank can cross an obstacle equal to about half it's track base length without falling into the obstacle itself, a mech can cross one equal to it's stride length. A 'mech may be able to cross a longer trench, though I'm not confident in saying that and it wouldn't be on the scale of centimeters longer, not meters longer.

And then, for the mountain goats, walkers can't do that. They have foot pads that are substantially larger than the mountain goats and can't find purchases like that; or they run into the ground pressure thing for a 50-ton war machine. A 50 ton war machine, or any war machine cannot walk on needlepoints, mountain goat sized hooves, or the area of your big toe on a mountain climbing toehold, it'll sink into the ground.



 Insectum7 wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

And I won't even mention mobile stability for firing.
If a human can fire a recoiless rifle or missile launcher I'd think a big robot could too. Any viable weapons on them will be "learned" and recoil compensated for. The balance of AI bots is only going to get better and better. Some of them are already showing some excellent feats of balance and they're only going to keep improving.


Really, this is just overcoming the deficiency, not an improvement over wheels or tracks. Tracked and wheeled combat vehicles also compensate for recoil, so really all of this is just going into not being comparatively deficient. Not being worse isn't a competting argument for adoption unless it's better in other ways, and it's still worse in most terrain passability and protection, that last of which is critical for MBTs, and the former for most other combat vehicles.


 Insectum7 wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
As for noise, a 'mech is going to be as loud or louder than a tracked or wheeled tank, since it has the same engine noise but a lot more mechanical parts moving and connecting with each other, not to mention the footfalls will have much more noise than conventional propulsion. AI control can react just as fast or faster with a turret, since it's moving an object with a lower moment of inertia with better torque on a more stable platform.
Like I said above, I really don't think stability will be a problem. Legs and "torso" and "gimbal/turret/arm" designs may offer better "rotation" times than the typical turret will because there are multiple servos working in concert to reach the distance rather than just one. If a turret has to traverse 50 degrees, it has to do the whole thing on one motor and system. If a robot with legs, "torso" and gimbal-arm is rotating the same 50 degrees it could mean something like 5+ motors effectively rotating 5-15 degrees in order to reach the full distance, each one traveling it's respective target rotation faster than the one single system. The entire motion will be more complicated, to be sure, but there's reason to believe it could be achieved faster than the traditional turret in the end.

As for noise, depends on weight, drive etc. Lot's of factors there, but electric cars are a lot quieter than gas ones. If you're dealing with an electric robot with some sort of sound dampening foot pads. . . who knows?


Any of these technologies can be applied to a tank too. If you have an electric and silenced 'mech, you can also have an electric and silenced tank.

As for rotation:
It's a matter of torque and moment more than having 5 motors versus 1. 1 motor with more torque turning a smaller object will turn faster than 5 with collectively less torque. Turrets weigh less than torsos, obviously, because they torso has all the things that are normally in the hull of the tank that isn't turning, but are heavier than just the gun hanging from the arm with an ammo feed belt [they stand to be approximately the same weight if the ammo is included with the gun on the arm]. Tank turrets are surprisingly fast though, able to rotate 360 degrees in under 10 second right now, and will likely be faster in the future as they get lighter.



 Insectum7 wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

As for elevating the weapons mount, while height is generally a tactical disadvantage for a war machine, if it became such that the ability to elevate the firing point of the weapon was an overriding tactical desire, an armature or elevating hydraulic track on a conventional unit would provide superior capability at reduced weight and complexity.
The vertical mobility comes for free with legs. (I actually think they'd weigh less too, depending on their design.)


Uh.... with identical metallurgy, I doubt it. Stuff like the engine are in both and equally available. The mech has a minimum of 4 more geared motors or hydraulics, though if we assume actuators aren't heavy relative to the structure, and the volumetric comparison of the road wheels, track belt, and torsion bars to the frame and actuators would lead me to expect that the tracks should weigh less, and wheels massively less than either. Structurally, tracks and wheels don't need to be as robust either, because they're not taking the full 50-70 ton load right down on them and any sort of strange angle.

Also, as you've phrased this scenario, the vertical mobility is the objective in choosing legs over tracks, so it's not free, it's coming at the cost of picking legs, and you're trying to make sure that the other capabilities aren't worse, or are only worse to an acceptable degree.


 Insectum7 wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Walking legged things offer a meaningful advantage only essentially in environments constructed for them, like inside of human dwellings. This means that bipedal human scale robots are valuable, but unless we start building structures to be convenient staircases for the Attack of the 50' Woman, then there isn't an advantage for feet on a tank.
I agree completely that human scale robots will be valuable, but I quite disagree that human scale is the size limit for walker-viability. I think the technology will be there at some point, I think it's more a issue of whether the mission would be one that's decided to be worth pursuing. Autonomous/semi-autonomous fire support platform for use in dense/rough terrain is sorta the realm I'm thinking.


That mission can be performed better by a tracked or wheeled combat vehicle. Tanks are already moving towards maybe being autonomous in the future.

A legged robot might be a good substitute for like a THEMIS UGV or other small weapons carrier, but as a battlemech to substitute for a tracked or wheeled tank, I don't see it from a realistic perspective. I can imagine it being possible to create, I just don't imagine useful, because anything it can do a tracked heavy combat vehicle can do as well, better, or more efficiently.




Personally, I think hovertank technology, when it comes about, or maybe advanced wheels, would be the next major leap for combat vehicles, not legs. A hovertank promises to offer the same-or-better capabilities but faster than any other option for any combat vehicle that can fit within whatever it's weight limits are, and if wheeled suspensions advance enough they could supersede tracks. Tracks are better in steep terrain, rough terrain, and soft terrain than wheels which are better on hard terrain, but if advanced suspensions and other stuff makes wheels catch up in steep and rough category, there's a lot more hard terrain in the world [and it stands to grow] than soft terrain.



I also feel compelled to express the reminder that while I don't think 'mechs offer compelling advantages over tracked tanks, I still think 'mechs are cool, imaginative, and fun. I like Battletech, and shows about giant fightan' robots, so like 'mechs are pretty cool and I like them.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/05/15 18:02:59


Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades! 
   
Made in us
Terrifying Doombull




 bullyboy wrote:
Tbh, an insect based tabletop wargame would actually be pretty good, fighting on an oversized garden.


Knew these guys when they were still playtesting this (friends of friends, admittedly). It was pretty fun.

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/1246/insecta

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/15 19:15:44


Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Voss wrote:
 bullyboy wrote:
Tbh, an insect based tabletop wargame would actually be pretty good, fighting on an oversized garden.


Knew these guys when they were still playtesting this (friends of friends, admittedly). It was pretty fun.

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/1246/insecta


The buzz I heard is the Game is full of bugs. :p

Sorry, couldn't resist.

greatest band in the universe: machine supremacy

"Punch your fist in the air and hold your Gameboy aloft like the warrior you are" 
   
Made in us
Terrifying Doombull




Fair.

It was more post-apoc than garden bugs, with each bug being built from mutations from a variety of species, trading off armor, speed, damage, etc.

I recall the designers have a few choice rants about Warhammer's resolution mechanics. Three rolls for a single action (hit/wound/save), struck them as absurd.

Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in us
Tough-as-Nails Ork Boy




Inquistor Lord Katherine has a point, though I can understand why Space Marine Dreadnoughts are bipedal as that is probably the best way to get a pilot to not reject their new body if it at least can move in a similar fashion to their old body. It also probably reduces acclimation time and uses their already present reactions to produce results. Its when you get to things like Telemon Dreadnoughts, Imperial Knights and well, the majority of walking vehicles in 40keks that things fall apart. Never got why the Tau just didn't just make a Hammerhead variant with the Riptide's guns, fits their fluff much better.
   
Made in ca
Secretive Dark Angels Veteran



Canada

I feel that walkers are an important part of the 40K aesthetic.

There are other games out there with realistic tanks like Flames of War, Team Yankee and Bolt Action.

All you have to do is fire three rounds a minute, and stand 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




Cronch wrote:
Beetles beat humanoid walkers for sure. better stability, lower profile, less frontal space to armor up, and losing one leg doesn't turn you into a fancy roadblock.


And that is why four legged animals dominate the world. Oh no wait, we actually wiped most of them out. And until we put them on a diet of american corn, they were on a good way to be gone for ever.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in ca
Stubborn Dark Angels Veteran Sergeant




Vancouver, BC

It's worth noting that John Deer created a prototype 6-legged walking forestry vehicle but that it never really generated any buzz. It's more expensive than current vehicles and offers little new capacity.

http://www.theoldrobots.com/Walking-Robot2.html

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/15 20:26:48


 
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut




Karol wrote:
Cronch wrote:
Beetles beat humanoid walkers for sure. better stability, lower profile, less frontal space to armor up, and losing one leg doesn't turn you into a fancy roadblock.


And that is why four legged animals dominate the world. Oh no wait, we actually wiped most of them out. And until we put them on a diet of american corn, they were on a good way to be gone for ever.

I'm sorry what? Like...what that has to do with anything? When was the last time you saw an armed cow? I thought we were talking about walkers, not whatever incredibly bad take on biology you have...
   
Made in us
Hurr! Ogryn Bone 'Ead!





Karol wrote:
Cronch wrote:
Beetles beat humanoid walkers for sure. better stability, lower profile, less frontal space to armor up, and losing one leg doesn't turn you into a fancy roadblock.


And that is why four legged animals dominate the world. Oh no wait, we actually wiped most of them out. And until we put them on a diet of american corn, they were on a good way to be gone for ever.

Karol, do you...do you think that beetles are four-legged animals?
   
Made in us
Powerful Pegasus Knight





Karol wrote:
 Sledgehammer wrote:
They're fine when they're not the focus of an army. Tau in particular focus way too much on their walkers, when they would fit the setting and aesthetic of 40k much more of they emphasized the "covenant" aspects of their army.


But people like their suit armies. Having regular battle suits as actually valid options or even base of the army, seemed to have been an argument from tau players throught out all 8th ed.
I do think the suits are valid and should be a part of the Tau army, but I'm really not a fan of all suit armies. I just think they play way too much of a role in the Tau army when you can get stuff like this.
Spoiler:
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare







I think we might be talking past each other a bit by way of assumptions about weight class. I 100% agree that a "walking tank" in the 40+ ton range (traditional mechs) feels unreasonable, unnecessary, and inferior to other options. I'm thinking of things bigger than "man-bot" and up to the sort of 20 ton range at the high end. Even 10 might really be quite a bit larger than I'm thinking.

Ground pressure at this smaller size becomes a non-issue, a la dinosaurs, elephants, whatever.

Speed becomes much easier, I'm thinking springy ostritch-like legs allowing quicker bursts and agile movement.

Instead of having to knock over trees in a forest, it would be running between them.

Either sophisticated ankle rotation or some other adaptible foot design allowing for good behavior on slopes. Animals can do this, people can do this, walking robots will be able to do it to.

Basically I'm thinking of a thing sitting in between soldier-bot and light IFV equivalent that works as a very adaptable force multiplier carrying mostly light weaponry, 50cal-ish, grenade-launcher-ish? Or more realistically, with very modular hardpoints that can be fitted a number of ways. What for? To operate in dense and awkward terrain (jungle/urban) and carry more firepower than a soldier-bot or whatever.

I also feel compelled to express the reminder that while I don't think 'mechs offer compelling advantages over tracked tanks, I still think 'mechs are cool, imaginative, and fun. I like Battletech, and shows about giant fightan' robots, so like 'mechs are pretty cool and I like them.
No worries, I think I get ya.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in ca
Discriminating Deathmark Assassin





Stasis

People have mentioned walker equivalents for most armies, but what of the glorious Necrons?

213PL 60PL 12PL 9-17PL
(she/her) 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Blndmage wrote:
People have mentioned walker equivalents for most armies, but what of the glorious Necrons?


Necrons don’t have walkers they have floaters
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




I don't know about anyone else, but I have a major difference between "walkers" and "suits".

Notionally yes, a Dreadnought is a suit - but its carrying a tank of amniotic liquid - or whatever the current fluff is. Wraithlords contain ghosts. Deff Dreads had Orks permanently wired up inside them I think - they couldn't just hop out to go punch a grot. Then you have say a Sentinel which probably does have guys inside - but its just a vehicle. I never really liked Eldar War Walkers perhaps for similar reasons, but arguably that's still a vehicle.

By contrast you have say the Dread Knight - which is explicitly a guy in terminator armour in a giant suit. And I know haters gonna hate - but the concept just seems "dumb". In much the same way having the the supreme commander of the Adepta Sororitas inside a suit pulling little levers to do stuff seems "dumb".

On the whole mech versus tanks thing. If you could create a genuine mechnical man with the full range of movement then I think there are advantages. For example a mech could potentially crawl up to a ridge and then fire a gun with less exposure than a tank. But if you are stuck on two metal legs that have to stay standing (see Knights etc) its hard to see what realistic upside there would ever be.
   
Made in nz
Trigger-Happy Baal Predator Pilot



New Zealand

The upside of using two legs is energy efficiency. More legs means more weight to lift, so more energy/engine-power needed. Similar reason why some vehicles have thin tracks and some wide tracks. The wide tracks make less ground pressure, but the added weight strains the engine and wears more.

Legs are also good on the softest ground, like swamps, sand and mud flats etc. In situations where wheels and tracks just digs themselves in legs can still make progress (energy draining though).
   
Made in ca
Drop Trooper with Demo Charge



Canada

 Canadian 5th wrote:
It's worth noting that John Deer created a prototype 6-legged walking forestry vehicle but that it never really generated any buzz. It's more expensive than current vehicles and offers little new capacity.

http://www.theoldrobots.com/Walking-Robot2.html


Well, I'm quitting 40k now. I need to save my money for a new tractor.

Imperial Guard - 1500 GSC - 250  
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





Tygre wrote:
The upside of using two legs is energy efficiency. More legs means more weight to lift, so more energy/engine-power needed. Similar reason why some vehicles have thin tracks and some wide tracks. The wide tracks make less ground pressure, but the added weight strains the engine and wears more.

Legs are also good on the softest ground, like swamps, sand and mud flats etc. In situations where wheels and tracks just digs themselves in legs can still make progress (energy draining though).


Except cawl has invented the hover tank which for some reason doesn’t fly backwards when it fires a round


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tyel wrote:
I don't know about anyone else, but I have a major difference between "walkers" and "suits".

Notionally yes, a Dreadnought is a suit - but its carrying a tank of amniotic liquid - or whatever the current fluff is. Wraithlords contain ghosts. Deff Dreads had Orks permanently wired up inside them I think - they couldn't just hop out to go punch a grot. Then you have say a Sentinel which probably does have guys inside - but its just a vehicle. I never really liked Eldar War Walkers perhaps for similar reasons, but arguably that's still a vehicle.

By contrast you have say the Dread Knight - which is explicitly a guy in terminator armour in a giant suit. And I know haters gonna hate - but the concept just seems "dumb". In much the same way having the the supreme commander of the Adepta Sororitas inside a suit pulling little levers to do stuff seems "dumb".

On the whole mech versus tanks thing. If you could create a genuine mechnical man with the full range of movement then I think there are advantages. For example a mech could potentially crawl up to a ridge and then fire a gun with less exposure than a tank. But if you are stuck on two metal legs that have to stay standing (see Knights etc) its hard to see what realistic upside there would ever be.


I agree Walker are very mechanical and limited in movement but heavy in armour and weapons. But battle suits are just big people. I sought don’t feel that they really fit the whole dogmatic technological stagnation thing that the imperium is supposed to have. I don’t believe there are STC for these battle suits and the technology leap between a dreadnought and something that can mimic human movement with total accuracy but heightened strength and agility seems to indicate a significant level of technical advancement.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/16 13:11:26


 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare






 Blndmage wrote:
People have mentioned walker equivalents for most armies, but what of the glorious Necrons?
They have several walkees now, don't they? Triarch Stalker, Ressurrection Walker thing and the Doomsday walker thing, no?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
VonGerrow wrote:
 Canadian 5th wrote:
It's worth noting that John Deer created a prototype 6-legged walking forestry vehicle but that it never really generated any buzz. It's more expensive than current vehicles and offers little new capacity.

http://www.theoldrobots.com/Walking-Robot2.html


Well, I'm quitting 40k now. I need to save my money for a new tractor.
That thing is ancient now. I remember seeing vids of that like 20 years ago.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/16 15:49:29


And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






In defense of suits, particularly for melee, I can see tremendous combat advantages when engaging large walking enemies. Something like a Warboss, Carnifex, large daemon, and many others would easily be able to overcome a tank in close combat, and these things are not uncommon foes.

Road to Renown! It's like classic Path to Glory, but repaired, remastered, expanded! https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/778170.page

I chose an avatar I feel best represents the quality of my post history.

I try to view Warhammer as more of a toolbox with examples than fully complete games. 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: