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.

As someone who doesn't have access to tabletop, I was hoping some experienced players here will answer some questions for me.

Who would win in a 1v1 fight? (and by how much? ie no contest, barely, etc.)
Canoptek Acanthrite v.s. Tomb Stalker or Tomb Sentinel (if the Tombs are stronger, how many CA will it take to bring it down?)
Seraptek Heavy Construct vs KX139 Ta'unar Supremacy Armour

Hierophant vs Seraptek Heavy Construct (if Hierophant, how many SHC will it take to bring it down?)
Hierophant vs KX139 Ta'unar Supremacy Armour (if Hierophant, how many KX139s will it take to bring it down?)

Necron Obelisk vs Seraptek Heavy Construct
Tesseract Vault vs Seraptek Heavy Construct

Hierophant vs Harridan

How many KX139 Ta'unar Supremacy Armours will it take to take out a...
1. Warlord Battle Titan
2. Emperor Battle Titan

How many Seraptek Heavy Constructs will it take to take out a
1. Warlord Battle Titan
2. Emperor Battle Titan

How many Hierophants will it take to take out a
1. Warlord Battle Titan
2. Emperor Battle Titan

How many Tomb Stalkers will it take to take out a Seraptek Heavy Construct?
How many Tomb Sentinels will it take to take out a Seraptek Heavy Construct?

It's bothers me a lot that I don't know how strong these guys are relative to each other >.<

You can approximate the math by looking at the profiles and calculating expected damage per turn in different contexts

 jeff white wrote:
You can approximate the math by looking at the profiles and calculating expected damage per turn in different contexts

not exactly easy when you don't play the game

Tabletop stats aren't necessarily consistent with the lore, and vary wildly edition to edition.

Also I don't think the Emperor-class Titan has ever had 40k-scale tabletop stats.

and on table top 40k, titans tend to be a bit.... odd due to some rules pecularities leading to them not being as strong as they proably should be. (Adeptus Titanicus I see as being the best representation of how titans should be depicted because the game is DESIGNED around them)

Thing its its not always so easy to work out for a few reasons

1) Lore VS Game Maths. This has been touched on above. Lore wise things are REALLY different and can vary quite a lot depending on who the author is, what generation it was written in and also depending who is the focus of the story (and what the story is in general). You'll get dogged warriors that last far beyond what they should and mighty titanic machines brought low by weaklings.

2) Game Maths - as noted not everything above has a game rule for it. Some you'd have to make up yourself.

3) Maths context. Number crunching doesn't always reflect game reality very well. For example is there any terrain present? Does it block line of sight for ranged weapons?

An artillery platform style unit is near useless if the terrain is really dense with lots of line of sight blocking angles; which gives great cover for a closer ranged unit to get up close.

Similarly if the field of battle is an open field with nothing upon it, a weaker ranged unit imght well do really well against a dedicated close combat unit.




I think the key question is if you're not playing why do you need to know this information? If its story writing I'd say the best thing isn't to ask about the game side of things, but to read stories and find out the lore about those units.
Gameplay leaves loads of things out (it has too to make the game simple enough to be fun) and makes approximations and more. Heck we don't really take into account ground conditions, weather etc...
Plus isolated duels are rare. You note Tyranids above and typically they'd have swarms around them. Perhaps the weaker tyranid wins because it synapse draws loads of gargoyles to it which cause confusion and damage of their own.

Q: Who would win in a fight (without using game math)?

A: Whoever the author decides is gonna win.

there are stories of Imperial Super heavies literally being taken down by being swarmed with Gaunts, for example

There are at least three rule systems we could use for some of these (40k, apocalypse, and titanicus), which I'm sure would produce wildly differing results. I'm just going to look at the 40k rules, as that's what I'm most familiar with.

roboemperor wrote:

Hierophant vs Seraptek Heavy Construct (if Hierophant, how many SHC will it take to bring it down?)

A Hierophant is a proper titan, somewhere between a warhound and a reaver in relative strength (closer to the reaver). However the 40k point costs for titans are a bit shonky, so it only costs as much as the warhound. Meaning that relative to its point cost, it's one of the more powerful titans in this ruleset.
A Seraptek Heavy Construct on the other hand is the necron equivalent to a knight. It's far weaker, and doesn't really want to be fighting titans.
On average the Hierophant will kill a heavy construct with just one of its two cannons each time it fires. So it could kill 2 per turn with shooting, then maul a third in close combat.
The Seraptek Heavy Construct will deal somewhere around 10 wounds back to the Hierophant each time it fires, out of the Hierophants starting 50 (this is assuming no defensive buffs have been applied to the Hierophant, which is unlikely).

roboemperor wrote:

Hierophant vs KX139 Ta'unar Supremacy Armour (if Hierophant, how many KX139s will it take to bring it down?)

This is a bit trickier. The Ta'unar is approximately equivalent to a Warhound titan. It's nastier than the heavy construct, but still a slightly lighter class of titan than a Hierophant.
By itself, the Ta'unar is not significantly tougher than a Seraptek Heavy Construct (although much better armed). However it has access to the best defensive buff in the game, which is Tau drone shenanigans. If the Hierophant can get a clean shot at the Ta'unar with no drones around, then it will wipe it out in a single volley. However if there are any drones around (and there will be many), then they'll absorb all the damage leaving the Ta'unar unscathed.
The Ta'unar will average around 2/3rds of the hierophants health each time it fires (once again assuming no defensive buffs).
This really comes down to how well the smaller supporting tyranids in the army can deal with the drones. If they can clear them out, the Hierophant wins. Otherwise it dies after a couple of rounds.

roboemperor wrote:

Necron Obelisk vs Seraptek Heavy Construct

This isn't even a contest. The Obelisk is not designed to deal with heavy vehicles. It has a bunch of anti-infantry guns, and a gravity pulse for damaging fliers. It has no business fighting a heavy construct.

roboemperor wrote:

Tesseract Vault vs Seraptek Heavy Construct

Both units have the same number of wounds, with the Tesseract Vault having a better invulnerable save. The Tesseract Vault can throw out a decent number of mortal wounds each turn. However it's mainly designed around damaging multiple units, while the heavy construct is better at focusing on a big target.
It'll take a few turns, but this is in favor of the heavy construct.

roboemperor wrote:

Hierophant vs Harridan

While the model may be the same size as the Hierophant, the Harridan is really bad. In terms of its abilities it's basically a knight class model. The Hierophant can bring one down each turn with a single cannon, and the harridan averages about 5 wounds back (out of 50).

roboemperor wrote:

How many KX139 Ta'unar Supremacy Armours will it take to take out a...
1. Warlord Battle Titan
2. Emperor Battle Titan

How many Seraptek Heavy Constructs will it take to take out a
1. Warlord Battle Titan
2. Emperor Battle Titan

How many Hierophants will it take to take out a
1. Warlord Battle Titan
2. Emperor Battle Titan

Can't be bothered calculating all this. There are currently no 40k rules for an Emperor titan, so I can't offer anything there. Other systems which contain rules for them would need to be looked at.
As for the warlord:
Ta'unar: Several
Seraptek Heavy Construct: Many
Hierophant: Around three

Warlord titans are equipped with void shields, which in the current iteration of the rules are represented by an invulnerable save that gets weaker as the titan takes damage (and can also be used to save mortal wounds, which are normally unsavable).
Firing both of its cannons, a Hierophant will average about 25 wounds out of the warlords 70 while the warlord is at full strength. A second Hierophant firing will on average inflict a further 37 wounds against the weakened void shield. At which point the warlord will have around 8 wounds left, and be easy pickings for a third Hierophant (conveniently the warlord costs as many points as three Hierophants).

As for its return fire, the Warlord is absolutely brutal. It can be equipped with a massive variety of weapons. I can't be bothered going through them all, but it looks quite capable of dropping at least two hierophants per turn. So it would really come down to who gets to shoot first.

If I were to guess what the Emperor titan rules might be, I would say it is would come out to around T20 and 120 wounds with the firepower to match. It's main guns are basically just upscaled warlord weapons a larger gatling blaster, dual volcano cannons, or big plasma gun, but it has a much larger array of secondary weapons (6 to a warlord's 2 or reaver's 1), which are lower scale titan class weapons in and of themselves. They also have more tertiary weapons, 3 on each leg and more on the rest of the body (the warlord only has 4 and the nemesis 5), although they won't play a big role in titan v. titan matches (except the swarm incubator).

Compared to its opponents, the Emperor can probably take out about 3-5 of each per turn (slightly less for the Hierophant, but not by much). Both the Hierophant and Taunar will do about 6 wounds on it if they can get the chance the Seraptek will only do about 3. As a result, I would say you would say about a dozen Taunars or Hierophants could take out an Emperor (range and movement is a big problem for the Hierophant, I suspect an Emperor could run out of its 48in range). Maybe two dozen Serapteks could take it out, the lack of macro weapons really hurts it.

emperor also has platforms for infantry on it, so you'd have stuff like Skitari standing on it's knees shooting stuff

There are rules for canon Imperator Titans out there. Just saying

 Lobukia wrote:
There are rules for canon Imperator Titans out there. Just saying

I've seen fan rules, but never any from GW. Do you remember what book they were in?

In Epic from the 1990s. The Tau and Necrons (Newcrons) didn't even exist then. And I don't know how to play Epic.

Imperators were in Titan Legions - you got a big double A4 sheet to move power tokens around on a diagram of it to shunt reactor power from different areas of it. They also carried rules forward into Epic 40K. I think Epic Armageddon might not have had rules as by that stage the plastic Imperator Kit was retired from sale if I recall right.

Heck the Imperator and Mega Gargant feature on the old cover art for Titan Legions on the starter boxed set.

So there are at least two editions of rules out there for it.

When superheavies get bigger than imperial knights, in game the winner is whoever shoots first.

For your match ups listed, the only times this won't really hold true is for some of the more unusual units like the Harridan which doesn't really shoot or fight that well against tough units, or maybe the Hierophant which is about 3x the cost of any of the other units on show.

If your a non player interested in these kind of stats, battlescribe would be worth a look for reasonably accurate unit comparisons.

Arson Fire wrote:
...

Thanks a lot! I just wanted to have a ballpark figure to see which ultimate land units stand where out of curiosity, and you delivered greatly!

So from what I got from you and Insularum
Seraptek Heavy Construct & Tesseract Vault & Harridan - not for titan class combat
KX139 Ta'unar Supremacy Armour - By itself it's not much but when supported (by drones) can take out everything "cost efficiently".
Hierophant - Kicks ass

Wait, Tau drones can actually intercept wounds for a goddamn Taunar?

LOL. that's like if the "look out - AAAARGH" bodyguard ability worked for a fething warlord titan.

"We thought we wuz a goner guv'nor, but then ol' - sniff - ol' Johnson jumped right in front 'o the macro-cannon shot. We'll never forget your bravery, Johnson!"

roboemperor wrote:

Arson Fire wrote:
...

Thanks a lot! I just wanted to have a ballpark figure to see which ultimate land units stand where out of curiosity, and you delivered greatly!

So from what I got from you and Insularum
Seraptek Heavy Construct & Tesseract Vault & Harridan - not for titan class combat
KX139 Ta'unar Supremacy Armour - By itself it's not much but when supported (by drones) can take out everything "cost efficiently".
Hierophant - Kicks ass

keep in mind the cost he's talking about is point cost which is utterly irrelevant for you. point cost is just how table top balances things. it doesn't nesscarily reflect it's cost in resources in the setting (especially as some things in 40k are literally "priceless")

BrianDavion wrote:
keep in mind the cost he's talking about is point cost which is utterly irrelevant for you. point cost is just how table top balances things. it doesn't nesscarily reflect it's cost in resources in the setting (especially as some things in 40k are literally "priceless")

I guess. Oh well. What can you do.

roboemperor wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
keep in mind the cost he's talking about is point cost which is utterly irrelevant for you. point cost is just how table top balances things. it doesn't nesscarily reflect it's cost in resources in the setting (especially as some things in 40k are literally "priceless")

I guess. Oh well. What can you do.

yeah I just wanted to mention that when I saw him talk about points, can't really say how cost efficant the Tau are, I imagine they are forced to be reasonably efficant by necessity though given the Tau empire is maybe 100-200 worlds tops. which makes them a VEERY small fish in a VERY big pond.

I went digging and found something claiming to be an Emperor-class datasheet from 4e-vintage Apocalypse. 12 structure points and 8 void shields make it about 1.3x the size of a Warlord in the same system, 8 S9/AP3 7" blasts and 8 D-strength blasts of various sizes give it also about 1.3x the firepower, though the Warlord doesn't have the Vortex missile that no-save RFPs anything smaller than a superheavy.

roboemperor wrote:

So from what I got from you and Insularum
Seraptek Heavy Construct & Tesseract Vault & Harridan - not for titan class combat
KX139 Ta'unar Supremacy Armour - By itself it's not much but when supported (by drones) can take out everything "cost efficiently".
Hierophant - Kicks ass

The Seraptek, Tesseract, and Harridan are all knight class units, if large ones. They aren’t designed to face titans.
The Taunar is also a knight class weapon, but it is actually designed to take on titans. Iirc the lore correctly, when the Tau first heard of imperial titans, they thought they were propaganda. During the damocles gulf war, they learned they were both real and something they had no answer to. First they tried using space ships to take them on, like the manta, but eventually they realized they simply had to build bigger mobile guns, hence the Taunar.
Thr Hierophant only kicks ass relative to the other xeno superheavies is because it is an actual titan, not an unusually mean knight-eq. Truth be told, it is rather weak as far as titans go, being equivalent to a warhound titan. The fact that it’s only T8 with a 5+ invuln really hurts it when most titans have a 4+ invuln and are T9. This is somewhat mitigated by its 50 wounds, almost as much as a reaver or phantom titan, but that only makes it a bit tougher than a warhound at the cost of a lot of mobility and damage. It’s probably the worst titan in the game. Maybe only a Revenant is worse.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I went digging and found something claiming to be an Emperor-class datasheet from 4e-vintage Apocalypse. 12 structure points and 8 void shields make it about 1.3x the size of a Warlord in the same system, 8 S9/AP3 7" blasts and 8 D-strength blasts of various sizes give it also about 1.3x the firepower, though the Warlord doesn't have the Vortex missile that no-save RFPs anything smaller than a superheavy.

So an emperor would come out to 90 wounds in modern 40k? I don’t see how to account for the improved voidshield without giving it a 2+ invuln, but I guess that’s not important. Given its size (1.5 times taller than a warlord) I would expect it to be much tougher than that, maybe it would be T28 or something. But regardless of how strong the weapons are, the shear number of weapon points the Emperor has puts it well above a Warlord in modern 40k titan comparisons, even if the main guns aren’t much better.

 Eipi10 wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I went digging and found something claiming to be an Emperor-class datasheet from 4e-vintage Apocalypse. 12 structure points and 8 void shields make it about 1.3x the size of a Warlord in the same system, 8 S9/AP3 7" blasts and 8 D-strength blasts of various sizes give it also about 1.3x the firepower, though the Warlord doesn't have the Vortex missile that no-save RFPs anything smaller than a superheavy.

So an emperor would come out to 90 wounds in modern 40k? I don’t see how to account for the improved voidshield without giving it a 2+ invuln, but I guess that’s not important. Given its size (1.5 times taller than a warlord) I would expect it to be much tougher than that, maybe it would be T28 or something. But regardless of how strong the weapons are, the shear number of weapon points the Emperor has puts it well above a Warlord in modern 40k titan comparisons, even if the main guns aren’t much better.

The conversion factor is odd. 12 Structure Points in 4e means 36 Hull Points in 6e, and hull points tended to be 3-4 wounds each in the conversion to 8e (ex. 6HP Knights -> 24 Wounds) so it could be as much as 144 wounds.

 Eipi10 wrote:

Thr Hierophant only kicks ass relative to the other xeno superheavies is because it is an actual titan, not an unusually mean knight-eq. Truth be told, it is rather weak as far as titans go, being equivalent to a warhound titan. The fact that it’s only T8 with a 5+ invuln really hurts it when most titans have a 4+ invuln and are T9. This is somewhat mitigated by its 50 wounds, almost as much as a reaver or phantom titan, but that only makes it a bit tougher than a warhound at the cost of a lot of mobility and damage. It’s probably the worst titan in the game. Maybe only a Revenant is worse.

While it's true that some of its base stats are weaker than imperial titans, the advantage it has over them is that it's part of a faction full of buffs you can apply to it.
The imperial titans have little in the way of supporting units or abilities. So what they can do is pretty much limited to what's on their datasheet.

Tyranids have an assortment of abilities and stratagems they can put onto their titan. Significantly improving its durability, offense, and speed over what you see on the datasheet.
Defensively, you can easily stack a -1 to hit it, a 5+++, counting as being in cover while in the open (for an effective 1+ save), and -1 to the strength of enemy weapons.

I stand by the Hierophant being significantly better than a Warhound.

roboemperor wrote:
As someone who doesn't have access to tabletop, I was hoping some experienced players here will answer some questions for me.

Who would win in a 1v1 fight? (and by how much? ie no contest, barely, etc.)
Canoptek Acanthrite v.s. Tomb Stalker or Tomb Sentinel (if the Tombs are stronger, how many CA will it take to bring it down?)
Seraptek Heavy Construct vs KX139 Ta'unar Supremacy Armour

Hierophant vs Seraptek Heavy Construct (if Hierophant, how many SHC will it take to bring it down?)
Hierophant vs KX139 Ta'unar Supremacy Armour (if Hierophant, how many KX139s will it take to bring it down?)

Necron Obelisk vs Seraptek Heavy Construct
Tesseract Vault vs Seraptek Heavy Construct

Hierophant vs Harridan

How many KX139 Ta'unar Supremacy Armours will it take to take out a...
1. Warlord Battle Titan
2. Emperor Battle Titan

How many Seraptek Heavy Constructs will it take to take out a
1. Warlord Battle Titan
2. Emperor Battle Titan

How many Hierophants will it take to take out a
1. Warlord Battle Titan
2. Emperor Battle Titan

How many Tomb Stalkers will it take to take out a Seraptek Heavy Construct?
How many Tomb Sentinels will it take to take out a Seraptek Heavy Construct?

It's bothers me a lot that I don't know how strong these guys are relative to each other >.<

Can't answer to the fluff, as others have said it can be inconsistent.

Canoptek Acanthrites are much weaker than Stalkers and Sentinels, you'd need about three Acanthrites to bring one down although one might get lucky and blast the head off a Sentinel.

Ta'unar is superior to the Seraptek, not by much and it depends on the layout of the battlefield, a Seraptek could very well take the fight in a 1v1 but the Ta'unar will usually have drones and Fire Warriors in support preventing the Seraptek from doing as much damage as it should, the Seraptek is 50/50 melee/shooting while the Ta'unar is 10/90 melee/shooting so if you can engineer a situation where melee or shooting gets to reign then that will decide the matchup. I believe the Hierophant should win most of the time without knowing all the stats by heart. The Hierophant isn't as good as the Seraptek in melee, but much better than the Ta'unar so that could move things.

Necron Obelisks are terrible in super-heavy battles. It's only good at frying lots of Orks/Guardsmen and against MSU jump pack/jetbike armies. Seraptek beats any other single Necron entity by miles so it's no contest really. If the terrain is favourable it could beat two Tesseract Vaults at once and you'd need something like four or five Obelisks to beat just one Seraptek.

Hierophant beats Harridan from what I know of the stats, but Harridans and Warlord+ Titans are the only units on this list I've never played with or against.

Two to three Serapteks are about on-par with a Warlord, four to an Emperor. Hierophants aren't much better than Serapteks, little tougher but I'd go with two and four for Warlord and Emperor class titans respectively.

 vict0988 wrote:
Two to three Serapteks are about on-par with a Warlord, four to an Emperor. Hierophants aren't much better than Serapteks, little tougher but I'd go with two and four for Warlord and Emperor class titans respectively.

huh. What you're saying directly contradicts the others. 2 against warlord and 4 against emperor is amazing, but others said it will take many to take down a warlord.

So... does the Seraptek kick major ass or not? :s

As for ta'unar vs seraptek, if I read you correctly, if they both start at maximum distance, 1v1 (no support) and ta'unar shoots first, ta'unar wins, but if they start in melee distance Seraptek wins even if the ta'unar goes first?

roboemperor wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:
Two to three Serapteks are about on-par with a Warlord, four to an Emperor. Hierophants aren't much better than Serapteks, little tougher but I'd go with two and four for Warlord and Emperor class titans respectively.

huh. What you're saying directly contradicts the others. 2 against warlord and 4 against emperor is amazing, but others said it will take many to take down a warlord.

So... does the Seraptek kick major ass or not? :s

As for ta'unar vs seraptek, if I read you correctly, if they both start at maximum distance, 1v1 (no support) and ta'unar shoots first, ta'unar wins, but if they start in melee distance Seraptek wins even if the ta'unar goes first?

As I mentioned I've never played with or against the Warlord, it might be way off. Taking another look at the Warlord it's probably closer to four Serapteks to a Warlord and I don't believe any Emperor class titans have had official rules in 8th and I believe I only saw fan rules for 7th. Serapteks are pretty strong, they have great melee and very good shooting, they also have a lot of wounds. Outside of competitive games and with favourable terrain they are absolute monsters. In the game everything has to be viewed in relation to pts and Warlord titans can't be brought within the normal pts limit which is why I don't know too much about them.

That's my understanding of how the Seraptek/Ta'unar matchup would go. Why are you curious about all these matchups?

What a strange and irrelevant topic.

If you want to know about these niche units work it out yourself by looking at the rules. Stage a mock battle with tokens.

 vict0988 wrote:
That's my understanding of how the Seraptek/Ta'unar matchup would go. Why are you curious about all these matchups?

The imperial titans are my attempt at trying to find a measuring stick for power.

Hierophant is to understand the ceiling of Tyranid's ground army power.

I'm mainly interested in Seraptek Heavy Construct and the KX139 Ta'unar Supremacy Armour. I really really really like the Seraptek Heavy Construct's design but performance matters too. No point in falling in love with weaksauce. So if the Seraptek Heavy Construct's performance falls behind what I deem acceptable then I'm going with the KX139 Ta'unar Supremacy Armour.

Tesseract Vault seems very powerful "ctan enslavement and all" but I have no idea how strong it is so I wanted to know how strong they really are. Now I know: weaker than Seraptek Heavy Construct.