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.

Martel732 wrote:
"So trying to put an Abrams into 40k is an example of a pointless thought experiment"

Not really. We have a hit rate for the Abrams. And then another hit rate for 40K tanks. Those numbers are directly comparable. 40K targeting sucks. 40K is basically the retro future, which basically makes me think that their ground forces would struggle against any non-retro future military.

Their tanks look like WW I tanks for crying about loud. And they don't have gyro stabilized turrets. (Can't fire on the move) And there are precious few seeking weapons. And the weapons ranges are absurdly short. It's like Battletech all over again.

In real futuristic warfare, you don't get to see your opponent, and there is no assault phase. And Orks and bugs just auto-lose for the most part. (Like in the Starship Troopers novel)

Why do people like this even frequent 40k background forums? I have pondered this for some time, and I don't really have an answer. Let us compare a tank - any real world tank - to...a plastic model in a tabletop game. You can't believe that you are being genuine, right? You pick and choose what you wish to compare, pretending that there is such "superiority" between modern tech and 40k tech, while conveniently missing all the things that irrefutably demonstrate the technological "superiority" of the 40k universe. What is a modern tank vs a lascannon? vs void shield generators? vs orbital bombardment? Last I checked, we also don't have humans with multiple stomachs, a second heart, extra corrosive saliva, etc. Do we have Titans? Regardless of whether or not the technology could stand up to any variety of missiles, etc. Do we have the capability to make any of those things? For that matter, are modern tanks designed to deal with weapons as exotic as distortion cannons that rip their target from reality and transport them into the Warp? Are there fungal spores on steroids prying its armor plating off with hydrolic, hand-held mechanical claws? How about daemons that fade in and out of reality? Pestilences spawned by an active, undeniable god or viral bombs designed to eradicate all life on a planet?

But, then again, what's it all matter, since "Their tanks look like WW I tanks for crying about loud," right?

There is a point to be made for comparing them with their IRL counterparts, because there are some features that empirically would make them better - like having suspension on their tracks, sloped armour, or having some clearance distance between the hull and the dirt.

On the other hand, we don't have a counterpart for Plasteel, Ceramite, Adamantium, Void Shields and the Power Of Love Incarnate (Warp).

Sloped armor I will grant you. Suspension systems? This assumes there's not some future-tech in the base design that obliviates the need for such as we would recognize it. Dirt, though, gives way for the Emperor's tanks, if it knows what's good for it.

 Grumblewartz wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
"So trying to put an Abrams into 40k is an example of a pointless thought experiment"

Not really. We have a hit rate for the Abrams. And then another hit rate for 40K tanks. Those numbers are directly comparable. 40K targeting sucks. 40K is basically the retro future, which basically makes me think that their ground forces would struggle against any non-retro future military.

Their tanks look like WW I tanks for crying about loud. And they don't have gyro stabilized turrets. (Can't fire on the move) And there are precious few seeking weapons. And the weapons ranges are absurdly short. It's like Battletech all over again.

In real futuristic warfare, you don't get to see your opponent, and there is no assault phase. And Orks and bugs just auto-lose for the most part. (Like in the Starship Troopers novel)

Why do people like this even frequent 40k background forums? I have pondered this for some time, and I don't really have an answer. Let us compare a tank - any real world tank - to...a plastic model in a tabletop game. You can't believe that you are being genuine, right? You pick and choose what you wish to compare, pretending that there is such "superiority" between modern tech and 40k tech, while conveniently missing all the things that irrefutably demonstrate the technological "superiority" of the 40k universe. What is a modern tank vs a lascannon? vs void shield generators? vs orbital bombardment? Last I checked, we also don't have humans with multiple stomachs, a second heart, extra corrosive saliva, etc. Do we have Titans? Regardless of whether or not the technology could stand up to any variety of missiles, etc. Do we have the capability to make any of those things? For that matter, are modern tanks designed to deal with weapons as exotic as distortion cannons that rip their target from reality and transport them into the Warp? Are there fungal spores on steroids prying its armor plating off with hydrolic, hand-held mechanical claws? How about daemons that fade in and out of reality? Pestilences spawned by an active, undeniable god or viral bombs designed to eradicate all life on a planet?

But, then again, what's it all matter, since "Their tanks look like WW I tanks for crying about loud," right?

 Selym wrote:
There is a point to be made for comparing them with their IRL counterparts, because there are some features that empirically would make them better - like having suspension on their tracks, sloped armour, or having some clearance distance between the hull and the dirt.

On the other hand, we don't have a counterpart for Plasteel, Ceramite, Adamantium, Void Shields and...

I find it's good to turn a blind eye to the technical unrealism when it's justified by awesomeness. They look like WW1 tanks, but that looks cool- Emperor titans have cathedrals on their shoulders/carapace, which is just silly, but it adds alot of character (as well as some good scenes in Helsreach). Having said that, simply being in a neo-gothic setting with space elves is not in itself a reason to reject realism. I've seen too often that people say "how can you say the Leman Russ is unrealistic in a game which has more unrealistic things like space elves and wizards?" Well that is a fallacy which assumes that just all logic can and will be tossed in the air just because it contains things which are fictional. The 40K universe still has it's own internal logic just as any fandom does- if a Craftworld Eldar shoots at one of his own Craftworld friends for no good reason you can't dismiss it as "meh it's 40K, it doesn't have to make sense"- they still done something which is irrational. Likewise, making a tank without modern principles of sloped armour is also irrational and silly- but it's also cool, so we choose to ignore it.

the Power Of Love Incarnate (Warp).

Lust has a god in 40K, but love doesn't! I'd guess it's just not grimdark enough. Although having some giant care bears running at them will fill my Tau with all sorts of dread.

The Emperor is the god of love.

In the Noble Brightness of the far future, there is only cuddling!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
*THE POWER OF LOVE COMPELLS YOU!*

.... this is getting into Ponyhammer 40k, isn't it?

Friendship is magic. Magic is heresy.

 Psienesis wrote:
.... this is getting into Ponyhammer 40k, isn't it?

Friendship is magic. Magic is heresy.

The filial love the Emperor has for all his people... do you dare cheapen it so?

 Furyou Miko wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
.... this is getting into Ponyhammer 40k, isn't it?

Friendship is magic. Magic is heresy.

The filial love the Emperor has for all his people... do you dare cheapen it so?

YEEEESSSSS!!

In the vast grimdark of 40k, the only surviving computer technology is the ancient and immortal TI-84, (Texas Instrument 83-89 series) and it still costs $150+ dollars! Cmon wtf? this thing is nearly useless! My Samsung S4 costs just as much but does so much more! God i hate this junk! I have had it lost, stolen, snd broken so I had to buy it 3 freaking times! I could have bought 3 imperial knight titans for thd same cost!

 Filch wrote:
In the vast grimdark of 40k, the only surviving computer technology is the ancient and immortal TI-84, (Texas Instrument 83-89 series) and it still costs $150+ dollars! Cmon wtf? this thing is nearly useless! My Samsung S4 costs just as much but does so much more! God i hate this junk! I have had it lost, stolen, snd broken so I had to buy it 3 freaking times! I could have bought 3 imperial knight titans for thd same cost!

There's a story in there somewhere, isn't there?

I reckon they still have Apple computers in 40k - for Ogryns to use.

The god of love is Nurgle.

40K is grimdark puritan in its ethos. There are no positive emotions.

Alcibiades wrote:
The god of love is Nurgle.

40K is grimdark puritan in its ethos. There are no positive emotions.

And nothing positive comes from lack of emotion. You just can't win.

via Imgflip Meme Maker

 SDFarsight wrote:
I find it's good to turn a blind eye to the technical unrealism when it's justified by awesomeness. They look like WW1 tanks, but that looks cool- Emperor titans have cathedrals on their shoulders/carapace, which is just silly, but it adds alot of character (as well as some good scenes in Helsreach). Having said that, simply being in a neo-gothic setting with space elves is not in itself a reason to reject realism. I've seen too often that people say "how can you say the Leman Russ is unrealistic in a game which has more unrealistic things like space elves and wizards?" Well that is a fallacy which assumes that just all logic can and will be tossed in the air just because it contains things which are fictional. The 40K universe still has it's own internal logic just as any fandom does- if a Craftworld Eldar shoots at one of his own Craftworld friends for no good reason you can't dismiss it as "meh it's 40K, it doesn't have to make sense"- they still done something which is irrational. Likewise, making a tank without modern principles of sloped armour is also irrational and silly- but it's also cool, so we choose to ignore it.[/url]

Well the whole issue with leman russes, as many other pieces of tech in the 40k universe, are not used for their original purpose. Leman Russ is a tractor (whether agricultural or artillery tractor is never verified), Rhino was a all terrain and atmosphere vehicle IIRC. Logically the original tanks in ww1 also used tracked tractors as inspiration and were little better than modified artillery tractors.

Also the vehicles in the 40k universe do share many common elements with modern combat vehicles. Most have sloped frontal armour (sloped side armour is still a rarity), they have AT missiles to augment vehicles with lesser AT abilities, the Chimera for example is pretty much spot on with a modern AFV, especially if you give them hunter killer missiles. The only real issue is side sponsors, which are very ww1'y but actually work fairly well if you have spare room on vehicles. However most ww1, ww2 vehicles lack that room due to size, and modern tanks need to save as much weight as possible. In the 40k universe because of engine tech etc etc heavier vehicles are more viable, as do supply lines become less of an issue when most engines pretty much run on anything.

The main convergence with the 40k universe is superheavy vehicles, walkers and titans. Plus a lack of explanation why A) Nuclear Weapons don't seem to be that common and B) How superheavy vehicles were developed in the first place, surely they would be equally susceptible to artillary and aircraft as the real life attempts were?

So as such compared to real life comparisons, most of the 'normal' vehicles are perfectly fine. You then also have the issue in the 40k universe the imperium does not 'create' vehicles, they have to discover them. The creation of brand new vehicles is pretty much considered as heresy by tech priests. While it was less of an issue around 30k, by 40k if you want to a new AA turret for a leman russ (as an example), you better hope you find ancient plans you can put together. Admittedly they do muddle parts together from different vehicles, but they still need to be STC data or blueprints and even then it can take a few hundred years for it to be approved, if it actually ever is at all.

Basically to cut a long story short, the fluff already explains why many of the imperium's vehicles seem so silly and un-realistic. Just look the Bob Semple tank, which in realistic terms is what the Leman Russ tank is in the 40k universe.

Rhino was a colony rover, kind of like a sci fi. tracked version of a land rover.

Computers of the Imperium I believe are as powerful as TI-83 Calculators.

Sauce?