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.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Agreed, Raxmei. Equipment can be transferred from person to person, making it a big advantage.

For all those people who say power armor-- I think equipping ten thousand soldiers with lasguns and ammo is more important than equipping one soldier with power armor and no weapon

Just give him one of the assault rifles we have lying around I guess? Ten thousand soldiers with power armour and AK-74s would easily beat ten thousand soldiers with a lasgun and contemporary armour. The lasgun is only a marginal upgrade in killing power to what we already have (and maybe even less, can a lasgun pierce walls like an AK?) and rifle munitions are only a tiny part of a supply line that has to be set up anyways. I fail to see any advantage offered by a lasgun. It is a great gun for 40k's IG, but much less so for a 21st century army.

Lasguns blow off limbs or completely blow up arms, can punch through concrete without much hassle, and their ammunition can be used as extremely potent IED's.

An off-the-wall one: Refractor fields. Replace forty pounds of body armor with a device the size of a bulky necklace. It doesn't protect as well as power armor but has a lower profile and is more convenient.

Conversion fields do more or less the same thing. I suggested refractor fields rather than the more powerful conversion field because conversion fields give away your position when hit.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Agreed, Raxmei. Equipment can be transferred from person to person, making it a big advantage.

For all those people who say power armor-- I think equipping ten thousand soldiers with lasguns and ammo is more important than equipping one soldier with power armor and no weapon

Just give him one of the assault rifles we have lying around I guess? Ten thousand soldiers with power armour and AK-74s would easily beat ten thousand soldiers with a lasgun and contemporary armour. The lasgun is only a marginal upgrade in killing power to what we already have (and maybe even less, can a lasgun pierce walls like an AK?) and rifle munitions are only a tiny part of a supply line that has to be set up anyways. I fail to see any advantage offered by a lasgun. It is a great gun for 40k's IG, but much less so for a 21st century army.

Lasguns blow off limbs or completely blow up arms, can punch through concrete without much hassle, and their ammunition can be used as extremely potent IED's.

And how is that so much better than an AK? It's killing power is not much less than a lasgun and already is all we need for a rifle, it can punch through concrete, and using lasgun ammunition for IED's leaves you unable to shoot. Better to use other stuff for IED's.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Agreed, Raxmei. Equipment can be transferred from person to person, making it a big advantage.

For all those people who say power armor-- I think equipping ten thousand soldiers with lasguns and ammo is more important than equipping one soldier with power armor and no weapon

Just give him one of the assault rifles we have lying around I guess? Ten thousand soldiers with power armour and AK-74s would easily beat ten thousand soldiers with a lasgun and contemporary armour. The lasgun is only a marginal upgrade in killing power to what we already have (and maybe even less, can a lasgun pierce walls like an AK?) and rifle munitions are only a tiny part of a supply line that has to be set up anyways. I fail to see any advantage offered by a lasgun. It is a great gun for 40k's IG, but much less so for a 21st century army.

Lasguns blow off limbs or completely blow up arms, can punch through concrete without much hassle, and their ammunition can be used as extremely potent IED's.

And how is that so much better than an AK? It's killing power is not much less than a lasgun and already is all we need for a rifle, it can punch through concrete, and using lasgun ammunition for IED's leaves you unable to shoot. Better to use other stuff for IED's.

Pretty sure if I remember correctly that overcharged lasgun magazines detonate with the force of something far greater then your typical IED. More like a grenade that can blow up a tank's flank armor.

And no, 7.62 and various other rounds of that mm do not blow off limbs. They overpenetrate and create lots of shock, but you can survive them. Lasguns vaporize your organs, shred, blow off, or explode limbs by boiling them, rip people to shreds, suffer from no inaccuracy issues due to gravity, have extremely good range, have a large magazine capacity per shot, can be set to damage APC's, and eliminates a great deal of ammunition logistics. It is absurdly better then an AK-47, especially when it requires some pretty damn good armor to actually protect against.

If you go for lasguns, I don't see why you don't go for pulse rifles instead. Much greater power and range, also powered by energy, and with a 50 shot battery pack, you will only never need a few with you to be set.

 Finlandiaperkele wrote:


]Just a quick question here. Could a human even use a Tau suit? Their physiology is different, so there is no indication that a human could pilot a suit in the first place.

Ask the OP why he included options people can't use.

It sounds like you're just a troll trying to find any excuse, no matter how ridiculous, to say the IoM rules.

Did you ask yourself why the OP would include such options? No, you didn't, because thinking probably isn't your strongest point.

More ammo per pack, recharable power packs, can be used to blow up heavier armor than pulse shots, easier to take care of, much small and less cumbersome, lasgun already kill you dead enough.

 Bobthehero wrote:
More ammo per pack, recharable power packs, can be used to blow up heavier armor than pulse shots, easier to take care of, much small and less cumbersome, lasgun already kill you dead enough.

Pulse rifles can kill IFVs and APCs.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Agreed, Raxmei. Equipment can be transferred from person to person, making it a big advantage.

For all those people who say power armor-- I think equipping ten thousand soldiers with lasguns and ammo is more important than equipping one soldier with power armor and no weapon

Just give him one of the assault rifles we have lying around I guess? Ten thousand soldiers with power armour and AK-74s would easily beat ten thousand soldiers with a lasgun and contemporary armour. The lasgun is only a marginal upgrade in killing power to what we already have (and maybe even less, can a lasgun pierce walls like an AK?) and rifle munitions are only a tiny part of a supply line that has to be set up anyways. I fail to see any advantage offered by a lasgun. It is a great gun for 40k's IG, but much less so for a 21st century army.

Lasguns blow off limbs or completely blow up arms, can punch through concrete without much hassle, and their ammunition can be used as extremely potent IED's.

And how is that so much better than an AK? It's killing power is not much less than a lasgun and already is all we need for a rifle, it can punch through concrete, and using lasgun ammunition for IED's leaves you unable to shoot. Better to use other stuff for IED's.

Its always nice to have the option. But the biggest advantage is the relief its puts on your logistics. Instead of needing to provide a steady supply of ammo, you instead just need some electrical generators. You also get more shots per pack.

So instead of a soldier having 5-6 magazines of 30 rounds each he has 5-6 magazines with 200 rounds each. Far more shots, plus the packs can be recharged quickly in the field. That's in the extreme cases where you actually would run out of ammunition, which are going to be less common because you can actually carry more.

AKs are great, but whats better than an AK? A gun that has all the same advantages, but also has even easier access to ammunition.

The modern military is obsessed with limiting casualties on the ground. Power armor basically turns a trooper into a walking tank... thus limiting the need for those vehicles. and for modern wars would be very useful for protecting troops going into conflicted areas, assuming it is 40k style power armor, it would be extremely hard for any modern army to counter.

Thing is in our world we already have overwhelming firepower in the air and we have weaponry that's as deadly as it needs to be... at the moment we don't need cheaper armies that waste human lives we need to protect our troops. But I may be thinking from a western perspective....

 Grey Templar wrote:

Its always nice to have the option. But the biggest advantage is the relief its puts on your logistics. Instead of needing to provide a steady supply of ammo, you instead just need some electrical generators. You also get more shots per pack.

So instead of a soldier having 5-6 magazines of 30 rounds each he has 5-6 magazines with 200 rounds each. Far more shots, plus the packs can be recharged quickly in the field. That's in the extreme cases where you actually would run out of ammunition, which are going to be less common because you can actually carry more.

AKs are great, but whats better than an AK? A gun that has all the same advantages, but also has even easier access to ammunition.

200? Most things I have read seem to put them in the 70-80 range.

While limiting casualties is definitely a good thing, I think we are a little too obsessed over that. Its war, people are gonna die. So we need to consider everything from a practical perspective.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

Its always nice to have the option. But the biggest advantage is the relief its puts on your logistics. Instead of needing to provide a steady supply of ammo, you instead just need some electrical generators. You also get more shots per pack.

So instead of a soldier having 5-6 magazines of 30 rounds each he has 5-6 magazines with 200 rounds each. Far more shots, plus the packs can be recharged quickly in the field. That's in the extreme cases where you actually would run out of ammunition, which are going to be less common because you can actually carry more.

AKs are great, but whats better than an AK? A gun that has all the same advantages, but also has even easier access to ammunition.

200? Most things I have read seem to put them in the 70-80 range.

It depends on how you adjust the power level, but 200 is in the possible range.

My heart says Titans, my head says lasguns.

However I would ditch anything and everything on the list in return for warp capable transports with properly working engines and Gellar fields.

FTL > all other technology, only the discovery of fire comes close in importance.

Stealth Suits. While fluffiwise, they're not as tough as power armour, crunchwise, they are. They would still be impervious to nearly all small arms fire and would be excellent for black ops and infiltration. I'd imagine the burst cannons would be pretty useful as well.

I think a lot of technology in 40k wouldent on it's own be revolutiony.
The lasgun or equivalent would change military logistics, not eliminate them.
You would still need power generaition, which is often loud or slow, and a fire isn't allways a option.
And units would need replacements due to use and unforceing circumstances, instead of planing for getting ammo to all units. You may end up with effectively random need for replacements,

I think something like the wave serpent or falcon grav tank (short of starships capable of firing on a planet) would make the bigist difernce.
You can drop both from high altetude, they are very fast over any sufvice and could provide support including charging lasguns
Both come with the eldar fields of varying types to keep them safe, and both are capable of flight in the lore.
So I think if the military could begin mass production that would find a place in the military's.
Off corse if you could have stealth tech on your soldurs jumping out, then that's much better

Apple fox wrote:
I think a lot of technology in 40k wouldent on it's own be revolutiony.
The lasgun or equivalent would change military logistics, not eliminate them.
You would still need power generaition, which is often loud or slow, and a fire isn't allways a option.
And units would need replacements due to use and unforceing circumstances, instead of planing for getting ammo to all units. You may end up with effectively random need for replacements,

I think something like the wave serpent or falcon grav tank (short of starships capable of firing on a planet) would make the bigist difernce.
You can drop both from high altetude, they are very fast over any sufvice and could provide support including charging lasguns
Both come with the eldar fields of varying types to keep them safe, and both are capable of flight in the lore.
So I think if the military could begin mass production that would find a place in the military's.
Off corse if you could have stealth tech on your soldurs jumping out, then that's much better

I don't think anyone was suggesting that it would 100% elimiate the need for logistics. as food water and other gear is still a thing.
And it would be the same thing with power armor, stealth suits or pulse equipment

I guess the wraith bone teck if we could ever get it working would be cool . and i like the idea of refractor shields or shield generators too.

Iron_Captain wrote:

 EmpNortonII wrote:
That power armor is beating stealth suits is a clear indication that about half of our posters would favor Space Marines over anything else no matter how much evidence there is that they're not the right choice.

No, but this comment is clear indication that you would pick anything related to Tau even when it is a pretty bad choice. The stealth suit is not the best choice. Especially not when one considers that its design would make it impossible to actually hold weapons, toss grenades, go to the toilet or whatever action that requires two hands.

Best choice or no, Stealth Suits are better than Power Armour. The poll assumes corrected usability for humans otherwise non-human tech wouldn't be on there, as it would be inherently worthless.

I would just like to make a note here: I'm not a Tau fangirl. I play Sisters, for the Emperor's sake.

In any case;



They're about the same size. The Stealth Suit gives equal protection and superior boosts to the wearer - the Marine's power armour carries its own weight, but the Tau power armour boosts its' wearers strength and toughness.

Tau power armour also comes with free controlled-liquid-metal technology which has all kinds of uses off the battlefield (Codex: Tau Empire 2013 page 70)

Both have neural interfaces (I assume I don't need to provide a reference for the Black Carapace, but the Tau neural interface is mentioned in Thorpe's Kill Team and Spurrier's Fire Warrior) that provide tactile feedback from the suit's exterior. The Tau one doesn't rely on invasive surgery, however.

The stealth suit's "use light-bending technology [...] to camouflage themselves. Additional cloaking fields deaden sound and shield them from heat-detecting sensors," (Codex: Tau Empire 2013 page 43).

It's not noted that they have waste recycling capabilities or not, but it would seem logical to include them if they operate behind enemy lines for long periods.

Heck, since the poll just says 'stealth suit', we can include the XV-22's shield generator as well in the equation, and we may as well use the arm model from it as well, which gives us two interchangeable weapon hardpoints and confirmed manipulator digits. So, in the end, we have;

Space Marine power armour (to be generous) that provides solid protection, carries its own weight, keeps the Marine active in the field via waste recyclers and provides tactile feedback to the wearer. It has manipulator hands and a nuclear fusion generator.

Tau stealth suit, which provides solid protection, carries its own weight, provides tactile feedback to the wearer, incorporates stealth technology that renders them undetectable by IR, hard to detect visually or audible, enhances the wearer's physical capabilities to be equivalent to a super-human Space Marine, has a jetpack that renders it capable of sustained, if nap-of-the-earth flight, and has an energy shield that resists even anti-tank weapons. It also has manipulator hands and is powered by a nuclear fission generator.

So, the Marine power armour actually has a better power system, and we can confirm its waste-recycling, while we have to assume that feature of the Tau gear. If we assume Tau armour does not have that feature, we end up with a final score of;

Power Armour: 2 confirmed advantages
Stealth Armour: 4 confirmed advantages
Equivalents: 3 confirmed equivalencies

Of course, if we consider that the poll specifies that these items can be mass produced, then it tips the scales even further, because if we can mass produce the item in question, we can also mass produce all of the components and requisite technologies.

Gaining the ability to make Marine style power armour gives us;
1) The ability to make Ceramite.
2) Neural interface technology requiring invasive surgery.
3) High-level medical technology to eliminate cybernetic rejection.
4) Reliable, miniaturised Nuclear fission technology.

Gaining the ability to make Tau style stealth armour gives us;
1) The ability to make a nanocrystalline composite (which means it gives us nanotechnology!)
2) Neural interface technology that does not require invasive surgery.
3) Liquid Metal manipulation technology.
4) Man-portable powered flight.
4) Reliable, miniaturised Nuclear fusion technology

Bleh, there are others, but I just realised I'm out of time to continue the list. If an Imperial could please round off the list of technologies required to make Power Armour, and a Tau do the same for the Stealth Suit, that's be grand.

I voted Imperial Knights because I didn't see any Melta-weapon options

 Furyou Miko wrote:
So, in the end, we have;

Space Marine power armour (to be generous) that provides solid protection, carries its own weight, keeps the Marine active in the field via waste recyclers and provides tactile feedback to the wearer. It has manipulator hands and a nuclear fusion generator.

Tau stealth suit, which provides solid protection, carries its own weight, provides tactile feedback to the wearer, incorporates stealth technology that renders them undetectable by IR, hard to detect visually or audible, enhances the wearer's physical capabilities to be equivalent to a super-human Space Marine, has a jetpack that renders it capable of sustained, if nap-of-the-earth flight, and has an energy shield that resists even anti-tank weapons. It also has manipulator hands and is powered by a nuclear fission generator.

From a modern day perspective, wouldn't this alone make power armour the superior choice? Nuclear fusion has so many potential applications it's ridiculous.

 Furyou Miko wrote:

Gaining the ability to make Marine style power armour gives us;
1) The ability to make Ceramite.
2) Neural interface technology requiring invasive surgery.
3) High-level medical technology to eliminate cybernetic rejection.
4) Reliable, miniaturised Nuclear fission technology.

Gaining the ability to make Tau style stealth armour gives us;
1) The ability to make a nanocrystalline composite (which means it gives us nanotechnology!)
2) Neural interface technology that does not require invasive surgery.
3) Liquid Metal manipulation technology.
4) Man-portable powered flight.
4) Reliable, miniaturised Nuclear fusion technology

Didn't you mix them up? Who has what? I'm pretty sure PA is powered by nuclear fusion. And reliable fusion technology would trump everything else on the list. Especially if you can have a reliable miniaturized portable version.

Whoops, yes, those are the wrong way round (I think I did it right further up).

Here's the thing. I'm not sure which is more valuable - reliable fusion technology, or nanotechnology in general, especially since nanotechnology theoretically can lead to even more advanced power generation technology.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Whoops, yes, those are the wrong way round (I think I did it right further up).

Here's the thing. I'm not sure which is more valuable - reliable fusion technology, or nanotechnology in general, especially since nanotechnology theoretically can lead to even more advanced power generation technology.

Hmm, they're both immensely useful but I think in the current age having basically unlimited and reliable power generation (clean too!) is more important. Governments having been pouring billions upon billions into nuclear fusion research for the past 50 years and we still haven't achieved it yet. Nano-tech seems more like a given with time and investment.

Miniature fusion generators basically allows the military to equip soldiers, ships, submarines, planes, etc that can operate for extremely long periods of time without the need to resupply and would be a big help for interstellar travel as well. It would also pretty much solve global warming and extreme pollution from coal and fossil fuels in countries like China pretty much instantly. And it would allow for energy independence as well. So I dunno, seems more "essential" (for lack of a better term) than nano-tech for us currently.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Whoops, yes, those are the wrong way round (I think I did it right further up).

Here's the thing. I'm not sure which is more valuable - reliable fusion technology, or nanotechnology in general, especially since nanotechnology theoretically can lead to even more advanced power generation technology.

The only thing more powerful then Fusion is Antimatter, and you probably don't want to screw around with that stuff unless you know full well what you're doing, seeing as to how much damage a couple grams of anti-hydrogen will do. Meanwhile fusion is completely safe and has no radioactive waste.

So. Militarily, I still maintain that stealth suits are Power Armour +2, but for the general good of mankind, the technology to build power armour would do far better for us.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
So. Militarily, I still maintain that stealth suits are Power Armour +2, but for the general good of mankind, the technology to build power armour would do far better for us.

Not really. Corvus Armor coupled with Shadow-Walking is just as stealthy as Stealth Suits, if not more so. Although, Raven Guard are incredibly hax given that an eight foot tall dude wearing an APC could infiltrate a subway station in broad daylight without anything seeing him, including CCTV.

I'm not familiar with Shadow-Walking, but even so, that only reduces it to Power Armour +1.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Agreed, Raxmei. Equipment can be transferred from person to person, making it a big advantage.

For all those people who say power armor-- I think equipping ten thousand soldiers with lasguns and ammo is more important than equipping one soldier with power armor and no weapon

Just give him one of the assault rifles we have lying around I guess? Ten thousand soldiers with power armour and AK-74s would easily beat ten thousand soldiers with a lasgun and contemporary armour. The lasgun is only a marginal upgrade in killing power to what we already have (and maybe even less, can a lasgun pierce walls like an AK?) and rifle munitions are only a tiny part of a supply line that has to be set up anyways. I fail to see any advantage offered by a lasgun. It is a great gun for 40k's IG, but much less so for a 21st century army.

Lasguns blow off limbs or completely blow up arms, can punch through concrete without much hassle, and their ammunition can be used as extremely potent IED's.

And how is that so much better than an AK? It's killing power is not much less than a lasgun and already is all we need for a rifle, it can punch through concrete, and using lasgun ammunition for IED's leaves you unable to shoot. Better to use other stuff for IED's.

Its always nice to have the option. But the biggest advantage is the relief its puts on your logistics. Instead of needing to provide a steady supply of ammo, you instead just need some electrical generators. You also get more shots per pack.

So instead of a soldier having 5-6 magazines of 30 rounds each he has 5-6 magazines with 200 rounds each. Far more shots, plus the packs can be recharged quickly in the field. That's in the extreme cases where you actually would run out of ammunition, which are going to be less common because you can actually carry more.

AKs are great, but whats better than an AK? A gun that has all the same advantages, but also has even easier access to ammunition.

Do you know how large a part of a logistics chain consists of rifle ammunition? A really, really tiny part. A soldier needs much more than bullets, so you are going to have to set up that logistics chain anyways. This makes the advantage rather irrelevent. Also, it is completely negated when you have people blowing up their ammo. A lasgun offers no real advantages over modern assault rifles for the military. The extra killing power of a lasgun might be great when fighting Orks, but the military will only ever have to fight other humans, against which a modern assault rifle already offers more than enough killing power. Compared to the huge advantages offered by power armour, the advantages offered by a lasgun are insignificant.

 Furyou Miko wrote:


They're about the same size.

Ehhh physical models are not a good indicator of scale. otherwise regular guardsmen have hands and heads the size of beachballs.

not disagreeing with the rest of it though.

Edit: Although how are you interpreting that one requires super invasive surgery while the other doesn't?

Edit2: Liquid metal tech?

Probably looking at the black carapace vs how tau are just connected to their suit w/o any surgery.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, the stealth suits attached weapons need a mention too, the burst cannon being a man-portable anti vehicle cannon, and the the fusion blaster being a weapon that would annihilate any armour we use today.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Probably looking at the black carapace vs how tau are just connected to their suit w/o any surgery.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, the stealth suits attached weapons need a mention too, the burst cannon being a man-portable anti vehicle cannon, and the the burst cannon being a weapon that would annihilate any armour we use today.

I assume you meant the Fusion Blaster there

 Desubot wrote:

 Furyou Miko wrote:


They're about the same size.

Ehhh physical models are not a good indicator of scale. otherwise regular guardsmen have hands and heads the size of beachballs.

not disagreeing with the rest of it though.

Edit: Although how are you interpreting that one requires super invasive surgery while the other doesn't?

Edit2: Liquid metal tech?

Yeah, Black Carapace = invasive surgery. Tau neural interfaces are headsets (Spurrier).

Liquid metal tech comes from a curious mention in Codex: Tau Empire that just says that Battlesuits are coated in 'liquid metal' to disperse energy weapon shots.