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.

Just a question that couldn't of been answered in my other threads (mostly the termie one)

As strong as the plot demands.

I assume its stronger than depleted uranium. Which is super dense.

 Melissia wrote:
As strong as the plot demands.

This.

LOLS EXALTED!

It's on the shelf next to unobtainium, so yeah...

Stronger than vibranium. Not as strong as batman thirst for justice.

Per the game ceramite is not that strong...maybe more like a protective coating that interferes with microwaves but only at short ranges. It has basically no effect on most AT weapons.

Armor of today is much better. We have ablative armor which redirects impact energy away from the vehicle when it breaks. Reactive armor which destroys incoming missiles with a blast before it detonates. And composite armor which is specially designed to bend and not break whilst not melting and having multiple layers of armor with different properties in order to stop different kinds of penetrators.

All these defenses are better than ceramite. I find it sad that tanks 10k years in the future don't have more effective counter measures.

 Melissia wrote:
As strong as the plot demands.

/thread lol

I saw a posting that "rang a bell" where they said 1 inch is equal to 12" of high grade steel (convenient it is a foot) but cannot be cited to any GW fiction.
Saw another stating it is ceramic and titanium but would be very hard and light (but not "tough" in the real world).
Note: The fluff ends here, I could not find anything that could be cited in the fluff.

NOTE: Allow me to add the real world to this, the "magic" armor is closer than you think.

Toughness is typically hard brittle layers with softer impact resistant layers backing them, the idea with a katana, layers of hard and soft to prevent shattering.
Energy being absorbed overcoming a hard surface then in turn, decelerating through soft impact absorbing material.
Bullet-proof glass works this way.

I envision a ceramic (Carbyne is our more recent "super" material that fits the bill = 40X stiffer than diamond) with a titanium disulfide in a fullerene-like nanostructure (ApNano creation) for impact resistance up to 250 tons per square centimeter (It has an huge amount of give or crumple-zone). Apply all that in layers and it would be some pretty freaking insane armor.

The trick is absorbing all that kinetic energy and not pulping the occupant (which makes the genetically enhanced super soldiers all the more sensible for wearing man-portable tank armor). This is why the poor AM/IG only have flak armor: little point in wasting all that armor only for the suit to survive (wash, rinse, repeat?).

Anyone bringing up the "depleted uranium" it is ideal for slugs since it is more 1.67 times heavier than lead (more mass per volume) it can be used for armor but you need to be willing to be VERY heavy.
It's mass gives some resistance but works best in layers with harder materials.
Force = Mass X Acceleration so heavy slugs with a good means of acceleration means a whole lot of hurt at the other end (Or a VERY heavy tank at ramming speed).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Melissia wrote:
As strong as the plot demands.

Or that too...

I vaguely remember they say its kind of a ceramic metal hybrid or something.

REALLY hard yet slightly flexible as to not shatter.

now ramp the plot o meter to 11 and you got ceramite.

 Melissia wrote:
As strong as the plot demands.

This. We have direct examples where a quick burst of lasgun fire cracks and obviously notably Astartes chestplate armor, and other stories where it might as well be light drizzle.

We've also seen Leman Russ tanks with Ceramite armor obviously destroyed by relatively primitive weapons, while other times highly advanced weapons just bounce off.

Not very...

Unless moving 18" in one turn is 55kph, I'd say that the Land Raider does not move 55kph. If so that means a normal move for a guardmen is at 18 kph.

Yeah, pretty much as strong as the plot needs.

In my headcanon (yes, don't take this as anything more), GW have grossly underscaled 40k armour, and that 40k armour is far better than anything we have today. Again, all headcanon, but I find it stupid to think that modern stuff is better.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Yeah, pretty much as strong as the plot needs.

In my headcanon (yes, don't take this as anything more), GW have grossly underscaled 40k armour, and that 40k armour is far better than anything we have today. Again, all headcanon, but I find it stupid to think that modern stuff is better.

Why? Their vehicles can't even move and shoot effectively. The Imperium has no smart weapons, even. They don't have modern profiles, either.

It needs to be remembered that 40k isnt really a scifi universe, its a Fantasy universe with a SciFi skin.

Same reason 40k space battles and naval forces revolve around Age of Sail tactics, methods, and command & organizational methods.

Because the rules and lore are separate, Martel.

I like Vakathi's point.

40K is really Renaissance level technology reskinned to look advanced.

This is yet another thread asking some subtle variant of "how strong is space marine armor"? What exactly are you hoping to discuss in this thread that hasn't been discussed in your other ones on the same topic?

 Peregrine wrote:
This is yet another thread asking some subtle variant of "how strong is space marine armor"? What exactly are you hoping to discuss in this thread that hasn't been discussed in your other ones on the same topic?

To be honest, Dakka has probably covered most fluff points ever created (even the bad ones). I've probably seen a lot of questions that have been asked more than once, I guess just to keep the ball rolling.

 Bobthehero wrote:


Not very...

Not everything in the wiki is true. And why are we bringing the bloody Abrams in this thread again?!

 Bobthehero wrote:


Not very...

I would be careful with how much cred I give IA numbers. They also said the Siege of Vraks, noted as an unusually drawn-out and bloody planetary conflict, had a fraction of WW2's casualties...

Yeah. The guys who write the IA books seem to only use WW1/2 tanks as a reference point. They don't seem to notice the decades of development we've had in armored warfare.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Commissar Terrence wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:


Not very...

Not everything in the wiki is true. And why are we bringing the bloody Abrams in this thread again?!

Why does it matter? Compare it to a Leopard II or a Challenger and you'll get a similiar discrepency.

Space magic > real world physics.
Wait, no, I mean the other way round.
Or is it?
Now Im confused again.

Why does it matter? Compare it to a Leopard II or a Challenger and you'll get a similiar discrepency.

Please. No american technology brought into this. I don't want another fething storm of comments

Ceramite is strong enough to withstand direct impacts of nuclear weapons or even space ship and exterminatus-grade weapons. At the same time it can also be cracked by lasguns or even common pistols.
In other words, 40k is fiction. Ceramite does not exist and therefore has no set strenght. Ceramite does whatever the writer wants it to do and therefore asking this kind of question is futile.

Okay, fine, let's go with the modern German big cat. The Leopard 2 has 1500mm of armor and has a maximum speed of 45 mph. 72 Km/h for those of us who use a sensible math system. The Leopard 2 is superior in armor protection and speed to the Land Raider if we take IA2 numbers at face value.

 Commissar Terrence wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:


Not very...

Not everything in the wiki is true. And why are we bringing the bloody Abrams in this thread again?!

The 40k source is not the wiki, if you're going to dismiss my source because ''muh wiki'' then why bother, it's like that other thread of yours, you're liking for people to confirm your opinion

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Ceramite is strong enough to withstand direct impacts of nuclear weapons or even space ship and exterminatus-grade weapons. At the same time it can also be cracked by lasguns or even common pistols.
In other words, 40k is fiction. Ceramite does not exist and therefore has no set strenght. Ceramite does whatever the writer wants it to do and therefore asking this kind of question is futile.

This is the correct answer. Ceramite is just another magic fantasy metal like mithril. It is as strong as you want it to be.