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.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
You just failed to sum up a titan, tanks are nothing to a titan in the lore, even shadowswords etc. They aren't even in the same ball park. Show me an instance, just one in the lore where a tank destroys a city, I can give you many of a titan. I mean where is everyone getting their info thinking titans are so under-powered and weak... Even in the game they are insanely cheesy and the lore they are even more cheesy.

I'm talking about a hypothetical titan-equivalent tank that would exist if, instead of walking shines to space Jesus, the Imperium made practical war machines. Obviously none of the canon tanks do it because the Imperium didn't build anything big enough.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Techpriestsupport wrote:
A titans weapons have great range and the titan, standing taller, let's them fire out to further range than a low platform like a tank.

A tank with those same weapons has the same range, except it also has the ability to use terrain for protection instead of being a giant exposed target for everything on the battlefield. In a tank vs. titan duel the tanks win a massacre.

Titans can step over obstacles that could stop a huge tracked vehicle.

Not easily. A titan would actually have very little ability to step over obstacles without losing its balance and falling over. And much of what a titan could step over is probably small enough that a tank could just smash through it.

Also titans have pilots controlling them via mind impulse interface that let's them operate it like their own bodies making them relatively agile for such huge constructs. A human pilot might not be able to interface with a tracked vehicle and operate it like they operate their bodies.

A titan's movement is nothing like a human's, so I don't see how this applies. And agility is about physical shape, how much force the driving hydraulics can exert, etc, not how comfortable the driver feels. All the comfort in the world won't do much if the titan is not physically capable of moving like you want it to.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Camkierhi wrote:
But if we want everything to be practical and fit our universe, maybe sci-fi is not the best setting for your toy soldiers.

You're kind of missing the point here. Titans are ing stupid and this is a good thing. The Imperium is a totalitarian theocracy run by suicidal lunatics, not a rational state making pragmatic choices to win wars. It is 100% appropriate that they pour immense amounts of priceless lost-tech resources into building giant impractical walking shrines to space Jesus instead of practical weapons that would be better on the battlefield. But we can recognize from an outside point of view that titans are another example of the Imperium's stupidity and ignorance, even if we acknowledge that they are cool and thematically exactly what the Imperium would build.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
You just failed to sum up a titan, tanks are nothing to a titan in the lore, even shadowswords etc. They aren't even in the same ball park. Show me an instance, just one in the lore where a tank destroys a city, I can give you many of a titan. I mean where is everyone getting their info thinking titans are so under-powered and weak... Even in the game they are insanely cheesy and the lore they are even more cheesy.

I'm talking about a hypothetical titan-equivalent tank that would exist if, instead of walking shines to space Jesus, the Imperium made practical war machines. Obviously none of the canon tanks do it because the Imperium didn't build anything big enough.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Techpriestsupport wrote:
A titans weapons have great range and the titan, standing taller, let's them fire out to further range than a low platform like a tank.

A tank with those same weapons has the same range, except it also has the ability to use terrain for protection instead of being a giant exposed target for everything on the battlefield. In a tank vs. titan duel the tanks win a massacre.

Titans can step over obstacles that could stop a huge tracked vehicle.

Not easily. A titan would actually have very little ability to step over obstacles without losing its balance and falling over. And much of what a titan could step over is probably small enough that a tank could just smash through it.

Also titans have pilots controlling them via mind impulse interface that let's them operate it like their own bodies making them relatively agile for such huge constructs. A human pilot might not be able to interface with a tracked vehicle and operate it like they operate their bodies.

A titan's movement is nothing like a human's, so I don't see how this applies. And agility is about physical shape, how much force the driving hydraulics can exert, etc, not how comfortable the driver feels. All the comfort in the world won't do much if the titan is not physically capable of moving like you want it to.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Camkierhi wrote:
But if we want everything to be practical and fit our universe, maybe sci-fi is not the best setting for your toy soldiers.

You're kind of missing the point here. Titans are ing stupid and this is a good thing. The Imperium is a totalitarian theocracy run by suicidal lunatics, not a rational state making pragmatic choices to win wars. It is 100% appropriate that they pour immense amounts of priceless lost-tech resources into building giant impractical walking shrines to space Jesus instead of practical weapons that would be better on the battlefield. But we can recognize from an outside point of view that titans are another example of the Imperium's stupidity and ignorance, even if we acknowledge that they are cool and thematically exactly what the Imperium would build.

Ah I see, though you couldn't really have one. The reason why Titans do so well is their height, they can have any weaponry. A tank can only have a main cannon or equivalent, any others are smaller arms like lascannon sponsons. I don't think you could ever have a tank that has the same firepower. Plus if you made the tank bigger to accommodate extra weaponry there far more problems with it traversing terrain.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
You just failed to sum up a titan, tanks are nothing to a titan in the lore, even shadowswords etc. They aren't even in the same ball park. Show me an instance, just one in the lore where a tank destroys a city, I can give you many of a titan. I mean where is everyone getting their info thinking titans are so under-powered and weak... Even in the game they are insanely cheesy and the lore they are even more cheesy.

I'm talking about a hypothetical titan-equivalent tank that would exist if, instead of walking shines to space Jesus, the Imperium made practical war machines. Obviously none of the canon tanks do it because the Imperium didn't build anything big enough.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Techpriestsupport wrote:
A titans weapons have great range and the titan, standing taller, let's them fire out to further range than a low platform like a tank.

A tank with those same weapons has the same range, except it also has the ability to use terrain for protection instead of being a giant exposed target for everything on the battlefield. In a tank vs. titan duel the tanks win a massacre.

Titans can step over obstacles that could stop a huge tracked vehicle.

Not easily. A titan would actually have very little ability to step over obstacles without losing its balance and falling over. And much of what a titan could step over is probably small enough that a tank could just smash through it.

Also titans have pilots controlling them via mind impulse interface that let's them operate it like their own bodies making them relatively agile for such huge constructs. A human pilot might not be able to interface with a tracked vehicle and operate it like they operate their bodies.

A titan's movement is nothing like a human's, so I don't see how this applies. And agility is about physical shape, how much force the driving hydraulics can exert, etc, not how comfortable the driver feels. All the comfort in the world won't do much if the titan is not physically capable of moving like you want it to.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Camkierhi wrote:
But if we want everything to be practical and fit our universe, maybe sci-fi is not the best setting for your toy soldiers.

You're kind of missing the point here. Titans are ing stupid and this is a good thing. The Imperium is a totalitarian theocracy run by suicidal lunatics, not a rational state making pragmatic choices to win wars. It is 100% appropriate that they pour immense amounts of priceless lost-tech resources into building giant impractical walking shrines to space Jesus instead of practical weapons that would be better on the battlefield. But we can recognize from an outside point of view that titans are another example of the Imperium's stupidity and ignorance, even if we acknowledge that they are cool and thematically exactly what the Imperium would build.

As to range, many titan weapons are energy beam weapons like honking megalasers and plasma cannons. Such weapons have line of sight only firing. They're effective range is blocked by the horizon. A higher mounted laser or plasma cannon will be able to reach further. Itcs sort of like what radio is broadcast from high towers to give it longer range.

As the the mind impulse control, a titan is humanoid with legs and a torso, the pilot can perceive the titan as an extension of his body and control it much like he moves his body. In a real sense he becomes one with the machjne and control it thru thought. That's 40k lore.

See these images for references.
https://i.warosu.org/data/tg/img/0434/30/1446510211210.jpg

https://i.warosu.org/data/tg/img/0338/88/1407174537644.jpg


Lastly I know a little about physics and engineering, and one thing I know is generally the larger a generator becomes the more efficient it becomes in terms of output vs mass of the generator and fuel consumed. Possibly a titan is big enough to contain a very large and efficient generator that can produce enough energy to run the energy weapons and shields.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Ah I see, though you couldn't really have one. The reason why Titans do so well is their height, they can have any weaponry. A tank can only have a main cannon or equivalent, any others are smaller arms like lascannon sponsons. I don't think you could ever have a tank that has the same firepower. Plus if you made the tank bigger to accommodate extra weaponry there far more problems with it traversing terrain.

Why exactly can't you put a titan's main gun on a tracked platform?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Techpriestsupport wrote:
As to range, many titan weapons are energy beam weapons like honking megalasers and plasma cannons. Such weapons have line of sight only firing. They're effective range is blocked by the horizon. A higher mounted laser or plasma cannon will be able to reach further. Itcs sort of like what radio is broadcast from high towers to give it longer range.

And if the enemy has the same energy beam weapons then they have line of sight to return fire against the titan. And, unlike the titan standing out in the open, the tank can use terrain to expose only its gun and make itself a much more difficult target to hit.

As the the mind impulse control, a titan is humanoid with legs and a torso, the pilot can perceive the titan as an extension of his body and control it much like he moves his body. In a real sense he becomes one with the machjne and control it thru thought. That's 40k lore.

"Legs and a torso" is not the same as human. A titan is very different in shape and movements, such that a person trying to make a titan move like a human would be lucky to walk without falling over. And TBH this would be worse than a tank because it would be close enough to human movements that the differences would be painfully obvious, while a tank is so far from human movements that it would be clearly driving a vehicle and separate from perceiving it as the driver's own body.

And yes, it is 40k lore. It's also the in-universe beliefs about what space Jesus commands. The obvious conclusion when the lore contradicts reasonable understanding of the situation is that yes, they believe that it works that way, but it's just another example of the Imperium being ignorant and stupid.

Lastly I know a little about physics and engineering, and one thing I know is generally the larger a generator becomes the more efficient it becomes in terms of output vs mass of the generator and fuel consumed. Possibly a titan is big enough to contain a very large and efficient generator that can produce enough energy to run the energy weapons and shields.

Again, the same principle applies to a large tank. Anything that can be used to justify a titan, other than its usefulness as a walking shrine to space Jesus, can be used even better to justify a titan-scale tank.

titans ultimately exist because THEY'RE COOL. Giant stompy robots with LAAAAAZOOOR GUNS!

they occupy the same niche as chainswords and well... pretty much all of 40k. they might not be effective but they're damn cool!

Regardless, there will exist terrain that a walker can go that a tank cannot. Huge boulders, mountainous terrain, etc. The bigger the tank, the bigger the path it will need. The smaller footprint that you say is a ground pressure problem is the same thing that allows for it to be able to traverse more terrain.

As for armor, the in-universe concession is void-shields.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Regardless, there will exist terrain that a walker can go that a tank cannot. Huge boulders, mountainous terrain, etc. The bigger the tank, the bigger the path it will need. The smaller footprint that you say is a ground pressure problem is the same thing that allows for it to be able to traverse more terrain.

This is highly overstated, at least at the scale of titans. A titan has very little ability to step over anything based on the range of motion of its legs and the requirement to keep its center of gravity within its footprint. And it would be extremely vulnerable to having that rough terrain collapse under its foot (hi, extreme ground pressure) and destroy the titan. Realistically anything too rough for tanks is going to be suicide for a titan anyway.

As for armor, the in-universe concession is void-shields.

Which would be even better on a tank, if the Imperium didn't have a rule that only walking shrines to space Jesus can have them.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Ah I see, though you couldn't really have one. The reason why Titans do so well is their height, they can have any weaponry. A tank can only have a main cannon or equivalent, any others are smaller arms like lascannon sponsons. I don't think you could ever have a tank that has the same firepower. Plus if you made the tank bigger to accommodate extra weaponry there far more problems with it traversing terrain.

Why exactly can't you put a titan's main gun on a tracked platform?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Techpriestsupport wrote:
As to range, many titan weapons are energy beam weapons like honking megalasers and plasma cannons. Such weapons have line of sight only firing. They're effective range is blocked by the horizon. A higher mounted laser or plasma cannon will be able to reach further. Itcs sort of like what radio is broadcast from high towers to give it longer range.

And if the enemy has the same energy beam weapons then they have line of sight to return fire against the titan. And, unlike the titan standing out in the open, the tank can use terrain to expose only its gun and make itself a much more difficult target to hit.

As the the mind impulse control, a titan is humanoid with legs and a torso, the pilot can perceive the titan as an extension of his body and control it much like he moves his body. In a real sense he becomes one with the machjne and control it thru thought. That's 40k lore.

"Legs and a torso" is not the same as human. A titan is very different in shape and movements, such that a person trying to make a titan move like a human would be lucky to walk without falling over. And TBH this would be worse than a tank because it would be close enough to human movements that the differences would be painfully obvious, while a tank is so far from human movements that it would be clearly driving a vehicle and separate from perceiving it as the driver's own body.

And yes, it is 40k lore. It's also the in-universe beliefs about what space Jesus commands. The obvious conclusion when the lore contradicts reasonable understanding of the situation is that yes, they believe that it works that way, but it's just another example of the Imperium being ignorant and stupid.

Lastly I know a little about physics and engineering, and one thing I know is generally the larger a generator becomes the more efficient it becomes in terms of output vs mass of the generator and fuel consumed. Possibly a titan is big enough to contain a very large and efficient generator that can produce enough energy to run the energy weapons and shields.

Again, the same principle applies to a large tank. Anything that can be used to justify a titan, other than its usefulness as a walking shrine to space Jesus, can be used even better to justify a titan-scale tank.

Sigh. A tracked vehicle s base most usually be wider than it is tall for stability, with a few notable exceptions like londons double decker busses and things like cranes which are special cases. Try to imagine a tracked vehicle with a base large enough to mount a huge cannon as high as a titans arm or, ghawd forbid, carapace. It would be like a pyramid. It would requires a lot of very flat and even ground to move over.

A titan can shift it's center of gravity like a man can to carry off center loads. It can gaks its legs and feet to move over uneven terrain far better than a tracked vehicle with a base a couple hundred feet across can.

 Techpriestsupport wrote:
Try to imagine a tracked vehicle with a base large enough to mount a huge cannon as high as a titans arm or, ghawd forbid, carapace. It would be like a pyramid. It would requires a lot of very flat and even ground to move over.

I'm imagining that it would look something like this:



That's a Shadowsword, a tank that carries a titan-scale weapon and is explicitly stated to be capable of killing a titan with a single shot.

Or maybe, since a titan is tall enough that it's going to be visible from anywhere on the battlefield, we might as well have our vehicle fly. In which case we might get something like this:



That's a Tigershark AX-1-0, carrying a pair of titan-scale weapons and explicitly shown in canon to kill a titan with a single shot.

A titan can shift it's center of gravity like a man can to carry off center loads. It can gaks its legs and feet to move over uneven terrain far better than a tracked vehicle with a base a couple hundred feet across can

I think you are vastly overestimating the range of motion available to a titan.

A Titan sized tank would have a major weak point. Its tracks. Tracks can even be damaged by bad driving IRL. As I understand it, tank tracks for modern tanks are difficult to change on the battlefield. If you supersize them that much there would be no way the crew could fix it without specialist help. Tracks also wear out, I suspect more so if carrying that much weight. If a muddy field can stop a WW2 tank, it can stop a titan tank. But at least it won't tip onto its side if its blown off.

If the titan tank has a top mounted turret weapon (like tanks do) it better have enough depression. An energy weapon with 0° depression would struggle to hit the ground.

There are trade offs for all designs.

Tygre wrote:
Two legs may have stability problems, but legs actually have advantages in some terrain.

IRL DARPA is experimenting with devices to carry equipment in rough terrain. These devices use legs. Wheels able to cross logs etc would be too big.

Legs also don't dig themselves deeper in soft terrain (mud and sand etc)

Yes, but... the devices they are developing have 4 legs, not 2.

The only advantage a two-legged Titan would have over a gigantic tank with similar weaponry would be going up giant stairs, or dancing.

 Ouze wrote:

Tygre wrote:
Two legs may have stability problems, but legs actually have advantages in some terrain.

IRL DARPA is experimenting with devices to carry equipment in rough terrain. These devices use legs. Wheels able to cross logs etc would be too big.

Legs also don't dig themselves deeper in soft terrain (mud and sand etc)

Yes, but... the devices they are developing have 4 legs, not 2.

That's because 2 legs have stability problems. Apparently it is very hard to program stability for 2 legs.

All designs fail when you make them too big. If you supersize a star to a black hole then it becomes not very good at its job, such as producing light.

......

I don't understand why you're saying that 2 legs have stability problems but had advantages, and then saying they are developing load bearing robots (omitting they're not two legged), and then circling back there and saying well, not if they make them too big. In the context we're talking about (Titans), they surely are too big. So why bring up the practical applications of the load bearing robots, which are actually dissimilar anyway, at all? I'm not really clear where you are going with this, is what I am saying.

I personally don't think they have any advantages at all, save for A.) being cool and B.) for morale purposes to followers of the Imperial Cult.

Peregrine wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I thought success in combat was killing the other guy while not dying? So being in something with starship level shielding that annihilates entire tank squadrons is pretty helpful for that.

I know Titans aren't practical but they aren't THAT bad.

Until the other side has a tank with starship level shielding that annihilates entire titan squadrons, because the tank is not an idiotic unstable walker with much worse armor and firepower than a tank of equal mass.

Land Trains have orbital class weaponry and are tracked/wheeled but can lose in combat to a titan, but vice-versa is also true. and both can lose to a tigershark. which in turn can lose to a gargorkmorkanautagant which can lose to a land train and so on and so on.

Psychological warfare plays a huge part in why titans are soo effective that they may not even have to fire a shot. But like others have said beta Garmon was a better site for massed god-machine class battles than Terra. they were fine having the collateral damage occur somewhere other than the throne-world.

I'm be at least somewhat realistic, what would happen if all of the sudden there was an MegaGargant parked in front of the white house/#10Downey, Red Square, etc what would happen? probably capitulation.

 Ouze wrote:
......

I don't understand why you're saying that 2 legs have stability problems but had advantages, and then saying they are developing load bearing robots (omitting they're not two legged), and then circling back there and saying well, not if they make them too big. In the context we're talking about (Titans), they surely are too big. So why bring up the practical applications of the load bearing robots, which are actually dissimilar anyway, at all? I'm not really clear where you are going with this, is what I am saying.

I personally don't think they have any advantages at all, save for A.) being cool and B.) for morale purposes to followers of the Imperial Cult.

I am saying legs in general have there advantages. But only 2 legs have stability problems.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Regardless, there will exist terrain that a walker can go that a tank cannot. Huge boulders, mountainous terrain, etc. The bigger the tank, the bigger the path it will need. The smaller footprint that you say is a ground pressure problem is the same thing that allows for it to be able to traverse more terrain.

This is highly overstated, at least at the scale of titans. A titan has very little ability to step over anything based on the range of motion of its legs and the requirement to keep its center of gravity within its footprint. And it would be extremely vulnerable to having that rough terrain collapse under its foot (hi, extreme ground pressure) and destroy the titan. Realistically anything too rough for tanks is going to be suicide for a titan anyway.

Uhhh, negative. A Titan will be able to navigate more terrain than a tank. You're just making stuff up when you say terrain too rough for a tank would be suicide for a titan. The scale of the difference is dependent on design, but a smaller footprint, higher step height, and alterable "groundshape" gives more flexibility.

As for armor, the in-universe concession is void-shields.

Which would be even better on a tank, if the Imperium didn't have a rule that only walking shrines to space Jesus can have them.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Uhhh, negative. A Titan will be able to navigate more terrain than a tank. You're just making stuff up when you say terrain too rough for a tank would be suicide for a titan. The scale of the difference is dependent on design, but a smaller footprint, higher step height, and alterable "groundshape" gives more flexibility.

I don't think you appreciate the range of motion and stability and ground pressure issues a titan has. Let's say the titan tries to step up onto some rock that would obstruct a tank. The immense ground pressure of the foot impact knocks the rock free of the dirt, the titan's foot slides instead of resting firmly on the ground, and the titan falls over and becomes a useless pile of scrap metal. A titan would have to walk extremely carefully to avoid falling over or sinking into soft ground, and the end result is that any advantage in terrain is minimal at best. And it's quite likely worse at getting through difficult terrain because the tank, being a very stable shape, can just smash its way through a lot of terrain.

Why would they be better on a tank? If we're assuming same power plant (or whatever) they'd be equivalent.

Because everything else about the tank is better. For example, a tank with the same mass as a titan can have the same void shields and weapons and armor as a titan but also have a better power plant to support additional void shields (or, instead, better guns, etc). And the tank's lower profile allows it to avoid more incoming fire, while the titan's void shields have to deal with more damage.

Another use of a titan is as a big bullet magnet. While the enemy is shooting everything at it the rest of the imperial forces storm forward and attack while the enemy is focused on the titans. A common tactic might be to engage the enemy, fire a few energy cannon gaks, then stop advancing, transfer power to void shields and fire off a missile pod or projectile cannon that takes little power to fire.

The conventional tanks and infantry surge forward and attack while everyone's eyes are glued to the titans and win. Propagandists overstate the titans role in the victory to keep them valid as propaganda weapons.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Uhhh, negative. A Titan will be able to navigate more terrain than a tank. You're just making stuff up when you say terrain too rough for a tank would be suicide for a titan. The scale of the difference is dependent on design, but a smaller footprint, higher step height, and alterable "groundshape" gives more flexibility.

I don't think you appreciate the range of motion and stability and ground pressure issues a titan has. Let's say the titan tries to step up onto some rock that would obstruct a tank. The immense ground pressure of the foot impact knocks the rock free of the dirt, the titan's foot slides instead of resting firmly on the ground, and the titan falls over and becomes a useless pile of scrap metal. A titan would have to walk extremely carefully to avoid falling over or sinking into soft ground, and the end result is that any advantage in terrain is minimal at best. And it's quite likely worse at getting through difficult terrain because the tank, being a very stable shape, can just smash its way through a lot of terrain.

Why would they be better on a tank? If we're assuming same power plant (or whatever) they'd be equivalent.

Because everything else about the tank is better. For example, a tank with the same mass as a titan can have the same void shields and weapons and armor as a titan but also have a better power plant to support additional void shields (or, instead, better guns, etc). And the tank's lower profile allows it to avoid more incoming fire, while the titan's void shields have to deal with more damage.

I agree that if all else were equal, then a superheavy tank would be superior in terms of armor per surface area and also lower target profile. However FW stated that Shadowswords for example have to charge their Volcano cannon using the tank's internal combustion engine, making the tank immobile until the cannon is charged. Then the cannon fires one shot and then requires recharging all over again.

The main thing a Titan has over a tank is a plasma reactor, which is presumably how it can simultaneously charge so many large weapons, power its void shields, and move all at the same time (more or less). Titans concentrate the firepower of several such superheavy/Titan class weapons into one frame. Superheavy tanks are lower tech so they cannot accomplish all that. Now why are they lower tech? Because the Adeptus Mechanicus is a religious organization and therefore more interested in building walking avatars of the Machine God, in a craftsman fashion rather than mass production line. Even their non-humanoid, vehicular Ordinatus war machines start becoming mad science super weapons rather than rational mass produced weapons of war.

However with that all said, I don't see why the lesser superheavy tanks cannot be mass produced in such numbers that they still overwhelm Titans by numbers, except for the fact the Mechanicus makes both superheavies and Titans and clearly wants Titans to be superior, which is why we don't get armies of superheavy Bolo equivalents.

Has anyone ever asked why the eldar build titans? We know orks do it after seeing human titans and as a monument to gork n Mork. Why do eldar build them?

Elder titans use holofields so you can't actually see them to shoot them, negating the issue of everyone being able to target them because of their height.

Tracksnkay be easily damaged. What about knees? As well.as the multi meganewton impact of titan feet onto possibly unstable ground, all.that force needs to be taken by very complicated knee and ankle joints that you can't really armour properly.. The ultimate anti giant robot weapons are kneeseeker missiles.

Capitol Imperialis are also tracked vehicles with Void shields and titan level weapons and a giant plasma reactor. I cant remember if Squat Collossus and Imperial Leviathans had void shields.

Ordinatus are tracked platforms with weapons larger than a titan could carry.

I think the best part of this thread are "kneeseeker missiles"

Asking why build a titan instead of a tank is like asking the church why they build cathedrals when you could just throw a table in the back of the van and have a much more mobile chapel!

The SRM carrier and LRM carrier were pretty much the most powerful units in the original BattleTech but we don;t want to jut field armies of them do we

Surprised no one has mentioned the void shields. Titans have a forcefield that soaks quite a bit of punishment and recharges quickly. The smaller knights lack it, not sure about the warhounds. I’m thinking a Titan is inefficient unless it soaks up dmg and delivers dmg in a matter that exceeds tanks.

Recently played the warhammer Armageddon game, basically panzer core with a warhammer 40k skinn. In it a huge benefit of a titan is that it’s a single machine. You usually deal with 10 or so tanks in every tank squad. You expect to lose some in every engagement, needing to replace them. The Titans just kind of keep on trucking and unless you lose all your forces the Titans value doesn’t diminish. That’s from that games point of view anyway.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Uhhh, negative. A Titan will be able to navigate more terrain than a tank. You're just making stuff up when you say terrain too rough for a tank would be suicide for a titan. The scale of the difference is dependent on design, but a smaller footprint, higher step height, and alterable "groundshape" gives more flexibility.

I don't think you appreciate the range of motion and stability and ground pressure issues a titan has. Let's say the titan tries to step up onto some rock that would obstruct a tank. The immense ground pressure of the foot impact knocks the rock free of the dirt, the titan's foot slides instead of resting firmly on the ground, and the titan falls over and becomes a useless pile of scrap metal. A titan would have to walk extremely carefully to avoid falling over or sinking into soft ground, and the end result is that any advantage in terrain is minimal at best. And it's quite likely worse at getting through difficult terrain because the tank, being a very stable shape, can just smash its way through a lot of terrain.

As before, suspensors can alleviate the ground pressure issue, skirting most of your argument. As for balance, those Boston Dynamics robots are getting extremely impressive from a balace-fall-recovery standpoint. I think we can immensely decrease the risk of the scenario you describe.

As for smashing through mountainous boulders and rough, uneven terrain, I give the tank a "no". There are obviously physical barriers that will stop a tank that won't stop a walker.

Why would they be better on a tank? If we're assuming same power plant (or whatever) they'd be equivalent.

Because everything else about the tank is better. For example, a tank with the same mass as a titan can have the same void shields and weapons and armor as a titan but also have a better power plant to support additional void shields (or, instead, better guns, etc). And the tank's lower profile allows it to avoid more incoming fire, while the titan's void shields have to deal with more damage.

A titan is powered by a fusion reactor, a big one. How many can the imperium produce? How many can they maintain and service? Maybe your superheavy tanks are powered by lesser tech that can be maintained. in late fe numbers but doesn't even compare to the energy of a fusion reactor in any way.

 Mr Morden wrote:
The SRM carrier and LRM carrier were pretty much the most powerful units in the original BattleTech but we don;t want to jut field armies of them do we

Haha, nice. I remember those.

The thing to remember for this thread is that the Imperium has both Titans AND superheavy tanks (void shields and all). I submit that all that's required for Titans is a single strategic niche where they have any advantage. The Imperium obviously dedicates enough resources to war machines that it can diversify the systems it makes.

The space Jesus commentary might be skipping over the mentality of those who created the Titans.

In the case of mankind, Mars was cut off and abandoned for a considerable period during Old Night. They required machinery and artificial means to live, and so the machines became sacred. Thus, the Mechanicum came to worship the machine. The Titans Legions are a celebration of that worship, the creation of "God Machines" to venerate the Omnissiah. And, of course, they fight intercene wars of conflicting belief with those God Machines, in the desert of Martian topography.

Along comes the Emperor and his Legions, clad in power armor, and the men of Mars see him and decide he is the Omnissiah. The Emperor is happy to have them, and hey, giant stompy robots, they're welcome to come along too. Just to be clear, the Emperor asks, you can still make power armor and tanks and such right? Absolutely, the Mechanicum agrees, and thus the Titan Legions are folded into the Crusade.

In practice, it says in Titan Death that the Legions really did not encounter much in the way of fighting during the Crusade, as most races don't field anything that could match them, aside from the rare Eldar or Ork creation. They would show up as a walking idol of the human form, wielding weapons capable of leveling xenos and non-compliant human cities, and this was more than enough to sway local populations toward not resisting. It was only in the Heresy, as the Mechanicum split in two, that those city leveling weapons were once more turned against each other.

Today, with Titans greatly reduced in number, they typically act only to support a conventional military, providing an undeniably potent strongpoint of firepower and resilience in larger conflicts.

That's what Titans are used for in 40k. Does it make sense? No, but neither do Leman Russ tank designs, power fists, chainsaw swords, cathedral shaped spaceships, 1000 strong space marine chapters being important in conflicts with billions of participants, Primarchs being inexplicably huge, the warp being a nightmare realm full of demons... on and on. It's science fiction. Klingons and lightsabers don't make sense either, it's just part of the joy of the fantasy.

 Peregrine wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I thought success in combat was killing the other guy while not dying? So being in something with starship level shielding that annihilates entire tank squadrons is pretty helpful for that.

I know Titans aren't practical but they aren't THAT bad.

Until the other side has a tank with starship level shielding that annihilates entire titan squadrons, because the tank is not an idiotic unstable walker with much worse armor and firepower than a tank of equal mass.

But nobody does though. Except other Titans.