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.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Nothing that can be deployed on the ground. There are no other vehicles that have as many voidshields as a titan, I don't need a citation unless you can name another vehicle with more.

Again, the fact that the Imperium chooses not to build vehicles with void shields does not mean that it can't be done.

We also need a citation for this.

You need a citation for basic geometry? A box will have much a much better ratio of volume to surface area than a titan-shaped object. If you put X tons of armor on each then the box will have a greater thickness of armor because that X tons is spread out across a smaller area. If you need X volume to hold a reactor the box will have to spend a smaller percentage of its total volume to hold X. Etc.

You do realise that titans don't have the same reactors as tanks?

You do realize that we're talking about a hypothetical alternate 40k in which the Imperium builds titan-scale tanks instead of titans, right? There's nothing about having arms and legs that allows a vehicle to have a better reactor, anything the titan can do can be done by the titan-scale tank.

Yes but a titan has voidshields to combat the amount of crap on the ground that attacks it and still shadowswords and the like are nothing in comparison to a titan, I mean a reaver is nothing compared to a warlord. The shadowswords and the like need a hell of a lot of time to take a titan down unless they are deployed in great numbers.

A Shadowsword is explicitly stated to be capable of one-shot kills on titans.

The manta can only match the smaller titans, doesn't come close to a warlord.

Nope. The Tigershark AX-1-0, a smaller aircraft with only the Manta's primary railguns and not its large number of secondary weapons, is explicitly stated to be a counter to the Imperium's largest titans. And remember, a Manta is not a conventional 40k ground unit. It's a small warp-capable warship designed for void warfare against capital ships.

Well whats to stop them from doing it now, I mean saying they just choose not to isn't really the Imperiums way.

Okay what are the dimensions of the reactor and whats its output?

A voidshield is a field, it doesn't work like that, it doesn't matter what they geometry is. What matters is what can house a voidshield, tanks obviously can't. Otherwise they would use them and protect vast amounts of their troops etc. The reason the titan can house voidshields is most likely because of its reactor not its geometry.

A tank has considerations due to its fuel reactor. They have combustion reactors not plasma reactors.

Yes It can one shot a titan, you have to get through its voidshields though.

Counter doesn't mean perform as well or has the same output.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Well whats to stop them from doing it now, I mean saying they just choose not to isn't really the Imperiums way.

Err, lol? Choosing not to do something isn't the Imperium's way? Are we discussing the same 40k here? Because in the canon version of 40k the Imperium is full of examples of not doing things because space Jesus says that change is heresy. This is the Imperium where it takes 500 years to approve a modification to a tank, and it requires STC documentation that it is recovered technology from the sacred word of god and not a modern invention. The Imperium where it's considered a significant fact when a space marine chapter defies the admech and bolts a lascannon turret to a Rhino.

Okay what are the dimensions of the reactor and whats its output?

I don't know, but you're still not answering the question. If you assume X size and Y output why is a titan capable of using it but not a titan-scale tank?

Counter doesn't mean perform as well or has the same output.

It really does, at least in the context of units that were specifically designed to kill titans.

What matters is what can house a voidshield, tanks obviously can't. Otherwise they would use them and protect vast amounts of their troops etc.

Alternatively, space Jesus demands that all available void shields be reserved for His walking shrines and not given to mere tanks. You know, the canon explanation when dealing with rare technology like void shields.

A tank has considerations due to its fuel reactor. They have combustion reactors not plasma reactors.

Why can't a tank have a plasma reactor?

 Peregrine wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Well whats to stop them from doing it now, I mean saying they just choose not to isn't really the Imperiums way.

Err, lol? Choosing not to do something isn't the Imperium's way? Are we discussing the same 40k here? Because in the canon version of 40k the Imperium is full of examples of not doing things because space Jesus says that change is heresy. This is the Imperium where it takes 500 years to approve a modification to a tank, and it requires STC documentation that it is recovered technology from the sacred word of god and not a modern invention. The Imperium where it's considered a significant fact when a space marine chapter defies the admech and bolts a lascannon turret to a Rhino.

Okay what are the dimensions of the reactor and whats its output?

I don't know, but you're still not answering the question. If you assume X size and Y output why is a titan capable of using it but not a titan-scale tank?

Counter doesn't mean perform as well or has the same output.

It really does, at least in the context of units that were specifically designed to kill titans.

Well why wouldn't they. So you are saying its impossible to add to or change an STC construct, I mean seriously... They strapped a couple on that Primaris SH.

Because of its plasma reactor probably a tank isn't big enough to house them especially not titan sized ones as there are smaller voidshields.

Again counter doesn't mean perform as well or has the same output.

 Peregrine wrote:

Tyran wrote:
When has a Shadowsword ever one-shot a titan?

IA1, the Shadowsword is explicitly stated to be capable of severing a titan's leg with a single volcano cannon shot. And guess what happens when a bipedal walker loses a leg.

Assuming of course that the Void shield is disabled otherwise that shot is not touching the leg.

For the record, the Imperium does have a non-humanoid ground vehicle with a plasma reactor: the Capitol Imperialis.

The Capitol Imperialis, and the Leviathan command vehicle, both have void shields at levels comparable to Titans. I can't quite find my old Epic sources so cannot confirm whether or not the Leviathan had a plasma reactor as well. However we can see from this there is no specific reason why a tracked vehicle cannot have a plasma reactor or void shield generators. However these vehicles are pretty huge, comparable to a Titan, so one issue is whether the Imperium can miniaturize plasma reactors beyond a certain size. Though that does not in itself address the issue of surface area difference between a Titan and a supersized tracked vehicle.

Also the lower sized titans don't have constant acting voidshields, they have to be turned on and off depending on where the attacks are coming from.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Also the lower sized titans don't have constant acting voidshields, they have to be turned on and off depending on where the attacks are coming from.

That AFAIK is not true. Once activated, the void shields are 360 degree protection. If you have evidence otherwise, please provide citation and quote. You may be thinking of Knights and Ion Shields, but those are different from void shields. Alternatively, you may be thinking of Titans that are not expecting combat. Titans don't always have their shields running because of worry about wear and tear on the generators and the reactor.

The only example I can recall of a Capitol Imperialis was when it got its ass kicked by a Tyranid Bio-titan.

Iracundus wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Also the lower sized titans don't have constant acting voidshields, they have to be turned on and off depending on where the attacks are coming from.

That AFAIK is not true. Once activated, the void shields are 360 degree protection. If you have evidence otherwise, please provide citation and quote. You may be thinking of Knights and Ion Shields, but those are different from void shields. Alternatively, you may be thinking of Titans that are not expecting combat. Titans don't always have their shields running because of worry about wear and tear on the generators and the reactor.

Yeah you're probably right, after googling, that was most likely head cannon.

Peregrine wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Go on, what 40k tanks have more void shields and weapons than the largest classes of Titan?

You're missing the point. The claim was that a tank can't fit the same level of void shields, not that the Imperium has chosen to save its void shields for its walking shrines to space Jesus instead of putting them on tanks. There is nothing about making a vehicle have legs and arms that makes it better able to carry void shields. In a hypothetical universe where the Imperium built practical tanks instead of titans those tanks would have just as much void shielding.

But why wouldn't the Imperium do it? I mean, if it IS more effective, as you say.

You mention a "practical world". That's not 40k. Your rules of a "practical" world might not apply there.
Look, I get what you're coming from, with your whole "it's sensible in our world, so it must be sensible in 40k, it's the IoM who are dumb", but what makes you think at all that what we know is sensible in our world is anything the same as the fictional one of 40k?

Surely, if it were sensible in the 40k universe (so, ignoring our conventions of physics and logic, and using internal logic of 40k), why wouldn't the Imperium try to put similar armaments on tanks if they were just as, if not more, effective?

Because space Jesus demands walking shrines to Himself. Titans, above all, are religious icons and tanks can't fill that role the same way. I have no idea why you think that "maximize effectiveness" is a driving concern for a faction whose fluff constantly references that faction making stupid decisions because it's an ignorant theocracy where common sense is heresy.

And who's fluff also states that they're pretty much the dominant military force in the galaxy? For all their gothic fanciness and devotion to ritual over common sense (a myth and overgeneralisation, I'm afraid - you see plenty of times in 40k where high-ranking IoM leaders use practicality over tradition, an example, funnily enough, is the Ultramarines), the Imperium sure does a brilliant practical job of beating nearly any single opponent. The only reason the IoM suffers so badly, like most factions, is because they're not in a protracted war against one target; they're attacked on all fronts.

For saying that, according to you, the Titans are dumb and would be super ineffective, they do pretty well in 40k.

It's almost like the rules of our reality aren't the same as 40k's.

Good thing then that the Titan can both engage the Shadowsword at roughly the same time (if they can both see eachother, then it's who-shoots-first), and still return fire if hit. The Shadowsword can't.

A Shadowsword is capable of one hit kills against titans.

If it breaches the void shields.

Plus, the source you've given was from slicing out the leg from under the Titan. However, the Titan's gun is going to have a line of sight to the Shadowsword before the Shadowsword gets line of sight to the legs. In fact, the legs are the most likely part of the Titan to have cover, due to most cover coming up from the ground.

Even more reason a Titan is superior.

The side that shoots first wins, and the Shadowsword has much better ability to hide behind obstructions and delay detection for a moment while it aims a kill shot. In fact, given that a titan's primary weapons are mounted much lower than its top, the Shadowsword might just score a fatal head shot on the titan before the titan's own weapons even get above the horizon.

But you didn't mention or cite Shadowswords making "headshot" kills. You mentioned sniping out the leg. Plus, don't know what Titans you've been looking at, but plenty have guns above the head - Warlords have Shadowsword-killing armaments on the upper shoulder mountings.

Plus, "the side that shoots first wins" is incorrect here - the Titan has Void Shields.

Peregrine wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Nothing that can be deployed on the ground. There are no other vehicles that have as many voidshields as a titan, I don't need a citation unless you can name another vehicle with more.

Again, the fact that the Imperium chooses not to build vehicles with void shields does not mean that it can't be done.

But why wouldn't they? I know you like to cling to you "the IoM is super dumb" headcanon, but they're really not THAT dumb. If it were effective, they'd do it (see, Land Raider Crusader, Land Raider Redeemer, Primaris, Xenophase Swords, Razorback, etc etc) If putting void shields on vehicles were that effective/feasible (and they do have the capability to do it, to at least try, as evidenced by things like the Leviathan), then why wouldn't they do it more?

Simple answer is - our understanding of what "should" be effective doesn't apply to 40k. Our rules of causality do not apply. 40k is a different world, and in that world, Void Shields are not as effective on tanks as they are on Titans, for whatever reason.

We also need a citation for this.

You need a citation for basic geometry? A box will have much a much better ratio of volume to surface area than a titan-shaped object. If you put X tons of armor on each then the box will have a greater thickness of armor because that X tons is spread out across a smaller area. If you need X volume to hold a reactor the box will have to spend a smaller percentage of its total volume to hold X. Etc.

And do those rules apply to 40k? You know for sure what the laws of a fictional, imaginary universe are?

You do realise that titans don't have the same reactors as tanks?

You do realize that we're talking about a hypothetical alternate 40k in which the Imperium builds titan-scale tanks instead of titans, right? There's nothing about having arms and legs that allows a vehicle to have a better reactor, anything the titan can do can be done by the titan-scale tank.

But a Titan-scale tank then loses the espoused benefits of being able to hide in cover. Plus, would the tank have more weight, therefore more energy requirements, if built to Titan scale? Maybe the cost is too high - all we know is that, at the current moment, Titans seem to be the best option available to the IoM, who do not see Leviathans as the same kind of quality as a Titan.

Yes but a titan has voidshields to combat the amount of crap on the ground that attacks it and still shadowswords and the like are nothing in comparison to a titan, I mean a reaver is nothing compared to a warlord. The shadowswords and the like need a hell of a lot of time to take a titan down unless they are deployed in great numbers.

A Shadowsword is explicitly stated to be capable of one-shot kills on titans.

As you said, with leg-shot kills. We don't know if that was with the void shields up or down, but considering that Titans are considered far more valuable than Shadowswords by the IoM, who are the ones winning wars with them, I'm going to work on the understanding that Titans are more effective than Shadowswords.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
How do you know a tank can? The only reason the Primaris one has any is because its big enough, but its a hover craft so terrain considerations aren't the same, a massive tank on tracks, do you know the logistics of that.

I know there's no reason why having a different shape prevents the use of void shields.

Really? You're a master techpriest with all the accumulated knowledge of Void Shields and their installation in the Warhammer 40,000 universe?

The Imperium wouldn't make something more effective if they didn't have a pre existing STC plan for it. The Imperium doesn't innovate or create, they follow ancient instructions and kill people who try innovation.

pm713 wrote:
The Imperium wouldn't make something more effective if they didn't have a pre existing STC plan for it. The Imperium doesn't innovate or create, they follow ancient instructions and kill people who try innovation.

*points to Land Raider Redeemer/ Ares/ Angel Infernus/ Solemnus Aggressor/ Wrath of Mjalnar, Infernum and Vortimer pattern Razorbacks, the entire Primaris range, Nephilim Jetfighter (used new STC jet engines, but required modification to older designs, creating new aircraft), etc etc*

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
But why wouldn't the Imperium do it? I mean, if it IS more effective, as you say.

Because space Jesus said so.

what makes you think at all that what we know is sensible in our world is anything the same as the fictional one of 40k?

Because we're talking about issues of basic physics and geometry here. If things in 40k are so detached from reality that, say, the surface area of a titan is less than the surface area of a tank of equal mass then we're clearly dealing with such bizarre and incomprehensible rules that conversation of any kind is pointless.

And who's fluff also states that they're pretty much the dominant military force in the galaxy?

Fluff that is written as in-universe propaganda from the point of view of the Imperium, and is explicitly stated by the authors to be full of bias, half-truths, etc. On the other hand, we have examples like a railgun Tigershark (a standard-issue Tau bomber) killing a Warhound in a single strafing run. That kind of performance is incompatible with the idea that titans are some kind of dominant force at the level that titan fanboys claim they are.

If it breaches the void shields.

It, or the artillery barrage targeting the titan from miles away. Void shields are hardly an impossible obstacle.

Plus, the source you've given was from slicing out the leg from under the Titan. However, the Titan's gun is going to have a line of sight to the Shadowsword before the Shadowsword gets line of sight to the legs. In fact, the legs are the most likely part of the Titan to have cover, due to most cover coming up from the ground.

And the Shadowsword is going to have line of sight to the titan's head before the titan's main guns have line of sight to the Shadowsword. And a head shot is just as good as a leg shot.

But you didn't mention or cite Shadowswords making "headshot" kills. You mentioned sniping out the leg.

Well yes, because the IA1 quote explicitly mentions a leg shot. But it's not like a titan's head is any less critical, kill the crew and the titan is a useless wreck.

And do those rules apply to 40k? You know for sure what the laws of a fictional, imaginary universe are?

If the angles of a triangle in 40k do not add up to 180* then what we're dealing with is so far detached from reality that there's no point in analyzing it. You might as well argue that titans win because once a tank gets above a certain size its wheels turn into squares and it can't move, so all large vehicles have to have legs.

Plus, would the tank have more weight, therefore more energy requirements, if built to Titan scale?

No. In fact, the exact opposite is true. A titan's shape makes it vastly less efficient than a tank and the tank would have a huge advantage in weight and energy requirements.

pm713 wrote:
The Imperium wouldn't make something more effective if they didn't have a pre existing STC plan for it. The Imperium doesn't innovate or create, they follow ancient instructions and kill people who try innovation.

It has done in the past and it certainly does now.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
But why wouldn't the Imperium do it? I mean, if it IS more effective, as you say.

Because space Jesus said so.

And not at all because there's a chance our understanding of physics doesn't apply to 40k?

I mean, the dogmatism with which you say everything was decreed by "space Jesus" is even more extreme than even the Imperium, and that's saying something.

what makes you think at all that what we know is sensible in our world is anything the same as the fictional one of 40k?

Because we're talking about issues of basic physics and geometry here. If things in 40k are so detached from reality that, say, the surface area of a titan is less than the surface area of a tank of equal mass then we're clearly dealing with such bizarre and incomprehensible rules that conversation of any kind is pointless.

Again, implying that base physics are the be-all and end-all of all fictional universes.

40k doesn't obey our physics. Can you prove otherwise?

However, in general, yeah, I'd agree. All kinds of conversations which involve physics in 40k are worthless, because we don't know the laws of 40k's physics. Simple.

And who's fluff also states that they're pretty much the dominant military force in the galaxy?

Fluff that is written as in-universe propaganda from the point of view of the Imperium, and is explicitly stated by the authors to be full of bias, half-truths, etc. On the other hand, we have examples like a railgun Tigershark (a standard-issue Tau bomber) killing a Warhound in a single strafing run. That kind of performance is incompatible with the idea that titans are some kind of dominant force at the level that titan fanboys claim they are.

So, if apparently "fluff can't be trusted", then I can't trust your account of Shadowswords downing Titans? That's just propaganda, right?

Same as T'au Tigersharks taking out Warhounds in a single run, that's just T'au propaganda.

Sorry, you can't dismiss sources with "it's propaganda" and then expect to use sources with the same amount of validity. That's not how this works.

If it breaches the void shields.

It, or the artillery barrage targeting the titan from miles away. Void shields are hardly an impossible obstacle.

So, it's not just the Shadowsword then, is it? It's the Shadowsword, plus whatever you need to take down the Void Shield. If we're playing by those rules, then that Shadowsword or the artillery pieces just got alpha-striked by Drop Podding Space Marines, or a bombing group of Marauders.

Let's stop moving those goalposts.

Plus, the source you've given was from slicing out the leg from under the Titan. However, the Titan's gun is going to have a line of sight to the Shadowsword before the Shadowsword gets line of sight to the legs. In fact, the legs are the most likely part of the Titan to have cover, due to most cover coming up from the ground.

And the Shadowsword is going to have line of sight to the titan's head before the titan's main guns have line of sight to the Shadowsword. And a head shot is just as good as a leg shot.

Is it? Because the example you gave (which TOTALLY can't be propaganda) was of it killing the Titan via a legshot, not a headshot. If you've got a source of a Shadowsword killing a Titan, with Void Shields up, via a headshot, I'll accept your answer.

Even IF I accept it, the Titan still has guns above the head. Not main guns, but guns more than strong enough to take down a Shadowsword in one shot.

But you didn't mention or cite Shadowswords making "headshot" kills. You mentioned sniping out the leg.

Well yes, because the IA1 quote explicitly mentions a leg shot. But it's not like a titan's head is any less critical, kill the crew and the titan is a useless wreck.

Considering that your argument for "one-shotting" was all about using gravity to cripple the Titan, and not just sheer force, I think that's a poor defence.

If Titans were THAT easy to one-shot, don't you think Titans would be, yanno, less of the unstoppable God-Machines that they are shown to be in 40k?
(And again, if you bring up "muh propaganda", what's to defend your Shadowswords from the same?)

And do those rules apply to 40k? You know for sure what the laws of a fictional, imaginary universe are?

If the angles of a triangle in 40k do not add up to 180* then what we're dealing with is so far detached from reality that there's no point in analyzing it. You might as well argue that titans win because once a tank gets above a certain size its wheels turn into squares and it can't move, so all large vehicles have to have legs.

That's exactly what I'm saying. I'm saying look at 40k how it's presented in it's own universe, and throw out the notion that our laws of physics have a tangible impact on a fictional universe.

Plus, would the tank have more weight, therefore more energy requirements, if built to Titan scale?

No. In fact, the exact opposite is true. A titan's shape makes it vastly less efficient than a tank and the tank would have a huge advantage in weight and energy requirements.

According to OUR laws.

I wonder, has anyone been paying attention to the development of Generation Zero? It has some interesting robot designs.

Indeed if mecha were to exist I doubt they would follow the humanoid form you see in 40K titans. A 4 legged variety with a back mounted weapon even heavier caliber than that seen on Warlord titans would be possible, most likely having advantages in recoil absorption and mobility/re-positioning. Like a lovable dog, mounted with a gun capable of clearing cities.

40K has always had the Rule Of Cool above any other, but I'd still enjoy seeing those brutally practical machines of war.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

pm713 wrote:
The Imperium wouldn't make something more effective if they didn't have a pre existing STC plan for it. The Imperium doesn't innovate or create, they follow ancient instructions and kill people who try innovation.

*points to Land Raider Redeemer/ Ares/ Angel Infernus/ Solemnus Aggressor/ Wrath of Mjalnar, Infernum and Vortimer pattern Razorbacks, the entire Primaris range, Nephilim Jetfighter (used new STC jet engines, but required modification to older designs, creating new aircraft), etc etc*

Yet, they literally refer to innovation as something that can get you killed. I think the general reasoning is like Cawl in 40k. If you're useful enough you can avoid being shot in the head. So making a Razorback means you don't die but experimenting for a new tank means dying.
They still took hundreds of years to approve taking the heavy bolters off a Predator and strapping on Lascannons.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Stuff

Given that your premise seems to be "geometry doesn't work like it does in the real world" I don't think there's any point in continuing the discussion with you.

PS: the example of a Tigershark killing a Warhound in one shot is from a book written from the Imperial point of view. So even in their own biased accounting of the story the Imperium admits that a standard mass-produced Tigershark can one-shot a titan.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Stuff

Given that your premise seems to be "geometry doesn't work like it does in the real world" I don't think there's any point in continuing the discussion with you.

PS: the example of a Tigershark killing a Warhound in one shot is from a book written from the Imperial point of view. So even in their own biased accounting of the story the Imperium admits that a standard mass-produced Tigershark can one-shot a titan.

You keep talking about geography, what does that have to do with the field of a void-shield. The question is 'can it fit and function on a tank' not can the titan viodshield field surround the tank, geography obviously doesn't have anything to do with it as there are void shields of every kind, but can you fit a titan voidshield onto a tank, well it pretty much looks like you can't and 'you can't mess with an STC' is nonsense, the lore isn't on your side on that one.

Voidshields aren't perfect so 'it can one shot a titan' is irrelevant, any macro weaponry can but its not the norm. Titans take massive amounts of macro weapons to put them down normally. Titans will batter other titans with far more output than that for ages to break their voidshields especially if they are of the same ilk. I mean a lasgun has been known to break through a Rosarius in one shot, doesn't mean thats a common occurrence.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
You keep talking about geography, what does that have to do with the field of a void-shield. The question is 'can it fit and function on a tank' not can the titan viodshield field surround the tank, geography obviously doesn't have anything to do with it as there are void shields of every kind, but can you fit a titan voidshield onto a tank, well it pretty much looks like you can't and 'you can't mess with an STC' is nonsense, the lore isn't on your side on that one.

Why can't you fit one on a tank? Why does a void shield generator require arms and legs to function? You just keep repeating the claim that titans are somehow uniquely able to use void shields, rather than the Imperium just saving its precious few void shields for its walking shrines to space Jesus and letting the IG deal with whatever is left.

Voidshields aren't perfect so 'it can one shot a titan' is irrelevant, any macro weaponry can but its not the norm. Titans take massive amounts of macro weapons to put them down normally. Titans will batter other titans with far more output than that for ages to break their voidshields especially if they are of the same ilk. I mean a lasgun has been known to break through a Rosarius in one shot, doesn't mean thats a common occurrence.

It's common enough that, after the Tigershark blew away a Warhound in one shot, the titan group's surviving commander withdrew from the battlefield rather than face another attack. IOW, it wasn't a fluke event that probably wouldn't happen again, the Tigershark killed it by straightforward superior firepower. And, again, the Tigershark was explicitly designed to defeat the Imperium's largest titans. We might be talking about the difference between one shot and 2-3 strafing runs to get a kill, but the titan is still going down.

As I recall both the space marine Mastadon and Astraeus tanks have void shields inbuilt. One being old the other of Cawl's design. Neither of which are small or particularly massive.

cody.d. wrote:
As I recall both the space marine Mastadon and Astraeus tanks have void shields inbuilt. One being old the other of Cawl's design. Neither of which are small or particularly massive.

Yep. It's clearly not the case that tanks can't have void shields, they just don't get the same priority for rare advanced tech like void shields.

Peregrine, I have a question since you seem to both hate most of the background of 40k and based on previous posts seem to want to purge most of the model line, most cool or interesting rules and variety. What exactly do you like about 40k?

Yes based on logic and real world physics Titans make no sense. So does 90 percent of 40k. Want to know what they are though, cool. There is a reason that giant bipedal robots are a near universal thing in sci fi, people like them.

HoundsofDemos wrote:
Peregrine, I have a question since you seem to both hate most of the background of 40k and based on previous posts seem to want to purge most of the model line, most cool or interesting rules and variety. What exactly do you like about 40k?

Yes based on logic and real world physics Titans make no sense. So does 90 percent of 40k. Want to know what they are though, cool. There is a reason that giant bipedal robots are a near universal thing in sci fi, people like them.

You are badly mistaken here. Titans are ing stupid from a real-world point of view, but they're perfect for 40k. It is absolute perfect that the Imperium has idiotic walking shrines to space Jesus, because the Imperium is an insane theocracy that executes anyone who dares to understand science or engineering. I love the fact that titans exist fluff-wise, and they're pretty cool models. The only thing I object to is people trying to defend titans as a reasonable and practical thing to have, rather than another monument to the Imperium's idiocy and waste.

Could I try a quick summary? Please let me know where I've missed someone's point.

Everyone agrees giant stompy robots are awesome and perfect for the imperium.

There are multiple sources of titan class weapons being fitted to other platforms, such as tanks and aircraft. This covers both spe ific weapons that get fitted to titans (volcano cannon, plasma blastgun) and weapons specifically introduced to kill titans (tau super heavy rail gun thingies).

There are multiple sources demonstrating that void shields get fitted to tanks or other tracked vehicles. The Capitol Imperialis is specifically noted as having titan class shields, and from memory, it even had the same level of protection as a Warlord (6 shields in old Epic money).

The main disagreement seems to stem from why the Imperium doesn't do more big tank type things with void shields compared to titan type things with void shields. I don't think this particular argument can be resolved

 Peregrine wrote:

 Camkierhi wrote:
not taking in to account any development in materials over thousands of years

We don't need to account for materials because the flaws with titans are issues of geometry. A titan will always have more surface area than a tank with comparable internal volume, which means that an equal mass of armor will be much thinner and give much less protection to the titan. A titan will always have a smaller surface area in contact with the ground and will always have the additional force of the foot impacting the ground with every step, so it will always be more vulnerable to soft ground. A titan will always have its center of gravity significantly higher up and require a much smaller rotation angle to put that center of gravity outside of its footprint and fall over. Any materials improvements that can help a titan will also help a conventional tank, and the tank will always win at everything except being a walking icon to space Jesus.

and as has been said, the sight of it would be just awe

Until a Tigershark pilot sees that nice easy target and puts a fatal railgun salvo through it. Then your icon to space Jesus becomes a burning wreck and the only awe is at the enemies that smashed it.

The simple factor of raising your line of sight above everything on the ground and your guns automatically having height advantage alone are not to be scoffed at either.

Err, no. Success in combat is about keeping a low profile and staying out of sight. A tall target that stands out from every possible direction is an easy target, and any advantage in gun elevation is negated by the fact that the enemy guns now have line of sight for return fire.

These were my arguments too, but its the same argument about any dude in a robot suit. Titans, mechwarrior, Macross, etc.
Rule of cool here, no biggie.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrianDavion wrote:
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!

Quote this man a hundred times.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tygre wrote:

 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.

FOUR LEGS GOOD TWO LEGS BAD!

As monuments to idiocy and waste, they're much like the cathedrals of the Middle Ages where they required so much effort and higher tech than equivalent buildings. Notre Dame is a terrible building for its requirements.

Like Notre Dame, however, the point is to show how powerful and godly you are by being able to build and maintain something so impractical.

pm713 wrote:Yet, they literally refer to innovation as something that can get you killed. I think the general reasoning is like Cawl in 40k. If you're useful enough you can avoid being shot in the head. So making a Razorback means you don't die but experimenting for a new tank means dying.
They still took hundreds of years to approve taking the heavy bolters off a Predator and strapping on Lascannons.

But if having Void Shielded super-heavy tanks was so much more effective than Titans are, as Peregrine is saying, then surely you'd be able to avoid execution because it would be, according to Peregrine, infinitely more effective.

Either Titans *are* the superior option, because tanks cannot be made as effective (and thus the people who tried were executed because it wasn't useful enough), or somehow, in the 10,000 years of the Imperium, no-one has tried to make a Void-Shielded Tank which apparently should be easily superior.

Peregrine wrote:Given that your premise seems to be "geometry doesn't work like it does in the real world" I don't think there's any point in continuing the discussion with you.

If your premise is "this fictional universe absolutely must obey by our current incomplete understanding of physics, and any signs that point to things being effective are just propaganda", I think I'd agree it's not worth discussing with you.

PS: the example of a Tigershark killing a Warhound in one shot is from a book written from the Imperial point of view. So even in their own biased accounting of the story the Imperium admits that a standard mass-produced Tigershark can one-shot a titan.

bUt tHaT'S jUSt PROpAgaNdA!

It's clearly propaganda, because the Imperium just falsify the strength of the T'au, making them look like an actual threat so Imperial warlords can justify sending massive armies and military expeditions to attack the T'au, and gain massive glory and honour leading battles against a foe that, in reality isn't as much of a threat. They make their enemy seem stronger, so they look better when they beat them.

See, not hard to explain that with PRoPAGaNDa

Peregrine wrote:Why can't you fit one on a tank? Why does a void shield generator require arms and legs to function? You just keep repeating the claim that titans are somehow uniquely able to use void shields, rather than the Imperium just saving its precious few void shields for its walking shrines to space Jesus and letting the IG deal with whatever is left.

But maybe those walking shrines are more effective than tanks, for whatever reason, and so it makes more sense to shield them?

You seem so fixated on the idea that Titans just simply CANNOT be effective - solely based on conceptions of real-world physics.

It's common enough that, after the Tigershark blew away a Warhound in one shot, the titan group's surviving commander withdrew from the battlefield rather than face another attack. IOW, it wasn't a fluke event that probably wouldn't happen again, the Tigershark killed it by straightforward superior firepower. And, again, the Tigershark was explicitly designed to defeat the Imperium's largest titans. We might be talking about the difference between one shot and 2-3 strafing runs to get a kill, but the titan is still going down.

Pssh. Propaganda, eh?



Again, I'm not saying that there isn't a religious element to the Titans. There absolutely is. However, even IF tanks were superior to Titans, why wouldn't tanks then become massive rolling churches? As I see it, the Imperium creates incredibly powerful war machines. The most powerful of these war machines, because they represent the massive strength of the Imperium, and the God-Emperor as a result, are converted to add cathedrals, shrines, and general religious pomp.

Titans aren't defended and made strong because they're religious icons. They're religious icons BECAUSE they're well defended and made strong.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

pm713 wrote:Yet, they literally refer to innovation as something that can get you killed. I think the general reasoning is like Cawl in 40k. If you're useful enough you can avoid being shot in the head. So making a Razorback means you don't die but experimenting for a new tank means dying.
They still took hundreds of years to approve taking the heavy bolters off a Predator and strapping on Lascannons.

But if having Void Shielded super-heavy tanks was so much more effective than Titans are, as Peregrine is saying, then surely you'd be able to avoid execution because it would be, according to Peregrine, infinitely more effective.

Either Titans *are* the superior option, because tanks cannot be made as effective (and thus the people who tried were executed because it wasn't useful enough), or somehow, in the 10,000 years of the Imperium, no-one has tried to make a Void-Shielded Tank which apparently should be easily superior.
.

3rd option. Adeptus Titanicus came out first before super heavy imperial tanks were really a thing

And who in their right mind would retcon Titans!

 Peregrine wrote:
The only thing I object to is people trying to defend titans as a reasonable and practical thing to have, rather than another monument to the Imperium's idiocy and waste.

I repeat from my earlier post; titans would have their uses. The tank concept is great and all, and probably more practical 80% of the time. But the basic issue with trying to fit armaments to the same degree as a titan onto a motorised chassis creates considerable limitations and difficulties of its own.

For fun, I spent a while in paint trying to figure out the rough dimensions the tank would need to have to mount the degree of arms/armour/shielding of a Warlord Titan along with equivalent arc of fire capability, and the result was really something of a mess. It ended up resembling a giant train more than a tank; and had about a third of the height of the warlord and slightly more width than one. And even that was really quite impractical, you'd need to make it wider still to give it a more stable centre of gravity.

Don't get me wrong, as a gun platform it would be of far more general use. But I can think of certain situations in which the Titan might be of more practicality.
(Note, I'm referring to the larger titans here, the smaller ones are clearly extraneous)