Switch Theme:

Space Marine Gladiator  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in ca
Commander of the Mysterious 2nd Legion





As Katherine said combat walkers are horriably impractical. even if some of the smaller ones might have a niche use, things like Titans are a HORRIABLE idea in real life (they'd be fodder for air strikes at the least) this is typical of everytime GW introduces a new tank. the edgey people who get off on disliking everything new bash it as silly and impractical while clutching their WW1 tanks and combat walkers to their chest like they're perfectly normal.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/22 21:16:32


Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




BrianDavion wrote:
As Katherine said combat walkers are horriably impractical. even if some of the smaller ones might have a niche use, things like Titans are a HORRIABLE idea in real life (they'd be fodder for air strikes at the least) this is typical of everytime GW introduces a new tank. the edgey people who get off on disliking everything new bash it as silly and impractical while clutching their WW1 tanks and combat walkers to their chest like they're perfectly normal.


Silly and impractical is 40k.

Just because not everyone love Primaris doesn't make them wrong either.
Your complaining that people are saying this thing doesn't fit within what they consider inkeeping with the last 20 years of what GW has produced for spacemarines.
   
Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







 fraser1191 wrote:
Can someone provide examples of human controlled hover tanks in scifi settings? I currently can't think of any

Don't think halo has any, or starcraft, aliens, mass effect has a singular 1 and everything else that low is treaded. My list is short but I genuinely can't think of another setting where humans had a hover tank. Command and conquer?

I'd say things like that make marines more set apart from the Imperium, closer to Xenos in comparison to guard. Similar to what it is that they want to destroy


Star Wars EU (repulsor tanks), Dahak, Battlefield 2142, Supreme Commander, Civ Beyond Earth, Traveller, Rifts.

Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using.
Homebrew oldhammer project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/790996.page#10896267
Meridian: Necromunda-based 40k skirmish: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/795374.page 
   
Made in us
Member of a Lodge? I Can't Say





Philadelphia PA

 AnomanderRake wrote:
 fraser1191 wrote:
Can someone provide examples of human controlled hover tanks in scifi settings? I currently can't think of any

Don't think halo has any, or starcraft, aliens, mass effect has a singular 1 and everything else that low is treaded. My list is short but I genuinely can't think of another setting where humans had a hover tank. Command and conquer?

I'd say things like that make marines more set apart from the Imperium, closer to Xenos in comparison to guard. Similar to what it is that they want to destroy


Star Wars EU (repulsor tanks), Dahak, Battlefield 2142, Supreme Commander, Civ Beyond Earth, Traveller, Rifts.


And in miniatures gaming Heavy Gear, Beyond the Gates of Antares and Battletech (although BT's hovertanks are more like real world hovercraft with big skirting).

I prefer to buy from miniature manufacturers that *don't* support the overthrow of democracy. 
   
Made in ca
Secretive Dark Angels Veteran



Canada

Although they used hover fans, Hammer’s Slammers used floating tanks to great Sci-fi effect. Picture a Vietnam era Armored Cavalry Regiment with flying tanks and APCs, not to mention energy weapons. Best tank science fiction around. Ogre GEV had hovertanks (light ones), and FASA’s Renegade Legions had grav tanks aplenty.

All you have to do is fire three rounds a minute, and stand 
   
Made in us
Monster-Slaying Daemonhunter





 AnomanderRake wrote:
 fraser1191 wrote:
Can someone provide examples of human controlled hover tanks in scifi settings? I currently can't think of any

Don't think halo has any, or starcraft, aliens, mass effect has a singular 1 and everything else that low is treaded. My list is short but I genuinely can't think of another setting where humans had a hover tank. Command and conquer?

I'd say things like that make marines more set apart from the Imperium, closer to Xenos in comparison to guard. Similar to what it is that they want to destroy


Star Wars EU (repulsor tanks), Dahak, Battlefield 2142, Supreme Commander, Civ Beyond Earth, Traveller, Rifts.


Regular Star Wars has repulsor tanks. There was just one in the Mandalorian on friday, they've been in Rebels and the Clone Wars, etc.

To add to the list, Dropzone Commander has human controlled hovertanks in the PHR.


Hammers Slammers is pretty awesome, there was a Panzer Blitz style wargame about them I played one time.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ice_can wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
As Katherine said combat walkers are horriably impractical. even if some of the smaller ones might have a niche use, things like Titans are a HORRIABLE idea in real life (they'd be fodder for air strikes at the least) this is typical of everytime GW introduces a new tank. the edgey people who get off on disliking everything new bash it as silly and impractical while clutching their WW1 tanks and combat walkers to their chest like they're perfectly normal.


Silly and impractical is 40k.

Just because not everyone love Primaris doesn't make them wrong either.
Your complaining that people are saying this thing doesn't fit within what they consider inkeeping with the last 20 years of what GW has produced for spacemarines.


The Repulsor isn't outside of what GW has made for the Space Marines. Literally nothing on it is something they didn't have before.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/11/22 23:41:55


Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades! 
   
Made in us
Resolute Ultramarine Honor Guard





 fraser1191 wrote:
Can someone provide examples of human controlled hover tanks in scifi settings? I currently can't think of any

Don't think halo has any, or starcraft, aliens, mass effect has a singular 1 and everything else that low is treaded. My list is short but I genuinely can't think of another setting where humans had a hover tank. Command and conquer?

I'd say things like that make marines more set apart from the Imperium, closer to Xenos in comparison to guard. Similar to what it is that they want to destroy


The VHT-1 Veritech Hovertank from the Robotech series.

They were all over the place in Battletech.

Shadowrun has a few LAVs

My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. 
   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar





jeff white wrote:Exactly. Restartes are heresy. Cawl’s flying tanks are almost as ridiculous as flying restartes with auto cannons. All evidence of GW execs aiming to become Hasbro as they turned space marines into GI Joe. Tripe for puppies.
Pardon? Do you have any ACTUAL reasons for why the Primaris tanks are "GI Joe tripe", or are you just being hysterical?


Ice_can wrote:Repulsors are designed to work like modern tanks, except the idea of Close combat in 40k terms especially as a main purpose of troops does not have a modern military equivalent. It's close range firefights usually.
Yeah for the drive up disembark and then have shoot out the repulsor design works fine as a shock assualt vehical dude leaving one by one on multiple sides would get overwhelmed and cutdown.
It's literally no different in it's disembarking points than a Rhino though?? Plus, that's why it has the storm bolter/fragstorm arrays on the exit points, to prevent that kind of encirclement.

The rhino isn't an assualt vehical so you generally wouldn't go crashing a rhino through walls its a apc, it's sole purpose is to move groups of troops for point a to point b relatively rested at speed with a level of protection from small arms eg lasguns and bolters maybe heavy bolters.
And THIS is why I don't see the point of the Rhino in the Astartes arsenal. What you've described, lasguns, bolters and heavy bolters - these should all be things that the power armour itself should be protecting from! Like, I don't know about everyone else, but I see the Rhino's armour as just about the same durability as the power armour of the people in it - if you want to have the Space Marines get upfield, why not use Drop Pods or jump packs, or a Razorback? For squishy guardsmen, an APC makes total sense, but for Space Marines, whose armour is just about as thick as the tank they're in, and who don't really tire out from movement on the battlefield, I question the need for an APC.

A Repulsor is like a king tiger tank too big and heavy for its ground pressure to stay reasonable, heck one of the storys talks about the antigrav tearing up the armour road, it's in keepingnwith the primaris design philosophy of brute force will over come any problem, make more, make bigger and ignore any reason why that would be a down side.
Except that's why it feels like such a Space Marine tank to me - that idea of "brute force" is so perfectly conceptualised even in the way it hovers. And again - "reasonable" and 40k don't often appear in the same sentence.

jeff white wrote:Hover and fly were not so common. Xenos had anti-grav tech mostly if at all until recently. Should not be in the imperium armory in any real numbers given the original mythology.
Land Speeder says hi.
Fun fact - Land Speeders are more common than Land Raiders!

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/23 11:12:06



They/them

 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Springfield, VA

As far as sci-fi series goes, the Bolo series implemented it in a pretty cool way - they can apply power to contragravity generators mounted in the hull plating between the treads to "fly". They could even do orbital descents using this device.

However, it consumed power, which was often needed for other thingies (e.g. energizing battlescreens, firing laser defenses or infinite repeaters or whatehaveyou, powering the psychotronic computer's needs, etc etc.). So during combat, most Bolo tanks rested on and maneuvered using their tracks. Contragrav mobility was an option if they needed it, but they could also use tracks and save the power, in other words.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/23 13:51:27


 
   
Made in ca
Arch Magos w/ 4 Meg of RAM






BrianDavion wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^It's the huge array of guns pointing in every direction off the tanks. The array of weapon systems has ballooned to cartoonish levels.


the executioner is a bit odd tbut the repulsor is not "just a huge array of guns in every nonsensical direction" you clearly have a main turret gun, a forward mounted gun in a hull mounting (very typical) and a gun covering each door. and then some grenade launchers on the front and sides of the turret.

there is a LOGIC in the weapons placement.


its the grenade launchers that make it look goofy as feth. All these boxes of grenades all over look goofy, and the extra stubber for no reason on top. Oh, and i just learned that it has a gun on the back by looking at the instructions to try and figure out the name of all its weapons (i gave up).

If the repulsor had only : hull gun, main turret gun, manned turret gun and "sponsons" on the sides only, it would look fine. As it is its just too much crap on it and rolling its shots is a pain in the ass.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Voss wrote:
Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:I am not a fan of Primaris tanks having grav locomotion, but at the same time; for them to have acceptable tracks to me, they really wouldn't look like Space Marine tanks anymore.


Curious about this, because if you put tracks on the two tanks you've got pictured, they'd be a lot like land raider's tracks. They'd very clearly go where the two big front 'skids' are, except recessed into the armor, and would run along the bottom (you'd pop off the side skids, and extend armor under the side doors), and replace the jet engines, which is where the tracks would feed back into the armor.

Both the rhino chassis and the land raider has the same kind of setup, though a slightly taller armored side (or rather, the repulsor cuts it short to stuff the antigrav skids underneath).

Not speaking to realism at all, just the overall design of a relatively narrow central hull sandwiched between armored side-sections.


real tracks go over the hull (like the land raider proteus or spartan assault tank).

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/23 14:32:55


 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

Arguing the combat worth of 'Mechs is kinda stupid IMO. Of course they wouldn't work in real life. But this isn't real life we're talking about.

In "real life" all the 'Mechs in BattleTech would get their gak kicked in by all the tanks. But they don't. The rules are written specifically to make tanks weaker and more vulnerable to incoming fire. It's unrealistic... but the point of the game is "big stompy robots" not "big stompy robots that get pasted by sensible, logical tanks".

The same obviously applies to 40k as well.

Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
the_scotsman wrote:That angle, for me, is....okay with the new primaris stuff. It certainly looks brutal and unsubtle. What I dislike about it is that it just kind of looks like a cheap toy, there's no dioramic action to it. All the marines you see in them are in completely static, often arbitrary places around the model. They look like a GI Joe toy I might have had when I was 9. It's never something I'd pay whatever, 80 bucks for. Compared to other spectacular big models like the Canoptek Doom thingy, the Lord Discordant, the new Ork buggies, the new Exorcist model, there's just no comparison.
Just to confirm, do the older SM tanks share this same problem?


Yeah, mostly they do. I've collected three different marine armies at this point and I've willingly built and painted a grand total of 3 box tanks for those armies, I'll freely admit that they basically just do nothing for me aesthetically. The distinction is that a rhino is a 44$ model and an impulsor is a 75$ model. And for most of the time I've been able to collect marine stuff, a rhino has been more like a 30$ model.

Something "looking like a cheap action figure instead of a premium super-expensive model" definitely it being nearly twice as expensive exacerbates that problem.

If I look at buying, lets say a Goliath truck for my GSC, it's a similar price point at like 65$ or something. But that model has several crewmembers that are all multipart guys compatible with the rest of my bits, it's got doors I can model open or closed, it's got a back hatch I can model one way or another, it's a dual kit I can build as a rockgrinder or a truck with a whole dozer blade and a whole different gun assembly and an open back...I look at that and I go "Yeesh, 65 bucks" but at the same time I know it's a nice diorama piece with enough bits on it to make me able to make something totally unique to my army and even unique to my other copies of that same kit.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/23 14:49:23


"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"

"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"

"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"

"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"  
   
Made in ca
Arch Magos w/ 4 Meg of RAM






 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Land Speeder says hi.
Fun fact - Land Speeders are more common than Land Raiders!


yeah, but land speeders and bikes aren't main battle tanks, theyre used to harass the enemy and outmaneuver them. not stay in the back of the map and gun them down all game long.

Actual hover tanks should be left for technologically advanced Xenos. Eldar, Drukhari, Harlequins, Tau and Necrons all make sense to be using hover tanks.
But i guess when people complain that primaris take up the identity of other armies its just mindless marine bashing and not a valid complaint.

As to whoever posted the Merkava to point out that auxiliary grenade launchers are a thing, notice how on the merkava they don't look like ammo boxes stapled to the side haphazardly? Thats the difference with the Repulsor.
   
Made in us
Monster-Slaying Daemonhunter





Sgt_Smudge wrote:
The rhino isn't an assualt vehical so you generally wouldn't go crashing a rhino through walls its a apc, it's sole purpose is to move groups of troops for point a to point b relatively rested at speed with a level of protection from small arms eg lasguns and bolters maybe heavy bolters.
And THIS is why I don't see the point of the Rhino in the Astartes arsenal. What you've described, lasguns, bolters and heavy bolters - these should all be things that the power armour itself should be protecting from! Like, I don't know about everyone else, but I see the Rhino's armour as just about the same durability as the power armour of the people in it - if you want to have the Space Marines get upfield, why not use Drop Pods or jump packs, or a Razorback? For squishy guardsmen, an APC makes total sense, but for Space Marines, whose armour is just about as thick as the tank they're in, and who don't really tire out from movement on the battlefield, I question the need for an APC.


A Rhino is still substantinally better armored than a PA suit, and it's faster. APC's are mostly for the tactical and strategic mobility anyway.


VladimirHerzog wrote:
its the grenade launchers that make it look goofy as feth. All these boxes of grenades all over look goofy, and the extra stubber for no reason on top. Oh, and i just learned that it has a gun on the back by looking at the instructions to try and figure out the name of all its weapons (i gave up).

If the repulsor had only : hull gun, main turret gun, manned turret gun and "sponsons" on the sides only, it would look fine. As it is its just too much crap on it and rolling its shots is a pain in the ass.


I actually think the grenade launchers look fine. They look like the NII Stali active-defense system on the Armata, and something that a real tank might have.

The door gun/recessed mini-turrets on the back of the turret are the things that I find weird about it.

VladimirHerzog wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Land Speeder says hi.
Fun fact - Land Speeders are more common than Land Raiders!


yeah, but land speeders and bikes aren't main battle tanks, theyre used to harass the enemy and outmaneuver them. not stay in the back of the map and gun them down all game long.

Actual hover tanks should be left for technologically advanced Xenos. Eldar, Drukhari, Harlequins, Tau and Necrons all make sense to be using hover tanks.
But i guess when people complain that primaris take up the identity of other armies its just mindless marine bashing and not a valid complaint.

As to whoever posted the Merkava to point out that auxiliary grenade launchers are a thing, notice how on the merkava they don't look like ammo boxes stapled to the side haphazardly? Thats the difference with the Repulsor.


The Imperium doesn't lack for the ability to create heavy hover vehicles, they just previously generally didn't chose to, presumably out of logistic or engineering pressures. [these aren't hard to imagine. Power draw, simplicity, internal volume, maintenance, rapidity of production, etc.]

The wolfwolf gunship has antigrav panels underneath it for flight, as does the Caestus, and both are pretty chunky vehicles.

There's also the Caladias and other Talons vehicles, and in the lore there were antigrav land raiders and rhinos.

And, of course, there's the famous "Imperial Grav Tank" from way back when.

Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades! 
   
Made in ca
Commander of the Mysterious 2nd Legion





 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Arguing the combat worth of 'Mechs is kinda stupid IMO. Of course they wouldn't work in real life. But this isn't real life we're talking about.

In "real life" all the 'Mechs in BattleTech would get their gak kicked in by all the tanks. But they don't. The rules are written specifically to make tanks weaker and more vulnerable to incoming fire. It's unrealistic... but the point of the game is "big stompy robots" not "big stompy robots that get pasted by sensible, logical tanks".

The same obviously applies to 40k as well.


and IIRC the introduction in Total warfare outright SAYS something along those lines

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in us
Resolute Ultramarine Honor Guard





 VladimirHerzog wrote:


its the grenade launchers that make it look goofy as feth. All these boxes of grenades all over look goofy, and the extra stubber for no reason on top. Oh, and i just learned that it has a gun on the back by looking at the instructions to try and figure out the name of all its weapons (i gave up).
that’s the AA Mount.

My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. 
   
Made in ca
Commander of the Mysterious 2nd Legion





Breton wrote:
 VladimirHerzog wrote:


its the grenade launchers that make it look goofy as feth. All these boxes of grenades all over look goofy, and the extra stubber for no reason on top. Oh, and i just learned that it has a gun on the back by looking at the instructions to try and figure out the name of all its weapons (i gave up).
that’s the AA Mount.


it CAN be an AA mount, although it can also be a storm bolter to cover the rear hatch

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in us
Lord Commander in a Plush Chair






First off: did any of you ever actually look at the rules or have you just been making wild assumptions from the model?

The "Grenade Launchers" in the boxes are autolaunchers, I.E. Smoke launchers; their placement is sensical even if their size is way too big.

They really have very few weapons compared to the realtor, which is fine: 3 Base guns, 2 add-on weapon options, and a defensive Item Option. The pics all show 1 add-on and 1 defensive gear with just a few showing the edges of the second add-on(personally I feel, rules/gamewise, that you should always pay the 15 points for both add-one and the defensive).

What is nonsensical is that they did the same thing with this model as the Executioner: Having the Icarus Rocket pod replace a single Autolauncher box. at least the base Repulsor and redemptor dreads have them on micro turrets.

Now, since we now have the preorders up: GW has created the debacle of the old Rhino/Razorback separate kits again. There is no reason that you should ever buy another impulsor since of $5USD more you can get a gladius that can be easily magnetized for swapping between the 2(and the gladius variants).I know that is what I will be doing.

This is my Rulebook. There are many Like it, but this one is mine. Without me, my rulebook is useless. Without my rulebook, I am useless.
Stop looking for buzz words and start reading the whole sentences.



 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka




NE Ohio, USA

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
 fraser1191 wrote:
Can someone provide examples of human controlled hover tanks in scifi settings? I currently can't think of any

Don't think halo has any, or starcraft, aliens, mass effect has a singular 1 and everything else that low is treaded. My list is short but I genuinely can't think of another setting where humans had a hover tank. Command and conquer?

I'd say things like that make marines more set apart from the Imperium, closer to Xenos in comparison to guard. Similar to what it is that they want to destroy


Star Wars EU (repulsor tanks), Dahak, Battlefield 2142, Supreme Commander, Civ Beyond Earth, Traveller, Rifts.


Regular Star Wars has repulsor tanks. There was just one in the Mandalorian on friday, they've been in Rebels and the Clone Wars, etc.


There's also that one in SW: Rogue One.
   
Made in us
Monster-Slaying Daemonhunter





ccs wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
 fraser1191 wrote:
Can someone provide examples of human controlled hover tanks in scifi settings? I currently can't think of any

Don't think halo has any, or starcraft, aliens, mass effect has a singular 1 and everything else that low is treaded. My list is short but I genuinely can't think of another setting where humans had a hover tank. Command and conquer?

I'd say things like that make marines more set apart from the Imperium, closer to Xenos in comparison to guard. Similar to what it is that they want to destroy


Star Wars EU (repulsor tanks), Dahak, Battlefield 2142, Supreme Commander, Civ Beyond Earth, Traveller, Rifts.


Regular Star Wars has repulsor tanks. There was just one in the Mandalorian on friday, they've been in Rebels and the Clone Wars, etc.


There's also that one in SW: Rogue One.


That one is actually tracked. It's a TX225 Occupier Assault Tank, and it's a tracked combat transport made by Rothana Heavy Engineering. The toy for it was advertised as a hovertank, but in the film and the lore it's tracked. IIRC there's a shot of it's tracks in the movie.

According to wookiepedia, it's tracked for better maneuverability in urban combat conditions. That said, I doubt it would be any good in an urban combat environment; it's weapons layout is terrible and it's guns have about 0 degrees of weapons traverse which would be important in an urban combat environment [also, while it's got a good frontal profile, it's top armor which is also important in an urban combat environment is unknown and based on the fact that it's also a flatbed cargo carrier might be questionable]. It would probably be relatively good, by the general standards of Imperial designs that gave us the AT-AT and AT-ST, in a general assault across open ground like Hoth.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/30 09:04:50


Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades! 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





I think the vehicle looks fine, that said, I prefer treads or more usual looking tanks. ( call me old fashioned ). My biggest issue with the Gladiator isn't the look or lay out, it's the money cost. I keep wondering when the rise will end, and all that happens is the new releases make the older ones I felt were over expensive seem reasonable over time.

It looks and feels fine though, considering the lay out of the primaris vehicles.
   
Made in ca
Commander of the Mysterious 2nd Legion





 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
ccs wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
 fraser1191 wrote:
Can someone provide examples of human controlled hover tanks in scifi settings? I currently can't think of any

Don't think halo has any, or starcraft, aliens, mass effect has a singular 1 and everything else that low is treaded. My list is short but I genuinely can't think of another setting where humans had a hover tank. Command and conquer?

I'd say things like that make marines more set apart from the Imperium, closer to Xenos in comparison to guard. Similar to what it is that they want to destroy


Star Wars EU (repulsor tanks), Dahak, Battlefield 2142, Supreme Commander, Civ Beyond Earth, Traveller, Rifts.


Regular Star Wars has repulsor tanks. There was just one in the Mandalorian on friday, they've been in Rebels and the Clone Wars, etc.


There's also that one in SW: Rogue One.


That one is actually tracked. It's a TX225 Occupier Assault Tank, and it's a tracked combat transport made by Rothana Heavy Engineering. The toy for it was advertised as a hovertank, but in the film and the lore it's tracked. IIRC there's a shot of it's tracks in the movie.

According to wookiepedia, it's tracked for better maneuverability in urban combat conditions. That said, I doubt it would be any good in an urban combat environment; it's weapons layout is terrible and it's guns have about 0 degrees of weapons traverse which would be important in an urban combat environment [also, while it's got a good frontal profile, it's top armor which is also important in an urban combat environment is unknown and based on the fact that it's also a flatbed cargo carrier might be questionable]. It would probably be relatively good, by the general standards of Imperial designs that gave us the AT-AT and AT-ST, in a general assault across open ground like Hoth.


it honestly looks more like an Anti air platform

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in us
Storm Trooper with Maglight






New Hampshire

BrianDavion wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
Spoiler:
ccs wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
 fraser1191 wrote:
Can someone provide examples of human controlled hover tanks in scifi settings? I currently can't think of any

Don't think halo has any, or starcraft, aliens, mass effect has a singular 1 and everything else that low is treaded. My list is short but I genuinely can't think of another setting where humans had a hover tank. Command and conquer?

I'd say things like that make marines more set apart from the Imperium, closer to Xenos in comparison to guard. Similar to what it is that they want to destroy


Star Wars EU (repulsor tanks), Dahak, Battlefield 2142, Supreme Commander, Civ Beyond Earth, Traveller, Rifts.


Regular Star Wars has repulsor tanks. There was just one in the Mandalorian on friday, they've been in Rebels and the Clone Wars, etc.


There's also that one in SW: Rogue One.


That one is actually tracked. It's a TX225 Occupier Assault Tank, and it's a tracked combat transport made by Rothana Heavy Engineering. The toy for it was advertised as a hovertank, but in the film and the lore it's tracked. IIRC there's a shot of it's tracks in the movie.

According to wookiepedia, it's tracked for better maneuverability in urban combat conditions. That said, I doubt it would be any good in an urban combat environment; it's weapons layout is terrible and it's guns have about 0 degrees of weapons traverse which would be important in an urban combat environment [also, while it's got a good frontal profile, it's top armor which is also important in an urban combat environment is unknown and based on the fact that it's also a flatbed cargo carrier might be questionable]. It would probably be relatively good, by the general standards of Imperial designs that gave us the AT-AT and AT-ST, in a general assault across open ground like Hoth.


it honestly looks more like an Anti air platform


I think the idea of the Rogue One tank was more of a WW2 Stug idea, it's even in the name. The Stug was classified as an "Assault Gun" and was to support infantry attacks. I can see Star Wars Empire using a similar vehicle, and were simply using it as a cargo vehicle because it was there. We used our tanks for all sorts of non-intended uses while I was in the Army, and there were test designs for supply trailiers for tanks in WW2 even though those didn't go anywhere because it limited maneuverability if attacked while towing.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/30 19:10:27


"Elysians: For when you absolutely, positively, must have 100% casualties" 
   
Made in gb
Road-Raging Blood Angel Biker





I do like the look of the Gladiator, but still not sure if game wise it would be better to take 3 atv invaders with multimeltas over the Valiant variant as they are around the same value in points.

Will prob still get the Gladiator though as it will be fun to paint up and use.

Looks wise, GW have done a good job in keeping with the overall design/feel of marines. Chaos desperately need their tanks done now as they are starting to look a tad dated in comparison.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/30 20:07:27


"For The Emperor and Sanguinius!"

My Armies:
Blood Angels, Ultramarines,
Astra Militarum,
Mechanicus 
   
Made in us
Monster-Slaying Daemonhunter





BrianDavion wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

That one is actually tracked. It's a TX225 Occupier Assault Tank, and it's a tracked combat transport made by Rothana Heavy Engineering. The toy for it was advertised as a hovertank, but in the film and the lore it's tracked. IIRC there's a shot of it's tracks in the movie.

According to wookiepedia, it's tracked for better maneuverability in urban combat conditions. That said, I doubt it would be any good in an urban combat environment; it's weapons layout is terrible and it's guns have about 0 degrees of weapons traverse which would be important in an urban combat environment [also, while it's got a good frontal profile, it's top armor which is also important in an urban combat environment is unknown and based on the fact that it's also a flatbed cargo carrier might be questionable]. It would probably be relatively good, by the general standards of Imperial designs that gave us the AT-AT and AT-ST, in a general assault across open ground like Hoth.


it honestly looks more like an Anti air platform


I don't think it could be an AA tank at all. An AA gun vehicle requires the ability to traverse quickly, with 0 degrees of traverse it couldn't track and hit a flying target.

It could definitely act as a SU-like assault gun or tank destroyer, though. Theoretically, it could also mount a larger weapon, like an AT-DT or AT-AT gun, on the flatbed in a traverable mount, which could make it probably one of the most formidable and reasonable weapons in the Imperial arsenal.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/30 22:54:19


Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades! 
   
Made in us
Preacher of the Emperor





Hanford, CA, AKA The Eye of Terror

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 jeff white wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:



Insectum7 wrote:^How many guns does the Merkava have?

And does it fly?


I fail to see why being a hovertank is a problem. Not only are grav vehicles not new to the Imperium, they're pretty common in 40k in general. Also, like, seriously, there are walkers, but a hover tank is a problem. Like seriously, there are walkers from the scale of Sentinels to Titans and they're accepted without question but a hover tank, which is like ten-thousand times more reasonable and isn't necessarily an active detriment to your combat vehicle by every measurable and immeasurable metric of performance, isn't.

Theoretically, a Merkava or Bradley 40000 years from now might be built with antigrav technology.


Hover and fly were not so common. Xenos had anti-grav tech mostly if at all until recently. Should not be in the imperium armory in any real numbers given the original mythology. I mean, guard used to ride actual horses. That is the state of the empire broadly speaking. So common? No. Plus, there is physics. Recoil. Actual gravity. We work with walking humanoid robots now. Hover anything remains a dream.

Ten thousand times? I am not sure how that even makes sense.


Giant Walking Robots are in fact basically a flight of geeky entertainment, not a valid military element.

Let us say that we have a walker tank and a tracked or wheeled combat vehicle of equivalent weight and armament:
A tracked or wheeled combat vehicle has the following advantages:
The walker must support it's entire weight on one of it's footpads, the weight of the tracked vehicle is distributed across it's entire track ground contact area. This is a huge difference; a tracked tank will have much better performance in soft ground than a walker of equivalent weight. [alternatively phrased, a tracked vehicle can be heavier than a walker before it sinks into the swamp]
The walker must neccessarily be taller, since it need approximately twice the height of it's maximum obstacle crossing height for it's legs alone, with additional height above that for the torso and weapons mounts. Leg length is also fundamentally critical for speed. Thus, the front profile area of a walker is much larger than the front profile area of a tracked combat vehicle. A cursory understanding of geometry, would indicate that for the same weight, the front armor of a tracked combat vehicle can be made much thicker than that of a walker. So not only does the tracked combat vehicle have better terrain passability for it's weight and armament, it also is better protected.
Finally, a tracked combat vehicle will always be faster. Even if a fairly long-legged walker wouldn't be able to keep up with a tank travelling at speed, because the mechanical efficiency of spinning a wheel can both be done much more quickly than a set of 3 joints can be actuated back and forth and at higher speeds.

A walker has the following advantages over a tracked combat vehicle:
None. Literally none. I head you something about "but it can step up!", except this requires whatever you're stepping up onto to well, support your weight. Also, you can't step up that far. A tracked tank can ascend a steeper grade [because it's wide and flat and won't tip over on as steep an incline, and also has a higher surface area to maintain traction while climbing so it doesn't sled back, and has better torque], cross a wider trench, and still scale a 4 foot obstacle.



If we had developed hover technology [which the Imperium does and did have before, see Land Speeders and all their combat aircraft], however, there isn't actually much reason that it shouldn't be used for a tank. The only real concern would be stability when firing, but that's really a false problem, because if you ever watch real tanks firing while jumping, they basically experience no momentum change because they're so heavy compared to their shells. Otherwise, for all intents and purposes, it winds up working dynamically the same as a tracked vehicle, with potential improvements in speed, obstacle crossing, and maybe even terrain passability.



TL, DR: walkers have no reason to exist and are worse in every way than wheels or tracks, hover technology could reasonably be used for a tank should it be available. So the Repulsor and Gladiator is intrinsically less silly than an Imperial Knight, Dreadnought, or Sentinel.


Also, here are some more design points in the Repulsor's favor:
Door in the back vs. Door in the front. A front ramp is not only a breach in the hull that you voluntarily open and let fire in through, the troops also can't use the tank for protection while disembarking from the tank. The repulsor has it's main door in the back, which is at least an improvement over having it in the front, though this improvement is tempered by it being flanked by the engines. While the tank is expected to be stationary while unloading troops, so it shouldn't be too much of a problem, it does mean it has to wait until they're clear before moving off. Complaining about this falls into the category of "rejecting an improvement that's a massive improvement in every way because there's a tiny inconvenience"
Actual turreted gun gives better fields of fire and performance as a vehicle.
No interference between it's abilities as a tank and it's abilities as a transport. Opening the doors doesn't block any of the guns no matter how you build it.


In terms of stupid things, there are 2, and one of them is shared with the Land Raider:
Size. It's stupidly tall. but literally all warhammer tanks are stupidly tall.
The little storm bolters and ironhail stubbers sticking out of every orifice. Why are they on the back side of the turret or over the doors? I have no idea. Why does it need these at all? I also have no idea. The grenade launchers and stuff is pretty standard though, since tanks as old as WWII have had grenade launchers for discouraging infantry assaults and modern tanks have active kill systems which also look like that to shoot down incoming missiles.


TL: DR: we accept the Land Raider for it's stupid design, the Repulsor is less stupid but apparently we can't accept it?


I'll second that. The land raider, in all of its iconic glory, isn't exactly a smartly designed tank. I guess maybe it could excel as the spearhead of a tank wedge and exist to block fire from its better armed and less armored allies. As you pointed out it cannot actually provide covering fire for anything that is disembarking from it. Soooo, what does a land raider really accomplish? It looks cool, but rules wise the 2+ armor can only take you so far when you aren't well armed and you have nothing of value to carry outside of maybe sternguard but even they are better served in a drop pod. It made sense when you could never assault out of deepstrike so it was an alternative.

As for all this repulsor hate. I don't get it. Theres guns over the door? How else do you cover yourself when in an extremely hostile situation like Space Marines are usually in. When they are swarmed with hormagaunts having a few door guns aren't exactly a bad thing. Besides, its well known that tanks are very vulnerable to be swarmed by infantry and this is a solution, even if an inelegant one. Id even argue that the weird turrets on the back of the executioner are just replacements for the over door guns and designed to also protect the rear of the tank. I'll assume that space marines are supposed to be operating way forward and completely unsupported and these tanks take that idea seriously.

I would also argue that the Gladiator is simply the "support tank" for the repulsor. It cannot protect its own rear or flanks so it won't be first in like a repulsor but would instead be running support for that tank as it delivers its cargo or it requires infantry support of its own to function. My only complaint about the Gladiator is that its Pure anti tank chasis, the Lancer, kind of blows for the points, especially when compared to the Valiant, which does its job way better at a closer range.

I don't mind that tanks lost core and rerolls because being babysat by captains was just pure awful from a game, lore, and design standpoint. They maybe could have used a point decrease to showcase the fact that they are not getting these reroll interactions. Especially the land raider and repulsors.

I guess im one of the weirdos that really likes all the new tank designs because they feel functional, futuristic, and fall in line with the baseline aesthetics of Space Marines having bold lines, heavy armor, mobility, brutality, and being well armed. Theres nothing elegant about psace marine tech and I love it

17,000 points (Valhallan)
10,000 points
6,000 points (Order of Our Martyred Lady)
Proud Countess of House Terryn hosting 7 Knights, 2 Dominus Knights, and 8 Armigers
Stormcast Eternals: 7,000 points
"Remember, Orks are weak and cowardly, they are easily beat in close combat and their tusks, while menacing, can easily be pulled out with a sharp tug"

-Imperial Guard Uplifting Primer 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





I just have to take a step back and admire that we've made page 5 on a discussion about a set of units that nobody will field unless they're deliberately handicapping themselves or playing for giggles.

   
Made in us
The Marine Standing Behind Marneus Calgar





Upstate, New York

The Newman wrote:
I just have to take a step back and admire that we've made page 5 on a discussion about a set of units that nobody will field unless they're deliberately handicapping themselves or playing for giggles.


Not everyone plays for the tournament scene. In casual play a lot more units open up and are viable. And if both players field “soft” lists, you get a balanced game that’s enjoyable for everyone. And they get to use units they like and think look cool. Now that might be “for giggles” to you, but for a lot of people that’s 40k.

There are not right and wrong ways. The problem is making sure everyone is on board for the kind of game you are going to play.

   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






I feel like the double gatling could be playable. It does put out more shots than/ is faster/ and has more thoughness than a redemptor dread for only a little more points. The tank destroyer version costs more than the same number of shots on infantry without the ability to buff. Why these tanks lost fly keyword is beyond me. Ill still get one for the lulz but core keyword has proven to be porely implemented. As the core keyword units fighting for the same roll are better even before you add in the buffs you can put on them. AKA bad internal balance = GW sucks at writing rules per usual.

If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in us
Powerful Ushbati





United States

 AnomanderRake wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
for those criticizing the massive amount of guns stuck on, let's try to look at the actual pictures instead of just spam repulsor memes?

that's a top down image of the tank.
it has a forward firing turrent gun and some sponson guns. that's pretty normal. and is no differant from the predator. the only thing additional to this. are some things mounted on the side of the turret that are are actually grenade launchers, being placed alongside the side of the turrent works. they're intended to mostly scare off infantry getting close. (to the point where I suspect the designer doesn't even consider it important for killing so much as supression()

even the repulsor isn't that bad. once you look at it you realize a lot of the guns sticking out of the side are actually covering the doorways the infantry exit from. so.. same idea. providing support to the infantry


Consider, however, that in the real world the idea of sponsons/secondary turrets was deemed inefficient and dumped from tank designs entirely very quickly (the Renault FT, which pioneered the configuration almost every tank from WWII on used, entered service a year after the tank was invented), and modern armoured vehicles tend to have one main gun and 2-3 pintle/co-axial machine guns at most. To someone who knows anything about tanks outside of Warhammer every tank in Warhammer looks pretty ludicrous.


Good thing 40K is fantasy and doesn't take place in the "real world."
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: