Modern tanks are objectivly better then the imperium's tanks

Those gun placements are stupid.

Modern tanks are quite a bit smaller then imperial tanks anyway. the primary gun is where the hurt is coming from, not the machine guns. The object you are looking for is a land battleship, an idea that is thouroghly laughed at.

It is a preposterous concept to execute with the tech available to us today. The Imperium is active in the year 40,000, which is 37,983 years from now and has gone through an age of post-scarcity technology. Such a concept is less ridiculous to such a society.

It is widely known that the Warhammer tanks were made by self.professed ww2 tank nerds who failed to appreciate how far and crazy tank tech had gone since WW2, or even the massive tank advancements of the 80ies.

Modern tanks would annihilate the Imperium's tanks easily. A t-72 with mid-70ies tech would be better than a platoon of Leman Russes: faster, better armour, less crew required. When Forge World dared to give us data it was bloody hilarious.

But you have to remember that WH40k's tech level IS schizo. Those tanks are the best choice for a tech-depleted, instruction-deprived force as the Imperial Guard: easy to use, rugged, built to work anywhere. If their performance is shitty in Real World terms, whatever.

What should be worried about is that supposedly elite units and advanced weapons aren't that better. Give me a Soviet Armoured division and I'll break a Craftworld in half, I guess.

>Give me a Soviet Armoured division and I'll break a Craftworld in half, I guess.

What? Don't the eldar have crazy stuff like D-Cannons, sonic weapons and monomolecular web launchers? Any one of those weapons would completely wreck anything modern humans have.

imperium tanks get rekt.

You sure they're better armoured? Pretty sure Leman Russ can take way more anti-tank missiles to the front than modern tanks.

The landraider's armour stats are noncanon. Have been for a VERY long time.

The Leman Russ on the other hand could very well be correct. They aren't that good.

Haven't Leman Russ's survived explosions powerful enough to send them literally flipping through the air with no major damage to the tank or the crew?

No, land battleships are stupid because they're so big they become a strategic target and a sitting duck for tube and rocket artillery, air strikes, at guns and atgms, even strategic assets like cruise and ballistic missiles (like the deathstrike).
Not to mention you get the same firepower from two or three MBTs without the risk of deploying a strategic asset.
On top of that, a platform like the Leman Russ or Baneblade, with all the weapons and systems hanging off the chassis MUST NECESSARILY have less armour than a vehicle that more closely resembles a modern MBT, and any futuristic armour/defense upgrades can just as easily be applied to an MBT as they can to a Russ or 'Blade

Whats worse on a technical stand point

/k/unts or fa/tg/uys

>The landraider's armour stats are noncanon.
So where did they get overwritten? Because those numbers have been there for multiple editions and I'm not aware of any subsequent change. And unless things get overwritten, they're still canon.

deal with it

Except we don't know:

Exactly which part of the imperial tanks the armour thickness described is on. The armour numbers given for modern tanks are usually for the thickest part. Most of the tank has much less protection.

Exactly what imperial standard steel is or what it's effectiveness is measured against. There are many steels which are stronger, tougher and/or harder than RHA. There is also the possibility that what they consider standard steel is amorphous metal or something, which could be way more effective than RHA.

What the weapons the imperial armour is optimised against are and what they would do to modern day materials. What's a modern tanks protection against space magic death rays?

But yes, imperial tanks designs are fucking retarded and the designers and writers really should have done some basic fucking research. It makes me twitch with autistic rage every time I look at my Leman Russ or read the books.

At least my orks have relatively believable looking vehicles. Apart from their weird habit of nailing metal plates to tires.

Given how a 40k tank can survive railguns, and modern tanks can't even survive an A-10, I'd say the 40k tank wins.

I think a Bolo could beat a modern tank. Especially one of the later marks that could hit it with a tactical nuke from over the horizon. Especially if it had the personality of a beautiful yet dedicated maiden who loves playing music for its operator.

And if you go by newer Necron lore the Russ apparently has a bunch of other features that would make them more powerful that the Imperium just doesn't understand how to access.

>Nerf® railguns

Closest I remember is in one of the Dan Abnett books a LR gets knocked back a couple of metres by a direct hit from an enemy gun and is basically fine. That's fairly unbelievable, but not quite what you describe.

Note that it's quite possible for a tank to survive that kind of punishment. Cold War era tanks survived being fairly close to nuclear tests. The crew surviving mostly unscathed is the dubious part.

Their bastard offspring who are too inbred and retarded to understand that 40k is fictional before making a useless thread like this.

I believe it was explicitly stated as no longer being correct. Alternatively we could try and use basic logic- for example the fact that the landraider has the same armour values as the monolith, a war machine created by aliens who were travelling the stars before humans even crawled out of the oceans.

Yes, of course. But I meant that if we check the rules, they are deadly, but not incredibly more advanced than the Imperium's own weapons. That are kinda shitty in modern terms.

On the other hand, we (myself included when I still played Warhammer) often fail to appreciate how freakishly lethal contemporary weapon systems are. Simply think of range: contemporary tanks and weapon systems are built to engage targets kilometers away and to maximize first-hit chances (as most armoured fights are decided from surprise and who shoots first). If we did an autistic thought experiment and placed Eldar systems with "tabletop faithful" stats their entire vehicle fleet would be annihilated at distance in few minutes my shells, ATGMs and AA fire. Infantry, on the other hand....

Well, there was a reason the first Space Empire of the humans was so successful. Maybe we got T-14 Armatas or something shooting at Orks.

If we trust the statistics, ATGMs, even shitty ones, would blow up easily a Russ. T-55s are more advanced and their burning hulks light up Youtube videos of the ME like christmas trees.

Sure, modern tanks are better designed but the forge worlds must know something you don't if they can take damage better than modern tanks anyway.

Modern tanks, even Western ones cough abrams cough leopard cough cough got btfo by half trained sand people in Syria equipped with ATGMs. No way it can hold up to lasguns let alone any of the other more powerful weapons in 40k.

This shit is kinda autistis and im a warhammer fan

You guys understand its fake right

>...and placed Eldar systems with "tabletop faithful" stats...

Yeah that's not how it works. At all. And you knew that.

Bringing a Bolo to a tank battle is like bringing The Culture to a "who could beat X" thread. The answer is usually yes, and if it isn't then the power levels are so high that the conversation is pointless.

Or more pointless than power level threads already are anyway.

>I believe it was explicitly stated as no longer being correct.
And your citation for that would be...?

>logic
>game mechanics = fluff
>40k
Pick one and only one.

That's why I called an "autistic thought experiment". It's silly: Warhammer is designed to look cool. Be merciful upon poor me, kind sir.

We're here to have fake WW1 soldiers with bayonets skewer alien bugs, not discuss the economy of the Imperium.

hmmm..... economy of the Imperium.....

>If we trust the statistics, ATGMs, even shitty ones, would blow up easily a Russ.
But they don't. Like that other guy said, they can take railguns (or choose whatever 40K weapon you want) so comparing stats directly doesn't work as their armour's performance is greater than what can be done with modern technology using the same amount of metal.

"Railgun" simply means it's a weapon that works by putting a conductive projectile in contact with two metal rails which have an electric current run through them. You can make one at home. The name has no implications for the power of the weapon.

Imperium, the ones with the technology, don't use regular steel but "plasteel" which is supposedly multitudes stronger and durable than regular steel.

Since AdMech has access to the top-notch technology and their own mish-mash inventions and run the factories, its safe to assume that the Leman Russ are a similiar mish-mash of obsolete and cutting-edge technology. You have the modern hull material of plasteel and plasteel-composite armor plating held together by a thoroughly obsolete method of holding it all together by rivets. Armed with equally inadequate low-velocity cannon that depending on the regiment, fires fairly modern munitions (by irl standards) or one of those dark-age era wonderbullets. Fairly good stabilizer and optics system. Almost all are equipped with a radar with a IFF system which is fairly futuristic piece of equipment. This all is propelled by an engine that can take anything combustible as fuel.

The cannon-version would get it's shit kicked in a fight against today's Main Battle Tanks. The variations with the lasercannons on the other hand would butcher our MBT's in a stand-up fight.

1. The land Raider stats are not accurate
2. The modern tank armor is only good vs conventional projectiles and HEAT not laser beams
3. The Land Raider carries 5-10 super humans inside that could kill the MBT with their hands and a grenade. Much like Space Marine strike craft the deadliest part of the land raider is the cargo not the guns.
4. The land raider has 95 MM of SPACE ARMOR, meaning it has near perfect dissipation of kinetic and energy impacts.
5. Apples to oranges.

Which is why I said you can compare it to any other weapon in 40K that you want if railguns weren't good enough for you.

Like 3 Landraiders could conquer the USA so ehhh.

Even a Leman Russ can only be penetrated in the rear with current tank cannons (if at all).
Laser Cannons one-shot everything we have and contrary to the TT have nearly unlimited range.

Can they, though? On the tabletop those tanks are very killable, and with a bit of luck you can do it easy and cheap, too.
desu based on the tabletop stats for a baseline human a lot of imperium tech is kinda shit compared to what we have now...

>and modern tanks can't even survive an A-10
Modern Western tanks can survive an A-10's gun, but an A-10 carries missiles as well

Modern tanks do not have machine spirits in them that make it possible for the tank to operate near autonomously should the crew meet an unfortunate fate. That's a pretty big deal.

A Landraider is 14/14/14 around a standard Russ cannon is S:8, approximate of a modern MBT firing HEAT. Meaning you could never penetrate the Land Raider's Armor.

WRONG!

Tau railguns (for the Broadside battlesuits) ranged from Mach 6-8 in one source, and Mach 6-10 in another. we dont knwo the dimensions or capabilities of the projectile (except that its a major scare to Battle tanks, and they can overpenetrate chimeras like a motherfucker) but I wouldn't want to just casually dismiss them either (they don't transmit enough force/momentum to send the chimeras flying for example.) Even Baneblades cannot simply shrug off the damage from those railguns.

They don't do very well vs railguns is what i'm getting at.

thats not acounting for the fact that 40k tanks fail big time at armour slopes.
you say wut mate?
youtube.com/watch?v=cjva7OXdwJE

Didn't even break the treads.

40k fan here.

I wonder which threads are more auttistic, realistic based discussion about magical gothic Imperium vs retearded sci-fi Empire, or realistic modern weaponry versus an army that has special forces knight monks that cast spells at giant robot coffins.

How do you figure that's the equivalent of modern HEAT rounds?
What about other types of ammunition, SABOT for instance?
How does reactive armour fit into the picture?

>nerds who failed to appreciate how far and crazy tank tech had gone since WW2, or even the massive tank advancements of the 80ies.
Or maybe they realized how trying to keep up with progress was doomed from the start since nobody can guess how advanced we will be in 38000 years, and decided to run with what would provide the best experience for a sci-fi tabletop wargame instead.

You know, like how a MG shots four rounds at 36" during a turn in bolt action, because you don't want to shoot (and roll for) 1400+ rpm at something that's two tables away when playing.

Because it's a game, therefore it's abstracted.

yes

>Even a Leman Russ can only be penetrated in the rear with current tank cannons (if at all).

Fucking prove it.

Reactive armor isn't for high power lasers; aka the main anti-tank gun in the setting is the Las cannon, Considering most MBT's are for anti-infantry and don't carry a full load out of anti tank rounds.

Yeah, with luck. Still takes a dozen anti-tank missiles to the front of a Leman Russ to stop it. Lasguns leave holes in people as big as a circle made by your index finger and thumb and cooks the surrounding flesh.

What's the most impressive thing you can say modern tanks have done?

I guess that's not really a fair question since their hasn't been a proper show of what they can do against a technological rival. Only tests and against civilians.

Well, it's easy. No Leman Russ has ever been damaged by any current tank cannon in its frontal and lateral arcs.
You can't deny such empirical evidence.

They could have at least taken the time honored method of tacking a couple more 0s onto the end. Instead they basically doubled WWII numbers and assumed that would work.

They didn't even bother to do research when printing the muzzle velocity of the guns in DH...

But man, BA is a terrible WW2 simulator. Nothing in BA works as it should on a battlefield. It's Warhammer with a coat of WW2 paint.

But again, they should not have given us stats. And accurate warfare is.... well, boring.

And their counterparts, the guys who both get that 40k is fictional and why it is what it is, and have knowledge of modern weapons, are sadly all too rare (they do exist though)

>They didn't even bother to do research when printing the muzzle velocity of the guns in DH..
Which is odd, because that's FFG

The rpgs have macrocannons having an energy output ranging from mere joules to 10^19J.
GW can't into numbers, but FFG is far worse.
Besides, the team in RT and now isn't the same at all. I don't think you had a single hard number in the earlier editions where tech was concerned.

What about the other questions? How do you figure modern heat rounds are the same as a Russ' main gun?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Challenger_2#Operational_history
Challenger 2 surviving 14 RPGs and a Milan ATGM, another surviving ~70 RPGS
Sounds pretty similar to your characterisation of the Russ, doesn't it?
A lasgun has a 50/50 chance of wounding if it hits, and has stats identical to an autogun (conventional assault rifle).

Leave the emperor of mankind to me!

>1. The land Raider stats are not accurate

The stats pre-date Imperial ARmour in general. Straight from GW in fact. They were printed/reprinted a ton of times in White Dwarf. I've got screenshots of the old Land Rader and Predator cutaway posters and they give alot of the old data we're used to seeing in Imperial armour.

Hell the armour company stuff was even worse for the Russ.. 29 kph on road as opposd to 35 kph on road for example.

So why are they not acurate?

2. The modern tank armor is only good vs conventional projectiles and HEAT not laser beams

And 40k tanks are? ever heard of the melta gun?

3. The Land Raider carries 5-10 super humans inside that could kill the MBT with their hands and a grenade. Much like Space Marine strike craft the deadliest part of the land raider is the cargo not the guns.

And the modern tank is crewed by five irorn mans. why does this matter again? this is about the machines themselves not their crews.

>4. The land raider has 95 MM of SPACE ARMOR, meaning it has near perfect dissipation of kinetic and energy impacts.

What part of "conventional steel" triggers you so much? is it the fact that it might as well be a direct referince to what we use today and can be directly compared to what is around today?

ayo so
hol on
so u b sayin
u b sayin
dat
40k iz a game and iz not realistic at all and shiet?

>MIND
>BLOWN

Yeah, maybe that's the reason why the numbers don't make any kind of sense.

Ps: Outside of Amirauté, good luck finding a tabletop wargame below corps level that is a decent simulator.

not quite modern but this has more turrets ..

I think he's got you there pal

All of that was retconned.
Las Cannon is not a melta gun and thats what I was referring to.
"The Land Raider uses a composite armour created by bonding layers in huge, high-pressure cookers, giving it a level of protection incomparable to most other Imperial vehicles. The first armour layer, in addition to structural supports, is constructed of adamantine. The second is a titanium/plasteel composite used to reinforce strategic locations, such as the assault ramp, front glacis and hatch doors. The next is a thermo-plas fibre mesh to absorb and dissipate high-energy laser weapons, followed by the first of two ceramite layers, designed to ablate against extreme heat and melta weapons.[4a] When combined, this armouring makes the Land Raider virtually immune to heavy artillery like Battle Cannons.[5]
So its not conventional steel anymore because that was retconned.

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Challenger_2#Operational_history
That is impressive. Even if the tank is 30-40 years ahead of the weapons being used against it.

Flawless troll logic.

"The weapon mounted on the Leman Russ battle tank is a 120mm smoothbore gun"
Most MBT have a 120mm gun right? or 125?

Standard round for the Leman Russ is S:8 AP:3 and large blast. a HEAT round with a very large explosive radius.

The impressive ones for me are surviving the Milan unscathed, and still being operational after being penned by an RPG-29

always /k/ids

Fair enough, but KEP/sabot are the real tank killers of a theoretical modern war pitting armour against armour, so should we compare that to the Vanquisher cannon's S8+2d6 with an average roll of 15?

Fair Enough.
Don't KEP and Sabot basically kill the crew?
IIRC then my retort is

>leman russ, gallia-pattern

If it was an old F1, we're only talking about 700mm RHA penetration, without any teat or tandem warhead. Chobham was made specifacally to counter that kind of things.

>"The weapon mounted on the Leman Russ battle tank is a 120mm smoothbore gun"
They forgot a 0 again. No way is that cavern only 120mm.

You have a point, to an extent, but if it kills the crew chances are it's going to mess up the internals of the tank too, I mean it's not like it pens the armour and then zaps the crew.
You're less certain of a kill when you take Machine Spirits into account, but we don't know to what extent.
And only Land Raiders would really get that advantage, wouldn't they?

Fair point. And after the RPG-29 incident and one where an IED penetrated the underside of another tank they up-armoured the vulnerabilities.

/k/ommandos are great
fa/tg/uys are great
40kiddies are annoying but 40k is a nice mixture of ham and cheese

Can 40k tanks swim? I'm inclined to say that they can't.

The ability to cross small rivers is a staple skill for most modern tanks out there.

Chimeras and Hellhounds are amphibious. Presumably, Land Raiders and Rhinos simply drive underwater.

>then
WTF man seriously

Land Raiders canonically do

>No because doing so is stupid.

Yes - in 21st Century tank doctrine, which is nothing like what original WWI and then WWII tank doctrine was.

Multiple weapon points on a tank make sense when the primary purpose of the tank is to break heavily defended lines, fight hordes of lesser foes in numbers we cannot even begin to fathom (Take Tyranids, for example), as well as crush an enemy beneath its sheer weight.

Furthermore, because there are many, many things that can and will punch a tank to death in the 40K universe, having heavier weapons that can fend off close-range threats while the big gun does more work is a vital asset.

Neither of these things are things that modern tank doctrine has to deal with, therefore they do not factor into their design.

Yes, Leman Russes can get a snorkel, and all of the listed are amphibious, Chimeras and Hellhounds float and paddle the water, Rhinos and Landraiders are sealed enough to drive under water, one landraider of the Crimson Fists drove with its machine spirit through a lake to flank some orks after the Rynns World incident and murdered a whole bunch of them.

The picture here: is a demolisher and not the standard tank gun.

True only land raiders, but the real deciding factor of 40k vs anything is always a matter of scale, the imperium wins eventually no matter what, because the numbers don't make sense.

On that note, in a say...Battalion size confrontation Tank Battalion: 58 tanks for a USA force

vs
An armoured company is typically made up of between 12 and 24 fighting vehicles
a Battalion is 4 companies
so 48-96 tanks.

I think in open ground with room to maneuver the MBT Battalion will win against a full size 40k Battalion

However, in an engagement with more restrictive terrain, City, Mountains, Forests, the Imperials will win with less tanks.

>to cross small rivers

That's not swimming. That's fording, which is different.

Chimeras are the only full-on amphibious vehicles in the sense that they both float and can traverse water under their own power without touching the bottom.

Modern tanks cannot swim unless they've been explicitly designed to do so, which is expensive and rarely necessary, therefore not done. They can, however, cross rivers so long as they are not completely submerged for any extended amount of time.

I'll grant you the Imperium has a lot more specialised vehicles suited to city fighting and restricted terrain. But then our doctrine is to use other units to do most of the fighting in close terrain.
Another interesting point is that tank battalions -ours or Guards - do not operate on their own, but with all kinds of support, especially air support. How would you say imperial support units and ours measure up?

Considering that all air support is also space capable id say air support is far above ours.
The Vendetta Mounts 3 Las Cannons S9 ap 2 tank busting lasers. The Vulture is an A-10 with two guns, the Valkyrie is a mix of a Black Hawk and Fighter Craft, Mounting two heavy bolters= 50MG's and a Mulit-Laser (hard to say, because its not good at penning armor but hits pretty hard.) and either two Hellstrike Missiles=Hellfire or two rocket pods=rocket pods. Can also carry 12 dudes.

They also have Lightnings, Marauders, Avenger, and Tunderbolts, that are more conventional jet fighters and bombers

While Space Marines have flying tanks= Thunder Hawks and Storm Ravens, with ground support gunships= Storm Talon and Fighter Interceptors= Stormhawks.

I forgot about the Fire Raptor and Storm Eagle, the Raptor is an AC-130 lite and the Storm Eagle is like a rapid jet insertion tool, it has some heavy anti tank weaponry, and some anti-infantry weapons.

Even with the dumb ww1 design. It's a hell of a lot better than the generic scfi "M1 Abrams but it floats"

Why would putting more weapons on an armored platform be a cost effective strategy to counter mass availability of anti armored platform capability? You've just centralized your offensive output, and one lucky shot from the enemy shuts down eleven times as many guns as it otherwise would have.

It's usually impossible to rank armchair generals on their ability to strategize with completely fictional technologies, but congratulations, you are the exception to the rule. I now hereby rank you worst armchair general on Veeky Forums.

ITT: /k/ and Veeky Forums butt heads over who is ultimately more autistic.
I'll be cheering for all of ya.

Many of those weapons platforms have their fields of view cut off by other turrets, thus reducing their utility for no reason.

#
>Our super special op materials totally justifies our use of rivets, hideous shot traps, exposed tracks, and a cannon that sticks up like a tower!

>No tank game where you can command a Leman Russ, Falcon Grav, Ork looted Leman Russ, Space Marine( Chaos too) Predator, Immolator, and Hammerhead gunship.

Nah, see, the answer is that this is all a ramshackle creole fiction and that the fantasies that play out in our heads and on our tabletops are not the logical approximations of a living world that we imagine them to be.

>True only land raiders
Not even true.

The Imperium regressed technologically after the DAoT and the tanks that are now being made and fielded are age old designs made from age old STCs.

If this technological regression didn't happen, 40k humanity would be almost Culture levels of bullshit.

...