- Location
- Utrecht
It's the vote counter apparently. Your post is correct.
A Different Breed (Warhammer 29K)
There's a reason I tagged all my subvotes, the vote counter likes eating them if they're the same as the subvote on a different line.
And that's in a relatively permissive environment. In a high threat environment with infiltrating enemy infantry or good anti-battery fire than a heavily defended SPG might be worth it.
This is actually where medium armour might shine in the SPG role, as counter-battery fire or air strikes may well be big booms, producing AoE attacks that the armour is the best option we have to passively resist. Armour can be penetrated, it seeme less binary than our shields which generally either work or don't.
In terms of longer term ambitions, the suggestions for regenerating armour based on Fatecaster ammo tech seems to be more likely to be thought of if we have more heavily armoured vehicles which might benefit more from such devices.
One other thought, in terms of thematic cohesiveness, the Vulkari using more heavily armoured vehicles fits with them also using more heavy personal armour than other Eldar.
Last edited:
Generally; I think ZZap guns are lascannon and up in terms of scale. They're usually heavy, vehicle, and super-heavy weapons in our parlance.
Now; there will be Mekz who are exceptions to the rule but as I understand it regular infantry scale las-weapons aren't dramatic enough for orks. It's not as if orks need to care about the logistical benefits of energy weapons.
- Location
- Asia
[X][Novel Chassis Design] Heavy
[X][Jetbike] Plan: Refractor Jetbike
[X][Light Grav-Vehicle] Plan: Crystalline light grav vehicle
[x][Air Racer] Plan: Crystalline Air Racer
[X][Jetbike] Plan: Refractor Jetbike
[X][Light Grav-Vehicle] Plan: Crystalline light grav vehicle
[x][Air Racer] Plan: Crystalline Air Racer
- Location
- Germany
Looking at potential chassis for our long range artillery and AA.
I think we are looking for both at least at a heavy chassis if not super heavy one.
The artillery will want to go with a super heavy slot which means 30 systems slots hard to get that on anything but the heavy/super heavy chassis.
The AA if we want to kind of copy the canon Eldar AA also uses a super heavy slot that is then stuffed with 3 linked vehicle weapons. Otherwise, we are still looking at a good number of system slots needed for the vehicle weapon slots so likely still a heavy chassis.
The main question that I have is if we can cheat with our logistics bit more by using the ammo generation from the Needler/Spike weapons to create more than pure kinetic projectiles. "Specialty" rounds for our tanks would sound really nice.
Same goes for our artillery.
I think we are looking for both at least at a heavy chassis if not super heavy one.
The artillery will want to go with a super heavy slot which means 30 systems slots hard to get that on anything but the heavy/super heavy chassis.
The AA if we want to kind of copy the canon Eldar AA also uses a super heavy slot that is then stuffed with 3 linked vehicle weapons. Otherwise, we are still looking at a good number of system slots needed for the vehicle weapon slots so likely still a heavy chassis.
The main question that I have is if we can cheat with our logistics bit more by using the ammo generation from the Needler/Spike weapons to create more than pure kinetic projectiles. "Specialty" rounds for our tanks would sound really nice.
Same goes for our artillery.
Professor Vesca
Good News Everyone!
[X] Plan: Vulkhari Fighting Vehicles Continued
- Pronouns
- Reader
it's an attached vehicle for serving as a basic model for us to design a troop transport and possibly mobile firing platform from. the from scratch medium is for a medium tank. it'll likely make use of more of the slots available to make weapons.
- Location
- Germany
If the plan for the light grav vehicle chassis from Fighting Vehicles is intended as an attached transport the lack of medium armor doesn't do it favors.
- Location
- Utrecht
It occurs to me that orks have extremely few energy weapons.
Not loud enough, probably.
Not loud enough, probably.
I'm certainly in favor of trying.
It will probably take dedicated systems on the vehicles, but something to regenerate missile ammunition or to custom-forge projectiles based on the expected target seem plausible, and (especially with the precedent of our Basic Refractor Fields) I'd like to make sure we have some high-quality kinetic weapons around.
(Though I will absolutely go for cryo-missiles if the machinery on Ectosa unlocks those.)
On the subject of Refractor Fields: where do we think the line for "exotic" energy weapons is? I feel safe in assuming Grav Weapons and Meson Blasters are over it, and Starblasters too, but is Plasma? Haywire guns?
- Pronouns
- Reader
Alectai had concerns about piling on to many speed reducing options. there are more than enough slots for quality defenses. our whole thing is a defensive tech combo that avoids damage not reliance on being able to soak an excessive amount of it up. let's not lose sight of the fact that design is a balancing act rather than focusing on one thing to the exclusion of all else.
- Location
- Germany
Pretty sure that the current spike cannon ammo counts as the high quality kinetic ammo.
I am mostly looking at potential smart rounds (no exotics use) and a heat equivalent that has a small plasma/melta charge inside the ammo.
The thing with armor is that it's the main reason to go for a sealed transport over an open-top one.
And light armor just doesn't add much when the troops will (most) likely be in full VGA already.
That's the same armor level as the jetbike and likely gives about as much protection as that.
Go for a light armored one and this will very likely not be used for a sealed one because it doesn't make sense, when adding a conversion field to an open-top one would add more defenses.
Last edited:
- Pronouns
- Reader
you'll want to consider develop missiles and then miniaturized missiles tech research and develop Melta variations. then build an armor with auto targeting.
And if we want a troop transport to operate in combat, we probably want medium armour, as it will at times need to drive up and park in front of the enemy long enough for the passengers to jump out. Those locations are probably generally dangerous with stray rounds, shell splinters, explosions going off all over the place. Medium armour just means we can shrug off that relatively low level of damage that would otherwise risk mission killing a less armoured vehicle.
That's the kind of scenario where you want all the protection you can get. We already have vehicles that can serve as troop transports in more permissive environments, that's what the Mirage can already do.
Similarly, for mobile firing platforms, we can use the existing medium chassis for ones that are expected to be far enough back from the front lines that counter-battery fire or air strikes aren't expected. For any that are expected to be in a contended environment the medium armour becomes more attractive. An SPG doesn't need to be particularly manoeuvrable or fast to accelerate
.
The only option that reduces top speed is the engine cowling. The medium armour only impacts manoeuvrability and acceleration. Those aren't quite the same thing.
Also; this isn't about losing sight of the fact that the design is a balancing acts it's about what factor to balance.
For example, when designing an APC then you can't just use speed or avoiding damage. Part of the job of an APC is literally to act as mobile cover, soaking up fire aimed at the infantry as they dismount from it. Another part of the job requires driving in front of the enemy, stopping, letting the passenagers disembark and then leaving. It's hard to dodge when you're stationary.
This is why for this use case Medium armour is particularly valuable.
I could see fully wraithbone munitions being potentially possible, like tracking spikes, but I suspect anything that needs a non-wraithbone material won't be.
Last edited:
We're a faction that has what's probably the easiest logistics of all of them. We should make use of that instead of cheating imo. Just put a webway gate straight into firing chamber lol.
- Location
- Germany
Using the Crystalline light grav vehicle chassis for this:
[] Open top
-[] 1x Heavy Weapon Slot,21 System Slots
-[] 1 Holo-Field, 2 Grav Shields, 6 Infantry slot (open top) (transport size 13), 7 system slots left
[] Sealed
-[] 1x Heavy Weapon Slot,21 System Slots
-[] 1 Holo-Field, 2 Grav Shields, 13 Infantry slots (sealed top) (transport size 13)
[] Sealed-Elite
-[] 1x Heavy Weapon Slot,21 System Slots
-[] 1 Holo-Field, 2 Grav Shields, 7 Infantry slots (sealed top) (transport size 7), 6 system slots for stuff
The open-top and sealed Elite ones can most likely add a conversion field to the defense onion.
More or less the medium armor is needed to for the sealed transport otherwise it gives up way more defense due light armor very likely not making up for the lack of the conversion field.
[] Open top
-[] 1x Heavy Weapon Slot,21 System Slots
-[] 1 Holo-Field, 2 Grav Shields, 6 Infantry slot (open top) (transport size 13), 7 system slots left
[] Sealed
-[] 1x Heavy Weapon Slot,21 System Slots
-[] 1 Holo-Field, 2 Grav Shields, 13 Infantry slots (sealed top) (transport size 13)
[] Sealed-Elite
-[] 1x Heavy Weapon Slot,21 System Slots
-[] 1 Holo-Field, 2 Grav Shields, 7 Infantry slots (sealed top) (transport size 7), 6 system slots for stuff
The open-top and sealed Elite ones can most likely add a conversion field to the defense onion.
More or less the medium armor is needed to for the sealed transport otherwise it gives up way more defense due light armor very likely not making up for the lack of the conversion field.
Another consideration about the Medium Armour. It costs EP. This is, of course, an issue in terms of volume produced, but in terms of the quality of the resulting vehicle, I would expect a vehicle with medium armour to be better than one with light armour, that the benefits of the extra armour outweigh the cost of the reduced acceleration and slower turns.
That's because we're paying nearly two thirds the cost of a grav field for it and I expect we're getting something for our 'money'.
That's because we're paying nearly two thirds the cost of a grav field for it and I expect we're getting something for our 'money'.
- Pronouns
- Reader
we haven't decided on a sealed transport. some of us are against it. a grav transport filled with VGW is going to have multiple grav shields deflecting stray blasts that find them inside there Holo field anyway, which is more effective than a chassis of medium armor against most of the fire that doesn't just miss us in the first place.
I think whole point behind upgrading armor at all was to put some armor over the engine.
overall the people obsessing over this are applying a disproportionate amount of value to this marginal addition to our defensibility which would only have an impact a handful of times a century at great detriment to overall combat effectiveness during that century. these individuals need to drop the headcanon of perfect defense and the ability to field an army which takes as close to absolutely zero risks as we can manage and still command an effective fighting force.
Last edited:
It also allows light SPG designs. Something like:
[] Sealed
-[] 1x Heavy Weapon Slot, 21 System Slots
-[] 1 Holo-Field, 2 Grav Shields -8 System slots
-[] 2 Vehicle weapon slots, 1 ranged weapon slot, -13 System Slots
Put a pair of Fusion Mortars in the Vehicle Weapon slots and you'd have a pretty decent short ranged artillery system that was hardly enough to stay just behind the front line and provide indirect fire support.
More aggressively; and expensively; a pair of vehicle sized point singularity projectors would make for a very potent direct fire artillery system for hitting enemy forces right before an assault. I get the impression from the description that this weapon requires the gunner to keep aiming the projector at the target until it detonates, functioning in some ways like a real life beam riding or laser guided munition.
If this is so, then losing manoeuvrability and turning speed doesn't matter so much, as when firing you won't be doing much of that anyway.
These both work better with Medium Armour than Light as both probably need to be relatively near the battlefield. They don't seem like something you'd fire from ten miles away.
For things that are fired from ten miles away, we can use our existing medium grav chassis.
Last edited:
My headcanon for armor levels:
- Minimal: resistant to average small arms fire
- Light: resistant to average ranged weapon
- Medium: resistant to average heavy weapon
- Heavy: resistant to average vehicle weapon
- Superheavy: resistant to average superheavy weapon
- Titanic: 7 meters thick slab of wraithbone, which that guy in engineering tries to put on everything bc eldar lives are too precious
I'd expect that every battle where APCs are used as APCs that better armour would help. It's just in the nature of the role. People are going to focus fire try to kill the infantry inside as they're bunched up as they disembark and the APC is going to have to soak up that concentrated firepower, which will likely be both explosive and not.
I also strongly doubt the acceleration or turning speed penalty is anywhere near enough to be a great detriment to anything.