You are basically asking for the enemy to not get an action and for them to not have heavy/vehicle weaponry around.
No, I'm suggesting mitigation possibilities for the situation. When fielding an assault squad, is it better to have them dismount from the front of the vehicle (like a land raider) or from the back (like a wave serpent)?

Also, holo-fields are nice, but I'm quite sure they're not "everyone else loses forever, no save."
It's not "everyone loses forever"

But a holofield should at least be able to cover the exact position from which the troops will disembark.
An assault from an invisible tank should be more surprising than one from a fully visible one, and with the element of surprise, your infantry shouldn't get instantly gunned down the moment they get off the transport.

Also, as a follow up to my previous post
4) if you're (for some reason) attacking a fortified hardpoint with melee troops, rather than melting it with artillery, they should probably be wearing Ithilmar suits.

Canonically, the eldar pick and choose their fights carefully, either fighting like ghosts in the night, or with overwhelming power.
If the enemy has tactical parity with us, we are probably in a fight we shouldn't be in.
 
Last edited:
No, I'm suggesting mitigation possibilities for the situation. When fielding an assault squad, is it better to have them dismount from the front of the vehicle (like a land raider) or from the back (like a wave serpent)?

Let's just say that frontal Embark reminds me of dday lands for how most of them will go when you are in a contested area.

The big part is that frontal embark means all the infantry inside the vehicle just lost their cover and now stand in front of the vehicle that gets shot at most likely not just from infantry, but also most likely other vehicles & some heavy weaponry.

It's just not a good position to be in.
 
Last edited:
Let's just say that frontal Embark reminds me of dday lands for how most of them will go when you are in a contested area.

The big part is that frontal embark means all the infantry inside the vehicle just lost their cover and now stand in front of the vehicle that gets shot at most likely not just infantry, but also most likely other vehicles & some heavy weaponry.

It's just not a good position to be in.
Yes but if you're assaulting from a vehicle, you can't do that while the vehicle is in front of you. you're going to be exposed regardless.
 
They are the attached transports for our assault/cqc/melee forces.
Said forces are also for the most part be equipped with weapons that are focused on short range so open-top designs make not nearly as much sense for them.

To be honest, I can see a strong role for them for line infantry as well. There will be plenty of scenarios where you want them to disembark where an enemy might be able to spot them, and having more armour makes the transport more likely to survive an artillery barrage air bursting over your head.

If RL can be any guide to Warhammer, which it may not be, artillery is the major cause of casualties so something that we need to particularly focus on defending against, particularly as holo-fields are particularly weak to it.

i don't see the problem at our tech level.
1) Use a holo field to become completely invisible
2) Mount some specialized shields to make those anti infantry weapons bounce off
3) Support your assault squad with vehicle mounted weapons. hell, just toss a bunch of screamer grenades.

That should buy enough time for disciplined assault troops to engage.

Moving around or under a grav vehicle is a worse choice, because you'll get shot even more.

The problem is that none of this stops an artillery shell catching you while the transport is briefly stationary for troops to disembark.

Holofields aren't cloaking devices. They're described as working like this

Article:
Rather than a typical force field which directly blocks an attack a holo-field distorts the user's image, preventing them from being hit in the first place. When stationary the field mimics the surrounding terrain so that the person or vehicle becomes invisible, but when they move the field causes their image to explode into a cloud of tiny, multi-coloured fragments, with the fragments dispersing more widely the faster they move and then collapsing back together as the subject stops, giving rise to the term jigsaw or domino field.


A holo-field spoofs your location while you're moving, then, when you stop moving, your location is briefly revealed as the image collapses back together before you fade into the background. Basically, holofields don't update fast enough to be invisible while moving, from this description.

This means that transports are particularly vulnerable. Unlike other grav tanks they can't keep perpetually moving so that aimed fire against them doesn't work. To do their job they have to stop to drop off and pick up infantry. This seems to make them momentarily visible for something to focus fire on them before the Holo-field matches the background.

Enemies know that a moving Holo-field equipped vehicles are there and roughly where they're heading, as they can see the cloud of multi-coloured static moving around. They just don't know where in the cloud the vehicle is. They can just saturate the cloud with artillery though, which is why that works as an anti-holo-field tactic, or wait for the vehicle to stop moving and track where it stops, as even if it then turns invisible if you keep watching you know that it'll be where it vanished.

And this isn't just for assault troops. Any infantry deploying from a transport is bunched up and vulnerable to artillery or long range fire, not just specialist melee units.

The only power who aren't vulnerable are troops operating out of weapons range of the battlefield, and they can use grav barges and don't need a militarised vehicle.

Yes but if you're assaulting from a vehicle, you can't do that while the vehicle is in front of you. you're going to be exposed regardless.

That's why you assault around the sides of the vehicle using it as cover from enfilading fire.
 
Last edited:
A holo-field spoofs your location while you're moving, then, when you stop moving, your location is briefly revealed as the image collapses back together before you fade into the background. Basically, holofields don't update fast enough to be invisible while moving, from this description.
Here's mechanis' take on a holo field:
Holo-fields are "you can't hit me, because I'm invisible, surrounded by illusuary smoke, and there are a half a dozen illusion clones your sensors can't tell apart from the real thing scattered over the nearby area." Or "you can't hit me, because I'm surrounded by flashing lights that are confusing your targeting system, swarming clones that are all merging and passing through eachother, and also I'm four feet from the edge of the mass and invisible" type shenanigans.
That is a lot better than you're making it out to be.

They are "fuck you" level stealth that messes with sensors on multiple levels simultaneously.
 
Here's mechanis' take on a holo field:

That is a lot better than you're making it out to be.

They are "fuck you" level stealth that messes with sensors on multiple levels simultaneously.

If they can just flat make you nigh perfectly imperceptible, why would this also be true:

Regardless, active holo-fields make hitting what they are mounted to an exercise in extreme frustration—unless one simply saturates the entire area with massed fire, explosives, or other weapons which do not require any particular accuracy, as a Holo-Field provides no actual protection beyond making a unit extremely difficult to hit.

If you could just make yourself invisible without also producing visual effects to indicate that you're somewhere in the area, then an enemy couldn't do this, as they wouldn't know what area to saturate.

For this to be an issue with holofields, I think they need to have some tell that there's someone with a holo-field active in the general area, like the clones or smoke or flashing lights.
 
Feels kind of bad how much this has to be cited

Yes, because some Questers seem to think that we have to look at the Imperium for Inspiration - of all the Factions - when even the Necrons are not as good at Stealth or Speed as Eldar are. Artillery could - potentially - hit us. Maybe. If we stand still for a very long time and do nothing, while advertising our Position with Giant Neon Signs.

And not speed past their Defenses before they even register we are there, kill everybody and be on our merry Way, before they can return fire, vanishing like Ghosts. Even the Tau can pull that off and their Stealth is not even near our Level of BS.
 
If you could just make yourself invisible without also producing visual effects to indicate that you're somewhere in the area, then an enemy couldn't do this, as they wouldn't know what area to saturate.

For this to be an issue with holofields, I think they need to have some tell that there's someone with a holo-field active in the general area, like the clones or smoke or flashing lights.
Or maybe they already know we're coming. Or maybe the vehicle is a diversion for a attack elsewhere. Maybe there are multiple vehicles, but only one is visible.

There are plausible reasons why we wouldn't always use perfect invisibility.
 
Yes, because some Questers seem to think that we have to look at the Imperium for Inspiration - of all the Factions - when even the Necrons are not as good at Stealth or Speed as Eldar are. Artillery could - potentially - hit us. Maybe. If we stand still for a very long time and do nothing, while advertising our Position with Giant Neon Signs.

And not speed past their Defenses before they even register we are there, kill everybody and be on our merry Way, before they can return fire, vanishing like Ghosts. Even the Tau can pull that off and their Stealth is not even near our Level of BS.

When Eldar try that against the Imperium in canon battles they generally get roundly humiliated and die in droves, so...

Now, I'm the first to say that the Eldar are done dirty by GW, but this is really not how the Eldar are presented in fluff. However, I strongly doubt we have 'I win' buttons that make potential enemies helpless.

Or maybe they already know we're coming. Or maybe the vehicle is a diversion for a attack elsewhere. Maybe there are multiple vehicles, but only one is visible.

There are plausible reasons why we wouldn't always use perfect invisibility.

Plausible in some extreme scenarios, but it happening often enough for this to be weakness that's called out? Just imagine trying to face a completely invisible enemy. Just the tactical benefits would be enormous, let alone the strategic ones. It's almost much better for the enemy to have no idea whether you're there or not at all except when you're actively shooting at them, and with indirect or low visibility weapons, not even then. It would be almost impossible to fight them even if you knew they were coming at some point. The sky is big, Falcons can apparently fly around at 800 km/hr when they try. The sheer volume that enemies would have to saturate to shoot down an unknown number of invisible enemies in unknown places travelling at unknown velocities would be so large that if they could do that it would totally change how they fought each other, as there'd just be ludicrous amounts of firepower floating around.

Both the examples Mechanis gave in your quote aren't of the holo-field completely erasing the user's presence. They were of obfuscating where the precise location of the user was, but in both examples it would be very obvious that something was there in the mess the holo-field made.

It would still be very hard if not impossible to hit them with a shot from aimed weapon, which is what the Holofield says it does. See this section of the very post you quote:

Holo-fields are holo-fields, regardless of scale---that is why they're a binary "have one or don't" type choice---the difference in scale is more in the area effected/how far away they can create believable illusions than in how "good" the protection is. An infantry holo-field might only be able to displace an image a couple of meters, but that's plenty to make a shot from most weapons miss by a proverbial mile; one covering a 15 kilometer Voidship is probably able to displace an image a few tens of kilometers at "good enough to fool advanced sensors" effectiveness but despite the scale difference it's still fundamentally the same trick, for example.

It talks about displacing an image, not about making you invisible. Yes, they can make the you in your actual location invisible as part of displacing your image a meter to the right or covering you with an illusion of a giant cloud of smoke. There's still some image there, of something that the enemy can see, covering an area around you so they don't know where in that area you are, but know that something is happening in that area.

This isn't to say that Holo-fields aren't great. I just don't think they're capable of making our very presence on the battlefield as undetectable as I think you're suggesting. The enemy would still know we were there, is not precisely where we are.

Note there are Eldar who can turn invisible. Striking Scorpions post psychic awakening learn to do it with their inherent powers. That's not the same thing though.
 
Last edited:
When Eldar try that against the Imperium in canon battles they generally get roundly humiliated and die in droves, so...

Yes, and a single Chapter of Space Marines can outfight a World Engine of the Necrons. A single Imperial Soldier can destroy Titans (Sly Marbo). Single Space Marines can fight and win against an Avatar of Khaine. So i guess we can just give up.
 
When Eldar try that against the Imperium in canon battles they generally get roundly humiliated and die in droves, so...

Now, I'm the first to say that the Eldar are done dirty by GW, but this is really not how the Eldar are presented in fluff. However, I strongly doubt we have 'I win' buttons that make potential enemies helpless.

Expect to be outnumbered in each and every engagement to a very unfunny degree.
Pretty much everyone else can lose armies and not feel that, the same thing happens to us and it will be a very painful blow.

And in general each and every lose being painful to us.
Meanwhile, the orks have no problems running into prepared firing positions die by the million only to kill a handful.
 
Last edited:
Yes, and a single Chapter of Space Marines can outfight a World Engine of the Necrons. A single Imperial Soldier can destroy Titans (Sly Marbo). Single Space Marines can fight and win against an Avatar of Khaine. So i guess we can just give up.

No; but we shouldn't assume we're on easy mode because we're Eldar and can win without struggling for it every step of the way.

Expect to be outnumbered in each and every engagement to a very unfunny degree.
Pretty much everyone else can lose armies and not feel that, the same thing happens to us and it will be a very painful blow.

And in general each and every lose being painful to us.
Meanwhile, the orks have no problems running into prepared firing positions die by the million only to kill a handful.

And this is exactly why we need layered defences, because the likes of the orks will try to saturate us in dakka.

That's why we want medium armour in our APCs, because we need to worry about being out-gunned that much. Our guns may usually be better and our defences much better, but that doesn't mean we can be complacent.
 
Yeah, you can generally expect a minimum baseline of "one Random Conscript=~5 well-trained soldiers" level disparity in your favor, getting more skewed as you pile on the force multipliers (especially since the general consensus I've been seeing is to slather generously).

You can also expect to regularly be outnumbered 100+-to-1 on a good day, because Orks, major human polities, and Isha Forfend superpowers like the later Imperium can throw out whole armies like you can lasguns, because of the sheer difference in scale, how fast they get pop growth, and so on. Of course, you do have the major advantage of basically only ever losing armies to, well, having them all get killed in battle, rather than having to worry about random rebellions, old age, and so on.
Anyway.

Vote Closing

 
Being outnumbered a hundred to one on a good day is the kind of firepower disparity that makes me really want to have more armour on our vehicles. If one of our APCs is going to be potentially going up against dozens of enemy artillery pieces, some extra protector from that attack would seem useful.

This is another good reason to consider a heavy design of tank. If we're going to be so outnumbered, we probably want to substitute metal for meat, so having a heavy design is useful.

I would ask that people seriously consider these options.

What are the people voting for it seeing as the stony reason to have a fourth medium-ish west design rather than getting our first heavy one? A heavy design might be able to have a super-heavy weapon to build a tank killer or heavy SPG around, and so be a lot more effective than a lighter design that certainly can't.

I've not seen any really developed argument in favour of this fourth medium vehicle, so is there are reason it's so clearly the preferred option?

There's been some argument in favour of the light armoured grav-tank, even if I don't think it's very convincing, but basically none for the 4th medium (ish) chassis grav vehicle.

There's also been very little argument or analysis about how the light armoured grab tank fits into our forces as a whole and what roles it overlaps with the existing two similar weight deigns and how much it adds in new capabilties.

That's the biggest argument to my mind for the medium armour, that it's more different, so together with the existing two we cover more of the potential design space. The heavy vehicle further extends the range of vehicles we can make with less overlap.
 
Last edited:
Clearly, the way to solve our numerical disadvantage is to get some vassals. We'll make our own Imperium, with magical blackjack and space-elf hookers!

Alternatively, we can train up some orks and point them in the general direction of our enemies. Surely nothing can go wrong with further empowering orks! The Aeldari clearly didn't go far enough in canon, just redirecting WAAAGH!s at humanity. We need to tech them up and make our problems, everyone's problems.
 
There's also been very little argument or analysis about how the light armoured grab tank fits into our forces as a whole and what roles it overlaps with the existing two similar weight deigns and how much it adds in new capabilties.

That's the biggest argument to my mind for the medium armour, that it's more different, so together we cover more of the potential design space.

That because most people don't seem to really care all that much or don't have a plan on how the ground forces should look.

Which is no surprise considering the massive amount of info we are lacking and near total absence of actual data on the weapons when it comes to damage, range, fire rate, accuracy + potential logistical concerns via ammo.

Same going for the effectiveness of the defense options with us having no idea how good light, medium or heavy i or how much the shields in theory could take.

While at the same time we have logistical concerns where we also have only very limited information.
 
Last edited:
That because most people don't seem to really care all that much or have a plan on how the ground forces should look.

Which is no surprise considering the massive amount of info we are lacking and near total absence of actual data on the weapons when it comes to damage, range, fire rate, accuracy + potential logistical concerns via ammo.

Same going for the effectiveness of the defense options with us having no idea how good light, medium or heavy i or how much the shields in theory could take.
We don't even really have a full combat doctrine as it stands, I think? As far as I can tell (and please let me know if I'm wrong) we have the vibe of 'aeldari but with big guns/armor because of industry.' But, probably partially because we only just built the Shrine to Khaine, Vaul Vulkesh doesn't seem to have an overall strategic/operation/tactical playbook against, say, the Orks that are our immediate major threat.
 
Back
Top