A Different Breed (Warhammer 29K)

DarkLight140 said:

[ ] Plan: Hammer-class Tank Chassis, System Slots And Crew Armor Edition

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Compared to Leman Russ:
- same-ish firepower with comparable weapons - Leman Russ is 2 Vehicle 2 Heavy slots vehicle - probably 50% better on suncannons, 10x better on starlances
- same armor
- 3x better survivability due to shielding
- vastly better mobility
- vastly better stealth

I'd think with Suncannons they can hold their own 1 against 4, and when the odds are against often can just retreat and find better odds another time.

[ ] Plan: Hammer-class Tank Chassis, extra engine v2
-[ ] Configuration: Fully Recessed [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[ ] Type: Plasma Drive [EXPERIMENTAL] (+17 EP, -2 slots)
-[ ] Enhance Payload x2 (+34)
-[ ] Maneuverability x3 (+3 EP)
-[ ] Stability x2 (+2 EP)
-[ ] Power Plant: Psykrystal Capacitractor [EXPERIMENTAL] (+5 EP)
-[ ] Basic Armor: Heavy (+12 EP)
-[ ] Enhanced Armor : Crew Compartment 10 EP
-[ ] Weapons Mounts: Default
-[ ] Crew Spaces: Fighting Compartment
-[ ] Basic Defense : Refractor Field
-[ ] Defense System: Holo-Field [EXPERIMENTAL] (+11 EP, -1 slot)
-[ ] Defense System : Grav-Shield Generator [EXPERIMENTAL] (+18 EP, -2 slots)
-[ ] Defense System: Energy-Dispersion Barrier Generator [EXPERIMENTAL] (+9 EP, -1 slot)
-[ ] Configuration: 3 Vehicle Weapons 4 Slots Remaining

EP cost:123 EP

Added in the Refractor field.
Its 2 EP so pretty cheap.
The question for why ?
Some more damage mitigation:

Mechanis said:

Fits a Basic Refractor Field to the unit, a shield system which can stop most non-exotic energy small arms (most notably Lasguns) and partially mitigate the damage of non-exotic heavy and vehicle energy weapons. +2 EP to cost of manufacture.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Impacts heavy and vehicle energy weapons and just pulling a bit of punch out of each hit can be pretty useful.
Not useful against orks (a lot of the time), but against a lot of other races should have a impact.

If medium chassis cost is at 100 EP, we are looking at a likely total price of:
100 (Base) + 123 (modification) + 90 (3 vehicle weapons 30 each) + 30 (grav shield) = 343 EP for a full outfitted medium chassis with some serious onion defense happening.

Potential for: Medium/Heavy Tank, Anti Air, Anti Infantry

3 in build vehicle weapon slots are nasty, and you can do a lot of work with that.
From keeping them all at vehicle's slot to going 3 pairs of heavy weapons that gives it a lot more flexibility than one visible at first.
It can't be used as an infantry transport, but we just did the iteration for that.

So far, in regards to finalized plans, I like mixed weapons Hammer the most. That said, I'm going to cast my official vote later today, compare and contrast with other designs.

Skjadir said:

Potential for: Medium/Heavy Tank, Anti Air, Anti Infantry

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It would also be really good for assault guns, which is basically an SPG but for direct fire weapons that are expected to engage the enemy. We'd probably put a Void Singularity Projector on such a vehicle.

Skjadir said:

If medium chassis cost is at 100 EP, we are looking at a likely total price of:
100 (Base) + 123 (modification) + 90 (3 vehicle weapons 30 each) + 30 (grav shield) = 343 EP for a full outfitted medium chassis with some serious onion defense happening.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It's a lot more tank, than say, Redshirt Army's design; which is a good example of a cheaper design, but let's look at the costs.

Assuming converting a system slot to a weapon costs 5 EP/slot, which I saw suggested before, if he l wanted to get three vehicle weapons it would take twelve slots being converted, for 60 EP.

Thus, his version of a triple sun cannon tank would cost:

100 (estimated base cost for medium)
52 (incremental chassis cost)
60 (slot conversion)
90 (weapons)
Total: 302 EP

Your design has roughly equal firepower (although his could add an extra heavy weapon quite cheaply).

However, your design also has heavy rather than medium armour and two grav-shields

Based on the costs you could get 1.14 of his designs for every one of yours.

Now, that's making an assumption about the cost of converting slots that may not be correct.

However even if slot conversion is free; which we know it isn't, the cheapest I think it would be is 242; meaning you could get 1.42 of his designs for one our yours.

That's a closer call. Personally, I think the extra survivability of heavy rather than medium armour and 2 rather than zero grav-shields is probably still worth it.

One thing I would consider through for the final design stage is that you can probably get away with only one grav shield for the purposes of this comparison.

That probably makes the final cost ratio somewhere between 1.03 assuming 5 EP/slot conversion cost, and 1.29, assuming zero.

As it's probably somewhere between those two, and more likely to be above the lower range as we can be pretty confident the cost isn't zero, then I think that having; say ten of your chassis of tanks with a single grav shield is better than having 12 of the lighter design.

That's simply because of the extra survivability, that I think will add up over the years.

Edit: I made a mistake, I didn't include crew equipment. If they're like the Starhammer, they'll have four crew; probably each costing 6 EP for their gear for a total of 24.

That makes the calculations above:

Two grav shield design: 1.13-1.38
One grav shield deign: 1.03-1.27

When we have missiles and a decent set of ammunitions for them, I'll advocate for making an open top lightly armoured medium or heavy open top self-propelled rocket artillery with 10 or 20 vehicle tubes respectively. Grav platforms are insanely good at run and gun, and combining this with long range indirect fire weapons would be very cool. Who cares that you're not armored if enemy has to eat 40 missiles to get within shooting distance of your super-powerful shields.

Mechanis said:

[ ] Power Plant : Starlight Reactor [EXPERIMENTAL]
Alternatively, there are 'Starlight Reactors', the Aeldari take on a fusion plant—an artificial star within a secure pocket webway-realm, its entire inner surface covered with thermoelectric generators and solar collectors. These provide effectively unlimited power, though with limited throughput; especially as the size of the generator machinery directly correlates to that of the pocket-realm. Building such a system small enough to mount in a vehicle would likely result in far lesser output. On the other hand, the increased power output will allow a substantially larger payload for the unit.
+4 EP to cost of manufacture, but adds +3 slots per engine, including the default.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

This likely has some serious benefits on longer combat missions, because it can just keep running.
The other engines sound like they are all some kind of battery setup, that from time to time needs to be recharged.

I plan to keep the Hammer chassis i vote for with the psykrystal engine to see how it works but an alternative:
[ ] Plan: Hammer-class Tank Chassis, Starlight Reactor
-[ ] Configuration: Fully Recessed [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[ ] Type: Plasma Drive [EXPERIMENTAL] (+17 EP, -2 slots)
-[ ] Enhance Payload x1 (+17)
-[ ] Maneuverability x3 (+3 EP)
-[ ] Stability x2 (+2 EP)
-[ ] Power Plant : Starlight Reactor [EXPERIMENTAL] 4EP +6 slots
-[ ] Basic Armor: Heavy (+12 EP)
-[ ] Enhanced Armor : Crew Compartment +10 EP
-[ ] Weapons Mounts: Default
-[ ] Crew Spaces: Fighting Compartment
-[ ] Basic Defense : Refractor Field +2 EP
-[ ] Defense System: Holo-Field [EXPERIMENTAL] -2 System slots and +16 EP standard
-[ ] Defense System : Grav-Shield Generator [EXPERIMENTAL] -3 System slots and +27 EP
-[ ] Defense System: Energy-Dispersion Barrier Generator [EXPERIMENTAL] -3 System slots and +14 EP
-[ ] Configuration: 3 Vehicle Weapons, 4 Slots Remaining

EP 126 vs 123 EP to my normal double engine version.
But this one likely has unlimited operating time ...

There is also the cheaper 87 EP version that uses the psykrystals.
With the note that the more expensive ones have better mobility in exchange otherwise being the same.

So assuming same load out for the total costs.
100+126+90+30=346 EP Starlight Reactor
100+123+90+30=343 EP extra engine v2
100+87+90+30=307EP System Slots And Crew Armor Edition

{} Falcon Grav Tank theory
-{} Configuration : Partially Recessed [EXPERIMENTAL]
-{} Type : Plasma Turbine [EXPERIMENTAL]
-{} Enhance Speed x1
-{} Maneuvering x2
-{} Speed x1
-{} Strength x2
-{} Power Plant : Liquid-Crystal Battery
-{} Basic Armor : Medium
-{} Weapons Mounts : Turret
-{} Crew Spaces : Basic Pods
-{} weapon configuration 1v, 2h, slots left: 12

typical build then goes on to put a pulse laser in the vehicle weapon mount, and shuriken catapults on the underslung weapon. 6 of the slots go to troop transport capacity, leaving 6 slots open for other systems.

Now that's a cheap design

Edit: i might be giving them too much credit with the plasma turbine engines, but credit where credit is due... Those tanks are fast AF, and they have 2 types of extra engines (vectored and star), so it wouldn't be far out.

Skjadir said:

-[ ] Configuration: 3 Vehicle Weapons, 94 Slots Remaining

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I don't think you mean 94 slots remaining…

Alratan said:

I don't think you mean 94 slots remaining…

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Should be 4, the 9 was from when it had 2 engines but that was cut down.
I think i also had a mistake in the EP cost (127 instead of 126)

It's also fun to see at which point which engine gets better.
You don't add any extra engine ? Psykrystal is better (all defensive options save 5 slots
You add 2+ engines when using psykrstal because more slots needed ? Starlight Reactor becomes quite good.

One thing that I really like about the Hammer designs is the level of investment in crew survivability.

I think this makes a real statement about the Craftworld's values. We aren't going for the cheap and cheerful throwing civilian volunteers at the problem approach the Craftworld Eldar did with their guardians. Instead, we're spending the resources to properly design and then make tailored platforms intended to maximise crew survivability. That's not just logistically important, it's culturally important.

It sends that one of the things the Vulkari value most is their people's lives.

I'm torn between it and then Agile Tank.

Skjadir said:

Should be 4, the 9 was from when it had 2 engines but that was cut down.
I think i also had a mistake in the EP cost (127 instead of 126)

It's also fun to see at which point which engine gets better.
You don't add any extra engine ? Psykrystal is better (all defensive options save 5 slots
You add 1-2 engines when using psykrstal because more slots needed ? Starlight Reactor becomes quite good.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

The way I see it, the Paykrstal is there to save slots and cost on smaller designs. The Starlight reactor is there to make larger designs more space efficient at the expense of cost.

Unsurprisingly, these cross over at certain price points.

Alratan said:

One thing that I really like about the Hammer designs is the level of investment in crew survivability.

I think this makes a real statement about the Craftworld's values. We aren't going for the cheap and cheerful throwing civilian volunteers at the problem approach the Craftworld Eldar did with their guardians. Instead, we're spending the resources to properly design and then make tailored platforms intended to maximise crew survivability. That's not just logistically important, it's culturally important.

It sends that one of the things the Vulkari value most is their people's lives.

I'm torn between it and then Agile Tank.



The way I see it, the Paykrstal is there to save slots and cost on smaller designs. The Starlight reactor is there to make larger designs more space efficient at the expense of cost.

Unsurprisingly, these cross over at certain price points.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Yeah, I generally like the hammer chassis a lot, good weapon slots on that, good all around defenses with good layering.

The baseline cost is about the same as for much less protect Fata Morgana-class Multirole Chassis adds because that lacks a grav shield which when adding posts get the cost up to 82.
That thing likely has less crew survivability to boot, because it also lacks the extra crew armor.


Starlight also has the potential for longer term operation without recharge and has some other potential uses*.

*special vehicle that is pretty much around to recharge other vehicles as needed or transport that is able to recharge the armors of the troopers it's carrying around.

Huh, when we make a brand new jetbike is going to be epic.

5 base slots ultralight
External plasma turbine
Some option to make +1 slot, depending on ultra-light options
Psykrystal Capacitractor
Light armor
Refractor field, deflector field, holo-field
Heavy weapon slot
2 ranged slots

It's a super fast heavy weapon platform that's virtually immune to basic infantry weapons and is protected from more powerful ones by a combination of speed and holo-field. Should be around 44 EP - twice the cost of Ithilmar. Can be further improved pretty cheaply with an Energy Barrier and an extra slot. I start to understand Saim-Hann's obsession with jetbikes. It's an ultimate anti-ork platform. Ranged chaff won't be able to deal damage, melee chaff won't be able to close in and everything more dangerous they can just kite.

As the voting is starting:
[X] Plan: Hammer-class Tank Chassis, System Slots And Crew Armor Edition
-[X] Configuration: Fully Recessed [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[X] Type: Plasma Drive [EXPERIMENTAL] (+17 EP, -2 slots)
-[X] Maneuverability x1 (+1 EP)
-[X] Strength x2 (+2 EP, +4 slots)
-[X] Stability x2 (+2 EP)
-[X] Power Plant: Psykrystal Capacitractor [EXPERIMENTAL] (+5 EP)
-[X] Basic Armor: Heavy (+12 EP)
-[X] Enhanced Armor : Crew Compartment (+10 EP)
-[X] Weapons Mounts: Default
-[X] Crew Spaces: Fighting Compartment
-[X] Defense System: Holo-Field [EXPERIMENTAL] (+11 EP, -1 slot)
-[X] Defense System : Grav-Shield Generator [EXPERIMENTAL] (+18 EP, -2 slots)
-[X] Defense System: Energy-Dispersion Barrier Generator [EXPERIMENTAL] (+9 EP, -1 slot)
-[X] Configuration: 3 Vehicle Weapons, 4 Slots Remaining

DarkLight140 last iteration on the hammer.
Did say i was going to vote for this as it's pretty good as is.
Also surprisingly cheap for the amount of defenses + weaponry it has.
Cost 87 EP
Likely end cost: ~307 EP with full outfit + second grav shield

[X] Plan: Hammer-class Tank Chassis, extra engine v2
-[X] Configuration: Fully Recessed [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[X] Type: Plasma Drive [EXPERIMENTAL] (+17 EP, -2 slots)
-[X] Enhance Payload x2 (+34)
-[X] Maneuverability x3 (+3 EP)
-[X] Stability x2 (+2 EP)
-[X] Power Plant: Psykrystal Capacitractor [EXPERIMENTAL] (+5 EP)
-[X] Basic Armor: Heavy (+12 EP)
-[X] Enhanced Armor : Crew Compartment 10 EP
-[X] Weapons Mounts: Default
-[X] Crew Spaces: Fighting Compartment
-[X] Basic Defense : Refractor Field +2 EP
-[X] Defense System: Holo-Field [EXPERIMENTAL] (+11 EP, -1 slot)
-[X] Defense System : Grav-Shield Generator [EXPERIMENTAL] (+18 EP, -2 slots)
-[X] Defense System: Energy-Dispersion Barrier Generator [EXPERIMENTAL] (+9 EP, -1 slot)
-[X] Configuration: 3 Vehicle Weapons 4 Slots Remaining

Cost 122 EP
Likely end cost: ~343 EP with full outfit + second grav shield

[X] Plan: Hammer-class Tank Chassis, Starlight Reactor
-[X] Configuration: Fully Recessed [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[X] Type: Plasma Drive [EXPERIMENTAL] (+17 EP, -2 slots)
-[X] Enhance Payload x1 (+17)
-[X] Maneuverability x3 (+3 EP)
-[X] Stability x2 (+2 EP)
-[X] Power Plant : Starlight Reactor [EXPERIMENTAL] 4EP +6 slots
-[X] Basic Armor: Heavy (+12 EP)
-[X] Enhanced Armor : Crew Compartment +10 EP
-[X] Weapons Mounts: Default
-[X] Crew Spaces: Fighting Compartment
-[X] Basic Defense : Refractor Field +2 EP
-[X] Defense System: Holo-Field [EXPERIMENTAL] -2 System slots and +16 EP standard
-[X] Defense System : Grav-Shield Generator [EXPERIMENTAL] -3 System slots and +27 EP
-[X] Defense System: Energy-Dispersion Barrier Generator [EXPERIMENTAL] -3 System slots and +14 EP
-[X] Configuration: 3 Vehicle Weapons, 4 Slots Remaining
Cost 126EP
Likely end cost: ~346EP with full outfit + second grav shield

Overall very solid baseline chassis, the more expensive version go for more mobility but pay for that a with the engines + having one more defense layer with the Refractor Field.
The Starlight version might also have a (much) longer operating time.

Lots of potential uses cases with different loadouts as tank, Anti Air, Anti infantry might also make for a good small SPG setup.
What it can't do is transport troops, but for that we just pretty explicitly made an iteration of the light grav vehicle to do just that job.

Edit: Approval vote
[X] Plan: Fata Morgana-class Medium Battle Tank Chassis

Another thought about the value of heavy armour and grav shields.

Daemons. The Eldar shine brightly in the Warp, unless they have rare and valuable and probably not invented yet war gear like Ghosthelms (which I think was so rare for the Craftworld Eldar that it was restricted to Farseers, so it may, like Witchblades and Singing Spears be Psytech that needs to be made with Seer AP, rather than something we can mass deploy).

I don't think that Holofields will also do the job of Ghosthelms for free, so even if Daemons can't see a vehicle because of the Holo fields I suspect they may be able to see the souls of the Eldar crew inside it with their psyniscience. This would help less in melee against individuals with holo-fields, but could really help target tanks.

Now, daemons are only one of several enemies we have to face, but given what we've done by revealing the Curses, they may be a relatively prominent one.

This probably doesn't just apply to actual daemons that are independently manifested, but also to daemons that are possessing people or vehicles.

It may also apply to psykers of mortal races who also have psynscience (in DoW psykers could reveal invisible units as a game manifestation of this), although this is less clear.

This isn't to say holofields are in any way bad or useless. It's just that any one defence they may have weaknesses.

This is why for our more common vehicles we want to have layering. An enemy may be able to deal with one or two different forms of defence, it's unlikely to be able to deal with four.

This is an issue because if (and it is only an if) daemons can partially disregard holo-fields, they're one of the enemies that we may be outnumbered 100 to 1 by. In that case I'd like our frontline tanks to have heavy armour and grav-shields, and as I don't think we'll be making specialist anti-daemon armies, th at means they should always have it. It's not as if grav-shields aren't useful against everyone anyway.

[X] Plan: Hammer-class Tank Chassis, System Slots And Crew Armor Edition
[X] Plan: Hammer-class Tank Chassis, extra engine v2
[x] Plan: Agile Tank

If @Candesce posts their plan I'll approval vote for it as well.

[X] Plan: To Be Iterated
-[X] Configuration : Partially Recessed [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[X] Type : Plasma Drive [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[X] Stability x2
-[X] Strength
-[X] Maneuvering x2
-[X] Power Plant : Psykrystal Capacitractor [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[X] Basic Armor : Medium
-[X] Weapons Mounts : Default
-[X] Crew Spaces : Fighting Compartment
-[X] Defense System : Holo-Field [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[X] Defense System : Grav-Shield Generator [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[X] Defense System : Energy-Dispersion Barrier Generator [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[X] 21 System Slots

This is a basic hull that isn't meant to be developed into a design directly but iterated into more specialized configurations. Want a tank? Iterate it to have vehicle slots. IFV? Slap a heavy slot on it.

Went with Partially Recessed because the integrated defenses will make it hard to hit and absorb what hits to dose take.

Edit: Here is a version with Fully Recessed if people prefer.

[X] Plan: To Be Iterated, buried engine
-[X] Configuration : Fully Recessed [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[X] Type : Plasma Drive [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[X] Stability x2
-[X] Strength
-[X] Maneuvering x2
-[X] Power Plant : Psykrystal Capacitractor [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[X] Basic Armor : Medium
-[X] Weapons Mounts : Default
-[X] Crew Spaces : Fighting Compartment
-[X] Defense System : Holo-Field [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[X] Defense System : Grav-Shield Generator [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[X] Defense System : Energy-Dispersion Barrier Generator [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[X] 20 System Slots

[x] Plan: Agile Tank
-[x] Configuration : Fully Recessed [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[x] Type : Plasma Drive [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[x] Speed
-[x] Stability x3
-[x] Maneuvering
-[x] Power Plant : Psykrystal Capacitractor [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[x] Basic Armor : Medium
-[x] Enhanced Armor : Crew Compartment
-[x] Weapons Mounts : Default
-[x] Crew Spaces : Fighting Compartment
-[x] Basic Defense : Refractor Field
-[x] Basic Defense : Deflector Field [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[x] Defense System : Holo-Field [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[x] Defense System : Grav-Shield Generator [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[x] Defense System : Energy-Dispersion Barrier Generator [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[x] 2x Vehicle Slots, 6 System Slots

[x] Plan: Hammer-class Tank Chassis, System Slots And Crew Armor Edition
[x] Plan: Hammer-class Tank Chassis, extra engine v2
[x] Plan: Hammer-class Tank Chassis, Starlight Reactor

One thing about Psykrstal designs that don't have a Grav-Shield.

It's very unlikely that a vehicle will have a total cost of less than 180 AP. Leaving off the Grav-Shield then makes less than a 10% difference in the number we can make.

And I think have 100 rather than say 108 of a tank is less of a disadvantage than those tanks not having grav shields. Over time those initial 108 less shielded tanks are likely to decrease to the point than there are fewer of them left than there would have been left of the shielded version.

As the only reason not to take grav-shields is if the final design isn't to have any.

Alratan said:

One thing about Psykrstal designs that don't have a Grav-Shield.

It's very unlikely that a vehicle will have a total cost of less than 180 AP. Leaving off the Grav-Shield then makes less than a 10% difference in the number we can make.

And I think have 100 rather than say 108 of a tank is less of a disadvantage than those tanks not having grav shields. Over time those initial 108 less shielded tanks are likely to decrease to the point than there are fewer of them left than there would have been left of the shielded version.

As the only reason not to take grav-shields is if the final design isn't to have any.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Was more because I think two shield types is excessive. But if everyone else is going to have it I guess I can't expect to be competitive without. Added.

Kolar said:

Was more because I think two shield types is excessive. But if everyone else is going to have it I guess I can't expect to be competitive without. Added.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Just a heads up, but I don't think everyone will; so you may not want to.

I would say though that a Conversion Shield and Grav shied covers each others weakness to some degree. A Conversion shield is more vulnerable to being overwhelmed by a powerful concentrated shot which overload it. I think the Grav Shield is vulnerable to being overloaded with volume of individual shots, but as long as you're not talking super-heavy weapons is good at deflecting strong concentrated shots.

If they're both integrated into a single chassis and designed to work together, hopefully they can cover each other. The conversion shield can soak up most of the mid energy attacks while the Grav-shield focuses on deflecting high energy attacks like multi-meltas and lascannons.

Adding a refractor shield makes this work even better, as it takes care of the chaff of weak energy weapons to spare the conversion field.

Adding a deflector shield on top of this would improve this further, as that pushes a way weaker kinetic weapons to even further spare the Conversion field's capacity.

While there is some redundancy, in a high threat environment, when outnumbered a hundred to one, the combined shields are much more likely to fail, as one can deal with the kind of attacks that would overwhelm the other.

This is particularly important for the Conversion/energy dispersion field, as if it's penetrated it can be broken for the rest of the battle until it can be repaired.

A grav-shield should be able to be focused on intercepting attacks that would overload the Conversion shield.

While we're all here and thinking about related topics, I've put together an open-topped vehicle to see how cheap we can make a Superheavy mount for indirect artillery.

Not something I'm going to put up as a vote - I think a decent light or medium tank chassis is more critical - but dedicated arty is something we'll want at some point, especially since we can expect to always be outnumbered.

[ ] Plan: Artillery Truck
-[ ] Configuration : Fully External
-[ ] Type : Plasma Drive [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[ ] Stability x3
-[ ] Strength x2
-[ ] Power Plant : Starlight Reactor [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[ ] Basic Armor : Light
-[ ] Enhanced Armor : Crew Compartment
-[ ] Weapons Mounts : Default
-[ ] Crew Spaces : Open
-[ ] Basic Defense : Refractor Field
-[ ] Basic Defense : Deflector Field [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[ ] Defense System : Holo-Field [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[ ] Defense System : Grav-Shield Generator [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[ ] Defense System : Energy-Dispersion Barrier Generator [EXPERIMENTAL]
-[ ] 1x Superheavy, 5 System

Open-topped, as mentioned, so I don't know how much use the extra defenses on the crew compartment will be - but at least they're very cheap. Both basic defense fields and all the integrated nonbasic defenses because those are defenses that'll do a lot more for the crew than armor that doesn't particularly cover them in the first place. Starlight Reactor even though this is a design that could make good use of the Psykrystal Capacitractor - the ability to just keep firing fusion mortars forever if allowed to set up and not threatened seemed like it might be an important bit of utility. Switching would free up an extra system slot and save a bunch of EP.

[X] Plan: Hammer-class Tank Chassis, extra engine v2
[x] Plan: Agile Tank

Skjadir said:

This likely has some serious benefits on longer combat missions, because it can just keep running.
The other engines sound like they are all some kind of battery setup, that from time to time needs to be recharged.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

While true, the Liquid Crystal Battery says it can be recharged in the field by the Eldar crew juicing it up with their warp mojo, and the Psykrystal Capacitractor is basically the same thing but also mentions multiple amplifier arrays to recharge it rapidly.
Considering we probably won't be deploying the tanks for long-term scouting missions, I'm not too worried about it, especially if we do end up attaching Warseers to the tank formations to cast buffs, direct fire and so on.


Incidentally, it occurs to me to wonder if we'll also have the [EXPERIMENTAL] tag in the Hull Militization mechanics.
That could be... painful.
I guess at least we have enough investigative psykery we probably won't end up like the Imperium with their occasional "made ship class/Astartes Founding/boarding pods/what have you, this should be good. Oops, it's cursed for some reason, back to the drawing board" issues. Or at least will be able to figure out why and compensate.

Another thought on the defences. Note this about the Conversion Field:


The Energy Dispersion field does not help against low energy projectiles or melee weapons. This probably means that grenades and possibly krak and melta missiles that rely on their payload to do damage and aren't AoE.

By contrast; a Grav Shield would deflect those attacks and heavy armour literally tank them.

The energy dispersion field is very good against one category of attacks, but it's a tailored for them.