FANDOM


  • When it comes to fluff as cool as super heavys are there just have too many drawbacks (can't move at practical speeds and is a nightmare to Maintain also is giant target and one shot in the tracks would destroy it provided it's a explosive also 200mm isn't even that good and that's for a baneblade for crying out loud in fact aeronautical weapons make super heavies even more obselete as do artillery a baneblade woudnt work any better in 40k than 2017 just I giant slow target that is prone to breaking down not to mention refueling that behemoth and what on earth could carry that off orbit onto battlefields still even with void and airpower obtained artillery would be a huge threat not to mention lascannon platoons melter guns etc. Also baneblades arnt worth the rescources considering 1 baneblade worth of metal and other materials might as well be 8 lemon Russ 2 valkyries and 12 chimeras with a full complement of full blown imperial guardsmen my point being how is a baneblade not totally impractical in every way (or any super heavy for that matter ) of course in fluff not game mechanics

      Loading editor
    • 1. you need a lot bigger shells to take out a baneblade than an LRus (artillery or airborn)

      2. Baneblade has more all around protection than an LRuss, aka infantry has a harder time making it through the fire laid down by said tank

      3. Morale . "Releasing eleven barrels of HELL! All Guardsmen, FOLLOW ME TO GLORY!"

      4. target you cannot ignore while other vehicles surrounding it get free shots

      5 Speed: 25/18 on a baneblade versus 32/19 on an LRuss

      shot on the tracks would make it immobile for a while, same as would happen to any other tracked veicle, your argument being?

      6. variants can actually be a threat to Titan sized enemies, unlike all other tanks

      7. aeronautical weapons, sure, like you would deploy any form of armoured assault without aerial support and protection, would be the same regardless of the presence of super heavies.


      8. http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Devourer_Dropship  sidenote: you have whole regiments deployed from ONE dropship, that is several thousand men, what makes you think that it ould not carry a couple of super heavies?

      The IoM has Titan landers, those can carry 55 meters high monsters of metal from orbit to ground and back.


      9 less exxageration would suit your argument

        Loading editor
    • One thing the imperium I'd say is still behind tau and chaos on airpower and when fighting chaos you don't neccessarly get void superiority also tau have flying titans so those guys or imperial rebels with conventional space war abilities (hence 80 fighter bombers coming towards each say 15 baneblades ) and there obselete besides melter cannons butcher baneblades and variants just anything that's not tyranids or orcs and it's an no (as far as I know )

        Loading editor
    • Long story short 15 baneblades and 3 strategic bombing operations or if possible orbit strikes to take all of them out

        Loading editor
    • Also you think skull cannons coudnt deliver those shells they could as could most khorne engines

        Loading editor
    • If you can debunk these points I will understand it as very useful

        Loading editor
    • the problem being:if you give Lrusses those odds, the chances are even lower ;)

      compare everything with the same things and the problems stay the same, only that baneblades can take more of a pounding and dish out more damage than comparable other tanks the IoM has

        Loading editor
    • Ok that explains it

        Loading editor
    • Baneblades are way superior to almost any other tank the factions in 40k has. The armor of the baneblade may just be about 200mm thick, but you have to take into consideration that this specific armor is made with a lot of high-quality durable materials like adamantium and ceramite that can make it withstand usual anti-tank weapons like lascannons many times over than your usual leman or macharicus tank. 

      While the baneblade is quite slow and a giant tank that makes it vulnerable to a lot of enemy fire, the sheer firepower that it can dish out should not be taken lightly. It would certainly decimate any of our tanks today like a hot knife through butter.

      We also have to consider that everytime a baneblade is deployed it will always have a ton of backup, including dedicated AA vehicles like your basic hydra or the more advanced praetor armored missile launcher. 

      A last thing i wanted to mention is that some baneblades can also be modified to have personal forcefields around them so they can withstand even the heaviest of firepower (if you are lucky enough). Yarrick's personal baneblade "The Fortress of Arrogance" has one. 

        Loading editor
    • Ah, my favourite kind of post to ruthlessly disassemble.

      can't move at practical speeds

      A Superheavy's job isn't to be fast, and I could probably dig up explicit book quotes of Baneblades or whatever moving faster than they have any right to if I had the time.

      also is giant target

      Which could well be the point, it draws fire onto its heavier armour and thus away from more vulnerable targets. This concept doesn't work IRL because armour is becoming increasingly less relevant in the face of modern offensive technology, but 40K has plenty of super armour materials which are better than anything that exists in real life.

      and one shot in the tracks would destroy it provided it's a explosive

      You do realise that this applies to any tank, or any vehicle really? And here we see that you haven't done your homework, armour-piercing rounds or shaped charges are actually more effective than conventional high explosive for attacking an armoured target.

      also 200mm isn't even that good and that's for a baneblade for crying out loud

      200mm of materials better than anything we have today. Unless you lowball really hard and deliberately cherry pick the worst showings for everything, at which point it's not really Warhammer anymore - not just thematically but in the sense that the setting stops working as a coherent entity.

      in fact aeronautical weapons make super heavies even more obselete as do artillery

      Once again you show the half-hearted level of research you've done. Every army in 40K practices combined arms, especially the Astra Militarum who make the most use of superheavies. A Baneblade or suchlike being deployed by any competent commander would have anti-air weapons and counterbattery fire to support it.

      a baneblade woudnt work any better in 40k than 2017

      "This idea doesn't work in real life, thus it totally also wouldn't work in a setting which repeatedly demonstrates vastly more advanced technology than anything that could possibly exist in a realistic world, much of which actually biases toward the justification of such things."

      just I giant slow target that is prone to breaking down not to mention refueling that behemoth

      Well, it's a good thing the Imperium canonically uses fuel with an energy density millions of times higher than ordinary gasoline.

      and what on earth could carry that off orbit onto battlefields

      Much larger and heavier things are canonically deployed from space all the time in 40K.

      still even with void and airpower obtained artillery would be a huge threat

      If you're using artillery to attack tanks you're either using the artillery wrong or desperately short of proper anti-tank weapons.

      not to mention lascannon platoons melter guns etc.

      Back in the 1950s people were saying that ATGMs would eliminate tanks from the battlefield entirely, yet sixty years on modern militaries still find non-niche use for MBTs despite ATGMs being far better than they were then. The existence of anti-armour weaponry does not in and of itself make armoured vehicles obsolete.

      Also baneblades arnt worth the rescources considering 1 baneblade worth of metal and other materials might as well be 8 lemon Russ 2 valkyries and 12 chimeras with a full complement of full blown imperial guardsmen

      I'd like to see the actual calculations you did to reach these conclusions about the proportions of resource expenditure, and the in-universe sources you have to back them up. Especially I'd like to see where it's stated that the same resources are being used to make Baneblades and Valkyries, given that automotive and aeronautical engineering are separate fields and the products thereof require different materials to do different things.

      I won't argue that there is plenty to criticise about the Baneblade, it's a silly design like most Astra Militarum tanks. But the concept of superheavies in and of itself does make sense within the setting - at the very least it's a damn sight less ridiculous than the Titan-class war machines which actually do make no sense. I'd recommend you do a bit more homework on both 40K lore and military doctrine in general.

        Loading editor
    • What. A. Post. 

      Baneblades in WH40k universe cannot be compared with Real Life situation, complication, comparisons, scenarios, characteristics or anything that comes from the real human world. As such and stated by Slug Gunner Fan, your argument on baneblade being a useless piece of weapon that the Imperium of Man field is utter complete trash.

      Please, and I do say please again, go and read all the WH40k books, novels, overpriced 6th or 7th codex about Imperial armoury, understand the contents on a fictional point then come back with constructive ideas as to why you think a baneblade is not worth it's place in the Imperium of Man. 

      Whatever you do, never ever compare WH40k universe with the real world, fiction and non-fiction can never go hand in hand. 

      Period. 

        Loading editor
    • Reinno wrote:
      Whatever you do, never ever compare WH40k universe with the real world, fiction and non-fiction can never go hand in hand.  Period.

      Eh, you can analyse fiction from a technical standpoint treating it as a "real" entity, you just have to remember that not very few works of fiction portray engineering and technology which is bound by the same constraints as real life. I can reasonably assume that penetration dynamics of armour-piercing shells versus armour work the same in 40K as in real life, but I'd be out of my mind to assume that the performance of those shells and armour is within real plausible limits seeing as the evidence from 40K novels and such often shows otherwise.

        Loading editor
    • Slug gunner fan wrote:
      Reinno wrote:
      Whatever you do, never ever compare WH40k universe with the real world, fiction and non-fiction can never go hand in hand.  Period.

      Eh, you can analyse fiction from a technical standpoint treating it as a "real" entity, you just have to remember that not very few works of fiction portray engineering and technology which is bound by the same constraints as real life. I can reasonably assume that penetration dynamics of armour-piercing shells versus armour work the same in 40K as in real life, but I'd be out of my mind to assume that the performance of those shells and armour is within real plausible limits seeing as the evidence from 40K novels and such often shows otherwise.

      Now this is constructive argument, learn from Slug gunner fan. imma impressed btw. 

        Loading editor
    • Reinno wrote:
      Now this is constructive argument, learn from Slug gunner fan. imma impressed btw. 

      Eh, I'm not that good, I just hang around with the right people. I frequent forums oriented at sci-fi nerds, there are one or two posters who are really dedicated to proper technical analysis, I won't pretend to be able to do more than spread the word of their excellent principles in the hope that others will take heed.

        Loading editor
    • 40k isn't written by proper experts and is instead written by people who think inter-World War tank designs look cool.

      That's pretty much it. I'd still put my bets on a company of T-72s than a Baneblade.

        Loading editor
    • So, what I got out of that post was:

      "The baneblade has some flaws, therefore it's worthless."


      By that logic Space Marines are worthless because they can die, same for Guardsmen, Eldar, Tau, etc.


      Everything is far from perfect in the setting of Warhammer 40,000 which is (for me atleast) one of the defining characteristics of this franchise. Humankind has not reached the pinnacle of technological advancement, in fact if my memory serves me correct, their has been a decline in the development of newer technologies by humankind since before the imperium and I haven't even begun to mention the state of eternal conflict that each and every faction is in with the rest of the universe. This is a stark contrast to many other science fiction franchises (I'm not saying it's the only franchise like this, there's always more) you could almost say it's a bit like the cyberpunk genre.

      You also have to remember that Games Workshop has to accomodate for the tabletop game with these things, they can't just have a nigh-unkillable perfect weapon of mass fuckery becaue:

      a) It would be unbalanced in the tabletop setting and would mean that there would be literally no point to play anymore (Games Workshop wants money, if you can't tell by the miniatures' hefty price tags)

      and

      b) It would ruin much of the plot. Pretty much every conflict (which are major plot points in almost every story, there's always some conflict to overcome) could be solved by deploying this "fuck-all device"

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.