# How good is Marine armour?



## Fivetide (Apr 17, 2008)

Thing is in a totally hypothetical situation.. would Mark IV stop Alien Zen morph acid blood ? 

Would it stop a Predator .. whatever the hell they use .. shoulder pistol round ? What from our world armoury would penetrate it ? 

Where’s its weak points ... looking at the figures you would have to say the joints.. ?

What is it is it Plastic. Metal .. some kind of composite.. ?


----------



## Red Orc (Jun 14, 2007)

It's called 'ceramite'. It's a kind baked metal, I think (sort of like, firing clay, but metal).

Not much from our world would pierce it. Even things that _look_ familiar (eg chainsaw-sword) aren't really the same, as chainswords have a mono-molecular cutting edge (so it slices at the molecular level). And an ork with a choppa is more or less equivalent to being hit by a specially-sharpened bus.

:glad he doesn't live in the 41st Millenium cyclops:


----------



## Fivetide (Apr 17, 2008)

Red Orc said:


> And an ork with a choppa is more or less equivalent to being hit by a specially-sharpened bus.


LMFAO !! that has to go in a Wh40k book.. my m8 has just sprayed 1664 all over his laptop , reading it !!!! 

BUT ... like a tank a bottle full of petrol and flaming taper could take out a marine ?


----------



## lordmat0 (May 17, 2008)

Thats red orc for clearing the question about chainsaws thats been on my mind for about 10 years!


----------



## Dirge Eterna (Apr 30, 2007)

Extreme heat might fracture marine armor. Maybe magnesium Sabot , like .105 rounds?

-Dirge


----------



## Jacobite (Jan 26, 2007)

I'd imagine the weak points to be here:










Basically where its joints and soft armour and where there are straight angles. I've also said the mid section as the armour seems lighter there in comparrsion to the chest.

As for what can hurt it from our world, I'm with Red, bugger all. Possibly a .50 round if it hit the right spot. Depleted uranuim would alos do it as well I imagine.


----------



## Fivetide (Apr 17, 2008)

Thanks for that Jacobite ... whats the joints made off ?

All I’m getting at is that we live in a universe of physics.. and like the Russians found out in WW2 a simple Molotov Cocktail can take out a Tiger – Panther.. 50 odd tonnes of steal death... can we say the same for the front line marine.. do real world physics apply to the armour ? Because if yes ,then there are some relevant questions to be asked in respects of their durability ..


----------



## Cato Sicarius (Feb 21, 2008)

Basically, if your stuck with a modern day gun when you've got a Marine army coming at you, nuke 'em all!!!


----------



## mrrshann618 (Jun 6, 2008)

Like the Molotov Cocktail comment. I'd have to assume that a flame thrower is a flame thrower no matter the name. RPG's, any fire/forget missile. Way back in the day, they equivilated an Autogun to a modern assault rifle. I'd also assume that any anti-tank round would be able to have a decent chance of going clean through. Marines are equipped with combat knives. I've got to assume that those are fairly similar to knives our combat troops use today. I do realize that many of these are going through those soft spots to kill the marine.

Either way, Toast a marine with fire, they would bake inside the suit.


----------



## Cole Deschain (Jun 14, 2008)

Here's the thing-
Molotovs worked because tanks weren't airtight.

Space Marine Armor most definitely is.

If a guy wearing that stuff can shrug off laser rifle fire, Bolter rounds (which scare me just thinking about them), Promethium Flamethrowers, Fragmentation missiles, Ork Choppas, and mono-molecular chainswords, then a I think a bottle of burning gasoline isn't going to bother him much.


----------



## The Son of Horus (Dec 30, 2006)

Cole Deschain said:


> Bolter rounds (which scare me just thinking about them)


I want a bolter, if only because it makes you nervous, and I can't think of many things that do off the top of my head. It'd be kind of like fishing with dynamite... it's totally unnecessary to have or to do, but it's cool anyway.


There's probably quite a few things that could get through power armor-- anything that's a violation of the Geneva Conventions to fire at "infantry" might be able to. There are a handful of automatic weapons that exist that are supposed to be "anti-vehicle" weapons, even though that's not what they're used for in the slightest, and the air displaced by their rounds are enough to seriously hurt someone... you don't actually have to hit them. Against a Space Marine, you probably would have to hit them, but the point remains, it's possible to get through it.

Keep in mind that a bolter fires a 75-cal round. Yes, it's an explosive round, but it's not fired at any sort of hypersonic velocity or anything. Bolters work just fine on Space Marines-- it's not the plasma gunner that racks up the most kills, both in fluff where there's Astartes on Astartes violence, but on the tabletop as well--it's the bolters that make the grade. It just doesn't reliably penetrate the armor. Something that can chew the armor up, but not necessarily pierce it, would work well enough, too. If the armor is seriously jacked up, it won't offer nearly as much protection. A second round hitting anywhere in the rather large impact point of a bolter, for example, would pass straight through.


----------



## Son of mortarion (Apr 24, 2008)

Cole Deschain said:


> Here's the thing-
> Molotovs worked because tanks weren't airtight.
> 
> Space Marine Armor most definitely is.
> ...


the game logic as to why blight grenades worked against them in 2e was that it ate through the seals, clogged intakes, etc. it stands to reason that that would happen with a Molotov. 

A .45 to one of the lenses would do the trick, as even space marines need their brains. :laugh:


----------



## Son of mortarion (Apr 24, 2008)

The Son of Horus said:


> I want a bolter, if only because it makes you nervous, and I can't think of many things that do off the top of my head. It'd be kind of like fishing with dynamite... it's totally unnecessary to have or to do, but it's cool anyway.
> 
> 
> There's probably quite a few things that could get through power armor-- anything that's a violation of the Geneva Conventions to fire at "infantry" might be able to. There are a handful of automatic weapons that exist that are supposed to be "anti-vehicle" weapons, even though that's not what they're used for in the slightest, and the air displaced by their rounds are enough to seriously hurt someone... you don't actually have to hit them. Against a Space Marine, you probably would have to hit them, but the point remains, it's possible to get through it.
> Keep in mind that a bolter fires a 75-cal round. Yes, it's an explosive round, but it's not fired at any sort of hypersonic velocity or anything. Bolters work just fine on Space Marines-- it's not the plasma gunner that racks up the most kills, both in fluff where there's Astartes on Astartes violence, but the bolters. It just doesn't reliably penetrate the armor. Something that can chew the armor up, but not necessarily pierce it, would work well enough, too. If the armor is seriously jacked up, it won't offer nearly as much protection. A second round hitting anywhere in the rather large impact point of a bolter, for example, would pass straight through.


not only that, but if you jack up the armour enough, the space marine inside is effectively neutralized. if you can't get up, you can't fight.


----------



## Cole Deschain (Jun 14, 2008)

Mmm-hmm.

And you REALLY want to compare a .45 ACP round to a SEVENTY-FIVE CALIBER explosive round?

Please.

And Blight Grenades are full of Nurgle Nastiness.

A molotov is full of plain ol' gasoline or high-proof booze.

Neither of which is gonna do much to bayttle armor designed to function ANYWHERE.

Just ask the Salamanders.


----------



## Red Orc (Jun 14, 2007)

Good point sir.

A combat knife is _not_ like a hunting knife, a French cooks knife, a WWII RMC's 'double edged blade for silent killing' or a WWI bayonet for instance... it is equivalent in game mechanics to a chainsaw with a blade that rips things at a molecular level. Ergo, it is itself an extremely powerful cutting implement.

I for one would not like to saw down even a small tree with a fishing knife. Do you see where I'm coming from?

Nor is a flamer exactly like a flamethrower (nor is a flamethrower like a Molatov cocktail). Flamers (more correctly _promethium_ flamers) fire a gout of a substance, like ceramite, that doesn't even exist, but is more like napalm than gasoline - but potentially, more like 'napalm plus'. 

So if you could make a bottle of super-concentrated napalm and throw _that_, yeah, the Molatov might work.

Basically, there is little in our world that equates. The autogun/assault rifle comparison stands, I believe. The only other thing I can think of that equates directly is a shotgun, which has no AP value. Fine against, well, basically, skin and cloth, as we know; not much use against ceramite.

repared to believe that cerremite is exremely hard cyclops:


----------



## Son of mortarion (Apr 24, 2008)

Cole Deschain said:


> Mmm-hmm.
> 
> And you REALLY want to compare a .45 ACP round to a SEVENTY-FIVE CALIBER explosive round?
> 
> ...


firstly, I said to shoot them in the eye.
secondly, a molotov cocktail is one part motor oil, two parts gasoline, which is why it sticks to things and burns longer, it is a poor man's napalm. Molotovs are known to burn almost anything short of tank armour,the sensitive parts of a marine's armour, such as power cables, vent intakes and air filters would be damaged/destroyed by the molotov.


----------



## The Son of Horus (Dec 30, 2006)

Kinda doubt it. Space Marines wander through raging infernos constantly-- infernos caused by things far more combustible than gasoline and motor oil-- and don't even notice that they're surrounded by +5 super napalm of doom. The power cables and whatnot are armored too, albeit not as well as the actual plate. The cables are supposed to be able to withstand a strike from a combat blade, and do quite well considering only MkVIII armour, which is extremely rare, has completely covered power cords.


----------



## TheUnmarked (May 19, 2008)

Its probably safe to assume that these cables have at least some protection or acidic atmospheres would eat them up, and likely that a marines armor has some very efficient cooling mechanisms and thermal protection (modern body armor is hot as hell so sealed armor would be worse and, there are suits today which can protect you from the intense heat radiating from lava although not the lava directly), not to mention that the marine inside is still insanely resilient and strong and probably doesn't need the power assist all the time. Plus the real effectiveness of molitovs is that the troops inhale the flames and smoke damaging the lungs(the main killer not skin burns)


----------



## Son of mortarion (Apr 24, 2008)

TheUnmarked said:


> Its probably safe to assume that these cables have at least some protection or acidic atmospheres would eat them up, and likely that a marines armor has some very efficient cooling mechanisms and thermal protection (modern body armor is hot as hell so sealed armor would be worse and, there are suits today which can protect you from the intense heat radiating from lava although not the lava directly), not to mention that the marine inside is still insanely resilient and strong and probably doesn't need the power assist all the time. Plus the real effectiveness of molitovs is that the troops inhale the flames and smoke damaging the lungs(the main killer not skin burns)


that is the point, the molotov will not necessarily burn the marine to death, or even enough to temporarily disable them, the smoke inhalation, especially that caused by a burning airfilter will. the point of using the molotov isto either incapacitatethearmmour or to choke the marine into incapacitation.


----------



## TheUnmarked (May 19, 2008)

yes but marine armor can work in vacuum for a period of time therefore the intakes can be closed preventing damage/intake of flames, and space marines are more than likely able to survive plain old smoke inhalation (although not flames)


----------



## jakkie (Dec 21, 2007)

I would imagin a Sidewinder would do the job of one marine, but its the rest of the Battle company you have to worry about. Also considoring that SMs are genetically enginered, a blow from a choppa/solid-slug round that would break bones or cause brain damage would probably do little to a Marine. They are also wearing power armour, so 9 times out of 10, the projectile wouldnt even reach the body. You do get lucky sometimes though, and I reckon that with an autocanon (Modern day equivilent) would fire enough rpm to hit at least one of the weak spots in thearmour, killing or incapacitating the Marine.


----------



## Cole Deschain (Jun 14, 2008)

Once again- Marines walk around on planets where the atmosphere is basically on fire.

A bottle of gas isn't going to do the trick

(And if you want to get technical, there is no one hard and fast recipe for a Molotov Cocktail. I suppose if you filed a bottle with Promethium, stuck a rag in it and threw it, you'd have one that worked)


----------



## cccp (Dec 15, 2006)

iv alwyas thought that ceramite is a kind of steel/concrete mix, not like reinforced concrete but like an actual mix with molten steel or whatever. so its kind of like trying to pierce a bunker rather than a suit of kevlar.

so, there isnt much which can actually pierce it. things like high expolsives (battlecannon shell) , powerful lasers (lascannon), powerful acids (spore mine) or plasma guns can reliably get through, but other more conventional weapons would have a very hard time indeed.

its also sealed, pressurised and airtight, nothing much at all is going to get through - considering the thickness of the armour, a firebomb isnt going to be much use.


----------



## deusvult (Apr 7, 2008)

The guns mounted on the AC-130 or A-10 might do the trick. But, I doubt any infantry weapon we have today, short of perhaps a mortar, will do anything to them.


----------



## Fivetide (Apr 17, 2008)

This has become more interesting than I first imagined it to be. Although I agree we don’t really know what the materials actual strength is because it’s basically a material we can’t test, all materials from sand to iron are governed by basic physics. The point was made about an Ork chopper being able to slice through Armour because and I’ll use the analogy “ its a specially sharpened bus”. Which in physics terms almost perfect. Although the Chopper itself does not have the size of a bus, it dose however exert the same mass and energy of a bus travelling at what ever speed the Orks arm can move it at. The same principle goes for a projectile. Though say a standard .50 cal shell ways 100gs stationary at nearly a km/s it mass would be closer to a small car factor into that its inertia at impact and you have allot energy condensed into a small object. So that energy has to dissipated and when it meat flesh and bone simply penetrates and the carry’s on until it runs out of inertia or hits an object or objects that dissipates it energy. However armour is different especially if the bullet cannot pierce it. The energy has to go somewhere, in the case of a huge tank the shear mass of the object it hits absorbs the impact. But in the case of a space marine I believe it would still result in the “scab” effect as in instead of going through the armour it impacts on the surface and transfers the energy to it that forms a metal scab inside the armours resulting in a molten lump of very fast metal or Cermite bouncing around shredding flesh internally. Its just a theory based on simple physics and doesn’t take into consideration 40k years of advancement in metals or ceramics.


----------



## TheUnmarked (May 19, 2008)

thats a good point there are already tank round which take advantage of just that effect however having layered armor with small spaces between the layers often negates the effect by allowing the inertia to dissipate better (like shock absorption) one example would be the plastic guards made to prevent a forklift from bending racking on impact, they simply dissipate the impact and are surprisingly effective. You need to hit the rack very hard to bend it with this simple protection in place, whereas before even light impacts could mangle the uprights


----------



## Red Orc (Jun 14, 2007)

Yeah, I always got the idea it was _layered_ ceramite. Though, I'm fairly sure if you fired a tank-shell at a Marine, he'd be hard pressed to stand back up again. But I don't think an AK-47 would do much.

To take this back a few stages, it should be simple enough to work out various principles from comaprison of a SM (genetically enhanced human) in his (sci-fi toughness) armour as against a guardsman (trained human soldier), stormtrooper (elite human soldier in enhanced armour) and/or conscript (untrained human). 

Can we assume carapace armour is pretty much like the best body-armour we currently posses? That seems to me to be a pretty fair point of comparison. So power armour is by definition better than that, and artificier armour, much loved of the Salamanders on their volcano-world, is _even better than that_. So we can conclude the protection is 'pretty substantial' I'd argue.

*However*, in all this discussion of flamers, I'd forgoten they ignore armour saves anyway, until I flamed some heretics yesterday (Hurrah! Toast the enemies of the Emperor!) - so I'm willing to concede that flamey-things will mess with the armour. At least, promethium will. Still not sure about gasoline, even mixed with engine oil. Or, and this is what I heard the British army used as 'poor man's napalm', tins of paint with grenades in. I can't see you'd get the necessary heat.

Still, maybe we need a new sort of weapon - a missile weapon, used in the shooting phase (obviously), which is assault 1, uses a small blast template, has a range of 12" and delivers a... Str 4, AP4 hit, but has the 'gets hot' rule (ie blows up in your hand on a roll of '1')? Is that a fair Molatov?

:now thinking about cities of death, the seige of Stalingrad and other urban warfare cyclops:


----------



## Rindaris (Mar 17, 2008)

Fivetide said:


> Thing is in a totally hypothetical situation.. would Mark IV stop Alien Zen morph acid blood ?
> 
> Would it stop a Predator .. whatever the hell they use .. shoulder pistol round ? What from our world armoury would penetrate it ?
> 
> ...


Hardshell (Xenomorph) blood WOULD melt through Marine armor. Maybe slowly, but it would get through. Mostly depends on how much blood got on the armor.

The Yautja (Predator) Shoulder Mounted Plasma Caster... the basic version, would probably have stats identical to a Plasma Gun (but no Gets Hot). So no... and there are much more powerful versions of this weapon in the arsenal of the Yautja.


----------



## jakkie (Dec 21, 2007)

The predators shoulder weapon does get hot; in AvP, after regaining his gun, the predator fires at a hoard of Aliens coming down the corridor. After the shooting frenzy, the end of the barrel is glowing red and partially melted. That seems pretty hot to me...

Anyway, why would you need to shoot your way through Marine armour when you can just fire a Shokk-Attack gun at it and watch it explode from the inside out


----------



## Rindaris (Mar 17, 2008)

jakkie said:


> The predators shoulder weapon does get hot; in AvP, after regaining his gun, the predator fires at a hoard of Aliens coming down the corridor. After the shooting frenzy, the end of the barrel is glowing red and partially melted. That seems pretty hot to me...
> 
> Anyway, why would you need to shoot your way through Marine armour when you can just fire a Shokk-Attack gun at it and watch it explode from the inside out


Yes, the plasma caster gets hot. But its attached to the Yautja in such a way they would not be harmed by this effect.


----------



## cccp (Dec 15, 2006)

Red Orc said:


> *However*, in all this discussion of flamers, I'd forgoten they ignore armour saves anyway, until I flamed some heretics yesterday (Hurrah! Toast the enemies of the Emperor!) - so I'm willing to concede that flamey-things will mess with the armour. At least, promethium will. Still not sure about gasoline, even mixed with engine oil. Or, and this is what I heard the British army used as 'poor man's napalm', tins of paint with grenades in. I can't see you'd get the necessary heat.


'normal' flamers ignore cover saves and not armour saves, meaning they cannot get through marine armour. for example, the inferno cannon on the hellhound is only ap4.

i say 'normal' because i cant remember the rules for the GK incinerator.


----------



## Dirge Eterna (Apr 30, 2007)

I still think a good Sabot round would probably go through a Marine and then kill the guy behind him. If it can kill the Transformers it can kill Space Marines. lol!

Also, would Marines be affected by pressure waves? Even if a round doesn't kill them, if it liquifies their organs or brain they're not going anywhere fast. The books say that marines "seal their suits" going into rough warzones. Space and such. But they leave their suits open in relatively open warzones. Like Earth. So, if we follow that reasoning, anything that would shake a Marine around enough would probably cause brain damage, or at lease smush a few vital organs. 

And don't forget the "I'm too cool to wear a helmet" Sergeant.
-Dirge


----------



## Silb (Jan 28, 2008)

Dirge Eterna said:


> I still think a good Sabot round would probably go through a Marine and then kill the guy behind him. If it can kill the Transformers it can kill Space Marines. lol!


I completely agree with that!

There are actually a lot of things that could kill a space marine. Suicidal terrorists with bombs strapped to themselves, one of those kamikaze pilots from world war II, a nuclear....anything, a direct hit/impact from almost any kind of bomb or missile, being hit by pretty much anything larger than a bus and denser than gold, etc.


----------



## Red Orc (Jun 14, 2007)

Silb said:


> ...
> 
> There are actually a lot of things that could kill a space marine. Suicidal terrorists with bombs strapped to themselves, one of those kamikaze pilots from world war II, a nuclear....anything, a direct hit/impact from almost any kind of bomb or missile, being hit by pretty much anything larger than a bus and denser than gold, etc.


So, they need to watch out for giant buses made of super-heavy gold? Blimey they must have a dangerous life, because there's there's _loads_ of those around...:wink:

Not sure a fanatic with TNT strapped to him would do the job, but a plane crashing in to him, yeah probably. Maybe not a WWII fighter plane, but probably a jet airliner. And a nuclear strike, yeah probably. Ditto a mountain falling on them, a super-tanker being hurled into them at 200mph, Superman punching them in the face etc.

@ CCCP... yeah you're right of course. D'oh. I take it all back. It was a cover save I gleefully ignored. Don't know why I thought it was an armour save. Oh, yeah, it's because I'm an idiot.

:homeric cyclops:


----------



## cccp (Dec 15, 2006)

i would like to see a fight between superman and a marine, lol.


----------



## chrisman 007 (Jan 3, 2008)

Wait, have we missed something? Cruise missiles? Fuel Air bombs? Depleted Uranium tank rounds? Wouldn't they royally screw up a marine?


----------



## Red Orc (Jun 14, 2007)

Well, no, not really. Yes, all of those things probably (except maybe the fuel air bomb, it depends on calculations about how hot/long could a suit of power-armoutr go) would take out a marine, I think we're agreed.

But, let's be honest, not many enemy soldiers are gonna be equipped with personal cruise missiles or personal depleted uranium howitzers. So yeah, if you put a marine up against a... Leman Russ let's say, he's gonna lose, in game terms or in as close as you can get to real-life comparison. But most hand-held weapons we have now - flamethrowers included - aren't going to do much damage.

:thinking maybe we're getting there cyclops:


----------



## Revelations (Mar 17, 2008)

Fivetide said:


> Thing is in a totally hypothetical situation.. would Mark IV stop Alien Zen morph acid blood ?


Giger's Alien... as in H.R. Giger. Look up his work people, appreciatte another artist whose work was robbed by hollywood. Sigh... had to get that out...




Use an equivilant weapon to knock out a Marine...

* Put a car battery on the end of a sledge hammer wired to barb wire wrapped around the head. 

* Use an Armor peircing 50 cal round, should be enough to bust their armor.

* Mines, Claymores, any short range high yield explosive should work well too.

* Construction equipment... yah, use your imagination on this one.


----------



## rgw (Jan 29, 2008)

I don't think mines or claymores would cut it Rev.

If I remember correctly they still rely on shrapnel to cause the most damage to a passing suqad. And I doubt shrapnel, which can't pierce today's body armor vests (it still gets kills from hitting other areas however), would pierce power armor.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

cccp said:


> i would like to see a fight between superman and a marine, lol.


That'd be a really short fight. Something tells me that since Superman survives blasts of energy that are almost as destructive as nuclear bombs on a regular basis he wouldn't have much in the way of trouble eating a bolter round. Not to mention he can move so fast that he can turn time backward and a bunch of other really dumb powers...


----------



## Holyboltshells (May 22, 2008)

Important question to ask would be whether were talking about a Table top Marine or a Movie/Fluff based marine. In my view we could down a table top marine with modern day weaponary. However dont think wed stand a chance with a Fluff based one.


----------



## cccp (Dec 15, 2006)

remember that space marine armour is tougher than the stuff we put on our challengers or abrams. can a bulldozer stop a tank?


----------



## chrisman 007 (Jan 3, 2008)

Well, in response to Orc's post, infantryman may not have cruise missiles on them, but they have got laser designators. Well, what about 30mm cannon (A.K.A: the machine gun on an apache)? FFAR? TOW? would a marine withstand a barrage from an Apache?


----------



## Cole Deschain (Jun 14, 2008)

A Marine, no.
A Tactical Squad? Oh yeahhhh.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

chrisman 007 said:


> Well, in response to Orc's post, infantryman may not have cruise missiles on them, but they have got laser designators. Well, what about 30mm cannon (A.K.A: the machine gun on an apache)? FFAR? TOW? would a marine withstand a barrage from an Apache?


One Marine would probably go down under that kind of firepower, but something tells me that the rest of the Squad wouldn't take too kindly to that and would tear the Apache to pieces with bolters and missiles.


----------



## Fivetide (Apr 17, 2008)

Fluff wins everytime ! although it would be hard to target a tabletop marine better to target the whole table !! lol ..


----------



## LegendX (Jun 16, 2008)

chrisman 007 said:


> Well, in response to Orc's post, infantryman may not have cruise missiles on them, but they have got laser designators. Well, what about 30mm cannon (A.K.A: the machine gun on an apache)? FFAR? TOW? would a marine withstand a barrage from an Apache?


Chrisman 007 is obviously skilled in killing MEQs. We all know the best way to kill them is to make them take as many armour saves as possible. 

Also, 30mm is just another way of saying Heavy Bolter(x10 rate of fire) 

LX


----------



## Initiate (Mar 25, 2007)

how about melted titanium flying towards them at 1500 mph? :grin:

Honestly, if space marines did have the intention to kill us all, we would die without them even having to land. :exterminatus: And if they did land, we would need every single army in the world working together (yea right) to stop them. All navies, airforces, artillery batteries would have to pump shells into the space marines. Footsoldiers would probably be cut down before lunch, and lascannons can destroy basically anything. Whirlwinds can target cannons and vessels, and i think missile launchers can lock on to helicopters. Thunderhawks and Stormbirds would fly in, killing everything in their way. 

Of course, if the Imperium ever did wage war on earth, I would go and join them! All hail the Immortal (not anymore ) Emperor!

About the flamers and choking on smoke, Astartes have specially thickened lungs that can withstand smoke i would think, similiar to how their stomachs can filter out poisons. 

Also, eye lenses seem to be quite easily broken, according to the books (ie: Jubal punched Garvi and his eye lens broke in Horus Rising) so if a sniper picked out the eye from the right angle, they could get a bullet into the marines brain. Again though, space marines have many weapons that could kill the snipers before they got any shots off... like orbital cannons 

On the subject of Superman and a space marine...Chuck Norris could kill them both!! :smug:


----------



## Pseudo (Nov 5, 2007)

A Guardsmen can kill a Space Marine with a lasgun.

By running up and hitting the SM over the head with it.

So yes, we can kill Space Marines with modern day weapons. Hell, we can kill Space Marines with stone-aged weapons.

(and don't quote fluff at me, the fluff is always biased toward whomever's perspective it's written from. Take the Gaunt's Ghost books - how many CSM get regularily owned, out of hand, by weedy little guardsmen? Skewed as it is, the TT rules are the fairest way of measuring relative power)


----------



## jakkie (Dec 21, 2007)

cccp said:


> remember that space marine armour is tougher than the stuff we put on our challengers or abrams. can a bulldozer stop a tank?


I find that hard to believe. termi armour perhaps but not power armour, bearing in mind that a rhinos armour is probably about the same as a ChallengerIIs


----------



## Bungholio (May 2, 2008)

Armour or not, those 1970's platform soles are a complete fashion disaster.


----------



## Jacobite (Jan 26, 2007)

Pseudo said:


> and don't quote fluff at me, the fluff is always biased toward whomever's perspective it's written from. Take the Gaunt's Ghost books - how many CSM get regularily owned, out of hand, by weedy little guardsmen? Skewed as it is, the TT rules are the fairest way of measuring relative power


I think at the last count it was about 10 that the Tanith 1st had killed. 5 Word Bearers in Ghost Maker and around another 5 in Tratior General from a unknown legion. Maybe one or two more, I think there may have been some in Necropolis but defintly nothing over 15. 

As for fluff always being baised towards whose point of veiw it is written from, not the case. Try reading any of the Imperial Armour books, all three so far have been written from the Imperial side and each and every one of them has the Imperium having their ass handed to them on a plate.


----------



## Pseudo (Nov 5, 2007)

Jacobite said:


> I think at the last count it was about 10 that the Tanith 1st had killed. 5 Word Bearers in Ghost Maker and around another 5 in Tratior General from a unknown legion. Maybe one or two more, I think there may have been some in Necropolis but defintly nothing over 15.
> 
> As for fluff always being baised towards whose point of veiw it is written from, not the case. Try reading any of the Imperial Armour books, all three so far have been written from the Imperial side and each and every one of them has the Imperium having their ass handed to them on a plate.


They kill about 4 Iron Warriors in First and Only too.

Point is - Gaunt is a guardsman (a commisar is a guardsman with a fancy hat IMO) who has faced off against multiple CSM and won. Ok, so he wasn't on his own when he faced them, but still...

Also, I'm not sure about the IA books (I only have IA1, personally), but my comment about bias was aimed more at Black Library books, not Forgeworld stuff. Black Library have clearly stated in the past that their books are written from the perspective of the story's protagonists, and therefore the truth is skewed/ignored in their favor.

And we can all agree that lasguns (both TT and fluff incarnations) have the potential to kill a SM, right? Well, a lasgun is roughly equivalent in power to an autogun. And an autogun is just a fancy term for machinegun. QED, enough machineguns can kill a Space Marine.


----------



## Red Orc (Jun 14, 2007)

Pseudo said:


> ... enough machineguns can kill a Space Marine.


Yes. Because that's what 'enough' means.

'Enough' bananas can kill a space marine. 'Enough' squirrels can kill a space marine. 'Enough' grains of sand can kill a space marine. You can put _anything_ in that space and the sentence is true.

We all agree that 'enough' of anything will kill a space marine. But that doesn't mean "all you need to take out a space marine is a guardsman throwing squirrels". The point is rather to determine what _is_ enough.

If you need 50 trillion grains of sand, it's probably not good enough. If you need 1 Apache attack copter, that's more like it. BTW, is the Apache's big gun like an assault cannon, or am I thinking of something else?

:not all that clued up on military technology cyclops:


----------



## Son of mortarion (Apr 24, 2008)

I agree that it is VERY hard to believe that a suit of armor that a rusty knife can find a way through is somehow better than armor that takes a daisy cutter to destroy. Th only way to destroy an Abrams tank shotr of taking three weeks with a welding torch is to drop heavy artillery (paladin or equiv.), bombs (500 lb+), or nukes:fuck:. In many places space marine armor has been breached by hunting rifle equivalents, such as the assault upon the sirenhold on isstvan IV. If space marine armor was as indestructible as described, they would have the "we win" rule. as no one would be able to hurt them. Even the mighty terminator armor isn't infallible.


----------



## Son of mortarion (Apr 24, 2008)

Red Orc said:


> Yes. Because that's what 'enough' means.
> 
> 'Enough' bananas can kill a space marine. 'Enough' squirrels can kill a space marine. 'Enough' grains of sand can kill a space marine. You can put _anything_ in that space and the sentence is true.
> 
> ...


It is an autocannon. an assault cannon is a minigun, watch predator or terminator 2 to see an assault cannon.


----------



## Pseudo (Nov 5, 2007)

Red Orc said:


> Yes. Because that's what 'enough' means.
> 
> 'Enough' bananas can kill a space marine. 'Enough' squirrels can kill a space marine. 'Enough' grains of sand can kill a space marine. You can put _anything_ in that space and the sentence is true.
> 
> ...


One machinegun can theoretically kill a Space Marine. I said 'enough' machineguns because 1 on it's own would probably miss a vital point. The same way one lasgun can kill a Space Marine, if you're lucky, but get enough lasguns and you don't have to be lucky (statistics reduce the chance of the Space Marine surviving to zero).

Try taking what I say in context next time.


----------



## chrisman 007 (Jan 3, 2008)

Why don't we just hit the nuke button?


----------



## Red Orc (Jun 14, 2007)

Pseudo said:


> ...
> 
> And we can all agree that lasguns (both TT and fluff incarnations) have the potential to kill a SM, right? Well, a lasgun is roughly equivalent in power to an autogun. And an autogun is just a fancy term for machinegun. QED, enough machineguns can kill a Space Marine.


OK; there it is in context.

The point still stands. "Enough" machine guns can kill a space marine. Just like "enough" of anything else can - bananas, squirrels or sand.

The point is surely that it's _possible_ to kill a space marine with one machine gun, but not one squirrel. So for machine guns, or lasguns of the same approximate power, one _can be_ "enough" - if let's say they get it in the eye.

But it's unlikely, as you admit. So in terms of the original question, it doesn't really cut it. As you point out, both lasguns and machine guns need multiple shots to come close to a definite kill. The chance of survival _approaches_ zero the more shots you throw at it, but it never actually reaches zero.

So can you take out a space marine with a machine gun? Yes, you _can_. Are you _likely_ to take out a marine with a machine gun? No, you're not. Are you likely to take out a marine with "enough" machine guns? Yes, because "enough" means "the amount of machine guns necessary to be likely to take out a marine".

:statistical, semantic and logical cyclops:


----------



## Son of mortarion (Apr 24, 2008)

you could increase the caliber of round, If a boltgun can penetrate sm armor, a .50 cal round should be able to also stop one, especially if you use armor piercing, incendiary ammunition.


----------



## Pseudo (Nov 5, 2007)

Red Orc said:


> OK; there it is in context.
> 
> The point still stands. "Enough" machine guns can kill a space marine. Just like "enough" of anything else can - bananas, squirrels or sand.
> 
> ...


I think you're being a wee bit too pedantic. The original question was what _could_ penetrate power armor, not what was 100% guaranteed to every time.

A machinegun _can_. And it's likely to penetrate power armor as well, in a single shot, if it's aimed by a crack-shot. Likewise, a grot weilding a lascannon is unlikely to even hit power armor, but get *enough* lascannon-weilding grots and yada yada.

But we're all agreed that lascannons are easily a match for power armor. As are machineguns, in the right circumstances.


----------



## Red Orc (Jun 14, 2007)

Fivetide said:


> ... What from our world armoury would penetrate it ?
> ...


Well, maybe I am being over-pedantic. Maybe we're just understanding the question differently.

You seem to read the question above as "_could_". I read it as "_would, on a sufficently regular basis to be useful_". "would" to me implies some condition, so I'm guessing what that condition is. Actually you are too - your guess is "...would, given a sufficently lucky shot". The answers to those questions are going to be quite different.

So; I'm not pointing out what I see to be logical flaws just to be annoying - and I apologise if you thought I was doing it just to wind you up - but because I see them as logical flaws... which, once we've looked at them, turn out to be different ways of interpreting the question.

:glad we've got to the bottom of that cyclops:


----------

