Baneblade Vs Mammoth Mk. III Vs Cyclop

Baneblade Vs Mammoth Mk. III Vs Cyclop

Suggested by Rookie

Baneblade (Warhammer 40K) vs Mammoth Mk. III (Command & Conquer) vs Cyclop (The Invincible).

As the title says, this is your typical tank battle.

They all fight in desert. Distance 10 kilometers.

Who will win?

Related Posts:

SHARE THIS POST

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Myspace
  • Google Buzz
  • Reddit
  • Stumnleupon
  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • Technorati
Author: admin View all posts by
Read before commenting! We welcome constructive comments and allow any that meet our common sense criteria. This means being respectful and polite to others. It means providing helpful information that contributes to a story or discussion. It means leaving links only that substantially add further to a discussion.

Comments being disrespectful to others or otherwise violating what we believe are common sense standards of discussion can lead to the banhammer getting used. You can read more about our comments policy here.

86 Comments on "Baneblade Vs Mammoth Mk. III Vs Cyclop"

  1. Skarbrand July 1, 2013 at 4:53 am -      #1

    Wow, this was posted earlier than usual…..
    -
    Anyways, anyone know what the Cyclop can do? As in feats of DC, durability, speed, etc
    -
    Mammoth MK.III can be upgraded to have railguns, thouh like most things in C&C are featless afaik
    -
    Leaning towards the Baneblade for the time being

  2. Neon Lord July 1, 2013 at 5:30 am -      #2

    The Mammoth has twin Railguns and a couple missile pods. It’s meant to be tough by C&C standards but I think the Baneblade will be tougher.
    -
    The Baneblade can have up to 17 barrels of hell. 4 sponson twin-linked Heavy Bolters, 4 turret Lascannons, Demolisher Cannon, Co-axial Autocannon, twin-linked Bolters and the Mega Battle cannon. Extra couple of barrels depending of if it has a pintle mounted Storm Bolter or Heavy Stubber.

  3. Zazax July 1, 2013 at 5:41 am -      #3

    No knowledge whatsoever about Cyclop, but if it’s anything like the Baneblade the Mammoth is way out of its league here. The MARV or even the Mark IV would have been a better choice, even if it’d still most likely lose.

  4. Neon Lord July 1, 2013 at 5:42 am -      #4

    Bugger, I got some of the facts wrong. Make the twin-linked Bolters into another set of hull-mounted twin-linked Heavy Bolters, and you can give the Baneblade an additional Hunter-Killer Missile. If you take the Storm Bolter, thats 19 barrels (18 with the stubber).
    -
    Either my google-fu skills are lacking, or there isn’t much on the cyclop(s?).

  5. Kitten Lord July 1, 2013 at 7:04 am -      #5

    Baneblade at the moment, I know the mammoth and I don’t think its in the league of a baneblade. I don’t know what a Clyclops is.

  6. Namer July 1, 2013 at 8:58 am -      #6

    Baneblade as well. Because I have absolutely no idea what the Cyclops. And the Mammoth is simply outclassed and outweighted and outgunned. As said, the MARV would’ve made a better match.

  7. Necroth July 1, 2013 at 8:58 am -      #7

    Currently leaning towards the Baneblade but i don’t know enough about the others to say do decisively
    _

    Also this has gotten old but: ITS THE BAEEEHHNBLAAEEEHD!

  8. Crimson Sentry July 1, 2013 at 9:14 am -      #8

    After reading up on the Cyclops I can confirm that it could pretty much annihilate anything, it has force fields and ceramic plating, but the main attraction here is it has a anti-matter cannon which it can shoot many times in succession before needing to cool down, each shot creates a nuclear explosion and the only reason this tank isn’t blown away with those explosions is because the force fields apparently can take being near multiple nuclear explosions. The force of the explosions rocked a space station 40 miles above the ground.
    -
    Now I’m a warhammer 40k guy and all as you know, but I’m pretty sure this was a cleverly disguised spite match. The only way I could see the Baneblade winning this is if it was able to outrange the cyclops, which it cannot considering the cyclops I going to assume has advanced telemetry in addition to the fact you don’t need pinpoint accuracy to hit with a machine gun nuke cannon.

  9. Crimson Sentry July 1, 2013 at 9:15 am -      #9

    Here is a link pertaining to some quotes from “The Invincible” book on the Cyclops:
    forums.spacebattles.com/threads/the-invincible-cyclops-is-go-nuclear-firepower-in-ground-combat.176064/

  10. Neon Lord July 1, 2013 at 9:19 am -      #10

    Well, if they start 10km away, wouldn’t it annihilate itself then?
    -
    Seems like another stomp match. Baneblade stomps Mammoth, and gets stomped by cyclops for its troubles.

  11. Crimson Sentry July 1, 2013 at 9:25 am -      #11

    I dunno Neon but from what I could tell, it should be able to survive at that distance, but I dunno I seems like it survives it’s own nuclear blasts frequently either way it’s a spite :/

  12. Necroth July 1, 2013 at 9:29 am -      #12

    @Crimson Sentry@

    “After reading up on the Cyclops I can confirm that it could pretty much annihilate anything, it has force fields and ceramic plating, but the main attraction here is it has a anti-matter cannon which it can shoot many times in succession before needing to cool down, each shot creates a nuclear explosion and the only reason this tank isn’t blown away with those explosions is because the force fields apparently can take being near multiple nuclear explosions. The force of the explosions rocked a space station 40 miles above the ground.”
    _

    Wow… Just Wow…
    _

    I agree this is indeed a very cleverly designed spite match… I mean yes the baneblade is good but it is not THAT good
    _

    So stomp for Cyclops i guess?

  13. Rookie July 1, 2013 at 10:21 am -      #13

    My second match!
    Here’s the link with full info about Cyclop:
    factpiletopia.com/viewtopic.php?f=99&t=60973&p=304464&

  14. Gluttonous-Behemoth July 1, 2013 at 1:57 pm -      #14

    Holy shiiiit. That is pretty frigging awesome.
    -
    Rookie, shame on you. It’s cool cause I got to learn about the Cyclops here, but still shame on you for suggesting this.
    -
    I think I’ll need to check out this book at some point in full.

  15. ZomBat July 1, 2013 at 2:03 pm -      #15

    I don’t think the Mammoth is as stomped by the Baneblade as you all assume. However, it hardly matters with the Cyclops hee.

  16. Rookie July 1, 2013 at 2:28 pm -      #16

    @Gluttonous-Behemoth
    “Rookie, shame on you. It’s cool cause I got to learn about the Cyclops here, but still shame on you for suggesting this.”
    -
    Blame me all you want, I now know that I am guilty about this. My original idea was to put Cyclop against Necron Monolith (I even suggest it) or Bolo. But neither of them was posted. And then my brother asked me to suggest this match. And I listened to him (because he was certain Baneblade and Mammoth is strong and all). Turns out I was wrong about it. Well, it can happen with anyone.

  17. TopaztheSpaz July 1, 2013 at 2:35 pm -      #17

    ABolo might be a good match against the cyclops, I would probably go with a later model Bolo though.

  18. PrimusxPilus July 1, 2013 at 3:43 pm -      #18

    Yay for hax machine gun nuke spitter

  19. Draco July 1, 2013 at 7:56 pm -      #19

    So, who would win of the baneblade and mammoth?
    -
    -
    Weird that this got posted instead of cyclop vs monolith..

  20. Skarbrand July 1, 2013 at 7:58 pm -      #20

    “So, who would win of the baneblade and mammoth?”
    -
    Baneblade stomps fairly easily

  21. Neon Lord July 1, 2013 at 8:10 pm -      #21

    The Monolith might shoot anti-matter, but that much…
    -
    The only thing that might save it is that it can teleport.
    -
    Btw, if this matters to anyone, the Baneblade Cannon has a range of 750m and the tank’s cruising speed is 25kph. Source is Only War: Core Rulebook

  22. ZomBat July 1, 2013 at 8:33 pm -      #22

    “Baneblade stomps fairly easily”
    -
    Seems like a big assumption. We know Railguns can hurt Baneblades.

  23. Skarbrand July 1, 2013 at 8:38 pm -      #23

    “We know Railguns can hurt Baneblades.”
    -
    Tau railguns do, doesn’t mean modern railguns or railguns from other verses can too by default
    -
    That and Tau railguns don’t even totally penetrate Baneblade armor so, yeah

  24. ZomBat July 1, 2013 at 8:46 pm -      #24

    “Tau railguns do, doesn’t mean modern railguns or railguns from other verses can too by default”
    -
    While I am not too knowledgeable on the Tiberium universe. I do think that GDI railguns may very well be better than Tau railguns. The GDI has been making man portable assault rifle railguns as powerful as tanks for awhile.

  25. Slayer July 1, 2013 at 8:50 pm -      #25

    “While I am not too knowledgeable on the Tiberium universe. I do think that GDI railguns may very well be better than Tau railguns”
    -
    I’m curious to know what lead you to this conclusion
    -
    Tau railguns overpenetrate Leman Russ tanks, which can tank attacks from other tanks of the same class without damage or loss of crew

  26. ZomBat July 1, 2013 at 8:54 pm -      #26

    Of course I haven’t played a Tiberium game in over a year, so don’t quote me on that. Don’t we have a C&C guy on this site?

  27. Aelfinn July 1, 2013 at 9:08 pm -      #27

    Does anyone ever get the feeling that there are like, a thousand people on this site just watching the commentators talk to each other?
    -
    I’m not here to contribute to the match directly, it was over the moment the Cyclop could rapid-fire nukes.

  28. ZomBat July 1, 2013 at 9:11 pm -      #28

    As I said, though I never used Mammoths much in TA. I did se Zone Troopers, ALOT. Their railguns were more powerful than the 150mms on Predators. It is no true evidence of couse, but I don’t think the Tau have that much power in their railguns of comparable size.

  29. Slayer July 1, 2013 at 9:15 pm -      #29

    “Does anyone ever get the feeling that there are like, a thousand people on this site just watching the commentators talk to each other?”
    -
    Well our facebook page has a few thousand likes, yet our site has far fewer members so theres that, lol

  30. Masonicon July 1, 2013 at 9:56 pm -      #30

    when it comes to Command and Conquer, trust Spacebattles instead of OBD

  31. ZomBat July 1, 2013 at 10:07 pm -      #31

    What does that even mean?
    -
    Anyways, I don’t trust the opinions of any other sites when debating.

  32. Aelfinn July 1, 2013 at 10:20 pm -      #32

    “Anyways, I don’t trust the opinions of any other sites when debating.”
    -
    Yeah, sometimes a culture of support can grow around a franchise, and it doesn’t allow that franchise to be challenged. Like the old days of Factpile, when 40K wouldn’t lose anything ever and Kharn was faced off against Galactus seriously.

  33. Draco July 2, 2013 at 12:17 am -      #33

    I believe the mammoth’s railguns also overpenatrate other armor. I don’t remember, i’d have to replay CnC 3. Or look up a vid…
    -
    If the railguns are the same as their 150mm cannons that’s one big shell being accelerated at high speeds. And theiir armor is a hexagonal composite…
    -
    Also, it’s able to take on at least three predator tanks and still be alive by the end. With the railgun accelerator it produces enough heat to damage the tank itself, but gives it nearly three times the usual fire-rate.
    -
    If that helps at all.

  34. Obyron July 2, 2013 at 10:04 pm -      #34

    Before 5th ed. I would have said that the Cyclop vs Monolith would be fair, but since the horrendous nerf to its “Living Metal” rule, not so much. That thing used to tank Melta and Lance weaponry and laugh in faces! Now it’s 200 pts of “Why aren’t you running two Night Scythes instead of this?”

    As to the BEINBLAAAADE vs Mammoth, I gotta go with the (Normally) 11 Barrels of Hell. It has crazy range on the main cannon, can take a LOT of abuse, and if something makes the mistake of closing with it, Demolisher Cannon says “go away, now.” Never mind some of the more specialized variants, like the Doomhammer(Stupid-Long-Range Quake Cannon Tank Killer) or the Shadowsword(Titan Killer, uses a Magma Cannon)

    @Aelfinn
    People actually thought Kharn could take Galactus?! What sort of Slaaneshi drugs were they smoking?!

  35. Aelfinn July 2, 2013 at 10:44 pm -      #35

    “People actually thought Kharn could take Galactus?! What sort of Slaaneshi drugs were they smoking?!”
    -
    Kharn was probably one of the most wanked characters on this site. 40K was the best here, and Kharn was the best fighter, so you could see how things went. While the debate was eventually settled with Galactus winning, the fact that it was not only suggested seriously but that some argued for Kharn spoke volumes of the wank we could have on here.

  36. ZomBat July 2, 2013 at 10:59 pm -      #36

    Those were the Dark Ages, those of us that were fans of other IPs dreaded seeing something from them pitted against a WH40k counterpart. There was no winning.

  37. Zazax July 3, 2013 at 9:01 am -      #37

    Hopefully matches like 40k vs Stargate sealed that era away for all time. I like 40k, but I have no time for fanwank.
    -
    “As to the BEINBLAAAADE vs Mammoth, I gotta go with the (Normally) 11 Barrels of Hell.”
    Really, the MARV would be a better matchup, although the Baneblade would still probably win. The Mammoth would be roughly equivalent to a Leman Russ; it’s not a super-heavy assault vehicle like the BB.
    Or, hell, even the Mk IV. Pretty much identical to the Mk III except add an auto-repair system and armor that reflects projectiles, and improve the armor from hexagonal to octagonal composite. Would still lose, but would put up a better fight.
    -
    On another note, we need more Tiberium-verse matches.

  38. Namer July 3, 2013 at 10:41 am -      #38

    I was thinking of requesting a Scrin Vs Ceph. Definitely would be a good match.

  39. ZomBat July 3, 2013 at 6:35 pm -      #39

    “The Mammoth would be roughly equivalent to a Leman Russ; it’s not a super-heavy assault vehicle like the BB.”
    -
    Nah, the Mammoth would annihilate a Leman Russ. A Predator would be a better match, though the Predator has a significantky bigger gun. About the same size. People always don’t give C&C enough credit, it is eons more advanced than current Earth. They have man portable railguns that pack more of a punch than tank fired 150mm shells. And they have armor that can stand up to those very same 150mm railguns.
    -
    -
    “I was thinking of requesting a Scrin Vs Ceph. Definitely would be a good match.”
    -
    How would the Ceph even be more than a speedbump to the Scrin?

  40. Neon Lord July 3, 2013 at 7:16 pm -      #40

    “As to the BEINBLAAAADE vs Mammoth, I gotta go with the (Normally) 11 Barrels of Hell. It has crazy range on the main cannon, can take a LOT of abuse, and if something makes the mistake of closing with it, Demolisher Cannon says “go away, now.” Never mind some of the more specialized variants, like the Doomhammer(Stupid-Long-Range Quake Cannon Tank Killer) or the Shadowsword(Titan Killer, uses a Magma Cannon)”
    -
    The Baneblade can have up to 19 barrels as I stated early on. The Baneblade Cannon has a range of 750m according to the Only War:Core Rulebook, whilst the Demolisher has 50m if I recall correctly.
    -
    I suggested a match that involved a Zone Trooper. I wonder if it’ll get posted… It’ll be nice to see my of my suggestions make it for once.

  41. Sauroposeidon July 3, 2013 at 8:21 pm -      #41

    How does the Baneblade ever get in range to hit anything ever? Oh right, because none of their writers understand tank combat even the slightest bit..

  42. Neon Lord July 3, 2013 at 8:43 pm -      #42

    Demolisher Cannons are more used for close-range bunker busting and clearing whatever is in front of the tank.
    -
    Btw, if anyone cares, Heavy Bolters have 150m range whilst Lascannons have 300m range.

  43. Sauroposeidon July 3, 2013 at 8:50 pm -      #43

    I still don’t get why the baneblade has the reputation it does.. it’s RIDDLED with weak points, slow, has pathetic ranges, and extremely vulnerable to air support. One round down that demolisher cannon’s barrel would end the tank right then and there..

  44. Neon Lord July 3, 2013 at 9:04 pm -      #44

    The Emperor protects!
    -
    Thats probably the reasoning :3

  45. seradon July 3, 2013 at 10:38 pm -      #45

    You guys aren’t giving the Mammoth MK.3 enough credit…
    Within C&C 3 it was capable of sustaining multiple shots of Scrin plasma weapons, sustain a direct hit from the Obelisk of Light (lasers on steroids), and the armor was sturdy enough that it was incapable of being harmed by Nod hand-carried particle beams within the novelization (terrible as it was). Weapons-wise it was equipped with twin mounted 150mm cannons which could be upgraded to more powerful railguns. The railguns produced more damage than Scrin plasma weapons and Nod vehicle mounted lasers, and the only units that could safely engage from out of range were the Scrin’s strongest units or artillery. Additionally, adaptive armor created a “field” that granted it protection from EMP weapons and increased the maximum ammount of damage each unit could sustain, while railgun accelerators basically tripled the fire rate of its already deadly railguns. Now, I admit that the Mammoth has no way in hell of surviving the massed fire of the battle cannon along with the lascannon and autocannon fire, but it could easily soak the damage if it attacked from a flank (where not all of the Baneblade’s weapons can focus fire) enough to deal some crippling hits on the Imperial tank.
    Truthfully it would been a fairer fight if it had been a MK. 2, MK. 4 or the Marv, but that’s not to say the Mk. 3 can’t put the pressure on the Baneblade crew if it’s given the chance.

  46. Sauroposeidon July 3, 2013 at 11:45 pm -      #46

    Couldn’t the Mammoth just out range the Baneblade? Pop off some of those little turrets, maybe shoot at the ridiculously huge number of windows on the vehicle? If it kept its side presented at an angle, it would deflect a lot of the rounds that could actually hurt it even if it got with in range.

  47. Zazax July 3, 2013 at 11:53 pm -      #47

    “Truthfully it would been a fairer fight if it had been a MK. 2″
    I agree with the rest of your post, but I’m just not seeing this bit. The Mk. 2 is painfully slow, cumbersome, a much larger target, has one rocket launcher that’s AA-only, and shoots much slower. It also lacks the special abilities the Mk. 3 and 4 have. It’s also a tripedal mech instead of a tank, so instead of treads on the side it has three large legs that are basically massive targets.
    Its railguns may be more powerful since it can one-shot damn near anything in TS and penetrate through buildings, but it’s also so short ranged it has to enter knife-fighting range. That combined with its speed leave me dubious.

  48. seradon July 7, 2013 at 11:37 am -      #48

    @Zazax
    There’s a few things that make the MK2 a better candidate than the MK3. The first is the obviously greater firepower (4 railguns and of larger size compared to the tank’s 2) the MK2 holds, it’s armor is far superior (the legs are seen taking multiple discharges from Obeliks of Light without any damage), a self-repair unit (abandoned on the MK3′s design), and possibly the most important factor of all is the fact it scares Kane. It takes some pretty serious stuff to bring fear into the heart of an immortal madman with alien supertech.

    Also, you seem to be confusing a few things… First up, the MK2′s limited range is obviously game mechanics (railguns would be too OP if they had their actual ranges in-game). Secondly, the single rocket launcher is actually two full scaled SAM sites, as opposed to the tank’s smaller missile pods. And lastly, the MK2 is a quadrupedal walker, so it actually has 4 legs (insert joke about ripping off SW here), and as previously mentioned, are fanned sturdy.

  49. seradon July 7, 2013 at 11:38 am -      #49

    @Zazax
    There’s a few things that make the MK2 a better candidate than the MK3. The first is the obviously greater firepower (4 railguns and of larger size compared to the tank’s 2) the MK2 holds, it’s armor is far superior (the legs are seen taking multiple discharges from Obeliks of Light without any damage), a self-repair unit (abandoned on the MK3′s design), and possibly the most important factor of all is the fact it scares Kane. It takes some pretty serious stuff to bring fear into the heart of an immortal madman with alien supertech.
    Also, you seem to be confusing a few things… First up, the MK2′s limited range is obviously game mechanics (railguns would be too OP if they had their actual ranges in-game). Secondly, the single rocket launcher is actually two full scaled SAM sites, as opposed to the tank’s smaller missile pods. And lastly, the MK2 is a quadrupedal walker, so it actually has 4 legs (insert joke about ripping off SW here), and as previously mentioned, are fanned sturdy.

  50. seradon July 7, 2013 at 5:54 pm -      #50

    @Sauroposeidon
    It might be possible for the Mk3 to outrange the Baneblade, but it’s hard to gauge by how much. The Juggernaut for example is one of the few units capable of outranging the Mammoth (being artillery) but it’s not by much, and the Mk3 can easily cover the distance to destroy it without much effort. That same Juggernaut can literally shoot from one side of the map to the other just by having a sniper near the bombing spot…
    It’s hard to gauge the maximum range of units in C&C (a TS grenadier can potentially hit farther than virtually any other unit in the game), but if you consider it’s ingame range (trumped only by a few “artillery” units), it should have quite a bit of range since it almost crosses the screen (about the distance of the superweapons).

  51. ZomBertholdt Fubar July 7, 2013 at 6:08 pm -      #51

    It shouldn’t be too hard to calculate a Mammoth’s range. as long as you know the size of something on the map.

  52. seradon July 7, 2013 at 6:34 pm -      #52

    @ZomB
    I wish it were that easy, but scaling in C&C is completely wacked. It doesn’t help that scale-wise most things would either have either shit range (going off buildings and other environmental elements most things probably wouldn’t hit you past a city block) or hideously long range (based off being able to match the radius of things like fuel air bombs or tactical nuclear missiles). The only thing that can be said for sure is that the Mammoth is pretty long ranged, but how long that range is, is incredibly hard to determine…

  53. tyrannicuslictorface July 7, 2013 at 7:32 pm -      #53

    Bad match is bad. Honestly. The baneblade is on the Marv’s tier.

    The mammoth itself is most likely on par with the Macharius class of tanks.

    Can’t say for the cyclops though. But it is without a doubt the baneblade will stomp this.

    Baneblade just has too much firepower and too much armor for the mammoth to go through in any meaningful quickness.

  54. ZomBertholdt Fubar July 7, 2013 at 7:52 pm -      #54

    “Can’t say for the cyclops though. But it is without a doubt the baneblade will stomp this.”
    -
    Read the debate mate. The Cyclops stomps both.
    -
    -
    “Baneblade just has too much firepower and too much armor for the mammoth to go through in any meaningful quickness.”
    -
    It also has piss-poor speed, and bad range. Armor and firpower isn’t everything.

  55. Neon Lord July 7, 2013 at 8:25 pm -      #55

    “It shouldn’t be too hard to calculate a Mammoth’s range. as long as you know the size of something on the map.”
    -
    The scales in C&C are like in the same situation as Starcraft. Stuff like Scrin Motherships would be ginormous compared to everything.
    -
    It also has piss-poor speed, and bad range. Armor and firpower isn’t everything.
    -
    Note that whilst its main cannon is listed as having 750m range, it can fire up to double that distance with some minor detriment to its accuracy (or further with major detriment). Considering its blast, it might be able to hit the Mammoth from around 1.5km away.
    -
    But its speed is really crap. Its 25kph on road, and like 10-15 off-road.

  56. ZomBertholdt Fubar July 7, 2013 at 8:35 pm -      #56

    “Note that whilst its main cannon is listed as having 750m range, it can fire up to double that distance with some minor detriment to its accuracy (or further with major detriment). Considering its blast, it might be able to hit the Mammoth from around 1.5km away.”
    -
    Even at 1.5km, the Mammoth has railguns and should outreach that by miles. Of course, since it is fictional, I can’t truly make that claim, but going by the modern railgun prototype the mammoth should have a stupidly big range advantage.

  57. seradon July 8, 2013 at 6:01 pm -      #57

    “Even at 1.5km, the Mammoth has railguns and should outreach that by miles.”
    Railguns are pretty damn awesome. The MK3′s railguns are especially awesome since they actually deal more damage than the laser/plasma weapons of equivalent “vehicles” (damn Scrin…).
    _
    By the way, Sauro, if you read this, there’s a mecha matchup I think has potential and wanted to discuss with you.

  58. Aelfinn July 8, 2013 at 6:35 pm -      #58

    “Of course, since it is fictional, I can’t truly make that claim, but going by the modern railgun prototype the mammoth should have a stupidly big range advantage.”
    -
    I should probably bring up that the modern prototype has a range of 100 nautical miles, or 185200 meters, so yeah.

  59. seradon July 8, 2013 at 6:47 pm -      #59

    @Aelfinn
    …Thank you for reminding me that the Juggernaut is canonically the equivalent of a some naval guns that grew legs. Why is this relevant? The MK3 Juggernaut uses “rail cannons” and has easily the longest range out of any C&C unit ever (or at least, it did until Kane’s Wrath gave NOD an equivalent unit).

  60. mattsmash July 14, 2013 at 2:25 am -      #60

    Cyclops> mammoth mk 3> baneblade.
    -
    Here is why the cyclops can spam nuke level attacks and take no damage, obviously it stomps. Now it might at first appear that that the mk3 vs baneblade is tough to decide ,and I thought so to until I learned that the BB has a range of 750m and top speed of 15mph oh and apparently it has windows lol. Now in comparison a modern Abrams has a range of 3 miles and thats with reasonable accuracy and a tiger tank of the 2nd world war could pick off shermans and t-34′s from about 1 mile.
    -
    The tigers top speed is approximately 20mph if the fuel pump doesn’t break and the Abrams can arguably hit 75mph and still fire with incredible accuracy. Neither tank has windows…
    -
    Now you might say well the BB isn’t matched against the Abrams or tiger and you’d be right its not but that is not the point. The point is the BB is a terribly conceived tank and that who ever did concieve of it was either quite high or has a complete lack of knowledge pertaining to tank warfare. How does this affect the match well , because the BB is at a grievous disadvantage against a tank from a universe where tank warfare is more realistic

    -
    The baneblade has no way to close on the mk3, lacks the range of the mk3 (by a lot) and has ready made holes in its armor. The BB cannot dictate the terms of engagement and therefore cannot win. The mk3 has simply to stay out of its range and pound away at its rear, flanks and perhaps a window or two lol.
    -
    Windows on a tank that cracks me up rofl

  61. Neon Lord July 14, 2013 at 2:42 am -      #61

    In the novels, a Baneblade can fire from kilometres away.
    -
    I don’t know where the stupid window idea came from. There are no windows on a Bandblade aside from the front viewport.

  62. Slayer July 14, 2013 at 2:50 am -      #62

    mattsmash stfu and gtfo factpile you degenerate
    -
    Mammoth Mk.III is not on the level of the Baneblade and cannot harm it where it’s armored, meanwhile the Baneblades main weapons can one shot the Mammoth. Not only that but you have no stats on the Mammoth at all range included
    -
    Also, where is the windows thing coming from?

  63. Sauroposeidon July 14, 2013 at 3:04 am -      #63

    Uh.. there’s windows all the fuck over a baneblade. Are you fucking blind?

  64. Slayer July 14, 2013 at 3:08 am -      #64

    Really, ’cause I don’t see ‘em anywhere, except for the front, far from “all the fuck over” as you put it

  65. Sauroposeidon July 14, 2013 at 3:17 am -      #65

    Also, I’ve never heard of Baneblades firing from kilometers away. Although they certainly need it, since there’s almost not even a point to pushing on the pedal they’re so slow.

  66. Slayer July 14, 2013 at 3:20 am -      #66

    “Also, I’ve never heard of Baneblades firing from kilometers away.”
    -
    Baneblade (Novel) has the main cannon firing from many km away according to Lexicanum

  67. Sauroposeidon July 14, 2013 at 3:20 am -      #67

    The ENTIRE upper hull is belted in windows, and there’s a huge one on the sloped frontal armor as well. The Turret is not exempt from windows either. Although it seems the commanders like to just sit outside anyways so it doesn’t matter. Brits love to have their hatches up for some fucking reason, so it’s no surprise.

  68. Sauroposeidon July 14, 2013 at 3:35 am -      #68

    And the guy has a point. The Mammoth has a vastly superior design to the Baneblade. All it has going for it are potentially good armor materials.. but thy don’t mean anything when you can just chuck a round in to the highly exposed turret ring to jam the gun.. Or plow a high explosive straight inside of the upper hull, and literally pressure pop the turret off its ring. One round down the front hull mounted cannon would gut the entire tank, leaving it as a smoking wreck with only its armor intact. This would arguably be an easy feat for any competent gunner. The Baneblade would lose against even an old M1A1 Abrams. What’s worse, it’s too slow to defense itself against rear attack, where in many places it doesn’t even appear to have any fucking armor at all. With completely exposed parts that should be completely internal.
    -
    The Mammoth only has to land one hit on the unarmored sponsons, or the thinly armored secondary turrets, to also deliver a crew killing blow which will either cripple or “kill” the vehicle. God forbid it sets off ammo inside of the tank, or power stores for las cannon weaponry or whatever have you. The Baneblade only ever wins in its own fluff because everyone aims dead for the most heavily armored portions of it.
    -
    It has no chance against a tank who’s armor actually has a chance of deflecting shells. Unless the Mammoth too is an absolutely terrible design, it should stand a good chance.

  69. Neon Lord July 14, 2013 at 6:01 am -      #69

    images.wikia.com/warhammer40k/images/c/c8/Baneblade.jpg
    -
    “The ENTIRE upper hull is belted in windows”
    -
    Those are NOT windows, they are either vents or decoration. If you look really closely at the pic above, you can make out skulls set into them. I doubt normal people would call a skull as a window. In any case, they are friggin miniscule in the first place.
    -
    “huge one on the sloped frontal armor as well. ”
    -
    Again, the viewport above is simply a tiny slit. Unless its a tank with sniper weapons, its not gonna score a direct hit on it. Heck, I remember a source in 40k stating that the glass on a Rhino is tougher than the APC itself. The same most likely applies here as its all Imperial tech. Wouldn’t most tanks have a front viewport anyway?
    -
    “Also, I’ve never heard of Baneblades firing from kilometers away.”
    -
    Hunt for Voldorius book has a Chaos Baneblade firing from kilometres away.
    -
    “but thy don’t mean anything when you can just chuck a round in to the highly exposed turret ring to jam the gun.. ”
    -
    I can’t see any highly obvious turret ring, unless you mean chucking a shell in the gap between the turret and the tank; in which case there is virtually no space anyway! If a round hits the armour directly above or below, it’ll bounce right off.
    -
    “Or plow a high explosive straight inside of the upper hull, and literally pressure pop the turret off its ring.”
    -
    That might work if the Mammoth actually fired explosive shells, in which case it doesn’t.
    -
    “One round down the front hull mounted cannon would gut the entire tank, leaving it as a smoking wreck with only its armor intact. This would arguably be an easy feat for any competent gunner. ”
    -
    I don’t know much about military, but firing directly down that barrel doesn’t seem particularly easy unless the tank is driving head on. The Mammoth also has two barrels designed to fire in straight lines parallel to each other, making firing a round onto a specific central target hard unless the tank is aligned correctly.
    -
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:M1_Abrams_tanks_in_Iraqi_service,_Jan._2011.jpg
    -
    By your reasoning, getting a shell down the spot where the guy is sticking his head out the front hatch is relatively easy and would take out the entire tank. Therefore, the M1 Abrams is a stupid design in head on battles :3
    -
    “What’s worse, it’s too slow to defense itself against rear attack, where in many places it doesn’t even appear to have any fucking armor at all. With completely exposed parts that should be completely internal.”
    -
    Irrelevant as the Mammoth isn’t going to attack it from behind (most likely). It would be nice to see a source on how fast the Mammoth anyway, just to prove if it is even capable of flanking quickly.
    -
    “The Mammoth only has to land one hit on the unarmored sponsons, or the thinly armored secondary turrets, to also deliver a crew killing blow which will either cripple or “kill” the vehicle. God forbid it sets off ammo inside of the tank, or power stores for las cannon weaponry or whatever have you. The Baneblade only ever wins in its own fluff because everyone aims dead for the most heavily armored portions of it.”
    -
    The sponsons are as well armoured as the rest of the tank hull, and the turrets aren’t that much less armoured. Yes taking one out will kill a crew member (if you can penetrate it in the first place), but not all of them at once.
    -
    The only ammo inside that is most likely to be able to be set-off are the main cannon and demolisher cannon shells. Laser weapon energy charges don’t explode unless they are deliberately overcharged, and Heavy Bolter shells are too small to do anything to the tank. In any case, you have to penetrate the tank in the first place anyway.
    -
    “The Baneblade only ever wins in its own fluff because everyone aims dead for the most heavily armored portions of it.”
    -
    Which would be most of its hull anyway, and its pretty hard to hit anything else.
    -
    The Mammoth doesn’t seem to have a very good design either. It also has windows on the front (which most tanks would have one of anyway), and you’ll only need to mangle one of the four track pods to immobilise the whole tank.

  70. Sauroposeidon July 14, 2013 at 2:27 pm -      #70

    “Those are NOT windows, they are either vents or decoration. If you look really closely at the pic above, you can make out skulls set into them. I doubt normal people would call a skull as a window. In any case, they are friggin miniscule in the first place.”
    -
    The most accurate name for them would be viewing ports, not windows. They are not miniscule and they are numerous. I have never seen them filled with skulls, although that would not change my opinion. It would just leave them as huge weak spots to shoot at which also suck at doing their job.
    -
    The Baneblades have these to evoke a much older tank design feel, to harken back to the period of tank design between wars. The oldest of tanks.. and it does a good job at grabbing this aesthetic. The problem is that while these old tank designs are charismatic… they also suck. The Baneblade suffers from this too.
    -
    “Again, the viewport above is simply a tiny slit. Unless its a tank with sniper weapons, its not gonna score a direct hit on it. Heck, I remember a source in 40k stating that the glass on a Rhino is tougher than the APC itself. The same most likely applies here as its all Imperial tech. Wouldn’t most tanks have a front viewport anyway?”
    -
    Yes, most tanks have a front view port. It’s a major weak point on ALL tank designs. The Hull is usually weaker armored than the turret, but the front is still often formidable and heavily slanted. The Baneblade’s sloping isn’t as severe, and there’s almost more weak point surface area than armor, to be honest.. but he viewing port for the driver would be one of them.
    -
    As for rhino glass being stronger than the armor, you’d have to source it.. and probably more than once since that’s so fucking dumb I honestly believe you’re mistaken. Why would they write that? Who would not just armor the whole tank in their super glass then?
    -
    “Hunt for Voldorius book has a Chaos Baneblade firing from kilometres away.”
    -
    You need a quote of an actual baneblade. I want to believe they can, because Main Battle Tanks of today can fire a maximum of 5 kilometers, and tanks from the USA are expected to reliably hit a target a kilometer away. Our Paladins can be expected to hit much further away and can land several shells on the target at the same time. So a sci-fi should be as good or better because it’s in the future, I always figure… but the IoM’s designs are often so backwards and incompetent that I now doubt the Baneblade is as efficient as our own real world vehicles.
    -
    “I can’t see any highly obvious turret ring, unless you mean chucking a shell in the gap between the turret and the tank; in which case there is virtually no space anyway! If a round hits the armour directly above or below, it’ll bounce right off.”
    -
    www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2110032a_99120105023_Baneblade360_445x319.jpg
    -
    The Turret Ring is HIGHLY exposed.
    -
    The turret armor is barely slanted at all, and the upper hull armor is only somewhat slanted. There’s almost no chance of bouncing a shell. Considering how vulnerably the turret ring is and all those windows on the upper hull? It’d be a safe bet to aim heavily in that region… unless you want to kill the commander. Then just shoot the commander’s cupola off. That thing is just begging to get shot off. WHY DOES IT EVEN HAVE ONE OF THOSE?!?! Oh right, because it’s designed for looks, not practicality.
    -
    “That might work if the Mammoth actually fired explosive shells, in which case it doesn’t.”
    -
    Fair enough. I don’t play C&C.
    -
    ” don’t know much about military, but firing directly down that barrel doesn’t seem particularly easy unless the tank is driving head on. The Mammoth also has two barrels designed to fire in straight lines parallel to each other, making firing a round onto a specific central target hard unless the tank is aligned correctly.”
    -
    Even an indirect round would permanently put out the gun. The reason why we don’t normally fire down the barrel of a tank is because the barrels are not very large. The Devastator Cannon has a huge gaping barrel with like a 2 meter wide hole. It shouldn’t be that hard for a trained gunner to get a shell down that.
    -
    “Irrelevant as the Mammoth isn’t going to attack it from behind (most likely). It would be nice to see a source on how fast the Mammoth anyway, just to prove if it is even capable of flanking quickly.”
    -
    Stop being retarded. Of course the Mammoth is going to try to attack it from behind. We have every reason to believe that if the Mammoth can, it will get around behind the Baneblade and then blast it out from the ass inwards. That’s just common sense and good tank combat tactics.
    -
    “The sponsons are as well armoured as the rest of the tank hull, and the turrets aren’t that much less armoured. Yes taking one out will kill a crew member (if you can penetrate it in the first place), but not all of them at onc”
    -
    No they’re not. Don’t lie. We can see that the sponsons’ guns are obvious weak points. Why? Because guns aren’t armored. One hit from the front (or side) and they’re obliterated. It won’t kill all the crew, but most of the crew in the hull will get shredded. If the bolter rounds cook, then probably all of the crew in the hull will die. And all of their gear inside of there will get destroyed too. There’s every chance that they’ll set off the Devastator cannon’s ammo too. Then the tank is super fucked, and that turret is going to literally get pressure popped off. The crew in there is definitely dead too from that. THAT’s why sponson mounted bolters is a bad idea. They aren’t JUST machine guns, they’re high explosive grenade launchers, pretty much.
    -
    “Which would be most of its hull anyway, and its pretty hard to hit anything else.”
    -
    No. It’s not hard. It’s really not. The thing is moving at the speed of smell, and again, HAS A LOT OF WEAK POINTS. You just out right state the turrets have equal armor, when we can clearly see how thick the hull armor is, and how thick their armor is at points. They do not share the same heavy armor plating. This is how it is a lot. Secondary areas don’t receive the same protection.
    -
    Pop one track, and the Baneblade is pretty much dead already.
    -
    Pop the turret ring or commander’s cupola afterwards, put the turret in to disarray.
    -
    Unless the Mammoth is also insanely slow, it’s easily going to just start picking apart the Baneblade, which is too slow and limited in range to do anything to fight back. Even assuming it can’t punch through ANY of the baneblade’s armor, it just has to roll behind it and then it’s over. Those fuel tanks are a super high way to victory.

  71. Neon Lord July 14, 2013 at 9:33 pm -      #71

    “The most accurate name for them would be viewing ports, not windows. They are not miniscule and they are numerous. I have never seen them filled with skulls, although that would not change my opinion. It would just leave them as huge weak spots to shoot at which also suck at doing their job.”
    -
    So if someone sticks a party cone on a tank hull, it suddenly becomes a massive weak spot? They don’t lead into the interior, and you were the one who started saying windows in the first place.
    -
    “As for rhino glass being stronger than the armor, you’d have to source it.. and probably more than once since that’s so fucking dumb I honestly believe you’re mistaken. Why would they write that? Who would not just armor the whole tank in their super glass then?”
    -
    It probably originated in some old White Dwarf from years ago, but it was when a Marine crew member commented on how a cultist spraying his pistol into the glass would do nothing as the glass was tougher than the hull.
    -
    Its probably not used everywhere as glass is brittle by nature, and it was being used on a small surface. It’ll be harder to shatter a small rectangular block of glass set into armour than an entire face of it.
    -
    “You need a quote of an actual baneblade. I want to believe they can, because Main Battle Tanks of today can fire a maximum of 5 kilometers, and tanks from the USA are expected to reliably hit a target a kilometer away. Our Paladins can be expected to hit much further away and can land several shells on the target at the same time. So a sci-fi should be as good or better because it’s in the future, I always figure… but the IoM’s designs are often so backwards and incompetent that I now doubt the Baneblade is as efficient as our own real world vehicles.”
    -
    As Deus pointed out, Lexicanum lists the ‘Baneblade’ novel as having a Baneblade firing from kilometres away. I can’t pull out a quote from the Voldorius book right now as I’m moving and the book is in a box somewhere…but I should be able to get it in a few days.
    -
    The turret armor is barely slanted at all, and the upper hull armor is only somewhat slanted. There’s almost no chance of bouncing a shell. Considering how vulnerably the turret ring is and all those windows on the upper hull? It’d be a safe bet to aim heavily in that region… unless you want to kill the commander. Then just shoot the commander’s cupola off. That thing is just begging to get shot off. WHY DOES IT EVEN HAVE ONE OF THOSE?!?! Oh right, because it’s designed for looks, not practicality.
    -
    Fair enough about the slanting. However, there are no open ports on the upper hull, and most tanks have a commander cupola anyway.
    -
    “Even an indirect round would permanently put out the gun. The reason why we don’t normally fire down the barrel of a tank is because the barrels are not very large. The Devastator Cannon has a huge gaping barrel with like a 2 meter wide hole. It shouldn’t be that hard for a trained gunner to get a shell down that.”
    -
    warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/File:Baneblade0000.jpg
    -
    It only looks large head on. Comparing it with the techpriests standing in front, I would say its about 1m wide max. Most likely a bit less (assuming a techpriest is normal human sized)
    -
    “Stop being retarded. Of course the Mammoth is going to try to attack it from behind. We have every reason to believe that if the Mammoth can, it will get around behind the Baneblade and then blast it out from the ass inwards. That’s just common sense and good tank combat tactics.”
    -
    Whilst it may be common sense, is the Mammoth able to? In-game, a Mammoth moves slower than infantry jogging, and is far more likely to get flanked itself than it flanking its target.
    -
    “No they’re not. Don’t lie. We can see that the sponsons’ guns are obvious weak points. Why? Because guns aren’t armored. One hit from the front (or side) and they’re obliterated. It won’t kill all the crew, but most of the crew in the hull will get shredded. If the bolter rounds cook, then probably all of the crew in the hull will die. And all of their gear inside of there will get destroyed too. There’s every chance that they’ll set off the Devastator cannon’s ammo too. Then the tank is super fucked, and that turret is going to literally get pressure popped off. The crew in there is definitely dead too from that. THAT’s why sponson mounted bolters is a bad idea. They aren’t JUST machine guns, they’re high explosive grenade launchers, pretty much.”
    -
    You said the sponsons themselves aren’t heavily armoured, in which case they certainly appear to have the same armour as the rest of the tank hull. However, of course the guns themselves are going to be vulnerable if you actually manage to hit them. However, I’m not sure if Bolter rounds cook and explode. Space marines regularly die to high explosives/heat energy weapons, and I can’t recall a single case of their Boltgun exploding.
    -
    “You just out right state the turrets have equal armor, when we can clearly see how thick the hull armor is, and how thick their armor is at points. They do not share the same heavy armor plating. This is how it is a lot. Secondary areas don’t receive the same protection.”
    -
    warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/File:Mars_Baneblade_of_the_Krieg_1st_Heavy_Tank_Company_Emperors_Loyal_Shield.
    -
    Looks to be much the same all over. I’m not sure how you are able to suddenly see exactly how thick armour is everywhere without seeing the interior.
    -
    “Unless the Mammoth is also insanely slow, it’s easily going to just start picking apart the Baneblade, which is too slow and limited in range to do anything to fight back. Even assuming it can’t punch through ANY of the baneblade’s armor, it just has to roll behind it and then it’s over. Those fuel tanks are a super high way to victory.”
    -
    “Pop one track, and the Baneblade is pretty much dead already.”
    -
    It may be immobilised, but it’ll be far from dead.
    -
    Those fuel tanks are spares, and Promethium tends to burn like napalm rather than explode. Burning isn’t going to get through the tank hull.
    -
    Can you provide something to support a Mammoth’s speed? You can complain about the Baneblade’s design as much as you want. That is fine by me. I don’t particularly like it either.But you are going to need to provide feats for the Mammoth for your complaints to actually matter.

  72. Sauroposeidon July 14, 2013 at 10:24 pm -      #72

    “So if someone sticks a party cone on a tank hull, it suddenly becomes a massive weak spot? They don’t lead into the interior, and you were the one who started saying windows in the first place.”
    -
    They pretty clearly are viewing vents. Until you can come up with another explanation besides “decoration”. Even if they aren’t big gaping holes they’re still shell traps asking to get the turret fucked up.
    -
    “Its probably not used everywhere as glass is brittle by nature, and it was being used on a small surface. It’ll be harder to shatter a small rectangular block of glass set into armour than an entire face of it.”
    -
    Then armor it in little bricks of glass. I’m still dubious as to the nature of this glass.
    -
    “As Deus pointed out, Lexicanum lists the ‘Baneblade’ novel as having a Baneblade firing from kilometres away. I can’t pull out a quote from the Voldorius book right now as I’m moving and the book is in a box somewhere…but I should be able to get it in a few days.”
    -
    Gonna need a quote of that battle cannon doing it, I’m afraid. We already know the devastator can pull it off.. even if very inaccurately…
    -
    “Whilst it may be common sense, is the Mammoth able to? In-game, a Mammoth moves slower than infantry jogging, and is far more likely to get flanked itself than it flanking its target.”
    -
    I don’t pay C&C, I have no idea how canon in game stats are. Otherwise I’d of already just looked up youtube videos on the damn thing. You think I’m an idiot? You think it didn’t occur to me to just go look up videos? It took all of half a second to realize that nothing I find would be of any use due to my lack of knowledge on what’s acceptable for it and what isn’t. I’d be just as well off presenting fanon.
    -
    “You said the sponsons themselves aren’t heavily armoured, in which case they certainly appear to have the same armour as the rest of the tank hull. However, of course the guns themselves are going to be vulnerable if you actually manage to hit them. However, I’m not sure if Bolter rounds cook and explode. Space marines regularly die to high explosives/heat energy weapons, and I can’t recall a single case of their Boltgun exploding.”
    -
    There being no instances of their rocket grenade bullets cooking is not proof that they won’t. Unless given proof of C4-like stability, we have no reason to believe that they’re any different from typical explosives.
    -
    “Looks to be much the same all over. I’m not sure how you are able to suddenly see exactly how thick armour is everywhere without seeing the interior.”
    -
    Your link does not work.
    -
    “Can you provide something to support a Mammoth’s speed? You can complain about the Baneblade’s design as much as you want. That is fine by me. I don’t particularly like it either.But you are going to need to provide feats for the Mammoth for your complaints to actually matter.”
    -
    That’s Matt’s job I presume. I’m just supporting his view that the Baneblade is rife with poor design choices.

  73. Neon Lord July 14, 2013 at 11:56 pm -      #73

    “They pretty clearly are viewing vents. Until you can come up with another explanation besides “decoration”. Even if they aren’t big gaping holes they’re still shell traps asking to get the turret fucked up.”
    -
    I fail to see how they are viewing vents in any way. Novel stories only show there are two ways of seeing out of a Baneblade, the front viewport and the hatches on top. You can’t see out of things around the turret.
    -
    In any case, the only way you’re gonna hit one of those is with luck or a sniper. You probably won’t even notice them from a kilometre away anyway, let alone specifically aim at them.
    -
    “Then armor it in little bricks of glass. I’m still dubious as to the nature of this glass.”
    -
    Yes, and tank armour held together by glue is very strong indeed…
    -
    “Gonna need a quote of that battle cannon doing it, I’m afraid. We already know the devastator can pull it off.. even if very inaccurately…”
    -
    First, what the hell is a Devastator? Unless you are referring to the hull Demolisher Cannon, which can’t hit anything at long range and is a non-factor here. I’ll be able to pull up sources for the actual Baneblade cannon later.
    -
    “There being no instances of their rocket grenade bullets cooking is not proof that they won’t. ”
    -
    When the instances are of situations where they should’ve gone off but didn’t, then it is proof they don’t.
    -
    images.wikia.com/warhammer40k/images/f/f0/Bandbladefront1.JPG
    -
    The above pic shows just how small the ‘vents’ are, and how the armour looks pretty much the same all round. You certainly can’t tell if the turret has less armour than the tank hull itself.

  74. mattsmash July 15, 2013 at 2:02 am -      #74

    Well I’ve never owned TS so I don’t have a game manual but according to the cnc wiki the mammoth mk3 has a speed rating of 3 and the juggernaut mk3 has speed rating of 5. The wiki wasn’t specific enough to list the top speed of the mammoth but it did list the top speed of the juggernaut which is 35 mph. Assuming a linear speed scale then the mammoths top speed should be 21mph , which while not faster by much it is still faster than the bane blade.
    -
    Here are the links
    cnc.wikia.com/wiki/Mammoth_Mk._III
    cnc.wikia.com/wiki/Juggernaut_Mk._III

  75. Slayer July 15, 2013 at 2:14 am -      #75

    “Well I’ve never owned TS so I don’t have a game manual but according to the cnc wiki the mammoth mk3 has a speed rating of 3 and the juggernaut mk3 has speed rating of 5. ”
    -
    Game mechanics which are worthless w/o specs
    -
    “Here are the links”
    -
    And here was me thinking that wikis aren’t evidence here, huh

  76. Sauroposeidon July 15, 2013 at 2:29 am -      #76

    “Unless you are referring to the hull Demolisher Cannon, which can’t hit anything at long range and is a non-factor here. I’ll be able to pull up sources for the actual Baneblade cannon later.”
    -
    Fun fact. I routinely mix up Devastator and Demolisher when it comes to Transformers too. The problem concerning this tank’s gun name probably stems from this.
    -
    “I fail to see how they are viewing vents in any way.”
    -
    You mean besides the fact that they look just like windows?
    -
    “Novel stories only show there are two ways of seeing out of a Baneblade, the front viewport and the hatches on top. You can’t see out of things around the turret.”
    -
    I don’t care at all what the novels say. The thing has windows. The commander’s cupola is ringed in them too! Saying no one can see out of that thing with out opening it is ridiculous.. although I expect that they regularly open it anyways, being brits. If you could find a quote which explicitly states what you’re proposal then you’d have a little to back up what you’re saying.. but only being able to find quotes of the doing one of two things from some poorly written books done by guys who know jack all about tank combat, involving tanks designed by guys who know jack all about tank combat, isn’t going to get you far.
    -
    “In any case, the only way you’re gonna hit one of those is with luck or a sniper.”
    -
    Modern main battle tanks can reliably hit what they want to hit from up to a kilometer away. I think you’re underestimating the accuracy of tank gunners. On top of that their mere presence causes the general area to be structurally weaker. Even hitting the armor immediately around the window will do the trick. It may not pass through on the first round, but it will weaken and warp the area enough that the next shell should.
    -
    “When the instances are of situations where they should’ve gone off but didn’t, then it is proof they don’t.’
    -
    Fair enough. Present a quote of them in an instance where they should. For comparison, please present records of similar circumstances where similar explosives (such as, perhaps, 40mm grenades) did cook. That should be enough to put the matter to rest.
    -
    “The above pic shows just how small the ‘vents’ are, and how the armour looks pretty much the same all round. You certainly can’t tell if the turret has less armour than the tank hull itself.”
    -
    Secondary Turrets. Not main turret. The main turret is probably more heavily armored than the hull if it follows traditional tank armoring doctrine. At least on the front. The sides of the Baneblade’s hull and the rear of the hull are probably the weakest points.. with the sides and rear of the turret being considerably better armored than their hull counterparts. The secondary turrets, however, clearly have much thinner armor.
    -
    The picture, by the way, shows off very well how vulnerable the turret ring is.

  77. Sauroposeidon July 15, 2013 at 2:31 am -      #77

    wiki’s are evidence as long as sourced, Slayer.
    -
    For instance. Wookieepedia sources nicely the First Battle of Coruscant.. but does not properly source that Alderaan had a planetary shield.

  78. Neon Lord July 15, 2013 at 3:33 am -      #78

    “Well I’ve never owned TS so I don’t have a game manual but according to the cnc wiki the mammoth mk3 has a speed rating of 3 and the juggernaut mk3 has speed rating of 5. The wiki wasn’t specific enough to list the top speed of the mammoth but it did list the top speed of the juggernaut which is 35 mph. Assuming a linear speed scale then the mammoths top speed should be 21mph , which while not faster by much it is still faster than the bane blade.”
    -
    Well, the Juggernaught is a walker, so the Mammoth would probably be even slower than that in a desert. The difference in speed between the Baneblade and Mammoth wouldn’t be enough to make much of a difference.
    -
    “You mean besides the fact that they look just like windows?”
    -
    What they look like depends entirely on the viewing person’s perspective. I can just as easily say those are headlights, as they have the same grilles as the headlights on the front of the Baneblade I posted a pic of.
    -
    I have a quote for the Baneblade cannon “The barrel of the first was 10 metres long, capable of hurling rocket-propelled shells over kilometres.”
    -
    Sample of the Baneblade novel on the iPad.
    -
    “Modern main battle tanks can reliably hit what they want to hit from up to a kilometer away. I think you’re underestimating the accuracy of tank gunners. ”
    -
    If they can reliably score a direct hit on 3 fat coke cans stacked on each other from a kilometre away, then I will have underestimated them. However, I do not believe they are able to hit a target that small from that range.
    -
    “Fair enough. Present a quote of them in an instance where they should. For comparison, please present records of similar circumstances where similar explosives (such as, perhaps, 40mm grenades) did cook. That should be enough to put the matter to rest.”
    -
    In what situation does a grenade cook off and detonate? I can provide the 40k situation, but I don’t know the specifics of how a 40mm grenade will cook off. Assuming all it takes is a lot of heat and general explosives (based off your claim that a shell detonating will set it off), than you can simply look at every Space Marine novel where marines die to bolters (so most Black library books). Chances are, at least some of the marines that die to bolter rounds will have their bolters hit in the process by the bolts detonation. Since there are no instances of an secondary exposion happening afterwards to the weapon and/or body, I can assume you can’t cook Bolter rounds.
    -
    Btw, you do realise that if you don’t like the sponsons that much, you can choose to upgrade a Baneblade with additional armour in the place of the sponson? Does that solve at least one flaw for you? (although at the same time it takes away three barrels of weaponry. You can also choose to add an extra sponson on each side if you want more guns at the cost of more weak points).
    -
    “I don’t care at all what the novels say. The thing has windows. The commander’s cupola is ringed in them too! Saying no one can see out of that thing with out opening it is ridiculous.. although I expect that they regularly open it anyways, being brits. If you could find a quote which explicitly states what you’re proposal then you’d have a little to back up what you’re saying.. but only being able to find quotes of the doing one of two things from some poorly written books done by guys who know jack all about tank combat, involving tanks designed by guys who know jack all about tank combat, isn’t going to get you far.”
    -
    You’ll have to find someone who owns the Baneblade novel, but I won’t contest your statements for now. All I can say is that I am pretty sure that the things around the hull below the turret are not windows. You also lack the proof to prove it otherwise, so we’ll just leave the issue.

  79. seradon July 15, 2013 at 11:44 am -      #79

    @mattsmash
    _
    The listed speed is for the Juggernaut MK.1, which is unfortunately too different in design to the current MK.3 model. However www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFoa5lEORE8 is probably the closest thing to a canon speed for the Mammoth.

  80. mattsmash July 15, 2013 at 1:49 pm -      #80

    @seradon
    -
    The juggernaut mk1 has a speed rating of 5, the same as the juggernaut mk3. I don’t think a cinematic trailer is of much use. I know there are infantry running beside the mammoth , but this doesn’t prove anything. One we don’t know that the mammoths are at full throttle and two the soldiers appear to be wearing some sort of armor suit which could be enhancing there physical abilities, such as the speed at which they can run.
    -
    cnc.wikia.com/wiki/Juggernaut_Mk._I

  81. seradon July 15, 2013 at 9:04 pm -      #81

    @mattsmash
    _
    Unfortunately game mechanics aren’t a good indicator of the 2 units speeds (especially since TS and TW were made by two distinct companies and it shows). Additionally, like I mentioned earlier, the MK1 and MK3 have too many design differences (such as armor materials, different armaments, and the fact the MK3 lacks the MK1′s 3rd “leg” used to stabilize the walker when firing) to consider them to have the exact same speeds. As for the infantry running next to the Mammoth, they are GDI Zone Troopers; Power Armor equipped heavy infantry (and just as you believed, the power armor enhances their physical abilities) equipped with railguns (which would break a regular persons arms), and jump jets.

    By the way, with games that have a heavy load of game mechanics involved (such as C&C), it is often best to rely on “canon” cinematics or whatever content (“fluff”) the game creators write about the units, instead of any showcased in-game content; especially since C&C – and RTS games in regular – suffer from horrible scaling issues.

  82. Sauroposeidon July 20, 2013 at 6:32 pm -      #82

    “What they look like depends entirely on the viewing person’s perspective. I can just as easily say those are headlights, as they have the same grilles as the headlights on the front of the Baneblade I posted a pic of.”
    -
    What they look like depends on if you’re using common sense and looking at the tank and identifying obvious features which real world tanks share with it… or if you’re using the most biased and fucking retarded view possible to claim that they aren’t what they clearly are. I don’t need proof to show that these things which look exactly like windows in every single baneblade design that I’ve ever seen, to prove that they are windows. You need an actual quote to positively identify the as something else when they look just like viewing slats which exist on older tank designs.
    -
    “Sample of the Baneblade novel on the iPad.”
    -
    Ability to hurl a shell that far does no indicate an ability to accurately hit a target at that distance. Max range for a modern tank to be able to hit something is nearly 5 kilometers. They can not regularly hit something at that distance.
    -
    “If they can reliably score a direct hit on 3 fat coke cans stacked on each other from a kilometre away, then I will have underestimated them. However, I do not believe they are able to hit a target that small from that range.”
    -
    You’re vastly underestimating the size of the weak points…
    -
    “In what situation does a grenade cook off and detonate? I can provide the 40k situation, but I don’t know the specifics of how a 40mm grenade will cook off. Assuming all it takes is a lot of heat and general explosives (based off your claim that a shell detonating will set it off), than you can simply look at every Space Marine novel where marines die to bolters (so most Black library books). Chances are, at least some of the marines that die to bolter rounds will have their bolters hit in the process by the bolts detonation. Since there are no instances of an secondary exposion happening afterwards to the weapon and/or body, I can assume you can’t cook Bolter rounds.”
    -
    The problem is that the explosion doesn’t just poof in and out of existence. The entire inside of a tank turns in to a lake of fire after a penetrating blow from the right kind of shell.
    -
    However, a good example would be just finding a bolter mag being destroyed by an explosion and the ammo be said to not explode as well because of it.
    -
    “Btw, you do realise that if you don’t like the sponsons that much, you can choose to upgrade a Baneblade with additional armour in the place of the sponson? Does that solve at least one flaw for you? (although at the same time it takes away three barrels of weaponry. You can also choose to add an extra sponson on each side if you want more guns at the cost of more weak points).”
    -
    The fact that it has all of these smaller guns is generally a bad idea to begin with for something so incredibly slow, and big, and full of weak points. It doesn’t help that you can close up the sponsons instead of having guns. It’s a bad design, and worse yet, the Imperium actually fields these things with those big vulnerable sponson weapons still there.

  83. felixjeager August 26, 2013 at 11:40 am -      #83

    “Ability to hurl a shell that far does no indicate an ability to accurately hit a target at that distance.”

    that cannon is an aoe weapon,not a simple AP shell…it’s main function is to kill buildings and infantry anyway so its not like it would be much of a problem in this match.

    “The fact that it has all of these smaller guns is generally a bad idea to begin with for something so incredibly slow, and big, and full of weak points”

    the imperium fields it because it works. if it didnt it wouldnt be fielded. its like saying the nazi’s shouldnt have fielded the tiger tank because it was slow and had weakpoints. (dispite the fact it could kill a tank at up to a mile and at the time and that was unheard of) the imperium can’t come up with new tanks IT MUST USE WHAT IT HAS OR DIE!

  84. seradon August 28, 2013 at 11:44 am -      #84

    @felixjeager
    _
    The nature of the shell as a HE weapon is actually gonna make the Baneblade’s chances of defeating the Mammoth worse. While it’s hard to gauge the power differences between C&C weapons and the Imperium’s, it is a fact that the Mammoth is a beast of a weapons platform built to take the best of the enemy’s weapons (including such exotic systems such as lasers, plasma, sonic technology, and even particle beams) and overwhelm them through sheer durability.

    That, however, completely changes once the Mammoth gains it’s railguns, as it’s firepower skyrockets to the point the formidable armor becomes a secondary boon to ensure that the doomsday unleashed upon the enemy is carried out in all of it’s hellish glory. As if that wasn’t bad enough, the speed of the shell combined with the Mammoth Tank’s targeting systems ensure that it can land a direct hit against infantry even at it’s maximum range. This is very bad news for the Baneblade, as it means the Mammoth can effectively target it from long range whilst ensuring direct hits on the more vulnerable parts of the armor (namely the bolter turrets and possibly the lascannons as well as they can cause catastrophic chain reactions), whilst the Baneblade will most likely be unable to score a direct hit, and damage from the AoE will likely not disable any of the Mammoth’s systems.

  85. felixjeager August 28, 2013 at 12:35 pm -      #85

    the baneblade doesnt need accuracy, if it can fire all of its guns at the same time, it cant miss; aside from that you can assume that the turrets on the tank are quite armored, if they werent why wouldnt the enemys of man take more advantage of that? anywho i think this disscussion is pointless if the cyclops beats the shit out of our two tanks why not have the baneblade and mammoth VS the cyclops, seems more interesting to me.

  86. seradon October 19, 2013 at 4:44 pm -      #86

    @felixjaeger
    _
    Not sure why I’m commenting on this… Figured I should respond I guess.

    Anyways:
    _
    “the baneblade doesnt need accuracy, if it can fire all of its guns at the same time, it cant miss”
    Rangewise, most of the Baneblade’s weapons are inferior to those of a modern day tank. At 1 mile the only thing that should be able to hit is the Baneblade Cannon. Meanwhile, the Mammoth has railguns of unspecified range except for “reaches to almost the other side of the screen” which could put it at anywhere between hundreds of meters (for VERY lowballing estimations) to several kilometers (based on the blast radius of the superweapons). If you apply real world logic into it (arguably possible in this case since Tiberium-verse is normally more of a hard scifi setting than 40k… or RA) then railguns should be more than capable of sniping the Baneblade from far beyond it’s maximum range.
    _
    “why not have the baneblade and mammoth VS the cyclops, seems more interesting to me”
    There really wouldn’t be much of a difference… To the Cyclops the MK3 and the Baneblade might as well be using pea shooters considering the type of firepower it holds. Might have been a fair fight had it been a MARV/MKII/MKIV Mammoth and a Titan killer variant for the Baneblade, although it would have still depended on who shot first.
    _

Leave A Response

You must be logged in to post a comment.


3b3390d9415db7f45e4b79ac7e8a57f590198af474230e495a