Do Imperium ships have defenses against plain old nuclear warheads?
>>47610237
The fact that plain old nuclear warheads suck in space
>>47610237
>void shields
>point defense
>armor
Yes, Rogue Trader had rules for nuclear armed torpedoes. I would have to look them up but they are just a different flavor compared to Plasma or Melta.
>>47610237
OH GEEZE
IT'S NOT LIKE THERE IS AN ENTIRE SPECIES OF ALIENS THAT LIVES, BREATHES AND SHITS UNSHIELDED NUCLEAR EVERYTHING.
>>47610891
Now, let's be fair, those guys are like the boogeymen of the Ghoul Stars, and most people don't even believe they exist in the first placeRak'Gol Codex when
>>47610932
Aren't Rak'gul kinda everywhere?
Also, I thought the Ghoul Stars was Slaughth territory.
>>47610952
It may be the Koronus Expanse, it's been some time since I re-read my Rouge Trader books.
Either way, they're a largely localized Xenos race, but plausible sightings have been expanding throughout the Koronus Expanse and Calixis Sectors.
>>47610999
Regardless, the Rak'Gol's entire theme radiates around Savagery, Crude-Techno-Cybernetic augmentation where they just jam bits and bobs into themselves, and making everything they can work on unstable, unshielded, nuclear reactors.
Hell, their "Power-Weapon" equivalent is powered by a micro-nuclear reactor, their ships have zero shielding and are irradiated ten different ways to sunday.
>>47611084
Don't forget the beam weapon that fires a stream of radiation that eats through armor and disintegrates flesh.
>>47611168
So a highly focused radioactive microwave?
What a redundant statement.
>>47610952
>Slaughth
How is it pronounced?
>>47612285
Slau-th.
Either that or:
Slu-gth.
Nuclear weapons don't really work in space. Explosive in general don't work in space.
>>47612842
They work fine, they just don't get the pressure wave found in atmospheres.
Nukes still put out enough raw heat and other radiation to work as a weapon.
>>47610891
>>47610932
Aren't they originally a FFG creation?
Doubtful they'd get a GW treatment.
>>47612842
That's false. Chemical explosives work fine, with the exception that they produce no blast overpressure. They're still entirely usable for producing fragments in the manner of blast-fragmentation and annular blast-fragmentation warheads.
Nuclear warheads emit just as much x-ray radiation in space as they would in an atmosphere, however because there's no atmosphere for the x-rays to interact with there's no huge fireball and massive pressure wave. As a result the damage produced comes from radiation interacting with the hull of the target directly.
The end result is that a nuclear weapon in space needs to detonate closer to the target in order to cause damage than it would in an atmosphere, but "closer" is still measured in hundreds of meters and a direct hit is going to utterly obliterate most kinds of spacecraft you'd actually plausibly build.
The answer to the OP question is that imperial ships are huge, have armor and take multi-megaton torpedo hits as a matter of course.
>>47615231
Isn't the concussive blast what you're mostly looking for with explosives?
Either way, I suppose I'm a bit wrong, sorry.
>>47615537
It depends on the specific warhead. Obviously in a thermobaric warhead or a torpedo warhead the blast is the primary means by which it inflicts damage and other effects are mostly incidental. But in shaped charges and fragmentation warheads it's the other effects that inflict damage and the blast is incidental.
>>47615683
Continuous Rod warheads are a good example other than shaped charges.
>>47610432
You can fire nukes from regular broadsides too.
Common quality nukes are 1d5+4 hits with 1d10+6 damage each one, armor and shields can be used, count as a salvo.
>>47615777
Also, what I do not like is that you can only fit one in a torpedo or shoot one in a broadside. I would rule that you can turn torpedoes into "ICBMs" against planetary targets at least fitting several warheads in each torpedo.
>>47615537
It's just a form of energy transfer, so it depends what form of energy would do the worst, and the energy is still out there.
Given that a space ship like those in 40k has to have some sort of inertial compensator, dealing with a broad kinetic energy transfer that blast overpressure represents, might not be that damaging. Or it could overtax those same capacitors and everybody inside goes squish.
The overpressure could of course also exert enough force to collapse the bulkheads, but that's energy transfer to the bulkheads, the x-rays are also transferring the energy directly to the hull plating, likely in the form of heat, could cause those plates to melt, weaken, expand suddenly and crack, etc. Thus exposing the ship to space. Or the energy could transfer deeper into the ship, so now you've got massive amounts of heat and radiation inside of the ship. I'm not entirely sure what rapid amounts of x-ray energy transfer does to made up sci-fi material.
weapons like >>47615683 >>47615751
are still energy transfer, just focused points designed so can overcome the energy holding the armor together, ie punch a hole, and keep passing through.
>>47615821
The acronym you are looking for is a modified MRV or MEV (Multiple Entry Vehicle as it is spaceborne by default). ICBM is an InterContinental Ballistic Missile which can have any type of warhead.
I also believe that mechanically it is easily taken into account with the damage as against a hardened target like a starship would need a single high-yield warhead (say 35 MT) to punch through armor as a typical MRV-like warhead would only be about 800kt apiece. Think large bore rifle versus a 12 guage shotshell against a steel plate.
Against surface targets it effectively comes out the same damage wise as the entire point of MRV was to make interception more difficult and cause damage through saturation.
>>47616080
>35MT
You really think they're that armoured? 35MT seems extremely excessive.
>>47610237
Void Shields, and defense Turrets.
Let's just point out you can ignore all of this armor and shielding if we teleport the nuke into their hold.
>>47616132
Imperial ships regularly put out and take weapon discharges that GIGAtons in power. And that's not even counting the void shields.
>>47616132
It's completely excessive. A 35 megaton warhead would vaporize armor made of basically any material hundreds of meters thick at the point of impact.
>>47616427
Gigatonnes? Isn't that enough to destroy a planet?
>>47610237
Consider the following:
>The best method of delivery for a nuke in space combat would be a missile.
>Missiles in 40k space combat are referred to as torpedoes
>Ships have tons of turrets specifically designed to deal with torpedoes.
There's your answer anon. Now that being said, if you could teleport a nuke onto someone else's ship, THAT would probably fuck them up (assuming your ship even has a teleportarium, which are pretty rare).
>>47610237
What don't they have?
>>47610237
the radiation shielding required of space-faring vessels would make all but the closest nukes (plus direct hits, obviously) ineffective
>>47613921
Nope, they were in Rogue Trader/1st edition
>>47616719
Nope. To give a point of reference the SuperMAC orbital guns in the Halo Universe yield about 63.4 gigatonnes of energy at impact.
>>47610891
So what this individual is saying would be they could have prisoners. Think about it.
>>47616443
Yep, but you are also hitting a vessel that is several thousand meters long. A 35 MT nuke would definitely blow a whole in an unshielded ship, cause serious damage, but unless it hit something extremely critical would not outright kill an Imperial ship larger than an escort.
>>47616801
Not only that Teleportariums are old ass tech and are prone to going haywire, meaning that the nuke is just has likely to show up in your bathroom then it is on an enemy ship.
>>47616719
You would need somewhere in the Pteratonnes of energy to destroy a planet. Gigatonnes would crater a large metropolitan city and destroy everything for several miles around.
>>47617005
60 gigatonnes is 60,000 megatonnes. Are you sure that's right?
>>47617150
Would it not also destroy the atmosphere at 60 gigatonnes?
>>47616132
No. Imperial ships exchange and survive sustained bombardments measuring in the gigatons to teratons.
For example of the kind of power 40k ships throw around, the almighty Nova Cannon, unleashes petatons of energy.
>>47617207
The Chicxulub impactor (dinosaur killer meteorite) had an impact energy of 100 teratonnes. That's over 2 million times the energy of the Tsar Bomme at 50 MT. It didn't destroy the planet or atmosphere. Fucked shit six ways to be sure but was not remotely planet destroying.
>>47617207
>Would it not also destroy the atmosphere at 60 gigatonnes?
Son you don't know shit about energy. Tens of gigatonnes is enough to fuck up massive chunks of a continent, but will not deal lasting damage to the planet. For fuck's sake, the asteroid that killed off the Dinosaurs in the K/T event, unleashed 100 teratonnes of TNT.
>>47617049
And I'm fairly sure they can use their Geller shield to disrupt teleportation, that's why boarding actions are mostly done via torpedo
>>47617525
It's voidshields that stop teleports. It's why you have to drop them before a strike. Most boarding actions are done through strike craft like Shark Assault Boats or short range attack vessels/boarding umbilicals. Boarding Torpedoes are actually fairly uncommon on Imperial vessels save for a few specific battlefleets like Bakka.
>>47617721
>Battlefleet Bakka
>>47615751
This is a real world weapon?
>>47617746
I'm sorry? Did I say something wrong here? Battlefleet Bakka was the fleet that responded to Calgar's call for aid during the Battle for Macragge against Behemoth.
>>47617883
>What is the AIM-9 Sidewinder
>>47617746
http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Battlefleet_Bakka
How nu r u
>>47616801
>The best method of delivery for a nuke in space combat would be a missile
No, the best method is teleportation
>>47617207
Son, you don't seem to grasp the massive scale of 40k and its warfare making methods, and that's okay, because sometimes the numbers get so big they become meaningless. Now,the most common weapon of the Imperial Navy is is the Macro cannon. It fires shells the size of the Empire State Building at an appreciable fraction of light over hundreds of thousands of kilometers in your average naval battle. The weapon probably impacts with tens to hundreds of gigatons. It is one of their weakest ship to ship weapons that remain effective. Believe me, a 35 MT nuke would only be slightly more effective against your average Imperial Destroyer than harsh language.
If you were to set a nuke off inside an Imperium ship, it would certainly do a lot of damage, but if you tried to fire it at one like a normal weapon, it would amount to a slight shudder for the crew, but no real damage. Void Shields would nullify pretty much all the damage, and whatever eeks through would barely char the thick as fuck plating on the ships.
>>47610237
They probably have special defenses against grappling hooks.
Which would actually be very practical since it seems like Orks would be likely to try that.
>>47610415
This.
>>47612285
I always said Slorth in my head, like slaughter
>>47617896
>>47617977
>n-no batlefleet-kun, what are you doing?
>SHUT UP YOU BAKA
>>47622508
Slouwhth was mine, with a bit of the low throat "ch" you use in German.
>>47622557
>it's almost spelled like one of Japanese animes!
Anon pls. It's not even pronounced the same.
>>47622571
>It's not even pronounced the same.
...now I'm wondering which one is pronounced differently, seeing as I'd say them both like "backer"
Not that anon though
>>47622656
Baka is pronounced like bahka where bakka is "backa"
>>47622684
Ah, gotcha. So like 'baker'
>>47622698
I...wut?
>>47622684
Ok, I can get bah
Though my accent means that I'd make Bahka and Backa sound the same anyway more often than not
>>47622724
Just trying to point out the foolishness in attempting to explain subtle differences in phonetics without an iron-clad and well known reference for pronunciation.
Otherwise you've got tomato tomato.
>>47622684
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guDchP4oe_E
Backa då!
>>47610237
Not particularly against smaller-scale nuclear warheads, which you could fit in racks on fighters if GW wasn't trying to balance their narrative and plot armour by somewhat reducing the capabilities of Imperial and Xenos tech even compared to today. Against larger scale nuclear warheads, though? This thread's mostly got you covered with the concepts of Voidshields and point-defence.
>>47622774
It wasn't the phonetics that was the issue initially it was the other anon going with a different word with a different spelling to make a weeb joke. The phonetic difference was just added.
It's more like asking if someone wanted a dessert and a guy smirking and saying "no I don't like sand."
>>47623120
>It's more like asking if someone wanted a dessert and a guy smirking and saying "no I don't like sand."
>>47619458
>Macrocannons fires shells the size of the Empire State Building
I swear they become bigger each time we discuss about macrocannons.
>>47611084
>>47611168
I wonder if we can be friends!
>>47615231
>there's no huge fireball
there would still be a fireball anon
air or no air you still have the extreme light, heat and plasma from nuclear fusion
>>47623312
Really? I got that from browsing battlefleet gothic general awhile back, the anon backed up his claim, so I figured it was accurate.
>>47624112
>extreme light, heat and plasma from nuclear fusion
The product of a fusion reaction is almost entirely invisible radiation, specifically x-rays and neutrons, in actual interplanetary space the only thing that would emit visible light would be the weapon itself vaporizing, which would be extremely bright but only for a split second, like a camera flash. There is no "heat" because there is no material present to be heated.
Starfish prime and other high altitude nuclear tests had large, visible explosions because they were conducted inside the atmosphere, specifically the thermosphere where there is still some gas for the radiation to interact with.
>>47625147
>Starfish Prime burst height 400km
>Vostok 1 apogee 327km
>ISS apogee 416 km
>conducted inside the atmosphere
try again
>>47625871
>inside the atmosphere, specifically the thermosphere
>The thermosphere is a layer of Earth's atmosphere. The thermosphere is directly above the mesosphere and below the exosphere. It extends from about 90 km (56 miles) to between 500 and 1,000 km (311 to 621 miles) above our planet.
>>47612842
>>47625871
The reason why satellites and space stations experience orbital decay is atmospheric drag. They're literally inside the atmosphere.
>>47617883
It's not just real, it's a common type of warhead for anti-air missiles. It's actually very effective.
>>47624430
It should also be noted that those Macrocannons are fired in ship-wide volleys, so you have hundreds of those shells zipping through space to smash into the enemy.
The really nasty shit though are Lances.
>>47628128
Yeah, don't those things fire in the hundreds of gigatons? Or do they rate for teratons?
>>47628467
Lances are literally dial a yield as they're souped up laser batteries. You dial them up however hard you want to hit at the expense of power available to the rest of the ship. So anywhere from megatons to teratons.
>>47616801
Missiles are missiles and torpedoes are torpedoes. Missile batteries usually act as broadside weapons, short range "instataneous" impact. Torpedoes last longer, can be used to break formations, need to travel a certain distance before arming, etc.
>>47612285
Cлoгт (use google translate to make sound)
>>47623312
House-sized.
To be fair though, much else is right and he probably conflated 'Empire State building' from torpedo sizes.
Most interestingly is that in Rogue Trader, use of rare and arcane 'atomics' inside a vessel or station are auto-kills. Decidedly unlike everything else. 'Atomics' might refer to total conversion antimatter though, out even something worse; like most good 40k writing, it doesn't try to explain the tech.
>>47629005
Atomics are nukes. Fallout included. Probably salted for extra grimdark, but that is.
>>47610237
Armour that can withstand continent-cracking super-weapons and void shields.
>>47629070
Sure, just like star trek and 40k use warp travel the same. Uh-huh.
>>47629091
That simil does not work.
40k warp travel clearly involves getting your ass in demon rape dimension. ST warp is just an Alcubierre engine.
Atomics in Rogue Trader Into the storm literally say that "turned many worlds into scoured radiactive wastelands"
They are also said to be unable to "destroy" a planet by themselves, they only fuck up the biosphere.
>>47623312
That's pulled out of someone's ass. There's pictures of macro cannon batteries being reloaded in the BFG rulebook as well as various other types of ordnance being loaded and they're nowhere near that big. It's also logically unsound since the empire state building has a volume of over 1 million cubic meters, a 5km long imperial cruiser or battlecruiser would have a volume of about ten million cubic meters.
The shells and torpedoes fired by imperial starship weapons are normally shown as being the size of large ICBMs.
>>47616995
page? Cause i looked and i didn't see 'em, anon. They seem pretty FFG to me.
>>47629219
Yup, atomics are nukes and one can destroy a hive spire when utilized on the ground like a nuke can be expected to. Them being instakill against ships is just FFG being dumb.
>>47630493
Them being instakill against ships is specifically for a nuke that is brought on board the ship, *inside* the armor, and detonated near the main engines or some other crucial yet explosive part of the ship. That seems like it would reasonably wreck or cripple nearly any ship. Fired against a ship and forced to deal with armor and shields, they're dangerous and painful but not even near instakill in most cases.
>>47618062
You can't teleport through shields, though. You still have to get those shields down before you can even do that.
Also, teleportation in 40K has a habit of either being extremely unreliable or taking you directly through the Warp, which is literally Hell. Neither are ideal situations.
>>47610952
Ghoul Stars are the territory of plentyof Xenos,but most importantly Necrons.
Void Shields are a defense against everything, and they can withstand much more powerful weapons like Plasma/Vortex.
>>47629221
>40k
>Logically sound
>>47627948
It just seems simultaneously complex and simple. Makes my brain a little fuzzy.
>>47610891
You get them after the SoB Update
>>47631671
>mfw teleporting the nuke through the warp leads to the nuke being possessed and flying away
>>47636184
It's literally just a shrapnel warhead but with the fragments hinged and welded together to create a specific pattern.
There's lots of creative ways to kill people! My personal favorite thing is combined effects munitions, so called because they are armor piercing, fragmentation and incendiary all at the same time.
>>47612842
Well you wouldn't have the nukes explode next to the space ship since that would be very inefficient. You would want them to hit the spaceship and penetrate the armour before exploding where it would most likely tear the ship in half
>>47630493
>nukes can destroy hive spires no problem
>hive spires are as big as the biggest battleships
>nukes can't destroy said ships or smaller
really anon?
>>47641130
Well, that actually makes sense because the tower needs to be supported, and isn't made out of super duper space armor.
>>47641317
>and isn't made out of super duper space armor
It's still pretty tough though, you don't build multi-kilometre high load-bearing structures out of cardboard
>>47641377
Point taken! But Armor and load bearing supports are going to be made out of different material, most likely.
>>47641442
load bearing supports are a lot more susceptible to catastrophic failure.
A block of c4 can collapse a building but it'll do shit all too a tank.
>>47641377
Nukes actually behave very differently based on their environment.
A nuclear detonation emits a lot of energy in the form of light spanning the spectrum, prominently. In atmosphere, this runs into all the air lying around and heats it into a plasma, forcing it out into the surrounding air and producing a massive shockwave. This shockwave is what does most of the immediate damage to buildings, followed by thermal radiation.
In space, the light doesn't have any air to interact with. Instead it just spreads out until it hits something. A nuke detonated near a ship would irradiate, overheat, and melt the hull armor near the point of impact, but there wouldn't be a shockwave inside the ship unless the nuke was close enough to outright vaporize the hull or was inside the ship itself.
In short, a nuke that couldn't kill a starship of similar tonnage can absolutely knock a hive over.
>>47641676
Direct impact against starship:>>47615777
>Common quality nukes are 1d5+4 hits with 1d10+6 damage each one, armor and shields can be used, count as a salvo.
The minimum damage is not even enough to pierce the armor of an ork ship.
Detonation INSIDE a spaceship = catastrophic destruction. It does not matter if the outter armor stands the explosion, everything inside is fried.
Just like a block of C4 want pierce a tank armor. But if said block exploded INSIDE the tank, the tank is FUBAR.
>>47619914
Don't know if it's still the case in 40k, but Horus Heresy implies that some sort of grappling hooks aren't completely uncommon. Pic related.
>>47610237
>Do Imperium ships have defenses against plain old nuclear warheads?
Bog standard plasma warheads are better than nukes, so yes.
>>47643130
in the Fire warrior game the imperial ship launches boarding craft attached too cables and winchs to reel the enemy ship in and stop it escaping.
>>47643130
What a nice guy.
>>47641708
Did you mean to reply to someone else?
>>47641676
>A nuclear detonation emits a lot of energy in the form of light spanning the spectrum
Not really. They emit electromagnetic radiation in the form of X-rays and gamma rays, which makes up about 90% of the energy they produce, the remaining 10% is neutrons. It's only "light" if you consider any type of electromagnetic radiation light, which people generally don't and it's only a very specific part of the spectrum.
The visible light, infra-red and ultraviolet radiation created by a nuclear detonation are exclusively products of that radiation interacting with other material present in the environment.
Other than that you're pretty much spot on.
>>47610237
>Point defence lasers
>Void Shields
And if all else fails
<Meters thick of plasteel and adamantium.
>>47646959
Apologies, I quickly skimmed a wikipedia article while half asleep, and was under the impression the nuclear reaction generated light across the spectrum.
>>47646960
Do Imperial ships go in for stupid amounts of redundancy? That would be another layer of protection, in that it makes a mission kill much harder to achieve.
