I've just had quite a long discussion with one of my PCs about Space Marines and the use of artillery. Specifically Whirwinds. We both kinda thought the stats were off.

Specifically the range of 300m was way too low. The Blast [10] seemed quite low for a rocket delivered artillery,

Other points which we potentially thought were issues were rate of fire (potentially ability to fire two per round) and whether artillery in general should have Concussive as standard (can't remmber if this is only an Only War rule?).

Basically all in all we thought Whirlwinds were kind of weak compared to there fluff and other options available to a Kill Team squad.

Now normally I am not too worried by tweaking the odd thing here or there and I do know that the stats are vaugly in line with the TT but i nthis case the stats seemed way off.

So am I missing something either i nthe crunch or the fluff about Whirlwinds and how they are used by the Space Marines

btw fluff reasons are fine and is why I didn't just post this in the rules section. If someone has alternative stats they want to share go right ahead!

Thing is though, a Whirlwind is built upon a Rhino chassis which makes it significantly more mobile than other artillery weapons such as Imperial Guard Basilisk and is also nice and enclosed to protect crew. Additionally the improved sensors of the Rhino design allow for accurate fire. To be honest I get the impression its more like an acccurate squad/infantry/light tank suppression platform instead of a siege weapon. Their numbers are limited so they need to use these to deliver some quick disruption to let Astartes squads close in, they havent got the vehicle power for long sieges. There are better weapons for that roll such as an IG Basilisk which has far greater range, far better blast and disruptive capabilities and is capable of utterly hammering structures into the ground at the cost of reduced movement, reduced accuracy and a little more open.

On tabletop, IIRC I think Whirlwind is a 48" range. I think thats roughly the same range as Las cannons but I might be wrong so the 300m range isn't that far off based on that for something which has a fair bit of bite to it. Also according to fluff, the Whirlwind requires manual reloading so it would take a while to fire between each volley.

Those are just my two thrones.

Thing is though, a Whirlwind is built upon a Rhino chassis which makes it significantly more mobile than other artillery weapons such as Imperial Guard Basilisk and is also nice and enclosed to protect crew. Additionally the improved sensors of the Rhino design allow for accurate fire. To be honest I get the impression its more like an acccurate squad/infantry/light tank suppression platform instead of a siege weapon. Their numbers are limited so they need to use these to deliver some quick disruption to let Astartes squads close in, they havent got the vehicle power for long sieges. There are better weapons for that roll such as an IG Basilisk which has far greater range, far better blast and disruptive capabilities and is capable of utterly hammering structures into the ground at the cost of reduced movement, reduced accuracy and a little more open.

On tabletop, IIRC I think Whirlwind is a 48" range. I think thats roughly the same range as Las cannons but I might be wrong so the 300m range isn't that far off based on that for something which has a fair bit of bite to it. Also according to fluff, the Whirlwind requires manual reloading so it would take a while to fire between each volley.

Those are just my two thrones.

I think these are some good points. Particularly about Whirlwinds being faster and maybe being able to fire on the move.

I haven't got the rule book to hand but RAW in Only War do Basilisks have to be stationary to fire? I am pretty sure in the TT they have to be. But then I can't remember if Whirlwinds in the TT have to be stationary.

If Whirlwinds can fire on the move and conventional Imperial artillery can't then I think that does go some way to refocusing the role of Whirlwinds.

You mentioned that whirlwinds are more accurate. Ignoring the crew's BS is there anything that RAW particularly makes the whirlwind more accurate in a like for like comparison (e.g both vehicles have same visibility codnitions). I am all for saying that Whirlwinds should have better senses/targeters etc but can't see it on the data sheet. Also I notice they don't have Indirect rule (though I think that might just be because that rule isn't in Deathwatch).

When I get the chance I might check out Astartes signium and target to see how these pieces of equipment might help a crew man (or be modfied to do so).

Using your take on it I could also see the Marines using whirlwinds as an interdiction unit. It is based over a klick out and firing at extreme range. Tactical squad goes in hits enemy HQ. Enemy counter attacks. Enemy squads get hit by Whirlwind. In the confusion Tactical Squad withdraws.

I did say to the PC that my take on Space Marines and sieges was that if they did have to take part in one without the benefit of support from Titans etc then I think they would use either infilitration tactics (telport or assault marines or scouts) or Orbital Bombardment from space craft. Space Marines don't have siege artillery because if it comes down to that they are probably going to lose because of lack of numebrs.

Iron Warriors get away with it because they have hordes of minions, mutants and slaves they can use.

According to latest Dex, both are Ordnance large blast weapons but the Whirlwind is a barrage. A Basi is double the potency and range is 36-240" versus 12-48" (which in OW equates to a max range of 3.5km versus 300m)

I would probably say that the marine one can, at your discretion, perhaps fire a single volley as long as they dont exceed half their movement speed, IE half action move half action shot.

Regarding the accuracy, the simple fact is that a Basilisk is just a set of tracks with a massive cannon attached to it. Not a lot of technology involved. Whereas since the Whirlwind is a turret on the roof of a Rhino it can likely benefit from auspex sensors on the tank, the machine spirit built into most vehicles etc. Again this is entirely up to you whether you want to go along those lines.

These can still be used as attacking but you could use them defensively I guess. My take on them is that you need to launch an attack, the Whirlwind launches a barrage or two to soften up the enemy lines and defensive positions with up close precision mobility before the enemy can respond. I mean you could hit it from a mile away with a Basilisk but these would take time to set up, not very accurate at long range and likely get noticed after a few stray shots, additionally the enemy could arm counter artillery in this time due to the high reloads of the Earthshaker or intercept with vehicles. Whirlwind meanwhile can fire and withdraw/deploy smoke launchers to disorientate.

They could speed into battle (having a much higher cruising speed), launch some barrages up close, and since its got Rhino qualities, I cannot recall if it may have some troop capacity to kick the marines out nearby and let the kill team charge in while the enemy is disorientated. You may also swap the turret for an AA mount (I think it's a valid option in the current SM Dex).

When I get home I am going to have a very close look at what talents, equipment and so on might work on the Whirlwind. I have a feeling that the Rites of Battle Chassis doesn't do it justice once you have a trained Marine with appropriate gear linked in to it.

I think troop capacity is out. The Rhino's space is dedicated to the rockets. Lexicanum says that some chapters employ servitors to help with reloading though.

But then Lexicanum also says that Marines sometimes use supression forces in conjunction with a Land Speeder to achieve far longer ranges.

The more I think about it the more I really like your idea that Whirlwinds are primarily there for reasonably close encounters and for rapid redeployment. Possibly even shooting on the move compared to the sustained artillery of the I.G.

Did a bit of serious indepth academic research (by which I mean google and wiki). It seems to me that the Whirlwind has been based on the modern M270 Multiple Rocket Launch System. Similar size speed thouhg the whirlwind is lighter. Comparable rate of fire as well (2 rockets every 10 seconds) The M270 uses (or can use) shoot and scoot tactics your proposing. However the M270 has got far longer range (40 miles!) and its rockets hit a far wider area. (about 1km square).

That said there is nothing in the rules that gives the enemies any bonuses to hit the Whirwind when it fires so for fairness we have to conclude that the Whirlwind is far more discreet when it fires compared to the M270 whcih generates a huge amount of smoke and noise as well as vapour trails making counter battery fire that much easier. I would assume (rule?) that Whirlwind produces limited back blast and the vapour trails disperse rapidly.

N.B It occurs to me that even by our 21st century standards the Imperium simply may not have very good rocket technology. The Whirlwind is the best they've got but generally they rely on 'gun artillery'.

EDIT:

Well I did indeed look at what you could use.

Conceivably the type of equipment you could be using with a Whirlwind would be

Exceptional MIU.

Astartes Targeter

Signium/Signium LInk

[Can't remember exact name of them but 'scout googles' that paint targets for artillery].

There are also various talents that may be useful such as Mighty Shot.

With all of these factors brought into account and a Marine is Bs 50+ you could be looking at the Whirlwind able to fire on the move at extreme range with a reasonable to good chance of hitting.

This would effectively make it excellent at supporting a space marine assault (as should be) be far more manouverable than a modern rocket artillery piece, potentially more accurate.

However it would still be, in the grand scheme of things, very short range although I am far more comfortable with that now.

Things I have learnt.....Whirlwinds are not conventional artillery. Marines Commanders and enemies of the Imperium who think of them as such do so at their own peril.

Unfortunately some of the vehicle stats dont make a lot of sense from a more 'realistic' military perspective. If you really look at the stats on the Warhound (which I did while designing some DAoT Titans for my RT game), you realize that it can't kill itself with a Plasma Blastgun on Normal, and needs 12 Perfect (Max damage) hits to do so on Maximal ignoring Void Shields. It would need 175 average damage hits to kill itself. In the original Adeptus Titanicus a Plasma Blastgun can actually have a 33% greater chance of seriously damaging a Titan than a Turbo Laser-Destructor, and a 33% chance of a one hit kill against a Warhound with no shields. It is a stronger weapon than a Turbo Laser-Destructor.

Some of the problem is that the system doesn't scale well (just throwing more dice at it tilts the odds a lot), and some is that they grabbed TT stats to build RPG stats. Those TT stats are sometimes very wonky. Can you really tell me that a Warlord Titan can be seriously hurt by a lascannon in some Chaos Cultists hands? The TT is ballanced to allow cool models to play without them being as amazingly curbstomp as they are in the fluff. Using those stats to build the RPG stuff makes for things like Titans that can't kill each other, and rocket artilary that has a range the same as a 20mm autocannon. I tend to look at a more logical limit for things like that, ruling that the whirlwind has a range of 1km instead. For some things, like Titan combat, you need to just make some GM rulings and let the players know ahead of time. For example, if you get hit by a Anit-Titan weapon (Turbo Laser-Destructor, Plasma Blastgun...) you need to spend a Fate Point. Not to say you survived a direct hit, but to have the Emperor smile on you and have a pillar fall between you and the weapons impact point blocking enough of the energy for you to melt you armor and face but survive.

I'd argue it is the contrary - GW's fluff is built around the TT, and in my opinion tend to reflect it nicely. From what I have read in the original studio material, I came to the conclusion that the destructive potential of the weapons of the 41st millennium tends to easily outweigh protective measures - which also makes for a nice equalising factor between the factions, as devastating weapons generally seem to be easier to come by than something that protects against them. This goes doubly so for lascannons.

Either way, there is arguably still a problem, which is that RPGs are generally designed to be a lot more forgiving towards characters, as well as deliberately dragging out confrontations so that the players have "something to do". This factor, for better or worse, applies to any and all weapon profiles, not just vehicle armaments. Sticking more closely to the TT stats might actually counter this factor ... but considering the consequences (greater lethalty/vulnerability, shorter combat, easier to die) it may well be that not many players actually want this.

In this light, the Whirlwind missile tank kind of bridges the gap between the Space Marines and the Imperial Guard, by providing a fast-moving fire support platform capable of softening up the Astartes' foes before the Marines commit to an engagement.

"The Space Marines' role as a highly mobile strike force means they can ill afford to be slowed down by static artillery guns. Such an elite force as the Space Marines do however recognise the need for good supporting fire, especially if they are dealing with numerous hordes of Orks or suppress highly mobile forces such as Eldar. It is vital that the strength of such foes is broken before they can take advantage of the Space Marines' lack of numbers. The Whirlwind comes into its own by combining the manoeuverability of the Rhino with the devastating punch of a multi-launcher."

- 2E Codex: Angels of Death

<disclaimer: as usual, these quotes are just GW's vision of the setting, which may or may not be contradicted by other sources - as per their writers' standard approach , all fluff is equally valid and you are free to pick or dismiss as per your own personal preferences>

My point was that a lascannon, per the original Adeptus Titanics rules (the original fluff if you will), has NO chance of harming a Titan. Being able to hurt a dreadnaught is not the same as hurting a titan. The fact that the Plasma Blastgun does LESS damage than a lascannon is rediculous. The curbstop nature of anything on Titan combat is a product of Adeptus Titanicus, the GW rules for titans. I remember playing it a very, very long time ago and the idea that infantry/Astartes/tanks played any factor in titan combat was completely ignored due to the scale of the fight.

If fact, the rules for the Warhound run oposite of your view that destructive weaponry is more powerful than armor in the Imperium. The Titan weapons listed are too weak. I can understand wanting players to live through combat, but a better option is not placing them against things they can not survive fighting. Note that the Leman Russ tank can't hope to really hurt even the weakest titan per either rule set. Sigh. Sometimes GW fluff is frustratingly erratic. As a military history buff and a physicist I tend to try and find a reasonably 'realistic' view even in my space fantasy.

My point was that a lascannon, per the original Adeptus Titanics rules (the original fluff if you will), has NO chance of harming a Titan. Being able to hurt a dreadnaught is not the same as hurting a titan. The fact that the Plasma Blastgun does LESS damage than a lascannon is rediculous. The curbstop nature of anything on Titan combat is a product of Adeptus Titanicus, the GW rules for titans. I remember playing it a very, very long time ago and the idea that infantry/Astartes/tanks played any factor in titan combat was completely ignored due to the scale of the fight.

Can't speak for the original Adeptus Titanicus rules set but from 'Space Marine' on a lascannon in 'Epic' had -1 armour modifier meaning it had about 5% of doing a killing headshot. (Assuming no Void Shields). Which isn't too shabby considering a Devestator stand had two shots each and you could buy a Company of them for about the same points as the Titan.

The "curbstomp" only tends to show up in exceptional battles (usually as a product of advantageous circumstances) .. or in licensed/outsourced material, whose authors may simply not care much for the original descriptions, and which may well be written off as myth and legend if one were looking for consistency. And as far as exceptional battles are concerned ... the 5E Guard Codex has an IG character whose hobby seems to be to take out Titans by one-shotting them with a Leman Russ battle tank ...

Last but one Epic battle I fought (about 6 months ago) this literally happend, God as my witness. I am playing Eldar 6000pts vs Imperial Guard/Squat alliance. Phantom Titan charges round a corner destroys a few nobodies (Rough Riders I think). Advance Fire phase the last goddamn Lemun Russ Battle Tank from a company opens up at the Titan and blows it's friggin head off. First shot the Phantom Titan had received all game from the first shot that tank had fired all game.....

Goddamn holofields.

For some things, like Titan combat, you need to just make some GM rulings and let the players know ahead of time. For example, if you get hit by a Anit-Titan weapon (Turbo Laser-Destructor, Plasma Blastgun...) you need to spend a Fate Point. Not to say you survived a direct hit, but to have the Emperor smile on you and have a pillar fall between you and the weapons impact point blocking enough of the energy for you to melt you armor and face but survive.

FYI, Turbo Laser Destructor and Plasma Blasguns are only S10 and S10/S8 (Maximal/Regular), or at least they were in the last IA Apocalypse book, dunno if they redid it. They are not true titan killer weapons. They will seriously ruin a marine's day but they wont turn you into a puddle of molten power armour or a red mist. No the things that will are the true Strength D (destroyer) weapons such as Tau Heavy Rail Cannon (on a Manta or Tiger Shark), Imperial Volcano Cannon or Eldar Distortion Cannon (on a Cobra). So the numbers here are indeed surviveable since these weapons have a chance, albeit slim, of actually not killing a human.

The titans presented here are more chosen as anti-infantry/anti-tank options rather than anti-fellow titan. For that you'd be looking at Reaver Battle Titans who have Vortex Missiles, Volcano Cannons, Melta Cannons etc, those are things properly deadly to a marine and other titans and will have much more of a long battle against others. If a KT marine is hit by one of the above D weapons then they are burning fate points straight away if they even are allowed at all. One of the novels and various articles suggest that the Warhound titans used in RoB are most used as scouting or heavy support but their mobility comes at a price, their reduced number of shields and their vulnerability to heavy weapons even going so far as to comment that a number of heavy infantry or battle tanks can pose a threat to it.

If you were to actually include true nasty titans you'd be looking at something that can dish out 100+ wounds worth of damage each shot, turn vehicles into molten mess in seconds, have multiple void shields (not just two) and significantly higher structural integrity (maybe 150-200+)

Note: All Stats taken from IA Apocalypse and descriptions/text/articles/sources from Lexicanum

The difference is that those are TT stats. They reduced Titan armor (and weapons) to allow interaction. A Turbo Laser-Destroyer in AT dropped Void Shields on a 3+, and had no chance to one hit kill any Titan (Even a Warhound). And it is far more powerful than a man-portable lascannon. It could kill a titan, but would require at least two hits with a 6 on the damage roll in the same location. It is a Destroyer weapon in TT (in the book I have, 2007), but is the same strength in AT as a Plasma Blastgun on Normal (and 2 points lower than on Maximal). In TT, the Volcano cannon is the same with a wider radius. In AT, a Volcano cannon has a 50% chance of a one shot kill vs a Warhound. Because of the limits of TT stats, the more powerful the Titan, the more they nerfed it. Actual Titan armor on a Warlord should be at least 15. Note that in the RPG Turbo Laser-Destroyer will still be a Fate point. It does a miniumum of 42 wounds with a Pen of 20.

I tend to look at the original Adeptus Titanicus for titan combat. The systems weren't really made to merge. I did a stats analysis of the RoB stats because I was looking at Titans for my Rank 7 RT game. I realized that they had made the weapons too weak for a Titan to commit suicide by Plasma Blastgun. After reviewing it I realized that it would just be easier to say you can't hurt a Titan with anything but anti-Titan weapons (or boarding actions, which gets interesting). Even a Warhound would require that you hit it 13 times with a perfect max damage lascannon shots to kill it. Average lascannon shots will drop shields (2 shots each shield), but not hurt the Titan. The anti-infantry weapons will likely kill your squad of Astartes long before you get that. Some of this is my personal bias, because I played AT long before Titans were allowed in TT. Some is just the differences in how the systems work, they just don't scale up together well. I think Knights are about as far as you can scale it, as they use heavy tank weapons to low Titan scale.

However you run it, I wouldn't throw Titans at players who lacked similar weapons. I might use them as background scenery or boarding/sneaking operations locations though. Note that the AT rules are easy to find should you like a change of pace for your group and want to use Titans...

Unfortunately some of the vehicle stats dont make a lot of sense from a more 'realistic' military perspective. If you really look at the stats on the Warhound (which I did while designing some DAoT Titans for my RT game), you realize that it can't kill itself with a Plasma Blastgun on Normal, and needs 12 Perfect (Max damage) hits to do so on Maximal ignoring Void Shields. It would need 175 average damage hits to kill itself. In the original Adeptus Titanicus a Plasma Blastgun can actually have a 33% greater chance of seriously damaging a Titan than a Turbo Laser-Destructor, and a 33% chance of a one hit kill against a Warhound with no shields. It is a stronger weapon than a Turbo Laser-Destructor.

Some of the problem is that the system doesn't scale well (just throwing more dice at it tilts the odds a lot), and some is that they grabbed TT stats to build RPG stats. Those TT stats are sometimes very wonky. Can you really tell me that a Warlord Titan can be seriously hurt by a lascannon in some Chaos Cultists hands? The TT is ballanced to allow cool models to play without them being as amazingly curbstomp as they are in the fluff. Using those stats to build the RPG stuff makes for things like Titans that can't kill each other, and rocket artilary that has a range the same as a 20mm autocannon. I tend to look at a more logical limit for things like that, ruling that the whirlwind has a range of 1km instead. For some things, like Titan combat, you need to just make some GM rulings and let the players know ahead of time. For example, if you get hit by a Anit-Titan weapon (Turbo Laser-Destructor, Plasma Blastgun...) you need to spend a Fate Point. Not to say you survived a direct hit, but to have the Emperor smile on you and have a pillar fall between you and the weapons impact point blocking enough of the energy for you to melt you armor and face but survive.

A few general hints: even in comparison to the TT I think DW exaggerates armour values a bit too much (bikes and land speeders too weak, land raiders too strong). I use this formula (basically a compression by 25% around the center of 30):

Adjusted AV = ((Vehicle AV - 30) x 0.75) + 30

Example values:

Rhino Front: stays 31

Rhino Rear: 22

Land Raider All-Around: 45

Land Speeder: 21

Also I use the Multiple Righteous Fury dice rule. Which is a real boon in vehicle combat as a multi-dice weapon can have very well 2d10 to add to damage! A good shot should hurt even a well-armoured vehicle. Also, and this is very important: anything that would allow you to roll 2d6 in the TT (such as close range melta) should half the enemy AP (not double Pen). Structural Integrity is generally about hull points x 10, roundabout.

Alex

Ah! I admit I know very little of the Titanicus game, so it's quite possible that the fluff and rules I am "used" to are somewhat different. GW is fairly consistent with its material, but some things have arguably changed over the years, in particular from the earliest games such as Rogue Trader and, well, Adeptus Titanicus (though in the latter case one could also argue with decay of technology - perhaps the Titans of M41 just are not as good anymore as the ones of M30).

Like Visitor Q, my earliest experience with Titans was Epic 40k, of which I have some fond memories, even if I never had anything as crazy happen to me as what Q mentioned with the Leman Russ headshot.

Though I did manage to blow up an Ork Gargant once by charging it with several companies worth of Tallarn infantry squads and Chimaera APCs (by that point, I had no other vehicles left).

even in comparison to the TT I think DW exaggerates armour values a bit too much (bikes and land speeders too weak, land raiders too strong).

Good point ... I never actually compared the vehicle stats, but Black Industries and FFG arguably did not look towards the TT for guidance when coming up with infantry equipment stats - why should we assume they did for the vehicles?

Good point ... I never actually compared the vehicle stats, but Black Industries and FFG arguably did not look towards the TT for guidance when coming up with infantry equipment stats - why should we assume they did for the vehicles?

Not saying we should. Only that in comparison to 40K TT a compression of stats might be in order. A Multi-Melta at short range really should be able to hurt a Land Raider imho. In my rules, melta range gives both +1d10 damage and halves AP. Against the compressed AP of the LR of 45 this means: 3d10+16 Pen 12 versus AP 23. Not a one-shot-kill unless multiple RF dice come up but not too bad either.

Alex

For what it's worth, I think Rogue Trader might justify William's point that some weapons are or should be ineffective against big targets. I cannot find the page but I recall reading something along the lines of:

"Weapons which would damage vehicles or infantry are ineffective against a ship. Similarly weapons on a ship designed to attack others are suitably devastating against ground targets."

So there is precedent for saying "Las cannons do nothing".

Also Alex, do you play by the rule that says Melta weapons do double pen at close range or is that removed in favour of the house rule? I think it was in an errata somewhere or one of the books which added this. If you double the pen then it means a multimelta or a meltagun has a chance of penetrating the vehicle.

Also Alex, do you play by the rule that says Melta weapons do double pen at close range or is that removed in favour of the house rule? I think it was in an errata somewhere or one of the books which added this. If you double the pen then it means a multimelta or a meltagun has a chance of penetrating the vehicle.

Yes, it was changed to halving AP instead in the light of even the errata'd MM being more or less useless against the LR at short range: 2d10+16 Pen 24 versus 50 means 2d10 -10 damage, no RF dice. That's at short range. At long range penetration is not possible... I kinda disagree with that. The beauty of the change is that for creatures it practically makes no difference, only for vehicles. To make Melta a real threat I kept the original +1d10 rule on top of things.

Half AP always applies when in the TT 2d6 would be rolled against AV.

Alex

For what it's worth, I think Rogue Trader might justify William's point that some weapons are or should be ineffective against big targets. [...]

So there is precedent for saying "Las cannons do nothing".

Oh, yeah - though that is a whole other magnitude of difference. To exemplify how I would see the relationship ... I kind of see lascannons against Titans like lasguns versus Space Marines, or Tau pulse rifles against a Predator tank: Very likely your attack will do nothing at all, but there's still a chance the blast might burn through the armour and seriously injure something beneath, either because you hit a spot that has been damaged before, or because you hit a weak point.

A weapon turning from "devastating" to "no effect at all" just because it's used on a similarly built target five times its size sounds kind of weird. But, that's just my interpretation - though it is backed up by the White Dwarf Index Astartes, which says about Land Raiders that they are "one of the few vehicles that could, when used in sufficient numbers, hold off and even destroy the massive Titans of the Adeptus Mechanicus" . And a Land Raider is equipped with heavy bolters and ... lascannons.

Yes, it was changed to halving AP instead in the light of even the errata'd MM being more or less useless against the LR at short range: 2d10+16 Pen 24 versus 50 means 2d10 -10 damage, no RF dice. That's at short range. At long range penetration is not possible... I kinda disagree with that.

Ouch.

Unfortunately some of the vehicle stats dont make a lot of sense from a more 'realistic' military perspective. If you really look at the stats on the Warhound (which I did while designing some DAoT Titans for my RT game), you realize that it can't kill itself with a Plasma Blastgun on Normal, and needs 12 Perfect (Max damage) hits to do so on Maximal ignoring Void Shields. It would need 175 average damage hits to kill itself. In the original Adeptus Titanicus a Plasma Blastgun can actually have a 33% greater chance of seriously damaging a Titan than a Turbo Laser-Destructor, and a 33% chance of a one hit kill against a Warhound with no shields. It is a stronger weapon than a Turbo Laser-Destructor.

Some of the problem is that the system doesn't scale well (just throwing more dice at it tilts the odds a lot), and some is that they grabbed TT stats to build RPG stats. Those TT stats are sometimes very wonky. Can you really tell me that a Warlord Titan can be seriously hurt by a lascannon in some Chaos Cultists hands? The TT is ballanced to allow cool models to play without them being as amazingly curbstomp as they are in the fluff. Using those stats to build the RPG stuff makes for things like Titans that can't kill each other, and rocket artilary that has a range the same as a 20mm autocannon. I tend to look at a more logical limit for things like that, ruling that the whirlwind has a range of 1km instead. For some things, like Titan combat, you need to just make some GM rulings and let the players know ahead of time. For example, if you get hit by a Anit-Titan weapon (Turbo Laser-Destructor, Plasma Blastgun...) you need to spend a Fate Point. Not to say you survived a direct hit, but to have the Emperor smile on you and have a pillar fall between you and the weapons impact point blocking enough of the energy for you to melt you armor and face but survive.

I don't disagree with your general point, BUT I'll point out that "one shot" in the TT _cannot_ equate to an actual "one shot" (given that fully automatic heavy bolters have a RoF of 3).

Interesting discussion and different points of view. I could see groups of land raiders firing volleys of accurate 'Godhammer-pattern' lascannon fire being a danger to a Titan. Much like a 30mm cannon firing dozens of rounds a second is a danger to a main battle tank. Individually the risk is tiny, it is the repeated impacts in the same general area that make it a danger. My main concern is the idea of a single 'lucky' lascannon shot.

I use the idea that the difference in scale is a lesser version of that between vehicles and voidships. Squadrons of bombers can be a threat to a voidship, but a single bomber is pretty much useless. Note that one shot of a lascannon in TT is (most likely) just the one shot. The most important part for me is that all my players understand how I run it and what that means for them. The fact that they are salvaging Dark Age of Technology 'Titans' just means that I can throw similar things at them now...

Mag 50 Land Raider Horde. Problem solved.

Or if you're Xenos and want something to flatten Imperials, an equivalent number of Tau Railguns. Average of 45 damage, Pen 15. Ouch.

Although waaaaaaaay back to the plot, how did the Whirlwinds fair?

Mag 50 Land Raider Horde. Problem solved.

Every problem solved, ever.

Unfortunatly for the purposes of this discussion the Kill Team hasn't used their Whirwind yet. The enemy up till now has had air and low orbit superiority so the KT didn't feel they could risk an air insertion of the tank.

As to the stats, I think with a few reasonable upgrades such as a Signum Link, Astartes Targeter and so forth a Whirlwind can fire on the move at Extreme Range with a reasonable chance of hitting (did I say that before?).

Reading the description of the Whirlwind rockets again it actually says that the rockets deliver a payload of fragmentation devices. Having discussed this issue on this thread I don't really see Whirlwinds as being conventional artillery, more as a highly mobile weapons platform more akin to a giant Tarantula.