Legion Sizes

[Legatus]

I was referring to the Kethra example with the 300 White Panthers and how exactly it made little sense militarily.

Considering that neither the actions of the Kethra Defense Force nor the offensive actions of the White Panthers had been described, such a complaint is rather unsupported. The account merely describes that the Kethra Defense Forces "attacked" the Space Marines, but not how they did it. The account also describes that the White Panthers destroyed the Kethra Defense Forces "piecemeal", but it would be erroneous to interprete that as the Kethran commanders sending their forces in bit by bit. It is rather more likely that the more manouverable Space Marine forces were able to strike where they wanted and to fight on their terms.

 

 

But if that example of Marine capabilities is not satisfying for you, we can perhaps find others. Here are a few examples I found in the 5th Edition Codex Space Marines alone:

 

In the introductory description of Space Marines (p. 5) after having explained how a hand full of Space Marines can influence the outcome of a campaign and how an entire Chapter can bring liberation or destruction to entire star systems, it goes on to describe the means by which Space Marines would rapidly attack an enemy, and that "Few opponents can weather the terrible storm of the Space Marines' onslaught, and most campaigns end in victory shortly thereafter."

 

In the Battle for Black Reach (p. 36), a single Company of Ultramarines effectively liberates the Hive World from occupying Ork forces within only a couple of weeks.

 

In 805.M41, Marneus Calgar leads three Companies of Ultramarines against a Waaagh that had been rampaging through an entire system (p. 40). Within a little more than three weeks the three companies destroy the Orks' tellyporta ships and Stompa factories.

 

 

The 5th Edition rulebook describes how Space Marines offensives are "normally over in mere hours" (p. 133), and that it "may take one, two or a dozen such strikes to bring a campaign to a victorious end". It is described as "rare occasions when an assault stretches out into days or weeks."

Half a company (i.e. 50) of Marines is given as sufficient to end a rebellion of thousands, while a full Chapter can decide the fate of an entire sub-sector.

[Gree]

Considering that neither the actions of the Kethra Defense Force nor the offensive actions of the White Panthers had been described, such a complaint is rather unsupported.

 

You are incorrect. We have actions of them engaging in an offensive and then being destroyed piecemeal.

 

The account merely describes that the Kethra Defense Forces "attacked" the Space Marines, but not how they did it.

 

Because I suspect the authors of the text would not be able to write something that did not result in annihilation of the Astartes.

 

It is rather more likely that the more manouverable Space Marine forces were able to strike where they wanted and to fight on their terms.

 

But that seems strange that the Kethran commanders would not keep their forces in range to support each other. It also clashes with the prior description of the Astartes deploying troops in order to provoke an attack. It also ignores the fact that Astartes would posses shorter-range artillery and it also begs the question of why the Kethran forces would leave their well-fortified cities and attack an enemy who has orbital superiority. ( I would assume they are well-fortified)

 

And Forge World reveals the exact technical specifications in that the Marines are not that faster than the Guard in terms of ground vehicles and they are certainly outmatched in terms of heavy firepower. Thunderhawks can be countered by bringing many Hydras to protect the Russes or by staying under the anti-aircraft blanket of a defense laser. A drop pod is a one-shot vehicle that can be shot down (Planetstrike, a Codex dealing with orbital assault, confirms that drop pods can be tracked and shot down by anti-aircraft weaponry).

 

Theoretically, assuming the Kethran capital city was well guarded with defense lasers, void shields and anti-aircraft batteries as any Imperial world then an attack by Thunderhawks or Drop Pods would be quite costly. Void shields would protect against orbital bombardment. If we go by the reasonable assumption that the Kethrans are at least as well equipped as the average Guard or PDF unit then all they would be able to do is stay under the protective umbrella of anti-aircraft and void shield defenses, thus forcing the Astartes to come at them on the ground.

 

Now assuming the Kethrans act with basic competence and keep all of their armor pieces under the range of artillery and ready to support one another, then the Astartes would be force to engage upon armored warfare on the terms of the Kethrans.

 

Now if we are generous to the White Panthers by giving them their entire armory (which three companies would unlikely to have) and using the Ultramarines as an example, then they would come into play with 25 Predators, 8 Vindicators, 9 Whirlwinds and 12 Land Raiders along with various Rhino and Razorback transports.

 

The United States alone during World War II was able to produce tens of thousands of armored vehicles. I would assume Kethra, as an entire planet, would be able to produce such munitions in similar numbers. (This is assumign Kethra is not an argi-world but even a fairly industrialised Imperial World.)

 

So we are looking at 45 tanks, supported by 9 Whirlwinds and a bunch of APC and IFV against at the bare minimum, hundreds of Leman Russes, Basilisks, Chimeras, Griffons and more. Not looking good for the Astartes.

 

 

In the introductory description of Space Marines (p. 5) after having explained how a hand full of Space Marines can influence the outcome of a campaign and how an entire Chapter can bring liberation or destruction to entire star systems, it goes on to describe the means by which Space Marines would rapidly attack an enemy, and that "Few opponents can weather the terrible storm of the Space Marines' onslaught, and most campaigns end in victory shortly thereafter."

 

It then conveniently does not exactly describe how they would do that. Which I suspect would be rather hard.

 

In the Battle for Black Reach (p. 36), a single Company of Ultramarines effectively liberates the Hive World from occupying Ork forces within only a couple of weeks.

 

All while largely skipping over exactly how they did it and mostly by providing hyperbolic descriptions of combat. The novella does not exactly have the orks operating in the most tactically capable manner either.

 

In 805.M41, Marneus Calgar leads three Companies of Ultramarines against a Waaagh that had been rampaging through an entire system (p. 40). Within a little more than three weeks the three companies destroy the Orks' tellyporta ships and Stompa factories.

 

Once again, not describing exactly how they do it.

 

Thank you for further proving my point.

 

The 5th Edition rulebook describes how Space Marines offensives are "normally over in mere hours" (p. 133), and that it "may take one, two or a dozen such strikes to bring a campaign to a victorious end". It is described as "rare occasions when an assault stretches out into days or weeks."

Half a company (i.e. 50) of Marines is given as sufficient to end a rebellion of thousands, while a full Chapter can decide the fate of an entire sub-sector.

 

Once again, not describing exactly how they can do that, mostly because I would suspect they can’t write it well in a realistic or senisble manner.

 

Answer me this Legatus, allow me to present a scenario to you.

 

Let’s deploy 3 battle companies of Astartes against a well-defended, well populated industrialised Imperial World with roughly the same population size as planet Earth and a pretty good industrial base. Let’s assume it’s well defended with each of the major cities well-equipped with defense lasers, void shields and anti-aircraft weapons as one can reasonably assume on an average Imperial world. Let us assume their PDF is average, but competent and well-equipped with the standard Guard vehicles and munitions. The Chapter Master wants resistiance curshed, but the planet's factories taken intact for Imperial use.

 

How do you take it?

[Legatus]

But that seems strange that the Kethran commanders would not keep their forces in range to support each other. It also clashes with the prior description of the Astartes deploying troops in order to provoke an attack. It also ignores the fact that Astartes would posses shorter-range artillery and it also begs the question of why the Kethran forces would leave their well-fortified cities and attack an enemy who has orbital superiority. ( I would assume they are well-fortified)

Since the White Pathers landing on planetside positions was intended to provoke attacks, they probably took important positions, such as energy plants, communication centres or space ports. The planetary defenders cannot afford to leave such installations in enemy hands, and it has the added benefit (for the White Panthers) that they cannot just bombard those installations either. Indeed, the entire point why you even have so many ground battles in 40K, even though every race has city levelling space ship weaponry, is that there are often important ground positions to take, and not every enemy position can just be obliterated by makro weapons.

 

And enemy force commanders cannot keep their forces "in range to support each other" because that is not physically possible. The big advantage of Space Marines is that they focus the power of ten or more times that number of soldiers on a very small area. It simply is not possible to get 10,000 men to be within fighting distance of just 50 men. There are simply constraints regarding the three dimensional space, and how many persons you can put into a certain area. You might get 500 men within fighting distance, but they are outclassed by the 50 men.

 

 

And Forge World reveals the exact technical specifications in that the Marines are not that faster than the Guard in terms of ground vehicles and they are certainly outmatched in terms of heavy firepower. Thunderhawks can be countered by bringing many Hydras to protect the Russes or by staying under the anti-aircraft blanket of a defense laser. A drop pod is a one-shot vehicle that can be shot down (Planetstrike, a Codex dealing with orbital assault, confirms that drop pods can be tracked and shot down by anti-aircraft weaponry).

For drop pods I assume you are refering to the account of Vorlinghast's Bane on page 62 of the Planetstrike book, which has the initial wave of Space Marine drop pods being shot down by anti aircraft fire. This stands against both the 4th Edition and the 5th Edition Codex Space Marines, both of which explain that this is generally not possible. And while the description in the Planetstrike book is a dramatization, the descriptions of the 4th and 5th Edition Codex Space Marines are general descriptions of the drop pods' capabilities. And Thunderhawks are pretty durable. Hydra batteries are probably also very attractive primary targets.

 

 

Theoretically, assuming the Kethran capital city was well guarded with defense lasers, void shields and anti-aircraft batteries as any Imperial world then an attack by Thunderhawks or Drop Pods would be quite costly. Void shields would protect against orbital bombardment. If we go by the reasonable assumption that the Kethrans are at least as well equipped as the average Guard or PDF unit then all they would be able to do is stay under the protective umbrella of anti-aircraft and void shield defenses, thus forcing the Astartes to come at them on the ground.

 

Now assuming the Kethrans act with basic competence and keep all of their armor pieces under the range of artillery and ready to support one another, then the Astartes would be force to engage upon armored warfare on the terms of the Kethrans.

If, on the other hand, you assumed that Space Marine ground forces were magnitudes superior to PDF forces, that the Space Marines had orbital superiority and could freely pick their initial targets, and that there was little the PDF could do to stop the Space Marines to attack wherever they wanted, then suddenly it doesn't look so bad for the Space Marines.

 

 

In the introductory description of Space Marines (p. 5) after having explained how a hand full of Space Marines can influence the outcome of a campaign and how an entire Chapter can bring liberation or destruction to entire star systems, it goes on to describe the means by which Space Marines would rapidly attack an enemy, and that "Few opponents can weather the terrible storm of the Space Marines' onslaught, and most campaigns end in victory shortly thereafter."

It then conveniently does not exactly describe how they would do that. Which I suspect would be rather hard.

Of course it would be cool if we were given detailed descriptions. But in lieu of that, the information that this is how things are is enough. But if I had to guess, I'd assume it has something to do with being an army of walking tanks with miniature grenade launchers. You know, Space Marines.

 

 

In the Battle for Black Reach (p. 36), a single Company of Ultramarines effectively liberates the Hive World from occupying Ork forces within only a couple of weeks.

All while largely skipping over exactly how they did it and mostly by providing hyperbolic descriptions of combat.

Once again, all that matters is that they did it, not how they did it.

 

 

In 805.M41, Marneus Calgar leads three Companies of Ultramarines against a Waaagh that had been rampaging through an entire system (p. 40). Within a little more than three weeks the three companies destroy the Orks' tellyporta ships and Stompa factories.

Once again, not describing exactly how they do it.

Yes. A pitty. But also irrelevant.

 

 

The 5th Edition rulebook describes how Space Marines offensives are "normally over in mere hours" (p. 133), and that it "may take one, two or a dozen such strikes to bring a campaign to a victorious end". It is described as "rare occasions when an assault stretches out into days or weeks."

Half a company (i.e. 50) of Marines is given as sufficient to end a rebellion of thousands, while a full Chapter can decide the fate of an entire sub-sector.

Once again, not describing exactly how they can do that, mostly because I would suspect they can’t write it well in a realistic or senisble manner

So, with only three sources (3rd Edition Codex Space Marines, 5th Edition Codex Space Marines, 5th Edition Rulebook) we have no less than three story accounts of a couple of Space Marine Companies achieving more than what I had suggested 1,000 Marines should be capable of. More importantly, we have two general descriptions of Space Marines saying that this is what Chapters are capable of.

 

If all you can muster as a reply to this is "but it doesn't describe in detail how they would do that", then I think we can consider this discussion as over.

 

 

But, why not:

 

Answer me this Legatus, allow me to present a scenario to you.

 

Let’s deploy 3 battle companies of Astartes against a well-defended, well populated industrialised Imperial World with roughly the same population size as planet Earth and a pretty good industrial base. Let’s assume it’s well defended with each of the major cities well-equipped with defense lasers, void shields and anti-aircraft weapons as one can reasonably assume on an average Imperial world. Let us assume their PDF is average, but competent and well-equipped with the standard Guard vehicles and munitions. The Chapter Master wants resistiance curshed, but the planet's factories taken intact for Imperial use.

 

How do you take it?

If the defense forces are spread all over the planet, I could strike at their command centres from the get go. But if they all somehow were drawn into the well defended Hives, I would take over exposed locations such as factories, energy plants, space ports, etc. to force the defense forces to leave the Hives. If my strike cruisers do not have the firepower to break the Hives' shields, or if too many of the factories are located directly within the hives, I would employ either Scouts, Veteran squads or even teleporting Terminator squads to disable the Hives' shields and/or major defense batteries.

Essentially, to take on an entire planetary force by themselves, a Chapter would first have to limit the enemy's ability to react, either by targeting command centres or by destroying air bases and AA positions. After that the Space Marines can basically take the defense forces apart in piecemeal, just as the story from the 3rd Edition Codex described. If the enemy has drawn all of his forces into one highly fortified position, it is easiest to simply force him to come out of that position, which could for example be done if there are other important locations that aren't within the confines of that fortress. Only if there was nothing else outside that fortress would things get tough, and would call for a protracted siege. In such a case, the best course of action would be to find a way to sabotage and means that would prevent teleport attacks and then strike with several Terminator squads.

[Gree]

Since the White Pathers landing on planetside positions was intended to provoke attacks, they probably took important positions, such as energy plants, communication centres or space ports.

 

Then why were not such positions fortified against orbital assault? Any commander would logically conclude them to be important targets.

 

Since the White Pathers landing on planetside positions was intended to provoke attacks, they probably took important positions, such as energy plants, communication centres or space ports. The planetary defenders cannot afford to leave such installations in enemy hands, and it has the added benefit (for the White Panthers) that they cannot just bombard those installations either.

 

Why not just garrison them heavily with troops and defense in the first place? If a world has rebelled then it would be quite reasonable to expect an attack.

 

And enemy force commanders cannot keep their forces "in range to support each other" because that is not physically possible.

 

It is completely possible. One simply has to maintain forces within the range of artillery support (A common military doctrine ranging back since artillery was first invented) and within range of support elements. (Another common military doctrine.)

 

However, a world of six billion people would be able to churn out tens of millions of men under arms if needed. Even if separated a realistically recruited PDF would still over overwhelming local superiority.

 

It simply is not possible to get 10,000 men to be within fighting distance of just 50 men.

 

It is quite possible however, to bring in many, many tanks and support artillery to engage a forces frim miles away if necessary.

 

You are familiar with the concept of an armored mobile reserve? A rapid reaction force to support each other formations have been in use since the Romans and the use of armor as a rapid action force has been in use since the Germans popularized in in WWII. Both basic tactics.

 

There are simply constraints regarding the three dimensional space, and how many persons you can put into a certain area. You might get 500 men within fighting distance, but they are outclassed by the 50 men.

 

You seem to assume that this will take place with mere infantry charging into close quarters for some reason.

 

That is............suicide tactics on a level I cannot begin to describe.

 

For drop pods I assume you are refering to the account of Vorlinghast's Bane on page 62 of the Planetstrike book, which has the initial wave of Space Marine drop pods being shot down by anti aircraft fire. This stands against both the 4th Edition and the 5th Edition Codex Space Marines, both of which explain that this is generally not possible. And while the description in the Planetstrike book is a dramatization, the descriptions of the 4th and 5th Edition Codex Space Marines are general descriptions of the drop pods' capabilities.

 

However the Planetstrike book is an actual depiction of how a drop pod would actually operate. We have an actual account. It’s style does not change the fact that it happened. I would assume the Space Marine Codex to be naturally biased for the Astartes and the Planetstrike book to be a neutral source that deals specifically with orbital assault.

 

And of course that is ignoring the Black Library examples of drop pods being taken out by anti-aircraft fire.

 

And Thunderhawks are pretty durable.

 

Durable enough to resist fire from 20-30 Hydras? Plus whatever fixed anti-air defenses a city might have. (And that is the low end of what a world could have.)

 

And this is being very generous and assuming the enemy does not possess dedicated fighter craft and tactical bombers, Astartes having only dedicated gunships, would be screwed quite thoroughly.

 

Hydra batteries are probably also very attractive primary targets.

 

However to take them out one would have to come within range, and given the amount of firepower that would be a bad idea.

 

And of course Hydras can easily be replaced by any decent industrial base. The loss of a Thunderhawk would be a severe blow to Astartes forces in orbit. the loss of a dozen Hydras is a mere drop in the industrial bucket. I suspect the PDF would be more than happy to trade a dozen Hydras for a wrecked Thunderhawk is even twenty of thirty Hydras for a single downed Thunderhawk.

 

If, on the other hand, you assumed that Space Marine ground forces were magnitudes superior to PDF forces, that the Space Marines had orbital superiority and could freely pick their initial targets, and that there was little the PDF could do to stop the Space Marines to attack wherever they wanted, then suddenly it doesn't look so bad for the Space Marines.

 

I do assume the Astartes are magnitudes of superior, however the realistic numbers will quickly negate that advantage, as will hundreds of artillery batteries dropping shells on a few hundreds Astartes.

 

Of course having orbital superiority and the ability to choose targets does not change that does targets are effectively immune form orbital assault. The ability to choose a target and attack wherever you want will not change the defense lasers blasting your starship as it comes into low orbit to drop off the pods or the multitude of anti-aircraft batteries filling the air with a sea of lead. It won’t change a mere 50 tanks facing 5,000 tanks.

 

And of course, we have already established that Astartes ground forces are not that much faster than Guard armor, certainly not enough to be any appreciable difference in maneuver warfare. This is also assuming that the planet does not possess aircraft that will bomb the hell out of the Astartes on the ground.

 

Of course it would be cool if we were given detailed descriptions. But in lieu of that, the information that this is how things are is enough.

 

Not is not I’m afraid. This is my entire point. We have this descriptions and I accept that Marines can do these things, but only because of authorial fiat and plot shields. When one starts to apply things like basic military strategy, common sense and realism……..well the Astartes tend to fall apart.

 

But if I had to guess, I'd assume it has something to do with being an army of walking tanks with miniature grenade launchers. You know, Space Marines.

 

…..that still die to artillery shells dropping in their heads and would be quite screwed when staring down the barrel of a hundred Russes with thousands of infantry behind it. Battlecannon>bolter.

 

And of course calling them walking tanks is a bit of an exaggeration since Astartes power armor would not provide the same protection as a Russ or Predator.

 

Yes. A pitty. But also irrelevant.

 

So, with only three sources (3rd Edition Codex Space Marines, 5th Edition Codex Space Marines, 5th Edition Rulebook) we have no less than three story accounts of a couple of Space Marine Companies achieving more than what I had suggested 1,000 Marines should be capable of. More importantly, we have two general descriptions of Space Marines saying that this is what Chapters are capable of.

 

That is nice, but not relevant to my argument as I have already stated.

 

My point is such general descriptions work because of author fiat and plot shields. Take that away and they fall apart.

 

If all you can muster as a reply to this is "but it doesn't describe in detail how they would do that", then I think we can consider this discussion as over.

 

Why? Because you can’t find a way that they can logically do this?

 

If the defense forces are spread all over the planet, I could strike at their command centres from the get go.

 

Said commander centers are in the main cities, logically defended by things like void shields, defense lasers, anti-air, hardened bunkers and tens of thousands of troops and tanks, like any reasonable commander would conduct.

 

I would take over exposed locations such as factories, energy plants, space ports, etc. to force the defense forces to leave the Hives.

 

Such things have already been heavily fortified (As any reasonable commander worth his salt would do). Given that this world has just rebelled that is only logical to expect.

 

And of course, no sane or reasonable commander is going to fight outside the void shields against an enemy that has orbital superiority. One would have to be suicidal or an complete idiot to do that.

 

I would employ either Scouts, Veteran squads or even teleporting Terminator squads to disable the Hives' shields and/or major defense batteries.

 

You don’t have scouts of Terminators, you have 3 battle companies.

 

However assuming you did have these forces the only way you can deploy scouts or veterans is by flying outside the defense laser gridiron and send them in by foot. I’m actually not sure if Terminators can teleport through void shields or not. An attempt to drop pod will result in them being shot down probably.

 

And each of those main defense are of course heavily guarded. Said scout Squad, Veteran squads and Terminator squads are facing down thousands of well armed troops and scores of tanks with the rest of the garrison (Hundreds of thousands of troops and thousands of tanks) now alerted to your arrival and moving quickly.

 

Assuming by some miracle that you actually manage to take out said defense the squads that have done so are pretty much screwed.

 

Essentially, to take on an entire planetary force by themselves, a Chapter would first have to limit the enemy's ability to react, either by targeting command centres or by destroying air bases and AA positions.

 

Unfortunately, approaching said targets by orbit or air will be quite costly to say the least, not to mention such places will be heavily guarded. An orbital assault will be pretty much a suicide one.

 

After that the Space Marines can basically take the defense forces apart in piecemeal, just as the story from the 3rd Edition Codex described.

 

This is assuming that for some reason the PDF forget to stay in touch with one another, position armored forces nearby to react quickly to an assault, or won’t place their troops under the shadow of mobile batteries?

 

If the enemy has drawn all of his forces into one highly fortified position, it is easiest to simply force him to come out of that position, which could for example be done if there are other important locations that aren't within the confines of that fortress.

 

Why would any commander leave a prime defensive position and leave out the protective umbrella of void shields and defense lasers against an enemy that has orbital superiority. No sane commander will fight out in the open were he can get glassed from orbit.

 

In such a case, the best course of action would be to find a way to sabotage and means that would prevent teleport attacks and then strike with several Terminator squads.

 

Once again, putting aside the fact that you don’t have terminator squads, how are you going to infiltrate in and sabotage them?

 

In conclusion, you seem to be relying on the fact that the enemy seems to be led by the Keystone Cops using suicide tactics.

[Pulse]

In conclusion, you seem to be relying on the fact that the enemy seems to be led by the Keystone Cops using suicide tactics.

Lol well said.

[Legatus]

Perhaps it would be best if in the future we would differentiate between the 40K universe and the gree-verse. In the 40K universe, Space Marines have assaulted planets for ten thousand years and are consistently described as imensely capable and terrifying forces. In the gree-verse, if the enemy has some decent anti-air and artillery forces then Space Marines can do jack squat.

 

As entertaining as "alternate fiction" considerations are, I do think people on this board are generally more interested in actual 40K lore. But perhaps the "Dornian Heresy" folks are interrested in a revised description of Space Marine capabilities? But if we are talking gree-verse, then at least I don't need to bother with citations and all that hassle.

[Gree]

Perhaps it would be best if in the future we would differentiate between the 40K universe and the gree-verse. In the 40K universe, Space Marines have assaulted planets for ten thousand years and are consistently described as imensely capable and terrifying forces. In the gree-verse, if the enemy has some decent anti-air and artillery forces then Space Marines can do jack squat.

 

In the ‘’gree-verse’ enemies use actual military tactics, use common sense and (Gasp!) exploit their military capacities to the fullest, as one would expect any reasonable sane military commander. One would logically assume a well-defended Imperial World to possess defense lasers and void shields and one would reasonably expect these things to make an orbital assault very difficult. On a similar note one would assume that even an average-sized industrial world should be able to churn out tens of thousands of tanks. Do you understand the numbers here?

 

Astartes are described as immensely capable and terrifying, unfortunately all we have is hyperbolic descriptions that tend to fall apart when one applies even basic logic and military tactics to them. Going by your inability to offer an effective counterpoint I would assume that you can’t really explain how they can take a realistic planet either.

 

Unless, of course, you are claiming that the opponents an Astartes force faces are complete morons. You seem to think for some strange reason, soldiers would leave a safe and fortifed position to fight an enemy who has orbital superiority. That's a suicide tactic.

 

As entertaining as "alternate fiction" considerations are, I do think people on this board are generally more interested in actual 40K lore. But perhaps the "Dornian Heresy" folks are interrested in a revised description of Space Marine capabilities? But if we are talking gree-verse, then at least I don't need to bother with citations and all that hassle.

 

Well I am using citations actually, I am drawing the experience of planet’s having defense lasers and void shields from a variety of sources, such as the Planetstrike book, Forge World, various codices and Black Library.

 

I operate on the assumption that while Astartes are badass and can do a lot of damage, what a planet could realistically put out and how those soldiers could realistically be used would negate that advantage rather easily. Everything I have described can happen just fine in the canon 40k universe if a planet's capacity was realistically portrayed and the PDF had two braincells to rub together.

[Legatus]

In other words, you reject the very premise of "Space Marines" as they are presented in the Warhammer 40K universe as "silly" and "unrealistic". They got great armour and are tough guys and all, yeah, but realistically they cannot really accomplish anything! At least not in the "gree-verse". In Warhammer 40K, Space Marines are awesome.

 

It's also great that you expect me to explain in detail all the things GW does not explain. I am affraid that all I can offer you is the fluff stating that that's how things are, and that Space Marines accomplish all the things you deny, and have done so for ten thousand years. Apparently they are quite capable to deal with anti-air and artillery just fine. I mean, of course I could come up with all sorts of explanations for how super soldiers that are leagues above anything a conventional army can muster might possibly tackle artillery positions or anti air batteries (like Land Speeders, Scouts, Teleport attacks, Bike/Jump Pack assaults, Orbital strikes, psychic strikes, sensor jammers, etc.), but to what end? No matter what I might come up with, the fact that Space Marines can deal with such obstacles is already firmly established anyway.

 

I mean, I could point out that the Imperial Armour 2 and 3 pretty much describe Thunderhawks as nigh impervious to flak and fighter craft, and can "bludgeon their way through enemy interceptors and flak fire and land their cargo safely into the heart of any warzone". I could point out that drop pods are described as untargetable by air defense systems, and that therefor any accounts describing how drop pods are actually shot down are examples of extremely rare "one in a million" lucky shots. I could point out that according to Imperial Armour specs the Leman Russ Tanks are only half as fast as Predator Tanks, and that thus Space Marines would run circles around Imperial Guard tank formations, while their Chimera variants are largely ineffective against predators. I could point out that Land Raider variants are just as fast as Predators, while being more heavily armoured than Imperial Guard battle tanks.

I could point all of this out, but they are moot points, as the background flat out states that even a single Battle Company could accomplish quite alot against conventional forces, and that an entire Chapter would be near unstoppable by the defense forces of a single average world. I can point to these generalised descriptions of Space Marine capabilities, secure in the knowledge that any battle account where Space Marines accomplish less than that are therefor simply extreme and rare cases, and in no way representative of the actual capabilities of Space Marines.

[Gree]

In other words, you reject the very premise of "Space Marines" as they are presented in the Warhammer 40K universe as "silly" and "unrealistic". They got great armour and are tough guys and all, yeah, but realistically they cannot really accomplish anything! At least not in the "gree-verse". In Warhammer 40K, Space Marines are awesome.

 

No I do not, I object to their enemy’s stupidity and the odd tactics used to deploy them. As far as I can tell Astartes are only successful because their enemies are morons. I assume the Astartes maintain the same level of effectiveness and lethality, but with their enemies acting in a reasonable, competent manner.

 

You seem to subscribe, for example, to the ludicrous assertion that troops would leave fortified positions to fight an enemy who has clear orbital superiority. That is just asking to die.

 

It's also great that you expect me to explain in detail all the things GW does not explain. I am affraid that all I can offer you is the fluff stating that that's how things are, and that Space Marines accomplish all the things you deny, and have done so for ten thousand years.

 

By author fiat and plot shields. Do you know what those mean? It’s because the authors write they can deal with it, while mysteriously being unable to explain exactly how they can deal with it.

 

I mean, of course I could come up with all sorts of explanations for how super soldiers that are leagues above anything a conventional army can muster might possibly tackle artillery positions or anti air batteries (like Land Speeders, Scouts, Teleport attacks, Bike/Jump Pack assaults, Orbital strikes, psychic strikes, sensor jammers, etc.),

 

And I can point out that a 10,000 man divisions plopped on that objective with a few hundreds Russes can defeats such an attack quite easily. Or void sheilds protecting from orbital strikes, or anti-air shooting down Thunderhawks coming in or dozen sof Hydras blasting Land Speeders into bits.

 

Hmmm, I wonder what would happen when a defense laser blasts a Thunderhawk.........

 

No matter what I might come up with, the fact that Space Marines can deal with such obstacles is already firmly established anyway.

Stated but not shown.

 

I mean, I could point out that the Imperial Armour 2 and 3 pretty much describe Thunderhawks as nigh impervious to flak and fighter craft, and can "bludgeon their way through enemy interceptors and flak fire and land their cargo safely into the heart of any warzone". I

 

And I can point out in Imperial Armour III in which the Thunderhawks had to eventually retreat under Barracuda attack. I can point out in Imperial Armour 5 were the Thunderhawks had to avoid the enemy anti-air grid or be shot down.

 

Hyperbolic descriptions are nice, but actual combat is better. I mean, do you seriously believe that a Thunderhawk could survive 40-50 Hydras blasting at it? Or a dozen fighters pursuing it repreatedly?

 

I could point out that drop pods are described as untargetable by air defense systems, and that therefor any accounts describing how drop pods are actually shot down are examples of extremely rare "one in a million" lucky shots.

 

I could then point out the neutral Planetstrike Codex that deals specifically with orbital assault featuring multiple drop pods being shot down an an Astartes orbital assault being held off. I would assume that is more objective and neutral than a Codex designed for the Astartes point of view.

 

I could point out that according to Imperial Armour specs the Leman Russ Tanks are only half as fast as Predator Tanks, and that thus Space Marines would run circles around Imperial Guard tank formations, while their Chimera variants are largely ineffective against predators.

 

I could then point out with the ranges of Russ’s weaponry that won’t matter, especially with Basilisks who can be deployed quite easily as anti-tank weapons when needed. (Look at Taros when they were dueling with Tau railguns at long range)

 

I could point out that Land Raider variants are just as fast as Predators, while being more heavily armoured than Imperial Guard battle tanks.

 

But still can be popped by a few dozen Basilisks blasting at it.

 

I could point all of this out, but they are moot points, as the background flat out states that even a single Battle Company could accomplish quite alot against conventional forces, and that an entire Chapter would be near unstoppable by the defense forces of a single average world. I can point to these generalised descriptions of Space Marine capabilities, secure in the knowledge that any battle account where Space Marines accomplish less than that are therefor simply extreme and rare cases, and in no way representative of the actual capabilities of Space Marines.

 

You can point it out, but strangely you can’t seem to find a realistic way to take out a world defended by reasonable, competent soldiers.

 

I have never denied the background has stated as such. What I however have denied, is that such tactics will work in reality. We have examples of Imperial technology working in a certain matter and we have examples of Imperial planets having certain populations and industries. It does not take a genius to put two and two together.

 

In other words, Astartes can only win by virtue of their opponents being idiots. My original asseration that Kethra was a bad example militarily holds true. Going by your statements the average world must be defended a mere handful of men with the competence of the Keystone cops.

 

But let’s look at the Kethra example. We have Astartes landing and provoking the PDF forces into attack. I asked why would they attack? You answered that the Marines must have taken important objectives for the PDF to come out. I asked, as any reasonable man would have done, why said objectives were not heavily garrisoned and fortified from orbital assault. It seems like the obvious move. We then have descriptions of the PDF moving out to attack the Astartes. I then asked quite sensibly why a force would venture out from fortifications to fight an enemy in the open who has orbital superiority. That is practically asking to be annihilated by orbital bombardment. I asked why any sane commander would do that and you have been curiously silent on the matter.

 

So we have established two things wrong from the defense of Kethra from a military standpoint. Let us look at Black Reach. Black Reach, as I recall, was invaded by 50,000 orks (It was from the rulebook if I recall correctly.)

 

That is, quite frankly, an absurdly small number to invade a planet with Russia and Germany each individually put out millions of men in WWII to invade countries. In invade a hive world I would assume a Waaaggh would be much, much bigger. Either that or Black Reach had a tiny, tiny population.

 

Imperial Armour 8 contains a more realistic ork Waaaggh consisting of two billion orks that is heading right twords Deliverance.

 

Now I ask you Legatus, 100 Astartes with their attendant ships vs. 2 Billion Orks with the massive fleet that logically would be needed to carry such a force. Who wins?

[Legatus]

No I do not, I object to their enemy’s stupidity and the odd tactics used to deploy them. As far as I can tell Astartes are only successful because their enemies are morons.

The basic description of Space Marine Chapter capabilities in the 5th Edition Rulebook and the 5th Edition Codex Space Marines are not tied to any particular kind of enemy. They are general descriptions, the definition of Space Marine capabilities, if you will. And they describe that a single Chapter can usually take a world in a short amount of time. Period.

 

 

You seem to subscribe, for example, to the ludicrous assertion that troops would leave fortified positions to fight an enemy who has clear orbital superiority. That is just asking to die.

IIRC the Kethran defense force was not said to be obliterated by orbital strikes, so your objection is invalid. It is also likely that the defense force had never faced Space Marines before, and was therefor convinced that a couple of batallions would be able to take back that power plant or space port that was held by only half a company of Space Marines.

 

 

It's also great that you expect me to explain in detail all the things GW does not explain. I am affraid that all I can offer you is the fluff stating that that's how things are, and that Space Marines accomplish all the things you deny, and have done so for ten thousand years.

By author fiat and plot shields. Do you know what those mean?

The 5th Edition Rulebook and the 5th Edition Codex Space Marines contain the basic description of Space Marine capabilities. That's the default outcome in any such situation. If a Space Marine force does worse in any story, then we know they were doing below average.

 

 

No matter what I might come up with, the fact that Space Marines can deal with such obstacles is already firmly established anyway.

Stated but not shown.

A completely irrelevant objection. You might have a case that the descriptions of battles are hardly satisfying. You cannot complain that Space Marines shouldn't be able to accomplish what GW has plainly and unmistakenly stated they are supposed to accomplish.

 

 

I could point out that drop pods are described as untargetable by air defense systems, and that therefor any accounts describing how drop pods are actually shot down are examples of extremely rare "one in a million" lucky shots.

I could then point out the neutral Planetstrike Codex that deals specifically with orbital assault featuring multiple drop pods being shot down an an Astartes orbital assault being held off. I would assume that is more objective and neutral than a Codex designed for the Astartes point of view.

As I had said in the statement quoted above, the description in the 4th and 5th Edition Codices is generic, describing the default and basic effectiveness of drop pods. The Planetstrike book describes one specific instance. The Codices therefor tell us how it's going to be in 99% of all instances, while the Planetstrike book tells us of that one rare and completely unexpected time when drop pods were actually shot down.

 

 

You can point it out, but strangely you can’t seem to find a realistic way to take out a world defended by reasonable, competent soldiers.

Well, on the one hand I don't need to, since the basic capabilities of Space Marines are clearly stated. And on the other hand it would be difficult to do so, since not all the factors that would be needed to make accurate predictions are given in the literature. That you yourself can brazenly assert that a world could just put everything and every individual outpost under massive void shields and defend them with orbital lasers and tank batallions, even if that might very well not be possible due to simple resource constriants is testament to that. The same goes with any assertions of massive hydra batteries (and their effectiveness against flying Land Raiders) on every square mile of a world.

 

 

I have never denied the background has stated as such. What I however have denied, is that such tactics will work in reality. We have examples of Imperial technology working in a certain matter and we have examples of Imperial planets having certain populations and industries. It does not take a genius to put two and two together.

 

In other words, Astartes can only win by virtue of their opponents being idiots.

No, Astartes can win because they are defined as being easily capable to win in such situations. That GW is then not able to describe in minute detail how they would accomplish that is a different matter entirely. But that does not in the least change the fact that Space Marines are fully intended to, and described as, being able to accomplish those things. This is not "author fiat", this is the creators of the 40K universe explaining the general capabilities of this fictional faction they created. You cannot get a more clear and definitive call than that.

 

 

But let’s look at the Kethra example. We have Astartes landing and provoking the PDF forces into attack. I asked why would they attack?

Because the positions that had been taken by the Space Marines were valuable, and because the PDF might have been confident to be able to deal with a few scores of Space Marines, by virtue of their vast numerical advantage. Most people in 40K will only have heard stories of Space Marines. Rarely will you find individuals that have fought against them in the past.

 

 

You answered that the Marines must have taken important objectives for the PDF to come out. I asked, as any reasonable man would have done, why said objectives were not heavily garrisoned and fortified from orbital assault. It seems like the obvious move.

On the one hand due to a lack resources, on the other hand a Space Marine drop pod assault is said to be nigh unstoppable, and an outpost such as a power plant or a space port would not have the forces to defend against it. Or maybe the Marines just shot down any defensive shields with their battle barge and then teleported in. Or maybe they landed off site and then took the outpost on foot, with Scouts or a ground attack.

 

 

We then have descriptions of the PDF moving out to attack the Astartes. I then asked quite sensibly why a force would venture out from fortifications to fight an enemy in the open who has orbital superiority. That is practically asking to be annihilated by orbital bombardment.

Well, they weren't annihilated by orbital bombardment. So, rejected. But if you must know why the PDF would come out of their big fortress to engage the Space Marines, then that might be because they were confident that 10,000+ soldiers would be able to overcome 100 Space Marines.

 

 

I asked why any sane commander would do that and you have been curiously silent on the matter.

So, there you go then. But none of this chanegs anything, really, since the description of the battle on Kethra is just one example, while the 5th Edition Rulebook and the 5th Edition Codex Space Marines state plainly and in general terms that Space Marines are capable to do these things.

 

 

So we have established two things wrong from the defense of Kethra from a military standpoint. Let us look at Black Reach. Black Reach, as I recall, was invaded by 50,000 orks (It was from the rulebook if I recall correctly.)

 

That is, quite frankly, an absurdly small number to invade a planet with Russia and Germany each individually put out millions of men in WWII to invade countries. In invade a hive world I would assume a Waaaggh would be much, much bigger. Either that or Black Reach had a tiny, tiny population.

 

Imperial Armour 8 contains a more realistic ork Waaaggh consisting of two billion orks that is heading right twords Deliverance.

 

Now I ask you Legatus, 100 Astartes with their attendant ships vs. 2 Billion Orks with the massive fleet that logically would be needed to carry such a force. Who wins?

I gues that would be one of those instances where you might need two or three Chapters...

[Gree]

The basic description of Space Marine Chapter capabilities in the 5th Edition Rulebook and the 5th Edition Codex Space Marines are not tied to any particular kind of enemy. They are general descriptions, the definition of Space Marine capabilities, if you will. And they describe that a single Chapter can usually take a world in a short amount of time. Period.

 

By author fiat and plot shields, not in a realistic and logical manner. What you give me is hyperbolic statements that do not contain examples.

 

However, I could accept that as true, if every world they took was less advanced and populated by modern day earth and was led by military officers with questionable competence. Then of course those sources would be totally true.

 

I mean, I'm just sending them against PDF. Emperor forbid I send them against a top-quality, heavily defended fortress world like Cadia or Boros Prime with hunderds of warships and defense stations in orbit or send them to attack a tomb world or fight against an entire hive fleet by themselves or have them engage billions of orks.

 

IIRC the Kethran defense force was not said to be obliterated by orbital strikes, so your objection is invalid.

 

No it is not. From the POV of the defense forces, if an enemy has orbital superiority it makes no sense to move out and fight out in the open. They did not have precognition telling them that they would be perfectly safe if they headed out.

 

It is also likely that the defense force had never faced Space Marines before, and was therefor convinced that a couple of batallions would be able to take back that power plant or space port that was held by only half a company of Space Marines.

 

Astartes are mythical legends throughout the Imperium, why would they not take them as anything less than serious, and even if they did send a single battalion, I would assume the generals in charge would send a few well-supported divisions next time instead of battalions.

 

And o course I would expect them to have millions of men in command by any reasonable estimate. Are you suggesting they sent a few regiments or battalions piece by piece until those millions of millions of men are all dead?

 

The 5th Edition Rulebook and the 5th Edition Codex Space Marines contain the basic description of Space Marine capabilities. That's the default outcome in any such situation. If a Space Marine force does worse in any story, then we know they were doing below average.

 

That is the outcome because the writers write them as doing so in a hyperbolic and overblown fashion in a book tha ti sbiased to them, not because they could logically and reasonably do so given an enemy with basic competence.

 

Looking at such sources, if they are indeed true, then their enemies must be complete morons then.

 

A completely irrelevant objection. You might have a case that the descriptions of battles are hardly satisfying. You cannot complain that Space Marines shouldn't be able to accomplish what GW has plainly and unmistakenly stated they are supposed to accomplish.

 

I can complain however by taking demonstrated military capacities and then suddenly applying logical production of what a good-size planet would be capable of and reasonable, logical military tactics.

 

As I had said in the statement quoted above, the description in the 4th and 5th Edition Codices is generic, describing the default and basic effectiveness of drop pods. The Planetstrike book describes one specific instance.

 

However the Space Marine Codex is……… well a Space Marine Codex, and that would be much more likely to be biased to that faction (Like Draigo would be fore Grey Knights) by contrast the Planetstrike Codex is a neutral element.

 

The Codices therefor tell us how it's going to be in 99% of all instances, while the Planetstrike book tells us of that one rare and completely unexpected time when drop pods were actually shot down.

 

Except it is not described as rare or unexpected in the Planetstrike book. Instead the only surprise seems to be that defenses are clearly deployed to engage the drop pods.

 

Well, on the one hand I don't need to, since the basic capabilities of Space Marines are clearly stated.

 

Well actually we do, because those stated capacities don’t really match up to actual tactics and intelligent use of equipment.

 

That you yourself can brazenly assert that a world could just put everything and every individual outpost under massive void shields and defend them with orbital lasers and tank batallions, even if that might very well not be possible due to simple resource constriants is testament to that.

 

I assert that because we have examples in real life of nations much less advanced than 40k planets producing tens of thousands of tanks with ease. I assert that because we have examples of planets and worlds being well-equipped with void shields and defense lasers and I assert that because any reasonable commander would equip important objectives with that. One would not need to put every individual outpost, only ones that are strategically relevant.

 

The same goes with any assertions of massive hydra batteries (and their effectiveness against flying Land Raiders) on every square mile of a world.

 

One does not need to cover every square inch of the world with Hydra batteries. One simply needs to cover important objects with them (As any sensible military commander would do) likewise I would reasonably assume that 30-40 Hydras will ruin a Thunderhawks’ day. Let alone a defense laser firing at it.

 

No, Astartes can win because they are defined as being easily capable to win in such situations.

 

No, they win because their enemies use insane suicide tactics as I have pointed out.

 

That GW is then not able to describe in minute detail how they would accomplish that is a different matter entirely.

 

I suspect they can’t write it because not even the GW authors could figure out a way that they could do that.

 

But that does not in the least change the fact that Space Marines are fully intended to, and described as, being able to accomplish those things.

 

They may be intended to, but once you apply actual tactics an logical use of resources then they intend to fall apart quickly.

 

This is not "author fiat",

 

That is exactly what author fiat is.

 

This is not "author fiat", this is the creators of the 40K universe explaining the general capabilities of this fictional faction they created. You cannot get a more clear and definitive call than that.

 

Oh, I acknowledge that fully. I then ask why these commanders make stupid pointless decisions and apparently do not use their resources to their fullest extent.

 

Because the positions that had been taken by the Space Marines were valuable, and because the PDF might have been confident to be able to deal with a few scores of Space Marines, by virtue of their vast numerical advantage. Most people in 40K will only have heard stories of Space Marines. Rarely will you find individuals that have fought against them in the past.

 

Well, putting aside the fact of why weren’t those positions fortified and prepared for Imperial retribution (If Kethra was an important world the generals in command would at least expect a heavy Guard retaliation) and of course since the Astartes are stated to have gained orbital superiority why would generals leave fortified positions to fight an enemy out in the open were they can be easily obliterated by orbital fire.

 

And of course if you are claiming they sent down a few score marines, if the first few battalions were eliminated then I would expect and reasonable and intelligent commander to then sent in say, a few hundreds of thousands of men, with mobile reserves in range to support one another, and supported by thousands of Russes and Basilisks to shell the forces from a nice, safe distance.

 

On the one hand due to a lack resources,

 

Well we’ve already proved that even singular nations in real life can put out millions of men and tens of thousands of tanks. If Kethra is comparable in any way to modern day earth then they could put out tens of millions of men and tens of thousands of tanks without strain.

 

Now if Kethra was less advanced industrially and contains less population than even single nation on earth and lesss miltiarily advanced than modern day armies then yes, your assertions suddenly makes sense.

 

on the other hand a Space Marine drop pod assault is said to be nigh unstoppable, and an outpost such as a power plant or a space port would not have the forces to defend against it.

 

I would assume that each place would have sufficient forces stationed to aid against Astartes and forces in range to reinforce the place.

 

Or maybe the Marines just shot down any defensive shields with their battle barge and then teleported in.

 

Of course since we know void shields are resistant to orbital bombardment, one would question how quickly that could be accomplished. Inevitably to take out such shields one would have to move into lower orbit, were counter-fire from defense lasers can be conducted.

 

On the GW site even a glancing hit by a defense laser is sufficient to take out a vessel up to cruiser class. I would assume multiple direct hits would be sufficient to destroy Astartes vessels if they tried to duel with a planet’s defenses.

 

Or let's look at Imperial Armour 5, pg. 12

 

Since it’s first construction it had been known that the citadel and the star port on Vraks would be vulnerable to an orbital assault. The defenses had been designed to repulse just such an attack. Batteries of planetary defense lasers ringed then, maybe as many as a hundred operational guns. There was enough firepower on the surface of Vraks to fight off an entire fleet in low orbit

 

….Below the defense lasers was a network of high and low altitude anti-aircraft defense that could engage any aircraft then went through.

 

…..Even the mighty Space Marines would not attempt such an attack. No Chapter Master would be foolhardy enough to risk the destruction of his valuable battle barges and worse still, his battle brothers, for the slim chance of victory

 

Admittedly Vraks posseses rather high-quality defenses as noted in the book, but here we have an explict statement on how they would fair against an orbital attack and Astartes policy in regards to it. Notably we have single instance of a strike cruiser attempting to brave the defenses. They are forced to withdraw after their void sheilds are taken out by several defense laser hits and take heavy losses. They manage to teleport some troops in, however said troops are unabe to penatrate the defense of Vraks and are reduced to helping to the Guard.

 

 

Well, they weren't annihilated by orbital bombardment. So, rejected.

 

Except that is irrelevant as I have already demonstrated. From a tactical viewpoint it makes no sense to run out in the open when the enemy has orbitals superiority. The Kethran commanders also could not have any possible warning or idea that they would not be glassed outside the void shields. Therefore their decision to go out and fight the Astartes is in no way justified.

 

But if you must know why the PDF would come out of their big fortress to engage the Space Marines, then that might be because they were confident that 10,000+ soldiers would be able to overcome 100 Space Marines.

 

Well actually I would be assuming that they would be sending out a mere 100,000 men of their millions strong army group to first engage the Astartes with hundreds of Leman Russes and Basilisks pounding them as a nice long range before finally sending in tens of thousands of troops to take out the bloodied survivors.

So, there you go then. But none of this chanegs anything, really, since the description of the battle on Kethra is just one example, while the 5th Edition Rulebook and the 5th Edition Codex Space Marines state plainly and in general terms that Space Marines are capable to do these things.

 

We have hyperbolic descriptions of that they do these things, but we have nothing showing of how or why they can do these things. And strangely enough, in the example you provided, said military commanders the Astartes faced made some truly stupid decisions and said planet was evidently less advanced and had a smaller population than modern day earth.

 

I gues that would be one of those instances where you might need two or three Chapters...

 

Well the, putting two or three chapterfleets together will result in apparently less than hundred ships, most, if not all are made specially for planetary assault and not ship-to-snip combat. How exactly are they going to defeat thousands of orks warships in space combat? (That is a low end estimate mind you) Can you give me an example of how you would take out the thousands of ork warships?

[Legatus]

But that does not in the least change the fact that Space Marines are fully intended to, and described as, being able to accomplish those things.

They may be intended to, but once you apply actual tactics an logical use of resources then they intend to fall apart quickly.

That there is the crux of the entire discussion. If the creators of this fictional universe explicitely intend for their fictional faction to be able to accomplish certain things, then that basically trumps all. They then simply fail to explain that to your personal satisfaction. Too bad, but I don't really care. Maybe 40K is just too far out there for your tastes. But I understand it can get confusing if other authors are not adhering to the established power levels of factions.

[Gree]

That there is the crux of the entire discussion. If the creators of this fictional universe explicitely intend for their fictional faction to be able to accomplish certain things, then that basically trumps all.

 

Unfortunately it does not. The creators also give us examples of weapons and munitions that are clearly outline in sources such as Imperial Armour. The creators give us solid population figures. The creators give us examples in which PDF soldiers act in an absolutely moronic manner with insane suicide tactics.

 

I have examined said examples and pointed out exactly why said military situations are dumb or unrealistic. Going over such examples of fluff I must conclude the writers are not very good, or they are deliberately writing away such troublesome things as common sense and good military tactics in favor of author fiat and plot shields.

 

If you accept that the Astartes are intended to do this, then one must accept that their eniemes must be absolutely moronic.

 

They then simply fail to explain that to your personal satisfaction. Too bad, but I don't really care.

 

It is not to me personal satisfaction. I am a Space Marine player for eight years now. I can enjoy the fluff knowing it is not realistic or a competent demonstration of military tactics. My point is when one takes the statistical and logistical information that is provided by the creators and applies it then the whole charade of the Astartes taking over planets falls apart.

 

Perhaps your personal satisfaction is having Astartes fight enemies who wage war like suicidal lemmings?

 

Maybe 40K is just too far out there for your tastes. But I understand it can get confusing if other authors are not adhering to the established power levels of factions.

 

Oh no, some authors like Ward run rampart over the established power level. Some authors write the PDF soldiery as using absolutely insane suicide tactics. Some, like in Imperial Armour, use actual tactics and common sense.

 

I can accept that an Astartes company can take an entire world, provided said world is less populated than Modern Earth, provided that said world is less advanced technologically then planet earth and provided the military leadership is completely incompetent.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

Oh goody, another thread derailed in a tit for tat between Legatus and Gree. B)

 

+++

 

The fact of the matter is, Marines are head takers. Full stop.

 

They raze opposition governments and military HQs. They successfully invade strong worlds with a handful of dudes. etc.

 

Yes, GW has not written high tech, high brow, fool proof, without loophole, contradiction free story. They never will. If you cannot grasp this and that just like its loosely written rules which are not really able to stand up as being read as RAW and so need RAI lenses when reading them, then you will also be frustrated with the fluff and convinced GW is doing it all wrong, Gree.

 

I would love to have had someone like you who would have planned out a high tech, high brow, fool proof, without loophole, contradiction free story. Honestly I would.

It is possible. I believe they managed it for the first few seasons of Babylon5.

 

But GW has not and have such a bird's nest of things, it really is non-sensical in many things.

 

Look how GW massively changed the Necron fluff. "Errr, we don't know how to make this work. Let's pretty much start all over."

 

You cannot zoom in too much when analysing GW fluff. Or indeed 'all' fiction. It is only written by a man, or team of men. Only real life will stand up to such scrutiny.

 

So I will restate my opening point:

The fact of the matter is, Marines are head takers. Full stop.

 

This is the paradigm you need to view 40K through.

 

Everything that doesn't make sense, etc, you need to reconcile what you are reading with "The fact of the matter is, Marines are head takers. Full stop."

 

You don't have to. But you'll be dissatisfied with all the holes if you don't. RAI.

 

*shrugs* but you are more than free to continue your way. Just don't give yourself ulcers about it :)

 

Anyway, I didn't mean to distract you. Continue fighting. :P

[Gree]

Oh goody, another thread derailed in a tit for tat between Legatus and Gree. :P

 

We are discussing Legion sizes and the practicality of them. The ability of a chapter to take a world is a natural part of said discussion.

 

Yes, GW has not written high tech, high brow, fool proof, without loophole, contradiction free story. They never will. If you cannot grasp this and that just like its loosely written rules which are not really able to stand up as being read as RAW and so need RAI lenses when reading them, then you will also be frustrated with the fluff and convinced GW is doing it all wrong, Gree.

 

…so you prove my point that Marines, as logically written cannot take entire worlds?

 

I would love to have had someone like you who would have planned out a high tech, high brow, fool proof, without loophole, contradiction free story. Honestly I would. :)

 

I’d love to actually. When writing my fanfiction I usually have Astartes operate alongside Guard forces and have explanations as to why cities need to be taken, how the anti-orbital defenses are taken care of and what kind of opposition the Astartes are facing and what tactical decisions they make from their POV. When writing Tau I too emphasis to note their superior long range ability and superior mobility to the Astartes.

 

It is possible. I believe they managed it for the first few seasons of Babylon5.

 

Perhaps you should check out Imperial Armour?

 

You cannot zoom in too much when analysing GW fluff. Or indeed 'all' fiction. It is only written by a man, or team of men. Only real life will stand up to such scrutiny.

 

Yes we can actually. Putting a solid canon to a setting and providing good ,sensible explanations for military warfare in fictional setting is not hard. I heartily recommend Honor Harrington, Hammers Slammers and anything written by Michael Stackpole. The author of the first two series, David Drake, has extensive military experience and it shows.

 

So no, tha tis no excuse for 40k.

[Octavulg]

Unfortunately it does not. The creators also give us examples of weapons and munitions that are clearly outline in sources such as Imperial Armour. The creators give us solid population figures. The creators give us examples in which PDF soldiers act in an absolutely moronic manner with insane suicide tactics.

 

In a shocking twist of fate, technical details of the far future fictional universe written by guys with arts degrees turn out not to create the universe as it is actually portrayed.

 

40K works best as broad strokes. Details which contradict the broad strokes need to be ignored.

 

So Space Marines can take on armies dozens or hundreds of times their size, through a combination of superiority in all aspects but numbers and the simple fact that generals in 40K are usually pretty lousy.

 

If it helps, just assume all non-Space Marine generals have been corrupted by Khorne.

[Gree]

In a shocking twist of fate, technical details of the far future fictional universe written by guys with arts degrees turn out not to create the universe as it is actually portrayed.

 

Why would they not turn out to portray the universe as it's actually portrayed?

 

40K works best as broad strokes. Details which contradict the broad strokes need to be ignored.

 

I will appearantly have to ignore certain quote sin the Marine Codex or accept that 40k generals are idiots.

 

If it helps, just assume all non-Space Marine generals have been corrupted by Khorne.

 

I think I'll have to do this then.

[Legatus]

The problem is not so much that GW doesn't give us explanations. The problem is that the explanations are overlooked by other authors.

 

E.g. the Space Marine Codices have explained quite sufficiently why a planetary force would have little chance to defend smaller outposts such as com centres, power plants, or space ports. It's because there is little they can do against the drop pods (or Thunderhawks), and even less they can do against the Space Marines jumping out of them. But then some author says "nope, they do get shot down, and when an outpost has a lot of anti-air defense, Space Marines can't land there".

 

E.g. Space Marines are described to be worth many times the number of conventional soldiers. But then some other author goes "nope, I'll have a full company of Space Marines including Terminator support be defeated by a mere one hundred Tau".

 

When Codex sources say that Thunderhawks and drop pods pretty much "cannot be shot down", but other authors say that they can, then those authors are not somehow applying "logic" to the setting. It's just that they simply ignored the specifications that had been established.

[Gree]

E.g. the Space Marine Codices have explained quite sufficiently why a planetary force would have little chance to defend smaller outposts such as com centres, power plants, or space ports.

 

No they do not. We have a vague hyperbolic description. That is all.

 

It's because there is little they can do against the drop pods (or Thunderhawks),

 

There is plenty they can do against such threats. A planet with a industry comparable to that of earth could produce tens of thousands of Hydras quite easily to cover such approaches. Such vehicles would be sufficient for shooting down aircraft.

 

and even less they can do against the Space Marines jumping out of them.

 

I would assume a few hundred Basilisks blasting the Marines against nice, long range will ruin an Astartes day.

 

But then some author says "nope, they do get shot down, and when an outpost has a lot of anti-air defense, Space Marines can't land there".

 

It is that and basic common sense. See we get detailed specific descriptions of Astartes combat in Imperial Armour, and vague, hyperbolic descriptions in the Space Marine Codex that would naturally be biased to Space Marines.

 

E.g. Space Marines are described to be worth many times the number of conventional soldiers. But then some other author goes "nope, I'll have a full company of Space Marines including Terminator support be defeated by a mere one hundred Tau".

 

A hundred Tau who used air support and armor against an enemy that had none. It’s called combined arms warfare.

 

When Codex sources say that Thunderhawks and drop pods pretty much "cannot be shot down", but other authors say that they can, then those authors are not somehow applying "logic" to the setting. It's just that they simply ignored the specifications that had been established.

 

The Codex does not state that Thunderhawks cannot be shot down. And the only source we have for the drop pod supposed invincibility is the Marine Codex, which is naturally biased to the Astartes. The Planetstrike Codex is a neutral source that deals specifically with such things and would logically be more reliable than a biased source.

 

And it is not so much as the other sources ignore the elements of the Space Marine Codex, rather the Marine Codex presents vague, hyperbolic descriptions without specifying much and in many of the examples they do give, the forces submitted are either woefully small it invade a planet (See the laughable 50,000 ork invasion force. The US sent more troops into Iraq.) or make boneheaded senseless decisions that have nothing to do with the Astartes’s supposed invcibility. (The Kethrans suicide tactics come to mind.)

 

In short one cannot ignore specifications when such specifications are nonexistent or from a biased source.

[Dark Apostle Thirst]

And so we come to the conclusion that the details of whether or not chapter sizes are effective is a minor detail, and get back on topic. As a note, chapters very rarely deploy as a whole anyways, and when they do, it's to combat a threat that is so big other Imperial forces will be drawn in to help them, so the point is moot regardless.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

Oh goody, another thread derailed in a tit for tat between Legatus and Gree. B)

 

We are discussing Legion sizes and the practicality of them. The ability of a chapter to take a world is a natural part of said discussion.

 

Yes, GW has not written high tech, high brow, fool proof, without loophole, contradiction free story. They never will. If you cannot grasp this and that just like its loosely written rules which are not really able to stand up as being read as RAW and so need RAI lenses when reading them, then you will also be frustrated with the fluff and convinced GW is doing it all wrong, Gree.

 

…so you prove my point that Marines, as logically written cannot take entire worlds?

 

I would love to have had someone like you who would have planned out a high tech, high brow, fool proof, without loophole, contradiction free story. Honestly I would. :)

 

I’d love to actually. When writing my fanfiction I usually have Astartes operate alongside Guard forces and have explanations as to why cities need to be taken, how the anti-orbital defenses are taken care of and what kind of opposition the Astartes are facing and what tactical decisions they make from their POV. When writing Tau I too emphasis to note their superior long range ability and superior mobility to the Astartes.

 

It is possible. I believe they managed it for the first few seasons of Babylon5.

 

Perhaps you should check out Imperial Armour?

 

You cannot zoom in too much when analysing GW fluff. Or indeed 'all' fiction. It is only written by a man, or team of men. Only real life will stand up to such scrutiny.

 

Yes we can actually. Putting a solid canon to a setting and providing good ,sensible explanations for military warfare in fictional setting is not hard. I heartily recommend Honor Harrington, Hammers Slammers and anything written by Michael Stackpole. The author of the first two series, David Drake, has extensive military experience and it shows.

 

So no, tha tis no excuse for 40k.

 

To be clear, your thought processes are clear, sensible and concise. But....

Yeah, 40K does not hold up to scientific logic. This has been evident since Rogue Trader. So what I am saying is, why are you expecting it to? It never has held up to it, and it never will.

Because it is a story that is for fun and for fantasy.

 

Yes, sometimes I pretend I'm a Space Marine. And I go around in perhaps the best armour available to Humanity without a helmet, even though if anywhere iss protected in RL, it is the head. And even shots from an autogun (as you'd know, equivalent to a modern rifle) are inferior to my sword. The sword that throws away its essential stabbing and chopping abilites, and instead has to saw through baddies. Which is slower than just a slice from a super sharp thing. And uses a lot of power to run the chain saw section.

 

Then I ride my Thunderwolf through a hail of small arms fire, mess some stuff up and hop on board a Titan. That can only walk on ground that has magnificent foundations, and would sink and stumble on anything that is not a perfectly laid foundation.

 

We have the IA books. They still draw on the above fantasies I have just noted. And they have tanks with twin guns. That have been tried and abandoned in RL.

 

I actually agree with you 100%

40K has no excuses for the birds nest of conflicting 'facts' that it is.

 

A D-B's reasons for canon/not canon, etc. are all fiddlesticks. Now, that is the position of GW, and so A D-B isn't saying anything false, at all. But that the powa! level of Marines is over 9000 in some books and then them getting pwned by Guard or Tau in another book, is illogical.

 

On Wednesdays, Marines are amazing, and on Thursday, it is the aliens who are amazing, etc.

 

There is a clear 'guts' of what 40K is supposed to be about, and some authors have basically used that as a door mat, showing complete disregard for things.

See Ward, those Blood Angels novels, Soul Drinkers, Blood Ravens in DoW2, etc.

 

What I am saying is.... well, Octi has already said it:

 

Unfortunately it does not. The creators also give us examples of weapons and munitions that are clearly outline in sources such as Imperial Armour. The creators give us solid population figures. The creators give us examples in which PDF soldiers act in an absolutely moronic manner with insane suicide tactics.

 

In a shocking twist of fate, technical details of the far future fictional universe written by guys with arts degrees turn out not to create the universe as it is actually portrayed.

 

40K works best as broad strokes. Details which contradict the broad strokes need to be ignored.

 

So Space Marines can take on armies dozens or hundreds of times their size, through a combination of superiority in all aspects but numbers and the simple fact that generals in 40K are usually pretty lousy.

 

If it helps, just assume all non-Space Marine generals have been corrupted by Telly Tubbies or Barney.

 

That was what I was trying to say. 40K doesn't hold up.

A] The GW writers never wrote that broad plan that gets fleshed out, a lá Babylon5

B] The authors have no genuine military experience, at least that is the way it looks

C] GW isn't interested in following a concise and logical story, because it is easy to be loose and lazy with it. It's all about cool stories, yo. DRAIGOOO!

D] Bob disregards what was already written, and does what Bob thinks is cool.

Bob's boss says 'will it sell well?'

Bob nods.

Tadaa, conflicting fluff. That fans who are methodical and logical now have to deal with. A lá you and Legs, etc.

E] GW are artsy people. The dudes making the moulds, injecting them, pumping out the product, would be logical and consistent people. The guys coming up with the fantasy are, somewhat, detached from such mundane things as consistency, logic, two sides to one coin, following a master plan, not writing fluff when they've had too much sugar and making sure that the probability of something only equals 1, to use a maths term.

 

Imagine this.

Gree and Marshal Wilhelm talk about something. G talks about heads. MW talks about tails. But they compliment one another, and heads follows tails follows heads, etc.

This is not GW.

 

This is GW.

G talks about heads. MW talks about a pin (number). Legatus talks about a cheque. Yet because they are all money things, GW says 'this is 40K'. But a coin is not a bank card is not a cheque. But GW somewhat hybridises them into some misshapen monster. So what G says about heads, has no 'ergo' on the bank card, which has not 'ergo' on the cheque.

 

GW is non sequitur.

 

That is why I am saying you are on a hiding to nothing trying to make sense of it, or trying to get others to follow how you understand it, etc.

40K is like those drawings of stairs going up but joining one another continuously. If you know the ones I am alluding to?

[Gree]

*snip*

 

Should I assume you have not read Thirst's post?

[Legatus]

And so we come to the conclusion that the details of whether or not chapter sizes are effective is a minor detail, and get back on topic.

Well, the point of that debate was whether or not 10,000 strong Legions could reasonably have accounted for the successes of the Great Crusade. And if within the boundaries set by the 40K fluff a single Chapter can journey to and conquer an average world within one month, then the answer is that, yes, they can.

What thus can be said with certainty in regard to the initial question of this thread is that 100,000 strong Legions would definitely have been enough.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

And, in perhaps in seeming contradiction, I do agree with Legatus and his method of 40K exegesis.

You have to know what to hold and what to prune out. What is for real and what doesn't hold up to other things, and therefore is false.

 

But the problem is, whether it is right or wrong, it is an interpretation. The right one I believe, 100% but still an interpretation.

 

It is hard to disagree with 1+1=2. But to use a trained eye, through understanding what the gist of 40K is about from having spent time with them from Rogue Trader, etc, is not accessible to everyone. So when I say 'it is like this', it is hardly going to sit well with someone who doesn't come from my background, etc.

 

In the OR, dudes like GC08 know what the rules are supposed to be. Experience with 40K, etc. This is how fluff needs to be seen. RAI. We need to take the gist of what is being said, regardless of RAW actually conflicting with it.

 

40K shouldn't need such a lens to view it through, but, as per the inconsistencies you accurately point out, it does.

The baddies are not supposed to be bumbling buffoons, Failbbadon, etc. When read literally, this conclusions could be made. By the trained eye knows that Abaddon is something like the anti-Christ, those who oppose Astartes are actually elite and quality soldiers/military thinkers, etc.

 

Hopefully what I have said has been helpful. You'll run yourself aground trying to understand 40K in any other way. 40K ain't changing. So it is up to you to change to understand the GW authors pov and thought process, or not....

 

Hopefully I have not sounded too imperious B)

 

Well, I have a Bio exam for end of year, tomorrow, so I'll let you meditate on what I've said but without my company :)

 

May the force live long and be with you, prospering, for in the far future, there is only inconsistencies :)

[Marshal Wilhelm]

*snip*

 

Should I assume you have not read Thirst's post?

 

I'm honestly just trying to help you. You can report me if you must. You seem to want 40K to work. It doesn't. You continually approach 40K trying to make it work, and go tit for tat with people. But as I said in my last post, it will not get you to the end of the maze.

 

Studying now B)