Post-Crusade Endgame & the Legions

[Conn Eremon]

Well of course, but that isn't what is being debated here. The debate is, there is the Imperial Army and there is the Imperial Navy or there is the Imperial Army, which included the infrastructure, personnel and resources of what would later become the Imperial Navy and the Imperial Guard.

 

Edit: I believe the use of the term "Army" is what is causing the confusion as well. Like you say, normally it is used to describe land-based infantry. However, the Crusade and Heresy era 'Army' is a catch-all for the entire imperial military, with the exceptions of the Mechanicum forces, which were independent, and the Legiones Astartes, to which the Army was subordinated.

[Wade Garrett]

Fighting a guerrilla battle on a death world against astartes would be pretty grim (with marines as the guerrilla force). Eventually the IA would run out of death world Regiments and morale would drop too low for the IA forces to continue effectively.

I'd be willing to wager the Imperial Army can replace fallen Catachans with their sons and grandsons much easier than the Raven Guard or the White Scars can make new Astartes.

 

And remember, any battle where the Legions don't hold the field at the finish means they don't recover the gene seed. And they lack the resouces to make their own. (Thus the Traitor Legions and Renegades going to such great lengths to plunder loyalist genestock all the time, as seen in "Storm of Iron" and "Blood Reaver").

 

You'd probably see Legions raiding each other for geneseed and armor. The Night Lords and Alpha Legion would certainly do it, and possibly the Wolves as well.

 

After all, it isn't as if Angron will use his resources intelligently, and raiding for plunder is a respected Fenrisian tradition.

[Perrin]

 

Fighting a guerrilla battle on a death world against astartes would be pretty grim (with marines as the guerrilla force). Eventually the IA would run out of death world Regiments and morale would drop too low for the IA forces to continue effectively.

I'd be willing to wager the Imperial Army can replace fallen Catachans with their sons and grandsons much easier than the Raven Guard or the White Scars can make new Astartes.

 

And remember, any battle where the Legions don't hold the field at the finish means they don't recover the gene seed. And they lack the resouces to make their own. (Thus the Traitor Legions and Renegades going to such great lengths to plunder loyalist genestock all the time, as seen in "Storm of Iron" and "Blood Reaver").

 

You'd probably see Legions raiding each other for geneseed and armor. The Night Lords and Alpha Legion would certainly do it, and possibly the Wolves as well.

 

After all, it isn't as if Angron will use his resources intelligently, and raiding for plunder is a respected Fenrisian tradition.

 

Depends on how strong the union of Primarchs is, and how wise the leaders are about it. I think we'd still see Horus, Guilliman, Sanguinius and maybe Dorn or the Lion as the main voice of the council, although they wouldn't actually have authority over the other Legions. If they were wise about it they wouldn't put Legions that aren't as reliable (WE, NL) in those kind of conditions, basically anytime they would have to be relied upon to cooperate. I think there was a reason that the NL were sent on the Thramas Crusade alone.

 

"Never give an order you know will not be obeyed" and all that.

 

I'm not entirely sure enough time would go by for regiments to be reinforced properly, especially not by whole new generations. The HH lasted 7 years and there was a huge amount of death on both sides, with 18 Legions there would be  a lot more death, and I think it would go a lot faster regardless of who the eventual victor was. Considering Astartes are mainly rapid attack forces, and with regards to guerrilla warfare don't need to eat or sleep as much as infantry, and can travel a huge distance on foot with getting tired, the amount of distance they could cover compared to the enemy infantry would make things very difficult for the Imperials.

[Kol Saresk]

Honestly, I don't see the Primarchs ever bein able to act as a united front. Ever.

[Phoebus]

Okay, fine. Show me a HH novel/nobella/short story/ebook/sourcebook(such as Betrayal and Massacre) where it says the Imperial Navy existed during the heresy.

Do you want me to cite every instance where a novel, novella, short story, or Forgeworld book on the Heresy refers to Navy personnel (with a capital N) or naval ranks and positions? It's simply disingenuous to say that the Army also has Admirals, Commodores, Captains, etc., and that they somehow exist under different chains of command but are still part of the same branch of service. There's a reason why Army officers are listed separately from Fleet officers in the Dramatis Personae of every single Heresy novel.

Bottom line, my argument is based on the fact that the system illustrated in these novels clearly parallels a pre-existing model. It requires you to merely read between the lines, and accept that the navy is simply not mentioned because (A) it's a secondary, supporting player in these stories and (B ) the authors' priorities aren't right.

Your argument is based on a couple of quotes that, no offense, require you to assume things about the Imperial Army that simply make no sense.

You have an Expedition Fleet. It has Army personnel and officers with a specific rank structure, and it has Navy personnel and officers with their own specific rank structure. There are Admirals, and there are Generals. Admirals command fleets. Generals command Armies. Those are two different forces, which ultimately answer to a single overall commander who is responsible for their theater of operations. This is basically how joint forces are arranged today.

The fact that no explicitly spells out the words "Imperial Navy" for you doesn't really mean anything. You can go all the way back to ancient Greece and the Persian and Peloponnesian Wars. Does a single author from that time use the terms "Greek Navy"? No, of course not. They use terms like "fleet", and "X number of triremes", etc. They also use the terms "Admiral", though, and they specifically qualify that as being different from being a General, and that fleet being a different command from an army.

That's exactly how Expedition forces work. The Lord Commander being an army officer makes naval personnel about as much "army" as Dwight Eisenhower made the sailors of the Allied European forces in World War 2 "soldiers".

The alternative is a bizarro construct of separate rank structures and chains of command that exist simply for the sake of... whatever.

And I think the ability of the Primarchs to subvert Army and Mechanicum elements is being greatly overstated.

I don't know about other posters, but I'm referring to assets that were already assigned to Legiones Astartes Expedition Fleets. Not only did the majority of those assets join the Traitor Legions in rebellion; roughly half of the Mechanicus did so as well. That's a fact. That rebellion was predicated on a significant percentage of the Mechanicus not believing the Emperor was the Omnissiah, as well as promises by Horus for greater freedom. Those same conditions can be replicated in this scenario.

Anyway, it's true that not all Space Marines are Eidolon, and not all humans are Lotarra and Gaunt. What isn't true is that Astartes and Primarchs will always outgeneral and outadmiral plain old mortals, full stop.

Not always. The majority of the time? Yes. I'm sorry, brother, but non-Space Marine Imperial forces are routinely portrayed as inflexible, slow to mobilize, slower to deploy, and anachronistic in their choice of tactics. I hate to keep bringing up "Rules of Engagement", but one can't overstate enough that, using the Codex, Remus was able to process tactical, operational, and strategic-level data and arrive at a "Primarch-approved" solution in seconds. A General Staff would have required hours, at best, to come up with a rushed result.

Would there be exceptions to the rule? Sure. Would it be enough for the Imperial Army and Navy to comprehensively win entire campaigns as opposed to one-off battles? No.

And remember, any battle where the Legions don't hold the field at the finish means they don't recover the gene seed. And they lack the resouces to make their own. (Thus the Traitor Legions and Renegades going to such great lengths to plunder loyalist genestock all the time, as seen in "Storm of Iron" and "Blood Reaver").

To begin with, both progenoid glands can be harvested within ten years of implantation. Given this, I sincerely doubt that the majority of the Legiones Astartes still have gene-seed left in their bodies.

Secondly, why do you think they can't make their own? At best, one could make the argument that the Legions relied on their fief worlds for this production, but if war with the Imperium became a reality, making this production process a mobile affair would be one of their first logical moves.

Traitor Legions are routinely shown plundering Loyalist gene-seed for the purpose of performing sacrifices to Chaos. Is there a source that shows them using it for themselves? By contrast, Storm of Iron makes it clear that the Iron Warriors consider using loyalist gene-seed to create their own warriors to be an abomination.

Honestly, I don't see the Primarchs ever bein able to act as a united front. Ever.

They were able to maintain a unified enough front for almost two hundred years. Four Primarchs weren't able to play nice, and one was subverted by Chaos from the get-go. That's twenty-five percent, a minority.

Cormac, my point is that Gaunt was the exception to the rule regardless of what rung of command you place him at. Whether you stack him against regimental commanders or battlegroup commanders, his mindset, tactical flexibility, etc., were not the norm.

[Kol Saresk]

Actually, just one instance in which it says "Imperial Navy". That's all I ask. Just one time "Imperial Navy" is explicitly mentioned as existing within the GC/HH era by a GC/HH era source. That's it. Just once. Ranks mean nothing. The Geno-Chiliads had Hetmen. That is something I do not expect to see across the Imperial Army. Why? Because it is a rank unique to the Geno-Chiliad.

 

So all I ask is one citation where "Imperial Navy" is used within a GC/HH era source material, whether it be audio, ebook, novel, novella, short story or source book. Just one quote.

 

Everything, including the quote from Scars that talks about a fleet, says "Imperial Army" not far behind. In fact, the quote from Scars explicitly says there are two types of fleets; Legion and Imperial Army. Not Navy, Army. As we've said earlier, there are naval type ranks within the Imperial Army, but there is no Imperial Navy. Just the Imperial Army. You say I assume that because no mention of the Navy is made that the Navy must not exist. And considering the numerous amounts of fleets shown, two of which are specifically referred to as "Imperial Army Expedition fleets", that is quite a feat. And yet there is nothing that says the Navy does exist within the GC/HH era.

 

So, just show me one time that "Imperial Navy" is used in a GC/HH era source. All I ask. Not much. Just one, little request.

[Don the Oiler]

To be fair, a hetman is an old polish land-based general which would indicate an Army soldier.

Admiral on the other hand is clearly a naval rank, so there had to be a seperate branch in the Imperial military, whose ranks were only used by ship crews as far as we know.

This branch would technically, for all intents and purposes, be the Navy, but it might have had a different name (like aforementioned Imperial Spaceforce).

I think you both are talking at cross-purposes.

The terms would make much more sense if originally there was the Imperial Guard, which included the Navy and the Army, which were then split up. But it's the other way around and we have to live with the terms as they are.

[Demus Ragnok]

Off topic: It made me happy that the space "fleet" in the Star Gate franchise were manned by Air Force. Hence "ships" were commanded by Colonels and not captains.

 

On Topic: If I were an evil genius, most powerful psyker to ever live, gestalt being that built an army of genetically engineered super soldiers to conquer the galaxy. And I wanted to ditch said super human soldiers when it was all over, I would have just built a psychically triggered "kill switch" into the geneseed.

 

"Execute order Platypus." And the legions all drop dead. Simples.

[Kol Saresk]

To be fair, a hetman is an old polish land-based general which would indicate an Army soldier.

Admiral on the other hand is clearly a naval rank, so there had to be a seperate branch in the Imperial military, whose ranks were only used by ship crews as far as we know.

This branch would technically, for all intents and purposes, be the Navy, but it might have had a different name (like aforementioned Imperial Spaceforce).

I think you both are talking at cross-purposes.

The terms would make much more sense if originally there was the Imperial Guard, which included the Navy and the Army, which were then split up. But it's the other way around and we have to live with the terms as they are.

Exactly.

 

Although my point on the "hetman" rank was that it was just a unique rank within the Imperial Army, and probably wouldn't exist outside of the Geno-Chiliads. To show that there were a variety of ranks within the Imperial Army and that because a rank existed, it didn't mean that there was an entirely other branch. The Imperial Army is the Imperial Army. There are many ranks and subsets within it, but it is the Imperial Army.

[Phoebus]

Actually, just one instance in which it says "Imperial Navy". That's all I ask. Just one time "Imperial Navy" is explicitly mentioned as existing within the GC/HH era by a GC/HH era source. That's it. Just once. Ranks mean nothing. The Geno-Chiliads had Hetmen. That is something I do not expect to see across the Imperial Army. Why? Because it is a rank unique to the Geno-Chiliad.

 

So all I ask is one citation where "Imperial Navy" is used within a GC/HH era source material, whether it be audio, ebook, novel, novella, short story or source book. Just one quote.

 

Everything, including the quote from Scars that talks about a fleet, says "Imperial Army" not far behind. In fact, the quote from Scars explicitly says there are two types of fleets; Legion and Imperial Army. Not Navy, Army. As we've said earlier, there are naval type ranks within the Imperial Army, but there is no Imperial Navy. Just the Imperial Army. You say I assume that because no mention of the Navy is made that the Navy must not exist. And considering the numerous amounts of fleets shown, two of which are specifically referred to as "Imperial Army Expedition fleets", that is quite a feat. And yet there is nothing that says the Navy does exist within the GC/HH era.

 

So, just show me one time that "Imperial Navy" is used in a GC/HH era source. All I ask. Not much. Just one, little request.

 

Kol_Saresk, please don't be obtuse.  I've already told you that you need to read between the lines on this one.  If that's not good enough for you, that's fine - feel free to call it a win.    Your approach to this topic frustrates me because, in another topic in this very forum, you've been willing to engage in some rather creative interpretation of quotes to reconcile what's in a book with what's in a discovery order that has never been released as part of any published material.  As such, please don't be coy on account of me trying to point out how illogical the proposed all-encompassing Imperial Army is.  :)

 

As an aside, the rank of Hetman doesn't aid an "Army only" argument.  It's still an Army rank that is distinct from Navy ranks used throughout game products and published fiction.  It doesn't disprove the existence of a Navy; all it proves is that the Imperial forces are a multicultural bunch that retains naming conventions from their various points of origin.

[Wade Garrett]

Not always. The majority of the time? Yes. I'm sorry, brother, but non-Space Marine Imperial forces are routinely portrayed as inflexible, slow to mobilize, slower to deploy, and anachronistic in their choice of tactics. I hate to keep bringing up "Rules of Engagement", but one can't overstate enough that, using the Codex, Remus was able to process tactical, operational, and strategic-level data and arrive at a "Primarch-approved" solution in seconds. A General Staff would have required hours, at best, to come up with a rushed result.

 

Would there be exceptions to the rule? Sure. Would it be enough for the Imperial Army and Navy to comprehensively win entire campaigns as opposed to one-off battles? No.

 

 

 

And remember, any battle where the Legions don't hold the field at the finish means they don't recover the gene seed. And they lack the resouces to make their own. (Thus the Traitor Legions and Renegades going to such great lengths to plunder loyalist genestock all the time, as seen in "Storm of Iron" and "Blood Reaver").

To begin with, both progenoid glands can be harvested within ten years of implantation. Given this, I sincerely doubt that the majority of the Legiones Astartes still have gene-seed left in their bodies.

 

Secondly, why do you think they can't make their own? At best, one could make the argument that the Legions relied on their fief worlds for this production, but if war with the Imperium became a reality, making this production process a mobile affair would be one of their first logical moves.

 

Traitor Legions are routinely shown plundering Loyalist gene-seed for the purpose of performing sacrifices to Chaos. Is there a source that shows them using it for themselves? By contrast, Storm of Iron makes it clear that the Iron Warriors consider using loyalist gene-seed to create their own warriors to be an abomination

The anachronistic tactics of the Non Astartes forces. Anachronistic tactics. Really? Because I'm looking at those Ultramarines in their shieldwall, the World Eaters and Space Wolves fighting hand to hand with axes, and those guys with the chevrons trying their darndest to reenact the Somne, and it makes me wonder just what exactly you plan to do with that wheelbarrow full of stones you're rolling into your glass house.

 

"Rules of Engagement" is not Remus creating strategies on the fly, he is blindly doing what Guilliman's Big Book of War says and nothing else. Anyone with access to the Codex Astartes and enough sense to use a cookbook could have done exactly the same thing.

 

It's sort of a major plot point in the story, what with Guilliman explicitly telling him "It isn't enough to just blindly follow the Codex in an 'If A then B' like you've been doing all this time."

 

And no, the Iron Warriors in "Storm of Iron" stole that gene seed to use it for themselves.

 

In "Dead Sky, Black Sun" we see them making new IV Legionaries with it, and it is such a valuable commodity that a civil war breaks out on Medengard between all the Warsmiths that want to use it to build up their own armies.

 

The same goes for "Blood Reaver", which specifically mentions Huron sending ships with cryo storage facilities so the Marines Errant gene seed will remain viable until it can be implanted in his new warriors.

[Don the Oiler]

Phoebus, just trying to point it out again: The misleading use of the term Army (by whoever wrote the fluff) is the main problem here.

The "Imperial Army" isn't the equivalent to today's "United States Army", it's the equivalent to the "United States Armed Forces". To make things more complicated, the ground-based branch of the Imperial Army (which would be the United States Army nowadays) doesn't have a seperate name, it's simply called Army too. The space-faring branch of this Imperial Army *might* be called Navy, or something entirely different, i'd have to reread all the HH novels to check on that.

 

I *think* the original intent was to have only one branch, the Army, commandeer the space vessels AND fight on the ground during the Great Crusade. But then the HH authors began to use naval ranks for their ship crews, and now we have have to deal with an Army that has a sub-branch of naval-ranked ship crews who might or might not be called Navy, but effectively do everything a Navy does.

 

When you say there's a Navy during the Crusade, you're right, for the ranking system clearly shows that.

When Kol says the Navy was part of the Army, he's right too, because "Imperial Army" is the overarching military organization.

[Conn Eremon]

 

 

Actually, just one instance in which it says "Imperial Navy". That's all I ask. Just one time "Imperial Navy" is explicitly mentioned as existing within the GC/HH era by a GC/HH era source. That's it. Just once. Ranks mean nothing. The Geno-Chiliads had Hetmen. That is something I do not expect to see across the Imperial Army. Why? Because it is a rank unique to the Geno-Chiliad.

 

So all I ask is one citation where "Imperial Navy" is used within a GC/HH era source material, whether it be audio, ebook, novel, novella, short story or source book. Just one quote.

 

Everything, including the quote from Scars that talks about a fleet, says "Imperial Army" not far behind. In fact, the quote from Scars explicitly says there are two types of fleets; Legion and Imperial Army. Not Navy, Army. As we've said earlier, there are naval type ranks within the Imperial Army, but there is no Imperial Navy. Just the Imperial Army. You say I assume that because no mention of the Navy is made that the Navy must not exist. And considering the numerous amounts of fleets shown, two of which are specifically referred to as "Imperial Army Expedition fleets", that is quite a feat. And yet there is nothing that says the Navy does exist within the GC/HH era.

 

So, just show me one time that "Imperial Navy" is used in a GC/HH era source. All I ask. Not much. Just one, little request.

Kol_Saresk, please don't be obtuse. I've already told you that you need to read between the lines on this one. If that's not good enough for you, that's fine - feel free to call it a win. Your approach to this topic frustrates me because, in another topic in this very forum, you've been willing to engage in some rather creative interpretation of quotes to reconcile what's in a book with what's in a discovery order that has never been released as part of any published material. As such, please don't be coy on account of me trying to point out how illogical the proposed all-encompassing Imperial Army is. :)

 

As an aside, the rank of Hetman doesn't aid an "Army only" argument. It's still an Army rank that is distinct from Navy ranks used throughout game products and published fiction. It doesn't disprove the existence of a Navy; all it proves is that the Imperial forces are a multicultural bunch that retains naming conventions from their various points of origin.

It isn't obtuse to ask for a single source that could validate what you have "read between the lines."

 

It is obtuse to say you have to "read between the lines" to get to a conclusion you are pushing as correct, a conclusion that runs contrary to what is directly stated.

 

Directly stated, like in C:IG 5e, pg 6

"In the aftermath of the Horus Heresy, massive changes were implemented to the forces of the Imperium . . . [T]he titanic armies of the Imperial forces were divided . . . The Imperial Army, as it was, ceased to exist. The link between fleet and army was severed - never again would ground commanders be given direct control over interstellar ships. From its ashes were born the Imperial Navy and Imperial Guard."

 

Notice how the Imperial Army, capitalized for convenience, included both fleet and army, notably lacking in capitalization, until the Imperial Navy and Imperial Guard, now having shiny new capitalizations to show off how they are big independent groups now, were formed from its (the Imperial Army's) ashes, post-Heresy.

[Kol Saresk]

Phoebus, just trying to point it out again: The misleading use of the term Army (by whoever wrote the fluff) is the main problem here.

The "Imperial Army" isn't the equivalent to today's "United States Army", it's the equivalent to the "United States Armed Forces". To make things more complicated, the ground-based branch of the Imperial Army (which would be the United States Army nowadays) doesn't have a seperate name, it's simply called Army too. The space-faring branch of this Imperial Army *might* be called Navy, or something entirely different, i'd have to reread all the HH novels to check on that.

 

I *think* the original intent was to have only one branch, the Army, commandeer the space vessels AND fight on the ground during the Great Crusade. But then the HH authors began to use naval ranks for their ship crews, and now we have have to deal with an Army that has a sub-branch of naval-ranked ship crews who might or might not be called Navy, but effectively do everything a Navy does.

 

When you say there's a Navy during the Crusade, you're right, for the ranking system clearly shows that.

When Kol says the Navy was part of the Army, he's right too, because "Imperial Army" is the overarching military organization.

To reinforce Don's point: No where have I said there is not a fleet system in place. What I have said is that the fleet does not exist separate from the Imperial Army.

[Don the Oiler]

I think we can agree upon that something *called* an Army having something effectively *being* a Navy as a sub-branch is unnecessarily misleading.

It gets even more stupid when we consider that this Army is again subordinate to the MARINES, which in turn should actually be the ground-based fighting force of the NAVY!

ACH, my head hurts! Good thing they decided to keep the airforce out of the equation entirely, before and after the heresy.

[Phoebus]

Cormac,

 

 

Obtuse

Adjective

1. Annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand.

 

Hence, when I say "deliberately obtuse", I'm talking about deliberately ignoring what I've typed and choosing instead to ask a question that has already been answered - merely to score a point.  It's not an insult; it's a criticism.

You are of course free to disagree with my points.  None of them are obtuse, though.  They simply represent a position that holds that the proposed definition of "Imperial Army" doesn't make sense when one takes into account how the various forces of the Expedition Fleets are described.

 

Also, I am aware of the quote you posted - I cited it as well, earlier.  I contrasted it to the way that various publications depicted the Expedition Fleets, which painted a picture different from an "Army" that also included a navy within its ranks.

 

Don,

 

I understand what you're getting at, and I appreciate the clarification.  I simply don't really agree with that approach.  I'm of the mind that Robin Cruddace, who wrote the fifth edition Codex: Imperial Guard, didn't necessarily find the best way to describe that historical tidbit.

 

My simple way of looking at things is that there is no real "Imperial Army" or "Imperial Navy", in the traditional sense.  Those terms are simply used as traditional naming conventions to describe forces that fall within each of the Expedition Fleets.

 

When you think about it, there doesn't appear to be a larger "Imperial Army" beyond the Expedition Fleets themselves.  We never see an "Army" chain of command or a "Navy" chain of command beyond the Expedition Fleet level.  The only authority they answer to is either a Primarch (if they are attached to a Legion) or the War Council (which eventually had its authority transferred to Horus Lupercal).  Between the Lord Commander of an Expedition Fleet and the Primarch or the War Council, there isn't a Lord Commander in charge of, say, twenty Expedition Fleets and so on.  Below the Lord Commander of each Expedition Fleet, there is a distinct chain of command of fleet officers (called Navy officers with a capital N, in Horus Rising) and army officers.  Both chains ultimately answer to the Lord Commander, who is given a position of authority much like that of the U.S. Army Generals whom I mentioned earlier.

 

I don't pretend that there is a source that spells all this out in the same way that I do.  Rather, I'm trying to point out that this is the picture that is painted by the novels, etc.

 

If I sound frustrated, it's because we're having this conversation about a fictional universe wherein names, themes, concepts, dates, numbers, and sizes have changed time and again in order to make things more logical.  In this case, Robin Cruddace thought that an Imperial Army that also included a navy somehow made sense when describing what existed before a division of forces.  Around that time, though, the Legions still numbered 10,000 Space Marines.  Now, most of them are twelve times or more larger than that.  Years before that (during the Rogue Trader era), Roboute Guilliman (or Leman Russ, I can't remember) wasn't even a Primarch; he was a human commander and not a Primarch...  and the Ultramarines were a Chapter of the Third Founding.

 

It's this context that informs my unwillingness to accept a somewhat illogical quote over so much evidence to the contrary.  So forgive me if I continue to point out the obvious and argue for a logical explanation between the lines.  :)

 

The anachronistic tactics of the Non Astartes forces. Anachronistic tactics. Really? Because I'm looking at those Ultramarines in their shieldwall, the World Eaters and Space Wolves fighting hand to hand with axes, and those guys with the chevrons trying their darndest to reenact the Somne, and it makes me wonder just what exactly you plan to do with that wheelbarrow full of stones you're rolling into your glass house.

 

The difference being that the Legiones Astartes have equipment and abilities that justify their anachronistic tactics.  I think we went more in-depth on this topic in the Betrayer thread, and I actually cited the "shield wall" as an example of taking this too far.  Still, out of all the Imperial factions, it is the Legiones Astartes (and, later, the Adeptus Astartes) who are most justified in sword-fighting and close-combat in general.  By contrast, the extremely far less survivable Imperial Army troopers are shown taking to the field on foot and in massed columns, phalanxes, firing lines, and so on - even though only plot armour would justify any sort of success or survival for them.

 

 

"Rules of Engagement" is not Remus creating strategies on the fly, he is blindly doing what Guilliman's Big Book of War says and nothing else. Anyone with access to the Codex Astartes and enough sense to use a cookbook could have done exactly the same thing.

It's sort of a major plot point in the story, what with Guilliman explicitly telling him "It isn't enough to just blindly follow the Codex in an 'If A then B' like you've been doing all this time."

 

I never said otherwise.  I pointed out that, Guilliman's precautions aside - which basically boil down to a nod by McNeil toward the blind obedience of the modern Ultramarines - the Codex is, in fact, incredible.  Yes, I have no problem accepting that the instructions of this interactive program, which apparently can process even millions of different pieces of data in a matter of seconds, will trump a General Staff comprised of hundreds of individuals who would ordinarily require days to come up with plans for operations of a scale that "Rules of Engagement" describes.

 

 

And no, the Iron Warriors in "Storm of Iron" stole that gene seed to use it for themselves.

In "Dead Sky, Black Sun" we see them making new IV Legionaries with it, and it is such a valuable commodity that a civil war breaks out on Medengard between all the Warsmiths that want to use it to build up their own armies.

The same goes for "Blood Reaver", which specifically mentions Huron sending ships with cryo storage facilities so the Marines Errant gene seed will remain viable until it can be implanted in his new warriors.

 

Touche.  You are correct, sir.  I failed to look up my own source and mistakenly thought the captured gene-seed was used to secure the Warsmith's ascension to daemonhood.

 

I stick by my other point, though, as pertains to gene-seed harvesting and production.  :)

[Kol Saresk]

Phobeus, please understand me. I am not here to "score a point" or whatever that means. I saw what I thought was a misunderstanding of the fluff and attempted to point out what the fluff says. Unfortunately it has turned into this.

 

Yes, there are naval ranks within the GC/HH era. Yes, there are fleets within the GC/HH era. However, from everything I have read of the GC/HH era fluff, it points to it all existing within the Imperial Army. Yes, I could read in between the lines. But when something as recent as Scars sits there and says "Imperial Army fleet", to me that is saying there are no lines to read in between. If you choose to see that as being deliberately obtuse, then I apologize. If you choose to see it as a matter of opinion, that is your perspective as well. Unfortunately, I cannot find anything that points to the Imperial Navy existing as a separate entity during the GC/HH era and therefore I cannot support that belief whenever everything I can find points to the opposite.

[Phoebus]

To me, as good as most of the Heresy novels and novellas have been, they have by no means been ironclad in terms of discrepancies and less-than-logical concepts.  We've had at least two corrections issued by the editing team in regards to novel timelines and such.  We've had an outright retcon (insofar as there can be a retcon in this series, given the policy on fluff) where Legion sizes are concerned.  I could go on.  My point being, Chris Wraight is obviously a terrific author, but him writing "Imperial Army fleet" doesn't make the concept logical in my eyes, nor can I easily reconcile it with what's being described.  For me, then, the lines are still wide enough to read between... Which I guess means "Agree to disagree!" at this point.  :)

 

For the record, the comment about being deliberately obtuse was in reference to your request for a citation of "Imperial Navy".  I think it was obvious to both of us at that point that I was presenting an opinion based on themes and concepts that I felt stood in contrast to the two quotes you mentioned.

If I misinterpreted you, your intent, or your position, then I apologize without reservations.

[helterskelter]

And while this debating occurs the xenos just ate your rearguard

[Kol Saresk]

I apologize as well. My stance with the fluff is just "show me at least once where it differs and I will change accordingly". Most recently, I have had to change my opinion on the White Scars an their standing with the Edict. So yeah, probably best to just go "agree to disagree" on our opinions. :D

[RapatoR]

I may be failing at communicating what's in my head to my posts, tis true.

 

Let me try and clarify:

 

Yes, the kingship was a game changer and without it all the Traitors would have died.

 

But at the same time, it's acknowledged repeatedly that it's thanks to Lotarra going above and beyond in keeping the Ultramarines from getting boots on the ground that Roboute's plan for the ground battle went up in smoke.

 

No kingship, everybody dead, agreed. But no Lotarra, Angron and Lorgar drown in a blue tide, Rob bangs his powerfists together and roars "LOGISTICS!" to celebrate. And then maybe the kingship nukes him from orbit, or maybe it doesn't, but hey. He won on the ground.

 

Thus, Lotarra, though a mortal, was instrumental in turning Guilliman's attack on Nuceria into a disaster.

 

Is that better?

Fair enough, my point was that going berzerk during fight isn't really classified as outsmarting the opponent. ;) Also I really don't think that Nurceria can be classified as disaster for Ultras.

 

Again it is important to keep in mind Lotarra had one ship to command, Guilliman had to command entire ragtag fleet consisting of wounded ships and various elements that might never worked together and was also in charge of landing troops and ground operations.

 

Now, as Kol said, Lotarra anticipated what Guilliman would do, but this was to show that there was really no better way to proceed. Guilliman was expected to do the best thing available (with fleet that outnumbered the Red team but was still outgunned) and he did it.

 

Imagine that places would be switched. Would Guilliman far better with Lotarra's ships at his disposal and would Lotarra be more successful then Guilliman commanding ragtag fleet with wounded ships? Something tells me that this wouldn't be the case.

[Kol Saresk]

My personal vote would be that if situations were exactly[/i] reversed(Lotarra in charge of the Ultramarines' fleet; Guilliman in charge of the Conqueror), it would probably go the same.

[Phoebus]

The key point here (I think) being that Lotara wasn't required to do something that was tactically remarkable... nor was she able to.

 

That's not meant as a slight against her, by the way.  I think it's clear that it was mathematically impossible to stop the enemy from landing troops given the circumstances.  When you only have three ships, your options are limited by default.  Your ability to outmaneuver, outflank, outsmart, etc., your opponent is drastically reduced.  From the second they care less about engaging you and more about getting to low orbit, you're kind of hosed.

 

What this means is that fancy stratagems and tactics were out the window.  Lotara "only" had to focus on fighting a valiant defense against a numerically superior, qualitatively inferior foe for whom a pitched battle was the secondary objective.  As such, she didn't so much prove herself to be Guilliman's better in terms of tactics as she weathered a fierce storm.  Again, I hope I'm not coming off as dismissive of her character.

 

For the same reasons, as you said, Guilliman himself probably wouldn't be able to do much better in her shoes.  I think all of us should leave room for his genius to work some sort of miracle.  Ridiculous mathematical calculations, some sort of arcane insight on a little-known property of one of the weapons carried by warships... Again, I don't think Guiliman could pull it off (preventing a fleet of that size from landing troops), but I wouldn't be surprised if he could.  Does that make sense?

[Phalanx Warder]

I don't know if it has been stated but I think that the big E would have sent the legions against that Ork empire that has locked horns with one of the hive fleets of 40k but that is my take on it. once you own the galaxy why not take over more?

[Deathwatch/Grey knight]

This will end the topic

 

 

The Imperial Army was the Imperial military force comprised of normal men and women that served as the ancestor of the modern Imperial Guard of the late 41st Millennium. Unlike the Imperial Guard, the Imperial Army contained ground, air and space assets all within the same table of organisation and there was no differentiation between space-based and ground-based branches of the service. The origins of the Imperial Guard date back to the time of the Great Crusade in the late 30th Millennium when the Emperor of Mankind conquered a large swathe of the galaxy and forged the Imperium of Man.

 

 

I think this settles it

 

 

In the aftermath of the Horus Heresy in the early 31st Millennium, a great reform of the Imperium's bureaucratic and military structure was undertaken at the behest of the Primarch Roboute Guilliman. To prevent the possibility of a large-scale interstellar rebellion from consuming the human-settled galaxy again, the titanic armies of the Imperium were divided into three basic parts: the Space Marine Chapters of the Adeptus Astartes, a ground-based force of mortal soldiers that would replace the fractured Space Marine Legions as the Imperium's front-line troops and a space-based service containing all of the Imperium's naval assets that was responsible for all space-related transport and combat duties. This reform led to the formation of the modern Imperial Guard and Imperial Navy.