Iron Hands vs Iron Warriors

[Sevatar]

Hi, 

I've just read Extermination and something struck me. It seems that whatever the Iron Hands do, the Iron Warriors do better. Let me explain.

 

Mechanized Warfare.

The Iron Warriors have a larger supply of armour than the Iron Hands.

 

Legion strength 

The Iron Warriors have ~150000  to the Iron Hands ~113000

 

Links to the Mechanicum

The Iron Warriors have links to the Mechanicum, just like the heavily machine emphasised Iron Hands.

 

Sieges

The Iron Warriors are incredibly good at this.

 

 

I may be oversimplifying here, but it seems to me that the Iron Hands are somewhat overlapped by the Iron Warriors. I understand that the Iron Warriors are better at sieges, and have larger stores of artillery batteries etc, but I would have thought the Iron Hands excelled above all in terms of armour divisions, both in quantity and quality. 

 

Am I oversimplifying?

 

Thanks.

[Scribe]

Having not read HH3, perhaps.

 

Are the IW noted for using more advanced tech than the IH? Are the IW leaning towards self modification more than IH?

 

I've never said 'Iron Hands, yeah those guys mech up' its always been about the underlying character of the IH, and since HH2, the ancient tech they have access to.

[DarKnight]

I think you're oversimplifying. 

[helterskelter]

I think if they were so inclined the warriors and the hands wouldve been quite a good compliment to each other

[E.G.J.]

I look at it more as how does each legion/chapter view technology.  So yes, they both have similar access to tech, ties to the mechanicum etc, but their outlook on technology is very different.

 

For me the Iron Warriors appear more practical and utilitarian, where technology is a means to an end, while the Iron Hands revere technology, seek to understand and improve it, and use it to enhance themselves and the world around them.  At least that's before recent fluff changes to the IH, and it does not include differences between Perturabo and Ferrus Manus in their individual relationships to technology (which actually appears to be the inverse of what I said above).

[Demus Ragnok]

Yes over simplifying.

[Conn Eremon]

Somebody else made a similarly over-simplified statement about how the Iron Warriors were bettered in everything by the Imperial Fists.

 

So why not just jump the gun and say that the Imperial Fists are better than the Iron Hands at everything?

[Iron Hands Fanatic]

Well....

 

Technology:

Book 3 actually states that the X Legion was the most technologically advanced - as the Iron Warriors were second only to them. Also, the attitude the two Legions take towards technology seems very different. The Iron Warriors reflect the attitudes of their Primarch, lacking the superstition of the Machine Cult and approaching it with a purely logical attitude, prioritizing a utilitarian attitude towards their wargear. Medusan culture however, is basically an offshoot of the Mechanicum, so the X Legion has inherited the reverence & thirst for knowledge from the Red Planet - they'd be more likely to develop untested technology. So, whilst the IV might be more likely to equip their Legionaries with advanced bolter rounds to increase their capabilities, the X would be more likely to outfit them with a completely different weapon system (e.g volkite weaponry). When it comes down to it, it speaks volumes that the Iron Hands were the Legion most used when it came to fighting technologically advanced enemies - they were the best equipped to deal with them, and they had the best technological understanding to counter them.

 

Mechanicum:

Extermination portrays the relationship between the Mechanicum & Iron Warriors as extensive but slightly cold and distrusting - they'd view each other as powerful & effective allies, but not close. In contrast, the Mechanicum & Iron Hands have deep cultural ties, and I'd imagine that they would perceive each other as battle-brothers rather than just allies - an Iron Hands commander would view the forces of the Mechanicum as being just as valuable as his own troops, whilst a Warsmith would likely be perfectly happy to treat them as a disposable tool.

 

Mechanised Warfare:

Yes the Iron Warriors have a larger pool of vehicles, but they're also a larger Legion, and I'd imagine an extensive proportion of these vehicles would be geared towards siege warfare rather than being, for example, main battle tanks. Also, the IV Legion seems to use massed infantry tactics as well as large armoured contingents - for the Iron Hands, mechanized warfare is a cornerstone of their military force - all units operate primarily as a mechanized force, with their vehicles a vital component of the vast majority of their operations.

 

Legion Strength:

The IV Legion engaged in attrition warfare to a far greater extent than the X - therefore, they required a Larger number of Legionaries to sustain such tactics. Also, Massacre mentions that the Iron Hands mechanized approach, in addition to its extensive stockpiles of advanced wargear meant it was a far more powerful force than its numbers alone suggested - pound for pound, it was an extremely powerful Legion.

 

One factor that might also effect the difference in size might be the fact the Iron Hands preferred using bionic replacements to the cloned organic tissue favored by the other Legions - purely for the speed with which they could get severely injured marines back onto the field. Its conceivable that an Iron Hands Legionary that had lost a limb could be back on the battlefield in 24 hours, whereas the same warrior in a different Legion might have to wait months for a cloned replacement. Therefore, its possible that the X Legion didn't need as many troops as other Legions because its entire force could be engaged relatively consistently - within the Iron Warriors, its possible that hundreds of Legionaries could be off the field at a time due to the need for cloned tissue replacements.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Both legions are comparable in terms of equipment and capabilities, but they both take a different approach to warfare, have a different ideology, and are very differently structured. Frankly, if both Legions were engaged in an all-out battle, it would most likely result in a grueling stalemate, with the X Legion's advantage in terms of wargear countered by the IV's larger numbers. Neither is greater, both are comparable.

[Visitor13]

Somebody else made a similarly over-simplified statement about how the Iron Warriors were bettered in everything by the Imperial Fists.

 

So why not just jump the gun and say that the Imperial Fists are better than the Iron Hands at everything?

 

But let's see, the Ultras have a bigger empire than the IFs, more numbers, are better organised, and just as stubborn if need be...

 

The conclusion is that Marneus Calgar is the liege of the Iron Hands. Not least because he has better bionics.

[sitnam]

I think the Iron Hands had theirnown set of advantages. Their use of bionics seems to of far surpassed any other legion, and they also seemed to have a great amount of advanced weaponry such as Volkite armaments and Graviton guns. I also feel the Iron Hands had a stronger connection to their primarch and were much more loyal

[Sevatar]

Thanks guys. My faith in the Horus Heresy is restored, and I will now report back to the Inquisition for penance-BLAM!-

[Nehekhare]

Somebody else

 

not to mention that the IW primarch is now even more hot-headed than ferrus!

[lokkorex]

Nehekhare: EVERYONE is more hot-headed than Ferrus Mannus nowadays...

...you know, since his skull is what, a cup holder for Horus or something.

if anyone needs me, i'll be in my bunker awaiting the Iron Hands seeker squads. ( Ooh, cool idea for an Iron Hands force! )

[BassWave]

Not gonna lie, I too find it hard to find what makes us different from the iron warriors. Pertuabo even uses Ferrus's hammer.

 

I guess the Tenth's specialty is more like a WW2 German blitzkrieg while iron warriors would be more like late WW1 trench warfare?

[Noctus Cornix]

Here's the difference I see. When you look at the the Iron Warriors and the Iron Hands, there is a distinct theme and mindset that is laid down for each of them.

 

To the Iron Warriors, that theme is the calculating anarchist, the cold brutal mentality to tear down the monoliths of society. They are true soldiers of attritional and siege warfare as we know it. A greater supply of weapon batteries, artillery, and specialized wargear intended for turning fortresses to rubble and fine tuning the WWI/II methods of warfare to another level of brutality and efficiency.

 

But the Iron Hands are something different. Iron Hands are not soldiers, they are the unstoppable machine. What sets the X apart is that they are undying, unbowing, and unyielding. They are born, bred, and even built to last and stand the tests of time and war. They come to you with a slow and methodical pace, shrugging off every blow you throw at them, until to rend you apart with brutal efficiency when they close in for the kill. This is reflected in their rules so well. -1 on all ranged weapons against them, expansive use of 6+ FnP, the ability to give all characters high level invulnerable saves, the option to take mountains of Land Raiders that even have IWND. You can shoot at an Iron Hand all you want. He will NOT fall.

 

Neither are better, its simply a completely different means of warfare and mentality. Iron Warriors fight in trenches and wage their war with calculated brutality, Iron Hands casually march towards you and DARE you to try and stop them.

[Wade Garrett]

Who is better, the Iron Hands or the Iron Warriors?

 

A fascinating question, deserving of in depth analysis.

 

Let's see:

 

"Infantry win firefights. Tanks win battles. Artillery wins wars."

 

The X have lots of tanks. The IV have lots of artillery.

 

And there you have it. The Iron Warriors are better.

;)

[Nehekhare]

I play and like both armies.

 

to me the difference is the value of life.

 

the iron hands strive for the perfection of the machine out of a feeling of failure and inferiority of the flesh, but ultimately, they value life because it gives meaning to that perfection as something necessary to protect life.

 

The iron warriors on the other hand reduce life to an equation, a ressource. They are destroyers, even as builders. Life has no value but material properties. There is no meaning, only war. 

[Marshal Rohr]

Who is better, the Iron Hands or the Iron Warriors?

 

A fascinating question, deserving of in depth analysis.

 

Let's see:

 

"Infantry win firefights. Tanks win battles. Artillery wins wars."

 

The X have lots of tanks. The IV have lots of artillery.

 

And there you have it. The Iron Warriors are better.

;)

A novel idea if this was Austerlitz or Gettysburg. What good is a 155 against a force field that repels kinetic blows? What effect does a JDAM have on a Xenos species comprised entirely of sentient nano creatures?

 

Comparing the conventional capabilities of a legion in scifi is genital measuring. The difference between the two legions is mind set.

 

The 10th Legion is an army of warrior tribesmen sworn in fealty to a powerful techno warlord.

 

The IV Legion IS their Primarch. Every warrior is a weapon to be utilized as part of Perturabo's ballet of destruction.

[BassWave]

@ marshal2crusaders- I like that summary. Iron Hands= techno barbarians, iron warriors=tools of pertuabo. Although it makes me wonder if the names should switch.

 

@wade- this thread isn't about who is better, it's about figuring out what makes to VERY similar legions different.

[Hyaenidae]

Simple. The Iron Warriors are a battered and dented vintage AK-47. Iron Hands are a modern factory fresh FN SCAR, with every piece of tech possible hooked to it.

 

Both will kill you stone-dead, but one's a lot prettier while it's killin'.

[BassWave]

I like that summary even better, very fitting.

[Flint13]

Simple. The Iron Warriors are a battered and dented vintage AK-47. Iron Hands are a modern factory fresh FN SCAR, with every piece of tech possible hooked to it.

 

Both will kill you stone-dead, but one's a lot prettier while it's killin'.

 

 

Ick... 5.56 NATO... give me a reliable, Russian 7.62 round any day of the week. 

[Hyaenidae]

SCAR-H, then.

 

Stop being picky.  :P

[Adeptus-Alaska]

SCAR-H, then.

Stop being picky.

that was the best weapon I was ever issued.

[minigun762]

Simple. The Iron Warriors are a battered and dented vintage AK-47. Iron Hands are a modern factory fresh FN SCAR, with every piece of tech possible hooked to it.

 

Both will kill you stone-dead, but one's a lot prettier while it's killin'.

You forgot the IW's stockpile of 80,000 rounds of ammunition for said weapon.

 

They most certainly had a longer view of war than the tenth.