GrandMagnus Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 I have a question regarding the flesh tearers and their companies. In the warhammer wiki it mentiones that due to atrittin the chapter only has 4 fully active companies with a hundred astartes each. But it also states that the chapters has 10 under strenght companies formed in the so called "vanguard strike force", each company being made of some 40 marines with veterans and vehicles. So which is it? 10 under strenght companies or 4 full companies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHelion Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Both? Depending entirely on how recently Seth's rejigged the organisation, I'd assume Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadDice0809 Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Most recent fluff is from Exterminatus and the Vanguard Strike Formations, if you want latest go with that. Nothing stops you from saying your particular force comes from a different point in the 40k timeline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrandMagnus Posted September 8, 2015 Author Share Posted September 8, 2015 Okay, the way I personally see it, it makes more sense to have 10 under strength companies supporting eachother than 4 full companies. Afterall 40 marines is more than enough to win a small war. Thanks for the replies! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marine7312000 Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Six of one, half a dozen of the other. GW is notorious for not remaining consistent with fluff, of which I'm sure you're aware. At the end of the day, its your army. Anyone that argues with how I represent MY army is more than welcome to pay me what I paid plus some extra to make them fit their head fluff\canon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrandMagnus Posted September 8, 2015 Author Share Posted September 8, 2015 Six of one, half a dozen of the other. GW is notorious for not remaining consistent with fluff, of which I'm sure you're aware. At the end of the day, its your army. Anyone that argues with how I represent MY army is more than welcome to pay me what I paid plus some extra to make them fit their head fluff\canon. Excellent point. Too bad consistency is not something GW is familiar with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.