A deep dive into Imperial Logistics for the Indomitus Crusade

[Brother Casman]

The limited material on the Indomitus Crusade reads like Imperial propaganda. I'd take it with a grain of salt.

Aye, you're probably supposed to do this.

[Marshal Loss]

Maybe consider the third order effects? If a planet revolted due to starvation because Guilliman took their grain shipments, you get a little grimdark back because the Imperium is shooting itself in the foot. If nefarious actors are the ones who tip the scales of rebellion and arm the insurgents - or even just show up after the fact to support the rebels - now you've got a real 40K plot going on.

 

Love it.

 

But the point is that the logistical issue that was the trigger point isn't the star of the show, it's the narration before the first act.

 

Never said anything to the contrary, but the logistical backdrop to a galaxy-spanning crusade does not have to be "the narration before the first act"; nor is anybody claiming that it is or should be the star of the show. When we as historians deal with campaigns, second & third order effects, etc, are most often evaluated in tandem with what came before, entwined with the substance of the campaign itself. That is precisely what I have suggested in numerous posts above, and what your own example touches upon; Herodotean-esque anecdotes and digressions are simple literary tropes used to add depth and legitimacy in this fashion, not to steal the focus entirely. This used to be something GW did more effectively in the past.

 

 

 

The limited material on the Indomitus Crusade reads like Imperial propaganda. I'd take it with a grain of salt.

Aye, you're probably supposed to do this.

 

 

Just an aside (because we are, and I don't disagree), but it's worth noting that this discussion arose because GW claimed they had written/were writing the IC with an eye to logistical believability & the cogs that turn behind the curtain, not because people weren't taking their requisite daily dose of sodium with each codex/campaign supplement.

[Slips]

We just want to quickly step in an mention that: while discussions like these often have frater with opposing views on certain aspects of 40k (or their perception thereof), the main goal of the B&C is for Topic-Relevant constructive discussion to occur in a respectful manner. 

 

So, while you (royal) might not agree with the views of others or their own interpretations, that doesn't mean they can be belittled, talked down to, denigrated or otherwise personally attacked for those views. Challenging their point of view is all well and good so long as it is done respectfully and constructively, no matter who they may be.

 

Having said that, please feel free to reacquaint yourselves with the http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/334648-rules-of-the-bolter-chainsword/'> Forum Rules, found here: http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/334648-rules-of-the-bolter-chainsword/