Portrayal and realism of close combat in BL fiction

[b1soul]

Didn't seem like you read through the posts based on your prior rant. Sorry if I hurt your feelings and triggered you to write the dissertation above.

 

Yes, fighting as a unit (be it at the squad level or higher) is generally good when clashing against the opposing side in close combat. Why are you treating this as somehow controversial?

Is fighting as a unit always good in every conceivable situation...I guess not. But you seem to fixated on cherry-picking exceptions to a general rule to the point that, well, I don't think you have a point anymore.

 

No one is saying marines have to close ranks shoulder-to-shoulder in every single situation, but the teamwork is oft lacking in BL's depictions of SM on SM melee. SM are supposed to be wolves to the Custodes' lions. Not really seeing that idea embodied in BL's typical "charge each other and swing away" approach.

[BrainFireBob]

Didn't seem like you read through the posts based on your prior rant. Sorry if I hurt your feelings and triggered you to write the dissertation above.

 

Yes, fighting as a unit (be it at the squad level or higher) is generally good when clashing against the opposing side in close combat. Why are you treating this as somehow controversial?

Is fighting as a unit always good in every conceivable situation...I guess not. But you seem to fixated on cherry-picking exceptions to a general rule to the point that, well, I don't think you have a point anymore.

 

No one is saying marines have to close ranks shoulder-to-shoulder in every single situation, but the teamwork is oft lacking in BL's depictions of SM on SM melee. SM are supposed to be wolves to the Custodes' lions. Not really seeing that idea embodied in BL's typical "charge each other and swing away" approach.

This is a redefinition of your repeated fixation on formations. You were not arguing cohesion, but formalized formation fighting.

 

Also, if you thought that was a rant or indicative of hurt feelings, the internet will be full of disappointment for you.

Edited March 24, 2020 by BrainFireBob

[Tyriks]

I know realism isn't BL's forte, but I would like to read about a CC-oriented Astartes chapter that focuses on group discipline, like how dominant ancient armies fought with unit cohesion and army-wide coordination, not as a collection of individual champions or berserkers.

 

I'm a bit surprised that no chapter closes ranks and presents boarding shields when closing into the CQC zone

 

 

 

Didn't seem like you read through the posts based on your prior rant. Sorry if I hurt your feelings and triggered you to write the dissertation above.

 

Yes, fighting as a unit (be it at the squad level or higher) is generally good when clashing against the opposing side in close combat. Why are you treating this as somehow controversial?

Is fighting as a unit always good in every conceivable situation...I guess not. But you seem to fixated on cherry-picking exceptions to a general rule to the point that, well, I don't think you have a point anymore.

 

No one is saying marines have to close ranks shoulder-to-shoulder in every single situation, but the teamwork is oft lacking in BL's depictions of SM on SM melee. SM are supposed to be wolves to the Custodes' lions. Not really seeing that idea embodied in BL's typical "charge each other and swing away" approach.

This is a redefinition of your repeated fixation on formations. You were not arguing cohesion, but formalized formation fighting.

 

Also, if you thought that was a rant or indicative of hurt feelings, the internet will be full of disappointment for you.

 

The very first post in the thread specifies cohesion.  Others kept bringing up formations, and the terms might have become confused as a result, but the topic was always about cohesion.

[Moonreaper666]

 

 

I know realism isn't BL's forte, but I would like to read about a CC-oriented Astartes chapter that focuses on group discipline, like how dominant ancient armies fought with unit cohesion and army-wide coordination, not as a collection of individual champions or berserkers.

 

I'm a bit surprised that no chapter closes ranks and presents boarding shields when closing into the CQC zone

 

Didn't seem like you read through the posts based on your prior rant. Sorry if I hurt your feelings and triggered you to write the dissertation above.

 

Yes, fighting as a unit (be it at the squad level or higher) is generally good when clashing against the opposing side in close combat. Why are you treating this as somehow controversial?

Is fighting as a unit always good in every conceivable situation...I guess not. But you seem to fixated on cherry-picking exceptions to a general rule to the point that, well, I don't think you have a point anymore.

 

No one is saying marines have to close ranks shoulder-to-shoulder in every single situation, but the teamwork is oft lacking in BL's depictions of SM on SM melee. SM are supposed to be wolves to the Custodes' lions. Not really seeing that idea embodied in BL's typical "charge each other and swing away" approach.

This is a redefinition of your repeated fixation on formations. You were not arguing cohesion, but formalized formation fighting.

 

Also, if you thought that was a rant or indicative of hurt feelings, the internet will be full of disappointment for you.

The very first post in the thread specifies cohesion. Others kept bringing up formations, and the terms might have become confused as a result, but the topic was always about cohesion.

Wouldn't unit cohesion only last as long as the squad remains intact? Until the first Marine in the squad dies? Edited March 25, 2020 by Moonreaper666

[BrainFireBob]

 

 

I know realism isn't BL's forte, but I would like to read about a CC-oriented Astartes chapter that focuses on group discipline, like how dominant ancient armies fought with unit cohesion and army-wide coordination, not as a collection of individual champions or berserkers.

 

I'm a bit surprised that no chapter closes ranks and presents boarding shields when closing into the CQC zone

 

Didn't seem like you read through the posts based on your prior rant. Sorry if I hurt your feelings and triggered you to write the dissertation above.

 

Yes, fighting as a unit (be it at the squad level or higher) is generally good when clashing against the opposing side in close combat. Why are you treating this as somehow controversial?

Is fighting as a unit always good in every conceivable situation...I guess not. But you seem to fixated on cherry-picking exceptions to a general rule to the point that, well, I don't think you have a point anymore.

 

No one is saying marines have to close ranks shoulder-to-shoulder in every single situation, but the teamwork is oft lacking in BL's depictions of SM on SM melee. SM are supposed to be wolves to the Custodes' lions. Not really seeing that idea embodied in BL's typical "charge each other and swing away" approach.

This is a redefinition of your repeated fixation on formations. You were not arguing cohesion, but formalized formation fighting.

 

Also, if you thought that was a rant or indicative of hurt feelings, the internet will be full of disappointment for you.

The very first post in the thread specifies cohesion. Others kept bringing up formations, and the terms might have become confused as a result, but the topic was always about cohesion.

Says cohesion, them goes on to offer an example of formation fighting. Same with the reference to army-wide.

 

Cohesion in fact is a nonsense word unless understood as formal formations in that paragraph. Any combined-arms force- you know, with fire support and comms between squads- is by definition cohesive. And they have that plenty in BL novels.

[Lord_Caerolion]

 

 

I know realism isn't BL's forte, but I would like to read about a CC-oriented Astartes chapter that focuses on group discipline, like how dominant ancient armies fought with unit cohesion and army-wide coordination, not as a collection of individual champions or berserkers.

 

I'm a bit surprised that no chapter closes ranks and presents boarding shields when closing into the CQC zone

 

Didn't seem like you read through the posts based on your prior rant. Sorry if I hurt your feelings and triggered you to write the dissertation above.

 

Yes, fighting as a unit (be it at the squad level or higher) is generally good when clashing against the opposing side in close combat. Why are you treating this as somehow controversial?

Is fighting as a unit always good in every conceivable situation...I guess not. But you seem to fixated on cherry-picking exceptions to a general rule to the point that, well, I don't think you have a point anymore.

 

No one is saying marines have to close ranks shoulder-to-shoulder in every single situation, but the teamwork is oft lacking in BL's depictions of SM on SM melee. SM are supposed to be wolves to the Custodes' lions. Not really seeing that idea embodied in BL's typical "charge each other and swing away" approach.

This is a redefinition of your repeated fixation on formations. You were not arguing cohesion, but formalized formation fighting.

 

Also, if you thought that was a rant or indicative of hurt feelings, the internet will be full of disappointment for you.

The very first post in the thread specifies cohesion. Others kept bringing up formations, and the terms might have become confused as a result, but the topic was always about cohesion.

Wouldn't unit cohesion only last as long as the squad remains intact? Until the first Marine in the squad dies?

 

 

I find it hard to believe that Astartes training wouldn't include the possibility of casualties, dude. They operate in demi-squads all the time, so they obviously understand how to operate with less than 10 guys. They're not going to drop to 9, and then suddenly forget everything they understand about tactics, and only remember how to shoot and stab really well, reach 5 and then suddenly be back to knowing how to coordinate, then become the equivalent of a hyperactive Counterstrike player with auto-aim once they drop to 4.

Hell, even modern armies would include this sort of thing in their training.

[mc warhammer]

i heard that's why the emperor destroyed the lost legions: too much cohesion fighting

[Phoebus]

Others have touched on the main points I wanted to make, such as the remarkable mental architecture and training regimen of the Space Marines, and the tactical flexibility and expertise this grants them. Here are a few thoughts — all reflecting just my humble opinion, of course:

 

“Realistic” comes down to whether or not a given author depicts combat in a way that’s authentic to the setting: its technology and the mindset that determines how it is used.

 

Melee combat is possible for the Adeptus Astartes because power armour provides significant protection against most small arms, allowing them to close in to their opponents. A Space Marine’s superhuman prowess and superior weaponry in turn makes melee combat both viable and desirable — in certain tactical situations. In most cases, however, the ability to make most targets explode from a distance, utilizing what is essentially a rapid-fire mini-rocket launcher, is more efficient. That, in turn, informs the equipment load-out for most Space Marines.

 

On the other hand, power armour does not provide the necessary protection against heavier weaponry. Whether we’re talking about artillery or lascannons, tactics and formations that rely on close order make Space Marines easier targets and would result in attrition rates that a Chapter could not sustain. Accordingly, concepts like breaching squads and their specialized equipment are limited to specific tactical situations.

 

Of course, how a Chapter of the Adeptus Astartes actually fights will be affected by their mentality and the culture that informs it. The Blood Angels, for example, may bring up solid arguments for the tactical merits of melee combat and aerial insertions... but it’s probably fair to say that the Red Thirst and their millennia-long idealization and veneration of Sanguinius play a bigger part in how they fight.

 

In my humble opinion, the above should inform how combat in M30-42 is depicted. I think it’s fair to say, however, that in practice they’re not always a consideration. More importance is placed on the representation of themes than realism — even when the “realism” in question is the setting’s, and not the real world’s. That said, is Storm of Iron a poorer story because Graham McNeill decided that walls somehow make sense in an era with artillery and orbital firepower? Does Betrayer suffer because Aaron Dembski-Bowden included an Evocati shield-wall? It depends on the reader, I suppose, and I imagine for most of us it comes down to the balance of the story being told. A reader may care more about how McNeill makes them feel about Forrix, Honsu, and Kroeger than about pointless walls. They may appreciate the thought Dembski-Bowden put into the advantage the Nails can give the World Eaters when facing disciplined warriors such as the Evocati. Of course, some readers may argue that it shouldn’t be a case of one over the other... just as some authors may argue that what’s “realistic” within the context of this setting is itself a subjective call.

Edited April 10, 2020 by Phoebus

[Rob P]

I've not read all the comments here, but I can imagine that by page 7 people have been going on about the nuance of battlefield tactics that aren't reflected in Black Library books.

 

What I want to talk about is the aesthetic of primaris marines and how they appear to be more like men-marines of the Predator/Aliens mould (albeit in power armour) rather than the more traditional OTT barely human super soldiers that i'm used to. Am i imagining this? Is this reflected in the novels? Ar they more like storm troopers than the traditional unknowable space marines?

[Noserenda]

Certainly in the novels ive read they operate exactly as oldmarines, albeit their doctrine is the heresy era specialist squads rather than the more generalist oldmarines.

Though they did have an issue in Crusade where a tunnel was too small for Tacticus armour so they could only send in reavers, fortunately most Imperial buildings are hugemongous :D