I didn't want to drag the other thread off topic. This side discussion is about which roles Sisters and Space Marines fill.

aka_mythos wrote:1: They are not within the military hierarchy
2: nor can the assert command like Space Marines can
3: They lack both rules wise and fluff wise an insertional capability that would put them at the forefront of larger formations
4: The "first in" nature of the Space Marines has always been a component who they are, so it goes without say that they are shock troops.
5: In the fluff marines are noted as operating in the smaller better equiped teams necessary to properly engage in boarding actions from boarding craft, SoB are not.

Edits are mine, I numbered it because I didn't feel like using multiple quotes (I hate reading through them so I don't want to use them myself).

1: Neither are Space Marines. In fact, Space Marines are FAR more separate from the Imperium in almost every way than the Sisters are-- the Sisters are inseparably a part of the Imperium, servants of the Imperial Cult which guides the spirit and mindset of its citizenry.

2: No, Space Marines cannot assert authority over the Imperial Guard-- not legal authority at any rate. They might be able to use their reputation to good effect, but much the same Sisters can exert religious authority, which has the same effect. A Guard commander might defer to a Space Marine. Just like they might defer to a Battle Sister. But they don't have to.

3: Fluffwise that's where they always are. I do not know where you get the idea that Sisters are not front line troops whereas Marines are. Marines do not have the numbers or equipment for front-line combat. That is not what they do-- they function similar to special forces, striking at valuable targets and withdrawing before the enemy can strike back, and then moving on to the next target.

4: Not really, Marines do not always arrive first. Quite a bit of Marine fluff has them arriving in a "big damn heroes" moment to rescue the Guard forces from a dire situation (to the point where it becomes a cliche). Regardless, this does not define a "shock trooper". "Shock troops" are frontline units that are designed to hit the enemy as hard as possible in order to break their lines open-- the grenadiers/sturmgrenadiers of WWI/WWII are a good example, soldiers equipped with short-ranged weapons and grenades who stormed enemy lines attempting to take a position rapidly. Just like Sisters-- who rapidly advance in fast-moving Rhinos and Immolators, and then attack with short-ranged firepower via bolters, stormbolters, flamers, and meltaguns.

5: Again, this is not really something that defines what a Shock Troop is. Boarding action is done by marines (as in soldiers aboard naval vessels)-- actually, not all boarding action done by the Imperium involves Marines, most of it doesn't (just like most combat doesn't involve Marines), as the Imperial Navy has its own boarding crew.

SoB utilize the same type of landers the IG use

Cite your source.

I'd put SM down as a specialist force, designed to deal with extreme threats, kind of like a veteran or specialist regiment in a modern-day army. Therefore they fill a lot of roles, not least that of cool super-soldier, which is obligatory in almost every sci-fi franchise.
I jest, but in seriousness, I'd compare them to something like the SAS or Navy Seals.

The SOB, on the other hand, are in some ways even more specialist than the SM. They are used only by the Inquisition, and so I'd say fulfil an even more niche role; that of a force for inquisitors to call upon in the direst circumstances. They're not as physically godlike as SM, but thats because they don't need to be. After all, they aren't used for the same role.

In summary,
SM=Crack troops - broad application
SoB=highly specialised troops - narrow application

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:They are used only by the Inquisition

Err, what? No.

Go read C:SoB and C:WH... they are used by the Ecclesiarchy first and foremost, to propagate its Wars of Faith (often declared in support of an Imperial Crusade, such as the Sabbat Worlds Crusade), defend important religious sites, and generally fight the enemies of the Imperium. The Inquisition only rarely uses Sisters, because the Inquisition's job is investigative in nature (Sisters are extremely unsubtle).

Oh? Whoops, my error.

Mind you, the Inquisition DOES have use for such an unsubtle hammer of an organization. Investigating a cult and finding out its location and the location of all its members-- then having the Sisters strike at them, brutally slaughtering them in front of lots of witnesses-- does a good job of spreading fear of disobeying the law and religious decrees. Which is useful. But the first and most important part is actually finding the cult. The latter part can be done with any Imperial military force I think (Guard can certainly devastate a corrupted section of a hive to set an example, and certainly Marines are capable of such strikes). So I can't say it's really the primary use of Sisters.

In a combined forces army, with Guard, Sisters, and Marines, I think the ideal solutionw ould be this:

Guard as the main line to form a rock of stability and long-ranged firepower (The anvil, so to speak, as well as its own hammer), Sisters as the vanguard to break enemy lines and storm their fortifications (thus shock troops) with short-ranged firepower, and Marines deep striking to hit valuable targets and decapitate the enemy leadership (often literally).

In the end, both have to be able to function as Shock Troopers and Special Forces.

I think Sisters are way more likely to be used as shock troopers than marines. Mainly because of the fact SoB outnumber SM so are much more expendable.

SoB are almost as well equipped (factoring in genetic alteration as well) as SM, have just as good training, and immaculate discipline.

Space Marines have to be shock troops less often than part of small organized teams but are still required to fulfil that duty often enough. Crusading chapters will be on the front-lines of their battles constantly. But even then, within that structure there are going to be groups of marines that organize into small teams and perform surgical strikes

I would also argue that both a Sister and a SM are at their peak effectiveness when they get to function as part of a small strike team.

Melissia wrote: In a combined forces army, with Guard, Sisters, and Marines, I think the ideal solutionw ould be this:

Guard as the main line to form a rock of stability and firepower, Sisters as the vanguard to break enemy lines and storm their fortifications, and Marines deep striking to hit valuable targets and decapitate the enemy leadership (often literally).

Probably, as this role would work well with power-armoured troops of any sort. However, SM do have a habit of dropping out of the sky, so I think their role would indeed be like what you've stated.

Well, IIRC only Astartes can reliably survive Drop Pod insertion, so that gives them their true unique ability I think.

Melissia wrote:I didn't want to drag the other thread off topic. This side discussion is about which roles Sisters and Space Marines fill.

aka_mythos wrote:1: They are not within the military hierarchy
2: nor can the assert command like Space Marines can
3: They lack both rules wise and fluff wise an insertional capability that would put them at the forefront of larger formations
4: The "first in" nature of the Space Marines has always been a component who they are, so it goes without say that they are shock troops.
5: In the fluff marines are noted as operating in the smaller better equiped teams necessary to properly engage in boarding actions from boarding craft, SoB are not.

Edits are mine, I numbered it because I didn't feel like using multiple quotes (I hate reading through them so I don't want to use them myself).

Ok, I'm going to bite the bullet and agree with mythos here.

1. Space Marines ARE within the hierarchy, they are right above the Imperial Guard. They are seperate in that they can choose whether or not to respond, or how to respond, but they are still within that hierarchy, as right above them is the Inquisition, which is definitely within the hierarchy. Sisters themselves fall under the Ecclesiarchy, who are also within the hierarchy.

2. A Space Marine Chapter Master is a peer of the Imperium, and can call upon Guardsmen Regiments and request aid from the Inquisition. A Canoness serves wherever The Ecclesiarchy sends her, or an Inquisitor demands her.

3. Ok, not agreeing with this one, really.

4. I completely agree here. Even if they aren't the "first in", they are used for quick insertions planetside in a lightning-assault to cripple the enemy, much like shock troops. In addition, they are often used to hit as hard as possible. I think the term Special Forces doesn't apply here because they are capable of both attack, defense, and many other types of warfare that I think Special Forces is too narrow to define.

5. While Space Marines aren't always involved in boarding actions, I'm sure the Sisters can engage in a boarding assault, if necessary. However, the Space Marine Strike Cruisers and other ships are often noted for their use of boarding craft. As the novel Soul Hunter puts it "it's deadliest and most feared weapons were already leashed into their deployment pods and awaiting the moment of launch." (Referring to the Strike Cruisers)

Yeah, pretty much.
So, so far:
Astartes: surprise assault force
Sisters: Frontline heavy infantry

Due to the drop pods, of course.

You are probably more likely to find Sisters slugging forward with Guardsman on the front lines. Leading with religious zeal and purifying flame.

Although chapters such as the Black Templars could potentially be seen in a similar position, or the Ultramarines with their PDF.

Religion would probably sway more Imperial Commanders to follow the Sisters lead, possibly with an element being based out of fear as well.

They are equally as good at breaking the moral of any Traitor or Xeno on the front lines.

Both can fill most roles well, so it's completely situational.

Cryonicleech wrote:[snip]

1. No, they're quite outside the Adeptus Munitorum-- which runs the Imperial military. Sisters are, as well.

2. Yes, they can REQUEST aid. Aid does not have to be given-- that it often is given is a mark of respect to the chapter, rather than a symbol of duty. The Guard has its own objectives, and the Marines have theirs-- these often coincide... but not always.

3. And why not? Space Marines do fight on the front lines, but that is not where they excel, yes? The reason Marines are written as fighting on the front lines is because "it sounds cool", but it's not what they're best at. It's not something they can do better than anyone else.

4. I don't think we're agreeing on what a shock trooper is, then. To me, "shock troop" is reminiscent of WWII tactics-- for example, the Soviet Shock Armies (thus the name), which spearheaded offensives on the eastern front. They were assault oriented units (in the sense of short-ranged firefights and house-to-house fighting) which were effectively the vanguard of the army.

5. Battlebarges / Strike Cruisers aren't as heavily armed as Imperial Navy ships, they're designed for rapid deployment of Astartes forces via drop pods, teleportation, or thunderhawks. Thus, when threatened they must use this offensively-- and thankfully for them it works well enough.

Seems like a number war then. (Not that this is a war, of course, =P)

1. Hmm, while they are not within the official body of the Adeptus Munitorum, they do still factor into the Imperium's military might.

2. Yes, but the fact that they have the option to call upon aid at all means that they have some weight in the Imperium, which is more than a Cannoness can do, if we're going on comparisons.

3. I wouldn't say they don't excel on the front line. They were on the front lines during the Great Crusade, and while times have changed in that they no longer are the spearhead of the Imperium, I don't think they've diminished in skill in front-line warfare.

4. In terms of being the spearhead, they were in the Great Crusade, but it would be correct that in the 41st Millennium, under your definition they are not shock troops. My definition is more of a unit that hits hard and strikes quickly, and it can be argued that they are the vanguard of many planetary assaults. And if I'm not mistaken, aren't Marines the supposed masters of the short-ranged fire-fight?

5. That's certainly true. However, for the purposes of determining if they are shock troops, I would say that since they are

A: In a short ranged-firefight (Most ships, excluding craftworlds, are pretty cramped)

B: Are the vanguard of the assault (generally, they're not always though)

and C: They are assault-oriented, and are assaulting the enemy ship

Cryonicleech wrote:[snip]

1. Same with the Sororitas then.

2. Actually the Canoness can easily do so, as Guard forces are often used in Wars of Faith and Crusades.

3. During the crusades each legion had hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Marines. That is certainly enough for a front line force. Deploying at company-level, Marines cannot effectively do frontline combat like the Guard or Sisters can-- they don't have the numbers. They might be able to function as the vanguard of an attack, but there's far better uses for them than that (and Sisters do that better due to their numbers and therefor their ability to absorb casualties).

4. My sisters dispute that on a regular basis in tabletop. Sisters aren't as good in an assault, yes, but in 3-12" range shooting very little can outdo them-- if anything can.

5. So that just means it's more comparable to, say... a modern special forces unit assaulting a large complex, than to shock troops.

Melissia wrote:3. During the crusades each legion had hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Marines. That is certainly enough for a front line force. Deploying at company-level, Marines cannot effectively hold a line like the Guard or Sisters can-- they don't have the numbers.

Yeah, pretty much. Again, you only read about this sort of thing happening in the fluff because it sounds cool. In practical terms, even the most powerful and skilled soldiers can be swamped by hordes of inferior troops - indeed, it's one of the great lessons of warfare. Only under special circumstances does the reverse happen.

4. My sisters dispute that on a regular basis in tabletop. Sisters aren't as good in an assault, yes, but in 3-12" range shooting very little can outdo them.

One of my regular opponents has an SoB army and it has been proven time and again to be able to go toe-to-toe with marines in a short-range firefight. In terms of shooty stats, SM and SoB are pretty much equal. SoB have less toughness, sure, but they have those weird holy powers to help them.

1. Fair enough

2. Also true

3. Marines have been forced on the defensive for a while now, Battles like Macragge show that even with only 100 marines (yes, the chapter's best and brightest, but a comparable Soroitas force of the same level of veterancy and numbers would have more trouble holding, I think) the Marines were able to hold off a Tyranid advance which was massive in number.

4. Certainly true, but Astartes units (Grey Hunters, CSM, Marines, etc.) have the advantage at T4. Sure, it's small, but it's an advantage nonetheless. I'd also advocate Dire Avengers with Bladestorm, but then again, I think they're the real masters of short-ranged firefights...

5. Also true, point conceded.

∞. Some arguments can never be won with some people, to the point where they in fact become pointless.

While true, IIRC wasn't their first company wiped out to a man on Macragge?

Alpharius wrote:∞. Some arguments can never be won with some people, to the point where they in fact become pointless.

Such is the futility of online discussion.

We all secretly love a bit of it though don't we... from time to time...

Melissia wrote:
2. Actually the Canoness can easily do so, as Guard forces are often used in Wars of Faith and Crusades.

No, they're actually not. The Guard are only used in "Wars of Faith" with the Munitorium's approval. The Ecclesiarchy has absolutely no control whatsoever over the Guard's deployment.
What you're talking about are the Ecclesiarchy's exploitation of a grey area where they train up Pilgrims to defend themselves while supplying them with weaponry.

Crusades are a completely different beast which require the joint approval of the Ecclesiarchy, the Inquisition, the Mechanicus and the Munitorium.
And as an aside, your average Guard Commanders are far far more likely to defer to an Astartes Commander in the field than they would a Sororitas. Sororitas are fanatics who more often than not have no real tactical expertise in large scale combat, just operations against cultists.

3. During the crusades each Legion had hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Marines. That is certainly enough for a front line force. Deploying at company-level, Marines cannot effectively do frontline combat like the Guard or Sisters can-- they don't have the numbers. They might be able to function as the vanguard of an attack, but there's far better uses for them than that (and Sisters do that better due to their numbers and therefor their ability to absorb casualties).

The Sisters are okay in a vanguard role, but they sure as hell can't do frontline combat like the Guard. Sisters are absolutely useless in anything outside of defending temples or being used against Psykers on the field.

5. So that just means it's more comparable to, say... a modern special forces unit assaulting a large complex, than to shock troops.

Again, no. They're more comparable to a SWAT team than an actual military Special Forces unit.

I certainly don't come here to win people over to my side, just to express my opinion. The very act of debate is enjoyable when both sides are civil, and provide coherent arguments for their positions. I try and support my own as well as possible, and sometimes I fail (which I hope does not happen very frequently, but I cannot judge my own arguments without bias). When that happens I admit it, re-evaluate my position, then move on.

Anyway, back on topic...

Kanluwen wrote:[snip

2a: Just like Marines, then.
2b: If you honestly believe that Sisters only ever fight against cultists, you are sorely mistaken.
3: Going to finish that thought? I do wish to know the entirety of the point I am to respond to.
5: Space Marines are not law enforcement personnel.

2a) Nope. Marines don't need any form of approval to conduct operations, period. They do it all on their own accord. They don't need anyone's actual help, for the most part--unless they're fighting a prolonged campaign.

Sisters can't do diddily without the Munitorium affording them Imperial Navy support or the Inquisition strongarming the Navy into giving them actual transport craft. Without that, your precious Sisters are effectively stranded on one world.

Just like the Guard.
2b) If you honestly believe the Sisters are actually useful against anything except Cultists, you're sorely mistaken. They're "trained" zealots. You'd find better shock troops in the ranks of Al Qaeda today than those crazed wenches.

3) Thought's finished, but you'll just reply to it with "hurrrrrr, Sisters can do everything Marines can but better!". They can't, end of story.

5) And mine wasn't a remark about Marines. It was about Sisters. Sisters are glorified PDFs with Power Armor and the backing of zealots.

Okay, I saw your edit.

3: Then you are wrong there as well. Sisters have been involved in every major conflict the Imperium has participated in since their formation.

-- The Black Crusades (not much information here aside from their presence, and therefor nothing to support your argument)
-- Armageddon (one Order's troops wiped out, but the other Order's troops were on the offense along with Guard and Astartes forces, and they were successful in that endeavor)
-- The Tyrannic invasions (many places defended successfully, only known defeat on Okassis and even that one was considered a strategic victory as they held the swarm off long enough to evacuate the entire population of the planet)
-- Sabbat Worlds Crusade (again, lack of information)

And so on. Actually, four of the six founding Sisters (the other two were non-violent) were said to have started crusades to retake sectors lost to the Imperium since the Great Crusade, but again there's almost no information on that.

The way I see it is that SOB are an elite force with a specific task. They fight mainly against humans (the ecclesiarchy doesn't fight Xenos much as they can't be converted so can be left to the otehr forces) and most of their battles are meant to bring rogue planets back into the imperium. When they do fight aliens it's because they have attacked a shrine world.

They don't have a role, that can't be covered by another imperial force. The only reason they exist is because the Ecclesiarchy need a force which they can call upon quickly and that will obey them excactly. They are like elite IG which makes them different to play, but in a war you could send in a large force of IG or a small SM force and they could do the same job eqully well.

SM are the elite special forces and shock troops. Everything they have is meant to make them look more intimidating. They may appear later in the fight but that is only for two reasons.
1. GW like marines to be the heroes, coming in at the last minute looks good.
2. Marines aren't meant to arrive first. They hold back until a point where one quck attack can change the course of the battle then they attack fast and hit hard.

When something needs to be done reliably the marines are the force best suited for it. Apart from numbers they are better at everything. Their scouts are better at infiltrating enemy lines than any other force and their ability to quickly take an objective is far better than any other imperial force.

4M2A wrote:but in a war you could send in a large force of IG or a small SM force and they could do the same job eqully well.

That depends on what kind of job you're talking about. Guard is going to have trouble when it comes to rapid assault, though they have the option to do that. Marines are going to have trouble holding a large amount of area, though they can still manage it. And so on and so forth.

Personally I prefer to see the armies looked at in unison, what they would excel at if you had the three forces working together. That way one can see their true specialties, what they have to offer the Imperium-- each one can get the job done by themselves, yet some each one gets certain jobs done better.

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:

Melissia wrote:3. During the crusades each legion had hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Marines. That is certainly enough for a front line force. Deploying at company-level, Marines cannot effectively hold a line like the Guard or Sisters can-- they don't have the numbers.

Yeah, pretty much. Again, you only read about this sort of thing happening in the fluff because it sounds cool. In practical terms, even the most powerful and skilled soldiers can be swamped by hordes of inferior troops - indeed, it's one of the great lessons of warfare. Only under special circumstances does the reverse happen.

4. My sisters dispute that on a regular basis in tabletop. Sisters aren't as good in an assault, yes, but in 3-12" range shooting very little can outdo them.

One of my regular opponents has an SoB army and it has been proven time and again to be able to go toe-to-toe with marines in a short-range firefight. In terms of shooty stats, SM and SoB are pretty much equal. SoB have less toughness, sure, but they have those weird holy powers to help them.

What? The legions never had anywhere close to "millions of marines" each. Last time I looked The Ultramarines had the most when the Heresy started at somewhere over 20,000 marines. everyone else had less. Even if this was multiplied by ten for everyone there's still no way they had even hundreds of thousands each.

They also had the Imperial Army supporting them wherever they went, but I think we're going ot have to look up the most recent fluff to find out the correct numbers-- 20,000 seems very light indeed, as they would have needed around 1,000,000 surviving loyalists to start the Chapter system, wouldn't they?

-Sabbat Worlds Crusade the Sororitas were not involved in, at all. There was more of an Astartes presence than Ecclesiarchal, and that's with the confirmed presence of a reincarnated friggin' Saint. The only tie the Sororitas had to the Sabbat Worlds was the fact that hundreds upon hundreds of years prior, a woman who was a Shepherd was declared a Saint and led a force of fanatics to reclaim a series of worlds from a Chaos occupying force.

-Black Crusade, they were mostly involved in operations on the Eastern Fringe--after making a bid for the Ecclesiarchy to take control of the Cadian sector war effort, and being told to sit down and shut the hell up and listen to Logan Grimnar by Creed.

-Armageddon is a completely different story than anything we've got a record of. The majority of the Orders present were the equivalents of the Hospitaller, and were operating in a medical capacity not a combat capacity.

So you're wrong on that note.

And again:
Crusades != Wars of Faith. You need to start understanding that, and fast, if you want productive discussions.

Yes they did have support, but once again there's absolutely no way they had millions of marines or even hundreds of thousands of marines in legion.

Logistics themselves would make it impossible given that each started at 10000 and given the (relatively) short period of the crusade involving them and the primarchs coupled with the time it takes to properly produce a marine.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:They also had the Imperial Army supporting them wherever they went, but I think we're going ot have to look up the most recent fluff to find out the correct numbers-- 20,000 seems very light indeed, as they would have needed around 1,000,000 surviving loyalists to start the Chapter system, wouldn't they?

Nah, if you read the most recent fluff only a few of the legions even had second founding chapters. The reason the number of SM is around 1 mil now is because of 10000 years of producing new chapters with the 5% tithe of gene seeds given to Mechanicus.

I don't pay much attention to fluff and I skipped over the last few posts, but I'm going to weigh in anyways 'cause I found it interesting.

The marines are like the U.S. marines - able to do any job up to and including army - level maneuvres. Their skill, training and equipment makes them both shock troops and special forces depending on what they're called to do. They have the numbers and tools for pinpoint action or large-scale warfare, and are stationed on ships to project their power.

It sounds like the SoB's are just the inquisition's version of SM's - able to do what they can do, just not at such a large scale. The inquisition just doesn't want to have to go through Chapter channels when it needs good troops fast.

A force of Battle Sisters accompanied Saint Sabbat before she was killed the first time, alongside forces from the Brazen Skulls and White Scars chapters, Imperial Guard regiments (including some very famous Lord Generals and stategists), and members of the Frateris Militia. This was hardly "a force of fanatics", because they managed to keep crusading for 105 years, and was considered largely successful. Hardly something a mere "force of fanatics" would be capable of. Check your sources (in this case, "The Sabbat Worlds Crusade" sourcebook by Dan Abnett I believe is the primary source for this).

IIRC, two orders of Sisters are stationed on Cadia itself, and fought there. I do not have the sourcebook with me, however, so if you can cite your source I will concede this.

The Second and Third invasions of Armageddon were some of the most important pieces of fluff for the Order of Our Martyred Lady, which defended Hive Tempestora for longer than any other force that was present in the city before being wiped out-- this despite betrayal by the governor leading to the attack being a massively successful surprise attack. The Order of the Argent Shroud, which was also present, was far more successful, fighting on the offense alongside the Flesh Tearers (whom they notably reported for heresy because the Flesh Tearers attacked the Armageddon Militia in the heat of battle) against the Ork horde. The source for both was, amongst other sources (such as C:SoB and the Inqusition background book) the Third War for Armageddon website, which was archived here, and GW's own website, which you can search through if you want (Though I don't know if they still have that information).

The same site also noted that they successfully attacked and destroyed forward bases of the Angels Vermillion chapter under a previous Canoness, which means they can indeed be effective against Marines.

I've got "The Sabbat Worlds Crusade" sitting right next to me. Saint Sabbat was killed before the Sabbat Worlds were reclaimed, and before those actual Guard and Space Marine forces were committed. Check your sources.

Those two Orders were "reassigned" after the Canonesses leading them tried to start crap against the Space Wolves for allowing The 13th Company to operate unopposed in Imperial space.

I don't really consider the SoB to be shock troops or special forces, at least not deliberately. They seem to just be the ecclesiarchy's private (but otherwise general purpose) army.

I'm sure if the ecclesiarchy were poverty stricken, then SoB would be something akin to female imperial guard (possibly with better leadership~faith). But as it happens the ecclesiarchy is super rich and powerful with money to burn, so they can afford to kit out their troops with all the best armour, weapons and training.

Of course that is just in fluff terms. In game terms they appear to serve very much the same role as Space Marines.

Alpharius wrote:∞. Some arguments can never be won with some people, to the point where they in fact become pointless.

Wasn't really giving up, just agreeing on some points.

Now I haven't read any of the Sabbat world fluff, but even if they weren't present, I still believe that Soroitas are the special forces, while marines remain more of a shock trooper role.

I think a lot of this just has to do with people not agreeing on what each of those terms mean...

Just to take it from Wikipedia, as I can't get to the library right now and get access to any hardcore military publications:

Shock troops or assault troops are infantry formations and their supporting units, intended to lead an attack. Shock troop is a loose translation of the German word "Stoßtrupp". The units which contain assault troops are typically organized for mobility, with the intention that they will penetrate through enemy defenses and attack into the enemy's vulnerable rear areas.

Although the term shock troop became popular in the 20th century, the concept is not a new one, see for example the use by Napoleonic era armies of the forlorn hope. Presently, the term is rarely used explicitly, as the strategic concepts behind it have become standard contemporary military thinking (see section After World War II).

Special Forces are VERY different than shock troops, but can operate in the capacity of shock troops.

Special forces are versatile and agile military assets capable of providing discreet reconnaissance, surveillance and capacity building to other states security forces. They are suited to operating against informally structured, irregular and asymmetric forces and capable of operating independently, or in direct support of either conventional military forces or other government departmental requirements. They are high value assets, commanded at the strategic level that deliver effects disproportionately to their size.

Excluding some chapters like the Raven Guard the Space Marines seem to be a little too unsubtle to be special forces. Same with the Sisters imho.

Melissia wrote:They also had the Imperial Army supporting them wherever they went, but I think we're going ot have to look up the most recent fluff to find out the correct numbers-- 20,000 seems very light indeed, as they would have needed around 1,000,000 surviving loyalists to start the Chapter system, wouldn't they?

You're thinking of the number of Astartes in the 41st Millennium, when the 2nd Founding took place there were considerably less than that.

In Codex: Ultramarines we are told that the old Legions devided into fewer than five Chapters (the Space Wolves only two and the Salamanders none at all.) The Ultramarines on the other hand who came through the Heresy relatively unscathed devided into twenty-three Chapters, according to the Apocrypha of Skaros. If we add up all of the Secound Founding Chapters, plus the Chapters which retained the original Legion names and taking into account the twenty-three Primogenitor Chapters we can roughly estiamte that there were forty-nine thousand Astartes at the time of the Second Founding.


Just to add some points to the where the Astartes sit in the Imperial Hierarchy it must be remembered that all Chapters exist outside the Imperium, they have no High Lord or any kind of representative in the Senatorum Imperialis. The newer background ommits some very interesting facts about Chapters which make their position much clearer.

For instance, the collective name for the Astartes is always written these days as the Adeptus Astartes but in the older background they were known as the Legionnes Astartes. The title of Adeptus Astartes was reserved for those Chapters who controlled a world. By having a homeworld the Chapter Master was able to take the title of Adeptus or Adept of the Priesthood of Earth, as he became an Imperial Commander. The Chapter by extension was then able to call itself Adeptus Astartes.

Looking at it from this angle it is easy to see the authority inherent with any Chapter of Adeptus Astartes as the Chapter Master is an Imperial Commander and the Chapter is then able to operate with the beenfit of that authority. The Sororitas however do not have this kind of authority but their role as religious police does allow them to do a fair bit even so; the extent of which is detailed fairly extensively in Rogue Trader.

idget wrote:Excluding some chapters like the Raven Guard the Space Marines seem to be a little too unsubtle to be special forces. Same with the Sisters imho.

Unsubtle? Possibly, as I doubt dropping out of the sky in artificial comets is considered stealthy. But just because that isn't subtle doesn't mean it isn't effective as a tactic. After all, having ten or so 8ft tall super-soldiers burst out of a drop pod in the middle of your position would probably be terrifying enough to throw the enemy into disorder. Not all special forces have to be subtle, as long as they have a significant effect on the battle.

idget wrote:Excluding some chapters like the Raven Guard the Space Marines seem to be a little too unsubtle to be special forces. Same with the Sisters imho.

In a modern context, "special forces" to many people means "stealth."

Not necessarily the case.

While many operations carried out by SFOD operatives demand a measure of subtlety, many do not. Modern US special forces (I can't speak for any other country) carry out a wide spectrum of operations, from undercover reconnaissance to the far less subtle armed sweep and clear (referred to before the Vietnam War as "search and destroy") operation.

The Marines can only do half of that, with the exception of Scouts, which are still limited (and, arguably, not yet full Marines). They're completely unsuited to subtlety, and even chapters like the Raven Guard who have a propensity for stealth ops and behind-the-lines sorties are still doing it while stomping around in power armor.

Calling the Space Marines the Imperium's special forces is only addressing half of that role.

The other half is arguably carried out by the Inquisition (though not the Sororitas), the Officio Assassinorum, and, quite possibly, the Imperial Guard, though I wouldn't be able to cite an example of the last one - it simply stands to reason.

As for the concept of "shock troops," every single fighting force in the Imperium has those. The Imperial Guard has great masses of mechanized infantry and Leman Russes to perform this task, the Astartes in general do it well, and the Sororitas are capable of it, though not as often used in that capacity.

These two terms, if we're going with the modern definitions, are far too abstract to be applied to any one branch of the Imperium's military might. Each branch is fully capable of at least part of each role.

Therefore, this debate is sort of silly.

For the Imperial Guard's special forces, it'd be the Stormtroopers. The Inquisition's stormtroopers are supposed to be the top one percent of all stormtroopers or something to that effect.

Melissia wrote:For the Imperial Guard's special forces, it'd be the Stormtroopers. The Inquisition's stormtroopers are supposed to be the top one percent of all stormtroopers or something to that effect.

From a "sweep and clear" standpoint, absolutely, but I wasn't sure if the Imperial Guard had operatives that handle the other half of special forces work.

Or do the Stormtroopers do that too?

Similar to modern SFOD-D?

The Stormtroopers are trained in stealth operations, insertion behind enemy lines, sabotage, etc.

This is represented by their Special Operations rule in tabletop, though tabletop doesn't really represent real world tactics naturally. You choose between "Airborne Assault", "Behind Enemy Lines", and "Reconnaissance" at the beginning of the game, each one having a set of special rules they get.

Well there you are, then. Forget the Astartes and Sororitas, the IG chuckle at their posturing and religious exclamations, then go do the real work.

Until it gets too tough for them, that is. I'll never concede that particular point!

If it's too tough for the Guard, you just don't have enough Guard.

Everyone knows that

Melissia wrote:

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:They are used only by the Inquisition

Err, what? No.

Go read C:SoB and C:WH... they are used by the Ecclesiarchy first and foremost, to propagate its Wars of Faith (often declared in support of an Imperial Crusade, such as the Sabbat Worlds Crusade), defend important religious sites, and generally fight the enemies of the Imperium. The Inquisition only rarely uses Sisters, because the Inquisition's job is investigative in nature (Sisters are extremely unsubtle).

More Offten than not, the Inquisition uses Highly Trained Veteren teams to accompany their Agents

Yeah, those kinds of teams (especially stormtroopers) are far less likely to attract attention than Sisters are.

I think GW really needs to drop the unthinking zealot image for SOB's, I'd far rather they were stoic, faithful, inspiring, and tactically adept rather than likely to forget all strategy and charge a tyranid swarm with the sole intent of nutting the hive tyrany as they seem to be portrayed at the moment.

On topic however, I think they are both adept shock troops, I see Sisters as being more likely to be deployed on the front line than SM purely because normal humans seem to be as intimidated marines as they are reassured by them, whereas I think they'd be a lot more Inspired by the sisters.

Oh, I disagree. Their unwavering fanaticism is why they're awesome.

The Imperial Guard venerates the Emperor, but only so that he'll protect them in battle.

The Astartes venerate the Emperor, but put Chapter cult first and foremost.

But the Sisters - faith is purest when it is unquestioning, and theirs is exactly that. They serve the God-Emperor of Mankind, and carry out His will without question or hesitation.

That's why they kick as much ass as they do.

You want stoic, faithful, inspiring, and tactically adept? Play Astartes.

I already do thanks lots, but the point I want to get rid of is that they're such fanatical zealots that they'll just chase after the enemy and sacrifice themselves in such pointless ways and leave the other faithful like guard and civvies to suffer the consequences, a la that Ciaphas Cain book with them in and at least one other I'm sure but my memory fails

You say that like it's a bad thing.

They're martyrs. It's kind of what they do.

What about the death watch?In one of my books they say the run spec. ops. for the Inq.

Again, define "special ops."

If you're talking about point insertion, sweep and clear, or small-scale take and hold operations, absolutely, the Deathwatch does exactly that. Specifically for the Ordo Xenos, not the Inquisition as a whole.

If you're talking about stealth reconnaissance or wetwork, that'd fall under the purview of the Officio Assassinorum.

The Deathwatch, clandestine as they are, are still Space Marines clomping about in power armor. They're not stealthy or subtle.

I guess the problem I have is the way its portrayed i.e that they're not selflessly sacrificing themselves, its just that they're monumentally stupid and ignorant of the causes of their actions, but I guess this is all down to the lack of actual Sisters themed books/fluff, all the things I've read have been from the marine/guard/civvie perspective and so its not focussing on the sacrifice just the problems they cause the protagonists.

And it is a bad thing if they go off on one leaving a hole in pdf lines for nids to go eat people in a chapel, how could that not be a bad thing?

Because that's awesome.

And the cardinal rule of 40k is that if it's cool enough, logic need not apply.

So there.

SaintHazard wrote:Because that's awesome.

And the cardinal rule of 40k is that if it's cool enough, logic need not apply.

So there.

Ok, let me get this straight, you think its cool that the sisters only get portrayed as daft, and do things that directly endanger other less militant faithful?

Each to their own but that suggests to me you like them to look stupid, rather than fanatically devoted.

Or am I reading this wrong?

I think its important to add context since Melissa quoted me out of context.

My quote comes out of a discussion on the new Caestus boarding ship. Melissa asserted that Sisters of Battle should have them. I said they shouldn't necessarily have them, since the Sisters of Battle's modus operandi for operations is not one that lends itself to being classified as shock troops, which the Caestus is immediately designed for. This led to a discussion of what makes Marines shock troops and Sisters of Battle not.

I do not deny that the Sisters of Battle are a power house or that they conduct themselves as the militant arm of the Ordo Hereticus, but just being zealots willing to charge into battle and wearing heavy armor, doesn't mean they fit the definition of shock troops.

aka_mythos wrote:1: They are not within the military hierarchy
2: nor can the assert command like Space Marines can
3: They lack both rules wise and fluff wise an insertional capability that would put them at the forefront of larger formations
4: The "first in" nature of the Space Marines has always been a component who they are, so it goes without say that they are shock troops.
5: In the fluff marines are noted as operating in the smaller better equiped teams necessary to properly engage in boarding actions from boarding craft, SoB are not.

I shall elaborate...
1. Sisters of Battle while a paramilitary orgnization, from legal stand point they are Military. It is like how the CIA run around Iraq and Afganistan in para-military units, but they are not military. Just as the CIA is a civilian authority, the SoB are an ecclesiarchical authority, both have their own powers but are not in a military chain of command of the military, they each require authorization from a higher authority President, general, or Inquisitor.

2. Imperial Guard do not have to listen to a Space Marine because he is in a different command structure. Just as a Navy ensign doesn't have to take operational orders from an Army officer. The Space Marines though are noted as taking command of Planetary Defense Forces. Sister of Battle, while shown fighting side by side other forces, are more often then not taking command of Adeptus Arbites, once again pointing to the distinction of their separate origins for authority. Simultaneously SoB do not have the autonomous military authority to wage battle, their authority comes from the Ecclesiarchy and the Inquisitors not the authority of the full council of the High Lords of Terra.

3. There is a distinction here between being a frontline force and being a vanguard force. Shocktroops are at the heart of a vanguard, who are specifically tasked with making penetrating strikes to weaken critical points in an enemy line, so that the greater mass of the army may advance. Space Marine and shocktroops are also used to make hit and run strikes at enemy targets. The faster moving capabilities of the Space Marine forces give them the ability to do more than just lead the charge and give them many roles.

4. Here I'm speaking of the nature and capabilities of the Marines, this not to say they are always the first to arrive on a planet, as Melissa infers, but that they are the first into a geographic region or first into an enemy stronghold, when they are present.

5. Again this is not to say that boarding, like Melissa infers, are a defining characteristic of shocktroops. The critical part of the above statement however is that they can function in smaller autonomous teams in a oranizationally smaller and quick to react formation, that these are characteristic of shocktroops as well special ops, but not of SoB.

Yes the Imperial Navy and Imperial Guard have shock troops, they're called Strom Troopers. I never asserted there weren't other shock troops, just that SoB are not congruent to that function.

It boils down to this Melissa thinks SoB should have a Caestus boarding ship because the SoB are shock troops. I say the fact they don't have Caestus boarding ships is symptomatic of SoB not fitting a organizational structure that could employ such a craft.

Its rarely directly addressed but the Ordo Hereticus and by extension SoB deal predominantly with the threats of mutants and influxes of dangerous psykers, that both of those point to the civilian population as their main concern as threats. Coming down to a planet to purge all of those heretics from a planet, while trying to leave intact critical infrastructure, is not a small scale or speedy operation. In such a blanket operation there would be no need to have a space to planet insertional capability in line with a Caesus boarding ship, since you're talking about landing thousands and thousands of personel and not squad operations. The scope of their target is in some ways too large for what a shock troop unit would be used for.

Melissia wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:SoB utilize the same type of landers the IG use

Cite your source.

Codex Sisters of Battle, you see larger vehicles and large landers. Those things are more characteristic of the Imperial Guard, since all marine equipment comes planet side by lighter insertional means like teleporter, droppod, or thunderhawk and the SoB equipment wouldn't fit on them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As to the bigger topic here... a chapter of marines are not special forces... Deathwatch are special forces, Sternguard and Vanguard could be used by a chapter as special forces, but not necessarily. Today most special forces originate from the shock troops of the past. The critical difference between special forces and shock troops is a heightened autonomy that allows them to focus on the clandestine in conducting warfare against strategic targets rather than tactical targets.

SaintHazard wrote:They're martyrs. It's kind of what they do.

No, what martyrs do is die, often needlessly. Sisters of Battle are holy warriors of the Emperor. They don't need to die, they need to make their enemies die for them.

Melissia wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:They're martyrs. It's kind of what they do.

No, what martyrs do is die, often needlessly. Sisters of Battle are holy warriors of the Emperor. They don't need to die, they need to make their enemies die for them.

Mel I am 100% with you on this. They should be self sacrificing when they its necessary (holding that hive while the populace escapes like you mentioned earlier) but not just throwing themselves to their deaths like some group of amazingly daft, power armoured, depressed Lemmings (as all BL stuff seems to show them as). On that note but a little Off Topic, Mel do you know of any books that are from their perspective (and hopefully a bit less demeaning than the representations I've seen thus far)?

Faith and Fire is the only one I'd recommend.

I'm not saying they should die needlessly, but if completing their mission requires throwing themselves at the enemy and dying so that someone else doesn't have to, then yeah. That's in their job description.

And then they're not just "dead Sisters," they're martyrs.

Martyrs do not die needlessly - that's the exact opposite of the definition of "martyr."

Martyrs die for the good of others. And Sisters do that. In spades.

Yeah, but if you look at my example it show sisters going nuts and nearly screwing over a load of refugee's sheltering in a chapel, just so they could throw themselves at a swarm, and you seemed to react positively to that, hence it sounded to me like you wanted them to just throw themselves stupidly at the enemy and die.

I think that to answer this question you need to exactly define what is a shock troop. But i would say SM are special forces.

DEATH89 wrote:Yeah, but if you look at my example it show sisters going nuts and nearly screwing over a load of refugee's sheltering in a chapel, just so they could throw themselves at a swarm, and you seemed to react positively to that, hence it sounded to me like you wanted them to just throw themselves stupidly at the enemy and die.

Well no one said individual Sisters were smart.

So that time they didn't do they job. Like at all.

But the whole zealotry thing needs to stay. Maybe make them smarter about how they throw around that holy wrath.

SaintHazard wrote:Well no one said individual Sisters were smart.

Actually GW did. Sisters are "shining examples of all that is good about humanity"-- GW's exact words. If stupidity is amongst those virtuous traits, then that says a lot of things about GW and none of them good.

wait the sisters are the good of humanity? I thought or at least it seemed that they were every thing thats bad about humanity

It's on the first page of C:WH-- they're supposed to be examples of everything good about humanity.

yet they use Arco Flagellants among other things and they routinely burn people who could of just been accused of any thing

That's the rather twisted version of 'good' that we've got in the Grim Darkness of the Far Future!

The Sisters do not perform arco-flagellation, or command arco-flagellants in battle. That is the Imperial Church's job (indeed, priests are the only ones allowed to control arco-flagellants). Same with Penitent Engines.

As for burning them alive, would you rather the Sisters let them live so that the Inquisition can... interrogate them? Frankly in most peoples' cases, burning them alive is a much cleaner death. Even without the religious implications of purifying their soul, it's far more pleasant than what they might have suffered under the hands of the Inquisition. Furthermore, Sisters are much more likely to defend civilians than to burn them alive, and it is only those who are under suspicion (in 40k, this suspicion is more often than not justified) who are in any danger. The Sisters Hospitalier in particular are revered by the populace.

Melissia wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:Well no one said individual Sisters were smart.

Actually GW did. Sisters are "shining examples of all that is good about humanity"-- GW's exact words. If stupidity is amongst those virtuous traits, then that says a lot of things about GW and none of them good.

By and large, sure. But any time you get a lot of people in one place, all believing in the same thing, stupidity will, from time to time, ensue.

I dunno about you, but I play the Imperium because they're the bad guys.

Does that mean anyone else is the good guy? Nah.

40k is beautiful in that its creators delved into human nature and decided that all sentient creatures are bastards.

I like that. 40k is a universe where bad guys kill bad guys, and everyone proclaims themselves the good guys.

Maybe. But I like to think that the faction I'm playing, whichever one it is that I am playing at the time (Be it Orks, Guard, or Sisters) are actually competent.

One reason I like to cadian guard is because they have CREEEED! (bad way to use but I had to)

I refuse to believe that organizations of human beings are competent.

It's a pretty good rule of thumb, worked for me so far.

Pessimism and misanthropy are amusing, but while that might be true of the rela world I at least would like to think that in a fantasy environment, competence in humans is a possibility

Then I would recommend Star Trek, or perhaps Battlestar Galactica, where individual heroics compliment mass cooperation and the day is always saved.

I like the grim darkness of the far future because it doesn't work that way.

Actually it does work this way if you read the 40k fiction. Or if you play Dark Heresy/Rogue Trader/Deathwatch.

Sisters don't have much of their own fiction. Most of the non-Sisters fiction depicts them as slowed and incompetent.

Notable exceptions to commonplace rules.

Diamonds in the rough, if you will.

Flukes that are notable enough to make it into stories. We have those in real life, you know.

But by and large, the Imperium works quite like the modern world: the rich are seperated from the poor by orders of magnitude and beaurocrats ruin everything for everyone else.

After all, in a galaxy of millions of planets, each with billions of inhabitants, someone somewhere IS going to get it right once in a while, and because that's the exception, not the rule, that's what they write the stories about!

Which is a nice supposition and all, but in truth humans in 40k are nowhere near as incompetent as you seem to claim. The bureaucracy in place, though labyrinthine, is actually rather effective for running millions of worlds each of which have a different culture and a different ruling style. They have to keep track of countless trillions of humans in imperfect situations, and for the most part it actually works.

Which is more than we can say about modern bureaucracy.

Until a planet with a population of billions is destroyed because there may have been a cult to Slaanesh somewhere on the Eastern continent possibly maybe.

Mostly because a cyclonic torpedo is easier and more cost effective than sending an Inquisitor.

This is a universe where "mechanized regiments" are "mechanized" in that APCs take them to the battlefield, then leave because the APCs are more valuable than the men.

I really don't think it's any better than today. Just bigger.

SaintHazard wrote:Until a planet with a population of billions is destroyed because there may have been a cult to Slaanesh somewhere on the Eastern continent possibly maybe.

So, what was that you said about rare occurrences in a previous post now? Are you going to continue standing by that statement, or does this post mean you retract it?

This one is far, far rarer than things actually going right of the Imperium. The Imperium does not like to destroy worlds or wipe them of their population.

But my second example is about as common as it gets.

Just about anytime you see a Guard regiment deploying in a combat zone.

Which is often.

I've read far more fluff where Chimeras stay to deliver fire support than leave, so I would have to ask you for a citation for that assertion.

edit: Also, let's try and steer this back on topic.

Where all the Chimeras stay? Enough to transport several thousand men? I don't think so.

One or two per platoon, maybe.

I still ask for a citation.

No, I anti-cited you. There's no quid pro quo here.

Then you concede you are wrong? Good, let's move back on topic

Burden of proof lies upon the accuser, not the accused! Show me an example where it aw you're right I lost this one.

Anyway, what the hell is the topic at this point?

The first and third Ciaphas Cain books are the first examples that spring to my mind.

The first book has them only leave the Chimeras behind because of the rough terrain of a heavily bombarded city sector, so they had to use sentinels instead. The third book has them use them as proper tnansports and fire support in several occasions.


The topic is still the same as it always was-- what do you classify the various armies of the Imperium as?

storm trooper/elysian are Special forces, Steel legions/ Cadian shock troops = shock troops thats for the IG, I dont know if you could classify any other regiments as one or the other, but those are the give aways

Just because GW throws these classifications around doesn't mean they are correctly used. So just because GW says Cadian are shock troops and Elysians are special forces doesn't make it true. Elysians are shock troops, the D-99 are more like special forces. Cadians are portrayed as line troops, not as any sort indoctrinated formation for pushing through enemy lines to generate weak points. Karsikins are the Cadian special forces and shock troop. A whole army of shock troops just move an enemy line back, they don't create the localized moment of weakness that shock troopers do.

The label of Cadians as shock troops originated from 2nd edition when GW wasn't sure if regiments were self contained armies or that an IG army was different IG regiments being specialist that intermixed into that army, where GW thought about using "Cadian Shock Troopers" in the same way they use Fire Dragons or Striking Scorpions as distinct units. Its one reason why the 2nd edition IG regiments all seemed to have distinct specialties.

The question in the thread title seems redundant. Shock Troopers often are a form of special forces . You can be both.

LordofHats wrote:Shock Troopers often are a form of special forces

Uh. Since when? They've got two radically different definitions.

Try a dictionary before posting nonsense all over the internet.

SaintHazard wrote:
Uh. Since when? They've got two radically different definitions.

Try a dictionary before posting nonsense all over the internet.

Definitions? It's hard to define something when the words are used so loosely as you see here. Read a book on military history. It's better.

The German Stosstruppen were classified as special forces. So were the Aditi of WWI. US Army Rangers too. All were formed and organized to fulfill the role of shock troops. Depending on how you look at it you could even call the Airborne shock troops.

Shock Trooper is a combat role. Special Forces denotes a type of military unit that can broadly be called one with more advanced training, experience, and often better equipment that operate in a more specialized chain of command for specific tasks. You can in fact be both. Not all Shock Troops are Special Forces but the title implies a comparison of a combat role and a form of unit organization. They do not mutually exclude one another. Both terms are used rather loosely though so a lot of people get confused as to their meaning. Nothing excludes Special Forces from assuming the role of Shock Troops (EDIT: Well, you could say it's not cost efficient to maintain a Special Forces unit to fulfill the role general units should be capable of in the first place). It's a meaningless comparison.

Most modern special forces units evolved from units of shock troop. The main difference is the tactical and strategic use of the unit. Special Forces are insertionary units that operate within the clandestine towards strategic ends. Shock troops, are more of an advance tactical force. The distinction being the scope of what they want to accomplish. Shock troops act on missions to turn the tide of battle, while special forces act in roles to deal with threats and targets that impact a larger scope, the war or campaign.

aka_mythos wrote:Most modern special forces units evolved from units of shock troop. The main difference is the tactical and strategic use of the unit. Special Forces are insertionary units that operate within the clandestine towards strategic ends. Shock troops, are more of an advance tactical force. The distinction being the scope of what they want to accomplish. Shock troops act on missions to turn the tide of battle, while special forces act in roles to deal with threats and targets that impact a larger scope, the war or campaign.

If all you ever used to define Special Forces were movies and video games and the last 50 years you'd be correct, but that's not what Special Forces are. Special Forces is simply a unit trained and equipped to perform a tasks that general troops are not capable of or whom could not achieve the objectives effectively. They aren't limited to strategic ends. You seem to have over defined the words based on a notion of how they are presented in fictional media and what they do today in modern militaries. If we were to use your definition of special forces, most special forces wouldn't really be special forces. The oldest role of special forces is force multiplication, which isn't strictly strategic and many modern special forces still fill that role (US Army Rangers). You also seem to be under the illusion that Special Forces are somehow new. Special Forces are present in militaries going back thousands of years. Just because their primary role is now in more abstract and unconventional fields of warfare doesn't change how the phrase is defined.

The purpose of shock troops wasn't to turn the tide of battle. Shock troops were merely combat units used to lead assaults; specially trained forces filled the role during WWI and WWII. Specially trained troops is the definition of Special Forces. The goal of any military asset is to turn the tide of battle. By your definition everything is a shock troop, right down to the guys driving supply trucks so the soldiers don't starve on the front lines. Being special forces doesn't exclude you from the role of shock troops. We still use special forces as shock troops in some cases.

We don't see Special Forces used as shock troops much anymore because modern militaries no long believe it cost efficient. Any standard infantry force should be capable of launching such assaults without the need for specialized troops. What Rangers and Aditi were specially trained to do is now considered a standard ability for any properly trained infantry force.

The Initial release of the Cadian's new line if I remeber was built around the Shock Mentality. Just because they are guard doesnt men they cant be shock troops. Like with anything in this setting the 40k universe is what you make it! If you think there is good in the Imperium then there is. Not saying they are the good guys, not even close. But ITs not all Death and Despair and hopelessness.

With that said, You can have a Cadian Shock Army. Its what the Russians did. There were the Infantry Divisions and Artilliery Regiments and there were Shock Armies. What classifies Shock & Special Forces, and Line Infantry I believe depends on what you equip them with.

Space Marines have their own Line formations. See I think the Auxillery Companies like 6th, 7th, and 8th which are just Tactical Squads & Devestator Squads. They are not ALL small elite forces. Yes they excellence at Orbital Deployments, but once down there, they are front line Troops. Holding the beachhead while the rest of the chapter or allies deploy.

Same thing with Imperial Guard.
They have their Shock Forces. Specifically equipped forces that are mobile, close action forces. Special Weapon Groups Backed up by mobile Infantry Platoons. However, Im sure Cadians also have their "frontline" formations that just dig in.

About the only force I would say are not capable of Frontline operations are Sisters of Battle. Not that they couldnt. They just dont have the equipment. They cant have Longrange Weapons. They are built for Close actions. Which makes them more like Firebrigade Units (in WWII concepts.) Like the SS Regiments (not to make an idelogical comparison) Just, Elite battle groups sent to shore up where the line is thinnest. High Morale and campable of making more common soldiers around them fight harder! Whether through fear or inspiration.

So, in the end! Going to say that all armies in the Imperium are capable of all aspects of war. Especially Spacemarines. Afterall, the Imperial Guard cant wait around for a Chapter to come aid them if a Planet has to be taken. They sometimes have to do it themselves. Thus, Elysium Drop Drops Valks the whole Nine Yards come into play.

( I say no to proper puncutation!)

I gather that the Aditi were shock troops, but i've never heard or read about them in any WWI or WWII material i've seen.

LordofHats wrote:If all you ever used to define Special Forces were movies and video games and the last 50 years you'd be correct, but that's not what Special Forces are. Special Forces is simply a unit trained and equipped to perform a tasks that general troops are not capable of or whom could not achieve the objectives effectively. They aren't limited to strategic ends. You seem to have over defined the words based on a notion of how they are presented in fictional media and what they do today in modern militaries. If we were to use your definition of special forces, most special forces wouldn't really be special forces.

This is the Defense Departments definition... A military unit that performes

(DOD) wrote: Operations conducted in hostile, denied, or politically sensitive environments to achieve military, diplomatic, informational, and/or economic objectives employing military capabilities for which there is no broad conventional force requirement. These operations often require covert, clandestine, or low visibility capabilities. Special operations are applicable across the range of military operations. They can be conducted independently or in conjunction with operations of conventional forces or other government agencies and may include operations through, with, or by indigenous or surrogate forces. Special operations differ from conventional operations in degree of physical and political risk, operational techniques, mode of employment, independence from friendly support, and dependence on detailed operational intelligence and indigenous assets. Also called SO.

http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/dod_dictionary/data/s/470.html
http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/dod_dictionary/data/s/49.html

That's the definition I'd use. Me defining the ends of their goals is a paraphrasing of "hostile, denied, or politically sensitive environments to achieve military, diplomatic, informational, and/or economic objectives" since those are not conventional goals and do not insist upon the conventional goals of a battle.

LordofHats wrote:The oldest role of special forces is force multiplication, which isn't strictly strategic and many modern special forces still fill that role (US Army Rangers). You also seem to be under the illusion that Special Forces are somehow new. Special Forces are present in militaries going back thousands of years. Just because their primary role is now in more abstract and unconventional fields of warfare doesn't change how the phrase is defined.

Except only the 75th Ranger Regiment is a special forces unit. The rest are organized as elite light infantry and are considered conventional warfare forces.

Force multiplication is a measure of elite unit capabilities and not a measure of special forces units; though special forces are rated for because they are elite, they are not done so just because they're special forces. It is for the sake of book keeping more than anything else.

LordofHats wrote:
The purpose of shock troops wasn't to turn the tide of battle. Shock troops were merely combat units used to lead assaults; specially trained forces filled the role during WWI and WWII. Specially trained troops is the definition of Special Forces. The goal of any military asset is to turn the tide of battle. By your definition everything is a shock troop, right down to the guys driving supply trucks so the soldiers don't starve on the front lines. Being special forces doesn't exclude you from the role of shock troops. We still use special forces as shock troops in some cases.

You're taking a single color phrasing and using it as my definition. I was trying to contrast the scopes of the two, based on what I had said in previous posts. I don't think its necessary to repeat myself or right paragraphs in every post.

Heres how I would define: Shock troops are elite, specially trained, conventional warfare units, whose purpose as a front line combatant is to identify and exploit tactical weak points in enemy formations and battle positions and exploit them through mobility, speed, and insertional methods in conjunction with and through the support of more conventional forces.

LordofHats wrote:
We don't see Special Forces used as shock troops much anymore because modern militaries no long believe it cost efficient. Any standard infantry force should be capable of launching such assaults without the need for specialized troops. What Rangers and Aditi were specially trained to do is now considered a standard ability for any properly trained infantry force.

You're talking out your posterior. To make it clearer, the 75th Rangers are special forces, the rest of the army Rangers are shock troops. What I said was that the majority of Special Forces units originated from the specialized shock troop units. Yes while a conventional force can be used in the role of shock troops, that doesn't mean they are trained as shock troops and that is often to the failing of such an inadequately tasked unit.

I don't think you know all the differences between Ranger training and standard infantry training. There are aspects of overlap, and that overlap has grown as the emphasis on certain abilities have grown but there are still a number of distinctions. The lines have blurred because of the growing distance between units and the smaller operational sizes of those units.The main way modern shock troop units are used, are as the conventional warfare elements that directly support special operations.

By that definition, mythos, an unarmed diplomat can be an elite shock trooper.

Melissia wrote:By that definition, mythos, an unarmed diplomat can be an elite shock trooper.

Exactly.

Welcome to the DoD.

This is why nobody uses the government's definitions unless they're making money off of it.

aka_mythos wrote:Operations conducted in hostile, denied, or politically sensitive environments to achieve military, diplomatic, informational, and/or economic objectives employing military capabilities for which there is no broad conventional force requirement. These operations often require covert, clandestine, or low visibility capabilities. Special operations are applicable across the range of military operations. They can be conducted independently or in conjunction with operations of conventional forces or other government agencies and may include operations through, with, or by indigenous or surrogate forces. Special operations differ from conventional operations in degree of physical and political risk, operational techniques, mode of employment, independence from friendly support, and dependence on detailed operational intelligence and indigenous assets. Also called SO.

Just because the DoD defines something as such doesn't make them factually or historically correct. Above is the modern usage of Special Forces and how the US Military and most modern Militaries now organize and deploy their Special Forces. Special Forces have been deployed in conventional combat. They still are in spite of the above stated mandate for Special Forces (And I'll add this sounds more like a definition of Special Operations than Special Forces).

Except only the 75th Ranger Regiment is a special forces unit. The rest are organized as elite light infantry and are considered conventional warfare forces.

The 75th is what I intended. And they are often deployed to operate in conventional roles of warfare.

Force multiplication is a measure of elite unit capabilities and not a measure of special forces units; though special forces are rated for because they are elite, they are not done so just because they're special forces. It is for the sake of book keeping more than anything else.

Force Multiplication is not a measure of elite unit capabilities at all. It a phrase used to describe a combination of elements or assets that make a military force more effective. The Multiplication factor is derived from what it would take to achieve that same level of effectiveness without said asset or element. For example, lets say that 50 infantry are going to assault an enemy position. The position is heavily fortified. We can give them a tank, or we can give them 50 more infantry to enable them to take that objective. The value difference between the tank and the 50 infantry is the multiplication factor. In the example, the factor is 2. You just enable fifty infantry and a tank through combined arms to achieve a goal that otherwise would have taken 100 infantry.

Being elite has nothing to with it. It is a measure of effectiveness. The same example could have been used saying that instead of a tank, we gave those 50 infantry support from a sniper team and a squad of Green Berets. In this case special forces are seen operating in conventional combat using their own nature to multiply effectiveness. This can be a boost to ally moral from having these elite soldiers present, or improved effectiveness from their greater experience and superior training etc.

Heres how I would define: Shock troops are elite, specially trained, conventional warfare units, whose purpose as a front line combatant is to identify and exploit tactical weak points in enemy formations and battle positions and exploit them through mobility, speed, and insertional methods in conjunction with and through the support of more conventional forces

Special Forces often engage in conventional combat operations even today. The role of Special Forces in warfare has shifted time and time again for thousands of years. They have always been and always will be practitioners of the unconventional, but in conflicts throughout history we've seen them perform conventional roles. They are differentiated by being able to do things standard forces can not. You seem to have a limited understanding of convention as it pretains to warfare. Convention is not limited to the role you perform in combat. Shock Troops is a conventional role; lead an assault and break enemy lines. But there are unconventional ways to go about it.

I don't think you know all the differences between Ranger training and standard infantry training. There are aspects of overlap, and that overlap has grown as the emphasis on certain abilities have grown but there are still a number of distinctions. The lines have blurred because of the growing distance between units and the smaller operational sizes of those units.The main way modern shock troop units are used, are as the conventional warfare elements that directly support special operations.

I think you have a incomplete understanding of military history. Shock Troops is a combat role. Not necessarily a kind of soldier.

I may have gotten sidetracked by my ramblings in my previous post and lost track of my point. This is what I'm trying to say:

Your definition of Special Forces leaves much to be desired. It doesn't stand to history, where special forces have been used as shock troops. In WWI, Special forces were created and took the name shock troops from the Stosstruppen, the most well known force at the time this transition was taking place. When conventional troops were proven unable to perform the role of breaking trench lines through conventional means, Shock Troops, special forces that used unconventional means, were created to perform a conventional task.

Being Special Forces doesn't by it's own nature stop a unit from functioning as shock troops and in history the only units actually called shock troops were special forces. As war evolved, militaries evolved with it and so does what is or is not conventional. We saw Shock troops in WWII because everyone expected another trench war. When that never materialized, what was then called shock troops began a transition to what are now modern special forces as war again evolved. The tactics pioneered by these forces were unconventional at the time they existed, but mostly are now considered convention. Fire teams for example were created by the Stosstruppen and adopted by other shock troops. In between the two World Wars, fire teams became standard convention along with other tactics they pioneered.

We just don't generally see Special forces in the role of conventional assault today because we don't need them for it.

This is why I defined shock troops using the Soviet Shock Army as the prime example, while special forces I defined via the British commandos.

Using historical examples rather than modern definitions-- I think they're more useful. The Shock Armies were effectively vanguard forces, trained in close quarters combat, house to house clearing, etc. The commandos were trained in sneaking around, silent deployment behind enemy lines, sabotage, etc.

Both were vicious combatants even when found outside of their primary role (war is imperfect-- you cannot always have the ideal force for each battle, and so you make due with what you have).

Melissia wrote:By that definition, mythos, an unarmed diplomat can be an elite shock trooper.

I said:

Heres how I would define: Shock troops are elite, specially trained, conventional warfare units, whose purpose as a front line combatant is to identify and exploit tactical weak points in enemy formations and battle positions and exploit them through mobility, speed, and insertional methods in conjunction with and through the support of more conventional forces

Diplomats are not conventional warfare unit and do not do any of the things I described. Learn to read.

SaintHazard wrote:Welcome to the DoD.

The DoD definition is correct. Because it is a cumulative statement that means that Special Forces do all of those things, while any number of other options or units or civilian groups may only do a smaller part. The definition doesn't exclude conventional warfare.

LordofHats wrote:Just because the DoD defines something as such doesn't make them factually or historically correct. Above is the modern usage of Special Forces and how the US Military and most modern Militaries now organize and deploy their Special Forces. Special Forces have been deployed in conventional combat. They still are in spite of the above stated mandate for Special Forces (And I'll add this sounds more like a definition of Special Operations than Special Forces).

The DoD defines how American Special Forces are used. So in America they make the definition of what they are now. Just because a unit is a Special Forces unit, doesn't exclude its participation in conventional warfare. The term special forces is not to the exclusion of the fact that they are soldiers and can function in a conventional role. It is just that when they are functioning in a Special Forces role, they are performing in the way the above definition describes.

Effectively Special Forces perform all those tasks on top of all the normal functions of a military combat unit, those additional roles are what distinguish them.

If you go back to my original posting I linked to the definitions... Special Forces are the organizational body of troops who conduct special operations. So in my original posting of this I said:

aka_mythos wrote:This is the Defense Departments definition... A military unit that performs: "Operations conducted..."

Let us take the definition even more basic... Special Forces are elite military units who specialize in unconventional warfare.

None of my above definitions exclude Special Forces from fighting in a conventional method.

LordofHats wrote:

Except only the 75th Ranger Regiment is a special forces unit. The rest are organized as elite light infantry and are considered conventional warfare forces.

The 75th is what I intended. And they are often deployed to operate in conventional roles of warfare.

My definition was not to the exclusion of conventional roles. I was saying Shock Troopers do "X" while Special Forces do "Y", where training for "Y" is what distinguishes them from from the former.

It is the same as saying Tactical Squad are the front line infantry of the Space Marines, while Assault Marines wear jump packs. Yes Assault Marines can take off those jump packs and fight as front line infantry, but what distinguishes the two similar things is the unlike quality.

LordofHats wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:Heres how I would define: Shock troops are elite, specially trained, conventional warfare units, whose purpose as a front line combatant is to identify and exploit tactical weak points in enemy formations and battle positions and exploit them through mobility, speed, and insertional methods in conjunction with and through the support of more conventional forces

Special Forces often engage in conventional combat operations even today. The role of Special Forces in warfare has shifted time and time again for thousands of years. They have always been and always will be practitioners of the unconventional, but in conflicts throughout history we've seen them perform conventional roles. They are differentiated by being able to do things standard forces can not. You seem to have a limited understanding of convention as it pretains to warfare. Convention is not limited to the role you perform in combat. Shock Troops is a conventional role; lead an assault and break enemy lines. But there are unconventional ways to go about it.

I was not defining it as exclusive to the other. The whole point of my original point was to show the fine difference between the two types of units that are largely similar; that distinction is what I pointed out. Special Forces are both a conventional and unconventional warfare unit, though there is a higher emphasis on the unconventional. Shock Troops, while the may have some aspects of unconventional warfare training, are first and foremost a conventional warfare unit.

Conventional warfare is any act of military force to reduce the number of enemy combatants through open confrontation. The fact that the role of "Shock Troop" is constrained by a battle field role makes them a conventional warfare unit.

Yes even conventional fighters can engage in unconventional tactics, but that is not the same as unconventional warfare. Occasionally conventional warfare units will participate in an unconventional role, but it is not their primary purpose for which their training emphasizes.

LordofHats wrote:
Shock Troops is a combat role. Not necessarily a kind of soldier.

When I say Shock Troop, I am referring to units that have the additional training to better excel in that role. Through history there have been many units trained with that role in mind. I have never insisted upon the term as being exclusive and disallowing other roles or functions. These different terms can stack.

This whole conversation started because, Melissa wants the Caetus to be a SoB unit. I've been insistent upon the fact that doctrinally SoB are not a shock troop styled force that would utilize the sort of lander, because their style of warfare favors larger landing craft. This is not to say SoB can't be used as shock troop, just that they aren't organized at higher level as such.

LordofHats wrote:
I may have gotten sidetracked by my ramblings in my previous post and lost track of my point. This is what I'm trying to say:

Your definition of Special Forces leaves much to be desired. It doesn't stand to history, where special forces have been used as shock troops. In WWI, Special forces were created and took the name shock troops from the Stosstruppen, the most well known force at the time this transition was taking place. When conventional troops were proven unable to perform the role of breaking trench lines through conventional means, Shock Troops, special forces that used unconventional means, were created to perform a conventional task.

Being Special Forces doesn't by it's own nature stop a unit from functioning as shock troops and in history the only units actually called shock troops were special forces. As war evolved, militaries evolved with it and so does what is or is not conventional. We saw Shock troops in WWII because everyone expected another trench war. When that never materialized, what was then called shock troops began a transition to what are now modern special forces as war again evolved. The tactics pioneered by these forces were unconventional at the time they existed, but mostly are now considered convention. Fire teams for example were created by the Stosstruppen and adopted by other shock troops. In between the two World Wars, fire teams became standard convention along with other tactics they pioneered.

We just don't generally see Special forces in the role of conventional assault today because we don't need them for it.

I completely agree with you, I think you have been misreading what I've been saying.

I do not view the terms Shock Troop or Special Forces as being types of units so much as particular skill sets or roles different elite units have received specialized training for. The 75th Ranger Regiment is many things, they are Special Forces, the are Shock Troops, they are light infantry, they are airborne... they are all those things and more. It is just that Special Forces refer to one distinct aspect of their mission while the other refer to another. The special forces label is not anyone skill set but the combination of a diverse skill set.

Melissa took something I said to describe the distinction of the shock troop role from a more basic infantry role and then asked for how that shock troop role is distinguished from the special forces role. I was attempting to distinguish these two terms from each other, that through history have overlap and an intertwined past. They are much alike because of that shared history, but in more recent history have diverged.

I appreciate the fact that you're making an intelligent argument, more than anyone else here you've made a concerted effort to express in no uncertain terms a definition of these two things that is based on facts and not just raw opinion.

I completely agree with you, I think you have been misreading what I've been saying.

So... we've been disagreeing about... agreeing? Or was that just me?

Irony

Lol... good word play there; I think that nails it.

Anyways, I'm afraid I must agree with Melissia that overall SoBs are closer to shock troopers than Space Marines who are usually spec ops. Shock troopers aren't even neccessarily more elite than normal infantry they are simply frontline "first-in" soldiers. I know because the British called their WW1 shock troopers "Canadians".
To me the SoBs are alot like the the SS both in the fact that they are elite troops that strategically. you'd want in the thickest of the fighting and also that they routinely cleanse populations of "undesirables". (yes, another thread ruined by Hitler). They were elite but also shock troopers.

Marines of course are spec ops in the fact that they operate behind enemy lines, are tasked with the most important and time sensitive objectives. However, much to the chagrin of many dakkaites despite being the galaxy's least numerous troops the are by far the most developed fiction-wise. So for every traditional spec-ops chapter there are many other flavors of marines. Death Guard in their hey day for example where little more than WW1 General Infantry tactics-wise and Flesh Tearers prefer to fight by biting their enemies faces off. So in other words there's a Space Marine for any tactic or really anything you can think of.

Sisters of Battle are glorified police forces/suicide troops.

End of story.

Kanluwen wrote:End of story.

Do you just enjoy baiting Melissia?

Because you should realize that the rest of us are all rolling our eyes at you, and at her.

Nope, it's simple facts.

Sisters of Battle are not used in real combat formations, except when Astartes aren't available or when even the Adeptus Arbites are on the frontlines.

Pretty simple to find out.

Space marines are special operation warrior monks . sisters of battle are special force warrior nuns,marines are genetically enhanced super humans.sisters of battle are not genetic supermen in anyway there devotion to the emperor and man kind is what gives them there furious fighting ability marines in my idea are shock troopers and special operatives because the have a edge with being superhuman while the sisters are strictly special opps cause there not hulking freaks so space marines could be like the USMC Grunt and the sisters are like the SS no disrespect intended just it fits there comparison in history. political warrior body guards devoted to one individual-the emperor and the Inquisition is the Gestapo and the gestapo could do what the please like the Inquisition as long as it benefited to find the heretic the daemon the xeno The Mutant and kill it.if i rant im sorry

Sorry, but no. Sisters of Battle are completely useless in any kind of battlefield role, unless they're facing far far inferior troops.

Sisters are kind of a blunt instrument, you just point them in a direction and scream 'HERETIC!' then they go off trying to shoot them with boltguns.

With that i quote Duty Calls, By Sandy Mitchell,

'This is Commissar Ciaphas Cain,' I transmitted at once, swinging the bolter to take down a pack of hormagaunts that had leapt
over the heads of the Sisters on the left flank and were now bounding towards us with baleful intent. I noted the sudden renewal of
their fighting spirit with trepidation. Clearly at least one synapse creature was coming within range and the tide of battle was about
to turn, perhaps within a matter of seconds. 'Disengage and fall back!' The squad leader, who, now we'd come close enough to
distinguish one psychotic psalm-singer from another, stood out from the others by virtue of the chainsword and bolt pistol in her
hands, turned and looked in my direction. Like most of her Sisters she disdained the use of a helmet, despite the manifest
foolishness of such a course,2 and her narrow face was clearly visible, framed by the rather unflattering hairstyle common to most
women of her calling. Dark eyes glared at me from beneath a crudely cropped black fringe, which didn't quite manage to hide the
fleur de lys tattoo emblazoned on her freckle-spattered forehead.
Thin lips compressed in disapproval. 'We're servants of His Blessed Majesty,' she snapped, 'and not subject to the authority of
your office. Go and shoot a few malingering Guardsmen like you're supposed to, and leave us to our holy task.'
'You're about to be overrun,' I said. 'Getting yourselves slaughtered isn't going to help the Emperor very much, is it?'
'Our destinies lie in His hands alone,' she responded, turning to disembowel a gaunt, which had just discharged its fleshborer at
one of her comrades from point-blank range.

SoB aren't either just because both shock troops and special forces by their definition require the SoB to be military when they are only paramilitary.

The assertion that space marines are Special Forces, actual sell them short; as its already been discussed labels like shock troops and special forces will only represent individual aspects of a military unit. Now looking more closely at space marines, I would say they have many units that act like special forces, but I wouldn't say the whole chapter is a special operations force. Sternguard/Vanguard/Deathwatch and Scouts certainly carry out the sort of operations to deserve the moniker; but standard marines don't conduct themselves in that way. Now there are the odd chapters who do follow more of a Special Forces modus operandi, so the the statement that marines aren't all special forces shouldn't be taken too definitively.