Context for the question. You and said Primarch are facing each other on the battlefield. Neither of you know the composition of each other's forces. Knowing only what you know about the Primarch, who would you want to go up against, knowing that losing would result in your death? Whose presence on the field as commander would give you the greatest chance of victory simply by being the commanding general?

I think I would have to go for Leman Russ, he's just an attack dog with a legion behind him and although he does have military training and know how to lead I can imagine that he would be easily led into a trap.

Rogal Dorn. He sees an obvious trap and just goes, "Yup, gonna just walk right in".

Ferrus, he was foolhardy and that led to his swift head loss

Yup, all three above would have been the obvious choices for me. I went with Ferrus Manus though, after reading about how Vulkan and Corax decided to abandon him as he decided to charge Fulgrim on Istvaan V.

Definitely Dorn, his stubbornness and pride makes him easy to fall into a trap. I would say Guilliman, but his fights against the Alpha Legion prove that he is not always so predictable.

I don't think anyone could seriously call Guilliman a bad general...

Probably Ferrus. He messed up on Istvaan V, big time stylee. I dunno though they're all pretty good in their own way, there isn't really a loyalist version of Curze or Angron.

 ImAGeek wrote:
I don't think anyone could seriously call Guilliman a bad general...

Probably Ferrus. He messed up on Istvaan V, big time stylee. I dunno though they're all pretty good in their own way, there isn't really a loyalist version of Curze or Angron.

People think about that paragraph that states that he's more of a logistician than a General, Which doesn't necessarily mean he's a bad General.

Which paragraph is that? And surely logistics are a big part of being a good general?

Honestly, I'm looking at them all and it's ahrd to judge any of em poorly as all where widely sucessful. as such I voted Ferrus Mannus. he's notable in that he allowed his rage etc to get the better of him and ended up dead.

"going stupid and getting yourself killed" is a pretty unique distinction among the primarchs

Very dependent on the situation. The honest answer is 'none' but they all have their weaknesses. If I had to pick three that I'd most want to face if I had to face any of them:

Ferrus Manus is headstrong and sometimes doesn't spot things (not just at Istvaan; he didn't spot the Diasporax' weakness until Fulgrim dangled it under his nose). However, he is relentless and will not quit. Yes, it's easy to make him angry, but "oh, look, I've made the Gorgon angry" is not necessarily something to celebrate.

By comparison, the Lion's weakness is his people skills. If the war is a chess game, or a sword duel, with known participants, limits and rules, he will win. As a pure theoretical strategist, he's the best in the Imperium. His weakness is everything outside that; if he doesn't know he's facing an enemy until things start exploding, or he thinks someone is friendly when they aren't, he can be badly at a disadvantage. He can't judge people and that's bit him several times.

Finally, Vulkan. He's a superb warrior and a competent strategist, but his weakness is his compassion. Sanguinius and Corax are the same, but they are talented at things like rapid manouvre, covert ops and orbital insertions; Vulkan is portrayed as much more of an endurance fighter little given to subtlety and shennanigans. This leaves him less in a position to do something cunning if I'm ensconced in a populated civilian area, and unlike other primarchs he's much less prepared to inflict collateral casualties amongst innocents.

Dorn embodied the human quest for truth, and could never tell a lie, even if it would have aided his cause.

Dorn.

Hell, if you're fighting Dorn, you could just send him a message asking him about his battle-plan. He would tell you the truth.

 PastelAvenger wrote:
I think I would have to go for Leman Russ, he's just an attack dog with a legion behind him and although he does have military training and know how to lead I can imagine that he would be easily led into a trap.

Angron didn't see the one Russ set out for him coming though

Khonsu wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
I don't think anyone could seriously call Guilliman a bad general...

Probably Ferrus. He messed up on Istvaan V, big time stylee. I dunno though they're all pretty good in their own way, there isn't really a loyalist version of Curze or Angron.

People think about that paragraph that states that he's more of a logistician than a General, Which doesn't necessarily mean he's a bad General.

In Vengeful Spirit Horus reflects that no one knew war like Ferrus and that if Fulgrim had managed to bring him to their side the war would have already be won. I found it one of the most interesting parts in the book.

Ferrus downfall is he is hot - headed and rash which could definitely be used to work against him. Well, it did after all, he got a head of himself BOOM BOOM!

Wonderwolf wrote:

Dorn embodied the human quest for truth, and could never tell a lie, even if it would have aided his cause.

Dorn.

Hell, if you're fighting Dorn, you could just send him a message asking him about his battle-plan. He would tell you the truth.

Spoiler:

except Dorn HAS shown he can at the very LEAST lie by omission.

According to fluff Dorn was maybe the best strategic general of the Primarches. And not telling lies doesn't mean he will phone you his battle-plans. Last I checked you have the option of refusing to talk to someone instead of lying to them.

Russ easily. As plans go, bumrushing into melee is almost always a bad idea.

 Wyzilla wrote:
Russ easily. As plans go, bumrushing into melee is almost always a bad idea.

Russ at one point out-generaled Angron, but then again thats not a huge achievement.

Wasn't part of Russes thing that the whole dullard attack dog concept is just a takeout. And like a wolf he'll stand out in the open saying 'come get me bro' distracting the target rom seeing the rest of the pack surrounding them...

I voted Dorn at first, but honestly, after giving it more than 2 seconds of thought I remembered Russ exists.

So, Russ.

Pick Russ and you will get your ass handed to you faster than you can say "woof".

He might have a appeared as a savage berserk, but he didn't end up bested only by Horus and Johnson in number of victories during the Crusades by just rushing in.
He was a barbarian, but that does not mean he was stupid or even remotely incompetent. Behind that veneer is a ruthless intellect.

Nor was he the one the Emperor turned to when we wanted another Legion to be taken down a notch because he just rushes in.

The number of people picking Dorn is truly baffling. It is one of those rare bits of consistency that he was one the greatest defensive mind in the Imperium and one of the best pure generals of the Primarchs.

Falling into Peterbo's trap was due to anguish, hate, and guilt, not some failure in generalship. He had a suicide complex.

Bran Dawri wrote:
Pick Russ and you will get your ass handed to you faster than you can say "woof".

He might have a appeared as a savage berserk, but he didn't end up bested only by Horus and Johnson in number of victories during the Crusades by just rushing in.
He was a barbarian, but that does not mean he was stupid or even remotely incompetent. Behind that veneer is a ruthless intellect.

Nor was he the one the Emperor turned to when we wanted another Legion to be taken down a notch because he just rushes in.

In "Prospero burns", a SW said that other legions see them as barbarians, and they don't mind because when the time comes, it will be easier to kick their ass because the other legions will underestimate they capabilities.

 PhillyT wrote:
The number of people picking Dorn is truly baffling. It is one of those rare bits of consistency that he was one the greatest defensive mind in the Imperium and one of the best pure generals of the Primarchs.

Falling into Peterbo's trap was due to anguish, hate, and guilt, not some failure in generalship. He had a suicide complex.

Yeahhhh but losing your head like that and trying to get yourself and most of your legion killed for no reason isn't exactly the mark of a good general is it. That one time you mess up that badly kinda ruins your reputation... 'He's a really really good guy except for that one time he went on a killing spree...'

Taking the single time a guy cracks after hearing the last spoken words of your god/father isn't exactly fair. And in the process of going on his journey of self flagulation, he wrecked some serious havoc on the traitors as they fled. He was caught in a trap by the guy likely to come out as the best pure general of the traitors, Peterbo. Not sure how that makes Russ the worst. He still managed to crack it and survive.

Dorn is unquestioningly one of the greatest generals in the Imperium and the most potent in a defensive setting. He shouldn't even come up.

Why isn't it fair? Everybody lost their father, and they didn't all go off the rails like Dorn did. Yeah he found the bodies but they all felt the same loss.

I'm not saying he's the worst btw, just playing devils advocate.

Assuming all Primarches are created equally and there was some sort of RPG stats allocation system for them...

I do think Dorn would be the 'easiest' to deal with. Yeah, sure, he's got the most stat points in 'Fortification Construction' and a fair chunk of points in 'Galactic Warfare administration'. Neither of which would really help you in a meeting engagement style army punchup.

Conversely, of course, Perturabo would have the most stat points in 'Fortification Demolition'.

Except of course he is repeatedly named the best at one of the two main phases of generalship. The traitors weren't able to deal with him.

 ImAGeek wrote:
Why isn't it fair? Everybody lost their father, and they didn't all go off the rails like Dorn did. Yeah he found the bodies but they all felt the same loss.

I'm not saying he's the worst btw, just playing devils advocate.

They weren't present, which is why he felt the loss greater than the others. He is also being described as so loyal it was a major flaw of his character. The Iron Cage happened as the Imperial Fists were fully willing to pay any price even the price of a Primarch to eliminate the Iron Warriors. I don't think the Iron Cage was that bad a decision but I'm a known mark of the Imperial Fists and Dorn so I might not be completely objective in this matter.

Bran Dawri wrote:
Pick Russ and you will get your ass handed to you faster than you can say "woof".

He might have a appeared as a savage berserk, but he didn't end up bested only by Horus and Johnson in number of victories during the Crusades by just rushing in.
He was a barbarian, but that does not mean he was stupid or even remotely incompetent. Behind that veneer is a ruthless intellect.

Nor was he the one the Emperor turned to when we wanted another Legion to be taken down a notch because he just rushes in.

Guilliman is stated as being second only to Horus, or perhaps even his general when it comes to compliances and victories.

 Beaviz81 wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Why isn't it fair? Everybody lost their father, and they didn't all go off the rails like Dorn did. Yeah he found the bodies but they all felt the same loss.

I'm not saying he's the worst btw, just playing devils advocate.

They weren't present, which is why he felt the loss greater than the others. He is also being described as so loyal it was a major flaw of his character. The Iron Cage happened as the Imperial Fists were fully willing to pay any price even the price of a Primarch to eliminate the Iron Warriors. I don't think the Iron Cage was that bad a decision but I'm a known mark of the Imperial Fists and Dorn so I might not be completely objective in this matter.

Dorn was pissed off about being overruled by Guilliman on the founding of the chapters, and hated Perturabo. He let his emotions and hatred blind his vision and got the majority of his legion killed, and gained nothing. Well, unless allowing Perturabo to ascend to demi-godhood and being impossible to permenantly kill is a 'gain' in his book.

I voted for Ferrus Manus, seeing as his greatest contribution to 40k history was getting his head cut off. He charged in, unsupported, against a numerically superior foe, challenged a better duelist to a duel, and lost his head. Well played Ferrus, well played. Make him angry, and he'll run in an die.

 PastelAvenger wrote:
I think I would have to go for Leman Russ, he's just an attack dog with a legion behind him and although he does have military training and know how to lead I can imagine that he would be easily led into a trap.

Isn't this ignoring that Space Wolves were regarded as some of the most cunning strategists and that Russ, with nary an effort, outmaneuvered Angron as an object lesson?

While he's no Perturabo, Russ had a cunning all his own. Were I to doubt any Primarch, it may be Corax. Everything was too small scale for him.

Corax is a pretty good general, actually. He beat Guilliman a few times when they were running simulations. What do you mean too small scale?

 ImAGeek wrote:
Corax is a pretty good general, actually. He beat Guilliman a few times when they were running simulations. What do you mean too small scale?

Specifically? The actual engagements we see in the HH fluff. When he takes the field, he's almost as bad an Angron at striking off on his own. He does better with small groups(escaping the dropsite massacre) than he seems to large scale engagements.

As a Primarch, you can't say he's a bad general. What we're doing is discussing who would be bad in comparison to the others.

 ImAGeek wrote:
Why isn't it fair? Everybody lost their father, and they didn't all go off the rails like Dorn did. Yeah he found the bodies but they all felt the same loss.

I'm not saying he's the worst btw, just playing devils advocate.

The thing with Dorn was that he was the "faithful son". The Emperor was his God, even if he didn't recognize that fact; he idolized the Emperor, followed his orders to the letter. He was a zealot through and through, and none of the other Primarchs were as loyal or as faithful as he was (except for perhaps Lorgar before being "chastized"). All of the other Primarchs were self-sufficient, but Dorn was completely reliant upon the Emperor, and saw it as his own failure that the Emperor and Sanguinius had died - it was like if you had been able to stop both God and Jesus Christ from being killed by the Devil, yet you got tied up fighting some Demons and they both died. You'd feel prettys hitty about yourself, wouldn't you?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I voted Russ, not because he's an idiot barbarian (quite the opposite, in fact), but because he relies too heavily on melee. While he's busy using his devious cunning and engaging his men and alongside his men in melee combat, my snipers just need to get a single headshot because he's too busy leading from the front. After that, I withdraw my troops and hide in the biggest fortification I've got and surround it with traps and bunkers that seem like ideal defensive positions until they spontaneously explode from the inside.

Looking at this list it's pretty hard to pick one in all honesty, I think the loyalists were all pretty top notch.

Not saying that the Traitors weren't, but they had more doozys than the loyalists. But then they made up for it by having Horus.

 dusara217 wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Why isn't it fair? Everybody lost their father, and they didn't all go off the rails like Dorn did. Yeah he found the bodies but they all felt the same loss.

I'm not saying he's the worst btw, just playing devils advocate.

The thing with Dorn was that he was the "faithful son". The Emperor was his God, even if he didn't recognize that fact; he idolized the Emperor, followed his orders to the letter. He was a zealot through and through, and none of the other Primarchs were as loyal or as faithful as he was (except for perhaps Lorgar before being "chastized"). All of the other Primarchs were self-sufficient, but Dorn was completely reliant upon the Emperor, and saw it as his own failure that the Emperor and Sanguinius had died - it was like if you had been able to stop both God and Jesus Christ from being killed by the Devil, yet you got tied up fighting some Demons and they both died. You'd feel prettys hitty about yourself, wouldn't you?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I voted Russ, not because he's an idiot barbarian (quite the opposite, in fact), but because he relies too heavily on melee. While he's busy using his devious cunning and engaging his men and alongside his men in melee combat, my snipers just need to get a single headshot because he's too busy leading from the front. After that, I withdraw my troops and hide in the biggest fortification I've got and surround it with traps and bunkers that seem like ideal defensive positions until they spontaneously explode from the inside.

Dorn seemed to carry the legacy of the unworthy son long before this moment. I feel like Empy and Sanguinius dying just exacerbated it in himself and in the legion which also carried that psychology genecurse. It's like a much darker turn on the Ultramarines "Captain Try-Hard" motif.

As for Russ, I can't even begin to argue his blatant recklessness. Dorn even said that Russ couldn't be counted on to come save Terra, as he'd likely die fighting on the way. Curze, Alpharius, or Mortarion could have taken advantage of his goodly viking nature and ended him, but at tremendous cost.

Looks like Russ's strategy of getting enemies to underestimate him is working well ITT.

 Shidank wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Corax is a pretty good general, actually. He beat Guilliman a few times when they were running simulations. What do you mean too small scale?

Specifically? The actual engagements we see in the HH fluff. When he takes the field, he's almost as bad an Angron at striking off on his own. He does better with small groups(escaping the dropsite massacre) than he seems to large scale engagements.

As a Primarch, you can't say he's a bad general. What we're doing is discussing who would be bad in comparison to the others.

Yeah he is very independent, but then the whole legion is. I don't think he's worse than the others but I guess we haven't actually seen much of him being a general.

I still don't know, I think they're all pretty good generals. It's hard to pick a worst one, they all have their strengths.

 Shidank wrote:

As for Russ, I can't even begin to argue his blatant recklessness. Dorn even said that Russ couldn't be counted on to come save Terra, as he'd likely die fighting on the way. Curze, Alpharius, or Mortarion could have taken advantage of his goodly viking nature and ended him, but at tremendous cost.

This is Dorn we're talking about, the same guy who imprisoned and/or killed all of his Librarians after the Edict of Nikaea. He's as gullible as a human in some respects, and he is one of those who sees the Khan and the Wolf as mindless barbarians, despite this being proven to be false time and again - otherwise the Wolf would have been killed fighting one of the thousands of wars he participated in.

 Pilau Rice wrote:
Looking at this list it's pretty hard to pick one in all honesty, I think the loyalists were all pretty top notch.

Not saying that the Traitors weren't, but they had more doozys than the loyalists. But then they made up for it by having Horus.

Yeah, OP's question sort of boils down to "how would you rather die?" And even among the traitors, the only guy who seems like a poor general is Angron but you can chalk that up to him not wanting to be a general ... although he didn't fare that well on Nuceria, either.

Id also say Curze isn't an amazing general either, and has very little control over his legion (and he hates them all which doesn't help).

On the other hand, he was able to conquer his homeworld. Curze is moody but can apply himself.

 Manchu wrote:

 Pilau Rice wrote:
Looking at this list it's pretty hard to pick one in all honesty, I think the loyalists were all pretty top notch.

Not saying that the Traitors weren't, but they had more doozys than the loyalists. But then they made up for it by having Horus.

Yeah, OP's question sort of boils down to "how would you rather die?" And even among the traitors, the only guy who seems like a poor general is Angron but you can chalk that up to him not wanting to be a general ... although he didn't fare that well on Nuceria, either.

Yep, it's just that he is a bit predictable and I would guess, more easy to manipulate to follow your plan rather than devise a counter strategy. If he didn't have the Nails he would be up there with the best I would imagine.

And that is a good point about wanting to be a general, a few of the Traitors didn't seem to have the passion for it. Lorgar and Magnus lead their Legions because it was what was expected of them. but would have been happier doing the Admin side of things.

 dusara217 wrote:

 Shidank wrote:

As for Russ, I can't even begin to argue his blatant recklessness. Dorn even said that Russ couldn't be counted on to come save Terra, as he'd likely die fighting on the way. Curze, Alpharius, or Mortarion could have taken advantage of his goodly viking nature and ended him, but at tremendous cost.

This is Dorn we're talking about, the same guy who imprisoned and/or killed all of his Librarians after the Edict of Nikaea. He's as gullible as a human in some respects, and he is one of those who sees the Khan and the Wolf as mindless barbarians, despite this being proven to be false time and again - otherwise the Wolf would have been killed fighting one of the thousands of wars he participated in.

Actually, yeah. Dorn is probably the most gullible of the Primarchs. Never looked at it that way.

But just because Dorn said it, that doesn't mean it's fact. We know that Russ didn't die fighting on his way to Terra; he just came really really close.

 Manchu wrote:
On the other hand, he was able to conquer his homeworld. Curze is moody but can apply himself.

Yeah but he did that by himself, so that wasn't being a general. He doesn't have any control over the Night Lords or even care about them so he already isn't a good general

I voted for the Khan. I mean, he didn't do anything now, did he?

 thenoobbomb wrote:
I voted for the Khan. I mean, he didn't do anything now, did he?

Well he got to and fought at Terra which was kind of a major battle

 ImAGeek wrote:

 thenoobbomb wrote:
I voted for the Khan. I mean, he didn't do anything now, did he?

Well he got to and fought at Terra which was kind of a major battle

Some may argue he sort of....won....the Battle of Terra

He was almost certainly a deciding factor, although we don't know if they would've lost if Horus didn't let the Emperor on board the Vengeful Spirit.

 ImAGeek wrote:

 thenoobbomb wrote:
I voted for the Khan. I mean, he didn't do anything now, did he?

Well he got to and fought at Terra which was kind of a major battle

He didn't lead the defence of Terra, and it doesn't look like he did anything else during the Great Crusade, so..

Jyst because we haven't seen anything yet, doesn't mean he did nothing. Getting to Terra from where he was to turn the tide of the battle is no mean feat. I'd say he did more than Ferrus did...

Well I wouldn't like to work for any of the traitor Primarches. I mean one of them even decimated his own forces before even knowing them, and the effect that guy would have on a work-force is just terrifying to comprehend.

If I were to work for any of the Primarches it would either be Dorn (wouldn't look for much praise as he wouldn't talk to me unless I frakked up), Guilliman or Leman Russ as the last one would likely hold an unending list of parties. Of the loyalist the person I least would like working for is Mannus as he is not a nice guy or the Lion as if I frakked up I might just as well end up beheaded.

As for worst general amongst the loyalists I guess Corax as he seem to fare the worst of them in larger scale conflicts but the all would be what we would describe as military geniuses even Angron despite him always going for the jugular and indiscriminate butchery. Would certainly not like working for him.

 ImAGeek wrote:
He was almost certainly a deciding factor, although we don't know if they would've lost if Horus didn't let the Emperor on board the Vengeful Spirit.

You're right. Horus was the worst General. He never made it through to the money shot with grace.

 ImAGeek wrote:
Jyst because we haven't seen anything yet, doesn't mean he did nothing.

thatsthejoke.jpg

Getting to Terra from where he was to turn the tide of the battle is no mean feat. I'd say he did more than Ferrus did...

Ferrus appears to have brought quite some worlds into compliance. The only mistake he made was his charge into the Traitor lines on Istvaan V - after mustering the remains of his crippled fleet into an effective combat force.

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

 thenoobbomb wrote:
I voted for the Khan. I mean, he didn't do anything now, did he?

Well he got to and fought at Terra which was kind of a major battle

He didn't lead the defence of Terra, and it doesn't look like he did anything else during the Great Crusade, so..

There was that whole space port thing that prevented the traitors from winning.

And I heard he cooked a mean fried chicken.

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Jyst because we haven't seen anything yet, doesn't mean he did nothing.

thatsthejoke.jpg

Getting to Terra from where he was to turn the tide of the battle is no mean feat. I'd say he did more than Ferrus did...

Ferrus appears to have brought quite some worlds into compliance. The only mistake he made was his charge into the Traitor lines on Istvaan V - after mustering the remains of his crippled fleet into an effective combat force.

So you're saying The Khan bought no worlds into compliance..?

 ImAGeek wrote:

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Jyst because we haven't seen anything yet, doesn't mean he did nothing.

thatsthejoke.jpg

Getting to Terra from where he was to turn the tide of the battle is no mean feat. I'd say he did more than Ferrus did...

Ferrus appears to have brought quite some worlds into compliance. The only mistake he made was his charge into the Traitor lines on Istvaan V - after mustering the remains of his crippled fleet into an effective combat force.

So you're saying The Khan bought no worlds into compliance..?

I just picture the Khan rolling up on a space chopper like Lobo, pointing at a planet, and shouting, "Fitty-bucks for the whole damn thing."

 ImAGeek wrote:

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Jyst because we haven't seen anything yet, doesn't mean he did nothing.

thatsthejoke.jpg

Getting to Terra from where he was to turn the tide of the battle is no mean feat. I'd say he did more than Ferrus did...

Ferrus appears to have brought quite some worlds into compliance. The only mistake he made was his charge into the Traitor lines on Istvaan V - after mustering the remains of his crippled fleet into an effective combat force.

So you're saying The Khan bought no worlds into compliance..?

Well, there certainly isn't written anything about him, so there's no way to be certain he did or didn't!

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Jyst because we haven't seen anything yet, doesn't mean he did nothing.

thatsthejoke.jpg

Getting to Terra from where he was to turn the tide of the battle is no mean feat. I'd say he did more than Ferrus did...

Ferrus appears to have brought quite some worlds into compliance. The only mistake he made was his charge into the Traitor lines on Istvaan V - after mustering the remains of his crippled fleet into an effective combat force.

So you're saying The Khan bought no worlds into compliance..?

Well, there certainly isn't written anything about him, so there's no way to be certain he did or didn't!

http://www.blacklibrary.com/horus-heresy/scars-hardback-edition.html

 Shidank wrote:

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Jyst because we haven't seen anything yet, doesn't mean he did nothing.

thatsthejoke.jpg

Getting to Terra from where he was to turn the tide of the battle is no mean feat. I'd say he did more than Ferrus did...

Ferrus appears to have brought quite some worlds into compliance. The only mistake he made was his charge into the Traitor lines on Istvaan V - after mustering the remains of his crippled fleet into an effective combat force.

So you're saying The Khan bought no worlds into compliance..?

Well, there certainly isn't written anything about him, so there's no way to be certain he did or didn't!

http://www.blacklibrary.com/horus-heresy/scars-hardback-edition.html

Looks like that's about Marines fighting eachother.

I dop hope you're all seeing I'm kidding by saying the Khan didn't do anything, right? Should be fairly obvious - I'm merely joking about the fact that there's so little written about him.

I get that now after the thatsthejoke.jpg thing haha. I do hope they give him something major to do though. They're criminally underrepresented.

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 Shidank wrote:

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Jyst because we haven't seen anything yet, doesn't mean he did nothing.

thatsthejoke.jpg

Getting to Terra from where he was to turn the tide of the battle is no mean feat. I'd say he did more than Ferrus did...

Ferrus appears to have brought quite some worlds into compliance. The only mistake he made was his charge into the Traitor lines on Istvaan V - after mustering the remains of his crippled fleet into an effective combat force.

So you're saying The Khan bought no worlds into compliance..?

Well, there certainly isn't written anything about him, so there's no way to be certain he did or didn't!

http://www.blacklibrary.com/horus-heresy/scars-hardback-edition.html

Looks like that's about Marines fighting eachother.

I dop hope you're all seeing I'm kidding by saying the Khan didn't do anything, right? Should be fairly obvious - I'm merely joking about the fact that there's so little written about him.

BUT IT ISN'T! YOU'RE MEAN!

I voted Vulkan. He seems like the most unremarkable in terms of warfare.

tgjensen wrote:
I voted Vulkan. He seems like the most unremarkable in terms of warfare.

Does unremarkable translate into bad?

Vulkan: Unremarkable
Corax: better at small engagements
Angron: Reckless
Curze: no plan or control

Honestly, it seems like Vulkan comes out on top given those 4.

Curious, didn't most of the loyalist forces on Istvaan V end up believing that they were going to die there with no escape available?

I remember that in the beginning of Deliverance Lost, Corax with the little men he has left are pretty much preparing for a last stand as they were under the impression that they had no way to get out of the losing battle. It's only thanks to Alpha Legion that Corax and the Astartes with him are able to evade certain death.

Assuming that Ferrus was in similar straights (I haven't read anything regarding Ferrus on Istvaan V) - under the impression that death and defeat were imminent and in no way avoidable - would his generalship still be considered that poor? If it is the case, it would sound more like to me he ends up trying to make the best of the situation by trying to 1) take out as many traitors as possible, and 2) beat another lesson into what was once his favorite brother - or kill him. Though possibly not in that order.

For me the answer is "Any of them would beat my army badly".

I'd prefer to face Russ because he's less subtle than the others.
That doesn't mean he's not subtle though; just less subtle than his brethren.

I certainly wouldn't take a Space Wolf's word for it that when others underestimate the Wolves it will be their downfall; that's typical Space Viking bravado talking. If, say, Alpharius or Magnus had said so it'd be different.

Despite that, any Space Marine's tactics will be subtle compared to your run-of-the-mill Imperial Army/AM commander. There's a reason those guys are called the Hammer of the Emperor.

As far as weaknesses go, yes, Vulkan can be baited to some extent by putting common citizens in danger. Not sure that's much of a weakness; at some point he might regretfully make the sacrifice rather than throw his forces into an obvious trap.

Ferrus Manus did let his emotions get the better of him at a key point. I'd argue that at Istavaan it didn't matter much in the end. Ferrus might well have realized the jig was up when his brothers didn't accept it, and he wanted vengeance while there was still time. Arguably, if all the Primarchs had worked together rather than leaving the Iron Hands to go it alone they might have had real success. Or not.

Dorn likewise let himself get sucked into the Iron Cage. Stupid, stupid mistake caused by emotion. For whatever reason, Dorn blamed himself more than any other Primarch for the Emperor's fall. He WAS the one Primarch who teleported to Horus' Battlebarge and lived, after all. Survivor's Guilt is definitely a thing. But it doesn't necessarily make him a bad general overall. As others have pointed out, he was probably the greatest defensive mind among the Primarchs.

Then again, let's not over-judge based on character flaws. Great commanders like Alexander and Napoleon let their emotions get the better of them, and paid for it with their armies and their empires. It doesn't mean they were worse commanders than, say, Wellsley or Porus, it just means they made bad emotion-charged decisions at some point.

Jon'son, Sanguinus, Guilliman, Corax and the Khan all were great commanders with few tactical, operational or strategic blunders to point to. Corax only real mistake was in desperate efforts to rebuild his Legion, not a battlefield error. I suppose you could blame Guilliman for not recognizing the Word Bearers were about to ambush him, but that seams a bit of a stretch. I can't think of any command blunders committed by Jon'son, Sanguinus or Corax.

And no, I wouldn't want to face ANY of them on the battlefield. If I had to I'd make sure my insurance was paid up.

My two teef.

 Shidank wrote:

 PastelAvenger wrote:
I think I would have to go for Leman Russ, he's just an attack dog with a legion behind him and although he does have military training and know how to lead I can imagine that he would be easily led into a trap.

Isn't this ignoring that Space Wolves were regarded as some of the most cunning strategists and that Russ, with nary an effort, outmaneuvered Angron as an object lesson?

While he's no Perturabo, Russ had a cunning all his own. Were I to doubt any Primarch, it may be Corax. Everything was too small scale for him.

The Wolves specialize in melee, making them an automatic loss as being contenders for competent military strategy.

The best way to tell who the best general is would be to give each Primarch ten platoons of US Marines and see who completed an objective minimal casualties.

 Shidank wrote:

tgjensen wrote:
I voted Vulkan. He seems like the most unremarkable in terms of warfare.

Does unremarkable translate into bad?

Vulkan: Unremarkable
Corax: better at small engagements
Angron: Reckless
Curze: no plan or control

Honestly, it seems like Vulkan comes out on top given those 4.

Lorgar comes off as a sloppy commander also.

How does he?

 Crazyterran wrote:

Bran Dawri wrote:
Pick Russ and you will get your ass handed to you faster than you can say "woof".

He might have a appeared as a savage berserk, but he didn't end up bested only by Horus and Johnson in number of victories during the Crusades by just rushing in.
He was a barbarian, but that does not mean he was stupid or even remotely incompetent. Behind that veneer is a ruthless intellect.

Nor was he the one the Emperor turned to when we wanted another Legion to be taken down a notch because he just rushes in.

Guilliman is stated as being second only to Horus, or perhaps even his general when it comes to compliances and victories.

Compliance, maybe. But that includes peaceful bringing-into-the-fold. Russ was third in military victories, Johnson second (by a thin margin to Russ IIRC) - despite the Wolves being one of the smallest Legions. Smaller numbers, yet more victories than almost everyone else. Yeah, that sounds like a bloodthirsty berserk allright :rolleyes: .

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Shidank wrote:

 PastelAvenger wrote:
I think I would have to go for Leman Russ, he's just an attack dog with a legion behind him and although he does have military training and know how to lead I can imagine that he would be easily led into a trap.

Isn't this ignoring that Space Wolves were regarded as some of the most cunning strategists and that Russ, with nary an effort, outmaneuvered Angron as an object lesson?

While he's no Perturabo, Russ had a cunning all his own. Were I to doubt any Primarch, it may be Corax. Everything was too small scale for him.

The Wolves specialize in melee, making them an automatic loss as being contenders for competent military strategy.

The best way to tell who the best general is would be to give each Primarch ten platoons of US Marines and see who completed an objective minimal casualties.

Melee can work. I have heard about bayonet-charges actually working in modern times as few things are more horrifying than being charged by a pissed off human intent on murder and if you are really good at close-combat it would be a viable strategy at situations.

 Beaviz81 wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Shidank wrote:

 PastelAvenger wrote:
I think I would have to go for Leman Russ, he's just an attack dog with a legion behind him and although he does have military training and know how to lead I can imagine that he would be easily led into a trap.

Isn't this ignoring that Space Wolves were regarded as some of the most cunning strategists and that Russ, with nary an effort, outmaneuvered Angron as an object lesson?

While he's no Perturabo, Russ had a cunning all his own. Were I to doubt any Primarch, it may be Corax. Everything was too small scale for him.

The Wolves specialize in melee, making them an automatic loss as being contenders for competent military strategy.

The best way to tell who the best general is would be to give each Primarch ten platoons of US Marines and see who completed an objective minimal casualties.

Melee can work. I have heard about bayonet-charges actually working in modern times as few things are more horrifying than being charged by a pissed off human intent on murder and if you are really good at close-combat it would be a viable strategy at situations.

Yeah. And those events can be counted on a single hand. Meanwhile this thing called the RPG, grenade launcher, mortar, and LMG absolutely ruin any idea of a bayonet charge. Dorn actually would be among the better generals simply because of how the Imperial Fists love bolters and heavy bolters.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Shidank wrote:

 PastelAvenger wrote:
I think I would have to go for Leman Russ, he's just an attack dog with a legion behind him and although he does have military training and know how to lead I can imagine that he would be easily led into a trap.

Isn't this ignoring that Space Wolves were regarded as some of the most cunning strategists and that Russ, with nary an effort, outmaneuvered Angron as an object lesson?

While he's no Perturabo, Russ had a cunning all his own. Were I to doubt any Primarch, it may be Corax. Everything was too small scale for him.

The Wolves specialize in melee, making them an automatic loss as being contenders for competent military strategy.

The best way to tell who the best general is would be to give each Primarch ten platoons of US Marines and see who completed an objective minimal casualties.

The Months of Shame in which they outwitted, outmaneuvered, and outfought the Inquisition, the Red Hunters, and the Grey Knights would singularly and magnifcently throw your claims to the wind.

 Shidank wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Shidank wrote:

 PastelAvenger wrote:
I think I would have to go for Leman Russ, he's just an attack dog with a legion behind him and although he does have military training and know how to lead I can imagine that he would be easily led into a trap.

Isn't this ignoring that Space Wolves were regarded as some of the most cunning strategists and that Russ, with nary an effort, outmaneuvered Angron as an object lesson?

While he's no Perturabo, Russ had a cunning all his own. Were I to doubt any Primarch, it may be Corax. Everything was too small scale for him.

The Wolves specialize in melee, making them an automatic loss as being contenders for competent military strategy.

The best way to tell who the best general is would be to give each Primarch ten platoons of US Marines and see who completed an objective minimal casualties.

The Months of Shame in which they outwitted, outmaneuvered, and outfought the Inquisition, the Red Hunters, and the Grey Knights would singularly and magnifcently throw your claims to the wind.

The Months of Shame are irrelevant. They weren't led by Russ, and they weren't an actual conflict.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Shidank wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Shidank wrote:

 PastelAvenger wrote:
I think I would have to go for Leman Russ, he's just an attack dog with a legion behind him and although he does have military training and know how to lead I can imagine that he would be easily led into a trap.

Isn't this ignoring that Space Wolves were regarded as some of the most cunning strategists and that Russ, with nary an effort, outmaneuvered Angron as an object lesson?

While he's no Perturabo, Russ had a cunning all his own. Were I to doubt any Primarch, it may be Corax. Everything was too small scale for him.

The Wolves specialize in melee, making them an automatic loss as being contenders for competent military strategy.

The best way to tell who the best general is would be to give each Primarch ten platoons of US Marines and see who completed an objective minimal casualties.

The Months of Shame in which they outwitted, outmaneuvered, and outfought the Inquisition, the Red Hunters, and the Grey Knights would singularly and magnifcently throw your claims to the wind.

The Months of Shame are irrelevant. They weren't led by Russ, and they weren't an actual conflict.

Incorrect. The chapter's tactics and strategies will have altered little since Russ. If anything, removing Russ shows how impressive Space Wolves are. You've actually made the argument more clear.

I recommend reading Vengeful Spirit. Russ repeatedly defeats Malcador at a board game and discusses strategy. I think the greatest blunder you've made is to actually believe the Wolves are savages.

This is actually pretty impossible to say, as all Primarchs were created as capable generals, but they all had different view on warfare.

 Shidank wrote:
Does unremarkable translate into bad?

Vulkan: Unremarkable
Corax: better at small engagements
Angron: Reckless
Curze: no plan or control

Honestly, it seems like Vulkan comes out on top given those 4.

No, it doesn't. They were all great generals. Some of them were undeniably greater than others, however, which is why I went by the one that, as far as I'm aware of, has the least greatest reputation. Corax and the Khan at least have trademark styles of warfare that they are supposedly masters of.
Another unremarkable Primarch is Sanguinius, actually. He's very charismatic and a great fighter, and gets lots of attention on those accounts, but I've never heard any praise of him as a general. Not like Guilliman, Dorn and the Lion.

And Angron and Curze are obviously irrelevant, since we are only discussing the loyalists.

here's the funny thing....... the loyalist primarchs, for the most part are the competant ones. Even Horus seems to reckongize this, noting that among his "peers" it's mostly loyalists. with the primarchs following him being the more broken ones.

 EmpNortonII wrote:
Context for the question. You and said Primarch are facing each other on the battlefield. Neither of you know the composition of each other's forces. Knowing only what you know about the Primarch, who would you want to go up against, knowing that losing would result in your death? Whose presence on the field as commander would give you the greatest chance of victory simply by being the commanding general?

Given one decisive battle to the death as stated by the OP, the advantage lies with more tactically gifted generals. In older fluff at least, Russ and the Lion were considered master tacticians, second only to Horus in their number of victories so they would be the loyalist primarchs to avoid. In turn Horus considered only Gulliman and Ferrus Manus as his true rivals for warmaster so they have to be quite good in all facets of war. The white scars are a mess when it comes to logistics but the Kahn is the hardest primarch to read and most unpredictable of the bunch. That is not a quality you'd like your opponent to posses in a single battle. Similarly, Corax is a gifted field commander and pulled off a successful retreat from Istvaan 5 while being pressured by several hostile legions.

Which leaves Sangunius, Dorn and Vulkan as worst options. Sangunius qualities as a general are somewhat of a mystery as the writers like to set him up one on one with whatever big demon they can come up with. The Blood angels are the premier loyalist shock assault force so he can't be all that bad. Dorn is somewhat inflexible but the best when it comes to defending a position and probably the worst in a offensive battle. Vulkan's main qualities lie with tenacity and endurance, but doesn't seem to posses any real standout qualities and is prone to self doubt so he would be my pick as 'easiest' opponent.

BrianDavion wrote:
here's the funny thing....... the loyalist primarchs, for the most part are the competant ones. Even Horus seems to reckongize this, noting that among his "peers" it's mostly loyalists. with the primarchs following him being the more broken ones.

Honestly, I only ever considered Perturabo and Alpharius as losses. The rest are pretty meh.

None of the primarchs were -bad- generals. Not even Angron was a bad general. Bad person, maybe, what with pounding nails into his own dudes' heads, but he got gak done just like any other primarch. Even the really spooky guys like Curze and Mortarion were efficient war leaders in their own styles.

 j31c3n wrote:
None of the primarchs were -bad- generals. Not even Angron was a bad general. Bad person, maybe, what with pounding nails into his own dudes' heads, but he got gak done just like any other primarch. Even the really spooky guys like Curze and Mortarion were efficient war leaders in their own styles.

I don't agree, considering Angron was rebuked twice, once by Russ and once by The Emperor, so clearly they both thought he wasn't up to scratch. Angron wasn't even a general in my opinion. He barely leads his legion, he just runs off ahead when the nails take him. He was just another one of the World Eaters at that point. He dug himself into the ground and had to be snapped out of his madness by the few remaining librarians from the WE because he was that damn loony he didn't know where he was.

I think you could just split them into three categories: Great, Unremarkable or specialized, and Liability.

In this case:

Horus: Great
Dorn: Great (or much less, depending on his mood and post Heresy.
Guilliman: Great
Jonson: Great->Specialized (he never commanded multi-legion, but seemed to have the potential to)
Fulgrim: Specialized
Sanguinus: Specialized (leaning towards Great?)
Ferrus: Specialized
Vulkan: Specialized (unremarkable?)
Russ: Specialized/Liability (sorta)
Angron: Liability
Perturabo: Specialized (potential for Great or unremarkable?)
Khan: Specialized
Mortarion: Specialized (leaning towards unremarkable it seems)
Curze: Liability
Alpharius/Omegon: Specialized, Liability, potential for great? (ie, all of the above)
Corax: Specialized/Unremarkable
Magnus: Specialized
Lorgar: Unremarkable.

Sounds definitely like Chaos got the short end of the stick.
Of the Loyalists, it's a close last-place race between Vulkan and Corax, it seems.

 ImAGeek wrote:

 j31c3n wrote:
None of the primarchs were -bad- generals. Not even Angron was a bad general. Bad person, maybe, what with pounding nails into his own dudes' heads, but he got gak done just like any other primarch. Even the really spooky guys like Curze and Mortarion were efficient war leaders in their own styles.

I don't agree, considering Angron was rebuked twice, once by Russ and once by The Emperor, so clearly they both thought he wasn't up to scratch. Angron wasn't even a general in my opinion. He barely leads his legion, he just runs off ahead when the nails take him. He was just another one of the World Eaters at that point. He dug himself into the ground and had to be snapped out of his madness by the few remaining librarians from the WE because he was that damn loony he didn't know where he was.

They rebuked his ferocity and bloodthirst, not his lack of success.

The success is basically just him and his legion butchering worlds. You don't need to be a good general to do that.

Roboute; do the Alpha Legion thing of memorising the Codex Astartes and then proceeding to anticipate his moves.

That didn't work out too well for the AL after he did what they least expected and killed one of the Primarchs (well presumably).

Bran Dawri wrote:

Compliance, maybe. But that includes peaceful bringing-into-the-fold. Russ was third in military victories, Johnson second (by a thin margin to Russ IIRC) - despite the Wolves being one of the smallest Legions. Smaller numbers, yet more victories than almost everyone else. Yeah, that sounds like a bloodthirsty berserk allright :rolleyes: .

Russ was also discovered second. Guilliman and the Lion were discovered later and still have astounding track records. Additionally the Ultramarines spent time on securing worlds after they were taken; ensuring they'd be productive, stable and loyal planets. Part of why the Ultramarines were so vast was because they generally took less casualties as well as having more worlds to draw recruits from.

Shidank wrote:Incorrect. The chapter's tactics and strategies will have altered little since Russ. If anything, removing Russ shows how impressive Space Wolves are. You've actually made the argument more clear.

I find that unlikely. During the Great Crusade all the Legions made use of massive superiority to smash aside resistance in a timely manner (which is pretty much the main way Angron survived). While sometimes they may have been outmatched and only able to pull through with superior tactics it does seem rare. In the 41st millennium the space marines (including the Space Wolves) no longer have the luxury of such an advantage and would likely generally favour taking time over casualties. Not too mention the changes in technology, fleet size, priorities and various other things.

The way that fight is described (roboute killing Alpharius very easily) makes it seem far to likely that "Alpharius" was just a regular legionaire. Similar to

Another example of the Alphas out maneuvering the Ultras

SonofTerra wrote:
The way that fight is described (roboute killing Alpharius very easily) makes it seem far to likely that "Alpharius" was just a regular legionaire. Similar to

Spoiler:

When Sheed Ranko drinks some of Omegon's blood, granting him with memories, knowledge and ability above that of a normal marine

Another example of the Alphas out maneuvering the Ultras

We don't know yet though, so. How many times have they actually outmanoeuvred the UM anyway? I know they led them around a bit after the siege, but apart from that did they really come into contact much?

The idea that Guilliman would confuse a regular marine for his brother is also pretty absurd.

Good point. My money is on that he kills either Alpharius or Omegon. Which still leaves one out there.

tgjensen wrote:
The idea that Guilliman would confuse a regular marine for his brother is also pretty absurd.

What happened in 'The Serpent Beneath' has a regular marine pretty much gutted and substantially weakened after being hit by one bolt pistol round at close range to his chestplate.

Guilliman in Unremembered Empire was shot dozens of times, while wearing his casual office clothes by a whole squad of enemy bolters, but healed up not too long after. He'd probably notice even a juiced up Marine 'Alpharius' as being way too easy.

We don't have any substantial modern fluff saying it was an easy kill anyway.

But that also requires Guilliman to have seen Alpharius, as I get the feeling from any Alpha fluff they always tended to be helmeted when in the presence of others.

For the poll though, if it's a battle of my choosing then any of them would do other than corax, as (as far as I recall) none of them were particularly known for their stealth descents, which gives you the advantage of forcing an awful drop on them (i.e. something like the planet Murder) followed up by the isolating of any elements that may come together via hit and run and overwhelming force.

Of those left that leaves you the unpredictability of the Wolves, something that you've unaccounted the Ultra's seeing before and copying and the fact that you're trying to beat the Scars at their own game.

From there it's a case of using the favourite aspects of the remaining legions against them, while providing enough differing sources of attack, that they can't come up with a reliable counter.

Hi there my favourite legion is the Alpha Legion. Does it show?

Honestly I think the Alpha legion fans tend to over state their trickyness. they certinly pull lots of fast ones but but honestly the "everything is a AL trick" gets kinda silly at times. especially in a serious discussion. right now all we have is whats presented to us, the AL tried planning for RGs conventional tactics. and RG adapted. but then I've always viewed the codex as being more orginizational and some tatical guidelines then a "paint by numbers" stragety guide.

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

Bran Dawri wrote:

Compliance, maybe. But that includes peaceful bringing-into-the-fold. Russ was third in military victories, Johnson second (by a thin margin to Russ IIRC) - despite the Wolves being one of the smallest Legions. Smaller numbers, yet more victories than almost everyone else. Yeah, that sounds like a bloodthirsty berserk allright :rolleyes: .

Russ was also discovered second. Guilliman and the Lion were discovered later and still have astounding track records. Additionally the Ultramarines spent time on securing worlds after they were taken; ensuring they'd be productive, stable and loyal planets. Part of why the Ultramarines were so vast was because they generally took less casualties as well as having more worlds to draw recruits from.

Shidank wrote:Incorrect. The chapter's tactics and strategies will have altered little since Russ. If anything, removing Russ shows how impressive Space Wolves are. You've actually made the argument more clear.

I find that unlikely. During the Great Crusade all the Legions made use of massive superiority to smash aside resistance in a timely manner (which is pretty much the main way Angron survived). While sometimes they may have been outmatched and only able to pull through with superior tactics it does seem rare. In the 41st millennium the space marines (including the Space Wolves) no longer have the luxury of such an advantage and would likely generally favour taking time over casualties. Not too mention the changes in technology, fleet size, priorities and various other things.

You cut my post in half! Cheater.

I understand the desire to view them as simple, but the killing blow is a legitimate strategy employed by some of the most famous generals in our own history. Russ sucks on the defensive(as shown when the Alpha Legion got his goose) but his offense is a force of nature. There simply hasn't been a blunted Space Wolf assault in the Great Crusade. Their approach to war is to strike first and in such a way as to leave a foe broken. Their strategy is just a faster paced Luna Wolves approach to the iron spear to the face of strategies. Where Luna Wolves adopted a "give no ground" mentality, the Space Wolves went Khan with it and said "who cares about the damn ground?"

BrianDavion wrote:
Honestly I think the Alpha legion fans tend to over state their trickyness. they certinly pull lots of fast ones but but honestly the "everything is a AL trick" gets kinda silly at times. especially in a serious discussion. right now all we have is whats presented to us, the AL tried planning for RGs conventional tactics. and RG adapted. but then I've always viewed the codex as being more orginizational and some tatical guidelines then a "paint by numbers" stragety guide.

I'm a huge alpha legion fan and the 'it's all an AL plot!' Gets old quick, both from the actual authors and from people speculating. They're tricky and very good at what they do but they're not infallible.

MozzyFuzzy, I don't think he would have needed to see Alpharius (although I'm sure they've probably all seen eachother informally at some point or another), in the original story for how Alph was found, he boarded Horus' ship and fought his way to the bridge, and when he got there they both knew they were brothers. I imagine Guilliman can tell the difference between a Primarch and a normal marine from things like their fighting skills and just the sheer awe factor a Primarch has, even Alpharius to a lesser degree. And they might even have a kind of sense for each other due to their creation.

No, the Alpha Legion are definitely above everyone else. While it probably wasn't under the leadership of Alpharius himself, a single Alpha Legionnaire with some Black Legion logistical support wiped out an entire Space Marine chapter in one fell swoop without taking a single loss.

No they're not, and one story of them doing something like that doesn't suddenly make them above everyone else. Sounds pretty badly written if they took zero casualties and one AL guy took out a whole chapter.

 ImAGeek wrote:
No they're not, and one story of them doing something like that doesn't suddenly make them above everyone else. Sounds pretty badly written if they took zero casualties and one AL guy took out a whole chapter.

the only time I can recall the AL destroying a chapter was when they brainwashed children with an activation code that someone got past the hypno-indoctrination and then activated it. a story I always thought was honestly a bit silly.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

There simply hasn't been a blunted Space Wolf assault in the Great Crusade

your source for this is?

 Crazyterran wrote:

Bran Dawri wrote:
Pick Russ and you will get your ass handed to you faster than you can say "woof".

He might have a appeared as a savage berserk, but he didn't end up bested only by Horus and Johnson in number of victories during the Crusades by just rushing in.
He was a barbarian, but that does not mean he was stupid or even remotely incompetent. Behind that veneer is a ruthless intellect.

Nor was he the one the Emperor turned to when we wanted another Legion to be taken down a notch because he just rushes in.

Guilliman is stated as being second only to Horus, or perhaps even his general when it comes to compliances and victories.

There's clearly a fluff contradiction here, as the Lion and the Wolf fluff is mentioned in both the Dark Angels and Space Wolves codices, as well as the Index Astartes. Who was Horus's general?

 ImAGeek wrote:
No they're not, and one story of them doing something like that doesn't suddenly make them above everyone else. Sounds pretty badly written if they took zero casualties and one AL guy took out a whole chapter.

Under Alpharius, they also took an entire planet and only lose a handful of Astartes in the process, compared to the typical losses of the Ultramarines or Dark Angels. When the Alpha Legion acts competently, they are memetic in their abilities. There's no equal to them in the other Legions- not even the Raven Guard Shadowalking is comparable. They Hydras are effectively the Batman of the Legions, not the Night Lords.

Id say Russ or Vulkan

Russ because he is just a dog which wants to run in and hurt you...which can easily be exploited.

Id actually learn more towards Vulkan his love for humanity would be his weakness. Send a few soldiers/vehicles to start wrecking refugee's and civilians and he would have to send help to them. Which would then be intercepted and destroyed and spread out his army.

I would probably fight against Vulkan.

Everyone is saying Ferrus because he was angry at Istavaan V unfortunately you as a general didn't betray him. When you and his army face off he will be level headed and not angry and march right over you.

 Killionaire wrote:
I think you could just split them into three categories: Great, Unremarkable or specialized, and Liability.

That's a pretty good system I would say. You could explain Russ with it, in that part of his specialization is appearing to be a liability.

Russ's "I'm just doing it to FEWL TEHM!" seems like a cop out.

It's like watching someone practicing karate and being really bad at it, and then them being like "I'm doing it badly on purpose so people will underestimate me!" Yeah. Right.

If lives are at stake, especially your precious Fenrisian ones, why would you not try your hardest?

 Wyzilla wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
No they're not, and one story of them doing something like that doesn't suddenly make them above everyone else. Sounds pretty badly written if they took zero casualties and one AL guy took out a whole chapter.

Under Alpharius, they also took an entire planet and only lose a handful of Astartes in the process, compared to the typical losses of the Ultramarines or Dark Angels. When the Alpha Legion acts competently, they are memetic in their abilities. There's no equal to them in the other Legions- not even the Raven Guard Shadowalking is comparable. They Hydras are effectively the Batman of the Legions, not the Night Lords.

Yeah they can pull of stuff like that but how long did that take them to set up? 6 months? A year? The AL work very differently to the other legions but that doesn't make them better than the other legions and it doesn't mean they never make mistakes.

 EngulfedObject wrote:

 Crazyterran wrote:

Bran Dawri wrote:
Pick Russ and you will get your ass handed to you faster than you can say "woof".

He might have a appeared as a savage berserk, but he didn't end up bested only by Horus and Johnson in number of victories during the Crusades by just rushing in.
He was a barbarian, but that does not mean he was stupid or even remotely incompetent. Behind that veneer is a ruthless intellect.

Nor was he the one the Emperor turned to when we wanted another Legion to be taken down a notch because he just rushes in.

Guilliman is stated as being second only to Horus, or perhaps even his general when it comes to compliances and victories.

There's clearly a fluff contradiction here, as the Lion and the Wolf fluff is mentioned in both the Dark Angels and Space Wolves codices, as well as the Index Astartes. Who was Horus's general?

I think I was typing horus' equal, but flubbed it while typing on my iPad, didn't check what I wrote, and ended up with that.

Know No Fear has Guilliman as = or better as Horus, and I believe the Marine codex says something similiar.

 Crazyterran wrote:
Know No Fear has Guilliman as = or better as Horus, and I believe the Marine codex says something similiar.

I find equal to or better than Horus difficult to accept when established fluff already has the Lion and Russ being second and third, with Horus having brought the most planets to compliance. Does someone here have the actual quote at hand?

Edit: Found the quote, from the 5th ed SM codex:

"With the exception of the Luna Wolves, no Legion conquered as many worlds, or conquered worlds as fast, or left conquered worlds in such good state during the Great Crusade, as the Ultramarines. Whenever Guilliman liberated a world, he would not move on until he had set up a self-sufficient defense system, and left advisors behind to create industry, set up trade routes with the rest of the Imperium, and form a government whose first concern would always be the well-being of the people."

Okay, so there is a fluff contradiction. I'm sticking with the Lion and the Wolf personally since this codex was written by Matt Ward and he's gone on record saying he's an Ultramarines fanboy. Not to mention he doesn't care at all about established fluff, trampling all over it with glee and replacing it with stuff like Draigo carving the name of his boss on Mortarion's heart. Ridiculous.

That is not necessarily a fluff contradiction. The Ultramarines conquered more worlds, while the Dark Angels had more victories. Not every battle is a world conquest.

Oh, and that quote can be found in the 2nd edition Codex:Ultramarines, I believe. So not written by Ward.

 ImAGeek wrote:
The success is basically just him and his legion butchering worlds. You don't need to be a good general to do that.

Depends on how you're defining "good general," honestly. The Primarchs were engineered to be the perfect generals, and they were. The problem is, they're people too, and people have weaknesses.

Horus had delusions of grandeur and doubted himself.

Russ was prone to drink, quick to anger, and had serious issues with authority.

Ferrus Manus tried to bury his emotion in cold logic (that suppression of self finally breaking is what caused his death).

Fulgrim was obsessed with self-perfection and a narcissist.

Vulkan would turn from victory to save worthless humanity.

Dorn had some massive self-worth issues, especially after the death of the Emperor.

Guilliman had trouble making snap decisions when he lacked all the facts.

Magnus the Red had father issues, the smallest legion, and a constant struggle with mutation.

Sanguinus ... okay, Blood Angels fans, he was pretty much perfect.

El'Jonson had basically no people skills.

Perturabo didn't really like being a general.

Mortarion was basically insane and though that suffering built character.

Lorgar had too much of an intellectual bent - he didn't really enjoy war.

Khan was one of those "honor before reason" types.

Curze was tormented by visions of his own demise and enjoyed scaring the crap out of everyone.

Angron was a psychotic murder-hobo with nails in his brain.

Corax was very quick to take to desperate measures.

Alpharius had a chip on his shoulder and something to prove.

The only correct answer is Ferrus Manus.

Russ? Please, read the fluff before you say silly gak like that.

As I said before, none of them are bad generals. They all just have different views on warfare.

No, I'd say Ferrus was definitely a pretty bad general, if only by the standards of his brothers.

 j31c3n wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
The success is basically just him and his legion butchering worlds. You don't need to be a good general to do that.

Depends on how you're defining "good general," honestly. The Primarchs were engineered to be the perfect generals, and they were. The problem is, they're people too, and people have weaknesses.

I don't know what your definition of good general is but Angron definitely is not a good general in any sense. He's a good fighter, but at leading a legion he falls way short of the mark. As I've said, as soon as the nails take hold there is no reason, he rushes ahead of his legion and half the time doesn't even know where he is. I don't know how you can say he's a good general. Every single other Primarch I could see arguments for (except maybe Curze) but not Angron.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Void__Dragon wrote:
No, I'd say Ferrus was definitely a pretty bad general, if only by the standards of his brothers.

Why? He made a fatal mistake at Isstvan, but before then he wasn't noticeably worse than the others. Dorn made the same fatal mistake he did at the Iron Cage, is he still worse than Dorn..?

 Void__Dragon wrote:
No, I'd say Ferrus was definitely a pretty bad general, if only by the standards of his brothers.

Your only piece of evidence to support this is that he was killed because of a momentary lapse of judgement.

By that standard, Sanguinius, Guilliman, Dorn, Curze, Horus, and Alpharius are also "the worst general."

To be fair, didn't Manus also screw up massively in his fight against the Eldar in 'The Primarches?'

Guilliman considered Ferrus to be one of the "Dauntless Four."

 Wyzilla wrote:
No, the Alpha Legion are definitely above everyone else. While it probably wasn't under the leadership of Alpharius himself, a single Alpha Legionnaire with some Black Legion logistical support wiped out an entire Space Marine chapter in one fell swoop without taking a single loss.

Which event are you referring to?

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:
No, the Alpha Legion are definitely above everyone else. While it probably wasn't under the leadership of Alpharius himself, a single Alpha Legionnaire with some Black Legion logistical support wiped out an entire Space Marine chapter in one fell swoop without taking a single loss.

Which event are you referring to?

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Crimson_Consuls

 j31c3n wrote:

 Void__Dragon wrote:
No, I'd say Ferrus was definitely a pretty bad general, if only by the standards of his brothers.

Your only piece of evidence to support this is that he was killed because of a momentary lapse of judgement.

By that standard, Sanguinius, Guilliman, Dorn, Curze, Horus, and Alpharius are also "the worst general."

Dorn and Alpharius are only MIA. We don't know if they're actually dead.

 j31c3n wrote:

Your only piece of evidence to support this is that he was killed because of a momentary lapse of judgement.

By that standard, Sanguinius, Guilliman, Dorn, Curze, Horus, and Alpharius are also "the worst general."

All of them also have statements or showings of military brilliance.

Manus does not, nor was he flying rodent gak out of his mind at the time like Dorn or Curze (who isn't a loyalist Primarch by the way, nor are Horus and Alpharius) were (though this statement is somewhat dishonest, because Dorn has always been flying rodent gak out of his mind).

If we're counting traitor Primarchs then Angron is the worst general, and it's not close.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 j31c3n wrote:

 Void__Dragon wrote:
No, I'd say Ferrus was definitely a pretty bad general, if only by the standards of his brothers.

Your only piece of evidence to support this is that he was killed because of a momentary lapse of judgement.

By that standard, Sanguinius, Guilliman, Dorn, Curze, Horus, and Alpharius are also "the worst general."

Dorn and Alpharius are only MIA. We don't know if they're actually dead.

Considering Dorn was exploded and only his hand survived... I'd say it's pretty safe to call him officially deceased.

As for Alpharius, he was killed by Guilliman. I'm as big of a fanboy of the new Alpha Legion fluff as can exist, but let's face it. He's dead.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 j31c3n wrote:

Your only piece of evidence to support this is that he was killed because of a momentary lapse of judgement.

By that standard, Sanguinius, Guilliman, Dorn, Curze, Horus, and Alpharius are also "the worst general."

All of them also have statements or showings of military brilliance.

Manus does not, nor was he flying rodent gak out of his mind at the time like Dorn or Curze (who isn't a loyalist Primarch by the way, nor are Horus and Alpharius) were (though this statement is somewhat dishonest, because Dorn has always been flying rodent gak out of his mind).

How were Ferrus Manus and Dorn "out of their minds"? Show your work.

 j31c3n wrote:


How were Ferrus Manus and Dorn "out of their minds"? Show your work.

I didn't say Manus was out of his mind. Reading comprehension.

Dorn, however, is a raging psychopath who sends his Legion into obvious traps for a suicidal charge and locks his Librarians in a basement for decades. All while inflicting self-harm. He's the biggest fruit loop of all the Primarchs.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 j31c3n wrote:


How were Ferrus Manus and Dorn "out of their minds"? Show your work.

I didn't say Manus was out of his mind. Reading comprehension.

Dorn, however, is a raging psychopath who sends his Legion into obvious traps for a suicidal charge and locks his Librarians in a basement for decades. All while inflicting self-harm. He's the biggest fruit loop of all the Primarchs.

That's ... really not Dorn at all. You're ignoring the larger picture of the character to focus on a few moments of his story. You're being deliberately disingenuous to make a point. Dorn, Ferrus Manus, Russ, and Sanguinius were referred to by Guilliman as "the dauntless few" - the four Primarchs who most exemplified the design of the Emperor. If Guilliman thought well of a guy, chances are that guy wasn't "out of his mind."

And besides, if Ferrus Manus wasn't "out of his mind" for charging after Fulgrim, then neither was Dorn for charging after Perturabo. Logical consistency.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
No they're not, and one story of them doing something like that doesn't suddenly make them above everyone else. Sounds pretty badly written if they took zero casualties and one AL guy took out a whole chapter.

Under Alpharius, they also took an entire planet and only lose a handful of Astartes in the process, compared to the typical losses of the Ultramarines or Dark Angels. When the Alpha Legion acts competently, they are memetic in their abilities. There's no equal to them in the other Legions- not even the Raven Guard Shadowalking is comparable. They Hydras are effectively the Batman of the Legions, not the Night Lords.

every world has taken worlds with no loses, where Alpharius may have done so with trickery. chances are other Primarchs (Gulliman, Sanguinus and Horus seem likely to be particularly good at this) likely brought in worlds through diplomacy that other Primarchs would have had to fight to bring in

 j31c3n wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 j31c3n wrote:

 Void__Dragon wrote:
No, I'd say Ferrus was definitely a pretty bad general, if only by the standards of his brothers.

Your only piece of evidence to support this is that he was killed because of a momentary lapse of judgement.

By that standard, Sanguinius, Guilliman, Dorn, Curze, Horus, and Alpharius are also "the worst general."

Dorn and Alpharius are only MIA. We don't know if they're actually dead.

Considering Dorn was exploded and only his hand survived... I'd say it's pretty safe to call him officially deceased.

As for Alpharius, he was killed by Guilliman. I'm as big of a fanboy of the new Alpha Legion fluff as can exist, but let's face it. He's dead.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 j31c3n wrote:

Your only piece of evidence to support this is that he was killed because of a momentary lapse of judgement.

By that standard, Sanguinius, Guilliman, Dorn, Curze, Horus, and Alpharius are also "the worst general."

All of them also have statements or showings of military brilliance.

Manus does not, nor was he flying rodent gak out of his mind at the time like Dorn or Curze (who isn't a loyalist Primarch by the way, nor are Horus and Alpharius) were (though this statement is somewhat dishonest, because Dorn has always been flying rodent gak out of his mind).

How were Ferrus Manus and Dorn "out of their minds"? Show your work.

We have no reason to believe that Dorn "exploded". Only his hand was recovered, his body or his armor was never found, and in all likelihood he ended up in the warp. The Ultramarines they themselves meanwhile don't even believe they killed Alpharius.

For some reason, I thought the Chaos ship he boarded exploded at the end of the battle. What happened to it? Did they get away? If so, then I suppose Dorn being alive is about as plausible as Khan still smashing heads in the Webway or any of the other "missing primarch" stories.

Still though. Ferrus Manus wasn't the "worst general." None of the Primarchs were. The only plausible contender for that title is Angron, and I don't think he deserves it, Nails and all.

Well, the obvious answer would seem to be Dorn since he was so useless that the Emperor took him off the line and gave him the "important job" of supervising building a fort.

But there's always Russ who never saw an enemy he didn't want to charge right into.


Of course, the poll was missing the correct answer, Lorgar. But that wouldn't really be an interesting poll. There would be two options: A: Lorgar, B: I've never read any 40K fluff.

Dorn was one of the "dauntless few" though, praised by Guilliman. Just because he excelled at siegecraft doesn't necessarily mean that he suffered elsewhere.

And Lorgar was man enough to stand against Guilliman for an extended period of time at Calth. The Word Bearers didn't fold easily because Lorgar wasn't a bad general.

I was mostly joking about Dorn.

And Lorgar wasn't at Calth. Only a hologram of him was. But either way, Calth was a ridiculous loss for the Word Bearers. They had total surprise and still managed to lose horribly. If that doesn't demonstrate just how expendable and incompetent the Word Bearers were, I don't know what would.

Seriously, the most logical explanation was that Horus sent the Word Bearers to Calth because they were his least valuable troops. He knew that whomever he sent was likely to be destroyed, and well, if you're going to sacrifice somebody, it might as well be the Word Bearers. The Alpha Legion or the World Eaters might bork it up (though for different reasons). The Word Bearers could be trusted to stick to the plan and die like good little pawns.

I have not read the HH books so forgive me if I am wrong about this.

I recall learning that the point of Calth was manyfold. Many elements of the Word Bearers were deliberately sacrificed to "purge" the legion of the Marines that were less than devoted to the Ruinous Powers and more interested in petty revenge. Guilliman was intended to survive the attack, which despite ultimately failing, would cause him to worry that Terra had fallen, and therefore retreat to Macragge and call his forces there to create Secundus.

Lastly, the Word Bearers were outnumbered something like four-or-five-to-one, and still managed to give a good fight.

They achieved total space superiority within minutes, and killed a good 40% of the assembled loyalist forces (Army and Marines) before the fighting even started, and an even larger percentage of the war material which had been pre-loaded.

It's important to understand that Lorgar is an extremely unrelaible source, even in describing his own motivations. He's wildly envious, and desperately craves validation. Which is why he fell to Chaos in the first place, and why he's been writing a book nobody will ever read for the last 10,000 years. It took him halfway through Betrayer to figure out that Guilliman didn't despise him or pity him, and just destroyed Monarchia because that was what he was told to do.

So when Lorgar talks about his reasons for doing things, it's important to take it with a grain of salt. Lorgar likes to feel enlightened, because being enlightened was the only thing he thought he was better at than his brothers. The reality is probably that Horus said "Pick half your guys and send them to Calth to ambush the Ultramarines" and so he did. If Lorgar "purged" his legion, it was out of his own self-indulgence. Not because they actually needed to be purged.

Read the way Magnus talks to Lorgar as if he was an idiot child. Lorgar is the kid who thinks he's super clever, but in reality, he was weak-willed and gullible, which is why he fell first. Heck, the Fateweaver says right to his face "I'm totally going to lie to you half the time" and Lorgar still believes everything he tells him.

Well, all that said, I still don't think Lorgar is worthy of the title "worst Primarch general."

Just because he's envious and gullible and was the first to fall doesn't necessarily make him stupid. An envious and gullible person can still be cunning, and indeed would have to be, to kickstart an event as grand in scale as the Horus Heresy.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
They achieved total space superiority within minutes, and killed a good 40% of the assembled loyalist forces (Army and Marines) before the fighting even started, and an even larger percentage of the war material which had been pre-loaded.

By "they" are you referring to the Word Bearers or the Ultramarines? Because if it's the former... that sounds like good generalling to me.

Well, to be fair, in his big long "Woe is me" speech, Lorgar also admits he was the worst general in TFH, and bemoans how the Emperor won't let him be a philosopher or priest instead.

I mean, Lorgar was probably not a complete schlub. But compared to the other Primarchs he wasn't very good at warfighting. Which makes it doubly funny that he teams up with the World Eaters. It's like the blind leading the blind.

The Word Bearers didn't achieve superiority by generalship, they achieved it by treachery. Pretty easy to destroy a fleet at anchor that isn't expecting you to open fire on them. If I invite you to the movies and stab you in the neck as soon as the house lights go out, that doesn't make me a good fighter.

tgjensen wrote:
That is not necessarily a fluff contradiction. The Ultramarines conquered more worlds, while the Dark Angels had more victories. Not every battle is a world conquest.

Oh, and that quote can be found in the 2nd edition Codex:Ultramarines, I believe. So not written by Ward.

Fair enough, I hadn't considered that.

 j31c3n wrote:
Depends on how you're defining "good general," honestly. The Primarchs were engineered to be the perfect generals, and they were. The problem is, they're people too, and people have weaknesses.

-snip-

That's a pretty good assessment!

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
They achieved total space superiority within minutes, and killed a good 40% of the assembled loyalist forces (Army and Marines) before the fighting even started, and an even larger percentage of the war material which had been pre-loaded.

That doesn't reflect badly on the Word Bearers considering how much larger the Ultramarines were as a legion. Its impressive that they could inflict casualties on that scale and it would have evened the odds. Plus the Ultramarines were in a much better position to recover from the attacks and reinforce.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
Well, to be fair, in his big long "Woe is me" speech, Lorgar also admits he was the worst general in TFH, and bemoans how the Emperor won't let him be a philosopher or priest instead.

True, but remember, Lorgar is an extremely unreliable narrator and he has that whole religious guilt/shame thing going on in absolute spades.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
The Word Bearers didn't achieve superiority by generalship, they achieved it by treachery. Pretty easy to destroy a fleet at anchor that isn't expecting you to open fire on them. If I invite you to the movies and stab you in the neck as soon as the house lights go out, that doesn't make me a good fighter.

Doesn't make it an invalid strategy, though. He's a treacherous snake, but a successful one.

I like to compare the Primarchs to the Greek gods, the Greek gods where.... exaggerations. everything about them was larger then life, INCLUDEING their flaws.

tgjensen wrote:

 Shidank wrote:
Does unremarkable translate into bad?

Vulkan: Unremarkable
Corax: better at small engagements
Angron: Reckless
Curze: no plan or control

Honestly, it seems like Vulkan comes out on top given those 4.

No, it doesn't. They were all great generals. Some of them were undeniably greater than others, however, which is why I went by the one that, as far as I'm aware of, has the least greatest reputation. Corax and the Khan at least have trademark styles of warfare that they are supposedly masters of.
Another unremarkable Primarch is Sanguinius, actually. He's very charismatic and a great fighter, and gets lots of attention on those accounts, but I've never heard any praise of him as a general. Not like Guilliman, Dorn and the Lion.

And Angron and Curze are obviously irrelevant, since we are only discussing the loyalists.

Read Fear to Tread and you will see Sanguinius's genius in action. Right at the beginning, in the prologue

Regarding Sanguinius... if Warmaster Horus says Sanguinius ought to have been Warmaster instead of him... I think that means Sanguinius is pretty frickin' baller.

 ImAGeek wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
Honestly I think the Alpha legion fans tend to over state their trickyness. they certinly pull lots of fast ones but but honestly the "everything is a AL trick" gets kinda silly at times. especially in a serious discussion. right now all we have is whats presented to us, the AL tried planning for RGs conventional tactics. and RG adapted. but then I've always viewed the codex as being more orginizational and some tatical guidelines then a "paint by numbers" stragety guide.

I'm a huge alpha legion fan and the 'it's all an AL plot!' Gets old quick, both from the actual authors and from people speculating. They're tricky and very good at what they do but they're not infallible.

MozzyFuzzy, I don't think he would have needed to see Alpharius (although I'm sure they've probably all seen eachother informally at some point or another), in the original story for how Alph was found, he boarded Horus' ship and fought his way to the bridge, and when he got there they both knew they were brothers. I imagine Guilliman can tell the difference between a Primarch and a normal marine from things like their fighting skills and just the sheer awe factor a Primarch has, even Alpharius to a lesser degree. And they might even have a kind of sense for each other due to their creation.

Horus was a Psyker Primarch, though, while Guilliman was not. Not all of the Primarchs were Psykers, but most of them were (Russ, Horus, Sanguinius, Fulgrim, Magnus, etc.). And that whole "sheer force of presence" thing is physical personality (which only shows when helmet is off).

 dusara217 wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
Honestly I think the Alpha legion fans tend to over state their trickyness. they certinly pull lots of fast ones but but honestly the "everything is a AL trick" gets kinda silly at times. especially in a serious discussion. right now all we have is whats presented to us, the AL tried planning for RGs conventional tactics. and RG adapted. but then I've always viewed the codex as being more orginizational and some tatical guidelines then a "paint by numbers" stragety guide.

I'm a huge alpha legion fan and the 'it's all an AL plot!' Gets old quick, both from the actual authors and from people speculating. They're tricky and very good at what they do but they're not infallible.

MozzyFuzzy, I don't think he would have needed to see Alpharius (although I'm sure they've probably all seen eachother informally at some point or another), in the original story for how Alph was found, he boarded Horus' ship and fought his way to the bridge, and when he got there they both knew they were brothers. I imagine Guilliman can tell the difference between a Primarch and a normal marine from things like their fighting skills and just the sheer awe factor a Primarch has, even Alpharius to a lesser degree. And they might even have a kind of sense for each other due to their creation.

Horus was a Psyker Primarch, though, while Guilliman was not. Not all of the Primarchs were Psykers, but most of them were (Russ, Horus, Sanguinius, Fulgrim, Magnus, etc.). And that whole "sheer force of presence" thing is physical personality (which only shows when helmet is off).

It's been suggested by the Khan that all Primarchs have psykic potential, most just never really tap it. (something I'm inclined to suspect has some truth to it) as for Horus being and outright Psyker, there's no real evidance of it other then the stories of the battle of terra. where it's notable he was "jumped up by the dark gods" thus he may have effectivly been granted psykic powers by chaos.

 dusara217 wrote:
And that whole "sheer force of presence" thing is physical personality (which only shows when helmet is off).

This is very untrue. Check out movies like Batman, Judge Dredd (the new one), Robocop, and V for Vendetta. The protagonists of these films have huge personality despite their face being obscured for nearly the entire film. Personality isn't shown just through the face, it's also body language, stance, gait, fighting ability, etc.

BrianDavion wrote:

 dusara217 wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
Honestly I think the Alpha legion fans tend to over state their trickyness. they certinly pull lots of fast ones but but honestly the "everything is a AL trick" gets kinda silly at times. especially in a serious discussion. right now all we have is whats presented to us, the AL tried planning for RGs conventional tactics. and RG adapted. but then I've always viewed the codex as being more orginizational and some tatical guidelines then a "paint by numbers" stragety guide.

I'm a huge alpha legion fan and the 'it's all an AL plot!' Gets old quick, both from the actual authors and from people speculating. They're tricky and very good at what they do but they're not infallible.

MozzyFuzzy, I don't think he would have needed to see Alpharius (although I'm sure they've probably all seen eachother informally at some point or another), in the original story for how Alph was found, he boarded Horus' ship and fought his way to the bridge, and when he got there they both knew they were brothers. I imagine Guilliman can tell the difference between a Primarch and a normal marine from things like their fighting skills and just the sheer awe factor a Primarch has, even Alpharius to a lesser degree. And they might even have a kind of sense for each other due to their creation.

Horus was a Psyker Primarch, though, while Guilliman was not. Not all of the Primarchs were Psykers, but most of them were (Russ, Horus, Sanguinius, Fulgrim, Magnus, etc.). And that whole "sheer force of presence" thing is physical personality (which only shows when helmet is off).

It's been suggested by the Khan that all Primarchs have psykic potential, most just never really tap it. (something I'm inclined to suspect has some truth to it) as for Horus being and outright Psyker, there's no real evidance of it other then the stories of the battle of terra. where it's notable he was "jumped up by the dark gods" thus he may have effectivly been granted psykic powers by chaos.

Psychic powers are a genetic mutation. You're either born with them, or you're not.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 j31c3n wrote:

 dusara217 wrote:
And that whole "sheer force of presence" thing is physical personality (which only shows when helmet is off).

This is very untrue. Check out movies like Batman, Judge Dredd (the new one), Robocop, and V for Vendetta. The protagonists of these films have huge personality despite their face being obscured for nearly the entire film. Personality isn't shown just through the face, it's also body language, stance, gait, fighting ability, etc.

Stance and body language were literally studied by the Alpha Legionaries in order to ensure best possible reproduction of the Primarchs, as were gait, fighting style, etc. As far as fighting ability, every commander in 40k is head and shoulders above his subordinates in melee combat for no logical reason whatsoever, so Alpharius's stunt doubles would work just fine, as just about all of them were pretty high ranking so as to be able to actually make decisions should the need arise.

The Primarch's 'force of personality' thing is also in their voice. Lion amplifies it with his librarians, but he's still able to project it through a comms system.

I don't think 'worst' really comes into it. In all reality, a Legion vs Legion fight is going to come down to who's more pissed, because he's gonna be more inclined to fight harder and think outside the box.

Psychic powers are a genetic mutation. You're either born with them, or you're not.

Yeah except as I said it's been theorized ALL Primarchs where born with it. and even if not, I'm sorry but I REALLY don't think it's outside the realm of the possiable for a buncha people capable of having limbs spontaniously become tentacles to turn someone into a psyker. so far we have not seen ANY sign of Psykic ability from Horus.

BrianDavion wrote:

Psychic powers are a genetic mutation. You're either born with them, or you're not.

Yeah except as I said it's been theorized ALL Primarchs where born with it. and even if not, I'm sorry but I REALLY don't think it's outside the realm of the possiable for a buncha people capable of having limbs spontaniously become tentacles to turn someone into a psyker. so far we have not seen ANY sign of Psykic ability from Horus.

That is true, but we didn't see any out of Fulgrim unitl he went talkin' to some Daemons and got them to teach him how to use 'em.

Roboute Guilliman (A.K.A.: Rowboat Girlyman, Rawbutt Jellyman, Rampant Gullytan, Robot Gulliver, Robot Gorillaman, Robert Gullible, Big BobbyG, Papa Ultra Smurf)

His tactics appear full of arrogance and a lack of flexibility, as long as the Ultramarines didn't have the "Emperor's Blessing" for a moment.

The thing that sets him out as one of the weaker ones out of that list is due to the fact he wrote the codex astartes every single trick he has come up with is written down and likely accessible. Being able to see what he's doing then checking it up in detail makes it easier to counter and predict him. Also while the others have specialities and excel with them, he has sort of stuck into a bland all around type which while good for when you get completely countered by the opposition also leaves him not being so great in any of those; a jack of all trades. What he does excel in, and does so well, is the political side of things.

Basically his strategies are broad, this is both a strength and a weakness.

It would be hilarious if like, Rule 1008 of the Codex Astartes was "don't follow standardized battle doctrines as they make you too predictable" or something.

Like, "The Codex Astartes does not support this Codex Astartes, brother-captain!"

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
It would be hilarious if like, Rule 1008 of the Codex Astartes was "don't follow standardized battle doctrines as they make you too predictable" or something.

Like, "The Codex Astartes does not support this Codex Astartes, brother-captain!"

I suspect there IS a line along those lines. people keep thinking the codex astartes is some sort of inflexable paint by numbers guide to fighting. it's not. that kind of book is frankly impossiable. the codex Astartes likely mostly focuses on orginization and logistics. it tells you how to set up your unit structure, how to ensure you have sufficant supplies for the fight, how to perpare for certin possiabilites etc. and yes it proably has many MANY examples, But I seriously doubt it says "you must do THIS at such and such a time" (as I said if the codex was that inflexable the Ultramarines would be dead. the Tyranids would have killed them)

it likely does have some stuff like "fast attack units are most useful if used to flank the enemy, such as in the battle of such and such, I held the enemies eyes with my tatic squads, while I moved up the sides and flanked them with bike mounted troops"

It's proably basicly "Space SunTzu's art of war"

BrianDavion wrote:
It's proably basicly "Space SunTzu's art of war"

That's pretty much exactly what it is.

 j31c3n wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
It's proably basicly "Space SunTzu's art of war"

That's pretty much exactly what it is.

yup, and I've read the art of war, but I'd still get my ass kicked by an experianced general even if I memorized the damned thing.

BrianDavion wrote:

 j31c3n wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
It's proably basicly "Space SunTzu's art of war"

That's pretty much exactly what it is.

yup, and I've read the art of war, but I'd still get my ass kicked by an experienced general even if I memorized the damned thing.

"Tactics are for amateurs, professionals study logistics."

As a Space Wolves player I have to vote Leeman Russ. He is a skilled leader and a cunning tactician, but he is a poor general who relies on the ferocity and valour of his men to carry the day rather than developing a well thought out plan.

So Leman Russ is responsible for killing maybe 2 mystery legions, but he's the worst strategist? Interesting.

 j31c3n wrote:
Regarding Sanguinius... if Warmaster Horus says Sanguinius ought to have been Warmaster instead of him... I think that means Sanguinius is pretty frickin' baller.

Being a Warmaster isn't really about being the best strategist or general. If it was, Guilliman would unquestionably be the best man for the job. Who does galaxy-scale warfare and army coordination better than the master of logistics?

No, the real job of a Warmaster is to make your proud, independent-minded, stubborn, sometimes downright idiotic brothers do their jobs. They are already great generals in themselves and require little coordination other than being pointed at a target. The real requirement is charisma, which is why Horus got the job and Sanguinius was the only other real contender.

 dusara217 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Psychic powers are a genetic mutation. You're either born with them, or you're not.

Yeah except as I said it's been theorized ALL Primarchs where born with it. and even if not, I'm sorry but I REALLY don't think it's outside the realm of the possiable for a buncha people capable of having limbs spontaniously become tentacles to turn someone into a psyker. so far we have not seen ANY sign of Psykic ability from Horus.

That is true, but we didn't see any out of Fulgrim unitl he went talkin' to some Daemons and got them to teach him how to use 'em.

Right, so Fulgrim had psychic potential but hadn't tapped into it then. You know, that statement you dismissed a minute ago...

Horus wasn't a 'Psyker primarch'. There is literally nothing about him being a psyker until Terra, so it's likely he was given those powers by the Chaos gods. Or, if all Primarchs have psychic potential, they were unlocked by the Chaos Gods.

On Lorgar; I think he was actually a damn good general, he just didn't want to be one. Before they were rebukes the issue was that they were taking too long with each compliance because they would spend loads of time after setting up their new religion, but after Monarchia, in the 50 years before the Heresy, they began to excel, bringing many worlds into compliances, and started catching up with his Brothers. When he puts his mind to it he seems pretty good, it just wasn't what he wanted to do. I don't think he's an idiot or overly gullible or anything either. Lorgar was cleverer than people give him credit for. He knew Signus Prime wasn't going to work, and warned Erebus and Horus that Sanguinius wouldn't turn. He knew Calth would cleanse his legion of marines just focused on petty revenge. He knew Calth and the Shadow Crusade would start the warp storm that keeps Guilliman in Ultramar. Lorgar definitely is not the worst General. Maybe, maybe he would be in a world without Angron, or Curze. But definitely not with them in the equation.

 Pyeatt wrote:
So Leman Russ is responsible for killing maybe 2 mystery legions, but he's the worst strategist? Interesting.

I said he was a great leader and tactician. Arguably the best amoung the primarchs . But the secret to his success is forging a legion full of incredibly agressive warriors who see themselves as heroes of legend seeking great deeds. He created a legion he can point at a problem and its members will compete with each other to achieve victory, taking any risk necessary to do so. Despite this they are not mad beserkers, but each of them is a cunning and clever warrior able to work as part of a team or as a lone hunter.

Leeman's greatest strength is only he could make the Space Wolves what they are and only he could use their capability to its ultimate.

History is full of great generals who have lost a battle to a well lead, aggressive army that didn't know they were beaten.

Also, worst strategist is relative, all the primarchs were natural military geniuses, capable of out generalling pretty much any human commander before them except the Emperor .

I'm amazed at the amount of votes for Leman Russ, considering the guy is said to be quite good tactically. He invented his own wargame, and he would sacrifice even himself to win the battle (as evident in Betrayal).

I agree Russ is pretty good, but sacrificing himself for a victory doesn't seem like a good tactic haha. I mean, if someone else sacrificed a Primarch to win a battle, that person would be an idiot...

 Pyeatt wrote:
So Leman Russ is responsible for killing maybe 2 mystery legions, but he's the worst strategist? Interesting.

It isn't like his plan for destroying the Thousand Sons was terribly ingenius.

"That was your plan Ray? Get her?"

 tydrace wrote:
I'm amazed at the amount of votes for Leman Russ, considering the guy is said to be quite good tactically. He invented his own wargame, and he would sacrifice even himself to win the battle (as evident in Betrayal).

The biggest issue with Leman Russ is that he is CONSTANTLY leading from the front. It would be so very easy to just kill him with a well-aimed shot to the head, or some well-timed artillery fire, and thereby leave his warriors in relative disarray for at least a few minutes/hours, which is all that is necessary to win the battle. Now, if Russ were to be leading the Space Wolves while this occurred, you would get anally raped just about as soon as he died, due to RAGEH!!! but against any other force (Army, Scions, etc.) some good sniper fire would win the day. The problem with Space Marines is that, to outsiders, they seem identical, (even the Wolves, to some extent) insomuch that their leaders are generally using the same gear as their subordinates and don't have much ornamentation on their armor, or at least, only as much as your standard Sergeants do.

I picked Ferrus without thus far reading any other replies. Just get him angry and then he pretty much would have fallen in to any trap at the rush.

To be fair, what made Ferrus angry was the worst possible betrayal imaginable. Sort of a high bar to set to"just get him angry".

But to be realistic, Dorn did the same thing. Guilliman just bailed him out.

 Rippy wrote:
I picked Ferrus without thus far reading any other replies. Just get him angry and then he pretty much would have fallen in to any trap at the rush.

Yeah, just be his best friend, closest brother, and most trusted confidant. Then betray him. Anyone could do it!

Going back to the OP original statement though. Unknown force, unknown numbers, etc. The guy I'd like to face is the guy least likely to adapt to the unknown. A guy who has a plan and then isn't willing to make changes to that plan.

So no defensive minded guys at all... those guys are right out. You might think head on attacker would be best, because you would know what they are going to do. The problem is that if that is what they do, they are probably pretty good at it and their forces are designed to do just that. So in actuality, I wouldn't want to go against them either.

No... it actually needs to be someone balanced. Someone who while wants to do all things perfectly, leaves holes that could be exploited... So on that idea, I'm going to go with the Lion. He seems like he knows what he is doing, but has proven that he can be blindsided and isn't the fastest to adapt in the shortest time.

 Jayden63 wrote:
No... it actually needs to be someone balanced. Someone who while wants to do all things perfectly, leaves holes that could be exploited... So on that idea, I'm going to go with the Lion. He seems like he knows what he is doing, but has proven that he can be blindsided and isn't the fastest to adapt in the shortest time.

That doesn't sound like the Lion.

"We are Dark Angels and in the practice of war, we follow the teachings of the Lion. He tells us war is a matter of adaptation, and whoever adapts most quickly to changing circumstances and takes advantage of the vagaries of warfare, will be victorious." - Descent of Angels, pg 383.

On the Primarchs being born with psychic powers. They weren't born at all. They were vat grown, made from the genetic coding of the Emperor and by the looks of it created from the very power of the warp. I would imagine that all of the Primarchs would be able to exhibit some form of psychic power if they chose to do so. Some were blessed with it being a key factor to their being, others had it as glimpse and some did not even recognise or attempt to use it until they learned how to.

I don't think either that there is any primarch of the Loyalists, nor the Traitors for that matter, that could not adapt to any situation. True, they specialised in their own specific ways of war, but these are all highly competent generals, all studied in every aspect of war and aware of each others tactics. If they weren't able to adapt they would have probably died a long time ago.

 j31c3n wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
I picked Ferrus without thus far reading any other replies. Just get him angry and then he pretty much would have fallen in to any trap at the rush.

Yeah, just be his best friend, closest brother, and most trusted confidant. Then betray him. Anyone could do it!

so you are saying that this is the only way to kill him? Dont be daft. His every actiom since awakening was on impulse and "Medusian" rage. Horus could have set something similar up easily.

 Rippy wrote:

 j31c3n wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
I picked Ferrus without thus far reading any other replies. Just get him angry and then he pretty much would have fallen in to any trap at the rush.

Yeah, just be his best friend, closest brother, and most trusted confidant. Then betray him. Anyone could do it!

so you are saying that this is the only way to kill him? Dont be daft. His every actiom since awakening was on impulse and "Medusian" rage. Horus could have set something similar up easily.

Ferrus usually was very cold and calculating I think, like a machine. The fact it was Fulgrim that had turned was probably what let his rage out.

After reading this thread, I revise my opinion to Fulgrim. Because a.) he leads from the front (gloryhound) and b.) He always has the perfect plan. When his plan goes tits-up, he doesn't adapt; he simply expects his people to follow through. This is demonstrated when the First Company was battling through the Laer, struggling to reach the rendezvous point, and were late, and Fulgrim pressed on despite only the Pheonix Guard and one other Company fighting alongisde him. He would have died because of it, if the First Company had not finally fought through the hordes of Laer and reached Fulgrim and the Pheonix Guard to support with the TDA. There was something like ten different Companies intended on reaching the rendezvous point at the designated time, and despite them being late, he pressed on into a fight where he was outmanned and outgunned just so he could get some glory.

All well and good, but the title is 'which Loyalist Primarch is the worst general'

 ImAGeek wrote:
All well and good, but the title is 'which Loyalist Primarch is the worst general'

I predict the rise of the "Which of the traitor Primarchs was the worst general?" thread.

Still, that was an interesting opinion on Fulgrim. A thread might not be a bad idea!

Made one

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

 j31c3n wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
I picked Ferrus without thus far reading any other replies. Just get him angry and then he pretty much would have fallen in to any trap at the rush.

Yeah, just be his best friend, closest brother, and most trusted confidant. Then betray him. Anyone could do it!

so you are saying that this is the only way to kill him? Dont be daft. His every actiom since awakening was on impulse and "Medusian" rage. Horus could have set something similar up easily.

Ferrus usually was very cold and calculating I think, like a machine. The fact it was Fulgrim that had turned was probably what let his rage out.

This. Ferrus taught his legion to emulate his cold logic. Anyone who thinks he was a raging berserker has clearly never read a single iota of Iron Hands fluff. He lost his cool about Fulgrim and this cost him his life. That's why his legion doubled down on the "flesh is weak, iron is strong" stuff.

 j31c3n wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

 j31c3n wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
I picked Ferrus without thus far reading any other replies. Just get him angry and then he pretty much would have fallen in to any trap at the rush.

Yeah, just be his best friend, closest brother, and most trusted confidant. Then betray him. Anyone could do it!

so you are saying that this is the only way to kill him? Dont be daft. His every actiom since awakening was on impulse and "Medusian" rage. Horus could have set something similar up easily.

Ferrus usually was very cold and calculating I think, like a machine. The fact it was Fulgrim that had turned was probably what let his rage out.

This. Ferrus taught his legion to emulate his cold logic. Anyone who thinks he was a raging berserker has clearly never read a single iota of Iron Hands fluff. He lost his cool about Fulgrim and this cost him his life. That's why his legion doubled down on the "flesh is weak, iron is strong" stuff.

Quite tragic really because Ferrus on the whole was against the 'Flesh is weak' stuff, he tried to stop the IH going down that path so much. And then went and got himself killed, affirming the belief hed been trying to suppress.

 ImAGeek wrote:

 j31c3n wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

 j31c3n wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
I picked Ferrus without thus far reading any other replies. Just get him angry and then he pretty much would have fallen in to any trap at the rush.

Yeah, just be his best friend, closest brother, and most trusted confidant. Then betray him. Anyone could do it!

so you are saying that this is the only way to kill him? Dont be daft. His every actiom since awakening was on impulse and "Medusian" rage. Horus could have set something similar up easily.

Ferrus usually was very cold and calculating I think, like a machine. The fact it was Fulgrim that had turned was probably what let his rage out.

This. Ferrus taught his legion to emulate his cold logic. Anyone who thinks he was a raging berserker has clearly never read a single iota of Iron Hands fluff. He lost his cool about Fulgrim and this cost him his life. That's why his legion doubled down on the "flesh is weak, iron is strong" stuff.

Quite tragic really because Ferrus on the whole was against the 'Flesh is weak' stuff, he tried to stop the IH going down that path so much. And then went and got himself killed, affirming the belief hed been trying to suppress.

Yeah, it's a bummer. At least Stronos has the sense to speak against it from time to time.

Guilliman is the most predictable, if I had a copy of the Codex Astartes then he would be useless.

Guiliman didn't follow the codex, he wrote it, as a guideline, its only after he did one that the astartes (ultras specifically) started to assume it was the be all and end all of tactics and wasn't to be deviated from.

Yeah Guilliman wouldn't be as rigid to the codex if the situation called for it. He was more flexible than 40k UM are.

Hazard30 wrote:
Id say Russ or Vulkan

Russ because he is just a dog which wants to run in and hurt you...which can easily be exploited.

Id actually learn more towards Vulkan his love for humanity would be his weakness. Send a few soldiers/vehicles to start wrecking refugee's and civilians and he would have to send help to them. Which would then be intercepted and destroyed and spread out his army.

I would probably fight against Vulkan.

Everyone is saying Ferrus because he was angry at Istavaan V unfortunately you as a general didn't betray him. When you and his army face off he will be level headed and not angry and march right over you.

I disagree with your assertion of Russ as being the mindless dog that every single Space Wolf fluff piece has their enemies thinking of them as, but I wouldn't say he's one of the more gifted generals either.

Vulkan would be more easily manipulated in a manner much as you describe. Dead on, in my opinion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ImAGeek wrote:
I agree Russ is pretty good, but sacrificing himself for a victory doesn't seem like a good tactic haha. I mean, if someone else sacrificed a Primarch to win a battle, that person would be an idiot...

Guilliman actually respected Russ, Dorn, Sanguinius, and Manus above his other brothers and called them "the dauntless few", claiming that any one of them and their sired legion could win any war if they fought alongside the UM

That's actually one of the new additions / concepts I've liked about the Ultramarines fluff that actually makes them a little interesting.

The idea that Gulliman originally wrote the Codex Astartes as an Art of War style equivalent combined with a collection of interesting 'stuff' and military stories he's read.

However, over 10000 years, in the minds of an ever increasing number of Ultramarines, the Codex has effectively become a religious text (I'll leave it up to you to draw any real world parallels you wish), and by the 41st millennium a great many Ultramarines are now taking the book very much literally and it's only really the stand out members of the Chapter - Sicarius, Calgar etc, that are really able to grasp what the Codex Astartes was meant to be.

So, it's actually a real danger to the long-term future of the chapter, if someone like um... (It's been a while...) Agemman, becomes the Chapter Master and begins describing this literal interpretation of the codex as the one true thing (again, draw any real world parallels you wish).

This sort of concept gives the Ultramarines a potential flaw, a proper characterful hook that isn't just being practically perfect in every way.

And that's really quite interesting to me.

 Formosa wrote:
Guiliman didn't follow the codex, he wrote it, as a guideline, its only after he did one that the astartes (ultras specifically) started to assume it was the be all and end all of tactics and wasn't to be deviated from.

No no no and no.

That's only in the Graham McNeilliverse. The guy they took the Ultramarines away from and gave to Dan Abnett and ADB for the Horus Heresy so he couldn't do any more damage.

The reality is that the Ultramarines are spoken of as having victories without number and being the Greates of all Space Marine Chapters. Calgar is referred to as one of the Imperium's greatest tacticians. These are literally quotes from the fluff. If the Ultramarines follow idiotic rules laid down in a book that makes no sense, and Calgar treats that book like it's the War Bible, and he's one of the Imperium's greatest tacticians, then imagine how awful everyone else in the galaxy is at fighting wars.

You're welcome to that kind of Three Stoogeshammer 40K universe where everyone is a bumbling idiot. Might make for a funny web cartoon.

The reality is that every one of McNeill's Ultramarines novels is actually just a fevered hallucianation of a dying Sergeant Ventris, and the events of those books existing only in his imagination, because Uriel Ventris has never been the Captain of the Ultramarines 4th Company, a fact that remains true through the most recent codex, dated 999.M41.

McNeill is a terrible writer of military fiction. Let's just leave it at that. This is the guy who wrote a book where the characters run out of ammunition in one scene, and miraculously have more in the next one. Also wrote a scene where one of the protagonists loses his hand, but then has two hands again later in the novel when he has to fight again. The particulars of the details don't mean much to him. He does a decent job at characterization, but once the bullets and lasers start flying, things go downhill fast.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
The reality is that every one of McNeill's Ultramarines novels is actually just a fevered hallucianation of a dying Sergeant Ventris, and the events of those books existing only in his imagination, because Uriel Ventris has never been the Captain of the Ultramarines 4th Company, a fact that remains true through the most recent codex, dated 999.M41.

I don't think we need to go quite that far. Uriel Ventris is kinda fun.

Agreed on the rest, though. The Ultramarines' hat is being the examplar of what the Astartes are. Someone has to be.

ther 6th ed 'nids 'dex specificly mentions Ventris, thing is EVEN IN the ultramarines novels... the codex isn't used that stupidly. where Ventris got in trouble was for essentially waltzing off from his leadership position to go accompany the death watch. I imagine most armies would... frown upon the senior officer of local forces running off to go play commando when he's supposed to be leading the battle

 ImAGeek wrote:

I dunno though they're all pretty good in their own way, there isn't really a loyalist version of Curze or Angron.

Curze used to be a darn effective general. So good that he won most of his battles without them even getting started.

There are no "bad" generals on the loyalist side, so deciding who is the worst becomes harder, as we have to dig for examples of comparison between good generals and decide who's the least great.

I have read little about the Khan, Vulkan or Ferrus Manus that depicts them into their role as generals.

Russ is a great general, but not a patient one. We know the Lion could do as well as him with less casualties, only a bit slower.

Unremembered Empire states that Horus really wanted to beat the Lion for the title of Warmaster, and Know no Fear has Horus admitting he tought it should have been Sanguinus instead.

UE clearly depicts Guilliman as competitive/jealous of the Lion and the First Legion. In it, the Lion readily agrees that Sanguinus would make a good heir for the Throne.

Guilliman wrote "the greatest war treatise of all time" and shaped the subsequent 10k years of warfare. We know he beat the Word Bearers...

I just don't think there's a way to tell. At most you can point at those who haven't been called "the best at x aspect of warfare" at any point... so, Vulkan?

 koooaei wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

I dunno though they're all pretty good in their own way, there isn't really a loyalist version of Curze or Angron.

Curze used to be a darn effective general. So good that he won most of his battles without them even getting started.

More barbaric and psychological monster than a good general. Still, I suppose that makes him effective.

The Loyalist foils to Curze and Angron are Corax and Sanguinius.

Really, that one was easy.

 Shidank wrote:

 koooaei wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

I dunno though they're all pretty good in their own way, there isn't really a loyalist version of Curze or Angron.

Curze used to be a darn effective general. So good that he won most of his battles without them even getting started.

More barbaric and psychological monster than a good general. Still, I suppose that makes him effective.

The Loyalist foils to Curze and Angron are Corax and Sanguinius.

Really, that one was easy.

I meant loyalist versions of them as in loyalist Primarchs that are crap generals, not loyalist foils to those two.

 ImAGeek wrote:


I meant loyalist versions of them as in loyalist Primarchs that are crap generals, not loyalist foils to those two.

I see! My mistake. I suppose the crap generals would be mostly lashed to Horus for the sake of plot convenience. It's easier to manipulate weaker people.

 Shidank wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:


I meant loyalist versions of them as in loyalist Primarchs that are crap generals, not loyalist foils to those two.

I see! My mistake. I suppose the crap generals would be mostly lashed to Horus for the sake of plot convenience. It's easier to manipulate weaker people.

I think it mentions that somewhere (I think someone mentioned it earlier here too); Horus mentions something about the most broken Primarchs are the ones that follow him. Which does make sense really.

 j31c3n wrote:


That's ... really not Dorn at all. You're ignoring the larger picture of the character to focus on a few moments of his story. You're being deliberately disingenuous to make a point. Dorn, Ferrus Manus, Russ, and Sanguinius were referred to by Guilliman as "the dauntless few" - the four Primarchs who most exemplified the design of the Emperor. If Guilliman thought well of a guy, chances are that guy wasn't "out of his mind."

And besides, if Ferrus Manus wasn't "out of his mind" for charging after Fulgrim, then neither was Dorn for charging after Perturabo. Logical consistency.

Is Guilliman God?

No?

Then I don't much care what he said about them.

Dorn has consistently been prone to doing silly insane things in the fluff.

No, that would be a fallacy.

Just because Dorn was insane while charging after Perturabo (and he explicitly was losing his sanity), doesn't mean Manus was. Manus was just pissed off, arrogant, and somewhat stupid.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 j31c3n wrote:


That's ... really not Dorn at all. You're ignoring the larger picture of the character to focus on a few moments of his story. You're being deliberately disingenuous to make a point. Dorn, Ferrus Manus, Russ, and Sanguinius were referred to by Guilliman as "the dauntless few" - the four Primarchs who most exemplified the design of the Emperor. If Guilliman thought well of a guy, chances are that guy wasn't "out of his mind."

And besides, if Ferrus Manus wasn't "out of his mind" for charging after Fulgrim, then neither was Dorn for charging after Perturabo. Logical consistency.

Is Guilliman God?

No?

Then I don't much care what he said about them.

Dorn has consistently been prone to doing silly insane things in the fluff.

No, that would be a fallacy.

Just because Dorn was insane while charging after Perturabo (and he explicitly was losing his sanity), doesn't mean Manus was. Manus was just pissed off, arrogant, and somewhat stupid.

If you've ever actually read the story (it's at the end of Fulgrim then you would know that is the opposite of true. Ferris Manu's just had dozens of hundreds of his sons murdered by the man he was closer to than he would be to a twin, and that man just so happened to have betrayed everything Ferris stood for. Ferris was so angry that he literally could not focus on ANYTHING but killing Fulgrim.

 dusara217 wrote:

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 j31c3n wrote:


That's ... really not Dorn at all. You're ignoring the larger picture of the character to focus on a few moments of his story. You're being deliberately disingenuous to make a point. Dorn, Ferrus Manus, Russ, and Sanguinius were referred to by Guilliman as "the dauntless few" - the four Primarchs who most exemplified the design of the Emperor. If Guilliman thought well of a guy, chances are that guy wasn't "out of his mind."

And besides, if Ferrus Manus wasn't "out of his mind" for charging after Fulgrim, then neither was Dorn for charging after Perturabo. Logical consistency.

Is Guilliman God?

No?

Then I don't much care what he said about them.

Dorn has consistently been prone to doing silly insane things in the fluff.

No, that would be a fallacy.

Just because Dorn was insane while charging after Perturabo (and he explicitly was losing his sanity), doesn't mean Manus was. Manus was just pissed off, arrogant, and somewhat stupid.

If you've ever actually read the story (it's at the end of Fulgrim then you would know that is the opposite of true. Ferris Manu's just had dozens of hundreds of his sons murdered by the man he was closer to than he would be to a twin, and that man just so happened to have betrayed everything Ferris stood for. Ferris was so angry that he literally could not focus on ANYTHING but killing Fulgrim.

Taking one mistake out of context seems to have damned Ferrus and thinking of Russ and the Wolves as the barbaric savages they purported to be has ruined them.

We should be able to look past these surface details and interpret what the BL writers have actually given us to disprove such notions.

 dusara217 wrote:

If you've ever actually read the story (it's at the end of Fulgrim then you would know that is the opposite of true. Ferris Manu's just had dozens of hundreds of his sons murdered by the man he was closer to than he would be to a twin, and that man just so happened to have betrayed everything Ferris stood for. Ferris was so angry that he literally could not focus on ANYTHING but killing Fulgrim.

Could be, Fulgrim was the first BL novel I ever read.

Quote?

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Guiliman didn't follow the codex, he wrote it, as a guideline, its only after he did one that the astartes (ultras specifically) started to assume it was the be all and end all of tactics and wasn't to be deviated from.

No no no and no.

That's only in the Graham McNeilliverse. The guy they took the Ultramarines away from and gave to Dan Abnett and ADB for the Horus Heresy so he couldn't do any more damage.

The reality is that the Ultramarines are spoken of as having victories without number and being the Greates of all Space Marine Chapters. Calgar is referred to as one of the Imperium's greatest tacticians. These are literally quotes from the fluff. If the Ultramarines follow idiotic rules laid down in a book that makes no sense, and Calgar treats that book like it's the War Bible, and he's one of the Imperium's greatest tacticians, then imagine how awful everyone else in the galaxy is at fighting wars.

You're welcome to that kind of Three Stoogeshammer 40K universe where everyone is a bumbling idiot. Might make for a funny web cartoon.

The reality is that every one of McNeill's Ultramarines novels is actually just a fevered hallucianation of a dying Sergeant Ventris, and the events of those books existing only in his imagination, because Uriel Ventris has never been the Captain of the Ultramarines 4th Company, a fact that remains true through the most recent codex, dated 999.M41.

McNeill is a terrible writer of military fiction. Let's just leave it at that. This is the guy who wrote a book where the characters run out of ammunition in one scene, and miraculously have more in the next one. Also wrote a scene where one of the protagonists loses his hand, but then has two hands again later in the novel when he has to fight again. The particulars of the details don't mean much to him. He does a decent job at characterization, but once the bullets and lasers start flying, things go downhill fast.

Well said. I hate how McNeil makes the Codex Astartes into an idiot ball. Whoever is thinking of something the codex said is doing something stupid so that Ventris can be 2coolz4roolz.
In Courage and Honour Sergeant Learchus(?) gets sent to sneak around and he sees the Tau at some point, he has to restrain himself from blowing his mission by jumping out and engaging them because the Codex says he has to do that for some reason.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 dusara217 wrote:

If you've ever actually read the story (it's at the end of Fulgrim then you would know that is the opposite of true. Ferris Manu's just had dozens of hundreds of his sons murdered by the man he was closer to than he would be to a twin, and that man just so happened to have betrayed everything Ferris stood for. Ferris was so angry that he literally could not focus on ANYTHING but killing Fulgrim.

Could be, Fulgrim was the first BL novel I ever read.

Quote?

Sorry, I'm going to have to give a few quotes to convey the message, shouldn't be more than three.

'I have long waited for this moment, Fulgrim,' replied Ferrus, '... For months I have dreamt of this reckoning. Only one of us will walk away from this, you know that.'

'You betrayed the Emperor, and you betrayed me!' said Ferrus, and Fulgrim was surprised to hear genuine emotion in his brother's voice.

Ferrus Manus tore his eyes from the slaughter of the Loyalist forces, his teeth bared with the volcanic fury of his homeworld

'All I see is betrayal, Fulgrim!' roared Ferrus Manus, 'You are not talking about claiming back what we have won; you are talking about betraying everything we stand for!'

Ok, that was four, but it should convey the message. I can find a few more if you like, though I find quote hunting quite tedious. This was all from Fulgrim

Animus wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Guiliman didn't follow the codex, he wrote it, as a guideline, its only after he did one that the astartes (ultras specifically) started to assume it was the be all and end all of tactics and wasn't to be deviated from.

No no no and no.

That's only in the Graham McNeilliverse. The guy they took the Ultramarines away from and gave to Dan Abnett and ADB for the Horus Heresy so he couldn't do any more damage.

The reality is that the Ultramarines are spoken of as having victories without number and being the Greates of all Space Marine Chapters. Calgar is referred to as one of the Imperium's greatest tacticians. These are literally quotes from the fluff. If the Ultramarines follow idiotic rules laid down in a book that makes no sense, and Calgar treats that book like it's the War Bible, and he's one of the Imperium's greatest tacticians, then imagine how awful everyone else in the galaxy is at fighting wars.

You're welcome to that kind of Three Stoogeshammer 40K universe where everyone is a bumbling idiot. Might make for a funny web cartoon.

The reality is that every one of McNeill's Ultramarines novels is actually just a fevered hallucianation of a dying Sergeant Ventris, and the events of those books existing only in his imagination, because Uriel Ventris has never been the Captain of the Ultramarines 4th Company, a fact that remains true through the most recent codex, dated 999.M41.

McNeill is a terrible writer of military fiction. Let's just leave it at that. This is the guy who wrote a book where the characters run out of ammunition in one scene, and miraculously have more in the next one. Also wrote a scene where one of the protagonists loses his hand, but then has two hands again later in the novel when he has to fight again. The particulars of the details don't mean much to him. He does a decent job at characterization, but once the bullets and lasers start flying, things go downhill fast.

Well said. I hate how McNeil makes the Codex Astartes into an idiot ball. Whoever is thinking of something the codex said is doing something stupid so that Ventris can be 2coolz4roolz.
In Courage and Honour Sergeant Learchus(?) gets sent to sneak around and he sees the Tau at some point, he has to restrain himself from blowing his mission by jumping out and engaging them because the Codex says he has to do that for some reason.

I coulda sworn the codex said as a scout squad he SHOULDN'T engage stupidly despite wanting too, but it's been awhile.