Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Omegus wrote:
Horus didn't unite jack squat, he just got lucky the other Primarchs also happened to be rebelling.

They were at that age you know

1hadhq wrote:

iproxtaco wrote:
Things stay as they are, an age of constant attrition warfare, one the Imperium is losing.

If things stay , nothing changes. To lose would imply things move... which cannot happen as the setup is based on playable factions.
Thus there is no winner ever. Without a winner , there is no loser.

The timeline is locked, it will remain so in 6th ed, so the current state of things will not change. But this is the background forum, where the future is dealt with as if it IS happening.

iproxtaco wrote:

1hadhq wrote:

iproxtaco wrote:
Things stay as they are, an age of constant attrition warfare, one the Imperium is losing.

If things stay , nothing changes. To lose would imply things move... which cannot happen as the setup is based on playable factions.
Thus there is no winner ever. Without a winner , there is no loser.

The timeline is locked, it will remain so in 6th ed, so the current state of things will not change. But this is the background forum, where the future is dealt with as if it IS happening.

Fine.

Open your rulebook, page 116 and behold:

IoM wins in the end.



too bad codices mislead people to beleive they got a chance....

1hadhq wrote:

iproxtaco wrote:

1hadhq wrote:

iproxtaco wrote:
Things stay as they are, an age of constant attrition warfare, one the Imperium is losing.

If things stay , nothing changes. To lose would imply things move... which cannot happen as the setup is based on playable factions.
Thus there is no winner ever. Without a winner , there is no loser.

The timeline is locked, it will remain so in 6th ed, so the current state of things will not change. But this is the background forum, where the future is dealt with as if it IS happening.

Fine.

Open your rulebook, page 116 and behold:

IoM wins in the end.



too bad codices mislead people to beleive they got a chance....

Your point? It's as relevant as Ruven saying it's the destiny of Abaddon to destroy the Imperium and rule the galaxy.

If that's true then the Guard and Space Marine codices are in the same basket, giving people false hope that the Imperium will survive.

iproxtaco wrote:

If that's true then the Guard and Space Marine codices are in the same basket, giving people false hope that the Imperium will survive.

Every codex gives false hope on victory.

Thus I am relying on the book o' rules, which is a source for 40k overriding BL novels so hard they are shredded in that process...

In the background, the is only war.
On the table, there lies victory or defeat in OUR hands.

But final victory? Could you provide a setup that has gone there? Even rpg's keep the future of a setting in a state of threats to come.
40k runs the same course.
The day the primarchs return is the day of GW sold to a foreign company and Goto returns as the primary author of fluff...

Point? If it's something along the lines of "all this is pointless because GW wont continue the story" then you can stop right now. This is the background forum. Any talk of the future is dealt with in hypothecticals and speculation based off of the facts GW has given us.

Still, you can't rely on an anecdotal legend, no matter where it's from.

iproxtaco wrote:Point? If it's something along the lines of "all this is pointless because GW wont continue the story" then you can stop right now. This is the background forum. Any talk of the future is dealt with in hypothecticals and speculation based off of the facts GW has given us.

Still, you can't rely on an anecdotal legend, no matter where it's from.

Its not pointless.

Your reply is.

Fact: BRB describes the future of the galaxy on the map.

Bottom line: I don't have to speculate as its written right there.

1hadhq wrote:

iproxtaco wrote:Point? If it's something along the lines of "all this is pointless because GW wont continue the story" then you can stop right now. This is the background forum. Any talk of the future is dealt with in hypothecticals and speculation based off of the facts GW has given us.

Still, you can't rely on an anecdotal legend, no matter where it's from.

Its not pointless.

Your reply is.

Fact: BRB describes the future of the galaxy on the map.

Bottom line: I don't have to speculate as its written right there.

Hmm. Are you being serious? It's a legend presented from the perspective of the Imperium, it's there to give hope. It's not fact, it's not telling us what will happen in the future, it's a legend.

False hope?







The only false hope I see here is for Chaos to win.

So you have literally nothing to say so you post another few of your videos for what could be the twentieth time. I see.

You are right, I have nothing to say on wild theories and fan dreams of Chaos defeating the Imperium.
And this is the first time I posted my Chaois tribute. It speaks the truth about Chaos.

Brother Coa wrote:You are right, I have nothing to say on wild theories and fan dreams of Chaos defeating the Imperium.
And this is the first time I posted my Chaois tribute. It speaks the truth about Chaos.

There are no wild theories posted by Chaos fans concerning the potential victory of Abaddon in this thread, but ignore that fact. If there were, they wouldn't be wild, and they wouldn't be dreams.

iproxtaco wrote:
Hmm. Are you being serious? It's a legend presented from the perspective of the Imperium, it's there to give hope. It's not fact, it's not telling us what will happen in the future, it's a legend.

What else should I Be?
Its written white on black , its presented as the present and the future and its a valid fluff source.
Youre just in denial good sir.

The fact of the imperiums destiny are irrefutable. But I can live with traitors dying with their false beliefs of a victory of chaos, as the major loser in any chaos enterprise are the minions of chaos..

iproxtaco wrote:

Brother Coa wrote:You are right, I have nothing to say on wild theories and fan dreams of Chaos defeating the Imperium.
And this is the first time I posted my Chaos tribute. It speaks the truth about Chaos.

There are no wild theories posted by Chaos fans concerning the potential victory of Abaddon in this thread, but ignore that fact. If there were, they wouldn't be wild, and they wouldn't be dreams.

Potential? Abby's potential was explained by Rogal Dorn back in the day before the heresy.

But feel free to rant on on this so called victory, as there are multiple contenders and IMO chaos is bound to ruin itself.
As usual, as seen in every games - universe.

1hadhq wrote:

iproxtaco wrote:
Hmm. Are you being serious? It's a legend presented from the perspective of the Imperium, it's there to give hope. It's not fact, it's not telling us what will happen in the future, it's a legend.

What else should I Be?
Its written white on black , its presented as the present and the future and its a valid fluff source.
Youre just in denial good sir.

The fact of the imperiums destiny are irrefutable. But I can live with traitors dying with their false beliefs of a victory of chaos, as the major loser in any chaos enterprise are the minions of chaos..

Now you're just trolling. This is the kind of thing I expect from Brother Coa.

iproxtaco wrote:

Brother Coa wrote:You are right, I have nothing to say on wild theories and fan dreams of Chaos defeating the Imperium.
And this is the first time I posted my Chaos tribute. It speaks the truth about Chaos.

There are no wild theories posted by Chaos fans concerning the potential victory of Abaddon in this thread, but ignore that fact. If there were, they wouldn't be wild, and they wouldn't be dreams.

Potential? Abby's potential was explained by Rogal Dorn back in the day before the heresy.

But feel free to rant on on this so called victory, as there are multiple contenders and IMO chaos is bound to ruin itself.
As usual, as seen in every games - universe.

I think maybe the important parts of this explanation is that it was before the Heresy, and it was Rogal Dorn, borderline fanatic loyalist who is now dead.

No one is ranting, you're just trolling again.

iproxtaco wrote:
Now I am just trolling. This is the kind of thing I expect from Brother Coa.

No one is ranting, I am just trolling again.

Fixed it for ya.

Don't have to thank me.
If youre available as serious poster again, we may continue until then good night.

1hadhq wrote:

iproxtaco wrote:
Now I am just trolling. This is the kind of thing I expect from Brother Coa.

No one is ranting, I am just trolling again.

Fixed it for ya.

Don't have to thank me.
If youre available as serious poster again, we may continue until then good night.

Good day to you sir, I have enjoyed yet another one of our Chaos versus the Imperium multiple quote arguments, and as usual, it peters out when you have literally nothing left to argue with. It pains me to see someone I thought was reliable fellow poster resort to thing as low as trolling when they've run out of anything to counter with, but further, it pains me greatly to see said person unable to come up with something a bit more clever than "noah yoor a troll" when they are called out on it. Hopefully, we can do this again sometime, but if it occurs again, please, do not resort to trolling, it does not but belittle you.

iproxtaco wrote:

1hadhq wrote:

iproxtaco wrote:
Hmm. Are you being serious? It's a legend presented from the perspective of the Imperium, it's there to give hope. It's not fact, it's not telling us what will happen in the future, it's a legend.

What else should I Be?
Its written white on black , its presented as the present and the future and its a valid fluff source.
Youre just in denial good sir.

The fact of the imperiums destiny are irrefutable. But I can live with traitors dying with their false beliefs of a victory of chaos, as the major loser in any chaos enterprise are the minions of chaos..

Now you're just trolling. This is the kind of thing I expect from Brother Coa.

And this Chaos trolling in every thread is a thing I expect from you traitor.

Brother Coa wrote:

iproxtaco wrote:

1hadhq wrote:

iproxtaco wrote:
Hmm. Are you being serious? It's a legend presented from the perspective of the Imperium, it's there to give hope. It's not fact, it's not telling us what will happen in the future, it's a legend.

What else should I Be?
Its written white on black , its presented as the present and the future and its a valid fluff source.
Youre just in denial good sir.

The fact of the imperiums destiny are irrefutable. But I can live with traitors dying with their false beliefs of a victory of chaos, as the major loser in any chaos enterprise are the minions of chaos..

Now you're just trolling. This is the kind of thing I expect from Brother Coa.

And this Chaos trolling in every thread is a thing I expect from you traitor.

You're hilarious Coa, god dammed hilarious. You know not of what you speak, but humor me, go and find one attempt at trolling in this thread from me. Saying 'your whole argument' will not be accepted on account of being stupid.

Now you are even insulting.
What else to expect...

Brother Coa wrote:Now you are even insulting.
What else to expect...

Yeah whatever. You never did what I asked though, I accept your concession that you were just saying things you had no real way of backing up.

So how bout them primarchs, eh?



I, for one, think that if they did come back, it would incite civil war. No one on Terra (in a high position) would be immediately welcoming - after all, these guys show up from nowhere and are threatening to take command.

The whole setting is that Chaos is winNING, not won or will win. Anything could happen to turn the tide, but the setting wouldn't be grimdark if all of the Imperium's victories weren't pyrrhic and if they weren't losing the greater battle. I thought this was elementary.

Chaos Forces = Charlie Sheen

It also wouldn't be very 'grimdark' if the primarchs came back. It might stir up some rallying, and more victories for the Imperium.

Nah, it would still be grimdark, as they would be treated with suspicion, would be aghast at the state of the Imperium (much like Dorn was, even though he played a part in it, and which is probably why he killed himself), and spark off a bunch of civil wars further harming the Imperium.

HLoT vs. a Primarch?

The winner is the side the Imperial Navy backs, specifically Battle Fleet Solar.

Didn't you hear, the Space Wolves Fleet beat the Segmentum Pacificus Navy.

iproxtaco wrote: you had no real way of backing up.

I did back all this up in the past 7'th thread, you just denied all that and start saying nonsense of united Chaos crushing the Imperium.
And you say that I am making things up. At least I am not saying complete nonsense.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AchillesFTW wrote:Didn't you hear, the Space Wolves Fleet beat the Segmentum Pacificus Navy.

They really didd this?
What about that rule that no SM chapter can't have fleet that can rival that of Segmentum one?

Space Wolves don't care about your silly rules, they have special snowflake powers.

iproxtaco wrote:
I have enjoyed yet another one of our Chaos versus the Imperium multiple quote arguments, and as usual, it peters out when you have literally nothing left to argue with.

AS usual, your lack of any believable argument in favor of your own POV misleads you to ignore whatever I say.
Why don't you start another pointless "who will win" thread if you deem it a worthy subject?
Maybe you know better but can't admit it?
I for one had enough time spent on another thread yesterday to refrain from lenghty arguments in a debate with someone lost to his flawed course of chaos fanboidom. Thus the only thing I am guilty of, is to reply to a questionable claim when I had the chance to do something useful instead.

iproxtaco wrote:
It pains me to see someone I thought was reliable fellow poster resort to thing as low as trolling when they've run out of anything to counter with, but further, it pains me greatly to see said person unable to come up with something a bit more clever than "noah yoor a troll" when they are called out on it.

Do you really expect me to take this "pains me" and "reliable" as serious after all you said?
I am not so new to miss when a poster lost his way because someone is wrong on the interwebz and the course of your unholy crusade to prove a certain poster as wrong or troll or [deleted to stay clear of your level of veiled insults] is obvious.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So maybe just for once consider :
- the design of chaos is not different at GW than anywhere else ( partially as they like copy&paste very much )
- chaos is the 'threat, but will splinter into infighting and finally lose each time' faction.
- codices provide promotional quotes and the claim to win. A BRB has not to and provides a general overview.
- the inevitable fall of empires is proven as none ever stood the test of time.
- the IoM is put on this "end of days" course , at least since 3rd ed ( when I firstly got involved )
- but it never matters as the endurance of a million worlds means GW can drag this out across dozens of editions as the loss of worlds is irrelevant and wouldn't even be noticed .

There is no way to run out of any so called "counter".

ExaMples:

The 5th ed page116 box is a shortened variant of 3rd ed page 34.
The idea of a rematch is thus not new, not a throwaway line.

The setup hasn't changed. But the details have.
3rd ed page 114 to 115, classification of worlds in the IoM.
Compare this to 5th ed. 3rd provided numbers and population sizes. 5th ???
the sense of scale has been lost, the little grasp they had gone

3rd ed page 120, the 'full circle' as I may call it.
Nothing of chaos winning but 'those who are not human'.....which hints at older races dwindling and newer coming to the fore.
the minions of chaos fight a lost cause. Others will rule the galaxy and their efforts wasted.

The path is laid out.
The IoM is the leviathan everyone pokes with pointy sticks but those are too blunt to kill it.

Primarchs are kept as jokers to do a final version if the setting is burnt out.
Abby is expendable. Hes the 'chosen' of 40k.... and shares the fate of the whfb 'chosen'..

iproxtaco wrote:Hopefully, we can do this again sometime, but if it occurs again, please, do not resort to trolling, it does not but belittle you.

Can't drop that idea of me trolling someone, can't you?
I am sure I never intentionally did as I tend to stick with the rules which I agreed to abide.

UselessSage wrote:HLoT vs. a Primarch?

The winner is the side the Imperial Navy backs, specifically Battle Fleet Solar.

The organization may tend to one side or the other, but why should the HLoT act as a monolithic block?

1hadhq wrote:

iproxtaco wrote:
I have enjoyed yet another one of our Chaos versus the Imperium multiple quote arguments, and as usual, it peters out when you have literally nothing left to argue with.

AS usual, your lack of any believable argument in favor of your own POV misleads you to ignore whatever I say.

Do tell, what is this misterious point of view that you are opposed to violently to?

Why don't you start another pointless "who will win" thread if you deem it a worthy subject?

Because, as we can see from this thread, we'll start, multi-quote responses for a few pages, you'll end up conceding half the points I laid out, or you wont br able to say anything about them. For example, 13 quotes I responded to, you ended up returning answers to..... Two of those, one was a joke and the other the use of an anecdotal legend presented in universe from the Imperium's perspective. It's not more reliable than Ruven saying it's Abaddon's destiny to win. By that I mean, not reliable at all.

Maybe you know better but can't admit it?

If you mean I know better than you then yes, I can freely admit that.

I for one had enough time spent on another thread yesterday to refrain from lenghty arguments in a debate with someone lost to his flawed course of chaos fanboidom.

Oh the irony. You wont find any of that from me, so there's a big flaw in your argument.

Thus the only thing I am guilty of, is to reply to a questionable claim when I had the chance to do something useful instead.

I've asked Coa already, detail these "questionable claims".

iproxtaco wrote:
It pains me to see someone I thought was reliable fellow poster resort to thing as low as trolling when they've run out of anything to counter with, but further, it pains me greatly to see said person unable to come up with something a bit more clever than "noah yoor a troll" when they are called out on it.

Do you really expect me to take this "pains me" and "reliable" as serious after all you said?

I dunno, maybe. I did think you were reliable before now.

I am not so new to miss when a poster lost his way because someone is wrong on the interwebz and the course of your unholy crusade to prove a certain poster as wrong or troll or [deleted to stay clear of your level of veiled insults] is obvious.

More irony, I like irony.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So maybe just for once consider :
- the design of chaos is not different at GW than anywhere else ( partially as they like copy&paste very much )
- chaos is the 'threat, but will splinter into infighting and finally lose each time' faction.
- codices provide promotional quotes and the claim to win. A BRB has not to and provides a general overview.
- the inevitable fall of empires is proven as none ever stood the test of time.
- the IoM is put on this "end of days" course , at least since 3rd ed ( when I firstly got involved )
- but it never matters as the endurance of a million worlds means GW can drag this out across dozens of editions as the loss of worlds is irrelevant and wouldn't even be noticed .

There is no way to run out of any so called "counter".

ExaMples:

The 5th ed page116 box is a shortened variant of 3rd ed page 34.
The idea of a rematch is thus not new, not a throwaway line.

The setup hasn't changed. But the details have.
3rd ed page 114 to 115, classification of worlds in the IoM.
Compare this to 5th ed. 3rd provided numbers and population sizes. 5th ???
the sense of scale has been lost, the little grasp they had gone

3rd ed page 120, the 'full circle' as I may call it.
Nothing of chaos winning but 'those who are not human'.....which hints at older races dwindling and newer coming to the fore.
the minions of chaos fight a lost cause. Others will rule the galaxy and their efforts wasted.

The path is laid out.
The IoM is the leviathan everyone pokes with pointy sticks but those are too blunt to kill it.

Primarchs are kept as jokers to do a final version if the setting is burnt out.
Abby is expendable. Hes the 'chosen' of 40k.... and shares the fate of the whfb 'chosen'..

All of it is irrelevant, but I find the notion that the BRB does not present biased quotes just absolutely hilarious. We can dismiss them since they're presented in-universe by a specific faction. Should I break out the Chaos codices? Certain quotes would be equally reliable if we use your line of thinking.

iproxtaco wrote:Hopefully, we can do this again sometime, but if it occurs again, please, do not resort to trolling, it does not but belittle you.

Can't drop that idea of me trolling someone, can't you?
I am sure I never intentionally did as I tend to stick with the rules which I agreed to abide.

What would you prefer, trolling, or ignorantly persistent?



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Brother Coa wrote:

iproxtaco wrote: you had no real way of backing up.

I did back all this up in the past 7'th thread, you just denied all that and start saying nonsense of united Chaos crushing the Imperium.
And you say that I am making things up. At least I am not saying complete nonsense.

No you didn't. I asked you to detail these apparent attempts at trolling or nonsense, but I have a feeling you're just saying things without knowing what they mean.