Delvarus Centurion wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Much as I love text walls of fighting do you want to cut it out a little?

How can you have second foundings constantly turn traitor anyway? It makes no sense.

Because they are the only ones that have turned traitor.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Much as I love text walls of fighting do you want to cut it out a little?

How can you have second foundings constantly turn traitor anyway? It makes no sense.

Because they are the only ones that have turned traitor.

Slipspace wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Eh yeah I know... Its not like we are having a complicated debate.

Then why do you clearly not understand what people are arguing?

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
The codex WAS designed to to stop the HH happening again. The Badab war still happened and what you seem not to understand is that its set a precident, what is there to stop 10, 20, half chapters from going rogue like in the Badab war (the codex hasn't worked and did what it was intended for). Refute my points rather than just repeating what other people have said.

The Codex prevents it. Limiting the power of individuals so instead of it taking one figurehead (like a Primarch) to corrupt huge battlegroups of hundreds of thousands, you'd now need multiple individuals all turning rogue at the same time is what the Codex was designed to do. It's all about numbers, that's the important point. If a HH-era Legion was roughly 100,000 marines, it would take 1000 Chapter Masters turning rogue to be the equivalent of even 1 Legion doing the same in the HH, and that's not taking into account the fact the HH Legions also commanded huge armies of regular humans too. The thing that stops half the Chapters going rogue is the massively unlikely probability of half the Chapter Masters deciding en masse to rebel. It's purely down to numbers. Having 9 super-charismatic awe-inspiring leaders go rogue and take most of their troops with them is simply orders of magnitude more likely than having 500 do the same all at the same time.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
The codex and the splitting up of the legions was to stop the HH happening again, well it happened again in Badab, just at a lower scale, so it failed. I grasp what they are all saying...

No. You don't. You claim to, but as with just about every debate involving you, it's clear to everyone else that you actually don't understand what is being argued. You even show that in the quote above, right before you say you grasp what we're saying. I'll say it again, so it's as obvious as I can make it. I'll even make it a bullet point to highlight my genius.

1. The size of the rebellion is the whole point. HH >>>>>>>>>>>> Badab War.

pm713 wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Much as I love text walls of fighting do you want to cut it out a little?

How can you have second foundings constantly turn traitor anyway? It makes no sense.

Because they are the only ones that have turned traitor.

That's not true a whole bunch of Legionnaire's went traitor. On top of that you have traitor Salamanders and Raven Guard post heresy.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Delvarus Centurion wrote:But here, size does matter. Otherwise, you could compare a single squad turning traitor to be a "mini Horus Heresy". What's the limit? One squad? A company? A Chapter? The force Huron had is only compared to the Legions because:
1. It was the largest rebellion (which took 10,000 years to occur) led by a Space Marine, making it the closest rival to Horus' (closest because all the others were so small)
2. Huron was able to make a far larger force from renegade forces AFTER he lost the War, which some people believe he possessed before he fled, which is untrue.

You haven't proved anything with that ^ that's irrelevant

Explain. How haven't I made that point clear?

The point is that, with the Codex in place, the closest thing to the scale of Horus Heresy was about four/five Chapters defecting, and the majority of those Chapters rejoining the Imperium, because they weren't directly under Huron's control.

It's very clearly not irrelevant. You might not like the facts, but they're there.

You miss understand, I never said Horus was the problem, my point is that if he banned warmasters then there was no need to cut down the legions.

I'm not saying Horus specifically was the problem either, nor Warmasters in general. The problem was in people LIKE Horus having positions of power wherein they controlled vast forces: such as just one space Marine Legion. Even if the position of Warmaster was removed, the threat of an entire Legion falling is still a possibility. That's what the problem is, and it's what the Codex solved.

As for the size all it requires are chapters joining together to rebel. The size comparison is irrelevant unless you can prove that more than 4 chapters couldn't join and rebel or half the chapters, you can't prove that and seeing that 4 turned, far more could easily have joined or more in another rebellion.

I can't prove that no more than four Chapters couldn't join. And yes, by having more separate forces, there was always the risk that more Chapter Masters could still take their Chapters with them. However, just ONE Legion Commander falling would take over ten times the amount of people with him, their equipment, and their combined auxiliaries and territory.

That was the risk Guilliman took. He could split the Legions, and risk more people falling, but taking fewer resources when they did, or he could risk putting more forces under fewer people's control, and risk losing the lot (eggs in one basket). In hindsight, we can see that the worst event was four Chapters rebelling (and only one of those four actually turning traitor for good). That is a far better case scenario than Huron taking the equivalent ten Chapters with him.

Yes, you can say all you like that "but you can't prove it COULDN'T have happened". No, I can't. But I can prove that it didn't. I can also tell you the same: you can't prove that "far more would easily have joined or more in another rebellion". You're relying on "what ifs" here, and that's nice for speculation, but that's all it is. I have facts.

"Again, the fact that some Chapters fell isn't a fault of the Codex. The Codex wasn't built for that. It was built to stop another Horus Heresy. Has another Horus Heresy occurred?
No." This is just a strawman, I never said anything like that. It does't fail if chapters turn, it fails when chapters join together and rebel.

And what was the biggest example of Chapters joining together and rebelling? Four Chapters. Not even close to a Legion sized force.
You can say all you like that "but it COULD have happened". Did it? No. I rest my case.

And no, you did actually say that. "The reason for cutting the legions into chapters was only to prevent the HH from happening again." The HH never happened again. Therefore, according to your own words, it worked.

"The fact that only one incident occurred, and most of the Chapters involved actually surrendered when Huron's third party influence wore off, that's evidence to me the Codex did it's job." Again another false positive. Even one incident wasn't supposed to happen.

Untrue, according to your own words. You said "The reason for cutting the legions into chapters was only to prevent the HH from happening again." Not to stop individual Chapters.

Guilliman couldn't stop Chapters banding together. Instead, he sought to destroy the natural ties of alliegance that the Legions created.
If Chapters banded together (which relied on multiple Chapter Masters simultaneously deciding to turn traitor, contacting eachother and running the risk of one of the Chapter Masters being loyal and ratting them out for heresy), then they would need to mobilise their forces together, on a Chapter-wide scale, which would certainly bring about the attention of the Inquisition and other Chapters. Far more steps and risks involved than a Legion Commander falling, and having the equivalent army at their beck and call without needing to liaise with anyone else.

The Codex couldn't stop Chapters banding together. It could stop the pre-created bands of Chapters in the form of Legions, however. It wasn't foolproof, but it succeeded nevertheless.

Plus the founding legions wouldn't have rebelled as they haven't in the 10,000 years after the HH, so all Guilliman did was weaken the Astartes without being able to stop rebellions.

Wouldn't they? You got any proof for that?
Sorry, I forgot, when you make suppositions, they're facts, aren't they?

If you agree that it reduced the size of the rebellion in the case of Badab war, but failed in stoping it from happening and that it could have been far bigger then you'd be right.

Yes. Could. But as far as the facts go, the Badab War was the largest rebellion of it's kind, and it was nowhere near the size of if one Legion fell.

So, I'll bite back with your attitude to things: "Having no Codex meant that one person COULD have taken a whole Legion with them at once!"

"Also, saying "the codex wouldn't have stopped it getting bigger" - I mean, in 10,000 years, it only reached the size of what Huron could manage. As you say, it ensured that it was a smaller conflict". So then, how long do you think it would have taken for someone to actually achieve something anywhere near what Horus did? Another 10,000 years? 20,000?)" - another false positive and anecdotal.

Implying that anything you're saying isn't just baseless supposition?

It's anecdotal, but it's still fact. Nothing larger than the Badab War occurred. Could something larger have happened? Yeah. Did something larger happen? No.
The problem with could is that nothing is off limits. "Horus COULD have been right all along, and would have overthrown Chaos after beating the Emperor!!" "Angron COULD have been the best Primarch if the Nails hadn't been in his skull!!" "Having a xeno-friendly policy COULD have saved humanity!!"

All coulds. But they have absolutely no validity to them beyond supposition.

"You say "the Badab War was a mini-Horus Heresy", but that's exactly the thing: it wasn't the Horus Heresy. It wasn't even close. Guilliman achieved what he meant" - it was another HH, just on a lower scale, a rebellion is a rebellion.

So is one squad rebelling "another HH"?

Sorry, this point is flat out wrong. I won't argue this point, because the idea that "a rebellion is a rebellion" shows you clearly don't understand what was important about the Horus Heresy.

The Horus Heresy was important because it took the decision of ONE (1) person to make over 10,000 people fall. With the Chapters split, it takes the decision of one person for every 1,000 people. To have the same effect, you need ten people, simultaneously, to make that same decision.
1 person versus 10. Even with a 50:50 chance, more there is a higher risk that the one person will fall.

Your biased because I know you are, I've had arguments with you on the Ultramarines before, you are extremely biased.

If my points are logical, supported with facts, and not based in blatant supposition and "what ifs" and "coulds", my views in other threads mean nothing. Bias is only bias when it ignores the actual facts and data to skew them in a certain favour.

In that respect, you're being far more biased than I am. But I'm not basing that on other threads which have nothing to do with this one: I'm basing it off what I can see in this thread.

You want to prove you're not? Give me some arguments that don't rely on "could", "what if" and other hypotheticals.

I mean the Badab war happened, the codex couldn't stop it from happening and all you can counter with is 'it wasn't the same size as the HH.

That counter is all the proof I need. It wasn't anywhere near the size of the HH, and therefore a success.

Think of a suppressor for a gun. The goal of that is to reduce the noise of a gun firing. It doesn't cancel all the noise. Yet to you, you would say that a suppressor fails in it's job because some noise is made.

The splitting up of legions was to 'stop' the HH happening again, not to make a future HH smaller (which you can't prove anyways, there is only one example and you have no proof to suggest a rebellion on the scale of the HH could not happen, which is the only way you could prove it worked).

You're making a fatal assumption here. You're implying that any rebellion = a Horus Heresy. This is not true.

The Horus Heresy was a rebellion. Not all rebellions are HHs.
The Codex wasn't there to stop rebellions. It was there to stop Horus Heresies - the massive rebellions caused by single people falling and taking their entire Legions with them.

I can't prove that a rebellion on the scale of the Horus Heresy couldn't have happened. However, I can prove that one did not happen for 10,000 years. Consider nuclear deterrents: I can't say with 100% certainty that a nuclear weapon will deter nuclear attacks on a country. But I can point to the fact that no-one has fired nuclear weapons at my country, and call that a success.
Do you think nuclear deterrents are failures?

At the same time, you can't prove that a Horus Heresy-sized event would have occurred at some point. So again, a supposition.

With the evidence we have at most you can only say the codex helped, you cannot say it worked as intended and you have to say it failed in what it intended.

I can only say it fails if a Horus Heresy scale event had occurred. Seeing as one hadn't, I can say that it is succeeding for now, and, up to the current point in the timeline, has worked as intended.

You can say that "there's a risk of another large scale rebellion" all you want, and you're right. However, the Codex has, up to the current point in the timeline, prevented such a large scale rebellion. That means, up until the current timeline, the Codex is succeeding and working as intended. And whatever baseless "what if" scenario is irrelevant up until the point that it happens. If it happens.

Coolyo294 wrote:Respect for Hawke. Dude mowed down a squad of Iron Warriors with an assault cannon, survived a grenade going off inside his bunker, then went on to almost singlehandedly turn the tide of the siege of hydra cordatus by blowing up half the traitor warhost with a feth-huge ICBM. And he ended up being the only Imperial survivor of the siege. For a worthless fethup that was one mistake away from getting sent to the Commissar's firing line, I'd say he did pretty well.

Can't believe I almost forgot about Hawke, I need to read Storm of Iron again.

Banville wrote:Beyond the admittedly hilarious tangent that the 'Badab War Topic' has taken, I feel the sheer badassery of Lugft Huron is being lost.

The guy's a legend. The sheer brass neck of him. He was trying to build the Astral Claws into a Legion, he had his own Guard regiments and he was charismatic enough to bring the Mantis Warriors, Lamenters and Executioners along for the ride. It took the entire weight of the High Lords and the dubious 'extreme prejudice' tactics of the Carcharodons to bring him to heel.

Lucky, he and his allies were limited to circa 1000 marines each, eh?

Huron was an absolute badass - that can't be forgotten!

 JNAProductions wrote:
You can repeat something without understanding it.

Delvarus Centurion wrote:There are far too many points here to reply to, I can't be bothered replying to all that.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Delvarus Centurion wrote:There are far too many points here to reply to, I can't be bothered replying to all that.

You can at least remove the giant wall of text for the sake of everyone else.

I think the fact that I outright say in my comment (if you bothered to read it) that you don't actually make any relevant comments that aren't just supposition is quite ironic here.

Still, pleasure discussing this with you.

 Ratius wrote:
Always liked this story from 2nd ed Wolf codex

The story of Ranulf’s death is told at great length in his saga. The Space Wolves were retreating over a narrow mountain pass following a rare defeat at the hands of the Orks. When the Orks caught up with the end of the Space Wolves’ column, Ranulf and a handful of Wolf Guard put up a gallant stand against the entire Ork army in a narrow gap in the pass. While the few warriors held back thousands of Orks, the remaining Space Wolves made it back to safety. Although they greatly outnumbered the defenders, the Orks were unable to bring more than a handful of troops into combat at any one time due to the narrowness and shape of the defile. Before many hours were passed there was a pile of Ork bodies as high as a wall. But even the giant Space Wolves warrior could not hold forever. One by one his Wolf Guard fell, until only Ranulf was left. Though the Orks overcame him in the end, even those creatures could not bring themselves to desecrate his body. When the Space Wolves recovered the pass they found Ranulf and his dead companions seated in a hastily constructed shrine surrounded by an immense pile of Ork wargear. To the Space Wolves Ranulf was a great Champion – but to his enemies he became nothing less than a God.

“During the long years of the Seventh Black Crusade, the full might of the Blood Angels Chapter falls upon a vast Black Legion warband on the world of Mackan. Although the conflict ultimately ends in the near-extinction of the Blood Angels at the hands of Abaddon the Despoiler and his primary lieutenants – the sorcerer-lord Iskandar Khayon and the swordmaster Telemachon Lyras – the Blood Angels Reclusiarch Thalastian Jorus becomes one of the few Imperial heroes to ever land a blow against the Warmaster of Chaos.

With his Chapter devastated, the Chaplain endures weeks of hardship in the wilderness and the constant trials of keeping his crazed warriors undetected on Mackan. When the time is right, Jorus leads his Death Company in a lightning raid behind enemy lines, butchering the unprepared sworn warriors of the Despoiler’s honour guard, and allowing the Reclusiarch to lock blades with Abaddon himself. It is said the Warmaster still bears the scars of that battle, even three millennia later.

Whatever the truth of the matter, it is known that the Despoiler honoured Jorus once the war was over – perhaps in mockery, or perhaps with nothing but sincerity. After Mackan, thousands of Blood Angels corpses were desecrated, their gene-seed ruined beyond recovery. Of all the Chapter, only a handful of bodies were left undefiled: Reclusiarch Jorus and his Death Company, clad in their battered and broken black ceramite, seated in makeshift thrones made from the armour of those Black Legion warriors they had killed on that fateful night.”

godking wrote:
If in 10000 years the only real rebellion regarding space marines was 4000 space marines the codex did its job in preventing a rebellion on the scale of the horus heresy.

 JNAProductions wrote:
You can repeat something without understanding it.

 EmpNortonII wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
You can repeat something without understanding it.

The genius of the Ultramarines.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 EmpNortonII wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
You can repeat something without understanding it.

The genius of the Ultramarines.

Yeah a nice statement in and of itself, but you'd have to actually prove I didn't understand it lol Me and the sgt know exactly what we are talking about. Only the people with nothing to say have talked about not understanding the argument.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 EmpNortonII wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
You can repeat something without understanding it.

The genius of the Ultramarines.

Yeah a nice statement in and of itself, but you'd have to actually prove I didn't understand it lol Me and the sgt know exactly what we are talking about. Only the people with nothing to say have talked about not understanding the argument.

no Del you don't understand what you're arguing about. You're absolutely incapable of grasping the nuance on display here and reducing everything to a frankly REDICULAS black and white eaither or arguement. One that someone who clearly thinks he's so smart should not be doing. you seem to be equating the Heresy to ANY rebellion. yeah no thats not the heresy dude. The Horus Heresy was not a rebellion. The Horus Heresy was a wide spread rebellion, lead by the Legions Astartes, the most dreadful weapons in the Imperial Arsenal (you've read eneugh HH books to understand what I mean by that, everytime someone witnessed the Astartes making war for the first time it terrified them) that was fought across the entire Imperium of man, NOTHING was left untouched, and losses in material and information (let alone lives) where IMMENSE. THAT is what Gulliman was trying to stop. And guess what, he did the Badab war was a very localized conflict, confined to a single region of space. a handfull of sectors at most.
You keep saying no one can prove the Codex suceeded or failed (ohh look you're moving the goal posts, because you where claiming until recently that it was a failure) but we can conclude looking at the facts that it made a differance. and certainly didn't FAIL to do what it was intended.

BrianDavion wrote:
Becuase you DON'T understand, you can quote massive blocks of text all you like but you've proven incapable of understanding those.

pm713 wrote:
I'm not quoting properly because I'm not helping Delvarus make horrid anti-user text walls.

The point Delvarus made about post 1st founding Chapters somehow constantly going Traitor remains completely wrong despite the statement "No full chapters went traitor in the first founding, which is the point..." because not only have a fair few individual Marines turned but you have things like a whole bunch of Blood Angels turning and nearly destroying the Chapter and rogue Salamanders trying to destroy their own homeworld

It's okay to be wrong, it's not okay to be in denial about it.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

godking wrote:
If in 10000 years the only real rebellion regarding space marines was 4000 space marines the codex did its job in preventing a rebellion on the scale of the horus heresy.

It was designed to never let it happen again. So if it didn't do what it was designed for then its obviously a failure. If Guilliman said this is to reduce the size of a rebellion then you could have an actual argument but its still conjecture, a massive one can come round the corner, if 4 chapters went rogue there is nothing stopping those numbers rising. Plus Guillaman said it failed, why do you think he created the Codex Imperialis The codex failed on the basis of governance and Guillaman admitted it.

godking wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

godking wrote:
If in 10000 years the only real rebellion regarding space marines was 4000 space marines the codex did its job in preventing a rebellion on the scale of the horus heresy.

It was designed to never let it happen again. So if it didn't do what it was designed for then its obviously a failure. If Guilliman said this is to reduce the size of a rebellion then you could have an actual argument but its still conjecture, a massive one can come round the corner, if 4 chapters went rogue there is nothing stopping those numbers rising. Plus Guillaman said it failed, why do you think he created the Codex Imperialis The codex failed on the basis of governance and Guillaman admitted it.

The fact that the Legions where broken up in chapters specifically prevents more then a handful at best chapters uniting in rebellion against the imperium.

Compared to the Horus Herery the Badab war was a brush war.

There is no plausible scenario where 20 chapters each with their own chapter master and their own customs and viewpoints are going to unite under one leader and rebel against the Imperium.

4 chapters uniting was already pushing it.

In 10000 years 4 chapters united against the Imperium and it was still just a brush war compared to the Horus Heresy next to that we have the occasional chapter going rogue.

That is a pretty good record.

You cannot stamp out corruption but you can mitigate it.

Less then 1 % out of a million + space marines rebelling means that the codex for the most part does what is was intended for.

BrianDavion wrote:
yet again the codex wasn't designed to stop any rebellions at all. it was to stop them from turning into incrediably destructive imperium wide conflicts.

The Horus Heresy was WW2, the Badab war was... I dunno the Iran-Iraq war? bloody sure, but small potatos compared to the larger war. the goal of the codex was clearly to prevent a large scale civil war engulfing the entire Imperium. to "ensure a war the likes of the Heresy never happens again" and it NEVER HAS.

claiming the differance in size is irrelevant is absolutely bonkers because thats the ENTIRE POINT, to ensure that instead of large imperium wide conflicts, the IoM sees, as best, small scale localized revolts that are easily put down

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I'm not quoting properly because I'm not helping Delvarus make horrid anti-user text walls.

The point Delvarus made about post 1st founding Chapters somehow constantly going Traitor remains completely wrong despite the statement "No full chapters went traitor in the first founding, which is the point..." because not only have a fair few individual Marines turned but you have things like a whole bunch of Blood Angels turning and nearly destroying the Chapter and rogue Salamanders trying to destroy their own homeworld

It's okay to be wrong, it's not okay to be in denial about it.

Why would individual members/or squads going traitor be relevant to anything in this discussion... I mean this is the kind of debating tactics with most people here, there is an inconsistency, lets point it out even though that has nothing to do with the argument... I stated it is the collusion of chapters which makes Badab like the HH and the only CHAPTERS that have gone rogue are 2nd founding and on-wards and you people say I don't understand, its quite comical. Its why I ignore most comments like that, there is no point debating with people that make points like that.

pm713 wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I'm not quoting properly because I'm not helping Delvarus make horrid anti-user text walls.

The point Delvarus made about post 1st founding Chapters somehow constantly going Traitor remains completely wrong despite the statement "No full chapters went traitor in the first founding, which is the point..." because not only have a fair few individual Marines turned but you have things like a whole bunch of Blood Angels turning and nearly destroying the Chapter and rogue Salamanders trying to destroy their own homeworld

It's okay to be wrong, it's not okay to be in denial about it.

Why would individual members/or squads going traitor be relevant to anything in this discussion... I mean this is the kind of debating tactics with most people here, there is an inconsistency, lets point it out even though that has nothing to do with the argument... I stated it is the collusion of chapters which makes Badab like the HH and the only CHAPTERS that have gone rogue are 2nd founding and on-wards and you people say I don't understand, its quite comical. Its why I ignore most comments like that, there is no point debating with people that make points like that.

You claimed that only second foundings went traitor. I proved that was wrong. Now you're bringing your weird personal issues to avoid admitting it. This is typical.

If I wanted to be silly I'd be pedantic and say that it's ridiculous that of all the foundings only the second one had traitors and bring up things like the Cursed Founding.

BrianDavion wrote:
Second founding actually means something, perhaps you should have used the term "later foundings"

and even then you're wrong, a full HALF of the first founding went rogue.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
Second founding actually means something, perhaps you should have used the term "later foundings"

and even then you're wrong, a full HALF of the first founding went rogue.

Yeah next time dealing with you I'll spell everything out for you.

"and even then you're wrong, a full HALF of the first founding went rogue." That is so pathetic and stupid. I mean this is what I'm dealing with...

BrianDavion wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
Second founding actually means something, perhaps you should have used the term "later foundings"

and even then you're wrong, a full HALF of the first founding went rogue.

Yeah next time dealing with you I'll spell everything out for you.

"and even then you're wrong, a full HALF of the first founding went rogue." That is so pathetic and stupid. I mean this is what I'm dealing with...

Sticks and stones may break my bones but they won't win a fething argument.