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.

 koooaei wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:


Because that's not the only reason Angron is a bad general. He literally isn't a general. As soon as the battle starts he leaves his men in the dust and rushes forward, cutting himself off. Kharn and Lortara do all the coordination of the legion.

But this is the way they function the best. They're allready bloodthirsty uncontrollable zerkers. There's no use in playing a 'good general' in front of them.

Yes, fine, whatever. That doesn't change the fact that Angron easily is the worst general of all the Primarchs.

How so. His legion accomplished stuff. If he was a bad general, they'd have simply failed all the time.

Not really. They only fought one way. If they fought in more ways than one and had a bad general theyd probably have failed sure. But it was hardly a mentally taxing way of waging war. I think if I had 110000 marines who were bloodthirsty beserkers even I could massacre a planet of humans. I am definitely not a good general. He isn't a good general. He abandons his men to go and fight by himself. He makes things harder than they need to be (see Istvaan 3) and ignores orders from superiors. He has no control or coordination over his legion. He literally has one tactic, is probably the most inflexible of the Primarchs, which means he's easily manipulated (see Betrayer when the legion runs straight into an ambush because they're lost to the nails). Occasionally his tactics are needed, but that doesn't make him a good general. Him and his legion were good at wiping out planters, but that doesn't make him a good general. If he was in charge of anyone but Space Marines, they would have failed every battle. The casualty rates of the WE were atrocious. theres even a battle against orks were the WE show up, and after all the orks are wiped out, the Imperial Army present are still being killed, because the WE just can't stop killing. He isn't even their general. He's just another beserker in an army of beserkers.

Best general for berserkers ever.

Remove Angron and they'd have still done as well. Kharn was the best general for them.

They were less berzerky before his introduction

 ImAGeek wrote:
Remove Angron and they'd have still done as well. Kharn was the best general for them.

Lhorke seemed to have been doing a good job before being put into a Dreadnought. If Leman Russ' sentiments can be believed.

 Pilau Rice wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Remove Angron and they'd have still done as well. Kharn was the best general for them.

Lhorke seemed to have been doing a good job before being put into a Dreadnought. If Leman Russ' sentiments can be believed.

Definitely. They would have been much better off had Angron not been found/died at De'Shea/been put down.

lliu wrote:

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:


You mean while the ship was being invaded by Daemons and Nemiel's suggestion was to simply slug it out instead of the Librarians obliterating the daemons and closing the portals? While the reaction is still extreme, Nemiel's suggestion was akin to telling a Platoon of Marines that shooting people is against the law, and therefore they should engage in a bayonet charge.

That justifies decapitating him for talking back? And having a sadistic grin while doing so?

Please, you can't spin that scene in a way which makes the Lion look like anything but an unstable sociopath. Which is what he is. A sociopath who just happens to be on the loyalist's side. Easily the most morally bankrupt loyalist, if not the most insane (that would be Dorn).

We're talking about war, not hugs and kittens here. Was he a bad commander and strategist? NO, he was the best. Did he fight poorly, NO. Then why do people vote for him to be THE WORST GENERAL?!



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wait, the Lion isn't even on there!!!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And again, how come Alpharius only has 2 votes? He likes making a war HARDER THAN USUAL!!!

Just saying, if you have to handicap yourself to make things a challenge, you're probably the best.

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Pilau Rice wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Remove Angron and they'd have still done as well. Kharn was the best general for them.

Lhorke seemed to have been doing a good job before being put into a Dreadnought. If Leman Russ' sentiments can be believed.

Definitely. They would have been much better off had Angron not been found/died at De'Shea/been put down.

I liked Lhorke, I was expecting some kind of big showdown between him and Angron but that part of the story seemed to fizzle out. I know there was a showdown, but not the one that there could have been.

You forgot to add the Lion on the poll.

DuskRaider wrote:
You forgot to add the Lion on the poll.

We've done that 'joke'.

 Skimask Mohawk wrote:
Just going to point out that in Savage Weapons the Night Lords and Dark Angels are locked in a stalemate for the Thramas Crusade; this is Curze (widely considered one of the lesser generals) against the Lion (considered a contender for Warmaster) and this stalemate only got broken because the Lion got the super warp teleport thing. Cuze is certainly insane which hampers his ability at times (PoC) but he was good enough to be on even terms with the Lion for 2 years

I thought this was more of a super-genius with psychotic episodes hiding from a super-genius who DIDN'T have psychotic episodes?