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.

 kirotheavenger wrote:

 Haighus wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
15 Hours and it's consequences have been a disaster for the Imperial Guard, as good as the book is.

What is wrong with 15 Hours?

The very idea that Guard have a life expectancy of just 15 hours, even in the competent regiments.
The whole "Enemy at the Gates, but sci-fi" has always been a part of the Guard, but usually portrayed as being particularly pompous/uncaring commanders rather than the default. 15 Hours portrayed it as the default for Guardsmen.

My personal favourite 40k "thought for the day" is

Life is The Emperor's currency, spend it well

I think this refrain should be foremost in any Imperial Commander's brain and is a call to competent military action.

Also the quote along the lines of “victory requires no excuse, failure allows none” if you win by spending the lives of your guardsmen, they were well spent.

 kirotheavenger wrote:

 Haighus wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
15 Hours and it's consequences have been a disaster for the Imperial Guard, as good as the book is.

What is wrong with 15 Hours?

The very idea that Guard have a life expectancy of just 15 hours, even in the competent regiments.
The whole "Enemy at the Gates, but sci-fi" has always been a part of the Guard, but usually portrayed as being particularly pompous/uncaring commanders rather than the default. 15 Hours portrayed it as the default for Guardsmen.

My personal favourite 40k "thought for the day" is

Life is The Emperor's currency, spend it well

I think this refrain should be foremost in any Imperial Commander's brain and is a call to competent military action.

15 Hours very specifically does not make that claim though. I think it is a prime example of meme lore.

The actual claim, is that soldiers in newly arrived regiments to that one specific warzone (a beseiged pocket holding out in a city against Orks) have an average* life expectancy of 15 hours. The veteran soldiers present have far longer life expectancies- the veteran regiment featured in the book has been fighting for 10 years! The implication is that the replacement regiments are usually green troops thrown into the meatgrinder with inadequate training- the main character is from such a freshly-raised regiment (this is actually an exaggerated version of a real-life effect where replacement green soldiers fitted into veteran outfits are far more likely to die, an effect observed in the World Wars through to Ukraine today).

The presence of less dire warzones is explicitly mentioned too- the main character's regiment was not supposed to be assigned to that world at all, but was intended for a much milder deployment suppressing a mutiny amongst part of the PDF on a forest world. A simple mistake by an administratum clerk led to them being deployed on Broucherac instead. Their training was for the features of the other world, not for the trench warfare they ended up in.


*The type of average is not specified, but would probably refer to the median figure- that is typical for life expectancy. The author is British and average in the UK is not synonymous with mean as it is in the USA.

All goes to show how The Imperium wages war.

Yes, it can and will expend vast numbers of its men and women at arms. But it’s the outcome alone that defines whether it was wasteful.

You could send untold millions off to die, to ensure the enemy is suitably distracted, allowing whatever elites/commandos you might have available to strike them right in the squishy parts. And I do mean whatever elites/commandos. That would include, but is not limited to, Astartes.

Could be Veteran Guard units, or even a veteran Regiment or three. Could be Kasrkin or Stormtroopers. Could be Sisters of Battle, or an Inquisitor and retinue.

If the distraction, regardless of cost, lets those other assets complete their mission (kill the Warboss, destroy a beachhead, collapse a warp rift, detonate a Tomb Complex, locate the Webway portals. All sort really), then they are lives spent wisely. Because such strikes can and will shorten a war by years.

Against Orks? Such seemingly reckless expenditure of life can be part of a larger, far wider plan. Basically keep throwing troops at them to keep the Orks entertained, and on that one planet. It could be to allow a relief fleet to come in and wreck the Orky Naval Assets prior to bombarding the world to really thing out numbers (targetting identified Orky strong points and settlements).

I can't imagine the administratum would be looking favourably on a commander that throws 10 regiments into a killing field as a "distraction" to win a minor engagement.

"Victory needs no excuse" can't be a 100% literal axiom of the Imperium.

Throwing away 10 regiments when 1 could have done the job would be very costly as that's 9 regiments that are now unable to participate in the next campaign or even another simultaneous campaign. The Imperium has a lot of men, but it isn't actually unlimited. The Imperium beset on all sides and unable to do all the things it wants is a recurring aspect of the lore.

Certainly if a significant victory is won no one will be asking if it was really necessary to expend 10 regiments.
It's just like any currency. spending it is fine - but you want to get value out of it.

It’s doubtful the Administratum/Munitorum reviews records in that level of detail. I mean, they dispatch Regiments that no longer exist to warzones with worrying regularity. Nobody noticed that Cain’s regiment was an amalgam, and sent standard reinforcements (including materiel) for two Regiments, allowing it to remain fighting fit where others didn’t.

Also, I said nothing about a Minor Engagement. Would that make the loss of 10 Regiments potentially unacceptable? Possibly. I guess. But not necessarily.

There may be an inquest (and I think that would come under the Commisariat?) yes. But something being reported as minor doesn’t minor make it. Especially with a tendency for things to escalate rapidly.

Imperial Armour books I think have been a good look into more of the bureacracy of war - IA4 Taros Campaign in particular.

And yeah commissarial oversight is exactly what it shows. When it's deemed the Imperial commander has done a poor job, wasting men and material, he is relieved by the Lord Commissar who then takes over the evacuation - attempting to retain as much fighting force as he can.
It's then strongly suggested to the commander that perhaps he should lead the force covering the retreat, and perhaps falling it battle is the best his epithet might read

I can see a similar thing happening in the adminstratum. "Lord Brannigan has consistently achieved results below the mean given the force coefficients he has been granted, this will prompt further investigation of his status".
Or perhaps just on a more personal level - not every decision is a random stroke of pen, I can imagine a commander in a theatre who performs poorly will be passed over for promotion by the sector commander or just assigned to deadend jobs. The administratum may not notice 10 regiments disappearing into a blackhole of wastefulness, but the sector commander who budgeted a campaign expecting to receive 9 regiments back may not be happy.

Definitely the puzzle of Imperial Bureaucracy.

I guess your best defence is “it escalated beyond my control, in a way I had no control over”.

Example? You’re send to Midden IV. It’s an Agri-world that’s been experiencing Eldar Raids. Reports are small scale raiding, so it’s expected to be a relatively quick in-and-out to drive them off.

But once planetside? A much larger scale raiding takes place. Or you find yourself caught between rival factions of Dark Eldar and/or Craftworld Eldar. Suddenly the situation has escalated, in a way you couldn’t predict or control.

Compare to “should’ve been a quick in-and-out but you refused to listen about where they were coming from, did nothing to destroy the Webway Portal, insisting instead they were actually coming from, and I quote ‘that cabbage patch over there’. This lead to 90% of your Regiment being slain or abducted, an unacceptable 3% drop in the world’s productivity, and the small matter of you only surviving because you hid in a privy.”.


The first example is by no means gonna get your exonerated of course. But you’ve a stronger case than the second!

 Haighus wrote:

15 Hours very specifically does not make that claim though. I think it is a prime example of meme lore.

You are correct, but the people circulating that meme lore do not read books.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Haighus wrote:

15 Hours very specifically does not make that claim though. I think it is a prime example of meme lore.

You are correct, but the people circulating that meme lore do not read books.

Fair point, but I was trying to determine if people were upset with the book due to the meme or the actual contents of the book.

I think Bobthehero is upset with the book because of the meme lore spawned from people not understanding what it's about, which simultaneously isn't really the book's fault but at the same time wouldn't have happened if the book hadn't existed.

Basically, similar to the bit about the implied Ork reality warping in the 4e codex, a small dose of flavour which saw the community promptly smoke the whole shipping container.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Imperial Armour books I think have been a good look into more of the bureacracy of war - IA4 Taros Campaign in particular.

And yeah commissarial oversight is exactly what it shows. When it's deemed the Imperial commander has done a poor job, wasting men and material, he is relieved by the Lord Commissar who then takes over the evacuation - attempting to retain as much fighting force as he can.
It's then strongly suggested to the commander that perhaps he should lead the force covering the retreat, and perhaps falling it battle is the best his epithet might read

I can see a similar thing happening in the adminstratum. "Lord Brannigan has consistently achieved results below the mean given the force coefficients he has been granted, this will prompt further investigation of his status".
Or perhaps just on a more personal level - not every decision is a random stroke of pen, I can imagine a commander in a theatre who performs poorly will be passed over for promotion by the sector commander or just assigned to deadend jobs. The administratum may not notice 10 regiments disappearing into a blackhole of wastefulness, but the sector commander who budgeted a campaign expecting to receive 9 regiments back may not be happy.

You are making the assumption that the Imperium reliably rewards success and punishes failure. It claims to, but frequently does not, which is part of the satire of actual authoritarianism. Corruption is rife. A hugely incompetent commander can escape punishment if they know the right people, or grease the right palms. It isn't reliable, nothing is in a brutal dictatorship like the Imperium, but plenty often a subordinate can be scapegoated instead, arguably as happened at Taros.

The Siege of Vraks is a good example. The original overall commander was appointed due to their political connections and "directed" the war from the sector capital (Thracian Primaris), meaning there was an inbuilt lag in communications. When he failed to meet estimated timelines and expenditures he was relieved of command. However, his connections protected him from punishment and he was shuffled sideways into a different command position.

The Imperium is definitely simultaneously more and less ridiculous than people make it out to be.

The satire is alive and well in some of the fantastic anecdotes on offer. I particularly love it when the Munitorum withdraws desperately needed materiel from a warzone in order to supply a distant stockpile that, due to bad communication, management and record-keeping, is already so overstuffed it has to destroy what it's sent.

 Hellebore wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Spoiler:

Charax wrote:
The Waaagh! field from the 3rd edition Ork codex. Not terrible in context, but people never take it in its original context, and it's spawned more memelore than Krieg Shovels

I think people not examining the original context is at fault for many, many things. . . in 40K and out. Human nature I suppose.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Background wise? Avatars have long been the Worf. The big scary that is nevertheless soundly beaten to show how Big Scary the other is.

When was the earliest, I wonder? The 5th ed Ward book is what comes to mind. There's an ancient story of an Avatar on the battlefield, but it's fighting a Keeper of Secrets, which should be it's equal, more or less, and thematically appropriate. I think the Avatar wins that one.

Edit: Avatar wins, seemingly growing in power and breaking the back of the Keeper of Secrets over its knee.

I would say that it came from the release of 3rd ed and the nerfing of big monster stats, where the avatar was the cheapest and also now the worst of the big bads statwise. He went from the same cost as a bloodthirster and capable of going toe to toe with one in 2nd ed, to an 80 pt W4 A3 wimp.

Chaos got a 3.5 codex which improved GD profiles (but not massively), making him look even worse. His 4th ed incarnation was almost twice the cost but still only W4 A4. He was W5 A5 in 7th ed iirc.

The Wardian era of DBZ style showdowns between marine characters and big monsters started with the Calgar vs Avatar story, which at the time had the 4th ed version of the avatar at 155pts with WS10 BS5 S6 T6 W4 I6 A4 Ld10 Sv3+. He was a lightweight in the MC category.



However it must be said that my favourite BL novel, Shadowpoint, came out in 2003 and had the most positive depiction of an Avatar in GW media for 2 decades...

It's a real shame GW didn't take to Rennie's depiction of the eldar in his BFG novels, they were a lot more alien and interesting than the pointy eared humans they've run with.

3rd ed Avatar version for sure. But I was honestly thinking about 2nd edition, because iirc the Avatar is killing a bunch of Terminators before Calgar begins fighting. (Brfore which the Avatar was hit with various heavy weapons). In 2nd ed the outnumbering bonuses could have given Calgar a good leg up with a +5 (or even better, with the base sizes in 2nd). Avatar started at WS10, but Calgar started with the Chapter Masters WS8. It was very feasible that Calgar could start landing hits and finish off a wounded Avatar in that scenario.

Yeah 3rd was weird for the Avatar You had the 80 point Avatar, and then the absolute baller Nightbringer at 360! The most expensive model in the game besides Forge World superheavies which started trickling out around that time. I remember feeling pretty confident and charging and killing an Avatar with just normal Terminators in 3rd. It was an unfortunate time for the big A.

I'll look up Shadowpoint. I'd like to read some decent Eldar stuff.

 Ashiraya wrote:
I think Bobthehero is upset with the book because of the meme lore spawned from people not understanding what it's about, which simultaneously isn't really the book's fault but at the same time wouldn't have happened if the book hadn't existed.

Basically, similar to the bit about the implied Ork reality warping in the 4e codex, a small dose of flavour which saw the community promptly smoke the whole shipping container.

Yes, that. It's a great book that is spoiled by the meme lore that spun out from it.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Hellebore wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Spoiler:

Charax wrote:
The Waaagh! field from the 3rd edition Ork codex. Not terrible in context, but people never take it in its original context, and it's spawned more memelore than Krieg Shovels

I think people not examining the original context is at fault for many, many things. . . in 40K and out. Human nature I suppose.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Background wise? Avatars have long been the Worf. The big scary that is nevertheless soundly beaten to show how Big Scary the other is.

When was the earliest, I wonder? The 5th ed Ward book is what comes to mind. There's an ancient story of an Avatar on the battlefield, but it's fighting a Keeper of Secrets, which should be it's equal, more or less, and thematically appropriate. I think the Avatar wins that one.

Edit: Avatar wins, seemingly growing in power and breaking the back of the Keeper of Secrets over its knee.

I would say that it came from the release of 3rd ed and the nerfing of big monster stats, where the avatar was the cheapest and also now the worst of the big bads statwise. He went from the same cost as a bloodthirster and capable of going toe to toe with one in 2nd ed, to an 80 pt W4 A3 wimp.

Chaos got a 3.5 codex which improved GD profiles (but not massively), making him look even worse. His 4th ed incarnation was almost twice the cost but still only W4 A4. He was W5 A5 in 7th ed iirc.

The Wardian era of DBZ style showdowns between marine characters and big monsters started with the Calgar vs Avatar story, which at the time had the 4th ed version of the avatar at 155pts with WS10 BS5 S6 T6 W4 I6 A4 Ld10 Sv3+. He was a lightweight in the MC category.



However it must be said that my favourite BL novel, Shadowpoint, came out in 2003 and had the most positive depiction of an Avatar in GW media for 2 decades...

It's a real shame GW didn't take to Rennie's depiction of the eldar in his BFG novels, they were a lot more alien and interesting than the pointy eared humans they've run with.

3rd ed Avatar version for sure. But I was honestly thinking about 2nd edition, because iirc the Avatar is killing a bunch of Terminators before Calgar begins fighting. (Brfore which the Avatar was hit with various heavy weapons). In 2nd ed the outnumbering bonuses could have given Calgar a good leg up with a +5 (or even better, with the base sizes in 2nd). Avatar started at WS10, but Calgar started with the Chapter Masters WS8. It was very feasible that Calgar could start landing hits and finish off a wounded Avatar in that scenario.

Yeah 3rd was weird for the Avatar You had the 80 point Avatar, and then the absolute baller Nightbringer at 360! The most expensive model in the game besides Forge World superheavies which started trickling out around that time. I remember feeling pretty confident and charging and killing an Avatar with just normal Terminators in 3rd. It was an unfortunate time for the big A.

I'll look up Shadowpoint. I'd like to read some decent Eldar stuff.

It would be an interesting scenario to run. The combined cost of terminators and Calgar would be almost twice the cost of the avatar.

But at i10 he'd win all the terminator combats (5 terminators the last guy is ws9 so the avatar still has the advantage). It might be hard to have him wounded in the first place. Calgar with ws13 would win the combat after that, but with only 1 wound per hit and 4+ to wound with 4+ save, I think he'd need to hit 28 times to kill him if he hadn't been hurt. Even with 2 wounds left he'd need to cause 8 hits to kill him.


If you're going to read shadow point read execution hour first if you like BFG. Shadow point is technically a sequel although the story doesn't really require the previous book.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

1.5k is probably the low end, representing a chapter that utilizes Serfs to a large extent in at least auxiliary combat roles(pilots, etc...). While a chapter that doesn't use Serfs might be closer to the 2x end.

I mean . . . source? Because we have a source from the 3rd ed codex, and it's nowhere near 1.5. It's kinda hitting 1.1 if all the company squads were full strength.

While I get your reasoning, given the information available I think we just have to assume much of the piloting/driving is done by "line" marines, possibly from reserve companies. For example, the Armory give the UM a total pool of, what looks like 41 Techmarines of various ranks (Master, Suprema, Techmarine, Apprentia). Even if all the 103 Servitors listed were also Marines (A big assumption), that's still not close to 1.5.

As I recall from the many discussions that were had at the time here on Dakka, it was pulled from the 3rd and 4th edition codices both from actual numbers and extrapolations of those numbers.



This is the famous 2nd company picture which shows 109 Marines in the 2nd company, including the 2 dreadnoughts.


There is also this picture here which is post-Primarus organization.



If we extrapolate this out using the official Ultramarine 2nd company as a baseline.

Companies 2-7 are the Battleline. So if we just go copypaste on the numbers for the 2nd company that is 654 Marines. 1st company is the same, except lets give them 6 Dreadnoughts instead of 2 for 113 more. 767 so far

8th and 9th. 1 captain, 2 Lts, Command squad(5 strong), 10 squads, and 2 Dreadnoughts. 110 each. 987 Marines

10th Company. 1 Captain, 2 Lts, 10 Vanguard squads, and an undetermined number of scout neophytes. So 103 definitely full Marines, plus a number of almost marines. Do scouts count towards the total??? How many are there if they do? I'll just say 50 to make it easy for now.

987+153. We are at 1140 Marines. This includes 20 Dreadnoughts and 50 scout neophytes as well as 9 chaplains.

Now we have the chapter command and ancillaries.

Chapter Command: Chapter Master and his command squad. 6 marines minimum. Chapter Master and 5 Honor Guard. You could maybe add another 5.

Reclusium: 9 Chaplains are already accounted for, but we still have the Master of Sanctity and perhaps a handful of additional chaplains. We'll add 6 more for the chapter to have 15 total(9 of which we already counted).

Apothecarian: 9 command squads have apothecaries. Lets just do the same as we did with the Reclusium and have 6 extra apothecaries who are not assigned to a particular company. 15(9 of which already counted)

Librarium: The average is 10-20 Librarians per chapter. Split the difference at 15.

1173 at the moment.

Armory: Here is where it gets messy. I'll need to estimate how many vehicles a chapter has of each type, including their Void Fleet.

Rhinos, Razorbacks, Land Speeders, and Bikes: I will assume these will only be crewed by the various Company squads directly using them with no dedicated crew.

Land Raiders: Crew of 2. 1 for the Chapter Master and his Honorguard. 5 for the 1st Company. 1 for each Command Squad. We'll just assume the typical chapter has no more than that, no extras. 7 Vehicles needing 14 crew.

Predators: Crew of 2. I'll assume 2 vehicles per company for a total of 20 needing 40 crew.

Gladiators: I can't find any crew numbers, but probably 2 again. I'll say half as many as Predators due to it being new-ish. 10 vehicles needing 20 crew

Repulsors: Same as Landraiders I'm guessing. Perhaps maybe 5 per chapter total with 2 crew each.

Vindicators and Whirlwinds: 5 per chapter, 2 crew each. 10 vehicles needing 20 crew

Each Chapter will have at least 1 Battlebarge as its flagship, then an additional Strike Cruiser for each Company and 3 Escort vessels per ship. To be conservative, I'll assume half of the ships are Commanded by a Serf while the others are commanded by a Marine. 11 capital ships, 33 escorts. 22 Marines holding the Master and Commander position.

Thunderhawks: 4 crew, 2 of which would basically have to be a Marine. The other 2 could potentially be Servitor or Serfs. I'll just count 2 marines each. 3 Thunderhawks per Strike Cruiser, 9 on the Battlebarge. 78 Marine crew for Thunderhawks on the Strike Cruisers.

So the armory total at this stage if we were to fully field every vehicle(probably unrealistic) would require 204 Marines just for vehicle crew and would not count any of the Techmarines operating in a logistical capacity.

It would logically take multiple dozen techmarines just to do the basic maintenance required for these vehicles, and a few more to crew them. I'll conservatively say 20 more Techmarines on top of the 204 marines who are dedicated vehicle crew across the fleet and armory. And I know I have skipped a bunch of vehicle types as well so you could maybe even have more.

Total is up to 1397 Marines with plenty of room for adding more dedicated crew.

This is definitely loosy goosy in terms of having any concrete numbers, but I really can't justify going any lower than this and having the chapter function in a meaningful way. Otherwise you'd have half the marines in each company having to do double duty as pilots most of the time and that just wouldn't work well.

Interestingly all the way back in 2nd ed, when there wasn't a command squad for each company, they listed 10 squads of 10 marines while also saying the scout squad had no fixed size.

I know some people have taken that to mean the scout company actually has 100 marines in it in addition to the scouts and I believe GW went that route with the primaris phobos squads.

Apart from that they list the techmarines and armoury separately along with the librarius and it was implied that the vehicle crews came from there. I can't find it now, but at one point junior techmarines were vehicle drivers. However it was never stated that they had enough crew for every vehicle in the arsenal, as they never deployed them all at once. This is where the companies trained to crew vehicles comes in, on the off chance you did need to deploy every vehicle at once.

Remembering that the original battle companies are only 2-5. 400 marines. With 2 tactical, 1 devastator and 1 assault reserve company. Each with additional training on bikes or land speeders.

Yeah, I never would assume they could deploy all their vehicles, but I would think they would have enough to at least deploy half before needing to draw upon company marines. They'd have to have at least 100 or so techmarines at a minimum, which at least feels right. A chapter has a lot of equipment to maintain between their fleet, vehicles, and the small arms.

Another question up in the air might be marines permanently stationed aboard their ships to act as boarding parties or defense against boarding. It kinda feels a little silly for a whole Strike cruiser to just have maybe a single Marine as its commanding officer and nothing but serfs and servitors if the vessel deploys an entire Company in an orbital drop. You'd think they'd want at least 5 marines to hold down the fort.

My feeling is the 1,000 headcount is less something strictly enforced to an exact number, and more a way to overall limit how powerful anyone Chapter can become, and make it relatively easy to notice.

For instance. The tactical difference between 1,000 and 1,200 Marines is lesser, and easier to notice in terms of “hmm, seems to be more of you than there should be” overall than when you’re meant to be 10,000 max, but have gone to 12,000. After all, it’s very rare that a given Chapter gathers in its entirety for an almighty scrap. Even in the common era, because it typically involves considerable logistics to gather and deploy as a whole.

So typically, we see the smaller forces more widely distributed. Might just be a squad. Might be a Demi-company task force, might be a whole company etc.

By nominally enforcing a low number? It strikes me as being easier for those who’s job it is to notice such things to notice when you’re fighting on too many fronts at the same time.

Which is why the Black Templars appear to get away with it. Well equipped and entirely fleet based, with I think each fleet acting more or less entirely independently including recruitment? They certainly seem to exist in numbers way above Codex Approval.

It could also be to help delay any building of numbers to anywhere Legion Level, by starting you off with extremely limited resources, including Geneseed.

Yes, a given Chapter could still, given sufficient time, grow its numbers to Legion Strength. But in the time it takes, it’s far more likely to be noticed. And, at least I believe the theory would go, be noticed long before your numbers became too high to be easily tackled by the rest of The Imperium.

Building Marine numbers is only slow if the Chapter continues active, significant combat operations during the rebuild and does not use vat-grown bodies to propagate geneseed.

Canonically, a single geneseed can be propagated into a thousand in 55 years (I've not personally checked the maths on this because I can't be bothered and the differential progenoid timings make it more complicated than simple doubling time), and it continues to accellerate from there (that stock would reach >2000 in less than 10 additional years).

The Imperium is not constrained in Marine numbers by geneseed, but by the fear of not being able to control large numbers of Marines and potential rebellion. Chapters are prevented from growing too big by being actively tithed of geneseed- ostensibly to build strategic reserves that can be used to found new Chapters, but in practice this serves as a monitoring mechanism to detect legion building (as seen with the Astral Claws) and a brake on Chapters developing overly-large stocks of geneseed that could be used to surge in size.

That said, the thousand Marines has never been a hard limit, only a rough indication of line troops.

And a Chapter never taking the field is going to be investigated.

Yes, they’ve the right to pick and choose where they go. But they are expected to fight. And for many? They have set areas (sectors?) of patrol and responsibility.

So to withdraw entirely to try to build your numbers to Legion Strength is going to be noticed by its general absence. More so because a more likely answer to “where the bloody hell have they gone” is they’ve been wiped out. And anything capable of doing that, with no action reports or calls for assistance being found, is something the wider Imperium would want to know about.

There’s also trying to find suitable recruits (though I remain unpersuaded the selection process is sniffy out of necessity), then arm and equip them.

Fleetwise you’re very likely fine. The Strike Cruisers and Battlebarges were of course built to carry far larger numbers than a Chapter.

But for your support tanks, Power Armour, ammo, and all the fiddly little logistical things? OK your Chapter’s forge can do much of that. Possibly even all of it to cut down on “we dunno therefore no” issues. But they still need the raw or pre-refined materials. Those have to come from somewhere!

So accepting your figure for getting to over 2,000 in 10 years? Thats great. But not if a large proportion of your new recruits are sitting around in their pants for lack of proper gear.

And again. Being able to double your headcount in 10 years is a very different proposition when you’re starting from 1,000 and when you’re starting from say, 10,000.

2,000 Marines, united a single force is nothing to be sniffed at. But much, much easier to bring to book than if it was 20,000.

So my point still stands. Enforcing a lower number makes breaches of that rule easier to deal with before it gets entirely out of hand,

I expect that as long as a chapter didn't partake in any particularly horrific campaigns they could easily maintain normal operations while still growing in numbers more or less indefinitely if they so chose.

You won't need to completely withdraw from combat unless the chapter pulls a Crimson Fists or something where they're down to only a few dozen marines and have simultaneously lost a lot of their infrastructure. Normally it seems that chapters end with a bit of surplus geneseed.

The Black Templars do show you can basically get away with completely ignoring the Codex if you are unquestioningly loyal AND you also just spread out across the whole galaxy so nobody can ever do a proper headcount. Space is big and communications are slow. Most chapters don't go much beyond a single sector.

Implicitly, Space Marine casualties are fairly low in standard engagements, presumably as they tend to use overwhelming force concentration that the enemy cannot proportionately respond to in time.

Novels tend to focus on the worst situations, the most hard-fought battles, as they create a more exciting story.

But, for example, the 4th edition SM codex mentions that a Space Marine Sergeant is expected to be a veteran of hundreds of battles. That would not be possible if the attrition was too high.

It also mentions that a Veteran Sergeant is expected to have fought thousands of campaigns. Which is, uh, probably pushing it, but it's still telling.


This is codex lore -and- 22 years old, so hopefully safe from people picky about their sources or snarky about new GW writing

Yeah, I would expect marines to have a very low mortality rate when they are operating in their preferred conditions. Also, even in the game, a model being killed does not necessarily mean actually killed. They're just taken out, and with marine physiology, one would expect them to survive many injuries that would be lethal to normal humans. They also have better access to bionics than, say, the Imperial Guard, and it is worth patching up a wounded marine with expensive cyberbits whereas it would not be done for some IG grunt. IG officers might be different of course.

It also reflects that being able to harm a Marine, and being able to kill a Marine are pretty different.

We’ve many examples of Marines fighting on despite the most horrific injuries. And from there? Imperial Bionics are honestly impressive. Replacement limbs, organs, even brains. So provided early intervention is available, you can live to fight another day. It might just take a while to heal.

As an absolute extreme in-universe? Huron. Whilst he’s seemingly singular, he still represents the level of injury a Marine could survive, without having to go in a Dreadnought.

Which all helps achieve Veterancy, provided you don’t get completely splatted by the many weapons capable of doing so.

We can also consider, as Ashiraya pointed out? Not every engagement is going to be a real test of the Marines. Because they’re not solely reserved to fight in the most desperate of theatres.

Putting down a Cult on a nearby world is no big shakes to any Chapter. And said Cult simply may not have anything like the right tools to stop them. So it’s about as quick an in, out, spread their innards all about action as you might hope.

Even in larger engagements? It’s pretty common for Marines to be fighting alongside other Imperial Forces. So it’s not as if they’re necessarily fighting the entirety of the foe, or doing what they do best without any form of support. And they do appear to be most efficient when acting as a force multiplier.

I agree with Crimson.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Implicitly, Space Marine casualties are fairly low in standard engagements, presumably as they tend to use overwhelming force concentration that the enemy cannot proportionately respond to in time.

Novels tend to focus on the worst situations, the most hard-fought battles, as they create a more exciting story.

But, for example, the 4th edition SM codex mentions that a Space Marine Sergeant is expected to be a veteran of hundreds of battles. That would not be possible if the attrition was too high.

It also mentions that a Veteran Sergeant is expected to have fought thousands of campaigns. Which is, uh, probably pushing it, but it's still telling.


This is codex lore -and- 22 years old, so hopefully safe from people picky about their sources or snarky about new GW writing

It isn't that incredible that a Marine veteran could survive hundreds of battles and thousands of campaigns. We are told a strike cruiser merely arriving in orbit is often enough to end a rebellion. It is likely a proportion more can be ended with some orbital fire alone. These are technically campaigns, but no Marine has to actually get their hands dirty up close and personal.

But on the flipside - Marines are so rare it would be such a waste of their time to commit them to a minor action.
Any action significant enough that it couldn't be handled better by Guard (even elite Guard troops such as Grenadiers or Tempestus) and therefore would warrant the deployment of astartes is an action significant enough that the Marines would be expected to take casualties.

This perhaps aligns with the narrative depictions of them where they're always thrown into the absolute teeth of an engagement.

Occasionally it can happen though - Taros Campaign iirc starts with several 'clean' actions by Astartes. But the opening phases of that campaign saw Astartes selected more to send a message than any tactical necessity. Such messages I'm sure would be a minority.

There's definitely a narrative inconsistency between even mere NCOs being veterans of hundreds of battles, and the expected/portrayed engagements the Astartes actually participate in.
Especially since we then get veteran sergeants to. How many centuries of war must such a man of lived through?

Well, I'd expect the fiction and the games to focus on those engagements that are not routine cakewalks. Granted, "thousand campaigns" seems pretty far fetched, unless these campaigns are far shorter than I'd imagine.

Interestingly "veteran sergeant" has not been a thing in the game for a while, and I'm not sure it is an official rank in many chapters either. It has always been a bit unclear how the marine ranks really work. Like does an intercessor sergeant outrank a basic sternguard veteran? Is the sternguard sergeant " a veteran sergeant" and thus outranks the other sergeants? How about the honour guard? Do they outrank sergeants and veteran sergeants?

Marines are broadly independent and have full choice over where they engage (although they may have political consequences and scrutiny for avoiding major clashes). Marines also typically cover a specific region and can react quickly to distress calls, quicker than the Navy or Guard typically can.

Their reputation is also legendary.

So Marines flitting about quickly putting down rebellions makes sense, especially as rebellions have been the main threat to the Imperium for most of the preceding 10000 years. As I said, the lore is clear that merely appearing in orbit allows Marines to end many rebellions. These events just don't make fun games and are a footnote in the narrative.

 Crimson wrote:
Well, I'd expect the fiction and the games to focus on those engagements that are not routine cakewalks. Granted, "thousand campaigns" seems pretty far fetched, unless these campaigns are far shorter than I'd imagine.

Interestingly "veteran sergeant" has not been a thing in the game for a while, and I'm not sure it is an official rank in many chapters either. It has always been a bit unclear how the marine ranks really work. Like does an intercessor sergeant outrank a basic sternguard veteran? Is the sternguard sergeant " a veteran sergeant" and thus outranks the other sergeants? How about the honour guard? Do they outrank sergeants and veteran sergeants?

Veteran sergeant in most Chapters means formally inducted into the 1st Company, and then may be reassigned back to another company.

Seniority seems to be the main decider of rank in most cases- i.e. the longest serving veteran sergeant, or the longest serving non-veteran sergeant if no veterans are present. Obviously this is overridden by any specific delegation of responsibility by a Chapter officer.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
But on the flipside - Marines are so rare it would be such a waste of their time to commit them to a minor action.
Any action significant enough that it couldn't be handled better by Guard (even elite Guard troops such as Grenadiers or Tempestus) and therefore would warrant the deployment of astartes is an action significant enough that the Marines would be expected to take casualties.

Yes, but also no. If it only takes a Strike Cruiser doing a drive-by on a planet to scare a potentially rebellious Governor its not really a waste of resources. A Governor contemplating rebellion might feel he can win against a Guard regiment and thus might actually try, leading to a long campaign which will inevitably destroy a lot on the planet. But a squad of Marines could come by, threaten the governor from orbit, and be gone within days of arriving. With the implicit threat that if they have to come back they'll easily decapitate his regime with minimal damage.

A couple of days of a Strike cruisers time could save a months/years long campaign, a few million lives, and decades of infrastructure damage. And the marines most likely are doing small stuff like that for years at a time between actually dangerous campaigns.

Spending a few days of Space Marine time would be a better use than wasting a guard regiment that could be reinforcing an actually dicey combat zone. Especially when the Marines could solve the minor issue so fast they could still help out at the major problem areas once they're done.