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.

Kain wrote:The blood pact was noted as being about three quarters of a million strong, which meant that they were a very tiny core of an army made mostly out of ill disciplined rabble. And every time they go up against the Tanith they suffer loss ratios in the ball park of 50:1. That is not the mark of an elite army, that is the mark of a bunch of idiots.

They do fairly well in Sabbat Martyr (I think that's the right book) before they get overwhelmed...
They also would have done well in many other cases if their plan hadn't been stumbled upon by the Tanith or someone else, then they fall apart.
They don't seem to do particularly well against an organised resistance but if they hit right they hit hard... go figure...

Kain wrote:The blood pact was noted as being about three quarters of a million strong, which meant that they were a very tiny core of an army made mostly out of ill disciplined rabble. And every time they go up against the Tanith they suffer loss ratios in the ball park of 50:1. That is not the mark of an elite army, that is the mark of a bunch of idiots.

Lmao

Kain wrote:The blood pact was noted as being about three quarters of a million strong, which meant that they were a very tiny core of an army made mostly out of ill disciplined rabble. And every time they go up against the Tanith they suffer loss ratios in the ball park of 50:1. That is not the mark of an elite army, that is the mark of a bunch of idiots.

Has anyone bothered to factor in though the fact that Dan Abnett likes to make the Tanith appear as the step right before you cross the line in to Space Marines? I mean no disrespect," Gaunt's Ghosts IS what got me started in the 40K hobby after all.." but when you look at the Tanith First, you see a regiment numbering at around 3,000 bodies at its highest point, that are classified in a Recon/Light Support role by the Munitorium, have been quoted by several of their own officers and commissars to use their helmets as buckets more then they actually wear them into battle, and usually only die when Abnett writes it out," or can come up with a name he hasn't already used ". The worst casualties that they ever suffered was on Jago," the book is Only In Death FYI" and that was in a much more realistic fashion compared to most other books he has written," and i use the word 'Realistic' in a very subtle manner."

I mean can you honestly say that comparing the Blood Pact to the Tanith is even remotely fair? Thats like comparing Autobots to Decepticons. though they are generally the same and of equal merit, Autobots Always seem to kick the Decepticons in the Weinerschneitzal's and call it game!

Kain wrote:The blood pact was noted as being about three quarters of a million strong, which meant that they were a very tiny core of an army made mostly out of ill disciplined rabble. And every time they go up against the Tanith they suffer loss ratios in the ball park of 50:1. That is not the mark of an elite army, that is the mark of a bunch of idiots.

In his last command they were holding off an entire arm of the Crusade on one planet, and the Tanith were involved in that conflict as the 51st/1st Belladon/Tanith

And remember not every conflict the Tanith fought in was against the BP,
And Jago was a bloodbath on both sides, and on Balhut a small team of BP seemed to do quite well against thee majority of the Tanith regiment (In avoiding detection and trying to complete their goal)
For books 1-3 the Tanith were just fighting untrained Cultists, except those World Eaters
Books 4-7 were when the BP were introduced and for the most part they had very difficult circumstances and the stories are told from an Imperial POV
I do like the way the books seem to be heading though


And Gaunt is the most badass guardsman ever to exist

I guess they wouldnt be too successful because the imperium can send some Astartes in to clean up the mess

If we're arguing numbers with Dan Abnett's books we might as well give up. First Guant saves 4k Tanith and that disappears to just 1 reg of 2k by the second book. In the third book he says the hive has 4billion population, yet only 50k soldiers defending the walls (*hint hint the Chinese, with 1.5bil pop, have a active service population of 2.5mil*). Later on in that book he claims the Hive has only 4million in population.

Abnett, although a good writer, has no idea on the vast scale of human combatants in any campaign in the past 100 years of human history. Agincourt had 10k of the French Killed, Waterloo had 25k of the French Killed, the Battle of Verdun had 542,000 French killed. Neither does he note down in huge numbers how much a force started with, how much it lost, and how much it had left after any campaign.

I use French statistics because it makes me, as an Englishman, happy. However as a country they are well versed in war, well versed in sending their people to death, The Imperium is much better at sending vast amounts, trillions, of people to their death, drowning the opposition in bodies and faeces.

To use any fluff as basis of an argument, when in a single book the author switches between a Hive of 4billion to 2million, is simply folly. Abnett's writings is, much like Alan Dean Fosters, "Humany Feck Yeah" but based in wh40k.