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.

That's the thing-- those two did not build their own armies. They were given them by the Emperor. A man born with silver spoon who accomplishes great things is not as tested and tried and true as a man born with nothing and yet accomplishes even greater things. The primarchs are inherently inferior generals to non-primarchs who accomplished similar feats (Solar Macharius, Alicia Dominica) because of this.

 Melissia wrote:
That's the thing-- those two did not build their own armies. They were given them by the Emperor. A man born with silver spoon who accomplishes great things is not as tested and tried and true as a man born with nothing and yet accomplishes even greater things. The primarchs are inherently inferior generals to non-primarchs who accomplished similar feats (Solar Macharius, Alicia Dominica) because of this.

Absolutely this ^

Coupled with the fact that GW fluff amounts to "He's the best tactician because we said so" rather than actually showing us any particularly impressive feats that don't involve massive technical or numerical superiority simply steamrolling whatever is in the way.

 Melissia wrote:
That's the thing-- those two did not build their own armies. They were given them by the Emperor. A man born with silver spoon who accomplishes great things is not as tested and tried and true as a man born with nothing and yet accomplishes even greater things. The primarchs are inherently inferior generals to non-primarchs who accomplished similar feats (Solar Macharius, Alicia Dominica) because of this.

The emperor gave them the start of their legion, but it wasnt all that great. He didnt hand Roboute the Ultramarines and say "this is easily the largest, best trained legion in the imperium" because it wasnt when Guilliman was found.
Horus was found so early the space marines were still just being created, the legions were not yet built.

Which still means they were given far more to work with than either Macharius or Dominica, yet accomplished basically about as much as either of those two-- except ultimately, the conquests of Macharius and Dominica lasted far longer than those of the Primarchs.

 Insectum7 wrote:
The UM quote I gave is from both the 2nd and 5th ed books, so not as ancient as you might think.

Ancient or not, it's from the UM codex which is naturally biased towards them, just like the other codices are biased towards the respective factions they're describing. The other codices often make no mention of the UMs at all when describing achievements during the Great Crusade.

As for Horus's success, he's mentioned in pretty much every source that talks about success during the Great Crusade (usually in the context of "While Horus did this and that, this legion we're describing closely trailed, matched, or exceeded him in other areas!")

 Exergy wrote:
The night lords definitely brought the highest percentage of worlds under the imperial banner without fighting. They only fought like 5% of the time.

Yea but they definitely fought more than 5% of the time since they enjoyed preying on helpless worlds too much and would often reject surrender and attack anyway.

 Melissia wrote:
Nah, that was Macharius. Lion'el Johnson relied upon the supremacy of his space marine minions, more than he did strategy. Macharius did better with less.

 Melissia wrote:
Which still means they were given far more to work with than either Macharius or Dominica, yet accomplished basically about as much as either of those two-- except ultimately, the conquests of Macharius and Dominica lasted far longer than those of the Primarchs.

Less resources or not, consider this:

There are around a million worlds in the Imperium. Macharius conquered 1000. That's 1/1000th of the Imperium, the rest of which was conquered mainly by the Primarchs. If you look at it that way, every single one of the Primarchs conquered way more territory than anyone that came after.

They also fought the length and breadth of the Imperium, whereas the Macharian Crusade was a localized affair.

So while I don't dispute his genius, I don't think he achieved more than the Primarchs, as they essentially built the Imperium. Also, he didn't build his army either as Imperial commanders are assigned their troops and get to requisition more over time if they do well. Not that it has anything to do with genius anyway. A Primarch would still be able to out think a normal human as they function on a different level (the Lion being able to do hyperspace calculations in his head for example).

 EngulfedObject wrote:

There are around a million worlds in the Imperium. Macharius conquered 1000. That's 1/1000th of the Imperium, the rest of which was conquered mainly by the Primarchs. If you look at it that way, every single one of the Primarchs conquered way more territory than anyone that came after.

They also fought the length and breadth of the Imperium, whereas the Macharian Crusade was a localized affair.

So while I don't dispute his genius, I don't think he achieved more than the Primarchs, as they essentially built the Imperium. Also, he didn't build his army either as Imperial commanders are assigned their troops and get to requisition more over time if they do well. Not that it has anything to do with genius anyway. A Primarch would still be able to out think a normal human as they function on a different level (the Lion being able to do hyperspace calculations in his head for example).

Macharius Crusade was made by half a million guardsmen and their transport, lasted 7 years and resulted in a thousand world conquered. The Great Crusade lasted almost three century. That's about 170 world per year per Primarch. That's if we are assuming all the world conquered were under the Primarch leadership, which isn't the case since the Emperor did and human generals did it too and if we are assuming that the Great Crusade started with a single world, Terra, which wasn't the case at all since there were at least three: the Moon, Mars and Terra. It also assumes that all the Imperium hasn't grown since the Great Crusade which is false. The example of Macharius Crusade, the Sabbath World Crusade and various other expedition proves otherwise. Macharius has nearly the same ratio of victory per year, clocking at around 150. He had very little Space Marines, no Titan Legions or Skitarii at his disposal and certainly commanded and conquered those 1 000 worlds. That's much more impressive in my opinion.

Another vote for Macharius, he did more, with less, in less time than anyone else that GW has put into 40k.

Hell, the guy is based upon Alexander the Great after all.

 Melissia wrote:
Which still means they were given far more to work with than either Macharius or Dominica, yet accomplished basically about as much as either of those two-- except ultimately, the conquests of Macharius and Dominica lasted far longer than those of the Primarchs.

I'm sorry but I must have missed when Macharius built the Imperial guard out of a spoon and some twin, bedded a TON of women to produce his army, trained the army entirely on his own, and then set out to the stars,. in a row boat he carved by hand and then stuck a pair of rocket engines to, and conquered 1000 worlds that way.

Macharius conquered the 100 worlds he did with logistics system and military foundations put in place by other people. just like the Primarchs.

also I call complete bs on your claiming the conquests of Macharius lasted longer. after he died his leuitenants basicly tore it apart into their own personal pocket empires. many if not most of the worlds conquered during the crusade are STILL members of the IoM

Imperial propaganda, to take the attention away from the DA always leaving the battlefield, when a rumor of a fallen occurs.

Easiest way to defeat the DA, make a fallen prank call

epronovost wrote:
Macharius Crusade was made by half a million guardsmen and their transport, lasted 7 years and resulted in a thousand world conquered. The Great Crusade lasted almost three century. That's about 170 world per year per Primarch. That's if we are assuming all the world conquered were under the Primarch leadership, which isn't the case since the Emperor did and human generals did it too and if we are assuming that the Great Crusade started with a single world, Terra, which wasn't the case at all since there were at least three: the Moon, Mars and Terra. It also assumes that all the Imperium hasn't grown since the Great Crusade which is false. The example of Macharius Crusade, the Sabbath World Crusade and various other expedition proves otherwise. Macharius has nearly the same ratio of victory per year, clocking at around 150. He had very little Space Marines, no Titan Legions or Skitarii at his disposal and certainly commanded and conquered those 1 000 worlds. That's much more impressive in my opinion.

Are you sure about the half a million number? That seems like a pathetically small and unrealistic number, especially when you consider he divided his army into 7 groups. The Sabbat Worlds Crusade involved something close to a billion guardsmen in comparison.

Also, Luna isn't a planet. And the Great Crusade lasted around 200 years, not 300. Plus the Primarchs were found one by one so it's impossible to calculate the speed of their conquests with what we have. But I get what you mean.

All that aside though, the speed of conquests and the number of planets aren't the only measures. We know for example that the Ork empire encountered during the Ullanor Crusade was largest ever encountered by Mankind and that by the end of the Crusade, there were none left to seriously challenge humanity's supremacy. So in that sense, Macharius's achievements on a side theater (basically somewhere where the author in question has free reign) seem insignificant in comparison. But I can see why some would favour Macharius over the Primarchs especially if you're an IG fan and dislike the focus on the astartes.

BrianDavion wrote:
also I call complete bs on your claiming the conquests of Macharius lasted longer. after he died his leuitenants basicly tore it apart into their own personal pocket empires. many if not most of the worlds conquered during the crusade are STILL members of the IoM

Indeed, since that's also what happened after Alexander's death. The Macharian Heresy broke out immediately after his death and apparently it took a seventy year long crusade involving a hundred astartes chapters to end it.

 King Pariah wrote:
Hell, the guy is based upon Alexander the Great after all.

Maybe that's why I dislike him as he seems out of place. There's already the Sabbat World's Crusade, which seems a lot more realistic in scale and scope.

Food for thought.

Primachs and legions were given different roles and utilized based on their strengths and needs of the blossoming Imperium.


Many of them could have conquered and brought many more worlds into the fold but didn't and couldn't.


Russ was the emperor's lap dog. He had to stop his campaigns to bring to heal and probably annihilate one or two of the lost legions. also, Prospero. Enough said.

Rogal Dorn was used to fortify the core.

Angron was used to annihilate. Cruze to terrify.

Also many of them had flaws that needed to be dealt with, took up their time, and or were outlawed and disrupted their lethality. Blood angels, Thousand sons with Nikea edict etc.


Also Some Primarchs were more even keeled or had more time to build the greater imperium (Horus). Also the Emperor was fighting alongside Horus for much of the crusade. That helps.



This is the same once Horus took over as well. Horus had an agenda. Especially after Davin. Efficiency was not the goal.

So to look at this question through the lense of mere numbers is looking at it all wrong.


Also I do not agree or disagree that the Lion was "the greatest" strategist among the imperium.

Personally I do not know enough about his legion except the wave tops. Also I can echo that he did lose many of his legion. Through his fault or circumstance it doesn't matter.

 EngulfedObject wrote:


Also, Luna isn't a planet.

Indeed, but the Imperium is made of Million world (or so). A world isn't necessarly a planet. Its any inhabited celestial body. Giant asteroids, Deathstar-like space station and moons can also be worlds. Thus, it still counts.

 EngulfedObject wrote:

And the Great Crusade lasted around 200 years, not 300. Plus the Primarchs were found one by one so it's impossible to calculate the speed of their conquests with what we have. But I get what you mean.

The Great Crusade lasted between 200 to 300 years. Unlike Macharius Crusade, there is no fixed date for how long the Great Crusade lasted. I used the most conservative estimate.

 EngulfedObject wrote:

All that aside though, the speed of conquests and the number of planets aren't the only measures. We know for example that the Ork empire encountered during the Ullanor Crusade was largest ever encountered by Mankind and that by the end of the Crusade, there were none left to seriously challenge humanity's supremacy. So in that sense, Macharius's achievements on a side theater (basically somewhere where the author in question has free reign) seem insignificant in comparison. But I can see why some would favour Macharius over the Primarchs especially if you're an IG fan and dislike the focus on the astartes.

Indeed, but a thousand inhabited world represent a massive amount. It's about as large as the Tau Empire. The Crusade of Macharius is considered the most succesful entreprise to expand the boarders of the Imperium in its 10 000 years of history. Macharius was canonised after his death and is considered an examplar for all Imperial commanders. That's a long lasting achievement worthy of note. The destruction of the Ork Empire of Ullanor was very impressive, but required the cooperation of several Legions led by the Emperor himself to be a success. 2000 years later, the war against the Beast erased all those accomplishments and, since then, Orks remain in control of several massive empires and dominate the galaxy. Of course what faction you like the most will show in your choice of greatest strategist. If the question could be extanded to count commanders outside of the Imperium, I would have proposed Asurmen, Puretide or Vect over Macharius and any Primarch (even if that doesn't make them poor strategist).

One point which seems to be overlooked is the fact the Emperor chastised the entire Word Bearer legion because they were not brining worlds to compliance at a rate anywhere near the other legions. He wanted conquest not monuments pronouncing him a God. Look what happened to Monarchia (IIRC).

 EngulfedObject wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
The UM quote I gave is from both the 2nd and 5th ed books, so not as ancient as you might think.

Ancient or not, it's from the UM codex which is naturally biased towards them, just like the other codices are biased towards the respective factions they're describing. The other codices often make no mention of the UMs at all when describing achievements during the Great Crusade.

As for Horus's success, he's mentioned in pretty much every source that talks about success during the Great Crusade (usually in the context of "While Horus did this and that, this legion we're describing closely trailed, matched, or exceeded him in other areas!")

Well, let's see some quantifiable information then. I don't doubt Horus's successes were great and many, but can you pull up the relevant quotes with "worlds" conquered or something similar? From the sources I have readily available, I can't find any. Mostly what I find are vagaries.

Perturabo, primarch of the Iron Warriors.
A rather detailed account of him is here: http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Perturabo
Not so much here: http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Perturabo

He would be the original "angry marine" where he was not into glory, just to overcome any obstacle.

"To Perturabo each battle and each campaign was no more than a problem to be objectified, deconstructed and overcome, and it would not be long before the first of Mandkind's foes would feel the terrible power of this murderous mind at work."
"...War had become a deadly equation which the Iron Warriors were supremely suited to solve; a relentlessly unyielding engine of war, a beast of steel and fire which swept worlds clean and devoured whole armies. "
"...It was said of the Iron Warriors that there was no fortress built by the hand of humanity or that of the xenos they could not smash down, no stronghold they could not storm and no army they could not drown in its own blood through shot and shell. "
"...The need to be better, the urge to prove his worth beyond taking the metal to the stone. Perturabo was a craftsman, and to be worthy of the appellation, every piece of work that bore his name must be judged for as long as it stood. His legacy was to leave no undertaking unfinished. Every task was approached as though it might be his last. "

Reading the lore, he seemed utterly without need of competing with his brothers other than in mental challenges.
Mind, the Imperial Fist primarch was so similar but a rivalry developed instead.

Reading the "fluff" he seemed like a just and intelligent leader with a soul of an artesian... initially.
As circumstances became more challenging more... "pragmatic" decisions needed to be made

Out of all the various primarchs, so many were focused on their "command", he was focused on solving the "problem" and getting things done efficiently.
It could be argued that being not quite so much a "people person" would limit the "military genius" title.
But it was without question his legion assaulted the strongholds, brought them down, made new ones and defended against all comers.
The contrast makes the other primarchs appear as children tilting at windmills.

who achieved more between Dominica and Macharius?

epronovost wrote:

 EngulfedObject wrote:


Also, Luna isn't a planet.

Indeed, but the Imperium is made of Million world (or so). A world isn't necessarly a planet. Its any inhabited celestial body. Giant asteroids, Deathstar-like space station and moons can also be worlds. Thus, it still counts.

 EngulfedObject wrote:

And the Great Crusade lasted around 200 years, not 300. Plus the Primarchs were found one by one so it's impossible to calculate the speed of their conquests with what we have. But I get what you mean.

The Great Crusade lasted between 200 to 300 years. Unlike Macharius Crusade, there is no fixed date for how long the Great Crusade lasted. I used the most conservative estimate.

 EngulfedObject wrote:

All that aside though, the speed of conquests and the number of planets aren't the only measures. We know for example that the Ork empire encountered during the Ullanor Crusade was largest ever encountered by Mankind and that by the end of the Crusade, there were none left to seriously challenge humanity's supremacy. So in that sense, Macharius's achievements on a side theater (basically somewhere where the author in question has free reign) seem insignificant in comparison. But I can see why some would favour Macharius over the Primarchs especially if you're an IG fan and dislike the focus on the astartes.

Indeed, but a thousand inhabited world represent a massive amount. It's about as large as the Tau Empire. The Crusade of Macharius is considered the most succesful entreprise to expand the boarders of the Imperium in its 10 000 years of history. Macharius was canonised after his death and is considered an examplar for all Imperial commanders. That's a long lasting achievement worthy of note. The destruction of the Ork Empire of Ullanor was very impressive, but required the cooperation of several Legions led by the Emperor himself to be a success. 2000 years later, the war against the Beast erased all those accomplishments and, since then, Orks remain in control of several massive empires and dominate the galaxy. Of course what faction you like the most will show in your choice of greatest strategist. If the question could be extanded to count commanders outside of the Imperium, I would have proposed Asurmen, Puretide or Vect over Macharius and any Primarch (even if that doesn't make them poor strategist).

The HH broke out during the 200th year of the great crusade and its stated a fair number of times 798-M30 to 005-M31, a world, is a planet, otherwise its a station, celestial bodies etc. do count I agree though.

But who was the greatest strategist? its the emperor, every achievement all of you have mentioned would not have happened if not for him.

 Formosa wrote:

But who was the greatest strategist? its the emperor, every achievement all of you have mentioned would not have happened if not for him.

Well, of course, the Emperor is the greatest strategist of the Imperium, but he was excluded from this exercise for the fact this choice is the most obvious.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

LightKing wrote:
who achieved more between Dominica and Macharius?

Dominica reunited the Imperium after it was torn appart by a massive civil war. It's achievement on the battlefield are impressive and numerous. Her career was also very long. She fought for the Imperium for almost 400 years before being killed in action. Her legacy is a restored Imperium, the Adeptas Sororitas and the title of living saint. Macharius achievements are significantly smaller, but what sets him appart is the short span of his career and his energy. If you want to judge him by quantity alone, Dominica dwarfs him, but in terms of quality as commander and strategist, I would give the palm to Macharius. Of all the Companions, Arabella was the one described as the most well thought and calculating. She was probably superior military commander than Alicia.

Why would it be the Emperor?
Driven by Xenophobia.
Blinded by favouritism.
Held up as a god against his wishes.
Bound to a life as an undead vampire.
Really planned things out well.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Why would it be the Emperor?
Driven by Xenophobia.
Blinded by favouritism.
Held up as a god against his wishes.
Bound to a life as an undead vampire.
Really planned things out well.

1: wasn't a Xenophobe, he had pretty good reasons to kill the aliens living in the galaxy at the time, he lived through old night remember.

2: he had no favourites, he didn't see the primarchs as people, just numbers, if anything that's worse.

3: tis true, but the god emp cult didn't arise until after he could do nothing to stop it.

4: has no relevance lol

5: yep he did, sadly he didn't take into account the human factor when considering his primarchs, read master of mankind, it paints him in a different light, he is still a douche... just a more relatable one.

 Formosa wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Why would it be the Emperor?
Driven by Xenophobia.
Blinded by favouritism.
Held up as a god against his wishes.
Bound to a life as an undead vampire.
Really planned things out well.

1: wasn't a Xenophobe, he had pretty good reasons to kill the aliens living in the galaxy at the time, he lived through old night remember.

2: he had no favourites, he didn't see the primarchs as people, just numbers, if anything that's worse.

3: tis true, but the god emp cult didn't arise until after he could do nothing to stop it.

4: has no relevance lol

5: yep he did, sadly he didn't take into account the human factor when considering his primarchs, read master of mankind, it paints him in a different light, he is still a douche... just a more relatable one.

1. He had reason yes, but he's also been depicted as irrational in his hatred of the alien.

2. What fiction doesn't say Horus was his favorite? I'd like to see that in context with him trying to reason with the Chaos Blessed Warmaster while Sanguinius lies dead in the corner "Number sixteen, there better be a damn good reason why you teamed up with the Chaos vileness and killed number nine".

3. Pretty sure he did repremand one of the Primarchs for just that. Lesson didn't stick.

4. Pretty sure Big Es plan was to stick Magnus on the throne or share it with him, not to be stuck on it himself. The best laid plans and all that.

5. Will read that.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Well, let's see some quantifiable information then. I don't doubt Horus's successes were great and many, but can you pull up the relevant quotes with "worlds" conquered or something similar? From the sources I have readily available, I can't find any. Mostly what I find are vagaries.

There's nothing specifically with "worlds conquered" on Horus but I found some quotes from the Forge World books, as they seem to be the most authoritative and up-to-date source on the subject. The info's pretty vague as well though, but it's the same for all legions.

For more, I'd have to dig into more individual HH novels, codices (like what's written in the DA codex, already posted on the first page of this thread), and stuff like the Index Astates. Maybe in the future, travelling atm and can't really be bothered.

You'll be pleased that I found something on Guilliman as well:

During this period, the Ultramarines, by some records, succeeded in liberating more worlds than any other single Primarch's forces, and the planets Roboute Guilliman brought within the Imperium always benefited from his intense passion for efficient and ordered government.

pg 70 The Horus Heresy Book Five: Tempest

More worlds conquered but note the "by some records" and "during this period." It's a pretty long and vague passage, you can check it out if you want to. Now on to Horus:

Came across this while reading about the Iron Warriors:

While once the IVth had been amongst the most numerous of the Space Marines Legions... at least to the poin where several others had since eclipsed them in size and range, while certain other Legions, most notably the Luna Wolves and Dark Angels, outshone them in the glory and in the majesty of their conquests.

pg 107, The Horus Heresy Book Three: Extermination

From the section about the Sons of Horus:

Horus' charisma and unequalled record lent him a measure of respect unrivalled among his brother Primarchs, while Horus himself demonstrated an almost preternatural talent for wielding the relative strengths of the other Legions to their best advantage on a strategic level.

Horus was said by some to be without peer beneath the Emperor. Certainly he was rare amongst the Primarchs in that he commanded the respect and the loyalty of all, and backed it up with strategic and tactical genus. Others commanded larger Legions saw more deeply, excelled beyond Horus in certain crafts of warfare and lore, or perhaps drew greater fraternal affection, but only Horus could hold every view and ideal in his mind.

pg 69 The Horus Heresy Book 1 Betrayal

It was a victory unrivalled in its day in scale and importance.

pg 69 The Horus Heresy Book 1 Betrayal, on the Ullanor Crusade

For a second time reborn, the Sons of Horus had risen with their father to an unrivalled height.

pg 69 The Horus Heresy Book 1 Betrayal

Okay, that's it for now. Obviously a lot of it is a bit vague, and the "by some" applies to Horus as well as to Guilliman, but the overall trend still indicates that Horus was without equal.

Also, let's not forget though that the number of worlds conquered is hardly the only measure for military genius. And Guilliman seems to have been more rounded overall than someone like the Lion, being superior in logistics for example. But then again we don't think of Albert Speer (responsible for dramatically increasing Nazi's Germany's war production in the second half of the war) as a military genius, even though logistics is vitally important in war.

On the Lion, I suspect we'll have to wait for Book 7 in the FW Horus Heresy series (supposed to cover the Dark Angels and Blood Angels) for a full overview.

In the end though, Horus was the one the Emperor himself saw fit to raise above all others and to grant the title of Warmaster to.

I would point out there is a difference between a strategic master and a tactical master.

For Strategic, I would go for Robutte, Tactical, probably Horus, or though the Lion was also pretty good

I always thought that he was the best strategist, Guilliman the best at Logistics and Horus the best "warrior" in that he had a good mix of both of them. As a die hard BA and IH player and fan, there is a part of me that thinks if the Lion was present at Istaavan or Terra maybe both my primarchs may not have died.

Terra, maybe.

The Lion was a brilliant strategist. But thats not the same as greatest military genius because war is not a game of regicide. If he could have been given to the mechanicus to command battle automata, maybe.

He had (many) strengths but his key weakness was he was a crappy judge of people with extremely limited peopke skills (hence needing luther). In the opening stages of a civil war, where you don't know which side everyone's on (like istvaan) he's the absolute worst possible general, see-sawing between paranoia (the drop assault at macragge, killing nemiel) and naivete (accepting torpedo reloads from the mechanicum, handing the seige guns to perturabo for "safe keeping") with no real understanding of the fact ge was doing so.