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.

thought the robotman would be winning this hands down, looks like he's getting some competition

 rednecroncryptek wrote:
Obviously it is Horus, I mean - he almost took over Terra for sake! Getting there would be damn near impossible in the 'current' millenia 40, and then Russ, coz I love 'im.

Horus' tactics are rumored to all be done by..
drumroll..
Alpharius.

..........


The Lion. Hands down.


Horus was a politician.. that's why he was warmaster.

Sanginius also was a good politician. Neither was the strategic equal to the Lion

Gulliman was great at LOGISTICS. He could move resources very efficiently and bring worlds and bureaucracy to a more streamlined fashion. He was NOT the equal to the Lion in strategy. Using the Codex Astartes as an example of this is like saying that the book that came with my pick-up truck is the definitive literature on automobiles. The Legions fought to great success without it. The Dark Angels. Spacewolves, Iron Hands, Raven Guard and a whole host of successors still fight without following it. The only reason that is was followed so widely was because Gulliman forced it down the few remaining Primarchs throats. Attacking Dorn when he wouldn't follow it as an example.


You can have all the resources in the world.. that doesn't mean you'll win wars. With such a huge legion to start with he should have EASILY surpassed the Lion and Horus's compliance totals... but he didn't. Why? Because he's a bureaucrat... not a general. Sure h can fill that role well, but not compared to some of his brothers level. If the Lion (or Horus) wold have had his numbers their compliance rate would have been astronomical.


Of course... comparing primarchs is comparing near equals, so the margins of difference is sometimes close. .


What? don't believe me?


Then why are the Unforgiven STILL a Legion?

Typheran wrote:
Then why are the Unforgiven STILL a Legion?

Humm wat? They aren't. Mind you, I agree with the Lion, with the exception that Horus was still better then him, but then it's an unfair comparison... Horus was the best at everything, basically. Between the 19 (or 20) others, the best strategist/tactician was the Lion.

But the Unforgiven aren't a Legion. 4-5 Chapters keeping close ties to each other doesn't make a Legion. Hell, by that standard the Black Templars would be the most uber awesome strategists/tacticians ever.

Alpharius/Omegon hands down!

Fluff wise I believe the Lion would be the greatest tactician of the Primarchs. No debate that Alpharius, Horus and Guilliman were good tacticians, however each had a bit of a falling.

Alpharius' legion seems very good at one thing and that is subterfuge. Whilst you can do this instead of say, laying siege to a city, sometimes that city just HAS TO be siege and I don't think the Alpha legion would go about this in the most efficient way.
Guilliman's Codex was torn apart by the Tyranids as they were unlike any other foe ever encountered, granted the ultramarines did succeed but thats because certain captains believe "nuts to the codex I'll fight this war how I want to", then promptly get censored.

As for the Lion stacking up to Horus, I believe reasons the Lion was not made warmaster is because of a few of his personal failings. The Lion is not a good judge of character or diplomatic, shown by him counseling Nemeil on the purity of.... someone I can't remeber, causing Nemeil to actually question the Lions ability to judge character, then there was that whole "Giver Perturabo unholy siege tank" thing. And on Calaban Luther was is diplomat. Secondly because he;s not a people person, as seen in the short story where the Lion KARATE CHOPS NEMEILS HEAD OFF!

Horus, However is not only a great tactician, but also a diplomat and a charasmatic person, more than just a leader of men.

Typheran wrote:
..........


The Lion. Hands down.


Horus was a politician.. that's why he was warmaster.

Sanginius also was a good politician. Neither was the strategic equal to the Lion

Gulliman was great at LOGISTICS. He could move resources very efficiently and bring worlds and bureaucracy to a more streamlined fashion. He was NOT the equal to the Lion in strategy. Using the Codex Astartes as an example of this is like saying that the book that came with my pick-up truck is the definitive literature on automobiles. The Legions fought to great success without it. The Dark Angels. Spacewolves, Iron Hands, Raven Guard and a whole host of successors still fight without following it. The only reason that is was followed so widely was because Gulliman forced it down the few remaining Primarchs throats. Attacking Dorn when he wouldn't follow it as an example.


You can have all the resources in the world.. that doesn't mean you'll win wars. With such a huge legion to start with he should have EASILY surpassed the Lion and Horus's compliance totals... but he didn't. Why? Because he's a bureaucrat... not a general. Sure h can fill that role well, but not compared to some of his brothers level. If the Lion (or Horus) wold have had his numbers their compliance rate would have been astronomical.

This was a ridiculously awesome and nonsensical rant for your first post. Bravo, good sir, bravo.

It's important to note that the Ultramarines were consistently noted as among the most successful legions. Their worlds brought into compliance were also known as among the most progressed and stable. The large numbers were due to the sold recruitment and training infrastructure Guilliman left in his wake. And yes, some bit of fluff have suggested the Dark Angels won more battles than the Ultramarines, though if you try to find all the instances of which primarch/legion won the most battles, you'll find examples that suggest the Sons of Horus, Space Wolves and Ultramarines as well.

But saying Guilliman wasn't a general? That's like going full slow. And you never go full slow. Everyone knows that. Plus, the Dark Angels are a Codex chapter, lol. So are the Iron Hands and Raven Guard. They all make their own tweaks to the organizational structure and the Raven Guard have their own preferred methods (which, it should be noted, are covered by the Codex so the Raven Guard are just more specialized, not necessarily "better" than other chapters). The Codex isn't like your car's manual. It's like surveying every great mechanic ever and combining every auto repair manual ever published into one thing so that you could fix or improve every car ever made.

Robinson92 wrote:
Guilliman's Codex was torn apart by the Tyranids as they were unlike any other foe ever encountered, granted the ultramarines did succeed but thats because certain captains believe "nuts to the codex I'll fight this war how I want to", then promptly get censored..

Censured, lol.

I've always kind of chuckled at this idea of the Tyranids being too weird for the Codex, as if there would be no tactics for swarming horde aliens. Then again, I think this bit of fluff comes from the 4th Edition Space Marines codex, which was written by Graham McNeill, who is probably the worst of the guys who writes Space Marines fluff. McNeill seems to really have no grasp on how warfare actually works, so this sounds like something he'd have written. The original story of the Battle of Macragge just had the Tyranid fleets so massive and unrelenting that they overwhelmed all resistance. And technically, it was Calgar's brilliant maneuvering in space that allowed the combined fleets to stop Behemoth. So I don't really know where this idea of a handful of captains doing their own thing came from.


Though, more on topic, it's important to note that it's not really a failing of Guilliman's either way. He probably would have found a way to fight the Tyranids. If the Space Marine commanders 10,000 years later couldn't, that's a different thing entirely.

As it had been said, strategy and tactics are not the same thing.
Hence, for me, we have:

Guilliman is the best "regent", imo, but he goes too much "by the book" to be the best tactician/strategist
Horus "delegates" much to the mournival (and when he does not, he makes mistakes)

Alpharius is the Intelligence men (typo intended )

On tactics (short term results, which in SM point of view is the compliance of a planet, a city for a 'normal warrior' ) I think we could put on top Russ, Kahn, with maybe the wolf king a bit "in the lead".

On strategy (long term) I see the Lion and the Angel: Jonson 'conquers' a planet with normal 'dark ages' men with a years-long plan (Luther is the charismatic one, the speaker, not the planner); Sanguinius has simply great potential for strategy, from his visions.

So, since the question was about tactics, I answered "Russ"

Sorry for the bump, but just want to know if the consensus is that its The Lion?