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.
Amaya wrote: I don't understand why Marines are used as pilots or drivers at all. Yes, I know it is so chapters can be largely autonomous, but even in the fluff their is only so much a single Chapter's full complement can do before they require allies. Virtually all major conflicts consist of multiple detachments of Imperial forces coming predominantly from the Imperial Guard and Space Marines.
It seems to me that using an elite killing machine that can deal and sustain more damage than any guardsman on foot as a pilot or driver is a waste of resources. The same is true for using Marines in Heavy Weapons squads. The Imperial Guard has personnel resources to spare, Marines do not. Why utilize Marines as anything other than shock infantry when the Imperial Guard can supply adequate pilots, drivers, and fire support?
What you have to remember though is the fact that space marine chapters are self contained forces that supply themselves, recruit their own man power and maintain their own fleets. Throw this in with the fact that they are honour bound space kinghts that basically think themselves above normal humans in all fields as their god's ultimate tool of war then you will see why they have space marines to do everything. Sure, it isn't the most productive means to stick space marines on powder monkey duty but they will see it as being certainly better than letting any normal "man" do it.
Let's also remember that the imperium has lost a lot of knowledge that we have, for example the designs of leman russes are actually terrible due to their flat large panneled parts. This also is comming from the same regieme that thinks that sending over a million million men to their deaths per day for a single warzone as a meat shield is considered a light tactical manuver...
And they also think that Plasma Weapons that when you pull the trigger have a 1 in 6 chance of blowing up in your face killing you, is actually a damn good idea. The mind boggles at how big Plasma Gun production must be to make up these loses. LOL.
I've truly given up with fluff, it is all RETCONN'd every few years. DOOMRIDER!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Collecting Forge World 30k????? If you prefix any Thread Subject line on 30k or Pre-heresy or Horus Heresy with [30K] we can convince LEGO and the Admin team to create a 30K mini board if we can show there is enough interest!
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
mwnciboo wrote: And they also think that Plasma Weapons that when you pull the trigger have a 1 in 6 chance of blowing up in your face killing you, is actually a damn good idea. The mind boggles at how big Plasma Gun production must be to make up these loses. LOL.
I've truly given up with fluff, it is all RETCONN'd every few years. DOOMRIDER!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well, Gets Hot doesn't always mean the gun explodes. It can cover the gun actually exploding, but it also covers the weapon venting the excess heat and burning its wielder. The gun is fine, but the guy shooting it has 3rd degree burns on his forarms. But armor protects you from heat, hence why you can take an Armor save against it. And medics can treat burns so thats also why FnP works.
So a IG veteran that Gets Hot is probably on the ground screaming in agony or getting taken to the rear, but he has to bring the gun with him because its valuable equipment that requires training. No handing it off to another guy.
A marine that fails Gets Hot can represent the marine also heading to the rear to get proper medical treatment.
Both could be the gun actually exploding, but not the majority of the time. Imperial Plasma is a danger to its user, the weapon itself will be fine 99% of the time.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Where it falls apart for me is that daemon hunters with near-flawless teleportation technology who fight ephemeral beings that pop in and out of existence need tanks in the first place.
So they can sell tank models.
Duh.
Marneus Calgar is referred to as "one of the Imperium's greatest tacticians" and he treats the Codex like it's the War Bible. If the Codex is garbage, then how bad is everyone else?
mwnciboo wrote: And they also think that Plasma Weapons that when you pull the trigger have a 1 in 6 chance of blowing up in your face killing you, is actually a damn good idea. The mind boggles at how big Plasma Gun production must be to make up these loses. LOL.
I've truly given up with fluff, it is all RETCONN'd every few years. DOOMRIDER!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well, Gets Hot doesn't always mean the gun explodes. It can cover the gun actually exploding, but it also covers the weapon venting the excess heat and burning its wielder. The gun is fine, but the guy shooting it has 3rd degree burns on his forarms. But armor protects you from heat, hence why you can take an Armor save against it. And medics can treat burns so thats also why FnP works.
So a IG veteran that Gets Hot is probably on the ground screaming in agony or getting taken to the rear, but he has to bring the gun with him because its valuable equipment that requires training. No handing it off to another guy.
A marine that fails Gets Hot can represent the marine also heading to the rear to get proper medical treatment.
Both could be the gun actually exploding, but not the majority of the time. Imperial Plasma is a danger to its user, the weapon itself will be fine 99% of the time.
Okay fair one, I didn't think that through, but the fundamental premise is that Space Marines get hurt by it, Imperial Guards get hurt by it. Not generally a good idea to have a weapon that 1 in every 6 times it fires it can wound the firer.
Collecting Forge World 30k????? If you prefix any Thread Subject line on 30k or Pre-heresy or Horus Heresy with [30K] we can convince LEGO and the Admin team to create a 30K mini board if we can show there is enough interest!
Well 1 shot from a lasgun or bolter is not actually 1 shot but an entire burst of fire. I think that may apply to plasmaguns as well. I don't think 1 in 6 rounds actually cause an overheat.
Don't take "burst fire" literally - as in, one pull of the trigger = 3 rounds salvo. What KC is (probably) referring to is the gun's owner ducking out of cover, shooting a single blast, ducking back down again, sprinting a couple meters, shooting again ... that sort of stuff, all in a single turn and represented by a single throw of the dice. Abstraction.
2012/09/19 17:09:12
Subject: Re:Are Space Marines be used incorrectly?
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
yeah, and its not 1 in every 6 shots will misfire. Its not like the marine says "I've shot it 5 times already, I better wait a little bit"
Its a 16% probability that the weapon will overheat on any one shot. it may never overheat(which represents the user taking every precaution and safety feature) and it may oveheat on each and every shot(representing the user not taking the precautions)
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
And the only reason it's a 16% chance is because we're stuck with a D6 system. In stories and in the fluff, plasma weapons do not blow up so often they kill/maim their user 1 out of 6 times, because that simply makes no sense. It's an abstraction for game purposes.
Battlefleet Gothic ships and markers at my store, GrimDarkBits:
2012/09/19 22:12:06
Subject: Re:Are Space Marines be used incorrectly?
Grey Templar wrote: yeah, and its not 1 in every 6 shots will misfire. Its not like the marine says "I've shot it 5 times already, I better wait a little bit"
Marines send three squads to beat a company of guard, and then fight another company of guard. They don't have armored companies;* they have a sergeant commanding two other squads and wishing some of those marines could move 17 miles per hour while firing autocannons. Instead of a full tactical squad, one sergeant gets a pair of predators and a mechanized combat squad. Easy-peasy.
So thirty-five marines tear through town relying on power to beat the guys in front of them before the reinforcements arrive. When tank armor fails, there are no battle lines or rear areas to fall back to. It's more like there are a bunch of burna boys right on top of the tank and the drivers still need to meltabomb that thing they were shooting at because nobody else is going to do it.
2012/09/19 23:55:34
Subject: Re:Are Space Marines be used incorrectly?
I just think its nonsensical for the Imperium to not use everything in its ideal role .
You make a false assumption that the Imperium is really coordinating all combat actions in any sort of logical/efficient way.
Space marine chapters can be rather autonomous at times. They undertake actions to further their own interests and holdings at times. They choose the way they wish to wage war. They are not really on a short leash nor under constant Imperial observation or order.
Space marines have the things you describe because they can and because it serves their own purposes.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/09/19 23:56:11
Amaya wrote: Well, I used to think that Imperial Guard organization was slowed, but then I realized that GW is British and are more familiar with the regimental system then the continental one so its only natural that they would order the Guard into Regiments.
I've got to say IG Regiments are like the same as a Brigade or Light Division. Look at the Tanith 1st and Only they were like what 3000 -5000 and that was written by a Brit. Most British Regiments in the late Victorian Era were made of Multiple Battalions 2-7. In the modern Era, we have reduced to Battalion size Regiments with maybe a Reservist battalion attached.
Soviet Regiments were different again, look at USMC Regiments for a different organisation again. You can even have Regiments of Corps, such as the Regiment of Artillery in the Indian Army.
The term Regiment is very different depending on Doctrine, historical factors and also differing military traditions.
No. It has nothing to do with unit size. Quotes from Wikipedia in spoilers.
Regimental System and Continental System
Spoiler:
n the regimental system, each regiment is responsible for recruiting, training, and administration; each regiment is permanently maintained and therefore the regiment will develop its unique esprit de corps because of its unitary history, traditions, recruitment, and function. Usually, the regiment is responsible for recruiting and administrating all of a soldier's military career. Depending upon the country, regiments can be either combat units or administrative units or both.
This is often contrasted to the "continental system" adopted by many other armies. In the continental system, the division is the functional army unit, and its commander the administrator of every aspect of the formation: his staff train and administer the soldiers, officers, and commanders of the division's subordinate units. Generally, divisions are garrisoned together and share the same installations: thus, in divisional administration, a battalion commanding officer is just another officer in a chain of command. Soldiers and officers are transferred in and out of divisions as required.
Some regiments recruited from specific geographical areas, and usually incorporated the place name into the regimental name. In other cases, regiments would recruit from a given age group within a nation (e.g. Zulu Impis), an ethnic group (e.g. the Gurkhas), or foreigners (e.g. the French Foreign Legion). In other cases, new regiments were raised for new functions within an army; e.g. the Fusiliers, the Parachute Regiment (British Army), and the U.S. Army 75th Ranger Regiment.
Disadvantages of the regimental system are hazardous regimental competition, a lack of interchangeability between units of different regiments, and more pronounced "old boy networks" within the military that may hamper efficiency and fairness.
A key aspect of the regimental system is that the regiment or battalion is the fundamental tactical building block. This flows historically from the colonial period, when battalions were widely dispersed and virtually autonomous, but is easily adapted to a number of different purposes. For example, a regiment might include different types of battalions (e.g. infantry or artillery) of different origins (e.g. regular or reserve).
Within the regimental system, soldiers, and usually officers, are always posted to a tactical unit of their own regiment whenever posted to field duty. In addition to combat units, other organizations are very much part of the regimental family: regimental training schools, serving members on "extra-regimental employment", regimental associations (retirees), bands and associated cadet groups. The aspects that an administrative regiment might have in common include a symbolic colonel-in-chief (often a member of the royal family), a colonel of the regiment or "honorary colonel" who protects the traditions and interests of the regimental family and insists on the maintenance of high standards, battle honours (honours earned by one unit of an administrative regiment are credited to the regiment), ceremonial uniforms, cap badges, peculiarities of insignia, stable belts, and regimental marches and songs. The regiment usually has a traditional "home station", which is often a historic garrison that houses the regimental museum and regimental headquarters. The latter has a modest staff to support regimental committees and administer both the regular members and the association(s) of retired members.
Brother Thomas wrote:I guess in a way amaya or whatever is right. Us marines are by no way superior, however i guarantee you most grunts i know can take you 1 v 1. Now youre probly gonna tell me youve done xyz martial arts and your bench is 400. I dont care. Its irrelevant, were crazy bastards
We really don't need any keyboard warriors out here. Basic infantrymen come in all shapes, sizes, and levels of skill.
Omegus wrote:But yes, this can be incredibly stupid, like the Grey Knights tasking their own to drive Rhinos. Really? You have a one in a billion type of individual... the genetic potential to survive the transformation into a Space Marine, a powerful psyker who isn't insane or possessed, and the strength of will to pass the trials and resist corruption.... and you have him driving a transport?
Well, it makes sense when you consider how much the Astartes value these vehicles.
Also, would you really trust someone who may actually get possessed by a daemon accompany you into battle against them, with a bigass tank whose cannons can quickly swivel around to blast your ceramite armour to bits?
Where it falls apart for me is that daemon hunters with near-flawless teleportation technology who fight ephemeral beings that pop in and out of existence need tanks in the first place.
Exactly.
CT GAMER wrote:
Amaya wrote:
I just think its nonsensical for the Imperium to not use everything in its ideal role .
You make a false assumption that the Imperium is really coordinating all combat actions in any sort of logical/efficient way.
Space marine chapters can be rather autonomous at times. They undertake actions to further their own interests and holdings at times. They choose the way they wish to wage war. They are not really on a short leash nor under constant Imperial observation or order.
Space marines have the things you describe because they can and because it serves their own purposes.
No, I didn't, but you make a false assumption in assuming that I did. It is well known that the Imperium is corrupt, inefficient, and at times downright slowed. I merely brought up Space Marines, because I have never seen anyone discuss whether or not Space Marines were being deployed appropriately.
Having individual branches/services i.e. the various Ordos of the Inquisition, the Space Marine Chapters, the Imperial Guard, and the Sisters of Battle interested in furthering their own goals instead of the Imperium's goals is detrimental to the war effort. The Imperium needs to be more cohesive.
In the grim darkness of the far future there is only bureaucracy.
When the legions were broken up the new bureaucratic rules say no guardsman, soldiers, or sailors for marine chapters. They have servitors, but servitors are of very limited uses.
The extra bulk is a real detriment inside a vehicle, but the extra human abilities would really help fighter pilots. Net result marine fliers would have an advantage in a dogfight, no real advantages for marine tanks.
End result doesn't matter much. When you look at the size and scope of the sm chapters to the ig the marines really don't count towards that much of the imperium's might. Being 1 in a million there is about 200,000 guardsmen in the imperium per marine.
Chaos isn’t a pit. Chaos is a ladder. Many who try to climb it fail, and never get to try again. The fall breaks them. And some are given a chance to climb, but refuse. They cling to the realm, or love, or the gods…illusions. Only the ladder is real. The climb is all there is, but they’ll never know this. Not until it’s too late.
What have done with my chapter is that I have included a large amount of details about how the chapters non-astartes work and operate, there are veterans and ships-men that deal with daily activities and are also security for the vessels along with the Astartes.
They also relay comms, messages, fix equipment and also maintain another duties. They are also selected to become leaders or Astartes later in life they survive that long. That way the Astartes ships aren't just protected by a small handful of serfs. But a small army of elite security teams that respond to any event.
Just a thought. If you wish to use your marines as how the modern world uses them go ahead. No shame in using gurellia warfare and squad based tactics.
Astartes are as mishandled as the Spartans at Reach.
They are never deployed properly. They just have plot armor to make up the difference.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/09/20 02:31:53
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
Amaya wrote: Well, I used to think that Imperial Guard organization was slowed, but then I realized that GW is British and are more familiar with the regimental system then the continental one so its only natural that they would order the Guard into Regiments.
I've got to say IG Regiments are like the same as a Brigade or Light Division. Look at the Tanith 1st and Only they were like what 3000 -5000 and that was written by a Brit. Most British Regiments in the late Victorian Era were made of Multiple Battalions 2-7. In the modern Era, we have reduced to Battalion size Regiments with maybe a Reservist battalion attached.
Soviet Regiments were different again, look at USMC Regiments for a different organisation again. You can even have Regiments of Corps, such as the Regiment of Artillery in the Indian Army.
The term Regiment is very different depending on Doctrine, historical factors and also differing military traditions.
No. It has nothing to do with unit size. Quotes from Wikipedia in spoilers.
Regimental System and Continental System
Spoiler:
n the regimental system, each regiment is responsible for recruiting, training, and administration; each regiment is permanently maintained and therefore the regiment will develop its unique esprit de corps because of its unitary history, traditions, recruitment, and function. Usually, the regiment is responsible for recruiting and administrating all of a soldier's military career. Depending upon the country, regiments can be either combat units or administrative units or both.
This is often contrasted to the "continental system" adopted by many other armies. In the continental system, the division is the functional army unit, and its commander the administrator of every aspect of the formation: his staff train and administer the soldiers, officers, and commanders of the division's subordinate units. Generally, divisions are garrisoned together and share the same installations: thus, in divisional administration, a battalion commanding officer is just another officer in a chain of command. Soldiers and officers are transferred in and out of divisions as required.
Some regiments recruited from specific geographical areas, and usually incorporated the place name into the regimental name. In other cases, regiments would recruit from a given age group within a nation (e.g. Zulu Impis), an ethnic group (e.g. the Gurkhas), or foreigners (e.g. the French Foreign Legion). In other cases, new regiments were raised for new functions within an army; e.g. the Fusiliers, the Parachute Regiment (British Army), and the U.S. Army 75th Ranger Regiment.
Disadvantages of the regimental system are hazardous regimental competition, a lack of interchangeability between units of different regiments, and more pronounced "old boy networks" within the military that may hamper efficiency and fairness.
A key aspect of the regimental system is that the regiment or battalion is the fundamental tactical building block. This flows historically from the colonial period, when battalions were widely dispersed and virtually autonomous, but is easily adapted to a number of different purposes. For example, a regiment might include different types of battalions (e.g. infantry or artillery) of different origins (e.g. regular or reserve).
Within the regimental system, soldiers, and usually officers, are always posted to a tactical unit of their own regiment whenever posted to field duty. In addition to combat units, other organizations are very much part of the regimental family: regimental training schools, serving members on "extra-regimental employment", regimental associations (retirees), bands and associated cadet groups. The aspects that an administrative regiment might have in common include a symbolic colonel-in-chief (often a member of the royal family), a colonel of the regiment or "honorary colonel" who protects the traditions and interests of the regimental family and insists on the maintenance of high standards, battle honours (honours earned by one unit of an administrative regiment are credited to the regiment), ceremonial uniforms, cap badges, peculiarities of insignia, stable belts, and regimental marches and songs. The regiment usually has a traditional "home station", which is often a historic garrison that houses the regimental museum and regimental headquarters. The latter has a modest staff to support regimental committees and administer both the regular members and the association(s) of retired members.
Brother Thomas wrote:I guess in a way amaya or whatever is right. Us marines are by no way superior, however i guarantee you most grunts i know can take you 1 v 1. Now youre probly gonna tell me youve done xyz martial arts and your bench is 400. I dont care. Its irrelevant, were crazy bastards
We really don't need any keyboard warriors out here. Basic infantrymen come in all shapes, sizes, and levels of skill.
Omegus wrote:But yes, this can be incredibly stupid, like the Grey Knights tasking their own to drive Rhinos. Really? You have a one in a billion type of individual... the genetic potential to survive the transformation into a Space Marine, a powerful psyker who isn't insane or possessed, and the strength of will to pass the trials and resist corruption.... and you have him driving a transport?
Well, it makes sense when you consider how much the Astartes value these vehicles.
Also, would you really trust someone who may actually get possessed by a daemon accompany you into battle against them, with a bigass tank whose cannons can quickly swivel around to blast your ceramite armour to bits?
Where it falls apart for me is that daemon hunters with near-flawless teleportation technology who fight ephemeral beings that pop in and out of existence need tanks in the first place.
Exactly.
CT GAMER wrote:
Amaya wrote:
I just think its nonsensical for the Imperium to not use everything in its ideal role .
You make a false assumption that the Imperium is really coordinating all combat actions in any sort of logical/efficient way.
Space marine chapters can be rather autonomous at times. They undertake actions to further their own interests and holdings at times. They choose the way they wish to wage war. They are not really on a short leash nor under constant Imperial observation or order.
Space marines have the things you describe because they can and because it serves their own purposes.
No, I didn't, but you make a false assumption in assuming that I did. It is well known that the Imperium is corrupt, inefficient, and at times downright slowed. I merely brought up Space Marines, because I have never seen anyone discuss whether or not Space Marines were being deployed appropriately.
Having individual branches/services i.e. the various Ordos of the Inquisition, the Space Marine Chapters, the Imperial Guard, and the Sisters of Battle interested in furthering their own goals instead of the Imperium's goals is detrimental to the war effort. The Imperium needs to be more cohesive.
You stated the imperium was not "using" marines ideally which is a false premise. I was responding to your statement by pointing out that it isnt a failure of some Imperial high command to use them properly because they dont have control over them to begin with. It is the freedom and status of the marines themselves that allows them to do as they please regardless of outside criticism of their ways. In general they kill enemies of the Imperium and are revered as favored sons, and this allows thema long leash when it cmes to their practices.
The Imperium doesnt "use" the marines really per se: The marines often deploy themselves as they see fit, where they see fit and in a manner of their choosing. They would continue to do this even if some central Imperial authority tried to "use them ideally" and would prbably take great offense that some outsider would dare try to dictate orders and equippage to them as if they are common guardsmen.
Space marine independence and pride is blinding at times, and this is the main cause of less than ideal usage of their resources/manpower far more so then any failure by some Imperial High Command directive.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/09/20 02:50:43
Iin the regimental system, each regiment is responsible for recruiting, training, and administration; each regiment is permanently maintained and therefore the regiment will develop its unique esprit de corps because of its unitary history, traditions, recruitment, and function
.
Regiments do not always conform to the Definition put forward for "Regimental System and Continental System" within Wikipedia.
It is to broad brush, the point I was making is that it can be used in many different interpretations of the term "Regiment" depending on History, Tradition and Doctorine.
I used the size as quick example of obvious differences. You are talking specifically about the "Regimental System and Continental System". I was talking about the term Regiment.
Again from Wiki, REGIMENT is defined as...
A regiment is a title used by some military units. The size of a regiment varies markedly, depending on the country and the arm of service.
Historically, in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, a full-strength regiment was typically supposed to be a thousand men, and was commanded by a colonel.
Today, there is no set size for a unit calling itself a "regiment", which may be:
Less than a battalion-equivalent, e.g. Regiment of Life Guards
A battalion-equivalent, e.g. 3rd Foreign Infantry Regiment
A number of battalions (or equivalents, such as US squadrons) e.g. Royal Regiment of Scotland, 2nd Infantry Regiment (United States)
An entire arm of service; In several commonwealth countries, the entire artillery arm is often titled "regiment" (e.g. the Regiment of Artillery), and may then be sub-divided into "field regiments".
It's like I was talking about Vehicles and you started specifically talking about Cars, a specific example. So I don't disagree with what you are saying, it's just that we are talking about different things.
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2012/09/20 09:42:52
Collecting Forge World 30k????? If you prefix any Thread Subject line on 30k or Pre-heresy or Horus Heresy with [30K] we can convince LEGO and the Admin team to create a 30K mini board if we can show there is enough interest!
That's what I would do.
