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.

kveldulf wrote:

Well, as far as the whole conquering a world stuff, I've always seen space marines as having to be apart of other military forces to accomplish such things, or anything like that (grand scale). Their use in most theatres, in my mind, are essentially deploying them for very high critical objectives - given by theater commanders - and also acting as autonomous branches of the larger imperial force - in vague coordination with the militarum. Their effeciency is so great, it tips the scale, and sometimes dramatically.

'Apart of other military forces'? A highly critical objective? Sure. No hassle. And this is what I'd like to see more. However,They're frequently depicted conquering cities/conducting whole campaigns defeating whole armies etc and doing it all on their own. And often on a company level. One hundred soldiers. The practicalities and logistics don't make sense.

kveldulf wrote:

As far as them recruiting the best of the best, keep in mind, it is the best of the best among youngins (who could perhaps sometimes surpass the ability of adult warriors), not to be confused in terms that they are truly best among the adults. Also, it isn't just 12 years old, but i think the range is somewhere between 10-15 Ish?

Uh huh, and these ten year olds are masters of battle because? Ten year olds? Come off it mate. I can't see the child soldiers of Sierra Leone as exemplars of military doctrine. Practicalities and logistics don't make sense.

kveldulf wrote:

Also, mechanics wise, yes, you can gauge with dice, like the 20% kill rate thing, whether or not that is appropriate; being closer or further to lore. Please, explain to me how you this is absolute rubbish? How is attempting to better represent lore via rules a matter you cannot do? I'm not asking for 100% perfection of their portrayal in rules, but definitely something closer than what we currently have.

How can you gauge with dice when the tabletop game doesn't represent the lore? The two don't align.

You're misrepresentimg my argument. you were using the current game stats as justification for your arguments that marines are poor. This was what was absolute rubbish. Game =/= lore. It's that simple.

Asking for rules to represent the lore more accurately? Different argument entirely, and one I'm not against.