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.

Are space marines in the 41st millennium tougher then those in the 31st millennium (on average)?

Here is how I have been thinking on it...


31st millennium
It seems to me that to make 1000000 space marines for the great crusades the selection process must have been much easier then it is in the year 40k meaning a 40k marine is, on average, tougher then a 30k marine. So I ran some numbers to try to see this difference and tried to keep my numbers fair.

Here are some percentages to start with (based on British stats)
80 000 000 people
10 000 000 teenagers
5 000 000 male teens = 6.25% of population

SAS selection percentage:
20 000 000 = Working men in Britain
121,800 = 0.609% (in army regulars - I know not all are men but mehh...)
500 = 0.0025% or 1 in 40000 make the SAS

You need a male between ages of 10 - 18 to create a space marine. The Emps created around 1 million (on average 50000 per legion x 20). In order to have that many space marines (using SAS selection) he needs a population of around:
Terra population= 1000000 * 16 (6.25% male teens) * 40000 (0.0025% make it into SAS)
Terra population= 640 000 000 000, that's 640 Billion people.

So it stands to reason that Terra, in the year 30k, needed to have a population of around 640Bn people to create 1 million space marines using SAS selection standards. Sounds feasible since the population of Terra is unknown, but believed to be in the hundreds of billions.


41st millennium
So now the "current day" space marine.
What is said is that aspirants are selected from humanities finest warriors, now here I have had to make up a percentage to define "finest warriors", I chose 1% (generous?...maybe but anything smaller works even more in favour of 40k marine being tougher).
It is said that from thousands of those selected, that only around 50 make it to aspirants. Then from many other sources we know only a handful make it to space marines (most die). So lets say of 5000 selected, only 5 make it. This means that only 0.1% make the cut.
So to make a space marine in 40k, you need to be top 0.1% of the top 1%, i.e. 0.00001%, that's 1 in 10,000,000


Summary
To make it as a space marine:
In 30k: 1 in 40,000
In 40k: 1 in 10,000,000

So it appears to be much tougher to become a space marine in 41 millennium by many orders of magnitude.
But the original question is are space marines any tougher because of it? - they still have the same enhancements and training etc... so it must come down to the mental aspects...

Thoughts?...

Considering roughly 50% of the original Astartes rebelled, and in more modern times, it is less than that (although they still fall to Chaos at a pretty good pace), I would say there is some larger amounts of indoctrination. That said, I don't believe it is part of the Space Marine process, but instead it is a product of the Imperium's wider culture.

Modern marines are watered down by quite a large margin, this is represented in deathwatch by the primarchs curse trait, they suffer from gene seed breakdown to a much larger extent, they also have lost a lot of tech and processes that make marines properly, being ritualised in a lot of chapters.

As to more powerful, physically I'd say they are the same, but modern marines don't seem to be able to reach the same peaks that 30k marines have, at least not on the tabletop.

Mentally 30k marines are ahead by a very large margin, but I think this is intentional, 30k marines rebelled, no Legion was totally loyal, so psychoindoctrination was ramped up to much higher than 30k marines had, training was changed in a lot of chapters to a younger age too.

I'd say that modern marines are better in one regard- experience. Astartes during the Great Crusade were fairly young (IIRC wasn't the GC only 200 years long), primarily fought a variety of minor xenos empires, and only had real experience dealing with Orks. Astartes of M41 meanwhile have regular experience fighting Orks, Tyranids, Necrons, Eldar, and even Chaos Space Marines.

I'd say so. Heresy Era Marines always struck me as pretty naff compared to the magna cum laude school of hard knocks graduates of M41.
If I recall correctly it's also been mentioned in the fluff that after the Heresy Guilliman ironed out the flaws in the Astartes creation process which had lead to physical and mental weakness.
So if their gene-seed is still working okay, then I could imagine that the modern Marines are intrinsically physically superior in addition to their better attitudes.

I have always thought it to be the reverse, that 30k marines were far tougher and more powerful than 40k marines.

My logic.

1. 40k marines have 30,000 years of genetic deterioration to contend with. Ok some might suggest this could lead to improvement but this is the grimdark so I am discounting that completely
2. 30k marines have access to much better tech, most of 40k tech is the last dregs of remembered lore from the early days of the imperium


Counter Argument, ways in which 40k marines are "better" than 30k

1. Indoctrination and control. Seems that 40k marines undergo much more psych indoctrination and are much more ridgedly controlled
2. Loyalty, I look at this not as them being more loyal to the Imperium but less loyal to their Primarchs perhaps. In 30k most marines looked to their Primarch before anything else.

With regards to the "experience" question it really comes down to are we talking about the start of the Great Crusade or the end? or the end of the Heresy even? If we are talking theend, then I would suggest nothing that is happening in 40k could give a marine (general run of the mill marine not Dante!!) more experience than fighting a crusade across the whole galaxy.

To the OP I would ask why use different statistics to figure out what percentage would get through to be marines? What the logic of it being any tougher to become a marine in 30k to 40k?

For me any reason for is to be tougher to become a marine in 40k is totally down to no one understanding the science anymore and them basically winging it coupled with out of date geneseed meaning a low success rate.

I think you mean 10,000 years of genetic deterioration : )

To the OP I would ask why use different statistics to figure out what percentage would get through to be marines? What the logic of it being any tougher to become a marine in 30k to 40k?

For me any reason for is to be tougher to become a marine in 40k is totally down to no one understanding the science anymore and them basically winging it coupled with out of date geneseed meaning a low success rate.

I think its relevant because...well, lets say you just take any old kid off the streets and made them marines.... true they will be tough b****rds, but there "base" level will be lower (because you are taking weedy kids in the mix - both mentally and physically). Physical defects I suppose can be over come... but week mentally?

So what I am saying is that the pass rate to be accepted as a space marine in 30k is (seemingly) lower and therefore are possibly mentally weaker. Surely selecting the correct candidate is everything, otherwise why are they so rigid? why bother having a selection at all?.... why not replace marines on a conveyor belt with whichever kid happens to be nearby?

Note: I am not saying SAS are weak, I am just saying that selection process is not as tough as the one in 40k (theoretically)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

2. 30k marines have access to much better tech, most of 40k tech is the last dregs of remembered lore from the early days of the imperium

I would disagree with this one. The tech has not really changed much. The year 30k is already "backwards" in tech, they have lost so much knowledge in the age of strife. Generally they do not want to progress/deviate too much as this is seen as blasphemous (in many cases)... the Mechanicum seem only interested in holy STDs from the golden age of technology (correct if I am wring here).

But also, there is progress. E.g. crusade era power armour is far inferior to current day mk VIII armour. And the bolters have gone through various pattern improvements.... what else is there for the average a space marine?... combat knife? No, your average SM is more or less exactly the same in terms of equipment (probably slightly worse)...

Another example is Terminator armour had only just been invented during GC and has been refined over the millennia.

Also I would like to point out that Marines in 30k were actually using inferior tech. MK IV armor is weaker in armor durability compared to MK VII, and the only real thing they have over 40k marines in chapter-to-chapter strength is proliferation of autocannons and power weapons.

It may be that the age restrictions that exist in the the 40k Space Marine creation process (recruits have to be teenagers) did not exist in 30k. We have several direct examples of adults becoming full Space Marines (Russ's followers and Jonson's knights), and even old men being made into semi-Space Marines (Kor Phearon, Luther).
Maybe the creation process used in 30k was more powerful or more effective, allowing for more recruits to be made into Space Marines.

 Wyzilla wrote:
Also I would like to point out that Marines in 30k were actually using inferior tech. MK IV armor is weaker in armor durability compared to MK VII, and the only real thing they have over 40k marines in chapter-to-chapter strength is proliferation of autocannons and power weapons.

Not true, mkvii was developed pre heresy and used towards the very end.

 Formosa wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:
Also I would like to point out that Marines in 30k were actually using inferior tech. MK IV armor is weaker in armor durability compared to MK VII, and the only real thing they have over 40k marines in chapter-to-chapter strength is proliferation of autocannons and power weapons.

Not true, mkvii was developed pre heresy and used towards the very end.

Yes, and virtually nobody used it.

Yes, I always thought 31 st millennium marines better than those of 40k.
Some tech have been lost/aren't understood anymore, they have implants failures, they have worse equipment....
I don't recall exactly where, but I read a little paragraph where chaos marines attack loyalist marines, in trench.
During the fight, the chaos lord kill a marine pretty easily and think that the "new" marines are weak and definitely don't deserve to rule the galaxy, unlike the previous one who where maybe worth it.
Something like that.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:
Also I would like to point out that Marines in 30k were actually using inferior tech. MK IV armor is weaker in armor durability compared to MK VII, and the only real thing they have over 40k marines in chapter-to-chapter strength is proliferation of autocannons and power weapons.

Not true, mkvii was developed pre heresy and used towards the very end.

Yes, and virtually nobody used it.

So it's not better tech, it's entirely consistent tech with 30k, mkviii is better though, 10k years to make a neckguard, madness.

Infact you'd be very hard pressed to find any modern tech that's better than the hh tech, Spartans, sicarions in abundance, volkites, plasma etc. They had more of everything we would consider "relic" tech.

Even things like newer developments are not as good as the true version, ironclad is nothing on the leviathan for example.

 Formosa wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:
Also I would like to point out that Marines in 30k were actually using inferior tech. MK IV armor is weaker in armor durability compared to MK VII, and the only real thing they have over 40k marines in chapter-to-chapter strength is proliferation of autocannons and power weapons.

Not true, mkvii was developed pre heresy and used towards the very end.

Yes, and virtually nobody used it.

So it's not better tech, it's entirely consistent tech with 30k, mkviii is better though, 10k years to make a neckguard, madness.

Infact you'd be very hard pressed to find any modern tech that's better than the hh tech, Spartans, sicarions in abundance, volkites, plasma etc. They had more of everything we would consider "relic" tech.

Even things like newer developments are not as good as the true version, ironclad is nothing on the leviathan for example.

MK VIII incorporates more than just a gorget. It has improved joint protection over-all.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
It may be that the age restrictions that exist in the the 40k Space Marine creation process (recruits have to be teenagers) did not exist in 30k. We have several direct examples of adults becoming full Space Marines (Russ's followers and Jonson's knights), and even old men being made into semi-Space Marines (Kor Phearon, Luther).
Maybe the creation process used in 30k was more powerful or more effective, allowing for more recruits to be made into Space Marines.

I don't about the Space Wolves, but only the knights that are still teenagers (Zahariel and Nemiel being in the first and oldest batch, 15 at the time) become full space marines. None of the adult knights become full astartes. Sar Hadariel is used as a specific example on how none of the older knights make the cut, as they are simply too old for the process.

 EngulfedObject wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
It may be that the age restrictions that exist in the the 40k Space Marine creation process (recruits have to be teenagers) did not exist in 30k. We have several direct examples of adults becoming full Space Marines (Russ's followers and Jonson's knights), and even old men being made into semi-Space Marines (Kor Phearon, Luther).
Maybe the creation process used in 30k was more powerful or more effective, allowing for more recruits to be made into Space Marines.

I don't about the Space Wolves, but only the knights that are still teenagers (Zahariel and Nemiel being in the first and oldest batch, 15 at the time) become full space marines. None of the adult knights become full astartes. Sar Hadariel is used as a specific example on how none of the older knights make the cut, as they are simply too old for the process.

Yeah, Descent of Angels may have retconned that. But still Zahariel and Nemiel were in their late teens. The recruits in 40k are normally in their early teens (the old fluff suggests the process can't be started after age 14). Zahariel was already close to 16 when starting the process to become a full Space Marine, and that process takes years, making them adults before finishing the process. Clearly even the age range given in Descent of Angels is more expansive than normal. We also don't how what part of the Legions were made up of true Astartes, and how much of semi-Astartes like Luther etc. It stands to reason that the Legions of 30k had much less restrictive recruitment procedures than the Chapters of 40k.

If I remember, a lot of the surviving chapters had mutations that resulted in more harmful effects and lower organ acceptance rate, which meant that far fewer initiates were able to make it past the implantation stage. The most notable of these are the Raven Guard, which is due to Corax's tampering to try and restore his legion's numbers after the dropsite massacre.

In addition, the process to make a space marine was far more technical back then, while now it's a highly ritualized fare. I've read in one of the old Black Gobbo articles that some initiates even have to undergo reconstruction surgery AFTER their implantation surgery, as they drag out the process too long with chants and whatnot and the initiate actually gets infected and disfigured.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Yeah, Descent of Angels may have retconned that. But still Zahariel and Nemiel were in their late teens. The recruits in 40k are normally in their early teens (the old fluff suggests the process can't be started after age 14). Zahariel was already close to 16 when starting the process to become a full Space Marine, and that process takes years, making them adults before finishing the process. Clearly even the age range given in Descent of Angels is more expansive than normal. We also don't how what part of the Legions were made up of true Astartes, and how much of semi-Astartes like Luther etc. It stands to reason that the Legions of 30k had much less restrictive recruitment procedures than the Chapters of 40k.

That's true, even I thought it was a bit odd that they could still undergo the procedure at their age, though they were still technically young teenagers. The legions were also operating along non-astartes almost all the time, so that further blurs the lines on legion composition.

Still, the book does show them to be the first batch and the only knights young enough, so there's a teenage upper limit at least. But I agree that they were much less selective than in the 40k era. Pretty much the entire Order was recruited in this case, full astartes or not (though the Order was more suited to become astartes than most normal humans would be, having already trained with primitive versions of similar equipment, warfare, and so on).

bolter_fodder wrote:
I think you mean 10,000 years of genetic deterioration : )

To the OP I would ask why use different statistics to figure out what percentage would get through to be marines? What the logic of it being any tougher to become a marine in 30k to 40k?

For me any reason for is to be tougher to become a marine in 40k is totally down to no one understanding the science anymore and them basically winging it coupled with out of date geneseed meaning a low success rate.

I think its relevant because...well, lets say you just take any old kid off the streets and made them marines.... true they will be tough b****rds, but there "base" level will be lower (because you are taking weedy kids in the mix - both mentally and physically). Physical defects I suppose can be over come... but week mentally?

So what I am saying is that the pass rate to be accepted as a space marine in 30k is (seemingly) lower and therefore are possibly mentally weaker. Surely selecting the correct candidate is everything, otherwise why are they so rigid? why bother having a selection at all?.... why not replace marines on a conveyor belt with whichever kid happens to be nearby?

Note: I am not saying SAS are weak, I am just saying that selection process is not as tough as the one in 40k (theoretically)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

2. 30k marines have access to much better tech, most of 40k tech is the last dregs of remembered lore from the early days of the imperium

I would disagree with this one. The tech has not really changed much. The year 30k is already "backwards" in tech, they have lost so much knowledge in the age of strife. Generally they do not want to progress/deviate too much as this is seen as blasphemous (in many cases)... the Mechanicum seem only interested in holy STDs from the golden age of technology (correct if I am wring here).

But also, there is progress. E.g. crusade era power armour is far inferior to current day mk VIII armour. And the bolters have gone through various pattern improvements.... what else is there for the average a space marine?... combat knife? No, your average SM is more or less exactly the same in terms of equipment (probably slightly worse)...

Another example is Terminator armour had only just been invented during GC and has been refined over the millennia.

I think perhaps you misunderstood, to follow on from your response - why would the "base" level as you put it be different in 30k to 40k? Purely because there are now more people around to choose from? Remember that most chapters in 40k recruit from a very limited population, much much smaller than was available on Terra. Imagine the space wolves selecting from Fenris whose population is only a few million in comparison to choosing from Terra which at the time had several hundred billion?

With regards to the tech I don't feel that they have progressed from the end of the Great Crusade at all, most if not all of the tech in 40k was there in 30k and we know that much has been lost and most of the fluff points towards even less understanding of it in 40k than in 30k. I think though we may have to just agree to disagree on that one! :-)

bolter_fodder wrote:

I would disagree with this one. The tech has not really changed much. The year 30k is already "backwards" in tech, they have lost so much knowledge in the age of strife. Generally they do not want to progress/deviate too much as this is seen as blasphemous (in many cases)... the Mechanicum seem only interested in holy STDs from the golden age of technology (correct if I am wring here).

But also, there is progress. E.g. crusade era power armour is far inferior to current day mk VIII armour. And the bolters have gone through various pattern improvements.... what else is there for the average a space marine?... combat knife? No, your average SM is more or less exactly the same in terms of equipment (probably slightly worse)...

Another example is Terminator armour had only just been invented during GC and has been refined over the millennia.

Backwards in comparison to the Age of Technology. But still ahead of the Imperium of the 41st Millennium. A lot was lost between the Horus Heresy and the "current" period in 40k history.

Right oldraven, but please name some of the tech that the average space marine of 30k has that the average space marine of 40k has. Not the rare superweapons or archaeotech that the leaders get.

Consider their roles:

30k Marines are shocktroops to be sure, but they fight extended battles and wars of attrition. They're elite, but still front line, fighters.

40k Marines, despite what the fluff tries to pretend, are Special Operations. That they are tougher, stronger, smarter, and better equipped than a normal human is only a part of their ability to wage war. They have obscene maneuverability, they can operate in nearly any environment with little prep, and they know how to hit choke points.

40k Marines are peak humans, trained to a superhuman peak, and then unleashed. 30k Marines are near peak humans, trained to a very high superhuman level, and then unleashed.

@Polonius yah..... that is really the point I am trying to get at. Its not a population thing, its that they are taking (on average) literally the very limit of what humanity has to offer (if they made selection any tougher then no recruits would make it) in the year 40k. But in 30k they are perhaps more lenient.

Also the thing about technology is not really the point from the original post. Strip the marine of all his equipment and then ask who is the tougher - if any (that is what the question really is). But still, no matter how good the tech in 30k, your average marine still only had power armour, a bolter and a knife (maybe some grenades).... that is still the same : )

What is it they say in that warhammer 40k movie?...."the Big-E protects, but it doesn't hurt to carry a hand cannon (bolter)"

 curran12 wrote:
Right oldraven, but please name some of the tech that the average space marine of 30k has that the average space marine of 40k has. Not the rare superweapons or archaeotech that the leaders get.

All of the basics are still available. Bolters, powered armor, gene seed implants, Thunderhawks, etc, etc. More than enough to make the Astartes a first rate rapid response/spec ops force for the Imperium, and to keep churning out new recruits.


But much that was once commonplace, or simply rare/low production, are now precious relics of a bygone age. Even the iconic Terminator tactical dreadnought armor cannot be produced anymore in any numbers. The current suits are either refurbished (i.e. carefully maintained and repaired) or built out of existing parts that were salvaged/stockpiled.

With deamons, traitor legions, Necrons and Tyranids as opposition you better hope the 40k ones can surpass ye olde space marines.

Interesting to see the debating here. My answer would be "whichever is currently the protagonist in a novel is the most powerful"

Nah, i'd say they are just as powerful as they were before though.

The marines from 30k if they fought a 40k counterpart would have 10k years of battle experience, raiding defending claims stakes in the eye from other marines daemons aliens the imperium. They would also be decadent hedonistic...and quite mad. But experience in a way you and I could never imagine, in a way even some if not most chapter masters wouldn't understand.
A 40k marine would be well drilled disciplined determined, single minded, unwavering, utterly devoted and unquestionably sure in his belief that he is just and he will win. Well drilled fresh from either training or battle.
As far as who is tougher the 30k marines had the emperor's direct guidance in their making the 40k are a degradation of an refined process of even that the emperor's best made sure to fix any mistakes after the heresy, but stagnation, ruin, sabbatoge, what have you caused forgetfulness in the imperium and we can know for certain that it's not now as they imagined it then

Nerak wrote:
With deamons, traitor legions, Necrons and Tyranids as opposition you better hope the 40k ones can surpass ye olde space marines.

You can add Eldar and Dark Eldars to that list. During the Great Crusade the Eldar barely had any aspect warriors and some shrines were not even created yet. The Dark Eldar were far from being as dangerous without the leadership of Vect, the murderous regime of the kabale and without the descent of their society to new heigth in murderous madness. The only major threat they faced (beside themselves) were the orks and even then, they only destroyed one major Ork Empire. I would say the 30K Marines aren't as well trained than the 40K ones, but they had access to a much better logistical system, more reliable technologie, were twice more numerous since the Traitor Legion were not traitors yet and were easier to create since there was less genetic degradation. The 40K Space Marines are fading legends.

epronovost wrote:

Nerak wrote:
With deamons, traitor legions, Necrons and Tyranids as opposition you better hope the 40k ones can surpass ye olde space marines.

You can add Eldar and Dark Eldars to that list. During the Great Crusade the Eldar barely had any aspect warriors and some shrines were not even created yet. The Dark Eldar were far from being as dangerous without the leadership of Vect, the murderous regime of the kabale and without the descent of their society to new heigth in murderous madness. The only major threat they faced (beside themselves) were the orks and even then, they only destroyed one major Ork Empire. I would say the 30K Marines aren't as well trained than the 40K ones, but they had access to a much better logistical system, more reliable technologie, were twice more numerous since the Traitor Legion were not traitors yet and were easier to create since there was less genetic degradation. The 40K Space Marines are fading legends.

18 Legions of 100k marines on average means 1,800,000, so a little less than twice the amount of marines.

I thought the general concensus was that they are, due to the recruits being more refinely scrutinised, as well as having stricter training.