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.

I can't understand why anyone would say there shouldn't be female models and I certainly did not say that. The fluff said it's split so its split.

I shouldn't have brought up the topic I did since it wasn't relevant to my post. I did not believe anything I said to be controversial or disputable. I'm fine with women seeing combat. I just don't think it should be a choice. The rules should be the same and the physical requirements to get in in the first place should never have been different. I remember how outraged my cousin was when she found out she didn't have to meet the same requirement when she joined 12 years ago and I can understand that. It should have been equal from the start in all ways and it's really not relevant so I won't speak on it anymore.

jakejackjake wrote:
I'm sorry to those who said the strength differences between men and women and their limits aren't drastically different are completely wrong and probably relatively weak themselves.

It's good for a new poster to come right in and show contempt for others, saves everyone time.

For goodness sake, stop comparing the guard to modern day armies! It's like comparing the modern American army to the militaries of Neolithic tribes!

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
For goodness sake, stop comparing the guard to modern day armies! It's like comparing the modern American army to the militaries of Neolithic tribes!

Why?

To my knowledge, it's never been stated that the Guard/PDF are any more capable than a modern day soldier.

That would be a pretty weird thing to state.

You've been banned from this thread. My orders!

BlaxicanX wrote:

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
For goodness sake, stop comparing the guard to modern day armies! It's like comparing the modern American army to the militaries of Neolithic tribes!

Why?

To my knowledge, it's never been stated that the Guard/PDF are any more capable than a modern day soldier.

Because the needs of the Guard and the needs of a modern day military are incredibly different. For a start, the Imperium is fighting 8-foot tall evil superwarriors clad in super-powerful armour, Na'vi with railguns and superadvanced weaponry, space elves thousands of years old, warriors made of self-repairing metal that can resurrect themselves at any time they want, hulking great Green monstrosoties whose equipment is as likely to kill you as it is them and space insects from beyond the galaxy. You'd want every advantage you can get. The American army, on the other hand, is the best equipped and second most numerous army on the planet. They don't fight to defend home soil, they bring the fight to other countries who may support groups that attack home soil. The methods of fighting are also pretty different. The average commander of the US armed forces is not likely to send wave after wave after wave to take an important location. The commander of the guard will.

We don't know how powerful a lasgun actually is. For all we know, it could have the power of a Challenger tank in one compact piece of kit. Their armour could be actually really awesome. Regardless, they've had many many many years of development, especially during the Golden Age of Technology. The entire human race could be genetically enhanced by this point, making them stronger and more agile etc. We don't know.

But imagine they aren't more capable. Well then, what are the chances that a Neolithic warrior is less capable? Are we now going to compare fighting styles of someone from Catal Huyuk to an American soldier? Of course not, because their purposes are different!

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:

BlaxicanX wrote:

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
For goodness sake, stop comparing the guard to modern day armies! It's like comparing the modern American army to the militaries of Neolithic tribes!

Why?

To my knowledge, it's never been stated that the Guard/PDF are any more capable than a modern day soldier.

Because the needs of the Guard and the needs of a modern day military are incredibly different. For a start, the Imperium is fighting 8-foot tall evil superwarriors clad in super-powerful armour, Na'vi with railguns and superadvanced weaponry, space elves thousands of years old, warriors made of self-repairing metal that can resurrect themselves at any time they want, hulking great Green monstrosoties whose equipment is as likely to kill you as it is them and space insects from beyond the galaxy. You'd want every advantage you can get. The American army, on the other hand, is the best equipped and second most numerous army on the planet. They don't fight to defend home soil, they bring the fight to other countries who may support groups that attack home soil. The methods of fighting are also pretty different. The average commander of the US armed forces is not likely to send wave after wave after wave to take an important location. The commander of the guard will.

We don't know how powerful a lasgun actually is. For all we know, it could have the power of a Challenger tank in one compact piece of kit. Their armour could be actually really awesome. Regardless, they've had many many many years of development, especially during the Golden Age of Technology. The entire human race could be genetically enhanced by this point, making them stronger and more agile etc. We don't know.

But imagine they aren't more capable. Well then, what are the chances that a Neolithic warrior is less capable? Are we now going to compare fighting styles of someone from Catal Huyuk to an American soldier? Of course not, because their purposes are different!

Standard calcs for the Lasgun put it in the dozens to hundreds of megajoules of energy given it's typical effects on the human body and quantifiable materials. Flak armor should be just about impervious to modern day small arms at any distance. So Imperial Guardsmen are lugging around .50 bmg equivalent weapons (Energy weapons are hilariously inefficient energy expenditure wise, requiring orders of magnitude more energy to kill someone than a kinetic weapon) while armored like a humvee.

As for guard tactics, they depend heavily on the model of recruitment they're based on (Cadian, Valhallan, Krieg, etc) and their personal commander. Regiments based on the Cadian model largely follow modern NATO army tactics, modified to be much more accepting of heavy casualties than real life, while Valhallan modeled regiments would largely follow Warsaw pact style doctrines that emphasize the all out mechanized assault and weight of numbers.

Actually, it would be more accurate to compare IG to WWII armies, both in tactics and force application methods.
Modern US army, as stated above, is in vastly different strategic situation than Imperium's IG - for last 60yearss US picks fights only with incomparably weaker, lower-tech countries who they can bomb into oblivion and/or bribe their generals into betraying their commanders.
IG fights enemy forces that are at least as strong and/or numerous as they are, with no diplomatic approach possible.
IG's situation is more like WWII USSR situation - a total war of annihilation/enslavement, foes are about as numerous, comparably if not more technologically advanced, space/air&sea is contested (so no fancy satellite stuff) and opponents cannot be bullshitted into backing down.
Its because of this IG tactics and organization may seem retrograde if compared to modern US armies, but when taking into account their different situation it is actually quite reasonable (as reasonable as Imperium can be expected to be, anyways).

 Ratliker wrote:
Actually, it would be more accurate to compare IG to WWII armies, both in tactics and force application methods.
Modern US army, as stated above, is in vastly different strategic situation than Imperium's IG - for last 60yearss US picks fights only with incomparably weaker, lower-tech countries who they can bomb into oblivion and/or bribe their generals into betraying their commanders.
IG fights enemy forces that are at least as strong and/or numerous as they are, with no diplomatic approach possible.
IG's situation is more like WWII USSR situation - a total war of annihilation/enslavement, foes are about as numerous, comparably if not more technologically advanced, space/air&sea is contested (so no fancy satellite stuff) and opponents cannot be bullshitted into backing down.
Its because of this IG tactics and organization may seem retrograde if compared to modern US armies, but when taking into account their different situation it is actually quite reasonable (as reasonable as Imperium can be expected to be, anyways).

Oh there's no denying the Strategic situation of the IG is pretty terrible, but tactically each model of guard regiment is very different. The Steel Legion's playbook is essentially the WW2 Panzer korps' book with some minor editing for example. The Valhallans generally use Zhukov's tactics or Cold War era Warsaw pact doctrine with some using more stereotypical human wave tactics. Krieg is still firmly stuck in the western front of world war 1, more towards the later end when tanks and aircraft became standard. Cadia's tactics seem to largely be based on Cold war era NATO tactics exemplified in engagements like Desert Storm.

jakejackjake wrote:

Yeah base your opinion off the few exceptions who train consistently and join the marines. 20 pull ups is not the highest possible score. I can do 20 with a 45 lb weight strapped to me or without weights 20 clap push up and I'm nowhere near peak. 20 pull ups is incredibly impressive for a women. For a man it's not really impressive at all. Thats why for the last 65 years the military has had DRASTICALLY different physical standards for women and men. Though this will change as far as combat goes the requirements I believe will be the same. Regardless though the fact they have different standard just to be let in says it all on it's own.

A simple google search will display your complete ignorance on the matter. I'm a personal trainer and am completely positive that you are 100% wrong on strength differences not being massive. Not only do women plateau much lower then even small men but it takes them a lot more work to get there. The fact that you would argue this point is insane. I've met many men stronger then me and never once a female who was. That alone shows that on average they aren't because of met tens of thousands if not more then that that are physically active and that's a big enough sample for it to even out. Are there a few women in the world who are stronger then me? Yes but only women who have put almost their entire life into it.

Im glad this threads still going, I think its been interesting.

If you are as fit as you say you are Jake, and you actually work as a PTI I think all of your clients are as well, and this has warped your perception of "not impressive at all"

feth me.. I (green beret) can do about 16-18. I once got up to 25 in Iraq because I didn't drink any booze for 6 months... but 20 fething heaves is very impressive. I was probably the best in my company, I reckon the average Joe on the street would be lucky to do ten, and fething hardly any at all could knock out twenty.

There is clearly a strength and cardio disadvantage for women, my missus is fit, she doesn't have an ounce of fat on her, and Im 7 years older and am about 20 lbs overweight, but I cant still crush her running or doing weights, but its hardly as large as you are talking about. At the end of the day, when they do make the physical requirements the same for both sexes (I agree they should have always been the same) I think its safe to say that there will still be hundreds of thousands of women who can pass it. I have always thought the initial requirements were easy personally, the current USMC minimums are a joke for example, but something along the lines of 10 heaves, 80 push ups and a decent run is clearly achievable for literally millions of American women. Its hardly freakish.

Finally, as a military man, I also think that people are really not getting into the mentality of how your psyche is affected by harsh military training, and as a result don't really understand just how nails the guard would be IRL.

As it stands, we (military) take soft, weak people and turn them into half decent soldiers. Take the SEALS. They take soft, moisturized, cable TV watching, hot shower taking, weak American kids, and in a year, turn them into decent soldiers. They have had almost two decades of absolute decadence. Our modern lifestyles mean even working class people enjoy the luxuries that even the Kings of Old would not have enjoyed. Fat mattresses, hot water, fine food, sugary drinks, central heating, air conditioning. Never uncomfortable.. and we take them for a harsh year, and train them, and then they can survive. I can survive at minus 30, I can hang out in the caves of Afghanistan if I really have to. When we initially invaded Iraq it was shell scrapes in the middle of the desert and MREs for 5 weeks, but at the back of my mind, I was always thinking "feth me a I want a hot bath/milkshake/case of beer)

And you think modern humans could even compare with people, that from birth, have got it rough? Trained to survive harsh from the age they can crawl?

Personally I think guardsmen would be absolute machines, and a Cadian woman would walk through the Navy SEALS/SAS/Delta like the bunch of soft, sweet smelling poofters they would obviously appear as to someone that has been trained to deal death since they could walk.

 mattyrm wrote:
*Snip*

Of course they would walk through the seals when their standard calcs would make their flak vests impervious to anything short of a M2 browning and their guns can blow through the side armor of an M2 Bradley.

 Kain wrote:

 mattyrm wrote:
*Snip*

Of course they would walk through the seals when their standard calcs would make their flak vests impervious to anything short of a M2 browning and their guns can blow through the side armor of an M2 Bradley.

Kit aside then, on an individual level their soldiering skills would be ten times as sharp.

A soft modern human who completes what amounts to a relatively short training course (32 weeks for the RM, one of the longest in the world) is never going to be anywhere near as sharp as someone that effectively spent 18 years in boot.

 mattyrm wrote:

 Kain wrote:

 mattyrm wrote:
*Snip*

Of course they would walk through the seals when their standard calcs would make their flak vests impervious to anything short of a M2 browning and their guns can blow through the side armor of an M2 Bradley.

Kit aside then, on an individual level their soldiering skills would be ten times as sharp.

A soft modern human who completes what amounts to a relatively short training course (32 weeks for the RM, one of the longest in the world) is never going to be anywhere near as sharp as someone that effectively spent 18 years in boot.

Training from an early age is fairly overrated. The Theban Sacred Band ended up curbstomping the Spartans in the end after all. Somalis who have been fighting since they were teens never manage favorable kill ratios against Delta force operatives who have five to six years of combat experience on average. There are limits to what the human body and mind can achieve. Although it seems that there is some deal of genetic divergence from today's homo sapiens sapiens and the Cadians.

The Theban Sacred Band faced a "Spartan" army that was actually mostly conscript troops from Spartan subject states, and themselves were just a small portion of the total Theban force, so that's really not a good comparison.

We don't actually have a good historical comparison, really, not even Spartans had to face what Cadians have had to face. Spartans also did not recruit 100% of their population for war, either, unlike Cadia.

 Kain wrote:

 mattyrm wrote:

 Kain wrote:

 mattyrm wrote:
*Snip*

Of course they would walk through the seals when their standard calcs would make their flak vests impervious to anything short of a M2 browning and their guns can blow through the side armor of an M2 Bradley.

Kit aside then, on an individual level their soldiering skills would be ten times as sharp.

A soft modern human who completes what amounts to a relatively short training course (32 weeks for the RM, one of the longest in the world) is never going to be anywhere near as sharp as someone that effectively spent 18 years in boot.

Training from an early age is fairly overrated. The Theban Sacred Band ended up curbstomping the Spartans in the end after all. Somalis who have been fighting since they were teens never manage favorable kill ratios against Delta force operatives who have five to six years of combat experience on average. There are limits to what the human body and mind can achieve. Although it seems that there is some deal of genetic divergence from today's homo sapiens sapiens and the Cadians.

There is a huge difference. The Sacred Band were from an era that knew nothing about sports science and conditioning, and Somalis are a bunch of malnourished ignorant hicks. I know, I've been on operations in Africa, (had some minor arguments with the West Side Boys in Sierra Leone!) and the reason you aren't scared of boy soldiers is not because of their age, its because they are poorly trained, ill disciplined drugged up idiots. Of course drugged up, home brew swigging Somali pirates aren't going to fight Delta, they wouldn't beat the National Guard!

But, give a modern first world military a bunch of ten year old kids to feed properly, and train properly, and indoctrinate (suicide bombers for example are rigorously indoctrinated) to replace all of that soda and ice cream with daily conditioning and whey protein and creatine and growth hormones and you would have an immensely strong, incredibly fit, well built group of 18 year olds that are willing to die for the cause. Throw in some gruesome milling against captured enemy troops on a monthly basis (highly illegal in the West) for unarmed combat training on live targets and you would have some kids who would be happy to rip your throat out with their teeth, and generally do the gak that even modern commandos would baulk at.

We have far too many rights and rules to have as good soldiers in the modern age, our hands are tied by our fairness and our (quite rightly!) moral unwillingness to properly condition people to cease to become people and simply become living weapons and as a result, Sci-fi troopers like Cadians would be able to pull us apart.

Frankly, they wouldn't be as human as our soldiers are. I doubt they would be as good at winning "hearts and minds" either! But they would be able to put smoke down and perform a frontal assault on an enemy fortification with a speed and fearless ferocity that no first world 21st human being could possibly hope to match.

 Melissia wrote:
The Theban Sacred Band faced a "Spartan" army that was actually mostly conscript troops from Spartan subject states, and themselves were just a small portion of the total Theban force, so that's really not a good comparison.

We don't actually have a good historical comparison, really, not even Spartans had to face what Cadians have had to face. Spartans also did not recruit 100% of their population for war, either, unlike Cadia.

I think our best modern comparison would be analysis of the Hitler Youth or those raised out of it.

How did they generally fare against Soviet and Allied elements?

 Kain wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
The Theban Sacred Band faced a "Spartan" army that was actually mostly conscript troops from Spartan subject states, and themselves were just a small portion of the total Theban force, so that's really not a good comparison.

We don't actually have a good historical comparison, really, not even Spartans had to face what Cadians have had to face. Spartans also did not recruit 100% of their population for war, either, unlike Cadia.

I think our best modern comparison would be analysis of the Hitler Youth or those raised out of it.

How did they generally fare against Soviet and Allied elements?

The Hitler Youth themselves?

Pretty poorly.

After all, they were boys fighting against the allies, who also had been indoctrinated into thinking that the men they were facing were monsters who'd rape your mothers and eat your children.

The Soviets, in fact, are probably the best example. And they fared pretty well in the last stages of the war.

Here is another genius of soviets (battle of Stalingrad) against german tanks ..... They used dogs with bombs...!!!

They starved the poor animals, and trained them to search the food under the tank...Which in combination with a explosive did make a fitting end....

Fitting end? So dogs are complete monsters and deserve to be used as suicide-bombers?

 Beaviz81 wrote:
Fitting end? So dogs are complete monsters and deserve to be used as suicide-bombers?

He goes defending the mother Russia and killing a tank...:-) What do you want more?
You don't remeber kamikazes, and russians who were marching on machine gun nests with 1 rifle - 2 men ratio...?

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:

 Kain wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
The Theban Sacred Band faced a "Spartan" army that was actually mostly conscript troops from Spartan subject states, and themselves were just a small portion of the total Theban force, so that's really not a good comparison.

We don't actually have a good historical comparison, really, not even Spartans had to face what Cadians have had to face. Spartans also did not recruit 100% of their population for war, either, unlike Cadia.

I think our best modern comparison would be analysis of the Hitler Youth or those raised out of it.

How did they generally fare against Soviet and Allied elements?

The Hitler Youth themselves?

Pretty poorly.

After all, they were boys fighting against the allies, who also had been indoctrinated into thinking that the men they were facing were monsters who'd rape your mothers and eat your children.

The Soviets, in fact, are probably the best example. And they fared pretty well in the last stages of the war.

Didn't some Hitler Youth divisions lead by a Waffen SS commander prove to be a massive pain in the arse for the allies in France?

 DarthMarko wrote:
Here is another genius of soviets (battle of Stalingrad) against german tanks ..... They used dogs with bombs...!!!

They starved the poor animals, and trained them to search the food under the tank...Which in combination with a explosive did make a fitting end....

After Stalingrad the Soviets rarely had to resort to such desperate tactics as their military was strategically speaking just as good by then and only somewhat tactically inferior with the average soviet general (Zhukov, Rukossovksy et al tended to beat the Germans with favorable ratios). The Soviets rapidly became able to meet the Germans on even terms even during the summer, and post Kursk the initiative was solely in Soviet Hands.

Sure the Germans cranked out monster tanks like the Panther and Tiger, but Soviet tankers like their western counterparts adjusted their tactics to deal with them, though like allied tankers a German Tiger or Panther would usually be able to become a very short lived tank ace before going down. The stereotype of a horde of badly equipped russian peasants is rather baseless from the second half of 42 onward. By mid 43 the Soviets and allies almost always had overwhelming materiel superiority.

By war's end the Germans barely had enough gas to drive a panzer out of Berlin or enough ammo to equip the home guard.

Hitler Youth isn't a good example either. Maybe if they had been given ten more years of training and experience.

And intelligent, competent commanders.

@Beaviz, would you prefer something like this:

 Melissia wrote:
Hitler Youth isn't a good example either. Maybe if they had been given ten more years of training and experience.

And intelligent, competent commanders.

Well, the Hitler Youth that graduated to the Waffen SS by most accounts were very fine soldiers. And also tended to be batgak insane with propaganda and hatred for non-aryans. But hey, when you've been raised from early childhood to believe in the kind of crap they put into your head in the Hitler Youth and then run through the Waffen SS' training program I have serious doubts about your ability to function in a non sociopathic manner.

 Kain wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Hitler Youth isn't a good example either. Maybe if they had been given ten more years of training and experience.

And intelligent, competent commanders.

Well, the Hitler Youth that graduated to the Waffen SS by most accounts were very fine soldiers. And also tended to be batgak insane with propaganda and hatred for non-aryans. But hey, when you've been raised from early childhood to believe in the kind of crap they put into your head in the Hitler Youth and then run through the Waffen SS' training program I have serious doubts about your ability to function in a non sociopathic manner.

Yes, and advancing through ranks (in SS) was only conditioned by "how someone goes batgak insane with propaganda and hatred for non-aryans" .....

There is that documentary about the SS when common soldier returns from eastern front and sees his pal (baker by trade) advanced through the rank of colonel (IIRC) in a shocking short period...

It was literary - the more you are a butcher, you go up faster...

I remember kamikaze. Forcing animals to do it are bad. Same with the 2 men per rifle. I just reacted to the fitting ending-thingy. Though the latter was more prevalent in WWI than WWII for the Russians.

Yeah, "fitting end" sounds like you're trying to punish the dog. I get what you really meant, DarthMarko, but it was expressed rather poorly.

Btw I was shocked too, but when you look how people were treated in WW2....

Yes poor choice of words - sorry @Mel...I was really trying to put the irony in the sentence...

 DarthMarko wrote:

 Kain wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Hitler Youth isn't a good example either. Maybe if they had been given ten more years of training and experience.

And intelligent, competent commanders.

Well, the Hitler Youth that graduated to the Waffen SS by most accounts were very fine soldiers. And also tended to be batgak insane with propaganda and hatred for non-aryans. But hey, when you've been raised from early childhood to believe in the kind of crap they put into your head in the Hitler Youth and then run through the Waffen SS' training program I have serious doubts about your ability to function in a non sociopathic manner.

Yes, and advancing through ranks (in SS) was only conditioned by "how someone goes batgak insane with propaganda and hatred for non-aryans" .....

There is that documentary about the SS when common soldier returns from eastern front and sees his pal (baker by trade) advanced through the rank of colonel (IIRC) in a shocking short period...

It was literary - the more you are a butcher, you go up faster...

I believe this phrase can sum up the Waffen SS perfectly "No better soldiers have ever served a worse cause." They were morally abhorrent and despicable people, the foulest military group ever made. But they did their jobs very, very well.