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.
Insectum7 wrote: The lore says they work most of the time, therefore use your imagination to come up with a scenario that puts your troubled mind at ease. They work.
I'd rather scrap this drivel (AKA consider it as legends and propaganda internal to the setting) and develop lore that actually make some sense (Space Marines are an incresingly useless relic from the past mostly used for gunboat diplomacy and occasionaly supplement other forces). Space Marines are incredibly popular and easily have the most trashy lore of the already fairly weak lore of 40K. I wonder if "brand loyalty" isn't the main reason it's still defended as it descend into greater stupidity with time thanks to their flanderisation.
A: Small forces can defeat larger forces, especially if they are better trained, equipped, deployed, more capable, and backed by asymmetrical support like aerial/orbital supremacy. The right weapon in the right place at the right time is worth way more than sheer numbers. I don't understand why that's so difficult to grasp. A battalion of tanks is great, for example, except in the case that the enemy gets the drop with a couple A-10s or Apache's. And then there's not even a fight to be had, the tanks are just dead. Asymmetry in capability or technology can be completely devastating to greater numbers, and it doesn't take much to get that sort of advantage.
Then you're not trying to reason it out hard enough. Your letting yourself be stopped by "real-world-think", which even then is probably faulty.
What is this, church? If I must ignore everything I know about real world AND good world building tips to enjoy some piece of fluff, maybe that fluff isn't worth the paper on which it was printed.
B: It's a fictional context that has different rules/technologies/abilities than the one you are used to. And if you aren't willing to accept proposition A above, then even your "realistic" logic is flawed.
Example: Do Navy Seals matter? Even though they can't take on an army of 1000000? They're obviously "ridiculosly few in numbers", their "most iconic strategy pretty much only works on weakened, distracted enemies" etc. I mean, those rafts can be spotted a mile away, and their armor is paper thin! . . .Or . . . maybe they have ways of being where they need to be, and doing what they have to do.
Do Navy SEALS have an operational specialty that cannot be reproduced by another force? Yes, they do have one unlike Space Marines. Are they used extensively for regular ground operation and attrition warfare? No they don't, unlike Space Marines. Are they operating alone against a variety of foes winning wars all by themselves? No they don't, unlike Space Marines. Are Navy SEALS mostly useful for conducting raids and sabotage against in a asymetrical warfare context? Yes, they are and they do lose a lot of efficency and freedom of use against competantly trained and equipped enemies. Are dead SEALS easy to replace? Yes, they are fairly easy to replace. Are SEALS more numerous in terms of proportion then Space Marines? Yes, by a factor of over 1000. It's time to put the SEALS and Space Marines comparison down. The only thing these forces have in common is the general knowledge in culture that both are suposed to be badass.
C: I could go through this point by point, but you missed my actual argument, which is that the style of thinking that you're using to approach the issue is fundamentally flawed. You could approach SEALS with an attitude of "but that's impossible" and use the same argumentation you're using to deny the usefulness of having such a force. You're looking for (and making up) points of failure rather than opportunities for success.
Spoiler:
Do Navy SEALS have an operational specialty that cannot be reproduced by another force? Yes, they do have one unlike Space Marines. Incorrect. Space Marines are better at boarding and taking enemy ships and installations. They can also deploy via Drop Pods, unlike most other factions (and certainly faster), and teleportation.
Are they used extensively for regular ground operation and attrition warfare? No they don't, unlike Space Marines. Marines don't routinely deploy into attrition settings as they did in the heresey. And even then, if it's an advantageous attrition maybe that's the way to go. Also, Marines have their own fleet of vehicles to engage in surface warfare, and are certainly better equipped for a conventional fight than SEALS.
Are they operating alone against a variety of foes winning wars all by themselves? No they don't, unlike Space Marines. Marines are more capable, and if necessary, sooo much more violent. If they have to level a city with orbital bombardment to accomplish a mission, they will do it. The rules of engagement in 40K are far more lax.
Are Navy SEALS mostly useful for conducting raids and sabotage against in a asymetrical warfare context? Yes, they are and they do lose a lot of efficency and freedom of use against competantly trained and equipped enemies. no comment
Are dead SEALS easy to replace? Yes, they are fairly easy to replace. Easier to replace than marines. Also easier to wound enough to take them permanently out of action.
Are SEALS more numerous in terms of proportion then Space Marines? Yes, by a factor of over 1000. Asymmetry + level of violence gives numbers a lot less value.
It's time to put the SEALS and Space Marines comparison down. The only thing these forces have in common is the general knowledge in culture that both are suposed to be badass.
To the point of the thread: Do seals matter even if they can't win wars? Do marines matter when they can?
...which every other faction have too? If only they were the only space wizards, or the best. that would help.
D: Actually, no. Not every faction has space wizards, and in at least some of the lore Librarians are among the more capable psykers in the galaxy. A Librarian will certainly be more capable than the local adepts in most cases. But "Space Wizards" is more a reminder again that the universe of 40K has a lot more options available to it than you are giving it credit for.
A: Small forces can defeat larger forces, especially if they are better trained, equipped, deployed, more capable, and backed by asymmetrical support like aerial/orbital supremacy. The right weapon in the right place at the right time is worth way more than sheer numbers. I don't understand why that's so difficult to grasp. A battalion of tanks is great, for example, except in the case that the enemy gets the drop with a couple A-10s or Apache's. And then there's not even a fight to be had, the tanks are just dead. Asymmetry in capability or technology can be completely devastating to greater numbers, and it doesn't take much to get that sort of advantage.
I agree, but Marines are none of those things according to the lore. They aren't elite enough to overwhelm their foes, neither are they overgunned compared to their opposition. They aren't especially fast and mobile either, especially when compared to Eldars, Tau, Necrons and Tyranids. They aren't even the fastest Imperial subfaction in terms of tactical deployment.
B: It's a fictional context that has different rules/technologies/abilities than the one you are used to. And if you aren't willing to accept proposition A above, then even your "realistic" logic is flawed.
My opinion isn't based on logic, it's based on the fluff which is filled with contradictions and internal inconsistencies. I didn't use logic to determine that the entirety of the Adeptus Astartes would be incapable of destroying the Tau Empire, far from that, I used GW fluff material and that's just one example.
A: Small forces can defeat larger forces, especially if they are better trained, equipped, deployed, more capable, and backed by asymmetrical support like aerial/orbital supremacy. The right weapon in the right place at the right time is worth way more than sheer numbers. I don't understand why that's so difficult to grasp. A battalion of tanks is great, for example, except in the case that the enemy gets the drop with a couple A-10s or Apache's. And then there's not even a fight to be had, the tanks are just dead. Asymmetry in capability or technology can be completely devastating to greater numbers, and it doesn't take much to get that sort of advantage.
I agree, but Marines are none of those things according to the lore. They aren't elite enough to overwhelm their foes, neither are they overgunned compared to their opposition. They aren't especially fast and mobile either, especially when compared to Eldars, Tau, Necrons and Tyranids. They aren't even the fastest Imperial subfaction in terms of tactical deployment.
Perhaps, but now you're switching scenarios from anti-rebellion to various Xenos. Naturally the relationships between forces begin to shift. As for anti-rebellion duties, being the only starship in theatre/having taken control of orbital weapons platforms, Marines can definitely become overgunned in comparison to the opponent. However, against Xenos, most of the time marines still hold the distinction of being the best ship-to-ship fighters around iirc, according to Battlefleet Gothic.
As for fast and mobile. . . that's complicated. Necron ships are fast, but Necron armies tend to be slow. Tyranids don't usually operate on speed for deployment, but in great numbers instead. Eldar are super-fast, although possibly not as brutal as Marines. I'm not too familiar with Tau from a strategic/logistical lore standpoint.
I'd like to know what Imperial subfaction can deploy faster than Marines.
B: It's a fictional context that has different rules/technologies/abilities than the one you are used to. And if you aren't willing to accept proposition A above, then even your "realistic" logic is flawed.
My opinion isn't based on logic, it's based on the fluff which is filled with contradictions and internal inconsistencies. I didn't use logic to determine that the entirety of the Adeptus Astartes would be incapable of destroying the Tau Empire, far from that, I used GW fluff material and that's just one example.
All opinions are based on some sort of logic. You're still extrapolating information from the lore with some sort of interpretation.
Nobody has made the assertion that the Astartes were capable of destroying the entire Tau Empire.
As for inconsistencies, there are certainly some. However it's also true that the galaxy is huge and scenarios can play out in a number of ways for all sorts of reasons. Many "inconsistencies" can just be the result of variables that are more ephemeral than "faction A has X, therefore auto-wins over faction B". The battle of Midway was won because a code was deciphered and used to turn the tables. That's a tiny thing from a materiel standpoint, but made a huge difference in outcome. So Drop Pods working in some scenarios, but not other scenarios becomes less of an inconsistency, and more of a "variable Y happened to be different in this case". The problem is people extrapolating that beyond those particular circumstances. You have to look at trends.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/06 22:57:52
As opposed to genetically enhance, post-human killing machines psychically and surgically indoctrinated to have no emotions who”s most basic weapon is unthinkably horrific?
Reeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaally?
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
Perhaps, but now you're switching scenarios from anti-rebellion to various Xenos. Naturally the relationships between forces begin to shift. As for anti-rebellion duties, being the only starship in theatre/having taken control of orbital weapons platforms, Marines can definitely become overgunned in comparison to the opponent. However, against Xenos, most of the time marines still hold the distinction of being the best ship-to-ship fighters around iirc, according to Battlefleet Gothic.
As for fast and mobile. . . that's complicated. Necron ships are fast, but Necron armies tend to be slow. Tyranids don't usually operate on speed for deployment, but in great numbers instead. Eldar are super-fast, although possibly not as brutal as Marines. I'm not too familiar with Tau from a strategic/logistical lore standpoint.
Well, that and marines still have a better chance against Xenos than your average human. A human will most likely get slaughtered by Eldar due to how stupidly fast they are in terms of reaction speed and agility. A marine can at least keep up and have the combat experience and training to deal with it.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2019/06/06 23:07:53
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
As opposed to genetically enhance, post-human killing machines psychically and surgically indoctrinated to have no emotions who”s most basic weapon is unthinkably horrific?
Reeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaally?
Theyre both absurd to the point where i cant buy it even for a second.
Perhaps, but now you're switching scenarios from anti-rebellion to various Xenos. Naturally the relationships between forces begin to shift. As for anti-rebellion duties, being the only starship in theatre/having taken control of orbital weapons platforms, Marines can definitely become overgunned in comparison to the opponent. However, against Xenos, most of the time marines still hold the distinction of being the best ship-to-ship fighters around iirc, according to Battlefleet Gothic.
As for fast and mobile. . . that's complicated. Necron ships are fast, but Necron armies tend to be slow. Tyranids don't usually operate on speed for deployment, but in great numbers instead. Eldar are super-fast, although possibly not as brutal as Marines. I'm not too familiar with Tau from a strategic/logistical lore standpoint.
I largely agree with you that Space Marines are mostly used to quell rebellion before they can spread, but then only on planets with no powerful defenses (AKA no Hive World, Fortress World, Forge World or any planet with a good technological level and a population that exceeds the 500 million in population). That's why I presented them as a force whose main plausible use is for "gunboat diplomacy" (AKA intimidate people into complience by parking a big ship and maybe make a demonstration of force with it). Gunboat diplomacy only works when the faction using the gunboat in question is overwhelmingly more powerful then the one tagetted.
PS: Necron have a wide access to jetbikes, flyers including flying transports, the very best in teleportation tech, phase shifting machines that can pass through anything, etc. That's a lot of very fast deployment assets.
I'd like to know what Imperial subfaction can deploy faster than Marines.
Strategically, the Space Marines are the fastest deploying force since they have their own fleet and excellent astropaths. They can deploy to numerous warzone very quickly, but once they are there, their assets aren't really fast moving. A Rhino isn't much faster then a Chimera and isn't amphibious, their tanks are faster than Leman Russ who are known to be ponderous (except one or two varient who are just as fast), but aren't really fast either. Space Marine are fast runners and have a nearly infinite amount of stamina, but require regular supply in ammunition which slows them down. During any battle. Scions are tactically faster, but strategically slower. Their tanks are much faster then those of Space Marines and are better in rough terrain too. They also make more generous use of flying transports and while they might not run as fast as Space Marines, they don't need to reload their guns nor have need for a supply chain as complex as that of Marines. They can also risk aerial assaults more readily then Space Marines. This makes them significantly faster if more fragile.
[As for inconsistencies, there are certainly some. However it's also true that the galaxy is huge and scenarios can play out in a number of ways for all sorts of reasons. Many "inconsistencies" can just be the result of variables that are more ephemeral than "faction A has X, therefore auto-wins over faction B". The battle of Midway was won because a code was deciphered and used to turn the tables. That's a tiny thing from a materiel standpoint, but made a huge difference in outcome. So Drop Pods working in some scenarios, but not other scenarios becomes less of an inconsistency, and more of a "variable Y happened to be different in this case". The problem is people extrapolating that beyond those particular circumstances. You have to look at trends.
I never said that drop pods never worked, I only mentionned that they never worked in warzones where the enemy as decent anti-air assets. Most stories about Space Marines require the eney to be monstruously stupid or weak (sometimes both) for the story to make sense. That or dial the power of Space Marines up to a point in contradicts the fluff of the faction that is tranformed into punching bags for the protagonist.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/07 00:18:49
As opposed to genetically enhance, post-human killing machines psychically and surgically indoctrinated to have no emotions who”s most basic weapon is unthinkably horrific?
Reeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaally?
Theyre both absurd to the point where i cant buy it even for a second.
Then why did you ever collect a blood angels army? You don't like their rules, you dislike the fluff to the point you want massive changes to the setting and seem full of self loathing. What ever appealed to you about them that you dropped money on an army you hate?
Perhaps, but now you're switching scenarios from anti-rebellion to various Xenos. Naturally the relationships between forces begin to shift. As for anti-rebellion duties, being the only starship in theatre/having taken control of orbital weapons platforms, Marines can definitely become overgunned in comparison to the opponent. However, against Xenos, most of the time marines still hold the distinction of being the best ship-to-ship fighters around iirc, according to Battlefleet Gothic.
As for fast and mobile. . . that's complicated. Necron ships are fast, but Necron armies tend to be slow. Tyranids don't usually operate on speed for deployment, but in great numbers instead. Eldar are super-fast, although possibly not as brutal as Marines. I'm not too familiar with Tau from a strategic/logistical lore standpoint.
I largely agree with you that Space Marines are mostly used to quell rebellion before they can spread, but then only on planets with no powerful defenses (AKA no Hive World, Fortress World, Forge World or any planet with a good technological level and a population that exceeds the 500 million in population). That's why I presented them as a force whose main plausible use is for "gunboat diplomacy" (AKA intimidate people into complience by parking a big ship and maybe make a demonstration of force with it). Gunboat diplomacy only works when the faction using the gunboat in question is overwhelmingly more powerful then the one tagetted.
PS: Necron have a wide access to jetbikes, flyers including flying transports, the very best in teleportation tech, phase shifting machines that can pass through anything, etc. That's a lot of very fast deployment assets.
I'd like to know what Imperial subfaction can deploy faster than Marines.
Strategically, the Space Marines are the fastest deploying force since they have their own fleet and excellent astropaths. They can deploy to numerous warzone very quickly, but once they are there, their assets aren't really fast moving. A Rhino isn't much faster then a Chimera and isn't amphibious, their tanks are faster than Leman Russ who are known to be ponderous (except one or two varient who are just as fast), but aren't really fast either. Space Marine are fast runners and have a nearly infinite amount of stamina, but require regular supply in ammunition which slows them down. During any battle. Scions are tactically faster, but strategically slower. Their tanks are much faster then those of Space Marines and are better in rough terrain too. They also make more generous use of flying transports and while they might not run as fast as Space Marines, they don't need to reload their guns nor have need for a supply chain as complex as that of Marines. They can also risk aerial assaults more readily then Space Marines. This makes them significantly faster if more fragile.
[As for inconsistencies, there are certainly some. However it's also true that the galaxy is huge and scenarios can play out in a number of ways for all sorts of reasons. Many "inconsistencies" can just be the result of variables that are more ephemeral than "faction A has X, therefore auto-wins over faction B". The battle of Midway was won because a code was deciphered and used to turn the tables. That's a tiny thing from a materiel standpoint, but made a huge difference in outcome. So Drop Pods working in some scenarios, but not other scenarios becomes less of an inconsistency, and more of a "variable Y happened to be different in this case". The problem is people extrapolating that beyond those particular circumstances. You have to look at trends.
I never said that drop pods never worked, I only mentionned that they never worked in warzones where the enemy as decent anti-air assets. Most stories about Space Marines require the eney to be monstruously stupid or weak (sometimes both) for the story to make sense. That or dial the power of Space Marines up to a point in contradicts the fluff of the faction that is tranformed into punching bags for the protagonist.
Unfortunately I don't have the time to fully respond to this, however I will point out again that the specific purpose of the Drop Pod is to bypass anti-air defences. A world may have some very nice AA, but Pods will still be viable.
Pods + Teleportation changes the equation when it comes to Space Marine capability. If you can't accept that Pods have this ability, then you are seriously affecting what Space Marines can accomplish. Indefensible precision strikes change the game considerably.
There will certainly be circumstances where they don't work. But Pods are not reserved merely for misbehaving agro-worlds.
Formosa wrote: no other species in the galaxy can do what marines are designed to do as well as them (in the fluff), drop down, totally smash the enemies command structure and get out again
No other species maybe, but a Manticore barrage or lance strike from orbit can deal with the problem just fine.
Kap'n Krump wrote: One could make the same argument regarding special forces v. the rest of the armed forces. Why would we need a SEAL team when I could just toss a thousand or so enlisted sailors fresh out of boot at the problem?
Because in the real world we tend to be a bit hesitant to do things like sacrifice a million soldiers to take an objective, or to slaughter a million enemy civilians to kill one military leader. The Imperium has no such constraints, life is cheap and any enemy civilians killed in an artillery barrage only reduce the amount of work for the extermination camps once the war is over.
Lance batteries don't actually work necessarily at all against Greater Daemons because, as Magnus the Red demonstrated, Tzeentchites can just casually deflect orbital bombardment with ease. Likewise shooting most daemons is completely ineffective due to Daemons being memetically resistant to all forms of missile weapons on account of lacking the symbolism of melee. Without Grey Knights themselves the Imperium would have already fallen several times (such as the return of Angron) while also acting as an emergency force that has stopped numerous daemonic outbreaks in the century since the formation of the Great Rift alone. And that's just the Grey Knights - others like the Ultramarines or Imperial Fists have played similarly crucial roles. The point of Marines is that ultimately there are some threats that the mortal fodder of the Imperium isn't capable of defeating regardless of how many bodies you shove at it, barring some future assembly of high level psykers. Otherwise the Imperium depends upon the Astartes and Custodes as its only real answer to threats like the Beast, Daemons, or Necrons. They're also generally incredibly useful in naval engagements simply because nobody can really do anything about a squad of Terminators showing up right in their bridge and shooting everything. The better question is in why in the god damn does the Imperium artificially limit the numbers instead of mass producing marines and their armor as much as possible. Just a single squad of termiantors on every ship with a teleportarium would do wonders for the Imperial Navy's performance.
Strategically, the Space Marines are the fastest deploying force since they have their own fleet and excellent astropaths. They can deploy to numerous warzone very quickly, but once they are there, their assets aren't really fast moving. A Rhino isn't much faster then a Chimera and isn't amphibious, their tanks are faster than Leman Russ who are known to be ponderous (except one or two varient who are just as fast), but aren't really fast either. Space Marine are fast runners and have a nearly infinite amount of stamina, but require regular supply in ammunition which slows them down. During any battle. Scions are tactically faster, but strategically slower. Their tanks are much faster then those of Space Marines and are better in rough terrain too. They also make more generous use of flying transports and while they might not run as fast as Space Marines, they don't need to reload their guns nor have need for a supply chain as complex as that of Marines. They can also risk aerial assaults more readily then Space Marines. This makes them significantly faster if more fragile.
[As for inconsistencies, there are certainly some. However it's also true that the galaxy is huge and scenarios can play out in a number of ways for all sorts of reasons. Many "inconsistencies" can just be the result of variables that are more ephemeral than "faction A has X, therefore auto-wins over faction B". The battle of Midway was won because a code was deciphered and used to turn the tables. That's a tiny thing from a materiel standpoint, but made a huge difference in outcome. So Drop Pods working in some scenarios, but not other scenarios becomes less of an inconsistency, and more of a "variable Y happened to be different in this case". The problem is people extrapolating that beyond those particular circumstances. You have to look at trends.
I never said that drop pods never worked, I only mentionned that they never worked in warzones where the enemy as decent anti-air assets. Most stories about Space Marines require the eney to be monstruously stupid or weak (sometimes both) for the story to make sense. That or dial the power of Space Marines up to a point in contradicts the fluff of the faction that is tranformed into punching bags for the protagonist.
Unfortunately I don't have the time to fully respond to this, however I will point out again that the specific purpose of the Drop Pod is to bypass anti-air defences. A world may have some very nice AA, but Pods will still be viable.
Pods + Teleportation changes the equation when it comes to Space Marine capability. If you can't accept that Pods have this ability, then you are seriously affecting what Space Marines can accomplish. Indefensible precision strikes change the game considerably.
There will certainly be circumstances where they don't work. But Pods are not reserved merely for misbehaving agro-worlds.
Don't forget the importance of the air power. Thunderhawks are ridiculous as far as aircraft design goes and allows reliably around 30 elite infantry to immediately assault a location after being dumped out of what is essentially a flying tank able to reach hypersonic speeds. It's also the main advantage of marines, as their orbital supremacy and airpower allows them to just pick up and immediately jump to another part of the planet in no time at all - all while forgoing the need to sleep or even be supplied with food.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/07 03:18:13
“There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance.”
Martel732 wrote:It is relevant, because the gulf between the two most definitely involves the fluff.
It involves the fluff just as much as it involves the rules. You can't say "the fluff's CLEARLY the one which is in the wrong!", because someone could quite easily say "the rules are CLEARLY in the wrong" instead.
Better to assume that they exist seperately to eachother.
If the fluff were different, ie more REASONABLE and less fanboy-spank-time, the gulf would be smaller and less of a massive pink elephant.
The problem is with you calling it "fanboy-spank" is that implies that it's not canon. The issue you're having is that what you're calling "fanboy-spank" is, in fact, canon.
Like it or lump it, but it IS canon. If you want to ignore the canon because you don't like it, or because muh realism (like you've been doing with plasma guns), that's okay, but just accept that it's your headcanon, not the actual lore.
Not are they not accurate, they are just about the worst army in the game by win rate. The two bottom dwellers, GK and BA ARE the bottom. Both power armor. Both based off astartes.
Martel, I implore you, can you actually make a point which doesn't involve the rules of the game? This is the *Background* forum. Any kind of point you're trying to make about Marines being useless, using sources from the actual game itself, is a flawed one.
I would also point out that the rules are monumentally stupid and make even less sense than the fluff, which actually does a semi-adequate job of explaining numerical disparity with necessarily power. It's the wonders of tabletop that gives us wonders like lasguns killing titans or Catachan oiled muscles being strong enough to shrug off .50 cal fire.
“There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance.”
Formosa wrote: So imagine the existential dread when one of the literal angels of the emperor not only turns out to be real, but is standing right there beside you, or worse, you are told to fight one.....
They matter before even a shot is fired to the rank and file of the imperium, they prove the emperor is not only real but his angels watch over us.
Propaganda is a wonderful thing, yes. The marines might not be quite as powerful as some fans would like them to be, but to the average Imperial citizen or soldier who hears they're coming to help against the evil chaos/rebels/xenos it's a massive boost to morale. The PDF will fight harder when actual Angels of the Emperor are come to see them fight. Crumbling units will regroup and throw themself back in the fight so they won't have to be ashamed in front of the marines. Workers will work extra hard to provide necessary materials for victory so as to not let the marines down. Quick marine strikes on key positions will lead the way for the regular grunts to seize the advantage, emboldened by the display of carnage left in the wake of the marines who are already redeploying.
The marines are often a force multiplier instead of a "win all alone" card. It's just that fluff too often fails to mention exactly that and instead only focuses on the heroics of the manly marines.
As opposed to genetically enhance, post-human killing machines psychically and surgically indoctrinated to have no emotions who”s most basic weapon is unthinkably horrific?
Reeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaally?
Theyre both absurd to the point where i cant buy it even for a second.
Hate to say it duder, but I think you're in the wrong hobby.
40k has always been dialled to 11. If it was a comic book character, it'd be Mean Angel, stuck on 4 3/4.
It's an inherently ludicrous setting. Always has been, and hopefully, always will be.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
As opposed to genetically enhance, post-human killing machines psychically and surgically indoctrinated to have no emotions who”s most basic weapon is unthinkably horrific?
Reeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaally?
Theyre both absurd to the point where i cant buy it even for a second.
Then why did you ever collect a blood angels army? You don't like their rules, you dislike the fluff to the point you want massive changes to the setting and seem full of self loathing. What ever appealed to you about them that you dropped money on an army you hate?
Martel732 wrote:It is relevant, because the gulf between the two most definitely involves the fluff.
It involves the fluff just as much as it involves the rules. You can't say "the fluff's CLEARLY the one which is in the wrong!", because someone could quite easily say "the rules are CLEARLY in the wrong" instead.
Better to assume that they exist seperately to eachother.
If the fluff were different, ie more REASONABLE and less fanboy-spank-time, the gulf would be smaller and less of a massive pink elephant.
The problem is with you calling it "fanboy-spank" is that implies that it's not canon. The issue you're having is that what you're calling "fanboy-spank" is, in fact, canon.
Like it or lump it, but it IS canon. If you want to ignore the canon because you don't like it, or because muh realism (like you've been doing with plasma guns), that's okay, but just accept that it's your headcanon, not the actual lore.
Not are they not accurate, they are just about the worst army in the game by win rate. The two bottom dwellers, GK and BA ARE the bottom. Both power armor. Both based off astartes.
Martel, I implore you, can you actually make a point which doesn't involve the rules of the game? This is the *Background* forum. Any kind of point you're trying to make about Marines being useless, using sources from the actual game itself, is a flawed one.
It's not useless, because I'm discussing the gap between the two. From what I've been told, even the fiction varies wildly.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/07 11:06:08
Insectum7 wrote: Pod is to bypass anti-air defences. A world may have some very nice AA, but Pods will still be viable.
I presented a piece of fluff where AA defense prevented Drop Pod assault earlier on the thread. The Space Marines in question couldn't teleport since they didn't have Terminators. If all it takes is a Firestorm Nexus to prevent their assault, it isn't much.
Pods + Teleportation changes the equation when it comes to Space Marine capability. If you can't accept that Pods have this ability, then you are seriously affecting what Space Marines can accomplish. Indefensible precision strikes change the game considerably.
Do you have a piece of fluff in which Drop Pod assaults are specified to have bypassed an AA defense grid that wasn't already destroyed?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/07 12:56:30
Martel732 wrote:It is relevant, because the gulf between the two most definitely involves the fluff.
It involves the fluff just as much as it involves the rules. You can't say "the fluff's CLEARLY the one which is in the wrong!", because someone could quite easily say "the rules are CLEARLY in the wrong" instead.
Also the problem with his argument is that the fluff isn't even consistent in how ridiculous it is. Marines have been overwhelmed in strength by a single entity atht's physically weaker than a common human (spore mine dragging off a marine in one of the Dawn of War books) alongside the many feats of strength they have in other books.
This is why no one can ever agree on the actual strength of marines, because GW doesn't care enough to put a set canon out In one book a single marine can take on an army, in another book, one common human commissar with a chainsword and takes down two veteran khornate berserkers in one on one combat (though the first one he more used melee combat to position the marine for a meltagun blast).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/07 13:12:29
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
On the issue of Drop-pods being susceptible to fire while descending, In the opening mission of Dawn of War II: Chaos Rising, a Drop-pod took anti-aircraft fire on final approach, killing all expect one of the passengers, who was severly wounded.
Insectum7 wrote: Pod is to bypass anti-air defences. A world may have some very nice AA, but Pods will still be viable.
I presented a piece of fluff where AA defense prevented Drop Pod assault earlier on the thread. The Space Marines in question couldn't teleport since they didn't have Terminators. If all it takes is a Firestorm Nexus to prevent their assault, it isn't much.
Pods + Teleportation changes the equation when it comes to Space Marine capability. If you can't accept that Pods have this ability, then you are seriously affecting what Space Marines can accomplish. Indefensible precision strikes change the game considerably.
Do you have a piece of fluff in which Drop Pod assaults are specified to have bypassed an AA defense grid that wasn't already destroyed?
Space Marine Codex 4th Ed.
"Drop Pods are capsules that are literally 'fired' at the battlezone and arrive so quickly it is impossible for enemy flak weapons to stop them."
Space Marine Codex 5th Ed.
"Such is the velocity of their approach there is little a foe can do to intercept Drop Pods once launched. . . "
Space Marine Codex 6th Ed.
copypasted from 5th Ed book.
Space Marine Codex 7th Ed.
"The speed of their descent is so great that the foe barely realize they are under attack before the Drop Pods crash down like a meteor storm."
Space Marine Codex 8th Ed.
Another copypaste from 5th.
Imperial Armor Volume 2
"Being small and travelling at high speed, Drop Pods are very difficult to hit with anti-aircraft fire and almost impossible to intercept with aircraft, should they even be close enough to react to a Drop Pod launch. This makes them a reliable method of delivering troops directly into battle. Conversely, a single Drop Pod is very difficult to detect and track, making them useful for inserting scout teams." -additionally-
"There are many different patterns, models and sizes of Drop Pod . . . Dedicated support weapon variant are used during planetstrike operations, as are cargo-carrying pods that allow squads fighting their way out of a drop zone to receive a much needed ammunition re-supply, even in the heat of battle."
It takes very fancy equipment or circumstances to fully defend against pods, and the way the books describe them in terms of the Space Marine MO makes gives the impression pods are used A LOT. If you're trying to get Space Marines to provide any special value to the Imperial armed forces, the capability of Drop Pods is absolutely key, imo. Pods can handle troop insertion and resupply, solving a lot of problems.
Robbert Ambrose wrote: On the issue of Drop-pods being susceptible to fire while descending, In the opening mission of Dawn of War II: Chaos Rising, a Drop-pod took anti-aircraft fire on final approach, killing all expect one of the passengers, who was severly wounded.
was that the same game that had a Librarian fall to Khorne worship?
Just saying..
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
The idea that something that is supposedly coming in so fast that it is difficult to hit with anti-aircraft batteries which fire lasers is also hard to detect and track is laughable.
It would be a giant sonic-booming fireball leaving a trail of flame and cloud directly to its landing point. Everyone for miles around would know the space marines had landed and where. You could also pinpoint the landing zone with seismometers detecting the impacts.
They are much larger than the Apollo command module and we could still track that on its descent to earth with radar whilst it was out of radio contact due to the ionisation of the atmosphere around it.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2019/06/07 16:46:36
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
Martel732 wrote:It is relevant, because the gulf between the two most definitely involves the fluff.
It involves the fluff just as much as it involves the rules. You can't say "the fluff's CLEARLY the one which is in the wrong!", because someone could quite easily say "the rules are CLEARLY in the wrong" instead.
Also the problem with his argument is that the fluff isn't even consistent in how ridiculous it is. Marines have been overwhelmed in strength by a single entity atht's physically weaker than a common human (spore mine dragging off a marine in one of the Dawn of War books) alongside the many feats of strength they have in other books.
This is why no one can ever agree on the actual strength of marines, because GW doesn't care enough to put a set canon out In one book a single marine can take on an army, in another book, one common human commissar with a chainsword and takes down two veteran khornate berserkers in one on one combat (though the first one he more used melee combat to position the marine for a meltagun blast).
I'm going to say that "inconsistency" is often a result of "narrative-fluke". The fact that 'thing X' happened once on record does not make that thing commonplace. Was the thing that dragged off a Space Marine really a Spore Mine? Was it one of the bigger spores? Was it something that might exist amid a Tyranid invasion but not a 'unit' with datasheet provided for game purposes? Was the marine in question just having a bad day?
It's important to note this goes both directions (or all directions). Not too long ago we had a thread where someone was claiming that because they read some instance where a Marine in a story kept firing his bolter after being cut in half (by a Carnifex or something), all Marines in-game should really have T5 3W (or whatever). When really that particular circumstance is already handled by the game as *particular marine makes all his saves/powerfist rolled a 1 to wound.* The spectacular doesn't directly translate to the overall trend.
Robbert Ambrose wrote: On the issue of Drop-pods being susceptible to fire while descending, In the opening mission of Dawn of War II: Chaos Rising, a Drop-pod took anti-aircraft fire on final approach, killing all expect one of the passengers, who was severly wounded.
See "narrative fluke" above.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/07 16:59:32
A Town Called Malus wrote: The idea that something that is supposedly coming in so fast that it is difficult to hit with anti-aircraft batteries which fire lasers is also hard to detect and track is laughable.
It would be a giant sonic-booming fireball leaving a trail of flame and cloud directly to its landing point. Everyone for miles around would know the space marines had landed and where.
They are much larger than the Apollo command module and we could still track that on its descent to earth with radar whilst it was out of radio contact due to the ionisation of the atmosphere around it.
Eh, its plausible. If it moves fast enough it can get pretty far before targeting systems catch on and acquire targets, and during a battle it might be hard to tell apart artillery from pods.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/07 16:46:24
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
A Town Called Malus wrote: The idea that something that is supposedly coming in so fast that it is difficult to hit with anti-aircraft batteries which fire lasers is also hard to detect and track is laughable.
It would be a giant sonic-booming fireball leaving a trail of flame and cloud directly to its landing point. Everyone for miles around would know the space marines had landed and where.
Short answer: TUBAD
Long answer: At the moment, effin cloud cover stops lasers in the real-world. All the marines would have to do is wait for a fog. Or, they possibly use all sorts of other tactics to make a successful drop, like dropping decoy pods, support pods, etc. and take their chances. There are solutions to be found for this problem, many of which I already mentioned earlier in the thread. Or, maybe the laser needs time to charge up, and by that point it's too late.
Robbert Ambrose wrote: On the issue of Drop-pods being susceptible to fire while descending, In the opening mission of Dawn of War II: Chaos Rising, a Drop-pod took anti-aircraft fire on final approach, killing all expect one of the passengers, who was severly wounded.
was that the same game that had a Librarian fall to Khorne worship?
Just saying..
Actually, no. Kyras's allegience to Khorne isn't revealed until the sequel, Dawn of War II: Retribution.
Also, "gore mages" were a thing and worshiped Khorne.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
HoundsofDemos wrote: Then why did you ever collect a blood angels army? You don't like their rules, you dislike the fluff to the point you want massive changes to the setting and seem full of self loathing. What ever appealed to you about them that you dropped money on an army you hate?
It was 1994. I guess they seemed cool in 1994.
Why bring up 1994? It's canon now, and it's still cool now. Subjective, of course - so if you don't think it's cool, why endure through it? What appeals to you?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Martel, I implore you, can you actually make a point which doesn't involve the rules of the game? This is the *Background* forum. Any kind of point you're trying to make about Marines being useless, using sources from the actual game itself, is a flawed one.
It's not useless, because I'm discussing the gap between the two. From what I've been told, even the fiction varies wildly.
But why? What about the gap between the lore and game is relevant to this topic, the topic being "why do Marines matter in the context of the 40k Background" at all?
I wouldn't go into a 40k tactics discussion about "what role do the Space Marines fulfil on the tabletop" citing fluff, because that's not the right place to do it.
Yes, the fiction varies wildly, but a great deal of it is actually in favour of Marines being on the strong side, not the weak side.
epronovost wrote:
Insectum7 wrote: Pod is to bypass anti-air defences. A world may have some very nice AA, but Pods will still be viable.
I presented a piece of fluff where AA defense prevented Drop Pod assault earlier on the thread. The Space Marines in question couldn't teleport since they didn't have Terminators. If all it takes is a Firestorm Nexus to prevent their assault, it isn't much.
Pods + Teleportation changes the equation when it comes to Space Marine capability. If you can't accept that Pods have this ability, then you are seriously affecting what Space Marines can accomplish. Indefensible precision strikes change the game considerably.
Do you have a piece of fluff in which Drop Pod assaults are specified to have bypassed an AA defense grid that wasn't already destroyed?
In the Fall of Damnos novel, the Ultramarines 2nd Company deploy via drop pod against Necrons, who have AA in the form of their Pylons. These pylons are able to hit some pods (including the one Captain Sicarius is in), but the vast majority hit the ground fine.
Melissia wrote:Also the problem with his argument is that the fluff isn't even consistent in how ridiculous it is. Marines have been overwhelmed in strength by a single entity atht's physically weaker than a common human (spore mine dragging off a marine in one of the Dawn of War books) alongside the many feats of strength they have in other books.
This is why no one can ever agree on the actual strength of marines, because GW doesn't care enough to put a set canon out In one book a single marine can take on an army, in another book, one common human commissar with a chainsword and takes down two veteran khornate berserkers in one on one combat (though the first one he more used melee combat to position the marine for a meltagun blast).
Not wrong there - is it inconsistent, but I think it's better to go with that, than use the very flawed game mechanics.
As far as I'm concerned, if GW say "Space Marines are a useful and important part of the Imperium's war machine, and are an effective and powerful opponent on the battlefield", then I'll suspend my disbelief to trust in that.
Melissia wrote:Also, "gore mages" were a thing and worshiped Khorne.
Maybe it's just my headcanon, probably is, but I was under the impression that Khorne hated psykers (naturally gifted people who channel the warp through themselves), but was okay with sorcery (as in, the use of ritual to draw power from the Warp).
Or, he was okay with it, so long as the warp energy was used to encourage someone to fight using their skill, and not just hiding, being a coward, and using mindbullets.
Again, probably headcanon.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/07 20:08:26
epronovost wrote: In my opinion, the only plausible use of Space Marines in the numbers they are presented with their organisation is for gunboat diplomacy. Space Marines have their own fleet. A small planet like Taros with a population that counts less then 50 million inhabitants with no orbital defense to speak off will be made compliant by a single ship and a 100 Space Marines. They have no force to fight them off. Their PDF is probably ridiculously tiny and spread over a large territory and poorly equipped with very little armored assets. Space Marines, in such a setting, are basically bullies. Very powerful warriors with very powerful weapons designed to fight ridiculously poor and ill trained opponents until they submit or simply bomb them from orbit until they are either all dead or compliant. The Imperium just needs its tithe, the rest is accessory. I guess this sort of role was better suited to the reformed, brain washed criminals and psycho that Space Marines used to be more then to the noble space knights and heroes of legend they have become. Flanderisation has rendered the fluff of 40K less and less coherant. This is especially true for Space Marines.
Space Marines quite explicitly are primarily gunboat diplomacy, but this works because they have such a high threat level to almost any world in the Imperium. Drop pods canonically are capable of avoiding air defenses on the vast majority of worlds*. Thunderhawks and other Space Marine transport craft are also depicted as being heavily resistant to ground fire, requiring strong defenses to reliably shoot down. In addition, Marines maintain transport craft that can rapidly relocate armoured vehicles in a way that is out of reach for almost all other Imperial forces. Teleportation circumnavigates most defenses, and does not require Terminator armour (or even Marines at all) to do, although for whatever reason, orbit-to-surface teleporter attacks using power-armoured Marines are rare (teleporter attacks are common in Naval warfare in general though- all Imperial Navy and Marine capital ships can launch teleporter boarding attacks. There is possibly some issue with teleporting into atmosphere/onto planets specifically).
When all is said and done though, these are the true strength of Marines.
Marine Chapters can have phenomenally powerful fleets. During the height of the 12th Black Crusade- the Gothic War, Lord Admiral Ravensburg lead a fleet comprising most of the capital ships of Battlefleet Gothic- the strongest force he could muster. This fleet had 17 capital ships. The Ultramarines (admittedly a well-supplied First Founding Chapter, but not fleet based) have at least 8 active Battle Barges (one being a Gloriana class), and at least 17 strike cruisers operating around M41. This dwarfs Ravensburg's fleet at Gethsemane, and quite possibly is not even the full capital ship complement of the Ultramarines, only what is known. This is a fleet of huge size in 40k terms, and is almost certainly enough to defeat the orbital defences of all but the most vital of Imperial worlds (places like Ryza or Necromunda). With a fleet like this, it becomes less unlikely that the Ultramarines would defeat Hive Fleet Behemoth. Many fleet based Chapters will operate similar fleets, and the vast majority of Chapters have at least 2-3 Battle Barges. Space Marines have a huge concentration of naval power in 40k terms.
*Of course there are always special-snowflake planets in fluff snippets that counter a particular common tactic and require special countermeasures. Your Firestorm nexus planet is a good example, the bastion cities on Vigilus are another. For whatever reason, the defenses on these planets are not widely replicated, which suggests they have irreplaceable relic variant defenses.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/06/07 21:31:59
ChargerIIC wrote: If algae farm paste with a little bit of your grandfather in it isn't Grimdark I don't know what is.
~4100
~1660
In one book a single marine can take on an army, in another book, one common human commissar with a chainsword and takes down two veteran khornate berserkers in one on one combat (though the first one he more used melee combat to position the marine for a meltagun blast).
