PDA

View Full Version : Space marine levels



Lord_Crull
12-05-2009, 14:41
What is the most common ''reasonable'' power level for a marine? I mean look at Brothers of the Snake, where a single squad literaly kills hundreds of cultists and a thousand dark eldar. contrast that to Nightbringer where the Ultramarines have some trouble with an entrenched PDf company. In Dawn of War the Eldar are a serious challange to marines wheres as in Brothers of the Snake the marines go through them like redshirts.

In Brothers of the Snake a marine is hardly bothered by an autocannon, wheras in Nightbringer a marine avoids an autocannon stating that it could crack his power armor.

In the Imprial Armor books a marine company gets caught off-guard by a Tau cadre with armor support and takes heavy losses. In Brothers of the Snake a single squad goes through literaly hundreds of enemies.

The Question in short if what ''vision'' of marines do you operate by?

Nero
12-05-2009, 15:28
1 marines = 10 guardsmen. Nice and simple, backed up by numerous quotes. Ok, so they've started saying 'dozen' instead of 10 recently, but still...

Nice and simple. Unless you're talking about Cadians or Catachans. How are they compared to a regular guardsmen? Is an Eldar Guardian equivalent to a regular Guardsman? Ect.

Just keep in mind that the BL novels tend to show the Space Marines that attempt some 1-in-a-million chance plan and who, against those odds, triumph. They don't show the other 999,999 Marines who go against the same odds and fail.

My personal "vision" of the 'Marines is based on the tabletop. It may not be 100% accurate, but it's a lot more consistent than Black Library.

FarseerMatt
12-05-2009, 15:45
I agree with Nero, a marine is good but not invincible. He can however multiply his power even further by fighting smart and striking where he'll have the biggest effect and where his strengths will count for most.

Like the Master Chief in Halo. He'd go down VERY quickly if he just charged in against a squad of Elites. But fighting smart, he can solo planets.

Phoenix Blaze
12-05-2009, 15:57
Hmm......I think I go by the 1 marine = 10 Guardsmen.

Marines are powerful, but some of the scenes in Brothers of the Snake and especially in the Space Wolf novels are just a bit too mental with, as has been said, a squad of marines taking out hundredss of enemies.

In my mind, marines should worry about Autocannons, heavy bolters (to an extent) and other such levels of weaponry, and above. Hell, enough boltguns should have a marine worried.

As always, I'll point towards my favourite scene of marine combat. Granted this was marine on marine but....in Fulgrim, the Istvaan V massacre. It's perfect as it's brutal and deadly. It also doesn't glorify marines in the way other books and fightscenes do.

Lord-Caerolion
12-05-2009, 16:37
Well, Fulgrim makes up for that with serious amounts of Primarch-love. McNeil can't go past a combat without putting in insane little details like "Fulgrim hit Manus with a blow that would send a mortal mans head hundreds of feet through the air, but would leave only a bruise on the iron flesh of a Primarch".
By the end of it I was surprised he included Primarchs getting hurt at all, he makes it seem like lascannons only leave grazes on them, let alone a simple bolter or sword.

NightrawenII
12-05-2009, 17:01
My favourite *marines action* is The Traitor hand, one of Cains novel, granted they are World Eaters, but they are dead 'ard.

WastedWhiteBoy
12-05-2009, 17:03
I have no problem with even a single squad of marines slaying hundred, possibly thousands of enemies.

But they won't walk into a room full of orks, say, "Lets rock!" and proceed to kill them all. They will destroy the leaders and manufacturing facilities with lightning strikes that leave the enemy reeling. As tough as anyone is, caught by surprise, one is at a serious disadvantage.

And as I see it, this is how marines can achieve such a ridiculous amount of kills (compared to how many of them die). Everything they do, every plan they make, every action hey take; it's all to give them even the slightest advantage in combat, and making the playing field as uneven for the enemy as is possible. A blunder can easily result in the brutal deaths of even whole companies. When things go according to plan, these companies can throw entire armies into disarray, allowing the Imperial Guard to do their work.

Quetch
12-05-2009, 17:40
i agree with wasted. 1 marine = 10 guardsmen in a straight fight, but their never in a straight fight; rapid strikes on vulnerable positions makes sure of that. i don’t think a marine would be able to take more than a couple of autocannon hits without the armour giving way, but small arms should cause them no problem

General Squeek Squeek
12-05-2009, 18:09
I have no problem with even a single squad of marines slaying hundred, possibly thousands of enemies.

But they won't walk into a room full of orks, say, "Lets rock!" and proceed to kill them all. They will destroy the leaders and manufacturing facilities with lightning strikes that leave the enemy reeling. As tough as anyone is, caught by surprise, one is at a serious disadvantage.

And as I see it, this is how marines can achieve such a ridiculous amount of kills (compared to how many of them die). Everything they do, every plan they make, every action hey take; it's all to give them even the slightest advantage in combat, and making the playing field as uneven for the enemy as is possible. A blunder can easily result in the brutal deaths of even whole companies. When things go according to plan, these companies can throw entire armies into disarray, allowing the Imperial Guard to do their work.


QFT

that right here is why I think there isn't much of difference between most "fluff" and the space marine table top rules. Most games on the tabletop don't make sense for a marine army to be fighting on. They wouldn't go into a fight with equal "points". More like 2000pts of marines would drop on a command center with 500pts of guard kill/sabotage the center and leave before the 50,000pts of guard show up to respond. They'd then move onto the next target and repeat till their enemy was subdued. Of course that wouldn't make for a very fun game so were left with marines fighting on equal footings with the enemy.

Urath
12-05-2009, 18:27
Yeah, the good ol' fashioned one Marine = ten "other troops" (human). But Astartes should generally always fight to their strengths as they are essentially storm troopers, capturing key facilities etc Basically like spitting in someones eyes so the smaller guys can beat said guy up.

I haven't read Brothers of the Snake, so I don't know under what circumstances they fought. But that sounds incredibly farfetched and, while I like abnett's writing, his grasp of the fluff angers me greatly at times. When Chaos Marines are concerned, their armour is paper. When loyalist Astartes are concerned, they're dead 'ard and can slaughter armies.

Radium
12-05-2009, 18:35
Hmm......I think I go by the 1 marine = 10 Guardsmen.

Marines are powerful, but some of the scenes in Brothers of the Snake and especially in the Space Wolf novels are just a bit too mental with, as has been said, a squad of marines taking out hundredss of enemies.

In my mind, marines should worry about Autocannons, heavy bolters (to an extent) and other such levels of weaponry, and above. Hell, enough boltguns should have a marine worried.

As always, I'll point towards my favourite scene of marine combat. Granted this was marine on marine but....in Fulgrim, the Istvaan V massacre. It's perfect as it's brutal and deadly. It also doesn't glorify marines in the way other books and fightscenes do.

This.

I tend to ignore most BL stuff, as it's fun to read but mostly very heavy on the marine love, to an insanely ridiculous extent.

Lord_Crull
12-05-2009, 19:18
Yeah, the good ol' fashioned one Marine = ten "other troops" (human). But Astartes should generally always fight to their strengths as they are essentially storm troopers, capturing key facilities etc Basically like spitting in someones eyes so the smaller guys can beat said guy up.

I haven't read Brothers of the Snake, so I don't know under what circumstances they fought. But that sounds incredibly farfetched and, while I like abnett's writing, his grasp of the fluff angers me greatly at times. When Chaos Marines are concerned, their armour is paper. When loyalist Astartes are concerned, they're dead 'ard and can slaughter armies.

A single squad of marines take out over a thousand dark eldar without a single loss. This is not an exaggeration, they even state so in the novel.

Urath
12-05-2009, 19:23
Is Dan Abnett sane?

Hive Mind 33
12-05-2009, 19:25
What is the most common ''reasonable'' power level for a marine?

Over 9000!!!!!!

obligatory reply is obligatory

NightrawenII
12-05-2009, 20:02
Is Dan Abnett sane?

Yes he is.
But he has good books and terrible books. BoS are one of terrible books:eyebrows:

Urath
12-05-2009, 20:06
Still, in *almost* every book of his that includes Space Marines, they're so heavily over-exaggerated it's madness beyond belief. We can rely on good old Eisenhorn though.

Maidel
12-05-2009, 21:05
Some people have touched on it already, but 1 marine is equal to 10 guardsmen AND 1000 guardsmen.

1 marine in a large room with 10 guardsmen and 50% of the time the guards will win, 50% of the time the marine will win.

HOWEVER - that just isnt how it works. Firstly, the marine wouldnt be on his own, he would be with his squad. Secondly, the first thing the guardsmen would know about the marine being there was a blast of bolter fire than cut the odds down to 8 to 1. Then, while they were crapping themselves hes shot two more, closed to close combat range and then its all over.

That the point - when you examine the 'combat ability' of two people you cant take them out of their normal method of operation. Its a bit like saying - whats more powerful a marine or a carnifex? Well, your immediate response is, the carnifex. Then if I say they are set up 72' appart the carnifex only has close combat weapons and the marine has a lascannon - who is more powerful now?

So, back to the case at hand - a single marine, on his own with no support and a limited amount of ammo is worthless. But, any marine commander that left a brother in this situation is not worthy to command.

1 marine is worth 10 guardsmen. 10 marines are worth 1000 guardsmen, 100 marines + tanks + dreadnoughts + thunderhawks + battle barges - well thats worth an entire sector.

They work by hit and run - 1 squad may well only kill 50 heretics - but those 50 are the command, support and head of the entire army - so they might as well have killed 50,000.

Ubermensch Commander
13-05-2009, 06:02
Some people have touched on it already, but 1 marine is equal to 10 guardsmen AND 1000 guardsmen.

1 marine in a large room with 10 guardsmen and 50% of the time the guards will win, 50% of the time the marine will win.

HOWEVER - that just isnt how it works. Firstly, the marine wouldnt be on his own, he would be with his squad. Secondly, the first thing the guardsmen would know about the marine being there was a blast of bolter fire than cut the odds down to 8 to 1. Then, while they were crapping themselves hes shot two more, closed to close combat range and then its all over.

That the point - when you examine the 'combat ability' of two people you cant take them out of their normal method of operation. Its a bit like saying - whats more powerful a marine or a carnifex? Well, your immediate response is, the carnifex. Then if I say they are set up 72' appart the carnifex only has close combat weapons and the marine has a lascannon - who is more powerful now?

So, back to the case at hand - a single marine, on his own with no support and a limited amount of ammo is worthless. But, any marine commander that left a brother in this situation is not worthy to command.

1 marine is worth 10 guardsmen. 10 marines are worth 1000 guardsmen, 100 marines + tanks + dreadnoughts + thunderhawks + battle barges - well thats worth an entire sector.

They work by hit and run - 1 squad may well only kill 50 heretics - but those 50 are the command, support and head of the entire army - so they might as well have killed 50,000.

Well said. Individually, a marine is scary. Then we start to multiply their killing power by putting them in squads, having those squads work in tandem above and beyond what most men can achieve, and backing the Astartes up with other equipment such as Thunderhawks,Droppods, etc.

Yes Brothers of the Snake was stupid, but not for the amount of enemies killed. It was the idiotic "300" style that Abnett chose to do it in. In order to play up the "Greek" cultural aspect of the Silver Snakes, he had them STAND IN A LINE with spear weaponry, and hold back the oncoming Orks. Or the scene where they charged through the Orks. And that is what made it poorly written, IMO, not the Marines killing many times their number.
Did they lay trap in the same setting and detonate charges, crushing greenskins beneeath rubble? No. Did they strafe them with Thunderhawks? Nope. Instead of using their trademark "Surgical Strike/Cut the head off of the snake" they stood there. Blah.

Hellebore
13-05-2009, 06:26
This is true of most armies though. No one fights with equal points values, whether they are marines or not. An army is only going to win when the odds are stacked in their favour, like having twice the number of soldiers etc.

Eldar like the hit and run surgical strike as much if not more than the marines. Orks love wave tactics, but have so many more troops than their enemies it doesn't really matter.

Any army, whether with limited numbers or not should be trying to maximise their effectiveness. You don't say 'well shucks we have 10x their number we might as well just run at them', you say 'even though we have 10x their number we'll fight this intelligently and maximise their casualties whilst minimising our own.'

Note: may not apply to necrons, orks, or tyranids. :p


As for marine 'power level', well it's a tricky one.

Like all soldiers when fighting to their strengths they are worth far more than when fighting to their weaknesses (and yes, marines do have weaknesses, not the least of which is their ridiculously brightly coloured armour).

My opinion is that marine SQUADS are self reinforcing force multipliers. 10 marines in a squad does not equal 100 guardsmen even if 1 marine equals 10 guardsmen. This is because the squad tactics and synchronicity that marines train unceasingly in allows them to reinforce each other in an exponenation sort of way. As a crude example, if one marine = 10 guardsmen, then several marines in a squad equal more: two = 22 guardsmen, 3 = 34 guardsmen, 4 = 46, 5 = 58, 6=70 etc.

Two marines in a squad can take on more enemies than two individual marines can take individually.

Having said that marines still need to be extremely careful in their missions. There are more lascannons in the Imperial guard than there are marines in the Imperium. Thus they have go be very careful that they aren't assaulting through areas covered by weaponry that their armour gives no protection against.

Of course this comes back to all armies and soldiers trying to tip the balance in their favour. Every army will try to assault in a way favourable to them.


As part of my view on marine 'power level' I also do not see a shortage of recruits. Yes the maximum number of marines in the Imperium is artificially suppressed, but the number of people they can recruit will never run out. Only 1st Co veterans take a while to rebuild, because they are produced through experience not recruitment. Thus, although a chapter doesn't have many marines in it at any one time, it can pretty much replace any casualty taken with a pretty fast turn around, because there will be a neophyte waiting in the wings to take their place.

I think that the strength of marines actually lies in close assault. That's where their advantages are further magnified. Anyone can fire a bolter and the person hit will explode just as easily as if a marine did it or a pleb. This was the problem with crossbows and later muskets, it didn't matter how skilled a warrior was, any honourless peasant with half an hour's training could end them.

A space marine is protected from plasma guns and lascannons in assault. His armour makes him even less vulnerable to melee attack than ranged attack. He can still shoot people with his pistol while he's doing it. A marine squad can lose a firefight, but will find it harder to lose a fist fight unless the opponents carry can-openers. Howling Banshees will cause trouble, but even ork boys won't be able to breach their armour easily.


Hellebore

DarkMatter2
13-05-2009, 06:39
Personally, I prefer the tabletop version of the Marines over the BL version, with the added quid pro quo of erasing references to Marines conquering entire planets and such nonsense.

Generally, I see the advantage of Marines as being primarily on the tactical level. They are the sort of guys you call in when something, on a relatively small level, HAS to be done.

A fortress has to be taken, some magical artifact has to be recovered, a position HAS to be held.

Mix that in with a few OMGZORZ UBERLEET last stands and other miraculous victories over much larger forces, and I think you are about right.

daemonkin
13-05-2009, 14:59
I liked the portrayal of the space wolves in 'Tales of Heresy'
where 1 squad managed to interrupt and turn back a Dark Eldar planetary invasion

simply by fighting smart and doing hit-and-run attacks.

D.

Condottiere
13-05-2009, 16:00
The optimal use of SM are in surgical strikes against strategic targets, not something you'd experience on a normal tabletop game, as the enemy should be somewhat surprised when they turn up and ideally, should only notice once they're too close for artillery support.

Somerandomidiot
13-05-2009, 18:35
I'm gonna go with the depiction in FW's IA series. In Taros, the marines are used to take and hold vital objectives, but the rest of the campaign is left up to the guard. There's a quote somewhere in there that basically says "when the fighting in the city reached its third day, the superhuman abilities of the marines really showed itself. In this situation, a normal human would require rest and sleep, while the marines were able to keep fighting without relief."

In the Anphelion Project, terminators are cut down by genestealers and the marines actually have to rescue their brothers when one of their thunderhawks goes down.

This kind of thing sounds far more real- the combination of the marine's superior armor and armament, combined with their physical enhancements, makes for a powerful warrior, but they're nowhere near the insane godlike power they're sometimes portrayed as.

Messiah
13-05-2009, 18:53
Ive read about the "100" marines can hold an entire planet, which is just silly, since they can only be in 100 places at once, and a planet is kinda big..

DarkMatter2
13-05-2009, 18:56
The optimal use of SM are in surgical strikes against strategic targets, not something you'd experience on a normal tabletop game, as the enemy should be somewhat surprised when they turn up and ideally, should only notice once they're too close for artillery support.

Realistically, the size of an average WH40k gaming board IS too close for artillery support.

Col. Tartleton
13-05-2009, 22:46
Realistically, the size of an average WH40k gaming board IS too close for rifle fire. :)

Maidel
13-05-2009, 22:55
Realistically, the size of an average WH40k gaming board IS too close for rifle fire. :)

Its probably about right for unaimed rapid fire guns.

But yea - aimed shots should do two boards lengthways - let alone 24'

Condottiere
14-05-2009, 03:27
Then I'd just place a beam laser in two corners, and lots of juice.

Cythus
14-05-2009, 13:06
I agree with Nero, a marine is good but not invincible. He can however multiply his power even further by fighting smart and striking where he'll have the biggest effect and where his strengths will count for most.

Like the Master Chief in Halo. He'd go down VERY quickly if he just charged in against a squad of Elites. But fighting smart, he can solo planets.


I agree totally, WastedWhiteBoy and Farseer Matt are right.

In a straight fight, 1 marine = 20 guardsmen IMO
However, unless the marines make a mistake there will never be that straight fight.

Marine's hit and run/surgical strike/assasinate etc I argee with the general consensus and would state this, take a normal civilised world:

100 marines (+support) could take the planet

but 10,000 marines couldn't hold it

that is why the guard are needed IMO

x-esiv-4c
14-05-2009, 14:00
quite a lot of marine fanwank here.

100 marines could not take a planet. That is simply ridiculous. Even with the 1 marine = 10 guardsmen ratio in place. Taking a planet involves denial of resistance, supression of logistic mobility, installation of pro-aggressor regime etc etc.
Lets not forget that marines are horribly fragile. They do well because the odds are always stacked in their favor. Something every combative force should attain. They strike quickly and their best weapon is the element of surprise.
Even suggesting a ratio is questionable since you have to place a lot of caveats. Are we talking about a Cadian or a Catachan, what are the conditions? Is the guardsmen armed with a plasmagun? It's just as trivial as throwing a 1:10 "power level" and calling it good.

Nero
14-05-2009, 14:55
quite a lot of marine fanwank here.

100 marines could not take a planet. That is simply ridiculous. Even with the 1 marine = 10 guardsmen ratio in place. Taking a planet involves denial of resistance, supression of logistic mobility, installation of pro-aggressor regime etc etc.
Lets not forget that marines are horribly fragile. They do well because the odds are always stacked in their favor. Something every combative force should attain. They strike quickly and their best weapon is the element of surprise.
Even suggesting a ratio is questionable since you have to place a lot of caveats. Are we talking about a Cadian or a Catachan, what are the conditions? Is the guardsmen armed with a plasmagun? It's just as trivial as throwing a 1:10 "power level" and calling it good.

Personally, I'd say it's 1:10 if it's a regular guardsmen weilding a lasgun/autogun.

Of course, you never play as the 'regular' guard on the TT. You play as the best of the best, the most famous and dangerous regiments in the entire Imperium, the Cadians and the Catachans and such. That's why 5 guardsmen on the TT are comparable to 1 Space Marine.

I'd also have to disagree with this 'force multiplier' business. That's true of absolutely all troops. A platoon of 100 guardsmen will be better than 10 individual squads of 10 guardsmen.

The Space Marines are powerful because they always fight fights that are in their favor. To put it in game-terms; they deepstrike 1000pts of Space Marines on top of a 200pt Command Squad, kill them quickly and then run away, leaving the enemy army in disarray.

The IG can't do this, they have to wade through the entire enemy army to reach that 200pt squad. That might take months and cost countless lives. The Space Marines take 3 minutes and lose nothing. That's why they're valuable.

x-esiv-4c
14-05-2009, 15:07
I would have to disgree with you concerning your statement about "the best IG regiments" on the TT. The imperial guard you play in 40k is representative of the imperial guard as a whole. If you want to play "best of the best" then you would just field veteran squads.

I'd like to reiterate that labelling SM with a power level or a ratio is hardly representative and misleading.

Idaan
14-05-2009, 15:52
IMHO one company of Marines can conquer a planet. But "can" doesn't mean "reliably will". "A planet" doesn't mean "any planet". The fact that in history Marines have conquered planets doesn't mean that you will send a company of Marines if Necromunda or Mars rebel. It's just that many quite important planets in the galaxy have population of less than 1 billion concentrated in one big city with authocratic, centralised government: Vraks being an example. It is possible to conquer them in one surgical strike on the capital with quite a small force if outside factors are favourable.

The quotes say "Give me a hundred Marines, or failing that give me a hundred other troops". It doesn't say that one Marine will defeat ten Guardsmen. It's more like a hundred Marines will do a job that otherwise would require 1000 Guarsmen, eg. capturing a foothold, sealing a breach, making an airborne assault on enemy capital. Notice that it doesn't say give me one Marine or ten Guardsmen: it's not only individual Marines but also excellent command, logistics and technological assets that make Marines better. As said, Marine squad and company is a force multiplier, and a bigger one than Guard squad or Company.

It's only that there aren't 1000 Guardsmen for every 100 Marines but rather 1000000.

NightrawenII
14-05-2009, 16:19
quite a lot of marine fanwank here.

100 marines could not take a planet. That is simply ridiculous. Even with the 1 marine = 10 guardsmen ratio in place. Taking a planet involves denial of resistance, supression of logistic mobility, installation of pro-aggressor regime etc etc.

Unless you talk about holding planet. Then yes you need regular forces to do the job.
But if we talking about taking planet, then the one SM Battle Force will be sufficient enough.

DarkMatter2
14-05-2009, 16:45
I don't think that giving Marines a power level in "kiloguardsmen" is a terribly effective way to look at their strength.

In situations like lightning assaults on fortresses or planets with highly inhospitable atmospheres, Marines are worth thousands and thousands of Guardsmen.

In direct assaults over a battlefield, I don't think a Space marine chapter is even worth a regiment of Imperial Guardsmen honestly. Heavy weapons and tanks would eat them alive.

x-esiv-4c
14-05-2009, 16:57
I think people are underestimating what it takes to "Take" a planet. What does that entail? What is the definition of a "take" on a planet as opposed to holding it?
Would an aggressor have to eliminate all military opposition for the planet to be "taken"?

NightrawenII
14-05-2009, 18:17
I think people are underestimating what it takes to "Take" a planet. What does that entail? What is the definition of a "take" on a planet as opposed to holding it?
Would an aggressor have to eliminate all military opposition for the planet to be "taken"?

No, if the all military opposition surrender.;)
In most cases the taking of planet is crushing the uprising. In such situation you need only kill the hight command and the rebellion lost its power.
After that IG is send to wash whats remain and establish the Imperial power again.

x-esiv-4c
14-05-2009, 18:25
Assuming the supreme command is centralized.
Assuming you know where the command is located and key figures.
Assuming the rebellion is coherent enough to fall apart when the command falters.

NightrawenII
14-05-2009, 18:52
Assuming the supreme command is centralized.Is there any problem with decentralized command?

Assuming you know where the command is located and key figures.Brother Librarian, where is our little friend the traitor governor??

Assuming the rebellion is coherent enough to fall apart when the command falters.Uprising without Chaos support are caused mostly by hight class of the planet. Masses simply follow the orders and without anyone in charge.......

x-esiv-4c
14-05-2009, 19:05
"Is there any problem with decentralized command?"

It will be much harder to stop a rebellion if the cells are operating independently of each other.

"Brother Librarian, where is our little friend the traitor governor??"

Again, you are assuming that there is a single person leading the rebellion which is probably not the case. You would also have to assume that the rebel leading caste didn't take precautions to be sought by psykers.


"Uprising without Chaos support are caused mostly by hight class of the planet. Masses simply follow the orders and without anyone in charge......."

Can you cite any references to this?

Nero
14-05-2009, 19:10
The quotes say "Give me a hundred Marines, or failing that give me a hundred other troops".

That's one of the quotes. There are also a bunch more making the direct 1:10 comparison (there's at least one that says exactly 1:10, I think it's in the rulebook, and both the current C:SM and C:IG say that a Space Marine is equivalent to a 'dozen' regular troopers).

NightrawenII
14-05-2009, 20:23
It will be much harder to stop a rebellion if the cells are operating independently of each other.
So they can be easily crush one by one.

"Brother Librarian, where is our little friend the traitor governor??" - Man, switch on your sarcasm-detector.


"Uprising without Chaos support are caused mostly by hight class of the planet. Masses simply follow the orders and without anyone in charge......."

Can you cite any references to this?

In the 3rd(4th:confused:) edition Codex:Space Marines the Inquisitor call the SM to stop the rebellion. When they destroyed entire PDf;) the Inquisitor began complain, because just death of the governor was enough.

Messiah
14-05-2009, 21:48
No, if the all military opposition surrender.;)
In most cases the taking of planet is crushing the uprising. In such situation you need only kill the hight command and the rebellion lost its power.
After that IG is send to wash whats remain and establish the Imperial power again.

Like killing Saddam stopped the fighting in Iraq?

To use a somewhat politically loaded example (sorry).

Lord_Crull
14-05-2009, 22:00
Like killing Saddam stopped the fighting in Iraq?

To use a somewhat politically loaded example (sorry).

The average 40k planet is an autocratic goverment of a billion or so people centered around a single main city. Look at Vraks for example.

WastedWhiteBoy
15-05-2009, 03:18
Also, to be fair, those who continue with the fighting in Iraq know that their actions won't cause the utter extermination of every last man, women, and child in the country.

Those in the 40k universe either realize this, or would figure it out in pretty short order.

TheOverlord
15-05-2009, 04:19
40k planets are pretty standard in governance, mostly by necessity. A single ruler, a single figurehead of government. Iraq is not that great of an example because Saddam's forces aren't the ones killing the Americans right now, is it?

In the case of Chaos cultists, for Chaos they seem to be attracted to power, and would usually unite under one major leader, which is why they have champions of Chaos. They only ever act as separate cells when they aren't ready to be revealed yet, but then they cause an uprising they would 'normally' unite under one flag, or else they'd all be fighting each other too, which makes the job easier for the marines. If you kill their figurehead, they break into chaos (heh) and then go back to their usual modus operandi as independent cells. And before you tell me that Chaos being Chaos having such a structured operation is bonkers, the only way you CAN command these bunch of freaks IS with ONE very commanding and charismatic leader, or else they'd all just be fighting over each other for power. In many ways they're like Orks.

But I agree no single company can subdue an entire rebelling planet. If the only ones that are rebelling are the 'structured' armies of the planet, like the pdf and it's governers, then yes it would be possible for them to cull the fighting power of a planet and kill off whatever that is the most obvious of targets, then they leave, but this neither conquers nor takes over a planet, they simply softened up the target, whether or not this action is sufficient enough to subdue the rest of the planet well that depends rather highly on how deep the corruption goes.

legio mortis
15-05-2009, 04:46
The average 40k planet is an autocratic goverment of a billion or so people centered around a single main city. Look at Vraks for example.
Provide proof, please. There is no average Imperial planet in 40k. They're all different in their own ways.

TheOverlord
15-05-2009, 06:07
Dark Heresy. Although every planet is different in the way they act as a government, they are ALL required to have a SINGLE ruler, which is representative of the Administratum. This was set in place for the sake of necessity. How they govern or indeed how they PICK said Head Governor is totally up to the planet.

Condottiere
15-05-2009, 06:55
If you plan a rebellion against an interstellar Empire, you need redundancy in command, and a method to replace those eliminated or captured. How many times have I read that the military head of Basque ETA terrorist organization has been captured?

General Squeek Squeek
15-05-2009, 08:29
There's a reason why this game fiction and not reality. In 40k its totally plausible and accepted that marines go in hit the vital areas hard and the rest of the enemy fall to pieces. That isn't at all what would happen in the real world, but then again thats not the world I signed up to play in. I wanna world where theres fish/cow aliens, aliens that shoot other aliens out their guns, the human race uses WWII tactics in a futuristic setting, and 8ft tall b@d@$$ space heroes pwn everyone. It doesn't have to make sense, and of course 1 million marines would mean nothing in a galaxy of 1 million planets, but thats what suspension of disbelief is all about.

Lord_Crull
15-05-2009, 11:23
Provide proof, please. There is no average Imperial planet in 40k. They're all different in their own ways.

Dark Heresy, Dakr Apostle, Imperial Armor 3 and 5.

legio mortis
15-05-2009, 18:29
Dark Heresy. Although every planet is different in the way they act as a government, they are ALL required to have a SINGLE ruler, which is representative of the Administratum. This was set in place for the sake of necessity. How they govern or indeed how they PICK said Head Governor is totally up to the planet.
That's not what I was challenging. I was challenging the notion that most planets are centered around one city and that's it.


Dark Heresy, Dakr Apostle, Imperial Armor 3 and 5.
And what do they say? Do you have page references? From my understanding, Taros was a small mining colony, not a "typical" civilized planet, and Vraks was just a munitorium storage facility, again, not a "typical" civilized planet.

Lord_Crull
15-05-2009, 19:36
The sheer fact that the tactics WORKS, suggest that all of the worlds are centered on a single authority. Look at the initial situation on Taros for an example.

Vaktathi
15-05-2009, 20:45
What is the most common ''reasonable'' power level for a marine? I mean look at Brothers of the Snake, where a single squad literaly kills hundreds of cultists and a thousand dark eldar. contrast that to Nightbringer where the Ultramarines have some trouble with an entrenched PDf company. In Dawn of War the Eldar are a serious challange to marines wheres as in Brothers of the Snake the marines go through them like redshirts.

In Brothers of the Snake a marine is hardly bothered by an autocannon, wheras in Nightbringer a marine avoids an autocannon stating that it could crack his power armor.

In the Imprial Armor books a marine company gets caught off-guard by a Tau cadre with armor support and takes heavy losses. In Brothers of the Snake a single squad goes through literaly hundreds of enemies.

The Question in short if what ''vision'' of marines do you operate by?

I tend to go with the oft-quoted "100 Space Marines or any 1000 other men".

10-1 sounds reasonable to me, assuming the ten other men are equivalent to hardened Cadian Shock Troops or the like, and still makes Space Marines *incredibly* badass and capable of incredible feats. At the same time however, it puts some limits on their OTT crap, and puts them in perspective with the rest of the 40k universe, especially in relation to the Imperial Guard.

legio mortis
15-05-2009, 21:17
The sheer fact that the tactics WORKS, suggest that all of the worlds are centered on a single authority. Look at the initial situation on Taros for an example.
When did I say that most planets don't have a single authority? It may be from an elected president, a dictator or even a group of people that rule as a council, like the Tetrarchs of Mordian. What I don't believe is that the population of most planets is centered around one city. That is the evidence that I am waiting for.

Col. Tartleton
15-05-2009, 21:37
I tend to go with the oft-quoted "100 Space Marines or any 1000 other men".

10-1 sounds reasonable to me, assuming the ten other men are equivalent to hardened Cadian Shock Troops or the like, and still makes Space Marines *incredibly* badass and capable of incredible feats. At the same time however, it puts some limits on their OTT crap, and puts them in perspective with the rest of the 40k universe, especially in relation to the Imperial Guard.

And remember kids, The Grand Master of Assassins counts as a man...

Those thousand assassins can take on a hundred marines and win! :)

Condottiere
15-05-2009, 21:50
A single urban centre on a planet with a sustainable and earth compatible ecology sounds like an attempt to keep the majority of the population under control, since most of the power centres, probably even religious, would be focussed there.

Whether this is Imperial policy or a development of the local vested interests would throw light on a great many things.

Lord_Crull
15-05-2009, 23:28
When did I say that most planets don't have a single authority? It may be from an elected president, a dictator or even a group of people that rule as a council, like the Tetrarchs of Mordian. What I don't believe is that the population of most planets is centered around one city. That is the evidence that I am waiting for.

Whenever you crack open a Black library book as in the Cain and Gaunt books thier is always that important captial city.

legio mortis
15-05-2009, 23:59
Whenever you crack open a Black library book as in the Cain and Gaunt books thier is always that important captial city.
And with that comes all the other cities on the planet. Every planet is going to inevitably have a capital city, just like how every country on Earth has a capital city, but there is no fluff basis for most planets having everyone living in just one area. Most of the planets described in the books have populations spread throughout their respective planets.

Maidel
16-05-2009, 00:09
Im with legio on this.

In many books and referances they will talk about 'important capital city' which is correct. And they will fight hardest to protect that place because its probably where all the admistratiion is carried out and where the leader is (they always look out for themselves)

But look at hive worlds - they might have 10+ hives on them. Sure one will be the biggest, but the rest of them still support more people than the average planet.

Or take a real world example - like England. Sure, 8 million people live in London. Its the biggest and most important city. IS the entire of england focused on London? Hell no. There are two other major hubs in birmingham and Mancester and probably 15 other smaller city hubs (portsmouth, bristol, newcastle/sunderland, liverpool, york, leicester, nottingham, southampton, etc etc) - sure the country would fight hardest to protect London - but its not the be all and end all of the country - infact, although 15% of the people in the country live in London - that leaves 85% of the people NOT living in London.

Lord_Crull
16-05-2009, 00:24
And with that comes all the other cities on the planet. Every planet is going to inevitably have a capital city, just like how every country on Earth has a capital city, but there is no fluff basis for most planets having everyone living in just one area. Most of the planets described in the books have populations spread throughout their respective planets.

But in the fluff a decapitation strike always works, so therefore a planet must be centered around a single center of power.

We know that at least minor mining worlds like Taros and Tanakreg have most of the power located in one big city as seen by examples.

legio mortis
16-05-2009, 00:55
But in the fluff a decapitation strike always works,
That doesn't mean that people only live in one area.



so therefore a planet must be centered around a single center of power.
One center of power =/= everybody living in one place. Hive Primus of Necromunda is the seat of the planetary governor, but there are hundreds of other hives scattered throughout the planet.



We know that at least minor mining worlds like Taros and Tanakreg have most of the power located in one big city as seen by examples.
Because they are small, backwater and generally inhospitable worlds that are only really used for mining. The only people that live there are the miners and their families.

Lord_Crull
16-05-2009, 01:25
That doesn't mean that people only live in one area.

One center of power =/= everybody living in one place. Hive Primus of Necromunda is the seat of the planetary governor, but there are hundreds of other hives scattered throughout the planet.



I wa'nt arguing about that. I was arguing about how a single strike could decapiate a planet.

Kozbot
16-05-2009, 14:16
One of the reasons that a relatively small number of marines can take a planet is a very euro-centric view of politics and leadership. I'd say its even pre-WWI. Except for major chaos or genestealer cults there are very few 'true believers' in a rebellion. The majority of those fighting against the Imperium are just following orders. If you eliminate the command structure they will surrender and the fight is over. Think the Iraqi army in the initial invasion of Iraq.

Now the obvious counter to this is 'what about insurgencies?'. By most of the fluff I've read insurgencies appear to be pretty uncommon and given the type of war that's fought that makes sense. In the modern world if someone is militarily more powerful then you, the logical thing to do is not meet them on the battlefield but wage an insurgency. That works so long as your opponent isn't willing to burn and salt all the fields, pollute any water source you need, and kill every man, woman, and child who's even vaguely associated with the rebellion.

The Basques were brought up and can serve to illustrate the point. Sure the leadership gets taken out and a new one take the mantel. How well would that work if every Basque everywhere was executed for the crime of being a Basque? One bit of fluff that springs to mind that I'm fairly certain was from a previous marine codex where in an inquisitor warned that calling in the marines was similar to calling for an exterminatus, so complete was the destruction. The Imperium is way closer to Nazi Germany than the modern US and Space Marines are way closer to elite SS troopers than to modern American Marines.

Idaan
16-05-2009, 14:29
People again are arguing that the Marines could take all planets because they're centered around a single city as I pointed out. That's obviously not true: they could take a sizeable minority of the planets without multiple power centres, insurgents etc. But it would be a fallacy that this kind of worlds are majority. Hell, even a planet with centralised power but multi-billion population could repel or hold off the Marine invading force.

kammilek
17-05-2009, 16:21
for me is more like 1 marine = 100 guardsman
as for book there is an exelent part in second book of lastchancers by gav thorpe;) marines are much toughter, stronger, faster now add power armor and bolter +chainsword... compare to normal human they are almost invincible:cool:

Grindgodgrind
17-05-2009, 18:02
I'm a subscriber to the 1 marine = 10 guardsmen theory, but remember that some of the 'average guardsmen' do believe that Marines are the ultimate ass-kickers in the universe. For instance, in 'Fall of Malovilion' (sp?), a few marines blow away a Carnifex, and as the 'fex dies, it spins and decapitates one of the marines. A watching guardsmen is terrified as he was lead to believe the Astartes are 't3h invincibubbles'.

stormblade
17-05-2009, 18:05
for me is more like 1 marine = 100 guardsman
as for book there is an exelent part in second book of lastchancers by gav thorpe;) marines are much toughter, stronger, faster now add power armor and bolter +chainsword... compare to normal human they are almost invincible:cool:

They die like the rest of them.

Cythus
17-05-2009, 19:37
i'm going to bring out the halo analogy here... ;)

masterchief, in a straight fight, dies to a group of say ... 5 brutes (assuming he isn't pumped up on powerweapons)

however, in the course of halo 3 he basically saves humanity (well the marines do nothing, even when I try to keep them alive) and kills 100s of brutes etc

this is how I see SM, yes they are very good, but it is there ability to apply themselves perfectly that wins with such devastating power compared to their size, that makes them truely awesome
(I guess its the xenophobic (in the sense of 40K - I'm not racist) part of me that likes humans to have the uber-good hero's - although my main army is necrons?)

IF guard could take over the role that SM do then the High Lords of terra would stop making SM and focus on guard
however they do not, so...

Im part of the camp which supports the stronger SMs (relatively) and that say half a chapter could subjuct a typical civilised world

Lord Raneus
17-05-2009, 20:01
I'm pretty sure the 1 marine=10 guardsmen doesn't actually make any sense at all.
If you put 10 guardsmen with lasguns up against 1 marine with a bolter, they're going to be dead in about 3 seconds and the marine will most likely be uninjured. Lasguns don't even punch through Guard flak armor sometimes so there's no way even 10 guardsmen are bringing down a marine before they get slaughtered.

I tend to go by somewhere between the Space Wolves marines, who actually die fairly easily, and the Cain marines.

Brothers of the Snake marines are pretty ridiculous, though.

stormblade
17-05-2009, 20:07
I'm pretty sure the 1 marine=10 guardsmen doesn't actually make any sense at all.
If you put 10 guardsmen with lasguns up against 1 marine with a bolter, they're going to be dead in about 3 seconds and the marine will most likely be uninjured. Lasguns don't even punch through Guard flak armor sometimes so there's no way even 10 guardsmen are bringing down a marine before they get slaughtered.

I tend to go by somewhere between the Space Wolves marines, who actually die fairly easily, and the Cain marines.

Brothers of the Snake marines are pretty ridiculous, though.

Unless the marine concludes, as they often do, that he would look way cooler without a hamlet:)

and I think it would definitely take more than 3 seconds.

Vaktathi
17-05-2009, 20:16
I'm pretty sure the 1 marine=10 guardsmen doesn't actually make any sense at all.
If you put 10 guardsmen with lasguns up against 1 marine with a bolter, they're going to be dead in about 3 seconds and the marine will most likely be uninjured. Lasguns don't even punch through Guard flak armor sometimes so there's no way even 10 guardsmen are bringing down a marine before they get slaughtered.


The marine's armor has weak points however (neck, eyes, joints, etc) that aren't covered by thick ceramite plates, and enough shots impacting in roughly the same place will weaken and eventually defeat even the thickest of the armor. Think of Lasguns as equivalent in power to modern assault rifles (which is what they are frequently described as being similar to) and there's a lot of energy there. Not even a Space Marine is going to want to walk through a hail of such fire for that long, and such weapons are still capable of killing a Space Marine should the armor be defeated, even if he's more resistant than a normal human soldier.

A hail of concentrated automatic weapons fire should find something squishy. That's why Space Marines fail their armor saves 33% of the time. Power Armor isn't invincible, it's a huge defensive boon, but isn't going to make the Space Marine immune to small arms fire. There are weak points, and repeated impacts will defeat it. The marine inside is not immune to weapons fire either, just better able to continue fighting in with some wounds.

For instance, a lasround or bullet catching a space marine in the joint area between the groin and thigh is likely going to put him out of the battle at least with a nonfunctional leg (which, for 40k game purposes, would be a unit casualty)

Also, statistically, 10 guardsmen firing lasguns are goign to inflict 1.11 casuatlies against a Marine unit. One Space Marine firing back is going to inflict .88 casualties back.

10-1 sounds pretty reasonable to me.

Col. Tartleton
17-05-2009, 20:22
I had in my story 50 marines killing 7,000 guardsmen in well under an hour.

Though it amounts to an orbital bombardment of 24 deathwind drop pods with assault cannons into the base in the middle of the night and then the marines hitting them the side and overwhelming their hastily prepared defenses.

Each marine killed like 50 men personally under these conditions of thousands of men rushing to the battle half asleep and half dressed.

It produces an approximate 2333:1 kill ratio... Oh dear.

Guard surrender, marines parley, then kill them when they decide they know too much to allow the marine mission to continue without additional risks of the Guard High Command knowing they're on to them.

Cythus
17-05-2009, 20:32
I had in my story 50 marines killing 7,000 guardsmen in well under an hour.



sooner or later you will be killed in a wave of marine hate...

until then, any chance of reading that book?

Nero
17-05-2009, 20:34
i'm going to bring out the halo analogy here... ;)

masterchief, in a straight fight, dies to a group of say ... 5 brutes (assuming he isn't pumped up on powerweapons)

however, in the course of halo 3 he basically saves humanity (well the marines do nothing, even when I try to keep them alive) and kills 100s of brutes etc

Master Chief has a reload button.

See how far you get through that campaign on Legendary without ever reloading. That's how powerful Master Chief is when he's not altering history to make himself the victor.


As for the centralised government argument - couldn't it be possible that the Imperium specifically designs it's colonies to be vulnerable like this so that they can be easily crushed if they rebel?

Cln_kickass
17-05-2009, 21:20
read at the front bit in brother and snake atuo cannon shells were bouncing off them no worries ect... in nightbringer they crack power armour. of course they crack power armour its a huge shell being fired at high velocity im suprised it doesnt just go through them also i blieve that 1 space marine squad used properly can take down a company thats 1 to the dozen but thats because they can in the fluff the tabletop mode is made to make it fair not make it like the fluff .... fluff rules!

Lord_Crull
17-05-2009, 21:49
The marine's armor has weak points however (neck, eyes, joints, etc) that aren't covered by thick ceramite plates, and enough shots impacting in roughly the same place will weaken and eventually defeat even the thickest of the armor. Think of Lasguns as equivalent in power to modern assault rifles (which is what they are frequently described as being similar to) and there's a lot of energy there. Not even a Space Marine is going to want to walk through a hail of such fire for that long, and such weapons are still capable of killing a Space Marine should the armor be defeated, even if he's more resistant than a normal human soldier.



I would say it depends on the depiction of the lasgun , we have had instances of full power lasguns blowing off limbs and shooting throught conrete walls in Necropolis, of course when Dan Abnett writes you can blow up a planet with an overloading lasgun and a tube charge.

Vaktathi
17-05-2009, 22:23
I would say it depends on the depiction of the lasgun , we have had instances of full power lasguns blowing off limbs and shooting throught conrete walls in Necropolis, of course when Dan Abnett writes you can blow up a planet with an overloading lasgun and a tube charge.

well...yeah, Abnett's fluff can be...overdone (Brothers of the Snake, Gaunts Ghosts, etc...)

However in most cases the lasgun is depicted as roughly equivalent to high power automatic weapons, more appropriately something like an FG42 or early model M14's with full power automatic cartridges, at least with how GW and FW have described Autoguns, which are interchangeable with lasguns.

Firaxin
18-05-2009, 02:47
You're looking at it wrong.

It was never supposed to be '10 guardsmen against 1 marine would be a fair fight.'

It means 'I need only 10 marines to hold this pass against those orks, or failing that, 100 guardsmen,' or, 'I need 10 marines to wipe out that rebel outpost, or failing that, 100 guardsmen.'

etc.

Of course marines against guardsmen you'll need a lot more than 10:1! But mankind does not wage endless war on every front against space marines. Traitor Guard, Orks, Tyranids, even (Dark) Eldar raids are all infinitely more common than chaos space marines.