# Has the Alpha Legion ever lost?



## MontytheMighty (Jul 21, 2009)

Has the Alpha Legion ever suffered a defeat in the fluff?

or is this a futile question because we never know whether their "defeats" are actually victories?


----------



## BlackGuard (Sep 10, 2010)

The Horus Heresy.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

Well, I'll answer your question with another question: Did any Legion really "lose" a fight?

Minus the occasional "reinforcement" by one Legion to another? Even in "Horus Rising", when the Blood Angels took it to the face on Murder they and the Luna Wolves turned around and crushed the spiders.


----------



## VX485 (Feb 17, 2011)

Hunt for Voldorius, Space Marine Battle novel, they lose


----------



## Protoss119 (Aug 8, 2010)

I believe there was an Alpha Legion warband known as "The Faithless" led by one "Arkos the Faithless" fighting in the Siege of Vraks. They were defeated and Arkos himself was captured along with 15 other Alpha Legionnaires by the Dark Angels led by an Interrogator Chaplain Belphegor. With Vraks under quarantine following the end of the Siege, I dunno how much of a defeat that was, though.


----------



## aboytervigon (Jul 6, 2010)

If they win the publicise it if they loose the ones they capture are just probably the marines that hold victory in alpha legion armour and then the whole commander of the winning chapter was probably alpharius himself.


----------



## vipertaja (Mar 20, 2010)

MontytheMighty said:


> Has the Alpha Legion ever suffered a defeat in the fluff?
> 
> or is this a futile question because we never know whether their "defeats" are actually victories?


What kind of question is this? Of course they have. Every faction has had losses and victories. 

The hardest part tends to be knowing they were involved in an operation at all and what they seek to achieve. Also the reliability of the source of the intelligence could be an issue, as it could be compromised (influenced by them).

Kind of like in the"inception" movie sometimes they might not be trying to take the assumed objective, but rather might be planting something/someone and leaving it behind. 



BlackGuard said:


> The Horus Heresy.


Taking the "Legion" novel at face value, yes...and I can't think of a way that it wouldn't be a loss.

I would also add the Dawn of war storylines, though I don't know how close the books are to the game. The Aplha legion also acted rather uncharacteristically in the game (Khorne worship, Khorne sorcerer?).


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

VX485 said:


> Hunt for Voldorius, Space Marine Battle novel, they lose


The Alpha Legion weren't in that book.

To the OP, of course, I'd wager most of their lossess occured in the beginning when their Primarch was still getting used to the whole leading a legion thing.

However in my opinion, overall it's hard for lossess to occur in a legion as meticulous and secretive as the AL, they plan for everything and their backup plans have backups.

To those talking about the AL's role in the HH, I wouldn't consider something as monumental as that as being a loss, especially when it was something planned by the Chaos powers from the beginning.


----------



## Bane_of_Kings (Oct 28, 2009)

Malus Darkblade said:


> The Alpha Legion weren't in that book.


Actually, I beg to differ:



> Originally Posted on *Black Library's Website*: Captain Kor'sarro Khan of the White Scars is petitioned by his Chapter Master to hunt down and destroy the daemon prince Voldorius, a warleader of the renegade Alpha Legion, thus ending his reign of terror across the stars. Hunting the beast doggedly for over a decade, Kor'sarro finally brings Voldorius to battle on Quintus, a world that has totally given itself over to the *Alpha Legion*. Together with their Raven Guard allies, the White Scars must fight an entire planet if they are to slay the daemon prince.


----------



## increaso (Jun 5, 2010)

They normally have normal humand or mutants doing all the leg work, so it's hard to determine whether the inevitable defeat of said humans/mutants is a 'loss' for the AL.


----------



## MEQinc (Dec 12, 2010)

Malus Darkblade said:


> However in my opinion, overall it's hard for lossess to occur in a legion as meticulous and secretive as the AL, they plan for everything and their backup plans have backups.


That doesn't really mean anything though. The same can be said of numerous other chapters, legions and factions, yet all have suffered defeat from time to time. The Eldar can forsee the future yet they lose. The Raven Guard and Night Lords are both meticulous and secretive yet they have lost. The Ultramarines make backup plans for their backup plans and have a book dedicated to having a plan for everything yet they have lost. So the fact that the Alpha Legion can also do these things in no way implies that they cannot lose.



> To those talking about the AL's role in the HH, I wouldn't consider something as monumental as that as being a loss, especially when it was something planned by the Chaos powers from the beginning.


So the fact that they lost badly means it doesn't count? 


To the OP.
Of course the Alpha Legion has lost. They don't always have straightforward plans and often have secondary objects but that doesn't mean that they will achieve these objectives always. They are masters of secrecy which means we are unlikely to hear of their defeats but that doesn't mean they don't occur.


----------



## vipertaja (Mar 20, 2010)

MEQinc said:


> Of course the Alpha Legion has lost. They don't always have straightforward plans and often have secondary objects but that doesn't mean that they will achieve these objectives always. They are masters of secrecy which means we are unlikely to hear of their defeats but that doesn't mean they don't occur.


I also think one of the reasons they aren't heard of much is because they do so much of their work behind the scenes. Usually they don't much reveal their involvement in an operation except possibly in the later critical stages. So one is more likely to just see revolts and uprisings that one doesn't necessarily connect to the legion in any way, while they may very much be behing funding and equipping these insurgencies.
If the thing doesn't pay off, they'll just sneakily withdraw their support.


----------



## MontytheMighty (Jul 21, 2009)

vipertaja said:


> What kind of question is this? Of course they have. Every faction has had losses and victories.


no doubt they've lost, but I'm looking for specific instances that are *canon* (i.e. the source of information is definitely accurate...for example, something in a codex/novel narrated by the 3rd person omniscient authour)

I guess I should have made myself more clear in the original post: I'm not questioning whether the AL has ever lost, I would like to know about the instances (actually mentioned in the fluff) when the AL has definitely suffered a defeat

Hunt for Voldorius, as mentioned by a previous poster, is an example 

I'm looking for particular engagements, not something as monumental as the HH, which arguably wasn't a "defeat" for the Alpha Legion 



aboytervigon said:


> If they win they publicise it if, if they lose...the commander of the winning chapter was probably alpharius himself


hehe yeah


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

MEQinc said:


> That doesn't really mean anything though. The same can be said of numerous other chapters, legions and factions, yet all have suffered defeat from time to time. The Eldar can forsee the future yet they lose. The Raven Guard and Night Lords are both meticulous and secretive yet they have lost. The Ultramarines make backup plans for their backup plans and have a book dedicated to having a plan for everything yet they have lost. So the fact that the Alpha Legion can also do these things in no way implies that they cannot lose.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I said they don't lose a lot based on fluff we know of them, not that they never lose. They probably lost a ton of battles but kept it secret but based on what we know, it dosen't seem that way as of yet.

The gift of foresight isn't 100% accurate as often the future has a million possible outcomes that can occur. So the Eldar and their farseers are not expected to win all their battles especially since their numbers are low, are fragile warriors in comparison to their enemies (orks, tyranids, astartes, etc.), and so on.

The AL have no such luxuries and so plan out everything with cold science, logic, and tons of intel.

I've never perceived the RG and the NL as taking their plan-making sessions to the extremes or on levels close to the AL. They're stealthy yes but they make their plans revolve around their abilities while the AL are not known for hit and run or stealth but simply their plan making/secrecy.

The UM are a by-the book legion and as such as easily countered by the AL as they have been time and time again. Again, I've never encountered fluff or perceived the UM as being heavy-duty planners.
.
How did they lose badly? Did you really think a single legion could have prevented what occurred in the HH especially against the Chaos powers and the might of the Emperor and the Siglllite?? 

I don't know why the Cabal thought that by siding with Horus, the AL alone could help him defeat the Emperor especially when the AL were told of the events only a few years prior to it occurring as opposed to having knowledge of the event a century in advance to allow them to really plan for it.


----------



## aboytervigon (Jul 6, 2010)

In the book john did say it was to late.


----------



## vipertaja (Mar 20, 2010)

MontytheMighty said:


> no doubt they've lost, but I'm looking for specific instances that are *canon* (i.e. the source of information is definitely accurate...for example, something in a codex/novel narrated by the 3rd person omniscient authour)
> 
> I guess I should have made myself more clear in the original post: I'm not questioning whether the AL has ever lost, I would like to know about the instances (that can actually be found in the fluff) where the AL has definitely lost


To be honest, I kind of figured it may have been what you were after, just sounded unusual. 

I did already mention dawn of war (books/games), but I don't know to what degree this applies, to my understanding the books more or less go a similar route to the game, hence Alpha Legion loss.

I don't think they've been featured enough for there to be much more than what's already been mentioned. 

I do recall having a compiled list somewhere that lists short blurbs of all kinds of conflicts where even alpha legion is mentioned (and they lost). I don't know where I have it, who made it or what it's a compilation of. Old white dwarf fluff? 2nd ed. fluff of some kind. Whatever. I recall their swamp based camp was attacked and they were forced to retreat? I don't remember who attacked them. If I stumble upon this I may post the blurb in question.


----------



## Some Call Me... TIM (Apr 3, 2011)

I'm sure they have for the sake of reason. I think there comes a time where their manipulative skills don't work and they have to do something pretty rash. Its been 10,000 years. So I think it definitely has happened.


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

Some Call Me... TIM said:


> I'm sure they have for the sake of reason. I think there comes a time where their manipulative skills don't work and they have to do something pretty rash. Its been 10,000 years. So I think it definitely has happened.


Of course, would be dumb if that wasn't the case. I'm just saying that it would make sense to assume their losses would be minuscule in comparison to most legions.


----------



## Some Call Me... TIM (Apr 3, 2011)

Malus Darkblade said:


> Of course, would be dumb if that wasn't the case. I'm just saying that it would make sense to assume their losses would be minuscule in comparison to most legions.


Fo Sho.:security:

The Alpha Legion is definitely on its own Agenda. I wonder it they have purpose though. Or they are just out there out of pride to just wreck havoc and show off their skills against the Imperium. 

I'm not buying the fact they are still listening to the Cabal. It may have started that way. But I'm not sure about that in the current age of 40k.


----------



## MontytheMighty (Jul 21, 2009)

Malus Darkblade said:


> Of course, would be dumb if that wasn't the case. I'm just saying that it would make sense to assume their losses would be minuscule in comparison to most legions.


I think other SM fans might have a problem with this, it smacks of inherent superiority on the AL's part 
of course it could just mean that the Alpha Legion picks its battles very carefully and uses proxies 90% of the time
I suppose it helps when you're totally autonomous and not bound by notions of "honour" or "duty" to the Imperium
Loyalist chapters have only limited freedom to set their own agendas 
Other traitor legions tend to get the "horde of maniacs" treatment fairly often 

I just read Hunt for Voldorius and an Alpha Legion daemon-prince and his legionnaires are destroyed by White Scars and Raven Guard. 

Some Alpha Legion fans are of the opinion that the Alpha Legion in Hunt for Voldorius were too "Chaos-ish"
Now as I understand it, the Alpha Legion are similar to the Night Lords in that neither legion wants to be pawns of Chaos. After 10,000 years though, I can see a substantial portion of each legion falling to Chaos. 

To give the authour credit, the daemon-prince did corrupt the military leadership before invading so that the planet fell with barely any resistance. The daemon-prince also used a huge number of traitor militia as meat shields for his legionnaires. The secret weapon was also something that could kill billions of people like a latent disease...so I wouldn't say the Alpha Legion in the book acted with no subtlety. 

Please note that I'm not saying that the book was great. I gave it a 6/10 in the BL book review section.


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

MontytheMighty said:


> I think other SM fans might have a problem with this, it smacks of inherent superiority on the AL's part
> of course it could just mean that the Alpha Legion picks its battles very carefully and uses proxies 90% of the time


I think it's just a case of most legions going 'LOL FOR THE EMPEROR/PRIMARCH' while the AL tend to spend years in the planning room.




MontytheMighty said:


> I suppose it helps when you're totally autonomous and not bound by notions of "honour" or "duty" to the Imperium



I wouldn't say the AL aren't honor bound to the imperium, their greatest sacrifice was for the emperor/imperium afterall 



MontytheMighty said:


> I just read Hunt for Voldorius and an Alpha Legion daemon-prince and his legionnaires are destroyed by White Scars and Raven Guard.


If we were to take everything that comes out with the GW logo stamped on the cover, then we would have to believe that a Sister of Battle can beat a Grey Knight 1v1 in combat. 

So no, the AL were not present in 'Hunt for Voldorius' but a bunch of generic Chaos Astartes were, I agree.



MontytheMighty said:


> Some Alpha Legion fans are of the opinion that the Alpha Legion in Hunt for Voldorius were too "Chaos-ish"


I would imagine anyone sensible enough would agree.



MontytheMighty said:


> Now as I understand it, the Alpha Legion are similar to the Night Lords in that neither legion wants to be pawns of Chaos. After 10,000 years though, I can see a substantial portion of each legion falling to Chaos.


I'm not saying the AL can't or haven't succumbed to the lures of Chaos over the years, in fact it's guaranteed that some or all of them have. They are not Grey Knights, they're regular Astartes with a penchant for plan making. 

But all the traitor legions retain some if not all of their pre-heresy traits, the AL in the Hunt for Vold. had 0 and thus any reasonable person would not consider them as being members of the AL.



MontytheMighty said:


> To give the authour credit, the daemon-prince did corrupt the military leadership before invading so that the planet fell with barely any resistance.


The way he described it was akin to any typical Chaos warband corrupting a planet's leadership.



MontytheMighty said:


> The daemon-prince also used a huge number of traitor militia as meat shields for his legionnaires.


Same way any generic Chaos Astartes group would go about using cultist fodder.



MontytheMighty said:


> The secret weapon was also something that could kill billions of people like a latent disease...so I wouldn't say the Alpha Legion in the book acted with no subtlety.


Again, almost every Chaos Astartes warband look for arcane/xenos weapons/tech to use against the imperium, it's nothing special.


----------



## Gree (Jun 13, 2010)

Malus Darkblade said:


> IThe UM are a by-the book legion and as such as easily countered by the AL as they have been time and time again.


Hardly. The one time we actually see the Ultramarines and the Alpha Legion fight each other it's an an account that is heavily implied to be the work of an Alpha Legion agent. That's hardly ''time and time again.''



Malus Darkblade said:


> Again, I've never encountered fluff or perceived the UM as being heavy-duty planners.


Guilliman is stated to be one. It probably would apply to his Legion.

IA Ultramarines.



> Every world the Ultramarines liberated rapidly took its place amongst those loyal to the Imperium, and Guilliman's *genius for planning campaigns *ensured that the planet's population and industry suffered the minimum amount of collateral damage.


----------



## XxDreMisterxX (Dec 23, 2009)

I agree with Malus on the account of the Hunt for Voldurus as the author clearly was biased in the Space marines favor and severely neglected to emphasize on the AL's strengths and rather turned them to your "average joe" chaos marines. Though that may be 40k canon I am very displeased with it and refuse to acknowledge any fluff bits about the AL to be solid or true in that book.

The Horus Heresy was a loss for the AL in the sense that the plan they had failed, due in part to the Cabal's lateness as I believe Alpharius could have done more with more time to plan. 

To get back to OP, the Dawn Of War series have shown that the Alpha legion lost because of the combined might of the Space marines and Eldar. (Though I would say the events would turn out very differently if the Eldar didnt help and also someone mentioned a earlier battle that the AL lost.)

The text below is to give those a better feel for the Alpha Legion and what they are capable of. The Alpha Legion were known to be one of the most elite legions because of Alpharius's dedication to excellence and the fact that his Legion was the youngest one so it was not as big as the other legions. This circumstance pushed Alpharius to adopt the "Quality over Quantity" motto which was a direct opposite to what he believed the Ultramarines were which were "Quantity over Quality". The Battle of Eskrador supports this as the UM only managed to supposedly kill Alpharius which his death is "not verified" and they end up losing the subsequent battle even with the AL leaderless. 

Here's a excerpt from the Codex: CSM about the Alpha Legion starting on sentence two on pg. 20 in the Divide and Conquer section:

" The Inquisition hold a special loathing for the Chaos Space Marines of the Alpha Legion for their part in spreading iniquitous daemon cults and fanning the embers of heresy into raging fires of bloody rebellion.

After the Horus Heresy ended, the Alpha Legion continued to fight the Imperium by the most covert means. Small units of Alpha Legion warriors set up hidden bases in asteriod fields, space hulks, and barren systems throughout the galaxy, each an autonomous warband. Raiding parties still sally forth from these secret bases to catch the defenders of Mankind unawares - sabotaging outposts, attacking ships, terrorising settlements and destroying garrisons with deadly efficiency. 

From these hiding places, the Alpha Legion warbands coordinate and direct the activities of magisters and covens from end of the galaxy to the other, instigating massive insurrections and subverting governments to their cause. These revolts are usually nothing more then diversions and shields for the Alpha Legions other activities, misdirecting the forces of the Emperor, leading them away from the Imperial worlds the Alpha Legion want to attack."

Well the CSM book goes on to tell the exploits of the AL in defeating the Emperor's Swords chapter on their home planet and destroying them through force and infiltration tactics.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

I haven't read The Hunt, but at any point did they say the chaos marines were AL?


----------



## Gree (Jun 13, 2010)

XxDreMisterxX said:


> The Battle of Eskrador supports this as the UM only managed to supposedly kill Alpharius which his death is "not verified" and they end up losing the subsequent battle even with the AL leaderless.


Once again, most of what we have from the battle of Eskrador is given to use from an Inquisitor who is heavily implied to be an Alpha Legion agent. Other Inquisitors and even the Ultramarines themselves doubt this information in universe. We can't really take what he said as total fact.


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

@gen.ahab: yes



Gree said:


> Once again, most of what we have from the battle of Eskrador is given to use from an Inquisitor who is heavily implied to be an Alpha Legion agent. Other Inquisitors and even the Ultramarines themselves doubt this information in universe. We can't really take what he said as total fact.


So what part of the battle can we confirm as being factual ?


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

Alpha legion are like Parker lewis; they cannot lose. As Park Lewis...cannot lose.

Here-to-for everyone else can suck on that.


----------



## Gree (Jun 13, 2010)

Malus Darkblade said:


> So what part of the battle can we confirm as being factual ?


IA Alpha Legion confirms the battle did happen. We get what appears to be Guilliman's opening deployments and then we switch to Kravin's account of the battle. After that it's pretty much Kravin's account of the rest of the battle and the aftermath. 

The only part we can actually confirm is the opening deployments. Anything else is in doubt.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Malus Darkblade said:


> @gen.ahab: yes


Ah, so then the AL were present during the battle and they did lose. That would be the canon, yes?


----------



## Gree (Jun 13, 2010)

gen.ahab said:


> Ah, so then the AL were present during the battle and they did lose. That would be the canon, yes?


If you take BL cas canon then yes.

However I point that the Alpha Legion's behavior in the battle was wildly consistant then what it is presented in other sources.

To put it in perspective. It was like World Eaters throwing away their chainaxes to engage in long-range combat or the Space Wolves shaking hands with the Thousand Sons. The Alpha Legion in the book acted nothing like the Alpha Legion of the Index Astartes or the book Legion.


----------



## Ferrus Manus (Apr 28, 2008)

I think the Alpha legion are by far the most interesting of all the chaos legions but the way they were portrayed in Dawn of War and Hunt for Voldorius was just aweful (ive read Hunt for V. and i thought the book was poor), i mean they just seemed to have no specialities and act as standard CSM. The part in the cathedral was just complete stupid! (those who have read the book will understand what im talking about).


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

gen.ahab said:


> Ah, so then the AL were present during the battle and they did lose. That would be the canon, yes?


Only if you believe a Sister of Battle can manhandle a Grey Knight.


----------



## Protoss119 (Aug 8, 2010)

Orochi said:


> Alpha legion are like Parker lewis; they cannot lose. As Park Lewis...cannot lose.
> 
> Here-to-for everyone else can suck on that.


I'll meet your Park Lewis and raise you the Siege of Vraks. Everybody up and ignores the Siege of Vraks...


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

It would seem that in these forums that BL is considered as such. Whether or not we don't like it is irrelevant, if it was written by BL, unless stated otherwise, it is canon.



Malus Darkblade said:


> Only if you believe a Sister of Battle can manhandle a Grey Knight.


Did it happen in one of the GK books? Yes? Well the I suppose they can. This is where the "tough shit" rule applies.


----------



## MontytheMighty (Jul 21, 2009)

I think the Ultramarines' "genius" lay in how efficient their resource management was 

they were the largest legion for a reason, and wielded the resources of an entire sub-sector (a highly loyal population, industrialized planets, human planetary military forces, etc.) 

Ultramar was an industrial/military giant...production capacity, industrial efficiency, and numbers were the UM's strength, sort of like the Union during the U.S. Civil War
coincidentally, the Union also used a lot of inflexible generals (especially early in the war) and almost always suffered higher casualties in battle
even though the South employed guerrilla warfare and had excellent generals like Robert E. Lee, the Union won in the end simply because of its industrial might 

not saying the UM is superior to the Alpha Legion, but both have their strengths and I don't think either side would have an easy time destroying the other


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

gen.ahab said:


> It would seem that in these forums that BL is considered as such. Whether or not we don't like it is irrelevant, if it was written by BL, unless stated otherwise, it is canon.


Ok but seriously, do you personally believe a Sister of Battle can beat a Grey Knight in physical combat? 

I'm going to say with a 99.9% certainty that you don't.

Good, we have that established 

Now then, retcons are no stranger to the world of WH40k. 

I'm sure BC's Grey Knight series will get retconned at one point (and hopefully anything written by him until he stops drinking), and the same with any fluff depicting the AL in the manner Andy Hoare did. 

It's bound to happen or it should happen. If an author were to write about the AL all dying their hair pink and getting mohawks but depicted them properly and did them justice, I would have no issue. 

As someone previously said, it's like saying the World Eaters would suddenly favor using multi-colored laser cannons (lol) as opposed to chainswords and other close combat weapons.

Edit



gen.ahab said:


> Did it happen in one of the GK books? Yes? Well the I suppose they can. This is where the "tough shit" rule applies.


Oh dear...

Son I am disappoint 





MontytheMighty said:


> I think the Ultramarines' "genius" lay in how efficient their resource management was
> 
> they were the largest legion for a reason, and wielded the resources of an entire sub-sector (a highly loyal population, industrialized planets, human planetary military forces, etc.)
> 
> ...


I agree. I view the UM as being masters at maintaining and supervising empires and raising great civilizations out of nothing as they did post HH. But I don't necessarily view Gulliman as being in the same league as Horus, Alpharius and El'Johnson. His strengths were focused on other aspects of warfare imo.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

No, I don't think a SOB could pwn a GK in CC, but unfortunatly the canon says otherwise at this point. 

And yes, I do believe that it should and probably will be retconned at some point, but, again, unfortunately I am not exempted from the "tough shit" rule so what I believe matters about as much as a dried turd does to the CEO of BP. 

If they wrote something like that I would be pissed the fuck off, but tough shit.


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

gen.ahab said:


> No, I don't think a SOB could pwn a GK in CC, but unfortunatly the canon says otherwise at this point.
> 
> And yes, I do believe that it should and probably will be retconned at some point, but, again, unfortunately I am not exempted from the "tough shit" rule so what I believe matters about as much as a dried turd does to the CEO of BP.
> 
> If they wrote something like that I would be pissed the fuck off, but tough shit.


Well this isn't something like an outdated medical procedure written into a guidebook all doctors are against but have to follow because their boss goes 'tough shit'

It's a fantasy world driven by rabid fanboys and $$$. Some authors take the expressive liberties their publisher offers them to the extremes, disregarding previous fluff to satisfy how 'they view' certain aspects of established lore all while under the influence of legal drugs. 

In these cases, GW got positive feedback from some alternate reality then gave them their nod of approval because money is the ultimate deciding factor. 

What's a good way of selling a lot of SoB related merchandise? Have them best the toughest Astartes ever created in combat. 

chaChing.

$ is the fifth chaos power.


----------



## MontytheMighty (Jul 21, 2009)

Malus Darkblade said:


> I agree. I view the UM as being masters at maintaining and supervising empires and raising great civilizations out of nothing as they did post HH. But I don't necessarily view Gulliman as being in the same league as Horus, Alpharius and El'Johnson. His strengths were focused on other aspects of warfare imo.


well it would really depend on what league you're talking about 

when it came to economic/industrial efficiency, production capacity or logistics, Guilliman was in a league of his own

whereas some other primarchs were better at innovative battlefield tactics and strategies


----------



## Gree (Jun 13, 2010)

I would have to disagree that Guilliman was merely average in the terms of battlefield strategy.

IA Ultramarines



> As ever, his greatest talents lay in the art of war and he led the Ultramarines to victory after victory, further expanding the Emperor's realm


His talents in infastructure are mentioned, but his battlefield skills are placed above that. Honestly? i've always viewed Guilliman as one of the more tactically and strategically skilled Primarchs due to his high victory count in terms of worlds conquered and said quote.


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

Gree said:


> His talents in infastructure are mentioned, but his battlefield skills are placed above that. Honestly? i've always viewed Guilliman as one of the more tactically and strategically skilled Primarchs due to his high victory count in terms of worlds conquered and said quote.


He had the largest legion so he could win wars of attrition and cover ground faster than the other legions.


----------



## Gree (Jun 13, 2010)

Malus Darkblade said:


> He had the largest legion so he could win wars of attrition and cover ground faster than the other legions.


That doesn't really counter the comment about ''skill'' at all in the IA, nor does that fit what he know of Guilliman, who was able to avoid losses and perserve his large Legion. I never saw Guilliman as a ''send more in'' type of guy.

Not to mention in the IA the Ultramarines growing into the largest Legion came after the section describing Guilliman taking command the Legion and leading it to victory. The Marine codex also notes Guilliman's exceptional tacticial ability and gives that as one of the reasons alongside the large recruitment base for the Ultramarines growth.


----------



## Some Call Me... TIM (Apr 3, 2011)

I imagine that there have been fragments of the legion that have completely run off from the Alpha Legion as a whole. This could also be a problem for them especially *IF* Alpharius is dead. 

Would spread the growth of doubt in their legion.


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

Gree said:


> Not to mention in the IA the Ultramarines growing into the largest Legion came after the section describing Guilliman taking command the Legion and leading it to victory.


He started off with a huge legion because rumor has it he incorporated the legions of the two missing Primarchs into his.



Gree said:


> That doesn't really counter the comment about ''skill'' at all in the IA, nor does that fit what he know of Guilliman, who was able to avoid losses and perserve his large Legion. I never saw Guilliman as a ''send more in'' type of guy.


When you have a huge legion, you can't not be a 'send more in' type of guy because it is a strength you can use.

Post-Heresy the Tyranids wrecked havoc with the legion's numbers so I don't think the UM given their size have been able to prevent massive losses of life of existing members but as you said, due to the large number of recruiting worlds are able to regain numbers of Astartes lost to wars of attrition. 



Gree said:


> The Marine codex also notes Guilliman's exceptional tacticial ability and gives that as one of the reasons alongside the large recruitment base for the Ultramarines growth.


All the Primarchs have exceptional tactical abilities so yes the Marine Codex wasn't lying. But as with everything, there are varying degrees. Guilliman was not in the same boat as Horus/Johnson/and Alpharius, as I mentioned earlier his strengths lied in other aspects of warfare. 

Monty covered it nicely:



MontytheMighty said:


> when it came to economic/industrial efficiency, production capacity or logistics, Guilliman was in a league of his own


----------



## Gree (Jun 13, 2010)

Malus Darkblade said:


> He started off with a huge legion because rumor has it he incorporated the legions of the two missing Primarchs into his.


No he did not start out with one. Those rumors are just that, rumors. (A D-B has even said it's just two soldiers joking around. I can dig through the forums if you really want the quote) the Marine codex notes that the Ultramarines grew _because_ of Guilliman's tactical expertise and Ultramar's large population.

Even the IA has Guilliman's Legion growing after his intial brilliant conquests, not because he was handed a huge number of troops.



Malus Darkblade said:


> When you have a huge legion, you can't not be a 'send more in' type of guy because it is a strength you can use.


Except Guilliman has never been described in those terms. We have praise for his tactical abiltities actually. In fact Rules of Engagement seems to describe it otherwise, with Guilliman being a highly analytical and pragmatic tactician.

The Marine codex even gives credit to Guilliman's ''lethal efficency in war'' citing it as one of the reasons Horus sent the Ultramarines away. Lethal efficency, not spamming numbers in a zerg rush.



Malus Darkblade said:


> Post-Heresy the Tyranids wrecked havoc with the legion's numbers so I don't think the UM given their size have been able to prevent massive losses of life of existing members but as you said, due to the large number of recruiting worlds are able to regain numbers of Astartes lost to wars of attrition.


There where no Legions post-Heresy and certainly none facing the Tyranids.



Malus Darkblade said:


> All the Primarchs have exceptional tactical abilities so yes the Marine Codex wasn't lying.


Angron has exceptional tactical abilties?

And special attention is drawn to his warmaking abiltities, which are stated to be his greatest talent. The Marine codex goes out on a limb to note how his Legion grew quickly because of Guilliman's expertise. generally that's only done when the Primarch in question is noted to be a good commander.



Malus Darkblade said:


> But as with everything, there are varying degrees. Guilliman was not in the same boat as Horus/Johnson/and Alpharius, as I mentioned earlier his strengths lied in other aspects of warfare.


I have seen no evidence of that at all. If anything the multitude of eivdence that I have witnesed indicates the opposite.


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

Gree said:


> No he did not start out with one. Those rumors are just that, rumors. (A D-B has even said it's just two soldiers joking around. I can dig through the forums if you really want the quote) the Marine codex notes that the Ultramarines grew _because_ of Guilliman's tactical expertise and Ultramar's large population.


Please do link this quote. I find it hard to believe especially when the Astartes involved sound dead serious


From the First Heretic:





"_But the Eleventh Legion–’

'Is expunged from Imperial record for good reason. As is the Second. I’m not saying I don’t feel temptation creeping over me, brother. A single sword thrust piercing that pod, and we’d unwrite a shameful future.’

Dagotal cleared his throat. ‘And deny the Ultramarines a significant boost in recruitment numbers.’

Xaphen regarded him with emotionless eyes, seeming to weigh the merit of such a thing. 

‘What?’ Dagotal asked the others. ‘You were thinking it, too. It’s no secret.’

‘Those are just rumours,’ Torgal grunted. The assault sergeant didn’t sound particularly certain.

‘Perhaps, perhaps not. The Thirteenth definitely swelled to eclipse all the other Legions around the time the Second and Eleventh were “forgotten” by Imperial archives.’_




Gree said:


> Even the IA has Guilliman's Legion growing after his intial brilliant conquests, not because he was handed a huge number of troops.


The IA was written before the First Heretic while the latter went into details not included in the former.



Gree said:


> Except Guilliman has never been described in those terms. We have praise for his tactical abiltities actually. In fact Rules of Engagement seems to describe it otherwise, with Guilliman being a highly analytical and pragmatic tactician.
> 
> The Marine codex even gives credit to Guilliman's ''lethal efficency in war'' citing it as one of the reasons Horus sent the Ultramarines away. Lethal efficency, not spamming numbers in a zerg rush.


The UM were a threat to Horus because a) Gulliman would never turn to Chaos and b) his legion was vast and would ultimately change the tides of battle. 

If you assume anything otherwise well then it's your opinion. There's a reason Horus had the AL ambush and bait them, because the counter to UM's strict and predictable methods was a legion that was the opposite and utterly unpredictable. 

Again I'm not saying he wasn't a tactical genius, he was but so were all the Primarchs in their own ways and levels.




Gree said:


> There where no Legions post-Heresy.


Don't be so literal. 



Gree said:


> Angron has exceptional tactical abilties?


This point alone shows your biased POV. You thinking a Primarch of all beings having no exceptional tactical abilities is /facepalm x infinity



Gree said:


> And special attention is drawn to his warmaking abiltities, which are stated to be his greatest talent. The Marine codex goes out on a limb to note how his Legion grew quickly because of Guilliman's expertise. generally that's only done when the Primarch in question is noted to be a good commander.


I don't know what it is with you and this Codex. A lot of things are said and retconned years later. I'm looking at things from a logical POV and based on I've seen and read not just on outdated pieces of fluff.

Do you think that if previous codexes stated that when the AL are not plotting and planning they like to play the violin, I would actually picture them doing so? 

Gulliman was a good commander, as all Primarchs naturally are but he wasn't the best or in the same league as the Primarchs I mentioned when it comes to ingenious/adaptable war tactics.



Gree said:


> I have seen no evidence of that at all. If anything the multitude of eivdence that I have witnesed indicates the opposite.


If all the evidence you have is of one liners saying Guiliman was a tactical genius then ok I have nothing to add.


----------



## Gree (Jun 13, 2010)

Malus Darkblade said:


> Please do link this quote.


I will. 



> If I'd known people would really believe it was a hint, rather than several soldiers joking, I'd never have written it. I genuinely had no idea people would take it as fact. Most of the other HH references to the Lost Legions (especially in Prospero Burns) are spoken with an air of truth. In The First Heretic, in that scene, it's blatantly just some soldiers even admitting they know it's just a rumour.


From Bolter and Chainsword.

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.php?showtopic=219161&st=25

It's post 30.



Malus Darkblade said:


> I find it hard to believe especially when the Astartes involved sound dead serious


One of the other Word Bearers expresses doubt even.



Malus Darkblade said:


> The IA was written before the First Heretic while the latter went into details not included in the former.


First Heretic also has rumors doubted in universe while we have other more reliable sources.



Malus Darkblade said:


> The UM were a threat to Horus because a) Gulliman would never turn to Chaos and b) his legion was vast and would ultimately change the tides of battle.


And because of his lethal efficency in war. I.e his command ability. This is flat out mentioned.



Malus Darkblade said:


> If you assume anything otherwise well then it's your opinion.


No, it's what's written down.



Malus Darkblade said:


> There's a reason Horus had the AL ambush and bait them, because the counter to UM's strict doctrines was a legion that was the opposite.


No the Word Bearers where told to do that. Read your fluff. that's what the entire battle of Calth was about. the Alpha Legion where sent to attack the Space Wolves as per Collected Visons.



Malus Darkblade said:


> Don't be so literal.


You made a false claim and I corrected you on it.



Malus Darkblade said:


> This point alone shows your biased POV. You thinking a Primarch of all beings having no tactical abilities is /facepalm x infinity


I was being half-joking actually. But Angron is noted in-universe to have a very hard time with rational thought due to the Butcher's Nails.



Malus Darkblade said:


> I don't know what it is with you and this Codex. A lot of things are said and retconned years later.


No, not really, I find it to quite conistant actually. Besides, there is no statement about Guilliman's ability that has been retconned.



Malus Darkblade said:


> I'm looking at things from a logical POV and based on I've seen and read not just on outdated pieces of fluff.


And I'm looking at things form a logical, objective point of view while taking all fluff into consideration. Not rumors and hersay.



Malus Darkblade said:


> Do you think that if previous codexes stated that when the AL are not plotting and planning they like to play the violin, and that I would actually picture them doing so?


What exactly does this have to do with the argument? Nothing in the older sources has contridicted the newer ones. There is nothing in the new fluff stating that Guiliman was average.

In fact we have new fluff implying we was _above_ average. Read Rules of Engagement.



Malus Darkblade said:


> If all the evidence you have is of one liners saying Guiliman was a tactical genius then ok I have nothing to add.


No, I have presented multiple sources from multiple different sources old and new. You have not offered anything concrete saying that he was an average Primarch. The best you have is an in-universe rumor doubted by other Word Bearers. And even that was disproved by the author's own statement.


----------



## sonn (Nov 25, 2010)

Here is what ADB said about the missing legions line:


Dead.Blue.Clown said:


> Or it was a couple of soldiers joking and guessing why the Ultramarines were so huge compared to the other Legions. Which one seems more likely?


Edit: All that searching for nothing. :angry:


----------



## TRU3 CHAOS (May 21, 2010)

Towards the main question, I'm going to say the Alpha Legion has never lost. Everything they have done is towards bigger purpose. So if someone really thinks they've lost for some reason or another they were actually putting it all together for their superior scheme.

One Imperial Victory may appear to have been a won battle against chaos but in reality they were falling ever deeper into the clutches of the schemers of chaos.


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

Gree said:


> From Bolter and Chainsword.
> 
> http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.php?showtopic=219161&st=25
> 
> It's post 30.


I'm not going to dive into the post history to determine if it's really him (his name here is dead.blue.clown) but if it is actually him, I think he dun goofed up. 



Gree said:


> One of the other Word Bearers expresses doubt even.


Yeah I know, it's because it's a rumor just as I said it was but one that seems logical given the disappearance of the legions and the sudden swelling of the UM's numbers.



Gree said:


> First Heretic also has rumors doubted in universe while we have other more reliable sources.


A HH novel isn't a reliable source now? 



Gree said:


> No the Word Bearers where told to do that. Read your fluff. that's what the entire battle of Calth was about. the Alpha Legion where sent to attack the Space Wolves as per Collected Visons.


When I said the AL ambushed the UM, I meant that they lured the UM to eskrador. Because they were terribly predictable

From your precious IA

"Alpharius chose his battleground, for he knew the Ultramarines would not rest until they had hunted the traitors down."




Gree said:


> You made a false claim and I corrected you on it.


Interesting coming from someone who conveniently says everything about the encounter between Macragge and Alpharius on Eskrador was fabricated.



Gree said:


> I was being half-joking actually. But Angron is noted in-universe to have a very hard time with rational thought due to the Butcher's Nails.


So you're saying a Primarch is stupid now? Where is it noted?



Gree said:


> No, not really, I find it to quite conistant actually. Besides, there is no statement about Guilliman's ability that has been retconned.


I'm saying it could be to fit with new fluff/logic 

And I'm looking at things form a logical, objective point of view while taking all fluff into consideration. Not rumors and hersay.



Gree said:


> There is nothing in the new fluff stating that Guiliman was average.


I never said he was average. Read my posts carefully.



Gree said:


> No, I have presented multiple sources from multiple different sources old and new. You have not ffered anything concrete saying that he was an average Primarch. The best you have is an in-universe rumor doubted by other Word Bearers. And even that was disproved by the author's own statement.


Again from your precious IA:

It is interesting to note that the terrain of Eskrador is quite similar to the terrain of Macragge. And yet the UM lose with many losses.

"The Alpha Legion deployed deep within the harsh mountain range at the pole of the planet. The mountains were riven with gullies, ravines, and high passes that would seriously hamper movement, especially ground vehicles. Alpharius was convinced that the battle would be won by the side that overcame these problems the best through forward planning, coordinated air support, and detachments coping independently of heavy support."


Macragge:


"Macragge itself is mostly bleak and rocky, with more than three-quarters of its land mass formed from mountainous upland almost entirely devoid of life. The people of Macragge do not live in this inhospitable region, but the fortress of the Ultramarines is built here upon a craggy peak surrounded by impenetrable mountains."


The UM don't use their strength in numbers and zerg?

"With perhaps 500 Space Marines remaining, the Alpha Legion force made a stand at the head of the valley. Their heavy weapons were deployed well, high on the mountain side, and felled many of our number 3000 as we fought upwards towards them, but their guns were too few and our resolve unswervering."


They also surprised the AL with drop pods/teleports with 3000 UM Astartes vs a measly 600 AL Astartes and still get owned.

Guilliman being very tactical?

"Guilliman's initial deployment followed exactly the doctrines set down in his own writings, and the Alpha Legion moved to trap them. But Guilliman chose the first nightfall to do something unexpected. Breaking his own rules of operation, he led a large portion of his forces with no lines of support or supply deep into the mountains and deployed by Thunderhawk, drop pod, and teleporter in the midst of the Alpha Legion. Guilliman's target was the enemy command center and none other than Alpharius himself."


So they had to stop using their regular tactics and be more spontaneous like the AL to 'win'. Even after supposedly killing Alpharius, the UM lose because of the AL's adaptability and because they assumed that any legion would falter without their leader.

"The enemy has launched several hit-and-run attacks on our strike force and caused numerous casualties."

"We are being harassed and ambushed every step of the way."

"Guilliman attempted a number of counterattacks to regain the initiative, but the Alpha Legion seemed to have prior knowledge of their every move."

So the UM get decimated and have to run back to their ship after failing to imitate the AL's tactics to the point of victory. Quite the military genius that Guilliman.

Fact of the matter is, the UM were clueless about how to deal with the hit and run/spy tactics of the AL. I'd wager the NL or the RG would have posed a serious threat to the AL. The UM? Not a chance.


----------



## TRU3 CHAOS (May 21, 2010)

I really don't think the Ultramarines are that good of a chapter. And I don't think they were that good of a legion. 

For one, they had a hard enough time dealing against an army of renegades, pirates, and Daemons. Not even the true face of the Chaos Legions and they almost lost everything. If it weren't for some crazy shit like Uriel and the Legion of the Damned poppen out of nowhere.


----------



## Gree (Jun 13, 2010)

Malus Darkblade said:


> I'm not going to dive into the post history to determine if it's really him (his name here is dead.blue.clown)


He uses the name Dead. Blue. Clown on Warseer as well. this accoutn has been active for several months. A D-B mentions on his blog that he has an account on B and C as well. I think an imposter would be caught by now.



Malus Darkblade said:


> but if it is actually him, I think he dun goofed up.


Why would the author goof up on something _he_ wrote? I chose to take his word over yours. After all, you never wrote the scene at all.



Malus Darkblade said:


> Yeah I know, it's because it's a rumor just as I said it was but one that seems logical given the disappearance of the legions and the sudden swelling of the UM's numbers.


Except we already have a perfectly logical explantion.



Malus Darkblade said:


> A HH novel isn't a reliable source now?


Never said it was. However when a scene is specifically said by an author to be a joking scene then that scene cannot be used.



Malus Darkblade said:


> From your precious IA
> "Alpharius chose his battleground, for he knew the Ultramarines would not rest until they had hunted the traitors down."
> 
> Interesting coming from someone who conveniently says everything about the encounter between Macragge and Alpharius on Eskrador was fabricated.


It's noted in the article itself. Keep on reading.

Oh and it's _possibly_ fabricated. Regardless it's not a reliable source at all.



Malus Darkblade said:


> So you're saying a Primarch is stupid now? Where is it noted?


Read Tales of Heresy. It describes Angron's problems pretty clearly. And No, I never said he was stupid.



Malus Darkblade said:


> It is interesting to note that the terrain of Eskrador is quite similar to the terrain of Macragge. And yet the UM lose with many losses.


Again, most of said battle was fabricated. Or heavily implied to be. By the IA article's own words. but I'm open to the possiblity that it might be true, but I would not use it in a debate.



Malus Darkblade said:


> The UM don't use their strength in numbers and zerg?


We don't know if the entire Ultramarines Legion was present. Plus the terrian would have made movements of large numbers of troops difficult. But then again most of the battle is shrouded in mystery.



Malus Darkblade said:


> "With perhaps 500 Space Marines remaining, the Alpha Legion force made a stand at the head of the valley. Their heavy weapons were deployed well, high on the mountain side, and felled many of our number 3000 as we fought upwards towards them, but their guns were too few and our resolve unswervering."


I'm stopping right here actually because the rest of the battle is irrelevant.

IA Alpha Legion



> The following account appears to be the personal log of a member of the Ultramarines strike force, probably a sergeant. It is included in Inquisitor Kravin's diatribe 'Lessons of Strife', though other Inquisitors and representatives of the Ultramarines themselves have questioned its validity. The original document was purportedly discovered in a system earth-ward of Eskrador





> Shortly after the conclave, Inquisitor Girreux publicly accused Kravin of consorting with traitors and conspiring to organize cultist uprisings on the worlds of Kartha IV, V and Archos II in the Korren sub-sector. Girreux challenged Kravin to appear for trial and face the evidence against him, however Kravin's current whereabouts is unknown. Of course this development has called into question the reliability of all Inquisitor Kravin's research, and as he was the leading scholar on the Alpha Legion's history and current activities, much of what was known about them must now be considered a lie. If, as Girreux claims, Kravin has been compromised by the very traitors he sought to investigate, then everything he said must be considered misinformation and propaganda invented by the Alpha Legion.


Putting it bluntly, the entire account of the battle you have rehashed is unreliable for those reasons. Everything from the first quote to the endof the battle description istelf is stated to be part of Kravin's account and thus unreliable.

It could be true, or it could be false. Regardless it's not something I would use in a debate.



TRU3 CHAOS said:


> I really don't think the Ultramarines are that good of a chapter. And I don't think they were that good of a legion.
> 
> For one, they had a hard enough time dealing against an army of renegades, pirates, and Daemons. Not even the true face of the Chaos Legions and they almost lost everything. If it weren't for some crazy shit like Uriel and the Legion of the Damned poppen out of nowhere.


M'kar's daemon army is nothing to scoff at. Plus not even the full chapter was present, the 3rd, 7th, 8th and part of the 10th where noted to be abset for the battle.

So despite a huge daemon army, the element of suprise, they still lost to the Ultramarines.


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

Whew that was a nightmare to edit.


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

Gree said:


> Putting it bluntly, the entire accoutnof the battle you have rehashe din unreliable for those reasons.


That's just silly to dismiss the entire event. It's stated that the death of Alpharius is subject to being fabricated but the entire event? Just no. 

And thanks for trying to counter my points by resorting to 'lol never happened'. If I had known you'd do this I wouldn't have bothered debating with you, you pulled an Alpharius on me. 

Admittedly it's hard to defend the UM with the huge expectations you've placed on them.


----------



## Gree (Jun 13, 2010)

Malus Darkblade said:


> That's just silly to dismiss the entire event. It's stated that the death of Alpharius is subject to being fabricated but the entire event? Just no.


I'mn not dismissing the entire event, just Kravin's account, whic is stated to be doubted in universe. Did oyu read my quote that I pulled directly from the article itself?



Malus Darkblade said:


> And thanks for trying to counter my points by resorting to 'lol never happened'.


Because I don't think something that is explicitly stated to be unreliable can be used in a reasoned debate. I need facts.



Malus Darkblade said:


> Admittedly it's hard to defend the UM with the huge expectations you've placed on them.


Not really. I don't think the Ultramarines are superior or anything to the Alpha Legion tactically. Nor do I think the Ultramarines are the best Legion or that Guilliman is the greatest Primarch. I am simply taking issue with your assement of Guilliman's leadership abilities.


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

Gree said:


> I'mn not dismissing the entire event, just Kravin's account, whic is stated to be doubted in universe.


So what really took place? Guilliman ran in, guns ablaze and killed every AL Astartes present? 

What is the real account of what took place there then? 



Gree said:


> Because I don't think somethign that is explicitly stated to be unreliable can be used in a reasoned debate. I need facts.


Whoever accused him didn't have facts, they just assumed no? 

Why should we believe those who are accusing said inquisitor?

See if we take this route, then pretty much anything we know of the AL is subject to being rumor and fabricated lies and perhaps even the other traitor legions.



Gree said:


> Not really. I don't think the Ultramarines are superior or anything to the Alpha Legion tactically. Nor do I think the Ultramarines are the best Legion or that Guilliman is the greatest Primarch. I am simply taking issue with your assement of Guilliman's leadership abilities.


I never questioned his leadership abilities. I don't know why you ignore 90% of my posts.


----------



## Gree (Jun 13, 2010)

Malus Darkblade said:


> So what really took place? Guilliman ran in, guns ablaze and killed every AL Astartes present?
> 
> What is the real account of what took place there then?


We don't know, thus we cannot use the battle as a judge of tactical ability or warmaking skills.

Anything else beyond that is pure speculation.



Malus Darkblade said:


> Whoever accused him didn't have facts, they just assumed no?


Maybe, we don't know.



Malus Darkblade said:


> Why should we believe those who are accusing said inquisitor?


Because we don't know if he is right or wrong. Kravin could be right, but we don't know. the entire area is muddled and unreliable, this it's not something I would use in a debate.



Malus Darkblade said:


> See if we take this route, then pretty much anything we know of the AL is subject to being rumor and fabricated lies and perhaps even the other traitor legions.


Only the stuff put out by Kravin, the rest of the Alpha Legion IA seems fine. the early stages and deployments of the Eskrador battle seem to be seperate from Kravin's account.



Malus Darkblade said:


> I never questioned his leadership abilities. I don't know why you ignore 90% of my posts.


You kind of did with your earlier post commenting on Kravin's account. But that's not the point. I was taking your objection to putting Guilliman below Horus, the Lion and Alpharius, which I feel is incorrect. I call it how I see it.


----------



## MontytheMighty (Jul 21, 2009)

I'm almost certain I read somewhere in Codex Space Marines that the UM were such a huge legion because Guilliman was extremely good at resource management, he was very very skilled at building and running a huge empire with incredible efficiency, that was his talent just like Alpharius really shone in the area of infiltration and covert ops 

I'll try to find quotes too 

I would like to point out that a distinction should be drawn between 30k and 40k Ultramarines 

40K Ultramarines might be more hide-bound to the Codex Astartes than 30K Ultramarines 
Guilliman wrote the thing, I'm pretty sure he could have modified it whenever he felt like it. 40K UM are probably more dogmatic in their approach 

I'm also not too sure about the exact nature of the Codex...is it like Sun Tzu's Art of War? Strict adherence to a very general text doesn't necessarily hurt you. 
The Codex does seem to contain a lot of specifics though

depending on the type of rule, strict adherence might not necessarily be a bad thing 

for instance a rule like "always bring a gun or something better to a gunfight" is a rule that should always be followed, I might pleasantly surprise my opponent by bringing a knife but it's not the kind of surprise that will help me 
whereas strict adherence to a rule like "a dreadnought should never be armed with two close combat weapons" might be detrimental in certain situations


----------



## Gree (Jun 13, 2010)

MontytheMighty said:


> I'm almost certain I read somewhere in Codex Space Marines that the UM were such a huge legion because Guilliman was extremely good at resource management, he was very very skilled at building and running a huge empire with incredible efficiency, that was his talent just like Alpharius really shone in the area of infiltration and covert ops


He is good at that. However he is also a great general as well.



MontytheMighty said:


> 40K Ultramarines might be more hide-bound to the Codex Astartes than 30K Ultramarines
> Guilliman wrote the thing, I'm pretty sure he could have modified it whenever he felt like it. 40K UM are probably more dogmatic in their approach


The Codex Astartes does get modfied. the Marine Codex states that guidelines have been modfied over the centuries and they contain the wisdom of hundreds of military minds beside Guilliman.



MontytheMighty said:


> I'm also not too sure about the exact nature of the Codex...is it like Sun Tzu's Art of War? Strict adherence to a very general text doesn't necessarily hurt you.
> The Codex does seem to contain a lot of specifics though
> 
> depending on the type of rule, strict adherence might not necessarily be a bad thing
> ...


The codex is stated in Index Astartes to have hundreds of solutions to every possible problem. The codex should enough to fill entire Libraries if the descriptions are true. Going off the IA the codex is so huge that the entire battle company has to memorise it. I believe the Deathwatch rulebook has quotation on the nature of the Codex.

Although, with everything 40k has things open to interpretation in areas.

EDIT: Here it is. The Deathwatch one



> "For any given tactical situation, the Codex offers hundreds of pages devoted to how it may be met and overcome. Each warrior of the [Ultramarines] Chapter is required to memorise whole sections of the Codex so that within a company there exists an entire record of the Codex's tenets. The wisdom of thousands of the Imperium's warriors has contributed to the Codex, and details on everything from unit markings to launching a full-scale planetary assault are contained within its pages.
> This is not to say that the Ultramarines are hidebound or unimaginative in their thinking, for it must not be forgotten that *Primarch Roboute Guilliman is regarded as one of the most imaginative and innovative military thinkers of all time*. It is rather a deep-seated belief that every problem can be solved with recourse to the Codex Astartes, that there is no need to reinvent solutions to dilemmas solved long ago. By their strict adherence to the Codex, the Ultramarines are in fact freed by it. The success of this doctrine is self-evident in the countless thousands of battle honours the Chapter has earned over then millennia of loyal service to the Imperium." (Deathwatch Rulebook, p. 54)


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Whilst i'm not disagreeing that he was one of the better tacticians and strategists, you have to take into account his vatly superior numbers when it comes to the numbe of victories. He effectively had the strength of three legions under his command, it would be shocking and hard for him to not have one of the highest victory counts, ability or not. I believe the Lion, Dorn and Horus were better though as they raked in the highest victories in the Crusade despite having normal sized legions, and in the Lions case ony being active for the last fifty years.


----------



## MontytheMighty (Jul 21, 2009)

Gree said:


> He is good at that. However he is also a great general as well.


I agree with you there, I just think that Guilliman's trump card, if you will, was his insane resource management 
the Ultramarines probably had (and prob still have) the highest rate of Astartes production, the largest planetary human armies backing them up, the highest capacity for vehicle production etc. 

even now, I think the Ultramarines and their host of successors can still be counted as a de facto legion, the UM and their numerous successors appear to be really tight-knit and mutually cooperating, much more so than other primogenitors and their respective successors. 
If Guilliman were really as self-serving as some suggest, he might have even foreseen that a division of the legions into chapters would affect other legions a lot more than the UM


----------



## Gree (Jun 13, 2010)

MontytheMighty said:


> even now, I think the Ultramarines and their host of successors can still be counted as a de facto legion, the UM and their numerous successors appear to be really tight-knit and mutually cooperating, much more so than other primogenitors and their respective successors.


Where are you getting that from?

In Warriors of Ultramar the Mortifactors, a Second Founding Chapter, has not had contact with the Ultramarines and the relationship is tenuous. When Ultramar was invaded no sucessors came to help other than the Novamarines (Who where in the area)

And yes, the Deathwatch book: Rites of Battle has the Novamarines at Macragge, retconning earlier fluff that just had the Ultramarines there.

Susposedly the Marine Codex states that all Ultramarine sucessors view Calgar as their spiritual leige, but in practicality I can only imagine the Second Founding chapters doing that. The further down the line from the parent Legion the more distanced the chapter becomes from it.

So no, I don't think the Ultramarines as a de facto Legion, especially since we've never seen them operate as such in the 41st millenium.



Angel of Blood said:


> Whilst i'm not disagreeing that he was one of the better tacticians and strategists, you have to take into account his vatly superior numbers when it comes to the numbe of victories. He effectively had the strength of three legions under his command, it would be shocking and hard for him to not have one of the highest victory counts, ability or not. I believe the Lion, Dorn and Horus were better though as they raked in the highest victories in the Crusade despite having normal sized legions, and in the Lions case ony being active for the last fifty years.


The growth of the largest legion occured after he started winning his noticable conquest though. I believe you are referring to Horus Rising for the Dorn quote, in the same book Horus lists both Dorn and Guilliman as brothers who looked up to and sought approval from.



> It was to these solid, resolved brothers that Horus turned in particular for counsel. Dorn and Guilliman both embodied the staunchest and most dedicated Imperial qualities, commanding their Legion expeditions with *peerless devotion and military genius*. Horus desired their approval as a young man might seek the quiescence of older, more accomplished brothers.


Horus actually seems to imply Dorn and Guilliman are equals here.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

No not that quote, in another quote, possibly Horus Rising aswell, Dorn is directly quoted as having the second highest number of victories, behind Horus. And the Lion was always second prior to that quote and is still just behind them in more current fluff. Guillimans legion may have grown with victories yes, but his legion was large from the very outset as he already had a small empire when he was found by the Emperor. For the vast majority of the crusade he had vastly superior numbers than everyone else, so of course he would be at the top. Yet like i said, Horus, Dorn and the Lion all managed to rake up higher victory counts despite having nothing near his legions size.


----------



## Gree (Jun 13, 2010)

Angel of Blood said:


> No not that quote, in another quote, possibly Horus Rising aswell, Dorn is directly quoted as having the second highest number of victories, behind Horus.


I know full well what quote you are talking about. ''Rogal Dorn has perhaps the finest military mind in the Imperium.'' is how it goes. It descirbes how ordered yet flexible and supple Dorn's mind is. However such an interpretation clashes with the earlier IA statement of the Fists's Pre-Heresy combat doctrine.

IA Imperial Fists.



> Initially, the Imperial Fists were an *inflexible formation*; each Company had an identical organisation and Company Commanders tended to be unimaginative. Overall planning was excellent, however, and this, coupled with the unshakeable determination of the individual Fists, made them an excellent assault formation against static defences. Throughout the Great Crusade, the Imperial Fists would be held in reserve waiting while other Legions pinned the enemy in position and identified the keystone of their defence. Inevitably, that position would then be shattered by the Fists. They were equally valuable when resolutely blocking, and often totally defeated enemy breakthroughs. The Legion had a willingness to fight until they won which few opponents could match. Rogal Dorn led from the front, a tireless warrior who, *having set the strategy for a battle*, would unerringly place himself in the most critical engagements


Dorn is also recorded as having a combat record second only ot Horus's. However as far as I know that's the only book it appears in.



Angel of Blood said:


> but his legion was large from the very outset as he already had a small empire when he was found by the Emperor.


No, it was not large from the outset. It wa snoted as growing large, but it did not start out any larger than any other Legion.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Right..........Point is he still raked up more victories than Guilliman despite having a smaller Legion. And his legion would have definetly grown larger from the moment Guilliman was found with a collossaly higher number of recruits available from the start. You don't get over 150,000 more astartes than all the other legions by not recruiting more heavily from the very beggining.

Whichever peice of fluff you take it still says Dorn was incredibly capable.



Gree said:


> Dorn is also recorded as having a combat record second only ot Horus's. However as far as I know that's the only book it appears in.


So? Just because its the only book it says it in, doesn't make it any less true. It's official canon and correct as of the end of the Great Crusade.


----------



## Gree (Jun 13, 2010)

Angel of Blood said:


> And his legion would have definetly grown larger from the moment Guilliman was found with a collossaly higher number of recruits available from the start. You don't get over 150,000 more astartes than all the other legions by not recruiting more heavily from the very beggining.


You also get it by perserving lives, which is stated int he Marine Codex. You seemed to imply Guilliman has the largest Legion from the start.



Angel of Blood said:


> So? Just because its the only book it says it in, doesn't make it any less true.


It's actually rather jarring given the other fluff we have of Dorn.



Angel of Blood said:


> . It's official canon and correct as of the end of the Great Crusade.


If you take BL has canon. I do, but not everyone does.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Gree said:


> You also get it by perserving lives, which is stated int he Marine Codex. You seemed to imply Guilliman has the largest Legion from the start.


Poor wording perhaps. Point is Guilliman should have and would logically have had a larger legion within a much shorter time once he was found, as like i said he had a massive recruting base, far superior to any of the other Primarchs.



Gree said:


> It's actually rather jarring given the other fluff we have of Dorn.


No other fluff suggests that he wasn't particularly succesfull or behind on the victory score card. Jarring or not, it is what it is. 



Gree said:


> If you take BL has canon. I do, but not everyone does.


BL is canon though, some people may choose not to for some reason, but it is officially endorsed by GW and recognised by them as official.


----------



## Gree (Jun 13, 2010)

Angel of Blood said:


> BL is canon though, some people may choose not to for some reason, but it is officially endorsed by GW and recognised by them as official.


Problem is, all background is also offical, and then you have pieces of offical background contridicting each other it becomes difficult to sort through things.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Indeed. I tend to subscribe to the theory that the newest fluff is correct, sometimes no matter how bad the newer fluff is. Eg. In the old fluff the loyalist reinforcement fleet heading to Terra was a combined fleet of Dark Angels and Space Wolves, to me it spoke words of the brotherhood between the Lion and the Wolf. But now the Ultramarines are part of that fleet, and the prominent part aswell, i don't like it, but being the newest piece of fluff i accept it as the canon now, retconning the old fluff. But hey, people are going to decide in there own ways.


----------



## TRU3 CHAOS (May 21, 2010)

Well wasn't the Ultarmarines fleet something entirely on its own coming from the Galactic East? That would probably mean they came dead last, and probably a bit longer due to the distance and the unstable warp.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Collected Visions suggests that both the Ultramarines and Wolves were merely hours away like in the old fluff, but the Dark Angels are now an unknown amount of time, potentially sooner or later.


----------



## increaso (Jun 5, 2010)

There is something in Age of Darkness that suggests that the Dark Angels and Ultramarines could have travelled to Terra together.


----------

