# Who Was the Best "Tactical Genius" of Them?



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

Of these primarchs, we have heard a lot of this guy was smart. He could do this, he could do that. BLAH BLAH. SO.... lets just narrow the list down to these guys and see which of them was the smartest of them all.

Horus
Lion El Johnson
Leman Russ
Alpharius 
Guilliman

Who will stand the greatest in this poll...? The choice is your!:smoke:


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

I want to say Russ, but Johnson was an unparalleled genius as far as tactics are concerned.


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

I said Horus. Especially since reading about him in the first three Heresy Novels. Everything done was almost done instrumentally. Diplomatic, Genius, in almost everyway before turning.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

ckcrawford said:


> I said Horus. Especially since reading about him in the first three Heresy Novels. Everything done was almost done instrumentally. Diplomatic, Genius, in almost everyway before turning.


Personally, I wouldn't consider Horus to be the best at any one thing, but very good at everything. 

IOW, he was within the top 5 in every category, but never the best at anything.


----------



## MEQinc (Dec 12, 2010)

See the thing for me is that we're told all of these commanders are brilliant tacticians. But we're only shown (in my mind) the brilliance of Alpharius. We're told the Lion is a genius but I've yet to see anything in the two DA novels to indicate true intuitive genius. We're told Horus is good, and we see that in the first three HH novels, but it's not true tactical genius so much as all around excellence. We're told Guilliman is a genius but aside from the Codex Astartes (which several of his brothers had a hand in) I have yet to see any real evidence of this (admitting fully that he hasn't had a book yet so my opinion on this could certainly change). On the other hand we're told that Alpharius has a gift for unorthodox and brilliant strategies and then we're shown that in _Legion_ and in several other blurbs about the Alpha Legion. 

That's why I picked Alpharius, more than just a stated genius, a *proven* one.


----------



## C'Tan Chimera (Aug 16, 2008)

The Deceiver. He's such a tactical genius that he sneaked in here anyway without even being qualified to participate here.

But in all due seriousness, probably Alpharius simply because he's a total mindbomb. 

I can't really say so about Horus because he was dumb enough to do the "HAHAHA, I WILL NOW STAND TRIUMPHANT OVER MY seemingly but not yet confirmed to be DEFEATED FOE AND RELISH MY IMMEDIATE VICTORY HAHAHAH_AAAAH_ WHAT THE FUCK DIDN'T SEE THAT COMING LOOKS LIKE TEAM CHAOS IS BLASTING OFF AGAIN"


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

I think the new book with Bjorn in it will probably give more light to the quality of Leman Russ and his legacy. Unfortunately one book about how "tactical" they are, doesn't really do it. Dan Abnett is interesting, because before the book came out, he described the legion as being the complete opposite of what it actually was in the book.


----------



## Khorne's Fist (Jul 18, 2008)

IIRC it's stated in several different HH novels by various characters that the Lion was the most tactically astute of all the primarchs. I think Papa Smurf may have been the best strategist though.


----------



## increaso (Jun 5, 2010)

Guilliman - he knows the _Rules of Engagement_


----------



## XxDreMisterxX (Dec 23, 2009)

1. The Lion. Mainly because some fluff says he is, though i have yet to see it proven.

2. Alpharius. The Genius of unorthodox tactical brilliance second only to Creed. xD
(Wait.... Wtf? Why is there a Titan in this thread and how did it manage to fit in the internet?!?!?! Their can only be one man capable of such tactical genius......... CREEEEEDDDD!!!!!! ) Lawlz


----------



## Cowlicker16 (Dec 7, 2010)

Omego..oh I mean Alpharius, could totally defeat people before they even knew the Alpha Legion was even there and had plans for any type of development, including his own. Unless I am misinterpreting tactical genius I'm sticking with him


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

MEQinc said:


> See the thing for me is that we're told all of these commanders are brilliant tacticians. But we're only shown (in my mind) the brilliance of Alpharius. We're told the Lion is a genius but I've yet to see anything in the two DA novels to indicate true intuitive genius. We're told Horus is good, and we see that in the first three HH novels, but it's not true tactical genius so much as all around excellence. We're told Guilliman is a genius but aside from the Codex Astartes (which several of his brothers had a hand in) I have yet to see any real evidence of this (admitting fully that he hasn't had a book yet so my opinion on this could certainly change). On the other hand we're told that Alpharius has a gift for unorthodox and brilliant strategies and then we're shown that in _Legion_ and in several other blurbs about the Alpha Legion.
> 
> That's why I picked Alpharius, more than just a stated genius, a *proven* one.


This I agree with.

Its one of the things the HH authors have struggled to get the grips with in my opinion, the Primarchs have always be described as _"gods among men"_ with vastly superior intellects, charisma and well generally everything. Yet throughout the HH novels that have covered Horus and Jonson for example, we havn't really seen any superior battle strategies or any such things which really validate them having vastly superior minds at all. As _MEQ_ said, we are told they are exceptional geniuses, but are yet to see it. Alpharius I think is probably the only exception as things stand. Or at least one you can much more easily justify.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

Solar Marcharius. He might not be listed but he is awsome enough to sneak in regardless. 

Given the current choice though I say Alpharius.


----------



## NiceGuyEddy (Mar 6, 2010)

MEQinc said:


> See the thing for me is that we're told all of these commanders are brilliant tacticians. But we're only shown (in my mind) the brilliance of Alpharius. We're told the Lion is a genius but I've yet to see anything in the two DA novels to indicate true intuitive genius.


Are you sure? In _Fallen Angels_ the Lion: successfully predicted Horus's movements, using misdirection gave Horus's spies the slip and using only a small hastily assembled force he effectively denies the traitors an entire planet. He dealt a HUGE blow to Horus' cause with a token force by denying him a vital forge world. If thats not intuitive genius I don't know what is. The space battle alone provides a good look at the Lion's tactical prowess against superior numbers.



And yes I know he then gave away the siege guns but that had nothing to do with tactical genius.


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

NiceGuyEddy said:


> And yes I know he then gave away the siege guns but that had nothing to do with tactical genius.


But do you think Alpharius would have done such a naive move?

Alpharius wouldn't have trusted anyone especially in a time where Primarchs were siding against one another. What assurance did El'Johnson have that Perturabo wasn't with Horus? Again, I'm 99.9% sure Alpharius wouldn't have done such a mistake.


----------



## gally912 (Jan 31, 2009)

Stephen_Newman said:


> Solar Marcharius. He might not be listed but he is awsome enough to sneak in regardless.
> 
> Given the current choice though I say Alpharius.


Was going to say that, but I'll go with the Lord Castellen instead 

Of the Primarchs, have to go with the Lion.


----------



## NiceGuyEddy (Mar 6, 2010)

Malus Darkblade said:


> But do you think Alpharius would have done such a naive move?
> 
> Alpharius wouldn't have trusted anyone especially in a time where Primarchs were siding against one another. What assurance did El'Johnson have that Perturabo wasn't with Horus? Again, I'm 99.9% sure Alpharius wouldn't have done such a mistake.


None, apart from the fact that he was on his way to join the punitive force tasked with fighting Horus. But el'Jonson wasn't the only person fooled here. Dorn, Malcador, Corax, Ferrus and Vulkan all believed Perturabo was loyal. Why should the Lion doubt this? He was in possession of siege guns and then gave these siege guns to siege specialists (the Iron Warriors) who were going to lay siege to Isstvan. At the time it seemed like the perfectly logical thing to do, the Lion was not on Diamat in force in fact he was there in secret so he wouldn't have had the equipment himself to remove the siege guns. Accordingly by the end of the conflict he could either destroy the guns or put them to use and potentially end the heresy then and there. He chose putting them to use. Not the best decision in hindsight but it was the tactically sound thing to do at the time and everyone was fooled by Perturabo.

I'm not out to bash Alpharius, I just thought the Lion wasn't being fairly depicted. For the record I voted for the Lion because he is almost universally regarded as one of the greatest strategists in the imperium and there IS proof of it if you can see the bigger picture.


----------



## MEQinc (Dec 12, 2010)

NiceGuyEddy said:


> Are you sure? In _Fallen Angels_ the Lion: successfully predicted Horus's movements, using misdirection gave Horus's spies the slip and using only a small hastily assembled force he effectively denies the traitors an entire planet. He dealt a HUGE blow to Horus' cause with a token force by denying him a vital forge world. If thats not intuitive genius I don't know what is. The space battle alone provides a good look at the Lion's tactical prowess against superior numbers.


He's good, I'm certainly not out to deny that. But basically all he did was think "Horus comissioned these increadibly powerful weapons, he's almost certain to want them to fight his Heresy. I know, I'll take a crack force to steal them anyway while he's still busy in Isstvan." Smart, sure. Tacticaly brilliant, probably not. And the strategies employed during the fighting hardly qualify as brilliant, nothing I haven't seen before in other stories. Indeed if it hadn't been for a fairly lucky fluke he could easily have lost that fight.


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

MEQinc said:


> He's good, I'm certainly not out to deny that. But basically all he did was think "Horus comissioned these increadibly powerful weapons, he's almost certain to want them to fight his Heresy. I know, I'll take a crack force to steal them anyway while he's still busy in Isstvan." Smart, sure. Tacticaly brilliant, probably not. And the strategies employed during the fighting hardly qualify as brilliant, nothing I haven't seen before in other stories. Indeed if it hadn't been for a fairly lucky fluke he could easily have lost that fight.


As you've said earlier, it's been established in the fluff that the Lion is a genius strategy wise but it's just that authors who have written about his exploits haven't _captured _that genius yet.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

The Lion is said the be a genius of immense proportions in the fluff and one of, if not the greatest tacticians in history. Saying he isn't because a piece of subpar writer hasn't managed to come up with a brilliant example of tactics and properly express it in writing is not, IMO, a valid point.


----------



## gally912 (Jan 31, 2009)

Interesting that it's a petty even split, I wonder if its more personal loyalist/chaos bias at this point.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

gen.ahab said:


> The Lion is said the be a genius of immense proportions in the fluff and one of, if not the greatest tacticians in hostory. Saying he isn't because a piece of subpar writing hasn't managed to come up with a brilliant example of tactics and properly express it in writing is not, IMO, a valid point.


Agreed. Just like ahab said, in all the sources and according to numerous primarchs, the Lion is one of the most tactically brilliant minds to have existed. I'm sure if Abnett, Mcneill, ADB or someone got hold of the Dark Angels they would be able to show it more clearly. As it happens at the moment he doesn't seem that geat from the books because of an average author. 

It's definetly a close call and i dearly wanted to vote Alpharius, but i'm going with pretty much every established fluff source here.

And for me it's not about Loyalists vs Traitors. I'm always on the loyalist side, but i've made no secret of my admiration for Alpharius/Omegon throughout these boards, easily one of my favourite Primarchs.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

On a side note, most poorly worded and proofread comment I have ever made on heresy..... ever.


----------



## XxDreMisterxX (Dec 23, 2009)

Alpharius hands down. He can basically out think anyone. He can out think anyone so much that he out thinks himself at times. xD 

Also regarding the Lion, just because people say he his does not necessarily make it true. 
I rather lean towards tried and true then general opinion. Even GW hasnt released any Fluff in the DA codex to commemorate any of the Lion's exploits and that alone is a huge blow to his credibility. While their are numerous accounts both in BL fluff and GW fluff that extensively support Alpharius's brilliance on several occasions and with his legion's continued existence and tactics.


----------



## NiceGuyEddy (Mar 6, 2010)

MEQinc said:


> He's good, I'm certainly not out to deny that. But basically all he did was think "Horus comissioned these increadibly powerful weapons, he's almost certain to want them to fight his Heresy. I know, I'll take a crack force to steal them anyway while he's still busy in Isstvan." Smart, sure. Tacticaly brilliant, probably not. And the strategies employed during the fighting hardly qualify as brilliant, nothing I haven't seen before in other stories.


I think you’re being harsh to the Lion. The space battle surely demonstrates the Lions tactical brilliance no? The Lion went into the battle with 16 warships which were “fresh” from a long and gruelling conflict in the shield worlds. These ships were also battle damaged to mislead Horus’s spies and maintain the illusion that they were retreating to repair and resupply. These 16 ships engaged twice that number over Diamat. Horus’s ships were “old but formidable” and most likely fresh an undamaged as all they would have been involved in prior to this was a massacre at Isstvan 3. You can break the skirmish into two separate engagements, the Lion is in direct command of both; 


The first is between the loyalist scout ships (9) and the traitor picket ships (15). The traitors open up first launching 30 torpedoes. However having predicted this the Lion had launched stormbirds at the exact correct time and used them to shoot down the incoming torpedoes. All but three torpedoes are successfully destroyed. That’s pretty impressive; he used what are primarily ground assault/troop transport craft as a torpedo screen. Following this the (outnumbered) scouts are able to destroy all 15 picket ships costing them only 4.
 

The next engagement is between the loyalist cruisers (7) and the traitor cruisers (12) here the Lion (again outnumbered) makes use of some pretty nifty manoeuvring which allows the aforementioned scout formation to flank the cruisers and remain undetected until the last minute as their presence was hidden by the traitor vessels own reactor emissions. The loyalists destroy 5 cruisers and disable two more while losing only one ship. 

Now considering the main purpose of this skirmish was not to wipe out the defending traitor ships but to land ground troops as quickly as possible a total of 20 confirmed kills at the cost of only 5 ships is staggeringly brilliant considering the loyalist were outnumbered almost 2 to 1. 



MEQinc said:


> Indeed if it hadn't been for a fairly lucky fluke he could easily have lost that fight.


If by fairly lucky fluke you meen an unexpected development outside of his control (siege gun) then maybe you're right but that unexpected development wouldn't have been such a deciding factor if not for the fairly unlucky



Archoi's betrayal 


Which is also outside of the Lion's control. Both events have little impact positive or negative on my perception of the Lion's tactical genius.


----------



## MEQinc (Dec 12, 2010)

NiceGuyEddy said:


> I think you’re being harsh to the Lion. The space battle surely demonstrates the Lions tactical brilliance no?


Possibly but when I hear 'tactically brilliant' I expect great things. As in better than flanking maneuvers and predicting basic enemy actions. 



> That’s pretty impressive; he used what are primarily ground assault/troop transport craft as a torpedo screen.


That's actually a pretty common use for these craft and is pointed out in the basic tactical guide for Battlefleet Gothic. So congrats Lion you read the strategy guide. Now that's me being harsh. 



> Now considering the main purpose of this skirmish was not to wipe out the defending traitor ships but to land ground troops as quickly as possible a total of 20 confirmed kills at the cost of only 5 ships is staggeringly brilliant considering the loyalist were outnumbered almost 2 to 1.


Again. The Lion is definitely good, he shows an excellent grasp of strategy and tactics. But is he the best of all the Primarchs? I have yet to see anything to show this. 



gen.ahab said:


> The Lion is said the be a genius of immense proportions in the fluff and one of, if not the greatest tacticians in history. Saying he isn't because a piece of subpar writer hasn't managed to come up with a brilliant example of tactics and properly express it in writing is not, IMO, a valid point.


An informed ability is not the equal of a demonstrated one. The fact that a writer might struggle to convey this is not a valid defense. If a book comes out that shows the Lion demonstrating his informed ability then I'll happily change my mind.


----------



## NiceGuyEddy (Mar 6, 2010)

MEQinc said:


> Again. The Lion is definitely good, he shows an excellent grasp of strategy and tactics. But is he the best of all the Primarchs? I have yet to see anything to show this.


My example isn't supposed to convince you that he is the best of all primarchs. You said that there was no evidence of tactical brilliance in the DA's two HH books, I disagreed. You have my example and you can't really argue with a kill ratio as good as the one he achieved with the odds stacked as highly against him as they were. 



MEQinc said:


> An informed ability is not the equal of a demonstrated one. The fact that a writer might struggle to convey this is not a valid defense. If a book comes out that shows the Lion demonstrating his informed ability then I'll happily change my mind.


Although my example doesn't seem to have convinced you, it is valid. Stenius and Nemiel on the bridge of the _Invincible Reason_ rate their chances against the traitor fleet as terrible due to the abundant traitor ships yet they prevail quite emphatically. At the end of the novel Perterabo calls the Lion's lightning raid a "masterstroke" and although I wouldn't go that far it's plain to see that the author in both scenes was _trying_ to portray the Lion as a tactical genius but not completely succeeding. Just because we haven't gotten a good enough example for you yet it doesn't mean all the other sources are wrong. 

Take Ferrus Manus, the fluff says that he is a master smith and can make wondrous things with his metal hands yet all that has been "demonstrated" to us is a blade for Fulgrim and a mace for Lorgar and the odd suit of armour. Now just because we've only been given a few fairly unremarkable creations it doesn't mean that I'm going to doubt Ferrus's craftmanship because practically all sources of fluff about him tell us he is a master craftsman. Similarly with the Lion just because I haven't been given a truly spectacular victory it doesn't mean I'm going to doubt fluff that specifically states he is one of the greatest (if not _the_ greatest) tactical geniuses of his age.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

MEQinc said:


> An informed ability is not the equal of a demonstrated one. The fact that a writer might struggle to convey this is not a valid defense. If a book comes out that shows the Lion demonstrating his informed ability then I'll happily change my mind.


What are you on about? It is a fictional character, it cannot demonstrate ability, the writers, however, can and have obviously failed to capture what the lion is meant to be which is a general possessing a mind of near unparalleled genius when it comes to tactics. Multiple fluff sources point to this, as AoB said. 

You are essentially saying that, because Legion was written buy a much better author, obviously Alpharius must be the more adept when it comes to tactics. That is not a valid case.


----------



## High_Seraph (Aug 28, 2009)

Lion El'Jonson, he racked up a tally third to only Horus and Dorn despite being found 50 years or so before the heresy.


----------



## TRU3 CHAOS (May 21, 2010)

NiceGuyEddy said:


> Are you sure? In _Fallen Angels_ the Lion: successfully predicted Horus's movements, using misdirection gave Horus's spies the slip and using only a small hastily assembled force he effectively denies the traitors an entire planet. He dealt a HUGE blow to Horus' cause with a token force by denying him a vital forge world. If thats not intuitive genius I don't know what is. The space battle alone provides a good look at the Lion's tactical prowess against superior numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> And yes I know he then gave away the siege guns but that had nothing to do with tactical genius.


Maybe Horus planned it... after, it was so much easier to just pick them up without being detected by a loyalist party and ratted out as a traitor.


----------



## MuSigma (Jul 8, 2010)

I would say between Alpharius and Lion, hmm it would be close.
On any "normal" battlefield the Lion would win. Alpharius on the other hand doesnt play by the rules and doesnt give you a normal battle field.
The question therefore would be if Alpharius had some time to study the DA and choose a fight on his terms would the Lion be able to outwit him given no time or resourses. Hmm
On the other hand if the battlefield was of the Lion's choosing would Alpharius be able to out think him given no time.

The two Primarchs differ in brilliance mainly because Alpharius is all about preparation and infiltration, having a lot more intel than you and the savvy to use it. The Lion is all about knowing how to turn any situation no matter how disastrous to a win.

Like the Imperial Fists and Iron Warriors, the Alpha Legion and Dark Angels would be two sides of a good coin.

Incidently the Dark Angels could have been very significant if Luther hadnt turned sour, his exile back to Caliban in charge of recruitment and training was a great success, and was churning out Astartes, well trained and equiped faster than any other Legion. May of been a late charge to be the biggest Loyalist Legion.


----------



## forkmaster (Jan 2, 2010)

I accidentally voted Horus, but he was also much a symbol. Just charisma and charm won everything for him. I would say Alpharius for his sneakyness or Lion since he had almost as many recorded victorious and he wasnt active for more than 50 years, almost a century less than Horus.


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

I would like to see a bit more of Horus' skill though while the Heresy progresses.


----------



## Jerushee (Nov 18, 2010)

I think the best strategist were
Guiliman
Horus
Alpharius
Dorn

I think the best tacticians were
Konrad cruze
Russ
Corax
Lion


----------



## Smokes (Nov 27, 2009)

Obviously the best tactical genius was Alpha....CRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDDDDDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What? Nobody else has and somebody had to do it.


----------



## CJay (Aug 25, 2010)

Why is Alphy number 1? He got his ass creamed by Guilliman, who is constantly talked about being the best, or at least him and Lion are. I mean analyze the final fight, Alphy thought Guilliman would follow his norm, then boom got kicked in the balls for it, thats like creating marauders because your opponent likes to go roaches, only to suddenly be attacked by mutalisks, guess who is going to be called the noob?

Now I know the UM were beatin back after his death, but Alphy died because he made an assumption.


----------



## XxDreMisterxX (Dec 23, 2009)

CJay said:


> Why is Alphy number 1? He got his ass creamed by Guilliman, who is constantly talked about being the best, or at least him and Lion are. I mean analyze the final fight, Alphy thought Guilliman would follow his norm, then boom got kicked in the balls for it, thats like creating marauders because your opponent likes to go roaches, only to suddenly be attacked by mutalisks, guess who is going to be called the noob?
> 
> Now I know the UM were beatin back after his death, but Alphy died because he made an assumption.


Haha. If any of the other legions fought the UM they would also expect the UM to fight according to their rules. But when they throw the rules out the window your fucked. Thats how Alpharius was. He relied on that fact, but Guil was not a dumbass so he changed up his tactics realizing the enemy would act and know what his battle doctrine was.


----------



## pylco (Jun 2, 2008)

spoiler from the burning of prospero.
the lion, he was the general of the imperium..
guilliman was the regent of the imperium, russ was the executioner, but horus was the best of them


----------



## High_Seraph (Aug 28, 2009)

pylco said:


> spoiler from the burning of prospero.
> the lion, he was the general of the imperium..
> guilliman was the regent of the imperium, russ was the executioner, but horus was the best of them


That is not a fact only an assumption.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

CJay said:


> Why is Alphy number 1? He got his ass creamed by Guilliman, who is constantly talked about being the best, or at least him and Lion are. I mean analyze the final fight, Alphy thought Guilliman would follow his norm, then boom got kicked in the balls for it, thats like creating marauders because your opponent likes to go roaches, only to suddenly be attacked by mutalisks, guess who is going to be called the noob?
> 
> Now I know the UM were beatin back after his death, but Alphy died because he made an assumption.





XxDreMisterxX said:


> Haha. If any of the other legions fought the UM they would also expect the UM to fight according to their rules. But when they throw the rules out the window your fucked. Thats how Alpharius was. He relied on that fact, but Guil was not a dumbass so he changed up his tactics realizing the enemy would act and know what his battle doctrine was.


Did Alpharius get creamed though? Literally the only account of the battle is from an Inquisitor who is very likely an Alpha Legion operative. The Ultramarines themselves doubt the authenticity of the account. And even so, Guilliman still got soundly beaten if the account is to be believed. He went beyond his usual tactics and thought outside the box, yet he still completely underestimated and misunderstood the Alpha Legion, he killed Alpharius(or did he?) expecting the Alpha Legion to break. But they didn't, they carried on fighting to no ill effect and soundly beat Guilliman to the point he had to withdraw and bombard the surface rather than risk warfare on the ground.

And again assuming the account is accurate, or even true, how can we be sure Guilliman killed Alpharius or Omegon? The Astartes withing the legion made every attempt to make themselves look like their Primarchs, he could have killed Alpharius, Omegon, Ranko, Pech or a number of legionaires. Point is even if Guilliman did kill one of the primarchs, he still got his ass handed to him.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

MEQinc said:


> He's good, I'm certainly not out to deny that. But basically all he did was think "Horus comissioned these increadibly powerful weapons, he's almost certain to want them to fight his Heresy. I know, I'll take a crack force to steal them anyway while he's still busy in Isstvan." Smart, sure. Tacticaly brilliant, probably not.


Actually, Perturabo disagrees with you.

And, as others stated, it's kind of tough to write convincing tactical/strategic geniuses. Do you know why, for instance, the Lion sounds mundane as opposed to the works of Bonaparte or Rommel (both considered "Great Captains")? Because the Lion comes courtesy of Mike Lee (no offense, Mike!) and the other two guys _kind of set the standard_ for their time. :grin:



> And the strategies employed during the fighting hardly qualify as brilliant, nothing I haven't seen before in other stories.


He pretty much trounces a naval force superior both in terms of numbers and size... Beyond that, he's rather limited in what tactics he can employ when in command of less than two hundred Astartes and some battered PDF-equivalents.

By contrast, the tactics of other Primarchs are more or less just alluded to. It's not like Fulgrim, Ferrus, Horus, etc., have shown anything more impressive. Alpharius toying with an inferior, besieged opponent (but still not taking anything away from his skills and concepts)? I'd say that best nod so far probably goes to Corax for keeping his survivors alive on Isstvan V.



> Indeed if it hadn't been for a fairly lucky fluke he could easily have lost that fight.


You can't really call it a fluke--the employment of the siege guns--when he went there _looking precisely for the weapons that turned the tide._ It's called a calculated risk. :grin:

Cheers,
P.


----------



## Lord_Anonymous (Oct 13, 2010)

Ima say Horus, just for all round badassness


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

After reading _Rules of Engagement_, I found Guilliman as a more down to Earth Primarch.


----------



## StalkerZero (Oct 3, 2010)

I voted Horus although I'm not very far in to the Horus Heresy series so that may be a bit biased by not having read non-codex entries for a few of the Primarchs.

Can't believe you left Ghazkull off the list though...


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

Roboute Guilliman as he is stated as being such. 

Also if you're voting for Alpharius you might want to check the difference between Tactics and Strategies. Alpharius was a master at strategies, Guilliman was the tactical genius.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

Tactics = battle.
Strategy = campaigns/wars.

Alpharius' examples qualify, as they deal with individual battles (whether the multi-faceted siege he used as his exemplar, his naval engagement in "Legion", or his supposedly final battle against Guilliman's Legion).

That having been said, I'm still sticking with the Lion. Alpharius' siege was one where he enjoyed every advantage. Against Namatjira, he had the element of surprise--I believe it's qualified that many of the ships he engaged didn't even have their shields up. In his final battle, Guilliman showed that the Alpha Legion (or their commanders) were not as able to deal with the tables being turned on them.

I think the final verdict on the Lion, though, might come with Aaron Dembski-Bowden's new short story, featuring the Dark Angels vs. the Night Lords. 

Cheers,
P.


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

Too bad we haven't seen Alpharius tactic in battle. I hope we get to see it sooner or later. I'm sure it will be fun to read on. 

The new short story in _Age of Darkness_ called _A Liar's Due_ was another awesome depiction of how the Alpha Legion operates. Truly awesome. 

As for Horus, on another thread I mentioned how even Guilliman's codex could not counter Horus' Legion. 



Horus Legion could just out manoever the Ultramarines at every point during the simulations. Its worth mentioning, that it seemed the Ultramarines seemed to sacrifice certain elements to fight against their opponent.

The World Eaters needed units to chop up. So the Ultramarines would reinforce the most important units, while sacrificing the more useless ones. Basically enveloping the World Eaters.

Before this, the Ultramarines gave up much ground to the Death Guard.

Similarly, they lost the whole planet basically. Given they did fairly well against these legions. It brings up the question whether they truly beat them. They lost everything else, except for the legion. The one legion they fought at the end. The Luna Wolves, at least to me seemed to have the better of the Ultramarines because for one, they had better manoevering skills than the Ultramarines. And second, the Ultramarines had nothing else to "sacrifice" and use their tactic around. Since their world was destroyed, and they had already suffered the more useless parts of their legion. 


It goes to show you, and perhaps remind us that Horus was a genius in warfare, but not only that, their abilities in combat were no less than awesome.


----------



## SoL Berzerker (May 5, 2009)

Ummmm.... Where is Marneus Calgar!? 

Without Marneus, I would say Horus. Sure the other guys would never assault Terra, but if they got the chance, would they really be able to come as close as Horus did to taking it over? No.


----------



## Scholtae (Aug 16, 2010)

I voted Alphirus. Why? because he is quite probably the mastermind behind the dropsite massacre, his legion proved their tactical flexibility against gulliman and he managed to hold off the space wolves preventing them from reaching terra. Plus he did it all "for the emperor"


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

ckcrawford said:


> Too bad we haven't seen Alpharius tactic in battle. I hope we get to see it sooner or later. I'm sure it will be fun to read on.


You kind of do. What they do in "Legion" pretty much corresponds to their contributions to the Dropsite Massacres and their efforts on Tesstra Prime (the famous battle where Alpharius gives the enemy a week to prep): ambushes, covert efforts, betrayals, etc. Alpharius is certainly cunning (probably the most cunning of the bunch), and as a Primarch he is certainly a masterful leader, but he doesn't display the highest calibre of tactical prowess.



Scholtae said:


> I voted Alphirus. Why? because he is quite probably the mastermind behind the dropsite massacre, ...


Mastermind behind the Dropsite Massacres? Sure, I guess, but how does that prove tactical genius? It was an ambush, a betrayal, a back-handed engagement that saw more than 4-1 odds against the ambushed.



> ... his legion proved their tactical flexibility against gulliman ...


Perhaps, even though the document that asserts that, from the Alpha Legion Index Astartes, is stated as being questioned in regards to its validity. At the end of the day, though, you know what? That same document shows how the Ultramarines also surprised the Alpha Legion through their initial deployment. Sure, the Alpha Legion got the better of the Ultramarines, but (A) Guilliman is not exactly stated as being tactically the best and (B) only 3,000 Ultramarines were involved in that battle. The number of Alpha Legionnaires is unstated, but they had set up the terrain and enjoyed the support of the locals.



> ... and he managed to hold off the space wolves preventing them from reaching terra. Plus he did it all "for the emperor"


Not really, he didn't. The Space Wolves were already weakened when the Alpha Legion engaged them. Beyond that, the reason why the Wolves didn't make it to Terra in time had to do with their own pace--Leman Russ wanted to stop and aid planets on his way back.

Cheers,
P.


----------



## Justindkates (Apr 30, 2010)

I gotta go with Johnson or Alpharius. I think Horus and Guilliman are more grand strategy oriented.


----------

