It wasn't a complaint per se, but to name 360 page novel after a component that only really appears in the last 30 pages is a bit of a stretch. Even then we only briefly see them in action, with Kersh's final gambit getting as much coverage.
Well, really, many
books typically have titles which have bugger all to do with the book. They barely reference the book, they don't correspond to something in the book...they just vaguely sort-of chime with gist of the novel.
Indeed, in that regard, 'legion of the damned' does
correspond to more than the literal phenomenon of the Damned Legionnaires themselves. There's the 'legion' aspect of the Imperial Fists - that they're all dealing with/damned by the Emperor-less universe glimpsed in the Darkness.
There's the microcosm look at the fracturing/splitting of the Imperial Fists Legion after the Heresy: how without their figurehead intact (Kersh's standard) everything falls to hell (the company starts bickering/fighting) and almost sets the Imperium on a path to self-destruction and further in-fighting or wasted expenditure (chasing off after the Alpha Legion).
Rob's done a nice piece on his blog about titles, it's worth a look, but personally I still can't get behind the 'gripe'. ('Twas wrong o'me to say it's a complaint.) Especially in comparison to Prospero Burns
(mainly because it's the blurb that's the trouble; not the title). Similarly with Galaxy in Flames
- it's only a prelude to the galaxy. They could've just called it Isstvan III
and that'd have been enough.
(I cite Galaxy in Flames
mainly because it's a grand name for a HH anthology, as per the massive tome Let the Galaxy Burn