Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums - Reply to Topic
40k Fluff Discuss GW background material here. All those bits in the Codex that aren't stat blocks or special rules. Post your custom character/chapter/army background in our Homebrew Fluff subforum!

Thread: (SW)Russ vs (WE)Angron Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
04-12-20 08:11 PM
Sonicsucks23 Angron, cause hes the unrivaled combat king. And he best russ.
04-12-20 08:05 PM
Sonicsucks23 Didnt angron and his legion best russ, in combat no less already? I give it to them but if russ and his kin have time to prep they when since the world eaters always job to well planned attacks. In a straight one vs one, they are unrivaled.
11-26-10 06:46 PM
For-The-Warmaster 1. Space wolves. Yes the WE's are great CC fighters but unless angron gets control of his bloodthirsty warrior's (and keep kharn as a last resort) he might win. He may be a primarch of wrath and blood but he is a good tactician. You have to remember that when he escaped the gladiator arena with a small army of gladiators and was able to finnd a secure location. He was assaulted many times by great armies why his army slowy became more tired and hungry. He was able to old because of his tactics not going bezerk and killing everything. Still i put my money on SW's

2. Okay thats hard. A well trained gladiator or a cunning proud warrior the moment he escaped his pod at fenrus. Probably a tie. When the other dies the remaing primarch will die later due horrific wounds. Or he gets knocked out and his larman cells heal him.
11-24-10 06:52 AM
Angel of Blood Space Wolves aren't exactly pysker specialists, they just happen to hate excessive use of it or anything that isn't fenrisian power. They were renowned for being good in combat. And Russ was raised in the wild by fricking wolves, not just regular wolves either, massive wolves(which may have alot more too them from the saying "there are no wolves on Fenris") He is without a doubt one of the best brawlers of the primarchs, up there with the other big melee monsters
11-24-10 06:32 AM
nate187 russ all over angron boom
11-24-10 01:10 AM
shaantitus Look at their origins. Angron is a primarch GLADIATOR. What do gladiators do? They are specialists in 1 on 1 hand to hand combat. Very little else. What are we talking about? Basically a gladiatorial combat between a specialist and an non specialist with the specialist doing what he does best. Angron would triumph. Also where is it written that russ is the anti primarch primarch? The wolves are anti psyker/sorcerer specialists. No help against the WE.
11-23-10 09:35 PM
Angel of Blood
Quote:
Originally Posted by XxDreMisterxX View Post
Beast Savagery is a different category from human savagery as there is no emotional influence and more instinctive in nature for animals. When wolves go berserk they are aggressive and dangerous but they do not feel anything when they are and is more an innate response to a threat not a over escalation of adrenaline and anger like humans experience
Well from this you pretty much summised that the WE have human savagery and the SW have beast savagery. Which is where most of this stemmed from. The SW have human savagery then by your recent post, so why is their savagery any less? Making oneself more angry doesn't make you more dangerous, against a non combatant sure, but against another highly trained warrior, not so much.

I read all about the anger things you posted. But the World Eaters can't control their anger, it says so right in the codex.

And with regards to Kharn, its still not rational thought. No one thinking rationally is going to think that salughtering your own men will make them fight and to for the legion to then implode in on itself rather than just all gangfuck Kharn isn't rational thought either. Mandathrax ill give you shows a degree of rational thinking, but its still very basic, and the moment they still go for quite a reckless and potentially suicidal charge in the end anyway, and the whole incident is rounded off by Kharn killing more of his troops again
11-23-10 08:48 PM
gen.ahab
Quote:
Originally Posted by XxDreMisterxX View Post
Angron definately beats Russ. hands down. xD
.......Why?
11-23-10 07:58 PM
XxDreMisterxX
Quote:
Originally Posted by Angel of Blood View Post
Yeah im sorry how am i not making any sense? How am i lacking credibility? Please go into detail rather than just going "lol your an idiot" which is what your effectively doing. You still haven't adressed the fact that one minute your argument was that their anger is so dangerous as it can't be controlled as an emotion, but then the next moment you were saying if it can be controlled(despite the afore mentioned statement that it can't be) then it is even more dangerous. Then you slander me for using comparisons between animals and humans despite the fact that it was you who first started this comparions by comparing the WE beserker nature as human and the SW as animal bezerkers. Like i said go into detail instead of making yourself look so childish.

I did compare WE berzerker nature as human anger for they are human. But i was comparing SW to animal berzerker because their traits are like animals But ARE NOT ANIMALS themselves for they are still human. So your comparison between a human vs any animal is fraught with inaccuracies because the difference between a human fighting a crazed rat is different from a human fighting a Elephant. The human will kill the rat, but might die to a elephant barehanded. Every animal is different with different characteristics. Sure there innate instincts and killing nature may be the same but different physically. A human vs wolf would be the best comparison if you were to do one. Human vs animal comparison is also biased in the fact that animals have weapons to in the form of claws, jaws with sharp teeth and other attribute unique to certain animals. So why a human not having a shotgun would not make it a fairer playground?

Im looking at Kharns entry right here, shall i quote it to you?

"The battle had to be before Skalathrax's long, frozen night drew in and killed victor and vanquished alike, Yet the World Eaters could gain no ground against their foes and were hurled back time after time by devastating sonic weapons. Kharn cursed his fellow warriors for abandoning the attack and seizing a flamer he torched the nearest buildings in a gesture of contempt. He cut down those that tried to stop him and marched into the glood, the serpents tongue of his flamer licking out again and again to consume the city. Through the mayhem strode Kharn, slaughtering all that he found, friend or foe. Anarchy engulfed the World Eaters ad they fought each other ans the Legion was irretriveably split into hundreds of warbands"

Seriously where are we not seeing this right? They couldn't win before nightfall in which they would all die, so using the most basic rational thought seeked shelter. Kharn then in his anger, rage and NON RATIONAL thinking decided to start burning the shelters down, killing his men and enemy at the same time and the World Eaters start to attack each other. How does this show rational and sound thought in any way shape or form?

Yes, this is the correct event but your post earlier was suggesting it look like that WE turned on each other at a moments notice without any catalyst or event to trigger such and not because Kharn went crazy and started attacking the legion which soon caused a riot making the zerkers not knowing who's attacking them fear of betrayal and started attacking those they couldnt trust. Kharn was using rational though, He was disgusted at his fellow marines for abandoning the attack on the EC and decided to "motivate them to fight" but it backfired and he ended up breaking the legion. If you want to see a zerker with rational thinking look up Mandathrax.
Anger when heightened to such extents that it cannot be controlled through conscious effort to suppress it can throw someone into a hostile crazed state which anything can happen thus the unpredictably = dangerious.

But when a will strong enough to suppress his anger can use that anger to make him more effective in ways far beyond his normal capacity. Thus making him highly dangerous and depending on the person violent. Stated in my post earlier when i posted a link on anger to support my argument ( which you most likely havent even bothered)

"Anger is "an emotional state that varies in intensity from mild irritation to intense fury and rage," according to Charles Spielberger, PhD, a psychologist who specializes in the study of anger. Like other emotions, it is accompanied by physiological and biological changes; when you get angry, your heart rate and blood pressure go up, as do the levels of your energy hormones, adrenaline, and noradrenaline."

I happily concede thou since no relevant point is being made and i'm running out of steam (no one seams to want to defend the WE so i'm alone and getting double-teamed isnt doing it for me). It would seem my views are biased also ( who isnt biased these days?)
so merely to end this:

SW maybe trump WE
Angron definately beats Russ. hands down. xD
11-23-10 12:08 PM
Angel of Blood
Quote:
Originally Posted by XxDreMisterxX View Post
Nope still doesnt. since apparantly u dont realize why i mentioned Kharn and the battle of Skalathrax or how they are related at all and it seems to me you havent read it too. Because then you would understand. and why would a human fight a animal without a weapon cause thats a completely useless analogy and one sided and has no relevance to a WE and SW fight at all. If he wants to make it accurate give the pissed off human a shotgun and then its accurate comparison. My point in the relevant post earlier was that they have there different methods of killing something and in the end that thing is going to end up dead either way.
Because you can't make a biased comparison like that. We are talking about which rage/beserker state will win out. Can human emotional anger win without adding superior weaponry and advantages into the equation. Or will the animals instinctual and emotionless beserker attitude still win out. If we have the human armed with superior technology then it is now a biased and unfair comparison as we know that the SW and WE are going to be armed in much the same way. A comparison needs to bear resemblance to what you are comparing it too.

How is giving the human a weapon making it more accurate, to make it accurate the WE would now need to be armed whereas the SW is unarmed. You;ve changed the entire dynamic of the fight by arming one side without arming the other.
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome