Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner

Is 40k too small scale?

1 reading
11K views 67 replies 31 participants last post by  Sturmovic  
#1 ·
So I was reading Siege of Vraks last week, and it was great. I come to the end of the book and see the total number of dead for the campaign-20 million, both sides. And this is supposed to be one of the bloodier conflicts in an epic, futuristic and overblown setting.

So here's the general question-could the setting do with adding a few zeroes to all combatants' numbers? Starting with the Imperial Guard and other massed armies and all the way up to Space Marines, I reckon making fluff numbers ten or a hundred times bigger would be a nice touch.

After all, even 10,000 Astartes is a tiny, tiny number on a galactic scale, but it might avoid galactic conflicts boiling down to a squad of Space Marines chainswording through a slightly larger gaggle of demons or orks.
 
#2 ·
Personally i agree and feel that most numerical reports of armies sizes, casualties etc could do with an extra zero. It seems far fetched to me that a 100 Space Marines could conquer a world, planets being as big and populous as they are. 1000 of them though and i'd have no issue. Guard regiments often being described as only 5000 men strong (or there about) seems pathetic and inadequate compared to the scope of what actions they're undertaking (and our own historic armies). Having armies or campaigns of a few hundred thousand or a couple million seems pathetic when we know there are billions or trillions of guardsmen out there and in our own history have had larger conflicts.

Of course not all armies or wars etc have to be of such scales but at least some of them should. The Sabbat Crusade for example, as detailed by Dan Abnett over the years seems to have an appropriate sense of scale. There a billion guardsmen are marshalled for the war effort, which makes sense when you consider that the Imperial forces are having to invade and conquer whole worlds (and a lot of them to boot).
 
#5 ·
yes the numbers are off, they are way off, a thousand marines couldnt hold a city let alone a country or a world, they fluff is flawed but the numbers that were chucked around in the early days have stuck, not alot of research went in to 40k as it was supposed to be a bit of a laugh and a joke game, "elves and dwarves in space ??? what are we like?"

But rather than revise the numbers they have stuck with them, personally i think a chapter should be at least a million space marines and guardsmen numbering into the trillions to have any hope of holding the galaxy in check and keeping invaders of the numerous kinds in check for this long.

The world armed forces is close to 20 million active people serving and god knows how many reserves and paramilitary, but i would guess at atleast double that number so our very own world could in theory field 60 million armed men and women at this moment in time and we are not in a general state of war or under thread of invasion from another world (as far as i know)
So you could argue that worlds in the 41st millenuim would be far more likely to have larger forces and that 1000 marines would be a piss in the ocean in terms of there ability to invade a planet, even a small one like ours.

But you have to read the fluff as though all the numbers are scaled down(like the models) and relative to each campaign because thats how the fluff works, it only makes sense to compare it to its own environment and setting,if you compare it to our numbers and technology etc it will fall down every time.

The fluff works in 40k but not outside of it.

Its a bit like gravity in cartoons,we know if you walk out of a phone box that has been shoved of a cliff at the last second you would die, but we are happy for Bugs bunny to do it if hes escaping from Elma fudd.



 
#7 ·
Still no harm in making fluff units larger-there's no difference between 10 Space Marines fighting 10 traitors in a city and a thousand on both sides.

Ever player the multiplayer computer game Space Marine? That CoD level is literally the battleground for the entire planet.
 
#8 ·
I haven't read the Siege of Vraks in years, so my memory may be bad, but it wasn't so much as conquering a major world, but the taking of a single fortress.

If I recall correctly, the planet of Vraks was simply an arms depot of a planet. It had a small population of administrators, laborers, and some Ecclesiarchy members. Glancing at the Lexi', it says the population was a total of 8 million people.

From what I remember of the actual battle, it wasn't the conquering of an entire planet, but rather the retaking of a single stronghold from the rebels. Considering they were trying to take one fortress (granted the one the size of a city) that took only a couple years of fighting, 20 million men is a lot of dead men.

I think WH40k generally does the number thing pretty okay. I personally think there ought to be more Space Marines for what they do, but do keep in mind they generally fight straight up. That's how they can come out ahead in offensive operations. On the defense, though, particularly against opponents that can be everywhere all at once (like Tyranids and Orks) I don't think I can justify them having so much influence.

Take the Battle for Macragge. The Ultramarines turned out to be a crucial lynchpin in Ultramar's defense. While some spots they could have made the difference (I imagine the First Company's terminators being useful in the northern fortresses), they simply didn't have the numbers to hold the line against millions of Tyranids. I'd rather have had Calgar call for support and had 10-15 Chapters come to his assistance.
 
#9 ·
What many of us seem to forget is that, yes we can brandish around these numbers like nobodys business, I can easily say the term "four hundred and twenty seven billiion" But to actually imagine that number would be so inconcievable that if I was ever thrust infront of four hundred and twenty seven billion humans (for example) my mind would not be able to even register that amount, even if my eyes could.

We can always say that we can imagine one million people, but all we really do is just imagine a lot of people, and then call that a million. My laboured point is yes the numbers might not be, to scale, but maybe they kept it scaled down so that we could get more immersed in the story lines, we could get more involved in the books and fluff. So that we could actually imagine what was happening. Besdies, out of everything else done on a galactic scale, 40k seems to be the only thing closely resembling enough to actually be accurate. (What was it in star wars? they prepped one million clones for a galactic republican army? Bitch please :p )
 
#18 ·
What many of us seem to forget is that, yes we can brandish around these numbers like nobodys business, I can easily say the term "four hundred and twenty seven billiion" But to actually imagine that number would be so inconcievable that if I was ever thrust infront of four hundred and twenty seven billion humans (for example) my mind would not be able to even register that amount, even if my eyes could.
Still, the casualty rates and overall numbers, even in the aforementioned scenario are paltry compared to what they should be. How many guys died in Vraks again, 20 million? WW2 had almost 3 times that many deaths and that was with armies filled with normal humans that were generally less ruthless than the IG and other parties are claimed to be. Also, Vraks had nearly its entire population wiped out in combat alone. A war over an entire planet that kills most of the population and lasts for over a decade kills fewer total people than the country of Madagascar.
 
#10 ·
I'll call Godwin here, just in case...
20 million is a shit-load of dead. WW2 left a total of ~8.8 million dead in the 3rd Reich alone. The Soviets lost ~13.5 million, over 50% of all of the deaths during this war. The Vraks conflict, alone, left almost as many dead as the two countries who lost the largest amount of military casualties during WW2.
Rather than 40k thinking too small, I think it is us who have issues with actually imagining what 20 million corpses looks like. Almost 1/3 of the UK's population. This number would leave Australia with only about 2.5 million survivers. Imagine Tokyo and New York with everyone dead, and you're coming close to seeing what 20 million dead is. And not just dead, torn apart by bullet, lasblast and shells. Run over by tanks, mashed to fragments by beserk Ogryns and Astartes.
As for Astartes numbers, you wouldn't need more than a thousand to conquer a planet. To take, say, the UK out of a conflict you would need to destroy its ability to function politically. So, an Astartes drop on the Houses of Parliament, when it's in full session, would wreak havoc. There would be so much trouble trying to get the country working again (who does what, who pays and how, who is now actually in charge?), that the country wouldn't be able to say what its own citizens should do, never mind any Armed Forces. Same with any large country. You don't need to kill every Soldier and occupy all of the landmass to defeat an enemy, just stop it from functioning properly. In what comes after, a Chapter is woefully short on manpower, but that's not what it's used for.
Anyway, I'm rambling now!

GFP
 
#11 ·
I have for a number of years now drawn attention to the fact that 100 marines would be a compleatly usless war asset. Helll when dealing with entire worlds even a billions soldiers is only a respectable force considering real hive worlds would have populations in the 10 billions mark going by places like india and china. 40k's math problem is a sign of when and how it is designed, and reasonable gamers have long abandoned the idea that 100 space marines could do anything important (Even trying to kill a important leader ect would entail going through around 10000 of the enemy armies most elite forces. Hell considering the rate of replacement most marine chapters would be ground into nothing under the constant military demand for their services.

When you get to planetary combat armies number in the billions when you get to galactic combat you start looking at armies of trillions. 40k according to its scope should have guard armies in the million to billions, and machine support assets in the tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands. Hell going by the nids and orc fluff a planatary conflict with them would number easily in the 10000-100000 mark in a matter of months.
 
#12 ·
I dont think its ridiculous at all.

Modern warfare is going down this route too: you dont need mass armies anymore, just highly mobile motivated well armed well trained special forces. Any thing else will just get smashed to bits from the air.

40k will be like this, but more.

You want to keep a planet, but don't want to obliterate it? You just need to teleport 100 marines into the enemy base, slaughter the top 1000 of the enemy, and there you go.

Presume you dont go down the Iraq route of constant insurgency as the tech is so good any revolt is identified almost immediately and taken care off by the Inquisition.
 
#13 ·
Modern warfare is going down this route too: you dont need mass armies anymore, just highly mobile motivated well armed well trained special forces. Any thing else will just get smashed to bits from the air.
Well put. While Marine Chapters may vary in doctrine and fighting styles, in my mind they've always been rapid response/quick strike forces that jump in, kill everything, then jump out. Drop pods, teleportation, Thunderhawks, they're all designed with this purpose in mind. Then again, Marines are just as viable when on the defensive, so it's kind of a moot point.
 
#14 ·
I second Fossil Penguin and Davidicus and Binman!
Also, for all the people talking about 100 Marines not holding territory, Marines arent supposed to hold territory by themselves, thats what the Guard is for. The Marines are just there to wreck house and leave. 100 marines is plenty enough to run around wrecking everything in sight that could leave a world capable of defending itself for when the Gaurd come and occupy.
Something to think on, even if the 100 Marines had to absolutely wreck everything on a plante, jsut by themselves, its not like they usually dont have time to do it. If it takes them a 100 years( which it woudlnt) then they can take 100 years to do the job. Not like they really age or whatnot. ( asuming supplies and no reinforcements, which for a lot of worlds isnt an unlikely scenario)
 
#15 · (Edited)
When talking of populations of hive worlds and what not, unless they've been corrupted or something, how many people would really care what's going on and take active interest, versus just getting in the way?

These are people who go to work day after day, pulling a single lever on the minute every minute without ever questioning why. It's a grim dark future.

At the end of the day, I don't think they'd really care what tyrant is ruling over them.
 
#16 ·
Not sure about this, thinking of the Marines wrecking the HQ and then who is around to clear up the mess got me thinking...you can only do that sort of thing where there is no communication or mobility, and no wide network of people not under your control (for example, in the dark ages there was the state and the church, and mobility was limited) but in 40k I presume there would be a level of global comms...

...but may be China is showing us the way to practice real social control with modern tech! With all the billions of Chinamen around now Chinamen would dominate 40k anyway..
 
#17 ·
The only figure that truly annoys me is in the Chaos Codex. It claims that the 'Zombie Plague has left millions dead, and it's victims will probably number in the billions before the plague runs it's course...' It's killed millions? I thought this thing ravaged planets, not just killed a handful of guys across a sector.

Midnight
 
#21 ·
.......seeing as how we are talking about superhuman warriors, some with psychic powers, with technology far beyond anything we can imagine. 300 Grey Knights cleansed Khorion IX. Yeah they all died but you get the point. BL doesn't care about the actual numbers. If they need 1,000 Astartes to hold a planet then guess what? Your going to see a bunch of stories about how a thousand guys kicked ass, probably high mortality, but still held out. Everyone's got that Spartan stand. Besides, don't over nerd this. It's sci/fi, so the limit is what you can imagine or they can. Your essentially arguing why 1,000 post-human warriors in tech armor can't hold off against either daemons or aliens. It loses credibility as a rational argument in the description.
 
#22 ·
See you have defeated your own argument. Rationality has no place in 40k. The whole setting is designed to be one giant power fantasy and that why we love it, however in a universe filled with things that could easily kill a hundred marines in a single go no good argument can be made for the pathetically small scale of 40k. Is it awesome? Yes. However no one is dumb enough to think that 1000 super soldiers would mean anything in wars that often involve things even more powerful then said marines. After all how many bloodthirsters can dance on the head of a pin?

And if we give up on rationality then you can't make any argument in favor of the scale or against it (Note I am always as rational as possible hence my problem). Hell entire squad of marines can easily be butchered by a Greater daemon or carnifex, or any other such thing and there are many more of these things in any given conflict then their are marines in a entire chapter. Its not even a stretch of the imagination to think that a average hive fleet would have a brood lord for each marine present. So I will repeat even by its own rationale 40k has a poor rationale at best for the limited scope of intergalactic warfare.

I will say that out of all the fiction the black library, and the siege of vraks does the best at trying to make a 40k conflict seem epic yet reasonable.
 
#27 ·
For the record, space marine scouts have succeeded in bringing down a trygon in the lore. A lone guardsman has felled a carnifex with a lucky shot. A single brave soldier has destroyed a necron monolith. A small band of ill equipped astartes toppled a fortress from within. A similarly small band has disrupted an entire ork waaagh from within.


Given these examples, I'd say the scaling isn't so bad. :)
 
#24 · (Edited)
Originally Posted by LukeValantine
.....Modern war? Do you mean were one vastly superior army shit kicks a bunch of insurgents, or has to conduct a police action? We have no idea how a real modern war would play out because such a thing hasn't really occurred yet. Hell even trying to compare WW2 or Korean war to a modern global conflict is a bit goofy.

Your conception is based on the small ass skirmishes that are being held through out the world. The fact others agreed with you on this point points to the fact that 40k fans typically have a baseline knowledge of war at best. Hell the only reason for the shift in war at all is the realization of mutually assured destruction and managing losses (Something that doesn't matter in 40k)

We are talking 40k here. If marines make planet fall it generally means every able person on the planet is either fighting or died (How many 40k books end with the bad guys being removed and everything turning up sun shine and rainbows?).

The only reason we can send in small elite forces is because in the last 40-60 years no war has been fought with a equally able forces. The US and other forces would not even be able to make ground fall near most industrialized cities (You know because they tend to have the same level of weaponry and tech)

God damn it, has video games and the like really confused our idea of war this badly. If we had a planetary war right now how many combatants would be involved? How many do you think would be dead in the first day? I can tell you it would be a hell lot more then a few million.

Also don't believe the crap about special forces they fail to. Small elite forces effectiveness goes down drastically with the intelligence of the enemy. How many such forces do you think ended up dead or imprisoned? Its a lot more then most industrialized countries will admit I can tell you that much (Hell their are still rumors about remaining POW's in Korea).

So stop trying to justify 40ks absurdity. Its a game made by sci-fi, fantasy fans that had a rudimentary understanding of science and history. The moment you forget this and try to rationalized it is the moment smart people stop taking anything you say seriously. (Really it starting to come of like a argument from a creationist)

However some people like me love the wacky side of 40k, its fun and retardedly grim dark to the point of hilarity. That why I love it so much. I mean in all honesty marines suck compared to half the shit some xeno races have, but damn if I don't love my space knights facing down the equivalent of 20 xenomorphs.
It's a game dude. Chill.
 
#25 ·
Are there actually stats counts of casualties in all the major wars in Warhammer 40 K? I don't think there is because just like it's hard to count how many Guardsmen there is it's more or less the same with the casualties of war.

If you compare to WW2 the total causalities is something in the range of 75 millions this includes military and civilian of all the nations that was involved.
But it's not uncommon in the 40 K universe where worlds are destroyed. I imagine billions of lives are lost. So I don't think the 40 K is in a small scale.

Part of 40K lore is the mythical abilities that the space marines can perform. After all this is science fiction we are reading. So if black library wants to write about a full company space marines taking down a planet it's possible.
 
#26 ·
Hmm, well, we have some examples of where ludicrously outnumbered forces managed to defeat numerically superior foes.

There is the battle of Marathon, where a Greek army outnumbered perhaps ten times or more defeated the Persian army. Even though the Greeks lost at Thermopylae - where they were more severely outnumbered - they did hold out for several days.

You also have the Spanish conquests of the Aztec and Incan empires. Tiny forces of Spanish conquistadors were able to defeat vast empires thanks to superior technology and divisions within those empires.

I'm sure there are also several examples from the history of the British Empire.

So it really is not hard at all to conceive of a company of Adeptus Astartes successfully conquering a planet much like our own, and then leaving it to the Guard to do the mopping up. Perhaps the Guard would face a decades-long guerilla war, but that's the sort of thing they do.
 
#29 ·
On a galactic scale, yes I find the numbers somewhat humorous and unbelievable. Then I remember this is a galaxy where humans are still using chainsaws and warhammers almost 40000 years in the future and I realize this is just a sci-fi/fantasy setting and I should just enjoy the characters and stories.
 
#33 · (Edited)
First off, I wouldnt knock on moder battles. In the initial invasion of Iraq the US had a lot of problems working out supplies, lines of communication, and friendly fire instances because people where too hopped up and not enough expeirence. Now, the US has gone to great lengths to fix these problems and has real combat expeierence and leadership at the squad and platoon level, whereas other countries who havent had anyone in their military fight for last 2 decades will have all the above problems.
Point being the US has worked out a lot of the practical problems involved in moving large amounts of men and materials, and coordinating them. Also a large pool of combat expeirenced grunts.

Also the difference between modern Spec Ops and Space marines is SM are armoured liek tanks and armed like apcs. And wheres people are correct in stating that tales of the failures of Spec Ops are skewed towards the positive, the SM IMO are going to be more of the succesfull lot. simply because of gear and equipment, and training. Every single one of them is Spartan level warrior times 10 from the tales of 300. SM arent goign to break like normal troops and are so far above them that you cant compare any normal human comat to the likes of an 8 foot tall, tank armored, rabid firing rpg wielding maniac that can run at speeds if some books are to b believed in excess of modern tanks, for short periods. Add that to potentially centuries of expeirence, and end result cannot be compared to modern comabt, the closest now that i think about it is the initial invasion of iraq, where the US tanks outranged and outmanouverd a much numeraclly larger and less trained and equiped force, for the loss of like 2 tanks, which was a thrown track and friendly fire IRRC. The Republican Gaurd couldnt even get into range of the Abrams, and had no means to effectively strike back, this is IMO the closest any modern comparison is going to come.
 
#34 ·
Yes numbers can be deceptive.

Example i have read many Star Wars books, well can't remember which book but Coruscant or Imperial Centre the capitol planet for the old republic and Empire had a population of over 1 trillion ( something like a million people from a million worlds) lived there, in american that is 1,000 billion on a planet about the same size as Earth, and in the star wars universe the amount of folks is in the hundreds and hundreds of quadrillion.

But even this spitball planet, i reckon we could easily defeat on the ground at least a full Space Marines Chapter with 600 million fighting them, i would like to see the Space Marines beat the 600,000 to 1 odds.
 
#40 ·
At the height of the vietnam war the south has 1.8 million troops. the north has around 461K, you see you don't need a huge army to win a war. You just have to been where they aren't

Let's say for example the US had 5 million men in their military and they were attacked by a force of 50,000.
We're assuming that they are using 40K tech.
Head to head the 50 thousand doesn't stand a chance. But you have to remember the country is huge you have to find them first to kill them. They could start in new york cripple the harbor and then start moving west immediately. With drop ships capable of spaceflight they can hit anywhere within minutes.

How long does it take to get a defense force mustered?
 
#41 ·
Once again your forgetting that 70% of 40ks battles play out like huge epic one sided fights. Also that 50000 would most likely would never win the war if they were technologically equal the best they would hope to do is fight a drawn out gorilla war that would make the opposing force more sadistic and violent in its attempts to route them out till almost every remnant was found and murdered in the street. In genocidal conflicts gorilla combat never works as the enemy can not be demoralized or forced into surrender when they know they will be murdered to the last man if they give up.

Like I have said before attempts to compare our rule based wars to the species murdering conflict in 40k is silly. The things that work in our war do so primarily do to the fact that both sides don't want to die, but when facing a armies that will literally fight to the last child, or that have no concept of death small tactical strikles are only affective when combined with a primary military force that can monopolized on the effect. Blowing up a harbor or airport is meaningless if you reap no benefit from such action (For instance they have 6 more and will triple security because of the pointless attack).

Marines and gaurdsman are just average soldeirs by 40k sandards. A ork nob can rip a marine in half, most tyranids can sense them through wall, and chaos can both psychic detect and murder them from a football field away. In all respects most armies are equal in strength and strategy to the imperium so marines are no more effective then regular special forces. Hence their contribution to a war would only be a tactical one not a 300 style stand off as most soldier in the nightmarish universe of 40k are better then regular marines.
 
#42 ·
Marines and gaurdsman are just average soldeirs by 40k sandards. A ork nob can rip a marine in half, most tyranids can sense them through wall, and chaos can both psychic detect and murder them from a football field away. In all respects most armies are equal in strength and strategy to the imperium so marines are no more effective then regular special forces. Hence their contribution to a war would only be a tactical one not a 300 style stand off as most soldier in the nightmarish universe of 40k are better then regular marines.
Making some decent post up to that point (or rather restating what you've already said for the third or so time, I think) and was doing okay until you hit this part.

One vs one, not too many things outside of a Space Marine will beat a Space Marine. Usually monstrous creatures and some of the more powerful, elite (often unique) units in an army, like Warbosses.

In a straight up fight, I'd put my money on Space Marine X over Nob X.
 
#44 ·
Argh, quotes within quotes. Can't manage it. I'll try my best to keep it organized. I'll add a number next to each of my responses corresponding to your paragraphs.

1. Plenty of battles have been solid victories, but even considering the larger strategic picture we still have some winners. Lord Solar Mach. being the most notable ones in recent times, the Sabbat World Crusade (presumably) ends up well. The First Battle of Armageddon was most definitely a solid victory for the Imperium, if not for the human survivors, since the manufacturing ability of the planet wasn't particularly hindered and bodies are cheap. The Damocles Gulf Crusade was a definite win, not the strategic knock-out punch that was hoped, but it wasn't merely a Pyrrhic victory.

2. You're missing the point, I think. It's not a matter of individuals being willing to die for a cause, but the percentage of a population willing to give everything. There will always be people willing to risk everything for a cause, but you're almost never going to get a majority to do so. If things look bad people will jump ship.

3. I think you're thinking too...human. Lots of enemies don't fall for the same pattern as us.

Tyranids, Necrons (before their fluff was ruined by the 5th edition Codex), Daemons, the Hrud, the Megaarachnid on Murder, and to a lesser extent, Orks, would not be broken permanently by traditional guerrilla tactics.
 
#46 ·
Argh, quotes within quotes. Can't manage it. I'll try my best to keep it organized. I'll add a number next to each of my responses corresponding to your paragraphs.

1. Plenty of battles have been solid victories, but even considering the larger strategic picture we still have some winners. Lord Solar Mach. being the most notable ones in recent times, the Sabbat World Crusade (presumably) ends up well. The First Battle of Armageddon was most definitely a solid victory for the Imperium, if not for the human survivors, since the manufacturing ability of the planet wasn't particularly hindered and bodies are cheap. The Damocles Gulf Crusade was a definite win, not the strategic knock-out punch that was hoped, but it wasn't merely a Pyrrhic victory.

2. You're missing the point, I think. It's not a matter of individuals being willing to die for a cause, but the percentage of a population willing to give everything. There will always be people willing to risk everything for a cause, but you're almost never going to get a majority to do so. If things look bad people will jump ship.

3. I think you're thinking too...human. Lots of enemies don't fall for the same pattern as us.

Tyranids, Necrons (before their fluff was ruined by the 5th edition Codex), Daemons, the Hrud, the Megaarachnid on Murder, and to a lesser extent, Orks, would not be broken permanently by traditional guerrilla tactics.


As a curtesy I'll answer these with numbers instead of the the in quotes.

1. Marcharius's troops literally told him to go screw himself when he tried to push on past the light of the astronomican. He's based off of Alexander the Great so if he had continued it wouldn't have ended well. Still I'll give you that. The first war for Armageddon your mistaken. The entire population was neutered and taken off planet to live out their lives in labor camps after fighting with the Imperial forces fo rthe planet. The event made the Great Wolf Logan Grimnar develop a lasting sense of enmity towards the Inqusition and Imperial doctrine. Definitely not a definitive victory.


The Damocles Gulf Crusade was successful as well but sadly I can't say it was that pivotal to the survival of the Imperium. Whatsmore it was a negotiation that ended it spurred by the impending arrival of a tyranid Hive Fleet. Sadly I think you've misunderstood a pyrrhic victory. Accomplishing the goals at a crippling cost. Being forced into negotiations, whicle not pyrrhic, is still not a real win as you've described.

2. I'm sorry but you misunderstood. Every group I've named (obviously the radical muslims are a zealot faction of Islam,but still they have forces) have this belief embedded in their culture. Dying for God or Country or both is seen as the fufillment of the highest ideals of their faith.

4. I think you're putting these bastards on a pedastal. How do you break a tyranid force? Start killing Carnifex's or the Swarmlord. How did the Emperor turn back the forces at the Siege of Terra? Killing Horus. How do most Ordo Malleus and Grey Knight forces defeat Chaos incursions? By killing the lead daemon or summoner(s). Ork Waagh? Kill the War boss. I can go on. Few of the forces you've named would fight on with the loss of their leader(s). The Megaarchnids I'll give you as they were a force of xenos who were just predatory and violent. No forces that are galactic threats really have their makeup. Everything has a ruling caste, sect, or power. Start at the top and work your way down and the body will collapse on itself.