Ye i was justing thinking of that if you gave a imperial guards man better weapons would the kill more stuff and survive longer or am i talking a load of rubbish

Oh and i am talking about infantry not tanks.

I find myself wishing for a better armor save...that way they can actually use the guns they give them, haha.

I find it doesnt matter if they live to shoot there guns or not they dont do anything either way... haha bring in the Leman Russes

They're fine as is. Though I do miss the old doctrine system.

Edit: Actually one thing could do with being redone. Storm troopers. In their current state vet squads just do it better.

Iunno they seem to do the job they do pretty good as is.

Human psykers need to be redone to fit the fluff regarding them instead of being a sucky and kinda useless pair of units.

Just played a small 400 pt Combat Patrol. I really miss the Space Marine armor save, haha. Though I could really throw the fiire down. 25+ lasguns with FRFSRF...not too shabby.

I lol'ed.

They're fine. Do you REALLY want to pay more than five points per model?

Samus_aran115 wrote:I lol'ed.

They're fine. Do you REALLY want to pay more than five points per model?

The codex in general maybe, but specific units?

From my perspective, the following need reworking, even if only slightly:

Primaris Psyker
Psyker Battle Squad
Stormtrooper
Leman Russ Punisher

Which is pretty good as far as codices go.

Melissia wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:I lol'ed.

They're fine. Do you REALLY want to pay more than five points per model?

The codex in general maybe, but specific units?

From my perspective, the following need reworking, even if only slightly:

Primaris Psyker
Psyker Battle Squad
Stormtrooper
Leman Russ Punisher

Which is pretty good as far as codices go.

Oh, I see what he's saying. Yeah, I think those that you just listed would probably be my top 3. The punisher is a great idea, but very poor execution.

I think it'd be cool if you could take a psyker in your PCS or CCS. Like a commissar, I guess. Other than that, I haven't even considered using psykers in my guard lists I'm too infatuated with leman russes and blob squads

I have to agree with Melissia here. The codex is fine as-is for the most part, but the psykers should have a little work done to them. I really do like Stormtroopers, but they should get a tune-up too; I get laughed at when I talk about wanting to field them.

Exactly. The only problem with the current guard codex is that there are certain things which multiple units can do, and you'd have to be an idiot to take one option over the other.

Like why would you EVER take a russ with a nova cannon? What about the punisher? The exterminator? The sad thing about all the new russ variants is that, with the exception of the executioner, they're all utter rubbish. They don't need to be made BETTER, per se, but actually make it so that there's ever a time when you'd consider taking them over something else (so, make them different).

That and there are some awkward units that don't seem to fit well in the guard codex, like the PBS, primaris psyker, armored sentinels, penal legionnaires, etc. whose primary fault is that they don't lend themselves to playing well with other units in the codex, and thus have no point but to be throwaway units. Once again, though, these don't need to be made better, they just need to be made different.

Otherwise, any guard player who can't get lasguns and bayonets to work for him (or her) should just go play marines and be done with it.

That and I don't think that stormies are actually as bad. Their role is VERY different from veterans (unlike in the old codex), and that people don't use them often is because they haven't been popular enough for a communal knowledge about how to use them to be built up. That said, they do suffer a bit from the "doesn't play well with others" problem.

Well...the battle psker thingy is pretty nifty IMO.
they cn reduce your leadership to 2, then you must pass a Ld test. FALL BACK! keep doing that to one unit (deverstators, fo instance) and they lose thier heavy weapons. any other army may have a squad run off the table couple it with a callidus... pop up next to IC, hit with flamer thing- auto-hit, 2s to wound, no armour, ID. ouch.

The Imperium of Man considers its population as it's most plentiful resource. They don't need to be better armed.

but it's a one-trick pony, and it requires other units to support it in order to be effective at all. Plus, given how much fearless and stubborn and transports and hoods there are out there, it's not even a particularly good ability.

Were I to remake the PBS, I would make it a buff unit, rather than an attack unit. Basically, it would fill in gaps that orders don't cover, or something. Like, they'd have one ability that they can cast on any friendly unit to give them FNP for the remainder of the turn, or +1A or something.

Better yet, you could have the psykers in the squad be "fuel" for the abilities. For example, if you pass a successful psychic test, you could affect any one die roll (including to see if the game continues at the end, or who goes first at the beginning) by +1 or -1 per psyker that you sacrifice.

Ailaros wrote:Exactly. The only problem with the current guard codex is that there are certain things which multiple units can do, and you'd have to be an idiot to take one option over the other.

Like why would you EVER take a russ with a nova cannon? What about the punisher? The exterminator? The sad thing about all the new russ variants is that, with the exception of the executioner, they're all utter rubbish. They don't need to be made BETTER, per se, but actually make it so that there's ever a time when you'd consider taking them over something else (so, make them different).

That and there are some awkward units that don't seem to fit well in the guard codex, like the PBS, primaris psyker, armored sentinels, penal legionnaires, etc. whose primary fault is that they don't lend themselves to playing well with other units in the codex, and thus have no point but to be throwaway units. Once again, though, these don't need to be made better, they just need to be made different.

Otherwise, any guard player who can't get lasguns and bayonets to work for him (or her) should just go play marines and be done with it.

That and I don't think that stormies are actually as bad. Their role is VERY different from veterans (unlike in the old codex), and that people don't use them often is because they haven't been popular enough for a communal knowledge about how to use them to be built up. That said, they do suffer a bit from the "doesn't play well with others" problem.

First of all, the standard Russ is plenty useful, as is the executioner and demolisher, its most of the "flavourful" Russes that have no real purpose.

Second of all, not everyone runs power blob guard, so getting lasguns and bayonets to work isn't an issue for say, mech, air cav or armoured guard.

Third, you're right about the storm troopers. I use them like I use British commandos in Company of Heroes. You pick a target, drop them in and the target dies. GW practically begs you to use them that way with their special operations and such. Using them like veterans is a mistake.

Imperial Guard have the most Competitive and Diverse codex to date.


They are the last codex that needs to be made better considering the state of some codexs (Necrons, Tau, Daemonhunters ect)

The IG codex is fine as is. I don't need better lasguns. I like paying 5 points a model, and then throwing said models away in massive charges against the enemy.

The only changes that I would make to the IG codex are...
1) Make the flavorful Russes competitive again. I love the idea for so many of these.....it's just a shame they kinda suck.

2) MAKE VALKS AND VENDETTAS MORE EXPENSIVE. Seriously, those two units are ridiculously under priced for what they do.

Actually I love the plasma russ. It's good against any particularly hard targets-- terminators, nobs, monstrous creatures, etc-- because of its sheer number of high-strength shots.

But Primaris Psykers are supposed to be the most powerful psykers in the Imperium, on par with or even exceeding most non-named Librarians. And yet they're just kinda suck at the moment. If they had abilities to support the army they'd really be worth taking over a CCS for flavor purposes, but they don't have that.

When I say flavourful russes I mean the exterminator, eradicator, the punisher and the vanquisher.

The executioner, demolisher and vanilla russ are all great tanks.

The Exterminator is pretty popular, as is the Vanquisher. They aren't bad tanks.

To be honest, I don't even know most of the variants other than the punisher

The vanilla russ just can't be beat for it's 'all-comer' attitude.

The Executioner is the plasma cannon one. Fires five plasma cannon shots when they have plascan sponsons purchased. Pretty nice stuff against TEQ, MEQ, or monstrous creatures.

The Exterminator is basically a pair of twin-linked autocannons.

The Eradicator is the nova cannon one, I haven't used it much nor do I remember the EXACT details of its fluff. I think it ignores cover as its main benefit.

The Vanquisher is an anti-tank variant, I think it gains bonus die on penetration and damage, but I don't use it myself.

The Punisher basically has a massive gattling cannon, but is kinda overpriced.

The Demolisher has a siege cannon, 24" S10 AP2 large blast etc.

The Annihilator is just like the predator variant.

The Conquerer is a short-ranged LRBT which is able to move faster than normal russes.

Melissia wrote:The Exterminator is pretty popular, as is the Vanquisher. They aren't bad tanks.

No they're not, its jsut that there are other thngs that are as good. I still sue the vanquisher every now and then, usually with pask in 2000 pt games.

Yeah, pask in a vanquisher is a great tank hunter.

I love the look on my opponent's face when he gibs a demolisher or land raider across the board on turn one. However I wouldn't take him in smaller games, too expensive.

I enjoy Pask-hunting. he's a flavorful buy, and I enjoy having a Panquisher in my army. Is it the most efficient use of points? No. Is it awesome? Hell yes.

But yes, the Eradicator's fluff says it fires an 'sub-atomic unstable shell' that ignores cover. I'm guessing it's some kind of neutron shell or something.

Basically it's a low-yield nuclear shell. Lol.

Considering I rarely play vs MEQs (amazing I know) I am considering giving it a try, my reqular opponent is a tau who runs 20 kroot and always fins cover for them.

Screw you kroot bunker!

I really did find the primaris a but underwhelming. Shame because I liked that model with its stately big blue forehead!

The only Russ I see as really "useless" is the Punisher. Everything else is very viable in a non-super competitive world.

I'm actually kind of surprised that with as many complaints as people have with cover being so prevalent, that the Eradicator isn't seen more.

I think its cause it gives up too much strength and AP....if it was still strong enough to go through power armor, I have a feeling it'd be a lot more prevalent.

Ailaros wrote:Better yet, you could have the psykers in the squad be "fuel" for the abilities.

As Sanctioned Psykers, this is precisely the kind of power they shouldn't have access to. Leave that to cabals of Chaos worshippers, not the faction where hazardous psykers get fed to the Emperor and the "safe" ones have inhibitors and commissars to keep their access to the Warp in line.

I use the primaris sometimes when my friend and I play big, 4000 point battles for fun. I've found that it can either be completely useless or very helpful in a pinch. Taking out str 3 things with 2d6 ID shots is invaluable in certain situations.

Buuut I agree it could definitely be better, especially when for 30 more points I could have myself a librarian..

Melissia wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:I lol'ed.

They're fine. Do you REALLY want to pay more than five points per model?

The codex in general maybe, but specific units?

From my perspective, the following need reworking, even if only slightly:

Primaris Psyker
Psyker Battle Squad
Stormtrooper
Leman Russ Punisher

Which is pretty good as far as codices go.

Well, there's also the Vanquisher which needs a fair bit of work, namely AP1 and a Coax stubber. As is, even assuming it penetrates with every single shot, it'll take 6 turns on average to kill a vehicle between BS3 and killing only on a 5/6. A coax stubber would help it hit more often (coax rules allow rerolls to hit if stubber hits) and AP1 is fairly obvious. It's probably the least efficient tank killer in the book, and with Pask it's hideously expensive and still isn't stupendous at its job.


That said, I wouldn't want to give basic Guardsmen better guns. Where they are at is just right and they don't need to be any better or worse given their cost.

However, I'd really like Stormtroopers to drop their S3 AP3 18" RF guns for S3 AP5 18" Assault 3 guns, gain Furious Charge and WS4, and drop their cost to 65 for 5, 125 for 10, and drop the Special Operations for just DS, Scout, Infiltrate as standard. They'd much better fit the archetypal "Stormtrooper" role of being armed with short range, high RoF guns to pin an enemy and then follow through with a close assault to clear them from a position, not to mention be more useful against a larger variety of foes and actually be worth their points costs.

I'm actually kind of surprised that with as many complaints as people have with cover being so prevalent, that the Eradicator isn't seen more.

A Hellhound can do the same thing for cheaper, (not to mention the 3-12 hull mounted heavy flamers you'll often see from Chimeras and the like) and paying an extra 15pts to lose 2S and that all important AP3 just to ignore cover over a basic LRBT is a bit too much for most players.

I actually really like the Primaris i use him quite frequently i get unusually high rolls for checking how many shots he gets

I think they just need a newer codex and some forge world books dedicated to giving them a zillion more options for their tanks. If a Guardsman could just cost 2 points they might be competative.

yeenoghu wrote:I think they just need a newer codex and some forge world books dedicated to giving them a zillion more options for their tanks. If a Guardsman could just cost 2 points they might be competative.

Wait wait wait....WHAA?! Are you saying the Guard AREN'T competivie? They they don't have enough tank options as is? Or that we even need a new codex? Seriously, I only play IG and I'd be pissed if a new IG codex came out now. OUrs is, what, a year old? Gee, we obviously need a new 'dex more than the Eldar, Necrons, or Tau. [/sarcasm]

Seriously 2pts Guardsmen? The Guard would be horribly broken then. 5 pts a model is cheap enough, and while I'm all in favor of a 2pts Guardsmen with S10, AP1 lasguns, I'd also say that it'd be ridiculoussly cheap and unfair to every other army.

[/ ]

Edit: I am, of course, all in favor of a coax stubber, and AP1 on the Vanquisher. Seriously, I love the model, but the rules are just...not. There.

I'm totally with you there Chris. We could, alternately make them Fleet instead of giving them those useless "orders" ability, halve the range of their guns in favor of making them assault 12" instead of that useless rapid 24", and charge twice as much points for them. That would be an improvement too!

yeenoghu wrote:I'm totally with you there Chris. We could, alternately make them Fleet instead of giving them those useless "orders" ability, halve the range of their guns in favor of making them assault 12" instead of that useless rapid 24", and charge twice as much points for them. That would be an improvement too!

You sir speak madness!

yeenoghu wrote:I'm totally with you there Chris. We could, alternately make them Fleet instead of giving them those useless "orders" ability, halve the range of their guns in favor of making them assault 12" instead of that useless rapid 24", and charge twice as much points for them. That would be an improvement too!

..........I really have no idea what you're saying here. I never said that we should do that to the IG, I only pointed out that the IG are competiive enough as is, especially compared to some of the other armies. We have a few units that don't preform as well as they should, or are a bit too expensive, but we really don't need to fix that. Leaf blower Guard is still competitive as hell, and even fluffy guard can be competitive. I don't see any reason why Guardsmen should be 2 points, nor do I understand what you're trying to convey with this response.

yeenoghu wrote:I'm totally with you there Chris. We could, alternately make them Fleet instead of giving them those useless "orders" ability, halve the range of their guns in favor of making them assault 12" instead of that useless rapid 24", and charge twice as much points for them. That would be an improvement too!

Chris's comment=Good sarcasm
Both of your comments=Bad sarcasm or poor understanding of IG right now.

Vaktathi wrote:However, I'd really like Stormtroopers to drop their S3 AP3 18" RF guns for S3 AP5 18" Assault 3 guns, gain Furious Charge and WS4, and drop their cost to 65 for 5, 125 for 10, and drop the Special Operations for just DS, Scout, Infiltrate as standard. They'd much better fit the archetypal "Stormtrooper" role of being armed with short range, high RoF guns to pin an enemy and then follow through with a close assault to clear them from a position, not to mention be more useful against a larger variety of foes and actually be worth their points costs.

My thoughts for Storm Troopers is something like this:

Variable Hellgun:

Dispersed/Rapid: R18", S3 AP6 Assault3

Focused/Aimed: R18", S4 AP3 Heavy1


PS: I am fairly certain yeenoghu is trying to troll.

Sorry for the sarcasm. I was refering to GuardIANs as reference point for the 'weak' Imperial GuardsMEN. The point was that I really don't think the IG need any help at all when looked at comparatively to what other Codex have to work with. It was obviously bad sarcasm if I have to explain it. My bad.

yeenoghu wrote:Sorry for the sarcasm. I was refering to GuardIANs as reference point for the 'weak' Imperial GuardsMEN. The point was that I really don't think the IG need any help at all when looked at comparatively to what other Codex have to work with. It was obviously bad sarcasm if I have to explain it. My bad.

I got it and thought it was funny...

That still doesn't explain your first comment, though. I couldn't detect a single trace of sarcasm in it at all.

ChrisWWII wrote:That still doesn't explain your first comment, though. I couldn't detect a single trace of sarcasm in it at all.

I think it's a culture difference... though sarcasm never comes out well in text so go figure.

Nah, I was born and raised in California. It's not a cultural difference, it's just a bad attempt at sarcasm at best.

ChrisWWII wrote:Nah, I was born and raised in California. It's not a cultural difference, it's just a bad attempt at sarcasm at best.

Must be the text thing then sarcasm never comes out well in text.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Actually looking over it the comment is pretty shocking in terms of sarcasm.

ChrisWWII wrote:Nah, I was born and raised in California. It's not a cultural difference, it's just a bad attempt at sarcasm at best.

I think it's just you.. they need a "zillion options" and a "newer codex" and "more forgeworld options" and should "cost 2 points" are all obvious jokes about the current state of ig..

Cantus wrote:

ChrisWWII wrote:Nah, I was born and raised in California. It's not a cultural difference, it's just a bad attempt at sarcasm at best.

I think it's just you.. they need a "zillion options" and a "newer codex" and "more forgeworld options" and should "cost 2 points" are all obvious jokes about the current state of ig..

Nah sarcasm need to start with things like 'Obviously' or 'everyone knows' or 'everyone can see that'

Exactly, in speech, sure his comment could have sounded sarcastic, but in text? It didn't come through. Something simple like [/sarcasm] or even some italics could have made it so much more clear,

I think, really, something like "Inspire" from Dark Heresy would make the psyker more readily taken. That power allows the psyker to, well, inspire the troops. Make them stubborn or fearless or somesuch. Since the Commissar Lord already has a stubborn bubble, a fearless one would be appropriate.

But then you get back into the overlap problem. Besides, a Primaris is probably more unsettling than inspiring. I would say give him some sort of defensive buffs ala Stormcaller or more morale wonkiness ala the psyker squad. Maybe his ranged attack forces a pinning check at -2 or something. Something that reinforces that the Warp is dangerous, but can be useful if channeled through the proper conduit.

I would like to see Ogryn boneheads get some better options like a pweapon or pfist.

Stormtroopers are definitely overpriced and the current weapon profile doesn't make any sense- S3 and ap3? Doesn't really make sense and is kind of ineffective for what you would want the AP for. Why not make it more of an assault weapon (maybe S3 AP 5 Assault 18 or 24) and leave the AP to the special weapon choices? If you can take 4x plasma/melta/demo per squad, that should be fine for AP and you don't have the basic stormtrooper so expensive.

1.) Sgt's need to get lasguns too. I mean seriously, would two extra las shots really break FRFSRF?

2.) Commissars should be able to take power fists, because power blobs aren't uber enough.

3.) Instead of #2, priests should be Commissar-like attachments rather than Independent Characters.

4.) Missile launchers in infantry squads should cost 10 points, so you actually consider them side by side with the autocannon.

5.) Heavy bolters should be 5 points like the mortar, so they don't get dismissed out of hand.

6.) Conscripts need to be 1/2 the cost OR have Send In the Next Wave! built in for free.

7.) Grenadiers doctrine should be no more than 20 points. Demolitions is fine.

8.) Stormtroopers should be 13 points each.

9.) Primaris should have a psychic hood so we aren't forced to take allies to have psychic defense.

10.) Squadron rules should let you ignore shaken results (this is universal for everyone, really).


I'll stop there, but that's a decent start.

Put Armored Company in the next IG codex!

Terminus wrote:1.) Sgt's need to get lasguns too. I mean seriously, would two extra las shots really break FRFSRF?

This one actually really bugged me when the new guard codex came out too, especially as most of my sergeants were modeled with lasguns. I run power blobs now, so no harm in the end, but it still strikes me as strange that sergeants MUST take pistols and swords.

Terminus wrote:10.) Squadron rules should let you ignore shaken results (this is universal for everyone, really).

Yes, yes they really should.

As for stormies, like other expensive guard choices, they seem overcosted because people underestimate them.

I own about 150 or so Stormtrooper models, they are my favorite units background wise and visually, however their poor reputation is unfortunately entirely deserved. Even with AP3, in a shooting war with Bolter marines (equal cost) that merely puts them on equal footing (meaning they'll do equal wounds to each other), but are still requiring twice the numbers to achieve CC parity with basic marines (and about 3.5x the numbers for GH's or CSM's), and their special ops abilities really don't make up for that, and of course are easier to kill with heavy/special weapons and have inferior leadership. Basically they are, at best, on par with similarly costed infantry (shooting) in one area and inferior in others (CC, survivability, leadership, etc).

Well, let's hope the Stormtroopers in the Grey Knights codex are a little more interesting. At the very least, having Vakyries as dedicated transports is some food for thought. And I'll be overjoyed if they get their Apocalypse data sheet as a special rule.

"How could imperial guard be made better?"


MOAR! large blast templates.

agroszkiewicz wrote:"How could imperial guard be made better?"


MOAR! large blast templates.

I like the sound of that

jmurph wrote:But then you get back into the overlap problem. Besides, a Primaris is probably more unsettling than inspiring.

Inspire is a psychic power which is commonly used by psykers in the Imperial Guard, it does not make the Psyker an inspiring figure, it merely bolsters the courage of any number of targets within range.

Terminus wrote:Well, let's hope the Stormtroopers in the Grey Knights codex are a little more interesting. At the very least, having Vakyries as dedicated transports is some food for thought. And I'll be overjoyed if they get their Apocalypse data sheet as a special rule.

If they don't ditch them to focus primarily on Grey Knights.

We already have plenty of pretty solid rumors that they WILL be in the codex. We just don't know what form.

I thought the prevailing rumor was that GKs and SoB were getting their own "Pure"codices with no guard or inq units.

The Guard needs Baneblades to be in their codex! No super heavies for anyone else though. *I jest of course*

Maledictus wrote:I thought the prevailing rumor was that GKs and SoB were getting their own "Pure"codices with no guard or inq units.

You've been out of touch. I don't know about the Sororitas, but every rumor to come out about the GK lately has had the Ordo Malleus represented. It's simply the opposite of the previous formula where it was 80% Inquisition and 20% GK.

Terminus wrote:

Maledictus wrote:I thought the prevailing rumor was that GKs and SoB were getting their own "Pure"codices with no guard or inq units.

You've been out of touch. I don't know about the Sororitas, but every rumor to come out about the GK lately has had the Ordo Malleus represented. It's simply the opposite of the previous formula where it was 80% Inquisition and 20% GK.

thats a relief, i thought it was pretty stupid to have the chapter militant of the ordo malleus running around without and inquisitor calling the shots, and STs to do the grunt work.

I don't think this is mentioned yet?

How about some plastic kits of some existing regiments? To be honest I'm surprised that this wasn't something which came with the previous codex, considering how many rumours had been flying about. In no particular order, perhaps Valhallans, Elysians or Tallarn? And the Catachans basic box really needs re-doing IMO, even compared to the old metal models they are not that good..

I would love to see plastic Vallhallans or Tallarn. A wider variety of Tanith models might be good too, but I digress.

I think everyone's pov is that we've got so many new tank models as is, with the Battle tank and Demolisher kits that we really have nothing to complain about. Hell, at least a model for every option in our codex exists at this point, unlike some of the other armies.

Standard carapace armor for the vets

Better armor profile for the chimera and remove the immobile = destroyed rule in squads so my techpriest can actually be more usefull!

Put some mechanicus like doctrine into the Guard codex, I'm a fan of the adeptus mechanicus armies

The immobile = destroy rules is there to balance out vehicle squadrons. Seriously, we can 9 Leman Russes, or 9 Hydras, or 9 Basilisks, there has to be something to balance it out, and the squadron rules help do that.

I do agree carapace vets would be nice. We're already selling out the potential to take a crap ton more firepower in order to take vets, so carapace would actually be a decent buy.

I persoanlly think that IG lack good Elite choices....I think GW could incorporate better weapons with the addition of a few more elites

ChrisWWII wrote:The immobile = destroy rules is there to balance out vehicle squadrons. Seriously, we can 9 Leman Russes, or 9 Hydras, or 9 Basilisks, there has to be something to balance it out, and the squadron rules help do that.

It's still a bad way of doing it, since the in-universe justification doesn't stand up to scrutiny. I'm pretty sure the famous quote doesn't go "When we run out of fuel we scuttle the tank and hide until the noise stops."

Element206 wrote:I persoanlly think that IG lack good Elite choices....I think GW could incorporate better weapons with the addition of a few more elites

Or just focus on fixing the elites they already have so they become more viable. Even that aside they have a great amount of units that can perform well in their own right. But at same time there's a lot of redundant units.

Great points, Terminus!

Sure, you guys can have a better codex, if you all agree that Vendettas and Executioners need to be nerfed or more expensive. :p

But seriously, I'd like to see units fixed. Mind, these are the suggestions of a dedicated MEQ player, so this is what I'd perceive as "fair and viable" rather than "a buff." Note that the basis for most of these changes are based on how often I see people take certain units/options, and how well they do against me.

I'm not sure why exactly what makes Ogryns bad, though a P.Fist option for Bone 'Eads and Fleet all around would certainly make them viable, I think.

Punishers need Range 36" and a points reduction to 150, maybe?

Primaris Psykers could use a few changes, and are a little more complex:

A) Make Lightning Arc Assault 6+D6. This takes it from being mildly annoying to "oh noes, you just 2 upped my mahreenz."

B) Allow Nightshround to be put on any unit within 12"? For clarification, in this case, vehicles may shoot unaffected, as they posses no leadership value.

C) The wording for Soulstorm needs to be "S equal to psykers in unit" not "S equal to Sanctioned Psykers in unit" and Primaris Psyker could maybe make the AP roll 1 better when joined to the PBS.

D)Ignore A and B, but give the Primaris Psyker a once per game psychic power nullification on a 2+.

Ratlings could use some work, but I think that should come by way of a buff to all Sniper type weapons. Alternatively, BS5.

Shock Troopers I think are fine when used intelligently, but a SoB profile with Special Operations and the option to take Bolters instead of Hot Shots would certaintly make them more popular, I think.

Penal Legions I have seen kick serious ass, but I won;t waste an opportunity to plug my Colonel Schaeffer idea for them.

Rough Riders simply need some more staying power in CC. Laspistols and Close combat weapons would be a step in the right direction, (instead of or) and I think if Space Marine can get +1 T for riding a giant wolf, a human can get +1 for riding an angry f***ing warhorse, comparatively. Finally, give the sergeant the same options as an Infantry Squad sergeant. Oh, and having some actual models for the unit would help too. (Instead of the "God damn Mongorians knocked down mah s***y wall" rough riders we have now.)

Armored Sentinels should have an actual side armor value; probably 11. Both types of sentinels should have 2 attacks base.

So, a fair amount of changes from someone who doesn't even play IG, but there it is. I fee like some of these may be overpower slightly, but I have tried to be conservative. I do fell, however, that every unit and most options should be viable.

ChrisWWII wrote:The immobile = destroy rules is there to balance out vehicle squadrons. Seriously, we can 9 Leman Russes, or 9 Hydras, or 9 Basilisks, there has to be something to balance it out, and the squadron rules help do that.

Being able to field multiple models in one FOC slot is balanced by the fact that they all have to target the same thing. The immobile=destroyed rule is supposed to balance out the free extra armor you get for being in a squadron.

I don't mind the immobile=destroyed rule in theory, but it's really stupid/annoying to get a benefit that's easily gotten elsewhere. If squadrons allowed you to ignore shaken results, you could combine that with extra armor to ignore 1s and 2s on the damage chart, while being destroyed on 4+. That would be a fair exchange (and make extra armor worth the 15 points premium).

I honestly don't think the rules writers spend a lot of time playing the game.

I guess you're right in a way, but the fact remains that IG vehicle squadrons have the potential to become very broken, very quickly if they go too far. Your idea really doesn't seem like it'd balance out too much, Terminus. A squadron of Leman Russes that can ignore all Crew damage results, and the consolation is that you wreck on a 4+?

Not much consolation for most people, I'd think. I mean really, most ways to kill a Russ are closing in for close comabt, or melta, in either case the tank has a high chance of being dead anyway.

I personally like Endova's rule suggestion the most right now...it seems like an outside player would be best for these kind of things, to be honest, as hey, all IG players will want their specific chunk of the army a bit more competitive.

I like Terminus' idea actually, or at least would like to give it a try. The big reason wreck on a 4 sucks so much is because it opens up a whole new door for being destroyed on glancing and I don't feel like extra armor compensates for that. Of course you get the benefit of being able to bring on more tanks, but you still have to pay full price and they're all handicapped by that and by having to shoot at the same thing.
At least from my experiences, vehicle squadrons suck for anything except sentinels and sometimes hellhounds.

edit: also, terrain tests, forgot about those. totally not worth it.

Terminus wrote:1.) Sgt's need to get lasguns too. I mean seriously, would two extra las shots really break FRFSRF?

Not too fussed about this one, I think its more of a personal preference over anything else, its kind of cool to have the Sergeant w/ pistol + CCW so you can easily identify him on the table. I think here 'rule of cool' > gameplay mechanics.

Terminus wrote:2.) Commissars should be able to take power fists, because power blobs aren't uber enough.

If they can take powerfists they should be able to picked out in close combat much like...

Terminus wrote:3.) Instead of #2, priests should be Commissar-like attachments rather than Independent Characters.

Priests with executioners are deadly. Not being able to pick these models out of a 30-40 wound power blob would be, quite frankly, broken. Cruddace has done a good job of balancing the killing power of Commisars (by limiting them to power weapons) with the survivability of a blob (not allowing them to be picked out). If you wanted Priests to be 'attachments' they'd have to lose their executioner option, any other variant breaks the blob even further.

Terminus wrote:4.) Missile launchers in infantry squads should cost 10 points, so you actually consider them side by side with the autocannon.

5.) Heavy bolters should be 5 points like the mortar, so they don't get dismissed out of hand.

100% agree on this.

Terminus wrote:6.) Conscripts need to be 1/2 the cost OR have Send In the Next Wave! built in for free.

And this. Conscripts are simply not cheap enough for what they do. Maybe having the option to add in an 'Overseer' (a la Runtherds) would strike a nice balance between cheapness and staying power, then they could actually perform as the fluffy bubble-wrap they were so obviously desgined to be.

Terminus wrote:10.) Squadron rules should let you ignore shaken results (this is universal for everyone, really).

YES! I also hate the immobilised = dead rule as well. Nothing like rolling a '1' on a DT check and losing an 150pt LRBT for really no good reason.

L. Wrex

So, the immobilized = destroyed doesn't bother me. In the real world, tanks only work if they're in formation, so it would make sense to abandon vehicles that can't keep up.

However, this exact same principle means that tank commanders are more likely to do what it takes to stay in formation. As such, if immobilized = destroyed, then stunned should equal shaken. That way the tank is still nullified for the turn, but the tank can stay in formation by moving.

Once these two even out, and the fact that you have to target a single unit evens out the fact that you have more than one. Then you're just left with squadding being more vulnerable to assaulting, which counters the benefit of even being able to do this in the first place.

That said, russes are so expensive that I still dont' think many people would squad them. Squadding seems like something that GW cautiously put in, but was afraid that it would be broken, and so heavily muted their new thing just in case (cf. the punisher).

Stunned does equal shaken - they essentially get EA for free...

The squadron rules currently are quite terrible, and it's why you generally don't see people fielding much besides barebones valks, griffons and hydras in competitive lists for the most part. The immobilized=dead thing just makes them far too fragile, bringing them back to 4E damage tables and is far more punitive than the bonus of essentially getting EA for free (which is worth far less on gun tanks than on transports). It's not actually in there as a balance mechanism, but rather as a simplification so that immobilzed units didn't act as unit anchors like they did in previous editions. I don't know why they needed to get rid of that, it worked just fine, but apparently they thought they did as it was a bit fiddly. However it makes vehicle squadrons much easier to kill and much more vulnerable to destruction by a wider array of weaponry (e.g. Leman Russ tanks can be killed by autocannons on side armor). Couple the immobilized=dead with how hits are allocated and it makes it very hard to get good use out of squadrons of anything that isn't rather cheap. When hits can be allocated to vehicles far out of range or base contact with attackers, it makes the whole thing far more fragile and vulnerable than they should be given the reduced effectiveness of each additional vehicle since they all have to shoot at the same thing (e.g. fire dragons killing LR's through double-pen shots that are 22" away from them, a Warboss killing a Leman Russ in a squadron up to 16" away from him, etc)

Ailaros wrote:So, the immobilized = destroyed doesn't bother me. In the real world, tanks only work if they're in formation, so it would make sense to abandon vehicles that can't keep up.

To be honest though I don't even like how they support the rules with that fluff. If I'm squatting three LRBTs in the back of my firing line and one gets hit by a lucky krak missile 48"+ away, gets glanced, is immobilized.. why is its crew scuttling it? Maybe if it was like immobilized by CC that would make sense, but if my tank squadron is a pack of basalisks (basili?) that aren't moving anyway who cares if a tread is severed?
Something like it just gets immobilized [maybe the squad is allowed to leave it behind and] it just is immobilized until an enemy unit is within 12, 18, 24" at which point the crew ditches it would make more sense to me.. Maybe it's immobilized + a weapon destroyed because some of the gun crew panics and runs away when they're left behind..
I dunno, maybe that'd be broken, all I know is I just don't like the rules how they are now..

Cantus wrote:

Ailaros wrote:So, the immobilized = destroyed doesn't bother me. In the real world, tanks only work if they're in formation, so it would make sense to abandon vehicles that can't keep up.

To be honest though I don't even like how they support the rules with that fluff. If I'm squatting three LRBTs in the back of my firing line and one gets hit by a lucky krak missile 48"+ away, gets glanced, is immobilized.. why is its crew scuttling it? Maybe if it was like immobilized by CC that would make sense, but if my tank squadron is a pack of basalisks (basili?) that aren't moving anyway who cares if a tread is severed?
Something like it just gets immobilized [maybe the squad is allowed to leave it behind and] it just is immobilized until an enemy unit is within 12, 18, 24" at which point the crew ditches it would make more sense to me.. Maybe it's immobilized + a weapon destroyed because some of the gun crew panics and runs away when they're left behind..
I dunno, maybe that'd be broken, all I know is I just don't like the rules how they are now..

Good point Cantus. In the rulebook they tried to explain the immobilized = wrecked rule by saying the crew needs to scuttle the tank since it cannot keep up?! SO how about formations that didnt need to move at all? Shouldnt that be taken cared of by techpriest?

I'm pretty sure it's more the case that the crew have just taken steps to destroy the tank if they have to leave it behind, or have just abandoned the whole thing to go hide somewhere else.

I'd imagine that after the battle the techpriests would recover the tank if they could, and even if they don't....so what? It's the Imperium! They don't care that a couple Basilisks got abandoned on random planet 1277x8d!

mindfield wrote:

Cantus wrote:

Ailaros wrote:So, the immobilized = destroyed doesn't bother me. In the real world, tanks only work if they're in formation, so it would make sense to abandon vehicles that can't keep up.

To be honest though I don't even like how they support the rules with that fluff. If I'm squatting three LRBTs in the back of my firing line and one gets hit by a lucky krak missile 48"+ away, gets glanced, is immobilized.. why is its crew scuttling it? Maybe if it was like immobilized by CC that would make sense, but if my tank squadron is a pack of basalisks (basili?) that aren't moving anyway who cares if a tread is severed?
Something like it just gets immobilized [maybe the squad is allowed to leave it behind and] it just is immobilized until an enemy unit is within 12, 18, 24" at which point the crew ditches it would make more sense to me.. Maybe it's immobilized + a weapon destroyed because some of the gun crew panics and runs away when they're left behind..
I dunno, maybe that'd be broken, all I know is I just don't like the rules how they are now..

Good point Cantus. In the rulebook they tried to explain the immobilized = wrecked rule by saying the crew needs to scuttle the tank since it cannot keep up?! SO how about formations that didnt need to move at all? Shouldnt that be taken cared of by techpriest?

The battles that are played are usually part of a bigger picture (Or suppse to be) which is why we see Chapter Masters and Dark Eldar Archons walking about, this isn't a minor skirmish it's a snapshot of a much larger fight. If this is taken into account it means that a tank would be abandoned since battles often shift and if the crew are found sat in a steel can when the battle shifts and suddenly they are miles from the fight or, worse, the enemy has won and is about to blow them the hell up. This is about the crew wanting to survive.

ChrisWWII wrote:I'd imagine that after the battle the techpriests would recover the tank if they could, and even if they don't....so what? It's the Imperium! They don't care that a couple Basilisks got abandoned on random planet 1277x8d!

...Yes, they do. They'd probably have you executed twice, once for abandoning the Emperor's artillery, and once for running off and hiding.

AlexHolker wrote:

ChrisWWII wrote:I'd imagine that after the battle the techpriests would recover the tank if they could, and even if they don't....so what? It's the Imperium! They don't care that a couple Basilisks got abandoned on random planet 1277x8d!

...Yes, they do. They'd probably have you executed twice, once for abandoning the Emperor's artillery, and once for running off and hiding.

The crews will never admit to having abandonedthem they would probably say thay were attacked and the got destroyed or something.

purplefood wrote:

AlexHolker wrote:

ChrisWWII wrote:I'd imagine that after the battle the techpriests would recover the tank if they could, and even if they don't....so what? It's the Imperium! They don't care that a couple Basilisks got abandoned on random planet 1277x8d!

...Yes, they do. They'd probably have you executed twice, once for abandoning the Emperor's artillery, and once for running off and hiding.

The crews will never admit to having abandonedthem they would probably say thay were attacked and the got destroyed or something.

So if I have a commissar within 6" can they stay at their posts?

purplefood wrote:

AlexHolker wrote:

ChrisWWII wrote:I'd imagine that after the battle the techpriests would recover the tank if they could, and even if they don't....so what? It's the Imperium! They don't care that a couple Basilisks got abandoned on random planet 1277x8d!

...Yes, they do. They'd probably have you executed twice, once for abandoning the Emperor's artillery, and once for running off and hiding.

The crews will never admit to having abandonedthem they would probably say thay were attacked and the got destroyed or something.

And that's a third time for lying to a member of the Emperor's Munitorum!

Exactly, the crew will say their tank was damaged or in some other way made inoperable. The Imperium will then say 'meh, whatever' and then throw another couple heavy artillery regiments into the fray.

Cantus wrote: a pack of basalisks (basili?)

basiliskoi

Cantus wrote:So if I have a commissar within 6" can they stay at their posts?

Yeah, if you have a "hit them with my sword" commissar, why wouldn't he summarily execute anyone who tried to leave the vehicle?

... Actually, he may run out of ammo after trying to summarily execute the tank for allowing itself to get immobilized....

Haha, I like the idea of commissars for vehicles. The crew option for the Baneblade was interesting.

I like the new gun the Stormtroopers got, but they seem too expensive to take for the use of their hellguns.

Valkyries and Vendettas look really good on paper. I feel like they have made my Sentinels completely obsolete, though I suppose they were always bad.

I am biased, but I would like better options for Sentinels. After going to the trouble of outflanking a Scout Sentinel, a multi-melta for the main gun would sure come in handy.

Does 2 weeks count as thread necromancy? As far Kavalion....

IA does allow for Commissariat vehicles, basically it gives you a Lord Commissar tank, same as the upgrade for the Baneblade does.

Hot shot lasguns (ignoring the heresy of that name) are meh....S3 AP3 is nice, but I'd rather have them have some kind of choice with what they shoot. A S4 AP3, Assault 1, and maybe S3, AP5, Assault 3 would be better, and make them much more useful.

Valks and Vendettas ARE good and are a complete redefinement of how the IG play. You can now build a fast moving, alpha striking IG force, something that wasn't possible in the past.

I agree that Sentinels are a tad useless....but they still are Scout sentinels. They're not meant to be heavy hitters.

I was going to post something about thread-o-mancy but couldn't be bothered, and yet here I am posting anyway! Oh cruel fate etc. etc.

I'd like to see Sentinels made...better, and perhaps Stormtroopers dropped to 10pts each but you HAVE to buy one of the special operations (rather than have all three costs lumped together and forced on you).

L. Wrex

I'd have to admit, the 16 pts a model thing REALLY annoys me. Not just cause of how high it is, but of what a weird number it is.

yeah.

Interestingly enough, it looks like GW occasionally "suggests" unit sizes with the way it prices things.

16 points a model makes no sense, but it all nice and perfectly lines up when you take 5 or 10 models. Likewise, 40 points for an ogryn seems a little off, and then you notice that if you take 6 it comes out to a clean 250 points.

Sorry if the thread was dead.

ChrisWWII wrote:Hot shot lasguns (ignoring the heresy of that name) are meh....

They do all come with hellpistols for a one shot assault weapon so they can get in close combat before they're shot to pieces. They're no great heroes in melee, though, and aren't even stubborn... I guess they really are just glory boys. I can see why normal guardsmen resent them for soaking up all the points!

things i would change:

1. reduce point costs. punisher and ogryn
2. better armour for the veterans. come on, if they are sort of stormtroopers, then, give them the carapace armour.
3. i like stormtroopers the way they are, but, a valkyrie/vendetta as a dedicated transport would fit thier style more so than a chimera.

Veterans don't need better armor, as that would make them more expensive and their whole shtick is cheap special weapon delivery.

Carapace armor is in general overpriced given the prevalence of cover saves in this edition.

That's part of the reason why Stormtroopers are way way overpriced.

Agreed on cheaper punishers and ogryns though. There's no reason why the gatling gun should cost 30 points more than a battlecannon.

Cheaper models.

Regarding Terminus hate on Vehicle Squadron, I think Terminus forgot one huge benefit that Vehicle Squadrons have, the ability to keep stacking Pens on 1 vehicle from different units firing upon the unit.

For example: A Basilisk and a Griffon in a unit usually ends with the Griffon sucking as many of the damage result as possible for the Basilisk. If the unit only takes 1 Damage result per unit firing at it, than it becomes very quickly absorbed by the same stun/shaken tank over and over.

@Mikhail

Yeah, thats one thing you could do. However, outside of Ordnance Batteries (which should be out of LOS *anyway*) its not really advised to mix vehicles in squadrons. You wouldn't put a Leman Russ Executioner with a Leman Russ Demolisher for example, as the two tanks don't really synergise well together. You're far more likely to put two identical tanks in the squadron (2 x LRMBT, 2 x Demolisher etc) as this increases the damage output by 100% and as they have to fire at the same target, your not 'wasting' shots.

So ultimately your paying the same amount of points for a massive increase in vulnerability and merely being granted extra armour for free. I don't think thats good enough.

Now - I can see a rule working whereby if a member of a tank squadron is immobilised it isn't destroyed BUT it the remaining members of the squadron move out of coherency (4") *then* the crew scuttles their vehicle and it counts as destroyed. This actually opens up some tactical desicion making as you can remain stationary and still have access to all the guns, but be more vulnerable to an assault, or sacrifice the immobilised vehicle to retain your manouverability.

L. Wrex

maybe in the future they will come out with multi part plastic kit for ogryns. at $20.00 a piece in the states, that is alot of money just for the models, not to mention point cost to play.