This may seem odd, but do the IG recruit women? My reasoning is twofold;
1. In the Space Marine game, the main NPC was Lt. Mira, a woman. But...
2. There are no female heads in the Cadian or Catachan troops sets iirc.

In typical GW fashion the info is conflicting (I'm not anti-GW in any way, no hate please). So I thought I'd ask.

So what is the IGs policy on women?

The Imperium doesn't care if a guardsmen is male or female. Only a planetary culture may or may not care, and they are free to do what they wish in this regard.

Cadia recruits EVERYONE. From the moment they are born, a Cadian is going to become a Shock Trooper. Cadia compensates for the obvious reproductive deficit by rotating regiments back to the planet as Garrison troops(read: reproductive duties)

As for a policy on women by the IG as a whole. There is no policy. Every warm body that can fire a lasgun reasonably straight is suitable for service.

Because regiments are raised by individual planets, the composition will depend on the planet. If its a society where women do not fight then their regiments will not have women. If its a planet where women are dominant the opposite will be true. And on a planet where there are no/limited barriers there will be mixed regiments.


In the book "Ice Guard" one of the Valhallen guardsmen is a women. She is one of the few women on her planet to join. Its implied its because she can't have children. This implies the Valhallen culture dictates women best serve the Emperor by having children. This character feels like she can only make up for this shortcoming by being a guardsmen herself.

Only one example of myriad cultures that exist and how the Imperium doesn't care. If they ever did have a policy on the matter(Again, they don't have one) they would probably take the same stance as Valhalla. Instead of getting one soldier from a single women, get maybe 5 or 6. Leave most women on the planet along with enough men to ensure future generations.

Of course such a policy would be impossible to enforce across the Imperium. And the natural reproductive rate is more than sufficient to raise new regiments every year.


As for why no female IG heads, likely because nobody gave the idea any thought or they just didn't feel like sculpting women's faces. And given GWs track record with female models is a little spotty its probably just as well they don't have any.

The IG definitely recruit women. Heck, Xenonia (not kidding, check the older Guard Codex) is renown for their Imperial Guard regiments of warrior women.

GW making female models, on the other hand, is very rare. That shouldn't be taken to indicate that the regiments depicted have no women, any more than the fact that they don't make adolescent 'new recruit' models, or 'skinny guy', 'fat guy', or 'glasses-wearing guy' models, should be taken as evidence that they don't have new recruits, skinny guardsmen, fat guardsmen, or guardsmen with corrective lenses.

GW could certainly do more to broaden the depiction of their Imperial Guardsmen (not just gender, but also age and ethnicity), but they are also realistically constrained by economics too. They only make a few sprues of Guardsmen models, so any variations have to be pretty popular. I think they err a little too far on the conservative side, IMO.

 Mitranekh the Omniscient wrote:
This may seem odd, but do the IG recruit women?

Yes. The IG doesn't give a damn about what's between their soldier's legs, as long as it is not some heretical mutant abomination. They only care that the person is capable of standing and firing their rifle at the enemy long enough to do a little damage before dying.

Something which most adult humans are capable of doing, with no difference between the sexes.

This seems to become a recurring theme? I wonder how many pages we'll manage this time until "someone" turns this into a social issues debate.

Anyways ..


From the 3E Guard Codex. Pictured on the lower left: a soldier of the Xenonian Free Companies. Five units from this world were deployed to Armageddon late during the Third War.


The (to my knowledge) full range of GW's female IG minis so far: Rocket Girl and Warrior Woman (Last Chancers boxed set), Female Commissar (GD limited edition), female Tanith Ghost (OOP), female Catachan (from the old Catachan Infantry box).

Bottom line: The Imperium does not care who fights in your regiment, as long as it's human. Gender, age, skin colour and other possible requirements are subject to local customs, which will differ from world to world. Specifically for Cadia, Codex fluff has the entirety of Cadia's population undergoing basic training, with a "lottery" determining who stays with the Shock Troops and who remains with the planetary reserves.

Thanks for the information, I'm glad there's a precedent, now I can find a female head in my HE army to use for it.

GW probably could do a wider range, but we leave that to them, this isn't the place for any 'social issues debate'

There are plenty of women in the guard and the Imperium is not wrong for recruiting them.

A corpse with ovaries jams the enemy's gears just as well as one with testicles.

Cannon fodder is cannon fodder, be it XY fodder or XX fodder.

The fluff has lots of female IG. GW figures do not. And it aint because "they won't sell." Laziness? Afraid of women? Don't have the skill to make women that don't look like men? I don't know. I'll let the reader decide.

 MWHistorian wrote:
The fluff has lots of female IG. GW figures do not. And it aint because "they won't sell." Laziness? Afraid of women? Don't have the skill to make women that don't look like men? I don't know. I'll let the reader decide.

Maybe they already have, released them but we didn't recognize them as female
See this "female" Elven beauty:

I tend to stick with perspective bias. I mean, by the same token you could ask why so few of the artwork depicts black people.

This game is made by a bunch of white males, so that is probably the first thing that springs to their mind when they think "I need a bunch of characters". For many people, it takes conscious effort to expand this scope to include other types of people, which is why they tend to show up as special focus groups such as an all-black Marine Chapter (Salamanders), an all-female army (Sisters of Battle), an all-female IG regiment (Xenonian Free Companies), or an all-female Hive Gang (House Escher).

This is also a consequence of how the individual writers and designers grew up, however, and what kind of games, books and movies helped shape their image of fantasy and sci-fi. A reader who read a lot of Battletech books in their youth and later turns into a game designer will include female characters by default, simply because they were "normal" in the stuff he grew up with. On the other hand, someone whose experience with this material has women only in the roles of damsel in distress will probably continue to have this idea stuck somewhere in his subconsciousness.
There will (fortunately) always be some authors and designers who will break with "established standards", else our storytelling media would merely run in circles, but all in all I believe that most people are considerably influenced by whatever nation/culture they grew up in, and this includes those who work in creative development.

 Lynata wrote:
This game is made by a bunch of white males, so that is probably the first thing that springs to their mind when they think "I need a bunch of characters".

 Lynata wrote:
someone whose experience with this material has women only in the roles of damsel in distress will probably continue to have this idea stuck somewhere in his subconsciousness.

It seems that they're aware and cautious of these factors too.

http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?34864-Gamesday-Germany-2013-Master-Roundup/page2

-one guy actually asked why there were so very few female characters in 40k, to general good-natured amusement - they said it was mainly because they have almost no women in their team, so they kind of fear that anything they might do could be involuntarily sexist, or something along those lines

Though when they do turn their hands to writing females, it usually goes fine. Female IG, SoBs and female Inquisitors are usually just as gritty and hardened as any male counterpart. At least in my view, anyway.

Oh look, this thread again.

Troike wrote:It seems that they're aware and cautious of these factors too.
http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?34864-Gamesday-Germany-2013-Master-Roundup/page2
Though when they do turn their hands to writing females, it usually goes fine Female IG, SoBs and female Inquisitors are usually just as gritty and hardened as any male counterpart. At least in my view, anyway.

Oh, yes, the GW core designers can write them - at least I think that they have displayed this ability to sufficient degree in the past (see Sisters Martika, Anastasia, Dominica, etc). It's just that I would have thought that the option to include a female character just doesn't spring to mind most of the time. I think Aaron Dembski-Bowden once talked about this little problem in 40k, if you recall that thread here on dakka?

Interesting that, at least according to that statement, they seem to intentionally avoid it. It may not have anything to do with the writing at all, then, but rather the miniatures. Although I see little risk in the writing (a character's gender never played a role in the fluff, they were just "people"), the design of the miniatures we have certainly shows a tendency towards fetishism. I mean, just going by the photo I posted above, we have a Commissar in thigh boots presenting her impressive rack, a skirt-wearing amazon, a belly-free Catachan ...

GW could certainly use one or two miniature designers who are capable of sculpting female characters that appear more "normal" for a militaristic setting. It's not an issue when the design fits in with the rest of their planetary culture and their male counterparts, such as with the Escher gang's "punk" outfit, which is why I don't perceive the aforementioned minis in a negative way. But I can see how someone who sees only those minis and not, say, the male Catachans or Necromunda Pit Slaves, could get a wrong idea when seeing those girls next to the "professionally dressed" male Cadians or Space Marines.

 Lynata wrote:
the design of the miniatures we have certainly shows a tendency towards fetishism. I mean, just going by the photo I posted above, we have a Commissar in thigh boots presenting her impressive rack, a skirt-wearing amazon, a belly-free Catachan ...

I dunno, across all armies, I think they've put out lots of decent female minis too. We've got Shadowsun, Howling Banshees, the SoB (that one unit aside, of course). Although we've also got ones like Daemonettes and Wynches (who are now mixed gender, though), those at least have acceptable fluff reasons to look the way that they do. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't most of the guardswomen you posted older models anyway? Could be that GW has "grown up" a bit since then. Hopefully, were they to make new female IG minis in the future, they might actually be dressed like soldiers.

Troike wrote:And, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't most of the guardswomen you posted older models anyway? Could be that GW has "grown up" a bit since then. Hopefully, were they to make new female IG minis in the future, they might actually be dressed like soldiers.

I'm not sure I'd actually want that, as weird as it sounds. As long as male troopers look one way, I think it'd be weird if female troopers would look different. So when you have a regiment like the Catachans, I'd expect to see a "Vasquez" there. Really, the only thing that could be argued as improper with the above mini is that her tanktop should go all the way down like with the male soldiers.

I have in the past years noticed a trend away from miniatures that are even remotely sexual in appearance. The new Dark Eldar Banshees as well as the new Slaanesh Daemonettes look just ugly and have lost much of their early allure - which was a fairly important part of their background. Ugly elves? Hideous daemons of seduction?
Just a feeling, but in my pessimistic mind I classified this as a move to make 40k more "kids-friendly", as in our modern society, blood, violence, gore and murder are, for some silly reason, regarded as less offensive than a pair of boobs.

And perhaps it is this kind of boardroom-style thinking that will forever prevent female Imperial Guard minis, for of course the safest way to avoid such a controversy would be to avoid the object of the controversy. Or, in other words, female miniatures not being available may be regarded as less conspicuous than GW potentially releasing "the wrong ones".

Everything could be so simple... Typical humans.

I was thinking more of the typical Cadian-esque IG when I was talking about possible future IG minis. But yes, the female Catachan isn't dressed any different than the dudes so she's really pretty inoffensive.

As for female IG possibly not showing up, that could also be due to GW seeing "no need" to spend the extra time and effort making female IG, as opposed to the whims of some shadowy boardroom guy. And, of course, they could also be thinking that the female human minis box is already ticked. Just speculation on my part, mind you, just wanted to highlight some alternate theories.

Sure, sure - I agree about the "no need / already ticked" part. But the initial design then goes back to my suggestion that the failure to include any females in spite of the Codex fluff is a result of the designers simply not thinking of this when they made this product line, which in turn is a result of the aforementioned perception bias.

Nothing malicious, merely human nature.

-one guy actually asked why there were so very few female characters in 40k, to general good-natured amusement - they said it was mainly because they have almost no women in their team, so they kind of fear that anything they might do could be involuntarily sexist, or something along those lines

I always wondered why GW sculpts mostly evil psychopaths and monsters

If you want to see some nice official female guard art, the "Only War" RPG series has TONS of female artworks (if you count FFG as official). I know there's female Cadian, Mordian, Catachan, Catachan Commisar, Valhallan... There's even a female Vostroyan Firstborn in there! (I guess sometimes they draft daughters in addition to sons).

...no models though, of course.

Its not that hard to do. Just make a sculpt of this woman and be done with it.

A sculpt of something like that, with numerous poses and variations, so that I can make an entire army out of it.

Yus! Lt. Mira was a nice asset to the game. Thankfully my initial fears that she'd play the role of Damsel in Distress or, worse yet, would become some sort of romantic interest for the Space Marine player character, proved to be untrue.



I think GW shut down the above fan project, but it goes to show how it could work out. The hips feel a tad wide in comparison to the slim waist ,but some compromises may be necessary due to GW's "heroic scale". A simple headswap could also be an option, but Cadian minis have really, really fat arms and hands, so the end result might look less cool .
Also, a slightly different leg pose might be in order.

TiamatRoar wrote:There's even a female Vostroyan Firstborn in there! (I guess sometimes they draft daughters in addition to sons).

The writers of those books just left additional some liberties to allow for greater freedom at character creation, other examples including Storm Troopers or Ogryns mingling with regular troops..
There's nothing wrong with an all-male, or all-female regiment. If that's the respective planet's culture/tradition, then that's that. Social discrimination is part of the setting's overall theme, and gender is one of the possible shapes it can take. What matters is that there are counter-examples of the opposite gender, as well as entirely mixed armies, so that in the greater picture the game does not send a "wrong" message, and allows us to cherrypick what aspects we like.

 MWHistorian wrote:
Its not that hard to do. Just make a sculpt of this woman and be done with it.

Wait don't! That many Miras in one army would be so drastically awesome that any other army would lose from her tactical prowess (I'll take about 100 of them to have an equal number of male and female guardsmen)).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lynata wrote:

Troike wrote:And, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't most of the guardswomen you posted older models anyway? Could be that GW has "grown up" a bit since then. Hopefully, were they to make new female IG minis in the future, they might actually be dressed like soldiers.

I'm not sure I'd actually want that, as weird as it sounds. As long as male troopers look one way, I think it'd be weird if female troopers would look different. So when you have a regiment like the Catachans, I'd expect to see a "Vasquez" there. Really, the only thing that could be argued as improper with the above mini is that her tanktop should go all the way down like with the male soldiers.

I have in the past years noticed a trend away from miniatures that are even remotely sexual in appearance. The new Dark Eldar Banshees as well as the new Slaanesh Daemonettes look just ugly and have lost much of their early allure - which was a fairly important part of their background. Ugly elves? Hideous daemons of seduction?
Just a feeling, but in my pessimistic mind I classified this as a move to make 40k more "kids-friendly", as in our modern society, blood, violence, gore and murder are, for some silly reason, regarded as less offensive than a pair of boobs.

And perhaps it is this kind of boardroom-style thinking that will forever prevent female Imperial Guard minis, for of course the safest way to avoid such a controversy would be to avoid the object of the controversy. Or, in other words, female miniatures not being available may be regarded as less conspicuous than GW potentially releasing "the wrong ones".

Everything could be so simple... Typical humans.

In the grimdark world of 40k where we can have intestine trails through the city and genocides every Tuesday boobs are icky and wrong and should not be shown to our children but slaughtering millions of human beings or entire xenos races is completely fine. I really ahve to admit I never understood that (plus I open my chaos daemon book and see a multiple boobed slaanesh daemon and am just like eh not as bad as the picture earlier on of a plagubearer getting a hole blasted through his gut from a bolter shot). Hey! We can hope that whenever the guardsmen codex comes out they have some female veteran guardsmen. Just model Mira (as mentioned above) or the FFG Cadian guardsmen that was rugged (I actually almost punched a friend for saying eeew that is ugly). Forget that, I want a guardsmen like that. Serious, obviously war hardened, noticeably female but not sexualized, and, most importantly, not constipated.

Really all they would need to do is include a couple female heads in the Cadian box. You wouldn't need to sculpt a female body for them either.

The standard IG kit is almost certainly unisex and may even be one size fits all. This would mean that as far as the models are concerned the body would be the same regardless of the sex of the guardsmen.

The same pants, the same flak armor, the same helmet, etc...

StarTrotter wrote:plus I open my chaos daemon book and see a multiple boobed slaanesh daemon

Merely an oversight! In the next Codex, all daemons will be depicted in appropriately modest lingerie and be designed in a suitably hideous way so as to not give rise to confusing feelings in the viewer.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Really all they would need to do is include a couple female heads in the Cadian box. You wouldn't need to sculpt a female body for them either.

The standard IG kit is almost certainly unisex and may even be one size fits all. This would mean that as far as the models are concerned the body would be the same regardless of the sex of the guardsmen.

The same pants, the same flak armor, the same helmet, etc...

I'd also be up for some more helmets that cover the entire face oh it might be a male or female. Huzzah!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lynata wrote:

StarTrotter wrote:plus I open my chaos daemon book and see a multiple boobed slaanesh daemon

Merely an oversight! In the next Codex, all daemons will be depicted in appropriately modest lingerie and be designed in a suitably hideous way so as to not give rise to confusing feelings in the viewer.

Spoiler:

v

oh mah what will the children think! Naked monsters that rip others apart!? Now then let us go make some plague bearers (I still miss the pink horrors ripping their mouth open for two blue horrors to hop out)

 Lynata wrote:

Spoiler:

I love those models - hard to get hold - just picked up a few on ebay but they do make the current versions look so bad :(

Back to the OP - its 40K it depends.... but yes many GW and francised products confirm the existance of female IG. In fact the only place they don't really show up in is the model range - luckily lots of other model ranges out there to plunder to fill the ranks

Well, for Xenonian Free Companies, you can admittedly just plunder GW's Necromunda Escher range.
That drawing in the Guard 'dex is a 1:1 copy of one. In fact, I recall many of the regimental designs on that page were GW minis from other games - as a "what you could do" showcase, so to say. You can even use WHFB minis ... the Guard is very versatile.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Really all they would need to do is include a couple female heads in the Cadian box. You wouldn't need to sculpt a female body for them either.

Yeah, but nobody wants that. There are dozens of companies out there that supply female heads that could be utilized with GW figures. If that was the solution, there would be no problem. Somebody would have supplied the link.

They want little idealized female guardsmen. Either with big hips, narrower waists and discernible boobs like those resin ones, or they want them like Lieutenant Mira and have slight feminine forms with skinny arms and wrists that wouldn't be able to sustain the muscle/joint endurance required to hold a large rifle for long periods of time.

It's heroic scale. All I would want from it is models that are subtly female, while being identifiably female. So no Battle Bras, but instead full flak armour. Heroic scale works on comparisons. Women in general have narrower waists, so make one or two torsos have slightly narrower waists. Give a few heads feminine faces maybe? Perhaps ones that don't look like crossdressers (see the High Elf Maiden Guard or whatever they're called).

Although I support the idea of single-gender fighting units, so why not have a male box set and a female? People can mix them if they are that way inclined, or ignore one in favour of the other. Maybe include different options in each kit, maybe not. I don't know, and GW ain't going to do it any time soon.

I get what you're saying, you don't want an anorexic little girl to go toe to toe with a World Eater. Women that look like women can and have been in combat. Its not like we're asking the impossible. I've seen it first hand. Heck, even Bonnie of Bonnie and Clyde fame could tote around a shotgun and BAR and she was a tiny woman. Russians used women a great deal during the Great Patriotic War.

And a modern look that would fit the IG. Yes, its hard to tell gender from a distance, but just a little touch of femininity would go a loooooong way.

Well this thread has gone to the bad place.

So I'll leave Sergeant to discuss whether or not having balls matters when facing down a Hive Tyrant in melee combat.

There are still posters who don't have him on ignore? Such things is what these sorts of threads descend into, time and time again, despite all evidence to the contrary. Coupled with the fact that it's a sci-fantasy setting, genres of fiction that have used gender equality, and discrimination, to good effect in its history, setting the precedent for there being good reason for women in the service.

Just for the record, In Iraq I saw combat and a female sergeant was with me from another unit and she kicked as much butt as anyone else.

 MWHistorian wrote:
Just for the record, In Iraq I saw combat and a female sergeant was with me from another unit and she kicked as much butt as anyone else.

I reckon this is the message we need to see.

 MWHistorian wrote:
I get what you're saying, you don't want an anorexic little girl to go toe to toe with a World Eater. Women that look like women can and have been in combat. Its not like we're asking the impossible. I've seen it first hand. Heck, even Bonnie of Bonnie and Clyde fame could tote around a shotgun and BAR and she was a tiny woman.

Clyde Barrow and some of the less famous male members of the gang were the ones who used the BARs. Bonnie Parker typically carried a small, cut down 20 gauge shotgun, using it on at least two occasions to murder police officers. But that's neither here nor there. It really isn't relevant what she would hold for a few minutes at a time during a robbery. Nor really is the use of women snipers in WW2 by the Russians (something historians believe was true, but vastly overstated by the Russians for propaganda purposes). It's not about whether or not there are roles women can serve in a combat capacity.

I was really just commenting on the idea of putting female heads on the sprue. People don't want thick, burly models with lady heads on them. They wants space action ladies. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Just the examples people give for the kinds of figures they want are amusing when transposing it against the idea of wanting "Female IGuard". Honestly, some of the old Escher figs weren't all bad. The juves were tiny, but the ganger models were half decent. I have them lying around somewhere. I'll get a picture of them next to the modern plastic Cadians though. I haven't done it before, but based on the size difference between the old metal guardsmen and the new plastics, it'll be pretty funny. There was a guy who had a P&M blog with converted Hasslefree female figs with modern plastic lasguns, and they looked ridiculous.

I actually bought one of the Hasslefree figs because I wanted to use her in my metal Cadian command squad. The difference in the scale was, to say the least, striking.

Veteran Sergeant wrote:Nor really is the use of women snipers in WW2 by the Russians

... or machine gunners, artillery crews, tankers, pilots, ...

 MWHistorian wrote:
Just for the record, In Iraq I saw combat and a female sergeant was with me from another unit and she kicked as much butt as anyone else.

Not that I don't doubt women saw combat in Iraq, because I knew female Marines who were in units that saw and returned fire, but what exactly was the situation you described?

The real difference is that I've always posited, and it gets shouted down by nay-sayers who point to stories like the anecdote you just provided, but use them without any context. The Imperial Guardsmen in the game are depicting infantry platoons. There's a significant difference between serving in an infantry platoon and, say, an MP or Motor Transport soldier whose convoy came under fire, and had to dismount to engage. The physical requirements to be able to sustain protracted ground operations are entirely different than putting on a vest, and carry your own personal weapon and ammunition for relatively short periods of time. If there are women serving in Imperial Guard line units, then they would be those who were physically capable of such an operation. And it's not impossible that in the grim darkness of the far future, there are women who have developed the genetic traits to sustain muscle mass similar to men (lol, the Russians and East Germans figured out how to do it in the 80s). But they aren't going to look like Lieutenant Mira, who was designed in a computer lab by a guy who was making a mass market video game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lynata wrote:

Veteran Sergeant wrote:Nor really is the use of women snipers in WW2 by the Russians

... or machine gunners, artillery crews, tankers, pilots, ...

Like I just said, this isn't about the imaginary version of the Soviet military you read a brief account of one time. But I already wrote one long post citing academic sources which you ignored in the past that disproved most of the common myths about the widespread use of women in the WWII Soviet military. I'm not going to do it again just because you enjoy being combative on the Interwebs just for the sake of being combative. I'll leave you to your 5 foot, 90 pound Valhallan Sniper fantasy.

After all, 40K is a fantasy game.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
*Snip*.

So tell me all about how a human male's physiology will help them at all when a Tyranid warrior with a bonesabre and lashwhip gets into melee range. Or when you're staring down a Bloodcrusher charging down your ranks. Or when a Wraithknight is about to step on you. Or when you're stuck in close combat with a Nob in mega-armor. Or when that Sorcerer of Tzeentch looks at you funny and now your head's exploded. Or when a Dark Eldar wych is ready to drag you off to the slave pens of commoragh.

Or heck just in combat with an Ork boy who is already superior enough to a human to pull his arms out of his sockets and club him to death with them without much effort and use HMG equivalents like assault rifles.

I don't ignore, I dismiss. Just like you seem to have done (or at least I would hope you've at least read the stuff) with the other academic sources that I have cited, including a contemporary analysis of the UK's Department of Defense about the expanding role of female soldiers in modern militaries, as well as evidence for how academic sources can be influenced by bias. Your choice of words regarding the issue just now is quite telling of yours.

I too would like to avoid such debates as every time this topic comes up it ends up going in circles, but I can't simply shut my yap when you feel like propagating your stories again. Just like you can't resist doing so in the first place.

 Kain wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
*Snip*.

So tell me all about how a human male's physiology will help them at all when a Tyranid warrior with a bonesabre and lashwhip gets into melee range. Or when you're staring down a Bloodcrusher charging down your ranks. Or when a Wraithknight is about to step on you. Or when you're stuck in close combat with a Nob in mega-armor. Or when that Sorcerer of Tzeentch looks at you funny and now your head's exploded. Or when a Dark Eldar wych is ready to drag you off to the slave pens of commoragh.

Or heck just in combat with an Ork boy who is already superior enough to a human to pull his arms out of his sockets and club him to death with them without much effort and use HMG equivalents like assault rifles.

It's a long, drawn out explanation that you have no context for understanding and will just nay-say anyway.

It's not an arrogance thing, just one of best time use. I'm not going to take the time to explain how warfare actually works for you while I can do other things that bring me entertainment. If you think combat is all about standing in one place and pulling the trigger when something runs at you, then I'm sure everything you just said makes sense.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:

 Kain wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
*Snip*.

So tell me all about how a human male's physiology will help them at all when a Tyranid warrior with a bonesabre and lashwhip gets into melee range. Or when you're staring down a Bloodcrusher charging down your ranks. Or when a Wraithknight is about to step on you. Or when you're stuck in close combat with a Nob in mega-armor. Or when that Sorcerer of Tzeentch looks at you funny and now your head's exploded. Or when a Dark Eldar wych is ready to drag you off to the slave pens of commoragh.

Or heck just in combat with an Ork boy who is already superior enough to a human to pull his arms out of his sockets and club him to death with them without much effort and use HMG equivalents like assault rifles.

It's a long, drawn out explanation that you have no context for understanding and will just nay-say anyway.

It's not an arrogance thing, just one of best time use. I'm not going to take the time to explain how warfare actually works for you while I can do other things that bring me entertainment. If you think combat is all about standing in one place and pulling the trigger when something runs at you, then I'm sure everything you just said makes sense.

Except that most enemies in 40k are already ridiculously superior to humans in most ways that count.

Gaunts are much more numerous and deadlier in close quarters. And the big Tyranids are far stronger and more durable to the point that one Carnifex can bowl over an entire tank column if it's hemmed in.

The Tau have far better precision fire than the Imperial Guard and are much more mobile and fluid.

The Eldar are even more precise, have specialists who completely out do anything humanity has to offer in their appointed task, and even more mobile.

The Dark Eldar are even faster still and have some of the nuttiest weaponry around.

Chaos followers tend to be altered or mutated in some way and the Chaos Space Marines are Space Marines and all that entails, before we even get into the Daemons who disregard physics entirely.

The Orks outnumber humanity, they are stronger than humanity, they do not know or appreciate fear, they tend to throw down more weight of fire within visual engagement ranges than equivalent humans do, and they've so far been shown to have an equivalent to just about every class of human weapon.

And the Necrons are antedeluvian gods who overwhelmed sixty Imperial worlds in just a hundred days with the forces of just one Major dynasty and it's clients, throw chunks of degenerate matter at near light speed as opening moves in space battles, drop anti-matter shards as bombs, have limited reality warping combat scientists, and can cause stars to burst into a solar storm that can fry everything on the dayside of a nearby planet. Oh and not only are they absurdly tough, but they regenerate really well and get back up if you kick them down.

The physical differences between male and female humans is rather meaningless when the Guard's only advantage is numbers (though Orks and Tyranids frequently outnumber the guard), Organization (though many armies are better organized than them) and weight of fire (they still are the best in terms of long ranged artillery fire). The only species that is used as a primary combatant in all of 40k we're definitively the physical superiors of has much better standard kit and superior training anyway.

Given that the Guard throws teenagers as young as thirteen into the field of battle on a fairly regular basis recruiting women for more corpses to try and grind the enemy's gears is neither to be unexpected nor abhorred.

I mean, this is an organization that condones Chenkov executing his own men for combat engineers to make stuff out of or use them to clear mines for his tanks by marching them across obviously trapped areas. They clearly only care if you can shoot and take orders.

The enemy is stronger than you, he has better guns than you, he can outnumber you, he is smarter than you, but by the Emperor you're going to keep on throwing ordinance at them in increasingly creative ways until something breaks.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:

 Kain wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
*Snip*.

So tell me all about how a human male's physiology will help them at all when a Tyranid warrior with a bonesabre and lashwhip gets into melee range. Or when you're staring down a Bloodcrusher charging down your ranks. Or when a Wraithknight is about to step on you. Or when you're stuck in close combat with a Nob in mega-armor. Or when that Sorcerer of Tzeentch looks at you funny and now your head's exploded. Or when a Dark Eldar wych is ready to drag you off to the slave pens of commoragh.

Or heck just in combat with an Ork boy who is already superior enough to a human to pull his arms out of his sockets and club him to death with them without much effort and use HMG equivalents like assault rifles.

It's a long, drawn out explanation that you have no context for understanding and will just nay-say anyway.

It's not an arrogance thing, just one of best time use. I'm not going to take the time to explain how warfare actually works for you while I can do other things that bring me entertainment. If you think combat is all about standing in one place and pulling the trigger when something runs at you, then I'm sure everything you just said makes sense.

I think the problem is that you are forgetting one important thing. 40k is sci-fantasy and grimdark where savages are grabbed and then promptly sent to war with a lasgun placed in their hands saying shoot the enemy. We are comparing guardsmen (conscripted some strong some weak) to hold the line. They fight monsters of such might that in reality their capabilities rarely mean anything unless it involves strategic wits (which many races can challenge) and going psyker or bionic. If there is one thing I've learned about 40k, it is that regardless of our own modern view of warfare, warfare in 40k is very different and unrealistic more often than not.

Anyways, I hope the poster has gained their answer about women in IG being there but not having models to represent them.

RL-stuff aside, there is also the point that the setting does allow for relative physical equality when one keeps in mind that human physiology has evolved from current local standards. Be it due to environmental conditions and mutation or pre-imperial genetical engineering, there now exists a wide array of different human strains that can be categorised based on their homeworld. For example, the average Catachan will be considerably stronger and tougher than the average Necromundan, whilst the latter may have an advantage in dexterity or cunning. Indeed, such developments have even led to abhuman mutations such as Ogryns or Ratlings. How difficult, then, is it to believe that one planet has males and females on equal grounds, or even females being the stronger gender?

Society plays a large role in how a species develops, which is why the males and females of the Neandertals, whose nutrition was almost entirely focused on hunting animals, had much more similar builds compared to the males and females of our ancestral Homo Sapiens Sapiens, who practiced the hunter-gatherer division [src], and considering the massive cultural differences between the various human colonies in 40k (and the setting's apparent rapid evolution/mutation phenomenon), it should not be hard to consider possible "what if" scenarios and how they might influence a colony population physiologically.

Also, I don't think anyone here is really argueing that this is a fictional setting with its own rules.

On a sidenote, I also think that the technology of the setting as well as a society's preferred fighting styles play a considerable role in "evening out" the advantages or disadvantages of both the various genders as well as the various homeworlds and their respective strains of humanity. I'd still expect Feral or Feudal World regiments to be male-dominated based on a higher chance for thusly shaped warrior societies on their planet (although real life examples for mixed or even all-female formations exist for human tribal societies as well), but the further you go towards a more modern environment and fighting force with mechanised infantry etc, the more likely it becomes that drafting requirements become more open or simply focused on other areas.

Really, even if women are overall slightly weaker than men in the 41st millennium, the difference will be miniscule compared to the foes the IG is called to face.

Even fighting other humans the difference isn't enough. We aren't training body builders here. We just need humans capable of sustained endurance, good physical health, and the ability to fire and maintain a lasgun. Anybody can do that.

A man will be just as dead if hit by a fleshborer beetle as a women would be.

 Mr Morden wrote:
luckily lots of other model ranges out there to plunder to fill the ranks

No... not really. Not very many that matc hthe Imperial Guard aesthetic anyway. Most of them are just "hurr naked gurlz". There's almost no miniatures out there which can be used for female IG that don't require some conversion, and if you're gonna do that, might as well just convert IG minis.

Regardless, the question's been answered-- the Imperium employs women in the Imperial Guard. The miniatures simply don't reflect this. It's sad, but that's how it goes.

Hey Sarge, go ahead and tell a combat vet about the realities of combat. Oh, but you knew a female marine once...yeah, that trumps first hand experience. Im also a combat vet (two tours in Iraq, US Army) and ill say that most of the female soldiers i knew there could hang with the infantry if given the chance. When they did see combat, they kicked butt with the rest of them. Being a combat soldier is alot more about mental fortitude than physical strength.

Where is that picture somebody had of "beating a dead horse?"....

What is that screenshot from? Space Marine game?

 ultimentra wrote:
What is that screenshot from? Space Marine game?

It sure is.

I want full armor. All I ask is for the bust to show through the slightest bit, so as to have any idea you're dealing with a female model.
A peak (batman not strongman) human can't bruise a World Eater unarmored, let alone draw blood from a wound that would close in 2 minutes anyway. Male anatomy won't help worth a damn with that.
As to this, ladies men are more suited to warfare (dodges streams of debris).
The male body has more adrenaline in it's system (this actually helps, you can't hurt a space marine, maybe you can at least dodge) and (god help me, for pointing out biology) men are on average slightly-mildly stronger (20-50 percent)
Of course none of this will stop you from exploding from being within a mile of the sheer power of Daemon Primarchs or Lords of Change.
In the end the more bodies to inevitably bury our enemies the better.
Seriously I actively play Deathwatch and the average marine bench is like 6000lbs (12x Worlds Strongest Man) and World Eaters it's like 10000lbs (20xWSM), And then it's possible to get stats where you can toss terminator Berzerker lords full on 150ft away.
These are the actual stats the game gives..........
Again the more bodies the better.

 Melissia wrote:
There's almost no miniatures out there which can be used for female IG that don't require some conversion, and if you're gonna do that, might as well just convert IG minis.

Well, on a purely miniatures related note, Victoria Miniatures is doing up a whole slew of female 28mm heroic 'not-guardsmen'. You can check out the initial sculpts here.

Comes in a variety of flavours, including not-Mordians, not-Praetorians, not-Cadians, and so on.

Your whole regiment doesn't have to have all women it could feature a couple of them or even have some as officers like in the Ciaphas Cain novels ( 597th Valhallan)

Musashi363 wrote:Hey Sarge, go ahead and tell a combat vet about the realities of combat. Oh, but you knew a female marine once...yeah, that trumps first hand experience. Im also a combat vet (two tours in Iraq, US Army) and ill say that most of the female soldiers i knew there could hang with the infantry if given the chance. When they did see combat, they kicked butt with the rest of them. Being a combat soldier is alot more about mental fortitude than physical strength.

Now, now. Your experience surely doesn't compare to VS's supposed decade of Marine experience, during which he dated a bunch of hawt models before entering a business career and finally becoming a writer. You should be thankful he still has the time to offer his sage advice on an internet message board for wargame nerds instead of considering running for PotUS or something.

Blacksails wrote:Well, on a purely miniatures related note, Victoria Miniatures is doing up a whole slew of female 28mm heroic 'not-guardsmen'. You can check out the initial sculpts here.
Comes in a variety of flavours, including not-Mordians, not-Praetorians, not-Cadians, and so on.

Wow. Hats off to the sculptor, and thanks for the link - this looks pretty much exactly like what people are asking for?

I suppose they'd warrant a small bit of tweaking before being added to an existing army of Cadians or Mordians - such as switching the lasgun, or adding shoulder pauldrons to the not-Cadian mini - but all in all there is little left to wish for here!

 Lynata wrote:
Wow. Hats off to the sculptor, and thanks for the link - this looks pretty much exactly like what people are asking for?

I suppose they'd warrant a small bit of tweaking before being added to an existing army of Cadians or Mordians - such as switching the lasgun, or adding shoulder pauldrons to the not-Cadian mini - but all in all there is little left to wish for here!

Yeah, Vic does some pretty top quality work.

I understand switching the guns and other small bits to fit in with an existing force. I will not be having that problem, cause I'm selling off all my metal Mordians and going full in on Vic minis after the line comes out in resin.

Certainly the best looking female not-guardsmen I've seen yet.

Oh, and remember that the torso and heads are sold seperately, so all you have to do is swap the normal Cadian/Catachan torso and head with the female version.

Vic's pretty ace. The news thread can be found here for updates and other shiny pics.

 Blacksails wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
There's almost no miniatures out there which can be used for female IG that don't require some conversion, and if you're gonna do that, might as well just convert IG minis.

Well, on a purely miniatures related note, Victoria Miniatures is doing up a whole slew of female 28mm heroic 'not-guardsmen'. You can check out the initial sculpts here.

Comes in a variety of flavours, including not-Mordians, not-Praetorians, not-Cadians, and so on.

The proportions are perfect and the models look good. They're still idealized in a different (possibly worse aesthetically) form though: They look way too warscarred, and just plain nasty. Regular guardsmen should just look like fit young people.
Edit: I just now caught a decent resolution through the zoom feature of my I-phone. So damn hard with no Images in the actual article. They look pretty much perfect.

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
There's almost no miniatures out there which can be used for female IG that don't require some conversion, and if you're gonna do that, might as well just convert IG minis.

Well, on a purely miniatures related note, Victoria Miniatures is doing up a whole slew of female 28mm heroic 'not-guardsmen'. You can check out the initial sculpts here.

Comes in a variety of flavours, including not-Mordians, not-Praetorians, not-Cadians, and so on.

The proportions are perfect and the models look good. They're still idealized in a different (possibly worse aesthetically) form though: They look way too warscarred, and just plain nasty. Regular guardsmen should just look like fit young people.

Strange, I don't think they look particularly warscarred at all, at least not more than any of the current plastic or metal GW figures. Care to explain what you mean? I also think they look like fit, normal women of a universally expected fighting age. But then again, at this point we're simply debating the finest of points, which can only end once we've discussed the available haircuts, or the size of their noses.

Either way, I think most people will find these models fill the gap almost perfectly for any GW-based IG force.

EDIT* Just saw your edit. I'll leave in my original comment in case you want to answer it anyways.

Victoria Miniatures is one of the few exceptions to my statement, yes. But what I meant was when I think of things like Infinity, I don't think of quality sci-fi infantry designs. And despite that, Infinity is still better than most in terms of designs of female sci-fi soldiers that aren't mind-bogglingly stupid. The standards are just so impossibly low.

But that's really a rant for another thread, since this is about the background, not the minis.

As for women kicking butt, I literally wrote the book on it. Just saying.
http://www.amazon.com/Fearless-Powerful-History-Zachary-Hill/dp/1490934340/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1378392705&sr=1-1&keywords=fearless+powerful+women+of+history

A published author? Very cool, congratulations!

Next time, though, maybe pick a more martial woman for the cover - someone like this one perhaps. Or was that the publisher's doing?

I was able to say "No bare midrifts, real armor." They did the rest. And yes, that other martial woman is awesome.

I see - rather ironic, but you did your best! The publisher always has the last words in such matters, from what I've been told.

Could you go in to it a bit more in depth (especially in regards to its applicability to this thread), so it doesnt' loook like an advertisement?

I'm rather interested in hearing about your interpretation.

Now, now. Your experience surely doesn't compare to VS's supposed decade of Marine experience, during which he dated a bunch of hawt models before entering a business career and finally becoming a writer. You should be thankful he still has the time to offer his sage advice on an internet message board for wargame nerds instead of considering running for PotUS or something.

Hes starting to grow on me for some reason though

It's a book that lists several women in history, many of them warriors. The point was to show that giving examples of women in combat isn't anecdotal but actually far more common that people realize. The book itself shows examples of women in combat that aren't well known to history, not because it was rare but because it was under-represented in the history books. The book lists Countess Matilda of Tuscany who led her armies (while wearing armor and sword) against the Holy Roman Empire. Women samurai and how it was far more common that people realize. Stiglata, the wife of a Norman warlord who fought on campaign with her husband, etc etc.

I can go on, so I figured, hey, I wrote a book about it and am planning a second volume because there were so many.

So, women in combat, Absolutely. Shooting a gun is a lot less physical than sword fighting. As one poster said, its far far more about mental toughness than physical. And I know that by personal experience.

Biased history certainly is a huge issue. How many people today have ever heard of the medieval Order of the Hatchet, female Gladiators, the African Dahomey "Amazons", or WW1 Russia's Women's Battalions of Death? It's just not common knowledge, so it's not taught in schools, which in turn further propagates a flawed image of history in the mind of the average person on the streets.

Just a few years ago historians dug up some old accounts of a German judicial court that discusses the case of a female mercenary captain who was accused of having attempted to impersonate Jeanne d'Arc. We wouldn't even know anything about her were it not for those records, simply because nobody else bothered to write about her.

Likewise, archaeologists were able to confirm the bones of two soldiers of a Roman Numerii unit serving in Britannia as being of female build. Earlier identification was not possible because the necessary technology supposedly did not exist until the 2000s, so everyone simply assumed they had to be male.

A lot of history is based on assumptions. A lot of assumptions eventually turn out to be wrong when subjected to greater scrutiny.

If I remember, the Scythians/Sarmatians also were rather eglitarian when it came to warmaking. To the point of some believing that they influenced the Greek's conception of the Amazons.

Do you want them to make more female minis? All they do is make them have impractically stupid armors. Mira from SM should be the template, yet they stray away from it. One size fits all sexes armor makes way more sense than boob plates and bared midriffs.

I dunno - do you really think they'd be unable to make "proper" female Cadians? One could argue that GW designs such as Necromundan Eschers are "impractical", but ... uh, well, they're street punks. It fits the theme, just like bare-chested male Catachans.

There are very, very few examples where GW sells "mixed" boxes of a unit consisting of both sexes, so a comparison might be tricky now .. but if we're going by the Dark Eldar, we do have an example where they manage to make everyone look equal. All that matters is that males and females both follow the same style ... how exactly that style looks and how practical it is depends on the individual army/regiment/culture.

Some things are just too dumb, though, like your example of bare-chested Catachans. Come on - you come from a death world where a freaking FROG is a biohazard nuke that can kill everything within a kilometer radius. Not that your example is dumb, but the fact that they exist in a universe given the context of their background is dumb.
I can see hive gangers dressing that way, because they don't have access to materiel that the IG has. But not the large majority of the military forces of the Imperium.
It's sort of in line with the Space Marine 'no helmet yipee' thing. I've noticed that in a lot of SM books - excepting SW ones - more and more Marines end up wearing helmets, including high-ranking officers within the Chapter. IIRC in Death of Integrity, CM Caedis wears a helmet (will check though).
Cadian females would literally just have their heads switched out. Under all that flak/carapace armor, there'd be no way to tell what gender they are.

TheSGC wrote:
Do you want them to make more female minis?

Yes.

If you think the only way to make female minis is bare midriffs and boob-cups, we will never agree. I think that GW is very capable of the job. Far more than most other wargame developers anyway-- especially the sci-fi ones, they're always the lowest common denominator when it comes to female minis.

Cadian females would literally just have their heads switched out. Under all that flak/carapace armor, there'd be no way to tell what gender they are

The tallest guy I know is 6'8 (offensive lineman make good friends). The tallest girl I know is 5'11. I'm 6'2.
I'm assuming that they have different sizes on the easy to produce armor.
I think you could tell......
EDIT: On the source of the book discussion, there is a very big difference between commanding from behind where it's possible to get shot at, and doing some Alexander the Great sh** where you're at the front lines and killing like 10 dudes per battle. For example Joan of Arc never killed anyone and probably would have had trouble if cornered. In a sword fight strength, speed, and toughness rule. Not the same in a gun fight.
'

One-size-fits-most is something that the US Army has learned, fairly recently, doesn't work when you need to equip two different genders of soldiers. Women are not simply shorter men, their bodies are proportioned differently, and a woman wearing a set of body armor designed for a man is tactically disadvantaged because of the issues trying to do that causes.

Fortunately, we're now designing body armor designed to fit our female soldiers.

TheSGC wrote:Some things are just too dumb, though, like your example of bare-chested Catachans. Come on - you come from a death world where a freaking FROG is a biohazard nuke that can kill everything within a kilometer radius. Not that your example is dumb, but the fact that they exist in a universe given the context of their background is dumb.

Ah, but you have to consider that what is perceived as "dumb" or "clever" always lies in the eye of the beholder! Sure, to us modern day western Earthlings, bare-chested Catachans may appear (obviously) impractical. But do the Catachans themselves think so? I would think not.

Ironically, it may well be that because their world is that ridiculously dangerous that protection is shunned. Take the frog you mentioned, for example - how exactly are you supposed to protect against that? Cadian-style flak vests? Nuh-uh. May as well forget about it and focus on avoiding such dangers entirely rather than focusing on (ultimately futile) attempts to survive them. Heavy armour tends to come with limitations for your personal mobility, and for 40k this is even stated in the rulebook description for carapace. So, be it due to heat, or mobility, or perhaps just because Catachans are so incredibly proud and macho, they just say "feth it" and go to war in t-shirts to show everyone how manly they are.

And look to our real world. Our own military history, right up to the modern day, is filled with practices and standards that were thought to be grand back when they were implemented, but are ridiculed later on simply due to a shift in established wisdom. Line combat was once a big thing a few centuries back, and nobody questioned its potential weaknesses or how such formations could be exploited, yet today every armchair general on the internet acts all clever because they would have obviously never used such "silly" tactics. Good job, Captain Hindsight.
Why should the Mordians change their ways if it was these tactics that had once saved their world? Since no Imperial Guard regiment ever returns to its homeworld, and the Departmento Munitorum does not bother with propagating the results of military studies (beyond some treatises such as the Tactica Imperialis) for the very reason that the IoM regards diversity as a strength (as well as simple carelessness - why should the generals today bother with the issues of some backwater world tomorrow, if all they want from them is a regiment of cavalry right now?), how could they ever make use of the experiences made by their units in the field? Whatever the regiments of the Mordian Iron Guard learn when operating next to or against units with less rigid tactics will never reach the academies and training fields of their homeworld!

tl;dr: what is regarded as "silly" on planet A could be seen as honourable tradition or a matter of course on planet B. I do not think it is wrong that the miniatures reflect the differences in the various Imperial worlds' cultures and tech-levels ... indeed, to me, this is a huge thing of what makes 40k be 40k! Same for the Space Marines. Pride and arrogance are kinda their thing, and how could you better demonstrate your defiance and faith in your abilities as a warrior than meeting your foe face to unshielded face?

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:

The tallest guy I know is 6'8 (offensive lineman make good friends). The tallest girl I know is 5'11. I'm 6'2.
I'm assuming that they have different sizes on the easy to produce armor.
I think you could tell......

These are people living in the far future on a completely different planet. Their heights aren't necessarily exactly the same as ours.

And TheSGC was referring to the actual minis, which aren't always heighted accurately anyway.

Many soldiers in Vietnam discarded their flak jackets because it was far too hot and humid to tolerate wearing one on as opposed to the possible two minutes where it might make a difference. Helmets, sure. It also served as a bucket, a seat, a pot, and a dozen other uses. Flak jackets? Cumbersome, hot, heavy, and a bullet-wound was a ticket home.

I know numerous guys shorter than me, despite being merely a bit over five foot seven. Average height really depends on where you're from. I am taller than the average Brazillian male, for example, or Chinese, or Egyptian, or Indian, Iranian, etc.

Given that Cadians have spent well over ten thousand years (which I come to about 500-450 generations) on Cadia with a culture that enforced no societal difference between men and women (all are conscripted, of those conscripted, it's a lottery to determine who gets sent off-world as shock-troops and who stays at home), it's quite plausible, indeed, probable, that there'd be little difference between the genders in terms of height.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Psienesis wrote:
One-size-fits-most is something that the US Army has learned, fairly recently, doesn't work when you need to equip two different genders of soldiers. Women are not simply shorter men, their bodies are proportioned differently, and a woman wearing a set of body armor designed for a man is tactically disadvantaged because of the issues trying to do that causes.

Fortunately, we're now designing body armor designed to fit our female soldiers.

Correct. However, that said, humanity had 28,000 years to develop effective male and female uniforms before the Great Crusade. The Imperium had had another 10,000 after the GC. There is no reason to believe that the Imperium does not have the infrastructure already in place from before it ever existed.

Honestly surprised no one's made mention of my avatar, It fits the discussion so well.

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:
Honestly surprised no one's made mention of my avatar, It fits the discussion so well.

...No...no it doesn't.

Now that you mention it ... yes, Balalaika is awesome.

Kain wrote:...No...no it doesn't.

I suppose you could say it's an insider for those who know the series.

 Lynata wrote:
Now that you mention it ... yes, Balalaika is awesome.

Kain wrote:...No...no it doesn't.

I suppose you could say it's an insider for those who know the series.

Balalaika could kick my ass anyday and do it while wearing men's clothing.
Roberta is probably the second coolest.
It's the only thing I could find with all the best characters and the logo together.
Some clips (short)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLx2_yIheOY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54Fd20UH-ng (incredibly violent, very well choreagraphed though)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQ116EVYVP4 (Balalaika on a normal weekday)

 Lynata wrote:

TheSGC wrote:Some things are just too dumb, though, like your example of bare-chested Catachans. Come on - you come from a death world where a freaking FROG is a biohazard nuke that can kill everything within a kilometer radius. Not that your example is dumb, but the fact that they exist in a universe given the context of their background is dumb.

Ah, but you have to consider that what is perceived as "dumb" or "clever" always lies in the eye of the beholder! Sure, to us modern day western Earthlings, bare-chested Catachans may appear (obviously) impractical. But do the Catachans themselves think so? I would think not.

Ironically, it may well be that because their world is that ridiculously dangerous that protection is shunned. Take the frog you mentioned, for example - how exactly are you supposed to protect against that? Cadian-style flak vests? Nuh-uh. May as well forget about it and focus on avoiding such dangers entirely rather than focusing on (ultimately futile) attempts to survive them. Heavy armour tends to come with limitations for your personal mobility, and for 40k this is even stated in the rulebook description for carapace. So, be it due to heat, or mobility, or perhaps just because Catachans are so incredibly proud and macho, they just say "feth it" and go to war in t-shirts to show everyone how manly they are.

And look to our real world. Our own military history, right up to the modern day, is filled with practices and standards that were thought to be grand back when they were implemented, but are ridiculed later on simply due to a shift in established wisdom. Line combat was once a big thing a few centuries back, and nobody questioned its potential weaknesses or how such formations could be exploited, yet today every armchair general on the internet acts all clever because they would have obviously never used such "silly" tactics. Good job, Captain Hindsight.
Why should the Mordians change their ways if it was these tactics that had once saved their world? Since no Imperial Guard regiment ever returns to its homeworld, and the Departmento Munitorum does not bother with propagating the results of military studies (beyond some treatises such as the Tactica Imperialis) for the very reason that the IoM regards diversity as a strength (as well as simple carelessness - why should the generals today bother with the issues of some backwater world tomorrow, if all they want from them is a regiment of cavalry right now?), how could they ever make use of the experiences made by their units in the field? Whatever the regiments of the Mordian Iron Guard learn when operating next to or against units with less rigid tactics will never reach the academies and training fields of their homeworld!

tl;dr: what is regarded as "silly" on planet A could be seen as honourable tradition or a matter of course on planet B. I do not think it is wrong that the miniatures reflect the differences in the various Imperial worlds' cultures and tech-levels ... indeed, to me, this is a huge thing of what makes 40k be 40k! Same for the Space Marines. Pride and arrogance are kinda their thing, and how could you better demonstrate your defiance and faith in your abilities as a warrior than meeting your foe face to unshielded face?

Line combat was big because it suited the type of weapons involved with warfare. As soon as machine guns came about, people realized that line combat was futile, because one sufficiently armed soldier could take on several times his number by simply depressing the trigger. Is line combat silly now? Of course. Was it still back then? Not really. It was an effective form of warfare for the time and technology. That's not armchair quarterbacking, that's the truth.
About the Catachans, though, that's fair enough. I will say this though, which is relevant to both Catachans and Mordian examples: culture won't save you when an autogun shell has your name on it - only a flak vest can do that. SM seem to be realizing this in the fluff recently.

 Psienesis wrote:
One-size-fits-most is something that the US Army has learned, fairly recently, doesn't work when you need to equip two different genders of soldiers. Women are not simply shorter men, their bodies are proportioned differently, and a woman wearing a set of body armor designed for a man is tactically disadvantaged because of the issues trying to do that causes.

Fortunately, we're now designing body armor designed to fit our female soldiers.

Of course, they may have better designed one size fits all armor. Or simply not care.

IIRC the problem with the US army body armor was that it was not really designed as one size fits all. Its was really more of a "one size fits all men" and they assumed that it would also work for women.

But if you designed a One Size Fits All set with the intention that it will be worn by both sexes it could work. A gender neutral set, instead of a male design that was only slightly altered to fit women.

 Kain wrote:

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:
Honestly surprised no one's made mention of my avatar, It fits the discussion so well.

...No...no it doesn't.

It's tarantino inspired. The designs often have everything or nothing to do with the characters.

 Lynata wrote:
Now that you mention it ... yes, Balalaika is awesome.

Kain wrote:...No...no it doesn't.

I suppose you could say it's an insider for those who know the series.

I suppose I can continue to mystify you with my own avatar much as how Melissa probably mystified you when she had her old troll Avatar.

TheSGC wrote:Line combat was big because it suited the type of weapons involved with warfare. As soon as machine guns came about, people realized that line combat was futile, because one sufficiently armed soldier could take on several times his number by simply depressing the trigger. Is line combat silly now? Of course. Was it still back then? Not really. It was an effective form of warfare for the time and technology. That's not armchair quarterbacking, that's the truth.

I don't think I'd agree there - line combat was practicable only because every side tended to utilise it and stick to a "gentlemen's agreement" of sorts. As soon as a participant in a conflict stopped adhering to those rules, the system began to show clear signs of weaknesses that allowed for exploitation. Skirmishers had much success in disrupting and harassing line infantry, yet the armies' response was simply to use skirmishers themselves instead of stopping to use line infantry altogether.

Don't get me wrong - it's not like I think that such tactics had no advantage whatsoever. The way I understand it, it was chiefly a morale thing, and obviously a formation like a karee(sp?) was good against cavalry charges .. yet is it not true that soldiers spreading out and seeking cover are much harder to hit than hundreds or thousand of people in brightly coloured uniforms standing together in a single huge pile of bodies? And I'm not talking gatling guns, but simple volley fire and artillery. The development of machine guns and more accurate rifles merely contributed to an issue that existed for centuries, and tbh I think the primary reason that line infantry dominated military tactics for that long is because such formations proved to be extremely successful in the classical and medieval periods (legionaries, phalanx, üikemen .. line infantry did develop out of the testudo, iirc?) - and because militaries are traditionally, well, traditional, and loathe to adopt changes. Especially back then.

That being said, I am merely an armchair general as well, and it would be arrogant to consider that I've misjudged the situation. In any way, I just thought it would qualify as an example to better illustrate my point - I'm sure there are others, such as the reliance on huge battleships in WW1/WW2 and dismissing the potential of the aircraft, which (supported by carriers) would come to replace those behemoths as the strategically most important weapon on the seas. A lot of seasoned admirals didn't see that coming, even though one could argue (today) that the signs were there to be seen.
Same for the gatling gun you mentioned, by the way. Its makers supposedly had a lot of difficulty selling it at first, as its potential was not realised by those in charge of the army, and merely saw a heavy apparatus that required a lot of maintenance and was difficult to move with the infantry.

TheSGC wrote:I will say this though, which is relevant to both Catachans and Mordian examples: culture won't save you when an autogun shell has your name on it - only a flak vest can do that. SM seem to be realizing this in the fluff recently.

Absolutely!
All I'm saying is that it's not unrealistic for GW to have such armies in the setting. It simply reflects the respective people's traditions and level of advancement.
In WW2, a lot of countries still had cavalry formations. Obviously that didn't help much against German panzers - but it's a precedent for what we see in 40k.

Don't underestimate a regiment like the Attilan Rough Riders, though! Depending on who and where they fight, they can be quite effective.

Kain wrote:I suppose I can continue to mystify you with my own avatar much as how Melissa probably mystified you when she had her old troll Avatar.

Now I feel kind of lost. Is there a joke I'm not getting?

 Kain wrote:

 Lynata wrote:
Now that you mention it ... yes, Balalaika is awesome.

Kain wrote:...No...no it doesn't.

I suppose you could say it's an insider for those who know the series.

I suppose I can continue to mystify you with my own avatar much as how Melissa probably mystified you when she had her old troll Avatar.

Out of curiosity, see the clips?
All together it's only 8 minutes.

 Lynata wrote:


Now I feel kind of lost. Is there a joke I'm not getting?

You have no idea how hard it is to resist the urge to post a "Let me tell you about homestuck" image right now.

 Kain wrote:

 Lynata wrote:


Now I feel kind of lost. Is there a joke I'm not getting?

You have no idea how hard it is to resist the urge to post a "Let me tell you about homestuck" image right now.

Looked it up............
Yeah about those clips, they're about a good $1mil in production costs, filled with awesome, and only 8 minutes.
You see em?
Edit: I like to keep away from strangely drawn webcomics with massive fanbases.

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:
Honestly surprised no one's made mention of my avatar, It fits the discussion so well.

I'm old and my eyes are going. Your avatar looks just like every other anime/anime-esque thing rendered in a three-quarter-inch scale: a blur of colors and some incomprehensible text to a thing I've never seen, don't understand, and am vaguely disturbed by.

 Psienesis wrote:

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:
Honestly surprised no one's made mention of my avatar, It fits the discussion so well.

I'm old and my eyes are going. Your avatar looks just like every other anime/anime-esque thing rendered in a three-quarter-inch scale: a blur of colors and some incomprehensible text to a thing I've never seen, don't understand, and am vaguely disturbed by.

Do I fit that bill?

The clips were eight minutes long and couldn't have been more on topic, but whatever.
Back on subject:
Average woman in a swordfight or good ole fashioned melee? Naw. Trained Women with guns? Yeah happens all the time.

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:
The clips were eight minutes long and couldn't have been more on topic, but whatever.
Back on subject:
Average woman in a swordfight or good ole fashioned melee? Naw. Trained Women with guns? Yeah happens all the time.

Joan of Arc, Hua Mulan, Tomoe Gozen, Stiglata, Boudica, Achilia and many others would beg to differ.

Well, he did say average woman - and I take it that this means "no training". Not to mention the emotional aspects of confidence and zeal, something any soldier benefits from.

As the lady I linked earlier, who managed to beat several male competitors in the longsword competition, proves, training is rather important.

 Kain wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:
Honestly surprised no one's made mention of my avatar, It fits the discussion so well.

I'm old and my eyes are going. Your avatar looks just like every other anime/anime-esque thing rendered in a three-quarter-inch scale: a blur of colors and some incomprehensible text to a thing I've never seen, don't understand, and am vaguely disturbed by.

Do I fit that bill?

I see a lot of blue and white, some dynamic swooshes, and some teenaged boy in glasses that is probably a wizard or something.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:
The clips were eight minutes long and couldn't have been more on topic, but whatever.
Back on subject:
Average woman in a swordfight or good ole fashioned melee? Naw. Trained Women with guns? Yeah happens all the time.

Joan of Arc, Hua Mulan, Tomoe Gozen, Stiglata, Boudica, Achilia and many others would beg to differ.

Joan of Arc was a horrible fighter. I already said this, there is a difference between commanding on the battlefield at the safest place in a formation and personally killing 10 guys per battle like Alexander the Great who fought on the front lines, bragging about how he had tons of scars on his front but none on his back.
She never killed a man and would get in real trouble real fast if she lost her formations and it was just her and an enemy.
I thought you wrote a book?
Her whole shtick was her purity.
Apparently Hua Mulan is a (as far as any historian knows) a fictional character in a poem.
Tomoe Gozen was a concubine (necessary to have a body not typical of a warrior).....
Boudica went out pretty poorly, and is another example of not commanding on the front line.

Unrelated, but seriously berserkers were apparently an actual unit.
There was the berserker at Stamford bridge............
http://www.badassoftheweek.com/stamfordbridge.html

Can we please not get in to that argument again?

It got threads locked the first fourty times, and surprisingly it hasn't gotten any better with age.

Regardless of your opinions on IRL matters, the fact remains, the Imperium as a general whole doesn't give a gak about what gender you are. You are meat to be thrown in to the grinder. A number in the system. Human resources-- fit for strip-mining.

 Kain wrote:
You have no idea how hard it is to resist the urge to post a "Let me tell you about homestuck" image right now.

Don't do it. Don't give in to the dark side.

Be strong, Kain.

 Melissia wrote:
Can we please not get in to that argument again?

It got threads locked the first fourty times, and surprisingly it hasn't gotten any better with age.

Regardless of your opinions on IRL matters, the fact remains, the Imperium as a general whole doesn't give a gak about what gender you are. You are meat to be thrown in to the grinder. A number in the system. Human resources-- fit for strip-mining.

 Kain wrote:
You have no idea how hard it is to resist the urge to post a "Let me tell you about homestuck" image right now.

Don't do it. Don't give in to the dark side.

Be strong, Kain.

We're on Dakka, threads like this will continued to be locked because they go on past "normal humans are fodder to almost everything so the more bodies the better/ thread" answer that's correct and perfectly reasonable.

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:
The clips were eight minutes long and couldn't have been more on topic, but whatever.
Back on subject:
Average woman in a swordfight or good ole fashioned melee? Naw. Trained Women with guns? Yeah happens all the time.

Joan of Arc, Hua Mulan, Tomoe Gozen, Stiglata, Boudica, Achilia and many others would beg to differ.

Joan of Arc was a horrible fighter. I already said this, there is a difference between commanding on the battlefield at the safest place in a formation and personally killing 10 guys per battle like Alexander the Great who fought on the front lines, bragging about how he had tons of scars on his front but none on his back.
She never killed a man and would get in real trouble real fast if she lost her formations and it was just her and an enemy.
I thought you wrote a book?
Her whole shtick was her purity.
Apparently Hua Mulan is a (as far as any historian knows) a fictional character in a poem.
Tomoe Gozen was a concubine (necessary to have a body not typical of a warrior).....
Boudica went out pretty poorly, and is another example of not commanding on the front line.

Unrelated, but seriously berserkers were apparently an actual unit.
There was the berserker at Stamford bridge............
http://www.badassoftheweek.com/stamfordbridge.html

Joan of Arc fought and killed people by the sword. She only had a month or two of training. I'd say that was pretty good when going against professional soldiers.
Tomoe Gozen was widely known for her lethality with the sword. One of her most famous deeds was pulling a man off his horse and cutting his head off in combat. She was a famous warrior and a concubine. Not mutually exclusive.
Hua Mulan, legend yes, but also not as rare as you'd think. At that time along the border of the China, women were trained in combat. There were several legends of Chinese women entering combat so chances are, Mulan came from an actual instance of a woman soldier rising through the ranks. (Almost every war has instances of that happening.)

And next time you should find out the actual history make sure you're right before being so condescending and dismissive.

 Psienesis wrote:

 Kain wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:
Honestly surprised no one's made mention of my avatar, It fits the discussion so well.

I'm old and my eyes are going. Your avatar looks just like every other anime/anime-esque thing rendered in a three-quarter-inch scale: a blur of colors and some incomprehensible text to a thing I've never seen, don't understand, and am vaguely disturbed by.

Do I fit that bill?

I see a lot of blue and white, some dynamic swooshes, and some teenaged boy in glasses that is probably a wizard or something.

Close, he's a god.

 Melissia wrote:
Can we please not get in to that argument again?

It got threads locked the first fourty times, and surprisingly it hasn't gotten any better with age.

Regardless of your opinions on IRL matters, the fact remains, the Imperium as a general whole doesn't give a gak about what gender you are. You are meat to be thrown in to the grinder. A number in the system. Human resources-- fit for strip-mining.

 Kain wrote:
You have no idea how hard it is to resist the urge to post a "Let me tell you about homestuck" image right now.

Don't do it. Don't give in to the dark side.

Be strong, Kain.

You're right.

A digression to explain Homestuck to the uninitiated would derail the thread even further.

So about them Scythian warrior women...

Gods fall under the "or something" category. I was spot-on.

Having a spot of trouble finding it from my work PC, but I was recently linked to an article about a woman winning some major swordfighting tournament (not fencing, medieval longsword fighting, in plate armor and all), which I will (if and when I find it) post here to expand on the concept that swordfighting as a men-only club is a fallacy. It's buried in my FB feed somewhere, I'm sure.

And whether or not Joan of Arc ever personally fought in combat is still being debated by historians. There's a lot about that girl we simply don't know.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:
The clips were eight minutes long and couldn't have been more on topic, but whatever.
Back on subject:
Average woman in a swordfight or good ole fashioned melee? Naw. Trained Women with guns? Yeah happens all the time.

Joan of Arc, Hua Mulan, Tomoe Gozen, Stiglata, Boudica, Achilia and many others would beg to differ.

Joan of Arc was a horrible fighter. I already said this, there is a difference between commanding on the battlefield at the safest place in a formation and personally killing 10 guys per battle like Alexander the Great who fought on the front lines, bragging about how he had tons of scars on his front but none on his back.
She never killed a man and would get in real trouble real fast if she lost her formations and it was just her and an enemy.
I thought you wrote a book?
Her whole shtick was her purity.
Apparently Hua Mulan is a (as far as any historian knows) a fictional character in a poem.
Tomoe Gozen was a concubine (necessary to have a body not typical of a warrior).....
Boudica went out pretty poorly, and is another example of not commanding on the front line.

Unrelated, but seriously berserkers were apparently an actual unit.
There was the berserker at Stamford bridge............
http://www.badassoftheweek.com/stamfordbridge.html

Joan of Arc fought and killed people by the sword. She only had a month or two of training. I'd say that was pretty good when going against professional soldiers.
Tomoe Gozen was widely known for her lethality with the sword. One of her most famous deeds was pulling a man off his horse and cutting his head off in combat. She was a famous warrior and a concubine. Not mutually exclusive.
Hua Mulan, legend yes, but also not as rare as you'd think. At that time along the border of the China, women were trained in combat. There were several legends of Chinese women entering combat so chances are, Mulan came from an actual instance of a woman soldier rising through the ranks. (Almost every war has instances of that happening.)

And next time you should find out the actual history make sure you're right before being so condescending and dismissive.

It's well known Joan of Arc technically never killed anyone (on the battlefield or murdering)
http://www.history.com/news/7-things-you-didnt-know-about-joan-of-arc
Her own Words: But I loved my banner forty times better than my sword. And when I went against the enemy, I carried my banner myself, lest I kill any. I have never killed a man." In Her Own Words, p. 27

"...I loved that sword, because it was found in the church of St. Catherine, whom I loved."
You're wrong friend.

"Well known" doesn't mean that it's a fact. Pardon me for invoking Godwin's Law, but something like eighty years ago it was "well known" that the Nazis were upstanding guys.

 Psienesis wrote:
Having a spot of trouble finding it from my work PC, but I was recently linked to an article about a woman winning some major swordfighting tournament (not fencing, medieval longsword fighting, in plate armor and all), which I will (if and when I find it) post here to expand on the concept that swordfighting as a men-only club is a fallacy. It's buried in my FB feed somewhere, I'm sure.

Goes by the stage name of "Samantha Swords".

She also designed her own swords, though it doesn't say if she forged them herself (probably not).

 Melissia wrote:
"Well known" doesn't mean that it's a fact. Pardon me for invoking Godwin's Law, but something like eighty years ago it was "well known" that the Nazis were upstanding guys.

 Psienesis wrote:
Having a spot of trouble finding it from my work PC, but I was recently linked to an article about a woman winning some major swordfighting tournament (not fencing, medieval longsword fighting, in plate armor and all), which I will (if and when I find it) post here to expand on the concept that swordfighting as a men-only club is a fallacy. It's buried in my FB feed somewhere, I'm sure.

Goes by the stage name of "Samantha Swords".

She also designed her own swords, though it doesn't say if she forged them herself (probably not).

These are her own words. Come on she was a teenager during most of those fights and like 4'11-5'2.
Edit: Sword wasn't a claymore or bastard sword. My mistake. To the unitiated claymores are a good 20 pounds.
Edit: Well mine is but it's gold, silver and platinum plated and 57 inches long.

Yes, those are her own swords. She designed them personally.

As for claymores, they aren't that hard to wield. You need to become acclimated to a style useful with larger swords is all.

 Melissia wrote:
"Well known" doesn't mean that it's a fact. Pardon me for invoking Godwin's Law, but something like eighty years ago it was "well known" that the Nazis were upstanding guys.

 Psienesis wrote:
Having a spot of trouble finding it from my work PC, but I was recently linked to an article about a woman winning some major swordfighting tournament (not fencing, medieval longsword fighting, in plate armor and all), which I will (if and when I find it) post here to expand on the concept that swordfighting as a men-only club is a fallacy. It's buried in my FB feed somewhere, I'm sure.

Goes by the stage name of "Samantha Swords".

She also designed her own swords, though it doesn't say if she forged them herself (probably not).

Exactly the one I was talking about, thanks.

ETA: History-dot-Com is owned by the same company that produces the History Channel that provides equal credence to alien ancestry theorists as it does actual archaeologists, so pardon me if I don't take anything they post as fact, but simply the results of their often-shoddy research.

 Melissia wrote:
Yes, those are her own swords. She designed them personally.

As for claymores, they aren't that hard to wield. You need to become acclimated to a style useful with larger swords is all.

I said those were her own words not swords. Still referring to Joan of Arc.
I also think you might be a "little" taller and stronger than Joan of Arc.
I don't like longswords because they don't have real power or length. They're also a bit too heavy when adorned to be wielded with skill and (lightning/ theatrical) quickness.

The actual, two-handed claymore (c. 1400-1700 AD) didn't weigh 20 pounds, more like a quarter of that. What makes them "unwieldy" is their length, requiring getting used to sweeping gestures rather than rapid chops or thrusts.

And while 20 pounds is heavy, it wouldn't be impossible to wield. And I don't think she would have used a sword that big in the first place. She would have used a different sword.

 Grey Templar wrote:
And while 20 pounds is heavy, it wouldn't be impossible to wield. And I don't think she would have used a sword that big in the first place. She would have used a different sword.

It would be impossible to wield one handed. The weight and distribution of a very heavy, lengthy sword makes it dramatically more difficult than swinging a similar weight object. You'd need to be a strongman to do that effectively in a fight. There are a lot more factors with two handing than just two hands to share the weight.

 Grey Templar wrote:
And while 20 pounds is heavy, it wouldn't be impossible to wield. And I don't think she would have used a sword that big in the first place. She would have used a different sword.

I don't think there are any twenty pound swords. Even huge Zweihanders weighed less than ten, tops.

 Kain wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
And while 20 pounds is heavy, it wouldn't be impossible to wield. And I don't think she would have used a sword that big in the first place. She would have used a different sword.

I don't think there are any twenty pound swords. Even huge Zweihanders weighed less than ten, tops.

Again mine is gold, silver, and platinum plated, 57 inches long, with a 3 1/2 inch wide blade, with a hilariously ornate massive guard and pommel.

That's a wall-hanger, though, not something meant to be used in actual combat.

Regardless, Joan of Arc wouldn't have carried a claymore, ever. Even if she had been a real-life Brienne of Tarth, the claymore is a Scottish weapon, she was French, and she lived during the time of its earliest incarnations. The French would not yet have imported and replicated its design.

So yours isn't a real sword, it's more of a mantlepiece.

Probably has a rat-tail tang, too.

 Melissia wrote:
So yours isn't a real sword, it's more of a mantlepiece.

Probably has a rat-tail tang, too.

That's a pretty big insult to a sword. It's not I've abused it constantly. Made of 540 steel, with a full tang, with some beautiful heat tempering.

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:
That's a pretty big insult to a sword

Not everything is a functional piece of equipment . A twenty pound sword is anything but functional.

I bet a space marine could use that sword just fine. That sword is 38,000 years ahead of its time!

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
So yours isn't a real sword, it's more of a mantlepiece.

Probably has a rat-tail tang, too.

That's a pretty big insult to a sword. It's not I've abused it constantly. Made of 540 steel, with a full tang, with some beautiful heat tempering.

It's still twice as heavy as the largest swords that ever actually saw combat.

Rosie the riveter for the Imperial Guard



PFC Jenette Vasquez

Now that's the way GW needs to make the IG females look.

Nah, that's how female Catatchan need to look. That'd look silly in a Cadian army.

 Soo'Vah'Cha wrote:
Rosie the riveter for the Imperial Guard



PFC Jenette Vasquez

Now that's the way GW needs to make the IG females look.

Not how Valhallan women would look.

The one on the right is a female.

I can't see her massive breasts and apple-bottom ass, so that can't be right.

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:


Edit: Sword wasn't a claymore or bastard sword. My mistake. To the unitiated claymores are a good 20 pounds.
Edit: Well mine is but it's gold, silver and platinum plated and 57 inches long.

Claymores weighed maybe 6.5 pounds, tops. What the hell kind of sword would weigh twenty? All that decoration on your mantlepiece more than triples the weight.

 Bobthehero wrote:


The one on the right is a female.

That can't be right, my comic books tell me all women have impossibly perky double Ds, bubble butts and hour glass figures.

Gotcha.

 Arcsquad12 wrote:

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:


Edit: Sword wasn't a claymore or bastard sword. My mistake. To the unitiated claymores are a good 20 pounds.
Edit: Well mine is but it's gold, silver and platinum plated and 57 inches long.

Claymores weighed maybe 6.5 pounds, tops. What the hell kind of sword would weigh twenty? All that decoration on your mantlepiece more than triples the weight.

And even then 6.5 pounds is on the heavy side.

My arming sword is a meter long and its about 3 pounds, and the blade is very broad a claymore is not twice as long/the blade is probably narrower.

 Arcsquad12 wrote:

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:


Edit: Sword wasn't a claymore or bastard sword. My mistake. To the unitiated claymores are a good 20 pounds.
Edit: Well mine is but it's gold, silver and platinum plated and 57 inches long.

Claymores weighed maybe 6.5 pounds, tops. What the hell kind of sword would weigh twenty? All that decoration on your mantlepiece more than triples the weight.

Yeah, that's my point. It's not a real sword, it's a mantlepiece shaped like a sword.

OK, now you've gone done it.
I dug this out of an old archive of mine.



The photo is terrible, but hopefully it illustrates my point. It's a model I converted years ago to be a female Caidan officer. Minimalist conversion, I just changed the head, and adjusted the torso and top of the legs to give it a bit of a waist.

I like to think it turned out reasonably well, given that I didn't spend too much time on it. The important thing is that he baggy nature of the clothes means the legs, boots and arms don't need modification, the hand are quite small anyway. So doing female Cadians, while not just a head-swap away, is quite easy.

The painting could use some work, but the modeling is fine I think.

Yeah, maybe a bit of a fill-coat for the paint, but I think the modelling job looks pretty perfect for a Cadian/Cadian-equivalent type of IG Regiment.

 Pendix wrote:
OK, now you've gone done it.
I dug this out of an old archive of mine.



The photo is terrible, but hopefully it illustrates my point. It's a model I converted years ago to be a female Caidan officer. Minimalist conversion, I just changed the head, and adjusted the torso and top of the legs to give it a bit of a waist.

I like to think it turned out reasonably well, given that I didn't spend too much time on it. The important thing is that he baggy nature of the clothes means the legs, boots and arms don't need modification, the hand are quite small anyway. So doing female Cadians, while not just a head-swap away, is quite easy.

Ah, perfect. Now, if GW just starts churning these out like crazy.

 Arcsquad12 wrote:

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:


Edit: Sword wasn't a claymore or bastard sword. My mistake. To the unitiated claymores are a good 20 pounds.
Edit: Well mine is but it's gold, silver and platinum plated and 57 inches long.

Claymores weighed maybe 6.5 pounds, tops. What the hell kind of sword would weigh twenty? All that decoration on your mantlepiece more than triples the weight.

Tops? Naw, but 20 pounds is not a sword meant to be swung at someone.

As I said, it's just a mantlepiece. It's really not difficult to swing a properly made sword, and if you're physically fit, it's not difficult to do so for an extended time, either.

 Melissia wrote:
As I said, it's just a mantlepiece. It's really not difficult to swing a properly made sword, and if you're physically fit, it's not difficult to do so for an extended time, either.

And as said, that's because a proper sword doesn't follow D&D for weights. A late German Zweihander only weighs 2-3 kg. They used heavier versions for ceremonial things like parades and such (up to 4,5 kg), but even the Germans call those "bearing-swords" or "parade-swords" (Paratschwert).

Weapons for practical use need be light enough that a "normal" person can use them. Same goes for lasguns - if an average male can use one it's not too hard for an average female either. The huge amount of other stuff you get to carry is the main problem for any troops expected to move by foot anywhere. And that's where so-called boot camp comes in. You not only learn to wear your uniform properly, you also train your strength enough that the gear moves with you. I wasn't a very muscular man when I started my mandatory service but I did move all my stuff from the warehouse to the barracks, with some difficulty. A woman weaker than me might have needed help. After basic training I could move it all to my next assignment, military police training, with no difficulty. A woman would have gained enough muscle to manage it too providing she got through basic. And when I got out it was easy to carry it all back to the warehouse.

Point? The tithe to the Imperial Guard is usually not raw conscripts, they're the best of the planetary PDF. If there's women in the group they've done basic training and proved they can pull their weight.

You guys missed a few female guard minis, so I'll just toss these here:
http://www.solegends.com/citrt/rt501imperials1.htm
Trooper Trewevas is female (picture doesn't make it clear, but I have the mini and it's a much better scuplt than the official paint job makes it look - one of my favourites from Rogue Trader actually)
http://www.solegends.com/citrt/rt501imperials2.htm
Troopers Rutherford (serious looking guardswoman, formerly calle 'Trooper Vaskez') and Bush (Rogue Trader era pinup).
http://www.solegends.com/citcat19911/c2041impguard-02.htm
The Vasquez style character in the bottom right, labelled "autocannon" (looks more like a multilaser of some sort to me, and I have this figure - find she looks like Sigourney Weaver if she was a member of the flathead dynasty from Zork).
I think that's all of them.

 Melissia wrote:
As I said, it's just a mantlepiece. It's really not difficult to swing a properly made sword, and if you're physically fit, it's not difficult to do so for an extended time, either.

It is properly made though. The 540 steel, full tan,1 mm edge. It just so happens to also be very pretty and big. When I first got it I used it as an axe to cut down a pine tree. It's that tough.
6.5 pounds for a claymore max? That's under. The sword is really more of a zweihander than anything else.

It's 20 pounds. That's not properly made.

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:
6.5 pounds for a claymore max? That's under. The sword is really more of a zweihander than anything else.

Well, some historical accounts do claim heroic individuals used heavier swords. But those are heroes - like the Frisian hero who was supposed to have used a sword 84'' (213cm) long weighing 14,5lbs (about 6,6 kg). An exceptional warrior could surely use something extraordinary, but "normal" people don't. A desperate individual could ofc also use one of those ceremonial swords (Paratenschwerts) made to look impressive instead of being useful on the battlefield. They were still sharpened after all, and such a thing hitting you would have hurt a lot.

It's really no different from the rifles people use today. Most of us will be happy with an assault rifle weighing a few kg, Rambo picks up a machine gun.

 Melissia wrote:
It's 20 pounds. That's not properly made.

When you can use a sword to cut down an average sized pine tree, In an effort taking 25 minutes, I think it's well made.
I'm 6'2 and 200 lbs. I'll use my overweight sword with pride.

Swords aren't made to cut down trees.

So no, cutting down a tree in 25 minutes isn't really an indication that it's well made.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Swords aren't made to cut down trees.

So no, cutting down a tree in 25 minutes isn't really an indication that it's well made.

Trees are tougher than people to say the least. It implies it can go through people really easily. It also shows how tough it is, and the sheer abuse it can take.
Assuming you have the strength to use it, these factors add up to a functional sword.

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:
It implies it can go through people really easily.

I could cut through a limb given twenty five minutes and a kitchen knife (not necessarily a particularly sharp one, either). That means nothing.

Frankly, if you're using a sword to cut down a tree, you deserve to have the sword taken away from you.

Considering that most sword fights last like, 25 seconds far as I've heard, I don't think cutting someone down in 25 minutes is particularly practical.

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:
[When you can use a sword to cut down an average sized pine tree, In an effort taking 25 minutes, I think it's well made.

It goes down in a minute with a proper axe, or less with a chainsaw. 25 minutes is crappy as hell far as woodcutting goes.

And even if you as a very large and muscular guy is fine with swinging a too-heavy sword, that's not what they made back when they used those things for real. They have very few real samples over 8 lbs in weight, and most of those haven't been used except for ceremony.

20 lbs sword and you are 6'2" and 200 lbs... and you swung it for 25 minutes? COOL STORY BRO!

I live fight with live steel in armor. My sword is 4 lbs roughly. I wear about 10 lbs, maybe a little less in armor. I train once a week. I run daily. My longest Melee was about 5 minutes long, and I need to rest.

My other stupid sport is MilSim Paintball. I use a RAP4 T68, which is a clip fed paintball gun. My weapon is kitted out an looks and functions like a M4a1, and it weights right are 6.7 lbs. I then carry about 20 lbs of extra ammo, airtank, camelpack ect. Once again, I train for this stuff by jogging daily.

With all this.. I wouldn't even pick up a 20 lbs sword. I mean feth at that length alone...
What you are saying is you can hold a Fire Extinguisher out, at arms length.. for a prolonged period of time.. and then use it as a hammer... for 25 minutes.

Now if you said. My name is Arnold, I am 6'2" and weight 280 lbs.... I might believe you, and then ask what it was like to be mister universe in the 1970s.

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
It's 20 pounds. That's not properly made.

When you can use a sword to cut down an average sized pine tree, In an effort taking 25 minutes, I think it's well made.
I'm 6'2 and 200 lbs. I'll use my overweight sword with pride.

Swords are noted as being some of the few weapons of war that are only actually good for human to human combat. They're not good for hunting, nor do they have uses for wood cutting, butchery or farming. Also, why do you need to be cutting down random trees? Did Trees kill your parents? Have you taken to dressing in intimidating outfits to play on the fact that Trees are a superstitious and cowardly lot?

You must be some kind of Superhero to swing a twenty pound sword for a half hour.

He's Durkon Thundershield relative

 Bobthehero wrote:
He's Durkon Thundershield relative

Hah! I need to catch up on OOTS.

I am also having a hard time even figuring out how the hell you can fit 20 lbs of metal into a 6 foot long blade. Assuming it is 6 feet long. I mean this claymore is either made out of PURE platinum... which means it is worth half a million dollars, or its made of star metal....

Even a pound of platinum, which costs about 25,000, is probably out of the question. The Heaviest claymore I can find on a quick search is 7 pounds... and gak hold that out at arms length for more than a minute...

TiamatRoar wrote:
Considering that most sword fights last like, 25 seconds far as I've heard, I don't think cutting someone down in 25 minutes is particularly practical.

Well I could expect stupidity this is too much.
If you swung this thing full force it would cut a large man in two. That same blow would have to be applied to a pine tree in the same spot a good 100 times.
People don't resort to stupid arguments just because you dont agree unless your frontal lobes really are that challenged.
I also remassed the zweihander and it's 14.5 pounds.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 thegrav wrote:
I am also having a hard time even figuring out how the hell you can fit 20 lbs of metal into a 6 foot long blade. Assuming it is 6 feet long. I mean this claymore is either made out of PURE platinum... which means it is worth half a million dollars, or its made of star metal....

Even a pound of platinum, which costs about 25,000, is probably out of the question. The Heaviest claymore I can find on a quick search is 7 pounds... and gak hold that out at arms length for more than a minute...

It's 57 inches long. It also has a massive ornate guard weighing more than the blade. There are way too many factors in a sword to look at it like you are.

That is still TWICE as heavy as it should be, and EVERY replica sword I have ever seen is lighter. Replica companies LOVE cheap/light materials.

And You wouldn't "cut a guy in half" with a heavy mass sword, you would smash and bash and tear and rip apart. Light, thin, sharp swords will cut through flesh and bone. I mean an Ulfberht, which is a ~1000 ad sword is 2.6 lbs and just that fact that it was Damascus crucible steel it would cut through European swords, chainmail, and at times shatter full plate armor.

Sword fighting has NOTHING to do with "ZOMG GUYS MY SWORD IS POWERLEVEL 9000!" and more about material, weight and training. A physically fit/trained swords person, in this case one of my friends Tina, with a Ulfberht could hack a person into bits with her "weak woman weight sword" before you could even think about picking up you 14 lb chunk of steel.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:


It's 57 inches long. It also has a massive ornate guard weighing more than the blade. There are way too many factors in a sword to look at it like you are.

I don't know anyone that would ever fight with that thing... ever. For any reason.

 thegrav wrote:
That is still TWICE as heavy as it should be, and EVERY replica sword I have ever seen is lighter. Replica companies LOVE cheap/light materials.

And You wouldn't "cut a guy in half" with a heavy mass sword, you would smash and bash and tear and rip apart. Light, thin, sharp swords will cut through flesh and bone. I mean an Ulfberht, which is a ~1000 ad sword is 2.6 lbs and just that fact that it was Damascus crucible steel it would cut through European swords, chainmail, and at times shatter full plate armor.

Sword fighting has NOTHING to do with "ZOMG GUYS MY SWORD IS POWERLEVEL 9000!" and more about material, weight and training. A physically fit/trained swords person, in this case one of my friends Tina, with a Ulfberht could hack a person into bits with her "weak woman weight sword" before you could even think about picking up you 14 lb chunk of steel.

It's not a replica, I don't know why you're assuming this.
I also made mention of the fact that it's a mm thick blade. Read the posts before you start an argument on a wargaming forum. It will go through a man very easily with that much weight.
Weight and sharpness go together quite nicely to say the least. They add on to the force applied.
And that's not twice what it should be for a zweihander. More like 1.4 times.

And 57 inches is ~ 4 feet 8 inches.

 thegrav wrote:
And 57 inches is ~ 4 feet 8 inches.

You made that mistake not me. Nowhere did I ever say it was 6 feet long.
I'm actually pretty strong. It isn't much of a burden at all really.

You do not have a 600 year old, 14 lbs sword. Especially since the sword we are talking about topped off at around 7 lbs (btw 7 x 2 is 14 lbs... ). Its a replica. Don't assume you can tell someone who sword fights you know what you are talking about, on a war gaming forum.

 thegrav wrote:
You do not have a 600 year old, 14 lbs sword. Especially since the sword we are talking about topped off at around 7 lbs (btw 7 x 2 is 14 lbs... ). Its a replica. Don't assume you can tell someone who sword fights you know what you are talking about, on a war gaming forum.

You know what a replica is right......It's a sword modeled after another sword. You're not using that word correctly in the first place. I don't know what you mean by top off. Heroes and kings would have much more ornate swords still expected to see use.
This isn't meant to be a historical replica. It's meant to be a sword made by new age artisans and smiths to make the best sword possible with new materials.
You make assumptions in an argument about my personal gak. There's no way you can do that accurately in your argument. You're not very good at this arguing business.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 thegrav wrote:
You do not have a 600 year old, 14 lbs sword. Especially since the sword we are talking about topped off at around 7 lbs (btw 7 x 2 is 14 lbs... ). Its a replica. Don't assume you can tell someone who sword fights you know what you are talking about, on a war gaming forum.

Now you're actually off topic in the argument. None of this stops it from being pretty, absurdly durable, and being able to cut large men in two.

"Replica" swords mean the same thing as the "replica" rifles used by Civil War re-enactors. We're using black-powder rifles that are mimics of/copies of those carried in the 1860s... but are not, themselves, from the 1860s. They're fully-functional, but they are not M1861 Springfields.

And the weapon you described is most certainly a sword of modern manufacture. Europe didn't develop platinum usage until the 16th/17th century. That was something the Conquistadors in South America brought back with them. The odds of seeing this appear, in quantity, on a sword are very slim, especially considering that Europe doesn't *have* any platinum mines.

 Psienesis wrote:
"Replica" swords mean the same thing as the "replica" rifles used by Civil War re-enactors. We're using black-powder rifles that are mimics of/copies of those carried in the 1860s... but are not, themselves, from the 1860s. They're fully-functional, but they are not M1861 Springfields.

And the weapon you described is most certainly a sword of modern manufacture. Europe didn't develop platinum usage until the 16th/17th century. That was something the Conquistadors in South America brought back with them. The odds of seeing this appear, in quantity, on a sword are very slim, especially considering that Europe doesn't *have* any platinum mines.

I never said it was historical and I just said in the last post, it was meant to be the prettiest, most durable, sharpest thing you could get with modern materials.
Did you read the comments or are you talking to grav?

Before I start snickering, I'd just like to know ...

Is it made of stainless steel?

 Lynata wrote:
Before I start snickering, I'd just like to know ...

Is it made of stainless steel?

540 isn't stainless. I mentioned the material a good 4 times.

I am guessing... "It is made of pure carbon and SMASHES through planets."

 thegrav wrote:
I am guessing... "It is made of pure carbon and SMASHES through planets."

How big is the blade? Damn. Carbon structure alone doesn't determine strength, if it did diamond would be the strongest material in every way. You do know this right?

You just lost 10 internets, dude.

 thegrav wrote:
You just lost 10 internets, dude.

What are you referring to?
The only thing I see is the smashing instead of cutting argument you made earlier. Which is wrong.
Ahh it's a meme. My rocket is made of pure carbon and smashes through planets.
How do I lose points for not recognizing useless internet junk?

As.;... amuuuuuuuuuusing (and sad) as this conversation is, weren't we talking about guardspeople of the feminine persuasion earlier?

 Melissia wrote:
As.;... amuuuuuuuuuusing (and sad) as this conversation is, weren't we talking about guardspeople of the feminine persuasion earlier?

Again the topic should have ended at "the more bodies the better/ thread".
You've also been in stupider arguments and this one is already at a close by the time you're positing.

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:

TiamatRoar wrote:
Considering that most sword fights last like, 25 seconds far as I've heard, I don't think cutting someone down in 25 minutes is particularly practical.

Well I could expect stupidity this is too much.
If you swung this thing full force it would cut a large man in two. That same blow would have to be applied to a pine tree in the same spot a good 100 times.
People don't resort to stupid arguments just because you dont agree unless your frontal lobes really are that challenged.
I also remassed the zweihander and it's 14.5 pounds.

.

You obviously know nothing about sword fighting. Only a fool would try to swing a sword full force in a real sword fight. That's suicide. Sometimes an answer seems "stupid" because it is an answer given to someone who is ignorant and too foolish to realize it.

TiamatRoar wrote:

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:

TiamatRoar wrote:
Considering that most sword fights last like, 25 seconds far as I've heard, I don't think cutting someone down in 25 minutes is particularly practical.

Well I could expect stupidity this is too much.
If you swung this thing full force it would cut a large man in two. That same blow would have to be applied to a pine tree in the same spot a good 100 times.
People don't resort to stupid arguments just because you dont agree unless your frontal lobes really are that challenged.
I also remassed the zweihander and it's 14.5 pounds.

.

You obviously know nothing about sword fighting. Only a fool would try to swing a sword full force in a real sword fight. That's suicide. Sometimes an answer seems "stupid" because it is an answer given to someone who is ignorant and too foolish to realize it.

Hi, guys, as cool as sword fighting is (and it is, especially when neither fighter knows that the other is not really left-handed), can we please keep this on the topic of persons of non-male persuasion in the Imperial Guard? Thanks.

TiamatRoar wrote:

 TheSaintofKilllers wrote:

TiamatRoar wrote:
Considering that most sword fights last like, 25 seconds far as I've heard, I don't think cutting someone down in 25 minutes is particularly practical.

Well I could expect stupidity this is too much.
If you swung this thing full force it would cut a large man in two. That same blow would have to be applied to a pine tree in the same spot a good 100 times.
People don't resort to stupid arguments just because you dont agree unless your frontal lobes really are that challenged.
I also remassed the zweihander and it's 14.5 pounds.

.

You obviously know nothing about sword fighting. Only a fool would try to swing a sword full force in a real sword fight. That's suicide. Sometimes an answer seems "stupid" because it is an answer given to someone who is ignorant and too foolish to realize it.

Someone's making assumptions about someone they don't know again...
I just said what would happen if I did. Not that I would ever do it in a fight. And the argument is unbelievably stupid, What the hell would that guy be made out of?
This is also getting reported. Enjoy .

Saint: I sword fight, I am not pulling ideas out of thin air. I am basing my thoughts and as you have decided to call them "arguments" on knowing the science of metallurgy and the martial practice of sword fighting. In the simplest medical relevant terms a heavy sword, for instance an executioners blade or a larger ax, don't cut. They crush the bone, dislocate anatomy and then tear the flesh. Often times heavier swords were not sharpened enough to "cleave a man in two" and often it took two or three swing to even cut off someones head. Even the Katana, which is the geek standard super sharp sword, wouldn't always cut straight through a limb. Our modern concept of beheading and dismembering the human body is a very Hollywood concept. I am no longer being sarcastic or an asshat here. This is just facts based on an understanding of armed combat with edged weapons and human anatomy and physiology.

I am not trying to say that, you personally, are wrong. What I am saying is that a lot of modern conversations on weapons and the understanding of how heavy they are, how sharp they are and what they do is all bs, because largely a Hollywood sword fight is much more interesting and romantic then a real exchange and crossing of blades.

Melissia: You are right...

 thegrav wrote:
Saint: I sword fight, I am not pulling ideas out of thin air. I am basing my thoughts and as you have decided to call them "arguments" on knowing the science of metallurgy and the martial practice of sword fighting. In the simplest medical relevant terms a heavy sword, for instance an executioners blade or a larger ax, don't cut. They crush the bone, dislocate anatomy and then tear the flesh. Often times heavier swords were not sharpened enough to "cleave a man in two" and often it took two or three swing to even cut off someones head. Even the Katana, which is the geek standard super sharp sword, wouldn't always cut straight through a limb. Our modern concept of beheading and dismembering the human body is a very Hollywood concept. I am no longer being sarcastic or an asshat here. This is just facts based on an understanding of armed combat with edged weapons and human anatomy and physiology.

I am not trying to say that, you personally, are wrong. What I am saying is that a lot of modern conversations on weapons and the understanding of how heavy they are, how sharp they are and what they do is all bs, because largely a Hollywood sword fight is much more interesting and romantic then a real exchange and crossing of blades.

Melissia: You are right...

I think a 20 pound sword with a 1 mm thick blade would cut really easily........
An argument is in debate terms a counter to someone's way of seeing something that says contrary.
Messed up a term again.
What evs, I'm done here.
The thread should have ended at the answer "the more bodies the better."

This is the last I will say of this ridiculous concept sword, that I doubt exists, purely based on how you have described it. 1 mm thick? That is .0375 of an inch. At about 15 inches that blade is going to start bending under its own weight. For comparison ~3/16th or .187 of an inch is about the average of how thick a European sword is at the hilt, and ~1/4 or .25 of an inch is the average thickness of a Katana at the hilt.

If you mean 1mm at the blade, that is a dull edge.

Speaking of the Millennium Falcon, IIRC I have maybe 10 - 12 Catachan Female metal models in my IG army. I think they are 3 different styles. But I could be wrong. Also I have been thinking of trying to kit bash my Dire Avengers to be all female. Just going off that Ripley kicks ass concept of wanting female war figs.

Enough with the Internet "sword"-waving. It's off-topic.

Or to quote myself - if the planetary PDF recruits women and they pass basic training there's no reason they couldn't be in the top percentage tithed to the Imperial Guard.

Even for us modern humans who have quite a bit more difference between males and females than, say Neanderthals, physical limits won't (automatically) stop a woman until you reach the very best Special Forces - and those would probably also disqualify 99,9% of Dakka posters automatically.

Slightly/somewhat on-topic, for those who like their armies to be made out of cheesecake, Raging Heroes has published a few updates to their TGG set lately. Definitely not in the same vein as a "realistic" set of minis, and not appropriate for someone looking to do a Cadian-style IG army....

.... but, hey, it's a big Imperium. If you have Planet Cheesecake, required to tithe to the IG, these are the units for you.

I'm also kind of fond of their Malinka character as a Commissar or Inquisitrix, mostly because she has flat-soled boots, and not some ridiculous heels.

Imperial Guardsmen die by the billions every second, in order to fill this quota, women have to be assigned to give births

I don't think Imperial Guard has women cause women can't give birth while fighting

In fact on most Imperial Worlds, women have to give birth to 5 sons or face sever punishments, in one planet, there was a prison of women who are chained down until they give birth to 10 sons

Citation needed.

Spetulhu wrote:Or to quote myself - if the planetary PDF recruits women and they pass basic training there's no reason they couldn't be in the top percentage tithed to the Imperial Guard.

Assuming that the world in question even is one of those that nominates the elite of its PDF. Although commendable and certainly in the spirit of the Emperor's decree, in the 5E Guard Codex this is just one of several methods by which the tithe in troops is paid. Some worlds hold huge contests, for others it is a question of birthright. Yet other planets send condemned prisoners to the Guard, and Necromundan regiments are recruited from the local hive gangs. In the 3E Guard 'dex, you have a letter from some guy who has been recruited into the IG straight from his farmstead. They literally hand you a lasgun, and training lasts for exactly as long as the transport takes until it reaches the warzone.

Even Cadia does not send its top performers for service in the Shock Troops but rather holds a lottery to determine who gets to remain on the planet and who will serve the Emperor elsewhere. Then again, if Cadia's reputation is to be trusted, the common rank-and-file soldier is easily the equal to a less developed or disciplined planet's elite.

There are probably half as many ways to become a Guardsman as there are planets.

marinekilla1 wrote:
I don't think Imperial Guard has women cause women can't give birth while fighting

Examples were, in fact, posted in this very thread!

 Lynata wrote:

marinekilla is probably a troll.

Hopefully. I'd hate to think otherwise.

Just to clarify for the guy spouting the baby machine nonsense. The Imperium does not need to pressure people to reproduce more, nor do they need to hold women from military service to make more babies. The Imperium is stated regularly to have an excess of people. There are worlds that recruit entirely on a voluntary basis, there are others (hive worlds for example) where they simply round up some of the millions to billions of excess unemployed unwanted people they have and sentence them to military service.
The Imperium maintains its numbers through self sustaining vast populations and by recruiting accross millions of worlds. Billions sacrificed everyday may seem like a lot until you realize that even if every pair of parents in the Imperium was producing only 2 to 3 kids (fairly standard numbers, at least for humans generally, one would expect that on most worlds the numbers would be higher) there would still be more than enough replacements being born.
Most Imperial worlds seem to actually have startlingly low mobilization rates, ie number in military compared to population (no citation, just thinking logically about the implications of having worlds of billions fielding a few million PDF and the like).

Melissia wrote:As.;... amuuuuuuuuuusing (and sad) as this conversation is, weren't we talking about guardspeople of the feminine persuasion earlier?

Melissa you're supposed to only use eight Us.

marinekilla1 wrote:Imperial Guardsmen die by the billions every second, in order to fill this quota, women have to be assigned to give births

I don't think Imperial Guard has women cause women can't give birth while fighting

In fact on most Imperial Worlds, women have to give birth to 5 sons or face sever punishments, in one planet, there was a prison of women who are chained down until they give birth to 10 sons

Lemme check through my novels, codices, and rulebooks.

Hmmm...nope, not a single reference to any such law in Imperial code.

And mixed gender regiments not only exist, but actually send the children that inevitably result from unions made over the permanent deployment most regiments have out into the field of fire to join their parents and older siblings once they reach the age of majority.

Effectively, an entire family will be going out to fight in the field of war, generation after generation, Father and Mother, Son and Daughter. It will keep on going until the family tree finally burns down in the field of battle.

Heck, the Tanith First and Only and Valhallan 597th, both well known regiments, are both mixed gender and the women are no less capable than the men. And if Ciaphas Cain is to be believed, the Commissar helps the new parents deal with well...being parents so that one day their children may join them and kill aliens and traitors for the Emperor.

Finally, the Imperium has nothing if not people to recruit in abundance. This is a polity with literally quadrillions if not quintillions of people with more being born every second than have ever lived on our Earth. The Imperium doesn't need to encourage births because it is already brimming with people.

In fact, only the Orks and Tyranids can be definitively said to outnumber the Imperium, everyone else is either iffy (no one is sure how many Necrons there really are), or definitively has significantly less manpower (Eldar, Tau, Chaos), and the Imperium continues to maintain a very positive growth rate population wise.

Kain wrote:And if Ciaphas Cain is to be believed

*snort*

Sorry, reflex.

 Lynata wrote:

Kain wrote:And if Ciaphas Cain is to be believed

*snort*

Sorry, reflex.

Ciaphas Cain is a somewhat satirical work you know. I always read it with the understanding that's it's a parody of 40k that realizes how fundamentally silly the entire premise is..

I read a lot of the sillier aspects of Cain as him bragging and inserting his own personal opinions while ignoring, forgetting, or just plain glossing over the facts, even if he refuses to admit it.

He is, after all, an inherently flawed and untrustworthy narrator.

 Melissia wrote:
I read a lot of the sillier aspects of Cain as him bragging and inserting his own personal opinions while ignoring, forgetting, or just plain glossing over the facts, even if he refuses to admit it.

Well that's an in-universe way of handling things.

Although I note Sandy hasn't touched the necrons post-retconning.

And now I kind of have to do mental gymnastics for why pariahs were on that Ice World.

You know - I would love Mitchell forever if he'd publish a book establishing that Cain's status as a Commissar was just a giant hoax; that he merely stole or otherwise appropriated the uniform to get out of some form of trouble, and then "just ran with it" when he got swept up in the Imperial war machinery. A 40k version of Germany's Captain of Köpenick, so to say. It would explain and save so many things.

Alas, never going to happen. But it would be oh so funny.

That would be hilarious, awesome, and epic.

And also totally within his character, too!

A lot of students in the Schola Progenium are orphans of Imperial Guardsmen. I always assumed that they came from male and female guardsmen relationships, although I suppose the chance of guardsmen having relationships off-duty is there, albeit slim in my opinion (since IG don't really get much off-duty time, I think)

They could also be children they had before they entered the Guard.

TiamatRoar wrote:
A lot of students in the Schola Progenium are orphans of Imperial Guardsmen. I always assumed that they came from male and female guardsmen relationships, although I suppose the chance of guardsmen having relationships off-duty is there, albeit slim in my opinion (since IG don't really get much off-duty time, I think)

If I recall correctly, Progenium students come from a wide variety of sources besides the IG. It can be any orphan whose parents were "Imperial servants", or something like that. Though, given the occupational hazard of being an IG, the profession would certainly contribute a lot.

 Kain wrote:
I always read it with the understanding that's it's a parody of 40k that realizes how fundamentally silly the entire premise is..

Probably the best way to go about reading it. I think it's easier to accept some of the more controversial stuff in there if you remember that one of thr author's main goals is to amuse the reader.

Mhm. Studio fluff unfortunately isn't very clear on who gets admitted into the Schola. It says "children of Imperial officials" and gives as examples the offspring of an IG Colonel as well as kids left behind by important Adepts who were ordered to transfer to a remote location. Whether or not the kids of some rank-and-file trooper would even be allowed into the Schola is questionable, especially as there is the Whiteshield fluff about a Guardsman's children being raised within the regiment and basically serving as direct reinforcements, born right into the grinder.

It could depend on social status (officers/nobility receiving preferential treatment, extending to their children), or it could depend on location/timing (Schola transfer only possible until the regiment leaves its homeworld), or both. It could even be different from one regiment to another (special deals with the Munitorum depending on the regiment's value and reputation), or depend on where exactly the regiment is deployed (availability of transport opportunities) ...

Several ways to interpret the material, I guess. I like the idea of the Schola being a bit selective and elitist when it comes to who is allowed in, but on the other hand the thought of a bunch of very young kids of common origin being herded through an odyssey spanning several planets, overcrowded transport nexuses and damp freighter hulls (including ample potential for raids, crippling/lethal accidents, slave trafficking or even simply "getting lost") until they finally arrive at the safe orphanage has a suitably grimdark ring to it, too.

 Lynata wrote:
Mhm. Studio fluff unfortunately isn't very clear on who gets admitted into the Schola. It says "children of Imperial officials" and gives as examples the offspring of an IG Colonel as well as kids left behind by important Adepts who were ordered to transfer to a remote location. Whether or not the kids of some rank-and-file trooper would even be allowed into the Schola is questionable, especially as there is the Whiteshield fluff about a Guardsman's children being raised within the regiment and basically serving as direct reinforcements, born right into the grinder.

It could depend on social status (officers/nobility receiving preferential treatment, extending to their children), or it could depend on location/timing (Schola transfer only possible until the regiment leaves its homeworld), or both. It could even be different from one regiment to another (special deals with the Munitorum depending on the regiment's value and reputation), or depend on where exactly the regiment is deployed (availability of transport opportunities) ...

Several ways to interpret the material, I guess. I like the idea of the Schola being a bit selective and elitist when it comes to who is allowed in, but on the other hand the thought of a bunch of very young kids of common origin being herded through an odyssey spanning several planets, overcrowded transport nexuses and damp freighter hulls (including ample potential for raids, crippling/lethal accidents, slave trafficking or even simply "getting lost") until they finally arrive at the safe orphanage has a suitably grimdark ring to it, too.

Hmm, yea. That's some good points and possibilities. Well, regardless of how that works, the mentioning of White Shields and children born right into the grinder that are raised within the regiment implies women in the guard too.

Well, technically it could of course refer to male troops interacting with female civilians in the warzone or the wagon train, or nearby their garrison ...

... but there's really sufficient references about women in the Guard all over the place. The Xenonian Free Companies have been mentioned in particular, and just yesterday I happened to read the following lines in the Medusa V global campaign PDF:

Governor Soloman stared open mouthed as the dark sky was pierced by the landing craft. Glowing brightly from their atmospheric entry, hundreds of bulk landers raced towards the war-torn planet. Most bore the drab livery of the Imperial Navy, their holds filled with the men and women of the Imperial Guard. Thousands of soldiers ready to fight and die for the Emperor. Others, fewer in number, had brighter, bolder heraldry. Soloman realised with a thrill that those were the landing craft of the Adeptus Astartes, bearing the finest warriors in the Imperium. Gods of war, the Space Marines were capable of defeating any foe. For a moment he felt his spirits lift as a flicker of hope sparked in his heart.
At his side, Inquisitor Baptiste snuffed it out. "There's not nearly enough", she said bluntly, her lavender eyes scanning the horizon. "Whatever foul work the Arch-enemy does here must be stopped at all costs, but do not fool yourself, Governor; this world will die. It just remains to be seen how many of us it takes with it."

The Uplifting Primer also says something similar, IIRC. Though throughout its default pronouns are male, it says "men and women of the Imperial Guard" once or twice.

The default pronoun in the English language when speaking about people is "him". It's just the usage of the language, and because we are, as a species, "the race of Man". It's a usage tradition that goes back quite a ways.

Incidentally, the gaming company White Wolf was one of the first to buck this trend in the early 90s, when it made the default pronoun the feminine in all its publications.

I noticed the feminine pronoun in the new Shadowrun rules, too. Surprising development.

Myself, I'm trying to use the neutral "their" whenever possible, unless something is specifically referring to either gender.

That being said, I would not at all be surprised if there are multiple languages on this Earth where the default pronoun is less gender-defined.

Troike wrote:The Uplifting Primer also says something similar, IIRC.

Hmm, now that you mention it ...
I'm just not promoting the Primer as it's not a direct studio publication, and some of its contents go strongly against what the Codex says. And no, I'm not referring to the funny bits of propaganda, but rather the idea that the Guard has any sort of standard about how many socks each trooper is issued and other such things.

(I still recommend that book to anyone, though, if only because it's quite simply a very entertaining read - and the prayer section is useful for 40k RPGs!)

 Psienesis wrote:
The default pronoun in the English language when speaking about people is "him". It's just the usage of the language, and because we are, as a species, "the race of Man"

Amusingly, "man" used to be non-gendered in English, with man, the gender, having its own noun.

Werman was male, and wiffman was female. Man referred to the species as a whole. It was changed later, or more likely evolved later over time (likely due to the social dominance over men, thus it was accepted that male is the default and female is the other).

Generally, in formal language, Man, capitalized, refers to the species, while man, lowercase, refers to the gender. It's stupid and dumb, but there's a lot of things about English which are stupid and dumb so... eh. These days, there's a movement that uses "they" as the singular "default" non-gendered pronoun. I prescribe to it myself (and "One" can similarly be used in specific contexts), although I'm sure (and hoping even) that some of my old English teachers woudl spin in their graves if they knew.

 Lynata wrote:

I'm just not promoting the Primer as it's not a direct studio publication, and some of its contents go strongly against what the Codex says. And no, I'm not referring to the funny bits of propaganda, but rather the idea that the Guard has any sort of standard about how many socks each trooper is issued and other such things.

It does say that each world's guardsmen can vary massively in its equipment. It appears "standard" because we're looking at the "standard" trooper, one from a Cadian regiment. It notes in the blurb that a Cadian regiment is being used as the model for it. See, as the IG is so massively diverse, a standard manual would have to be standardised too for practicality. We can assume that individual regiments have their own instructions on how to operate based on what said regiment is like.

But anyway, as a look at the culture of the organisation, it's useful. And certainly, it supports the point made about the IG having women.

Melissia wrote:Amusingly, "man" used to be non-gendered in English, with man, the gender, having its own noun.
Werman was male, and wiffman was female. Man referred to the species as a whole. It was changed later, or more likely evolved later over time (likely due to the social dominance over men, thus it was accepted that male is the default and female is the other).

Interesting. I did not know that.

OT:

Troike wrote:It does say that each world's guardsmen can vary massively in its equipment. It appears "standard" because we're looking at the "standard" trooper, one from a Cadian regiment. It notes in the blurb that a Cadian regiment is being used as the model for it. See, as the IG is so massively diverse, a standard manual would have to be standardised too for practicality. We can assume that individual regiments have their own instructions on how to operate based on what said regiment is like.

Oh, I would have less of a problem with it if it said something like "this book is issued only to regiments from planet so-and-so". But to me, with how it is actually printed and supposedly distributed, it gives the false impression that the Imperial Guard is way more standardised than it says in the studio material. To be precise, the book does not say that it would "vary massively" from world to world, the exact quote is "some details may differ" - from a table listing about 30 items. That's quite the difference, especially as (going by the Codex) the only standard piece of equipment is the lasgun, nothing else.
It may just be another piece of propaganda, or even just the bureaucracy operating independently from reality, but I don't think I'm alone in thinking that the vast majority of readers will not "get it", as (assuming it is meant as a joke) it is arguably less obvious than the funny bits about the various aliens and how they're no threat.

Also, when you say that regiments have their own instructions based on how they work (which is quite possible for formations recruited out of the PDF), doesn't that mean that a standardised catch-all manual would be redundant? To whom would it be issued?

To be precise, the book does not say that it would "vary massively" from world to world, the exact quote is "some details may differ"

That's Imperial bureaucracy for you.

 Lynata wrote:
Oh, I would have less of a problem with it if it said something like "this book is issued only to regiments from planet so-and-so". But to me, with how it is actually printed and supposedly distributed, it gives the false impression that the Imperial Guard is way more standardised than it says in the studio material

Like I said, it does note that the book is modelled on the Cadian 91st. I suppose it can be interpreted as the Munitorum trying to establish some sense of unity in the IG. If not with equipment then with litanies and basic survival skills, stuff like that.

 Lynata wrote:
(going by the Codex) the only standard piece of equipment is the lasgun, nothing else.

Really? What about vox casters, laspistols or grenades? I imagine that those are all very standard pieces of equipmnent too.

 Lynata wrote:
I don't think I'm alone in thinking that the vast majority of readers will not "get it", as (assuming it is meant as a joke) it is arguably less obvious than the funny bits about the various aliens and how they're no threat.

I will say, it's likely been influenced to some extent by the authors realising that this is for public consumption. As a standardised, "all-encompassing" book, it gives the reader an overview of the Imperial Guard. It would be a bit messy if it was both in-universe and tried to cater for every possible guard regiment.

 Lynata wrote:
Also, when you say that regiments have their own instructions based on how they work (which is quite possible for formations recruited out of the PDF), doesn't that mean that a standardised catch-all manual would be redundant?

Nah. They're all still using the same weapons, vehicles, will be fighting in any sort of terrain, ect. A lot of the stuff in there will be useful to most regiments, or is propaganda that the Munitorum wants all regiments to believe. And of course all regiments, in theory, have the same beliefs and such, so the litanies and prayers are applicable to any regiment.

The ways the do vary, usually in outfit or equipment (tactical variances seem to be covered already, the book mentions that absurdly big collection of tactical manuals) would probably be adapted to on a regiment by regiment basis. So one regiment might disregard what the book has to say about a piece of attaire that they do not use or have some vairiant of, subsituting their own practice for it. But ultimately, they could all be going to any warzone, are all meant to be of the same mindset and are using roughly the same equipment.

Troike wrote:Really? What about vox casters, laspistols or grenades? I imagine that those are all very standard pieces of equipmnent too.

Hmm, not according to that line - and personally, I could easily imagine some regiments having to rely on messengers (horse or bike), or foregoing pistols and grenades entirely. It all depends on where they come from and what their specialisation is.

But really, every trooper getting a lasgun, 4 power packs, 4 grenades, an autopistol-sidearm ... the autopistol alone makes little sense as it would need a very specific type of ammunition, something that will be hard to come by in the field. And even Cadians do not carry autopistols as part of their standard gear, else the trooper in the 3E Codex would not have had to loot his from an enemy. In fact, the text below that image makes it clear that this sort of equipment is non-standard.

And I've now noticed that the list of "standard" equipment in the Primer is 2 pages rather than a half one, so my earlier remark about 30 items should actually read ~80, out of whom "some may differ" between the various regiments...
I dunno about you, but that's just not the Imperial Guard I know.

 Lynata wrote:
I dunno about you, but that's just not the Imperial Guard I know.

After thinking about it, I think that the Infantryman's handbook still meshes with the way the Guard actually are (incredibly diverse). As I've touched upon, the content on stuff like how to take cover, fill out a Munitorum form or the various litanies will be applicable to any regiment, really. As for the equipment, I would again interpret that as the Munitorum trying to establish some sense of unity in the IG, probably a futile effort. Or they're trying to cater to the "average" Guard regiment.

 Lynata wrote:
and what their specialisation is.

As I've said, tactics seem to be a seperate issue, given that the Munitorum section mentions that huge collection of tactical documents that no man could ever actually read through completely. So from this, I guess we can infer that overall tactics are something that the IG have a lot of leeway over. So I'd imagine that if a Regiment is specialised/equiped in a way that doesn't mesh with what the handbook says, then they can just look to their own tactical doctrines.

Well, "Only War" lists the standard issue gear for most regiments. If I recall correctly, it's pretty similar for most regiments, the main exception being personal knives that might come from the home world depending on culture.

Only War isn't studio material, but I still think it's good stuff.

Troike wrote:As for the equipment, I would again interpret that as the Munitorum trying to establish some sense of unity in the IG, probably a futile effort. Or they're trying to cater to the "average" Guard regiment.

But what regiment gets such a huge range of gear? And autopistols? That doesn't even fit to the Cadians the document supposedly emulates, at least if one were to go by Codex fluff.

But that's just me nitpicking over details. I'm more concerned about fans being influenced by such material (an especially "serious" issue if you consider how many people still believe in "everything is canon") than the material itself. As I said, I still love the book and would recommend it to anyone.
I'm perfectly fine with it being regarded as just yet another humorous detail, as if your average Guardsman would look at the list and be like "What? We didn't get anything of this!" (although that still doesn't explain the autopistol)

It may also be that it simply depends a lot on how we interpret the idea of an "average" Guard regiment. For someone who thinks that ~half the IG works like Cadians, I could see the booklet being perfectly viable, but I "grew up" with those images in the 3E Codex (my 2nd 40k Codex ever! first one was Space Marines ) and they just left me with an impression that there is very little connecting them.

Someone on the FFG forums recently uploaded these scans - I think they illustrate neatly what I'm thinking about:


Huh, looks like Dneipr regiments have female tankers. Didn't notice that one before...

@Lynata

It's possible that each Primer is somewhat tailored to each regiment (As in, they have a Primer for a Barbarian regiment, one for a Mordian style regiment etc.). The Primer that's published would probably be for a more elite regiment from a world that can afford to issue handguns to all of it's members. Possibly an airborne regiment like the Fallschirmjaeger (Who were given pistols standard)?

Now, a possible reason it says all guardsman are equipped like this is simple: Propaganda. The Munitorum wants each guardsman to think that their comrades from other planets will be an elite fighting force like them so that they'll have higher confidence in the battles that lie ahead. You wouldn't be feeling good if your allies were all equipped with muskets, would you? They'd be a liability.

For more primitive regiments it probably says that other guardsman are equipped with muskets/rifles or whatever so that they don't feel intimidated/short changed. I wouldn't be very happy in a organization that gave everyone else super cool space guns while I got some boom stick. Unsatisfaction on that level could let to mutiny after all. I mean, sure, they'll know they suck eventually but at least by that point if they try to mutiny they'll be blown up by the other better equipped regiment.

Note, I am just guessing. It's just as possible that the Uplifting Primer really is that useless of a document for your "average" guardsman.

As for women in the guard, women can fire a gun and die horribly just as well as a man. Who cares if they produce more people? The Imperium has more people than they do power packs.

The primers are IIRC for different campaigns - so there is a Damocles Crusade edition.

I don't belive that all Guard Regiments are literate either

I would think that a Primer for a Barbarian Regiment... or the Death Korps... would be a waste of paper... well, at least for use in its Administratum-intended purpose.

I actually have both the original as well as the Damocles Gulf edition. The campaign sections don't mention anything about equipment - which kinda makes sense; a regiment doesn't just switch over to new gear just because they go on a new deployment.
The DG part talks a bit about the Tau and travel aboard Imperial transport ships. Fun stuff as well, was worth the 2nd purchase. I might even cave in and buy a 3rd one whenever they release it.

TheCustomLime wrote:Note, I am just guessing. It's just as possible that the Uplifting Primer really is that useless of a document for your "average" guardsman.

Which would fit well with the grimdark style of the setting, if you think about it.

 Psienesis wrote:
I would think that a Primer for a Barbarian Regiment... or the Death Korps... would be a waste of paper... well, at least for use in its Administratum-intended purpose.

Are you saying it isn't already a waste of paper in it's Administratum-intended purpose?

Even so, I doubt that the Munitorum would care if the guardsmen could use or read it. From my impression of the book it is somewhat like a German Soldbuch. You have to have it on your person at all times or you'll suffer the consequences (I am not sure if the Primer has you put your name in it or it records what equipment you were issued). So, in the case of the illiterate it's intent would be to instill discipline and respect for Imperial authority.

Of course, if a Commissar started executing people from a particularly tribal world for defiling a stupid book I am sure he would find himself on the business end of one of their knives... or having to execute mutineers faster than he can reload his pistol.

 Mitranekh the Omniscient wrote:
This may seem odd, but do the IG recruit women? My reasoning is twofold;
1. In the Space Marine game, the main NPC was Lt. Mira, a woman. But...
2. There are no female heads in the Cadian or Catachan troops sets iirc.

In typical GW fashion the info is conflicting (I'm not anti-GW in any way, no hate please). So I thought I'd ask.

So what is the IGs policy on women?

They recruit women (there are a few in the books as well) but obviously there won't be as many women in the army as men but it is still weird that there aren't any female minis for guard iirc