With the current way that the orders system works, Guardsmen end up looking more like superhuman mega-freaks in game than the supposed "superhumans" depicted in the other factions.

There are a tiny handful of units that get to move twice for free in the movement phase: Lightning-fast eldar and harlequins specialized in close combat, swarms of genestealers commanded by the most notorious tyranid command monster in the whole galaxy, an angel imbued with the emperor's godlike power, and guardsmen. Recently GW made it so the angel couldn't do that anymore because it felt unfair.

There are a tiny handful of units that get to fight twice for free in the fight phase: Crazy bezerk sisters of battle strapped to death walkers, khorne bezerkers dedicated to the god of war and skulls, and guardsmen.

There are a small number of units that can double their shots at will in the shooting phase: Massive Tau mechas bristling with missiles and cannons who fire pneumatic support struts into the ground and brace themselves before unleashing hellfire, space marines in specialized body-encapsulating suits of iron man armor who stand still and unload into oncoming enemy swarms, highly advanced crystal-powered eldar grav tanks, and regular guard tanks and guardsmen.

I understand what they were going for with the orders system, but the current incarnation of the mechanic ends up making other armies and specialist units who make just one of the at-will commands their specific "thing" feel inadequate. In my last game playing my Guard against some Eldar, I was able to effortlessly outpace the fething Eldar in a last-turn objective grab, sending upwards of 40 guard bodies flying across the board 20+" to flood an objective with obsec bodies.

Caught myself wondering similar this morning ...

when did it change from guardsmen following tanks under heavy fire to infantry standing in a semi circle to protect the tank.

but to your question, when the superhumans are only 16.6666% better than the humans, and the humans can more than make up that difference in quantity .. then superman is going to stay home feeling very inferior

Reanimation_Protocol wrote:
Caught myself wondering similar this morning ...

when did it change from guardsmen following tanks under heavy fire to infantry standing in a semi circle to protect the tank.

but to your question, when the superhumans are only 16.6666% better than the humans, and the humans can more than make up that difference in quantity .. then superman is going to stay home feeling very inferior

It's less about the "quality vs quantity" aspect and more about "because of orders, guardsmen feel stronger in quality than the specialist units other armies have."

Guard have a plethora of free buffs on 30-50 point characters that would make other armies blush coming off of the auras of 200+ point characters or 2CP stratagems.

Largely because the game rewards two or three things right now. Be super cheap to take up space, fish for 6s on wounds and generate CP. Be super fast and hard hitting, jumping from screen to screen unit and wrecking the enemy or be stupid durable and hand out a ton of rerolls. Medium to heavish infantry and tanks don't hold up.

Most infantry die at the same rate as guardsmen, so you taking anything worth more than them is not very points efficient.

What is the strongest weapon of mankind? The god-machines of the Adeptus Mechanicus? No! The Astartes Legions? No! The tank? The lasgun? The fist? Not at all! Courage and courage alone stands above them all!

- Lord Commander Solar Macharius

Nothing can compare to the power of the Human spirit! Orders simply unlock this awesome potential.

Because cheaper is better in 8th.

It should be noted that, while Orders are usually better buffs than auras, Orders affect a very limited amount of units, while auras affect anyone you can cram near the HQ.

But castling usually results in losing on objectives. Auras are NOT your friend.

Martel732 wrote:
But castling usually results in losing on objectives. Auras are NOT your friend.

So... Have a core of powerful units buffed by auras, and then have some mobile objective grabbers. Van Vets or Assault Marines who can Deepstrike and move fast, Scout Bikers who have great Dakka anywhere on the table, Terminators if you really love the models because they're not very good right now...

Martel732 wrote:
But castling usually results in losing on objectives. Auras are NOT your friend.

That’s why you have more than one

Reanimation_Protocol wrote:
Caught myself wondering similar this morning ...

when did it change from guardsmen following tanks under heavy fire to infantry standing in a semi circle to protect the tank.

but to your question, when the superhumans are only 16.6666% better than the humans, and the humans can more than make up that difference in quantity .. then superman is going to stay home feeling very inferior

Kill the meat, save the metal.

Marines cost too damn much for that. Furthermore, its trivially easy for Eldar and IG to just ignore the "power units" for a couple of turns, and kill all the objective grabbers first. Marines don't have firepower, even with auras, to threaten the big boys. Especially IG, who can field so many wounds that marine shooting is pissing in the wind.

Martel732 wrote:
Marines cost too damn much for that. Furthermore, its trivially easy for Eldar and IG to just ignore the "power units" for a couple of turns, and kill all the objective grabbers first. Marines don't have firepower, even with auras, to threaten the big boys. Especially IG, who can field so many wounds that marine shooting is pissing in the wind.

So is the issue that Guardsmen are finally good, or that Marines just suck?

 Horst wrote:

Reanimation_Protocol wrote:
Caught myself wondering similar this morning ...

when did it change from guardsmen following tanks under heavy fire to infantry standing in a semi circle to protect the tank.

but to your question, when the superhumans are only 16.6666% better than the humans, and the humans can more than make up that difference in quantity .. then superman is going to stay home feeling very inferior

Kill the meat, save the metal.

In the Guard, tanks have names, men have numbers.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Marines cost too damn much for that. Furthermore, its trivially easy for Eldar and IG to just ignore the "power units" for a couple of turns, and kill all the objective grabbers first. Marines don't have firepower, even with auras, to threaten the big boys. Especially IG, who can field so many wounds that marine shooting is pissing in the wind.

So is the issue that Guardsmen are finally good, or that Marines just suck?

Oh marines suck. Because they can't handle Drukhari, or Eldar, or Ynnarri, or IG, or DG, or Nids. IG are just the most soul crushing. I can't even hide from them.

Martel732 wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Marines cost too damn much for that. Furthermore, its trivially easy for Eldar and IG to just ignore the "power units" for a couple of turns, and kill all the objective grabbers first. Marines don't have firepower, even with auras, to threaten the big boys. Especially IG, who can field so many wounds that marine shooting is pissing in the wind.

So is the issue that Guardsmen are finally good, or that Marines just suck?

Oh marines suck. Because they can't handle Drukhari, or Eldar, or Ynnarri, or IG, or DG, or Nids. IG are just the most soul crushing. I can't even hide from them.

And why is that? Is it because IG is supposed to be an NPC faction?

You can't hide from Eldar or Dark Eldar either. They're fast enough to get you wherever you go.

Eldar are close, but outright ignoring LoS is busted as feth.

Where did I say IG was supposed to be NPC faction? Reading in much?

IG is soul crushing because of the sheer number of wounds they can put on the table. Wounds you can never get rid of because of their sheer numbers.

So then why are Guard better than [non-Marine]?

Martel732 wrote:
Eldar are close, but outright ignoring LoS is busted as feth.

Where did I say IG was supposed to be NPC faction? Reading in much?

You said it was especially soul-crushing. Why is that? You get killed just as badly by the space elves, and hiding doesn't do much of anything against them either.

Edit: And Dark Eldar can put a little less wounds, but at T6 4++ or T5 5++ -1 to be hit. With better shots too.

Being cheaper trumps almost everything.

Martel732 wrote:
Being cheaper trumps almost everything.

Must be why no one takes Castellans, the most expensive Knight, right?

I said almost. The castellan is propped up by a relic, too. Without that relic, it goes back in the closet. There are also dark reapers and such. Some expensive units can be worth it with the right special rules. But no such units exist for marines in general. I don't consider DG marines, or else they would qualify.

Martel732 wrote:
I said almost. The castellan is propped up by a relic, too. Without that relic, it goes back in the closet. There are also dark reapers and such. Some expensive units can be worth it with the right special rules. But no such units exist for marines in general. I don't consider DG marines, or else they would qualify.

So, by your definition, Marines have to be bad? Because Death Guard are pretty clearly Marines. They're Chaos, sure, but it seems like the disqualifying criteria for you is that they're good.

Well really 3 meta reasons guardsmen are so good.

First, quantity. all hordes forces in general reach a point where they have more cost to put attacks on them then they are worth. Mostly due to some weapons and Morale not scaling right.

Second, utility, Flashlight guardsmen do more damage and provide more ability on the table than they should at the points they cost.

Third, the game is very rewarding in several points of play to Admen with Guard being in a sweet spot where Cover makes them much better, and Orders, and the game scenario's make them much more efficient than they might.

It is always going to be hard to deal with mass infantry when armies tend towards bringing as much AT power as possible to deal with knights. How often are plasma guns and lascannons suggested as the best weapons for squads? Doesn't help much against cheap infantry.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I said almost. The castellan is propped up by a relic, too. Without that relic, it goes back in the closet. There are also dark reapers and such. Some expensive units can be worth it with the right special rules. But no such units exist for marines in general. I don't consider DG marines, or else they would qualify.

So, by your definition, Marines have to be bad? Because Death Guard are pretty clearly Marines. They're Chaos, sure, but it seems like the disqualifying criteria for you is that they're good.

T5 with 5+++ is a massive deviation from the marine statline. Give marines T5 and 5+++, and I'll say they're good.

It has been a long, long time since marines have been good at a basal level, though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It's also really helping the IG that the kinds of weapons that are good against them are NOT good vs Drukahri and other Xenos. If I don't build in at least moderate levels of anti-Drukhari tech, I instantly lose against them. That means that I must make my lists less effective vs IG.

the_scotsman wrote:

Reanimation_Protocol wrote:
Caught myself wondering similar this morning ...

when did it change from guardsmen following tanks under heavy fire to infantry standing in a semi circle to protect the tank.

but to your question, when the superhumans are only 16.6666% better than the humans, and the humans can more than make up that difference in quantity .. then superman is going to stay home feeling very inferior

It's less about the "quality vs quantity" aspect and more about "because of orders, guardsmen feel stronger in quality than the specialist units other armies have."

Guard have a plethora of free buffs on 30-50 point characters that would make other armies blush coming off of the auras of 200+ point characters or 2CP stratagems.

Orders are a really flavorful mechanic, and I think they're a good thing to have for the Guard. The orders are still being given to not-particularly-capable units though. Orders make a low-stat unit do a particular task sort of as well as a non-low-stat unit. But the bonus is limited to that single task, and they still have the downsides of having relatively puny stats.

The major upside of Guardsmen is that they are cheap, cheap, cheap. The loyal 32 is taken because they are a cheap way to generate CPs, and they're cheap enough to swamp objectives and ignore casualties to some degree. Guardsmen take up space, which helps out heavy Imperial units built to pound away at things from afar.

Guardsmen > Marines
Obviously, because cheap always wins

Reapers > Devs
Obviously, because they're more elite

Custodes Captains vs SM Captains
Shining Spears vs SM Bike Squads

I woudn't necessarily agree that cheap almost always wins. Marines are just in a bad spot.

 Trickstick wrote:
It is always going to be hard to deal with mass infantry when armies tend towards bringing as much AT power as possible to deal with knights. How often are plasma guns and lascannons suggested as the best weapons for squads? Doesn't help much against cheap infantry.

Plasma Cannons wind up doing pretty well at both tasks, imo. Multishot S7 AP-3 has the benefit of ignoring armor+cover for Guardsmen and wounding on a 2+. Cheap as dirt now, too.

As Jospeh Stalin would have put it, quantity is a quality of its own.

That's basically the biggest advantage of the Guards right now. That and the fact that orders can make them very versatile and make this otherwise nearly worthless cannon-fodder unit into something that is worth every penny and even more.

Bharring wrote:
Guardsmen > Marines
Obviously, because cheap always wins

Reapers > Devs
Obviously, because they're more elite

Custodes Captains vs SM Captains
Shining Spears vs SM Bike Squads

I woudn't necessarily agree that cheap almost always wins. Marines are just in a bad spot.

Ehh... in isolation those things are true-ish. I think the design mantra of Marines is that once they're mutually supporting each other, they can tip the scales.

Bharring wrote:
Guardsmen > Marines
Obviously, because cheap always wins

Reapers > Devs
Obviously, because they're more elite

Custodes Captains vs SM Captains
Shining Spears vs SM Bike Squads

I woudn't necessarily agree that cheap almost always wins. Marines are just in a bad spot.

Its not obvious as all that. But elites need some really fancy tech to compete. Like ignore all hit mods or universal 5+++. I dont care for custodes, marines, or most eldar. Eldar have a few super strong units with super strong rules and the rest just seem like marineesque victims.

Bharring wrote:
Guardsmen > Marines
Obviously, because cheap always wins

Reapers > Devs
Obviously, because they're more elite

Custodes Captains vs SM Captains
Shining Spears vs SM Bike Squads

I woudn't necessarily agree that cheap almost always wins. Marines are just in a bad spot.

Only all of those things are cheap, comparing to what rules they have. If reapers had the cost of soul burst, or ton of other buffs eldar can get build in to their cost, no one would be using them. Same with s spears. Custodes cpts vs normal cpts are hard to compare. Compare a normal sm cpt vs a BA DC smashammer cpt.

If you want to compare a custodes captin to something compare him to another elite marine HQ, the GK grand master. Then you will clearly see that the custodes gets the jetbike with all its rules, speed and shoting practicly for free.

But how can you discuss the relative value of appropriately-costed hordes vs appropriately-costed elites?

The logic itself boils down to "Appropriately-costed units should be roughly equally good as appropriately-costed units", which of course is tautological.

You're trying to fit a regression, then you're adjusting what you're fitting to to what you want the regression to be. So you lose all value in the exorcise.

There is a massive disconnect between fluff and crunch.

You hear 1 marine can take out 100 guardsmen but in game the conversion is only 16% in general.

its never going to feel right.

"You hear 1 marine can take out 100 guardsmen ..."
You also hear about a Guardsman upping the setting on his Lasgun to oneshot a CSM.

So if we have both
-1 Marine can beat 100 Guardsmen
-10 Guardsmen can beat 1 Marine

There is no logical way mechanics can meet that fluff; it's not internally consistent.

Bharring wrote:
But how can you discuss the relative value of appropriately-costed hordes vs appropriately-costed elites?

The logic itself boils down to "Appropriately-costed units should be roughly equally good as appropriately-costed units", which of course is tautological.

You're trying to fit a regression, then you're adjusting what you're fitting to to what you want the regression to be. So you lose all value in the exorcise.

Well this is not med tech science, we don't have to be right to the 6th place after zero. I doubt anyone thinks that a ravellan has a proper cost for what it does. Or that stuff like s spears or reapers can be fixed, and not killed, with point costs. Now considering that GW is in favour of point changes and not rules changes, people have to live with the fact that some stuff is over costed and some is undercosted.

Just compare the point cost of a LR cmd and a normal LR. Or something like a GK termintor and GK paladin.

You're right that this isn't med tech science. But if the math shows that the line of reasoning we're going down means literally nothing (as in, we're just showing that 1 equals 1), it's useful to back out of that path.

Further, it's a great way to expand and/or practice logic and understanding. Realizing that adjusting data for your regression so it better fits your model truly is pointless - you're just using your model, not the regression - is an important lesson to learn. Better learnt debating plastic toy soldiers than doing something important.

My point is that, claiming Elites are almost always overcosted and Hordes are almost always undercosted, then waving way every counterexample as "but they're undercosted, they should fit this model" doesn't get us anywhere.

Reanimation_Protocol wrote:
Caught myself wondering similar this morning ...

when did it change from guardsmen following tanks under heavy fire to infantry standing in a semi circle to protect the tank.

but to your question, when the superhumans are only 16.6666% better than the humans, and the humans can more than make up that difference in quantity .. then superman is going to stay home feeling very inferior

I mean from a lore standpoint (depending on the regiment/general) guardsmen are often used as meat shields to protect valuable assets like tanks.

Also isn't this just another "space marine power armor needs a buff" thread? I don't think anyone is arguing that the SM codex (and their counterparts) don't need a rules update. But also holding game mechanics to fluff levels is just dumb. I mean for example you would have to field thousands of guardsmen to ever equal the fluff rules of marine army we see on the tabletop now

Asmodios wrote:

Reanimation_Protocol wrote:
Caught myself wondering similar this morning ...

when did it change from guardsmen following tanks under heavy fire to infantry standing in a semi circle to protect the tank.

but to your question, when the superhumans are only 16.6666% better than the humans, and the humans can more than make up that difference in quantity .. then superman is going to stay home feeling very inferior

I mean from a lore standpoint (depending on the regiment/general) guardsmen are often used as meat shields to protect valuable assets like tanks.

Also isn't this just another "space marine power armor needs a buff" thread? I don't think anyone is arguing that the SM codex (and their counterparts) don't need a rules update. But also holding game mechanics to fluff levels is just dumb. I mean for example you would have to field thousands of guardsmen to ever equal the fluff rules of marine army we see on the tabletop now

Nah, originally it was a thread about why it is that Guard orders allow basic human mooks to do for free what almost every other faction has to pass a test, spend CP, or have a super specialized unit ala Khorne Bezerkers to be able to do.

Fight Twice, Move Twice, Fall Back and Shoot, and reroll all hits should not be thrown around like candy.

Agree. Even those who get it, it should be watered down.

From a balance perspective, the Ynnari versions are certainly bigger offenders. But I dislike both.

No other faction has a unit as weak as a commander giving out those buffs. Just murder them and be done with it.

"No other faction has a unit as weak as a commander giving out those buffs. Just murder them and be done with it."
*cough* Warlock.

the_scotsman wrote:

Nah, originally it was a thread about why it is that Guard orders allow basic human mooks to do for free what almost every other faction has to pass a test, spend CP, or have a super specialized unit ala Khorne Bezerkers to be able to do.

Fight Twice, Move Twice, Fall Back and Shoot, and reroll all hits should not be thrown around like candy.

Right. My standpoint on this is that it's Move Twice, Fire Twice etc. on low-stat units, which blunts the effectiveness.

Reanimation_Protocol wrote:Caught myself wondering similar this morning ...

when did it change from guardsmen following tanks under heavy fire to infantry standing in a semi circle to protect the tank.

It's pretty much always been the infantry standing in a semi circle to protect the tank, except for 5E where everything rode in its own tank. Certainly you never hid behind the tanks in 6E/7E when anything making base contact with a tank basically auto-killed it

the_scotsman wrote:
It's less about the "quality vs quantity" aspect and more about "because of orders, guardsmen feel stronger in quality than the specialist units other armies have."

Guard have a plethora of free buffs on 30-50 point characters that would make other armies blush coming off of the auras of 200+ point characters or 2CP stratagems.

Having a squad of guardsmen fight twice next to an Officer (who does nothin but give orders) has a wee bit different effect compared with other armies where that 200pt HQ is a tank of a CC monster and the aura affected troops are individually many times more capable, and the Aura can enhance a larger number of units than any individual IG officer can. Now, there are cost issues for some things that can certainly be addressed, but the impact of these abilities between the different contexts is enormous. Also, Orders have been a thing for almost a decade and 4 editions now, largely doing the same things they do now.

Martel732 wrote:
Eldar are close, but outright ignoring LoS is busted as feth.

Where did I say IG was supposed to be NPC faction? Reading in much?

IG is soul crushing because of the sheer number of wounds they can put on the table. Wounds you can never get rid of because of their sheer numbers.

Well actually ignoring LoS in a game where every official terrain element does not block LoS is not particularly useful.

 Trickstick wrote:
No other faction has a unit as weak as a commander giving out those buffs. Just murder them and be done with it.

Couple things here.

1) I can have three for 90 points, the cost of almost every other faction's basic HQ.

2) They are still characters, hiding behind the cheapest screen horde in the game.

3) even when you get to them they have 5++ and W4.

Psychic buffs that don't require a roll and can't be cancelled are way better than the way the game tries to implement support roles into other armies via the very janky psyker mechanics.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Reanimation_Protocol wrote:Caught myself wondering similar this morning ...

when did it change from guardsmen following tanks under heavy fire to infantry standing in a semi circle to protect the tank.

It's pretty much always been the infantry standing in a semi circle to protect the tank, except for 5E where everything rode in its own tank. Certainly you never hid behind the tanks in 6E/7E when anything making base contact with a tank basically auto-killed it

the_scotsman wrote:
It's less about the "quality vs quantity" aspect and more about "because of orders, guardsmen feel stronger in quality than the specialist units other armies have."

Guard have a plethora of free buffs on 30-50 point characters that would make other armies blush coming off of the auras of 200+ point characters or 2CP stratagems.

Having a squad of guardsmen fight twice next to an Officer (who does nothin but give orders) has a wee bit different effect compared with other armies where that 200pt HQ is a tank of a CC monster and the aura affected troops are individually many times more capable, and the Aura can enhance a larger number of units than any individual IG officer can. Now, there are cost issues for some things that can certainly be addressed, but the impact of these abilities between the different contexts is enormous. Also, Orders have been a thing for almost a decade and 4 editions now, largely doing the same things they do now.

Yes, "Largely" except in this context means "doing none of the things anyone is complaining about."

Move Move Move used to be "roll 3d6 pick the highest when you run(advance), move an extra inch or two". Now it's "Advance AGAIN multiplying your move by two. Oh, if you're the right army tactic, you can still shoot after rofl rofl rofl." First Rank Second Rank didn't double your firepower, and in the olden days you had to stay still if you wanted to double tap (you know, like you would if you're firing in ranks . "Get Back in the Fight" was a morale thing, not a "Leave melee and shoot again at full effect like you've got a jet pack strapped to your back" thing.

Every order has the same NAME it used to have, but the effects have been amped to such goofy levels that you've now got guardsmen doing things that in other factions you have to be a fast close combat specialist, or a stationary shooting specialist, or using a 3CP stratagem to do.

Also, "every other faction can do that with auras" is a silly argument because A) show me a faction that has a fight twice, double your firepower, or move twice aura please, and B) GUARD GETS THE AURAS EVERYONE ELSE GETS ANYWAY. They have a morale aura. They have reroll to hit auras. They have +1 attack auras. They also have psychic powers, one of the better lists in the game. And all these aura giving/order giving/psychic power casting buff characters are half to a third the cost that other factions pay for these characters.

Guard infantry squads are awesome (and always have been) because whatever the edition, for the pts, you can get a helluva lot more shots at the enemy. End of the day it's about making your opponent roll as many saves as possible, as often as possible.
Guard are also awesome because they're cheap enough that you can also afford to bring a good selection of heavier options in addition to that hoard of infantry.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Trickstick wrote:
No other faction has a unit as weak as a commander giving out those buffs. Just murder them and be done with it.

Couple things here.

1) I can have three for 90 points, the cost of almost every other faction's basic HQ.

2) They are still characters, hiding behind the cheapest screen horde in the game.

3) even when you get to them they have 5++ and W4.

All true. You could use snipers but I know they are not the best units. How does that new formation stack up?

the_scotsman wrote:
Move Move Move used to be "roll 3d6 pick the highest when you run(advance), move an extra inch or two". Now it's "Advance AGAIN multiplying your move by two. Oh, if you're the right army tactic, you can still shoot after rofl rofl rofl."

You can't shoot after Move Move Move, it replaces shooting.

ccs wrote:
Guard infantry squads are awesome (and always have been) because whatever the edition, for the pts, you can get a helluva lot more shots at the enemy. End of the day it's about making your opponent roll as many saves as possible, as often as possible.
Guard are also awesome because they're cheap enough that you can also afford to bring a good selection of heavier options in addition to that hoard of infantry.

They really haven't been. I'm sorry, it is definitely a pet peeve of mine when people decide "thing that's strong now has ALWAYS BEEN TOO STRONG" because in many cases (like this case) it really isn't. Guard in previous editions were flimsier (due to basic weapons having AP5 and the old wounding system making S5 wound them on 2s), less offensively powerful (fewer shots from FRFSRF in 7th and 6th and in 5th you had to not move to even double tap) and costed more.

You get this a lot about Dark Eldar as well, who have averaged about as well as Orks throughout the editions. One tiny flare of high-tieredness in 5th and that's...about it until now.

As soon as 6th came along an introduced removing models from the front, Guardsmen became almost impossible to advance with. You would lose far too much ground. I'm glad that mechanic is gone.

Also, Guardsmen have been underpowered in a few editons. Look at 3rd-4th, where they were pretty useless compared to other troops.

the_scotsman wrote:
Fight Twice, Move Twice, Fall Back and Shoot, and reroll all hits should not be thrown around like candy.

- Fight twice just became a faith power for Sororitas, was a psychic power for Slaanesh daemons, was a innate unit power for Khorne Berzerkers, is a stratagem for Marines and CSM, and is available to Eldar through Ynnari. It's hardly unique to IG, and IG squads are hardly the most devastating unit to receive that buff.

- Move twice is available to CSM through Warptime, Tyranids through Hive Commander, index Sororitas through Acts of Faith, and Eldar through Ynnari. It's hardly unique to IG, and IG squads are hardly the most durable and fastest units able to receive that buff.

- Fall back and shoot is available to every unit with Fly, SM through Ultramarines. It's hardly unique to IG, and IG squads are hardly the most mobile and devastating units able to receive that buff.

- Re-roll all hits is available to CSM through Abbadon, Space Marines through Guilliman, Adeptus Mechanicus through Cawl, and to several other units through stratagems (e.g. Daemonforge). It's hardly unique to IG, and IG squads are hardly the most devastating shooting units able to receive that buff.

They are hardly thrown around like candy, and IG are hardly the scariest units they can be used on.

 Trickstick wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Trickstick wrote:
No other faction has a unit as weak as a commander giving out those buffs. Just murder them and be done with it.

Couple things here.

1) I can have three for 90 points, the cost of almost every other faction's basic HQ.

2) They are still characters, hiding behind the cheapest screen horde in the game.

3) even when you get to them they have 5++ and W4.

All true. You could use snipers but I know they are not the best units. How does that new formation stack up?

the_scotsman wrote:
Move Move Move used to be "roll 3d6 pick the highest when you run(advance), move an extra inch or two". Now it's "Advance AGAIN multiplying your move by two. Oh, if you're the right army tactic, you can still shoot after rofl rofl rofl."

You can't shoot after Move Move Move, it replaces shooting.

Which new formation? The space marine one that gives you the special Mordian order for 3CP?

Also - this is true, I thought it was just a second advance which would prevent shooting for non-tallarn. So I suppose the fastest Guard can move is 6"+D6"+3" embark+12"+D6"+3" disembark for 1cp (new Emperor's Blade Stratagem)

the_scotsman wrote:

Nah, originally it was a thread about why it is that Guard orders allow basic human mooks to do for free what almost every other faction has to pass a test, spend CP, or have a super specialized unit ala Khorne Bezerkers to be able to do.

Fight Twice, Move Twice, Fall Back and Shoot, and reroll all hits should not be thrown around like candy.

Fight Twice("Fix Bayonets!") requires you to be in 1" range to fight and be in range of an Officer to receive an Order.
Move Twice("Move! Move! Move!") is you foregoing Shooting and foregoing the ability to Charge, with the requirement of it being an "Advance" move instead of just moving as normal.
Fall Back and Shoot isn't. The Order("Get Back In the Fight!") is that you can shoot this phase even if they Fell Back--so the unit has to Fall Back during their Movement, they don't get to remain stuck in and then Fall Back+Shoot in one action.
"Reroll All Hits" isn't. The Order("Take Aim!") is to reroll hit rolls of 1. Cadians get a native trait that allows for them to reroll hit rolls of 1s, with "Take Aim!" instead getting the ability to reroll all hits if the unit remained stationary during its Movement


Also, as usual, it's worth mentioning that no one unit can ever do all of those things at once. If you receive an Order, that's it--you're done. No more Orders on that unit unless the Officer in question has Laurels of Command Relic and rolls a 4+. That Order is also 'consumed' effectively, as Officers have a set number of Orders.

In older editions, Guardsmen rarely got their 5+ save, thanks to the AP system. So, Guardsmen are now 50% more durable than they used to be.

Guardsmen, way back in 3rd, cost about half of a Marine. Now they cost less than a third. So, Guardsmen are cheaper than they used to be.

Rapid Fire used to force you to choose between maximizing firepower and being able to move. Now you can do both, so basic infantry make decent objective-grabbers. So, Guardsmen are more mobile than they used to be.

Morale used to mean that you could kill three Guardsmen and watch the rest run away. Now they tend to stick around, and you have to kill 7+ to reliably wipe the rest via morale.

Target allocation used to make special weapons less useful. If you shot a tank with a lascannon, the lasguns had to shoot the tank too. Now you can hide a heavy weapon in a squad and still maximize firepower.

I think people get too hung up on Orders. They're powerful, but they require officers who contribute basically nothing else besides filling slots. The biggest changes to Guard in 8th have been the subtle changes across editions, that combine to make them tougher, cheaper, faster, more tenacious, and better-armed than they used to be. Orders are just an easy scapegoat since their effects are so obvious.

Guard weren't always supposed to be a cannon fodder army; them becoming cheaper than even the Tyranid swarm units is a recent thing. I don't know why they didn't get bumped up to at least 5pts in CA.

the_scotsman wrote:
Which new formation? The space marine one that gives you the special Mordian order for 3CP?

It doesn't really cost 3cp though, it cost 1cp with 2cp to unlock it. You get other stuff for that 2cp too.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

catbarf wrote:
In older editions, Guardsmen rarely got their 5+ save, thanks to the AP system. So, Guardsmen are now 50% more durable than they used to be.

Guardsmen, way back in 3rd, cost about half of a Marine. Now they cost less than a third. So, Guardsmen are cheaper than they used to be.

Rapid Fire used to force you to choose between maximizing firepower and being able to move. Now you can do both, so basic infantry make decent objective-grabbers. So, Guardsmen are more mobile than they used to be.

Morale used to mean that you could kill three Guardsmen and watch the rest run away. Now they tend to stick around, and you have to kill 7+ to reliably wipe the rest via morale.

Target allocation used to make special weapons less useful. If you shot a tank with a lascannon, the lasguns had to shoot the tank too. Now you can hide a heavy weapon in a squad and still maximize firepower.

I think people get too hung up on Orders. They're powerful, but they require officers who contribute basically nothing else besides filling slots. The biggest changes to Guard in 8th have been the subtle changes across editions, that combine to make them tougher, cheaper, faster, more tenacious, and better-armed than they used to be. Orders are just an easy scapegoat since their effects are so obvious.

Guard weren't always supposed to be a cannon fodder army; them becoming cheaper than even the Tyranid swarm units is a recent thing. I don't know why they didn't get bumped up to at least 5pts in CA.

You used to be able to blob up and be fearless from commissars, be able to deploy platoons as single choices, outflank them and get free respawning conscripts. Go back far enough and you even had crazy things like entire drop/infiltration armies and carapace/camo armies etc. Not to say they are not awesome now, but it isn't like they haven't taken some hits over time too.

 Kanluwen wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

Nah, originally it was a thread about why it is that Guard orders allow basic human mooks to do for free what almost every other faction has to pass a test, spend CP, or have a super specialized unit ala Khorne Bezerkers to be able to do.

Fight Twice, Move Twice, Fall Back and Shoot, and reroll all hits should not be thrown around like candy.

Fight Twice("Fix Bayonets!") requires you to be in 1" range to fight and be in range of an Officer to receive an Order.
Move Twice("Move! Move! Move!") is you foregoing Shooting and foregoing the ability to Charge, with the requirement of it being an "Advance" move instead of just moving as normal.
Fall Back and Shoot isn't. The Order("Get Back In the Fight!") is that you can shoot this phase even if they Fell Back--so the unit has to Fall Back during their Movement, they don't get to remain stuck in and then Fall Back+Shoot in one action.
"Reroll All Hits" isn't. The Order("Take Aim!") is to reroll hit rolls of 1. Cadians get a native trait that allows for them to reroll hit rolls of 1s, with "Take Aim!" instead getting the ability to reroll all hits if the unit remained stationary during its Movement


Also, as usual, it's worth mentioning that no one unit can ever do all of those things at once. If you receive an Order, that's it--you're done. No more Orders on that unit unless the Officer in question has Laurels of Command Relic and rolls a 4+. That Order is also 'consumed' effectively, as Officers have a set number of Orders.

I have never claimed that orders are unlimited, just that they allow basic guardsmen to do things that other armies spend CPs on or only have on their most specialized units. I can't count the number of times I've looked at a Stratagem or other ability and gone "oh, it's like that thing I can do with my Guard, but with fewer limits and not CP free/automatic."

That said, some of the things you're highlighting here as limits are...questionable. You have to be in close combat in order to fight twice. ooookay. You can't...remain stuck in combat, then fall back and still shoot? What other unit does that? Every unit that can fall back and shoot has to do it in that order and doesn't get to keep the enemy stuck. Even if you could The only units that can have their cake and eat it too are units that can continue firing while stuck in combat, like Space Wolves with a stratagem, and....well....guardsmen, with Vostroyan or Death Korps orders.

the_scotsman wrote:

I have never claimed that orders are unlimited, just that they allow basic guardsmen to do things that other armies spend CPs on or only have on their most specialized units. I can't count the number of times I've looked at a Stratagem or other ability and gone "oh, it's like that thing I can do with my Guard, but with fewer limits and not CP free/automatic."

Obliterators shoot twice with awesome weapons. Hive Guard shoot twice with awesome weapons. Guard shoot twice with lasguns. It's a giant difference.

the_scotsman wrote:

I have never claimed that orders are unlimited, just that they allow basic guardsmen to do things that other armies spend CPs on or only have on their most specialized units. I can't count the number of times I've looked at a Stratagem or other ability and gone "oh, it's like that thing I can do with my Guard, but with fewer limits and not CP free/automatic."

And did you ever think that's because if one goes and look at the "most specialized units" in Guard, they don't get access to these Orders?

That said, some of the things you're highlighting here as limits are...questionable. You have to be in close combat in order to fight twice. ooookay.

No, you have to be in 1" of an enemy unit in order to get to be issued the Order. You then get to fight during your Shooting Phase, and then you have a normal Combat phase afterwards.

You can't...remain stuck in combat, then fall back and still shoot? What other unit does that?
Every unit that can fall back and shoot has to do it in that order and doesn't get to keep the enemy stuck. Even if you could The only units that can have their cake and eat it too are units that can continue firing while stuck in combat, like Space Wolves with a stratagem, and....well....guardsmen, with Vostroyan or Death Korps orders.

Your portrayal of the Order made it read to me as though the unit would get to tarpit and then retreat+shoot in one action. I just wanted to make sure people are aware of the way things work.


Just like I'm sure you know that, as mentioned, "Take Aim!" doesn't do what you claimed it did.

the_scotsman wrote:


Also - this is true, I thought it was just a second advance which would prevent shooting for non-tallarn. So I suppose the fastest Guard can move is 6"+D6"+3" embark+12"+D6"+3" disembark for 1cp (new Emperor's Blade Stratagem)

You cannot both Embark and Disembark in the same turn. Transports section of main rules.

Orders aren't what makes guardsmen so awesome. The ultimate result of resolving the orders have minuscule effect on the game overall.

What makes guardsmen so scary is their board control and how cheap they are.

For 240 pts, mere 12% of 2000 pt games, 60 Guardsmen can swamp the entire deployment zone of any type.

Currently, 8th ed largely undervalues board control and low T/Sv single wound models.

 Kcalehc wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:


Also - this is true, I thought it was just a second advance which would prevent shooting for non-tallarn. So I suppose the fastest Guard can move is 6"+D6"+3" embark+12"+D6"+3" disembark for 1cp (new Emperor's Blade Stratagem)

You cannot both Embark and Disembark in the same turn. Transports section of main rules.

"can" trumps "can't." If I have a stratagem that says "unit immediately moves as if it was the movement phase" that breaks the usual BRB restriction of only getting to move once.
You can tell that "Rapid Redeploy" does allow you to disembark even if you embarked, because the GSC version of the same stratagem (that costs the same, but has the additional restriction of only being able to get out 9" away and causes mortal wounds) has an additional restriction that says "you can't do it if you embarked that movement phase."




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

I have never claimed that orders are unlimited, just that they allow basic guardsmen to do things that other armies spend CPs on or only have on their most specialized units. I can't count the number of times I've looked at a Stratagem or other ability and gone "oh, it's like that thing I can do with my Guard, but with fewer limits and not CP free/automatic."

And did you ever think that's because if one goes and look at the "most specialized units" in Guard, they don't get access to these Orders?

That said, some of the things you're highlighting here as limits are...questionable. You have to be in close combat in order to fight twice. ooookay.

No, you have to be in 1" of an enemy unit in order to get to be issued the Order. You then get to fight during your Shooting Phase, and then you have a normal Combat phase afterwards.

You can't...remain stuck in combat, then fall back and still shoot? What other unit does that?
Every unit that can fall back and shoot has to do it in that order and doesn't get to keep the enemy stuck. Even if you could The only units that can have their cake and eat it too are units that can continue firing while stuck in combat, like Space Wolves with a stratagem, and....well....guardsmen, with Vostroyan or Death Korps orders.

Your portrayal of the Order made it read to me as though the unit would get to tarpit and then retreat+shoot in one action. I just wanted to make sure people are aware of the way things work.


Just like I'm sure you know that, as mentioned, "Take Aim!" doesn't do what you claimed it did.

"Take Aim" does do what I claimed it does, you just have to be a particular subfaction to get it and not move - which basically means that the order is for HWTs who don't want to be moving anyway, because FRFSRF is always better for regular guard squads.

Restrictions in special rules doesn't necessarily mean lack of restrictions in similar rules is permission, though.

If there's a rule that says "Add +1 BS. This does not apply to Overwatch", and another that says "Add +1 BS", both units are hitting on 6s on Overwatch.

the_scotsman wrote:
With the current way that the orders system works, Guardsmen end up looking more like superhuman mega-freaks in game than the supposed "superhumans" depicted in the other factions.

There are a tiny handful of units that get to move twice for free in the movement phase: Lightning-fast eldar and harlequins specialized in close combat, swarms of genestealers commanded by the most notorious tyranid command monster in the whole galaxy, an angel imbued with the emperor's godlike power, and guardsmen. Recently GW made it so the angel couldn't do that anymore because it felt unfair.

There are a tiny handful of units that get to fight twice for free in the fight phase: Crazy bezerk sisters of battle strapped to death walkers, khorne bezerkers dedicated to the god of war and skulls, and guardsmen.

There are a small number of units that can double their shots at will in the shooting phase: Massive Tau mechas bristling with missiles and cannons who fire pneumatic support struts into the ground and brace themselves before unleashing hellfire, space marines in specialized body-encapsulating suits of iron man armor who stand still and unload into oncoming enemy swarms, highly advanced crystal-powered eldar grav tanks, and regular guard tanks and guardsmen.

I understand what they were going for with the orders system, but the current incarnation of the mechanic ends up making other armies and specialist units who make just one of the at-will commands their specific "thing" feel inadequate. In my last game playing my Guard against some Eldar, I was able to effortlessly outpace the fething Eldar in a last-turn objective grab, sending upwards of 40 guard bodies flying across the board 20+" to flood an objective with obsec bodies.

I'll take, Game Imbalance for 800, Alex.

Daily Double! Here's the answer: Because the rules writers clearly favor Imperial Guard.

You wrote... "Why are guardsmen so awesome?"

You wagered... $10000. That doubles your cash for a total of $20000! Great job!

At least you're starting to realize that you can automatically win against almost all lists, meta or not, by playing imperial guard, and without much difficulty. That's more than can be said for quite a few people on here.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 skchsan wrote:
Orders aren't what makes guardsmen so awesome. The ultimate result of resolving the orders have minuscule effect on the game overall.

What makes guardsmen so scary is their board control and how cheap they are.

For 240 pts, mere 12% of 2000 pt games, 60 Guardsmen can swamp the entire deployment zone of any type.

Currently, 8th ed largely undervalues board control and low T/Sv single wound models.

This. Guardsmen are 6 point models at the very least.

the_scotsman wrote:

"Take Aim" does do what I claimed it does, you just have to be a particular subfaction to get it and not move - which basically means that the order is for HWTs who don't want to be moving anyway, because FRFSRF is always better for regular guard squads.

By this logic, Space Marine units are at a -1 to be hit by ranged weapons.

I know what you're talking about. Not everyone is aware of the particulars and I dislike people pretending that this kind of crap is always the case.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:

I'll take, Game Imbalance for 800, Alex.

Daily Double! Here's the answer: Because the rules writers clearly favor Imperial Guard.

...

 skchsan wrote:
Orders aren't what makes guardsmen so awesome. The ultimate result of resolving the orders have minuscule effect on the game overall.

What makes guardsmen so scary is their board control and how cheap they are.

For 240 pts, mere 12% of 2000 pt games, 60 Guardsmen can swamp the entire deployment zone of any type.

Currently, 8th ed largely undervalues board control and low T/Sv single wound models.

This. Guardsmen are 6 point models at the very least.

If Guardsmen are 6 point models, then Marines are 20 points and fricking Scions are 15.

 Marmatag wrote:

This. Guardsmen are 6 point models at the very least.

Not in my Chapter Approved.

Have you lost a game in 8th edition to marines, with Imperial Guard?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

This. Guardsmen are 6 point models at the very least.

Not in my Chapter Approved.

No one cares man.

 Marmatag wrote:

No one cares man.

Unlikely. I suspect another thread about it will pop up in 3. . . 2. . .

 skchsan wrote:
Orders aren't what makes guardsmen so awesome. The ultimate result of resolving the orders have minuscule effect on the game overall.

What makes guardsmen so scary is their board control and how cheap they are.

For 240 pts, mere 12% of 2000 pt games, 60 Guardsmen can swamp the entire deployment zone of any type.

Currently, 8th ed largely undervalues board control and low T/Sv single wound models.

Not to mention the near total removal of area effect weapons which could mulch large numbers of models and changes to the way wounding works so now S5 is equally effective against T3 targets and T4 (and S3 is equally effective against T4 and T5). The changes to AP also help guardsman (and boyz) so now their armor actually does something unlike before where most anti infantry weapons had least AP6 or AP5. Before those T shirt and cardboard armor saves didn't do a thing against most shooting necessitating the need for cover which made forming screens across open ground very susceptible to getting gunned down.

the_scotsman wrote:


Yes, "Largely" except in this context means "doing none of the things anyone is complaining about."

I guess. Some have improved, some are demonstrably inferior to older versions, some were made obsolete and needed new functionality. Bring It Down for example just rerolls wounds on 1 now, whereas it used to reroll all failed hits against MC's and Vehicles, a much more powerful ability.

Move Move Move used to be "roll 3d6 pick the highest when you run(advance), move an extra inch or two". Now it's "Advance AGAIN multiplying your move by two. Oh, if you're the right army tactic, you can still shoot after rofl rofl rofl."

Thats probably the one that has the most merit to complain about ill grant.

First Rank Second Rank didn't double your firepower

Only partially true, it did double your lasgun shots at targets over 12" away, the only change now is that it's a bit better at under 12", but an extra half dozen lasgun shots probably arent swinging too many games.

and in the olden days you had to stay still if you wanted to double tap (you know, like you would if you're firing in ranks .

While true, that hasn't been the case for the last 3 editions.

Get Back in the Fight" was a morale thing, not a "Leave melee and shoot again at full effect like you've got a jet pack strapped to your back" thing.

The original functionality of this order no longer exists, it's about the only mechanic in the game to approximate the original intent of the rule.

That said, given what usually happens to guardsmen in close combat, how often are units withdrawing and still are able to hit back with great power? Relatively rarely, these are weeny units that will generally have been quite depleted.

Every order has the same NAME it used to have, but the effects have been amped to such goofy levels that you've now got guardsmen doing things that in other factions you have to be a fast close combat specialist, or a stationary shooting specialist, or using a 3CP stratagem to do.

Lots of factions and units have many of the same abilities and don't need to spend 3CP to do it. More to the point, in such cases, the units getting 3 CP spend on them are typically delivering dramatically more impressive returns than the guardsmen are.

Also, "every other faction can do that with auras" is a silly argument

I don't recall making that argument, only that there is a difference between a 200pt CC beast of a combat character and what their abilities are impacting, and what guardsmen bring to the table.

They also have psychic powers, one of the better lists in the game. And all these aura giving/order giving/psychic power casting buff characters are half to a third the cost that other factions pay for these characters.

Primarily because the IG characters have literally no other utility. They bring no great resiliency or killing power in and of themselves for the most part, just the order/aura/powers.

Marmatag wrote:At least you're starting to realize that you can automatically win against almost all lists, meta or not, by playing imperial guard, and without much difficulty.

Must be a grand conspiracy that mono-Guard aren't winning tournaments, then.

Marmatag wrote:No one cares man.

Pot, kettle. Please show us on the doll where the Imperial Guardsman touched you.

Anyone who has used both marines and guardsmen should have noticed how much easier it is to play with guardsmen. You don't have to be careful, you don't care if they die, etc. They get in the way to the enemy, cause more damage than they should, and are a general nuisance. So good. They are better in every phase of the game, including assault, because they block assaults so effectively, and don't REALLY care if they don't shoot.

I think this thread was more about how strange feels that something that in most other armies is made by a great power (Ynnari gain power from the souls of the death, Sororitas are literally making miracles, etc...), Guardsmen, normal, humans, do the same just because a dude is shouting them.

And yeah this is not a "well a SM can't kill 300 guardsmen ingame because fluff doesn't matter" and more about "The gameplay should try to create sensations that work accordingly with the expectation the players have" just like playing Custodes feels like playing a true ultra elite army unlinke Space Marines.

Orders are pretty miraculous, as it makes guardsmen better at something like falling back and shooting than the ultramarine, who practice it all the time in theory.

But then, it can mimic at 3 CP stratagem and let guardsmen fight again.

And then mimic a stratagem only slaaneesh forces get.

And it also makes them move faster than my jump troops.

"well a SM can't kill 300 guardsmen ingame because fluff doesn't matter"

Marines can't kill a dead cow with a power chainsaw atm.

catbarf wrote:

Marmatag wrote:At least you're starting to realize that you can automatically win against almost all lists, meta or not, by playing imperial guard, and without much difficulty.

Must be a grand conspiracy that mono-Guard aren't winning tournaments, then.

Marmatag wrote:No one cares man.

Pot, kettle. Please show us on the doll where the Imperial Guardsman touched you.

Everyone tells me how great guard are but you pretty much never see mono guard winning anything, just the loyal 32 boosting a small squad of whatever stupid stuff the meta is using at the moment. Sure they have cool order and can do some amazing things but at the end of the day you are shooting with lasguns on T3 platforms with poor shooting.

I think an adjustment to how CPs work (i.e. limiting how they are used, as in per detachment only) and also an increase in the strength of anti infantry weapons will really help. A simple solution would be to make flamers have the number of shots based on unit size. So 1d6 for less than 5, 3+D3 for 5 or more, 6 hits for 10 or more. That would put a lot of Oooomph back into the flamer and really make elite armies shine while horde armies will have to really think about who they are shooting at, as well as make flame weapons actually worthwhile instead of simply being used to snipe Eldar aircraft (which is very silly)

Guardsmen shoot at T5 and below better than marines by a long shot. I've fought some vicious lists with 120-150 guardsmen. I wonder if only group think keeps these lists out of the top, or if there actually is a weakness I haven't found.

Mass infantry can be a liability in a timed tournament setting.

Martel732 wrote:
Guardsmen shoot at T5 and below better than marines by a long shot. I've fought some vicious lists with 120-150 guardsmen. I wonder if only group think keeps these lists out of the top, or if there actually is a weakness I haven't found.

There is just no reason to play an inferior list, is all. If Imp soup got nerfed or outright prohibited, you'd probably see more mono Imp lists at the top.

 Trickstick wrote:
Mass infantry can be a liability in a timed tournament setting.

So much this. If tournament format dropped a round each day (down to 2) and went to a 4 hour time limit you would see a lot more list variety I think. Not to mention that horde lists could actually bring the strength of their lists to bear without slow play.

catbarf wrote:

Marmatag wrote:At least you're starting to realize that you can automatically win against almost all lists, meta or not, by playing imperial guard, and without much difficulty.

Must be a grand conspiracy that mono-Guard aren't winning tournaments, then.

Marmatag wrote:No one cares man.

Pot, kettle. Please show us on the doll where the Imperial Guardsman touched you.

"Mono" is the ultimate disingenuous argument.

A faction is good or bad irrespective of whether it's forced to play mono or not. Only 3 factions, Orks, Necrons, and Tau, really are mono faction.

Imperial Guard not winning as a mono faction means nothing, because they have no restriction where they need to be played mono faction. That's like saying "how many games have you won while standing on one foot?" It's irrelevant, because that's just not a metric by which the game is measured. And since you're bringing up tournament data, guard is still far and away the most common army and has bar none the most wins in 8th edition. Oh but wait, some guard players have added an imperial knight to their lists. Therefore, Guard aren't strong? Derp. That's obviously a fallacy, but then we get back to the whole "mono" sideshow.

the_scotsman wrote:

Nah, originally it was a thread about why it is that Guard orders allow basic human mooks to do for free what almost every other faction has to pass a test, spend CP, or have a super specialized unit ala Khorne Bezerkers to be able to do.

Fight Twice, Move Twice, Fall Back and Shoot, and reroll all hits should not be thrown around like candy.

Yep, it is just silly. It is not even about balance, if IG was costed fairly (it isn't) it would still be silly. It is just immersion breaking that a guy shouting at you can make a regular grunt to perform things that ludicrously agile ancient aliens or genetically enhanced supersoldiers with centuries of experience cannot. If these officers are so effective, Guilliman should definitely assign them to marine chapters and Assassin Temples!

In the spirit of sticking to the OP and the topic:

Guardsmen are not these uber-OP boogieman of the 8th edition. However, they ARE indeed the sole S-tier troop choice in the game, reasons being but not limited to:
1. cheap.
2. has access to 'do-this-twice-in-a-turn' buff with minimal point expenditure.
3. obsec.
4. CP generation system scaling based on how many troop choices you take.
5. board control.
6. change in how AP works, increasing their durability per point.
7. fall back mechanism.

Guardsmen have the best offense, defense & utility per point in the game currently with GREAT synergy to changes made to core mechanics in 8th ed.

They're pretty OP boogiemen. Especially if you try to play with elite troops.

Martel732 wrote:
They're pretty OP boogiemen. Especially if you try to play with elite troops.

Yeah but they're not uber-OP boogiemen - just OP boogiemen!

Okay. They aren't scatterbike good. So they are merely stuck at OP boogiemen. They lose the "uber".

 Galas wrote:
I think this thread was more about how strange feels that something that in most other armies is made by a great power (Ynnari gain power from the souls of the death, Sororitas are literally making miracles, etc...), Guardsmen, normal, humans, do the same just because a dude is shouting them.

Oorah!!

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Galas wrote:
I think this thread was more about how strange feels that something that in most other armies is made by a great power (Ynnari gain power from the souls of the death, Sororitas are literally making miracles, etc...), Guardsmen, normal, humans, do the same just because a dude is shouting them.

Oorah!!

Orks believe that red makes things go fasta. Humans believe that you have to follow orders. Same thing.

 Marmatag wrote:

"Mono" is the ultimate disingenuous argument.

A faction is good or bad irrespective of whether it's forced to play mono or not. Only 3 factions, Orks, Necrons, and Tau, really are mono faction.

And even Orks, Necrons and Tau effectively 'soup' with themselves. You rarely see one single Clan, Dynasty or Sept at competitive events.

 Marmatag wrote:

catbarf wrote:

Marmatag wrote:At least you're starting to realize that you can automatically win against almost all lists, meta or not, by playing imperial guard, and without much difficulty.

Must be a grand conspiracy that mono-Guard aren't winning tournaments, then.

Marmatag wrote:No one cares man.

Pot, kettle. Please show us on the doll where the Imperial Guardsman touched you.

"Mono" is the ultimate disingenuous argument.

A faction is good or bad irrespective of whether it's forced to play mono or not. Only 3 factions, Orks, Necrons, and Tau, really are mono faction.

Imperial Guard not winning as a mono faction means nothing, because they have no restriction where they need to be played mono faction. That's like saying "how many games have you won while standing on one foot?" It's irrelevant, because that's just not a metric by which the game is measured. And since you're bringing up tournament data, guard is still far and away the most common army and has bar none the most wins in 8th edition. Oh but wait, some guard players have added an imperial knight to their lists. Therefore, Guard aren't strong? Derp. That's obviously a fallacy, but then we get back to the whole "mono" sideshow.

You might have a point if tournament-winning armies didn't tend to rely on a bare minimum of Guard needed to fill slots as cheaply as possible, and no more.

Are we supposed to believe that the basic Guardsmen is so wtfbroken that a Guard army can auto-win against most lists (your words), but tournament players just haven't caught on? They're so brokenly, shockingly OP that they're taken in minimum quantities?

I can accept that tournament players will build the strongest list they can, and that means soup. But you didn't say 'soup is broken', you said Guard are broken in the most hyperbolic way possible.

Once again, people saying mono guard aren't winning tournaments is absolute selection bias. All competitive IMPERIUM players will make full use of the soup they have access to. Mono guard is bloody strong, it's just there are few people who gimp themselves with it when they have the option to play even stronger lists through soup. BIAS 101 FOR DUMMIES

 Sluggaloo wrote:
Once again, people saying mono guard aren't winning tournaments is absolute selection bias. All competitive IMPERIUM players will make full use of the soup they have access to. Mono guard is bloody strong, it's just there are few people who gimp themselves with it when they have the option to play even stronger lists through soup. BIAS 101 FOR DUMMIES

By the same token, mono-guard over performing doesn't mean Infantry Squads are OP. They are one unit in the book.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Sluggaloo wrote:
Once again, people saying mono guard aren't winning tournaments is absolute selection bias. All competitive IMPERIUM players will make full use of the soup they have access to. Mono guard is bloody strong, it's just there are few people who gimp themselves with it when they have the option to play even stronger lists through soup. BIAS 101 FOR DUMMIES

By the same token, mono-guard over performing doesn't mean Infantry Squads are OP. They are one unit in the book.

I play Orks.. wanna trade your catachan for my Ork boys? I'd take that trade, saying a lot as Ork boys are Hella strong

 Sluggaloo wrote:
I play Orks.. wanna trade your catachan for my Ork boys? I'd take that trade, saying a lot as Ork boys are Hella strong

Catachan is an OP doctrine and Guardsmen should be 5ppm.

Doesn't mean these utterly absurd statements about Guard armies being auto-win are at all reasonable.

catbarf wrote:

 Sluggaloo wrote:
I play Orks.. wanna trade your catachan for my Ork boys? I'd take that trade, saying a lot as Ork boys are Hella strong

Catachan is an OP doctrine and Guardsmen should be 5ppm.

Doesn't mean these utterly absurd statements about Guard armies being auto-win are at all reasonable.

Not saying guard is auto win at all. I'm saying guard would not suffer from having appropriately costed troops at 5ppm

catbarf wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

catbarf wrote:

Marmatag wrote:At least you're starting to realize that you can automatically win against almost all lists, meta or not, by playing imperial guard, and without much difficulty.

Must be a grand conspiracy that mono-Guard aren't winning tournaments, then.

Marmatag wrote:No one cares man.

Pot, kettle. Please show us on the doll where the Imperial Guardsman touched you.

"Mono" is the ultimate disingenuous argument.

A faction is good or bad irrespective of whether it's forced to play mono or not. Only 3 factions, Orks, Necrons, and Tau, really are mono faction.

Imperial Guard not winning as a mono faction means nothing, because they have no restriction where they need to be played mono faction. That's like saying "how many games have you won while standing on one foot?" It's irrelevant, because that's just not a metric by which the game is measured. And since you're bringing up tournament data, guard is still far and away the most common army and has bar none the most wins in 8th edition. Oh but wait, some guard players have added an imperial knight to their lists. Therefore, Guard aren't strong? Derp. That's obviously a fallacy, but then we get back to the whole "mono" sideshow.

You might have a point if tournament-winning armies didn't tend to rely on a bare minimum of Guard needed to fill slots as cheaply as possible, and no more.

Are we supposed to believe that the basic Guardsmen is so wtfbroken that a Guard army can auto-win against most lists (your words), but tournament players just haven't caught on? They're so brokenly, shockingly OP that they're taken in minimum quantities?

I can accept that tournament players will build the strongest list they can, and that means soup. But you didn't say 'soup is broken', you said Guard are broken in the most hyperbolic way possible.

Also from a logical standpoint is Guardsmen=instant win as mamatag states in thread after thread then more guardsmen would=more winning. So not only should you see mono guard winning tournaments you should see massed mono guard infantry spam winning tournaments because "you can automatically win against almost all lists, meta or not, by playing imperial guard". So it simply amazes me that we have this ultimate plug and play unit that auto wins against any list and players like nick nanavati are simply too dumb to figure it out. I mean look at that guy that clearly knows nothing about tactics or winning choosing to play eldar for the majority of the year. I mean look at all these idiots that spent a few hundred dollars on BA and Knights when they could have won with the far superior guard spam... i mean they clearly already had the guardsmen left over from the conscript nerf

Gw CEO: "Dammit guys! You got it wrong again! Everyone should have an equal chance at winning, this time I'm going to fire you and hire another team!"
Rule writers: "No Sir! Please give us another chance! We'll do better next time!"
Gw CEO: "I can't ignore those puppy eyes! Okay, just one more chance! Although, I have said that 8 times now..."

 Sluggaloo wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Sluggaloo wrote:
Once again, people saying mono guard aren't winning tournaments is absolute selection bias. All competitive IMPERIUM players will make full use of the soup they have access to. Mono guard is bloody strong, it's just there are few people who gimp themselves with it when they have the option to play even stronger lists through soup. BIAS 101 FOR DUMMIES

By the same token, mono-guard over performing doesn't mean Infantry Squads are OP. They are one unit in the book.

I play Orks.. wanna trade your catachan for my Ork boys? I'd take that trade, saying a lot as Ork boys are Hella strong

Dunno. Can I use IG Stratagems on them? Orders? If they're in the Ork army do they lose Catachan? Are the Orks still generating CP as part an IG detatchment? Maybe Guard survive in an IG army because attention is being paid to to other things? Maybe Orks get killed in an Ork army because the Orks are themselves are seen as the primary offensive threat? (I haven't played against Orks in a while) There's a lot that could be going on here.

Forgive me for bringing Catachan up, you're right, they should be able to out punch point per point Ork boys.

Doing some quick math...

Straken is 70, a Priest is 35, each squad is 40. Call it three squads getting buffed, so that's 225 points, against 30 Boyz (210 points).

Each squad gets 32 attacks, hitting on 4s, wounding on 4s.
Priest gets 4(?) attacks, 4s on 5s.
Straken gets 5(?) attacks, 3s on 3s at AP-1.

Gaurdsmen all charge in to the Boyz. 32 attacks, 16 hits, 8 wounds, 7 dead.
Boyz interrupt, putting 5 Boyz into the Priest and the remaining 18 into the two squads that have NOT swung, 9on each squad.
20 swings into the Priest nets 13-14 hits, 8-9 wounds, at least 4 failed saves and a dead Priest.
36 swings get 24 hit, 16 wound, and 10-11 dead, for two squads gone.
Straken then swings, getting about 4 hits and 3 wounds, for 3 dead Boyz.
Morale is irrelevant-the only Guard casualties are totally dead and Boyz are leadership 20.

Next turn! Let's put 9 Boyz into the last Guard squad, killing it, and 11 into Straken.
44 attacks.
29-30 hits.
20ish wounds.
Dead Straken.

So, with MORE POINTS of IG, the Boyz win.
This does assume that the Ork player spends two CP to interrupt... But why would you NOT?

Yeah, if you're gonna let 5 Ork Boyz hit your priest that you're bringing along as a force multiplier idk what to say to you hahhahahh

 Sluggaloo wrote:
Yeah, if you're gonna let 5 Ork Boyz hit your priest that you're bringing along as a force multiplier idk what to say to you hahhahahh

Leave the Priest out. Leave Straken out. One squad gets to swing before the other two get obliterated, and then on the Ork's turn, the other squad goes kaput.

Edit: Leave out as in "Leave out of combat" not leave out entirely. They still need to be there to buff Guardsmen.

Make the Catachans a Conclave for a bit more fun.

 Trickstick wrote:
Make the Catachans a Conclave for a bit more fun.

Is that from Vigilus?

What does it do?

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Trickstick wrote:
Make the Catachans a Conclave for a bit more fun.

Is that from Vigilus?

What does it do?

Several things:

Trait - Reroll 1s to hit within 6" in fight phase.
Relic - Moral thing, plus if bearer dies pick a unit for +1 attack and fearless
Stratagem 2cp - models that die can fight again before death
Stratagem 1cp - +1 charge distance

Some minor stipulations on those, mostly "be near a priest".

the_scotsman wrote:
With the current way that the orders system works, Guardsmen end up looking more like superhuman mega-freaks in game than the supposed "superhumans" depicted in the other factions.

There are a tiny handful of units that get to move twice for free in the movement phase: Lightning-fast eldar and harlequins specialized in close combat, swarms of genestealers commanded by the most notorious tyranid command monster in the whole galaxy, an angel imbued with the emperor's godlike power, and guardsmen. Recently GW made it so the angel couldn't do that anymore because it felt unfair.

There are a tiny handful of units that get to fight twice for free in the fight phase: Crazy bezerk sisters of battle strapped to death walkers, khorne bezerkers dedicated to the god of war and skulls, and guardsmen.

There are a small number of units that can double their shots at will in the shooting phase: Massive Tau mechas bristling with missiles and cannons who fire pneumatic support struts into the ground and brace themselves before unleashing hellfire, space marines in specialized body-encapsulating suits of iron man armor who stand still and unload into oncoming enemy swarms, highly advanced crystal-powered eldar grav tanks, and regular guard tanks and guardsmen.

I understand what they were going for with the orders system, but the current incarnation of the mechanic ends up making other armies and specialist units who make just one of the at-will commands their specific "thing" feel inadequate. In my last game playing my Guard against some Eldar, I was able to effortlessly outpace the fething Eldar in a last-turn objective grab, sending upwards of 40 guard bodies flying across the board 20+" to flood an objective with obsec bodies.

Because its about time they should be, the Imperial Guard are the most dominant army in the universe, whether you like their low tech or relative physical weakness or not. They should be top tier.

 Trickstick wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Trickstick wrote:
Make the Catachans a Conclave for a bit more fun.

Is that from Vigilus?

What does it do?

Several things:

Trait - Reroll 1s to hit within 6" in fight phase.
Relic - Moral thing, if bearer dies pick a unit for +1 attack and fearless
Stratagem 2cp - models that die can fight again before death
Stratagem 1cp - +1 charge distance

Some minor stipulations on those, mostly "be near a priest".

Stick those on the priest, I'd imagine. Can it apply to ordinary Guardsmen? The strat, that is. If yes... The math doesn't change a ton. More dead Boyz, not enough to make them lose.

8th edition rules make more wounds more valuable as a result of the AP system changes.

This is part of the reason guard is so good right now. The basic guardsmen gets a 5+ save, which isn't fantastic, but it isn't terrible either, and there are a LOT of guardsmen. Couple that with the fact that anti-infantry weapons generally aren't as efficient as anti-tank weapons and you get the mess we are in. I'm glad horde is good again, because it was absolutely non-viable for like 3 editions, but I'm wondering if the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Because its about time they should be, the Imperial Guard are the most dominant army in the universe, whether you like their low tech or relative physical weakness or not. They should be top tier.

I'd shy away from balancing armies based on lore. All armies are supposed to be viable on the tabletop.

 Sluggaloo wrote:
Forgive me for bringing Catachan up, you're right, they should be able to out punch point per point Ork boys.

I don't think catachans should be able to out-melee the equivalent points in ork boyz considering that catachans shoot better... but I sure think that catachans should be able to hold their own against melee units like ork boyz or hormagaunts. Catachan's whole schtick is that they are good in a melee.

Yeah it's both commanders, priests, infantry, conscripts and crusaders are allowed.

w1zard wrote:
8th edition rules make more wounds more valuable as a result of the AP system changes.

This is part of the reason guard is so good right now. The basic guardsmen gets a 5+ save, which isn't fantastic, but it isn't terrible either, and there are a LOT of guardsmen. Couple that with the fact that anti-infantry weapons generally aren't as efficient as anti-tank weapons and you get the mess we are in. I'm glad horde is good again, because it was absolutely non-viable for like 3 editions, but I'm wondering if the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Because its about time they should be, the Imperial Guard are the most dominant army in the universe, whether you like their low tech or relative physical weakness or not. They should be top tier.

I'd shy away from balancing armies based on lore. All armies are supposed to be viable on the tabletop.

 Sluggaloo wrote:
Forgive me for bringing Catachan up, you're right, they should be able to out punch point per point Ork boys.

I don't think catachans should be able to out-melee the equivalent points in ork boyz considering that catachans shoot better... but I sure think that catachans should be able to hold their own against melee units like ork boyz or hormagaunts. Catachan's whole schtick is that they are good in a melee.

Eldar have always been OP because of the lore, people shy away from that when its not their own army. If there are going to be tiers then why not try to be realistic lore-wise. I mean I primarily play WE's but lorewise, no army strikes more fear than when Guard, Orks or Tyranids are deployed and Chaos as a black crusade or basically any time since the Indomitus Crusade, but thats only chaos as a whole.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
If there are going to be tiers then why not try to be realistic lore-wise.

Because it's really not that easy to assess faction strength accurately on every level of analysis. The Imperium of Man is able to flood whole systems with huge fleets and billions of replacable bodies. They have the means of eradicating whole planets if that's what they need to do in order to achieve victory. One would think that the Imperium consequently is the strongest military force in the galaxy, but that's only true on a galactic scale, and it doesn't translate to the tabletop at all. Even moving down to planetary scale, which is still much larger than what is played on the tabletop, the military strength of the Imperium becomes a lot less impressive:

A remote human planet might be consumed by an invading Hive fleet without the Imperium even batting an eye because it just takes too long to get the message out there and move assets all the way through the galaxy. Maybe the Planet is not considered to be very valuable and other campaigns have a higher priority at this point in time, so the planet will be left to its own devices. The inhabitants and the local guard garrison will most likely get overrun, because in this very specific instance, the Tyranids are an overwhelming force.

Now, moving down to what is actually happening on the table, a Guard Platoon with a couple of tanks, a Knight and a Flyer is ambushed by a local Genestealer Cult that had been biding its time in order to prepare for the arrival of the hive fleet. In this scenario the GSC probably have a decent chance to win the engagement, because they have planned the encounter and start from a favourable position. They also have observed patrol routes and infiltrated the local command structure, disrupting communications and preventing reinforcements to be called in.

Long story short, on the level the game is played at, each faction has a reasonable shot at beating all other factions lore wise, depending on the circumstances. If this wasn't the case, there would be no point in having a relatively small force of elite soldiers like Space Marines. In the grand scheme of things, they are far too few to make an impact on a galactic scale, but they can and will completely demolish that one enemy stronghold that needs to be taken at a critical juncture of a campaign.

BertBert wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
If there are going to be tiers then why not try to be realistic lore-wise.

Because it's really not that easy to assess faction strength accurately on every level of analysis. The Imperium of Man is able to flood whole systems with huge fleets and billions of replacable bodies. They have the means of eradicating whole planets if that's what they need to do in order to achieve victory. One would think that the Imperium consequently is the strongest military force in the galaxy, but that's only true on a galactic scale, and it doesn't translate to the tabletop at all. Even moving down to planetary scale, which is still much larger than what is played on the tabletop, the military strength of the Imperium becomes a lot less impressive:

A remote human planet might be consumed by an invading Hive fleet without the Imperium even batting an eye because it just takes too long to get the message out there and move assets all the way through the galaxy. Maybe the Planet is not considered to be very valuable and other campaigns have a higher priority at this point in time, so the planet will be left to its own devices. The inhabitants and the local guard garrison will most likely get overrun, because in this very specific instance, the Tyranids are an overwhelming force.

Now, moving down to what is actually happening on the table, a Guard Platoon with a couple of tanks, a Knight and a Flyer is ambushed by a local Genestealer Cult that had been biding its time in order to prepare for the arrival of the hive fleet. In this scenario the GSC probably have a decent chance to win the engagement, because they have planned the encounter and start from a favourable position. They also have observed patrol routes and infiltrated the local command structure, disrupting communications and preventing reinforcements to be called in.

Long story short, on the level the game is played at, each faction has a reasonable shot at beating all other factions lore wise, depending on the circumstances. If this wasn't the case, there would be no point in having a relatively small force of elite soldiers like Space Marines. In the grand scheme of things, they are far too few to make an impact on a galactic scale, but they can and will completely demolish that one enemy stronghold that needs to be taken at a critical juncture of a campaign.

Exterminatus is extremely rare, the Imperium takes worlds with boots on the ground the majority of the time. Guard are only weak infantry wise, their armour is the most devastating in the galaxy because they are cheap to make and very effective, Eldar have high tech weapons but nothing that outstrips the Imperium, The Imperium has weapons that can match the Eldars, they just aren't as efficient. I mean pit an Imperial Titan against an Eldar Titan, the Eldar one may dance about like its a disco but it can just as easily be brought down. And infantry is is mostly the same, all infantry are pretty much a match for one another barring a few cases and then when it comes to elites and heavies ect all armies have ways to combat each. To say that guard are weak because humans are st3 for instance is short-sighted. As for marines, a chapter is the equivalent of an army, marines in the lore are the greatest warriors in the galaxy, on the table top they are incredibly under powered. Guard fight without marines most of the time, its rare for a guard army to ever see a space marine. I mean the Imperial guard are the reason the Imperium dominates the galaxy, they don't do it out of sheer luck.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Exterminatus is extremely rare, the Imperium takes worlds with boots on the ground the majority of the time. Guard are only weak infantry wise, their armour is the most devastating in the galaxy because they are cheap to make and very effective, Eldar have high tech weapons but nothing that outstrips the Imperium, The Imperium has weapons that can match the Eldars, they just aren't as efficient. I mean pit an Imperial Titan against an Eldar Titan, the Eldar one may dance about like its a disco but it can just as easily be brought down. And infantry is is mostly the same, all infantry are pretty much a match for one another barring a few cases and then when it comes to elites and heavies ect all armies have ways to combat each. To say that guard are weak because humans are st3 for instance is short-sighted. As for marines, a chapter is the equivalent of an army, marines in the lore are the greatest warriors in the galaxy, on the table top they are incredibly under powered. Guard fight without marines most of the time, its rare for a guard army to ever see a space marine. I mean the Imperial guard are the reason the Imperium dominates the galaxy, they don't do it out of sheer luck.

All of that is entirely true.

It doesn't mean that one army should be stronger than another on the tabletop just because. Otherwise, what point would there be in playing the weaker army?

w1zard wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Exterminatus is extremely rare, the Imperium takes worlds with boots on the ground the majority of the time. Guard are only weak infantry wise, their armour is the most devastating in the galaxy because they are cheap to make and very effective, Eldar have high tech weapons but nothing that outstrips the Imperium, The Imperium has weapons that can match the Eldars, they just aren't as efficient. I mean pit an Imperial Titan against an Eldar Titan, the Eldar one may dance about like its a disco but it can just as easily be brought down. And infantry is is mostly the same, all infantry are pretty much a match for one another barring a few cases and then when it comes to elites and heavies ect all armies have ways to combat each. To say that guard are weak because humans are st3 for instance is short-sighted. As for marines, a chapter is the equivalent of an army, marines in the lore are the greatest warriors in the galaxy, on the table top they are incredibly under powered. Guard fight without marines most of the time, its rare for a guard army to ever see a space marine. I mean the Imperial guard are the reason the Imperium dominates the galaxy, they don't do it out of sheer luck.

All of that is entirely true.

It doesn't mean that one army should be stronger than another on the tabletop just because. Otherwise, what point would there be in playing the weaker army?

Ask a Grey Knights player.

For what it's worth, I definitely agree that all armies should be balanced.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Ask a Grey Knights player.

For what it's worth, I definitely agree that all armies should be balanced.

There are winners and losers in every edition because for one reason or another GW cannot balance properly.

This edition the losers are GK, necrons, and SM.

The winners are DE, eldar, and IG.

In 7th edition, IG and DE were basically garbage, and it was SM, eldar, and Tau who were dominating.

All armies should be balanced but you are never going to get that with 40k, we will get a more balanced game in 8th because you have CP's and now everyone's got decent heavy options rather than 7th when there were just wraithknights Imperial knights and stormsurges, but if GW was balanced it would be awful because all armies would be the same and you'd have to get rid of the flavour.

If you'd like to see an interesting viw of what some IG might be like watch the classic Outer limits ep "Soldier", then get ready to name one of your IG characters Quarlo Chlobregny.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Doing some quick math...

Straken is 70, a Priest is 35, each squad is 40. Call it three squads getting buffed, so that's 225 points, against 30 Boyz (210 points).

Each squad gets 32 attacks, hitting on 4s, wounding on 4s.
Priest gets 4(?) attacks, 4s on 5s.
Straken gets 5(?) attacks, 3s on 3s at AP-1.

Gaurdsmen all charge in to the Boyz. 32 attacks, 16 hits, 8 wounds, 7 dead.
Boyz interrupt, putting 5 Boyz into the Priest and the remaining 18 into the two squads that have NOT swung, 9on each squad.
20 swings into the Priest nets 13-14 hits, 8-9 wounds, at least 4 failed saves and a dead Priest.
36 swings get 24 hit, 16 wound, and 10-11 dead, for two squads gone.
Straken then swings, getting about 4 hits and 3 wounds, for 3 dead Boyz.
Morale is irrelevant-the only Guard casualties are totally dead and Boyz are leadership 20.

Next turn! Let's put 9 Boyz into the last Guard squad, killing it, and 11 into Straken.
44 attacks.
29-30 hits.
20ish wounds.
Dead Straken.

So, with MORE POINTS of IG, the Boyz win.
This does assume that the Ork player spends two CP to interrupt... But why would you NOT?

This maths is garbage for a few reasons.
1. The Catachans have forgotten they have guns.
2. No overwatch from Orks?
3. You assume the Orks player has 2 CP to spare/hasn't used the interrupt stratagem already.
4. You've added buffing characters instead of pure Guardsmen which has skewed the numbers.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
All armies should be balanced but you are never going to get that with 40k, we will get a more balanced game in 8th because you have CP's and now everyone's got decent heavy options rather than 7th when there were just wraithknights Imperial knights and stormsurges, but if GW was balanced it would be awful because all armies would be the same and you'd have to get rid of the flavour.

Asymmetric balance is possible, it is just very difficult.

The bigger issue with the maths is that there is only one unit of guardsmen fighting.

32*3=96 attacks. 48 hits. 24 wounds. 20 dead orks.
If they can charge they can also shoot.
So 60 shots, 30 hits, 10 wounds, 8.333 dead orks.
Straken can issue just about any order which should comfortably kill the nob. Some deviation for overwatch etc, but still.

Then again if the situation is reversed a 30 shoota boyz squad would expect to shoot one squad of 10 guardsmen to death and then do around 26-27 wounds to guardsmen in assault, so if you were lucky (and could perfectly balance your attacks) you could kill both remaining squads along with straken and the priest. (This is assuming you are Red Sunz and so not getting in-combat buffs, its even better if you are say goffs or bad moonz.)

But then Orks are top tier troops, like kabalites, fire warriors and guardsmen.

The TL/DR though is that a 4 point model should not be able to shoot 4 times and then punch at S4 3 times even if does require buffing characters.

Also, if we're spending 2cps/ gaming the example using stratagems, then the Catachans spend their 2cps merging into one blob. Guardsman charge in, kill 21 boys. And at least 8 would be dead from long-range frfsrf. 16 if they got caught in RF range.

the_scotsman wrote:

ccs wrote:
Guard infantry squads are awesome (and always have been) because whatever the edition, for the pts, you can get a helluva lot more shots at the enemy. End of the day it's about making your opponent roll as many saves as possible, as often as possible.
Guard are also awesome because they're cheap enough that you can also afford to bring a good selection of heavier options in addition to that hoard of infantry.

They really haven't been. I'm sorry, it is definitely a pet peeve of mine when people decide "thing that's strong now has ALWAYS BEEN TOO STRONG" because in many cases (like this case) it really isn't. Guard in previous editions were flimsier (due to basic weapons having AP5 and the old wounding system making S5 wound them on 2s), less offensively powerful (fewer shots from FRFSRF in 7th and 6th and in 5th you had to not move to even double tap) and costed more.

You get this a lot about Dark Eldar as well, who have averaged about as well as Orks throughout the editions. One tiny flare of high-tieredness in 5th and that's...about it until now.

I never said they were too strong.

I saw this and just imagined somewhere some guardsman doing this with his lasgun to keep his squad entertained between battles.

https://www.facebook.com/Distractify/videos/753444278146397/

Are Guardsmen in general considered powerful? Or could you run some infantry and Leman Russes (without Catachan) and have fun in some home games without steamrolling friends?

The game can be more balanced it just requires a complete rules rewrite from ground up to make the game a activation system and not a 1 player does everything first then the other player does all their things after.

I've played many games like this and it does feel fair.x-wing 2.0 is a great example as I've fought players who have more powerful shios but I've still won based on skill . I've also fought players with a lot less points and I've lost because I was out skilled.

Well guys, I think this "G-guardsmen s-should be trash, r-right?" meme needs to die in 30 minutes from right fokkin now.

Guardsmen ARE awesome. They might be lacking in body, but the more than make up for it in spirit. And as a wise man once said, a plasma bolt melts the weeniest man and the gene-enhanced demigod all the same way...

 Tiberius501 wrote:
Are Guardsmen in general considered powerful? Or could you run some infantry and Leman Russes (without Catachan) and have fun in some home games without steamrolling friends?

There is definitely space for casual guard lists. I play a Meta that is supremely casual for the most part and we do have guard players who just play what they've collected through the years.

Amazingly I've never encountered the magical unicorn everyone always brings up who is a player who collects an army for aesthetics then magically ends up with a tournament competitive army. I've had players who claimed to be that, who just happened to ebay their collection every half edition for an army that's winning tournaments they just happen to love the fluff of, but never seen it occur honestly.

There's a wide gulf between 150 unupgraded guardsmen standing between you and a wall of ignores LOS arty using Catachan or Cadian tactics and a regular collection of random stuff with upgrades, oddball units and load outs that aren't currently optimal.

Funny thing is guardsmen just need someone to yell at them to outrun a plane.

Catachans are so jucied even Justin Gatlin is impressed

Catachan jungle tanks are so bad ass they kill more enemies than famed dedicated tank units.

Lasguns are sound operated but only respond to officers in case the milita get above themselfs.

Cadians spent so long standing guard they can't move and do things at the same time.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:


Exterminatus is extremely rare, the Imperium takes worlds with boots on the ground the majority of the time. Guard are only weak infantry wise, their armour is the most devastating in the galaxy because they are cheap to make and very effective, Eldar have high tech weapons but nothing that outstrips the Imperium, The Imperium has weapons that can match the Eldars, they just aren't as efficient. I mean pit an Imperial Titan against an Eldar Titan, the Eldar one may dance about like its a disco but it can just as easily be brought down. And infantry is is mostly the same, all infantry are pretty much a match for one another barring a few cases and then when it comes to elites and heavies ect all armies have ways to combat each. To say that guard are weak because humans are st3 for instance is short-sighted. As for marines, a chapter is the equivalent of an army, marines in the lore are the greatest warriors in the galaxy, on the table top they are incredibly under powered. Guard fight without marines most of the time, its rare for a guard army to ever see a space marine. I mean the Imperial guard are the reason the Imperium dominates the galaxy, they don't do it out of sheer luck.

My point was that the military strength of the Imperium is not as grand on the scale of the tabletop as it is on a galactic or even planetary scale. I wasn't referring to specific equipment or technology, just that if the scale is small enough (and 2000 points are an incredibly small scale), there is not much difference between the factions in terms of strength. So in a perfect world, where all armies are more or less balanced, that would be an accurate depiction of the lore as well.

Ice_can wrote:
Funny thing is guardsmen just need someone to yell at them to outrun a plane.

Catachans are so jucied even Justin Gatlin is impressed

Catachan jungle tanks are so bad ass they kill more enemies than famed dedicated tank units.

Lasguns are sound operated but only respond to officers in case the milita get above themselfs.

Cadians spent so long standing guard they can't move and do things at the same time.

^This is the reason I created the thread. Not the overall effectiveness of guard in tournaments, the over-the-top way their orders mechanic gets transferred to the game that makes them feel crazy strong, fast, accurate, etc when compared to other stuff in the game.

It's like my pet peeve that Eldar vehicles are faster than Dark Eldar vehicles, when DE vehicles are literally using the same engines but they've stripped off all the armor and safety features and built the whole thing just to maximise speed.

Guardsmen can move faster not just than the basic troops from the "Fast" factions like Dark Eldar and Harlequins, but literally faster than units that can FLY, using the Move Move Move order.

The problem is, with orders being automatic (unlike Psychic powers and Acts of Faith, it's not harder to get off better orders) and unlimited in the sense that you can use them repeatedly (unlike Canticles of the Omnissiah, where one is clearly better than the other but you can only use the best one once) they must be designed such that there's a compelling reason to use EVERY order over every other order.

The "run faster, don't shoot" order has to be sufficiently powerful to give you a reason to use it over the "shoot better" order, so you get guardsmen running faster than jetbikes. The "Fight in close combat" order has to compete with the "run away from close combat, turn around, and shoot at full effectiveness" order, so you get Khorne Beguardzmerkers.

If I were going to fix it, I'd make every order have its own restrictions, and I'd add power to an order if it ends up too weak.

"Take Aim!" - unit must not have moved in the movement phase
"Bring it down!" - unit must fire all its guns at the same target
"First rank, fire! Second rank, Fire!" - to be issued this order, every model in the unit must be touching the base of at least one other model in the unit, and the unit must contain a Sergeant to direct the firing.
"Move, Move, Move!" - Same as current order, however I would remove the "instead of shooting' restriction allowing Tallarn and Assault weapons to still work, and make it only +D6" extra move instead of 6+D6"
"Get Back in the Fight!" - officer must shoot a member of the squad
"Fix Bayonets!" - Rather than the current pile in and fight, I'd have this be "the unit immediately charges, if they succeed, they fight. In the ensuing Fight phase, they do not count as having charged".

I just had to throw this out there:

Tyel wrote:
The TL/DR though is that a 4 point model should not be able to shoot 4 times and then punch at S4 3 times even if does require buffing characters.

Imperial Guard players: It is OK for my 4 point infantry to make 7attacks in a turn. Meanwhile 13 point elite infantry get to make 2 attacks. The difference? 1 strength, 1 WS/BS.

 Marmatag wrote:

Tyel wrote:
The TL/DR though is that a 4 point model should not be able to shoot 4 times and then punch at S4 3 times even if does require buffing characters.

Imperial Guard players: It is OK for my 4 point infantry to make 7attacks in a turn. Meanwhile 13 point elite infantry get to make 2 attacks. The difference? 1 strength, 1 WS/BS.

... nobody is saying marines are OK for 13 points.

And the difference is 1 strength, 1 toughness, 2 better armor save, extra equipment (krak grenades), 1 WS, 1 BS, better leadership.... each of which makes it worth more than a guardsmen.

3 guardsmen rapid firing = ~0.325 dead marines
3 guardsmen using FRFSRF = ~0.65 dead marines.
1 marine rapid firing bolter = ~0.57 dead guardsmen.

So in that tiny vacuum, it's not like guardsmen are better than marines without buffs, and with buffs, they are a bit better than an unbuffed marine at shooting. One of their biggest virtues is that you throw more dice, so they're less random... roll enough dice and you approach the expected distribution of results. With marines you have fewer rolls, so you're more likely to have very "swingy" results where you just have unexpectedly bad or good results.

 Marmatag wrote:

Imperial Guard players: It is OK for my 4 point infantry to make 7attacks in a turn. Meanwhile 13 point elite infantry get to make 2 attacks. The difference? 1 strength, 1 WS/BS.

Space Marine players: You shouldn't be anything but CPs for my army. Why do you even get to do anything?!

Tyel wrote:
The TL/DR though is that a 4 point model should not be able to shoot 4 times

9 4 point models in a squad(remember: Sergeants don't get Lasguns kids!), buffed with an Order that prevents them from getting any other Order(unless the Officer has Laurels of Command) get to shoot their S3 weapon(it literally only affects Lasguns) 4 times if the enemy is in Rapid Fire range to begin with.

This means that the squad has:
-No Plasma Gun
-No Heavy Weapons Team with Mortar

So realistically, it's 6 models "shooting 4 times if they have a Lasgun and the enemy is within 12"".

and then punch at S4 3 times even if does require buffing characters.

They get to "punch at S4" if they're Catachan. The two additional attacks mandate not just one but two characters within 6" of the unit.

That one's an easy fix, "wholly within".

 Marmatag wrote:

Tyel wrote:
The TL/DR though is that a 4 point model should not be able to shoot 4 times and then punch at S4 3 times even if does require buffing characters.

Imperial Guard players: It is OK for my 4 point infantry to make 7attacks in a turn. Meanwhile 13 point elite infantry get to make 2 attacks. The difference? 1 strength, 1 WS/BS.

Well, and all those aforementioned supporting characters...and lots of tabletop positioning

The catachan doctrines could use some toning down. SM's could use some point reductions. But dont make it out like naked 4pt mods are doing that on their own (just like those Tank Commanders arent gettin 4d3 plasma cannon sponson shots like you keep posting), we're talking about a specific build going off in the most favorable possible way here.

For what you're describing to work, it needs at least 110pts worth of character models within 6" of a specifically Catachan infantry squad to function and have an enemy within RF/reliable Charge distance, not just something every Guard army can do whenever it wants wherever it wantd, and such units usually end up more like 10ppm after wargear and characters, assuming at least 3 squads to spread the characters over (and its hard to manageably spread them over more than that with a 6" bubble, and you need an additional officer after the at least the first two if they're all gonna frfsrf)

 Marmatag wrote:

Tyel wrote:
The TL/DR though is that a 4 point model should not be able to shoot 4 times and then punch at S4 3 times even if does require buffing characters.

Imperial Guard players: It is OK for my 4 point infantry to make 7attacks in a turn. Meanwhile 13 point elite infantry get to make 2 attacks. The difference? 1 strength, 1 WS/BS.

3 Attacks, 3+ save. +1 Ld. T4, some sort of Chapter Tactics. Possibly their own Character buffs..

Lasguns are the best gun in the game, hands down. Doubly so if they get orders.

Guardsman are a 5ppm model, which becomes 6.5ppm if you want to buff them with orders (2x10 infantry squads, 1 commander), which is still a very reasonable price for the amount of work they do. They're as good as Firewarriors, and Firewarriors are 7ppm (even more if you take the Fireblade leader guys).

Nevermind that if you go...you get:
...Mordian
Overwatching on 5+'s, just like Tau
Volley Fire (1cp) - roll a 6 on any of the four dice per model you use to shoot with lasguns, and you get to pick up ALL four dice for that model, and make another shooting round.
...Vostroyan
+6" range (tying with Tau)
...Cadian
RR1's/RR all misses
+1 to hit if shooting at a unit wounded previously this round
...Armageddon
Double shots at 18"
...Tallarn
Move and shoot

They're basically Firewarriors, 4ppm instead of 7ppm.
The real issue is that their PPM is so low, their damage/durability outputs are so high, and on top of all that - they get amazing stratagems and regiment bonuses.

Back them up with the best vehicles in the game, and soup on top of it, and well...

 Horst wrote:
... nobody is saying marines are OK for 13 points.

And the difference is 1 strength, 1 toughness, 2 better armor save, extra equipment (krak grenades), 1 WS, 1 BS, better leadership.... each of which makes it worth more than a guardsmen.

3 guardsmen rapid firing = ~0.325 dead marines
3 guardsmen using FRFSRF = ~0.65 dead marines.
1 marine rapid firing bolter = ~0.57 dead guardsmen.

So in that tiny vacuum, it's not like guardsmen are better than marines without buffs, and with buffs, they are a bit better than an unbuffed marine at shooting. One of their biggest virtues is that you throw more dice, so they're less random... roll enough dice and you approach the expected distribution of results. With marines you have fewer rolls, so you're more likely to have very "swingy" results where you just have unexpectedly bad or good results.

This is a bit of an odd way of calculating it.

3 guardsmen shooting marines.
6*1/2*1/3*1/3=1/3rd Marine = 4.333 points.
1 Marine shooting marines.
2*2/3*1/2*1/3=2/9 Marine=2.888 points.
Guard=50% better.

3 guardsmen shooting guardsmen.
6*1/2*1/2*2/3=1 guardsmen=4 points.
1 marine shooting guardsmen.
2*2/3*2/3*2/3=0.59 guardsmen. 2.37 points.
Guard=68% better.

From the above, Guard shooting Marines=4.333, marines shooting guard equals 2.37, so Guard=82.8% (!!!) better.

When you consider you get more than 3 guardsmen for each marine it gets even worse.
You can factor in the laspistol making a guard squad slightly worse - but by nowhere near making up this massive difference.

In terms of available buffs/synergy - the guard player can boost a unit's shooting by 100% (sorry, 94%~ cos of the pistol). He can boost their melee ability to four and half times as (!!!) effective versus T4 targets. (3 S4 attacks kill 0.25 marines vs just 0.0555 with 1 S3 attack).
A marine player can take Guilliman - which has a big impact if you are wounding on 5s or 6s but thats about it. A more typical reroll 1s to hit and wound aura is a 36% buff. This 36% buff doesn't make marines as good as normal non-buffed guardsmen.

A friend and I had this conversation already

IS need to be 5-6 ppm, they have no business being 4. That's a pretty criminal undercosting.

In addition, Company Commanders (and anyone with Voice of Command or whatever it is) needs to go up considerably as well. The Guardsman himself is not intimidating, but for the price of 17.5 points per order, you can make them into factories that pop out stratagem-like effects all game long for nothing.

These guys probably need to be like 60, since they have the actual orders.

5-point Guardsman = 150 points for 3 IS
60 point Commander = 120 points for 2 Commanders.

Loyal 32 now cost 270.

80 points doesn't seem like much, but it MAY get people looking in-faction instead of out of faction immediately.

Purifying Tempest wrote:
A friend and I had this conversation already

IS need to be 5-6 ppm, they have no business being 4. That's a pretty criminal undercosting.

In addition, Company Commanders (and anyone with Voice of Command or whatever it is) needs to go up considerably as well. The Guardsman himself is not intimidating, but for the price of 17.5 points per order, you can make them into factories that pop out stratagem-like effects all game long for nothing.

These guys probably need to be like 60, since they have the actual orders.

5-point Guardsman = 150 points for 3 IS
60 point Commander = 120 points for 2 Commanders.

Loyal 32 now cost 270.

80 points doesn't seem like much, but it MAY get people looking in-faction instead of out of faction immediately.

How do you suggest we point Scions and Tempestor Primes?

Tyel wrote:

 Horst wrote:
... nobody is saying marines are OK for 13 points.

And the difference is 1 strength, 1 toughness, 2 better armor save, extra equipment (krak grenades), 1 WS, 1 BS, better leadership.... each of which makes it worth more than a guardsmen.

3 guardsmen rapid firing = ~0.325 dead marines
3 guardsmen using FRFSRF = ~0.65 dead marines.
1 marine rapid firing bolter = ~0.57 dead guardsmen.

So in that tiny vacuum, it's not like guardsmen are better than marines without buffs, and with buffs, they are a bit better than an unbuffed marine at shooting. One of their biggest virtues is that you throw more dice, so they're less random... roll enough dice and you approach the expected distribution of results. With marines you have fewer rolls, so you're more likely to have very "swingy" results where you just have unexpectedly bad or good results.

This is a bit of an odd way of calculating it.

3 guardsmen shooting marines.
6*1/2*1/3*1/3=1/3rd Marine = 4.333 points.
1 Marine shooting marines.
2*2/3*1/2*1/3=2/9 Marine=2.888 points.
Guard=50% better.

3 guardsmen shooting guardsmen.
6*1/2*1/2*2/3=1 guardsmen=4 points.
1 marine shooting guardsmen.
2*2/3*2/3*2/3=0.59 guardsmen. 2.37 points.
Guard=68% better.

From the above, Guard shooting Marines=4.333, marines shooting guard equals 2.37, so Guard=82.8% (!!!) better.

When you consider you get more than 3 guardsmen for each marine it gets even worse.
You can factor in the laspistol making a guard squad slightly worse - but by nowhere near making up this massive difference.

In terms of available buffs/synergy - the guard player can boost a unit's shooting by 100% (sorry, 94%~ cos of the pistol). He can boost their melee ability to four and half times as (!!!) effective versus T4 targets. (3 S4 attacks kill 0.25 marines vs just 0.0555 with 1 S3 attack).
A marine player can take Guilliman - which has a big impact if you are wounding on 5s or 6s but thats about it. A more typical reroll 1s to hit and wound aura is a 36% buff. This 36% buff doesn't make marines as good as normal non-buffed guardsmen.

So just to be clear, you're allowed to assume a certain Reigmental tactic and two buffing characters (one of whom is unique) within 6", but you can't assume Guilliman?

Purifying Tempest wrote:
IS need to be 5-6 ppm, they have no business being 4. That's a pretty criminal undercosting.

In addition, Company Commanders (and anyone with Voice of Command or whatever it is) needs to go up considerably as well. The Guardsman himself is not intimidating, but for the price of 17.5 points per order, you can make them into factories that pop out stratagem-like effects all game long for nothing.

These guys probably need to be like 60, since they have the actual orders.

5-point Guardsman = 150 points for 3 IS
60 point Commander = 120 points for 2 Commanders.

Loyal 32 now cost 270.

80 points doesn't seem like much, but it MAY get people looking in-faction instead of out of faction immediately.

I can see IS being 5ppm, but 6 would be a criminal overcosting when you compare guardsmen to kabalites, fire warriors, and skitarii rangers.

Orders are guard auras. A company commander being 60 points is way overcosted considering that it is roughly the cost of a primaris lieutenant. A primaris lieutenant can re-roll all wounds for ANY unit within 6" of him and has MUCH better stats than a CC. Sure the CC has a better variety of buffs and can change them at will but he can only effect 2 units at a time within 6" of him, and they have to be GUARD infantry, which aren't exactly scary, even in their buffed up state. I can see MAYBE putting a CC up to 35 or 40 points base but no more than that.

Purifying Tempest wrote:
A friend and I had this conversation already

IS need to be 5-6 ppm, they have no business being 4. That's a pretty criminal undercosting.

In addition, Company Commanders (and anyone with Voice of Command or whatever it is) needs to go up considerably as well. The Guardsman himself is not intimidating, but for the price of 17.5 points per order, you can make them into factories that pop out stratagem-like effects all game long for nothing.

These guys probably need to be like 60, since they have the actual orders.

5-point Guardsman = 150 points for 3 IS
60 point Commander = 120 points for 2 Commanders.

Loyal 32 now cost 270.

80 points doesn't seem like much, but it MAY get people looking in-faction instead of out of faction immediately.

Last time Company Commanders were 60pts it was when that included a command squad of Veterans that could be given quad special weapons.

At 60pts all youll get is people just taking Primaris psykers for HQ's instead and dropping the commanders entirely for CP batteries, and just relying on Elites officers for Orders where needed otherwise.

Orders are not guard auras. It's AM gimmick that makes units that are otherwise ignorable into something less ignorable.

The problem is that guardsmen are no longer ignorable.

w1zard wrote:

Purifying Tempest wrote:
IS need to be 5-6 ppm, they have no business being 4. That's a pretty criminal undercosting.

In addition, Company Commanders (and anyone with Voice of Command or whatever it is) needs to go up considerably as well. The Guardsman himself is not intimidating, but for the price of 17.5 points per order, you can make them into factories that pop out stratagem-like effects all game long for nothing.

These guys probably need to be like 60, since they have the actual orders.

5-point Guardsman = 150 points for 3 IS
60 point Commander = 120 points for 2 Commanders.

Loyal 32 now cost 270.

80 points doesn't seem like much, but it MAY get people looking in-faction instead of out of faction immediately.

I can see IS being 5ppm, but 6 would be a criminal overcosting when you compare guardsmen to kabalites, fire warriors, and skitarii rangers.

Orders are guard auras. A company commander being 60 points is way overcosted considering that it is roughly the cost of a primaris lieutenant. A primaris lieutenant can re-roll all wounds for ANY unit within 6" of him and has MUCH better stats than a CC. Sure the CC has a better variety of buffs and can change them at will but he can only effect 2 units at a time within 6" of him, and they have to be GUARD infantry, which aren't exactly scary, even in their buffed up state. I can see MAYBE putting a CC up to 35 or 40 points base but no more than that.

I can't believe I'm about to say this in a way.
However I agree with the guard player, you've totally jumped the shark with 60 points per comander. The idea is balance not GTFO points.
Re-costing the Guard codex around 5PPM infantry squads and 40 PPM company comander would solve alot of it's issues.

Leaving Eldar soup(burn Yannari) fix DOOM (non craftworld) and we're a heck of a lot closer to an actually balanceable game.
Oh and Castellen being it's true 680ish points.

Bar GK but they buster busted.

Saying again:

Guard aren't going to be fixed with points. They're going to be fixed with a refocus of the Codex.

Conscripts going to 6+ saves and losing <Regiment>(no Orders!), Orders being entirely reworked to be an armywide 'series' of Auras ala the Doctrina Imperatives that Skitarii had and the Blessings of the Omnissiah that Cult had.

Why would conscripts go to 6+ though? They have exactly the same equipment that regular Guardsmen have. Well, at least the type of conscripts we see in game do. Conscripts are just soldiers fresh from boot camp, or given less training than standard Guardsmen. To get a 6+ save you would need different models to represent the sort of "frateris militia" style men that a 6+ save would represent.

 Trickstick wrote:
Why would conscripts go to 6+ though? They have exactly the same equipment that regular Guardsmen have. Well, at least the type of conscripts we see in game do. Conscripts are just soldiers fresh from boot camp, or given less training than standard Guardsmen. To get a 6+ save you would need different models to represent the sort of "frateris militia" style men that a 6+ save would represent.

For a reason why it could be different let me just use hockey gear as an example. You can buy the same goalie pads off the shelves that they use in college/pros and it looks identical, But on the inside its completely different. They actually have several different grades of protection as you continually progress through the ranks. The higher the level you play at the more expensive the actual gear becomes and the more protection it offers. Everything from the way its stitched to the actual materials are different.

I'm assuming the Imperium would do something similar. The guns/ armor handed out to people conscripted into service with essentially no training and used for nothing but wave attacks and human shields is probably of a lower quality then those regiments raised and trained to a normal standard. Why not mass produce conscript armor with cheaper materials

"Why not mass produce conscript armor with cheaper materials"

Well because it is more efficient to mass produce more of the standard line trooper armour. Also those conscripted troops may get enough experience and training to count as regular troops, and you don't want to have to keep track and rearmour them. It is easier administratively and more efficient to give line troops line troops quality armour.

Conscripts aren't being taken already, why would you nerf them. You may as well delete them, as no one would take them anyway.

Tygre wrote:
"Why not mass produce conscript armor with cheaper materials"

Well because it is more efficient to mass produce more of the standard line trooper armour. Also those conscripted troops may get enough experience and training to count as regular troops, and you don't want to have to keep track and rearmour them. It is easier administratively and more efficient to give line troops line troops quality armour.

Conscripts aren't being taken already, why would you nerf them. You may as well delete them, as no one would take them anyway.

I'd imagine that this would be combined with them being a point cheaper than Guardsmen.

Less durable (both with morale and a 6+), less shooty, can't be ordered... But cheap.

I would occasionally take conscripts if they were cheaper than Guardsmen, whether that is 3/4 or 4/5. However, I just can't justify taking them at the same cost as regular Guardsmen. What's the point?

I think I could handle 4/5/6 pricing for the three Guardsmen types, as long as veterans moved to troops. The flexibility of having 3 different costing troops choices for different qualities of army would be really nice. Sure, I would prefer 3/4/5 pricing, but maybe GW is reluctant to go for 3 point conscripts after the problems that caused last time. Even though I think that the commissar nerf largely fixed the problems.

Ya know why not just remove conscripts.. I dont think they actually officially have any models.

And with GWs whole no model no rules thing im surprised it even exists still.

 Desubot wrote:
Ya know why not just remove conscripts.. I dont think they actually officially have any models.

And with GWs whole no model no rules thing im surprised it even exists still.

They do have official models.

Conscripts make a core of the guard army, and are a major part of its fluff. Removing them would be a mistake.

 Trickstick wrote:
Why would conscripts go to 6+ though? They have exactly the same equipment that regular Guardsmen have. Well, at least the type of conscripts we see in game do. Conscripts are just soldiers fresh from boot camp, or given less training than standard Guardsmen. To get a 6+ save you would need different models to represent the sort of "frateris militia" style men that a 6+ save would represent.

Conscripts don't have official models. They never really have.
They've just conveniently been able to be made out of the Cadian Shock Troop and Catachan Jungle Fighter kits since both include enough Lasguns to outfit the models in the boxed set with them.

Conscripts, as they stand, continue to be problematic units to balance and in terms of theme. Some people look at them like you do and some look at them with an eye towards the penal units. Bringing Conscripts to 6+ and giving them Auxilia instead of <Regiment> actually gets them a smidge closer to fluff which has the "RIP"(Recruitment Indoctrination Penal) details which are mixed Regimental recruits and malcontents under a Munitorum Officer rather than a Regimental Officer. We really got a good look at it in "Only in Death" through Dalin Criid's eyes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sir Heckington wrote:
Conscripts make a core of the guard army, and are a major part of its fluff. Removing them would be a mistake.

Common misconception:
Conscripted individuals might make up the "core of the Guard army"...but that isn't the same as the actual Conscript unit.

Conscripts, the unit, are supposed to be broadly representative of things ranging from:
"Gunbabies" of the Cadian(and their 'descendant') Regiments: kids trained from an early age in live fire exercise who in some cases have almost as much experience and training as veteran PDF members to Hive Gangers ala Armageddon and the Gaunt's Ghosts novels with their 'Scratch Companies' that organized themselves and used whatever they could get their hands on with no real training aside from maybe a few PDF officers who got caught up in their craziness.

IMO, the fix for guard is a 4/5/6 point scheme. Concripts should still have the <Regiment> tag for access to doctrines, but the raw recruits rule should be changed to "Can't receive orders at all". Commissar summary execution should be: "If a unit within 6" fails a morale test, execute a model of your choice and redo the morale test without adding the roll"... simple, USEFUL, and you always at least break even regardless of the circumstances. It also ensures that large conscript units aren't totally immune to battle shock because at absolute maximum you are saving 5 models.

w1zard wrote:
IMO, the fix for guard is a 4/5/6 point scheme. Concripts should still have the <Regiment> tag for access to doctrines, but the raw recruits rule should be changed to "Can't receive orders at all". Commissar summary execution should be: "If a unit within 6" fails a morale test, execute a model of your choice and redo the morale test without adding the roll"... simple, USEFUL, and you always at least break even regardless of the circumstances. It also ensures that large conscript units aren't totally immune to battle shock because at absolute most you are saving 5 models..

Um... That's actually WORSE than nothing.

I lose 5 guys on Leadership 4 Conscripts. I roll a 1 on die. 2 run away. BUT WAIT! COMMISSAR! He shoots one, and I reroll to a 4.

Total dead Conscripts without Commissar? 7.
With? 11.

I'd make it this:

"When a unit within 6" fails a morale test, you may choose to reduce the number of fleeing models by 1d6, but never to less than 1."

 JNAProductions wrote:

w1zard wrote:
IMO, the fix for guard is a 4/5/6 point scheme. Concripts should still have the <Regiment> tag for access to doctrines, but the raw recruits rule should be changed to "Can't receive orders at all". Commissar summary execution should be: "If a unit within 6" fails a morale test, execute a model of your choice and redo the morale test without adding the roll"... simple, USEFUL, and you always at least break even regardless of the circumstances. It also ensures that large conscript units aren't totally immune to battle shock because at absolute most you are saving 5 models..

Um... That's actually WORSE than nothing.

I lose 5 guys on Leadership 4 Conscripts. I roll a 1 on die. 2 run away. BUT WAIT! COMMISSAR! He shoots one, and I reroll to a 4.

Total dead Conscripts without Commissar? 7.
With? 11.

I'd make it this:

"When a unit within 6" fails a morale test, you may choose to reduce the number of fleeing models by 1d6, but never to less than 1."

You aren't understanding.

Using your example, you lose 5 guys on Leadership 4 conscripts. You roll a 1 on the morel test roll, which would mean normally, 2 conscripts would run. Instead, the commisar blams one, you IGNORE adding the dice to the morale test, one runs away, you break even.

Ah. I did indeed misunderstand.

Yeah, I'd be cool with that.

I would expect that if there is a change to Conscript equipment, it would be paired with a new model kit of some sort, with GW's current scheme of things. Right now conscripts, veterans, and guardsmen live in something of a grey area to the "no model no rule" thing as they're broken down by fluff regiment not explicit models, as they all share the same statline and basic equipment and can be freely interchanged. That said, I don't expect we'll ever see that happen given the current business model, conscripts don't make for a sexy new kit, I think GW likes the whole "we can just make a gakload of one kit and have it produce lots of different units for this horde army".

Right now, there is no choice between conscripts and infantry squads. Unfortunately, I don't think there's a case for Conscripts over Infantry Squads until the latter get absurdly expensive given their current relative differences. Perhaps instead of worrying about whether they can get orders, perhaps just give them a single unique order related to being just a mass of bodies? Something similar could be done with the doctrine.

Ultimately, within 8th edition, I suspect all we'll see is points rejiggering, Guardsmen will go to 5ppm, Veterans will be left where they are for one reason or another, Conscripts will stay 4ppm, and GW will call that "good enough".

 Vaktathi wrote:
Ultimately, within 8th edition, I suspect all we'll see is points rejiggering, Guardsmen will go to 5ppm, Veterans will be left where they are for one reason or another, Conscripts will stay 4ppm, and GW will call that "good enough".

Veterans being the same price as guardsmen is utterly stupid. They really need to be troops choices. Stromtroopers should be elites, but count as troops inside <Militarum Tempestus> detachments.

I also think platoon commanders should be HQ's, but you need to take 2-3 to count as one choice. The way it is now, company commanders will always outnumber platoon commanders in any given detachment and that is so wrong from my perspective.

w1zard wrote:
I also think platoon commanders should be HQ's, but you need to take 2-3 to count as one choice. The way it is now, company commanders will always outnumber platoon commanders in any given detachment and that is so wrong from my perspective.

Alternatively, what if Guardsmen were 5pts per model, but for every 2 units of them you get a free Platoon Commander?

 vipoid wrote:

w1zard wrote:
I also think platoon commanders should be HQ's, but you need to take 2-3 to count as one choice. The way it is now, company commanders will always outnumber platoon commanders in any given detachment and that is so wrong from my perspective.

Alternatively, what if Guardsmen were 5pts per model, but for every 2 units of them you get a free Platoon Commander?

That's really wonky. If 7th edition taught us anything it is that "free" units are a bad thing for the game.

w1zard wrote:
That's really wonky. If 7th edition taught us anything it is that "free" units are a bad thing for the game.

You're probably right, though it wouldn't actually be a net gain:

Currently: 2x 40pt Infantry Squads + 1 20pt Platoon Commander = 100pts
2x 50pt Infantry Squads + 1 Free Platoon Commander = 100pts.
(And anyone using just 3 Infantry Squads in a Battalion would actually be 10pts worse off, even if you include the "free" points.)


Anyway, I thought it might be a way to make IG Battalions more expensive, without just being an outright nerf, as well as a way to see more Platoon Commanders taken and to hint at the old Platoon rules.

To make platoon commanders more common, just make the half the cost of company commanders. So 15/30 or 20/40. Then they wouldn't feel like a hindrance.

 Trickstick wrote:
To make platoon commanders more common, just make the half the cost of company commanders. So 15/30 or 20/40. Then they wouldn't feel like a hindrance.

Not a bad price point, BUT two Platoon Commanders are more durable than one Company Commander.

I'd rather they be a 1-3 HQ choice, like Lieutenants. (Maybe 2-3, so that way the 32 don't get cheaper.)

 JNAProductions wrote:

Not a bad price point, BUT two Platoon Commanders are more durable than one Company Commander.

The thing is, though, durability just isn't that much of an issue.

I'm not saying it never comes up but with characters being nigh-untargetable, I don't think it makes a huge difference. Especially when you have to take HQs anyway but Elites are optional in most cases.

 JNAProductions wrote:
I'd rather they be a 1-3 HQ choice, like Lieutenants. (Maybe 2-3, so that way the 32 don't get cheaper.)

I can see where you're coming from but having Platoon Commanders as HQs just feels wrong to me.

 vipoid wrote:

I can see where you're coming from but having Platoon Commanders as HQs just feels wrong to me.

Why? Small armies are platoon level. Now we have situations where there is two company commanders commanding a platoon of troops. How does that make any sense?

 vipoid wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
I'd rather they be a 1-3 HQ choice, like Lieutenants. (Maybe 2-3, so that way the 32 don't get cheaper.)

I can see where you're coming from but having Platoon Commanders as HQs just feels wrong to me.

But, as was pointed out, by making them Elites you're pretty much guaranteed to see more Company Commanders than Platoon Commanders. Doesn't that feel even more wrong?

 Crimson wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

I can see where you're coming from but having Platoon Commanders as HQs just feels wrong to me.

Why? Small armies are platoon level. Now we have situations where there is two company commanders commanding a platoon of troops. How does that make any sense?

I mean, if you're going by the military terms, small armies aren't platoons either.

Nevertheless, I see your point.

 vipoid wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

I can see where you're coming from but having Platoon Commanders as HQs just feels wrong to me.

Why? Small armies are platoon level. Now we have situations where there is two company commanders commanding a platoon of troops. How does that make any sense?

I mean, if you're going by the military terms, small armies aren't platoons either.

Nevertheless, I see your point.

Blame the post-Doctrines book. They used to be called "Junior Officers" with HQ slots being Senior and Heroic Senior Officers.

Literally removes most of the whinging about names by reverting to that.

You don’t need to completely rewrite the Guard codex to enact some of the suggestions here.

Conscripts become Gretchin-like and don’t benefit from stratagems, orders or doctrines. They stay at 4ppm. This can be done with a simple revised data sheet. Where Grots are 3 ppm, 3 ppm Conscripts have no place.

Guardsmen go up to 5 or 6 ppm and keep everything they have now. Perhaps they get the ability to be taken in larger squads.

Vets go back up to 6 ppm and stay as they are. They do not belong as troops unless their points are increased to justify the change.

Commissars ability is fixed so it actually helps mitigate morale but doesn’t make the army immune to it. Perhaps units only take half morale losses rounded up to a minimum of 1 if they have a Commissar near them? Or they can only affect one unit at a time.

I think these, pretty simple changes would go some way to help make the game more balanced and they hardly require a full rewrite of the Guard codex (which isn’t happening).

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
You don’t need to completely rewrite the Guard codex to enact some of the suggestions here.

Yes, you do.

Conscripts become Gretchin-like and don’t benefit from stratagems, orders or doctrines. They stay at 4ppm. This can be done with a simple revised data sheet. Where Grots are 3 ppm, 3 ppm Conscripts have no place.

Then Gretchin have no place at 3ppm thanks to a Stratagem where they become a FNP/Invul save for other units.

Guardsmen go up to 5 or 6 ppm and keep everything they have now. Perhaps they get the ability to be taken in larger squads.

Larger squads aren't the problem. If anything, they'd be more of a problem.

Vets go back up to 6 ppm and stay as they are. They do not belong as troops unless their points are increased to justify the change.

...They're not Troops. Have you ever read the Guard book? Get out.

Commissars ability is fixed so it actually helps mitigate morale but doesn’t make the army immune to it. Perhaps units only take half morale losses rounded up to a minimum of 1 if they have a Commissar near them? Or they can only affect one unit at a time.

It didn't "make the army immune to it". It was an aura, similar to any other ability that does the same thing.

I think these, pretty simple changes would go some way to help make the game more balanced and they hardly require a full rewrite of the Guard codex (which isn’t happening).

Sure it will. When they get rid of certain individuals who think Guard are still the "Derp Waves of Bodies!" route.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Vets go back up to 6 ppm and stay as they are. They do not belong as troops unless their points are increased to justify the change.

lolwut? 6ppm vets as an elite choice were unusable, the last year has proven that beyond doubt. It's only since they dropped a point that they've started to be seen as a potentially viable alternative to scions. Move them back to the troops slot and if necessary change them back to 6ppm, but vet's becoming troops is the real buff they need. As is, there is basically no reason to take vets when you could take scions instead, same BS, native deep strike, better special weapon density, lower model count lets them actually work out cheaper overall and the aforementioned native deepstrike means you don't have to shell out for a transport either. Oh and they count as troops as well so you build basic detachments with them, which is the real reason they're so much better than vets.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
You don’t need to completely rewrite the Guard codex to enact some of the suggestions here.

Yes, you do.

Conscripts become Gretchin-like and don’t benefit from stratagems, orders or doctrines. They stay at 4ppm. This can be done with a simple revised data sheet. Where Grots are 3 ppm, 3 ppm Conscripts have no place.

Then Gretchin have no place at 3ppm thanks to a Stratagem where they become a FNP/Invul save for other units.

Guardsmen go up to 5 or 6 ppm and keep everything they have now. Perhaps they get the ability to be taken in larger squads.

Larger squads aren't the problem. If anything, they'd be more of a problem.

Vets go back up to 6 ppm and stay as they are. They do not belong as troops unless their points are increased to justify the change.

...They're not Troops. Have you ever read the Guard book? Get out.

Commissars ability is fixed so it actually helps mitigate morale but doesn’t make the army immune to it. Perhaps units only take half morale losses rounded up to a minimum of 1 if they have a Commissar near them? Or they can only affect one unit at a time.

It didn't "make the army immune to it". It was an aura, similar to any other ability that does the same thing.

I think these, pretty simple changes would go some way to help make the game more balanced and they hardly require a full rewrite of the Guard codex (which isn’t happening).

Sure it will. When they get rid of certain individuals who think Guard are still the "Derp Waves of Bodies!" route.

1. You clearly have no idea how the Grot shields stratagem works. Learn your arguments before you make them.
2. I did not suggest that Vets were currently troops, my comment is to the myriad of people suggesting they should be made troops in here. Do no, I won’t ‘get out’.
3. Keep Comissars as they are then. Sorry bud but the old Commissar rule isn’t returning. Nor are 3 ppm Conscripts for that matter.

Guardmen are 4 ppm, that is the truth that we have to accept and that has been set in stone by veterans going to 5.

Yeah it makes tactical marines (loyal and not) look really bad in comparison, but the sad reality is that they are bad. Compared to other troops like kabalites and fire warriors, they are not so out of it at 4 ppm, so let's accept that tacs are just bad.

We also had the GW answer to this "Yeah tacs are bad, but you have those nice primaris troops right here!.Oh look now they are even cheaper!". Intercessors at 17 are exceptional troops, clearly meant to squat marine troops. The meta is a bit against 2W models right now, but mathematically intercessors are good.

Spoletta wrote:
Guardmen are 4 ppm, that is the truth that we have to accept and that has been set in stone by veterans going to 5.

Yeah it makes tactical marines (loyal and not) look really bad in comparison, but the sad reality is that they are bad. Compared to other troops like kabalites and fire warriors, they are not so out of it at 4 ppm, so let's accept that tacs are just bad.

We also had the GW answer to this "Yeah tacs are bad, but you have those nice primaris troops right here!.Oh look now they are even cheaper!". Intercessors at 17 are exceptional troops, clearly meant to squat marine troops. The meta is a bit against 2W models right now, but mathematically intercessors are good.

No 4ppm guardsmen as a baseline, is bad for the game. Firewarriors are 6PPM and intercessors are 14 points each on that scale.

+1 for Intercessors not being exceptional troops.

Boring numbers but:
Intercessor vs 4 guardsmen.

Intercessor shooting Intercessors:
2*2/3*1/2*1/2=0.33 wounds=2.83 wounds.
Guardsmen shooting intercessors:
8*1/2*1/3*1/3=0.44 wounds=3.77 points.

Intercessors shooting guardsmen:
2*2/3*2/3*5/6=0.74 guardsmen=2.96 points.
Guardsmen shooting guardsmen:
8*1/2*1/2*2/3=1.33 guardsmen=5.33 points.

3.77/2.96=guardsmen do 27% more damage in head to head.

Conclusion: Intercessors are reasonably "tough" versus S3/S4 Ap- 1D weapons. They have however got crap damage output. At the same time you are locking in vulnerability to D2 weapons with reasonably strength or AP or both.

If Intercessors could get down to about 14/15 points they might become interesting. I doubt however they would ever be competitive, because if they became meta relevant it is incredibly easy to add things that hard counter them, and as it stands a lot of them are common choices anyway.

Spoletta wrote:
Guardmen are 4 ppm, that is the truth that we have to accept and that has been set in stone by veterans going to 5.

Yeah it makes tactical marines (loyal and not) look really bad in comparison, but the sad reality is that they are bad. Compared to other troops like kabalites and fire warriors, they are not so out of it at 4 ppm, so let's accept that tacs are just bad.

We also had the GW answer to this "Yeah tacs are bad, but you have those nice primaris troops right here!.Oh look now they are even cheaper!". Intercessors at 17 are exceptional troops, clearly meant to squat marine troops. The meta is a bit against 2W models right now, but mathematically intercessors are good.

Ok let just use the new primaris...oh wait, GW didn't give them to all marines. Chaos can't take them, GK can't take them.

f Intercessors could get down to about 14/15 points they might become interesting. I doubt however they would ever be competitive, because if they became meta relevant it is incredibly easy to add things that hard counter them, and as it stands a lot of them are common choices anyway.

So they would cost 5pts less then strikes. That would be kind of a unfair considering they have 2W.

Spoletta wrote:
Guardmen are 4 ppm, that is the truth that we have to accept and that has been set in stone by veterans going to 5.

Yeah it makes tactical marines (loyal and not) look really bad in comparison, but the sad reality is that they are bad. Compared to other troops like kabalites and fire warriors, they are not so out of it at 4 ppm, so let's accept that tacs are just bad.

We also had the GW answer to this "Yeah tacs are bad, but you have those nice primaris troops right here!.Oh look now they are even cheaper!". Intercessors at 17 are exceptional troops, clearly meant to squat marine troops. The meta is a bit against 2W models right now, but mathematically intercessors are good.

4 ppm Infantry are the best performing troop in the game bar none by quite margin.

5 ppm Infantry are one of the best (joint top performing troops) still.

This isn’t a comparison between Tacs and Infantry either. This is a comparison between Infantry, Boyz, Cultists, Fire Warriors, Skitari Rangers and any other troop you think is half decent. They beat them all. Hands down.

If they stay at 4 ppm I’ll be petitioning GW to reduce the cost of every other troop in the game to balance. It makes Boyz going up to 7 ppm even more heinous and stupid.

w1zard wrote:
IMO, the fix for guard is a 4/5/6 point scheme. Concripts should still have the <Regiment> tag for access to doctrines, but the raw recruits rule should be changed to "Can't receive orders at all". Commissar summary execution should be: "If a unit within 6" fails a morale test, execute a model of your choice and redo the morale test without adding the roll"... simple, USEFUL, and you always at least break even regardless of the circumstances. It also ensures that large conscript units aren't totally immune to battle shock because at absolute maximum you are saving 5 models.

I like that a lot. It makes commissars reliable at keeping basic Infantry in line, but unable to totally stop Conscripts from fleeing.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
4 ppm Infantry are the best performing troop in the game bar none by quite margin.

5 ppm Infantry are one of the best (joint top performing troops) still.

This isn’t a comparison between Tacs and Infantry either. This is a comparison between Infantry, Boyz, Cultists, Fire Warriors, Skitari Rangers and any other troop you think is half decent. They beat them all. Hands down.

If they stay at 4 ppm I’ll be petitioning GW to reduce the cost of every other troop in the game to balance. It makes Boyz going up to 7 ppm even more heinous and stupid.

Agreed with this. I'm quite surprised that CA didn't bump them up to 5pts, because as it stands Infantry can outshoot Fire Warriors and that just isn't right.

I like the 4pt Conscript, 5pt Infantry, 6pt Veteran progression, but I'm not sure that Conscripts would be worth it at that price. Their terrible morale, reduced BS, and only receiving orders on a 4+ are more than a 1pt penalty, but at the same time 3pts feels too cheap. Maybe if they could still receive orders normally and had Ld6; then they'd basically be Infantry with 2/3 the accuracy, worse Ld, larger units, and no heavy weapons for a point cheaper.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Guardmen are 4 ppm, that is the truth that we have to accept and that has been set in stone by veterans going to 5.

Yeah it makes tactical marines (loyal and not) look really bad in comparison, but the sad reality is that they are bad. Compared to other troops like kabalites and fire warriors, they are not so out of it at 4 ppm, so let's accept that tacs are just bad.

We also had the GW answer to this "Yeah tacs are bad, but you have those nice primaris troops right here!.Oh look now they are even cheaper!". Intercessors at 17 are exceptional troops, clearly meant to squat marine troops. The meta is a bit against 2W models right now, but mathematically intercessors are good.

4 ppm Infantry are the best performing troop in the game bar none by quite margin.

5 ppm Infantry are one of the best (joint top performing troops) still.

This isn’t a comparison between Tacs and Infantry either. This is a comparison between Infantry, Boyz, Cultists, Fire Warriors, Skitari Rangers and any other troop you think is half decent. They beat them all. Hands down.

If they stay at 4 ppm I’ll be petitioning GW to reduce the cost of every other troop in the game to balance. It makes Boyz going up to 7 ppm even more heinous and stupid.

Yeah, 8 ppm Scions!

Karol wrote:
So they would cost 5pts less then strikes. That would be kind of a unfair considering they have 2W.

Play something else.

w1zard wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Ultimately, within 8th edition, I suspect all we'll see is points rejiggering, Guardsmen will go to 5ppm, Veterans will be left where they are for one reason or another, Conscripts will stay 4ppm, and GW will call that "good enough".

Veterans being the same price as guardsmen is utterly stupid. They really need to be troops choices. Stromtroopers should be elites, but count as troops inside <Militarum Tempestus> detachments.

I'm actually not so sure on that, I could see an argument for 4 point Conscripts, 5 point Infantry,and 5 point Veterans.

Infantry: Troop Choice, Objective Secured - they hold objectives and give you your CPs

Veterans: Better BS, more access to special weapons (but they also pay more for special weapons), rule of 3 - they hit more often and harder than Infantry, but their weapons cost more and you can only have 3 of them. So unless you really want that sweet BS 3+ on your lasguns, you are going to be paying more than the standard Infantry Squad, the price is just in their equipment rather than the body.

The point being, the standard Infantry Squad will have its place as the boots on the ground, while Veterans will give you more bang for your buck but require more investment to hit much harder than a regular Infantry Squad.

kurhanik wrote:
I'm actually not so sure on that, I could see an argument for 4 point Conscripts, 5 point Infantry,and 5 point Veterans.

Infantry: Troop Choice, Objective Secured - they hold objectives and give you your CPs

Veterans: Better BS, more access to special weapons (but they also pay more for special weapons), rule of 3 - they hit more often and harder than Infantry, but their weapons cost more and you can only have 3 of them. So unless you really want that sweet BS 3+ on your lasguns, you are going to be paying more than the standard Infantry Squad, the price is just in their equipment rather than the body.

The point being, the standard Infantry Squad will have its place as the boots on the ground, while Veterans will give you more bang for your buck but require more investment to hit much harder than a regular Infantry Squad.

I find it so hard to justify taking Veterans as elite units. With CP being so useful, just taking more Infantry is almost always the better option. Or if I really need veterans, I take Scions, which fill up troop slots and so give CP. It's not even like you have to take Veterans to get a brigade working, as Astropaths, Enginseers and Platoon Commanders are all decent choices.

I would totally pay 6 point for troop veterans though. Maybe even 7, but that is a lot. Then you could do a proper mechvet brigade.

kurhanik wrote:
Veterans: Better BS, more access to special weapons (but they also pay more for special weapons), rule of 3 - they hit more often and harder than Infantry, but their weapons cost more and you can only have 3 of them. So unless you really want that sweet BS 3+ on your lasguns, you are going to be paying more than the standard Infantry Squad, the price is just in their equipment rather than the body.

The point being, the standard Infantry Squad will have its place as the boots on the ground, while Veterans will give you more bang for your buck but require more investment to hit much harder than a regular Infantry Squad.

Why should veterans cost the same as infantry if they are better? Points cost is purely supposed to be about tabletop performance, not be about "role"... and objective secured is another stupid rule.

Veterans being elite choices means that mechanized vet armies, or aircav vet, or even foot vet (elite light infantry) regiments are impossible to play on the tabletop.

Guard should have a choice between cheap but poorly trained meatshields (conscripts at 4ppm) meant to be tarpit units and objective holders, expensive but flexible and deadly vets (veterans at 6ppm) meant to be hard hitting glass cannons, or something between the two (guardsmen at 5ppm).

Either that, or vets should be eliminated entirely and just have the progression be conscript>guardsman>stormtrooper. Problem with that is people would have to run every regiment that is not a bog standard infantry regiment or a soviet style conscript regiment as a <Militarum Tempestus> regiment instead which limits people's options.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Guardmen are 4 ppm, that is the truth that we have to accept and that has been set in stone by veterans going to 5.

Yeah it makes tactical marines (loyal and not) look really bad in comparison, but the sad reality is that they are bad. Compared to other troops like kabalites and fire warriors, they are not so out of it at 4 ppm, so let's accept that tacs are just bad.

We also had the GW answer to this "Yeah tacs are bad, but you have those nice primaris troops right here!.Oh look now they are even cheaper!". Intercessors at 17 are exceptional troops, clearly meant to squat marine troops. The meta is a bit against 2W models right now, but mathematically intercessors are good.

4 ppm Infantry are the best performing troop in the game bar none by quite margin.

5 ppm Infantry are one of the best (joint top performing troops) still.

This isn’t a comparison between Tacs and Infantry either. This is a comparison between Infantry, Boyz, Cultists, Fire Warriors, Skitari Rangers and any other troop you think is half decent. They beat them all. Hands down.

If they stay at 4 ppm I’ll be petitioning GW to reduce the cost of every other troop in the game to balance. It makes Boyz going up to 7 ppm even more heinous and stupid.

Check your math, guards at 4ppm have exceptional durability, but have less firepower point per point than firewarriors and kabalite against a lot of targets. At 5 points they would be woefully behind them.

 Trickstick wrote:
Why would conscripts go to 6+ though? They have exactly the same equipment that regular Guardsmen have. Well, at least the type of conscripts we see in game do. Conscripts are just soldiers fresh from boot camp, or given less training than standard Guardsmen. To get a 6+ save you would need different models to represent the sort of "frateris militia" style men that a 6+ save would represent.

Erm . . . Catachan figures? Not armoured at all?

Maybe conscripts get armour that does not pass quality control?

Moriarty wrote:


Erm . . . Catachan figures? Not armoured at all?

They are so buff bullets just bounce off their abs

Spoletta wrote:
Check your math, guards at 4ppm have exceptional durability, but have less firepower point per point than firewarriors and kabalite against a lot of targets. At 5 points they would be woefully behind them.

Completely and utterly wrong.

The maths has been done. Its also been referenced in this thread. I'm not going to ask the person who's done it already to do it again.

I think you need to check your numbers.

Does this mean if the maths is as I've states you'll concede the point that Infantry are too cheap?

w1zard wrote:

Why should veterans cost the same as infantry if they are better? Points cost is purely supposed to be about tabletop performance, not be about "role"... and objective secured is another stupid rule.

Veterans being elite choices means that mechanized vet armies, or aircav vet, or even foot vet (elite light infantry) regiments are impossible to play on the tabletop.

Guard should have a choice between cheap but poorly trained meatshields (conscripts at 4ppm) meant to be tarpit units and objective holders, expensive but flexible and deadly vets (veterans at 6ppm) meant to be hard hitting glass cannons, or something between the two (guardsmen at 5ppm).

Points cost most definitely needs to take battlefield role into account. Objective secured is not a stupid rule at all.

A mechanised vet list or foot based vet list is absolutely possible on the tabletop. You just aren't happy because it doesn't give you a ton of CP. Well such is life. Its why my dedicated Biker Orks army has to take Grots or Boys for CP. Why pure jetbike armies aren't a thing anymore. Why pure Deathwing armies don't exist. Every faction has had the same change so I'm not sure why Guard should be any different? The complaint is even more confusing because Guard players are very quick to point out that their stratagems are 'useless' and the CP they provide is used only to feed better stratagems in other factions. I guess in a pure Guard list you won't miss not having CP then, as the stratagems are so poor?

I hope that you don't mean that dumb math that gets thrown around pitting one unit against each other, because it is 100% misleading in its results.

Man, if you truly run it you get that Hunters are the most OP thing in the game, because they are 250% better than Lemans, how can you even consider a math like that??.

Trickstick wrote:

kurhanik wrote:
I'm actually not so sure on that, I could see an argument for 4 point Conscripts, 5 point Infantry,and 5 point Veterans.

Infantry: Troop Choice, Objective Secured - they hold objectives and give you your CPs

Veterans: Better BS, more access to special weapons (but they also pay more for special weapons), rule of 3 - they hit more often and harder than Infantry, but their weapons cost more and you can only have 3 of them. So unless you really want that sweet BS 3+ on your lasguns, you are going to be paying more than the standard Infantry Squad, the price is just in their equipment rather than the body.

The point being, the standard Infantry Squad will have its place as the boots on the ground, while Veterans will give you more bang for your buck but require more investment to hit much harder than a regular Infantry Squad.

I find it so hard to justify taking Veterans as elite units. With CP being so useful, just taking more Infantry is almost always the better option. Or if I really need veterans, I take Scions, which fill up troop slots and so give CP. It's not even like you have to take Veterans to get a brigade working, as Astropaths, Enginseers and Platoon Commanders are all decent choices.

I would totally pay 6 point for troop veterans though. Maybe even 7, but that is a lot. Then you could do a proper mechvet brigade.

Oh, I'm not saying Veterans wouldn't be better as a troop choice, I'm just saying that if everything stays as it is, but regular Infantry get a price bump, Veterans at least will have a place at 5ppm.

w1zard wrote:

kurhanik wrote:
Veterans: Better BS, more access to special weapons (but they also pay more for special weapons), rule of 3 - they hit more often and harder than Infantry, but their weapons cost more and you can only have 3 of them. So unless you really want that sweet BS 3+ on your lasguns, you are going to be paying more than the standard Infantry Squad, the price is just in their equipment rather than the body.

The point being, the standard Infantry Squad will have its place as the boots on the ground, while Veterans will give you more bang for your buck but require more investment to hit much harder than a regular Infantry Squad.

Why should veterans cost the same as infantry if they are better? Points cost is purely supposed to be about tabletop performance, not be about "role"... and objective secured is another stupid rule.

Veterans being elite choices means that mechanized vet armies, or aircav vet, or even foot vet (elite light infantry) regiments are impossible to play on the tabletop.

Guard should have a choice between cheap but poorly trained meatshields (conscripts at 4ppm) meant to be tarpit units and objective holders, expensive but flexible and deadly vets (veterans at 6ppm) meant to be hard hitting glass cannons, or something between the two (guardsmen at 5ppm).

Either that, or vets should be eliminated entirely and just have the progression be conscript>guardsman>stormtrooper. Problem with that is people would have to run every regiment that is not a bog standard infantry regiment or a soviet style conscript regiment as a <Militarum Tempestus> regiment instead which limits people's options.

Well, the idea is that while Veterans would be the same price per model as Infantry, they still pay more to kit out. With Chapter Approved, I think a Plasma Gun is 4 points more to give to a Veteran than an Infantryman. The slot they are in matters specifically because that is the current limiting factor of using them - they generate less cp, lack ob sec, and limit your other Elite choices.

So:
Infantry Squad (noting 5ppm), 1 Plasma Gun - 57 points --- 4+ to hit, a troop choice so A) basically required and B) objective secured
Veterans (also 5ppm), 3 Plasma Guns - 83 points (noting I don't have Chapter Approved yet, but I think 11 is the new points for Plasma) --- 3+ to hit, elite choice so A) limited by rule of 3 and Elite slots, and B) no objective secured

One squad is killier while the other is soakier, and neither are the same cost per unit in the end. I will admit that not all special weapons, and none of the heavy weapons have alternate points cost, so not a perfect example, but the other point still stands.

I am solely noting this on the thought process that GW is more likely to rejigger points than to say "hey, remember how we moved Veterans to the Elite slot 2 years ago? Pretend that didn't happen".

For your second point, with the loss of Carapace Armor for Veterans, some people already have to use Tempestus to mark their better kitted out troopers.

An Actual Englishman wrote:

w1zard wrote:

Why should veterans cost the same as infantry if they are better? Points cost is purely supposed to be about tabletop performance, not be about "role"... and objective secured is another stupid rule.

Veterans being elite choices means that mechanized vet armies, or aircav vet, or even foot vet (elite light infantry) regiments are impossible to play on the tabletop.

Guard should have a choice between cheap but poorly trained meatshields (conscripts at 4ppm) meant to be tarpit units and objective holders, expensive but flexible and deadly vets (veterans at 6ppm) meant to be hard hitting glass cannons, or something between the two (guardsmen at 5ppm).

Points cost most definitely needs to take battlefield role into account. Objective secured is not a stupid rule at all.

A mechanised vet list or foot based vet list is absolutely possible on the tabletop. You just aren't happy because it doesn't give you a ton of CP. Well such is life. Its why my dedicated Biker Orks army has to take Grots or Boys for CP. Why pure jetbike armies aren't a thing anymore. Why pure Deathwing armies don't exist. Every faction has had the same change so I'm not sure why Guard should be any different? The complaint is even more confusing because Guard players are very quick to point out that their stratagems are 'useless' and the CP they provide is used only to feed better stratagems in other factions. I guess in a pure Guard list you won't miss not having CP then, as the stratagems are so poor?

The reason a full vet list isn't possible on the tabletop is due to them being elite slot, limiting you to 3 Veterans. In past editions, Veterans were troops, so you could make a list that was pure Veterans without any standard Infantry or Conscripts. Hard to call a list a vet list if it only includes 3 squads of them.

If I ever get my hands on that Vigilus book, I do want to test out that Mechanized group with my Steel Legion. Might even be somewhat useable with Veterans due to the recent price cuts on them, their special weapons, and Chimera. If the bit I saw is true, I'd be able to move, disembark via stratagem, and then reembark said unit afterwards thanks to Steel Legion rules, which gives at least a small glimpse at the old Mech Vets from past editions.

The armageddon order can't be used on a unit that disembarked this turn, so your vet squad would have to spend a turn in the open before being able to hop in on your next turn.

Because they're the real protagonists in 40k

Marines are just a front

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
A mechanised vet list or foot based vet list is absolutely possible on the tabletop.

Please, enlighten me on this considering vets are elites and therefore limited to the rule of 3.

kurhanik wrote:
Well, the idea is that while Veterans would be the same price per model as Infantry, they still pay more to kit out. With Chapter Approved, I think a Plasma Gun is 4 points more to give to a Veteran than an Infantryman. The slot they are in matters specifically because that is the current limiting factor of using them - they generate less cp, lack ob sec, and limit your other Elite choices.

I just fundamentally disagree with the concept of a better unit being the same price as a worse unit tabletop wise. That is not how the points system is intended to work, and encourages spam. In your scenario, the only time I would ever take standard guardsmen is if my elite slots are full because veterans are just better in every way.

kurhanik wrote:
For your second point, with the loss of Carapace Armor for Veterans, some people already have to use Tempestus to mark their better kitted out troopers.

I don't mean in terms of models using the "counts as" rule... I mean if veterans are eliminated, people who want to run anything more elite than a standard infantry regiment will have to run stormtroopers or go home. Stormtroopers have their own rules and restrictions, and don't even get their doctrines if anything else in their detachment doesn't have the <Militarum Tempestus> keyword.

Tyel wrote:

Karol wrote:
So they would cost 5pts less then strikes. That would be kind of a unfair considering they have 2W.

Play something else.

40pts termintors, because GK don't have any other troops? termintors are even worse when comparing to primaris. They get same fire power for half the points and twice as many wounds, on top of chapter tactics or any synergy marines have between their units.

Please, enlighten me on this considering vets are elites and therefore limited to the rule of 3.

Can't IG "cheat" the way chaos does, where a catachan vet and cadian vet are two different type of models.

w1zard wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
A mechanised vet list or foot based vet list is absolutely possible on the tabletop.

Please, enlighten me on this considering vets are elites and therefore limited to the rule of 3.

kurhanik wrote:
Well, the idea is that while Veterans would be the same price per model as Infantry, they still pay more to kit out. With Chapter Approved, I think a Plasma Gun is 4 points more to give to a Veteran than an Infantryman. The slot they are in matters specifically because that is the current limiting factor of using them - they generate less cp, lack ob sec, and limit your other Elite choices.

I just fundamentally disagree with the concept of a better unit being the same price as a worse unit tabletop wise. That is not how the points system is intended to work, and encourages spam. In your scenario, the only time I would ever take standard guardsmen is if my elite slots are full because veterans are just better in every way.

kurhanik wrote:
For your second point, with the loss of Carapace Armor for Veterans, some people already have to use Tempestus to mark their better kitted out troopers.

I don't mean in terms of models using the "counts as" rule... I mean if veterans are eliminated, people who want to run anything more elite than a standard infantry regiment will have to run stormtroopers or go home. Stormtroopers have their own rules and restrictions, and don't even get their doctrines if anything else in their detachment doesn't have the <Militarum Tempestus> keyword.

That last bit is fairly debunked with the Tempestus Drop Force specialist detachment. Militarum Tempestus can take Advisors and Auxillia without losing Stormtroopers.

w1zard wrote:

I just fundamentally disagree with the concept of a better unit being the same price as a worse unit tabletop wise. That is not how the points system is intended to work, and encourages spam. In your scenario, the only time I would ever take standard guardsmen is if my elite slots are full because veterans are just better in every way.

Whilst I agree that it seems wrong to have a unit with worse stats to cost the same than unit with better stats, the fact is that being a troop is worth something, worth quite a lot in fact. Troops have objective secured, and more importantly are much more effective generating CP. These are tangible effects which should be reflected in the point cost of the unit.

Karol wrote:
Can't IG "cheat" the way chaos does, where a catachan vet and cadian vet are two different type of models.

No, a veteran squad is a veteran squad, regardless of the doctrine or regiment tag it has. You get 2/3/4 at the appropriate point levels and that is it.

 Apple Peel wrote:
That last bit is fairly debunked with the Tempestus Drop Force specialist detachment. Militarum Tempestus can take Advisors and Auxillia without losing Stormtroopers.

Oh I am well aware. But you can't say... run a "heavy infantry" regiment using stormtroopers and take tanks without losing your doctrine. Trying to run any kind of "elite infantry" guard list using stormtroopers as your "veterans" doesn't work the second you want to include anything except advisors, taurox, or valks.

 Crimson wrote:
Whilst I agree that it seems wrong to have a unit with worse stats to cost the same than unit with better stats, the fact is that being a troop is worth something, worth quite a lot in fact. Troops have objective secured, and more importantly are much more effective generating CP. These are tangible effects which should be reflected in the point cost of the unit.

I see your point, but I want to just re-iterate that points are NOT the way to balance this. Again, I bring up the example of why the hell should I take basic Infantry Squads if I have elite slots open for veterans in that scenario, since veterans cost the same and are better in pretty much every way?

 Apple Peel wrote:
That last bit is fairly debunked with the Tempestus Drop Force specialist detachment. Militarum Tempestus can take Advisors and Auxillia without losing Stormtroopers.

Oh I am well aware. But you can't say... run a "heavy infantry" regiment using stormtroopers and take tanks without losing your doctrine. Trying to run any kind of "elite infantry" guard list using stormtroopers as your "veterans" doesn't work the second you want to include anything except advisors, taurox, or valks.

Good thing I’m building Militarum Tempestus list, in which I only use that stuff! Hew hew hew.

w1zard wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Whilst I agree that it seems wrong to have a unit with worse stats to cost the same than unit with better stats, the fact is that being a troop is worth something, worth quite a lot in fact. Troops have objective secured, and more importantly are much more effective generating CP. These are tangible effects which should be reflected in the point cost of the unit.

I see your point, but I want to just re-iterate that points are NOT the way to balance this. Again, I bring up the example of why the hell should I take basic Infantry Squads if I have elite slots open for veterans in that scenario, since veterans cost the same and are better in pretty much every way?

Vets are glass cannon's, they have a much better damage output but are every bit as fragile as regular infantry squads. They also cost more (extra special weapon choices and the increased cost for those special weapons), in short they'll be less efficent as objective holders, screening units and ablative wounds, things you'll still want typical infantry squads for as they're more cost efficient.

w1zard wrote:
Oh I am well aware. But you can't say... run a "heavy infantry" regiment using stormtroopers and take tanks without losing your doctrine. Trying to run any kind of "elite infantry" guard list using stormtroopers as your "veterans" doesn't work the second you want to include anything except advisors, taurox, or valks.

Sure you can. Just take a Tempestus battalion and then add a spearhead for the tanks.

 Trickstick wrote:

w1zard wrote:
Oh I am well aware. But you can't say... run a "heavy infantry" regiment using stormtroopers and take tanks without losing your doctrine. Trying to run any kind of "elite infantry" guard list using stormtroopers as your "veterans" doesn't work the second you want to include anything except advisors, taurox, or valks.

Sure you can. Just take a Tempestus battalion and then add a spearhead for the tanks.

Let me just load up my heavy infantry regiment in Chimeras and.... Oh
Oh no.

Guardsmen are so good because GW loves money. Imperial Guard are one of the most expensive armies to collect and if the most competitive army also costs the most money, then GW sales go through the roof. Just look at their profits last year!

Just look at Chapter Approved 2018. The models that got the greatest reductions were the ones that arguably sell the least. Tyranids is a great example of this, with a lot of the big nids taking reductions but only the ones that are barely used by most people.

The other side of mass points reductions means those who build to a set list, MUST buy more models to make their army up to the points it used to be.

In about a year, when they have reached market saturation, i will put good money on the belief they will nerf Imperial Guard with points increases and instead favour another army that will lead to better sales.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Trickstick wrote:

w1zard wrote:
Oh I am well aware. But you can't say... run a "heavy infantry" regiment using stormtroopers and take tanks without losing your doctrine. Trying to run any kind of "elite infantry" guard list using stormtroopers as your "veterans" doesn't work the second you want to include anything except advisors, taurox, or valks.

Sure you can. Just take a Tempestus battalion and then add a spearhead for the tanks.

Let me just load up my heavy infantry regiment in Chimeras and.... Oh
Oh no.

Taurox are pretty good.

 Trickstick wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Trickstick wrote:

w1zard wrote:
Oh I am well aware. But you can't say... run a "heavy infantry" regiment using stormtroopers and take tanks without losing your doctrine. Trying to run any kind of "elite infantry" guard list using stormtroopers as your "veterans" doesn't work the second you want to include anything except advisors, taurox, or valks.

Sure you can. Just take a Tempestus battalion and then add a spearhead for the tanks.

Let me just load up my heavy infantry regiment in Chimeras and.... Oh
Oh no.

Taurox are pretty good.

Taroxes are great, as long as you buy a wheel conversion kit and throw away the silly tracks.

As far as I can glean from this conversation, guardsmen are awesome not for their ability to kill things (seriously, they have lasguns? why are we even discussing the math for that, no one is winning games on lasguns or bolt shots. And if you're complaining about the HW or SW thats a seperate point cost), but for the meta aspects such as board control and CP generation.

Fix the CP thing by not permitting people to use CPs from one detachment on another unless they're the same sub-faction. Thats the way it should have been from the beginning.

I doubt anyone can fix board control without a new game revision though. Its too varied. I watch youtube game reports, and some people use nearly zero terrain in their battles, while others pack it to the gills. At that point you're playing different games.

The terrain rules in 8th edition were just too basic. The recommended terrain piece count should be higher (imo), and more terrain should be made that blocks LOS. My terrain supply consisted of ruins, trees, bushes, hills. . . a really diverse selection. My opponent and I would take turns placing it until we felt like there was enough, although ussually we just went until we ran out. The only house rule was you had to leave enough room between one piece and another for the vehicles to drive through.

gbghg wrote:The armageddon order can't be used on a unit that disembarked this turn, so your vet squad would have to spend a turn in the open before being able to hop in on your next turn.

Blast. Well, better to find that out now than later. I guess I should have taken more than a cursory look at the leaks (I don't have the book yet, probably won't get it for awhile).

w1zard wrote:

kurhanik wrote:
Well, the idea is that while Veterans would be the same price per model as Infantry, they still pay more to kit out. With Chapter Approved, I think a Plasma Gun is 4 points more to give to a Veteran than an Infantryman. The slot they are in matters specifically because that is the current limiting factor of using them - they generate less cp, lack ob sec, and limit your other Elite choices.

I just fundamentally disagree with the concept of a better unit being the same price as a worse unit tabletop wise. That is not how the points system is intended to work, and encourages spam. In your scenario, the only time I would ever take standard guardsmen is if my elite slots are full because veterans are just better in every way.

Except rule of 3 means that you aren't spamming Veterans until the elite slots are full, you are spamming until you hit 3 squads total. And you could be using those elite slots for other things as well, and unless you plan on just throwing in 3 squads/150 points of BS 3+ lasguns, you are paying extra for the special weapons, so they still come out as more expensive per model.

Crimson wrote:

w1zard wrote:

I just fundamentally disagree with the concept of a better unit being the same price as a worse unit tabletop wise. That is not how the points system is intended to work, and encourages spam. In your scenario, the only time I would ever take standard guardsmen is if my elite slots are full because veterans are just better in every way.

Whilst I agree that it seems wrong to have a unit with worse stats to cost the same than unit with better stats, the fact is that being a troop is worth something, worth quite a lot in fact. Troops have objective secured, and more importantly are much more effective generating CP. These are tangible effects which should be reflected in the point cost of the unit.

This.

gbghg wrote:

w1zard wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Whilst I agree that it seems wrong to have a unit with worse stats to cost the same than unit with better stats, the fact is that being a troop is worth something, worth quite a lot in fact. Troops have objective secured, and more importantly are much more effective generating CP. These are tangible effects which should be reflected in the point cost of the unit.

I see your point, but I want to just re-iterate that points are NOT the way to balance this. Again, I bring up the example of why the hell should I take basic Infantry Squads if I have elite slots open for veterans in that scenario, since veterans cost the same and are better in pretty much every way?

Vets are glass cannon's, they have a much better damage output but are every bit as fragile as regular infantry squads. They also cost more (extra special weapon choices and the increased cost for those special weapons), in short they'll be less efficent as objective holders, screening units and ablative wounds, things you'll still want typical infantry squads for as they're more cost efficient.

Also this.

Note, I still personally would rather the 4-5-6 deal with Veterans as Troops. I'm just arguing the point that GW is much more likely to bump the point of the standard Infantry Squad by 1ppm than they are to change the battlefield role of Veterans.

Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Trickstick wrote:

w1zard wrote:
Oh I am well aware. But you can't say... run a "heavy infantry" regiment using stormtroopers and take tanks without losing your doctrine. Trying to run any kind of "elite infantry" guard list using stormtroopers as your "veterans" doesn't work the second you want to include anything except advisors, taurox, or valks.

Sure you can. Just take a Tempestus battalion and then add a spearhead for the tanks.

Let me just load up my heavy infantry regiment in Chimeras and.... Oh
Oh no.

Man, I do like the look of the Chimera far more than the Taurox.

Sumilidon wrote:Guardsmen are so good because GW loves money. Imperial Guard are one of the most expensive armies to collect and if the most competitive army also costs the most money, then GW sales go through the roof. Just look at their profits last year!

Just look at Chapter Approved 2018. The models that got the greatest reductions were the ones that arguably sell the least. Tyranids is a great example of this, with a lot of the big nids taking reductions but only the ones that are barely used by most people.

The other side of mass points reductions means those who build to a set list, MUST buy more models to make their army up to the points it used to be.

In about a year, when they have reached market saturation, i will put good money on the belief they will nerf Imperial Guard with points increases and instead favour another army that will lead to better sales.

Eh, if that were true Guard and other Horde armies would be consistently better over the years. Instead we have the situation where Guard was bad for a good chunk of 3rd, 4th, 6th, and 7th editions, Tyranids were bad from 5th-7th, and Orks from 6th-7th.

I can't argue with your point on mass point reductions though. They really need to just multiply the points on everything so that they can be rejiggered with more granularity.

Another dakka thread reduced to salt about Guardsmen.

I'll live for a thousand years at this rate.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
Another dakka thread reduced to salt about Guardsmen.

I'll live for a thousand years at this rate.

But this isn't about guardsmen. It's about marines being 'not good'.

 gbghg wrote:
Vets are glass cannon's, they have a much better damage output but are every bit as fragile as regular infantry squads. They also cost more (extra special weapon choices and the increased cost for those special weapons), in short they'll be less efficent as objective holders, screening units and ablative wounds, things you'll still want typical infantry squads for as they're more cost efficient.

Not if vets and infantry squads are both worth 5 points... that is what we are talking about here... vets wouldn't be any more expensive than regular infantry squads. If you intended to use them as a backfield objective holder than just leave them bare... if you wanted to use them as a frontline heavy hitter take 3 plasma guns... vets are actually MORE flexible in that scenario because they can pretty much do everything.

 Trickstick wrote:
Sure you can. Just take a Tempestus battalion and then add a spearhead for the tanks.

Then your tanks are a totally different doctrine as your stormtroopers, throwing away your army cohesion. You are playing two separate armies at that point that have merely allied rather than a cohesive fighting force of a single regiment.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Let me just load up my heavy infantry regiment in Chimeras and.... Oh
Oh no.

This x1000. Using stormtroopers as stand ins for "veterans" or "elite regiments" leads to a whole host of problems.

kurhanik wrote:
Except rule of 3 means that you aren't spamming Veterans until the elite slots are full, you are spamming until you hit 3 squads total...

Which I still think is a terrible thing. Vets being the same price as infantry means pretty much every competitive guard army runs the max complements of vets before they even touch infantry. My point still stands.

Vets are supposed to be their own thing, paying for the trade-off of having better aim for a higher price.

 Mmmpi wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:
Another dakka thread reduced to salt about Guardsmen.

I'll live for a thousand years at this rate.

But this isn't about guardsmen. It's about marines being 'not good'.

It has Guardsmen right there in the title?

It just got Polandified by Martel and his clone/minion/offspring.

Yes, but the whole conversation was about how they made Marines seem less 'special'. Well, until the points costs of veterans vs troops came up.

 Mmmpi wrote:
Yes, but the whole conversation was about how they made Marines seem less 'special'. Well, until the points costs of veterans vs troops came up.

Personally, I think this hits the nail on the head.

Guard are strong this edition, nobody is debating that. If they are "overpowered" is arguable, mostly because the worst offenders in the guard index were nerfed into oblivion in the codex. Besides a few outstanding issues (guardsmen could really come up to 5ppm) I would personally say guard are "strong but balanced" territory.

The problem is that SM suck this edition, easily in the bottom 3 codices only above the abomination that is the GK codex. Guard being strong and SM sucking make SM look really bad by comparison. People seem infuriated by the fact that an army of "standard dudes" seems to outperform their supersoldiers. Eldar are arguably even worse than guard in terms of power and you don't see half as much "nerf eldar" threads as you do "nerf guard" threads. People seem to be ok with their space marines getting blown away by an army of psychic uber-elves, but get cognitive dissonance when their space marines get blown away by schmucks with laser pointers.

w1zard wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
Yes, but the whole conversation was about how they made Marines seem less 'special'. Well, until the points costs of veterans vs troops came up.

Personally, I think this hits the nail on the head.

Guard are strong this edition, nobody is debating that. If they are "overpowered" is arguable, mostly because the worst offenders in the guard index were nerfed into oblivion in the codex. Besides a few outstanding issues (guardsmen could really come up to 5ppm) I would personally say guard are "strong but balanced" territory.

The problem is that SM suck this edition, easily in the bottom 3 codices only above the abomination that is the GK codex. Guard being strong and SM sucking make SM look really bad by comparison. People seem infuriated by the fact that an army of "standard dudes" seems to outperform their supersoldiers. Eldar are arguably even worse than guard in terms of power and you don't see half as much "nerf eldar" threads as you do "nerf guard" threads. People seem to be ok with their space marines getting blown away by an army of psychic uber-elves, but get cognitive dissonance when their space marines get blown away by schmucks with laser pointers.

This.

Guards could go to 5 ppm and probably should i agree, but that change wouldn't even make it in the top 5 of a "Most important balance changes" chart in an edition where we are enjoying the best balance in a loooong time. Yet it is receiving as much flack, if not more, of wraithknights and grav cannons of 7th.

Hmm let's see:

1) Disable CP sharing
2) Somehow fix Yannari trait
3) Change/remove Supreme Command Detachment
4) Cawl's Wrath to D2
5) Dissie cannons to D1
6) Rotate ion shields capped at 4++
7) Tank commanders BS to 4+
8) Limit infantry squads in some way


Yeah, definitely not in the top 5. Even there, i prefer guards at 4 ppm now that veterans are at 5. Guards are not a problem because they cost 4 ppm, that is not ruining anyone's day, they are a problem because they can receive a lot of support in the form of orders or through priest/Yarrick. Instead of increasing the base cost of guards, i would increase the cost of orders, putting the platoon commander at 30 and the company commander at 55. This would also reduce the soupability of guards a bit.

Jesus Christ all this defending of undercoated Guardsmen.

It makes no difference if Vets are 5ppm. Perhaps they need to go back up.

4ppm Guardsmen are too cheap. They are taken en masse in competitive lists. Both of these things can be evidenced.

Spoletta I missed your previous question because you didn't quote me - the maths I'm referring to has Guardsmen offensive output per point against archetypal units. It also has durability per point against archetypal weapons. Then the same was done for Fire Warriors, Kabalites etc. Guardsmen were seen to be the best performing unit in any scenario.

Wizard the rule of 3 is for matched play only. If you want to run a fluffy vet only list play narrative or open. Or learn to live with it, like every other army. Again my Orks bikes are bound by the rule of 3, they've also had their maximum squad size reduced from index to codex. I don't see why IG should have more different rules to every other army (you already get pointed stratagems with orders that can't be denied).

On the lack of changes for Guardsmen in CA, the cynic in me thinks the only reason they stayed at 4ppm was because of the Boxing day Vostroyan release. But I'm sure many of you will call that paranoia, despite it being logical business practice.

30 guard in the scheme of things is not 'en masse'. 130 would be.

 Mmmpi wrote:
30 guard in the scheme of things is not 'en masse'. 130 would be.

How about 60? Or 80?

How about the fact that they feature in every competitive Imperium list, regardless of whether 30 or 120 are taken?

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Jesus Christ all this defending of undercoated Guardsmen.

It makes no difference if Vets are 5ppm. Perhaps they need to go back up.

4ppm Guardsmen are too cheap. They are taken en masse in competitive lists. Both of these things can be evidenced.

Spoletta I missed your previous question because you didn't quote me - the maths I'm referring to has Guardsmen offensive output per point against archetypal units. It also has durability per point against archetypal weapons. Then the same was done for Fire Warriors, Kabalites etc. Guardsmen were seen to be the best performing unit in any scenario.

Wizard the rule of 3 is for matched play only. If you want to run a fluffy vet only list play narrative or open. Or learn to live with it, like every other army. Again my Orks bikes are bound by the rule of 3, they've also had their maximum squad size reduced from index to codex. I don't see why IG should have more different rules to every other army (you already get pointed stratagems with orders that can't be denied).

On the lack of changes for Guardsmen in CA, the cynic in me thinks the only reason they stayed at 4ppm was because of the Boxing day Vostroyan release. But I'm sure many of you will call that paranoia, despite it being logical business practice.

If that math says that against typical targets GEQ at 4ppm are superior to the alternatives, then that math is wrong. For example Fire warriors point per point outshoot guards against all T4, 6,7,8 targets and do so at longer range. Against T5 guards shoot a bit better, but at shorter ranges. The only target against which they are better is T3 (at shorter range).

Compared to kabalites, guards are outshoot against all targets of T4 or greater except against vehicles, and even against those targets guards are not much better.

Even against guardians the guards come really short on firepower, but there they have the range advantage, so i'm not going to make that comparison.

Against T6 ot T7 3+ targets they are even worse than necron warriors, and those things are not exactly renown for firepower.

Guards have exceptional durability, but when it comes to firepower they come short.

Probably that math you were talking about took orders in considerations, which makes them a lot better even including the costs of said orders. That though points to my solution of leaving guards at 4ppm but increasing the cost of orders.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
30 guard in the scheme of things is not 'en masse'. 130 would be.

How about 60? Or 80?

How about the fact that they feature in every competitive Imperium list, regardless of whether 30 or 120 are taken?

In 'every' competitive imperium list we see 30+ 2 officers. That's not a horde. That's not even a perk of guardsmen, outside of their price. If you gave them conscript stats and upgrades you, still see them taken.

IG lists field 60+. The rest don't. They take the Loyal 32 and no more. How many guard main lists do you see in tournaments?

Define what is an IG list, because no so long ago I was told that an army with 3 interceptor squads and the rest IG and SoB is a GK army.

If an IG army is something like 1950pts in only IG units, then it is less common. But if it is having your warlord being an IG dude, that it is a lot of armies.

Probably that math you were talking about took orders in considerations, which makes them a lot better even including the costs of said orders. That though points to my solution of leaving guards at 4ppm but increasing the cost of orders.

Well math is one thing. Another is the fact that while your IG dudes may not be the best at killing t6-7 stuff, they are still ok at it considering the numbers and point costs. And their cost means IG players can load up on baneblades, castellans, Lemman Russ cmds, basilisks etc for their anti heavy stuff. Other armies have to deal with tanks using their basic dudes with basic weapons and have zero free points to load take something like a castellan, or their method of dealing with tanks is melee. Which after the deep strike nerfs is not "easy" to do with 160 chaff standing in front of the tanks.

Spoletta wrote:
If that math says that against typical targets GEQ at 4ppm are superior to the alternatives, then that math is wrong. For example Fire warriors point per point outshoot guards against all T4, 6,7,8 targets and do so at longer range. Against T5 guards shoot a bit better, but at shorter ranges. The only target against which they are better is T3 (at shorter range).

Compared to kabalites, guards are outshoot against all targets of T4 or greater except against vehicles, and even against those targets guards are not much better.

Even against guardians the guards come really short on firepower, but there they have the range advantage, so i'm not going to make that comparison.

Against T6 ot T7 3+ targets they are even worse than necron warriors, and those things are not exactly renown for firepower.

Guards have exceptional durability, but when it comes to firepower they come short.

Probably that math you were talking about took orders in considerations, which makes them a lot better even including the costs of said orders. That though points to my solution of leaving guards at 4ppm but increasing the cost of orders.

I honestly can't remember if the maths took orders into account but I distinctly remember same points of Guard outperforming same points of other units both in terms offence and the obvious massive advantage they have I'm defence

The solution is certainly not to leave Guardsmen at 4ppm when, as you have yourself stated, they also have exceptional (read - the best of any troop by a long way) durability. This is not balanced. This is yet another reason why they need to be repointed appropriately.

 Mmmpi wrote:
In 'every' competitive imperium list we see 30+ 2 officers. That's not a horde. That's not even a perk of guardsmen, outside of their price. If you gave them conscript stats and upgrades you, still see them taken.

IG lists field 60+. The rest don't. They take the Loyal 32 and no more. How many guard main lists do you see in tournaments?

No mate. You are wrong. Look at the top lists. They aren't just taking a minimum battalion of Guard. Many take a brigade and many take even more by taking 8 units. Why do you think I raised those numbers earlier? They are commonly taken in the top competitive lists.

Guard primary (main) are the most common of all the Imperium soup lists taken to tournaments. They are certainly one of if not the most competitive configuration.

I field 60 Guardsmen due to the brigade requirements. It is no where near a large amount. In fact, I think it is a tiny number and they die off pretty quickly. If you are talking about "en mass" you need to be getting 120. Maybe 90 would do, but 120 is the point at which infantry is a major factor in the game.